Introduction  What follows is an analysis and critique of the New Testament, the founding document of the Christian religion. The purpose is to address, and hopefully resolve, the following questions:
 Is the New Testament consistent and credible?
  Is the New Testament historical verifiable?
  Are the claims of biblical inerrancy true?

Sources include the audio tape lecture series, A Critical Look at the New Testament, by Shmuel Golding of the Jerusalem Institute of Biblical Polemics, Losing Faith in Faith by Dan Barker of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, Who Wrote the New Testament by Burton L Mack, The Story of Christian Origins by Martin A. Larson, The Five Gospels by Robert W. Funk and Roy W. Hoover and others.

All biblical quotes are from the King James version (KJV) of the Bible. Here it should be noted that, although homosexuality is roundly condemned in the laws of Moses (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13), King James I of England, the patron of the King James Bible, which is so highly esteemed by evangelical Christians and so widely distributed by the Gideon Bible Society, was a vicious homosexual who, when he tired of them, had his young male lovers murdered. He also victimized countless "heretics" and women while justifying his despicable acts by invoking the "divine right" of kings. (See The Christ Conspiracy by Acharya S., page 292).

The New Testament can be organized into four major divisions¹. The first division is made up of the four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. These books, meager though they may be, describe the life of Jesus and are in fact the only ones to do so. The second division consists of only one book, Acts of the Apostles, the earliest church history. The third division consists of the 21 epistles allegedly written by early Christian leaders focusing on Christian beliefs and ethics as well as on church doctrine. The fourth division, like the second, consists of a single book, the Book of Revelation. Revelation is a apocalypse revealing events that are going to transpire at the end of time when God brings all of his promises to fulfillment and establishes his kingdom on earth. Let us begin with the gospels.

The gospels  The gospels as presented in the New Testament are out of chronological order. Most Bible scholars agree that the Gospel of Mark is the oldest, the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were written after Mark, and the Gospel of John is the most recent². They are here considered in that order.

The Gospel of Mark is attributed in Christian tradition to a man named John Mark, the personal secretary of the Apostle Peter. However this is pure speculation since the author remains unknown. All we know about the author is that he was a highly educated Greek-speaking Christian who was writing some 40 years after the events he describe³. Also, he was unfamiliar with the geography of Palestine.

Mark 1:2 ~ Here the author says (NRSV), "as is written in Isaiah the prophet," and then quotes the passage. But, the passage quoted can not be found anywhere in the Book of Isaiah⁴. Part of it comes from Exodus, part from Malachi, and the last third from Isaiah. Scribes later caught this goof and changed the wording to read "as is written in the prophets" (See KJV.)

Mark 1:9 ~ The Gospel of Mark has no birth narrative. It opens with an adult Jesus being baptized by John the Baptist. Matthew (3.13) and Luke (3.21), also tell how Jesus was baptized. For Christians these passages create a most embarrassing contradiction. According to Mark 1:4 the sole purpose of baptism is for the remission of sin. The implication is that Jesus, said by the Apostle Paul to be sinless (2 Corinthians 5:21), was, in fact, not sinless after all. Question: Was the revered Son of God just another sinner in need of redemption?

Mark 1:44 ~ Jesus here reveals that he is laboring under the false impression that Moses actually wrote the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible. See also Matt. 8:4, 19:7,8, 22:24; Luke 5:14, 20:28, 24:27. He apparently was unaware that Moses, if he ever lived at all, had been dead for three hundred years before the first word of the Bible was written^4a.

Mark 2:14 ~ Here Jesus calls a tax collector named Levi to join him as a disciple. He did but is never mentioned again. It's interesting to note that in Mathew 9:9 this very same situation is recorded except that instead of "Levi" the person is referred to as "Matthew". In Matthew 10:3 the disciple Matthew is identified as a tax collector (publican) thereby further linking this passage with the one in Mark, although the Gospel of Matthew never mentions a Levi..

Mark 2:25-26 ~ Jesus tells of an incident involving King David which he says took place in the "days of the high priest Abiather." Now he was apparently referring to an incident described in I Samuel 21:1-6, but that incident took place not in the days of Abiather but in the days of the high priest Ahimelech. Also, he said the there were others with David when according to I Samuel David was alone. A gospel said to be divinely inspired should never make obvious mistakes like this.

Mark 3:21~ Jesus' family went out to restrain him because they were convinced that he was insane. Were they unaware of the miraculous virgin birth and all that went with it? Perhaps they knew it was all a big lie. Who better than his own family would know the truth?

Mark 4:31 ~ Jesus says, "It is like a grain of mustard seed, the smallest of all the seeds that be in the earth." The mustard seed is not the smallest of seeds. There are others such as the orchid seed and the poppy seed which are smaller. This blunder is repeated in Matthew 13:32.

Mark 6:30-44 ~ Here we are treated to the story of the loaves and the fishes, one of Jesus’ awesome "miracles." The author of Mark was so impressed with this story that he deemed it worthy of repeating, albeit with a few alterations, in 8:1-10. This story appears again, practically verbatim, in Matthew 14:13-21 and 15:32-38; Luke 9:12-17, and John 6:9-13.

Mark 7:18-19 ~ And he said to them, "Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a man from outside cannot defile him, since it enters, not his heart but his stomach, and so passes on?" By declaring all foods clean, Jesus violates the law of Moses which clearly forbids the eating of certain foods. See Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14.

It seems that one day Jesus and his disciples found themselves out in the desert at sundown hosting a great multitude of followers. The crowd numbered about five thousand. However, in Mark 8:9 the number has dropped to about four thousand. With only five loaves of bread and two fishes (seven loaves and "a few small" fishes in the chapter 8 account) Jesus succeeds not only in feeding the multitude, but there were twelve baskets of leftovers (only seven baskets of leftovers in the Chapter 8 account.) But apparently his rather slow witted disciples forgot all about these two mind boggling performances because a few days later Jesus has to remind them of it (8:18-19.) This story is often sited by Bible believers as a convincing testimonial to Jesus' awesome supernatural power. But, did it really happen, or is the whole idea just another scam inspired by Old Testament renderings? In that regard, a strong echo of this "miracle" occurs in 2 Kings 4:42-44 where we read: "And there came a man from Baalshalisha, and brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and full ears of corn in the husk thereof. And he said, Give unto the people, that they may eat. And his servitor said, What, should I set this before an hundred men? He said again, Give the people, that they may eat: for thus saith the Lord, They shall eat, and shall leave thereof. So he set it before them, and they did eat, and left thereof, according to the word of the Lord."

Mark 7:31 ~ Then he [Jesus] returned form the region Tyre, and went by way of Sidon towards the Sea of Galilee, in the region of Decapolis. Here the writer of Mark displays an appalling ignorance of the geography of Palestine. According to the Anchor Bible Dictionary. vol.2, page 116, Sidon is thirty miles north of Tyre, while Decapolis is south of the Sea of Galilee, which is southeast of Tyre. Also, Mark refers to the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee as being the country of the Gerasenes (Mark 5:1). However, Gerasa is in fact 37 miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee, half-way between the it and the Dead Sea.

Mark 8:12 ~ Jesus says, "There shall be no sign given to this generation." This statement contradicts Acts 2:22 which says, "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God before you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you."

Mark 9:25-26 ~ Jesus rebuked the foul spirit, saying into him, "Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him. And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him." This statement makes no sense. If the spirit was deaf, how could he have heard Jesus and come out? If he was dumb, how could he have cried out?."

Mark 9:44 ~ Jesus says, "Then he will say to those at his left hand, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." Jesus obviously believed in a literal hell and in sending people there for eternity. Forgiveness was not an option.

Mark 10:17-18 ~ When a follower addressed him as "Good Teacher" Jesus replied, "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." Along with Jesus being baptized by John this passage stands as an embarrassment to Christians. The writer of this gospel was obviously unaware of the virgin birth and the incarnation of Jesus. It also stands in direct contradiction of the doctrine of the holy trinity.

Mark 11:1-4 ~ See Matthew 21:1-3, 5-7 below.

Mark 11:12-14 ~ Here we have the story of the accursed fig tree. On his way home after cleansing of the Temple, Jesus spied a fig tree in the distance and went to it seeking figs. This is strange indeed since fig trees do not bear fruit in late March when this is supposed to have taken place. Upon finding no figs Jesus became irate and proceeded to curse the fig tree. Now to curse a fig tree for not bearing fruit in March is not unlike kicking a dog because it can not speak English thereby punishing it for the inability to do the impossible. Mark concludes this story by telling us that due to Jesus' curse the fig tree withered and died. By destroying a fruit tree Jesus broke God’s law (Deut. 20:19). The writer of Matthew (21-18-20) repeats this story but says that the unfortunate tree withered and died instantly. Although he mentions fig trees in a couple of places (13:6, 21:29) the writer of Luke wisely skips this story as does the writer(s) of John. The concluding point emphasized in Mark and Matthew is that with enough faith one can literally move mountains. But, it’s indeed hard to get the connection.

Mark 12:9 ~ Here Jesus predicts that God will 'destroy the tenants' of his vineyard (Israel) because they have murdered 'his beloved son.' This one presupposes knowledge of the destruction of Jerusalem including the temple. This historical event is know to have occurred in the year 70 thereby suggesting that Mark had to have been written sometime after that date.

Mark 12:31 ~ Jesus says, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than this." Is he speaking for God here? In Exodus 3:22 God instructs the Hebrews on the eve of their departure from Egypt, " But every woman shall borrow of her neighbour, and of her that sojourneth in her house, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: and ye shall put them upon your sons, and upon your daughters; and ye shall spoil (plunder, NRSV) the Egyptians." That doesn't sound very loving to me. As noted above, Jesus himself also has a poor record when it comes to obeying this "greatest of all commandments." For a more complete analysis of God's love see The Bloody Bible on this web page.

Mark 12:35-37 ~ And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, "How say the scribes that Christ is the son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then his son?" This passage refutes any claim that Jesus is in the Davidic line thereby refuting the alleged genealogies of Jesus as given in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Also refuted by this passage is the famous declaration of Paul in Romans 1:3, " . . . concerning his son, Jesus Christ our lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh."

Mark 12:36 ~ Here Jesus reveals that he is laboring under the illusion that King David actually wrote the Psalms. See also Matt. 22:43-45 and Luke 42-44. Scholars place the writing of most of the Psalms during the Babylonian exile (596 BCE - 538 BCE) which dates them at least 400 years after the death of King David^4b. How do believers account for such gross ignorance from one claiming to be God?

