Tony Bushby - What the Church doesn't want you to know

[D.Schlenk]

http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=70&Itemid=71


THE FORGED ORIGINS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

by Tony Bushby


What the Church doesn't want you to know


It has often been emphasised that Christianity is unlike
any other religion, for it stands or falls by certain
events which are alleged to have occurred during a short
period of time some 20 centuries ago. Those stories are
presented in the New Testament, and as new evidence is
revealed it will become clear that they do not represent
historical realities. The Church agrees, saying:
"Our documentary sources of knowledge about the origins
of Christianity and its earliest development are chiefly the
New Testament Scriptures, the authenticity of which
we must, to a great extent, take for granted."
(Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 712)

The Church makes extraordinary admissions about its New
Testament. For example, when discussing the origin of
those writings, "the most distinguished body of academic
opinion ever assembled" (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface)
admits that the Gospels "do not go back to the first
century of the Christian era" (Catholic Encyclopedia,
Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6). This statement
conflicts with priesthood assertions that the earliest
Gospels were progressively written during the decades
following the death of the Gospel Jesus Christ. In a
remarkable aside, the Church further admits that "the
earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament],
it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the
fourth century AD" (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp.
656-7). That is some 350 years after the time the Church
claims that a Jesus Christ walked the sands of
Palestine, and here the true story of Christian origins
slips into one of the biggest black holes in history.
There is, however, a reason why there were no New
Testaments until the fourth century: they were not
written until then, and here we find evidence of the
greatest misrepresentation of all time.

It was British-born Flavius Constantinus (Constantine,
originally Custennyn or Custennin) (272-337) who
authorised the compilation of the writings now called the
New Testament. After the death of his father in 306,
Constantine became King of Britain, Gaul and Spain, and
then, after a series of victorious battles, Emperor of the
Roman Empire. Christian historians give little or no hint
of the turmoil of the times and suspend Constantine in the
air, free of all human events happening around him. In
truth, one of Constantine's main problems was the
uncontrollable disorder amongst presbyters and their
belief in numerous gods.

The majority of modern-day Christian writers suppress the
truth about the development of their religion and conceal
Constantine's efforts to curb the disreputable character
of the presbyters who are now called "Church Fathers"
(Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xiv, pp. 370-1).
They were "maddened", he said (Life of Constantine,
attributed to Eusebius Pamphilius of Caesarea, c. 335,
vol. iii, p. 171; The Nicene and Post-Nicene
F a t h e r s, cited as N&PNF, attributed to St Ambrose,
Rev. Prof. Roberts, DD, and Principal James Donaldson,
LLD, editors, 1891, vol. iv, p. 467). The "peculiar type
of oratory" expounded by them was a challenge to a settled
religious order (The Dictionary
of Classical Mythology, Religion, Literature and Art,
Oskar Seyffert, Gramercy, New York, 1995, pp. 544-5).
Ancient records reveal the true nature of the presbyters,
and the low regard in which they were held has been subtly
suppressed by modern Church historians. In reality, they
were:
"...the most rustic fellows, teaching strange paradoxes.
They openly declared that none but the ignorant was fit to
hear their discourses ... they never appeared in the
circles of the wiser and better sort, but always took care
to intrude themselves among the ignorant and uncultured,
rambling around to play tricks at fairs and markets ...
they lard their lean books with the fat of old fables ...
and still the less do they understand ... and they write
nonsense on vellum ... and still be doing, never done."
(Contra Celsum ["Against Celsus"], Origen of Alexandria,
c. 251, Bk I, p. lxvii, Bk III, p. xliv, passim)


Clusters of presbyters had developed "many gods and many
lords" (1 Cor. 8:5) and numerous religious sects existed,
each with differing doctrines (Gal. 1:6). Presbyterial
groups clashed over attributes of their various gods and
"altar was set against altar" in competing for an audience
(Optatus of Milevis, 1:15, 19, early fourth century).
From Constantine's point of view, there were several
factions that needed satisfying, and he set out to develop
an all-embracing religion during a period of irreverent
confusion. In an age of crass ignorance, with nine-tenths
of the peoples of Europe illiterate, stabilising religious
splinter groups was only one of Constantine's problems.
The smooth generalisation, which so many historians are
content to repeat, that Constantine "embraced the
Christian religion" and subsequently granted "official
toleration", is "contrary to historical fact" and should
be erased from our literature forever (C a t h o l i c
E n c y c l o p e d i a, Pecci ed., vol. iii, p. 299,
passim). Simply put, there was no Christian religion at
Constantine's time, and the Church acknowledges
that the tale of his "conversion" and "baptism" are
"entirely legendary" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed.,
vol. xiv, pp. 370-1).

Constantine "never acquired a solid theological knowledge"
and "depended heavily on his advisers in religious
questions" (C a t h o l i c E n c y c l o p e d i a,
New Edition, vol. xii, p. 576, passim). According to
Eusebeius (260-339), Constantin noted that among the
presbyterian factions "strife had grown so serious,
vigorous action was necessary to establish a more
religious state", but he could not bring about a
settlement between rival god factions (Life of
Constantine, op. cit., pp. 26-8). His advisers warned
him that the presbyters' religions were "destitute of
foundation" and needed official stabilisation (ibid.).

Constantine saw in this confused system of fragmented
dogmas the opportunity to create a new and combined
State religion, neutral in concept, and to protect it by law.
When he conquered the East in 324 he sent his Spanish
religious adviser, Osius of Córdoba, to Alexandria with
letters to several bishops exhorting them to make peace
among themselves. The mission failed and Constantine,
probably at the suggestion of Osius, then issued a
decree commanding all presbyters and their subordinates
"be mounted on asses, mules and horses belonging to the
public, and travel to the city of Nicaea" in the Roman
province of Bithynia in Asia Minor. They were instructed
to bring with them the t e s t i m o n i e s they orated
to the rabble, "bound in leather" for protection during
the long journey, and surrender them to Constantine upon
arrival in Nicaea (The Catholic Dictionary, Addis and
Arnold, 1917, "Council of Nicaea" entry). Their
writings totalled "in all, two thousand two hundred and
thirty-one scrolls and legendary tales of gods and
saviours, together with a record of the doctrines orated
by them" (Life of Constantine, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 73;
N&PNF, op. cit., vol. i, p. 518).



The First Council of Nicaea and the "missing records"

Thus, the first ecclesiastical gathering in history was
summoned and is today known as the Council of Nicaea.
It was a bizarre event that provided many details of early
clerical thinking and presents a clear picture of the
intellectual climate prevailing at the time. It was at
this gathering that Christianity was born, and the
ramifications of decisions made at the time are difficult
to calculate. About four years prior to chairing the
Council, Constantine had been initiated into the religious
order of Sol Invictus, one of the two thriving cults that
regarded the Sun as the one and only Supreme God (the
other was Mithraism). Because of his Sun worship, he
instructed Eusebius to convene the first of three sittings
on the summer solstice, 21 June 325 (C a t h o l i c
Encyclopedia, New Edition, vol. i, p. 792), and it was
"held in a hall in Osius's palace" (Ecclesiastical
History, Bishop Louis Dupin, Paris, 1686, vol. i, p. 598).
In an account of the proceedings of the conclave of
presbyters gathered at Nicaea, Sabinius, Bishop of
Hereclea, who was in attendance, said,
"Excepting Constantine himself and Eusebius Pamphilius,
they were a set of illiterate, simple creatures who
understood nothing" (Secrets of the Christian Fathers,
Bishop J. W. Sergerus, 1685, 1897 reprint). This is
another luminous confession of the ignorance and
uncritical credulity of early churchmen. Dr
Richard Watson (1737-1816), a disillusioned Christian
historian and one-time Bishop of Llandaff in Wales
(1782), referred to them as "a set of gibbering idiots"
(An Apology for C h r i s t i a n i t y, 1776, 1796 reprint;
also, Theological Tracts, Dr Richard Watson, "On Councils"
entry, vol. 2, London, 1786, revised reprint 1791). From
his extensive research into Church councils, Dr Watson
concluded that "the clergy at the Council of Nicaea were
all under the power of the devil, and the convention was
composed of the lowest rabble and patronised the vilest
abominations" (An Apology for C h r i s t i a n i t y, op. cit.).
It was that infantile body of men who were responsible for
the commencement of a new religion and the theological
creation of Jesus Christ.

The Church admits that vital elements of the proceedings
at Nicaea are "strangely absent from the canons"
( C a t h o l i c E n c y c l o p e d i a, Farley ed.,
vol. iii, p. 160). We shall see shortly what happened to
them. However, according to records that endured,
Eusebius "occupied the first seat on the right of the
emperor and delivered the inaugural address on the
emperor's behalf" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol.
v, pp. 619-620). There were no British presbyters at the
council but many Greek delegates. "Seventy Eastern
bishops" represented Asiatic factions, and small numbers
came from other areas (Ecclesiastical H i s t o r y,
ibid.). Caecilian of Carthage travelled from Africa,
Paphnutius of Thebes from Egypt, Nicasius of Die (Dijon)
from Gaul, and Donnus of Stridon made the journey from
Pannonia.

It was at that puerile assembly, and with so many cults
represented, that a total of 318 "bishops, priests,
deacons, subdeacons, acolytes and exorcists" gathered to
debate and decide upon a unified belief system that
encompassed only one god (An Apology for Christianity,
op. cit.). By this time, a huge assortment of "wild texts"
(Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, "Gospel and Gospels")
circulated amongst presbyters and they supported a great
variety of Eastern and Western gods and goddesses: Jove,
Jupiter, Salenus, Baal, Thor, Gade, Apollo, Juno, Aries,
Taurus, Minerva, Rhets, Mithra, Theo, Fragapatti, Atys,
Durga, Indra, Neptune, Vulcan, Kriste, Agni, Croesus,
Pelides, Huit, Hermes, Thulis, Thammus, Eguptus, Iao, Aph,
Saturn, Gitchens, Minos, Maximo, Hecla and Phernes
(G o d ' s Book of Eskra, anon., ch. xlviii, paragraph
36).

Up until the First Council of Nicaea, the Roman
aristocracy primarily worshipped two Greek gods - Apollo
and Zeus - but the great bulk of common people idolised
either Julius Caesar or Mithras (the Romanised version of
the Persian deity Mithra). Caesar was deified by the
Roman Senate after his death (15 March 44 BC) and
subsequently venerated as "the Divine Julius".
The word "Saviour" was affixed to his name, its literal
meaning being "one who sows the seed", i.e., he was a
phallic god. Julius Caesar was hailed as "God made
manifest and universal Saviour of human life", and his
successor Augustus was called the "ancestral God and
Saviour of the whole human race" (Man and his Gods,
Homer Smith, Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1952). Emperor
Nero (54-68), whose original name was Lucius Domitius
Ahenobarbus (37-68), was immortalised on his coins as the
"Saviour of mankind" (ibid.). The Divine Julius as Roman
Saviour and "Father of the Empire" was considered "God"
among the Roman rabble for more than 300 years. He was
the deity in some Western presbyters' texts, but was not
recognised in Eastern or Oriental writings.

