It is easy to dismiss religion’s most damaging ideas as the work of extremists, a small group of fanatics whose beliefs don’t reflect the whole. But some of the most destructive doctrines aren’t hiding on the margins. On the contrary, normalized, they sit quietly at the very center of mainstream faith.

Chief among them is Original Sin.

For centuries this one idea has told people they enter the world corrupt and condemned from their first breath. It planted inherited guilt in millions of minds and taught them their basic nature is broken. When a baby died before a priest could baptize it, the church told the parents their child was lost and often wouldn’t bury it in consecrated ground. Imagine what that did to those parents, “knowing” their children were doomed forever.

What makes all that emotional wreckage so infuriating is that the story never started out this way.

The people who first wrote and heard Genesis 2-3 were asking plain, ancient questions about hard work, pain, and death, and nobody among them read the garden as the place humanity picked up a cosmic guilty verdict. So how did a story about human limits turn into centuries of spiritual dread?

To see how a basic origin tale turned into a burden carried by ordinary believers, you have to start with how its first readers understood it, and then find the point where a bishop in North Africa misread one line of Paul.

Before We Begin

I know the word “invention” in the title might come across as provocative and upset some Christian readers. Nonetheless, I chose it on purpose. Scripture leaves plenty of room for interpretation, and people have read the Eden story in good faith in many different ways; I understand that.

However, when you bring in an idea the text never states and read it back into the text so it says what you need, you’ve gone beyond the borders of interpretation. If you disagree, let me know in the comments. I’m curious to hear your case.

How Early Readers Understood the Garden Story

The people who wrote and first heard Genesis 2-3 took it as an origin story, the kind every ancient culture told. Why do snakes crawl? Why does childbirth hurt? Why does farming break your back? Why do we die? The story answers each question with a curse handed out at the end of chapter 3 and stops there. God throws the couple out of the garden to keep them away from the tree of life (Genesis 3:22), which tells you what the writer thought had been lost. Humans were cut off from living forever and sent out to sweat for their bread until they went back to dust, and nobody’s soul picked up a stain on the way out.

Then the story goes quiet. Adam turns up in a genealogy in 1 Chronicles, and there’s a line or two in Job and Hosea that may or may not mean him, but the prophets, the psalms and the law never once trace human wickedness back to that fruit. When Israel’s writers explain why people do wrong, they point at the people doing it.

They also ruled out inherited guilt in so many words. “Parents shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their parents” (Deuteronomy 24:16). Ezekiel spends an entire chapter on the subject and lands here: “A child shall not suffer for the iniquity of a parent, nor a parent suffer for the iniquity of a child” (Ezekiel 18:20). Jeremiah throws out the old proverb about fathers eating sour grapes and their children’s teeth going numb (Jeremiah 31:29-30). A doctrine that makes every newborn guilty of a forefather’s crime runs straight into the prophets of the book it claims to come from.

Sin Shows Up One Chapter Late

The first time the Hebrew word for sin appears in the Bible, it’s aimed at Cain in Genesis 4:7, just before he kills his brother. God warns him that sin is crouching at the door and wants him, “but you must master it.”

One generation after the supposed fall, God tells Adam’s son he can beat sin on his own. Cain fails, and he’s punished for his own murder with nothing said about his father’s fruit.

Later Jewish teachers built on that. Genesis says twice that the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth (6:5 and 8:21), and the rabbis turned that inclination into a fixture of human nature: everyone’s born with a pull toward wrong and a pull toward good, and God gave the law as the counterweight. They weren’t even sure the bad pull was all bad. One rabbinic commentary on Genesis says that without it nobody would build a house, marry or have children. A drive you’re born with and expected to steer is a very different thing from a guilty verdict handed down before you’re born, and Judaism kept the first and never took up the second.

Everyone Blamed Somebody Before They Blamed Adam

In the centuries just before Jesus, Jewish writers started asking a bigger question: where did evil come from in the first place? Adam wasn’t their first answer.

The Book of Enoch, a Jewish apocalyptic text from around the third century BCE, blamed angels. Its retelling of Genesis 6 has heavenly beings called the Watchers come down, sleep with human women and teach people metalwork, weapons, sorcery and makeup. One angel gets the whole bill: “the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin” (1 Enoch 10:8). Ben Sira, a Jerusalem scribe writing around 180 BCE, blamed Eve: “From a woman sin had its beginning, and because of her we all die” (Sirach 25:24). The Wisdom of Solomon, written by a Jew in Alexandria, blamed the devil’s envy for bringing death into the world (2:24).

Look at what those writers were worried about. When Adam and Eve come up at all, the subject is death, the moment mortality came in, and even that was one theory among several.

The closest any Jewish text comes to original sin was written after Rome burned the Temple in 70 CE. A writer grieving that catastrophe, in the book we call 4 Ezra, cries out: “O Adam, what have you done? For though it was you who sinned, the fall was not yours alone, but ours also who are your descendants” (7:118). Around the same time another apocalypse, 2 Baruch, answers him almost point for point. Adam is responsible for his own soul, it says, and “each of us has been the Adam of his own soul” (54:19). That second answer is the one Judaism kept.

Paul Needed Everyone in the Same Hole

Paul’s argument in Romans is that Jesus’ death and resurrection rescue Jew and Gentile alike, which means both groups need rescuing from the same thing. He locates that shared problem in Adam: “Sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned” (Romans 5:12). Elsewhere he writes, “as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ” (1 Corinthians 15:22).

Paul reasons from the cure back to the disease, which makes his Adam largely a counterpart to Christ: one man brought death and one man brings life. The final clause of Romans 5:12 gives each person’s own sin as the reason death reached everyone (“because all have sinned”). Paul ties humanity to Adam through death and through sin as a power at large in the world, and he leaves each person’s guilt with that person.

The Greek-speaking church read him this way for centuries. Irenaeus, the second-century bishop of Lyon, described Adam and Eve as children who stumbled and humanity as a race still growing up. The Eastern Orthodox churches still teach that people inherit Adam’s mortality and a damaged nature, and they’ve never accepted that people inherit his guilt.

Two Words of Bad Latin in North Africa

The Greek phrase at the end of Romans 5:12 is eph’ hō, and it means “because” or “inasmuch as.” The Latin Bible read in Hippo, a port town in what’s now Algeria, rendered it in quo, which can mean “in whom.”

Augustine became bishop of Hippo in the 390s, and he admitted in his Confessions that he’d hated Greek as a schoolboy. He worked from the Latin. “In whom all sinned” meant in Adam: every human who’d ever live was present in Adam when he ate, so every human sinned with him and carries his guilt from conception. Around 396 Augustine gave the idea the name it still has, peccatum originale, original sin.

A century and a half earlier, Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, argued that babies should be baptized promptly because they carry “the contagion of the ancient death,” though he added that what’s forgiven in them are the sins of another and not their own. Augustine took that contagion and turned it into a verdict. Modern Bibles have quietly walked his reading back. The NRSV has “because all have sinned,” and the translation approved by the US Catholic bishops has “inasmuch as all sinned.”

Sex, Dead Babies and the Manichaean Hangover

If guilt passes down from Adam, it needs a delivery route, and Augustine found it in sex. Since the fall, he argued, the body won’t obey the will, and the clearest proof is sexual arousal, which shows up uninvited and won’t show up on command. Every child is conceived through that disordered lust, and the guilt rides along.

It helps to know who was making the argument. Before his conversion Augustine spent about nine years as a follower of Mani, a Persian prophet who taught that the material world, and the body above all, belonged to the forces of darkness. He also spent his twenties with a concubine who bore him a son, and he’s the man who prayed “give me chastity and continence, but not yet.” His opponents noticed. Julian of Eclanum, an Italian bishop who fought him in print for over a decade, accused him of never having left Mani behind.

If guilt starts at conception, a baby who dies before baptism dies guilty, and Augustine accepted that. The best comfort he could offer grieving parents was that their children would get “the mildest punishment of all” (Enchiridion 93). The church spent the next fifteen centuries trying to soften that, inventing limbo along the way, until its International Theological Commission published a document in 2007 saying there are grounds to hope unbaptized infants are saved.

Hunting for Words in a Text Its Copyists Kept Editing

Augustine hung his entire doctrine on a preposition, and that’s the trap of word-hunting in the Bible. It’s risky even in the original languages, Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and it’s worse in a Latin translation. People like to pretend God dictated scripture letter by letter. In reality, the scribes paid to copy these books worked as editors. They rephrased awkward lines for clarity as they copied, wrote notes in the margins, and sometimes a later copyist merged an earlier scribe’s note into the text itself. The copyists cared about carrying the sense of a passage across, and they treated the exact wording as theirs to adjust. Augustine handled two words in a translation of a copy as if God had chosen them, and he built a verdict on every human being ever born out of them.

So the trail runs from an origin story about why we die, through a Jewish tradition that put each person in charge of their own wrongdoing and a Jewish apostle who needed a universal problem for his universal answer, to a North African bishop with weak Greek and a troubled relationship with his own body who read a preposition as a person. Every Western Christian baptized as an infant for the remission of original sin is living inside that reading.

Leave a comment

Share

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

How the Invention of Original Sin Resulted in the Invention of Mary’s Immaculate Conception

Augustine’s theory contained a gap from the start. If guilt travels with conception, and Jesus was born of Mary, the question is how Jesus came to be born clean. The virgin birth covered …

Read more

People look for Christianity’s best-hidden secrets locked away in the Vatican archives or buried in ancient desert caves, yet they’re perfectly visible to anyone paying attention. Many assume biblical criticism is a modern atheist conspiracy, when for over a century the rigorous historical methods used to take the Bible apart have come from inside the church. The pastors know this, and the Vatican keeps pouring money into studies whose findings contradict its own tradition.

If you want a scholarly look at the ancient Near East, and Mesopotamia in particular, where many of the Bible’s stories have older relatives, check out The Academic Archaeologist.

What Seminary Teaches and the Pulpit Leaves Out

When I talk about the anonymity of the Bible, save for the seven uncontested letters of Paul, many jump to the conclusion that doubts about who wrote it come from atheists and bitter ex-believers sniping from the outside, when most of them came from inside the church’s own schools.

The historical-critical method was built largely by Protestant scholars in German universities during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, many of them devout, and it’s been standard coursework at mainline Protestant seminaries in the US since the early twentieth century. Students at Princeton Theological Seminary, Yale Divinity School, Duke Divinity School, and dozens of denominational schools read the same introductions to the Old and New Testaments that secular religious studies majors read at state universities. Often it’s the same textbook.

So the gap between what the pastor knows and what the congregation hears has nothing to do with access. The pastor has the information. In fact, he paid tuition for it, wrote term papers on it, and in a lot of cases, still keeps the books on the shelf behind the desk where he writes his sermons every week.

What happens between seminary and Sunday is a choice about what to share, made over and over by people who know exactly what they’re leaving out.

The Footnote Is Already in Pew Bibles

If you pick the NIV or the ESV, the two most popular translations in American evangelical churches, and turn to the end of Mark, you’ll find a note telling that the earliest manuscripts don’t include verses 9-20. Those twelve verses contain Mark’s resurrection appearances, Mark’s version of the Great Commission, and the line about believers picking up snakes and drinking poison without harm, which a handful of Appalachian churches still take literally. Flip to John 7:53-8:11 and the story of the woman caught in adultery (”let him who is without sin cast the first stone”) comes bracketed with a similar warning.

Evangelical publishers, working with evangelical translators, put textual criticism on the printed page. Millions of copies sit in pew racks every Sunday announcing that two of the best-known passages in the New Testament were added by later scribes. And a pastor can still preach on the adulterous woman for twenty-five minutes without once mentioning that the story wasn’t in John’s gospel when John’s gospel was written. Nobody calls him on it, because the congregation trusts him to tell them what matters, and he’s decided this doesn’t.

The Paycheck Comes From the Pews

The most honest explanation is also the least flattering. In most American Protestant churches, the congregation pays the pastor. Elders or a church board do the hiring and firing, and in congregational systems like most Baptist churches, the members can vote a pastor out. A minister who stands up and explains that 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus were written in Paul’s name by someone in a later generation is handing every unhappy member a reason to call a meeting.

The stakes run past one job. A pastor in his forties with a mortgage, kids, and a degree in a field with exactly one kind of employer has very little to fall back on. A Master of Divinity doesn’t open many doors outside the church. Plenty of pastors live in church-owned parsonages or depend on housing allowances tied to the position, so losing the pulpit can mean losing the house too. Few pastors will say it this bluntly, but the math explains a lot of silence.

Shielding the Flock From Information

The public explanation sounds much nicer. Pastors talk about meeting people where they are, about not wanting to wreck anyone’s faith, about the difference between the classroom and the parish. The phrase that keeps coming up is that the congregation “isn’t ready.”

In other words, someone with a graduate degree has looked out at a room full of engineers, nurses, accountants, teachers, and small business owners, people who send off their spit for DNA ancestry tests and watch documentaries about Pompeii, and decided they can’t cope with hearing that Genesis has two creation accounts. These same people manage retirement accounts, sit on juries, and raise teenagers. They can handle the idea that a book was edited.

The protective instinct also runs in one direction only. Pastors worry about unsettling believers with accurate information about the Bible, and they rarely worry about what happens when those believers find it on their own. And they do find it. A college freshman takes an intro to religion course to fill a requirement, or a forty-year-old picks up a popular history book on vacation, and learns in a single afternoon what the pastor knew the whole time. The question that follows is almost always some version of “why didn’t anyone tell me?” That’s the moment faith tends to crack, and what cracks it is usually the discovery that someone knew and kept quiet.

The Pastors Who Know Too Much

Some ministers can’t keep the two worlds apart. A philosopher and a clinical social worker spent several years interviewing active clergy who’d stopped believing what they preached, first in a small 2010 study and later in a book-length collection of interviews. A recurring thread in those conversations was seminary itself. Several of the pastors traced their unraveling back to their Bible courses, and they described a working life built on careful wording: sermons phrased so that listeners could hear literal history while the pastor privately meant something closer to metaphor.

A support network called The Clergy Project launched in 2011 to give current and former religious professionals who no longer believe a confidential place to talk, and it’s kept growing since. The fact that such a group needs to exist, and needs to promise its members anonymity, says plenty about how safe it feels to be honest from the pulpit.

Not every pastor who learns criticism loses faith, of course. Many mainline clergy hold a less literal faith and find that the scholarship makes the Bible more interesting to them. That makes the silence even harder to defend. If learning how the Bible was put together didn’t destroy your faith, why assume it’ll destroy your congregation’s?

The Catholic Church Settled This Decades Ago

Catholics might assume this is a Protestant hang-up. Rome formally opened the door to historical-critical study in 1943, when Pius XII issued the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu, and in 1993 the Pontifical Biblical Commission (the Vatican’s own panel of Bible scholars) published The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church, which calls the method indispensable and warns against fundamentalist reading in unusually blunt terms. The introductions and footnotes in the New American Bible, the translation read at Mass in US parishes, openly discuss multiple sources behind the first five books and a second-century BCE date for Daniel.

Then you go to Sunday Mass and hear the lector announce “a reading from the Second Letter of Saint Peter,” a letter that the church’s own scholars widely regard as written long after Peter died. The official teaching is more than eighty years old, and the homily still hasn’t caught up with it.

Can a Faith Kept Alive by Silence Still Call Itself Christian?

That leaves the question underneath all of this. If what keeps someone a Christian is a set of claims their own pastor knows are false, can that person be considered a Christian in the first place, or are they just a loyal member of one man’s congregation?

Christianity stakes its case on things it says happened in history. Paul, writing in one of the seven letters nobody disputes, puts it bluntly: if Christ hasn’t been raised, your faith is futile (1 Corinthians 15:17). The gospel of John has Jesus promise that the truth will set you free (John 8:32), a few verses after a story about an adulterous woman that scribes slipped into that same gospel generations later. The religion’s own founding texts put truth ahead of comfort, and a pastor who decides his congregation can’t handle the truth about those texts has quietly ruled against them.

The scholarship itself doesn’t settle whether God exists or whether Jesus rose. Plenty of the scholars who built it were believers, and plenty of mainline clergy stay Christian after learning it. What it does settle is a long list of smaller claims: who wrote the Torah, when Daniel was composed, which letters Paul wrote, and which verses scribes added. When a congregation’s faith depends on those claims, it’s leaning on a version of Christianity the pastor himself gave up somewhere around his second year of seminary.

That puts the person in the pew in an odd spot. They’re devoted to a story the person in the pulpit no longer holds, and the thing they’ve placed their trust in is a man who decided which parts of the truth they were allowed to have. It’s a shaky foundation for a religion whose founder, according to that same gospel of John, called himself the truth (John 14:6).

Leave a comment

Share

Paid subscribers get a passage-by-passage guide to the spots in your own Bible where the seams show, plus three questions to ask your pastor this Sunday

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Pew-Bench Audit: 5 Passages to Check in Your Own Bible Today

Grab whatever Bible is on your shelf or in the rack in front of you on Sunday. The NIV, ESV, and NASB all work. You don’t need Greek, Hebrew, or a seminary degree, just a pen and about twenty minutes.

Passages 1 and 2: What the Footnotes Leave Out

You’ve already seen …

Read more

What happens to a story when the Church declares it a forgery? Usually it disappears, but sometimes it hides in plain sight, painted on chapel walls, celebrated on church calendars, and eventually preserved inside the Quran.

Long before the 27-book New Testament was officially finalized, the Christian world was a Wild West of unofficial gospels featuring vigilante toddler-saints, teenage virgins fed by angels in the Temple, and palm trees that bent down to feed pregnant mothers. Orthodox bishops eventually purged these tales from the Bible, but they couldn’t purge them from the cultural memory of the Near East.

Today Christians look at Islam and see a completely different religion with enough similarities to make them think Muhammad must have stolen from theirs. In reality, Islam is built on Christianity, though, just a version Paul never had a hand in.

When the Quran emerged in seventh-century Arabia, it responded to the living, oral folklore of local Christians in the Near East, much closer to home than the finalized 27 books of the West. And in doing so, it left both Christian and Muslim apologists with an awkward historical problem.

Twelve Clay Sparrows of a Dangerous Five-Year-Old

Let’s start with a story from The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, which we covered in an earlier piece.

Around the second century, somebody wrote down this collection of tales about Jesus as a boy. In its opening scene, five-year-old Jesus is playing by a stream on the Sabbath and molds twelve sparrows out of mud. A neighbor runs to Joseph to report the Sabbath violation. Jesus claps his hands, tells the birds to go, and they fly off chirping.

The Quran tells this story twice, in chapters 3 and 5. Jesus says he’ll make “the shape of a bird” out of clay and breathe into it, and it’ll become a bird by God’s permission. The miracle sits in a list next to healing the blind and raising the dead, with no setup and no explanation, which tells you the audience already knew it. Nobody drops a one-line reference to a story their listeners have never heard.

The Quran understandably leaves out the rest of the book, where young Jesus withers a boy who splashes his pools, kills another kid who bumps into his shoulder in the street, blinds the neighbors who complain about it, and strikes down a teacher who smacks him during an alphabet lesson.

Christian leaders were less selective and threw the whole book out. By the 180s a bishop in what’s now France was already quoting one of its stories as an example of heretic forgery, and a sixth-century church list of banned books, known as the Gelasian Decree, put a “book about the infancy of the Savior” on the reject pile.

The Girl Raised in the Temple and Fed by Angels

The New Testament says almost nothing about Mary before the angel shows up. Christians in the second century found that unsatisfying, so somebody filled in the gap with a text now called the Protoevangelium of James. In it, Mary’s mother is childless for years, then vows her baby to God. At age three, Mary goes to live in the Jerusalem Temple, where an angel brings her food. When she turns twelve, the priests panic that a girl hitting puberty will make the sanctuary unclean, so they summon the widowers of Israel, have each bring a rod, and wait for a sign. A dove flies out of Joseph’s rod, and he gets the job of taking her in.