Mark 13:25 ~ "And the stars of heaven shall fall." Jesus, like others in the Bible, was laboring under the misconception that the earth is flat and stationary and the heavenly bodies are rotating around it.

Mark 14:50 ~ "They (the disciples) all forsook him and fled." The author of Mark apparently felt a strong need to exonerate the disciples for this cowardly behavior. So, he turned to the book of Zechariah and there he found what he was looking for. In the 7th verse of chapter 13 we read    “. . . strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered." These words are quoted often in the gospels (see Mark 14: 27, Mt. 26: 31, and Jn.16: 32) in an effort to exonerate the disciples.

Mark 15:17 ~ And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head. In Matthew 17:28 we are told the robe was scarlet.

Mark 15:33-37 ~ "Now when the sixth hour (12 noon) had come, there was a darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour (3 pm)." Only two things could cause this, 1) an exceedingly thick cloud cover, of which there is no mention, or 2) a full solar eclipse. Based on astronomical calculations no full solar eclipse occurred in the region of Palestine during the time in question. But, even if it had, a full solar eclipse cannot possibly last more than three minutes.

Mark 15:37-38 ~ "And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom." According to Jusephus the temple veil was was displayed in Rome as a victory trophy some forty years later following the defeat of the Jews in the Judeo/Roman war.  It was all in one piece.

Mark 16:9-20, often referred to as the 'long ending,' has been identified as a late Christian forgery. As originally written Mark ended at 16:8. Verses 9 through 20 do not appear in the earliest New Testament transcripts. In spite of this powerful evidence many Bible believers continue to piously and irresponsibly quote verses 17-18, "These signs will accompany those who believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." Another often quoted passage from this forgery is verse16 in which Jesus says, "He who believeth and is baptized will be saved". In Amos 3:7 God assures us that he does nothing without first informing his prophets. However, not one Old Testament prophet ever mentioned any of this. Thus, an entire Christian fundamentalists movement is predicated upon what is nothing more than an obvious fraud and a forgery. For more on this subject see "The Long and the Short" in New Testament Forgeries on this web site.

The Gospel of Matthew is erroneously credited to the disciple, Matthew. The real author, whose identity remains unknown, appears to have been a Greek-speaking Christian writing between 80 and 85⁵.

Matthew 3:5-6 ~ Many people were baptized by John the Baptist in the Jordan river while confessing their sins. In Matthew 21:31-32 it says that publicans and harlots entered the Kingdom of God simply by performing deeds of righteousness. If repentance of sin and baptism took place before Jesus came, then they obviously could be obtained without him. So doesn't that render his suffering and death unnecessary for salvation?

Matthew 3:7 ~ But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, "O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come"? This verse had been often used to justify the persecution of the Jews.

Matthew 4 1-10 ~ Jesus is tempted by Satan. This is confirmed in Hebrews 2:18. But in James 1:13 it plainly states that God cannot be tempted. Therefore, Jesus could not have been God as he claims in John 10:30. It is also at odds with the Trinity.

Matthew 5:19 ~ Jesus warned that, "Whosoever breaks one of God's laws will be the least in the kingdom of heaven." But in Matthew 21:19, he violated one of God's laws (Deut. 20:19) by deliberately destroying a fruit tree. In the eighth chapter of John he prevents the execution of a woman caught committing adultery thus violating another one of God's laws (Lav. 20:10). In John 2:4 he insults his mother and in Matthew 16:28 he lied. Does this mean that Jesus is least in the kingdom of heaven?

Chapters 5, 6, and 7 of Matthew comprise the venerated Sermon on the Mount. For an in depth analysis of that topic see, The Sermon on the Mount on this web site.

Matthew 6:19 ~ Do not store up for yourself treasures on earth. Most Christians I know certainly do not follow this rule.

Matthew 9:13 ~ For I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. This verse refutes the assertion that salvation can only be found in Jesus.

Matthew 10 is probably one of the most bigoted, intolerant, and hateful chapters in the entire Bible. Some examples follow.

Matthew 10:5-6 ~ Jesus tells his disciples, "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans inter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." This contradicts Luke 2:32 where Jesus is to be a light unto the Gentiles and Mark 16:15 where he tells them, "Go ye unto all the world; preach the gospel to every creature." It also runs counter to the story of Jesus healing the Roman centurion's servant (Mt. 8:5-13). Jesus not only healed the sick servant but proceeded to laud the centurion, a non-Jew, for his exemplary faithfulness.

Matthew 10:10 ~ Jesus tells his disciples not to take staffs. But in Mark 6:8 he tells them to take a staff. So, what are they to do?

Matthew 10:23 ~ Jesus tells his disciples, "Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of Man be come." Almost two thousand years have passed since this promise was made.

Matthew 10:34 ~ Jesus says, "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. According to this passage Jesus is anything but a man of peace. Yet, Acts 10:36 says just the opposite, "The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ."

Matthew 10:35-36 ~ Jesus says, "For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household." The source of this astounding statement is Micah 7:2-6 where the writer is bemoaning the fact that everyone is corrupt including a man’s own family.

Matthew 10:37 ~ Jesus issues a stern warning, "He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." Jesus is therefore reveled as a destroyer of families. It should be noted here that in Proverbs 6:16-19 there is a list of the things God hates one of which is anyone who sows discord within a family.

Matthew 11:2-3 ~  Here, and again in Luke 7:19-20, John the Baptist asks Jesus a most curious question, "Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?" The readers first reaction might well be, "Was he really that forgetful?" Just a few days earlier, when he saw Jesus coming toward him to be baptized, hadn't John the Baptist cry out with great emotion, “Behold the lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29)? Surely, when he baptized Jesus in the Jordan river (Matthew 3:13-17) he witnessed the heavens open and watched as the "Spirit of God descended like as dove and alighted on Jesus." How could he have failed to hear God’s heavenly proclamation acknowledging Jesus to be his son? In view of all this why would he then turn around and ask Jesus to identify himself as if he wasn't sure? Well, there may be an explanation for what appears to be an appalling case of forgetfulness. Jesus answered by listing the miracles he performed (Mt. 11:4-5 and Lk. 7:21-22). With that, another claim of prophecy could be made. In  Isaiah 35:4-6 is states: Your God will come . . . and save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing. 

Matthew 11:14 ~ Jesus says that John the Baptist is, in reality, the long dead prophet Elias. But in John 1:21 when asked if he was Elias, John the Baptist replies that he is not. So we see that John the Baptist was not sure who Jesus was, nor was Jesus sure who John the Baptist was.

Matthew 11:18-19 ~ Here and again in Luke 33-34 we are told how people were referring to Jesus as a glutton and a drunkard.

Matthew 11:23 ~ Here Jesus condemns an entire city to hell with no exceptions because its citizens refused to repent. Is this the way he shows his love? How about the children, the babies and the viable fetuses? Did they disserve such a terrible fate?

Matthew 11:29-30 ~ Jesus says, "Take my yoke upon you for my yoke is easy and my burden is light". But according to other passages the yoke is difficult and the burden is heavy (Luke 18:22, 14:26, 6:29-30; Mark 8:35; Matthew 5:30, 19:12, 10:16).

Matthew 12:32 ~ "Who so ever speaketh a word against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven him. But who so ever speaketh against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven neither in this world nor in the world to come." This verse contradicts the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in which God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are said to be one and the same. How could someone speak against one without at the same time be speaking against all three? In Hebrews 6:4-6 we are told that apostasy is the only unforgivable sin.

Matthew 12:40 ~ Jesus says, "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." This contradicts the accounts of the resurrection. In the synoptic gospels Jesus was crucified and buried late on Friday afternoon. According to John 20:14 he appeared to Mary Magdalene some time during the early morning hours of the following Sunday. There is no indication as to when the resurrection actually took place, but it had to have been prior to his encounter with Mary Magdalene. This means Jesus was in the "heart of the earth" only about forty hours, not three days.

Matthew 12:46-50 ~"While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. Then one said to Him, 'Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.' But He answered 'Who is My mother and who are My brothers?' And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, 'Here are My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother.'" Here, in spite of commandment #5 which he has sworn to uphold, Jesus denies his own family in a most rude and contemptuous manner. How can he teach us anything about family values?

Matthew 13:31 ~ See Mark 4:31 above.

Matthew 14:25, 29 ~ Here Jesus performs an astounding miracle. Not only does he walk on water, he arranges for Peter to walk on the water with him. Another amazing aspect of this miracle is that none of the other gospel writers deemed it worthy of mention. Maybe that was because they never heard of it.

Matthew 15:21-28 ~ Then Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon where a Canaanite woman cried unto him saying, "Please help me, Lord. My daughter is grievously vexed with a devil." But Jesus refuses her saying, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Whereupon the woman again beseeched him to cure her daughter. But Jesus again refused her saying, "It is not good to take the children's bread and cast it to dogs." The woman reminded him that even dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from the master's table. With that Jesus relented and cured her ailing daughter. Although considered to be a forgery by many Bible scholars ^5a, this passage is one of the few in the entire New Testament with a hint of authenticity. In it Jesus reacts like the typical narrow-minded Jew of that day concerned exclusively with members of his own tribe. In fact, his initial bigoted response to this poor distraught mother clearly shows that his famous declaration in John 13:34, "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you", was meant only for his fellow Israelites. See also Matthew 10:5-6 above.

Matthew 16:18-19 ~ Jesus blesses Peter calling him the rock upon which he will build his church against which even the gates of hell shall not prevail. A few verses later (23), however, Jesus pulls a stunning reversal when he openly insults Peter by referring to him as Satan, calling him offensive, and accusing him of having no interest in the things of God. These are the actions of a crazy man. For more on this important passage se "The Ordination of Peter" in New Testament Forgeries on this web site.

Matthew 16:28 ~ Jesus says to his disciples, "There are some standing here who will not face death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." They should still be alive today, shouldn't they? Do you know any of these people?

Matthew 17:16 ~ A sick man is brought to the disciples to be healed but they are unable to deal with it. This directly contradicts Matthew 10:1 where Jesus is reported to have given his disciples "authority to heal every kind of disease and all manners of sickness."

Matthew 17:22-23 ~ Jesus tells his disciples that, "The Son of Man shall be betrayed into the hands of men and they shall kill him. But on the third day he shall be raised again." This is the second time in Matthew (16:21) Jesus has told them. He tells them yet again in 20:1-19. He tells them for the fourth time in 26:31-32. Yet when all these things actually happened, the disciples were shocked and surprised just as if they had never heard of it (John 20:9). Were they that stupid?

