2.1 Christian scholars
recognize contradictions (Part 1)
(note: Many of the following quotations were obtained
from the writings of Ahmed Deedat although many other
sources were used as well)
Let us start from the beginning.
No Biblical scholar on this earth will claim that the Bible
was written by Jesus himself. They all agree that the Bible
was written after the departure of Jesus peace be upon him
by his followers. Dr. W Graham Scroggie of the Moody Bible
Institute, Chicago, a prestigious Christian evangelical
mission, says:
"..Yes, the Bible is human, although some out of zeal
which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those
books have passed through the minds of men, are written in
the language of men, were penned by the hands of men and
bear in their style the characteristics of men..."
"It is Human, Yet Divine," W Graham Scroggie, p. 17
Another Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican
Bishop of Jerusalem, says:
"...Not so the New testament...There is condensation
and editing; there is choice reproduction and witness. The
Gospels have come through the mind of the church behind the
authors. They represent experience and history..."
"The Call of the Minaret," Kenneth Cragg, p 277
"It is well known that the primitive Christian Gospel
was initially transmitted by word of mouth and that this
oral tradition resulted in variant reporting of word and
deed. It is equally true that when the Christian record was
committed to writing it continued to be the subject of
verbal variation. Involuntary and intentional, at the hands
of scribes and editors"
Peake's Commentary on the Bible, p. 633
"Yet, as a matter of fact, every book of the New
Testament with the exception of the four great Epistles of
St. Paul is at present more or less the subject of
controversy, and interpolations are asserted even in these."
Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 12th Ed. Vol. 3, p. 643
Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf, one of
the most adamant conservative Christian defenders of the
Trinity was himself driven to admit that:
"[the New Testament had] in many passages
undergone such serious modification of meaning as to leave
us in painful uncertainty as to what the Apostles had
actually written"
Secrets of Mount Sinai, James Bentley, p. 117
After listing many examples of contradictory statements
in the Bible, Dr. Frederic Kenyon says:
"Besides the larger discrepancies, such as these,
there is scarcely a verse in which there is not some
variation of phrase in some copies [of the ancient
manuscripts from which the Bible has been collected]. No
one can say that these additions or omissions or alterations
are matters of mere indifference"
Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, Dr. Frederic
Kenyon, Eyre and Spottiswoode, p. 3
Throughout this book you will find countless other
similar quotations from some of Christendom's leading
scholars. Let us suffice with these for now.
Christians are, in general, good and decent people, and
the stronger their convictions the more decent they are.
This is attested to in the noble Qur'an:
"...and nearest among them (men) in love to the
believers will you find those who say 'we are Christians':
because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men
who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant. And
when they listen to the revelation received by the messenger
(Muhammad), you will see their eyes overflowing with tears
for they recognize the truth: They pray: 'Our Lord! we
believe; write us down among the witnesses'."
The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):82-83.
All biblical "versions" of the Bible prior to the revised
version of 1881 were dependent upon the "Ancient Copies"
(those dating between five to six hundred years after
Jesus). The revisers of the Revised Standard Version (RSV)
1952 were the first biblical scholars to have access to the
"MOST ancient copies" which date fully three to four hundred
years after Christ. It is only logical for us to concur that
the closer a document is to the source the more authentic it
is. Let us see what is the opinion of Christendom with
regard to the most revised version of the Bible (revised in
1952 and then again in 1971):
"The finest version which has been produced in the
present century" - (Church of England newspaper)
"A completely fresh translation by scholars of the
highest eminence" - (Times literary supplement)
"The well loved characteristics of the authorized
version combined with a new accuracy of translation" - (Life
and Work)
"The most accurate and close rendering of the
original" - (The Times)
The publishers themselves (Collins) mention on page 10 of
their notes:
"This Bible (RSV) is the product of thirty two
scholars assisted by an advisory committee representing
fifty cooperating denominations"
Let us see what these thirty two Christian scholars of
the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating
Christian denominations have to say about the Authorized
Version (AV), or as it is better known, the King James
Version (KJV). In the preface of the RSV 1971 we find the
following:
"...Yet the King James Version has GRAVE DEFECTS.."
They go on to caution us that:
"...That these defects are SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS as
to call for revision"
The Jehovah's Witnesses in their "AWAKE" Magazine dated
8th September 1957 published the following
headline: "50,000 Errors in the Bible" wherein they
say "..there are probably 50,000 errors in the
Bible...errors which have crept into the Bible text...50,000
such serious errors..." After all of this, however, they
go on to say: "...as a whole the Bible is accurate."
