Alteration and additions to scripture

[polonius]

70 AD Mark 8 27 Jesus went on with his disciples to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that I am?"
28 And they answered him, "John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets."
29 He asked them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered him, "You are the Messiah."
30 And he sternly ordered them not to tell anyone about him.


80 AD Luke 9 Once when Jesus was praying alone, with only the disciples near him, he asked them, "Who do the crowds say that I am?"
19 They answered, "John the Baptist; but others, Elijah; and still others, that one of the ancient prophets has arisen."
20 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered, "The Messiah of God."
21 He sternly ordered and commanded them not to tell anyone,


80 AD Matthew 16 13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"
14 And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
17 And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.
18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
20 Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Both Matthew and Luke writing in about 80 AD copied from Mark written about 70 AD. But Matthew is seriously flawed by an addition (see underlined above) not found in the original writing of Mark. It also contains two errors. Can anyone spot them?

[showme]

70 AD Mark 8 27 Jesus went on with his disciples to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that I am?"
28 And they answered him, "John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets."
29 He asked them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered him, "You are the Messiah."
30 And he sternly ordered them not to tell anyone about him.


80 AD Luke 9 Once when Jesus was praying alone, with only the disciples near him, he asked them, "Who do the crowds say that I am?"
19 They answered, "John the Baptist; but others, Elijah; and still others, that one of the ancient prophets has arisen."
20 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered, "The Messiah of God."
21 He sternly ordered and commanded them not to tell anyone,


80 AD Matthew 16 13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"
14 And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
17 And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.
18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
20 Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Both Matthew and Luke writing in about 80 AD copied from Mark written about 70 AD. But Matthew is seriously flawed by an addition (see underlined above) not found in the original writing of Mark. It also contains two errors. Can anyone spot them?

I have heard of Matthew, one of the apostles, but who is Luke, and who is Mark, and are their sisters good looking?

[brianbbs67]

[brianbbs67]

I have compiled a list of NT additions. I could send a poor copy, if you like.

[polonius]

brianbbs67 posted:

I am assuming you meant John's account. Every witness, seems to have more or less to add. Have you ever done this little experiment? Gather 20-30 people. Seat them in a circle. Whisper to the one on your right, a story with specific details. Instruct everyone to pass along the same story by whispering in the next's ears. Then marvel at the story you receive at the end of the circle.

RESPONSE: Then you recognize the risk as treating as historical writings that were not written until 40 to 65 years after Jesus death. Such as the Gospels.

[brianbbs67]

brianbbs67 posted:

I am assuming you meant John's account. Every witness, seems to have more or less to add. Have you ever done this little experiment? Gather 20-30 people. Seat them in a circle. Whisper to the one on your right, a story with specific details. Instruct everyone to pass along the same story by whispering in the next's ears. Then marvel at the story you receive at the end of the circle.

RESPONSE: Then you recognize the risk as treating as historical writings that were not written until 40 to 65 years after Jesus death. Such as the Gospels.

There is always a risk with oral traditions. But, they seem to be quite accurate historically. Look at the Torah and Tanahk. Written much later, especially the Torah, but when checked against discovered history, very accurate. I am reading an archeologist's book about this now. Amazing how correct they're. So, you can't discount the gospels because they were second or third generation writers. You must note this, as not to deceive, but not , necessarily, discount.

[polonius]

[Jack]

[Replying to polonius.advice]

Just because archeologists have not found evidence doesn't mean there is no evidence. It's very possible they just failed to find the evidence. Also seeing that only forty short years ago a military vehicle was lost in the desert, and was recently found buried under fifty feet of sand. How deep can three thousand year old things be buried?

I find it strange to go to atheist archeologists to answer Judeo - Christian theological questions. These atheists obviously have an anti religious agenda, and it would be very foolish for a faithful Jew or Christian to put much stock into their OPINIONS.

[polonius]

[Replying to polonius.advice]

Just because archeologists have not found evidence doesn't mean there is no evidence. It's very possible they just failed to find the evidence. Also seeing that only forty short years ago a military vehicle was lost in the desert, and was recently found buried under fifty feet of sand. How deep can three thousand year old things be buried?

I find it strange to go to atheist archeologists to answer Judeo - Christian theological questions. These atheists obviously have an anti religious agenda, and it would be very foolish for a faithful Jew or Christian to put much stock into their OPINIONS.

RESPONSE:

The majority of the archaeologists are Jewish and the majority of the publications come from Tel Avis University in Israel, hardly a "atheist" institution.

And evidence has been found. The Jews were settled in Canaan, not Egypt.

Are you going to seriously going to maintain according with the Bible, that the Jews were in Egypt for 400 years and had risen to about 2 million or 1/4 the population of Egypt and left no graves and not,as one archaeologist pointed out, not even a single broken piece of pottery?

Perhaps you would enjoy:

Bible Unearthed Discoveries of Old versions of the bible)
youtube.com

[Jack]

[Replying to post 18 by polonius]

Your buddy Ze'ev is an atheist. When asked , "are you a believer? Has your faith changed during your life? He answered "No change, I always believed that men created God and not that God created man."

Look up Ze'ev Herzog UNESCOS resolution is pure anti Israel propaganda has no basis.

Like I said just because he found no evidence in favor of the biblical account does not mean that the biblical account is false.

Some aspects of the biblical account may not be perfectly historically accurate bu

[polonius]

[Replying to post 18 by polonius]

Your buddy Ze'ev is an atheist. When asked , "are you a believer? Has your faith changed during your life? He answered "No change, I always believed that men created God and not that God created man."

Look up Ze'ev Herzog UNESCOS resolution is pure anti Israel propaganda has no basis.

Like I said just because he found no evidence in favor of the biblical account does not mean that the biblical account is false.

Some aspects of the biblical account may not be perfectly historically accurate bu

RESPONSE: And many are purely fictional like the Hebrews being in Egypt for over 400 years and having an "Exodus. " of about 2 million people,

In fact, the first seven books of the Bible contain a lot of fiction. Did you hear the "talking snake" story?

When were they really written? How about a a founding folk tale about 800-700 BC?

And are you really claiming they have to be true because Paul said these are all "God Breathed."

Collins, Raymond F. (2004), 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: A Commentary, Westminster John Knox Press, p. 4, ISBN 0-664-22247-1, By the end of the twentieth century New Testament scholarship was virtually unanimous in affirming that the Pastoral Epistles were written some time after Paul's death. ... As always some scholars dissent from the consensus view.