Pierre77 a écrit :" Rabbi " Mahomet il vous trompe, actuellement en reniant le sacrifice du christ, vous n'êtes même pas dans la nouvelle alliance et Dieu ne vous connais même pas, c'est frustrant mais c'est la vérité.
Tu vois? qu'est-ce que j'avais dit?
Je t'ai donné des preuves de la bible et non du Coran, la bible mentirait-elle?
Pierre77 a écrit : Moi je suis convaincus à 100 % que l'évangile est authentique a 100% car jésus a dit que ces paroles ne disparaitront jamais :
Mathieu 24:35 (Jésus dit) Le ciel et la terre disparaitront mais mes paroles ne disparaitront jamais
Cela contredit les faits réelles, car la bible a bel et bien était falsifié, Avant et Après Muhammad. et les évangiles originaux furent tous brulé par constantin.
Avant Muhammad
1-L'évangile selon Mathieu
"The unknown author, whom we shall continue to call Matthew for the sake of convenience, drew no only up the Gospel according to Mark but upon a large body of material (principally, sayings of Jesus) not found in Mk that corresponds, sometimes exactly, to material found also in the Gospel according to Luke. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1008)"
"As for the place where the gospel was composed, a plausible suggestion is that it was Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1009)"
Ces deux citations laisse penser que les versets de Mathieu ne sont pas de Mathieu
2-Lévangile selon Marc
"Although the book is anonymous, apart from the ancient heading "According to Mark" in manuscripts, it has traditionally been assigned to John Mark, in whose mother's house (at Jerusalem) Christians assembled. (
The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"
"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary , page 1488)"
-Sans oublier que L'évangile selon Marc fut écrit 40-50 ans après Jésus
"Traditionally, the gospel is said to have been written shortly before A.D. 70 in Rome, at a time of impending persecution and when destruction loomed over Jerusalem. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes , page 1528)"
"This verse, which reads, "But if you do not forgive, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your transgressions," is omitted in the best manuscripts.
(The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1081)"
"This passage, termed the Longer Ending to the Marcan gospel by comparison with a much briefer conclusion found in some less important manuscripts, has traditionally been accepted as a canonical part of the gospel and was defined as such by the Council of Trent. Early citations of it by the Fathers indicate that it was composed by the second century, although vocabulary and style indicate that it was written by someone other than Mark. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1088)"
En conclusion, on ne sait pas si ces versets sont réellement l’œuvre de Marc, ni on connait la date et le lieu de leurs rédaction, et vu aussi que le nouveau testament ne fut écrit sur des papier que dans les années 150-300 après Jésus pbsl, alors comment pouvons nous savoir si ils sont réellement les écrits et citations de Marc?
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV il est écrit: "The most reliable early manuscript and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20"
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes , page 1528)"
-Mais il existent tellement de doute au sujet de l'évangile de Marc que je ne vais pas les citer toutes en entier... restons-en là
3-Le livre de 1 et 2 pierre:
"Nevertheless, acceptance of 2 Peter into the New Testament canon met with great resistance in the early church. The oldest certain reference to it comes from Origen in the early third century. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"
"Some modern scholars on the basis of a number of features that they consider incompatible with Petrine authenticity, regard the letter as the work of a later Christian writer. Such features include the cultivated Greek in which it is written, difficult to attribute to a Galilean fisherman, together with its use of the Greek Septuagint translation when citing the Old Testament; the similarity in both thought and expression to the Pauline literature; and the allusions to widespread persecution of Christians, which did not occur until at least the reign of Domitian (A.D. 81-96). In this view the letter would date from the end of the first century or even the beginning of the second, when there is evidence for persecution of Christians in Asia Minor.
(The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1348)"
"Among modern scholars there is wide agreement that 2 Peter is a pseudonymous work, i.e., one written by a later author who attributed it to Peter. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"
-Alors comme le reste des autres livres du nouveau testament:
1- On ne sait pas qui les a écris
2- Combien de personnes les ont écris
3- Quand fussent-ils écris
4- Où Fussent-ils écris
4- Le livre des actes
"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary , page 1643)"
voir aussi:
http://www.gotquestions.org/Francais/Bi ... ompue.html
Après Muhammad
fait attention aux mots "Revised", "New" et "New revised":
English Revised Version (1885)
American Standard Version (1901)
Revised Standard Version (1946, 1952)
Good News For Modern Man (1966)
Good News Bible (1976)
The Living Bible (1967, 1971)
New American Standard Version (1960, 1971)
New International Version ( 1973, 1978)
New King James Version (1979,1982)
New Revised Standard Version ( l990)
Sans oublier:
the United Bible Societies' 4th revised edition Greek New Testament and the Nestle-Aland 27th edition Novum Testamentum Graece include the New Living Translation (NLT), the New Century Version (NCV), the Contemporary English Version (CEV) et Eugene H. Peterson's The Message
Pierre77 a écrit :
De plus jonas était mort (dans le séjour des morts) dans le ventre du poisson, il n'était pas vivant, il était dans le séjour des morts, il était mort :
Jonas 2: 2 Il dit: Dans ma détresse, j'ai invoqué l'Eternel, Et il m'a exaucé; Du sein du séjour des morts j'ai (Jonas) crié, Et tu as entendu ma voix.
Ah bon? Les prêtres enseignent quelque chose d'autre, ils disent que Jonas était vivant....Et ils n'ont pas tort.
Car tout comme psaume 22:16 les chrétiens (Constantin et compagnie)ont réécris les verset, car le mot utilisé en hébreux "Sheol" ne veut pas seulement Dire "Séjour des mort" mais il veut aussi dire "Tombeau" (Prison dans le cas de la baleine.)
Et le mot utilisé désigne bien le mot "Tombeau" qui fait référence au ventre de la baleine.
Car lis le verset d'avant
◄ Jonas 2:1 ►
Jonas,
dans le ventre du poisson, pria l'Eternel, son Dieu. (était il dans le ventre du poisson (sheol= tombeau) ou était-il au séjour des mort?
Ce verset prouve que Jonas a vécu assez longtemps pour prier Dieu de le libérer de Sheol (ventre de la baleine)