[drisky]

Hi ;)

Please help me I'm really stuck thanks lukee

[donf]

Are you referring to Matthew, Luke, Mark and John?

[joypulv]

Matthew Mark Luke John

[dwashbur]

All four gospels are anonymous, which is to say they don't actually say who the authors are. The third gospel gives hints that it was written by the same person who wrote Acts, and we have strong evidence that Luke, who seems to have been Paul's personal physician, wrote those. The fourth gospel suggests it was written by "the disciple Jesus loved" and who leaned on Jesus' chest at the last supper; this is most likely John son of Zebedee, who also appears to have been the youngest of the apostles. The others, we don't know. A very early tradition says that Mark wrote the second gospel while traveling with Peter; ostensibly, he wrote down Peter's remembrances of Jesus. Another tradition says that Matthew, the tax collector turned disciple, wrote the first gospel, originally in "Hebrew" (whether this was actually Hebrew or Aramaic, opinions differ) and various people translated it into Greek.

Personally, I have no problem accepting these attributions, since I have yet to see any better ideas. I do reject the notion that Matthew wrote in something other than Greek, because the Greek of the first gospel really doesn't show any signs of being a translation.

For what it's worth.

[De Maria]

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John

[HeadStrongBoy]

The Bible in Jeremiah 36:2,4 tells us how God Himself through obedient men actually dictated every word in the whole Bible. The example in Jeremiah applies to all writers of the Bible. So even though the pen was held by Matthew, by Mark, by Luke, and by Lazarus(there is strong evidence that the gospel of John was actually penned by Lazarus), God Himself gave every word that they wrote in the original Greek language.

For evidence of Lazarus see http://www.tdwjl.com/

[jakester]

Headstrong, that's true that God did inspire people to write as you pointed out... but your answer is kind of like saying "who invented Microsoft?" "Bill Gates, did"... "no, God did because he gave man the mind to figure that stuff out." On the one hand that's absolutely true, but when people line up to meet the founder of Microsoft, they aren't looking to meet God.

Just a minor quibble that I have because I think it's a little trite to answer the question that way.

[HeadStrongBoy]

I maintain that God actually D-I-C-T-A-T-E-D WORD BY WORD. This is not just a minor quibble. It throws a completely different light on the Bible. The Bible is not based on the understanding of the men who were mere secretaries to God HIMSELF.

[donf]

Headstrongboy,

Just curious, how old are you?

While your beliefs are yours to have and hold dearly, they are not mine and I do not appreciate being ridiculed when I asked a question.

[Wondergirl]

Comment on jakester's post
I maintain that God actually D-I-C-T-A-T-E-D WORD BY WORD.

You are proposing an automatic writing situation. That's not what the Bible says. 2 Peter 1:21 (KJV): "... holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost."

from leaderu.com --
"How can one hold to the verbal inspiration of the whole of Scripture without lapsing into a dictation theory of inspiration which, in effect, extinguishes the human author? A theory of divine inspiration based upon God's middle knowledge is proposed, according to which God knew what the authors of Scripture would freely write when placed in certain circumstances. By arranging for the authors of Scripture to be in the appropriate circumstances, God can achieve a Scripture which is a product of human authors and also is His Word."

My minister father taught that God used the experiences and temperaments and personalities of the writers themselves when they penned the Gospels (and the rest of the Bible).

If God had "dictated" to you and me to write a certain thing, the writings would be exactly the same. If God had "moved" you and me to write that certain thing, our messages would be the same, but the style would be different because you and I are two different people.

[jakester]

Headstrongboy,

Just curious, how old are you?

While your beliefs are yours to have and hold dearly, they are not mine and I do not appreciate being ridiculed when I asked a question.

Yes, I think Headstrongboy is an apt name for him... I usually don't even address things like this but I think Headstrongboy has a huge axe to grind with everyone who even starts to dissent from his opinion... people like this are trolls, who look use religion as a weapon against others.

