Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The gospel of Mark, the shortest and first written of the Gospels (c 70AD) was one of the source documents used by Matthew and Luke in writing their Gospels.
Traditionally, the author is claimed to be John Mark, a companion of Peter, a cousin of Barnabus, and travel companion of Paul.
Modern scripture scholars tell us that the author of the Gospel later called Mark's was probably a Hellenistic Jewish Christian writing in Syria.
As we don't have any of the originals and all that has survived were copies of copies of copies x 100 we have to take it on faith that God has left us with what He wanted us to have. Of all the gospels I trust John the most. I don't bother reading Matthew, Mark and Luke because they borrow quite a bit from each other and from Q and we can't be sure who really authored them.
One problem, for example, is how can experts claim Matthew the Apostle is the author of Matthew when the writer had to borrow from Mark. Wasn't he right there at Jesus' side?
I feel that the God of the Bible is vastly different from the God that is in heaven. The God of the Bible is largely fictionalized, conjured up by thousands of hands that had agendas to paint God this way or that way, which is why we hear Jesus and God sometimes coming off as cruel ("Depart from me, ye cursed", "I never knew you") to incredibly loving (parables of the prodigal son and the lost sheep).
People of all faiths and persuasions who have had near-death experiences and death bed visions have talked of the most loving, the most compassionate, the most forgiving God they could never imagine. It's the Fundamentalist Corporate Machine that has poisoned the bulk of Christians' minds with their dogmatic agenda of terrifying people into believing in a God that is so sadistic He's going to dangle 90% of humanity over the fires of hell to taunt them before letting them fall into its flames for eternity.
As we don't have any of the originals and all that has survived were copies of copies of copies x 100 we have to take it on faith that God has left us with what He wanted us to have. Of all the gospels I trust John the most. I don't bother reading Matthew, Mark and Luke because they borrow quite a bit from each other and from Q and we can't be sure who really authored them.
One problem, for example, is how can experts claim Matthew the Apostle is the author of Matthew when the writer had to borrow from Mark. Wasn't he right there at Jesus' side?
I feel that the God of the Bible is vastly different from the God that is in heaven. The God of the Bible is largely fictionalized, conjured up by thousands of hands that had agendas to paint God this way or that way, which is why we hear Jesus and God sometimes coming off as cruel ("Depart from me, ye cursed", "I never knew you") to incredibly loving (parables of the prodigal son and the lost sheep).
People of all faiths and persuasions who have had near-death experiences and death bed visions have talked of the most loving, the most compassionate, the most forgiving God they could never imagine. It's the Fundamentalist Corporate Machine that has poisoned the bulk of Christians' minds with their dogmatic agenda of terrifying people into believing in a God that is so sadistic He's going to dangle 90% of humanity over the fires of hell to taunt them before letting them fall into its flames for eternity.
So sad.
RESPONSE:
>>we have to take it on faith that God has left us with what He wanted us to have.<<
Of course, aren't you assuming that the New Testament is actually divinely inspired? Is it? Any evidence?
>>I don't bother reading Matthew, Mark and Luke because they borrow quite a bit from each other and from Q and we can't be sure who really authored them. <<
Incorrect. Luke and Matthew copied from Mark. There is no "Q" material in Mark.
>>One problem, for example, is how can experts claim Matthew the Apostle is the author of Matthew when the writer had to borrow from Mark. Wasn't he right there at Jesus' side? <<
You are correct. The gospel we now call Matthew's was writtgen anonomously. It was attribute to the Apostle Matthew by Papias in 135 AD. It is cleear that the evangelist called Matthew is not the Apostle Matthew, for the reason you give. Neither the writer of Mark, nor the writer of Matthew were witnesses to the events they describe.
>>The God of the Bible is largely fictionalized<<
Yes. Men tend to do that when writing legends.
>>People of all faiths and persuasions who have had near-death experiences and death bed visions have talked of the most loving, the most compassionate, the most forgiving God they could never imagine<<
Do you think this may be a result of he same neurological event, perhaps the release of endorphrins as the brain shuts down?
Last edited by ancient warrior; 08-31-2012 at 11:07 AM..
Reason: type
>>we have to take it on faith that God has left us with what He wanted us to have.<<
Of course, aren't you assuming that the New Testament is actually divinely inspired? Is it? Any evidence?
No, no evidence. The larger part, actually the entire thing about Christianity is that we have to accept it on faith. I look at it this way. I am not atheist or agnostic. I believe in God and Jesus, the Son of God with all my heart. If I walk away with only one thing from the Bible it is this: "Jesus Christ, the Son of God, crucified, died and resurrected for the salvation of man." That Christianity has survived as long as it has is testament that there is more to believe than to not believe, regardless of the dicey origins of the Bible.
