New Indian-Chennai News + more

Members Login
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Quotes


Status: Offline
Posts: 24624

The resurrection must have occurred, it is possible that there will always be differences of opinion as to what precisely took place(in regard to the tomb being found empty); yet it is clear enough from such records as we have that unless something epoch-making had happened there would have been no church to make any records at all. Chamber's Encyclopedia 1963 V-8, P-86.


On Last Supper Between 1Corinthians and Gospels

What we have here, the, is an account of the essential elements in the Last Supper that formed the pattern for the church's meal. It has been argued that the story in the Gospels is not so much a part of the story of Jesus as a Liturgical text that was preserved on its own and then inserted into the Gospel narrative. Some sholars would go further and claim that the story is based on early christian liturgies rather than  on history, the accounts of what  the church did having been read back into the lifetime of Jesus. Still others claim that the uncertainty in the tradition of Jesus' sayings and how they express early Christian theology suggests that they are the creation of the early church (or at least that the original form has been heavily modified in transmission), which the result that we can no longer be sure what Jesus said. For example, the presence of the command to "do this'{-In Mark Jesus says, "This is my body"; in 1Corinthians, Jesus says, says "This is my body that is foryou. Do this in remembrance of me"; in Mark the next clause is, "This is my blood of the covenant which is poured out for many"; in Luke the last words are "which is poured out for you"; in 1Corinthians addiditional words figure. " Do this as ofteh as you drink it, in remembrance of me." } in remberance of Jesus, which is lacking in Mark's account, given once in Luke and twice in 1Corinthians, could be due to the early church putting into words what it took to be the intention of Jesus. Even if this is the case, we would still be left with a tradition of Jesus' sharing a loaf and cup with his disciples, and these actions would invite interpretation. In other words, to account for the origins of the church meal and the early christians' appeal to Jesus we must surely postuate the historicity of some kind of meal he held.

The Osford Companion to the Bible P 465-466 




Status: Offline
Posts: 24624


மாற்கு 1


2-3“இதோ, என் தூதனை உமக்குமுன்

அனுப்புகிறேன்; அவர் உமக்கு வழியை

ஆயத்தம் செய்வார்.

பாலை நிலத்தில் குரல் ஒன்று

முழங்குகிறது; ஆண்டவருக்காக

வழியை ஆயத்தமாக்குங்கள்;

அவருக்காகப் பாதையைச்


என்று இறைவாக்கினர் எசாயாவின் நூலில் எழுதப்பட்டுள்ளது.

4இதன்படியே திருமுழுக்கு யோவான் பாலை நிலத்துக்கு வந்து, பாவ மன்னிப்பு அடைய மனம் மாறித் திருமுழுக்குப் பெறுங்கள் என்று பறைசாற்றி வந்தார்.  
5யூதேயாவினர் அனைவரும் எருசலேம் நகரினர் யாவரும் அவரிடம் சென்றனர்; தங்கள் பாவங்களை அறிக்கையிட்டு யோர்தான் ஆற்றில் அவரிடம் திருமுழுக்குப் பெற்று வந்தனர்.
6யோவான் ஒட்டகமுடி ஆடையை அணிந்திருந்தார்; தோல்கச்சையை இடையில் கட்டியிருந்தார்; வெட்டுக்கிளியும் காட்டுத்தேனும் உண்டு வந்தார்.
9அக்காலத்தில் இயேசு கலிலேயாவிலுள்ள நாசரேத்திலிருந்து வந்து யோர்தான் ஆற்றில் யோவானிடம் திருமுழுக்குப் பெற்றார்.


10அவர் ஆற்றிலிருந்து கரையேறிய உடனே வானம் பிளவுபடுவதையும் தூய ஆவி புறாவைப் போல் தம்மீது இறங்கிவருவதையும் கண்டார்.