Matthew 18:21-22 ~ Then Peter came to Him and said, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven." That comes out to be 490 time. Yet according to Revelation 2:20-23 Jesus was unwilling to forgive Jezebel. He even offers to kill her children. In Matthew 10:14-15 and again in Matthew 11:20-24 Jesus threatens to destroy those cities in Israel unwilling to join him. In Matthew 10:33 Jesus warns that, "Whosoever denies me before others, I also will deny before me Father in heaven." Instead of forgiving Judas Iscaroit, his betrayer, who, incidentally showed genuine remorse for his actions (Mt. 27:3-5,) Jesus reacts by vowing revenge when during Passover Seder (Matthew 26:24; Mark 14:21) he said, "But woe to that one by whom the Son of Man is betrayed for it would have been better for him had he never been born." It sounds to me like Jesus was more concerned over getting revenge than extending the hand of forgiveness. Doesn't that make him a hypocrite?

Matthew 19:12 ~ Jesus says, "For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." This amounts to a most irresponsible statement because Jesus is saying that it's okay for men to go castrate themselves for the glory of God. It is interesting to note that Origen, the famous second century church father, did exactly that.

Matthew 19:16-17 ~ A rich young man came to Jesus and said, "Good Master, what must I do that I may have eternal life?" Jesus replied, "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." Is Jesus admitting here that he is not good? Also, this amounts to an outright denial of the Holy Trinity, one of Christianity's most important beliefs.

Matthew 19:20-21 ~ When the young man persists by asking what must he do in addition to obeying the commandments, Jesus gives this reply, "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell everything you have and give the proceeds to the poor: and come and follow me." Often when I confront true believers with this command I'm told that Jesus was talking just to that one person, not to no one else. But isn't it logical to conclude that, like the Ten Commandments, this provision applies to everyone?

Matthew 19:23-25 ~ Jesus says to his disciples, "Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven for it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God". (See also Mark 10:24-25 and Luke 18:24-25). Along these same lines in Luke 6:24-25 Jesus says, “But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger". By these statements it is obvious that according to the ethics of Jesus no righteous person can be rich or own property. Being well fed and comfortable are mortal sins per se. Although it would appear that Jesus despised the rich, this is all contradicted by Ecclesiastes 10:19 where we are told, "Money is the answer to all things!"

Matthew 20:20 ~ Then came the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons. This contradicts Mark 10:35 where it says that only James and John the sons of Zebedee came. No mention is made of their mother. In Matthew 20:21 the mother requests of Jesus, "Grant that these my two sons may sit one on thy right hand and the other on thy left in thy kingdom." In Mark 10:37 the sons, not the mother, make the same request. In Matthew 20:23 and in Mark 10:40 Jesus informs them that such a request can be granted only by his father (God). This is very puzzling because in John 10:30 Jesus emphatically states, "I and my father are one." In John 14:9 Jesus says, "If you have seen me you have seen the father." In John 14:14 he assures his disciples that, "If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it." In Philippians 2:5-6 we are told that Jesus is equal with God. So, Jesus clearly told a lie, but did he lie about being God or about being unable to grant the request?

Matthew 21:1-3,5-7 ~ And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem,... then sent Jesus two disciples, Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, AND A COLT with her: loose THEM, and bring THEM unto me. And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of THEM, and straightway he well send THEM. And the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them, And brought the ass, AND THE COLT, and put on THEM their clothes, and they set him thereon.

Seven times (count 'em) the writer of Matthew references two different animals, an ass and a colt. He then proceeds to tell us how Jesus rode BOTH of them into the city at the same time like a rodeo trick rider. But the versions of this same story recorded in the Gospels of Mark (11:1-4,7), Luke (19:28-40) and John (12:12-19) are a little more rational. According to them there was only one animal, a colt, which Jesus road into the city. The writer of Matthew, in his dogged determination to have Jesus fulfill Old Testament prophecy, obviously misread Zechariah 9:9. " . . . behold, your king is coming to you; He is . . . riding upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass.

Matthew 21:23-27 ~ Here the chief priests and the elders confront Jesus in the temple and ask him a logical question, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" Instead of giving an honest and forthright answer, which they had every right to expect, Jesus, in the best lawyerly tradition, cleverly sidesteps it. Why didn't he seize this wonderful opportunity to reveal to his questioners that his authority came directly from God?

Matthew 22:6-7 ~ In Matthew 22:2-14, The Parable of the Wedding Banquet, verses 6 and 7 read as follows:

And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.

This parable appears in Luke 14:15-24 and in the Gospel of Thomas but without these two verses. Also, the parable reads naturally without them. Therefore, it can only be assumed that the parable came to the author of Matthew without these two verses which he inserted. Their purpose is to make it appear that Jesus foresaw the destruction of the Temple in 70 and the tragic (for the Jews) aftermath of the Judao/Roman war. The author’s intention was to show these catastrophic events as God’s punishment of the Jews for their rejection of his son, Jesus. In addition to identifying a gospel forgery with devious intentions, this passage defiantly dates the Gospel of Matthew to post 70.

Matthew 22:21 ~ Jesus instructs his followers to, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Yet, in this country the churches enjoy a an exemption from taxation by all levels of government, city, county, state and federal.

Matthew 22:34-40 ~ But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophet". This is strange indeed when we see in the very next chapter how Jesus ignores the second commandment as he proceeds to level a vicious attack against his own neighbors.

Matthew 24 is considered by Bible believers to be devoted entirely to a prophecy by Jesus of events to be fulfilled in the future heralding his second coming. However, scholars tell us that the events described in this chapter took place long before the writing of this gospel. Verses 15, 21, and 22, for example, were plagiarized from the Old Testament Book of Daniel (see Daniel 12:1-11). They fit the events of that day (circa 165 BCE). Some Bible believers also say that Jesus is referring not to his contemporaries but to people living at some unspecified future date. But what has been conveniently ignored is that Jesus was addressing his disciples in private (see verse 3). Therefore it is obvious that these remarks were directed at them and not to some future generation.

Matthew 25:14-30 is a parable in which a servant is cast into "outer darkness" because he is "unprofitable." Well, this sharply contradicts Jesus earlier teachings on the subject (Matthew 6:25-34). It is contradicted again in Matthew 19:21 where Jesus tells a rich young man that in order to be saved he must sell all that he has and give the proceeds to the poor. Also in Luke 18:25 Jesus says that it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Matthew 27:9-10 ~ Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; And gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.” Here the writer of this gospel erred greatly in scholarship. This statement comes not from Jeremiah as he claims but from Zechariah 11:12-13.

Matthew 27:24-25 ~ "So when Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather that a riot was beginning, he took water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying, 'I am innocent of this man's blood; see to it yourselves.'" And all the people answered, "His blood be on us and on our children!" To seriously believe that such a self imposed curse on their own children could actually be uttered by Jews, or any one else, is a violation of respect for the human intellect. Be that as it may, the fact is that no other Bible passage has provided the justification for so much violence and bloodshed against the Jews as has this one. Coupled with the anti-Jewish ranting of  Martin Luther, this passage played a huge role in the implementation of the Nazi Holocaust

Matthew 27:45-50 ~ "Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over the land. See Mark 15:33-37 above.

The Gospel of Luke was written in Greek, apparently at about the same time as Matthew. Tradition has it that a gentile physician named Luke, known to have been a traveling companion to the apostle Paul, wrote the gospel bearing that name as well as Acts of the Apostles. However, the true author remains unknown⁶.

Luke 1:15 ~ Speaking of John the Baptist we note that ." . . he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother's womb." Verse 41 reads, "And Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost." Verse 67 says, "And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost." In Luke 2:25-26 we read, "And the Holy Ghost was upon him (Simeon) and it was revealed to him by the Holy Ghost that he should not die before he had seen Christ. Here are five passages identifying people filled with the Holy Ghost. Yet in John 7:39 it says that the Holy Ghost was not yet given because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Luke 1:71-76 ~ Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, prophesied that through Jesus the Jews will be saved from all who hate them. The fact is that just the opposite has occurred. History shows that since the rise of Christianity, the Jews have been persecuted more than ever before.

Luke 2:7 ~ Here the writer of Luke tells us how Mary wrapped the new born Jesus in "swaddling cloth." In a book called the Wisdom of Solomon, Israel's most opulent king is quoted as having said, "When I was born I was carefully swaddled for that is the only way a king can come to his people." This is without a doubt the source of this statement. 

Luke 2:41-51 ~ The only reference to Jesus' life between his birth and his baptism occurs in Luke 2:41-51. Here we are told that when Jesus was 12 years old he went with his parents to Jerusalem to celebrate Passover. While there, his parents lost track of him in the crowd and did not find him for three days. Mary and Joseph were frantic. But as it turned out he wasn’t lost. All that time the young Jesus had been in the temple questioning the elders who expressed their astonishment at his great depth of understanding. Upon locating him his mother rebuked him saying, "Your father and I have been looking all over for you.” Note that Mary refers to Joseph as "your father". Jesus' rather haughty reply is, “Why were you looking for me? Don’t you know that I must be about my father’s business?” But Mary and Joseph did not understand. What! Had they so soon forgotten about the appearance of the angel Gabriel and Mary's miraculous insemination by the Holy Ghost?  But most of all, had they forgotten that Jesus was in fact the "Son of God" (Luke 1:35)? Or was this the writer's way of saying, "Hey, can't you see that this is all a hoax?"

Luke 2:52 ~ And Jesus increased and in stature, and in divine and human favor. This is lifted directly from I Samuel 2:26.

Luke 4:5-6 ~ The devil took Jesus up on a high mountain from which he showed him all the kingdoms of the world. There the devil said unto him. "All this power I will give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will give it." The question is, "Where in the Bible does it say that the world belonged to the devil and, therefore, was his to give?" It clearly states in Psalm 24:1 that, "The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein." Does this mean that God and Satan are one and the same?

Luke 7:19-20 ~ See Matthew 2-3 above.

Luke 10:15 ~ Here, as in Matthew 11:23,  Jesus condemns an entire city to hell with no exceptions because its citizens refuse to repent. Is this the way he shows his love?

Luke 11:27-28 ~ A woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, "Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you sucked!" But he said, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!" Here Jesus refuses to bless his mother. How's that for family values?

Luke 11:41 ~ Jesus says, "But rather give alms of such things as ye have and, behold, all things are clean unto you." When put in context, this passage makes absolutely no sense. However, in Matthew 23 we have an almost identical situation but with an important difference. Verse 26 reads: Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. This blunder by the writer of Luke definitely points to an Aramaic source because in that language the words "to give alms" (Zakkau) and "to cleanse" (Dakkau) are very similar. Luke's writer obviously mistranslated here. How then can it be said seriously that the Bible is divinely inspired?

