False Gospel Prophecies

 

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
ـــــ
For a long time, I have been driven by a desire to collect the false Gospel prophecies in the (New Testament) that were cited by the writers of the four Gospels, or the writers of the Epistles from the (Old Testament) ... in one comprehensive topic ..... as these prophecies are of four forms:

1- Either they are present in the Old Testament and were cited by the writers of the Gospels and Epistles in the New Testament to establish a certain doctrine or idea in Christianity ..... and we will not discuss this.

2- Or they are present in the Old Testament but were falsely and slanderously cited by the Gospel writers in order to apply them to certain events that happened to Jesus Christ in his life ... in order to delude the simpletons that they are old, established prophecies that prove the truth of the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ .... and we will discuss this.
3- Or they are prophecies cited by the Gospel writers and the apostles in the New Testament from texts they claimed were present in the Old Testament... However, if they were examined and scrutinized, we would not find them present in the Old Testament at all, neither in text nor in meaning... We will discuss these.

4- Prophecies in the New Testament that were spoken by Jesus Christ, considering that they would occur after (his crucifixion and resurrection), according to the Gospel writers. However, we see that Christ, according to the Christian faith, (died and rose) and the prophecies have not been fulfilled to this day... We will certainly discuss these.

I know that many of the brothers who defend the doctrine of truth and the religion of monotheism (Islam) that we have been honored with have addressed these topics in various topics scattered throughout Islamic forums and books on comparative religions... But I saw that I should collect them all in one topic so that they would serve as a reference for every seeker of truth...

And God is behind the intention,

the glory of Islam.

It came in the Book of Acts on the tongue of Peter when he stood and spoke about the fate of Judas Iscariot ..... who informed the Romans about the location of the Lord Christ in order to hand Him over to them and crucify Him, that:

17 For he was numbered among us, and had a portion in this ministry.
18 For this man purchased a field with the rewards of his unrighteousness, and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle, and all his bowels gushed out.
19 And this became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that that field was called in their language, “The Field of Blood,” that is, “The Field of Blood.”
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, “Let his dwelling place be desolate, and let no one dwell in it.” And let another take his position.

So this Peter tried to decide that the fate of Judas Iscariot had been prophesied by David in the Book of Psalms? .... Was Peter right when he tried to do that? .....

If we return to the Book of Psalms, we will discover that this prophecy was spoken of by David in two different psalms and not in one psalm ..... And all Peter's effort was to combine the two texts into one text in order to delude the crowds who were listening to him that what happened to Judas was a prophecy decided in advance that would prove the truth of the new Christian faith and the validity of his claim .....

But in vain did Peter try when he tried to address the matter in this way for the following reasons:

The first reason - The first text of the prophecy is found in Psalm 69 ... paragraphs 25 - 28 which say:

69:25 Let their dwelling place be desolate, and let no one dwell in their tents.

69:26 For whom you have struck, they have persecuted him, and with pain Those whom you have wounded shall speak

69:27 I will add iniquity to their iniquity, and let them not enter into your righteousness

69:28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.


As we see, the previous texts speak of (a group ) and not of (one individual) because he came with words like (they expelled him, their iniquity, they shall not enter....etc.) .... So how did Peter try to force the text in while he was speaking of (a group of enemies) and not of (one enemy, meaning Judas Iscariot) ? ....

And David himself admitted in this psalm that he was speaking of (a group of enemies) and not of one enemy or one person as Peter claimed he was about Judas Iscariot .... For David said:

69:18 Draw nigh unto my soul, and redeem it because of mine enemies, inform me

for the second reason: Peter added to the text of the previous psalm (69) another text from another psalm and made them into one text in a strange and amazing way that calls into question Peter’s intentions towards you.. Where Peter in the rest of his speech cited what came in Psalm 109:8-15:

109:8 Let his days be few, and his position let another take.

109:9 Let his children be orphans, and his wife a widow.

109:10 Let his children wander about, and beg, and seek bread in their ruins.

