The Healing at the Pool
Here's one of many interpolations that completely crush the Bible's credibility.
The gospel of John reads, "Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew Bethesda, having five porticoes. In these lay a multitude of those who were sick, blind, lame, withered. (see footnote) And a certain man was there, who had been thirty eight years in his sickness. When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he had been a long time in that condition, he said to him, 'do you wish to get well?' The sick man answered him, 'Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, but while I am coming, another steps in before me.' Jesus said to him, 'Arise, take up your pallet, and walk.'" (John 5:2-8, NASB)
The footnote reads, "many authorities insert, wholly or in part, 'waiting for the moving of the waters; V.4 for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool, and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from which ever disease with which he was afflicted.'" (NASB)
Does this footnote not have the aroma of myth? Imagine the superstition and hearsay that would have fuelled such a childish story. If some priest took it upon himself to add (or subtract) to this story, how are we able to trust the many other supernatural stories in the Bible? Can we know with certainty that Jesus was born of a virgin, or that an angel appeared to some shepherds, or that the dead walked the streets after Jesus' death?
Either we ignore the manuscript discrepancies and blindly accept that 2000 years ago an angel used to come down to stir the waters of a pool and the first man to jump in became healed, OR we have to admit that the text has a serious interpolation problem, thus sinking all the supernatural tales of the Bible to the ocean floor of myth.
The gospel of John reads, "Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew Bethesda, having five porticoes. In these lay a multitude of those who were sick, blind, lame, withered. (see footnote) And a certain man was there, who had been thirty eight years in his sickness. When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he had been a long time in that condition, he said to him, 'do you wish to get well?' The sick man answered him, 'Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, but while I am coming, another steps in before me.' Jesus said to him, 'Arise, take up your pallet, and walk.'" (John 5:2-8, NASB)
The footnote reads, "many authorities insert, wholly or in part, 'waiting for the moving of the waters; V.4 for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool, and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from which ever disease with which he was afflicted.'" (NASB)
Does this footnote not have the aroma of myth? Imagine the superstition and hearsay that would have fuelled such a childish story. If some priest took it upon himself to add (or subtract) to this story, how are we able to trust the many other supernatural stories in the Bible? Can we know with certainty that Jesus was born of a virgin, or that an angel appeared to some shepherds, or that the dead walked the streets after Jesus' death?
Either we ignore the manuscript discrepancies and blindly accept that 2000 years ago an angel used to come down to stir the waters of a pool and the first man to jump in became healed, OR we have to admit that the text has a serious interpolation problem, thus sinking all the supernatural tales of the Bible to the ocean floor of myth.
posted by R.K. at 1:32 PM
5 Comments:
Your footnote should also say - "many original manuscripts do not contain the last portion of verse 3 and all of verse 4". This was added later, probably to explain the man's reply in verse 7. Everything in God's Word is to be examined, studied, and taught to us by the Holy Spirit - especially since human translation errors can easily occur, and without the Holy Spirit, we cannot comprehend spiritual things. To say that you can't trust any of the Bible because of one misunderstanding is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. Since the footnote explains that it was put in, then it is safe to assume that whatever Scripture doesn't have a similar footnote, is probably accurate.
All of God's Word, as originally written and meant, is Truth. To not believe God is a sin."...And Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him as righteousness and he was called the friend of God" James 2:23. It takes a childlike faith to accept Him at His Word, because as great as the human mind is, we're like ants compared to God and His wisdom. You doubt because you want to, it is easier to doubt and you want to rebel against God. You don't want to be accountable to your Creator and told what is right and wrong, you don't want to have to pay for your sins, yet you don't want to owe Jesus for paying for them for you. That's just human nature - fallen into a sinful condition that hates God. Hopefully one day, you will come to see the Truth and Love of God again. He weeps over your departure, like losing a precious child. If you cannot see God's love for you right now, then at least see mine through this post. Take care!
Whether the footnote says, "many original manuscripts do not contain the last portion of verse 3 and all of verse 4"
or,
"many authorities insert, wholly or in part" (NASB)
the fact remains that at some point someone decided to add to the text. This is not a little "human translation error" (spelling or grammar); this a conscious, blatant alteration of the text.
It is true that this footnote was put into question because it didn't conform to other manuscripts. However, since its now established that a supernatural tale can be falsely added (or subtracted) to ancient manuscripts, how can we trust that any of the Bible’s other stories were not also tampered with, or falsely written in the first place? Look at the plethora of gospels and other apocryphal writings that appeared after Jesus' death. Look at the many other interpolations present in modern bibles (i.e. Mark 16:9-20). Strict accounts of factual history apparently wasn't a preferred writing style for the vast number of early authors. With this in mind, wouldn’t it be more prudent to question the bible, instead of embracing it as truth?
