Can you say biblical innacuracy overload?

I want to start by saying that i don't think any person could ever go wrong morally by following the teachings of Jesus. I think that he was a man who taught of love and peace of being slow to anger and quick to forgive. However the bible as we know it today is incorrect and i think there are a couple issues that need pointing out.

My problem with Jesus' story is that he never said that he was what people said he was. The story of the virgin birth wasn't came up with till (theologians suggest) the second century. In fact Jesus had many brothers and sisters (they name them in Mathew 13:55). His mother came from a religious school that was known for the priests impregnating the girls who studied there and shipping them off to kings around the area who (after getting laid on the first night) would think that the child was there's. This is the same school that some scholars suggest Jesus himself went to at a young age. As for Jesus being a "driect line" of the house of David he couldn't have been, as it is the father who carries the line.

Another thing that gets me is the baptism. It was taught by John that baptism is to recognize the covenant between God and man that baptism was not to be used for cleansing the soul but for purifying the physical symbolizing that the changes had already been made internally to purify the soul. To understand this more you have to understand that John's mission was to purify the world for the comming appocolypse. He baptised to "hasten the purification" and sooner bring about the final battle between good and evil. In order to be baptised one had to accept the teachings that John had to offer making Jesus a pupil of his even though the church has strongly stood against this for ever. This tells us that Jesus is not someone who lived a sin free life because he qualified for baptism by John through purifying his soul.

Another thing that doesn't make sense is the story of the crucifixion. Pontius Pilate the Roman prosecutor at the time had tried and charged Jesus for sedition as a way to keep the people of Jerusalem calm durring the passover feast. He believed that a riot might occur with Jesus leading the way after he upset the money-changers in the temple. He was not taken and tried for blaspheme by the Jews. The punishment for blaspheme was death by stoning.

Yet another distortion in the current bible is the belief that Peter was appointed by Jesus to lead the desciples after the crucifixion. This was used as a falsity by Rome as an attempt to claim there supremecy. The gospel of Thomas was one of the books that was removed from the bible 1500 years ago because it portrayed a different Jesus then the church had wanted to portray at the time. In it we read;
The desciples said to Jesus:
We know that you will depart from us
Who will be our leader?
Jesus said to them:
Wherever you are, you are to go to
James the righteous
For Whose sake heaven and earth came into being.
Acts 12:17 then states that he(James) became the first archbishop of Jerusalem. Paul then became a student of James'. Paul tried teaching that all you needed was faith alone. The others cast him out for this. They do this because it was NOT A TEACHING OF JESUS. Jesus was a devote Jew. He believed that doing Torah was the upmost importance. There is no way to wholly describe Torah in the english language but it is basically the act of living spiritually to devote your life to God. Jews considered part of this eating pork. It is the entire body of spiritual laws. Paul then became angry and sought out a close relative of his, King Agrippa II. The King who was already not a fan of James' had him charged with blaspheme. The kings newly appointed high priest Ananus then pushed him off the side of a building and was stoned to death.

I have one last issue with Christianity and that is the marriage of Jesus. (yes i said of Jesus). The wedding story in the bible is found in the Gospel of John. It says;
And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; andthe mother of Jesus was there:
And both Jesus was called, and his desciples, to the marriage.
And when they wanted wine the mother of Jesus sayeth unto him, they have no wine, Jesus sayeth unto her< Woman, what have i do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come. His mother sayeth unto the the servats, Whta so ever he sayeth unto you, do it. (John 2:1-5). He then goes on to change the water into wine. Now the important part isn't the water turning into wine. Its the mother bossing around the servants. In Jewish tradition it was only the grooms mother who would have the only woman to have authority to do that.(not being sexist just the truth). Now as for who he married im assuming you've all read or seen the divinci code. For further evidence we can turn to The Woman with the Alabaster Jar(Mary Magdalene) by Margaret Starbird. In it she says while Jesus was in Bethany in the home of Simon the Leper, a Woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume Which she poured on his head as he was reclining at table. Now this is a custom preserved for royal brides.It was a symbol of unity and would bless the king as the true anointed one. Now as for having children Jesus was a "direct line" of the house of David and a rabbi (which held him to the 613 strictures of the law) made it crucial that he produces an heir.
The church has distorted to much of Jesus' actual teachings for anyone to truly be "Christ"ian anymore. This also makes it much harder for us to know who he was as a person and what his true message to the world was. I believe that Jesus was a great man but nothing more. God says to pray only to him and i believe that praying to Jesus (as well as saints) is an insult to God. You are using his religion to pray to the MAN MADE and idolized deities that the roman catholic church used to help "sell" christianity to other places. In conclusion i guess i'd like to say that God likes it when you ask questions, it helps you learn and grow as a person, the Vatican doesn't

reply to post by openeyeswideshut


What gets me is, if you were to write a book and claimed fact on several angles that were easily proven absolute crap, you might never get away with it.
But you do the same thing and make it about religion, folks would fall at your feet and look at you as a profit.....err prophet.

reply to post by g146541

LOLOL... profit... err Prophet.

Add vaulted ceilings, tall hats and your prophet$ really soar.

reply to post by openeyeswideshut

I must be misunderstanding you, please correct me where I am in error. The topic is Biblical inaccuracy, but your example make the assumption that the Bible is correct, and we are misinterpreting the story.

What I thought you meant by Biblical inaccuracy, was that the Bible said things that were false. What have I missed?

reply to post by openeyeswideshut
" My problem with Jesus' story is that he never said that he was what people said he was." do you have a for instance? ..peace

reply to post by charles1952


What's being said is that the bible as you know it today is not the bible that was originally made. There have been MAJOR changes made to the story and structure of the book, in a way to perceive the godliness of Jesus. Most of the bible is accurate, but they changed the entire way of belief than Jesus taught. Jesus was a prophet to them and it wasn't till 40 years after he died and his brother James was dead that people started claiming him mesiah. Mostly in small sect of Israel before spreading to the catacombs of Rome before it exploded 300 years later when emperor Constantine claimed it the nations new religion. I personally believe that Rome did this as a way to stay in control religiously after there empire fell apart. But that's getting sidetracked. If you read the bible carefully enough the story gives itself away. It's kind of like a lawyer; if you ask them the same question over and over if they are lying they'll tell you a different answer once and a while.

reply to post by the2ofusr1


metaphorical. The Jesus that people think he is today, isn't the Jesus that he said he was back in the day.

reply to post by g146541


haha well put . I would love to get my hands on the books in the vatican archive to see what they have been hiding the last 1700 years.

Thank you for clarifying what you mean by Biblical inaccuracies.

As I understand it, everything in our modern New Testament was written within a hundred years or so of Christ's birth. It seems you are saying that the books in the NT do not accurately reflect what they believed about Christ. So, some of the NT books are lies? Can you be a little more specific? Are the Gospels and Acts lies, or the letters?

It's hard for me to follow your explanation that Christians didn't believe Christ was God, when that idea seems to be all through the New Testament.

I'm sorry to be bothering you for more help, but I still need some.

reply to post by openeyeswideshut
The for instence I meant was ,what or who did Jesus say He was as opposed to who people think He is today ....peace
ps. and could you give me your opinion on the authour and the book of Jude .

Originally posted by charles1952
Thank you for clarifying what you mean by Biblical inaccuracies.

As I understand it, everything in our modern New Testament was written within a hundred years or so of Christ's birth. It seems you are saying that the books in the NT do not accurately reflect what they believed about Christ. So, some of the NT books are lies? Can you be a little more specific? Are the Gospels and Acts lies, or the letters?

It's hard for me to follow your explanation that Christians didn't believe Christ was God, when that idea seems to be all through the New Testament.

I'm sorry to be bothering you for more help, but I still need some.

I think I can help you, I was just posting about this very things earlier today.

Did Jesus Ever Say He was God?
We need only read the Gospels to attest to the fact of Jesus' genuine humanity. There is not a limitation that humanity shares that Jesus did not fall heir. Like the rest of us, he got hungry. When at the well of Sameria he asked the women who was drawing water for a drink. When he grew tired, he needed rest and sleep. He leared obedience, we are told, in the way we must learn it. When his disciples were unfaithful it was very cutting to his heart. The blindness of the city he longed to save moved him to tears. In the garden he experienced the normal agony of any individual in the same situation. He did say he was equal to God, as all of Humanity can be. He was not God.

Lies? Here are some bible verses....

(Mark 11:34) "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours."

(Mat 16:27) "For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done."

(Mat 16:28) "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

(Mat 8:22) "But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead."

Now, I do not see these as "truths."

reply to post by autowrench

Dear autowrench,

Thanks for the help, I appreciate it.

I absolutely agree with you that Jesus was a full human being. You're right that He suffered, and was tempted, just as a human would be.

I suppose you know that there are people who believe that, in addition to that full humanity, He was completely God? Certainly, reading through the Gospels, it's hard to come to any other impression than that He was seen as God, or had made the claim to be. Did he say "I am God?" I don't think so, but He would have been a very bad man to have left that impression in the minds of His disciples if He knew it to be a lie, or if not a bad man, then a very bad teacher.

I'm surprised that you think Jesus was tellling lies. That would make Him a terrible example, a false prophet who should have been stoned. Certainly, if you're right, no one should ever listen to Jesus or His teachings.

Remember that I am not a Biblical scholar, and this is just off the top of my head, but here are some comments.

(Mark 11:34) "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours."

"it will be yours" At some time in the future. When? I don't know. Clearly false? I don't think so.

(Mat 16:27) "For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done."

Isn't this part of the end of the world prophecy? How do we know it won't happen?

(Mat 16:28) "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

I think this one is true. Some of His listeners were martyrs, like Steven. I have no trouble believing that they saw the Son of Man before they died.

(Mat 8:22) "But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead."

Isn't He saying "Let the spiritually dead bury the physically dead?"

I am really grateful that you brought this up, it's the kind of discussion and lesson that I hope for from ATS, but am often disappointed. Thanks a lot.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952

(Mark 11:34) "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours."

It says beleive that you HAVE received it and it will be yours. Which when I read it says that your asking for something you already have then that thing you already have will be yours.

(Mat 16:27) "For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done."
Isn't this part of the end of the world prophecy? How do we know it won't happen?

I don't believe Jesus was the son of man. I believe that someone else may come eventually, but I don't think Jesus is going to be the one that comes.

Mat 16:28) "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."
I think this one is true. Some of His listeners were martyrs, like Steven. I have no trouble believing that they saw the Son of Man before they died.

All I can really say to this is Jesus was speaking this quote. He said SOME of you standing here will see the Son of Man. If he was the Son of Man he would have said you have all...

(Mat 8:22) "But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead." Isn't He saying "Let the spiritually dead bury the physically dead?"

He was saying this to one of his disciples who's father just died. He says "let the dead burry the dead" meaning leave them to be. He follows that by saying "follow me follow life."

reply to post by charles1952
Joh 19:4 Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him.
Joh 19:5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man!
Joh 19:6 When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.
Joh 19:7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.
Joh 19:8 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid;
Joh 19:9 And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer.

John 19:7
The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God — Their criminal charges having come to nothing, they give up that point, and as Pilate was throwing the whole responsibility upon them, they retreat into their own Jewish law, by which, as claiming equality with God (see Joh_5:18 and Joh_8:59), He ought to die; insinuating that it was Pilate’s duty, even as civil governor, to protect their law from such insult.

John 19:7
We have a law - The law respecting blasphemy, Lev_24:16; Deu_13:1-5. They had arraigned Jesus on that charge before the Sanhedrin, and condemned him for it, Mat_26:63-65. But this was not the charge on which they had arraigned him before Pilate. They had accused him of sedition, Luk_23:2. On this charge they were now convinced that they could not get Pilate to condemn him. He declared him innocent. Still bent on his ruin, and resolved to gain their purpose, they now, contrary to their first intention, adduced the original accusation on which they had already pronounced him guilty. If they could not obtain his condemnation as a rebel, they now sought it as a blasphemer, and they appealed to Pilate to sanction what they believed was required in their law. Thus, to Pilate himself it became more manifest that he was innocent, that they had attempted to deceive him, and that the charge on which they had arraigned him was a mere pretence to obtain his sanction to their wicked design.
Made himself - Declared himself, or claimed to be.
The Son of God - The law did not forbid this, but it forbade blasphemy, and they considered the assumption of this title as the same as blasphemy Joh_10:30, Joh_10:33, Joh_10:36, and therefore condemned him.

He declared Himself equal with God ....peace

reply to post by the2ofusr1


The only people that know truly who Jesus was is a group of people called the ma'madot. Or Rex deus families. They are the sacred keepers of the bloodline of Christ. They are a Family of people that wait till the world is ready to hear the true teachings of Jesus.
Jude i think was Jesus' brother. The book seems well written but the last 5 verses seem to have been tampered with. As if they were not wholly written by him.

reply to post by openeyeswideshut
Do you have a source for your information ? ...peace

reply to post by the2ofusr1


My source comes from the book Custodians of Truth by Tim Wallace-Murphy and Marylin Hopkins.

There is, of course, no reason for anyone to be concerned with my opinion (except me). But such as it is, I'll offer it. The position that Christ was not God, did not claim to be God, and is only seen as such because of Biblical tampering, appears to have no credible support.

I think I'll go with the orthodox Christian position. Thanks, everyone, for working with me.

reply to post by charles1952

I'm surprised that you think Jesus was tellling lies. That would make Him a terrible example, a false prophet who should have been stoned. Certainly, if you're right, no one should ever listen to Jesus or His teachings.

That was not my purpose at all, friend. Of course Jesus told a few, he was human, remember? He was not perfect, and definitely not infallible. His message of Peace and Love, however, is also human, and still stands very clear to this day. There have been others who preached Peace and Love who were murdered too, John Lennon, for one. Martian Luther King for another. Perfection is not required when one has a good message, friend.

Are you certain you wish to call him a "Prophet," friend?" The word origin means "foreteller," from the Greek. The word derives from Greek cults, in which prophets interpreted answers to questions put to oracular mediums, such as "Oracles."

Claims of prophets have existed in many cultures through history, including Judaism, Christianity, Islam, the Sybilline and the Pythia, known as the Oracle of Delphi, in Ancient Greece, Zoroaster, the Völuspá in Old Norse and many others. Traditionally, prophets are regarded as having a role in society that promotes change due to their messages and actions. In the late 20th century the appellation of "prophet" has been used to refer to individuals particularly successful at analysis in the field of economics, such as in the derogatory "prophet of greed". Alternatively, social commentators who suggest escalating crisis are often called "prophets of doom."

source

(Mat 8:22) "But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead."

Isn't He saying "Let the spiritually dead bury the physically dead?" I am really grateful that you brought this up, it's the kind of discussion and lesson that I hope for from ATS, but am often disappointed. Thanks a lot. With respect, Charles1952

I am not entirely certain what is meant by those words. I know beyond any doubt that there is in fact an Afterlife. I myself have seen the dead for most of my life. I have spoken at length with my Grandfather, he "died" in 1962 when I was 7. Humanity constantly reincarnates, whether people want to believe it or not. Reincarnation was also taught by Early Christianity, it was later omitted for political reasons, no doubt.

Reincarnation and the Early Christians

In December, 1945, early Christian writings containing many secrets of the early Christian religion were found in upper Egypt, a location where many Christians fled during the Roman invasion of Jerusalem. Undisturbed since their concealment almost two thousand years ago, these manuscripts of Christian mysticism rank in importance with the Dead Sea Scrolls. These writings affirmed the existence of the doctrine of reincarnation being taught among the early Jews and Christians. These Christian mystics, referred to as Christian Gnostics, were ultimately destroyed by the orthodox Church for being heretics. Their sacred writings were destroyed and hidden with the belief that they would be revealed at an appropriate time in the future.

The discovery in 1945 yielded writings that included some long lost gospels, some of which were written earlier than the known gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Brian A. Bain, M.A., has this to say about the 1945 discovery: "Long considered to be heretical, ancient Gnostic Christian texts unearthed this century display compelling similarities between Gnostic conceptions of life and death and modern near-death experiences.

The Gnostic texts devoted extensive tracts to what readers could expect to encounter when they died. Other passages make numerous allusions to near-death-like experiences that can be realized in this life, most notably the human encounter with a divine light. The Gnostic Christian literature gives us one more example of NDEs and similar experiences in the ancient world."

Reincarnation and the Early Christians

reply to post by openeyeswideshut

All I can really say to this is Jesus was speaking this quote.

No, you cannot say that. How do you know he said that? You speak as if you were there, in first person, listening to him speak. Remember, nothing at all was even written about Jesus until after many years after he died, in fact, there is no evidence the so called "gospels" existed before 150 AD. The modern list of twenty-seven books was first published in 367 AD. Don't forget, Justin Martyr, A.D. 161, is the oldest Christian writer whose extant works may be confidently regarded as genuine.