Mark 13:10

[JustTheFacts]

No, I just want you to present the evidence; something you seem very reluctant to do.


I've given it to you

You tell me that early church fathers said so and call it evidence. Origen won't laugh at that because I'm certain, like you, he has never had to deal with evidence. I gave you the process on how you can figure out Nicodemus is the author and even offered to help you do the analysis, but you are clueless on how to proceed and you keep asking for evidence. I provided the analysis proving that Matthew 16:17-19 is an edit by false teachers and you have no comment. I separately posted the analysis proving that there is no seven year tribulation specified in Daniel, and you want evidence.

 

[Stephen]

You tell me that early church fathers said so and call it evidence.

Yes it is evidence.
We could ague about the quality of the evidence but it is evidence.

Origen won't laugh at that because I'm certain, like you, he has never had to deal with evidence.

More ad-hominens to try and disguise your failure to provide evidence.

I gave you the process on how you can figure out Nicodemus is the author and even offered to help you do the analysis, but you are clueless on how to proceed and you keep asking for evidence.

I expect you to provide evidence not a process for working anything out.
The fact is there is no evidence for your claims otherwise you would provide it.

I provided the analysis proving that Matthew 16:17-19 is an edit by false teachers and you have no comment.

Point me to the post where you did that.

I separately posted the analysis proving that there is no seven year tribulation specified in Daniel, and you want evidence.

We are not discussing Daniel or tribulations

 

[JustTheFacts]

Yes it is evidence.
We could ague about the quality of the evidence but it is evidence.

Maybe if you examined the quality of those claims like I have, you would say there's no evidence too.

More ad-hominens to try and disguise your failure to provide evidence.

If you examined what I wrote and told me why it is a failure, you would have some credibility.

I expect you to provide evidence not a process for working anything out.
The fact is there is no evidence for your claims otherwise you would provide it.

Why would I go through the trouble when you are a claimed Catholic and you haven't even examined my analysis of Matthew 16:17-19--you know, the section of Gospel that provides the foundation for your Church. Scared to find out the truth?

Point me to the post where you did that.

It's on the third page of this post.

We are not discussing Daniel or tribulations

Maybe you should after you examine Matthew.

 

[Stephen]

Maybe if you examined the quality of those claims like I have, you would say there's no evidence too.

I gave you biblical and historical evidence that Matthew was a follower of Jesus and that he wrote a gospel.

You have given me no evidence that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus or that he wrote a gospel.

If you examined what I wrote and told me why it is a failure, you would have some credibility.

What you wrote was an failure because it does not address the issue of whether Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus or wrote a gospel.

Why would I go through the trouble when you are a claimed Catholic and you haven't even examined my analysis of Matthew 16:17-19--you know, the section of Gospel that provides the foundation for your Church. Scared to find out the truth?

Matthew 16:17-18 is not the issue I am discussing with you.
I'm asking for any evidence that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus and/or wrote a gospel

It's on the third page of this post.

Maybe you should after you examine Matthew.

Which post - please be more specific

 

[JustTheFacts]

I gave you biblical and historical evidence that Matthew was a follower of Jesus and that he wrote a gospel.

You have given me no evidence that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus or that he wrote a gospel.
What you wrote was an failure because it does not address the issue of whether Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus or wrote a gospel.

You can't even find the information about Nicodemus in the Bible, how could I ever possibly explain how he wrote the Gospel.

Which post - please be more specific

Where is my Origen laugh when I need it?

 

[Stephen]

You can't even find the information about Nicodemus in the Bible, how could I ever possibly explain how he wrote the Gospel.

No need to descend to insults. They don't help your points.
Of course I can find information about Nicodemus in the Bible but none of it says that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus or that he wrote a gospel.
I'm still waiting for your evidence that:
1. Nicodemus wrote the gospel according to Matthew (or any gospel)
2. Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus.

So stop prevaricating and present it.

 

[JustTheFacts]

No need to descend to insults. They don't help your points.

