The factual report describes how Christ, due to his provocative statements, increasingly incurred the wrath of the Jews-Supreme. Therefore they searched for an appropriate occasion to get rid of him.
That the Jews-Supreme really wished to eliminate Christ cannot be doubted. Even the Bible itself repeatedly confirms this fact. According to St. Mark's Gospel (14,1) “… the chief priests and the teachers of law were looking for some sly way to arrest Jesus and kill him.”
Pilate and Herod, to whom the life of a non-Roman most probably would not have caused much worry, are not able to see the point of the elders of the Jewish nation, and not even the instigated people intimidate them. They find Jesus not guilty and want to release him. The Gospel according to Luke (23,13) reports:
„Pilate called together the chief priests, the rulers and the people, and said to them, „You brought me this man as one who was inciting the people to rebellion. I have examined him in your presence and have found no basis for your charges against him. Neither has Herod, for he sent him back to us. With one voice they cried out, Away with this man! Wanting to release Jesus, Pilate appealed to them again. But they kept shouting, Crucify him! Crucify him!“
Chapter 4 of the Acts (and many other passages analogously report the same) express too that not only Jesus but all his disciples were unwanted persons. After Christ's death, Peter and John were arrested because the apostles were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead:
„The priests and the captain of the temple guard and the Sadducees came up to Peter and John while they were speaking to the people. They were greatly disturbed because the apostles were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead. They seized Peter and John, and because it was evening, they put them in jail until the next day.”
In the Gospels of St. Matthew as well as in those of St. Mark and St. Luke it can be read how Jesus spoke to the crowds, and how he warned them against the teachers of the law and Pharisees:
„Beware of the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and love to be greeted in the marketplaces and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. They devour widows' houses and hypocritical say lengthy prayers.” (Luke 20,45-47)
„Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness.” (Luke 11,39)
„Woe to you, because you are like unmarked graves, which men walk over without knowing it.“ (Luke 11, 44)
And when one of the experts in the law felt offended after having heard all these reproaches, Jesus went on and added:
„And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them. Woe to you, because you build tombs for the prophets, and it was your forefathers who killed them. So you testify that you approve of what your forefathers did; they killed the prophets, and you build their tombs.” (Luke 11,46-48)
And finally Christ threatens that this generation will be punished for everything. He reproaches the experts in the law not to have used the gate to knowledge and to have hindered those who want to enter. „When Jesus left there, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law began to oppose him fiercely and to besiege him with questions, waiting to catch him in something he might say. Meanwhile, when a crowd of many thousands had gathered, so that they were trampling on one another, Jesus began to speak first to his disciples, saying: »Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.« And he encourages his friends not to be afraid of their suppressors, „I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more” (Luke 12)
There is no doubt that there were massive conflicts in opinion between Jesus and the Jews-Supreme, the elders, the scribes, the Pharisees and the lawyers. But the question must be raised why Jesus opposed the Jews-Supreme and their laws with such obvious stubbornness?
From the Gospels it can easily be seen that Jesus was a friend of the people and wanted to help them. He comforted them, healed the sick, gave them to eat, raised dead to life and warned of the Supremes as their seducers. Jesus most obviously wanted to win the people to join him and his ideas and thus risked getting into trouble with the leaders of the nation.
According to the factual report, the Essenes were not Jews. This, however, is hardly plausible. The numerous scrolls that were found in Qumran at the Dead Sea describe the Essenes as a kind of Jewish sect. In his work »The House of the Messiah« Ahmed Osman says about the Qumran scrolls and the Essenes that the scrolls belonged to a library of the Essenes, a secret Jewish sect that had separated from the Jewish community and the priests in Jerusalem whose faith and teachings they rejected as wrong.
It is even less plausible that Essenes lived among all peoples. The claim of the factual report that Christ was in India to visit the Essenes community there, could not be proved by a single document.
According to up-to-date research results it seems likely that Jesus originated from the Jewish sect of the Essenes. During his life he developed an ever-growing dislike against the Jewish leaders. More and more he considered himself a liberator and redeemer of the Jewish nation. Most probably he had a highly convincing appearance, a vivid mind and extraordinary rhetoric skills. Moreover it is likely that he had certain healing powers and thus was able to heal through his words (his will).