Constantine's intention at Nicaea was to create an
entirely new god for his empire who would unite all
religious factions under one deity. Presbyters were asked
to debate and decide who their new god would be.
Delegates argued among themselves, expressing personal
motives for inclusion of particular writings that promoted
the finer traits of their own special deity. Throughout
the meeting, howling factions were immersed in heated
debates, and the names of 53 gods were tabled for
discussion. "As yet, no God had been selected by the
council, and so they balloted in order to determine that
matter... For one year and five months the balloting
lasted..." (God's Book of Eskra, Prof. S. L. MacGuire's
translation, Salisbury, 1922, chapter xlviii,
paragraphs 36, 41).

At the end of that time, Constantine returned to the
gathering to discover that the presbyters had not agreed
on a new deity but had balloted down to a short list of
five prospects: Caesar, Krishna, Mithra, Horus and Zeus
(Historia Ecclesiastica, Eusebius, c. 325). Constantine
was the ruling spirit at Nicaea and he ultimately decided
upon a new god for them. To involve British factions, he
ruled that the name of the great Druid god, Hesus, be
joined with the Eastern Saviour-god, Krishna (Krishna is
Sanskrit for Christ), and thus Hesus Krishna would be the
official name of the new Roman god. A vote was taken and
it was with a majority show of hands (161 votes to 157)
that both divinities became one God. Following
longstanding heathen custom, Constantine used the official
gathering and the Roman apotheosis decree to legally
deify two deities as one, and did so by democratic
consent. A new god was proclaimed and "officially"
ratified by Constantine (Acta Concilii Nicaeni, 1618).
That purely political act of deification effectively and
legally placed Hesus and Krishna among the Roman gods as
one individual composite. That abstraction lent Earthly
existence to amalgamated doctrines for the Empire's new
religion; and because there was no letter "J" in
alphabets until around the ninth century, the name
subsequently evolved into "Jesus Christ".



How the Gospels were created

Constantine then instructed Eusebius to organise the
compilation of a uniform collection of new writings
developed from primary aspects of the religious texts
submitted at the council. His instructions were:
"Search ye these books, and whatever is good in them,
that retain; but whatsoever is evil, that cast away. What
is good in one book, unite ye with that which is good in
another book. And whatsoever is thus brought together
shall be called The Book of B o o k s. And it shall be
the doctrine of my people, which I will recommend unto
all nations, that there shall be no more war for religions'
sake." (God's Book of Eskra, op. cit., chapter xlviii,
paragraph 31)

"Make them to astonish" said Constantine, and "the books
were written accordingly" (Life of Constantine, vol. iv,
pp. 36-39). Eusebius amalgamated the "legendary tales of
all the religious doctrines of the world together as one",
using the standard god-myths from the presbyters'
manuscripts as his exemplars. Merging the supernatural
"god" stories of Mithra and Krishna with British Culdean
beliefs effectively joined the orations of Eastern and
Western presbyters together "to form a new universal
belief" (ibid.). Constantine believed that the amalgamated
collection of myths would unite variant and opposing
religious factions under one representative story. Eusebius
then arranged for scribes to produce "fifty sumptuous copies
... to be written on parchment in a legible manner, and in a
convenient portable form, by professional scribes thoroughly
accomplished in their art" (ibid.). "These orders," said
Eusebius, "were followed by the immediate execution of the
work itself ... we sent him [Constantine] magnificently
and elaborately bound volumes of three-fold and four-fold
forms" (Life of Constantine, vol. iv, p. 36). They were
the "New Testimonies", and this is the first mention
(c. 331) of the New Testament in the historical record.

With his instructions fulfilled, Constantine then decreed
that the New Testimonies would thereafter be called the
"word of the Roman Saviour God" (Life of Constantine, vol.
iii, p. 29) and official to all presbyters sermonising in
the Roman Empire. He then ordered earlier presbyterial
manuscripts and the records of the council "burnt" and
declared that "any man found concealing writings should be
stricken off from his shoulders" (beheaded)
(ibid.). As the record shows, presbyterial writings
previous to the Council of Nicaea no longer exist, except
for some fragments that have survived. Some council
records also survived, and they provide alarming
ramifications for the Church. Some old documents say that
the First Council of Nicaea ended in mid-November 326,
while others say the struggle to establish a god was so
fierce that it extended "for four years and seven months"
from its beginning in June 325 (Secrets of the Christian
Fathers, op. cit.). Regardless of when it ended, the
savagery and violence it encompassed were concealed
under the glossy title "Great and Holy Synod", assigned to
the assembly by the Church in the 18th century. Earlier
Churchmen, however, expressed a different opinion.

The Second Council of Nicaea in 786-87 denounced the
First Council of Nicaea as "a synod of fools and madmen"
and sought to annul "decisions passed by men with troubled
brains" (History of the Christian Church, H. H. Milman,
DD, 1871). If one chooses to read the records of the
Second Nicaean Council and notes references to "affrighted
bishops" and the "soldiery" needed to "quell proceedings",
the "fools and madmen" declaration is surely an example of
the pot calling the kettle black.

Constantine died in 337 and his outgrowth of many now-
called pagan beliefs into a new religious system brought
many converts. Later Church writers made him "the great
champion of Christianity" which he gave "legal status as
the religion of the Roman Empire" (Encyclopedia of the
Roman E m p i r e, Matthew Bunson, Facts on File, New
York, 1994, p. 86). Historical records reveal this to
be incorrect, for it was "self-interest" that led him to
create Christianity (A Smaller Classical Dictionary, J. M.
Dent, London, 1910, p. 161). Yet it wasn't called
"Christianity" until the 15th century (How The Great Pan
Died, Professor Edmond S. Bordeaux [Vatican archivist],
Mille Meditations, USA, MCMLXVIII, pp. 45-7).