Chapter 3 of the Quran tells the same story. Mary’s mother vows the child in her womb to God’s service. Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, is put in charge of her, and every time he walks into her sanctuary he finds food already there. When he asks where it came from, Mary tells him it’s from God. A few verses later the Quran reminds its audience that the Prophet wasn’t present “when they cast their pens” to decide who’d take charge of Mary. That’s the rods scene, remembered as drawing lots, and Zechariah is the priest who runs the selection in the Protoevangelium too.

The Western church never let this book anywhere near the Bible, and the same Gelasian Decree that banned the infancy stories also condemned a gospel circulating under James’ name. Yet the Catholic calendar still celebrates Mary’s Presentation in the Temple every November 21 and honors her parents, Joachim and Anne, every July 26. Those feasts, and the names of those parents, come straight from the book Rome rejected. The Quran and the Catholic Church both kept the story while only one of them admits where it came from.

A Palm Tree, a Stream, and a Detour

Chapter 19 of the Quran has the most vivid birth scene in either scripture. Mary goes off alone, and labor pains drive her to the trunk of a palm tree, where she wishes she’d died and been forgotten. A voice from below tells her not to grieve, since God has put a stream at her feet, and if she shakes the trunk, fresh ripe dates will fall on her.

Christian readers who know only Luke’s manger have no idea what to do with this. Christian readers of the seventh century would have recognized it right away. A Latin text known as the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, put together around the early 600s from older material, tells how the Holy Family rested under a palm during the flight to Egypt. Mary wants fruit, Joseph worries about water, and the infant Jesus orders the palm to bend down so his mother can pick dates, then tells it to open a spring from its roots. Same tree, same fruit, same water, just moved to a different week of Jesus’ life. An infant who gives orders to trees isn’t far from one who speaks from his cradle, which is what Jesus does a few verses later in the same Quran chapter to defend his mother.

On the road between Jerusalem and Bethlehem stood a Byzantine church called the Kathisma, Greek for “the seat,” built around a rock where a pregnant Mary was said to have stopped to rest. Local Christian tradition there had already tied the palm-tree rest stop to a pregnant Mary on her way to give birth, and the Quran’s scene matches that local version far better than it matches anything in Luke or Matthew.

The Crucifixion That Only Looked Like One

Chapter 4 of the Quran says the Jews claimed to have killed Jesus, “but they didn’t kill him and didn’t crucify him, it was only made to appear so to them.” Christians treat this as the most un-Christian line in the book, even though Christians in the second century said it first.

A teacher in Alexandria named Basilides, teaching in the 120s and 130s, taught that Simon of Cyrene, the man the Gospels say was forced to carry Jesus’ cross, was changed to look like Jesus and crucified in his place while Jesus stood nearby laughing at the executioners. We know this because a bishop wrote it up as heresy around 180. A text called the Second Treatise of the Great Seth, found among the Egyptian manuscripts unearthed at Nag Hammadi, puts it in Jesus’ own mouth: it was another who drank the gall and vinegar, and it was Simon who carried the cross on his shoulder. Other early Christians went further and taught that Jesus never had a physical body at all, so nothing on that cross could suffer.

The motive differs from the Quran’s. Those Christians thought flesh was beneath a divine being, while the Quran wants to spare a prophet the humiliation of execution. The move is identical, though, and it was circulating among Christians for five hundred years before the Quran repeated it.

The Canon Was Drawn Up by Bishops, and the Losers Kept Talking

The 27-book New Testament didn’t exist as a fixed list until a bishop of Alexandria named Athanasius spelled it out in a letter in 367, and even then churches kept arguing for centuries. The Syriac-speaking churches closest to Arabia used a Bible that left out 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation. The Ethiopian church across the Red Sea used a bigger one.

None of those lists stopped ordinary believers from loving the rejected stories. They heard them in sermons and hymns, saw them painted on church walls, and celebrated them on feast days. A Christian in seventh-century Arabia knew Jesus through that world of story, since almost nobody owned a book. The Quran preserves the faith those people practiced, rejected books and all.

That leaves both camps with a problem. Christian apologists who sneer that the Quran “borrowed from apocrypha” are sneering at what their own ancestors believed and still celebrate on the calendar. Muslim apologists who insist the Quran couldn’t have human sources have to explain why its Jesus stories were written down by Christians centuries earlier, in books those same Christians eventually binned.

Leave a comment

Share

The rejected gospels aren’t the only Christian material hiding in the Quran. Chapter 18 contains two more Christian legends: a group of young men who sleep in a cave for centuries, and a world-conquering king who walls out the monstrous armies of Gog and Magog. One of them was written down in Syriac within a few years of the Quran’s own appearance, and the details line up so closely they’re hard to explain any other way. Paid subscribers get the full breakdown below, including the fish that comes back to life in both a Moses story and an Alexander the Great adventure. If you’re on the free list, this is a good one to upgrade for.

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Christian Bedtime Stories in Chapter 18

Chapter 18 of the Quran, known as “The Cave,” reads like an anthology, and two of its most famous stories were already well known to Christians.

The first is the..

Read more

Before a single canon was closed, a war was fought over who got to speak for the risen Christ. On one side stood the men who would build an empire’s church, writing letters to quiet women and seal the hierarchy. On the other was a silent, shifting tradition that remembered something else entirely: a woman who stood up when the apostles cowered, who held to her vision when Peter doubted, and who was trusted with mysteries the rest were never meant to hear.

That story didn’t survive in the Bibles handed down through centuries of Western cathedrals, but it lived on in a fifth-century Coptic manuscript that came through water damage, world wars, and fifteen hundred years of Egyptian dust. It’s missing half its pages, but it carries enough truth to unravel fourteen hundred years of quieted history.

A Gospel Missing Half Its Pages

In the spring of 1896, amid the bustling noise and dust of Cairo’s antiquities market, a German scholar named Carl Schmidt stumbled upon a leather-bound relic that had spent fourteen centuries sleeping in the Egyptian soil. Written in the ancient script of Christian Egypt (aka Coptic) it was a fifth-century papyrus codex unlike anything the scholars of Europe had ever seen. Luckily, Schmidt recognized its value immediately, secured the book, and set out to give its long-buried secrets back to the world.

What he hadn’t know at the time was that history itself was about to throw a sixty-year obstacle course in his path.

By 1912, after years of painstaking translation, Schmidt’s first edition was finally resting at a printing house, ready to be pressed into history. Then, a water pipe burst overhead, drowning the typeset pages in torrents of water before a single copy could ship.

Before Schmidt could rebuild his work, Europe erupted into the catastrophe of the First World War. The chaos froze scholarly publishing across the continent, and by the time the smoke cleared, Schmidt passed away, his life’s work unfinished, left sitting in a drawer. Decades dragged on, and just as interest was rekindled, the Second World War broke out, locking down libraries and cutting off international research once again.

Then came 1945. Far south along the Nile, near the town of Nag Hammadi, an Egyptian farmer dug into the dirt and unearthed a jar filled with an entire library of forgotten gospels. Suddenly, the isolated manuscript Schmidt had bought fifty years prior was no longer an anomaly but part of a vast, hidden constellation of early Christian thought. Scholars rushed back to their desks, setting the Cairo text alongside these new discoveries to compare, contextualize, and cross-reference.

Finally, in 1955, nearly six decades after it was bought in a Cairo stall, the text was published.

Around the same time, two fragile third-century Greek fragments emerged from separate digs in Egypt. They provided crucial evidence: centuries before the Coptic translation was buried, this book had been copied, shared, and treasured across the Mediterranean in its original Greek, likely composed sometime in the second century.

Yet, when scholars finally read what had survived, they realized the tragedy of its long voyage. Time, moisture, and neglect had taken a bitter toll. The first six pages were gone entirely. Four more had been ripped from the middle. Roughly half of the entire gospel had dissolved into history.

At the heart of what survives, a woman is speaking. The manuscript never explicitly gives her full name; it calls her Mary. But as she steps forward to steady the terrified disciples, speaking with authority and revealing mysteries no one else had heard, scholars realized there was only one woman in the early Christian world who fit the frame. This was Mary of Magdala, the premier witness at the tomb, holding open a book that history had tried, for sixty long years, to keep closed.

Jesus Leaves and the Apostles Fall Apart

When the surviving text picks up, the risen Jesus is finishing a conversation with his followers. He tells them that sin comes from people tangling themselves up in the material world, and that nobody should go around laying down rules beyond the ones he gave them. Then he sends them out to preach and leaves.

They don’t go. They sit there grieving, asking how they’re supposed to preach to the nations when the people who killed Jesus could do the same to them.

Mary is the one who stands up. She greets them, tells them not to weep or doubt, and reminds them that Jesus’ grace will protect them and that he’s made them into true human beings. The text says she turned their hearts toward the good, and they started talking about what Jesus had said.

Then Peter asks her for help. He calls her sister, says they all know Jesus loved her more than any other woman, and asks her to tell them whatever Jesus told her that the rest of them never heard. Before anything goes wrong, Peter himself admits that Mary had private teaching from Jesus.

So she tells them. She’d seen the Lord in a vision, and he praised her for not flinching at the sight of him. The next four pages are missing, and when the text resumes, she’s describing a soul climbing upward past four powers that try to hold it down: Darkness, Desire, Ignorance and Wrath. The soul talks its way past each one and goes free.

Andrew and Peter Turn on Her

When she finishes, she goes quiet, and Andrew speaks first. He tells the others to say what they like about her story, but he doesn’t believe Jesus said any of it, because these teachings sound strange.

Peter goes further, and he aims at her instead of the teaching. Would Jesus really speak to a woman privately and keep it from them? Are the men supposed to turn around and listen to her now? Did Jesus prefer her to them?

This is the same man who, a page earlier, asked her to share the teachings only she knew. He believed she had private teaching until he heard it and realized what it meant: Jesus had trusted a woman with something he never gave Peter.

Mary weeps and asks Peter if he thinks she made this up, or that she’d lie about the Lord.

Levi’s Answer to Peter

The one who stands up for her is Levi, the tax collector the Gospels also call Matthew. He tells Peter he’s always been hotheaded, and now he’s going after the woman the way their enemies would. If Jesus made her worthy, who’s Peter to reject her? Jesus knew her well, Levi says, and that’s exactly why he loved her more than the rest of them.

Then Levi tells everyone to be ashamed of themselves, to get on with preaching, and to stop inventing rules and laws beyond what Jesus taught. In the Coptic version, they all go out to preach. In one of the Greek scraps, only Levi goes.

The book ends without telling us whether Peter ever came around.

The Same Peter Shows Up in Other Lost Gospels

If this were the only text with Peter turning on Mary, you could put it down to one writer’s grudge. It’s a pattern, though. In the last saying of the Gospel of Thomas, Peter tells Jesus that Mary should leave them, because women aren’t worthy of life. Jesus answers that he’ll make her male, which tells you how far that writer could stretch his imagination. In the Pistis Sophia, a long third-century book of dialogues with the risen Jesus, Peter complains that Mary talks too much and keeps the men from getting a word in. Mary tells Jesus she’s afraid of Peter because he hates women.

Three separate books, written by different hands, all cast Peter as the man who wants Mary to sit down and be quiet. Whoever these writers were, they knew which apostle the anti-woman side claimed, and they knew which side Mary stood for.

The Fight Behind the Story

Christians in the second century were fighting about exactly this question. In Paul’s own letters, the ones scholars agree he wrote, women do the work of leadership. He trusts his letter to the Romans to Phoebe, a deacon of her church. He greets Prisca, who taught alongside her husband, and Junia, whom he calls outstanding among the apostles. Later copyists and translators found Junia so awkward that for centuries many Bibles printed her as a man named Junias, a name that appears nowhere else in ancient records.

Then come the letters to Timothy, written in Paul’s name decades after his death, which forbid women to teach or hold authority over men and tell them they’ll be saved through childbearing. In the early 200s, Tertullian, the North African church writer, complained that women in his day were teaching and baptizing, and that they pointed to a story about a woman apostle to justify it.

The Gospel of Mary comes from that fight. The side that wrote 1 Timothy built the church structure that lasted, and the side that wrote the Gospel of Mary lost. Their book stopped being copied, and it sat buried in Egypt until a dealer sold it in Cairo.

From First Witness to Fallen Woman

The Gospel of Mary doesn’t call her a sinner, and neither does it make her Jesus’ wife. The kissing scene people remember from The Da Vinci Code comes from the Gospel of Philip, a different book.

The prostitute everybody learned about came from somewhere else entirely.

Leave a comment

Share

If you’ve been reading free, this is the one to upgrade for. Supporters keep The Unholy Truth running, and you can still comment on every post either way.

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

How a Pope Turned the First Witness Into a Prostitute

On a Sunday in September 591, Pope Gregory the Great preached a sermon in Rome on a passage from Luke 7. In that story…

Read more

High above Jerusalem on the Mount of Olives, the disciples lean in to ask Jesus a quiet, nervous question: How will we know when the end is coming?

If you leave it to the Gospel of Matthew, the answer is a grim list of geopolitical chaos: wars, rumors of wars, famines, and false messiahs. But if you happened to be reading another text widely popular among early Christians in the second century, Jesus skips the list and gives Peter a full guided tour.

What Peter sees is a full-color, hyper-detailed horror show, and it drew the exact blueprint for the hell Western culture has been terrified of ever since.

Jesus on the Mount of Olives

The book opens much like the end-times speech in Matthew 24, with Jesus on the Mount of Olives and the disciples asking for the signs of his return. Matthew’s answer is wars, famines, and false messiahs. The Apocalypse of Peter gives the same answer and then goes on: Jesus extends his hand and shows Peter what happens to the wicked after Judgment Day.

The catalog Peter witnesses:

• Blasphemers hang by their tongues over flames.

• Women who made themselves beautiful to lure men into adultery hang by their hair over boiling mud. The men who slept with them hang upside down by their feet, heads sunk in it.

• Murderers are thrown into a pit crawling with venomous things, while the souls of the people they killed stand by, watch, and praise God for his fairness.

• Loan sharks stand up to their knees in a lake of pus and blood.

• False witnesses chew their own tongues with fire burning in their mouths.

• The rich who trusted their money and let widows and orphans go hungry roll in rags over red-hot stones sharper than swords.

Women who had their babies aborted or left out to die sit up to their necks in a pit of filth. Across from them sit the children, crying out to God, and bolts of fire shoot from the children into their mothers’ eyes. The Ethiopic version adds that those children are handed to a caretaking angel to be raised. An angel named Ezrael, the angel of wrath, runs the whole operation.

Every punishment matches its crime, and usually it falls on the body part that committed the sin: the tongue that lied, the hair that seduced, the hands that grabbed the money (I wonder what happens to the adulterous men). Ancient readers knew the principle as measure for measure. Modern readers know it as the structure of Dante’s Inferno, where flatterers wallow in excrement and fortune-tellers shuffle along with their heads twisted around backward.

Where a Second-Century Writer Found His Torture Chambers

Long before the writer of the Apocalypse of Peter picked up his reed pen, Greek religion had been sending visitors to the underworld for centuries. Odysseus talks with the dead in the Odyssey. Plato ends the Republic with a soldier named Er who wakes up on his funeral pyre and reports how souls get judged, and the mystery cults handed their followers maps of the afterlife. Jewish writers had their own version. The Book of Enoch, the one I wrote about getting kicked out of the Bible, shows its hero in a hollow place in a mountain where the dead are held until judgment, sorted by what kind of people they were.

The Apocalypse of Peter even borrows a Greek landmark by name. In one Greek copy, the saved are baptized in the Acherusian lake. That’s the lake in Plato’s Phaedo where ordinary souls are cleansed before being sent back to be born again. A Christian writer reached into Greek myth, took one of its lakes, and gave it to Jesus.

His addition was scale and detail. Earlier texts tell you the wicked suffer, while this one tells you which wicked end up in which pit, with which part of their body, and who’s standing around watching.

Scripture in Egypt, Scripture in Rome

The Apocalypse of Peter was more than fan fiction, and the early church took it very seriously.

Clement of Alexandria, the leading Christian teacher in Egypt around 200, quotes it by name as scripture on the fate of abandoned infants. The Muratorian list, one of the oldest surviving lists of accepted Christian books, accepts exactly two apocalypses, John’s and Peter’s. It adds that some in the church don’t want Peter’s read aloud. Methodius, a bishop writing around 300, calls it divinely inspired. A sixth-century Bible manuscript, Codex Claromontanus, carries a list of scripture that includes the Apocalypse of Peter, placed after Revelation.

The doubts were there from the beginning, and they grew. Eusebius, the church historian writing in the early 300s, files it among the books he calls spurious, next to the Shepherd of Hermas and the Letter of Barnabas. Even so, more than a century after Eusebius, the historian Sozomen reports that some churches in Palestine still read it aloud once a year on Good Friday. On the day Christians mark the crucifixion, those congregations sat listening to women hanging by their hair over boiling mud.

It never made the final cut, and the reason is easy to see. Peter didn’t write it. The book dates to about a century after his death, probably the 130s, since one passage seems to have Bar Kokhba in view. Bar Kokhba led a Jewish revolt against Rome from 132 to 135, claimed to be the messiah, and punished Christians who wouldn’t join him. Church leaders sorting out the canon cared a great deal about who wrote what, and a book with no solid line back to Peter was always going to lose that fight.

Lost for Fourteen Centuries, Found in a Monk’s Grave

After that, the book faded out of Christian memory. For most of church history, scholars knew it only from those scattered mentions and a handful of quotations.

Then in the winter of 1886-87, a French archaeological team digging at Akhmim in Upper Egypt opened a grave believed to belong to a monk and found a small book buried with him. It held a piece of the Gospel of Peter and a long section of the Apocalypse of Peter in Greek. Somebody had cared about this book enough to take it into the ground with him.

A fuller version surfaced in an Ethiopic manuscript in 1910, folded inside a longer work about the second coming. The Ethiopian church, which kept Enoch and Jubilees after everyone else dropped them, had held on to this one too. Scholars generally treat the Ethiopic as the closer match to what the original said.

The Hell You Inherited From a Rejected Book

The book lost its canon fight, but its hell won. In the late 300s, someone wrote the Apocalypse of Paul, which lifted the tour of hell, expanded it, and handed it to the other great apostle. That book became one of the most copied texts of the Middle Ages, translated into Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Slavonic and more. When Dante’s pilgrim hesitates at the start of the Inferno, he says he’s neither Aeneas nor Paul, the two men who’d already gone down to see the dead. His readers knew which journey of Paul’s he meant, and it isn’t in the Bible.

The preacher describing specific torments for specific sins, the church wall painted with devils shoveling sinners into the fire, the Inferno assigned in literature classes: all of it runs back through Paul’s tour to Peter’s. The detailed hell most Christians carry in their heads came from a book the church decided wasn’t scripture, and almost nobody sitting in the pews has heard of it.

The Clause That Let the Damned Out

The strangest part of the Apocalypse of Peter comes near the end, after all the torture is done. It says something about who gets out of hell that later Christians found so disturbing that copyists muddied it, rewrote it, and in one case scrawled an angry note in the margin. That passage, what the copyists did to it, and the theologian they blamed for the whole idea are in the supporter bonus below.

Leave a comment

Share

If you’ve been reading free, this is a good one to upgrade for. Supporters keep The Unholy Truth running, and you can still comment on every post either way.

The Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Universalist Secret Scribes Tried to Erase

The most dangerous idea in early Christianity wasn’t that Jesus was a revolutionary, nor was it that the Roman Empire was doomed. It was the idea that…

Read more

Before Jesus ever turned water into wine or healed the sick in Galilee, early Christians swapped stories about a very different miracle worker: a volatile five-year-old with a god's power and a toddler's temper. In the non-canonical Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Jesus makes clay sparrows fly, and in his spare time, he strikes annoying people dead and blinds neighbors who dare to complain. It's an eerie, forgotten portrait of a divine child learning restraint, and for centuries it was one of the most popular stories in the ancient world.

Five Years Old with a Body Count

The book opens with Jesus at five, playing by a stream after a rainstorm on the Sabbath. He gathers the runoff into little pools, makes the water clean with a word, and molds twelve sparrows out of soft clay. A neighbor sees it and runs to tell Joseph his son is working on the Sabbath. His stepfather Joseph comes down to scold him, Jesus claps his hands, and the sparrows fly off chirping. So far you’ve got a sweet story with a Sabbath lesson the adult Jesus of the Gospels would recognize.

Then the son of Annas the scribe takes a willow branch and drains the pools Jesus made. Jesus calls him a godless fool, tells him he’ll wither like a tree, and the boy dries up on the spot. Shortly after, as Jesus walks through the village, another boy running past knocks into his shoulder. Jesus tells him he won’t go any further on his way, and the child drops dead.

The dead boy’s parents go to Joseph with a reasonable request: teach your son to bless instead of curse, or take your family and leave, because he’s killing our children. Joseph confronts Jesus, who says he’ll keep quiet for Joseph’s sake but the accusers will still pay. They go blind immediately. Joseph’s response is to grab the boy by the ear and yank it hard, which earns him a lecture from a five-year-old about not knowing who he’s dealing with.

Most notably, nobody in the text treats the dead children as a moral problem for Jesus**, and judging by how popular the book was among early Christians, neither did the people reading it.

Three Teachers and One Very Bad School Year

A teacher named Zacchaeus overhears Jesus mouthing off to Joseph and offers to teach him his letters, assuming discipline is what’s missing. He writes out the alphabet and starts drilling him.

Jesus refuses to move past alpha until the teacher explains what alpha is, then lectures him on the letter’s shape, its strokes and its middle line, in language that sounds profound and says very little. Zacchaeus ends up humiliated in front of a crowd, saying the child must be a god or an angel and begging Joseph to take him away.

Joseph tries a second teacher, who loses his patience and smacks Jesus on the head. Jesus curses him and the man collapses, or drops dead, depending on which version you read.

Joseph tells Mary to keep the boy indoors, since anyone who makes him angry dies. A third teacher, a friend of Joseph’s, has the good sense to let Jesus teach himself. Jesus reads the law aloud with authority, the teacher praises him, and Jesus, pleased, heals the second teacher (or raises him from the dead).

Ancient readers saw childhood as an unfinished stage of life, and the book traces an arc. In the later chapters Jesus raises a boy named Zeno who fell off a roof (partly to clear himself of a murder charge), heals his brother James of a snakebite, carries water home in his cloak when a jar breaks, and stretches a short board so Joseph can finish a bed for a rich customer. The miracles keep coming, but the body count stops. By the last chapter he’s twelve, and the text runs straight into Luke’s temple story almost word for word, as if the author wanted his book to dock well with the one everybody already knew.

Greek Audiences Already Knew Divine Children Were Dangerous

Whoever wrote this was likely writing for people raised on Greek stories, where gods behave no differently as children. The Homeric Hymn to Hermes has the god born at dawn, inventing the lyre by noon and stealing Apollo’s cattle by nightfall, then lying to Zeus’ face about it. Heracles strangled two snakes in his cradle. Greek and Roman biographers loved childhood episodes that predicted the adult, and Plutarch, the first-century biographer, has a young Alexander taming a horse nobody else could ride.

Luke’s temple story belongs to that same genre, a boy outclassing the experts. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas takes the premise to its logical end. If Jesus was divine at five, then a five-year-old with divine power and a five-year-old’s temper is what you’d get. The author never hints that this is a problem, because for his audience power was the whole appeal. A god who could wither a bully was a god worth praying to.

The text also answers a theological question the canon leaves open. If Jesus was fully God from birth, did he know everything as a toddler? The alphabet scene says yes, and the teachers who can’t see it get hurt. Later church thinkers wanted a Jesus who grew in wisdom the way Luke says, so the answer this gospel gave became an embarrassment.

The Church Tried to Ignore It and Lost

Readers expecting another suppression story are in for a surprise. No council condemned this book by name, and nobody needed one, since it never had a claim to apostolic authorship and nobody seriously proposed reading it in church. Bishops dealt with it by arguing against its premise. John Chrysostom, the fourth-century archbishop of Constantinople, pointed to John 2:11, which calls the wedding at Cana the first of Jesus’ signs, and argued that this ruled out childhood miracles entirely. If Cana came first, the sparrows never flew.

While that argument won among theologians, it failed everywhere else. The stories were already old by Chrysostom’s time. Irenaeus, the second-century bishop of Lyon, quotes the alpha episode around 180, which puts the material in circulation within a few generations of the Gospels themselves. The text spread into Syriac, Latin, Georgian, Ethiopic and Slavonic, and the clay birds turn up in the Qur’an. Medieval writers folded its episodes into longer infancy collections, and artists put them on church walls. The British Museum holds the Tring tiles, a set of fourteenth-century English tiles that show the child Jesus striking down a playmate and, later in the series, bringing children back to life.

Medieval laypeople grew up with this Jesus while their theologians insisted the stories were false, and the laypeople kept copying them. Look at what the book offered a peasant family in a village where children died constantly and nobody could protect them: a God who’d been a child himself, who had enemies on the street and a father who pulled his ear, and who could raise a dead boy when he chose to. The Gospels gave them a savior for the end of the world, while this gospel gave them one for the neighborhood.

Leave a comment

Share

The cursing Jesus is the part everybody remembers, but the history behind the text is where things get truly wild. Below the line, paid supporters get access to the hidden layers of this text that scribes tried to erase: how 5th-century manuscripts reveal an even colder version of the story, the bizarre missing miracles left out of modern translations (including riding sunbeams and leaping salted fish), and a direct side-by-side look at how medieval copyists edited “Psycho Jesus” to protect his reputation.

If you’ve been reading for free, today is a great day to unlock full access and keep deep-dive historical pieces like this coming four days a week.

Exclusive Content to Paid Subscribers

The Lost Scenes and Censored Variations

Modern translations of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas offer a surprisingly sanitized view of the text—the result of copyists quietly wrestling with its contents for over a thousand years. The moment medieval scribes encountered stories of a five-year-old striking his playmates dead, a silent war broke out in the scriptoriums. Yet, try as they might, they never fully erased the darker, older layers of the gospel…

Read more

Long before the first word of Genesis was penned, before Islam swept across the desert, and long before the chosen people were announced, tens of billions of human beings walked the Earth. They fell in love, buried their dead, huddled around fires, and tried to make sense of the dark. They had no holy books, no formal creeds, and no prophets we’d recognize.

If you stack human existence against the timeline of history, the great book religions turn out to be a recent, highly regional addition to a religious life that had already been running for hundreds of thousands of years.

So today we’re asking different questions: why did God sit through all those generations in silence, then make himself known to one small group of people in the ancient Near East? And what was most of humanity doing while he kept quiet?

If you don’t agree with me or you think you have satisfying answers to these questions, the comments are open to everyone, and I’d like to hear from you.

Most Humans Who Ever Lived Never Heard of Abraham

The Population Reference Bureau, a Washington nonprofit that tracks demographic data, estimates that about 117 billion humans have been born since our species showed up. People who look like us have been around for roughly 300,000 years. Yet, writing appeared in Mesopotamia around 3200 BCE, and the oldest parts of the Hebrew Bible took written shape somewhere in the first millennium BCE. Christianity is about 2,000 years old and Islam about 1,400.

If we line the dates up against the population curve, the picture changes. Tens of billions of people lived and died before anyone wrote a word of Genesis, and billions more lived afterward in places where no one would hear of Abraham for centuries: the Amazon, the Arctic, the Australian interior, the Pacific islands, and most of sub‑Saharan Africa. Across the full span of human history, the religions of the book are a late, regional development. The default human religion, the one practiced by most people who’ve ever drawn breath, had no scripture, no creed, and no founder anyone can name.

The Ojibwe Elder Who Said Only Some Stones Are Alive

In the 1930s an American anthropologist named A. Irving Hallowell was living among the Ojibwe along the Berens River in Manitoba. He asked an old man whether all the stones around them were alive. The man thought it over and answered, “No! But some are.”

That answer is a better way into animism than any textbook definition. The word comes from Victorian anthropology, where it described a childish error: primitive people supposedly projected souls onto objects because they couldn’t tell living things from dead ones. Hallowell’s informant had no trouble telling the difference. He’d seen particular stones move or respond in ways that made a relationship with them sensible, so he treated those stones as persons, and he understood perfectly well that most stones were just stones.

That’s much closer to what animism means to the people who live it. The world is full of persons, and only some of them are human. Bears, rivers, mountains, certain trees, the weather, and the dead can all be persons, which means you owe them what you’d owe any person: respect, good manners, a fair exchange, and sometimes gifts. Hunters across the northern forests, from Lapland to Labrador, apologized to the animals they killed and handled the bones carefully so the animal would return. Those rules come out of a relationship, and they have more in common with how you’d treat a neighbor than with reciting a statement of faith.

In this world, nobody asks whether you believe in the bear since the bear is standing in front of you. The only question is whether you’re treating it right.

Trance Healers From Siberia to the Kalahari

If animism describes the world, shamanism describes the specialist who deals with it. The word comes from the Evenki, reindeer herders in Siberia, whose shamans drummed themselves into trance to travel to other worlds, bring back lost souls, find game, and heal the sick. The drum was the shaman’s ride. Many Siberian groups described it as a horse or reindeer that carried him between worlds, and his coat, hung with iron pendants, bones, and ribbons, served as armor and as a map of the spirit world at the same time. Russian explorers picked the word up, European scholars started applying it everywhere they found something similar, and they found something similar almost everywhere.

The San of southern Africa hold all-night trance dances where healers enter a state they describe as dying, then pull sickness out of people with their hands. Inuit healers made spirit journeys to the bottom of the sea to bargain with the woman who controls the seals and whales when hunting went bad, and in many tellings the shaman calmed her by combing the tangles out of her hair, since she had no fingers to do it herself. Healers in the Amazon drink a vision-producing vine brew to see and fight whatever is making a patient sick, singing songs they say the plants taught them.

Early writers got carried away and lumped every village healer, priest, and fortune-teller on Earth into one ancient world religion called shamanism, which never existed as a single thing. Even after you throw that out, a core pattern holds across continents that had no contact with each other. Some person in the community uses rhythm, fasting, pain, or plants to reach an altered state, travels in that state to a world of spirits, and comes back with healing or information. The job usually starts with a crisis. In Siberian accounts, a future shaman falls sick for months and dreams of spirits cutting his body apart and rebuilding it, sometimes counting the bones as they go. He comes out of it with spirit helpers, often animals, and an obligation he can’t turn down, since in many traditions a person who refuses the call stays sick or dies. The world he travels through usually has three levels (an upper world, the middle world where people live, and a lower world) joined by a great tree or pole that he climbs or descends.

The likeliest explanation for all this overlap is anatomy. Every human population has the same nervous system, and drumming, sleep loss, and mind-altering plants produce similar experiences in all of them. A Siberian herder and a Kalahari forager who hit the same altered state will report some of the same things, like flying, dying, turning into an animal, or squeezing through a tunnel into another place. The clearest link between those experiences and ancient art comes from southern Africa, where San rock paintings show dancers bent forward with their arms stretched behind them and blood running from their noses. San informants in the 1800s explained that this is how a healer looks when the healing power boils up inside him during trance. Some archaeologists think the zigzags, dots, and half-animal figures in Ice Age European caves record the same kind of visions. That reading is contested, but it’s a serious argument about the oldest religious images we have, and none of those images came with a holy book attached.

Earth-Divers and the Bear in the Big Dipper

Comparative mythology has a reputation for squinting at stories until every one of them turns into the same hero’s journey. Squinting isn’t evidence, but some recurring myths are specific enough that coincidence gets hard to defend.

Take the earth-diver story, for example. In the beginning there’s only water. Animals dive one after another trying to reach the bottom, and the smallest, least promising one (a muskrat in many Ojibwe and Cree tellings, a loon or a duck elsewhere) comes back half-drowned with a pawful of mud that grows into the land. In the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) version, the mud gets spread on the back of a great turtle, which is why North America is still called Turtle Island. In Eastern Europe and parts of Siberia, the story picked up a Christian coat of paint: God sends the devil down to fetch the mud, the devil hides some in his mouth, and when he spits it out it becomes the mountains and swamps. Versions turn up across North America, Siberia, and Eastern Europe, which tracks the routes people took into the Americas.

Or take the Cosmic Hunt, where the stars of the Big Dipper are a bear or an elk being chased across the sky by hunters. Siberian peoples tell it, many North American peoples tell it, and the Greeks told their own version about Callisto being turned into a bear and set among the stars. In the Mi’kmaq telling from eastern Canada, the bowl of the Dipper is the bear and the handle is a line of bird-hunters chasing her all summer. They catch her in the fall, and her blood dripping from the sky turns the leaves red. When researchers ran dozens of versions through the same software biologists use to build family trees of species, they concluded the story likely crossed into the Americas with some of the earliest migrants, back in the Ice Age.

Flood stories show the same kind of spread. Mesopotamia, India, Greece, Mesoamerica, and dozens of North American peoples all tell of a world drowned and restarted, and in many Ojibwe tellings the earth-diver goes down after the flood to rebuild the land. Some researchers argue that the myths of Eurasia and the Americas share a whole storyline, from creation out of chaos to a flood to the end of the world, while the older myths of Africa south of the Sahara and Australia mostly don’t. That claim is contested, but the basic point holds up: some myths are older than farming and traveled on foot.

That bears directly on Genesis. The Bible opens with a formless earth and darkness over deep water, then raises dry land out of it, and the Hebrew word for “the deep” is a cousin of the name Tiamat, the Babylonian sea monster whose split body became sky and earth. The flood story follows Mesopotamian flood stories that were circulating centuries earlier, down to the details. In the Babylonian version, the survivor’s boat comes to rest on a mountain, he sends out a dove, a swallow, and a raven to look for dry land, and when he offers a sacrifice afterward the gods smell it and gather around like flies. Noah lands on a mountain, sends out a raven and a dove, and offers a sacrifice whose smell pleases God. The book religions inherited their raw material from people who never wrote anything down.

Songlines, Sacred Groves, and the Extinct Moa

Aboriginal Australian traditions show how far religion can sit from a book. In what English speakers call the Dreaming, ancestral beings traveled across the land at the beginning of things, shaping it as they went, and their routes are preserved in long song cycles that work as maps, law, and history at once. A single songline can run hundreds of miles and cross several language groups, with each group holding its own stretch of the song and the knowledge to go with it. Some coastal stories describe land that’s now underwater, which fits sea levels that rose at the end of the Ice Age more than 7,000 years ago. The religion is welded to specific waterholes, ridges, and rocks. You can’t convert to it from Ohio, and if you push the people off their country you’ve damaged it in a way no book-burning could.

That tie to place often has ecological effects. India and Ghana both have sacred groves, patches of forest protected by taboo, and they’re frequently the oldest surviving forest in their districts. In many Indian groves, dedicated to a local goddess or guardian spirit, nobody is allowed to take so much as a fallen branch. Many hunting peoples kept seasonal bans on taking certain animals.

The temptation is to turn this into a fable about wise natives living in harmony with nature, and the evidence won’t cooperate. The Maori settled New Zealand around 1300 with a religion full of ancestral and forest spirits, and the moa, a giant flightless bird, was hunted to extinction within roughly two centuries. A spirituality rooted in the land trains people to pay close attention to it. Whether they act wisely on what they notice is a separate matter, as it is for everybody else.

Holy Books Promise Everyone the Same Truth, But…

Writing things down changed religion in ways that are easy to miss when you grew up inside the result. A text makes faith portable, so it can travel with soldiers and merchants. It also makes faith fixed, which means you now need official interpreters, and once you have official interpreters you get heretics. Animist peoples had plenty of feuds and wars, but nobody burned a neighbor over whether the bear spirit had one nature or two.

The idea that your neighbor’s gods are false gods arrived with biblical monotheism. Before that, other people’s gods counted as foreign gods, and foreign gods could be borrowed, matched up with your own, or recruited. Ancient treaties listed the gods of both kingdoms as witnesses. Greek travelers looked at Egyptian gods and called them by Greek names, so Amun became Zeus. When Rome besieged a city, its priests sometimes called out to the enemy’s chief god and offered it a bigger temple in Rome if it switched sides, and after the city of Veii fell in 396 BCE, its goddess Juno got exactly that. Rome took in Isis from Egypt and Cybele from Anatolia without anyone worrying that Jupiter would get jealous.

Christianity and Islam both present themselves as truth for all humanity, regardless of birthplace. In practice, the strongest predictor of which religion you’ll hold is still where you were born and who raised you. A kid in Mississippi grows up Baptist, and a kid in Tamil Nadu grows up Hindu for the same reason they speak different languages. The animist traditions never pretended otherwise, and they made no claim that their local spirits ruled the whole planet.

Wouldn’t a Super-Intelligent Being Have Picked a Better Delivery System?

For 99% of our history, God lived in the timber of a tree, the current of a river, and the marrow of a bone. The sovereign monarch issuing written decrees from a mountaintop only showed up at the very end.

The technique chosen by a super-intelligent being is to talk in secret with a handful of individuals and hope everyone else believes them, without giving anyone a test to separate the charlatans from the chosen. Every generation after that is left believing things on evidence it can’t check, and the message itself is boxed in by geography, time, and whatever language the locals happened to speak.

You’d expect a God who’s meant for everyone to speak past time, geography, human language, and human culture. Why would he decide our genetic code wasn’t enough to get us through life?

Leave a comment

Share

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Monotheism Paradox
How the “One True God” Unwittingly Created the Secular World

If written scripture was meant to bring humanity into a singular, undeniable truth, it triggered one of the greatest ironies in history: it accidentally created the modern secular mind.

When you tell a culture that only one god is real and all other spirits are…

Read more

History has a way of inflating its heroes. The farther you stand from an event, the taller the stories grow, and the more the rough edges get smoothed over, which takes time. Muhammad’s evolution from a man who made mistakes, admitted them, asked for forgiveness, and retracted his own earlier words into a “demigod” with no sins and no mistakes, whose every word carried the power of the holy book, took centuries.

Jesus breaks that rule, since his evolution in the New Testament unfolded over mere decades, and you can watch it happen in real time by comparing the gospels.

What Jesus Says About Himself in Mark

In Mark 10:17-18, a man runs up, kneels, and calls Jesus “Good Teacher.” Jesus doesn’t accept the compliment. He asks why the man is calling him good, since nobody is good except God alone. If you’re God, that’s a strange way to answer a man who just called you good. It reads exactly like what it looks like: a Jewish teacher drawing a hard line between himself and God.

In Mark 12:28-34 a scribe asks which commandment comes first. Jesus quotes the oldest creed in Judaism, the one every observant Jew recited daily: hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. The scribe agrees with him, and Jesus tells him he’s not far from the kingdom. Nobody in that scene thinks the answer needs a footnote explaining that the one Lord comes in three persons.

In Mark 13:32 Jesus talks about the end of the world and says nobody knows the day or the hour, not the angels in heaven and not the Son, only the Father. He names himself and puts himself on the side of the people who don’t know. An all-knowing God who doesn’t know something is a problem the church would spend centuries trying to solve.

Then there’s Mark 15:34. On the cross, Jesus’ last words in Mark are a scream: my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? He’s quoting Psalm 22, a psalm of a suffering man calling on God, and Mark leaves it there with no softening. Jesus dies addressing God as someone other than himself, and someone who seems to have left.

Mark also has no birth story. Jesus first walks on stage as an adult getting baptized by John, a wilderness preacher whose ritual was for the forgiveness of sins. The spirit comes down on him, and a voice from heaven calls him Son, giving the impression of a man being chosen, and that’s how a good number of early Christians read it.

Each Gospel Moves the Moment Further Back

The earliest Christian material puts Jesus’ elevation at the resurrection. Paul, writing in the 50s, quotes an older creed in Romans 1:3-4 that says Jesus was declared Son of God in power by being raised from the dead. A speech in Acts 2:22-36 calls Jesus a man God vouched for, then says God made him Lord and Messiah after raising him.

