Chapter 7 Part II - 2

But a more remarkable instance than this occurs in Deuteronomy.That example, on the one hand, shows that Moses could not have been the author of the book, and also shows the absurd notion that was prevalent in the age of the giants.According to the third chapter of "Deuteronomy", in the victory that Moses gained according to the legend, "Og", the king of Bashan, was captured. The eleventh verse of it says: "For all that remains of the tribe of giants is Og the king of Bashan." Behold, his bed was made of iron. Is it not now in Rabbah the Ammonites? The length of the iron bed was nine cubits, and the breadth was four cubits, the measure of a man's cubit." The ruler is one foot nine inches, so the length of the bed is sixteen feet four inches, and the breadth is seven feet four inches, which is the size of a giant's bed.Now when it comes to the historical part, although the evidence is not so direct and positive as in the previous case, it is generalized and speculative evidence, but it is better than the "best" evidence on the opposite side.

The author, intending to prove the existence of the giant, mentions his bed as a relic of antiquity, and says, Was it not at Rabbah the Ammonites?The meaning here is: it is because this method is often used in the Bible to affirm a thing.But Moses could not have been the one who said that, for Moses knew nothing about Rabbah, nor the circumstances of it, and Rabbah was not a city that belonged to this giant king, nor was it one of the cities that Moses conquered.So this bed was at Rabbah and the exact dimensions of this bed must relate to the time of Rabbah's capture which must have started four hundred years after the death of Moses; for this see the second book of Samuel Chapter 12, verse 26, "Joab (David's general) attacked Rabbah, the capital of the Ammonites, and occupied it."

It is not my intention to point out any inconsistencies in the time, place, and circumstances of the books alleged to belong to Moses, which all prove that they could not have been written by Moses, nor were they written in Moses' time: I will further refer to the Joshua The book, and pointed out that Joshua was not the author of that book, and also pointed out that the book was anonymous and had no authority.The evidence I would like to present is contained in that book itself, and I take no proof from outside the Bible against the supposed reliability of the Bible. False testimony is often good at self-defeating.Joshua, according to the first chapter of the Book of Joshua, was Moses' direct successor and a soldier, Moses was not.He continued to be the head of Israel for twenty-five years, that is, from the day of Moses' death.That date, according to the chronology of the Bible, was from 1451 BC to 1426 BC.According to the same chronicle, Joshua died that year.So, if we find records in this book that it was written by Joshua, and provide facts about what Joshua did after his death, it proves that Joshua cannot be the author; it also proves that this book The book will not be written until the last facts recorded in the book are written.As for the nature of the book it is dire.This is a military history of plunder and murder, as savage and cruel as the account of his predecessor Moses in viciousness and hypocrisy.As for the blasphemy (of God), as in the previous books, it is attributed to the command of God.

First, the book of Joshua, like all previous books, is written in the voice of a third person; speaking in the voice of the historian Joshua.Would it not be absurd and conceited if Joshua spoke of himself as in the last verse of the sixth chapter of the book?According to the words of this verse: "The fame of Joshua spread throughout the land." Now I will give the proof more directly. In the thirty-first chapter of the twenty-fourth chapter, it is said: "In the days of Joshua and the elders who died after Joshua, the children of Israel served the Lord. Now try to speak of common sense. Can Shuah tell what the people did after his death? This account, not only by posthumous historians of Joshua, but certainly posthumous historians of elders who died after Joshua as written.

Some passages, dealing with the general sense of time, are scattered throughout the book of Joshua.These records extend the writing time of this book to a period after the writing of "Joshua", but do not indicate that a specific time is not included, as in the quotation in the above section.In that passage there is absolutely no mention of the time between the death of Joshua and the death of the elders.All evidence only proves that the book was written after the death of the last people. But the passages I have mentioned and are about to quote, while not evasively specifying a particular time, they are meant to point to a time far beyond Joshua's day, than Joshua's death and The distance between the death of the elders is much longer.The passage I want to quote is the fourteenth verse of chapter ten.

There it is said that, at Joshua's command, the sun was to rest on Gibeon, and the moon was to rest on the valley of Aijalon (a story fit only for the amusement of children).The scriptures say, "There is no day like this before or since, when the LORD hears prayers." The story of the sun at Gibeon and the moon at the valley of Ajalon is one of the fables of self-development.Such a situation cannot arise without the knowledge of the whole world.Half of the people wonder why the sun doesn't rise; the other half don't understand why the sun doesn't set.This legend will be worldwide, yet no country in the world knows such a thing.But why must the moon stop?At what point does the moon appear during the day, and so again under the sun?As a poet, the whole thing is quite appropriate.It is similar to the song of Deborah and Barak, where the stars fight from heaven, and attack Sisera from their orbits; but this song falls short of the figurative language with which Mahomet counsels those who counsel him as he advances.He said, if you came to me with the sun in your right hand and the moon in your left hand, it would not change my career.For the sake of Joshua, and to win over Muhammad, he should put the sun and the moon in two separate pockets, and carry them with him, just as Gae Fox carried the dark lantern, when he occasionally needed it. When it is time, it is taken out for lighting.

The sublime and the ridiculous are often so closely related that it is difficult to classify them separately.Take the sublime one step higher and it becomes ridiculous, and the absurd one step higher and it becomes sublime again.Nevertheless, something drawn from the poet's imagination illustrates the folly of Joshua, since he should have commanded the earth to stand still. The time contained in this term hereafter is after that day, and it is used to compare with all the time that has passed before this day. In order to make this passage clear, the day mentioned above means a long period of time;— —For instance, it is absurd to say, next day or week, next month or year; so compare the meaning of this passage with the wonders it speaks of and the time before which it refers, it must mean In terms of centuries; although, it is a joke to say that it is less than the first century; it is barely acceptable to say that it is less than the second century.

A remote but common time is also illustrated in Chapter VIII, where the description after the capture of Ai is given.In the twenty-eighth verse it says, "Joshua burned the city of Ai, and he made it a heap and desolation forever to this day; on the tree, and took the body down from the tree and buried it at the gate of the city"; and then said, "On the body, heaped a great heap of stones, which has existed to this day;" that is, until the writing of "Joshua" while the author was still alive. In the tenth chapter, it is said that after the five kings were hung on five trees by Joshua, they were thrown into the cave. It is said, "He piled a big stone at the entrance of the cave and left it until today."

When listing some of Joshua's feats, and the places and tribes they conquered and tried to kill, Chapter XV, verse 63 says: "As for the Jebusites and the Jews living in Jerusalem, they cannot be driven out. went out, but the Jebusites lived with the Jews in Jerusalem to this day.” The question in this verse is, when did the Jebusites live with the Jews in Jerusalem?Since the matter reappears in the first chapter of Judges, I'll save my opinion until I get to that part. Without any circumstantial evidence, the book of Joshua itself proves that Joshua was not the author of the book, and the book is anonymous, so it has no authority.As mentioned earlier, I will now discuss the Book of Judges further.

It is apparent from the surface that the Book of Judges is anonymous; therefore there is no pretense of the word of God, not even a nominal guarantee; its natural father is unknown. The book begins with the same phrases as the book of Joshua. The first verse of the first chapter of the Book of Joshua says: After the death of Moses, the servant of the Lord, and so on. The book of Judges begins after the death of Joshua, and so on.This, and the similarity in style between the two books, suggest that they are the work of the same author.But who this author was, no one knows.The only thing this book proves is that the author lived long after the time of Joshua.For the book begins as immediately after his death; its second chapter is a miniature or synopsis of the whole book, which, according to the biblical chronology, extends the history to three hundred and six years. from the death of Joshua - 1426 years before Christ, to the death of Sampson - 1120 years before Christ, before Saul went to find his father's donkey , and his reign was only twenty-five years, but there is every reason to believe that the book was not written until at least the time of David, and that Joshua was not written before the same time.

In the first chapter of "Judges", after the author announces the death of Joshua, he goes on to tell what happened between the Judahites and the Canaanites.In this sentence, after the author's sudden mention of Jerusalem in verse 7, he immediately explained it in verse 8, saying, "The men of Judah attacked Jerusalem and took the city." Therefore, this book cannot Written before the capture of Jerusalem.The reader will be reminded of the fifteenth verse sixty-third of the Book of Joshua which I quoted not long ago, where it says, As for the Jebusites who lived in Jerusalem, the Jews could not drive them out, and the Jebusites But he lived with the Jews in Jerusalem to this day.These words mean that the book of Joshua was written at this time. The evidence I have given up to this point proves that the book I am dealing with was not written by such and such a person as others say, and that the book was written hundreds of years after their death.If such people have ever lived, so many have, I can admit that this passage carries less weight than I deserve.Because the situation is such that as long as the Bible is as reliable as history, Jerusalem has not been captured until the time of David; therefore, the two books of "Joshua" and "Judges" were not captured until after David began to rule. , will not be written, this is three hundred and seventy years after the death of Joshua. The name of the city was later called Jerusalem. It was originally called Jebus or Jebushi, and it was the capital of the Jebusites.The account of David's capture of this city can be found in the second part of Samuel, chapter five, verse four, etc.; it can also be found in the first part of Chronicles, chapter fourteenth, verse four, etc. In any part of the "Bible", there is no reference to the conquest before this time, and no one mentions any record of anyone supporting this opinion.In the Book of Samuel or Chronicles, it is only said that they killed all men, women, and children; and it is said that of those who lived, there was not one left, as other conquerors are said; here The mention of silence implies that the city was acquired by massacre, and that the local Jebusites continued to live there after the city was taken.Therefore, it is said in the Book of Joshua that the Jebusites lived with the Judahites in Jerusalem until today, except that after David captured the city, there is no other time corresponding to it. I have pointed out that every book in the Bible, from Genesis to Judges, lacks authenticity.Now comes the book of Ruth.It is a clumsy and dull storybook, told by no one who knows, and stupidly he tells of a wandering country woman who sneaks into the bed of her cousin named Boaz.Wonderful, this is called the way of God!Although, this is one of the best books in the bible because there is no killing and robbery in the book. Next, I will talk about the two books of Samuel, and point out that those books were not written by Samuel, it was written long after Samuel's death, and like all the writings mentioned before, it is anonymous and has no authority . To convince people that these books were written long after Samuel's time, and not by Samuel, one only has to read the author's record that Tun Lo went out to find his father's donkeys and he met with Samuel to hear about the lost donkeys, as today It's like fools go to the magician to ask for lost things. When the author narrates the story of Tara, Samuel and the donkey, he does not write it as an event that was happening at that time, but as an ancient story when the author was alive.Because the language and terminology he used in telling it were those used by Samuel while he was alive, the author had to explain the story in the words that the author used when he was alive. When Samuel is mentioned in Chapter 9 of Book 1 of Samuel, he is called a "seer", and this term was used by Tunora during his interrogation.In verse 11, it says, "When they (Yun Luo and his servants) climbed up the hill to the city, they found some young women coming out to draw water, and asked them, "Is the 'seer' here?" ’ Then Tolo walked in the direction the women pointed, and when he met Samuel but didn’t recognize him, he said to him, (see verse 18), “Please tell me, where is the seer’s residence?”Samuel replied, I am the 'seeer'". When the writers of Samuel narrated these questions and answers, they spoke in the language and style in which they are said to have spoken; and that style of speaking was outdated when the writer wrote.He felt that in order for people to understand the story, the terms used in these questions and answers must be explained; so in verse 9 he says, "Once in Israel, when anyone asked God, he said, Let us ask 'First Behold'; what is now called a prophet was formerly called a 'seer'".As I have said before, this proves that the story of Tara, Samuel and the donkey is an ancient story from the time of the book of Samuel, therefore, Samuel did not write the story, so that book is not true. However, if we go deeper into those books, we can more positively prove that Samuel was not the author of those books, because the events described in the books did not take place until several years after Samuel's death.Samuel died before Tara, because in the twenty-eighth chapter of the first book of Samuel it is said that Tunara and that witch Endor invented a heresy about Samuel's death; yet the history of the events contained in those books, prolongs To the rest of Tara's life, and to David's old age.David is the heir of Tun Lo.As for the account of Samuel's funeral (a matter which he himself could not relate) is found in the twenty-fifth chapter of the First Book of Samuel. The chronicle in this chapter affirms this to be 1,060 years before Christ; but the history in the first part of this book is recorded as 1,056 years before Christ, that is to say, until the time of Tara. death, not four years after Samuel's death. The story narrated at the beginning of the second part of "The Book of Samuel" did not happen until four years after Samuel's death, because the beginning of the book was after David ruled the country, and David was the heir of Tara.The book continues until the end of David's reign, forty-three years after Samuel's death.So those books themselves are positive evidence that they were not written by Samuel. I have examined the books of the first part of the Holy Bible, and have attached names to them as their authors, while the Church, which calls itself the Christian Church, has imposed them on the world as the writings of Moses, Joshua, and Samuel .I have tracked down and proven this bogus claim to be a lie.Now, you priests of all kinds, have preached and written against the first part of the Age of Reason, what have you to say?With these overwhelming evidences against you staring in your face, do you still have the confidence to go to your pulpits and continue to force these books upon your congregations as the work of inspired authors and the word of God , when there is sufficient evidence that the facts have clearly pointed out that the person you call the author is not the author, and you do not know who the author is. What false innuendo can you come up with to continue your slanderous deception?What else can you put forward against a pure and moral natural god (a religion) in order to support your system of hypocrisy, idolatry, and pseudo-revelation?The Bible is full of cruel and murderous commands. Because of these commands, countless men, women, and children were cruelly executed. Is this also from a friend?This friend you think of with esteem, your countenances radiate with satisfaction at the discovery of this false accusation, and it is an honor to defend his damaged reputation.This is because you have indulged in cruel superstition, or are not interested in honoring your Creator.You have heard, or have listened to, the dreadful stories of the Bible, and are obstinately indifferent. The evidence I have presented, and will continue to present throughout the course of this book, is to prove that the Bible There is no authority.I will comfort and calm the hearts of millions, when it would hurt the obstinacy of a priest.This will liberate them from all strict thoughts of God.These thoughts were instilled in their minds by the priests and the Bible, and they were always in a hostile position to all their conceptions of God's morality, justice, and mercy. Now I am working on two books of Kings and two books of Chronicles.Those books are entirely historical, mostly confined to the lives and actions of the Jewish kings.These kings are generally a gang of rascals; but we are no more concerned with these matters than we are with the Roman emperors or with Homer's account of the battle of Tro.Moreover, since those works are anonymous, we know neither the authors nor their characters, so it is impossible to know how much credit should be given to the matters in the books. Like other ancient histories, they appear as a jumble of fables and facts, possible and impossible; but the remoteness of time and place and the changing circumstances of the world make them feel dated and uninteresting. My main use of those books is to make comparisons between them and with the rest of the Bible to show that this false book of the Word of God is confusing, contradictory, and brutal. The first book of Kings begins with the reign of Solomon, one thousand and fifteen years before Christ according to biblical chronology, and the second book ends five hundred and eighty-eight years before Christ, at Zedekiah Soon after taking office.Zedekiah was taken to Babylon as a captive after Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem and defeated the Jews.These two books cover a period of four hundred and twenty-seven years. The two Chronicles, a history of the same period, generally speaking of the same characters, were written by another author, for it would be absurd to say that the history was written twice by the same author . The first part of Chronicles (providing a genealogy from Adam to Tara, which uses the first nine chapters) begins with the reign of David; Shortly after Zedekiah's reign, approximately 588 years before Christ.The last two stanzas of its final chapter advance history by fifty-two years, making it five hundred and thirty-six years.But these verses do not belong to this book, as I will explain when I come to the book of Ezra. The two chapters of "Kings", in addition to the history of Jula, David and Solomon who ruled the whole of Israel, include the life summary of seventeen kings and one queen. The national jade of Israel, because the Jewish nation was divided into two parts immediately after Solomon's death.They each choose a king, and wage a war of deep hatred against each other. Those two books are almost entirely histories of assassinations, treachery, and wars.The violence which the Jews were accustomed to inflict on the Canaanites whose country had been subjected to their savage invasions under the pretense of God's grace;Hardly half of their kings died of natural causes.In some instances, successors have murdered entire families in order to gain ownership.Yet after a few years, or even months, or less than a few months, the successors met the same fate.There is a passage in the tenth chapter of the second book of Kings that two baskets filled with the heads of seventy children were exposed at the city gate; they were the children of Ahab, and they were killed out of The order of Jehovah, and the person who conveyed this order was Elijah, who pretended to be a servant of God. Elijah anointed Jehovah and made him king of Israel. He deliberately wanted him to commit this murder and assassinate his predecessor.In the account of the reign of Manahen, it is said that he was one of the kings of Israel who killed Shalam, who ruled for only one month. "Kings" chapter 15, verse 16 says that Manahan rushed into the city of Tefsha, because they did not open the city gate for him, and tore apart all the pregnant women in the city. Can we allow ourselves to speculate that God would distinguish between any people of any nation in the name of his chosen people?If so, those people must set an example for the most pious and benevolent peoples in the world, not a people full of thugs and murderers like the ancient Jews; nor a people who corrupt and imitate Demons and liars like Moses, Aaron, Joshua, Samuel, and David ruled the world with barbarism, evil, and uniqueness.Were we not obstinately closed our eyes and hardened our hearts, it would be impossible, even with long-established superstitions stamped into our minds, not to see that the flattering title of His Chosen People was nothing but clergymen and Jewish leaders. A lie created by men to conceal their own vile qualities; Christian clergy are sometimes equally corrupt and brutal, and sometimes profess religion. The two Chronicles are copies of the same crime, but the history is in some places incomplete, because the author has abridged the reigns of certain kings; in this book, as in the Kings As in the above, there is often a transition from the king of Judah to the king of Israel, and from the king of Israel to the king of Judah; these accounts are confusing to read.History in the same book sometimes contradicts itself, as in the second chapter of Kings, chapter 1, verse 8, which tells us in rather vague terms that after the death of King Ahaziah of Israel, Jehua Ram or Jehoram (who was of the house of Ahab) succeeded him in the second year of Jevarram or Joram son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and in the same book VIII verse sixteenth But it says this: In the fifth year of Jehoram king of Israel (son of Ahab), Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign; and in another chapter it is said that Jeram of Israel began to reign in the fifth year of Joram of Judah. Several very unusual events are recorded in one history, which are said to have taken place in the reign of their king so-and-so, but are not found in another history, under the same king; For example, after the death of Solomon, the first two competing kings were Rehoboam and Jeroboam; and in the twelfth and thirteenth chapters of the first chapter of "Kings", it is said that Jeroboam offered sacrifices and burned incense, and it is also said that there is a king called The men of God cry out to the altar, "O altar! O altar!" (see thirteenth verse 2) Thus saith the Lord, A son shall be born in the house of David, and his name shall be Josiah, and he shall The priest shall burn incense before you, and the bones of men shall be burned before you." Verse 3 says, "Then the man of God gave a sign that this altar would burst, and its ashes would be poured out; this is what the LORD said When King Jeroboam heard the words that the man of God called to the altar of Bethel, he stretched out his hand from the altar and said, Take him, and the hand that the king stretched out to the man of God was withered and could not be bent." One would think that such an extraordinary situation (this is speaking as a judgment) happened to the head of one party, and at the first moment of the division of the Israelites into two countries, if it is true, there should be two histories. There are such records.But later people believed everything the prophets told them, and the prophets and the historians don't seem to trust each other, they know each other very well. In the book of Kings there is a long narrative about Elijah.This account, which takes up several chapters, ends (2 Kings, second chapter, verse 11), "They (Elijah and Elisha) were walking and talking, when they suddenly became angry. The chariot and the flaming horse separated the two, and Elijah went up into heaven in a whirlwind." Humph!The story amounts to a miracle, but there is no mention of the author of Chronicles, although he mentions Elijah's name; nor does he say anything about the story recorded in the second book of Kings; A group of children shouted: Elisha was bald, bald; twelve lads".Tales say, he passed silently again, ("Kings" Chapter 13 of the second part) also said that someone was burying the dead, and at the place where Elisha was buried, he suddenly saw (verse 21) "As soon as the dead man touched the bones of Elisha, he (the dead man) rose again. , stood up."The story doesn't tell us whether they buried the man, even if he came back to life and stood up, or pulled him up again.Throughout all these stories, the author of Chronicles was as silent as any author today.They are not meant to be dismissed as lies, or at least exaggerated, as stories of this type are. Although these two historians may tell different stories about each, they are as silent as the so-called prophets, and their works occupy the second half of the Bible.Isaiah, who lived in the time of Hezekiah, is mentioned in the Book of Kings, and again in the Book of Chronicles when these historians speak of that dynasty.But in at most one or two cases, and apart from those briefly mentioned, the rest are not even mentioned, not even hinted at; although according to the Bible Chroniclers, they lived in the period when those histories were written; some of them were still long before this period.If the prophets were, as they were called, such important persons in their day, as biblical compilers, missionaries, and commentators account for them, none of these histories speak of them, nor How will it be explained? As I have already said, the history of Kings and Chronicles is advanced to 588 BC, so it is appropriate to check which prophets lived before that period. According to the chronology attached to the first chapter of each book of the prophets, a table is attached below, recording the names of all the prophets and the years they lived before Christ, and when they lived as "Kings" and "Kings" Years before Chronicles. A list of the prophets with the time they lived before Christ and the time before Kings and Chronicles were written. Years Before Name Christ Kings and Chronicles previous years