generalhurrss you crack me up!!!
The books you are referring to were written by "men" at different times and different places. I believe that these men were inspired by the holy spirit, but I don't think the purpose of the gospels were to give an exact account of certain events. They had other purposes.
For instance, the book of Matthew was unnamed, but the early church and scholars believe that it was written by Matthew. An ongoing debate by scholars is the time when it was written - possibly sometime before 70 A.D., and that Matthew used Mark as a source. The purpose for the book of Matthew was to show detailed lineage of Christ and that the Old Testament prophesies had been fullfilled by Christ.
Mark who was also known as John (Hebrew name), was not one of the original twelve disciples. Scholars say that it was written possibly around 65 & 68 A.D. The pupose of the book was to show Jesus's ministry and his activities, and the "Good news of Jesus".
Luke was written between 59 & 63 A.D. and is considered an historical work with a theological message. It's purpose was to show that Christ was the one that all people could find salvation through.
My point: They weren't written for the purpose that you have deemed them to have been. Men wrote them and accounted what others had seen and heard, as well as themselves. In the book of Matthew there is a lot of "you have heard", "it is written", and "that which was spoken" - not a lot of first hand accounts.
Some Scholars say that Matthew was probably written later than both Mark and Luke. The early church made the decision to put Matthew at the begining of the New Testament because they felt it was kinda a bridge between the Old and the New.
The Bible was written by man, compiled by man, but inspired by God. Get my point?
Bev
![Smile :) :)]()