Fundamentalist Christianity often proclaims as an absolute
fact that anyone who fails to accept the Bible as God's
infallible word and who fails to accept Jesus as their savior
will be damned to hell as an eternal punishment.
That's quite a claim to be making to people.
Telling other people what they must believe in order to
avoid being eternally punished is certainty a tremendous moral
responsibility for a person to be taking on.
An unbeliever should always ask why they should carry around
someone else's spiritual luggage when it's accompanied by so much
unsustantiated rhetoric, along with threats of hellfire and
damnation for the failure to reach the same conclusions about the
universe that a zealous believer has reached.
Organized religions that revolve around a God or savior figure
are sometimes described as cults that have achieved some type of
official government or popular recognition.
When a cult evolves into an officially recognized religion, it
accrues a wide array of benefits for itself.
It's often the nature of hierarchy based, power seeking
organizations to not only establish influence and power for
themselves, but to expand and dominate other beliefs which
compete in the same or related arenas of human thought.
Other characteristics exhibited by this type of system can be
found in the requirements for maintaining control over existing
and newly acquired territory.
Often, as more territory is annexed in the name of (fill in the
blank), more energy and resources are needed to maintain the
status quo, which is often kept in place by the use of
standardized teachings, combined with the rejection and
vilification of anything that doesn't conform to the "word
of God".
Controlling information, the use of elaborate rationalizations,
ritualized attendance at meetings, and aggressive advertising are
all tools used to achieve the desired goal of doctrinal
maintenance, which is universal conformity to a belief.
The expand and dominate prime directive can easily be
observed in the areas of politics, industry, commerce,
nationalism, and corporate advertising,
These areas are often looked upon by theologians as being crassly
materialistic and soulless human enterprises.
Christian doctrines and teachings are by no means immune from the
principles exhibited in self serving human ideological
structures, and the New Testament is loaded with examples of the
vilification of a competing belief in order to discredit it.
Upon observance and inspection, the commonly displayed traits of
an aggressive, proselytizing religion differ little from the
competitive nature exhibited by worldly institutions and such
religions reside on no fluffier or higher a moral plane than
these secular humanist enterprises.
Many fundamentalist Christian apologists and intellectuals go to
great lengths advertising and reassuring the masses that the New
Testament most surely represents the official word of God and
also represents absolutely reliable and accurate history, free
from the taint of opportunistic human manipulation that would
corrupt the word of God.
In other words, the New Testament stories are not in any way
embellished or tainted with human materialism in order to serve a
political type agenda.
According to Christian preachers and apologists, the New
Testament is a perfectly harmonious continuation of the Old
Testament teachings and represents God's latest word to mankind.
However, these assurances are bogus if the entire Bible and its
tenets are to be taken seriously.
The scriptural evidence suggests that the New Testament writers
and Christian theologians grafted their ideas onto the Old
Testament writings and proceeded to weave a new religion, which
is based on the Hebrew male tribal God, but actually evolves him
into a three headed(or three person) Trinity volcano God.
This new God also has a new system for salvation that revolves
around a volcano like human sacrifice that was made to appease
his wrath.
Salvation for all humans under the dominion of the three headed
volcano God requires faith in a human sacrifice called
"Jesus"(Mark 16:16).
This new system neatly replaced God's prior instructions(Ezek
18:20-28) in the Old Testament, which state that salvation is
achieved through obedience to his eternal laws(Psa 111:7-8,
Psa 119:152,160).
The employment of fear tactics to reinforce the superiority of
the new system over the old system is vividly displayed in the
New Testament.
Failure to comply with the new system results in immediate
disqualification from salvation along with the promise that God
will hold it against any person who thinks the old system was
God's truth.
John 3:36
He that believeth on the Son(Jesus) hath everlasting life: and he
that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of
God abideth on him.
The new system must be obeyed and believed. Fear is a useful tool
in this theological power grab.
Threats and intimidation also abound in the following New
Testament scripture:
2 Thess 1:8-9
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and
that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the
presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
Another example of the type of intimidation tactics used by the
allegedly inspired writers of the New Testament follow.
Anyone who denies that Jesus was a valid Messiah is a liar and
denies God as well.
1 John 2:22-23
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ(or
Messiah)?
He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that
acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
Whether or not an actual cult leader called "Jesus"
existed is somewhat secondary to the issue at hand.