Mark pushes the moment back to the baptism. Matthew and Luke, writing in the 80s, push it back to the conception, with a virgin birth and angels. John, writing last, pushes it back before creation: in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

So the high claims show up in the latest gospel, and the further you get from the events, the bigger Jesus gets. That’s the opposite of what you’d expect if Jesus had been walking around Galilee announcing his own divinity. A claim that explosive would be in the earliest sources, front and center, and the later writers would be the ones toning it down.

Matthew and Luke Edit Mark

We know Matthew and Luke copied Mark, because they reproduce whole stretches of his wording. That gives us something rare in ancient history: we can watch two authors revising a source in real time, and their changes tell you what bothered them.

Take the rich man again. Matthew 19:16-17, in the oldest manuscripts, has the man ask what good thing he should do, and Jesus answers, why do you ask me about what is good? The “why do you call me good” line is gone, and with it the denial.

In Mark 6:5, Jesus goes to his hometown and can’t do any miracles there apart from healing a few sick people. Matthew 13:58 changes “couldn’t” to “didn’t,” and adds that it was because of their unbelief. A Jesus who couldn’t do something became a Jesus who chose not to.

Mark 3:21 says Jesus’ family went out to restrain him because people were saying he’d lost his mind. Matthew and Luke both drop it. Luke also drops the line about the Son not knowing the day or hour. And Luke cuts the cry of abandonment from the cross completely, replacing it with a calm “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” John goes further still, with Jesus serenely announcing “it is finished.” Three later writers, three different replacements for the same embarrassing last words.

The Copyists Pick Up the Pen

For roughly fourteen centuries every copy of the New Testament was made by hand, mostly by believers who knew what the text was supposed to mean. When it didn’t say that clearly enough, some of them helped it along.

Matthew kept the “not even the Son” line in his version of the end-times speech (Matthew 24:36). Plenty of later manuscripts don’t have it. If you own a King James Bible, check: the phrase is missing from Matthew and still sitting in Mark, because the scribes behind the text the King James translators used got to one and not the other. A fourth-century bishop of Milan even claimed the phrase had been slipped in by heretics, which gets the history exactly backward.

Luke 2:33 originally called Joseph and Mary Jesus’ “father and mother.” That’s awkward for a virgin birth, so many manuscripts changed it to “Joseph and his mother.” Luke 2:43 called them “his parents,” and the same fix appears there. The King James has both changes.

1 Timothy 3:16 originally spoke of Christ as the one who was revealed in the flesh. In Greek, scribes abbreviated the word for God in a way that looked almost identical to the word for “who,” and adding a couple of strokes turned one into the other. The King James reads “God was manifest in the flesh.” The oldest manuscripts don’t.

At Jesus’ baptism in Luke 3:22, several early sources have the heavenly voice quoting Psalm 2:7: you are my son, today I’ve become your father. That reading says Jesus became Son of God on a particular day as an adult, which is exactly what the church would later condemn. The version that won reads “with you I’m well pleased.”

Then there’s the big one, the only verse in the King James that spells out the Trinity in so many words, 1 John 5:7. It isn’t in any Greek manuscript from the first thousand years of Christianity. I’ll get to how it got there.

The Bishops Split Jesus in Two

By the early fourth century, Christians had a theology that called Jesus God and a Bible that kept showing him as something less. The fight broke open in Alexandria, Egypt, where a popular priest named Arius taught that the Son was the first and greatest thing God created, divine in a lesser sense but not equal to the Father. Arius had plenty of Bible on his side. He leaned heavily on John 14:28, where Jesus says The Father is greater than I.

The emperor Constantine, who wanted one church for one empire, called the bishops together at Nicaea in 325. The council wrote a creed calling the Son “true God from true God” and “of one substance with the Father,” and Arius was exiled. That settled the vote. It didn’t settle the verses, which were all still sitting there in every copy of the gospels.

The solution that won out over the next century was to divide Jesus into two natures, one fully divine and one fully human, joined in one person. The Council of Chalcedon made this official in 451. In practice it works like a sorting machine. When Jesus says he doesn’t know the day or hour, that’s his human nature talking, while his divine nature knew perfectly well. When he cries out that God has abandoned him, that’s the human side. When he says “I and the Father are one,” that’s the divine side.

With this non-Biblical finding of the bishops, every verse where Jesus sounds like a man becomes evidence of his humanity, and every verse where he sounds like more becomes evidence of his divinity, so no possible sentence in the gospels could ever count against the doctrine. If Mark had written “Jesus said, I’m not God,” the two-natures answer would have filed it under the human side and moved on. A claim that survives every conceivable piece of evidence isn’t being tested by the evidence.

When’s an Interpretation No Longer an Interpretation?

Every reader interprets, since you can’t open a two-thousand-year-old book written in another language for another culture without making judgment calls about what the words meant to the people who first heard them. But where do we draw the line on reinterpretation?

There are more than 30 verses in the Bible where Jesus implies or outright says he isn’t God. After Jesus’ promotion to God’s equal, every one of these problematic verses had to be reinterpreted.

Reinterpretation is making sense of what you have, and the Bible doesn’t say Jesus has a split personality, switching back and forth between his human side and his divine side mid-sentence without warning anyone, either not realizing the confusion it would cause or not caring. That idea was brought in from outside, centuries later, to solve a problem the text created. Furthermore, once it’s in place, there’s no way for him to say he isn’t God and mean it. Every denial gets filed under his human side, and the doctrine stays standing no matter what he says.

So when you create evidence, such as a split personality, to make the Bible say what you need it to say, is it still interpretation? If we’re allowed to make things up so the Bible means what it doesn’t say, does it matter what the Bible says at all?

It gets worse, because the churches that teach Jesus is God’s equal, somewhere between 2.3 and 2.6 billion people, go further and make the belief the test of who counts as a Christian. Catholics, the Orthodox, and most Protestant churches refuse to recognize Jehovah’s Witnesses or Latter-day Saints as Christians on exactly this point, and the Athanasian Creed, still part of the official creeds of the Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran churches, says anyone who doesn’t hold this belief about the Trinity will perish forever.

Apply that test to the first Christians and see who’s left standing. Peter, preaching the church’s first sermon in Acts 2, calls Jesus a man God vouched for, whom God made Lord and Messiah after raising him from the dead. The thousands in Jerusalem who were baptized that day never heard a word about Jesus being equal with the Father, because nobody had come up with it yet. By the standard of today’s churches, the apostles were heretics and the first church was full of fake Christians. So was Jesus himself, who answered the most important question he was ever asked by reciting that the Lord our God is one.

Leave a comment

Share

☕︎ Say Thanks

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

What Christian Scholars Say About All This

Most of what’s in this piece comes straight from the textbooks used in seminars. Mark is the earliest gospel and Matthew and Luke copied it, which is the standard view in Catholic and mainline Protestant schools and taught at most evangelical ones. The scribal changes are documented by ….

Read more

Long before the Bible was bound in leather and placed in church pews, it was an argument.

For thousands of years, the Canaanites were the ultimate villains of the biblical story, referred to as the idolaters, the pagan foils to the God of Israel. We only knew them through the hostile lens of the prophets who wanted them wiped out. But in the spring of 1928, a Syrian farmer hit a slab of stone with his plow, cracked open a forgotten tomb, and accidentally handed the microphone back to the enemy.

The Clay Tablets a Plow Turned Up in Syria

The digging that followed the incident uncovered Ugarit, a port city that was destroyed around 1185 BCE and then sat under a mound called Ras Shamra for more than three thousand years. Ugarit’s scribes wrote on clay, and when the city burned, the fire baked their tablets hard, preserving a library of Canaanite religion written by its practitioners.

Before those tablets came out of the ground, almost everything anyone knew about Canaanite gods came from the Bible, which is about like learning what Democrats believe by watching Fox News. The Bible calls Baal a fake, mocks his priests, and has the prophet Elijah call down fire from heaven to humiliate them in front of a crowd. The tablets finally let Baal’s own worshipers speak, and what they say sounds uncomfortably familiar to anyone who’s read the Psalms.

Baal’s Fight With Prince Sea

The longest story from Ugarit is the Baal Cycle, a set of tablets about how a young storm god became king of the gods. In it, the sea is a god named Yam, whose titles are Prince Sea and Judge River. Yam is a bully. He sends messengers to the assembly of the gods, demanding that they hand Baal over as his prisoner, and the gods are so afraid that they bow their heads to their knees and prepare to comply.

Baal refuses to go quietly. The craftsman god forges him two clubs, names each one, and sends him into the fight. The first club bounces off Yam’s body, but the second cracks him between the eyes and drops him to the ground, and Baal finishes him off. His reward is kingship over the gods and a palace on his holy mountain, Zaphon, a peak you can still climb on the coast just north of Ugarit’s ruins.

The sea god isn’t the only water monster on these tablets. Baal and his sister Anat, a war goddess, both get credit for killing a dragon. Here’s how Mot, the god of death, describes Baal’s most famous kill:

When you struck Litan, the fleeing serpent,
finished off the twisting serpent,
the tyrant with seven heads...

Anat has her own brag list and covers the same monster. She says she muzzled Tunnan the dragon, crushed the twisting serpent, and destroyed the tyrant with seven heads. So the plot goes like this: the storm god and his family fight the sea and its monsters, win, and take the throne. The Canaanites had been telling that story for centuries before anyone wrote down a line from Isaiah.

Isaiah Uses the Same Phrases for the Same Monster

In Isaiah 27:1 in the King James:

In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

If we compare this with the Ugaritic tablets, Litan and Leviathan are the same name in two closely related languages. “Piercing serpent” is a mistake by the King James translators. The Hebrew means fleeing serpent, the exact phrase from the tablet. “Crooked serpent” is the twisting serpent, and it appears second in both texts. The “dragon that is in the sea” is the Hebrew word tannin, the same word as Tunnan, the monster Anat muzzled.

Whoever wrote Isaiah 27 knew this ancient creature. So did his audience, or the verse would have meant nothing to them. The writer took a Canaanite victory story, changed the hero’s name, and moved it to the end of time as a promise that Yahweh would do it all over again.

Psalm 74 Counts the Dragon’s Heads

In Psalm 74, the psalmist says Yahweh broke “the heads of Leviathan,” implying it has multiple heads without giving numbers. The Ugaritic tablets gave Litan multiple heads too (more precisely seven) and the monster kept them when it moved into Israel’s hymns.

Psalm 74:15 says Yahweh dried up “mighty rivers,” and River was Yam’s other title. Then verses 16–17 go from the dead monster to Yahweh setting the sun and moon in place and drawing the borders of the earth. In this psalm, order comes after the fight, as the winner’s prize. That’s the sequence Baal’s worshipers knew: beat the sea, then take charge of everything else.

Rahab, the Other Dragon Nobody Mentions

Leviathan has a partner. Rahab is a sea monster that shows up several times in the Hebrew Bible, and it’s unrelated to the woman named Rahab in the book of Joshua (the two names are spelled differently in Hebrew). Psalm 89:9-10 says Yahweh rules the raging sea and “hast broken Rahab in pieces, as one that is slain.” Job 26:12-13 has God dividing the sea, striking Rahab, and piercing the fleeing serpent, using the same phrase from the Baal tablet again.

In 7:12, Job uses the myth as a complaint. “Am I a sea, or a whale, that thou settest a watch over me?” The word the King James turns into “whale” is tannin, the sea dragon. Job’s asking why God guards him like a defeated monster that might break loose.

Isaiah 51:9-10 goes further and welds the myth onto Israel’s founding story: “Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon? Art thou not it which hath dried the sea, the waters of the great deep; that hath made the depths of the sea a way for the ransomed to pass over?” The crossing of the Red Sea becomes a rerun of the dragon fight. Pharaoh’s army plays the monster, the Red Sea plays Yam, and Yahweh plays the storm god who dries him up.

Yahweh Took Baal’s Nickname and His Mountain Too

Baal’s favorite title in the tablets is Rider of the Clouds. Psalm 68:4 uses nearly the same title for Yahweh, and modern translations render it as the one who rides on the clouds. Psalm 104:3 says Yahweh “maketh the clouds his chariot.”

Then there’s the mountain. Psalm 48:2 praises “mount Zion, on the sides of the north.” The Hebrew calls Zion the heights of Zaphon, which is Baal’s mountain. Jerusalem’s hill is lower than the Mount of Olives right next door, and it sits hundreds of miles south of the peak where Baal built his palace. The line only makes sense as a borrowed title, taking the prestige of Baal’s home and hanging it on Yahweh’s.

Psalm 29 reads like a Canaanite storm hymn with the name swapped. Yahweh’s voice thunders over the waters and shatters the cedars of Lebanon, and verse 10 says “The LORD sitteth upon the flood; yea, the LORD sitteth King for ever.” That’s a storm god enthroned on top of the defeated waters. Exodus 15, the Song of the Sea, follows the same plot as Baal’s story: Yahweh beats his enemies at sea, plants his people on his holy mountain, builds his sanctuary there, and “shall reign for ever and ever.”

Genesis 1 Turned the Monster Into Livestock

That brings us back to the calm opening of Genesis. Genesis 1:2 says darkness was on the face of “the deep,” and the Hebrew word there is tehom, the same word as Tiamat, the sea goddess whose corpse Babylon’s chief god Marduk split in half to build the sky. In Genesis the deep has no personality and puts up no fight. It just lies there waiting for instructions.

Genesis 1:21 goes further: “God created great whales.” That’s tannin again. The sea dragons that took a war to kill in Psalm 74 show up in Genesis as ordinary animals made on day five, and God looks them over and calls them good. Psalm 104:26 does the same thing to Leviathan, calling it a creature God made to play in the sea, and Job 41 turns it into a showpiece God parades in front of Job to make a point.

That’s why Genesis 1 feels so peaceful. Its author knew the fight story and rewrote it, making God so powerful that there’s nothing left to fight and the monster becomes one more item in the inventory. The editors kept both versions in the Bible, which is how the calm creator and the dragon slayer ended up a few pages apart in the same book.

Revelation Brings Back All Seven Heads

Revelation 12:3 describes “a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns,” and Revelation 13:1 has a beast rise out of the sea with seven heads. Christianity’s final book ends its war against evil by bringing back the same seven-headed sea monster the Canaanites credited to Baal. When the fight’s over, Revelation 21:1 describes the new creation in one line: “and there was no more sea.” The Christian happy ending is the world with Yam permanently deleted.

The monster made it from a Canaanite clay tablet to the last pages of the New Testament, and the story doesn’t stop there. In the bonus section for paid subscribers, I’ll show you where the Gospel of Mark casts Jesus in the storm god’s role, down to the Greek verb Mark uses when Jesus talks to the sea, and why the disciples’ terrified question in that boat has an answer every Jewish reader already knew. Upgrade to read the rest.

Leave a comment

Share

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

Christian Scholars Accept the Borrowing, But…

You’d expect Christian scholars to deny all this, since a Bible that borrows from a Canaanite storm god doesn’t look great on a seminary brochure. Most of them accept it. The link between Leviathan and the Ugarit tablets is…

Read more

Long before monotheism took hold in the Hebrew Bible, the cosmos was a bustling, high-stakes boardroom, aka divine council. In this ancient cosmic geography, the Most High parceled out the nations of the earth like real estate, assigning a supernatural patron to every single border and keeping Israel as His own personal inheritance.

For centuries, we’ve read these texts through a modern lens, editing out the ghosts of the ancient pantheon. But with the discoveries of the Qumran scrolls and the Ugaritic clay tablets, a fascinating, forgotten narrative roars back to life. The gods of the nations were real to the biblical writers, who just didn’t expect them to rule so poorly.

Here is how a single, radical poem in Deuteronomy opens the door to a lost supernatural worldview where the nations were handed out by number, the managers got fired, and monotheism arrived late to rewrite the story.

Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and the Nations Handed Out by Number

Deuteronomy 32 is a poem usually called the Song of Moses, and it’s one of the oldest pieces of writing in the book. Here’s verses 8-9 in the King James Version:

When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For the LORD’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

The poem sets this scene at the moment the human race was split into nations, which in Genesis happens at the Tower of Babel, generations before Jacob was born. As the King James has it, God is carving up the whole world according to the number of Israel’s sons before Israel has any sons to count.

The oldest surviving copies of the verse have the nations divided according to the number of the sons of God. That’s the reading in a Deuteronomy fragment from the Dead Sea Scrolls, and it’s the reading behind the Greek translation Jews made before the time of Jesus, which says “angels of God.” Both are more than a thousand years older than the oldest complete Hebrew Bible (a manuscript from around 1008 CE), which is where “children of Israel” comes from.

With the original wording in place, the verse describes a divine council. The Most High splits humanity into nations, gives each one to a son of God, and keeps back one people as Yahweh’s share, and that share is Jacob. The numbers line up too. Genesis 10 lists seventy nations descended from Noah’s sons, and the Canaanite clay tablets dug up at Ugarit in Syria starting in 1929 give El, the high god, seventy sons with his wife Athirat, which gives every nation a divine patron of its own.

Deuteronomy says the same thing in prose elsewhere. Chapter 4 warns Israel not to worship the sun, moon and stars, “all the host of heaven,” because God allotted them to the other peoples and took Israel for himself (Deuteronomy 4:19-20). Chapter 29 complains that Israel served gods Yahweh hadn’t assigned to them (Deuteronomy 29:26). The people who wrote those lines took the other nations’ gods as existing beings who belonged to somebody else.

That was too much for later readers, and at some point before the Common Era a scribe swapped “sons of God” for “sons of Israel,” which removes the other nations’ gods from the verse. The Masoretes, the medieval Jewish scribes who standardized the Hebrew text and added its vowels, inherited that reading, and English translators followed them for centuries. Some modern translations have put the older reading back, the ESV with “sons of God” and the NRSV with “gods,“ while the King James and the NIV keep “sons of Israel.”

Psalm 82 and the Assembly of El

The first verse of Psalm 82, translated straight from the Hebrew, reads: “God stands in the assembly of El; in the middle of the gods he gives judgment.”

“Assembly of El” is the same phrase the Ugarit tablets use for the gathering of the gods around their high god. And the word for “gods” in the second half of the verse is elohim, which can mean one God or many gods depending on context. Here the context settles it, since you can’t stand in the middle of one.

God then accuses the other gods of ruling badly, of favoring the wicked and ignoring the poor and the orphan. In verses 6-7 he sentences them: “I said, you are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you. Yet you’ll die like humans and fall like any prince.” The psalm ends with a plea for God to rise and judge the earth, “for you shall inherit all the nations.” Put that beside Deuteronomy 32 and you can watch the story move. The nations were handed out to the sons of God, the sons of God made a mess of them, and now the God of Israel is taking the whole map back.

The standard church reading says these “gods” are human judges. So God is threatening human judges that they’ll die like humans? That’s the punchline of the psalm, and it only lands if the ones on trial weren’t expecting to die at all.

Micaiah’s Vision of a Throne Room Meeting That Ends in a Lie

In 1 Kings 22:19-23, the prophet Micaiah tells King Ahab what he saw: Yahweh on his throne with the host of heaven standing to his right and left. Yahweh asks who’ll lure Ahab into a battle where he’ll die. The spirits kick ideas around, and one steps forward and offers to be a lying spirit in the mouths of Ahab’s prophets. Yahweh approves the plan and sends him off.

That’s a meeting with an agenda, a discussion and a vote, and the plan that wins involves deceiving a king through his own prophets. It isn’t a one-off, either. Job opens with the sons of God coming to present themselves before Yahweh, with the satan (a title meaning “the accuser,” with no capital letter or pitchfork yet) arriving among them as a member of the court. Psalm 89 asks who among the sons of God is like Yahweh, “a God feared in the council of the holy ones.” Exodus 15 asks who’s like Yahweh among the gods. Genesis has God saying “let us make humans in our image,” worrying that the man has become “like one of us,” and deciding “let us go down” at Babel.

