Thread: Discerning(testing) A spirit, if it be of God...
Admin
Discerning(testing) A spirit, if it be of God...
Posted : 3 Jan, 2012 09:55 AM
It is as I stated through the discussions with Agapheton, and asked the questions as to his intent and purposes for his questions and comments he made in questioning what is written in God's holy word, and about his true faith in what is written about Jesus Christ;.
Here are a few of my comments from another thread from Monday 1/02/2012: "Agapheton, Darling please know that you have not challenged anyone beliefs here, you have only PORVEN YOUR OWN SPIRITUAL IGNORNACE AND UNBELIEF, doubt, and a lack of spiritual godly wisdom> You are not even able to spiritually articulate what it is you THINK you know... your spirit is not of God nor in leadrship under that of the Holy Spirit, but of the devil who has you WIRED UP FOR HIS SERVICE, and fooled to make you think you know something others don't know, and about God's word...
How foolish can the devil make you think so highly in pride of yourself when you cannot even connect the dots of the scriptures to even bring forth and express your stance, because you are only posting what you are gathering and rewording informaytion from articles written by unbelievers...
You don't have enough God power nor spriitual Word enlightment to challenge PJ, Angel, or me or anyone who is sincerely in Chirst... you deceive yourself when you THINK you have more than others especially when what you speak goes nowhere, and is void, null, and empty!"
"Right Angel... and you know what happens when people question God's word in disbelief, and yet cconfess to being a Christain believer is, that if they are asking questions for a better understanding the Holy Spirit will reveal to them the answers. But if a believer is asking questions trying to denounce what God has written as not being a truth, God will make it difficult for the person to ARTICULATE what it is they are trying to say, and therefore, the person will speak in a state of confusion, saying and agreeing with one thing, then with another, God says a flase balance is a sin... it either one way or the other, not both.
As Paul points out, God will give the person a delusion, to casue the eprson to think that what he/she is speaking is correct when in fact it does not line up with nothing in God's word, nor with any biblical teachings.
This is why we, as believers must be very careful as to what we read online, and whose articles we quote from, because there are many people out there who are posting stuff that SOUND spiritually sound, but is really denouncing God and the BIble. And this is the sign of the antichrist, and how believers will be deceived into belieivng a lie as Paul speaks about in Thessalonians.
When a person denounces everything Christian faith is based upon, and give no biblically solutions we must them start questioning that person's motives, intent, and purpose as we are taught, otherwise, we will becaome deceived and find ourselves caught up in their false believes and doctrines...search the scriptures and compared commanteries, ask questions and listen to your pastor if he is biblically sound, and most importanly pray for guidence of the Holy Spirit for revelation fo what God is speaking."
The articles from which Agapeton was using to question how long Jesu was on earht was written by Earl Doherty an unbeliever who has doubts, and thinks that Jesus might be a myth. This is why it is SO VERY IMPORTNAT that believers seek the Holy Spirit and ask for discernment in order to test the spirit of the person who is coming and creeping into the body of Christ with ANOTHER GOSPEL that is not of God, nor is it of faith in belief in Jesus Christ, but has a FORM of godliness and spiritual knowledge.
Please be warned as Paul as so warned us about listening to others who come to us with ANOTHER GOSPEL, WE ARE TO WATCH, AND PRAY, AND KNOW THE WORD OF GOD FOR YOURSELF, in order that you amy TEST THAT SPIRIT whether it be of God or the devil:
All that Agapeton has post questioning the gospels about Jesus is information he gathered from reading writings of Earl Doherty and Bernard D. Muller methodology of trying to undertsand Jesus and God and to prove that the gospels about Jesus may or may not be true. To question the existance of Jesus Chirst... is this true faith and belief... I doubt it very seriously, but I know many of you were carried away with Agapeton and most likely felt that ANGEL, Elsiha, PJ, and I, AND A FEW OTHERS WHO QUESTIONED Agapeton's motives, intent and purpose were being arrogant and full of pride, as he so stated, and I'm sure you all agreed, but you yourselves are not rooted and grounded in God's word of truth, and don't have a clue as to when you hear or have heard ANOTHER GOSPEL.
