Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Annoymous authorship of the New Testament

The Gospel of Mark:
Note:   This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!

"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 [1], page 1488)"
  • We certainly do not know whether Mark was the author or not!  The quote clearly states "no direct internal evidence of authorship".  Also, the so-called unanimous testimony of the early church:
      
    -  Does not prove that the author was Mark.
       
    -  Nor does it prove that other people did not alter and modify the book, especially when the book was written at least 40-50 years after Christ.  We don't even know if Mark even wrote the book.
  •    "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 [1], 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)"

    The Book of 1 and 2 Peter:
    "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)"
    "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)"
    "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)"
    So like the rest of the books and gospels of the Bible, we don't even know regarding 1 Peter:
    1. Who wrote it.
    2. How many people wrote it.
    3. When it was written.
    4. Where it was written.

    The Book of Acts:
    "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 [1], page 1643)"

    The Gospel of Luke:
    "The identification of Luke as the author is primarily based on the "we" passages in Acts (beginning in Acts 16:10), which indicate that Luke was associated with Paul in his ministry and wrote down the account of his activities.  (The Amplified Bible, Page 1153)"
    The only proof that they have about Luke being the sole author of this gospel is a weak speculation on "we".  This is absurd at best!  This speculation shows:
    1. The gospel was likely to have been altered or written by others beside Luke.
    2. It's place of documentation is unknown.
    3. It's date of documentation is also unknown.
    It is also worth mentioning that the author of the book of Acts is also unknown as shown above:
    "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 [1], page 1643)"

    The Book of Hebrews:
    "The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1856)"

    The Gospel of John:

    Here is what the Bible's theologians and historians said about this gospel:
    "Many scholars of the past two centuries have denied that John wrote this book, partly because of their belief that the author fabricated many details such as the miracles and the discourses of Jesus.  (The Holman Illustrated Study Bible, ISBN: 978-1-58640-275-4, Gospel of John, Page1540)"
    "Critical Analysis makes it difficult to accept the idea that the gospel as it now stands was written by one person.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
    "Within the gospel itself there are also some inconsistencies.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
    "To solve these problems, scholars have proposed various rearrangements that would produce a smoother order.  However, most have come to the conclusion that the inconsistencies were probably produced by subsequent editing in which homogeneous materials were added to a shorter original.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
    "Other difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form are presented by its highly developed theology and by certain elements of its literary style.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
    "The gospel contains many details about Jesus not found in the synoptic gospels.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
    "The final editing of the gospel and arrangement in its present form probably dates from between A.D. 90 and 100.  Traditionally, Ephesus has been favored as the place of composition, though many support a location in Syria, perhaps the city of Antioch, while some have suggested other places, including Alexandria.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
    So again, no one knows regarding the "Gospel of John":
    1. Who wrote it.
    2. How many people wrote it.
    3. When it was written.
    4. Where it was written.
    Also, when one reads this gospel, he would immediately notice that it was not written by John himself.  Christians say that it was John the Apostle writting about John the Baptist.  The evidence in the quotes above clearly proves that this is a desperate lie!  I submit to you that neither John wrote anything!  Let us look at the following verses from the gospel:
    "And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?  (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:19)"
    "John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;  (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:26)"
    "For John was not yet cast into prison.  (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:24)"

    Here is what the Bible's theologians and historians said about this gospel:
    "....Unlike most NT letters, 1 John does not tell us who its author is.  The earliest identification of him comes from the church fathers...(From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1904)"
    "The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1905)"
    This is really ironic! with all respect due to Christians.  If the Book's author is not for sure known, then why assume that it was Saint John who wrote it?
    Please visit The lie of 1 John 5:7.  This verse was later discovered to be a Satanic lie.  The Roman Catholic Theologians don't believe in it, and it doesn't exist in their Bibles.
    The same case where no author is really known exists in the Gospels of 2 and 3 John.

    The Book of Revelation:
    "The author of the book calls himself John, who because of his Christian faith has been exiled to the rocky island of Patmos, a Roman penal colony.  Although he never claims to be John the apostle, he was so identified by several of the early church Fathers, including Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Terullian, Cyprian, and Hippolytus.  This identification, however, was denied by other Fathers, including Denis of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, and John Chrysostom.  Indeed, vocabulary, grammar, and style make it doubtful that the book could have been put into its present form by the same persons responsible for the fourth gospel.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1373)"
    "Four times the author identifies himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8).....In the third century, however, an African bishop named Dionysius compared the language, style and thought of the Apocalypse (Revelation) with that of the other writings of John and decided that the book could not been written by the apostle of John.  He suggested that the author was a certain John the Presbyter, whose name appears elsewhere in ancient writings.  Although many today follow Dionysius in his view of authorship, the external evidence seems overwhelmingly supportive of the traditional view.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1922)"

    The Book of Romans:
    Keep in mind that Paul himself admitted that he wasn't sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspiring him or not.  Please visit:
  • Paul's Delusions: In 1 Corinthians 7:40, he claimed that he "thinks" that he has the Holy Spirit in him!
  • Having said that, let us now see what the Bible theologians say about Paul's books:
      
