Originally Posted by DBT
It has not been established that any of the gospels were written by eyewitnesses. Plus there is an overlap, the later gospels copied heavily from Mark, which in turn is based on word of mouth, and possibly earlier unknown manuscripts.

The early church writers from all over the world of that time give testimony on authorship of the gospels. They didn't get together to conspire authorship conspiracies. The critics also quoted these gospels and their authors. A lot of skeptical reasoning today is based purely on speculative conjecture because it is fashionable among the liberals.
Originally Posted by Starman
Originally Posted by DBT
... Paul himself was not aware of some of the things mentioned by the later works of the gospel writers.


Paul claimed to be a legitimate eyewitness to the resurrected Jesus despite not having seen him,
scripture ( Acts 9 ) simply says he saw a flash of light, then fell to the ground and heard a voice,
while the other men travelling with Paul heard no such voice and saw no Jesus, only the light.

When Paul got up from the ground and then opened his eyes, he also saw no Jesus,
and also found that he was blind for some days following.

Paul chose to subjectively interpret that light flash experience as a post resurrection appearance of Jesus,
thus one would have to consider how influenced he was by his own credulity or wishful thinking.

In recounting that testimony he makes it clear that he saw the Lord and talked with Him and received his missionary calling.
Peter also in his epistle affirms the reliability of Paul's writings.