10-12-2004, 09:44 AM
Hi Ronniv93,
Sorry for running into this thread, but something you wrote caught my attention.
''It is not an authentic book written by a person who really knew Jesus. It's unlikely that the author, whoever he is, even lived in the same geographic area and time of Jesus.'' This about the Gospel of Barnabas.
If I try to reflect on something, and then try to do it from your point of view, that you don't acknowledge this Gospel, but can I instead concentrate on the other Gospels that is used by Christianity today?
The New Testament Gospel of Mark, though considered by Church scholars to be the oldest of the Gospels is that it was not written by a disciple of Jesus. Biblical scholars concluded, based on the evidence contained in the Gospel, that Mark himself was not a disciple of Jesus. Furthermore, according to them, it is not even certain who Mark really was. The ancient Christian author, Eusebius (325 C.E.), reported that another ancient author, Papias (130 C.E.), was the first to attribute the Gospel to John Mark, a companion of Paul.
This according to 'The Five Gospels' and 'The New Encyclopaedia Britannica' vol. 14.
The same is the case with the other Gospels. Although Matthew, Luke and John are the names of disciples of Jesus, PHUB, the authors of the Gospels bearing their names were not those famous disciples, but other individuals who used the disciples’ names to give their accounts credibility. In fact, all the Gospels originally circulated anonymously. Authoritative names were later assigned to them by unknown figures in the early church.
This according to the 'The Five Gospels'.
So my question is - shall I from this draw the conclusion that these sources, and there are other similar to, most of them Christian, that they are not telling us the truth? Shall I assume that they they are lying?
Regards