Jobs Worldwide & Bottom prices, cheaper then Amazon & FB
( 17.905.982 jobs/vacatures worldwide) Beat the recession - crisis, order from country of origin, at bottom prices! Cheaper then from Amazon and from FB ads!
Become Careerjet affiliate

AuthorTopic: THE BIBLE OF 27 BIBLES (1 christian with 2000 errors) 1879 -KERSEY GRAVES  (Read 20266 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

including men, women and children, and beasts, to stop eating
and drinking, and to be covered with sackcloth. What sin
can we suppose the beasts had committed that they must be
doomed to starve, and be covered with sackcloth as an emblem
of repentance ? It must have required an enormous amount of
sackcloth to cover two millions of people, and probably as many
domestic animals. Where it all came from, the Lord Jehovah
only knows. And it seems singular that all of the animals
should stand quietly while such an uncouth covering was thrown
upon them.

25.   It is also difficult to comprehend why a nation of people,
who probably never heard of Jehovah before, should all repent in
sackcloth and ashes. It is the most effective missionary work
we have ever read of. In modern times it requires two hundred
missionaries a whole centmy to make half that many converts.

26.   But the most conclusive argument against the truth of the
stor}T is found in the fact that it is falsified by the testimony of
histoiy. According to her history by Diodorus, Nineveh was
destroyed by Arbaces sixteen years before Jonah’s time.

27.   I have noticed this senseless storey at some length, because
Christian writers have invested it with great importance, and be-
cause it is indorsed by nearly all the New-Testament writers.
Even Christ himself indorses it, and compares Jonah’s case to
his. Their extreme ignorance is evinced by the foregoing expo-
sition.

28.   Several similar stories are found in heathen mythology, a
few of which we will briefly sketch here. The Hindoo sacred
book, the Purans, states that Chrishna was swallowed by a croco-
dile, and, after remaining three da}rs in its stomach, was thrown
upon dry land, much to his relief and also to that of the crocodile.
A Grecian demi-God (Hercules), according to Gales, was
swallowed by a dog, and remained in his stomach three days.
But the stoiy entitled to the premium is one preserved in the
legends of some of the Eastern islanders. A man, for some
misdemeanor on a voyage across the Indus, was thrown over-
board, and swallowed by a shark ; but, as the fish still followed
the vessel, it was finally caught, and search made for the man,
when, to the surprise of the whole crew, he was found sitting
 BIBLE PROPHECIES NOT FULFILLED.

121

bolt upright, pla3Ting the tune of “ Old Hundred ” on a fiddle he
had in his possession when he went down the throat of the sea-
monster. This was rather a pleasant way of putting in the
time. Jonah, it appears, was not so fortunate as to have a fiddle
in his possession while in the stomach of the whale. The fore-
going ten stories, from that of the serpent to Jonah, have been
for hundreds of years printed by the thousand, struck off in
almost every known human language, and sent off by ship-loads
to almost every nation on the globe, to be placed in the hands of
the heathen as being productions of Infinite Wisdom, the inspira-
tions of an All-ioise God, and calculated to enlighten them and
improve their morals. What sublime nonsense ! what egregious
folly ! And what a deplorable and sorrowful mistake has been
thus committed by the blinded disciples of the Christian faith!

CHAPTER XIX.

BIBLE PROPHECIES NOT FULFILLED.

Having devoted a chapter to this subject in “The World’s
Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” we shall treat the subject but briefly
in this work. The Old Testament has been thoroughly searched
for prophecies, and more than a hundred texts selected, by vari-
ous Christian writers, and assumed to be prophetic of some
future event. But a critical and impartial investigation of the
subject will show that not one of them is, strictly speaking, a
prophecy ; but most of them refer to events either in the past, or
events naturally suggested by the circumstances under which
the writer was placed. And in many cases the text has no
reference whatever to the event which Bible commentators
assume they refer to. In treating the subject briefly, we will
show, —

1.   That if one-fourth of the texts from Genesis to Revela-
tion were prophecies, and it could be shown that every one of
them has been fulfilled to the letter, it would not prove that there
was any divine inspiration or divine aid in the matter; because
 122

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

many facts show that prophecy, or the power to discover future
events, is a natural, and not a supernatural, gift.

2.   Many cases are reported in history of the prediction of
future events by pagan or heathen seers, and also by persons
not claiming to be inspired nor even religious. I will cite a few
cases: Josephine, wife of Napoleon, relates that she had all
the important events of her future life pointed out to her by an
ignorant, illiterate fortune-teller, long before they occurred;
such as her marriage, her unhapp}r life, and the death of her
husband, — all of which was fulfilled to the letter. An astrologer
predicted the great fire in London. Rousseau foretold the
French Revolution. Cicero made a remarkable prophecy, which
was realized in the discovery of America and the history of
George Washington by consulting the Sibylline oracles. These,
and many other cases that might be cited, furnish satisfactory
evidence that the capacity for foretelling the occurrence of
future events is a natural and inherent power of the human
mind, and hence can do nothing toward proving the divine
origin of any religion, or the divine illumination of any prophet.
Therefore any further argument in the case would be superflu-
ous. We will only briefly review a few of the Jewish prophe-
cies (or texts assuming to be prophecies) to show that the Jew-
ish nation occupied a lower moral plane, and possessed less of
the gift of prophec}r, than some of the contemporary heathen na-
tions. Hence Christian writers are wrong in assuming that the
Jews alone possessed this power, while they possessed it in a
less degree than some of the Oriental prophets. Prophecies
(assumed to be) relating to Babylon, relating to Damascus, re-
lating to Tyre, relating to the dispersion of the Jews, relating
to the advent of Christ, &c., have been quoted time and again
by Christian writers and clergj’men, and dwelt upon at great
length in attempts to show their fulfillment, in order to deduce
therefrom the argument and conclusion that the Jewish nation
wore divinely commissioned to furnish the world with a true sys-
tem of religion and morals. But we are prepared to show that
every one of these prophecies so called has utterly failed of
any fulfillment in the sense that writers and preachers assume.
As it would require a large work to treat this subject fully, we
 BIBLE PROPHECIES HOT FULFILLED.

123

shall only briefly refer to one or two cases as samples of the
whole. As Babjdon and Tyre are the most frequently referred
to, and are regarded as the strongest cases, our attention will be
confined to them. Relative to Babylon, Isaiah says, “ It shall
not be dwelt in from generation to generation ; neither shall the
Arabian pitch his tent there” (Isa. xiii. 19) : but he says,
“ It shall be inhabited by wild beasts of the desert and satyrs
and dragons,” —not one of which predictions has ever been real-
ized. It is still inhabited, though its name has been changed to
Hillah, which has now a population of about nine thousand.
So far from the u Arabian not pitching his tent there,” it is the
very thing they have done, and are now doing daily. Mr. Lay-
ard, who recently visited the place, says, in his work (“Nineveh
and Babylon”), “The Arab settlement showed the activity of a
hive of bees.” What a singular rebuff to Isaiah’s prophecy,
and also to that of Jeremiah, who says it should become a “ per-
petual desolation ” (xxv. 12), and that it should not be dwelt in
by man nor the son of man! (Jer. 1. 40.) Isaiah declared,
“ Her days shall not be prolonged ” (Isa. xiii). And thus the
prophecies have all failed which refer to Babylon. Speaking of
Tyre, Ezekiel says, it should be taken by Nebuchadnezzar, and
trodden down by his chariots and horses ; and 6 6 thou shalt be
built no more, and thou shalt never be found again.” And yet
Tyre never was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, nor by any
power; and, although it has suffered like other Eastern cities, it is
still a flourishing city with a population of about five thousand.
St. Jerome spoke of it in the fourth century as being “the most
noble and beautiful city in Phoenicia.” And this was more than
a thousand years after Ezekiel’s maledictions were pronounced
against it, which declared it should be destroyed, and never be
rebuilt. True, it has been partially destroyed several times, —
and what ancient city has not? —but it has been rebuilt as often.
We have, then, before us two illustrative cases of the failures of
Jewish prophecies pronounced against neighboring cities and
kingdoms, probably prompted by a spirit of envy and animosity
because they had either overruled the Jewish nation, and sub-
jected it to their power, or outstripped it in temporal prosperity.
The Jewish prophets were continually fulminating their thunders
 124

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

and curses upon those powers and principalities which had over-
powered them, and held them in subjection. This was very
natural; and occasionally an unpropitious prediction may have
been realized. But it is a remarkable fact, that more than forty
disastrous events, which the Jewish prophets declared the Lord
would inflict upon Eg}^pt (the nation they so much contemned
and envied because it held them in slavery for four hundred
years), have never been realized in the history or experience of
that nation. Some of these cases are noticed in “ The World’s
Sixteen Crucified Saviors,’’ as also the prophecies and failures
in regard to Damascus and other cities, to which the reader is
referred for a further elucidation of this subject.

CHAPTER XX.

MIRACLES, ERRONEOUS BELIEF IN.

Having treated the subject of miracles at some length in
“The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” we shall give it but
a brief notice in this work, and will comprehend the whole thing
in a few points.

1.   The histor}r of miraculous achievements by Gods and men
form a very large chapter in the “ inspired writings ” of nearly
all the ancient religious sj'stems which have flourished in the
world ; and to notice all these cases would require volumes enough
to make a library.

2.   Almost the only evidence we have in any case of the actual
performance of a miracle is the report of the writer who re-
lates it.

3.   St. Chrysostom declares that “miracles are not designed
for men of sense, but on!}" for sluggish minds.” It will be un-
derstood, therefore, that what we write here on the subject will
not be designed for persons of sense, but only for the ignorant
and superstitious.

4.   Many things in the past which were set down as miracles
are now known to be the result of natural causes ; such as the
 ERRONEOUS BELIEF IN MIRACLES.

125

rainbow, most cases of sickness, and, in fact, nearly every phe-
nomenon of nature. And, as every age develops new light on
natural causes, it has made the list of miracles not alread}7 ex-
plained so small, that we may reasonably conclude that they
will all yet be explained and understood in this light, excepting
those fabricated without any basis of truth.

5.   As God appears to have regulated every thing in the be-
ginning by fixed laws, if he should break one of those laws by
the performance of a miracle, it would throw every thing into
chaos and confusion, and prove that he is not a God of order
and stability.

6.   If God, as we are told, made every thing perfect, then the
performance of a miracle must make them imperfect, or prove
that they have always been imperfect.

7.   The performance of a miracle would prove that God is an
imperfect being in not having every thing regulated by the laws
of nature.

8.   If the performance of miracles can authenticate the truth
of one religion, then it must prove the truth of all religions ; for
all report miracles of some kind, and furnish, in most cases, the
same kind of evidence that these miracles were performed.

9.   There is not a miracle related in either the Old or New
Testament that has not a parallel reported in the Bibles or
sacred writings of the Orientals; such as curing the halt and
blind, raising the dead, crossing streams in a miraculous man-
ner, &c. Many cases are reported of the Hindoo Savior and
Son of God, Chrishna, raising dead persons who had been
drowned, murdered, or died a natural death. According to
Tacitus, Vespasian performed a number of miraculous cures;
such as curing the lame, restoring sight to the blind, &c., just
as is related of Jesus. According to Josephus, Alexander with
his army passed through the Sea of Pamphylia in the same mir-
aculous manner that Moses did through the Red Sea. As
Alexander’s army was engaged in the work of human butchery,
we may assume that, if God could have had an}’ thing to do with
it, he would have embraced the opportunity to drown them, and
wash them all away.

10.   Jewish Miracles.—The Jewish Talmud speaks of birds
 126

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

so large that the}7, darkened the sun, and shut out the light of
the sun from the earth. Probably they supposed, like Moses,
that nearly all the earth was located between Dan and Beersheba.
Another kind of bird was’so tall, that, when walking in a river
seventy feet deep, the water onty reached its knees. This is a
tall story; but it should be remembered that it is related by the
same people who tell us about sticks being converted into ser-
pents, water into blood, dust into lice, &c., and a man (Sam-
son) overturning a house with several thousand people in it, &c.
Hence all these as stories are equalty reliable or unreliable.

11.   Mahomeclan Miracles.—Mahomedans bear off the palm
in miraculous prodigies. For instance, a cock is spoken of
so large that the distance between its feet and head was five
hundred da}V journey. What a pit}" Barnum could not obtain
it! Another example: an angel so large that the distance
between his eyes was seventy thousand days’ journey. The
head of this tall ghost must have been among the planets. The
earth would have been too small to furnish him with a seat; and
the attempt to use it for that purpose would probably have
thrown it out of its orbit.

12.   Christian Miracles. — The early Christians seem to have
had the whole miracle-making machinery of heaven under their
control. Their miracles were prodigious and numerous. They
claimed they could cast out devils, call the dead from their
graves, and make ghosts walk about either end up. We are
told that when a Mr. Huntingdon was reduced to great poverty
and suffering, and prayed for dime assistance, fishes came
out of the water to him, and larks and leather breeches from
heaven, to serve as food and clothing. It is difficult to conceive
how leather breeches came to be stored in heaven. With these
few specimens, selected at random, we will stop. They are too
large even to excite our marvelousness. The most ignorant
and superstitious nations have always had the longest creeds

• and the tallest miracles.

VS. We have stated that the only evidence of the perform-
ance of any miracle in most cases is the simple narration of it
by the writer who records it. The Roman Catholics, however,
claim to have the testimon}T of thousands of reliable witnesses
to attest to the performance of some extraordinary miracles
 ERRONEOUS BELIEF IN MIRACLES.

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

127

which they have reported the history of; such as a picture
of the Virgin Mary, hanging on the walls of the church,
opening and shutting its eyes daily for six or seven months,
which they declare was witnessed by sixty thousand people, in-
cluding Pope, cardinals, bishops, &c.,—leading men of the
Church.

14.   There is as much evidence that Esculapius raised Hypo-
litus from the dead (as related by the Roman historian Pausa-
nias), as that Elijah or Christ raised the dead; as much evidence
that the serpent’s egg inclosed in gold (as related by Pliny in his
“ Arguinum Ovum”) swam up stream when thrown into the
river, as that Elisha raised an ax to the surface of the water by
casting a stick into it (2 Kings vi. 6) ; as much evidence that
Mahomet opened a fountain of water in the end of his little fin-
ger, as that Samson found a spring of water in the jaw-bone of
an ass ; as much evidence that Mahomet’s camel tallied to him,
as that Balaam’s ass was endowed with human speech; and as
much evidence that Esculapius cured the blind with spittle, as
that Christ performed such cures. All stand upon a level; all
lack the proof.

15.   Ilere let it be noted that many of the miracles recorded
in the ^Christian Bible are susceptible of an explanation upon
natural principles ; such as the shadow going back on the dial
of Ahaz, as the phenomenon has been witnessed in some of the
Eastern countries of the shadows appearing to recede, when
the sun is near the solstice, once in the forenoon and once in the
afternoon. The story of the devils entering the hogs may be
explained by assuming the devils *to have been frogs ; for they
are described as being like frogs. (See Rev. xvi. 13.)

The resurrection of Lazarus may be explained by assuming
him to have been in a state of coma, or trance ; for Christ once
declared, u This sickness is not unto death, ” but u he sleepeth”
(John xi). The bloody sweat of Christ, and his transfigura-
tion, can also be explained on natural principles; also Paul’s
conversion, and his miraculous cures with a handkerchief. Dr.
Xewton, the great healer, has cured hundreds of cases in a sim-
ilar manner. And the time will come when all real occurrences,
now called miracles, will be accounted for, and understood as
the operation of natural causes.
 128

TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

CHAPTER XXI.

ERRORS OF THE BIBLE IN FACTS AND FIGURES,

A spiritual or metaphorical interpretation, if allowable in
any case, can not avail any thing towards either removing,
explaining, or mitigating, in the least degree, the numerous
palpable Bible errors represented by figures. u Figures never
lie” and admit of no construction. The almost innumerable
errors, therefore, of this character which abound in the Bible
utterty and for ever prostrate it as a work possessing any
authority, reliability, or credibility in matters of history, science,
or even theolog}r. Bible Tvriters, when they have occasion to
refer to numbers which they are interested in making appear
veiy large, seem to make almost a lawless use of figures. I
will present some examples, stated in brief language, com-
mencing with the Pentateuch. The author of these five books,
in speaking of the genealogy, population, armies, &c., of his
own tribe, makes use of figures which are not only incredible,
but utterty impossible. The number of valiant fighting men,
for example, among the Israelites, is frequently stated to be
about six hundred thousand, and never less. (See Exod. xii.
and xxxviii. ; Num. xxvi., &c.) This number, as Bishop
Colenso demonstrates, reaches far beyond the utmost limits of
truth. If the regular arm}' had been six hundred thousand,
then the whole population (women and children included) could
not have been less than two millions, — a number which many
facts, cited by the Bible writer himself, demonstrate to be im-
possible. I would ask, in the first place, how Moses could
address all this immense congregation at once, as he is often
represented as doing. (See Ex. xxiv. 3; Lev. xxiv. 15;
Xuin. xiv. 7, &c.) Joshua makes cc all the congregation ” to
 ERRORS OF TEE BIBLE.

129

include women and children. But how could Moses address
this vast multitude of people, some of whom must have been at
least ten miles distant, unless he used a speaking-trumpet or a
telephone, neither of which, however, had then come to light?
The writer of Deuteronomy says,46 Moses spake unto all Israel ”
(Deut. i. 1). But not one in a hundred could have heard it:
therefore it was very nearly 46 labor lost.” And Joshua says
Moses wrote out his commandments, and he read them 44 before
all the congregation of Israel” (Josh. viii. 35). But it would
have required a voice as loud as thunder to make “all” of
them hear. And it should be borne in mind that the people
on these occasions were assembled in the tabernacle, — as we
infer from many texts, — a building one hundred and eight yards
square, and capable of holding about five thousand people,
which would be just one to four thousand of the congregation;
so there were five thousand people inside, and one million nine
hundred and ninety-five thousand outside. These last, we are
told, occupied the outer court, which was just eighteen feet wide.
This would .place the most distant hearers twenty miles off.
How comforting the thought, that, when Moses called them to
the temple to worship (see Josh. viii. 35), the}" could get within
twenty miles of him and 4 4 the tabernacle of the Lord? ’ ! The
Lord had built a tabernacle for them to worship in, but only one
or two in six thousand could get inside of it. This small num-
ber only could enjoy seeing and hearing Moses and the Lord.
The rest — one million nine hundred and ninety-five thousand —
were outside, waiting for admission. Bishop Colenso estimates
the size of the camp of Israel at about twelve miles square.
This camp was situated in a desert of Sinai for at least a year;
and the business of keeping this camp in order, waiting upon
the people, and removing also, the remains of the daily sacrifice
of two hundred thousand oxen, sheep, &c., devolved upon three
priests,—Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar. It would be quite an
improvement of the sacerdotal order if the priests of to-day
could be subjected occasionally to some such healthy exercise ;
but the}" have managed to get the rule reversed. They now
have the people to wait upon them. But those three priests of
tbe Israelites must have achieved a herculean task to wait each
 180

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

one upon three hundred and thirty-three thousand people daily,
and, after preparing their food outside the camp, travel twelve
miles to supply each one of this vast multitude with food and
water. If they carried provision for only one person at a time,
they would have had to perform this journey of twelve miles
five thousand five hundred times an hour, which would have
required them to be rather fleet on foot. And, besides the
labor of carrying away ever}" day, to the distance of six or seven
miles, five hundred cart-loads of the offal of the dead animals,
there would be at least one pound of victuals to be carried to
each person, making, in the aggregate, five thousand five hun-
dred pounds. They must have enjoyed good health, if abun-
dant exercise would produce it. They could not have been
much troubled with dyspepsia or liver-complaint, as many of
that order are nowadays.

1.   We are told that Moses gave notice to the children of
Israel at midnight, that they must take their departure from
Egypt the next morning for the promised land (Exod. xii.) ;
but, if they constituted the immense number represented, they
would have made a column two hundred miles long, arranging
them five abreast, so it would have taken several days for all to
get started. How, then, could they all start the next morning ?
And how did they keep their two millions of sheep and cattle
alive for several days while passing over a sandy desert too
poor to produce dog-fennel? And it is strange how the whole
tribe of Israelites, if two millions in number, could live forty
years in a wild, barren desert, and keep their immense flocks
and herds alive.

2.   The number of first-born male children over a month old,
on a certain occasion, is set down at twenty-two thousand two
hundred and ninety-three, which would make about eighty-eight
children for each mother. This was 44 replenishing 99 rapidly.
But their little tents, like the tabernacle of the Lord, would not
accommodate one-fourth of that number. This would necessi-
tate the mothers to leave most of their children 44 out in the
cold.”

The number of the children of Israel that went down to
Egypt, according to Exod. i. 5, was seventy souls; and they
 ZEROES OF THE BIBLE.

131

remained there during four generations, represented by Levi,
Kokatk, Amram, and Moses, making a period (as marginal
notes state) of two hundred and fifteen years; though Exod.
xii. 40, gives it at four hundred and thirty years. But this is
another case of incredible exaggeration. Four generations of
ordinary length, in that age, would not exceed the marginal
calculation of two hundred and fifteen years ; and for those
seventy souls to increase to two millions in that short period of
time, of four generations, would have required each mother to
have had twelve or fifteen children at a birth.

3.   Dan, in the first generation, had but one son (Gen. xlvi.
23) ; yet in the fourth generation he had increased to sixty-two
thousand seven hundred, or, according to Num. xxvi. 43, to
sixty-four thousand, which would have required each son and
grandson to have had about eighty children apiece. This would
have been u multiplying and replenishing ” on a rapid scale.

4.   Aaron and his two sons had to make all the offerings, and
on an altar only nine feet square; and an offering had to be
made at the birth of every child, which would require about
five hundred sacrifices daily; and then there were thirteen cities
where these offerings had to be made, and only three priests to
doit. (See Lev. i. 11.) And, besides, the priests had to
eat a large portion of the burnt offerings (see Num. xviii. 10) ;
and, as these offerings consisted of five hundred lambs and
pigeons, it would subject them to the task of eating enormous
quantities daily.

5.   At the second passover, an offering had to be made for
every family (Exod. xii.), which would require the slaughter
of about one hundred and fifty thousand lambs. The three
priests had to sprinkle the blood of these lambs ; and it had to
be done in about two hours (1 Chron. xxx. 35). The lambs
had to be sacrificed at the rate of about one thousand two hun-
dred and fifty a minute, and each priest had to sprinkle the
blood of more than four hundred lambs per minute with their
own hands, which would make the affair rather a bloody busi-
ness, if it were not wholly impossible, and therefore an incredible
story.

6.   If we could credit the statements of u the inspired writer ”
 132

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

of the book of Numbers (see chap. Xxxi.), we should have to
believe twelve thousand Israelites, in a war with the Midianites,
after selecting out thirty-two thousand young damsels, killed
forty-eight thousand men, eighty thousand women, and twenty
thousand boys; burned all their cities, and captured all their
stock, amounting to eight hundred and eight thousand, and all
this without the loss of a single man. Each Israelite would
have had to conquer seventy-five resisting enemies, including
men, women, children, and stock. It is a story too incredible
for serious reflection. We are told that the clothing of the
Israelites lasted forty years “ without waxing old” (see Deut.
xxix. 5), —another story too incredible to be entertained for a
moment.

7.   In Deuteronomy the priests are always called sons of Levi,
or u Levites ; ” but, in the other books of the Pentateuch, they
are always called “ the sons of Aaron,” which is an evidence
they were not written by the same hand. Contradictions. Ac-
cording to Exod. xviii. 25, Moses appointed judges over Israel
before the giving forth of the law; but (Deut. i. 6) we are
told that the appointment took place after the law was issued at
Sinai.

8.   According to Deuteronom}", chap, x., u the Lord separated
the tribe of Levi ” after the death of Aaron ; but, according to
Numbers, chap, iii., the separation took place before his death.

9.   According to Exodus, God instituted the sabbath because
he rested on that da}T; but, according to Deuteronomy, it was
because he brought the Israelites out of Eg}Tpt “ b}T a stretched-
out arm.” In Deuteronomy, chap, xiv., every creeping thing
that flieth is declared to be unclean, and is forbidden to be eaten;
but in Leviticus, chap, xi., every creeping thing, including four
kinds of locusts, is allowed, and is prescribed as a part of tlieir
food.

10.   In Exodus, chap, vi., God is represented as sa}ing, “By
my name Jehovah was I not known to them ” (the patriarchs).
But he was mistaken ; for that name occurs frequentty in Gen-
esis. In 1 Sam. chap, viii., we are told the name of Samuel’s
first-born was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah : but in
Chronicles, vi. 2«s., we are told the name of Samuel’s eldest son
was Vaslini. Which is right?
 ERRORS OF THE BIBLE.

133

11.   Bad Bible Morals.—Persons mutilated by accident, or
otherwise in helpless condition, were excluded from the congre-
gation of the Lord; while the guilty culprits who caused this
mutilation were allowed free access to the holy sanctuary. (See
Ley. xxi.) IVe consider this bad morality. Innocent base-
born children were also excluded from the temple, while the
guilty parents were allowed free admission.

12.   By the law of Moses and the will of God, as is claimed,
parents were required to stone rebellious children to death;
and yet the parents were often the cause of this rebellious dis-
position, and tenfold more guilty than the children, having cor-
rupted them by bad influences. (See Deut. xxi.) This is a
specimen of Bible justice and Bible morality.

13.   The Jews not Civilized. —The Lord’s chosen people pos-
sessed so little of the element of civilization, they had to go to
the King of Tyre to hire artisans and skilled workmen to build
their temple. (See 2 Chron. ii. 3, and 1 Kings v. 6.)

14.   It is stated that it took one hundred and fifty-three thou-
sand men seven years to build Solomon’s temple, — and heathen
at that. (See 2 Chron. ii. 17,18.) Strange, indeed, when it was
only a hundred and ten feet long, thirty-six feet wide, and fifty-
five feet high ! (1 Kings vi. 2.) Some of our modern churches
are much larger buildings, and generally erected in less than a
year by less than a dozen workmen. It is certainly very dam-
aging to the exalted pretensions of u the Lord’s peculiar
people” that they possessed minds and intelligence so far
below the heathen, that no workmen could be found amongst
them, and they had consequently to go to these same heathen
to hire workmen to build the Lord’s house. Such facts sink
the reputation both of them and their God.
 134

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

CHAPTER XXII.

