The story I’m about to tell you is absolutely true. It has always been known by an inner circle of powerful people and generally kept from the masses. The reality is, this truth has been hiding in plain site for well over 2,000 years. The truth can be a very dangerous thing. That is why it is most often guarded by a battalion of lies. Most of you have never heard this. Most of you will refuse to believe it. Some will do the research merely looking for a way to refute this truth. The thing about truth is, whether you believe it or not, once you’re exposed to it, it changes you. If you are unable to handle truth, stop reading now. If on the other hand you want to know, I have a story to tell you.
This story begins with a very famous Greek who conquered the then known world. His name was Alexander of Macedon. He is better known from history as Alexander the Great. While this story begins with him, it is not about him. The story is actually about one of his generals by the name of Ptolemy. Alexander practiced a form of conquest that was focused more on acquisition than destruction. What he did after he conquered a land, was install a governor, make those people a part of his empire and of course, tax them. The Romans learned from and followed Alexander’s example.
It should come as no surprise, after conquering Egypt, Alexander installed a governor and moved on. The governor that Alexander installed, was one of his favorite generals a man by the name of Ptolemy. It is important to note, that at that time – circa 300 BC – the only Europeans were either Greek or Roman. This is important to note because it means that the people who lived in Egypt, the Egyptians were Black Africans. All the great pyramids had already been built. All the great temples, the Sphinx all the wonders in Egypt had already been built before any Europeans stumbled into the Nile Valley. In point of fact, Egypt had already reached the pinnacle of it’s civilization and was in decline. This is important to note because many modern revisionist historians refuse to recognize the accomplishments of the Africans. The Jews have tried to take credit in their mythologies, but as usual get their stories wrong. A trip to Egypt and a simple inspection will prove that nothing from that period was built out of mud bricks made with straw. The Egyptians built in stone. And of course, now there is the “Alien Connection.” Some are saying that ancient visitors from outer space came down and did all the construction. It seems anything is more believable than Africans having built and left such a legacy. But I digress.
Ptolemy had a problem. In order to rule Egypt, he had to become Pharaoh of Egypt. The Pharaoh was considered to be a living god. Sure, you could try and rule by force alone. However, a culture as mature and developed as the Egyptians would be very difficult to rule by force of arms. If you think about it, our modern army the most modern and powerful fighting force yet to exist on this planet, has been unable to pacify the primitive nation of Afghanistan. You reach a point, where military might will not take you to the resolution you desire. What Ptolemy needed was to find someone to make him a god. Egypt was full of various religious denominations however the only group that would agree to his demands were the Coptic priests. In order to rule, Ptolemy had to become the supreme god, over and above all other Egyptian gods. The Coptics had just the ticket. They combined the essence of Osiris with Apis the bull and created a god called Serapis.
This new god was supreme and over all other gods. It possessed the form of a man and was depicted with an overflowing cup upon his head. Often around his head were depicted sprouting branches. Serapis gave life by pouring his essence or anointing from the cup that sat atop his head. This anointing was called the Christos. The priesthood who served Serapis became known as the Bishops of the Christos or Bishops of Christ.
“A correspondence of Emperor Hadrian refers to Alexandrian worshipers of Serapis calling themselves ‘Bishops of Christ’:
‘Egypt, which you commended to me, my dearest Servianus, I have found to be wholly fickle and inconsistent, and continually wafted about by every breath of fame. The worshipers of Serapis (here) are called Christians, and those who are devoted to the god Serapis (I find), call themselves Bishops of Christ.’
–Hadrian to Servianus, 134A.D. (Quoted by Giles, ii p86)”
Historical Context.
You are no doubt familiar with a rather famous Egyptian Queen by the name of Cleopatra. What most people do not know is that there were several Queens named Cleopatra. In point of fact, the one we’re going to focus on is the one who was married to Julius Caesar and then later to Marc Antony. She was Cleopatra VII. She was the several generations – nearly 300 years – a great granddaughter of Ptolemy Soter. (The study of salvation through Jesus is called soteriology) Following the death of Julius Caesar, Marc Antony and Octavian went to war for control of the Roman Empire. We’ve all seen the story of Cleopatra committing suicide by embracing the poisonous asps. The dreams of the star crossed lovers ended when Marc Antony was defeated and killed by Octavian making Octavian sole emperor of Rome. What most people do not know is that upon becoming emperor, Octavian took on the name Augustus. Yes, the same Caesar Augustus that figures so prominently in the Christmas story.
It is important to have some historical context when placing events and understanding their meanings. This is the time into which Jesus was born. Rome was consolidating it’s power under Augustus. Because of this instability some of the nations under the control of Rome began testing Rome’s resolve. Why did the Angels sing “Peace on Earth?” Because there wasn’t any. The Jewish people were looking for a messiah that would liberate them from Roman rule.
We all are familiar with the story of Jesus. He travels, preaches, develops a following and is crucified. His followers carry on his mission. At that time, being a follower of Jesus was not a spectators sport. Being a follower of Jesus could get you killed. The Romans would kill you for being a member of a group that wanted to overthrow of Rome. The orthodox Jews didn’t like you because you were antagonistic to their authority and control. They considered you to be heretics. This presented a problem for the early followers of Jesus which can be seen from the archaeological record. The followers of Jesus built hidden and concealed gathering places to worship. They used coded symbols, most prominently the symbol of a fish. Notice I have not referred to the followers of Jesus as “Christians.” The reason is quite simple. They didn’t refer to themselves as Christians.
