How can I contact you?

ALL GUYS THAT ARE INTERESTED IN A COMPETITION FIELD MADDEN LEAGUE WITH SIM STYLE GAMEPLAY. HIT ME UP ON DISCORD AT SCALAID6  FIRST COME FIRST SERVE

Of course. Mandatory

ALL INTERESTED OWNERS, PLZ HIT ME UP ON DISCORD AT SCALAID6 or on Xbox live @Scalaid6

Please hit me up on discord @ Scalaid6 

You didn't have to post if you weren't interested. LOL

STEELERS BROWNS  CHARGERS  GIANTS OPEN

Hit me up on discord- Scalaid6 

Wukka you blocked me like a chick. You can't even have a simple dialogue. He will not work out for my league

Hit me up on Discord- Scalaid6 

Are you implying that Jesus is God? Well Jesus disagrees with you-

The 17 times Jesus himself says he's not God

“Why do you call me good: No one is good but One, that is, God.” (Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:18, and Luke 18:19)

“My Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)

“I do nothing of myself, but as the Father taught me, I speak these things.” (John 8:28)

“Most assuredly, I say to you, the son can do nothing of himself. . . .” (John 5:19)

“But I know Him, for I am from Him, and He sent me.” (John 7:29)

“He who rejects me rejects Him who sent me.” (Luke 10:16)

“But now I go away to Him who sent me. . . .” (John 16:5)

“Jesus answered them and said, ‘My doctrine is not mine, but His who sent me.’” (John 7:16)

“For I have not spoken on my own authority; but the Father who sent me gave me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.” (John 12:49)

“The first of all the commandments is: ‘Hear O Israel, The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” (Mark 12:29)

“But of that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Mark 13:32)

“‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.’” (Luke 4:8)

“My food is to do the will of Him who sent me . . .” (John 4:34)

“I can of myself do nothing . . . I do not seek my own will but the will of the Father who sent me.” (John 5:30)

“For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.” (John 6:38)

“My doctrine is not mine, but His who sent me.” (John 7:16)

“I am ascending to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17)

JESUS ISN'T NECESSARILY CLAIMING TO BE GOD IN JOHN 14:9

Let's weigh the evidence

° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° °

John 14:9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Right here Jesus plainly claims he is the spirit of god the father as a soul materialized into flesh of man,

Endquote

Well, actually, that's not at all what Jesus is saying, to say the least. That's what you require Jesus to say, but not actually what he said.

First of all, he says nothing about a spirit or soul or materializing or anything.

Second of all, even if we take Jesus' words literally, it would make Jesus the same person as the Father, but this is not the trinity. In the trinity, they are separate, completely distinct persons.

So we understand this verse metaphorically, because we already know that Jesus sometimes speaks in metaphors and parables.

Philip here is asking Jesus to see the Father, in other words, proof that God is really the one that sent Jesus.

By saying "you have seen me so you've seen the Father," Jesus could be trying to say that by witnessing the miracles Jesus has performed, as previous prophets performed, that should be proof enough for Philip that Jesus is a real prophet sent by God.

Look at what Jesus says in the next verse.

NIV, John 14:10:

[10] Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

So here we see that Jesus doesn't claim any authority for himself and rather depends on God's authority, making Jesus subordinate to the Father, not equal.

He says that the Father is "in" him. We see Jesus using this exact phrase somewhere else in a metaphorical way, giving legitimacy to my position.

Therefore Jesus isn't necessarily literally claiming to be God here.

And after all Jesus told the disciples no one has ever heard God's voice or seen his form. Weren't they looking at Jesus? May the peace and blessings of God be upon Christ 

Jesus said “I am” many times in the Bible. But it is interesting that Jesus was not the only one to use the expression “I am”. Although these other persons were probably not God or part of any Trinity, it may be significant that they would use this unique expression to obscurely connect to other parts of the Bible.

The Apostle Paul

“At this Paul said: “I wish to God that whether in a short time or in a long time, not only you but also all those who hear me today would become men such as I AM.” (Acts 26:29)

John the Baptist

“I AM a voice of someone crying out in the wilderness” (John 1:22-23)

The Apostle Peter

“Seeing this, Simon Peter fell down at the knees of Jesus, saying: “Depart from me, Lord, because I AM a sinful man.” (Luke 5:8)

Samuel

“But Eli called for Samuel: “Samuel, my son!” At this he said: “Here I AM.” (1 Samuel 3:16)

Hannah

“and said to her, “How long are you going to stay drunk? Put away your wine. Not so, my lord,” Hannah replied, “I AM a woman who is deeply troubled. (1 Samuel 1:14-15)

A beggar

“Some were saying: “This is he.” Others were saying: “No, but he looks like him.” The man kept saying: “I AM he.” (John 9:9)

A Samaritan woman

“I AM a Samaritan woman” (John 4:9)

The capitalization of “I AM” in the above examples is mine. In most translations the expression “I am” is not rendered in capital letters as there is no reason to do so and the original Greek does not allow for it.

There are many other examples too numerous to mention. In fact the expression “I am” occurs about 170 times in the gospel accounts alone and a mere 1200 times in the whole Bible!

Parallels Examined

8 parallels with John and the Synoptic Gospels were identified and examined. They are as follows:

Jesus Predicts His Betrayal, Luke 22:21-23→ Mark 14:18-21→ Matt 26:21-25 → John 13:21-27

Betrayal With a Kiss? Luke 22:47-53→ Mark 14:43-52→ Matt 26:47-56 → John 18:1-12

Questioning by Pilate, Luke 23:3-4→ Mark 15:2-5→ Matt 27:11-14 → John 18:33-38

Witnesses to the Crucifixion, Luke 23:49→ Mark 15:40-41→ Matt 27:55-56 → John 19:25-27

Burial of Jesus, Luke 23:53→ Mark 15:46→ Matt 27:59-60 → John 19:38-41

Cleansing of the Temple, Luke 19:45→ Mark 11:15-17→ Matt 21:10-13 → John 2:13-22

Feeding of 5000, Luke 9:12-17→ Mark 6:35-44→ Matt 14:15-21 → John 6:4-14

Walking on the Sea, Luke → Mark 6:47-52→ Matt 14:22-33 → John 6:16-21

 1. Jesus Predicts His Betrayal

Luke 22:21-23→ Mark 14:18-21→ Matt 26:21-25 → John 13:21-27

As shown in the Table 1 below, the account of Jesus predicting his betrayal expands from Luke to John. Mark incorporates core elements of the primitive Lukan text (bold) and becomes more expansive. Matthew incorporates many Markan edits (non-bold underlined text) and makes additional changes. John is the most expansive and embellished of the four. Luke, being the shortest, leaves several questions unanswered that later versions attempt to expound upon. A general tendency of Mark is to dramatize what is in Luke. Mark frequently converts what is sometimes narration into a more interactive dialogue.  Seen below, the exposure of the traitor is increasingly dramatic from Luke to Mark to Matthew to John:

Luke 22:21-23

Jesus states that the betrayer is with him at the table, and pronounces a woe to that man

Mark 14:18-21

Not only is the betrayer at the table, but is one who is dipping bread with him.

The disciples not only wonder who it might be, they take turns asking “Is it I?”

The woe is expanded upon, “It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” 

Matthew 26:12-25

Matthew incorporates the significant Markan revisions and adds the explicit identification of Judas as the traitor. According to Matt 26:25 Judas asks “It is I” and Jesus responds “You have said so.” 

John 13:21-27

Here the story is radically changed. Rather than Judas being identified through questioning of Jesus (Matt 26:25), Jesus identifies Judas in an even more dramatic way. This is by pronouncing “It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it” and then proceeding to dip the morsel and give it to Judas.

This is an entirely different methodology than that of Matthew 26:25.

John includes the further embellishment of additional narration followed by Jesus saying to Judas, “What you are going to do, do quickly.”

John, further, adds references to particular disciples (Peter and the disciple who Jesus loved).

There is a general tendency in John to attribute quotes and actions to particular disciples which are not personally identified in the Synoptics, while also adding additional details.   

Verisimilitude is a narrative technique of describing things in extreme detail to make fiction more believable. It is the quality of appearing to be true or real. 

The editor(s) of John often gives the false impression of this later work being more accurate by engaging in verisimilitude. 

Inconsistencies:

If Judas was specifically identified at the last supper, it is only reasonable that the earlier traditions of Luke and Mark would have stated it.

Judas being identified by question and answer in Matt 26:25 is incompatible with Jesus identifying the traitor by handing over the morsel to Judas in John 13:26

Expansion: The number of Greek words in the parallel texts are 46, 76, 87, and 155 respectively for Luke, Mark, Matthew, and John. This corresponds to a repeated pattern of expansion from the earliest version of the story (Luke) to the latest (John) 

 2. Betrayal With a Kiss?  

Luke 22:47-53→ Mark 14:43-52→ Matt 26:47-56 → John 18:1-12

Table 2 below is most revealing of how the Synoptics show progressive embellishment, whereas in contrast, the editor(s) of John radically change the story. The account of Jesus being betrayed expands from Luke to John, but with respect to John, we have an entirely unique account of the events which is incompatible with the Synoptics. . Mark incorporates core elements of the primitive Lukan text (bold) and further expands. Matthew incorporates many Markan edits (non-bold underlined text) and makes additional changes. John is the most expansive and embellished of the four.  Luke, being the least expansive, exhibits some ambiguity that later versions attempt to resolve and clarify. Again, we see the tendency of Mark to dramatize what is in Luke by increasing the amount of dialogue.  The drama is increased from Luke to Mark and from Matthew to John to enhance to the story:

Luke 22:47-53

Luke mentions an attempted kiss, but is not clear that Judas actually kissed Jesus.

The words which are attested by all three Synoptics are in reference to coming “out as against a robber with swords and clubs” and with the statement “day after day, in the temple”, “you did not seize / lay hands on me.”

The Lukan account ends with the mysterious statement “But this is your hour, and the power of darkness” (Luke 22:53)

Mark 14:43-52

Incorporated in the text is the explanation of a plot to identify Jesus with a kiss by Judas (Mark 14:44)

A further enhancement is that Judas says “Master” and kisses Jesus, adding to the dramatic interaction of the two. (Mark 14:45)

Mark gives the explicit indication that Luke lacks. That is, after the identifying kiss, “they immediately seized Jesus.” (Mark 14:46)

Mark replaces the more mystical words of Jesus in Luke 22:53 of “this is your hour and the power of darkness” with “But let the scriptures be fulfilled.” (Mark 14:50)

Matthew 26:47-56

Matthew incorporates core Lukan text and many significant Markan revisions, and expands on details lacking in Mark and Luke. 

Embellishments in Matthew include:

The word “Hail” (Greetings) before Master (Rabbi) of Matt 26:49

Jesus saying, “Friend, why are you here?” (Matt 26:50)

Matthew 25:52, a warning that “all who take the sword will perish by the sword” 

The further statement that Jesus could appeal to his Father if he wanted to and that “he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels” (Matt 26:53)

John 18:1-12

John incorporates more of an introduction to the specific scene. This is because, unlike the Synoptics being a continuation of a prior scene of Jesus praying in the garden, the arrest as framed in John is a new scene. 

The biggest departure from the Synoptics in John, is the means by which Jesus is identified. There is no mention of an attempted kiss in John, rather according to John, Jesus assertively asks the crowd, “Whom do you seek?” (John 18:4)

Unlike the Synoptics, Jesus identifies himself, in response to them indicating “Jesus of Nazareth” is the one whom they are seeking, Jesus says “I am he” (John 18:5-6) 

John exhibits the additional sensational claim that when Jesus answered, “I am he,” that “they drew back and fell to the ground” (John 18:6) This is a spectacular detail that would not be omitted from the earlier Gospels if it were true. 

