
Originally Posted by
Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
I've browsed your "arguments - but I don't see the force of them.
Muhammed did not say the was "100% correct", in fact as I'm sure Hax will tell you, he said quite the opposite. In any case, the Bible does not state that Jesus was the Incarnation, which is the core contention between Christians and Muslims.
Andrew is in both - in Matthew Andrew is with his brother Simon Peter - even your NIV shows that.
For the same reason the lame got up and walked, he was the Incarnation. His death rattle rent the curtain of the temple, caused and earthquake and blotted out the sun.
Nowhere does it show that the "Beloved Disciple" is actually John, he is NEVER named in John, and he has that role only in John.
Count them - the Eleven Apostles go away with Jesus to be instructed in John, but the Beloved Disciple walks off into the sunset and is never heard from again - he may have never died. In any case there are lots of Johns in the New Testament
There are no original manuscripts - all copies are corrupt.
The world is Fallen, get over it.
No, you have the Bible in original languages, edited together from newer manuscripts. Read the Forward to your Bible, the editors should explain it there.
You want evidence? Look up the oldest Hebrew manuscript, it's medieval.
I despise atomisation of Sciptura, but very well.
14.26 references the Holy Spirit, the "advocate" will teach the Apostles everything and remind them of what Christ has said - it doesn't say theywill write these things down. Nor do the following verses
15.25 - this is the tale end of Jesus' bit about the Temple Priests, (18-26) they hate him (and God) because of his good works, he has incited them to wrath and damned their souls to fulfil the prophecy, because they are hateful. Perhaps you meant to reference 26? Here the disciples are called to testify because they have been with Jesus from the beginning, still there is nothing about writing.
16.13 - the Holy Spirit again - he will guide and testify to the Apostles. This still didn't stop Peter from initially disbelieving the Command of God in Act's 10, though, did it.
None of this pertains to the Gospels, which were clearly not written by the disciples themselves.
John is in many ways a counter-intuitive book, and much of the New Testament is about anti-intellectual inspiration and word of mouth, none of the Gospels are about writing. In fact, Jesus never writes anything and people bring messages to him by word of mouth. The only significant writing done is by Pilate, when he hangs a sign above Christ's head as he is Crucified.
The New Testament is about the movement of the Holy Spirit, not a written word. Indeed, the "Word" of God is not the Bible - it is YHWH - "I AM" - which is the sum totality of everything we need to know about God, and can know.
Bookmarks