Jesus last words?

Hey....if I were gonna die bloody on a cross....that's what I'd say.

 

Anyone got a serious answer to my question? Cause so far im still clueless.

 

As far as I know, none of the "last words" in The Bible are said to be his last words, they're just things he said before he died, so he could easily have said all three of them.

The most famous one, "My God, why have you abandoned me?" is not Jesus losing his faith, it's Jesus in hell. This line is a fundamental element of Christianity.

 

Then why did all the apostles only catch one phrase?? And didnt Jesus go to hell after He died, and then came back?

 

gospel of thomas is the only one worth reading

 

Naykid gave what i would consider a fairly good answer-i tried

but i don't think there is ever a difinitive answer with most things in the Bible

 

Ive only yet read that of Mary Magdalene and am now reading a book on the Dead Sea scrolls. Cant do everything at once.

 

you can read it in one sitting! but it may be hard to understand, and you should read numerous translations, for none of them are actually correct, but the more you read, the closer to the real words you can get

 

maybe i should have pm'ed it, but i'm just really curious....

why?


love,

 

i think that is a very weak argument. surely the saviour's last words would be recorded, not his 3rd or 4th-to-last.


love,

 

yeah

yeah

yup

i don't know, but i suspect we are being bamboozled in there somewhere.

 

I only knew of the one where he asks god why he has left him.

Which is pretty odd seeing as he is god ?

 

I think last year a new translation in Dutch was made, a book with extra information and all. I want to have it, but its 60 euro, so i guess ill just have to stick to the 2 translations i can find on the internet (one dutch, one english) for now

 

well i never really liked the icons of the past [cause we don't know what He looked like] and this just adds to it. Also all of that stuff with Jesus talking to the Devil in the gardem Mary seeing the Devil during the cross procession, and the Devil's demon kids chasin Judas...

also, i watched it way too much over easter [it was on the movie channels constantly]

i don't really have lots of reasons, but i just really don't like it

take care everyone

 

They are recorded, but only one of the gospels quotes them.

Than again, it could also depand on what the writers heard Him say.
Matthew could have stood further away than John, and Peter may have stood further away than Matthew, one only says He gave out a big yell, the other one said He yelled certain words.
See what I mean?

 

"John" wasn't there, and it's unlikely The Gospel of John was written by John (same goes for the other gospels, all of which were named centuries later and had no relevance to the authors). John, though, for sure wasn't there, because he couldn't have been alive, seeing as how it was written after 100 AD, probably around 110 or something.

 

yes, i see what you mean; it's still a very weak argument, and kind of funny. the writers were staggered and got different messages? if that were so, wouldn't the list of what jesus said go from one recorder having all of it, the 2nd having all but one, the 3rd having all but 2.. you see what i mean? and in any case, imagine if you're standing there, listening to god die. he says something that you hear, then he says something else, that you don't hear... wouldn't you go over and say, "hey, whaddidhe say?" i for one wouldn't forget the fact that he said something i didn't hear, and just write down the last words i heard.

these are jesus' followers, GOD is getting killed here, surely they'd all record god's last words equally. also, as trippinbtm has pointed out, it is extremely doubtful that the gospel of john was written by john.

not only that, but i have to point out that it's commonly believed -by christians- that only two of the gospels were written by eye witnesses, not all of them. those are matthew and john. of course, john is now considered by scholars to definitely not be an eyewitness account. but mark is supposed to have been written by a disciple of peter, and luke is supposed to have been a friend of paul's. since scholars now generally agree that mark is the earlist gospel, this zilches the whole traditional system of who was there and who wrote the gospels. we don't actually know if any of the writers were there at all.

love,

 

can i also point out another discrepancy between the "eyewitnesses" at the cruxifiction.
the sign above jesus' head reads............

Mark: "The King of the Jews"
Luke: "This is the King of the Jews"
John: "Jesus of Nazerth, King of the Jews"
Matthew: "This is Jesus, The King of The Jews"

 

It's not quite as cut and dry as all that.

Back when the gospels were written it was common practice for for a student, follower, or even an admirer, of a famous person to attribute his own writings to that person.
It was more of a dedication than a claim of authorship.

Theorectically it's possible for the apostle John to have been alive when the gospel of John was written (95-115 AD). If you use the earlier estimate, and he was say 20 at the time of the crucifixion, he would have been in his late 80s or early 90s at the time of it's writing.

As far as the other gospels go as far as I know they've always been called by the names we use today.

Mark (circa 65 AD): Named supposedly for a follower of Peter
Matthew (80-95 AD): Traditionally identified with the apostle Matthew/Levi. Scholars don't seem to have much of an opinion about this one way or the other.
Luke (same period as Mtt.): Supposed to have been Pauls physician. Scholars believe (due to the style of the writing and some other details) that whoever he was he was also the author of the book of Acts, which agrees with christian tradition).
John (95-115 AD): Anybody's guess. Could have been a follower of John or just someone who belonged to a sect that honored that particular apostle.
Most scholars agree that he was probably a hellenised Jew living in asia who was educated in greek philosophy.
One theory is that this particular gospel was intentionally written as propaganda against Thomas christians (the sect of gnostic christians who followed the gospel of thomas).

 

Edit Double post.