Vatican Requests 1,500-Year-Old Bible Held In Turkey

The Vatican has allegedly issued an official request to examine a 1,500-year-old Bible that has been held in Turkey for the past 12 years,

According to a report by National Turk, the Bible was seized from a gang of smugglers in a Mediterranean-area operation. The report states the gang was charged with smuggling antiquities, illegal excavations, and the possession of explosives.

Today’s Zaman reports that the Bible is under high security and that a Turkish daily newspaper, the Star, claims the book could be a copy of the Gospel of Barnabas — a controversial text which Muslims claim is an addition to the original gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — that was suppressed.

In it, Jesus is said to have predicted the coming of the Prophet Muhammad.

Due to its value as a cultural and religious artifact, even photocopies of the pages could be worth between 3 and 4 million Turkish Lira, or about 1,703,233 U.S. dollars.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Vatican Requests 1,500-Year-Old Bible Held In Turkey

  1. toadspittle says:

    .

    Just get in through the parson’s nose and drag the damn thing out, suggests Toad
    .
    http://vox-nova.com/2012/02/28/in-case-you-missed-it/

    But, on more frivolous topics, Toad has just spent the last hour and a half watching the above. He hadn’t bothered before on account of it might have bored him. Biut , far from it, he found it far too short. No doubt, nobody else will.
    (And what an elequent, handsome young fellow Dawkins is! An example to all of us, eh Raven?)
    Ah, the Hell with it.

    Like

  2. toadspittle says:

    .
    Re: Turkey, and Toad’s utterly absurd refence to fowl treatment of Bibles:

    A pome for youse all.
    (Toas has been getting a little too serious lately. He suspects.)

    “There was a little man
    And he had a little gun
    And he filled it up with liquorice.
    He took a shot at the parson’s nose
    And it went right through to the vicarage..

    But, there is more to it..
    “The report states the gang was charged with smuggling antiquities, illegal excavations, and the possession of explosives.”

    The Bible according to St. Barnabas! Prophecies! Mohammed! That ought to blow the Holy Land sky high!
    (We all devoutly hope, do we not!)

    “Due to its value as a cultural and religious artifact, even photocopies of the pages could be worth between 3 and 4 million Turkish Lira, or about 1,703,233 U.S. dollars.” Not worth more than a measly few hundred thousand lives, though.

    Thinks Toad.
    But you never know, do you?

    Like

  3. JabbaPapa says:

    the Star, claims the book could be a copy of the Gospel of Barnabas — a controversial text which Muslims claim is an addition to the original gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — that was suppressed.

    In it, Jesus is said to have predicted the coming of the Prophet Muhammad.

    These particular claims have already been debunked as fanciful — it is NOT “a copy of the Gospel of Barnabas” ; it is a Bible, including the apocryphal *Epistle* of Barnabas.

    No predictions of Muhammed are contained in its pages.

    Most reports that it contains so-called “extra” books are simply due to the fact that it contains those books of the Old Testament that Protestants claim as being “apocryphal” (Judith, Toby, Maccabees etc), so that even *this* fantastic claim is grossly exaggerated. NOT that the typical Protestant is liable to be happy about this ancient Bible containing those particular books.

    Like

  4. JabbaPapa says:

    You can read an English translation of the Epistle here : http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/barnabas-lightfoot.html

    It contains some heresies and errors, and it is clearly inspired by gnosticism (as well as an unchristian dualism (God/Satan) informing the text as a whole).

    Suff like :

    Barnabas 4:2
    Let us give no relaxation to our soul that it should have liberty to consort with sinners and wicked men, lest haply we be made like unto them.

    is directly opposite to Christ’s teaching.

    It’s violently anti-Jewish, no wonder some Islamic extremists love it …

    The textual interpretations it provides of the Bible are depressingly similar to the sort of rubbish the Jehovah’s Witnesses crowd come up with…

    Most of the text is just boring and poorly written though, rather than being a collection of heretical statements — the author provides some heresies, but given the poor literary quality, these are more likely to be errors of ignorance, rather than being actively schismatic…

    This is a bad piece of writing — it is utterly unsurprising that it should not be part of the canon.

    Like

  5. kathleen says:

    This is a really fascinating discovery !

    Many thanks Jabba for your additional informative comments.
    I couldn’t read much of the translation of the *Epistle* of Barnabas though….. too heavy going.

    Like

  6. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) never invented any new religion. Islam means submission, Muslim means someone who submits his/her will to God. All the prophets of God (From Adam to prophet Muhammed) were submitting their will to God. That means they were Muslims. But later Christians invented the idea of Trinity and made Jesus (PBUH) himself to be God. None of the prophets (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed, peace be upon them all) ever taught the idea of Trinity or claimed divinity. To accept the truth, we need sincerity.

    Like

  7. Wall Eyed Mr Whippy says:

    A salaam o alaikum , Abdul. I’m sure the members here, as people of the Book, will discuss with you the teachings of the Prophets.

    But did Muhammed ever teach the suppression of women in all its current forms, as we see today? I don’t think so, but it takes place all over the world. How did that happen?

    Like

  8. Wall Eyed Mr Whippy says:

    You say that “all the prophets” before Mohammed are Muslims, including Jesus and people who had never heard of Muslims and Mohammed, because it wasn’t around in their times. If you base this all on a narrow linguistic definition of Islam, well it falls rather flat I think.

    Including everyone before Mohammed is a bit of a retrospective statement, isn’t it?

    Like

  9. JabbaPapa says:

    Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) never invented any new religion. Islam means submission, Muslim means someone who submits his/her will to God. All the prophets of God (From Adam to prophet Muhammed) were submitting their will to God. That means they were Muslims. But later Christians invented the idea of Trinity and made Jesus (PBUH) himself to be God. None of the prophets (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed, peace be upon them all) ever taught the idea of Trinity or claimed divinity. To accept the truth, we need sincerity.

    If Jesus is a Prophet, then you should listen to His Prophecies, right ?

    Quite apart from which, neither Adam nor Noah were prophets in this sense of the word, setting aside the question of their historicity, which is difficult and complex.

    Alone in your list, Muhammed denies the teachings of his predecessors.

    God cannot be made submissive to the contents of Arabic Logic — God is all powerful, and transcends such earthly limitations. Islam teaches that the Divinity may never become both material and incorrupted simultaneously — this is an attempt to set up limitations upon God’s Omnipotence on the basis of a materialistic human logic ; rather ironically, given Islam’s basis in neo-platonist idealism.

    The argument that God did not make Himself incarnate in Christ makes sense — the argument that He *could not* is nonsensical.

    The Trinity is not a description of God — there is only one God. The Trinity is a description of human understanding of God, of which there is more than one. Except that any human relationship with God must necessarily partake of this multiple human understanding of Him.

    Like

  10. toadspittle says:

    .

    If they go on in this fashion, Jabba and Whippy will end up getting their heads cut off.
    And we must not forget what Tweedledee (or was it Dum – so hard to tell!) said, .”…it’s one of the most serious things that can possibly happen to one in a battle — to get one’s head cut off.”

    Like

  11. Md. Mohiuddin says:

    The last day will not come until and unless the entire people of the world declare kalima ”La ilaha illalla, mohammadur rasulallah”. ”La tajhabat duniya hatta yamlikal araba wahual mehdi min etrati min awladi fatima”. Isah ibne Marium and Imam Mahdi will led the world after defeating Djaal & gong in a clear cut peaceful Tawhidi manner. May Almighty Allah give more intelligence and power to Jabba PaPa in order to combat enemy’s of Allah (SW) talah. Either they will have to back to the righteous path or go to astry. If the nonbeliever even see Allah, they will never believe. The 1500 Year Old Bible is nothing to them because they are friends of Saitan. Barakallah hulana fil Quranil Hakim wakhir dawana wanil hamdullilahi rabbil alameen.

    Like

  12. JabbaPapa says:

    I can see two possible responses to this comment.

    1) Pointing out that you are unlikely to be responded to on the basis of having posted it in Arabic.

    2) Alternatively, I could just say :

    Videns autem Jesus turbas, ascendit in montem, et cum sedisset, accesserunt ad eum discipuli ejus.

