inJESUS:
same here…at least Joseph tries …but Justice still has a long way coz he doesnt know basic things…not that it’s very easy to grasp some doctrines when you come from a muslim background, but step by step if he wants too…i lost interest as well.
Well, Mr. inJESUS, your catholic Bible
doesn’t even contain full deposit of your Christian faith nor it contian full accounts of what in fact Jesus preached nor it is reliable because all of your so called *ancient * and
most ancient manuscripts of Hebrew/Greek are works of later authors. Most of them are still UNKNOWN to your Bibles scholars and Catholic magesterium, let alone ordinary people like you.
What you are asking me to know about your faith is not the teachings of Jesus but what those books say about Jesus whose authors are still UNKNOWN.
If you have a Gospel titiled “Gospel of Jesus” then I would be interested in reading it and accepting it after verifying it.
St.Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to his name. Who ever wrote Gospel According to St. Matthew, has used “Gospel Acording to St. Mark”.
Your Catholic
The New American Bible informs you that:
**The position of the Gospel according to Matthew as the first of the four gospels in the New Testament reflects both the view that it was the first to be written, a view that goes back to the late second century A.D., and the esteem in which it was held by the church; no other was so frequently quoted in the noncanonical literature of earliest Christianity.
"The questions of authorship, sources, and the time of composition of this gospel have received many answers, none of which can claim more than a greater or lesser degree of probability. The one now favored by the majority of scholars is the following:
The ancient tradition that the author was the disciple and apostle of Jesus named Matthew (see Matthew 10:3) is untenable because the gospel is based, in large part, on the Gospel according to Mark (almost all the verses of that gospel have been utilized in this), and it is hardly likely that a companion of Jesus would have followed so extensively an account that came from one who admittedly never had such an association rather than rely on his own memories. The attribution of the gospel to the disciple Matthew may have been due to his having been responsible for some of the traditions found in it, but that is far from certain.
The unknown author, whom we shall continue to call Matthew for the sake of convenience, drew not only upon the Gospel according to Mark but upon a large body of material (principally, sayings of Jesus) not found in Mark that corresponds, sometimes exactly, to material found also in the Gospel according to Luke.
This material, called “Q” (probably from the first letter of the German word Quelle, meaning “source”), represents traditions, written and oral, used by both Matthew and Luke.
Mark and Q are sources common to the two other synoptic gospels; hence the name the “Two-Source Theory” given to this explanation of the relation among the synoptics.
In addition to what Matthew drew from Mark and Q, his gospel contains material that is found only there. This is often designated “M,” written or oral tradition that was available to the author.
Since Mark was written shortly before or shortly after A.D. 70 (see Introduction to Mark), Matthew was composed certainly after that date, which marks the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans at the time of the First Jewish Revolt (A.D. 66-70), and probably at least a decade later since Matthew’s use of Mark presupposes a wide diffusion of that gospel. The post-A.D. 70 date is confirmed within the text by Matthew 22:7, which refers to the destruction of Jerusalem.
As for the place where the gospel was composed, a plausible suggestion is that it was Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria. That large and important city had a mixed population of Greek-speaking Gentiles and Jews. **
[
usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/intro.htm]](
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/intro.htm])
Then as to the so-called “Gospel According to St. Mark”, Catholic’s the **New American Bible ** says:…
cont.
.
rather than answering and giving us sensible responses he goes on to to something new, anti catholicism is not welcome here :tsktsk: however if you are willing, Justice2006 to be open minded and have an understanding of our faith you are more than welcome here along with your muslim brothers and sisters who have been nothing but a pleasure to post with 
This is strawman strategy. But unfortunately it doesn’t work.