109:11 Let the usurer hunt down all that he has, and let strangers plunder his labor.

109:12 Let no one extend mercy to him, nor be gracious to his orphans.

109:13 Let his descendants be cut off in the generation to come, that their name may be blotted out.

109:14 Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered before the Lord, and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out

. 109:15 Let them be before the Lord continually, and let their remembrance be cut off from the earth.

As we see, Peter deceived his listeners by combining two different texts from two psalms and projecting them onto the person of Judas Iscariot. But Peter forgot that the rest of the texts speak about the fate of Judas, that his sons would be orphans and his wife would be widowed. Although he does not know at all in all the Gospels whether Judas was married and had children when he reported Christ or not.

Rather, it would have been more appropriate for Peter to bring a text from the Psalms that would tell us in a decisive and explicit manner that Judas would be exposed to what Peter claimed was the end of Judas Iscariot, which is:

For this man purchased a field with the reward of his iniquity, and falling on his face Acts 1-18

If Peter had brought a text like this from the Psalms, that Judas would fall face down and burst open in the middle and his bowels would have been more effective and convincing. But it seems that Peter's main concern was to convince the simple listeners with different texts from different Psalms, in which he worked with the cutting and pasting technique.

The Apostle Peter also missed that the writer of the Gospel of Matthew claimed that Judas Iscariot met a different fate than the one Peter told the crowds. He did not buy a field (with silver) as a reward for his betrayal of Christ. His bowels poured out, nor did he fall on his face. Rather, he threw (the silver) and committed suicide and hanged himself: “

And he cast down the silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.” Matthew 27:5.

What is even more astonishing is that Papias, one of the Apostolic Fathers who was a disciple of John, the author of the Gospel known as the Gospel of John, narrated a third, completely different account of the death of Judas than what was mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew or what was mentioned by Peter in the Book of Acts. In the book (Fragments of Papias - chapter 3) , Papias said about the death of Judas: “


Judas walked about in this world a sad example of impiety; For his body having swollen to such an extent that he could not pass where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels gushed out.

I

wonder..... What is the state of the Apostle Peter now after it has become clear to us that he lied and relied on false prophecies that he would not have mentioned had it not been for his confidence in the ignorance of his listeners and their failure to search the scriptures?

The writer of the Gospel of Luke tells us that Jesus Christ had predicted in advance what would happen to him (insults, beatings, spitting, crucifixion, and resurrection) .... Indeed, all of this is mentioned in the Old Testament .... The writer of the Gospel said:

31 And he took the twelve and said to them, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything will be fulfilled that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man,
32 For he will be delivered to the Gentiles, and will be mocked, and will be reviled, and will be spit upon,
33 and they will flog him, And they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise again.” Luke 18:31-33

So the lioness acknowledges that the Lord Christ will be exposed to (six things) which are in order (handing him over to the Gentiles, i.e. the Romans and the Jews - mocked - spat upon - flogged - killed - on the third day he will rise from the dead) .

And as the interpreter Tadros Yacoub Malati claimed, if we review what came in the previous Gospel text, we will find that Luke tried to attribute to the Lord Christ, peace be upon him, a prophecy that the Prophet Isaiah spoke about when he said:

I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who plucked the hair. My face I have not hid from shame and spitting... Isaiah 50:6

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-18.html#1

As we see, the previous text only spoke about three of the total of what Luke spoke about, which is six... and these three things are (the scourging in his saying I gave my back to the smiters - the mockery in his saying My cheeks to those who plucked out - the spitting in his saying I have not hid my face from shame and spitting) ... meaning that what came in Isaiah is half of what Luke claimed that Christ said about himself... and more importantly, the prophecy did not address at all the most important beliefs of Christians about Christ, which are the crucifixion and resurrection... even though Luke claimed that Christ said:

They will kill him, and on the third day he will rise again... Luke 18:33

So where is the killing and where is the resurrection in the text of Isaiah, my dear Luke?... This means only one thing, that Luke lied about the Old Testament and included in it texts that did not exist and claimed that it was a prophecy that spoke about the crucifixion Christ and his resurrection... How easy it is for us to explain Luke's doing this, since he was the only one among the Gospel writers who was (gentile) , i.e. not (Jewish), and that he wrote his Gospel in the (Greek) language for the Greeks (gentiles) who did not believe in Judaism or Christianity... i.e. he was fully aware that they would not search for him in the Old Testament and the books of the previous prophets, and would not exert themselves in the trouble of scrutiny, examination, and investigation to prove the truth of his claim or not...

