Would you not say that they all see what they want to see?
I would for some, yes. Perhaps even many. When they are looking for a reason to hate. They have to ignore the evidence to see what they want to see. But you said this:
But you will make them say the same thing....because you want it to.
I will make them (the gospels) say the same thing because I want them to.
But I don't do this... and while you cannot know that, I understand... so I e x plained how I have changed from something I wanted to believe and to see... to where the evidence leads, even when I have not wanted to believe 'it', whatever it might be.
You reason it....so, it is what you want to see....I see what I want to see...so what? You have no evidence at all that these writers were witnessess....but you say they are....I say thats what you want to see...why don't you like that.
That is not what you said. You have changed it. You said I make the gospel writers say the same thing because I want them to say the same thing. Has nothing to do with whether or not they were eyewitnesses.
As to that, I will say the same thing now that I have said before: Luke's account seems to be written by him... granted not the original copy. Whether the original witnesses wrote any of the others gospels or not (and we only know that they are not the original copies)... they were people who gave their testimony to those who later wrote their words down. Paul's letters were personal, and so those are written by him. Though again, not original copies.
Peace,
tammy