Inerrancy
of the Bible <http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CIZ05Q4>
The Bible should be
regarded as a Guidebook. It is definitely not a book of facts. The teachings
are couched in parable. But the Truth is there to be found by the discerning
student.
About the Bible
1. The books of the Bible were written by men inspired
by God. However, men are subject to error and flawed in their understanding of
the divine principles and these defects are carried over in their writings.
Moreover, the individual writers are themselves situated at different levels in
the order of evolution. Their understanding and authority is limited only
to such extent.
2. The selection of the books for inclusion in the authorized Bible and the
formulation and adoption of the Nicene Creed were conducted under inauspicious
circumstances and coercion by Rome. The end result does not exactly conform to
the true teachings of Jesus.
3. Further, in the ensuing periods coming into our modern age, there have been
massive mistranslations, misrepresentations, corruptions and outright
deliberate editing and substitution of the Biblical texts such that the
surviving manuscripts may no longer be accurate and true to the spirit of the
original writings.
4. There is a hierarchy of the divine teachings. There are different levels of
awareness. Different writers and teachers address different levels and aspects
of the teachings. Each person should seek out those teachings that are
appropriate to his own level of study, but he should continue to move forward
from that starting point.
5. Jesus already upgraded most all of the objectionable Old Testament teachings.
We should now dispense with the old and superseded and embrace the new, more
rational and enlightened teachings.
Continuing terrorism in
Jesus’ name
From 'On the Path' <http://goo.gl/LwSFRP>:
Many times I had observed that Jesus would conclude
his message whenever I arrived or I would manage to arrive late after he had
already given his message. I thought it was just my imagination, but this
happened much too often for it to be mere coincidence. Later on, I understood
the reason, why. It certainly is not my place to criticize, but in my ignorance
and presumption, I had always faulted him for the intolerant acts of his
followers. I blamed him for the wars and conflicts that brought much pain and misery
to so many as a result of his followers’ fanatical and misguided beliefs. I
could see why he, knowing my sentiments, first waited for me to come around
before he continued my instruction.
Only after I had found the Truth did I realize just where I was so wrong. Jesus
imparts the same Truth to everyone, but everyone can understand only a small
part of what he teaches us at any given time. Every student not yet being
perfect can understand only in part, according to his level, and because of his
incomplete knowledge, he cannot but commit mistakes that inevitably do cause
harm. This cannot be helped. However, this situation is only temporary.
Eventually, as we learn enough, we will commit less and less harm and do more
and more good.
Even as he was suffering unto death on the cross, Jesus knowing us
still prayed, “Father,
forgive them for they know not what they do.”
Who
are the true followers of the teachings of Jesus and who are just plain
terrorists pretending to be Christians but really are not? The intolerance,
injustices, persecutions, hatred and violence continue to the present day.
“By their fruits, you shall know them.”
The Authorship of the Bible
by Jim Blanston
October, 1993
This document is NOT copyrighted. In the interest of liberating others from the
tyranny of deception, I am placing this document in the public domain. Please
feel free to distribute it as you see fit.
INTRODUCTION
I decided to write this work after seeing the effects of Christian
bigotry, in the past, present, and, undoubtedly, in the future. Please note
that this is not intended to be an indictment of Jesus “Christ;” I really don't
know that much about him. And, as you will see from the evidence presented,
neither does anyone else: the Bible, according to most modern, respected
biblical scholars, is one of the most tampered scriptures on Earth, with
dubious authorship and beginnings.
Nor does this work seek to lump all Christians under the same rock; there are a
wide variety of Christian sects, ranging from the ultra-liberal and open-minded
Unitarians and Episcopalians to the ultra conservative fundamentalist sects,
and all the way over to the lunatic fringe, the white supremacist “Aryan”
churches.
This work does, however, censure and condemn those on the so-called religious
“right”, who perpetuate the mindset of utter bigotry. A “bigot”, according to
the dictionary, means “one BLINDLY intolerant of the views of others, esp. in
the matters of RELIGION, politics, and race.” The right-wing religious sects
all base their beliefs on the Bible, and its infallibility. I was not content
to naively assume that the Bible was infallible; I sought out information on
the sources of the Bible, and this work will share what I have found.
And this work certainly does not intend to downgrade theism... although many
right-wing Christians certainly proclaim, in their arrogance, that if you are
not a Christian, you are an atheist. On the contrary, I have found deep truths
in the serene teachings of the Buddha in the “Dhammapada”, the sublime
teachings of Krishna in the “Bhagavad-gita”, the illustrious thoughts of
Lao-Tse's “Tao-te Ching”. How true is scholar Juan Mascaro's statement that
“the Upanishads is the path of light; the Dhammapada is the path of life; and
the Bhagavad-gita is the path of love”!
CHAPTER FOUR: AUTHORSHIP OF THE BIBLE
This is a list of the authorship of the Bible, according to most
modern biblical scholars. This information can be found by looking in any
encyclopedia. The scholars base their conclusions by carefully weighing the
evidence... there is a reason why they feel the way they do. Although many
fundamentalist Christians try to minimize or even ignore these scholarly
conclusions, the fact remains that they are completely unable to counter these
arguments by any evidence whatsoever. Although they are quick to accept
archeological data that verifies a piece of biblical history, and they are
quick to accept scholars' conclusions on the questionable nature of the
scriptures of other religions, they completely downplay a critical, unbiased
study of their own supposedly “infallible” scripture, the Bible. Which is
ironic, since their entire claim to spiritual superiority rests on their
premise that the Bible is perfect and flawless.
In the following analyses, it is important to watch for the references to
“editing”, “rewriting”, and “additions” to the books of the Bible. These
changes to the Bible might make one wonder: “Why did someone find it necessary
to change this scripture? What was their motive? What was the original
scripture lacking? Or what did it say that someone felt it was necessary to
change? And who did the changing?”
After reading this section, the obvious question that comes to mind is, “How
can someone base their life, and condemn other religions, on such a scripture?”
THE OLD TESTAMENT
It doesn't take a scholar to realize that autobiography is very rarely
found in it. It is mostly written in the third person (“he said” or “she said”,
rather than “I said”). Scholars say that the vast majority of the Old Testament
consists of stories that were handed down via the unreliable method of oral
transmission before they were finally written down. There was a long journey
from the creation of these stories until the time they were compiled... and
this journey involved storytellers and editors.
It is also important to note that almost none of the books in the Old Testament
have “signature verses”. Christians and Jews maintain different “traditional”
authors, although they have little or no evidence to support these claims.
There is also a common misunderstanding among many Christians that the books
are by individuals, rather than about individuals. For example, many Christians
believe a man named Job wrote the book in the Old Testament, “The Book of Job”.
But here, as elsewhere, “of” means “about”, not “by”. This is quite clear in
the very first verse of that book: “There was a man in the land of Uz, whose
name was Job...” (Job 1:1)
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy: These first five books of the
Bible are known as the “Pentateuch”, and tradition ascribes these books to have
been written by Moses. This is highly unlikely, since these books tell of the
death of Moses (Deuteronomy 34:5)! In reality, these books are actually
anonymous and composite works. In these books are two and different accounts of
Creation, of the “flood”, and of the plagues of Egypt. Scholars have
overwhelming evidence that Genesis was compiled from several different sources.
They also feel that Exodus and Leviticus were written by members of the
priesthood in the 5th or 6th century BC.
Joshua: Scholars maintain that this book is drawn from a number of different
sources. The oldest passages of the book date from the 10th century BC, but
were rewritten around the 7th century BC by members of the Deuteronomic school.
Around the 5th century BC, persons motivated by priestly matters added to or
rewrote altogether the entire second half of the book.
Judges: The traditional author of this book was Samuel. However, scholars believe
that it was written after the death of Samuel; chapters 2-16 are believed to be
written by members of the Deuteronomic school, and chapters 17-21 are
considered to be an addition by priests in the 5th century BC.
Ruth: Nothing is known about the author, or when it was written. Scholars point
out that certain references in the book show that it was written sometime in
the “post-exilic” period, probably sometime between the 4th and 2nd centuries
BC.
Samuel (1 and 2): Scholars concur that these books are clearly composite works.
