Old and New Testaments are Incompatible
June 13, 2017
Douglas Reed says there is noPart 1- Deuteronomy is Blueprint of New World Order
Chapter 3 THE LEVITES AND THE LAW
The Controversy of Zion 1955
by Douglas Reed
The Judaist attitude towards other mankind, creation, and the universe in general, is better understood when [Deuteronomy] has been pondered, and especially the constant plaint that Jews are "persecuted" everywhere, which... runs through nearly all Jewish literature.
To any who accept this book [Deuteronomy] as The Law, the mere existence of others is in fact persecution; Deuteronomy plainly implies that. The most nationalist Jew and the most enlightened Jew often agree in one thing: they cannot truly consider the world and its affairs from any but a Jewish angle, and from that angle "the stranger" seems insignificant.
[ Douglas cites Jewish historian Joseph Kastein, History and Destiny of the Jews (1933): "Owing to the idea of the Chosen People, the Jewish world was Judeocentric; and the Jews could interpret everything that happened only from the standpoint of themselves at the center." He also cites H.S. Chamberlain": "From the moment when Jehovah makes the Covenant with Abraham, the fate of Israel forms the history of the world, indeed the history of the whole cosmos, the one thing which the Creator..troubles himself." p127]
Thinking makes it so, and this is the legacy of twenty-five centuries of Jewish thinking; even those Jews who see the heresy or fallacy cannot always divest themselves entirely of the incubus on their minds and spirits.
In the Twentieth Century this standard of judgment has been projected into the lives of other peoples and applied to all major events in the ordeal of the West. Thus we live in the century of the Levitical fallacy. Having undertaken to put "all these curses" on innocent parties, if the Judahites would return to observance of "all these statutes and judgments", the resurrected Moses of Deuteronomy promised one more blessing ("The Lord thy God, he will go over before thee, and he will destroy these nations from before thee, and thou shalt possess them. . . ") and then was allowed to die in the land of Moab.
In "the Mosaic Law" the destructive idea took shape, which was to threaten Christian civilization and the West, both then undreamed of. During the Christian era, a council of theologians made the decision that the Old Testament and the New should be bound in one book, without any differentiation, as if they were stem and blossom, instead of immovable object and irresistible force.
The encyclopaedia before me as I write states ironically that the Christian churches accept the Old Testament as being of "equal divine authority" with the New. This unqualified acceptance covers the entire content of the Old Testament and may be the original source of much confusion in the Christian churches and much distraction among the masses that seek Christianity, for the dogma requires belief in opposite things at the same time.
How can the same God, by commandment to Moses, have enjoined men to love their neighbours and "utterly to destroy" their neighbours? What relationship can there be between the universal, loving God of the Christian revelation and the cursing deity of Deuteronomy?
But if in
fact all the Old Testament, including these and other commands, is of
"equal divine authority" with the New, then the latter day
Westerner is entitled to invoke it in justification of those deeds by
which Christendom most denied itself: the British settlers'
importation of African slaves to America, the American and Canadian
settlers' treatment of the North American Indian, and the Afrikaners'
harsh rule over the South African Bantu. He may justly put the
responsibility for all these things directly on his Christian priest
or bishop, if that man teaches that the Old Testament, with its
repeated injunction to slay, enslave, and despoil is of "equal
divine authority".
No Christian divine can hold himself blameless if he so teaches. The theological decision which set up this dogma cast over Christendom and the centuries to come the shadow of Deuteronomy, just as it fell on the Judahites themselves when it was read to them in 621 BC.
Only one other piece of writing has had any comparable effect on the minds of men and on future generations; if any simplification is permissible, the most tempting one is to see the whole story of the West, and particularly of this decisive Twentieth Century, as a struggle between the Mosaic Law and the New Testament and between the two bodies of mankind which rank themselves behind one or other of those two messages of hatred and love respectively....
FIRST WE TAKE BABYLON
Some twenty years after the reading of Deuteronomy in Jerusalem, Judah was conquered by the Babylonian king, in about 596 BC. At the time, this looked like the end of the affair, which was a petty one in itself, among the great events of that period....
Instead, the Babylonian victory was the start of the affair, or of its great consequences for the world. The Law, instead of dying, grew stronger in Babylon, where for the first time a foreign king gave it his protection. The permanent state-within-states, nation-within-nations was projected, a first time, into the life of peoples; initial experience in usurping power over them was gained.
Much tribulation for other peoples was brewed then. As for the Judahites, or the Judaists and Jews who sprang from them, they seem to have acquired the unhappiest future of all. Anyway, it was not a happy man (though it was a Jewish writer of our day, 2,500 years later, Mr. Maurice Samuel) who wrote [in "You Gentiles"]: ". . . we Jews, the destroyers, will remain the destroyer forever. . . nothing that the Gentiles will do will meet our needs and demands". At first sight this seems mocking, venomous, shameless.
The diligent student of the controversy of Zionism discovers that it is more in the nature of a cry of hopelessness, such as the "Mosaic Law" must wring from any man who feels he cannot escape its remorseless doctrine of destruction.
---
Makow Comment- The Jewish God is an egregore, i.e. an alter ego for the Jewish people. Worshipping this God is like worshipping Jews. This may be a factor in our current malaise.
First Comment by Robert K:
The attempt to reconcile the Old Testament with the New instills cognitive dissonance, resulting in the most absurd speculative rationalizations (e.g. that the peoples--or, maybe, actual demons pretending to be human?--Jehovah ordered be destroyed, down to the last infant and goat, were so inherently wicked that obliterating them was a good deed). Such rationalization regarding the superiority of one's own cult, class, society (secret or otherwise) or nation has been used to justify unkindnesses and atrocities throughout history. The sense of superiority is a tendency devolving from the conviction that one's own way of thinking is best; after all, if it weren't, why ever would one think that way? This is a natural bent of human ideation overcome only by experience and maturation, but it becomes a menace when it acquires power to control the lives of others who apparently think differently. Assumed personal or group superiority is what lurks behind the endless pressure for centralization of power.
Christ demonstrated the fallacy of this approach by never compelling compliance with his will and always, while indicating the best course, leaving the final choice with the individual. This radically decentralized model of human society, which could easily be facilitated by recognition of universal personal ownership rights in the "tickets to living" monetary system, is forever in conflict with the belief that money should be the means of domination of the many by the few.
GC said (June 15, 2017):
I agree that the old and new testaments are incompatible. This is because the god of the old testament is not the same loving god as the new testament. I firmly believe we are living in a computer-generated reality, created by the original god. This view is supported by genesis and the account of creation. The original god created this reality with a computer many, many years in advance of our own current ability (time being digital) . I am a Christian and believe that my views are completely compatible with this theory which has quite a bit of support, although still dismissed as too science fictiony for many of my Christian friends to believe. God made man in his own image so he could have died or just mentored a younger god who sent his son to visit us and help us understand why we are here and the path to eternal life. Two different gods, but the same reality and I am pleased that He still cares about us even after all the bad we have done. So there is hope.