Planters Dry Roasted peanuts - NOT KOSHER
Riain Barton
ad from the Kashruth Council of Canada[COR].
They claim that the Planters Dry Roasted Peanuts 70 gram package was
"inadvertently labelled with an unauthorized COR"
They further claim that "This product is NOT kosher certified"
and "the product is being recalled"
What happened? How is such a screw-up possible?
Were the kosher food inspectors asleep at the plant,or having a pork sandwich
somewhere else?
Didn't Planters pay enogh KOSHER TAX to COR?
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
Ninth Commandment
wrote:
I'm glad to see there is a growing number of foods labelled kosher and
halal friendly.
R?ain - ריעין
Notice, I now have only my first name and it is in Irish and in Hebrew.
and my e-mail address is listed as ri...@riain.com on newsgroups.
The Real and only Riain Barton ריעין ברתון
"Riain Barton" <Ri...@riain.us> wrote in message
news:9dr131tuvb3ht7o09...@4ax.com...
: Canadian Jew News on page 34 of the issue for March 3,2005 are
Felix Raucht
Care to comment on the actual subject, or are you afraid to discuss the KOSHER
TAX, now that you are a zhid convert?
Felix Raucht
Presumably they did not pay the KOSHER TAX?
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 03:23:50 GMT, Ninth Commandment
<ninthcom...@revelations.org> wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:00:31 -0700, Riain Barton <Ri...@riain.us>
>wrote:
>
>>Canadian Jew News on page 34 of the issue for March 3,2005 are carrying a huge
>>ad from the Kashruth Council of Canada[COR].
>>
>>They claim that the Planters Dry Roasted Peanuts 70 gram package was
>>"inadvertently labelled with an unauthorized COR"
>>
>>They further claim that "This product is NOT kosher certified"
>>and "the product is being recalled"
>>
>>What happened? How is such a screw-up possible?
>>Were the kosher food inspectors asleep at the plant,or having a pork sandwich
>>somewhere else?
>>
>>Didn't Planters pay enogh KOSHER TAX to COR?
>
Susan Cohen
Not "Riain Barton" <Ri...@riain.us> wrote in message
news:9dr131tuvb3ht7o09...@4ax.com...
>
[snip]
> Didn't Planters pay enogh KOSHER TAX to COR?
No such thing, stupid bigot.
But you knew that before you posted.
Susan
Susan Cohen
"Felix Raucht" <fe...@guess.where> wrote in message
news:137231949gpc1slem...@4ax.com...
> But these Planters peanuts are NOT kosher or halal, apparently.
> Presumably they did not pay the KOSHER TAX?
Interesting how, no matter what name they use, these morons cut-n-paste as
tho' no one's going to be able to figure out their "subterfuge".
Susan
Susan Cohen
"Felix Raucht" <fe...@guess.where> wrote in message
>I think that you are just saying so, to stimulate discussion.
Says the lying forger.
Susan
Susan Cohen
"R?ain - ריעין" <ri...@riain.com> wrote in message
news:eeGdnQbKLo4...@comcast.com...
>I don't give a fuck what you think, you Jew-hating cunt.
He's also the one forging your name.
Same account, same language.
Susan
7h3_Fr13nd1y...@salmahayeksknockers.edu
> I'm glad to see there is a growing number of foods labelled kosher and
> halal friendly.
Why?
--
.............................................................................
"Israel's policies in the West Bank are an outgrowth of an imperial concept
'I want this' - combined with the ability to go about taking it. It must
be stressed again that this 'ability' is conferred by lavish US funding,
ideological support and diplomatic support"
-Noam Chomsky (The Fateful Triangle, p114)
.............................................................................
ds...@m3m3t1ccand1ru.com http://www.memeticcandiru.com
R?ain - ריעין
"Susan Cohen" <flav...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:9CaYd.43628$uc.18575@trnddc01...
:
: "R?ain - ריעין" <ri...@riain.com> wrote in message
:
:
z
Riain Barton wrote:
> Canadian Jew News on page 34 of the issue for March 3,2005 are
carrying a huge
> ad from the Kashruth Council of Canada[COR].
>
> They claim that the Planters Dry Roasted Peanuts 70 gram package was
> "inadvertently labelled with an unauthorized COR"
>
> They further claim that "This product is NOT kosher certified"
> and "the product is being recalled"
>
> What happened? How is such a screw-up possible?
> Were the kosher food inspectors asleep at the plant,or having a pork
sandwich
> somewhere else?
>
> Didn't Planters pay enogh KOSHER TAX to COR?
More likely like you suggest; somebody found one of the operators
chewing on a ham sandwich over the peanut hopper one day.
R?ain - ריעין
"Warren Oates" <Warren...@Gmail.Com> wrote in message
news:dAkYd.34325$JH1.1...@news20.bellglobal.com...
: On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:00:31 -0700
: Riain Barton <Ri...@riain.us> wrote:
:
::Canadian Jew News on page 34 of the issue for March 3,2005 are
carrying a huge
::ad from the Kashruth Council of Canada[COR].
::
::They claim that the Planters Dry Roasted Peanuts 70 gram package was
::"inadvertently labelled with an unauthorized COR"
:
: Further to your conspiracy theory: I have heard that Planters Dry
: Roasted Peanuts may contain traces of peanuts. So be careful.
:
: --
: Looks like more of Texas to Me
Ninth Commandment
7h3_Fr13nd1y...@salmahayeksknockers.edu wrote:
>In can.general Ninth Commandment <ninthcom...@revelations.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm glad to see there is a growing number of foods labelled kosher and
>> halal friendly.
>
>Why?
If it corresponds with the old testament then that is great for me
because I'm a Christian. If it can pass govt standards, halal and
kosher then I'm more likely to buy that product.
Kenneth McVay OBC
Felix Raucht <fe...@guess.where> wrote:
>But these Planters peanuts are NOT kosher or halal, apparently.
>Presumably they did not pay the KOSHER TAX?
Which "Kosher tax" might that be?
http://www.vex.net/~nizkor/hweb/people/g/grosvenor-william
http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=grosvenor+faq
KILLFILE these Grosvenor sockpuppets:
-------------------------------------
bo...@movil.com
Desi...@zeouane.fr
ErnstSt...@veritas.net
Ernst Zundholz
ErnstZu...@veritas.net
ErnstZ...@wahrheit.net
heinrichh...@xmail.net
her...@nowhere.com
JoeRos...@vex.net
kmcva...@xmail.net
Kenny...@vex.net
PanPiot...@vex.net
Ri...@riain.us
RiainYB...@nitzkor.NAMBLA.net
Sami...@veritas.net
SusanShi...@vex.net
ViktorA...@veritas.net
--
The Nizkor Project - An electronic Holocaust educational resource
David Irving, Holocaust denial, and his connections to Right-Wing
Extremists and Neo-Nazism in Germany:
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/f/funke-hajo/
h1dd3n_...@salmahayeksknockers.edu
> If it corresponds with the old testament then that is great for me
> because I'm a Christian.
How relevant do you consider the OT to be to the NT? In many ways it is
contrary to it, isn't it?
--
.............................................................................
Even if you do learn to speak correct English, whom are you going
to speak it to?
- Clarence Darrow
.............................................................................
ds...@m3m3t1ccand1ru.com http://www.memeticcandiru.com
Ninth Commandment
h1dd3n_h4m$7...@salmahayeksknockers.edu wrote:
>In can.general Ninth Commandment <ninthcom...@revelations.org> wrote:
>
>> If it corresponds with the old testament then that is great for me
>> because I'm a Christian.