Some scholars maintain that the books were composed from an “Early Source”,
which dates around the time of the reign of Solomon (961-922 BC), and the “Late
Source”, which dates from around the 7th century BC. Other scholars believe
that there were three sources, known as “J”, “L”, and “E”. In both theories, it
is interesting to note that the Early Source (or J and L) favors the
establishment of the monarchy as divinely willed. Yet the Late Source (or E),
clearly disapproves of the concept of a monarchy, saying it rejects the role of
God as the true king! This is an example of one of the many contradictions of
the Bible (even though so many fundamentalists claim the Bible to be
“harmonious”).There are other inconsistencies as well. For example, in 1 Samuel
17, David is credited with killing the giant Goliath. But in 2 Samuel 21:19,
Elhanan, son of Jaareoregim, is credited with the act. Another point to mention
is that if you look in the popular King James Version (KJV) of the Bible, and
turn to 2 Samuel 21:19, you will see “the brother of” (Goliath) in italics.
This italic print means that it was an embellishment of the editor of the KJV,
in an attempt to cover up this inconsistency (by making it appear that Elhanan
killed the brother of Goliath, as opposed to Goliath himself). But if you look
in a reputable version of the Bible, such as the New English Bible, you will
see the original rendition: that Elhanan killed Goliath... an obvious
contradiction.
Kings (1 and 2): The traditional author is ascribed to be Jeremiah. However,
modern scholars have determined that it was actually composed by at least two
anonymous authors. The earlier author wrote his portion sometime before the
death of Josiah, the king of Judah, in 610 BC. The second portion is thought to
have been written around 60 years later. They reason this by noticing that the
last historical event mentioned occurred around that time, and no mention at
all was made of the fall of Babylon in 539 BC, a significant historical event
that certainly would have been worthy of mention. Both authors, however,
certainly seemed to have been motivated by a nationalistic fervor in the cause
of Israel.
Chronicles (1 and 2), Ezra, Nehemiah: Almost all scholars agree that that these
four books were written by the same author(s). Internal evidence suggests that
he (or they) was a member of a priestly tribe, probably a Levite. Nothing is
known about the author, neither his name, nor his character. Like most books of
the Bible, the author was anonymous.
In Chronicles 1 and 2, the author refers to other books, but scholars are
uncertain as to which are genuine references, and which are embellishments of
the author. Most scholars agree that these books contain many later additions,
and that the entire work took from 332 to 167 BC to complete. It is also
obvious that the author used specific references from the books of Samuel and
Kings (which scholars say is less inaccurate), significantly modified to suit
the author's point of view. The writer attempted to find answers to such
troubling questions as “Why do good people sometimes suffer? And why do the
unjust sometimes flourish?” In attempting to answer these questions, it is
notable that the author rejected source material which did not further his aim.
Also, although fundamentalists consider the entire Bible harmonious, there are
many inconsistencies with the book of Chronicles and the book of Kings.
Esther: This book is not even mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Because the
mood of this book is vindictive, with nationalistic overtones, and completely
secular in nature, early Jewish scholars were reluctant to include it into the
Bible. But, bowing down to popular demand, it was eventually included, but not
until AD 90. It is interesting to note that the Greek version of this book
contains over 100 additional verses that were not in the original Hebrew
version.
Job: Modern scholars say that not only was this book written anonymously, the
author used, as his sources, an Israelite or Edomite folktale.
Psalms: This is one of the few sections of the entire Bible which contains
signature lines. 74 of the psalms are
attributed to David, and 32 to other authors... but all of the remainder are of
unknown authorship. Christians and Jews have always attributed the authorship
of this entire book (or at least the editorship) to David, but in reality, this
book is a collection of psalms that took almost 800 years to compile.
Proverbs: Traditionalists attribute this book to Solomon, but scholars point
out that it was probably written around 600 years later (by an unknown person),
because it is clear that the author(s) were heavily influenced by Greek
philosophical systems of thought, such as Epicureanism and Stoicism.
Song of Solomon: You would think that this book would be written by Solomon,
but scholars believe that it was composed 400-600 years later, and that it was
obviously influenced by cultic and pagan rituals.
Isaiah: Traditionally ascribed to Isaiah, but scholars maintain that the first
36 chapters were of his teachings, and the rest were the teachings of his
disciples.
Jeremiah: One of the very few books of the Old Testament that contains
first-person references (although this is only a part of the book). Other
sections are third-person accounts, probably from the students of Jeremiah. The
rest clearly shows the influence of the Deuteronomic school. The entire book
shows evidence of tampering, in the form of editing.
Lamentations: Traditionalists say that the author was Jeremiah, but educated
scholars say that it was composed by different anonymous authors. Chapter 5 is
clearly a later, edited addition of the book. Actually, the ascription of the
book to Jeremiah is the result of a misunderstanding of 2 Chronicles 35:25,
which says that the lamentation of Jeremiah for the king Josiah “are written in
the lamentations”. But the book of Lamentations never even mentions Josiah.
Ezekiel: This is one of the very few books where the majority of the book was
probably written by its namesake. But the last nine chapters are believed by
scholars to have been a later edition by the disciples of Ezekiel.
Daniel: This book is traditionally ascribed to Daniel (who lived in the 6th
century BC). In this book, he tells of his kidnapping by Babylonians from
Jerusalem. But since there is absolutely no historical record of a Babylonian
attack on Jerusalem until about 400 years later, the actual date is estimated
to have been in the 2nd century BC, by an anonymous author. Although the
traditionalists tend to categorize this book with the other so-called
“prophetical” books, it is important to note that this book is not even
mentioned in the directory of famous Hebrew writings, the “Wisdom of Sirach”
(200 BC).Also, although the traditionalists ascribe this book to one author, a
significant portion (2:4 through 7:28) is written in another language, Aramaic
(the remainder of the book being in Hebrew).Furthermore, historians note
numerous historical inaccuracies mentioned in this book (when compared against
other historical records of that time, as well as other books of the Old
Testament).
Hosea: Again, traditionally ascribed to Hosea. But scholars believe that
portions (1:10-11 and the latter half of the second chapter) are later
additions. In is interesting to note that these two additional sections are
verses which describe the “specialness” of the Jewish people.
Joel: Absolutely nothing is known about the author, except his name (Joel).
Amos: Traditionally ascribed to Amos, but scholars believe that this was
written after his death. They also point out that the end of this book (9:8-15)
differs so dramatically from the rest of the book that it must have been an
even later addition, which deals with the people of Israel, the favorites of
Jehovah, being spared the divine wrath.
Obadiah: The traditionalists say this book was written by Obadiah. But biblical
scholars question the unity of the book, and maintain that more than one author
wrote it (one of which may have been Obadiah). Aside from that, absolutely nothing
is known about this Hebrew prophet. Regarding the question of unity of this
book, it is interesting to note that this entire book is only 21 verses in
length!
Jonah: Tradition holds that this book was written by the prophet Jonah, who,
according to Judeo/Christian mythology, lived in the 8th century BC and was
swallowed by a giant fish. But scholars point to evidence that this work was
written anonymously about 300 years later, in the post-exilic period. Among
their evidence, they point to 1) the later form of Hebrew used by the
author(s), and 2) the familiarity of the author(s) with other postexilic works.
The traditionalists say this, and so many other books of the Bible, are
autobiographical works. But even a casual glance at these books show they were
written by another (unknown) person. Using this book as an example, let us
examine chapter 1, verse 17: “Now the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow
up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish for three days and three
nights.” This is clearly a third-person account. A first-person account would
read, “Now the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow me up. And I was in
the belly of the fish for three days and three nights.” What evidence do the
fundamentalists produce in supporting their claim that Jonah is the author?
Absolutely none. There is nothing in the book that even suggests a signature
verse. And remember, I am just using this book as an example. The exact same
case could be made against the vast majority of the so-called “autobiographical”
books.
Micah: Again, the traditionalists say that this book was written by Micah. But,
again, scholars say that it is a composite work. Chapters 1-3 seem to have
actually have been written by him, except for the 12th and 13th verses of the
second chapter, which appears to have been a later addition. These last two
verses speak of the restoration of the tribes of Israel, probably to bolster
the Zionist effort. Scholars maintain that the contents of chapters 4 through 7
reflect circumstances that occurred long after Micah's life. Therefore, Micah
could not have been the author of these chapters.
