What evidence the author base his story off?

According to The New Testament, in one of the stories (Luke 9:10-17 for example) Jesus arrives by boat with his apostles. When they see the townspeople, Jesus tells his apostles to fetch the bread and fish from the boat, and in front of 4000 people (and a further 5000 on another occasion) he creates enough bread to feed them all, with enough left over for themselves.Now, even though around 9000 people accumulatively witnessed this event, who would have no doubt told another 2 people each (so it’s no stretch to imagine 27000 people should have known about this by the second or third day), there is not one record of anyone ever witnessing this; no carvings, no statues, no stories, no paintings, no myths spawned from this event, not one thing. 9000 people (plus a further 18000 hear about it) see this amazing event and not one record of them ever seeing it can be found.So, obviously this story never made it to the bible because of the thousands of pieces of evidence that were found in remembrance of it one century later, so one of the apostles there that day must have remembered that event. Paul was not one of the apostles, he was not there on that day, and he never actually wrote about that event in any of his epistles either. This leads me to my question:If this happened, and Paul never wrote about it happening in his epistles, and it wasn’t based off evidence found from those who saw it, how did the author of that story find out about it one century later? What is the writer basing their story off?If we don’t have any record of that event happening, either internally as Paul’s writing, or externally through records of other accounts, how did this story come about?[edit - Fixed up thread as per AdminPhats suggestions, also changed the title. I didn't like the old one]This message has been edited by boolean, 03-27-2006 07:02 PMThis message has been edited by boolean, 03-27-2006 07:04 PM

Hello, boolean! You have some great questions and sound as if you are ready to discuss this type of "stuff". I want to encourage you to participate in the topics that others have already started and get a "feel" for the forum and the persons here. Your topic is a bit too big. Maybe you can edit it (By pushing the EDIT button) and focus on one of your questions. That way, your topic will get rolling and you can bring the other questions in later.Im not going to reject this topic....but I want you to get a few posts in the other topics first. In my non-admin mode, (Phat) I would like to discuss literalism, legend, and lunacy with you. Do edit and get back to me by March 25th.

---

---

Hi AdminPhatNo problem at all.What I will do is spend a bit more time on the forums first, maybe get my post count to around 20 or 30 (not spammy posts, but proper replies), then I will edit this post and bump it back up with just one question in it.Cheers mate.

I think that you have proven to me that you can reason and ask questions in a polite and professional manner! Now you are ready to carry on with this proposed new topic.1) Go back to your opening post and edit it. Push the EDIT button and redo the post. You can even change your title.What I do, often, is to first write my post out on a wordpad document and edit it there. I read it over and imagine how it would sound if I were reading it. I then copy that to the box on the forum and paste it in there.You probably have thought of new ways to express this post, and may even want to totally redo it. If you are ready to go ahead with it, you may edit and revise it and send me a reply to this message as well so as to flag me.

Thanks AdminPhat How's it looking now?

Its still a bit off.I may be a bit of a perfectionist regarding proposed new topics.Im gonna call on the other admins to help me evaluate your topic.You certainly are polite enough! We like polite people at EvC!In a nutshell, here is my critique:1) The title is gramatically incorrect.
2) My non-admin mode sees flaws in your initial premise. That is not for me to judge regarding promoting your topic, but it certainly can be influential regarding this topics liklihood of falling flat or not.(as an example, Paul was NOT an Apostle at the time of the alleged miracle)This is not the place to debate the merits of your topic, but if you wish to e-mail me, please feel free. In the meantime, other admins may offer you constructive criticism or may even promote you as is.This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 03-28-2006 04:20 AM

Hey Boolean,The post looks good and I understand what you are asking. I see Phat's dilemma. Sometimes our nonadmin self jumps ahead of the game.I have some questions that might help set up the discussion so you don't get trampled (but no guarantee ).I assume you realize the story shows up in all three of the synoptics. Are you only wanting to discuss how the author of Luke came about his info or how the gospel authors came by their info?Since you seem to want to look at the actuality behind the Bible (correct me if I'm wrong), I suggest putting this in Bible Accurracy and Inerrancy.Possible Title Options:
Sources for the Bread and Fish Story
Luke the Investigator, What Were His Sources?This message has been edited by AdminPD, 03-28-2006 07:38 AM

Tell ya' what, I might leave this topic for now. When my bible-fu is stronger, I'll bring it up then This message has been edited by boolean, 03-29-2006 06:24 AM

As you wish. I will close this topic, but leave you with a thought.In Luke 1:1-3, the author presents himself as someone who has carefully investigated "everything" from the beginning.Since you want to know sources, a topic discussing the sources of the investigator would be different and interesting. Just an angle to think about.Happy researching