Other nations’ gods show up doing their jobs, too. In Judges 11 the Israelite leader Jephthah tells the Ammonite king to keep whatever land his god Chemosh gave him, just as Israel keeps what Yahweh gave. In 2 Kings 3 the king of Moab sacrifices his eldest son on the city wall, and “great wrath” falls on Israel’s army, which packs up and goes home. The writer never tells you whose wrath it was, and the ancient reader didn’t need telling.

How the Gods of the Nations Became Angels and Demons

So how did a religion with a heavenly assembly end up with the flat “one God, some angels” picture? The council got demoted. It never went away.

Around the time of the Babylonian exile, writers like the author of Isaiah 40-55 started insisting there was no god besides Yahweh at all. Once that became the official position, the old texts needed new readings. The Greek translators turned “sons of God” into “angels of God.” The Book of Daniel, written in the 160s BCE, has an angel explain that he was held up fighting “the prince of Persia” and will soon face “the prince of Greece,” while Michael is Israel’s prince. Those are Deuteronomy 32’s national patrons again, now filed as angels.

The ones who couldn’t be made respectable went the other way. Deuteronomy 32:17 already complains that Israel sacrificed to shedim, a word usually translated “demons,” and calls them gods their ancestors never knew. Foreign gods slid into the demon column, and that’s the version Christianity inherited.

Paul’s Many Gods and Many Lords

The New Testament never fully shook the older picture. In 1 Corinthians 8:5-6, Paul concedes that there are many so-called gods and lords in heaven and on earth before saying that for believers there’s one God and one Lord. Two chapters later he says pagan sacrifices go to demons, echoing Deuteronomy 32:17 almost word for word. The letter to the Ephesians warns that the fight is against rulers, authorities and cosmic powers “in the heavenly places,” which is the council’s language with the serial numbers filed off.

Jesus quotes the council directly. In John 10:34, when a crowd is ready to stone him for making himself God, he answers with Psalm 82: “Is it not written in your law, I said, you are gods?” The gospel writer treats the line as a trump card, and the crowd doesn’t argue with it.

Monotheism Wrote Over What Came Before

Most Christian scholars working today, conservatives included, accept that "sons of God" is the original wording of Deuteronomy 32:8. In fact, the council passages are all in the Bible you own, and most of them were never edited. What changed was the reading. A faith that started out treating Yahweh as the greatest god among many, and Israel as his private share of a divided world, spent centuries rewriting that into the idea that no other gods exist. Where the text could be touched, like Deuteronomy 32:8, it sometimes was. Where it couldn’t, the gods were renamed judges, angels or demons, and preachers learned to read past them.

Deuteronomy 32:8 wasn’t the only line in that poem to get the treatment. A few verses later, the same song originally called on the gods themselves to bow down to Yahweh, and the Hebrew text behind your Bible cut them out. The New Testament quotes the older version anyway, in a verse your pastor has probably read aloud without knowing where it came from.

That’s in the bonus below, verse by verse, along with two Jewish books from before Jesus that kept the national-patron idea alive. If you’re reading this as a free subscriber, the core of every piece stays free, but supporters get the deeper cut that makes the case airtight. Become a Supporter and it unlocks right now.

Leave a comment

Share

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Other Verse in the Song of Moses That Got Rewritten

The last verse of the Song of Moses, Deuteronomy 32:43, reads like this in the medieval Hebrew text behind the King James: “Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.”

Read more

The history you were handed over says that Jews were promised a messiah; they were also given prophecies the messiah would fulfill, and in the first century, Jews in Judea were waiting for this unique savior. Then Jesus came along, fulfilling every prophecy to the extent that it would be ridiculous to call it a coincidence.

To name a few, seven centuries before Bethlehem, the prophets described a virgin birth, a flight to Egypt, a donkey ride into Jerusalem, and a suffering servant wounded for our sins. If you grew up around this stuff, fulfilled prophecy was probably the strongest card in the deck, since nobody could fake predictions written hundreds of years in advance.

Yet Jews not only chose not to believe in him, but in the end got him killed.

So how did the Israelites fail to recognize the messiah right in front of them, knowing all that he was fulfilling the prophecies that they were desperately waiting for?

Isaiah’s Young Woman Was Standing in Front of the King

Let's start with recapping something we previously covered at length.

Isaiah 7 opens around 735 BCE with Ahaz, king of Judah, in a panic. The kings of Aram and northern Israel have teamed up and are marching on Jerusalem. Isaiah tells Ahaz to calm down and offers him a sign: a young woman is pregnant and will have a son named Immanuel, and before that boy is old enough to tell good food from bad, the lands of those two kings will be deserted (Isaiah 7:16). The sign is a countdown. By the time a baby born this year hits toddlerhood, your enemies will be gone. It only works as a sign if Ahaz lives to watch it happen, and the very next chapter has Isaiah fathering a son of his own with a nearly identical countdown attached (Isaiah 8:3-4).

To sum up:

• A young girl gave birth, not a virgin.

• Gave birth in the 8th century BCE, not 1st century CE

• The boy is called “Emmanuel” and not Jesus

The virgin bit comes from a translation mistake made centuries before Jesus was born, when someone mistranslated or at the very best made a poor choice of words.

The Hebrew word is almah, a young woman of marriageable age. Hebrew has a specific word for virgin, betulah, and Isaiah didn’t use it. When Jewish scholars translated scripture into Greek a few centuries later, they rendered almah as parthenos, a word that usually means virgin but could stretch to cover a young girl. Matthew read the Greek, saw a virgin, and wrote in 1:22-23 that Mary’s pregnancy happened to fulfill what the prophet had said. A sign meant to reassure a frightened king in the 700s BCE became a prediction about a birth that happened long after Ahaz, his enemies, and the toddler in question were all dead.

The writer of Matthew either didn’t know or didn’t care that the original Hebrew text had no virgins.

Jews have never expected a messiah born to a virgin because the Hebrew Bible doesn't say anything like that.

Hosea’s Son Was a Whole Nation

Christian theology claims that Hosea's prophecy about God calling his son out of Egypt was fulfilled when Jesus returned from Egypt as an infant.

Matthew 2:15 has the holy family fleeing to Egypt and staying until Herod dies, to fulfill the prophet’s words, “Out of Egypt I called my son.” That line is Hosea 11:1, and here’s the full verse: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” Hosea names the son in the same breath. He’s looking back at the Exodus, with God describing the nation of Israel as a child he raised. The next verse says the more God called them, the more they ran off to sacrifice to the Baals and burn incense to idols.

If Matthew wants Jesus to be the son in Hosea 11:1, he’s stuck with Jesus as the son in Hosea 11:2 too, the one who can’t stop worshipping other gods. Nobody applies the verse that way because nobody reads the verse at all. They read Matthew’s clipping of it.

Rachel Was Crying About the Exile

Matthew asserts that Jeremiah's elegy for Babylonian exiles returning home was fulfilled in the slaughter of infants in Bethlehem, keeping the weeping and cutting the promise of return since dead children weren't coming back from anywhere.

After Herod slaughters the boys of Bethlehem (an event no other ancient source mentions, including the Jewish historian Josephus, who cataloged Herod’s cruelties in loving detail), Matthew 2:17-18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 about Rachel weeping for her children in Ramah. Rachel was Jacob’s wife and the ancestral mother of the northern tribes. Ramah was where the Babylonians gathered captives for deportation around 586 BCE, and Jeremiah 40:1 places the prophet himself there in chains. The verses immediately after Rachel’s weeping tell her to dry her eyes because her children will come back from the land of the enemy.

In reality, Jeremiah wrote a poem of comfort about exiles coming home. Matthew kept the weeping and cut the promise, because the dead boys of Bethlehem weren’t coming home from anywhere.

The Prophecy That Doesn’t Exist at All

Matthew 2:23 says Joseph settled the family in Nazareth so that what the prophets said would be fulfilled: “He shall be called a Nazarene.” If you check out the verse and you won’t find it in the Hebrew Bible, in the Greek translation, or in any Jewish text we know of. Nazareth doesn’t appear anywhere in the Old Testament.

Defenders have tried to rescue it with wordplay. Isaiah 11:1 calls the coming king a netzer, a branch, which sounds a bit like Nazareth. Judges 13:5 says Samson will be a Nazirite, a man under a vow to skip wine and never cut his hair, which is an odd fit for a man the gospels themselves say was mocked as a drunkard (Matthew 11:19). When the best available defense of a fulfilled prophecy is a pun on the Hebrew word for a twig, the prophecy was written after the fact to explain an awkward detail of Jesus’ biography. He came from a nowhere village in Galilee, and Matthew needed scripture to have planned it.

Matthew Put Jesus on Two Donkeys

Zechariah 9:9 describes a king coming to Jerusalem humble and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. Anybody familiar with Hebrew poetry recognizes the pattern. The Psalms and the prophets say things twice, with the second line restating the first in slightly different words, so what Zechariah describes is one donkey mentioned two ways.

Mark, Luke, and John all have Jesus riding one animal. Matthew 21:2-7 has the disciples fetch a donkey and a colt, drape cloaks on both, and Jesus sits on them. Matthew read the poetic doubling as two separate animals and rewrote the scene so it matched his reading of the text, which tells you which direction the process ran. Nobody watched a man straddle two donkeys and then went searching for a verse to explain it. Matthew started with the verse and adjusted the event until it fit.

The Servant Was Israel

Isaiah 53 carries more weight in Christian apologetics than any other passage: despised and rejected, wounded for our transgressions, led like a lamb to the slaughter. It reads beautifully as a portrait of the crucifixion, and Christians have been reading it that way since the first century.

The servant poems in the second half of Isaiah were written around the time of the Babylonian exile, and the author tells you who the servant is. Isaiah 41:8 addresses “Israel, my servant.” Isaiah 44:1 says it again. Isaiah 49:3 is as blunt as it gets: “You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified.” The suffering servant is the exiled nation, beaten down and humiliated in the eyes of its neighbors, and the prophet insists that suffering will be vindicated. The kings in 52:15 and the speakers in 53:1-6 are the surrounding nations watching Israel restored and realizing they’d misjudged it. Jewish readers have understood the passage this way for centuries, and the text backs them up.

Psalm 22 got the same treatment. It’s a lament by someone who feels abandoned by God and surrounded by enemies, and it ends with the speaker rescued and praising God in the assembly. The gospels mined it for the crucifixion: the opening cry, the mocking crowd, the soldiers gambling for clothes. The famous line “they pierced my hands and my feet” leans on the Greek translation and a disputed reading. The standard Hebrew text says “like a lion, my hands and my feet,” which is clumsy Hebrew, but it’s what the manuscripts say.

Micah Was Talking About Assyria

Micah 5:2 does say a ruler will come from Bethlehem, and it’s the one prophecy that seems to fit on its face. Keep reading, though, and it’s clear Micah is promising a new king from David’s line (David came from Bethlehem, so the town stands in for the dynasty), and verses 5-6 say this ruler will save Israel when the Assyrians invade and will rule Assyria with the sword. Assyria was the superpower of Micah’s day and collapsed around 609 BCE, and Jesus never came within six centuries of fighting one.

The gospels can’t even agree on how Jesus got to Bethlehem. Matthew has Joseph and Mary already living there and moving to Nazareth later to dodge Herod’s son. Luke has them living in Nazareth and traveling to Bethlehem for a Roman census that took place about a decade after Herod died, even though Luke also sets the story in Herod’s reign (Luke 1:5). Two writers with two incompatible stories arriving at the same town is what you’d expect if scripture fixed the destination and each writer built his own road to it.

Reading Backward Was Standard Practice in the First Century

Matthew was doing what Jewish interpreters of his day did, and he’d have been baffled by the accusation of cheating. The community behind the Dead Sea Scrolls wrote commentaries on Habakkuk and Nahum that treated those old prophets as if they’d been writing coded messages about the sect’s own leader and his enemies in the first century BCE. Readers of that era assumed the prophets had their own moment in view.

The early Christians believed Jesus was the messiah, got blindsided when Rome executed him, and went back to their scriptures to work out how that could have been God’s plan. They found verses, lifted them out of context, and read them as predictions. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:3 that Christ died “according to the scriptures” without naming a single one, which is what you’d expect from a movement convinced the answer was in there somewhere and still hunting for the page.

The trouble started when a first-century method for coping with a crisis got repackaged in the modern era as evidence. Apologists present fulfilled prophecy as a statistical miracle, dozens of specific predictions that came true against impossible odds, and they count Hosea 11:1 and the Nazarene verse toward the total. A prediction counts as evidence when the writer meant it as a prediction, stated it clearly before the event, and it came true without anybody shaping the story to match. Almost none of these meet the first condition, and Matthew’s two donkeys show the third one failing in plain sight.

In the end we're left with three options: God either didn't know how to relay a message that would be clear to Israelites so that they'd know what to expect, He knew but intentionally chose not to, or Matthew was hunting for fulfilled prophecies in the Hebrew Bible in Greek to convince his readers. If it's the third one, was he evil? Not necessarily. If making the stories more colorful would bring people to Jesus, what could be wrong with it?

Leave a comment

Share

But that’s not all.

There’s one more fulfillment in Matthew that falls apart even faster when you take into account that he names the wrong prophet, and his account of Judas’ death flatly contradicts the other one in the New Testament. Paid subscribers get the full breakdown below: the thirty pieces of silver, the potter’s field, and how two writers built two different deaths for Judas out of scraps of scripture. If you’re on the free list, upgrading unlocks this and every bonus section in the archive.

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

How Matthew Built Judas’ Death From the Wrong Prophet

Matthew 27:3-10 says that Judas regrets betraying Jesus, throws his thirty pieces of silver into the temple, and hangs himself. The priests can’t put blood money back in the treasury, so they buy a potter’s field to bury foreigners in, and that’s why it’s called the Field of Blood. Matthew then says this fulfilled what the prophet Jeremiah said about thirty pieces of silver, the price set on a man, being given for the potter’s field.

Yet that quote isn’t from Jeremiah but from…

Read more

Thirty pieces of silver, a kiss in a garden, a rope, and two thousand years of his name serving as shorthand for a traitor. So when National Geographic announced in April 2006 that a lost gospel had turned up in which Jesus asks Judas to hand him over, the headlines wrote themselves. The villain was the hero, the betrayal was a favor, and the church had been telling the story backward since the second century.

The Codex That Rotted in a Long Island Bank Vault

The manuscript surfaced in the late 1970s in Middle Egypt, near the town of El Minya, and went straight into the antiquities trade. It’s a leather-bound papyrus book written in Coptic, the last stage of the Egyptian language, and it holds four texts. The Gospel of Judas is the third.

Nobody wanted to pay the asking price, so the codex spent about sixteen years in a safe deposit box in Hicksville, New York, where the humidity did what the Egyptian desert hadn’t managed in seventeen centuries. One later buyer reportedly stuck it in a freezer, which split the papyrus further. By the time a Swiss dealer bought it in 2000 and handed it to conservators, it had crumbled into close to a thousand fragments. The restoration took five years and pieces are still missing, which matters more than you’d expect, because some of the gaps fall on the very lines where the argument over Judas turns.

Radiocarbon testing dated the codex to somewhere between 220 and 340. The text inside it is older than the copy, and we know that because of a bishop who hated it.

A Gospel Already Condemned Around 180

Irenaeus, bishop of Lyon in Gaul, wrote a five-book attack on the Christian groups he considered heretics around the year 180. In it he describes people who claimed Cain, Esau, and the men of Sodom as their spiritual kin, and who’d produced a made-up history they called the Gospel of Judas. According to Irenaeus, they taught that Judas alone knew the truth and carried out “the mystery of the betrayal.”

So the 2006 find wasn’t the first anyone had heard of it. What National Geographic unveiled is a Coptic translation of a Greek text written around the middle of the second century, roughly two generations after the Gospel of John and more than a century after Jesus. It can’t tell us anything about what Judas did or thought. It tells us about a Christian group in the 100s and what they believed, and that’s plenty.

Scholars call that group Sethian, after Seth, the third son of Adam, whom they treated as the ancestor of a spiritual race. The Sethians held that the world was made by a lower, ignorant god, that the god of the Hebrew Bible was this lower god, and that the true God sat far above the whole mess in a realm of light. Salvation came through knowing that higher realm, and the body was a trap to get out of.

Jesus Laughs at the Disciples’ Prayer

The gospel opens with the twelve sitting together giving thanks over bread, which any Christian reader would recognize as the Eucharist. Jesus walks in and laughs at them. When they get defensive, he tells them they’re doing this because it’s how their god gets praised. They take it as an insult, and it’s meant as one, since their god isn’t his.

Later the disciples describe a dream about a great temple where priests stand at the altar sacrificing animals, their own wives, and their own children, all while calling on Jesus’ name. Jesus tells them the priests in the dream are the disciples themselves, and the crowds being led astray are the people who follow them.

This is the heart of the text, and the 2006 coverage mostly skated past it. The Gospel of Judas is an attack on the mainstream church of the second century, with its leaders tracing their authority back to the twelve, its sacred meal, and its growing celebration of martyrs who died for the faith. To this author, a church that saw its god as demanding blood and bodies was worshipping the wrong god. You don’t have to squint to see who the targets are.

“You Will Sacrifice the Man That Clothes Me”

Judas is the only disciple who can stand in front of Jesus, and he names where Jesus comes from: the immortal realm of Barbelo, the Sethian name for the first power to come out of the highest God. Jesus takes him aside and walks him through the whole cosmology, from the invisible Spirit and the realms of light down to the rebellious rulers who made this world, one of whom is named Saklas, an Aramaic word for “fool.”

Then comes the line that made the headlines. In the first published translation, Jesus tells Judas he’ll exceed all the others, because “you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.” Read the way the publication team read it, that’s Jesus asking Judas to free him from his body. The flesh is the clothing, the spirit is Jesus, and Judas is the friend who helps him out of the costume.

The gospel ends with the betrayal itself, told in a few flat lines. The high priests approach Judas, he takes some money, and he hands Jesus over. There’s no crucifixion, no resurrection, and no redemption scene for Judas, and the text stops there.

The Thirteenth Demon Problem

Jesus calls Judas the “thirteenth daimon,” which the first translation rendered “thirteenth spirit.” In Sethian texts, though, a daimon is a lower power, and in Christian writing of the period the word means a demon. The number doesn’t help him either. In Sethian cosmology the thirteenth realm belongs to the ruler of this lower world, the ignorant creator the whole text despises.

Other passages lean the same way. Jesus tells Judas his star has led him astray, and he says Judas will grieve a great deal. In one disputed line the published version had Judas “set apart for” the holy generation, while critics argued the Coptic means he’s separated from it. In another, the critics argued a negative had gone missing in translation, and the passage says Judas will not go up to that holy generation.

April DeConick, a professor of biblical studies at Rice University, laid this out in a 2007 book and a New York Times op-ed, and most specialists who’ve worked on the text since have moved away from the hero reading. On their reading, “you will exceed all of them” is an indictment. The disciples in the dream sacrifice to the wrong god, and Judas outdoes every one of them by handing over Jesus’ body as the ultimate offering to Saklas. That makes him the worst of the twelve, and it makes the text a mockery of a church that built its salvation on that same sacrifice.

The debate hasn’t fully closed, and some scholars read Judas as a tragic figure who grasps the truth and still ends up serving the lower powers. The version where he’s the trusted friend on a secret mission hasn’t survived contact with the Coptic.

How Judas Got Worse From Mark to John

Mark, the earliest gospel, written around 70, gives Judas no motive at all. He goes to the chief priests, they promise him money, and he hands Jesus over (Mark 14:10-11). Matthew, written a decade or two later, has Judas ask what they’ll pay and sets the price at thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:15), a figure lifted from Zechariah 11:12. Luke says Satan entered him (Luke 22:3). John, the latest, calls him a devil from early on (John 6:70-71), makes him a thief who helped himself to the common purse (John 12:6), and has Satan enter him at the supper (John 13:27).

Then there’s his death. Matthew has Judas throw the silver into the temple and hang himself, after which the priests use the money to buy a potter’s field (Matthew 27:3-8). Acts has Judas buy the field himself, fall headlong, and burst open so his intestines spill out (Acts 1:18). The two accounts can’t both be right about who bought the field or how he died. They agree only that the traitor came to a gruesome end on a plot of land called the Field of Blood.

The Judas Christians grew up with took shape over several decades, each gospel adding something darker than the one before. The Sethian author was writing into a story that was still moving.

The Hiring Problem Nobody Preaches On

The Gospel of Judas also pokes at a hole that exists however you translate it. John says Jesus knew from the beginning who would betray him (John 6:64). Mark has Jesus say it would’ve been better for that man never to have been born (Mark 14:21). In John, Jesus even tells Judas to go and do it quickly (John 13:27).

So Jesus picks Judas knowing what Judas will do, the plan of salvation needs somebody to do it, and Judas then takes the blame for all eternity.

Christian theology has spent centuries working at this knot, mostly by arguing that knowing something in advance isn’t the same as causing it. I wonder what a court would make of that defense from an HR manager who hired a bookkeeper he knew for certain would defraud the company.

Rival Christians Who Thought the Church Worshipped the Wrong God

The best reason to read this text survives either translation. The Gospel of Judas is a second-century Christian document written by Christians who believed the people running the churches were praying to a false god.

The author had company. Irenaeus bothered to refute these people by name, and more Sethian texts turned up in 1945 in the jar of books found near Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt. There were enough of these Christians, with enough books, that a bishop in Gaul spent pages attacking them. Christianity in the 100s was a crowd of groups each claiming the true Jesus, and the group whose books became the New Testament was one of them. That group won, and its bishops decided which books kept getting copied, which is why the Gospel of Judas reached us through a single damaged codex that spent sixteen years in a New York bank.

Perhaps the story of Judas the villain worked better before Jesus was made God's equal. A Jesus who wasn't God didn't have to be all-knowing, and in Mark 13:32 he says that not even the Son knows the day or the hour of the end, which means he never claimed to be all-knowing.

Leave a comment

Share

Free subscribers have the story. Supporters get the bonus below, where I walk through the four spots in the Coptic that decided whether Judas came out a hero or a demon, including the final scene where one reading has Judas entering a cloud of light and the other has Jesus doing it. If you want to see how a handful of words became a worldwide headline, that’s the section to read. Become a supporter to unlock it.

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Four Readings That Decided Who Judas Was

The whole hero-versus-demon fight comes down to a few spots in the Coptic, several of them sitting right beside holes in the papyrus. Here they are in the order they appear.

Read more

Plenty of ancient books didn’t make it into the Bible, but Enoch stands out among them for three reasons. Early Christians loved it, it tells a wild story, and the Bible itself still quotes it.

The quote sits in the short letter of Jude, right before Revelation. In verses 14-15, Jude cites a prophecy from “Enoch, the seventh from Adam,” warning that the Lord is coming with thousands of his holy ones to judge the ungodly. He introduces it the same way he’d introduce Isaiah. Enoch prophesied it, and that settles it.

You won’t find that prophecy anywhere else in your Bible since it comes from the Book of Enoch, a Jewish text that early Christians read, copied and quoted, and that the church later dropped so completely that Western readers lost track of it for over a thousand years.

Free subscribers get the full story of how Enoch got kicked out of the Bible. Paid subscribers also get the bonus at the end, on the forbidden lessons the fallen angels taught and the angel hiding in plain sight in Leviticus. For the full picture, you know what to do.

The Ancient Work the Church Tried to Erase?

What we call 1 Enoch runs 108 chapters and it’s more of a collention since it doesn’t tell one coherent story. It’s five separate works, written by different people over about three centuries, all speaking in Enoch’s voice. (Two later books, 2 and 3 Enoch, borrowed his name too, but they’re separate works with their own histories.)

The first part, the Book of the Watchers, opens with the judgment prophecy Jude quotes and then tells the story that made the whole collection famous. Two hundred angels called the Watchers swear a pact on Mount Hermon, come down to earth, and take human wives. Their children are giants who eat everything humans grow, then eat the humans, then eat each other. The angels also teach people things they were never supposed to know, from weapons to sorcery. The earth cries out, and God sends the flood. Enoch gets stuck as the go-between, carrying the fallen angels’ plea for mercy up to heaven and bringing back a no. Then angels take him on a tour of the universe, showing him the ends of the earth, the prison where the fallen angels wait for judgment, the pits where the dead are held, and the mountain where God will come down one day.

The second part, the Parables, moves from the past to the end of the world. Enoch sees a figure called the Son of Man, also called the Chosen One, sitting on a throne of glory and judging the kings and the powerful who crushed God’s people. The last chapter delivers a twist Christian readers tend to find awkward, when an angel tells Enoch that he himself is that Son of Man.

The third part is an astronomy textbook. The angel Uriel walks Enoch through the gates the sun rises and sets through, the phases of the moon, the stars and the winds, and lays out a year of exactly 364 days. It warns that in the days of sinners, the seasons will fall out of sync and people will get the calendar wrong.

The fourth part is a pair of dream visions. In the first, Enoch watches the earth get swallowed by the flood. The second retells the history of the world with animals. Adam is a white bull, Israel is a flock of sheep, and the foreign nations are lions, wolves and vultures. The sheep get torn apart for centuries until a sheep with a big horn fights back (a stand-in for the Jewish revolt against the Greek kings in the 160s BCE), God steps in, and in the end every animal turns back into a white bull.

The last part, the Epistle of Enoch, is Enoch’s final message to his children. It squeezes all of history into ten “weeks,” then turns into a long string of curses against the rich, the violent and anyone who got fat on other people’s misery, with a promise that the righteous will get their reward after death even if they get nothing in this life. It closes with the birth of Noah, a baby so strange (white as snow, with eyes that light up the house) that his own father suspects an angel fathered him, and Enoch has to reassure the family that the boy is theirs and will survive the flood.

Two Odd Passages in Genesis Built an Entire Book

Enoch gets four verses in Genesis. Genesis 5:21-24 says he lived 365 years, “walked with God,” and then “was not; for God took him.” Every other man in that family tree gets the same flat ending, “and he died.” Enoch disappears instead.

By the last few centuries before Jesus, Jewish writers had turned that strange line into a whole career. If God took Enoch up alive, he’d seen heaven, and a man who’d seen heaven would have things to report.

The book also takes the weirdest passage in Genesis, the four verses in chapter 6 where the “sons of God” take human wives and father the Nephilim, right before the flood. Genesis mentions this and moves on. The Book of Enoch turns it into an epic. Two hundred angels called the Watchers swear a pact on Mount Hermon, come down to earth, take wives, and father giants who eat everything in sight, then eat people, then eat each other. The angels also teach humans things they were never supposed to know. The earth cries out, God sends the flood, and Enoch gets stuck as the go-between, carrying the fallen angels’ plea for mercy up to heaven and bringing back a no.

What we call 1 Enoch is a collection written over roughly three centuries. The Watchers story is the oldest part, from around the third century BCE. There’s a section on the movements of the sun and moon, a retelling of Israel’s history where the people are sheep and their enemies are wild animals, a set of warnings to the rich and powerful, and a later section called the Parables, probably written around the turn of the era. When the Dead Sea Scrolls came out of the caves near Qumran, they included Aramaic fragments of every section except the Parables. The Jews who hid those scrolls kept more copies of Enoch than of several books that made it into the Hebrew Bible.

The First Christians Read It as Scripture

Jude’s quote is the most obvious sign, but it’s hardly the only one. Jude 6 describes angels who “kept not their first estate” now locked in chains of darkness until judgment day, and 2 Peter 2:4 says the same thing. That’s the Watchers story. Genesis never mentions angels being chained up anywhere, so the writers of those letters were working from Enoch’s version of events and assumed their readers knew it.

The Epistle of Barnabas, an early second-century letter that some churches read in worship, quotes Enoch and introduces it with “the scripture says.” Tertullian, a Christian writer in North Africa around 200 CE, defended the book as scripture outright. His explanation for why Jews had rejected it was that it talked about Christ, which tells you how Christian the book felt to him.

You can see why Christians loved it. The Parables describe a heavenly figure called the Son of Man who sits on a throne of glory and judges the kings of the earth. “Son of Man” is the title Jesus uses for himself more than any other in the gospels. Enoch also gave early Christians a backstory for demons. In chapter 15, the spirits of the dead giants become evil spirits that roam the earth and torment people. Read the gospels with that in mind and all those unclean spirits Jesus keeps casting out suddenly have an origin story.

How Enoch Lost the Vote

Rabbinic Judaism went first. After the Romans destroyed the Temple in 70 CE, the rabbis who rebuilt Jewish religious life settled on a list of sacred books, and Enoch wasn’t on it. It was written centuries after the man it’s named for, it pushed a 364-day solar calendar that clashed with the one the rabbis used, and it had been a favorite of exactly the kind of end-times groups the rabbis spent the next few centuries trying to calm down.

Christians took longer for a few complex reasons. Origen, the most influential Christian scholar of the third century, noted that the churches didn’t count the books of Enoch as divine. Augustine, the bishop of Hippo in North Africa around 400 CE, admitted that Enoch must have written something inspired, since Jude said so, and then threw the book out anyway. His reasoning was that it was too old to verify and the Jews hadn’t preserved it among their sacred books. Genesis claims to describe events even older than Enoch’s, but it passed the test because the Jewish list included it.

The deeper problem was the angel sex. Early Christians had read “sons of God” in Genesis 6 as angels, the same way Enoch did. By the third and fourth centuries that reading had become embarrassing. Christian writers such as Julius Africanus and later Augustine swapped in a tidier explanation, that the “sons of God” were pious men descended from Adam’s son Seth who married into Cain’s corrupt family line. Once the angels were gone from Genesis 6, a book built entirely on angels having children with women had nothing left to stand on.

Enoch’s explanation for evil caused trouble too. In Enoch, the world goes wrong because rebel angels come down and corrupt it. Augustine was building his whole theology around sin entering the world through Adam and passing down to every human being. A book that pinned the blame on angels competed with that story, and Augustine’s story won.

An interesting detail comes from Jerome, the scholar who translated the Bible into Latin. Writing in the late fourth century, he noted that many Christians rejected the letter of Jude itself because it quoted Enoch. The quote could have dragged Jude out of the Bible along with it. Jude survived the doubts and Enoch didn’t.

Nobody burned the book. The Council of Laodicea, around 363 CE, ruled that only canonical books should be read in church, and its list left out Enoch along with hundreds of other writings, without naming any of them.

Apparently, Christianity started out wrong and spread wrong, and the church spent the next few centuries fixing it until the correct version finally took shape.

If you’re finding value here, I’d love for you to consider becoming a paid subscriber to keep The Unholy Truth alive.

Ethiopia Never Let It Go

One church kept the whole thing. Ethiopia’s kingdom became officially Christian in the fourth century, earlier than most of Europe, and its church translated scripture into Ge’ez, the classical Ethiopian language. Enoch came along with the rest, and the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church never took it out. The Beta Israel, Ethiopia’s Jewish community, kept it in their scriptures too.

For centuries, European scholars knew the book mainly as a rumor and a line in Jude. Then James Bruce, a Scottish explorer, came back from Ethiopia in 1773 carrying complete copies. In 1821 Richard Laurence, a professor of Hebrew at Oxford, published the first English translation. The book Augustine had written off as too uncertain to trust had been sitting in Ethiopian churches the whole time, read as scripture by millions of Christians who’d never heard it was supposed to be gone.

It’s still there today. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has tens of millions of members, and for all of them, Enoch is part of the Bible.

Leave a comment

Share

There’s a part of Enoch I left out of this piece, and it’s the part that did the most damage. When the Watchers came down, they didn’t only take wives. They ran a school. The book names which angel taught which subject, and the list reads like an indictment of human civilization, from weapons to makeup to astrology. One early Christian writer used it to tell women what they could and couldn’t wear, and one of the angels shows up hiding in plain sight in a ritual from Leviticus.

That’s all in the bonus section below, available to paid subscribers. If you’ve enjoyed the free pieces, this is a good time to upgrade and get the rest of the story.

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Forbidden Curriculum of Enoch’s Angels

Chapter 8 of 1 Enoch works like a course catalog. The leader of the teaching effort is an angel named Asael, spelled Azazel in later versions, and his subject is metal. He teaches men to make swords, knives, shields and breastplates, so war itself becomes angelic contraband. He also teaches the working of gold and silver into bracelets and ornaments, the use of antimony to paint the eyes, dyes, and the cutting of precious stones.

Read more

In December 1945, a farmer digging for fertilizer near the town of Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt hit a sealed clay jar. Inside were thirteen leather-bound books written in Coptic, the language Egyptian Christians used in the fourth century. One of them opens by announcing that these are the hidden sayings the living Jesus spoke, and that Judas Thomas wrote them down.

It’s an easy mistake to assume the church threw this book out primarily because it was weird. It’s got some strange lines, sure, but the Bible has never been short on weird. Ezekiel has wheels covered in eyes, Revelation has a seven-headed beast, and Mark has a young man running off naked during Jesus’ arrest for reasons nobody’s ever explained, and all three made it into the Bible with no trouble at all.

The trouble with Thomas is what it hands to ordinary believers.

A Gospel With No Crucifixion and No Resurrection

Thomas has 114 sayings and almost nothing else. It mentions no birth in Bethlehem, no miracles, no trial, no crucifixion, and no empty tomb. Jesus talks, a disciple asks a question now and then, and Jesus talks some more. About half the sayings have close matches in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, including the mustard seed, the sower, the blind leading the blind, and the prophet with no honor in his hometown.

The first saying lays out the whole deal: whoever finds the meaning of these words won’t taste death. Salvation comes from understanding what Jesus said, and his death doesn’t come into it.

Paul, writing to the Christians in Corinth in the 50s, says the core of what he passed on is that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and was raised on the third day (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). A few lines later he tells them that if Christ wasn’t raised, their faith is worthless and they’re still in their sins (15:17).

Paul's version relies on something that happened once to one man, and the only way to get your share of it is through a church that baptizes you and hands you the bread and wine. Thomas’ Jesus gives out sayings, and whoever works out what they mean has what they came for, which you can do alone with the book open on a kitchen table, with no baptism, no bread and wine, and no empty tomb.

The Kingdom That Doesn’t Need a Priest

Saying 3 opens with Jesus mocking religious leaders who claim the kingdom is up in the sky. If that’s where it is, he says, the birds will get there first, and if it’s in the sea, the fish will beat you to it. The kingdom is inside you and outside you, and once you know yourselves, you’ll be known.

Furthermore, in Saying 113, the disciples ask when the kingdom’s coming, and Jesus tells them waiting for it won’t bring it, because it’s already spread out across the earth and people can’t see it. In Saying 77 he says that if you split a piece of wood or lift a stone, you’ll find him there.

Then there’s Saying 14, where Jesus tells his followers that fasting will bring sin on them, praying will get them condemned, and giving to charity will damage their spirits. That’s a Jesus who looks at the three pillars of organized piety and waves them off.

If you read this the way a bishop would have around the year 200, it’s not hard to see why it's such a problem. His authority rests on sacraments only he can perform, fasts he puts on the calendar, and a collection plate. Thomas tells his congregation the kingdom is already around them, under the rocks in their own yards, and that his fasts are hurting them. Saying 108 finishes the job: whoever drinks from Jesus’ mouth becomes like him, and Jesus becomes that person with no ladder, no ranks, and nobody standing between them and God holding a key.

Doubting Thomas Was a Smear Job

Mark, Matthew and Luke name Thomas in their lists of the twelve and never give him a single line. The Gospel of John, written around 90-100, is the only book in the Bible that gives him a personality, and every trait it hands him is a failure.

In John 11:16, Thomas gloomily tells the disciples they should go die with Jesus, missing the point of the Lazarus story completely. In John 14:5, Jesus tells the disciples they know the way to where he’s going, and Thomas answers that they don’t even know where he’s going, so how could they know the way? Then comes the scene that stuck him with a nickname for two thousand years. In John 20:24-29, Thomas misses the risen Jesus’ first appearance, refuses to believe until he can put his fingers in the nail holes and his hand in the wound in Jesus’ side, and gets scolded when Jesus comes back: blessed are the ones who haven’t seen and believe anyway.

Thomas’ followers taught that you meet Jesus by looking inward, that the kingdom is already here, and that the body is a poor thing next to the spirit (Saying 29 marvels that such great wealth could live in such poverty). John’s answer is a Thomas who can’t know anything until he’s poked a physical body that died and got up again, and who gets corrected to his face by the risen Christ. John also stresses more than any other gospel that the resurrected Jesus had a body you could touch. When the only writer who bothers to develop a character uses him three times as the guy who doesn’t get it, and the third time lands on the exact issue that character’s followers were known for, it’s fair to call it a targeted hit.

The first move against Thomas was made inside the New Testament, generations before any bishop wrote a list.

One Secret Conversation Too Many

In Saying 13, Jesus asks his disciples to tell him who he’s like. Peter says a righteous angel, and Matthew says a wise philosopher, and Thomas says his mouth can’t put it into words. Jesus takes Thomas aside and tells him three things. When Thomas comes back, the others ask what Jesus said, and he tells them that if he repeated even one of those things, they’d pick up stones to kill him, and fire would come out of the stones and burn them up.

In Matthew 16:13–19, Jesus asks the same question, but in this telling, Peter gets it right and consequently Jesus hands him the keys to the kingdom. Matthew’s scene became the charter for church authority, a line of leaders passed down from Peter. Thomas’ scene flips it. Peter gets it wrong, and the one disciple who understands gets private teaching that the rest of the group, the future leadership, couldn’t handle.

Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyon in Gaul around 180, spent five books of his Against Heresies fighting groups who claimed Jesus gave secret teaching to a chosen few. His answer was that the apostles taught everything in the open and handed it to the bishops, whose succession you could trace name by name. He also insisted there could be four gospels and only four, because the earth has four corners and there are four winds. Those two arguments prop each other up. A fixed set of four books, read in public and explained by bishops, makes the bishop the gatekeeper. A fifth gospel saying the best teaching went to one man in private makes the bishop unnecessary.

What makes this dynamic so intriguing is how much weight second-century writers placed on apostolic authority. Yet ironically, it wasn't the original apostles' Christianity that ultimately defined the institutional church, but it was Paul, an outsider who never met Jesus in the flesh.

From Warning Labels to a Sealed Jar

Hippolytus, a church leader in Rome in the early 200s, wrote that a heretical sect called the Naassenes quoted from a gospel under Thomas’ name. Origen, the most prolific Christian scholar of the third century, put the Gospel of Thomas on his list of gospels written by heretics. Eusebius, the bishop of Caesarea who wrote the first history of the church around 325, filed it with the books to be rejected as heretical. Cyril, the bishop of Jerusalem around 350, told people preparing for baptism not to read it and blamed it on a disciple of Mani, founder of a rival religion out of Persia.

In 367, Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, sent his yearly Easter letter to the churches of Egypt. It listed the 27 books of the New Testament exactly as Christians have them today, the earliest surviving list that matches, and warned against secret books that heretics had made up and passed off as ancient. That letter went out to every monastery in Egypt, including the network of communal monasteries founded by a former soldier named Pachomius along the Nile, a few miles from where the jar turned up.

Nobody left a note explaining the jar. What we do have is the scrap paper glued inside the book covers to stiffen them, which includes letters and receipts from the 340s. So the books were bound near those monasteries, and someone sealed them in a jar and hid them in the cliffs around the same time Egypt’s most powerful bishop was ordering heretical books out of circulation. Somebody loved those books enough to hide them instead of burning them, and the order that made hiding them necessary came from the top.

The Gospel That Wouldn’t Stay Buried

The church won the argument for sixteen hundred years, but it never managed to erase the book. Between 1897 and 1904, two Oxford researchers digging through an ancient garbage dump at Oxyrhynchus in Egypt pulled out three scraps of papyrus with Greek sayings of Jesus that nobody could place. When the Nag Hammadi copy turned up, scholars realized the scraps were pieces of Thomas, copied in Greek in the 200s. The book was being read and copied in more than one language, in more than one town, for well over a century before Athanasius wrote his letter.

