God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of The Bible (42 page)

Whilst Mark’s narrative doesn’t single out anyone in particular:

However, Judas Iscariot knew that Jesus was implicating him as the would-be traitor and in a declaration of his innocence he rose to his feet and pleaded:

Oddly, the narrative doesn’t include any further dialogue demonstrating allegation and denial between Judas and Jesus, as the passage continues to show that all thirteen men continued to enjoy the food and wine. Jesus rose to his feet once again though and gave a toast to his disciples offering his gratitude for their support and service, before breaking a loaf of bread with a strange cannibalistic metaphor:

It is from this incredibly odd passage that us rationalists often bear witness to seemingly intelligent friends who function as rational human beings Monday through Saturday, but come Sunday these same friends will step towards an altar and passionately believe they are eating the of Christ in the form of a cracker, whilst washing it down with a cup of wine they believe is his blood. Ignoring the grotesque nature of this ritual, this is outrageous, and we should no longer reserve our ridicule. I am sure, though, that many perform this ritual out of tradition and observation without thinking how daft it truly is, but I believe you can change that with a solid slap to the side of their head. Try it!

As the wine flowed, Jesus became increasingly accusatory, as many drunks do, and this time he turned towards Peter, with a recitation of the prophecy of Zechariah 13:7:

Jesus, using this Old Testament prophecy to predict, that as a result of tough times ahead, his weakest followers will disperse into the night so as to save themselves. Naturally, Peter firmly denied this could ever be true and replied:

Jesus kept on the attack however and countered Peter’s defence testimony:

This is a glaring contradiction to Mark’s account:

Naturally, the dinner ended on a very sombre note and Jesus led his disciples later that same night to a town called Gethsemane. Once there he displayed his concern that the end was near for him:

However, his disciples were tired and were unable to stay awake in order to stay on guard against the enemies that Jesus believed were assembling against him. And as dawn approached, his disciples remained asleep, only to be awoken by Jesus’ sudden declaration:

As Jesus continued speaking, the doors flung open and a large number of armed Roman soldiers and mercenaries, sent from the chief priests, stormed the house where Jesus and eleven of his disciples had taken refuge for the evening. The armed assailants were led, as predicted, by Judas Iscariot. Judas had pre-arranged a signal with the would-be captors and foretold them:

Judas stepped towards where Jesus was seated and pronounced, “Greetings, Rabbi!” before kissing his teacher on the cheek. The infamous Judas kiss. But this is only according to Matthew. With far less dramatic effect John, however, makes no mention of a kiss, as he writes that Judas led the arresting officials to the house and only stood amongst them.

It is very unclear why the Gospels needed to include the story of a betrayal, other than so that a few more prophecies could be fulfilled. The Pharisees, Jewish elders and Romans did not need such a betrayal because Jesus could have been arrested any number of times and his identity, according to the Gospels themselves, was hardly a secret amongst the religious authorities of the time. The whole episode is pure fiction and, as expected, it is riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies.

The armed men stepped forward and placed Jesus in handcuffs. As this was taking place, several of his disciples lunged at the captors with their swords in order to protect Jesus till the death. Jesus put a stop to his servant’s intended retaliation:

John writes that Jesus shouted at Peter, who was the only one of the disciples to wield a sword:

Jesus then turned to his armed assailants, in an effort to convince them that he had no intention of resisting arrest and that, in fact, he was indeed pleased that things were all going to God’s plan, which makes no sense of the claim that Jesus chose to hide from the arresting authorities:

According to Matthew, Judas, now riddled with guilt and remorse for fingering Jesus, decided to return the thirty silver coins paid to him by the Priests for his part in Jesus’ arrest. Matthew then once again makes a major historical blunder and writes that this event fulfilled the prophecy of Jeremiah:

Only one
big
problem, silver coins as currency had gone out of circulation at least three hundred years before the time of Jesus. In fact, minted coins bearing the insignia of the Roman Emperor of the time were used and weighted currency such as silver were used at the time of Jeremiah, but Matthew’s lack of investigative journalist skills demonstrates the fiction of this story yet again.

The final act of Judas has him throwing a piece of rope over a tree and hanging himself. We will return to the death of Judas in the Book of Acts, as this story is one of the largest blunders of the New Testament.

Jesus was then taken away to be placed in front of Calaphas, the high priest and his disciples deserted and fled. Although Peter followed safely from a distance to stand amongst the crowd awaiting the official charges to be laid against Jesus. The hearing was nothing more than a legalized dog and pony show, as the priests and high priest were looking for any false testimony they could pin on Jesus so they could sentence him to death. One of two false testimonies was quickly thrown out for lack of ‘credible’ evidence and the fact that Jesus refused to answer their questions. The high priest, growing frustrated, rose to his feet and demanded Jesus answer the following question:

Jesus did not hesitate to answer the question:

The high priest, seizing the opportunity, declared at the top of his voice:

The assembled gallery of onlookers then proceeded to spit in the face of Jesus, whilst others kicked and punched him. The lesson here is, do not represent yourself in court, better to hire a good lawyer in an expensive suit.

As this was all taking place Peter fled the scene of the court and found refuge outside under a nearby tree. A passer-by recognized him as one of Jesus’ disciples and said to him. “You also were with Jesus of Galilee.” But Peter denied that he had ever known such a man, before quickly setting off to the other side of the city. But once there, another person approached him and said, “You were with Jesus of Nazareth weren’t you?” Peter again denied knowing him, or having had any relationship with him. Again he promptly walked away to avoid detection. Sure enough he is recognized for a third time and this time in frustration and desperation he yells, “I don’t know the man!” But just as the last word was leaving his mouth, a rooster crowed loudly a few yards away and Peter remembered what Jesus had said to him at the Last Supper:

Peter dropped to the ground and began to sob uncontrollably for he, as Jesus forecasted, denounced his teacher. Interestingly, this means John’s prediction didn’t come true, as the cock had crowed before he had completed his third denial and Mark’s account proven false also as the cock crowed only once.

Jesus was then brought before the Roman Governor of Jerusalem, Pontius Pilate. Pilate asked the members of the Jewish high court what charges they had laid against the man standing before him, Jesus. The Jews claimed that Jesus was indeed a criminal otherwise they would not have bothered the Governor with such a matter. But upon hearing the case against Jesus, Pilate continued to believe this was purely a case to be tried in the Jewish religious courts. The Jewish elders protested claiming that, as Roman Citizens, they did not have the authority to execute those convicted within their courts. Pilate then summoned Jesus and asked him if he was the king of the Jews, because any Jew that claimed kingship status within the Roman Empire could be tried for treason. Jesus replied:

Pilate, somewhat confused by this answer, then asked seeking clarification, “So you are a king then, right?” To which Jesus replied:

According to the remainder of John’s version of events, Pilate stated that he found no basis for a charge against Jesus, but ordered Jesus to be flogged and a twisted crown of thorns placed around his head, this being adequate punishment. This version of events contrasts, however, to Luke who writes that Jesus was not only brought before Pilate but also Herod. The same former Roman Governor Herod who wanted baby Jesus dead, forcing him and his parents to flee to Egypt. This is problematic for Luke because Matthew wrote that Herod had long passed away, enabling Jesus to return to Nazareth from Egypt.

Pilate then brought Jesus and a murderer named Barabbas before the Jews, as the Bible claim’s that it was customary for the Roman Governor to offer clemency to a Jewish prisoner as part of the annual feast of celebrations. This is again a matter of total fabrication, as the only authority given by Rome to a Roman governor in situations like this was postponement of execution until after the religious festival. Release was always out of the question. The motive of the Gospels to include such a passage is to remove the responsibility of Jesus’ death from Pilate or the Romans in general and thus place responsibility on the Jews.

As a matter of fact, the four Gospels go to extraordinary lengths to absolve the Romans of Jesus’ crucifixion in order to blame it on the Jews. The reasoning behind this was two-fold. Firstly, the church of Christianity was going to have to exist under Roman rule, which is the reason why the New Testament contains nothing critical of the Romans, even though they were truly despised by the Jews for their prejudiced taxation laws.