Over the ensuing centuries, Constantine's New Testimonies
were expanded upon, "interpolations" were added and
other writings included (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed.,
vol. vi, pp. 135-137; also, Pecci ed., vol. ii, pp. 121-122).
For example, in 397 John "golden-mouthed" Chrysostom
restructured the writings of Apollonius of Tyana, a first-
century wandering sage, and made them part of the New
Testimonies (Secrets of the Christian Fathers, op. cit.).
The Latinised name for Apollonius is Paulus (A Latin-
English Dictionary, J. T. White and J. E. Riddle, Ginn &
H e a t h , Boston, 1880), and the Church today calls
those writings the Epistles of Paul. Apollonius's
personal attendant, Damis, an Assyrian scribe, is Demis in
the New Testament (2 Tim. 4:10).

The Church hierarchy knows the truth about the origin of
its Epistles, for Cardinal Bembo (d. 1547), secretary to
Pope Leo X (d. 1521), advised his associate, Cardinal
Sadoleto, to disregard them, saying "put away these
trifles, for such absurdities do not become a man of
dignity; they were introduced on the scene later by a sly
voice from heaven" (Cardinal Bembo: His Letters and
Comments on Pope Leo X, A. L. Collins, London, 1842
reprint).

The Church admits that the Epistles of Paul are forgeries,
saying, "Even the genuine Epistles were greatly
interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of their
authors" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vii, p.
645). Likewise, St Jerome (d. 420) declared that the Acts
of the Apostles, the fifth book of the New Testament,
was also "falsely written" ("The Letters of Jerome",
Library of the F a t h e r s, Oxford Movement, 1833-45,
vol. v, p. 445).



The shock discovery of an ancient Bible

The New Testament subsequently evolved into a fulsome
piece of priesthood propaganda, and the Church claimed
it recorded the intervention of a divine Jesus Christ into
Earthly affairs. However, a spectacular discovery in a
remote Egyptian monastery revealed to the world the extent
of later falsifications of the Christian texts, themselves
only an "assemblage of legendary tales"
(E n c y c l o p é d i e, Diderot, 1759). On 4 February
1859, 346 leaves of an ancient codex were discovered in
the furnace room at St Catherine's monastery at Mt Sinai,
and its contents sent shockwaves through the Christian
world. Along with other old codices, it was scheduled to
be burned in the kilns to provide winter warmth for the
inhabitants of the monastery. Written in Greek on donkey
skins, it carried both the Old and New Testaments, and
later in time archaeologists dated its composition
to around the year 380. It was discovered by Dr
Constantin von Tischendorf (1815-1874), a brilliant and
pious German biblical scholar, and he called it the
Sinaiticus, the Sinai Bible. Tischendorf was a professor
of theology who devoted his entire life to the study of
New Testament origins, and his desire to read all the
ancient Christian texts led him on the long, camel-mounted
journey to St Catherine's Monastery. During his lifetime,
Tischendorf had access to other ancient Bibles unavailable
to the public, such as the Alexandrian (or Alexandrinus)
Bible, believed to be the second oldest Bible in the
world. It was so named because in 1627 it was taken from
Alexandria to Britain and gifted to King Charles I (1600-
49). Today it is displayed alongside the world's oldest
known Bible, the Sinaiticus, in the British Library in
London. During his research, Tischendorf had access
to the Vaticanus, the Vatican Bible, believed to be the
third oldest in the world and dated to the mid-sixth
century (The Various Versions of the Bible, Dr Constantin
von Tischendorf, 1874, available in the British Library).
It was locked away in the Vatican's inner library.
Tischendorf asked if he could extract handwritten notes,
but his request was declined. However, when his guard
took refreshment breaks, Tischendorf wrote comparative
narratives on the palm of his hand and sometimes on his
fingernails ("Are Our Gospels Genuine or Not?", Dr
Constantin von Tischendorf, lecture, 1869, available in
the British Library).

Today, there are several other Bibles written in various
languages during the fifth and sixth centuries, examples
being the Syriacus, the Cantabrigiensis (Bezae), the
Sarravianus and the Marchalianus.

A shudder of apprehension echoed through Christendom in
the last quarter of the 19th century when English-language
versions of the Sinai Bible were published. Recorded
within these pages is information that disputes
Christianity's claim of historicity. Christians were
provided with irrefutable evidence of wilful
falsifications in all modern New Testaments. So different
was the Sinai Bible's New Testament from versions then
being published that the Church angrily tried to annul the
dramatic new evidence that challenged its very existence.
In a series of articles published in the London Quarterly
Review in 1883, John W. Burgon, Dean of Chichester,
used every rhetorical device at his disposal to attack the
Sinaiticus' earlier and opposing story of Jesus Christ,
saying that "...without a particle of hesitation, the
Sinaiticus is scandalously corrupt ... exhibiting the most
shamefully mutilated texts which are anywhere to be met
with; they have become, by whatever process, the
depositories of the largest amount of fabricated readings,
ancient blunders and intentional perversions of the truth
which are discoverable in any known copies of the word of
God". Dean Burgon's concerns mirror opposing aspects of
Gospel stories then current, having by now evolved to a
new stage through centuries of tampering with the fabric
of an already unhistorical document.



The revelations of ultraviolet light testing

In 1933, the British Museum in London purchased the Sinai
Bible from the Soviet government for £100,000, of which
£65,000 was gifted by public subscription. Prior to
the acquisition, this Bible was displayed the Imperial
Library in St Petersburg, Russia, and "few scholars had
set eyes on it" (The Daily Telegraph and Morning Post,
11 January 1938, p. 3). When it went on display in 1933
as "the oldest Bible in the world" (ibid.), it became the
centre of a pilgrimage unequalled in the history of the
British Museum.

