MonroeTalks.com > Categories > Religion & Philosophy > The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7   Go Down

Author Topic: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method  (Read 4105 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« on: June 13, 2012, 05:04:42 PM »

Gospels

Mark is written roughly 40 years after Jesus supposedly dies.
Matthew & Luke are written a decade or two after Mark.
John is written a few decades after Matthew and Luke.

Where Were Jesus's Parents From?

Matthew: Bethlehem

Luke: Nazareth

Matthew: Jesus's parents flee into Nazareth because of an angelic warning, after coming out of Egypt, that the scripture may be fulfilled; he shall be called a Nazarene.

Luke: Jesus's parents live in Nazareth and travel to Bethlehem for a census. There Jesus is born and shortly after they return to their home of Nazareth.

Slaughter of the Innocents & Flight Into Egypt

Matthew: There was a slaughter of the innocents in the days of Jesus's infancy, and his parents fled into Egypt to fulfill a so-called prophesy; out of Egypt I have called My Son.

Luke: It's impossible for there to have been a slaughter of the innocents and for Jesus to have been in Egypt, for his parents stayed in Bethlehem only long enough to have him circumcised, etc., and returned to Nazareth. They didn't return to Nazareth because of a warning in a dream, but because they lived there.

Virgin Birth

Paul's epistles and the earliest gospel of Mark, which predate the virgin birth accounts of Luke and Matthew never mention such a birth, nor does the gospel of John mention this great thing.

Mark: Jesus's family comes to take him home, for they said he lost his mind. Highly unlikely his family would have thought he was crazy if they knew he was born of a virgin.

Matthew: Virgin birth.

Luke Virgin birth.

Jesus as the Son of God

Mark: This gospel calls Jesus the son of God, but there's no virgin birth. Solomon and Adam were also called the son of God, and others were called the sons of God. Nothing in Mark about Jesus being the only begotten; that comes later in time.

Matthew & Luke: Jesus is the virgin birthed son of God. BUT some early copies of Luke state that he became the “Son of God” at his baptism, which fulfilled a prophesy; today I have begotten You!

Paul in Acts: Jesus becomes the Son of God at his resurrection, fulfilling the same verse Luke mentions at Jesus's baptism; today I have begotten You! Acts 13.



There's a few options based on these discrepancies.

1. One is true and the others are not.
2. None of them are true.

Two contrary accounts cannot both be true, if they differ to this degree.

Were Matthew and Luke both inventing stories, or was one right and other wrong? There's no way to know. Some believe early Christians searched the Old Testament, as we call it, for scriptures in which they could mold stories about Jesus.

Matthew, for example, would have taken Hosea 11:1 out of context, created a fictional story about Jesus going into Egypt, and then saying, “Jesus fulfilled Hosea 11:1; Out of Egypt I have called My Son.” It's clearly taken out of context for if Jesus is that son of Hosea 11, then verse 2 says he committed idolatry.

Could it be that Christians took verses that were not prophesies, took them out of context, isolated them from the original context, created fictional stories around them, and said, “Look! This proves Jesus was the Christ!” Most of Jesus's life was built around such so-called prophesies.



I'll post more later. This is the first post of quite a few, as there are A LOT of problems with this character's life. I'll explain the historical method in light of these problems as well. You'll find, if realistic, that it's impossible to really know who the historical Jesus truly was, did, and said. And you'll understand why before the Orthodox got the stronghold there were many different schools of Christianity with many different beliefs about Jesus.

« Last Edit: June 13, 2012, 05:08:18 PM by Xerxes »
Logged

marilyn.monroe

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9218
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2012, 08:49:59 PM »

To me Jesus is freedom in its purest form.

God gave ya a moral compass! ;)
Logged

ShorTea

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3749
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2012, 09:02:03 PM »

To me Jesus is freedom in its purest form.

God gave ya a moral compass! ;)

Like!!! Short. Sweet. Perfect.  ;)
Logged

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2012, 09:03:05 PM »

To me Jesus is freedom in its purest form.


I can see someone thinking that, provided they see it in a more Eastern sense of freedom. But the historical Jesus may have been teaching something altogether different from that. Depends which Jesus you subscribe to, and again, there's no way to know the original historical Jesus because of the major conflicts among the New Testament and early branches of Christianity.

Quote
God gave ya a moral compass!


Yes. It's called perception based upon the instincts of a community species (humans), and has nothing to do with any particular religion. The moral compass of the Bible is perverted, in part.


In Mark 7, the earliest gospel, Jesus supports the killing of dishonoring children. I hardly call that Jesus a moral compass.

Logged

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2012, 09:17:30 PM »

Which day did Jesus die on?

In the synoptics (Mark, Matthew, Luke), Jesus dies the day after the eating of the Passover. In John, Jesus dies the day before the eating of Passover - the Day of the Preparation of the Passover.

Mark 14:12-21
John 18:28, John 19:14.
Read Leviticus 23, which explains exactly what the Passover is.

They disagree on which day the Passover fell on. The 15th of the month could fall on any day of the week. They disagree on which day it fell on that year. Why would John move the day? It adds more symbolic meaning to Jesus being "The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world." So, the writer of John has Jesus killed when the priests are killing the Passover lambs.


The Conversation Jesus *Probably* Never Had


Part of the historical method is called "Contextual Credibility."

According to this part of the historical method, scholars don't see it credible that Jesus and Nicodemus, both 1st century Jews, in John chapter 3 would have been speaking in Greek, but rather would have been speaking in Aramaic.

In this conversation Nicodemus misunderstand Jesus, in relation to being born-again/born from above. Nicodemus misunderstands him on the double meaning Greek word "Anothen." Anothen can mean "again" or "above." There is no double meaning word in Aramaic for "above." Based on this it doesn't seem probable Jesus and Nicodemus ever had this conversation, but rather, some later Greek writer, 70 years after Jesus died, invented this story.



A few more points. Many more to come. Trying to keep the posts fairly short.
Logged

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #5 on: June 13, 2012, 10:42:07 PM »

I guess I will attempt to upset this little attempt to discourage believers with some more Kent Hovind - why not - I am sure NOBODY can verify what he is saying is either well thought/studied out, truthful or accurate, since the IRS went after him as an alleged "tax protestor".

My guess is Hovind learned this from bible scholars who weren't thrown in Federal prison - but - since Hovind regurgitated it for believers who inquired of him, it must be totally FALSE now.

Kent Hovind explains why KJV ONLY and why not other versions
Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #6 on: June 13, 2012, 11:10:30 PM »

That Hovind video has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. All the discrepancies I'm mentioning are within the KJV too.

Anyways, back on topic.


Matthew the Confused

The writer of Matthew doesn't even know his prophets, as in Matthew 27:9-10, he says, "Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of Him who was priced, whom they of the children of Israel priced, and gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord directed me.”

That was NOT in Jeremiah. It was in Zechariah 11.

This is the word of God without error?


Matthew doesn't understand the language of Isaiah, so he has Jesus tell the disciples to get two animals, and Jesus rides into Jerusalem on two animals. Luke interprets it rightly and has the disciples get one animal for Jesus, and Jesus rides into Jerusalem on one animal.


Matthew 21

Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Loose them and bring them to Me.

So the disciples went and did as Jesus commanded them. They brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set Him on them.


Luke 19

Jesus sent two of His disciples, saying, “Go into the village opposite you, where as you enter you will find a colt tied, on which no one has ever sat. Loose it and bring it here.

Then they brought him to Jesus. And they threw their own clothes on the colt, and they set Jesus on him.



So much for being without error.
Logged

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2012, 01:49:51 AM »

The question is not "...is the word of God without error?" - the question is WHAT is your goal?

You are the proud, arrogant, deprogrammed, atheist who in denying God's Word and creation account waste your God-given stewardship over your time(brief existence on this Earth) using your God-given logic in an attempt to prove God doesn't exist.

The totality of your posts are an epic fail because everyone knows your position is not derived from a humble inquiry where you express that you have questions about biblical claims, Christ's authority, or God's actual words to His creation - but rather - you are an abrasive mocker to all believers(the way you ripped John MacArthur in the other thread is typical of your attitude); so, who would waste their time straightening you out when you really don't want an answer about creation evidence or the consistency/truthfulness of the Gospel accounts?

You haven't won any converts to your side who are TRUE believers, and if you understood the parable of the seed and the sower, you would likewise see that you yourself were never a believer(let alone a "reformed" one).

You're basically having a temper tantrum "no he doesn't exist, no he doesn't exist, no he doesn't exist" - and I say "give it a rest man." - or- state your GOAL.  Hovind's goal was get the lies out of the textbooks, do not put creation in the textbooks; and basically, leave origins out of our public school curriculum because it is "religious" subject matter, and not reading, writing, and arithmetic.

Any of your citations can also likely be refuted/dismantled with a quick Google search:
http://www.e-cepher.com/papers/interesting/Mat27_9.html
« Last Edit: June 14, 2012, 01:52:46 AM by LessGovernment »
Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2012, 02:10:11 AM »

You are the proud, arrogant...

