Dear Jacknaim
Thank you for asking me the below questions. However, I am afraid that I do not have the knowledge to give you any ‘official’ answer. I shall share whatever I remember from my RCIA and copy some things that I believe are in agreement with what I was taught in RCIA.
jacknaim
September 10th, 2008 at 12:59 am e
Assala’mualaikum..I just got copy of catholic bible.. my question is, why the arrangement of the books inside it is so much different with protestant bible. and also the numbers of books also different. so which one is true?
my second question is.. i get an info which saying that Gospel according to Mark, Matthew, Luke and John are not the earlier revelation in NT as it is written 200 years after year of Jesus christ. it’s also being mention that the epistles of Paul are the first teaching of NT. what is your opinion
Firstly, memang Catholics and Protestants have some differences in our practice. But we believe in God and in Jesus Christ. I was given a short history lesson about how Martin Luther King, John Calvin and another ‘break away’ from the Catholic teachings and set up their own church. They are of course, not the only one who decided to leave the Roman-Catholic church. There was the King of England who wanted to marry his mistress and started the Anglican church. You see, Catholics are not allowed to divorce and re-marry.
You need to transport yourself back to the early centuries where our world was divided by all the wars. Not very long ago, Catholics and Protestant did go to war as well. So, if there are differences in the number of books in the Bible, then, it is understandable.
Note that the differences are not Jesus Christ’s era but the earlier Old Testament.
What are the differences in the Catholic and Protestant Bible?
The National Bible Association said this :
Is There A Difference Between Catholic and Protestant Versions of the Bible?
Catholic and Protestant versions of the Bible are different because Catholics and Protestants have different doctrine and dogma which result in differences in word choice, translation style and explanatory notes.But there is only one Bible, and on the whole, the Catholic and Protestant versions of the Bible are very similar. The main difference between Catholic and Protestant versions of the Bible is found in the table of contents. The Catholic version of the Bible contains 73 books of Scripture. Protestant Bibles contain 66. The difference is that the Catholic canon includes 7 Old Testament books that are not found in the Protestant Bible. The New Testament is the same in both Bibles (27 books).
The seven OT books at issue are Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (or Ecclesaisticus) and Baruch. The Catholic Bible’s OT also contains some extra verses or chapters in the books of Daniel and Esther.
As for your second question, Jacknaim, well…..many websites available on the internet seems to harp on St. Paul and how he twisted the Bible etc etc etc. Some of the arguments are so detailed, even I myself am puzzled. But Jacknaim, for me Christianity is boiled down to the belief of Jesus Christ who died (yes, we believe He died on the cross, please don’t try to prove otherwise) on the cross and He rose again, as promised. He then went up to heaven and is seated with God. Then, the Holy Spirit (which is Jesus Christ’s Holy Ghost) was sent to us Christians (we are baptised with the Spirit) and that Holy Spirit dwells in each of us.
So, St. Paul is just a disciple of Jesus Christ. Some of us referred to him as a zealot (one who used to kill Christians) who turned to be a believer of Christ. Yes, I understand that St. Paul did say many ’sharp words’ in his letters to the various people (Romans, Corinthians and etc) but those were for the people back then when they didn’t have a uniformed teachings yet.
As for the four Gospels, I know many websites also refuted the truth we Christians believed in. I know many scholars have pointed out that there are errors in Luke Gospel because he seemed to miss two or three names in Jesus ascendants.
Frankly, I do not see my religion in that ‘Sirim certified, ISO 9002′ or whatever standard non-Christians used to measure the accuracy of the Bible. Basically, all the four Gospels of Matthew, Luke, Mark and John have the teachings of Jesus. Remember that Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were four different people who were inspired (or shall I say have divine guiding) to note down the ‘dairy of Jesus’. Since they are not writing as a group but as individuals, at different times, surely there are some bits and pieces which do not tally. Even in this electronic age, media and their reporters still come up with different version of stories sometimes.
Finally, I never see religions as competitive races or a 100% accurate and truthful book. The Bible is a Living Word (i.e. fluid and changeable) and the message from God comes to us through our wisdom to reflect on those words. By changeable, I do not mean anyone can change the Word of God but how we interpret it at different times. Of course, I am referring to us personally and not what our church taught us.
I hope I make sense to you with my interpretations. Peace be unto you too.
September 11th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
The Bible used by the Catholics and the Protestants only differ in a few extra books found in the Old Testament. During the early days, some elders found that the 7 books were not “strong” enough to be included as part of the Word of God and thus, omitted them. Of course, these elders also had differences in doctrine and dogma and thus, you have the non-Catholic churches. But as Lilian rightly pointed out, the differences between the Catholics and the core Protestant churches are not that many as to divide us. Rather, what unites us all is our belief in the Trinitarian God – God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, that Jesus was the Son of God, sent to earth to die for our sins, died and was buried and rose on the third day and is seated on the right hand of the Father. And God the Father sent the Holy Spirit to be the counsellor of all believers (since Jesus has resurrected and has gone back to Heaven).
At the end of it all, it is the calm assurance that each and every one of Jesus’s disciples have in the belief that I just shared above. We know that it is by the grace of God that we are saved and there is a true communion with the living God.
