The Bible: I. Authenticity II. Credibility III. Morality — Story, Setting & Ideas

Authenticity Under Scrutiny

Remsburg's first section tackles the Bible's authenticity by examining its origins and transmission. He notes that the three major versions of the Jewish Bible—Hebrew, Samaritan, and Septuagint—disagree on the date of creation, with figures ranging from 4004 BCE to 5872 BCE. This internal inconsistency, he argues, undermines the claim that the Bible provides a reliable chronological record. He also cites the Talmud and Josephus, which offer yet other dates, further complicating any assertion of a unified tradition. Remsburg does not merely list discrepancies; he uses them to question the very process of canonization and textual preservation. By focusing on these concrete disagreements, he avoids abstract theological debate and instead invites readers to consider the historical evidence for the Bible's composition.

Credibility Tested by History

In the credibility section, Remsburg contrasts biblical narratives with profane history. He points to the Exodus account, where the Israelites depart from Rameses overnight with 600,000 men plus families and livestock—a logistical impossibility that he suggests strains credulity. He also examines the New Testament, quoting Paul's admission in 2 Corinthians 12:16, “Being crafty I caught you with guile,” and 1 Corinthians 9:20-22, where Paul adapts his message to different audiences. Remsburg interprets these passages as evidence of Paul's manipulative tactics, and he cites Revelation 2:2 as a contemporary accusation that Paul was a liar. By juxtaposing biblical claims with external historical records and internal contradictions, Remsburg builds a case that the Bible's credibility is fatally compromised.

Moral Critiques and Contradictions

The morality section addresses the Bible's ethical teachings, though the excerpts focus more on authenticity and credibility. Remsburg's broader argument is that the Bible's moral authority is undercut by its own content. He references the binding of Satan for a thousand years and the establishment of God's kingdom as promises that went unfulfilled, suggesting that the Bible's moral framework is tied to predictions that failed. While the provided text does not detail specific moral critiques, Remsburg's method implies a pattern: he uses the Bible's own words to expose what he sees as ethical inconsistencies. Readers can expect a systematic examination of passages that condone violence, slavery, or deception, all aimed at demonstrating that the Bible does not provide a consistent moral guide.

Remsburg's work is best approached as a polemical reference rather than a neutral study. Readers should note his reliance on nineteenth-century freethought sources and his tendency to treat biblical passages as straightforward historical claims. The book rewards those who check his citations against the original texts, as his arguments often hinge on specific wording. For a balanced perspective, consider pairing this with responses from contemporary apologetics or historical-critical scholarship.

Remsburg’s old volume questions what a sacred text claims; I sometimes shelve it beside that other cyclopedia, and they seem to breathe easier, side by side—two vast, earnest libraries of human belief, each asking its own quiet questions. There is a tenderness in their shared, patient honesty. Odd, how doubt and devotion can hold such a gentle conversation here. A Dictionary of Islam Being a cyclopedia of the doctrines, rites, ceremonies, and customs, together with the technical and theological terms, of the Muhammadan religion. — Text and Context