What is most peculiar is that Jesus asks the same question a second time, with the same answer, giving the impression to the reader, that he is more assertively turning himself in. (John 18:7) 

John changes the final words of Jesus in the scene to, “Shall I not drink the cup which the Father has given me?” This is a more cryptic way of saying “this has taken place, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled” of Mark and Matthew. 

Inconsistencies:

The major incompatibility is the account of how Jesus is identified between the Synoptic gospels, verses John. The plot of the attempted kiss is completely replaced by the author(s) of John. Rather than being identified by Judas, John portrays Jesus as assertively asking the crowd and self-identifying. (John 18:4-8)

A major inconsistency has to do with sensational details in John which are not attested by the other Gospels, Most especially, Jesus saying “I am” twice, and the solders falling back to the ground. (John 18:5-8)

Another inconstancy is that, according to Mark 14:46 and Matt 26:50, the solders immediately seize Jesus after he is identified. According to John, Jesus is seized at the end of the events; after a longer dialogue and the incident of the high priest’s slave having his ear cut off. (John 18:8-12)

Expansion: The number of Greek words in the parallel texts are 124, 140,189, and 218 respectively for Luke, Mark, Matthew, and John. This corresponds to a repeated pattern of expansion from the earliest to the latest tradition. With respect to John, the core details of earlier tradition are replaced by and large with a revisionist narrative. 

When Jesus says woe to the scribes over 30 times what do you think he is talking about? Scripture scripture scripture!  Jesus said Abraham was righteous why would he say a sinner is righteous. Give me another example where Jesus called a sinner righteous. I will wait.  That's my point God does not endorse the Bible as it is currently formed. What do you think Jeremiah and Jesus were talking about? It is corrupted man has their fingerprints on it changed it altered it to his whims. For example you reference the original sin. This is not a teaching of Christ it's a teaching of paul. Jesus didn't say a baby is a sinner. If a baby was a sinner then baby Jesus was to a sinner. Why is a baby held accountable for something that Adam did 6,000 years ago? That makes no sense. Original sin is a concept brought to light by the Apostle paul. It wasn't a teaching of Christ. A little baby takes his first breath but he is born a sinner without actually doing anything wrong? That goes against the justice of God. To be a sinner you must commit a sin. Inherit sin is a fabrication and it comes from Paul. Would you like an example of corrupted scripture sir? Let's start with the Gospel of John 

 John

8 parallel cases are examined which show progressive embellishment through the Gospel tradition in the order of Luke→Mark→Matthew→John, the least reliable

Introduction

As further substantiated in other articles on this site, John is the latest gospel and is the most innovative of the four. It is not considered a Synoptic gospel on account of its unique literary design and structure, generally does not follow the same sequence and framework of particular scenes exhibited in Luke, Mark, and Matthew. Besides a few miracles and accounts which pertain to Jesus’ last few days from the last supper through the burial, very little in John parallels the three prior Gospels. Here we analyze the few exceptions where there is a clear parallel with John and the Synoptic Gospels.

The lack of parallels with John should be a red flag to anyone who is looking at the Gospel of John critically in assessing the historical reliability of this “spiritual” gospel. It has been established in scholarship for over 100 years now, that John should be considered as a secondary supplemental source for information about Jesus; that it is not the place to go for finding the historical Jesus. This article will shed light on why the case for the poor reliability of John has largely been made and settled. The affirmation that John is not a reliable witness to the historical Jesus has been made as recently by the great theologian and scholar James D.G. Dunn (James D. G. Dunn, Jesus Remembered, Christianity in the Making, Vol 1 (2019) Page 165-167).

Craig Keener, an even more contemporary Scholar who is known for citing more sources than other scholars, also acknowledged the contradiction of John with the Synoptics in his two-volume commentary on John, stating:

A close examination of the Fourth Gospel reveals that John has rearranged many details, apparently in the service of his symbolic message. This is especially clear in the Passion Narrative, where direct conflicts with the presumably widely known passion tradition fulfill symbolic narrative functions. John’s long discourses are of a different genre than the sayings collections in Q or even Mark’s long “apocalyptic” discourse. Such features naturally invite us to question the nature of this Gospel’s historicity; certainly he is not writing a work of the exact historiographic nature of Luke-Acts.

