messianic jews in israel published a shocking book-
these jews, who believe in the book called new testament and emphasize water baptism just like almost all "serious" christians- have-
assembled the sections of the four "gospels" into one story, called the "life of christ"-
if you are a christian, reading now, this probably makes you feel happy and wonder why i chose the "wrong" title for this article?
because blending together the gospel of john with luke [or synoptic] makes a certain problem more noticeable.
ready for some "blasphemy"?
according to luke- on the day of the passover luke 22.7
"7 Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed."
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Luke-Chapter-22/
he ate it- "15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer"
and this is "duely recorded" in the chapter called "the week of the Crucifixion" the story continues and about ten pages LATER after reading about arresting jesus in the "dark" and peter denied three times until the rooster crowed and then "morning came"- apparently the morning after the passover sacrifice- this book quotes from john- that they had not yet eaten the passover-
glaringly long after eating the passover- somehow the following morning they had not eaten-
"27 Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew [crowed]. 28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early [dawn niv etc.] and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover."
huh? you said they ate already?
if luke 22.7 is true, then this is false- they already ate and no concern about "so they can eat" and if the day of the passover was when christ was killed, like corinthians 5 and john, then luke and the synoptics are false-
***my point is blending them into one tale-
helps to show the problem
i suggest that two groups of christians compromised on having both versions in the one uniting "new testament book" and later it became blasphemy to deny either one of the versions and must believe both.
if i wanted to "compromise" between full denial and ignoring my opinion=full faith, then-
i would prefer the pair of corinthians with john as more reliable- and have faith that christ was the passover- while rejecting the three gospels of mathew mark and luke-
as erroneous and therefore not holy-
but then i would be a blasphemer- and gain nothing from saying "3 false and 2 true" john and corinthians are true...
so why bother?
if you value truth-
do not accept the twists of falsehoods- choose a version and deny the other.
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה