Reply to thread

First you make the statement that parts of the bible WERE passed down from generation to generation.

Now that I ask you for an example your best argument is that 50 or 60 years is enough time for it to have been told and retold. All you have done is demonstrate that it is plausible for it to have been passed down not that it has been.

The similarities between Matthew and Mark are not relevant is they can just as easily be the result of the two authors having spend a lot of time together and even sharing notes or outright sharing some material directly. (The statement that Matthew reproduced about 90% of Mark is obviously wrong since we can actually count the verses that are the same and Matthew contains about 2/3 of the same verses as Mark.)

So it seems to be that the best explanation for the same stories being in Matthew that are in mark are that the authors witnessed the same stories and collaborated with each other when writing their letters.

Both your and my explanation are plausible but yours requires that the authors of the letters be liars and mine requires that miracles be possible. However, we would expect that a book that was passed down in an oral tradition would exhibit different styles based on the different tellers of the tales. The book of Matthew has all the hallmarks of a letter that was written by one author who borrowed from one other author.

Your last line: "Such stories are simply not to be taken seriously." was not supported in any way by the evidence you presented.