Does the Bible mention Islam?

[CG Didymus]

Or Baha'u'llah is the fulfillment and thus what Baha'u'llah says is correct.

Baha'u'llah has said they are in error.of interpretation.

A Baha'i beleives this to be the case.

Regards Tony

With Christians, when did this "error" take place? 'Cause it sure seems like it happens right off the very pages of the NT. Which means the writers were already off base. But, if not with them, when? With the early Church leaders? During the council at Nicaea? When exactly did they start misinterpreting? And, if at that point they starting getting it wrong, then does that mean before that point they had it right? Because I don't see it. If the Baha'is are correct, then Christians never had it right. There was never a spring, summer or fall of Christianity. They misinterpreted the words of Jesus, then wrote down the misinterpretation of those words in the NT. So Christianity was wrong from the beginning.

 

[CG Didymus]

As you say the Christians believe the Holy Spirit in Acts of the Apostles 2:1-4 to be the same Holy Spirit Christ talks about in the gospel of John.

I agree the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost but that is a separate event from the Comforter being sent later.

At Pentecost they were empowered to go out and proclaim the gospel Jesus had taught them. They weren't being told something new that they couldn't bear to hear when Jesus was still alive. That doesn't make sense. What makes more sense is the comfort refers to a new Revelation from God according to the more advanced capacity of people in the future to receive that message.

Lets look at those verses in the Gospel of John more closely .

John 16:12-14 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

So if it was 'all truth' they could not near to hear, why were not ready for 'all truth' at that time? That description best fits Baha’u’llah who revealed 'truths' that clearly the disciples of Christ were not ready for at that time. Of course 'all truth' can't literally be all truth so meant relative to what Christ taught.

Jesus was “a Comforter” because Jesus brought the Holy Spirit. Muhammad and Baha’u’llah were other Comforters and also had the Spirit of truth.

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

John 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

It is the Comforter who fulfils these verses in John, not the Holy spirit at Pentecost spoken in Acts.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

John 16:13-14 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

Muhammad and Baha’u’llah did all these things as Jesus promised.

Well, I think that Christians probably will say that the things that they will be "shewn" by the Comforter, that they couldn't bear would be his death and coming back to life. But, don't you think it's strange that Jesus would say Muhammad and Baha'u'llah would "abide" with them for ever? And then that they "dwelleth" within them? And, are you sure Jesus used such words as "Howbeit" and "shew"? Not to mention all the "eth's" added on to words?

 

[CG Didymus]

This sounds like a very familiar question from you.

As you know the Christians and Baha'is believe in the same gospel. We simply have different understandings as to what Christ taught. Obviously, verse like John 14:6, the literal resurrection and existence of Satan we see differently.

We do believe in the Virgin birth, Jesus as 'Son of God' and the Divinity of Christ. We don't remove parts of the Bible to suit our own theology.

In a post to Tony, I already said the gospel I'm talking about is the one evangelical Christians use. They say they get it from the NT. Are they wrong? Jesus didn't have to die to save people from their sins? People could have been good enough on their own. They didn't need Jesus to pay the price for them?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Uriah

Uriah? The Hittite? Guy only famous for getting set up to die because a king wanted his wife? How is he a prophet?

King Cyrus ordered the rebuilding of the Jewish temple and Jerusalem many years later.

And he was considered a messiah for this, but it just screams to me "we don't care who he is as long as he gives us our funding sources back." I know there are Jews who seem to NEED Jerusalem and the temple, but the thing is, they really don't. Jews have only owned those things a fraction of the time. Everyone else, Syrians, Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, hell, just about everyone in the area ... all have owned that land for far longer. Clearly the religion can exist without one particular building in one particular town.

To find Islam we need to go to the apocalyptic writings such as Daniel, the Olivet discourse and Revelations. For example check out Daniel 7 where four beasts are mentioned, each representing an Empire. We are told the identity of the first 3 beasts but what about the fourth in Daniel 7:23-26? It could be the Roman Empire but then it appears again in Revelation 12:3-4.

I honestly don't care what Daniel thought. Or the John of Revelation. Apocalypse-mongering is just a snuff story where all the people who irritate the authors get tortured and killed off.

A Baha'i exegesis is the beast refers to militant Islam or more specifically the Umayyad dynasty that started 661 AD and lasted until 750 AD..

I honestly don't care, because it's apparent apocalypse stories are about whoever the author doesn't like at the time, but because they use coded phrases to avoid execution or jail time, everyone starts to see people who aren't there. It's like:
"Oooooh, the red serpent will slither down the road."
Religious people far removed from the event: Look! Roses are red! Some random government official in our time is named Rose! She must be the subject of this story that was talking about some random soldier beating the crap out of that author who dressed up as a red snake for the laughs.

None of the prophets could ever contradict anything that Moses had already said.

How is that logical, since Moses could be wrong? Why is Moses and not fact the standard for prophecy? I've heard Christians tell me that if God told them the bible was wrong, they'd believe the bible because God can't go against what's in the bible. Doesn't that make a book God instead? Is God not aware of who wears the pants in the relationship?

Do you have proof for this?

There was never any editing done in the scriptures? At all? Never mind translations and such things.

In fact, the literal translation of verse 32 implies exactly that - the very same Law that G-d gave us at Mt. Sinai, would be accessed internally, instead of externally.

He could've done that in the beginning and saved a lot of ink.

I think the Vatican created Islam.

I'm sure the Vatican would be shocked.

El was the God of the phoenecians and canaanites.

And in the bible. Judaism wasn't monotheistic until later on in its history. People worshiped several gods, including Yahweh's Daddy El.

Christ said their were two paths, one broad, for many to take, that leads to disaster, one narrow and difficult, that leads to salvation

Indeed. To me, just saying one believes in Jesus is a very wide path that is ultimately useless.

He would speak in G-d’s name; the things foretold would come to pass (Deuteronomy 18:20-22); what He teaches must be in harmony with G-d’s commandments (Deuteronomy 13:1-4). and a true prophet must bear good fruit (Matthew 7:17-20).

Indeed. Although, I would posit that being in harmony with God's commandments isn't a deal breaker, because we can't establish God made them. We can see the fruit of actions or thoughts ourselves. We can't go back in time and confirm authorship of some rules.

And even if we could, we must avoid appeals to authority as well.

Absolutely not. G-d is unchanging and He said that His Laws are eternal. How could He contradict Himself?

There's not an asterisk with some really fine print that says "subject to change"?

For another time, but a second, better covenant came to Israel from God, one that more Jews are beginning to recognize. Since Jews are the chosen of God, there will be a time when they accept the Messiah, and the second covenant.

Why does everyone seem to need to accept a person? The covenant or Way should speak for itself. The authority appeal is unnecessary.

Christians emphatically accept the Jewish scriptures, i.e. the Old Testament, exactly as written.

Except in versions where it's rather apparent that things were massaged to fit *current* (at the time) Christian thinking. Christians don't even keep the same order of books as Jews.

However, God will end THIS world, and it will be recreated as originally intended, before the fall, and He will reign over a world of peace and justice, exactly as promised.

Given that God had a rebellion in heaven and can't keep two idiots from eating some fruit in Paradise, I have a hard time swallowing this one.

If something is abrogated, than it is not eternal.

The only thing that doesn't change is change.

Have you not rendered G-d impotent by that interpretation?

God managed to protect the Tora for thousands of years.

He didn't protect all the books in the bible mentioned but clearly not preserved.

The 12 tribes of Israel and the twelve disciples of Christ are historic.

Debatable. The biblical authors love them some numerology and thus can't be trusted when it comes to numbers. Jesus had lots of disciples. 12 of them are focused on (and even then, not all 12) because the author wanted to fixate on the number 12.

It's like the idea that there are four gospels because some monk or something said there are four corners to Earth and thus there should only be four gospels, even though obviously there were many more. It's insanely stupid.

They misinterpreted the words of Jesus, then wrote down the misinterpretation of those words in the NT. So Christianity was wrong from the beginning.

Pretty much. The bible notes that Jesus himself complained that his own disciples didn't "get" him. In other words, the entire religion is based off the people who were flunking the class.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

We need to get past words to understand the spiritual message the authors of the Bible are trying to convey. The Jews see no verses in the Tanakh relating to Jesus, whereas many Christians see over 300 verses that are prophetic. It is a matter of perception and Faith.

Muhammad in the Quran affirms the importance of both the Torah and Gospels. He says its not enough to follow Islam but all the prophets that have gone beforehand with special emphasis on Jesus and Moses. Over 50 Biblical characters are mentioned in the Quran and there are many similarities between Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The three religions have more in common with each other than with Hinduism or Buddhism, though the are important shared themes in all religion.

Early Islamic scholars examined how Muhammad fulfilled prophecies in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament in much the same way as Christians have with the Hebrew Bible. For cultural reasons the process with the Muslims became derailed early on and the narrative became focused on how the Gospel and the Torah had become corrupted, in part because there wasn't any clear specific references to Muhammad. Besides there were contradictions with the Quran, for example with the crucifixion of Christ. More recently the attention has focused back on Biblical prophecy but viewing it more symbolically as the Christians have. The Muslims don't have anywhere near as many as the 300+ prophecies the Christians can claim. Maybe if they work at it long enough they will!

My perspective as a Baha'i is that Jesus fulfils Messianic prophecies in the Tanakh and Muhammad fulfils prophecies in both the Tanakh and the New Testament.

So double standard. Understood.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

That's the point I'm getting at. That in the book of Revelation, God uses certain animals and certain insects to represent people and Nation's and kingdoms.

To figure out, what and who the Locust army is, In Revelation chapter 9,
How does Locust operate, what do Locust eat, how does scorpions operate and how does scorpions catch their prey and what happens once the scorpions catch their prey.

You're contradicting yourself. Again.

The book of Revelation, has no symbolism.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Just what do you think the "true" gospel is? 'Cause the evangelical Christians, that's the ones that go spread the word, they go tell people about being saved from hell by believing in Jesus. And you know the rest. Your Mom probably tells you that gospel all the time. Another part of that gospel "spreads" the news about Judaism by telling the world how they got off track. How following the Law will not save them... only by believing in Jesus gets them saved. And also, in the gospel those Christians teach, they don't think Muhammad nor Baha'u'llah are the "return" of Christ.

I think the Gospel we can read today is a true and reliable source of what Jesus the Christ offered us.

It is full of great advice and we all get to choose. What a great day we live in

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

With Christians, when did this "error" take place? 'Cause it sure seems like it happens right off the very pages of the NT. Which means the writers were already off base. But, if not with them, when? With the early Church leaders? During the council at Nicaea? When exactly did they start misinterpreting? And, if at that point they starting getting it wrong, then does that mean before that point they had it right? Because I don't see it. If the Baha'is are correct, then Christians never had it right. There was never a spring, summer or fall of Christianity. They misinterpreted the words of Jesus, then wrote down the misinterpretation of those words in the NT. So Christianity was wrong from the beginning.

I personally think there was a big error when that made a doctrine called the Trinity.

The error is spurred on by the fact that some men like to have a monopoly on the Truth. They would reject that it is possible for people to see a Bible verse in a different light from someone else!

Then the error multiplies when people are forced to beleive the doctrine and not have an opinion. We come to this day when it is part of scripture, meaning added that the Bible warns against.

Regards Tony

 

[InvestigateTruth]

If that is true, then why do no Muslims obey Jesus's command to be born again?

" " why do no Muslims regard Jesus as God, since Jesus was crucified for claiming to be God?

