I didn't say it was an issue, I said I found it interesting.
On the other hand, I take some comfort in knowing that you wrote the words above, now I know something about how you think. Otherwise, had I read, say from Joe Blow, that you said the things above, I would have to consider whether you said the things above or whether they are Joe Blow's interpretation or memory or further hearsay.
Bottom line; if I could read Christ's words, in his own words, as I can George Washington's for example, I would have more faith in what I think and believe about them.
It became an issue when you said you found it 'interesting.' "I find it interesting..." often carries a negative connotation in today's world.
On the other hand, I take some comfort in knowing that you wrote the words above, now I know something about how you think. Otherwise, had I read, say from Joe Blow, that you said the things above, I would have to consider whether you said the things above or whether they are Joe Blow's interpretation or memory or further hearsay.
On the other hand, if this hypothetical Joe were an eyewitness to what I said, you would have reason to believe him, now wouldn't you? Unless, of course, he was a pathological liar.
Bottom line; if I could read Christ's words, in his own words, as I can George Washington's for example, I would have more faith in what I think and believe about them.
Since you don't, you'll just have to accept the multiple corroborating witnesses, two of whom wrote first-hand and two of whom wrote from first-hand sources. If you can't, it's not for lack of evidence, it's for unbelief in the evidence.