View Full Version : The Esoteric Teachings of Jesus and the Nazarene Essenes

Monday, December 19th, 2005, 04:49 PM
The Esoteric Teachings of Jesus and the Nazarene Essenes:


Monday, December 19th, 2005, 04:51 PM
SUNDRY HOLY HEBREW men of old, we are told on the authority of the name of the pseudo-first Jewish-Christian Pope, “spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter, i, 21). These literary movings of the Spirit were sometime reduced to writing in “Sacred Scriptures”; and again later Christian authority assures: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim. iii, 16),—though this is a falsified rendition: the true reading is: “Every scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired,” as the original Greek text is quoted by Father Tertullian. (ANF. iv, 16.) It is the popular supposition that the 66—(Catholic Bible 73)—“little books” which comprise the Bible as we know it, are the whole sum of Hebrew and Christian “sacred writings,” which have claimed and have been accorded the sanction of Divine inspiration and “treated by the Church as canonical.” The term “canonical” in ecclesiastical parlance means Books accepted as divinely inspired; books which “were definitely canonized, or adjudged to have a uniquely Divine or authoritative quality,” as is the authorative definition. (CE. iii, 267.) “Canonicity depends on inspiration.” (EB. i, 653.) The holy Hebrew “canon” was closed, or the last inspired Book of the Old Testament written, according to Jewish “Tradition,” by Ezra, about 444 B.C. (Ib. i, 658, 662.) In truth, however, several of the Books of the Old Testament were written much later, and were never heard of by Ezra; and “some found their way in, others not, on grounds of taste—the taste of the period,” says Wellhausen. (Einleitung, p. 652, 6th Ed.)
The popular idea is that when the “moving” of the above inspired 66 sacred writings was ended, the moving Spirit retired from the field of Hebrew, and later of Christian literature, and thus closed the “sacred canon” of the respective Hebrew and Christian Testaments. This will be seen to be a mistake, in the judgment of the True Christian Church, according to which the Jews evidently did not know their own inspired writings, and curiously omitted from their “canon” a number of divinely “moved” books and scraps of books, which the better-instructed Christian Church has adopted as full of inspiration into its own present official Bible, as we shall notice in its place. There is also a much greater number of such books, of both Hebrew and Christian origin, which the inspired Church formerly and for ages regarded as inspired and “canonical,” but which it now repudiates as “apocryphal” and acknowledges as forgeries; as we shall also duly note.
There is, indeed, an eminence mass of religious writings, the work of Jewish or Christian priests or professional religious persons, or composite productions of both sets of forgers, which are generally known as “apocrypha” or pious forgeries; but which each and all have been held by the Church through many ages of faith as of the highest inspired sanctity and accredited with the full rank of “canonical” truth of God.
The term apocryphal or forged “takes in those compositions which profess to have been written either by Biblical personages or men in intimate relation with them.” (CE. i, 601.) “Since these [apocryphal] books were forgeries, the epithet in common parlance today denotes any story or document which is false or spurious, ... apocryphal in the disparaging sense of bearing names to which they have no right; all come under the definition above, for each of then has at one tine or another been treated as canonical.” (EB. i, 249-250.)
That the above 66 (or 73) Books of the accepted Bible of Christianity come exactly, both as to manner of spurious origin and matter of fictional content, within the above definition of apocrypha or forgery, shall be made exceedingly evident. A brief review of these acknowledged religious forgeries in the name of God and of his inspired biographers, will afford a curious and instructive study of the workings of the fervid, credulous and contorted priestly mind, reckless of truth, and shed a floodlight of understanding on the origins and incredibility of the so-called “canonical” Books of the Bible, Hebrew and Christian alike.
While speaking here immediately of the Jewish Apocrypha or pious forgeries, it is to be noted and borne in mind that it is the Holy-Ghost-guided True Christian Church which alone has accepted and cherished these spurious productions of Jewish priestcraft—(scornfully repudiated by the Jews), has adulterated and re-forged them to more definite deceptive purposes of Christian propaganda, and has outdone Jewry by adding innumerable like forgeries,—“a whole literature” of fabrications—to its own spurious hagiography, or sacred writings. There will thus occur some necessary and unavoidable over-lappings of Jewish and Christian forgeries in the course of our treatment.
“It must be confessed,” admits the Catholic Encyclopedia, “that the early Fathers and the Church, during the first three centuries, were more indulgent towards Jewish pseudograph circulating under venerable Old Testament, names. The Book of Henoch [Enoch] and the Assumption of Moses had been cited by the canonical Epistle of Jude. Many Fathers admitted the inspiration of Fourth Esdras. Not to mention the Shepherd of Hermas, the Acts of St. Paul (at least in the Thecla portion) and the Apocalypse of St. Peter were highly revered at this and later periods. ... In the Middle Ages ... many pseudographic [i.e. forged] writings enjoyed a high degree of favor among both clerics and laity.” (CE. i, 615.)
A curious and edifying side-light on the chronic clerical flair for forgery is thrown by a sentence from the paragraph above quoted from the Catholic Encyclopedia. The earliest papal decree condemning certain of these pious forgeries is itself a Christian forgery! “The so-called ‘Decretum de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris,’ which contained a catalogue of some half-hundred works condemned as apocryphal, was attributed to Pope Gelasius (495), but, in reality is a compilation dating from the beginning of the Sixth century.” (CE,. i, 615.)
And, be it noted, these Christian forgeries were not at all condemned by the Church as forgeries and pious lies, but simply because they contained some dogmatic doctrines which were regarded by the Orthodox as “heresies” they were condemned “always, however, with a preoccupation against heresy.” And again in the same article: “Undoubtedly it was the large use heretical Circles, especially the Gnostics made of this insinuating literature which first called out the animadversions of the official guardians of doctrinal purity.” (Ib. p. 615.)
The same authority cautiously and clerically explains, that “ancient literature, especially in the Orient, used methods much more free and elastic than those permitted by our modern and occidental culture. Pseudographic [falsified] compositions was in vogue among the Jews in the two centuries before Christ and for some time later. This holds good for the so-called ‘Wisdom of Solomon,’ written in and belonging to the Church’s sacred cannon.—[This admits that this book of the Catholic Bible is spurious.] In other cases, where the assumed name did not stand as a symbol of a type of a certain kind of literature, the intention was not without a degree of at least literary dishonesty.” (Ib. p. 601.)
Apocryphal religious literature consists of several classes, one of the most important subdivisions being that designated as “apocalyptic,” and which consists of “pretended prophecies and revelations of both Jewish and Christian authorship, and dating from about 200 B.C. to about 150 A.D.,” the latter being the approximate date of the new “canonical” Books of the New Testament, Their general subject is the problem of the final triumph of what is called the Kingdom of God. Speaking particularly of the apocalypses, the best known of which are the Hebrew Book of Daniel, written about 165 B.C., and the Jewish-Christian Book of Revelation imputed to the Apostle John of Patmos, a recent secular authority (corroborated at all points by clerical authorities) points out that many if not all of the Jewish apocalypses are adulterated with “alterations and interpolations by Christian hands, making the alleged predictions, point more definitely to Jesus,” which pious tempering “gave certain of these Jewish works a very wide circulation in the early Church. ... The revelations and predictions are set forth as though actually received and written or spoken by ancient worthies, as Enoch, Moses, etc. ... They were once widely accepted as genuine prophecies, and found a warm reception in Jewish and early Christian circles.” (The New International, Encyclopedia, vol. i, p. 745.) This form of pious fraud is admitted as quite the expected thing: “Naturally basing itself upon the Pentateuch and the Prophets, it clothed itself fictitiously with the authority of a patriarch or prophet who was made to reveal the transcendent future” (CE. i, 602),—most usually long ex post facto.
The vast and varied extent of Jewish-Christian forgery of religious books is shown by the groupings under which the several kinds of apocrypha forgeries are quite exhaustively considered in the technical works treating of them, such as the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Encyclopedia Biblica, as well as the more popular Britannica and New International Encyclopedias, where the subject is fully discussed. “Speaking broadly,” says the first, “The Apocrypha of Jewish origin are coextensive with what are styled of the Old Testament, and those of Christian origin the apocrypha of the New Testament. The subject will be treated [”according to their origin”]—as follows: (I) Apocrypha of Jewish origin: (II) Jewish Apocrypha with Christian accretions; (III) apocrypha of Christian origin, comprising (1) apocryphal Gospels; (2) Pilate literature and other apocrypha concerning Christ; (3) apocryphal Acts of Apostles; (4) apocryphal doctrinal works; (5) apocryphal Epistles; (6) apocryphal Apocalypses, (IV) the apocrypha and the Church.” (CE. i, 601.)
What a catalogue of confessed ecclesiastical forgers, and fraud in the name of God, Christ and his Apostles, and the Church of God, for the propaganda of priestly frauds as “our Most Holy Faith”!
What will probably—In view of the foregoing and what is yet to come—be appreciated by many as a peculiarly rare bit of apocrypha (in its secondary sense) is the following, uttered apparently with the due and usual ecclesiastical solemnity, in the celebrated Dictatus of Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085), stating the presumptuous pretenses of the Papacy:

[I]“The Roman Church has never erred, nor will it err to all eternity. No one may be considered a Catholic Christian who does not agree with the Catholic Church. No book is authoritative unless it has received the papal sanction. ... The pope is the only person whose feet are to be kissed by all princes”; “the Pope may depose emperors and absolve subjects from allegiance to an unjust ruler.” (Cited by Robinson, ‘The Ordeal of Civilization, pp. 126, 128; Library of Original Sources, vol. iv, p. 126-321.)
This puts the stamp of canonical inspiration and verity on some dozen Jewish books and parts of books of the Catholic Bible which the Jews and the whole body of otherwise discordant sects of Protestants hesitate not unanimously to pronounce apocryphal and forged. These “apocrypha” are either entire rejected Jewish books, all doubtless with Christian “interpolations,” or apocryphal chapters or parts, interpolated probably by the same industry into the equally apocryphal books of the accepted Jewish canon. The names of these books, original and interpolations, and which are not included in the Hebrew Old Testament, -- but are in the True Church Bible,—are: Tobit, Judith, Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach (or Ecclesiastics), I and II Maccabees, Prayer of Manasseh, Additions to Esther, and Additions to the Book of Daniel, consisting of the Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Holy Children (in the Fiery Furnace), the History of Susannah, the History of Bel and the Dragon, and sundry such precious fables. (See CE. iii, pp. 267, 270; iv, 624, passim.) These are all included in the Greek Septuagint and in the Latin Vulgate, were read as Scripture in early Christian Church, and were declared by the Council of Trent, at its Fourth Session, in 1546,—under the Curse of God on all skeptical doubters,—to be “inspired and canonical”; and they are so held by the Roman, and some of the Greek and Oriental Catholic Churches, but are declared “apocrypha” and forged by Jewry and all the rest of Christendom. To several of these extra-revelations of Judaism included in the Christian True Bible, head-notes apologetic for their inclusion are attached, of which that to the celebrated Book of Tobit or Tobias is typical: “Protestants have left it out of their modern Bibles, alleging that it is not in the canon of the Jews. But the Church of Christ, which received the Scriptures not from the Jews, but from the Apostles of Christ,—[who were all Jews, to believe the Christian record]—by traditions from them, has allowed this book a place in the Christian [sic] Bible from the beginning.” (See Cath. Bible, Tobit, et passim). We may admire in synopsis the divine inspiration of
This Book of Tobit, or Tobias, scoffed both by Jews and Protestants as a ridiculous fable, but held by all True Believers as a precious revelation of God, to disbelieve which is to be damned, is a veritable treasure-trove of exalted heavenly inspiration, for the preservation of which Jew and Gentile alike may be dubiously grateful to the pious “tradition” of the Apostles of Christ, as above said. This Tobias was a very pious and stubborn Israelite of the Captivity, who, before departing, had cached all his available cash with his kinsman Gabelus, of Rages, a city of the Medes, “taking a note of his hand” for its repayment on demand. While captive in a strange and pagan land, Tobias wan visited by a piteous calamity, for “as he was sleeping, hot dung out of a swallows nest fell upon his eves, and he was made blind”; which affliction Tobias looked reverently to the Lord as visiting upon him as “revenge for my sins”; as a result Tobias became extremely poor, and his wife took in work. At that time there lived in the city of Rages another pious Israelite by name Raguel, who had a marriageable—or rather muchly married daughter, Sara, who was under grave reproach and even imputation of murder, “Because she had been given to seven husbands, and a devil named Asmodeus had killed them, at their first going in unto her,” so that she complained that though sevenfold a widow she remained yet a virgin.
