what Gospel did Jesus preach?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by onemoreyouth

WHY DID LUKE WRITE HIS GOSPEL ?

---[Luke 1:1]

MOST EXCELLENT THE-OPH'-I-LUS, (the church tried to know : who is that The-oph'-i-lus, Luke's close friend. However, there are some Christians today claim that this is not a name of a person, but a Greek word which means "People".


* I do not understand why the whole Bible was translated into English except for this word!
* And if such: what is the value of keeping it ?
* And they start this "so called" Greek word with a capital letter ?
* And who was "most excellent" to Luke ? The people or his friend: The-oph'-i-lus ?

**he was a person, not a group of people. he was more than likely an official in the roman army, thus justifying the "most high" terminology used to greet officials


This is how they defend the error by making another error, it is in fact another trick, by this they attempt to avoid the difficulties which this paragraph creates. The fact that this introduction of Luke's Gospel makes hisGospel no more than a personal letter.)...

Theophilus



Bishop of Antioch. Eusebius in his "Chronicle" places the name of Theophilus against that of Pope Soter (169-77), and that of Maximinus, Theophilus's successor, against the name of Eleutherus (177-93). This does not mean that Maximinus succeeded Theophilus in 177, but only that Theophilus and Maximinus flourished respectively in the times of Soter and Eleutherus. Lightfoot and Hort showed that Eusebius, having no such precise chronological data for the bishops of Antioch as he had for those of Rome and Alexandria, placed the names of the Antiochene bishops against those of contemporary Roman bishops (Lightfoot, "St. Ignatius", etc., II, 468 sq., and St. Clement", etc., I, 224 sqq.). When therefore we find in the third book of Theophilus, "Ad Autolychum", that the writer was alive after the death (180) of Marcus Aurelius, it does not follow, as even writers like Harnack and Bardenhewer suppose, that Eusebius made a chronological blunder. The "Ad Autolychum", the only extant writing of Theophilus, is an apology for Christianity. It consists of three books, really separate works written at different times, and corresponds exactly to the description given of it by Eusebius as "three elementary works" (Hist. eccl., IV, xxiv). The author speaks of himself as a convert from heathenism. He treats of such subjects as the Christian idea of God, the Scripture accounts of the origin of man and the world as compared with pagan myths. On several occasions he refers (in connection with the early chapters of Genesis) to an historical work composed by himself. Eusebius (op. cit.) speaks of refutations of Marcion and Hermogenes, and "catechetical books". To these St. Jerome (De vir. illust., xxv) adds commentaries on Proverbs and the Gospels. He speaks of the latter in the prologue to his own commentary on the Gospels, and also in his epistle "Ad Algasiam", where we learn that Theophilus commented upon a Diatessaron or Gospel Harmony composed by himself ("Theophilus . . . quattuor Evangelistarum in unum opus compingens"). A long quotation in the same epistle is all that survives of this commentary, for Zahn's attempt to identify it with a Latin commentary ascribed in some manuscripts to Theophilus has found no supporters.

I hope this answers at least part of your question as to whom Theophilus was.

By the way, we get our Capitalizing proper nouns from the Greeks, not the Romans. Hence the Capitalization of the word Theophilus, leads the learned to presume immediately that the word is either describing an individual, or a specific body of people with a particular title of meaning. If we look at the original Greek text (particularly the second and third person descriptors refering to Theophilus, our next strongest clue is that the descriptors are in singular, as opposed to plural. Hence one can logically conclude that Theophilus describes a single person, or more specifically, his name. This also points out that Luke refers to a historically validated person (in secular studies).

v/r

Q

[Marsh]

Dear Friend,

The gospel that Jesus preached-- and preaches-- has been explained very well several times by several people in this thread, namely Faithfulservant and Quahom 1. So I'm not going to address this question per se.

Instead, I would like to direct your attention to one book that should have been included in this discussion long ago, but (interestingly enough) has been avoided: The Revelation of Jesus Christ.

I don't know whether or not you are familiar with this book, but for now I will assume that you are, and if you are not I will clarify later.

In your first post you pointed out the fact that Jesus himself never wrote a gospel. In actual fact he did; the Spirit of Jesus is the Spirit of prophecy, and thus any work (in the Bible or out of it) inspired by the Holy Spirit was technically written by Jesus. This phenomenon culminates with the Revelation; while Jesus inspired other books indirectly, he inspired this one directly, sending the message directly to John.

This book makes Jesus' gospel (good news) very clear, and it's the same gospel that Jesus preached in all of the 4 gospels that Christians trust in today: Repent, because the kingdom of God is near (coming). And this implies that the current kingdom of the world-- which is of Satan-- is coming to an end.

Love God, and love your neighbours. Why? Because this is the Kingdom of God; that is to say, the citizens of this kingdom will love God, and will love their neighbours. Jesus explains this in the 4 synoptic gospels, and hammers the details home in Revelation.

Just one more detail, and it's kind of an aside, but anyways:

From Revelation 14:6

"And I saw another angel flying between heaven and earth. With him was the everlasting gospel which was to be preached to all of the inhabitants of the earth; to every nation, and kindred, and language, and people."

Perhaps you are right, at least to a degree, when you speak of there being corruption in the texts we Christians believe in. But this doesn't necessarily mean that the texts you believe in are not corrupt. Perhaps none of us knows the fullness of Jesus' gospel; after all, it's pretty hard to put the word of God into human terms.