Before I summarise its conflictions, it should be noted
that this old codex is by no means a reliable guide to New
Testament study as it contains superabundant errors and
serious re-editing. These anomalies were exposed as a
result of the months of ultraviolet-light tests carried
out at the British Museum in the mid-1930s. The findings
revealed replacements of numerous passages by at least
nine different editors. Photographs taken during testing
revealed that ink pigments had been retained deep in the
pores of the skin. The original words were readable under
ultraviolet light. Anybody wishing to read the results of
the tests should refer to the book written by the
researchers who did the analysis: the Keepers of the
Department of Manuscripts at the British Museum (Scribes
and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus, H. J. M. Milne and
T. C. Skeat, British Museum, London, 1938).




Forgery in the Gospels

When the New Testament in the Sinai Bible is compared
with a modern-day New Testament, a staggering 14,800
editorial alterations can be identified. These amendments
can be recognised by a simple comparative exercise that
anybody can and should do. Serious study of Christian
origins must emanate from the Sinai Bible's version of the
New Testament, not modern editions.

Of importance is the fact that the Sinaiticus carries
three Gospels since rejected: the Shepherd of Hermas
(written by two resurrected ghosts, Charinus and
Lenthius), the Missive of Barnabas and the Odes of
Solomon. Space excludes elaboration on these bizarre
writings and also discussion on dilemmas associated with
translation variations.

Modern Bibles are five removes in translation from early
editions, and disputes rage between translators over
variant interpretations of more than 5,000 ancient words.
However, it is what is not written in that old Bible that
embarrasses the Church, and this article discusses only a
few of those omissions. One glaring example is subtly
revealed in the Encyclopaedia Biblica (Adam & Charles
Black, London, 1899, vol. iii, p. 3344), where the Church
divulges its knowledge about exclusions in old Bibles,
saying: "The remark has long ago and often been made
that, like Paul, even the earliest Gospels knew nothing of
the miraculous birth of our Saviour". That is because
there never was a virgin birth.

It is apparent that when Eusebius assembled scribes to
write the New Testimonies, he first produced a single
document that provided an exemplar or master version.
Today it is called the Gospel of Mark, and the Church
admits that it was "the first Gospel written" (Catholic
Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 657), even though it
appears second in the New Testament today. The scribes
of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were dependent upon
the Mark writing as the source and framework for the
compilation of their works. The Gospel of John is
independent of those writings, and the late-15th-century
theory that it was written later to support the earlier
writings is the truth (The Crucifixion of Truth, Tony
Bushby, Joshua Books, 2004, pp. 33-40).

Thus, the Gospel of Mark in the Sinai Bible carries the
"first" story of Jesus Christ in history, one completely
different to what is in modern Bibles. It starts with
Jesus "at about the age of thirty" (Mark 1:9), and doesn't
know of Mary, a virgin birth or mass murders of baby boys
by Herod. Words describing Jesus Christ as "the son of
God" do not appear in the opening narrative as they do in
today's editions (Mark 1:1), and the modern-day family
tree tracing a "messianic bloodline" back to King David is
non-existent in all ancient Bibles, as are the now-called
"messianic prophecies" (51 in total). The Sinai Bible
carries a conflicting version of events surrounding the
"raising of Lazarus", and reveals an extraordinary
omission that later became the central doctrine of the
Christian faith: the resurrection appearances of Jesus
Christ and his ascension into Heaven. No supernatural
appearance of a resurrected Jesus Christ is recorded
in any ancient Gospels of Mark, but a description of over
500 words now appears in modern Bibles (Mark 16:9-20).

Despite a multitude of long-drawn-out self-justifications
by Church apologists, there is no unanimity of Christian
opinion regarding the non-existence of "resurrection"
appearances in ancient Gospel accounts of the story. Not
only are those narratives missing in the Sinai Bible, but
they are absent in the Alexandrian Bible, the Vatican
Bible, the Bezae Bible and an ancient Latin manuscript of
Mark, code-named "K" by analysts. They are also lacking
in the oldest Armenian version of the New Testament, in
sixth-century manuscripts of the Ethiopic version and
ninth-century Anglo-Saxon Bibles. However, some 12th-
century Gospels have the now-known resurrection verses
written within asterisks-marks used by scribes to indicate
spurious passages in a literary document.

The Church claims that "the resurrection is the
fundamental argument for our Christian belief" (Catholic
Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xii, p. 792), yet no
supernatural appearance of a resurrected Jesus Christ is
recorded in any of the earliest Gospels of Mark available.
A resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ is the sine
qua non ("without which, nothing") of Christianity
(C a t h o l i c Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xii,
p. 792), confirmed by words attributed to Paul: "If
Christ has not been raised, your faith is in vain"
(1 Cor. 5:17). The resurrection verses in today's
Gospels of Mark are universally acknowledged as forgeries
and the Church agrees, saying "the conclusion of Mark is
admittedly not genuine ... almost the entire section is a
later compilation" (Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol. ii, p.
1880, vol. iii, pp. 1767, 1781; also, Catholic
Encyclopedia, vol. iii, under the heading "The
Evidence of its Spuriousness"; Catholic Encyclopedia,
Farley ed., vol. iii, pp. 274-9 under heading "Canons").
Undaunted, however, the Church accepted the forgery into
its dogma and made it the basis of Christianity.

