(May 11, 2014 at 7:56 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: Truth be told your explanation for how Christianity is even worse. At least brake mans explanation will account for why the Jews are still here and why there is no note of Jesus at all until Paul wrote his epistle to the thessolians around 50 ad. More over once you know the dates of the new testament literature you can actually watch the growth of the myth in the bible. For example the first gospel penned, mark has no ressurection scene in the earliest copies and the least miracles. Also in mark Jesus does not claim to be the son of god irrc, and instead the gospel focuses more on the moral teaching Jesus. The gospel of luke came next and that was the idea of the virgin birth came from as well as the ressurection. Then we have matthew shortly after taking the works of luke and mark and trying to fit it all with the old testament in order to make it appeal to the Jews. Lastly and at least 20 years later we have john which by Christian admission sits oddly next to the three synaptic gospels which portrays Jesus as a full on rock star . This is from established and respected bible scholarship too. So therefore brakeman's description is quite apt.
You are right the gospels writers were writing to different audiences and were trying to portray the gospel in a way that would be attractive to their readers. Why does that mean that they changed or added anything to the true story? They called on different aspects of his ministry to make the points they were trying to make. It demonstrates more clearly that the gospels were not part of a conspiracy to promote a false doctrine. If you think brakeman's description is apt go ahead, but it's nothing but conjecture.
