CHAPTER VI. ASTRAL KEYS TO BIBLE STORIES

_“Therefore they took a key and opened them.”—Judg. 3: 25._

IT is the carefully-formed conclusion of many independent thinkers that

there is very little real history or biography in the Old-Testament

Scriptures. It is a monstrous mistake in modern ministers to take as

literal what is, in fact, strictly allegorical. The figurative character

of most of the Bible narratives was well known and freely admitted by

many ancient writers, Jewish and Christian, as will be shown hereafter.

It would be natural to commence our studies of Hebrew symbolism with the

account of the creation and alleged fall of man; but as this dogma is so

directly connected with the dogmas of modern sacerdotalism, we reserve

the examination of the so-called Mosaic account of Eden and the fall

until we are ready to enter upon what is called, in theological

parlance, “the redemptive scheme” of Christianity. We say so-called

Mosaic account, for there are many reasons for doubting, as I have

shown, that he wrote the Pentateuch, should his existence be admitted

for the sake of argument. Archbishop Burnet, in speaking of the story of

creation, says: “We receive this history without examination, because it

was written by Moses; but if we had found it in the work of a Greek

philosopher, a rabbi, or Mohammedan, our minds would be arrested at

every step by doubts and objections. This difference in our judgment

does not come from the nature of the facts; it comes from the opinion we

have of Moses, whom we believe to be inspired.” Here are three

assumptions not supported by a particle of evidence, to wit: that such a

man as Moses existed, that he was supernaturally inspired, and that he

wrote Genesis and other books of the Pentateuch under divine

inspiration. Now, we have no account of the real existence of Moses, and

no account of what he did and said except from writings accredited to

him and the incidental mention of him in the New Testament. His alleged

wonderful exploits in Egypt are not mentioned in Egyptian annals nor in

any other contemporaneous writings, while many things-said of him in the

Old Testament are substantially recorded of many other persons, as

already shown.

There are many reasons for believing that Moses was a personification of

the sun and his whole history a myth. Observing persons cannot fail to

notice that all ancient paintings and statues of Moses represent him

with horns, probably originally denoting the rays of the sun when in the

constellation Taurus the Bull. The fact is well known that what is

called the history of the Jews is mainly fiction, and that, too,

borrowed from other peoples and modified to suit circumstances; and very

bungling work have they made of it. The sacerdotalists of the world may

be safely challenged to produce anything strictly original from the Old

Testament, especially relating to morals. The historian Josephus admits

that the Jews “never invented anything useful.” Even the writings of

Josephus should be received with many grains of allowance. He was

himself superstitious and credulous, as shown in his story of a heifer

giving birth to a lamb when being led from the temple stable to the

altar. Moreover, we have no ancient certified copies of what he did

actually write, and there is abundant evidence of alterations and

interpolations in his alleged writings by sacerdotalists in modern

times. There is no greater imposition palmed off upon the ignorant than

the commonly-believed falsehoods that the Jews were a very ancient

people and that their Scriptures are the oldest book extant.

We now take up a few Bible stories, and give to them a symbolic instead

of an historic interpretation; and for obvious reasons we begin with the

alleged progenitor of the Jewish nation, _Abraham_.

It may or may not be a mere coincidence that by transposing the letters

of the name Abraham we have the name Brahma—just as in the old legend of

the sacrifice of the daughter of Agamemnon, Iphthi-genia, if we divide

the syllables into words, Iphthi-geni, we have literally Jephthah’s

daughter; so, after all, it may be greatly to the credit of Jephthah

that the story is fabulous. These curious coincidences are not here

offered as evidence. It is acknowledged, at least by implication, in the

Bible itself that the story of Abraham is of Chaldean origin, as his

father Terah was a native of Ur of the Chaldees and the alleged

patriarch was a Chaldean. Now, these people were great astronomers in

very ancient times, and were accustomed to veil their occult science

under just such allegorical personifications and fabulous tales as this

of Abraham. Paul, or whoever wrote the Epistle credited to him, lets out

the whole secret (Gal. 4: 22-26): “For it is written Abraham had two

sons, one by a bondmaid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of

the bondwoman was born after the flesh, but he of the free woman was by

promise; _which things are an allegory,_” etc. Now, if you carefully

read the apostolic explanation in these verses, you will notice that the

two sons of Abraham are two covenants, and the bondmaid Hagar represents

an Arabian mountain, which by a magical change becomes the same as the

city of Jerusalem. The name Abram signifies the “Father of Elevation,”

which is the astronomical distinction of the planet Saturn, the

exaltation of which, with its devious ways, well represents the alleged

history of its prototype. The word _Chasdim_, translated _Chaldees_,

literally means _light_, and is a professional not a geographical name,

and probably refers to the art of magic and the work of astrologers; so

that it is more than probable that Abram was not a person, any more than

Chasdim was a place. There are many references in the Scriptures which

favor this interpretation, but which cannot here be mentioned. Even in

the _Lord’s Prayer_, found in Jewish rituals long before the Christian

era, there are evidences that it was first addressed to Saturn. There

never was any form of religious worship which did not contain an

expression equivalent to _Our Father who art in heaven_. Even Jupiter

means _Our Father in the sky_.

The name of Abram has many variations, and there is an important sense

in which he may be called “the father of many nations.” He was the

Esrael of the Chaldeans, the Israel of the Phœnicians, as the historian

Sanchoniathon distinctly alleges that their name for Saturn was Israel:

the names Abraham and Israel are used interchangeably in both the Old

and New Testaments, and among the Hindoos, the Greeks, the Persians, and

other nations he was the god Saturnus of the whole pagan world. Even

upon the dials of our “grandfathers’ clocks,” cherished in many families

as heirlooms in our day, his memory is kept green by the figure of the

god of Time. Scores of other similitudes between Saturn and Abraham

could here be introduced did space permit. Suffice it to say, Saturn in

fable married his own sister, who was a star; and so did Abraham, and

the name of his wife signifies a star. Both had many sons, but each had

a favorite son, and Saturn called his _Jeoud_, which implies an only

son, as Abraham so regarded Isaac. A learned English scholar has

suggested that the name “Jeoud” is the real origin of the name “Jew,”

and he assigns several philological and historical reasons for his

theory. It is certain in the minds of many profound and independent

investigators that the Jewish tribes originated in Arabia, and were

originally a mere religious order, and that their so-called history is

largely fabulous, and that their exodus is a comparatively modern novel

with an ancient date, as has been shown.

Let us now take the best-remembered incident in the life of Abraham, the

attempted murder and the rescue of his son Isaac, and see what will come

of applying the symbolic instead of the literal interpretation to it.

Let it be noted that this is not an original story. The ancient Hindoos

have one like it. King Haris-candra had no son. He prayed for one, and

promised that if one should be born to him he would sacrifice him to the

gods. One was born, and he named him Rohita. One day his father told him

of his promise to Varuna to offer him in sacrifice. The son bought a

substitute, and when he was about to be immolated he was marvellously

rescued. Then there is the well-known similar story written by the

Phœnician Sanchoniathon

thirteen hundred years before our era. Then there is the Grecian story

of Agamemnon, to whom, when about to sacrifice his daughter, a stag was

furnished by a goddess as a substitute. There is another Grecian fable

in which a maiden was about to be sacrificed, and as the priest uplifted

his knife to shed her blood the victim suddenly disappeared, and a goat

of uncommon beauty stood in her place as a substitute. Another story

runs thus: In Sparta the maiden Helena was about to be immolated on the

altar of the gods, when an eagle carried off the knife of the priest and

laid it upon the neck of a heifer, which was sacrificed in her stead.

Similar stories might be produced from among many nations in the most

ancient times, long before the Jews picked this up in Babylon and

rewrote it, with modifications, so as to apply it to their mythical

progenitor; for this fable of Abraham’s offering was not written until

after their return from their Babylonish captivity—much nearer our own

time than is generally suspected.

