Posts Tagged ‘gospels’

Gospels-“do not go back to the respective authors”

May 3, 2019

Religious Forums

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/gospels-%E2%80%9Cdo-not-go-back-to-the-respective-authors%E2%80%9D.220354/

#1 paarsurrey

Gospels-“do not go back to the respective authors”
None, emphasis none, of the Gospel writers was the eye-witness of Jesus’ Crucifixion.
Thread open to everybody including those who claim they have no religion, please

Regards

_____________
“The first four historical books of the New Testament are supplied with titles ( Euaggelion kata Matthaion, Euaggelion kata Markon , etc.), which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacred writings. ”
Gospel and Gospels – Encyclopedia Volume – Catholic Encyclopedia – Catholic Online

#659

None of the NT-Bible is “god inspired”

May 2, 2019

Religious Forums

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-jesus-crucified-or-not.217361/page-11#post-6088520

#215 paarsurrey, 

I understand, while I read Kitab-i-Iqan, that neither Bahaullah nor Shoghi Effendi nor their followers understood Pauline-Christianity in its true colors. One may like to read “Pagan-Christianity” to have its glimpses.
Pagan Christianity – Wikipedia
It has nothing to do with Jesus , Mary and teachings of Jesus. One may like to read what is written in Quran about Jesus and Mary, quite some chapters, no compulsion however.

Regards

“I believe”

#216 paarsurrey

I understand that mostly when one starts with these words,it is mostly a blind-faith, and that one is not going to change it even if most reasonable arguments and evidences are given. Right, please?

Regards

#217 paarsurrey

I agree with one.
One who dies does not return to this earthly life again and Jesus was not an exception to it.

Regards

“The claim that anything in the bible is “god inspired” is just an unfounded assertion.”

#658 paarsurrey

It will be as good to say that none of the NT-Bible is “god inspired”.

Regards

“I say that it is anonymous”

#659 paarsurrey

Not only you say that the four Gospels were anonymous documents but the Catholic-Encylopedia also affirms that these were anonymous documents. Right, please?
The names of the Gospels do not suggest that the the accounts written were written by these disciples, their names were just assigned to give them some credulity. Right, please?
None, emphasis none, of the Gospel writers was the eye-witness of Jesus Crucifixion. Right, please?

Regards

______________
“The first four historical books of the New Testament are supplied with titles ( Euaggelion kata Matthaion, Euaggelion kata Markon , etc.), which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacred writings. ”
Gospel and Gospels – Encyclopedia Volume – Catholic Encyclopedia – Catholic Online

Entire Gospels are openly confessed to be hearsay

November 20, 2017

~all the quotes attributed to Jesus in the New Testament cannot be trusted to have actually been said by Jesus.
~It is true that the entire Gospels are openly confessed to be hearsay.
~It is also true that Gospels are filled with contradictions too.
~This is also true and no doubt in it that people can find contradictory verses in the NT. 

Thread: “Bible verses Pope. Who is wrong? ”
Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma

Post 20: 

Quote:
X————- :
Also, keep in mind that I don’t believe that all the quotes attributed to Jesus in the New Testament can be trusted to have actually been said by Jesus. The entire Gospels are openly confessed to be hearsay. I also hold that the Gospels are filled with contradictions too. So I have no doubt that people can find contradictory verses. However, this doesn’t bother me because all that does is confirm my position that the Gospels are indeed self-contradictory.

Paarsurrey wrote:

I agree with one that:

~all the quotes attributed to Jesus in the New Testament cannot be trusted to have actually been said by Jesus.
~It is true that the entire Gospels are openly confessed to be hearsay.
~It is also true that Gospels are filled with contradictions too.
~This is also true and no doubt in it that people can find contradictory verses in the NT.

This is because Pauline-Christianity got hold of anonymous narrations and doctored them cunningly to trick the followers of Jesus to the hold of Pauline-Christianity, nevertheless, one could find the clues and signs to separate truth from the fiction. Right, please?

Regards

Inner evidence of Gospels confirms: NT Bible is not eyewitness account

June 4, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com><Thread : Did Jesus have Scribes, ie are the Gospels actual witness accounts?>

Please click the post # below.