Pot calling the kettle black. FALLACY ALERT! Ad homenim.


Quote
The totality of your posts are an epic fail because everyone knows your position is not derived from a humble inquiry where you express that you have questions about biblical claims, Christ's authority, or God's actual words to His creation - but rather - you are an abrasive mocker to all believers(the way you ripped John MacArthur in the other thread is typical of your attitude); so, who would waste their time straightening you out when you really don't want an answer about creation evidence or the consistency/truthfulness of the Gospel accounts?

The epic fail is your Red Herring Fallacy, Ad Hominem, and poisoning of the well. What does that have to do with the discrepancies pointed out?


Quote
You haven't won any converts to your side who are TRUE believers, and if you understood the parable of the seed and the sower, you would likewise see that you yourself were never a believer(let alone a "reformed" one).

No True Scotsman Fallacy.



Quote
You're basically having a temper tantrum "no he doesn't exist, no he doesn't exist, no he doesn't exist" - and I say "give it a rest man." - or- state your GOAL.  Hovind's goal was get the lies out of the textbooks, do not put creation in the textbooks; and basically, leave origins out of our public school curriculum because it is "religious" subject matter, and not reading, writing, and arithmetic.

Name the logical fallacy and win a prize!


Quote
Any of your citations can also likely be refuted/dismantled with a quick Google search:
http://www.e-cepher.com/papers/interesting/Mat27_9.html

Nice Jehovah's Witness source. Is that against your faith? That site in no way answered the problem. And I learned about this problem from scholar and textual critic Professor Bart D. Ehrman, Professor of New Testament Studies, North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Now, how about YOU address these discrepancies from your own studies, as opposed to posting from a website.
Logged

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2012, 02:30:58 AM »

That guy adds nothing to the discussion itself.


Back to the topic!


Matthew's Strange Resurrection


Matthew 27:52-53

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Seriously!?

Why doesn't Mark, Luke, John, Paul, or any other Christian of the New Testament mention this mass resurrection of saints, which is greatest resurrection in history?

We've already seen Matthew can't get his prophets right, he makes up stories to fulfill verses that were not really prophesies, so here he invents a wild resurrection account, that no other writer dares to mention.




Logged

marilyn.monroe

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9218
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2012, 03:59:07 PM »

For God so loveth the world, that he hath given his only son, that none that believe in him, should perish: but should have everlasting life. John 3:16

(Tyndale translation)

Logged

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2012, 04:15:19 PM »

There is a difference between proud and arrogant, and CONFIDENCE! ;D

I am CONFIDENT that a hippo-like animal NEVER evolved into a whale over MILLIONS OF YEARS ;D

I am CONFIDENT the (12) most famous followers of Jesus were NOT a cult that hoped to turn the world upside down so they could sit on top in wealth, pomp and circumstance; they were not interested in throwing off Roman rule, occupying government, or abolishing Jewish orthodoxy(remember the Matthew diatribe 23 which happened the very week Christ was handed over to the government to be killed(the END of His ministry) by the religious types who he was a THREAT to); notice a PATTERN in HISTORY there Xerxes - a threat presents itself to, and then by use of government, a goal to SILENCE the exposure of HYPOCRISY by celebrity LEADERS in government and clergy who express EXTERIOR religiosity is hatched?

Most of Christ's early apostles/followers were martyred for their faith; so what was their goal in even writing the Gospels(eyewitness accounts) - to what PERSONAL benefit?  Were they selling books on Amazon?  And now your side comes along, after they are DEAD and of no influence(the church is named after CHRIST), and tear them down as dis-believable/untrustworthy/unthinking liars?  To what end?  After 2000 years, surely your side could have discredited them by now - there should be no church in existence; is every naysayer of Christianity less capable than you, or, are you the master of the cut-and-paste.

Do you have any original thoughts of your own, or, are you a student/priest of the church of Satan? 

Your side is still losing and you guys are done, man - it's OVER; this NEW provocation thread of yours - that the Gospels are a JOKE(just like the idea that the circulatory, respiratory, skeletal, nervous, and digestive system of  hippo-like creatures CHANGED into something that would stop walking on land and suit a WHALE through natural selection and beneficial mutations over millions of years) is STUPID - because - as I have heard the arrogant John MacArthur(ignorant servant of a tyrant God) preach...