The Book of Joel stabs the Bible in the heart
ـــــ ـــــ

In the second chapter of the Book of Joel, there is a very important prophecy that talks about the last day of the Lord (the Day of Judgment). This prophecy was accompanied by a number of cosmic signs and phenomena:


28 "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions.
29 And also upon the male servants and the female servants I will pour out my Spirit in those days,
30 and I will show wonders in heaven and earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.
31 The sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes.
32 And it will come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be delivered. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be deliverance, as the Lord has said. And among the rest there is he whom the Lord will call.


If we notice the last paragraphs highlighted in blue, we will find that Tadros Yacoub Malaty interprets them as (the last times) ….. that is, before the Day of Resurrection.
http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-02.html#1

These paragraphs were mentioned explicitly in the New Testament in the Book of Acts when the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples, where Peter mentioned them as evidence that this process of the descent of the Holy Spirit is the core of what the Prophet Joel spoke about…

14 Then Peter stood up with the eleven and lifted up his voice and said to them, “Men of the Jews and all who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you and listen to my words.

15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only the third hour of the day.
16 But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel. 17 And
it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, that I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18 And also upon my menservants and upon my maidservants in those days I will pour out of my Spirit, and they shall prophesy.
19 And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs on the earth beneath, blood, fire, and smoke of vapor.
20 The sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord comes.
21 And it will come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.


We can now conclude from the connection between the account of the Book of Joel and the account of the Book of Acts the following:

A - The account of the Book of Joel speaks of the Lord pouring out his Spirit on all flesh before the last day of the Lord

B- The coming of the last day of the Lord will come accompanied by cosmic signs such as (the sun turning into darkness, and the moon into blood).

C- When the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples, this was what was mentioned in the Book of Joel verbatim, as claimed by the Apostle Peter


. The question now is:

If the Apostle Peter claimed that the day on which the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples is the same day that was mentioned as a prophecy about the coming of the Lord on the last day, as mentioned in the Book of Joel... then was it true that on that day:

the sun really turned into darkness and the moon into blood?

Was there really smoke, fire, and vapor above and below the earth?

And did Christ really come immediately after this day, since the prophecy originally speaks of signs before the coming of the Lord?


Of course, if we look closely at all these false claims, we will find that the Apostle Peter lied when he tried to link the day of the Holy Spirit’s descent upon the disciples with what was mentioned in the Book of Joel… This is something that is easy to explain in order to find a biblical legitimacy from the Old Testament for the day of the Holy Spirit’s descent upon the disciples as if it were established in the Jewish books… Because the prophecy of the Book of Joel begins with the pouring out of God’s Spirit upon all people, which is what the Apostle Peter tried to exploit as historical and biblical evidence for the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples.

The great disaster that Peter fell into was that in order for the Holy Spirit to descend upon the disciples, there must be a number of cosmic phenomena such as the sun turning into fire and the moon into blood, and steam and water rising from above and below the earth, and then finally the Lord comes.


But none of this happened… The earth did not shake, the sky did not fall, and the moon did not turn into blood… In fact, until this year, we have not seen the Lord… Because the prophecy says that the Lord will come immediately after all of this.


We are now in the year 2014 and we have not seen the Lord coming to fulfill all the threads of the prophecy that occurred nearly 2000 years ago.

So why did the Lord delay His promised day of coming? A question we are still asking the fair-minded Christians and those with understanding among them to answer it for us.