Christians 2.0
In spite of persecution, the message carried by the followers of Jesus seemed to flourish. The truth of his teachings seemed to strike a chord in the hearts of the people who heard them. The Jesus movement grew. Although there is some historical evidence for followers of Jesus being crucified, used for entertainment and sport in the Roman arenas and Colosseum, in spite of this, the movement continued to grow. It grew to the point that it attracted the attention of the mother of a Roman general named Constantine. Her name was Helena. Helena was not one to go halfway. She dived into the story of Jesus and his followers as avidly as some await the next installment of Harry Potter or the Twilight series. She went to the “Holy Lands” and basically asked anyone she met, where some pivotal event occurred. Where was Jesus born? There was no way to know whether or not the person she was asking actually had any idea. Nevertheless, whatever she was told, she placed an imperial marker and that place became the official site. Churches were built wherever these markers were placed and they have become the official sites that people go to and revere today.
Now we come to the matter of what you believe. If you believe that there has been an evil force – Satan – out to destroy the followers of Jesus, what do you think it has been doing? At first the plan seemed to have been to scatter the followers of Jesus. That didn’t work because wherever they went, they took his teachings with them and the message spread. Oppression simply wasn’t effective. The more oppressed, the more the movement grew. A change in strategy was in order. If you can’t beat them, join them. There is a saying that goes, “if we can name it we can tame it.” The first thing done was to give the followers of Jesus a name. They were called Christians. It was a nice fit. The iconography was already there. The budding branches around the head of Serapis morphed into a crown of thorns. The cup atop the head of Serapis became a halo. The image of Jesus became one and the same as that of Serapis.
Of course the message changed. Jesus said to Roman soldiers who asked what they needed to do to gain eternal life, “do violence to no man.” Constantine, claimed – like Paul – to have had a vision. His vision was of a cross floating in the sky. A voice spoke to him telling him to go and conquer under this sign. The story goes, that Constantine won his battle and Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. Constantine thought that having a universal religion would help to unite the Empire. To this end, Constantine decided to build 50 churches across his empire. He wanted a Bible to go in each of his churches thus, documentation had to be gathered, vetted and created. To this end, in 325 AD Constantine convened the first Nicaean Council.
Nicaean Council 325 AD
This is where it all began. Christian apologist take the position that this council merely met to produce a clear and comprehensive statement on the tenets of the Christian faith. However, common sense proves this not to be the case. First, Nice is in what is modern day Turkey. 300 Bishops from all around the empire were called to attend. Travel at that time was an arduous proposition. Further you can tell from the agenda of the meeting that these issues had hardly been decided or accepted by all. The first item on the agenda was the Arian controversy. Arius, who was from Alexandria Egypt, taught that Jesus was the creation of God. He was God’s most perfect creation but he was not God. He was the perfect son of God.
Why is this significant? Remember where the Christos was created? That’s right, in Egypt by the Coptic priests. Arius knew and was quite familiar with the story. He knew that the Christos was a created being. The other problem this controversy exposes is, in order for their to be any dispute, the Gospel of John 10:30 could not have been in existence. That verse reads, “I and my father are one.” After uttering this, the Jews took up rocks to stone Jesus. Thus, if that gospel existed prior to the Nicaean Council and the events recorded therein are factual, there could have been no dispute regarding the true nature of Jesus. Thus, there is evidence that the Gospel of John did not exist prior to 325 AD. If it did, the members of the Council seemed unfamiliar with it.
It was at this council that Jesus officially became Christ. His deity was ratified by what has become known as the Nicaean Creed:
“We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God,eternally begotten of the Father,God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.”
The important point here is the fact, anytime you have to call everyone together to hammer out a statement of position, there had to have been some dispute. Clearly by the time of the Nicaean Council, the chain of custody of the message of Jesus had long been broken. While some would argue that this was a symptom of success, the practical reality was, this council was beginning the process of creating the message of Jesus. How do we know this? Because following the canonization of the texts put together by Eusebius of Caesarea the book burning began. The newly formed church began gathering up all other manuscripts and burning them. This is why the “Dead Sea Scrolls” were sealed in clay jars and buried in caves. All other documents, some giving an entirely different take on the story of Jesus had to go.
Biblical apologist will defend this indefensible action by claiming that these other documents were heretical. That is an easy charge to make in their absence. If you murder all the witnesses, your account is all that is left. Nevertheless, some documents did escape the purge. Biblical apologist will try and point to the similarities in the canonized texts in an attempt to prove the validity of their texts, but they ignore the differences. You cannot have it both ways. It amazes me that people are so ready to place their faith and ultimately their hope for eternal salvation in the hands of men they did not know, who had agendas and beliefs of which they are unaware who were under the control, direction and guidance of a pagan emperor who was not even baptized until he was on his deathbed.
How do we know that the original texts were edited, altered and added to? One of the most glaring examples of this can be found in the Gospel of Mark. The earliest manuscripts found all end at Mark 16:8. Some of your better study Bibles have a footnote stating something to the effect that other manuscripts of Mark have a different ending. The seminal question is whom wrote verses 9 – 20? Even the earliest manuscripts were approximately 200 years after Mark would have been dead. There are other problems with the Gospel of Mark. Whom ever wrote it obviously was not familiar with the geography of Galilee. Mark 7:31 has Jesus by passing the “Sea of Galilee” on his way to the “Sea of Galilee.” This is a mistake that Mark would not have made. It would be like my saying, “I sailed down the Mississippi River and into the “Grand Canyon.” Huh??? Anyone with a smattering of North American Geography knows that the Mississippi River goes nowhere near the Grand Canyon.
Here is another problem that a true witness to the life of Jesus would not have made. Ask any “Christian” how long Jesus was in the grave and you’ll get the answer, 3 days and 3 nights. Why is this? They’re quoting from Matthew 12:40 where Jesus reportedly says, “as Jonas was in the belly of the whale for 3 days and 3 nights, so shall the Son of Man be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the Earth.” Yet, we have Jesus crucified on “Good Friday” and resurrected on “Easter Sunday Morning.” You do the math.
