= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PhilGoetz comments on Every Paul needs a Jesus - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (24)
No. The Gospels were written at about the same time as Paul's letters. The selection we have to day was finalized about 300 years later.
Yes, but my understanding is that they were written following Paul's example.
For instance, I once asked a teacher if the Gospels, written by Jews for a the followers of a Jewish rabbi, were originally written in Aramaic. With the possible exception of Luke, we are pretty certain that the original versions were written in Greek, and not Hebrew or Aramaic, because the Gospel writers were following the convection set by Paul. Christianity did not have any texts (other than the traditional Jewish ones) before Paul, and his actions prompted other people to write down their oral history of Jesus.
The fact fact that Paul chose to write in Greek, is itself interesting, and reflective of the content of his reformed message; that it was one meant for the world, and not just the Jews (which it can certainly be argued was not the case of Jesus's original teachings).
The earliest Gospel (Mark) is thought to have been written about the same time as the last letters of Paul, so this is plausible. But even if they were responding to Paul, they may have been responding against him, not responding to imitate him.
All that is speculation, but we know from reading them that the Gospels have a different focus than the letters.
Luke was traditionally thought to be a Gentile &, if so, wouldn't speak Aramaic. Some of Luke is copied from Matthew, & some from Q, so it's pretty certain it was written in Greek.