The New Testament came together through choices people made, and those choices tracked what their church needed. A gospel where salvation came through a crucified and risen body, handed out by bishops through sacraments, got in. A gospel where salvation came through understanding, open to anyone willing to split a piece of wood and look, got condemned by name, and the people who treasured it ended up burying it in a jar.

Ironically, condemning Thomas by name is what saved it, because its readers hid it carefully in a jar that kept it until our day. On the other hand, almost nothing survives of the Gospel of the Hebrews, which the church chose to ignore instead of declaring it heretical.

Before anyone starts a Thomas fan club, though, there’s a problem. The book’s final saying is the one its modern promoters quietly skip, and it complicates the story of the enlightened gospel the bishops were too narrow to accept. In this edition’s bonus section, I go through Saying 114, where Peter tries to throw Mary Magdalene out of the group and Jesus’ fix is worse than the problem. If you're a free subscriber who's been thinking about upgrading, today's as good a day as any, and the bonus is waiting on the other side.

Leave a comment

Share

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

The Last Saying Nobody Broadcasts

Today, Thomas is marketed as the gospel the patriarchs tried to bury. It’s mystical, accessible to anyone, free from church hierarchy, and filled with scenes where Mary Magdalene and Salome stand among the disciples asking questions. Most of that modern pitch holds up, but it conveniently overlooks the last line of the book.

Read more

The Christian Old Testament and Jewish Tanakh consist of roughly the same books. They’re just in a different order, divided differently, and in a few places, different words are used for the exact same Hebrew text. These dissimilarities are the residue of a centuries-long argument about what these texts were for, and Christianity won that argument so thoroughly that most Christians have no idea it happened.

The heart of the problem is that early Christians inherited a set of Jewish scriptures they couldn’t read in the original language, worked from a Greek translation with its own quirks and ambiguities, and needed those scriptures to predict Jesus. When the plain Hebrew didn’t cooperate, they had other options.

The Septuagint Problem

By the time Christianity shows up in the first century, most Jews outside Judea read Greek, not their mother tongue Hebrew, since that’s the language of the Mediterranean world after Alexander. So somewhere around the third to first century BCE, Jewish scholars translated the Hebrew scriptures into Greek. That translation is called the Septuagint, and it’s the version nearly every New Testament writer quotes when they cite “scripture.”

This causes issues more serious than lost-in-translation ones because translation wasn’t neutral. Every translator made choices, and some of those choices shifted meaning in ways that later became load-bearing for Christian theology.

The well-known case is Isaiah 7:14. The Hebrew word is almah, which means a young woman of childbearing age. It doesn’t specify virginity one way or the other; there’s a separate Hebrew word, betulah, that does that job more precisely. The Septuagint translators rendered almah as parthenos, the Greek word for virgin. Maybe that’s a reasonable Greek gloss for a young unmarried woman in that era. Maybe the translators just picked the wrong word. Either way, Matthew’s gospel quotes the Greek version of Isaiah 7:14 and builds a virgin birth narrative directly on top of it, in a passage that in its original Hebrew context is about a political sign given to King Ahaz during a war in the eighth century BCE, with zero connection to any messiah seven hundred years in the future.

Furthermore, in that era Hebrew family trees were patrilineal. A messiah from King David’s bloodline means a messiah with a father from King David’s bloodline, and no human father means no relation.

Naturally, Jewish readers working from the Hebrew never had this problem, because the Hebrew never said what the Greek said, and they had never expected a virgin to give birth. The doctrine of the virgin birth exists, in significant part, because of a translation choice.

Needless to say, modern Bible translations still keep this mistranslation because the fundamentals of faith hang on this translation blunder.

Reading Backward From the Answer

Once you have a Greek text you can cite, the next move is reading it as if it were always about you, which is what scholars call typology. This is the primary tool early Christianity used to turn the Hebrew Bible into a Christian document.

The logic is simple, as well as non-Biblical: the “Old Testament” isn’t really about ancient Israel at all, but a series of foreshadowings, types, and shadows pointing toward the “true” fulfillment in Christ. Adam prefigures Christ, the Passover lamb prefigures Christ, the binding of Isaac prefigures Christ, and the bronze serpent Moses lifts up in the wilderness prefigures Christ. Practically every major figure and event in the Hebrew Bible gets reassigned a role in a story its original authors never knew they were writing.

Take Psalm 22, which opens with “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me,” a line Jesus quotes from the cross in Mark and Matthew. The Psalm in Hebrew is a lament, however, a genre with dozens of examples across the Psalter, written by someone in distress who eventually pivots to praise and trust in God’s deliverance. There’s no messianic claim anywhere in the text as the psalm’s own community would have understood it. Christian readers, working backward from the crucifixion, found phrases in the psalm that resonated (dividing garments, piercing hands, mocking bystanders) and reassembled the whole poem as prophecy after the fact.

The events come first. The proof texts get assembled afterward, and sometimes edited or intentionally mistranslated to fit.

The Suffering Servant’s Career Change

Isaiah 53 is probably the single most contested chapter in this whole fight, because Christians read it as an unmistakable prophecy of Jesus’ crucifixion and Jewish readers, historically, have read it as being about someone else entirely.

In its literary context, Isaiah 40-55 repeatedly identifies “the servant” of the Lord explicitly as Israel itself. Isaiah 49:3 says it outright: “You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor.” The servant suffers on behalf of the nations, and multiple ancient and medieval Jewish commentators, along with a strong current of modern scholarship, read the “suffering servant” passages as describing the nation of Israel’s suffering and exile among the Gentile powers, followed by eventual vindication.

Christian readers isolated chapter 53 from its context, stripped away the surrounding chapters that identify the servant as Israel, and applied it individually to Jesus: pierced for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities, led like a lamb to the slaughter. It’s a compelling read if you already know the ending you’re looking for. It’s a much harder read if you’re following the argument Isaiah’s actual audience, exiled Judahites in Babylon, would have understood as being about their own national suffering and eventual restoration.

Neither reading is objectively obvious from the Hebrew alone. What’s clear is that the Christian reading requires actively working against the passage’s literary context, and that only makes sense once you already need Isaiah to be about a crucified messiah.

Rearranging the Furniture

Seemingly cosmetic, the change in book order is more important than one would think, since it reflects a different theological argument about what the collection as a whole is for.

The Hebrew Bible is organized into three sections: Torah, Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings). It ends with Chronicles, a book that closes on the Persian king Cyrus issuing a decree letting the exiles return home and rebuild. That’s the note the Jewish canon ends on: restoration, a people going home.

Christian Old Testament reorganizes the same books into Law, History, Wisdom/Poetry, and Prophets, and they put the Prophets last, ending on Malachi. Malachi closes with a warning about “the great and terrible day of the Lord” and a promise that Elijah will return before it. Read that as the final word of the “Old Testament” and it functions as a cliffhanger, practically begging for a sequel. Turn the page and you’re in Matthew, where the very next event is John the Baptist, whom the gospel explicitly casts as the returning Elijah.

It’s how the book ends once you’ve rearranged it to set up a resolution that arrives four hundred silent years later in a different language, written by a different religious movement, for a different purpose than anything the original compilers had in mind.

Deuterocanonical Books and the Expanding Canon

The Septuagint also included a batch of additional books, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Maccabees, and others, that never made it into the Hebrew Bible as it was eventually standardized by rabbinic Judaism. Catholic and Orthodox Christian canons kept these books (calling them deuterocanonical); most Protestant traditions eventually dropped them, following a decision Luther and other reformers made in the sixteenth century to align more closely with the Hebrew canon, centuries after these texts had already shaped Christian theology and liturgy.

So depending on which Christian tradition’s Bible you pick up, you’re getting a different set of books entirely, and none of those sets matches the Jewish canon that existed before Christianity showed up to argue about it.

What the Text Was

Contrary to how early Christianity treated it, the Hebrew Bible wasn’t a locked box waiting for the right key. It was a Jewish document, written by Jewish authors for a Jewish audience, addressing Jewish concerns about covenant, exile, and national survival. Christianity picked it up centuries later, translated it into a language its authors never spoke, and read a different story into it.

Once you let yourself reinterpret the Bible through the lens of new information you get from thin air, it doesn't matter anymore what the scripture says. Now you have the power to decide what it should.

What do you think about the whole ordeal?

Leave a comment

Share

Paul does something with a single Hebrew word in Genesis that erases the ethnic reading of Abraham’s promise entirely. What that move cost Jewish-Christian relations over the next two thousand years is below, for paying subscribers.

Exclusive Content for Paying Subscribers

Paul’s Word Games With Abraham’s Seed

Galatians 3:16 might be the single boldest piece of exegesis in the entire New Testament, and once you see what Paul’s doing there, you can’t unsee it.

Read more

Around the year 228, Origen, the most gifted Christian scholar of his generation, was working through the Gospel of John in Alexandria when he ran into a quotation he would’ve preferred to skip. He introduced it with “if anyone accepts the Gospel of the Hebrews,” a phrase that keeps him from vouching for the book, and then he quoted Jesus speaking in the first person: “My mother, the Holy Spirit, took me by one of my hairs and carried me away to the great mountain Tabor.”

A gospel that Jewish Christians treasured has Jesus calling the Holy Spirit his mother, and the people who quoted it were among the most respected scholars in the early church. Clement of Alexandria, a Christian teacher in Origen’s city a generation earlier, cited it with the same formula he used for scripture. Jerome, the scholar who later produced the Latin Bible, says he translated it into Greek and Latin. Eusebius, the church historian writing around 325, reported that Jewish believers took special delight in it. Yet no pastor preaches from it and no Bible prints it.

What’s left is a handful of quoted passages, and the best-known of them show a Jesus who caused trouble for the church that won the argument.

What the Gospel of the Hebrews Was and Who Read It

The Gospel of the Hebrews has no connection to the New Testament letter called Hebrews, which is a separate, anonymous book. The one we’re discussing today was a gospel, an account of Jesus’ teaching, death, and resurrection, and it was in circulation among Jewish Christians no later than the middle of the second century. Hegesippus, a Christian writer of Jewish background who died around 180, drew on it, and teachers in Alexandria were quoting it by the 200s. Every line we have survives because somebody quoted it in order to explain it, argue with it, or worry about it.

Ancient writers blurred this book together with two close relatives, the Gospel of the Nazarenes and the Gospel of the Ebionites, and modern scholars still sort passages among the three, so a few of the lines below could belong to a sibling text. The bonus section shows how the three divide up.

Gospels like these belonged to Jewish followers of Jesus who kept the law of Moses, the groups the later church called Ebionites and Nazarenes. They took Jesus for the Jewish Messiah and saw no new religion anywhere in the picture, and the Jesus of Mark, the earliest gospel in the Bible, never announces one either. Irenaeus, a bishop in Gaul writing around 180, complained that the Ebionites rejected the apostle Paul as a man who’d abandoned the law. The apostle Paul, for his part, insisted in his letter to the Galatians that his message came from a revelation of the risen Christ and that the leaders in Jerusalem, with Jesus’ brother James named first, had added nothing to it. Those are two competing claims about who held authority after Easter, and only one side ended up with its books in the Bible.

James Gets the First Appearance

According to the passage that Jerome, the translator of the Latin Bible, quotes, James, Jesus’ brother and the leader of the Jerusalem church, swore at the Last Supper that he wouldn’t eat again until he saw Jesus risen from the dead. After the resurrection, once Jesus had handed the linen cloth to the priest’s servant, he went to James, called for a table and bread, blessed the bread, broke it, gave it to James, and said, “My brother, eat your bread, for the Son of Man is risen from among those who sleep.”

The apostle Paul’s list of Easter witnesses in 1 Corinthians 15 puts Peter first and mentions James well down the line, and none of the four gospels in the Bible says a word about James seeing the risen Jesus. In the Gospel of the Hebrews the first person Jesus goes to see is his brother, over a meal, in a scene that hands James the opening spot in the resurrection story. A church that had settled on Peter and Paul as its founding heroes had no natural place for a gospel that put the Jerusalem leader in front of both.

The Mother Spirit Who Carried Jesus Up a Mountain

In Hebrew the word for spirit, ruach, is feminine, and Syriac-speaking Christians, whose language is a close relative of the Aramaic Jesus spoke, went on calling the Spirit “she” for centuries. Jerome knew this and told his readers not to be scandalized by the line about the mother, since spirit is feminine in Hebrew, masculine in Latin, and neuter in Greek, and God has no gender anyway. Origen, the scholar who quoted the line, took a different route: anyone who does the Father’s will counts as Jesus’ mother, according to a saying in Matthew, and the Spirit does the Father’s will, so the passage holds up. Two of the most learned Christians of their eras looked at that line and went to work explaining it, and neither called it a forgery.

Jerome, the church father who quotes this gospel most, preserved a second passage that rewrites the best-known scene in the gospels. In Matthew, a voice from heaven announces at Jesus’ baptism, “This is my beloved Son.” In the Gospel of the Hebrews, the whole fountain of the Holy Spirit comes down, rests on him, and speaks: “My son, in all the prophets I was waiting for you, that you would come and I might rest in you. You’re my rest, my firstborn son, who reigns forever.” The Spirit does the talking, and the Spirit is the one calling him son.

Church leaders spent the 300s deciding what the Spirit was in relation to the Father and the Son, and the Council of Constantinople in 381 finally wrote the Spirit’s standing into the creed. A gospel in which the Spirit acts as Jesus’ mother, carries him off to a mountaintop, and greets him as her firstborn was the wrong text to have lying around while that argument ran.

How the 27 Books Got Chosen

Since it’s so fundamental to Christianity and to us as ancient as Jesus himself, the New Testament feels like it arrived with faith as a finished package.

In reality, in the first two centuries, congregations swapped letters and gospels with no shared list, and some communities loved the apostle Paul while others couldn’t stand him. Around 140, Marcion, a wealthy shipowner who’d landed in Rome, assembled his own Bible from an edited Luke and ten letters of the apostle Paul, and the church that expelled him had to start deciding what its own collection would contain.

Around 325, Eusebius, the church historian, sorted books into accepted, disputed, spurious, and heretical piles, and he put the Gospel of the Hebrews among the spurious ones, next to the Shepherd of Hermas and the Didache. Then Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, listed the 27 books used today in an Easter letter in 367, and regional church councils in North Africa signed off on the same list at Hippo in 393 and Carthage in 397. That’s the closest thing the early church produced to an official ruling, and it came from bishops in one region.

Even then the argument didn’t end. Churches in Syria kept Revelation out of their Bibles for centuries, and the church in Ethiopia still reads Enoch and Jubilees as scripture, so the idea of one Bible everybody agreed on has always had exceptions.

Nobody Ordered It Burned and It Vanished Anyway

Given that no manuscript of the Gospel of the Hebrews has ever been found and that everything we have comes from quotations in the church fathers (Clement, Origen, Jerome, Eusebius, and a few others), you might think that at some point a bishop collected every copy of it and tossed it on a fire. Yet no surviving source describes that happening to the Gospel of the Hebrews. Ancient books lasted only as long as somebody paid a scribe to copy them, and the communities that valued this one dwindled once the wider church labeled them heretics, so nobody with money and a scriptorium had a reason to make another copy. Jerome says he handled the text in the late 300s, and no complete copy has surfaced since.

The outcome was the same as if someone had lit the fire, anyway. The Bible that survived is the collection of books the winning churches kept copying, so it gives the winners’ account of the argument. The Gospel of the Hebrews gives James the first Easter meal, makes the Spirit a mother, and treats Jesus as the Jewish Messiah his first followers took him for, and each of those choices cost it something with the churches that decided what got copied. To learn what the losing side believed, you need the fragments the winners quoted while explaining or arguing against them, which is why a few scraps in Origen and Jerome are worth more than they look.

Leave a comment

Share

Paid subscribers get a bonus section right below this post: six more surviving fragments, including a story of two rich men that Origen’s Latin commentary places in this gospel, a woman accused of many sins that Eusebius says it contained, and a passage where a heavenly power named Michael comes down to earth as Mary. It also includes a field guide to the three Jewish-Christian gospels so you can tell them apart.

Exclusive Content for Paid Subscribers

Six More Fragments and a Field Guide to the Three Jewish-Christian Gospels

The famous fragments get the attention, but the rest of what survives shows the gospel’s character just as well. Here are six more, each with the writer who preserved it, followed by a guide to the three related gospels that scholars keep sorting apart.

Read more

You’re born in 1950 to a devout family in Mecca instead of a Baptist one in Tennessee. By age five, you are reciting and memorizing the Qur’an. By twelve, you are standing alongside your father, observing the dawn-to-dusk fast of Ramadan. By seventy, your entire worldview is naturally anchored in the faith of your upbringing: you firmly believe Jesus was a revered prophet who was never crucified—just as Surah An-Nisa (4:157) states — and you deeply venerate Mary, knowing the Qur'an devotes an entire chapter to her, honoring her purity and her unique selection for the virgin birth.

Would you still be defending the inerrancy of the Bible, the Trinity, and Muhammad cartoons as freedom of expression?

Friday is for staying with the questions most of us wave off: what a map of world religions tells you, how Christianity and Islam each admit the problem in their own scriptures, and the best reply a believer can give.

If you’ve ever wondered whether you chose your faith or inherited it, become a Supporter to unlock the full article.

A Religion You Can Predict From a Map

Although my parents weren’t atheists or anything, I was brought up in a non-religious home. It may sound strange to you, but I don’t even know exactly what my parents or my siblings believe. Still, there was a dominant religion at school and among my friends, and I was assumed to share it because it was part of my cultural identity, and not sharing it was close to treason.

My biggest problem with religion was its direct link to geography and to the culture of my immediate family.

Shade a world map by religion and you get borders that follow old empires, trade routes and conquests. Practically every citizen of Saudi Arabia is Muslim. Thailand is overwhelmingly Buddhist, Tamil Nadu is overwhelmingly Hindu, Mississippi’s largest church body is Southern Baptist, and Utah’s largest is the Latter-day Saints. If religious truth spread by evidence, you’d expect it to scatter across the map the way the germ theory of disease did. It spreads by birth, and by the army that happened to win a war a thousand years ago.

People do switch, but mostly they switch next door, from Methodist to Baptist, or out of religion altogether. Somebody raised Southern Baptist in Alabama who becomes a Shia Muslim is rare enough to make the local paper, and the same holds in reverse for a Shia raised in Iran. Almost everyone dies in the tradition their parents handed them or in no tradition at all.

Brought up by atheist parents? If you convert, you’ll most likely pick the religion that dominates the culture you were born into, or something popular like Buddhism, because geography shapes the pool of religions you choose from too.

The Church Began as the Religion You Left Home For

The first generation of Christians were all converts. Every one of them had been raised Jewish or pagan and walked away from their family’s religion to follow a crucified preacher. Jesus warns in Matthew 10:35-36 that he came to set a man against his father and a daughter against her mother, and Paul spent his life telling people to break with what they’d inherited.

Two thousand years later, Christianity is among the most inherited religions on earth. It grows today mainly where families are large, and it shrinks where they’re small. So is a faith that spreads through birth rates the same faith that spread through persuasion, or has it become exactly what its founders asked people to leave?

Islam Named the Problem Fourteen Centuries Ago

The Qur’an takes this on directly. In chapter 43, verses 22-23, it mocks the pagans of Mecca who defended their gods by saying they’d found their fathers following a religion and were walking in their footsteps. A well-known hadith in Bukhari’s collection goes further: every child is born in a natural state of faith, and it’s the parents who make the child a Jew, a Christian or a Zoroastrian.

That hadith concedes the whole point, that parents make religion, and then exempts one religion from it by declaring Islam the default setting. Christians make the same move when they say the Holy Spirit leads the sincere seeker to Christ. Each tradition sees the accident of birth with perfect clarity in everybody else. Would a Christian accept the hadith’s logic if a Muslim offered it? And if not, why accept the mirror image from a pulpit?

The Best Reply, and the Question It Leaves

The strongest answer a believer has is that where you learned something doesn’t make it false. You learned arithmetic from your parents and teachers too, and nobody thinks multiplication is a cultural accident.

