SSMF #2 = On Copying and Correcting
1. Intro
~ click here for an introduction (and for links to previous SSMFs) ~
2. The Koran copied and corrected the Bible
A couple of years ago I started a side-by-side comparison of the Koran and the Bible (here's a link to that project). I found many similar-sounding stories in both books. The Koran contains stories about Adam and Eve and Noah and the Flood, and even stories about Jesus! But there were many tiny differences between the way the stories were told. And I noticed a sort of a pattern between the differences ...
2.1. For example, in the Koran's version of the Adam and Eve story, Allah goes out of his way to warn Adam and Eve about their enemy, Satan (Sura 20:117). But in the biblical version, no explicit warning about Satan is ever given. That's bad. It makes the biblical God look sort of stupid: He's punishing Adam and Eve for being tricked (but it's not really their fault -- cause they were tricked)! How can you punish someone for being tricked into doing wrong? How is that just or fair? Christians and Jews of all kinds will find ways to explain away this "apparent problem". But they wouldn't have to invent crazy-sounding stories if the text wasn't so ambiguous. The Koran corrects this problem by adding one tiny part to the story (it adds a warning about Satan).
2.2. Another example: in the Bible's version of Noah and and Flood, God kills every human being except for Noah's family. The entire world is flooded. Only Noah's family is spared. Again, this kind of makes the biblical God look sort of stupid (not to mention petty and cruel--why did everyone have to die?). The biblical story seems to imply that women and children were flooded by God. But why should they have died? What could children have done to deserve death? Again, Christians and Jews will tell you this "isn't a problem", and they'll try to convince you that either no children died, or that children deserved to die! But again, the Koran sidesteps the entire problem by correcting the original story. The Koran makes it clear that only disbelievers were killed in the Flood -- and a global flood isn't implied by the koranic text (Sura 7:61, 11:40).
2.3. Another example: in the Bible, Jesus is God's only son. But in the Koran, we're told that Allah does not have a consort to produce a son (Sura 6:101), that Allah is Self-sufficient (and therefore does not need a son) (Sura 10:68), and that it is an abomination to say "God has a son" (Sura 19:88). Muslims view Jesus-worship as a form of polytheism: worshiping many gods and not just the One True Allah. Thus, when the Koran speaks of Jesus, it corrects the polytheistic problems associated with the Trinity, and clearly states that Allah is One (and that Jesus was "only a messenger") (Sura 4:171, 5:75).
2.4. Again, for more examples of the Koran correcting the Bible, click here.
2.5. Summary
Hopefully I've drawn out the pattern a bit: if you want to make a religious story sound better (or more coherent), or if you just want to make a point more explicit (or remove some ambiguity), then you have to retell the old story and modify it slightly. This is how I think the Koran was written.
3. The Book of Mormon copied and corrected the Bible
This is also how I think the Book of Mormon was written. The BOM also contains similar-sounding stories to those found in the Bible. But there are tiny differences that seem to be part of this pattern I've been describing. Again, I'll give a couple representative examples:
3.1. In the Bible there are a couple of passages that almost sound like they're describing geocentrism (the idea that the Sun moves around the Earth) as opposed to what we've all been taught in school, heliocentrism (the idea that the Earth moves around the Sun). Such ambiguous-sounding passages include the story of God making the Sun move backwards 10 steps (Isaiah 38:8), and where God made the Sun stand still (Joshua 10:13). But the BOM corrects this problem by adding just a few key words here and there. Let's watch!
3.2. Helaman 12:13 = Yea, and if he [God] say unto the earth--Move--it is moved. 14Yea, if he say unto the earth--Thou shalt go back, that it lengthen out the day for many hours--it is done; 15And thus, according to his word the earth goeth back, and it appeareth unto man that the sun standeth still; yea, and behold, this is so; for surely it is the earth that moveth and not the sun.
<< Do you see what the BOM did right there? By adding just a few simple words, all ambiguity is removed and it is clear that heliocentrism is being preached.