The factual report says that in his spirit Christ was the greatest of all beings, and it was he who enabled all other creatures to live. I decline on principle any discourses on the »greatness of spirit«. But nevertheless I would like to point out that I consider it most unlikely that Christ should have created the basis for the life of all living beings. Life evolved gradually, and human life – including Christ's – evolved much later.
There have always been critical voices that have pointed to the crumbling foundations of the Church. At universities it is taught how much was falsified and how many battles and disputes preceded the so-called »truths of faith« before they could be passed off nicely as expressions of God's will. Even the crowds of ordinary people feel that something must be wrong. They feel that Christ was a man dressed in simple clothes, who definitely would have rejected the purple caps and luxurious garments and who preferred the poor dwellings of a simple man to the noble houses of the rich. Everyone feels that dirty thoughts and mean deeds cannot be made undone by forgiving sins and that confession is a way to find out the people's most secret thoughts. Many people know what actually happened under the sign of the cross, how fantastic the biblical story about Creation is and how much guilt the Church has loaded onto it. And nevertheless crowds flock to the places where His Holiness, the Pope, appears!
The Church is not dead and religious criticism has certainly not come to an end, as Karl Marx believed. Marx is dead, but the Church is still alive and is celebrating its revitalization in formerly Communist domains.
What is going on in all the people, who on the one hand think logically and realistically and are able to achieve incredible things, but on the other hand flock to places in their hundreds of thousands where the highest bishop on Earth appears? What is going on in these people that makes them act in such an inconsistent way?
It is an old but successful trick: the Church establishes a figurehead, preaches justice and truth, charity and fraternity, about equality and humaneness, and its representatives make pious and compassionate faces and warningly lift their finger. Then they raise their hand that it may be kissed, the pouch is handed round, and afterwards they return to their daily business, namely multiplying the number of believing souls, increasing the power of the Church, collecting as much money as possible, taming the stubborn ones, managing estates and trying to increase them in number, elaborating guidelines and commandments and finally eliminating those who oppose the Church.
What does Joachim Kahl write in his work »Das Elend des Christentums« (»The Misery of Christianity«)? “The necessity to go on criticizing Christianity and theology is due to the simple fact that they continue to exist. The light of reason once more has to be directed against today's representatives of religion who have always benefited from the universal human trend to forget.”
Joachim Kahl, born in 1941 in Cologne, studied theology and graduated from Philipps University Marburg with a PhD in theology at a time when he had already started to settle up with the Church. “This book is a pamphlet”, he writes in the preface. “It cannot and does not want to conceal its polemic intentions. It was written due to a constant constraint of purification. I do not share the generally prevailing prejudice that rational criticism can only be presented in an undercooled and reserved manner. I have not written this work without anger and without study, but with anger and with study, with the ire developing of its own accord after a sufficient amount of thorough studies. If Christianity does not scandalize you, you do not know it!”
I am interested above all in the human who is sacrificed on the altar of a God whom I detest from the deepest bottom of my heart. Franz Overbeck, the renowned theology professor in Basel, admitted at the end of his professional career, „I may say that Christianity has cost me my life.“ But who really has enough courage and energy to throw everything overboard and start all over again after having completed his theological studies?“
Gustav Wyneken, the important German pedagogue (1875–1964), who studied theology for some semesters and then gave it up, devoted himself for a long time to studying on a scientific basis biblical traditions and interpretations of the Christian Church. In his work »Abschied vom Christentum« (»Farewell from Christianity«) he struggles for honesty and truthfulness and fights hypocrisy and the thoughtless followers. „An acute text analysis, while applying all methods available in scientific-critical philosophy and historical research, permit only one conclusion,“ the book says. „The New Testament is not a Holy Scripture, no historiography, but it is literature, tendentious and propaganda literature. Christian theologians know this, but still keep preaching Christian faith. The believing laymen hardly know anything about the loss of credibility of their faith, nor are they able to explain why they believe. In religious matters most Christians nowadays throw overboard their critical sensibility and acute skepticism, which they usually show as »world people«: In faith, however, they persist in an attitude which in their every-day lives is totally obsolete and contradictory.“
Kahl's judgment, which is the result of his most understandable anger, is even tougher, „The New Testament is a manifesto of inhumanity, a wide-ranging mass betrayal; it makes people dumb instead of enlightening them about their real interests.“
„Like its younger brother, joint heir and competitor, Islam, Christianity is based on Judaism,“ says Wyneken. „These three religions did not develop (gradually), but they were founded. They had a historical beginning that can be dated. The other big religions of antiquity such as the Babylonian, the Egyptian or the Greek, were natural religions. Their main Gods were personifications of natural powers, natural phenomena and natural laws that fill the universe and will eternally stay the same.
