"新约"所谓的福音书又怎样呢？1 1 为什么每一部福音书的开头都是"按……所记"（ACCORDING TO ... ACCORDING TO ...）的字样？（见下文）为什么用"按"（according to）？因为在所谓的四千多份现存抄本中，竟没有一份带有其作者的亲笔签名！因此才有了"按"这一推测！即便是内证也表明，那部以马太之名流传的第一福音书，并非马太所写。

What about the so-called New Testament? 1 1 Why does every Gospel begin with the introduction — ACCORDING TO ... ACCORDING TO ... (See below). Why "according to?" Because not a single one of the vaunted four thousand copies extant carries its author's autograph! Hence the supposition "according to!" Even the internal evidence proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name.

"耶稣从那里经过的时候，他看见一个人名叫马太，坐在税关上，耶稣对他说：你跟从我。他就起来跟从了他。"（马太福音 9:9）

"And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (JESUS) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (JESUS) saith unto HIM (MATTHEW), follow ME (JESUS) And HE (MATTHEW) arose, and followed HIM (JESUS)." (Matthew 9:9)

1. 所谓的"圣经"，因为"新约"从未称自己为"新约"，"旧约"也从未称自己为"旧约"。而且"圣经"这个词在圣经的篇章中也从未出现。上帝竟忘了给"祂"的书籍取一个名字！不必费多少想象，就能看出上述叙述中的"祂"和"他"并不指耶稣或作者马太，而是某个第三者在记述他所见所闻——这是一种传闻式的记载。如果连这部"梦境之书"（第一部福音书也是这样被描述的）都无法确认为门徒马太所作，我们又怎能接受它为上帝的话语呢？

1. The "so-called," because nowhere does the "New Testament" calls itself the New Testament, and nowhere the Old Testament calls itself the Old Testament. And also the word "Bible" is unknown within the pages of the Bible. God forgot to give a title to "HIS" books! Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the "He's" and the "Him's" of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but some third person writing what he saw and heard — a hearsay account. If we cannot even attribute this "book of dreams" (as the first Gospel is also described) to the disciple Matthew, how can we accept it as the Word of God?

我们在"马太不是《马太福音》作者，而是某位匿名者所写"这一发现上并不孤单。J. B. 菲利普斯也与我们的结论一致。他是英国奇切斯特大教堂的圣职津贴领受者，受雇于圣公会。他没有理由说谎，也没有理由背叛其教会的官方观点！请参阅他为《马太福音》所写的导言（转载于下）。菲利普斯在导言中就其作者问题有如下论述。

We are not alone in this discovery that Matthew did not write the "Gospel according to St. Matthew" and that it was written by some anonymous hand. J. B. Phillips concurs with us in our findings. He is the paid servant of the Anglican Church, a prebendary of the Chichester Cathedral, England. He would have no reason to lie or betray to the detriment of the official view of his Church! Refer to his introduction to the "Gospel of St. Matthew" (reproduced here below). Phillips has this to say about its authorship.

"早期传统将这部福音书归于使徒马太名下，但如今的学者几乎都否定了这一看法。"换言之，那部以马太为名的福音书并非圣马太所写。这一结论出自最具声望的基督教学者之手，而非可能带有偏见的印度教徒、穆斯林或犹太人。让我们的圣公会朋友继续说："作者，我们仍可方便地称之为马太。"之所以说"方便"，是因为否则每当我们提到"马太"时，都得说"新约的第一卷书"，再加上第几章第几节。如此一遍又一遍地说"第一卷书……"等等，未免繁琐。因此，按照J. B. 菲利普斯的说法，给这卷书取一个名字是方便的。那为什么不叫"马太"呢？这个名字和其他任何名字一样好！菲利普斯接着写道："作者显然借用了神秘的'Q'，它或许是一部口传传统的汇编。"什么是那个神秘的"Q"？"Q"是德文"Quelle"一词的缩写，意为"来源"。据推测，存在另一份共同的文献来源，我们现在的马太、马可和路加都曾接触过它。这三位作者，无论他们是谁，都是在以同一份手边的材料为依据进行写作，仿佛透过"同一只眼睛"在看。正因为他们的看法如出一辙，最初的这三部"福音书"便被称为"对观福音"。