3.3. Another example: there are few (if any) messianic prophecies in the Bible that actually sound like they're predicting the coming of Jesus Christ (here's a link to a typical type of messianic prophecy debate. Perhaps this should be it's own SSMF? Oh well, too late now!). Anywho, biblical prophecies are often vague and poetic. But the messianic prophecies in the BOM are exact and precise. They leave no doubt that Jesus Christ is being predicted. Compare this prophecy from the 1st book of Nephi to anything found in the Bible:1 Nephi 10:4-11 = Yea, even six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem, a prophet would the Lord God raise up among the Jews--even a Messiah, or, in other words, a Savior of the world. ... 7 And he spake also concerning a prophet who should come before the Messiah, to prepare the way of the Lord-- 8 Yea, even he should go forth and cry in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight; for there standeth one among you whom ye know not; and he is mightier than I, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. And much spake my father concerning this thing. 9 And my father said he should baptize in Bethabara [Bethany?], beyond Jordan; and he also said he should baptize with water; even that he should baptize the Messiah with water. 10 And after he had baptized the Messiah with water, he should behold and bear record that he had baptized the Lamb of God, who should take away the sins of the world. 11 And it came to pass after my father had spoken these words he spake unto my brethren concerning the gospel which should be preached among the Jews, and also concerning the dwindling of the Jews in unbelief. And after they had slain the Messiah, who should come, and after he had been slain he should rise from the dead, and should make himself manifest, by the Holy Ghost, unto the Gentiles.
3.3.1. A few things to note: an exact year is given: in 600 years Jesus will come.
3.3.2. The words "Messiah", "Savior of the world", and "Lamb of God" are used to describe the one who's coming.
3.3.3. The Messiah will be "baptized with water."
3.3.4. The Messiah will "take away the sins of the world."
3.3.5. The Messiah will "rise from the dead."
3.4. No messianic prophecy in the Bible contains any of those 5 things. Yet this one passage from the BOM contains them all!
3.5. Summary
Again, I hope I've clarified the pattern: if you want to make a religious story sound better (or if you want to remove all ambiguity from an existing story), then you need to retell it and include your changes. At this point I'm not going to talk about "who would do such a thing" (that's another SSMF entirely!). It's clear to me, however, that certain groups over the centuries have done such things. Even if you or I might call it blasphemy!
4. SSMF #2 = Matthew and Luke copied (and corrected) Mark
If you can see the pattern I've been talking about above, then it shouldn't be too hard to apply the same pattern to the 4 Gospels of the New Testament. Just as the Koran copied and corrected the Bible, it looks like the gospels of Matthew and Luke copied and corrected the gospel of Mark. This time, I'll list many more examples:
4.1. no beginning (in Mark)
4.1.1. The Gospel of Mark starts abruptly when Jesus is already about 30 years old, and is baptized by John the Baptist (Mark 1:9). Mark's gospel contains no manger scene, no wise men, and no virgin birth. The gospels of Matthew and Luke add some of these "extra" details.
4.1.2. In Matthew's version, an angel appears to Joseph 3 times (Matt 1:20, 2:13, 2:19), Magi visit the infant (Matt 2:1), and Jesus' family flees to Egypt to escape Herod's random orders to "kill all the boys in Bethlehem" (Matt 2:13).
4.1.3. In Luke's version, an angel appears to Mary (Luke 1:26), shepherds visit the infant (Luke 2:16), and Jesus' family goes to the temple in Jerusalem 8 days after he's born (Luke 2:21). Luke also adds a story about John the Baptist's father, Zacharaiah (Luke 1:11), and mother, Elizabeth (Luke 1:39), some random songs (Luke 1:46, 1:67), and a story about Jesus as a boy in the temple (Luke 2:41).
4.1.4. I think these stories about "wise men" and visitors coming to the infant's birth were added to make Jesus seem "larger than life." Similar stories (with similar celestial events) are told about the Buddha's birth and Mohammed's birth. No great teacher is born the way common people are born (by 2 parents fucking). No! Great teachers are born in great ways: with stars and angels and virgins and wise men. ;)
4.2. no ending (in Mark)
See SSMF #1 for more on the ending of Mark. (The original manuscripts of Mark do not contain post-resurrection accounts: there's no Doubting Thomas, no talking to the disciples after the crucifixion, and no Ascension into Heaven).
4.3. no genealogies (in Mark)
4.3.1. Mark's gospel does not contain a genealogy of Jesus.
4.3.2. Matthew's gospel, however, does include a genealogy, stating that Joseph is a descendant of King David's son Solomon (Matt 1:6).
4.3.3. Luke's gospel also contains a genealogy, stating that Joseph is a descendant of King David's son Nathan (Luke 3:31).
4.3.4. Perhaps the genealogies were added to the original story to "prove" that Jesus was the predicted Messiah (who was supposed to be a descendant of David).