Let us have a look at only a very few of these errors.
In John 3:16 - AV(KJV) we read:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only
begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not
perish, but have everlasting life.."
But as seen in section 1.2.3.10, this fabrication
"begotten" has now been unceremoniously excised by
these most eminent of Bible revisers. However, humanity did
not have to wait 2000 years for this revelation.
In Maryam(19):88-98 of the noble Qur'an we read:
"And they say 'Allah Most Compassionate has begotten a
son!'. Indeed you have put forth a thing most monstrous! The
skies are ready to burst (at such a claim), and the earth to
split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin.
That they should ascribe a son to the Most Compassionate.
But it is not befitting [the majesty of] the Most
Compassionate that He should beget a son. Not one of the
beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to the
Most Compassionate as a servant. He has taken account of all
of them and has numbered them all exactly. And every one of
them will come to him singly on the day of judgment. On
those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, will
Allah most gracious bestow love. Verily, We have made this
[Qur'an] easy in your tongue [O Muhammad]
that you might deliver glad tidings to those who seek refuge
[in Allah] and warn with it a people who are
contentious. And how many a generation before them have we
destroyed! Can you find a single one of them or hear from
them so much as a whisper?"
In 1st Epistle of John 5:7 (King James Version) we
find:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are
one."
As we have already seen in section 1.2.2.5, this verse is
the closest approximation to what the Church calls the holy
Trinity. However, as seen in that section, this cornerstone
of the Christian faith has also been scrapped from the RSV
by the same thirty two Christian scholars of the highest
eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian
denominations, once again all according to the "most ancient
manuscripts." And once again, we find that the noble Qur'an
revealed this truth over fourteen hundred years ago:
"O people of the book! commit no excesses in your
religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus
the son of Mary was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah, and
his Word, which he bestowed upon Mary, and a spirit
preceding from him so believe in Allah and his messengers.
Say not "Three" desist It will be better for you for Allah
is one God Glory be to him Far exalted is he above having a
son. To him belong all things in the heavens and the earth.
And enough is Allah as a disposer of affairs."
The noble Qur'an, Al-Nissa(4):171
Prior to 1952 all versions of the Bible made mention of
one of the most miraculous events associated with the
prophet Jesus peace be upon him, that of his ascension into
heaven:
"So then the lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them,
was taken up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of
God"
Mark 16:19
and once again in Luke:
"While he blessed them, he parted from them, and was
carried up into heaven. And they worshipped him, and
returned to Jerusalem with great joy."
Luke 24:51-52
In the 1952 RSV Mark 16 ends at verse 8 and the rest is
relegated in small print to a footnote (more on this later).
Similarly, in the commentary on the verses of Luke 24, we
are told in the footnotes of the NRSV Bible "Other
ancient authorities lack "and was carried up into
heaven'" and "Other ancient authorities
lack 'and worshipped him'". Thus,
we see that the verse of Luke in it's original form only
said:
"While he blessed them, he parted from them. And they
returned to Jerusalem with great joy."
It took centuries of "inspired correction" to give us
Luke 24:51-52 in their current form.
As another example, in Luke 24:1-7 we read:
"Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the
morning, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices
which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And
they found the stone rolled away from the sepulcher. And
they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout,
behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: And as
they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth,
they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you
when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be
delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified,
and the third day rise again."
Once again, in reference to verse 5, the footnotes say:
"Other ancient authorities lack 'He is not here
but has risen'" Also, please read entries 16
and 17 in the table in section 2.2.
The examples are far too numerous to list here, however,
you are encouraged to obtain a copy of the New Revised
Standard Version of the Bible for yourself and scan through
the four gospels. You shall be hard pressed to find even two
consecutive pages that do not contain the words "Other
ancient authorities lack..." or "Other ancient
authorities add..." etc. in the footnotes..
Let us now talk about the alleged authors of the New
Testament. We will note that every Gospel begins with the
introduction "According to..." such as "The Gospel
according to Saint Matthew," "The Gospel according to Saint
Luke," "The Gospel according to Saint Mark," "The Gospel
according to Saint John." The obvious conclusion for the
average man on the street is that these people are known to
be the authors of the books attributed to them. This,
however is not the case. Why? Because not one of the vaunted
four thousand copies existent carries it's author's
signature. It has just been assumed that they were the
authors. Recent discoveries, however, refute this belief.
Even the internal evidence proves that, for instance,
Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to him:
"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a
man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE
(Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE
(Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus)."
Matthew 9:9
It does not take a rocket scientist to see that neither
Jesus nor Matthew wrote this verse of "Matthew." Such
evidence can be found in many places throughout the New
Testament. Although many people have hypothesized that it is
possible that an author sometimes may write in the third
person, still, in light of the rest of the evidence that we
shall see throughout this book, there is simply too much
evidence against this hypothesis.
This observation is by no means limited to the New
Testament. There is even proof that at least parts of
Deuteronomy were neither written by God nor by Moses. This
can be seen in Deuteronomy 34:5-10 where we read
"So Moses...DIED... and he (God Almighty) BURIED HIM
(Moses)... He was 120 years old WHEN HE DIED... and there
arose not a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses..."
Did Moses write his own obituary? Joshua also speaks in
detail about his own death in Joshua 24:29-33. The evidence
overwhelmingly supports the current recognition that most of
the books of the Bible were not written by their supposed
authors.
The authors of the RSV by Collins say that the author of
"Kings" is "Unknown." If they knew it to be the word of God
they would have undoubtedly attributed it to him. Rather,
they have chosen to honestly say "Author...Unknown." But if
the author is unknown then why attribute it to God? How can
it then be claimed to have been "inspired"? Continuing, we
read that the book of Isaiah is "Mainly credited to Isaiah.
Parts may have been written by others." Ecclesiastics:
"Author. Doubtful, but commonly assigned to Solomon." Ruth:
"Author. Not definitely known, perhaps Samuel." and on and
on.
Let us have a slightly more detailed look at only one
book of the New Testament:
"The author of the Book of Hebrews is unknown. Martin
Luther suggested that Apollos was the author...Tertullian
said that Hebrews was a letter of Barnabas...Adolf Harnack
and J. Rendel Harris speculated that it was written by
Priscilla (or Prisca). William Ramsey suggested that it was
done by Philip. However, the traditional position is that
the Apostle Paul wrote Hebrews...Eusebius believed that Paul
wrote it, but Origen was not positive of Pauline
authorship."
From the introduction to the King James Bible, New
revised and updated sixth edition, the Hebrew/Greek Key
Study, Red Letter Edition
Is this how we define "inspired by God"?
As seen in chapter one, St. Paul and his church after
him, were responsible of making wholesale changes to the
religion of Jesus (pbuh) after his departure and were
further responsible for mounting a massive campaign of death
and torture of all Christians who refused to renounce the
teachings of the apostles in favor of the Pauline doctrines.
All but the Gospels acceptable to the Pauline faith were
then systematically destroyed or re-written. Rev. Charles
Anderson Scott has the following to say:
"It is highly probable that not one of the Synoptic
Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) was in existence in the
form which we have it, prior to the death of Paul. And were
the documents to be taken in strict order of chronology, the
Pauline Epistles would come before the synoptic
Gospels."
History of Christianity in the Light of Modern Knowledge,
Rev. Charles Anderson Scott, p.338
This statement is further confirmed by Prof. Brandon:
"The earliest Christian writings that have been
preserved for us are the letters of the apostle Paul"
"Religions in Ancient History," S.G.F. Brandon, p.
228.
In the latter part of the second century, Dionysius,
Bishop of Corinth says:
"As the brethren desired me to write
epistles(letters), I did so, and these the apostles of the
devil have filled with tares (undesirable elements),
exchanging some things and adding others, for whom there is
a woe reserved. It is not therefore, a matter of wonder if
some have also attempted to adulterate the sacred writings
of the Lord, since they have attempted the same in other
works that are not to be compared with these."
The Qur'an confirms this with the words:
"Then woe to those who write the book (of Allah/God)
with their own hands and then say: 'This is from Allah', to
traffic with it for a miserable price. Woe to them for what
their hands do write and for the gain they make thereby"
The noble Qur'an Al-Bakarah(2):79
Victor Tununensis, a sixth century African Bishop related
in his Chronicle (566 AD) that when Messala was consul at
Costantinople (506 AD), he "censored and corrected" the
Gentile Gospels written by persons considered illiterate by
the Emperor Anastasius. The implication was that they were
altered to conform to sixth century Christianity which
differed from the Christianity of previous centuries (The
Dead Sea Scrolls, the Gospel of Barnabas, and the New
Testament, by M. A. Yusseff, p. 81)
These "corrections" were by no means confined to the
first centuries after Christ. Sir Higgins says:
"It is impossible to deny that the Bendictine Monks of
St. Maur, as far as Latin and Greek language went, were very
learned and talented, as well as numerous body of men. In
Cleland's 'Life of Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury', is
the following passage: 'Lanfranc, a Benedictine Monk,
Archbishop of Canterbury, having found the Scriptures much
corrupted by copyists, applied himself to correct them, as
also the writings of the fathers, agreeably to the orthodox
faith, secundum fidem orthodoxam."
History of Christianity in the light of Modern knowledge,
Higgins p.318
In other words, the Christian scriptures were re-written
in order to conform to the doctrines of the eleventh and
twelfth centuries and even the writings of the early church
fathers were "corrected" so that the changes would not be
discovered. Sir Higgins goes on to say:
"The same Protestant divine has this remarkable
passage: 'Impartiality exacts from me the confession, that
the orthodox have in some places altered the Gospels."
The author then goes on to demonstrate how a massive
effort was undertaken in Costantinople, Rome, Canterbury,
and the Christian world in general in order to "correct" the
Gospels and destroy all manuscripts before this period.
Theodore Zahan, illustrated the bitter conflicts within
the established churches in Articles of the Apostolic
Creed. He points out that the Roman Catholics accuse the
Greek Orthodox Church of remodeling the text of the holy
scriptures by additions and omissions with both good as well
as evil intentions. The Greek Orthodox, on the other hand,
accuse the Roman Catholics of straying in many places very
far away from the original text. In spite of their
differences, they both join forces to condemn the
non-conformist Christians of deviating from "the true way"
and condemn them as heretics. The heretics in turn condemn
the Catholics for having "recoined the truth like
forgers." The author concludes "Do not facts support
these accusations?"
"And from those who said: "We are Christians," We took
their Covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message
which was sent to them. Therefore We have stirred up enmity
and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, and
Allah will inform them of what they used to do. O people of
the Scripture! Now has Our messenger (Muhammad) come to you,
explaining to you much of that which you used to hide in the
Scripture, and forgiving much. Indeed, there has come to you
a light from Allah and a plain Scripture. Wherewith Allah
guides him who seeks His good pleasure unto paths of peace.
He brings them out of darkness by His will into light, and
guides them to a straight path. They indeed have disbelieved
who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. Say: Who
then has the least power against Allah, if He had willed to
destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone
on earth? And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens
and the earth and all that is between them. He creates what
He will. And Allah is Able to do all things. The Jews and
Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones.
Say; Why then does He punish you for your sins? No, you are
but mortals of His creating. He forgives whom He will, and
punishes whom He will. And to Allah belongs the dominion of
the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and
unto Him is the return (of all). O people of the Scripture!
Now has Our messenger (Muhammad) come unto you to make
things plain after a break in (the series of) the
messengers, lest you should say: There came not unto us a
messenger of cheer nor any Warner. Now has a messenger of
cheer and a Warner come unto you. And Allah is Able to do
all things."
The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):14-19
St. Augustine himself, a man acknowledged and looked up
to by both Protestants and Catholics alike, professed that
there were secret doctrines in the Christian religion and
that
"there were many things true in the Christian religion
which it was not convenient for the vulgar to know, and that
some things were false, but convenient for the vulgar to
believe in them."
Sir Higgins admits:
"It is not unfair to suppose that in these withheld
truths we have part of the modern Christian
mysteries, and I think it will hardly be denied that the
church, whose highest authorities held such doctrines, would
not scruple to retouch the sacred writings" (The Dead Sea
Scrolls, the Gospel of Barnabas, and the New Testament, M.
A. Yusseff, p.83)
Even the epistles attributed to Paul were not written by
him. After years of research, Catholics and Protestants
alike agree that of the thirteen epistles attributed to Paul
only seven are genuinely his. They are: Romans, 1, 2
Corinthians, Galatians, Philipians, Philemon, and 1
Thessalonians.
Christian sect are not even agreed on the definition of
what exactly is an "inspired" book of God. The Protestants
are taught that there are 66 truly "inspired" books in the
Bible, while the Catholics have been taught that there are
73 truly "inspired" books, not to mention the many other
sects and their "newer" books, such as the Mormons, etc. As
we shall see shortly, the very first Christians, for many
generations, did not follow either the 66 books of the
Protestants, nor the 73 books of the Catholics. Quite the
opposite, they believed in books that were, many generations
later, "recognized" to be fabrications and apocrypha by a
more enlightened age than that of the apostles.
Well, where do all of these Bibles come from and why the
difficulty in defining what is a truly "inspired" word of
God? They come from the "ancient manuscripts" (also known as
MSS). The Christian world today boasts of an excess of
24,000 "ancient manuscripts" of the Bible dating all the way
back to the fourth century after Christ (But not back to
Christ or the apostles themselves). In other words, we have
with us gospels which date back to the century when the
Trinitarians took over the Christian Church. All manuscripts
from before this period have strangely perished. All Bibles
in existence today are compiled from these "ancient
manuscripts." Any scholar of the Bible will tell us that no
two ancient manuscripts are exactly identical.
People today generally believe that there is only ONE
Bible, and ONE version of any given verse of the Bible. This
is far from true. All Bibles in our possession today (Such
as the KJV, the NRSV, the NAB, NIV,...etc.) are the result
of extensive cutting and pasting from these various
manuscripts with no single one being the definitive
reference. There are countless cases where a paragraph shows
up in one "ancient manuscript" but is totally missing from
many others. For instance, Mark 16:8-20 (twelve whole
verses) is completely missing from the most ancient
manuscripts available today (such as the Sinaitic
Manuscript, the Vatican #1209 and the Armenian version) but
shows up in more recent "ancient manuscripts." There
are also many documented cases where even geographical
locations are completely different from one ancient
manuscript to the next. For instance, in the "Samaritan
Pentateuch manuscript," Deuteronomy 27:4 speaks of "mount
Gerizim," while in the "Hebrew manuscript" the exact same
verse speaks of "mount Ebal." From Deuteronomy 27:12-13
we can see that these are two distinctly different
locations. Similarly, Luke 4:44 in some "ancient
manuscripts" mentions "Synagogues of Judea," others mention
"Synagogues of Galilee." This is only a sampling, a
comprehensive listing would require a book of it's own.
There are countless examples in the Bible where verses of
a questionable nature are included in the text without any
disclaimer telling the reader that many scholars and
translators have serious reservations as to their
authenticity. The King James Version of the Bible (Also
known as the "Authorized Version"), the one in the hands of
the majority of Christendom today, is one of the most
notorious in this regard. It gives the reader absolutely no
clue as to the questionable nature of such verses. However,
more recent translations of the Bible are now beginning to
be a little more honest and forthcoming in this regard. For
example, the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, by
Oxford Press, has adopted an extremely subtle system of
bracketing the most glaring examples of such questionable
verses with double square brackets ([[ ]]).
It is highly unlikely that the casual reader will realize
the true function these brackets serve. They are there to
tell the informed reader that the enclosed verses are of a
highly questionable nature. Examples of this are the story
of the "woman taken in adultery" in John 8:1-11, as well as
Mark 16:9-20 (Jesus' resurrection and return), and Luke
23:34 (which, interestingly enough, is there to confirm the
prophesy of Isaiah 53:12)...and so forth.
For example, with regard to John 8:1-11, the commentators
of this Bible say in very small print at the bottom of the
page:
"The most ancient authorities lack 7.53-8.11; other
authorities add the passage here or after 7.36 or after
21.25 or after Luke 21.38 with variations of text; some mark
the text as doubtful." (emphasis added).
With regard to Mark 16:9-20, we are, strangely enough,
given a choice of how we would like the Gospel of
Mark to end. The commentators have supplied both a "short
ending" and a "long ending." Thus, we are given a
choice of what we would prefer to be the "inspired
word of God". Once again, at the end of this Gospel in very
small text, the commentators say:
"Some of the most ancient authorities bring the
book to a close at the end of verse 8. One authority
concludes the book with the shorter ending; others include
the shorter ending and then continue with verses 9-20. In
most authorities, verses 9-20 follow immediately after verse
8, though in some of these authorities the passage is marked
as being doubtful."
Peake's Commentary on the Bible records;
"It is now generally agreed that 9-20 are not an
original part of Mk. They are not found in the oldest MSS,
and indeed were apparently not in the copies used by Mt. and
Lk. A 10th-cent. Armenian MS ascribes the passage to
Aristion, the presbyter mentioned by Papias (ap.Eus.HE III,
xxxix, 15)."
"Indeed an Armenian translation of St. Mark has quite
recently been discovered, in which the last twelve verses of
St. Mark are ascribed to Ariston, who is otherwise known as
one of the earliest of the Christian Fathers; and it is
quite possible that this tradition is correct"
Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, F. Kenyon, Eyre
and Spottiswoode, pp. 7-8
Even at that, these verses are noted as having been
narrated differently in different "authorities." For
example, verse 14 is claimed by the commentators to have the
following words added on to them in some "ancient
authorities":
"and they excused themselves saying 'This age of
lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow
the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean
things of the spirits. Therefore, reveal your righteousness
now' - thus they spoke to Christ and Christ replied to them
'The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but
other terrible things draw near. And for those who have
sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to
the truth and sin no more, that they may inherit the
spiritual and imperishable glory of the righteousness that
is in heaven'.".
Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin
Von Tischendorf was one of the most eminent conservative
biblical scholars of the nineteenth century. He was also one
of the staunchest most adamant defenders of the "Trinity"
history has known. One of his greatest lifelong achievements
was the discovery of the oldest known Biblical manuscript
know to mankind, the "Codex Sinaiticus," from Saint
Catherine's Monastery in Mount Sinai. One of the most
devastating discoveries made from the study of this fourth
century manuscript was that the gospel of Mark originally
ended at verses 16:8 and not at verse 16:20 as it does
today. In other words, the last 12 verses (Mark 16:9 through
Mark 16:20) were "injected" by the church into the Bible
sometime after the 4th century. Clement of Alexandria and
Origen never quoted these verses. Later on, it was also
discovered that the said 12 verses, wherein lies the account
of "the resurrection of Jesus," do not appear in codices
Syriacus, Vaticanus and Bobiensis. Originally, the "Gospel
of Mark" contained no mention of the "resurrection of
Jesus" (Mark 16:9-20). At least four hundred years (if
not more) after the departure of Jesus, the Church received
divine "inspiration" to add the story of the resurrection to
the end of this Gospel.
The author of "Codex Sinaiticus" had no doubt that the
Gospel of Mark came to an end at Mark 16:8, to emphasize
this point we find that immediately following this verse he
brings the text to a close with a fine artistic squiggle and
the words "The Gospel according to Mark." Tischendorf was a
staunch conservative Christian and as such he managed to
casually brush this discrepancy aside since in his
estimation the fact that Mark was not an apostle nor an eye
witness to the ministry of Jesus made his account secondary
to those of the apostles such as Matthew and John. However,
as seen elsewhere in this book, the majority of Christian
scholars today recognize the writings of Paul to be the
oldest of the writings of the Bible. These are closely
followed by the "Gospel of Mark" and the "Gospels of Matthew
and Luke" are almost universally recognized to have been
based upon the "Gospel of Mark." This discovery was the
result of centuries of detailed and painstaking studies by
these Christian scholars and the details can not be repeated
here. Suffice it to say that most reputable Christian
scholars today recognize this as a basic indisputable
fact.
Today, the translators and publishers of our modern
Bibles are beginning to be a little more forthright and
honest with their readers. Although they may not simply
openly admit that these twelve verses were forgeries of the
Church and not the word of God, still, at least they are
beginning to draw the reader's attention to the fact that
there are two "versions" of the "Gospel of Mark" and then
leave the reader to decide what to make of these two
"versions."
Now the question becomes "if the Church has tampered with
the Gospel of Mark, then did they stop there or is there
more to this story?. As it happens, Tischendorf also
discovered that the "Gospel of John" has been heavily
reworked by the Church over the ages. For example,
- It was found that the verses starting from John 7:53
to 8:11 (the story of the woman taken in adultery) are
not to be found in the most ancient copies of the Bible
available to Christianity today, specifically, codices
Sinaiticus or Vaticanus.
- It was also found that John 21:25 was a later
insertion, and that a verse from the gospel of Luke
(24:12) that speaks of Peter discovering an empty tomb of
Jesus is not to be found in the ancient manuscripts.
(For more on this topic please read 'Secrets of Mount
Sinai' by James Bentley, Doubleday, NY, 1985).
Much of the discoveries of Dr. Tischendorf regarding the
continuous and unrelenting tampering with the text of the
Bible over the ages has been verified by twentieth century
science. For example, a study of the Codex Sinaiticus under
ultraviolet light has revealed that the "Gospel of John"
originally ended at verse 21:24 and was followed by a small
tail piece and then the words "The Gospel according to
John." However, some time later, a completely different
"inspired" individual took pen in hand, erased the text
following verse 24, and then added in the "inspired" text of
John 21:25 which we find in our Bibles today.
The evidence of tampering goes on and on. For example, in
the Codex Sinaiticus the "lord's prayer" of Luke 11:2-4
differs substantially from the version which has reached us
through the agency of centuries of "inspired" correction.
Luke 11:2-4 in this most ancient of all Christian
manuscripts reads:
"Father, Hallowed by thy name, Thy kingdom come. Thy
will be done, as in heaven, so upon earth. Give us day by
day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins, as we
ourselves also forgive everyone that is indebted to us. And
bring us not into temptation."
Further, the "Codex Vaticanus," is another ancient
manuscript held by the scholars of Christianity in the same
reverent standing as the Codex Sinaiticus. These two fourth
century codices are together considered the most ancient
copies of the Bible available today. In the codex Vaticanus
we can find a version of Luke 11:2-4 even shorter than that
of Codex Sinaiticus. In this version even the words "Thy
will be done, as in heaven, so upon earth." are not to
be found.
Well, what has been the official Church position
regarding these "discrepancies"? How did the Church decide
to handle this situation? Did they call upon all of the
foremost scholars of Christian literature to come together
in a mass conference in order to jointly study the most
ancient Christian manuscripts available to the Church and
come to a common agreement as to what was the true original
word of God? No!
Well then, did they immediately expend every effort to
make mass copies of the original manuscripts and send them
out to the Christian world so that they could make their own
decisions as to what truly was the original unchanged word
of God? Once again, No!
So what did they do? Let us ask Rev. Dr. George L.
Robertson. In his book "Where did we get our Bible? he
writes:
"Of the MSS. of Holy Scripture in Greek still existing
there are said to be several thousand of varying worth ...
Three or four in particular of these old, faded out, and
unattractive documents constitute the most ancient and the
most precious treasures of the Christian Church, and are
therefore of special interest." First in Rev.
Richardson's list is the "Codex Vaticanus" of which he says:
"This is probably the most ancient of all Greek MSS. now
known to exist. It is designated as Codex 'B.' In 1448, Pope
Nicholas V brought it to Rome where it has lain practically
ever since, being guarded assiduously by papal officials in
the Vatican Library. It's history is brief: Erasmus in 1533
knew of its existence, but neither he nor any of his
successors were permitted to study it... becoming quite
inaccessible to scholars, till Tischendorf in 1843, after
months of delay, was finally allowed to see it for six
hours. Another specialist, named de Muralt in 1844 was
likewise given an aggravating glimpse of it for nine hours.
The story of how Dr. Tregelles in 1845 was allowed by the
authorities (all unconscious to themselves) to secure it
page by page through memorizing the text, is a fascinating
one. Dr. Tregelles did it. He was permitted to study the MS.
continuously for a long time, but not to touch it or to take
notes. Indeed, every day as he entered the room where the
precious document was guarded, his pockets were searched and
pen, paper and ink were taken from him, if he carried such
accessories with him. The permission to enter, however, was
repeated, until he finally had carried away with him and
annotated in his room most of the principle variant readings
of this most ancient text. Often, however, in the process,
if the papal authorities observed he was becoming too much
absorbed in any one section, they would snatch the MS. away
from him and direct his attention to another leaf.
Eventually they discovered that Tregelles had practically
stolen the text, and that the Biblical world knew the
secrets of their historic MS. Accordingly, Pope Pius IX
ordered that it should be photographed and published; and it
was, in five volumes which appeared in 1857. But the work
was very unsatisfactorily done. About that time Tischendorf
made a third attempt to gain access to and examine it. He
succeeded, and later issued the text of the first twenty
pages. Finally in 1889-90, with papal permission, the entire
text was photographed and issued in facsimile, and published
so that a copy of the expensive quartos was obtainable by,
and is now in the possession of all the principle libraries
in the biblical world."
"Where did we get our Bible?", Rev. Dr. George L.
Robertson. Harper and Brothers Publishers, pp.110-112
What were all of the Popes afraid of? What was the
Vatican as a whole afraid of? Why was the concept of
releasing the text of their most ancient copy of the Bible
to the general public so terrifying to them? Why did they
feel it necessary to bury the most ancient copies of the
inspired word of God in a dark corner of the Vatican never
to be seen by outside eyes? Why? What about all of the
thousands upon thousands of other manuscripts which to this
day remain buried in the darkest depths of the Vatican
vaults never to be seen or studied by the general masses of
Christendom?
"[And remember] When God took a Covenant from
those who were given the Scripture: You shall make it known
and clear to mankind, and you shall not to hide it; but they
flung it behind their backs, and purchased with it a
miserable gain! How evil was that which they
purchased!"
The noble Qur'an, A'al-Umran(3):187
"Say: 'O people of the Book! exceed not in your
religion the bounds [of what is proper], trespassing
beyond the truth, nor follow the vain desires of people who
went astray in times gone by, who misled many, and strayed
[themselves] from the straight path.'"
The noble Qur'an, Al-Maida(5):77
Returning to our study of some of the "discrepancies" to
be found between our modern Bibles and between the most
ancient copies of the Bible available to the chosen few, we
find that the verse of Luke 24:51 contains Luke's alleged
account of the final parting of Jesus (pbuh) and how he was
"raised up into heaven." However, as seen in previous pages,
in the Codex Sinaiticus and other ancient manuscripts the
words "and was carried up into heaven" are completely
missing. The verse only says:
"And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was
parted from them."
C.S.C. Williams observed, if this omission were correct,
"there is no reference at all to the Ascension in the
original text of the Gospel."
Some other "inspired" modification of the Church to Codex
Sinaiticus and our modern Bibles:
- Matthew 17:21 is missing in Codex Sinaiticus.
- In our modern Bibles, Mark 1:1 reads "The
beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of
God;" however, in this most ancient of all Christian
manuscripts, this verse only reads "The beginning of
the gospel of Jesus Christ" Strangely, the very words
which are most grating to the Muslim's Qur'an, "the
Son of God," are completely missing. Isn't that
interesting?
- The words of Jesus in Luke 9:55-56 are missing.
- The original text of Matthew 8:2 as found in Codex
Sinaiticus tells us that a leper asked Jesus to heal him
and Jesus "angrily put forth [his] hand, and
touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean." In our
modern Bibles, the word "angrily" is strangely
absent.
- Luke 22:44 in Codex Sinaiticus and our modern Bibles
claim that an angel appeared before Jesus, strengthening
him. In Codex Vaticanus, this angel is strangely absent.
If Jesus was the "Son of God" then obviously it would be
highly inappropriate for him to need an angel to
strengthen him. This verse, then, must have been a
scribal mistake. Right?
- The alleged words of Jesus on the cross "Father,
forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke
23:34) were originally present in the Codex Sinaiticus
but was later erased from the text by another editor.
Bearing in mind how the Church regarded and treated the
Jews in the middle ages, can we think of any reason why
this verse might have stood in the way of official Church
policy and their "inquisitions"?
- John 5:4 is missing from Codex Sinaiticus.
- In Mark chapter 9, the words "Where their worm
dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." are again
missing.
- In Matt. 5:22, the words "without cause" are
missing in both the codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
- Matt. 21:7 in our modern Bibles reads "And
[the disciples] brought the ass, and the colt,
and put on them their clothes, and they set
[Jesus] thereon." In the original
manuscripts, this verse read "and they set
[Jesus] upon them," However, the
picture of Jesus being placed upon two animals at the
same time and being asked to ride them at once was
objectionable to some, so this verse was changed to
"and they set [Jesus] upon him"
(which "him"?). Soon after, the English translation
completely avoided this problem by translating it as
"thereon."
- In Mark 6:11, our modern Bibles contain the words
"Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for
Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that
city." However, these words are not to be found in
either of these two most ancient of Christian Biblical
manuscripts, having been introduced into the text
centuries later.
- The words of Matthew 6:13 "For thine is the
kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever." Are
not to be found in these two most ancient manuscripts as
well as many others. The parallel passages in Luke are
also defective.
- Matthew 27:35 in our modern Bibles contains the words
"that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the
prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my
vesture did they cast lots." This passage, once
again, is not found according to Rev. Merrill in any
Biblical uncial manuscript dating before the ninth
century.
- 1 Timothy 3:16 originally read "And without
controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
which was manifest in the flesh.." This was
then later (as seen previously), ever so subtly changed
to "And without controversy great is the mystery of
godliness: God was manifest in the
flesh
." Thus, the doctrine of the "incarnation"
was born.
Next Page
|