I keep promising to myself to stop writing about religion, but I just can’t. Religious belief, particularly belief which contradicts history and science in order to justify itself, simply astounds me. I just cannot understand how normal, educated people, who otherwise understand human nature and employ reason and logic in their daily decisions, are willing to suspend reason and logic when it comes to their beliefs. By stating this I honestly don’t mean to judge anyone, or act as if I’m ‘above’ religious people for praising logic and reason. I understand that religious belief exists in every culture and is obviously deeply rooted in our psychology. It’s a very complicated human characteristic and I respect it as such. However, I don’t understand it.
In particular, I don’t understand how anyone can truly believe that the modern Bible is ‘true’ and currently exists in a form intended and inspired by divinity. That the Bible is free of mistakes, omissions, alterations, forgeries, misinterpretations and propaganda, all of which characterize human writings throughout history. How can one believe this, when Biblical scholarship has shown that many, many passages of the Bible exist in multiple inconsistent or contradictory forms, and that the text has been altered and added to hundreds (if not thousands) of times? How can one really accept the bible’s veracity in the face of its chaotic textual history?
I accept that biblical scholars frequently disagree over interpretations and that they may be wrong. But on issues where the vast majority of scholars agree, there is at least a high probability they are right. And some of these issues, if explained to the world, should rightly rock the foundations of the religion. These textual discoveries contradict the notion that the bible is divinely inspired. These discoveries should be verified and addressed by the church.
One specific passage that has had enormous influence on modern theology is Mark 16:9-20, which states the following:
9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.
12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.
14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 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.
19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
This controversial passage has long been an accepted part of Jesus’ story, and has been cited as historical proof that Jesus rose from the grave (See Josh McDowell’s ‘Evidence That Demands a Verdict’). It has inspired sects of Christianity and established the precedent for ’speaking in tongues’ which still occurs in many mainstream churches today. More importantly, the phrase “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” forms the very basis for Christian fundamentalist judgment (other passages may support this too–I’m no scholar).
Shockingly, it turns out that this passage was likely not part of the original gospel of Mark. There is an extensive scholarly debate on this issue, but it is undisputed that many extant versions of the gospel do not include some or all of these verses. One of these is the Codex Sinaiticus, handwritten in Greek over 1600 years ago and discovered in 1844 (this text has a fascinating history, by the way). The Sinaiticus, along with other texts, has provided very real evidence that Mark 16:9-20 were added to the bible at a later, unknown date. Although the issue remains controversial, it is undisputed that these early texts were later altered, which not only disproves the ‘divinely inspired’ theory but brings into question the teachings within those verses.
I’m pleased to learn that the aim of the Codex Sinaiticus Project is to eventually “reunite the entire manuscript in digital form and make it accessible to a global audience.” Hopefully, a greater understanding of the text will re-open debates over what constitutes christian doctrine. The same process should be used to address the tenets of every religion.
Again, I raise these issues not as an attack of christian or general religious beliefs, but as an attempt to propose answers to the following questions: What if we could improve our religious institutions? Is there some way to curb religious fundamentalism, an increasingly dangerous byproduct of belief? Will reconciling faith with science, history, and modern ethics help deter fundamentalist thinking?
Recent Comments