The Barbarian Bible

by Ianto Watt

  So, do you want another example of the confused state of the Koran’s understanding of the Jewish and Christian scriptures? Ok. The Koran insists that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was under the care of Zechariah during the period of her life when she was living in the Jewish temple precincts from the age of 3 till 14. This timeline agrees with Christian tradition, which explains this situation as being the result of her mother Anne’s desire to consecrate her daughter to the Jewish God. So far, so good. Now Zechariah was an aged priest who was to be the father of John the Baptist, who was to be the cousin of Jesus. But anyone familiar with the Christian tradition knows that Mary was raised, in the temple, under the care of Anna, an elderly woman who later was present when Mary presented the child Jesus in the temple shortly after his birth.

  So why would Zechariah be the one who was caring for Mary, when all who know the Jewish traditions would know that she would be in the care of women and not men while under the protection of the temple authorities? Now certainly, as a relative, Zechariah would have an understandable interest in her care, yet the morality of the day would militate against Zechariah tending to her in her room as the Koran relates. Why? Because there was strict segregation between the sexes within the confines of the temple (as well as in much of public life) in ancient Israel. Could this simply be a case of Mohammed being confused about the conduct of daily temple life in Israel? Pretty big error for a guy who claims everyone else has corrupted the historical past.

  Or could it be that he had never read the Jewish or Christian scriptures, because he couldn’t read at all? Many writers state that he was illiterate, as were most people then. Therefore his only understanding of these scriptures, both Jewish and Christian, was obviously by hearsay and not self-study. Let’s remember that Mohammed never wrote a single line of the Koran or the Hadith’s that followed his life on earth. All of that was written by his followers after his death. But wait, you say. Isn’t that the same as Jesus? He never wrote a thing about himself, right? Yes, fair point. But Jesus was the object of the religion he founded, whereas Mohammed simply claimed to be a prophet-messenger of his religion. The messenger should be in charge of delivering a specific message, right?

  And remember, there were no Christian prophets, because Jesus claimed to be the fulfillment of the previous prophets. And Christian writers never claimed to hear a disembodied voice. Rather, they simply quoted a Man-God who everyone else could hear as well. In the case of Mohammed, the later writers were quoting a prophet, who supposedly was quoting God. Nobody else ever heard Mohammed’s God speak. But everybody heard Jesus speak. Especially his enemies, who heard him quite clearly. Which is why they killed him, of course.

  So name a single instance where a Jewish prophet was written about by a later prophet who related the first prophet’s prophecy for the first time? Did somebody else write the 5 books of Moses? Did someone else write the Psalms for David and the Proverbs for Solomon? Nope, they claimed them for themselves, notwithstanding the modernist Wiener-Dogs who claim (3,000 years after the fact) that not only did Moses not write the first five books of the Bible (the Pentateuch), but that the stories related in them never happened. Some Weiner Dogs even question the real existence of a man named Moses. Bark bark bark. That’s the price of gaining tenure, I suppose. Idiots.

  No, the human-nature explanation of Mohammed’s story is pretty simple; he used a religious cover-story to sanitize his behavior which was, properly characterized, literally that of a bandit laying in ambush for the next caravan. Mohammed himself doesn’t try to hide this behavior, but rather sanctifies it by saying it was done in the name of Allah. But let’s face it, the place of honor given in the Koran to the concept of ‘booty’ was pretty high, and Mohammed himself was said by Allah (according to Mohammed, of course) to be deserving of ‘a fifth part’. That’s 20% to you and me, which is double the tithe of the Jewish scripture for ordinary income. Tax-free, too, I’m sure. Not a bad deal if you can get it!

  All you have to do to earn that 20% is to gather like-minded individuals who buy your story that what you are engaging in isn’t robbery and murder as commonly understood. No, according to Mohammed, it’s actually the reformation of mankind according to some unwritten (at the time) rule that was given to one man by a mysterious voice who commanded him to do these same acts of piracy. And given the fact that very few of his comrades-in-arms were likely to be literate themselves, all it took was a passing familiarity with the Jewish and Christian scriptures to convince the gullible among them that you were indeed a messenger of Allah. The non-gullible needed no persuasion, just booty. Just like today, eh comrade?

