Originally posted by wolfgang59Who is "us"?
Know something else?
I don't care that you don't care!
But I'm puzzled as to why you take the time to tell us?
I tell you, because you asked. The answer is that it's not important.
As I said once before, we don't really have a need to know. It makes zero difference to the bigger purpose of the Gospels.
11 Dec 13
Originally posted by Suzianne"Us" is anyone who reads this thread.
Who is "us"?
I tell you, because you asked. The answer is that it's not important.
As I said once before, we don't really have a need to know. It makes zero difference to the bigger purpose of the Gospels.
If I was asking you personally I would have PMed you.
If you believe it's expected for you to "tell me because I asked" then using
the same 'logic' you are presumably expecting everyone who frequents this
forum to reply? (Or are you just special?)
And finally, regarding a 'need to know' it is a valid and interesting
historical question. As interesting as discovering when any religious
texts were written.
(And this thread is not about the purpose of the gospels)
11 Dec 13
Originally posted by wolfgang59Also, determining who wrote the Gospels and why would be an important step
"Us" is anyone who reads this thread.
If I was asking you personally I would have PMed you.
If you believe it's expected for you to "tell me because I asked" then using
the same 'logic' you are presumably expecting everyone who frequents this
forum to reply? (Or are you just special?)
And finally, regarding a 'need to know' it is a valid and inter ...[text shortened]... ligious
texts were written.
(And this thread [b]is not about the purpose of the gospels)[/b]
in determining what their purpose was.
Originally posted by SuzianneYeah, you'd hate to listen to bible scholars, and their suggestions that instill ... doubt (😲) about the authorship of certain books.
Who is "us"?
I tell you, because you asked. The answer is that it's not important.
As I said once before, we don't really have a need to know. It makes zero difference to the bigger purpose of the Gospels.
Originally posted by wolfgang59Mark came first in a foot race, but he had to run away naked, John came last in a foot race, but it was to Peter, who reached the tomb of Christ first, being a younger man.
1. In a foot race.
And
2. Which [b[writtengospel came first?[/b]
Matthews gospel is considered to have come first (41CE) , then Lukes, then Marks then Johns (98CE) 😀
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIs that a JW stance?
Mark came first in a foot race, but he had to run away naked, John came last in a foot race, but it was to Peter, who reached the tomb of Christ first, being a younger man.
Matthews gospel is considered to have come first (41CE) , then Lukes, then Marks then Johns (98CE) 😀
I thought all the gospels were later than that and that Matt & Luke were
bad copies of Mark.
(Not arguing - genuine interested)
Originally posted by wolfgang59No, there is the retelling of the same accounts, but also differences. Luke is a superlative Gospel but Matthews is considered to have been first, if you like I can find out the reason why its considered to have come first, but I have no time at present. I am sure jaywill posted a video link once in which a lecture was given detailing just how early the gospels were actually considered to have been written.
Is that a JW stance?
I thought all the gospels were later than that and that Matt & Luke were
bad copies of Mark.
(Not arguing - genuine interested)
Originally posted by robbie carrobieGot a source for that? From what I have a read Mark's Gospel came first.
Mark came first in a foot race, but he had to run away naked, John came last in a foot race, but it was to Peter, who reached the tomb of Christ first, being a younger man.
Matthews gospel is considered to have come first (41CE) , then Lukes, then Marks then Johns (98CE) 😀