[kosta50]

I don't know if it was word for word before it was written down, but I do know it was idea for idea because what was taught was what was believed and that is what was written down and then later accepted and canonized

But we know that what was written was not all the same, as great many variant manuscripts show, and that there were errors and additions and omissions, and that Chirtsianity neither used the same books, nor preached the exact same faith for three centuries.

Just like today, they all preached Christ, their version of who and what he is. Sure, they all had some version of the Gospels, be it either the one where the Great Commission does not have the Triniatrian formula in it (as attested by Eusebius in the third century), which also the Book of Acts strongly supports, or be it the long or short versions of Luke's Gospel, or be it the Peshitta or the various 2nd century AD  attempts to bring LXX closer to the Hebrew text (Aquila, Symmachs, etc.), etc.

All this has been erased or eliminated, or conveniently forgotten, or even destroyed or buried somewhere, so as not to cause any 'confusion'.  And the myriad of other books, besides the "canonical" ones that were used by Christian apologetics were simply expunged as profane and purged from the canon, including the ones found in the oldest complete Bibles dating back to the 4th century, as if they never existed.

[FK: The Apostles taught orally with authority from Christ] [Who says?]Jesus did in His Great Commission.

And who wrote the Great Commission if not the very people who claim to teach with the authority of Christ!? This is like the Congress voting itself a pay raise.

Judaism never believed in the devil.

Moses was also an "observant Jew" (as Jesus approved of Moses' testimony about Him).

Of course he did. Written in retrospect by people vying desperately for some divine authority as they were being kicked out of synagogues as apostates and heretics by the Jewish community. Remember, this is "John" writing at the end of the first century as this was taking place. Besides, there is no Mosaic testimony of Jesus, in the minds of people capable of hyperbolic rationalizations.

If Moses testified about the correct Jesus then he testified about a Jesus who believed in the existence of satan. Therefore, the faiths of the OT righteous included knowledge of satan.

If is the operanat word here, FK. John 5:46 does not correspond to anything specific Moses wrote about Christ, unless of course one uses some pretty far out ideations. Judaism simply does not believe in satan, and never did. Apparently some heretical Jewish sects did under the influence of Zoriastrinaism.

I don't know if it was word for word before it was written down, but I do know it was idea for idea because what was taught was what was believed and that is what was written down and then later accepted and canonized

But we know that what was written was not all the same, as great many variant manuscripts show, and that there were errors and additions and omissions, and that Chirtsianity neither used the same books, nor preached the exact same faith for three centuries.

Just like today, they all preached Christ, their version of who and what he is. Sure, they all had some version of the Gospels, be it either the one where the Great Commission does not have the Triniatrian formula in it (as attested by Eusebius in the third century), which also the Book of Acts strongly supports, or be it the long or short versions of Luke's Gospel, or be it the Peshitta or the various 2nd century AD  attempts to bring LXX closer to the Hebrew text (Aquila, Symmachs, etc.), etc.

All this has been erased or eliminated, or conveniently forgotten, or even destroyed or buried somewhere, so as not to cause any 'confusion'.  And the myriad of other books, besides the "canonical" ones that were used by Christian apologetics were simply expunged as profane and purged from the canon, including the ones found in the oldest complete Bibles dating back to the 4th century, as if they never existed.

[FK: The Apostles taught orally with authority from Christ] [Who says?]Jesus did in His Great Commission.

And who wrote the Great Commission if not the very people who claim to teach with the authority of Christ!? This is like the Congress voting itself a pay raise.

Judaism never believed in the devil.

Moses was also an "observant Jew" (as Jesus approved of Moses' testimony about Him).

Of course he did. Written in retrospect by people vying desperately for some divine authority as they were being kicked out of synagogues as apostates and heretics by the Jewish community. Remember, this is "John" writing at the end of the first century as this was taking place. Besides, there is no Mosaic testimony of Jesus, in the minds of people capable of hyperbolic rationalizations.

If Moses testified about the correct Jesus then he testified about a Jesus who believed in the existence of satan. Therefore, the faiths of the OT righteous included knowledge of satan.

If is the operanat word here, FK. John 5:46 does not correspond to anything specific Moses wrote about Christ, unless of course one uses some pretty far out ideations. Judaism simply does not believe in satan, and never did. Apparently some heretical Jewish sects did under the influence of Zoriastrinaism.

[boatbums]

Judaism simply does not believe in satan, and never did. Apparently some heretical Jewish sects did under the influence of Zoriastrinaism.

If the Jews didn't believe in Satan, then it was because they didn't read their own Scriptures. Starting in Genesis, he is referred to as the "serpent" who deceived Eve. There are many scriptures that speak of "evil spirits". We see in Isaiah 14:12, that he is called "Lucifer" who was at one time "Son of the morning". He was the "anointed cherub", the "Great Dragon". Jesus made references to him many times and the Jewish religious leaders never called him on it - they would have grabbed at anything to trip him up. In Revelation we are given many references reiterating the same titles such as in Rev. 8:10 and Rev. 12:9.