Is Islam true?.

[total relism]

Totum Realism, In Nomine Dei Patri, Filiae et Spiritus Sancti, te maledicto!*

*Total Realism, I curse you in the Name of God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost!

Now - let us look at the calling of the first Disciples again.

We shall begin John:

The sequence begins at 1.35 and ends at 51 - sequence goes like this:

35. John stand with his disciples

36. John sees Jesus

37. John's disciples hear him exclaim and decide to follow IHC

38. IHC confronts them, they ask where he is staying.

39. They go with Jesus, they stay with him that afternoon.

40. One is Simon's brother, Andrew

41. He proclaims the Messiah to his brother, Simon.

42. He takes Simon to IHC and IHC declares him a rock.

43. The next day Jesus decides to go to Galilee. There he finds Philip, he tells Philip to follow him.

44. Philip is from the same city as Andre and Peter, Bethsaida.

45-51 Nathanael is called and Jesus proclaims he will do great signs.

This is clearly the callings of the first disciples, crucially, Peter and Andrew are in the city during the day, and so far as we can see they follow Jesus immediately Jesus goes to Galilee the next day and implication is that he takes Andrew and Peter with him, because he next calls Philip. The key point is that they are not already in Galilee - and if they had day jobs they have given them up.

Now, lets compare that to the (older) account in Matthew:

The relevant part is Matthew 4.12-22

12. John is arrested - IHC goes to Galilee.

13. Specifically, he settles in Capernaum

14-16. The prophecy is fulfilled.

17. IHC begins to preach (over a period of time, not just on a day).

18. Jesus sees Peter and Andrew at work (anybody who knows about lake-fishermen knows they'd have to work every day to survive, so this is clearly different to them being disciples of John. We know Peter was a disciple of John in John because like Andrew he was waiting for IHC.

19. IHC calls them to follow.

20. They immidiately do.

21. IHC sees James and John - so if John's Gospel claims "John" was there from the beginning, he is not the same John who is one of the 12.

22. They follow him also.

The differences are striking - principally, the difference is that John presents a coherent narrative, where the first two disciples come to Jesus and follow him of their own volition into Galilee whereas in Matthew Jesus flees to Galilee after John is captured by the Temple, he then begins to preach and there he finds Peter and Andrew together at work. There is not enough time for John to fit within the narrative of Matthew, because in John 2. Jesus already has his disciples with him when he goes to the Wedding, but he has not yet begun to preach, while in Matthew he has begun to preach and wander through Galilee before he calls any of his disciples.

The fact that Peter is being called to be IHC's disciple in John 1 is made very clear in the latter part of that chapter by the way Philip and then Nathanael are called - and even if you support the "two callings" argument you can't account for the discrepancy over whether Jesus already has disciples when he begins to preach.

So, one of the Gospels is wrong and John is the most likely culprit because it is later and because it presents Peter, by then the Crucified head of the Church (we know Peter is dead by the time John is written because it tells us so) as a more proactive figure who is already waiting for IHC's arrival, rather than as a passive fisherman, a simple man from a simple background called to great work.

I disagree for the reasons I stated before, I shall again.
John 1
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...+1&version=NIV
matt 4
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...+4&version=NIV

Notice it never says peter follows jesus, just that andrew and another disciple andrew with jesus. Than andrew goes and gets peter by himself in v 41 brings him to jesus, all jesus says to peter is you will be called Cephas. It says nothing of him following jesus as a disciple,nothing of him fishing etc Plus you would have to explain why the disciples [peter] just up and followed jesus in matt when fishing, if they had no prior knowledge of him. He becomes disciple later fully in matt 4. As far as being a fisherman, he was and a disciple of Jesus the same time. Just as paul who did more than any disciple worked full time. You were not paid to follow a teacher [jesus] you had to work. The disciples worked the entire time.

Or it could just be, that they were already disciples from john 1 [I dont agree] and did not levee fishing/business until matt 4.

1. The Beginning of Christ’s Public Ministry
a. Jesus baptized in the Jordan (Mark 1:9-11, Matt 3:13-17, Luke 3:21-23)
b. Christ Tempted in the Wilderness (Mark1:12-13, Matt 4:1-11, Luke 4:1-13)
c. John the Baptist testifies of Christ (John 1:19-34)
d. Calling of the first Disciples (John 1:35-51)
e. First Miracle at Cana (John 2:1-11)
f. First cleansing of the Temple (John 2:13-22)
g. Meeting with Nicodemus (John 2:23-3:21)
h. Christ leaves Judea (Mark 1:14, Matt 4:12, John 4:1-4, Luke 3:19-20; 4:14)
i. Jesus goes to Jacob’s Well in Samaria and in Sychar (John 4:5-42)
j. Christ goes to Galilee (John 4:43-45)

2. The Galilean Ministry
a. Healing in Cana (John 4:46-54)
b. First rejection at Nazareth (Luke 4:16-31)
c. New home in Capernaum (Matt 4:13-16)
d. Christ calls four fishers of men (Mark 1:16-20, Matt 4:18-22, Luke 5:1-11)



here is a site I found that agrees with me
The reason for the disparities in these stories is not because they are contradictory (as Paul Carson alleged in his 1995 article, “New Testament Contradictions”), but because John is describing a totally separate incident from the one the synoptists describe. John places Andrew, Peter, and the unnamed disciple (who very likely was John himself; see McGarvey, n.d., p. 109) in Judea (cf. John 1:19,28), whereas the synoptists describe an event that took place in Galilee (Matthew 4:18; Mark 1:16; Luke 5:1). What’s more, the call for Peter, Andrew, James, and John to become “fishers of men” (i.e., apostles) in the synoptics is absent in John 1. As Luther noted: “John’s theme is not the calling of the apostles into office; it is there congenial association with Christ” (as quoted in Morris, 1995, p. 136). In John, “[t]he disciples of John [the Baptizer—EL] recognize the Messiah and spontaneously attach themselves to him” (Morris, p. 136). In the synoptics, the disciples clearly were called to begin a life of service as apostles (Matthew 4:19; Mark 1:17; Luke 5:10). At least two other differences in these accounts are evident: (1) In John 1, Andrew is with an unnamed disciple, not Peter (whom he later finds and informs that he had “found” the Messiah), whereas in the synoptics, Peter and Andrew are called together; (2) James and John are called together in the synoptics, whereas in John 1, James is nowhere mentioned, while John is likely the unnamed disciple (John 1:37).

The skeptic’s charge that John contradicts Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s accounts of Jesus’ calling of the apostles is unwarranted. John actually referred to a different circumstance altogether. John records Peter and Andrew’s first meeting with the Christ. The synoptists, however, testify of a later meeting, when Jesus called them at the Sea of Galilee to become “fishers of men.” Once again, the problem is not with the Bible writers, but with the Bible critic.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apco...=6&article=513


here is more in depth response
http://www.answering-islam.org/Respo...les_chrono.htm


My friend, I have shown all your claims false, I wish to offer you a 1v1 debate on a topic such as we discus here. This thread is on islam. Would you be willing to debate me 1v1? what topic would you like?.