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra


BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS — TWO HUNDRED AND
SEVENTY-SEVEN.

It is difficult to conceive how any real benefit or any reliable
instruction can be derived from a book which contains state-
ments with respect to doctrines or matters of fact that are con-
tradicted on the next page, or in some other portion of the book ;
because it not only confuses the mind of the reader, but renders
it impossible for him to know, as he reads a statement in one
chapter of the book, that it is not contradicted and nullified in
some other chapter, until he has sacrificed sufficient time to
commit the whole book to memory: and but few persons have
ever achieved that herculean task. Hence it must be an unrelia-
ble book as an authority. We know it has been stated by man}7
admirers of the 4 4 Holy Book ’ ’ that it contains no conflicting
statements when properly understood. But who is to decide
when it is properly understood? Here, again, is a conflict of
ideas. All words have certain specific meanings attached to
them by common consent. And certainly an}7 man of good
sense would not attempt to attach any other meaning*to them,
without stating the fact and clearly defining his new meaning, if
he expects any reader to understand him, or any two readers to
understand him alike; and, if he writes without giving a hint
that he has invented or employed new meanings for the words
he uses, we are compelled to assume that his words and lan-
guage have the ordinary and universally adopted signification.
With this view of the case (as the writers of the Bible have
given no hint that they employed new meanings), it is false to
assume or say there are no contradictions in the Bible, when, if
we accept language with its ordinary and established significa-
 BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.

135

tion, an honest and unbiased investigation will show that it
contains several thousand statements which conflict with each
other or with science, histoiy, or moral truth, and hence must
be totally unreliable as an authority. To prove this, we will
now enter upon the unpleasant task of arranging and classifying
a large number of these contradictions found both in the Old
and New Testaments.

I.   Contradictions in Matters of Fact and in Doctrines.

1.   Was it death to eat the forbidden fruit? Yes: “In the day thou eatest thereof,
thou shalt surely die” (G-en. ii. 17). No: “And all the days of Adam were nine hun-
dred and thirty years ” (Gen. v. 5).

2.   Can a woman, according to scripture, ever speak on religious matters ? Yes: “ The
same man had four daughters—virgins — who did prophesy” (Acts xxi. 9). No: “I
suffer not a woman to teach, hut to be in silence ” (1 Tim. ii. 12).

3.   Should a man ever laugh? Yes : “ There is a time to weep and a time to laugh ”
(Eccles. iii. 4). No: “Sorrow is better than laughter” (Eccles.viii.3). Yes: “I com-
mend mirth, because a man hath no better thing under the sun than to eat, drink, and be
merry ” (Eccles. viii. 15).

4.   What is our moral duty relative to trimming the hair on our heads? “ There shall
no razor come upon his head, ... let the locks of his head grow ” (Num. vi. 5). “ If a
man have long hair, it is a shame unto him ” (1 Cor. xi. 14).

5.   Is there any remedy for a fool? Yes: “ The rod of correction will drive it far from
him ” (Prov. xxii. 15). No: “ Though thou bray a fool in a mortar, yet will his foolish-
ness not depart from him ” (Prov. xxvi. 6).

6.   Should we pay a fool in his own coin? Yes: “ Answer a fool according to his
folly ” (Prov. xxvi. 5). No : “ Answer not a fool according to his folly ” (Prov. xxvi. 6).

7.   Is man’s life threescore years and ten? Yes: “The days of our years are three-
score years and ten ” (Ps. xc. 10). No : “ His days shall be a hundred and twenty years ”
(Gen. vi. 3).

8.   Is it desirable to be tempted? Yes: “ Count it all joy to 'be tempted ” (Jas. i. 2).
No: “ Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation ” (Matt. xxvi. 41).

9.   Which is the tempter, God or the devil? The devil: The devil tempted Christ and
Judas. (See Matt. iv. 1). God: God tempted David (2 Sam. xxiv. 1).

10.   Does the Lord ever tempt man? No: “ Neither tcmpteth he any man” (Jas. i.

13). Yes: “And God did tempt Abraham” (Gen. xxii. 1). No: “He blinded their
eyes, and hardened their hearts ” (John xii. 40).

11.   Can God be tempted? No: “ God can not be tempted ” (Jas. i. 13). Yes: “ They
have tempted me, the Lord, ten times ” (Num. xiv. 22).

12.   Is any thing good? Yes: Every thing (1 Tim. iv. 4). No : “ Every thing is cor-
rupt” (Gen. vi. 12).

13.   How many Gods are there? One: “ The Lord our God is the Lord” (Deut. vi.

4). Several: “ Let us make man in our own image ” (Gen. i. 26). Three: “ There are
three that bear record in heaven, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ” (1 John v. 7).

14.   Is God omnipresent? Yes: David declares the Lord is everywhere, in heaven
and earth, and even in hell (Ps. cxxxix. 7). No : “ The Lord came down to see Sodom ”
(Gen. xviii. 20). Yes: “There is no place where the workers of iniquity can hide
themselves ” (Job xxxiv. 2z). No: “ Adam and Eve hid themselves from the presence
of the Lord” (Gen. iii. 8). No: “Cain fled from the presence of God” (Gen. iv. 16;.
Yes : “ Man can not get out of his presence ” (Ps. cxxxix. 7).

15.   Is God omniscient? Yes : “He knoweth the hearts of all men” (Acts i. 24). No :
“ The Lord had to prove the Israelites, and also Abraham, to know what was in their
hearts” (Deut. viii. and Gen. xxii.).

16.   Is God omnipotent? Yes: “With God all things are possible” (Matt. xix. 26).
No: “ He could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because their chariots were
made of iron ” (Judg. i. 19).

17.   Is God unchangeable ? Yes: With him “ there is no variableness, neither shadow
of turning; I change not” (Mai. iii. 6). No: “And the Lord repented of the evil he
said he would indict upon the Ninevites ” (Jon. iii. 10).

18.   Is God a merciful being? Yes: “ The Lord is very pitiful, and full of mercy”
(Jas. v. 11). No: “ I will not pity nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy” (Jer. xiii.
 136

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

14). Yes: “Ilis tender mercies are over all his works ” (Ps. cxlv. 9). No: “Have no
pity on them, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling” (Sam. xv. 2). Yes:
“ His mercy cndureth for ever ” (1 Chron. xvi. 34). No: “ I have taken away my loving-
kindness and mercies ” (Jer. xvi. 3).

19.   Does God even* hate? No: “ God is love ” (1 John iv. 16). Yes: “ He hated his
own inheritance” (Ps. cvi. 40).

20.   Is God’s anger perpetual? No: “His anger endureth but a moment”(Ps.xxx.

5). Yes : “ Mine anger shall burn for ever” (Jer. xvii. 4).

21.   Is God the author of evil? Yes: “I make peace, and I create evil ” (Isa. xlv. 7).
No : “ Out of his mouth proceeds not evil ” (Lam. iii. 38).

22.   Is God in favor of war? No : “He is the God of peace.” Yes: “The Lord is a
man of war” (Exod. xv. 3). No: “He is not the author of confusion, but of peace”
(1 Cor. xir. 33).

23.   Is the spirit of God for peace? Yes: It is “love, peace, joy, gentleness, and
goodness” (Gal. v. 22). No: “The spirit of the Lord came upon him, and he slew a
thousand men” (Judg. xv. 16). Yes: “The spirit of the Lord begets love, peace, and
goodness” (Gal. v. 22). No: “By the spirit of the Lord Samson slew thirty men”
(Judg. xiv. 19).

21. Has any man seen God? Yes: “Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and the
seventy elders of Israel ” saw the God of Israel (Exod. xxiv.9). No: “No man hath
seen God at any time ” (John i. 18). Yes: “ I have seen God face to face, and my j.tc
has been preserved” (Gen. xxxii. 30). No: “There shall no man see me, and live”
(E::od. xxxiii. 20). Yes : “ I saw also the Lord standing upon the throne ” (Isa. vi. 1).
No : “ Ye have never seen his shape” (John v. 37).

2-3. Can any man hear God’s voice? Yes: “I heard thy voice in the garden” (Gen.

iii.   9). No : “Ye have never heard his voice at any time ” (John v. 37).

26.   Does God dwell in light? Yes: “He dwellcth in light which no man can ap-
proach to ” 1 Tim. vi. 16). No: “The Lord said he would dwell in thick darkness”
(1 Kings viii. 12).

27.   Does God dwell in temples? Yes : “ I have chosen this [Solomon’s] temple for a
house” (2 Chron. viii. 16). No: “The Most High dwelleth not in temples made with
hands ” (Acts xvii. 24).

28.   Docs God ever tire? Yes: “God rested,and was refreshed” (Exod. xxxi. 17).
No : “ God fainteth not, neither is he weary” (Isa. xl. 33).

29.   Is God a respecter of persons? No : “ There is no respect of persons with God ”
(Rom. ii. 11). Yes : “ And God had respect to Abel and his offering” (Gen.).

30.   Can God always be found? Yes: “Those who seek me early shall find me”
(Prov. viii. 17). No: “ They shall seek me early, but shall not find me ” (Prov. i. 28).

31.   Docs the Lord believe in burnt offerings? No: “I delight not in the blood of
bullocks or of lambs or of he-goats” (Isa. i. 11). Yes: “Thou shalt offer every day a
bullock for a sin-offering” (Exod. xxix. 36).

32.   Does the Lord believe in animal sacrifices of any kind? No : “Your burnt offer-
ings arc not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me ” (Jer. vi. 20). Yes : “ Burnt
sacrifices are sweet unto the Lord” (Lev. i. 9).

33.   Does God believe in human sacrifices? No: For he condemned the human sac-
rifices of the Gentiles. (See Dent. xii. 30.) Yes: “ For his anger was abated by David’s
hanging the five sons of Miclial in the hill before the Lord.” (Sec 2 Sam. xxi. 8, and
Judg. xi. 30.)

34.   Docs God ever repent? Yes: “It repenteth the Lord that he had made man”
(Gen. vi. G). No: “ The Lord is not a man that he should repent” (Num. xxiii. 19).

35.   Is all scripture given by inspiration of God? Yes: “All scripture is given by
inspiration of God” (2 Tim. iii. 16). No: “I speak it not after the Lord” (2
Cor. xi. 17).

36.   Is war and fighting right? No : “ They that take the sword shall perish with the
sword ” (Matt. xxvi. 52). Yes: “ lie that hath no sword, let him sell his coat and buy
one ” (Luke xxii. 36). No: “ Beat your swords into plowshares, and your spears into
prunlngdiooks” (Mic. iv. 3). Yes: “Beat your plowshares into swords, and your
pruning-hooks into spears” (Joel iii. 10). Yes: “Cursed be he who kcepeth back his
sword from blood” (Lev. xl viii. 10).

37.   Shall nation war against nation? Yes: “Nation shall rise up against nation”
(Matt. xxiv. 7). No: “Nationshall not rise up against nation” (Mic. iv. 3).

3S. Khali we love our enemies? Yes: “Love your enemies ” (Luke vl. 27). No:
“ Bring my enemies, and slay them before me” (Luke xix. 27).

39.   Is hatred right? No :'“Whosoever liateth his broth risa murderer”(l John iii.15).
Yes : “ You must hate father and mother, brother and sister, &c., or ye can not be true
followers of Christ” (Luke xiv. 26).

40.   Is anger commended? Yes: “Bo ye angry, and sin not” (Eph. iv. 26). No:
“Anger resteth in the bosom of fools ” (Eccles. vi i- 9).

41.   Is it right to steal and rob? No: .“ Thou shalt not steal” (Exod. xx. 15); “Neither
 BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.

137

rob” (Lev. xix. 13). Yes: The Israelites took from the Egyptians “jewels of silver
and jewels of gold, and raiment, and they spoiled the Egyptians ” (Exod. xii. 35).

42.   Is it right to kill? No : “ Thou shalt not kill ” (Exod. xx. 13). Yes : “ Kill every
male child amongst them.” Yes ? “ Go ye out and slay every man his companion, and
every man his neighbor, and every man his brother ” (Exod. xxxii. 24).

43.   Is it right to lie on any occasion? No: “All liars are to be punished with fire
and brimstone ” (Rev. xxi. 8). Yes: “ Go put a lying spirit into the mouths of all the
prophets ” (1 lungs xxii. 21). No : “ Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord ” (Prov.
xii. 22). Yes : “ The harlot Rahab lied, and was justified by works ” (Jas. ii. 25). No :

“ Say nothing but the truth” (2 Chron. xviii. 15). Yes : “ If the truth of God hath more
abounded -through my lie for his glory, why am I adjudged a sinner? ” (Rom. iii. 7).

44.   Is God in favor of lying and deception? No: “Thou shalt not bear false wit-
ness” (Exod. 20). Yes: “If a prophet is deceived, I the Lord deceived that prophet”
(Ezek. xiv. 9).

45.   Is a pious life a happy life? Yes: “Come unto me, and I will give you rest”
(Matt. xi. 28). No : “ In the world ye shall have tribulation ” (John xvi. 33).

46.   Will righteousness make a man happy? Yes : “ There shall no evil happen to the

just” (Prov. xii. 21). No: “It is through much tribulation the righteous enter the
kingdom of heaven ” (Acts xiv. 21). Yes : “ The righteous shall flourish ” (Ps. xcii. 12).
No: “ The righteous shall perish” (Isa. lvii. 1). Yes: “The prayer of the righteous
availeth much” (Jas. v. 16). No: “Thereis none righteous; no,notone” (Rom! iii. 10).
Yes:   The righteous to be slain with the wicked (Ezek. xxi. 3). No: The “ righteous

not to be slain” (Exod. xxiii. 7).

47.   Can we live without sinning? Yes: “ Those born of God can not sin” (1 John iii.9).
No: “ There is no man that sinneth not ” (1 Kings viii. 46). Yes: “ lie that committeth
sin is of the devil” (1 John iii. 8). No: “ There are none that doeth good, and sinneth
not” (Eccles. vii. 20).

4S. Does wickedness shorten a man’s life? Yes: “ The years of the wicked shall be
shortened ” (Prov. x. 27). No: “ The wicked live, and become old ” (Job xxi. 7).

Shall we resist evil? Yes: “Put away the evil of your doings” (Isa. i. 16). No:

“ Resist not evil ” (Matt. v. 37).

49.   Who can know whether the golden rule is right or wrong? Right: “ Whatsoever
ye would that men should do unto you, do you even so unto them ” (Matt. vii. 12). Wrong:

“ Spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant. and suckling” (1 Sam. xv. 3).

50.   Is wisdom desirable? Yes : “ Happy is the man that findeth wisdom ” (Prov. iii.
13). No: “Much wisdom is much grief, and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth
sorrow” (Eccles. i. 18). Yes: “ Get wisdom with all thy gettings” (Prov. iv. 7).
Yes: “Be wise as serpents” (Matt. x. 16). No: “The wisdom of the wise shall be
destroyed” (1 Cor. i. 19).

51.   Shall we aim a* a good reputation? Yes: “ A good name is better than riches”
(Prov. xxii. 1). No : “ Woe unto you when all men speak well of you ” (Luke vi. 26).

52.   Are riches desirable? Yes : “ The rich man’s wealth is his strong City ” (Prov.
x. 15). No: “ Woe unto you that are rich ” (Luke vi. 24). Yes:“ Blessed is the man
that feareth the Lord, . . . wealth and riches shall be in his house” (Ps. cxii.). No:

“ Blessed be ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God” (Luke vi. 20).

53.   Can a righteous man be rich, or a rich man be saved? Yes: “In the house of the
righteous is much treasure” (Prov. xv. 6). No: “It is easier for a camel to go through
the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God ” (Matt. xix. 24).

54.   Does the Lord believe in riches? Yes: “The Lord blessed Job with fourteen
thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen,” &c. (Job xlii.
12). No : “ A rich man can not enter into the kingdom of heaven ” (Matt. xix. 24). Yes:

“ Wealth and riches shall be in the house of the man that feareth God ” (Ps. cxii. 1). No:

“ Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth ” (Matt. vi. 19).

55.   Shall we use strong drink? No : “ Wine is a mocker, and strong drink is raging”
(Prov. xx. 1). Yes: “ Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish ” (Prov. xxxi. 6).

56.   Should we ever use wine? No : “ Do not use wine nor strong drink ” (Lev. x. 9).
Yes: “Use a little wine for the stomach’s sake” (Tim. v. 23). No: “ Look not upon
the wine when it is red” (Prov. xxiii. 31). Yes: “Give wine to him that is of heavy
heart” (Prov. xxxi. 6).

57.   Is it right to eat all kinds of animals? Yes: “ There is nothing unclean of itself;
eat every moving thing” (Gen. ix. 3). No : “ Swine, hares, and camels are unclean; ye
shall not eat of their flesh ” {Deut. xiv. 7).

5S. Is it good to eat flesh? . Yes: It is good to eat flesh (Deut. xii. 20). No: It is
not good to eat flesh (Rom. xiv. 21).

59.   Is man justified by works? Yes: “Abraham was justified by works” (Jas. ii. *
21). No : “ A man can not be justified by works ” (Gal. ii. 16).

60.   Is man saved by faith? Yes : “ Man is saved by faith without works ” (Rom. iii.
28). No : “Man can not be justfied by faith without works” (James ii. 24).

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

61.   Should our works be seen? Yes: “ Let your light shine before men” (Matt. v.
16). No: “ Do not your alms before men” (Matt. vi. 1).

v
 138

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

62.   Is public prayer right? No : “ Enter into thy closet, and shut thy door ” (Matt. vi.

6). Yes: “ Solomon prayed before all the congregation ” (1 Kings viii. 22).

63.   How can it be a moral duty to pray, there being no certainty of an answer ? “ Every
one that asketh receiveth ” (Matt. vii. 8). “They that seek me early shall find me”
(Prov. viii. 17). “ Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek
me early, but shall not find me ” (Prov. i. 28).

64. Is man to be rewarded in this life?   Yes: Both the righteous and the wicked are

to be rewarded on earth (Prov. xi. 31).   No: They are to be rewarded after death

(Matt. xvi. 27).

65.   Are children punished for the sins of their parents? Yes: “ The iniquities of the
father are visited upon the children” (Exod. xx. 5). No “ The son shall not bear the
iniquity of the father ” (Ezek. xviii. 20).

66.   Should marriage be encouraged ? Yes: “ Marriage is honorable to all ” (Heb. xiii.
6). No: “ It is good for a man not to touch a woman ” (1 Cor. vii. 1).

67.   Is divorce right or wrong according to the Bible? Right: “ If thou have no delight
in her (thy wife), then thou shalt let her go ” (Deut. xxi. 11). Wrong: “ Whosoever shall
put away his wife, saving for the crime of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery ”
(Matt. v. 32).

63. Is it right to marry a brother’s widow? Yes: “ If a man die childless, his brother
shall marry his widow” (Deut. xxv. 5). No: “To marry a brother’s widow is an un-
clean thing” (Lev. xx. 21).

69.   Is it ever right to marry a sister? No: “ Cursed shall he be who does so ” (Deut.
xxvii. 22). Yes: “ Abraham married his sister, and was blessed” (Gen. xx. 2).

70.   Does the Bible allow adultery? No: “ Whoremongers and adulterers God will
judge ” (Ileb. xiii. 4). Yes: “ The Lord commanded Hosea to take a wife of whoredoms ”
(Hos. i. 2).

71.   Is fornication sinful? Yes: “ You should abstain from fornication ” (1. Thess. iv.

3)   . No: “Every woman who hath not known man by lying with him, save for
yourselves” (Num. xxxi. 18).

72.   Should we always obey kings and rulers? Yes: “ To resist [them] is to resist the
ordinance of God ” (Rom. xiii. 3). No : “ Whether it is right to obey God or man, judge
ye.” Yes : “ Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake” (1 Pet.

ii.   14). “ Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do ” (Matt, xxiii. 3). No:
“ We ought to obey God rather than man ” (Acts v. 29).

73.   hTthe obedience of servants a duty? Yes : “ Servants, obey your masters” (Col.

iii.   22). No : “ Be ye not the servants of men ” (1 Cor. vii. 23).

74.   Is slavery right? No: “ Be not called master;” “ Break every yoke” (Isa. lviii.
6). Yes: “Ye shall buy of the children of the stranger, &c., and they shall be your
possession ” (Lev. xxv. 48). No: “ Proclaim liberty throughout all the land ” (Lev. xxv.
10).

75.   Who can tell if baptism is an obligatory ordinance? Yes: “ Go ye and teach all
nations, baptizing them,” &c. (Matt, xxviii. 19). No: “Christ sent me not to baptize,
but to preach the gospel” (1 Cor. i. 17).

76.   Is image-making right? No: “ Ye shall make no image of any thing” (Exod. xx.

4)   . Yes : “ Moses made an image of a serpent ” (Num. xxi. 9).

77.   Is circumcision right? Yes: Except ye be circumcised after the manner of men,
ye can not be saved” (Acts xv. 1). No: “If ye he circumcised, Christ shall profit you
nothing ” (Gal. v. 2). Yes :“ Ye must be circumcised” (Acts xv. 24). No: “Circumcis-
ion is nothing” (Cor. vii. 19).

78.   Is it right to swear? No: “Swear not at all” (Matt. v. 35). Yes: God swore
eleven times, says the Bible.

79.   Why was the sabbath Instituted? Because “God rested on the sabbath day”
(Exod. xx. 11). Because “ he delivered his people on that day” (Deut. vi. 15).

80.   Is it right to observe the sabbath? Yes: “ Remember the sabbath day to keep it
holy.” No: “ Your new moons and your sabbaths, . . . I cau not away with. It is ini-
quity ” (Isa. I. 12).

81.   Is it right to judge? Yes: “Judge righteous judgment” (John vii. 24). No:
“Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matt. vii. 2).

82.   (’an a man work miracles without divine aid? No: “No man can work such
miracles except God be witli him ” (John iii. 2). Yes : “ The Egyptians did in like man-
ner witli tiieir enchantments” (Exod. vii. 10).

83.   Can any m:in a*e'*nd to heaven? Yes: “Elijah ascended in a chariot of fire” (2
Kings ii. 11). No: “No man hath ascended up to heaven” (John iii. 13). Yes: “All
men must see death ” (1 lob. ix. 27). No : “ Enoch did not see death ” (Ileb. xi. 5).

.   81. Should we fear death? Yes: “Christ walked not in Jewry because the Jews

sought to kill him ” (John vii. 1). No : “ Fear not them that kill the body” (Matt. x. 18).

85. Will the earth ever be destroyed? Yes : “ The earth also shall be burned up ” (2
Pet. iii. 10). No : “ But the earth abideth for ever ” (Eecles. 1. 4).

8G. Does the Bible teach a future life? Yea: “They shall go away into everlasting
 BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.

139

punishment ” (Matt. xxv. 46). No: “ For that which hefalleth men hefalleth beasts; . . .
as the one dieth, so dieth the other,” See. (Eccles. iii. 19).

87.   Does the Bible teach a future resurrection? Yes: “The dead shall be raised”
(Cor. xv. 52). No: “They shall not rise” (Isa.xxvi.14). Yes: “The saints came up
out of the ground” (Matt, xxvii. 52). No: “Those who go down into the grave never
come up again” (Job vii. 9).

88.   Are the actions of men ever to be judged according to the Bible? First, “The
Father judgeth no man” (John v. 22). Second, “ I [Jesus Christ] judge no man” (John
viii. 15). So there is to be no judgment.

89.   No: “God saw every thing was corrupt” (Gren.vi.il). Yes: “God saw every
thing he had made was good” (Gen. i. 31).

90.   Yes: “God forgives the sinner” (Jer. xxxi. 34). No: “God kills the sinner”
(Ezek. xviii. 20).

91.   Yes: “God justifies the ungodly” (Rom. iv. 5). No: “God will not clear the
guilty” (Exod. xxxiv. 7).

92.   Yes: “ Man is justified by the law ” (Rom. ii. 13). No: “ Man can not be justified
by the law” (Gal. iii. 11).

93.   Yes: “ Many have sinned without the law” (Rom. ii. 12). No: “ Where there is
no law there is no transgression” (Rom. iv. 18).

94.   Yes: “ Heaven iiTa kingdom that can not be moved ” (Heb. xii. 18). No: “ I will
shake heaven and earth” (Heb. xii. 26).

95.   Yes: “Everything is afraid of man” (Gen. i. 28). No: “ The lion is not afraid
of man” (Prov. xxx. 30).

96.   Yes: “Every man in his own tongue ” (Gen. x. 5). No: “ The whole earth one
tongue” (Gen. xi. 1).

97.   Yes: “ All things are become new” (2 Cor. v. 17). No: “ There is nothing new
under the sun” (Eccles. i. 9).

98.   Yes: “ You shall make a likeness of a serpent and a cherubim ” (Exod. xxv. 18).
No: “Make no likeness of any thing in heaven above or the earth beneath,” &c. (Exod.
xx. 4).

99.   Yes: “ Deborah the prophetess judged Israel” (Judg. iv. 4). No: “ A woman is
not to judge or rule, a man ” (1 Tim. ii. 12).

100.   Yes: “ God’s people shall be ashamed” (Hos. x. 6). No: “God’s people shall
never be ashamed” (Ps. xxxvii. 19).

101.   Yes: “Blessed are the fruitful” (Gen. i. 28). No: “Blessed are the barren”
(Luke xxiii. 29).

102.   Yes : “ Edom being thy brother, do not abhor him ” (Deut. xxiii. 7). ’ No: “ He
slew of Edom ten thousand” (2 Kings xiv. 7).

103.   Yes: “Bear ye one another’s burdens” (Gal. vi. 2). No: “Every man must
bear his own burden ” (Gal. vi. 5).

104.   Yes: “ Labor not for meat” (Johnvi. 27). No: “He that labors not shall not
eat” (2 Thess. iii. 10).

105.   In Genesis vi. 5 God declared he would pour out his curses because “the
imagination of man’s heart is evil, and only evil continually.” In Genesis viii. 21 he
gives the same reason for not cursing the world.