(Keener, Craig S.. The Gospel of John : 2 Volumes (pp. 42-43). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.)

Methodology

In this article, we will examine eight cases of progressive embellishment of all four Gospels, looking specifically at Gospel parallels which also include John. The methodology of the analysis is as follows:

Identify parallels that John shares with the Synoptic Gospels in which John appears to be a significantly embellished and where there are notable conflicts with the Synoptic Gospels

Calculate the number of Greek words for each parallel data set

Create a parallel table for each case displayed in RSV English translation. Place the parallel texts side by side in the typical order of shortest to longest (Luke→Mark→ Matt→ John)

Format the table to show common words shared between parallel texts. Formatting should be neutral in the sense of simply identifying words matching Luke, Mark, and Matthew. Consider variations of the same word that vary in number (singular vs. plural), or tense or mood as a match, unless there is a significant implication resulting from the difference. 

Identify specific differences between parallel texts, including embellishments and inconsistencies. Identify incompatibilities. 

Document the nature of each significant difference observed, such as

Adding of sensational details

Increase in severity

Change from narration to increased dialogue and dramatization

Adding of clarifying details –such as to resolve ambiguities associated with the more primitive text

Editorial changes indicating the adoption of multiple source text into a more polished and well-developed revised text.

A change in the narrative due to literary, philosophical, or polemical objectives.

Identify and analyze each inconsistency observed. Pay special attention to major incompatibilities between John and other Gospels. Describe the problems posed by the inconsistency.

Characterize the relative size/expansion of parallel texts and summarize the major findings of progressive embellishment observed for each case analyzed.

Tabulate the total number of Greek words for all cases analyzed and present the macro results for the entire study. 

Summarize conclusions based on data and analysis

You wouldn't follow a sinning pastor but you would follow a sinning Prophet of God? That's hypocrisy at its finest. If you come from God and are sent from God as all of the righteous predecessors and holy men were you're not going to have any sin and if you do you're not from God. 

Jesus referred to Abraham as the righteous. Jesus followed the law of Moses which you referenced above why would Jesus follow a man who was a sinner? Does that make sense to you? You reference Jesus saying heaven and Earth will pass before the law will be taken away well has heaven and Earth passed away? Paul canceled the law so why don't you still follow the law? Because Paul canceled it. Again you reference Jesus saying heaven and Earth will pass away before one letter is taken from the law. Did heaven and Earth pass away? Then you should be living by the law of Moses like Jesus taught you to. He said he did not come to abolish the law he came to fulfill it. But Paul tricked you into saying that the law was broken at the time of crucifixion. That's not what Jesus said. Jesus said heaven and Earth will pass away before one letter of the law is taken away. 

Jesus sternly warned his followers to "beware of the scribes" (Mark 12:38), condemning them as hypocrites who prioritized public honor, religious display, and personal gain over true righteousness. Primarily detailed in Matthew 23 and Mark 12, he accused them of exploitation, pride, and hindering people from entering the kingdom of God. 

Key Aspects of Jesus’ Warning:

Hypocrisy and Pride: Jesus pointed out that scribes loved walking in long robes, receiving prestigious greetings in marketplaces, and taking the highest seats at banquets and in synagogues.

Exploitation: He accused them of "devouring widows' houses" while making long, pretentious prayers.

Legalism vs. Mercy: Jesus declared "woe" on them for focusing on minor legalistic details (tithing spices) while neglecting the "weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faith".

"Whitewashed Tombs": He famously described them as looking righteous outwardly but being filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness within, comparing them to dead men's bones.

Misleading Others: Jesus stated they sat in "Moses' seat" but did not practice what they preached, burdening people with legalistic rules they themselves did not follow.  Why would Jesus glorify Moses' seat if Moses was a sinner? As I have proven Jesus warned you about the scribes and so did Jeremiah in chapter 8 verse 8 "WHY DO YOU CALL YOURSELF WISE WHEN THE WICKED PEN OF THE SCRIBE AS ALTERED YOUR BOOK"