An actual Jesus may have existed but that doesn't have to mean
the New Testament is accurate history or inspired by an
infallible deity.
Embellishing a character story to serve an agenda isn't at all
uncommon in history.
Of primary concern is the claim by Christian fundamentalists, who
in seeking to expand and dominate other beliefs, declare to the
world that the New Testament represents the absolute word
of God and is 100% accurate and reliable history.
The inconsistencies between Old Testament and New Testament
theology are quite glaring, and that may help explain why
Christian apologetics is a virtual industry in itself.
It provides validation of whatever theological whims the
Christian hierarchy wants to set forth as "gospel" to
the masses of church going believers, who are the lifeblood and
cash cows for any ministry.
The issue of whether or not Christianity borrowed any ideas from
"pagans", and incorporated them into their construct of
"Jesus", is one that will usually produce an absolute
denial from fundamentalist Christians that any such thing could
have or did happen in the New Testament.
However, apologists have no problem with New Testament
writers borrowing as long as it comes from the useful launching
pad of Hebrew scriptures.
The author of the Gospel of Matthew was perhaps the most obvious
borrower, as he lifted a prophecy about a young woman giving
birth to a child and retrofitted the birth of Jesus into it,
claiming a fulfillment of prophecy.
(Matt 1:22-23 borrows Isa 7:14).
Another one of the many examples of borrowing can be seen when
the author of Matthew records a journey to Egypt by Joseph, Mary,
and Jesus. The author of Matthew then claims the return trip
fulfilled yet another prophecy.
(Matt 2:15 borrows a piece of Hosea 11:1, which is
not a prophecy of anything).
All of this is claimed to be 100% reliable and accurate
history .
Apparently, some borrowing is perfectly acceptable and inspired
by God while other forms could never have happened.
The New Testament character called Jesus claims that he was sent
by the "Father" (who is supposed to be the Old
Testament tribal God), to do his will.
John 6:38-40
For I(Jesus) came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the
will of him that sent me.
And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all
which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it
up again at the last day.
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which
seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life:
and I will raise him up at the last day.
Jesus also claimed that the "Father" told him what to
say.
John 12:49
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he
gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should
speak.
However, some of the teachings of Jesus are not in line with what
the "Father" declares to be his word in the Old
Testament.
One has to wonder who this "Father" is that gave Jesus
some of his teaching points.
The new covenant as defined by God in the Old Testament(Jer
31:28-34) says absolutely nothing about belief and
faith in a human sacrifice replacing obedience to his laws as the
vehicle for salvation.
Even more disturbing is the bizarre new ritual for salvation that
Jesus instructs his disciples to follow.
Jesus instructs his disciples to consume his blood, which he
claims is real drink.
John 6:53-55
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except
ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood,
ye have no life in you.
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life;
and I will raise him up at the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink
indeed.
If the Old Testament is to be regarded as the word of God, then
God the "Father" most certainly would not have
instructed a valid Messiah to teach this abomination.
The consumption of blood by anyone, in any form, is a sin in the
eyes of God.
Lev 17:10
And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the
strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any
manner of blood; I will even set my face against that
soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his
people.
Jesus also declared that symbolic sin was still sin(Matt 5:28),
so drinking wine and pretending it was blood doesn't make the sin
any less of an abomination or wicked affront to God.
Christians are constantly telling unbelievers that God's moral
standards are absolute and represent the unchanging essence of
holy thought.
The Bible states that God's laws are perfect(Psa 19:7),
that God does not change(Mal 3:6), nor does God change his
mind(1 Sam 15:29).
If God changed his mind and decided that an abomination and
sinful act was no longer a sin, then this God practices moral
relativism.
This type of God, who changes his laws to suit the situation,
presents fundamentalists with a dilemma of universal proportions
as it makes a shambles of the God they wish to promote.
Under this system, which fundamentalists say they abhor, God's
laws would not be moral absolutes but would be based on situation
and only applicable to specific time periods.
Since this blood drinking ritual didn't come from Yahweh the
"Father", it could easily have been borrowed from a
pagan belief system where blood is consumed as part of a ritual.
In an attempt to set the record straight on where this blood
drinking ritual came from, the Christian apologist Saint Justin
Martyr (~C.E.100-165) claimed that "wicked devils" had
borrowed this from Jesus and used it in the religion of Mithras.
