|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Many claim that the gospels were written by the disciples of Jesus and the bible is the inerrant word of god - if that is so, then why do the gospels disagree when it comes to the day of the week and the time of day that Jesus died? For the record, one version says it was the day before Passover and another says it was on Passover, one version says he died in the morning and another says it was in the evening.
I have numbered the points in your post only for clarity purposes.
1. The Catholic Encyclopedia mentions it very clearly that the gospels were anonymous writings and only named after the disciples for identification purposes.
2. These were not the writings of the disciples; most of the disciples accompanied Jesus while he travelled towards India.
3. In fact there is no agreement among the Christians as to on what date, day and time the event of Crucifixion took place. The four gospels are in contradiction to this as do the different 32000+ denominations of the Christians.
4. “the bible is the inerrant word of god” is a myth only; it is not even written by Jesus or dictated by him; not to speak of that it has ever been the Word of the Creator- God Allah YHWH; it has never been.
To be more specific, the books of Mark and John differ as to whether the death occured on the day of Passover or the day before Passover, and whether it was morning or late afternoon.
For the record, what took place on the day before the Passover was necessarily the Last Supper.
Otherwise, Christ's death on the cross was unmistakably on the day of the Passover itself as the specific times and matching events show.
1) "at about three o'clock (Matt. 27:46).
2) "at three o'clock" (Mark 15:34),
3) "three o'clock" (Luke 23:44),
4) after the drinking of the wine from a soaked sponge (John 19:29).
There is no disagreement whatsoever. Is there?
Not only do the gospels agree on the TIME of Christ's death on the cross, but, much more importantly, they agree on the KIND OF DEATH he suffered on the cross, viz.: Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical death, with far-reaching benefits.
(Matt. 27: 50-56; Mark 15: 37-41; Luke 23: 44-49; John 19: 30-37)
This may be an interesting question, but at least the main point of all the accounts is that Christ ROSE from the dead.
Why don't the gospels agree as to when Jesus died?
Because, the gospels themselves were written some 50-60 years afterward.
Nothing was written while Jesus was teaching his followers. It was all done at a later date.
More specifically, each gospel was written at a different time and different place by different authors who were trying to convince a specific audience that their religious views were authentic.
Mark was written about 20-50 C.E.
Matthew and Luke came 10-20 later than Mark.
John was written 90-110 years after Mark.
The commonly held beliefs of most Christians is erroneous in that it uses a composite of version of these writings that no single gospel writer taught.
And that is why the it is important to know that there is disagreement for day and time of the death of Jesus - because these 4 gospels do not portray one common religious system.
Assuming all of that's the case, what point are you making?
Fair question, Don.
The point is that Christianity is not based on a specific consistent lesson but on combining sources and messages that were written as stand-alone documents that do not preach a consistent message.
In other words, the idea of the bible or even the new testament as the inspired inerrant word of god is really stretching creduality.
Would not the better question be.
Do they contradict each other?
they are 4 different writers writing about 4 different aspects of Jesus
John writing about Jesus in the Flesh, Luke a physician more to the Historical side...etc...
I would think Validity would be better un-proven in the Contradictions between them, not in the differences of them.
to me , if they were highly identical I would be more suspect.
Just a thought, please forgive the interuption
dutchman1951, you make good points.
To cite an example, one will find the contradictions in the portraits of Jesus Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane, between the eye-witness account in the 4th gospel and the synoptic accounts (Matthew, Mark and Luke) based on hearsay, quite honest and appreciable.
They do not contradict
send me an email
Irrespective of what the Christian religion claims, the unique terms of the Spirit-based "new covenant" and the "seal" in Christ's death on the cross, are completely independent of the fruits of man's labor of writing, editing, compiling, etc.
Therefore, what is still written by Christ himself on human hearts with the Spirit of the living God (rather than with ink) is absolutely beyond human fallibility.
(Jer. 31: 31-34; Matt. 26: 26-29, 64; 2 Cor. 3:1-6)
Mark was written about 20-50 C.E
Odd since christ died in 33ad
When one considers the terms in the "new covenant" (Jer. 31: 31-34) and its "seal" in Christ's death on the cross (Matt. 26: 26-29, 64; 27: 50-56; Heb. 10: 19-25), the agreement between the gospels and their dates of writing is absolutely irrelevant in practice.
Not quite sure what you are getting at. For the dates of the gospels I use acts 28:16, Paul is under house arrest and not dead yet. Paul died 65ish ad
so the gosple of luke is written before acts and mark before luke, mark being the first one written so you can go backward from 65 and have general accuracy.
I was pointing out that it would be impossible for mark to be written in 20AD as he did not even start his ministry then but until age 30, by jewish tradition the age of wisdom and knowledge - its one of their 'born again' milestone ages that i speak about in the hub pertaining to nicodemus and he had a 3.5 yr ministry, dying in 33.5 AD. That i believe is concrete.
The reference is to God's superior ministry in the "new covenant" BY THE SPIRIT ONLY in contrast to the "old covenant" BY THE WRITTEN WORD ONLY as fully acknowledged by the apostles.
The distinction is highly significant. Chronologically, the former brings death, but the latter gives life. (2 Cor. 3)
Cagsil...I believe you have been reading Thomas Paine writings. Good fer ya.
http://www.rapturechrist.com/did_christ … friday.htm
Did Jesus die on Friday?
Some Christians believe that Christ died on a Friday because the next day after His crucifixion was a Sabbath. But this Sabbath was not a weekly Sabbath, it was an annual Sabbath. See Jewish Holy Days.
The problem with the "Friday burial hypothesis" is that the length of time from Friday evening to Sunday morning is not 72 hours (3 days and 3 nights); it is only 1 1/2 days.
There are not 3 full nights, but only one night -- Saturday--, and part of another night -- "Friday". There are not 3 full days, but only one day --Saturday; and we cannot count any daylight hours of Sunday because Yeshua/Jesus was already resurrected before daybreak of Sunday.
John 20:1 "To the first of Sabbaths Mary Magdalene came to the memorial tomb early, while there was STILL DARKNESS, and she beheld the stone already taken away from the memorial tomb."
So we can not count any daylight hours of Sunday, and we cannot count any daylight hours of "Friday" either because Christ's burial FINISHED in the predawn hours of Nisan 15 -- the day after His crucifixion.
If you are wondering why the text says "First of Sabbaths" instead of "First day of the week," read both: Two Sabbaths and The Resurrection.
We need to have exactly 3 days and 3 nights between Yeshua's BURIAL and His RESURRECTION, because Jesus said that He would be buried "in the heart of the Earth" for 3 days and 3 nights.
Matthew 12:40 "..the Son of man will be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights."
This is the sign of Jonah, the only sign Yeshua/Jesus gave to identify Him as the true messiah.
Matthew 12:39 "A wicked and adulterous generation keeps on seeking for a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah the prophet."
For more information on this topic, read Sign of the Messiah.
We know that for Him to be the true messiah He must be inside the Earth for three whole days and nights. That means not only dead, but also BURIED. Counting back from Sunday morning 3 days and 3 nights we arrive at Thursday morning as the time of His finished burial. His crucifixion had to have occurred on the third hour as stated by Mark 15:25. All we need to do is find out if all the passages of the bible fit into this time frame.
Sequence of Events:
1. Tuesday night around 7:00 PM -- Christ sits down to eat the Passover with his disciples
Matthew 26:19-20 and the disciples did as Jesus ordered them, and they got things ready for the Passover. When now it had become evening, He was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples.
2. Tuesday night around 8:00 PM -- Jesus washes the feet of the apostles.
John 13:3-12 He...got up from the evening meal and laid aside his outer garments. and, taking a towel, he girded himself. After that he put water into a basin and started to wash the feet of the disciples and to dry them off with the towel...when now he had washed their feet and had put his outer garments on and laid himself down at the table again, he said to them 'Do you know what I have done to you?'
3. Tuesday night around 10:00 PM -- Jesus and his disciples go to the Mount of Olives.
Matthew 26: 30-31 Finally, after singing praises, they went out to the Mount of Olives. Then Jesus said to them: all of you will be stumbled in connection with me on this night.'
4. Tuesday night around 10:20 PM -- Jesus goes to Gethsemane to pray for the first time
Mark 14:32-34 So they came to a spot named Gethsemane, and He said to His disciples: ' Sit down here while I pray' And He took Peter and James and John along with him....and He said to them 'my soul is deeply grieved, even to death. Stay here and keep on the watch '
5. That night around 11:20 PM -- Jesus finds the apostles sleeping
Mark 14:37 And He came and found them sleeping, and He said to Peter 'Simon, are you sleeping? Did you not have strength to keep on the watch one hour?'
6. That night around 11:30 PM --Jesus goes to pray for a second time
Mark 14:39 And He went away again and prayed
7. That night (already Wednesday) around 12:30 AM -- Jesus goes to pray for a third time and finds the Apostles sleeping again.
Mark 14:41 And He came the third time and said to them 'At such a time as this you are sleeping and taking your rest! It is enough! The hour has come! Look! The Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.
8. That night around 1:30 AM -- Christ is taken prisoner.
Mark 14:42-43 Get up, let us go. Look! My betrayer has drawn near. And immediately, while He was yet speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, arrived and with him a crowd with swords and clubs from the chief priests and the scribes and the older men. Matthew 26:47-48 ....Judas, one of the twelve, came and with him a great crowd with swords and clubs from the chief priests and older men of the people. Now his betrayer had given them a sign , saying: 'whoever it is I kiss, this is He; take Him into custody.'
Judas betrays Jesus
9. That night around 2:00 AM -- Jesus is taken to Annas.
John 18:12-13 Then the soldier band and the military commander and the officers of the Jews seized Jesus and bound Him. and they led Him first to Annas; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, who was high priest that year.
10. Around 2:30 AM -- Peter and another disciple follow Jesus into the courtyard.
Matthew 26:58 But Peter kept following Him at a good distance, as far as the courtyard of the high priest, and after going inside, he was sitting with the house attendants to see the outcome.
John 18:15 Now Simon Peter as well as another disciple was following Jesus. That disciple was known to the high priest, and he went in with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest, but Peter was standing outside at the door. Therefore the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the doorkeeper and brought Peter in.
11. Around 3:00 AM -- Peter denies Jesus for the first time
Luke 22:57 ...'I do not know Him woman.'
John 18:17 the servant girl, the doorkeeper then said to Peter 'you are not one of this man's disciples, are you?' He said 'I am not.'
12. Around 3:00 AM -- Peter sits down with them around a fire.
Mark 14:48 ...and he [Peter] was sitting together with the house attendants and warming himself before a bright fire.
13. Around 3:00 AM -- Jesus is questioned by the chief priest Annas.
John 18:19 And so the chief priest questioned Jesus about His disciples and about His teaching.
14. Around 4:00 AM -- Peter denies Jesus a second time.
Luke 22:59 -- and after an hour intervened, a certain other began insisting strongly 'for a certainty this also was with Him, for in fact He is a Galilean, but Peter said 'man I do not know what you are saying.'
15. Around 4:00 AM -- Jesus is mocked.
Luke 22:63 Now the men that had Him in custody began to make fun of him, hitting Him and after covering Him over they would ask and say 'prophesy, who is it that struck you?'
16. Around 4:30 AM -- Jesus is bound to be sent to Caiaphas, the high priest.
John 18:24 Then Annas sent Him away bound to Caiaphas the high priest.
Jesus before Caiaphas, the high priest Caiaphas was the high priest, son in law of Annas
17. Around 4:30 AM -- Peter denies Jesus for the third time.
John 18:25 ... Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. Then they said to him 'you are not also one of His disciples, are you?' He denied it and said 'I am not' One of the slaves of the high priest [Caiaphas], being a relative of the man whose ear Peter cut off, said: 'I saw you in the garden with Him, did I not?' However Peter denied it again and immediately a cock crowed.
Peter Denies Jesus
18. At dawn, around 6:00 AM – Christ is taken to the Sanhedrin.
Matthew 27:1 When it had become morning, all the chief priests and the older men of the people held a consultation against Jesus so as to put Him to death
Mark 15:1 And immediately at dawn the chief priests with the older men and the scribes, even the whole Sanhedrin, conducted a consultation...
Luke 22:66 At length, when it became day, the assembly of older men of the people, both the chief priests and scribes, gathered together, and they haled him into their Sanhedrin hall.
Notice that Yeshua was taken to the Sanhedrin when it was already morning. Morning during Passover week occurs about 6:00 AM, so these verses point out an EXACT time reference from where to piece together the next sequence of events that occurred that morning.
