Whether or not the Gospels are eyewitness accounts first rests on the evidence for their dating. They would have to be dated early enough to record the testimony of those who witnesses Jesus' ministry.
So Jim Wallace's approach to the Gospel of Mark is an interesting one. Jim is a cold case homicide detective and has specialized skill in forensic document analysis. He applied these skills to the Gospel of Mark to evaluate the source of the testimony. His conclusion is that Mark is not only dated very early, it's likely Peter's testimony recorded by Mark. Here's his evidence.
I basically agree that the date of Mark's Gospel is early, but the parallels in Luke are accounted for by Luke's use of a smaller Proto-Mark; this explains Luke's non-use of so much of Mark. Also, I don't think arguments about the date of Mark based on the DSS are going to survive for long.
Nice to see folks looking into this sort of thing though.
Yours in Christ,
James Snapp, Jr.
Posted by: James Snapp Jr | July 24, 2010 at 07:33 PM
Isn't it plausible that Luke interviewed Peter or Mark or them both as he gathered the information from which he composed the Gospel of Luke?
Karl Anderson
Posted by: Karl | August 09, 2010 at 04:04 PM