 |
Search this site |
 All Rights Reserved World Copyright supporting advertisers helps to provide an income for this website this page last updated August 7, 2008 |
This website is being renovated throughout 2008. Pages and the content of pages will continue to change until the end of the year and there may be some inconsistencies and missing links. Please do not quote from or link to specific pages (apart from the home page) without contacting the webmaster first. The crumbling Bible Discrepancies in the Old and New Testaments By © Martin Foreman Word Count: 795 words Publication date: April 9, 2006 So now we have the gospel according to Judas. In this recently rediscovered manuscript, which has resurfaced after 1,700 years, new light is shone on the twelfth disciple and his relationship to Jesus. The Messiah, it seems, entrusted Judas with special knowledge and even asked to be betrayed to the Romans. Judas’ story joins that of Thomas, Peter, Bartholomew, Mary Magdalene and other gospels which appeared in the first few centuries CE (common era; the secular equivalent of AD). They did not make it into the final version of the Bible because their versions did not coincide with prevailing views. The Magdalene’s gospel, for example, suggests a proto-feminism that would be unacceptable to most men of the time. Don’t expect Judas’ story to be incorporated into the Christian canon any time soon, despite the fact that Iscariot is essential to the God/Jesus story. If there is no “betrayal” in the garden of Gethsemane, there is no trial and crucifixion and Christ does not die for humanity’s sins. Judas has always remained unrecognized as the most important human in Christianity after the “Virgin” Mary; without these two the religion would not exist. Catholics with any conscience should be clamoring to have him elevated to the sainthood. Setting Judas aside… the fact that there are hidden or forbidden versions of the gospels tell us that there is controversy or uncertainty about Christ’s life and deeds. The official line is that God finally got round to finalising his version of the story four hundred years after the crucifixion when his believers authorized the books we know as the New Testament. But although Jehovah inspired or, in the mind of fundamentalists, set down in stone the NT, there are still enough discrepancies in the Bible to destroy yet another layer of Christian belief. Firstly, Catholics have seven more books in their canon than Protestants. Secondly, the Bible exists in so many languages and translations that a definitive version is impossible. Thirdly, mistranslations persist. The worst is the failure in the early books of the Old Testament to render Elohim as “the Gods” in English and other vernaculars. Millions of Christians believe that Genesis describes the creation of the world by a single god, when the Hebrew tells us that it was the work of several gods and only after an intrafamilial dispute lasting many human generations did one god – Yahweh – win out. Fourthly, several stories are told in two or more contradictory forms. There are two versions of the creation story, confusion over numbers and timing in the story of the Flood, and a host of discrepancies in the different stories about Christ’s life. A comparison of the descriptions of Christ’s last night in Gethsemane yields a dozen examples. How often do the disciples fall asleep? Once? (Luke) Thrice? (Matthew, Mark) Not at all? (John) Should the disciples be armed? “Yes” says Jesus (Matthew). “No” says Jesus (Luke). Who betrays Jesus and how? Judas, with a kiss (Matthew, Mark). Judas, but kiss uncertain (Luke). Jesus himself, and no kiss (John). And so on. These contradictions make sense when it is remembered that no-one wrote about Jesus until at least sixty years after he was said to have died. Nor were the gospels written by the Mark, Matthew and others that they are attributed to, but by men and women who had never witnessed the situations they describe. A story narrated orally across the generations and throughout the Roman empire has been reinterpreted again and again by the many people through whom it has passed. In fact, there is no proof that the story was true in the first place and many scholars are now convinced that Christ did not exist. Does this matter? Fundamentalist Christians tie themselves in theological knots to “prove” that every word in the Bible is true. Other Christians, with more intelligence and self-respect, see no more than an inherent truth which transcends the human errors that the Bible contains. The trouble with that approach is that the closer you look, the less you believe. If the Bible is imperfect, then you don’t need it to approach God. Christ’s story may be important, but whether or not he actually existed is irrelevant. From that perspective, the stories told about Jesus in the Apocrypha or the New Testament are no more than myths retold by authors anxious that their particular perspective is set down for posterity. The logical conclusion is that God may exist irrespective of the Bible – a position that is perfectly logical to Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and believers of other faiths. That, however, is the subject of another column. In the meantime, let’s put both the Bible and the Apocrypha back on the bookshelves – in the fiction section – and return to the real world of today.
Custom Search
|
If God existed, he would... admire the beauty of a universe that he did not create recognize that eternity is meaningless deny both heaven and hell disown all men and women who speak in his name denounce the harm caused by religious "morality" help the human race to thrive without him If God existed, he would be an atheist. |