How famous is that prophecy that was mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew about the origin of Christ that he (will be called a Nazarene) which Matthew claimed was present in the books of the prophets in the Old Testament:


And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, “He shall be called a Nazarene” ..... Matthew 2-23

And how well known is that this prophecy in this text was not mentioned in the Old Testament in all its forms (the Torah of Moses - the Psalms - and the books of the prophets) .... And we do not know in any case where Matthew got this forged text from ..... Although we know his purpose in this forgery .. He wanted to include a text that Matthew believed was present in the Old Testament to support the truth of Christ’s message to the Jews ..... Especially since Matthew was a Jewish tax collector who wrote His Gospel in Hebrew specifically for the Jews.

It is no secret how much the interpreters of the Ansar have stumbled in finding a way out of the embarrassment caused to them by this false prophecy.... They also followed in the footsteps of deception by interpreting the prophecy in a way that is completely contrary to its truth: Tadros Malti in his interpretation claims that the word "Nazareth" is derived from the word "Nasara", the title of Christians; in Hebrew it is Natzar and means branch, and from it the Arabic word "Nadir", and the Lord Christ was called the branch in more than one prophecy in the Old Testament. It came in the prophet Isaiah: "And there shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow from his roots: and the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord..." (Isaiah 11:1-2). In Jeremiah it is said: “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise up unto David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign, and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the land” (see Jer 33:15). And in Zechariah it is said: “Behold, I am bringing my servant, the Branch” (Zech 3:8), “Behold, the man whose name is the Branch, and he shall spring forth from his place, and shall build the temple of the Lord” (Zech 6:12)… Thus the Jews were expecting the Messiah to be called “the Branch”… that is, “a Nazarene.” .... End

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-02.html#1

In response to Tadros Malti and others who claimed this biased interpretation of the text, we say that Matthew never intended to mean by the word (Nazarene) the word (the branch) which Tadros Malti insisted meant (Nazareth) ..... because Matthew cited the text in reference to the place from which the Messiah would emerge, which is ( Nazareth) ..... so he said: And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled: “He shall be called a Nazarene.” So

Matthew’s only concern and intention was to attribute the Messiah to the city of Nazareth ..... but the only concern of the Christian interpreters, including Tadros Malti, was to attribute Nazareth to the meaning of (the branch)

even if We temporarily gave up our minds that God has honored us with and went along with the Christians in their claims and reviewed all the prophecies that Tadros Malti cited when we found one of them saying about the Messiah (He will be called the Branch) ...

This is the text of Isaiah that Tadros Malti relied on in his interpretation of the meaning of (He will be called a Nazarene) which says:

And there shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow from his roots...Isaiah 11:1

As we see, the text says (a branch will grow) and at least it did not say (it will be called a branch)... and how clear the difference between them is.

As for the text of Jeremiah, it says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, that I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, and a king shall reign and prosper, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the earth…” Jeremiah 33:15… He also did not say ( he shall be called the Branch )

, and the last text that Tadros Malaty used as an excuse in the Book of Zechariah says: “Behold, I am bringing my servant, the Branch” (Zechariah 3:8).

Apart from the fact that the text also does not mention the word (he shall be called the Branch) , it is certainly not in favor of the Christian faith at all, because it states that Christ is a (servant), and this completely contradicts the Christian belief in the nature of Christ as a (God) and not a (servant).

How in vain did Matthew try to invent a text from the Old Testament to strengthen people’s understanding of the prophecies that spoke about Christ, even if it was a lie and deception… And how in vain did the Christian interpreters follow in the footsteps of the deception that Matthew adopted in their interpretation of this text.

Despite what we know of Paul’s accuracy in his citations from the Old Testament and his prophecies, especially since he was a Jewish man who learned at the hands of Rabbi Gamaliel, as Paul spoke about himself… However, this does not prevent him from falling into the forbidden thing that Matthew and Luke fell into before him, which is to include prophecies that he claims exist in the Old Testament, although they do not exist at all in the Old Testament and there is no mention of them…

Paul says in his first letter to the Corinthians:

But as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered the heart of man, what God has prepared for those who love him.” 1 Corinthians 2:9

If Paul is dead and therefore it is impossible for us to ask him from which Old Testament books he quoted this text... we still have millions of Christians who believe in Paul as an apostle of Christ and a preacher of His... Where is this text, our dear Christians, in the Old Testament books?... And from which book was it quoted?... Do you have an answer that you can tell us?

Antonius Fikry declared it explicitly that there is no book in the Old Testament that mentions this text, saying (There is no explicit verse quoted by the Apostle Paul with this meaning.)

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-02.html#1

As for Tadros Malti, he completely evaded attributing the prophecy to its origin in the Old Testament and began to interpret it as if it actually existed, saying ( For with regard to the simplicity of our faith, the firmness of our hope, and the ardor of our desire, we more broadly accept what is offered to us in great abundance, this which “eye has not seen,” because it has no color, nor ear heard, because it has no sound, nor has it ascended to the heart of man, but the heart of man ascends to it.)

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-02.html#1

So with what reason do you speak to your followers, O interpreters, while you lie to them openly and support sayings that were not mentioned in the Old Testament.... Is this how you attract people to you?..... Is this how you convince people of your beliefs?

The writer of the Gospel of John tells us about a prophecy that was spoken by Christ during his alleged crucifixion..... This prophecy is (the last words spoken by Christ) during his crucifixion..... Where he said in the Gospel of John:

28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now finished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, “I thirst.”
29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar; and they filled a sponge with the vinegar, put it on hyssop, and put it to his mouth.
30 So when Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished.” And he bowed his head and gave up his spirit... John 19/29-29-30


So we understand according to this prophecy that the last thing (Jesus said) during his crucifixion was (I thirst) ... and we also understand that Jesus' thirst is part of a prophecy that already existed in the Old Testament because John mentioned it saying (that the Scripture might be fulfilled) ...

and the interpreter Tadros Yacoub Malati pointed to the Old Testament indications of the truth of this prophecy as it is found in the Book of Psalms, saying:

(The psalmist David prophesied beforehand in the psalm about the crucifixion, saying: "My tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth" (Psalm 22:15). As also mentioned in Psalm 69:21)... End

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-19.html#1

If we review the texts of the prophecies in the Book of Psalms as discussed by the interpreter Tadros Yacoub Malati, we will find that they speak about The thirst of Christ is as follows:

Psalms 22:15
My strength is dried up like a potsherd, And my tongue clings to the roof of my mouth; And thou shalt bring me to the dust of death.

Whereas the phrase (My tongue clings to the roof of my mouth) refers to severe thirst

Psalms 69:21
And they put gall for my food, And for my thirst they give me vinegar to drink.

Vinegar was mentioned in the story of Jesus’ crucifixion in the Gospel of John, Chapter 19/29:

Now there was a vessel set there full of vinegar. So they filled a sponge with vinegar, put it on hyssop, and put it to his mouth.

So, as is very clear, John the Evangelist tried to prove Jesus' thirst on the cross as if it were a prophecy that had been predicted in the Book of Psalms... John's intention in doing so is very clear, which is to report the crucifixion and confirm it by attributing its events to prophecies from the Old Testament so that no one would doubt it... But when John tried to do that, he did not confirm the crucifixion as much as he (raised doubts) about it and about this story, and this is for the following reasons:

1- The prophecy in the Book of Psalms spoke of (hunger and thirst) ... and not just (thirst) ... as it says:

Psalm 69:21
And they put gall for my food, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.

