So much for the bible demoralization. Ch. v. The ages of mankind assumed by the bible, prove, by all the laws of physiology, ignorance of the times, and leave us uncertain whether years were months or not.

When the world was destitute of science, it proves itself inaccurate in most of its important points.

The ancients lived several centuries! What fixed the years for that obscure period ? Was there science to decide whether the years were not months? Have we any authority but tradition; and is not tradition fable when it is not history?

Instead of degenerating, man is actually improving in the social circle of being. “24. And Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him.” What an absurd falsehood about Enoch! The direct translation of Enoch to God is against all the principles of life. If they pretend to mean God Almighty, they lied outrageously, as

his word proves.

All mortals die, by the principles of physiology. The change of death is essential for spiritual existence. Death is one of the works of God Almighty.

Every page of this bible teems with preposterous falsehood. decide which is most absurd, the familiarity of God with man, his inability of resistance to the serpent that spoke a reptile low in intellect and morals, or his translating Enoch. All this is priestcraft.

The bible is an idol worship. Faith is an idol, because power and money are the idols. Only get the mass to believe, that is all that is requisite. This is the world. Who can dare affirm that man is exempt from death?

All things are possible with the peculiar god of the Jews, even to lies. For the peculiar god always read their priestocracy.

V. 29. Because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed.

If the God of the universe had not had omniscience and forethought, then he might have done this. As a god cursed the ground, it proves afterthought of the priestocracy who wrote for their peculiar god. But how imbecile and self-contradictory, when he

saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was (not only good but) very good.” Curses and evils are not the God's of the universe, hence they belong to this clique.

Chapter sixth of Genesis gives us a fabulous view of the marriage of the sons of God with the daughters of men. If all this does not prove a second race, a diversity of human species, then all such book is a mixture of fable and confused history. What better could we expect of shepherd writers, men of the second age of the world, preparing the mind of the faithful, the credulous, for miracles, prophecies and monstrous stories? People lived to most extraordinary ages, had most extraordinary size, excessive wickedness, all by the mind-jugglery of the priestocracy. Their god only saw by experience and after-thought, what was only the property of man, if we believe the bible stories. His forethought would have told him what man would be, and clearly proves that all this is an absurdity of man's fictions.

To say as the bible says, “and it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart," is to propagate a libel on God's attributes, especially as "God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually," so contradictory to the statement previously made, “and God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” And the Lord decides by this bible statement, to destroy all animated nature, except that of the sea. Why was that reserved : Because the bible, alias libel authors, could not devise in their absurd schemes and pusillanimous minds, any plan to destroy that? Their peculiar god had to compromise on that position, Was that humanity, to destroy the land-brute creation, for men's sins. How much better was it that the God of the universe presided over the world's conservation, despite of the peculiar pretences ! “But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.” And was it not as easy for the world to find grace in the eyes of the Lord in all its ages, as well before as after Noah, Christ, the priestocracy? What had they, mortals, to do with any grace but their own ? Nothing could possibly prevent the reception, as long as the creator of mind could dispense grace. But “ Noah was a just man, and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God,” however contradictory to all truth and its reason, in walking with the God of the universe. Noah was of the pulpit-priestocracy, and had the telling of his own tale, however impossible it was for tradition to be accurate as regards the vast generations of men, unsupported as it is clearly by any god-inspiration that is worth mind's attention. All was the inspiration peculiar of the priestocracy, not any inspiration at all. V. 17. And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life from under heaven: and every thing that is in the earth shall die. 18. But with thee will I establish my covenant, 19. Two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark. 20. Of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind.How preposterous was it to conduct through oceans of thousands of miles in width, two of every sort of animated nature of the earth, the very thing that was to be avoided by the ark. Had these wise men ever conceived of another continent and ocean? How are they caught. Some animals are covered with heavy woolly coats that, when wet, would sink them. All had to forego climate, and all the peculiarities of animated nature, to the silly conception of an addled-brain priestocracy. To what world-absurdities will not peculiar faithites reduce themselves But how could there be a universal deluge? They had declared for the theatrical exhibition of their peculiar preacher, Noah, who was most righteous, and yet who could only be one least free of sin—not certainly exempt, according to human nature. Nothing is impossible with their god, in the eyes of these men! But all things consistent with his godship are certainly impossible with God the immutable, and cannot be consistent with himself, as he is a perfect being. The earth of the priestocracy was a plane, easily deluged, but circumnavigation has proved God's earth to be nearly a sphere or a globe, and that has spoilt all their pretences. Had the writers dreamt that the waters were oceans instead of seas, and that their four-cornered plane was a globe, they would have fixed up the universal deluge more cautiously. The same waters of the earth could only be used after all--they could only return to the bed of the ocean, absorbed therein compatibly with the nature of currents. Where are their brains ? As the earth is, all the waters collectable in the clouds could not drown the whole earth, and the abstraction of more water from other globes would derange the universe.

So all the matter is quieted at once, as an impossibility.

And God's creation of earth, but the ark and contents, was destroyed, when a wiser action could have prevented that creation, as God is just and perfect. Honest sense on this, if on no other point, decides the right position.

Ch. vii., v. 20." And the mountains were covered." This kills the deluge, as all this is conclusively contradicted by exact science, God's mouthpiece.

The ante-human world was when water and earth separated to their right position. “There are frequently found, in places leagues from the sea, and even on the tops of high mountains, whole trees and bones of animals; even fishes entire ; sea-shells petrified and sunk deep under ground, which the best naturalists (geologists) are agreed could never have come there but by the deluge.”Buck.

Where are the bones of man? Are they found there?
If not, of what avail is the theory of the deluge ?

All ancient nations had an idea of floods and deluges from these signs first mentioned. • In India, also, Sir William Jones has discovered that in the oldest mythological books of that country there is such an account of the deluge as corresponds sufficiently with that of Moses." Or is it not that of an anterior doctrine ? Geology proves man the culminating point of creation.


WHAT the barbarian writers of the peculiar-faith bibles mistook for universal deluges was only a mighty universal operation or elaboration of conservative principles. To these same worthies the world is indebted for the sun rising and setting for the earth exclusively. What humanity was it to destroy all the brute creation for man? Even in Egypt, in regard to the cattle. Surely the priestocracy are a curse to all animated creatures, which they sacrificed on all occasions, but the fish, and those defied and defeated the poor stupid dolts. No thanks to them that the fish were not drowned or burnt up, as with all their ingenuity it could not be brought about.

The fish defeated the priestocracy, as the peculiar devil defeated their peculiar god in the peculiar creation. What a peculiar set of numbsculls !

We can see what kind of earth the priestocracy had. 1 Sam. ch. ii., v. 8. “ For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the world upon them.” 10. The Lord shall judge the ends of the earth.”

What an absurdity in talking about the universal deluge, which the Jew bible pretends to, when history well discloses, which is well evinced by the immense numbers of people soon after the time claimed, to be false. Of course all things are peculiar with the Jew-peculiar people. They had a peculiar deluge. It could not have been a universal one, as it is eternally estopped from all such by God's earth, which is different from the peculiar-bible creation, that presented a four-cornered prodigy or abortion, resting on pillars.

According to Rollin, who quotes Callisthenes for carrying the origin of the Babylonians to one hundred and fifteen years after this deluge of the bible.

That is about the time of Nimrod, the father of Ninus. He enlarged his conquests by his own troops and powerful succors from the Arabians, conquered a large extent of country from Egypt as far as India and Bactriana, " which he did not then venture to attack.” Why build Nineveh so large and with such powerful walls, but for the populousness of the times. Nineveh, the city he built, was fortified and adorned with fifteen towers, two hundred feet high. After he had finished this prodigious work, building the city of Nineveh sixty miles in circumference, he resumed his expedition against the Bactrians.

Ctesias, who had access to the court of Persia, states that his army was over one million nine hundred thousand men. · Ninus made himself master of a great number of cities, and at last laid siege to Bactria, the capital of the country," which he took with the aid of his wife, Semiramis, finding therein a great treasure. Now the people of the opposing side were vastly numerous, and bear evident marks, by numbers and treasure, of a high antiquity. Not only that, but we must look at the real state of mind so cultivated as to bring about all these grand results, indisputably above the Jews in their best days, and of course showing a better peculiar faith. Now the Jew must have gotten of this very source. Eight people, according to the Jew bible of the peculiar flood, replenish the Jew earth in that time and to that extent, when it took four hundred and thirty years from the time of the peculiar promise to Abraham, who had then a large household, to increase to six hundred thousand persons ! But the jesuitical caviller may affect to estimate the peculiar longevity as some aid ; but that remains, as all other bible peculiarities, to be proved. The thing is as bad as the insects crossing the oceans to avoid the very difficulty that they thus thereby encounter. Of all the impostor-dolts and blockheads, the bible writers exceed all, not only for foolish legends, but for striving to make the world as ignorant and mean as themselves. They not only seek to render the world ignorant, but to keep it at that state to promote their nefarious views.

We have panoramas of the deluge that amount to only fancy sketches. The ancients could not analyze anything complex. They saw traces of local and partial deluges, but those were not universal. T'he very tides of the ocean would repudiate all such solecisms. The world has to get rid of all such miserable rubbish, fit for barbarians.

V. l. For thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.
How does this compare with Noah's drunkenness, and cursing an innocent grand-

son ?


Ch. viii. 20. And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord ; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

Noah proved himself a good priest in building an altar unto the peculiar god, who was pleased by smelling a sweet savor, to say in his heart not to curse the ground any more for man's sake. So great a priest was Noah. So great a revolution was thus effected by Noah, that “while the earth remaineth, seed-time and harvest shall not cease,” whatever Elijah said to the contrary. Thus will the bible priestocracy tie themselves forever, and contradict themselves most disreputably for inspired men. Honest truth would become them. Ch. ix. 9. And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after

12. And God said, 13. I do set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be for a token of a.covenant between me and the earth. 14. And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud.,

But the token of the covenant is the rainbow, a natural phenomenon on the reflection of the sun's rays on a cloud, and which, fortunately for the bible, belongs to the effect of the rays of the sun on the particles of water thrown up even by an engine, a natural phenomenon illustrated by a prism. All this is below the dignity of mind. The writers were numbsculls.

The writers of the universal deluge affect to know, that the rainbow was a compact against any more such deluges by God. Now, mere prisms of glass prove the refraction of the sun's rays, and the school-boy excels their Moses in true science. It is a shame, not that Moses and his priestocracy knew so little, but that the moderns should know no more, and be gulled by impudent impostor priestocracy.

The deluge has been more of blood than of water, for peculiar faiths. The world would never have heard of the first persecution, blood, massacre, had any been true. The result reflects on the partisans, their vindictiveness, passions, and all that.

As to the division of the earth among the sons of Noah, it is not also in the power of tradition that is remote, to give us an accurate account. Who can affirm of tradition? Who can testify to its first settlers, when ancient history is so deficient ?

21. And he (Noah) drank of the wine, and was drunken ; and he was uncovered within his tent.

Alas, the drunken priest! That Noah was a righteous man, his drunkenness forbids, when his nakedness was exposed, and his unjust curses of his son's son were blasphemously uttered. What will not a priest do?. It was important to state the power of priest's curses, however unjust on an inoffensive unborn generation, however ferocious The fanaticism. Does a priest ever forgive aught against himself, though he foolishly condemns his own posterity of which his high-mindedness should have prevented right minds.

But it was essential to curse Canaan to get at his land, as if the priestocracy could be possibly justified in such iniquities. And he (the priest) said, cursed be Canaan ; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. Who can say aught to this as correct, or to any abomination growing out of it as prophecy? 26. And he said, blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

The children of Israel, descendants of Shem, were servants, by Moses' account, for four centuries in Egypt. 27. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

The Canaanites were conquered, slaughtered and despoiled of their lands, by the Jews who libeled them with savage ferocity. Of all the abominable stupidity, that of the priestocracy is the meanest. The children of Shem, were Elam and Asshur, &c. And the Abrahamites were also in captivity for seventy years under the Assyrians worse than that, they were also under those very Canaanites.

Ch. xi. 1. And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. The dif. ference of language proves different races, and natural causes acting thereon.

To make out the unity of the human family, it was expedient to make out the unity of language, and if the preceding race destroyed were more wicked, surely those that were left, were the most foolish. What is the tower of Babel? A fable? 4. “ And they said, go to, let us build a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven ; and let us make a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth." What ignorance in the people, having no science ? Who? who but the priestocracy? Where and what is heaven? Surely not the concave ether. Lest we be scattered abroad : that is what was essential, necessary and unavoidable. But the worst was the peculiar “ Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded," and it was concluded by him, as the people were one, and they all had one language, that nothing would be restrained from them which they have imagined to do, unless there was a confusion of tongues.

So their language was confounded, and the people were scattered from building the city Babel. And yet unity of language is one of the very best benefits that will promote civilization of the world most speedily. It is the game of priestocracy, to disunite the people.

The diversity of language helps to prove the diversity of race. What a libel on science, the bible is! Its seal of condemnation is on its face forever. This was the little god of Judaism, the little sense-god. The people were scattered from the best natural causes, and have built thereby the cities of the world. The authors assume to be very particular about the old names ; now if they could not give true histories, how could they give true traditions ?

As Abraham, the head of Judaism, is taken from Ur, of the Chaldees, it is very satisfactory to conclude that the tenets of the bible originated from that circle, modified by the changes of time and the knowledge of a more diffused circle, that is as mind advanced. To build up a foundation, it was expedient to refer the priestocracy to the peculiar god's own acts.

Thus we have the calling of Abraham, and the origin of the Hebrew state. And now we see the curse of prophecy ; Abraham was introduced into the land of Canaan, who had been cursed by the priest Noah, alias the priestocracy writers, and because his grandfather cursed him, an inoffensive being, in his drunkenness, Abraham was to be blessed by robbery of his possessions! This is priestocracy's logic. Abram, &c., went forth from Ur, of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan : xii. 5. and into the land of Canaan they (Abram, &c.) came. n And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, unto thy seed will I give this land.” Who endorses this pretence? This land now belongs to the Turks. This, then, is a false prophecy fully condemnatory of the bible. 7. “And there builded he an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him." Well done, priest Abram. This was not the Lord of the universe, who is the God of rational beings.

