B
billcu1
Guest
Is it true that Mark was Luke the Doctor’s scribe?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
patrick457
Guest
I don’t know where you get this from. Tradition has it that Mark was Peter’s secretary.Is it true that Mark was Luke the Doctor’s scribe?
B
billcu1
Guest
I was told that by a priest once.I don’t know where you get this from. Tradition has it that Mark was Peter’s secretary.
F
fhansen
Guest
Or could it be that Luke was Mark the Scribe’s doctor?
B
billcu1
Guest
I don’t know. Maybe he forgot.Ok so tradition teaches that Mark was Peter’s scribe. It’s been awhile.Or could it be that Luke was Mark the Scribe’s doctor?
G
gus
Guest
Tradition has Mark as Peter’s scribe.
I believe his gospel is a collection of Peter’s homilies.
Mark did not wasn’t to lose the things he heard directly from the mouth of Peter. He probably wasn’t as professional as the Luke or Matthew.
I also believe Mark or Peter were interviewed by Luke as he put together his gospel. Matthews gospel was originally written in Aramaic or even Hebrew and was the primary gospel of the Jewish converts.
I believe his gospel is a collection of Peter’s homilies.
Mark did not wasn’t to lose the things he heard directly from the mouth of Peter. He probably wasn’t as professional as the Luke or Matthew.
I also believe Mark or Peter were interviewed by Luke as he put together his gospel. Matthews gospel was originally written in Aramaic or even Hebrew and was the primary gospel of the Jewish converts.
N
Nita
Guest
newadvent.org/fathers/0125.htm
VI
………For information on these points, we can merely refer our readers to the books themselves; but now, to the extracts already made, we shall add, as being a matter of primary importance, a tradition regarding Mark who wrote the Gospel, which he [Papias] has given in the following words]: And the presbyter said this.** Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. **It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took special care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements. [This is what is related by Papias regarding Mark; but with regard to Matthew he has made the following statements]: **Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, **and each one interpreted them as best he could.I included the line about Matthew too. I find it interesting that he wrote his gospel in Hebrew. To my knowledge, the oldest copies we now have are in Greek
VI
………For information on these points, we can merely refer our readers to the books themselves; but now, to the extracts already made, we shall add, as being a matter of primary importance, a tradition regarding Mark who wrote the Gospel, which he [Papias] has given in the following words]: And the presbyter said this.** Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. **It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took special care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements. [This is what is related by Papias regarding Mark; but with regard to Matthew he has made the following statements]: **Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, **and each one interpreted them as best he could.I included the line about Matthew too. I find it interesting that he wrote his gospel in Hebrew. To my knowledge, the oldest copies we now have are in Greek
- Status
- Not open for further replies.