19. Wednesday morning around 7:00 AM -- Judas returns the thirty pieces of silver.
Matthew 27:3-7 Then Judas, who betrayed Him, seeing He had been condemned [by the Sanhedrin] felt remorse and turned the thirty silver pieces back to the chief priests and older men...After consulting together they bought with them the potter's field...
20. Wednesday morning around 8 AM – Christ is taken to Pilate where He is questioned.
John 18:28 ... they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Governor's palace [the pretorium]. It was now EARLY IN THE DAY. Luke 23:1 So the multitude of them rose, one and all, and led Him to Pilate. John 18:29 Therefore Pilate came outside to them and said : 'what accusation do you bring against this man?'
Pilate interrogated Jesus for a long time and finding no fault in Him went back to the crowds and told them "I find no crime in this man."
Luke 23:5-7 But they began to be insistent saying 'He stirs up the people by teaching throughout all Judea even starting out from Galilee to here. On hearing that, Pilate asked whether the man was a Galilean, and after ascertaining that He was from the Jurisdiction of Herod, he sent Him on to Herod...
21. Wednesday morning around 9:00 AM – Christ is taken to Herod where He is questioned for a LONG time.
Luke 23:8-9 When Herod saw Jesus he rejoiced greatly, for over a considerable time he was wanting to see Him because of having heard about Him, and he was hoping to see some sign performed by Him. Now he began to question Him with a good MANY WORDS...
22. Wednesday morning about 10:00 AM – Christ is taken back to Pilate
Luke 23:11-12 Then Herod together with his soldier guards discredited Him, and he made fun of Him by clothing Him with a bright garment and sent Him back to Pilate. Both Herod and Pilate now became friends with each other on that very day; for before that they had continued at enmity between themselves.
Obviously, Pilate and Herod had a long talk that morning, which also took time in the sequence of events that led to the crucifixion.
23. Wednesday morning around 10:15 AM -- Pilate's wife tells him about the dream she had with Jesus.
Matthew 27:19 While he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent him a message, saying, "Have nothing to do with that righteous Man; for last night I suffered greatly in a dream because of Him."
24. Wednesday morning about 10:30 AM -- Pilate is sitting at the judgment seat in the stone pavement (Gabbatha) and the angry crowd asks Pilate to release Barabbas and kill Jesus.
Matthew 27:20-23 But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowds to ask for Barabbas and to put Jesus to death. But the governor said to them, 'Which of the two do you want me to release for you?' And they said, 'Barabbas.' Pilate said to them, 'Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?' They all said, 'Crucify Him!' And he said, 'Why, what evil has He done?' But they kept shouting all the more, saying, 'Crucify Him!'
Matthew 27:24 When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd, saying, 'I am innocent of this Man's blood; see to that yourselves.'
Matthew 27:25 And all the people said, 'His blood shall be on us and on our children!'
Luke 23: 18 But with their whole multitude they cried out, saying: 'take this one away, but release Barabbas to us.'
Matthew 27:26 Then did he release to them Barabbas, and having scourged Jesus, he delivered [Him] up that He may be crucified;
Pilate tried over and over to convey to the angry mob that he did not find in Jesus any cause deserving punishment.
Luke 23:24-25 So Pilate gave sentence for their demand to be met, he released the man that had been thrown into prison for sedition and murder and whom they were demanding, but he surrendered Jesus to their will.
25. Wednesday around 10:45 AM. -- Pilate gives sentence to Jesus and Jesus is whipped.
Mark 15:15 At that, Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released Barabbas to them, and after having Jesus whipped, he handed Him over to be crucified.
26. Wednesday around 11:45 AM -- After the scourging, Jesus is led into the Pretorium and is given a crown of thorns.
Mark 15:16-19 The soldiers now led Him off into the courtyard, that is, into the Pretorium, and they called the whole body of troops together, and they decked Him with purple and braided a crown of thorns and put it on Him. And they started greeting Him 'good day you king of the Jews' also they would hit Him on the head with a reed and spit upon Him and bending their knees, they would do obeisance to Him.
John 19:4 Pilate therefore went forth again, and said unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that you may know that I find no fault in him.
John 19:5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And [Pilate] said unto them, Behold the man!
John 19:6-8 When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify [him], crucify [him]. Pilate said unto them, Take you him, and crucify [him]: for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid;
John 19:9-10 And went again into the judgment hall, and said unto Jesus, Where are you from? But Jesus gave him no answer. Then said Pilate unto him, You are not talking to me? Don't you know that I have power to crucify you, and have power to release you?
John 19:11 Jesus answered, You could have no power [at all] against me, except it were given you from above: therefore he that delivered me unto you has the greater sin.
John 19:12-14 And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If you let this man go, you art not Caesar's friend: whosoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Stone Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the SIXTH hour and he said unto the Jews, Behold your King!
This is a quote that tells us exactly what time it was when Jesus was with Pilate at the Stone Pavement. It can not be 6:00 AM, because we know Jesus was taken to the Sanhedrin about that time (dawn). It can not be 6:00 PM because at that time it is sunset and there would not be any trials.
The explanation is that John is using the Hebrew way of counting time, the first hour being one hour after dawn and therefore, six hours from dawn being noontime. Therefore, the sixth hour in Hebrew time corresponds to 12:00 noon of our time.
Also compare what is said by Mark 15:25 It was now the third hour, and they crucified Him. Mark is using the Roman way of reckoning time, the same as we use nowadays. Mark states that the crucifixion occurred at 3:00 pm in the afternoon.
It was at noontime that Pilate says to the crowd:
John 19:15-17 But they cried out, Away with [him], away with [him], crucify him. Pilate said unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led [him] away....
27. Wednesday afternoon around 12:30 PM -- Christ is stripped off the purple garments and given his outer garments to wear.
Mark 15:20 Finally when they had made fun of Him, they stripped Him of the purple and put His outer garments upon Him and they led Him out to crucify Him.
28. Wednesday afternoon around 1:00 PM -- Christ is given the cross to carry.
John 19:17 And He bearing His cross went forth into a place called [the place] of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha:
29. Wednesday afternoon around 1:30 PM -- Simon of Cyrene carries the cross for Jesus.
Mark 15:21 Also they impressed into service a passerby, a certain Simon of Cyrene, coming from the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, that he should lift up His cross.