11அப்பொழுது, “என் அன்பார்ந்த மகன் நீயே, உன்பொருட்டு நான் பூரிப்படைகின்றேன்” என்று வானத்திலிருந்து ஒரு குரல் ஒலித்தது.
12உடனே தூய ஆவியால் அவர் பாலைநிலத்துக்கு அனுப்பி வைக்கப்பட்டார்.
13பாலை நிலத்தில் அவர் நாற்பது நாள் இருந்தார்; அப்போது சாத்தானால் சோதிக்கப்பட்டார்; அங்குக் காட்டு விலங்குகளிடையே இருந்தார். வானதூதர் அவருக்குப் பணிவிடை செய்தனர்.
14யோவான் கைதுசெய்யப்பட்டபின், கடவுளின் நற்செய்தியைப் பறைசாற்றிக் கொண்டே இயேசு கலிலேயாவிற்கு வந்தார்.
“காலம் நிறைவேறிவிட்டது. இறையாட்சி நெருங்கி வந்து விட்டது; மனம் மாறி நற்செய்தியை நம்புங்கள்”
 என்று அவர் கூறினார்.

மத்தேயு 3

1-2அக்காலத்தில் திருமுழுக்கு யோவான் யூதேயாவின் பாலை நிலத்துக்கு வந்து, “மனம் மாறுங்கள், ஏனெனில் விண்ணரசு நெருங்கி வந்துவிட்டது” என்று பறைசாற்றி வந்தார்.

13அதன்பின் இயேசு யோவானிடம் திருமுழுக்குப் பெறக் கலிலேயாவிலிருந்து யோர்தானுக்கு வந்தார்.
14யோவான், “நான்தான் உம்மிடம் திருமுழுக்குப் பெற வேண்டியவன்; நீரா என்னிடம் வருகிறீர்?” என்று கூறித் தடுத்தார். 
“இப்பொழுது விட்டுவிடும். கடவுளுக்கு ஏற்புடையவை அனைத்தையும் நாம் நிறைவேற்றுவதுதான் முறை”
 எனப் பதிலளித்தார். அதற்கு யோவானும் இணங்கினார்.
16இயேசு திருமுழுக்குப் பெற்றவுடனே தண்ணீரை விட்டு வெளியேறினார். உடனே வானம் திறந்ததையும் கடவுளின் ஆவி, புறா இறங்குவது போலத் தம்மீது வருவதையும் அவர் கண்டார். 
17அப்பொழுது, “என் அன்பார்ந்த மைந்தர் இவரே. இவர் பொருட்டு நான் பூரிப்படைகிறேன்” என்று வானத்திலிருந்து ஒரு குரல் கேட்டது.

லூக்கா 3

1திபேரியு சீசர் ஆட்சி செய்துவந்த பதினைந்தாம் ஆண்டில், பொந்தியு பிலாத்து யூதேயாவின் ஆளுநராக இருந்தார். ஏரோது கலிலேயப் பகுதிக்கும் அவன் சகோதரராகிய பிலிப்பு, இத்துரேயா, திரக்கோனித்துப் பகுதிகளுக்கும் லிசானியா அபிலேன் பகுதிக்கும் குறுநில மன்னர்களாக இருந்தனர்.
2அன்னாவும் கயபாவும் தலைமைக் குருக்களாய் இருந்தனர். அக்காலத்தில் செக்கரியாவின் மகன் யோவான் பாலைநிலத்தில் வாழ்ந்து வந்தார். அவர் கடவுளின் வாக்கைப் பெற்றார்.


3“பாவமன்னிப்பு அடைய மனம்மாறித் திருமுழுக்குப் பெறுங்கள்” என்று யோர்தான் ஆற்றை அடுத்துள்ள பகுதிகள் அனைத்துக்கும் சென்று அவர் பறைசாற்றிவந்தார்.


4இதைப்பற்றி இறைவாக்கினர் எசாயாவின் உரைகள் அடங்கிய நூலில் இவ்வாறு எழுதப்பட்டுள்ளது:

“பாலைநிலத்தில் குரல் ஒன்று முழங்குகிறது;‘ஆண்டவருக்காக வழியைஆயத்தமாக்குங்கள்;அவருக்காக பாதையைச்செம்மையாக்குங்கள்;

5பள்ளத்தாக்குகள் எல்லாம் நிரப்பப்படும்;மலை, குன்றுயாவும் தாழ்த்தப்படும்;கோணலானவை நேராக்கப்படும்;கரடு முரடானவை சமதளமாக்கப்படும்.


6மனிதர் அனைவரும் கடவுள் அருளும்

மீட்பைக் காண்பர்’.”

21மக்களெல்லாரும் திருமுழுக்குப் பெறும் வேளையில் இயேசுவும் திருமுழுக்குப் பெற்று, இறைவனிடம் வேண்டிக் கொண்டிருந்தபோது வானம் திறந்தது.


22தூய ஆவி புறா வடிவில் தோன்றி அவர்மீது இறங்கியது. அப்பொழுது,
“என் அன்பார்ந்த மகன் நீயே, உன்பொருட்டு நான் பூரிப்படைகிறேன்”
என்று வானத்திலிருந்து ஒரு குரல் ஒலித்தது.

யோவான் 1

29மறுநாள் இயேசு தம்மிடம் வருவதைக் கண்ட யோவான், “இதோ! கடவுளின் ஆட்டுக்குட்டி! ஆட்டுக்குட்டியாம் இவரே உலகின் பாவத்தைப் போக்குபவர்.
30எனக்குப்பின் வரும் இவர் என்னைவிட முன்னிடம் பெற்றவர்; ஏனெனில் எனக்கு முன்பே இருந்தார் என்று நான் இவரைப்பற்றியே சொன்னேன்.
31இவர் யாரென்று எனக்கும் தெரியாதிருந்தது. ஆனால் இஸ்ரயேல் மக்களுக்கு இவரை வெளிப்படுத்தும் பொருட்டே நான் வந்துள்ளேன்; தண்ணீரால் திருமுழுக்குக் கொடுத்தும் வருகிறேன்” என்றார்.
32தொடர்ந்து யோவான் சான்றாகக் கூறியது: “தூய ஆவி புறாவைப்போல வானிலிருந்து இறங்கி இவர் மீது இருந்ததைக் கண்டேன்.
33இவர் யாரென்று எனக்கும் தெரியாதிருந்தது. ஆனால் தண்ணீரால் திருமுழுக்குக் கொடுக்கும்படி என்னை அனுப்பியவர் ‘தூய ஆவி இறங்கி யார்மீது இருப்பதைக் காண்பீரோ அவரே தூய ஆவியால் திருமுழுக்குக் கொடுப்பவர்’ என்று என்னிடம் சொல்லியிருந்தார்.
34நானும் கண்டேன்; இவரே இறைமகன் எனச் சான்றும் கூறிவருகிறேன்.”
35மறு நாள் யோவான் தம் சீடர் இருவருடன் மீண்டும் அங்கு நின்று கொண்டிருந்தார்.
36இயேசு அப்பக்கம் நடந்து சென்று கொண்டிருந்தார். யோவான் அவரைக் கூர்ந்து பார்த்து, “இதோ! கடவுளின் ஆட்டுக்குட்டி” என்றார்.
40யோவான் சொன்னதைக் கேட்டு இயேசுவைப் பின்தொடர்ந்த இருவருள் அந்திரேயா ஒருவர். அவர் சீமோன் பேதுருவின் சகோதரர்.
41அவர் போய் முதலில் தம் சகோதரரான சீமோனைப் பார்த்து, “மெசியாவைக் கண்டோம்” என்றார். ‘மெசியா’ என்றால் அருள்பொழிவு பெற்றவர் என்பது பொருள்.
42பின்பு அவர் சீமோனை இயேசுவிடம் அழைத்து வந்தார். இயேசு அவரைக் கூர்ந்து பார்த்து, 
“நீ யோவானின் மகன் சீமோன். இனி ‘கேபா’ எனப்படுவாய்”
என்றார். ‘கேபா’ என்றால் ‘பா
றை’* என்பது பொருள்.