Yet another problem is, IF the Gospel of John existed and was known prior to the Nicaean Councils, it would have rendered half the agenda for the first council moot. Most of the first council was taken up by a debate over the nature of Jesus. Was he God? Was he Son? Was he the Logos – Word?” What does the very first chapter of the Gospel of John declare?
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 ¶There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
15 ¶John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
All that would have been needed would have been for anyone one of those 300 Bishops to take the floor and read those 18 verses. End of debate. Yet, at nowhere in the records of those councils do you have any such exchange or even an exchange containing the ideas expressed within those 18 verses. Why? You have two explanations. The first is, that Gospel had yet to be forge… WRITTEN! The second is equally as disturbing, all those would be journeymen, running around with the title of Bishop – note this was before there was an actual office of a Bishop – were not even aware of the rudimentary of documents or sacred writings of their faith. Why is this so important? The Bible that you read today and call “Holy” was put together by these men.
People do things for a reason. Those reasons are more profound usually when there is money involved or political gain to be had. Constantine was a pagan Sun worshiper. The “Cross” is a pagan Sun sign. The horizontal beam represents the Sun’s transit from East to West across the sky. The vertical beam represents the Sun’s rays coming down to touch the Earth. No follower of Jesus would ever sanctify the instrument of his execution. In point of fact, the symbol used by the early followers of Jesus was that of a fish. Do you think it a coincidence that Constantine, an avowed pagan Sun worshiper would just so happen pick a pagan Sun sign – the Cross – as the new emblem for the religion he was creating? Of course not. Why is it so important that Jesus be in the grave for 3 days and nights? If he was dead for one hour and resurrected, wouldn’t that be just as significant? Would his having only spent 1 day dead and in a grave have accomplished the same thing? Yet, hammered into all “true believers” is this notion of 3 days and 3 nights. Is there another reason for this?
As it turns out, there actually is! All Sun gods have these same attributes. They all are surrounded by 12 helpers. They all give life and perform miracles. They are all enemies of the Dark. They all fall and die for 3 days and 3 nights. They all are resurrected and are seen by all in the sky. Here are some more points:
- The sun dies for three days on December 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops in travels southward, to be born again (resurrected) on December 25th, when it continues its progress north.
- In various areas, the calendar originally began in the constellation of Virgo and the sun would consequently be perceived as being born of a ‘virgin’.
- The sun is of course the ‘Light of the World.’
- The sun ‘cometh on clouds and every eye shall see him.’
- The sun rising in the morning is the ‘Saviour of mankind.’
- The sun wears a corona, crown of thorns or ‘circle of light’ (halo).
- The sun is seen to ‘walk on water.’
- The sun’s follower’s helpers (disciples) are the 12 months and the 12 signs of the zodiac or constellations, through which the sun has to pass.
- The sun at 12 noon is in the house/temple of the ‘Most High,’ consequently ‘he’ begins ‘his Father’s work’ at the age of 12.
- The sun enters each sign of the zodiac at 30°; hence, the ‘Sun of God’ begins his ministry at the age of 30.
- The sun is hung on a cross (crucified) which represents its passing through the equinoxes, the spring/vernal equinox being Easter, at which time it is then reborn.
From the stories of Isis, Osiris and Horus, to Mithra, to Krishna to Jesus, all these Sun gods have similar characteristics. Consider all the effort Constantine’s mother – Helena – put into identifying and verifying the stories of Jesus. Wouldn’t it have been odd for her not to ask about various important dates? The stories of the nativity of Jesus describe shepherds in the fields watching over their flocks at night. Consider, that area of the world is in the northern hemisphere. If Jesus were actually born in December, or for that matter, anytime during the winter months, flocks wouldn’t be grazing and shepherds would not have been in the fields. So we know there was a reason why Jesus’ birth was set on December 25th although he clearly wasn’t born around that date.
With the death of Judas, the Apostles numbered 11. In the first chapter of the book of Acts, the Apostles for some reason, seemed to feel that they needed to replace Judas and return their number to 12. Why? However, more importantly, why isn’t this mentioned in any of the Gospels? Jesus had multitudes following him. Clearly by the very presence and the statements made, Matthias and Barsabas had been followers of Jesus from the beginning. Read that again. They had been followers from the beginning. So, from the written account, Jesus had more than 12 Disciples. In fact, we have no idea how many Disciples Jesus had. So why the emphasis on only 12? Why was it necessary to return the number to 12 following the departure of Judas? Was this written in by design? Someone’s design?
Enter Saul:
Paul was simply the Greek name for Saul. In keeping with the sun god theme. You have the Sun and His 12 helpers. We encode this into your 12 month calendar year. We have the 12 signs of he zodiac. We have the 12 Disciples/Apostles, plus Jesus, makes 13. With the addition of Paul to this pantheon, we’re back at 13. Now we come to the question of what you truly believe. If you truly believe that the followers of Jesus were under Satanic attack, do you believe that Satan, probably the second most intelligent being in existence simply sat on his figurative hands? Remember, when he first made his appearance in the Garden of Eden story, he was described as being an extremely subtle entity. If you wanted to utterly destroy the Jesus movement, would it be best to do it from the inside? Or would it be best to do it from the outside?
Remember that Paul was a contemporary of Jesus. IF Jesus had wanted Paul as a follower, do you think Jesus could have found him and called him to discipleship? Of course he could have. Yet he did not. Jesus gave the “Keys” to Peter. Yet, Paul is credited with writing most of your “New Testament.” Why? It is Paul who sets in place the doctrine and dogma of the Christian Church. It is Paul who clearly changes the focus and in some cases the actual message of Jesus. Consider how salvation is wrought. Here is a classic example. In Luke 18:18 a “Certain Ruler” comes to Jesus and asks him what he must do to inherit eternal life. What does Jesus tell him? Jesus tells him first to keep all the Commandments. The Ruler says he has done so from his youth. Jesus then tells him there is only one more thing he needs to do, sell all that he has, distribute it to the poor and follow Jesus. The story records that the Ruler went away sorrowful. Why? Because he was very rich.
