FallentoReason Wrote:Well done in relaying what Tradition says.
Any time.
FallentoReason Wrote:With Mark being the first Gospel written, why did "Matthew", a supposed witness, feel the need to use the content in Mark as opposed to his own eyewitness testimony? Why is it written in third person?
Mark was the account already written. He could have simply not wanted to repeat a story already told in another way. Mark was the historical account and first written. Matthew was trying to convert Jews. Matthew is laced with OT references and genealogies and prophesies fulfilled and whatnot that the Jews at the time loved.
Mark never mentions himself. John never mentions himself. Matthew doesn't either. This wasn't a letter, it was a book to tell the story.
FallentoReason Wrote:John is a clear example of rumours being hyped up, which indicates it couldn't have been an eyewitness who wrote it, otherwise we wouldn't see this clear exaggeration in e.g. theology.
Do you believe all the conspiracy websites? Perhaps those websites are a conspiracy themselves...
Anyway, the reason you say John has "hyped up rumors" must be because you really want there to be a flaw, because this is quite the stretch. Lets put this book at 100 A.D. to make this easy. You're going to tell me, that rumors got hyped up so amazingly high within the course of 60-70 years, that some guy wrote a book in which the dude claims to be God... and everyone believes it? Wouldn't most of the people be able to ask their friend about the dude? So there is a group that starts making racket about this guy, and no one stops and thinks, "I should probably ask people who were also there"? Such a stretch.
The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you; the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.