So in order for this prophecy to actually apply to Jesus , (he had to prove it by his hunger) and even his crucifiers had to put the flag in his food... and all of this was not mentioned at all in the story of the crucifixion that was mentioned in the Gospel of John... rather, the story of John came (truncated and distorted)Because it only spoke about (thirst and vinegar) .... although the prophecy speaks about (hunger and thirst) ..... about (food with gall, and water with vinegar) ..... and not about (thirst and vinegar) only

, so where is the missing half of the prophecy? ..... Has it been lost like many other texts of the Holy Bible were lost and gone with the wind? ... especially since an interpreter like Tadros Malti claimed that this prophecy (literally happened) with Jesus Christ at the time of his crucifixion.

2- Drinking (vinegar) is not, as some people imagine, a (bitter) drink that increases a person's thirst and desire to (drink water) .... and this was confirmed by the interpreter Antonius Fikry, who said:

Vinegar = the word refers to a type of "delicious sauce". (See more about this topic here on the website of St-Takla.org in the articles and other interpretations sections). It is a drink of fermented wine mixed with oil, which has the property of refreshing and moisturizing.

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-02.html#1

If the text mentioned (about Jesus drinking vinegar) in the story of the crucifixion came as evidence of (his thirst) .... then we say that this is (a lie) because vinegar in the Holy Bible does not mean that bitter-tasting drink, but rather ..... it is a drink of wine that has the property of refreshing and moisturizing ..... Therefore we find in the Old Testament that (Boaz) when he wanted to honor (Ruth) and treat her well ..... he offered her food and vinegar:

And Boaz said to her at mealtime, Come here, and eat of the bread and dip your morsel in the vinegar. So she sat down beside the reapers, and he offered her parched grain, and she ate and was satisfied, and there was some left over.

3- The Bible Dictionary states that the vinegar that Jesus drank was the same type of vinegar that Roman soldiers used to drink mixed with water: It was the custom of Roman soldiers in their camps to drink a diluted type of vinegar mixed with water. Perhaps
a drink of this type was what the Roman soldier gave Jesus while he was on the cross to quench his thirst with a sponge..... End

http://st-takla.org/Full-Free-Coptic..._KH/kh_38.html

This is conclusive evidence that giving Jesus vinegar during his alleged crucifixion was not to further torture him and arouse his thirst.... It is completely opposite to what is stated in the Gospel of John, which relied on the prophecy of the Book of Psalms to make the reader believe that due to the severity of the Romans’ brutality and torture of Jesus, they did not give him pure water during his crucifixion, but rather mixed water. With vinegar so that his thirst would not go away completely, but he would remain suffering from the bitterness and acidity of the vinegar.

The confusion in the Christian interpretation of (vinegar) has become clear. Is it a way of mockery and ridicule and to further humiliate the crucified? Or is it taken as a drink to moisturize and alleviate the severity and burning of thirst? For example, we see Tadros Malti (contradicting himself) when he says that it was presented as a way of mockery and ridicule, and another time he says that it was presented to him as a way of alleviating the severity of his thirst:

But here in the psalm, this was mentioned as a kind of disdain and mockery, and not as a kind of pity for the crucified. It was mentioned in Luke 23:36, that it was presented to him as a kind of mockery.... End

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...pter-19.html#1

Here we see him contradicting himself and claiming otherwise:

Some people have tended to consider this an unnecessary cruelty towards the dying, as it was customary to offer a cup of wine to the crucified to ease their pain at the moment of their death, but as for the Lord Christ, in a sense of mockery, they offered a sponge with vinegar. Some see the matter quite the opposite, for those who have investigated the truth have long since established that the Roman soldiers in hot countries were provided with a special drink called pouska, a mixture of water and vinegar, which would quench thirst .... End
http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interpretations/Holy-Bible-Tafsir-02-New-Testament/Father-Tadros-Yacoub-Malaty/04-Enjeel-Youhanna/Tafseer-Engeel-Yohanna__01-Chapter-19.html#1

Although the prophecy of the Book of Psalms indicates quite the opposite, as it indicates the continuation of torture, abuse and mockery:

And they put gall in my food, and in my thirst they give me vinegar to drink. .... Psalms 69/21

When talking about the prophecy (in the Book of Psalms) they claim that it is in mockery and derision, and when talking about the crucifixion (in the Gospel of John) they claim that the vinegar was in the form of compassion for the crucified one and to quench his burning thirst.... So by God, O Christians, have you determined the purpose and intent of the vinegar instead of this confusion and bewilderment?