Of course I can find information about Nicodemus in the Bible but none of it says that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus or that he wrote a gospel.

Insults? A man who went to Jesus at night to learn about him, stuck up for him when his fellow Pharisees were plotting against Jesus, then helped another man who was a stated disciple of Jesus take and entomb Jesus body, was surely a disciples.

I'm still waiting for your evidence that:
1. Nicodemus wrote the gospel according to Matthew (or any gospel)
2. Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus.

So stop prevaricating and present it.

I know that the Catholics are used to having your priest, bishops, cardinals and even the pope do all your Bible work, but maybe it's time that you opened and studied the Bible for yourself. I gave you the analysis of Matthew 16:18 that will help point you away from Matthew and to Nicodemus, but you will reject anything that points away from Matthew and to Nicodemus because it puts your Catholic faith in jeopardy. BTW, it won't be your Catholic faith that gets you into heaven, it will be your faith in Jesus. I know Origen won't like this comment either.

 

[Origen]

I know Origen won't like this comment either.

 

[JustTheFacts]

View attachment 2154

You hit the wrong one button reaction Origen? BTW, can you give me an example of Exegesis and how it differs from the opinions of theology? Serious question.

 

[Stephen]

Insults? A man who went to Jesus at night to learn about him, stuck up for him when his fellow Pharisees were plotting against Jesus, then helped another man who was a stated disciple of Jesus take and entomb Jesus body, was surely a disciples.

Still dodging.
Still no evidence that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus.
Still no evidence that Nicodemus wrote a gospel

I know that the Catholics are used to having your priest, bishops, cardinals and even the pope do all your Bible work, but maybe it's time that you opened and studied the Bible for yourself.

More insults.

I gave you the analysis of Matthew 16:18 that will help point you away from Matthew and to Nicodemus, but you will reject anything that points away from Matthew and to Nicodemus because it puts your Catholic faith in jeopardy. BTW, it won't be your Catholic faith that gets you into heaven, it will be your faith in Jesus. I know Origen won't like this comment either.

Point me to this analysis to "points me away from Matthew to Nicodemus.
By point I mean the exact post number - not more vague look in the thread.

You call yourself JustTheFacts but you produce no fact show that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus. That may be your opinion but it's not a fact.
Yes he snuck in under the cover of darkness so no-one would know.
That's not following Jesus.
Now Matthew: "As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax office; and he said to him, “Follow me.” And he rose and followed him". (Mt 9:9) - see also Luke 5:27-28.

Matthew, Mark and Luke all list Matthew as one of the Twelve apostles. None of them mention Nicodemus being one.
Luke lists Matthew as one of the eleven apostles in the upper room. Doesn't mention Nicodemus.
The only evangelist that mentions Nicodemus is John.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Still dodging.
Still no evidence that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus.
Still no evidence that Nicodemus wrote a gospel

More insults.



Point me to this analysis to "points me away from Matthew to Nicodemus.
By point I mean the exact post number - not more vague look in the thread.

I can't spend much more time on you. So going back to #3 on this post and looking at JustTheFacts is too difficult for you to handle?

You call yourself JustTheFacts but you produce no fact show that Nicodemus was a follower of Jesus. That may be your opinion but it's not a fact.
Yes he snuck in under the cover of darkness so no-one would know.
That's not following Jesus.
Now Matthew: "As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax office; and he said to him, “Follow me.” And he rose and followed him". (Mt 9:9) - see also Luke 5:27-28.

John described Nicodemus being taught by Jesus in CHAPTER THREE of his book immediately after he addressed the importance of Jesus resurrection and Nicodemus with another "disciple" of Jesus entombed Jesus and you can't find the evidence of Nicodemus following Jesus. Not only that, Nicodemus was challenged to investigate Jesus by his fellow Pharisees and after that challenge, what was written in the Gospel of John is missing! Then you want to compare all the attention John paid to Nicodemus and you throw one line at me as proof that Matthew followed Jesus. If you read and really studied your bible you would know that the author of the Gospel of Matthew COPIED that account from the Gospel of Mark, then someone came along and changed the name.