    Et aperiens os suum docebat eos dicens:

    Beati pauperes spiritu: quoniam ipsorum est regnum cælorum.

    Beati mites: quoniam ipsi possidebunt terram.

    Beati qui lugent: quoniam ipsi consolabuntur.

    Beati qui esuriunt et sitiunt justitiam: quoniam ipsi saturabuntur.

    Beati misericordes: quoniam ipsi misericordiam consequentur.

    Beati mundo corde: quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt.

    Beati pacifici: quoniam filii Dei vocabuntur.

    Beati qui persecutionem patiuntur propter justitiam: quoniam ipsorum est regnum cælorum.

    Beati estis cum maledixerint vobis, et persecuti vos fuerint, et dixerint omne malum adversum vos mentientes, propter me.

    Gaudete, et exsultate, quoniam merces vestra copiosa est in cælis. Sic enim persecuti sunt prophetas, qui fuerunt ante vos.

    Vos estis sal terræ. Quod si sal evanuerit, in quo salietur? ad nihilum valet ultra, nisi ut mittatur foras, et conculcetur ab hominibus.

    Vos estis lux mundi. Non potest civitas abscondi supra montem posita,

    neque accendunt lucernam, et ponunt eam sub modio, sed super candelabrum, ut luceat omnibus qui in domo sunt.

    Sic luceat lux vestra coram hominibus: ut videant opera vestra bona, et glorificent Patrem vestrum, qui in cælis est.

    Like

  13. Wall Eyed Mr Whippy says:

    A suitable response Jabba.

    Md. will agree. And that Mr. Jabba is already well served in the intelligence department.

    Like

  14. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    “If Jesus is a Prophet, then you should listen to His Prophecies, right ?”
    Almighty God speaks to Moses in Book of Deuteronomy chapter 18 verse 18:

    “I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”

    The Christians say that this prophecy refers to Jesus (pbuh) because Jesus (pbuh) was like Moses (pbuh). Moses (pbuh) was a Jew, as well as Jesus (pbuh) was a Jew. Moses (pbuh) was a Prophet and Jesus (pbuh) was also a Prophet.

    If these two are the only criteria for this prophecy to be fulfilled, then all the Prophets of the Bible who came after
    Moses (pbuh) such as Solomon, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Malachi, John the Baptist, etc. (pbut) will
    fulfill this prophecy since all were Jews as well as prophets.

    However, it is Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who is like Moses (pbuh): (to be continued)

    Like

  15. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    i) Both had a father and a mother, while Jesus (pbuh) was born miraculously without any male intervention. [Mathew 1:18 and Luke 1:35 and also Al-Qur’an 3:42-47]
    ii) Both were married and had children. Jesus (pbuh) according to the Bible did not marry nor had children.
    iii)Both died natural deaths. Jesus (pbuh) has been raised up alive. (4:157-158)

    Muhammad (pbuh) is from among the brethren of Moses (pbuh). Arabs are brethren of Jews. Abraham (pbuh) had two sons: Ishmail and Isaac (pbut). The Arabs are the descendants of Ishmail (pbuh) and the Jews are the descendants of Isaac (pbuh).
    Words in the mouth:
    Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was unlettered and whatever revelations he received from Almighty God he repeated them verbatim.
    “I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”[Deuteronomy 18:18]
    (to be continued)

    Like

  16. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    iv)Both besides being Prophets were also kings i.e. they could inflict capital punishment. Jesus (pbuh) said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” (John 18:36).
    v)Both were accepted as Prophets by their people in their lifetime but Jesus (pbuh) was rejected by his people. John chapter 1 verse 11 states, “He came unto his own, but his own received him not.”
    iv)Both brought new laws and new regulations for their people. Jesus (pbuh) according to the Bible did not bring any new laws. (Mathew 5:17-18).

    Like

  17. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    Muhammad (pbuh) is prophesised in the book of Isaiah:
    It is mentioned in the book of Isaiah chapter 29 verse 12:
    “And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.”

    When Archangel Gabrail commanded Muhammad (pbuh) by saying Iqra – “Read”, he replied, “I am not learned”.

    Like

  18. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned by name in the Song of Solomon chapter 5 verse 16:

    “Hikko Mamittakim we kullo Muhammadim Zehdoodeh wa Zehraee Bayna Jerusalem.”

    “His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.”
    In the Hebrew language im is added for respect. Similarely im is added after the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to make it Muhammadim. In English translation they have even translated the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as “altogether lovely”, but in the Old Testament in Hebrew, the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is yet present.

    Like

  19. kathleen says:

    AbdulMuneerTharayil,

    I find it incomprehensible how Muslims claim Jesus to be a ‘Prophet’ rather than the Son of God, and then refuse to believe His teachings. Time and again, Jesus made his Divinity abundantly clear to His Apostles and followers. He was wholly Man and wholly God. Not only did he fulfill all the prophesies of the Old Testament announcing the coming ‘Messiah”, but also by His pure life, words, miracles, knowledge of men’s hearts, God the Father’s words at His Baptism and Transfiguration…..and above all by His Resurrection from the Dead, as witnessed by thousands of His followers, He proved He spoke the Truth.

    Whereas what proof do you have that Mohammed ever even spoke to the Archangel Gabriel??

    Christ’s divinity is shown over and over again in the New Testament. For example, in John 5:18 we are told that Jesus’ opponents sought to kill him because he “called God his Father, making himself equal with God.”

    In John 8:58, when quizzed about how he has special knowledge of Abraham, Jesus replies, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I Am”—invoking and applying to himself the personal name of God—”I Am” (Ex. 3:14). His audience understood exactly what he was claiming about himself. “So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple” (John 8:59).

    In John 20:28, Thomas falls at Jesus’ feet, exclaiming, “My Lord and my God!” (Greek: Ho Kurios mou kai ho Theos mou—literally, “The Lord of me and the God of me!”)

    In Philippians 2:6, Paul tells us that Christ Jesus “[w]ho, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be g.asped” (New International Version). So Jesus chose to be born in humble, human form though he could have simply remained in equal glory with the Father for he was “in very nature God.”

    Also significant are passages that apply the title “the First and the Last” to Jesus. This is one of the Old Testament titles of Yahweh: “Thus says Yahweh, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, Yahweh of armies: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god’” (Is. 44:6; cf. 41:4, 48:12).

    This title is directly applied to Jesus three times in the book of Revelation: “When I saw him [Christ], I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, ‘Fear not, I am the First and the Last’” (Rev. 1:17). “And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the First and the Last, who died and came to life’” (Rev. 2:8). “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the beginning and the end” (Rev. 22:12–13).

    This last quote is especially significant since it applies to Jesus the parallel title “the Alpha and the Omega,” which Revelation earlier applied to the Lord God: “‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty” (Rev. 1:8).

    As the following quotes show, the early Church Fathers also recognized that Jesus Christ is God and were adamant in maintaining this precious truth.”

    http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-divinity-of-christ

    Like

  20. The Raven says:

    Sorry, not a flyer: the Hebrew word מחמדים (mahamadim) comes from the root “chamad” and has a different origin to the Arabic word that we render “Mahomet” (the Hebrew word meaning “desirable”, the Arab word meaning “praise”).

    In the verse you have quoted the word מחמדים is an adjective (and a plural in the original Hebrew), not a proper noun: it is being used to describe the beloved mentioned in verse 10 (after all, c5 is a decidedly erotic poem in praise of a male lover).

    The same word, מחמדים, crops up another dozen or so times in the OT, how have you come to fix on this one instance?

    Like

  21. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    In the above passage you are desperately trying to prove that Jesus PBUH is God and divine (Muslims believe that Jesus (PBUH) is one of the mightiest messengers of God, not God himself).

    Then how do you explain the below character in the Bible ? Is he a greater God ?

    Melchizedek: “Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.” (Heb. 7:3).

    All the prophets of God (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Solomon, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed) were calling their people to worship only one God. None of these prophets claimed himself to be God. Unfortunately, Christianity deviated from this and invented Trinity and divinity of Jesus.

