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.
"Matthew composed the sayings in the Hebrew language and everyone interpreted as he was able." Papias (60-130)
"Now Matthew brought forth among the Hebrews a written gospel in their language, while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and founding the church." Irenaeus (130-200)
"Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a tax collector, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism, and published in the Hebrew [or Aramaic] language." Origen (185-254)
"For Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss of his presence" Eusebius
I suggest you actually take some time and study what you are positing...because it's already been PROVEN that both the book of Matthew and Luke came from the same Mark source. You're just spouting what you've been taught and your lack of real education in this area shows.
He writes of his conversion to Christianity by meeting Jesus Christ in person on the way to Damascus to route out the Christians there.
Wrong...yet again. There isn't a single instance in all of Paul's writings that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, neither does he give any reference to Jesus' (alleged) life on earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikk
"Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a tax collector,
If Matthew was a witness to Jesus, why does he write in the 'third person' as in...
"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, he saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him (Matthew), follow me and he (Matthew) arose, and followed him." (Matthew 9:9)
Why didn't he write, as an eye witness...
"And as Jesus passed forth thence, he saw me sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto me, follow me and I arose, and followed him."
Because it was not written by Matthew...that's why.
I suggest you actually take some time and study what you are positing...because it's already been PROVEN that both the book of Matthew and Luke came from the same Mark source. You're just spouting what you've been taught and your lack of real education in this area shows.
Wrong...yet again. There isn't a single instance in all of Paul's writings that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, neither does he give any reference to Jesus' (alleged) life on earth.
If Matthew was a witness to Jesus, why does he write in the 'third person' as in...
"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, he saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him (Matthew), follow me and he (Matthew) arose, and followed him." (Matthew 9:9)
Why didn't he write, as an eye witness...
"And as Jesus passed forth thence, he saw me sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto me, follow me and I arose, and followed him."
Because it was not written by Matthew...that's why.
You can add John 21:24 into the mix too:
This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.
Who exactly is WE and why are THEY saying HIS testimony is true? If John wrote the book, why would he refer to "we" when it should just have been "me?" Um...maybe because John the Disciple didn't write a damn thing and someone was just using his name or, to be fair, someone else wrote it for him?
You gotta be kidding, right? Even my kids could read Matthew and Mark and see that they are almost identical word for word with some key differences by the latter (Matthew) to correct Mark or to add his own little incredulous accounts that bend reality.
You gotta be kidding, right? Even my kids could read Matthew and Mark and see that they are almost identical word for word with some key differences by the latter (Matthew) to correct Mark or to add his own little incredulous accounts that bend reality.
Yeah...they won't do that either....but mine is more poetic and makes much better sense...don't ya think?
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.