Nevertheless, I report, YOU DECIDE: The website that Agapeton posted also has a warning that the research about Jesus was not done by faith, in other word this dude was out to discredit the existance of Jesus but the evidences he found was too overwhelming for himm to DENY the total personhood of Jesus' existance
Earl Doherty: (born 1941)[1] is a Canadian author of Challenging the Verdict (2001), The Jesus Puzzle (2005) and Jesus: Neither God Nor Man (2009). Doherty argues for a version of the Christ myth theory, the view that Jesus did not exist as an historical figure.
Education: Doherty has a working knowledge of Greek and Latin, which he has supplemented with the basics of Hebrew and Syriac
The Jesus PuzzleDoherty was introduced to the idea of a mythical origin of Jesus by, among other things, the work of G. A. Wells, who has authored a number of books arguing a moderate form of the "Christ myth" theory.
Doherty has used the title "The Jesus Puzzle" for four different works. In 1997, the Journal of Higher Criticism published his article, "The Jesus Puzzle: Pieces in a Puzzle of Christian Origins." In 1999, his book The Jesus Puzzle: Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ? was published by Canadian Humanist Publications. He uses the title for a website where he publishes additional commentary and responses to reviews and criticisms of his work. He also used the title for a novel which he provides for download on his website.
In all four of these works, Doherty presents views on the origins of Christianity, specifically promoting the view that Jesus is a mythical figure rather than a historical person. Doherty argues that Paul and other writers of the earliest existing proto-Christian Gnostic documents did not believe in Jesus as a person who incarnated on Earth in an historical setting. Rather, they believed in Jesus as a heavenly being who suffered his sacrificial death in the lower spheres of heaven in the hands of the demon spirits, and was subsequently resurrected by God. This Christ myth was not based on a tradition reaching back to a historical Jesus, but on the Old Testament exegesis in the context of Jewish-Hellenistic religious syncretism heavily influenced by Middle Platonism, and what the authors believed to be mystical visions of a risen Jesus.
According to Doherty, the Jesus myth was given a historical setting only by the second generation of Christians, somewhere between the 1st and 2nd century. Doherty claims that even the author of the Gospel of Mark probably did not consider his gospel to be a literal work of history, but an allegorical midrashic composition based on the Old Testament prophecies. In the widely supported two-source hypothesis, the story of Mark was later fused with a separate tradition of anonymous sayings embodied in the Q document into the other gospels; according to Doherty these became interpreted as the literal history of the life of Jesus. Doherty denies any historical value of the Acts of the Apostles, and refers to works by John Knox,Joseph B. Tyson,[8] J.C. O'Neill,Burton L. Mack and Richard Pervo[11] in dating Acts into the 2nd century and regarding it as largely based on legend.In 2009 Doherty self-published a revised edition of his book, with a new title of Jesus: Neither God nor Man.
Reception Among authors sympathetic to the view that Jesus never existed, Doherty's work has received mixed reactions. The Jesus Puzzle has received favorable reviews from skeptics Robert M. Price and Richard Carrier.[14] Frank R. Zindler, former editor of American Atheist, in a review of The Jesus Puzzle described it as "the most compelling argument against the historical Jesus published in my life-time".[15] George Albert Wells, who now argues a more moderate form of the Christ myth and who rejects Doherty's view that the mythical Jesus of Paul did not also descend to Earth,[16] has nonetheless described The Jesus Puzzle as an "important book".[17] R. Joseph Hoffmann considers that there are "reasons for scholars to hold" the view that Jesus never existed, but considers Doherty "A 'disciple' of Wells" who "has rehashed many of the former�s views in The Jesus Puzzle (Age of Reason Publications, 2005) which is qualitatively and academically far inferior to anything so far written on the subject".[18] Doherty has responded that his work owes very little to Wells.[19]
Writers who do not necessarily support the hypothesis that Jesus did not exist have found merit in some of Doherty's arguments. Hector Avalos has written that The Jesus Puzzle outlines a plausible theory for a completely mythical Jesus."[20]
I made a google search and posted the page in Jame's topic and Jude's because TWO SAME TOPICS THAT WERE GOOGLED WERE POSTED FOR MY BENEFIT.