And building altars in this land by Abraham, did not prove the rights of the priestocracy. But the priestocracy's right by their peculiar god's deeds of gift, is supreme, “ And the Lord said unto Abram, for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever;" a death blow to all prophecy and its peculiar gods. Now

Abraham proved himself a good priest, as he lied about his wife, when he came into Egypt. But the customs of the ancients might be plead in Abraham's justification, as there was perfidy among mankind. But then the peculiar lord of Abraham had blessed him; yet doubtless he had lied about the Lord, as he had about his wife. When a man, priest particularly, transcends the limits of truth intentionally, there is no end to the violation. None can be a priest, without personally by the very act lying. It is very clear by Abraham's lies and actions, that the world had been destroyed to little purpose, as perfidy of mankind was prominent. So the peculiar god who had a peculiar creation of heaven and earth, had peculiar labor, his peculiar deluge, in vain. If the worst part of mankind had not been left, it at least was equal to its predecessors. The peculiar organization of man's brain had to be altered, ere deluges did any good. As there is no proof that mind's organization was altered, it is conclusive proof that the priestocracy lied about the deluge. 17. “And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house, with great plagues, because of Sarai, Abram's wife.”

Who endorses all this; who affirms this to be truth? It seems that Pharaoh rebuked Abraham, for his duplicity and dissimulation, the characteristics of priestocracy. All this was natural to Abraham. But we suspect that the author's lies about the whole affair, are the worst of the whole.

As a proof that God had left a very bad set of people, this bible tells us, • But the men of Sodom were wicked, and sinners before the Lord exceedingly; and moreover the iniquity of the Amorites was not yet full. Ch. xiv. y. 18. And Melchisedek, king of Salem, brought forth the bread and wine : and he was the priest of the most high God. v. 19. And he blessed him, and said, blessed be Abram of the most high God.”—The highest peculiar god; the God Creator cannot have priests. One priest endorses the other priest; but who endorses this statement? Who can truthfully, and in good honest faith, endorse the whole? But the best is to follow-v. 20. And he gave him tithes of all. Here is Melchisedek, the tithing priest. Here is the foundation of priests confirmed. The proper appreciation of Melchisedek is that he was of the priestvcracy, a chief actor in the incipient drama. For his peculiar blessing on Abram, Melchisedek got the tithes of all. Here was the institution of tithes. And shall the dissimulator, the incestuous, the adulterer Abraham, be in a better position than the rest of the world, merely because the bible says, “ And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness”? Who endorses this for truth? After Abram falsified his word, he could not be believed. All rational minds will believe unmistakably in the God of the universe, if they look properly at the works of that universe, and most purely too, without any taint or corruption of priestocracy.

Shall bible visions and dreams be preferred, as in this instance, to the highest demonstration of God's creation before the universe ?

As a just and immutable perfect being, God gave all mankind, of all ages, their mind, with all their science of demonstrating his rule and religion. If the priestocracy had been honest, they would have acknowledged that it was mind, not they, that found out all such things. What an exhibition of the priestocracy, who have sought to prove their mission divine, by their own false pretences ? To prove their own exaltation, they have sought to disgrace the God of the universe to a peculiar imbecile god—that is themselves, not God, as that is impossible. Ch. xv. v. 1. After these things, the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision. What of that? 6. And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness. The whole rational world can easily be placed on the safe ground, not by visions, but by the highest proof of principles. That word of the Lord would be current to-day, if mind would permit the priestocracy.

Ch. xvi. The adultery of Abraham caused strife in his household. Polygamy is felony with us—yet not with this righteous patriarch, who is any and everything, as the dictatorial priestocracy decide, whether adulterer or not. They have lied for him, calling his concubine his wife. The priestocracy will do anything. 7. And the angel of the Lord, &c. God has conservative principles, not angels, to do the commands of the universe. He could have hardly sent after an adultress. The pretended inspired authors miss a figure here certainly. 11. Ishmael; because the Lord hath heard thy affliction. Now all this is legend. How could he give all such reasons? If Ishmael be the Arabs, the prophecy against him is against the Old and New Testaments; a death-blow to both. 12. And he will be a wild man, his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him. Whom had he to thank, but those that ought to have been his rightful protectors?

C. xxi. v. 20. And (he, Ishmael) dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer. What was he but an outlaw? What less could he be, but a robber? Who made him thus but the author of his existence, Abraham ?

« VorigeDoorgaan »