Luke 23:27 And there followed Him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented Him.
The Jewish people cared about Jesus. They knew about the miracles He had performed. It was Caiaphas and the other religious leaders who hated Jesus out of envy. They delivered Jesus to Pilate, and instigated a mob to ask for his crucifixion.
Luke 23:28 -29 But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed [are] the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.
Luke 23:30-31 Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?
Luke 23:32 And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death.
These were the two robbers that were crucified along with Christ.
... they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.
30. Wednesday afternoon around 2:00 PM -- A title is made in 3 languages and is placed on the cross.
John 19:19-20 And Pilate wrote a title, and put [it] on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, [and] Greek, [and] Latin.
31. Wednesday afternoon at 3:00 PM – Christ is crucified
Mark 15:24-25 And they crucified Him and distributed His outer garments by casting the lot over them as to who takes what. It was now the third hour, and they crucified Him.
This is another verse that tells us exactly the time it was when Jesus was nailed to the cross.
Mark 15:27 Moreover, they crucified two robbers with Him, one on His right and one on His left.
32. Wednesday at 6:00 PM -- Darkness falls upon the earth.
Luke 23:44-45 Well by now it was about the sixth hour, and yet a darkness fell over all the earth until the ninth hour, because the sunlight failed; then the curtain of the sanctuary was rent down the middle.
Mark 15:33 When it became the sixth hour a darkness fell over the whole earth until the ninth hour.
These are two other verses that give us exact time for our timeline.
The darkness that fell between 6:00 PM and 9:00 PM could be observed because on that day, Nisan 14/ Passover, there is always a full moon. At a time when no electricity existed, variations in the light were very obvious.
33. Wednesday night at 9:00 PM -- Jesus side is pierced, He dies, an earthquake occurs, and the curtain of the sanctuary is rent in two pieces. This verse gives us EXACT time of His death.
Mark 15:34-37 And at the ninth hour Jesus called out with a loud voice; 'Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani' which means when translated: 'my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? And some of those standing near, on hearing it, began to say: 'See, He is calling Elijah' but a certain one ran, soaked a sponge wit sour wine, put it on a reed, and began giving Him a drink, saying: 'Let Him be. Let us see whether Elijah comes to take Him down. But Jesus let out a loud cry and expired.
Matthew 27:49-54 But the rest of them said: 'Let Him be. Let us see whether Elijah comes to save Him.' Another man took a spear and pierced His side, and blood and water came out. Again Jesus cried out with a loud voice and yielded up His spirit ...and the curtain of the sanctuary was rent in two... but the army officer and those with him watching Jesus, when they saw the earthquake and the things happening, grew very much afraid, saying: 'Certainly this was God's Son.'
Mark 15:34 tells us exactly the time it was when Jesus died -- the Ninth hour.
We have listed the major events in order to help the reader realize that the hypothesis that states that:
1. Christ died on a Friday
2. He was crucified at 9:00 AM in the morning and died at 3:00 PM in the afternoon
So Yeshua/Jesus, our Messiah, did NOT die on a Friday. If He did, He is not the true Messiah. He died on a Wednesday night (Roman time) / Thursday night (Jewish time).
Christ did not die at 3:00 PM Roman time. He died at 9:00 PM. We know from reading the Holy Scriptures that it was already morning when Jesus was taken to the Sanhedrin. All the listed events from the time He went into the Sanhedrin to the time He was actually crucified cannot happen in three hours from 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM. Besides, this erroneous assumption would contradict the statement made by the apostle John that it was the sixth hour (12:00 PM noon, Roman time) when Jesus was with Pilate in the Gabbatha, John 19:13. It would contradict the statements made by Mark, Mark 15:24-25 that Yeshua was crucified at the third hour (3:00 pm Roman time) and Mark 15:33-37 that Yeshua died at the ninth hour (9:00 pm Roman time). Here is the correct timeline:
To continue the story from Jesus' death to His finished burial, read Time of Christ's Burial.
http://www.rapturechrist.com/did_christ … friday.htm
Your entire story is a load of dung as you mix and match different books of the bible to create a whole new 5th gospel account we could just as well call the gospel according to Paarsurrey.
The key timeline is established by Passover versus the day before Passover. No matter how hard you try, you cannot make 24 hours disappear and reconcile the the difference in days.
There is a significant difference between the resurrection proper (as documented) and its common-garden variety (as predicted in "the miracle of the prophet Jonah").
The present and real power in the former, which you can check out in the passages below, has not yet been disabled.
(Matt. 12: 38-42; 27: 50-53; John 12: 32-36)
I think jesus died on Friday cus that’s payday…then he could separate more dust (money) from his subjects and into his own pockets.
The Catholic Encyclopedia mentions it very clearly that the gospels were anonymous writings and only named after the disciples for identification purposes.
This is why the accounts of four gospels differ with one another; the difference could not be reconciled even though the Church selected four gospels out of some forty gospels and other gospels were discarded and Church declared them not "inspired" ones.
So, laboring under the assumption that Jesus is of some importance; and the resurrection was real; why the discrepancies?
I would think it took quite some time for his importance to be understood. Just a couple of distraught women and, maybe, one man witnessed the crucifixion. Days of intense mourning and then he's seen by a woman....later on some men.....the sightings continue and increase....and then he's gone.
I would think the entire event; from crucifixion to ascension would have been a time where I would have lived first in misery, then in constant amazement. The little details would escape me and be difficult and of little importance when trying to piece them together after the fact.
I don't think the discrepancies on the timeline at the end would be a problem for someone who believes a story that begins with a virgin birth.
It does not matter what word is used. Bethulah or alma or parthenos (matt)
The virgin aspect is derived from jewish tradition and practice that virginity was expected in all women prior to marriage. Some may have been promiscuous but it was important that men marry virgins and this is the slant on the term. This is not referring to mary being a virgin after jesus birth but prior to Jesus birth. God picked Mary so safe to assume that Mary fit the requirements - she was a virgin. God who is spirit placed a zygote within mary and hence she was still a virgin.
Not difficult to believe at all.