"EARLY TRADITION ASCRIBED THIS GOSPEL TO THE APOSTLE MATTHEW, BUT SCHOLARS NOWADAYS ALMOST ALL REJECT THIS VIEW." In other words, St. Matthew did not write the Gospel which bears his name. This is the finding of Christian scholars of the highest eminence — not of Hindus, Muslims and Jews who may be accused of bias. Let our Anglican friend continue: "THE AUTHOR, WHOM WE STILL CAN CONVENIENTLY CALL MATTHEW" "Conveniently" because otherwise everytime we made a reference to "Matthew" we would have to say — "THE FIRST BOOK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT" Chapter so and so, verse so and so. And again and again "The first book . . ." etc. Therefore, according to J. B. Phillips it is convenient that we give the book some name. So why not "Matthew?" Suppose its as good a name as any other! Phillips continues: "THE AUTHOR HAS PLAINLY DRAWN ON THE MYSTERIOUS 'Q' WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN A COLLECTION OF ORAL TRADITIONS." What is this "mysterious 'Q'?" "Q" is short for the German word "quella" which means "sources." There is supposed to be another document — a common source — to which our present Matthew, Mark and Luke had access. All these three authors, whoever they were, had a common eye on the material at hand. They were writing as if looking through "one" eye. And because they saw eye to eye, the first three "Gospels" came to be known as the Synoptic Gospels.

但是那所谓的“默示”又怎么说呢？这位英国圣公会的教士一针见血，他比任何人都有资格这样说。他是教会的带薪神职人员，正统的福音派基督徒，一位享有声望的圣经学者，能够直接查阅“原始”的希腊文抄本，那就让他亲口把话说清楚吧。（请注意他说得多么委婉，把真相轻轻透露出来）：“他（马太）大量借用了马可福音”，用校长的话来说，就是“整段整段地抄袭马可！”然而基督徒竟把这种大规模的剽窃称为上帝的话语吗？

But what about that "inspiration" business? The Anglican prebendary has hit the nail on the head. He is, more than anyone else, entitled to do so. A paid servant of the Church, an orthodox evangelical Christian, a Bible scholar of repute, having direct access to the "original" Greek manuscripts, let HIM spell it out for us. (Notice how gently he lets the cat out of the bag): "HE (Matthew) HAS USED MARK'S GOSPEL FREELY" which in the language of the school-teacher — "has been copying WHOLESALE from Mark!" Yet the Christians call this wholesale plagiarism the Word of God?

难道你不觉得奇怪吗？据说门徒马太是耶稣传道的亲眼见证者和亲耳听闻者，他本应亲笔记下自己对“他的主”之传道的第一手印象，却反而去抄袭一个少年（马可）的著作。而那少年在耶稣斥责他的民族时，还只是个十岁左右的孩子。一个亲眼见证、亲耳听闻的人，为何要抄写一个本身是依据传闻写作的人的文字呢？门徒马太绝不会做这种愚蠢的事。一部匿名的文献，被强加在马太的美名之上了。

Does it not make you wonder that an eye-witness and an ear-witness to the ministry of Jesus, which the disciple Matthew was supposed to be, instead of writing his own first hand impressions of the ministry of "his Lord" would go and steal from the writings of a youth (Mark), who was a ten year old lad when Jesus upbraided his nation? Why would an eye-witness and ear-witness copy from a fellow who himself was writing from hearsay? The disciple Matthew would not do any such silly thing. For an anonymous document has been imposed on the fair name of Matthew.

剽窃是指文学上的盗窃。有人逐字逐句（一字不差）地照抄他人的著作，并将其据为己有，这就称为剽窃。 这是《圣经》中约四十位匿名作者所写书卷的一个common trait（共同特征）。基督徒夸耀说，新教的66卷书和天主教的73卷书，它们的作者之间有一种共同的纽带，这套书被称为"圣经"。的确存在某种共同的纽带：马太和路加，或者不管他们是谁，据称有85%是逐字抄自马可！上帝全能者并没有向众对观福音作者（独眼的）口授相同的措辞。基督徒自己也承认这一点，因为他们不相信言语默示，而穆斯林对神圣的《古兰经》则持有言语默示的信仰。

Plagiarism means literary theft. Someone copies ad verbatim (word for word) from another's writing and palms it off as his own, is known as plagiarism. This is a common trait amongst the 40 or so anonymous authors of the books of the Bible. The Christians boast about a supposedly common cord amongst the writers of the 66 Protestant booklets and the writers of the 73 Roman Catholic booklets called the "Holy Bible." Some common cord there is, for Matthew and Luke, or whoever they were, had plagiarised 85% word for word from Mark! God Almighty did not dictate the same wordings to the synoptists (one-eyed). The Christians themselves admit this, because they do not believe in a verbal inspiration, as the Muslims do about the Holy Qur’ân. 1 1