What does Paul have to say about salvation? In Ephesians 2:8, Paul says that ye are saved by grace, through faith, not of works. If the Rich ruler had simply waited until he met Paul, he could have kept all he had and had eternal life too. Both Paul and Jesus cannot be correct if they’re saying different things. The question is, whom are you going to believe? Whom are you going to follow? How could Paul be a true Apostle and teach a message different from Jesus? Again, your answers are in plain sight if you know where to look. Since Paul was not chosen by Jesus and sort of showed up claiming to be not only a follower but an Apostle, it is instructive to examine his credentials.
What do we know about Paul? We know that his original mission was to destroy the followers of Jesus and to extinguish the Jesus movement. Surprisingly, Paul claims to have had a meeting with Jesus which converted him. Could this possibly have happened? Anything is possible. However, since we already know that Paul’s mission was to destroy, perhaps it might be prudent to examine his testimony carefully. There are three accounts of Paul’s conversion experience. Not surprisingly, none of them agree. You can read them for yourself here:
- Acts 9:1-12
- Acts 22:6-12
- Acts 26:12-18
Pay careful attention to the reactions of those with him who would have been his only witnesses. In the first recounting of his conversion experience, those who were with him, all stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no man. In the second telling of his conversion experience, the witnesses, saw a light, but heard no man. In the third and final rendition of his conversion experience, the witnesses all fall down and we don’t know if they saw or heard anything. It would seem to me that if Jesus appeared to you in person, at the very least, you’d be able to tell a consistent account of the event. Of course if you were making he whole thing up, you would probably tailor your account to fit your target audience.
In point of fact, Paul has a habit of not getting his story straight. Consider the accounts of his “Great Escape.” You may recall this story from Sunday School. It seems to be a favorite. It is the account of Paul escaping capture by being let down over a wall in a basket by a rope. It could almost be out of a James Bond movie. The only thing better would have been a story of him rappelling down the wall in three controlled leaps. You can read both accounts here:
- Acts 9:23-25
- II Cor. 11:32-33
In the first account, we are told that the Jews took council to kill Paul. In the second account we learn that it was a civil matter. The governor wanted to arrest him. Was the story altered to fit Paul’s target audience? If so, that would be what we call a LIE. Surprisingly enough, Paul admits to lying and is not ashamed about it.
II Cor. 12:16
“But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.”
Rom. 3:7
“For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?”
As it turns out, Paul did not deceive the true followers of Jesus. Read what God says about Paul in Revelations 2:1-2.
“1 Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:”
Who claimed to be the Apostle to the Ephesian Church? Paul. In point of fact, you don’t have anyone other than Paul pushing his Apostleship on people. The true Apostles didn’t need to. The followers of Jesus were quite familiar with whom they were. Only Paul runs around declaring himself to be an Apostle. In Revelations 2, God is commending the Ephesian Church for rejecting Paul. Some Bible apologist will try and claim that this passage refers to some other persons unknown who were claiming to be Apostles. The trouble is, in none of the writings left to us, do we have any mention from any writers, including Paul, specifically addressing false Apostles.
The second point is, that the Ephesian Church rejected Paul. If there is any doubt, Paul himself in his letter to Timothy complains that “all Asia has rejected him.” (II Tim. 1:15)
Coming Full Circle
When you know where to look, the evidence of what was done becomes clear. Constantine was a Pagan Sun worshiper right up until he was baptized on his death bed. On his shield were inscribed the words, “Sol Invictus” which translates to, “The Conquering Sun.” Serapis was substituted for Jesus complete with the ready made iconography. When you close your eyes and picture Jesus, you are picturing the face of Serapis a man made created god. The attributes of Serapis are those of any one of a number of Sun gods. From the date of his birth to the story of his death and resurrection.
Your most Holy Book, the Bible, was edited, altered, massaged and created to comply with and enforce this myth. The documents of the early followers of Jesus were carefully selected for their ability to be edited to conform with this myth. Those that were deemed unusable were destroyed in a massive book burning campaign. What remains today is fruit from the poisonous tree. Yet, even with all that has been done to destroy the message, you can still find it’s essence in the simple passages.
Jesus said, there were only two commandments: Love God and Love your neighbor. When Jesus left, he promised to send a Comforter in His name that would lead and guide you into all truth. He didn’t promise to send you a Bible, a Pastor or a Preacher. When the Disciples entered the empty tomb, they did not find a copy of the “King James Version of the Bible” sitting atop a neatly folded “Shroud of Turin.” God wants a personal relationship with you. Not a relationship by proxy. Jesus’ mission was not to reinvent the Levitical Priesthood. He did not come to build a church of brick and mortar. He did not come to create a system that could be co-opted by power hungry men seeking to bleed the people of their resources. It is time to wake up, grow up and get up. Read your Bible if you must, but know that the words contained therein, are not now, nor have they ever been “The Word of God.” The “Word of God is Jesus.” He’s not in a book. He resides in hearts. If you want to hear the “Word of God,” get quiet and listen.
Oh yeah, do take those crosses from around your necks. Jesus really finds those offensive. That picture that goes with this note? That’s a bust of Serapis. It’s not Jesus. Jesus would be the SON of God, not the Sun of God.
This was good to read… again. I could just imagine a whole bunch of brains splatting on the walls from being inundated with truth… LOL
That was a very impressive article. I really admire the research you put into this and the courage in taking on these difficult and sensitive issues.