At this juncture Tobias bethought himself of the good money he had left with Gabelus of Rages, and after much palaver decided to send his son, Tobias, Jr., a comely youth, with the note of hand in his pocket, and his dog (name unrevealed), on the long journey to recoup the fortune of ten talents of silver. As Tobias, Jr. started on the journey, a beautiful young man, who was really the Archangel Raphael, met him and introduced himself as Azarias, son of Ananias,—(Ananias must have written the account)—and offered to accompany and guide him upon his journey, which offer was gratefully accepted. As the two journeyed they came to the river Tigris; Tobias waded in to wash his feet, when, lo, “a monstrous fish came up to devour him,” whereat Tobias called to his companion for help. The Angel told him to take the monster fish by the gill and haul him out, which Tobias seems to have had no trouble in doing. The Angel then directed Tobias to open the yet live and “panting” fish, “and lay up his heart, his gall, and his liver, for thee; for these are necessary for useful medicines”; this done, they cooked the fish and carried it all along for provisions for the trip. As they journeyed, Tobias asked the Angel what these medicinal scraps were good for; “and the Angel answering said, if thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof driveth away all kinds of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they come no more to them. And the gull is good for anointing the eyes, in which there is a white speck, and they shall be cured.”
So discoursing pleasantly and instructively, the twain arrived at Rages, and the Angel guided Tobias straight to the house of Raguel and his daughter Sara, his sole heiress, and told Tobias to ask for her in marriage. Tobias said that he was afraid of Sara, for he had heard of what happened to those seven other men; but the Angel reassured him, that he would show him how to overcome the devil Asmodeus; that he should marry Sara and go to bed with her for three nights, but should continently confine his activities “to nothing else but to prayers with her”, and, assured the Angel, on the first night “lay the liver of the fish on the fire, and the devil shall be driven away,” other holy marvels happening on the succeeding nights; “and when the third night is past, thou shalt take the virgin with the fear of the Lord, moved rather for love of children than for lust.” The affair was arranged according to these prescriptions; with Sara and her parents; after the wedding supper, the newlyweds were left alone in their boudoir; Tobias did nothing but pray and put a part of the fish liver in the fire, whereupon “the Angel Raphael took the devil, and bound him in the desert of Upper Egypt”; then both prayed some more, the fervid prayers being repeated verbatim. In the morning, Raguel, out of force of habit, called his servants and ordered them to go into the garden and dig an eighth grave for the reception of Tobias; when the maidservant went to the room to arrange for the removal of the corpse, she to her great surprise “found them safe and sound, sleeping both together.” The empty grave was filled up, a big banquet prepared, and the happy bridal couple spent two weeks with the bride’s family, while the Angel took the note of hand, went to Gabelus, collected the money, and paid it over to Tobias; Raguel gave Tobias one-half of all his property, and executed a writing to give him one-half of the remainder upon the death of Raguel and wife. Tobias sent the Angel back to Gabelus, to invite him to his wedding, and the Angel made him Come.
To proceed swiftly to the climax of marvel, Tobias; and the Angel, leaving the hymeneal cortege to follow as best it could, with such impedimenta of wealth, hastened back to the home of Tobias, Sr., where blind father and the mother were in great grief over the supposed loss of their son and the money with him. But at the behest of the Angel, Tobias, Jr. ran into the house, though “the dog, which had been with them in the way, ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, showed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail,” an act which has since become habitual with dogs which have enough tail to wag. After kissing his mother and father, as the Angel had suggested, Tobias, Jr. took the remaining fish gall out of his traveling bag, and anointed with it the eyes of his father; “and he stayed about half an hour; and a white skin began to come out of his eyes, like the skin of an egg. And Tobias took hold of it, and drew it from his eyes, and immediately he recovered his sight. And they glorified God,” and Tobias, Sr. dutifully said “I bless thee, Lord God of Israel, because thou hast chastised me, and thou hast saved me: and behold I see Tobias my son.” Then, “after seven days Sara his son’s wife, and all the family arrived safe, and the cattle, and the camels, and abundance of money of his wife’s, and that money also which he had received of Gabelus”; they all feasted for seven days “and rejoiced with all great joy”; then, when Tobias, Sr. suggested doing something handsome for the “holy man” through whom all their good fortune had come, the Angel introduced himself as really not Azariah, son of Ananias, but “The Angel Raphael, one of the Seven, who stand before the Lord”; and he explained, “I seemed indeed to eat, and to drink with you, but I use an invisible meat and drink, which cannot be seen by men”; thereupon in true angel style he dissipated into thin air and they could see him no more. The whole Tobias family then, “lying prostrate for three hours upon their face, blessed God: and rising up they told all his wonderful works.” Thus endeth happily the reading of the lesson, dictated by the Holy Ghost to the pious Ananias who recorded it for the edification of True Believers. Let us pray that it is true.

Until the Council of Trent, in 1546, there was no infallibly defined sanction of inspiration of these Jewish “apocrypha”; like the “canon” sacred Books of the Hebrew Bible, all alike were more or lest; eclectically accepted and used in the True Church; but, as said: “The Tridentine decree from which the above list is extracted was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, addressed to the Church universal. Being dogmatic in its purport, it implies that the Apostles bequeathed the same Canon to the Church as a part of the depositum fidei. ... We should search the pages of the New, Testament in vain for any trace of such action. ... We affirm that such a status points to Apostolic sanction, which in turn must have rested on revelation either by Christ or the Holy Spirit.” (CE. iii, 270.)
This is luminous clerical reasoning: a lot of anonymous Jewish fables, derided by Jews and all the rest of the world for want of even common plausibility of fact or truth, and as to which the “inspired” Christian books said to emanate from Apostles, are silent as the grave, are declared after 1500 years to have the ear-marks of Apostolic sanction, which “must have” been founded on divine revelation to them “either by Christ or the Holy Spirit,”—which the Church claims are one and the same person; and it is curious that the “infallible” Council couldn’t say which was which, but vaguely and uncertainly opined it must have been one or the other. So much for infallible cock-suredness as to “inspiration” of holy Scriptures. Even the Old Testament itself, says our logician of inspiration, “reveals no formal notion of inspiration,” though, again, “the later Jews must have possessed the idea.” (Ib. p. 269.) The cursory notice which we shall take of the Old Testament books will serve to confirm that they reveal no notion at all of inspiration; that the later Jews must have had the idea that they were inspired, does not much help the case for them.
In addition to these rejected Jewish books admitted into full canonical fellowship by the inerrant True Church, there are several other Jewish apocrypha which are only semi-canonical and admitted {62} into a sort of bar-sinister fellowship with the legitimates. They have a place in the Orthodox Bible for the “edification” of the Faithful, but are usually printed in the Appendix as suggestive to the devout that they will not be damned for not fully believing these particular forgeries,
Among these are two very celebrated books forged in the name of the great Restorer of Israel, Ezra, under the titles of Third and Fourth Esdras, as the name is written in the True Bibles. “Third Esdras,” says the Encyclopedia, “Is, one of the three uncanonical books appended to the official edition of the Vulgate. ... It enjoyed exceptional favor in the early ages of the Church, being quoted as Scripture with implicit faith by the leading Greek and Latin Fathers.” (CE, i, 605.) In like errant faith was regarded its companion forgery, Fourth Esdras, of which the same ecclesiastical authority says: “The personage serving as the screen of the author of this book is Esdras (Ezra). ... Both Greek and Latin Fathers cite it as prophetical. ... Notwithstanding this widespread reverence for it, in early times, it is a REMARKABLE FACT that the book never got a foothold in the Canon or liturgy of the Church ... and even after the Council of Trent, together with Third Esdras. it was placed in the appendix to the official edition of the Vulgate. ... The dominant critical dating assigns it to a Jew writing in the reign of Domitian, A.D. 81-98,”—the “screen” Ezra being gathered to his fathers since about 444 B.C. (Ib. p. 603-604; v, 537-8; EB. i, 653, 1393.) It is curious that it is regarded as “remarkable” that the Holy Ghost did not “fall” for this particular forgery, when it did for so many others!

A remarkable apocryphal tale relating to the Hebrew Scriptures is enshrined by pseudo-inspiration in chapter 14 of this Fourth of Esdras, regarding the miraculous restoration of Hebrew Holy Writ after its total perishment. In the calamity of the capture and destruction of the Holy City by Nebuchadnezzar, 586 B.C., the Temple of Solomon was destroyed, together with the entire collection of the sacred Rolls of Scriptures, so that not a scratch of inspired pen remained to tell the tale of theocratic Hebrew history and its “revealed” religion. This inconsolable and apparently irreparable loss affected the holy People all the time of the of the Babylonian captivity. But upon their return to the restored City of God, and over a century after their loss, God, we are told in Fourth Esdras, inspired Ezra and commissioned him to reproduce the sacred lost Books, which, judging from the result, of his inspired labors, were many more than the supposed twenty and two of the supposed old Hebrew canon. Accordingly Ezra, employing five scribes, dictated to them (from inspired memory) the textual contents of the lost sacred books, and in just forty days and nights reproduced a total of 94 sacred books, of which he designated 24 as the sacred canon, the remaining 70 being termed esoteric and reserved fir the use of only the wisest. This inspired fable was eagerly accepted for truth by the early Church Fathers, many of whom, from Irenaeus on, “admitted its inspiration”; and it was frequently quoted and commented on as canonical by such Church luminaries as Tertullian, St. Ambrose, Clement Alexandrensis, Origen, Eusebius, St. Jerome, et als., and was prevalently accepted as Scripture throughout the scholastic period. (EB. i, 654, 139 2-94; CE. i 537-8, 601-615.)
This legend, however, had, through a better understanding of “the powers of ordinary human memory,” quite faded out by the time of the Reformation, but only to make way for a more modern and rationalistic one, invented by the Jew Levita, who died in 1549. According to his new fable Ezra and the Talmudic “Men of Great Synagogue” simply united into one volume the 24 books which until that time had circulated separately, and divided them into the three great divisions yet recognized, of the Law the Prophets, and the Hagiography or holy writings. This fabulous statement of Levita “became the authoritative doctrine of the orthodoxy of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.” (EB. i, 654.) This new legend is cited simply to show how prone is the credulous clerical mind to accept as truth the most baseless fables; and how, when one of their precious bubbles of faith is pricked by tardy exposure or common sense, they eagerly catch at the next which comes floating by.

Another ancient priestly fiction, which to this day passes current among the credulous as inspired truth of God, is the fabled “finding of the Law” as recorded in the Word of God. We are all familiar with the notable “finding” by the late lamented Prophet. Joseph Smith—thereto led by the Angel Moroni—of the golden plates containing the hieroglyphic text of Book of Mormon, near Palmyra N.Y. in 1823-1827. (Book of Mormon, Introd.) History repeated itself. A like remarkable discovery was made in the year 621 B.C., this time by a priest, with the help of a witch or lady fortune-teller. As related in 2 Kings xxii, corroborated by 2 Chronicles xxxiv, in the eighteenth year of the “good king” Josiah of Judah, while some repair work was being done in the Temple, Hilkiah the priest of a sudden “found the book of the law of Yahweh given by Moses,” over 800 years before, and never heard of since. Hilkiah called in Shaphan the scribe, and they took the great “find” to Josiah the King. To verify the veracity of the high-priest, Huldah the lady prophet was consulted; being intimately familiar with the sentiments of God, she at once declared that Yahweh was very angry about it, “because,” as the King said, “our fathers have not hearkened unto the words of this book, to do after all that is written in this book”; and the King at once set about to carry into effect the laws prescribed in Deuteronomy,—just then for the first time in the history of Israel ever heard of or acted upon. This “book of the law given to Moses” 800 years before was doubtless the priestly work of Hilkiah, palmed off under the potent name of Moses to force its very reluctant observance and belief on the superstitious Jews. That this is the fact is the consensus of the scholars, as summarized in the Encyclopedia Biblica, and any modern work of O.T. criticism. An examination of the Bible texts themselves, as made in my previous work, demonstrates that this holy “law of Moses” was totally unknown and unobserved through all the History of Israel from its beginnings until Josiah, and was composed by his priests and enlarged into the present Pentateuch during and after the captivity in Babylon.

As priestly forged tales were fabricated to account for the origin and preservation of the sacred Hebrew Books, so like pious fraud was adopted to account for their very notable translation into Greek, in what is known as the Septuagint, Version. After the conquests by Alexander the Great and his establishment of the city of Alexandria in Egypt, immense numbers of Jews were settled in the new city, which quickly became the commercial and intellectual center of the ancient world, with Greek the universal language. The holy Hebrew language had became a dead language to the Jews of the “Dispersion”; their synagogue services could not be conducted in the mother tongue. The Alexandrian Jews were accordingly under necessity to render the “Law” into Greek for their public use; and this was gradually done by such of them as thought themselves able to do such work. But this common-place mode of rendering the sacred Hebrew into a Gentile speech did not satisfy the pious wonder-craving Jewish mind. Accordingly, somewhere about 200 B.C., an anonymous Jew invented a more satisfactory tale, which has had incalculable influence on the Christian faith and dogmas. This pious Israelite had the customary recourse to religions forgery; he forged a letter in the name of one Aristeas, an official of Ptolemy II, Philadelphus, the Greek king of Egypt, 285-247 B.C., purporting to be addressed to his brother, Philocrates, and giving a marvelous history of the Translation.
Here, in substance, is what we read of the first origin of the Version, limited therein to the “law” of Moses, as first related by Josephus. Ptolemy had recently established a library at Alexandria, which he purposed should contain a copy of every obtainable literary work extant. This Library became the most extensive and celebrated of the ancient world, containing some 700,000 manuscript books at the time it was savagely destroyed, in 391 A.D., by the benighted Christian zeal and fury of Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria and his crazy monks of Nitria, as related in Kingsley’s Hypatia or any history of the times. CE. xiv, 625.) At the suggestion of Demetrius, his Librarian, fables the pseudo-Aristeas through Josephus, that he should enrich the Library with a copy of the sacred law of the Jews Ptolemy wrote to Eleazar the chief priest at Jerusalem, sending the letter and magnificent presents “to God” by the hand of a delegation including Aristeas, requesting a copy of the Law and a number of learned Jews competent to translate it into Greek. The embassy was successful; a richly ornamented copy of the holy law, written in letters of gold, was sent to the King, together with seventy-two Doctors of Israel, deputed to deliver the Book and to carry out the wishes of the King. They were received with great honor, says pseudo-Aristeas, and duly feted for several days; they were then conducted across the long causeway to the Island of Pharos to the place which was prepared for them, “which was a house that was built near the shore, and was a quiet place, and fit for their discoursing together about their work, ... Accordingly they made an accurate interpretation, with great zeal and great pains,” working until the ninth hour each day, and visiting Ptolemy every morning. “Now when the Law was transcribed, and the labor of interpretation was over, which came to its conclusion in seventy-two days,” the work was read over to the assembled Jews, who rejoiced that “the interpretation was happily finished”; they were enjoined to report any errors or emissions which they might discover, to the “Seventy,” who would make the necessary corrections in their work. (Josephus, Antiq. Jews, Bk. XII, chap. 2; CE. xiii, 722.) Thus the translation wag only of “The Law,” the Five Books of Moses; and it was open team-work, all the Seventy-two working together, comparing and discussing as they proceeded, and expressly enjoining the Jews to note and report for correction all errors of omission or commission which they might discover.
Thus the pseudo-Aristeas, as cited by Josephus; though, as a matter of fact, this Septuagint Version, so-called because of the legendary Seventy-(two), was in the grossest manner inaccurate, and imported innumerable errors into the Christian religion which was based upon and propagated for several centuries only through the Septuagint texts. Indeed, “the text of the Septuagint was regarded as so unreliable, because of its freedom in rendering, and of the alterations which had been introduced into it, etc., that, during the second century of our era it was discarded by the Church.” (CE. iv, 625.) We shall notice the fearful error of Isaiah’s “virgin-birth” text; for other well-known instances, it makes out Creation 1195 years earlier than the Hebrew and Vulgate, 4004 B.C., and the venerable Methuselah is made to survive the Flood by fourteen years.
Despite, however, its patently legendary character, the pseudo-Aristeas’ account, the forged letter and the story, were eagerly accepted as genuine and authentic by Fathers, Popes and ecclesiastic writers until the sixteenth century, when their spurious character was revealed by the nascent modern criticism. “The authenticity of the letter, called in question first by Louis Vives (1492-1540), professor at Louvain, is now universally denied.” (CE. xiii, 722.)
The Fathers, however, could not rest content with this unvarnished original fabrication in the name of Aristeas, of an ordinary human and errant translation of the “Law”; they avidly set about embellishing it in the accepted clerical style, adding fanciful and lying details to emphasize the miraculous and inspired origin of the Version. As this notable instance serves admirably to illustrate the childish and uncritical credulity of the Fathers, their reckless disregard of truth, their chronic zest for any untruth or fable quotable to pander to the glory of God and enhance the pious superstition of the Faithful, let us here watch the growth of this simple human yarn of the Jewish aristeas-forger into the wonderful and ever more embellished miracle as it passes from Father to Father,—exactly as the Gospel-fables grew from “Mark” to “John.” According to Fathers Tertullian, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, et als., the 72 were inspired by God each severally for the entire work; in translating they did not consult with one another; they had been shut up incommunicados in separate cells on Pharos, either singly or in pairs, and their several translations, when finished and compared, were found to agree entirely both as to sense and the expressions employed, with the original Hebrew text and with each other (St. Clement of Alexandria, St. Irenaeus, Justin Martyr). Finally, the 72 translated not only the Law, but the entire Old Testament,—several of whose Books were not yet at the time written.
Father Justin Martyr adds near-eye-witness verification to the false and already embroidered history, saying that the “Seventy” were, by order of the King, “shut up in as many separate cells, and were obliged by him, each to translate the whole Bible apart, and without any communication with each other, yet all their several translations were found to agree verbatim from the beginning to the end, and were by that means demonstrated to be of divine inspiration”; and he adds, for confirmation of faith! -- like Paul, protesting he is not lying in anticipation of the accusation: “These things, ye men of Greece, are no fable, nor do we narrate fictions; but we ourselves having been in Alexandria, saw the remains of the little [cells] at the Pharos still preserved.” (Ad Graec. ch. xiii; ANF. i, 278-9.) But in repeating the tale to the Roman Emperor, Father Justin makes the unhappy blunder of saying, that Ptolemy “sent to Herod, who was at that time king of the Jews, requesting that the books of the prophets [pseudo-Aristeas said the “Law”] be sent to him; and the king did indeed send them” (I Apol. ch. xxxi; ANF. i, 173); whereas Herod lived some 300 years after Ptolemy died. This forged fable is time and again repeated as sober truth. Bishop Saint Irenaeus emphasizes the miraculous nature of the translation of all the Books, saying that when the 72 identical translations were compared, “God was indeed glorified, and the Scriptures were acknowledged an truly divine; ... even the Gentiles present perceived that the Scriptures had been interpreted by the inspiration of God. And there was nothing astonishing in God having done this. ... He inspired Esdras the priest (after the return from captivity) to recast all the words of the former prophets, and to reestablish with the people of God the Mosaic legislation.” (Adv. Haer. III, xxi, 2; ANF. i, 451-2.)
In the course of a century or two before the Christian Era, the other Hebrew sacred books were likewise translated into Greek for the use of the Greek-speaking Jews of “the Dispersion,” together with numbers of the forged Jewish apocrypha, and all these were added to the rolls of “Scriptures.” This final and adulterated form of the Septuagint “was the vehicle which conveyed these additional Scriptures [i.e. the apocryphal Tobias, etc.] into the Catholic Church.” (CE. iii, 271.) This vagary of the Holy Ghost in certifying the ill-translated and tempered Septuagint for the foundations of Christian Faith, was very disastrous, as CE. points out: “The Church had adopted the Septuagint as its own; this differed from the Hebrew not only by the addition of several books and passages but also by innumerable variations of text, due partly to the ordinary process of corruption in the transcription of ancient books, partly to the culpable temerity, as Origen called it, of correctors who used not a little freedom in making ‘corrections,’ additions, and suppressions, partly to mistakes in translation, and finally in great part to the fact that the original Septuagint had been made from a Hebrew text quite different from that fixed at Jamnia as the one standard by the Jewish Rabbis.” (CE. vii, 316.) So Yahveh only knows what he actually said and did in the 4004 years up to the time his Son came to try to “redeem” his people from some of the tangles of his Holy Law.
Matters grew worse as time progressed: the ex-Pagan Greek Fathers who founded Christianity, propagated the new Faith for several centuries only from the tortuous texts of this falsified Septuagint, which was the only Old Testament “Scriptures” known to and used by them as the source of the “prophecies fulfilled by Jesus Christ” and the holy mysteries of the Jewish-Christian Faith. “Copies of the Septuagint.” says CE., “were multiplied, and, as might be expected, many changes, deliberate as well as involuntary, crept in.” (CE. xiii, 723.) Indeed, the itch for Scripture-scribbling was so rife among such ex-Pagan Christians as could write and get hold of a copy, that St. Augustine complains: “It is possible to enumerate those who have translated the Scriptures from Hebrew into Greek, but not those who have translated them into Latin. In sooth, in the curly days of the faith whoso possessed a Greek manuscript and thought he had some knowledge of both tongues was daring enough to undertake a translation.” (De Doct. Christ. II, xi; CE. ix, 20.) So the Faith was founded on befuddlement of the Blessed Word of God as any nondescript scribbler palmed it off to be.
We shall more than abundantly see that Holy Church never possessed or used a single book of “Scripture” or other document of importance, to the glory of God and the glorification of the Church, which was not a rank original forgery and bristled besides with “many deliberate changes” or forged interpolations.

Monday, December 19th, 2005, 04:51 PM
The most colossal of the blunders of the Septuagint translators, supplemented by the most insidious, persistent and purposeful falsification of text, is instanced in the false translation of the notoriously false pretended “prophecy” of Isaiah vii, 14,—frauds which have had the most disastrous and fatal consequences for Christianity, and to humanity under its blight; the present exposure of which should instanter destroy the false Faith built on these frauds.
The Greek priest who forged the “Gospel according to St. Matthew,” having before him the false Septuagint translation of Isaiah, fables the Jewish Mary yielding to the embraces of the Angel Gabriel to engender Jesus, and backs it up by appeal to the Septuagint translation of Isaiah vii, 14:

“Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel.” (Matt. i, 23.)
Isaiah’s original Hebrew, with the mistranslated words underscored, reads: “Hinneh ha-almah harah ve-yeldeth ben ve-karath shem-o immanuel”;—which, falsely translated by the false pen of the pious translators, runs thus in the English: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isa. vii, 14.) The Hebrew words ha-almah mean simply the young woman; and harah is the Hebrew past or perfect tense, “conceived,” which in Hebrew, as in English, represents past and completed action. Honestly translated, the verse reads: “Behold, the young woman has conceived—As Thomas Jefferson prophetically wrote,—as is being verified: “The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter”!

Monday, December 19th, 2005, 04:52 PM
The marvels of the canonical apocrypha of the Hebrew sacred Books, or of the whole 94 miraculously “restored” by Ezra, could not slake the thirst of the Jewish intellect for such edifying histories, and their priests were very industrious in supplying the demands of piety and marvel-craving. Making use, as above admitted, of the most “venerable Old Testament names,” they forged a voluminous literature of fanciful and fantastic fairy-tales in the guise of sacred history, revelations, oracles or predictions, all solemnly “set forth as thought actually received, and written or spoken by ancient worthies, as Enoch, Moses, etc., which were widely accepted as genuine, and found a warm reception in Jewish and early Christian circles.” Scarcely is there a Biblical notable of Israel in whose name these pious false writings were not forged, including Adam and Eve and most of the ante- and post-Diuvian Patriarchs. It is impossible here to much more than mention the names of some of the principal ones of these extra-canonical apocrypha and forgeries of the Jews, as listed in the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Encyclopedia Biblica, most of them worked over with surcharge of added Christian forgeries, to adapt them to their pious propaganda.
The names of these “intriguing” volumes of forgotten lore, listed somewhat after the order of their distinguished pretended authors and times, are: Life of Adam and Eve; Testament of Adam; The Book of Creation; the Books of Seth (son of Adam); Book of Enoch (grandson of Adam); Secrets of Enoch; Parables of Enoch; Book of Lamech; Book of Noah; Book of Zoroaster (identified with Ham, son of Noah); Apocalypse of Noah; Apocalypse of Abraham; Testament of Abraham; Testament of Isaac; Testament of Jacob; The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs; Testament of the Three Patriarchs; Testament of Naphthali; The Prayer of Menasseh; The Prayer of Joseph; The Story of Asenath (wife of Joseph); Prayer of Asenath; The Marriage of Asenath; The Assumption of Moses; The Testament of Moses; Book of Jannes and Mambres (the Egyptian magicians with whom Moses contended); Penitence of Jannes and Mambres; The Magical Books of Moses; The Book of Jubilees, or Little Genesis; Book of Og the Giant, Treatise of the Giants, Josippon; Book of Jasher; The Liber Antiquitatem Bibliarum, ascribed to Philo; The Chronicles of Jerameel; Testament of Job; Psalm CLI of David, “when he fought with Goliath”; Testament of Solomon; The Contradictio Salomonis (a contest in wisdom between Solomon and Hiram); The Psalms of Solomon; Apocalypse of Elijah; Apocalypse of Baruch; The Rest of the Words of Baruch; History of Daniel; Apocalypse of Daniel; Visions of Daniel; Additions to Daniel, viz.: The History of Susanne (Chap. 13), the Song of the Three Children, Story of Bel and the Dragon (Chap. 14); Tobit; Judith; Additions to Esther; The Martyrdom of Isaiah; The Ascension of Isaiah; III and IV Esdras; Apocalypse of Esdras; Story of the Three Pagans, in I Esdras; I, II, III, and IV Mitceabee”; The Prophecy of Eldad and Medad; Apocalypse of Zephaniah, Stories of Artaphanus; Eupolemus; Story of Aphikia, wife of Jesus Sirach; The Letter of Aristeas to Philocrates; The Sibylline Oracles.
Quite half of the above Jewish false-writings, separately listed under the grouping of “Jewish with Christian Accretions,” the Catholic Encyclopedia describes with comments such as “recast or freely interpolated by Christians,” “many Christian interpolations,” etc., “presenting in their ensemble a fairly full Christology” (CE. i, 606). If the pious Christians, confessedly, committed so many and so extensive forgeries and frauds to adapt these popular Jewish fairy-tales of their God and holy Worthies to the new Christian Jesus and his Apostles, we need feel no surprise when we discover these same Christians forging outright new wonder-tales of their Christ under the fiction of the most noted Christian names and in the guise of inspired Gospels, Epistles, Acts and Apocalypses.

The processes of the formation of the Hebrew Old Testament Scriptures are, however, interesting and intriguing, if sacred tradition is true. According to priestly lore, the man Moses, “learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (another Christian assurance; Acts vii, 22), sat down in the Wilderness of Sinai and under divine inspiration wrote his Five Books of prehistorical history, codes of post-exilic divine Law, and chronicles of contemporary and future notable events, including four different names of his father-in-law—(Viz.: Jethro, Ex. iii, 1; Reuel, Ex. ii, 18; Jether, Ex. iv, 18, and Raguel, Num. x, 29, while a fifth name, Hobab, is awarded him in Judges iv, II), together with a graphic account of his own death and burial, and of the whole month afterwards spent by all Israel mourning his death. He also records the death of his brother Aaron at Mt. Hor (Num. xx, 28; xxxiii, 38), just six months before his own death; though, in amazing contradiction, he elsewhere records Aaron as having died at Mosera, just after leaving Sinai (Deut. x, 6), thirty-nine years previously—and thus nullifies the entire history of the wonderful career and deeds of Aaron as high priest during the whole 40 years of wandering in the Wilderness, of which the Books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers are largely filled; as also many other matters and things occurring for some centuries after his death, and known as “post-Mosaica” to the scholars.
Joshua, the successor of Moses, next wrote the history of his life and times, working in, too, a sketch of his own death and funeral obsequies (Josh. xxiv, 29-30), and quoting the celebrated miracle of the nun standing still, of which he says, “Is it not written in the Book of Jasher?”—which Book of Jasher was not itself written until several hundred years later, at least in or after the time of David; for it is recorded: “And he [David] bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow; behold, it is written in the Book of Jasher.” (2 Sam. i, 18.)
The Book of Judges was written by nobody knows whom, nor when, except that it was long “post-exilic.” It relates that, “Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it” (Jud. i, 18); whereas it was not until David had reigned seven years and six months in Hebron, that “the King and his men went to Jerusalem” and failed to capture it, “nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion, and called it the City of David.” (2 Sam. v, 5-9.) It is further recorded in Judges that the tribe of Dan made a silver idol of the Hebrew God and hired a grandson of Moses to serve it, and “he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the captivity of the land” (Jud. xviii, 30)—about a thousand years later.
The gifted Samuel. Prophet of the heathen High Places of Baal worship, gives his name and inspiration to two books of mythical history written piecemeal until the “return from captivity,” as above indicated, and early in his work he records the historic episode of the calling up of his own ghost from the dead by the famous Witch of En-dor. (I Sam. xviii, 1, 7-19.)
The ex-bandit David, “man after God’s own heart”—after murdering a man to get his adulterous wife, and engendering of her his all-wise son and hero, Solomon, wrote the 150 songs of the Hebrew Hymn Book, many of his psalms singing of the long posthumous Babylonian Captivity.
Solomon himself, who was son-in-law to nearly everybody in the heathen nations round about who had eligible daughters, wrote the wisdom of the ages into his Book of Proverbs, though not one of them is by Solomon, and in his lighter (headed or hearted) spells penned his erotic Canticles, which for realistic lubricity quite outdo Boccaccio, and would be really unmailable under the Postal laws if they weren’t in the Holy Bible and clerically captioned “The Church’s Love unto Christ.” These are indeed but one collection out of the great many pornographic stories of The Holy Ghost’s Decameron, enshrined in God’s Holy Word for delectation of the Puritans of Faith.
Other divinely inspired and anonymous writers, falsely entitling their effusions under the names of this or that Prophet or other wholly fictitious personage, as Job, Esther, Ruth, Daniel, gave forth yet other inspired histories, books of oracles or prophecies, apocalypses or high powered visions into Futurity, and a miscellany of sacred novels, love-stories and nondescript musings or ravings known collectively as the hagiographa or holy writings of the Jews. All these together, now thirty-nine in number, comprise the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament. It being out of question to review each of these here, it may be stated with assurance that not one of them bears the name of its true author; that every one of them is a composite work of many hands “interpolating” the most anachronistic and contradictory matters into the original writings, and often reciting as accomplished facts things which occurred many centuries after the time of the supposed writer, as Psalms, isaiah, Daniel, and the so-called “historical” books. For scientific detailed demonstration of this the Encyclopedia Biblica digests the most competent authorities; my own Is It God’s Word? makes the proofs from the sacred texts themselves. See the recent “Religions Book of the Month Club’s” notable Unraveling the Book of Books, by Trattner. (1929.)
But as the Christian religion depends more vitally on Genesis and Moses than on all the other sacred writings and writers, we may appeal to the admissions of CE., thereto driven by force of modern criticism, for the destruction and abandonment of the Moses Myths.
“It is true that the Pentateuch, so long attributed to Moses, is now held by the vast majority of non-Catholic, and by an increasing number of Catholic, scholars to be a compilation of four independent sources put together in final shape soon after the Captivity.” (CE. i, 622.)
This scores strongly for Hebrew-Christian forgery and fraud in attributing this primitive system of Bible “science” and barbarous law to a god as a pretext for priestly domination of the superstitious people. That God-given forged law thus prescribes for priestcraft: “The man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest, ... even that man shall die.” (Deut. xvii, 12.) The whole Five Books of Moses are thus a confessed forgery in the names of Moses and of God; every one of the Thus saith the Lord a thousand times repeated, with speeches and laws put into the mouth of the God, are false and forged. Speaking of the “difficulty, in the present condition of Old Testament criticism, of recognizing more than a small portion of the Pentateuch as documentary evidence contemporary with Moses,”—who, if he ever lived, which may be confidently denied,—never wrote a line of it, CE. further confesses to the natural evolution—not the “divine revelation”—of the Hebrew mythology into a (no less mythological) monotheistic religion: “The Hegelian principle of evolution ... applied to religion, has powerfully helped to beget a tendency to regard the religion of Israel as evolved by processes not transcending nature, from a polytheistic worship of the elements to a spiritual and ethical monotheism.” (CE. i, 493.) But this finally and very late evolved monotheism is neither a tardy divine revelation to the Jews, nor a novel invention by them; it was a thousand years antedated by Amenhotep IV and Tut-ankh-amen in Egypt,—nor were even they the pioneers. We have seen the admission that the Zoroastrian Mithra religion was “a divinely revealed Monotheism” (CE., ii, 156). But the Hebrews were confessed and notorious idolaters and polytheists until after the Captivity; that fact is a thousand times alleged throughout the Scriptures as the sole reason for their troubles and captivity. As above suggested, and as thoroughly demonstrated by the texts in my other book, the Hebrew God Yahveh was but one of the many gods worshipped by the Hebrews; and Yahveh never claimed more than to be a “God above all gods,” to be preferred before them all;—as at Sinai he enacted: “Thou shalt have no other gods before [in preference to] me,”—thus admitting the other gods.