And these are mere specimens of a vast number of similar
kind. Kings and Chronicles especially are full of such discrep-
ancies of dates, numbers, names, &c. In one case the author
of Chronicles makes a son two years older than his father, the
father being forty and the son forty-two. For proof, compare
2 Chron. xxi. 20 with xxii. 1,2. And observe, the author of 2
Chron. xvi. 1 has Baasha, King of Israel, fighting against Judah
ten years after the author of 1 Kings xvi. 8 has him dead and
buried. But we have not space to spare to continue the list, as
it would comprise a large chapter. Let the reader compare the
names and numbers of the leaders, families, tribes, &c., of the
children of Israel, as recorded by Ezra (chap, ii.), with those
 140

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

of Nehemiah (chap, vii.), and he will find more than a dozen
discrepancies and contradictions; the difference amounting in
some cases to thousands. He will also find a difference with
respect to the coronation, period of rule, and termination of the
reign of various kings, and wide differences tracing genealogic
families, tribes, &c., if he will compare Kings, Chronicles,
Samuel, Ezra, Nehemiah, &c. Such are the verbal discrepancies
of the “ Word of God ; ” such is arithmetic when u inspired.”
Two questions upon the above : 1. How much older can a son
be than his father according to scripture, basing the inquiry
upon Chron. xxi. and xxii. ?   2. How long can a man continue

to fight after he is dead and buried, as is illustrated in the case
of Baasha, King of Israel? (See contradictions 142, 143, and
144.)

Contradictions in History.

106.   When was man created? Gen. i. 25 says after the other animals. Gen. ii. 18
says before the other animals.

107.   Were seed-time and harvest to he perpetual? Yes: “Seed-time and harvest
shall not cease” (Gen. viii. 22). No: “There was neither earing nor harvest” for five
years (Gen. xlv. 6).

108.   Did Eve see before she ate the forbidden fruit? Yes: “ Woman saw before she
ate the fruit” (Gen. iii. 6). No: “ Her eyes were opened by eating the fruit” (Gen. iii.

7).

109.   When did the earth become dry after the flood? “In the first month the
waters of the flood were dried up” (Gen. viii. 13). “In the second month the
waters of the flood were dried up ” (Gen. viii. 12).

110.   How old was Abraham when he left Haran? The eleventh chapter of Genesis
makes him one hundred and thirty-five years old; but the twelfth says he was only
seventy-live.

111.   Did Abraham know where he was going? Yes: “ He went forth to go into the

land of Canaan” (Gen. xii. 5). No: “He went out, not knowing whither he went”
(lleb. xi. S).   %

112.   Did God give Abraham land? Yes : “I give it to thy seed for ever” (Gen. xiii.

15). No: “Abraham had none inheritance in it, not so much as to set his foot on”
(Acts vii. 5).

113.   Did Moses fear Pharaoh ? Yes : “ Moses fled, fearing Pharaoh ” (Exod. ii. 14 and
18). No : “ Moses did not fear Pharaoh ” (lleb. xi. 21).

114.   Who hardened Pharaoh’s heart? “The Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh”
(Exod. ix. 12). “ Pharaoh hardened his heart” (Exod. viii. 15).

115.   IIow many lighting men in Israel ? Samuel says eight hundred thousand (2 Sam.
xxiv. 9). Chronicles says one million one hundred thousand (1 Chron. xxi. 5).

110. IIow many lighting men in Judah? Samuel says live hundred thousand (2 Sam.
xxiv. 9). Chronicles says four hundred and seventy thousand (1 Chron. xxi. 5).

117. Who moved David to number Israel? God: “The Lord moved David to num-
ber Israel ” (2 Sam. xxiv. 1). The devil: “ Satan provoked him to do it” (Chron. xxi. 1).

IIS. Did David sin more than once? Yes: “I have sinned greatly in numbering
Israel ” (2 Sam. 24. 10). No : “ He sinned only when he killed Uriah” (1 Kings xv. 5).

119.   IIow many years of famine was David to suffer? Chronicles says it was three
years (1 Chron. xxi. 11). Samuel says it was seven years (2 fckun. xxiv. 13).

120.   IIow many horsemen did David capture? Samuel says it was seven hundred
(2 Sam. viii. 4). Chronicles says it was seven thousand (1 Chron. xvlii. 4).

121.   What did David pay for his threshing-floor? Samuel says fifty shekels of silver
(2 Sam. xxiv. 21). Chronicles says six hundred shekels of gold (1 Chron. xxi. 25).

122.   Was David’s throne to come to an end? No : “ It shall be established for ever”
(Pa. lxxxix 4). Yea: “It was caat down to the ground” (Ps. lxxxix. 44).
 BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.

141

123.   Was David really a man after God’s own heart? Yes: “ David was a man after
God’s own heart ” (Acts xiii. 22). No: “ David displeased the Lord ” (2 Sam. xi. 24).

124.   Was it a man or God that Jacob wrestled with? “Jacob wrestled all night
with a man” (Gen. xxxii.24). “Jacob wrestled all night with God” (Gen. xxxii.
30).

125.   How many were there of Jacob’s family? “ Jacob’s family was only
seventy souls” (Gen. xlvi. 27). “Jacob’s family was seventy-live souls” (Acts vii.
14).

126.   How long was Israel in Egypt? “Israel was four hundred and thirty years
in Egypt” (Exod. xii. 41). “Jacob was only four hundred years in Egypt” (Acts
vii. 6).

127.   Did they see what the Lord did in Egypt? Yes: “You have seen all the Lord
did in Egypt” (Deut. xxix. 2). No: “ You have seen nothing he did in Egypt” (Deut.
xxix. 4).

128.   Who was the father of Salah? Arphaxad (Gen. xi. 12). Cainan (Luke iii. 35).

129.   HadMichal any children? No: “Michalhad no children unto the day of her
death ” (2 Sam. vi. 23). Yes: “ The five sons of Michal ” (2 Sam. xxi. 8).

130.   Where was the law written? Exodus says it was written on Mt. Sinai. Deuter-
onomy says it was written on Mt. Horeb.

131.   How many died of the plague? Numbers says it was twenty and four thousand
(Num. xxv. 9). Corinthians says three and twenty thousand (1 Cor. x. 8).

132.   When did Zachariah begin to reign? In the thirty-eighth year of Azariah”
(2 Kings xv. 8). But a comparison of 2 Kings xiv. 29 and xv. 1 makes but fourteen
years.w

133.   How many stalls for horses had Solomon? We are told in 1 Kings iv. 26, he had
forty thousand. But, according to 2 Chron. ix. 25, it was only four thousand.

134.   How much oil did Solomon give Hiram? According to Kings v. 11, it was twenty
measures. But, according to Chron. ii. 10, it was twenty thousand.

135.   Of what tribe was Solomon’s artificer, who came from Tyre? According to 1
Kings vii. 14, he was of the tribe of Naphthali. But, according to 2 Chron. ii. 14, he was
of the tribe of Dan.

136.   How long were the two pillars of Solomon’s porch? According to 1 Kings vii.
15, they were eighteen cubits long. But, according to 2 Chron. iii. 15, they were thirty-
five cubits long.

137.   How many baths were contained in the brazen sea? According to 1 Kings .vii.
26, it contained two thousand; but, according to 2 Chron. iv. 5, three thousand.

138.   How many mothers had Abijah? and who was she? According to 1 Kings xv, 2,
she was the daughter of Abishalom. But 2 Chron. xi. 20 says she was the daughter of
Absalom; and 2 Chron. xiii. 2 says she was the daughter of Uriel.

The chronology of the kings of Judah and Israel are a mass of confusion.

139.   Where was Ahaziah killed, and how often ? According to 2 Chron. xxii. 8, he
was killed at Samaria; and, according to 2 King ix. 27, he was killed again.

140.   How many did Jashobeam kill? “ Jashobeam slew eight hundred at one time ”
(2 Sam. xxiii. 8). No : It was only three hundred he slew (1 Chron. xi. 11).

141.   Who killed the Amalekites? Samuel says “ Saul utterly destroyed them” (1
Sam. xv. 3). But, according to chapter twenty-seven of the same book, David killed
them all, “ left neither man nor woman ” (1 Sam. xv. 13). And yet it appears they were
not well killed; for, forty years after, they fought a battle with Ziklag (see 1 Sam. xxx.
18), and they were all killed again, “ save four hundred young men; ” and Simeon after-
wards slew them. (See 1 Chron. iv. 3.) And yet, although destroyed three times, Jose-
phus says he was a descendant of the Amalekites. They must have been a live people.

142! When did Baasha fightabattle with Judah? According to 2Chron. xvi. 1, it was
in Asa’s thirty-sixth year. But, according to 1 Kings xvi. 8, in the twenty-sixth year of
Asa, Baasha died, or, at least, vacated the throne, — a difference of ten years.

143.   How did Asa and Baasha stand toward each other ? “ There was war between
Asa and Baasha all their days ” (1 Kings xv. 16). But, according to Chron. xiv. 1, they
were at peace ten years.

144.   How long did Baasha reign ? “ Baasha reigned over Israel twenty-four years ” (1
Kings xv. 33). But, according to 1 Kings xvi. 5, it was twenty-seven years.

145.   How long did Elah reign? According to 1 Kings xvi. 8, Elah reigned two years,
commencing in Asa’s twenty-sixth year.

146.   When did Ahaziah begin to reign over Judah? Kings says it was the eleventh
year of Joram (2 Kings viii. 16). Kings also says it was the twelfth (2 Kings viii. 25).

147.   When did Omri begin to reign? “ In the thirty-eighth year of Asa began Omri
to reign” (Kings xvi. 15). But, as Zimri only reigned seven days, and began in Asa’s
twenty-seventh year, Omri must also have commenced in his twenty.seventh year.

148.   When did Ahab commence his reign? “In the thirty-eighth year of Asa began
Ahab, son of Omri, to reign ” (1 Kings xvi. 29). How can that be if Omri reigned twelve
years? (See 1 Kings xvi. 23).
 142

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

-v

$

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

149.   When did Jehoram, son of Ahab, begin to reign? “In the eighteenth year of
Jehoshaphat, King of Judah, began Jehoram to reign (2 Kings iii. 1). Impossible, if his
son Ahazjah commenced in Jehoshaphat’s nineteenth year (see 1 Kings xxii. 51), and
reigned two years: seventeen and two are nineteen. And, according to 2 Kings i. 17.
and 1 Kings, it was twelve years later, if Jehoshaphat reigned twenty-five years. (See 1
Kings).

150.   WTien did Azziah, or Uzziah, begin to reign? In the twenty-seventh year of
f Jeroboam, according to 2 Kings xv. 1. But, according to 2 Kings xvi. 17 and 23, it was

sixteen years.

“. How long did Jehu reign over Israel? “Jehu reigned over Israel twenty-eight
“ (2 Kings x. 36). But, according to 2 Kings xiii. 1, he reigned thirty years.

How long did Jehoahaz reign? Jehoahaz reigned seventeen years ” (2 Kings
I xiii. 1). But, according to 2 Kings xiii. 10, it was twenty years.

L***00* 153. How old was Ahaz when he began to reign? Twenty years. (2 Kings xvi. 2.)
According to the text (2 Chron. xxiv. 2), his father was about eleven years old when he
was born.

# Jeroboa
I only six

I 151. :

I years ” i
J 152. ;

New-Testament Contradictions.

There is a continual conflict in the statements of Christ’s
biographers with respect to the various events of his life as
compared with each other; and in some cases they contradict
themselves. We will present some examples : —

154.   Who came to worship Christ when he was bom? Matthew says, “wise men
from the East” (Matt. ii. 5). Luke says they were shepherds of the same country
(Luke ii. 8).

155.   How were they led? Matthew says they were led by a star (Matt. ii. 6). Luke
says by an angel (Luke ii. 3).

156.   What did the parents of Jesus do when he was born? Matthew (ii. 13) says
they fled into Egypt. But, according to Luke (ii. 26), they staid there forty-one days.

157.   To whom did God speak at Christ’s baptism? To him: “ Thou art my beloved
son ” (Luke iii. 22). To the bystanders: “ This is my beloved son ” (Matt. iii. 17).

158.   Where did Christ go after being baptized? Mark says he went immediately
into the wilderness, and was there forty days (Mark i. 12). John says three days after
he was in Cana (John ii. 12).

159.   Where was John while Christ was in Galilee? “ John was put in prison ” (be-
fore that) (Mark i. 14). “ John was baptizing in ASnon ” (John iii. 23).

160.   Where was Christ when he called Peter and Andrew? Matthew and Mark say,
“ walking by the Sea of Galilee.” Luke says, “ sitting in their ship ” (Luke v. 3).

161.   Where were Peter and Andrew at the time? Matthew and Mark say, “ in their
ship, fishing.” Luke says, out “ washing their nets ” (Luke v. 2).

162.   How came Peter and Andrew to follow Jesus ? Matthew and Mark say he “ called
them.” But, according to Luke, the draught of fishes caused them to go.

163.   Where did Christ heal the leper? Matthew says at the mount, after the sermon
(viii. 2). Mark says when preaching in Galilee.

164.   Who told Jesus the centurion’s servant was sick? Luke says he sent the elders
0 of Israel to tell him (Luke vii. 3). But Matthew says the centurion went himself (Matt.

viii. 5).

165.   Where did Christ go after curing Peter’s wife’s mother? Matthew says beyond
the lake, and drowned a herd of swine (viii. 18). Luke says to Nain, and raised the dead
(Luke vii. 11).

166.   Where did Christ drown the swine with devils? Matthew says in the country
of Gergesencs. Mark and Luke say in the country of Gadarenes.

167.   Where did the devils remonstrate against going? Mark (v. 10) says against
being sent out of the country. Luke (viii. 31) says it was against going into the deep.

168.   Were Christ’s disciples allowed to use staves? Yes: “Take nothing . . . save a
staff only ” (Mark vl. 8). No : “ Take neither shoes or yet staves ” (Matt. x. 9).

169.   When did (’hrist pluck the ears of corn? Matthew (xii. 1) says after he had
appointed his twelve disciples. But Luke and Mark make it after that event.

170.   What woman interceded for her daughter? “A woman of Canaan . . . cried
untof him” (Matt. xv. 22). The woman was a Greek (Mark vii. 26).

171.   I low great was the multitude which Jesus fed with seven loaves and a few fishes?
Matthew says four thousand, besides women and children (xv. 38). Mark says four thou-
sand in all (viii. 9).
 BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.

143

172.   How long was it after Christ was transfigured that he took James and John up
into the mountain? Six days after (Matt. xvii. 4). Eight days after (Luke ix. 28).

173.   How much power did Jesus say faith as hig as a grain of mustard-seed can impart?
Matthew (xvii. 20) says enough to remove mountains. Luke says (xvii. 6) enough to
pluck up trees by the roots. Both large jobs for one man.

174.   Who asked seats in the kingdom for Zebedee’s children? Matthew says (xx. 22)
it was their mother. Mark says (x. 35) they asked it themselves. Why did he refuse
them two seats when he had promised them, with the other ten disciples, twelve thrones?
(Matt. xix. 28.)

175.   How many blind men did Jesus restore near Jericho? Matthew says (xx. 30)
two blind men. Mark and Luke say only one, Bartimeus.

176.   Where did he perform this miracle? Matthew says as he was going away from
Jericho. Luke says as he was coming into the city (xviii. 35).

177.   When did Christ drive out the money-changers ? Matthew and Luke say the day
he rode into the city. Mark says not till the next day (xi. 11).

178.   What did Jesus tell his disciples about the ass? Matthew says (xxi. 2) he told
them they would find an ass and colt tied. Mark and Luke say they found tied only a
colt. And John says it was a young ass, and Jesus found it himself (xii. 14). Mark and
Luke say he rode the colt. But Matthew (xxi. 7) represents him as riding both the ass
and the colt.

179.   "Who answered Christ’s question in the parable of the vineyard? Matthew says
(xxi. 41) his disciples answered the question. Mark and Luke both say he answered it
himself.

180.   WTien did Christ tell the truth about Lazarus ? He first said his sickness was not
unto death, but afterwards said he was dead.

181.   When did the anointment of Christ take place? Matthew says (xxvi. 2) it was
two days before the passover. But John says it was six days after (John xii. 1). And
Luke makes it much later (viii. 36 and xxii. 1).

182.   Where did the anointment take place ? Matthew says (xxvi. 6) in the house of
Simon the leper. Luke says (vii. 36) in the house of a Pharisee. But, according to John,
it was in the house of Lazarus (xii. 1).

183.   Where was the ointment poured? Matthew and Mark say on his head. But
Luke and John say on his feet.

184.   When did Christ say one of his disciples would betray him? Matthew says
(xxvi. 21) while they “ did eat supper.” But, according to Luke (xxii. 20), it was after
supper wa3 over.

185.   Where did Jesus go after supper ? John says “ over the brook Cedron ” (xviii. 1.).
But the other three evangelists say to the Mount of Olives.

186.   "When did Judas betray Christ? John says (xii. 27), after supper he went out
and made the bargain. But the other three say it was before supper he made the bar-
gain.

187.   Where and to whom did Peter first deny Christ? John says (xviii. 17) to the
damsel at the door. The other three say to the men in the hall.

188.   To whom was the second denial made? Matthew and Mark say to a maid. Luke
says to a man. John says to those who stood by the fire (xviii.).

189.   To whom was the third denial made? Matthew and Mark say to those who
stood by. John says (xviii.) to the servant of the high priest.

190.   Where was Christ crucified? John says at Calvary. The other three say at
G-olgotha.

191.   At what hour was Christ crucified? Mark says (xv. 25) it was the third hour.
But, according to John (xix. 14), it was after the sixth hour.

192.   How was Christ dressed for the crucifixion? “ And put on him a scarlet robe ”
(Matt, xx vii. 28). “ They put on him a purple robe ” (John xix. 2).

193.   What was the drink offered to Christ at the crucifixion? Mark says it was wine
mixed with myrrh (xv. 23). Matthew says it was vinegar mingled with gall. But Luke
represents it as being only vinegar (xxiii. 36). Matthew says Christ tasted it; but, ac-
cording to Mark, he did not.

194.   Who bore Christ’s cross? Matthew says Simon of Cyrene (xxvii. 32). But
John says Jesus bore it himself (xix. 17).

195.   Which of the thieves reviled him? -Mark says both of them (xv. 29). Luke says
(xxiii. 39) only one of them, and the other reviled him for it.

196.   What were the words of the superscription on the cross? “This is Jesus, the
King of the Jews ” (Matt, xxvii. 37). “ The King of the Jews ” (Mark xv. 26). “ This is
the King of the Jews” (Luke xix. 18). “Jesus, of Nazareth, the King of the Jews”
(John xix. 19). But one of these can be right.

197.   Was it lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death? Yes: “We have a law by
which he ought to die” (Johnxix. 7). No: “It is not lawful to put any man to death”
(John xviii. 31).

198.   Who came to Christ’s sepulcher? Matthew says (xxviii. 1) Mary Magdalene and
 144

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

another Mary. According to John, it was Mary Magdalene only (xx. 1). But Luke says
the two Marys and Joanna (xxiv. 10).

199.   Was it daylight when they came to the tomb? No: “They came while it was
yet dark ” (John xx. 1). Yes: •“ They came at the rising of the sun ” (Mark xvi. 2).

200.   Whom did the women see at the tomb? Matthew says (xxviii. 1) an angel sit-
ting. Mark says (xvi. 5) a young man. Luke says (xxiv. 4) two men. John says (xx.
12) two angels.

201.   Did any of the women enter the sepulcher? Yes: They entered in (Mark xvi.
5). No : They did not (John xx. 2).

202.   Who looked into the sepulcher? According to Luke, it was Peter (xxiv. 12).
According to John, it was another disciple (xx. 4).

203.   Did Peter go into the sepulcher? John says he did go in (xx. 6). According to
Luke, he did not (xxiv. 12).

204.   Did those who visited the tomb relate the case to any one? According to Luke,
they told the eleven disciples (xxiv. 27). But Mark tells us they said nothing to any man
(xvi. 8).

205.   To whom did Christ appear after his resurrection? Matthew says to the two
Marys (xxviii. 9). Mark says to Mary Magdalene alone (xvi. 9). According to Luke, it
was to two of his disciples at Emmaus.

206.   When did Christ first appear to his disciples? Matthew says it was at Galilee
(Matt, xxviii. 16). Luke says it was at Jerusalem (Luke xxiv. 33).

207.   How did Christ’s disciples feel when they met him? Luke says they were terri-
fied (xxiv. 37). But John says they were glad (xx. 20).

208.   How often did Christ show himself to the disciples? John says, “ This is now
the third time.” But, according to the other three, it was the sixth time.

209.   Where did Christ part from his disciples? Mark says (xvi. 14) it was at Jerusa-
lem. But, according to Luke, it was at Bethany.

210.   When did Christ ascend? According to Luke, it was the day of his resurrection
(Luke xxiv. 13). John says it was nine days after (John xx. 26). But, according to Acts
i. 3, it was forty days after.

211.   From what place did Christ ascend? Luke says (xxiv. 5) it was from Bethany.
Acts says (i. 5) it was from Mount Olivet.

212.   Did Christ bear witness of himself? Yes: “ I am one that bear witness of my-
self” (John viii. 18). No: “ If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true” (John
v. 21).

213.   Could man bear testimony for Christ? Yes: “ Ye also shall bear witness ” (John
xv. 26). No: “ I receive not testimony from man ” (John v. 23).

214.   Did Christ come on a mission of peace? Yes: “To preach glory to God, . . .
and on earth peace ” (Luke ii. 13). No: “ I came not to send peace but a sword ” (Matt.

x.   34).

215.   Did Christ have a dwelling-place ? No: Matthewsays (viii.20), “ He had not where
to lay his head.” But John says he had a house, and his disciples saw it (i. 34)/>> \

216.   Was Christ the savior? Yes: “ Christ is the savior of all men” (1 Tim. iv. 10).
No: “ Beside me [Jehovah] there is no savior” (Isa. xliii. 11).

217.   Was Christ omnipotent? Yes: “I and my Father are one” (John x. 30). No:
“ My Father is greater than I” (John xiv. 28).

218.   Was Christ equal to God? Yes; “lie thought it no robbery to be equal with
God ” (Phil. ii. 6). No : “ My Father is greater than I ” (John xiv. 28).

219.   Was Christ supreme God? Yes: “ He was God manifest in the flesh ” (1 Tim.
iii. 16). No: “ He was man approved of God ” (Acts ii. 22).

220.   IIow did Judas die? Matthew says lie went out and hanged himself (Matt, xxvii.
6). The Acts says he went out and fell headlong (Acts i. 18).

221.   Did the men at Paul’s conversion hear a voice? Yes : “ Hearing a voice, but see-
ing no man ” (Acts ix. 7). No: “ They heard not the voice” (Acts xxii. 9).

222.   Did John see a book? Yes. “I saw . . . a book written within,” &c. (Rev.
v. 1). No : “ No man In heaven or earth could look on the book ” (Rev. v. 3).

223.   Was John the Baptist Elias? Yes: “This is Elias which w.as to come” (Matt.

xi.   14). No: “ And he said I am not Elias ” (John i. 21).

224.   When did llerodlas ask for the head of John the Baptist? Matthew says before
Herod’s great promise to her; but Mark says it was after (Mark vi. 24).

225.   Is the law of Moses superseded? Yes : “ We are delivered from the law ” (Rom.
vii. 6). No : “ I came not to destroy the law ” (Matt. v. 17).

226.   Who was the father of Joseph? “And Jacob begat Joseph, husband of Mary
(Matt. 1. 16). “ He was the son of Heli ” (Luke iii. 23).

227.   Who purchased the potter’s field? “ Judas, with the reward of iniquity” (Acts
i. 18). “The chief priests look the silver, and bought the potter’s field” (Matt, xxvii. 6).

228.   Yes: “The spirit led Christ to Jerusalem” (Acts xx. 22). No: “The spirit
forbade him to go ” (Acts xxl. 4).

229.   Yes : “ I go to prepare a place for you” (John xiv. 2). No: “It was prepared
from the beginning” (Matt. xxv. 34).
 OBSCENE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE.

145

230.   Yes: “ The mission of the gospel began at Jerusalem” (Luke xxiv. 47). No:
“ It began at Galilee ” (Acts x. 37).

231.   Yes: “ I beseech you as strangers ” (1 Pet. ii. 11). No: “ You are not strangers ”
(Eph. ii. 14).

232.   Yes: “Christ died for his enemies” (Rev. x). No: “For his friends” (John
xv. 13).

233.   Yes: “I write unto you, fathers” (1 John ii. 13). No: “Call no man father”
(Matt, xxiii. 9).

234.   Yes: “ I am with you alway ” (Matt, xxviii. 20). No: “ It is expedient for you
that I go away ” (John xvi. 7).

Total, 277, including double contradictions.

We will not attempt to argue that these conflicting statements
prove that no such events as here referred to ever transpired,
and that the whole thing is a fabrication. We only argue that
it proves the writers were not inspired by infinite wisdom, or they
would have told the exact truth in all cases, so that there could
have been no mistakes. It also proves that we never can know
the real facts, or arrive at an accurate knowledge or the exact
truth, with respect to any of those doctrines, duties, or events
the contradictions appertain to; and, as these contradictions
refer to almost every doctrine, precept, and event of any im-
portance, it thus sinks all Bible teaching into a labyrinth of
uncertainty. Hence not one single statement in it can be set
down as absolutely true without corroborative evidence.

Note.—The reader will observe, from the contradictions in the foregoing list with
respect to all the duties of life, as well as all the crimes of society, — such as war, intem-
perance, slavery, theft, robbery, murder, falsehood, swearing, lying, &c., — that it is
absolutely impossible to learn our moral and religious duties from the Bible.

CHAPTER XXin.

OBSCENE LANGUAGE 0E THE BIBLE-TWO HUNDEED

CASES.

No person of refinement and good morals, who has not been
warped and biased by education or religious training in favor
of the Christian Bible, can read that book through without
being often shocked and put to the blush by its obscene and
vulgar language. Indeed, there are more than two hundred
texts calculated to raise a blush on the cheek of modesty.
Many of them are so obscene that we would not dare copy
them into this work. It would not only outrage the feelings of
 146

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

the reader, but it would render the author liable to prosecu-
tion. A law has been recently passed by Congress prohibiting
the publication and circulation of obscene literature ; and many
persons have already been prosecuted under that law, — some of
them for merely selecting and publishing some of the obscene
texts of the Bible. But, without being influenced by these
considerations, we will, in order to spare the feelings of the
reader, merely state the import of some of these texts.