>
>How relevant do you consider the OT to be to the NT? In many ways it is
>contrary to it, isn't it?
There are around 4600 different Christian sects and they all believe
in the Bible. The New Testament is the fulfillment of the Messiah and
his promises for the future. Although there are contradictions I don't
find too many and it gives me something to ruminate on.
Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון
Edited by Hugh Fogelman
A FORMER PASTOR 1 ASKS “If you think I am wrong, then answer these
questions;” WITHOUT taking anything out of context, mistranslating or
imposing a pre-conceived notion. (All chapter and verse numbers are
according to Christian bibles)
Why does the subject of 2 Samuel 7.14 “commit iniquity” if, according to
Hebrews 1.5, this is Jesus?
Why does the speaker in Psalms 41.4 say, “I have sinned against Thee,”
if, according to John 13.18, this is Jesus in verse 9? Is Christianity
so shallow that it must take certain verses out of context in a chapter
ignoring what the author actually meant?
Why does the speaker in Psalms 69.5 mention his “folly” and his “wrongs”
if, according to John 15.25, John 2.17, Romans 15.3, and John 19.28,
this is Jesus?
Why is the speaker in Psalms 69:30-31 (who Christians mistakenly
established is Jesus) declaring that praise and thanksgiving will please
God better than a sacrifice?
Why does God, in Jeremiah. 31:29-30, make a point of stressing that
“everyone will die for his own iniquity”?immediately before introducing
the new covenant, whereby Jesus will die for everyone else’s iniquity?
Isn’t that a rather strange way for the “tutor to lead us to Christ?”
When does the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31 come into effect? If it was
2,000 years ago, why hasn’t verse 34 happened yet?
Why will there be sin sacrifices when the messiah comes, when the New
Testament (NT) is fixed that there won’t be? (Hebrews 9:28;
10:10,12,14,18; Ezekiel 3:18,19,21,22,25; Ezekiel 44: 27, 29; Ezekiel
45:17,20,22,23,25)
Why is Torah law going forth from Zion in the messianic age, in the
sight of all the nations of the world, instead of Jesus, if the law is a
curse and Jesus has fulfilled and replaced it? (Isaiah 2.3, Micah 4.2)
Why are the Jews keeping (DOING) the Torah law in the messianic age, if
it is a curse and Jesus has fulfilled and replaced it, according to the
NT? (Ezekiel 37.24)
Why is no one who is uncircumcised IN THE FLESH allowed to enter the
temple in the messianic age, if “neither circumcision nor uncircumcision
means anything,” according to Paul? (Galatians 5.6, Ezekiel 44.7) Whose
opinion should I trust, Paul’s or God’s?
Why does “forever” have an expiration date in Christianity? (Romans
10.4; Psalms 119: 44, 111, 152, 160, 172, 142), whereas in Judaism, it
means “forever”?
How can Jesus be qualified to be the messiah through Davidic lineage if
he did not have a human father? Can the “Holy Spirit” be of the seed of
David? Think!
How can Jesus be qualified to be the messiah through Davidic lineage,
even through Joseph, if Joseph came through the cursed line of Jeconiah?
(Jeremiah 22:28-30, Matthew 1.11,12)
How can Jesus be qualified to be the messiah through Davidic lineage,
even through Mary, if she came from Nathan, the wrong son of David, as
well as from the cursed line? (Luke 3:31, 1 Chronicles. 22:9,10, Luke
3:27)
How could both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies be correct, and
“divinely” inspired, even if they are of two different people, if they
diverge (at Nathan and Solomon) and then come back together (at
Shealtiel)? How can two brothers have the same grandchildren???
Why don’t the genealogies in the New Testament agree with each other, or
with 1 Chronicles 3, which came first and CANNOT be incorrect? The
SOURCE BIBLE is wrong?
Why is Paul so anxious for you to not study the genealogies? (1
Timothy1:4, Titus 3:9-11)
Why does Hebrews 8.9 lie about what God said in Jeremiah 31.32?
Why does Hebrews 10.5 lie about what God said in Psalms 40.6?
Why does 2 Corinthians 3 lie about what God said in Exodus 34.29-35?
Why does John 19.37 lie about what God said in Zechariah 12.10?
Why does Romans 9.33 and 2 Pet. 2.8 lie about what God said in Isaiah
28.16?
Why does Romans 10.6-8 lie about what God said in Deuteronomy 30.12-14?
Why does Romans leave out Deuteronomy 30.11, and the last half of verses
12, 13, and 14???
Why does Romans 11:26-27 lie about what God said in Isaiah 59:20-21?
Why does Matthew 12.21 lie about what God said in Isaiah 42.4?
Why does Matthew 1.12 lie about what God said in 1 Chronicles 3.19?
Why does Matthew 2.6 lie about what God said in Micah 5.2?
Why does Luke 4:18-19 lie about what God said in Isaiah 61:1-2?
Why does Jesus lie in Matthew 5.43 about what God said in Leviticus
19.18?
Why does Paul, in Romans 9 does:24-26, leave out the first part of Hosea
1.10, which tells us that the verses he is quoting (the second half of
Hosea 1.10, and Hosea 2.23), refer to the sons of Israel?
Why does Matthew 2.15 leave out the first half of Hosea 11.1, which says
that Israel is God’s son?
Where in the Hebrew scriptures is the verse, “And he shall be called a
Nazarene,” quoted in Matthew 2.23? Matthew makes it appear the Jewish
Scriptures said that.
Why are the holy and inspired men of the New Testament so ignorant of
the Hebrew Scriptures?
Why doesn’t Jesus himself know his own scripture, if he’s God and he
wrote it? (Matthew 23; 35; Zech 1:1,2; 2 Chronicles 24:20,21)
Why does Jesus change God’s law (Matthew 5:32, Luke 16:18?declaring
every legally divorced woman an adulteress, and every man married to a
legally divorced woman an adulterer), if “I did not come to abolish the
law,” and “whoever annuls one of the least of these commandments, and so
teaches others, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven?”
(Matthew. 5:17, 19)
Why do most Christian translators lie about what God said in Hosea 14.2,
and change His words, “take away all iniquity... that we may present our
lips as bulls” (demonstrating that prayer substitutes for sacrifice) to
“... the fruit of our lips?”
Why do Christians never mention verses like Hosea 14.2 or 1 Kings
8:44-52 or 2 Sam 12:13 or Leviticus 5:11-13 or Psalms 32.5 or Isaiah
6.6-7 which demonstrate that one does not need a blood sacrifice to have
their sins forgiven, or verses like Proverbs 21.3 or Psalms 40.6 or
Hosea 6.6 or Psalms 69:30-31 or 1 Samuel 15.22 which say clearly that
God actually PREFERS other methods of atonement to blood sacrifice, or
Jeremiah 7:22-23 which goes so far as to say that God NEVER EVEN
COMMANDED US ABOUT SACRIFICES???
Why are there numerous stories in the torah of people who sinned, and
were forgiven through prayer and repentance?WITHOUT A SACRIFICE, such as
David in 2 Sam 12:13, or the city of Nineveh in Jonah?and not a single
story, ever, of someone who sinned and gave a sacrifice in order to be
forgiven?
How can Jesus be the Passover lamb for the gentiles, especially the
uncircumcised, if outsiders were forbidden to partake of it? (Exodus
12:43,45,48)
Why is the New Testament so concerned about the laws of the paschal lamb
when it comes to the 2nd half of Exodus 12.46 (see John 19.36), but not
at all concerned with these laws when it comes to Exodus 12:
3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,44, the first half of 46, or 48?
