Book Review: The Bible: The Biography, by Karen Armstrong

To many people in the twenty-first century, the Bible may seem an anachronism, but as an all-time best seller, it still attracts many new commentaries. Undoubtedly, Karen Armstrong is one of those best qualified to add to this vast body of literature. Her breadth of knowledge is impressive. After providing an outline of how the sixty-six books were assembled she turns to describing how these texts have been interpreted by different groups of scholars over the ages, in a process which she constantly reminds us is called exegesis, a Greek word meaning to lead or guide out.

Karen Armstrong explains that for hundreds of years before any of the words were committed to writing, the wisdom of the past was passed orally from generation to generation. Story tellers have always been given licence to modify and embellish their tales and this licence was extended to the generations of new authors, many anonymous or purporting to be well-known past prophets, who reworked and rearranged the early texts. ‘From the first, biblical authors felt free to revise the texts they had inherited and give them entirely different meaning.’ Much was added and some things were lost, but eventually an effort was made to establish an official canon, a set of books approved by religious authority.

Two canons are discussed. The books of the Old Testament, originally composed in several languages including Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, are shared by both Jews and Christians, but the books of the New Testament, all originally composed in Greek, are used only by Christians. Karen Armstrong describes how both Jews and Christians have undertaken the process of exegesis over the ages, each seeking new insights from old texts in the belief that this patchwork of ancient papers preserves the hidden Word of God.

Exegesis has been undertaken in an astonishing variety of ways. Many scholars have devoted their lives, and schools have worked for generations, on detailed analysis of every book, chapter and verse. Most efforts have involved looking beyond the words for an underlying meaning. Others have sought new insights by linking words and phrases from different books, often far removed from one another in time and context. Only one system is condemned. The Bible lacks historical accuracy and contains so many contradictions that any attempt at a literal understanding soon leads to confusion. Karen Armstrong is sympathetic to most of the religious groups who have wrestled with this literary leviathan but she warns of the dangers of literal interpretation leading to fundamentalism.

Biography of Mary According to the Bible

In the New Testament Mary is a young Virgin who has been impregnated by the so-called Holy Ghost. Finding herself in this state as an unmarried maid her embarrassment sends her off to her cousin, Elizabeth, who is also pregnant (Luke 1:1-43). They console each other and an angel intervenes to explain that their future children will be caught up to God. She then takes Joseph as her husband (Matthew 1:18,19) and the baby is born but no date is given.

We discover little more than this about Mary in the New Testament as the importance of her role was to produce the baby, Jesus. Only John 19:25-27 makes any mention of her at the cross when Jesus Christ is executed.

Neither Mark nor John make any mention of the way Mary is impregnated or of the birth of Jesus. Both Matthew and Luke, which do, are at odds with each other. In Matthew Mary gives birth in Matthew 2:11 it occurs in a house but in Luke 2:7 this happens in a stable.

In Matthew the parents are warned that Herod intends to kill the babies so they flee to Egypt Matthew 2:13-15. In Luke2:22-24 there is no such threat and at eight days the child is openly taken to a temple to be circumcised. The confusion over these things is what makes the entire story incredulous.

Other things that are not right is the role of Herod in the time when these events supposedly occurred. As no one has pinpointed the exact date of the confinement of Mary the Catholic Church posited the birth took place on December 25th, which is the date that most avatars are born. This aligns with the return of the sun after the summer solstice.

It also claims that Christ was born around the year 1 AD. Herod was dead some years before this date and had previously been confined to his palace far away from Jerusalem for some years previously due to illness. That make it impossible for him to have been in the city and ordering the death of children.

The king’s aids kept records of all that Herod did and in no place is such mentioned, according to recent research of those times. Without this to qualify the story the entire event loses credibility.

Other incorrect claims are the failure of the authors to know about genetic inheritance or how two parents donate chromosomes essential for birth of a human baby. The ‘Holy Ghost’ did not contribute any such material because it has no body.

There is another side to Mary that are not published in the New Testament but are in the Book of Revelation. The Spirit of the Universe, the real God, led me to understand her origin and why she is the Mother of God, according to Christian and other religious beliefs. This followed my reincarnation and link to it through which communication occurs.

My knowledge from that experience is that there is no heaven or hell and that the Trinity is a ploy instigated by Constantine, who established the catholic church in 325 AD. This Roman Caesar was a descendant of the Amor (Roma reversed) and they were Assyrian. Their capital was Babylon and Mary was the Mother God and the sun. The name mean ‘mother’s powerful eye’.

The ‘eye-man’ or ‘iman’ is one who has supposedly passed through the eye to become a god. He is, therefore, a teacher whose word is indisputable. Such men passed through it by dying on crosses at dawn to ‘marry Mary’. It is the reason why executions are still carried out at dawn in some places.

Anyone married to Mary knows what she thinks and wants of her people. That is they are the law-makers and enforcers. This gave the Bishops the right to kill in the name of their god and to carry out other atrocities. The Vatican’s insignia comprises the so-called keys to heaven because it purports to be able to open the door for anyone who practices its faith.

Of Mary we learn that she is BABYLON THE GREAT and the Mother of Harlots (Revelation 17:5). This is the only place in the bible where a description of someone is written in capital letters to emphasise the importance of it. She is also

“… drunken with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus” (ibid 17:6)

A martyr is one who has passed through the cross. ‘Ma-r-t’ means ‘mother’s powerful cross’ and the old ‘marts’ or ‘markets’ were recognised as places of exchange and crosses were erected in and around them for this reason. The dead man was called ‘d-o-l’, or ‘food from the circle of god’ because his body was consumed by observers. ‘Dol-or’ or the ‘dol-sun’ is the origin of ‘dollar’ for the unit of exchange in the market. ‘Or’ is an old term for ‘sun’.

Constantine ordered that anyone who did not worship the image he presented would be tortured and/or murdered. Thus, they became the ‘martyrs of Jesus’ because this is the so-called Son of God of his invention (ibid 12:15).

“And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication” (ibid17:4).

The number of men who died in expectation of mating with her or who serve in religious institutions claiming such have given ‘her’ the title of ‘whore’ and qualifies the claim. The golden cup is the challis and the expectation that one is eating and drinking of the body of the dead god-man is the abomination. Dressed in purple means she is of royal concoction while the Bishops who serve her are in scarlet.

Mary is man’s stylised version of the sun-star of Babylon. They pretend to mate with her while hiding the women with whom they are genuinely mated. The idea of needing the god’s blessing on such a union is to appease the Mother God, Mary of Babylon.