DISCREPNCY–a discrepancy marks the lack of compatibility or similarity between two purported facts. In everyday life, we encounter seeming discrepancies on a rather frequent basis. That is especially true in the turbulent times of presidential elections.
A candidate or supporter will make a statement of ‘proposed’ fact. A candidate or supporter of an opposing party will make a contrarian ‘factual’ statement about that identical subject. Of course, those statements are intended to ease and appease their ‘base’ supporters while, simultaneously, hopefully gaining new supporters.
Considering how national ‘news media’ (?) have aligned themselves with political ideologies, those who consistently watch particular TV channels are never exposed to the ‘opposite’ viewpoints—one might say, they are being brainwashed. Then the question arises—how do we know truth?
Enter the ‘fact checkers’—then what? Well, in my experience, discrepancies frequently exist among the ‘fact checkers’—it depends on who the fact checkers are. Where did their ‘facts’ come from? In the realm of ‘hard science and mathematics’, facts are difficult to disguise—it can sometimes be done by sly ‘slight of hand, but very difficult. However, in the field of ‘soft science’ (sometimes classed as pseudoscience), it may be rather easy.
Just consider for one moment ‘climate change’. That singular subject has become a completely, world-wide, ‘political football’. There seems to be little doubt or disagreement about the fact that climate change has existed for billions of years. Our earth has undergone many periods of climatic change. Archeologists and geologist have demonstrated rather conclusively that at least two major ‘Ice Ages” have occurred—the most recent began about 15,000 years ago and ended about 10,000 years ago. Since that time the earth has gradually warmed.
The big question, then, is why the earth’s atmosphere is warming. Many scientists claim it is a ‘natural’ occurrence happening in the normal ebb and tide of global temperature changes. On the other hand, the ‘Green Wave Liberals’ proclaim with ‘Biblical certainty’ that global warming is man made and must be stopped. They have disavowed the use of any and all carbon dioxide producing materials such as crude oil, natural gas and coal—I might add that many ‘extremists’ have suggested putting a ban on beef cattle in order to eliminate the ill effects of ‘bovine flatus’—pretty radical?
We, The People have to be the ‘Judge and Jury”. Our obvious problem is the ‘fact checkers, themselves’. As a scientist, myself, I am definitely inclined to go with the ‘natural history’ of things.
There is another source of discrepancy which affects peoples lives continuously—so-called Christianity and the Bible. I say so-called Christianity because there are at least 33,000 Christian religions—and I daresay, not one of them can concretely define the ‘essence of Christ’. The reason being, they cannot define the essence of God. However, they keep pouring their bias at you and you are ‘caught in the middle’ not knowing which way to turn—just likened to a wild animal caught in a cage.
The Bible is full of discrepancies but I will point out two of them:
The Bible frequently depicts Jesus warning people in one way or another about the ‘dangers of sin and its’ consequence of eternal damnation’. However in one specific place it paints an entirely different picture. In 1 John-3:2 we hear an entirely different assessment—“Dearly beloved, we are God’s children now; what we shall later be has not yet come to light. We know that when it comes to light, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.” It goes without saying that no-one can see God as he is except God himself. Therefore, collectively we and all of God’s creation, including, Jesus are the 2nd person of the Trinity.
The second major discrepancy I will address in the Bible is the crucifixion story as told by Matthew and Luke. In Matthew’s ‘version’, both of the insurgents crucified beside Jesus berated and derided him continuously. However, Luke paints an entirely different picture. Luke’s ‘version’ claims that one insurgent scolds the other for his hostility toward Jesus and asks Jesus to ‘remember him when he comes into his kingdom’. Jesus replies, ‘this day thou shalt be with me in paradise’. That statement in itself is a major contradiction to the Apostles Creed which states that ‘Jesus descended into hell for three days’.
I point out the discrepancy between Matthew and Luke because, in the Catholic Liturgy, there is an entire section devoted to ‘the repentant insurgent’—what does that mean? To me it means that very likely, Luke was lying. I say that because Professor Garry Wills in his astute book, What Paul Meant, shows rather conclusively that Luke was a veritable liar. In comparing Paul’s writings with Luke’s descriptions of Paul’s activities, there is no similarity. It seems very likely that Luke was a ‘romanticist’. He painted a picture of a church the way he envisioned it—not the way it truly was. Parenthetically, I would strongly urge you to read Professor Wills’ book.
So what’s the point—the point is very simply this: we, ‘the herd’, for the most part, are at the whimsical ‘mercy’ of the scalawags who earnestly desire, and will stop at nothing, in order to control our minds and our pocketbooks. We have to always be ‘on our guard’ so as not to get caught in the whirlwind of their ‘self-serving untruth.
I have written two books which discredit them. I strongly urge you to read Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality.