Did any author in the New Testament actually know Jesus?

I can only imagine you are taking part in too many discussions, and have forgotten what your own point was. Allow me to go over it again:In Message 202 you were asked when was Justin Martyr testifying to Matthew writing Matthew/the authenticity of Matthew (if you go back further to Message 186 you can get more context).In Message 205, you responded that Justin Martyr was born about 110CE.In Message 222, Kapyong rebutted that Justin Martyr didn't start writing until the 150s and that he didn't mention the name of a single evangelist and asked you to quote Justin Martyr naming the Gospel writers.Finally you write Kapyong and you were both talking about Justin Martyr attesting to the authorship of Matthew, not Josephus. I'd still like to hear your answer to the original question - when is the earliest time when Matthew was attributed to Matthew?Also this is from Message 224By that naive criterion, the Gospel of Thomas was written by Didymos Judas Thomas.

When quoting early Christian writers, posters act like we have the autographs or originals. Many of these quotations come from supposed copies centuries later. For example, Eusebius quoting Papias. Wouldn`t it be a better plan to actually quote the document author rather than ASSUME that Papias, Justin Martyr, etc. said this or that?Would anyone know of a site listing all of the EXTANT writings of these early Christian writers? Peter Kirby`s?

hi mod,yep i think you're right, too many different threads for me.
was this thread about justin martyre??,.. i'll have to go back and read it thru. the exact year is not known but in several manuscripts of the 10th century there is an inscription at the end of the gospel of stating 41CE as the year written. the Gospel of Thomas is not considered an authentic Christian writer. He likely did write it, but who he was is unknown...he certainly didn't stick to the christian teachings.

there are plenty of sites where you can view all of their writingshere's one
Justin Martyr

Gday, Peg -
you made claims about the authorship of Matthew, and you were asked questions about it - now you seem to be avoiding the issue.When was the earliest G.Matthew was attributed to him?Did you check Justin Martyr?
Does he name the author of Matthew as you claimed? A 10th century scribal note?
A millenium later?
Do you really think that is good evidence?KapyongEdited by Kapyong, : No reason given.

Can someone explain to me why this horse has been shackled to the rear end of my cart???

That`s Peter Kirby`s site, Peg. On it you get items like: Which don`t fill me with confidence. Bear in mind, apart from ASSUMING these are genuine, afaik, none have been carbon-dated, and most rely on paleography to date them. Lots of possiblys, maybes, could-bes. Did Justin actually write something, or have later copyists ASSUMED it was authentic? Y`know, that bit about 'tickling the ears'. In matters of this kind with a lot of forging going on, I find it better to start off with a blank sheet, and go with confirmed evidence.

Kapyong has resumed the thread of discussion about authorship of Matthew, I'll allow you to answer his post in that regard rather than repeating the question myself. I know he isn't considered an 'authentic Christian writer', by which I choose to interpret as 'canonical'. The author was certainly a Christian, it just wasn't the same kind of Christianity as the kind that proscribed it.You said "He likely did write it", I'm fairly sure you don't really mean what that sounds like. It is likely that a man wrote it, for sure, but he sounds like you are saying that it is likely that the Apostle Thomas wrote it? No - because your next sentence is "who he was is unknown".If, for some reason, you had forgotten who Thomas was (!) See John 20:24-29

quote:

---

But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.

​

The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

​

And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: [then] came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace [be] unto you.

​

Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust [it] into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

​

Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.

---

The author of the Gospel of Thomas claims to be the same Apostle and one of the twelve disciples of Christ that the author of John claims to be describing above.It seems fitting that I ask you to disprove that Thomas wrote the Gospel of Thomas. If you cannot, should we assume that it was in fact Thomas that wrote it? During your answer you might want to consider also how the claim of authorship in 1 Peter is different enough to avoid disqualification, since that is the point I am trying to drive you towards.Likewise, can you disprove that Simon Peter did not write the text that this came from:

quote:

---

Now it was the last day of Unleavened Bread, and many were returning to their homes since the feast was ending. But we, the twelve disciples of the Lord, continued weeping and mourning, and each one still grieving for what had happened, left for his own home. But I, Simon Peter, and Andrew my brother, took our fishing nets and went to the sea.

---

(From the gospel of Peter)Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

you realise you quote minded my post then.in reply to Modulous i stated that 41CE is the year attributed to the writing. i said Justin Martyr makes references to Mathews Gospel. His writings go back to 2nd Century so this means that mathews gospel must have been in circulation before the 2nd century.

for someone who cannot be authenticated, we surely have a lot of information about him and his works.Nightrain, we can say the same thing about every person in history, the scholars of today can put doubt on everyone...it doesnt mean they are rightit means they have doubts. but do those doubts change the historical records that we have? No, those records written by earlier scholars and historians are still there and still say that this person did this and this one did thatwe can take it with a grain of salt, but we cannot write it off completely

1stly, i dont think its called the Gospel of the Apostle Thomas or the Gospel of Saint Thomas
i believe its called, the 'Gospel of Thomas'
Im sure there could have been any number of people named thomas. it is highly unlikely that any christian wrote this book because it contains accounts of miracles supposedly performed by Jesus in his childhood.this is completely contradictory to the gospel accounts and no other bible writer mentions anything like this in their accounts about Jesus. There is very limited information about his childhood anywhere else in the christian scriptures.So it can be disproved quite easily..it is completely out of harmony with the rest of the christian teachings. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

We certainly can, Peg, if it can`t be authenticated. And when you have a body who are known forgers, you have to be doubly careful. Narratives, even fictional, are at the mercy of the author. Historians are only people, not some impeccable source whose word is (pardon )gospel. Unless you approach their work with reserve, how will you know if they are telling some, all, none of the truth?

Gday, Pardon?
What on earth do you mean ? Yes, you did make that reply.
Which completely avoided the real question.The question is :
When was the Gospel of Matthew first attributed to him specifically?
(NOT : When do later Christians claim G.Matthew was written?)By the way - can you please provide some specific details for that manuscript that has the 41CE date? Indeed you did.
And I pointed out that Justin Martyr NEVER actually referred to Matthew by name, and the quotes he gives are NOT the same as our modern G.Matthew. You never addressed these points. Did you think we wouldn't notice you dropped those 50 years or so? Justin wrote in the 150s.In fact what it really shows is that mid 2nd century there were several UN-NAMED gospels known to Christians which were NOT quite the same as ours.The evidence is quite clear - the Gospels stories gradually appear in Christian history in early-mid 2nd century, initially as UN-named writings, grow and change over the 2nd century, and are finally named by Irenaeus in the 180s.That's century and a half from the alleged events to the first Christian to name the four evangelists.(Aristides specifically refers to the Gospel (singular, with no author's name) as being only recently preached in the period 138-161.)Modern NT scholars agree that we do no know the actual author of any of the Gospels, nor most of the other NT books.Kapyong.Edited by Kapyong, : No reason given.Edited by Kapyong, : No reason given.

The thing with Gospels is that they aren't title "The Gospel of Thomas/Mark/Matthew". If it had been titled 'The Gospel of Saint Thomas', that would be obviously problematic since saints don't write things since to be a saint you have to generally be dead.Still if you don't think that the following,

quote:

---

These are the secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke and which Didymos Judas Thomas wrote down.

---

is claiming to be Thomas, known as Didymos also known as Judas, Apostle, disciple of Jesus, and a witness to the secret things Jesus said to him...then I am at a loss for words. Suffice to say that pretty much everybody in the world disagrees with you on this point and we'll move on.If you didn't outright deny what everybody else can see with their own eyes, and it did claim to be written by an Apostle - would this be evidence that the account was from an eyewitness? Or might it be more likely that the author pretended it was written by an Apostle in order to convince people of the authority of his work? It is highly unlikely you've even read a paragraph about this book because it contains no miracles or accounts of Jesus' childhood. Does this mean that Matthew and Luke are completely contradictory to Mark? After all, Mark doesn't mention Jesus' birth. Having more information than someone else, doesn't necessarily mean that the account is wrong. It is highly likely that there were far more Christian Gospels that the canonical Gospels were not harmonious with than the other way around.
So no, you have failed to disprove it.

Nor by the same token can one justify that that the manuscript was written by whoever.Can one prove that Homer wrote the Illiad? No.Can one prove that Plutarch wrote Plutarch's Lives? No.It is the same with any ancient or even Medieval writing.It is only by tradition that Matthew was written by Matthew. No real evidence. The subject of this topic is "Did any author in the New Testament actually know Jesus?" The answer is simply "Unknown."

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969