Because the Quran claims that its message is that same message of Christ revealed again with correct interpretations. Also, Quran claims, God has revealed a newer social laws, in comparison to the Revelation of Christ.

 

[Dawnofhope]

In a post to Tony, I already said the gospel I'm talking about is the one evangelical Christians use. They say they get it from the NT. Are they wrong? Jesus didn't have to die to save people from their sins? People could have been good enough on their own. They didn't need Jesus to pay the price for them?

The gospel of Christ is the gopsel of Christ. That's worlds apart from how evangelical Christians interpret the gospels in modern times. A major theme of the book of revelation is corrupt theology.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Christians don't even keep the same order of books as Jews.

Only Protestants accept the same books as Jews, too. Catholics and Orthodox have more books and other material in their OT canon.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well, I think that Christians probably will say that the things that they will be "shewn" by the Comforter, that they couldn't bear would be his death and coming back to life. But, don't you think it's strange that Jesus would say Muhammad and Baha'u'llah would "abide" with them for ever? And then that they "dwelleth" within them? And, are you sure Jesus used such words as "Howbeit" and "shew"? Not to mention all the "eth's" added on to words?

The Quran has been around a long time as has the gospels. There's good reason to believe Baha'u'llah's revelation would stand the test of time.

Jesus had already informed His disciples (John 13:33-38, John 14:1-5) of his impending Martyrdom. So the Holy Spirit descends at Pentecost and tells upo the disciples of Jesus telling them He has been crucified? How does that constitute telling them what they could not previously bear to hear?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Thanks for liking some of my earlier posts. This is certainly a challenging topic.

And he was considered a messiah for this, but it just screams to me "we don't care who he is as long as he gives us our funding sources back." I know there are Jews who seem to NEED Jerusalem and the temple, but the thing is, they really don't. Jews have only owned those things a fraction of the time. Everyone else, Syrians, Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, hell, just about everyone in the area ... all have owned that land for far longer. Clearly the religion can exist without one particular building in one particular town.

It breaks the mould of a Messiah being Jewish, which is a big deal. Cyrus certainly was a Saviour to the Jews after their time under the Babylonians.

I honestly don't care what Daniel thought. Or the John of Revelation. Apocalypse-mongering is just a snuff story where all the people who irritate the authors get tortured and killed off.

I honestly don't care, because it's apparent apocalypse stories are about whoever the author doesn't like at the time, but because they use coded phrases to avoid execution or jail time, everyone starts to see people who aren't there. It's like:
"Oooooh, the red serpent will slither down the road."
Religious people far removed from the event: Look! Roses are red! Some random government official in our time is named Rose! She must be the subject of this story that was talking about some random soldier beating the crap out of that author who dressed up as a red snake for the laughs.

I think it serves as a tool to understanding history and the cyclical nature of religion, whether it meets the prophecies or it has no more credibility than astrology. The apocalyptic books have certainly been used to bash anyone who is not in favour by demonising them. My main focus is to look at one of the four major Islamic Caliphates, the Umayyads 661-750 AD, and to explore how this was an empire that was different from the others mentioned in Daniel 7:19-21. That's different calling Islam in its entirety 666. I appreciate your concern though.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Everything in Revelation, God has given what everything represents and who everything represents. With No symbolism added.

Therein lies contradiction and misunderstanding. I doubt you can see it and I suspect any explanation from me with just harden your resolve. Besides I prefer love to faith (1 Corinthians 13:13). All the best

 

[Trailblazer]

Then why can't people put the things together in the bible, to make any sense of the things in the bible.
If the bible is for everyone as you say it is.

The Bible was never meant to be fully understood until the time of the end. The “book” was to be unsealed at the time of the end.

Daniel 12:4 “But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.”

Daniel 12:9 “And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.”

Daniel 12:12 “Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.”

These verses mean that many shall run to and fro because they could not understand what the Bible really means; then knowledge would be increased at the time of the end.