Regarded as an historic account of a real transaction, this story of the

attempted sacrifice of a beloved son by a venerable father is shocking

in the extreme, dishonoring alike to God and to Abraham. A good God

could not have done such an unnatural and cruel thing. He had no

occasion to try Abraham to find out how much faith he had. He knew that

already. Regarded as an astrological allegory, it is ingenious and

contains a moral lesson, to wit: obedience to the voice of God and the

hope of deliverance in the hour of extreme emergency. The defect in the

story is, that God could trifle with a loving child, and pretend to

require him to break one of his own commandments, “Thou shalt not kill,”

and subject him to its own penalty, “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man

shall his blood be shed.” It would not have availed Abraham to plead

that God told him to murder his son, any more than it availed the

Pocasset crank when he pleaded that God had directed him to murder his

little daughter. The State of Massachusetts sent the semi-lunatic to a

safe place of confinement. This story of Abraham and Isaac has led to

scores and scores of murders of children by their fathers, just as the

passage in the Old Testament, “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live,”

has been pleaded in justification of the cool, deliberate murder of

multitudes of men, women, and children on the charge of witchcraft.

The literal interpretation of what is called infallible Scripture has

been the most bitter curse to deluded, priest-ridden humanity. It is the

“stock in trade” of ignorant and selfish ecclesiastics to-day.

Let us look a little more closely at this Abraham-and-Isaac myth.

Abraham was the personification of Saturn, the god of Time, while Isaac

was the personification of the Sun. Abraham took Isaac up to

Hebron—which means _union or alliance_, and clearly indicates a union of

the ecliptic and equinoctial line—the very point at which the Ram of the

vernal equinox passed by, or, as might be poetically said, was caught in

a cloud or bush; so that the whole story was written long ages before in

the celestial heavens, and emblazoned in the skies at the return of each

vernal equinox. Writers on astro-theology point out details at great

length to support the symbolic interpretation, but it is enough for pur

purpose to merely give the keynote. Let the fact be specially noted that

the names of the patriarchs have an astrological meaning,

and that the twelve sons of Jacob, the grandson of Abraham, who became

the heads of the twelve tribes of Israel, have distinctly astrological

characters, fully indicated in Jacob’s dying blessing on his sons (Gen.

49) and in the corresponding “Song of Moses” (Deut. 33), on the banner

carried by the different tribes in their mythical march from Egypt to

Canaan; and that on the breastplate of the officiating high priest the

jewels correspond to the celestial signs of the solar zodiac; and

although Jacob had children by several different women and was a

first-class Mormon, his twelve sons are made to correspond with the

twelve months of the year and the twelve signs of the zodiac. This fact

is admitted by the orthodox author of _The Gospel in the Stars_. His

daughters are not considered worthy of notice, as that would have

spoiled the riddle. The philology and etymology of the name _Jacob_ has

suggestions of the serpent; and from his history he must have been a

snaky fellow from the first to the last. He was born with his hand upon

his brother’s “heel,” and he managed to cheat him out of his share of

his mother’s affections, and lied to his father, and conspired with his

mother to rob Esau, his brother, of his “blessing.” The stories of Laban

and Leah and Rachel all conform to the symbolic rather than the literal

hypothesis, as well as Jacob’s vision of the ladder, and his

wrestling-match with the angel, when he openly obtained the astrological

name of the children of Saturn—Israel. It must be admitted that the

allegorical hypothesis relieves the patriarchs of the charge of many

mean things, such as the heartless manner in which Abram treated Hagar

when Sarah got jealous, and the manner in which he treated Sarah herself

when he lied to the king through a selfish cowardice and gave his wife

over to the lusts of the monarch Abimelech, who was (or one bearing his

name) deceived by Isaac in regard to Rebekah by a similar trick (Gen.

26:1). Lot, the nephew of Abraham, was guilty of a meaner and more

unmanly act when he himself proposed to give over his two virgin

daughters to the worse than beastly lusts of a howling mob, to protect

two angels who were guests at his tent (Gen. 19:1-11).

But theologians will never willingly admit that the Abraham of Genesis

was a myth. They well know the logical conclusion. They would have to

give up the “Abrahamic covenant,” which is the basis of sacerdotalism.