Monday, December 19th, 2005, 04:54 PM
“It was a monk of the 6th century, named Dionysius Exiguus (Dennis the Little), who fixed our present Christian era, laying down that Jesus Christ was born on the 25th of December, A.U.C. 753, and commencing the new era from the following year, 754. That date, as we shall see, cannot be correct and, instead of being an improvement on, is farther from the truth than the dates assigned by the early Fathers, St. Irenaeus and Tertullian, who fixed the date of the Nativity in the 41st year of Augustus, that is to say, 3 years B.C., or A.U.C, 751 ... All this points to the fact that Herod died in the year 4 B.C., and that our Savior must have been born before that date ... Our Savior was born some time before Herod’s death, probably two years or more. So that, if Herod died in the year 4 B.C., we should be taken to 6 or 7 B.C. as the year of the Nativity” (CE. 735-6).
This, of course, discredits the date given by the inspiration of [71] Luke, and demonstrates that both he and Matthew merely alleged fictitious dates for what in all human probability was a purely fictitious event. The new Era of Christ was, however, very slow in gaining recognition; the first official secular document dating by it was a charter of Charlemagne, after 800 A.D., and it did not come into general use until about 1000 A.D. I may mention a fiery sermon I once heard, in which the expounder of truth vindicated the glory of God by declaiming that every Jew and Infidel confessed to Jesus Christ every time he dated a letter or mentioned the year of an event. Being simply a hearer of the Word, I could not rise to suggest, that by the same token we confess more to the Pagan gods than to the Christian,—for more than half the months and every day of the week are named for Pagan deities, and we name them much more often than we do the years of grace and salvation of Christ. After this bad start from Gospel error and contradiction, we now turn to further evidences of “Gospel truth” in contradictions and forgery.
Among the most signal of these incessant contradictions and scientific impossibilities of Divine Inspiration, are those relating to the capital matter,—for the credit of the Christian Religion, of the time and manner of Creation of earth and Man, based on Holy Writ and on the “chronology” worked out, with several hundred disparate results, from the inspired pedigrees of the ante-Diluvian Patriarchs. So fatally important is this to Christianity, that the ‘True Church—“which never deceived anyone” and “has never erred,”—speaking through CE., thus admits that Christianity stands or falls with—“the literal, historical sense of the first three chapters of Genesis in as far as they bear on the facts touching the foundations of the Christian religion, e.g., the creation of all things by God at the beginning of time, the especial creation of man, the formation of the first woman from the first man, the unity of the human race”! (Papal Biblical Commission, June 30, 1909; CE. vii, 313). Thus: No Adam and Eve, no Garden of Eden and Talking Snake, no “Fall” and Curse—therefore: No Savior Jesus Christ, no Plan of Salvation, no truth in the Christian Religion! The fatal point is elucidated with inexorable logic and dogmatic truth by the “Reformed” ex-Father Peter Martyr: “So important is it to comprehend the work of creation that we see the creed of the Church take this as its starting point. Were this Article taken away, there would be no original sin; the promise of Christ would become void, and all the vital force of our religion would be destroyed”! Father Luther inherited the same faith and bequeathed it to his dissident following: “Moses spoke properly and plainly, and neither allegorically nor figuratively; and therefore the world with all creatures was created in six days.” Calvin, in his “Commentary on Genesis,” argues that the Genesis account of Creation is literally true, and warns those who dare to believe otherwise, and thus “basely insult the Creator, to expect a Judge who will annihilate them.” Again he says: “We know on the authority of Moses, that longer ago than 6000 years the world did not exist.” So too, the Westminster Confession of Faith, in full Protestant force and effect today—specially lays it down as “necessary to salvation to believe that all things visible and invisible were created not only out of nothing but exactly in six days.” And the Churches have murdered countless thousands to impress this beautiful impossible truth.
Notwithstanding the crushing disproofs of those primitive forged “Fables of Moses,” by every fact of astronomy, geology, anthropology, biology, and kindred sciences, known to schoolboys today, Faith clings fatuously to its fetches: Arkansas (“Now laugh!”), Mississippi, Tennessee, three States of the Twentieth Century United States, have made it crime by Law to teach the sciences which discredit the Genesis Myths, upon which Christian Superstition utterly depends;, and like medieval laws are sought to be imposed in all our States. The True Church, like all the others, still founds its “Faith and Morals” upon these old Hebrew forgeries of Genesis and peddles them to its Faithful; but it knows better. Thus the whole True Faith is shipwrecked by these heretical confessions of CE., forced from it by the truths of heretical Modernism, in full face of the fierce inspired fulminations of the Syllabus of Errors: “In an article on Bible chronology it is hardly necessary in these days to discuss the date of the Creation. At least two hundred dates have been suggested, varying from 3483 to 6934 year B.C. all based on the supposition that the Bible enables us to settle the point. But it does nothing of the kind. ... The literal interpretation has now been entirely abandoned; and the world is admitted to be of immense antiquity”! (CE. iii, 731.) Again the “sacred science” of Genesis and of Christianity is further admitted to be false, and the fabulous “Septuagint” Bible on which Christianity was founded before the era of the second century forgeries of Gospels and Epistles, to be a holy fraud, in these further excerpts accrediting the true revelations of modern Science as against those of Moses:
“The church ... does not attach decisive influence to the chronology of the Vulgate, the official version of the Western Church, since in the Martyrology for Christmas day, the creation of Adam is put down in the year 5199 B.C., which is the reading of the Septuagint. It is, however, certain that we cannot confine the years of man’s sojourn on earth to that usually set down. ... Various explanations have been given of chapter v (Genesis) to explain the short time it seems to allow between the Creation and the Flood. ... The total number of years in the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Septuagint differs, in the Hebrew it being 1656, in the Samaritan 1307, and in the Septuagint 2242. ... According to Science the length of this period was much greater than appears from the genealogical table. ... In any case, whether we follow the traditional or critical view, the numbers obtained from the genealogy of the Patriarchs in chapter xi must be greatly augmented, in order to allow time for such a development of civilization, language, and race type as had been reached by the time of Abraham.” (CE. iii, 731-3.)

link (http://www.thenazareneway.com/Forgery%20in%20Christianity/forgery_in_christianity_chapter_2.htm)