Having done my own rudimentary research, I have come to what I believe are basically the same conclusions as you in that, the original disciples of Jesus became the Church (ekklēsia) and called their movement The Way. This movement was built entirely on the power of the Holy Spirit indwelling and leading those disciples.This movement was known and grew so quickly because of the radical displays of nonjudgmental self sacrificing service and love to the communities the disciples belonged to. This Spirit led explosion of growth continued until Constantine hijacked the movement and made it the religion of the State. At that point, the power of the Holy Spirit seemed to leave the now named “Christian” movement and was only found occasionally by people who were willing to diverge from the mainline Church doctrinal teachings or disassociate from the Church completely. God’s simple message of grace, mercy, compassion, peace, and love for others by way of relationship with Him through the Holy Spirit was replaced by a mentality of oppose, conquer, convert, and rule. The authority to become the same type of oppressive force that God clearly warns against in scripture was gained from misinterpreting the Bible as a set of doctrinal rules and regulations (either by mistake or, in many cases, intentionally).
We are now left with the remnants of that altered message and with the Holy Spirit and His power to transform completely misunderstood as being something the Church or individuals can use for their own “good” works. The Holy Spirit can not and will not be “used” for any purpose man comes up with. There is only one that is good (Matthew 19:17). We can either accept the Holy Spirit into our hearts completely and let Him change us into the faithful, patient, self-controlled, gentle, good, kind, peaceful, and joyful warriors of love that defined the original disciples and who can still change the world, or we can be the disappointed, bitter, argumentative, disillusioned, selfish “Christians” who currently fill all the Churches and sing about God’s glory every Sunday morning yet rarely make the slightest positive influence in changing much of anything.
It is time stop arguing about who’s God is better. The One God is the God of all people. It is time to start taking care of each other. This is a world of abundance for everyone if we will stop having a selfish “me first” mentality. It is time to stop focusing on what makes us different from each other and start accepting everyone as a child of God (because that is how He sees it). It is time for Christians to change into disciples (John 13:35). It is time for the Church to change into the one body of Christ (Romans 12:5). It is time for a change.
There is a new age dawning. The Holy Spirit is ready to make His presence felt once again. God is calling His elect to led the change. Join the fight. Relentlessly bring God’s love into all places and circumstances. It is time!
Dying and rising gods and the zodiac.
—This is the type of stuff popularized by speakers like Ray Haggins and the recent film zeitgeist. I’ve dispensed with it all several years ago here:
http://benstanhope.blogspot.com/2010/12/kersey-graves-debunked-worlds-sixteen.html
For the Egyptian Horus, see my in-depth review of the subject here (starts at 28 minutes): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxEaxu-dA3g
Egyptians were “black Africans”
—This is indefensible. Michael S. Heiser (PhD Semitic languages from Wisconsin-Madison) cites Keita’s biological survey in the International Journal of Anthropology and Frank M. Snowden Jr. (a leader in African American studies) of Howard University. http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2011/06/ancient-egyptians-and-race/
A trip to Egypt and a simple inspection will prove that nothing from that period was built out of mud bricks made with straw.
—This is a good object lesson in the author’s ignorance. The reason stone is common in Egypt and not 14th century mud brick is that mud deteriorates and stone does not. Kenneth Kitchen, professor of Egyptology from Liverpool University writes (On the Reliability of the Old Testament [2003], 247-8):
In brick making, the most famous example comes from a scene in the tomb chapel of the vizer Rekhmire of circa 1450. It shows mainly foreign slaves “making bricks for the workshop-storeplaces of the Temple of Amun at Karnak in Thebes” and for a building ramp. Here, labeled “captures brought-off by His Majesty for work at the Temple of [Amun],” hence serving as forced labor, Semites and Nubians fetch and mix mud and water, strike out bricks from brick molds, leaving them to dry and measuring off their amount. And all is done under the watchful eye of Egyptian overseers, each with his rod…Close account was kept of numbers of bricks produced, and targets were set, as in the Louvre leather scroll, Year 5 of Ramesses II, 1275. The forty “stablemasters” (junior officers) of this document had each a target of 2,000 bricks, clearly to be made by men under them with group foremen. These officers fulfill the role of the noges’im, “overseers,” of Exodus. 5:6. One official smugly records: “Total, 12 building-jobs. Also, people are making bricks in their spells-of-duty(?)…They are making their quota of bricks daily”
“A correspondence of Emperor Hadrian refers to Alexandrian worshipers of Serapis calling themselves ‘Bishops of Christ’:
‘Egypt, which you commended to me, my dearest Servianus, I have found to be wholly fickle and inconsistent, and continually wafted about by every breath of fame. The worshipers of Serapis (here) are called Christians, and those who are devoted to the god Serapis (I find), call themselves Bishops of Christ.’
—Despite the obvious fact that this letter (if it were authentic) is a century too old to demonstrate any meaningful Christian etiology, this letter is part of a late 4th century forgery entitled Historia Augusta. The Historia Augusta contains so many anachronisms that it is easily dated to 395 CE. The “Serapis letter” itself is full of anachronisms. Hadrian was only in Egypt in 130 CE, and the letter mentions his adopted son Lucius Aelius, who Hadrian did not adopt until six years after. Hadrian also salutes Servianus as consul, but Servianus did receive that position until 134 CE. The letter also mentions the “Patriarch of Jewry,” a position that did exist until he created it after the Jewish Revolt in 132 CE.
John post-dates Nicaea
—This is perhaps one of the most idiotic things I have ever heard. P52, the oldest NT manuscript we have quotes John 18.31-33, 37-38. It dates to AD 125. Virtually all the Nicaean fathers quoted John! Heracleon in 170 wrote a full commentary on John’s Gospel and Origen wrote a famous full commentary on John around 230. Athenasius, the lead bishop at Nicaea quotes John’s prologue often. For example, i.ii of his Incarnatione Verbi Dei states, “St. John, speaking all inclusively, says, ‘All things became by Him and without Him came nothing into being.’” In Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians he quotes John three times. No New Testament scholar on earth would date John after Niceae.