Christianity is totally different. It does not have any »Book of Natural Secrets«, it is not interested in nature which it totally ignores. It does not pursue the great human target to work out how the world really is. It selfishly breaks away from solidarity with human fate and human efforts. »Cosmos«, the word that the Greeks use for describing the wonderfully ordered universe, is used as a kind of swearword in the Christian religion: it stands for the evil world, from which we should escape. And religion is the way we should go in order to escape, the way which was opened to the humans because Jesus, the Son of God, has become human.“
„The word »Bible« should actually be removed, if not from our linguistic usage then at least from our thoughts,“ explains Wyneken. „In reality this comprehensive, famous, ancient book is not a homogenous work, but a colorful collection of literary monuments from more than a thousand years. These works are totally inconsistent among themselves and not just accumulated by bookbinders but due to the will of two religious communities that collected and compiled these scriptures and decided to consider them as the documents of their faith.
Linguistically speaking the term »The Bible« is a malformation, or at least it is based on a misunderstanding. The German word is derived – via Latin – from the Greek »biblia« (plural!) and means »books«. Only from the medieval ages, when Greek was no longer studied in the Occident, »biblia« became to be understood as a singular: »the Bible«, and it was increasingly forgot that this book is not an organic unit, but a conglomerate consisting of many different and diverse components.“
The Church structured its »New Testament« according to the model of the »Old Testament«, which comprises the books of Moses and other scriptures of prophets and kings. The New Testament comprises the four Gospels, the Acts and instructive scriptures by the apostles. As Jesus is described as the son of Yahweh, the Old Testament has become a binding and divine revelation for the Christians, too.
But there exists no single line written by Christ himself, and the Gospels according to Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were not really written by the apostles of the Lord. »Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament« (»Herder's Theological Commentary on the New Testament«), a work, of which it cannot be said that it was written by an author hostile to the Church, reports about the time and the authors of the Gospels and the Acts:
„The Gospel according to Luke was written around 70 A.D. For the Acts it seems appropriate to assume the decade between 80 and 90 A.D. as time in which they were written.“
„Like all »Gospels« - as the scriptures based on St. Mark's Gospel will be referred to later – the Gospel according to St. Mark was undoubtedly published anonymously.“ The assumed time in which it was written is most probably around 70 A.D.
„The Gospel according to St. Matthew was written anonymously around 80 A.D.“
»Of course« the various scriptures are full of contradictions which I do not want to discuss in detail. Only one example: Christ was borne by the Virgin Mary in only two of the Gospels, but not according to the other two.
In his work »Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums« (»Criminal Story of Christianity«) Karlheinz Deschner says about the numerous falsifications of the Church, „Many, maybe even most people are afraid to suspect such terrible betrayal particularly in the most »holy« sphere of their lives; but in no other field were there more lies and betrayals and more unscrupulous ones than in religion.“
According to Wynekens, who very much tried to find the truth, the scriptures were written in the following periods: The Gospel according to Mark at around 70, the Gospel according to Matthew at around 90, the Gospel according to Luke at around 100 and the Gospel according to John at around 140. The Acts, most probably by Luke too (although no-one really knows who Luke actually was, as the Gospels were edited anonymously), were written after 100. The First and Second Epistles of St. Peter as well as Jude's Epistle are falsifications, as many other epistles are supposed to be; the integrity and completeness of some of the scriptures seem to be more than dubious; furthermore it is suspected that parentheses and supplements were added at later stages in time. Merely the Pauline Epistles seem to be authentic.
Paul was a Jewish-Supreme, and his actual name was Saul. He hated Christ from the bottom of his heart, and together with other Jewish-Suprems he persecuted him and his followers. The Acts report how fanatically Saul schemed against the Christians even after Christ's death (Acts 8,1-3): „On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.”
