Brez kategorije

Church – A lie and a scam? #Must read this #

Most people talk about Christianity today, as it would be a coherent, homogeneous and cohesive community. But none of this is true. Everyone knows that there are countless religions and sects – for example, the Roman Catholic or English Church, founded by King Henry VIII. There are various variants of Protestantism, from the original Lutheranism and Calvinism of the sixteenth century to the relatively newer phenomena of unitarianism. There are many extreme or evangelical congregations, such as the Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Here are modern sects and cults as the children of God and the United Church. Looking at this stunning spectrum of beliefs – from rigidly dogmatic and conservative to radical and ecstatic – it is difficult to determine what exactly Christianity is.As the only common denominator of these differently oriented religious beliefs, the New Testament is offered, in particular the special position attributed to Jesus, his crucifixion and resurrection. Even if one does not believe in the literal or historical reality of these events, the acceptance of their symbolic meaning in general is sufficient to be regarded as Christians.
For many Christians, the testimonies of the four Gospels of the New Testament are logical and irrefutable, the sum and the source of everything they believe. Already, they tell little children that the story of Jesus, as the Bible texts of the four evangelists say – if God has not already inspired God – is a truth about which there is no doubt. The four evangelists, supposed authors of the gospel, are regarded as unquestionable witnesses that strengthen each other and confirm their testimonies. But most of those who are Christians are unaware of the fact that the four Gospels not only contradict each other, but they even strongly oppose them here and there.
Regarding the folk tradition, Jesus’ origins and his birth are well known: only two evangelists (Matthew and Luke) speak of this subject, although contradictory. According to Matthew, Jesus is a noble generation, because David and Solomon are descendants and thus a legitimate and legitimate king. At Luke, Jesus is also a descendant of David’s house, but less of a noble line. The proper place in Mark’s Gospel is fundamentally different from these two descriptions, since the legend of the poor carpenter is, of course, the ultimate source of this. In short, these two pedigrees are so conspicuously inconsistent that it could refer to two completely different individuals.The inconsistencies and contradictions in the gospels are not limited to the question of Jesus’ ancestors and his pedigree. After Luke, Jesus was visited by herdsmen at birth; At Matthew, the wise men were kings. In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus’ family lived in Nazareth, from where, due to human counting, of which the true history is, that it was never actually gone, she went to Bethlehem; Jesus was born there in the poor manger. On the contrary, we can read with Matthew that Jesus’ family was wealthy and has always lived in Bethlehem, where Jesus came into the world in the house. She settled in Nazareth only after returning from Egypt, where she escaped because of Herod’s pestilence.
Both reports are fairly accurate and completely probable, but they differ significantly from one another. Since the contradiction between them can not be easily removed, it must be confronted with the fact that either Matej or Luka, or even both, give false information. The obvious and inevitable conclusion of the gospel can not be regarded as indisputable. How could they be unquestionable when challenging each other?
This is not all that long. For example, there are deviations in the time of the crossing – John was crucified one day before the Passover, and after Matthew, Mark, and Luke one day after it. Even with regard to Jesus’ personality and character, the gospels are not united. If Luke is more like a lamb that humbly takes the role of a savior, Matej describes him as a magnificent and powerful figure who “did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Mt 10,34). Here there are further disagreements about Jesus’ the last words. In Matthew and Mark, we read “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27,46; 15,34), and in Luke: “Father, I give my spirit in your hands” (Lk 23,46 ) According to John, Jesus only called: “It is done.” (John 19:30)
These disparities can only be accepted by the gospel as a highly questionable source, but certainly not as a definitive one. They are no ultimate God’s word; if they are, then the human hand freely censored, rearranged, examined, embellished and written again. We must not forget that the Bible, as we know it today – this applies to the Old and New Testaments – does not in any way contain all the texts that were originally part of biblical scriptures. The Gospels were repeatedly repaired, copied, shortened, modified, and censored. The Bible is a voluntary choice of scriptures from which a whole series of texts were deliberately removed. In 367, Bishop Atanasia of Alexandria compiled a list of texts that he would include in the New Testament. The selection was confirmed by the synods in Hip in 393 and Cartagini in 397; it was supplemented with some other texts, from which the New Testament was then formed. According to what criteria the choir of ecclesiastical leaders decisively decides which texts belong to the New Testament, and who does not? What were the reasons why they were rejected by some of the books that were entitled to a certain historical validity?
More. Today’s Bible is not only the product of a more or less arbitrary selective process. It was also subject to quite a lot of drastic corrections, censorship and audits. In 1958, Professor Morton Smith discovered a letter from a Columbian university in a monastery near Jerusalem containing the missing part of the Gospel of Mark. On the contrary, this piece was not lost; on the contrary, it was deliberately removed, on the initiative or explicit order of Bishop Clement Alexandria, one of the most respected early church fathers.
As it seems, Klemen previously received a letter from his disciple Theodore, in which he reported on the disputes with the Gnostic sect of the Carpocrats. The followers of this sect interpreted some of the places of the Mark’s Gospel so that they did not conform to the representations of the Bishop and his disciple. In a letter found by Professor Smith, Klemen answers Theodore:
You have done right to silence the untold teachings of the carpocrats. These are the foolish stars that the Book of the Prophets speaks of, which have turned away from the narrow paths of commandment, and thundered into the swamp of fleshly sins. For while they praise themselves with the knowledge of Satan’s hidden things, they do not notice that they are exposed to the lower world of darkness and lies. They boast that they are free, but in reality they have become slaves of servants’ wishes. Such [people] should always and everywhere be opposed. Even if they express what is true, the one who loves the truth can not be affirmed at all … Because not all the real [things] are true, nor should the truth, which in human opinion [almost] seems real, be given priority over that which is true by faith. “This is an unusual finding for a church dad. Indeed, Klemen does not say anything less than: “If your opponent may be telling the truth, you must deny it and lie to challenge it.” But that’s not all. In the next passage, Klemen talks about Mark’s gospel and his abuse, which in his eyes begins to carpococze:”[As for Mark], when Peter was in Rome, he wrote a [report] of the Lord’s works, without mentioning everything or mentioning the secret. Instead, he chose the one he considered most appropriate for strengthening the faith of the pupils. When Peter died of martyrdom, Marko came to Alexandria and brought with him all his own notes and also Peter’s. Among them, he transferred to his first book those which were suitable for further progress towards the true realization [gnosis]. [In this way] he composed a very spiritual gospel, useful for those who striven for perfection. Nevertheless, he did not reveal things for which he was not allowed to divorce, nor did he write down the hieropathic doctrines of the Lord. On the contrary, the previous stories were added by others that he equiped with certain proverbs, which he knew would be read by them as an ancient priest who introduced into mysteries, to bring the reader into the deepest sanctuary of the truth that is wrapped in the seven vancouver ] … So, in short, he rearranged things, in my opinion, neither imprudent nor carelessly, and when he died, he left his work to the church of Alexandria, where he is still preserving it very carefully; they are read only by those who have been consecrated in great mysteries. But because evil spirits always contemplate the destruction of mankind, the Carpocrats, with the help of magical powers, so subordinated a primate in Alexandria to get the transcript of the secret gospel from him. He explained it in the style of his blasphemous and discarded doctrine, and besieged it on the contrary, when he added to the purest and sacred words the most shameful lies … “Klemen then freely admits that there is the original mystery of Mark’s Gospel: He instructs Theodore to deny her:”As I said, we can never give up [the carpocrats]. If they are enforced with their counterfeits, then, although oathed, it is necessary to deny that Marko is the author of the secret gospel. There is no need that people always for all the real [things] “What was this secret gospel, for which Klemen ordered his disciple to deny him, and which the carpocratians misinterpreted him? Klemen answers this question when he includes a literal copy of the text in his letter:That’s why I will not think of answering your questions and denying fakes with the words of the gospel itself. [The secret gospel] mentions, for example, the words “when they came near Jerusalem,” and the following verse goes on to say “after three days the following will rise”:
“They came to Bethany, and there was a woman whose brother died. She fell on her knees before Jesus and said: “Son of David, have mercy on me!” The pupils refused her. Jesus was very upset, and went with his wife to where her brother was buried. Suddenly there was a loud scream from the grave. Jesus stepped closer, rolled the stone from the entrance to the tomb and went in. He grabbed the young man’s hand and placed it upright. But he loved Jesus from the first moment and prayed that he should be with him. Together they went from the grave to the young man’s house, for he was rich. After six days, Jesus told him what to do. In the evening that the young man came to Jesus, he was only wrapped in linen cloth through [his] naked body. This night stayed with him and Jesus taught him about the mystery of the kingdom of God. Then he went and settled down and returned to the other side of the Jordan.This episode does not appear in any other official version of Mark’s Gospel, but it is well known to us. It is thematically identical with the training of Lazarus in the Gospel of John. With the exception of a few deviations, both texts speak about the same thing, but in the quoted excerpts there are important variations. In contrast to John, a loud scream is heard before Jesus took the stone from the entrance to the tomb or instructed the young man to leave. From this we could conclude that the young man was not even dead at all, which would deprive the process of any miracle. In addition, Lazar’s story is more than permitted to presume known reports. The content of the above indices clearly shows the special relationship between the dead and the one who re-instilled it into life. A modern reader might have come into temptation to see the hint of homosexuality in the passage. In any case, it can be imagined that the carpocrats who sought to transcend the senses through their oversizedness interpreted this story precisely in this spirit. However, Professor Smith thinks that in this Mark’s text it is not primarily the story of Lazarus’s story, but that it should be a dedication to her, a symbolic rite of death and rebirth, as it was in various forms in the Middle East at that time.
Since we find the narrative of Lazarus’s training only in the Gospel of John, we can conclude that not only Teodor obeyed the advice of the bishop of Alexandria, but also other church circles: they simply removed Lazarus’s story from Mark’s Gospel.
On the one hand, Mark’s gospel drastically cleared all bad passages, but on the other hand, they had no doubts about subsequent additions. The original version ends with a cross, a burial, and an empty tomb; no word is about resurrection or re-engagement with students. In today’s editions of the Bible, Mark’s Gospel ends with a familiar, conventional conclusion, which also contains the resurrection of Christ. This is a proven later addition that was added to the original document at the end of the second century.
Mark’s Gospel thus represents two examples of the scripture – apparently inspired by God-in which the human hand interfered, reorganized, censored, revised. These are not just theoretical examples. On the contrary, scientists today accept it as obvious and verified. Can we then suppose that Mark’s gospel was unique as an object of change? If they were so willingly corrected, we can rightfully conclude that the rest of the gospel experienced the same fate.
The evangelists could not therefore be regarded as a reliable source of truth. Nevertheless, we had to keep in mind that they were certainly not entirely fictitious; On top of that, they contained some essential information on what happened in the Holy Land two thousand years ago. We decided to examine them in detail, to screen them in order to separate the facts from myths, the truth from the wrong mold in which it was often buried. It turned out that we can not avoid getting acquainted with the historical-political reality and circumstances in Palestine at the beginning of our count. The gospels are certainly not independent beings that emerge from an empty space, eternally and universally floating over centuries. They are historical documents like everyone else – for example, kumrane manuscripts, Homer’s and Vergil’s epi, or poems about the grail. They produce a very special environment, time, people and historical facts.


Categories: Brez kategorije

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.