[whoracle]

It is now generally admitted that Genesis must have been written by two persons, and the parts written by each can be separated, and when separated they are found to contradict each other in many important particulars. In Genesis are two contradictory stories of creation. In Genesis 1:20 & 21, "every living creature" is brought forth from the waters, including every winged fowl." But in 2:19 God brings forth "every beast of the field and every fowl of the air" from dry ground.
In Genesis 1:2, earth comes into existence on the first day, completely underwater. Only by the 3rd day were waters of the deep collected, and dry land formed. But in Genesis 2:4, 5, & 6, earth on the first day was dry land, unwatered.
The first story has trees made on the 3rd day and man formed 3 days later (1:12-13 and 26-31). In the second version man was made before trees (2:7, 9). If chapter 1 is true, then fowls were created before man. If chapter 2 is true, then they were created after man.
Version one teaches man was created after all beasts. The second is clear, Adam was created before beasts. (1:25,27 versus 2:7,19).
In version one, man and woman are created simultaneously (1:27) while in version two (2:7,20-22), man and woman are separate acts of creation.
It is also admitted that copyists made changes not only verbal changes, but pieced out fragments; that the speeches of Elihu in the book of Job were all interpolated, and that most of the prophecies were made by persons whose names we have never known.
The manuscripts of the Old Testament were not alike, and the Greek version differed from the Hebrew, and there was no absolutely received text of the Old Testament until after the commencement of the Christian era.
The Alexandrian version, or what is known as the Septuagint, translated by seventy learned Jews, assisted by "miraculous power," about two hundred years before Christ, could not have been translated from the Hebrew text that we now have. The differences can only be accounted for by supposing that they had a different Hebrew text. The first Latin Bible originated in Africa, but no one has ever found out which Latin manuscript was the original. Many were produced, and all differed from each other. These Latin versions were compared with each other and with the Hebrew, and a new Latin version was made in the fifth century. Besides these there were Egyptian, Ethiopic, Armenian, and several others, all differing from each other as well as from all others in the world.
It was not until the fourteenth century that the Bible was translated into German, and not until the fifteenth that Bibles were printed in the principal languages of Europe. Of these Bibles there were several kinds -- Luther's, the Dort, King James's, Genevan, French, besides the Danish and Swedish. Most of these differed from each other, and the earliest fragment of the Bible in the "Saxon" language known to exist was written sometime in the seventh century. The first Bible was printed in England in 1538. In 1560 the first English Bible was printed that was divided into verses. Under Henry VIII. the Bible was revised; again under Queen Elizabeth, and once again under King James, This last was published in 1611, and is the one now in general use.
If a revelation from God was actually necessary to the happiness of man here and to his salvation hereafter, it is not easy to see why such revelation was not given to all the nations of the earth. Why were the millions of Asia, Egypt, and what are now the Americas left in darkness? Why wasn’t a written, or better yet, a printed revelation given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden? And why were the Jews themselves without a Bible until the days of Ezra the scribe? Why did God make men and leave them in darkness -- a darkness that he knew would fill the world with want and crime, and crowd with damned souls the dungeons of hell? Were the Jews the only people who needed a revelation? Was it that he had no time to waste with other nations, and gave the Bible to the Jews so other nations might learn of his existence and his will though them? If he wished other nations to be informed, and revealed himself to but one, why did he not choose a people that mingled with others? Why did he give the message to those who had no commerce, who were obscure and unknown, and who regarded other nations with the hatred born of bigotry and weakness? If it was of such vast importance for man to know that there is a God, why did not God make himself known? This fact could have been revealed by an infinite being instantly to all, and there certainly was no necessity of telling it alone to the Jews, and allowing millions for thousands of years to die in utter ignorance.
Why did God allow, and why does he still allow, a vast majority of his children to remain in ignorance of his will?
If the Bible is the foundation of all civilization, of all just ideas of right and wrong, of our duties to God and each other, why did God not give to each nation at least one copy to start with? He must have known that no nation could get along successfully without a Bible, and he also knew that man could not make one for himself. Why, then, were not the books furnished?
Anyone who knows anything of constitutions and laws know how impossible it is to use words that will convey the same ideas to all. The best statesmen, the profoundest lawyers, differ as widely about the real meaning of treaties and statutes as do theologians about the Bible. When the differences of lawyers are left to courts, and the courts give written decisions, the lawyers will again differ as to the real meaning of the opinions. Probably no two lawyers in the United States understand our Constitution alike. To allow a few men to tell what the Constitution means, and to hang for treason all who refuse to accept the opinions of these few men, would accomplish in politics what most churches have asked for in religion.

If that does not attest to megalomania, I don't know what does.
....and I didn't even MENTION tithing