1.   Omitting the history of Adam, in which we find some not
very refined language, we will commence with Noah. We are
told that Noah became so drunk as to strip off all his clothing,
and one of his sons, to avoid seeing him in that situation,
walked backward, and covered him: for which act his father
cursed him. Thus it appears that Noah, although “a righteous
man,” was not a very modest or decent one. And such a man
being held up as a righteous example must have a demoralizing
tendency upon those who accept him in this light. (See Gen. ix.)

2.   The story of Abraham and Sarah, and the account of
Abraham’s illicit intimacy with his servant-maid Hagar, as
related in Genesis (chap, xvi.), and his and Sarah’s gossip
over the affair, is any thing but modest.

3.   The “ holy man” Lot: The story of Lot’s incest with
his daughters, as set forth in Genesis (chap.xix.),is both im-
modest and disgusting.

4.   Rachel and Bilhah: The tea-table talk of Jacob and
Rachel, about the act of Jacobin seducing their maid-servant
Bilhah, must be morally repulsive to all only Bible believers.

5.   The story of Leah and Zilpah is not much better. (See
Gen. xxx.)

G. The bargain between Leah and Rachel about Reuben’s
mandrakes (Gen. xxx.) is too immodest to relate or con-
template.

7.   Jacob’s trick of using peeled sticks and poplar-trees
among his cattle is something more than a descent from the
sublime to the ridiculous. And were it not deemed divine
revelation, heavenly instruction,” it would have been left out
(Gen. xxx.).

8.   The account of Rachel’s stealing her father’s images, and
 OBSCENE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE.

147

then telling an indecent falsehood to hide it, is not very suitable
for a “ Holy Book ” (Gen. xxxi.).

9.   The story of the defilement of Dinah we will not attempt
to describe, as we can not do it without offending decency. (See
Gen. xxxiv.)

10.   The story of Reuben and Bilhah, in the next chapter,
may be instructive to the pious, but is not so to persons of
refined taste.

11.   If you read the narratives of Judah, Onan, and Tamar,
as related in the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis, for human-
ity’s sake keep it out of the hands of your children, and use your
influence to prevent its circulation among the heathen; for it
must have the effect to sink them still deeper in moral depravity
and mental degradation.

12.   The disgusting story of Absalom’s familiarity with Ms
father’s concubines, as related (2 Sam. xvi. 32), is so disgust-
ing, that we will barely allude to it.

Having referred to twelve cases as samples, we shall pursue
the repulsive subject no further, except merely to indicate the
chapter and verse where a long list of such cases may be found
and examined by those who may need more evidence that the
Bible is an obscene book, not fit to be read in decent society.

13.   Vulgar language is used in representing men as acting
like dogs. (See 2 Kings ix. 8.)

14.   Job describes disgusting conduct toward a woman (Job
xxxi. 9).

15.   Solomon’s Song of Songs contains much that is obscene
language from the first to the eighth chapter.

16.   Isaiah makes revolting suggestions relative to stripping
women. (See Isa. xxxii. 2.)

17.   Ezekiel is represented as eating disgusting food (dung)
(Ezek. iv. 12).

18.   Jehovah’s command to .Hoseato marry a harlot is of
immoral tendency.

19.   Isaiah frequently makes use of vulgar language. One
case may be found in chap. lxvi. 3.

20.   Another case in Hosea, describing horrible treatment of
women and cMldren. (See chap. xiii. 16.)
 148

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

21.   The conduct of Sechem towards certain women, as told
in Gen. xxxiv. 4, is loathsome.

22.   The conduct of parents toward their daughters, as de-
scribed in Deut. xxii. 15, and as enjoined by the Mosaic law,
is disgusting and shocking in the extreme.

23.   And language no less disgusting, relative to the treatment
of men, as prescribed by law, is found in Deut. xxiii.

24.   The account of Paul’s conversion, as described in Acts
ix., is extreme^ vulgar.

The above-cited cases are mere samples of hundreds of simi-
lar ones to be found in God’s Holy Book in the use of indecent
language, calculated to make any person blush to read in pri-
vate, much more if read in public. Indeed, no person dare
read them to a company of decent people. Look, then, how
the case stands. Look at the mortifying condition in which
every devout Bible believer in Christendom is placed. Here is
a book which, it is claimed, emanated from a pure and holy being ;
which contains so many passages couched in such obscene and
offensive language, that any person who attempts to read the
book to a company must be constantly and critically on his
guard, and is liable to be kept in a state of fearful anxiety (as
the writer knows by his own experience), lest he stumble on
some of these offensive texts. What an uncomfortable situa-
tion to be placed in when reading a book wdiich is claimed to be
perfect in ever}T respect! We have seen a Bible class in school
stopped suddenly by the teacher, with orders to close their Bibles,
because he had observed, by looking ahead, that the chapter con-
tained language which would bring a blush to every check if read.
In the same school we saw a modest boy, of refined feelings, burst
into tears because he was required to read to the school a cer-
tain passage in the account of the conversion of Paul. The
teacher being a devout Christian, whose piety overruled his
decorum, attempted to enforce the reading by a threat of pun-
ishment, but failed. We have also seen the offer of one hun-
dred dollars’ reward, standing in a paper for a considerable time,
to any person who would read a dozen texts to a company of
ladies, which the gentleman offering the reward might select;
but no person dared to disgrace himself by accepting the
offer.
 CIRCUMCISION A HEATHEN CUSTOM.

149

And what is the moral, or lesson, taught by these things?
Why, that the Bible is a very unsuitable book for a refined nation
of people to read habitually, or for a morally elevated and enlight-
ened age of the world, though it was probably adapted to the
age and to the people for which it was written. J?hey had not
attained to the present standard of morality and refinement.
We cherish no disposition to censure them. They were probably
honest, and lived up to their highest idea of right. If anybody
deserves censure in the case, it is the professedly enlightened
Christians of the present age for going back to a savage, unen-
lightened age and nation for their religion and morals.

A Partial List op the Obscene Passages of the Bible.
The following figures point to texts, many of which are too
vulgar to be described in any kind of language : —

Gen. xvii. 2, very disgusting; xix. 8, 33, 35, a shocking case; xx. 18; xxv. 23, disgust-
ing; xxx. 3, very obscene; xxx. 15,16; xxxi. 12; xxxiv. 2, 7, 16, 22; xxxviii. 9, loath-
some; xxxviii. 29; lix. 25; Exod.i.16; xix. 15; xx. 2; xxii. 16; xxxiv. 15, 16; Lev. xii.
15; xviii. 7, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24; xxi. 7, 20, extremely vulgar; Num. xiv. 33; xix. 5,
disgusting; xxv. 1; xxxi. 35; Deut.xxi.il; xxii. 15, 21; xxii. 22, 23, 25; xxiii. 1, very
disgusting; xxiii. 13,17,18; xxv. 5, 7,10; xxxi. 16; Judg. xi. 37; xix. 2, 25; Ruth i.ll,
12; iii.; iv. 13; 2 Sam. vi. 20, 22; vii. 12; xi. 4,11; xii. 11, 12, very disgusting; xiii. 11,
12,14, 20, 22, 23; 1 Kings i. 4; iii. 16,17, 26; xi. 3; xvi. 11, very filthy; xxi. 21; 2 Kings
xviii. 27, very filthy; 2 Chron. xxi. 13,15; Esth. ii. 12, 14; Job iii. 10; xvi. 15; xxi. 24;
xxxi. 10, very disgusting, and 15; xxxii. 19; xl. 16; Ps. xxii. 10; xlviii. 6; cxxxix. 13; Prov.
. xxiii. 27; xxx. 16,19; Eccles. iv. 11; xi. 5; Sol. i. 13; iii. 1; vi. 8; vii. 2, 3; viii. 8; Isa.
iii. 17; xxvi. 17, very nasty; xlvii. 2; xlix., very obscene; xlvi. 7; Jer. ii. 20; iii. 1, 2, 6,
9, very filthy, and 13; iv. 31; xiii. 27; xiv. 17; xvi. 3, 4; xxix. 8; xxx. 6; xxxi. 8, 27;
Lam. ii. 13; vii.; Ezek.iv. 15,16, 17,18,19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 28, 33, 35; xviii. 6; xix. 2; xxii.
11; xxiii. 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10,11,14,17, 18,19, 20, 21, 29, 43; xliv. 25; Hos. i. 2; ii. 2, 4, 5; iv.
14,18; vii. 4; ix. 1,14; Mic. i. 2; iv. 10; Nah. iii. 4; Hah. ii. 16; 2 Esd. viii. 8; ix. 43;
xvi. 38, 49; Jud. ix. 2; Wisd. of Sol. iii. 13; iv. 6; Ecclus. xx. 4; xxvi. 9; xxxviii. 25;
xiii. 10; Bar. vi. 29; 2 Macc. vi. 4; Matt. i. 25; xxiv. 19; xxv. 10; Luke i. 15, 24, 31, 36,
41,44,49; ii. 6, 7,23; xi.27; John xvi. 21; Acts ii. 30; Rom. i. 26,27; iii. 28; 1 Cor. vii. 1;
2 Cor. vi. 12; Heb. xi. 11; 2 Pet. ii. 2; Rev. xii. 2; xvii. 1; xviii. 4.

CHAPTER XXIV.

CIRCUMCISION A HEATHEN CUSTOM.

Circumcision is a very ancient rite, and of heathen origin,
though we are told in Genesis that it was a command of God to
Abraham; and it was nationalized by Moses. It was considered
by the Jews a very important religious rite, and has been prac-
 150

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

ticed by them from their earliest history. So highly was this
ordinance esteemed amongst them, that it was in some cases
performed twice. According to Herodotus and Diodorus, in-
stead of the Jews getting the command direct from God, they
borrowed the custom of the Assyrians; and Josephus silently
assents to its truth ; and J. G. Wilkinson says, u It was estab-
lished in Egypt long before Joseph was sold into that country,”
which furnishes evidence of its existence before the time of
Moses.

Among the Jews this rite was performed on the eighth day
after birth: all converts to their religion, and all servants, had
to submit to the ordinance.

Jerome says that in his day a majority of the Idumaeans,
Moabites, Ammonites, and Ishmaelites were circumcised. The
ancient Phoenicians also observed this rite, and the aboriginal
Mexicans likewise. The Mahomedans also practice it; and,
although the Koran does not enjoin it, it has been practiced
wherever that religion has been adopted. The rite is performed
on both sexes in Arabia. This rite was practiced by the early
Christians. Even the wise Paul gave practical sanction to this
ordinance in the case of Timothy. The Coptic and Abyssinian
Christian churches still observe the custom. A circumcision
festival was established in the Church, and kept on the 1st of
January in commemoration of the circumcision of Jesus.

The toleration of this rite by the Jews and Christians shows
that they were dwelling on the animal plane,—that they had
not risen to that high state of spirituality which would lead them
to abandon such heathenish ordinances and customs. It is so
repulsive to refined society, that some civilized nations have en-
acted laws interdicting the custom. Yes, this senseless, cruel,
heathenish rite has to some extent been abandoned, and must
ere long entirely disappear from the earth. It can not with-
stand the lights of science and civilization: it is a childish,
senseless, obscene, vulgar, heathenish, cruel, and disgusting
superstition.

II. Fasting and Feasting.

A total ignorance of the laws of health is indicated as exist-
ing amongst the disciples of all the ancient religions by the
 HOLY MOUNTAINS, LANDS, CITIES, AND RIVEBS. 151

alternate extremes of fasting and feasting. The latter is injuri-
ous to health, and the former, also, if long continued, as was
frequently the case. But the subject of health did not occupy
the minds of religious enthusiasts. They knew nothing of the
laws of health, and cared less if possible. Fasting is reported,
in some cases, as extending to an incredible period of time, con-
tinuing in some cases for months. Hindoos often fasted for a
week, and in some cases, if reports are true, for several weeks.
Pythagoras of Greece fasted, it is said, forty da}^s. Both the
fasts and the feasts were generally held to signalize or celebrate
some astronomical epoch; such as the changes of the moon,
changes in the seasons, &c. The ancient representatives of the
Christian faith were much given to fasting, as were also some of
the Jews ; but, at the present day, Christians, with others, are
more addicted to feasting than fasting, although fasting is en-
joined by the Bible both by precept and practice. In this
respect modern Christianity bears no resemblance to ancient
Christianity.

CHAPTER XXV.

HOLT MOUNTAINS, LANDS, CITIES, AND RIVERS.

I. Holy Mountains.

Those who have read the Christian Bible are familiar with the
fact that the ancient Jews and early Christians had their holy
mounts and holy mountains, and that they are often referred
to in the Bible. Mount Sinai and Mount Horeb were to the
Jews consecrated spots. They called forth their highest feel-
ings of veneration; they occupied a place in their devout medi-
tations, similar to that of heaven in the mind of the Christian
worshiper. It may be said to have been a substitute for
heaven with the Jews; for they knew no other heaven, and
dreamed of no other in their earlier history. And Mount Zion
was a x>lace equally sacred in the devout meditations of the
early Christians. All the Oriental nations had their holy
mountains before the Jews were known to history: Merau was
 152

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

the holy mount of the ancient Hindoos ; Olympus, of the Greeks ;
Athos, of the Egyptians. It is therefore evident that the found-
ers of the Christian religion borrowed the idea of attaching
sacredness to mountains. Several of Christ’s important acts
were represented as having been performed on mountains. His
sermon was delivered on a mount; his march into Jerusalem
was from the “Mount of Olives.” Luke says he went and
abode in the Mount of Olives (xxi. 87). The Devil took him
up into an exceeding high mountain, and showed him all the
kingdoms of the world; and, finally, his earthty career culmi-
nated on Mount Calvar}r. “Holy hill,” holy mount, and holy
mountain — the most important of which was Mount Zion
— are terms often used in the Old Testament. History dis-
closes very fully the origin of the custom of attaching sacredness
to hills and mountains. One writer sa}^s it was partly from the
conviction, that, the higher the earth ascends, the nearer it ap-
proaches the residence of the Gods ; and consequently thejT would
the more certainty hear the pra}’ers and invocations of mor-
tals. Prophets, seers, and anchorites were accustomed, from
these considerations, to spend much time on the hills and moun-
tains. In view of these facts, we may conclude that all persons
acquainted with history will acknowledge that the Jews and
Christians derived the tradition of regarding hills and mountains
as “holy” from the Orientals, hnd that it is consequently a
heathen tradition.

II. Holy Lands and Holy Cities.

Jerusalem was the principal holy cit}rof both Jews and Chris-
tians ; and Palestine was their holy land. Here, again, we find
them anticipated by heathen nations. Thebes was the holy city
of Eg}’pt, Ida the hoty city of India, Rome the holy city of the
Greeks and Romans, Mecca the hoty cit}r of the Mahomedans.
And, like the earty Christians who spent much time in visiting
Jerusalem, the Mahomedans make frequent pilgrimages to Mecca.
Syria was the hoty land of the Chaldeans and Persians, Wis-
dom the hoty land of the Hindoos, and Benares the principal
‘i hoty city. ’ ’ And these hoty places the}r visited very fre-
quently, going in large companies, singing hymns, and reciting
 BIBLE CHARACTERS.

153

texts from their holy books as they traveled. And Christians
in the time of Constantine spent much time in traveling to and
from Jerusalem and the Holy Land, prompted by the same su-
perstitious notions and feelings. Here we observe another
analogy in the religious customs of the Jews, Christians, and
heathens, all of which were derived from ancient India.

III. Holy Livers and Holy Water.

Holy rivers were quite numerous among the devotees of
the ancient religions. Ganges, in India, appears to have been
the first river invested with the title of “hoi}7.” Its waters
were used for the rite of baptism, and were supposed to impart
a spiritual life to the subject of immersion. Jordan and the
Euphrates were regarded as sacred by the Jews, and the former
was the chosen stream for the rite of baptism by that nation.
Even Christ appears to have believed he could receive some
spiritual benefit by being dipped beneath its waves. The Nile
was a sacred river in Egypt, and many repaired to it for spir-
itual benefit. Thus the origin of holy rivers and holy waters
is plainly indicated to be of heathen origin.

CHAPTER XXVI.

BIBLE CHARACTERS.

I. Character of Jehovah.

The Old Testament is principally a history of the Jews and
their God Jehovah, — a narrative of their trials, troubles, treach-
ery, quarrels, and faithless dealings toward each other. No
other God ever had so much trouble with his people; and no
other nation ever showed so little respect for their God, or so
little disposition to obey him, or live up to his commands.
There appears to have been almost a natural antipathy between
them ; so that they were constantly repelling each other. The
relationship appears to have been a forced one, possessing but
few of the adhesive ties of friendship.
 154

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

Both parties were apparently happier when separated, as they
were several times, —on one occasion for a long period (Lam.
v. 20). And yet, according to the biblical history of the case,
the}" got along as well, were as moral and as happy, as when
their God was with them. Hence it is evident, if he had never
returned, the}" would have sustained no serious loss or disad-
vantage in any way. The case furnishes an argument in favor
of that class of people who are frequently denounced by the
priesthood for u living without God in the world.” If “ God’s
own people ” could get along without him, why can not men and
women of this intelligent age? And the reason he assigns
for remaining with them as much as he did shows it was not
from natural affinity or affection for them, but because he had
u promised ” to do so. Did he not know that u a bad promise
is better broken than kept?” Another circumstance which
implies that Jehovah cherished but little respect for his people,
and cared but little about them, is that, from his neglect (as it
seems most natural to attribute it to this cause), they were lit-
erally broken up while he was apparently with them. One
portion of them fell into the hands of Shalmaneser, King of
Assyria, and the other portion into the hands of Nebuchad-
nezzar, King of Babylon; and they were never able to regain
their political power as a nation afterwards. And, to cap the
climax, ten out of the twelve tribes were lost entirely, thus leav-
ing Jehovah almost childless, and destitute of worshipers. And
a search for them for several thousand years has failed to bring
them to light. This circumstance is entirely irreconcilable with
the idea that the Jews were the special favorites of God. In-
deed, it prostrates the assumption entirely beyond defense. It
proves, also, that Jehovah’s promise never to leave or forsake
them was not adhered to. (See 1 Sam. xii. 22.)

And the language and conduct of the God of the Jews on
several occasions imply that, if he ever did make choice of them
as his pets, he was disappointed in them, and repented of the
act. When lie exclaimed, u I have nourished and brought up
children, and they have rebelled against me” (Isa. i. 2), he
virtually confesses he had been short-sighted, or that he had
erred in judgment in selecting the Jews as special favorites.
 BIBLE CHARACTERS.

155

Certainly this is the language of vexation and disappointment,
and want of judgment or foresight.

2.   We are told 44 he hated his own heritage ” (Jer. xii. 8).
Here is evinced again a feeling of hatred, vexation, and dis-
appointment, that no sensible being should manifest, much less
a God.

3.   44 He gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Ama-
lek, and went and smote Israel” (Judg. iii. 13). This was a
traitorous act, calculated to discredit any being. Hence it
could not have been the act of an all-wise and benevolent God.
Think of such a being getting into a squabble with his own
children, and having to invoke the aid of heathen tribes to
subdue them, and get him out of the difficulty! One day he
heads an army composed of his 4 4 peculiar people ” to fight the
heathen, with the avowed determination to exterminate them,
and 44 leave nothing alive that breathes.” The next day he
gets out of patience with their stubbornness and iniquity ; his fury
gets up to fever heat; and he traitorously abandons them, and
joins those same enemies to fight them, and reduce them to
slavery. It is scarcely necessary to say we do not believe such
a God ever existed, excepting in the imagination of ignorant
people.

4.   Again : Jehovah is represented as selling his people several
times to the neighboring heathen tribes, which again leads to
the conclusion that he was disappointed in them, tired of them,
and wished to get rid of them. He sold them once to Jaban,
King of Canaan (Judg. iv. 2), and twice to the Philistines.
Wonder what he got, and what he did with the money! The first
time he sold them to the Philistines, he told them he never would
deliver them again: but he seems either to have forgotten his
promise, or forgot there is a moral obligation to stick to the
truth; for he delivered them several times after that, if his
own biographer and inspired writer tells the truth, Here is
more evidence that he is fickle-minded and unreliable, or that
the Bible writers have misrepresented his character.

5.   If we could assume there is any truth in the Bible history
of Jehovah, we should not wonder that the Jews preferred wor-
shiping a golden calf to paying their devotions tQ such a God ;
 156

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

and, on the other hand, it is not surprising that he should mani-
fest his displeasure toward them, and frequently steal away from
them, and often confess grief, vexation, and regret for having
made choice of such an ignorant, rebellious set of rambling
nomads, who subsisted by war and plunder.

6.   Jehovah’s jealousy of other Gods, which he so frequently
manifested and so often confessed, and which is one of the
most objectionable traits of his character, must be attributed to
his own moral defects; for he acted in such a manner as to
cause his own people to prefer other Gods to him. He fre-
quent^ scolded and punished them for worshiping other Gods, —
a circumstance which furnishes evidence that other Gods were
better, and therefore more worthy of being worshiped. What
else could have caused them to prefer other Gods ? He should
have acted in such a loving and fatherly manner that other Gods
could not have been more venerated and sought after. Then he
would not have been so often vexed, harassed, and perplexed^at
the idolatrous proclivities of Iris worshipers, and so often resorted
to retaliation by forsaking them, selling them, enslaving them,
or delivering them into the hands of the spoiler. In Judges ii.
14, it is declared, u The Lord delivered them into the hands of
the spoiler ; ” and, in Judges vi. 1, we are told he delivered them
into the hands of Midian for seven years. This looks like an
attempt to spoil his own plans, and to falsify his own promises
to be with them, and protect them at all times.

7.   Much of Jehovah’s dealings with his people seemed to be
by way of experiment, as in the case of trying Abraham’s faith
by requiring him to offer up his son. What an idea for an all-
wise and omnipotent God, of whom it is said, u Known unto him
are all his works ’ ’!

8.   But many circumstances prove that Jehovah was not the

God of the universe, but only a family or national God. 1.
His acknowledgment of the existence of other Gods (Deut. vi.
14).   2. Ilis jealousy of other Gods (Exod. xxxiv. 14).   3. His

traveling on foot, lodging in tents, having his feet washed, eat-
ing veal and cakes (Gen. xviii.), &c., all tend to prove this.
4. And the fact that he could not know what was going on in
other nations, and not even his own until he visited the spot in
 CHARACTER OF GOD9S “HOLY PEOPLE” THE JEWS. 157

person (as in the case of the Tower of Babel), is proof he was
not the God of the universe.

9.   We can not concede that the “ Creator of unnumbered
worlds ” is (like Jehovah) an angry, malevolent being, addicted
to feelings of revenge and retaliation, which seemed to banish
the feeling of love and goodness entirely from his mind, and
who is represented as being frequently thwarted in his designs
and purposes by the caprices of his weak and ignorant children,
who, so far from answering his expectations of being the best,
turned out to be the worst, of his human heritage. Such ideas
would be derogatory to Deity.

And this is the God the “ American Christian Alliance ” are
trying to obtain a recognition of in the Constitution of the
United States. What a moral calamity such a step would be!

CHAPTEE XXVII.

CHARACTER OE HOD’S “HOLY PEOPLE,” THE JEWS.

As the Jews are reputedly “the chosen people of God,” —
chosen by him out of all the nations of the earth to be the
special recipients of his favors, —the chosen instruments through
which to communicate his will and his laws to the whole human
race, and chosen to be a moral example for all mankind, for that
age, and for all future generations, —it becomes a matter of great
importance to know their real character for morality, for intelli-
gence, for honesty, and for reliability. And that we may, in
the effort to present a brief sketch of their character, furnish no
ground for suspecting any misrepresentation, we will present it
in the language of Jewish and Christian writers of established
reputation. It may reasonably be presumed that their own
writers would be more likely .to overrate than underrate their
virtues. Hear, then, what one of their leading prophets says
of them. Isaiah thus describes them (Isa. lix.) : “ Their hands
are defiled with blood, and their fingers with iniquity ; and their
lips speak lies ; their tongues mutter perverseness. None of
them call for justice ; none of them plead for truth. They trust
 158

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

in vanity, and speak lies ; they conceive mischief, and bring forth
iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hand. Their feet
run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood. Their
thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are
in their paths.” Such is a description of God’s holy people by
one of their number. And David completes the picture by de-
claring, “ There is none righteous ; no, not one.”

And Christ calls them “ a generation of vipers.” Bather a
shocking picture of God’s peculiar people! “Peculiar” they
were, if Isaiah’s description of them was true,—peculiar for de-
fective character. It is rather strange that Jehovah should have
selected such moral outlaws as lawgivers and moral examples for
the whole human race. There were, at the time, several nations
superior to the Jews in morals and intelligence, and much
further advanced in civilization. The Greeks, Egyptians, Chal-
deans, and a portion of the Hindoos were in advance of the
Jews.

