- When I first spoke to a close Christian friend of mine
about the publishing of Tony Bushby's The Bible Fraud, her reaction was
one that many Christians have expressed, and one that made me aghast. She
didn't want the book available because it would "persuade them away
from the Bible and the word of God." Further discussions with her
and many other Christians around the world about The Bible Fraud all result
in the Bible being quoted as the ultimate reference for the apparent "words
of God," and therefore the basis for their arguments. The problem
lies in that they believe the Bible is infallible.
- If we examine the oldest known Bible to date, the "Sinai
Bible" housed in the British Museum (I believe that, during his many
years of research, Tony had a private viewing of this priceless book),
we find a staggering 14,800 differences from today's Bible and yet it still
remains the word of God?
- As Tony points out, the history of our 'genuine' Bibles
is a convoluted one. Firstly we cannot be sure that we have the full version
as it was originally intended. In 1415 the Church of Rome took an extraordinary
step to destroy all knowledge of two second century Jewish books that it
said contained the true name of Jesus Christ. The Antipope Benedict XIII
firstly singled out for condemnation a secret Latin treatise called "Mar
Yesu" and then issued instructions to destroy all copies of the book
of Elxai. The Rabbinic fraternity once held the destroyed manuscripts with
great reverence for they were comprehensive original records reporting
the life of Rabbi Jesus.
- Later, Pope Alexander VI ordered all copies of the Talmud
destroyed, with the Spanish Grand Inquisitor Tomas de Torquemada (1420-98)
responsible for the elimination of 6,000 volumes at Salamanca alone.
- Solomon Romano (1554) also burnt many thousands of Hebrew
scrolls and, in 1559, every Hebrew book in the city of Prague was confiscated.
The mass destruction of Jewish books included hundreds of copies of the
Old Testament and caused the irretrievable loss of many original handwritten
- The oldest text of the Old Testament that survived, before
the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls" was said to be the Bodleian
Codex (Oxford), which was dated to circa 1100 AD. In an attempt by the
church to remove damaging Rabbinic information about Jesus Christ from
the face of the earth, the Inquisition burnt 12,000 volumes of the Talmud.
- In 1607, forty-seven men (some records say fifty four)
took two years and nine months to re-write the Bible and make it ready
for press. It was, by the order of King James, issued with a set of personal
'rules' the translators were to follow. Upon its completion in 1609, it
was handed over to the King James for his final approval. However, "It
was self evident that James was not competent to check their work and edit
it, so he passed the manuscripts onto the greatest genius of all time...
Sir Francis Bacon"
- The first English language manuscripts of the Bible remained
in Bacon's possession for nearly a year. During that time ... "he
hammered the various styles of the translators into the unity, rhythm,
and music of Shakespearean prose, wrote the prefaces and created the whole
scheme of the Authorized Version. At the completion of the editing, King
James ordered a 'dedication to the King' to be drawn up and included in
the opening pages. He also wanted the phrase 'Appointed to be read in the
churches' to appear on the title page.
- The King James Bible is considered by many today to be
the 'original' Bible and therefore 'genuine' and all later revisions simply
counterfeits forged by 'higher critics'. Others think the King James Bible
is 'authentic' and 'authorized' and presents the original words of the
authors as translated into English from the 'original' Greek texts. However,
as Tony points out, the 'original' Greek text was not written until around
the mid fourth century and was a revised edition of writings compiled decades
earlier in Aramaic and Hebrew. Those earlier documents no longer exist
and the Bibles we have today are five linguistic removes from the first
bibles written. What was written in the 'original originals' is quite unknown.
It is important to remember that the words 'authorized' and 'original',
as applied to the Bible do not mean 'genuine', 'authentic' or 'true'.
- By the early third century, it became well noted that
a problem was occurring . politics! In 251AD, the number of Presbyter's
(roving orator or priest) writings had increased dramatically and bitter
arguments raged between opposing factions about their conflicting stories.
According to Presbyter Albius Theodoret (circa 255), there were "more
than two hundred" variant gospels in use in his time. In 313, groups
of Presbyters and Biscops (Bishops) violently clashed over the variations
in their writings and "altar was set against altar" in competing
for an audience and territory.
- When Emperor Constantine conquered the East in 324, he
sent his Spanish religious advisor, Osius of Cordoba, to Alexandria with
letters to several Biscops exhorting them to make peace among their own.
But the mission failed and Constantine, probably at the suggestions of
Osius, then issued a decree commanding all Presbyters and their subordinates
"be mounted on asses, mules and horses belonging to the public and
travel to the city of Nicaea" in the Roman province of Bithymia, the
country of Asia. The Presbyters were instructed by the Emperor to bring
with them the manuscripts from which they orated to the rabble (that's
us!) "wrapped and bound in leather".
- Constantine saw in this developing system of belief the
opportunity to make a combined state religion and protect it by law. The
first general church council was thus convened and the year was 325.
- On 21 June, the day of the Summer Solstice, (and under
those cult conditions) a total of 2048 "presbyters, deacons, sub-deacons,
acolytes and exorcists" gathered at Nicaea to decide what Christianity
really was, what it would be, what writings were to be used and who was
to be it's God.
- Ancient church evidence established that a new 'god'
was to be approved by the Roman Emperor and an earlier attempt (circa 210)
to deify either Judas Khrestus or his twin brother Rabbi Jesus (or somebody
else) had been 'declined'. Therefore, as late as 325, the Christian religion
did not have an official god.
- After a long and bitter debate, a vote was finally taken
and it was with a majority show of hands that Judas Khrestus and Rabbi
Jesus both became God (161votes for and 157 votes against). The Emperor
effectively joined elements of the two individual life stories of the twin
brothers into a singular creation. The doctrine of the Celtic / British
church of the west was democratically attached to the Presbyters stories
of the east.
- A deification ceremony was then performed 'Apotheosis'.
Thus the deified ones were then called 'saviours' and looked upon as gods.
Temples, altars, and images with attributes of divinity were then erected
and public holidays proclaimed on their birthdays.
- Following the original example set by the deification
of Caesar, their funerals were dramatized as the scene of their resurrection
and immortality. All these godly attributes passed as a legal right to
Emperor Constantine's new deity, Jesus Christ.
- The Emperor then instructed Bishop Eusebius to compile
a uniform collection of new writings "bound together as one"
using the stories from the large collection of Presbyters as his reference
source. Eusebius was to arrange for the production of "fifty sumptuous
copies ... to be written on parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient
portable form, by professional scribes thoroughly accomplished in the art".
This was the first mention of finished copies of a Christian 'New Testament'
in the history of mankind.
- As one can imagine, to condense the real life of the
Jesus Christ, the Church and His teachings with supporting evidence into
a short article is very difficult. It is therefore wise for those who wish
to have supportable evidence to read and study Tony Bushby's epic work,
The Bible Fraud, along with it's detailed blood lines (family trees) and
over 869 references. (see www.thebiblefraud.com)
- However, attempting to summarize what Tony has written.....
in 325 AD, the first Christian council was called at Nicaea to bring the
stories of twin brothers, Jesus 'the Rabbi' and Judas Khrestus into one
deity that we now know as Jesus Christ. Tony says they were not born of
virgin birth but to Nabatean Arab Mariamne Herod (now known as the Virgin
Mary) and fathered by Tiberius ben Panthera, a Roman Centurion. The brothers
were raised in the Essene community and became Khrists of their faith.
Rabbi Jesus later was initiated in Egypt at the highest of levels similar
to the 33rd degree of Freemasonry of which many Prime ministers and Presidents
around the world today are members. He then later married three wives,
one of whom we know as a Mary Magdalene, a Druidic Princess, stole the
Torah from the temple and moved to Lud, now London.
- Tony believes the reason Jesus stole the Torah was that
he said it contained "a very special secret", which he was going
to reveal that secret to the world. He was stoned to death and the Torah
taken from him before he could.
- The elder brother, Judas Khrestus, with his "Khrestian"
followers conspired to take the throne of Rome, his royal birthright, and
was captured, tried, and was sentenced to be crucified. (The "Khrestians"
and the Essenic army, the Nazarenes, would today be likened to terrorists.)
At the trial, Judas exercised his royal birthright to have a replacement
in Simon of Cyrene (Luke 23:41) and then was sold as a slave to live out
his days as a carpenter in India.
- Rabbi Jesus spent a considerable amount of time at the
Palace of the British in Rome and sometime around 48 AD, he left for Egypt
to pursue his greatest esoteric goal. The spiritual knowledge from his
secret education in the Essene and Druid movements was soon to be elevated
to the highest level possible - initiation into the innermost rite of the
- It was probable that Rabbi Jesus' earlier initiation
into both the Essene and Druid schools played a major part in his acceptance
into the Egyptian school. The Druids could claim a very early origin and
the essence of their wisdom was also that of the Essenes. In the case of
the Essenes, it is possible to show that their movement was specifically
established to preserve secret information, for they knew and used the
sacred writing of the Initiates. The full meaning of the point being made
by Bushby is that in the case of all Secret Schools, the inner and ultimate
Mystery was revealed only to a High Initiate.
- Those who were initiated into the Ancient mysteries took
a solemn oath never to reveal what had passed within the sacred walls.
Every year only a comparatively few Egyptian initiations were conducted,
and the number of persons who knew their secrets was never at any time
large. The initiations always took place with the onset of darkness and
the candidate was entranced for periods of varying length, depending upon
the level of the degree for which he had entered.
- The first initiatory step involved a forty-day procedure
that basically involved purification, not only in physical form, but dissolving
all tendencies to evil thoughts, purifying the mind as well. It appears
that he would have fasted, alternatively on vegetables, juices and very
special herbal concoctions.
- The New Testament recorded that this happened to Rabbi
Jesus who "was led into the desert.... and he fasted forty days and
forty nights" (Matt. 4:1-2).
- This trial period involved more than just fasting. During
the forty days and nights' ordeal, Tony says the candidate was required
to study astronomical charts to supplement his skills in astronomy and
memorize charts of the heavens. They were also given a particular ritual
from which to memorize certain passwords, secret signs and handclasps,
skills that are still practiced to this day in Freemasonry.
- These initiations were not limited to Egypt. The ancient
civilizations inherited these Mysteries from a remote antiquity and they
constituted part of a primitive revelation from the gods to the human race.
Almost every people of pre-Christian times possessed its institution and
tradition of the mysteries. The Romans, the Druids of Britain, the Greeks,
the Cretans, the Syrians, the Hindus, the Persians, the Maya and the American
Indians, among others, had corresponding temples and rites with a system
of graduated illuminations for the initiates.
- The modern world knows little of these ancient rites
yet they were conducted in a huge variety of buildings the world over.
- The 'Towers' that are found throughout the East in Asia
were directly connected with the Mystery-initiations. The candidates for
initiation were placed in them for three days and three nights, whenever
there was no temple with a subterranean crypt close at hand.
- In this aspect of the initiatory procedure, Tony points
out a direct Gospel parallel with Rabbi Jesus saying, "After three
days I shall rise again", for he knew the finishing process he was
to undertake would take three days being a symbol of the period of time
required to complete a condition of development. The ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic
texts speak of an initiate as 'twice-born', and he was permitted to add
to his name the words 'he who has renewed his life', so that on some ancient
tomb-inscriptions archaeologists still discover these phases descriptive
of the spiritual status of the deceased person.
- So little did the later Gospel writers understand the
initiatory process that they never perceived they were developing a story
that included a Rabbi's (and Arch Druid of Britain) experience in an Egyptian
- St Austin (c. 380) asserted that it was generally known
in church circles that Rabbi Jesus had been initiated in Egypt, and that
"he wrote books concerning magic". In the Gospel of Nicodemus,
the Jews brought the same accusation before Pontius Pilate, "Did we
not tell you he was a magician?" Celsus (c. 178) spoke of the same
charge. In the Clementine Recognitions, the accusation was brought against
Rabbi Jesus that he did not perform any miracles but practiced magic and
carried about with him the figure of a seated skeleton.
- Jewish tradition invariably asserted that Rabbi Jesus
learned 'magic' in Egypt. Bushby says the kernel of this persistent accusation
may perhaps be reduced to the simple historical element that Rabbi Jesus
went to Egypt and returned with far wider and more enlightened views than
those of his former religious associates.
- Now, I'm sure that many of you are having trouble grasping
some of the ideas presented in this article and I congratulate you on taking
the effort to read this far. We all need to demand our local Church, the
Church scholars, theologians and media make an open examination of the
evidence compiled in Tony Bushby's The Bible Fraud. It may rattle some
core beliefs but what is more important to you . the truth or what sits
comfortably because it's what you've known all you life?
- I leave you with a quote from one of the conspirators
- "How well we know what a profitable superstition
this fable of Christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)
- Article first published in New Dawn Magazine No 71, March
- While few, even Roman Catholics, would argue that there
have indeed been both Popes of questionable, if not evident rancor to the
faith and to morals in history, likewise few would argue that there have
been upheavals of church politics of every variety imaginable in 1800+
years, some of which has effected church function and even doctrine to
this day. An imperfect church hierarchy does not ipso facto mean everything
about the Lord Jesus Christ or the Bible is a lie or fabrication!
