Apart from the most rabid fundamentalists among us, nearly everyone admits that the Bible might contain errors — a faulty creation story here, a historical mistake there, a contradiction or two in some other place. But is it possible that the problem is worse than that — that the Bible actually contains lies?
Most people wouldn’t put it that way, since the Bible is, after all, sacred Scripture for millions on our planet. But good Christian scholars of the Bible, including the top Protestant and Catholic scholars of America, will tell you that the Bible is full of lies, even if they refuse to use the term. And here is the truth: Many of the books of the New Testament were written by people who lied about their identity, claiming to be a famous apostle — Peter, Paul or James — knowing full well they were someone else. In modern parlance, that is a lie, and a book written by someone who lies about his identity is a forgery.
Most modern scholars of the Bible shy away from these terms, and for understandable reasons, some having to do with their clientele. Teaching in Christian seminaries, or to largely Christian undergraduate populations, who wants to denigrate the cherished texts of Scripture by calling them forgeries built on lies? And so scholars use a different term for this phenomenon and call such books “pseudepigrapha.”
It may be one of the greatest ironies of the Christian scriptures that some of them insist on truth, while telling a lie. For no author is truth more important than for the “Paul” of Ephesians. He refers to the gospel as “the word of truth” (1:13); he indicates that the “truth is in Jesus”; he tells his readers to “speak the truth” to their neighbors (4:24-25); and he instructs his readers to “fasten the belt of truth around your waist” (6:14). And yet he himself lied about who he was. He was not really Paul.
end quote (my bold)
The irony that the whole idea of truth and righteousness “Christian purity” and especially Christians need of “separation from evil” and all that kind of stuff.
Much of it might have been founded on a load of
solid-rock sloppy sinking mud more of less from the get-go
Loads of people burned at the stake,or put through all manner of punishment, upon being convicted of thing like “heresy” and suchlike
Think of the great irony in that, in that the Christian movement (so much of itself likely to be based on a load of bullshit heresy anyway)would then proceeded to go convict and condemn some other people to death, for their act’s of heresy
And then the Irony in that loads of exclusive brethren families (and all manner of other many schisms as well too) will have suffered because of it with some living-out their whole lives apart living in separation for reason of some “supposed purity-reasons” (upon their live’s having been based upon a pious bunch of Christian
heresy bullshit lies)
Most people within the Christian flock today will still remain ignorant of these problems
1 .Christains dont bother to need to know about these kind of full fact.
2 . In the very same way that exclusive brethren will then also feel like they dont bother to need to know the full fact about “their own roots” or “any suspect aspects of one James Taylot Jr wicked behavior at Aberdeen” either
In all instances it feel far “easier” to learn how live blissfully “by faith” (Sheep follow sheep)