Chapter 9,1-22 of the Acts reports about Saul's desire to kill the disciples of the Lord. „Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples. He went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem.“ But Jesus, who would have had enough opportunities during his lifetime to convert Saul into Paul, appeared to him on his way, and he asked why he persecuted him? As a consequence Paul was without sight, did not eat or drink for three days, and he prayed. So the Lord had to appear again. This time he appeared to Ananias, who was a disciple of the Lord in Damascus. He reported about the praying Saul, whereto Ananias replied that he well knew Saul and his evil spirit. But the Lord did not give in and said that he wanted to make this tireless persecutor of his spirit his chosen instrument (!). When Ananias finally did what he was commanded to, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized.
So what was the purpose of this evidently feint? What was it for?
It is not difficult to see that here most evidently a wide-ranging betrayal was launched. The Jews-Supremes were obviously searching for new, promising means to do harm to the Christian movement. Cunningly they decided to make the Christian movement feel insecure and to break it up by spreading fantastic tales and lies. Paul, a fanatic, was the best man for this purpose. Endowed with a new identity (Paul), money, secret support from the Jewish-Supremes and a nicely invented story about the appearance of the Lord, he came up with more fantastic news about Christ. Of course people did not believe him immediately. In Acts 9, 1-22 is written, „When Saul came to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he was a disciple.“
In this way, the recorded disputes in the ancient Church can easily be understood. Soon many people no longer knew what Christ really had said, and they tended more and more to believe the version disseminated by the pious and hypocritical Paul, who - due to the money he had at his disposal - was able to emphasize the meaning of his words with bread and wine which he turned into flesh and blood of the Lord during his ceremonies.
One of the early Fathers of the Church, Clement Alexandrinus (born at around 150), also pointed out the confusing state the Christian groups were in. He complained that Jews and heathens rejected joining the Christian movement, „because due to confusing dogmatic disputes raging among the various Christian groups people did not know who really stood for the truth.“ Origen, another Early Christian Father (who died at around 254) admitted that „many of those who confess to believe in Christ are unable to agree, not only about small and trivial things but also about important and significant matters.“
They could not even agree on the position of Christ. The so-called triune interpretation with a Father, a Son and the dove as Holy Spirit was developed after horrible disputes in a Church Assembly which today is nobly referred to as a »Council«. The Roman Emperor Constantine finally became fed up with all the religious disputes and fights. So he convened the rivaling and fighting groups to a church assembly and commanded them to agree on one homogeneous opinion on God and Christ. In this assembly, that was an in-door battle resembling a national-socialist meeting rather than a civilized discussion, the Creed was worded. Since then innumerable „I believe in God, the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ, his only son…“ were sent up to Yahweh.
But what else could be expected? When speaking about the Creed it has to be pointed out that there are numerous different versions. So one must not believe that the bishops during their synods were inspired by the Holy Spirit to find the right words. To study the various versions is a highly time-consuming effort that does not really lead to any satisfying results. Those interested can refer to the »Compendium of Creeds and Doctrines« and study the »Coptic Creed«, the »Ethiopian Creed in Questions«, the »Apostle's Creed«, the »Eastern Formulae« and many others.
The religious controversy did not at all come to an end after the Nicene Council. Synod followed synod.
When the Germanic migration of the peoples began, and the Roman Empire was increasingly under threat, the Christian movements achieved a decisive victory. They managed to move Emperor Theodosius, a man of a most violent temper, to declare the Christian Church the official religion of the Empire and to forbid heathen practices.
In the course of the centuries the power of the Church increased steadily. Soon even the emperor and the kings had to ask for the pope's favor, because it was the pope alone who was able to grant God's mercy and award the insignia of world power. Monk Hildebrand, after having become Pope Gregory VII (1073–1085), strove to set up a world empire under papal guidance. An open fight between Gregory VII and King Henry IV broke out after Gregory VII had proposed his program of spiritual predominance in the Dictatus Papae of 1075 (a series of 27 propositions exalting papal authority). Henry IV did not surrender to Gregory's demands and called for battle against his Church-friendly opponent, a battle which he lost. The fights continued and caused Gregory VII to excommunicate the king. He thus liberated all the King's subjects from the oath of allegiance and forbade the King to rule his empire. Henry IV had to travel to Italy and appear in front of the Pope dressed in a penitential robe. So the Pope had to lift the ban from the repentant king. In 1080 Gregory VII excommunicated Henry IV a second time. The angry King reacted to his excommunication by applying all available military means. His strategy was so successful that Gregory VII had to seek refuge with his Norman allies.
In the Middle Ages mental stupefaction was steadily growing towards a simply intolerable state. Any criticism was nipped in the bud. Inquisition, one of the most cruel incidents the world ever experienced, evolved. The Protestant Church historian Walter Nigg writes about it: „If someone claims that it was not that bad, it must be answered: Oh yes, it was bad, so bad that it could not have been worse!“
At first the bishops and their synods were responsible for the inquisition. They entrusted some laymen in every parish to track down »heretics«. When the Church could not be »purified« in this way, Pope Gregory IX finally changed inquisition into a centrally controlled institution of the Curia and assigned (1232) the Dominicans with its tasks (»domini canes« - »dogs of the Lord«, as the name was interpreted in the vernacular).
The inquisitors usually announced their visits to the towns to which they went. So the people could prepare themselves and gather at the given time. Those who did not appear were automatically considered suspects. Every Catholic was obliged to denounce »misbelieving« Christians, parents had to betray their children, children their parents, and spouses each other. Anyone who did not do so was guilty too. And the inquisitors had a particular liking for anonymous, written denunciations.
Trials against heretics usually began with imprisonment. The accused person was considered guilty right from the beginning. He was sent to prison, put in chains and forbidden to receive the sacraments. Right at the very beginning the accused person had to swear to the inquisitor, who was prosecutor, judge and confessor in one person, to respect all the commandments of the Church, to answer all questions in full compliance with the truth, to reveal all joint heretics and to willingly accept all kind of penance. No defense counsel was admitted in the trial. If the accused person did not make a full confession, torture was applied.
Obstinate or recidivous »heretics« were burnt alive. The inquisitors did not even shy away from exhuming bodies and burning the remains if it was »proved« afterwards that the deceased had been a heretic.
The burning of heretics usually took place on Sundays or holidays in order to attract the biggest number of spectators possible. Special riders were sent out to nearby places to invite the people to watch the spectacles. High prices were paid for windows with a view of the stake. While the National Socialists gassed their victims before burning them, the inquisitors feasted their ears on the moaning and crying of those tortured.
Sexuality was demonized and women were defamed. What every animal perceives as natural was debased to something demonic in human life. Every thought of physical pleasure had to be suppressed and fought down. Perverse acts were the consequences. The woman who already in Yahweh's time was seen as not equal to man was considered inferior, and women increasingly faced the arbitrariness of men. Kahl says, „The New Testament is the outcome of neurotic and narrow-minded people. Human sexuality is not seen as a source of pleasure, but as a source of fear, not as a medium of love, but as a medium of sin. Everything natural and bodily is banned – in part openly, in part hidden.“
In what a miserable state the Church was can easily be seen from the many anathemas which popes, bishops and their followings exchanged. In 1054 the Latin and the Greek Church finally broke apart. The two parties cursed and excommunicated each other. For many years there existed two Popes simultaneously, one residing in Rome and one in Avignon, France. Both of Christ's Substitutes on Earth anathematized each other and the regions subject to them, and they precipitated crowds of ignorant people into a terrible fear for their eternal grace. The Synod of Pisa in 1409, whose aim was to end the schism, removed both Popes and elected a new one. As the former two did not even think of retiring, the children of God were suddenly blessed with three Popes. The office of some Popes only lasted a few days or hours, and once it even happened that a Pope was killed by his successor, and his body was dragged through the streets of Rome in order to set a warning example.
Irrevocable theorems, the so-called dogmas, forced the believers to respect believingly, this means uncritically, every commandment of the Vatican. While every scientifically-minded person is well aware of the fact that every assumption remains a theory as long as it has not been sufficiently verified, the Popes and bishops believed that pretensions once made could be upheld for eternity. Although it must have been clear for a long time how much the popes and their followers had erred, infallibility was adopted on 18th July 1870 in the 4th Session of the 1st Vatican Council. Although even many Council Fathers expressed their reservations and finally left the Council before the decisive session, Pope Pius IX managed to adopt the dogma of infallibility.
Those who are able to bear studying the dogmas of the Church will constantly come across open threats. Those who cannot agree are cursed and anathematized. „Si quis autem huic Nostrae definitioni contradicere, quod Deus avertat, praesumpserit: anathema sit. But he who dares – God forbid! - to contradict this Our definition (of the infallibility of the Popes), shall be anathematized“. What the anathema, the ban of the Church, the expulsion from the community of believers, accompanied by horrifying curses and threats, meant to the people of those times is nowadays hard to imagine for us, who are relatively free people.
It is no use enumerating all the wrong decisions that followed the adoption of infallibility. It is clear to everyone that is not wholly in the thrall of the Church that there is no connection whatsoever between the Holy Spirit and the Curia. Furthermore the adoption of infallibility concerned only the interests of the Church and never those of its believers. After Hitler had come to power, he concluded his first international treaty with the Holy See. No Holy Spirit hung over the Pope's head to suggest that any treaty with that man who was just about to become one of the biggest criminals of history should not be concluded.
When somebody is tormented by pressure of conscience because the »truths« of the Church cannot be conciliated with his reasonable mind, the priests tell him: „You must not doubt, my dear child!“
Yes, we are treated like children. We are baptized and integrated into the Church long before we have any idea about where we are taken. Right from the moment when we are born it has tried to obscure our mind with horrifying tales and to fight our reasonable thinking by applying lies and pretended truths.
All major or great findings or movements were fought down. Giordano Bruno died at the stake on 2 February 1600. In 1633 Galileo Galilei, down on his knees and dressed in a penitential robe, was forced to abjure his teachings and to perjure, „I have in front of me the Holy Gospels, touch them with my hands and swear that I believe and with the help of God will always believe all that the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church considers, preaches and teaches as true… Therefore I abjure honestly and without any hypocrisy, I damn and curse all these errors and heresies, and furthermore I abjure any other kind of error, heresy or sectarianism which is against the Holy Church. I swear that in the future I will neither in writing nor in speaking disseminate anything that might cast suspicion on me. But if I know a heretic or someone who is suspected of being a heretic, I will denounce him in this Holy Office or inform the inquisitor or the local Church authority.“
„All parties concerned knew only too well that this oath was a lie,“ writes Johannes Hemleben in his monograph on Galileo Galilei. „But the state of moral corruption, in which the »Holy Office« was at the beginning of the 17th century, contributed to overcoming all sensations of conscience both in the accusers and the accused alike. People had long become used to such untruthfulness. As long as people allow any impulses of power to affect the finding of justice and jurisdiction, there will be trials that should be unbearable to human conscience. Therefore the point cannot be a mere »rehabilitation of Galileo«, as the Viennese Cardinal König demanded in summer 1968. A shameful verdict that was executed cannot be annulled centuries later.
The »Case of Galileo« was and is not primarily concerned with the question of which position the Earth has in the universe, but with the right the Church claims to decide between truth and untruth, with its decision being binding for all believers. Under the pretext of being the guardians of truth, crimes were committed on behalf of Christianity and under the official guidance of the Church, crimes that have contributed to eliminating people whose orthodoxy was doubted.“
Instead of teaching the believers how to write and read and to inform them about their objective interests, the Church preferred to keep them dumb to make it easier to collect their money. The Lord priests were well respected, and even though they did not own them, they still administered estates of various sizes. Even up to the 20th century some lamb that felt guilty in some way would donate his property to the Church to buy salvation for life in the hereafter. Enormous sums of money were made by selling all kinds of things – pictures and relics; and the sale of indulgences proliferated so terribly that it finally had to be prohibited.
