| 
   The Holy Bible?  A roman-letter reprint of the 1611 King James Translation*
Webster’s Dictionary defines “holy” as “exalted or worthy of complete devotion as one perfect in goodness and righteousness,” but does this describe the Hebrew-Greek Bible, especially the Old Testament of today? Our research on that portion of that so-called "Holy Bible," known to the English-speaking world also as just "The Bible," definitely indicates otherwise.
In The Bible, John E. Remsburg discusses hundreds if not thousands of details questioning its “Authenticity,” Credibility,” and “Morality,” and he pointed out that Ingersoll** announced that “Somebody ought to tell the truth about the Bible.” He meant that the Bible is a book just like any other one, a human invention, and at times, especially in the Hebrew Old Testament, often a despicable one at that. "I regard the Bible," exclaimed Robert G. Ingersoll, "especially the Old Testament, the same as I do most other ancient books, in which there is some truth, a great deal of error, considerable barbarism and a most plentiful lack of good sense." Illinois Attorney General Robert Green Ingersoll (1833-1899) "I have read the Bible," the Civil War Colonel added in an interview with a Washington Post reporter in 1878. "I have heard it talked about a good deal, and am sufficiently acquainted with it to justify my own mind in utterly rejecting all claims made for its divine origin." “All that is necessary, as it seems to me, to convince any reasonable person that the bible is simply and purely of human invention—of barbarian invention—is to read it," wrote the prolific author, in The Gods. "Read it as you would any other book; think of it as you would of any other; get the bandage of reverence from your eyes; drive from your heart the phantom of fear; push from the throne of your brain the cowled form of superstition—then read the holy bible, and you will be amazed that you ever, for one moment, supposed a being of infinite wisdom, goodness and purity, to be the author of such ignorance and of such atrocity.”  Our research into Remsburg's three questioned areas of the Bible demands that we agree with a substantial portion of the evidence that he presented in the nineteenth century; although we want to emphasize that the Bible has some accurate historical information and much guidance and prophecies that would inspire one to lead a good life. That historical information, when exposed to the light of modern electrical technology, rips open the ancient veil in front of the mysterious Hebrew Ark or Arc of the Covenant.  However, our intention here is not to expound on ancient technology. Instead, we just wanted to quote a few deductions about the holiness of the Bible, by some prominent authorities, and ask just three questions that should inspire any interested reader to do further research on the topic. Firstly, we must ask: If the Creator of this universe is perfect, then why would He have to supplement the Hebrew Old Testament with the Greek New Testament? Couldn't a perfect god get it right the first time?
Secondly: Why does the Old Testament message of hate, destruction, and ruthless retribution contradict the New Testament's message of love and kindness? It seems like two different gods wrote two different holy books, one much less so than the other. And what is also curious is that these two collections of books, often completely opposed in divine philosophy, were attached to another group, secret books, called the Old Testament Apocrypha, to glue their words together.
 Thirdly: Why, if the Bible is so holy, was the bond of the Apocrypha later broken by the Protestants, even though it was firmly attached to the Bible of the early church, the Greek version of the Old Testament, and all English versions from their beginning in 1382 through the original 1611 King James Version? And even despite the fact that in 1546 the Council of Trent had reaffirmed the Catholic position that these books were canonical, Protestant preachers, the self-appointed judges of God's holy work, decided to cast them out of later versions of the King James Translation. They are: The Wisdom of Solomon, The First Book of Esdras, The Second Book of Esras, The Book of Tobit, The Book of Judith, The Additions to to the Book of Esther, Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Sirach, The Book of Baruch, The Story of Susanna, The Song of the Three Children, The Story of Bel and the Dragon, The Prayer of Manasseh, The First Book of Maccabees, and The Second Book of Maccabees. "It is difficult see why some of them were not in fact included" in the Bible, wrote the renowned American scholar and translator Edgar J. Goodspeed, in his introduction to The Apocrypha. "Those who argued for their retention in the canon could maintain that The Wisdom of Solomon and Baruch are at least as useful for religious instruction as Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, that if Esther is worthy of inclusion so is Judith also, that the Books of Maccabees are as deserving as Chonicles and Ecclesiasticus as Proverbs. If Wisdom was not actually written by Solomon, neither was Ecclesiastes or the Song, which make the same claim."
 These questions, comments, quotations, and animations should jump-start the thinking mechanism and research gears of anyone who has wondered about the holiness of the Bible, and maybe even loosen any fetters that religion has attached to their walk through life.
*Note in the use of "I" for a "J" and the "V" for "U" in the 1611 King James Translation. The introduction of the "J" and "U" into the English alphabet followed at a later time. Alphabets as well as languages evolve over time. **Colonel Robert Green Ingersoll was an American lawyer who served in the Union army during the Civil War. He was the Attorney General of Illinois and became a renowned lecturer. He wrote The Gods and Other Lectures; Some Mistakes of Moses; Why I am an Agnostic; Superstition; Debates with the Clergy; Arguments in Support of Suicide; What We Must Do to be Saved; Christ and the Colonel, The Wisdom of Jesus and the Wisdom of Ingersoll Compared; The Enemies of Individuality and Mental Freedom; A Christmas Sermon, and many other lectures, some of which are of book length.
AN EXTERNAL NOTE OF INTEREST:
How do you know the Bible is true?
“In the United States of America, most Christian ministers don't really believe the Bible,” wrote David Kupelian, the vice president and managing editor of WorldNetDaily.com. “In fact, back in the 1960s, University of Virginia professor and sociologist Jeffrey Hadden conducted a survey of 10,000 U.S. pastors – to which 7,441 replied. Their responses revealed what many had long suspected. . . .
“Although Hadden, when I contacted him to verify the poll numbers bandied about on different websites, couldn't confirm them after 35 years, here are a few of the shocking findings he made, according to Rev. D. James Kennedy's Coral Ridge Ministries.
“Asked whether they believed that the Old and New Testament Scriptures were the "inspired and inerrant Word of God in faith, history and secular matters," mainline ministers responded "NO" in overwhelming numbers:
· Episcopalians, 95 percent
· Methodists, 87 percent
· Presbyterians, 82 percent
“Remember, those are "NO" responses.”
If this was true in the 1960’s, maybe there’s even more hope now.
 
This page was last modified on Thursday, August 19, 2010 | |