Umm, I think you've missed the point. Who cares if a married couple had sexual relations? The virgin birth is difficult to believe. There is no documented evidence of anyone becoming pregnant in this manner outside of this story (and myths). It's Christmas. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here, but to expect all of humanity to do the same is hoping for a miracle; but not a miracle from the source of Love this story is generated from. To say the souls of all mankind hang on believing this as fact and condemning them if they don't is, imo, far removed from what the subject of the story would want us to believe.
If God exists, he exists for all and loves all. This story is simply one avenue for mankind to know this.
Merry Christmas, Emile.
I have heard it argued on here that we are simply animals... and we know virgin births happen among them. So how can you argue it is impossible in a woman?
I wouldn't argue that Mr. Mason. I wasn't there. I wouldn't know. What I do know is that no God of Love would give us a story that cannot be corroborated, cannot be replicated and cannot be explained; then hinge our eternal souls on belief of said story. That, to me, is much more ridiculous than accepting the story of a virgin birth.
Love has nothing to do with corroboration.
Love has nothing to do with God consciously thinking, "oh gee, i can't do that because it isn't replicated and it seems difficult to explain or they are gonna find this hard to explain." Truth is truth and the bible is full of truths and embarrassing situations but still, the bible records all things that are true as hard to swallow or agree with as they are, God minces none of His words, He smooths nothing over because it will not be politically correct 2,000 yrs down the road. We get the heavies and the softness, judgment and love, conditions and principles because that is the way it is.
Also our place in Christ is not hinged on the virgin birth. One does not have to be believe in the VB to be a christian. When a person, first, becomes a christian then many issues and doctrines do fall into place, over time and through experiencing God; for example, many Christians are content to believe things that just blow non Christians away and yet they are the Christians and those others are not.
Its a thing called faith: trust and assurance; which grows over time. Can a person doubt and still have faith - YES. Abraham had doubts. Doubts come with the package of being human, but, faith that is challenged by tough questions and adversity is often a stronger faith in the end.
No offense B O, but you've put forth as complete a case for the POSP religion as anyone could. It's been proven wrong, time and again. I'm a little confused why you continue to push something no one in their right mind could believe. Other than arguing for argument's sake, I can't see where you've made a point.
Of course you didn't get it.
How can you?
I wasn't there. I wouldn't know
News flash; if this is a valid argument then really, nobody has been anywhere concerning anything, from scientists to archaeologists.
What is the POSP?
When I said I wasn't there and didn't know I was attempting to be nice to Mr. Mason. He can be nice sometimes and I didn't see the point of arguing. But, you are wrong. A story over two thousand years old that has one source that tells it; a story that speaks of an event so astounding that it flies in the face of the reality we inhabit leaves its veracity incredibly open to conjecture. I would think you would know that.
exactly so since you and christianity have no common understandings why do you persist in being in here.
To me you are foolish
to you i am foolish
never the twain shall meet
but lets part
No BO. I get along with Christians fine. Well, those who appreciate the example of Christ. And I have found much wisdom in their words.
This 2.9% labeled pentecostal is simply a fleeting moment of insanity when viewed from the eternal, I'm sure. I know what you don't know won't hurt you, although it is sad to read posts of those so woefully lost.
My apologies, Emile.
I was thinking for some reason that you were of the Secular Humanist Evolutionary school of thought. The ole, "we are all just animals, hairless apes!", line...
My lil 4 month forced hiatis has skewed my memory of you all.
Without the Holy Spirit, Mary herself could not believe in conceiving "the Son of the Most High God" as the angel spoke.
The next higher level of faith, by the Holy Spirit, is the whole truth about Christ, viz.: "the first and the last" born to be known in his perfect and diacritical death on the cross giving rise to visions of "a Lamb standing in the centre of the throne ... appearing to have been killed" but, otherwise, divinely alive, well and powerful.
You need to actually read it.
Understand that God is a spirit
realize he is powerful
notice the stars and our earth
remember all the miracles
and then sadden my heart some more with your carnal, limited perceptions.
More faith based gobbledegook.
The stars and earth have nothing to do with your fantasies.
that's all you got?
instead of just venting, perhaps you should align yourself more within the framework of hub pages intentions and that is one of debate. If you just want to use hub pages to throw around hate filled snippets maybe your time would be better spent typing more informational conclusions.
You consider that a hate filled snippet, but see comments you've made on the forums born of God's love? Strange, indeed. Let's break your post down to find why ATM's response was dead on.
You need to actually read it.
This falls into the category of religious gobbledygook simply because the truth of the matter is, he probably has. He simply sees it differently. To imply that your understanding is meant to be universal is, at best, uninspired. At worst, extremely egotistical.
Understand that God is a spirit realize he is powerful
You are fully aware of the school of thought that there is no God. You are aware of the fact that ATM stands firmly in that camp. You have all of the information needed to understand why some fall into that camp. You aren't debating when you throw a statement such as this one on the table. Why chastise him if you, yourself, refuse to consider his points?
notice the stars and our earth remember all the miracles
This certainly falls into the category of religious gobbledygook. Again, there are two schools of thought (I use this term loosely, attempting to give you the benefit of the doubt). We are learning much on how the universe was formed. We have no proof of miracles. You base your conclusions on faith of the unseen and the unknown. He bases his opinion on what we know for sure. Because he chooses not to believe what he does not know and chooses not to attempt to condemn others for not agreeing with his narrow points; places him on the side of integrity.
and then sadden my heart some more with your carnal, limited perceptions.
Honesty is always the best policy. Wouldn't you agree? I assume your intended use of this word refers to the earthly. You are a person of the book. What could be more earthly and limited than that?
You need to up your meds.
In a christian forum it necessitates that opinions pertain to christianity. This small factoid you seem to have completely overlooked.
If you don't want to hear or discuss bible then please find a forum that is dedicated to what you want to discuss.
But to tell christians in a christian forum that their book is gobbledygook is just stupidly arguing for argument sake.
Perhaps you should also align yourself to hub pages intent toward real debate.
He bases his opinion on what we know for sure
places him on the side of integrity
More faith based gobbledegook.
The stars and earth have nothing to do with your fantasies.
Now we know your definition of integrity
So, you're actually proud of your hateful and malicious words to Earnest? It's the best post yet?
Unbelievable hatred. Thank you Jesus for making this guy what he is today.
Piece of advice. I don't think that type of behavior is what you are supposed to thank Jesus for. Not in main stream Christianity anyway. No matter what the pentecostals are selling these days.
