John 1:20-25 who is the Prophet here!?

[Yusef]

....
[Youtube][/youtube]

Gospel of John chapter 1

• John the Baptist Denies Being the Messiah
  
  19 Now this was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders[c] in Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was.
  
  20 He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, “I am not the Messiah.�
  
  21 They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?�
  
  He said, “I am not.�
  
  “Are you that Prophet we are expecting?�
  He answered, “No.�
  
  22 Finally they said, “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?�
  
  23 John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.’�[d]
  
  24 Now the Pharisees who had been sent 25 questioned him, “Why then do you baptize if you are not the Messiah, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?�
  
  26 “I baptize with[e] water,� John replied, “but among you stands one you do not know.
  
  27 He is the one who comes after me, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie.�
  
  28 This all happened at Bethany on the other side of the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

Well,
We have here 3 personalities that prophet Yahya[pbuh] denies he is one of them!

• 1. Messiah
  2. Elijah
  3. The Prophet

If we assume the Messiah is the same Jesus[pbuh],
And the Elijah the same Eliyahu[pbuh]

Then Whom the Jews were expecting as the Prophet which is except for the Messiah and Elijah!??

Who is the third person here!?
ref:detecting of decoding of the encoded holy books: *Secrets of Enoch *Revelation of John *Qur'an *Hadith

[Difflugia]

i don't say that the narrator wrote untrue!
I say one of them: [the disciples/narrators/narrators of narrator of] misunderstood!

The sense of συνῆκαν looks to me to be "understood" in the sense of a direct antonym to "misunderstood" rather than the colloquial English usage of "thought" to mean something akin to "incorrectly assumed."

I checked the concordance for συνίημι to see if it's ever used to mean "think, perhaps incorrectly." It isn't.

I stand by my earlier analysis. If Jesus did not mean to equate John the Baptist with Elijah, then Matthew 17:13 is a false statement.

[Yusef]

[Replying to post 21 by Difflugia]

Tell us Whom Jesus was called?
ref:Ali is the same Elijah in the Torah

[Difflugia]

Tell us Whom Jesus was called?
ref:Ali is the same Elijah in the Torah

The Christ? Son of David? The faithful witness? The high priest? Lord? Firstborn of the dead? God? Son of Man? The Word? Ruler of the earthly kings?

I'm not sure what you're asking or what your reference is supposed to mean to me.

[Difflugia]

Tell us Whom Jesus was called?
ref:Ali is the same Elijah in the Torah

I just read this again. Do you mean whom was Jesus calling? (I understand English isn't your first language and the difference between active and passive voice can be subtle.)

Jesus is calling "my God." It's a quotation from Psalm 22. In Mark, where the entire quote is Aramaic, it's Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani. Matthew changes the Eloi to Eli, which matches the Hebrew, but leaves the rest as Aramaic (if the entire quote were Hebrew, it would be similar to Eli, Eli, lama azabtani). It looks to me like he did that to make it more plausible that bystanders would think He was calling Elijah. Even so, Elijah in Aramaic (or in the Syriac Peshitta, anyway) is Eliyah, same as it is in Hebrew. If He actually was calling Elijah, though, Jesus apparently wants to know why Elijah has forsaken Him. Is that what He's asking?

[Yusef]

Tell us Whom Jesus was called?
ref:Ali is the same Elijah in the Torah

I just read this again. Do you mean whom was Jesus calling? (I understand English isn't your first language and the difference between active and passive voice can be subtle.)[/quoted]Yeah. Whom was Jesus calling?

Yeah,
My English is weak,
Plus, the keyboard sometimes write automatically[predicts words] and maybe mistakenly, because God Has Given me a fast accelerated intelligence(Thanks God) and i don't spell check and...
Plus, my first language is Right to Left[RTL] and is reversed than those LTRs!
In the Persian we say:
Isa ke ra seda kard? = Jesus whom call did?
Plus, wait wait!! Is the eastern languages RTL also!?
Means from easternmost the earth all languages be RTL up to Jerusalem and from that to the westernmost be LTR!?
And plus!! The more important than others, the ancient books have been written as ancient languages and we religious/seekers are reading those texts daily and our conversations have been changed like those ancient people and try to translate the same forms haha..

