Inerrant Lie #59

Another lie from "God's ineffable, inerrant word":

The writers of the 'Holy Bible' had no respect for many things they would have been well- advised to rather respect. Among the little things the writers-- indeed the nation-- who penned this singular tome of scripture should have had more respect for is the simple word "all." All, as used by the writers of the Hebraic scriptures, rarely-- if ever-- means all. This arrogance concerning this tiny word has been noted in a previous 'Lie'.

As Moses presumably "slew all the males" of Midian [Numbers 31:7], so David-- the one and only true King of the Jews-- presumably smote all the males of Edom. This claim is not recorded in the various accounts of David's (albeit illegal, as per the law of Moses [Deuteronomy 2:4 & 5]) conquest of Edom; but rather as a sidebar mention in the record of Solomon's reign. In particular, the claim that David smote all the males of Edom instructs as to the origins of the popular rebellion which culminated-- at the time of Solomon's son's ascension to the throne of Judah-- in the rebellion of ten tribes of Israel from under the Judaic throne in Jerusalem.

In explaining how the aforementioned popular rebellion was born-- in the years of David's reign (while scapegoating the oppression of Solomon's reign for it)-- and from whence it issued, the scribes recorded, "15 For it came to pass, when David was in Edom, and Joab the captain of the host was gone up to bury the slain, after he had smitten every male in Edom 16 (For six months did Joab remain there with all Israel, until he had cut off every male in Edom:) 17 That Hadad ["the Edomite," verse 14, ibid.] fled, he and certain Edomites of his father's servants with him, to go into Egypt; Hadad being yet a little child [1 Kings 11:15 - 17]."

As Moses' lie concerning the alleged slaying of all the males of Midian was later exposed by the course of historical events [again, see 'Lie #7'], so this claim made by the King of the Jews to have smitten all the males of Edom was likewise exposed by current events in the years of Jehoram's (son of Jehoshaphat) reign over Judah: sans the rebellious ten tribes of Israel. The king's scribe records it thus: "In [Jehoram's] days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and made a king over themselves [2 Kings 8:20]." This would not be possible if the claim to have cut off all the males of Edom, made in 1 Kings were true.

If all the males had-- as alleged by Solomon's scribe-- been cut off from Edom under David's reign, the people inhabiting Mount Seir in Jehoram's reign would have been known as something other than Edomites: presumably Jews, inasmuch as one would expect the conquerors to appropriate the women of the vanquished. Thanks to just this sort of manipulation of the facts, the LORD of the 'Holy Bible' is not known by his name-- Baal-- but rather by the meaning of his name: the LORD. "For we may not make mention of the name of the LORD [Amos 6:10j]."