The Deist said:
None of the gospel writers were eyewitnesses
paarsurrey said:
I agree with you. The inner evidence of the NT Bible confirms this.
Regards

Paarsurrey wrote:
Gospel According to Saint Luke
Chapter 1
[1]Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a narration of the things that have been accomplished among us;[2]According as they have delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word:[3]It seemed good to me also, having diligently attained to all things from the beginning, to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,[4]That thou mayest know the verity of those words in which thou hast been instructed.​

Luke was not an eyewitness, he says so and admits it in so many words.

Regards

Popcorn likes this.

June 25, 2013

Jesus never owned the Gospels said to be “canonical”

 

Bryan Says:

 June 25, 2013 at 1:57 am

No problem with your delay of response! I’m trying to figure out another way of approaching your belief of Paul and Jesus, and I was wondering if you believe that Jesus as portrayed in the four “canonical” Gospels is accurate and authentic?

No hurry – there is no compulsion (I like your saying!)

paarsurrey Says: 

June 25, 2013 at 6:54 pm

Being Canonical adds no authenticity to it, in my opinion; first it should be a quote from Jesus and then it should not be contradicting with other narratives about Jesus and quotes from Jesus irrespective of their being canonical or otherwise; thirdly it should not contradict with the OT Bible as Jesus being a Jew believed the truth in it; though in a diluted form.

As you know even the four Gospels, said to be canonical; were authored by anonymous persons; they were given names just to add some credulity to them; and they were compiled at a time when Jesus had traveled to India. In any case Jesus never owned them.

Thanks however for your comments.

 

 

 

“If the bible is the word of God” | akin to finding jewels in the rubble

May 5, 2013

Hank Kimball says:

 

(While commenting on one of my posts <https://paarsurrey.wordpress.com/2013/05/04/i-have-studied-bible-both-ot-and-nt-from-cover-to-cover/#comment-2798>.)

“If the bible is the word of God, it is unrighteous and dishonest to use any other book to interpret it.”

 Paarsurrey says:

It should be a very big “if”.

Bible is a mess; finding Word of God in it is akin to finding jewels in the rubble; though not impossible.

NT Bible is errant; written by errant scribes. It is neither authored by the one true Creator God whom Jesus used to call God-the-Father nor by Jesus himself. It is not even dictated by Jesus; not even written by men authorized in writing by Jesus to write it on his behalf.

Gospels are not work of inspiration either; angels cannot inspire such incorrect information as we find many contradictory accounts of Jesus’ life in the Bible.

It is wrong to say that it was written by person who got inspired by the holy spirit. The holy spirit does not inspire to errant and sinful persons. The contradictions show, if at all, it is the evil spirit in them which inspired them.

Gospels did not record event of crucifixion and resurrection by the eye-witnesses; it is written that they all deserted Jesus and fled away.

Jesus did not belong to the physical lineage of King David as written by errant Matthew and errant Luke.

Bible presents Jesus as god; on what basis?

If it is on the basis of Paul or Gospels; that makes it a circular argument and Christianity reduces to a misnomer; it should be named after Paul.

The reasons or arguments should be from elsewhere; from a book or Gospel written by Jesus himself or dictated by Jesus, if it is to be truly called Christianity.

Jesus never, ever, appointed any attorney to write for him. So what the sinful disciples wrote, it had got nothing to do with Jesus or his teachings.

When Paul doctored the anonymous writing called gospels and named them after Jesus’ disciples to give some credulity to them; Jesus was at that time very much alive and was travelling towards India and the neighbouring countries; unaware of the misdeeds of Paul and the scribes in his absence.

Since we believe in Jesus and love him and his mother; we are willing to accept, whatever God Allah YHWH revealed Word from his mouth on the heart of Jesus; provided Jesus had himself written it, Jesus had dictated it verbatim in the original language revealed in.

Even if no Word was revealed on Jesus which he should have preserved for the Christian friends; but Jesus himself said something and wrote it himself or dictated it himself or authenticated it or authorized somebody before the event of Crucifixion to write for him; though that would be only at a Secondary Level, yet for our Christian friends we could consider that.

Has any Christian got anything like that? If so it is welcome to an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim.

Other Christians are also welcome to join this discussion in search and understanding of Truth.

I believe that Jesus was a truthful person and existed historically only because his and his mother Mary’s accounts have been mentioned in Quran. Except for the Muslims, you know that no other religion believes that Jesus and Mary even existed in this world; I think one should appreciate it.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.

