Click here for previous session

 

 

The Old Testament

[The Bible] has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood­
drenched history; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies. —Mark Twain, Letters from the Earth, Vol. II
Let’s begin by putting “two of every sort (of animal) into the ark,” and then …
Oh, wait. Was that “two of every sort,” as per Genesis 6:19, or seven of clean and two of
unclean animals, as per Genesis 7:2­3?
Hmm. Well, we’ve got up to 120 years to think about it, because that’s the limit
of the human lifespan, as per God’s promise in Genesis 6:3. So, just like Shem …
Oops. Bad example. Genesis 11:11 states, “Shem lived five hundred years …”
Oookay, forget Shem. So, just like Noah … Double Oops. Genesis 9:29 teaches,
“So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.” So let’s see,
Genesis 6:3 promised a lifespan limited to a hundred and twenty years, but a few verses
later both Shem and Noah broke the rule?
Whoa, time out.

Let’s look at Old Testament dates from a different angle. Here’s Genesis 16:16:
“Abraham was eighty­six years old when Hagar bore Ishmael to Abraham.” Genesis 21:5
tells us, “Now Abraham was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him.”
So let’s see, one hundred minus eighty­six, subtract the six from the first ten, nine minus
eight … I get fourteen. So Ishmael was fourteen when Isaac was born.
A bit later, in Genesis 21:8, we read, “So the child (Isaac) grew and was weaned.”
Now, weaning in the Middle East takes two years, according to ethnic custom. So tack
two onto fourteen, and Ishmael was sixteen before Sarah ordered Abraham to cast him
out (Genesis 21:10).
Fine.
So far.
A couple more verses, and Genesis 21:14­19 portrays the outcast Ishmael as a
helpless infant rather than an able­bodied, sixteen­year­old youth, as follows:
So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin
of water; and putting it on her shoulder, he gave it and the boy to Hagar,
and sent her away. Then she departed and wandered in the Wilderness of
Beersheba. And the water in the skin was used up, and she placed the boy
under one of the shrubs. Then she went and sat down across from him at a
distance of about a bowshot; for she said to herself, “Let me not see the
death of the boy.” So she sat opposite him, and lifted her voice and wept.
And God heard the voice of the lad. Then the angel of God
called to Hagar out of heaven, and said to her, “What ails you, Hagar?

Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is. Arise, lift
up the lad and hold him with your hand, for I will make him a great
nation.”
Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. And
she went and filled the skin with water, and gave the lad a drink.”
A sixteen­year­old youth described as a “boy” or a “lad?” In a time and place
when sixteen year­olds were commonly married and awaiting their second or third child
while supporting a growing family? In addition to being hunters, soldiers and, albeit
rarely, even kings on occasion? Sixteen years equated to manhood in Ishmael’s day. So
how exactly did his father give the sixteen year­old “boy,” Ishmael, to Hagar? And how
did she leave him crying (i.e., “the voice of the lad”) like a helpless baby under a shrub?
And how, precisely, did his mother lift him up and hold him with her hand? Lastly, are
we truly expected to believe that Ishmael was so frail that his mother had to give him a
drink, because he was unable to get it himself?
Uh, yes, that’s the gist of it. That’s what we’re supposed to believe.
But wait, there’s more.
2 Chronicles 22:2 teaches that “Ahaziah was forty­two years old when he became
king….” Hunh. Forty­two years old. Hardly seems worthy of mention. Unless, that is, we
note that 2 Kings 8:26 records, “Ahaziah was twenty­two years old when he became
king …” So which was it? Forty­two or twenty­two?
Let’s take a hint from the Bible. 2 Chronicles 21:20 teaches that Ahaziah’s father,
King Jehoram, died at the age of forty.

Ahem.
King Jehoram died at the age of forty and was succeeded by his son, who was
forty­two? In other words, King Jehoram fathered a child two years older than himself?
Arithmetic, according to Mickey Mouse, is “Being able to count up to twenty without
taking off your shoes.” But between the reader’s toes and all appendages of the family
cat, there’s no way to make sense of these figures. And while the logical conclusion
approaches ramming speed, 2 Chronicles 22:1 points out that Ahaziah was King
Jehoram’s youngest son, for raiders had killed all Jehoram’s older sons.
So if Ahaziah was two years older than dear departed Dad, how many years did
his older brothers have on their father?
Obviously, 2 Chronicles 22:2 can’t be trusted and 2 Kings 8:26, which teaches
that Ahaziah was twenty­two when he became king, must be the correct version.
So King Jehoram died at forty (2 Chronicles 21:20) and was succeeded by
Ahaziah, who was twenty­two (2 Kings 8:26). Which means King Jehoram was eighteen
when Ahaziah was born, and roughly seventeen when he was conceived. Not only that,
but Jehoram had older sons (2 Chronicles 22:1), so he must have started his family at the
age of fifteen or less. So much for Ishmael having been a helpless lad at the age of
sixteen. It was a time when teenagers were men.
But what about 2 Chronicles 22:2, which states that Ahaziah was forty­two when
he assumed the throne?
A copying error, no doubt.
But that’s not the point.

 

 

…….continue reading……

Click here for previous session

 

 

BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE

 

There is only one religion, though there are a hundred versions of it. —George Bernard Shaw, Plays Pleasant
and Unpleasant, Vol. 2, Preface
The common theme that runs through all religions is that if we believe in God and
submit to His decree—obeying the commanded and avoiding the forbidden, and
repenting our transgressions to Him—we will achieve salvation. The difference is in
defining God’s decree. Jews consider the Old Testament the endpoint of revelation at
present, whereas Christians and Muslims alike contend that if the Jews followed their
scripture, they would accept Jesus as a prophet and embrace his teachings.  Muslims carry the thought a step further by asserting that anybody (Jewish,
Christian, or otherwise) who does embrace Jesus’ teachings has to acknowledge that he
taught strict monotheism, Old Testament Law, and to coming of the final prophet. But in
fact, most who claim to follow Jesus don’t follow what Jesus taught, but rather what others taught about Jesus. In this manner, Paul (and the Pauline theologians who
followed in his wake) usurped Jesus in the derivation of Christian canon. And yet we find
the Old Testament cautioning us:
“Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not
add to it nor take away from it. If there arises among you a prophet or a
dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or
the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go
after other gods’—which you have not known—‘and let us serve them,’
you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams,
for the LORD your God is testing you to know whether you love the
LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk
after the LORD your God and fear Him, and keep His commandments and
obey His voice; you shall serve Him and hold fast to Him” (Deut. 12:32–
13:4).
Despite this warning, Paul proclaimed a construct of God which “you have not
known.” The theological morass derived from Paul’s mysticisms is unavoidably thick and
confusing. Many, if not most, worshippers are not aware of the questionable origins of
their religion’s doctrine, and simply trust a charismatic leader (pastor, priest, pope, etc.)
and commit their path to his (or her’s). Once that choice is made, the followers become
confirmed believers in a religious construct of men, which as we have seen, significantly
conflicts with the teachings of Jesus himself. Monotheistic Christians, on the other hand, recognize that charismatic leaders, though convincing, are frequently astray, and struggle
to adhere to scripture instead.
This isn’t always easy, as anyone who attempts to distill God’s teachings from the
Old and New Testaments knows. The broad guidelines (to believe in God, His prophets
and revelation) and laws (e.g., the Ten Commandments) are clear. The finer points are
not, and to this the tremendous variety of Jewish and Christian sects and churches, and
the depth and breadth of their differences, testifies.  Where, then, does this leave the serious seeker? To give up on religion, as many
have? Or to seek a final, clarifying book of revelation, as conveyed by the final prophet
predicted by both Old and New Testaments?
What follows is an analysis of the Old and New Testaments, not to validate them
as scripture, but rather to expose the many errors and inconsistencies which betray their
corruption. The purpose of this book is not to shake the faith of those who revere these
texts as scripture, but to redirect that faith where these texts direct it themselves. In the
face of modern textual criticism, we deceive ourselves (as well as invite ridicule and
condemnation) if we believe the Old or New Testaments to be the unadulterated Word of
God. However, if we recognize the errors of the Jewish and Christian bibles and
understand the significance of these errors, this understanding might direct our search for
guidance.
After reading the following chapters, those wishing to continue that search may
do so in the sequel to this book, God’ed, which extends the analysis first to the Holy
Qur’an, and then to the prophets. In the same manner that the scriptures demand analysis so too must we validate the prophets if we are to trust the revelation they claimed to have
transmitted.

 

 

……continue reading…..