The trend of fictitious resurrection narratives continues.
The final chapter of the Gospel of John (21) is a sixth-
century forgery, one entirely devoted to describing Jesus'
resurrection to his disciples. The Church admits: "The
sole conclusion that can be deduced from this is that the
21st chapter was afterwards added and is therefore to be
regarded as an appendix to the Gospel" (Catholic
Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. viii, pp. 441-442; N e w
Catholic Encyclopedia (N C E), "Gospel of John", p. 1080;
also NCE, vol. xii, p. 407).




"The Great Insertion" and "The Great Omission"

Modern-day versions of the Gospel of Luke have a
staggering 10,000 more words than the same Gospel in the
Sinai Bible. Six of those words say of Jesus "and was
carried up into heaven", but this narrative does not
appear in any of the oldest Gospels of Luke available
today ("Three Early Doctrinal Modifications of the Text
of the Gospels", F. C. Conybeare, The Hibbert Journal,
London, vol. 1, no. 1, Oct 1902, pp. 96-113). Ancient
versions do not verify modern-day accounts of an ascension
of Jesus Christ, and this falsification clearly indicates
an intention to deceive.

Today, the Gospel of Luke is the longest of the canonical
Gospels because it now includes "The Great Insertion", an
extraordinary 15th-century addition totalling around 8,500
words (Luke 9:51-18:14). The insertion of these forgeries
into that Gospel bewilders modern Christian analysts, and
of them the Church said: "The character of these passages
makes it dangerous to draw inferences" (Catholic
Encyclopedia, Pecci ed., vol. ii, p. 407).

Just as remarkable, the oldest Gospels of Luke omit all
verses from 6:45 to 8:26, known in priesthood circles as
"The Great Omission", a total of 1,547 words. In today's
versions, that hole has been "plugged up" with passages
plagiarised from other Gospels. Dr Tischendorf found that
three paragraphs in newer versions of the Gospel of Luke's
version of the Last Supper appeared in the 15th century,
but the Church still passes its Gospels off as the
unadulterated "word of God" ("Are Our Gospels Genuine or
Not?", op. cit.)




The "Expurgatory Index"

As was the case with the New Testament, so also were
damaging writings of early "Church Fathers" modified in
centuries of copying, and many of their records were
intentionally rewritten or suppressed.

Adopting the decrees of the Council of Trent (1545-63),
the Church subsequently extended the process of erasure
and ordered the preparation of a special list of specific
information to be expunged from early Christian writings
(Delineation of Roman Catholicism, Rev. Charles Elliott,
DD, G. Lane & P. P. Sandford, New York, 1842, p. 89; also,
The Vatican Censors, Professor Peter Elmsley, Oxford, p.
327, pub. date n/a).

In 1562, the Vatican established a special censoring
office called Index Expurgatorius. Its purpose was to
prohibit publication of "erroneous passages of the early
Church Fathers" that carried statements opposing modern-
day doctrine.

When Vatican archivists came across "genuine copies of the
Fathers, they corrected them according to the Expurgatory
Index" (Index Expurgatorius Vaticanus, R. Gibbings, ed.,
Dublin, 1837; The Literary Policy of the Church of Rome,
Joseph Mendham, J. Duncan, London, 1830, 2nd ed., 1840;
The Vatican Censors, op. cit., p. 328). This Church
record provides researchers with "grave doubts about the
value of all patristic writings released to the public"
(The Propaganda Press of Rome, Sir James W. L. Claxton,
Whitehaven Books, London, 1942, p. 182).

Important for our story is the fact that the
E n c y c l o p a e d i a B i b l i c a reveals that
around 1,200 years of Christian history are unknown:
"Unfortunately, only few of the records [of the Church]
prior to the year 1198 have been released". It was not by
chance that, in that same year (1198), Pope Innocent III
(1198-1216) suppressed all records of earlier Church
history by establishing the Secret Archives (Catholic
Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xv, p. 287). Some seven-
and-a-half centuries later, and after spending some years
in those Archives, Professor Edmond S. Bordeaux wrote
How The Great Pan Died. In a chapter titled "The Whole of
Church History is Nothing but a Retroactive Fabrication",
he said this (in part):
"The Church ante-dated all her late works, some newly
made, some revised and some counterfeited, which contained
the final expression of her history ... her technique was
to make it appear that much later works written by Church
writers were composed a long time earlier, so that they
might become evidence of the first, second or third
centuries."
(How The Great Pan Died, op. cit., p. 46)

Supporting Professor Bordeaux's findings is the fact that,
in 1587, Pope Sixttus V (1585-90) established an official
Vatican publishing division and said in his own words,
"Church history will be now be established ... we shall
seek to print our own account" (E n c y c l o p é d i e,
Diderot, 1759). Vatican records also reveal that Sixtus V
spent 18 months of his life as pope personally writing a
new Bible and then introduced into Catholicism a "New
Learning" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. v, p.
442, vol. xv, p. 376). The evidence that the Church wrote
its own history is found in Diderot's
E n c y c l o p é d i e, and it reveals the reason why
Pope Clement XIII (1758-69) ordered all volumes to
be destroyed immediately after publication in 1759.




Gospel authors exposed as imposters

There is something else involved in this scenario and it
is recorded in the Catholic Encyclopedia. An appreciation
of the clerical mindset arises when the Church itself
admits that it does not know who wrote its Gospels and
Epistles, confessing that all 27 New Testament writings
began life anonymously:
"It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels
are not traceable to the evangelists themselves ... they
[the New Testament collection] are supplied with titles
which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective
authors of those writings." (Catholic Encyclopedia,
Farley ed., vol. vi, pp. 655-6)

The Church maintains that "the titles of our Gospels were
not intended to indicate authorship", adding that "the
headings ... were affixed to them" (Catholic Encyclopedia,
Farley ed., vol. i, p. 117, vol. vi, pp. 655, 656).
Therefore they are not Gospels written "according to
Matthew, Mark, Luke or John", as publicly stated.
The full force of this confession reveals that there are
no genuine apostolic Gospels, and that the Church's
shadowy writings today embody the very ground and pillar
of Christian foundations and faith. The consequences are
fatal to the pretence of Divine origin of the entire New
Testament and expose Christian texts as having no special
authority. For centuries, fabricated Gospels bore Church
certification of authenticity now confessed to be false,
and this provides evidence that Christian writings are
wholly fallacious.

