Secrets of the Bible
This critique is against
some writings of the Bible that blaspheme God.
IS NOT against the people of
Israel. I am a friend not an enemy of people of Israel!
And the Lord said to them: If you are
Abraham's children, do the deeds of Abraham. But as it is, you are seeking to
kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham
did not do.
Abraham was, according the writings, a just and pious man.
About his name, Abram=father, or Abraham=father of nations,
it was not of course a real name! So, it couldn't be his original one. Logical,
who would call him father when he was a little boy!! Perhaps he remained known
by this name because, people of his family, sons, relatives, grand-children,
etc, used to call him father, instead of
his unknown original name. The Lord called him Abraham, as it is written! It
seems rather clearly that Moses used the name Father/Abram under Lord's will as a holy one, of a just and pious father,
and also as a reference to a holy "starting point" of the nation, while the just and pious Abram
especially for the Hebrews was a holy
model for imitation. His
original name was rather Hebrew, but for others
this name meant nomad or wanderer or walker.
Chaldea, where he
came from, was the south western part of Babylonia that started from the
stretched to the Arabic desert. In those places, and in all
as well, lived Semitic tribes, forefathers of Abraham. According the writings,
Abraham was born in Ur of Chaldeans, from where his father Terah took the whole
family intending to live in Canaan, but for unknown reasons they resided in
Haran. When his father died, he decided to go in the
Canaan, as it was their first intention. It is written that God spoke to Abraham, and
told him to leave his land and circle of relatives and go to the land that Lord
would show him. Well, it is rather
correct to accept he felt a voice calling him, not he heard by his
ears the voice of God. But maybe Abraham
heard His voice indeed. Why not?
As we know, God has His various ways to communicate with pious
people, without speaking directly, and Abraham certainly was a pious, honest and just man. Abraham, of whom
Lord Jesus also spoke about, using his truthfully as an example, must have been one of
those human phenomenon, children of man, for whom you would think came from
no-where; they remind oasis in the desert, in which the wild nature and the
law of eating each other prevails. People like him do not belong to the
environment, do not compromise injustice, they cannot tolerate snatching,
lie and exploitation, they cannot stand hypocrisy. They prefer injustice for
themselves than injustice for others; they would rather give than take,
serve than to be served, to be
humiliated than to humiliate others. They prefer to die than to disobey the
voice of virtue that inflames their souls and gives directions to their acts.
They are incompatible against the corruption of powerful rulers and
so most of them end to prison, or judged to death. This kind of man was also Socrates.
could also be Abraham. They
are graceful people, all
of them look like one, regardless if they lived in pagan environments, or in
different religious systems. All of them have the common sign of obeying virtue,
in which the basic demand is the simple formula; don't do to others what you
wouldn't like others do to you,
or do to the others what you would expect the others do to you.
This is a common understanding for every one, it is the law
of God written in our souls! Simply, you don't want to be a slave,
so, don't make other
people your slaves, you don't want others to be unjust to you,
so, don't be unjust to the others. But
even if someone is unjust to you, don't
also become unjust in return, don't come down to the same
low level of him who was
unjust to you. Don't return hate to hate; beside the destructive
results that streams from hate, the most important is that
the hate would destroy the beautiful treasures of your soul,
would destroy the wonderful and vivifying treasures of love that raises the
human on those divine levels that approach the Highest
Lord Jesus mentioned about Abraham and said; if you were Abraham's
children then you would do Abraham's acts. Everybody knew that Abraham was a pious and just
man. The secretaries and Pharisees were also very proud to be descendents of
Abraham. But what is the meaning of piety and justice for people
to whom the Ego is the centre of
the universe and so end up
being hypocrites? The meaning of piety and justice
can be easily adapted and alienated from Ego and from the other various personal
and racial interests. To understand who Abraham was by the meaning Lord Jesus
mentioned about, they should try against the contraries to get to higher levels
that approach God, and then they will understand who Abraham was and what were
Well, that was Abraham,
but, as we distinguish,
and as we should expect, the pious and just Abraham was adapted to match
and reflect the prosperous economic positions of other people who were rich
leaders of some posterior time, in which the state of
ruled. There were about times of the rich people of
who were owners of all those places, that walked by the poor nomad Abraham, yet
those rulers were very rich in gold, silver,
sheep, slaves, cows,
including of course some
innocent horses and donkeys as well. So, they
also presented poor Abraham as rich as were
themselves for easy understanding pursuits, which also
mean a kind of opium. Hashish! Put people to sleep! "God made
him rich", as they said!! But
if we look closely the writings that are mixed up
with the writings of the Prophet, we might realize that Abraham's
wealth was rather charcoals. It is written he left the city Haran with a lot of
wealth and slaves, while it is also written he heard the voice of God telling him to leave the environment of
his family and start to walk free and independent into the land that God would
So, some writings, (Moses' writings),
declare he left his country together with his wife, and rather with Lot too, and he
was poor, but other writings say, he was very rich and
slave-owner. Well, of course, if he had slaves he must also have had wealth,
while if he was poor how could he be owner of slaves? But if he was rich, then
why did he live as a nomad, and why was he wandering and setting up his tents in
various places? When, as it is written, there was starvation in Canaan he had to
go in Egypt to survive, but why if he was very rich! He was dreaming to get some
land for his own, and as it is written God promised to him his descendants would inherit all those areas
in which Abraham didn't have a permanent place to
stand. But if he was a wealthy man he could buy some land,
thought the only place he bought was a little
plot of land after the death of Sarah, and he used it as a family tomb.