The Rev. Mr. Hilliard, in a sermon preached in New York in
1861, says of the Jews, “They were by nature, perhaps, the
most cruel and blood-thirsty, as well as idolatrous, people in the
world.” And yet he says in the same sermon, “ that the Lord
chose the Israelites because of their adaptedness of character to
the carrying out of his divine ends of mere}7 to the race.” What
cogent reasoning! Why not select the Devil at once, if beings
the most cruel and blood-thirsty were best calculated for “ car-
lying out his divine ends of mercy to the race ’ ’ ? Here is more
proof of the evil effects of preaching, or adhering to, a religion
which is so full of errors, absurdities, and immoral elements, that
it blinds the moral vision, and weakens the reasoning faculties
to give it a place in the mind, and leads to a s}'stem of false
reasoning, and often corrupts the natural judgment. We have
more orthodox testimony to show the defective morals of the
Lord’s chosen people. Dr. Burnet (a Christian writer), in his
“ Archneologia Philosophic,” says, “ The}' were of a gross and
sluggish nature, not qualified for the contemplation of natural
tilings, nor the perception of divine ones. And consequently,”
lie tells us, “ Moses provided nothing for them of an intellectual
nature, and promised them nothing bej^ond this life,—did not
 CHARACTER OF GOD’S “HOLY PEOPLE,” THE JEWS. 159

teach a future state of existence.” Lactantius says, “ They
were never visited by the learned men of other countries, be-
cause they were never famous for literature.” St. Cyril says,
“ Moses never attempted to philosophize with the Jews, because
they were ‘ grossly ignorant/ and addicted to idohdiy.” Dr.
Burnet further says, “ The}7 were depraved in their manners and
discipline, and almost bereaved of humanity. If I may speak
the truth, . . . they were a vile company of men, — an assembly
of slaves brought out of Egyptian prisons, who understood no
art but that of making bricks.” Josephus, being a Jew, was
their friend and defender; and yet he says, “They were so
illiterate, that they never wrote any thing, or held intercourse
with the learned.” St. Cyril says, “ Some of them adored the
sun as a deity ; others, the moon and stars ; and others, beasts,
and birds.” One writer says, “They hated all nations, and
were hated by all nations,” and they seemed determined to
exterminate all nations but their own. They might also have used
the language of an ancient Christian sect, who declared, “We
are the friends of God, and the enemies of all mankind.” Lot
it be borne in mind that the testimonies here cited are not from
infidel writers, but all from Jews and Christians, who, we should
presume, could have no motive for exaggerating their moral
defects, but rather inducements for concealing them. Other
similar testimony might be presented. Some of the laws which
Moses adopted for the government of the Jews corroborates
still further the statement that they occupied a very low position
in the scale of morals as well as intellect; for the laws of a
nation are a true standard of their character. Hence the law
of Moses prohibiting uncleanness (Lev. xv.), the law against
incest (Lev. xviii.). Laws against bestiality, to prohibit both
sexes from carnal familiarity with beasts, and various other
laws of a similar character, furnish a clear implication that they
were addicted to all these vile habits; and a law to compel
them to wash their hands leads to the conclusion that they were
inclined to be filthy in their habits. And the following law
shows that they were not very particular about their food : “Ye
ma}- eat the locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind,
and the grasshopper after his kind ” (Lev. xi. 22). Here were
 160

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

three kinds of rather repulsive insects which the Jews were ex-
pected to eat, at least licensed to use as food. Can such a nation
be considered to be civilized ? If so, where is a nation now ex-
isting that can not, with equal propriety, be said to be civilized?
This portraiture of the Jewish character is not here presented
in any caviling spirit, or to show that they are justly objects of
either censure or ridicule. Far from it. They most probably
acted up to the highest light they were in possession of. The
primary motive of this exhibition of their character is to show
that the}" possessed no qualifications and no traits of character
calculated to fit them for moral lawgivers and moral exemplars
for us, and for the whole human race; and we can not assume,
without really dishonoring ourselves, that such a morally and
intellectually inferior nation of people were the chosen instru-
ments in the hands of God to communicate the revelation of
his will to the human family. We are under no moral obligation
to believe it. A revelation from a pure, perfect, and holy God
must (if we assume a revelation necessary) come through a
pure and holy channel: otherwise it would be contaminated and
corrupted before it reached us. If God could consent to com-
municate a revelation to the human race through such a channel
as the Jewish nation furnished, we see not how he could escape
a stigma upon his character for stooping to such ignoble means.
And would not the act of familiarizing himself with such a
people show that he kept bad company, and furnish a bad ex-
ample to us who are enjoined to be u perfect as our Father in
heaven is perfect”?

CHAPTER XXVIII.

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

CHARACTER OP MOSES, MORAL DEFECTS OP.

Tiie history of Moses is so intimately and thoroughly inter-
blcndcd with that of the Jews, that, to present the character of
one, is to present the character of the other. We shall there-
fore devote but a brief chapter to a special exposition of his
character, as it will be found fully set forth in the history of
 CHARACTER OF MOSES.

161

the Jews, and the practical illustration of their moral character.
No religious chieftain ever claimed to be on more intimate terms
with God,, and no writer ever presented a more dishonorable
exhibition of his character. He made God the author of nearly
every thing he said and did, no matter how wicked, how cruel,
how demoralizing, or how shocking to decency or refined moral
sensibilities. If some of his characteristics of God are not
blasphemous, we can have but little use for the word. Some
of his laws serve as an illustration of this statement. He sa}^,
u The Lord spake unto Moses,” and told him that no person
with a flat nose or crooked back or broken hand, a crooked
eye, or who was lame or possessing any kind of a physical
blemish, should be admitted into the congregation of the Lord
(Lev. xxi.) This was punishing the unfortunate for defects
they could not help, thus aggravating the misfortunes of a class
who, above all others, had special claims upon his kindness on
account of the very defects for which they were excluded.
These laws, and many others no better, sufficiently illustrate the
character of the man. His penal code, which inflicted death
for two hundred acts, many of them no crime at all (such as
picking up sticks on the sabbath to make a fire to cook their
food with), furnishes conclusive evidence that he was a cruel
and unmerciful lawgiver. And the fact that he was almost
constantly engaged in a bloody warfare with neighboring na-
tions, with the avowed determination to exterminate them, and
“ leave nothing alive that breathes,” simply because they pre-
ferred to worship some other God than the cruel Jehovah, leads
to the conclusion that he was a bloody-minded warrior. Had
Christ lived under the Hebrew monarchy, Moses’ laws would
have put him to death; and yet they both claimed to derive
their moral code from the same God, the Jewish Jehovah. A
circumstance is related of Moses killing an Egyptian, and hiding
him in the sand. And it is stated, u He looked this way and
that way” before committing the deed, and then concealed the
dead body. This implies that he felt guilty, and that it was an
act of murder in the first degree. Although every chapter of
Moses’ history proves him to have been a cruel and bloody-
minded barbarian, with a moral code possessing but a slight ex-
 162

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

hibition of the elements of mercy, humanhy, and justice, yet
Dr. Gaussel, in his 44 Theopneustia,” calls him 44 a holy and
divine man,” and says, 44 He was such a prophet, that his holy
books were placed above all the rest of the Old Testament.”
The doctor furnishes us one of the many cases of the blinding
and biasing effect of a perverted religious education, and an
argument in favor of laboring to supersede Bible religion with
something better. Here we will notice it as a curious circum-
stance, that, after Jehovah had occupied but six days in creating
eighty-five millions of worlds, and made most of them in a few
hours, it should have taken him and Moses both forty days
to write a law, and a very imperfect one at that. And then it
would seem it took Jehovah three thousand years to make a
devil, as his Satanic Majesty does not figure in the Jewish hier-
archy till after the lapse of that period.

One of the most conspicuous traits in Moses’ mental compo-
sition was an unbounded self-esteem. Although he claimed to
be in constant consultation with Jehovah, he seldom j’ielded to
his advice when it conflicted with his own judgment. On the
contrary, he several times detected his God in error, and ad-
monished him, and entered into an argument to convince him
that he was wrong; and, of course, he alwa}rs came out first
best in the logical contest. Take, for example, the case of
Aaron making the golden calf. It occurred while he and Jeho-
vah were engaged in writing 4 4 the holy law” on Mount
Sinai. When the case became known to Jehovah, it so
disturbed and aggravated him, that he at once declared he
would not only punish the guilty sinner, — the apostate Aaron,
— but would exterminate the whole race. But the better tem-
pered and more considerate Moses began to reason and remon-
strate against such a rash act. He appealed to his honor and
love of approbation, and told him the Egj-ptians would report
that lie was not able to get his 44 holy people” to the prom-
ised land, and hence killed them to conceal the failure. 44 Oh,
yes, Moses, jtou are right! I never thought of that,” was the
seeming reply of Jehovah. And thus Moses proved to be smarter
than his God, and enlightened his ignorance.

Here we will call the attention of the reader to the resemblance
 CHARACTER OF MOSES.

163

between Moses and the still more ancient Egyptian Mises, or
Bacchus. It is so striking, that we can not resist the convic-
tion that they were originally closely connected with each
other. 1. Bacchus, like Moses, was born in Egypt. 2. Bac-
chus, or Mises, was also exposed to danger on the River Nile,
like Moses. 3. Bacchus lived on a mountain in Arabia called
Nisas ; Moses sojourned on Mount Sinai in Arabia. 4. Bac-
chus passed through the Red Sea dry-shod with a multitude
of men, women, and children, as Moses is represented as doing.

5.   Bacchus likewise parted the waters of the River Orontes, as
Moses did those of Jordan. 6. Bacchus commanded the sun
to stand still, as Moses’ friend Joshua did. 7. Bacchus, with
his wand, caused a spring of wine to spring from the' earth,
as Moses did a spring of water to flow from a rock with the
“rod of God,” or “the rod of divination.” 8. Mises, like
Moses, also engraved his laws on tables of stone. 9. Both have
been represented in pictures with rays coming out of their heads,
indicative of the light of the sun. Thus, it will be observed, the
resemblance runs through nearly the whole line of their history.
That Bacchus figured in history anterior to the time of Moses,
no person versed in Oriental history can doubt, — a fact which
impels us to the conclusion that the two stories got mixed before
the history of Moses was written. There is one important
chapter in the practical life of Moses we can not omit to notice
before we close his history, as it furnishes a still fuller illustra-
tion of his character. We allude to his deliverance of “ the
Lord’s holy people” from Egyptian bondage. Several of the
incidents in this narrative are incredibly absurd; and some of
them of such demoralizing tendency, that it becomes the duty
of the moralist to expose them to view. The conduct of his
God Jehovah toward the King of Egypt in this case is so repul-
sive and unjust, that it must call forth the condemnation of
every honest-minded reader possessing a true sense of justice.

1.   We are told that Jehovah, through Moses, frequently
ordered Pharaoh to let his people go, and then as often hard-
ened his heart that he should not let them go ; and finally pun-
ished him with death because he was unwilling to let them go.
It would certainly be difficult to discover any sense or any justice
or any consistency in such conduct.
 164

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

2.   It looks like not only a strange kind of justice, but mon-
strous injustice, for Jehovah or any God to- kill a man for
doing what he had purposely compelled him to do. Live frogs,
lice, flies, blood, vengeance, and death were poured out upon the
king and his subjects, ostensibly for the purpose of compelling
him to liberate the Jewish nation; and yet it was moralfy impos-
sible for him to do so, because the same Jehovah had planted
in his mind the determination not to let them go.

3.   When Moses spake to Pharaoh in the name of Jehovah
to release the Israelites, the king asked, “ Who is the Lord [thy
Lord] that I should obe}7 his voice? ” Here let it be borne in
mind that different nations had their own Gods. And Moses’
God is here the same itinerant being who had been rambling
about among the bushes, hunting his lost child (Adam), eating
griddle-cakes with Abraham, wrestling all night with Jacob,
getting whipped in a fight with the Canaanites, &c. Pharaoh
was therefore justified in calling for his credentials.

4.   In nearty all the contests between Jehovah and other
Gods, their power is full}T admitted ; and their success was only
secondary to that of the God of Israel. The question was not,
Shall Jehovah succeed, and other Gods fail? but* Shall Jehovah
be awarded the first prize in the contest, and his name stand at
the top of the list ?

5.   There are man}’ texts in the Bible which go to show that

Jehovah was jealous of other Gods, and perpetually in fear of
being outgeneraled by them. “Ye shall know that I am the
Lord,” was the constant burden of his song. In the case be-
fore us he is represented as saying to Pharaoh, “In this thou
shalt know that I am the Lord ” (Exod. vii. 17).   “ It is true

you have a God, and he is ver}7 smart and powerful; but he can’t
come up to me.”

C. Jehovah seems to have been actuated by an aspiration for
fame and power, as well as by a sympathy for his people in this
contest with Pharaoh ; for he is represented as sa}’ing, “ I will
get me honor upon Pharaoh and his host” (Exod. xiv. 17).
Here seems to be displa}Ted a spirit of vanity, and a thirst for
gloiy, —the aspiration of vain rulers and petty t}Tants.

7.   The magicians kept up with Moses’ God in the perform-
 CHARACTER OF MOSES.

165

ance of miracles till it came to making lice : here the}- failed.
We might conjecture it was because all the dust had been already
converted into lice by Jehovah, were it not that they had pre-
viously converted the water into blood just after Jehovah had
performed that miracle, and left not a pint to drink.

8.   In the achievement of all the ten prodigies, there is no inti-
mation but that the heathen magicians performed the miracles
in the same manner that Moses did, and with equal success in
most cases and in all the most difficult ones ; thus leaving Jeho-
vah no laurels worth boasting of.

9.   There must have been a great many thousand honest men
and women in Egypt; and yet Jehovah is represented as killing
the first-born of all Egjqptian parents without an}r distinction of
character, or any regard to their innocence ; and even the first-
born of beasts also. In the name of justice and mercy, what
sin had the beasts committed that they had to be punished ?

10.   We are somewhat puzzled to see how the magicians could
turn all the waters of Egypt into blood, when it was already
blood, having been converted into blood a short time before by
Moses and Jehovah.

11.   And it seems strange that Pharaoh should have horses
enough for six hundred u chosen chariots ” (Exod. xiv. 7) after
they had all been killed three or four times by some of the
plagues of Egypt.

12.   It is not strange that Aaron’s rod should swallow up the
others as represented ; for he had such a start in the business,
and had made such a large serpent, he had probably used up
most of the materials, and left nothing but scraps for making
others.

13.   The Christian who can lay down his Bible after reading
such stories as this, and not feel his natural and instinctive love
of honesty, justice, and morality weakened, must be strongly
fortified by nature against moral corruption.
 166

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

CHAPTER XXIX.

CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM, MORAL DEFECTS OF.

A brief history of the father of the Jewish tribe will tend to
illustrate and indicate the character of the whole nation, as chil-
dren usually inherit the qualities of their parents.

1.   We will first notice the great promise which Jehovah
made to Abraham with respect to the boundless extent of his
future dominion. His seed were to be as the dust of the earth
or the sands of the sea for multitude (Gen. xiii. 16). And how
lias this promise been fulfilled ? Why, after a faithful compli-
ance with the command to u multiply and replenish the earth’’
for more than three thousand years, his whole tribe only num-
bers about six million souls, which is less than one in two hun-
dred of the entire population of the globe. It would take but a
few handfuls of dust to furnish the particles to represent the
number, instead of all the dust of the earth as promised or
predicted.

2.   Jehovah promised Abraham, in the second place, all the
country u from the river of Egj’pt to the great river,—the
River Euphrates” (Gen. xv. 18). And yet, after the lapse of
three thousand years, we do not find them occupying a foot of
it. Another failure to execute his promise.

3.   “To thee will I give it [the promised land], and to thy
seed for ever” (Gen. xiii. lf>). It will be observed here, that
the title and possession was to be perpetual, —to the end of the
world, “for ever.” And }Tet it lias been in the possession of
other nations five or six times ; and now not one family of the
Lord’s holy people can be found there. Another signal failure.

4.   .Jehovah promised Abraham all the land u from the river
of Egypt to the River Euphrates ; ” but they have never had
possession of the country within two hundred miles of the river
 CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM.

167

of Egypt (Nile). A writer quaintly suggests that Jehovah
could never have previously seen the country he selected for his
holy people, or he would not have chosen it; for all modern trav-
elers agree in describing it as being a poor, mountainous, rocky,
barren, and desolate country. One writer says, “ It is a coun-
try of rocks and mountains, stones, cliffs, bounded by vast,
dreary, and uninhabitable deserts. St. Jerome describes it as
being “ the refuse and rubbish of nature.” And this is the
country, let it be remembered, that Jehovah promised his people
as the chosen spot of the earth. How little he knew of geography!

5.   Jehovah and Abraham appear to have been very intimate
friends, as they ate and slept together; and the “Judge of all
the earth” was often a guest in the little, narrow, mud-built
hut of the patriarch to eat veal, parched corn, and griddle-cakes
with him, and have his feet washed also by the old man (Gen.
xviii. 18). From such circumstances it would appear that Jeho-
vah traveled over the country in the character of a foot-pad or
“tramp,” and got into the mud occasionally. It is strange
that Christians can read their Bible without noticing this dispar-
aging caricature of their God.

6.   Abraham’s conduct towards his servant-girl Hagar is both
disgraceful and inhuman, as he first destroyed her character
and virtue by criminal intimacy, and then turned her and her
child into the wilderness to starve (Gen. xxi.). Such conduct
is certainly very reprehensible.

7.   And this is the man who is represented as being chosen by
a God of infinite wisdom, infinite purity, and infinite holiness, to
stand at the head of the moral regeneration and salvation of the
whole human race. Such a conception is derogatory to the divine
character, and demoralizing to those who read and believe it.

8.   Among other immoral and disgraceful acts of “ God’s
chosen servant,” “the righteous patriarch,” “the Holy man
of God,” was that of uttering.the most shameful and unblushing
falsehood. He is charged with intentional lying on two different
occasions, in representing his wife as being his sister, —once to
Pharaoh, and once to King Abimelech; and his wife indorsed
his falsehood. (See Gen. chap. xii. and xx.)

9.   And yet, in the face of all these immoral deeds, God is
 168

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

represented as saying, “ Abraham kept all my commands, all
my statutes, and all my laws.” (See Gen. xxvi. 5.)

Hence the inevitable conclusion that Abraham was living up
to the commands, statutes, and laws of God, while committing
these crimes and outrages upon humanity. What a moral, or
rather immoral lesson, is this to place before the heathen of for-
eign countries, and the children of our own, who read the Bible !
It must have a tendency to demoralize them, and encourage
them in the commission of similar crimes, as certainly as they
are beings endowed with human frailties. Note these facts.

10.   And we find other disgraceful, as well as incredible, deeds
charged to the father of “ the faithful.” The account of the
surrender of his manhood, and the obliteration of ever}- impulse
of parental feeling required to obtain his consent to butcher his
son Isaac upon the altar, imparts a humiliating moral lesson
(Gen. xxii.). It matters not that he did not commit the deed.
He consented to do it, and was ready to do it; which proves a
state of mind calculated to make humanity shudder. The New-
Zealanders have been known to point the missionaries to this
example as a justification of their cruel practices of slaughtering
human beings. If a father in this age of civilization should do
such a thing, or even attempt it as Abraham did, he would be
looked upon as a monster in human shape, or perfectly insane,
even if he should claim that God called upon him to perform the
act. It would have been infinitely better to disobey such a God
than to disobey and outrage every parental and kindly im-
pulse of his nature. But the case furnishes prima-facie evi-
dence that Abraham was under a religious delusion in supposing
God required the performance of such an inhuman deed. To
assume that he did would make him more of a demon than a
God. Any man or woman is to be pitied whose education has
misled him or her, and blinded them so that they can not see
that the reading of a book teaching such lessons must prove
morally injurious to the mind.

11. The injunction on Abraham to slay his son is said to
have been imposed upon him to try his faith. His faith in
what? I would ask. Faith in his own humanity? faith in his
love and affection for his son? Nothing of the kind ! but faith
 CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM.

169

in his susceptibility of rendering himself an inhuman monster.
Let us suppose a father says to his son, u Richard, I want }tou
to draw a knife, and cut your brother Robert’s throat; ” and
afterwards explains the matter by telling him he issued this or-
der to try whether he would obey him. But his son would
evince more manhood, and a better moral character, by refusing
to obej^ him. It is much better to obey the dictates of con-
science, humanity, and mercy, than to obey a father or a God in
a case like this.

12.   And Jehovah is represented as saying, through an angel,
u Now I know that thou fearest God ” (Gen. xxii. 12) ; equiv-
alent to saying, “ If I had not tried this experiment, I should not
have known any thing about it.” What blind mortals human
beings can become, to suppose that a God of infinite wisdom,
who “ searcheth the hearts of all men,” must resort to cruel and
shocking experiments to find out the the state of their minds !

13.   But the history of the case discloses the fact that it did
not effect the end desired, — that of proving Abraham’s faith,
— not in the least, unless we assume that Abraham lied in the
case. For he said to the 3'oung men while on the road to
the altar, u Abide here until we [mj^self and son] go yonder
and worship, and come again to you.” Here is evidence that
Abraham knew he wx>uld bring his son back alive ; that is, that
Isaac would return with him, or that he told a falsehood in
order to deceive. The reader can seize which horn of the
dilemma he prefers. If he knew what the issue of the case
would be, it would, of course, be no trial of his faith whatever.
And yet Paul and other New-Testament writers laud the act as
being one of great merit and a proof of his faith.

14.   We must hasten on. We can only give a passing notice
of a few other acts of this illustrious patriarch, in whom u all
the nations of the earth were to be blessed.” Jehovah is repre-
sented as saying to Abraham, on a certain occasion, u I will go
down now, and see whether they [the Sodomites] have done
according ” to my desire. “ If not, I will know ” (Gen. xviii.
21). This is one of several cases in wThich u the Judge of all
the earth ” is represented as abandoning the throne of heaven,
and coming down to learn what was going on below. What a
contracted and ignorant being was the Jewish Jehovah!
 170

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

15.   The mission of Jehovah at one time, when he called upon
Abraham, was to inform him that his gray-headed wife, ap-
proaching a hundred years, was to be blessed with a son in her
old age. Has it never occurred to Bible admirers that this and
other similar cases represented the Almighty, whom “ the heav-
en of heavens can not contain,” as traveling over the country in
the character of a fortune-teller, notifying old women that the
laws of nature would be suspended long enough to allow them to
be blessed or cursed with the care and perplexity of children in
their old age ?

16.   It should be noticed that Abraham’s God never reproved
him for any of his misdeeds; while, on the other hand, the
heathen King Abimelech called the man of God to account for his
moral defects (Gen. xx.).

17.   One of the most dishonorable acts recorded in the history
of Abraham’s God was that of bringing a plague upon Pharaoh
and his household for receiving Abraham’s wife, when it was
brought about wholly through his treachery and misrepresenta-
tion, and tv hen it appears that Pharaoh treated her in the most
respectful manner.

18.   But, with all these moral stains upon the character of
Abraham, it becomes a pleasant task to record one good act in
his life. lie seems to have presented the practical proof that
he was a better man than his God ; for, when Jehovah threat-
ened the destruction of Sodom for her wickedness, Abraham
remonstrated, and suggested that it would be an act of injustice
to destroy the righteous with the wicked. It appears that this
moral consideration had escaped the mind of Jehovah. What
an inconsiderate, reckless being Bible writers represent the
Almighty as being!

1 \). Abraham, according to his history, was a man of valor, and
achieved some great exploits. For instance, with the assistance
of his regiment of one hundred and eighteen servants, he chased
at one time four great kings, with their mighty hosts, —the King
of Babylon, the King of Persia, the King of Pontus, and the King
of Nations (Gen. xiv.). lie drove them, we are told, more
than a hundred miles, and recovered his brother Lot from their
grasp. A few such daring heroes could have put down the
American Rebellion without a battle.
 CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM,

171

20. We will only observe further, that this 44 true servant of
the Lord ’ ’ was both a polygamist and an idolater ; at least we
have the authority of the Jewish writer, Philo, for saying that
his father was a maker of images, and that Abraham worshiped
them. Such is a brief outline of the character of the man who
is held up as an example for us to imitate, and through whom
44 all the nations of the earth are to be blessed,” and the man
who stands at the head of that nation through which, we are
told, a revelation has been given to the world which is to effect
the moral regeneration and salvation of the whole human race.
Whether the means are adapted to the ends, the reader is left to
judge.

II. Character of Isaac.

1.   In accordance with the adage, 44 Like father, like son,” we
find Isaac carrying out the same spirit of fraud and deception
practiced by his father. When 44 the men of the plain asked him
about his wife, he said, she is my sister ” (Gen. xxvi.) ; and this
man Isaac was another of 44 the faithful servants of the Lord.”

2.   If the statement is true that the Lord struck Ananias and
Sapphira with sudden death for telling a falsehood, as related
in Acts v., the question naturally arises, Why did Abraham and
Isaac escape the same fate, as they were guilty of the same sin?
Why this partiality? Manifestly, this is a bad lesson in morals.

III. Character of Jacob, Moral Defects of.

1.   44 Like father, like son,” is again verified in the practical
life of Jacob. We find this patriarch excels, in moral defects,
both his father and his grandfather.

2.   His conduct toward his brother Esau, in robbing him of
his just and inherited rights, is an act which stamps an eternal
stigma upon his character. When Jacob’s father, old and blind,
asked him, 44 Art thou my son Esau?” he replied, 441 am”
(Gen. xxvii. 24), thus telling a base falsehood, and deceiving
his old father; and this deceptive and underhanded act caused
his brother 44 to cry an exceedingly bitter cry ” (Gen. xxvii. 34).
What an unfeeling brother was this 44 true servant of the Lord ” !
It appears that Isaac and Jehovah both intended that Esau
should inherit the blessing; but Jacob outwitted them by the
 172

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

aid and connivance of his mother. This is but a sample of the
character and conduct of the family throughout their whole
history.

3.   Jacob seems to have entertained very singular and selfish
ideas in regard to his religious obligation to serve and worship
his God. He made it entirely a question of bread and butter,
or, rather, of bread and raiment. He proposed to strike up a
trade with Jehovah relative to his future allegiance to his gov-
ernment, and to fix the terms of the contract himself (Gen.
xxviii.). He kindly and condescendingly told Jehovah, that if
he would provide him with food and raiment, and be his con-
stant companion in the future, “then shall the Lord be my
God, and this stone shall be God's house; and I will give one-
tentli to the Lord of what he giveth me ” (Gen. xxviii. 20).
Here is the attempt to drive a bargain with Jehovah on the
quid-pro-po principle. We are not informed how Jehovah ap-
preciated this kindly offer. This is an unfortunate omission, as
every reader must feel interested in knowing whether he ac-
cepted the proposition; and henceforth he whom “the heaven
of heavens can not contain ” took up his abode in the patriarch’s
little stone hut. We are led to infer, that, if Jehovah refused to
accept his terms, Jacob would henceforth refuse to be a subject
of God’s kingdom, and thus bring him to grief. This is a
sample of the childish conception entertained by the whole
Jewish nation of “ the God of the universe,” if we may presume
their God was any thing more than a family or national deity.

4.   The proncncss of the Lord’s hoi}’ people to falsify, cheat,
and deceive is well illustrated in the case of Laban, who, after
Jacob had, by a fair contract, labored seven years for him for his
daughter Rachel, would not let him have her, but forced his
older daughter Leah upon him ; and, when Jacob complained, he
told him lie must serve seven years more if he got Rachel; and
his love for her prompted him to accept the terms. But he
seems not to have been well compensated for his fourteen long
years of* toil for these two sisters. Their subsequent conduct
indicates that he fcfc paid dear for the whistle; ” and one month’s
labor ought to have paid for both, even at ten cents a da}’, for
they both turned out to be failures. They were, however, a fair
 CHARACTER OF DAVID.

173

specimen of the race. Rachel stole her father’s images; and,
when pursued and overtaken by him, she hid them, and told him
a falsehood to conceal the act. The circumstance of her father
. having images, and of her stealing them, is an evidence that both
were idolaters (Gen. xxxi.).

5.   It is easy to see, from the foregoing facts, from what source
the Jewish proclivity to idolatry and also to falsehood was de-
rived. The latter was practically manifested by four hundred
prophets at one time. It is true the Lord was charged with
putting the lie in their mouths (1 Kings xxii. 22).

6.   We are told, that, on a certain occasion, u the sons of Jacob
answered Shechem, and Hamor his father, deceitfully” (Gen.
xxxiv. 13) ; by which it appears the spirit or propensity to fraud
and deception was still transmitted to their posterity.

CHAPTER XXX.

CHARACTER OF DAVID-HIS NUMEROUS CRIMES.

Here is one of the illustrious Bible characters who has been
held up to the world for several thousand years as the “ sweet
singer of Israel,” and u the man after God’s own heart;”
whose life is stained by the commission of a long list of crimes
of the blackest character, some of which would send him to
the State prison for life if committed in this morally enlightened
age.

1.   One of his first acts of moral delinquency was that of turn-
ing traitor to Achish, King of Gath. After the king had kindly
given him a ruler ship over the city of Ziklag, he manifested his
ingratitude by waging an unprovoked war for plunder upon the
king’s friends and relatives, to rob them of their cattle (1 Sam.
xxvii.).

2.   David, with an army, committed a similar act of aggression
and spoliation upon the rights and property of Nabal, to attain
his cattle by robbery (1 Sam. xxv.).

3.   David at one time turned traitor to his own nation by join-
ing the army of Achish to fight them (1 Sam. xxix.).
 174

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

4.   David obtained possession of the kingdom of Ish-bosheth
by bribery and intrigue, after acknowledging him to be a right-
eous man (2 Sam. iii.).

5.   David robbed Mephiboshetb, the son of his bosom-friend
Jonathan, and a poor cripple, of one-half of his estate, upon
the plea that might makes right (2 Sam. xvi.).

6.   David connived at some of the most abominable and
atrocious crimes of his sons (2 Sam.).

7.   The manner ill which David obtained his first wife Michal
is shocking to all who possess kind and philanthropic feel-
ings. Saul had proposed a hundred foreskins of the Philistines
as the price of his daughter; but David, in wanton cruelty,
killed two hundred for this purpose.

8.   The manner in which David obtained his beautiful wife
Bathsheba, to add to his list of wives, might be tolerated in that
era of barbarism ; but it must be looked upon at the present time
as an act of cruelty and wickedness. He said to Joab, kCSet
Uriah in the front of the battle . . . that he maj" be smitten
and die ” (2 Sam. xi. 15) ; which was equivalent to sla3Ting him
with his own hands, and for no crime, but solely to get his
widow for a wife.

9.   Thus, we see, David was not only a polygamist, but he
obtained his wives by fraud, murder, and intrigue.

10.   David’s dancing naked in public was an indecent act,
although several cases are reported of u the holy” men of that
age appearing in public in a state of nuditj\ His wife Michal
upbraided him for u uncovering himself to the eyes of the
handmaids, his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly
uncovereth himself” (2 Sam. vi.). It is said that “ David
danced before the Lord with all his might.” Can we suppose
the Lord would fancy such sights?

11.   David’s treatment of the Moabites in killing two-thirds
of them without any just provocation is an act that would hang
any man of the present da}r (2 Sam. viii.).

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

12.   The fiendish act of David in placing the Moabites under
saws and harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and making
them walk through brick-kilns (2 Sam. xii.), bespeaks a heart
callous with cruelty, and unmerciful as a tiger. The very
 CHARACTER OF SOLOMON.

175

thought of it is calculated to chill the blood of a person with the
feelings of common humanity.

13.   David’s murder of five step-sons and two brothers-in-law,
to gratify a malignant grudge toward the house of Saul, is
another act showing the fiendish character of the man.

14.   ,'WTien David was so old and stricken in years that no
amount of bed-clothing could keep him warm, he made this a
plea for marrying another wife — and a young maid at that —
to lie in his bosom, and keep him warm (1 Kings i. 1). Lust
knows no failure in expedients.

15.   David’s advice to his son Solomon on his death-bed, to
assassinate Joab and his other enemies, shows that his ruling
passions — animosity and revenge — were strong in death.

16.   And finally David’s wicked prayer, as found in the hun-
dred and ninth Psalm, in which he invokes a string of the most
horrid curses upon his enemies, culminates his immoral history.
It completes the demoralizing picture of the “ man after God’s
own heart.” Now, we ask in solemn earnest, is it not evident
that a book indorsing such characters as David, placed in the
hands of the heathen of other countries or the children of our
own, must have a demoralizing tendency? Most certainty, if
Franklin was right in saying, “ The reading of bad examples
will make bad morals.” Remember, the perpetrator of all
these crimes is said to be “ a man after God’s own heart.”
If so, then God must have approved of all his crimes. But
such a God will not do for this age; and to teach children and
heathen such a lesson is calculated to efiect their moral ruin.

II. Character of Solomon.

Solomon’s writings and history both show that he was a liber-
tine, a tyrant, and a polygamist. His tyrannical monopoly
of seven hundred wives and three hundred prostitutes, making
him a practical “ Free-lover ” on a large scale, is an indelible
stigma upon his character. It was a usurpation of the rights,
and a trespass upon the liberties, of nearly two thousand men
and women. It prevented them from filling the mission or
sphere in life that God designed them to enjoy. The organiza-
tion of the sexes shows they were designed to be husbands and
 176

THE BIBLE OF BIBLEB.

wives and parents. And the nearly equal number of the sexes
is an evidence that nearly a thousand men were deprived of
wives by Solomon’s monopoly of women; while, on the other
hand, those women were prevented from sustaining the true
relation of wives. When he could not see those women more
than once in three years by calling on one of them each day, it
is a farce, and an insult to reason, to call them wives. Could
a woman sustain the practical relation of wife to a man she
only saw as husband once in three years ? The very idea is
ridiculous, and a mockery of the true marriage relation. And
yet this is the man who is represented as being such a special
favorite of God as to receive a portion of his divine wisdom. It
is a slander, if any thing can be, upon Infinite Wisdom. By
reading his amorous song, we can learn his motives for enslav-
ing such a large number of women.

If this c c wise man ” is to be accepted as authority (and he
should be if he got his wisdom directly from God), then we must
relinquish all hope of an immortal existence. Hear him : “ For
that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth the beasts:
... as the one dietli, so dieth the other ; yea, they have all one
breath, so that a man hath no pre-eminence over a beast ’ ’ (Eccles.
iii. 19). Here is a plain and unequivocal denial of man’s
conscious existence beyond the grave. Nor does one Old-Tes-
tament writer teach the doctrine. Job denies it in still more
explicit terms, if possible. (See Job xiv. 10.)

III. Lot and I-Iis Wife and Daughters.

The act of Abram’s brother Lot delivering up his two daugh-
ters to the Sodomites, u to do to them as is good in your eyes ”
(Gen. xix. 8), must excite reflections in the highest degree
revolting to the mind of every father who has daughters. The
act of a father voluntarily offering up his virtuous daughters to
gratify the depraved passions of a mob is too shocking to con-
template. And to accept such a character as a “righteous
man” must certainly weaken the faith of the Bible believer
in a true system of morality, and plant in his mind a very low
standard of the moral perfections of God.

We arc told (Gen. xix. 2G) that Lot’s wife was converted
 CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.

177

into a pillar of salt as a penalty for the simple act of looking
back. Several absurdities are observable in this, story: —

1.   It is difficult to conceive how any sin or crime could be
attached to the natural act of turning the head to look in any
direction, especially when no injunction had been laid upon
the act.

2.   If there were any thing so inherently wrong in the act of
looking back as to be visited with such direful penalties, pillars
of salt would soon become more numerous than frogs were in
Egypt.

3.   Reason would suggest that, to put the thing in shape to
be believed by future generations, the woman should have been
converted into some imperishable substance, such as granite,
gold, silver, or pig-iron. A woman made of salt, or salt of a
woman, would soon dissolve and disappear.

4.   The Hindoos relate that a woman in India was once con-
verted into a pillar of stone for an act of unchastity; and
“the stone is there unto this day.’5 Here is a story with a
better foundation: the Egyptians have the tradition of a woman
being converted into a tree for the act of plucking some fruit
after it had been interdicted. How many of these stories should
we credit?

CHAPTER XXXI.

CHARACTER OE THE JEWISH PROPHETS.

It is a circumstance indicative of the natural moral defects of
the Jewish character, that their most 66 holy men,5’ who were
assumed to be familiar with the counsels of Infinite Wisdom,
and on terms of daity intercourse with Jehovah, yet were,
according to their own history, men of such defective moral
habits and moral character as to be unreliable either as exam-
ples of moral rectitude, or with respect to their prophetic utter-
ances. We will here present a brief sketch of the character of
the principal prophets, drawn from their own “inspired writ-
ings :99 —

The leading prophet Isaiah says, “ The priest and the prophet
 178

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

have erred through strong drink. They are swallowed up of
wine. They are out of the way through strong drink. They err
in vision. They stumble in judgment” (Isa. xxiv. 7).

Here is a sweeping charge against all the prophets, —not one
of them excepted. If they err in vision (of course he means
spiritual vision), then what reliance can be placed in their
prophecies, especially if it is true, as he declares in chap, ix.,
that “ the prophets teach lies ” ? Then we can not confide im-
plicitly in any thing they say. This conclusion, and also the
foregoing portraiture of their character, is confirmed by Hosea,
who says, in chap, ix., that “ the Lord will punish the prophets
for their sins and their iniquities; ” also, “The prophet is a
snare in all his ways; the prophet is a /ooZ,” &c. (Hos. ix. 7,
9). Micah says that they divined for money, and made the
people err. What confidence, we ask, can be placed in men,
either for truthfulness or as moral teachers, who are thus repre-
sented by their own historians and their own friends to be
almost destitute of moral principle ? Each one denounces all the
others. The implied meaning in each case seems to be, “ Take
my pills, and beware of counterfeits.” Zechariah, who was one
of them, declared the Lord would drive them all out of the
land with the unclean spirits (Zech. xiii. 2). We should not,
however, be surprised to find them possessing such a character,
when their God, Jehovah, is represented as being no better, and
is on the same moral plane. They, in fact, make him responsible
for all their moral derelictions and sinful acts by representing him
as being the author or instigator. “If a prophet be deceived,
... 1 the Lord have deceived that prophet” (Ezek. xiv. 9).
Here the word prophet is used in a general sense, so as to imply
that none are excepted. Jeremiah takes God at his word when
he exclaims, “O Lord, thou hast deceived me” (Jer. xx. 7).
Here, it will be observed, the moral character of Jehovah and
his prophets were all cast in the same imperfect mold.

That superstition reigned supreme in the veiy highest order
of the Jewish minds, to the exclusion of science, is shown by
some of the wild, superstitious freaks of the prophets. Isaiah
traveled through Egypt and Ethiopia three }'ears stark naked
(Isa. xx. 3). Such a disgusting exhibition, if attempted in
 CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.

179

this age of civilization, would terminate in a few hours by the
lodgment of the lunatic in the calaboose. Jehovah, it appears,
first prompted the act, and afterwards spoke approvingly of it
by saying it was performed by “ my servant Isaiah” (Isa.
xx. 3).

Ezekiel and Habakkuk both would have us believe that God
seized them by the hair of the head, and carried them, —the
former, the distance of eight miles ; and the latter, three hundred
miles. How Jehovah himself traveled while performing this feat
of carrying the prophets is not explained. It must have been
rather an unpleasant way of traveling, and must have caused
some serious perturbation of mind lest the hair-hold should slip,
and precipitate them to the ground. If this mode of travel could
have been continued, it would have superseded the necessity of
railroads.

Ezekiel, we are told, lay three hundred and ninety days on
his left side, and forty days on his right side ; and then, having
swallowed a roll of parchment with the aid of Jehovah (Ezek.
iii. 1), he was prepared for business. We are not told what
was the object in swallowing such a formidable document, or
how he managed to get into his stomach an article having a
diameter four times that of his throat. Jeremiah wore cords
around his neck, and a yoke on his back (rather a singular
place for a yoke). Hosea claimed that God commanded him
twice to go and marry a whore (Hos. i. 2). This looks like a
connivance at, if not a tacit indorsement of, whoredom. Eze-
kiel relates a “ story” about being carried by u the hand of
the Lord,” and set down among some old dry bones, which he
proceeded to invest with human flesh and sinews, and then drew
skins over them to hold the flesh and bones together (Ezek.
xxxvii.). Having thus manufactured a new supply of the genus
homo, he invoked the four winds to inflate their bodies with
breath, when, lo! there “ stood upon their feet an exceeding
great army.” We use his own language. Here is a story
that casts all the wild and weird tales of heathen mythology in
the shade. There would have been no necessity for drafting
soldiers in the recent Rebellion if the country could have been
blessed with such a creative genius as Ezekiel. Such stories set
 180

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

all logic at defiance. If the first commandment, “Multiply and
replenish the earth,” had been neglected so as to render it
necessary to adopt another process for increasing the number of
human beings, certainly a more rational and decent mode might
have been invented. We will not relate any more of the curious
capers of these “ inspired men of God.”

Some Christian writers have disposed of such erratic conduct,
and such wild freaks of fancy, b}r assuming them to be the
garb or metaphor of some great spiritual truth. This is ex-
plained by the proverb, “ Necessity is the mother of invention; ”
but the common mind knows nothing of these inventions of the
priesthood to save the credit of the Bible. Hence, whether true
or false, such an explanation does not destroy the demoralizing
influence of such ideas and language upon the public mind;
and then it is derogatory to the character of God to assume he
would do such senseless and unrighteous things as are related
in some of the above cases. We insist that it would be a
serious calamity upon the country to make a book containing
such moral lessons, or rather immoral lessons, “the fountain
of our laws and the supreme rule of our conduct,” as urged by
the Evangelical Alliance ; and it is a sorrowful and deplorable
circumstance that such a book is circulated among the heathen
by the thousand as guides for their moral conduct. We wish
they would refuse to accept it, as the Japanese have done in the
past.

II. The PnoniETS Elijah and Elisha.

There are some peculiar features in thd history of these two
Hebrew prophets, for which they seem to merit a special notice.
They appear to have been on very familiar terms with Jehovah ;
and the whole machinery of heaven, we are led to conclude, was
under their control, with no special reason why they should
merit such divine partiality, as they were not overstocked with
practical righteousness. The acts of raising the dead and con-
trolling the elements appear to have been to them very common-
place performances. One of Elijah’s greatest miraculous feats
was that of “ shutting up the heavens,” so that there was no
dew nor rain for three years (1 Kings xvii. 1). Aside from
 CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.

181

the absolute impossibility of intercepting the action of the laws
which control and regulate* the entire machinery of the universe,
there are several considerations which render this story wholly
incredible. It appears, from the language used, that this
drought extended over the whole earth, and all nations must
have suffered the direful consequences; and yet none of their
histories allude to it. The absence of rain and dew for three
3^ears must have caused the surface of the earth to become dry
and parched to a considerable depth, particularly in the torrid
zone. The creeks and rivulets must have been dried up. Every
spear of grass, every tree, every plant, must have withered and
perished ; and all the cattle must have died for want of food and
drink ; and the people must have shared the same fate. Indeed,
not a living thing could have been left upon the face of the earth
where this drought prevailed. And yet no other history makes
any allusion to such a calamity ; and a circumstance which ren-
ders it more incredible is, that the moisture which is constantly
ascending from the earth could not have been held in the upper
strata of the atmosphere for half that period of time. When it
ascends and accumulates, and becomes sufficiently condensed, it
must fall in the shape of rain.

2.   It appears that the prophet himself, in order to escape the
fatal consequences of this terrible visitation of divine wrath,
was instructed to flee, and hide near the Brook Cherith, which
was in the vicinity of Jordan. Here, we are told, he was fed
by a raven, which brought him both bread and water. The
queries naturally arise here, Where did the raven obtain those
articles of food ? Why can not suffering and starvation be pre-
vented at the present day by a similar expedient ? Why should
several millions of human beings have suffered a terrible death
by starvation in India within a recent period, if ravens can be
employed as messengers of mere}" ? Why should God be par-
tial? The preservation of the life of the prophet could not
have been of so much more importance, judging from his sub-
sequent history, as he achieved but little good afterward ; and,
as nobody claims to have seen the raven but Elijah, the case
looks a little doubtful.

3.   The next miraculous feat of Elijah was that of increasing
 182

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra


a widow’s barrel of meal and cruse of oil after they were nearly
exhausted, so that they lasted for many months. In nearly all
such cases we find incredible features, in addition to the impos-
sibility of performing the act. No reason can be found, in the
history of this case, for bestowing such miraculous favors upon
this woman that would not apply to thousands of women now,
some of them even in a worse state of suffering, and in greater
need of divine aid. It does not appear that the miracle had
the effect to convince anybody of the might and power of his
God, nor that it was designed to produce such an effect. Hence
nothing was accomplished by it but the relief of the poor
widow’s wants, which was a very good thing; but, as we have
already remarked, she had no more claim upon the benevolence
and munificence of God than thousands of poor widows and
others of the present day who receive no such aid.

4.   The prophet performed, we are told, another miracle for
the benefit of this woman, though we do not learn that she was
more righteous than other women. Her son sickened and died
(perhaps the meal was not in a very healthy condition) ; and
Elijah restored him to life. If there were any truth in the story,
it could be accounted for by supposing the boy was in a state of
catalepsy, or trance, as life has been revived in numerous cases
in persons in this condition in modern times ; and the conduct
of Elijah furnishes some evidence that he understood it in this
light. lie took the body into an upper room, so the performance
should not be witnessed by an}7 of the company (perhaps for fear
of being disturbed ; and he was probably apprehensive that they
would suspicion, from his actions, that the boy was not dead).
In fact the narrator does not say he was dead, but only that
the breath had gone out of him ; and this could be said in any
case of swooning, trance, or catalepsy.

5.   Aliab is reported as reproving Elijah for bringing so much
suffering upon the people by the great drought. The reason
the prophet assigns for this divine judgment is worth}7 of note.
It was because Ahab and his subjects worshiped a false God
(Baalim). This explains the whole affair. The Jews were
always assuming that those who did not worship as they did
were worshipers of false Gods ; but there is no evidence of
 CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.

183

this, and no reason in the assumption. As St. John (i. 18)
declares, u No man has seen God at any time,” it follows that
each worshiper, under every system of religion, pictures out
the form, size, shape, and character of God for himself; and,
certainly, other nations had as much right to form their own
mental conceptions of God as the Jews had, and were as likely
to form a correct idea of him as they. They could not picture
out a worse God than Jehovah. Here we have a true explana-
tion of the reason the Jews were perpetually denouncing and
making war on other nations: it was simply because they
would not subscribe to the Jewish creed. The Jews were creed-
worshipers.

6.   This conclusion is confirmed by the relation, in the next
chapter, of a contest between the God of Elijah and the God
of the prophets of Baal. We are told that Elijah’s God could
kindle a fire upon the altar, while theirs could not. Here is
admitted the existence of other Gods. The only difference be-
tween them is, Elijah’s God was a little smarter. The same
thing is aimed to be shown in numerous other contests between
Jehovah and other Gods. It is merely a trial of skill, strength,
and knowledge.

7.   And because the God of the prophets of Baal fell a little
behind, and could not quite equal the achievements of Jehovah,
we are told that Elijah put the prophets all to death. Here is
another circumstance tending to show that Elijah could not have
been a true servant of a just God ; for such a God would not
sanction such cruelty. But the story carries an absurdity upon
the face of it. To suppose that four hundred and fifty men
would stand quietly, and submit to be slain by one man single-
handed and alone, without any resistance, is altogether too
incredible to be entertained for a moment.

8.   The next achievement of Elijah, after eating a barley cake,
baked on the coals, and drinking a cruse of water (1 Kings
xix. 8), was to walk forty days and forty nights, without stop-
ping to eat or sleep. This performance was almost equal to
that of the Hindoo, Yalpa, who walked round the sun in eleven
hours. One story is just as credible as the other.

9.   We are told that, when Ahaziah, who succeeded his father
 184

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

Ahab upon the throne, got crippled by falling, and sent to con-
sult the God of Ekron, Elijah, on hearing of it, asked why
he did not consult the God of Israel (2 Kings i. 6) ; and, when
the king’s messengers reported to him what the prophet Elijah
had said, he sent fifty messengers to the prophet to invite him
to come and see him, that he might consult with him. These
messengers treated him very respectfully, and called him u the
man of God ; ” but the prophet, we are told, instead of com-
plying with the king’s request, called down fire from heaven,
which consumed the whole number. When the king heard of the
circumstance, he sent fifty more messengers, who shared the
same fate, and were likewise consumed by fire from heaven.
An uncivil and ver}r wicked thing for a righteous prophet to do.

10.   We are told that Elijah, in the course of his travels, came
to a stream of water, and took off his mantle, and smote it.
The water parted hither and thither, and permitted him to walk
in the bottom of the stream. Another displa}T of his great
miraculous power ; but it is void of truth.

11.   The last astounding feat reported of this miraculous
prophet was that of ascending to heaven in a chariot of fire,
with horses made of the same material. Rather a hazardous
mode of traveling. This stor}r is contradicted both by the laws
of nature, and the express declaration of the Bible itself. The
former teaches us that the fire would have been extinguished for
want of oxygen before he had ascended many miles from the
earth ; and the latter declares, u Flesh and blood can not enter
the kingdom of heaven ; ” and also that “ no man hath ascended
up to heaven but lie that came down from heaven,”—Christ
Jesus (John iii. 13). There are several circumstances which
render these marvelous achievements of Elijah wholly incredi-
ble, in addition to their setting aside the laws of nature. We
can not learn that any good was accomplished by it. It does
not appear that anybody was converted to a life of practical
righteousness; while we must assume that God must have
had some great purpose in view to cause him to thus set aside
and trample under foot his own laws. On the other hand,
a great deal of bad feeling was engendered, and a great many
lives destroyed. And then there is no allusion whatever to
 CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.   185

these astonishing miracles in any other history. All these cir-
cumstances and considerations warrant us in discarding the
whole affair, though Christian writers attach great importance
to it.

The Feats of Elisha.

The marvelous deeds of Elisha appear to be, to a considera-
ble extent, a mere repetition of those of Elijah. Like his
predecessor, he raised a dead child to life, increased the supply
of oil for a widow after it had run short, and also increased
the quantity of good water for the people by a supernatural
process, though not by a shower of rain, as Elijah did, after a
three years’ drought. There is evidently a disposition to imitate
and outdo his predecessor: hence he brings water without the
process of rain. There are two or three incidents in his his-
tory worthy of notice : —

1.   When Elijah took his perilous flight heavenward, and left
him alone, we are told he rent his garments. This act, although
customaiy among u the Lord’s holy people,” was rather an
insane way of manifesting his grief. A man in this age doing
so would be taken to the insane asylum.

2.   The second performance of Elisha, deserving particular
notice, was an act of malignant revenge upon some frolicsome
boys reminding him that he was bald-headed. For this simple,
childish, though rude, act of calling him u bald-head,” we are
told he caused u two bears to come out of the woods, and
tear forty-two of them to pieces.” Why the other children
escaped this fate, we are not told. This conduct on the part
of the prophet evinces a morose, cruel, and revengeful disposi-
tion, instead of a philanthropic and benevolent one, as we
should have expected the Lord’s chosen prophet to manifest.
If the story were a credible one, it would be a stigma upon his
character while it stands on the page of history.

3.   There is one circumstance related in the history of Elisha
which seems to indicate that he was a man of rather gross habits.
It is stated, that, when he killed a yoke of oxen for food, he
“ boiled their flesh with the instruments of the oxen,” and gave
the people to eat (1 Kings xix. 21). We infer, from this lan-
 «

186

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

guage, that the oxen were thrown into the cooking-vessel whole,
without being skinned or cleaned. It must have been rather a
rare dish, and a tough one also.

4.   We will notice one more remarkable incident in the history
of this remarkable prophet. We are told, that, as some men
were felling some trees on the banks of the Jordan, one of
them, by accident, let his ax fall into the stream. On the case
being reported to Elisha, he soon relieved the man of his trouble
by throwing a stick into the water, which caused the ax to swim.
Here is another specimen of the philosophy of the Christian
Bible. Heathen mythology is full of such lawless stories.
When the boat in which a Hindoo was rowing capsized, and
threw his dinner into the Indus, a fish was accommodating
enough to arrest it in its descent, and bring it to the surface,
and restore it to the hungry boatman. A very accommodating
fish ! as much so as the stick !