Read more

A stone tablet, later known as the Hazon Gabriel, sat in a Jordanian antiquities dealer’s shop for years before anyone with real training laid eyes on it. Like many other tablets before and after, it passed through the grey market the way these things do, a slab covered in ancient Hebrew columns that nobody in the academic world knew existed. A collector eventually bought it without knowing what he had, and it sat in his collection, essentially unstudied, until he finally brought it to a paleographer who could date a script by the angle of a stroke.

The ink had degraded badly, whole words were gone. What survived was a broken, ambiguous text that read like prophecy, angels, blood, a figure who might rise after three days. The first scholarly publication in 2007 released quietly, the way epigraphy usually does.

Then another scholar got hold of the tablet and zeroed in on one badly damaged phrase, reading it as a command: “in three days, live.” He argued this was a Jewish messianic text, written decades before Jesus, describing a messiah who dies and comes back after three days. If he’s right, the “Christianity invented the dying-and-rising messiah” story takes a direct hit, since here’s a Jewish text doing the same move first.

What turned the artifact into a headline was The New York Times, which ran the story in 2008. A fragmentary, ink-smudged stone that, a week earlier, maybe three people on Earth could read landed on the front page, with the question writing itself: did Jesus copy his resurrection from an older Jewish idea?

When you’re done reading, hit the like button and leave a comment. Criticize it, argue with it, trash it if you want. Your reaction directly decides what I write next.

A Three-Foot Slab Written in Ink

Most ancient inscriptions were typically cut into stone. Yet, the text of Hazon Gabriel was written on it in ink, which is unusual but possible. The slab stands about three feet tall and was reportedly found on the Jordanian side of the Dead Sea, near where the Dead Sea Scrolls turned up.

Experts date the writing to the first century BCE or the first century CE. That’s the same stretch of time as Jesus’ life and the last years of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. The text claims to be a message from the angel Gabriel, the same Gabriel who appears in the Hebrew Bible, announces Jesus’ birth in the Christian story, and plays a starring role in Islam by personally delivering God’s messages to Muhammad. On the stone, he talks about visions, a coming messiah, God’s power, and rising from death, which reads a lot like a preview of the New Testament.

A Stone From the Antiquities Market and the Forgery Question

The trouble starts with how it surfaced, since nobody pulled it out of the ground during a supervised dig. It showed up on the antiquities market, which makes archaeologists twitchy, though they deal with that headache constantly. Anyone with a shovel and free weekends can dig, plenty of people do it for a living, and a lot of what they find gets sold off quietly and later proves genuine. So the question that counts is whether the text on the stone holds up.

Some scholars studied the ink and the language and found that both fit the period. Others stayed skeptical because nobody knows where the stone has been and because ink is easier to fake than carving. There’s no consensus, but they all agree that a forger would’ve needed a lot of skill to pull this off. Nothing on the stone screams hoax, and the suspicion hangs over it anyway. You can’t blame the doubters much, since history is full of objects hailed as ancient that turned out to be embarrassing fakes. But one would expect that, having gone out of their way, a highly skilled forger would be after good money, yet the stone was sold before anyone even knew what it was.

What a Resurrection Text Older Than Jesus Means

The resurrection is the foundation of Christianity, and without it Jesus becomes one more teacher or preacher. When the Romans crucified him, his movement looked finished, a dead would-be messiah leaving behind a handful of disappointed followers. What brought it back to life was the talk that he'd risen, passed from one believer to the next.

Hazon Gabriel suggests Jews were already imagining a messiah who’d rise after three days before Jesus came along. If that holds, Jesus’ followers may have borrowed the central idea of the Easter story from a tradition that was already in circulation, and most of what’s been written about how Jews and Christians pictured the messiah needs a second look.

Some Christians argue that God was preparing people for Jesus’ message in advance. Others take the same evidence to mean resurrection stories were already part of the culture and got attached to Jesus the way they could’ve been attached to anyone.

Judaism’s Problem With a Messiah Who Dies

Judaism has never put much weight on a messiah who dies and comes back, an idea that belongs mostly to Christianity. This stone suggests some first-century Jews were at least playing with it, which complicates things for Jewish scholars as well. Jewish beliefs about the messiah in that period turn out to have been varied and experimental, with several versions competing for attention.

That said, Jews who expected the dead to rise at the end of days pictured it happening in the flesh, with bodies climbing out of their graves. The Gospels follow that picture, with a risen Jesus who eats fish in front of his disciples and tells Thomas to touch his wounds. Paul, writing years before any of the Gospels, describes something else: the dead rise with a “spiritual body” (1 Corinthians 15:44), and “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15:50).

“In Three Days, Live”: The Line Everyone Fights Over

The most argued-over line on the stone reads, “In three days, live.” Some scholars take it as a literal rising from death. Others read it as symbolic, maybe about spiritual renewal or rebuilding. Critics warn that people are reading Jesus into a text that’s older than Christianity and might have nothing to do with Easter.

Still, the resemblance is hard to wave off. If the reading is right, the idea of a leader rising on the third day was part of Judaism before Christianity existed, and that single line is what keeps Hazon Gabriel at the center of the argument.

A quick side note on the counting. According to the Gospels’ own timeline, Jesus rose in less than 48 hours. However, the Israelites had no concept of zero, so the day something happened counted as day one, making the Sunday following Jesus’ crucifixion the third day.

Black-Market Finds That Rewrote History Anyway

Hazon Gabriel also shows how complex archaeology gets. Objects with unclear origins split scholars, with some dismissing them, others embracing them, and everyone bringing their own biases. Keep in mind that some of the finds that rewrote history came through the black market too, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi books (early Christian texts found buried in Egypt), and pieces tied to the Cyrus Cylinder, the clay record of the Persian king Cyrus the Great.

Religious groups tend to read the stone in whatever way protects their own tradition. Christians play it down, Jews tiptoe around it, and secular writers hold it up as proof that religious ideas grow out of older ones. By now, each camp mainly wants to know whose story the stone serves.

One of the Great Finds or One of the Great Fakes

Hazon Gabriel is either one of the most disruptive finds in Christian history or one of the most convincing forgeries anyone has made. Either way, it forces people to ask where religious ideas come from. Beliefs grow, shift, and spread from one group to the next, and this stone, authentic or not, puts that process on display and leaves the easy answers looking shaky.

Leave a comment

Share

The stone isn’t the only place a third-day rising shows up in Jewish writing. There’s one in the Hebrew Bible itself, centuries older, and Paul points to it without quoting it. In the bonus section for paid subscribers, I get into that verse, the rebel whose death may be behind the stone’s messiah, and why the word “live” might not say “live” at all. If you’re a free subscriber, upgrade to read it. And tell me in the comments whether you think this stone threatens long-held beliefs or is just an interesting piece of history.

Exclusive Content for Supporters

Hosea, a Beheaded Rebel, and a Smudged Word

Christians tend to treat “on the third day” as a detail that only makes sense after Easter**, though the phrase is centuries older.** The prophet Hosea, writing in the 700s BCE, put these words in the mouths of the people of Israel: “After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him” (Hosea 6:2)…

Read more

Today, Christianity (as well as Islam) asserts that evil comes from the devil.

In Christian teaching, Satan lied to Eve, Satan tempts you at the office, and someday God will pitch him into a lake of fire for all the trouble he’s caused.

The whole idea conveniently lets God run the universe while keeping his hands clean.

However, the people who wrote most of the Old Testament would’ve been puzzled by this conclusion.

When you’re done reading, hit the like button and leave a comment. Criticize it, argue with it, trash it if you want. I check the stats on every post when I choose next week’s topic, so your reaction directly decides what I write next.

“I Make Peace, and Create Evil”

Isaiah 45:7 in the King James Version says:

“I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

Most modern Bibles change “evil” to “disaster” or “calamity,” and apologists love to point this out, as if it gets God off the hook. Think about what calamity meant to a farmer in ancient Judah. It meant drought, locusts, plague, a dead child, and a foreign army burning the town. That list is the problem of evil for most of human history, and the verse says God makes all of it on purpose.

Isaiah has plenty of company in Amos, who asks, “Shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?” (Amos 3:6). Lamentations asks whether evil and good both come out of the mouth of the Most High (3:38), and the expected answer is yes. In Deuteronomy God announces, “I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal” (32:39). When Job loses his children, his health, and everything he owns, he tells his wife, “Shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?” (Job 2:10), and the book praises him for it.

Evil Spirits Sent Straight From Heaven

If you’re still hoping this is only about weather and bad harvests, the Old Testament has more. When God turns against King Saul, “an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him” (1 Samuel 16:14), and two chapters later that spirit has Saul hurling a spear at David. In Judges 9:23, God sends an evil spirit to start a feud between a would-be king and the city that put him on the throne.

The best example is in 1 Kings 22. The prophet Micaiah describes a vision of God on his throne, surrounded by the host of heaven, asking for a volunteer to trick King Ahab into a battle that will kill him. One spirit steps forward and offers to be “a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.” God approves the plan and sends him off to do it.

Add the verses where God hardens Pharaoh’s heart so he can keep punishing Egypt, and the strange night in Exodus 4:24 when the LORD meets Moses on the road and tries to kill him, and the picture comes into focus. The God of early Israel lied, attacked, sent madness, and delivered disaster, and his worshippers took all of it as proof he was in charge.

Same Census with a Different Culprit

In 2 Samuel 24:1, “the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.” David takes the census, God counts it as a sin, and 70,000 Israelites die of plague as punishment. God provokes the sin and then kills tens of thousands of people over it.

First Chronicles tells the same story again, copying much of it nearly word for word. Chronicles was written centuries after Samuel, after the Babylonian exile, when Judah was a small province of the Persian Empire. Here’s how its version opens: “And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel” (1 Chronicles 21:1).

The census is the same, the plague is the same, and the dead are the same. The one detail the writer changed is the name of whoever started it.

Even the word had to grow into the job. In Hebrew, “satan” is an ordinary noun meaning adversary or accuser. In Numbers 22, the angel of the LORD stands in the road as a satan to block Balaam and his donkey. In Job and Zechariah, “the satan” is a member of God’s court, a heavenly prosecutor who works for God and needs permission for everything he does. God even admits to him in Job 2:3, “thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.” Chronicles drops the “the,” and most readers take it as the first place in the Bible where Satan works as somebody’s name.

Two Centuries Under Persian Rule

So what happened between Samuel and Chronicles? Babylon destroyed Jerusalem in 586 BCE and hauled off its leading families. In 539 BCE, Cyrus of Persia took Babylon and let the exiles go home, and Judah spent the next two centuries inside his empire.

Persian religion had a good god, Ahura Mazda, locked in a long war with a destructive spirit, Angra Mainyu. Each side commanded armies of spirits, and the war would end with a final battle, the dead raised, and the wicked judged. Every piece of that shows up in Jewish writing after this period, and later in the New Testament.

Look again at Isaiah 45:7 and you’ll see a verse that sits in a speech addressed to Cyrus himself (45:1). A God who makes both light and darkness, both peace and evil, reads like a direct answer to a religion that split those between two rival powers. Over the following centuries, Isaiah’s side lost that argument.

From Heavenly Prosecutor to Prince of This World

Once the idea got in, it grew fast. The Book of the Watchers, now part of 1 Enoch, blames the world’s corruption on rebel angels who came down, took human wives, and taught people weapons and sorcery. The Book of Jubilees, from the second century BCE, retells Genesis and Exodus with a spirit named Mastema handling jobs God used to do himself. In Genesis 22, God decides to test Abraham by ordering him to sacrifice Isaac, while in Jubilees, Mastema is the one who suggests the test. In Exodus, the LORD attacks Moses on the road, and in Jubilees, Mastema does it.

The Dead Sea Scrolls describe a coming war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness, with a figure called Belial leading the dark side. By the time the gospels were written, Satan could offer Jesus every kingdom on earth (Luke 4:5-6), John calls him “the prince of this world” (12:31), and Paul calls him “the god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4). In a few hundred years, Satan had gone from a clerk in God’s court to a rival running the planet.

Moving the Blame Left God Holding It Anyway

In older stories of the Bible, God doesn’t present himself as a likeable figure you’re required to love. He asserts authority and puts submission ahead of morality. You’re meant to fear God as the source of both good and evil. This God has human flaws: he makes mistakes, has regrets, and finds the future as much of a puzzle as anyone else does.

As Christian theology developed, moving the blame for evil from God to Satan bought God a cleaner reputation and dug him a new hole in the same stroke. Satan’s heavenly father is God, too, and God knew all too well he was creating the source of all evil and created him anyway. By modern moral standards, knowingly enabling evil makes you guilty of it.

So, what do you think? I’d like to hear from you, especially if you believe in the existence of Satan as part of your faith. How do you square an all-knowing God with a devil he knew he was making? Tell me in the comments.

Leave a comment

Share

The Snake Nobody Called Satan

There’s one piece I’ve left out, and it’s the one most people assume holds the whole thing up: the serpent in Eden. If you check Genesis 3 and you won’t find Satan anywhere in it. So how did a talking animal become the devil, which ancient text made the switch first, and why did it take roughly a thousand years to stick?

That’s today’s bonus section for paid subscribers, right below. If you’ve been reading for free, this is as good a day as any to upgrade. Paid support is what keeps The Unholy Truth independent, and upgrading also unlocks every past bonus section.

Exclusive Content for Supporters

How a Snake in Eden Got Promoted to Devil

Genesis 3:1 introduces the serpent as “more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.” It’s an animal, one of God’s own creatures, set apart only by being clever. It talks, but so does Balaam’s donkey, and nobody thinks the donkey is a demon…

Read more

There are two options when it comes to gods. The first says the gods are real and human beings perceive them because there’s something there to perceive. The second says our ancestors were frightened and ignorant, they heard thunder, and they invented a thunder god because nobody had told them about static discharge yet. Both stories treat belief as a conclusion, something people arrived at after looking around and thinking it over.

In reality, belief is equipment, and the cognitive machinery that produces gods was installed long before anybody had a theology to put in it. It was installed because it kept people alive.

The Grass Moves and You Run

Think about the cheapest decision your ancestors made a thousand times a year. You’re on the savanna, the grass moves twenty feet to your left, and you’ve got about a quarter of a second to decide whether that’s wind or something that has just ordered its lunch.

If you get it wrong in one direction you sprint for no reason, needlessly burn a few calories, and look ridiculous. Get it wrong in the other direction and your genes are removed from the pool.

When one error is trivially cheap and the other is fatal, selection doesn’t build you an accurate detector, it builds you a jumpy one. Evolution couldn’t care less whether you got it right. All it weighs is the expected cost of being wrong.

Anthropologists call the result hyperactive agency detection, which is a clinical name for a system that assumes a mind behind every ambiguous movement and asks questions later. The system fires on rustling grass, on footsteps in an empty hallway, on the shape in the closet at 3 a.m., and on the face you see in a burnt piece of toast. It fires on weather, on disease, on a run of bad luck. You can’t turn it off by knowing better, which is why people with graduate degrees in atmospheric physics still flinch at thunder.

Once you’ve got a detector that finds minds everywhere, gods become the expected output.

Your Brain Finds the Pattern Regardless

Human beings are pattern-finding animals of extraordinary power, and that power comes from a willingness to accept patterns on very thin evidence. Two events in sequence, and we’ve got a cause. The berries from the low bushes made three people sick, so the low bushes are cursed. Nobody has time to run a controlled trial on berries, and the cost of a false pattern (avoiding a bush that was fine) sits nowhere near the cost of a missed one.

B.F. Skinner watched this in pigeons in 1948. He fed them on a timer, regardless of what they were doing, and within a few sessions the birds were turning counterclockwise, bobbing, and swinging their heads, each one repeating whatever it happened to be doing when the food arrived. The pigeon is running the same rule you run, which is that things happening together are probably connected, and that rule has paid for itself so many times that the occasional useless head-bob is a rounding error.

Now put those two systems together in one skull and you’ve got a machine that assumes a mind behind ambiguous events sitting next to a machine that connects events into causes on almost no evidence. Feed it a drought, a stillbirth, a sudden recovery, a herd that showed up when it was needed. What comes out is a person who wants something, whose intentions can be read, and whose mind might be changed if you offer the right thing.

Nobody Can Imagine Being Dead

Ask a young child what happens to a mouse after a cat eats it. With little to no prior training, children reliably report that the dead mouse doesn’t need food anymore and can’t see, then report in the same breath that it still misses its mother and knows where it is. The body stops, the mind keeps going, and children reach this on their own before anybody teaches them a religion.

Adults never lose it. Trying to imagine your own nonexistence means running a simulation of the experience of having no experiences, and the machinery quietly refuses. What’s left is a strong intuition that minds and bodies are separate things, which makes ancestors who go on existing somewhere the default assumption rather than a doctrine anyone had to argue for.

Dead relatives are also useful. A grandfather who’s still watching is a grandfather who still enforces the rules he enforced alive, and that’s where this stops being about individual brains.

The Part That Got Selected: Groups

Everything so far explains why belief comes easily to one human head. It doesn’t explain why religion got organized, expensive, and universal. For that you need to look at what belief does to a group.

If we think in terms of costs, fasting, circumcision, food restrictions, celibacy, tithes, scarification, dietary rules that make it impossible to eat with outsiders, and festivals that shut down weeks of productive work all take something from the people who follow them. Any economist looking at that ledger sees waste; any biologist looking at it sees a signal that’s hard to fake.

The problem every cooperating group has to solve is freeloaders, people who take the benefits of membership without paying the costs. You can’t read commitment off someone’s face, but you can read it off their behavior when the behavior is expensive enough that nobody would bother faking it. A man who’s given up pork, alcohol, and Saturdays for thirty years has posted a bond. The group can extend him credit, marry him into families, and leave him with the harvest, because the cost of his exit is visible.

That prediction has been tested against nineteenth-century American communes, about two hundred of them, religious and secular, all trying to hold a community together on shared property. In any given year the religious communes were roughly four times more likely to survive than the secular ones. Two decades in, most of the religious communes were still standing and almost none of the secular ones were, and among the religious communes the ones that demanded more of their members lasted longest. The same demands imposed by the secular communes did nothing for their survival, because a rule you can argue with is a rule members eventually argue their way out of.

Human beings also behave differently when observed, which is why the drawing of a pair of eyes above an honesty box raises the money people put in it. A high god with full access to your thoughts is the only enforcement mechanism that scales past the number of people who can keep track of each other, and it arrives free with equipment you already had. Groups carrying that belief could trust strangers, trade at distance, and field larger armies than groups that couldn’t.

This publication runs on your support. If you find value in what you read here, consider joining to help keep The Unholy Truth alive and independent.

Upgrade to Paid

Does This Mean There’s No God?

Most or all of what we’ve covered so far gets brought out by convinced atheists to make a case against God, so I wouldn’t blame you if you thought I was heading in that direction.

Instead I’ll leave you with this: Having evolved to believe in a creator, and building or borrowing a religion around that belief, doesn’t mean no creator exists outside the universe. Convincing yourself for no good reason that you’re being followed, your phone lines are tapped, and your house is bugged doesn’t guarantee every one of those beliefs is wrong.

Leave a comment

For supporters: the story above has a serious fight inside it that I kept out of the main piece. Researchers split hard on whether religion was selected for at all or whether it’s a side effect of cognitive systems built for other jobs, and the strongest evidence for the group-selection side (Sosis and Bressler’s commune numbers, the Big Gods thesis) took a significant hit from a 2019 study in Nature that found moralizing gods showed up after societies got complex rather than before.

Below the line I walk through both the commune data and the challenge to it, including what the critics got right and where the original thesis still holds. If you want the argument with its weak points exposed, that’s what your support pays for, and it’s how this publication stays free for everyone else.

Exclusive Content for Supporters

Where the Evidence Gets Contested

The commune numbers, in detail. Sosis and Eric Bressler examined 83 communes founded in nineteenth-century America with enough surviving records to code. At year twenty, 39% of religious communes were still operating against 6% of secular ones…

Read more