As Christians go on about this Jesus character, it is interesting to see rather than what
As Christians go on about this Jesus character, it is
interesting to see rather than what Christians say about
him, what the Bible says. and this is it...........
The Jesus of the Gospels is hardly the character that
Christians like to present, eg. he used violence - John 2:15
(and apparently encouraged it; before his arrest he told his
disciples to buy a sword; this was used immediately afterwards
- Luke 23:36,49-50; if he was the omniscient Son of God, he
would have known this was to happen).
His purpose was to break up families - Matthew 10:34-35,
Luke 12:51-53. He taught the gospel was not available for
certain races - Matthew 10:5-8, 15:24. He was ignorant of
the Scriptures he quoted - Mark 2:26 (In fact the priest
was Ahimelech, not Abiathar - see 1 Samuel 21:1,6). He was
cruel to animals - Matthew 8:1-4 ('the offering' Jesus
commanded was a bird being sacrificed - Leviticus 14:2-5),
8:28-34. He treated his mother with contempt - John 2:4.
He suffered fits of temper, not justified by the situation
- Matt 21:18-19, 23:13-33 (In the John 7 outburst, in John
7:37, the Greek is 'to screech like a raven'). He was
hypocritical - Matthew 5:22 (Compare his action in Matthew
23:17); Matthew 6:14 (Compare Matthew 10:14-15); Matthew 7:1
(Compare John 5:30, 8:26). He lacked sympathy for other
people's suffering - Matthew 8:21-22. He rejected his own
family - Matthew 12:46-50, Mark 3:32-35. He had contempt for
other religions and their adherents - Matthew 12:30, 23:2-33,
John 8:44,55. He deliberately taught in a way so people would
not understand him (and therefore be saved from going to
eternal hellfire) - Mark 4:9-12. He encouraged people to
desert their families - Matthew 19:29, Mark 10:29.
He taught people to hate* their families - Luke 14:26
(*The Greek here means 'active ill-will' or 'persecuting
spirit'). He taught that suffering was to show God's glory
- John 9:1-3. He ignored a woman pleading for his help: only
after she asked him three times did he condescend to help -
Matthew 15:22-28. He taught that ill-health and human
suffering was the result of sin, or for the purpose of
glorifying God - Mark 2:5,11,12, John 5:8-14.
And furthermore, he clearly seemed to have thought that his
second coming/the end of the world, ie. the final judgement
(etc, etc) was only a short time away, eg. he told the high
priest that he would see his return - Mark 14:61-62, he told
three disciples that they would see his return - Matt 16;28,
he told the disciples he would return before they had preached
throughout Palestine - Matt 10:23.
Furthermore, when Jesus told his disciples about the end of
the world (Mark 13:3-27), he told them that the generation
living at that very time (ca. 30 AD) would still be alive when
"all these things", (ie. the Second Coming, the Final Judgement,
the end of the world, etc, etc) took place (Mark 13:30).
Despite saying all this, only seconds later he then told the
disciples that no one - including himself - knew when
the end would come (13:32).
Also, he foretold that he would be buried for 3 days and 3
nights in Matthew 12:40 - but Friday evening (Mark 15:42-46)
to before Sunday daybreak (John 20:1-2) is NOT 3 days and 3
nights ! Mark 15:42 states he was buried AFTER sundown on the
Friday, ie. this in Jewish reckoning was in fact now Saturday
- the sabbath (also burial on the sabbath was something quite
impossible to have happened!).
The Gospels repeately say how Jesus' death etc 'fulfilled'
the Old Test scriptures (eg. Luke 24:27), but nowhere in the
Old Test does it say the messiah is to be killed, buried and
resurrected after 3 days.
With regard to the end of the world etc, Jesus stated that
there would be an "abominating sacrilege" (Matthew 24:15, Mark
13:14) which would cause a tribulation (Matt 24:16-28, Mark
13:15-23) and IMMEDIATELY after this (Matthew 24:29), he
would return to usher in the Final Judgement (Matthew 24:29-31).
Now Luke has in the parallel passage, the "abominating sacrilege"
as the Fall of Jerusalem (Luke 21:20); as can be seen by Luke
21:21-23, the author of Luke does equate "the abominating
sacrilege" of Matthew and Mark as Jerusalem's destruction).
However, Jerusalem's destruction (particularly as described
in Luke) occurred in 70 AD - therefore isn't Jesus' return
(which remember, was supposed to occur "Immediately" afterwards),
somewhat overdue ?
Over to you............
Ps. The VERY last promise by God/Jesus in the whole Bible was Jesus'
promise in 96 CE "SURELY, I AM COMING SOON"
So 1900 years later - where is he then ????????????????
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank