Ancient supporting documents for the New Testament
Loading...
Loading...
3:07
Should the last 12 verses of Mark be in the Bible?by johnankerberg4,025 views- 1:06
Has the New Testament been altered?by johnankerberg1,313 views
- 4:31
Gospels that never made it into the Bibleby johnankerberg2,108 views
- 5:50
New Testament Canonby johnankerberg2,466 views
- 4:38
Are the gospel writers considered to not be eyewitnesses?by johnankerberg852 views
- 22 videosDaniel Wallace
- 2:34
Did Constantine invent the deity of Christ?by johnankerberg2,899 views
- 3:09
Paul vs Jesusby PublicChristianity1,986 views
- 1:54
Are the gospels too late to be good history?by toolsfortalks2,370 views
- 10:01
The Septuagintby Bingolly18,777 views
- 3:39
When were the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) written?by johnankerberg392 views
- 9:34
Making of What I've Done Part 1by alwok13,223 views
- 3:12
Are the New Testament manuscripts reliable? (Part 1)by ehrmanproject6,599 views
- 3:10
Christian Martyrs - Voice of the Martyrsby reflect720,681 views
- 0:57
Were Jesus appearances real after his resurrection?by johnankerberg248 views
- 9:10
From Greece To Columbus - The Falsification Of History - Part 5: Dr. Jeffries, Dr. Scobe, Dr. Asanteby mjrob19144,255 views
- 20:52
Chinese Girl with an amazing voice, versatility & rangeby oleanderx5,455,280 views
- 5:24
Are the Gospels Historically Reliable?by johnankerberg754 views
- 4:32
The Reliability of Scriptureby AgApE0103,115 views
- 7:22
Ancient New Testament Documents: Codices Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus, and Vaticinusby thendo00504 views
- 2:28
Archaeology and the New Testamentby johnankerberg736 views
Wow. From your response, it's quite clear you haven't the foggiest clue what I'm talking about (it has NOTHING to do with mention of Jesus, i said what they wrote was important to understand what was happening during the 1st c related to what the apostles were living through). You do realize that you can cite an entire chapter without quoting the whole thing right? talk about "LOL". You are extremely immature. I'm sorry for ever responding to your post. Enjoy your strawman Jesus.
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
That's about the kind of response expected. Putting important words spoken in context is "just stupid" "yadda yadda yadda." You're vain imaginations are flawless, you can't be wrong (as much as you hate being right). Yep. I'm done here.
Have a good day.
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
Here's a common error you just made about Revelation. I'm sure you think your 100% right. Why not? Don't top scholars like Ehrman agree? They're fools. While you were busying seeking errors, you forgot to put the book in its proper context which John himself does for you: "I was in the Spirit ON THE LORD'S DAY" -Rev. 1.10. When Christ talked about coming very soon, he said that ON THE LORD'S DAY, not 1st c. See how simple that was? Yes, it takes an individual with integrity to admit failure.
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
Give me some passages b/c your paraphrasing is very loose, I want to make sure were on the same page. The whole NT does not attest to what you say it does, in fact some epistles actually show they realized he was not coming (just like he told them) and Paul was right (who first realized this), read 2 Peter for instance. It really helps to know Philo & Josephus during 1st c. to understand what was happening & why they were mistaken. It is a brilliant help that all this happened, and a lesson.
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
Put another way, the apostles wouldn't see the signs in a way that they would know the time of his return was near (like the parable of the fig tree) as Christ clearly told them they would not know the time or date (Acts 1:6-8), however he did tell them that there would be some standing there with him that would see him coming in glory (Matt.16.28, etc.). There is a very simple explanation for this, but I want for you to think about it, if you don't already know how this could be done.
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
The apostles did indeed think Christ was returning in their generation at first, but that wasn't Christ's fault. Before he was taken up, Christ told the apostles that they would *not* know when he would return (Acts 1:6-8), yet in the olivet discourse he told them how they would know he would return (the signs he gave)-- in other words he told them they would not see the signs of his coming.
The apostles, as fallible men, erred when they did not heed Christ's commission & predicted his coming.
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
The scriptures do have seeming contradictions that are inexplicable & I've found that some of the biggest revelations are hidden in them, almost as if the "mistakes" are firewalls to keep out the unprepared. Many of them surround the "problems" of Christ's "failure" to return. People like Ehrman can't be answered because to answer it involves an area of teaching that mainstream scholarship won't go b/c of tradition.
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
@djbehemoth
Could you tell me your reasons for thinking Christ intended to return in the 1st century? I know what folks like Ehrman and his mockingbirds say, but just wondering if you had anything original?
AllOtherNamesUsed 1 year ago
So you are saying that the Deity of Christ was probably made up? You mean it wasn't in the original text?
creationcenterTV 2 years ago
Baloney.... We have letters from very early church fathers Clement of Alexandria: Peter's disciple, Polycarp: John's disciple. Theology wasn't "invented" in the third century. Paul wrote in the first century.
creationcenterTV 2 years ago