And the sad part of it is that THEY DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION WHICH IS BASED OFF OF FACT THAT WAS DOCUMENTED IN THE EARLY ANTI-NICEA CHURCH FATHERS TO BE ONE YEAR.
The sad part is that you don't even see how prideful and contentious you are in all your statements toward me with your ASSUMPTIONS along with them IN A DISCUSSION FORUM.
But one thing i will say though. I'M GLAD THAT YOU ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO ME, ET. Because you might actually learn something about the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and your pride enough to repent from.
One word of advice though sister. These type of topics excite me to do more topics challenging you to search the Scriptures. Expect more now that I know i got your attention.
Only for your sake, come at me with Scripture to prove me wrong and not some web page cause I can do the same too. If you want to get me to see your view then you got to show me from the Scriptures AND NOT FROM YOUR OWN OPINION. I don't accept webpages because they are a dime a dozen. You want my respect, then come at me with your provable knowledge with Scripture in its context. That is how you gain something from me, young lady.
Don't get me wrong. I still love you as a brother and will pray for you but respect is another by your contentious behavior.
"My approach, as an investigative and critical historian, will appear radically new. The research was not based on studying extensively scholarly works; but instead by inquiring about contextual facts, scrutinizing primary sources,..."
What part of that didn't he present? He made his conclusions based on his unbelief BUT IT STILL NEVER CHANGED THE FACT THAT THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS DIDN't BELIEVE THAT JESUS WAS A THREE YEAR MINISTRY UNTIL THE 4th CENTURY.
ooooppps! sorry about that, this posted before I could finish my comments, and had nerves to post twice.
CORRECTIONS by Ella: For your information George,I THINK Agapeton means well, BUT he is being led the wrong way,BECAUSE of his lack of spiritual insight into God's word by FAITH TO BELIEVE, caused by his doubts, unbelief, and reading STUFF by those who DO NOT BELIEVE and QUESTION whether or not the Lord Jesus Christ even extisted. And when a person starts to question if Jesus Chirst lived and how long He lived and if God exist, something is very worng, and if its not of God, ther only other choice is of the devil! And when a person does not know the difference between what is God's Word of Truth and man's OPINIONS of what they think is God's truth tested by faith and the Holy Spirit of God, this is of the devil's work, not of God!
UM, You do know that YOU HAVE ASSUMED A LOT AND SPOKEN OUT OF THE ABUNDANCE OF YOUR HEART, sister.
What do you know what I believe, or doubt, or anything else for that matter?
Are you the Holy Spirit now?
Any Christian Psychologist would consider what you just did an act of EXTREME BEHAVIOR BASED ON UNPROVABLE EVIDENCE OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN VAIN IMAGININGS, sister.
I will STRONGLY pray for you and not hesitate to suggest that you seek therapeutic, and medicinal help for your erratic and illogical behavior.
Amen sisterella, and agapeton, if we dont have tokeep the commandments what do we need torepent from?
agapeton, while your calling everyone elswe prideful you have notonce thought that itsa even possible that you are wrong! those of us that are spirit filled can see and you are decieved bro about a lot of things
I would like to add that walking after the flesh is the same as living in the ways that your flesh would lead you, such as breaking the commandments or noting being christ like in your every day life! I mean if the commanments arent for us to follow then what does it mean to walk after the flesh! good grief , diod yall notice that nobody ever says one word about my covenant article? they nevr have nothing to say cause ther is nothing they canm say! Its obsed to thging that God would make those laws then say nevermind I will let evil men kill my son and that way yall can sin all you want to! Yall are self serving! If your saved you would never want to walk in sin as in it was our sins that nailed our lord to that cross! How sad to love sin so much that you must use the lords blood to justify continuing in sin, Makes me sick
It is important that we learn not to be disobedient to the heavenly vision, not to doubt that it can be attained. It is not enough to give mental assent to the fact that God has redeemed the world, nor even to know that the "Holy Spirit" can make all that Jesus did a reality in our life. We must have the foundation of a "Persoanl relationship" with Him. There would be nothing there without a "Personal relationship" with Jesus.
