Image via Wikipedia

I sometimes wonder how come not a single Roman writer, a single Greek writer, or of any other nation’s of the time Jesus must have lived, didn’t waste a single line to write about that remarkable miracle performer the bible describes Jesus to be.

There are of course some documents, of non christianic origin, that refer to Jesus, but none of them speak a good word for him. He is either presented to us like a political rebel against Rome, a kind of zealot, a member of a wealthy Jewish family who was fighting only for himself and his family’s interests. Not a word of Jesus the peacemaker, Jesus the miracle performer, Jesus the healer, Jesus the son of God…

On the other hand the Christian churches, around the world, claim that the bible is a historical proof by itself, as it is an original document written by the students of Jesus.

So where does the church keep those original documents? Why don’t they show them to us, who seek for real historical proofs and not just speculations, to shut our mouth once and for all? Simply because those “original documents” DO NOT EXIST! What we have is copies that come from the 4th until the 10th century after Christ. (AD) These copies are about 1,500 in number and are taken from older copies. Not a single one of them is exactly the same with an other!

They have more then 80,000 discrepancies counted in them and not a single page in them is with no contradictions. All of the people that worked as copiers, intensively or not, alternated the text they were copying. And from copier to copier the meaning is changed.

In 1844, in the Sinai monastery, Codex Sinaiticus was found, (something like Codex Vaticanus) from the 4th century AD. It contains 16,000 corrections made by, at least seven, different persons in it. And even in that text you can find several alternations. Professor Dr Friedrich Delitzsch found around 3,000 copy mistakes in that text alone.

Even the first fathers of the church had agreed that changes were made to the documents. They spoke, quite openly, for “additions, erasures, improvements and wholesale deconstruction”. As it is known, the evangelists didn’t write anything before the destruction of Jerusalem at 70 AD and the Jewish diaspora that followed. According to Gregorian (Christian) calendar, the one that we all use, Jesus died at 33 AD. Doesn’t that add 37 years to the age the evangelists had the time Jesus died?

It is more likely to me that Mark, Matthew, Lukas and John, might not have even been bornat the time Jesus was crucified. And that becomes even more possible if we consider that the average life expectancy of a person at those times was much shorter than the one we have nowadays. After all if those people were eye-witnesses in the events in Jesus’s life, would their gospels be so contradictive with each other?