Quote:
>>I don't bother reading Matthew, Mark and Luke because they borrow quite a bit from each other and from Q and we can't be sure who really authored them. <<
Incorrect. Luke and Matthew copied from Mark. There is no "Q" material in Mark.
>>One problem, for example, is how can experts claim Matthew the Apostle is the author of Matthew when the writer had to borrow from Mark. Wasn't he right there at Jesus' side? <<
You are correct. The gospel we now call Matthew's was writtgen anonomously. It was attribute to the Apostle Matthew by Papias in 135 AD. It is cleear that the evangelist called Matthew is not the Apostle Matthew, for the reason you give. Neither the writer of Mark, nor the writer of Matthew were witnesses to the events they describe.
Correct.
Quote:
>>The God of the Bible is largely fictionalized<<
Yes. Men tend to do that when writing legends.
I don't believe God is a legend, neither Jesus Christ. There is plenty of historical evidence for Jesus, and such an ordered universe is plenty of evidence to me that some powerful Being created it all.
Quote:
>>People of all faiths and persuasions who have had near-death experiences and death bed visions have talked of the most loving, the most compassionate, the most forgiving God they could never imagine<<
Do you think this may be a result of he same neurological event, perhaps the release of endorphrins as the brain shuts down?
To some extent, but neurological events do not explain how patients clinically dead and with absolutely no brain wave or heart circulation can later describe to operating room personnel precise details and dialogues that transpired during the operation or the attempt to resuscitate when there is plenty of evidence that nobody coached them afterward.
It is questionable if the author of Mark was Jewish. He seeems to have know little about Jewish law and custom. And little about the geography of Israel.
For example:
Mark 10:11-12, " He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."
But Jewish law did not permit a woman to divorce her husband. Only husbands could divorce wives.
Mark’s Gospel claimed that the Second Coming would occur during his generation. But it didn’t.
Mark 9.1
“And he said to them, ‘Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.’(NRSV)
Mark 13:24-27, 30
‘But in those days, after that suffering, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see “the Son of Man coming in clouds” with great power and glory. Then he will send out the angels, and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven...
Truly I tell you, thisgeneration will not pass away until all these things have taken place.” (NRSV)
[Note: Some apologists try to avoid the error in Mark's prediction by claiming that he was really talking about some future generation. But they overlook the plain meaning of words, "Thisgeneration..." and "some standing here..come with power."]
Last edited by ancient warrior; 09-06-2012 at 08:41 AM..
Reason: addition
Mark’s Gospel claimed that the Second Coming would occur during his generation. But it didn’t.
Mark 9.1
“And he said to them, ‘Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.’(NRSV)
Transfiguration - not second coming. Check out the next verse.
Quote:
Mark 13:24-27, 30
‘But in those days, after that suffering, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see “the Son of Man coming in clouds” with great power and glory. Then he will send out the angels, and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven...
Truly I tell you, thisgeneration will not pass away until all these things have taken place.” (NRSV)
[Note: Some apologists try to avoid the error in Mark's prediction by claiming that he was really talking about some future generation. But they overlook the plain meaning of words, "Thisgeneration..." and "some standing here..come with power."]
There are two references going on throughout verses 14-31: the immediate destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and the future Tribulation. The passage talks about both at the same time. And "generation" (genea) is a tricky word that could have either a narrow ("contemporaries") or broad (group of people descended from common ancestor) sense. In this case (see context above) it's being used as double reference incorporating both senses.
At least that's what many futurists think. You'll have to ask preterists their beliefs.
Transfiguration - not second coming. Check out the next verse.
There are two references going on throughout verses 14-31: the immediate destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and the future Tribulation. The passage talks about both at the same time. And "generation" (genea) is a tricky word that could have either a narrow ("contemporaries") or broad (group of people descended from common ancestor) sense. In this case (see context above) it's being used as double reference incorporating both senses.
At least that's what many futurists think. You'll have to ask preterists their beliefs.
RESPONSE:
This is the coming of the Son of Man, not the Transfiguration which is mentioned earlier.
Please note that the words used are "This generation". Not some (future) generation. The plain meaning of words.
See also:
Mark 8 "And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation.
"This generation" is specified in both cases.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 09-06-2012 at 06:09 PM..
Reason: addition
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mark's prophecies of the Sacond Coming