Nahum: Traditionalists believe this book was written by Nahum. Scholars have
found no evidence to disagree with this. Of course, the traditionalists have no
evidence that it was written by Nahum... this is a type of philosophic fallacy
wherein a conclusion is “proven” true on the basis that it has not been proven
false.
Habakkuk: Scholars believe that the first two chapters were actually written by
Habakkuk, although absolutely nothing is known about this person. But the rest
of the book is considered to be a later addition by an anonymous author. The
scholars’ strong, irrefutable evidence: there was no reference to that part of
the book in the Habakkuk Commentary of the Dead Sea scrolls.
Zephaniah: Tradition attributes it to the prophet Zephaniah, but scholars say
that chapters 2 and 3 were added later. And the end of the third chapter was an
even later addition. Again, this later addition speaks of the Jews regaining
their homeland.
Haggai: Although traditionalists believe that this was written by the prophet
Haggai, scholar doubt this, pointing to the impersonal third-person references
to him as “the prophet”.
Zechariah: Tradition holds that this was written by Zechariah himself. This may
be the case, in the first eight chapters. But scholars point to the last six
chapters, which differ significantly from the first eight, in language, style,
theology, and other matters. This dramatic difference leads the scholars to
believe that this section was composed over a century later than the first part
of the book.
Malachi: Early Jewish commentators believed that this book was written by Ezra,
but scholars believe that is was written later.
THE NEW TESTAMENT
Before discussing the authorship of the New Testament, it is important
to remember that much of the justification of the New Testament is due to the
supposed fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. But, as is clearly shown
above, the authorship and the authenticity of the Old Testament is highly
doubtful. You cannot build a sturdy house on a flimsy foundation. Similarly,
you cannot have a sound argument when your premise for your argument is a weak,
shaky presumption.
The philosophic “center” of the New Testament is the first four books (Matthew,
Mark, Luke and John), which are known as the “Gospels”. The rest of the New
Testament is, for all practical purposes, an elaboration on these four books.
Many Christians believe that these four Gospels were written by the direct
disciples of Jesus, but, as you will see, this is hardly the case. So even the
beloved Gospels are not free from the nagging doubt of dubious authorship.
Christians cite the similarity of the Gospels as “proof” of their authenticity.
But the similarities between these four books is due to the existence of a
alleged collection of the sayings of Jesus called “Q”. The compiler of Q is
unknown. Christians place enormous faith that this unknown person(s) did not 1)
fabricate his own sayings to suit his own agenda, and 2) use saying from
questionable sources.
Also, as I noted earlier, there were over 50 different Gospels in circulation
at the time the New Testament was compiled. Since the persons choosing the
canon used only books that were, more or less, harmonious, it is reasonable to
conclude that the results would be... harmonious books!
For example, one book that did not make it into the New Testament was the
“Gospel of Peter”, because the book does not consider the Crucifixion as an act
of atonement. Similarly, the “Acts of John” was not included because of its
subversion of traditional Christian teachings (such as, denying the reality of
Jesus’ physical body). It may be argued that these (and many other books) were
not included because of “questionable authorship”, but the authorship of these
books is no less questionable than other books that have been included.
Another significant, disquieting fact concerning the New Testament is the
widely used literary tradition at that time of pseudonymously ascribing new
works to a venerated personage of the past in order to give the new concoction
credibility! This has, indeed, serious implications for the entire New
Testament.
Matthew: Traditionalists believe that this is the earliest of the four Gospels,
and was written by St. Matthew, one of the 12 apostles. However, most modern
scholars believe that the Gospel of Mark was earlier, and that the author of
the Gospel of Matthew drew upon the Gospel of Mark for material. This is significant,
because the Gospel of Mark is indeed of highly questionable authorship (see
below). They base these beliefs on internal and external evidence. And this
evidence also casts strong doubts that St. Matthew wrote this book. They have
narrowed down the date of the writing of this book between 70 and 80 AD.