When Professor Driver, of the orthodox University of Oxford, recently

admitted only by implication that Abraham may have had no real personal

existence, and claimed that such hypothesis would not be injurious to

religion, his article was rejected and suppressed by the editor of an

orthodox paper in Philadelphia as dangerous. But to assume that all the

principal actors of Genesis and some other books were impersonations,

not persons, would not destroy the good things they are alleged to have

said and done. It is no more necessary to insist upon the real

personality of Abraham than to insist upon the literal existence of

Faithful and Great-Heart and other impersonations in _Pilgrim’s

Progress_. Nobody insists that the characters in the parables accredited

to Jesus must be taken in a literal sense. And yet it may be admitted

that the fictions of Scripture may have been suggested by some persons

and facts, just as in modern novels there generally is some person who

stands for the original of the story. This is eminently so in the novels

of Dickens and D’Israeli. Nevertheless, it is difficult to doubt that

the principal characters of the Old Testament are mythical, pure and

simple, as we find the originals in the older scriptures of different

nations, confessedly founded upon the solar and other forms of

Nature-worship. The feet is, that the only rational way to explain the

marvellous stories of the Hebrew Scriptures is by the well-known methods

of ancient symbolism.

Let us now merely glance at some other Old-Testament fables.

_Noah_ and his Deluge are mainly mythical, as this story is almost a

literal copy of the Chaldean, though found substantially in the writings

of many other nations. It readily fits the allegorical method of

interpretation in almost every particular. The Chaldean account as

written by Berosus, and found recently by the late George Smith of the

British Museum on the clay tablets, is so much like the story in Genesis

that the latter must have been copied from the former; and the slight

variations in the two narratives are no greater than might have been

expected as between Chaldea and Palestine. The Jews obtained it from

Babylon, as there is no mention made of this miracle in any book of the

Bible written before the Captivity. The books of Psalms, Proverbs,

Chronicles, Judges, Kings, etc. are silent on this subject. Josephus

defended the Noachian Deluge on the sole ground that an account of it

was held by the Chaldeans, never pretending that the Chaldean account

was taken from the Jewish record.

But it is useless to dwell on the story of a universal deluge of water.

It is in the light of modern science physically impossible and absurd;

and such men as Buckland, Pye Smith, Hugh Miller, and Hitchcock, with

many other distinguished Christian scientists, give up the doctrine of a

universal deluge while claiming a partial one. And here, again, the

ancient astronomy comes in with an explanation of partial floods of

waters by the natural results of the “precession of the equinoxes,” in

which, at certain periods during the change of the polar axis of the

earth, great physical convulsions must follow, with wide eruptions of

water, making a partial overflow and suggesting the idea of a universal

deluge. Four such cataclysms must have occurred while the sun was making

one journey through the twelve zodiacal constellations. Prof. Huxley has

recently well said: “But the voice of archæology and historical

criticism still has to be heard, and it gives forth no uncertain sound.

The marvellous recovery of the records of an antiquity far superior to

any that can be ascribed to the Pentateuch, which has been effected by

the decipherers of cuneiform characters, has put us in possession of a

series once more, not of speculations, but of facts, which has a most

remarkable bearing upon the question of the trustworthiness of the

narrative of the Flood. It is established that for centuries before the

asserted migration of Terah from Ur of the Chaldees (which, according to

the orthodox interpreters of the Pentateuch, took place after the year

2000 b. c.) Lower Mesopotamia was the seat of a civilization in which

art and science and literature had attained a development formerly

unsuspected, or, if there were faint reports of it, treated as fabulous.

And it is also no matter of speculation, but a fact, that the libraries

of this people contain versions of a long epic poem, one of the twelve

books of which tells the story of a deluge which in a number of its

leading features corresponds to the story attributed to Berosus, no less

than with the story given in Genesis, with curious exactnesss.

“Looking at the convergence of all these lines of evidence leads to the

one conclusion—that the story of the Flood in Genesis is merely a

version of one of the oldest pieces of purely fictitious literature

extant; that whether this is or is not its origin, the events asserted

in it to have taken place assuredly never did take place; further, that

in point of fact the story in the plain and logically necessary sense of

its words has long since been given up by orthodox and conservative

commentators of the Established Church.”