Matthew, Mark and Luke all list Matthew as one of the Twelve apostles. None of them mention Nicodemus being one.
Luke lists Matthew as one of the eleven apostles in the upper room. Doesn't mention Nicodemus.
The only evangelist that mentions Nicodemus is John.

Yep--you got me there. Matthew, along with several other men that we know nothing about are listed as disciples. FYI, the term "apostles" was a term created by the false teachers so that others besides Jesus witnesses would be considered holy and able to speak for God. The reference to it in Mark is nonsense because it doesn't fit in with the surrounding text and Matthew has edits from false teachers to support the Catholic founder takeover of the Church. The term is referenced six times in the Gospel of Luke--the only one admittedly not written by a disciple to get you used to it, then the term "apostle" is used throughout the rest of New Testament document--a total of seventy six times--to ensure you understand that the false teachers want you to know "apostles" are just like "disciples" who testify for Jesus.

BTW, why do you ignore John to focus on lists. John lists the names of twelve too; he just didn't conveniently give you a list so that you could see that Matthew and others who we never hear about actually were disciples. The spelling out of the twelve that you reference in three or four lists was to help validate Matthew as a disciple of Jesus that authored the Gospel and promote Peter. You don't find it strange that Jesus had already selected several disciples according to John, then separately went out of his way to choose the twelve in a list? You don't think it strange that Peter is always mentioned first in that list? Peter is the special one the false teachers used to take over the CJC in accordance with Revelation 13:3 and 13:12. Peter was the only one Jesus personally told would be executed--receive a fatal wound.

I suggest you start reading the Bible as though you want to understand rather than selecting a few verses that to you prove the theology you've been taught.

 

[Stephen]

I can't spend much more time on you. So going back to #3 on this post and looking at JustTheFacts is too difficult for you to handle?

No, not too difficult to handle. I just needed to know which post you were referring to.

My comments on it will, be in my next post

John described Nicodemus being taught by Jesus in CHAPTER THREE of his book immediately after he addressed the importance of Jesus resurrection and Nicodemus with another "disciple" of Jesus entombed Jesus and you can't find the evidence of Nicodemus following Jesus.

Nicodemus came to Jesus at night. He didn’t follow Jesus.

Not only that, Nicodemus was challenged to investigate Jesus by his fellow Pharisees

John's gospel doesn't say Nicodemus was challenged to investigate Jesus.

and after that challenge, what was written in the Gospel of John is missing!

In your opinion

Then you want to compare all the attention John paid to Nicodemus

You exaggerate the attention John paid to Nicodemus

and you throw one line at me as proof that Matthew followed Jesus.

That Matthew was a follower of Jesus is in three gospels and also he was one of the twelve apostles.
Also Matthew was in the upper room after Jesus ascended into heaven (Acts 1:13)

Nicodemus is not mentioned as one of the twelve, nor was he in the upper room after Jesus ascended into heaven

If you read and really studied your bible you would know that the author of the Gospel of Matthew COPIED that account from the Gospel of Mark,

No it wasn't copied from Mark's gospel. Matthew may have used Mark as a basis for his gospel but he added much to it.
Mark's gospel is about 11,000 words
Matthew's gospel is about 18,000 words

then someone came along and changed the name.

Pure invention. You have no proof at all of that.

Yep--you got me there. Matthew, along with several other men that we know nothing about are listed as disciples. FYI, the term "apostles" was a term created by the false teachers so that others besides Jesus witnesses would be considered holy and able to speak for God.

In your opinion

The reference to it in Mark is nonsense because it doesn't fit in with the surrounding text

In your opinion

and Matthew has edits from false teachers to support the Catholic founder takeover of the Church.