- The foundation stone of Bushby's erratic, nonsensically
woven tale of two Jesii is conjecture and wild imagination, at best, having
a remarkably embarrassing lack of evidence and/or reference materials for
any given statement or postulation. This is typical of the current rash
of De-Christers who are dead set on confounding the issues surrounding
who Jesus/Y'shua of Nazareth "really" was and locking that element
into centuries of both real and unsubstantiated accounts of church malfeasance
(some authentic, most invented, almost all irrelevant to the issue of Biblical
veracity). Most such disastrous doctrinal defects wound up in 'catechisms',
not holy scripture (though sadly, some to this day regard the two as equal)
- "How well we know what a profitable superstition
this fable of Christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521) is a
quote tossed around like a hacky-sack, but it cannot be substantiated in
the least! Most research finds this quote, or a variation of it, attributed
to a Carmelite who converted to protestantism named John Bale (1495-1563),
a playwrite, who swore to inflict as much damage upon the Roman church
as possible, and in so doing, placed this quote in the mouth of Leo X in
his own writings, as represented in 'The Pageant Of The Popes,' pages 179-180
of Vol. 2 (an 1835 reprint in 2 volumes) which was a satirical piece believed
to be one of many Bale productions to defame Leo X. It was written even
then, regarding this peculiar excerpt, this story "has been repeated
by three or four hundred different writers, without any authority whatsoever,
except that of the author above referred to."
- That quote aside, even if there were a pope that made
such a statement, who was secretly a heretic knowing dark secrets, it by
no means alters the consistent and substantial course of reasonable historic
analysis which has been conducted through the centuries regarding the life,
person, passion and truth of Jesus Christ, give or take a few Renaissance
influences and peculiar doctrinal stances of various Christians sects down
through the years, the core recognition of the essential story of Christ
is backed by extant manuscripts (more than 12,000!) which literally stack
neck high, whereas for often blindly accepted sources and resources of
detractors and enemies of the veracity of scripture, there exists either
no or little empirical data by which to authenticate. The means of properly
examining both Biblical and Historic truth has been turned completely upside
down. Say something enough, repeat it on enough websites, and it becomes
part of the fabric of "truth."
- One of the key arguments posed by the De-Christers is
that the earliest known writings about the life of Christ appear far too
late to be accepted as valid or accurate. They are, of course, ignoring
a key reality of that time which was the oral tradition, which then far
outweighed writing (Plato called writing "third hand from the truth").
- Few could own or possess a Septuagint (A Greek translation
of the Hebrew scriptures, the "Bible" of that day) or even a
proper Torah (A scroll of parchment containing the first five books of
the Hebrew Scriptures, used in a synagogue during services) in the time
of Jesus; this was something only the wealthy acquired, sometimes owning
only one book of the collection as every copy was painstakingly reproduced
by scribes, by hand, and under the most stringent of conditions and observations,
with endless proofing -- one mar or mistake would bring an entire scroll
into the fire and the scribe would begin again.
- But memorization and reciting of the words was the active
means of distribution of the Word of God ((often times set to memory in
song. Few of us can remember the full preamble to the Constitution of the
United States, but almost any of us can remember verbatim the words to
our favorite song), and following the death and resurrection of Christ,
the 'Great Commission' of the Lord to the Apostles, to "go into all
the world, teaching every creature the gospel (good news), baptizing them.."
came to pass, and historical records of these teachings are replete throughout
Asia Minor, evidenced by the tens of thousands of churches established
upon Jesus Christ as God's only Son and Savior of mankind -- some still
standing to this day or uncovered from the ruins of time and war, even
as far east as India.
- They 'preached' the Gospel. But Bushby would have readers
believe that it wasn't until the Counsel of Nicea in 325 AD -- three generations
later -- that "Christians" knew who to worship or had formulated
any real doctrine whatsoever! He depicts it as a mad shambles of wild myths
interwoven by a conspiratorial counsel, when in fact, the counsel was called
to settle reasonable disputes of very deep intellectual, theological and
rational inquiry (such as the nature of Christ, incarnate, man and God,
etc) and to codify a creed and an authorized position. This was a bad thing?
Only to those who have already determined that Jesus was a fraud and the
Apostles were twelve of the most addle brained lunatics to have ever suffered
the tortures of the damned for a myth!
- Bushby would have readers believe the entire ordeal was
a mad dash to 'concoct' a god. And yet, for more than three hundred years,
adherents to the Gospel message as delivered by the Apostles far and wide,
had established churches, with minor differences in function, ritual and
doctrine, and worshiped and recognized Jesus Christ as the only begotten
Son of the Living God and Savior of the world. One need only glance through
the writings of Paul's epistles (letters) to the churches in the New Testament
to see everything was not perfect from church to church; far from it --
and he personally exhausted himself traveling from one established church
to another, properly aligning them in the original tenets of the faith.
- As he wrote, "And I, brethren, when I came to you,
came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the
testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save
Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in
fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with
enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and
of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in
the power of God." (1 Cor. 2:1).
- The Bible Fraud is just that. A fraud.
- Still love your site man! You definitely post some interesting
articles from interesting sorts.
- I read the article on your site "Bible Fraud - What
was the church trying to hide".
- Im not a scholar.....I don't have a PHD in astrophysical
whoosiwhatsits. I don't have 20 years to study the original origins of
- I am a simple man with simple understandings. I have
read up on some of the early formation of the church and its doctrines.
Since the book ("Bible Fraud")wants to maintain a pure scientific/historical
approach to events, I will try my best at some form of rebuttal.
- Not for the purpose of rousing an argument, but so that
the simple person and those that may be too easily swayed in their christian
faith may know that there actually IS ONE single HISTORICAL account of
Jesus that still exists and that is failed or at least I failed to see
- And before I mention it, I will say....YES, I know that
others will argue and try to disprove and claim the account forged. I wish
I could disprove my taxes and claim them false but a written record proves
them each year.
- Back in the 1st century...OOOooh say a good 210-220 years
BEFORE the first christian counsel in 325A.D
- There was a Jewish scholar by the name of Flavious Josephus.
Jospehus was charged with writing/documenting the history of the Jews.
He was given access to 1st century writings, scrolls etc (the papers that
no longer even exist).
- In the year 93A.D, he wrote the extremely lengthy history.
Taken is the following paragraphs from Josephus:
- "About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man,
if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising
deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won
over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon
the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him
to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared
to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God
had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the
tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not
disappeared. " - Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63
- So, here we have a 1st century account of a Jewish historian,
who had access to the original writings, scroll, etc. Confirming what was
told to us in the Book of Luke...as his writing was probably from the original
- He was more than a man
- He performed miracles
- He was a teacher
- He was the truth
- He was the Messiah
- He was the one foretold of by the prophets thousand of
- He was condemned under Pilate
- He rose on the 3rd day
- Again....Josephus wrote about this in 93AD, 200+ years
BEFORE the 325AD Counsel. Have I read Mr. Tony Bushby's "Bible Fraud",
nope and I don't plan to, (I haven't read "War and Peace" either
but I hear its pretty good).
- In this day and age, it still comes down to one thing.
Faith.....are you strong enough to step out on that limb and simply believe
that Jesus is indeed who He said He was, is...and is yet to come.
- In Christ,
- re. "Behind The Bible Fraud - ..." by Robert
Adams, posted at http://www.rense.com/general66/hide.htm
- Please forgive the length of what follows, but typically
it is a much more difficult (and involved) matter to give rebuttal than
it is to make assertions.
- Rather than reading the pseudo-scholarly works that are
all the rage on this topic (and those related to it - ala "The Da
Vinci Code"), the author of this piece would have been better served
to have actually read CREDIBLE sources on this topic; namely, reading the
polemics/apologies which surrounded the matter discussed at the Council
of Nicea (which sadly, is a favourite point of attack for enthusiastic,
but terribly ill-informed new-agers and so called "free thinkers").
You'll have to forgive me if this sounds presumptuous, but I can hardly
believe someone who is actually familiar with the history of this period
(whether a Christian or not; religious or secular in outlook) and has read
primary sources on the context in which the Council of Nicea occured, could
have written such an incredibly unfortunate article.