It is as I stated through the discussions with Agapheton, and asked the questions as to his intent and purposes for his questions and comments he made in questioning what is written in God's holy word, and about his true faith in what is written about Jesus Christ;.
Agapeton, It sounds like to me, and from what you have posted, YOU ARE THE ONE WITH THE SERIOUS ISSUES, you're the one having SPELLS AND FITS ALL OVER THE PLACE, AND HAVE A NEED FOR ANGER MANAGEMENT CLASSES OR SOMETHING! :ROFL:
Have you read your comments? they are no different than what is usual and typical of those who react when they are exposed in a lie. As God say, YOUR NAKEDNESS has been exposed, so you TRY to redirect, by attackibng me personally... but you say nothing that I have said is incorrect, nor have you pointed out what it is you are soooo maaad about that I said.. because you know it is the truth... But you now have become a doctor of personal issues telling me what's wrong with me, but not what's wrong with what I stated, STICK WITH THE TPOIC AND NOT YOUR PERSONAL ATTACKS ON ME...
Moreover, as I said this is to be expected when a lie has been expsoed, Jesus warns us of theses things, and they happened to the prophets, to Jesus, to Paul, Peter, and the other apsotle and disciples, and we are warned that when we stand for the faith there will be false believers among us who will deny the truth and come up against us... so what you have said ain't about nothing sweetheart, I'm in great company with Jesus and the other prophets and apostles , and this lets me know I'm doing my job, and God Himself is using me as a Christian believers by FAITH in Christ WITHOUT DOUBTS OF ANYTHING THAT IS WRITTEN, TO CONTEND FOR THE FAITH, AND TO STAND VERY TALL, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO STAND... Only thing wrong here, YOU do no t realize that the devil is using you for his work with all your doubts and unbelief, and lack of faith.and it is as I have said...
AND AGAIN I REPEAT WHAT I SAID: "Agapheton, Darling please know that you have not challenged anyone beliefs here, you have only PORVEN YOUR OWN SPIRITUAL IGNORNACE AND UNBELIEF, doubt, and a lack of spiritual godly wisdom> You are not even able to spiritually articulate what it is you THINK you know... your spirit is not of God nor in leadrship under that of the Holy Spirit, but of the devil who has you WIRED UP FOR HIS SERVICE, and fooled to make you think you know something others don't know, and about God's word...
How foolish can the devil make you think so highly in pride of yourself when you cannot even connect the dots of the scriptures to even bring forth and express your stance, because you are only posting what you are gathering and rewording informaytion from articles written by unbelievers...
You don't have enough God power nor spriitual Word enlightment to challenge PJ, Angel, or me or anyone who is sincerely in Chirst... you deceive yourself when you THINK you have more than others especially when what you speak goes nowhere, and is void, null, and empty
... and you know what happens when people question God's word in disbelief, and yet cconfess to being a Christain believer is, that if they are asking questions for a better understanding the Holy Spirit will reveal to them the answers. But if a believer is asking questions trying to denounce what God has written as not being a truth, God will make it difficult for the person to ARTICULATE what it is they are trying to say, and therefore, the person will speak in a state of confusion, saying and agreeing with one thing, then with another, God says a flase balance is a sin... it either one way or the other, not both.
As Paul points out, God will give the person a delusion, to casue the eprson to think that what he/she is speaking is correct when in fact it does not line up with nothing in God's word, nor with any biblical teachings.
