Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese
The names Mark, Matthew, Luke and John represent nothing more than second century guesses by the early church fathers as to the identity of the evangelists. Of course, they guessed wrong.
Next we ask ourselves the obvious question, could documents written at least close to half a century after the death of its main character, by non-eyewitnesses, give reliable testimonies of that person's life. We ask whether the oral tradition gives us confidence in the gospels? The answer is a resounding "No." The elapsed period between the written account and the purported events certainly allow corruption of the stories
|
You've got no evidence to suggest that the Gospels were written a half a century after Jesus' death and ressurection. This is just more of your
positive atheist thinking. Someone told you and you placed your faith in that person because it is what you want to believe.
The church Fathers as they are called were pastors of different churches in different locations. They never came together in order to write some fiction for their new found religion. The religion was already there. The bible was already being quoted by them and the epistles and gospels copied. A few were first or second hand witnesses to the lives of the Apostles. Many knew which Apostle planted their church. By these early pastors we know how and when the Apostles died. Sorry, but once again you are wrong.