Because following the canonization of the texts put together by Eusebius of Caesarea the book burning began. The newly formed church began gathering up all other manuscripts and burning them. This is why the “Dead Sea Scrolls” were sealed in clay jars and buried in caves. All other documents, some giving an entirely different take on the story of Jesus had to go.
—This one is a real knee-slapper. The Dead Sea scrolls library was composed by an apocalyptic Jewish community before the birth of Christ. They do not contain competing tellings of Jesus because the Christian movement did not exist during their composition. The scrolls were hidden in caves in Qumran because Emperor Vespian’s campaign to Jericho advanced faster than anticipated when the community was destroyed.
Constantine’s deathbed baptism
—-This is not at all an argument against Constantine’s fidelity as it is used. It was very common in the fourth century to be baptized on one’s death bed for soteriological reasons.
Constantine, “made Christianity the state religion.”
—The edict of Milan in 313 only made Christianity legal. It did not establish a state religion. Most people in Constantine’s day were pagans. Chris Forbes, Senior Lecturer in Ancient History, and Deputy Chairman of the Society for the Study of Early Christianity at Macquarie University has emphasized this in interview (cf. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujkfoc6Fpi0).
So, from the written account, Jesus had more than 12 Disciples. In fact, we have no idea how many Disciples Jesus had. So why the emphasis on only 12? Why was it necessary to return the number to 12 following the departure of Judas?
—Virtually all NT scholars attribute the twelve as a representation of the twelve tribes of Israel. The Twelve tribes of Israel post-date the condensing of the zodiac by the Babylonians into twelve signs.
The author claims that Jesus taught salvation by works in contrast to Paul who taught justification by faith. “Paul says that ‘ye are saved by grace, through faith, not of works.’ If the Rich ruler had simply waited until he met Paul, he could have kept all he had and had eternal life too.”
—This is really stupid exegesis. The point Jesus is making is that you must be willing to give up everything to serve Him. He was making an object lesson in exposing the inability of the ruler to be His servant by demanding he abandon what he loved more that God. cf. Luke 14:25-27. Paul did exactly that. He was willing to give up everything for Christ. He spent his life traveling to the ends of the known world as a missionary; he was whipped with 39 lashes on five occasions, beaten with rods on three, stoned, shipwrecked three times, and killed all for the sake of Christ.
Jesus taught justification by faith in John 5.24, “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.”
Horrific eisegesis of 2 Corn 12.16 and Rom. 3.7.
—Paul is saying the exact opposite in these passages. In the Romans passage Paul is raising a rhetorical objection before refuting it. Paul continues to say those who think lying is ok (because God turns all things for good) will receive a just punishment. The Corinthians passage follows a chain of sarcasm directed at the super apostles. Note the ESV: “But granting that I myself did not burden you, I was crafty, *you say,* and got the better of you by deceit.”
The “Word of God is Jesus.” He’s not in a book. He resides in hearts. If you want to hear the “Word of God,” get quiet and listen.
—Jeremiah 17.9: The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?
First of all, let me say welcome to The Whirling Wind. I hope you enjoy your stay. I simply love it when neophyte “Biblical Apologist” come to play. Where to begin…
First of all, the piece you’re referring to was written years ago. It may have been written before Zeitgeist was released. I’ll have to check the actual date on my original. I have indeed seen Zeitgeist and I have viewed some of Dr. Hagins presentations. As a rule, it is extremely rare for me to agree with everything anyone says. My roots go back well over 30 years. I believe at that time, Dr. Hagin was preaching a gospel you would probably agree with.
I do think it cute that you believe you have “dispensed” with the many issues raised in Zeitgeist – only a small portion of which deal with religion – and have likewise dealt with Dr. Hagins. I find your hubris charming. I note you make quite a bit of use of Dr. Heiser. I presume he like yourself fancies himself something of a Biblical apologist in his spare time? He probably would do much better if he stuck to his actual area of study.
Were the original Egyptians – Kemetians – Black? Of course they were. The very fact that you and others would have a problem with this fact I find quite revealing. They’ve been trying to pretend that Egypt isn’t in Africa for years. The ethnicity of the ancient Egyptians was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt back in the 60’s through the work and research of:
• Sheikh Anta Diop,
• Dr. Yosef Ben-Jochannan,
• Robert Bauval in his book, “Black Genesis.”
Mud Bricks:
Like most Biblical apologist, you go shopping for someone who will either say or offer an explanation you can hang your hat on. No further research is necessary! We don’t find a lot of mud brick structures in Egypt because mud bricks deteriorate and of course, they’re all gone. Really??? Here again is a classic example of nitwit-ery masquerading as knowledge. The Ceremonial enclosure of Khasekhemwy: The Fort at Hierakonpolis was made from mud bricks and it’s been there for over 4,600 years.
Do you actually research any of this or do you simply make this up as you go??? According to the Bible there were approximately 1.2 million Jews in Egypt. They didn’t count the women and children. So let’s say that you had 600,000 men. How many of them were making mud bricks? You pick a figure. Whatever figure you come up with, there ought to be quite a few examples of mud brick structures from that time period. There are not. Did the Egyptians make anything from mud bricks? Sure they did. They certainly knew how to. They chose stone because they could work with it in ways we cannot duplicate today without power tools, cranes and heavy machinery.
If the Jews were such great builders, where are all their lasting monuments? Hell! If they were ever slaves in Egypt they should have learned at least *some* building techniques from the Egyptians.
Bishops of Christ:
So good of you to bring up the subject of forgery and authenticity! First allow me to clarify. The Christos goes all the way back to Ptolemy Soter. In point of fact the study of salvation as effectuated by Jesus is called, “SOTERiology.” Ptolemy predates Jesus by what? Some 700 years or so? So, yes indeed there were Bishops of Christ – Hadrian’s letter notwithstanding – long before Jesus. The point is, Hadrian or whomever wasn’t making up some fictitious group. These people actually existed. When Constantine called his Nicaean councils, who attended? Bishops! There were some 220 – 318 Bishops present. Of course, this begs the question of how exactly are you starting a Church when you’ve already got organizations in place with their own hierarchies.
While we’re on the subject of forgeries, we probably need to throw out the entire New Testament. We don’t know whom actually wrote hardly any of it. A lot of it was plagiarized. In Acts it says that Peter and John were illiterate and then we have supposed writings of Peter that are in highly stylized Greek. Did Peter even speak Greek??? (Acts 4:13)
The Gospel of John – Circa 325AD.
Yeah, I know all about “p52” the credit card sized piece of papyrus that seems to be from the Gospel of John. That is sort of like me finding a wheel on the ground and building a jumbo jet around it. Trouble is, it’s a bicycle wheel. If you had any familiarity with the first Nicaean Council and what was discussed, debated and argued over, the Gospel of John could *not* have existed because merely reading from it would have made many of the issues moot. The very first chapter of the Gospel of John, pretty much lays to rest everything they were fighting over. Was Jesus, God? Man? Both? The Word? All this is covered in the very first chapter of the Gospel of John. So, either it did not exist in 325AD or it was not accepted.
I believe I’ve already addressed the fact that people were calling themselves “Christians” before Jesus was born. In point of fact, the followers of Jesus did not call themselves Christians. They were first *called* Christians at Antioch. Who called them that and why? Someone(s) who recognized some similarities in what they were teaching to something they *already* knew.
My suggestion to you would be, before you wade into a discussion on these topics, you would do well to do a lot more study… and not just things written by other apologists. You haven’t refuted anything I’ve said, all you’ve done is attempt to put your spin on the facts to make them come out the way you’d like for them to. I really have very little time for trivial dalliances with people who simply want to argue for arguments sake.
I do wish you all the best.
Mr. Moore, I have spent thousands of dollars for years receiving a formal education in these subjects at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. You have had no formal training in church history, the Biblical languages, Biblical textual criticism or Ancient Near Eastern history.
I’ve numbered these points so that you will have to enumerate them back if you respond, instead of avoiding them:
1) You did not address the fact that Origen and Heracleon wrote very extensive and detailed full commentaries on the gospel of John hundreds of years before the council of Nicaea (they quote the gospel along the way). Your initial claim that that gospel was written “after Nicaea” is therefore impossible. How can John post-date Nicaea when we have full commentaries on it hundreds of years before and manuscripts like P66 (a nearly complete copy of John that dates to AD 200)?
2) Name a single New Testament scholar on earth holding a current academic chair in New Testament in any university on earth who would date the Gospel of John past the third century.
3) As far as mud-brick goes, your examples are geographically irrelevant and silly (but they show you have retracted your initial statement, “A trip to Egypt and a simple inspection will prove that nothing from that period was built out of mud bricks made with straw. The Egyptians built in stone.”)
You must be unaware that we are geographically restricted to the East Nile Delta as the location in which the Bible presents the Israelites as staying. On the page before the one I cited Emeritus professor of Egyptology at Liverpool K. A. Kitchen states:
“The setting presented in Exod 1-14 is indubitably that of Egypt’s East Delta, whence the Hebrews are shown going directly into the Sinai Peninsula first of all. Background data may well be drawn from Egypt overall, but for locating the biblical Hebrews and their movements ‘on the ground in Egypt we are restricted to the East Delta zone geographically.
This fact imposes further severe limitations upon all inquiry into the subject. The Delta is an alluvial fan of mud deposited through many millennia by the annual flooding of the Nile; it has no source of stone within it. Mud, mud and wattle, and mud-brick structures were of limited duration and use, and were repeatedly leveled and replaced, and very largely merged once more with the mud of the fields…The mud hovels of brickfield slaves and humble cultivators have long since gone back to their mud origins, never to be seen again. Even stone structures (such as temples) hardly survive, in striking contrast to sites in the cliff-enclosed valley of Upper Egypt to the south. All stone was anciently shipped in from the south and repeatedly recycled from one period to another.
Scarce wonder that practically no written records of any extent have been retrieved from Delta sites reduced to brick mounds (whose very bricks are despoiled for fertilizer), with even great temples reduced to heaps of tumbled stones.”
So then, you agreed that you were wrong. The fact is, Egyptians were building with mud-brick during the time period of the Exodus (regardless of the late or early date).
4) Are you aware, I have spoken with Dr. Hagins and have offered him money for evidence of his claims and that he will no longer will speak to me?
http://benstanhope.blogspot.com/2010/03/open-letter-to-ray-hagins.html
5) S. O. Y. Keita’s is a black scholar, stationed out of a black prestigious university who is associated with the National Human Genome Center. Explain exactly which part of his Egyptian genetics research in his recent peer-reviewed journal of anthropology paper I cited you disagree with.
6) Do you admit the Hadrian Serapis letter is a forgery? If not, explain each of the three anachronisms I listed in that letter.
7) You did not respond to my comments on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Do you now admit that they are pre-Christian Jewish texts and were hidden from the Romans who invaded Qumran? If not, name a single scholar in the world, holding an academic chair at any university in the field of Hebrew Bible, Hellenism or New Testament studies who thinks they were “hidden from Christians” as you claim.
I’ll assume you don’t care to talk about the New Testament exegesis I mentioned since you avoided that category all together.
