Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 1996. [Vol. 3.] Eger Journal of American Studies. (Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 23)

STUDIES - Zsolt K. Virágos: The American Brand of the Myth of Apocalypse

perverted—the natural to the supernatural, and truth to error. The Bible is, we assert, but priest-perverted cosmology. The process began with the very first chapter

—the world's creation. This first was not the original űrst; it is priestly cosmology substituted centuries later and for a priestly purpose... Literally, the priestly account of Creation is but kindergarten cosmology, yet we have accepted it for two thousand years... All the metaphysical and cosmological knowledge Western man has, came to him from the East... The Bible is not "the word of God,

" but stolen from pagan sources. Its Eden, Adam and Eve were taken from the Babylonian account; its Flood or Deluge is but an epitome of some four hundred flood accounts; its Ark and Ararat have their equivalents in a score of Deluge myths; even the names of Noah's sons are copies, so also Isaac's sacrifice, Solomon's judgment, and Samson's pillar act; its Moses is fashioned after the Syrian Mises; its laws after Hammurabi's code. Its Messiah is derived from the Egyptian Mahdi, Savior, certain verses are verbatim copies of Egyptian scriptures. Between Jesus and the Egyptian Horus, Gerald Massey found 137 similarities, and those between Christ and Krishna run into the hundreds. How then can the Bible be a revelation to the JewsP"{ 1—5) Subsequently our author surveys the whole Bible book by book, often verse by verse, debunking most of its truth, symbology, coventionally accepted interpretations, as well as alleged sources and origins. At the beginning of the two separate chapters devoted to the discussion of the Revelation of St. John, Graham, not surprisingly, makes these two assertions: it is not a revelation, and it should not be taken too seriously. In the concluding part of the survey

—verse by verse comments and corrections

—he declares, "we see then that this 'Revelation' is no revelation at all, but ancient, esoteric Cosmology. As such, its ominous threats and glorious promises have no meaning for the individual either here or hereafter" (363, 407). 119