The impossibility of Christianity

An example, and perhaps the essence, of the way in which the teachings of Jesus have been “doctored” by Christianity for its own ends is the last two verses of the Sermon on the Mount.

The Christian version reads:

28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

(Matthew 7, KJV)

The word “one” has been inserted by Christian sources. Without this insertion a correct translation would be;

28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
29 For he taught them as having authority, and not as the scribes.

Jesus did not teach as “one having authority,” but “them” (the people) as having authority. This one point alone destroys any claim that the church makes for acting in the name of Jesus. Jesus taught personal authority and responsibility, not blind obedience. This is in total contradiction to the teachings of Christianity.

The crux of the matter is that Christianity is not a religion, it is a legal system. It is a legal system inherited from the Pharisees via Paul. The premise of the Christian legal system is that the Christian church is the legal representative of God on earth, and that it cannot do any wrong because everything that it does is God’s will. This is why it has been possible for Christianity to be responsible for acts of genocide and brutal suppression and still claim to represent God. It is also why Christianity must never be allowed to get a foot hold back into our legal system.

The real problem for Christianity comes at the other end of Jesus' life. His “virgin” birth.

Jewish law at the time was extremely complicated, and it is uncertain just what the laws on marriage and legal status of Mary were at the time of the conception of Jesus, but it is possible to say that modern English words are not sufficient to explain her legal status.

In Jewish Law this was not the case at all. Two conditions were clearly distinguished: betrothal and marriage. Young people who had agreed with one another with a view to marriage were betrothed, but they would not be considered as truly married until the husband, according to the words of Deuteronomy, should have “taken her to himself.” The “taking possession,” the hakhnashah, was really the uniting of two beings for life; the word had both meanings. Thus, in Saint Matthew the angel says to Joseph, “Do not be afraid to take thy wife Mary to thyself” - that is: “Let her, who has been your betrothed, become your spouse.”

But although these two conditions were in theory quite separate, in fact they merged into one another. The fact is that the Law recognised rights and obligations during the betrothal that were almost the same as those of marriage.

(Daily Life in Palestine at the Time of Christ, Daniel-Rops, 1962)

It is likely that Mary was betrothed, but not legally married at the time of the conception of Jesus, and according to law still a virgin, even though Joseph and Mary were for all practical purposes husband and wife.

The really telling part of the whole thing about the virgin birth is that there was a major problem in it for the Christian church. If Mary had to be a virgin to be pure, then original sin could only have been transmitted by the male of the species. If Mary was pure until she lost her virginity, then all women are pure while they remain virgins.