ان الإنجيل كما نعلم ليس إنجيل واحد بل هو عدة اناجيل ولم يكتبه عيسى عليه السلام بل

وقد وقع فيه الوضع والتحري وفقد قدسية كونه كتاب منزل من الله تعالى على نبيه عيسى عليه السلام تلاميذ وكل حسب رؤياه

لا يوجد دليل على ان الانجبل غير مزور لان الموجود حاليا ليس انجيل واحد بل اناجيل عدة كتبت حسب رغبات رجال الدين المسيحي

What do you mean by "forging"?

Jesus gave His gospel to the twelve disciples and seven women during the forty days between his Resurrection and Ascension. He did not write His gospel himself. That was the only time He mentioned the Plan of Salvation and the "mysteries" which allow faithful Christians to ascend to the highest heaven. See TinyURL.com/EarlyChristianityVideo

Hiba, hello I am pleased to meet you. There is no evidence to prove there is no forgery because some of the books were written by secretaries. There was a named they called secretaries back then, I have forgotten what it is, but Paul had a secretary, Jeremiah had a secretary , The Gospel of John was not written by John but students of John. Peter seemingly had a secretary. One cannot interpret or settle issues that concern factual matters by an appeal to prayer or the illumination of the Holy Spirit. One must know history, the culture, the dates, etc. One cannot know through prayer that Baal was a fertility god worshipped by the Canaanites or that the Jews of Jesus's day regarded Samaritans as hated half-breeds. One cannot determine the identity of the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:1-4 or the "spirits in prison" in 1 Peter 3:18-22 simply by reading and rereading these texts in a prayerful and humble way. One must study history and culture to discover the nature of the "high place" at Bethel (2 Kings 23:15) and the "head coverings" in first-century Corinth. Want to say more, but don't want to bore you.

To forge is intentionally to deceive, unless you wish to redefine the word. Forgery is almost always proved with reference to a forged document, and since we have no 'original' texts, it would be quite impossible to prove or disprove forgery. If you question relates to whether the gospels are factually true, what can be said with some certainty is that they represent the memories of those who followed him and wrote them, along with their impressions of Jesus and who he was or is. You ask, 'where is Jesus' gospel', to which the answer is that it is in the words of those who followed him and believed on him. He himself did not write a gospel. Returning to the question of forgery, the writers of the gospels had no intention to deceive, nor any need to do so, having a wonderful and true story to tell. Their aim was to spread the word that they had heard from Jesus.

You can always tell if witnesses are deceivers if they all have a different story. The first three Gospels are called Synoptics because they basically agree on specific healings, miracles, and parables that was told. I learned in The New Testament Survey at Liberty's Online School that Matthew wrote his Gospel basically for the Jewish nation. He wrote it in Hebrew. Evidently he did not expect it to be used in the Bible canons. But Luke and Mark agrees with a lot of events that Matthew the Apostle wrote about.

Jonathan, you put it correctly and succinctly. The gospels were written by Christians using their memory of Jesus and the way of life left behind by the early disciples.

Dear Hiba,

I think you may be asking whether the Bible is actually inspired by God and therefore free from error. Is this correct?

You may appreciate reading the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on the Inspiration of the Bible: . There is a very simple summary here:

Brother Andre Marie, M.I.C.M., researched the question of Biblical Inerrancy in an article here: The conclusion in the last sentence, but is amply supported in the text.

I hope this helps.

Thoughts on the possibility of forging, taken to mean a deliberate attempt to falsify the origin and content of a document...this will only be possible to verify or falsify based on the available standards of reliability at that time in history. It seems that intent would be a huge factor to consider when questioning forgery. There has to be a motive or reason to do a forgery and usually the inherent quality of such a document would expose it to be a counterfeit. Textual critics are the experts in this area of manuscript veracity/truthfulness.

Considering the risks to life and property by the authorities (civil and religious), for any person who claimed to worship a messiah who was raised to life after three days (the core claim of the Christian Gospel), it would be a very high risk and people will not knowingly give up their life for a lie.

Your non-religious source, if you consider all religious sources suspect, would be the writings of the Roman historian, Josephus.

After reading the Josephus account you may appeal to your own logic to reason that falsification or distortion of such an event would generate a push-back by those who knew the eye witnesses. Experts in historical criticism can weigh in on this more precisely. There were pseudo gospels during that time which were exposed and disqualified by the Church Fathers and Church councils much closer in time to the historicity of the events of the Gospel in question.

Others with much greater knowledge on this can give a much more thorough answer.

As well as Josephus, the Jewish historian, there is also Pliny the Younger who sent important information about the "superstitious" Christians to his uncle, Pliny the Elder who was a Roman ambassador.

With respect to all opinions.

I mean.

Are the writings and texts contained in the Bible are true writings have been written about the tongue of the Prophet Jesus.

Or she was expressing the views of her book.

I requested that this be confirmed with conclusive evidence.

But unfortunately no one has given me a guide yet.

With my appreciation and respect for all.

Hiba, I think that Lauren, answered your question. The gospels were written by Christians who was using their memory of Jesus and that of the Apostles. Matthew was an Apostle, Mark was a follower of Peter, Luke wrote what the early disciples said. The gospel of John was not written by John but by his students. This is still what an Apostle said. To read more about the Synoptics and the Gospel of John I suggest reading the second edition of The New Testament: Its Background And Message by Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black. They are very good in explaining the Synoptics and the Gospel of John.

This means that Christians have no evidence that the Bible is not distorted.