What good is Jesus as a sin sacrifice to the intentional sinner, since
(with one exception, Leviticus 6.2,3) the sin sacrifices were only for
the unintentional sinner? (Leviticus 4: 2,13,22,27; 5:15,18)
Why did God, in Jeremiah 31:16, tell Rachel that her children would
return, if He was referring to the dead children in Matthew 2:16? Were
they going to come back to life?
Why are the nations putting their hands on their mouth in Micah 7:16,
much like in Isaiah 52:15? What is it that they’re seeing and being
ashamed of?
Why did the church put an unnatural chapter break between Isaiah 52:15
and 53:1?
Why does the servant in Isaiah 53:10 have physical children (“zera”/seed)
if it refers to Jesus?
If “zera” really means spiritual children in Isaiah 53, why do all
Christians agree it means physical offspring in every other place in the
bible that it is used to refer to people?
If “zera”/seed really means spiritual children, which ONE of the world’s
Christians is the true child of Jesus, since according to Paul in
Galatians 3:16, “seed” refers to only one person?
Why are there many clear prophecies which state that Israel is despised
and afflicted, but none which say this about the messiah?
Why is the automatic Christian response to the problems of Isaiah 53
ALWAYS to quote the rabbis they otherwise despise and mock and whose
writings they don’t believe in, that Jesus berated and Paul called “men
who turn away from the truth” (Titus 1.14) ???
Why did the disciples not understand what Jesus was talking about in
Luke 18:31-34 and Mark 9:32, if it was always common knowledge among the
Jews that the messiah was to suffer, die, and rise from the dead?
Why did Jesus make predictions that didn’t come true, if that’s a sure
sign of a false prophet? (Matthew 16:38, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27,
Deuteronomy 18:20-22)
Why does God the Father know something Jesus does not know (Mark 13:32)
if Jesus IS the Everlasting Father, and the Mighty God, according to
Isaiah 9.6?
Why do Christians translate the word “moshiach” correctly as “an
anointed one” every time it appears in the Torah, except for in Daniel
9?
Why do Christians translate the word “ca’ari” correctly as “like a lion”
every time it appears in the Torah, except for in Psalm 22:17?
Why do Christians translate the words “y’mei olom” correctly as “days of
old” every time it appears in the Torah, except for in Micah 5:2?
Why do Christians translate the word “bar” correctly to “cleanliness” or
“purity” every time it appears in the Torah, except for in Psalm 2:12?
Why is it that 5 verses earlier King David knew the correct word for
“son,” but not in verse 12?
Why don’t Christians translate “ha’almah” as “virgin” in Proverbs 30:19,
if that’s what it means? (What the four “ways” in vs. 19 have in common
is that they leave no trace, as evidenced by vs. 20 that follows.)
Why did the Septuagint authors use “parthenos” in Genesis to describe
Dina who had just been raped, if it means virgin according to messianic
authorities?
If Isaiah 7:14 refers to the virgin birth of Jesus, via “dual prophecy”
(since it obviously can’t refer to him via the context), then whose was
the other virgin birth that occurred at the time of the prophecy?
* Why are there numerous prophecies about gentiles bowing and
apologizing to the Jews in the last days, and admitting they (the
gentiles) have been wrong, and not a single prophecy the other way
around?of the Jews apologizing to the gentiles?if it is indeed the Jews
who are wrong? (see my messianic prophecies list) *
* * Why, if our salvation depends on it, does the Hebrew Bible (Source
Document) NOT command anyone to believe in the messiah when he comes? *
*
* * * Why do all the prophecies that Jesus supposedly fulfilled deal
only with the PERSON of the messiah, which the Hebrew Bible barely
mentions, and have nothing to with the ACCOMPLISHMENTS of the messiah,
about which the Torah is very specific? * * *
* * * * Why is it that all of the so-called prophecies that Jesus
supposedly fulfilled are only things that are of no practical advantage
to anyone, and do nothing to improve the quality of anyone’s life, while
all of the prophecies that he FAILED to fulfill are of tremendous
benefit to every individual on the planet, and all of mankind as a
whole? (For example, how does a virgin birth that happened 2,000 years
ago, or Jesus’ being thirsty and being offered vinegar, or being born in
Bethlehem, or being killed with a robber, or riding on a donkey, etc...
help improve any person’s life at all? How do any of these
“fulfillments” solve a single problem in anyone’s or any peoples’ life?
Yet, on the other hand, when there is world peace, and all the evil
people are gone, and all the sick are healed, etc... Now THERE are some
messianic prophecies all mankind can use!!! ) * * * *
* * * Why is it that all of the prophecies that Jesus supposedly
fulfilled are all things that CANNOT BE PROVEN, while all of the
prophecies that Jesus did NOT yet fulfill, on the other hand, are all
things that COULD NOT BE DENIED IF HE HAD fulfilled them?even just ONE
of them??? * * *
* * * * * Why is it that the ONLY way to fit Jesus into the Hebrew Bible’s
messianic prophecies is through the use of extreme force? Why is one or
more of the following methods ALWAYS required?
1) Taking verses out of context;
2) Mistranslating;
3) Placing a 2,000 year gap (at least) in the middle of a verse?totally
unjustified by the context?i.e. sweeping any failure of Jesus to fulfill
the scriptures under the rug of the 2nd coming; or
4) Making verses up?
Why does the Torah NEVER ONCE mention Jesus clearly, if it’s so
important that we believe in him? * * * * *
ARE ALL OF THE ABOVE FACTS JUST TREMENDOUS, AMAZING, UNBELIEVABLE
COINCIDENCES??? NO!
If God changed his mind about so very many crucial things He said in the
Torah, as demonstrated above, and now wants us to believe in Jesus, why
did He NOT come down to ALL of us, and endorse Jesus in person to make
it clear to us; just as He came down to all 3 million of His children
at Mt. Sinai to endorse Moses and make sure we would accept the Torah
forever? (Exodus 19:9,11,17; Exodus 24.17)
Why would God break one of His own commandments, “You shall not place a
stumbling block before the blind” (Leviticus19.14), since according to 2
Corinthians 3.14 and 4.4, I am blind, and according to Romans 9.32, 1
Peter 2.8, and 1 Corinthians 1.23, the above challenges are all part of
“a stumbling stone?”
Why would God trick us, and present us with such tremendous difficulties
as shown by the above questions, and then throw us into hell for
rejecting an apparent false god, who’s really not false, if “God our
Savior desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the
truth?” (1 Timothy 2.4)
WHY IS THE CHRISTIAN GOD SUCH A SADIST??? AND WHY DO CHRISTIANS EXPECT
JEWS TO WANT TO EMBRACE HIM???
Yes, I want to know too – someone please answer all the questions from
the ex-pastor
Footnote:
1. Pastor Craig Lyons, M.Div: 902 Cardigan, Garland, Texas 75040
"Ninth Commandment" <ninthcom...@revelations.org> wrote in message
news:31e731dkv1fe7okck...@4ax.com...
: On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 01:58:39 GMT,
Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון
Paul Carlson
I. THE BIRTH OF JESUS
A. THE GENEALOGIES OF JOSEPH
1. Matthew and Luke disagree
Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew
1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of
Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by
suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though
Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23).
Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at
least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church
Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been
only too eager to dilate at length on these passages."
2. Why genealogies of Joseph?
Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct
descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then
Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and
one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels.
The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that
Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic
requirement of being a direct descendant of King David.
Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented
(or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the
virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by
inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link
between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical
link between David and Jesus.
The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the
existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2)
to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David.
The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans
1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same
Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or
"offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical
descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a
physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally
adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not
qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line
of David was required.
Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it
was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm
(the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just
the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil
that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs
that could not produce children.
This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the
Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the
possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the
"seed of David" through Mary.
3. Why do only Matthew and Luke know of the virgin birth?
Of all the writers of the New Testament, only Matthew and Luke mention
the virgin birth. Had something as miraculous as the virgin birth
actually occurred, one would expect that Mark and John would have at
least mentioned it in their efforts to convince the world that Jesus was
who they were claiming him to be.
The apostle Paul never mentions the virgin birth, even though it would
have strengthened his arguments in several places. Instead, where Paul
does refer to Jesus' birth, he says that Jesus "was born of the seed of
David" (Romans 1:3) and was "born of a woman," not a virgin (Galatians
4:4).
4. Why did Matthew include four women in Joseph's genealogy?
Matthew mentions four women in the Joseph's genealogy.
a. Tamar - disguised herself as a harlot to seduce Judah, her
father-in-law (Genesis 38:12-19).
b. Rahab - was a harlot who lived in the city of Jericho in Canaan
(Joshua 2:1).
c. Ruth - at her mother-in-law Naomi's request, she came secretly to
where Boaz was sleeping and spent the night with him. Later Ruth and
Boaz were married (Ruth 3:1-14).
d. Bathsheba - became pregnant by King David while she was still married
to Uriah (2 Samuel 11:2-5).
To have women mentioned in a genealogy is very unusual. That all four of
the women mentioned are guilty of some sort of sexual impropriety cannot
be a coincidence. Why would Matthew mention these, and only these,
women? The only reason that makes any sense is that Joseph, rather than
the Holy Spirit, impregnated Mary prior to their getting married, and
that this was known by others who argued that because of this Jesus
could not be the Messiah. By mentioning these women in the genealogy
Matthew is in effect saying, "The Messiah, who must be a descendant of
King David, will have at least four "loose women" in his genealogy, so
what difference does one more make?"
B. THE ANGEL'S MESSAGE
In Matthew, the angel appears to Joseph in a dream and tells him that
Mary's child will save his people from their sins. In Luke, the angel
tells Mary that her son will be great, he will be called the Son of the
Most High and will rule on David's throne forever. A short time later
Mary tells Elizabeth that all generations will consider her (Mary)
blessed because of the child that will be born to her.
If this were true, Mary and Joseph should have had the highest regard
for their son. Instead, we read in Mark 3:20-21 that Jesus' family tried
to take custody of him because they thought he had lost his mind. And
later, in Mark 6:4-6 Jesus complained that he received no honor among
his own relatives and his own household.
C. THE DATE
According to Matthew, Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great
(Matthew 2:1). According to Luke, Jesus was born during the first census
in Israel, while Quirinius was governor of Syria (Luke 2:2). This is
impossible because Herod died in March of 4 BC and the census took place
in 6 and 7 AD, about 10 years after Herod's death.
Some Christians try to manipulate the text to mean this was the first
census while Quirinius was governor and that the first census of Israel
recorded by historians took place later. However, the literal meaning is
"this was the first census taken, while Quirinius was governor ..." In
any event, Quirinius did not become governor of Syria until well after
Herod's death.
D. THE PLACE
Both Matthew and Luke say that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Matthew
quotes Micah 5:2 to show that this was in fulfillment of prophecy.
Actually, Matthew misquotes Micah (compare Micah 5:2 to Matthew 2:6).
Although this misquote is rather insignificant, Matthew's poor
understanding of Hebrew will have great significance later in his
gospel.
Luke has Mary and Joseph travelling from their home in Nazareth in
Galilee to Bethlehem in Judea for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:4).
Matthew, in contradiction to Luke, says that it was only after the birth
of Jesus that Mary and Joseph resided in Nazareth, and then only because
they were afraid to return to Judea (Matthew 2:21-23).
In order to have Jesus born in Bethlehem, Luke says that everyone had to
go to the city of their birth to register for the census. This is
absurd, and would have caused a bureaucratic nightmare. The purpose of
the Roman census was for taxation, and the Romans were interested in
where the people lived and worked, not where they were born (which they
could have found out by simply asking rather than causing thousands of
people to travel).
E. THE PROPHECIES
Matthew says that the birth of Jesus and the events following it
fulfilled several Old Testament prophecies. These prophecies include:
1. The virgin birth (Isaiah 7:14)
This verse is part of a prophecy that Isaiah relates to King Ahaz
regarding the fate of the two kings threatening Judah at that time and
the fate of Judah itself. In the original Hebrew, the verse says that a
"young woman" will give birth, not a "virgin" which is an entirely
different Hebrew word. The young woman became a virgin only when the
Hebrew word was mistranslated into Greek.
This passage obviously has nothing to do with Jesus (who, if this
prophecy did apply to him, should have been named Immanuel instead of
Jesus).
2. The "slaughter of the innocents" (Jeremiah 31:15)
Matthew says that Herod, in an attempt to kill the newborn Messiah, had
all the male children two years old and under put to death in Bethlehem
and its environs, and that this was in fulfillment of prophecy.
This is a pure invention on Matthew's part. Herod was guilty of many
monstrous crimes, including the murder of several members of his own
family. However, ancient historians such as Josephus, who delighted in
listing Herod's crimes, do not mention what would have been Herod's
greatest crime by far. It simply didn't happen.
The context of Jeremiah 31:15 makes it clear that the weeping is for the
Israelites about to be taken into exile in Babylon, and has nothing to
do with slaughtered children hundreds of years later.
3. Called out of Egypt (Hosea 11:1)
Matthew has Mary, Joseph and Jesus fleeing to Egypt to escape Herod, and
says that the return of Jesus from Egypt was in fulfillment of prophecy
(Matthew 2:15). However, Matthew quotes only the second half of Hosea
11:1. The first half of the verse makes it very clear that the verse
refers to God calling the Israelites out of Egypt in the exodus led by
Moses, and has nothing to do with Jesus.
As further proof that the slaughter of the innocents and the flight into
Egypt never happened, one need only compare the Matthew and Luke
accounts of what happened between the time of Jesus' birth and the
family's arrival in Nazareth. According to Luke, forty days (the
purification period) after Jesus was born, his parents brought him to
the temple, made the prescribed sacrifice, and returned to Nazareth.
Into this same time period Matthew somehow manages to squeeze: the visit
of the Magi to Herod, the slaughter of the innocents and the flight into
Egypt, the sojourn in Egypt, and the return from Egypt. All of this
action must occur in the forty day period because Matthew has the Magi
visit Jesus in Bethlehem before the slaughter of the innocents.
F. THE TRUTH BEHIND THE PROPHECIES - MATTHEW'S BIG BLUNDER
Since the prophecies mentioned above do not, in their original context,
refer to Jesus, why did Matthew include them in his gospel? There are
two possibilities:
1. The church says that the words had a hidden future context as well as
the original context, ie, God was keeping very important secrets from
His chosen people.
2. Matthew, in his zeal to prove that Jesus was the Messiah, searched
the Old Testament for passages (sometimes just phrases) that could be
construed as messianic prophecies and then created or modified events in
Jesus' life to fulfill those "prophecies."
Fortunately for those who really want to know the truth, Matthew made a
colossal blunder later in his gospel which leaves no doubt at all as to
which of the above possibilities is true. His blunder involves what is
known as Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem riding on a donkey (if
you believe Mark, Luke or John) or riding on two donkeys (if you believe
Matthew). In Matthew 21:1-7, two animals are mentioned in three of the
verses, so this cannot be explained away as a copying error. And Matthew
has Jesus riding on both animals at the same time, for verse 7 literally
says, "on them he sat."
Why does Matthew have Jesus riding on two donkeys at the same time?
Because he misread Zechariah 9:9 which reads in part, "mounted on a
donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey."
Anyone familiar with Old Testament Hebrew would know that the word
translated "and" in this passage does not indicate another animal but is
used in the sense of "even" (which is used in many translations) for
emphasis. The Old Testament often uses parallel phrases which refer to
the same thing for emphasis, but Matthew was evidently not familiar with
this usage. Although the result is rather humorous, it is also very
revealing. It demonstrates conclusively that Matthew created events in
Jesus' life to fulfill Old Testament prophecies, even if it meant
creating an absurd event. Matthew's gospel is full of fulfilled
prophecies. Working the way Matthew did, and believing as the church
does in "future contexts," any phrase in the Bible could be turned into
a fulfilled prophecy!
G. CONCLUSIONS REACHED SO FAR
From looking at just the birth accounts several conclusions can be
reached, all of which will be further reinforced by examining other
parts of the New Testament:
1. The gospel writers contradict each other.
2. The gospel writers rewrote history when it suited their purposes.
3. The gospels were extensively edited to accommodate the evolving dogma
of the church.
4. The gospel writers misused the Old Testament to provide prophecies
for Jesus to fulfill.
From the birth accounts alone, it is obvious that in no way can the New
Testament be considered "the inerrant Word of God," or even "the Word of
God, inerrant regarding matters important to faith and practice."
II. JESUS AND JOHN THE BAPTIST
A. WHAT DID JOHN THE BAPTIST KNOW ABOUT JESUS AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?
John's first encounter with Jesus was while both of them were still in
their mothers' wombs, at which time John, apparently recognizing his
Saviour, leaped for joy (Luke 1:44). Much later, while John is
baptizing, he refers to Jesus as "the Lamb of God who takes away the
sins of the world", and "the Son of God" (John 1:29,36). Later still,
John is thrown in prison from which he does not return alive. John's
definite knowledge of Jesus as the son of God and saviour of the world
is explicitly contradicted by Luke 7:18-23 in which the imprisoned John
sends two of his disciples to ask Jesus, "Are you the one who is coming,
or do we look for someone else?"
B. WHY DID JOHN BAPTIZE JESUS?
John baptized for repentance (Matthew 3:11). Since Jesus was supposedly
without sin, he had nothing to repent of. The fact that he was baptized
by John has always been an embarrassment to the church. The gospels
offer no explanation for Jesus' baptism, apart from the meaningless
explanation given in Matthew 3:14-15 "to fulfill all righteousness."
Other passages, which indicate that Jesus did not consider himself
sinless, are also an embarrassment to the church (Mark 10:18, Luke
18:19).
Luke, who claims to be chronological (Luke 1:3), tries to give the
impression that John did not baptize Jesus. Luke's account of Jesus'
baptism occurs after the account of John's imprisonment (Luke 3:20-21).
C. WHY DIDN'T JOHN THE BAPTIST BECOME A FOLLOWER OF JESUS?
If John knew that Jesus was the son of God, why didn't he become a
disciple of Jesus? And why didn't all, or even most, of John's disciples
become Jesus' disciples? Most of John's disciples remained loyal to him,
even after his death, and a sect of his followers persisted for
centuries.
The gospel writers were forced to include Jesus' baptism in their
gospels so that they could play it down. They could not ignore it
because John's followers and other Jews who knew of Jesus' baptism were
using the fact of his baptism to challenge the idea that Jesus was the
sinless son of God. The gospel writers went to great pains to invent
events that showed John as being subordinate to Jesus.
III. THE LAST SUPPER
A. WHEN - BEFORE OR DURING PASSOVER?
In Matthew, Mark and Luke the last supper takes place on the first day
of the Passover (Matthew 26:17, Mark 14:12, Luke 22:7). In John's gospel
it takes place a day earlier and Jesus is crucified on the first day of
the Passover (John 19:14).
B. THE LORD'S SUPPER - INSTITUTED BY JESUS OR PAUL?
In Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus institutes the Lord's Supper during the
Passover meal (in John's gospel the Lord's Supper is not instituted -
Jesus was dead by the time of the Passover meal).
In 1 Corinthians 11:23 the apostle Paul writes, "For I received from the
Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the
night in which He was betrayed took bread..." Here Paul claims that he
got the instructions for the Lord's Supper directly from Jesus
(evidently from one of his many revelations). Paul writes these words
about twenty years after Jesus' death, and had the church already been
celebrating the Lord's Supper he certainly would have been aware of it
and would have had no need to receive it from the Lord. Some apologists
try to play games with the text to make it seem like Paul actually
received the instructions from the other apostles, but one thing Paul
stresses is that what he teaches he receives from no man (Galatians
1:11-12).
The Lord's supper was not invented by Paul, but was borrowed by him from
Mithraism, the mystery religion that existed long before Christianity
and was Christianity's chief competitor up until the time of
Constantine. In Mithraism, the central figure is the mythical Mithras,
who died for the sins of mankind and was resurrected. Believers in
Mithras were rewarded with eternal life. Part of the Mithraic communion
liturgy included the words, "He who will not eat of my body and drink of
my blood, so that he will be made one with me and I with him, the same
shall not know salvation."[*].
The early Church Fathers Justin Martyr and Tertullian tried to say that
Mithraism copied the Lord's Supper from Christianity, but they were
forced to say that demons had copied it since only demons could copy an
event in advance of its happening! They could not say that the followers
of Mithras had copied it - it was a known fact that Mithraism had
included the ritual a long time before Christ was born.
Where did Mithraism come from? The ancient historian Plutarch mentioned
Mithraism in connection with the pirates of Cilicia in Asia Minor
encountering the Roman general Pompey in 67 BC. More recently, in 1989
Mithraic scholar David Ulansey wrote a book, The Origins of the Mithraic
Mysteries, in which he convincingly shows that Mithraism originated in
the city of Tarsus in Cilicia. That this is also the home town of the
apostle Paul cannot be a coincidence.
Paul admits that he did not know Jesus during Jesus' lifetime. He also
says that his gospel was not taught to him by any man (Galatians
1:11-12). All of Paul's theology is based on his own revelations, or
visions. Like dreams, visions or hallucinations do not come from
nowhere, but reveal what is already in a person's subconscious. It is
very likely that the source of most of Paul's visions, and therefore
most of his theology, is to be found in Mithraism. That we find Jesus at
the Last Supper saying more or less the same thing Paul said to the
Corinthians many years later is another example of the church modifying
the gospels to incorporate the theology of Paul, which eventually won
out over the theology of Jesus' original disciples.
C. JUDAS ISCARIOT
It is very unclear in the gospels just what Judas Iscariot's betrayal
consisted of, probably because there was absolutely no need for a
betrayal. Jesus could have been arrested any number of times without the
general populace knowing about it. It would have been simple to keep
tabs on his whereabouts. The religious authorities did not need a
betrayal - only the gospel writers needed a betrayal, so that a few more
"prophecies" could be fulfilled. The whole episode is pure fiction -
and, as might be expected, it is riddled with contradictions.
1. The prophecy
Matthew says that Judas' payment and death were prophesied by Jeremiah,
and then he quotes Zechariah 11:12-13 as proof!
2. Thirty pieces of silver
According to Matthew 26:15, the chief priests "weighed out thirty pieces
of silver" to give to Judas. There are two things wrong with this:
a. There were no "pieces of silver" used as currency in Jesus' time -
they had gone out of circulation about 300 years before.
b. In Jesus' time, minted coins were used - currency was not "weighed
out."
By using phrases that made sense in Zechariah's time but not in Jesus'
time Matthew once again gives away the fact that he creates events in
his gospel to match "prophecies" he finds in the Old Testament.
3. Who bought the Field of Blood?
a. In Matthew 27:7 the chief priests buy the field.
b. In Acts 1:18 Judas buys the field.
4. How did Judas die?
a. In Matthew 27:5 Judas hangs himself.
b. In Acts 1:18 he bursts open and his insides spill out.
c. According to the apostle Paul, neither of the above is true. Paul
says Jesus appeared to "the twelve" after his resurrection. Mark 14:20
makes it clear that Judas was one of the twelve.
In Matthew 19:28, Jesus tells the twelve disciples, including Judas,
that when Jesus rules from his throne, they will sit on twelve thrones
judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
5. How did the Field of Blood get its name?
a. Matthew says because it was purchased with blood money (Matthew
27:6-8).
b. Acts says because of the bloody mess caused by Judas' bursting open
(Acts 1:18-19).
IV. JESUS' TRIALS, DEATH AND RESURRECTION
A. THE TRIALS
Before listing the contradictions regarding the trials of Jesus, it
should be stated that the whole episode is quite obviously a
fabrication. Anyone familiar with Jewish law recognizes the
impossibility of the chief priests and scribes arresting Jesus and
assembling to question him during the most holy of Jewish festivals.
1. Where was Jesus taken immediately after his arrest?
a. Matthew, Mark and Luke say that Jesus was taken directly to the high
priest (Matthew 26:57, Mark 14:53 and Luke 22:54).
b. John says that Jesus was taken first to Annas, the father-in-law of
the high priest (John 18:13) who, after an indeterminate period of time,
sent Jesus to the high priest (John 18:24).
2. When did the priests and scribes gather together to question Jesus?
a. Matthew 26:57 says that on the night Jesus was arrested the priests
and scribes were gathered together prior to Jesus being brought to the
high priest.
b. Mark 14:53 says the priests and scribes gathered together on the
night of Jesus' arrest after Jesus was brought to the high priest.
c. Luke 22:66 says the priests and scribes assembled the day after Jesus
was arrested.
d. John mentions only the high priest - no other priests or scribes play
a role in questioning Jesus.
3. Was Jesus questioned by Herod?
a. Luke says that Pilate sent Jesus to Herod who questioned Jesus at
length and then returned Jesus to Pilate (Luke 23:7-11).
b. Matthew, Mark and John make no mention of Herod. This, in itself,
means nothing, but it brings about another contradiction later.
4. Who was responsible for Jesus' death, Pilate or the Jews?
The gospel writers go to every conceivable length to absolve the Romans
in general, and Pilate in particular, of Jesus' crucifixion and to blame
it on the Jews. The reason, of course, was that Christianity was going
to have to exist under Roman rule for many years, which is why the New
Testament contains nothing critical of the Romans, even though they were
hated for their heavy taxation, and Pilate was hated for his brutality.
For the church, the Jews made an appropriate scapegoat because the Jews
were a thorn in side of the early church. The Jews, of course, had far
greater knowledge of Jewish laws and traditions than the largely gentile
church, and were able to call attention to some of the errors being
taught by the church.
The Biblical account of Pilate's offer to release Jesus but the Jews
demanding the release of Barabbas is pure fiction, containing both
contradictions and historical inaccuracies.
a. What had Barabbas done?
1. Mark 15:7 and Luke 23:19 say that Barabbas was guilty of insurrection
and murder.
2. John 18:40 says that Barabbas was a robber.
b. Pilate's "custom" of releasing a prisoner at Passover.
This is pure invention - the only authority given by Rome to a Roman
governor in situations like this was postponement of execution until
after the religious festival. Release was out of the question. It is
included in the gospels for the sole purpose of further removing blame
for Jesus' death from Pilate and placing it on the Jews.
c. Pilate gives in to the mob.
The gospels have Pilate giving in to an unruly mob. This is ridiculous
in light of Pilate's previous and subsequent history. Josephus tells us
that Pilate's method of crowd control was to send his soldiers into the
mob and beat them (often killing them) into submission. Pilate was
eventually recalled to Rome because of his brutality.
5. Who put the robe on Jesus?
a. Matthew 27:28, Mark 15:17 and John 19:2 say that after Pilate had
Jesus scourged and turned over to his soldiers to be crucified, the
soldiers placed a scarlet or purple robe on Jesus as well as a crown of
thorns.
b. Luke 23:11, in contradiction to Matthew, Mark and John, says that the
robe was placed on Jesus much earlier by Herod and his soldiers. Luke
mentions no crown of thorns.
B. THE CRUCIFIXION
1. Crucified between two robbers
Matthew 27:38 and Mark 15:27 say that Jesus was crucified between two
robbers (Luke just calls them criminals; John simply calls them men). It
is a historical fact that the Romans did not crucify robbers.
Crucifixion was reserved for insurrectionists and rebellious slaves.
2. Peter and Mary near the cross
When the gospel writers mention Jesus talking to his mother and to Peter
from the cross, they run afoul of another historical fact - the Roman
soldiers closely guarded the places of execution, and nobody was allowed
near (least of all friends and family who might attempt to help the
condemned person).
3. The opened tombs
According to Matthew 27:51-53, at the moment Jesus died there was an
earthquake that opened tombs and many people were raised from the dead.
For some reason they stayed in their tombs until after Jesus was
resurrected, at which time they went into Jerusalem and were seen by
many people.
Here Matthew gets too dramatic for his own good. If many people came
back to life and were seen by many people, it must have created quite a
stir (even if the corpses were in pretty good shape!). Yet Matthew seems
to be the only person aware of this happening - historians of that time
certainly know nothing of it - neither do the other gospel writers.
C. THE RESURRECTION
1. Who found the empty tomb?
a. According to Matthew 28:1, only "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary."
b. According to Mark 16:1, "Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of
James, and Salome."
c. According to Luke 23:55, 24:1 and 24:10, "the women who had come with
him out of Galilee." Among these women were "Mary Magdalene and Joanna
and Mary the mother of James." Luke indicates in verse 24:10 that there
were at least two others.
d. According to John 20:1-4, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb alone, saw
the stone removed, ran to find Peter, and returned to the tomb with
Peter and another disciple.
2. Who did they find at the tomb?
a. According to Matthew 28:2-4, an angel of the Lord with an appearance
like lightning was sitting on the stone that had been rolled away. Also
present were the guards that Pilate had contributed. On the way back
from the tomb the women meet Jesus (Matthew 28:9).
b. According to Mark 16:5, a young man in a white robe was sitting
inside the tomb.
c. According to Luke 24:4, two men in dazzling apparel. It is not clear
if the men were inside the tomb or outside of it.
d. According to John 20:4-14, Mary and Peter and the other disciple
initially find just an empty tomb. Peter and the other disciple enter
the tomb and find only the wrappings. Then Peter and the other disciple
leave and Mary looks in the tomb to find two angels in white. After a
short conversation with the angels, Mary turns around to find Jesus.
3. Who did the women tell about the empty tomb?
a. According to Mark 16:8, "they said nothing to anyone."
b. According to Matthew 28:8, they "ran to report it to His disciples."
c. According to Luke 24:9, "they reported these things to the eleven and
to all the rest."
d. According to John 20:18, Mary Magdalene announces to the disciples
that she has seen the Lord.
V. THE ASCENSION
According to Luke 24:51, Jesus' ascension took place in Bethany, on the
same day as his resurrection.
According to Acts 1:9-12, Jesus' ascension took place at Mount Olivet,
forty days after his resurrection.
VI. MISCELLANEOUS
A. THE UNCHANGEABLE LAW
According to Matthew 5:18, Jesus said that not the tiniest bit of the
Law could be changed. However, in Mark 7:19 Jesus declares that all
foods are clean, thereby drastically changing the Law.
The church tries to get around this obvious contradiction by
artificially separating the Mosaic Law into the "ceremonial" law and the
"moral" law, a separation which would have abhorred the Jews of Jesus'
time. The Mark passage and similar ones like Acts 10:9-16 were added to
accommodate the teaching of Paul regarding the Law (which was
diametrically opposed to the teaching of Jesus on the Law) and to make
the gospel palatable to the Gentiles.
B. NO SIGNS, ONE SIGN, OR MANY SIGNS?
At one point the Pharisees come to Jesus and ask him for a sign.
1. In Mark 8:12 Jesus says that "no sign shall be given to this
generation."
2. In contradiction to Mark, in Matthew 12:39 Jesus says that only one
sign would be given - the sign of Jonah. Jesus says that just as Jonah
spent three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so he will
spend three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Here Jesus
makes an incorrect prediction - he only spends two nights in the tomb
(Friday and Saturday nights), not three nights.
3. In contradiction to both Mark and Matthew, the gospel of John speaks
of many signs that Jesus did:
a. The miracle of turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana is
called the beginning (or first) of the signs that Jesus did (John 2:11).
b. The healing at Capernaum is the "second sign" (John 4:54).
c. Many people were following Jesus "because they were seeing the signs
He was performing" (John 6:2).
C. SON OF DAVID?
Matthew, Mark and Luke all contain passages which have Jesus quoting
Psalm 110:1 to argue that the Messiah does not need to be a son of David
(Matthew 22:41-46, Mark 12:35-37 and Luke 20:41-44).
1. This contradicts many Old Testament passages that indicate that the
Messiah will be a descendant of David. It also contradicts official
church doctrine.
2. In Acts 2:30-36 Peter, in what is regarded as the first Christian
sermon, quotes Psalm 110:1 in arguing that Jesus was the Messiah, a
descendant of David.
D. THE FIG TREE
After Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem a sees a fig tree and wants
some figs from it. He finds none on it so he curses the tree and it
withers and dies (Matthew 21:18-20, Mark 11:12-14, 20-21).
1. Since this occurred in the early spring before Passover, it is
ridiculous of Jesus to expect figs to be on the tree.
2. Matthew and Mark cannot agree on when the tree withered.
a. In Matthew, the tree withers at once and the disciples comment on
this fact (Matthew 21:19-20).
b. In Mark, the tree is not found to be withered until at least the next
day (Mark 11:20-21).
E. THE GREAT COMMISSION
In Matthew 28:19 Jesus tells the eleven disciples to "go therefore and
make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father
and the Son and the Holy Spirit."
1. This is obviously a later addition to the gospel, for two reasons:
a. It took the church over two hundred years of fighting (sometimes
bloody) over the doctrine of the trinity before this baptismal formula
came into use. Had it been in the original gospel, there would have been
no fighting.
b. In Acts, when people are baptized, they are baptized just in the name
of Jesus (Acts 8:16, 10:48, 19:5). Peter says explicitly that they are
to "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ
for the forgiveness of your sins" (Acts 2:38).
2. This contradicts Jesus' earlier statement that his message was for
the Jews only (Matthew 10:5-6, 15:24). The gospels, and especially Acts,
have been edited to play this down, but the contradiction remains. It
was the apostle Paul who, against the express wishes of Jesus, extended
the gospel (Paul's version) to the gentiles.
F. ENOCH IN THE BOOK OF JUDE
Jude 14 contains a prophecy of Enoch. Thus, if the Book of Jude is the
Word of God, then the writings of "Enoch" from which Jude quotes, are
also the Word of God. The Book of Enoch was used in the early church
until at least the third century - Clement, Irenaeus and Tertullian were
familiar with it. However, as church doctrine began to solidify, the
Book of Enoch became an embarrassment to the church and in a short
period of time it became the Lost Book of Enoch. A complete manuscript
of the Book of Enoch was discovered in Ethiopia in 1768. Since then,
portions of at least eight separate copies have been found among the
Dead Sea scrolls. It is easy to see why the church had to get rid of
Enoch - not only does it contain fantastic imagery (some of which was
borrowed by the Book of Revelation), but it also contradicts church
doctrine on several points (and, since it is obviously the work of
several writers, it also contradicts itself).
G. THE APOSTLE PAUL'S CONVERSION
The Book of Acts contains three accounts of Paul's conversion on the
road to Damascus. All of three accounts contradict each other regarding
what happened to Paul's fellow travelers.
1. Acts 9:7 says they "stood speechless, hearing the voice..."
2. Acts 22:9 says they "did not hear the voice..."
3. Acts 26:14 says "when we had all fallen to the ground..."
Some translations of the Bible (the New International Version and the
New American Standard, for example) try to remove the contradiction in
Acts 22:9 by translating the phrase quoted above as "did not understand
the voice..." However, the Greek word "akouo" is translated 373 times in
the New Testament as "hear," "hears," "hearing" or "heard" and only in
Acts 22:9 is it translated as "understand." In fact, it is the same word
that is translated as "hearing" in Acts 9:7, quoted above. The word
"understand" occurs 52 times in the New Testament, but only in Acts 22:9
is it translated from the Greek word "akouo."
This is an example of Bible translators sacrificing intellectual honesty
in an attempt to reconcile conflicting passages in the New Testament.
H. JESUS CALLS THE DISCIPLES
1. In Matthew 4:18-22 and Mark 1:16-20, Peter and Andrew are casting
nets into the sea. Jesus calls out to them and they leave their nets and
follow him. Jesus then goes on a little further and sees James and John
mending their nets with their father. He calls to them and they leave
their father and follow him.
2. In Luke 5:1-11, Jesus asks Peter to take him out in Peter's boat so
Jesus can preach to the multitude. James and John are in another boat.
When Jesus finishes preaching, he tells Peter how to catch a great
quantity of fish (John 21:3-6 incorporates this story in a post-
resurrection appearance). After Peter catches the fish, he and James and
John are so impressed that after they bring their boats to shore they
leave everything and follow Jesus.
3. In John 1:35-42, Andrew hears John the Baptist call Jesus the Lamb of
God. Andrew then stays with Jesus for the remainder of the day and then
goes to get his brother Peter and brings him to meet Jesus.
I. SHOULD THE TWELVE DISCIPLES TAKE STAFFS?
When Jesus summons the twelve disciples to send them out to proclaim the
kingdom of God, he lists the things the disciples should not take with
them.
1. In Matthew 10:9-10 and Luke 9:3-5, a staff is included in the list of
things not to take.
2. In contradiction to Matthew and Luke, Mark 6:8 makes a specific
exception - the disciples may take a staff.
J. THE APOSTLE PAUL GETS CONFUSED
In Romans 7:1-6 the apostle Paul tries to compare a Christian's "dying
to the Law" to a woman who marries again after her husband has died. In
doing so, Paul gets hopelessly confused about whether the Christian
corresponds to the wife (by being released from the Law), or corresponds
to the husband (by having died). One scholar has referred to the passage
as "remarkably muddle-headed." This just goes to show that, although a
brilliant man, Paul did have his bad days.
K. THE SECOND COMING
1. During the disciples' lifetime
There are several passages in the gospels where Jesus says he will
return in the disciples' lifetime (Mark 13:30, Matthew 10:23, 16:28,
24:34, Luke 21:32, etc.).
The same expectation held during the period the apostle Paul wrote his
letters. In 1 Corinthians 7:29-31 Paul says that the time is so short
that believers should drastically change the way that they live. But
Paul had a problem - some believers had died, so what would happen to
them when Jesus returned?
Paul's answer in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 shows that Paul expected that
at least some of those he was writing to would be alive when Jesus
returned - "we who are alive, and remain..." The same passage also
indicates that Paul believed that those believers who had died remained
"asleep in Jesus" until he returned. However, as the delay in Jesus'
return grew longer, the location of Jesus' kingdom shifted from earth to
heaven and we later find Paul indicating that when believers die they
will immediately "depart and be with Christ" (Philippians 1:23).
It is quite obvious that Jesus never intended to start any type of
church structure since he believed he would return very shortly to rule
his kingdom in person. It is also quite obvious that Jesus was wrong
about when he was coming back.
2. The earth in the Book of Revelation
Revelation 1:7 says that when Jesus comes with the clouds, everybody on
earth will see him. Some Christians have said that this will be
literally fulfilled because the event will be broadcast by satellite
over all the world's TV stations (We interrupt this broadcast...).
Actually, the passage reflects the flat-earth cosmology of the time, as
does also "the four corners of the earth" in Revelation 7:1 and 20:8.
Here, and in many gospel passages, Jesus is spoken of as coming with or
on the clouds. This is because the Bible's view of heaven is "up" and
Jesus has to pass through the clouds to get back, just as in Acts 1:9
Jesus ascended up through a cloud.
3. The Book of Daniel
The Book of Daniel is included here because, after the Book of
Revelation, Daniel is the book most studied with regard to the second
coming. Christians are very impressed with the detailed prophecies in
Daniel that have been fulfilled. Anybody would be, if they believed that
Daniel was written during the Babylonian exile, as the book of Daniel
says.
However, the book itself makes it possible to pinpoint the date of its
writing as 167 BC. How? Because up to that year all of Daniel's detailed
prophecies came true. After that year none of them did. But how was
Daniel to know that shortly after he wrote his book one of the greatest
events in Israel's history, the Maccabean revolution that defeated
Antiochus Epiphanes, would occur?
VII. THE CAUSES OF THE CONTRADICTIONS
There are four primary causes for most of the contradictions listed
above:
A. THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES
The gospel writers (especially Matthew) tried to show that Jesus was the
Messiah by having him fulfill Old Testament "prophecies," sometimes with
absurd results (as in the case of the "two donkeys" and the "thirty
pieces of silver").
B. THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN JESUS' AND PAUL'S GOSPELS
The gospel that Jesus and his disciples proclaimed to the Jews was in
accordance with what the Old Testament predicted about a human Messiah
reigning over a restored kingdom of Israel, a kingdom of peace and
righteousness. The people of Israel were to repent as personal
righteousness was necessary to become a member of the kingdom.
In contrast to Jesus' gospel was the gospel preached to the Jews and
gentiles by the apostle Paul, which Paul refers to as "my gospel" and
"the gospel that I preach" to differentiate it from what was being
proclaimed by the disciples. In Paul's gospel the human Jewish Messiah
became a divine saviour of all nations, the restored kingdom of Israel
became a heavenly kingdom, and admittance to the kingdom was based on
faith rather than personal righteousness.
The two gospels caused great animosity between Paul and the original
apostles, an animosity that is played down in the books of Acts and
Galatians, but which still shows through in several places. When
Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD the Jewish Christians in
Jerusalem were scattered or killed, and the opposition to the gospel of
Paul was largely eliminated. The gospel of Paul was incorporated into
the gospel of Jesus, in many cases supplanting it.
C. THE DELAY IN JESUS' RETURN
As time went by without Jesus returning, the apostle Paul was forced to
rethink things he had written about earlier, including the state of dead
believers and the nature of the kingdom.
D. CREATING A HISTORY FIT FOR A GOD
When Jesus was changed from a Jewish "son of David" sitting on David's
throne to a divine "son of God" sitting on a heavenly throne, it became
necessary to invent a godlike biography for him. Thus the troublesome
virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, etc.
The list of contradictions in this paper is by no means complete, the
examples being chosen primarily from the gospels. The examples given
above, however, more than prove the point that the Bible is most
definitely not, in any sense, the Word of God. The church has made
imaginative (and often absurd) attempts to reconcile these
contradictions. None of these attempts have the ring of truth - instead
they have the ring of desperation.
"Ninth Commandment" <ninthcom...@revelations.org> wrote in message
news:31e731dkv1fe7okck...@4ax.com...
: On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 01:58:39 GMT,
gerbils...@yahoo.com
--
You know what else isn't kosher, Riain? That troll "LC", who hasn't
paid yet for that 'Anal Lube'he used when he came to visit you last
year.
LC
Schizo-stalker "J Young" made an appearance as <gerbils...@yahoo.com> to
troll in message news:Vypsn.21567$iu2....@newsfe15.iad...
<idiocy flushed>
Well, if it's not my impotent stalker, "Moishe/J Young/Dr. Hellman" et al.
How's tricks, J<unkie>?
When you're done stuffing gerbils, are you going to get back to me on this?:
From: "Troll-Buster" <inv...@nomail.com>
References: <holq7...@enews5.newsguy.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Message-ID: <O0asn.36828$9b5....@newsfe01.iad>
X-Complaints-To: ab...@teranews.com
From: "gerbils...@yahoo.com" <gerbils...@yahoo.com>
References: <hor5t...@enews1.newsguy.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Message-ID: <9tfsn.91$iL1...@newsfe24.iad>
X-Complaints-To: ab...@teranews.com
Btw, how come all your nyms have the same MO?
"Troll-Buster":
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.abortion/msg/f832f088c55414f6?hl=en
"Moishe":
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/4a0b84b587364d3a?hl=en
LOL!
What a tool.
The Revd
<gerbils...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Riain Barton wrote:
Surely not THE Riain Barton, Ir*sh faggot and 'convert' to jewdism???
LOL
The Peeler
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:22:13 GMT, "gerbils...@yahoo.com"
> <gerbils...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Riain Barton wrote:
>
> Surely not THE Riain Barton, Ir*sh faggot and 'convert' to jewdism???
> LOL
What's this now, The Retd? Is there ONE Jew who ever posted in the long
history of Usenet that you don NOT know about, you hilarious housebound
impotent idiot? LMAO!
--
Retarded, subnormal and extremely proud of it: our resident psychopath, The
Retd!
R?ain - ריעין
"Felix Raucht" <fe...@guess.where> wrote in message
news:f07231lbndu4ltnbc...@4ax.com...
:I think that you are just saying so, to stimulate discussion.