This is why we, as believers must be very careful as to what we read online, and whose articles we quote from, because there are many people out there who are posting stuff that SOUND spiritually sound, but is really denouncing God and the BIble. And this is the sign of the antichrist, and how believers will be deceived into belieivng a lie as Paul speaks about in Thessalonians.
When a person denounces everything Christian faith is based upon, and give no biblically solutions we must them start questioning that person's motives, intent, and purpose as we are taught, otherwise, we will becaome deceived and find ourselves caught up in their false believes and doctrines...search the scriptures and compared commanteries, ask questions and listen to your pastor if he is biblically sound, and most importanly pray for guidence of the Holy Spirit for revelation fo what God is speaking."
The articles from which Agapeton was using to question how long Jesu was on earht was written by Earl Doherty an unbeliever who has doubts, and thinks that Jesus might be a myth. This is why it is SO VERY IMPORTNAT that believers seek the Holy Spirit and ask for discernment in order to test the spirit of the person who is coming and creeping into the body of Christ with ANOTHER GOSPEL that is not of God, nor is it of faith in belief in Jesus Christ, but has a FORM of godliness and spiritual knowledge.
Please be warned as Paul as so warned us about listening to others who come to us with ANOTHER GOSPEL, WE ARE TO WATCH, AND PRAY, AND KNOW THE WORD OF GOD FOR YOURSELF, in order that you amy TEST THAT SPIRIT whether it be of God or the devil:
All that Agapeton has post questioning the gospels about Jesus is information he gathered from reading writings of Earl Doherty and Bernard D. Muller methodology of trying to undertsand Jesus and God and to prove that the gospels about Jesus may or may not be true. To question the existance of Jesus Chirst... is this true faith and belief... I doubt it very seriously.
Agapeton you teach ANOTHER GOSPEL!... AND FALSE BELIEFS HINDERING THE FAITH.
Agaepton, sweetheart, May God HImself protect you and show you your ways, because they are not good at all to even nor od God, and as we are taught NOT ENTERTAIN EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF EVIL... being the DEVIL'S ADVOCATE AIN'T THE RIGHT WAY... you are being used and made a fool out of by satan himself!:prayingf:
How foolish. Did I once imply any words tht were "emotional"? If so Please POINT THEM OUT sister. If there are none then the only thing left for the reader to conclude is that the only emotional responses that were in the text were purely the ONES THAT YOU ASSUMED and put into them. Did I insult you? Did I call you unspirit filled? Did I explain myself in eAch stAtement?
Show me where I Assumed anything bout your character, please. Show me where I sid thAt satan had you under his spell nd thereby go as far s saying that you re not in Christ because God isn't powerful enough to keep me in Christ's hands? If you can please pste it here other than the one I made in one topic after your goating me into one.
How many have I made compared to your every comment in a topic towards me?
Shall we compAre?
NOW TElL ME! AM I ANGRY BECAUSE I TYPED IN CAPS????
Am I? Or are you left to assume because I've not said anything to show for it?
If you can read any sort of emotion in an emotionless statement such as this, then it is the emotion (yours) that YOU put into it, dear.
Now, james made a statement in my topic that he'd research the question I sked. He googled the topic and didn't answer anything. I showed him by googling a page and posted the scholarly references in there and even told him that the references he made to he church fathers were dead on whether he was. Believer or not. That was the issue. I even went ahed and said thAt no one studied this on their own in James topic because of the googled page. Nd what do you do?
You come in nd guess s usual.
Here is the whole threAd.
ReAd it nd weep.
Where is your response to the fct thAt the 3-4 yeAr ministry theory came About in the 4th century?