September 14th, 2008 at 2:27 am
then what is your opinion about Gospel Of Barnabas. one of Jesus Disciples in which is teaching completely different in concept taught by St Paul?
September 14th, 2008 at 2:35 am
jacknaim – Christians read the Bible. And there is no Gospel of Barnabas that is recognised by my faith. So, I shall not comment on something that none of the Christians accept.
September 14th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
But sister, the gospel of Barnabas is written by one of Jesus’s disciples. one whom follow Jesus for a period of times compared to St PAul who never met Jesus. you can check the detail of Gospel of Barnabas in wikipedia. It mention that, there is original copy of it in museum..
September 15th, 2008 at 2:51 am
Jack –
Christians generally believe that books in the Bible has to be God inspired – meaning the author has to be lead by the Spirit of God. Any other affiliation does not particularly matter.
Anyways this short clip from Pastor John Ortberg should adequately answer your question.
http://www.johnortberg.com/vid.....robelT1133
September 15th, 2008 at 11:23 am
First: “why the arrangement of the books inside it is so much different with protestant bible?”
The ordering of the books of the Bible is practically universal. The Protestant bibles which incorporate some of the books they don’t believe are Scripture place them in different locations. Among Catholic bibles, sometimes Maccabees I and II are placed at the end of the O.T., and sometimes before the books of the prophets. It’s not a doctrinal matter, really.
Second: “the numbers of books also different. so which one is true?”
Some (all?) Protestant reformers rejected certain books which the Catholic Church had already believed to be Scripture. Any Catholic would tell you that the Catholic bible is complete, and that the Protestant versions are lacking.
Third: “Gospel according to Mark, Matthew, Luke and John are not the earlier revelation in NT as it is written 200 years after year of Jesus christ.”
That’s VERY VERY wrong. While it is true that the earliest documents of the New Testament are the letters of St. Paul (most probably 1 Thessalonians), it is likely that at least three of the Gospel accounts (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) were written before AD 70, and that John’s account was written within the next couple of decades afterward (but before AD 100).
These Gospels are the written record of (true!) oral traditions that were already circulating. One of the reasons they were written down was for the reading of them at worship; most of the evangelizing was done orally, not by sitting down and reading. But another reason was for the codifying, as it were, of the true revelation of God.
Fourth: “then what is your opinion about Gospel Of Barnabas. one of Jesus Disciples in which is teaching completely different in concept taught by St Paul?”
Why would you believe that the so-called “Gospel of Barnabas” is REALLY by Barnabas and is inspired Scripture? Why would you expect it is true while the other writings of the New Testament aren’t? What’s your measuring stick, your “canon”?
The early Church rejected the Gospel of Barnabas as not being true, which is why it is not considered Scripture. Just like with the “Gospel of Judas”: it was garbage then, it’s garbage now.
September 15th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Jeff – Thanks for enlightening me as well as Jacknaim.
HH – Thanks for the link.
Jacknaim – There are lots of things to read over the net and I admit that I am also very confused with all the different accounts. Therefore, I am glad I have a church and its learned persons to refer to. They in turn, look to the Pope and Vatican. And the Pope, as we all know, is the appointed person from the Divine to shepherd us.
September 15th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
then what about the lost scripture which mention in the bible but it is not in there like “Book of Jasher”, “Book of War of The Lord” and few books which i dont remember….
regarding the Mark, Matthew, Luke and John.. are you tying to say that they are all just being inspired by holy spirit to wrote it eventhough they never met Jesus Christ. so the matter of ‘being inspired’ is more important than ‘being a disciples and follower of Jesus’
but anyway, thanks for your explaination eventhough it confuse me a lot.
September 15th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Lillian: I’m pleased to meet you and help you on your journey deeper into the Catholic and Apostolic faith. I found your blog through a link someone gave me (on the Catholic Answers Forum) of the singing priests’ YouTube video.
Jacknaim: “then what about the lost scripture which mention in the bible but it is not in there like “Book of Jasher”, “Book of War of The Lord” and few books which i dont remember…”
Israel did not consider those books sacred scripture either. From our best information, they appear to be historical-political annals of wars and conquests and things that kings did.
You’d have been keener to bring up a third letter which St. Paul wrote to the church in Corinth (which he alludes to in what we have as his second letter).
But why did you even bring this up? Does the Qur’an supply the missing books? If it doesn’t, why not?
Jacknaim: “regarding the Mark, Matthew, Luke and John.. are you tying to say that they are all just being inspired by holy spirit to wrote it even though they never met Jesus Christ.”
Mark was a disciple of Peter. Matthew and John were Apostles. Luke was Paul’s companion and physician. They were most certainly inspired by the Holy Spirit and two of them had direct knowledge of Jesus Christ, having been Apostles.
When did Mohammed meet Allah? Oh, that’s right, he got the Qur’an from the angel Jibril.
Jacknaim: “so the matter of ‘being inspired’ is more important than ‘being a disciples and follower of Jesus’”
One can be a disciple and follower of Jesus without having met him “in person” as the apostles and disciples did for 3 years. Anyway, you present a false dichotomy, since the one who inspires (the Holy Spirit) and the one of whom we are disciples (Jesus) are both God. Of course, that makes no sense if you don’t understand the basics of the Trinity (one God in three Divine Persons), and Islam is pretty dead-set against the concept of a Trinity at all, so it’s a very steep learning curve.
And what would you say about all the people who’ve never met Mohammed and yet write commentaries (tafsir and ta’wil) that many Muslims accept as authoritative. These men have never met Mohammed or Allah in person, have they? And yet their commentaries are “inspired”, are they not?
September 15th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Jeff: Very well articulated. Thanks for taking the time, being a relatively new christian I find myself occasionally struggling to field such questions.
Jack: Think of the trinity as water in different forms – regardless of which the elements are similar.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:48 am
jacknaim – Sorry but it all boils down to the Holy Trinity which not everyone can grasp. So, I hope what Jeff explained makes sense to you. As for myself, I am also learning about all these. I have made it very clear that this blog is just a Christian convert (me) faith journey. I am now taking Theology and hope I would be more enlightened after a year. Meanwhile, you have to hear what other readers shared.
Jeff – So, that’s who Mark, Matthew, Luke and John are! I never know that until now. Thanks a lot for the explanations. I am going to take up some courses to be more knowledgeable.
Yes, the singing priests. Their voices are fantastic. And it is divine intervention that my post was picked up by the Catholic forum. As usual, the Lord helps me even in the cyberworld. My post on Oprah Winfrey church got on Google and I didn’t know what to do ‘cos I have no opinions of my own. So, I got my parish priest to explain to me.
HH – Yes, like you, my knowledge is really shallow, especially the historical part.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:53 am
To Jeff : i’m not going to answer what you wrote about Islam in this post because you’re the one who suppose to answer all my question and doubt. this is not the right channel.
To HH: concept of trinity as water in different form is not accurate. those who learnt chemistry will know about it.
of course water can exist in many states; solid, liquid and ice and like you mention just now, the element are still the same. Yes i agree with that. no matter in what state, it elements still H2O.
However, in trinity, besides the form changes, the element and materials also changes. and not compose of the same element anymore. The father is god, Jesus is man while holy ghost is spirit.
so how can it differ?
1)Man contain flesh and bones whereas God and Spirit do not have it.
2) Man require to eat whereas God dont need it.
So no wonder Jesus said in Luke, 24:39-43 regarding the differences of him and God..
September 16th, 2008 at 2:10 am
dear Sis Lilian :
It’s ok sister. it’s nice to hear explanation from others too. just wanna thank you for providing this space for this very interesting discussion. you contribute a lot to this.
Are you taking theology now? Hurm great. next time you can tell me more ..
discussion is quite meaningful. Thanks to Catholic for giving chance to this. You’re very open minded. Few weeks back, i’ve a chance to Meet Father Valentine Dompok of Cheras Church. He’s very nice for giving us Muslim a chance to share about our faith in his church. Maybe later we can do the same things in your church if God’s will.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:06 am
Jacknaim: “i’m not going to answer what you wrote about Islam in this post because you’re the one who suppose to answer all my question and doubt.”
Then this isn’t a discussion… it’s an interview, or an interrogation. It’s just one-sided. That’s awfully unfair.
Jacknaim: “concept of trinity as water in different form is not accurate … However, in trinity, besides the form changes, the element and materials also changes. and not compose of the same element anymore. The father is god, Jesus is man while holy ghost is spirit.”
Right, the analogy of the Trinity being like water (solid/liquid/gas) is an incomplete and imperfect analogy.
All three Persons of the Trinity are of the same Divine substance/essence. Jesus, the Son, is a Divine Person, and as such, is Spirit. Paul mentions the “Spirit of Christ” (Romans 8:9) and Luke mentions the “Spirit of Jesus” (Acts 16:7); connection of the Spirit to the Lord (and Jesus is Lord!) happens elsewhere in Paul’s writings as well.
HOWEVER, the Son has assumed for himself a human nature — body, blood, bones, etc., including a human soul! — so that he may redeem it. The Divine nature or substance of God was in no way changed or altered or confused: the two natures (divine and human) co-existed within the one Divine Person of Jesus Christ, the Word, the Son of God.
Jacknaim: “Man contain flesh and bones whereas God and Spirit do not have it. Man require to eat whereas God dont need it.”
Jesus is both fully God and fully Man. No, it’s not easy to understand. Yes, it’s a mystery.
As for Luke 24:39-43, they already knew Jesus (before he died) was a walking, talking, flesh-and-blood human. They were afraid that they were NOW seeing, after his death (and resurrection), his ghost. He showed them that he was not a ghost or spirit: he had a glorified resurrected body. This is not contradictory if the Incarnation can be accepted.
If you can’t accept the Incarnation, then of course you can’t accept this teaching.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:52 am
Jeff Pinya :
“Then this isn’t a discussion… it’s an interview, or an interrogation. It’s just one-sided. That’s awfully unfair.”
Jacknaim:
It’s not like that brother. Since the post is dedicated for me, then let us finish the main discussion first without deviate into other topic. So we will discuss bout present question first and ask sister Lilian to post a new topic. Okay?
to Jeff Pinya:
Spirit of Jesus did not meant that Jesus is being God. Maybe they are same in purpose of life or mission. For examples is in I Samuel 18:1
After David had finished talking with Saul, Jonathan became one in spirit with David, and he loved him as himself.
Jeff Pinya:
As for Luke 24:39-43, they already knew Jesus (before he died) was a walking, talking, flesh-and-blood human. They were afraid that they were NOW seeing, after his death (and resurrection), his ghost. He showed them that he was not a ghost or spirit: he had a glorified resurrected body. This is not contradictory if the Incarnation can be accepted.
Jacknaim said:
So you are saying that Jesus was resurrected in complete body. However, what you said is completely against the teaching of Paul which mention that the resurrection of Jesus is in Spirit state. please refer I Corinthians 15:35-44
September 16th, 2008 at 5:29 am
Jacknaim: “Spirit of Jesus did not meant that Jesus is being God. Maybe they are same in purpose of life or mission.”
That’s your misinterpretation, based on a selective reading of Scripture. What about John 1:1-14, which clearly identifies the “Word” (Logos) with God — as being with God and being God! — and becoming Incarnate on earth? What about when Jesus refers to himself as “I AM” (“Before Abraham was, I AM.”, John 8:58). Elsewhere, the N.T. refers to both God (the Father) and Jesus (the Word, the Lamb, etc.) as “the ONE who is, was, and is to come”, “the Alpha and the Omega”. I could go on. You have to look at Scripture as a whole, otherwise you risk falling into wrong interpretations.
Jacknaim: “So you are saying that Jesus was resurrected in complete body. However, what you said is completely against the teaching of Paul which mention that the resurrection of Jesus is in Spirit state. please refer I Corinthians 15:35-44″
Again, you are wrong. (I happen to love studying the resurrection and what we do (and don’t) know about it.) The Gospels clearly attest that Jesus’s body was missing from the tomb and that Jesus did indeed have a physical body (which could be touched, which could take in food, etc.) but that it was beyond merely physical: it was glorified, so he could walk through walls, disappear, etc. John 2:19-21 attests to Jesus meaning that he would be killed and raised, body and all!
Why would his body be missing from the tomb if his resurrected self did not include his body? His disciples clearly weren’t getting the big picture, so why would they have stolen it to promote a “lie of the resurrection of the body” which they themselves didn’t understand?
As to 1 Corinthians 15, Paul CLEARLY says body both in the physical (natural) and spiritual (supernatural) senses. He uses the word “body” both times! He’s not simply talking about physical thing (a body) and a spiritual thing (a soul or spirit), but about a WHOLE ENTIRE BODY. The Latin reads corpus animale and corpus spiritale… the Greek reads ???? ??????? and ???? ???????????.
Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable”. But this does not mean that flesh and blood is out of the picture, but that it must be changed. The imperishable inherits the imperishable, so the perishable must be changed to be imperishable so it can inherit what is imperishable. (Say that three times fast!) He says it himself: “For this perishable nature must put on the imperishable, and this mortal nature must put on immortality.” The mortal nature (our physical, natural bodies) are not gotten rid of, they are supplemented, they are glorified, they are enhanced spiritually: they put on immortality.
September 16th, 2008 at 7:46 am
Since you already mention about John 1. Then let’s take a look at John 1:1
In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1)we are all know that God has no beginning
2) These words are not in red- meaning that, not Jesus said that but it is the word of John.
3) from the greek bible, the correct word uses is ‘logos’ which actualy means To speak, something spoken,thought, command that is spoken and not ‘God’ as you mention. You will see the weirdness of it when we substitute ‘God’ into ‘Word’
In the Beginning was the God, and the God was with God, and the God was God.
or let say we substitute it with Jesus. it even dont make any sense
In the Beginning was the Jesus, and the Jesus was with God, and the Jesus was God.
what abaout if we substitute it with spoken word/ command
In the Beginning was the spoken word/ command, and the spoken word/ command was with God, and the spoken word/ command was Divine.
4) how ever, another problem is, the greek word uses in that verse is Theos instead of Ho Theos. so, there is mistranslation here into english.
5) Finally, This verse actually similar to the concept introduce by philo of alexandria (you can check in Catholic encyclopedia)
———————————————————————
Regarding John 8:58,
is it sufficient to prove divinity of Jesus? How many people exist before the day of Abraham?
Even prophet Jeremiah was appointed as a prophet before he was conceived in her mother’s womb. Jeremiah 1:5
——————————————————————-
I’m quite confuse when you guys use the concept of Alpha and Omega because Jesus himself is a jews. the original manuscript was in aramaic before it is translated into Greek. So where did the term alpha and omega arise? Since it is in Greek term and not Aramaic??
September 16th, 2008 at 10:02 am
1) we are all know that God has no beginning
Right. John 1:1 is bringing to mind Genesis 1:1-3. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth; and in the beginning, when God did this, there was this entity which John calls the “Logos”, the Word. This Word was WITH God and the Word WAS God. Now, if God is something with no beginning, then that means the Word has always existed (even before “the beginning”).
2) These words are not in red- meaning that, not Jesus said that but it is the word of John.
Right. These are John’s words, as inspired in him by the Holy Spirit, which is God. So they’re John’s words, and they’re God’s words. Fully divine, fully human… just like Jesus, THE WORD!
3) from the greek bible, the correct word uses is ‘logos’ which actualy means To speak, something spoken,thought, command that is spoken and not ‘God’ as you mention. You will see the weirdness of it when we substitute ‘God’ into ‘Word’
In Greek philosophy, the logos is the word, the command, a spoken instruction. “The Word of God”. God created the universe with His Word; that means the Word couldn’t have been created (since He created WITH the Word) and so again, the Word must have already been around. The Word is “a part” of God, so to speak: the Word is a Person.
Your examples of it being confusing are confusing because you’re changing the words of Scripture. John used “Logos”, “Word”. He did it that way to prove a difficult point: that the Word both was with God and was God. Using “God” would’ve been confusing, certainly. Using “Jesus” wouldn’t, but John is introducing the Person of the Word before the name “Jesus”… he associates the two later.
4) how ever, another problem is, the greek word uses in that verse is Theos instead of Ho Theos. so, there is mistranslation here into english.
But even without the article, “ho”, “theos” is still a noun and not an adjective (he would have used “theios”). And John is not a poly-theist, he’s a Jew, so he couldn’t believe there are TWO Gods, nor could he consider a created being to be God. Here is a long handling of the issue from a Baptist minister; an excerpt:
5) Finally, This verse actually similar to the concept introduce by philo of alexandria (you can check in Catholic encyclopedia)
What does it matter that Philo had a similar idea already? People can get SOME things right about God without having it ALL right!
Regarding John 8:58, is it sufficient to prove divinity of Jesus? How many people exist before the day of Abraham?
How many people who existed before Abraham were standing and talking with Jews on THAT DAY? He didn’t say “Before Abraham was, I was”, he said “I am”.
Even prophet Jeremiah was appointed as a prophet before he was conceived in her mother’s womb. Jeremiah 1:5
Jeremiah was appointed to be a prophet, yes. But he did not have consciousness of that: it was revealed to him by God. But Jesus WAS before Abraham.
I’m quite confuse when you guys use the concept of Alpha and Omega because Jesus himself is a jews. the original manuscript was in aramaic before it is translated into Greek. So where did the term alpha and omega arise? Since it is in Greek term and not Aramaic??
Scripture is written in Greek as well as Hebrew and Aramaic. Jesus, though a Jew, is the universal Savior: he speaks to any man and that man will understand him. Christianity had become a predominantly Gentile religion because the majority of Jews rejected Christ, so the New Testament was written in Greek.
Now, you believe the Qur’an was transmitted in Arabic because that’s God’s language, right? And that the Qur’an can only really be understood in the Arabic, right? And you’ll admit that the Qur’an contains Arabic phrases and idioms that were contemporary to its date of authorship? (You don’t have to answer those if you don’t want to…)
God uses language that His people will understand when He speaks to them. He’s thoughtful like that! If this had been transmitted in Hebrew, perhaps He would have said “Aleph” and “Tav”.
Regarding the foreignness of this concept to Israel, Wikipedia mentions this:
September 16th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Jeff:
John 1:1 is bringing to mind Genesis 1:1-3
Jacknaim:
Genesis 1:1-3 saying that in the beginning of the day, the spirit of god hovering over the water. It did not mention that it is word or Jesus Christ. Even so it is Jesus Christ, then it will deviate from your doctrine: Doctrine of original sin. Since Adam has not yet been created and eat the fruit. Christian doctrine about Jesus being establish after the doctrine of Original Sin that Go finally want to forgive the sins of human.
Jeff:
Right. These are John’s words, as inspired in him by the Holy Spirit, which is God. So they’re John’s words, and they’re God’s words. Fully divine, fully human… just like Jesus, THE WORD!
Jacknaim:
Thanks. Look like we find an argument here. Jeff, it is the word of John or John The Baptist? Remember, Holy spirit will not going to descent before Jesus is ascend to heaven.
Jeff:
Jesus, though a Jew, is the universal Savior: he speaks to any man and that man will understand him.
JAcknaim:
Here you are twisting our discussion. Jesus is not universal savior according to Bible. He come to glorify the law of Mosses which has been forgotten by the Israel. Jesus was sent to Israel not others. refer Matthew: 15:24
He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
Even when he ask his disciples to spread his word, he mention about spreading it to Jews.. In Matthew 10:5-6
These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel
So how can the concept of Alpha and Omega being derived?
Jeff:
Now, you believe the Qur’an was transmitted in Arabic because that’s God’s language, right? And that the Qur’an can only really be understood in the Arabic, right? And you’ll admit that the Qur’an contains Arabic phrases and idioms that were contemporary to its date of authorship? (You don’t have to answer those if you don’t want to…)
Jacknaim:
Nope. Arab is not God language, but the language of Prophet Muhammad whom Quran was revealed to. In ISlam there are more that 124k prophet, each sent into their tribes. The words of God depends on what type of tribes. It is indeed true, God sain in th Quran that he reveal Quran in Arab so that Muhammad will understand it better. In Islam we also believe in Torah, Psalm and Gospel. each of them was reveal by God in their prophet’s language.
for Muhammad, Quran was revealed in Quraisy slang (One of Arab slang.) Quran was revealed to confirm earliest scriptures and at the same time, to correct mistakes and guard them.
differ from previous prophet who was sent unto their own tribes, Muhammad is a final messenger for everybody and not only to Arab.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
correction
Jack:
‘Thanks. Look like we find an argument here’
- Not argument but agreement..
and will you excuse me to hold our discussion for few days because i’m going back for a leave. Maybe i’ll come back on Sunday..
September 16th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
one more things is… i think that you are indeed wrong when you said that ‘theos’ can stand alone without ‘Ho’. As far as I’m concern the word ‘Ho’ gives the meaning of Divine.If u check the bible, even Satan is referred as ‘theos’. so do we have to take Satan as God too? for me, this is absolutely wrong.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
i guess i come earlier..
so what’s ur comment towards my question, bro?
September 19th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Jacknaim: Genesis 1:1-3 saying that in the beginning of the day, the spirit of god hovering over the water. It did not mention that it is word or Jesus Christ.
Genesis 1:3 says: And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
John 1:3 says, about the Word: all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made.
So the Christian sees a relation between God “speaking” creation into existence, and St. John speaking of the Logos or “Word” of God. Not to mention the phrase “Word of God” is found throughout the Old Testament; it means, roughly, the “revelation of God” or the “message of God”.
Jacknaim: Doctrine of original sin. Since Adam has not yet been created and eat the fruit.
God knows, before He creates the universe, that Adam and Eve are going to use their free will against HIS Divine will. He knows that Cain will slay Abel. He knows that He will have to “start again” the Noah. He knows that Moses isn’t a good speaker, and that Aaron will assist the Israelites in building a golden calf. Etc. But God did it anyway, because God also knows the ending, and God, and those who love Him and obey Him, will be victorious.
Jacknaim: Jeff, it is the word of John or John The Baptist?
The author of the “Gospel according to John” is John the Apostle, not John the Baptist.
In John’s gospel, he often records the words of John the Baptist. Insofar as John the Baptist is speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (which filled him in the womb, when Mary visited his mother Elizabeth), he is speaking the words which God has given him.
Elsewhere in John’s gospel, he himself is writing under the influence of the Spirit.
Jacknaim: Holy spirit will not going to descent before Jesus is ascend to heaven.
Right, there was no general dwelling of the Spirit with the Church until Pentecost. However, the Holy Spirit did dwell in particular people (“special cases”, you might say) before then.
Jacknaim: Jesus is not universal savior according to Bible. He come to glorify the law of Mosses which has been forgotten by the Israel. Jesus was sent to Israel not others.
Jesus was SENT to Israel, for the lost sheep of Israel, yes. That doesn’t mean that non-Israelites did not seek him out! There are instances of non-Jews believing in Jesus and being healed in the Gospels. See Matthew 15:21ff and Luke 7:1ff for examples.
Furthermore, Jesus’ mission didn’t end at his death or his ascension into heaven; rather, he told his Apostles to perpetuate his mission (preaching the Good News and baptizing and making disciples) throughout the WHOLE WORLD. See Matthew 28:18-20 and Acts 1:8.
And Jesus knew about (and spoke prophecies of) his rejection by Israel. See Luke 4:23-28 for an example.
Conclusion: God sent His Son to the People of Israel whom God had made His own through many covenants. Through the small group of Israelites who DID accept His Son, God would create a new and everlasting covenant — made in the blood of His Son, not animals — that would never end and that would embrace all the nations of the world. But there was a specific order to follow, which is why Jesus’ ministry on earth was to Jews.
Jacknaim: So how can the concept of Alpha and Omega being derived?
First, there were Hellenized Jews: that is, Jews who knew and spoke Greek. So God giving a message to a Jew in Greek isn’t far-fetched.
Second, by the first few decades of the Church, there were plenty of Gentile members. And by the time the Book of Revelation was received, there was a CONSIDERABLE drop-off of Jews converting to Christianity. So it isn’t unreasonable that God would reveal something to John using Greek imagery.
Jacknaim: Nope. Arab is not God language, but the language of Prophet Muhammad whom Quran was revealed to.
Ok, that’s different from what I’ve read in some places. I’ve heard that the Qur’an is the definitive revelation from God because it’s written in His language with His exact words (whereas the Bible is written in OUR language with OUR words, even though those words come from God). But that’s not what you’re saying, so I apologize for generalizing, and we can move on from that.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Jacknaim: i think that you are indeed wrong when you said that ‘theos’ can stand alone without ‘Ho’. As far as I’m concern the word ‘Ho’ gives the meaning of Divine. If u check the bible, even Satan is referred as ‘theos’.
Could you provide a reference for me so I can investigate?
September 21st, 2008 at 8:59 am
Hi Jacknaim
Did you know that there is no record of Barnabas being an apostle of Jesus? When he is introduced in the Bible, it is after Jesus has returned to heaven; the Bible never mentions that Barnabas ever met Jesus.
Did you know that many people consider the Gospel of Barnabas to be a medieval forgery? There are “anachronisms” in the Gospel of Barnabas — things that are out of place in the first century — but are perfectly in place many centuries later.
Did you know that even the latest gospel written, the Gospel of John, has had fragments of it found dating to about 120 A.D., and has quotes of it in other authors from about the same time? 120 A.D. is less than 100 years after Jesus’ ascension.
Did you know that Paul speaks of Jesus’ teachings in his letters more than some of the others? For example: when Jesus was asked what was the most important of the laws, he answered that the most important commandments were these: Love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength; and the second is like it: love your neighbor as yourself. Now read what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians chapter 13. See how much Paul spoke about how loving our neighbor is the most excellent way? Read also his letter to the Romans, chapter 13, how Paul taught what Jesus taught, that love does no harm to its neighbor so love is the fulfillment of the law. See how Paul took Jesus’ teaching on love and preached the same thing Jesus taught.
Jesus proclaimed that God — almighty and without equal — is our Father.
I wouldn’t get too distracted by the different branches of Christianity; think of them like the Sunni and the Shiites and the Druzes and so forth. Of course there are differences and the differences are meaningful; however, we all preach Christ crucified as the forgiveness for your sins, so that you have the certainty of resurrection and the certainty of God’s mercy, to the praise of God’s name.
Take care & God bless
WF
September 22nd, 2008 at 1:56 am
Hi Jacknaim
Jesus was the savior for all mankind and his teaching was for all tribes: we know this because when Christ sent his apostles into the world, they were gifted by the Holy Spirit to speak in the languages of all mankind so each tribe and nation could learn the Word of God in their own language, pray in their own language, and study God’s word in their own language. Even the Sirat Rasul Allah records that Jesus’ followers were gifted with languages for the whole world. See for yourself that God gave the gift of all languages to the followers of Jesus, so that the message for all people could be proclaimed in all languages, and the religion for all people could be prayed in any language and studied in any language.
This was the message: that God has declared Jesus to be the judge by which he will judge the world, and God has made this plain to all people by raising Jesus from the dead to ascend to heaven. Jesus’ tomb is to this day empty, praise God.
Take care & God bless
WF
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Jeff said:
Genesis 1:3 says: And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
Jacknaim said:
Look, I don’t get the picture here. Why you pin point Gen 1:3? What I’m trying to stress on Gen 1:1 is that ‘the spirit of God’ could mean something else besides Jesus or Holy Spirit. Erm well, maybe you try to proove the existence of two personalities here by bolding the word ‘said’. And again, I’m questioning you. What is the word in Greek for God in Gen 1:3 Theos or Ho Theos?
Check Exodus 31:3
and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills—
So, is it possible that Spirit of God could means something else?
Jeff:
God knows, before He creates the universe, that Adam and Eve are going to use their free will against HIS Divine will
Jacknaim said:
is it? Then how come God cannot find where Adam and Eve hid and don’t even sure that Adam and Eve ate the fruit? Not me said so, but the Bible said it. Refer Gen 3:8-11
8Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9But the LORD God called to the man, “Where are you?” 10He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.” 11And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”
Jeff said:
Jesus was SENT to Israel, for the lost sheep of Israel, yes. That doesn’t mean that non-Israelites did not seek him out! There are instances of non-Jews believing in Jesus and being healed in the Gospels. See Matthew 15:21ff and Luke 7:1ff for examples.
Jacknaim said:
If you read those text carefully, they are healed by their faith towards Almighty God and not faith towards Jesus Christ.
Jeff said:
he told his Apostles to perpetuate his mission (preaching the Good News and baptizing and making disciples) throughout the WHOLE WORLD. See Matthew 28:18-20 and Acts 1:8.
Jacknaim said:
Christian schoolar agreed that the old scripture of Matthew does not contain verse 28:18-20 and said that this was an edtitoon. So how would I know whether it is the true word of Jesus or not?
And these two verse certainly against what is mention in Matthew 10:5-6
“Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel
Jacknaim said:
Since you believe in the concept of Alpha and Omega, then it is not the Lord God. The Lord God does not have the beginning or ending. By putting the word alpha and omega, you re putting the beginning and ending to God. If so, then Malchaesaedik is greater than God as he has no beginning and ending.
Jeff said:
Could you provide a reference for me so I can investigate?
Jacknaim said:
II Corinthians, 4:4
And the devil is the God of this world.
Besides, Pharoah also being reffering as god.
Weekend Fisher said:
I wouldn’t get too distracted by the different branches of Christianity; think of them like the Sunni and the Shiites and the Druzes and so forth.
Jacknaim said:
Division in christianity and Islam is totally different. Sunni and Shiites born due to the political differences after the death of Prophet Muhammad. The Shiites want the family of Muhammad (Ali) to become a leader. However the community choose Abu Bakar. The fight continue that result in the murdering of Islamic Chalipht. They are fighting until now but still believing in one God, having the same Quran.
However the division I christianity is totally defferent with different Bible, opinion regarding Mary and position of the head of the church and many more.
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:25 pm
Jacknaim: Look, I don’t get the picture here. Why you pin point Gen 1:3?
In Gen. 1:1-3, we are “introduced” to God, His Spirit, and His Word (by which He creates all things). That was my point.
Jacknaim: What is the word in Greek for God in Gen 1:3 Theos or Ho Theos?
In Gen 1:1, it appears to be “ho theos”, and in Gen 1:3, “ho theos” as well. It is God’s Word that creates; the Old and New Testaments agree on this. The New Testament identifies Jesus Christ as that Word.
Jacknaim: Then how come God cannot find where Adam and Eve hid and don’t even sure that Adam and Eve ate the fruit?
It COULD be a literary construction used by God (and the author). Or, it could be simply literal, that God asked a question: NOT because He didn’t know the answer, but to force the one to whom He asked the question to “fess up” and give the answer. Surely you know that a person can ask a question to which they already know the answer! Does Allah never ask a question in the Quran?
Jacknaim: If you read [Matthew 15:21ff and Luke 7:1ff] carefully, they are healed by their faith towards Almighty God and not faith towards Jesus Christ.
In Matthew 15, the woman comes to Jesus and calls him “O Lord, Son of David” and asks HIM to have mercy on her. In Luke 7, the centurion sends for Jesus, and then declares that he is unworthy to receive Jesus, but that the words of Jesus will be enough to heal his servant. Why did these two people bother asking Jesus for anything, then? They could have exercised their faith in Almighty God from home…
Jacknaim: Christian scholar agreed that the old scripture of Matthew does not contain verse 28:18-20 and said that this was an edtitoon. So how would I know whether it is the true word of Jesus or not?
HOW CONVENIENT FOR YOU. This is why I will not be continuing this question-and-answer session any further. I prophesied this to my wife over the weekend, saying to her that EVEN IF I produce strong evidence from the Bible, you can always refuse to accept it by means of the argument that it has been corrupted by Christians.
You can know Jesus said those words because the Church, endowed with grace and authority by God Himself, has recognized that the Gospels are true.
Jacknaim: And these two verse certainly against what is mention in Matthew 10:5-6
DIFFERENT TIMES. At the END of his earthly ministry, after his death and Resurrection, and just prior to his Ascension, THEN Jesus gives them the commission to go to the rest of the world. At first, it is necessary to spread the Gospel among Israel; afterwards, to the whole world.
Jacknaim: Since you believe in the concept of Alpha and Omega, then it is not the Lord God. The Lord God does not have the beginning or ending.
That’s your lousy interpretation; that is not what the Church understands it to mean. He is the source and end of everything. He is before all and after all. He was, He is, and He will be. He does not say “I have a beginning and an end”. He says HE IS the beginning and the end.
Jacknaim: then Malchaesaedik is greater than God as he has no beginning and ending.
Some Jews believed that Melchizedek might have been a manifestation of God; other Jews identified him with Noah’s son Shem. In Hebrews 7:1-3, the author is pointing out that Melchizedek is an oddity in Scripture, because he is never “introduced” by means of a genealogy.
Jacknaim: II Corinthians, 4:4: And the devil is the God of this world.
That’s not what it says. It says “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not…” Yes, it is referring to the Devil as the “god of this world”, but not in the sense that the Devil is truly god, but that he rules this world by means of our sinfulness. And the Greek reads “ho theos” there, in case you were wondering.
I am not continuing this conversation. I apologize to Lillian, and I apologize to you, Jacknaim. I wish I could convince you of the truth of Jesus Christ, but I am not the one to do so. I pray that God would open your heart so that your eyes and ears would be opened as well.
September 24th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Thanks,Jeff for having the patience to share what I haven’t learn.
Thanks, Jacknaim for having this peaceful discussion. Like I said earlier, there is no right and wrong to how we worship God. Anyway, I hope you have been enlightened by Jeff and Weekend Fisher for their generous sharing of our Christian faith.
Thanks also to Weekend Fisher for helping out to explain to Jacknaim.
September 24th, 2008 at 12:58 am
To Jeff:
Ok Jeff, i accept your decision for not continuing this discussion. LAst word from me. Now you see that the word ‘Ho Theos’ also being referring to Satan. That’s why i got confuse with the translation in the english Bible and reject John 1:1 as a source to prove divinity of Jesus. However, i do appreciate our discussion. I learn lot of things.I hope that your faith will grow stronger.
To Lilian:
Thank you sister for providing space for this discussion. That’s Very nice of you. Just bear in minds that this discussion is not about converting other into particular faith. It’s more about sharing and changing idea among us. Hope, there will be more space for discussion. If God Wills, we will organize second interfaith dialog in USM Kubang KErian Kelantan this December. Once the date and speaker is confirmed, i will inform you ok……
November 26th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
God works in mysterious ways…some events can’t be explain in literally….jack