When was the Gospel of Matthew really written?

[polonius]

[polonius]

For the kingdom posted:

polonius.advice wrote:

When compared with the other Gospels and history itself, Matthew's gospel contains a number of contradictions.


All of which have been answered.

RESPONSE: Are you serious? Lets start with just these few.

Did Jesus send for and ride one animal (it) when entering Jerusalem as reported by Mark, Luke, and John, or did he send for and ride two animals (them) so Matthew could fulfill a prophecy, but Matthew misunderstood?

Did the prophets say Jesus was to be called a Nazarene? Please give the scriptural citation for this prophecy?

Did Jeremiah say that Jesus would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver as Matthew reports?

Was Jesus really born in a manger or Joseph's house?

Did Jesus fulfill the prophecy that he would be born in Bethlehem or only of the tribe of David?

etc. etc.

And whatever happened to all those people who were raised from the dead when Jesus was crucified? Remember, according to Paul, a man can die but once. So where are they all now?

And did the Second Coming occur while "some of those standing there" were still alive?

And have you ever noticed that nowhere in the gospel we call Matthew's does Jesus or an apostle speak to Matthew, or does he speak to them. Doesn't that seriously suggest that he was never there?

[polonius]

Gospel of Matthew
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The anonymous author of Matthew was probably a male Jew, standing on the margin between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values, and familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time.[4] The majority of modern scholars believe that Mark was the first gospel to be composed and that Matthew (who includes some 600 of Mark's 661 verses) and Luke both drew upon it as a major source for their works

http://www.usccb.org/bible/matthew/0
The ancient tradition that the author was the disciple and apostle of Jesus named Matthew (see Mt 10:3) is untenable because the gospel is based, in large part, on the Gospel according to Mark (almost all the verses of that gospel have been utilized in this), and it is hardly likely that a companion of Jesus would have followed so extensively an account that came from one who admittedly never had such an association rather than rely on his own memories.

[brianbbs67]

For full disclosure , Mathew draws from Mark and another source Q(reminds me of Star Trek), as he has been named. The original title of Mathew was "The Sayings of Jesus Christ". This NT is rife with problems of authorship. As sketchy as they are, why is not the Gospel of the Hebrews(or the Gospel of Peter) included? Same could be said of the "Apocalypse of Peter" or the "Gospel of Thomas". Realistically, we have to ,first look to God. And second, remember who put this together. And their agenda.

[polonius]

For full disclosure , Mathew draws from Mark and another source Q(reminds me of Star Trek), as he has been named. The original title of Mathew was "The Sayings of Jesus Christ". This NT is rife with problems of authorship. As sketchy as they are, why is not the Gospel of the Hebrews(or the Gospel of Peter) included? Same could be said of the "Apocalypse of Peter" or the "Gospel of Thomas". Realistically, we have to ,first look to God. And second, remember who put this together. And their agenda.

RESPONSE: Common sense, well said!

[For_The_Kingdom]

[For_The_Kingdom]

For full disclosure , Mathew draws from Mark and another source Q(reminds me of Star Trek), as he has been named. The original title of Mathew was "The Sayings of Jesus Christ".

"The Sayings of Jesus Christ" <---presupposes Jesus Christ, right?

This NT is rife with problems of authorship. As sketchy as they are, why is not the Gospel of the Hebrews(or the Gospel of Peter) included?

That is like asking "Why is not every single Michael Jackson song included on his Greatest Hits album?"

Because not every song is considered a "greatest hit", that is why. The Biblical Gospels; we don't have a history of the early Church bickering about which of the books were inspired and should be considered sacred/holy.

However, we do have a history of the early Church questioning the Gospel of Peter, though...for more reasons than one.

Not every book that was titled "Gospel of X" made the Billboard charts.

[brianbbs67]

For full disclosure , Mathew draws from Mark and another source Q(reminds me of Star Trek), as he has been named. The original title of Mathew was "The Sayings of Jesus Christ".

"The Sayings of Jesus Christ" <---presupposes Jesus Christ, right? Yes no problem there.

This NT is rife with problems of authorship. As sketchy as they are, why is not the Gospel of the Hebrews(or the Gospel of Peter) included?

That is like asking "Why is not every single Michael Jackson song included on his Greatest Hits album?"

Because not every song is considered a "greatest hit", that is why. The Biblical Gospels; we don't have a history of the early Church bickering about which of the books were inspired and should be considered sacred/holy.

However, we do have a history of the early Church questioning the Gospel of Peter, though...for more reasons than one.

Not every book that was titled "Gospel of X" made the Billboard charts.

YEs and no. Since Billboard is involved, If I really liked a band, I bought all the music, not just the parts that fit. Regardless. As I am sure many young people did.

[polonius]

[polonius]

[polonius]