The Gospel Of Mark: A Literary Analysis

Many atheists claim that the gospels are fiction, or myth. One specific argument they present is that the authors of the gospels actually intended for them to be read as fiction. This idea however, seems not only to be a bit far fetched, but also lacking substantial evidence for it. Parallels can be seen all throughout the world; some are related while others are merely an accidental byproduct. Dennis MacDonald, a member of the Jesus Seminar, “argues that the Gospel of Mark, upon which he believes Matthew and Luke are based, was intended to be an inspiring myth intentionally modeled after Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey...[because] he claims to find significant parallels between Mark and Homer” (Boyd and Eddy 83-84). Even upon first glance, this argument seems absurd because it presents a very week parallel. If MacDonald were to actually try and make a parallel between the the Gospel of Mark, it seems that he would at least be able to find a more plausible parallel. A necessary question that must be asked after this claim is, what does it matter if there are parallels? In one hundred years, some person …show more content…
Is that, if considered with an open mind, there is strong evidence that the Gospels are historically reliable. The beginning part of the thesis is especially important because it seems like many people, like MacDonald, have already decided that the Gospels are not historically reliable and therefore will make any kind of claim in order to prove their point. In my opinion, most of the arguments made for the Gospels being fiction is rather rudimentary and lacking in significant proof, and the few arguments that do hold water can be dismissed through pure faith. Sometimes, in life, all of the facts do not perfectly match up and there are slight discrepancies, but this does not mean that there are reasons to doubt everything. For those who are willing to believe, there is great evidence suggesting that the Gospels are historically