    Like

  22. The Raven says:

    The passage that you’ve just cited in Isaiah is ironic: it is dealing with the silencing of prophecy, not its propagation:

    29:10 For the Lord hath mingled for you the spirit of a deep sleep, he will shut up your eyes, he will cover your prophets and princes, that see visions.
    29:11 And the vision of all shall be unto you as the words of a book that is sealed which when they shall deliver to one that is learned, they shall say: Read this: and he shall answer: I cannot, for it is sealed.
    29:12 And the book shall be given to one that knoweth no letters, and it shall be said to him: Read: and he shall answer: I know no letters.
    29:13 And the Lord said: Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips glorify me, but their heart is far from me, and they have feared me with the commandment and doctrines of men:
    29:14 Therefore behold I will proceed to cause an admiration in this people, by a great and wonderful miracle: for wisdom shall perish from their wise men, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.

    Given the quotation’s full context (that wisdom perishes, that doctrines of men will substitute those of God and that God’s word will be entrusted to one unable to read it) are you really sure that you want to claim that Mahomet is the person referred to here?

    Like

  23. JabbaPapa says:

    Prophet Muhammad was unlettered

    This statement is historically untenable.

    Christ left behind no writings by His own hand, certainly — if this sort of thing is important to you.

    But a perfect text is a linguistic impossibility, because not only is language inherently non-static ; but interpretation of text must by necessity be a variable, so that all religious movements based on a textual infallibility are based on some demonstrably false theories of language.

    Quite apart from which, I am under no onus whatsoever to heed and obey the contents of the Koran.

    Like

  24. JabbaPapa says:

    Both were married and had children.

    There is no realistic historical basis whatsoever for the suggestion that Christ married and had children. This is the invention of some gnostics and other heretics several centuries after the events.

    The Arabs are the descendants of Ishmail and the Jews are the descendants of Isaac.

    There is no realistic historical basis whatsoever for this suggestion.

    Like

  25. JabbaPapa says:

    Jesus according to the Bible did not bring any new laws. (Mathew 5:17-18).

    This is a false statement — The New Testament teaches that Christ did not *abolish* any part of the old Law. Which is where we get back to Islam claiming that Moses and Jesus etc are prophets of Islam, but then denying their teachings.

    Like

  26. JabbaPapa says:

    Prophet Muhammad is mentioned by name in the Song of Solomon chapter 5 verse 16:

    “His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.”
    In the Hebrew language im is added for respect. Similarely im is added after the name of Prophet Muhammad to make it Muhammadim. In English translation they have even translated the name of Prophet Muhammad as “altogether lovely”, but in the Old Testament in Hebrew, the name of Prophet Muhammad is yet present.

    This is based on a straightforward mistranslation of the text, and willfully ignoring the actual meanings provided.

    These sorts of tactics are very similar to those used by such groups as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and they do not impress.

    The reason why Muhammed is not mentioned in the Song of Songs is that this text has nothing to do with Muhammed. Er, that’s it.

    Like

  27. JabbaPapa says:

    In the above passage you are desperately trying to prove that Jesus is God and divine (Muslims believe that Jesus is one of the mightiest messengers of God, not God himself).

    Then how do you explain the below character in the Bible ? Is he a greater God ?

    Melchizedek: “Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.” (Heb. 7:3).

    All the prophets of God (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Solomon, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed) were calling their people to worship only one God. None of these prophets claimed himself to be God. Unfortunately, Christianity deviated from this and invented Trinity and divinity of Jesus.

    Again, with the Jehovah’s-Witnesses-like bad readings, based on a direct misunderstanding of the text.

    “without father or mother” and “without genealogy” mean that he was not a Jew by birth — but that this converted gentile attained to the position of high priest of Israel, in the eyes of man and God.

    Without beginning of days means that he was not born to Israel ; without end of life means that he is blessed in Heaven in the Kingdom of God ; “like the Son of God he remains a priest forever” means that he is being compared with Christ (not *identified* as *being* Christ !!!), and described as being a member of the eternal priesthood, which is expressed in Catholic teachings in several ways, among which the Communion of Saints, the living and the dead.

    Had Paul wanted to describe Melchizedek as *being* the Son of God, he would have just done so, directly and with no need for twisted interpretations such as yours. But of course he didn’t, because Melchizedek is not in fact the Son of God.

    The passage does nevertheless illustrate a part of the complexity of the “Son of God” Attribute of Christ, and the need to interpret it in different ways in different circumstances — instead of trying to falsely claim that an Attribute of the Godhood must necessarily obey the narrow restrictions of whichever fallible human logic.

    The theology of incarnation and of The Incarnation is among the most complex of Catholic theological doctrines, and it is only compatible with islamic theology in some of its aspects but certainly not all of them.

    Where it is closest is that our own souls are incarnate in our flesh as the Godhood was incarnate in Christ, including the same qualitative differences between spirit and flesh, soul and intellect and thought, and so on… but whereas islamic theology claims that there is an ideal reality of which the world and the flesh is a distorted and corruptible emanation, Catholic theology makes no final claims as to the nature of incarnation as such, with the islamic position being just one of several conflicting explanations of it.

    So, to answer your question, Is Melchizedek a greater God ?

    No, obviously not. If that’s what you draw from your readings, then you’re simply not reading the texts properly.

    These comments of yours are a bit like, if I were to barge in and provide you with what the Koran “really” says and how wrong you are in your interpretations of it ; despite my having not even the faintest familiarity with that book.

    Like

  28. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in John 8:28 Jesus said “I do nothing of myself”? Can’t GOD do anything he wills?
    If Jesus was GOD, then why in John 14:28 Jesus said “My Father (GOD) is greater than I”?
    If Jesus was GOD, then why in Luke 23:46 Jesus said “Father (GOD), into thy hands I commend my spirit”?
    If Jesus was GOD, then why in Mark 10:18 Jesus said “And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”?

    Like

  29. AbdulMuneerTharayil says:

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in Matthew 24:36 Jesus said “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” Jesus told his followers that no one (including Jesus) knows when the judgment day will come, only GOD knows?

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in Isaiah 11:2-3 GOD had put the spirit of fearing GOD in Jesus? Also see GOD’s Spirit in the many others beside Jesus.

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in John 5:31 Jesus told his followers that if he (Jesus) bears witness of himself, then his record is not true?

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in John 5:30 Jesus told his followers that he can’t do a single thing of his own initiative?

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in John 5:36-38 Jesus said that GOD had assigned him (Jesus) work and GOD is a witness on Jesus?

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in John 5:32 Jesus told his followers that they have never seen GOD at anytime nor ever heard his voice?

    If Jesus was GOD, then why did he pray to his GOD in Luke 5:16?

    If Jesus was GOD, then why in Matthew 26:39 Jesus fell on his face and prayed to his GOD?

    If Jesus was GOD, then how come in Hebrew 5:7 he prayed and cried for GOD to hear him and give him mercy by saving him from death?

    If Jesus was GOD, then how come in John 1:18 he said “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the FATHER’S side, has made HIM known.” Where do you see Trinity in this Verse?

    If Jesus was GOD, then how come in John 5:37 he said “And the FATHER who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard HIS voice nor seen HIS form,” Jesus and the GOD are different. People heard Jesus, but never heard GOD.

    Like

  30. JabbaPapa says:

    If you wish to deny the divinity of Christ, why not do so elsewhere than in a Christian blog ?

    Would you like me to log onto your preferred Islamic website and make several posts denying the central teachings of your religion ?

    You are just trolling — and given your complete failure so far to address any of the points that have been made to you, including by the way the answer to this latest litany of denials from you (The theology of incarnation and of The Incarnation is among the most complex of Catholic theological doctrines, and it is only compatible with islamic theology in some of its aspects but certainly not all of them. … Where it is closest is that our own souls are incarnate in our flesh as the Godhood was incarnate in Christ, including the same qualitative differences between spirit and flesh, soul and intellect and thought, and so on…), it is hard to see what would be the point of even attempting to carry out a conversation with you.

    Hint — discussing people’s religion with them does not equal going to a religious website and spouting forth angrily motivated and openly hostile denials of that religion at tedious length.

    Like

  31. Pingback: Vatican Requests 1,500-Year-Old Bible Held In Turkey | kokicat

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s