4.4. no Sermon on the Mount (in Mark)
4.4.1. Mark's gospel does not contain any lengthy sermons from Jesus.
4.4.2. Matthew's gospel contains the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5).
4.4.3. And Luke's gospel contains the Sermon on the Plain -- which is very similar (Luke 6:17).
4.4.4. Perhaps these sermons were added later to make Jesus sound that much wiser.
4.5. no "Keys" given to Peter (in Mark)
4.5.1. Only in the gospel of Matthew does Jesus give the "keys of the kingdom of heaven" to Peter (Matt 16:19).
4.5.2. I think this part was added to give the Roman Catholic Church power (the Church claimed Peter was the first Pope -- because Jesus gave him the keys of heaven!).
4.6. no "suicide" for Judas (in Mark)
4.6.1. Only in the gospel of Matthew does Judas hang himself (Matt 27:1).
4.6.2. This is interesting because in another book in the New Testament, Judas dies by falling "headlong" and having his intestines fall out (Acts 1:18).
4.6.3. Either way, the death of Judas was a nice addition to the story. Nobody wants to see that guy get away with betraying Jesus!
4.7. no "triumphant" last words (in Mark)
4.7.1. When Jesus dies in the gospel of Mark, his last words are "why have you forsaken me" (Mark 15:34).
4.7.2. Jesus says the same depressing thing in Matthew (Matt 27:46). But in Luke a much nicer final phrase is put in Jesus' mouth: "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit" (Luke 23:46).
4.7.3. And in the gospel of John, the most triumphant phrase of all is used. Right before Jesus dies, John has him say: "It is done" (John 19:30).
4.7.4. The way Mark's gospel ends, it almost sounds like Jesus didn't want to die on the cross. Luke and John correct this by adding more triumphant last words.
4.8. no "spear" in Jesus' side (in Mark)
4.8.1. Only in the gospel of John do the Romans pierce Jesus' side with a spear to make sure he's dead (John 19:34).
4.8.2. Perhaps this part of the story was added to quell the argument that Jesus "wasn't really dead" when he was entombed...
4.9. no "guards" at the tomb (in Mark)
4.9.1. Only in the gospel of Matthew are Roman guards placed at Jesus' tomb (Matt 27:62).
4.9.2. Perhaps this part of the story was added to quell the argument that Jesus' disciples stole his body from his tomb...
4.10. no "zombies" or "earthquakes" when Jesus dies (in Mark)
4.10.1. Only in the gospel of Matthew do we hear about earthquakes and zombies rising from their graves when Jesus dies (Matt 27:52).
4.10.2. I just think this was added for dramatic effect. I mean, come on. Zombies? That's awesome. :)
4.11. no "exceptions" for divorce (in Mark)
4.11.1. In the gospel of Mark, Jesus says "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her" (Mark 10:11).
4.11.2. But in the gospels of Matthew and Luke, an exception clause is inserted into Jesus' teaching so that divorce is ok some of the time (Matt 5:32, 19:9, Luke 16:18).
4.11.3. Perhaps Matthew and Luke saw a need for divorce that Mark didn't foresee.
4.12. no "signs" will be given (in Mark)
4.12.1. In the gospel of Mark, when Jesus is asked for a "sign from heaven," he tells the Pharisees that "no sign will be given" (Mark 8:12).
4.12.2. But in the gospels of Matthew and Luke, an exception clause is inserted into Jesus' teaching so that one sign will be given (the sign of Jonah)! (Matt 12:39, 16:4, Luke 11:29).
4.12.3. This is a very good correction as Jesus just sounds like an asshole in Mark 8:12.
4.13. Summary
I view the gospels of the New Testament the same way I view the Koran and the Book of Mormon. They all appear to've been written to correct and improve upon previously existing stories. As for where those stories originally came from -- that's another SSMF entirely. ;)
5. main point(s)
5.1. If the gospels of the New Testament were created in the same way as the Koran and the Book of Mormon, then they might not be any more authoritative (or truthful) than the Koran and the Book of Mormon.
5.2. If the gospels of Matthew and Luke copied the gospel of Mark, then there might not be 4 "eye-witness" accounts of the resurrection (as christian apologists would have us believe).
5.3. And if Matthew and Luke copied Mark, and if Mark didn't contain any post-resurrection accounts (see SSMF#1), ... then what? More on that later. :)
cheers,
MITCHELL