I appreciate your concern for my spiritual well being. And I know that from the xian perspective, seeing a man leave the faith as he would a cult just doesn’t register.
I don’t doubt because I want to or because I’m rebellious towards God. I doubt because to do otherwise would betray myself, suppressing what my heart and mind knows to be true.
Since you don't seem to want to see my love either, I'll speak bluntly. How good for you that your heart and mind are so far above God's. (Although you are forgetting that all were born into sin, in a fallen world, therefore your heart and mind are corrupt). You must feel very secure. If you are going to be wrong, then I'm glad that you can at least feel good about it now while you are given that liberty. I say that in complete sincerity and not in any way of judgmentalism or "hell fire" condemnation. I see that you have clearly made up your mind and me speaking my conviction isn't going to sway you in one way or another. I wouldn't have said all that if I didn't have a real concern for you. So we're just having an honest conversation - that's fine! I'd like it if you could try to convince me to be an atheist too.
But I must say, that if you didn't want to doubt, you would have heard what I said in my last comment: "Since the footnote explains that it was put in, then it is safe to assume that whatever Scripture doesn't have a similar footnote, is probably accurate." In other words, since it is clearly marked whenever human error does occur, you can trust everything in Scripture that isn't marked. What's so difficult about that?
What you are saying here in your argument doesn't make sense. You seem to have a lot of opinions on things you've gotten a lot of wrong information about.
First you must study the procedure by which we get the Bible before assuming that the ancient manuscripts were wrong. What is human error is not the ancient manuscripts, but rather those in Catholicism (hundreds of years later) who translated it in their own limited understanding, under their own traditions and culture, and for pleasing man - not to carry on God's Word with 100% accuracy. Since this century, Bible scholars have been going back to reconstruct the original writing and meaning of God's Word and putting it into newer versions to help sort out some of the mess Catholicism did. (Not only did Catholicism mess with God's Word, but also with the church, bringing paganism and idolatry in.) That's where the footnotes come in. Yeah - they could have just taken that stuff back out, but instead, they chose to note it.
If you are talking about the four gospel writers not exacting their records word for word and plagiarizing off each other, rather than see things through their own eyes and witnessing from different locations at different times of their lives, and instead of them each hearing God tell them what was and was not important to add in their particular writing - then sure - you may have something there. Does that mean they don't agree or line up with each other?... nope!
Still praying for you! Take care!
First off, I think I'm going to have to admit that your right. After a little research, the manuscripts that have the footnote are definitely not as early as the manuscripts that omit it (I assumed the manuscripts in question were all of the same general caliber and the decision to footnote it was more of a disputed one). Although it is strange that the story seems to make more sense with the footnote included (in light of verse 7).
That being said, I wasn't trying to be offensive or sarcastic. I was quite sincere when I said that I appreciated your concern. Also, I think it's simply a matter of fact that xians are incapable of comprehending the possibility that they might be in a cult (albeit a rather large, respectable one at that).
You went on to say, "How good for you that your heart and mind are so far above God's".
All I'm trying to say is that I honestly, deep down don't believe God exists. I can't tell my brain to believe in something it finds unbelievable. For me to be true to myself, I have to stick to my convictions. What kind of person would I be if I ignored my true beliefs and convictions and accepted Christ out of fear, or for some other reason? Would God even want such a wishy-washy person in heaven? Besides, as proven in this post, I am open to being wrong.
I'm sorry if I misread your intent. I respect that you can't believe at this point in your life, and I'm glad that you are being honest in yourself to not play the church game or call yourself a Christian if you truly aren't. More people should be so honest.
And I have to agree with you - most of the church in terms of organized religion is just that... dead religion, a cult, man-made institution in it's various forms and denominations, and have made Christianity no better than all the other false religions in the world - not relationship with Christ. That's because we (Christians as a whole and throughout history) have gone away from God's Word and done church our own way - according to man-made tradtions, beginning with the institution of catholicism, and then remaining strong even in protestantism (because we only got possesion of God's Word, but didn't learn how to interpret it by the Holy Spirit and so couldn't accept it all). If we went back to the Source (Jesus) and did things His way in His power - a lot of those who aren't really in Christ in the church would freak out! (which I'd love to see) :) And God could finally have His people showing His glory in the earth! (which I'd really love to see) It's hard when there's a large majority of people thinking they are saved because they follow "the church" or the religious traditions of their family or community - rather than really being saved because they know God personally through Jesus.
There are a few true believers out there who don't subscribe to the man-made church, and who are seeking God by His Word and Spirit alone to discover truth. I happen to be one of those.
Post a Comment
<< Home