"You see, the hope of the return of Jesus Christ means we(Christians) have an ultimate point of accountability for how we live. Let me give you something you might not understand at first, but think it through. I believe that liberal theology is not the product of intellect, it is the product of immorality. It is the direct child of passion. It is an effort to deny spiritual accountability. Michael Greene(http://books.google.com/books?id=eQIBxWTuAS4C) said, "Anthropocentric hedonism always mocks at the idea of ultimate standards and a final division between the saved and lost. For men who live in the world of the relative, the claim that the relative will be ended by the absolute is nothing short of ludicrous. For men who nourish a belief in human self-determination and perfectibility, the very idea that we are accountable and dependent is a bitter pill to swallow, no wonder they mocked," end quote.

They want to ignore the inexorable law of Romans 1:18, that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all unrighteousness. This shows up nowhere more clearly than in evolution. Notable evolutionists and denier of divine creation, divine intervention and divine judgment was Aldous Huxley, the grandson of Thomas Huxley. He wrote Confessions of a Professed Atheist. Listen to what he said, most insightful, this is Aldous Huxley, the brother of Julian, he wrote this, "I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning, consequently assumed it had none and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics. He's also concerned to prove that there's no valid reason why he should personally not do just what he wants to do. For myself,...writes Huxley...as no doubt for most of contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously a liberation from a certain political and economic system...listen to this...and a liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom," end quote. Evolution is not the child of science, it is child of sexual liberation. It is not produced by people who have come to it purely from the intellectual, it is produced by people who wanted no meaning to culture, no meaning to behavior, no judgment, no accountability, no God so they could live any way they want to live. It's a moral issue, not an intellectual issue."

You are a mocker of the Bible and Christianity, Xerxes - for purely self-centered reasons of you own(temper tantrum) ... It is not my goal to "convert" you ... just expose what you do and why you do it to Monroe-area Christians. 

They have enough problems accepting the fact that REAL unemployment out there is better than 30%, despite ALL the Christian churches that "flourish" there(and the fact that ALL the Democrats and Republicans that represent them in Lansing and Washington D.C. are CHRISTIANS) - so - seriously man, your hobby here is only digging your side into a deeper hole; not mine...[and, I am certain those/all pro-government growth politicians LOVE your God-less evolution BTW]

I am only accountable for myself when it comes to meeting the Creator; same as Hovind or MacArthur - if we speak to quickly, or, make a mistake; our audience can chew on the meat and spit out the bones - that is why I differ/argue with you from a PHILOSOPHICAL point of view(that your energy/approach is a WASTED one) because you cannot overcome the human conscience that compels people(at the youngest of age) to "do right" and ask for PERMISSION to do things, as well as the vast intricacies/varieties/dependencies that exist in creation that ONLY "millions of years" or "God did it" can explain.

If I believe God did it, which I do; I likewise find it reasonable to be in AWE of His abilities whereby I also think it reasonable to seek to willingly OBEY His natural laws, and, believe He did do it in 6 literal 24-hour days(even though Christians have dropped so much reverence for Him that not only do they rationalize any and all their sins/vices away - but - they don't even blink at the theistic evolution idea; which justifies their pursuit of fleshly lusts and love of money these days).

The burden of proof is still on you because you want TAX DOLLARS to be used to change our law books to the degree that all laws that can be derived from anything remotely in line with Mosaic Law be stricken down as poppycock through purely emotion-based ridicule(which is not the test of truth); and, you want the youngest of school-children to be instructed that NO Supreme Being exists anywhere in the universe, especially one that could be appealed to when immorality, hypocrisy, murders, violations of personal and property rights and lawlessness reigns and is facilitated as permissible by governments.

Based on our nation's founding, this should NEVER happen; and if guys like you go unchecked, it just may - so - I am thankful I am still FREE to opine/philosophize as I wish here; not worried how many I anger with my adherence to the TRUTH as I see it.

Usually when you plant a seed, and you really want it to germinate; it helps if you stick a spade into the dirt(no matter how hard), rather than throw the seeds up in the air and hope some take root wherever they randomly land...I think Hovind/MacArthur take the same approach(target audience - professing Christians predominately)...and..."if some are offended, (we) mean to offend" because they need it!     
« Last Edit: June 14, 2012, 08:18:51 PM by LessGovernment »
Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #12 on: June 14, 2012, 04:15:37 PM »

For God so loveth the world, that he hath given his only son, that none that believe in him, should perish: but should have everlasting life. John 3:16

(Tyndale translation)


Jesus probably never said that, as I pointed out above.  :) And you'd think the major gospels that came before the latest (John), would have pointed out Jesus saying that.
Logged

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #13 on: June 14, 2012, 04:54:07 PM »

Most of Christ's early apostles/followers were martyred for their faith; so what was their goal in even writing the Gospels(eyewitness accounts) - to what PERSONAL benefit?  Were they selling books on Amazon?  And now your side comes along, after they are DEAD and of no influence(the church is named after CHRIST), and tear them down as dis-believable/untrustworthy/unthinking liars?  To what end?

