Do you know that Mark and Luke are not named among the twelve apostles?
444902
Hi there,\n\nThe apostles are listed in Matthew 10:2 "These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him."\n\nJudas Iscariot is replaced by Matthias in Acts 1:23-26.\n\nMark is understood to be the sidekick or secretary of Peter. This is why his Gospel is included, as it contains information of an eyewitness (Peter), even though the author themselves may not have been one of the twelve. This however, does not mean they were not necessarily there.\n\nLuke makes it known that his account is compiled from an investigation of the events. (Luke 1:1-4)\n\nLuke is also the author of the book of Acts (or The Acts of the Apostles). Although written mainly in the third person, Luke makes it known that we was present at the events starting from Luke 16:10 by using the word "we" instead of "they".\n\nAs a bit of trivia, Luke appears to have written Luke and Acts as one volume, to the same audience, a person referred to as Theophilus (Luke 1:1, Acts 1:1).
917725
Nothing is really known about Jesus, including whether he actually existed.  All the stuff written about him was written decades after he supposedly died.
563690
The word "disciple" refers to a "learner" or "follower." The word "apostle" refers to "one who is sent out." While Jesus was on earth, the twelve were called disciples. The 12 disciples followed Jesus Christ, learned from Him, and were trained by Him. After Jesus' resurrection and ascension, Jesus sent the disciples out (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8) to be His witnesses. They were then referred to as the twelve apostles. However, even when Jesus was still on earth, the terms disciples and apostles were used somewhat interchangeably.\n\n \n\nThe original twelve disciples / apostles are listed in Matthew 10:2-4, "These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him." The Bible also lists the 12 disciples / apostles in Mark 3:16-19 and Luke 6:13-16. In comparing the three passages, there are a couple of minor differences in the names. It seems that Thaddaeus was also know as "Judas, son of James" (Luke 6:16) and Lebbaeus (Matthew 10:3 - NKJV & KJV). Simon the Zealot was also known as Simon the Canaanite (Mark 3:18 - NKJV & KJV). Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus, was replaced in the twelve apostles by Matthias (see Acts 1:20-26). Some Bible teachers view Matthias as an "invalid" member of the 12 apostles, and instead believe that the Apostle Paul was God's choice to replace Judas Iscariot as the twelfth apostle.\n\n \n\nThe twelve disciples / apostles were ordinary men whom God used in an extraordinary manner. Among the 12 were fishermen, a tax collector, and a revolutionary. The Gospels record the constant failings, struggles, and doubts of these twelve men who followed Jesus Christ. After witnessing Jesus' resurrection and ascension into Heaven, the Holy Spirit transformed the disciples / apostles into powerful men of God who "turned the world upside down" (Acts 17:6). What was the change? The 12 apostles / disciples had "been with Jesus" (Acts 4:13). May the same be said of us!
12933
Gaspar, Melchior, and Balthasar. But these names do not actually appear in the Bible.
493391
To pink_maltese8, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not all apostles. Matthew and John were, but Luke was not and Mark was a disciple of peter and wrote down the teachings of Peter but never actually sat under Christs teachings. I am not trying to be mean but you obviously attend church because that is where you find the most people that know very little about the Bible yet think they have it down pat.\n\nRegarding the question: I would think that you are referring to the Catholics and JW's but I may not know your thinking. My personal opinion is that if they have a religious denominational name then they probably aren't Christians at all. There are very few Christians involved in any type of religion, the true believers won't tolerate the lies spewed from the pulpits. "come out of her my people".\n\nJoin the Revolution\nReject Religion\nTurn to Christ
57242
<">Jesus had both 1/2 brothers and sisters. no record that I know of exist of what any of his sisters reported.\nHis brother James did write one of the epistles.\nThere is of course only one Jesus
343163
I am pretty sure that the Bible does not refer to Jesus being "PWN3DZ0R'D"!
508860
Allow me to rephrase.. Yes it changes the meaning. But ((why)) are such things in the bible when we know they were added later? But there are more verses which were added (the NIV indicates them in footnotes). So, if such things were added, then who knows what else was added or removed?\n\nBTW, do you know about the "Secret Gospel of Mark"? This is a gem indeed. It answers the difficulty of Mark 10:46 (ie. what happened at Jericho?) and demonstrates nicely how they removed things they didn't like ;)
579042
No. We are imperfect. Jesus did gave a report regarding the church eras up to the start of the tribulation. See it here... http://tinyurl.com/nyjzb
939916
Intersting that the only reference cited outside the bible is Josefus, who never mentioned Jesus. Any reference to Jesus in his writing was added 1000 years later by other 'christians 'trying to strengthen their arguement.\n\nGreenleaf may have decided that the story was real but I don't believe that it would stand up in court. It would be interesting to look at his background.
846087
I would assume it is ascribed to Joseph of Aramathea,  the rich man who Jesus body was buried in... according to Isaiah 53... He would counted with criminals but with a rich man in his death\n\nproblem with allot of the lost gospels  is they claim big names for credibility doesnt go allong with the humility of the other books...\n\nconsider.. Matthew the tax collector, Mark the guy who abandoned Paul on a mission trip  or Luke the gentile... notice except for the gospel of John the longest living apostle..  the rest were not big name people...  and even the apostle John doesnt name himself in the book leaving himself as 'the unamed disciple who Jesus loved'  and even the genilte Dr Luke doesnt name himself ever eitehr out of humility\n\nthe last 'new' gospel the gospel of Judas  was known for 30 years  and ignored because  there was only 1 copy and about 2 centuries late...  if it werent for the Da Vinc that Stol Easter movie  (aka Davinci code)  it would get no attention\n\nthis is proabbly the same
271234
mohammed is not mentioned by name in the bible because he came many centuries after the bible was written.  jesus' name is in the qu'ran because it was written by mohammed several centuries after jesus' death.
877013
True, and it is what I've been saying all along. When I was a Christian, I still didn't believe in the letters of Paul. Was it not the prophets of the ancient times that brought laws and the word of G-d through revelation (ie. a burning bush, the direct voice of G-d)? Then years later, the "new" testament is revealed through letters and secondary sources written by people who weren't even there.  Another great point, thanks for the question.
1084031
All well and fine but I think you may be getting your Marys mixed up.  I believe that there may be two separate Marys.  Mary Magdalene: the forgiven prostitute and Mary the sister of Martha and Lazarus of whom Jesus was a close friend. Cross reference various commentaries and see if this may be correct.
94503
Paul wrote the most of the letters  in the New Testiment.  I do not believe he had anything to do with any of the Gospels!
1080723
I know and to be a gospel it had to be written by one of the disciples or their assistant.  The gos[pel of Thomas, Judas etc, were NOT written by them.  The stuff that people will believe!
924598
No, Jesus is referred to as the second Adam.  See 1 Cor 15:45.