Justifying one year ministry and dating Jesus' crucifixion, Paul's three missionary journeys & council of Jerusalem
Front page: Jesus, a historical reconstruction
You may email the author, and learn more about him here
Note: all emphasese are mine
1. The synoptic gospels evidence:
According to the gospels of "Mark", "Matthew" and "Luke" (the synoptic gospels), many biblical critical scholars would agree Jesus' public life seems no longer than one year. And looking at Mark's gospel (the least elaborated and the earliest), some postulate all the major events in Jesus' ministry happened within a few months:
"While I used to toy with the idea that GJohn might justify the idea that HJ [Historical Jesus] had an extended public career, I have long since abandoned that notion. I now think that Crossan is correct. HJ was a flash in the pan, with his public career ... lasting less than a year, perhaps only a couple of months." Malhon H.Smith, on Crosstalk
Many prominent 2nd, 3rd & 4th century Christians (such as St Clement of Alexandria, 150-211/216) also called for an one-year "ministry".
Notes:
a) "Luke" thought Jesus had an one-year "ministry", because in GLuke (and only here), Jesus, at the beginning of his public life, is quoting a passage of 'Isaiah', which includes a reference to an one-year period:
Lk4:17-21 "... And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written: "The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor; ... to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD." ... And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.""
b) MSN Encarta, for "Jesus Christ": "All three Synoptic Gospels ... record Jesus' public ministry as beginning after the imprisonment of John the Baptist, and as lasting for about one year ..."
c) Eusebius of Cesarea, 'History of the Church' (published c.316), III, 24, 8: "For it is evident that the three [synoptic] evangelists recorded only the deeds done by the Saviour for one year after the imprisonment of John the Baptist"
d) From "Chronology of the Life of Jesus Christ", Catholic Encyclopedia: "the year of my redemption" (Isaiah 34:8; 63:4), appear to have induced Clement of Alexandria ['Stromata', I, 21, 145], Julius Africanus [160-240], St Philastrius [4th cent., died before 397], St Hilarion [291-371], and two or three other patristic writers to allow only one year for the public life."
Other early Christians believing an one-year ministry include the followers of (gnostic) Basilides (active 120-140) (according to Clement's 'Stromata', I, 21, 146) and the ones of (gnostic) Valentinus (active 120-160) (according to Irenaeus 'Against Heresies', I, 3, 3), Origen (185-254) (De Principiis, IV, 1, 5 "[Christ] taught about a year and a few months"), Tertullian (160-220?), Lactantius (late 3rd to early 4th cent.), St Gaudentius (died c. 410), Evagrius (4th cent.), Orosius (375?-418?) and St Ephraem (306?-373).
e) In 'Against Heresies', II, 22, 4-6, the very influential St Irenaeus (130?-200?) "demonstrated" that the public life of Jesus lasted twenty years!
"... He did not therefore preach only for one year, nor did He suffer in the twelfth month of the year. For the period included between the thirtieth and the fiftieth year can never be regarded as one year, ..."
Remarks: Irenaeus' comment, based of John's gospel (8:57), shows that there was no significant acceptance then (around 180) about a three (or two) years ministry: that will come later.
The first one to mention a three-year ministry might have been Origen (changing his mind!) in 'Commentary on Matthew' (Book XXIV), written late in his life, but Eusebius (early 4th cent.) was the first to argue for it.
In his 'Demonstratio Evangelica' (published before 311) VIII, 106, 8, Eusebius stated, "the whole period of our Savior's teaching and marvel-working is recorded to have been three years and a half, which is half of a week [reference to the book of Daniel, seen here as containing prophecies about Jesus! Look here in order to understand it is not the case!]. This, I take it, John the Evangelist accurately establishes by his presentation in the gospel."
He then erroneously stated (in order to demonstrate the ministry was less than four years!), "Since, then, he (Jesus) began in the high priesthood of Annas [!!! Annas was high priest during 7-13/14C.E.] and continued to the reign of Caiaphas the intervening time does not extend to a full four years [WRONG: this time can be as long as 29 years (7-35C.E.) and cannot be shorter than 12 years (14-26C.E.)]." ('History of the Church' (published 311-325) I, 10, 2)
Later in the same book (III, 24, 11) Eusebius explained John's gospel covers a longer period than the others, but did not mention three years.