Before she die, and before Ishmael was born, he appeared living in a
large area of land around the Jordan River (there is not clarification
for if he
bought it or rented it), that he shared it with Lot by yieldingness; why should
we fight, my brother, and why should there be hate between your shepherds and my
shepherds, the whole land is in front of us!!
You make your choice, if you go
left, I will go right, and if you go right, I will go left. That is very good of
course, but if the whole land was free in front of them, and
if he could share it with
Lot, then why did he have to move around to various places? Why
was he a nomad?
It is written (then) at that time the Canaanites lived in those lands and
so the land was their land. So how come it appears
as Abraham was saying "all the
land is in front of us"? They usually give details but they do
how it happened so much good land was free for Abraham and Lot! If he bought it,
then why did he ask to have a piece of land for family's
tomb, and why did he have to move around setting up his tent in various places? But then, if he was
poor and without land, and without a place to lay his head, how then could it be
possible to have slaves, to be owner of humans, where would the slaves work
if he had no place to stand, and how would he feed them?
But there is something else too. We suppose that his son
Isaac inherited his wealth, which later became the
dispute-reason of the birthrights between Jacob and Esau. But as we
notice, the plate of lentils that Esau ate had the "same value" as the
inheritance of Isaac, which was written that Jacob inherited,
but we didn't see it anywhere. "All the land
is in front
of us", did not belong to poor Abraham, but belonged
centuries later to people of
Israel, and especially to the rich rulers when ruled in those
So they were trying very correctly to teach the owners to be nice, not to kill one
another for a piece of land, and in order to justify the "pious" rich
rulers, were "teaching" that
even Abraham who was blessed by God was also very rich
and human-owner; he "was the same"
like the rich
rulers of Israel!
God, they said, shares the wealth and the slaves, slaves were like sheep
and like cows for the "pious" owners, and so according to them, when God loves
"becomes bad and unjust" to some other people!
God they said converts people into trade objects giving them
to a "special ones", makes some special people rich,
so it might be very difficult for
them to enter in the Kingdom of Heaven!
What an absurdity!
So, according to them, God contradicts Himself, speaking
about justice, but "acts unjustly", play favourites with His children, converts
the unlucky child of a slave, into a toy and property of another lucky child of
a rich father!! God made the rich they say, and so God made the poor as well! In
another words they blaspheme God! And even to day
people of religious authorities have the audacity to say it,
without even feel ashamed, how much more would say it at that time! So they adapted the pious and just
Abraham to look like them, a blessed by God man, to act according their pursuits and agree with the
rich slave owners.
while the religious illogical that is presented as the will of God, including
racist, etc. that being used as guidance of mind in order to control the man, it is a very dangerous
poison! It might hypnotize people converting them into blind and heartless
robots or even into bombs!
It is also written the Pharaoh raped Sarah, when, according the writings,
she was at least 65 years old. We read the same
phenomenon with king Abimelech when she
was around 90 years old! Well, were there no younger, more beautiful and
women around, or it was about an allegorical story of Moses that was
"corrected" to be as a literal one?
Or it was some other kidnapping and rape
that was adopted into the story of Abraham? It doesn't seem logical at all,
especially for those kings who always had harems with young and beautiful girls. Why
would like to have sexual relations with a 65 and 90 years old woman?
seems rather clearly that there was about some allegorical meaning, written by
Moses, but as it is "corrected" now, it doesn't make any sense! Abraham
appears also as the forefather not only of Israel but of another Semitic tribes
and nations who also maintained that according to their traditions they were
descendents of father Abraham.
according to the writers, or rather according to those age's common pursuits
who always wanted to enslave the other tribes, the other tribes were not equal
to the people of Israel. So, beside some more mistresses that
Abraham "had" after the death of Sarah, when he was
very old, (according to them of course), he also "had"
a maid whose name was Hagar. She
was a slave, as they wrote, and Abraham had relations
with her. She was the one who gave birth to Ishmael.