Luke 12:4 ~ In this verse Jesus tells his followers not to fear being killed. Yet in John 7:1 we are told that Jesus walked in Galilee because he was afraid that if he walked in Jewry the Jews would kill him.

Luke 12:51-53 ~ Concerning family values, Jesus says, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law." Doesn't this passage fly in the face of Jesus' famous statement in John 15:12, "This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you." Also, where are those Christian family values we hear do much about these days?

Luke 13:3, 5 ~ Here Jesus issues what can only be described as a dire warning, “I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish . . . I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish”. He is so certain of it that he repeats it for emphases. However, this is contradicted a few verses later in the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:1-7) where he says, “I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance”.

Luke 13:33 ~ Here Jesus says that it is impossible for a prophet to be killed outside of Jerusalem. Yet he was killed at Golgotha which is outside of that city.

In the 14th chapter of Luke there appears the Parable of the Great Dinner. In it someone, probably a wealthy nobleman, gave a dinner to which he invited many guests. But when it came time for the dinner many of those whom the nobleman had invited did not show up, and there were lots of empty chairs at his table. This irritated the nobleman no end so he ordered one of his slaves to, “Go ye into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, so that my house will be filled” (vs 23.) Citing this verse as his justification Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (AKA St. Augustine) drew up what is known as Cognite intrare, “Compel them to enter,” that was used by the church as an excuse to carry out forced conversions and commit other brutal, inhumane acts of torture, vandalism and murder against non-Christians.

Luke 19:11-27 ~ Here we read how while visiting at the house of Zacchaeus, the rich tax collector, Jesus recites the parable of the ten pounds. The point of this parable is to invest your money wisely so as to always make a profit or you will come to regret it. In verse 27, however, the greedy, wicked nobleman whom Jesus is quoting says, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." Instead of condemning such a wanton display of cruelty and intolerance as he surely should have, Jesus simply ignored it and proceed on to Jerusalem. In KJV the word “servant” is used in this parable, but in NRSV, a more recent and by all accounts a more accurate translation, servant is replaced with “slave” which is probably the correct word. So, Jesus passed up another good opportunity to issue a condemnation of slavery.

Luke 19:29-35 ~ Here we have Luke's version of the confiscated colt of Mark 11:2-7 and Matthew 21:1-7. There is an important difference worth noting. Just as in Mark and Matthew, Luke's Jesus orders two of his disciples to: "Go ye into yon village where you will find a colt tied. Untie the colt and bring it here. If anyone asks you why you are taking the colt, tell him the Lord has need of it." The two disciples went into the village where they did indeed find a colt tied to a tree. But in contrast to Mark's and Matthew's version, Luke tells us that the colt's owner protested. According to Luke as they were untying it, the colt's owner ran up to them and yelled, "Hey, why are you untying my colt?" The disciples, ignoring the owner's protest, told him the Lord needed it, and they took the man's colt to Jesus. Since there is no indication that the colt's rightful owner was ever compensated for his lose, doesn't that make our dear Lord and Savior a common horse thief?

Luke 22:31-32 ~ And the Lord said, "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not."  This is, without a doubt, one of the most bizarre and puzzling passages in the entire New Testament. Here Jesus openly admits that he has prayed for something very specific - that Simon Peter's faith not fail him. This was certainly not asking a lot, and it would have been of some comfort and solace to Jesus as he faced his ordeal. Yet, for some strange reason the prayer was not answered. In verse 34 Jesus admits that he knows in advance that it wont be answered. So, what was the point in it except as a revelation of God's indifference? This little episode also contradicts the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.

Luke 23:44-49 ~ "And it was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour." See Mark 15:33-37 above.

The writers of both Matthew and Luke drew liberally from Mark as well as form the reconstructed document, Quelle (“Q”). However, they appear to have been working independently because they both contain passages unique to each. These sources are referred to as “M” and “L” respectively. Together this is known as the “four source hypothesis,” Mark, Q, M and L⁷. Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the Synoptic Gospels because they have so many traditions in common that they can be “seen together.” The Gospel of John, however, is quite different.

Traditionally the Gospel of John has been ascribed to John, the son of Zebedee, one of Jesus/ closest disciples. However, this ascription cannot be found until near the end of the second century. Also, According to Acts 4:13 this disciple was illiterate. Therefore the writer of the Gospel of John remains anonymous⁸.

Was Jesus God incarnate? John 1:14 appears to confirm that he indeed was. Also, the Apostle Paul declares in Philippians 2:6 that Jesus is equal to God. However, in John 14:28-31 Jesus very definitely denies it.  Also, in John 1:45 Jesus is referred to as, the son of Joseph from Nazareth not the son of God.

John 2:1-2 ~ And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there. And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. In order to understand its full impact this verse should be read in context with the previous chapter beginning with verse 19 describing the meeting between Jesus and John the Baptist. Although there is no mention in John of Jesus being baptized as there is in the synoptics, other elements of this tale, such as the heavenly anointment (John 1:32), do correspond with the synoptics' account. Therefore, all four gospels are obviously talking about the same event. But something doesn't add up. The "third day" noted in John 2:1 obviously means day three following this meeting. However, Matthew 4:2 and Mark 1:12-13 say that following his encounter with the heavenly dove Jesus was banished to the wilderness where he remained for the next 40 days. So, would some one please explain how Jesus could attend a wedding in Cana and at the same time be fasting in the wilderness?

John 2:4,19:26 ~ Jesus was disrespectful to his mother. He had a habit of referring to her as "woman" as if she was nothing more than a simple servant .

John 2:11 ~ The first miracle performed by Jesus was the turning of water into wine at Cana. The church celebrates this event on January 6. But how many Christians know that for centuries before the alleged time of Jesus that very same day was a traditional pagan celebration known as the Water Feast in honor of the god Dionysus (a. k. a. Bacchus) who was famous for turning water into wine.

John 2:23 ~ "Many believed in him when they saw the miracles which he did." Acts 2:22 ~ "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God before you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you." Though Jesus' signs and wonders are elsewhere in the gospels contradicted, it was through these alleged miracles he got his following. Later the disciples were able to perform the same bag of tricks and, through them, establish the church. The Catholic saints followed in the same vane so Christianity was founded on huckstering.

Miracles were part and parcel of contemporary beliefs throughout the world at the alleged time of Jesus. In those days people's minds were attuned to the reception of such reports as being accurate. Everyone believed in miracles, signs from heaven, wonders, and the like. It was assumed in those days that anyone identifying his self or her self as being saintly or divine demonstrated their power by performing miracles. For example, Apolonious of Tianna is credited with many miracles and those told of the early Christian saints are more numerous than the miracles accredited to Jesus. Now when Christians are challenged as to how they explain the many miracles said to be performed by Mormons, Muslims, Hindu holy men, etc they become very skeptical. The reason for this is, in my opinion, threefold. First, if nonbelievers can perform miracles, then the miracles of Jesus cannot be regarded as a sign of his divine sonship. Second, if unbelievers can perform signs and wonders, then it is perplexing in view of what Jesus said, "These signs shall follow them that believe" (Mark 16:17). Third, Christians are skeptical of the miracle claims of other religions simply because down deep inside they do not really believe in their own. They know that much of the healing, demon chasing, speaking in tongues, etc. are brought about simply through mass hysteria and emotionalism, and that many testimonies of miraculous healing are simply false. For more on miracles see Are the Gospels True? on this web site.

John 3:13 ~ Here Jesus tells us, "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." This demonstrates the author's ignorance of Hebrew scripture. In II Kings 2:11 it tells how the prophet Elijah ascended directly up into heaven.

John 3:16 ~ 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. The authenticity of this verse, a favorite with fundamentalist Christians, must be questioned. If Jesus was God's only son, as it states, then who were the sons of God mentioned in Job 1:6 and in Genesis 6:2? King David is depicted in Psalm 2:7 as being begotten of God and therefore his son. Israel in also designated as "my son" in Exodus 4:23 and Hosea 11:1. God apparently has more than one son.

John 4:29 ~ Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ? The author's concept of the messiah is very different from the prophetic concept. In John the messiah is depicted as a lamb, a sin bearer, a miracle worker. But in this verse he is seen as being a fortune teller. The Hebrew prophets, however, only spoke of the messiah as a future king of Israel who would establish Israel's independence from Rome, return the Jews to their homeland and bring about world peace. Jesus never accomplished any of these things.

John 4:40 ~ So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. The author apparently was not aware that Jesus had instructed his disciples not to go into any city of the gentiles especially of the Samaritans (Matthew 10:5). Also, in Matthew 15:24 Jesus clearly states that he is sent only to the lost sheep on the house of Israel and to no one else.

John 5:28-29 ~ . . . all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth. This verse contradicts Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 which tells that, "the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also, their love, their hatred and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun."

John 5:46 ~ When speaking to the Jews, Jesus says, “For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me." In their desperate, even frantic, attempt to justify this false claim  connecting Jesus with Moses Bible believers often site Exodus 4:15. Here God is speaking to Moses not about Jesus but about Aaron. - "And thou (Moses) shalt speak unto him, (Aaron) and put words in his mouth; and I (God) will be with thy (Moses;) mouth, and with his (Aaron's) mouth, and will teach you (Moses) what ye shall do." The truth is that nowhere in the five books of the Pentateuch, allegedly written by Moses, is there any mention Jesus.

John 6:51 ~ Beginning here we have some very disturbing words. Jesus says, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever. The bread which I will give is my flesh which I give for the life of the world." In verse 53 Jesus goes on to declare, "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. Whosoever eateth of my flesh and drinketh my blood shall have eternal life and I shall raise him up the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him."

Through this passage the author brings into his gospel yet another pagan custom. It is known to the Christians as the Eucharist or the holy communion. Actually, it is a form of symbolic pagan cannibalism. By a process known as transubstantiation the symbolic bread and wine are actually changed into the flesh and blood of Jesus. It is interesting to note that when Jesus spoke these words, many of his disciples left refusing to following him any longer (John 6:66).

In addition to its pagan source, the consumption of blood is strictly forbidden in Leviticus 7:26-27. Also, in Leviticus 17:11-14 we are told that eating the flash is allowed, but only after the blood is drained completely. So, by telling his followers to drink his blood, Jesus committed blasphemy against God.

John 7:5 ~ Here we learn that Jesus' brothers didn't believe in him. How could they have been raised in the same house as the son of God and not know about it? Something's fishy here!

