1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Matthew, Mark, Luke Vs the Gospel of John

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by wizanda, Jan 11, 2015.

  1. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake dragonslayer

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,690
    Ratings:
    +1,617
    Religion:
    The Lord
    Choosing one Gospel would not make the other Gospels false, by default, though. You would really have to prove that. I think that that is not provable with merely theologic belief, then interpreting them in ones belief system.
     
  2. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,492
    Ratings:
    +11,953
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    I really don't deal with the issue of "false" in this context sense scriptures tend to be mostly subjective by nature. "Difference", yes.
     
  3. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake dragonslayer

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,690
    Ratings:
    +1,617
    Religion:
    The Lord
    I havn't read them in entirety. I've read portions. I can't really think of reason why I would read them ,I don't think any belief/s/ hinges on those texts.

    I know that, traditionally, the Gospel of Johanan is legit, though. This all goes to what /we think the early Xians believed, not what ''I'' believe....
     
  4. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,867
    Ratings:
    +1,628
    Religion:
    Øneness
    So we've got three (more or less) matching witnesses, these therefore can establish a case vs John...Yet we couldn't do it the other way around; though most of Christianity has done to establish its beliefs. :confused:
    What if the overall amount of differences are so substantial, that there is overwhelming evidence to deem it 'false'? o_O
     
  5. Muffled

    Muffled Jesus in me

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    15,223
    Ratings:
    +915
    Religion:
    Christian
    I believe this is unreliable as a source for theology. One aspect of NDE's is a noticing of events on earth and that has no verity as to what theology is correct; a second aspect is an experience of Heaven which out of necessity is fantasy and also not a very good basis for theoogy.

    I believe you are in error since Jesus create Christianity. I also believe that they did not contradict Christ.

    I believe you must have made this up out of your imagination.

    I beleive there is no such thing.

    I believe all the gospels have diferences and I have no problem with that.

    I believe miracles can be done by the devil lso that is no guarantee,

    I believe what I am saying is that you have no experience with what Jesus said and I would bring into question anything you think God said to you.
     
  6. Muffled

    Muffled Jesus in me

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    15,223
    Ratings:
    +915
    Religion:
    Christian
    Mat. 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name JESUS; for it is he that shall save his people from their sins.
     
  7. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,867
    Ratings:
    +1,628
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Would be nice if you got his name right then.... Yeshua or Yehoshua. ;)
    My own theology has nothing to do with what is being discussed; so you can't believe anything about my own experience, when not even shared it with you. :confused:
     
  8. Muffled

    Muffled Jesus in me

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    15,223
    Ratings:
    +915
    Religion:
    Christian
    I believe you were the one who mentioned it. I believe in personal revelation but I also believe it ought not to be contrary to the word of God.
     
  9. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,867
    Ratings:
    +1,628
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Yeshua said John the baptist was Elijah, it is denied in the gospel of John.
    Simon was from Capernaum, not Bethsaida like John says.
    John says jesus got the donkey himself.
    No kiss from Judas within John.
    Carried cross all the way on his own with John; Simon of Cyrene helped in the synoptic gospels.
    Multiple women came to the tomb, only Mary did in John.
    Was crucified the day of the passover in John or day after in the synoptic gospels.
    Women stood at distance from the cross in the synoptic gospels, John says they stood near by.
    Yeshua in the synoptic gospels doesn't say amen twice (verily, verily); yet it is used 25 times in John like he did.
    Yeshua said he didn't come to bring peace, John says he did.

    Vs Tanakh

    No one has ever seen God, when clearly the Bible says they have.

    Theological

    11 times we're told that we should believe in jesus within John; yet he tells Simon to have faith in God, not himself.
    It is only in John that has the concept of believing in his name, that we're saved.
    People hated and didn't understand him in John, the multitude met to hear him.
    In John jesus is the light, everyone doing the work of God is light in the synoptic gospels.
    Call no man your father, yet claims the father is within him to Philip, and he who has seen him, has seen the father.
    All who work for God are children, only jesus is begotten in John.
    John said that God is the vine dresser; Yeshua said he is the owner of the vineyard.

    John vs john
    Disciples meet jesus at tomb in Galilee, then Sea of Tiberius, and then Jerusalem all on the same day, no time for travel.
    Testifying of himself (5:31) not valid, and testifies of himself valid (8:14).

    Loads more to add still....
     
  10. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,276
    Ratings:
    +3,896
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    You really don't understand the source theory, do you.
     
  11. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0


    Christianity had this argument pretty much since the beginning. They excommunicated Marcion for it in 144 CE, which was pretty much when the Gospel of John was received in the churches.

    Anyway, the Gospel of John is a theological polemic against Christian theologies that had developed since the writing of the other three Gospels. A Jesus is produced that was openly exclusive of the 'opposing' theologies. The early churches knew this, which is why they accepted it along with the previous three. Of course, many churches did not accept John, but they were eventually wiped out.
     
  12. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,867
    Ratings:
    +1,628
    Religion:
    Øneness
    I understand it; just don't accept it. ;)
     
  13. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,276
    Ratings:
    +3,896
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Your circus; your monkeys.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Muffled

    Muffled Jesus in me

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    15,223
    Ratings:
    +915
    Religion:
    Christian
    Wazanda said: "Yeshua said John the baptist was Elijah, it is denied in the gospel of John."

    I don't believe I have seen a denial of it in John. Verse?
     
  15. Muffled

    Muffled Jesus in me

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    15,223
    Ratings:
    +915
    Religion:
    Christian
    I beleive I don't know what kind of assessment you are using but it seems to me that John has written about the ministry of Jesus just as the other gospels did.

    I beleive if John is a being considered a later book, the evidence is that John lived a longer life than the other apostles so it would not be out of the question and John would certainly want to set the record straight.

    I believe the churches would accept a book that is authentic and reject books that are not.
     
  16. Muffled

    Muffled Jesus in me

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    15,223
    Ratings:
    +915
    Religion:
    Christian
    I beleive I am not familiar with it so I will be happy to rely on your vast education to give me an abstract of it.
     
  17. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    I understand....

    There were many churches that were 'Gnostic' and/or 'Marcionite' - so many that some historians think that they (read 'heretics') were the majority, not the proto-orthodox (read 'pre-Roman Catholic'). Of course, the position of Roman Catholics is that proto-orthodox Christian churches were both the earliest churches and the majority, but this position cannot be defended beyond doubt (in fact, it's an inductive [not directly supported by evidence] and not a deductive argument [directly supported by positively proven evidence or theory]).

    So all that being said, Marcionites rejected John as a Gospel. This means that many, many churches rejected John as authoritative. In my opinion, this is because they received the Gospel of Luke first, along with some of the epistles of Paul, and then the other works of the NT followed slowly. They kept the original works as authoritative, building their theology and practice from them, and when later works permeated the churches, they rejected them, causing significant division that was not resolved until hundreds of years later in the counsels dominated by the proto-orthodox, who subsequently and systematically squashed the minority.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Muffled

    Muffled Jesus in me

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    15,223
    Ratings:
    +915
    Religion:
    Christian
    I don't know if there is any evidence of what criteria the Marcioites used but I go by the Holy Spirit and He points me to John all the time so it must be one of his favorites. That indicates a possiblity that the Marcionites were jsut deciding things in their own heads which leads to heresy.
     
  19. Simplelogic

    Simplelogic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    2,477
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Torah
    The Marcionites rejected all the gospels except for Luke. Even Luke was edited and trimmed down to fit Pauline theology. The Marcionite rejection of John gives it more credibility imho.
     
  20. Simplelogic

    Simplelogic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    2,477
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Torah
Loading...