It seems they tried to give proof, that yes, other tribes were also
descendents of Abraham, but descenders of Ishmael were not
equal while were sons of a slave. The slave was not an
equal human, and so her descendents too! It is written that
Hagar disregarded Sarah and so Abraham told her to do whatever she wanted with
her, and Sarah sent her away to the desert, even though she was pregnant.
Hagar went away very desperate, mainly for the future of her child, even
though Abraham was a just and "very rich" man, he didn't at least put her in
another tent, but told Sarah to do whatever she wanted with her. In other words,
and of course according to them, Abraham behaved very unjustly to Hagar,
although she was pregnant to him. What happened to Abraham's justice? Was he a
just man or was he not? Well he was, but the pursuits of slave owners were not.
Then an Angel appeared to Hagar asking her to return to her lady and be
obedient to her. That was really their pursuits.
The "message" was, become
obedient slaves, and of course it was not only the pursuits and dreams of
Israel's rich rulers but everyone had the same pursuits. They were trying to
undervalue the other people and emphasize their racial prestige as well. It is
written that Ishmael was hard and wild. They wrote the same thing about Esau as
well. The Angel said to Hagar to return and be obedient to her lady. Well, it
clearly reflects the wishes and pursuits of the rich people of Israel about
submission and enslaving on the other people, and of course, the pious and
honest Abraham have nothing to do with these kinds of wishes and demands.
The holy inspired Moses wrote the real story of Abraham; he wrote
allegorically about the enslaved in the sin of the son of Abraham, but the
posteriors added their own perceptions and pursuits, rendering Abraham to match
and agree with them. It seems that Moses wrote about Hagar and Ishmael by
symbolic meaning. The Apostle Paul in his epistle to Galatians
mentioned the name of Hagar saying Hagar symbolizes mount Sinai in Arabia. I transfer here
the writings of Paul, from 22 to 26 verse of chapter 4. " For it is written
that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman. But
the son of bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free
woman through the promise. This contains an allegory: for these women are two
covenants, one proceeding from the mount Sinai bearing children who are to be
slaves; she is Hagar. Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds
to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the
Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. (The holy Jerusalem, the New
Heavenly, symbolic Jerusalem, not the known city Jerusalem.)
So Moses wrote allegorical about Hagar and her son, (maybe
Hagar and her son was only a
reference, it was about a
symbolic association) as a symbol of the enslaved human in the sin, who
doesn't inherit the Promised Land, which means he cannot enter in the Kingdom
of God. But of course this doesn't mean at all, every human who happened to be
an Arab couldn't enter in the Kingdom of God. God didn't
make a "bad testament" for the Arabs and a good one for the Hebrews and
Christians. The writings of Moses spoke allegorical
language; spoke in general about the enslaved
in the sin son (descendant) of Abraham, regardless where he comes from, who
cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, and also about the liberated and atoned son
of Abraham, regardless where he comes from, who
would inherit the
spiritual treasures of God, the Promised Land, the
Kingdom of God. Now without comments, the Apostle Paul wrote symbolic about
Hagar as the mount Sinai of Arabia, while his time was
not the time of
critique of the Bible. But obviously, there are a lot of additions on top of Moses writing that
change the meaning and falsify the messages.
Now as about mount in Arabia of Paul, I would rather consider it was his
prophecy about the Arabic nations. Generally the Arabian people didn't believe
to the Lord. But beside this, the Apostle Paul makes things clear, as he
speaks allegorical about the enslaved in sin son of Abraham, who cannot inherit,
regardless if he is an Arab or a
Hebrew, and about the spiritual and liberated
son of Abraham, regardless if he is an Arab or Hebrew, who inherits, not a piece
of land in Palestine, but inherits the Kingdom of God. So the writings of Moses
were allegorical, stating that everyone who is enslaved in the sin
might insist he/she
is a descendant of Abraham, but will not be Abraham's inheritor.
writings of Moses didn't speak literal about slaves and lower people, just
because it happened to be born Arabs, neither for wild and enslaved Arabian
nations. Moses wrote spiritual about the enslaved in the sin human, who maybe is
a descendant of Abraham, but as he is enslaved in the sin, he cannot be
Abraham's inheritor. Well,
I should notice in here something else. Because Moses
wrote allegorical about the spiritual inheritance of Abraham; this was one of
the reasons where the others appeared Abraham as rich and slave-owner. Other
things Moses meant and wrote, and because of their interests, other things they
understood! They have put everywhere additions on top of Moses' writings, and
we have to be very careful, in order to separate straws from the wheat. And
because his writings are so much mixed up, we rely on the Lord Jesus words, and
so we realize that Abraham was indeed a pious and just father, and all the other
negative stories about him reflect various interests and pursuits of
In the story of Abraham we also read about the three Angels who went to
"investigate" and destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. It is a very strange story,
because while they wrote about God's Angels, we read
they appeared like normal men who have the same necessities and weaknesses as
regular men. They came tired with their feet dusted from the road, like
they came walking from some other far away country.
They were hungry and thirsty, and needed to eat, drink, and have a rest. So for
what kind of Angels did they write about? What common characteristic had those
Angels with those Angels who appeared to Daniel? Of
course they used to believe that as the gods, also the
Angels of God would drink and eat material food.
It is also written that only two Angels
visited Lot, who made wrong
decisions and Lot advised and enforced them to obey his demands. So again, for
what kind of Angels did they write
about? Certainly God doesn't send Angels to find out how
many are good and how many are corrupted. God knows. And besides they couldn't
make it, while by arriving in Sodom had been surrounded by the Sodomites who shouted out
"where are the two men who came into your house". Obviously, the Sodomites
were not looking for Angels. Why would look for Angels for, and how could see them
and hurt them? The Sodomites were looking for two men,
perhaps for homosexual intentions, or because they did something wrong,
and wanted to kill them.
At the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, we distinguish
of course some mixed up Moses' writings. But
again, Moses himself would
that God's Angels ate veal and butter, or
they made the
wrong decisions etc.
Some other people wrote all those illogical things for Moses!
Moses rather wrote, that God revealed to Abraham through a dream of three
Angels, or maybe Abraham indeed saw with his eyes three Angels who told him
cities that were about to be destroyed.
It seems Abraham sent two men to inform Lot to go away from
the cursed cities. Abraham asked (in his dream or if indeed saw them), the
Angels, if there were 50 or 40 or even 10 pious and just men in the cities,
would God destroy the just with the unjust? But there was no one. Of course
there were the innocent children, but while God is the Master of life, as
usually, Lord saves the innocent and the children and makes them worthy to live
with the Lord forever. But Moses wrote these words to pass a message.
In my understanding the
message says, if a city is totally corrupted, then it belongs totally to the
reptilian mind, and so the balance is lost.
In this case it provokes irritation and totally aversion,
because then, only the devil rules, and so there is no
longer place for love and justice,
and so there is no longer place for life; in this case the
devil has the right and authority to destroy it.
And he does it. A city of so much corrupted people
do not justify
any longer its existence. By destroying a corrupted city like
this, regardless how it was
destroyed, then God at least would save the innocent children from devil's
nails. And also, those people that been destroyed by devil's
authority, God would atone them and finally save them from devil's authority,
regardless how long would take after their death.
But again there was no way, and for no reason, that God would
ask some people, to kill other corrupted ones, further more,
it is impossible to
say, go and kill children. By doing so, it is like asking the
non corrupted to be very corrupted! If indeed God Himself destroyed Sodom and
Gomorrah, or in general, if wants to destroy a
corrupted city, then the Lord has various ways to do it, but will never ever ask
I do not believe that God Himself destroyed them. But this issue goes too far,
it is unimagined complicated, and so, unspeakable.
It is absolutely correct that the cities had been destroyed by volcanic
eruptions, and fell under the surface of the Dead Sea, which is lower than the
surface of Mediterranean by 396 meters. Its depth is also around 395 meters, and
it is about 80 kilometres long and 16 kilometres wide. Not much
life, or rather no life can survive in that sea as it contains about 24%
salt and other
chemicals as well. The story of Lot's wife, who turned to see the destruction
and was converted into a column of salt, it is rather
only allegorical and certainly belongs to Moses. The message says, no body should watch without
care the other's sufferings.
Must try to help if we can help, but if nothing can
be done, turn and face the other way and with grief go away. If the corrupted
get punished, then the people, who watch his suffering without care and pain,
become even more corrupted. They become cold and lifeless as a column of salt
that can be used only as material and selfish taste.
allegorical story of the woman who became column of
salt, speaks a very clear language that says, God would never ever ask people to kill other people, and especially
innocent and children.