God spoke to the prophet Malachi and said that in the last days he would send Elijah to set everything straight. Perhaps the true gospel-- the eternal gospel-- is still to come. But until that time, I am content with what I know, knowing that I still don't understand all of what's been given to me. Love God and love your neighbour seem simple enough concepts, but in real life they are much harder to apply than one might think.

[Bandit]

I am seeing the gospel as being the good news of the death burial and resurrection of Jesus.

Death - repentance
Burial - water baptism
Ressurection- indwelling of the spirit of God

I see these 3 basic keys taught many times by Jesus and many times later by the Apostles. Starting with Peter, whom Jesus gave the keys to the Kingdom.

[Friend]

Thanks to all for these informative information

[InChristAlways]

quote Marsh post #47:............ The gospel that Jesus preached-- and preaches-- has been explained very well several times by several people in this thread, namely Faithfulservant and Quahom 1. So I'm not going to address this question per se.

Instead, I would like to direct your attention to one book that should have been included in this discussion long ago, but (interestingly enough) has been avoided: The Revelation of Jesus Christ...........

One of the most fascinating books in the NT, but it is only addressed to those that "follow the Lamb" wherever he goes along with the mention of the type/shadows of the good thing to come.

The Camp--The Court--The Tabernacle--The Brazen Altar--The Laver-- The Table--The Lampstand--The Golden Altar--The Mercy Seat and Ark--The Gate--The First Veil--The Second Veil--The Significance of These and Their Antitypes.

At the very outset the book is addressed to a peculiar class of people: "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to show unto His servants things which must shortly come to pass" (Rev. 1:1).

Reve 14:4 These are the ones who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These were redeemed from [among] men, [being] firstfruits to God and to the Lamb.

I did a lenghthy article here on it for those interested:

http://newjerusalemministriesboards....read.php?t=180

[mee]

Originally Posted by Friend

Why there are many changes of verses in the Gospels
__________________________________________________ _____________

for example
LUKE 22:70
---------------------------------------
K.J.V Then they said, "Are you the son of God? He said unto them, "You said that I am."
N.I.V They all asked, "Are you the son of God? He said, "You are right in saying I am."
L.B.V They all shouted "Then you claim you are the son of God. And He replied YES I AM."

DUET. 23:2
-----------------------------------------
K.J.V A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord.
N.I.V No one born of a forbidden marriage may enter the assembly of the Lord.
G.N.B No one born out of wedlock may be included among the Lord's people

HEBREW 12:8
-----------------------------------------
K.J.V Then you are *******S, and not sons.
R.S.V Then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
G.N.B It means you are not real sons, but *******S.
L.B.V It means that you are not God's son at all.
JOB 13:15
-------------------------------------------
K.J.V Though he slay me yet I trust him.
R.S.V He will slay me, I have no hope.
G.N.B I've lost all hope so what if God kills me.
L.B.V God may kill me for saying this-in fact, I expect him to.

PSALMS 2:7
-------------------------------------------
K.J.V David said, "God said to me: You are my son, this day I have begotten you.
N.I.V David said, "God said to me: You are my son today I have become your father.(The N.I.V revisers analyzed that the word begotten should not be attributed toboth David, and Jesus, while Jesus should be the only begotten son of God asJohn 3:16 proclaims.

Yet by this modification of this verse -as well as others-they attract the attention of the people how the false pen of the SCRIBES change the word of God as Jeremiah 8:8 proclaimed.)

LEVITICUS 15:20
-------------------------------------------
K.J.V And everything that she lies upon in her separation shall be unclean.
R.S.V And everything upon which she lies in her impurity shall be unclean.
L.B.V Anything she lies on sits on during that time shall be defiled.

BETWEEN ACTS 9:3 AND ACTS 22:9
----------------------------------------------
K.J.V They saw the light, but they heard not the voice.
N.I.V They saw the light, but they did not understand the voice.(The reason behind the change in this verse is because of the contradictionbetween Act. 9:3 and Act. 22:9 which they attempted to cover. you find thatmodification in the N.I.V.)

ANOTHER ADDITION IN G.N.B.
--------------------------------------------
G.N.B The women went to Peter and his friends, and gave a brief account of all they had been told.
R.S.V Does not exist
N.I.V Does not exist
K.J.V Does not exist .

At this they all said: "Are you, therefore, the Son of God?" He said to them: "YOU yourselves are saying that I am. luke 22;70 NWT

No illegitimate son may come into the congregation of Jehovah. DEUT 23;2 NWT

But if YOU are without the discipline of which all have become partakers, YOU are really illegitimate children, and not sons. HEBREWS 12;8 NWT

Even if he would slay me, would I not wait

Or, "I would not wait," M; MmarginTSyVg, "for him I would wait." ,,JOB 13;15

Let me refer to the decree of Jehovah;


He has said to me: "You are my son;

I, today, I have become your father PSALM 2;7 NWT

And anything upon which she may lie down in her menstrual impurity will be unclean LEVITICUS 15;20 NWT

Now as he was traveling he approached Damascus, when suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him ACTS 9;3 NWT

Now the men that were with me beheld, indeed, the light but did not hear

(Or, "hear understandingly," as Paul did in vs 7)

the voice of the one speaking to me ACTS 22;9 NWT I MUST HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO I DONT KNOW WHY I HAVE QUOTED THESE VERSES ..SILLY ME .