How often do we hear people “explaining” religious beliefs by stating “The Bible says so,” as if the Bible fell out of the sky, pre-translated to English by God Himself? It’s not that simple, according to an impressive and clearly-written book that should be required reading for anyone who claims to know “what the Bible says.”
Bart Ehrman’s Exploration: Who Changed the Bible and Why?
The 2005 bestseller, Misquoting Jesus, was not written by a raving atheist. Rather, it was written by a fellow who had a born-again experience in high school, then went on to attend the ultraconservative Moody Bible Institute in Chicago. Bart Ehrman didn’t stop there, however. He wanted to become an evangelical voice with credentials that would enable him to teach in secular settings. It was for this reason that he continued his education at Wheaton and, eventually, Princeton, picking up the ability to read the New Testament in its original Greek in the process.
As a result of his disciplined study, Ehrman increasingly questioned the fundamentalist approach that the “Bible is the inerrant Word of God. It contains no mistakes.” Through his studies, Ehrman determined that the Bible was not free of mistakes:
We have only error ridden copies, and the vast majority of these are centuries removed from the originals and different from them, evidently, in thousands of ways.
(Page 7). At Princeton, Ehrman learned that mistakes had been made in the copying of the New Testament over the centuries. Upon realizing this, “the floodgates opened.” In Mark 4, for example, Jesus allegedly stated that the mustard seed is “the smallest of all seeds on the earth.” Ehrman knew that this simply was not true. The more he studied the early manuscripts, the more he realized that the Bible was full of contradictions. For instance, Mark writes that Jesus was crucified the day after the Passover meal (Mark 14:12; 15:25) while John says Jesus died the day before the Passover meal (John 19:14).
Ehrman often heard that the words of the Bible were inspired. Obviously, the Bible was not originally written in English. Perhaps, suggests Ehrman, the full meaning and nuance of the New Testament could only be grasped when it was read in its original Greek (and the Old Testament could be fully appreciated only when studied in its original Hebrew) (page 6).
Because of these language barriers and the undeniable mistakes and contradictions, Ehrman realized that the Bible could not be the “fully inspired, inerrant Word of God.” Instead, it appeared to him to be a “very human book.” Human authors had originally written the text at different times and in different places to address different needs. Certainly, the Bible does not provide an an “errant guide as to how we should live. This is the shift in my own thinking that I ended up making, and to which I am now fully committed.”
How pervasive is the belief that the Bible is inerrant, that every word of the Bible is precise and true?
Occasionally I see a bumper sticker that reads: “God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.” My response is always, what if God didn’t say it? What if the book you take as giving you God’s words instead contains human words. What if the Bible doesn’t give a foolproof answer to the questions of the modern age-abortion, women’s rights, gay rights, religious and supremacy, western style democracy and the like? What if we have to figure out how to live and what to believe on our own, without setting up the Bible as a false idol–or an oracle that gives us a direct line of communication with the Almighty.
(Page 14). Ehrman continues to appreciate the Bible as an important collection of writings, but urges that it needs to be read and understood in the context of textual criticism, “a compelling and intriguing field of study of real importance not just to scholars but to everyone with an interest in the Bible.” Ehrman finds it striking that most readers of the Bible know almost nothing about textual criticism. He comments that this is not surprising, in that very few books have been written about textual criticism for a lay audience (namely, “those who know nothing about it, who don’t have the Greek and other languages necessary for the in-depth study of it who do not realize there is even any “problem” with the text).
Misquoting Jesus provides much background into how the Bible became the Bible. It happened through numerous human decisions over the centuries. For instance, the first time any Christian of record listed the 27 books of the New Testament as the books of the New Testament was 300 years after the books have been written (page 36). And those works have been radically altered over the years at the hands of the scribes “who were not only conserving scripture but also changing it.” Ehrman points out that most of the hundreds of thousands of textual changes found among the manuscripts were “completely insignificant, immaterial, of no real importance.” In short, they were innocent mistakes involving misspelling or inadvertence.
On the other hand, the very meaning of the text changed in some instances. Some Bible scholars have even concluded that it makes no sense to talk about the “original” text of the Bible. (Page 210). As a result of studying surviving Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, Ehrman concluded that we simply don’t have the original words constituting the New Testament.
Not only do we not have the originals, we don’t have the first copies of the originals. We don’t even have copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. What we have are copies made later-much later. In most instances, they are copies made many centuries later. And these copies all differ from one another, and many thousands of places . . . Possibly it is easiest to put it in comparative terms: there are more differences among our manuscripts and there are words in the New Testament.
In Misquoting Jesus Bart Ehrman spells out the ways in which several critical passages of the New Testament were changed or concocted. They are startling examples:
A.) Everyone knows the story about Jesus and the woman about to be stoned by the mob. This account is only found in John 7:53-8:12. The mob asked Jesus whether they should stone the woman (the punishment required by the Old Testament) or show her mercy. Jesus doesn’t fall for this trap. Jesus allegedly states “Let the one who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.”
The crowd dissipates out of shame. Ehrman states that this brilliant story was not originally in the Gospel of John or in any of the Gospels. “It was added by later scribes.” The story is not found in “our oldest and best manuscripts of the Gospel of John. Nor does its writing style comport with the rest of John. Most serious textual critics state that this story should not be considered part of the Bible (page 65).
B) after Jesus died, Mary Magdalene and two other women came back to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus, according to Mark 16:1-2). They were met by a man in a white robe who told them that Jesus had been raised and was no longer there. The women fled and said nothing more to anyone out of fear (16:4-8). Everyone knows the rest of Mark’s Gospel, of course. The problem with the remainder of the story is that none of it was originally in the Gospel of Mark. It was added by a later scribe. Those additions include all of the following:
Jesus himself appeared to Mary Magdalene. She told the eleven apostles (minus Judas) about this vision, but they did not believe her. Jesus then appeared to the apostles, chastising them for failing to believe. He tells them that those who believe will be saved and those who don’t will be condemned. Then follows a critically important passage of the Bible.
And these are the signs that will accompany those who believe: they will cast out demons in my name; they will speak in new tongues; and they will take up snakes in their hands; and if they drink any poison, it will not harm them; they will place their hands upon the sick and heal them.
Jesus is then allegedly taken up into heaven and sits at the right hand of God, while the disciples go forth into the world to proclaim the Gospel in miraculous fashion.
Without the above passages (which, again, were not written by Mark) the Pentecostals lose their justification for speaking in “tongues.” And the Appalachian snake handlers have no basis for their dangerous practices.
C) John 5:7-8 is the only passage in the entire Bible “that explicitly delineates the doctrine of the Trinity (that there are three persons and God but that all three constitute a single God):
There are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Spirit and these three are one; and there are three that bear witness on earth, the spirit, the water, and the blood, and these three are one.
Ehrman cites strong evidence that this Trinity passage was entirely concocted and foisted upon Erasmus by outraged theologians who needed support for their prized theological doctrine (page 81).
—
Ehrman reveals numerous other difficulties with the popular assumption that the Bible was perfectly handed down from its original written expression.
Many believers rely fervently on the King James version of the Bible, for instance. They sometimes even say “If the King James was good enough for St. Paul, it’s good enough for me.” Ehrman points out many problems with the King James version, warning that “we need to face up to the facts.”
The King James was not given by God but was a translation by a group of scholars in the early 17th century who based their rendition on a faulty Greek text.
(Page 209).
So what should we make of the Bible? Ehrman argues that the attacks of the New Testament are not simply collections of obvious, self-interpreting words. It’s the same problem we have with other important documents, such as the United States Constitution:
Texts do not simply reveal their own meanings to honest inquirers. Texts are interpreted and they are interpreted (just as they were written) by living, breathing human beings, who can make sense of texts only by explaining them in light of other other knowledge, explicating their meaning, putting the words of the text “in other words.”
(Page 217) The scribes changed the original words of the New Testament by putting them in other words.
In my experience, many people who cherry pick excerpts from the Bible as the proper way to determine what is moral are in utter denial that we don’t have accurate copies of the original writings. Most of them refuse to acknowledge that current popular versions of the Bible contain numerous discrepancies, even compared to the earliest manuscripts we do have. This is on top of the fact that their are hundreds of patent contradictions in the English version of the Bible. To most believers, none of this matters. Stay the course! In fact, in my experience most believers rarely read what the consider to be God’s own inspired word.