Finally, in his 'Chronicles' (published 325) he ascribed the crucifixion to the eighteenth year of Tiberius, basing himself on an eclipse and the false claim that, "It is written [in John's gospel] that after the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar the Lord preached three years."
Note: Eusebius repeatedly claimed that John's gospel represents a three-year ministry, but he offered no specific arguments. It seems the three-years came from the O.T, that is the book of Daniel.
Normally, a pious Jesus, with no obligation (and having high regard for the temple -- his most direct followers, the "Nazarenes" certainly did) would be expected to go to Jerusalem for each Passover; but during his public life, only one trip for Passover is reported in GMark.
And, if ever the "ministry" would have lasted for two or three years, why wasn't it written in the synoptic gospels? Evidently, it would have been beneficial to say it.
But then, if three gospels imply one year, and the fourth gospel suggests more, why choose the one (GJohn, the last one) in the minority (one against three)? Like I said, it is more beneficial to invoke a long "ministry" rather than a short one.
2. John's gospel evidence:
We have to pay close attention to GJohn, because it is here (and only here) that a longer "ministry" is implied, because of the three Passovers reported in Jesus' public life: one at the start (Jn2:13), one in the middle (Jn6:4), and one at the very end (Jn12:1).
The author of GJohn does not say that Jesus "ministry" lasted two or three years. But the extension from one year (synoptic gospels) to (a minimum of) two years & about one month (GJohn) is implied indirectly by the mention of the two additional Passovers.
There are many differences between GJohn and the synoptic gospels. John's gospel is considered by most biblical critical scholars to be the least credible (by far!). They are many signs of editing, cut and paste operations, latter additions and so forth. Major stories like the (very public) resurrection of Lazarus (here the main cause for Jesus' crucifixion, not any "disturbance") and Jesus' several extended visits (with preaching) in Jerusalem are not even mentioned in the synoptic gospels!
In conclusion, this gospel, at least in its final form, cannot be relied upon concerning the duration of Jesus' ministry.
Note: anyone who read this Section before April 3rd/2001 will notice I considerably reduced its content. This is the result of my on-going research on the making of GJohn. I am now confident about the validity of my reconstruction, verse by verse, of the original gospel and its later alterations. I hope to write a page about it (with arguments for justification on each item) within the next months. A preview: the original version came with only two Passovers, the middle one (Jn6:4), and the last one (Jn12:1). But the first one (Jn2:13) was added later (when relocating 2:14-3:21 from 12:19^20).
Done! as of September 2001:
http://historical-jesus.info/appb.html
Googled in just about twenty seconds and got this response.
I see that no one actually does their own research now a days....
Thanks James.
His main response:
ohn STATED that Jesus celebrated three passovers.
stating something is NOT "implying" something.
Three passovers, MEANS THREE YEARS.
case SHOULD be closed, but for some reason the author continues.....
Agape posted:
The author of GJohn does not say that Jesus "ministry" lasted two or three years. But the extension from one year (synoptic gospels) to (a minimum of) two years & about one month (GJohn) is implied indirectly by the mention of the two additional Passovers.
James replies:
This is a non-Christian writing this, and as such, not a person to trust when it comes to expounding upon Scripture.
My response to him:
ames, Where did John say that Jesus' ministry lasted 3 years in his gospel?
The facts remain that the info he stated about the early church fathers was pretty dead on about Jesus' ministry.
Why can't you and the topic that you posted ANSWER HOW LONG THE MINISTRY WAS? The topic you presented was just a bunch of dates that pointed to WHEN Jesus could have been crucified and nothing else. It did NOT ADDRESS THE THREE YEAR MINISTRY AT ALL. IT NATURALLY ASSUMED IT TO BE TRUE.
As i said earlier, thanks.
And guess who comes in now with this?
Agapheton said:How many times did Jesus' disciples tell jesus about the spices and the woman washing his feet?
You think they would have remembered it if it happened one more time during the three years?
This comment, let's me know for sure you don't have the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Whose your pastor or teachers?