We can all pick at each other, but that comment you made in the tribute to Ernest thread was heinous. He is spot on with his assessment of that.
Truth is truth
The shame is that he was the way he was not that I mentioned how he was.
Really get off the superficial and start to think deeply okay
You know, I think if something were to happen to you and they started a thread, each and every person would search and search and maybe find something kind to say. And if they couldn't? They would couch their comment in compassion.
Compassion BO. That is the defining characteristic of Christianity at its very best. A concept you cannot fathom. Go forth and hate some more. It's what you do.
Again you just take the response to a whole nuther area.
The shame is that he was the way he was (a prick) not that I mentioned how he was.
Let that sink in before you find another topic to respond with.
And as far as caring how people think of me I am not so full of ego as to treat this like a popularity contest.
No worries, I have decided a different strategy. I am writing a lengthy detailed letter to the Pentecostal church in Duncan BC outlining exactly what occurred and to make sure they read his posts here. If they are normal human beings, they will deal with him. If they are just like him, then it will be a lost cause.
thanks for the laugh
Ill try once more to let this sink in
The shame is that he was the way he was (a prick) not that I mentioned how he was.
If you are agreeing with the Scriptures that say, that no one can believe either in the Incarnation or its reverse, a.k.a., "the Son of Man going back to the place where he was before" (John 6: 62-64) or in Jesus as LORD, without the Holy Spirit, I have nothing to add! AMEN.
All mention Jesus dying about the ninth hour.
There were two preparation days that week. One for passover and one for another high day. One on wednesday then the high day and then a preparation day and passover on the saturday.
There is never a discrepancy it all boils down to how much do you actually know.
I have yet to see one suppossed contradiction stand when looked at without bias and preassumed conclusions.
The contradictions I have seen thrown up against the bible are usually simply a lack of understanding.
Can you please help me to explain the apparent contradiction between the 4th gospel and the synoptic gospels in their conflicting portraits of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane? Thank you.
I see no discrepency or contradiction in this matter. As you stated above... it is simply apparent... not actual.
Matthew and Mark speak in plain terms of the frailty of man in the flesh.
While Luke speaks to the spiritual aspect of this night, and having wrote his account influenced by the Holy Ghost, gives more of the details of Jesus' encounter and inner trial. (As He was a Man not God, and feared as we do pain and death. His faith suffered the same trials as the rest of us.)Luke therefore does not spend time on the frailty of men and flesh.
Which makes sense considering Luke was a doctor and well aware of the frailty and failings of the flesh... and understood clearly that our hope is in the Spirit.
And John speaks more to Judas and the act of betrayal than to the incident in the garden itself.
At least that is how I see it.
Here is an alright site with side by side comaparisons.
The incident in question is about two thirds of the way down the page.
The writer of the 4th gospel was one of three more insightful eye-witnesses in the Garden of Gethsemane (the very same that were present at the Transfiguration). None of the synoptic writers were so privileged.
Accordingly, the synoptic writers portray Christ as full of "grief and anguish" and as repeated victim of Jewish and Roman miscarriages of justice.
(Matt. 26: 36 - 27:56; Mark 14:32 - 15:46; Luke 22: 39 -24:56)
In the fourth gospel, on the other hand, Christ is portrayed as a hero in full control of all the unfolding events without a single exception.
(John 18:1 - 19:37)
The differences are too vivid to ignore.
The only difference I see is perspective.
Ask several eyewitnesses regarding the same event and individuals involved and see if they do not have what appear, or may be, discrepencies.
No. I see none in there.
Hi Mr. Mason. I hope you're having a Merry Christmas. And, I agree with you. People see through different eyes and remember events in different ways. To have been privy to such an event would have rendered me too dumbfounded to share every detail in order; but I would have certainly made an attempt to document it. However poorly.
I will agree with you on this. The gospels are a beautiful story. It is too bad a few choose to selfishly pervert them into a mold that plays to their ego. 2.9% and counting.
I noticed that you chose to flee the posted subject again and drag your poor audience into some other area... that is merely your biased opinion.
Please remember that reply means to respond to what was posted not bring up another topic.
I see more differences in objective works than in subjective viewpoint!
id like to know more about contradiction perhaps chapter and verse.
John is a very different gospel and rightly so, but he does focus on the last week of Jesus as do the other gospels and to my understanding all 4 gospels completely align.
The nits are important. We are looking at a two thousand year old story and it is difficult to understand how anyone can think your eternal soul hangs in the balance of a story that has been, at times, mistranslated and doesn't line up. Don't take me wrong. After reading the Bible I have my opinion on who, and what, Yeshua stood for.
However, I believe one of the main reasons the nits (as you call them) exist is to force us to think. To find the deeper meaning and to use the example of Christ as a guideline for our lives. The room for doubt is there for a reason. That age of blindly following religion is fast receding. Who and what God may be is bigger than can be contained in religion and the nits make that point clearly to those willing to use their heads to think.
But unfortunately that tale does not have a happy ending because the nits are too protective of their own ideas. The bible invites investigation! It wants to be checked out... But by people who have not disabled their believing abilities and by people who are open to the persuasiveness of the bible truths; not those who become more unreasonable and do not listen.
Yes, the bible invites investigation! It also wants to be checked out without any preconditions of make-belief or unbelief.
The exclusive "key" to the Bible and all the hidden treasures of God's wisdom and knowledge is vision of Christ's death on the cross, a.k.a., "a Lamb standing in the centre of the throne ... appearing to have been killed' but otherwise divinely alive and well as "source of life" and omnipotence.
This is the only way of "drawing everyone to him himself".
(John 12: 32-36)
What's unreasonable about noticing the fallacy of the New Testament writings?:
From "Fragments of Hegesippus" http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/hegesippus.html
And, when many were fully convinced by these words, and offered praise for the testimony of James, and said, "Hosanna to the son of David," then again the said Pharisees and scribes said to one another, "We have not done well in procuring this testimony to Jesus. But let us go up and throw him down, that they may be afraid, and not believe him." And they cried aloud, and said: "Oh! oh! the just man himself is in error." Thus they fulfilled the Scripture written in Isaiah: "Let us away with the just man, because he is troublesome to us: therefore shall they eat the fruit of their doings." So they went up and threw down the just man, and said to one another: "Let us stone James the Just." And they began to stone him: for he was not killed by the fall; but he turned, and kneeled down, and said: "I beseech Thee, Lord God our Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."