After years of dedicated New Testament research, Dr
Tischendorf expressed dismay at the differences between
the oldest and newest Gospels, and had trouble
understanding... "...how scribes could allow themselves
to bring in here and there changes which were not simply
verbal ones, but such as materially affected the very
meaning and, what is worse still, did not shrink from
cutting out a passage or inserting one."
(Alterations to the Sinai Bible, Dr Constantin von
Tischendorf, 1863, available in the British Library,
London)

After years of validating the fabricated nature of the New
Testament, a disillusioned Dr Tischendorf confessed that
modern-day editions have "been altered in many places" and
are "not to be accepted as true" (When Were Our Gospels
Written? , Dr Constantin von Tischendorf, 1865, British
Library, London).



Just what is Christianity?

The important question then to ask is this: if the New
Testament is not historical, what is it? Dr Tischendorf
provided part of the answer when he said in his 15,000
pages of critical notes on the Sinai Bible that "it seems
that the personage of Jesus Christ was made narrator for
many religions". This explains how narratives from the
ancient Indian epic, the M a h a b h a r a t a, appear
verbatim in the Gospels today (e.g., Matt. 1:25, 2:11,
8:1-4, 9:1-8, 9:18-26), and why passages from the
P h e n o m e n a of the Greek statesman Aratus of Sicyon
(271-213 BC) are in the New Testament.

Extracts from the Hymn to Zeus, written by Greek
philosopher Cleanthes (c. 331-232 BC), are also found in
the Gospels, as are 207 words from the Thais of Menander
(c. 343-291), one of the "seven wise men" of Greece.
Quotes from the semi-legendary Greek poet Epimenides
(7th or 6th century BC) are applied to the lips of Jesus
Christ, and seven passages from the curious Ode of
J u p i t e r (c. 150 BC; author unknown) are reprinted in
the New Testament.

Tischendorf's conclusion also supports Professor
Bordeaux's Vatican findings that reveal the allegory of
Jesus Christ derived from the fable of Mithra, the divine
son of God (Ahura Mazda) and messiah of the first kings of
the Persian Empire around 400 BC. His birth in a grotto
was attended by magi who followed a star from the East.
They brought "gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh" (as
in Matt. 2:11) and the newborn baby was adored by
shepherds. He came into the world wearing the Mithraic
cap, which popes imitated in various designs until well
into the 15th century.

Mithra, one of a trinity, stood on a rock, the emblem of
the foundation of his religion, and was anointed with
honey. After a last supper with Helios and 11 other
companions, Mithra was crucified on a cross, bound in
linen, placed in a rock tomb and rose on the third day or
around 25 March (the full moon at the spring equinox, a
time now called Easter after the Babylonian goddess
Ishtar). The fiery destruction of the universe was a
major doctrine of Mithraism - a time in which Mithra
promised to return in person to Earth and save deserving
souls. Devotees of Mithra partook in a sacred communion
banquet of bread and wine, a ceremony that paralleled
the Christian Eucharist and preceded it by more than four
centuries.

Christianity is an adaptation of Mithraism welded with
the Druidic principles of the Culdees, some Egyptian
elements (the pre-Christian Book of Revelation was
originally called T h e Mysteries of Osiris and Isis),
Greek philosophy and various aspects of Hinduism.




Why there are no records of Jesus Christ

It is not possible to find in any legitimate religious or
historical writings compiled between the beginning of the
first century and well into the fourth century any
reference to Jesus Christ and the spectacular events that
the Church says accompanied his life. This confirmation
comes from Frederic Farrar (1831-1903) of Trinity College,
Cambridge:

"It is amazing that history has not embalmed for us even
one certain or definite saying or circumstance in the life
of the Saviour of mankind ... there is no statement in all
history that says anyone saw Jesus or talked with him.
Nothing in history is more astonishing than the silence
of contemporary writers about events relayed in the four
Gospels." (The Life of Christ, Frederic W. Farrar,
Cassell, London, 1874)

This situation arises from a conflict between history and
New Testament narratives. Dr Tischendorf made this
comment:
"We must frankly admit that we have no source of
information with respect to the life of Jesus Christ other
than ecclesiastic writings assembled during the fourth
century."
(Codex Sinaiticus, Dr Constantin von Tischendorf, British
Library, London)

There is an explanation for those hundreds of years of
silence: the construct of Christianity did not begin
until after the first quarter of the fourth century, and
that is why Pope Leo X (d. 1521) called Christ a "fable"
(Cardinal Bembo: His Letters..., op. cit.).

[D. Schlenk]

"D.Schlenk" <detmar...@hotmail.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:ji9320$m8g$1...@online.de...

>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=70&Itemid=71
>
>
> THE FORGED ORIGINS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
>
> by Tony Bushby
>
>
> What the Church doesn't want you to know
>

> [...]
>
>
>
>

http://books.google.de/books?id=lcuu-5NYmW4C&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq

The Mystery Man of the Bible / Apollonius - The Nazarene

by Hilton Hotema - 1967


Chapter 5

Hesus KRISTOS

In the religion that came from the east, the most prominent
god was Krishna, Kristos, Cristos, Christos.

