Martinus: Livets Bog, vol. 4, sect. 1301

1301. But how can it be that terrestrial mankind is confronted with two such great, contrary moral terrains or two such very different forms of social ideals? The first ideals make it highly dangerous to really "love" one's neighbour, while the latter make it highly dangerous "not to love" one's neighbour. Is it not precisely this circumstance that has caused the sacred book of the "Christian" world, "The Bible", to appear in two fundamental sections: "The Old Testament" and "The New Testament"? Is not the law of marriage or the family the main subject of "The Old Testament"? Is it not here that formidable capital punishment was introduced for every condition or state that was not entirely in harmony with the supposedly terrestrial human "ideals of mating and procreation"? Was it not in accordance with the laws of "The Old Testament" that the woman who was taken in adultery would have been stoned to death? And was it not the originator of the laws of "The New Testament" who would not judge her and commanded that "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone"? Is it not the observance of the laws of the family from "The Old Testament" that has kept the Jewish people together as one people for thousands of years, even though it was spread over almost the entire civilised world, even though it had to live in permanent exile among many other races and even though it had to speak all the languages of the world in addition to its own? And was it not precisely the history and ideals of this people that became the first section of "Christianity's" holy book? Is it not precisely this section that constitutes the so-called "Old Testament" in the holy book for the people of the West? Was not our religious education based on this "testament" a perpetual study of wars and more wars. Did not all the great figures, all the great principal characters in this doctrine, sing the praises, so to speak, of the sword and retribution? Were they not "warring heroic figures"? Was it not "David" who slew "Goliath"? And were the other Jewish kings not involved in wars? Were they not to a very great extent inflamed and inspired to wage these wars by the leading prophets of their country? Did not the Law of Moses itself call for "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth"? And was it not the high priests themselves, the leaders of the temple, the only people allowed to enter the "Holy of Holies", who sentenced Jesus of Nazareth to torture and crucifixion? And why? Was it not precisely because he preached the "gospel of neighbourly love"?