 

 

Quran resolves all contradictions and ambiguities of Torah and Gospels

April 8, 2010

https://paarsurrey.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/quran-is-neither-ambiguous-nor-contradictory/#comment-980

wudjab Says:
April 7, 2010 at 9:15 pm

Is this the same quran that real muslims (Shia, Sunni, etc) believe in or is this the magical Ahmediya version ?

Paarsurrey says:

April 8, 2010 at 11:08 am

Hi friend wudjab

Quran, the first and the foremost source of guidance of Islam is the same whatever the denomination; and it has not changed from the time it was revealed. It is the pristine Word of the Creator- God Allah YHWH. It has got all the lasting and truthful teachings of all the religions of the world; including OTBible or Torah and the NTBible.

There are many contradictions and ambiguities in the Bible and their followers are perplexed to note them, as you must have observed. If they have claims for the issues, they don’t have reasons for them in their books and if they have reason, which is very seldom; they don’t have the claims for that in their books.

To resolve such contradictions their followers have to add something from their own selves which mean they add wisdom to their Books which was not there to start with.

All such contradictions and ambiguities are resolved by Quran.

The text of the Quran is the same for Shias, Sunnis and Ahmadis. Ahmadis neither believe in any magic nor do we have any magical version of the Quran.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslims

Bible cannot and should not be taken as a whole

January 28, 2010

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=5516&p=92927#p92927

A Christian wrote:

The problem we Christians have is when the Bible is not taken as a whole.

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friends

The Bible cannot and should not be taken as a whole, as it was never a complete “whole”. It is not a book written by one author or at one time. It is a collection of heterogeneous books having nothing in common, not selected by Jesus; but selected haphazardly by people who were not authorized by Jesus to do this work. For instance four Gospels were selected from 56 books; the selectors never mentioned as to why they selected four and rejected the rest of them. It is erring men selecting unauthorized from Jesus.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.

Thanks

No infallible historicity of the Catholic Protestant Scriptures

January 24, 2010

Aaron wrote:

I invite you to love the Jesus of history, the true Promised Messiah, as recorded in Scripture.

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend Aaron

There is no infallible historicity of the Catholic Protestant Scriptures. Jesus lived up to the age of 120 years. The Catholic Protestant Scriptures give only 3 years of Jesus life in Judea and that only for a specific purpose which makes it a biased resource; one could simply judge the historicity of the scripture from it.

There is hardly any account of Jesus life before three years of his childhood and what he did before the age of 27 years in Egypt or elsewhere in the Catholic Protestant Scriptures.

When Jesus made good his escape to India from a cursed death in consequence of Jews putting him on the Cross; the Catholic Protestant Scriptures fail to record accounts of Jesus’ life in India and the neighboring countries.

Even these three years accounts of Jesus life in Judea have contradicting reports of the events.

For instance I just take one:

Matthew records that all the disciple of Jesus had fled away from the scene of the Cross and they deserted Jesus.

John says that a beloved disciple of Jesus was there and Jesus asked him to take care of his mother deserted Jesus Mary; the other Gospels don’t record it. Even John mentions it in third person; why should he be ashamed of mentioning his name in the first person if he was there; he was simply not there.

It is only a wishful thinking of the Catholic Protestant that their scriptures have any infallible historicity. No; that is not true.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran

Thanks and regards

The concept of Trinity is alien to Jesus and Mary

January 23, 2010

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=4701&p=91931#p91931

Wootah wrote:

I believe (Trinity) God is Good and Just

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend wootah

First of all the Catholics Protestants should present the claim of the Trinity as also the essence of its reason from the Gospels; why should you try to put words into the mouth of Trinity, your assumed god, which it individually and collectively failed to mention in your book or to provide reason for it, to start with?

I don’t think your Trinity-god has anything to do with justice when it attempted to kill its own son for the sins of others; it is a cruel Trinity-god. Would you following your Trinity-god kill you own son or daughter for the sins of a passerby in the street? It is a cruel act, so you should rather leave the Trinity-god; than doing this inhuman act.

Trinity is neither Good nor Just; it is cruel and irrational.

The concept of Trinity is alien to Jesus and Mary; they never believed in it.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.

Thanks