P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Matthew was originally written in Aramaic, which is where the passage in question appears.I’m not even a Bible “scholar” and I know that.
- Status
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
It means to admit your mistake, Believers. Something that you have failed to do after all your attacks on the Catholic Church have been refuted.
This is probably true, but I wanted to see whether you were familiar with the theories about an Aramaic Matthew.
Sure thing, Believers. The original Greek makes complete sense to you. I did not realize that you are a Greek scholars…my apologies.
So, again, why does the Greek New Testament call Simon “Cephas” five times if Jesus had actually named him “Petros” as you claim?
Shouldn’t his name simply be “Petros” in all verses?
Where did the word “Cephas” come from?
Hmmm…it would have been logical for a JEW to speak ARAMAIC, wouldn’t it?
BTW, which Church did the writing and the preserving, Believers?
That wouldn’t be the CATHOLIC Church, would it?
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Compared to your Christian testimony of continuously telling someone whom you’ve never met, that they need to REPENT and be saved, even though they had just said they had done that very thing?
You’ve read the original manuscripts? Is that what happened to them - they’re all at your house!? :doh2: Why didn’t you say so?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Easy there, Pixie. This is a theory, but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it. Many scholars do not accept this.Matthew was originally written in Aramaic, which is where the passage in question appears.I’m not even a Bible “scholar” and I know that.
That aside, there are several Aramaic words that appear in the New Testament (maranatha, for example), so we can be sure that the Aramaic speakers carried some of their original tongue into the Greek New Testament with them.
Cephas is another biggie, of course, and Believers has no response other than to lash out wildly at the Catholic Church for something he does not understand.
He’s still in the “pre-investigation” stage of his conversion.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Probably the same scholars who think Noah’s Ark and Jonah are myths.
Ah, yes. I remember those days… :knight2: I set out to prove those stupid Catholics didn’t know their Bibles!!That aside, there are several Aramaic words that appear in the New Testament (maranatha, for example), so we can be sure that the Aramaic speakers carried some of their original tongue into the Greek New Testament with them.
Cephas is another biggie, of course, and Believers has no response other than to lash out wildly at the Catholic Church for something he does not understand.
He’s still in the “pre-investigation” stage of his conversion.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Then my work here is done!
I actually did laugh out loud at this…Pixie, you crack me up.
Nite, all.
I’m feelin’ a little snarky tonight. I should go to bed, too.
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Hi
I respect you views, however, according to my research JesusYeshuaIssa did not die on cross and was delivered in neardead condition and was treated in the tomb where he was laid and he gained consciousness in due course of time, his life was saved and he alongwith MaryMeriumMaryam set off from Galiliee where they were seen lalt time. They went in search of ten lost tribes of the house of Israel who lived in the East. Since I am clear that they were alive when strange things were done at Rome in their absence, so neither there was ascention to heaven of Jesus nor assumption of Mary. This is what is truth accroding to my resources. Others are not under any sort of compulsion to believe it unless they are also confirmed and convinced what I have expressed here, of course with reasonable arguments.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics
The West, as I understand, due to certain disinformation has seen only MullahIslam or MullahShariah; the true face of Muhammad’sIslam and PromisedMessiahImamMahdi’sIslam is yet hidden from their eyes, which is truly speaking only peaceful.
K
kujo313
Guest
K
kujo313
Guest
Sure she did. Just because the CCC says “no” does not mean “no”. The CCC is not above the Word.
K
kujo313
Guest
Have you ever wondered what happens to the leftover lamb when it’s sacrificed in the OT?
Z
Zooey
Guest
No, it’s not. If it were, there would be no Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unitarians, Unity School, 7th Day Adventists, etc, ad nauseum, because they all started with somebody who read the “Bible alone” without the benefit of the scholars of old, without respect for their forebears, & made up a religion which they can pull verses out of the Bible alone, & “prove”.
Not to mention that, if you were going by the Bible alone, as you claim, wouldn’t be pulling out quotes all over CAF, from your own favorite Bible teacher.
Yeah, I noticed that, too…Compared to your Christian testimony of continuously telling someone whom you’ve never met, that they need to REPENT and be saved, even though they had just said they had done that very thing?
For somebody who “bases everything on the Bible”, he ought to at least be able to read a message board well enough to notice that, huh???
L
LilyM
Guest
No - don’t need to. All I need to know is Jesus said ‘take and eat, this is my body’ and then ‘do this in memory of me’
So I do :yup:
K
kujo313
Guest
Jesus was sinless. He got that from His Father’s side.
L
LilyM
Guest
Mary was sinless too - she also got that from HER Father’s side (who also happens to be His Father of course
)
K
kujo313
Guest
“Confusion” translates to “disorder”.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
This is known as the “swoon theory” and it has no basis in fact. You can Google on that term to find any number of articles refuting it. Here’s just one:
godonthe.net/evidence/swoon.htm
If you are truly interested in researching the truth, then you will do a bit of reading of true Christians to discover that Jesus did die on the cross, was placed in a sealed tomb, and rose again on the first day of the week (Sunday).
Jesus is God, the second person of the Blessed Trinity, one in being with Father and the Holy Spirit.
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
You sidestepped the argument because of the logical implications of it…
Jesus was not a sinner yet he was fully man. “All” does not include him.
Infants, children below the age of reason and mentally deficient adults are not sinners. “All” does not include them.
The Catholic Church is not above the Word, but she interprets it infallibly and teaches on matters of faith and morals without error.
You do not. :tiphat:
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
No.
I am not a Jew, and it does not concern me.
I believe (and this is from many years ago, so I could be wrong) that the sacrifices were either consumed by fire or taken home and consumed as food by the priests who served in the temple.
However, you have a point you wish to make, and I can’t wait to hear it. :coffeeread:
K
kujo313
Guest
“In memory”. He opened blind eyes, made the lame walk and raised the dead. Yet, bread remained bread and wine remained wine.
Why?
The rest of the sacrificial lamb in the OT went to the owners of the lamb for a feast. They celebrated the fact that God accepted their sacrifice and their sins were forgiven. They ate meat.
If we accept God’s “Sacrifice”, our sins are forgiven.
In breaking bread (wasn’t in slices back then), we remember Jesus being beaten and crucified for our sins. In the cup, we remember that His shed blood made us white as snow.
- Status