A Challenge to Farrell Till

Michael Fisher mwfisher@cts.com
Thu, 04 Feb 1999 11:17:05 -0800 (00918177425, 36B9F230.53326CBF@cts.com) 

Some more stuff for Matthew to prepare for.


  "THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES
  (NEW TESTAMENT): THE GOSPELS"

AT http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm

    Till could bring up any of the points raised in the discussions here. One I found
interesting was in a table, loosely recreated for the one line entry below:

Item                    Matthew, Mark, Luke                    John

Virgin birth       Mentioned in Matt, Luke        Rejected (John 1:45)


    When I checked, sure enough John 1:45 refers to Jesus as of the seed of David and
the son of Joseph. That's it.

    Some interesting commentary from the site:



  The Gospel of Matthew:

  An early church father, Papias (circa 130 CE), named Matthew as the author of this
gospel. He is identified as a tax collector
  in a list of the twelve disciples in Matthew 10:3. He is probably the Levi, son of
Alphaeus, referred to in Mark 2:14 and
  Luke 5:27. Papias also believed that the gospel was originally written in Hebrew.
This belief has little support today.

      Conservative Christians generally assert that the gospel was written by the
disciple Matthew, perhaps as early as 45  CE.

      Liberals believe that the name of the author is unknown. It was written after the
destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 CE, because it describes the event in
Matthew 24. Various authorities date Matthew about 85 CE.


  Matthew, along with the other synoptic gospels, stresses the humanity of Jesus. It
the only gospel that contains the word "church" (Matthew 16:18 and 18:17). Judgement,
Hell are major themes. The author wrote from a Jewish perspective, with  about 50
quotations and over 75 references to Old Testament passages. It incorporates many
passages from the gospel of  Mark and the gospel of Q.


  The Gospel of Luke:

  "Luke" was motivated to write the gospel and its sequel, the book of Acts, because he
felt that previous gospels written by  eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry lacked accuracy.
Most of the gospel was copied from Mark and Q; about one third of the passages came
from another source unique to Luke, often called "L". The special material includes
some of the most  important passages: the  parables of the Good Samaritan, of the
Prodigal Son, and of Lazarus, as well as  the story of Martha  and Mary. Luke is also
the only synoptic gospel to present Jesus as a savior (Luke 2:11). The gospel is aimed
at an international audience of Greco-Roman readers. Luke is commonly believed to have
been a physician. But recent analysis of  his writings indicates that his knowledge of
medicine was no greater than that of a typical educated person at the time. One
  interesting feature of the gospel is the use of duplicate parables: one involving a
man and another a woman. This, the emphasis  on Mary in the first two chapters of the
gospel, and other internal evidence, has led one theologian to suggest that the author
  of Luke was a woman.

Estimates of the date of writing range from the late 50's to the 90's. A date closer to
90 CE is likely, because the author comments on the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE,
and because of its dependence on Mark. Most conservative Christians believe that Luke
was a doctor who accompanied Paul on his missionary journeys. Most liberal Christians
believe that Luke  was an educated person whose identity is unknown.

  The purpose of Luke appears to be the promotion of Christianity among the Gentiles.

===============

    Till can adopt any of the above arguments based on any of the above, or as I
suggested elsewhere could just grant that the gospels were written by whomever whenever
conservatives say they were written -- and leave it up to Matthew to prove that what
they recorded was true.

    Matthew of course needs to be prepared for either alternative.

¡Salud!

Mike, aka Elfish Chimera