  Again, a Barbarian understanding of basic human nature is sufficient to understand the likely motive for the establishment of this religion of ‘booty’. But in the Jewish scriptures there was a constant theme that the victorious Jews, in their battles with the pagan Canaanites, should refrain from taking even the smallest item of the vanquished tribes they defeated. In fact King Saul was condemned in part for violating exactly this same rule. Violating it would have made their efforts to seem rather carnal and self-serving, and that their real reward was to be material instead of spiritual. And in Christian scripture, the entire idea of piracy conducted under the banner of a ‘convert-or-die’ theology would be totally foreign to the written word of not just one but all 4 gospel-witnesses who all related the same theme of peaceable conversion. You can’t square Mohammed’s message of ‘Loot they neighbor’ and the message of ‘Love thy neighbor’ as preached by Jesus. So why does Mohammed say Jesus was a great prophet? Who’s goofy here?

  Other stories in the Koran are also bent from their original mention in both the Old & New Testament, but they are rarely if ever mentioned with dates, places and supporting cast members. In other words, the basic Muslim claim is that the Old and New Testament were both corrupted, but we’re never told specifically which parts, or which beliefs are wrong. All we are told is that Mohammed came to correct them. And time and again, the Allah of the Koran says things like ‘And We set out many parables to properly warn!’ (Sura 14.45). But you can look high and low in this book for even a few parables, whereas the New Testament is full of them. Where are they in the Koran? It says they are there, but I can’t find but a few, and they all seem to be twisted, without apparent purpose, from the original Christian and Jewish parables. The explanation, to me, is that the repetition is the message, not the context of the text itself.

  It’s one thing to say these Jewish and Christian scriptures were corrupted, but the lack of explanation of how and when and why they became that way is strange. As is also the lack of a clear restatement of the real meaning of the brief recounting of these few instances in the Koran. It’s like I walked up to someone who was reading a novel and I said that their book was corrupted and that the author’s original conclusion was no longer clearly present in that edition they were reading, and then I just walked away without saying anything further to back up my claim. Huh? Idiotic.

  So overall, I conclude that the Koran, while it mentions a few of the basic players (Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and Jesus) from the Old and New Testament (which it claims to correct after its alleged corruption), it never delves into the minute detail of their lives or the meaning of their words like the Bible does. It doesn’t even bother to tell us what parts were corrupted and what the real story is. It merely claims that each of these personages was in reality a devout Muslim, and that their followers corrupted their words and works. And the rest of the Koran, the vast majority of it, is simply filled with the basic repetitions of Allah’s greatness, his fierceness, his inscrutability, his singularity, etc. More repetitions, more hypnosis. And all in that untranslatable Arab tongue, of course.

  Another part of the problem with the Koran is this; it was written to cover 1 man’s actions over the span of a few years. The Old Testament was written in 46 different books by dozens of authors over a span of 1500+ years. The New Testament has 27 books written by about a dozen me
n over a 70 year period across all of Asia and Europe, and is full of allusions and accurate references to the Old Testament, claiming that their contents are the fulfillment of the Old Testament (which they quote at length). So here you have a whole 1600+ year written tradition by two related religions that are, at least on the surface, in complete agreement on the major times, places, players and events in all their books. All of this historical connectivity is missing both within the Koran and between it and its predecessors, which it claims to correct. But it never tells us which parts are corrupt and which parts are still true. It’s not a very rational way to rebut your critics. But that’s because the god of Islam can’t be rationally understood, in the least, according to its believers. Nor is there any mystery present in the Koran. All is diktat. No explanations, understandable or not, are offered, now or later, as Allah is unknowable.

  And so, I have to say it doesn’t reach the level of historical presentation of the Old or New Testament with their thousands of historical names, dates, places and actions. But let’s give this a pass for now and move on to the next 4 criteria and see if this ommissive element is overcome in some other fashion.