这种对马太福音和路加福音约85%抄袭的指控，与旧约作者遭受的“文学绑架”相比，简直微不足道。在所谓的“神的书”中，发生了百分之百的剽窃。肯尼斯·克拉格主教等水准的基督教学者，委婉地将这种剽窃称为“再现”，并以此为荣。

This 85% plagiarism of Matthew and Luke pales into insignificance compared to the literary kidnapping of the authors of the Old Testament where a hundred percent stealing occurs in the so-called Book of God. Christian scholars of the calibre of Bishop Kenneth Cragg euphemistically calls this stealing, "reproduction"2 and take pride in it.

1. 参见《AL-QURAN — The Miracles of Miracles》（即将推出）

1. See "AL-QURAN — The Miracles of Miracles" (coming soon)

2. 完整引文请见第一章开头。

2. See beginning of chapter one for the full quotation.

斯克罗吉博士（前文已提及）在他的书中极为热情地引用了约瑟夫·帕克博士对圣经的独特赞颂。¹

Dr. Scroggie (referred to earlier on) most enthusiastically quotes in his book Scroggie (referred to earlier on) most enthusiastically quotes in his book1 a Dr. Joseph Parker for his unique eulogy of the Bible:

"圣经在内容的多样性方面是一部多么奇特的书!……整页整页都被晦涩的人名占满,关于家谱所叙述的比关于审判之日的还多。故事只讲了一半,夜幕便降临了,我们还未能说出胜利究竟在何处。世界的宗教典籍中,哪里还有能与之相称的东西?" 这无疑是一串优美的词句项链!然而这不过是小题大做,而且是赤裸裸的亵渎上帝至大的言行,竟授权这样令人尴尬的杂乱拼凑。然而基督徒却沾沾自喜地夸耀其书的这些缺陷,正如罗密欧夸耀朱丽叶嘴唇上的那颗痣一般! 1. 《圣经是上帝的话语吗?》,Moody Press出版社。Moody Press出版社。

"WHAT A BOOK IS THE BIBLE IN THE MATTER OF VARIETY OF CONTENTS! . . . WHOLE PAGES ARE TAKEN UP WITH OBSCURE NAMES, AND MORE IS TOLD OF A GENEALOGY THAN OF THE DAY OF JUDGMENT. STORIES ARE HALF TOLD, AND THE NIGHT FALLS BEFORE WE CAN TELL WHERE VICTORY LAY. WHERE IS THERE ANYTHING" (in the Religious Literature of the world) "TO CORRESPOND WITH THIS?" A beautiful necklace of words and phrases undoubtedly! It is much ado about nothing, and rank blasphemy against God Almighty for authorising such an embarrassing hotch potch. Yet the Christians gloat over the very defects of their book, like Romeo over the "mole" on Juliet's lip! 1. "Is the Bible the Word of God?" by the Moody Press. by the Moody Press.

为了展示“受启示”的圣经作者所进行的抄袭程度，我在开普敦大学与神学系主任Cumpsty教授举行的一场研讨会上（主题为“圣经是神的话语吗？”）请听众打开他们的圣经。

To demonstrate the degree of plagiarism practised by the "inspired" Bible writers, I asked my audience during a symposium at the University of Cape Town conducted between myself and Professor Cumpsty the Head of the Department of Theology on the subject "Is the Bible God's Word?" to open their Bibles.

许多基督徒非常喜欢在宗教讨论或辩论时把《圣经》夹在腋下。没有这本书，他们似乎就完全无所适从。应我的建议，一些听众开始翻动书页。我请他们翻到《以赛亚书》第37章。听众准备好后，我请他们在我朗读时，把我读的"以赛亚书37章"与他们手中的"以赛亚书37章"对照，看看是否完全相同。我开始朗读，读得很慢，依次读了第1、2、4、10、15节等，直到全章结束。每读一节，我都问他们刚才读的内容是否与他们圣经中的经文一致。他们一次又一次齐声回答："是的！""是的！"读到章末时，我手里仍拿着摊开的圣经，停在我所读的那一页。这时我请主席向听众宣布：我根本不是在读以赛亚书37章，而是在读列王纪下19章！听众中顿时一片惊愕！由此，我便证明了《圣经》中存在100%的抄袭。（见下文）

Some Christians are very fond of carrying their Bibles under their arms when religious discussions or debates take place. They seem to be utterly helpless without this book. At my suggestion a number of the audience began ruffling the pages. I asked them to open chapter 37 in the "Book of Isaiah." When the audience was ready, I asked them to compare my "Isaiah 37" with their "Isaiah 37" while I read, to see whether they were identical. I began, readingly slowly. Verses 1, 2, 4,10, 15, and so on, until the end of the chapter. I kept on asking after every verse if what I had been reading, was identical with the verses in their Bibles. Again and again they chorused — "Yeh!", "Yeh!". At the end of the chapter with the Bible still open in my hands at the place from which I had been reading, I made the Chairman to reveal to the audience that I was not reading from Isaiah 37 at all but from 2 KINGS 19! There was a terrible consternation in the audience! I had thus established 100% plagiarism in the "Holy Bible." (See below)

换言之，以赛亚书第37章与列王纪下第19章逐字相同。然而，这两段经文却被归于两位不同的作者，相隔数世纪，而基督徒却声称他们都受到了上帝的启示。

In other words, Isaiah 37 and 2 Kings 19 are identical word for word. Yet they have been attributed to two different authors, centuries apart, whom the Christians claim have been inspired by God.

谁在抄袭谁？谁在偷窃谁？RSV（修订标准版）的32位知名圣经学者说，《列王纪》的作者是"未知"的！请看后面从"Collins"出版社的RSV中摘录的内容。这些圣经注释由纽约圣经会总干事、文学博士David J. Fant主教编辑整理。显然，如果这些尊贵的基督教绅士们对圣经是神的话语有哪怕一丁点的信仰，他们就会这样说。但他们坦率地（或者说羞愧地？）承认："作者——未知！"他们口头上尊奉这些可能出自任何一个汤姆、迪克或哈利之手的经文，却期望所有人都把它们当作神的话语来看待——天哪，这怎么可能！

Who is copying whom? Who is stealing from whom? The 32 renowned Bible scholars of the RSV say that the author of the Book of Kings is "UNKNOWN!" See later on for a reproduction from the RSV by "Collins'". These notes on the Bible were prepared and edited by the Right Rev. David J. Fant, Litt. D., General Secretary of the New York Bible Society. Naturally, if the Most Reverend gentlemen of Christiandom had an iota of belief about the Bible being the Word of God, they would have said so, but they honestly (shamefacedly?) confess: "Author — UNKNOWN!" They are prepared to pay lip service to Scriptures which could have been penned by any Tom, Dick or Harry and expect everyone to regard these as the Word of God — Heaven forbid!

这些经文摘自钦定本（Authorised Version），但在每一个译本中你都会找到同样的内容。

These verses are culled from the Authorised Version, but you will find the same in every Version.

(有关圣经所有书卷及其作者的完整列表,请参阅"Collins'"出版的R.S.V.版圣经及其注释。)基督教学者对《以赛亚书》有何看法?他们说:"主要归于以赛亚名下,部分内容可能由他人所写。"鉴于圣经学者的这些承认,我们不会去苛责可怜的以赛亚。那么,我们能否把这种抄袭的罪名扣在上帝头上?这是何等的亵渎!在前述研讨会结束时的提问环节中,坎普茨教授确认,"基督徒并不相信圣经的逐字默示"。所以全能的上帝并不是心不在焉地把同一个故事口述了两遍!充满人性、过于人性的双手,把所谓的上帝之言——圣经——搞得一团糟。然而,那些死守字句的圣经信徒仍会坚持说:"圣经的每一个字、每一个逗号和句号都是上帝的话语!"

(For a complete list of all the books of the Bible and their authors, avail yourself of the "Collins'" R.S.V. 'with' its annotations). What have Christian scholars to say about the "Book of Isaiah?" They say: "MAINLY CREDITED TO ISAIAH. PARTS MAY HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY OTHERS" In view of the confessions of Bible scholars, we will not take poor Isaiah to task. Can we then nail this plagiarism on the door of God? What blasphemy! Professor Cumptsy confirmed at question time, at the end of the aforementioned symposium that the "Christians do not believe in a verbal inspiration of the Bible" So God Almighty had not absent-mindedly dictated the same tale twice! Human hands, all too human, had played havoc with this so-called Word of God — the Bible. Yet, Bible-thumpers will insist that "every word, comma and full stop of the Bible is God's Word!"