Jesus emphasized the importance of eyewitness testimony of two or three people for verification of the truth. The Gospel authors are anonymous so we have no eyewitness testimony of the life, acts, and resurrection of Jesus. This fact kept me from believing in Jesus for many years. I set out three years ago to find the truth.
Eyewitness Testimony
- Thread starter Jaz
- Start date
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
God is The Author of the Gospels. Is God anonymous?
Wrong choice of words when handing out a non sequitur.
False. The Gospels and Epistles (all which are God-breathed) are full of eyewitness testimony of the life, acts, miracles, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, etc., of Jesus Christ.
So you are telling me that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John didn't write the Gospels, God did? There had to be authors and yes they are Holy Spirit inspired, but human hands wrote them. The Gospels are full of testimony but if we don't know who wrote them, they are not evidence. Evidence is eyewitness testimony and this is what Jesus required. This is a big problem for a lot of people seeking faith. It was for me, so I took a deep dive into scripture to look for answers.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Are you not asking me two questions, rather than just one?
1. "Are you telling me that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John didn't write the Gospels?" Answer: No, I'm not telling you that.
2. "Are you telling me that God wrote the Gospels?" Answer: Yes, I am telling you that. Do you disagree?
Which proposition(s) are you saying we don't know, when you say "we don't know who wrote them"?
The Gospels are truth, so of course they are evidence. Do you really wish to sit there and tell us that truth is not evidence? If you wish to say that truth is not evidence, and that evidence is not truth, then you will thereby be showing that you have some sort of self-defeating epistemology going on.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
A very simple search will reveal to you that the gospel authors are considered to be anonymous. Also, you can open any study bible and read the introductions to the gospels to find the data. John the disciple has the most confidence of theologians as the author of the Gospel of John. If you want to have a theological discussion, you need to do some homework. Many Christians are not aware of this fact, but many who fail to believe are well aware of this fact - it is a major thorn for having confidence in the scripture as the truth.
In addition, to the posting about witnesses versus eyewitnesses - you are right about the language, but never that I know of in history, has second-hand information been considered witness testimony. A witness by definition is someone who can give a firsthand account of something seen, heard, or experienced. Was Jesus really was going to give the world second hand information to verify his life and resurrection? If so, why did he choose four specific disciples to witness everything that he did? By claiming the eyewitnesses did not write the gospels, you are essentially claiming that God did not know what he was doing. God's plan was always to provide the world eyewitness testimony of Jesus so that the words of would spread to all nations and all people, with confidence to stand up to all scrutiny. Why would anyone think differently?
I started this thread not to discount the scripture as the word of God, but to prove it is eyewitness testimony and that there is no doubt that Jesus is the resurrected Son of God.
Make the argument yourself. Don't expect others to do your homework for you.
What data?
This is an appeal to authority.
Right back at you.
Again, don't expect others to do your homework for you.
Make the argument yourself.
What fact? You haven't established any "facts" yet, you've only made assertions, and those without evidence.
What is?
So what?
Nope.
You're begging the question that it's a "someone."
The Hebrew word is:
| Strong's h5707 - Lexical: עֵד - Transliteration: ed - Part of Speech: Noun Masculine - Phonetic Spelling: ayd - Definition: a witness. - Origin: Contracted from uwd; concretely, a witness; abstractly, testimony; specifically, a recorder, i.e. Prince. - Usage: witness. - Translated as (count): a witness (23), witnesses (15), witness (8), My witnesses (3), and witness (2), as a witness (2), of the witnesses (2), an witness (1), and a witness (1), and Even the witness (1), and their own witnesses (1), as evidence (1), but a witness (1), but witness (1), for a witness (1), Forever (1), my witness (1), of witness (1), of witnesses (1), the witness (1), their witnesses (1), Your witnesses (1). |
It is used in scripture for both people and objects.
The Rod of Aaron and the 10 Commandments, for example, are witnesses against Israel.
More evidence is always good, when corroborating the extraordinary.
"Two or three witnesses shall establish a matter."
Note the "or" in that qualification.
Weighing the evidence is important.
My position is that men named Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, wrote each of their respective gospels.
In case you haven't noticed, none of those eyewitnesses are still around today...
All we have is their testimony as evidence.... as a witness to the truth.
Because no one cares what dead men said while they were alive, unless it was recorded.
Except that the Bible isn't an "eyewitness." It is just a "witness."
Yes your position is like most - Matthew, Mark, and Luke wrote Gospels, but there is no evidence for it. So who were your witnesses to the authors that you cite? Do you have any proof? No you don't because there is no evidence for those authors. The evidence of who wrote the gospels is very clear from scripture and it isn't Matthew, Mark, and Luke. My analysis is completely from scripture rather than the words of other men who weren't around to make any valid claims.
How about the fact that they're called "Matthew" "Mark" and "Luke."
Luke wrote Luke, and he also wrote Acts.
Not "who."
"What."
Who Wrote the Four Gospels?
The only firsthand testimony that we have about the life and teachings of Jesus comes from the four Gospels. Who were the people that wrote these books? The
Saying it doesn't make it so.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
And why should we trust your analysis?
Not really.
I have given you evidence that those four men wrote their respective books.
Now it's your turn, present witnesses that corroborate your claims, please.
Last edited:
Saying that the Gospels are named Matthew, Mark, and Luke is not evidence. It's a claim and who made this claim? It wasn't eyewitnesses of the authors. Who wrote the Gospels? Nicodemus wrote Matthew, James wrote Mark, Silas wrote the words of Peter in the Gospel of Luke and the words of Peter, Paul, Philip, and his own eyewitness testimony in the book of Acts.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Be honest, @Jaz: if, in Matthew, you could read the words, "I, Matthew, wrote this Gospel," you would still be sitting there claiming that Matthew did not write it. Yet, you are claiming the name of the writer of Matthew is "Nicodemus", a name that does not even once occur therein, let alone we find nothing like "I, Nicodemus, wrote this Gospel." Why your self-inconsistency?
I have written a few books that provides all the evidence, but in a nutshell, follow the trail for naming of Matthew, Mark, and Luke and you come up empty with missing documentation, words of people who came many years after the gospels were written, and no valid evidence. James, Peter and John and even Andrew were eyewitnesses selected by Jesus to see and hear everything he did and said. If the Gospels are eyewitness accounts then the words in them had to come from these men. My analysis of scripture proved that there are three different eyewitness versions.
Nicodemus as the author of Matthew makes sense because the work is clearly from a religious leader who had access to many things only a religious leader could have witnessed. These men as the authors also provide an explanation for the copying aspect of the gospels. Nicodemus, James, John and Peter through Silas as authors prove the story of Jesus as true and that made me a 100% believer and follower of Christ. Matthew, Mark, and Luke as authors leave the Gospels without any proof of validity besides the words of other men who lived years after the gospels were written (Papias, Irenaeus, Eusebius, etc.).
Nicodemus as the author of Matthew makes sense because the work is clearly from a religious leader who had access to many things only a religious leader could have witnessed. These men as the authors also provide an explanation for the copying aspect of the gospels. Nicodemus, James, John and Peter through Silas as authors prove the story of Jesus as true and that made me a 100% believer and follower of Christ. Matthew, Mark, and Luke as authors leave the Gospels without any proof of validity besides the words of other men who lived years after the gospels were written (Papias, Irenaeus, Eusebius, etc.).
Thanks Gary. It's been a wild and crazy ride to become someone who won't stop preaching Jesus (NDE, reflection on how the Lord was with me through my whole life, dreams/visions, and more bible investigations). A message that contradicts years of tradition is not an easy one to present but the Holy Spirit is with me along the way so I try to follow where led. Blessings!