****yet the Catholic Church bases much of it’s beliefs on word of mouth accounts sometimes hundreds of years removed from eyewitness accounts.****
You realize that both the gospels of Mark and Luke are second hand accounts. Neither was an eyewitness or original disciple of Jesus. Accepting, of course, that the authorship of both are who they are believed to be.
Mark was a companion to Peter and Luke to Paul. So that would make at least two gospels second hand accounts.
Also, there is not one existing original manuscript. All that we have are copies of copies.
And lastly, the written word comes from the oral tradition and not the other way around.
When one accepts the Bible as writings inspired by God, one must do so on faith. A faith in something/someone who exists eternally, who is the creator of all things and who is the sustainer of all things. A faith that is not of our making, but a gift of God and one that is kindled in us by someone telling us about God and Jesus and leading us to His revelation.
Without that faith, the Bible is a collection of myths and legends and familial stories. Just ask any atheist.
Well, let’s look at Luke.
Luke 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, 2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; 3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
We know that Luke was with Paul. Should we take his words that he was and eyewitness?
As for Mark, he was more than a follower of Peter wasn’t he. In fact when Peter came to the house of Mary the mother of John Mark (Acts 12:11-12) Barnabas took him with them (Acts 15:37) when they left didn’t he. In fact, wasn’t Peter married to one of John Marks father’s relatives? I do believe that when John Mark’s father died Peter took John Mark in and raised him thus calling him “Marcus my son”. (1 Peter 5:13) I do believe that that would qualify him to be considered an eyewitness. Mark actually did much of Peter’s writing didn’t he?