Comments by "Fu Uf" (@fuuf7092) on "Josh Brett" channel.

  1. wake up! they had to add the trinity later Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version...,,.,
    1
  2. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.” The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but…a later liturgical addition.”,
    1
  3. tthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family
    1
  4. Bruce Metzger, the premier New Testament textual critic, writes: “Matthew and Luke suppress or weaken references in Mark to such human emotions of Jesus as grief and anger and amazement as well as Jesus’ unrequited love; they also omit Mark’s statement that Jesus’ friends thought he was beside himself”. He explains further, that: “The later gospels omit what might imply that Jesus was unable to accomplish what he willed…and also omit questions asked by Jesus which might be taken to imply his ignorance.”[3]
    1
  5. Metzger continues further by enumerating instances where Matthew and Luke soften Mark’s statements which might minimize the majesty of Jesus and replaced it with illustrations of a more alluring and authoritative Jesus. In the story of the fig tree as found in Mark, the disciples did not notice the withering of the tree until next morning. For Matthew, this seemed less dramatic and unimpressive, and hence in his narrative the tree withered at once, leaving the disciples in shock and amazement. Matthew and Luke were adamant in changing the words of Jesus. They wanted to make Jesus say what they wanted people to believe, “reflecting a later stage of theological understanding than that in Mark.” (Metzger, pg 83) It seems quite clear that during both the pre and post gospel stages of the gospel traditions transmission, the available material was molded, filtered and changed in direct correlation to the Christological convictions of those who handled the traditions. It is important to stress that this is not a case of the evangelists’ mere differing in emphasis; rather there are numerous occasions when the later gospel writers go out of their way to modify and alter the earlier version. Therefore, if we wish to come close to the historical Jesus in the gospels, it is a good starting point to compare the stories in the various gospels, to discern where the story has altered.
    1
  6. What about “He who is without s77n, should k4st the f1r5t”? On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1