quote:
Matthew and Luke plagiarized this from Mark. Most scholars believe this reading is not the original - that it has been edited. Scholars believe it is supposed to be like Psalm 2 “you are my son, today I have begotten you”.

Most scholars are reading into the text from the point of view that Christ was not who He said He was. They are also making conclusions based on the belief that Mark was the first gospel written because it was the shortest of the four and because it contains a passage where Christ predicts that the Temple will be destroyed. This is an assumption that the author of Mark was aware of the destruction of the Temple in the year AD 70. However, even in the year AD 29 when Christ supposedly made this prediction it wasn't much of a stretch of a prediction to make considering war between the Jews and the Romans seemed imminent even at that particular time.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the gospels and Acts of the Apostles were all written far earlier than modern scholarship typically dates them. The biggest of course being that the Acts of the Apostles completely ignores the Roman persecution of Christians and the martyrdom of both Peter and Paul. It also fails to talk about the Jewish Revolt and the destruction of the Temple, something that Luke would have most definitely mentioned had those events already occurred, considering his hostility toward the Jewish authorities. Also...the synoptic gospels are very friendly toward the Romans and very critical of the Jews. Whereas by the time Revelation is written around the year AD 100, you see a shift in tone toward the Romans. They are regarded by the author of Revelation (assumed to be the Apostle John) as the absolute spawns of Satan.

This post was edited on 11/24/23 at 8:19 am