September 18, 2010, 5:38 pm by dc-agape.

John Chapter 19

This post will describe some of the issues with John’s account verse the Synoptic Gospels and the Traditions of Men.  My last post covered some issues with the events before the Sanhedrin.  In this post I want to introduce some questions about the events before Pilate and Herod.  I will have to leave the events of Jesus’ death and burial till the next post. 

Since only four Gospels have been canonized since 320 AD, we have four “eye-witnesses” to the events leading up to Jesus’ crucifixion. But as it turns out some issues do crop up with this Traditional view of events.  Some “eye-witness” accounts add things that the other “reports” leave out, others suggest unforgettable events that are eliminated from all the other reports.  In the events with Pilate and Herod just such things occur.

In the Gospel of John (the only eyewitness to the “trial”) there is not a single mention of Herod!  Without the non-eyewitness accounts of the trial we would not believe today that Herod was involved or that he was even in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus’ death.  In fact, only the Gospel of Luke (recorded by a follower of Paul) was Herod even mentioned at all.  Neither the Gospels of Matthew (another “actual” witness) or Mark (the most likely first gospel recorded) describe Herod’s involvement in the trial of Jesus.  Why would John, Mark, and Matthew leave out such an event?  Herod was the second most important person in the Roman occupation of Israel…leaving him out would be like leaving out the Ambassador to Iraq when describing the formation of the Iraqi constitution!  More importantly, why would Paul (through Luke) add something that Matthew, Mark, and John left out?  To believe that Paul was at the trial would again attempt to make the lifespan of the occupied Israeli longer than the average lifespan of a Roman Citizen (40 years).  For Paul to have died in ~60 AD he would have had to be less than 15 years old or have been much older than the average person when he died.  Since we are told that the Sanhedrin was made up of elders and chief priest, a young Paul would not have been in attendance.  So the Gospel of Luke is actually third-hand knowledge at best, not the most authoritative source! So actually for the events of the trial we have only one actual source…the Gospel of John.  The other three Gospels are merely Traditions of Men recorded as Authority.

So what does this mean for Christians?  It is actually very simple:

John 19:36 Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world.  If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews.  But my kingdom is from another place.”

The Kingdom of God (Jesus) is not of this world…Christian have no say in the governance of the world’s nations!  There cannot be a Christian Nation here on this planet, for Jesus himself, told Pilate that his kingdom did not exist on Earth.

There are two other troubling issues with the Gospel account of Jesus’ trial.  That would be of the “custom” to release a prisoner on the Passover holiday.  Two problems exist with this “custom”: first, no record of such a custom exists in Roman or Jewish histories of the time, and second, Barabbas (a known rebel) would not have had the option of parole!  Why is it that neither the Roman nor the Jewish histories tell us about this custom?  Were all the records from both nations destroyed or tampered with?  There aren’t any!  Not a single one records this custom.  The historical accuracy of the Gospels is questionable at best, but when they cannot be verified by outside sources, it certainly begins to look a lot like a mythology.  The concept that a known traitor to Rome would be released by a Roman overseer of Israel seems unlikely.  The Roman Empire looked very unfavorably on political enemies.  In fact, crucifixion was the choice way to eliminate the slaves, pirates, and the enemies of the State.  As a result of this information, Jesus would not have been crucified; he was not an enemy of the State as Pilate decreed.  But Barabbas would not have been freed, either, for he was an enemy of the State!

To the non-believer the accuracy of these Gospels is highly unlikely.  With John being the only source of information about these events, the missing verification, and the contradictory evidence John does provide, it was highly unlikely to have taken place the way it is recorded in the Gospels.  When you add the unlikely lifespan of these “authors” to the mix the tales become even bigger – they become Tall Tales from a superstitious group of religious hopefuls.  The only person who knew the truth about this part of Jesus’ life and recorded these events – died as an old man in Ephesus.  But even the events of the crucifixion are to be questioned.  I will do exactly that in the next post.

Posted in Important Questions, Contradictions, Traditions of Men, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | 18 Comments »

September 11, 2010, 7:18 am by dc-agape.

Mark Chapter 16

This is the last chapter in the Gospel of Mark.  It must be one of the shortest chapters in the Word of God; as a result it would be a very short post about a gay Atheist’s interpretation.  But someone had to go and add to the Word of God.  That’s right; some purposely changed the unchanging Word of God.  And yes, that’s right; whoever did it broke the commandments of Moses (Deut 12:32), Peter (2^nd Peter 2:3), Paul (1^st Tim 6:3-4), John of Patmos (Rev 22:18) and even in Proverbs (Proverbs 30:5-6) which is attributed to a man named Agur son of Jakeh.  And yes, you can claim that it was YHWH will to have the change made.  But then you have to justify why YHWH commanded someone to lie and attribute this addition to John Mark, when it certainly was not John Mark who made the addition.

As Agur says:

Proverbs 30:6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

That is exactly what happened in this chapter.  Within two verses the lie is revealed.

Mark 16:8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb.  They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

These women were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome (Mark 16:1).  Yet just a short few sentences later:

Mark 16:9-10 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared to first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.  She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping.

Two lies are recorded in these three verses.  The inerrant Word of God was changed and as Agur warned…the liar is easy to prove.  In verse 8 Mary Magdalene did not tell anyone what she saw.  Yet in verse 10 she immediately tells them what she saw.  The other difference is that in verses 9-10 it is only Mary Magdalene…all of a sudden Mary the mother of James and Salome are missing.  Someone has added to the Word of God and the lie is easily proved just as Agur warned in Proverbs. 

This obvious lie negates the rest of the chapter and there is no reason for a gay Atheist to interpret it.  Oddly there is disunity between the Gospels here as well.  In John 19:40 it is Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea who prepare Jesus’ body by the Jewish burial customs.  Yet in Mark 16:1, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome go to do the same thing 3 days later.  The disciple’s spiritual leader was just killed and they do not understand what will happen in the future…wouldn’t they all be together and won’t they all relate the stories about Jesus, especially the last few days?  Wouldn’t Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea tell the others that they had completed the burial customs?  From a gay Atheist’s interpretation this is another disunity.

So the chapter ends with a young man sitting outside the tomb and tells the woman that Jesus is not there.  He wants them to tell the other disciples to meet Jesus in Galilee.  So the disciple’s Master and Lord has risen from the dead, just like a Zombie Lord.  Worse is that Jesus is also a Zombie Master, remember in Matthew 27:52-53, zombies invade Jerusalem at the same time as the woman reach the empty tomb.

Posted in Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | 2 Comments »

September 4, 2010, 10:26 am by dc-agape.

Mark 15:21-47

The “prophecies” that were fulfilled with Jesus’ crucifixion are spread across the four Gospels.  But this is as good as any to examine if they are prophecies of wishful thinking or more like those of Nostradamus, where we fit the outcome to his writing.  The first type of prophecy is like the Tarot cards.  The cards are vague and cover almost any condition possible; in hindsight the “meaning” of the read is understood.  In the case of Nostradamus, well he was uncannily accurate on the time, place, and sometimes even the name.  Jules Verne was of a similar vein to Nostradamus; Verne’s science fiction was highly accurate but written 50-100 years before his topics switch from fiction to fact. 

The main prophecies of the crucifixion are:

Oops, that’s a heck of a lot of verses to compare.  Well as I get to each Gospel I will cover these prophecies in a special post.  I think I best just focus on the Gospel of Mark for today.

1)      Mark 14:49 vs. Isaiah 53:7-12

a.      All Jesus says in this verse is that the Scriptures must be fulfilled.  Then all his disciples deserted him.

b.      I did mention that Jesus was not lead off without opening his mouth.  But I do think it strange that he could be assigned two graves: one with the wicked and one with the rich.  We don’t even know that the grave he was buried in was a rich man’s tomb.  Disunity in the Gospels – Part 2. 

2)      Mark 15:23 vs. Psalms 69:21

a.      In the next verse somebody offers Jesus wine with gall. 

b.      This verse is directly related to the after effects of King David’s sins, when Israel is in turmoil.  Interestingly, the gall was placed in King David’s food.  It is correct in the vinegar water.  But that is not what Mark describes.

3)      Mark 15:23 vs. Proverbs 31:6

a.      Same verse in Mark about wine with gall.

b.      Proverbs 31:6 Give beer to those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish; Jesus fits both of those, why did someone not give Jesus some beer!

4)      Mark 15:24 vs. Psalms 22:18

a.      In Mark they divide his clothing by casting lots.

b.      In Psalms 22:18 David is crying out to YHWH, since he has not been delivered yet from his enemies (due to David’s own sin).  The verse is a direct word for word quote.  But it is still taken out of context.

5)      Mark 15: 27 (alternate translation) vs. Isaiah 53:12

a.      Jesus was counted with the lawless ones in Mark’s version of this prophecy.

b.      In Isaiah the Servant will only gain a portion among the great but he will be numbered with the transgressors.  So taken in full, Jesus will not be sitting on the right-hand side of YHWH…he will only have a portion of what any other “great” gets.  This prophecy is even worse than being taken out of context…it nullifies the Word of God.

6)      Mark 15:33 vs. Amos 8:9

a.      In this verse 3 hours of darkness covers the land, in broad day light.  An actually solar eclipse of the sun can only last for at most 7.5 minutes (Bruce McClure’s Astronomy Page).  So someone was exaggerating here!

b.      The verse in Amos, so what?  YHWH predicts that a solar eclipse will occur.  Amos does not describe the length of time.  Amos goes on to describe horrible misery and famines.  Oddly that does not occur at Jesus’ death.  Another verse taken out of context.

7)      Mark 15:40 vs. Psalms 38:11

a.      This verse in Mark describes the women who were at the crucifixion.

b.      Psalms 38 is another song written by David asking for YHWH help.  David complains about his companions avoiding him.  Yet this does not occur in the Gospels…in the Gospel of John, Jesus directly talks to the disciple John.  So again this is a verse taken out of context and does not even fit the situation.

So, most of these “prophecies” are nothing more than fitting the Old Testament to events that were occurring with a strong dash of liberalism.  Most of these OT verses were so taken out of context that it is shameful to even claim that they are “prophecies” about the Christian savior that the entire religion is based on.  These over-exaggerations make the story a lie, whether it happened or not.

Posted in Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | 1 Comment »

August 21, 2010, 7:56 am by dc-agape.

Mark 15:1-20

These last two chapters of the Gospel of Mark are crucial to the Christian faith.  Yet from a gay Atheist’s reading of the Bible two major “flaws” are quite apparent.  One is the story of Jesus being by himself in front of the Sanhedrin, Pontius Pilot, possibly Herod Antipas, and the soldiers prior to being lead to the crucifixion.  Who exactly recorded this information?  The second “flaw” is the relationship between accounts and Jesus fulfilling the prophecy here:

Isaiah 53:7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

In the Gospel of Mark he said two things to his “oppressors” but in the Gospel of John Jesus became extremely long winded.

The biggest question that requires an answer is who recorded these events?  Did Jesus, after returning to his disciples tell them all about?  Then why would there be such a huge variation in the story?  True the synoptic Gospels are all second hand info…which would make the events in the Sanhedrin third hand information.  The Gospel of John would be more accurate, but it would still be second hand recollection written between 20 and 50 years after the event.  Everyone knows that second hand information that is at least 20 years old is suspect.  If the story was third hand or 50 years old, wouldn’t that make the entire section before the Sanhedrin useless information.  Since this is the crux of the faith, how safe is it to use this information to base the future of your soul?  Or do Christians just ignore these questionable passages?  If you don’t think about it, it’s ok?  On the other hand, if you believe that one of the Sanhedrin joined the Church after these events and confessed all the deeds, many other people would be required as well…one of the soldiers who mocked him, a servant to Pilot or Herod, etc.  This is even more unreliable than the other hypothesis, due to the number of people required.  And these are hypotheses…it is not recorded in the Bible who was responsible for this information being passed to the authors of the four Gospels.

Now the other flaw is actually more serious.  Jesus claimed, and the Traditions of Men, continue to claim that Jesus fulfilled a prophecy from Isaiah 53 in this chapter.  Yet he was not silent.  In the Gospel of John (John 18:19-39) he preached to the Sanhedrin and to Pontius Pilot.  As a result, if you take Isaiah 53 to be a prophecy about Jesus, then this prophecy was not fulfilled.  I have pointed out in other posts that Jesus made the prophecies fit the situation.  I have, also, pointed out where he took verses so out of context and claimed them to be prophecy about himself.  Here I am pointing out that he did not fulfill prophecy at all.  The core of Christian faith is that Jesus fulfilled prophecy, yet a close read of the Bible and it is apparent that much of this is not true.  How do Christians adjust their faith to include these blunders in the inerrant Word of God?

Posted in Traditions of Men, Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | 1 Comment »

August 14, 2010, 10:11 am by dc-agape.

Mark 14:32-72

This section starts in Gethsemane and moves to a late night meeting of the entire Sanhedrin.  At first, in Gethsemane, Jesus has second thoughts about the plans that YHWH and he created.  Then, just as required, for those plans to be enacted, Judas carries out his duty.  Once they are in the Sanhedrin Jesus is almost off the hook, until he blasphemies in front of the high priest.  At the end of the chapter Peter does exactly what Jesus prophesied.  Within this section of the Gospel of Mark three people carry out what is predestined to happen to them.  In both Jesus’ and Peter’s case it is against their own will, with Judas he deeply regrets it afterwards.  But none of them can change what YHWH has forced upon them.

In Gethsemane, three times Jesus goes and begs YHWH to take this predestination away from him.  Each one seems to be an about an hour long.  Since the Lord’s Supper was not started until after night fall, by the time these prayers were done it had to have been after midnight.  Yet Jesus, knowing the weakness of humans, still rebuked his disciples each time.  They certainly did not know what Jesus knew, and were not distressed like Jesus about the future.  They had just eaten a late dinner and the food made them sleepy.  Here we see an example of how human Jesus truly was, his concern is only about himself and he has no compassion for his disciples. 

During this third rebuke, Judas arrives with a large number of men to arrest Jesus.  Obviously, Jesus had made sure that Judas knew where to find him.  And obviously, Jesus stayed there until Judas arrived.  Whether this was predestination or an actual plan between Jesus and Judas is not clear.  But being at Gethsemane early in the morning hours, instead of in the town of Bethany (where they stayed during the trip to Jerusalem) certainly made the arrest easier and did not require a large number of people knowing about it.

During the arrest, Peter actually attacks one of the servants (not the high priest himself – bad choice).  We know that it is Peter from a different Gospel (John 18:10).  In other stories of this event, Jesus rebukes Peter against the act.  What is the oddest part of this story is that Peter is not arrested for harming the servant of the high priest.  Wouldn’t the high priest take that act as a personal affront?  Instead, Peter is allowed to remain near Jesus once they get to the meeting of the Sanhedrin. 

There are some odd correlations between the OT prophecies and what is written in the NT as acts that Jesus performed to carry out those prophecies.  In the Book of Isaiah chapter 53, Jesus does exactly what is required (Isaiah 53:7), but other references to the OT are not so clear.  In fact, they seem to be taken way out of context.  During Jesus’ rebuke of his disciples for falling asleep the NIV claims that this is a reference to:

Psalms 51:12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

This has nothing to do with what Jesus complains to his disciples about:

Mark 14:38 Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation.  The spirit is willing, but the body is weak.

In the Psalms verse it is obviously a prayer to have a willing spirit.  In Mark, Jesus assumes that his disciple have a willing spirit.  So the two verses are not related and revering to the Psalms verse at this point is meaningless.  The other verse that seems to be taken out of context, by our editors, is the reference to Zechariah 13:7.  It is taken out of context because when Jesus is arrested everyone deserted him and in Zech something similar happens.  But take a closer look:

Zech 13:7-8 “Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, again the man who is close to me!” declares the Lord Almighty.  “Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones.  In the whole land,” declares the Lord, “two-thirds will be struck down and perish; yet one-third will be left in it.

Zechariah has nothing to do with Jesus crucifixion.  YHWH did not strike down 2/3 of the whole land after Jesus was arrested and killed.  Obviously, this combination of verses is a Tradition of Man that is incorrect.  Why do we persist in allowing such misinterpretations to continue?  Why is it ok for some people to take verses out of context (including Jesus)?  Taking the Word of God out of context is changing the Word and we know what will happen to people who do this:

Proverbs 30:5-6 Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.  Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

In the Sanhedrin, Jesus is quite and no one can bring true witness against him.  I wonder when this part was transferred from Jesus to the disciples.  Jesus does not see his disciples again until after he is crucified.  But Jesus does himself in at the end.  In front of all the religious leaders Jesus says this about himself:

Mark 14:62 “I am,” said Jesus, “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

It was unanimously decide that Jesus should be put to death.  But by

Lev 24:16 Say to the Israelites: If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord must be put to death.  The entire assembly must stone him.  Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.

Again the Word of God is taken out of context.  Blaspheme in this context is cursing YHWH’s name…not claiming to be the Son of Man.

The chapter ends with Peter denying Jesus, just as Jesus predicted.  Peter had no freewill.  The first two denials seem trivial; one is to a servant girl and the second time was to the exact same servant girl.  The third denial is serious.  In front of a large number of people, Peter calls down curses on himself to lie to the crowds that he is not related to Jesus.  As soon as this occurred the rooster crows and Peter is filled with remorse. 

This story read without the god bias, leaves a gay Atheist wondering how Christians read this Book and not recognize the falsehoods that are blatantly apparent.  The OT is taken out of reference, punishment for crimes are strangely absent (Peter’s physical attack), stories that cannot be related to the author (Jesus before the Sanhedrin) and the proof that none of these characters had freewill.  It would seem that anyone reading these verses would see the truth…that these are stories that have been modified, if not completely made up.

Posted in Word of God, Traditions of Men, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Freewill, Readings | Print | 2 Comments »

August 8, 2010, 9:39 am by dc-agape.

Mark 15:21-47
This is the story of how the Christian savior died.  It would be a horrible tale no matter who it was about. Mankind has devised many ways to torture, but crucifixion is supposed to be one of the longest, painful, and most humiliating one ever created.  Jesus was but one of millions (Wikipedia) who have been killed in this way.  What truly makes this story so sad is that we have four accounts of it in the inerrant Word of God that is so inconsistent we don’t know what happened.

Because it is recorded four different times the traditional thought was that we got to see four different perspectives.  But this is just not the case.  Five different things happened only in one of the stories; the other stories either omit these happenings or outright deny them.  To compound the variability of the story (and hence its veracity) the parts about Joseph of Arimathea and the location of the tomb are not anywhere close to being in harmony.  The prophecies of his death will require a second post, there are just too many taken out of context.

The six differences that break the harmony of the story include: the thieves, an earthquake, the undead, Jesus’ mother, Nicodemus, trip to Golgotha.  Starting with the thieves, in two of the stories the thieves heap insults on Jesus as all three die (Matt 27:44, Mark 15:32).  Only in Luke 23:40-42 does one of the thieves ask to be remembered by Jesus.  If he was insulting Jesus to begin with, what would be the point in asking to be remembered at a different period of time?  The Gospel of Matthew has two more events that are not collaborated by the other three Gospels. 

Matt 27:51-53 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in tow from top to bottom.  The earth shook and the rocks split.  The tombs broke open and he bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.  They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared too many people.

No other Gospel records these two events.  Don’t you think that if the earth shook the disciples would all have remembered it?  Don’t you think that is a bunch of zombies entered Jerusalem all the disciples would have recorded it?  The Gospel of John (the only actual witness) also has two events that are not collaborated by the other Gospels.  Does his actual witness make it correct?  The other three Gospels do not mention that Mary the mother of Jesus was witness to the crucifixion.  Only in John 19:26-27 is this story mentioned.  Yet all the other Gospels mention which Mary’s were present (Matt 27:55-56, Mark 15:40, Luke 23:49).  The other event that occurred only in the Gospel of John was the burial preparation that Nicodemus and Joseph of Ariamthia carried out.  Nicodemus is not even mentioned being there by the other Gospels.  Lastly, the trip to Golgotha is not in harmony between the four Gospels either.  Three of the Gospels remember Simon of Cyrene (Matt 27:47, Mark 15:21, Luke 23:26) carrying the cross for Jesus.  Yet in the Gospel of John (John 19:17) Jesus carries it himself.  These six events that are not collaborated by the other Gospels indicate the disharmony in the Gospels. They are much more important than the directly copied verses from the Gospel of Mark into the other Gospels at telling us something about this story. 

The most telling errors in the Gospel stories about the crucifixion of Jesus is that of Joseph of Arimathea and the location of the tomb.  Two of the Gospel openly tell that Joseph was a disciple (Matt 27:57, John 19:38) the other two Gospels only say that he was a Council member (Mark 15:43, Luke 24:50).  They all agree that he was responsible for taking Jesus’ body to a tomb (I get to that in a minute).  He was the most important person in the story at that moment, yet the disciples could not remember him well enough to be accurate about whom he was?  If Joseph was a disciple and helped them in the worst period of their experience with Jesus, don’t you think they would give him proper recognition?  At least all four of the Gospels remember him as a disciple?  It seems to a gay Atheist to be a great oversight in the harmony of the Gospels that Joseph is so poorly documented. 

The other poorly documented and extremely important piece of information that is not recorded accurately is where the tomb was located.  In the Gospel of Matthew (Matt 27:59-60) the tomb actually belongs to Joseph of Arimathea (another reason to remember him better).  But in both the Gospel of Mark (Mark 15:46) and the Gospel of Luke (Luke 24:53) the tomb is unspecified.  But the oddest of all is what the Gospel of John says about the tomb:

John 19:41-42 At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden was a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid.  Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.

John’s documentation of the tomb is quite different from the others.  This tomb obviously did not belong to Joseph of Arimathea.  Why would he purchase a tomb in Golgotha, where the crucifixions took place?  But since the disciples actually did not know where Jesus was buried, how can they (and we by extension) be certain that there was ever an empty tomb?  This is the most critical piece of the resurrection story and the disciples and we don’t even know where it took place!  Would not the exact place where Jesus rose from the dead be remembered by the disciples?  And wouldn’t they, even secretly, point it out to all the new followers?

Yet, instead, there is no consensus on where and what took place during this most important time in the history of Christianity.  The validity of the entire story is broken by these “personal” additions that conflict with the other “eye witnesses”.  In the end, the inerrancy of the Word of God is put to the test.  And guess what…it failed. 

Posted in Word of God, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Readings | Print | 4 Comments »

August 7, 2010, 9:56 am by dc-agape.

Mark 14:1-31

Three stories occur in this section of the Gospel of Mark.  First, Mary the sister of Lazarus, anointed Jesus.  The story of Lazarus, Martha, and Mary are only told in the Gospel of John.  Second, is the “Lord’s Supper”.  This is where Jesus predicts his betrayal and death.  Third, the freewill of Peter is compromised.  Jesus knows not just that Peter will deny him, but he knows that it will be three times before morning.

The story of the anointing of Jesus is actually damaging to the notion that the Word of God is inerrant.  This, if you add all the Gospels together, is the second time that Jesus is anointed by a woman with expensive perfume.  Unfortunately, the Gospel of Mark only has one story and the Gospel of Luke has the other story.  In the Gospel of Mark it is Mary the sister of Lazarus (the man Jesus “Wakes up” in other Gospels, but not in Lazarus does not appear in Mark).  In the Gospel of Luke (Luke 7:36-39), it is a sinful woman.  The “god bias” explains this as the different writers remembering different things that happened in the three years of Jesus’ ministry.  But oddly, Mary of Magdalene is attributed to this act, making her the sinful woman!  This is by far due to the Traditions of Men.  Yet we do not know the sinful woman’s name (only in the Gospel of Luke), we know that it is Lazarus’ sister in one story (Gospel of Mark), and we only know Mary of Magdalene as one of Jesus’ followers.  The stories of the anointing do have very similar plots.  They all have expensive perfumes, it is carried out by a woman, and the disciples complain about the lost of an expensive bottle that could be used to help the poor.  But there are dissimilarities as well; in the Gospel of Matthew and Luke it is on Jesus’ head and in The Gospels of Luke and John it is on Jesus’ feet.  The timing of the event is also not consistent.  When comparing the four different accounts, of what must have been the exact same event, it is obvious to a gay Atheist (without the god bias) that the Word of God is not completely reliable.  With this in mind the question becomes what parts are reliable and which parts must be changes due to the Traditions of Man.  These types of mistakes by an inerrant YHWH only reinforce an Atheists determination that YHWH does not exist or is so powerless that his worship is not required.

We also read about Judas Iscariot for the first time in this chapter of Luke.  It is odd that John Mark only refers to Judas when it comes to betraying Jesus, especially since Jesus shortly explains that this must happen.  I will repeat this again, the freewill of Judas is compromised.  Jesus might have been using Isaiah chapter 53 when he describes the betrayal, but reading that chapter betrayal is not one of the events that will take place.  It is much more likely (without the god bias) that Jesus and Judas conspired together to ensure that “the prophecies” would be fulfilled.

The Beginning of the Lord’s Supper is quite interesting as well.  Even thought the population of Jerusalem has doubled for the Feast of Unleavened Bread, Jesus just happens to have a room.  And it just so happens that when two of his disciples enter the city they met the man who Jesus told them to find.  All the food was ready, the room was ready, and all this planning occurred between Jesus’ arrival in Bethany and the Supper.  We know that Judas was responsible for the money (John 13:29)…so wouldn’t have to be Judas who paid the man for the room?  You don’t believe that the citizen of Jerusalem didn’t make a killing off of Celebrations like this do you?  And would Jesus trust the man he knew would betray him with the money?  There was obviously a deeper relationship between Judas and Jesus than the Traditions of Man would allow you to think. 

During the Supper, Jesus even directly points out which one will betray him. 

Mark 14:20 “It is one of the Twelve,” he replied, “one who dips bread into the bowl with me.

Yet none of the other disciples seem to recognize the significance.  In John 13:26, Jesus is even more specific.  If you knew who was going to betray your Teacher (Savior) would you not do something about it?  Instead, the disciples ignore what Jesus says and continue eating. 

The last part of this section is also about freewill.  Jesus predicts that all his disciples will “fall away” before morning.  Jesus knows that he will be arrested that night.  Either this is foreknowledge of the future, negating all freewill, or he planned the events with Judas.  Those are the only two options that explain what is about to happen.  He is so specific in Peter’s denial that he says:

Mark 14:30 I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “today – yes, tonight – before the rooster crows twice you will disown me three times.”

The fear that the disciples would feel after Jesus’ arrest would explain this behavior, but knowing that Peter would repeat this denial three times in less than 12 hours…is proof that we do not have freewill.  If the Christian god exists, we do not have freewill!  We are just enacting what has already been recorded!  Because of this, YHWH is not a loving god, he has already decided who will be saved and who will be punished for the acts that he himself has forced upon us. 

Posted in Traditions of Men, Inerrancy - My Ass, Gospel of Mark, Freewill, Readings | Print | 1 Comment »

July 31, 2010, 8:27 am by dc-agape.

Mark 13

This is the famous chapter that many people use to claim that the end is near.  To their misfortune that has not occurred in the last few centuries.  A proper reading of the entire chapter will leave you with 3 distinct possibilities.  First, Jesus was talking about the Day of Pentecost.  The entire chapter is devoted to preparing his disciples for this Day.  Second, if Jesus is describing his return…then two things contradict this interpretation.  One, he uses the phrase “this generation will certainly not pass away”.  Well the generation that he spoke to certainly did pass away.  Two, these end times do not agree with the Book of Revelation. Rev 19:11-21 speaks of the return of Jesus on a white horse which is nothing like Jesus’ depiction in Mark 13:26-27.  The last possibility is that John Mark (or later scribes) muddled this story from different messages that Peter told in Rome.  Parts of this story are about the end of Jerusalem, others could be about the end times. 

What were the signs to look for?

1)      False Prophets:  Jesus uses this at the beginning (Mark 13:6) and in the middle (Mark 13:21-22).  I don’t know how many false prophets occurred in the 1^st century AD, but we certainly have ours now (rev Hagee – Jewish Journal).

2)      Rumors of war:  Mark 13:7-8 – Well there have certainly been plenty of wars!

3)      Earthquakes: Mark 13:8 – Well that doesn’t give us any new info either.

4)      Plagues: Mark 13:8 – Nothing new there either.

5)      Persecution: Mark 13:9-13 – well it certainly happened in the 1^st few centuries.  But today is rather rare and family members are not the ones turning in their blood relatives.  One site here does describe the “persecution” today – Kjos Ministries. 

6)      Destruction of Jerusalem: Mark 13:14-15.  Well that certainly happened in 70AD (Eyewitness to History).  It certainly has not occurred again.  If fact, it has been fortified and protected by the greatest powers on the planet.  Both the United States and the Muslim religion protect the city of Jerusalem.

7)      Days of distress: Mark 13:15-20.  Here is a good one:

a.      Mark 13:19 because those days will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now – and never equaled again.

b.      So the Days of Distress will be worse than the flood!  And nothing like that will ever happen again…meaning that it is not the end of the world (or the heavenly kingdom – which requires the destruction of the old earth – Rev 21:1).

8 )      Jesus will return: Mark 13:26-27.  These verses are very different from Rev 20.  In the Gospel of Mark Jesus says that he will gather the elect from earth and heaven.  In opposition to this The Book of Revelation chapter 20 only talks about rising the elect dead without any coming from heaven.

9)      This generation will not pass away: Mark 13:30.  Either the end times occurred in the first century AD or we have to wait until #1, #6, and #7 occur.  Even accounting for the partial destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD #1 and #7 will be tough ones.

Since we don’t need to worry about this happening anytime soon and won’t know when it is going to happen (Mark 13:32-33), there is one thing that we should be worried about.  The term elect is used in this chapter, which should make everyone perk up their ears and listen.

Mark 13:20 If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive.  But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them.

We are back to freewill.  YHWH will choose the elect.  We do not choose to be the elect; we don’t have the freewill to be saved.  But this elect will be immune to false teachings:

Mark 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect – if that were possible.

Jesus is not just banking on the elect not being gullible…he knows that they cannot be fooled.  How many today are fooled by false teachings and false prophets?  38,000 denominations of Christianity exist as of this day; can all of them be right?  How many of them do miracles  (Polycarp)?  How many of them say here is Christ (gotquestions.org)?  How many of them prophecy the end times are near (Fundamental Preaching)?

Posted in Inerrancy - My Ass, kingdom of God, Gospel of Mark, Freewill, Readings | Print | 1 Comment »