  Does Islam have an impressive history of prophesy

  and miracles? No.

  Actually, there’s only one thing predicted in the Koran, and that is the end of the world. Heck, everyone except the Hindus and the evolutionists predict that. Give me some particulars! Like, what will the messiah be like? What will be the signs of his coming? Who will accompany him? Where will he appear? What will be his mode of action? What will be his criteria for judgment? You know, simple things. How about his name or his title? Nope, nothing. All we get in this area of inquiry is silence.

  As for miracles, the only thing that approaches being a miracle is the relatively few battles fought by Mohammed and his followers, which have no religious symbolism attached to them. No Ark of the Covenant, no True Cross, no Manna from heaven, no parting of the Red Sea. Nothing. Nobody is raised from the dead, but lots of people are lowered from this life. That was Mohammed’s main mode of operation. Things haven’t changed much with his followers.

  Honestly, I’ve tried to find something positive to say. I wanted this book to be longer, but these guys won’t cooperate! So let’s move on to the next criteria for a believable world-class Operating System that we can put our hopes in and our bets on in this quest to decipher the many tales of old that will, hopefully, lead us to a true understanding of what awaits us in this life.

  Does Islam promise us something of great

  value or reward? Yes and No.

  Here we go again. It depends on your outlook. What is it you want in this life and then the afterlife? Are you looking for earthly gratification in heaven or heavenly gratification on earth? Or neither? Or both?

  But let’s look at what we can expect from this Allah guy once we make it to his heaven. As I said earlier, there seems to be a caste system already at work in the world of Islam. Those who know the Arabic language have a leg up on everyone else, because they are the only ones who can decipher the full meaning of the Koran. But I also noted earlier that, nuance or not, there’s not a whole lot to learn in the Koran, other than ‘Allah is great’, and he has no partners nor children, adopted or otherwise, and that he will smash his enemies. And he is absolutely and totally inscrutable, so there is no sense trying to understand him. All you can do is to obey. The problem is that his orders are contradictory. Peace for all, but kill all the infidels. Mohammed is only a messenger, who is sent to do nothing but warn and correct, but he is also the glorious leader of their army who gets a 20% cut of the booty from all those infidels he kills.

  Now a lot of folks, in an attempt to be conciliatory, will insist that Islam is a religion of peace. And that’s true for a lot of Muslims. But a lot will say that Islam is a religion of jihad, holy war. And that’s true too. Because the Koran says both of these things. That’s why there are special words in Islam that describe this dichotomy; Dar al-harb, the world of war, and Dar al-salaam, the world of peace. If you are a non-believer, you live, by definition, in the world of war (wherever you are, physically), and you are fair game for jihad, my friend. And nowhere does the Koran counsel its believers to turn the other cheek, as the Christian God says.

  Don’t believe me? Just look at the Koran. Look at Sura (chapter) 5:32, where it’s talking about how Allah, visited the Jews (before Mohammed came as the ‘last messenger’). In this Sura, Allah supposedly says “For that cause We (there’s that crazy ‘we’ again) decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely ….”.20 Okay, sounds pretty peaceful, huh? But wait, what does ‘corruption in the earth’ mean? Doesn’t it mean human corruption? I mean, why would you get a ‘007-license-to-kill’ for a rotten apple? Doesn’t ‘corruption in (and not of) the earth’ refer to the ongoing claim throughout the Koran that Allah’s previous scripture-messages to mankind (before Mohammed arrived) had been corrupted- by infidels, of course? And that the Torah and the Gospels had been altered over time, twisting Allah’s previous word (since he supposedly was the giver of the Old and New Testaments to the Jews and Christians)?