The writer of (the Epistle of Jude) tells us about a text quoted from the Old Testament, but when we searched for this text in the Old Testament... we did not find any evidence or trace of it....
The text says:

But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil, disputing about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous sentence, but said, The Lord rebuke you... Epistle of Jude, paragraph 9.

This text has clearly caused a state of confusion among Christian interpreters... especially since, as we said, it is considered a lost text... without a witness to it or evidence from the Old Testament to confirm it.

As for Antonius Fikry, he tried to escape this confusion by claiming that this text is a text that was passed down through generations through tradition only... meaning that the respected interpreter tried in a naive way to suggest that the text was taken (orally) from one generation to the next without attributing a real (recording) to it in any of the books of the Old Testament in the Holy Bible.

The interpreter Antonius Fikry says:

Judas took this story from tradition, as it does not exist in the Old Testament.... End.

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...hapter-01.html [/COLOR]

As we saw from the words of the interpreting priest... he admitted that it does not exist in the Old Testament... and resorted to the issue of tradition to relieve himself of the embarrassment of the loss of the text from the Old Testament... knowing that this issue of tradition is considered one of the things that Jesus rebuked the Jews for and rejected from them... and it is the matter that the Gospels mentioned in several places:

Gospel of Mark 7: 8 “
For you have laid aside the commandment of God and hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.”


Matthew 15:6
You have nullified the commandment of God because of your tradition.


Mark 7:9
Then he said to them, “Well done! You have rejected the commandment of God in order to keep your own tradition.


Matthew 15:3
But he answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?

So how does the writer of the Epistle of Jude, who is supposed to be one of the twelve disciples of Jesus, resort to oral transmission of tradition, even though Jesus had previously rebuked the Jews for this matter and condemned them for it? .....

Indeed, when Jesus himself rebuked the Jews for tradition ..... he rebuked them for something that the Jews were doing according to (the law) that was revealed to them through Moses. They did not invent this tradition, but it is (recorded) and (written) in the texts of the Old Testament .... and is definitely established in the Old Testament ..... and such a text as that which was mentioned in (the Epistle of Jude) which was transmitted from the Old Testament is not considered tradition without being proven, recorded or written.

Otherwise, let the writer of the Epistle of (Jude) tell us how he knew about a (unseen) matter that happened between the Archangel (Michael) and (Satan) without this story being recorded by one of the writers of the books of the Old Testament? .....

Does tradition, O Christians, tell you about matters?(Occultation) between angels and demons without having a (written) basis from the Old Testament? .... So how do we guarantee (the truthfulness, security and integrity) of the one from whom this (tradition) was transmitted , unless it was documented in (your ancient books) .... Or do you think that the text was lost from the beginning and was lost just as other texts were lost, and Judas quoted this (lost) text that was present one day, but your distortion ruled that it was lost and missing? .....

What is worse than this is that Antonius Fikry himself acknowledged before that (the Holy Bible) is preserved (by tradition)

the Holy Bible itself is preserved for us by tradition, so whoever said that these books are the canonical books, there are non-canonical books. Who determined the canonical from the non-canonical except the tradition of the fathers who determined the canonical books and rejected the non-canonical ones..... End

http://st-takla.org/pub_Bible-Interp...hapter-15.html

So according to this claim of the venerable interpreter, the text contained in the Epistle of Jude must be preserved , i.e. according to tradition... But unfortunately, it seems that tradition forgot to (record and confirm) the text contained in the Epistle of Jude, just as it recorded the rest of the texts of the Holy Bible...

So after all this, do you Christians still demand that we acknowledge the (infallibility) of your alleged book and the truth of its (inspiration)