The only rational interpretation of the extraordinary stories of the

Pentateuch and other scriptures is to regard them as mythical and

allegorical, borrowed from the astrological systems of more ancient

peoples. It is very difficult to present within the limits here allowed

what has grown into ponderous volumes in elucidating the matter in hand.

The story of Jonah and the Fish, taken as a literal story, is

incredible, though the notorious Brooklyn preacher thinks that it must

be literally true, as that God might have so diluted the gastric juice

in the stomach of the fish as to make Jonah quite indigestible! This

whole story is found in earlier pagan writings, and is fully explained

by the astronomical phenomena. The earth is a huge fish in the ancient

mythology, and on December the 21st the sun (Jonah, the type) sinks into

its dark belly, and after three days—to wit, December 25th—it comes

forth. The Sun-god is on dry land again.

There is a Hindoo fable much like this. In Grecian fable Hercules was

swallowed by a whale at Joppa, and is said to have lain three days in

his entrails. The Sun was called _Jona_, as can be shown from many

authorities. The nursery-tale of “Little Red Riding-Hood” was also a

sun-myth, mutilated in the English story, showing how the _Sun_ was

devoured by the _Black Wolf_ (Night), and came out unhurt. Scores of

similar sun-myths could be narrated.

But there are geographical inaccuracies which show its mythical

character. Instead of Nineveh being “three days’ journey” from the coast

where Jonah was vomited out, it is distant some four hundred miles of

hill and plain, and the size of the city was not twenty by twelve miles,

but more nearly eight by three miles. Moreover, the city showed no signs

of decay till about two hundred and fifty years after the alleged

warning of Jonah. It is truly astounding that intelligent men can be so

blind. It was recently admitted by high Christian authority that there

is not a particle of proof for this story except that Jesus had referred

to Jonah as being “three days and nights in the whale’s belly.” If Jesus

did say this, he used it as an illustration. He probably stated a

current tradition, if he said it at all.

Let us now try our key in the closet-door of the Samson story.

According to the Bible account, Samson performed twelve principal

exploits; and if you will turn to any good dictionary of mythology you

will find a wonderful likeness to the twelve labors of Hercules in the

Greek myth of the Sun. Time can be taken to examine only one—the cutting

off of Samson’s hair while reposing in the lap of Delilah, and the

consequent loss of his strength. Professor Goldhizer says: “Long locks

of hair and a long beard are mythological attributes of the sun.”...

“When the powerful summer’s sun is succeeded by the weak rays of the

winter’s sun, its strength departs.” But as the sun becomes ascendant

again he renews his strength, just as Samson’s strength returned when

his hair grew out again. The seven locks represent the seven planetary

worlds. The constellation Virgo represents Samson’s wife; and Delilah,

in whose lap he dallied and lost his strength, represents the months of

autumn, before the winter came to hand him over to the Philistines, the

dreary time of the winter months. The story of Samson is found in the

sun-myths of all the Sun-worship-ping nations, and the story of Hercules

was known in an island colony of the Phœnicians five hundred years

before it was known in Greece; and the story is almost as old as

humanity itself. The very name Samson (or Samp-shon) in some languages

means the sun; and there is not an exploit recorded of him that does not

yield to the solar interpretation; and when modern ministers undertake

to explain how Samson caught three hundred foxes and set fire to their

tails, they never think to mention (if they happen to know it) that in

the ancient festival of Ceres a fox-hunt was enacted in the theatres of

Rome in which burning torches were bound to the foxes’ tails. We have an

explanation of this from Prof. Steinthal: “This was a symbolical

reminder of the damage done to the fields by mildew, called the ’red

fox’ in the last of April. It was at the time of the _Dog Star_ at which

the mildew was most to be feared; and if at that time great solar heat

followed too close upon the hoar-frost or dew of the cold nights, the

mischief raged like a burning fox through the corn-fields. Like the

lion, the fox is an animal that indicates the solar heat, being well

suited both by its color and long-haired tail.” Bou-chart gives a

similar explanation and application, and so do many other writers. It

remains for ministers of this nineteenth century to dole out the ancient

fables of the past as literal history to the grown-up children of

to-day. The story of Samson in all its details yields to the key of

ancient symbolism. Why not admit the fact that this is a solar myth, and

thus get clear of all the blasphemy and absurdities of a literal

interpretation?

The incredibly absurd story of Joshua’s commanding the sun to stand

still for several hours has a rational explanation, regarded as a myth,

well known to initiates to set forth the correction of the calendar, so

as to make different periods correspondras one stops a clock to make it

agree with the ringing of the standard time by the town bell. There are

scores of parallels in ancient history.

Regard Solomon as a sun-myth, and you have no difficulty about the size

of his family. The seven hundred wives and the three hundred concubines

represented so many stars. Even the narratives of David’s exploits with

the five kings, his “unpleasantness” with Saul, and his dalliance and

intrigue with Bathsheba yield to the astro-mythological key.

The same is true of the story of the two she-bears that ate up the

forty-two children who called shorn Elisha “bald-head.” The prophet was

the Sun, denuded of his curls at a certain astronomical period; the two

bears were the constellations _Ursa Major and Ursa Minor_, the great

bear and the little bear; and the forty-two children were a group of

stars covered by the two bears, so that, figuratively, it might be said

they were “eaten up.” And yet the late Dr. Nehemiah Adams of Boston once

exclaimed: “I believe that the forty-two children who made fun of the

bald head of the prophet of God are now in hell.” He once wrote an

admirable book entitled _Agnes; or, The Little Key,_ but he failed to

find the skeleton key to unlock the solar fable of the prophet, the

saucy little children, and the voracious bears.

Within the last few months Philadelphia has been the scene of a most

imposing ecclesiastical ceremony—the investiture of the Roman Catholic

archbishop with the pallium, a narrow band or sash made from wool grown

upon white lambs that had been blessed by the Pope on St. Agnes’ Day. We

heard the eloquent sermon of the archbishop of New York, and he

commenced his plausible discourse by tracing the pallium to the mantle

that fell from Elijah upon Elisha, the summer and winter sun, and was

worn by him after the translation of Elijah. But we try our skeleton

key, and find that Elijah represented the ascending summer sun, and

Elisha the sun of autumn; and when Elijah gained the greatest height, of

course his lessened rays, well called a “mantle,” fell upon the

bald-headed man representing the autumn. This is the whole story in

plain language, and this is the kind of stuff that ecclesiastical

man-millinery is made of. The crowd stared with admiration and wonder,

just as children are amused with their doll-babies, who are “sick” or

“well,” “naughty” or “good,” according to the whims of the “little

women” who dress and nurse them. There is a doll-baby period in every

child’s history, and it may be necessary to have a doll-baby period in

religion; but it does seem to some of us that it is about time for

full-grown women and men to doff their bibs and aprons, lay aside their

doll-babies and other ecclesiastical toys, and act as becomes men and

women of full growth. Even Paul said, “When I was a child, I spake as a

child, I understood as a child; but when I became a man, I put away

childish things.” It has been well said by a judicious writer:

“Intelligent readers, except revelationists, well know that the Hebrew

fables are myths which teem with history of a kind, if we can only

separate the wheat from the chaff. So also is the story of the Creation

in Genesis. We have a very valuable myth, though a purely phallic tale,

such as East Indians—and perhaps they only—can thoroughly comprehend.

“We would not seek to detract from the great value of myths, for,

besides their own intrinsic worth, these stories also exhibit to us many

phases of ancient life and thought. Myths may be regarded as history

which we have not yet been able to read. We should not discard as untrue

or unhistorical any tale, biblical or other, as implying that it is

false and unworthy of consideration. On the contrary, we cannot too

earnestly and patiently ponder over every ancient tale, legend, or myth,

as they all have some foundation and instructive lesson. Whenever an

important myth has existed an important fact has doubtless been its

basis.”

The Eliminator; or, Skeleton Keys to Sacerdotal Secrets · 第 6 / 16 章