Hi,
I'm a little confused; was the event recorded in the other Gospels or not? You say they aren't in the first sentence but they are in the second.
Yes, I made a formating error, I fixed it now, thanks for pointing it out.
someone has to have the original content.
Not at all, it is perfectly feasible that no one had the original content, and since we do not have any original Gospel we do not know how often the stories have changed. Here's how it could have went. Mark wrote his Gospel first, Matthew copied it and added to it, Mark read matthew and altered his own Gospel, so the Gospels we have today could be copied off each other.
It is oft supposed that Matthew and Luke borrowed from Mark; however, consider that Matthew was one of the apostles and would have had no reason to borrow from Mark or any other source.
You also have to consider the fact that Matthew's Gospel (in fact all of the Gosepls) is an anonymous work, so we don;t know if it was written by the apostle or not.
Mark, supposed to be John Mark, received his information directly from the apostle Peter.
Again, an anonymous work. What a text claims for itself isn't always the truth, a little bit of spice helps sales.
And Luke, by his own testimony, was meticulous in gathering eye-witness testimony of the events of his gospel.
As has been pointed out, this is a strange reading of the text.
Brian.