John 7:38 ~ "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water". The source scripture to which Jesus refers in this verse has never been located. So, what exactly is he talking about? Is he saying that we should drink our urine?

John 8:1-11 ~ When a woman accused of adultery is brought before him for judgment Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." As a result, the woman was not stoned because the men in crowd were apparently convicted by their own conscience. Jesus then turns to her and says, "Neither do I condemn thee." Now does this mean that Jesus was also convicted by his own conscience? This cannot be ruled out because according to Hebrews 2:18 he did suffer temptation.

John 8:24 ~ "I say therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall surely die in your sins." In the synoptic gospels Jesus teaches that salvation can be attained only through repentance, doing good works and observing the law. But according to John 3:16, 14:6 as well as 8:24 all of that is in reality unnecessary for salvation. One has only to believe in Jesus in order to be saved. Nothing else is needed and nothing else counts. But, according to Ezekiel 18:5-9, to be right with God one must observe the law and do good works. No reference is made to Jesus or to the sacrifice he allegedly made.

John 10:30 ~ Jesus declares, "I and my father are one." If this is meant to say that Jesus is God, it contradicts Matthew 27:46, "My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?" as well as Mark 10:18 where Jesus tells a follower not to refer to him as good since "there is none god but one, that is God." 

John 11:38-44 ~ Here Jesus performs what is perhaps his most important miracle. He restores Lazarus to life after he had been dead for four days. Much to our amazement, however, the writers of Mark, Matthew and Luke deemed it unworthy of mention. Maybe that's because they never heard of it.

John 12:24 ~ Here Jesus tells us that a grain of wheat that falls to the ground and dies will produce lots of wheat. The truth is that a dead seed produces nothing.

John 13:34-35 ~ Here Jesus announces a brand new commandment, "I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." So far so good, but just how well did Jesus keep this loving commandment himself? Well, in Revelation 2:20-23 he fails to show much genuine love for Jezebel and her children. But, we must remember that Jezebel was not an Israelite. She was a Sidonian, a worshiper of Baal, and herein my lie the explanation. In Matthew 10:5-6 when instructing his disciples on their duties as missionaries, he admonishes them to "Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but rather go only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." This limitation on love is again noted in Matthew 15:24. When confronted by the distraught Canaanite woman imploring him to cure her demon possessed daughter, Jesus again say emphatically "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." So, this commandment of love applies only to his fellow Israelites, not to the rest of us.

John 14:6 ~ Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". (See also Acts 4:12). If one must accept Jesus in order to be saved, what about the billions of human embryos, fetuses, and infants who decease prematurely? What about the mentally deficient or those who never heard of Jesus thus never had the opportunity to accept him? What about those who lived long before he arrived?  For them to accept Jesus would be impossible.  So they are condemned to hell because of conditions over which they had no control. Yet Deut. 32:4 tells us that God is just. My question is, "Where is the justice here"?

John 14:9 ~ Jesus says to Philip, "Ye that hath seen me hath seen the Father (God)." This statement contradicts Exodus 33:20 where God says, "Thou cannot see my face for no man can see me and live."

John 14:13-14 ~ Here Jesus tells Philip, "And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. When read in context this promise is obviously not meant for Philip alone but for all who believe in him. Yet we know that many Christian prayers, especially those for the sick and dying, go unanswered.

John 14:28 ~ Jesus says, "My Father is greater than I." See "Was Jesus God incarnate" above.

John 15:6 ~ "If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned." This short verse was seized upon by the Inquisition as a justification for burning alive all those whom the church considered to be heretics.

John 15:12 ~ This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. See Luke 12:51-53 above.

John 18:19-20 ~ The high priest then asked Jesus of his doctrine. Jesus replied, "I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing." However in Mark 4:10-12 when speaking privately to his disciples he flatly contradicted this by saying, "Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables that seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them." Also, he taught in places other than in synagogues and in the temple.

John 19:25 ~ Here we are told that the women were standing near the cross, not afar off as in Mark and Matthew. With the exception of Mary Magdalene, John's women were different than those in either Mark or Matthew. They included his mother, her sister, and Mary the wife of Cleophas. I find it hard to believe that if Jesus' mother had been present at the crucifixion, the other gospel writers would have neglected to mention it. Also, if she attended the crucifixion, why did she not also visit the tomb? The presence of Jesus' mother at the crucifixion presents another problem for John's gospel. According to John 6:38 he never had a mother. In fact, he was never "born" in the human sense. He descended directly from heaven apparently as an adult.

John 21 begins with the resurrected Jesus mysteriously appearing on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias where seven of his original disciples were fishing. They had apparently abandoned their mission in favor of returning to their original profession. This is a curious development indeed. Had they already forgotten that a few days earlier Jesus had appeared to them under mysterious circumstances instructing them to go out as missionaries of his faith and had in fact granted them the power of the Holy Ghost (20:22-23) whereby they could forgive sins or withhold such forgiveness?

Acts of the Apostles  Acts 7:14 ~ Stephen, who in Acts 6:8 is characterized as being "Full of faith and power performing great wonders and miracles among the people," tells us that, "Joseph called his father Jacob to him and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen (75) souls in all." If we check the source, Genesis 46:27, we find that there were but threescore and ten (70). So, here we have another God inspired goof.

Acts 7:15-16 ~ Here we discover yet another goof by Stephen the "Wise." He says, "Jacob went down into Egypt and died, he and our fathers and were carried over into Sychem and laid in the sepulcher that Abraham bought." The death and burial of Jacob is discussed at length in chapters 49 and 50 of Genesis. In Genesis 50:13 we learn that, "His (Jacob's) sons carried him (not into Sychem, but) into the land on Canaan and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah before Mamre." Genesis 23:19 records where it is located, "Abraham buried Sarah in the cave of the field on Machpelah before Mamre: the same as Hebron in the land of Canaan." Sychem, the location claimed by Stephen, lies 99 kilometers north of Hebron. Go figure!

Acts 7:16 ~ Stephen tells us that Abraham bought the sepulcher for a sum of money from the sons of Emmor. However, in Genesis 23:17-18 it records that he bought it from Ephron. No mention is made of the sons of Emmor.

Acts 7:38-53 ~ According to Stephen it was an angel who came down from heaven to Mount Sinai and gave the law to Moses. This contradicts what is written Exodus 19:20 where it clearly states that God himself came down and gave the law to Moses.

Let us here consider the three accounts of Paul's conversion as recorded in Acts chapters 9, 22, and 26. There is an obvious contradiction between the first two accounts. In chapter 9 we are told that the men accompanying him heard the voice whereas in chapter 22 it states that they did not hear the voice. Another contradiction is the inconsistency in the manner in which Paul claims to have received his instructions. According to the first two accounts he is told to go into the city where instructions will be given to him. When testifying before King Agrippa, however, Paul embellishes the story. Here he says that Jesus himself instructed him in great detail right there on the spot (Acts 26:15-18). These passages bear all the earmarks of a forgery.

Acts 13:38-39 ~ Paul announces with great authority, "Let it be known to you therefore, my brothers, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you; by this Jesus every one who believes is set free from all those sins from which you could not be freed by the law of Moses" . Is he unaware that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost and apostasy are identified as unforgivable sins? (See Mark 3:29 and Hebrews 6:4-6)  

Acts 19:19 ~ Non-Christian books are burned whose value came to fifty thousand silver coins.

Acts 20:35 ~ Speaking to the elders at Ephesus Paul said, "I have shown you all things, how that so laboring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, who said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’" While this may sound good and noble, there is no record that Jesus ever was at Ephesus., a city in Turkey, which lies some 600 miles from Israel across the Mediterranean sea. So, let us apply a little common sense here: (1. Jesus never was at Ephesus, (2. Paul never saw Jesus except in a vision, (3. the Ephesians could never have heard Jesus say this or, for that matter, anything else, (4. how could they "remember" something they had never heard? (5. Paul may have told them Jesus said that, but how would he have known, having never seen him? So, we only have Paul's word for it, and that amounts to no more than hearsay.

Acts 23:3 ~ In a fit pique Paul openly curses the high priest. When reminded that such disrespect is unlawful (Exodus 22:28), Paul replies, "I was not aware that I was talking to the high priest." This is hard to believe indeed when one considers that he had recently been an agent of the high priest and had in fact directly petitioned him for letters authorizing the arrest of Christian living in Damascus.

The epistles  Romans 1:3 ~ "Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh," says Paul. This statement flies in the face of everything we are told in the gospels. In Matthew 1:20 and Luke 1:35 we learn that Mary was made pregnant with Jesus not by Joseph, to whom she was betrothed, but by the Holy Ghost. This creates a really big problem for the Bible believer. First, although Joseph may have been of David's line, he was not Jesus' father. Second, the Holy Ghost is a spirit and spirits do not have flesh and blood bodies. Third, "according to the flesh" could not have been referring to Mary's flesh because she was not from David's line. So if the birth narratives are to be believed, Jesus did not come from the seed of David, and Paul told another big lie.

Romans 1:16 ~ Paul announces that, "The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." Salvation from sin through the blood of a man who died on a Roman cross is alien to everything in the Old Testament and to everything that is Jewish. When a fundamentalist Christian says that God made a new covenant with the Jews and sealed it with the blood of his son who is supposed to have died a sacrificial death one need simply tell them to read Jeremiah 31:29-30. This passage makes no provision for anyone to die for the sins of others. Everyone shall die for his or her own sins. Therefore, Jesus' death is in no way a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. The Jewish way to salvation is given in Ezekiel 18:27 where it says, "When a wicked man turns away from his wickedness and practices justice and righteousness he will save his life." Notice that there is no mention of Jesus or a messiah.

Romans 2:11 ~ Here Paul proclaims that there is no respect of persons with God. Well, let's just see about that. First, in the creation stories (there are two of two of them) God definitely favored Adam over Eve. In fact, the Bible is rife with the degradation of women. In Deuteronomy 7:6 God announces to the Israelites that out of all of the people of the world they are chosen to be his people. God showed respect of persons between Cain and Able (Gen. 4:4-5). He also showed it when in Malachi 1:2-3 he openly expresses his love for Esau and his hatred for Jacob, Esau's brother. Jesus, an equal member of the triune godhead, showed favoritism when he declared in Matthew 15:24, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." So, again Paul shows his ignorance of scripture.

Romans 2:13 ~ "The doers of the law shall be justified." Here it seems that Paul has had a change of heart until we come to Romans 3:20 where he contradicts this statement by saying, "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin." Which are we to believe?

Romans 12:14 ~ Paul says, "Bless them that persecute you, bless and curse not." Although he preached this doctrine to others, Paul did not practice it. The truth is that he had a violent temper and held grudges. He openly cursed those who disagreed with him (I Corinthians 16:22 and Galatians 1:9). These incidents show Paul to have been little more than a pious hypocrite.

Romans 14:1-8 ~ Here Paul says, "Let every man be persuaded in his own mind." In this chapter Paul outlines the code of law for Christian living according to which every one is free to do just as he or she pleases. Thus the law of the Old Testament is abandoned. Rather than fulfilling the law of the prophets Christianity is in fact a distortion of it.

Romans 15:29 ~ "When I come unto you I will come in the fullness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ." But when Paul did eventually go to Rome, he went as a prisoner under guard (Acts 28:16).

I Corinthians 1:18 ~ "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God." It became the primary symbol of the faith. From its earliest days the church of Rome made the sign of the cross on the foreheads of those whom it baptized. However, this amounts to a flagrant misuse of the true meaning of the sign.

Ezekiel 9:4. The symbol Tav (t), the 23rd letter of the ancient Hebrew alphabet was to be placed on the forehead of the righteous to identify them so that they would be saved from destruction. This is the earliest reference in the Bible to a "sign." It bears no relation what so ever to the cross of Jesus.

I Corinthians 5:1 ~ Paul scolds the Corinthians, "It is reported that there is fornication among you." Here he is rebuking his followers because they took Romans 14:1-8 seriously. Here Paul is put in the embarrassing position of having to turn to the very law which he had abrogated in Romans 14:1-5 where he asked, "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? It is before their own lord that they stand or fall." In other words, let each one judge for themselves what is right and wrong.

I Corinthians 6:5 ~ Paul asks, "Is it so that there is not one wise man among you?" Has he already forgotten his own exaltation back in I Corinthians 3:18? There he said, "If any man among you seem to be wise in this world, let him become a fool that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is but foolishness with God."

I Corinthians 6:7 ~ True to the words of Jesus in Matthew 7:1 (Do not judge) or Matthew 5:39 (Do not be opposed to evil), and Luke 6:30, (If robbed, do not ask for your goods back), Paul recommends that his followers not go to the law to settle their disputes. It is preferable, he says, to suffer yourself to be defrauded. Had these recommendations been observed it would have robbed the world of its civilization and created a society dominated by lawless thugs. What this passage actually shows is that the early Christians were indeed capable of defrauding one another. All of these rebukes from Paul only go to show that his doctrine of freedom from the law (Romans 8:2)and saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8) did nothing more than give men the license to sin.

I Corinthians 7:1 ~ Here Paul says, "It is good for a man not to touch a woman." This contradicts Genesis 1:28 where God tells us to, "Be fruitful and multiply." If, however, all of Paul's followers had obeyed him in this matter, Christianity surely would have died out early in the second century for a lack of followers.

I Corinthians 7:39 ~ "The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth." This shows how little Paul knew of Jewish law for nowhere in the five books of Moses (the Pentateuch) can such a statement be found. According to Deut. 24:1-2 a man has the right to divorce his wife after which she is free to remarry.

I Corinthians 9:20-23 ~ In this passage Paul is saying that it is okay to deliberately deceive people in order to convert them to Christ.

I Corinthians 13:2 ~ "If I have not charity (love) then I am nothing." Paul showed very little charity toward those who disagreed with him. In Galatians 1:9 he says, "If anyone preach any other gospel, let him be accursed." So according to his own teachings he is nothing.

1 Corinthians 15:3 ~ Paul says, "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scripture." Such a scripture has never been located.

Paul's brief rendition of the resurrection of Jesus contradicts that of the gospels. In I Cor. 15:5-6 Paul says, "First he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that he appeared to more than five hundred at once." This claim has been questioned by many, however, the earliest of which there is any record is that of Thomas Paine. In his great work, The Age of Reason, Paine reminds us that, "It is only Paul who says that (the resurrected) Jesus was seen by five hundred at once. It is not the five hundred who say it for themselves. Who were they? Could their testimony be relied upon? It is, therefore, the testimony of only one man, Paul." Paine reminds us that Paul did not believe one word of the matter at the time it allegedly happened. "Paul's evidence," Paine says, "is like that of a men who comes into a court of law today to swear that everything he swore to yesterday was a lie." In addition to Paine's devastating critique, Paul's reference to "the twelve" obviously refers to the twelve apostles. Is it possible that Paul was unaware of Judas Iscariot's demise? That makes no sense because Judas was not replaced until after the ascension (Acts 1:26.)

II Corinthians 4:2 ~ Paul says, "We have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God." But in II Corinthians 12:16 he says of himself, "Being crafty, I caught you by deceit."

II Corinthians 6:14-15 ~ Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?  And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? The message here is one of prejudice, bigotry and intolerance.

Galatians 1:18-19 ~ Paul recalls that, "After three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Peter and stayed with him for fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I not except James, the brother of the Lord." This contradicts the account given in Acts 9:27-28 where it says that while in Jerusalem Paul was brought to the apostles by Barnabas and was with them coming in and going out.

Galatians 3:28 ~ Here Paul, says, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Although this verse pronounces everyone to be equal, it is contradicted in Titus 2:9 where Paul exhort servants to "be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things."

Galatians 4:4 ~ Paul says, "God sent forth his son, made of a woman, made under the law." Jesus was not born according to the law. His father was not Joseph to whom Mary, his mother, was betrothed. It was the Holy Ghost as noted above. Therefore, Jesus was born of an adulterous union. Technically speaking, he was a bastard. In that regard see Exodus 20:14 and Deuteronomy 23:2.

Ephesians 1:4-5 ~  “According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will”. This passage provides the scriptural affirmation of the doctrine of Predestination, also called “election,” stating that God has ordained all that happens.

Ephesians 2:8-9 ~ For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works. Is this telling us that the bloody sacrifice allegedly made by Jesus was unnecessary for salvation? For more on this subject see the section titled "Salvation" in Are the Gospels True? on this web site.

Philippians 1:18 ~ Paul says, "Whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached I therein do rejoice." So Paul is here saying if anyone can successfully evangelize for Christ by being deceitful go ahead and be deceitful. Apparently anything goes so long as it gets converts. Here again II Cor. 4:2 and 12:16 are contradicted.

Philippians 3:2 ~ Paul says, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision." Concision means mutilation of the flesh, and that is what circumcision is. Luke 2:21 tells us that Jesus was circumcised. In Leviticus 22:20 we learn that anything with a blemish is unacceptable for sacrifice. Therefore Jesus was unacceptable.

Colossians 3:17 ~ Paul tells us, "And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him." In other words, we must have divine authority for all that we do. Paul was by his own admission an admitted trickster and deceiver. (See II Corinthians 12:16 and Philippians 1:18.) So, was he acting in the name of Jesus?

II Thessalonians 2:9 ~ Here it says, "Even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders." But in Matthew 28:18 we learn that, "All power in heaven and in earth was given to Jesus who performed signs and wonders." Again in Luke 21:27 we read that, "Jesus is coming with power and great glory." Now if all power belongs to Satan yet Jesus is the one with all of the power, doesn't that mean that Jesus and Satan are one and the same?

I Timothy 2:5-6 ~ "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." There are a couple of whoppers in this little passage. First, by stating emphatically that Jesus is a man it denies the Holy Trinity. Second, it contradicts Psalm 49:7-8 which tells us that no man can give himself as ransom for another because no payment will suffice.

I Timothy 2:11-14 ~ "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." The myth of Adam and Eve is thrown back into the faces of women countless times by New Testament writers. The writer of Timothy, whoever that was, epitomizes the way in which the story was exploited in order to legitimize the church's systematic and relentless degradation and oppression of  women.

I Timothy 2:15 ~ "Despite their many shortcomings, women can be saved through childbearing if they continue in faith, charity, and holiness with sobriety." Although degrading, this seems to offer women some access to salvation. But they shouldn't get their hopes up because in I Corinthians 7:7-8 Paul announces that it is better to remain unmarried. So, if a woman doesn't have children, she is denied salvation. But she can't have children legally unless she is married, and Paul has discouraged that. If she elects to have children out of wedlock, she will be declared a fornicator and thus denied salvation again (I Corinthians 6:9). For women this is a real Catch 22.

I Timothy 6:14 ~ In the instructions to ministers it says, "Keep this commandment without stain or reproach, unrebukable until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ." This is another of those passages showing that the early Christians believed that Jesus would return within their own lifetime.

II Timothy 3:16 ~ All scripture is given by inspiration of God. Check this declaration against the web page essay, Bible Science.

Titus 1:12-13 ~ One of their own prophets said, "Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons, and this testimony is true." This is a bigoted, racist, prejudicial, untrue statement.

Hebrews 1:4 ~ Here it says of Jesus, "Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they." But in verse 9 of the next chapter we learn that Jesus was actually made a little lower than the angels.

Hebrews 2:14 ~ Here we learn that through his death on the cross Jesus destroyed Satan. But the devil appears to have been around doing his dirty work long after Jesus died. In fact, in I Thessalonians 2:18 Paul says, "We would have come unto you, but Satan hindered us." Also, many Christians are quick to assure us that the devil is quite active even today. Maybe this, like the second coming, is another one of those things that Jesus is supposed to have done but just never got around to doing.

Hebrews 2:18, 4:15 ~ Jesus was tempted. James 1:13 ~ God cannot be tempted. Therefore Jesus was not God.

Hebrews 4:15 ~ This passage declares that Jesus was without sin. However, in I John 3:4 sin is defined as being any transgression of the law, and in Deuteronomy 13:5 the law states that one must put away evil. But in Matthew 5:39, Jesus says, "Resist not evil." Thus Jesus transgressed the law. Doesn't that make him a sinner?

Hebrews 5:6 ~ Here the author says of Jesus, "Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek." What does this mean, and who was Melchizedek? The first reference to Melchizedek appears in Geneses 14:18 where he is identified as the King of Salem. But not until Psalm 110:4 do we discover the source of Hebrews 5:6. Psalm 110:4 is directed to King David and reads, "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." After that, there are no more references to Melchizedek until the Epistle to the Hebrews where there are several. In Hebrews 6:20 we are reminded that Jesus was a high priest of the order of Melchizedek. Christian fundamentalists claim this as proof that Melchizedek was an early manifestation of Jesus, what ever that means. But in Hebrews 7:3 we learn that Melchizedek was, "Without father, without mother and without genealogy having neither beginning of days, nor end of life." The problem is that unlike Melchizedek Jesus had a father, the Holy Ghost, and a mother, Mary and two genealogies, one in Matthew 1 and another in Luke 3. He began his days as a baby in Bethlehem and died on the Roman cross. So, where is the similarity?