- Nicea was ultimatly decisive between two points of view,
though both were underpinned by similar assumptions; those who confessed
that Christ (according to His Divinity) was "homoousion" ("same
essence" - orthodox view, and despite what some falsely claim, majorative
before Arius's rise in popularity) and the novel, but rationalistically
appealing teaching of the Alexandrian Priest Arius, that Christ was "unlike"
God, though in some wise pre-existed His appearance on earth (being a demiurge,
created by God the Father - a sort of arch-angel to put it plainly.) There
would also arise those who for various reasons took a position that has
come to be known as "semi-arianism" - the description of Jesus
Christ as being "of like" or "similar" essence to God
the Father. This was a comprimise position, in that it was sufficiently
vague for people to continue using the same basic language while intending
different things; thus some of these "semi-arians" were in fact
orthodox in their beliefs about Christ, but for comprimise' sake or due
to some distaste for the choice of wording used by their more uncomprimising
brethren, avoided the language of "one essence" which at the
time could also itself sound like a throw back to the heresy of "sabellianism"
(which taught that the three Persons of the Trinity were simply "modes"
or "masks" portrayed by a singular, unitarian God) which Arians
and Orthodox alike regarded as a blasphemy.
- I'm going through the trouble of explaining the positions
of the "parties" involved in this controversy (which the Council
of Nicea sought to sort out, to restore peace to the Church and the Empire)
to illustrate the following point - that as much as the above was a cause
of furious argument and division, practically everything apart from this
was not all that "controversial" at that time. The Orthodox and
Arian Christians had the same basic libraries of sacred books (particularly
when it came to older materials), and both argued out of the same body
of Biblical texts - no one pulled out "secret Gospels" or "secret
Epistles" of which the other party was unaware. Indeed, had one entered
either an Orthodox or Arian house of worship, it's highly unlikely that
they would perceive an immediate difference between the two. Thus the idea
that the big bad "Council of Nicea" was assembled to determine
what Christianity in it's most basic sense amounts to, is ridiculous. Indeed,
for many moderns (for whom "ideas" are not something important
enough to get worked up over) much of the debate before, during, and after
the Council of Nicea can seem tedious and like hair splitting - which round
aboutly, demonstrates that what Christianity in it's basics "was",
including it's sacred books (since this was what the "Bible"
is - a library, not a single book), was not so controversial by the time
325 A.D. rolled around.
- The author also makes another fatal error - the confounding
of the Roman Catholic Church with the "Church of Nicea", and
anachronistically reading the absurdities and excesses of later "Papism"
upon this "Nicean Church". The fact of the matter is, those assembled
at Nicea would not have recognized what the local Roman Church became in
later centuries - indeed, the Bishops of Rome contemporary to that period
would not recognize the "Church of the Crusades" or the pretended
"infalliblity" of the 19th century Popes as her own. If you want
to see descendents of "Nicene" Christianity, you'd be better
off going to Greece, Russia, or Egypt, than looking to later Rome, which
by their lights, represents a false, schismatic church, not the "Catholic
Church" proper. IOW, for all of the pretense of open mindedness, the
author has taken an extremely narrow view of the topic - and in fact, is
guilty of buying into the anachronistic propaganda of the Vatican itself
(which tries to present itself as the "ancient church", when
in reality it's a schism from the Orthodox Church of the East, which to
this day has a nominal membership in the hundreds of millions, though is
largely unknown to westerners.)
- T. Rivera
- I was surprised to see Robert Adam's article describing,
and in support of, the Bible Fraud. I haven't researched the sources of
the assertions that the author of the Bible Fraud uses as "proof"
for his claims, so I hesitate to offer up an opinion, but from Adam's article,
and the responses of Jack Manuelian and Alton Raines,
it seems as if the Bible Fraud is yet another outrageous attempt to discredit
the Bible and Christianity, but this isn't anything new or unusual, it's
been going on for two thousand years now.
- I disagree with Alton Raines that Jews don't ever hate
Christianity. Some of them do; I personally know two Jews who have an intense
hatred of Christianity, but as a Christian, I don't hate them in return.
- Jews make up 2 or 3 percent of our population, yet they
wield a powerful influence in this country. The top four Hollywood film
studios are owned by Jews. There is rarely a film that comes out of Hollywood
today (or for a long time now)that ever mentions God, religion, Jesus,
or even Moses. I believe that the Jews are intentionally keeping all relgious
references out of films.
- But in all fairness, it's not only some Jews who are
against Christianity. Occultists, Freemasons, New Agers - many of them
are also against Christianity. No doubt the Bible Fraud will attract a
legion of followers, but people have always been deluded by belief systems
that go against God and religion.
- The trick is to always check the sources of any writer's
claims, but most people don't take the time to do this. They'll believe
anything if it sounds credible, or fits within their own framework of beliefs.
- Marcea Ray
- I am a Muslim and was very interested in reading the
article "Behind The Bible Fraud - What Was The Church Trying To Hide?
By Robert Adams New Dawn Magazine.com
- However, after reaching where he talked about Jesus (peace
be with him), I realized that Mr. Robert Adams is trying to deceive your
audiences. Our source of guidance is the Quraan. We believed what has been
revealed to Jesus (peace be with him) is from Allah. We also have evidences
proving the Bible of today is not in its original form and has been altered.
What the Muslims cannot tolerate is the blasphemy Mr. Adams is leveling
against Allah's Messenger.(paragraph 20-21)
- The Holy Quraan says:
- 1. Jesus (peace be with him) was born from virgin Mary
(peace be with her).
- 2. Jesus (peace be with him) was never married.
- 3. Jesus (peace be with him) was never a thief.
- 4. Jesus (peace be with him) was never murdered nor crucified.
He is alive and will
- be sent back to earth near the end of this world. There
is an empty spot alongside
- the grave of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). That's
where Jesus (peace be with
- him) will be buried.
- Mr Rense, I would humbly request you to remove all article
by Robert Adams from your website so that only truth may be said about
Allah's Holy Messenger.
- Yours Truly,
- Mohamed Imtiaz
- Absolutely not, Mohamed! You may believe in censorship
of the ideals, beliefs and faith of others, but we do not. You need to
recognize that centuries of censorship and bloodshed to silence others
has resulted in nothing but misery and the rule of mad dictators, very
often in the name of God. You need to learn to patiently abide with longsuffering
the opinions and views of others IN PEACE. Your views, as well as those
of Mr. Adams, are welcome and valid and worthy of attention. This is not
an Islamic website, anymore than it is a Christian website. ALL viewpoints
are welcome. This is how people are properly educated. Now -- peace be
with you! - ed
- My comment to Robert Alves:
- The so-called "Josephus paragraph" is a forgery,
there is excelent web page about paragraph and about other "non-Christian"
testimony of Jesus:
- Josephus (c37-100 AD)
- Flavius Josephus is a highly respected and much-quoted
Romano-Jewish historian. The early Christians were zealous readers of his
- A native of Judea, living in the 1st century AD, Josephus
was actually governor of Galilee for a time (prior to the war of 70 AD)
the very province in which Jesus allegedly did his wonders. Though
not born until 37 AD and therefore not a contemporary witness to any Jesus-character,
Josephus at one point even lived in Cana, the very city in which Christ
is said to have wrought his first miracle.
- Josephus's two major tomes are History of The Jewish
War and The Antiquities of the Jews. In these complementary works, the
former written in the 70s, the latter in the 90s AD, Josephus mentions
every noted personage of Palestine and describes every important event
which occurred there during the first seventy years of the Christian era.
- At face value, Josephus appears to be the answer to the
Christian apologist's dreams.
- In a single paragraph (the so-called Testimonium Flavianum
) Josephus confirms every salient aspect of the Christ-myth:
- 1. Jesus's existence 2. his 'more than human' status
3. his miracle working 4. his teaching 5. his ministry among the Jews and
the Gentiles 6. his Messiahship 7. his condemnation by the Jewish priests
8. his sentence by Pilate 9. his death on the cross 10. the devotion of
his followers 11. his resurrection on the 3rd day 12. his post-death appearance
13. his fulfillment of divine prophesy 14. the successful continuance of
- In just 127 words Josephus confirms everything
now that is a miracle!
- BUT WAIT A MINUTE ... Not a single writer before the
4th century not Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian,
Cyprian, Arnobius, etc. in all their defences against pagan hostility,
makes a single reference to Josephus' wondrous words.
- The third century Church 'Father' Origen, for example,
spent half his life and a quarter of a million words contending against
the pagan writer Celsus. Origen drew on all sorts of proofs and witnesses
to his arguments in his fierce defence of Christianity. He quotes from
Josephus extensively. Yet even he makes no reference to this 'golden paragraph'
from Josephus, which would have been the ultimate rebuttal. In fact, Origen
actually said that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ."
- Origen did not quote the 'golden paragraph' because this
paragraph had not yet been written.
- It was absent from early copies of the works of Josephus
and did not appear in Origen's third century version of Josephus, referenced
in his Contra Celsum.
- Consider, also, the anomalies: