Quote:
Originally Posted by Shasown
snip
Given that neither book were actually wrote as they are alleged to have occurred, but consdierably later after his death, dont you find it amazing that the writer in the case of Mark's godspel can quote what was said word for word, given that they werent actually there because it was wrote about 2 centuries after the actual event?
|
this whole paragraph is nonsensical and just plain incorrect,
Mark was written mid to late 50s AD to mid to late 60s AD
John was written 70-100 AD
Mark was eyewitness dictation from Peter
John was an apostle, one of the 12 disciples ("the disciple whom Jesus loved"), John the son of Zebedee.
This is not my own personal opinion it is historical accepted fact which can be fully checked online or in any modern study Bible.
and the Bible translation I use is the ESV if you can prove to me that the Catholic Bible (which uses the vulgate) uses better sources and more up to date manuscript and sources than the ESV that would be just grand.