NOTE: This introduction is taken directly from The Gospel of Christ, the first book in history to merge over 250 ancient texts about Jesus into one coherent narrative using contemporary English. It is the complete life and teachings of Jesus, and you can purchase it right now!
CHRISTIANITY HAS ABANDONED ITS CHRIST
One doesn't have to look far to come across a questionable person who declares themselves as a Christian. They will thank Jesus Christ in one breath, maybe even quote some scripture, and then turn to exhale fire upon anyone who does not fit into their demographic. Different country of origin? Different religious background? Different sexual orientation? You'd better get ready for an obscure Old Testament interpretation, chosen specifically to cut you down as inferior, complete with warnings of divine retribution that will bring you harm. For a little cherry on top, they'll add something like, "I'll pray for you", not with any sense of authenticity but as a condescending remark from an authoritative platform they've placed themselves upon. With people like this lauded as "Good Christians," you have to wonder how low the bar is.
From this observation point, it is clear that many "Christians" use the faith as a tool of manipulation and impenetrable armour. Politicians have utilised this technique for centuries. If you loudly announce yourself as a Christian in the West, you automatically have the ears of the largest religious group in the world. Simply remind the masses that a vote for you is a vote for good old-fashioned traditional Christian values, and you'll get a leg up, even if none of your policies could be considered Christlike. It becomes extra terrifying when people in power claim to be guided by a godly message, for if this is true, how could they do anything wrong? And with that, they are free to glorify racism, nationalism, homophobia, Islamophobia... you name it, all under the security blanket of the word "Christianity".
Let it be stated as clear as possible: these ideologies are a betrayal to the very essence of Jesus' teachings, yet the audience falls for it time and time again. That is why so few of us are surprised to learn that Mahatma Gandhi once said: "I love your Christ. It is just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ."
What I've come to understand is that there is a canyon-sized difference between Christianity and those who follow Jesus Christ. Christianity is not the worship of the Messiah. It is the worship of a book named the Bible. Not only that, but this worship is wrangled into new shapes and squeezed even tighter by whatever denominational interpretation is being imposed. Of course, one could never deny that the Bible wields immense power. Its influence over our world cannot be overstated. But upon closer inspection, the Bible itself, just like Jesus, has become a victim of sinful men. Indeed, the manipulation of Christianity for higher gain is a tale as old as the religion itself.
The Old Testament
The Bible comes in two parts: the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament comprises the majority of the Bible, accounting for approximately 75%. It is wholly Jewish scripture, generally known as the Tanakh, albeit often rearranged with slight edits. Denominations can't agree on which books should be included, and different versions of the Bible contain varying content. For example, the Protestant Bible has 39 books in its Old Testament, the Catholics have 46, and the Ethiopian Orthodox (Tewahedo) have 54.
The combinations of discrepancies continue to multiply when you take into account the hundreds upon hundreds of available Bible translations, and that's just in the English language. BibleGateway.com alone offers 64 interpretations, and at times, the content is significantly dissimilar. Let's examine Romans 5:12 for one notable example. The Douay-Rheims version (often favoured by traditional Catholics) reads: "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned," meaning that babies are born with sin through Adam's lineage, and therefore, every human is guilty via heritage. Contrarily, translations like New International Version (the most popular Protestant choice after King James), reads: "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned," which places sin on the individual, making them personally responsible. The Catholic-Protestant dispute over the origin of sin and its consequences is no small quarrel. It has been used as major ammunition in the Protestant Reformation, one of the most significant theological conflicts in Western history. It also provides a good starting point to highlight how the Bible is not one agreed-upon thing. We can already see how it is so effortlessly adapted to fit perspectives, and we're just getting started.
Whenever you hear someone spouting scripture in an effort to demonise others, it is almost always a verse from the Old Testament. To behave in this way makes valid sense… if you're Jewish. However, if you're Christian, one of the most crucial things you should learn about Jesus' mission is that he came to redefine the Jewish creed. Of course, Jesus was a Jew. He followed Jewish customs, celebrated Jewish holidays, and quoted Jewish prophets with the expertise of a star scholar. But to say he preached and obeyed the Law of the Tanakh/Old Testament is demonstrably false. A considerable portion of Jesus' teachings actively rub against Judaism, sometimes tweaking the wording, other times challenging rules as being completely incorrect, until they killed him. The examples of this are substantial, and we will reveal each of them throughout this book.
Nevertheless, a decision was eventually made to affix the New Testament onto the Old one. Even the naming convention of these two parts speaks volumes: there was the OLD, aka, of the outdated era, but now we have the NEW, aka, the updated version, rendering the former archaic in the eyes of non-Jews. Which means that any Christian quoting from the Old Testament should do so with the understanding that Jesus may have disagreed. Indeed, we could never even say what Jesus would've thought about slapping these two Testaments together in the first place. But as we shall see, very little of the Bible pays any regard to what Jesus may have thought whatsoever.
The New Testament
Analysing the New Testament is even more fascinating. Unlike the Jewish figures of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or Moses, the majority of historians agree that a man named Jesus existed. Called the Messiah by many, he developed a strong following throughout Galilee and Judea, but sadly, the movement took a massive blow when he was killed. Interestingly, the cross was initially a symbol of tremendous embarrassment for those who believed, for it only mocked how easily their Christ was murdered. Consequently, numbers dwindled, especially when they, too, were threatened with persecution. However, word of mouth kept the rumours humming, many convinced that the Second Coming and apocalypse were imminent. The immediate period following Jesus' demise was one of preparation for many. Documentation was seen as less critical, owed in part to Jesus' lower-class followers who could not read or write.
As generations grew older and eye-witnesses neared death, so did the fear of losing oral tradition. Pens soon took to paper. At the same time, the word of Christ's missionaries had begun to spread successfully, and the belief system quickly turned into theological anarchy. There were an incalculable number of sects built around varied interpretations, and further denominations blossomed within those. In the pursuit of harvesting this fresh philosophy, the fertile soil of change encouraged everyone to join the conversation and find personal connections with Christ in whichever way made the most sense to them. It must have been an exciting era, but it came to a sudden halt shortly thereafter.
In the 4th century, the Roman Empire sought to exert control over the Christian narrative, and the first step was to unify a doctrine that served its best interests. Decades of meetings took place, during which, men argued and negotiated over the available texts until they established a canon. Why did they choose the scripture they chose? Some will say they were guided by a holier hand, which is a lovely thought! And it's also so incredible how often the Spirit's direction aligns with imperial convenience! No, more commonly argued is that every move was political, as Rome was famous for.
We've already noted that only 25% of the Bible is the New Testament. Of that 25%, around 42.4% directly deals with the life and teachings of Jesus (the Gospels). What took up the Testament's other half? What could possibly be more important than Jesus' actual story?
A small portion (roughly 15.9%) is the Acts of the Apostles. These have value as they detail the spread of Jesus' message and the founding of the Church through the disciples. Granted, Jesus spent much of his time alive correcting his disciples for misunderstanding his teachings, but the Acts are relatively valid. Christ chose the disciples to perform these missions, and we do find several additional Jesus quotes here that are close enough to the source.
Moving on, a whopping 34.5% of the New Testament consists of the Epistles, which were letters written by individuals such as the disciples. But then there is Paul, whose musings dominate with 21.2% of the New Testament attributed to him. Who was Paul? Exactly. He was a Jew initially responsible for persecuting Christians, but when he had a vision of Christ, he converted, writing about his ideas based on his encounter while travelling around, expanding the word. He was not an official disciple. He never even met Jesus (although he did claim to be acquainted with Peter, John, and James).
In fairness to Paul, he is considered one of the most influential figures in Christianity for good reason. His letters (dated 50–60 AD, approximately two decades after Jesus' death) are the earliest texts associated with the religion. He also initiated the notion that one did not have to go through Judaism to become Christian, meaning Christianity broke free from the restraints of being a Jewish sect. However, we must reiterate that the teachings of Paul were independent of the teachings of Christ, and scholars point out that he distorted Jesus' message to reconcile it with the Greek philosophies of the time. Simply put, to regard Paul's writings as holy is to worship the Bible, not Jesus. Paul's authority was based on a vision that only he witnessed, making him his own reference.
I can't help but think about the innumerable number of people throughout history who have sworn Jesus appeared to them, giving instructions. There are several easy-to-find high-profile cases of troubled individuals leading mass cult suicides or killing their families for this reason, which I won't detail here. Should we regard these reports as sacred? Christ apparently met up with Joseph Smith in 1820, and his message was so powerful that 17.5 million people follow it today. Should this not be integrated into the official timeline of biblical Christianity? Or is it better as a separate Christian denomination called Mormonism? In 1976, Helen Schucman claimed she received revelations from Jesus and wrote the book A Course in Miracles, which sold two million copies and is so critically acclaimed that many attest that it is impossible not to be divinely inspired. How different are Schucman and Paul? What about when Jesus' face appears on a mouldy wall or on a slice of toast? I tease, of course, but there is still more physical evidence of these examples than what Paul asserted.
In truth, Jesus dedicated much of his time to correcting his students. It's a shame he never got a chance to do so with Paul, because now these texts are in the Bible forever, placed on an equal footing with Jesus' own words. And why? Simply because they fit the model the Romans conceived.
Before we move on to the most crucial part of the Bible, we should note that approximately 7% of the New Testament consists of the Book of Revelation. This apocalyptic text is vividly poetic about the end of times, truly a masterpiece of literary imagination, but we can regard it in much the same manner. A man named John (assumed to be the disciple yet never accurately identified by any historic measurement) hallucinated an incredible array of symbolic imagery, and we accepted it, with or without Jesus' stamp of approval.
The Gospels
After all this, we have finally arrived at the Gospels, the canonical life and teachings of Jesus Christ. You would assume this would be the Bible's priority, yet it makes up only around 10.6% of the entire book. To exacerbate matters, the Gospels essentially recount the same story four times over (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), resulting in even less space for the combined account. What's more, Matthew, Mark, and Luke are so similar that scholars have hypothesised that Matthew and Luke were based on Mark, as well as what is suggested as the Q source.
Be that as it may be, those dedicated to the word of Christ find the backbone of their faith here. These scriptures not only provide an easy-to-follow narrative but are also some of the earliest Christian texts we know of (for example, Mark is dated as early as 70 CE).
Yet we must not lose sight of the intentions behind sinful men dabbling with these stories. These Gospels were selected because they favoured Roman operations. When the council were compiling the Good Book, there were well over a hundred reports to choose from, but if something didn't grant them control, it was discarded.
The Gospel of Thomas is frequently dated before the core four (sometimes as early as 50 AD). However, it denounced hierarchy, claiming no need for priests, bishops, or popes. According to this scripture, the power of Christ lived within the individual, which would not allow the institutional Church to thrive, and so they promptly tossed it aside.
The Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Philip gave women equal (or even greater) spiritual authority. But if you believe in the conspiracy of man's desire for control, then there is no swifter method of assuming power than to lower half the population as inferior. Hence, they rejected these ancient feminist scriptures too, holy or not.
Make no mistake, under the influence of the Roman Empire, they packaged Jesus how they wanted him, and then they sold him to you.
Now, it's one thing to deny work that doesn't agree with your policies. But it's another thing to declare many of them as heresy, ordering the mass destruction of these writings. This is not only a tragic loss of potential sacred passage but also a highly suspicious move indicative of desperate men. And those who persisted in following these teachings? They were executed. That really sounds in tune with Jesus' message, right?
Of course, this didn't apply to Rome itself. It's commonly speculated that the Vatican library archived copies of every scripture, perhaps even with collections we have never heard about. Meanwhile, those in power still quietly protected their spirits by continuing to celebrate noncanonical stories as if Gospel. One such demonstration is the Presentation of Mary, a feast that takes place on November 21st. It is in honour of the day Mother Mary was presented as a baby to the Second Temple in Jerusalem. This event is featured in many Infancy Gospels but was cut out from the Bible for reasons that will become apparent in the book.
Nonetheless, the anti-heretical campaign was successful. Most ancient Christian texts were eradicated and considered lost forever. Thankfully, discoveries over the years (most notably, the 52 treatises of the Nag Hammadi library, uncovered in 1945) have brought those perspectives back to light, even if the Church may urge you to dismiss them as subpar ramblings of inauthentic mystics. Whether this is true or not isn't the point. The point is that if you genuinely follow Jesus, you wouldn't risk missing a single word. Many of these texts originate from the same era as those from the New Testament and therefore have as much potential as any message in the Bible. In modern times, people continue to redefine the details of Jesus, but these legendary materials are far closer to the source than where we are now. Word of mouth will carry any story in multiple directions, but just because one strand was captured and then cemented by the New Testament does not necessarily mean it is the end-all authority. I am of the opinion that it is better to take a chance on a slightly inaccurate account than to omit something legitimate that Jesus wanted us to know.
As previously stated, there are those who follow Jesus Christ, and there are those who worship the Bible. If you are of the latter, that is your journey to take. Still, please do so with the utmost awareness that if any other ancient Roman sect had dominated the conversation, then your entire belief system would be different. People will call something heretical because another person told them to call it heretical. None of those decisions had anything to do with Jesus. Personally, I find limiting the word of Christ to the Bible as the ultimate blasphemy. That is claiming a book bound by humans could hold together the vastly complex and profound works of the most influential teacher in history. I don't buy it.
The Gospel of Christ
From the Diatessaron to the Jefferson Bible, multiple books have harmonised the Gospels into a single, coherent narrative. The Gospel of Christ is the latest to do so, with one key difference: I not only used the four Gospels, but also scoured information from over 250 ancient Christian texts, blending them into this unified story.
As you can imagine, this was no straightforward ordeal, and some leeway was required. Scholars still argue over numerous details. Disciples are known by different names or are combined. Many pieces are irreconcilable due to their contradictory proposals. Even more challenging, there is no officially agreed-upon geographical trajectory or chronology of events. My ultimate choices were democratic, based on the most common accounts. However, where there were major discrepancies, I made a separate note of them for you to analyse. It is also worth emphasising that certain stories are centuries younger than others, and therefore, lose some credibility. Yet even as the timelines diverge, the soul of Jesus' message never does. My advice is to follow your gut and follow the references. Every source is accounted for and dated at the back so you can gauge your level of trust accordingly.
These hurdles were daunting, but I dedicated my soul to this book, and I am proud of the result. That said, I am indebted to numerous sources that assisted me along the way. The four main Gospels proved invaluable for their structure. I gravitated towards the King James Version when I could (especially with the speech), the Contemporary English Version when I got stuck, and the Easy English Bible when I got really stuck. Following that, I gradually packed on the meat from noncanonical works, to which I owe a great deal of thanks to EarlyChristianWritings.com, Gnosis.org, NewAdvent.org, and Gospels.net. Thank you!
My goal was to present a project that was neatly organised while using easy-to-understand language and a casual voice to simplify the story. I wanted to appeal to modern audiences by reinvigorating the enjoyment of this incredible tale, one which revolutionised society as we know it. That said, I refused to sacrifice the core message of Christ, because that is what I wanted to deliver above all else. To simplify it, Jesus presented us with two radical new concepts. The first was philosophies to access a deeper spiritual awakening. And the second was to present profound love without borders wherever we went. If we don't observe these straightforward commandments, then I can't see how we can call ourselves followers of Jesus.
My full intention was to blow everyone's mind with the complete life story and teachings of Christ. What I didn't account for, however, was blowing my own mind. Writing this book changed my life. I hope you get something similar out of it.
Follow @LegoTrip
