BIBLE HISTORY
Now let's roll up our sleeves and get serious about the Christian Bible. This study about the Bible will help you understand how some of your beliefs got to you and how most religious people view the Bible today. The purpose is to help you know and understand the difference in the Clear Thinker's approach to the Bible and the religious believer's approach to it.
If you were a sculptor with great
talent and had a beautiful block of marble, what would you make with it? The
block of marble is six feet by four feet by four feet. You may describe what
you would make out of it in as few as one word, or you may describe it in
detail, or even draw a picture if you wish. So stop right here and decide what
you would make out of that block of marble before reading any farther.
In asking a group of thirty people there will usually be at least twenty or more different objects or uses for the block of marble. A few typical uses for the marble will be such items as large praying hands, beautiful woman, hunting dog, athletic man, a vase, a rooster, a horse, a bird, a book (the Bible), some type of cat, a bath tub, the ten commandments and one innovative idea of a stack of large children's blocks spelling out "go gators.” Even in the ones that are alike, let us say a beautiful woman, the image that the maker has in mind will differ. One will have the woman with a baby in her arms, another will have her in a nude pose, one will have her doing something, others will have her sitting, or standing, or praying, or singing or even in some sexy pose. There will be no two who have seen the same identical thing in the block of marble.
Someone asked me what I saw in the
stone. I saw a tombstone in it with this epitaph.
HERE LIES BELIEF.
IT DIED FROM HONEST
CLEAR THINKING.
You
have seen what each person saw in the block of marble will be different from
what others saw in it. What Is The Point?
The point is people all use the
Bible in the same manner as we used that block of marble. A sculptor approaches
the block, looks it over and sees something in it. Different sculptors see
different images (pictures) in it. So the sculptor begins to discard and chip
away at everything that Doesn’t Conform To the Image He Sees In It.
That is exactly how denominations,
religions and individuals use the Bible. They approach it with the image
already in their heads. They chip away, discard or ignore everything that does
not agree with and conform to the image (doctrines) they see in it.
Think for a moment of all the
Christian denominations, sects and cults, all of which get their teachings
straight from the same one and only, Holy Bible. Yet, some of the doctrines
they see in it are so diverse that some of the things they see in it are
mutually exclusive. That is, if one doctrine is correct the other one cannot
possibly be true. So they all chip away everything that doesn't agree with the
preconceived image, picture or notion (belief) that they bring to this Holy
Book.
Take a look at a few parts of the Bible that different denominations chip away, explain away, distort the meaning, or refute and discard. Some chip away the ban on women speaking and teaching in church, foot washing, Mary having other children, God telling lies to his people. Some chip away speaking in tongues, salvation by works, salvation by faith, salvation by marriage. Did you know according to the Bible, women are to be saved by bearing children? (1 Timothy 2:15.) Is that chauvinistic or what?
Others chip away some of the
miracles or permanent salvation. Some chip away national salvation or universal
salvation. Some chip away this prophecy or that prophecy. Some even chip away
the divinity or the humanity of Jesus. Some denominations chip away the creation
of the universe, or even the whole of the Old Testament. And of course some
chip away whole books or parts of books of the New Testament. The Jews chip
away the whole of the New Testament. Some leading church denominations chip
away, or ignore, all of the writings attributed to someone called Paul, or of
someone called James, or of books called Peter or John. Some chip out the earth
standing still, or this miracle, or that one and some exclude the book of
Revelation of Saint John, or all the miracles in the whole Bible. Some chip out
(explain away) all literal references to hell.
In fact if there were only one Bible and each Christian denomination were allowed to remove the parts that they do not believe, that they believe to be in error, that they believe do not apply to them, or that they ignore, there would hardly be a scrap of the Bible left. And that mind you is what happens when we listen to All the Christian denominations that say they believe in the Holy Bible, who tell us it is the Word of God and some who tell us they believe it from cowhide to cowhide.
Can you imagine ten sculptors all
working on the same block of marble? One is trying to chip out a bird, another
a woman, one a flower, others a dog, a child, a vase, one a book, one a star, a
horse or a hand. What happens? Before anyone has a chance to do a bit of work
they all start protecting the image that they see in the marble by chipping
away at one another with their hammers and chisels.
If you can see that, you now have
the best seat in the house for watching the Council of Nicaea (Nice) set up by
Constantine in 325 AD. In establishing his state religion, Constantine needed
to bring several feuding and persecuted religions together, all of which
worshiped a Jesus Christ (a Savior Anointed) into one strong central
organization that could be controlled from the top by the state. The idea was
to bring together all these large and small, scattered religions that worshiped
a Savior Anointed (a Jesus Christ), incorporate their sacred writings, unite
their leadership and form a single strong organization that would have a deep
and broad appeal.
This new composite (federated)
religion would become the official state (political) religion. It would be
coequal and fused with the Mithraic religion (worship of God through his
crucified, anointed, savior Son, Mithra). It would also be fused with the
official Roman derivation of the Mithraic religion, the Sol Invictus religion.
This was the worship of God through Apollo and/or Mithra as the Savior Anointed
(the Jesus Christ). Apollo and Mithra were symbolized as the Son of the Sun.
The Sun was the visible sign of the invisible God. The soldiers and Greeks
worshiped through the Persian name, Mithra, while the elite Romans worshiped
through his Roman name, Sol Invictus.
Sol Invictus was the religion that
worshiped God through Apollo or Mithra. This savior God also carried the title
of Savior Anointed (Jesus Christ in English). Constantine’s new religion would
become the only religion the state would recognize. All other religions that
refused to join would become outlawed, persecuted and eradicated - and it
became so.
Now Constantine (who was a Sol
Invictus worshiper) attached himself, as a student, to the Eastern part of the
early Jewish church called "The Way." They taught a Spiritual Jesus.
He become friends with Eusebius of Caesarea who worshiped this Spiritual Jesus.
He also became friends with Hosius of Rome, who worshiped a materialized Human
Jesus. Note this conflict!
These men were interested in
solving the question of the divinity of the Savior (the Jesus). Was this Savior
(Jesus) just a regular man with special powers, or was he a spiritual being of
God who did his work in the spiritual realm. Was he from God, or was he God
himself? Eusebius was in favor of the reasoning of one, Arias, who said the
Spiritual Jesus was begotten. He was coequal with God but was not the God
himself. Jesus was the Son of God. Therefore, he could not be The God. This
Spiritual Savior did all his work in the spiritual realm.
However, the religion of Mithra,
whose doctrines were being studied by the leaders of The Way, also worshiped
their Jesus Christ (Savior Anointed) named Mithra. They had already solved this
problem. Their Savior Anointed (Jesus Christ) was Mithra, a human man divinely
born, in whom God (at his baptism) had been incarnated into his flesh to suffer
and die for the sins of man. Thus, Mithra died in the Flesh to save the world
from sin and Satan. Up to this point in time the church of The Way never
claimed that their Spiritual Jesus (Savior), or that their human Jesus was a
God.
It is said that Constantine, while
in battle, looked up one day and saw a sign in the heavens. That sign was a
"Cross " (the Persian instrument of death upon which Mithra died).
Then into his head came the notion (or revelation) that said, "In this
sign (of the cross) conquer." Without doubt Constantine was well
acquainted with the Mithraic Church because he was also a soldier and Mithras was
known as the soldier's religion (the earlier form of Sol Invictus). They
worshiped God though Mithra, the Persian crucified Jesus Christ (Savior
Anointed).
The problem Christians of today
must face at this point is this. The sign of the "Cross" was not used
at all by the early Jewish church (called, The Way). They worshiped the Jewish
Spiritual Savior Anointed (Jesus Christ) who resided and acted only in the
spirit world and they used the symbol of the Lamb or the Fish. The Only
religion in the Roman Empire that used the "Cross" (the Persian
instrument of death) as its symbol of faith was the Mithraic religion, called
"Christian” (little anointed ones) by their enemies. Christians were
“little-know-it-alls” who worshiped a Savior Anointed (Jesus Christ). The Sol Invictus
religion used the image of a sun spray that looked a bit like a cross but it
was never intended to represent an instrument of death. Rather it symbolized
the divine connection between heaven and earth with Apollo at the center.
Even before the Council of 325 AD,
leaders of "The Way" were envious of the Cross used by the Mithraic
church because it indicated a physical life for Mithra, their Jesus (Savior).
The Mithraic religion worshiped Mithra, their Persian Human, crucified Jesus
Christ (Savior Anointed). Their Jesus Christ, Mithra, physically died on a
"Cross" in the old Persian method of execution several hundred years
before the Jewish Jesus Christ (Savior Anointed) was later claimed to be
executed in the Roman method of execution. The Romans executed their victims by
"poling" (impaling).
Constantine was a worshiper of Sol
Invictus, Apollo being their Savior Anointed (their Jesus Christ). He wanted to
combine all the saviors to make One Soul Saving Savior (one Jesus) and make him
into a Christ God Man (a Christ or Savior like Apollo or Mithra). In fact he
wanted to name the new savior, Apollo and worship him as The God (The Deity) to
give status to his New Church. This New Church would then mesh with his own
religion and become one with it.
To deify someone was a legal
process and was not difficult for a king or emperor. Constantine had his
subjects call him “Son of God” because he had recently deified his own father
and expected the same to be done for himself. Thereafter, “Son of God” was added
to the titles of Constantine. So, he summoned the leaders of the church called
"The Way" and the church called Mithraic (or Christian) along with
other scattered sects and churches that worshiped a Savior Anointed (a Jesus
Christ). He was going to choose, or create, a savior (a Jesus), settle this
question of the divinity of the savior once and for all time and build a strong
single State Church.
Constantine began immediately to
lay the groundwork for his New State Church. In 321 AD he enacted the Edict of
Tolerance. This gave Christians (Mithraic, The Way, Sol Invictus and other
Savior worshipers) new freedom. In addition, he declared that all businesses,
courts, shops, transactions and entertainments were to be closed on Sun-day in
honor of the Sun God (Apollo and/or Mithra, the saviors anointed). All Savior
Gods were to be worshiped on that day. He also declared that all Savior Gods’
birthdays (including Mithra, the Jewish Savior and Apollo) were to be
celebrated on the third day after the winter solstice. That is when the Sun
begins to return north (by our calendar, December 24th - 25th). This is the
first day astronomers can observe the return north of the sun. All of the Gods
were to be celebrated at that time with festivals and worship.
The leaders of The Way refused to
stop their Jewish Sabbath worship because their Savior (Jesus) had not yet been
declared as a God. Only after the Council of 325 AD did they claim their Jesus
was a God and change their day of worship from Friday to Sunday. Since the
regular Jews did not worship a Jesus Christ they were allowed to continue their
worship on the Sabbath.
Constantine even decided on a name
for his new religion. It was to be known (by literal translation into the
English language) as the Divine Universal Assembly. Think about the meaning of
those words as they relate to the Divine Roman Empire. Don't forget, the Roman
emperor was considered to be a Son of God and soon to be a God, (but Not a
Savior God). The Roman Empire was also considered to be Holy, that is, divinely
appointed and sustained by God.
The religious and political
language of that period was Greek. The Greek word for "Divine" can
also mean, "separate" and transliterates (brings the sound of the
Greek word) into English as Holy. "Universal" comes into English as
Catholic. "Assembly" comes into English as Church. Thus was born the
New conglomerate (confederated and amalgamated) religion of all religions that
worshiped a Savior Anointed (a Jesus Christ). Together they became the New Holy
Catholic Church.
Literally hundreds and hundreds of
priests and leaders from many other religious organizations throughout the vast
Roman Empire came to the Council at the command of Constantine. He was the
Emperor of the Roman Empire and one did not defy the Emperor without a good
reason, or even with a good reason. So all who were able were furnished secure
public transportation. They all came together to take part in the new
"political" experiment designed to make one Divine Church organization
out of Several Varied Religions that worshiped a Savior Anointed (a Jesus
Christ).
Also the fact that the Assembly
(Church) was held in the East made it easier for those of the Eastern Church of
the Way and the Mithraic "Christian" Church to be well represented. Constantine
also wanted to hide the truth of his plan from the Romans in Rome (who would
surely object - and did!) until it was an accomplished fact.
Hundreds who originally came to
the council were killed, some before they got there. Others were driven away,
or were put in prison by those who finally succeeded in getting the upper hand.
The most ruthless were obviously the winners in that struggle. Those who were
driven away, including Arias, recorded many fights, screaming, nasty words,
objects thrown, books burned and hostilities. Almost all of those killed,
driven away or put in prison were worshipers of the Jewish materialist Human
Savior of "The Way.” Why just them? Because they were the only ones who
did not yet claim that their particular Savior Anointed (Jesus Christ) was a
God himself. Who was in charge here anyway? No one even knows who presided over
the Council. It was a free-for-all. But in the end, Constantine got exactly
what he wanted.
Those who were left were to decide
on a creed for the new church. They were also to decide on New Gospels and
which (and what parts) of over three hundred gospels and writings would go into
the new Divine Book (Holy Bible) and which would not. They fought and fussed
among themselves until Constantine finally stepped in, appointed a head man,
his friend Eusebius and said, "What he says goes in, goes in. What he says
stays out, stays out."
Very early it was agreed that they
would not name the Savior Anointed, that is, Mithra, Apollo or the name of the
Jewish savior (Judas, Jeshu, Thomas or Issa, whichever it was). They soon found
out a personal name would be too divisive. (Many scholars think the original
Jewish Jesus was based on the Man of Light written about in the Dead Sea
Scrolls about 125 BC.) The Council decided that instead of using the personal
name of one of the saviors, they would simply use the Title, (Savior Anointed)
or transliterated (bringing the sound) into English, “Jesus Christ.” That is
how the Jesus of the Bible got his name. It is the Title of All Saviors
Anointed! This way all Saviors Anointed (all Jesus Christs) would be included
into the new church and new holy book.
One man who is thought to be the
Jewish Jesus’ was called Issa (or Jissa) in the Far East. Still other scholars
claim that the only man that actually fulfills some of the claims about the
Jewish Jesus in Jewish history of that time was a man named Judas or Jeshu of
Gamla (in Galilee). This man was a Nazarene (a title for a religious rabble
type of militia that opposed Roman rule). He is officially listed as Judas Bar
Abbas. Or in another place as, Jeshu Bar Abbas (Son of God) and yet again as,
Judas Krist. He was called a rabble “Nazarene” in all three accounts.
There is no record of a town
called Nazareth during the time of the Jewish Jesus! The term ”Jesus of
Nazareth” is a mistranslation of the literal original, “Jesus the Nazarene.”
This means Jesus belonged to a religious rogue militia that sought by war to
overthrow Roman rule in Judah.
The present town of Nazareth was
established after the Jewish and Roman war (70 AD) and later named Nazareth by
the Catholic Church’s Knights Templar. The Jewish histories claimed this Judas
Jeshu was anointed Messiah (Christ, there have been many). A woman who used a
fortune in prized spices anointed him and dried his feet with her hair. He led
a strong and costly rebellion against the Romans. He was supposedly “Impaled”
by the Romans and the only charge against him was, "The King of the Jews.”
He is also rumored to have escaped (a secret legal provision for those of royal
birth who then lost their birthright). A substitute was allowed to take his
place. In all of Jewish or Roman history, no other person has ever been killed
by the Romans under the charge, "The King of the Jews.”
This Judas had a contractor
father, Joseph, of royal Davidic blood, a mother named Mary, brothers named
James, Joses, Simon and Judas Thomas and sisters not named. (See Mt.13:55-56.)
He also had sons named Jacob and Simon (both later arrested by the Romans) and
a son named Menahim. This son, Menahim, was the one who led the final rebellion
against Rome that ended the nation of Israel in 70 AD. (See: The Wars of the
Jews by Josephus Flavius, Book XVIII.)
Meanwhile back at the Council (the
free for all), the hostility and problems continued. They finally solved the
problem by agreeing on a creed. This gave them a standard by which to discuss
the divinity of the New Jesus (the Savior) and to make selections of those
books and sections of books that could be updated (rewritten) or Created to
conform to the new creed and that were not too offensive to the majority of
those who were left. As a result we have a book that says drinking is good and
one that says drinking is bad. It says making money is good and making money is
bad. It says charging or paying interest is good and it says paying and
charging interest is bad.
This Book says everyone will be
saved and it says no one will be saved. It says follow the orders of your
political leaders and it says not to follow the orders of your political
leaders. It says to leave all and follow God and it says to stay where you are.
It says don't drink. It says it is ok to drink. On every issue of life except
one, it takes both sides of the question. The only issue about which the Bible
is certain (and I might mention the one issue that Rome could not do without)
is the issue of slavery. Slavery is regulated, defended and supported by the
Almighty, the Holy Ghost, the Holy Bible, the Jesus and the Divine Universal Assembly,
according to Constantine's Bible.
In other words there is something
for everyone in the Bible. You can "prove" anything by it and you can
"disprove" anything by it. Where do you think all the many sects and
denominations in Christendom came from? They came straight out of the Bible,
every last one of them. Even the Jehovah's Witnesses, Latter-day Saints,
Seventh Day Adventist and Christian Science Practitioners, who wrote their own
holy books, still use the Bible to "prove" many of their points (doctrines).
I am trying to make a point. I am
trying to show you the Clear Thinking philosophy as it examines the founding of
the Catholic Church and the Holy Bible.
The first thing the Clear Thinker
notices when he approaches a problem, whether it is religious, political,
social or personal is, few people actually study the facts or look in the right
places for the truth of the matter. If you want to find out if a man (a group
or an organization) is a thief and a liar, you don't ask his family and his buddies.
You ask the victims! Ask yourself, "Who were the victims of this un-Godly
movement and the conglomeration of these various churches and religions?"
Are people still made victims of this confederation of churches?
Most people read the Bible or any
reference work for only one purpose. That purpose is to prove a preconceived
point of view. They will search the Bible, the newspaper, reference books, any
source, looking for those statements that back up or tend to "prove"
their views and beliefs. They will even lift out of context, they will distort,
they will misread, so determined are they to prove themselves right. They will
also ignore and hide those things that prove, or tend to prove they are wrong.
Religious people believe they are
right and cannot possibly be wrong. Therefore, any contrary evidence must be in
error and is something that the Devil is using to try to deceive the faithful.
These same people believe it is also permissible for them to use a lie, or to
tell a lie to "prove" that their belief IS correct. After all, since
their belief IS correct, in the long run it is not really a lie. Once the whole
truth is made known the lie is really just an insight into a truth that others
have not yet clearly seen. That is another type of chaos that Belief produces.
On the other hand, the Clear
Thinking philosophy demands of its followers that they find and know what the
correct position is, not that they prove some position to be correct. So, we
study the surrounding histories of that period of time. We study what the
religious leaders had to say and what the civil authorities had to say. We
study what the opposition had to say. We study what individuals wrote about the
issues. We compare, we analyze and we stand flabbergasted and in awe at the differences
between the historical records of the civil authorities and the claims and
writings of the religious authorities of the church.
Finally, when the evidence is
actually overwhelming, we draw our conclusions. We find the Council of Nicaea
to be a hatchet job by Constantine to renovate, update and create a New
Political State Religion out of the doctrines and writings of the Mithraic
religion called Christian and the Jewish and Greek religion called “The Way.”
Many Clear Thinkers have died or been tortured because they revealed and proved these same things in the past. Truth is sometimes a very dangerous commodity to possess. I Salute the United States! The Clear Thinking philosophy does not necessarily demand that an Honest Clear Thinker puts his safety in danger in order to explain or follow the position he finds to be correct. It does demand that he knows what he is doing and what the facts are.
Truth is always hated by the lie. Read any history book and find out who it was that tortured and killed whom. Why? It would have been simple enough to produce evidence showing the truthfulness of the Church's position and claims. But when you have No truth on your side and No evidence, the best you can do is to kill the messenger, the truth teller and hope thereby to prove your point. Of course it does prove one point. That is, there is No proof of the claims, or of the truthfulness of the official church records about the Council of Nicaea of 325 AD (and this includes most other claims).
The big question that comes now
is, "How can we know the facts?" Half of the answer is summed up in
the word "Honesty.” The other half is found in locating and testing the
various claims against each other and against known science, facts and good acceptable
morals. One could use the words "research" and "thinking"
to describe the second half. First, honesty demands that one looks in the right
places for the Truth of the matter. This is actually harder than the work of
research. It also means one will accept the answer once it has been laid open
to him. One must lay aside preconceived notions, beliefs and biases. It is hard
work, but it is Right!
As for how the Clear Thinker sees
the Bible, he must honestly conclude the Bible is the work of many men. No one
knows who wrote a single line of it. The Bible has been revised, edited, added
to and subtracted from since the inception of each of its many little books. A
short study of the Babylonian Tablets, Dead Sea Scrolls, the Gnostic and
Mithraic writings and literature, prove beyond doubt, there is little
conclusive original work in the New Testament or Old Testament. Every major
aspect of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ (the Jewish one) in the New
Testament was written hundreds of years earlier about Mithra in the Persian and
Indian Holy Books.
Many of these same things were
also written around 125 BC about the Man of Light in the Dead Sea Scrolls
including the New Testament miracles and the Sermon on the Mount. Many scholars
think the Man of Light in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the model for the Jewish
Jesus Christ - miss dated and modified by using known names of political
leaders of the later period. Some scholars conclude, with ample evidence, that
the Man of Light was not even a Jew.
The last writings of the Jewish
histories of that period were stored about 100 AD. They include the history of
Judah through the supposed lifetime and death of Jesus and the claimed
beginning of the early church of the Jews, called The Way. They wrote about
every other religion, every other God and every other political and religious
movement. Yet not one word is mentioned about a human Jesus, or the apostles,
or the church. Not One Single Word! They wrote about everything else but not
the early church, or this Jewish Jesus (Savior). Why?
It is claimed Mithra did many of the same things that the New Constantine Bible claims a human Jewish Jesus did. And that claim for Mithra was made hundreds of years before Jesus (the Jewish one) was supposed to have lived. In fact the Crucified Savior, Mithra, was called, Iesus Christos (Jesus Christ) or "Savior Anointed" (his title). Mithra also instituted All of the so-called Christian ordinances and sacraments such as the Eucharist (Communion or Lord's Supper), Baptism, Foot Washing, Forgiveness of Sin, Unction, Holy Matrimony, Mass and all the rest of the modern Christian Sacraments. All of this was no less than eight hundred years before the Jewish Jesus was supposed to have been born. Crishna (one of the Indian Jesus Christs) also did these same claimed things over four thousand years ago as did Hesus (Jesus by modern translation) in the west a bit later.
For that matter, anyone buried under the sign of the Cross before the fifth century AD, was buried as a Mithra worshiper (called, Christian). Those of the early Jewish and Greek church (called The Way) were buried under the sign of the fish or the lamb. From my studies, it seems the Jewish Jesus was Not crucified. If he actually lived and was killed at all by the Romans, then he was probably poled. The Romans usually poled their victims. The Persians were the ones who crucified. Mithra was the Crucified Savior. There are tile floors, murals and pictures in Iran, Iraq and India that are more than three thousand years old. They show a crucified God (or man) on the cross with a hole in his side, nails in his hands and feet and thorns on his head.
The Jewish Jesus was the “Poled”
Savior. The word translated “crucified” in the English Christian Bible is the
word that literally means "poled" (or impaled). Why did they not use
the Greek word for crucified? Look it up! There is little historical evidence
that the Romans ever crucified anyone. However they poled or impaled thousands
and Later the church called that poling, "crucifixion.” I will leave to
your research or imagination the type of death this was. Count Dracula of the
Balkans was the last to use this Roman method of execution.
The Mithra celebrations of
Christmas, All Saints day, Lent, Easter, etc., were incorporated into the New
Christian mythology by Constantine's New state church. The early pre-Nicean
Jewish church (The Way) held only Jewish ceremonies and holidays. Their worship
on the Jewish Friday evening or Sabbath was replaced by the Mithraic Lord's Day
or Sun-day worship. This too came from Constantine and the Mithraic religion
when many Mithraic doctrines were incorporated into Constantine's new religion
called the Holy Catholic Church.
However, the early Jewish church
had already been drawn to some of the Mithraic teachings since that church also
worshiped a Jesus Christ (Savior Anointed). Mithra worshipers suffered the same
tortures and discriminations that the Jewish and Greek worshipers of The Way
suffered under the Romans. The Romans made little to no distinction between the
two religions. Both worshiped a Savior "Anointed" (Christ). They
called both groups, "Christians.”
At the time Constantine was
forming his new church at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, other than Sol
Invictus (Emperor worship of the Sun as the symbol for God), Mithras was the
largest religion in the Roman Empire. Its doctrines had also begun to
intermingle with the early church (The Way) of the Jews. It is known they often
swapped guest priests. At first in Rome, Mithras was known as the "Soldier's
Religion," brought to them from Persia to Rome by the Greeks.
Constantine's plan was to so integrate the religions of Mithras, The Way and
Sol Invictus that all their symbolism, creeds and history became one. This
enabled Constantine to now possess the one and only “Soul Saving” religion in
the Roman Empire. Though he wanted the savior's name to be Apollo, he did
settle on “Savior Anointed” (Jesus Christ), the Title, to obtain unity.
Following the Council of Nicaea,
the New Holy Catholic Church did everything in its power to stamp out all old
records and histories of both the earlier Mithraic church and the earlier
Jewish church, called "The Way.” They substituted new records to give
Constantine's new Church both a "Divine" book and a
"Sacred" history.
Even today one must go to
translations of scholarly works by Jews, Germans, Greeks, Persians, Indians and
the Dutch to find information on the Mithraic Church. Catholic Rome did a good
job of destroying and hiding the information. [See: The New Schaff-Herzog
Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge and its Bibliography. Early editions (pre
1900's) of Encyclopedia Britannica have some of this information, as do early
Catholic Encyclopedias.) (Read the life of Constantine by at least two
different authors.]
Some scholars say there is no
record of these things in the Christian writings of that day. Certainly there
isn't! They were destroyed! But there are many Non-Christian records. Besides,
if the Mithraic church had nothing to do with the Council of Nicaea, why did
the New church go on a five hundred-year campaign to destroy every record of
both the Mithraic church and the early Jewish church? And why did they even
destroy or hide the records of the Nicean Council itself?
One of the most difficult historical
events to research is the 325 AD Council of Nice (Nicaea). The accounts are
conflicting. Many accounts were written one or two hundred years After the
Council. The letters from Council attendees to friends or other ministers or
church leaders give differing dates, differing accounts, differing numbers,
differing results and differing information.
There are No official public
reports from the meetings - only Eusebius' book. The council lasted two months
or three months or four months depending on whose account one reads. Many
clerics and Bishops came early and/or stayed late while they worked on writing
or rewriting and compiling the new, New Testament books.
Some of the letters written by
priests to each other were supposed to be written before the Council, but there
is proof that some were written much later after the Council. The lowest number
of official attendees is given as two hundred and eighty. The highest number of
official attendees is given as one thousand and eight hundred. The unofficial
attendees (scribes, grooms, students, lesser clergy, sons, friends, cooks,
grooms, etc.) numbered into the thousands. This was a big "blowout"
and extravaganza to show off Constantine's new city (Constantinople) that he
was building. He also built his new temple. It is reported by some that his new
temple was the eighth wonder of the world. Constantine wanted a new religion to
go along with his new temple and his new Capitol City of Constantinople. And he
got all three.
In many of the accounts there is
criticism over the fact, not one single prayer was offered during the entire
Council (two or up to four months). Constantine's opening remarks did use the
name of God in a general way, but no one counted it as prayer. Even Eusebius
notes, “There were no prayers.” This prayer business was one of the meanest and
hotly contested debates at the Council as recorded by the dissenters. Why?
ON TO WHOM THEY
SHOULD PRAY
AND IN WHOSE NAME TO DO IT.
After the Council, the church (the
winners) destroyed thousands of letters and accounts. To possess a letter, or
an account, or a record about the Council of Nicaea was Punishable By Death.
And a large number were killed. The church established a reward system for
anyone turning in such letters and accounts, or for turning in their friend or
enemy for possession of some of this material. This diabolical attack on truth
lasted well over five hundred years! Thank goodness numbers of the accounts
survived. Is this religion? Has it changed any since then? Or is this something
else?
Clearly and certainly, The Holy
Catholic Church was not trying to hide the information that they tell us today
about the Council. What they were trying to hide was the Truth about the
Council, why it was called, who attended, what went on and what the results
were. I hope the true account is hidden somewhere in the Vatican and some brave
and honest priest will show it to the world.
We can be sure that the official
information given to us by the church today about the Council has very little
truth in it. We must glean for the real purpose by studying the political and
religious powerful forces prior to the Council. The religious power was in the
hands of the state religion, Sol Invictus, the Mithraic church and to a smaller
degree in the hands of The Way of the Jews. Both of the latter religions were
called "Christian.”
It is interesting that scholars, who have not bothered to examine these facts, are very confused over how and why such a strong and prolific religion as the Mithraic Church should fade from western history in less than fifty years. They attribute the demise to the fact that the new Divine Universal Assembly (Holy Catholic Church) simply overshadowed it. Not so! The old Mithraic Church “Became” the New Holy Catholic Church. It was the Jewish sect called "The Way" that was absorbed and disappeared.
Before the new conglomerate church
became the official Holy Catholic Church, the Mithraic priests had been
baptizing in the name of their Father, Son (Mithra their Jesus Christ) and the
Holy Spirit of God for several hundred years. They had been calling themselves
followers of the Christ for centuries. Those who opposed their religion also
called them “Christians” as a derogatory term. Centuries ago these Mithraic
priests had adopted the term Christian for themselves and simply continued to
call themselves and their church members, Christians.
Constantine wished to separate
Mithras from its Persian roots and reform it into a Roman religion so it would
be more easily accepted and propagated among the Romans. The Mithraic priests,
seeing the advantage to enlarge their church, fully accepted the New rewrite of
their religion. And the amazing thing about it was they did not lose any of
their doctrines, claims or ceremonies. In fact, we still have them today. They
are Still called Christianity.
The Mithraic priests preached the
same sermons they had been preaching for hundreds of years, used their same
Christian symbols, read some of the same sacred writings that were now being
called the New Divine Book (New Testament) or Holy Bible. Their Bible stories
were reworked so that the Persian stories and Jewish stories were mingled and
now set to read as though they happened in more recent times rather than
hundreds of years earlier. They preached the same Jesus Christ that they
preached in Persia for hundreds of years, changing only the time and place of
his life and death and some names of his followers and officials. They
incorporated the stories of their Jesus Christ (Mithra) into the gospels and
letters of the New Testament. They also incorporated some of the teachings of
Appollonius, called Pol of Tyana. In 325 AD Mithras went from a religion where
they worshiped mostly in secret caves and homes (due to the persecutions) to a
Temple religion called The Holy Catholic Church.
There were many manuscripts circulating in the early Jewish church of "The Way" and some of them were writings by Gnostic and Mithraic priests or clerics. Nearly illiterate traveling preachers wrote some of the others. There were several different Matthews, Marks and Lukes. There were about two hundred gospels. There were letters written by leaders of the various congregations (both Mithraic and The Way) that were read and discussed. But the Mithraic church refused most of these and only those that could be rewritten to conform to the New Creed and New sacred history were accepted. The others were hunted down and destroyed, often along with the owners.
Now it was not the power or influence of the Mithraic priests that caused their doctrines to dictate the outcome of the Council. It was not the power or influence of the church called The Way. It was the power and will of Constantine, who had Already Decided what the outcome should be. It was he who had decided that the Savior (the Jesus) must be The Highest God in order to give great and holy status and prestige to his New Holy Catholic Church, his new Holy Temple and his new Holy City, Constantinople (now Istanbul).
In other words, the worshipers of
Mithra did not change anything much, accept to change the date and place of
their Jesus Christ and give their allegiance to the New official state Holy
Catholic Church that the emperor Constantine had newly formed. It also meant
that the Mithraic priests now had new bosses from the former church of The Way.
On the other hand, those who had
been a sect of the Jewish religion (that they called - The Way) had to change
everything. They had to change every single one of their Jewish holidays. They
had to adopt the new (old) symbolisms of the Mithraic church including the
"cross.” They had to change their day of worship from Friday evening to
Sunday morning (The Sun God, Apollo's, day). They had to change their
terminology to conform to the new terminology adopted from the Mithraic
religion. They had to allow sculpture in their churches as well as paintings.
Up to this time such imagery was forbidden by God and considered one of the
worst kinds of sin. They had to change their doctrines and accept the New Creed
of the Holy Catholic Church. Those who didn't accept were killed or banished.
And many, many were!
One thing the Jewish sect won was
the inclusion of the Old Testament in Greek into the New Divine Book. The Old
Testament was the only Bible that the early Jewish church possessed. Since the
Mithraic priests held the Jewish writings in high esteem, there was little
opposition to its (OT) inclusion. It was from this Old Testament book and from
the spiritual writings of the Hellenistic and Gnostic philosophies from which
the early Jewish church, first Evolved.
For more than seventy-five years after the fall of Judah and the scattering of the Jews in 70 AD, there was no Human Jesus Christ known. Up until this time, these displaced and disillusioned Jewish Holy Men studied their Old Testament Bible. There (in the OT) it was revealed to them that this Spiritual Christ, (the Jewish one) was a Spiritual being and could bring hope and salvation to them. As they interpreted it the deeds of this Spiritual Christ happened and existed only in the spirit world. This Spiritual Christ defeated death and Satan in the spiritual world. It was the ignorant preachers and converts who thought that what God did in the spirit world, he must, or should have also done on the physical earth.
Since the Mithraic priests held the Jewish writings in high esteem, there was little opposition to its (OT) inclusion. Where as the worshipers of Mithra had to make few changes in their worship, the Jewish sect had to make a great multitude of changes.
Another thing the leaders of the
earlier church (The Way) accomplished was to get their own self-appointed
Bishops and leaders into the highest places of the New church. They were able
to do this because they were more wealthy, more educated, more ruthless, more
determined and already had a system of hierarchy in place. There were few
Mithraic priests who had the experience of ruling over a large organization.
The early church of The Way swapped their Spiritual Savior (Jesus) for a Human
Jesus Christ God. These Jewish leaders swapped their historical foundations and
their claimed apostolic teachings for New Power over their own people and those
not yet in their New religion. Power quickly becomes oppressive - and wealthy.
The Clear Thinker looks at all of this and reaches a conclusion: The Bible and the religions are man made. Much of the Bible, the gospels and some of the letters, were just a fusion and rewrite of accounts about Mithra, Crishna, Apollonius and the Man of Light known to us from the Persian, Gnostic and Escene writings.
We will stop here and look at some
of the other claimed Jesus Christs of the world. These Saviors Anointed have
about the same evidence for their claims as do the Christian religions for the
claims of their Jesus Christ (Savior Anointed).
OTHER SAVIORS ANOINTED (OR JESUS CHRISTS)
One of the problems that Bible Christianity must face is there is not a single precept or claim in the Christian Bible that was not already being taught by ancient religions for thousands of years prior to the advent of modern Christianity. They even had their "plans of salvation,” usually called, The Path, The Way or The Mysteries.
The early historical records in India and Tibet tell of the Hindu Jesus Christ (Savior Anointed) who was claimed to be a God. He descended to be born of a virgin. He worked miracles in his youth and early life, including the raising of the dead. He preached moral concepts, said he was God's Son, had twelve students who followed him, was betrayed by one of them, was killed on a tree, run through with a spear, rose again on the third day, was seen by many people and after preaching for forty days he ascended into heaven from the top of a mountain in full view of hundreds of people. This would be no less than four thousand years ago.
His "gospel" was preached in Israel many years before and even during the time the Jewish Jesus Christ (Savior Anointed) was supposed to have been born. The Escenes carried on debates (and recorded them) with these teachers of Hinduism and they taught each other their doctrines and beliefs. The Escenes were looking for a Jewish Messiah, not a universal Messiah. Is there a connection? This Hindu Jesus Christ died "once and for all time" to redeem All mankind from their sins and the evils of life. By believing in this Hindu God, when one died and qualified, he would go to the judgment and then to heaven to be with Chrishna, the Savior Anointed (Jesus Christ) for eternity. If one had not received Chrishna and his teachings, he was reincarnated again.
The paintings and murals of this God Man show that soon after his death, he was pictured with nail holes in his hands, feet and a spear hole in his side, as were earlier saviors. Yet secular civil accounts claim that an arrow went through his heel and penned him to a tree. He was speared in the side and died penned to the tree. This hearkens back to an even earlier savior (about 8000 BC). Of this savior we have little knowledge except that he died on a cross for the sins of the world and is pictured the same as the Jewish Jesus. He was pictured as being black.
One of these Hindu Saviors
Anointed was named Chrishna (Krishna). Some say in one Indian dialect Chrishna,
means, "anointed or appointed.” There are sculptures and paintings (some
are over three thousand years old) of Chrishna nailed on the cross that are
exactly the same as modern pictures of the Jewish Savior Anointed (Jesus
Christ). Chrishna was often pictured as blue (representing the alien blood line
of the Gods). Is this not "copy cat” or what?
Mithra was also crucified on a
cross, first in the spirit world and later it was claimed the deed was done in
the real world. He likewise did all of these God like things. He is also
pictured the same as Chrishna. In one mural he is pictured as hanging in the
heavens on a cross, arms outstretched and with a caption saying, "Come
unto me all you who are burdened."
In fact, including Chrishna and Mithra, there are known to have been many crucified anointed saviors claimed. They were killed on a cross, pole or tree. All were claimed to be Gods who were born in some divine way to a virgin on or about the third day after the shortest day of the year (December 24th or 25th). They were saved in infancy from some evil death, showed divine genius in youth, later taught divine precepts, worked miracles (healed the sick and raised the dead), had twelve students or followers, was betrayed by one of them, was killed on a cross (tree or pole), entombed, raised again on the third day, appeared to their followers and told their followers of their divine sacrifice for the evils and sins of the world. They then ascended into the sky where they intercede on the right hand of God in behalf of all men. Here is a short list of those Saviors.
These few names are copied from
the book, Sixteen Crucified Saviors, by Kersey Graves. There is some dissension
over the proper names of some of these God Men and over the dates. These are
not here to defend the claims. These are here only to show, many have made the
same claims as was later made for the Jewish God Man. There are many more, some
of local origin but many are of more general reputation. Some of these claimed
God Men (Christs) in English are:
NAME AND APPROXIMATELY THE DATE THEY DIED.
Chrishna (Krishna) 2000 B.C. (2500 B.C. or before)
Sakia 600 B.C.
Thammuz 1160 B.C.
Wittoba 552 B.C.
Ioa 600 B.C.
Hesus 834 B.C. (Jesus, by new translation.)
Quexalcote 587 B.C. (Claimed not to have died.)
Quirinus 506 B.C.
Aeschylus Prometheus 547 B.C.
Thulis 1700 B.C.
Alcestos 600 B.C.
Atys 1170 B.C.
Crite 1200 B.C.
Bali 725 B.C.
Mithra 1800 B.C. (OR EARLIER)
Jesus Christ 34 AD
Appollonius (Pol of Tyana) 98 AD
There were also many lesser or more local saviors and this list does not include the Egyptian Gods. Osirus should be included because he seems to have been the first western God who did most of these Christ like activities.
We need to look at Apollonius of Tyana (known as Pol of Tyana) because some of his many deeds, travels and teachings are preserved for us in the Holy Bible. Pol was the Cappadocian Savior who worked miracles, preached morals, preached a Gnostic Spiritual Christ who was a spiritual being in the world, who did not ever become corruptible flesh. Instead this spiritual Christ, taught by Pol, entered Mithra the Christ, (as a dove) at his baptism and left him at his crucifixion. He then became the sacrifice of God’s Son, the Christ, for all mankind.
Some reports said Pol himself died (upside down) to save mankind. Much of his activities are recorded in the Bible as those things attributed to a man called Paul of Tarsus in the New Testament. Some of Pol's known letters (to the same towns listed in the Bible as letters from Paul) were known and quoted in the fourth century by Greek historians. These fourth and fifth century historians claimed Pol's letters are the basis for the letters that the (possibly fictitious?) Paul of the Bible was supposed to have written. They accused the Christians of Plagiarism (stealing someone else's work) and denied that there was any evidence that a Paul of Tarsus ever lived!
Many of these writings that are attributed to someone called Paul in the New Testament, came straight out of known Gnostic texts and other writings. It has been well demonstrated that the Paul of Tarsus in the New Testament is claimed to have done many of the same identical deeds, spoke some of the same words and made the same claims as was earlier attributed to Apollonius, who was called Pol of Tyana (a suburb of Tarsus).
Pol was a real man, a Mithraic
and/or Gnostic philosopher who was written about in a number of Official court
histories by both the Romans and the Greeks. Also recording him were the
Egyptians and others. Pol preached his Gospel all over the Middle East, Europe
and even over in India and Persia. The Holy Catholic Church succeeded in
destroying much of this material, or of infusing Paul’s name where Pol was
listed. Today we must depend on the writings of Philostratos, several others
who eulogized Pol and the Christian writers who tried to discredit the claims
of Pol and his works and teachings. These defenders of Christianity tried to
show that there really was a Paul even if he did do some of the same things
credited to Pol of Tyana.
Many of the events that were
supposed to have happened to the Paul of the New Testament, were events that
were Known (and recorded) to have happened to Pol of Tyana. Some of the same
words that were recorded officially as statements of Pol were reported to have
been said later by Paul in the New Testament. There is not one single scrap of
non-Christian evidence that Paul of the New Testament was a living person.
(There is some disputed genealogical evidence in early Jewish and British
manuscripts of a man that escaped to Britain called Saul that may have been the
Paul of the Bible.) There are No civil historians who record him as they do Pol
of Tyana. Yet, in spite of the extensive efforts of the early Holy Catholic
Church to wipe out every trace of Pol of Tyana, they did not completely
succeed. His deeds, his travels and even some of his teachings have been saved
in the East from the censorship and destruction that the Holy Catholic Church
pursued for several hundred years.
Some scholars say that not only
did Paul not exist, but that All of the original writings and teachings
attributed to him in the New Testament are the teachings of Pol of Tyana. Pol
is known to have traveled widely. It may have been Pol who preached and wrote
all of the letters to the early church that claimed to help the early church of
The Way to understand Jesus (the heavenly spiritual savior, whose work was all
done in the spiritual world, not as a physical presence on earth). He is
credited also with helping the church (The Way) understand the teachings of the
Old Testament and the spiritual truths of The Way. Without doubt, whoever wrote
these letters (or if they were copied by Paul of the New Testament), they
certainly diverted the whole course of the early church and created doctrinal
differences that still exist today.
I am not saying that a man called Paul, mentioned in the New Testament, did not live, though many scholars do give strong evidence that Paul was only a mythical character patterned after Pol. Nor am I saying that a man called Paul did not do some of the things written about him. I am saying that another well-known man, Pol of Tyana, also did many of the same things. He did these things during the same period as credited to Paul. He did these things for another Gnostic religion, possibly Mithras, whose followers were called Christians, whose symbol was the cross, who worshiped a divine Jesus Christ who did all of his deeds in the spirit world. There are secular and civil records that give details of Pol, his letters, sermons and life. Pol was worshiped as a Savior in Cappadocia. There is no mention of the Bible Paul in any civil writings or accounts.
Finally, the Clear Thinker
discovers, as he studies the Bible, any short honest effort in the Old
Testament or the New Testament will uncover scores of errors there. (See
Chapter 28.) To open a real can of worms on the subject, there is not one
single bit of substantial Western evidence that the Jewish Jesus Christ or
Joshua Messiah of the New Testament ever lived or did what is claimed for him
(especially during the period claimed). The only remaining possibility is that
his commonly used name was Judas Thomas (meaning twin), Jeshu or Judas Krist.
Of those there is a record.
This was a telling blow to the early Holy Catholic Church. It's adversaries, especially among the Jews, denied and still do (doctrinally) that the Jewish Messiah (Christ) ever lived. Constantine's New Catholic Church did the three things that it could to stop their adversaries. They killed those whom they could catch. They tried to destroy all of the writings that tended to oppose the falsehoods of the new church. Finally, they "manufactured" what proof they thought would be accepted by their own worshipers and tried to use this new "Proof" in support of their newly created religion.
The Holy Catholic Church inserted
an account about a Human Jesus into the work of the Jewish historian, Flavius
Josephus. They did the same thing in Tacitus, Pliny the Younger and later they
did the same to the writings of Suetonius among others. These forgeries are
blatant (bold and obvious), written in language and styles unknown to the
earlier historians. The forgers used words and spellings that did not come into
vogue until centuries after the original historians were dead. Names for towns
were used that did not come into being until after the original historians
themselves were dead. The term "Christian" was used in some of the
forged passages. This could have made them Mithraic or Gnostic worshipers, not
members of the Jewish sect called "The Way" who worshiped the Jewish
"Savior Anointed.”
Also, these civil histories and works, before they were altered, were well known to the early defenders of the Holy Catholic Church. Yet for more than seven hundred years not one single Christian writer ever mentioned these interpolated (fake) passages in defense of Jesus being a real person. It was only in the eighth century AD and later in the sixteenth century when they are first used. However before the eighth century, those who opposed the new church spoke and wrote often of the fact that of All the historians who covered the supposed period of the life time of Jesus Christ and the early church, not one ever even mentioned Jesus, Paul, or the Apostles. Neither did they find any mention of the great turmoil that was claimed to surround Jesus, his disciples, or the early church. And these were scholars of the histories of that period. The defenders of the early church used the most outlandish arguments one could imagine trying to prove that Jesus was a real person and not just a composite of several mythological "Christ" characters as the Jewish and Greek scholars charged.
In the final analysis, the
Christians had to rely on the New Holy Bible that Constantine got the Council
of Nicaea to put together. All these religious defenders of the faith could say
was, "The Bible says, the disciples, who would not lie, said Jesus lived
and did this and that." Thus, it remains today! They said you must believe
and not doubt. It was the late Seventh Century AD before the church found the
First "Proof" that Jesus was a real person. That is when the old
copies were destroyed and updated versions written to conform to the new
"Facts.”
It is interesting that there was no Holy Bible for years and years after the Council of 325 AD. There was simply a list of approved texts and writings that floated among the clergy. Many clerics had some copies of the letters or gospels in scroll form. It was much later that all the letters, gospels and writings were bound together in book form for some special churches, clergy and scholars. Individual copies of the scrolls differed widely from each other and it was only with the advent of printing in the 1600’s that the church got serious about making all the tests the same.