Pseudoclementine Recognitions, Book 1
Here's Clement on the attack on James by Paul:
1.70 -- Tumult Raised by Saul.
"And when matters were at that point that they should come and be baptized, some one of our enemies,63 entering the temple with a few men, began to cry out, and to say, 'What mean ye, O men of Israel? Why are you so easily hurried on? Why are ye led headlong by most miserable men, who are deceived by Simon, a magician?'
"While he was thus speaking, and adding more to the same effect, and while James the bishop was refuting him, he began to excite the people and to raise a tumult, so that the people might not be able to hear what was said.
"Therefore he began to drive all into confusion with shouting, and to undo what had been arranged with much labour, and at the same time to reproach the priests, and to enrage them with revilings and abuse, and, like a madman, to excite every one to murder, saying, 'What do ye? Why do ye hesitate? Oh sluggish and inert, why do we not lay hands upon them, and pull all these fellows to pieces?'
"When he had said this, he first, seizing a strong brand from the altar, set the example of smiting. Then others also, seeing him, were carried away with like readiness. Then ensued a tumult on either side, of the beating and the beaten. Much blood is shed; there is a confused flight, in the midst of which that enemy attacked James, and threw him headlong from the top of the steps; and supposing him to be dead, he cared not to inflict further violence upon him."
Compare to Acts 7:54-8:1. Stephen utters "Lord, do not hold this sin against them." Same words spoken by James are then put in the mouth of JESUS, a second attempt at plagiarism, in the gospel accounts of the crucifixion. This is the stoning of fictitious "Stephen" who is killed where James should be being stoned -- the grave clothes of the condemned (not witnesses, as the condemned is the one stripped and buried to the waist) are put at the feet of "Saul", indicating his involvement in the crime, and his approval. This follows fictitious "Judas Iscariot" being replaced by fictitious "Matthias" in Acts 1, where James should be the one being "elected" to replace Jesus as leader of the Jerusalem assembly. Luke brings the real James in after the 'other' James is killed by the sword a few chapters later. James is seen as the leader in the Jerusalem Council segment, even above Peter.The defeated candidate is Joseph Barsabas Justus, a twisting of James (the "Just") son ('bar') of 'sabas' (his father) Joseph (Jesus and James' father -- note, not GOD!). That's the literary bone to the dog Luke must have thought was cute, but tips off the real dynamic here, of the election or appointment of James to follow Jesus, as leader of the movement.
(all from Eisenman)
I haven't a clue what you are trying to say.
judas iscariot is dead before the time matthias is voted in, in acts 1.
James is head of the jerusalem church before stephen is stoned.
Nobody should have been elected in to replace Judas I.
This statement is ludicrous:
The defeated candidate is Joseph Barsabas Justus, a twisting of James (the "Just") son ('bar') of 'sabas' (his father) Joseph (Jesus and James' father -- note, not GOD!
I find your post unreliable and distorted and giving good credibility to my sure advice that outsourcing is often more trouble than a benefit.
thank you for your answer Emile, but to me it's as if nit picking is getting hung up on the small detail while missing the big picture. I think that people who like to pick on nits use it to discredit the big picture because it's not perfect. That's fine, somebody has to have a hobby.
Yes. It does seem that way. All the way around, at times. I guess those outside of the faith focus on one set of nits and those inside of the faith another. Both stands pit the camps one against the other. We are all imbedded too deeply in our own desire to be right to see that we are all probably wrong in the most important ways. It certainly keeps us all from loving our neighbors as ourselves. Don't you think?
Love your neighbor as yourself, Do unto others as you would have them do to you, Harm none do as you will.
All sounds like a good way to live one's life to me.
I agree. I don't know a lot about all of the religions man has created, but that seems to be one ideal that binds many together. It would be wonderful if we could, at the least, agree to do that.
No it's not about setting up camps and who is on what side. It's really the intention people have. When someone picks a nit you are focused on it for a reason. I want to know what that reason is. That tells me what you are trying to do. You look at that imperfect nit and you go into this whole discourse about questioning whether the gospels happen. I look at it as an imperfect brushwork painted by humans with devotion. The nits don't spoil the picture for me.
I think you attempt to read into others intentions, when you cannot know what is in their hearts. So, the things you perceive as nits strengthen your faith. That's great.
Why get upset when others react differently? What forces you to become upset when others don't agree? That's your nit, perhaps? I don't have to agree in order for you to believe. Do I?
I think you're the one trying to read other's intentions. I initially asked the question because it didn't have any context. You were the one who went into what the nits meant -- to you. I responded. Again, if you want to use the nit to say the picture isn't perfect and is wrong go right ahead, but don't expect me to agree with you. And you should be fine with that.
Arguing about apocryphal accounts of an apocryphal person.
How silly would it be if we instead argued about discrepancies in early Egyptian myths?
It's the same thing. This never happened, so why fret over misaligned details of tall tales?
Why don't the gospels agree as to when Jesus died?
The gospel writers were sinful persons and not trusted friends of Jesus.
To my understanding, the gospels didn't even agree on when he was born...
You are right.
The gospel account are contradictory.
But, you have to remember that each was supposedly written from the recollections of eye witnesses. Doesn't the quran point out that three is the number needed to bear witness? I'd take three who agreed on the major points over one who expects to be believed with no proof any day of the week.
None of the gospel writers was an eye-witness.
All of them fled away from the scene of the Cross.
The scene of the cross is only part of the point paar. No one argues that people were crucified by the Romans. Few care to argue that a person named Jesus could have suffered that fate. But, all of the disciples and other followers claim to have encountered the resurrected Jesus. They claim miracles were performed after that. And they claim he ascended into heaven.
You are certainly welcome to point out that the disciples deserted after the arrest, but that is common knowledge and well documented. I don't understand your point.
What if the scene at the cross features "the seal" of the new covenant or the greater Jesus Christ in divinity-only nature, which "not even death will ever be able to overcome"?
(Matt. 16:18; 17: 1-13; 26: 26-29, 64; 27: 50-56; Heb. 10: 19-25)
It does not matter at all!
According to the terms in the "new covenant" and its "seal" in Christ's death on the cross, what is written by God's "life-giving Spirit" on people's hearts has no contradictions whatsoever!
The gospel writers did not write Jesus' account of life truthfully; that is why they say things which don't agree with the rest.
I have some experience in this department and I can tell you that rarely do eye witness accounts line up point by point. I can follow many arguments against the New Testament, but this is the weakest argument of them all. It's too easily explained away because of the problem with eye witness testimony not lining up; and the fact that the discrepancies exist strengthens the case to believe that the words of the persons who wrote them down were left intact.
If I was going to create a lie and attempt to build a religion around it, the first thing I would do would be to get the story straight.
If Jesus was to resurrect from the dead as the gospel writers make others to believe in; then Jesus' friends should have not demanded his body from Pilate; they should have left it where it was so that Jesus should have resurrected before everybody's eyes.
You need to go review jewish law. With the Sabbath being the nex day they had to do it then, Paas.
The Romans set guards at the tomb, and they wouldn't have let the Apostles take the body as the jews thought they may have tried something like that. And the Roman gurds are not lying for the christians.
I think you actually need to go read the gospels instead of spewing the BS you learnt at the Madrassa. If you would put the qu'ran down and pick up a Bible, you might know something about the subject. Something more than islamic confabullations at least.
The Gospel writers say that Jesus had told that he was to show the Jews the sign of Jonah which the Christians believe to be resurrecting from the dead; so it was the worry of the Jews to observe Sabbath; they should have left Jesus' body to do whatever the Jews liked as the sign was for them; in any case Jesus was to resurrect from the dead.
But, that's the point. No one knew what was to happen. No one expected a resurrection. They assumed the teacher would remain dead. Have you read the gospels? It's looking doubtful.
Muslims are not allowed to read the ingeel or the torat, (Old or new testament),, they are said to be corrupted and therefore so as not to be misled to error they are told not to look.
Convienent eh? Like the Chaldean Catholics, keep the masses ignorant.
Everything they know of the bible, Christianity and judaism, comes from the lies of mohhammud within the qu'ran. And anyone who has ever read the qu'ran knows damn well it is no more than a perversion of mis-understood doctrine and misogynistic hedonism.
I don't know. They talk about how poetic the quran is. I've tried to read it, I keep falling asleep. Kind of along the lines of listening to JW hymns. I suppose because it isn't something I grew up with.
Any religion that prohibits the study of anything tells me that they fear the truth being revealed to their adherents. I feel sorry for people, but everyone will do what they feel is right for them. I guess there is nothing wrong with that, as long as they give others a wide berth to do the same.
It is not correct that we Muslims are prohibited in Quran from reading NTBible or OTBible. Quran often corrects where OTBible or NTBible have made a wrong statement.
You have to let this go. You cannot interpret the OT or the NT with Quran definitions, you will never get the NT or OT right. Your understanding is marred.
See why God chose to wipe out many nations of strange gods... and today we have the confusion that God wanted to avoid.
Can you please give an example of one mistake committed in the Bible but corrected in the Qur'an?
What Joseph and Nicodemus did was as ill-advised as the women's "looking for the living among the dead".
There are never any excellent points made on wrong understanding.
"Looking for the living among the dead" is confirming Jesus' resurrection, instead of trying to assert that He never died.
One thing you seem to miss, either deliberately, or by ignorance, is that all of Christianity is founded on the very fact of the resurrection. If there was no resurrection, there is no christianity!
Maybe that's your agenda! Denounce the resurrection, and eliminate christianity.
Only one problem with that agenda.
God Himself is backing the FAITH of those who believe!
Hold your horses!
"Why are you looking among the dead for the one who is living?" is an indirect confirmation of Jesus' resurrection, which is characterized by a direct and personal knowledge and sustainable faith to seekers according to the Scriptures.
Christ's resurrection proper (Matt. 27: 50-56) is not at all the same like the Christian run-of-the-mill resurrection without the slightest knowledge of God (Matt. 12: 38-42).
Christianity (as religion) and faith (based on God's self-revelation) are far from synonymous.
That is the Islamic agenda.
Pretty transparent eh?
The fact is that THE TRUTH ABOUT JESUS CHRIST exclusively depends on his own work of baptism in the Holy Spirit (in his death on the cross) than on the writers of the gospels themselves! PTL.
Jesus died on Nisan 14 33 C. E. Nisan is the Jewish calendar, and bear in mind that their day begins at sundown, and runs until sundown the next day.
That being the case Jesus’ betrayal, arrest, forced trial, and subsequent death took place on that same day, Nisan 14 33 C. E.
You all are wasting your time with AKA Winston. Questioning like this is designed with one purpose: to prove to you all that he is right. His mind is closed like the rusted door on an old ship stuck on a reef.
If you first pray, and answer with wisdom, you will have a chance. Pray and cast out a devil, like Jesus commanded, and he might hear you when you preach the gospel.
But, if you are simply going to debate, no amount of solid reasoning will help. He is bound by a blocking demon. These prevent understanding the gospel of salvation no matter how many times it is heard. Want to break disbelief? Prove it. Heal a deaf man.
You're funny Man. Not once in all my dealings with any religious individual have I ever met one who prayed and gained wisdom from doing so.
Presentation of the LOGIC OF FAITH is necessary for building up the demand and a successful conclusion.
Ok. Winston's avatar creeps me out too, but I don't think he's demon possessed. He disagrees with your assessment. Please explain the harm in that, without resorting to accusations of demons.
by retellect2 years ago
Why are the Gospels so important to the Christian faith?
by CONSCIOUSNINJA6 years ago
This is a common belief amongst Christians, but a few questions arise...what about the individuals that lived before Jesus' arrival on Earth?if Jesus died for your sins, then whats the motivation to do good deeds in...
by Carolyn Dahl5 years ago
Was the Law nailed to the cross when Jesus died?Many Christians believe that the Law is done away with or nailed to the cross. Do you believe this and why?
by Brenda Durham4 years ago
"For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward."Taking the surrounding verses into account, please give your...
by graceinus23 months ago
The gospel means Good News, so what exactly is the good news Jesus brought?The word gospel is misused by many Christians. And why do many christians misuse this word? Many think everything in the bible is the gospel....
by Roberto Lima Netto5 years ago
KW: Jesus, Christianity, Catholic Church, Christ, Buda, Matthew, Mark, Luke, Gospel of John, Gospel of Thomas, Nicene Council, Description: The article discusses the controversy about Jesus being God or an illuminated...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.