There are Actually Five Gospels

[rockytopva]

"There are five Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and the Christian. Most people will never read the first four." - Gipsy Smith

 

[daq]

Haha, I thought you were going to add the "Gospel of Paul" and was going to say they are the same.
However, with the information you have quoted, I cannot say what I would have said. :)

 

[Mungo]

Some people call the "Servant Songs" in Isaiah a fifth gospel.

Is 42:1-4, 49:1-6, 50:4-9 & Is 52:13 to end chap 53

http://www.abideinchrist.com/messages/isa42v1.html

 

[empowered2love]

Haha. I thought you were going to go into "Gospel Q", an alleged source for the synoptic gospels. Personally, I think scholars invented the idea this gospel to explain why the gospels are so incredibly similar. I think they're so similar because they were all written by the Holy Spirit. When we have a God who can do the impossible, the disciples don't need to copy off other writings to have similar content.

But anyway, I love how light hearted you made this discussion :) It can be so easy to get all caught up in a heated argument.

 

[clark thompson]

the Lord uses me to write my gospel all the time if I stsy out of His way. It is often refered to our testimony.

 

[zhavoney]

There are actually Five written eye witness accounts of the Gospel of Christ. Matthew, John, Peter, Jude and James. Mark was a second Generation Christian who wrote his account from what Paul and those who He met told Him. Luke was a fourth generation book keeper who lived in 160 AD in the time of Theophilus The Patriarch of Antioch.

Luke copied His account of the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles from Matthew and other documents whitch did not make it through to this day

 

[BLACK SHEEP]

Luke was a fourth generation book keeper who lived in 160 AD in the time of Theophilus The Patriarch of Antioch.

Luke copied His account of the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles from Matthew and other documents whitch did not make it through to this day

How did you come up with that?

Luke was a physician who traveled with Paul and went with him on his missionary journey to Troas. He also wrote the book of Acts. My bible dates his gospel in A.D. 60.
Are we talking about the same Luke? I thought maybe you made a mistake on the date but you didn't.

 

[zhavoney]

How did you come up with that?

Luke was a physician who traveled with Paul and went with Paul on his missionary journey in Troas and he wrote the book of Acts. My bible dates his gospel in A.D. 60.
Are we talking about the same Luke? I thought maybe you made a mistake on the date but you didn't.

Read what I wrote again. The Luke who traveled with Paul did not live in the time of Theophilus the Patriarch of Antioch. Also if The Luke who wrote an account of the Gospel to Theophilus would have been with Paul, Paul would have rebuked him for adding the Greek mythalogy into the gospel.

 

[BLACK SHEEP]

Read what I wrote again. The Luke who traveled with Paul did not live in the time of Theophilus the Patriarch of Antioch. Also if The Luke who wrote an account of the Gospel to Theophilus would have been with Paul, Paul would have rebuked him for adding the Greek mythalogy into the gospel.

I read your reply several times prior to my post and I still don't understand you.

The Luke who traveled with Paul did not live in the time of Theophilus the Patriarch of Antioch.

That's pretty much common sense.

Explain this with more than a few sentences. What Luke are you talking about that was a fourth generation book keeper? And what does this "Luke" have to do with the gospels?

 

[zhavoney]

I read your reply several times prior to my post and I still don't understand you.

That's pretty much common sense.

Explain this with more than a few sentences. What Luke are you talking about that was a fourth generation book keeper? And what does this "Luke" have to do with the gospels?

Luke 1
1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us,
2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us,
3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus,

Acts 1
1 The former account I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
Luke 1 KJV
1 For as much as many have taken in
Luke 1 KJV
1 For as much as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

Luke is the only writer who boasts of himself perfect understanding.

The book of Luke and the acts are addressed to Theophilus the patriarch of Antioch. he is given a royal Greek greeting by Luke. "Most Excellent Theophilus"

 

[BLACK SHEEP]

Like I said you are one of the most ambiguous poster I've ever seen on a forum.

