Quote Originally Posted by skiguy View Post
I have to disagree, Marc. Most of the early (pre AD 60) churches, such as those in Ephesus, Thessalonica etc, did accept Paul as one of the messengers of the gospel. If there was any argument about Paul's authority, it was over whether or not the gospel was meant for the Gentiles as well as the Jews.
It's certainly open to debate. Most of Paul's churches weren't accepted by the Church in Jerusalem for exactly the reason you listed. I wouldn't call them "original" partly for that reason, and partly because Paul wasn't a first hand witness. I tend to think of them as a set of "first round expansion teams" to use a hockey analogy .

Quote Originally Posted by skiguy View Post
Yes, the Gospels (and the rest of the NT) were written after Jesus's death, but the gospel writers were all eye witnesses of His ministry. Speculation here, it wouldn't surpirse me if Luke (the Dr.) kept a journal, seeing how specific he was in his writing.
There is some really serious question about the Gospel of John beingn written by an eye witness. Most of the non-conservative theologians I know or have read tend to place it fairly late, say ~85-95, and generally conclude that it wasn't written by the disciple of that name. At least when I studied it, the general agreement was that the Johanine community derived from Paul's churches rather than from John. I'll agree with you on the synoptics, however.