/lit/ - Literature

>>19647284
Manetho*

>>19647320
See:

https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-march-2020/were-israelites-slaves-in-egypt/

>>19647361
Okay, thanks for the advice friend

>>19647372
God bless you too !

>>19625561
>Historians, with much better evidence, (for reasons you can read here https://www.learnreligions.com/gospel-according-to-mark-248660 ) conclude it was written much alter.

According to the earliest traditional testimony available, Matthew wrote his Gospel around 41 C.E. There is nothing in his Gospel to contradict this testimony.

Apparently Matthew felt it urgent to get down all the facts supporting the truth that Jesus was the Messiah; he could appreciate what a great help this would be in carrying out Jesus’ commission to make disciples in all the nations, baptizing them.

So we find that Matthew wrote his Gospel some fifteen or more years before Luke and Mark wrote theirs. The date 41 C.E. is found in manuscripts as early as the tenth century C.E.

True, not a few scholars object to such an early date for Matthew’s Gospel because Matthew and Mark have so much in common, and they theorize that Mark’s Gospel, being the shorter, came first.

But Matthew’s Gospel is by no means a mere enlargement of Mark’s. As has well been observed, the similarity between the two could well be accounted for in that Peter had a copy of Matthew’s Gospel and used it in his preaching. Mark, in incorporating parts of what Peter said, would thus be writing down much that Matthew wrote.