First you said this,

Luke was a fourth generation book keeper who lived in 160 AD in the time of Theophilus The Patriarch of Antioch.

Then this...

Luke copied His account of the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles from Matthew and other documents whitch did not make it through to this day

Then this...

"Read what I wrote again. The Luke who traveled with Paul did not live in the time of Theophilus the Patriarch of Antioch. Also if The Luke who wrote an account of the Gospel to Theophilus would have been with Paul, Paul would have rebuked him for adding the Greek mythalogy into the gospel. "

Then you said this...

1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us,
2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us,
3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus,
Acts 1
1 The former account I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
Luke 1 KJV
1 For as much as many have taken in
Luke 1 KJV
1 For as much as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luke is the only writer who boasts of himself perfect understanding.
You never explained what you meant here...
Luke was a fourth generation book keeper who lived in 160 AD in the time of Theophilus The Patriarch of Antioch.
Luke copied His account of the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles from Matthew and other documents whitch did not make it through to this day.

You're contradicting yourself! Am I wasting my time with you? Are you just playing games?
EXPLAIN YOURSELF! If you don't get real about this I'm giving up on you!

 

[zhavoney]

Like I said you are one of the most ambiguous poster I've ever seen on a forum.

First you said this,

Then this...



Then this...



Then you said this...




You're contradicting yourself! Am I wasting my time with you? Are you just playing games?
EXPLAIN YOURSELF! If you don't get real about this I'm giving up on you!

"O" I see. You are giving up on me? Luke addressed the books of Luke and Acts to Theophilus who lived in 160 AD.

 

[BLACK SHEEP]

"O" I see. You are giving up on me? Luke addressed the books of Luke and Acts to Theophilus who lived in 160 AD.

I didn't say I gave up on you. I said,

If you don't get real about this (debate) I'm giving up on you!...And you aren't!

You aren't being at all conducive to a good debate.
So I am giving up on you.
I've been on several forums for over ten years now and quite honestly I can tell you that I've never seen anybody like you!

But first I have to reply about this major blunder of yours.

You said,

Luke addressed the books of Luke and Acts to Theophilus who lived in 160 AD.

That's crazy! How can someone address a book to someone who exist 100 years in the future?
Theophilus was mentioned in two places. Luke 1 and Acts 1.

Acts 1:1 ¶The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

How can someone who existed to give commandments to the apostles that he chose in A.D. 60 exist again in A.D.160? Not sure but he may have been dead! (or translated I suppose??)

 

[zhavoney]

I didn't say I gave up on you. I said,

If you don't get real about this (debate) I'm giving up on you!...And you aren't!

You aren't being at all conducive to a good debate.
So I am giving up on you.
I've been on several forums for over ten years now and quite honestly I can tell you that I've never seen anybody like you!

But first I have to reply about this major blunder of yours.

You said,

That's crazy! How can someone address a book to someone who exist 100 years in the future?
Theophilus was mentioned in two places. Luke 1 and Acts 1.

Acts 1:1 ¶The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

How can someone who existed to give commandments to the apostles in A.D. 60 exist again in A.D.160? He was also DEAD! (or translated I suppose??)

Because the Luke in question was a keeper of the books that were handed down to them by the eyewitnesses and He lived in the time of Theophilus the Patriarch of Antioch. It is not the Luke that followed Paul.

 

[BLACK SHEEP]

Because the Luke in question was a keeper of the books that were handed down to them by the eyewitnesses and He lived in the time of Theophilus the Patriarch of Antioch. It is not the Luke that followed Paul.

You make no sense....

 

[zhavoney]

You make no sense....

Then may God bless you with understanding.

 

[BLACK SHEEP]

Then may God bless you with understanding.

Same to you brother.

 

[aspen]

I understand what you are getting at - we are supposed to live out the four Gospels and in affect, record our own, but we need to remember that our own application and story of our justification and sanctification is private revelation, not public so it is not technically a fifth gospel.