Hebrews 9:27 ~ And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment . . . Here we are told that ALL will die. No exceptions are noted. However, in Hebrews 11:5 it says the Enoch did not die. Also, in 2 Kings 2:11 we are told that Elijah did not die.

Hebrews 9:28 ~ "And unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time." According to these words the second coming of Jesus will be seen only by those who look for him. This contradicts Revelation 1:7 where it says that every eye shall see him.

Hebrews 11:12 ~ Here the writer of Hebrews is telling us that at the time Abraham sired Isaac he was "as good as dead." If he had had any knowledge of the Old Testament the writer would have been aware that in Genesis 25:1-5 it tells how Abraham lived seventy five years after the birth of Isaac, and during that time he took more wives and concubines and produced many more children.

Hebrews 12:1 ~ "Let us set aside the sin that does so easily beset us." If sin so easily besets Christians, the sacrifice of Jesus was in vain because those who professed to believe in him apparently went right on sinning.

The Epistle of James ~ Many Christians believe that the James here referred to was the brother of Jesus. Some maintain that he took over the leadership of the apostolic group in Jerusalem following the death of Jesus. However, this tradition can nowhere be conclusively verified. There is no mention of any of Jesus' brothers becoming his follower. In fact, in John 7:5 it says that his brothers did not believe in him. Also, there is no mention anywhere in the New Testament that Jesus ever tried to contact any member of his family either before or after his alleged resurrection. Maybe he was estranged from them because in Mark 3:21-22 his family is depicted as not only not believing in him but actually declaring him to be beside himself (crazy.) The scribes from Jerusalem said that Jesus was possessed by none other then Beelzebub himself.

Only once is James the brother of Jesus identified as an apostle. In Galatians 1:19 Paul says, "But of the apostles saw I non except for James the Lord's brother." The names of the twelve apostles are listed in Matthew 10:2-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, and Acts 1:13. In all those passages two James are included. One is identified as being the son of Alphaeus; the other as the son of Zebedee. James the son of Zebedee was later killed by Herod (Acts 12:2) leaving James the son of Alphaeus as the only apostolic James genuinely identified. It therefore must have been this James whom Paul met in Jerusalem and not James the so-called brother of Jesus. This epistle is Pharisaic in content and has nothing whatsoever to say about Jesus other than a salutation in his name.

James 5:14-15 ~ "Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up." As for myself, I'd rather rely on medical science. See also John 14:13-14 above for a more definitive exposé of prayer.

1 Peter 4:6 ~ "For this cause was the gospel preached also to the dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit." Here we have a new doctrine - that of the dead having the gospel preached to them. However, this doctrine contradicts the Old Testament where it is stated in Psalm 88:10, "Wilt thou show wonders to the dead? Shall the dead arise and praise thee?" Also, in Psalm 115:17 it says that the dead cannot praise the Lord. In Ecclesiastes 9:5 we read that, "The living know that they shall die, but the dead know not anything neither have they any more a reward." So, what is the point in preaching the gospel to the dead?

In my opinion, 1 Peter 4:6 in a very clever interpolation. Through it a vast new fund raising opportunity is created for the church. Just think about it. Now not only can the living be saved, but so can all of their dead relatives for a price, of course.

1 Peter 5:8 ~ "The devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about seeking whom he may devour." But didn't we read back in Hebrews 2:14 that by the death of Christ the devil and his power were destroyed?

2 Peter 1:20 ~ "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Ghost spoke from God." Yet we see that the writers of the New Testament have relied on their own interpretation throughout in order to deceive prospective converts into believing that the words of the prophets were all fulfilled by Jesus.

2 Peter 2:1 ~ "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you." But the problem here is that there is no way of knowing which are true and which are false. For example, in Mark 16:17-18 Jesus says, "These signs shall follow them that believe; in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak in new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover." But, in Matthew 7:22 he says, "Many will say to me, ‘Lord have we not prophesied in thy name? In thy name have we not cast out devils, and done many wondrous works'?" These sound like true believers following his teachings. Yet, in the very next verse he says, "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." According to this criteria the sign of a believer is at the same time the sign of a non-believer. It gets confusing.

2 Peter 3:10 ~ But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works therein shall be burned up. However, in Ecclesiastes 1:4 we are told that the earth abides forever.

James 1:17 ~ Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights with whom is no variableness. See also Malachi 3:6 where we are again assured that God is does not change. Yet we read in Genesis 6:6 that God came to regret that he had made man. In Jonah 3 it is recorded that God vowed to destroy Nineveh. But upon learning that the people of that great city had turned from their evil ways he changed his mind (vs. 10.) In 2 Kings 20:1-6 God sends his prophet Isaiah to tell King Hezekiah, “Set your house in order for you shall die.” But after hearing Hezekiah’s tearful prayers God changed his mind and gave him another fifteen years of life. So much for God’s immutability.

1 John 1:7 ~ But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. How can this be when in Matthew 12:32 we are told in no uncertain terms that "Who so ever speaketh against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven neither in this world nor in the world to come" or in Hebrews 6:4-6 where we are told that apostasy is an unforgivable sin?

1 John 1:8 ~ "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." This statement contradicts what is said later in 1 John 3:9, "Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin."

1 John 2:22 ~ "He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." To many, the labels "antichrist" and "beast" are considered synonymous and interchangeable. Nothing could be farther from the truth. In the passage above it clearly states that antichrist is an epithet reserved for those who deny Jesus. The Beast, on the other hand, is identified in Revelation 13 as a certain despotic ruler who specialized in persecuting Christians. (See below.)

1 John 3:8 ~ "For this purpose the son of God was manifested so that he might destroy the works of the devil." If this was the purpose of Jesus' mission he failed because according to many Christians the devil is still around doing his dirty work.

1 John 3:15 ~ "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer, and ye know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." Compare that to Luke 14:26 wherein Jesus states that, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters, he cannot be my disciple." How could Jesus make such a requirement of his followers without also subscribing to it? Does this mean that Jesus and his followers were all murderers who had no eternal life abiding in them?

1 John 4:2 ~ "Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is of God." But in Mark 1:23-24, demons recognize Jesus as the "Holy one of God." Accordingly, the demons are all of God.

1 John 5:1 ~ "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God." It is interesting to note that according to his book, Mine Kampf, Adolph Hitler believed this fervently, so he was born of God.

1 John 3:4 ~ "..; for sin is the transgression of the law." Doesn't that mean that before the law there was no sin?

1 John 5:7 ~ For there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Ghost. Here we have an endorsement of polytheism contradicting Deuteronomy 6:4 which states, "The Lord our God is one".

Jude 14 ~ Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied saying, "Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints." No such prophesy has ever been found anywhere in the Bible. If it is from the apocryphal book of Enoch, that book was not compiled until the second century BCE. So here we have an inerrant book, the Bible, citing a book/prophecy outside of itself and hence subject to error.

The Book of Revelation  The Bible ends with the mysterious Book of Revelation, also known as the Apocalypse of John. It was the last to be accepted as New Testament canon. Revelation has mystified and fascinated Bible believers for centuries with its bizarre imagery and purported prophecy. This fascination has led to endless speculation and interpretation of its alleged "prophecy" by biblical literalists, who, being unable to do anything else with it, usually interpret Revelation allegorically. As late as the fifth century many church leaders regarded Revelation with suspicion⁹.

Scholars are agreed that Revelation dates from the mid 90s CE¹⁰. Its author is identified in 1:1 simply as John. According to ecclesiastical tradition this is none other than Saint John the Evangelist said to have also authored the fourth gospel, the Gospel of John¹¹. But in view of such evidence as the linguistic and stylistic differences between Revelation and the Gospel of John  most scholars reject this claim¹². Also, if the alleged date of writing is correct, John the Evangelist, said to have been one of the original twelve apostles, would have been a very, very old man indeed when he wrote Revelation. The Jewish Bible scholar, Shmuel Golding, believes that Revelation was originally a Jewish work belonging to the category known as “outside books”¹³. Suffice it to say that the author of Revelation as well as the true origin of this book, remains unknown.

The message in Revelation is, shall we say, challenging to understand. However, the repeated use of the mystical number 7 can have no other than mythical significance: 7 angels, 7 horns, 7 stars and 7 seals, 7 vials, 7 plagues and 7 candlesticks, 7 churches and 7 letters addressed to them, 7 spirits before the throne, and a beast with 7 heads. In Ezekiel 4 we find the exact same set of symbols which was undoubtedly an important source for this weird narrative ¹⁴ Thus the “awesome” Book of Revelation stands revealed as nothing more than a convoluted collection of ancient myths encumbered with Christian interpolations to the point where it requires another revelation to understand it. Revelation is, in fact, a hodge podge of borrowed utterances, Jewish mysticism, ghost stories, fairy tales and interpolations. Now let us consider some of this book’s more obvious absurdities.

The following (italicized) Bible citations along with the associated commentary are excerpted in part from New Testament Fallacies, Part 19, “The Book of Revelation” by Shmuel Golding of the Jerusalem Institute of Biblical Polemics, Jerusalem, Israel and from my web page essay, “Some Famous New Testament Forgeries”¹⁵.

Rev. 1:5 ~ . . . and from Jesus Christ, . . . the first begotten of the dead and the prince of the kings of the earth” According to the Bible, several resurrections occurred before that of Jesus. See Luke 7:5; John 11:14; 2 Kings 4:32-37; 2 Kings 13:21. Also, “Prince of the Kings of the Earth,” the name now conferred upon Jesus, is in fact the name of the devil (John 12:31).

Rev. 1:7 ~ Behold, he cometh with clouds, and every eye shall see him . . . This stands in direct contradiction to Heb. 9:28 we are told that at the second coming only those looking for him will see him.

Rev. 1:10 ~ I was in the spirit on the Lord’s day. This is the first and only time the Lord’s day is mentioned in the New Testament. This is an obvious interpolation since the first day of the week did not officially become the Lord’s day until it was decreed so at the council of Nicea in 325 CE. (Smith’s Bible Dictionary).

Rev. 1:18 ~ Jesus said, " I am he that was dead but am now alive for evermore, and have the keys of hell and death." Since he earlier gave Peter the keys of heaven (Matt. 16:19,) this can only mean that Jesus, also titled Prince of the Earth ( Rev. 1.5,) a title which John (12:31) accredits to the devil, was in reality, the devil.

