by Tony Bushby
Extracted from Nexus Magazine
Volume 14, Number 4 (June - July
In the fourth century, the
Roman Emperor Constantine united all religious factions
under one composite deity, and ordered the compilation
of new and old writings into a uniform collection that
became the New Testament.
About the Author
Tony Bushby, an Australian, became a businessman
and entrepreneur early in his adult life. He established
a magazine-publishing business and spent 20 years
researching, writing and publishing his own magazines,
primarily for the Australian and New Zealand markets.
With strong spiritual beliefs and an interest in
metaphysical subjects, Tony has developed long
relationships with many associations and societies
throughout the world that have assisted his research by
making their archives available. He is the author of
The Bible Fraud (2001;
reviewed in NEXUS 8/06 with extracts in NEXUS 9/01—03),
The Secret in the Bible (2003; reviewed in 11/02, with
extract, "Ancient Cities under the Sands of Giza", in
11/03) and The Crucifixion of Truth (2005; reviewed in
12/02) and The Twin Deception (2007; reviewed 14/03).
Copies of these books are
available from the NEXUS website and the Joshua Books
As Tony Bushby vigorously protects his privacy, any
correspondence should be sent to him care of NEXUS
Magazine, PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560, Australia, fax
+61 (0) 7 5442 9381.
What the Church
doesn't want you to know
It has often been emphasized 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
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
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.,
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
authorized 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
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 Fathers, 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
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, stabilizing religious splinter groups
was only one of Constantine's problems.
The smooth generalization, 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 (Catholic Encyclopedia, 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" (Catholic
Encyclopedia, New Edition, vol. xii, p. 576, passim). According
to Eusebeius (260-339), Constantine 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 stabilization (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 testimonies 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 totaled,
"in all, two thousand two hundred
and thirty-one scrolls and legendary tales of gods and
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).
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
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 (Catholic
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 Christianity, 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 patronized the vilest abominations" (An Apology
for Christianity, 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" (Catholic Encyclopedia,
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 History, ibid.). Caecilian of
Carthage traveled 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
(God'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 idolized either Julius
Caesar or Mithras (the Romanized 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 "Savior" was affixed to his name, its literal meaning
being "one who sows the seed", i.e., he was a phallic god.
Caesar was hailed as, "God made manifest and universal
Savior of human life", and his successor Augustus was called the
"ancestral God and Savior 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
immortalized on his coins as the "Savior of mankind" (ibid.). The
Divine Julius as Roman Savior 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
recognized 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 shortlist of
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 Savior-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".
Gospels were created
Constantine then instructed Eusebius to organize 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 Books. 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,
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
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
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"
"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.
They were the "New Testimonies", and
this is the first mention (c. 331) of the New Testament in the
With his instructions fulfilled, Constantine then decreed that the
New Testimonies would thereafter be called the "word of the Roman
Savior God" (Life of Constantine, vol. iii, p. 29) and official to
all presbyters sermonizing 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
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
(Encyclopedia of the Roman
Empire, 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
of Tyana, a first-century wandering sage, and made them part of the
New Testimonies (Secrets of the Christian Fathers, op. cit.).
The Latinized name for Apollonius
is Paulus (A Latin-English Dictionary, J. T. White and J. E.
Riddle, Ginn & Heath, 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
(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
Fathers, Oxford Movement, 1833-45, vol. v, p. 445).
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" (Encyclopédie,
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
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 willful
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,
"...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.
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 in 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 summarize 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
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 recognized 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
the Missive of Barnabas
the Odes of Solomon
Space excludes elaboration on these
bizarre writings and also discussion on dilemmas associated with
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
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 (Catholic
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
(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
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; New Catholic Encyclopedia (NCE),
"Gospel of John", p. 1080; also NCE, vol. xii, p. 407).
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 totaling 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 plagiarized
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.)
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
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
"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.
Important for our story is the fact that
the Encyclopaedia Biblica 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 Sixtus V (1585-90)
established an official Vatican publishing division and said in his
"Church history will be now be
established ... we shall seek to print our own account"
(Encyclopédie, 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 Encyclopédie, and it reveals the reason why Pope
Clement XIII (1758-69) ordered all volumes to be destroyed
immediately after publication in 1759.
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
Just what is
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 Mahabharata, 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 Phenomena 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 Jupiter (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
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
The Mysteries of Osiris and Isis)
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.
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
(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
(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
(Cardinal Bembo: His Letters...,