In old Persia, Tibet and India there exists ample evidence that Jesus (the Jewish one) was a real historical person. They do give an earlier date for him (that might make him the Man of Light in the Dead Sea Scrolls). There exist books, scrolls and legends concerning the teachings and activities of this Jesus (called Issa or Jssa in the East). He sojourned in the East from his fourteenth year through his twenty-ninth year. He first spent his time at the feet of Brahman priests whose doctrines he rejected. They sought to kill him because he insisted on teaching the common people (the untouchables). He escaped possibly to Brit (Britain). Returning, he was next accepted by early Buddhist type priests and learned their language and holy books. He became a great Buddhist type teacher and is referred to today as Saint Issa. Until the 1700's there was no "J" in the English language. Thus, "I" and "H" in the old languages are generally translated with a "J" today. So Issa would be Jssa, their word for "savior.”
When Jesus left these Holy Men, it
is recorded that he said, "I must be about my Father's business."
When he was thirty years old (the earliest age for a Holy Master, or Buddhist
priest) he went back to Judah, raised such a stink with the Pharisees that within
three months they sought to have him killed. The Buddhist's accounts agree on
this. They also say that Saint Issa (Jesus) was of royal blood or a King.
Some accounts claim there were two
Jesus’ and they were twins and the New Sacred Book combined both of their
lives, making the two different lives into one account. One Jesus escaped and
went west to Britain and the other escaped to the East. The Buddhist's accounts
do not agree on whether Issa was actually killed or not. Some say he escaped to
the west, married and had children. Those who say he was killed, say it was
reported to them hundreds of years later that he was killed by the Pharisees
against the will and law of the Romans. They know nothing of a resurrection or
ascension. (All those added stories came later, after 325 AD.)
In fact, the Buddhists in Japan
Insist to this very day that Jesus (one of them) left his family in Europe
(Spain), came to Japan, married and they can point you to the very house in
which Jesus (Issa) lived out his last years and the place where he is buried.
This they claimed before western men and Christianity arrived in the Orient.
They maintain that claim today.
The Christian churches in the west still seek to deny and hide this
valuable proof of a Jewish Jesus as a real historical person. Such evidence,
publicly accepted, would undercut their doctrines, destroy their plans of
salvation and contradict large portions of Constantine's New Holy Bible.
Not a single book in the gospels
can be honestly and confidently attributed to the person whose name appears at
the beginning of each book. All these books were written by persons unknown.
Many Christian scholars say the names at the beginning of these books were
simply to whom the books were dedicated, not who wrote the books. Not a single
eyewitness to any of the marvelous tales told about Jesus in these books wrote
a single word of the Bible. To give testimony or to be a witness, one must tell
what he has Personally seen or heard. He may not officially tell what someone told
him about the event. He cannot say it is the truth because he cannot know. The
only book really claimed by some religious scholars to be by an eyewitness is
the book John. We will examine that shortly.
In addition, these books about
Jesus disagree not only with each other but even with statements made in one
part of the book with statements made in a later part of the same book. Jesus
stayed in the grave three days and three nights (from sundown Friday night,
which was Saturday to the Jews, until before sunup Sunday morning). Add those
religious numbers up. There was an angel at the tomb. There was not an angel at
the tomb. Jesus first appeared to one. He first appeared to two. He first
appeared to the eleven. Which account tells the truth? Are they all wrong? Look
it up.
Matthew, Mark and Luke (the
synoptic gospels) record the ministry of Jesus as being about Three Months long
(from his baptism to his death). Also say the Buddhists that in three months
Jesus had to escape being executed. If the Buddhist's records and the synoptic
gospels are true, the ministry of Jesus in Judah lasted just three months.
“Synoptic” means “in agreement.”
The Gospel of John, on the other
hand, claims the ministry of Jesus lasted over Three Years. All four accounts
make separate and opposing claims as to when Jesus was poled (crucified), who
was there when it happened, what time he died, who was at the tomb, who saw the
apparitions of Jesus and under what circumstances. All disagree over whether
Jesus ascended or not. Those who say he did, differ on where it happened, when
it happened and who was present.
All these death and resurrection
accounts were added later, some even After the Council of 325 AD. The earliest
known Christian writers claim Jesus lived over fifty years, well into manhood,
before he died, presumably stoned or in some normal way. They were disputing
the claims of some that Jesus was poled (crucified) buried and resurrected.
They claimed Jesus was a Man, the Jews or the Romans did not kill him and he did
not rise from the dead.
(This came to my attention just
before publication. There are accounts in old Medieval English manuscripts that
claim Jesus was stoned in London for stealing the Torah from the Rabbis). See:
The Bible Fraud, by Tony Bushby.
If Jesus was a real living person,
how is it even possible that close friends of his could have differed so wildly
in their account of his life, ministry, teachings and death? The only honest
conclusion at which one can arrive is that the writers neither knew him
personally, nor did they have any first hand information from anyone who did
know him. If we were to say one of them knew him personally it would be
impossible to say which one. The one who can be eliminated for sure is the
writer of the book called John. He didn't even have a third hand account of a
human Jesus. Is the Holy Spirit responsible for these differences? If not, who
is guilty of it?
One could go on and on with the
different accounts of the genealogies of Jesus, the time of the poling (crucifixion),
the copying from the Gnostic texts, the copying of the miracles, the copying of
the teachings of Jesus, the copying of the sermon on the mountain from the Man
of Light, the earthquake that caused the saints to wake up out of their graves
and walk around Jerusalem, the killing of the children of Bethlehem, the copied
Lord's Prayer, Jesus going into Egypt, etc. All said to be true in one book and
contradicted in another one. Not one single Roman or Jewish record confirms or
even mentions a single one of these tales. There are hundreds of items like
these and you should read the mishmash written by priests, professors and
preachers who try to find some acceptable explanation for these inconsistencies
and errors. They avoid even talking about the fact that there is No Civil
Record or evidence at all. Not one line! Not one word!
The Bible is only a book of
Testimony, or as some have called it, "A book of gossip.” That is, the
writers are testifying to certain things and events as though they personally
experienced them. They testify to certain events as being true and therefore,
they are asking you to believe that what was written by them are the True
accounts of those events. Let us interview some of those who are giving witness
and testimony about these unusual and wonderful religious claims.
It is claimed that you wrote the
book called, Matthew. Why did you use spellings in your book that did not come
into practice until after the third century AD?
The Holy Spirit led my writing.
Why in Matthew 28:15 did you
write, "And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this
very day." Doesn't that indicate the story was written a long time after
the man called Matthew was dead? If you were not at least two hundred years
old, you were not an eyewitness to any of the events in Matthew. Only an
eyewitness can give testimony about an event.
It is claimed you wrote the book
called Mark? Were you an eyewitness to any of the events described in this
book? How do you know those things are true?
No. Peter, Paul and Barnabas
told me.
But you were not a witness? Was
Paul a witness?
No, Paul was told by God who whispered in his ear - in a vision.
Why did you use so many Latin words in your gospel and why are several of these words spelled as they were spelled in the third century and not spelled as they were spelled in the first century?
I was writing to the Romans.
Then the book that bears your name
was written much later than is claimed. Unless you lived to be well over two
hundred years old, you could not have written the book called Mark.
No need to call the writer of the
book called Luke. He got all of his information from Paul (possibly a
fictitious character) who got his information in a vision - in his head. Luke
was not an eyewitness.
So next, we call the writer of the
book called John. It is claimed that you wrote the book called John. Were you
an eyewitness to what you wrote?
Yes.
You said Jesus was God?
Yes.
Did you say a man must believe
what you wrote about the Savior (Jesus) and if he did not believe in Jesus, he
would be condemned by God and forever cast into hell and separated from God?
And why are these the very Same words used by the Mithraic Church about their
Jesus Christ called Mithra?
I don't know.
Then we must look deeper into what
you have said.