You spent thousands of dollars??? Bummer! You should ask for a refund! I am not impressed. In point of fact, you have no idea what training I’ve had nor where I received it. Clearly you’ve attended institutions which taught you what to think without teaching you how to think. Tragically sad.
Your assertion that I have to respond to you or your points is cute. You are a guest in my house. You neither make the rules, nor control the flow and nature of debates on The Whirling Wind. Clearly it is your intention to get banned and thus pretend it was your righteousness, rather than your insipid arguments that caused the problem.
As is often the case with neophyte Biblical Apologists, you fudge facts, dates and data in your favor. You cherry pick references that seem to support your positions while ignoring any references to the contrary. For instance, regarding the dating of the Gospel of John… as a matter of fact, before we even get into that, I’ll make you the same offer. Name a single New Testament Scholar from an accredited institution, holding a degree who will offer proof that the Gospels, John in particular, were actually written by the people they’re named for. What we have are fictitious books of uncertain authorship. When you do not know the author, the book lacks authority.
Notice that actual Biblical theologians take a much more careful view of the dating than you do. It is “believed…” “some point after 218 A.D.” I am quite comfortable with my assessment for the creation of the Gospel of John. As I point out, had it existed, much of the debate and the disputes which marked the first Nicaean council could have been dispensed with by merely reading from the very first chapter starting with the first verse. Perhaps it just slipped the minds of all the 318 Bishops that were gathered there?
You know? At some point perpetually applied ignorance begins to seem like mendacity. You’re not a follower of the Rev. Sun Yung Moon are you? They taught that lying to further the Gospel of Christ was acceptable and blessed. I sincerely hope I’m not dealing with a “Moonie.”
Here again is a classic example of your mendacity. In your previous reply you cited a source whi stated that mud bricks deteriorated which is why we don’t see much evidence of them.
When I then point out a structure – also in Egypt – made from mud brick and dated at 4,600 years old, you then want to pretend that it cannot be considered. It is less than 500 miles away from the Giza Plateau. Is this the type of scholarship you practice? My professors would disavow any knowledge of me if I made such a ridiculous statement. In a futile effort to recover you attempt to bring in the flooding of the Nile as though the Egyptians were silly enough to repeatedly build in the flood plains over and over again. If you knew anything about Egyptian culture, you would know that the flood plains are where they planted crops. They counted on the Nile flooding each and every year. They waited for it to enrich the soil. You don’t build buildings on valuable farm land.
Do mud bricks deteriorate? Of course they do. Everything deteriorates. However, not nearly as fast as you would need for them to in order to support your untenable position. They’ve got 2,000 year old mud brick aqueducts in Peru that are still in use today. Exposed to water? Their purpose is to transport water. No I do not agree that I was wrong. You really need to read and consider an argument before your knee begins to jerk and you start replying. When you’ve got some 600,000 people by Biblical accounts, making bricks out of mud, you ought to see a plethora of mud brick structures – or their ruins – dotting the landscape. You do not.
The fact Dr. Hagins refuses to speak with you, does not surprise me. He does not suffer fools. I should probably be instructed by his example. As far as the Hadrian Serapis letter is concerned, I deem in no more a forgery than anything else in the Bible and the New Testament in particular. It is a data point to be considered and either noted or discarded like everything else.
When it comes to Christianity before Christ, St. Augustine said the following:
Eusebius said:
When it comes to the original ethnicity of the ancient Egyptians, I cited my sources and I’m quite comfortable leaving it in the hands of Archaeologist who actually did the research. All the great pyramids and temples were built long before the first Europeans and or Jews if there ever were any Jews there, stumbled into Egypt. There were no Jews prior to Abraham – whom probably never existed – and the structures in Egypt pre-date any probable date for Abraham.
Forgive me. I thought you were merely whining… I didn’t realize you called yourself delivering an exegesis. With regard to Jesus, no you do not get to reinterpret what he is recorded as having said, to fit your orthodoxy.
[KJV] II Peter 1:20
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
I’m comfortable with this principle and apply it liberally. Cuts down on Bible classes by those not qualified to teach them. We’ll stick with the actual text. Clearly the based on the response of the “Ruler,” he understood what Jesus was saying and also understood his meaning. You can hear it in his responses.
With regard to Paul being a liar and a false apostle, this is without dispute. Unless you know of any other person claiming to be an apostle to the Ephesian Church, Revelation 2:1-2 is talking about Paul. Paul confirms that he was rejected in his supposed letter to Timothy. II Timothy 1:15.
Further examples of Paul lying are when he describes his “Great Escape.” In one telling, some murderous Jews were out to kill him. In another telling of the same escape, we learn that no, it was some soldiers sent to arrest him on a civil matter. You can find both accounts here:
Acts 9:23
2 Cor. 11:32
Budding theologian that you are, I’m sure you can find the 3 differing accounts of his conversion in the book of Acts. Pay attention to the witnesses. What did they hear? What did they see? What did they do?
Have fun!
It will be apparent to anyone who reads our conversation above that you have no formal training in these associated fields and that you are unable to address the refutations I provided.
I have no more purpose to continue.
That’s even more sad than you wasting all that money and not getting a quality education in return… If what you say is correct… you were just handed your head on a silver platter by a layman… with no formal training as you say.
In your previous reply you indicated I believe in your 4th point? That you had spoken with Dr. Hagins and offered him money. Dr. Hagins just advised me today that he has never spoken with you at any time.
As a rule, when someone invokes the name of an absent, disinterested 3rd party in a negative manner to bolster their own arguments, when possible I will give that person notice. I do not believe in talking behind someone’s back, nor speaking ill of a person not present to defend themselves.
Since you’ve indicated that you are done, I’m closing the comments on this discussion.