It's an ancient document.
It has a clear agenda.
It is anonymous.
The earliest copies we have are considerably later than the events that are described.
A human or humans wrote it.
I was giving reasons to mistrust Matthew's reliability. I was not giving reasons that demonstrate that Matthew was incorrect or outright wrong.
So you distrust the reliability of any ancient document? What is mistrustful of having an agenda if your agenda is to spread the truth? It probably was not anonymous to the receivers of matthew's text. Who ever delivered the document to each church knew who it came from , and can probably made that known to the elders of that church. You are assuming that just because its author is unknown now doesn't mean its author was unknown when it was first delivered. A human can write something under inspiration and under non-inspiration. If the author of Matthew was under the inspiration of God, you cannot say it is totally the work of a man. If you sit under a teacher for over ten years and listen to no one else, and then write a thesis based on what you have learned, is it your work alone? No. It is a reflection of the thoughts of your teacher seen through the prism of your personality.
Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
