“Hopelessly corrupted”

 

“Right up until the 18th century, someone claimed to possess the original Gospel of Mark. It was said to be in Venice as well as in Prague, and that both originals were in Latin, something no evangelist had ever used. In reality, no original ever existed, neither a New Testament text nor any biblical book at all was preserved in its original text form. Nor do first copies exist. There are only copies of copies of copies. Today’s text of the New Testament is a mixed text, pasted together from various writings that had been passed down. The text of the “book of books,” today disseminated in more than 1100 languages and dialects, is thus hopelessly corrupted.” Karl Heinz Deschner: Abermals krähte der Hahn

 

Jerome changed the
scriptures in 3500 places

 

With foreboding foresight, Jerome wrote the pope:

“Is there a man ..., who will not, when he takes the volume [Bible] in hand..., break out immediately into violent language, and call me a forger and a profane person for having the audacity to add anything to the ancient books, or to make any changes or corrections therein?”

 

One must admit that Jerome did not have an easy task. He would have preferred to go back completely to the original texts in Greek and correct all the mistakes introduced by “inaccurate translators.”vii And so he writes: “why not go back to the original Greek and correct the mistakes introduced by inaccurate translators, and the blundering alterations of confident but ignorant critics, and further, all that has been inserted or changed by copyists more asleep than awake?” But Jerome didn’t dare so much, because the Romans had already become accustomed to certain texts by repeated readings. And so, he wrote that he used his “pen with some restraint.” He is said to have changed the scripture in a mere 3500 places.

 

Besides, the Hebrew and Greek original texts could hardly be relied on, because too much had been changed in them during the nearly 300 years since they had been written. Considering this and the following facts, it is not only an effrontery to present the whole Bible to the faithful as the “true word of God” (Catholic Catechism) – it also leads them astray.

 

While for Jerome it was hard to “glean the truth” in the scriptures that diverged from each other, the Catholic and Protestant institutions view this very differently.

 

Main point of dissension:

The Nazarene’s love for animals

 

Apparently, the vegetarianism of the Early Christians was a great problem for those in power at that time. In no case was it to be included in the Bible. The author Carsten Strehlow writes: “The Church Father Jerome was even driven from Rome because of his clear statements concerning vegetarianism and abstinence from alcohol.”10 He really would have had to fear for his life if he had truthfully included Jesus’ love for the animals in his new translation of the Bible into Latin. Already under Emperor Constantine I, liquefied lead was poured down the throats of vegetarian and pacifist Christians. There were great fights between the parties, because “most Church Fathers strongly advocated vegetarianism, veganism and abstinence from alcohol.”x But the Roman authorities and the Roman Church that was emerging with their help won out. The following citation may shed some light on the pitch-black power that from then on took possession of the teachings of Jesus. The new Catholics, for example – before they were forcefully taken into the just developing Catholic Church – were forced to speak out a curse against the followers of Jesus, or, rather against His teachings and thus, in the final analysis, against Jesus Christ, Himself.

 

“…I anathematize the Nazarenes, the stubborn ones, who deny that the law of sacrifice was given by Moses, and who abstain from eating living things, and who never offer sacrifice...”

 

Vegetarian priests

were let go

 

In the year 314 at a church synod in Ankara the following decree was even issued:
“It is decreed that among the clergy, presbyters and deacons who abstain from flesh shall taste of it, and afterwards, if they shall so please, may abstain. But if they disdain it, and will not even eat herbs served with flesh, but disobey the canon, let them be removed from their order.”

 

Contents       Description