Mark: Traditionalists believe that St. Mark wrote this book. And many
Christians believe that St. Mark was one of the 12 apostles, but that is not
the case. The very earliest evidence concerning the authorship of this Gospel
comes from the 3rd century, from a church historian, Eusebius of Caesarea, who
in turn quotes a writer who lived a hundred years earlier, whose name was
Papias... who in turn quotes a still earlier person called only “the elder”. This
quote refers to the author, Mark, being an interpreter of Peter, whose name was
John Mark, a cousin of Barnabas. But there are reasons to doubt this. Because
most early Christians linked this Gospel to Mark, the “elder” did his best to
at least try to link the author with a man named “Mark” (Peter's interpreter).
The conclusion by most scholars that the author was an otherwise unknown man
(named Mark), who drew on a large number of traditions to compose this work. It
is also interesting to note that many Greek manuscripts end with the eighth
verse of the 15th chapter. Yet the Bible today ends with verse 20! Most
scholars believe that the final 12 verses were added by a 2nd century monk or
scribe to make a more satisfying ending.
Luke: Attributed to St. Luke, although very little is known about St. Luke,
except that he may have been a travelling companion of St. Paul. And, like
Paul, there is no record or mention of St. Luke even meeting Jesus. Therefore,
even if this gospel was written by St. Luke, it would clearly be at best a
second-hand account of the biography of the savior of the Christians, and was
written 40 or 50 years after Jesus’ death. Modern scholars agree that the
Gospel of Luke is clearly based on the earliest Gospel (Mark), and that the author
used two major interpolations (Luke 6:20-8:3, and 9:51-18:14) from the
collection of supposed sayings of Jesus, “Q”, and from a large body of oral
traditions (commonly referred to as “L”).
John: The authorship of this book has created heated controversy since the
1800s. Although traditionalists have always believed that the author of this
book was St. John the Evangelist, in actuality there are four candidates for
authorship: 1) it was written by a person known as “the elder”, as mentioned in
the Epistles of John; 2) it was written by a student of St. John the
Evangelist; 3) it was written by Lazarus of Bethany; or 4) it was written by an
anonymous person in Alexandria a hundred years after Jesus’ death. Also,
scholars generally agree that the entire 21st chapter is a later addition. This
chapter deals with Jesus’ resurrection.
Acts of the Apostles: Traditionally believed that the author was St. Luke, but,
since there is no reference to this within the book itself, there are many
doubts to this. Many scholars contend that it was written by someone who had
acquired the diary of a travelling companion of St. Paul. Scholars point out
that it was written around AD 62-90, and was written in Greek, instead of
Hebrew.
Romans; Corinthians (1 and 2); Galatians: Attributed to Paul. Ephesians:
Traditionally attributed to Paul, but it is doubted by many modern scholars,
because of the extreme differences of tone, vocabulary, and writing style as
compared to authentic letters of Paul. Philippians: Attributed to Paul.
Colossians: Although traditionally ascribed to Paul, many scholars have strong
doubts about this, because of the differences of vocabulary used (as compared
to genuine Pauline writings).
1 Thessalonians: Attributed to Paul.
2 Thessalonians: Attributed to Paul, although, based on internal and external
evidence, many scholars tend to doubt this.
Timothy (1 and 2); Titus: Traditionally attributed to Paul, but most scholars
believe otherwise due to the fact that the style and vocabulary differ in significant
ways from authentic works by Paul. Also, historical events as reflected in
these works do not fit into any known situation of Paul's life. The scholars
believe that these books are by an unknown author(s), who used the name of Paul
to give it an air of authority.
Philemon: Traditionally ascribed to Paul.
Hebrews: Practically all modern scholars doubt this was written by Paul (as the
traditionalists claim). Actually, even the early Christian Church itself had
strong doubts about Paul's authorship of this book! Scholars point out that the
vocabulary, grammar, and style are dramatically different from known works by
Paul. But the most damning evidence is that the author(s) of this book quote
from the Greek versions of the Old Testament (instead of the Hebrew originals,
as Paul would have done)! Therefore, it is clear that this book was not written
by Paul, or any other apostle. This is significant, for in this book contains
the cornerstones of the fundamentalists' beliefs: 1) that Jesus died for everyone's
sins (chapter nine and ten); and 2) that the doctrine of faith alone is
sufficient for salvation (chapters 11 and 12)
James: This book is traditionally ascribed to St. James, the apostle. Most
scholars doubt this, because of the expertise of the author in the Greek
language. Therefore, they feel that it was written by an unknown Greek
Christian. And even many Christians themselves have their doubts about this
work. Even Martin Luther, the founder of one of the three main branches of
Christianity (Protestantism), called it “an epistle of straw”. One reason why
he may have said this was because of a verse in James (2:20): “But wilt thou
know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” The Protestants believe
that faith alone is sufficient for salvation. The Catholics believe that it is
important to do good works as well. This one point was a major factor in
causing Protestantism to break away from Catholicism. And this one verse
devastates the fundamentalists' argument. This is completely contradictory to
Paul's exhortations of “justification by faith” in Romans and Hebrews. So much
for the “harmony of the Bible”, as the fundamentalists claim (as proof of the
Bible's validity).
Peter 1: Although attributed to Peter, it is widely doubted by most scholars,
on the basis of the fact that the author of this book cites Greek translations
of the Old Testament, instead of the Hebrew originals. This questionable book
contains the fundamentalists' slogan, “born again” (1 Peter 1:23)
Peter 2: This book has even more doubtful authorship that Peter 1, so much so
that it was delayed entrance into the New Testament's canon. It is generally
believed that it was written by an unknown scribe around 150 AD.
Epistles of John: Traditionally ascribed to St. John the Evangelist, but many
scholars disagree. Many scholars feel that it was written by one of the four
“Johns” as listed above under the “Gospel of John”, but they can't agree on
which one.
Revelations: Again, attributed to St. John the Evangelist, but scholars again
disagree. But there are so many linguistic differences between this book and
the Gospel of John that it is clear that they were written by different people.
This book is the cornerstone of the fundamentalists, the evangelicals, and the
millenarianists. It records a purported “vision”, and Christians are fond of
tying its enigmatic allegory to current events, to show that the end of the
world is near. And they are generally successful, since this book is so obscure
that one elicit practically any interpretation from it. In fact, ever since it
was written (around AD 100), people of every generation have been able to link
it to their own period of time. The numerous references to “a thousand years”
in chapter 20 has led many to consider that doomsday will occur at the end of a
millennium. The “Judgment Day” hysteria that occurred as the year 1000
approached is a historical fact. Similarly, social psychologists predict that,
as we approach the year 2000, the same hysteria will occur. Many scholars believe
that Revelations is actually a collection of separate works by various unknown
authors. One reason they believe this is because the book is a strange
collection of Greek and Hebrew idioms. And some believe that it was never
intended to be viewed as a “prophecy”, but as an allegory showing the crisis of
faith at that period of time (of the Roman persecutions).
It is interesting to note that Jesus himself never authored any book of the New
Testament, not even a paragraph. In fact, most of the New Testament was written
by Paul. This has led many to consider that Paul is the architect of modern
Christianity, not Jesus. A more accurate name for Christians, then, is
“Paulists”, not “Christians”.
Many Christians believe that Paul was one of the 12 apostles of Jesus, but this
is not the case... the 12 were Andrew, John, Bartholomew, Judas, Jude, the two
Jameses, Matthew, Peter, Phillip, Simon, and Thomas. After Judas committed
suicide, Matthias replaced him. By the way, this is one way of testing the
fundamentalist's knowledge of his own religion. Many believe that St. Mark (the
alleged author of the Gospel of Mark), and St. Luke (the supposed author of the
Gospel of Luke), and St. Paul (the author of many New Testament books), were
members of the 12 apostles, Jesus' direct disciples. But they are not on the
list.
As for Paul, who plays such an important part of Christian theology, it is
important to note that he never met Jesus. In fact, he was active in the
persecutions of early Christians, claiming it to be an unlawful Jewish cult.
Acts 8:1 depicts Paul as agreeing with the stoning of the first Christian
martyr, St. Stephen: “And Saul (Paul's pre-Christian name) was consenting unto
his [Stephen's] death.” Saul was converted to Christianity later, and became a zealous
missionary (perhaps motivated by extreme guilt for his atrocities).
No comments:
Post a Comment