The Gospel of John begins with,
"In the beginning was the Word . . ." This and many more sections of
John are direct quotes from the Hindu and Buddhist holy books. These quotes
were also copied by some of the Greek religious writers and philosophers at
least two centuries before the Christian era. Other parts of John come from
Gnostic writings, many of which were also copied from Hindu or Buddhist
scriptures. What do you have to say about this?
You must believe and not doubt!
There is a major problem with the
Gospel of John. It is an altogether different religion than Matthew, Mark and
Luke describe. John's religion is almost totally Mithraic and follows Hindu,
Buddhist and Gnostic texts, while the other gospels are somewhat more Jewish in
nature. The combination of Hindu, Buddhist and Gnostic philosophy is Mithraic
in tone and fact. It is the Gospel of John that sets the theology of most
Fundamental Protestant doctrines. All scholars agree that John was written much
later than the other gospels and letters and that it does Not conform to the
other books of the gospel, or to the letters of other Bible writers. It is
very, very different.
There must be a reason why the
book, "John" follows the Mithraic doctrines so closely. Why? No eye
witness to the life and teachings of Jesus could have accidentally, or even on
purpose, changed those Jewish accounts into a different Mithraic type of
religion as happened with the book called John and certainly not if he ever
knew the man Jesus. It is interesting that the ministry of Mithra lasted three
years. According to John, the ministry of Jesus lasted the same amount of time.
Is there a connection?
Someone who did not know the truth
about the New Testament events in the life of Jesus, or who sought to change
those events, wrote the book called John (whatever those events were, IF there
were events). He may have been a Mithraic or Gnostic priest. He may have
written the book called John as late as the beginning of the fourth century AD
and certainly not earlier than the middle of the third century. The Mithraic
doctrines began to penetrate the religion of "The Way" quite early in
its history.
The New Testament
gives us three different religions.
First, there is the Jewish type found in Matthew, Mark and Luke. That is a type of new covenant between God and all the Jewish believers as a whole. Then there is the Gnostic and Mithraic type found in John. That is a despotic and rigid type of religion with magic formulas and dire threats against disbelievers. Finally, there is the religion of Paul that is sort of a middle of the road between the other two. It is a spiritual and philosophical religion between God’s Spiritual Son, Jesus Christ (Savior Anointed) and the individual believer. There is no evidence that Paul (or Pol) knew of a physical man called Jesus (Savior) who lived on earth. Paul’s (Pol’s) Christ was a divine Son of God whose work and sacrifice happened in the spiritual sphere. The Holy Scriptures (Old Testament) revealed this Spiritual Christ through whom the believers could find salvation. Later Additions to the writings attributed to Paul, attempted to add the element of a physical Jesus. Most scholars agree that these additions were much later and were not added until after the sixth century.
Clear Thinkers accept the Bible as
a unique book that has widely affected western culture of the past and present.
They see no evidence a God inspired a single word of it. They do see a great
deal of evidence that the Bible was copied from earlier accounts, from
different religions and from men who lived a long time before the Christian
era. They do see a multitude of errors in it (see Chapter 28 on errors). They
also find scores and scores of added bits of information and statements that
were not even present in Constantine's first Holy Book. Many other sections
were later deleted from Constantine’s first Holy Book.
All in all, Clear Thinkers find the New Testament unreliable in the areas of history, ethics, morals, science, economics, education, psychology, political science, social relationships, justice, family relationships, and yes, even in religion. The Holy Bible is the work of many men therefore men must judge it.
Why are there so many errors still in the Bible? The leaders of the religions have had hundreds of years to rid their Holy Book, their doctrines and their teachings of those things that are "dead giveaways" that the Bible and their religion itself are simply man made. Why have they not taken out those internal statements that expose their stories as being false? The reason is, because They Haven't Had To. The believers have been quieted and kept in servitude by the simple fear that to honestly and seriously study into these things would be to doubt and to doubt is to Sin Unpardonably. To sin this Sin is to lose their salvation and all of the good things that their religion has promised.
The gullible, the fearful and the
guilt ridden shall inherit the Holy Bible and the Holy Catholic Church and its
offshoot - Protestantism. (And maybe they deserve it.)
FEAR MAKES GOOD
BELIEVERS.
To rid yourself of fear and guilt
learn to think Honestly. To embrace the Clear Thinker's philosophy one must
desire to know the truth over and above any emotional attachment that he may
have to any belief. In fact, there are Clear Thinkers in many of our churches
today. Good work can be done almost anywhere, in or out of religious
organizations. (Later, in chapters 7 - 8, we will be discussing the Clear
Thinker's view of staying in the church.) But before one can embrace honesty
and the philosophy of the Clear Thinker, he must honestly ask and honestly
answer some questions.
"If I found out much or even
all I have been taught by church, priests, preachers, Bibles, mother, etc.,
were proven false, could I stand up under the emotional strain? Could I stand
up under the bitterness of finding out I have been lied to and deceived? How
would I react if I suddenly found there is no heaven or hell as taught by the
religions? If I am one who makes my living from those who support the church (a
priest, minister, teacher, professor, etc.), could I give up my job, or stay on
as a Clear Thinker? Could I work things out with my spouse, children, parents,
friends, mistress and others?"
There are only two reasons or drives for being a Clear Thinker and actually they are one in the long run. You must be Honest, at least with yourself. And you must have a strong desire to know the truth about God, religion and those things called spiritual. You must use your mind the best you can. The key phrases to a Clear Thinker are, "Honest Doubt" and "Logical Thought.” No one will ever know all the answers so forget a lifetime hunched over reference books in dozens of foreign languages.
What you will be looking for are
the principal criterions (standards) for judging life within you and around
you. You will be looking for the standards by which you can judge the claims of
the past and the present. You will be looking for the moral and ethical
standards that will be the correct and compatible guides for your activities as
long as your life shall last on this earth. And in any hereafter you will do
the same there. Here is that standard!
Do not do to others that which you would not have done to yourself!
If you are looking for the philosophy that will allow you to be the best person you can possibly be, you will find it in Clear Thinking. If you are looking for the philosophy that will set you free from all the garbage that controls your actions and inhibits your logical thinking and creativity, you will find it in the Clear Thinking philosophy. Honest Clear Thinkers shall inherit freedom, justice, peace of mind and above all, sanity.
Sanity is a nice, desirable commodity
to posses. But if a person has a delusion, or makes one up (false concept or
lie), that the normal cultural sanity does not accept as being true, then that
person is considered to be somewhat insane (a disbeliever) by that culture.
However, if that deluded person can convince others that the delusion is real,
then that delusion (lie) becomes a Religious Belief and is tolerated. If more
and more accept the lie, then soon it becomes a Religion and is granted status.
If enough people over time can be convinced that the delusion is true, then
that delusion (lie) becomes a Culture Truth. That delusion then becomes a
standard culture norm by which sanity is now measured.
Finally, the cycle becomes a full
circle. The person who does Not believe that delusion (lie) is now considered
as insane to some degree by that new modified culture. Christians consider
Atheists to be somewhat insane because they do not accept their Christian
delusions as being true.
So by our New Christian cultural
norm, I am considered to be somewhat insane. I have a question about this. Does
Honest Clear Thinking make a person insane? Or does believing (instead of
thinking) make one insane? Honest Thinking provides stability for the mind.
Believing removes all protective filters and rationality from the mind.
Believing mingles reality with delusions to such an extent that it produces
fear, guilt and delusions of all sorts - Just Like Drugs. No! Worse than drugs,
because the druggy Knows he is on drugs.
DID JESUS DIE TO
MAKE US STOP THINKING AND START BELIEVING?
Men created the Holy Bible and the Holy Catholic Church for selfish, political, economical and personal reasons! What a powerful bunch!
DOES HONEST CLEAR
THINKING SCARE YOU?
BELIEF SCARES ME!
For the real roots of the problem
of the church, and indeed, all religions, one needs to read the sections on
Thom's Law.
Copyright: September 1989
renewed: January 2005
by: Thomas E. Blaylock, Jr.
posted: 02/26/02
updated: 03/04/05