Cursing, Whipping and Violating the Rights of Others

One night in 2007, at the Kaczynski Memorial Auditorium in Chicago, a council of over 200 persons came together to render a verdict on the sanity of Jesus. Finally, the verdict was given: Jesus Christ, known to Christians as "the Messiah," was legally insane. Some of the audience agreed, and others disagreed. The speaker of the council, Dr. David Eardman eventually answered some questions from the audience. He said:

"The reasons we declared Jesus unhinged had to do with his unstable behavior in cursing a fig tree for not having fruit on it (Mark 11:12-14), for sending soul-raping demons into a herd of two thousand swine, causing their needless deaths (Mark 5:11-13), and for his famous temple conniption fit (John 2:14-17)."

A Dr. Chamberlain said, "Why Jesus agreed to go along with a request of Hellbound demons . . . isn't clear, but it is clear that Jesus was no animal rights activist . . . Jesus sent them on a short trip inside the bodies of sweet little pigs and piglets that were subsequently drowned in the river. . . . This is crazy behavior. I've never seen anything like it outside of a sanitarium! We have no choice but to declare Jesus insane and to warn others to stay away from him . . ."

The guess is that Chamberlain have not seen massive pig slaugther and drowning of pigs in a sanatorium either.

Dr. Eardman concluded the matter: "I'm afraid the conclusion is unavoidable. Jesus is insane – and we are not the only ones who think so. Even his family thought Jesus was nuttier than a fudge sundae. Mark 3:21 says 'When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, He is out of his mind.'" [1]

⍽⍽⍽⍽

The gospel says Jesus okayed that evil spirits entered a herd of pigs and then possessed and drowned the pigs, even though pigs normally manage to float and swim well.

What a heavy loss to the owner of the pigs. Should he have pressed charges? To whom? [Matthew 8:28-33]

Do not let things get out of hands. As Jack Welch says, "Control your destiny or someone else will." [in Tichy and Sherman 1994]

Jesus allowed killings of pigs - of highly intelligent, emotionally sensitive animals. He also said that his teachings, salvation and kingdom were for Jews only (Matthew 15:24; 10:1-8; Vermes 2010:37,41; 2012).

Being Misguided is a Serious Matter

Misguided Christians in the Roman Empire in the first centuries thought the end of all time was at hand, for Jesus "had told it". In the book Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (2001), Bart D. Ehrman (2014) finds that Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher and that his main message was that the end of history was near, that God would shortly intervene to overthrow evil and establish his rule on earth, and that Jesus and his disciples all believed these end time events would occur in their lifetimes. (WP, "Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium").

After the prophesies of Jesus did not come true, he was also a false prophet, the Old Testament says, along with that the false prophet must be killed. However, at the time when it was clear that the end of the world did not come as Jesus had foretold, Jesus had been executed for something else.

The ruins and deaths of millions of martyrs are worse than slightly embarrassing. Non-Jewish Christians of the early church soon enough became victims of cruelty after embracing an untrue faith - that is, a faith for Jews only; that the world would end "soon", and with later-added forgeries to make gospels seemingly fit for non-Jews too - plainly against what Jesus insisted on (Matthew 15:24; 10:1-8; Vermes 2010:37,41; 2012).

Jesus also said in some gospels that were accrued long after his burial: "All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved." [Mark 13:13; Matthew 10:22]. Put in a sensible question: "Saved from what, saved to what, and what ground to stand on after then end, in case?"

Persecution scenarios get some resonance in some sects, and Christianity is a sect that has grown large since antiquity, when it was a tense offshoot of Judaism in the Roman Empire. However, if we consider that all men seldom or never have heard of any one man yet, how can "all men" hate unmet ones? It does not quite fit . . . Besides, the teachings of Jesus were for Jews only, he said. For some there is much hope in that too. (Matthew 15:24; 10:5-8; Vermes 2010:37,41; 2012).

Ugly teachings

For our own good we had better rip the mask of ugly teachings, to avoid future harm after succumbing. Looking deeper than a false, misleading prophesy, brutal whipping and that sort of stuff, we had better ignore untruths that prevent the gathering of wisdom and other treasures to carry along. Consider these words by Kong-zi, or Confucius:

Tsze-kung asked, saying, "What do too you say of a man who is loved by all the people of his neighbourhood?"

The Master replied, "We may not for that accord our approval of him."

"And what do you say of him who is hated by all the people of his neighbourhood?"

The Master said, "We may not for that conclude that he is bad. It is better than either of these cases that the good in the neighbourhood love him, and the bad hate him." [Analects 13:24]

Better to be liked by the good than hated by all. Add to that: To be so feared by bad ones that they flee is also good for something. I think the best way is to meditate. Now, ancient alternatives to being hated and persecuted "by all" are found, at least in principle.

If you find yourself hated by someone, one or many, proper precautions or tact may be more fit than placing yourself in harm's way to be slaughtered. Martyrs in millions were slaughtered. Why on earth, in the light of John 14:12? And why kill off Jesus when just a couple of goats yearly would do would maintain the Jews in good standing year after year "for all time to come" [Leviticus 16]? To be wiped out by evil-minded ones means leaving the way open for criminals and worsening conditions too if things go far.

"When in doubt, win the game" - or many a self-maiming martyr plot.

Slaugher vs Kind-Heartedness

Pigs cannot fly, but they are excellent swimmers. Matthew 8:28-33 tells of pig murder and demon-possession. A creative God could have come up with a better solution than being an accomplice in massive pig murder. In another place Jesus trespasses by telling followers to take a colt without the owner's permission [Mark 11:1-6].

Demagoguery and propaganda may back up sinister goings. The "religious slaughter-business" of letting innocent animals suffer and die for others is what Hebrews justified by calling it righteousness and of the Law of Moses. It is vicarious sacrifice [Cf. Leviticus 16] - it is heinous wrong against innocents, meant to promote the lives of wrong-doers. By calling a ruthless doing good and "of God", some evidently hope to get away with it, at least for some time, until sore repercussions abound.

Gautama Buddha teaches to show mercy to animals in the first place and not take what has not been given in the second place. Note these differences. He also shows that a good religion has its hallmarks. He teaches a mark of the best of humans: they will not inflict sufferings on themselves and on others. Christianity, however, is built on an idea of one man's suffering for all so as to lord it over all . . . and these teachings at the end of Matthew are almost certainly a forgery (see further down). [Apannaka Sutta]

"The Four Pillars of Christianity"

Jesus had only Jewish followers, about 120 of them when he was executed. Christianity came years later (Acts 15:19-30; 21:25), with just four requirements and no particular commands of Jesus altogether. Tens of so-called gospels also came later, and four of them were singled out and edited for use long after that again. There are vagaries in them, for certain, since in the oldest gospels of the New Testament Jesus is recorded to have said his teachings were for Jews only, and his kingdom and salvation too. (Matthew (15:24; 10:4-8). His teachings are not for non-Jews, he says. Non-Jews were excluded. (Vermes 2005; 2010:37,41; 2012)

"Only four things" are required of non-Jewish Christians - that is, Gentile followers - in addition to getting the comforting, teaching Truth-Spirit [Acts 15; 21:25]:

1. No to blood food. That includes black pudding and many a Wurst also;
2. No to strangled poultry and chickens and other choked animals;
3. No to Biblical adultery;
4. One more no.

But there is no "no to Bible study": Better make sure; look up. It is easy: Search for Acts 15 (see in particular v. 13-32) on the Internet, choose a well-esteemed translation (NIV would be good), and there you are.

Forgeries in Christianity

We had better be able to deal with forgeries that determine a faith, so as not to base a childlike or fervent trust on something false that brings undue submissions, perverted thought and harm in its wake. Prevention is better than many attempts at cure.

In late additions to the gospels of Matthew and Mark, blatant forgeries are put in the mouth of Jesus:

[IS FALSE OK?] All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." [Matthew 28:18-20; cf. Mark 16:14-19].

However, Jesus alive was a Jew for Jews only, the gospels tell (e.g. Matthew 15:24; 10:4-8), and the Bible scholar Geza Vermes agrees after careful study for many years that Jesus in the gospels says his teachings, work, kingdom and salvation were for Jews only (Matthew 10:4-8; Vermes 2010:39,41; 2012).