    "Although the introduction, which is rather lengthy, and the conclusion, which has a longer list of greetings than usual, identify this book as an epistle, the content as a whole does not have the occasional character or personal touch usually found in the Pauline letters.  (The Amplified Bible, Page 1297)"
    So it's quite possible and probable that the letter (book) of Romans was any of the following:
    1. Written by Paul and other people.
    2. Written by people other than Paul.
    3. Written by Paul and altered by others.
    4. Written by unknown people altogether.
    "The writer of this letter was the apostle Paul (see 1:1). No voice from the early church was ever raised against his authorship.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1705)"
    Ok, but notice how in this Book, we see the actual author himself, and in the ones above, we see nothing but conclusions. If GOD was the actual inspirer of all of these Books, then He wouldn't put us in the agony of making some conclusions to figure out His Words. Is GOD the author of confusion?  Paul is also clear about his ownership of the Books of  1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians.
    But why must we take every single word that Paul spoke especially during his conversations with others as Words of GOD Almighty?!
    Is Paul GOD Himself? No Christian believes in that.  Paul fought with Saint Peter and accused him of being "clearly in the wrong" (Galatians: 2:11-12), and had a huge argument with Saint Barnabas (Acts 15:36-39).
    Did GOD favor Paul over Barnabas and Peter and inspired him the words while he was fighting with them?  I don't think so!.
    Paul himself admitted before that he wasn't always inspired by GOD Almighty himself (1 Corinthians 7:25-30). 
    And since Paul never met Jesus in person (Acts 9:2-4.  Note: Paul's name used to be Saul.  Yet, Paul admittedly wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspirning him or not), and only claimed that Jesus came to him in person then there is always the possibility of him being untruthful. Since Paul never performed any miracles to help us believe his claim of Prophet hood, then his claim about him being GOD's apostle is just as good as me for instance claiming to be GOD's apostle.
    Benny Hyne, one of today's famous Christian missionaries who have millions of fans world wide, claims and shows on TV how he could cure the paralyzed and makes him walk again. He claims that Jesus is inside him when he performs his so-called miracles. Why can't it be a bunch of liars that he paid and brought on TV, pretend to act paralyzed and pretend to act healed?
    Paul could just as well be another Benny Hyne, except that Benny Hyne performed miracles (that are fake of course), but Paul never performed anything.
    I hope you see how confusing the Bible really is. Its books are believed today from conclusions only as you've seen above, and it is only to be believed by blind faith. Blind faith is not the way to believe in GOD Almighty's Words, because GOD is not the author of confusion.
    Please visit: Famous Theologians and Historians believe that Paul was not truthful.
    Christian Scholars refuting the status of the NT as an inspired scripture.
    Paul, Peter and John are in clear contradiction with each others regarding the disbelieving husbands to believing wives!
    What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe in?

    The Books of 1 and 2 Corinthians:
    "Scholars have noticed a lack of continuity in this document.  For example the long section of 2, 14-7, 4 seems abruptly spliced into the narrative of a crisis and its resolution.  Identical or similar topics, moreover, seem to be treated several times during the letter.  Many judge, therefore, that this letter as it stands incorporates several briefer letters sent to Corinth over a certain span of time.  If this is so, then Paul himself or, more likely, some other editor clearly took care to gather those letters together and impose some literary unity upon the collection, thus producing the document that has come down to us as the Second Letter to the Corinthians.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1252)"
    Again, we have no idea how many people wrote and edited the letters, and we don't know where and when this happened.
    And again, Paul admitted that he wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspiring him or not:  Paul's Delusions: In 1 Corinthians 7:40, he claimed that he "thinks" that he has the Holy Spirit in him!

    The Book of Philippians:
    "The early church was unanimous in its testimony that Philippians was written by the apostle Paul (see 1:1).  Internally the letter reveals the stamp of genuineness.  The many personal references of the author fit what we know of Paul from other NT books.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1803)"
    Again, it was assumed that this book was written by Paul himself.  No one knows for sure whether it was Paul or somebody else.  The New Testament wasn't even documented until 150-300 years after the disappearance of Jesus peace be upon him.  If we're going to assume that Books that look appealing to us as the True Word of GOD Almighty, then we are committing a great crime against GOD Almighty and His Holy Words.  No where in this Book we see a statement saying that it was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself.
    And again, Paul admitted that he wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspiring him or not:  Paul's Delusions: In 1 Corinthians 7:40, he claimed that he "thinks" that he has the Holy Spirit in him!

    The Book of Colossians:
    "That Colossians is a genuine letter Paul is not usually disputed.  In the early church, all who speak on the subject of authorship ascribe it to Paul.  In the 19th century, however, some thought that the heresy refuted in ch. 2 was second-century Gnosticism.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1813)"
    Again, it was assumed that Paul was the one who wrote the Book.  But again, who's to say that it was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself?
    And again, Paul admitted that he wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspiring him or not:  Paul's Delusions: In 1 Corinthians 7:40, he claimed that he "thinks" that he has the Holy Spirit in him!

    The Books of 1 and 2 Thessalonians:
    "Paul's authorship of 2 Thessalonians has been questioned more often than that of 1 Thessalonians, in spite of the fact that it has more support from early Christian writers.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1829)"
    So basically we're not certain whether or not Paul wrote the Book.  And even if Paul was the one who wrote it, we still don't know whether it was the True Words of GOD Almighty or not, because no where in the Book we see any indication that it was inspired by the Almighty GOD.

     Book Information (Bibliography):
    1- The NIV Study Bible, 10th Anniversary Edition. 
    General Editor: Kenneth Barker.
    Associate Editors: Donald Burdick, John Stek, Walter Wessel and Ronald Youngblood.
    Published at: Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI 49530, USA.
    ISBN: 0-310-92589-4.


    2- Holy Bible - King James Version.
    KJV Giant Print, personal size reference Bible.
    Published by Zondervan Publishing House.
    Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530, U.S.A.
    Printed in the United States of America.
    00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1



    3- The New Jerusalem Bible.
    Published by Doubleday, A division of Bantam Doubleday, Dell Publishing Group, Inc.
    1540 Broadway, New York, New York 10036.
    ISBN: 0-385-14264-1 (Regular Edition).
    ISBN: 0-385-46961-6 (Deluxe Edition).


    No comments:

    Post a Comment

    Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.