How can you prove that the gospel of Mark is not the "word of god"?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Mislaid burden of proof.

Next.

[Expired]

How can you prove that I didn't talk to a burning bush on my way home from bingo last night? I don't play bingo BTY but if I did.

[Esquilax]

Well, let's say that the claimee says "It is the only gospel without any errors. It is also seen by scholars as the most authentic gospel".

"Without any errors"? How the hell do you determine that?

I'll tell you how: it's by ignoring all the god stuff. That's the only way, because, see, you have no way at all to confirm the god claims of that particular gospel, and everything that we know about history and reality in general seems to contradict those particular claims. So you either have a book without errors that contains no claims about god, which I'm sure is not what you want here, or you have a book that makes claims about god, in which the "without errors" label cannot be applied.

Either way, you cannot rationally make anything special of that gospel.

[robvalue]

1 + 1 = 2

Without errors. God wrote it?

It's a ridiculous notion from start to finish.

[Minimalist]

Suppose I tell you that Star Trek is real.

You mean Star Trek isn't real?

[Nihilist Virus]

So this has been bothering me for a while. I am 100% sure that Matthew, Luke and John's gospels were not "divinely inspired" and they are not the "word of god" because of some of the errors I found in them. However, I can't find any errors in Mark's gospel. No historical errors, no theological errors, nothing. In addition to that, I don't see how it contradicts the old testament in any way.

How can you prove that Mark's gospel is not the word of god? Is there anything in this gospel that scholars don't agree with? Is there anything in the gospel that proves that this book was not divinely inspired?

1.) The last dozen verses of the gospel of Mark are known to be a forgery. There are even alternate endings in very early manuscripts. This is known fact. The earliest copies end after the young boy in the tomb (who later becomes an angel in the other gospels) informs the women that Jesus is risen. The actual postmortem appearances of Christ are forgeries.

2.) The forgery was inserted later as a revision.

3.) Divinely inspired works should not require a revision.

4.) Divinely inspired works should be divinely protected from alterations. While a deity might allow a person or group of people to make alterations (you know, free will and all), it is difficult to believe that said deity would allow a forgery to become the widely accepted version of the work. The forgeries in Mark became canonized and are thought to be holy scripture.

5.) It is not reasonable to believe that a deity would inspire a work and then offer it no protection unless the text is only meant to be of use for a short period of time.

6.) The Bible is supposed to endure forever, or at least for the duration of earth's existence.

7.) It is not reasonable to believe that the gospel of Mark is divinely inspired.

[robvalue]

What would we expect from a god communicating with us?

This heap of shit? That's a pretty lousy god and some crummy expectations.

Personally I'd expect direct communication, requiring no other medium, and without any chance of misinterpretation. Not some bag of bollocks book written by a load of numpties, with other asswipes telling me what god "meant to say". Everything about it is truly laughable.

[Whateverist]

Q: How can you prove that the gospel of Mark is not the "word of god"?

The answer is right there in the title. It's this guy Mark's word. Whether or not his word is any good regarding what he says about this god-thingy remains to be seen.

[A Handmaid]

What would we expect from a god communicating with us?

This heap of shit? That's a pretty lousy god and some crummy expectations.

Personally I'd expect direct communication, requiring no other medium, and without any chance of misinterpretation. Not some bag of bollocks book written by a load of numpties, with other asswipes telling me what god "meant to say". Everything about it is truly laughable.

The bible is direct communication from god! C'mon people go get your shekels and your swords, let's go kill some infidels!

[robvalue]

Oh yeah, did anyone mention that it's not even Mark? It's an anonymous author. No one knows who wrote it. Or why, ultimately. It could have been intended to be fiction from the start.