  Oh, I get it now. If you are a Jew or Christian, and you don’t cave in and admit that true Judaism or true Christianity is really to be found in Islam, as spoken through its last messenger (Mohammed), then any Muslim is justified in killing you. Why? Because you are adhering to the ‘corruption in the earth’. Actually, it’s even better than that. It’s really just like Talmudic (modern) Judaism, where if your Rabbi (like the Muslim holy man) says it’s OK, then it’s OK. So, if you follow an Imam that says Islam is really peaceful and he preaches peace and co-existence, then Islam is peaceful for you. But if you follow an Imam that says you won’t enter paradise unless you help with the ‘cleansing’ of the world, then you’d better find an infidel and blow him up. Oh, and you can seal the deal by blowing yourself up with him! Why waste good explosives, right? After all, as Richard Dawkins would say, we have to be good stewards of our finite resources. Except human resources, eh Richard? Somebody needs to enroll him in the Witless Protection Program. No, that’s not a typo, grandson.

  So really, all we have here is Phariseeism for Muslims. The Arabic speakers are the upper class, and in the rest of the Islamic world are the lower class Muslims. And the rest of us are Gentile-toast. And just like in the Talmudic world, as long as you follow your holy man (Rabbi, Imam, what’s the difference), you’re OK, your ticket is booked for paradise. The only question is, first class or coach? Arab or Non-Arab? Can I please see your ID? Please step through the scanner so that we can be assured that you ARE carrying explosives on this flight. Thank you for flying Air Allah!

  But forget that for now and let’s look at Islamic Paradise for a minute, as we keep in mind the distinction we just noted. If every faithful Muslim is only a servant of Allah, then I think we can make a simple extrapolation here; there are servants (Arabic speakers), and then there are the servants of servants (non- Arabic speaking Muslims). But not like the Christian version (hint, the Popes are known as the servant of servants). No, in this world of Islam, I’m guessing that the upper class servants of Allah are on permanent break-time in Islamic Paradise. And the lower class faithful are their servants. And maybe that wouldn’t be so bad, given the other option: Hell. But at least there’s BBQ pork and football in hell, right? Well, maybe not. Anybody wanna go and check that out for the rest of us?

  But wait. There still another problem. What about Allah? What does he want from us in his Paradise? It never really says in the Koran. But there is a hint of something there when it tells us, again and again, that Allah is unknowable, inscrutable, and beyond ALL human understanding. And that all we can ever be is his servants, period. Now here’s the problem; any Muslim will tell you, in all honesty, that the Koran says that Allah cannot be held to his word, on anything. Regardless of what he has said or
promised, he cannot be held to it, because Allah can do whatever he wants. Including changing his mind on what he has promised.

  Well, doesn’t the Christian God reserve the same right to change his mind? Yes and no. He has said numerous times that he wanted to kill almost all mankind (except Noah and his family), and more particularly the Jews (for failing to kill the Canaanites and for serial fornication, serial idolatry, serial faithlessness, etc.). Fortunately, Moses talks him out of it several times. And in the case of Noah, the Jewish/ Christian God promised never again to wipe out mankind as a whole. (Rainbow people, take note. You may be violating cosmic copyright law). And Abraham tries to talk his God out of destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, and God is willing to bargain with him. Unfortunately for those Rainbow people, Abraham wasn’t as successful a negotiator as Moses was. Which is funny, because Moses stuttered. Go figure.

  So anyway, the governing theme in the Old and New Testament in regard to these examples is that their God, while He is mysterious, is also rational, but most of all, He is a God of mercy. And this Judeo/Christian God is in thrall to this thing called ‘love’ that governs his relationship with man. And the hallmark of the reality of this ‘love’ is that faithful Jews and Christians will be adopted by their God as true sons and daughters of their God. And those who don’t repent are toast. Burnt toast. There’s the choice, grandson.

  Now being a son or daughter is a whole lot better in my mind than being a servant, even an upper class servant. You can get away with a whole lot more as a member of the family versus a member of the staff. To begin with, you can order the servants around! Just look at Downton Abbey if you don’t believe me. By the way, speaking of Downton Abbey, what the hell are the laity doing living in an abbey? But that brings up another question, namely, what’s everyone going to be doing in heaven or paradise or whatever you call it? The thing that gets me is that there’s absolutely no ritualism in the Muslim world, other than the 5-times a day prayer ritual on earth. There’s no ceremony like there was in Mosaic Judaism at the temple, or in the Mass of the Holy Roman world.