Rev. 2:9 ~ Jesus said, "I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan." This refers to gentile Christians who had been told by Paul that they were now Jews but were not required to observe Jewish law such as circumcision. They were not accepted by the original apostolic group. Much of Revelation is a protest against the teachings of Paul.

Rev. 2:20-23 ~ Jesus said, "But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her immorality. Behold, I will throw her on a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her doings; and I will strike her children dead." This is from the letter to the church at Thyatira. In it Jesus speaks of Jezebel, the 9th century BCE queen of Israel whom he knew only through myth and legend, as if she were a contemporary. This is truly amazing. But, what he has to say here is even more amazing. Instead of showing love and forgiveness, as he preached in the gospels¹⁶, Jesus was so consumed by what can only be described as a pathological hatred for this long dead woman that, acting as though she were still alive, he vows to have her gang raped and to kill her children. Was he that delusional?

Rev 5:6 ~ . . . and in the midst of the elders stood a lamb having seven horns and seven eyes. The lamb, of course, was Jesus who in addition to being reincarnated as a lamb had grown seven horns and five new eyes. Weird!

Rev. 6:1 ~ Then I saw the lamb open one of the seven seals. Opening those seals with hoofs must have been quit a trick. Maybe the horns helped.

Rev. 7:4-9 ~ The tribes of Israel are listed, but the tribe of Dan is omitted. For an inerrant, God-inspired book to make such a goof is inexcusable because the founder of the Tribe of Dan was none other than the son of the patriarch, Jacob (Genesis 30:6). Also, he includes the half tribe, Menasseh but forgets about Ephraim, the other half tribe.

Rev.11:8 ~ Here we learn that Jesus was crucified not in Jerusalem, but in Sodom in Egypt. How interesting.

Rev. 12:5-6 ~ And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days. Christian fundamentalists claim that "the child" referred to in this passage is Jesus, while "the woman" symbolizes the Christian church. However, this cannot possibly be right for the following reasons. First, Jesus never ruled all nations with a rod of iron nor indeed with anything else. Second, Jesus allegedly ascended into heaven not as a child but as an adult in his thirties. Third, there is no record anywhere in the Bible of Mary, the mother of Jesus, fleeing into the forest and remaining there for 1260 days. Fourth, the fundamentalists have it exactly backwards. It was Jesus who gave rise to the Christian church, not the other way around. It is interesting to note that the Greeks tell a story of the birth of Apollo remarkably similar to this one except that it predates Revelation by almost a thousand years. The ancient Egyptians also told a similar story of Horace. In fact, this story seems to have been well known throughout the eastern Mediterranean world of the second century when the Book of Revelation was written.

Rev.13:18 ~ Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. The so-called "number" of each letter in a word can to assigned in such a way as to have it appear to stand for a number that, when added to the others in that word, yields a meaningful sum total. The solution in this case is the Roman emperor Nero because the numerical value of the Hebrew spelling of Neron Kaisar, an inscription found on Roman coins of Nero's time, is 666. So the beast referred to in Revelation 13:18 is none other than Nero who is known to have died in the year 68 CE. Fundamentalists naturally reject this explanation because if Nero was the beast, then according to the prophecy Jesus should have returned to destroy him which he obviously did not do.

Rev. 21:8 ~ But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. Here the sexual immoral are condemned in the same sentence as liars a d murderers. Yet in the public sphere Evangelicals appear to be far more concerned with sex than with the other more serious sins.

The Antichrist (1John 2:18, 2:22. 4:3 and 2 John 7) is often perceived, especially by fundamentalist Christian sects, as being synonymous with the beast of Revelation. For that reason it is an appropriate topic for discussion here. Upon the death of Nero the Roman empire, in the absence of a strong leader, was throne into a state of confusion. As a result, the rumor soon spread, especially in the east, that Nero had not died but was actually in hiding from his sworn enemies. Also according to the rumor, he was poised to advance on Rome at the head of a huge army. Believing this to be the case, Christians were filled with fear and dread. They well remembered that it was Nero who had initiated the first government sponsored persecution of them. The Christians became convinced that Nero was none other than the beast, A.K.A., the Antichrist. But not to worry, the Christians were told, because this was simply the prelude to the second coming of Jesus who, after vanquishing Nero, the Antichrist, would inaugurating the much anticipated millennium. In 22:7 Jesus says, "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.” In verse 12 Jesus says again, "Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me." In verse 20 the Book of Revelation closes with with the Jesus quote, "Surely I come quickly." So the Book of Revelation ends on a note of urgency, Jesus is on his way. Thus, many naive Christians went joyfully to their death obviously hoodwinked into expecting the imminent return of Jesus, a promise which remains unfulfilled to this very day.

God vs Satan ~ Satan, known also as “the Devil,” stands as the most hated, despised, contemptuous character in the entire Bible. To be fair, however, it is worth noting that, compared with many of the atrocious acts of God, Satan comes off as a relative paragon of virtue. Satan is in fact guilty of just three main misdemeanors. First, according to a passage which sets the moral tone of the Bible, Satan, in the guise of a serpent, tempts Eve with the forbidden fruit of moral enlightenment, fruit from what is described as "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" (Gen. 2:9). One might have thought it a good thing for Satan thus to start her on the path to moral education. But God didn't want her eyes to be "opened," as Gen. 3:5 puts it; he demanded nothing less than blind obedience. So God, responding in typical fashion, not only punishes Eve for an act that she didn't know was wrong until after she'd performed it. He also punishes Adam, and all their descendants, including you and me. He imposes on us all the burden of what theologians call “Original Sin” by which none of us can start life with a clean slate. At the very least this action could be characterized as over kill.

Satan appears next in I Chronicles 21:1where he plays the very same role that was assigned to God in 2 Samuel 24:1. So wherein lies his wrong this time? If it is good enough for God to order David's census-taking, can it be evil for Satan to do so?

Satan's third appearance is in the book of Job where he makes life difficult for God's protege. But that, it should be noted, is only because God had issued him a challenge to do so.

Thereafter, Satan does almost nothing of a dubious nature except for tempting God himself, in the person of Jesus, during his forty days in the desert - an exercise doomed to futility.

What is remarkable, in light of the bad press Satan has subsequently suffered, is that he, unlike God, doesn't violate a single one of our important moral principles. He does not slaughter the innocent as did God in the Great Flood of Noah, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and other occasions. He does not give helpless captive virgins including children to the troops for their sexual pleasure as God does in Numbers 31. Satan never condones child sacrifice as God did in Judges 11. Satan never condemns to eternal torture in Hell all those who refuse to recognize Jesus as their lord and savior. Satan did not lie or teach people to steal as did God in Exodus 3:18-22. Last but by no means lease, Satan did not create evil. That distinction belongs exclusively to God (Isaiah 45:7).

Rev.19:17-21 ~ The birds are invited by an angel to partake of the "great supper of God." The featured item on the menu is human flesh. However, the high point of the feast was to see the beast and the false prophet thrown alive into a lake of fire.

Rev. 21:8 ~ But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. This verse is contradicted in verse 27 which states that the workers of all kinds of iniquity are still around only they will not be admitted into the new Jerusalem. What would be the need for such a prohibition if the unrighteous are all burning in hell?

Christian fundamentalists remain convinced that the Book of Revelation is replete with ominous prophesies of future events at an unspecified place and time. For that reason they try to twist each and every event, particular those of a catastrophic nature, so as to make it fit their preconceived expectations as in the case of the self-fulfilling prophecy. It also permeates their political and social agenda. However, it is obvious that the writer of Revelation was speaking not to future generations but to people and events of his own day and time.

The typical way of interpreting the Book of Revelation is as a blueprint for the future. Christian evangelists in every generation, including the current one, have preached that it is referring to their time. This is both wrong and wrongheaded¹⁷. The book should be read in its own historical context. It is a Christian apocalypse whose setting is 1^st century Rome, and the "beast" is the emperor Nero. Revelation was intended to offer hope to the persecuted by assuring them that their God is still sovereign over the world and will soon intervene to right its wrongs and vanquish the persecutors. Needless to say, it never happened.

Conclusion  The New Testament cannot be taken seriously by well informed, thinking people. Christianity, the religion founded upon it, claims to have a monopoly on truth and morality. But when objectively examined, Christian theology turns out to be completely irrational. It is centered around one man, Jesus, said to be the son of God who was born of a virgin, died on a Roman cross and resurrected from the dead. None of these extravagant claims is supported by objective historical fact. Christianity is predicated on myths and legends most of which are rooted in paganism. Humanity must turn away from seeking refuge in such an illusion, cherished though it may be. Our survival depends not on some established cultural fantasy like God but on our resolute willingness to face reality with determination, logic and rational thought even when that reality is not what we would like it to be.

For related information see Are the Gospels True?, The Epistles of Paul, The Apostle Peter and "Q" on this web cite.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Ehrman, Bart D., The New Testament, Part 1, pages 14 - 15.

2 Funk, R. W. and Roy W. Hoover, The Five Gospels, 1996, pg. 128.

3 Ehrman, Bart D. , The New Testament, Part 1. The Teaching Co., page 82 

4 Ibid, The New Testament, Part 2,  The Teaching Co., page 207.

4a Spong, John S., The Sins of Scripture, Harper San Francisco, 2005, pg. 19.

4b Ibid, pg. 20.

5 Ehrman, Bart D., The New Testament, Part 1, The Teaching Co., page 92.

5a Funk, Robert W. and Roy W. Hover, The Five Gospels, A Polebridge Press, 1996, pages 203-204.

6 Ehrman, Bart D., The New Testament, Part 1, The Teaching Co.

7  Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, The Five Gospels, Scribner, 1996, page 15.

8 Ehrman, Bart D. , The New Testament, Part 1. The Teaching Co., page126.

9 Buehrens, John A.; Understanding the Bible; pgs. 187-196.

10 Wells, G. A., The Jesus Myth, pg. 32.

11 Encyclopedia Encarta, Microsoft corp.,  2004

12 Golding,, Shmuel; The Book of Revelation; Biblical Polemics issue no. 63, page 2.

13 Encyclopedia Encarta; Microsoft Electronic Reference Library, 2003.

14 Graham, Lloyd M.; Deceptions and Myths in the Bible, pg. 363.

15 Skeptics Corner <http://www.inu.net/skeptic>

16 First there’s John 15:17 where Jesus commands us to love one another, a commandment he repeats throughout the gospels. Where was his love for