We will now take a view of the moral bearing of the stories
of these great “ God-chosen ” and “God-favored prophets/’
as one Christian writer styles .them. We must assume that God
would not suspend the action of those laws which secure order
and harmony throughout nature to perform such miracles as
these prophets are represented as performing, unless some
great and important end was to be accomplished by it. Well,
let us see if this was the result; if not, we must assume that these
miracles were never performed. According to Dr. Lardner,
miracles were always designed to accomplish some great good,
and generally to remove the skepticism of unbelievers, and to
convince them of the mighty power of God. But we do not
find that an}' such effects were produced by any of the miracles
here reported. The performance of Elijah did not convert
Ahab nor Jezebel, nor the worshipers of Baal, either to the
faith or to a life of practical righteousness; nor did those of
Elisha convert Naaman ; nor did either of the prophets convert
or reform any of the thousands of heathen in the countries
through which they traveled. The contemporary kings of Judah
and Israel still continued in their ungodly course as before. In
a word, nobody was benefited, nobody reformed, and no good
effected by any of these miracles, only to a few individuals, who
 PBOGBESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

187

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

could have been accommodated in the usual way, — by ordinary
means. On the other hand, bad feelings were engendered,
many lives lost, and much suffering caused by their miraculous
proceedings. We must conclude, then, that,* so far as any
agency of God is claimed in the several cases, these miracles
were never performed ; and we have the negative testimony of
history to prove still further that these miracles were never
wrought. The history of no other nation mentions them, not
even the three years of drought; yet Christ speaks of it, and
indorses it with all its impossibilities and all its bad conse-
quences, which is an evidence of his ignorance of natural law.
As these stories, by their stultifying absurdities, do violence to
our reason, and also to our moral faculties, on account of the
cruelty, injustice, bloodshed (for it shows both prophets were
murderers), we hold, from these considerations, that the influ-
ence of these stories is demoralizing, and that they should not
be put into the hands of the heathen, as they are every year by
the thousand.

CHAPTER XXXII.

PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

Idolatry : its Character, Uses, Harmlessness, and Primary

Origin.

There is no act, no species, of human conduct, nothing
recognized as a sin within the lids of the Christian Bible, which
is perhaps more fearfully or more frequently condemned, or
denounced with more awful and terrible penalties, than that of
idolatry. Those who practiced it are ranked with murderers
and liars (Rev. xxii. 15) ; and it is declared, “ The}" shall not
inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. vi. 9), but “ shall have
their portion in the lake of fire and brimstone” (Rev. xxi. 8).
Now, we propose to bestow a brief examination upon the origin,
character, and practical moral effect of this ancient practice,
that we may learn the nature of the custom which is thus placed
at the head of the list of the acts of human depravity, and
 188

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

regarded as the blackest and most infamous crime ever perpe-
trated b}r sinful man. We find it manifested under various
forms, the original or most primitive aspect of which, so far as
disclosed by the light of history, is known as Feticliism,—the
worship of inanimate objects. Stretching the imagination far
awaj" in the rearward of time,—far back along the receding
pathway of human history, over a series of many thousands, not
to say millions, of years,—we arrive at a period in which
man is found occup3dng a plane of mere animal, sensorial exist-
ence, connected with which was an imperfect development of per-
ception and reflection. In this era of his mental growth he began
to perceive and recognize the motions of objects around him.
He observed bright and shining bodies rolling over his head, —
one by da}T, and ten thousand more by night. At least he ob-
served that they changed positions,—being in one locality in the
morning, and in the opposite direction in the evening. What
conclusion from these observations could be more natural, more
childlike (for, bear in mind, this was realty the childhood of the
race), or more reasonable, than that these bodies possessed life, —
that they inherently possessed the power of locomotion, the same
ability to move that he did himself,—just as the infant, now gaz-
ing out upon the sky' from the lap of its mother, fancies the darting
meteor to be a bird or an animal? Wherever the ignorant, illit-
erate, primitive inhabitants of our globe perceived motion,—
whether it was displaj^cd in the revolution of the planets, the
falling tree, or the rippling stream, — there they associated life
and motion. And, soon learning that these adjuncts of nature
possessed a power and force superior to that with which they
themselves were endowed, tlicir feelings of awe and veneration
were thereby excited ; and to the highest degree their deep in-
wrought devotional feelings first found an outlet by bowing in
humble acknowledgment to the superior greatness of the shining
orbs wheeling in such majestic grandeur along the deep blue sky,
and “ bidding defiance to all below.” This is believed to have
been the first form, the first practical manifestation, of religious
worship, and the first form or phase of idolatiy now denomi-
nated Feticliism.

Polytheism. —This word is from polus, u many,” and Theos,
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

189

‘•God;’’ and hence is used to denote a belief in many or
several Gods, which comprehends the second form and stage
of idolatry. We have spoken of the early recognition by the
primitive inhabitants of the earth of the motion of the heavenly
bodies as giving rise to the belief that they possessed self-
constituted life and volition. But, progressing a step farther,
their attention was turned to motion where there was no visible
agent to produce it, — action without a visible actor. The
thunder rolled and reverberated along the great archway of
heaven, the winds whistled and moaned through the thick
foliage of the trees, and rushed along the valleys, oft-times
with such violence as to overturn their rude tenements, and
prostrate the towering oak at their feet. Yet nothing could
be seen of the agent which produced these direful effects. No
being, no agent, no cause adequate for their production, was
visible. Hence they very naturally concluded that they were
produced by invisible beings who could wing their way through
space without being seen. This assumed discovery soon gave
rise to the thought that the stars might be moved by these
beings, instead of possessing, as they had previously been sup-
posed to do, an inherent power of motion of their own. And
these prime movers of the planets they concluded to be Gods,
or moving spirits. Thus originated the notion of a plurality
of Gods, each planet having a separate ruling Deity. And the
sun—being greatly superior to, transcending in magnitude, light,
power, and influence, all the other luminaries, with their quali-
ties all combined — was, with the most childlike naturalness,
supposed to be ruled by the chief of the Gods, “the Lord
of lords and King of kings.” It was he who, every morning
throwing open the magnificent portals of the Orient, — the huge
golden gates of the eastern horizon, — slowly lifted aloft his stu-
pendous body of lighf to dispel the deep dark gloom which for
many hours had been spread like a pall over universal nature.
It was he who, plowing his way through the heavens, despite
the mist and clouds piled upon the great highway of his wonted
march, rolled down at eventide the western declivity of the
cerulean causeway to give place to Luna, queen of night, real-
izing that,
 190

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

“ Soon as the evening shades prevail,

The moon takes up the wondrous tale;”

and that

“ Ten thousand marshaled stars, a silver zone,

Diffuse their blended radiance round the throne.”

It was this mighty solar orb, “ the king of day,” who, having
performed his wonted journey to the south, returned in early
spring to banish the chilling blasts of the drear cold season ; to
drive from off the earth the biting frosts and freezing snows of
gloom-dispensing winter, and pour down, in lieu thereof, his
genial and vivifying rays to waken the flowers ; to call forth
vegetation, and ultimate^ ripen the golden harvest. In a word,
he dispensed heat, light, life, and blessings innumerable over
all the earth. How eas}r, how natural, then, it was for the
untutored savage to conclude that the indwelling or ondwelling
spirit of the sun was u the chief of the Gods,” to whom all
the inferior Deities (those who presided over the stars) bowed
in humble allegiance, acknowledging his superior sway, his right
to rule over the boundless universe ! The sun, being thus the
great central wheel of all recognized power,—i.e., the tabernacle
or dwelling-place of the supreme, omnipotent God, —became the
principal object of admiration and adoration, the pivot around
which clustered their deepest devotional aspirations ; the subor-
dinate Deities of the planets holding but a second place in their
devout contemplations and uprising venerations. The worship
of these imaginary beings, including the ruling and overruling
“ God of all,” with his tabernacle pitched in the blazing sun, is
now termed idolatry, and may be regarded as the second phase
or form of this species of worship. Hence we may note it as
a remarkable circumstance, that all the principal systems of
religion now existing, as well as most of those which have
passed away, exhibit very strong marks of this ancient solar
worship ; and it is more especially remarkable, that both Juda-
ism and Christianity, with all their exalted claims to a super-
natural origin, should be, as they seemingly are, deeply tinctured
with this ancient Sabean or solar worship. Distinct traces of it
are observable in the whole religious nomenclature of Christian-
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

191

ity. It, in fact, pervades the whole s}Tstem. This declaration
is borne out by the fact that nearly every divine epithet, nearly
eveiy name applied to the Deity in the Christian scriptures,
including those addressed to Jesus Christ, and also nearly every
theological term in both the Old and New Testaments, are
traceable to the ancient solar worship ; that is, the words, when
traced to their roots, or original form, are found to have been
solar titles. We will present some samples by way of proof:
The divine title Lord, in the New Testament, is translated from
the Greek Kuros, which is the Persian name for the sun ; God
is from Gad, an Ammonian name for the sun; Jehovah, by
translation and declension, becomes Jupiter, which, according
to Macrobius, is 44 the sun itselfDeity is from the Latin
Bens, which is traceable to dies, a day,—a period of time
measured by the sun ; Jesus is from Jes or J-es (with the Latin
termination us), which means 44 the one great fire of the sun;99
and Christ is derived from Chris, a Chaldean term for the sun ;
and so on of other divine titles. And whole phrases of scripture-
texts disclose the same idolatrous solar origin. Why is Jesus
Christ called 44 the sun of righteousness 99 ? (spelled s-u-n, let
it be noticed), as this text, quoted from Malachi, is assumed to
apply to him ; and why is the term 44 light,” so frequently used
and preferred throughout the Christian scriptures, to denote
the spiritual condition of man? Why are nations, whose
minds are cultivated and stored with knowledge, said to be
44 enlightened 99 ? Certainly, to our external vision, they are as
opaque as the most grossly ignorant barbarians. But they are
called enlightened when advanced in knowledge, simply because
all knowledge was once supposed to be imparted by the God
of the sun through its descending rays of light. Hence light
and knowledge are now synonymous terms. David says, 44 The
Lord is my light and my salvation ” (Ps. xxvii. 1), —just what
the ancient pagans used to say of the sun. Isaiah says, 4 4 The
Lord shall be to thee an everlasting light’9 (Isa. lx. 19),—
exactly such a conception as the ancient heathen entertained of
the sun, to which its application is more obviously appropriate.
Habakkuk says,44 His brightness was as light99 (iii. 4). Apply
this language to the sun, and its meaning becomes strikingly
 192

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

significant. Christ is said to be “ a light to lighten the Gen-
tiles,” “the true light,” “the light of the world,” &c. ; and
yet we can not discover that those who have embraced his
doctrines, and thus come into possession of this “true light,”
shed any more light upon a devious pathway, traveled in the
darkness of night, than the veriest Jewish pharisee or infidel.
The Christian reader will reply, “ These phrases are mere figures
of speech.” To be sure they are : we admit it. But then their
derivation and origin are none the less obvious, and, when scru-
tinizingly examined, disclose remote traces of Oriental idolatry ;
and, moreover, they most unmistakably prove Christianity to be
of heathen extraction with respect to its verbal habiliments, or
external vestment, as well as the main drift and scope of its
doctrines and teachings, as shown elsewhere. We will observe
further, that such conceptions (found in the Christian Bible) as
“God is a consuming fire,” “ God is light,” &c. (John i. 5),
originated in the primeval ages, when God was supposed to
reside in the sun; also such ejaculations as “O Lord, the
Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of
thy rising ” (Isa. lx. 3). The words “ light,” “ brightness,” and
“ rising ” apply with striking force to the sun, and were used by
the ancient Persians in such a relation, while, on the other
hand, it is difficult to discover any sense or appropriateness in
applying them—at least the word “ rising ”— to the Supreme
Being; for lie is represented as alwa}Ts occupying “ the highest
heavens : ” so there can be no higher point to rise to. We might
also ask, Wli}^ are “the Lord’s day” and “Sunday” used as
s3’nonyinous terms ? or why is the Lord now worshiped on the
very day anciently set apart for the worship of the sun or solar
Deities? Do not these facts prove that many remnants of
the ancient idolatrous religions are still retained in Christian
theology ?

Monotheism.—This word — from monos, one, or alone, and
Theos, God — represents a belief in but one God. We have
shown in the preceding section how a belief in a plurality of Gods
originated. We will now trace the progress of this idea to a uni-
tary conception of the Deity. It will be observed, b}" the study of
ancient theology, that, as the human mind becomes enlightened
 PBOGBESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

193

and expanded by the discovery of the laws governing the heav-
enly bodies, the lesser or inferior Deities gradually fall into
disbelief and disuse, and u the Supreme Holy One ” proportion-
ally becomes exalted in the devout affections of the worshiping
multitude, until most religious nations become, in one view,
virtually and practically monotheists. And it may be remarked
here, that, as neither the imaginary God nor carved images of
God were objects of worship by the most enlightened classes of
any nation, they can not strictly and truthfully be termed idola-
ters. Hence some writers are bold to affirm there never was a
nation of idolaters ; and we incline to this opinion-. We are also
bold to affirm that there never was, properly speaking, a nation of
monotheists, —believing in but one God, and no more, —neither
Jews nor Christians excepted; and we are likewise prepared to
exhibit the proof of the affirmation, that every nation, reported
in history making a profession of religion, has acknowledged
the existence of one supreme God. This is true even of those
who believe in a multiplicity of Gods, — a circumstance which
places both Jews and Christians in rather an awkward position,
claiming as they do, and always have done, a monopoly of this
faith ; and the fact that they have long professedly labored to
bring other nations to this belief, while some of those nations
have, as we shall show, been much more consistent, both in
the belief and practice of this doctrine, than themselves, places
them, as we conceive, in rather a ludicrous aspect. The Chris-
tian Bible and the Christian world have arrogated vastly too
much to themselves, and overstepped the bounds of truth, in
claiming to be the only propagators of the unitary conception
of a God, as the following citations from historical authorities
will clearly manifest: —

1.   Christians have a numerous cortege, or retinue, of angels
in their system of inspired theology, as is shown in various parts
of the Bible, which, in theological parlance, must be regarded
as so man}" secondary Gods, inasmuch as they are assigned the
same duties, perform the same functions, and sustain precisely
the same relation to the supernal Deity as did the subordi-
nate Gods of the pagans under the ancient systems. It is, in
fact, only a change of name, in order to get rid of the illogical
 104

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.


Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

dilemma of holding to the existence of but one God, while vir-
tual^ acknowledging the existence of many. We might cite
manj’ facts and testimonies from history in proof of this state-
ment, but will restrict ourselves to one. Mr. Higgins says,
“ All nations believed in one supreme God, and many subordi-
nates. The latter some termed angels ; others called them Gods.”
More anciently than the Jews, we find that the Babylonians,
Chaldeans, Persians, and Syrians all vested these subordinate
beings with the properties of mere angels. “Angels,” then,
with Christians, we legitimately infer, is only another name
for second-class Gods, or subordinate Deities of the Orientals.

2.   Even if we should pass over, as unworthy of considera-
tion, the historical facts which go to identify the Christian
angels with the subordinate Deities of the ancient pagans, there
is yet spread out before us a broad and tenable ground for
charging Christians with being polytheists, — that is, for re-
jecting their pretensions of worshiping and preaching a unitary
God; for it is a very striking and depreciating fact, that, not-
withstanding their boastful and arrogating claims, there are
many texts in the Old Testament which imply, in the most dis-
tinct manner, a belief in a plurality of Gods. Indeed the
first passage in the book, according to Mr. Parkhurst, would
read, if correctly translated, “In the beginning the Gods
created the heavens and the earth,” thus disclosing an acknowl-
edgment of more than one God. And we find man}’ other
passages which arc made to conceal the old polytheistic idea
by a wrong translation. Fortunately, however, for the disclo-
sure of truth, there are many texts in which it comes very dis-
tinctly to the surface. As for example, in Genesis i. 26, we
have the undisguised language, “Let us make man in our own
image.” Now “us” and “our” being plural pronouns, it
would be folly and nonsense to deny that they refer to a plural-
ity of Gods. “ Let us make man ” means, “ Let us Gods make
man;” for no sophistry, shifting, or dodging can make sense
of it with any other construction. And several times, in this
and other chapters, is similar language used. Wc will cut the
matter short by observing, upon the authority of Parkhurst,
that Alcim and Elohim arc the Hebrew plurals used to represent
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

195

God in the Old Testament; that these are much more frequently
employed than the singular forms, Al and jE7, thus disclosing
the conception of a plurality of Gods beyond dispute.

3.   And this argumentation acquires additional logical strength
when based on the fact that the Jews did not claim Jehovah as
the only God, but merety as supreme to other Gods. He
was “ God of Gods” and u Lord of Lords.” Nor was he
claimed to be a God of anj^ but the Jewish nation. Jethro is
made to say, “Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all
Gods” (Exod. xviii. 11). And in Exodus xv. 11 it is asked,
“Who is like unto Jehovah among the Gods?” Just such a
claim as is put forth for Jupiter by Homer in his Iliad :—

“ O first and greatest God, by Gods adored,

We own thy power-, our Father and our Lord! ”

Hence it will be observed, that if there were any merit or any
honor in professing faith in a unitary Deity, or any truth form-
ing a basis for such a claim, neither Jews nor Christians could
justl}r arrogate a monopoty of such faith, inasmuch as there
is an older claim to the doctrine.

4.   But we find that the professors of the Christian faith occupy
still more untenable and more palpably erroneous ground than
the Jews with respect to the profession of holding strictly to
the unitary conception of Deity ; for they not only tacitly
accept the contradictory phases of this doctrine, which we have
pointed out above, in the Jewish writings, but they add thereto
a new installment or chapter of errors by having accepted into
their creed the old Oriental doctrine of a trinity of Gods.
They have “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy
Ghost,” which present us with a family of Gods as complete
and absolute as the confederated union of Gods in either the
ancient Hindoo or Grecian Pantheon. To allege, in defense,
that these three Gods were all one, while we find each in various
parts of the Bible spoken of separate^, and discriminated b}r
peculiar and distinct properties and titles, instead of mitigating
the error and contradiction, such a plea only aggravates it. In
the same sense the Hindoos claimed that their thousand Gods
were one. And all the triads or trinities of Gods swarming
 196

TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

through the ancient mythologies were x)roclaimed to be each
44 a trinit}’ in unity;” so that such a defense only lands the
professor of Christianity amongst heathen myths.

5.   The absurdity of the Christian Church in professing to
worship a single God, also making a profession of rising above
and contemning the idolatrous, polytheistic conception of Deity,
culminates in their act of embodying and incorporating the infi-
nite deityship in 44 the man Christ Jesus,” and declaring him
to possess 44 the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” For we thus
have one fall and absolute God perambulating the earth in the
person of Christ during his temporary sojourn here, while another
absolute God (the Father) occupied the throne of heaven, thus
presenting us with a plurality of Gods too marked and undis-
guised to admit a rational defense. . A profession of monotheism
arrayed with such facts bespeaks folly supreme. The polythe-
ism of the ancient heathen is science and sense compared with
such jargon. For, with all their Gods, they never paid divine
honors, or prayed to but one God (44The Supreme Ruler”) ;
while Christians, on the contrary, worship all of theirs, — Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, — frequently naming each one separately
in their supplications to the throne of grace, thus rendering
themselves more open to the charge of polytheism, and that
species of idolatry which consists in worshiping several Gods,
than those whom they condemn as heathen for committing similar
acts. We will prove this statement. The reverend missionary,
D. O. Allen, says of a large body of heathen professors, 4k They
believe in the existence of beings whom they call Gods, but do
not recognize them as possessing any qualities, or as having an}’
agencies in human affairs, which properly make them objects
of worship. They resemble the angels in the Christian system.
Brahma with them is the supreme God, and all the other Gods
offer him worship.” It is evident, then, that they virtually wor-
ship but one God, the inferior Deities being but angels; while
Christians, on the contrary, have placed two, if not three, Gods
on the throne. Which, then, have the best claim to bo consid-
ered monotheists?

G. And what sense, we would ask, can attach to the profes-
sion of monotheism with such a God as the Bible sets forth, —
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

197

a limited, local, personal God. No doctrine stands out more
prominently as a fundamental tenet of the Christian faith than
that which makes God appear a circumscribed, finite being.
He is represented in their “ inspired ” book as possessing those
qualities, properties, faculties, and functions which only a local,
organized being can possess, — such as a body, head, eyes, nose,
mouth, arms, fingers, feet, stomach, bowels, heart, &c. ; as
eating, sleeping, walking, talking, riding, laboring, resting,
laughing, crying ; and as getting angry and jealous, and cursing,
swearing, smiting, fighting, &c., and on one occasion getting
whipped or vanquished in a fight because the enemy were forti-
fied with chariots of iron. (See Josh. 17-16.) And hardly
was creation completed before he was down in Eden striding
over the bushes, hunting for his lost child Adam,—the first sam-
ple of the genus homo. And several times he had to leave his
golden throne, and descend to earth before he could be posted
in human affairs.

Now it must be evident to any person possessing a moiety
of common sense that such a limited, local, circumscribed
being, limited in size, and restricted in powers and qualities as
Jehovah is represented in the Bible to be, could neither be
omnipotent, omniscient, nor omnipresent. True, Christians con-
sider him so; but the Bible fails to make him so. And hence
there would be room in infinite space for countless millions of
such Gods, and the doctrine of polytheism would be perfectly
consistent. Indeed, such a dwarfish and circumscribed God
would need thousands of such confederates to aid him in gov-
erning the countless worlds of the vast universe; so that the
polytheistic doctrine from the Christian stand-point becomes a
necessity, as it does also from another plane of view. We are
told in Gen. i. that the wmrk of creation wras completed in six
days; that the myriads of worlds which now chase each other
through the sky were all rolled put of the vortex of infinitude in
a week. But it is evident to every scientific or reflecting mind
that a million of years would not have sufficed for the work, espe-
ciall}7 for such a God as Moses describes and sets to the task.
Hence the period of creation should be extended, or the number
of Gods increased ad infinitum, to save the credibility of the
 198

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

cosmologic traditions. We would say, then, that, for the fol-
lowing reasons, the more Gods Christians acknowledge, the
better for the consistency of their cause: —

1. Their conception of the Divine Essence is that of a local,
limited, anthropomorphic, organized being, in exact conformity
with the notion of the ancient pagans; with which, in order to
have every part of the infinite universe supplied, would require
more in number than the most fertile imagination of the hea-
then ever created. 2. A countless host of such finite Gods
would have been required to complete the work of creation in
six da}^s. 8. There is room enough for any number of such
finite Gods to exist without encroaching on each other’s domin-
ions. 4. There should have been at least one such God to be
assigned the creation of each planetary world, which would re-
quire many millions of creative entities. 5. And the superin-
tendence of the endlessly complicated machinery of each planet,
and the supply, specifically and individually, of the various wants
of its swarming millions of diversified inhabitants, would require
an infinite host more of such local Gods as Jehovah of the Jews.

6.   And, as Christians already practically acknowledge the wor-
ship of three Gods, the addition of three hundred or three thou-
sand more would only be an extension of the principle, and could
not be a whit more objectionable. For it is not any specific
number of Gods they object to, but a “ plurality; ” and three is
as certainly and absolutely a plurality as three hundred or three
thousand. From the above considerations, founded on views of
consistency, we think Christians should ground their arms, and
cease their moral warfare upon the votaries of other religions
for being polytheistic or idolatrous. And “the sin of worship-
ing man}' Gods,” which they declaim so much on, is all a mere
phantom. We can not see how the divine mind could possibly
be offended at the simple mistake of overnumbering the God-
head. We will illustrate the case. We will suppose a mer-
chant in Cincinnati orders a bill of goods from New York,
addressing the order to John Ap John & Co. The latter opens
and examines it, then returns it unfilled, with the following
quaint protest: “Sir, there is no 1 Co.’ attached to m}r address.
It is simply John Ap John ; and yon have insulted my dignity
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

199

by this mistake, thus assuming that I have not the brain and
bullion to do business on my own hook, but must have partners.
I therefore return it with contempt for your insolent blunder.5 ’
Now, we ask if there can be a man found who would be guilty of
displajdng such coxcomb vanity as this. We trow not. Then,
why charge it upon an infinite God — an all-wise Deity — by
supposing that a prayer addressed, by an innocent mistake, to a
hundred or a thousand Gods would not be as acceptable to him
as if addressed to him alone, or even if erroneously addressed
to the Christian trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ?

The Construction and Worship of Images. —In Exod. xx. 4
we find the following command: “Thou shalt not make unto
thee any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in
heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the
water under the earth.’9 Here, it will be observed, is a sweep-
ing interdiction against image-making; and, as it prohibits
“ the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above or the earth
beneath,” it is a dead-lock upon the fine arts. All engravings,
paintings, photographs, &£., with which the civilized world is
now flooded, and which hold high rank among the arts and
sciences, involve an open infraction of this command. And
hence, this biblical interdiction being devoid of reason, and of
an anti-civilizing tendency, the enlightened portion of Christen-
dom, by common consent, tramples it heedless^ under foot.
And we are bold to say that this command is both foolish and
of impracticable application; for a living, thinking human
being can no more avoid forming images of every thing that
comes within the range of his mental vision, whether situated in
heaven above or the earth beneath, than he can stop the entire
machinery of his thoughts, or the blood from circulating through
his veins. It is as natural as eating, and as inevitable as
breathing. To be sure, he does not.give expression with wood,
metal, or canvas to every image .formed in the mind; but the
nature of the act, morally speaking, is precisely the same as if
he did. St. Clemens admits this when he declares it to be a
sin for women to look in the glass, because they form images of
themselves. All true ! viewed from the Christian stand-point,
which regards image-making as a sin. The most sinful or rep-
 200

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

rehensible act of image-making, however, in the view of Chris-
tians, is the construction of idols or images to represent the
Deity. Living in a civilized age, they would be ashamed to
occupy the broad ground assumed by the command which we
have quoted above, which forbids the likeness of ever}' thing that
exists ; yet they still hold that it is wrong to make images of
the Deity, —not anymore so, according to the above command,
than the acceptance of engravings of animals and photographs
of friends. But where is the man now living, or when did the
man live, who has not formed images of the Deity, or who does
not instinctively and habitually do it every day of his life?
Ever}' man makes a likeness of God, or what he supposes to be
such, every time he thinks of such a being. It is impossible to
make him the subject of thought without constructing a mental
image of him, —i.e., without constructing an image of him in
the brain. And can it be more sinful to make an image of
him with the hand than with the head?—in other words, to
construct a likeness of him externally, than to construct it
internally. Certainly not. One is shaped out in the mind ; the
other is shaped out of a block of wood or metal: and most cer-
tainly, if the latter is idolatry, the former is also. The Chris-
tian kneels in supplication with the image of God set up in his
mind ; the pagan worships with the image set up in the temple
or on the altar. One is externally represented with words ; the
other, with wood. The only difference between the Christian
and pagan idolatry is, that, after each has sketched out a like-
ness of the Creator upon the tablet or dial-plate of his mind
according to his conception of the form of Deity, the Christian
stops short with his work but half completed, while the pagan
goes on and gives practical expression to his by representing it
with wood, stone, or other material, by which it is more thor-
oughly impressed upon the memory, and u the devout contem-
plation/’ the remembrance of God,” kept more constantly in
the mind ; and thus the savage is proved to be the most practi-
cally religious of the two. We have shown that the representa-
tion and delineation upon canvas, paper, wood, or steel, of the
various objects of art, — of human creation, —are set down as
the highest marks and the most distinguishing proofs of civiliza-
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

201

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

tion. And can it be right and laudable to thus represent or
image the works of the Creator, and wrong to image the Creator
himself? Not according to the above command. Or can one
be pleasing to him, and the other offensive? There is neither
sense nor science, logic nor lore, in such conclusions. Christian
reader, do you not know that your little innocent daughter vio-
lates the command every day of her happy life by nursing,
dressing, and caressing her wax doll, her image miniature man?
For if it be true — and the Bible teaches it — that c ‘ man was
created in the image of God,” then these artificial human like-
nesses, these images of the infant man, are also images of God ;
and your little girl daily commits “the awful sin of idolatry,”
and you, too, for countenancing her in the act. It may be no-
ticed here that the pious Christian confers upon himself an
honor which he denies to the Creator when he has his photo-
graph struck off for the accommodation of a friend, while he
denounces as idolatry all attempts to construct an imaginary
likeness of God. But consistency is a jewel rarely found.

Image - Worship. —We may be met here with the answer that
“it is not the making of images, but the worship of images,
in lieu of the worship of God, that constitutes idolatiy.” To
this we reply, we have no proof that any nation or people
reported in history were ever obnoxious to the charge. True,
the people of man}r countries have been in the habit of pros-
trating themselves before idols in their daily worship. Yet in
no case which we have examined do. we find that those idols
were worshiped with the thought of their being the true and
living God, or of their being endowed with divine attributes,
but only as types or representations of God. It is possible that
some of the lower stratum of society—some of the debased and
ignorant — ma}^ have been deluded into the idea that God had
taken up his abode in those lifeless images. In fact we are
assured that the priest, in some cases, labored to instill this
belief into their minds. Some of them may have been ignorant
and pliable enough to be misled by his artful misrepresentation.
But, by a large proportion of the idol-worshipers of every nation,
we have the highest authority for asserting that these artificial
images were not regarded as any thing more than the mere

i

!
 202

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

representation, or outward type, of the Deity, and were venerated
with the same religious conviction which Christians experience
in partaking of the body^ and blood of Christ with the images of
bread and wine, and without the suspicion of incurring the charge
of idolatry. The two acts are precisely the same in spirit and
essence. But the untutored denizens of the Pacific isles do not
conceive that the dumb and lifeless sylvan figure before which
the3T prostrate themselves in worship is the omnipotent, self-
existent God, the Creator of heaven and earth, more truty than
the Christians believe they are realty eating and drinking 44 the
body and blood of Christ” when partaking of the sacrament.
They are both mere symbols, or representations, of something
higher. It is irrational to suppose that beings endowed with
minds believe that inanimate figures of gold, silver, iron, &c.,
possess omnipotent thought, power, and feeling. That able,
pious Mahomedan writer, Abel Fezzel, declares (in his 44 Aren
Akberry ”) that 44 the opinion that the Hindoos (who make many
idols) are idolaters has no foundation in fact; but they are
worshipers of God, and only one God.” 44 This,” says the
modern traveler, Mr. Ditson of New York, 44 I know to be true ;
for I had it from the lips of the Hindoos themselves.” And
this will apply wfith undiminished force to other nations liabitu-
ualty styled idolaters. 44 Even the most savage nations,” says
Mr. Parker, “regard their idols only as types of God.” And
we might quote whole pages from heathen writers to that effect.
The ancient Grecian poet.Ovid says, 44 It is Jove we adore in
the image of God.” 44 The Gods inhabit our minds and bod-
ies,” says Statius, a Latin writer, 44 and not the images made
to represent them.” Ilencc it is evident they had a perception
of their true character. And the missionary, Rev. D. 0. Allen,
tells us that even those who have been represented as worship-
ing the sun, moon, and stars, only contemplate these planets
as symbols of the Deity, and that 44 their worship is realty aimed
to the invisible, omnipotent, omnipresent God.” It appears,
then, that whatever external objects the most ignorant and
savage tribes have addressed, or have been supposed to worship,
have been used merely as types and symbols to enhance their
devotion in the worship of the true God. Though, as Cicero
 PBOGBESSIYE IDEAS OF DEITY.

203

remarks (in kis philosophical works), 44 A few may have
been so feeble in their perceptions as to confound and iden-
tify the statues and Gods together.” But another writer
avers, 44 There is not in all antiquity the least trace of a prayer
addressed to a statue.” He also sa3rs, 44 All paganism does not
offer a single fact which can lead to the conclusion that they
ever adored idols; nor was there ever a law compelling them
to do so.” When Paul declared to the Athenians, 44 Whom ye
ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you,” he confessed most
explicitly that they worshiped the true God through their idols.
Where, then, is the sin of idolatry?

In one of the Hindoo Bibles (the Baghavat Gita) God is
made to say, 44 They who serve other Gods with a firm belief
of being right do realty involuntarily serve me, and shall be
rewarded.” How admirable, how noble, how magnanimous
and merciful is this sentiment compared with the damning, death-
dealing denunciations against idolatry by^ the Jewish Jehovah !
And the Mahomedan Bible (the Koran) contains a similar
sentiment to the above. Thus, we observe, both the Hindoo
and Mahomedan Bibles evince in this respect a higher degree
of moral sense than that of the Christian Bible, whose violent
interdictions against idolatry have caused many nations to be
butchered, and their lands deluged with blood. 44 There is noth-
ing in the Christian Bible,” says Mr. Higgins,44 of one-twentieth
part of the value of this text of the Hindoo Bible in the way
of preventing a foolish persecution and bloodshed.” It may be
remembered here that Christians inherited their extreme hatred
of idolatry from the Jews, which is fostered by the Jewish
Bible, and that the Jews derived their feelings of opposition to
it from the two nations under which they were long enslaved, —
the Persians and Egyptians,—both of which, according to
Herodotus, forbid the making of idols, the former interdicting
it by law ; as did also the Roman.emperor, Numa Pompilius, 600
B.C. The Parsees of India to this day oppose idolatry ; and the
learned among the Chinese have always discountenanced it.
Strabo and other Grecian philosophers wrote against it. 44 And
many sects arose among the ancient heathen,” says the 44 Hiero-
phant,” 44 who rejected all external symbols of the Deity.” On
 204

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

the other hand, neither Jews nor Christians have been entirely
free from this 44 sin’’ so called. As for 44 the Lord’s holy
people,” there probably never was a nation who manifested h
stronger or more invincible proclivity to idolatry than they, or
wTho indulged more eagerly in the practice of it whenever oppor-
tunity presented; and frequently did they break over all re-
straint to plunge into this seemingly enticing luxury, not even
withholding their ear-rings when a molten image or golden calf
was to be constructed. And even their lawgiver Moses con-
sented to the construction of a number of imitations or substi-
tutes for the carved images of the pagans. Their brazen
serpent displayed upon a pole ; their carved cherubims with the
body of a man, the head of an animal, and the wings of a bird ;
and the ark of the covenant, which was borne about in the
same manner the heathen carried their idols, —were all compro-
mises with and concessions to idolatry, and were all venerated
with the same spirit and in the same fashion the heathen adored
their carved or molten images. As for the holy ark, the Jews
as solemnly believed that God Almighty was shut up in that
little box of shittim-wood as truly as ever the pagans believed
that he sometimes condescended to a transient abode in their
idols ; while it was death to touch it with 44 unholy hands,” and
sixty thousand were butchered because one man (the pious Uzza),
on a certain occasion, instinctively and devoutly clapped his
hand on it to keep it from falling. In fact, the golden image
which it contained was an idol to all intents and purposes;
nor were the brazen serpent and cherubim of the altar much
less so. Hence the vindictive condemnation of other nations
for making and adoring images came with an ill grace from
the Jews. Nor are the skirts of the disciples of Christ any
freer from the stain of idolatry. In fact, it constitutes the veiy
substratum of their religion. In the first place, they quote
approvingly such texts as the following: 44 The Lord is my
rock” (Ps. xviii. 2) ; 44 Who is a rock save our God?” (Ps.
xviii. 31) ; 44 The shepherd the stone of Israel ” (Gen. xlix. 24).
Peter calls him 44 a living stone ” (1 Pet. ii. 4). And there are
a number of other similar texts, all of which disclose real fetich-
ism, or the first form of idolatry. The ancient Laplanders,
 PBOGBESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

205

Arabians, Phoenicians, and several tribes of Asia Minor used
rocks and stones as representative images of Deity. And here
we find the same association of ideas in the Christian Bible.
Do you reply, u They must be considered figurative”? Very
well: prove that the ancient heathen tribes did not also consider
them figurative.

But we have a much more serious and conclusive proof than
this that nearly the entire retinue of Christian professors are
practical idolaters, and that their “ holy religion,” in all its
essential characteristics, comprises, in its very nature, the high-
est species of idolatry. Some Christian professors tell us that
those who worship idols must have a limited conception of the
character and attributes of the Deity; thus conceding that idol-
atry consists in ascribing to God a false character. Well, now,
this is the very objection which we would urge as one of the
first, and one of the most serious charges against the Christian
system. It presents us with a cramped, dwarfish, and childish
conception of Deity. In the first place, the disciples of Chris-
tianity still cling to the old tradition, which they inherited from
the heathen, of investing God with the form and characteristics
of a man. For if the Deity possesses the human form, as they
and their Bible teach, then he must possess the human character-
istics,— a logical sequence, which science defies all Christendom
to overturn, as it is the infallible testimony of the natural his-
torj of all time that nothing can possess the form of one being
and the characteristics of another. As is form, so is and must
be the character, is an axiom supported by numberless proofs
of daily and hourly observation. Hence, Jesus Christ possess-
ing, according to the scriptures, the form of a man, — “ the form
of a servant,” —must inevitably have possessed the character of
a man. Hence we are not surprised to find, that, in spite of the
combined efforts of his evangelical biographers to make him a
God (if they are really to be understood as designing to ele-
vate him to the Godhead), his finite human qualities are dis-
played in his history in every chapter. Every saying and every
credible incident of his life prove him to have been a man, not-
withstanding some of them are apparently set forth as prima-
facie evidence of his being a God. Therefore the conclusion
 206

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

that, as Jesus Christ Had the form of a man, he could not have
been a God ; and to worship him as such was and is idolatry in
the highest and fullest sense. And, besides the form, there are
other evidences of his having been a man. He walked, talked,
ate, slept, wept, shed tears, &c., and finally died just as other
men do. And, furthermore, he believed and taught some of the
traditions and superstitions of finite, ignorant men, — such as a
vengeful God, an endless hell, disease produced by demons, a
personal devil, the speed}7* conflagration of the world, &c. Thus
we have a threefold proof of his manhood, and disproof of his
Godhead, and a proof that those who worship him are idolaters.
And as the primitive or primordial Bible God Jehovah is rep-
resented as possessing, as we have alread}" shown, a compre-
hensible body, e}^es, nose, mouth, hands, arms, legs, feet,
bowels, &c., and as being a jealous, angry, revengeful, fighting
God (the God of battles), and inferior in several respects to
some of the men who worshiped him, such worship is conse-
quently idolatry. We observe, then, that the Jews worshiped one
idol (Jehovah) ; and the Christians, three (“ Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost ”), —the two former possessing the form of man,
and the latter the form of a bird (a dove). There is exactly
the same objection, and it is to exactly the same extent idol-
atry, to worship Jesus Christ as to worship Chrishna, Confu-
cius, Mahomet, or any of the wooden Gods or graven images
of the idolatrous pagans. In each case it is assuming that God,
instead of being eternally infinite in all his attributes, has
been invested with the finite, limited, and comprehensible form
of man, to say nothing of the corresponding finite qualities
which his worshipers have assigned him. And this narrow,
childish assumption, with its attendant conceptions, keeps the
mind of the worshiper in an intellectually cramped and dwarf-
ish condition, besides perpetuating their dishonorable and dis-
paraging views of Deity. And herein lies the great objection
to idolatry. If any of these venerated beings could possess
divine attributes, there would be less moral objection to wor-
shiping them as Gods. The error is not in ascribing divine
attributes to the wrong being, but in the conception of wrong
qualities and attributes as comprehensible in a divine being.
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

207

Offline PrometheusTopic starter

  • BeautifullDisgrace
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nl
  • Location: Tholen
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Sign: Libra

For God is not possessed of tlie vanity to be offended by the
simple mistakes of men and women directing their prayers and
devotions to another being or object instead of to him. The
grand error consists in mistaking the real character and attri-
butes of Deity; that is, in constructing false images of him, —
whether mental or material is all the same. In other words,
idolatry consists in worshiping, for God, beings or objects pos-
sessing finite forms, with whom, consequently, infinite and divine
attributes could not be properly associated, and through whom
they could not possibly be displayed. And so self-evident was
the proof that these beings, possessing the form, size, and
physical outline of men, and presenting every appearance of
men (as Christ, Chrishna, Confucius, &c.), were nothing but
men, that even those who were habitually taught to adore them
as the supreme, omnipotent Deity, naturally and instinctively,
in their intercourse with them and their descriptions of them,
invested them with human qualities as well as divine. And
thus they came to present to the world the awkward and ludi-
crous figure of beings displaying both finite and infinite attri-
butes,— i.e., of being demi-gods, half God and half man.
This is especially true of u the man Christ Jesus.’’ And it
may be safely assumed as an incontrovertible proposition, that
just so long as men are in the habit of worshiping beings in
the human form, whether Jehovah or Jesus Christ, or beings
possessing any conceivable form as the great UI am,” just so
long will they entertain, to their own injury and to the disgrace
of religion, inferior and dishonorable views of God. They
must learn that a finite body can not contain an infinite spirit,
nor possess an infinite attribute ; and that to worship an object
or being known to possess or even supposed to possess any con-
ceivable form, size, or shape within the comprehension of man,
whether the materials composing this adored object or being are
gold, silver, wood, brass, iron, or flesh and blood (as in the case
of Jesus Christ), constitutes the highest species of idolatry.
It can make no difference what the materials are, as it is just as
impossible to associate divine and infinite attributes with an
image of flesh and blood or a finite body, as to associate them
with an image of wood, stone, or metal. All is alike idolatry.
 208

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

The Christian world have an image or idol, constructed in
part of flesh and blood, restricted, as they tell us, to a spiritual
body, which they call Jesus Christ, and which they place upon
an imaginary throne situated in or above the clouds, and wor-
ship it as God; while the Babylonians had the same image
carved from wood and metal, which they called Dagon, and set
upon a throne in the temple: and, in both cases, we are told, by
way of apology, that it was not the external form, or outward
bod}T, which constituted the divinity, but the spirit within. Now,
as there is room in infinite space for millions of such beings
(such finite Gods), there could be no moral objection to mul-
tiplying their number, and worshiping as many of them as the
imagination could conjure up, or the polytheist’s fancy could
create. We worship none but the infinite God; the living,
moving, all-pervading, and all-energizing spirit of the infinite
universe, who has no finite or comprehensible body, and never
had; and hence, being infinite in extent and in all his attri-
butes, but one such being can possibly exist, and monotheism
thus becomes a virtue and a necessity. We will only remark
further, that the man who can worship a being with the human
form or any form as the infinite God, no matter if he swells
his proportions by imagination to the size of the planet Jupiter
or the whole solar system, yet still, as this is not one step of an
approach toward infinitude or omnipresence, his conceptions of
Deity are puerile, childish, belittling, and dishonorable, if not
blasphemous. If there is such a thing as blasphemy, it is
found here. And his ignorance of the essential characteris-
tics of an infinite being, or the scientific view of God, is on a
par with the child’s ignorance of astronomy, who exclaims,
“ Give me the moon ! ” Here we desire to apprise the reader
more distinctly that we do not regard idolatry as a crime or
blamcworth}” act in those who originated it, but actualty useful
when restricted to its legitimate uses. To those groveling in
spiritual darkness, on the lower plane of religious development,
it is as 44 eyes to the blind, and crutches to the lame.” It is
only in those, who, like Christians, profess to be enlightened,
that it becomes a culpable act. Several writers have shown
that idols were really practically useful, in a religious point of
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

209

view, in the primitive spiritual condition of mankind, and are
yet so to the lower classes in various countries; that is, to
those who dwell upon the sensorial plane, and whose spiritual per-
ceptions are hence too feeble to soar to an ethereal world to find
the great object of spiritual worship. The learned Hindoo,
Roh Mun Roy, who wrote a work against idolatry, and who
condemned the Christian churches for 6 4 worshiping an idol in
the person of Jesus Christ,” beautifully sets forth the true na-
ture and purpose of idolatry when he says (after stating that
idols were not made for the learned), 44 The Yedas [Hindoo
Bible] directs those who are spiritually incapable of adoring the
invisible Supreme Being to apply their minds to some visible
object as an external manifestation of the only true God, rather
than lose themselves in the mazes of irreligion, the bane of
society. As God exists everywhere, and pervades everything
(even idols), such means were mercifully provided for the
ignorant and untrained to lead them on to true mental adora-
tion and spiritual worship.55 And thus idols were used as
aids and stepping-stones to the true worship for those who were
mentalty incapable of raising their minds from 4 4 nature up to
nature’s God,55 as taught by this heathen writer. Thus they
served the same purpose as pictures do for children, and were
equally innocent and useful. It is, therefore, no more sinful to
be an idolater than to be a child. In fact, idolatry was a neces-
sity of man’s religious nature. The Yedas makes God say,44 The
ignorant believe me visible while I am invisible.55 The able,
pious Abel Fezzel (a Mahomedan writer) says, in his 44 Aren
Akberry,” 44 The Brahmins and Hindoos all believe in the unity
of the God-head ; yet they hold images in high veneration, be-
cause they represent celestial beings, and prevent the mind from
wandering.” Swedenborg says in like manner, 44 The heathen
kept images not only in their temples, but in their houses, not
to worship them, but to call to mind the heavenly being they
represented.” Thus it will be observed that the idol was the
sanctuary where man, in his childhood, met to commune with
his God, just as the Christian now seeks his spiritual presence
at the communion-table or the altar. The pagan, who was a
child in religious experience, was morally necessitated to have
 210

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

a God, or representation of God, he could see, feel, and handle.
And it is remarkable that the Christian world, after two thou-
sand years’ religious experience, still occupy the same plane, —
are still pagans or children with respect to believing in visible
external Gods, as they virtually worship two, Jehovah and Jesus
Christ, who, according to the teaching of their Bible and their
established creeds, were often seen in the human form, and
one of them with a human body. Thus it will be observed they
have not outgrown or advanced beyond the essential principle
of idolatry, —that of worshiping a visible or imaginary form for
an invisible God, who, the u positive philosophy” teaches,
never has been and never can be seen under any circumstances,
because, being omnipresent (that is, present everywhere, and
everywhere alike), if he could be seen at all, he could be
seen at all times and in all places. This is a self-evident, axi-
omatic truth.

Origin of Idolatry. —Here we deem it proper to speak more
directly and specifically of the primary origin of idolatry, or
image-worship, than is disclosed in the preceding pages. After
the primitive inhabitants of the earth had conceived the notion
that the sun, moon, and stars are moved in their orbits through
the heavens by beings who occupied them (as has alread}" been
shown), the}^ were in the habit of gazing upon these tower-
lights of the Elysian fields (the home of the Gods) with the
most intense delight, the most reverential awe and devotion.
But ever and anon this pleasing reverie was interrupted, and
subjected to sad suspense, by 66 the departure of the heavenly
host to other and distant lands.” First of all, the solar God,
mounted upon his gem-wlieeled chariot drawn by his fleet steeds,
after plowing his wa}T through the deep-blue vault of the sky,
was off on his swift-sped journey behind the western hills, but
followed almost immediately by the whole retinue of stellar orbs
(the homes of the lesser Gods), who danced along in his wake;
but, ever true to the line of march, followed on apace, and
were soon beyond the bounds of human vision. This left an
aching void in their devout minds. Hence the invention and
construction of images as imaginary likenesses of the Gods, to
serve as substitutes for them, to be venerated in their stead
 PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.

211

during their absence, as we secure the likeness of a friend when
about to leave us for a journey, or to be long absent. And
here we may date the primary origin of idolatry, which is noth-
ing more nor less than the first rude germination of man’s
religious nature.

II.   All Christians Atheists or Idolaters.

It seems most strikingly strange that atheism and idolatry
should be considered by the orthodox representatives of the
Christian faith as 6 ‘ the most God-defying and heaven-daring sins
that man can be guilty of” (as one Christian writer represents
them to be), when there is not a professor of the Christian faith,
and never has been, who was not guilty most unquestionably
of one of these sins. It requires but a few words to prove this
statement. Nearly all the early Christian writers defined atheism
to be u disbelief in a personal God,” and idolatry as u image-
making.” How obtuse must have been their perceptions that
they could not see that their definition of these terms made
them all either atheists or idolaters, and that it is impossible
to escape one of these charges without becoming obnoxious to
the other! No person can believe in a personal God without
forming an image of him in the mind ; and this is just as much
idolatry as though that mental image should find expression in
wood or stone or brass, as shown in the preceding chapter.
On the other hand, to believe in an infinite and spiritual God,
instead of a personal God, is, as shown above, atheism. It will
be seen, then, to believe in a personal, organized Deity is, to
all intents and purposes, idolatry; while to reject this anthro-
pomorphic and sensuous idea, and accept the belief in a spiritual
God in its stead, is atheism. And thus the position is reduced
to a demonstrated problem, that all Christians are either athe-
ists or idolaters.
 212

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

NEW-TESTAMENT ERRORS.

I. Divine Revelation Impossible and Unnecessary.

The Hindoos, Egyptians, Persians, Chaldeans, Jews, and
Mahomedans, and various other nations, claim to have had a
special revelation of God’s will communicated to them for the
benefit of the whole human race. But the following facts and
arguments will tend to show that no such revelations have ever
been made, and that there is none necessary : —

We will inquire, in the first place, what a divine revelation
would be. Coming from a perfect being, it would of course be
perfect, and perfectly adapted to the moral and spiritual wants
of the whole human race. Such a revelation would be so clear,
explicit, and unequivocal in its language with respect to every
doctrine, principle, and precept, and eveiy statement of fact,
that no person of ordinary mind could possibly misunderstand
it; and no two persons could differ for a moment with respect
to the meaning of an}r text embraced in it. It would need no
priest and no commentator to explain it; and, if any attempt
should be made to explain it, it would only “ darken counsel,”
render the matter more obscure, and would amount to the blas-
phemous assumption that Omniscience can be enlightened, and
his works improved. And a divine revelation should be com-
municated to the whole human race; for, if restricted to one
nation, it would render God obnoxious to the charge of par-
tiality. And, in order to make it practicable to communicate it
to all nations, it would be necessary to comprehend it in a uni-
versal language constructed for the purpose, or else impart it to
the world through all the three thousand languages in use by
different nations and tribes. But, as such a revelation has never
been made or known on the earth, it is at once evident that
 NEW-TESTAMENT ERRORS.

213

no such revelation has ever been communicated to man by Infi-
nite Wisdom.

II. Revelation for One Age. and Nation no Revelation

for Another.

A revelation issued two or three thousand years ago could
be no revelation for this age. The Rev. Jeremiah Jones admits
that 4 4 a revelation can only be a revelation to him who receives
it,” and can not be made use of to comince another (Canon,
p. 51). Bishop Burnet admits that a revelation to one man
is no revelation to another. You can neither see nor feel a
revelation made to another person. You can merely see the
marks on the paper on which he has recorded what he claims to
have been a revelation to him. And this is all the proof you
can have in the case, which is no proof at all.

III.   A Revelation on the Brain called Reason.

I know that God has inscribed a revelation on m3" brain called
reason, as it is ever present with me. Hence I know that it
was designed for me. But I can not have this testimonj- with
regard to a written revelation, as it was not communicated to
me. Hence, as a matter of certainty and safetj", I should
hold to m}T own revelation in preference to any other.

I can 011I3" be certain of m}r own revelation. Indeed I can
not know that any other revelation was designed for me, because
a dozen revelations are brought forward b}T different nations for
m3" acceptance ; and I can not determine to an absolute certainty
which is divine and which is human. To settle the matter, I
must have another revelation made express^ to me to inform
me which is the true revelation. To save this extra labor, I
might as well have had the original revelation itself.

IV.   The Human Brain Superior to xVny Revelation.

As an idiot can not be made to understand a revelation, it is
evident that a revelation presupposes a rational mind for its
reception; otherwise the revelation would be perfectly useless.
Hence it is evident the brain must be right before the revela-
tion is given, or it will not be able to understand it. This
 214

THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.

makes the brain superior to, and of higher authority, than reve-
lation.

The moment we begin to reason on the revelation of the
Bible, which we are compelled to do to determine which is the
true one, that moment we transfer the authority of the Bible to
the brain, and the brain thus becomes its judge and jury. The
reason sits in judgment over the Bible, and is thus proved to be
superior'to it. This is realized in the experience of every man
who is superior to an idiot; and thus the question of Bible
authority and superiority is at once and for ever settled. It is
proved to be inferior to reason, and subordinate to it, and dare
not advance a step beyond it.

V.   Infallible Revelation Impossible.

A Bible or revelation could only be infallible to a man or
woman of infallible understanding; that is, to an infallible
being. And, as no such being has ever existed, it is evident
that no infallible revelation has ever been issued.

VI.   Every Thing must be Infallible.

No infallible revelation could be of any practical use to
any person unless all the circumstances connected with it were
infallible. The language in which it is written must be infal-
lible ; the person receiving it must be infallible ; and the reader,
or his understanding, must also be infallible. But, as no such
state of things has ever existed, it follows that no infallible
revelation has ever been given to man, and is absolutely imprac-
ticable.