Justin Martyr wrote:
"For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body; "and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood; " and gave it to them alone.
Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done."
(Justin Martyr-- First Apology, Chapter LXVI)
The implication here is that the blood drinking ritual was
started by Jesus and was not borrowed from other belief systems.
If this is true, and if the Old Testament laws of God are to be
taken seriously, then Jesus was an apostate and a false teacher,
not of God.
The other equally possible scenario is that early Christians did
borrow, or were influenced, by concepts from other belief
systems, despite the apologetic claims of Justin Martyr.
Christians have no problem borrowing the "pagan" based
holiday of the winter solstice in late December, calling it
"Christ-mas" and using it to promote their human
sacrifice savior called Jesus.
They even claim that Jesus is the real reason for the season and
in the process they violate God's mandate not to adopt any heathen
ways(Jer 10:1-5).
Apparently, expedient public relations and slick advertising are
more important than doing God's will.
The version of Jesus portrayed by the author of the Gospel of
John also declares that his sermons to the Jews insured
that they were sinners.
The character called Jesus then manipulatively declares that any
Jews who aren't impressed with his works and words not only
"hate" him, but they hate the "Father" as
well.
John 15:22-25
If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but
now they have no cloak for their sin.
He that hateth me hateth my Father also.
If I had not done among them the works which none other man did,
they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated
both me and my Father.
But this cometh to pass, *that the word might be
fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a
cause.*
This is quite a piece of self-praising rhetoric on the part of
Jesus, considering how he thumbed his nose at God's law by
telling his followers they should drink his blood as part of a
new salvation ritual in order for them to live forever.
Jesus also disregarded the law of God when declared all foods
clean in Mark 7:18-19.
All foods are not clean according to God's law(Lev 11).
God the "Father" certainly wouldn't endorse any prophet
that urged people to break his laws.
[*Jesus also misquotes the Old Testament Bible in John
15:25 by claiming that the scripture "They hated me
without a cause" is part of the written law.
The Old Testament scripture used in John 15:25 is found in
Psa 35:19 and Psa 69:4, which are part of the
Psalms of David.
The Psalms are not part of the written law in the Torah,
nor do they have anything to do with Jesus.
It's also interesting that in John 15:25 and also in John
10:34, Jesus(who was supposed to be Jewish) refers to the Law
of God as "their" law and "your"
law.
One would think that Jesus, the alleged King of the Jews, would
refer to the Law of God as "our" law.
Perhaps the Gospel of John was written by a Gentile who didn't
have any problem putting assorted dialog into the mouth of
"Jesus" as part of promoting a savior designed to serve
a particular theological agenda.]
While the New Testament attempts to portray Jesus as a valid
representative of God, the Old Testament speaks against such a
claim.
God doesn't endorse or send false prophets and dreamers.
Jer 23:32
Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the
Lord, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies,
and by their lightness; yet I sent them not,
nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people
at all, saith the Lord.
The God of the Old Testament set down a set of explicit
instructions that are to be used by his people in identifying
false prophets and teachers:
Deut 13:1-5,18
If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of
dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto
thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not
known, and let us serve them;
Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet,
or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God
proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all
your heart and with all your soul.
Ye shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep
his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall
serve him, and cleave unto him.
And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be
put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you
away from the Lord your God, which
brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the
house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the Lord
thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil
away from the midst of thee.
When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, to
keep all his commandments which I command thee this
day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the Lord thy God.
Also: Deut 18:20-22
But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which
I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak
in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which
the Lord hath not spoken?
When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing
follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord
hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously:
thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Some key points to consider in these instructions from God:
* The performance of miracles does not mean that someone is a valid teacher or prophet from God.
* A false teaching can be a test for the people of God, to see if they will hold to his commandments.
* False teachers may try to redefine God and make claims in his name which are not true.
* Prophecy that does not come true is an indication of a false prophet.
* False teachers are to be put to death for the crime of trying to deceive God's people and lead them astray.
These key points all come into play when one inspects the New Testament claims about Jesus being a valid Messiah, and they also come into play when analyzing the common Christian assertions, which advertise that the New Testament represents the unembellished and accurate thoughts of God, as beamed into the minds of his "inspired" writers.
This essay is continued on Part 2...click on the link for Part 2...LINK
-- BACK --