The "book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand a lot of the Bible we had never been able to understand before.

Can you explain by using the bible, What happen back during the first earth age, That brought us to be here in this second earth age.
The bible explains all of this, But can you explain it.
So if the bible is for everyone as you say it is, then explain what happened back during the first earth age that brought us to be here in this second earth age?

I do not know what you mean by first earth age and second earth age. I believe that the Bible and the Qur’an brought us to the “new age” of mankind. Muhammad was the seal of the Prophets, the last Prophet in the prophetic cycle of religion. The Bab and Baha’u’llah ushered in an entirely new religious cycle called the “cycle of fulfillment” or the Baha’i Cycle, which will last no less than 500,000 years. During this Cycle, we will see the Golden Age that God promised in the Bible.

“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it......
What we witness at the present time, during “this gravest crisis in the history of civilization,” recalling such times in which “religions have perished and are born,” is the adolescent stage in the slow and painful evolution of humanity, preparatory to the attainment of the stage of manhood, the stage of maturity, the promise of which is embedded in the teachings, and enshrined in the prophecies, of Bahá’u’lláh. The tumult of this age of transition is characteristic of the impetuosity and irrational instincts of youth, its follies, its prodigality, its pride, its self-assurance, its rebelliousness, and contempt of discipline.”
The Promised Day is Come, pp. 116-117​

Can you explain how everything is to come down from the beginning to end of the Bible.

I do not know what “you mean” by that. I am quite sure you have a different understanding of “beginning” and “end” than I do.

I do not believe that the Bible was the first revelation from God to humanity and I do not believe it was the last. The Bible is only one chapter in the religious history of the human race. It is a long chapter but it is not the only chapter.

 

[Tumah]

Thanks, and if you don't mind, I have another question. The Baha'is use the "Edict of Toleration" as a fulfillment of the Jews returning to their homeland. This is very important to them, because it happened in 1844, the year their religion started. So my question is just how important was this edict to the Jews? Was it when Jews were finally allowed to return to their homeland?

I have never heard of any connection. The first major wave of Jews going to Israel was in 1882, although obviously there had already been Jewish communities there and smaller groups or individuals that had been making there way there.

 

[Tumah]

How is that logical, since Moses could be wrong? Why is Moses and not fact the standard for prophecy? I've heard Christians tell me that if God told them the bible was wrong, they'd believe the bible because God can't go against what's in the bible. Doesn't that make a book God instead? Is God not aware of who wears the pants in the relationship?

It's because Moses is the only one who demonstrated his credibility to the entire nation. Without that, I'd have no reason to ever believe anyone claiming to be a prophet. Look at the Egyptians. They were able to perform some miracles. Obviously performing miracles can't establish authenticity - anyone could argue that Moses was simply a better magic-worker than the Egyptians, that's all. Or look at Nostradamus. There's no reason to take the word of a person claiming to be a prophet of G-d on their say so, because their signs could be reasoned away. But at Mt. Sinai, the entire nation experienced a clear revelation of G-d with Moses. That established his prophetic nature beyond any doubt. So basically, every other prophet relies on the commandment in the Torah that Moses prophesied to obey a prophet who passes the tests establishing his prophecy (without which, we'd have no strong reason to believe them). Since they're authority only comes through Moses' prophecy, they don't have the wherewithal to contradict him.

There was never any editing done in the scriptures? At all? Never mind translations and such things.

Not in my opinion.

He could've done that in the beginning and saved a lot of ink.

That was the original plan, but we messed it up with the golden calf.

 

[Faithofchristian]

The Bible was never meant to be fully understood until the time of the end. The “book” was to be unsealed at the time of the end.

Daniel 12:4 “But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.”

Daniel 12:9 “And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.”

Daniel 12:12 “Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.”

These verses mean that many shall run to and fro because they could not understand what the Bible really means; then knowledge would be increased at the time of the end.

