Sorry, my duties have kept me busy. bahous, glad to see you back. RBrown has shown your conclusion about the Synoptic Gospels is incorrect. Just a few more verses Matthew 3 identifies John as the messenger and the messenger proclaims Jesus as the Christ/Messiah. You can even read where God proclaims Jesus as His Son. Matthew 12:33 the Apostles worship Jesus saying "you are the Son of God." Matthew 16:16 Peter say Jesus is the Christ. Mark 8:29 Peter proclaims Jesus as the Christ Mark 9 again in this chapter God proclaims Jesus as His Son and tells us to listen to Him. Mark 15:39 the Roman Centurion proclaims "Truly this man is the Son of God". Luke 9:20 Peter proclaim Jesus as Christ Luke 24 The Disciples on the road to Emmaus encounter the risen Christ. Jesus. They go back to Jerusalem to tell the Apostles, who tell them they have already seen the risen Christ. So you declaration that the Gospel of John does not reflect the Synoptic Gospels had been shown with the Synoptic Gospels to be false. As to the author. St Irenaeus of Lyon in the second century tells us the author is St John. Other Church Fathers and Historians tell us also. St John was an Apostle. The youngest Apostle who Jesus gave charge to care and protect the Blessed Virgin Mother. He was not a theologian in "Paul's Church". Paul did not setup a different Church. Paul himself tells us in Galatians 1:8, 1 Corinthians 1:23 and 2:2 he preaches Christ and Him crucified. In Galatians 1:7-8 that those want to pervert the gospel of Christ and if anyone to even include an angel from heaven preach any other gospel let him be accursed. Verse 10 Paul tells us he is a slave of Jesus Christ. John's First General Epistle was to counter the false teachings that said Jesus was not God, had not assumed human flesh. You quote 1 John 2:22 but why did you stop? verse 23 states "whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either, he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also. In verse 26 John warns the faithful that he wrote the Epistle against those trying to deceive them. Deceive them about who Christ is. At the beginning of the Epistle John tells us who he is, he walked, ate and live with Jesus. Saw the miracles, was taught by Jesus. Heard all he is passing on from the mouth of Jesus. I do believe you have read Bart Erdman's or similar books on Jesus and the Early Church. Erdman is an apostate from all faith. His purpose is to destroy Christian faith. From what I have read and see of serious theologians and historians, they consider Bart a second rate writer. Read Eusebius History of the Church. Written in the 4th Century. Covers the first 4 centuries very well. Shows the Church in a good light and with all of its failings. Still praying God will reveal the truth to you and you will come to faith in Jesus Christ. Fr. Mark
I do not think that this verse was included from the beginning in the book of Mark for the resons below: I-this verse is in totally contradiction with its parallels the ecumenical translation of the Bible) 1- it is you who said it ( Mathiew 26/64) 2-the governor asked him, saying: Art thou theking of the Jews? Jesus saith to him: Thou sayest it.( Mathiew 27/11) 3-"Mark 15/2 :" And Pilate asked him: Art thou the king of:"the Jews? But he answering, saith to him: Thou sayest it. 4-Luke 22/70 :" 70 Then said they all: Art thou then the Son of God? Who said: You say that I am. 5-Luke 23/3 And Pilate asked him, saying: Art thou theking of the Jews? But he answering, said: Thou sayest it. in comparing what's written in Mark 14/62 and the five parallel verses ,we realize that the prisoner did not recognize that he is the messiah in the arabic and french version it is written clearly : it is you who said that. and all the scholars of the Bible are unanimous that the prisoner didn't recognize he was the Messiah ( refer back to the ecumenical translation of the Bible) II-if he were the Messiah he would say it loudly since the first time of his ministry. it is unthinkable that Jesus would have hidden his Messiahship to believers and his close disciples so he revealed it at the last minute behind closed doors to his enemy .that does not make any sense. you must complete the verses. the following shows that he has corrected the jew's belief: Mathiew 16:" 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was the Christ." this means he refused the title. and in order to understand you have to read the other parallel verses in Mark and Luke : Mark 08/27 : " 29 Then he saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Peter answering said to him: Thou art the Christ.30 And he strictly charged them that they should not tell any man of him 20 And he said to them: But whom do you Luke 9/:"say that I am? Simon Peter answering, said:The Christ of God. 21 But he strictly charging them, commanded they should tell this to no man. 22 Saying: The Son of man must
Bahous, Give us your references. Please name the theologians who promote and stand by what you have said. If this is our opinion, so be it. You are wrong. Now show us which Christian theologian has said this. Or which Muslim theologian or which non believer. No make comments with out supports. Also, again your not being familiar with the English language hinders your understanding. Jesus response in each of the Gospels with the same meaning, just in a variance of words. Really, bahous, to Native English speakers each verse you quoted and think does not mean the same, we are wondering what are you talking about. Each of those verses mean the same thing. Just said differently. Again for the last three verses. This has already been answered earlier in the this thread. Sorry you do not want to accept it. But those objections have been answered and shown to be baseless. You appear to be just repeating the same thing over and over. As Jesus said, "Let him who has ears, hear." Maybe you need to stop looking for the next objection and read our answers and try to understand them. Still praying God will open your ears, heart and mind to His Messiah Jesus and you will be saved. Fr. Mark
in new ecumenical Bible translation, exactly in the verse Luke 22/70 : 139 scholars of the Bible say: that could be translated it is you who say it. and this means that Jesus was not recognized the title of the Messiah I did my biblical studies on 15 translations: three Arab , nine French and three English. dear Mark "yes I am " in Mark don't have the same meaning with the other verses : " Thou sayest it" unless you let yourself go astray. in the first he recognised himself as the Messiah , in the other verses he denied even he was Jesus. the prisoner was not Jesus. if I misjudge Brown's person and I told him you are Mark and he answers me: it is you who say it. and when he answers me : yes I am .do the two prases have the same meaning?
bahous, You have not given any sources. To say "in new ecumenical bible" means nothing. Which Bible are you talking about? Which group? Which translations did it use, ie NT Byzantine/textus receptus or Alexandrian. OT (or Jewish Scriptures) Masoretic or Septuagiant or Targum or Peshitta. It does matter. You cite 139 scholars. My response......so. Who are they? Are they Muslim, Jewish, Christian, non-believers, Hindu etc etc etc. What you think is support is, as Mrs. Strawbridge my English teacher taught me, "nothing". I can make a general ecumenical bible and 139 biblical scholars say anything. I ask you to give me the names of these scholars. Not all 139. Just the top 10. Usually in a list detailing the scholars and theologians for a bible, the best known and the ones who had the most influence are named first. The English language is still a problem for you. Just as Spanish is for me. At least my Spanish in laws tell me. If you asked me my name and you did not know me I would say Mark. If you said "who do people call you?" And you have heard me speak, been in the crowd listening to me, had me pointed out, interacted with me how would I respond? "You know who I am." "Who do you think I am." If you know my name is Mark and then ask me "is your name Mark" and we both know you know it is my name....I may just answer you with a snarky response "You said my name." The modern translation of the King James you are using. Jesus tells us and the authorities who He is. Also understand, each Gospel is from a different writer who has nuance differences. That is accurate eyewitness testimony. I was a fraud investigator for 13 years. A sure sign you are being lied to is when everyone's story is exactly the same. If is impossible for humans to see and interpret everything exactly. Everyone will focus on the various details. But again with our scriptures you only quote very narrow sections of certain verses. Let take Luke 22:70. Luke 22:66-71New International Version (NIV) Jesus Before Pilate and Herod 66 At daybreak the council of the elders of the people, both the chief priests and the teachers of the law, met together, and Jesus was led before them. 67 “If you are the Messiah,” they said, “tell us.” Jesus answered, “If I tell you, you will not believe me, 68 and if I asked you, you would not answer. 69 But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God.” 70 They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?” He replied, “You say that I am.” 71 Then they said, “Why do we need any more testimony? We have heard it from his own lips.” Luke 22:66-71King James Version (KJV) 66 And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying, 67 Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe: 68 And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. 69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. 70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. 71 And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth. Luke 22:66-71Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) Jesus Faces the Sanhedrin 66 When daylight came, the eldersa]">[a] of the people, both the chief priests and the scribes, convened and brought Him before their Sanhedrin. 67 They said, “If You are the Messiah, tell us.” But He said to them, “If I do tell you, you will not believe. 68 And if I ask you, you will not answer. 69 But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the Power of God.” 70 They all asked, “Are You, then, the Son of God?” And He said to them, “You say that I am.” 71 “Why do we need any more testimony,” they said, “since we’ve heard it ourselves from His mouth?” Luke 22:66-71English Standard Version (ESV) Jesus Before the Council 66 When day came, the assembly of the elders of the people gathered together, both chief priests and scribes. And they led him away to their council, and they said, 67 “If you are the Christ, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I tell you, you will not believe, 68 and if I ask you, you will not answer. 69 But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” 70 So they all said, “Are you the Son of God, then?” And he said to them, “You say that I am.” 71 Then they said, “What further testimony do we need? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips.” So here are four different translations. All say the same thing. All show the Authorities acknowledging Jesus says He is the Son of God. So again, the Scriptures show you are wrong. There is too much overwhelming evidence to show that Jesus is the Son of God. You can't answer it, so you ignore it. You say a mysterious bible and equally mysterious "bible scholars" support you. Scripture, the plain reading of scripture shows you to be woefully wrong. If you had read the Gospels, as you say you have; you would not be here making these basic mistakes and unable to really dialogue with us. Now give precise references to your positions. Name of works, authors, names of scholars, names of theologians, which groups they work for and with. You know, basic reference work for scholarly or academic papers. Still praying for the salvation of your soul. Fr. Mark
i am talking about "new ecumenical bible translation". it is did by 139 christians scholar. and this translation is famous and represents all christians church. it is so hard. i am not I am not a civil registration officer. if you are concerned you can make research in internet or you can ask your church. this is not a problem for me . I did my Bible study in French if you are attempting to suggest that the two responses of the accused before the hignest priest are the same then you are wrong. " yes i am" in the ancient James King version is not the same " thou sayest it"always in the same translation. in the five parrallele verses the accused denied being the Messiah. the accused was trying to say that it is you who want to stick me this title , I am not the Messiah. do not forget that it was a political accusation that will have heavy consequences for the accused. the the context tends to tilt the accused denies he is the Messiah. if you are fraud investigator you would notice that the four book of John was attempting to prove that Jesus was the Messiah ( reread the post above). this justify that any believer at Jesus's time had not accepted Jesus as the Messiah.
if you are still in your first position. why Mark Mark 14:61-62King James Version (KJV) is like this :62 And Jesus said, I am: here is English that we all know. if all the verses say the same we can't at any way make his veracity in question. Ancient James King version know well how make response of the accused clear. now let me answer you why the response is clear in Mark. Mark is the only gospel where the words " Messiah" and "son of God " appear in a very limited verses. Mark prefer the word " King"instead of Messiah , and the word " son of God" appear only five times all in the mouths of Satan , or pagan , or enemy. the translator wanting to balance out this shortfall in this word, he made it clear in the last minute .
John's corrections to the synoptic I- Texts regarding the kingdom of God Mathiew ; Mark and Luke agree to say that Jesus and John the Baptist came to announce the good news of the kingdom of God.: Luke 4/43 :” 43 To whom he said: To other cities also I must preach the kingdom of God: for therefore am I sent. » John: said nothing of it. The kingdom of God means the Messiah who have to establish the kingdom was not coming yet. II- Texts regarding Jesus’s baptem. Synoptic agree that Jesus was baptized by John John: said nothing of it . despite that he knows the fact. John 1/32:” And John gave testimony, saying: I saw the Spirit coming down, as a dove from heaven, and he remained upon him.”. Jesus have been baptized by John demonstrates that Jesus was not the Messiah. It’s for this John denies Jesus baptem. III-Jesus and John were cousin , they are the same age and were living in the same country. This is well knew in the synoptic especially Luke. John correct synoptic so: “: “33 And I knew him not;” John 1/33. John said this because in synoptic John the baptizer said : “after me came one who is greatest of me. With out appointing Jesus. IV- texts regarding disciples of John Synoptic relate that disciples of John were living next door of Jesus and his disciples. This means Jesus was not the Messiah. John: said nothing of disciples of John. 40” And Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter,was one of the two who had heard of John, and followed him” John 1/40. And all the synoptic said that Simon and his brother Andrew were from Galilia. And they were fisherman invited by Jesus to follow him. IV-The John’s prophety is related in synoptic and John differently In synoptic here is related : Mark 1/7:” 7 And he preached, saying: There cometh after me one mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and loose.” In John: “29 The next day, John saw Jesus coming to him, and he saith: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who taketh away the sin of the world.30 This is he, of whom I said: After me there cometh a man, who is preferred before me: because he was before me. 31 And I knew him not” you can notice that John explains what the synoptic’s verses open to misinterpretation. this is why we believe in Muhammed (SAWS)
I find your use of the term "your Allah" to be derogatory and inflammatory. He is everyone's Allah, Allah is simply the Arabic word God, just as Dieu is the French. Arabic Christians also pray to Allah
what is the evidence that Jesus fulfilled the function of the prophet Elijah and therefore it is only the precursor of Messiah , Based on the prophecy of Malachi (3/1; 3/23) and again on that of Esias (40) The Jews were expecting the messenger and Elijah both paving the way for the Messiah. This expectation is reformulated in question by the Jews sent from Jerusalem to John the Baptist: And they asked him : Why then do you baptize if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet? . (JN1 / 25). John the Baptist recognized he was the voice crying in the desert. So it is left Elijah and the Messiah. Here are the texts that affirm that Jesus had the power and spirit of Elijah I-Jesus himself has repeatedly appeared to Elijah and Elisha see Luke 4/23 "23 23 And he said to them: Doubtless you will say to me this similitude: Physician, heal thyself:as great things as we have heard done inCapharnaum, do also here in thy own country. 24 And he said: Amen I say to you, that no prophet is accepted in his own country. 25 In truth I say to you, there were many widows in the days of Elias in Israel, when heaven was shut up three years and six months, when there was a great famine throughout all the earth. 26 And to none of them was Elias sent, but to Sarepta of Sidon, to a widow woman. 27 And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet: and none of them was cleansed but Naaman the Syrian. 28 And all they in the synagogue, hearing these things, were _lled with anger” II-Jesus and Elie are similar in several ways . see the following points of similarities 1- They multiplied the loaves I King 17 / 10-16: " the God of Israel: The pot of meal shall not waste, nor the cruise of oil be diminished, until the day wherein the Lord will give rain upon the face of the earth. ." 2- They resurrect the dead (I King 17 / 17-24). "1and said: O Lord, my God, let the soul of this child, I beseech thee, return into his body.22 And the Lord heard the voice of Elias: and the soul of the child returned into him, and he revived." 3-They ascended to heaven (II King 2 / 11) .: "11 And as they went on, walking and talking together, behold, a _ery chariot and _ery horses parted them both asunder: and Elias went up by a whirlwind into heaven. 4- And to better understand the spirit of Elijah, Elisha healed the lepers when the spirit of Elijah rested on him (King II 2/15: "15 And the sons of the prophets, at Jericho,who were over against him, seeing it, said:The spirit of Elias hath rested upon Eliseus. And coming to meet him, they worshipped him, falling to the groundearth, and said to him ; II King 5 / 12-14): "12 Wash, and thou shalt be clean? 14 Then he went down, and washed in the Jordan seven times, according to the word of the man of God; and his esh was restored, like the esh of a little child: and he was made clean .. and Jesus did the same.
Adian, Yes Arab Christians call God Allah. But the Allah of the Muslims in not the Allah of the Christians. Our Scriptures tells us, if you reject Jesus the Christ, you reject God the Father. Christianity has never, until recently when a few misguided people have left the Christian faith, ever claimed the God of scriptures is the god in the koran. So while the words are the same, the meanings are different. I am not sorry you are offended. I am tired of Christians hiding their faith so as not to offend. I am tired of Christians accepting what ever anti-christ theory is out there and singing the barney song, "I ok your ok". If you do not have Jesus as your Christ. You will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Jesus says this, God says this, our scriptures say this and our Church says this. Fr. Mark
bahous, You have come to a Anglican website. A Christian website. You proceed to tell us we are wrong and you are right. You offer your opinion on selected scripture verses. You are shown just how wrong you are. You repeat, though in a slightly different way, the same assertions that you are right and 2000 years of Christian teaching is wrong. Again you are shown you are wrong. Using the Scriptures you profess to have studied and know so well. You are asked for your sources. Your reply is "new ecumenical bible" and a mysterious "139 bible scholars." When asked for clarification you tell me to go look it up. Well I did google "new ecumenical bible" and got 1.26 million results. So which one of the 1.26 million results is your supposed "bible". Oh and you refuse to name, not 139 scholars, but 10. They you start in again with how you have a better understanding of our Scripture than the Church, our Church Fathers, our theologians, our Creeds etc. And you think I are going to continue to list to this prattle? Really? You have no authority. You have shown no education or understanding of basic scripture. Your command of the English language is, well needs to improve as English grammar and meaning escape you. Me listening to you tell me about Jesus and our Scripture would be like me listening to the dry cleaners tell me he knows medicine better than my Doctor. The last few post you have made are more of the same. You are closed minded. Arrogant. You refuse to answer questions, like how the Koran tells you the Christian Scriptures are correct. If you were open to dialogue I would continue. But you are not. Matthew 7:6 Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces. The words of Jesus. I think it fits here. I have also notice no others are interacting with you. I believe once I stop you will go away as no one will be drawn into trying to reason with you. I will still pray for your soul. For without Jesus as your Christ there is no hope of eternal life. Fr. Mark