Re: Logia

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Not-easily-duped <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>"stephen bayzik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<voggg7s5
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> Just a wee bit of information regarding the Gospels.
>> 
>> (Greek: "sayings," "words," or "discourses"), hypothetical collection,
>> either written or oral, of the sayings of Jesus, which might have been in
>> circulation around the time of the composition of the Synoptic Gospels
>> (i.e., those of Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Most biblical scholars agree that
>> Matthew and Luke based their written accounts largely on The Gospel
>> According to Mark. The versions of Matthew and Luke, however, both 
>share a
>
>
>
> Why do you think that Matthew who was an apostle and spent the rest of 
>his
> life as Jesus follower would need Mark an outsider 
> to compose his "Gospel"?
> Was Mark better informed about Jesus than Matthew?
> Was Mark among the twelves?
>
> I am baffled how stupid scholars can get

Accepted wisdom says that Mark was Peter's secretary in Rome, and
wrote his gospel in around 70 a.d., from Peter's memories. The other
apostles were all dead by then, and as has already been pointed out,
the other gospel writers were not  the apostles of  the same names.
The church does not deny this, but does not make a big thing of it,
either.


[EMAIL PROTECTED]