In your opinion

The term is referenced six times in the Gospel of Luke--the only one admittedly not written by a disciple to get you used to it, then the term "apostle" is used throughout the rest of New Testament document--a total of seventy six times--to ensure you understand that the false teachers want you to know "apostles" are just like "disciples" who testify for Jesus.

In your opinion

BTW, why do you ignore John to focus on lists. John lists the names of twelve too;

In your opinion

he just didn't conveniently give you a list so that you could see that Matthew and others who we never hear about actually were disciples. The spelling out of the twelve that you reference in three or four lists was to help validate Matthew as a disciple of Jesus that authored the Gospel and promote Peter.

In your opinion

You don't find it strange that Jesus had already selected several disciples according to John, then separately went out of his way to choose the twelve in a list?

What do you mean by that?

You don't think it strange that Peter is always mentioned first in that list?

No

Peter is the special one the false teachers used to take over the CJC in accordance with Revelation 13:3 and 13:12.

In your opinion

Peter was the only one Jesus personally told would be executed--receive a fatal wound.

Peter has nothing to do with Rev 13:3 and 13:12.

 

[Stephen]

You have chosen to believe the list in Mark but you ignore John’s summary of twelve disciples.

John didn't list the twelve apostles

Why did John present Nicodemus in Chapter 3?

Why not?er 3

Why did Jesus provide the most powerful verse in all of scripture to Nicodemus?

In your opinion

Nicodemus was challenged to investigate Jesus as the Messiah,

No he wasn't

and was the most written about person other than Peter and John, yet you claim he was not a disciple of Jesus.

He wasn't one of the twelve

There is no proof that Luke wrote anything and you know nothing about Luke except for a few verses written by someone who wasn’t a disciple.

The historical evidence shows that Luke wrote "The gospel according to Luke".

You are following theology—the words and opinions of people. I ignore theology and read/study the word of God. You might not like my results but you can’t prove them wrong.

Your results are full of opinions and speculation.
You offer no proof.

 

[JustTheFacts]

No, not too difficult to handle. I just needed to know which post you were referring to.

My comments on it will, be in my next post



Nicodemus came to Jesus at night. He didn’t follow Jesus.


John's gospel doesn't say Nicodemus was challenged to investigate Jesus.


In your opinion


You exaggerate the attention John paid to Nicodemus



That Matthew was a follower of Jesus is in three gospels and also he was one of the twelve apostles.
Also Matthew was in the upper room after Jesus ascended into heaven (Acts 1:13)

Nicodemus is not mentioned as one of the twelve, nor was he in the upper room after Jesus ascended into heaven

No it wasn't copied from Mark's gospel. Matthew may have used Mark as a basis for his gospel but he added much to it.
Mark's gospel is about 11,000 words
Matthew's gospel is about 18,000 words


Pure invention. You have no proof at all of that.


In your opinion

In your opinion


In your opinion


In your opinion


In your opinion


In your opinion



What do you mean by that?

No

In your opinion

Peter has nothing to do with Rev 13:3 and 13:12.

So you focus on the word follow? Matthew must have wrote the Gospel of Matthew because that book says he followed Jesus and Nicodemus did not follow Jesus because the word "follow" isn't anywhere in the extensive discussion of him by John. Do you know how narrow minded that it?

Also, I know you didn't bother to research John because John 7:52 states, "They answered him, “Are you also from Galilee? Search, and see that no prophet has arisen out of Galilee." I guess you don't see that meaning in it because it doesn't say, "challenge?" Furthermore, again you have not done your homework. My NIV study Bible claims, "“The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11)." This is not an opinion, like their statement for the author of the Gospel of Matthew that states, "“Although the first Gospel is anonymous, the early church fathers were unanimous in holding that Matthew, one of the 12 apostles, was its author." Then it goes on to state, "However, the results of modern critical studies.....have cause some Biblical scholars to abandon Matthean authorship." Do your homework.

Peter only has nothing to do with Revelation 13:3 and 13:12 because you haven't yet reviewed and found that Matthew 16:18 is fiction-it was never stated by Jesus.