Many Muslims, Mormons, Hindu's, Buddhists, etc., have been martyred for their faith. Does that make it true?

You see, ALL faiths can use the same pathetic arguments. Doesn't make them true.


Quote
After 2000 years, surely your side could have discredited them by now - there should be no church in existence; is every naysayer of Christianity less capable than you, or, are you the master of the cut-and-paste.

Do you have any original thoughts of your own, or, are you a student/priest of the church of Satan?
 

I only copied-and-pasted the verses themselves. I'm able to recite all these problems and arguments by memory, because I HAVE studied the matters.

I have many original thoughts, but as Schopenhauer said, "He who reads thinks with the minds of others." And as John MacArthur's hero CH Spurgeon said, "He who will not think with the brain of another, through reading, proves to have no brain of his own."



Quote
....was Aldous Huxley, the grandson of Thomas Huxley. He wrote Confessions of a Professed Atheist. Listen to what he said, most insightful, this is Aldous Huxley...

Huxley? I've read a fair amount of his work. Doors of Perception, etc... You're talking about a man who was a student of Swami Prabhavanada. Huxley supported the views of Advaita-Vedanta. And he also encouraged drug use.

Less, you appeal to people that are highly opposed to your religious views.


Quote
Evolution is not the child of science, it is child of sexual liberation. It is not produced by people who have come to it purely from the intellectual, it is produced by people who wanted no meaning to culture, no meaning to behavior, no judgment, no accountability, no God so they could live any way they want to live. It's a moral issue, not an intellectual issue.

What? Darwin was a Christian and planned on being a minister. He wrote letters to his wife about how he would cry about losing his faith in light of his discoveries. He didn't care about sex. He was a scientist who cared about REALITY.

Where do you come up with this crap? Seriously, read a book or two, especially on logic!


Of course, he didn't address any of the real discrepancies I posted. My next post is one of the strongest evidences to the evolution and changes of Jesus over the development of the gospels.
Logged

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #14 on: June 14, 2012, 05:21:41 PM »

Back to the topic...



The Early Jesus and Paul as Apocalyptics - Jesus as two DIFFERENT Christs


These comparative verses show that the Jesus of Luke and John is NOT the Jesus of Mark, Matthew, and Paul. Remember, Paul's early epistles and the gospel of Mark are the earliest New Testament books, predating Luke and John by a few decades. The Jesus of John preached the Kingdom of God was coming to earth soon, where the Son of Man would reign as King. Paul, also, taught the end of times was coming very near. Here's some verses to support this.


Matthew 10:23 - When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

In Mark, these two verses are side by side, and remember, there were no chapter and verse to divide these in the original, so they flow into each other, in reality, and are not divided by the chapter number.

For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.” And He said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power.”




Here is what Jesus says to the Jewish leaders in Mark 14:

But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

In the earliest gospel, Jesus flat out tells the Jewish leaders THEY will see him coming with the clouds of heaven. BUT after all those men died, and it did NOT happen, Luke, who used Mark as a source of his copying, CHANGED this.

Same passage in Luke 22:

“If You are the Christ, tell us.” But He said to them, “If I tell you, you will by no means believe. And if I also ask you,you will by no means answer Me or let Me go. Hereafter the Son of Man will sit on the right hand of the power of God.” Then they all said, “Are You then the Son of God?” So He said to them, “You rightly say that I am.”

What!? Now the Jewish leaders are not going to see him coming in the clouds? It was changed to cover up the fact these men died and never saw him coming in the clouds.

The early Jesus of Mark and Matthew stated he would return and rule as the Son of Man, within that generation. But the later gospels change those verses! Luke even says, "The kingdom is not coming... it's within you..." Within you? And the latest gospel of John never mentions those verses about the Son of Man and his return in that generation.




Paul tells the church of Thessalonica to watch, for Christ is coming like a thief in the night, and that THEY would be caught up in the clouds. 1 Thess 4. He also tells the Corinthians this: What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none. 1 Cor 7

2 Thess came as a forgery to cover up Paul's false prophesies by saying, "Brothers, don't worry about the end. Many things have to happen first, like the Son of Perdition being manifested, the great falling away, etc., etc.."



Again, this clearly shows the evolution of Jesus from the earlier to the later gospels. Jesus is apocalyptic in the earliest ones, as is Paul, but after that generation passed and nothing happened, the later gospels and forgeries amend the problems by altering the texts.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7   Go Up