The "book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand a lot of the Bible we had never been able to understand before.

I do not know what you mean by first earth age and second earth age. I believe that the Bible and the Qur’an brought us to the “new age” of mankind. Muhammad was the seal of the Prophets, the last Prophet in the prophetic cycle of religion. The Bab and Baha’u’llah ushered in an entirely new religious cycle called the “cycle of fulfillment” or the Baha’i Cycle, which will last no less than 500,000 years. During this Cycle, we will see the Golden Age that God promised in the Bible.

“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it......
What we witness at the present time, during “this gravest crisis in the history of civilization,” recalling such times in which “religions have perished and are born,” is the adolescent stage in the slow and painful evolution of humanity, preparatory to the attainment of the stage of manhood, the stage of maturity, the promise of which is embedded in the teachings, and enshrined in the prophecies, of Bahá’u’lláh. The tumult of this age of transition is characteristic of the impetuosity and irrational instincts of youth, its follies, its prodigality, its pride, its self-assurance, its rebelliousness, and contempt of discipline.”
The Promised Day is Come, pp. 116-117​

I do not know what “you mean” by that. I am quite sure you have a different understanding of “beginning” and “end” than I do.

I do not believe that the Bible was the first revelation from God to humanity and I do not believe it was the last. The Bible is only one chapter in the religious history of the human race. It is a long chapter but it is not the only chapter.

Theres a reason why you don't know what i mean by first earth age and second earth age.
Because the Quran does not teach it and the bible does teach it.

What I mean by, to explain how everything is to come down from the beginning to the end.
Start with back when Satan first started his rebellion against God, explain why it happen and what caused Satan to rebell.
Then from there put everything together all the way down to the coming of Christ Jesus.
The bible expains all of this, what happened in the first earth age and the second earth age which we are living in the second earth age now, When Christ Jesus returns, Christ Jesus will bring about the third earth age.
So what we have is, there are 3 stages of the earth, 1st earth age, 2nd earth age and the 3rd earth age.
The 2nd earth age, is where we're at now. In the 2nd phase in the history of the earth.

The 1st earth age, is where the dinosaurs lived and now we find the remains of the dinosaurs bones.giving witness about the 1st earth age.
Muhammad was not the last of the Prophets, Jesus was very clear that John the Baptist being the last of the
Holy Prophets.

Luke 7:28 ►"I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John the Baptist, yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he"

If Muhammad is to be the last Prophet, then that would mean, that John the Baptist couldn't possibly be the greater prophet born of women.

But yet Jesus very plainly said, among those born of women,there is no one greater than John the Baptist.That would mean, John the Baptist was the last of the Holy Prophets.

So therefore John the Baptist being the greatest of all the Prophets and the last of the Holy Prophets.

 

[PruePhillip]

There are compelling arguments to suggest the traditional beliefs about the authors of who wrote Matthew and Luke are not the tax collecter and companion of Paul.
Authorship of Luke–Acts - Wikipedia

I read this link, again.
I hate this "modern scholars" business. Their representation in the Gospels is as the 'scribes'
And adding "we" to create a forgery? No. I bet Luke didn't even realise he had written 'we' when
he wrote his accounts. And claiming Paul's account of Luke was also a form of forgery gets to
be too much.
I am fine with Luke writing this account. In naming the Gospel of Luke SOMEONE must have
known something we don't.

 

[BilliardsBall]

You will need to cite which scripture you refer.

Do these words sound like it is God Himself that speaks?

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Matthew 27:46

This is basic Bible stuff, in all three synoptics, the high priest asks who Jesus is, and Jesus says I AM, and the priest and others say, "We need not witnesses, he blasphemes!"

In Matthew 27, however, Jesus is quoting Psalm 22, the first verse. When a teacher gives the first verse, one is to read the rest of the passage, in which case, we see David surrounded by Gentiles who gamble for his clothing, his hands and feet pierced--and other things that never happened to King David--prophecy!