Ehrman’s book points out numerous troublesome issues that demand attention even assuming that the original writers of the Bible accurately reported the events described in their original writings (whatever those writings were). The elephant in the room, however, is that none of the authors of the Gospels ever claimed to witness any of the events they were reporting. Further, the extraodinary nature of Biblical claims demands extraordinary proof that ancient self-contradictory writings are simply incapable of providing, except to those of us who believe that the Bible is completely true “because it says so in the Bible.”
For all of those people who continue to go around clentching and thumping those Bibles they bought at Wal-Mart, and for all the rest of us who want to get the story straight, Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus should be required reading.
[Administrator’s Note: More than 540 comments were quickly contributed to this post, making this page too long to download and display. Therefore, on March 23, 2007, I closed off new comments. Last night (February 4, 2009), I discovered a WordPress plugin that allows me to paginate comments, thereby protecting the site from the sudden and repeated load of 540 comments.
Here’s the good news, then. Anyone who has not yet had his or her say on Bart Ehrman’s book may now jump in at the original post and post a comment. That’s right! If none of the 540 comments that have come before you didn’t address an important aspect of Bart Ehrman’s book, you may now remedy that omission, right here in the comments to this original post. Godspeed. ]
I meant to say looking for fault in the Bible. After reading it I realize that it doesn't sound as I meant it to sound.
Interesting reading but flawed. The book of Isaiah found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, when compared to the current manuscripts were identical except for 3 letters which most expositors felt were simply "flourishes" in copying and did nothing to change the meaning of the text. Please remember that the book of Isaiah is the longest in the Old and New Testament, some 66 chapters. My belief is that if you wish to criticize the theology, it is your prerogative but for me, I will hold fast to what I feel is correct.
"To tear the Bible apart is discusting to me, and I can’t beleive you people call yourselves intelligent…..hmmmmmmm……."
We damn Hitler for killing so many but not the Judeo-Christain God who murdered a vastly greater percentage of humanity than any 20th century tyrant. Take the Great Flood of Noah's time. If you believe all but Noah's group drowned then consider who that includes: all Chinese, all Japanese, all Russians, all Mongols, all Africans, all Native Americans, all Germanic tribes, the Aborigines of Australia, the Jews, Eskimos, Pacific Islanders, etc. Makes Hitler, Stalin, and Mao look like minor leaguers. And let us not forget the nuking of Sodom and Gomorrah. Or the murder of the innocent first born of Egypt. Or the fact that to replace these lost peoples required a rather incestuous formula centerpointed on Noah's family or Adam and Eve.
Religion on this planet is one of the greatest tools for murder and death that has ever been invented by mankind. It continues today with Islam, Judism, Hinduism, Christianity and atheism organizing killing in the name of their God-du-jour….
Someday we will remove the yoke of religion and look at what it has done to humanity. Perhaps we will learn the philosophy and live by it rather then use it to justify murder.
By the way, wasn't the King James version (version means it is not the original) invented to prevent a religous civil war in England?
And following up on a few other posts — yes, Bart Ehrman is a believer as far as I understand (certainly I got that impression reading his book). I don't think his faith or salvation was all that affected by writing up what is already pretty standard fare in Biblical textual analysis.
What Bart Ehrman did is actually write an English-language (instead of German), easily readable compendium of the current state of knowledge about the New Testament source texts. It's a great read. I recommend it to everyone — I loved it, and will be giving it to my pastor as a birthday present.
P.S. One earlier poster said that the earliest documents are 4th century. This is true, but we do have 2nd century fragments.
Seems that Mr. Vieth wanted to allign himself with his athestic instructors to get his degree….everyone above has done an excellent job of shooting this one down, so I won't add to their good work….all I can say is that I wish my own work contained as few gramerical and spelling mistakes as the Bible. Context and point has suvrived the copy and translations process. And is that not the real point here.
According to the article above that got us all writing, he says that only John 5:7-8 proves the Trinity. Has he forgotten John 1:1? "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God?" You can't have Jesus as God anymore closer than that, being that Jesus IS God.
Perspective,
take a look, take a breath. one can only imagine the purpose. every human that ever lived stand up and be counted because your beliefs and experiences broadcast through time will count.
psych, LOL
http://newsizeofourworld.ytmnd.com/
If ya ask me (and I know ya didn't), god was invented when the first human realized that he/she was going to die. Og the caveman looked down at the lifeless body of the cavemen lying next to him and said, "What the…? That can't possibly happen to ME! I'm too important!"
And so a belief in an afterlife and a "big daddy" who will take care of everything and right all wrongs was created.
Those who TRULY believe will never be persuaded otherwise because to do so forces them to consider that they may not be quite as important to the universe as they thought. There is great comfort in belief.
I have a question for Ray and anyone else who considers themselves true believers of any faith:
Suppose there was no god. Just suppose for a moment that it could be proven. For the sake of argument let's say the bible was written by men and there is no god. What would happen then? Would you go out and kill your neighbor and steal his stuff? Commit adultery? Cheat on your taxes? Eat an entire cheesecake? Would anarchy rule the streets?
What would happen when you then realized that there was no afterlife, that THIS is all there is? These 70 or so years that you walk around on this speck of mud are all you will ever have. Wouldn't you strive to make this life as positive and pleasant as possible? And how would one do that?
My suggestion would be to treat each other as you would have them treat you. Hey, wait a minute…where have I heard that before??
Love is what remains when everything else is gone.
Come let us reason together… Isaiah 1:18
God is a God of reason, and fairness. That's the conclusion I have come to. So many thoughts presented here. Let me add some thoughts.
A careful reading of the NT one must come to the conclusion that Jesus is who He says He is or the whole Bible should be thrown out. Who He is is God, the Son,… Not the "only begotten" but the "One of a Kind"… a better translation of the phrase in John 3:16. He isn't a human only He is Human and God at the same time. Only God could "atone" for the sins of the world.
He is the "word made flesh"… Since Jesus is also human, He, in His life made human errors. Even thought the Bible doesn't say so,… we could assume He might have cut Himself at the carpenters shop. Thus the Bible has the same nature as Jesus… It is the Word of God. Perfect in all the important aspects,… yet still written by humans, thus having little mistakes that do not amount to anything more than a splinter in one's hand.
The fact that the Bible has some problems, 99% of which are only grammatical etc. only confirms that fact that the Bible and Jesus were in the Beggining and are the Word of God to humans.
That said, one must wonder why so many religions and contradictory doctrines abound. There is another truth in the Bible that is sometimes forgotten. "The devil is a roaring lion,.." wanting to destroy everyone.
There is a fierce battle for our souls going on. It is this battle that causes the world to be a crazy place to live. What do you believe??? The winds of every belief system in the world is blowing in every direction. How does one find "TRUTH". The other force is the Holy Spirit, also God, ONE God, by the way… Christianity is monotheistic. The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit are One in every aspect that counts. One God.
The Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. He came to earth to not only die for us, as only God could… "The wages of sin is death" and Jesus died in our stead so we could have life. No pagan sacrifice here. It is universal justice at work. All are saved by Jesus blood. They might not even know about it. another subject however… God will judge on what people understand of Him and what they do with it. Yes there must be a judgement or there is no justice. If no justice, then God is not love. God is love.
Does a loving God commit a soul, person, to eternal suffering for eternity for sinning for 70-90 years? I don't think so. Even though the Bible seems to say that in a few passages… "The wages of sin is death." NOT eternal torment. Big subject, can't go into it but read Malachi 4:1+ Even though there must be justice the justice is just that JUST and fair. Everyone is judge by their own works. Saved by faith and judged by works. We aren't in this alone… the whole universe is watching to see if God is just. God is the one actually on trial.
thanks for reading all this. Have a great day… yes, I could go on and on 🙂
Actually, "is Bert Ehrman still a believer?" is a question I never saw addressed when I read this book. His presentation suggests that he is, but he never explicitly says in what direction his studies have affected his faith.
God is dead. ~Nietzsche
Nietzsche is dead. ~ God
So who's right? Who knows – believe what you want. But the Bible hasn't been clearly translated – not even into Greek. So saying it is God's word, and PERFECT… well, you can have faith in the God of Abraham, but blind faith in the NIV/KJV bible is asking a little much of anyone. That's all Bart Ehrman’s book is stating. Not that Christianity is a giant sham, just rehashing the text is flawed, something that's been proven time and time again – and honestly he says nothing origonal from what I can gather. Thank God I have the Wesleyan Quadrangle/Methodist Quadrangle.
Now that we have this whole Bible/Jesus/Muslims thing settled (finally). Let's get to figuring out the deal with Santa and the Easter Bunny.
I think the Bunny is a little peeved that Santa gets more hoopla, not to mention the whole gift giving thing.
Hello!!!
this is all HOOWEE!
you know why all this Jesus talk goes on…its been pushed by the 'churh/that bunch'! Know why? the ALMIGHTY DOLLAR (what ever type of money you use), not the ALMIGHTY GOD. All these churches…are the biggest money making scam ever! that is why they want you to remain stupid (i.e. see intelligent design as opposed to SCIENCE!!!)
They pastors/preachers/priests…don't believe in the crap they are selling! Hence the common examples of priest molesting kids…pastors banging the wives of members in his own congregation…and so on and so on.
If any of you really believe in 'god'…then put your bibles away…don't go to some church with check in hand…don't give some televangelist 10%…if you truly believe…
then pray nightly…do onto others as you would have them do onto you and stay away from the scams and the hypocrits…skip the tax free monolyth churches…let it be you and your god…
you have just as direct a line to 'god' as these scumbags that preach and pretend they somehow communicate with god.
I will GENEROUSLY share an interesting statistic which is certainly relevant to this discussion….
Percent of Americans who Believe in GOD (or other dieties) = 87%
Percent of High School Graduates who Believe in GOD = 65%
Percent of College Graduates who Believe in GOD = 51%
Anybody see the trend…? Its not meant as an insult to those who choose to believe in GOD, just food for thought.
Source: Newsweek 6/04
Anything written or spoken by humans is to be questioned. Most all of us lie and twist the trust to suit our own needs. Not only do I not believe that the bible is the word of God, I do not beleive anything in the media or in history books…they were written by humans….the most deceitful animals on the planet.
It's unfortunate, but most people will not render an accurate description of what actually happens. You can put ten people in one place, have them observe an event, ask for their take on what they saw…and you will get 10 different stories. All colored by deceit or opinion.
Why on earth would I or anyone else beleive supposed "history" when it was written by people we do not know and are supposed to trust. The bible is a glorified history book, written by semi-intelligent people to control the not-so-intelligent ones. Believe the supposed "word of God." No..I think not. Not with what I know of mankind today. Not now… not then….NOT EVER.
Better yet, does the Koran actually say there are 72 virgins waiting in heaven for those who kill an infidele in the name of Allah. People always attack the Bible but are affraid to question the Koran and the Muslim faith. Oh well, I guess you take what you can get and leave a religion as violent as Islam alone.
how come some people believe nothing and some believe anything
Some of the responses here are quite interesting, if not un-nerving in their fervor.
The fact that some of you put "faith", your very life in teachings from a book not more special or authentic than any other non-fiction, is utterly amazing. I can understand if it teaches life lessons through hyperbole, but to actually embrace the idea of some invisible super being watching your every move, without a shred of evidence, is fascinating…
Have you never questioned why you believe in your particular god and say not some other (Zeus perhaps)? What were your critical thinking steps to come to your conclusions? Are you willing to step back, and take a non-biased view of your "faith"?
Another interesting aspect of this is how normally rational people, who are shown there is no rational reason or proof their god exists, will continue to believe even violently defend their views…As if they so desperately need this type of reassurance and/or meaning that their religion gives them, they will do anything to cling to it.
Today’s society has enough problems. We needn’t Bronze Age myths to cloud the minds of today citizens. Religion is the last great lie that needs to be addressed and tossed by the way side as other beliefs were such as a flat earth or the sun revolving around us…
Oh, the limitations of finite beings trying to define an infinite God. It's impossible for a small part of Creation to define God, because our very human thinking (definition) requires a boundary around the very thing we are trying to define. I for one am so glad that God is in control and not the people above who continue to frame their arguments in human understanding. There seems to be a lot of arrogance and anger in the responses above, and God knows they are masking the emptiness of lives being lived without God. Life is a gift. Love is a gift. Trying to earn a gift cheapens the giver. (Trying to kill others in the name of God is the worst form of this). Acknowledging our Creator is supposed to be a humbling thing for us, but we still persist in claiming to know what is right on our own. Trying to do something to exalt ourselves.
God had to enter into this world as Jesus to show us what life is all about, because without Him we simply die in our own SelfIshNess. We are easily distracted by what our physical eyes see. A follower submits to God's will first, and places their own selfishness last. We get on our knees and pray to God for strength and guidance, for everyone to understand, yet it is interpreted as arrogance on the part of the faithless observer. It is interpreted as a mockery of God if it is not following a certain "formula".
What should a loving God do for those who refuse to acknowledge or outright deny that He even exists? He made a place called hell, not because He hates unbelievers, but because He loves them enough to make a place where they can exist but be separated from Him. His presence is our very life. Only God can save us, that is why only He could die (physically) as Jesus to prove it. Yet vanity still goes on… Forgive them Lord for they do not know what they are doing.
Scholar:
very good point.
I have had talks about religion with lots of folks…a prevelant theme seems to be that it makes sense to say 'I believe in GOD' since that potentially can get you into heaven! why not hedge your bet, no matter what you trully believe. I bet if you ask Micheal Jackson if he believes in GOD, he would say yes.
This from a man (or whatever) who has gained sexual favors from boys with wine and using money much like dangling a carrot on a stick.
Bush who took this country to a war that was not our last resort…600,000 Iraqis have been killed and I don't know why! BTW, Osama is still around. Him I want DEAD!
I am not saying all of our religious kooks are molesters and liars…just that a high percentage of them are lacking in true morality and decency. I am sure both Jesus and Mohamed would prefer a moral and decent person over some religious murderer/molester!
Bravo to Gato, Wil and all the other folks who are willing to open their mind and find "miracles" within themselves. I used to believe in GOD, because that's what I was taught. But once I learned how to think for myself, I have decided otherwise. This means that I am in control of my own destiny and free will and actions! Beware the age-old trap of trusting a figment of your imagination that "everything will be okay".
Honk if you love science 🙂
And the beat goes on.
I refuse to read the book.
I prefer to better my self.
By reading as many books as possible.
As long as they are fiction
And don't bore me too badly
Generally Stephen King is okay.
And perhaps Dean Koontz.
But only if I'm not having Slim-Fast
induced boredom ^_^
Wow, with this argument raging, I'm glad I'm a Jew!
See, us Jews don't believe in Hell. Isn't that nice? We feel that an omnipotent, benevolent G-d would not consign his children to a place of eternal torment. Makes sense, right? As a result, I don't need Jesus, or anyone else, for that matter, to intercede or mediate between myself and G-d. If I have an issue, I can talk to G-d myself….He may not always answer, but hey, at least I don't need to send him a message through someone else.
It's because we don't operate with the assumption of original sin: We're not operating 'in the red' off the bat, so to speak. Instead, we get credit for doing Mitzvot, or good works, and trying to follow the laws of behavior laid out in Torah. We don't lose ground for slipping; we only gain ground for doing good! Good deal, right? How do I know the Torah is valid, or even more valid than the New Testament? Well, I don't! But, according to what I was taught, the Torah was the only testament that wasn't given to just one person; It was given to an entire PEOPLE. all simultaneously, at the foot of Mt. Sinai. Do I know it's true, without doubt? Nope. That's why they call it faith.
Part of the problem is that the New Testament was written in order to validate Jesus as the Messiah….In fact, the name 'Christ' is derived from the Greek word "Cristos", or "Annointed", the same as "Moshiach", the Hebrew of the same word.
The issue is that Jesus did not fulfill any of the prophecy associated with the Messiah. There were certain events meant to accompany the Messiah's arrival….among them, the end of all earthly wars, the return of all people to G-d, pervasive enlightenment and intelligence, and a worldwide kingdom with the Messiah as its King in Israel. They also explicitly describe the Moshiach as a man of flesh and blood, of regular ol' human parents, but that he would follow all of G-d's laws naturally, like a fish to water, and bring humanity back to them. He is not divine, by any means, but a leader of great intelligence, wisdom, responsibility, and overwhelming charisma. Since none of these prophecies was met (not the Jesus wasn't intelligent or charismatic, by any means), the religion that sprung up around Jesus's death had to back track and try and change the meaning of the prophecy to suit their own needs….Hence, the "second coming", where Christians believe Christ will come back to fulfill all the requirements he missed the first time…
The use of Jesus as an intermediary to G-d for the sins of mankind occured the same way… This happened, essentially, because Jesus dying as a common criminal just doesn't jive, because how could you start a religion on that? But by making his death an atonement for the rest of us, and making him G-d incarnate, BAM, revisionist validation. Hence the crucification as a metaphor for Jesus dying to absolve humanity of their "original sin".
The Trinity is another result of trying to ascribe Jesus divinity instead of recognizing him as a man. Father, Son, Holy Spirit actually runs contrary to the Old Testament, as does Jesus as the only path to G-d. In fact, it's a break of the very 1st commandment…..y'know, the one where G-d says "Thou shalt have no other BEFORE ME". You don't need anyone in front of G-d; in fact, putting anyone as an intermediary breaks a commandment! This is why Jews wouldn't convert to Christianity, even during the Inquisition or the Crusades; by Jewish accounting, to do so would be breaking the most basic of laws. In fact, the intellectual response of Jewish scholars and Rabbi's to this was the Talmudic tradition and the Midrash. It's my opinion that the inconsistencies of the New Testament may be a result of the revisions necessary to ascribe Jesus divinity and start an organized religion, rather than focusing on the quality of his philosphies and ideas.
I won't proclaim my faith the only true faith: all the soap-box operatic going on is ridiculous. The whole point is that it's called FAITH for a reason. Why is it that your own way has to be the only way? Shouldn't it be enough that you believe? Whether it's Allah, Jehova, or Hashem, if we're all monotheistic, what does it matter HOW you praise Him? If we all hold that there's only one G-d, wouldn't it stand to reason that it's THE SAME ONE we all praise? The elitism is silly, and please, all Catholics and Christians, please don't take the above as a personal affront. Whether you're Muslim, Christian, or Jew, it shouldn't matter! That people kill each other over how to praise G-d is the most idiotic contradiction.
And for the agnostics and atheists: more power to you! You're doing what you should; reserving your own judgements on what the truth is until the evidence is in. I consider myself a Jew, but that doesn't mean I don't think for myself, and examine and question what I'm taught as the categorical truth. ALWAYS QUESTION EVERYTHING. If it has the ring of truth is up to you. I just feel sympathy for those of you who've never been so moved by the natural world, or been over-awed by something so profound that it points the way towards the likelihood of a being or consciousness greater than yourself.
To all of you, Keep the Faith.
I HAVE RESEARCHED MANY YEARS IN HOPES OF ANSWERING THE QUESTION OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUE OF THE BIBLE. As a very young man, I read in the first or second page of our bible, a statement that read:THIS IS A TRANSLATION OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUE INTO ENGLISH, GERMAN, FRENCH, HEBREW, etc.,etc." ( this statement is no longer in the newer versions of the bible). WHY??
I have found the answer to that question! I have also learned why the western european can not except these facts. I suggest you and your readers will read a book titled " THE AFRICANS WHO WROTE THE BIBLE"; By NANA BANCHIE DARKWAH, ISBN 0-9701900-0-X
"NO MAN NOW OR EVER WILL LET HIMSELF BE PUT ON A CROSS AND PRETTY MUCH ROT TO SAVE US, ONLY GOD HIMSELF WILL DO THAT. AND HE DID."
If your god is all powerful, why would he need to be crucified to "save us"? Please don't respond with additional dogma.
BTW: Yelling in caps doesn’t make your argument more valid.