The Gospel Truth

The phrase ‘the gospel truth’ is used when someone wants to suggest that a thing is unquestionably true. It is implied here that our gospels possess this type of unquestionable truth and thus deserve to be accorded the status of measuring rod.

Now if someone was part of the remnant then they must understand that gospels were documents that were written by people who were not Christians. If you do not understand this simple truth then it is important that you do come to understand it for otherwise you will fall away from a life under grace and instead come under the enslaving yoke of religious law.

The problem first emerges in the Gospel of Mark, which I would compare to a half baked flap jack. The problem then becomes more serious in the Gospel of Matthew, which is a rewritten version of the Gospel of Mark, and which rather than removing the errors in Mark’s Gospel only makes matters even worse and takes us even further from the truth. We then come to the Gospel of Luke which could be compared to a whipped puree of an assortment of different ingredients, some from Mark, some from Matthew, and a few special ingredients which were the authors own contribution to the recipe, all of which were chucked into a blender and then pureed. We could also compare to author of the Gospel of Luke to a man who was found straddling a fence on those occasions when he was not actually just sitting on the fence, although in the case of this author he would more often be found straddling than he would be found sitting.

The Gospel of Mark consists of a collection of controversy stories, with each controversy accompanied by the lame excuses offered by the author to explain how the atrocious and shocking conduct of Yeshua (Jesus) was not atrocious or shocking after all, because, you see, he had a perfectly good excuse each time.

It is worth noting here that the author of the Gospel of Mark seemed to feel that Yeshua required an excuse for his bad conduct, which indicates that the author was not really a Christian, for he was as shocked and scandalized by the conduct of Yeshua as was his intended audience. The audience he is addressing in this gospel are extremely conservative religious people, in particular the followers of John the Baptist. Both the author of Mark’s Gospel and the followers of John the Baptist had this one thing in common, in that they were both scandalized by the conduct of Yeshua, with the difference being that the gospel author was convinced that things were not as bad as they might first seem, as becomes obvious when you consider that there were perfectly good excuses that could be made to excuse each and everyone of those atrocious acts.

Now we know, thanks to our gospel, that Yeshua rejected the validity of the Ten Commandments, which meant that he rejected the story of Moses going up the Mountain, which meant that he rejected the entire Jewish Torah, which religion at the time insisted was brought down from that very same Mountain by Moses. We know that this is true, for he consistently broke the Sabbath. This made religious people very angry, so much so that they found it necessary to quote the Ten Commandments : ‘Six days there are to do your work, but not on the Sabbath.’ It becomes apparent just how determined Yeshua was to discredit the Ten Commandments and the Torah religion when we recall that he engaged in such practices as harvesting on the Sabbath, which was a death penalty offense, and as we know he was eventually crucified for his many offenses against religion and its laws. It is hard to imagine anyone being more committed to an ideological position than that.

This ideological position was not shared by the author of Mark’s Gospel, for he felt that the religious laws were to soft and needed to be made much tougher. As for Sabbath breaking, in each instance it was a matter of a special exception rather than a general rule. So then, as an example, if a man was sick and suffering for forty years, it was therefore an emergency that required him to be healed on the Sabbath. Would not people pull a goat out of a well on the Sabbath? This is a lame excuse and quite typical of the lame excuses offered by the author of this gospel, for while it might be true that if a goat fell down a well that would constitute an emergency situation which would then require breaking the Sabbath law, when someone has been sick for forty years that is not a similar emergency situation, and a respect for religious opinion would require that he wait patiently for a few hours until sundown, thus avoiding unnecessary scandal. Here we are assuming that Yeshua wished to avoid scandal, and apparently he did not, and so therefore excuses are required, for to invite such scandal is to invite questions that the author of Mark’s Gospel would rather people didn’t ask.

The practice of Lent is not a Christian practice, for as the author of Mark’s Gospel tell us, Lent was practiced by John the Baptist and his followers, and Yeshua never practiced Lent. Rather he was scandalously found drinking and partying during Lent. This was scandalous and one might suppose that such a scandal might tax even the abilities of the author of this gospel when it came time to find some excuse for it all that might sit well with extremely religious people who were the type to be provoked and then outraged when some sacrilegious heathen was found partying instead of keeping Lent. The lame excuse offered by the author of Mark’s Gospel is that while it was true that Yeshua never kept Lent, and that he drank and he partied, that was because it was like a wedding party where the church was getting married to the bridegroom. We all know how people behave at wedding parties, so therefore under those exceptional circumstances the behavior of this Yeshua was acceptable. But only under those circumstances. That was then and this is now. It is now a funeral, and so therefore from now on all Christians in all churches were expected to start observing Lent, fasting and doing penance and all those other practices which, we are told, were not the practices of Yeshua, but rather were the practices of John the Baptist. Therefore the position of the author of this gospel is ‘don’t be like Yeshua.’ If there was one thing that author did not want is drinking and partying, and he shared the view point of John the Baptist, which means that he highly approved of religious mortification, and therefore figured out some lame excuse to convince the Christian Church to become that famous institution of sour mortification and self flagellation that it eventually became.

A Unified Field Theory

The Unified Field Theory
is also available as a zip file -> unified.zip

Introduction :The Pioneer Effect and the New Physics. A brief description of the new physics required to explain the 'Pioneer Effect', which is the constant deceleration of space craft as they fly through space.

Principles of Evolution: A Study in the Evolution of Bedbugs