Posted on 03/31/2018 5:13:46 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Holy Spirit only authored the four gospels.
Bookmark
Thanks for a very interesting and timely post. I personally feel that many along the course of early Christianity were inspired to write - by the spirit and their faith, and all brought their unique perspective to what they wrote. Although I agree with you about the four Gospels, I would love to read translations of all that was written.
Personally, I feel that God speaks to us each and every day, if we listen. I am too often preoccupied with things that won’t matter ultimately, or I would hear, see, and feel what God ‘speaks’ much more than I do.
I believe to him (Luke) and him alone can we be grateful for an account of Mary's visit ti Elizabeth and the beautiful Magnificat along with all the marvelous details.
Which are the two that there has been some speculation that one was at least in part copied from another one?
Because they either didn’t glorify God or Yeshua; wasn’t preaching the word Yeshua risen.
Good work by Tim Barnett. Thanks for posting.
>>Personally, I feel that God speaks to us each and every day, if we listen.
He speaks as a Father, but does not give out Special Revelation anymore. We are in an age where the Special Revelation found in the bible is still being played out.
Farrer (Mark-Matthew)
Three‑source (Mark‑Q/Matthew) 
Q+/Papias Hypothesis (Mark‑Q/Matthew) 
Wilke (Mark-Luke)
Two‑gospel (Griesbach) (Matthew‑Luke) 
Augustinian (Matthew‑Mark)
Jerusalem school (Luke‑Q) 
Proto‑gospel 
Independence 
I’m certainly no Biblical scholar but I do know that the four Gospels tell the story of the life of Jesus, whereas the Gospel of Thomas, which was discovered in 1945 as part of the Nag Hammadi library, is more of a collection of sayings by Jesus. That would seem like a nice addition through today’s lens, but at the time I can see that those who compiled the Bible would be more interested in the narrative.
Where is the Gospel of John?
It’s not one of the synoptic Gospels
If there is a Q, I assume it is the scribes who were often present and following Jesus with Pharisees. Perhaps Joseph of Arimathea or Nicodemus had access and made them available and their writings preserved much of Jesus’s words. Turning something meant for evil to good is something God would do.
Glad you cleared that up with charts..
My understanding is other accounts are forgeries with gnostic sympathies. Furthermore, what we have included in actual canon is the inspired word of God, and God has provided us with it as a complete reveation for his will for salvation. So, what’s the point in even bothering with the other stuff outside of being sure someone isn’t mislead?
John 21:24-25
This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.
25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
I always tell the profs that they're full of it because the scriptures clearly point out in 2 Peter 1:20 & 21,
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
How about we just say that the Holy Spirit spake through holy men of old and gave us the Gospels? It’s more accurate and much simpler.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.