While the ideas the so-called heathens – for example the Romans – had about God were based on tolerance, and the Roman Empire developed a relatively just legal system, Yahweh does not know any mercy with dissenters. He spreads a feeling for justice that may cause one to weep. His commandments demand belief in him, and him alone; he is the great and vying God who appears as fire, tolerates nothing and nobody besides himself, and eliminates everyone that dares not to believe in him and serve him. Yahweh is a slaveholder, who gives Moses exact instructions about how to manage this servitude, and how he even may sell his own daughter as a maidservant. Hypocritically he instructs, »Thou shall not kill!« (Fifth Commandment), but in the same moment this God demands the murder of all prophets who pronounce other beliefs and killing every thief regardless of why he has stolen. Children must die if they swear against their father or mother even if they do so because they are beaten or tortured. Entire peoples must be eliminated because of God's wrath. „If you (Moses) listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and will oppose those who oppose you. My angel will go ahead of you and bring you into the land of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites and Jebusites, and I will wipe them out. I will send my terror ahead of you and throw into confusion every nation you encounter. I will make all your enemies turn their backs and run.” (Exodus 23, 20ff)
It is really interesting to see which commandments Yahweh did not promulgate. Those who lie remain unpunished as those who are hypocrite. He does not dislike the filthy types, but those who dare to doubt Yahweh, this strange Lord, must be eliminated at once.
If men fight – God really thinks of everything! – and while fighting hurt a pregnant woman and she loses her unborn child, then the culprit has to pay a fine. But if any other harm is done, then a life must be given for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot, a brand for a brand and a weal for a weal.
How stupid his instructions and commandments are can easily be seen in Exodus 21,28-29: „If a bull gores a man or a woman to death, the bull must be stoned to death. If, however, the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not kept it penned up and it kills a man or woman, the bull must be stoned and the owner also must be put to death.” The idea that the ox might have pushed because it was tormented does not even enter this God's mind.
Although Yahweh has commanded not to kill only a few moments before, he continuously sets up rules about killing Man and beasts. „Do not allow a sorceress to live. Anyone who has sexual relations with an animal must be put to death. Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the LORD must be destroyed” (Exodus 22,17-20)
And see which promises this God makes and does not keep, only to make people loyally serve and worship him and only him: „Worship the LORD your God, and his blessing will be on your food and water. I will take away sickness from among you, and none will miscarry or be barren in your land. I will give you a full life span. I will send my terror ahead of you and throw into confusion every nation you encounter. I will make all your enemies turn their backs and run.” (Exodus 23,25-27) Either Yahweh is that naïve as to believe himself that he can prevent disease and miscarriage and will make the people fulfill the number of their days, or he just says these things so that his wishes and commandments are observed.
Yahweh is like a raven that wants to have everything that glitters. He instructs Moses to levy offerings. ”Tell the Israelites to bring me an offering. You are to receive the offering for me from each man whose heart prompts him to give. These are the offerings you are to receive from them: gold, silver and bronze; blue, purple and scarlet yarn and fine linen; goat hair; ram skins dyed red and hides of sea cows; acacia wood; olive oil for the light; spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense; and onyx stones and other gems to be mounted on the ephod and breastpiece. Then have them make a sanctuary for me, and I will dwell among them. Make this tabernacle and all its furnishings exactly like the pattern I will show you. Have them make a chest of acacia wood—two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half wide, and a cubit and a half high. Overlay it with pure gold, both inside and out, and make a gold molding around it. Cast four gold rings for it and fasten them to its four feet, with two rings on one side and two rings on the other. Make an atonement cover of pure gold—two and a half cubits long and a cubit and a half wide. And make two cherubim out of hammered gold at the ends of the cover.” (Exodus 25,2-18)
God's instructions continue like this. The cherubs shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and candlesticks of pure gold must be made and the tabernacle of this Lord must be decorated. There must be an altar and many nice instruments for sacrificing as often and conveniently as possible. His servants, the priests must look lovely. So this almighty God instructs garments to be made with a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle, that are similar to the garments which are still worn by the priests today during their service to this God.
Sacrificing to God mainly consisted in slaughtering animals, which had to be done in a strictly dictated manner. In front of the altar the best animals were slaughtered in the face of God. The priest had to take the blood (!) with his finger and put it upon the horns of the altar (!) and pour all the blood (!) beside the bottom of the altar. And all the fat had to be burned upon the altar. But the other parts had to be burned with fire without the camp. How it must have stunk most disgustingly after these acts of sacrifice and after the numerous raids directed by this God! In a raid against the Midianites – which can be read in the Old Testament – twelve thousand well-armed Hebrews slew all males. And they took all the women captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire. And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoils unto Moses. And Moses was wroth with the captains and robbers and murderers. He said unto them, „Have ye saved all the women alive? Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that had known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. Whosoever had killed any person, and whosoever had touched any slain, purify yourselves with water.“
Just imagine: hordes of robbers kill all males and devastate everything that can be devastated. But Moses, the great prophet of God, is angry and demands that the boys and all the women who have already had intercourse be killed too. Only virgins are welcome, first because they are nice to look at and convenient to abuse, and secondly because they can serve in multiplying the nation. How these women felt and what happened to their children is not written in the most holy of the books.
After the slaying of the children and the strangling of the women it was God's turn again. He did not order an end to the murdering and that the scared and abused maidens be left alone; no, he demanded his share of the prey. He instructed Moses to separate from each sort whether man or cattle one out of five hundred souls. This made, as documented in the books, 675 sheep and goats, 72 oxen, 61 donkeys and 32 virgins (!). Moses had to bring all of them – even the virgins! – to the priest Eleazar to sacrifice them before the altar of this Lord who rejoiced over the blood of those murdered.
Who can consider such deeds as good? Which man, even one of a very bad character, cannot find such morbid actions disgusting and perverse? How perverted, how obsessed, how errant must people be who have read or even studied these things and in the face of a deceived crowd still speak pious prayers in front of the altars of this monster?
The Old Testament is full of lies and brutalities of all kinds. The cock and bull stories start with the tale about Creation and continue until Moses, who was a strange leader of his nation. All the time there is tussling and quarrelling, killing and murdering, fornicating and sacrificing, and sacrificing again, swearing and breaking oaths, cursing and damning, deceiving and lying.
Yahweh is no God, Yahweh is a demon, immeasurably vain and obsessed with the thought of being served and glorified by all living creatures. He who is unable himself to do anything but brag and boast, makes use of Man to achieve His goals.
Yahweh uses his »angels«, whom he also calls »prophets«, to talk to Man. Stories such as the one about the burning bush are fairy tales. In reality the angels and prophets were media, and only through these media could Yahweh negotiate with Moses and other leaders and dictate his commandments and orders to them.
That mediumship to communicate with the hereafter was known at that time can be seen from Leviticus 20,27: „A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads.”
So when someone was a medium but not in Yahweh's service, he had to be eliminated immediately to make sure that the true demon-like nature of Yahweh would not be revealed by these media. In Numbers 12 there is a description of how even Moses' media – Miriam and Aaron – tried to oppose and said, „Has the LORD spoken only through Moses?“ they asked. „Hasn't he also spoken through us?“ Consequently this God became very angry, and he made Miriam become leprous, white as snow. And Aaron was very much frightened and did not say anything. But a little later this God called him into his kingdom and made Aaron's son Eleazar a prophet.
The book of Deuteronomy (18,10-15) also reports about wizards and prophets, „Let no one be found among you who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. You must be blameless before the LORD your God. The nations you will dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD your God has not permitted you to do so. The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him.”
Is it not more than clear why this God has such panic fear of people who have clairvoyant or medial abilities?
Why is Yahweh considered a God, but Hitler on the other hand a mass murderer? Have both not ordered the same thing? – Hitler did not like ethnic groups such as Jews or gypsies, Yahweh disliked entire nations!
For a long time the Church knew only too well how to keep believers away from the foundations of their faith and how to satisfy them with what they considered good and pleasant. The holy mass was read in Latin; what was preached from the pulpit was merely in the interest of the Church. Martin Luther finally translated the Bible into German and thus managed to make it known to the small minority who knew reading and writing.
The Church has always benefited from the fact that alternatives – such as cults and sects etc. – actually offer well-known things and usually the same God. It has managed to maintain its position, because »blasphemy« - like I practice it here - is still punishable. But the Church has also benefited from the fact that scholars again and again have become fed up and done away the topic God with three simple words »does not exist«.
But the end of the rule of Yahweh and his servants is only a matter of time. »Modern« humans are reasonable and capable of learning; they will manage to get rid of the burden of the past and will do so with pleasure as soon as an appropriate occasion arises. One day, which might not be too distant, churches will disintegrate because they lack financial contributions, and many of them will have to be preserved with public funds in order not to erase totally the memory of terrible times.