யோவான் 3

22இவற்றுக்குப் பின்பு இயேசுவும் அவர்தம் சீடரும் யூதேயப் பகுதிக்குச் சென்றனர். அங்கே அவர் அவர்களோடு தங்கித் திருமுழுக்குக் கொடுத்து வந்தார்.


23யோவானும் சலீம் என்னும் இடத்துக்கு அருகில் உள்ள அயினோனில் திருமுழுக்குக் கொடுத்துக் கொண்டிருந்தார். ஏனெனில் அங்குத் தண்ணீர் நிறைய இருந்தது. மக்கள் அங்கு சென்று திருமுழுக்குப் பெற்றுவந்தார்கள்.
24யோவான் சிறையில் அடைக்கப்படுமுன் இவ்வாறு நிகழ்ந்தது.



Status: Offline
Posts: 24624

Paul and the Synoptic Gospels in parallel columns
1 Corinthians 11:23-26Mark 14:22-25Matthew 26:26-29Luke 22:14-20
In vv 17-22 Paul criticises abuses of the Lord's Supper prevalent in Corinth, he continues: For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, ‘This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.In the preceding verses the evangelist makes it clear that the setting is a Passover meal.

While they were eating, he took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to them, and said, ‘Take; this is my body.’ Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, and all of them drank from it. He said to them, ‘This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Truly I tell you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.’

In the preceding verses the evangelist makes it clear that the setting is a Passover meal.

While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will never again drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.’

In the preceding verses the evangelist makes it clear that the setting is a Passover meal.

When the hour came, he took his place at the table, and the apostles with him. He said to them, ‘I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; for I tell you, I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.’ Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he said, ‘Take this and divide it among yourselves; for I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.’

Then he took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ And he did the same with the cup after supper, saying, ‘This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.



Status: Offline
Posts: 24624

The Gospel of John (John 3:23) refers to Enon near Salim as one place where John the Baptist baptized people, "because there was much water there".[18][19]

Separately, John 1:28 states that John the Baptist was baptizing in "Bethany beyond the Jordan".[18] This is not the village Bethany just east of Jerusalem, but is generally considered to be the town Bethany, also called Bethabara in Perea.[19]

In the 3rd century Origen, who moved to the area from Alexandria, suggested Bethabara as the location.[27] In the 4th century, Eusebius of Caesarea stated that the location was on the west bank of the Jordan, and following him, the early Byzantine Madaba Map shows Bethabara as (Βέθαβαρά).[27]

A favorite place for Christian pilgrimages to the location of the baptism of Jesus on the Jordan River is near Jericho.[28][29] Located on the bank of the Jordan at Al-Maghtas (baptism, or immersion in Arabic), this possible site was found following UNESCO-sponsored excavations.[30]

Al-Maghtas was visited by Pope John Paul II in March 2000, and he said: "In my mind I see Jesus coming to the waters of the river Jordan not far from here to be baptized by John the Baptist".[31]

Mark, Matthew, and Luke depict the baptism in parallel passages. In the gospels, the accounts of Luke and Mark record the voice as addressing Jesus by saying "You are beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased", while in Matthew the voice addresses the crowd "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3:13–17; Mark 1:9–11; Luke 3:21–23[11][12][13]



Status: Offline
Posts: 24624

Who Really Killed John the Baptist?


Index – click to navigate site




Those who believe Jesus existed have a lot of disturbing stuff to face.  The Gospels actually make it look like their Jesus murdered John the Baptist!


The Jesus they depict was certainly capable of murder for he commanded people to choose death rather than defy him and he slandered the Jews and accused them of scheming to kill him (Matthew 23) which could have led to murder.


It is certain that John the Baptist existed for Josephus recorded some things about him.