The disciples didn't tell Jesus anything about the spices and the woman washing his feet, wher in scripture did you read this?.... You don't even know why you are reading the four gospel accounts of each Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as they are written with a four-fold message about Jesus.
If it is said that there were THREE PASSOVERS... Again, I ask you the question, HOW MANY TIMES A YEAR DOES THE PASSOVER COME??
My response:
ME: UM,YOU think they didn't? You saying that they COULDN'T REMEMBER ANYTHING JESUS SAID AND DID AND THE 3 GOSPELS THAT SHOW IT WAS ONE YEAR ARE WRONG? How about you look at the other SYNOPTIC GOSPELS AND COMPARE THE EVENTS IN THERE WITH JOHN AND SEE WHEN AND WHERE THEY ARE MENTIONED IN JOHN'S GOSPEL FOR SIMILARITY? I can't believe you don't ever ATTEMPT to do that. It's down right scary.
The simple fact that we HAVE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS STATING THAT JESUS HAD A ONE YEAR MINISTRY RECORDED IN HISTORY BEFORE 400AD SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT WHERE THIS BELIEF CAME FROM. But NOPE. You got to critisize things and people you know nothing about like a good Pharisee. Yup I said it./ You have Pharisee spirit within you, sister. How do we know this?
This comment, let's me know for sure you don't have the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Whose your pastor or teachers?
^^^^^^^^^^^^
BINGO! THAT'S HOW. The Pharisee did the same thing to Jesus and anyone else who came and said something that they didn't agree with. They even followed Jesus around and tried to give Him a bad name.
So how many topics have you gone into and tried to goat me in, sister? That's down right demonic in some circles..
The disciples didn't tell Jesus anything about the spices and the woman washing his feet, wher in scripture did you read this?....
AND YOU STILL DON'T SEE ANY SIMILARITY IN THIS EVENT?
12:1 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.
Joh 12:2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.
Joh 12:3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
Joh 12:4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him,
Joh 12:5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?
Joh 12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.
Joh 12:7 Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this.
Joh 12:8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.
This couldn't be the same event now could it? According to you, of course not. AND WHY DO YOU SAY THIS EXACTLY? Does John say that this is in the 1st 2nd or 3rd year during any of the narration? NOPE! Why is that?
Mat 26:8 But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste?
Mat 26:9 For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.
Mat 26:10 When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
Mat 26:11 For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
Mat 26:12 For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.
You don't even know why you are reading the four gospel accounts of each Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as they are written with a four-fold message about Jesus.
Dear sister, I highly doubt you even know what I'm trying to get at much less read anything outside of your own concoctions and assumptions about what I'm trying to do.
If it is said that there were THREE PASSOVERS... Again, I ask you the question, HOW MANY TIMES A YEAR DOES THE PASSOVER COME??
DID IT EVER OCCUR TO YOU AT ALL THAT John is mentioning about these events in a NON CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER AND JUST MENTIONS THE SAME PASSOVER THREE TIMES?
EXAMPLE: It's like me talking about going to the third day concert on friday and then proceeding to tell you of certain events BEFORE THAT CONCERT ON FRIDAY.
Here let me elaborate further:
Story one: "Man, ET, Just as Friday was approaching, I saw PJ and he was talking about Acts 2:4"
Then I stop and talk about something else that wasn't so close to Friday and go with;
Story two: Hey! I was going to the third day concert and fell.
And again.
Story three: as Friday was approaching, this weird alien chick was talking smack and really needed to check herself. I don't know what her gripe was about.
NOW. Did I go to THREE DIFFERENT THIRD DAY CONCERTS ON THREE DIFFERENT FRIDAYS, OR DID I JUST GO TO ONE?
Simple. Isn't it?
How can YOU GUESS THAT HIS MINISTRY WAS THREE YEARS FROM THE WORD PASSOVERS MENTIONED THREE TIMES WITHOUT THE AUTHOR SAYING IT WAS DONE ON A PARTICULAR YEAR OF THE THREE, sister?
