
The Myth of Jesus
- The God of the Bible
The Biblical picture of God can hardly be reconciled with the Christian teaching of 'God is love', e.g., ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() The Bible presents an interesting picture of God, i.e., a god who never changes (Malachi 3:6) but actually does frequently change his mind and even regrets what he's done ('repents') - Genesis 6:6,7, Exodus 32:14, 1 Samuel 15:35, 2 Samuel 24:16, 1 Chronicles 21:l5, Jeremiah l8:8,10, 26:3,l3,l9, 42:l0, Ezekiel 24:14, Joel 2:13, Amos 7:3. However, Numbers 23:19 and 1 Samuel 15:2 say that God never repents. It is said that God is 'spirit', i.e., non-physical (John 4:24) and yet he is always called 'him' or 'he' as if he had a male body, and it is also said that although spirit, he has feet (Psalm 18:9), arms (Jeremiah 27:5), wings (Psalm 36:7), hands (Job 27:11), eyes (Deuteronomy 8:3), a mouth (Isaiah 1:20), ears (2 Chronicles 6:40), nostrils (Exodus 15:8) and legs (Genesis 3:8). He also uses a razor - Isaiah 7:20. He also occasionally roars (Joel 3:16) and sometimes he even whistles (Isaiah 5:26). Although he has never been seen (John 1:18), he has been seen (Isa 6:1), and he even revealed his rear to Moses (Exodus 33:21-22)... Christian theology asserts that evil exists because of the disobedience/sin of Adam (and Eve), and it is because of their transgression that all humans must die: this is taught by Paul in Rom 5:12,17,18 and is the central theology of Christianity. However, this contradicts 2 Kings 14:6, Ezekiel 18:20, Jeremiah 31:30 that state a person will not suffer for an ancestor's wrongdoing. If the God of the Bible is truly God, then there is a dilemma; for God to be God, he has to be omnipotent, responsible for the creation of everything, and this includes evil; if he did not create evil, then he was not wholly creative, and therefore cannot be God. In fact the Bible does say that God commits and/or is responsible for evil, e.g., Exodus 32:l4, 2 Sam 24:l6, 1 Chron 21:l5, Jer l8:8, 26:3,13,19, Jonah 3:l0. Furthermore, he sends lying spirits (1 Kings 22:23, 2 Chronicles 18:22) and deliberately deceives people (2 Thessalonians 2:11). And not only this, he admits to being responsible for the creation of evil and misery (Isaiah 45:7), and that he has deliberately made people so he can destroy them (Proverbs 16:4). The Christian 'explanation' that evil occurs because 'God allows free will' is absurd as evil occurs without the involvement of any supposed 'free will'. Moreover, free will is an illusion as cognitive science demonstrates humans (and animals) behave according to their genetic and environmental origins (i.e,, determinism). God is also said to condemn killing (Exodus 20:13) and yet he orders it (Exodus 32:27); he encourages wisdom (Proverbs 4:7) but condemns it (1 Corinthians 1:19); he protects the righteous (Proverbs 12:21) but does not (Hebrews 11:36-37); he cuts off the wicked (Proverbs 10:27) but does not (Job 21:7-9); he commands respect for parents (Exodus 20:12) but encourages hatred for them (Luke 16:9); he blesses peace (Matt 5:9) but brings war (Matt 10:34, Revelation 19:11). God will keep the earth (Ecclesiastes 1:4), but destroy it (2 Peter 3:10); is invisible and unseen (John 1:18, 1 Timothy 6:15-16) but has been seen (Amos 9:1, Deuteronomy 5:24); he lives in dazzling light (1 Timothy 6:15-16), but lives in darkness (l Kings 8:12)...... Another example of how the Christian God appears unable to make up his mind which naturally leads to problems for Christian belief is how the Old Testament portrays family life, i.e., being married with children, as God's goal for each human being, whereas in the New Testament, this no longer applies. As far as Jesus' teaching about the 'sanctity' of marriage or even family life, the Gospels say virtually nothing concerning this. In the case of Jesus' teaching regarding divorce in Matt 19:3-12, Mark 10:2-12 and Luke 16:18 (John omits this passage), even this appears suspect. In Mark, Jesus speaks to his Jewish audience about a woman divorcing her husband (10:12), but no such thing was possible in first cent. Palestine and thereby indicates: (i)Mark was written in an area where a woman divorcing her husband was possible, e.g., Rome, and (ii)the author of Mark was ignorant of Palestinian/Jewish life and customs, and (iii)the author of Mark betrays the fact that he was not an eyewitness of the events about which he wrote. This of course conflicts with the Christian belief that the author of Mark is the John Mark mentioned in Acts 12:12. Matt's author omits Mark's statement about women divorcing their husbands as he realized the error. While Mark also allows no reason for divorce (10:12), the author of Matt has Jesus saying that one reason was acceptable for divorce (i.e., unfaithfulness) in 19:9. Presumably by the time Matt was written, Christians (particularly Gentiles) were finding Jesus' instruction in Mark impossible to follow, so Matt's author introduced an escape clause. One of the very few occasions when Jesus is said to refer or rather, allude to family life is when he lists some of the Ten Commandments to the man asking about acquiring eternal life, and repeats the commandment about honouring parents. This appears in Matt 19:16-22 where the enquirer is a young man. In Luke 18:18-23 he is a ruler, and in Mark 10:17-22 he is clearly not 'young' as he recalls his youth (10:20). In Mark, Jesus lists some of the Ten Commandments including 'Honour your parents', but he also lists 'Do not defraud' (10:19) as one of the Commandments: however, this is not one of the Ten Commandments (These are found in Exodus 20:1-17, Deuteronomy 5:6-21): Matt (19:18) and Luke (18:20), correct Mark's error. This again is an example of how Mark's author could not have been a Jew or used the apostle Peter's recollections (as the church claims) as a Jew would at least know the Ten Commandments. Furthermore, it shows how Matt and Luke's authors freely changed Mark when they saw a mistake; thus, their compositions cannot be reliable accounts either. There is also the factor that it is somewhat inappropriate for Jesus to preach about the honouring of parents when he also said, for example, people should hate their own family (Luke 14:26), and not bury relatives when they die (Matt 8:21-22): he also said his purpose was to break up families (Matt 10:34-36, Luke 12:51-53), and people should desert their family (resulting in a reward) (Luke 18:29-30). In fact Jesus refers to becoming 'eunuchs' for the sake of the kingdom (Matt 19:12) and Paul says it is preferable to be single (1 Cor 7:27,29,32-34,39-40): in Revelation, the redeemed are depicted as celibate males (Rev 14:4). Another anomaly in traditional Christian preaching is that in raising a family, it is inevitable to have full-time employment, but this conflicts with the New Testament call to Christians to give up everything to preach the gospel. Christians invariably excuse having to work (rather than obeying the New Testament to give up everything in order to preach the gospel) because of their family commitments. But as we have seen above, the New Testament favours the single/celibate life in order that Christians can devote themselves full-time to the gospel. Indeed, Jesus is reported as telling his disciples that they should take up their cross and follow him and 'he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me' (Matt 10:37-38). It is therefore difficult to see how Christians, who spend most of their time in secular employment in order to finance the raising of a family, etc., are complying with Jesus' supposed request. In reality they are not, as they obviously prefer earning a full-time salary to buy luxuries and material goods, pensions, investments, etc., etc., in order to provide and ensure a comfortable home for themselves and their children rather than 'picking up their cross' and going out into the world to preach (Matt 28:19). As 'rich' and 'wealthy' in the New Testament would have meant anyone with money or assets beyond his daily need, the irony is that the vast majority of today's Christians, by New Testament standards, would be considered 'rich'. And yet the rich are the very people condemned in James (James 1:9-10, 5:1) and by the Gospel Jesus. One naturally wonders how the life enjoyed by so many Christians particularly in the West, can be reconciled with Jesus' supposed command to his followers not to have wealth (Matt 5:42), to sell all they have and give this to the poor (Luke 12:22,32-33; see also Luke 14:33), and the instruction not to consider the future but only be concerned about the present (Matt 6:25-34): the very fact that virtually all Christians ignore this instruction indicates that they realize the foolishness of such a grossly irresponsible command. Nonetheless, the statements attributed to Jesus are very straightforward:
|