The gospels claim that John sent men to ask Jesus if he was the Son of God after John allegedly realised Jesus was when he baptised him in the Jordan.  Jesus told the delegation to tell John about his miracles.  This shows that there was more than some bad blood between the pair.  Jesus said that John was the greatest prophet ever born and quoted the Bible speaking of a prophet preparing the way before the Lord to prove it (Matthew 11:10), meaning that the person who knew God the best knew that Jesus was a fake and anything but the Son of God.  The Christians would interrupt me at this point to say that John was not denying Jesus but doubting him.  But to doubt Jesus with the claims he was making is the same thing as denying him.  It is denying that he has any convincing credentials for the claims he makes and therefore accusing him of being an evil charlatan.  Jesus took offence at John for he told John’s men that he blesses those who are not offended by his claims.


Matthew 11 says that John heard of Jesus’ miracles in prison which evidently means that the gospel is lying when it says that Jesus was openly doing miracles as soon as John baptised him in the Jordan long before John was incarcerated.  John would have heard of them before had they been happening.  And if John had been keen on Jesus or his message he would not have waited until he went to prison to send a few men to ask Jesus questions to investigate him.  And God couldn’t tell him about Jesus’ miracles though John was a prophet having two-way conversations with him meaning that God would not sanction Jesus meaning that God disapproved of Jesus’ activities.  Moreover, John was in jail to shut his gob up (Matthew 14:3) for Herod did not like his judgements on his private life so there was no way he would have been able to commune with his disciples.  It is more plausible that the disciples were really Jesus’ disciples who were able to get to John.  Jesus covered up by pretending they were John’s.  Why?  Was it because he was going to use these same men to take care of the Baptist once and for all?


So Jesus said that John was the best and most important human being ever – Catholics who say that it was Mary take note – but then added that the least in God’s kingdom is far better than John.  Jesus must mean that the worst person in Heaven is better than John at least that person would believe in Jesus.  John was inferior no matter how good he is for he didn’t believe.


Jesus was obviously sentencing John to Hell or to exclusion from God’s kingdom.  John is the best man on earth, not in the afterlife.  Jesus is saying that it is better to believe in Jesus than to be a very good man.  Christians might object that if John fell into sin at the end of his life he would be very evil.  But surely God would take the best man on earth before he would depart from the faith and the righteous way?  Jesus is inferring that goodness is inferior to believing in him.  Since John did not believe he is either destined for Hell or bad because the lowest sinner who believes in Jesus and joins his kingdom is better for he believes.  There is real rancour in this.  Jesus wanted John to rot in Hell in case he would do his cause any harm.  He would have liked to see John die.


The gospels claim that Herod promised the daughter of Herodias that she could have anything she wanted even half the kingdom if she danced for him.  The mother told the girl to ask for the head of John the Baptist who she hated for condemning her morals and her sleazy romps with Herod.  This is a silly yarn because she could have asked for half the kingdom to get control of the prison.  Or she could have asked for more authority over Herod’s own kingdom and decreed John’s execution.  Or she could have taken her half of the kingdom and then transferred John to another prison and personally send the executioner to destroy him.  And anyway, why would she be so keen to get John murdered when he could not do her any harm in jail?  And harm was done already.  There is some kind of cover-up here.  We read that the Jews were afraid to run John’s baptism down because the people loved him and yet we read that Herod released the decapitated body so that the disciples of John could bury it and spark off a major scandal that could have been averted by a secret murder!  It seems that the body was found and then the murder blamed on Herod.  These details do not appear in Josephus’s account which merely says John was arrested and executed in jail and Herod had did this because John had too many followers who were willing to treat him as a dictator and Herod therefore feared a sedition.  It is bizarre that nothing was done about John’s disciples.  His disciples would still have preached his message after his imprisonment and a sedition would have been more likely upon John’s arrest so Herod would have needed to get rid of them.  It is probable that John’s disciples turned against him when he was imprisoned which contradicts the gospels that they did not. 