 

[JustTheFacts]

John didn't list the twelve apostles

You didn't do your homework again. John lists the following as disciples:

1. John Zebedee
2. James Zebedee
3. Andrew
4. Peter
5. Philip
6. Nathanael
7. Thomas
8. Judas-not Iscariot
9. Judas Iscariot
10. Joseph of Arimathea, a secret disciple (John 19:38)
11. Cleopas—in the room as Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit into the disciples
12. Nicodemus—in the room as Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit into the disciples

Why not?er 3

Why at all? Nicodemus gets top billing!

In your opinion

So John 3:16 isn't the most repeated verse. Naw, not an opinion, a fact. And I'll neglect the rest of your trolling comments, and those of the ones you are sure to present in the future.

 

[Stephen]

So you focus on the word follow? Matthew must have wrote the Gospel of Matthew because that book says he followed Jesus and Nicodemus did not follow Jesus because the word "follow" isn't anywhere in the extensive discussion of him by John. Do you know how narrow minded that it?

If you read the gospels you will find that following Jesus is an action - leaving your job and literally following Jesus around Israel.

For example
Luke 5:11 "And when they had brought their boats to land, they [Simon, James and John] left everything and followed him".
There is no evidence that Nicodemus gave up his job and followed Jesus, only that he visited him by night.

Also, I know you didn't bother to research John because John 7:52 states, "They answered him, “Are you also from Galilee? Search, and see that no prophet has arisen out of Galilee." I guess you don't see that meaning in it because it doesn't say, "challenge?"

Actually I did do my homework. Search doesn't mean go and investigate Jesus. It's about searching scriptures for any prophet that came from Gallilee.

John 7:52

They replied, “You aren’t from the Galil too, are you? Study the Tanakh, and see for yourself that no prophet comes from the Galil!” (Complete Jewish Bible)

They answered and said to Rav Nakdimon, Surely not you also are from the Galil, are you? Search [the Kitvei Hakodesh] and see that from the Galil a Navi does not arise. (Orthodox Jewish Bible)

Then they said, “Nicodemus, you must be from Galilee! Read the Scriptures, and you will find that no prophet is to come from Galilee.” (CEV)

They answered, and said to him: Art thou also a Galilean? Search the scriptures, and see, that out of Galilee a prophet riseth not. (DRA)

They responded, “Are you also from Galilee? Search [and read the Scriptures], and see [for yourself] that no prophet comes from Galilee!” (AMP)

They answered him, “You are not from Galilee too, are you? Look it up and you will see that the prophet doesn’t come from Galilee.” (CEB)

and many other translations say similar

Furthermore, again you have not done your homework. My NIV study Bible claims, "“The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11)." This is not an opinion, like their statement for the author of the Gospel of Matthew that states, "“Although the first Gospel is anonymous, the early church fathers were unanimous in holding that Matthew, one of the 12 apostles, was its author." Then it goes on to state, "However, the results of modern critical studies.....have cause some Biblical scholars to abandon Matthean authorship." Do your homework.

I have a book on this subject which states that all the early manuscripts are titled either "The gospel according to Matthew or just "According to Matthew". The author states "no anonymous copies of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John have ever been found.

Peter only has nothing to do with Revelation 13:3 and 13:12 because you haven't yet reviewed and found that Matthew 16:18 is fiction-it was never stated by Jesus.

It is only fiction in your opinion

 

[Stephen]

You didn't do your homework again. John lists the following as disciples:

1. John Zebedee
2. James Zebedee
3. Andrew
4. Peter
5. Philip
6. Nathanael
7. Thomas
8. Judas-not Iscariot
9. Judas Iscariot
10. Joseph of Arimathea, a secret disciple (John 19:38)
11. Cleopas—in the room as Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit into the disciples
12. Nicodemus—in the room as Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit into the disciples

Just because John mentions some (not all) of them in various places it does not mean they were one of the twelve apostles.
Nowhere does John give a list of the twelve.

Why at all? Nicodemus gets top billing!

In your opinion

So John 3:16 isn't the most repeated verse. Naw, not an opinion, a fact.

You cannot prove it therefore it's your opinion; not a fact.

And I'll neglect the rest of your trolling comments, and those of the ones you are sure to present in the future.

Not trolling. Just pointing out that your have a lot of opinions not facts.

 

[JustTheFacts]

If you read the gospels you will find that following Jesus is an action - leaving your job and literally following Jesus around Israel.

For example
Luke 5:11 "And when they had brought their boats to land, they [Simon, James and John] left everything and followed him".
There is no evidence that Nicodemus gave up his job and followed Jesus, only that he visited him by night.



Actually I did do my homework. Search doesn't mean go and investigate Jesus. It's about searching scriptures for any prophet that came from Gallilee.

John 7:52

They replied, “You aren’t from the Galil too, are you? Study the Tanakh, and see for yourself that no prophet comes from the Galil!” (Complete Jewish Bible)

They answered and said to Rav Nakdimon, Surely not you also are from the Galil, are you? Search [the Kitvei Hakodesh] and see that from the Galil a Navi does not arise. (Orthodox Jewish Bible)

Then they said, “Nicodemus, you must be from Galilee! Read the Scriptures, and you will find that no prophet is to come from Galilee.” (CEV)

They answered, and said to him: Art thou also a Galilean? Search the scriptures, and see, that out of Galilee a prophet riseth not. (DRA)

They responded, “Are you also from Galilee? Search [and read the Scriptures], and see [for yourself] that no prophet comes from Galilee!” (AMP)

They answered him, “You are not from Galilee too, are you? Look it up and you will see that the prophet doesn’t come from Galilee.” (CEB)

and many other translations say similar

Nicodemus would have to investigate to see if 1. Jesus was born in Galilee, 2. Search the scriptures to see if that is a requirement, and 3. See if Jesus is actually a prophet from God. That would be a thorough investigation, with the end result, Jesus is either from God or he isn't.

I have a book on this subject which states that all the early manuscripts are titled either "The gospel according to Matthew or just "According to Matthew". The author states "no anonymous copies of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John have ever been found.

You have a book, so it must be true? So that author of your book says he has a manuscript proven to be written by Matthew? I haven't heard of this before so please share the details with me. That is a serious request.

It is only fiction in your opinion

I'm not going to address your claims of me providing opinions when you haven't looked over any of my analysis and conclusions and questioned anything.

 

[Stephen]

Nicodemus would have to investigate to see if 1. Jesus was born in Galilee,

Not true. They knew Jesus came from Galilee

2. Search the scriptures to see if that is a requirement

A requirement for what?

3. See if Jesus is actually a prophet from God.

The point is that they reckon no prophet ever came out of Galilee.

That would be a thorough investigation, with the end result, Jesus is either from God or he isn't.

They didn't ask for a thorough investigation. They just asked Nicodemus if a prophet ever came out of Galilee (implication that Jesus could not be a prophet).

You have a book, so it must be true? So that author of your book says he has a manuscript proven to be written by Matthew? I haven't heard of this before so please share the details with me.

I didn't suggest that the author had a manuscript. You seem to be having reading problems.

That is a serious request.

Meaning all your other requests have been jokes? That would explain a lot.

I'm not going to address your claims of me providing opinions when you haven't looked over any of my analysis and conclusions and questioned anything.

You never do, so no change there

 

[JustTheFacts]

Just because John mentions some (not all) of them in various places it does not mean they were one of the twelve apostles.
Nowhere does John give a list of the twelve.

Just because John doesn’t provide them in a list doesn’t mean they aren’t disciples. You are choosing what to believe and you have chosen to believe the lists even though they contradict John and each other.

In your opinion


You cannot prove it therefore it's your opinion; not a fact.




Not trolling. Just pointing out that your have a lot of opinions not facts.

You could claim that if you provided data and facts to back you up but you have provided none.