Judged from this alone, the late additions to the gospel are untrue. But there are more good indications - so-called intrinsic evidence - that the missionary command is forged later. For example, Joseph Wheless (1868-1950) writes in "Forgery In Christianity" that the last chapter of Matthew - as of Mark 9-20, - are late vagaries in the form of interpolations or forged passages from a time when the "second coming" in the "Kingdom of God" and the immediate "end of the world" were not hot issues any longer, because of the "lapse of long years of time and disappointed expectation. It could also only have been written after the gospel of the "Kingdom" for the Jews had failed."

Culminating evidence that Jesus Christ never uttered this so-called missionary command is found in Acts, he further explains. If Jesus Christ, just arisen from the dead, had given any missionary command to Peter and the eleven, it would have been impossible for the remarkable "history" recorded in Acts to have occurred, and the apostles would not have been astonished at being told by Peter that he had served gentiles. Peter had not heard that he should preach the gospel to Gentiles until he had a vision on a roof-top in Joppa (Jaffa) when Jesus was gone. And when he did teach Gentiles, it was something new, something that the other apostles never had said was an option.

There is another contradiction worth noting as well: Matthew 18:16-19 says the missionary command was given on a mount, whereas Mark says the command was given to the eleven apostles "as they were eating," (Mark 16:14-19). The gospel apparently does not tell what actually happened when it says the apostles went forth and preached everywhere, for Acts shows they did not. The fact: "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20. [NIV]"

The silence of the other two gospels about such preaching is also a heavy-weighter, and several of the epistles of Paul go against that it happened too.

New Testament evidence tends toward the conclusion that Jesus never uttered any "Go, teach all nations," and that the texts telling it are later-added vagaries - most likely forgeries to serve Gentile propaganda after the Jews had rejected Jesus and his sect massively. As it is, the whole section appears as a spurious addition. Says Wheless: "The Christian Church is thus founded on a forgery of pretended words of the pretended Christ." He goes on to conclude that there could not be

[m]ore shaming proofs and confessions of forgery of pretended words of the Christ . . . than of this falsified command to preach a forged Gospel to the credulous dupes of Paganism. Gentile Christianity collapses upon its forged foundations. [in the section, "The "Gospel" Forgeries"]

However, Christianity for Gentiles is different. Its groundwork is given in Acts 15 (and 21:25). It dispenses with what Jesus said for Jews, and keeps just four requirements. No to blood food (including Brat, Wurst, black pudding, etc.) is one of them, and no to wrangled chickens (strangled animals) is another. Both may be considered as bad as adultery, or the other way round.

Wheless thinks that baptism formulas are most likely forged too. He brings up how likely it is that the baptism part of these gospel sections are forged. "The elaborated forgery of Matthew, 'in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,' are sufficiently branded with falsity in the preceding paragraphs, and may be dismissed without further notice. And the Holy "Trinity" spoken of in it, was not actually invented until the Council of Constantinople, in 381 AD. McCabe says "It was fraudulently added to the gospel when the priesthood was created." It is almost certain that baptism at first was into the name of Jesus Christ, and not formally into the name of the a Trinity." [Joseph Wheless. Forgery in Christianity] Dr Geza Vermes concurs:

During his days of preaching, Jesus of Nazareth addressed only Jews, "the lost sheep of Israel" (Matthew 10:5; 15:24). His disciples were expressly instructed not to approach gentiles or Samaritans (Matthew 10:5). On the few occasions that Jesus ventured beyond the boundaries of his homeland, he never proclaimed his gospel to pagans, nor did his disciples do so during his lifetime. The mission of the 11 apostles to "all the nations" (Matthew 28:19) is a "post-Resurrection" idea. It appears to be of Pauline inspiration and is nowhere else found in the Gospels (apart from the spurious longer ending of Mark [Mark 16:15], which is missing from all the older manuscripts). Jesus' own perspective was exclusively Jewish; he was concerned only with Jews. (Vermes 2012).

To clarify these matters still further:

Jesus reserve his teachings and salvation for Jews (Matthew 15:24; 10:5-8; Vermes 2012), but only depraved Jews: those of sound moral and spirit are not called by him, and the healthy do not need him (Mark 2:17; Matthew 9:12-13; 12.11). Jesus further puts his sheep on a path to perdition in that he teaches his sheep what is opposed to sound self-preservation. Thereby eyes, limbs, property, fit living-conditions and life itself soon enough are at risk (Matthew 5: 29-30; 39-42). Finally, marring losses come to those who call him 'Lord, Lord' without doing as he tells. (Luke 6:46)

For Gentile followers, all the disciples and the Holy Spirit dispensed with all but a few laws for Jews. And not a word by Jesus for ill Jews was included in the Apostolic Decree from 50 CE either (Acts 15:19-29; 21:25). The four requirements for all Gentile Christians include no to eating blood sausages (blood food) and wrangled chickens and other poultry (choked animals)

The healthy man does not torture others. - Carl Gustav Jung

Eunuch News

Several canonical gospels passages contradict one another

The vast majority of Jews did not welcome Jesus or his teachings. Later, after Jesus was dead, the net was cast on Gentiles instead by fishers of men, and the Gentile Christians did not actually have to learn anything by Jesus in 49 or 50 AD, when the Council of Jerusalem came about [Acts 15; 21:25; (WP "Council of Jerusalem")].

A story about the apostle Philip seems to confirm it too. One day Philip went down from Jerusalem to Gaza. On his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch. The two of them went down into water where Philip baptized the eunuch. [Acts 8:5-39, passim]

As for "testifying" about Jesus, "He was born, lived and died largely in vain for Jews only," is a testimony based on the canonical gospels (e.g. Matthew 15:24; cf. Vermes 2005; 2010:37,41; 2012). Early Christians did not have any written-down canon. What they should get, on the other hand, was what Jesus called "the Spirit of truth", who would "guide you into all truth". [John 16:13]. But as you can see, the plethora of forgeries in the many gospels that were written, guarantees that did not happen. Diverging versions of central happenings suggests that some or many or all were not telling the truth [Examples: Two different deaths of Judas; wrong mustard teachings etc.].

The resurrection plot

You may think they agreed on how Jesus was resurrected. The scene is described in all four gospels. If the versions are treated as evidence from truthful witnesses, you may insist firmly that the witness versions stand up to the standards in a normal court of law. But different gospels give different accounts. Sort out by plucking the feathers of differences off, and what remains is the body of the bird - in this case what all four versions agree on, the very few common elements. You find that the key elements in the tales are that someone was executed by the Romans and buried, and that followers and friends visited the grave a few days later, to find it empty. If that is The Thing to build a faith on, as Paul says, it is not much. So don't get trapped by words.

Tongue-talkers have not helped in nearly 2000 years either. New Testament writers have proved to us they could not get that big incident right, so what did they get right? Who can tell? Do not expect it from all who speak in tongues, at any rate, for evidence goes against such hopes.

Unity and concord among first followers - a myth. The apostles also argued among themselves to the point that some of them would not co-operate (Paul). Many fractions actually threatened the early church (Gnosticism).

The crucifixion. Let us start somewhere during the crucifixion. Matthew tells that the robbers that were crucified along with him, heaped insults on him. But Luke says only one of them did, and John does not mention anything of the kind. The versions do not agree on that point; that is fair to say. So we have to say the Bible is far from true in all cases. [Matthew 27:44 - 28:8; Mark 15:28 - Mark 16:11; Luke 23:39 - Luke 24:12; John 19:18 - John 20:18].

Further, in New Testament letters and the Acts the apostles hardly quote Jesus. They talk about him, but rarely quote him. We should have no need for him either, if the Spirit promises of Jesus hold good. [John 14:12]

You might prefer to write down a list and give charge to each of these points. Moreover, in weighing a whole chapter and very much else in the New Testament against a few inserted, later-added passages - and the confusing gospels - consider what all the apostles and the Holy Ghost did, and that the Letters and Acts testify to:

You should probably have no need whatever for quoting any saying of Jesus of his failed, original mission of saving Jews only, all on the authority of Acts 15 and 21:25.

Select the translations of highest repute to save yourself embarrassments.