Josephus said that Herod had John put to death because he had such a devoted following and was frightened that John might make a bid for political power.  He could take a piece of or all of Herod’s kingdom.  This does not match this Herod of the gospels who was willing to give away part of his kingdom for a flippant reason.  The gospels here were going against common knowledge.  They must have had good reason for lying like this.    There was something they wanted to prove by saying that it was Herodias’ fault that John had to die. 


Why would the gospellers go to such lengths to cover up the real facts about John’s death?  They would not have done so if one of the apostles had cut John’s head off for their image in the gospels is not very flattering.  The answer is that the murder was believed to have been committed by Jesus personally or somebody he commissioned to kill for him.  It is undeniable that Jesus was able to go into the prison when his men masquerading as John’s disciples were.  Whoever made up the story of the dancing girl felt sure that Jesus was the person who had ripped up the Baptist or had a lot to do with it and sanctioned it.  Jesus had the motive and could have been the authorised or unauthorised executioner sent to behead John.  Jesus went on the run after that like a guilty man.  He went into hiding on a boat alone and in a wilderness as soon as he heard the news (Matthew 14:13).  Mark says that Jesus and the apostles were stormed by visitors at the time of the murder.   If that were true Jesus would have heard of the murder from the people not from the apostles or John’s disciples and yet the account says it was from John’s disciples after they buried John.  Jesus was given an alibi he never had.  Herod must have pretended to think that Jesus was John back from the dead if Jesus was as well known as the gospel says.  He had an ulterior motive if he did that.  Jesus and Herod would have agreed to pretend they did not know one another. 


We are told that John’s disciples buried John.  We must remember that if Jesus could really raise people from the dead or was thought to have this power, John’s disciples would not have been given the body in case a resurrection hoax would be carried out which would start up the trouble that Herod hoped to avoid in jailing John in the first place.  John back from the dead or being alleged to be would mean the king’s relationship with Herodias would be under the condescending spotlight again.  The body of John would have been kept safe and produced if any rumours about a resurrection emerged.


If Jesus did not behead John then it could have been that it was somebody else who was beheaded.  We don’t know if the head was with the body or if it was recognisable if it was.  The people thought that Jesus was John raised from the dead meaning that the two probably looked identical.  Luke says they were second cousins.  Did Jesus help John to fake his death so that John could masquerade as Jesus if Jesus’ antics caught up with him and put him on the cross?  Was the reason that Jesus was thought to be John back from the dead that John was seen alive after his alleged death? 


Josephus has John the Baptist dying about 36 AD.  The huge problem with this is that it flatly and completely contradicts the gospels.  The gospels have Jesus being crucified about 33 AD.  And they say John died before 33 AD. Herod Antipas married the wife of his brother Herod Philip after the death of this brother in 34 AD.  The gospels say that John the Baptist condemned Herod Antipas for this marriage so this detail from the gospels backs up the year of John’s death given by Josephus.  John did not die before Jesus.


Christians however prefer to say Josephus was the one that was wrong and the gospels were right.  They have no evidence for this but they just assume it for they don’t want to admit their religion can be wrong.  Josephus should be regarded as more reliable firstly because he was a professional historian and the gospellers didn’t claim to be professional historians.  Josephus used records and we know he knew Jewish history well.  We can’t say these things about the gospellers. 


When the gospels lied that Jesus was alive when John died perhaps they lied about his entire connection to John.  John may never have heard of him. They lied either because Jesus never existed and they wanted it to look like he did or because they wanted to take the crown of Messiah ship from the Baptist and give it to Jesus instead.  They wanted to fake evidence that John looked up to Jesus and approved his mission.  Another reason for the lie could have been the need to make it look like Jesus lived.  “This man never lived but we have to make sure it looks as if he did for its over for us if people realise he was a fiction.  So we will pin a murder on him for nobody would believe that we would do that to somebody we were making up.  We won’t pin it on him too blatantly for we can ‘t make it too obvious.”


John the Baptist has an interesting story.  And whatever you make of it, it doesn’t bode well for the truth of the Jesus story.

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard