When there are two different versions of an event in the Bible, literalists quickly assert both actually happened.  Accounts differ, they explain, because one account did not happen to include the other.

Take the death of Judas.  Matthew 27 tells that Judas died by hanging himself. Then the priests took his money and bought the “field of blood”.   We can go to Acts 1 which explains Judas first bought the property.  Then, while on the property, he fell on his head and his bowels exploded.

No problem, literalists say, both are true.  One account just happens not to mention the other.  Judas hung himself, they say, then after decomposition his bowels exploded.  We skeptics wonder why the first account did not include the second, or, visa versa.

I’ve never heard, either,  how the very different versions of purchasing the property are explained away.  I just know they are somewhere.

Ironically, omitted material helps skeptics, too.  Folks who believe the Jesus character did not have a problem with homosexuality note he did not comment about  it.  Apologists point to other things he said that might imply he was against homosexuality, but he didn’t really say it.

Then, there is priest/preacher pedophilia supporters.  Since, so I’ve been told, the Bible does not condemn, specifically, sex between clergy and little children, it could be OK.

Because everyone can find their views approved of, either in the text or by omission, the Bible remains a best seller.

See us on FaceBook, Red River Freethinkers