[dwashbur]

You are proposing an automatic writing situation. That's not what the Bible says. 2 Peter 1:21 (KJV): " ...holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost."

from leaderu.com --
"How can one hold to the verbal inspiration of the whole of Scripture without lapsing into a dictation theory of inspiration which, in effect, extinguishes the human author? A theory of divine inspiration based upon God's middle knowledge is proposed, according to which God knew what the authors of Scripture would freely write when placed in certain circumstances. By arranging for the authors of Scripture to be in the appropriate circumstances, God can achieve a Scripture which is a product of human authors and also is His Word."

My minister father taught that God used the experiences and temperaments and personalities of the writers themselves when they penned the Gospels (and the rest of the Bible).

If God had "dictated" to you and me to write a certain thing, the writings would be exactly the same. If God had "moved" you and me to write that certain thing, our messages would be the same, but the style would be different because you and I are two different people.

Agreed. Beyond that you have the problem of preservation. If God dictated the Bible word for word, why didn't he care enough to preserve it word for word through the centuries? There are plenty of places in the New Testament, and even more in the Old Testament, where we not only aren't sure what the words mean, we're not even sure what the words ARE because there are variations in wording in the copies that we have. So if you want to take HSB's approach, God dictated the whole thing word for word, then said "Okay, I'm done. Do the best you can keeping it because I don't care any more."

Are you really prepared to say that, Headstrong?

[Wondergirl]

(there is strong evidence that the gospel of John was actually penned by Lazarus)

For evidence of Lazarus see The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved - who was that beloved disciple?

Lazarus is the only man named in the Gospel of John who is described as someone Jesus "loved." Therefore, a few scholars have proposed that Lazarus was the Beloved Disciple who wrote the Gospel of John. Of course, they neglect the fact that the Gospel of John also says that Jesus loved Mary and Martha, and we all know Jesus was big on women as equals in a patriarchal time. Could it be that a woman (*gasp*) was the Beloved Disciple who wrote the gospel?

All that link does is try to sell me a book. It doesn't prove anything about Lazarus being the writer of the Fourth Gospel.

[dwashbur]

Lazarus is the only man named in the Gospel of John who is described as someone Jesus "loved." Therefore, a few scholars have proposed that Lazarus was the Beloved Disciple who wrote the Gospel of John. Of course, they neglect the fact that the Gospel of John also says that Jesus loved Mary and Martha, and we all know Jesus was big on women as equals in a patriarchal time. Could it be that a woman (*gasp*) was the Beloved Disciple who wrote the gospel?

All that link does is try to sell me a book. It doesn't prove anything about Lazarus being the writer of the Fourth Gospel.

The "disciple that Jesus loved" is described as leaning on Jesus' chest at the last supper, and as being the one Peter asked about in John 21. Lazarus wasn't present at either event. And since he's named when Jesus raised him, why wouldn't he be named later on? Lazarus as the beloved disciple just doesn't work.

[HeadStrongBoy]

I did not say it PROVED. I said it was evidence. You don't have to buy the book. You can read it FREE online.

[HeadStrongBoy]

Closed minds also don't work.

[HeadStrongBoy]

Clearly the issue is complicated. All I'm saying is to take Jeremiah 36:2 and 4 as applicable to the whole Bible just like 2 Peter 1:21 is applicable to the whole Bible.

[Fr_Chuck]

Please remember the bible, while a "book" to us, was not a book at all till much more recent times in the history of the bible anyway.

Each scripture was written separate and the old testament we have was an accept version. The parts that made up the New Testament was not as easy to decide on, and from common use, to writing styles were all used to determine ( including which versions were used in the major churches)

So at the time of the writing of either verse, there was no "bible" so to speak.

[Fr_Chuck]

Also, notice and/or warning,

Stop using the comment feature to add more information, use the answer button

[NeedKarma]

Also, notice and/or warning,

stop using the comment feature to add more information, use the answer button

I don't think its fair to give the user a warning - it's a site design issue.