And that the writings written by the disciples of Christ had been misrepresented during the transfer.

With respect and appreciation.

Hello Hiba, I am going to try to help you. 2 Peter 1:20-21 NLT says, " Above all, you must understand that no prophecy in Scripture ever came from the prophets themselves or because they wanted to prophesy. It was the Holy Spirit who moved the prophets to speak from God." And he moves the believers today to speak from God too Hiba. The message we get from our Pastor every Sunday morning is a message from God. Paul says that all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works", (2 Timothy 3:16-17). God inspires the believers to deliver his words to men and women so that they will know what God require of them in order to be with him in heaven. Deuteronomy 29:29 says, "The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: But those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." Hiba if God did not want us to follow what he is speaking in his words by the believers he would have kept them secret, but he revealed the law to us in Scriptures. It is up to us to accept them and obey them. I hope I help you Hiba. You need a friend who is a believer who will show you the truths of God words.

You need to specify what proof you would accept. There is no proof positive about any scripture in any tradition. The fact that a tradition has a firm belief or tradition that a particular text is authentic does not constitute truth. This is so of all texts. For example, in terms of history, there is no proof that the histories written by Caesar are accurate, because there is no way to go back to check. Neither do we have the text in his handwriting to verify. All scripture, in all traditions, is verified by the fact that a religious tradition has used them from earliest times, and also by the fact that their teaching is found to be true in the practice of believers. There is no proof of scripture in any tradition that is separate from the believing community.

So you need to say what you would accept as 'proof', and what you consider to be 'proof' in any other tradition.

There is no proof - either that there was or was not "forgery." Also, the notion of "forgery" is a 20th/21st century construct.

During pre-literary times, much information was passed on verbally and narratives tend to "evolve" as they are shared and shaped into a single narrative.

Good Christian theologians and scholars admit that the gospels were written by human beings in history and can be studied as such. They are also inspired by the Holy Spirit which always works through fallible people. Unlike Islam which teaches a theory of divine inspiration which does not acknowledge the role of the human, yes I repeat, HUMAN author, something which seems far fetched to a Christian theologian, at least this one.

They may be verified much in the same way that evidences are verified in law courts. Some popularly helpful books are Josh McDowell’s Evidence that Demands a Verdict and Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ. The canonicity criteria in determining which gospels are aunthentic is very strong. It helps to discern the true gospels from the forged ones like the gospel of Barnabas and the gospel of Mary. Here is a link to one useful article on the topic https://bible.org/seriespage/canonicity

"This means that Christians have no evidence that the Bible is not distorted.

And that the writings written by the disciples of Christ had been misrepresented during the transfer.

With respect and appreciation."

Your conclusion indicates that you were not asking a serious, sincere question, "with respect and appreciation." Or maybe you don't realize how negative such words as "distorted" and "misrepresented" are. Or that "the Bible" is not solely a "Christian" collection, and that the gospels are just four books in a collection of 66 books (in the Christian-established canon).

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that your question was asked in ignorance of the negativity of how you asked it, and responding to your question with respect ... Let's start with a discussion of "truth" vs. "evidence" or "facts." The Bible seeks to examine truth, especially the truth of the relationship of God to humanity. That is different from the kind of "facts" we encounter in journalism or contemporary history. The most important approach to understanding the Old Testament and New Testament, including the gospels, is to look for answers to "why," not "how."

Why does Jesus say, "Love one another as I have loved you," not, "were these Jesus's exact words?"

As other commenters have said, we don't have the sayings of Jesus in his own handwriting. We're not even sure that he could write. We don't have a book in the New Testament that claims Jesus's authorship.

If you want a discussion about the sources of the gospels in the Bible, I recommend Funk, Robert; Hoover, Roy W.; and The Jesus Seminar. The Five Gospels: The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. 1993.) The Jesus Seminar is a collaborative group of scholars seeking to determine what could be considered accurate quotes of what Jesus said. But even this group doesn't say that the rest of the sayings in the gospels are therefore invalid or "forgeries."

Gospel writers wrote their impressions of what Jesus said and did. Sometimes these impressions were from eye witnesses, but most often they were related by word of mouth, passed down orally before being written down. The earliest gospel in the canon, the gospel of Mark was probably written in 66-70 C.E. (A.D.), more than 30 years after Jesus's life, death and resurrection. The "fifth gospel" mentioned in the book by the Jesus Seminar is the book of Thomas, which some scholars believe was written before Mark. It is simply a catalogue of Jesus's sayings, with little or no connecting narrative of his actions.

Much of the rest of the New Testament (the "Christian" part of the Bible) consists of letters, many from Paul or from his followers, to groups of Christians around the Roman-occupied Middle East. Christianity gets a lot of its theology from Paul and his interpretation of the significance of Jesus. Paul makes more claims for Jesus as Son of God than Jesus is quoted saying in any of the gospels (except possibly the gospel of John, which was written well after the letters written by Paul.)

The most important approach to understanding the Old Testament and New Testament, including the gospels, is to look for answers to "why," not "how." Why did Paul and the other letter writers write what they did and why did their audience save those letters? Why did the gospel writers begin to write accounts of Jesus's life, sayings, death and resurrection? What were they inspired to convey to the rest of us?

What do you mean by "distorted"? Distorted from what? The gospels are stories of faith, not proof texts.

Hello

I would like to tell a few points:

1. Write in english

2. Respect the Bible

3. If you are not Christian how can you criticized the Holy Bible or Jesus live

Best regards

Ingrid