henrymakow.com — June 13, 2017
Douglas Reed says there is no relationship between the universal, loving God of the New Testament and the cursing psychopathic tribal deity of Deuteronomy. The Old and New Testaments never should have been bound together.
Chapter 3 THE LEVITES AND THE LAW
The Controversy of Zion 1955 — by Douglas Reed (excerpt by henrymakow.com)
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