Jesus is calling "my God." It's a quotation from Psalm 22. In Mark, where the entire quote is Aramaic, it's Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani. Matthew changes the Eloi to Eli, which matches the Hebrew, but leaves the rest as Aramaic (if the entire quote were Hebrew, it would be similar to Eli, Eli, lama azabtani). It looks to me like he did that to make it more plausible that bystanders would think He was calling Elijah. Even so, Elijah in Aramaic (or in the Syriac Peshitta, anyway) is Eliyah, same as it is in Hebrew. If He actually was calling Elijah, though, Jesus apparently wants to know why Elijah has forsaken Him. Is that what He's asking?

Bravooo
You yourself brought an Algorithm;

• 1. If he actually was calling Eli "my God"
  • Return back to the mentioned post
  2. If he actually was calling Eli "Elijah";
  • Which one of two Elijahs of the bible he meant!? Elijah Tishbati or one other!?

And there is a connection between these 3 issues:

• * The video clip of the first post that the Rabbi called Ali "Eliya"
  * The Shi'a Hadith is mentioned
  * The verses of Matthew

Also the previous verses of the chapter of Matthew shows clearly Prophets Elijah and Moses came to prophet Jesus and are different than Yahya John the Baptist.
Peace be upon all prophets and successors of them

[Yusef]

i don't say that the narrator wrote untrue!
I say one of them: [the disciples/narrators/narrators of narrator of] misunderstood!

The sense of συνῆκαν looks to me to be "understood" in the sense of a direct antonym to "misunderstood" rather than the colloquial English usage of "thought" to mean something akin to "incorrectly assumed."

I checked the concordance for συνίημι to see if it's ever used to mean "think, perhaps incorrectly." It isn't.

I stand by my earlier analysis. If Jesus did not mean to equate John the Baptist with Elijah, then Matthew 17:13 is a false statement.

Bravop!
According to doctrines of Shi'a, all 12 saint disciples were pure while Paul the satan came and deceived and tempted Christians and made them astray.

Well,
As a Shi'a i can't insult saint Matthew and i should suppose he was been mistaken and or I should check other paths of the gospel of Matthew and at all i should think there has was a problem between the path and one of the narrators changed the gosples

Well,
An example:
I write a thread in a forum about "Predestination", Forcing Vs Free will
Like this in this forum:
viewtopic.php?p=969893#969893
And proved that Forcing in the Persian is "Gabr" and ancient Persians means Zoroastrian believed in Gabr and it was a wrong belief among them!
Then someone were read that and made other threads and debated and defended the concept "Free will" versus "Jabr" without that reply my posts and understand the more!!!!
I told them hooooo!! Why do you make people astray!!! Oooo arrogant fools, the first be sure about the Free will by debate; then create a new topic!!
And this is appeared to all countries with all religions with all levels of arrogant fools..

Shame on me that brought this example about the book of saint Matthew,
But it was the best example to realize that;
And i guess the narrators of saint Matthew themselves thought and analyzed a thing and themselves verified that and added to the book!![/quote]

[Yusef]

.....
....
......
Other explanations offered are also mystical in nature. A hadith by Imam Muhammad al-Baqir e.g. is narrated in which he attributes the aforementioned esoteric knowledge of Asif ibn Barakhia to the Asma 'ullah or the "names of God", another widely discussed topic in Islamic philosophy and mysticism and even kabbalah:
"The Almighty's greatest name has 73 letters (or parts). Asif ibn Barakhia knew only one letter of it, which enabled him to traverse the earth in the blink of an eye. We Shia Imams however possess 72 of them. And the last letter is concealed from all creation and remains a secret to only the Almighty Himself."[5]

The only Decoders of All Holy Books:
ref:Who hold the testimony of Jesus and commandments of God!?

• â—Ž The All → Encoder[God] → Holy Books
  ☆ Holy Books → Decoders[The Prophet & 12Imams] → Hadith
  ○ Hadith → Detectors[Scientists/Scholars] → The All

Here i explained what the last letter is:
ref:Predestination Bada' Vs Forcing/FreeWill