Is it Gospel?
Doesn't anybody think those who compiled the books Greek Scriptures could have included more books? Who are the ones who claimed to have compiled the books?
Aren't you the least bit suspicious that they left out books that should have been there?
I'm sure there are a lot more people on this site that know the
story better than I. But I think it was the 3 century Constantine
was the ruler and wanted to make his power further reaching
so he divised away to bring the christians and romans
together. The Holy Bible was thus born.
What it comes down to is do you believe in the HOLY book or
not? We humans are never ever going to be sure if everything
written was divine. Only if we have faith in it. If your answer is
yes than keep digging into the WORD. If no is your answer
than its time for you to move"further on up the road"
What I am trying to get you to think about, Crossroads, is that there are no original mauscripts to even know what was written in the books we do have. Who is to say that some copyist, monk or otherwise, didn't insert certain things that weren't there in the first place, in order to slant the Greek scriptures toward a certain theological practice, for instance?
About the apostle John, I think he stayed there the whole time Jesus was dying because he asked either him or one of the other apostles to take care of his mother before he expired. She was there too, btw.
I know John was there; my point do you think he heard
everything that was said that day? The mother reference
Jesus looked down had his beloved apostels attention
and spoke to him. The evil doers were up with Jesus how
high up? Talking[ must realize here that talking in this kind
of situation is awful difficult not being able to breath is how
one dies at this.] directly to them face to face as best as HE
could. My point nobody else heard what was said except the
three. Maybe there was only two witness's to what was said
to the 'good' evil doer the evil doer and the LORD after all HE
was in human form and in really bad shape. How loud do
you think he was talking they were outside people were
mermuring the whether was getting bad, NO one else heard
what was said.
What you say about the good book might be correct but you
would think if they were going to doctor things there wouldn't
be so many things still left in doubt. You know freddie wasn't
alive then so at least thats a comforting thought.
Also the catholic bible has more books in it than the regular
Either you believe the DIVINE one watched out for his WORD
or you don't . With that I'll just 'Let it Be' as Paul sings in the
backround-'because there will be an aswer let it be'
John may have heard everything--but then again maybe he didn't; yet Luke, who wasn't there, is the only person, and not an apostle I might add, who wrote the conversation. Maybe there was no such conversation. Maybe it was put there by a copyist who had his own agenda.
Why do you think there is so much controversy about where the comma should be? Perhaps to distract us from the rest of what Jesus taught?
And the parts that I am talking about that might have been added or even subtracted were not major things, but things that sincere Bible students would catch.
How come you didn't ask me what theological practice I am referring to?
And Jesus was pretty weak before he died, yet the apostle John heard him make arrangements for his mother to be cared for. I doubt he was that high up that he would have to shout to be heard.
I really don't care about Freddie.
Luke got his story from Jesus himself
Paul got his story from Jesus himself
John got Rev. from Jesus himself-where do you believe
Genisis came from?
As far as the comma goes who really cares, in reality there might have been a pause between every word HE was dying
are you saying HE had the same strength all day. Then why
did he die.
Point about the comma is not as important as the fact the
two evil doers get different rewards.
The comma only confuses those who don't believe
they are going to heaven. So again I do not care where the
comma is I want you to explain the different rewards to
the evil doers.
OK so what practice are you trying to get through to me?
There are probably hundreds of Christian gospels but these are regarded as mythologies...........but the four we have are not myths like the others but truth!
But scholars today regard very little of the gospels we have as authentic........82% derived from the prevailing traditions. I find it remarkable that so powerful teaching was virtually ignored by the 1st Century leaders. Why? Because there was nothing to speak to of. i.e it was only later that sayings/teachings were attributed to him.
The book of Acts is another book that creates more questions than it answers.
crossroads, you asked me if Jesus had the same strength all day.
I'm saying he didn't have the same strength all day. Since John records that he made arrangements for someone to care for his mother after he was gone, he would have had to shout it out, right? But he was weak and dying; he wouldn't have had the strength to shout.
As far as being inspired to write, I am not denying that the gospel writers were inspired. I am suggesting that copyists may have inserted little things here and there in these writings that weren't there in the first place.
Come off it, ISP!
How could you expect Paul to recall Jesus words on earth when he wasn't a disciple at the time? He was a Pharisee and the most zealous one at that, according to his own words. He wrote that the only boast he wanted to have was Christ crucified. This is the one who converted him. This is the one who instructed him.
The gospels may have come later; John's certainly did.
The argument you put forward needs to be in harmony with facts.
is there any point trying to figure out who was where to hear what? there were lots of occasions when clearly no one was around to hear anything (Jesus prayer while disciples slept) - you have to accept that there was supernatural transmission of information or else just forget it.