n followers for two thousand years. Because of the differences in his statements, the different times and the different versions of them, as reported by the four Apostles, different Christian sects which have followed either one or the other phases have been in conflict for centuries.
It is probably true that in the early centuries of the church, before the days of printing, many churches had differing copies of various books of both the Old and the New Testament. Much of the material was handed down at first by oral tradition, and only later was it written. The copies would not be exact and the men who made the copies could change them to suit their own ideas, and as the manuscripts were passed from hand to hand, they were changed and edited and interpolated and translated until there are now hundreds of religious sects, each believing that the others are wrong, and each having a different idea of the Testaments they follow.
Added to all this is the change in the meaning of words and their interpretation in the Bible, each preacher, priest and religious leader interpreting them to suit his own needs, and their followers understanding them according to their own degree of intelligence, or lack of it.
In the fifth Chapter of Matthew, Christ appealed to the poor and poverty stricken, giving the impression that those who were successful and powerful would not go to Heaven, as was promised to the poor.
This is the typical talk of political demagogues who hope to get a large following by promising something to the lower classes.
Then he says: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. I am not come to destroy but to fulfill." Contrast this with his statement that he "did not come to bring peace but a sword and to set brother against brother and daughter against daughter and father against mother."
He says "neither do men light a candle and put it under a bushel" but that "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father, which is in Heaven.
In the next chapter he says, "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them, otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in Heaven."
Here he expressly commands people to show their good works, but later he says: "Let not thy right hand know what thy left hand doeth," and commands his followers not to permit their philanthropies to be known. What a ridiculous thing it is for him to say: "If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee, for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell." Then he repeats about cutting off the offending hand. The result of this commandment has caused many weak-minded people to injure themselves, and only a few years ago a Canadian priest cut off his hand with a hatchet.
Christ's statement as to divorce is unreasonable. It is not the fault of two people that they are unable to live happily together. Why then should either or both be condemned to eternal hell fire because they divorce each other? Not only does Christ threaten them with hell fire, but the people they marry, according to Christ, also commit adultery and are subject to eternal damnation.
Some Biblical followers quote the Biblical instruction -- "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." Others, to satisfy their demands, quote Christ's saying -- "Resist not evil, but whoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." How does this contrast with the philosophy, later expressed by Christ of setting people against each other?
Besides this, it is a ridiculous thing and of no benefit in any way for people to encourage other people to injure them. Rational intelligence indicates that being good to other people when they are good to you, and protecting yourself against those who are injuring you, is the sensible way of life.
But let us consider whether the Christian followers have paid any attention to "turning the other cheek" -- "to returning good for evil." Down through the centuries the intolerant chu