Apollonius spent some years in India studying the scriptures
of their god, and took copies of these back with him when he
returned to Antioch, where he came regarded as "an eloquent
man, and mighty in the scriptures" (Acts 18:24), and where
he taught the doctrines of the Hindu god.

In the religion of the Druids to the west of Rome, the leading
god was known as Hesus, or Hesous, or Iseous, a word which,
traced to its source, came from "Nous," meaning Mind or
Intelligence, first of the Eons, beginning of all things, first
revelation of the Divinity, or "Only Begotten" (Pike, p.560).

The Celtic Druids, wrote Godfrey Higgins, "were the priests
of oriental colonies who emigrated from India." They were
"the builders of Stonehenge or Carnac, and of other
Cylcopean works, in Asia and Europe."

Kristos is a name derived from Kris, meaning the orb of
the Sun. Krishna or Kristos was the Hindu Son God. In the
ceremonies of the Indian Mysteries, Kristos was the incarnate
spirit of the Hindu God Brahm, who in the course of time
became the Chaldean Ab-Ram of the Jewish scriptures
(Gen. 11:27), the same signifying Father Brahm or Father
God.

The Druidical ceremonies came from India; and the Druids
were originally Buddhists. They worshipped the Sun (Kris)
under the name of Hesus.

Apollonius is mentioned in the Bible as Apollos, "an eloquent
man, and mighty in the sciptures (Acts 18:24). The statement
that he was a Jew, born at Alexandria, is another falsehood
used to conceal his real identity. As he was destined to
become the Jesus of the Bible because of his extraorinary
work in religion, his true identity was carefully concealed.

Apollonius brought the Hindu religion into the Roman provines
to the east of Rome. He was known also by a name that meant
the Son of Apollo -- Apollo in turn meaning the Sun, the same
as Kris.

The name Apollo means the same as Sol, Saul (Acts 7:58),
and was frequently abbreviated into Pol, Paul, Paulus. He is
the Paul of the Bible.

In the Acts, these names are changed in the spelling to suit
the purpose of the author, and to conceal the fact that they
were of the same meaning, and related to Apollonius, the
greatest propagator of the Hindu religion in Rome in the
first century AD; and beyond all question the author,
expounder, and advocate of the Hindu theology set forth in
the New Testament, no part of which ever had the remotest
relation to any Jew or Hebrew theology.

So careful were the politico-religious founders of orthodox
Christianity to conceal everything relating to Hesus of the
Druids, that little mention of him can be found, and that
little is contained in that valuable book, "The Celtic Druids,"
by Godfrey Higgins (London, 1826). Under the head, "The
Druids Adored the Cross," he wrote:

"Having shown that the Cross was in common use in all
religions long before the time of Christ, by the continental
nations of the world, it is only necessary now to show that
it was equally in use by the Celtic Druids in Britain and
Ireland, in order to overthrow the arguments used to show
certain monuments as being of Christian origin from the
circumstances alone of their bearing the figure of a Cross.

-25-

"Shedius, in his treatise "De Mor. Germ." 24, speaking of
the Druids, confirms all I have said on this head. He wrote
that the Druids seek studiously for an oak tree, large and
handsome, growing up with two principal arms, in the form
of a Cross, beside the main stem upright. If the two horizon-
tal arms are not sufficiently adapted to the figure, they
fasten a cross-beam to it."

"This tree they consecrate in this manner: Upon the right
branch they cut in the bark the word, Hesus; upon the center
or upright stem, the word, Taramis; upon the left branch,
Belenus; over this, above the going off of the arms, they
cut the name of God, Thau (the Mark of Ezek. 9:4); under all,
the same repeated Thau."

"This tree so inscribed, they make their kebla, in the grove
cathedral, or summer church, toward which they direct
their faces in the offices of religion, as to the amber stone
or the cove in the temple of Abury; like as the Christians
do to any symbol or picture at the Altar" (Antiquity Unveiled,
p.372).

When the church fathers made this discovery, they inter-
polated in Deut. 21:23, "For he that is hanged (on a tree)
is accursed of God," then interpolated in Gal. 3:13, "For
it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree."

Here the evidence is preserved and rendered plain that the
Druids of Gaul, Germany, Britain, Ireland and Scandinavia
had a trinity, of which Thau (Thoth of the pre-Egyptians) was
the supreme God, Hesus the human executor of the will of
the first, and Belenus, the solar light and heat thru which all
life was believed to have originated and to be preserved.

These were the three personifications of the Trinity. Hesus
in the trinity occupied the same position and represented
the same theological function as the Kristos of the Hindu
trinity.

Furthermore, the Druidic Hesus was connected with and
attached to a natural, not an artificial, Cross, and that much
nearer were the Druids to the worship of the true God, the
God of Nature, than the Christian idolators who bow in
adoration before the carved crucifix.

According to tradition, the Druidic Hesus and the Hindu
scriptures reached Marseille about 800 BC, being taken
there by the Phoenicians, who visited and traded in that
region, and carried their religion with them. The name of
their god, Hesus, was derived from the word Hes, meaning
fire, fire-god, or sun-god, The Son of God.

The doctrines of Hesusism were propagated among the
nations west of Rome. It was not until 1500 years later,
about 700 AD, that Kristosism was introduced there by the
Christian priesthood, and then it was resisted even by
resort to arms.

Hesusism had gained great ascendency and had some of
the finest schools in Gaul, Germany, Britain, and Ireland,
and it was ardently taught by St. Patrick and others.

The group that appropriated the Druidic god Hesus under
the name of Hesus Christos, sought diligently to conceal
the facts by destroying the evidence as to the source of
their spurious deity Jesus Christ.