IamJoseph

I'm not bashing you about it. I'm for all such stuff being removed from all religions. Things are not complicated when you are the victim.

spamandham

Do the gospels actually say that?

...we agree on this.

IamJoseph

Yes. And the quran says Jews are born of apes. I wonder which one is the better divine revelation. Because the Quran does not recognise the Gospel's claims, it switches the term lord with prophet - and Jews still become prophet killers. :banghead:

Yet the Jews have more prophets than any other belief system - and every one of them is cherished today. In a sense, the two biggest religions are more primitive today than in ancient times - and far less credible. What a miracle they still survive! :huh:

J-D

Where?

Doug Shaver

I agree that that particular argument against inerrancy is pretty stupid. However, the text does not say that the circumference measurement was only an estimate, and so your rebuttal assumes facts not in evidence.

I worked as a journalist for several years, and I have read numerous scholarly works describing the context of the gospels. Do you think I might be qualified to tell if something in one of the stories about the discovery of the empty tomb might be an error? If not, then what else do I need to become qualified, in your opinion?

sschlichter

I am sure you are an excellent journalist and am sure you are well read. I cannot say whether you are qualified or not. I know many people that are well read are not because they have not been trained formally or they are willingly performing eisegesis on the text.

I am curious why you think journalism would be a particular advantage. You may be surprised that I do not believe the gospels to be a reporters account of the life of Christ. I see them as very biased (toward God and his Kingdom) and more of a marketing effort (for lack of better term). I do not mean this in a negative light but the gospels are not just to report facts. They are meant to persuade. I see many on this site saying that Matthew wrote this or that for his theological aims - this is true. it does not make the story or the theology untrue or the aim un-worthy.

~Steve

Deus Ex

How can you know if the story is true or not? Faith?

If the Gospels are just tall tales told "so that you will believe", then how can you determine what Jesus ever said or did?

Do you just believe in Paul's theology?

spamandham

I've read the Gospels many times and don't recall ever seeing that Jews are born of the devil. Can you point me to a passage?

Thanks in advance.

Deus Ex

Probably referring to John 8:44

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

aa5874

I produced Justin's reference to Isaiah 66 to show that Justin NEVER did use alternate phrases from different writers. Once Justin claimed he was making reference to any passage of any writings then he would repeat the passage word for word virtually all the time.

You have failed to show that Justin did employ the practise of alternate phrasing with other writers, you have failed to show that there were gospels named gMatthew and gLuke during Justin's time and that he singled out only these two writers for alternate phrasing.



There is no benefit to Justin to re-write gMatthew and gLuke and called his new work Memoirs of the Apostles[/b] just as it would have been ridiculous to re-write Isaiah and Jeremiah and called the new work Memoirs of the prophets.


Once Justin quoted passages from the Memoirs of the Apostles, the passages would be virtually a WORD FOR WORD repetition of the actual passage.

Now, I will EXPOSE the practise of ther authors of gMatthew and gLuke.

It has been deduced by some that the authors of gMatthew and gLuke copied gMark.

Based on the deduction, it was the authors of gMatthew and gLuke that isolated and clinically MUTILATED gMark.

We have a match, we know their modus operandi.

[ The authors of gMatthew and gLuke are known to alternate the words, phrases and chronology of gMark even adding and removing events.

It would appear to me that the authors of gMatthew and gLuke did the very same to the Memoirs of the Apostles. They mulilated the Memoirs.

Look at what they did to gMark. Look at the the time when the women went to visit the tomb. Look at the mutilation by the authors of gMatthew and Gluke.

Please read Mark 16.1-8, then Matthew 28 and Luke 24 and see the MUTILATORS, (Matthew and Luke) at work.

It is almost certainly confirmed that the authors of gMatthew and gLuke MUTILATED the Memoirs of the Apostles, since the authors were mentioned for the first time AFTER the Memoirs of the Apostles and that these authors have been deduced to be mutilators of MEMOIRS OF PETER called the Gospel of Mark.

Now, you know. The authors of gMatthew and gLuke MUTILATED the Memoirs of the Apostles.

The Church claimed gMark was the MEMOIRS OF THE APOSTLE Peter.