The Franklin Files

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Truths Against The World - The Curse III


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 604
Date:
RE: Truths Against The World - The Curse III
Permalink  
 


I am looking back for the info on the Torah being a Levite Grimore for
Akenataton.....came across some Marduk info that seems to correspond with the new Nexus article I am going to post....


That Marduk was imprisoned alive in the "Mountain Tomb," there is no doubt; texts that have been found and authoritatively translated attest to that. Other Mesopotamian texts throw light on the nature of his offense. Altogether enable us to arrive at a plausible reconstruction of the events.

"Evicted from Babylon and Mesopotamia, Marduk returned to Egypt. He promptly established himself in Heliopolis, enhancing its role as his "cult center" by assembling his celestial memorabilia in a special shrine, to which Egyptians made pilgrimages for a long time thereafter.

"But seeking to reestablish his hegemony over Egypt, Marduk found that things had changed since he left Egypt to attempt his coup d’etat in Mesopotamia. Though Thoth, we gather, did not put up a struggle for supremacy, and Nergal and Gibil were far from the center of power, a new rival had emerged in the interim: Dumuzi. That younger son of Enki, his domain bordering Upper Egypt, was emerging as a pretender to the throne of Egypt.


"....As a gesture of good will, Gula (the spouse of Ninurta) sends to Sarpanit (the sister-wife of Marduk) new clothing and sandals for Marduk; Marduk’s driveless chariot also appears. But Sarpanit is dumbfounded: she cannot understand how Marduk can be free again if he had been imprisoned in a tomb that cannot be unsealed: "How can they let him free, the one who cannot come out?"

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sitchin/sitchinbooks03_04.htm
The King decided to end transshipment of gold from Mars. His decision favored the Enlil lineage--sons of Enlil and their children--over the Enki lineage. Anu suspected Enki of abetting revolts by Alalu's kinsman Anzu and the Astronaut Corps and also instigating the miners' revolt in Africa. When Anu ended gold transfer on Mars he deprived Marduk, Enki's eldest son and heir, of his power base on Mars.

King Anu further favored Enlil’s lineage; he awarded rule of new spaceport (from which the gold was to be directly rocketed to Nibiru) at Sippar to Enlil’s son's son Utu (the first Earth-born Nibiran).

Enki sympathized with his son Marduk and pledged that Marduk would one day supplant Enlil and his descendents: Marduk the Earth Shall rule.


ENKI STARTS FIRST SECRET EARTHLING SOCIETY: BROTHERHOOD OF THE SNAKE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADHrwbJG8kU&mode=related&search=

Enlil (at this point the Yahweh of the Bible; other Anunnaki later amalgamate as Yahweh) waged propaganda campaign against Enki. Enlil/Yahweh warned Earthlings controlled by his lineage to resist Enki the Snake. To counter Enlil's campaign against him and help Earthlings survive, Enki started the first Earthling secret society, The Brotherhood of the Snake. "Enki had to resort to a clandestine approach to uplift mankind...the establishment of a small group of humans who were introduced to more advanced thinking, information and technology." [Tellinger, M., 2006, Slave Species of god, page 147]

One of the Adamite girls bore a boy, Adapa; the other, a girl--Titi. Enki hid his paternity of Adapa and Titi. Enki's wife, Damkina (Ninki) "to Titi took a liking; all manner of crafts was she teaching.
"To Adapa, Enki himself teachings gave, how to keep records he was him instructing." Enki boasted, "A Civilized man I have brought forth. A new kind of Earthling from my seed has been created, in my image and after my likeness. From seed they from food will grow, from ewes sheep they will shepherd. Anunnaki and Earthlings henceforth shall be satiated." [Sitchin, Z., 2002


The Seven Who Judge banished Ka-in, hybrid Adapa's eldest son, and Ka-in's beardless descendants east of Edin, to Nod. There, Ninurta taught them metallurgy, cattle herding, lyre, flute. The Nibiran nobles in Iraq/Sumer taught Adapa's other, bearded, descendants administration, writing, math, well-digging, brewing, harping, healing oil preparation. Ninurta taught them gold-smelting and refining. He also taught them to ceremonially venerate the Lords.


Climatic, magnetic and astronomical disruptions damaged Marsbase, where Asronauts refined and transshipped Earth's gold to Nibiru. The Anunnaki leaders on Earth--Enki, Ninmah and Enlil--met to deal with the crisis.

Face-to-face, they saw each other's wrinkling visages. The three half-siblings, children of Anu each, worried at what they saw. They'd aged drastically. Said Enki, "Old on Earth we became, but those on Earth born are even older sooner."

To deal with the crisis caused by the astronomical disruptions, the siblings sent Ninurta, Enlil and Ninmah's son "to the Land Beyond the Seas [The Andes Mountains of South America] in the mountainland a Bond Heaven-Earth [transmission tower] to establish." They sent Ninurta's rival, Enki's son Marduk, to evaluate damage at Marsbase.


Marduk told his parents he wanted to marry an Earthling, Sarpanit, daughter of Marduk's Earthling protégé, Enkime (a descendant of Enki's part-Earthling son, Adapa).

Marduk's mother, Ninki (Damkina), warned Marduk that if he married Sarpanit "to Nibiru with his spouse he would never go. His princely rights on Nibiru he forever will forsake. To this Marduk with a bitter laugh responded: My rights on Nibiru are nonexistent. Even on Earth my rights as firstborn have been trampled" [by Enlil and his heir, Ninurta, who preempted Earth commands].

Though trampled on Earth, Marduk vowed, he would rise and become master. He'd marry Sarpanit, and by the marriage, bind the Earthlings to himself . They'd be weapons for him to claim mastery, first of Earth, then to his birthright on Nibiru.

Enlil beamed King Anu on Nibiru. He asked the King to stop Marduk and Sarpanit from marrying. But Anu and his counselors ruled, "On Nibiru Adapa, the maiden's progenitor, could not stay. Therefore to return to Nibiru with her, Marduk must forever be be barred. Marduk marry can, but on Nibiru a prince he shall no more be."

Enlil let Marduk and Sarpanit announce their wedding at Eridu, Enki's place on the Persian Gulf. However, Enlil also ordered that Marduk and Sarpanit, after their wedding, banished to Egypt (which would henceforth be Marduk’s own domain), within Enki's sphere of influence (Abzu/Africa).
Enlil, the Foremost Son, was king Anu's legal successor. Enlil was first in succession because his mother, Anu’s Royal Spouse, Antu, was Anu's half-sister. This made Enlil, not Ea, Anu's Foremost Son by Nibiru succession rules

"Enki and Enlil and Ninmah...Offspring of Anu the three leaders were, by different mothers....

"Enki was the Firstborn Son; a concubine of Anu's was his mother.

"Enlil by Antu, the spouse of Anu, was born; the Legal Heir he thus became.

"Ninmah by another concubine was mothered, a half sister of the two half brothers she was....Greatly beautiful she was, full of wisdom, one quick to learn.
"A son from Enlil's seed Ninmah bore, Ninurta....

Enki's Lineage: When Ninmah stopped Enki impregnating her again, Enki sent to Nibiru for his wife, Damkina (Ninki), and their son, MARDUK. With them, and with the children Damkina bore him on Earth, Enki built his clan--Marduk's Earthborn half-brothers--NERGAL, GIBIL, NINGISHZIDDA/THOTH and DUMUZI--and their progeny.

Enki's eldest son, Marduk, recall, was grandson of Alalu. When Alalu seized the Nibiran Throne he bestowed his daughter, Damkina, on Anu's son Enki/Ea. The first son of Damkina and Ea was Marduk. Marduk (Anu and Alalu agreed) would one day reign as King of Nibiru. So Marduk, the son of Enki and Damkina, was supposed to inherit the Nibiran throne. But Anu deposed and condemned Alalu, sent Enki and Enki's siblings Ninmah and Enlil to Earth. On Earth, Enki and Enlil bred lineages. Powerful groups of patrilineally-related (related-through-men) kin who competed for power in Operation Gold Dust. Enlil's Lineage: Enlil bred his lineage on Earth with his wife, Sud/Ninti. Their sons together-- NANNAR/SIN and ISHKUR/ADAD/TESHUB--reinforced him and his eldest son, NINURTA (Enlil's illicit child with Ninmah) in their struggles with the Enkiites.

Enlil and sons Ninurta, Nannar/SIn, Ishkur/Adad

Three of Enki's sons: Nergal, Gibil and Marduk
In the words of Enuma elish, Marduk became "the Enlil of the gods," their "Lord."

"No longer residing in Egypt, Marduk/Ra became Amen, "the Unseen One."

BEL/BAAL This was the primary name by which other nations (including Israel) were introduced to the worship of Marduk. Baal means "lord" or "master". Under this name with many prefixes and suffixes he was worshiped by the Canaanites, Phoenicians, Syrians and to some extent by the Egyptians. Later, the Greeks associated him with Hercules under the name Melkarth which is a transliteration of Marduk. The name Baal sometimes occurs in connection with a locality such as "Baal-Peor" or "Baal-Hermon". More frequently it occurs with compound attributes such as "Baal-zebub", "lord of the flies", still today one of the epithets of Satan. "Baal-zephon" later to be the god Triton means "lord of the black north, or the northern void", and "Meri-Baal" translates as "lord of the rebellion".

NABUL/NEBO The prophet. This god was the son of Marduk associated with prophecy received by singing, chanting and muttering (in "other tongues"); as well as oracles. He was the original of both Apollo (Nabul) and Hermes as the Greeks knew them. The names Nabul and Bel were the official names of Nimrod/Marduk in later periods and were popular in later periods among the ruling classes of Babylon as name elements as in NEBUchadnezzar and BELshazzar.

As a note on the Babylonian mystery religion, the original cult of the mother and child, Semiramis and Tammuz, became later Isis and Osiris, Venus and Adonis, the madonna and child in various cultures down to this day.


There is one common element to Nimrod/Marduk in all his manifestations and that is the symbol of the snake/serpent/dragon. Nimrod took the dragon as his personal emblem, so that from him spring various dragon myths and their special association with apocalyptic events. Strikingly the only favorable accounts of dragons are found among the Hamitic peoples of the world (like Nimrod) including the Ethiopians, Hittites, Chinese, Japanese and American Indian.

The thread of serpent lore is evident in all of Marduk's guises regardless of nation, pantheon, or role. Poseidon was accompanied by creatures who were half man and half snake as well as by the sea serpent Leviathan (mentioned in Job). Aesculapeus/Chiron/Hermes were all associated with the cadduceus of entwined serpents. The story of Apollo and the python is well known as that of Hercules/Melkarth and the Hydra. The god Triton was half snake. That the worship of Nimrod and Semiramis is the origin of all the pagan systems on earth is well documented by Alexander Hislop in his book, The Two Babylons which contains many sound facts in spite of the author's anti-Roman-Catholic sentiments which appear to some readers as too strong.

It is remarkable that there is a syllable with the consonant value "M*R" which is found everywhere in connection with the planet Mars, the god of Mars, and its associated emblem, the dragon. The source of all these words is to be found in the Semitic roof "marah" (M*R) which in Hebrew means bitterness as well as disobedience. From this roof is derived "marad" (M*R*D), or rebellion, which is the original both of Nimrod (the Babylonian Nin-Mir-Rud), or (N*M*R*D), as well as Marduk/Merodach (M*R*D*K). The Bible tells us that Nimrod was the founder of Ninevah, and Nineveh's own half-legendary history ascribes that honor to one Ninur or Nimur (N*M*R).
Marduk was the original in both name and character of the gods Mercury (M*R*K*R) and Mars (M*R*TS) from which of course we derive the current names of these planets. It is notable that Mercury, like Mars, is also "battle-scarred".

Under the name Apsu (P*S), Marduk became Poseidon (P*S*D*N) who founded Atlantis which was named after his son Atlas (T*L*S), the Babylonian Astalluhi (S*T*L*). Atlantis was overthrown in the throes of a great war bringing destruction and dissolution upon the land. The only remnant of Atlantis was the island Hesperus (S*P*R) upon which lived a dragon in possession of the fruit of the tree of life (immortality). This fruit was stolen by the god Hercules/Melkarth (M*L*K*R*T), a pseudonym of Marduk (M*R*D*K). The people of Atlantis, called Merodes (M*R*D) were descendants of Merou (M*R) or Merod (M*R*D).

After their deaths, Nimrod and his wife Semiramis (the ancient "queen of heaven") were confirmed by their priests as gods and given homage as Marduk and Astarte. The name Marduk was not revealed to the masses but his attributes were set forth under pseudonyms of various gods constructed for the public interest. Some of his alter-egos include:
ENKI The god of wisdom, incantations, and the deep waters of the oceans. This god was also called APSU, from which comes the name Poseidon.

ASTALLUHI The son of ENKI/APSU was the god of healing and exorcism. The temple of Marduk at Babylon was called the Esagila after him. This name is the original of the Greek Aesculapius. Astalluhi was also the god of wisdom like his father but in addition the god of instruction and the tutor of many of the other gods and heroes of the Babylonian pantheon. This aspect of his personality became associated with the Greek centaur Chiron who fulfilled a similar function. The Titan Atlas also derives his name and personality from this god.
IS-RA-EL - says RA is god - [EL - means 'god'] - RA is another name for Marduk

Marduk's name means: son of light, son of the brilliant day, true son - by this same description was Jesus known
Osiris, son of Marduk, was, killed; he then was, resurrected, ascending into the heavens through the secret gates. Isis [goddess] found his dead body; Jesus, son of YHWH, was, killed, resurrected, and later he ascended, into the heavens - Mary Magdalene sat watch over his body, and was first to witness Jesus after his rising.

The Bel myth parallels to the Jesus myth are nevertheless present in the Langdon translation, clearly indicating that regardless of the discovery of the tablet in Nineveh in Assyria, not in Babylonia, and its dating as 700 B.C. and not 2000 B.C. The Bel myth does in fact have mythical elements including death and resurrection which parallel the Jesus myth and thus are forerunners of mythical elements in the Jesus myth.

In Babylonia, the god Bel is also called Marduk. In some writings the two names are linked as Bel-Marduk or Marduk-Bel.
From what is common knowledge of the Jesus myth of Christianity, we can make a reasonable judgment that there are enough parallels of the

JC myth with the Bel myth that we can judge Christianity to be at least in part based upon the Bel myth.
The Assyrian-Babylonian Bel Myth Parallels to the Christian Jesus Myth
The Egyptian Horus Myth Parallels to the Christian Jesus Myth
The Egyptian Horus-Osiris/Assyrian-Babylonian Bel-Marduk Myth Parallels to the Christian Jesus Myth

The Jesus story incorporated elements from the tales of other deities recorded in this widespread area, such as many of the following world saviors and "sons of God," most or all of whom predate the Christian myth, and a number of whom were crucified or executed.

Adad of Assyria
Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece
Alcides of Thebes
Attis of Phrygia
Baal of Phoenicia
Bali of Afghanistan
Beddru of Japan
Buddha of India
Crite of Chaldea
Deva Tat of Siam
Hesus of the Druids
Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded appearance was adopted for the Christ character34
Indra of Tibet/India
Jao of Nepal
Krishna of India
Mikado of the Sintoos
Mithra of Persia
Odin of the Scandinavians
Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece
Quetzalcoatl of Mexico
Salivahana of Bermuda
Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later turned into the disciple Thomas35)
Thor of the Gauls
Universal Monarch of the Sibyls36
Wittoba of the Bilingonese
Xamolxis of Thrace
Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia
Zoar of the Bonzes
Enki, now called Ptah, gave son Marduk, now called Ra, rule of Egypt and the workers there.

Marduk, his
Adapite Earthling wife, Sarpanit, and their sons, Asar (Osiris) and Satu (Seth) sheltered on Marsbase with the Igigi Commander, Shamgaz. Marduk's boys, Asar and Satu, married Shamgaz's girls, Asra (Isis)* and Nebat (Nephys). Shamgaz formed a close friendship with Satu [Sitchin, Z., 2002 The Lost Book of Enki pages 243 244.]
“When Marduk [now called Ra], after a long absence, to the Land of the Two Narrows [Egypt] returned, Ningishzidda [called Thoth in Egypt] as its master he there found. With the aid of offspring of the Anunnaki [astronauts from Nibiru] who Earthlings esposed did Ningishzidda the land oversee, what Marduk had once planned and instructed by Ningishzidda was overturned.” [Sitchin, Z., 2002, The Lost Book of Enki, page 284].
For the next 350 years, the armies of brothers Marduk/Ra and Nigishzidda/Thoth clashed over Egypt. Finally, Enki, their father, known in Egypt as Ptah, ordered Thoth to Leave Egypt to Ra. Thoth moved on: he guided the building of the Stonehenge around 2800BC [Sitchin, 1993, When Time Began, page 310].

Triumphant, Ra reunited Egypt. And he honored Father Ptah. Ptah as Enki hadn't been able to give Marduk rule of Nibiru, which was once to have been his patrimony. But Ptah could at last settle Ra down in Egypt. Ptah gave his son the MEs (super computer programs) to make Egypt prosper; he gave Ra all his knowledge except how to revive the dead.

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 604
Date:
Permalink  
 

The Forged Origins of The New Testament
In the fourth century, the Roman Emperor Constantine united all religious factions under one composite deity, and ordered the compilation of new and old writings into a uniform collection that became the New Testament.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 14, Number 4 (June - July 2007)
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia. editor@nexusmagazine.com
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381
From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com

by Tony Bushby © March 2007
Correspondence:
c/- NEXUS Magazine
PO Box 30, Mapleton, Qld 4560, Australia
Fax: +61 (0)7 5493 1900

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

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

It was British-born Flavius Constantinus (Constantine, originally Custennyn or Custennin) (272-337) who authorised the compilation of the writings now called the New Testament. After the death of his father in 306, Constantine became King of Britain, Gaul and Spain, and then, after a series of victorious battles, Emperor of the Roman Empire. Christian historians give little or no hint of the turmoil of the times and suspend Constantine in the air, free of all human events happening around him. In truth, one of Constantine's main problems was the uncontrollable disorder amongst presbyters and their belief in numerous gods.
The majority of modern-day Christian writers suppress the truth about the development of their religion and conceal Constantine's efforts to curb the disreputable character of the presbyters who are now called "Church Fathers" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xiv, pp. 370-1). They were "maddened", he said (Life of Constantine, attributed to Eusebius Pamphilius of Caesarea, c. 335, vol. iii, p. 171; The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, cited as N&PNF, attributed to St Ambrose, Rev. Prof. Roberts, DD, and Principal James Donaldson, LLD, editors, 1891, vol. iv, p. 467). The "peculiar type of oratory" expounded by them was a challenge to a settled religious order (The Dictionary of Classical Mythology, Religion, Literature and Art, Oskar Seyffert, Gramercy, New York, 1995, pp. 544-5). Ancient records reveal the true nature of the presbyters, and the low regard in which they were held has been subtly suppressed by modern Church historians. In reality, they were:
"...the most rustic fellows, teaching strange paradoxes. They openly declared that none but the ignorant was fit to hear their discourses ... they never appeared in the circles of the wiser and better sort, but always took care to intrude themselves among the ignorant and uncultured, rambling around to play tricks at fairs and markets ... they lard their lean books with the fat of old fables ... and still the less do they understand ... and they write nonsense on vellum ... and still be doing, never done."
(Contra Celsum ["Against Celsus"], Origen of Alexandria, c. 251, Bk I, p. lxvii, Bk III, p. xliv, passim)

Clusters of presbyters had developed "many gods and many lords" (1 Cor. 8:5) and numerous religious sects existed, each with differing doctrines (Gal. 1:6). Presbyterial groups clashed over attributes of their various gods and "altar was set against altar" in competing for an audience (Optatus of Milevis, 1:15, 19, early fourth century). From Constantine's point of view, there were several factions that needed satisfying, and he set out to develop an all-embracing religion during a period of irreverent confusion. In an age of crass ignorance, with nine-tenths of the peoples of Europe illiterate, stabilising religious splinter groups was only one of Constantine's problems. The smooth generalisation, which so many historians are content to repeat, that Constantine "embraced the Christian religion" and subsequently granted "official toleration", is "contrary to historical fact" and should be erased from our literature forever (Catholic Encyclopedia, Pecci ed., vol. iii, p. 299, passim). Simply put, there was no Christian religion at Constantine's time, and the Church acknowledges that the tale of his "conversion" and "baptism" are "entirely legendary" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xiv, pp. 370-1).
Constantine "never acquired a solid theological knowledge" and "depended heavily on his advisers in religious questions" (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, vol. xii, p. 576, passim). According to Eusebeius (260-339), Constantine noted that among the presbyterian factions "strife had grown so serious, vigorous action was necessary to establish a more religious state", but he could not bring about a settlement between rival god factions (Life of Constantine, op. cit., pp. 26-8). His advisers warned him that the presbyters' religions were "destitute of foundation" and needed official stabilisation (ibid.).
Constantine saw in this confused system of fragmented dogmas the opportunity to create a new and combined State religion, neutral in concept, and to protect it by law. When he conquered the East in 324 he sent his Spanish religious adviser, Osius of Córdoba, to Alexandria with letters to several bishops exhorting them to make peace among themselves. The mission failed and Constantine, probably at the suggestion of Osius, then issued a decree commanding all presbyters and their subordinates "be mounted on asses, mules and horses belonging to the public, and travel to the city of Nicaea" in the Roman province of Bithynia in Asia Minor. They were instructed to bring with them the testimonies they orated to the rabble, "bound in leather" for protection during the long journey, and surrender them to Constantine upon arrival in Nicaea (The Catholic Dictionary, Addis and Arnold, 1917, "Council of Nicaea" entry). Their writings totalled "in all, two thousand two hundred and thirty-one scrolls and legendary tales of gods and saviours, together with a record of the doctrines orated by them" (Life of Constantine, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 73; N&PNF, op. cit., vol. i, p. 518).

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 604
Date:
Permalink  
 

The First Council of Nicaea and the "missing records"
Thus, the first ecclesiastical gathering in history was summoned and is today known as the Council of Nicaea. It was a bizarre event that provided many details of early clerical thinking and presents a clear picture of the intellectual climate prevailing at the time. It was at this gathering that Christianity was born, and the ramifications of decisions made at the time are difficult to calculate. About four years prior to chairing the Council, Constantine had been initiated into the religious order of Sol Invictus, one of the two thriving cults that regarded the Sun as the one and only Supreme God (the other was Mithraism). Because of his Sun worship, he instructed Eusebius to convene the first of three sittings on the summer solstice, 21 June 325 (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, vol. i, p. 792), and it was "held in a hall in Osius's palace" (Ecclesiastical History, Bishop Louis Dupin, Paris, 1686, vol. i, p. 598). In an account of the proceedings of the conclave of presbyters gathered at Nicaea, Sabinius, Bishop of Hereclea, who was in attendance, said, "Excepting Constantine himself and Eusebius Pamphilius, they were a set of illiterate, simple creatures who understood nothing" (Secrets of the Christian Fathers, Bishop J. W. Sergerus, 1685, 1897 reprint).
This is another luminous confession of the ignorance and uncritical credulity of early churchmen. Dr Richard Watson (1737-1816), a disillusioned Christian historian and one-time Bishop of Llandaff in Wales (1782), referred to them as "a set of gibbering idiots" (An Apology for Christianity, 1776, 1796 reprint; also, Theological Tracts, Dr Richard Watson, "On Councils" entry, vol. 2, London, 1786, revised reprint 1791). From his extensive research into Church councils, Dr Watson concluded that "the clergy at the Council of Nicaea were all under the power of the devil, and the convention was composed of the lowest rabble and patronised the vilest abominations" (An Apology for Christianity, op. cit.). It was that infantile body of men who were responsible for the commencement of a new religion and the theological creation of Jesus Christ.
The Church admits that vital elements of the proceedings at Nicaea are "strangely absent from the canons" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 160). We shall see shortly what happened to them. However, according to records that endured, Eusebius "occupied the first seat on the right of the emperor and delivered the inaugural address on the emperor's behalf" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. v, pp. 619-620). There were no British presbyters at the council but many Greek delegates. "Seventy Eastern bishops" represented Asiatic factions, and small numbers came from other areas (Ecclesiastical History, ibid.). Caecilian of Carthage travelled from Africa, Paphnutius of Thebes from Egypt, Nicasius of Die (Dijon) from Gaul, and Donnus of Stridon made the journey from Pannonia.

It was at that puerile assembly, and with so many cults represented, that a total of 318 "bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, acolytes and exorcists" gathered to debate and decide upon a unified belief system that encompassed only one god (An Apology for Christianity, op. cit.). By this time, a huge assortment of "wild texts" (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, "Gospel and Gospels") circulated amongst presbyters and they supported a great variety of Eastern and Western gods and goddesses: Jove, Jupiter, Salenus, Baal, Thor, Gade, Apollo, Juno, Aries, Taurus, Minerva, Rhets, Mithra, Theo, Fragapatti, Atys, Durga, Indra, Neptune, Vulcan, Kriste, Agni, Croesus, Pelides, Huit, Hermes, Thulis, Thammus, Eguptus, Iao, Aph, Saturn, Gitchens, Minos, Maximo, Hecla and Phernes (God's Book of Eskra, anon., ch. xlviii, paragraph 36).
Up until the First Council of Nicaea, the Roman aristocracy primarily worshipped two Greek gods-Apollo and Zeus-but the great bulk of common people idolised either Julius Caesar or Mithras (the Romanised version of the Persian deity Mithra). Caesar was deified by the Roman Senate after his death (15 March 44 BC) and subsequently venerated as "the Divine Julius". The word "Saviour" was affixed to his name, its literal meaning being "one who sows the seed", i.e., he was a phallic god. Julius Caesar was hailed as "God made manifest and universal Saviour of human life", and his successor Augustus was called the "ancestral God and Saviour of the whole human race" (Man and his Gods, Homer Smith, Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1952). Emperor Nero (54-68), whose original name was Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus (37-68), was immortalised on his coins as the "Saviour of mankind" (ibid.). The Divine Julius as Roman Saviour and "Father of the Empire" was considered "God" among the Roman rabble for more than 300 years. He was the deity in some Western presbyters' texts, but was not recognised in Eastern or Oriental writings.

Constantine's intention at Nicaea was to create an entirely new god for his empire who would unite all religious factions under one deity. Presbyters were asked to debate and decide who their new god would be. Delegates argued among themselves, expressing personal motives for inclusion of particular writings that promoted the finer traits of their own special deity. Throughout the meeting, howling factions were immersed in heated debates, and the names of 53 gods were tabled for discussion. "As yet, no God had been selected by the council, and so they balloted in order to determine that matter... For one year and five months the balloting lasted..." (God's Book of Eskra, Prof. S. L. MacGuire's translation, Salisbury, 1922, chapter xlviii, paragraphs 36, 41).
At the end of that time, Constantine returned to the gathering to discover that the presbyters had not agreed on a new deity but had balloted down to a shortlist of five prospects: Caesar, Krishna, Mithra, Horus and Zeus (Historia Ecclesiastica, Eusebius, c. 325). Constantine was the ruling spirit at Nicaea and he ultimately decided upon a new god for them. To involve British factions, he ruled that the name of the great Druid god, Hesus, be joined with the Eastern Saviour-god, Krishna (Krishna is Sanskrit for Christ), and thus Hesus Krishna would be the official name of the new Roman god. A vote was taken and it was with a majority show of hands (161 votes to 157) that both divinities became one God. Following longstanding heathen custom, Constantine used the official gathering and the Roman apotheosis decree to legally deify two deities as one, and did so by democratic consent. A new god was proclaimed and "officially" ratified by Constantine (Acta Concilii Nicaeni, 1618). That purely political act of deification effectively and legally placed Hesus and Krishna among the Roman gods as one individual composite. That abstraction lent Earthly existence to amalgamated doctrines for the Empire's new religion; and because there was no letter "J" in alphabets until around the ninth century, the name subsequently evolved into "Jesus Christ".

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 604
Date:
Permalink  
 

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

"Make them to astonish" said Constantine, and "the books were written accordingly" (Life of Constantine, vol. iv, pp. 36-39). Eusebius amalgamated the "legendary tales of all the religious doctrines of the world together as one", using the standard god-myths from the presbyters' manuscripts as his exemplars. Merging the supernatural "god" stories of Mithra and Krishna with British Culdean beliefs effectively joined the orations of Eastern and Western presbyters together "to form a new universal belief" (ibid.). Constantine believed that the amalgamated collection of myths would unite variant and opposing religious factions under one representative story. Eusebius then arranged for scribes to produce "fifty sumptuous copies ... to be written on parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient portable form, by professional scribes thoroughly accomplished in their art" (ibid.). "These orders," said Eusebius, "were followed by the immediate execution of the work itself ... we sent him [Constantine] magnificently and elaborately bound volumes of three-fold and four-fold forms" (Life of Constantine, vol. iv, p. 36). They were the "New Testimonies", and this is the first mention (c. 331) of the New Testament in the historical record.
With his instructions fulfilled, Constantine then decreed that the New Testimonies would thereafter be called the "word of the Roman Saviour God" (Life of Constantine, vol. iii, p. 29) and official to all presbyters sermonising in the Roman Empire. He then ordered earlier presbyterial manuscripts and the records of the council "burnt" and declared that "any man found concealing writings should be stricken off from his shoulders" (beheaded) (ibid.). As the record shows, presbyterial writings previous to the Council of Nicaea no longer exist, except for some fragments that have survived.
Some council records also survived, and they provide alarming ramifications for the Church.Some old documents say that the First Council of Nicaea ended in mid-November 326, while others say the struggle to establish a god was so fierce that it extended "for four years and seven months" from its beginning in June 325 (Secrets of the Christian Fathers, op. cit.). Regardless of when it ended, the savagery and violence it encompassed were concealed under the glossy title "Great and Holy Synod", assigned to the assembly by the Church in the 18th century. Earlier Churchmen, however, expressed a different opinion.

The Second Council of Nicaea in 786-87 denounced the First Council of Nicaea as "a synod of fools and madmen" and sought to annul "decisions passed by men with troubled brains" (History of the Christian Church, H. H. Milman, DD, 1871). If one chooses to read the records of the Second Nicaean Council and notes references to "affrighted bishops" and the "soldiery" needed to "quell proceedings", the "fools and madmen" declaration is surely an example of the pot calling the kettle black.
Constantine died in 337 and his outgrowth of many now-called pagan beliefs into a new religious system brought many converts. Later Church writers made him "the great champion of Christianity" which he gave "legal status as the religion of the Roman Empire" (Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire, Matthew Bunson, Facts on File, New York, 1994, p. 86). Historical records reveal this to be incorrect, for it was "self-interest" that led him to create Christianity (A Smaller Classical Dictionary, J. M. Dent, London, 1910, p. 161). Yet it wasn't called "Christianity" until the 15th century (How The Great Pan Died, Professor Edmond S. Bordeaux [Vatican archivist], Mille Meditations, USA, MCMLXVIII, pp. 45-7).
Over the ensuing centuries, Constantine's New Testimonies were expanded upon, "interpolations" were added and other writings included (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, pp. 135-137; also, Pecci ed., vol. ii, pp. 121-122). For example, in 397 John "golden-mouthed" Chrysostom restructured the writings of Apollonius of Tyana, a first-century wandering sage, and made them part of the New Testimonies (Secrets of the Christian Fathers, op. cit.). The Latinised name for Apollonius is Paulus (A Latin-English Dictionary, J. T. White and J. E. Riddle, Ginn & Heath, Boston, 1880), and the Church today calls those writings the Epistles of Paul. Apollonius's personal attendant, Damis, an Assyrian scribe, is Demis in the New Testament (2 Tim. 4:10).

The Church hierarchy knows the truth about the origin of its Epistles, for Cardinal Bembo (d. 1547), secretary to Pope Leo X (d. 1521), advised his associate, Cardinal Sadoleto, to disregard them, saying "put away these trifles, for such absurdities do not become a man of dignity; they were introduced on the scene later by a sly voice from heaven" (Cardinal Bembo: His Letters and Comments on Pope Leo X, A. L. Collins, London, 1842 reprint).
The Church admits that the Epistles of Paul are forgeries, saying, "Even the genuine Epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of their authors" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vii, p. 645). Likewise, St Jerome (d. 420) declared that the Acts of the Apostles, the fifth book of the New Testament, was also "falsely written" ("The Letters of Jerome", Library of the Fathers, Oxford Movement, 1833-45, vol. v, p. 445).

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 604
Date:
Permalink  
 

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

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

The revelations of ultraviolet light testing
In 1933, the British Museum in London purchased the Sinai Bible from the Soviet government for £100,000, of which £65,000 was gifted by public subscription. Prior to the acquisition, this Bible was displayed in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg, Russia, and "few scholars had set eyes on it" (The Daily Telegraph and Morning Post, 11 January 1938, p. 3). When it went on display in 1933 as "the oldest Bible in the world" (ibid.), it became the centre of a pilgrimage unequalled in the history of the British Museum.
Before I summarise its conflictions, it should be noted that this old codex is by no means a reliable guide to New Testament study as it contains superabundant errors and serious re-editing. These anomalies were exposed as a result of the months of ultraviolet-light tests carried out at the British Museum in the mid-1930s. The findings revealed replacements of numerous passages by at least nine different editors. Photographs taken during testing revealed that ink pigments had been retained deep in the pores of the skin. The original words were readable under ultraviolet light. Anybody wishing to read the results of the tests should refer to the book written by the researchers who did the analysis: the Keepers of the Department of Manuscripts at the British Museum (Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus, H. J. M. Milne and T. C. Skeat, British Museum, London, 1938).

Forgery in the Gospels
When the New Testament in the Sinai Bible is compared with a modern-day New Testament, a staggering 14,800 editorial alterations can be identified. These amendments can be recognised by a simple comparative exercise that anybody can and should do. Serious study of Christian origins must emanate from the Sinai Bible's version of the New Testament, not modern editions.
Of importance is the fact that the Sinaiticus carries three Gospels since rejected: the Shepherd of Hermas (written by two resurrected ghosts, Charinus and Lenthius), the Missive of Barnabas and the Odes of Solomon. Space excludes elaboration on these bizarre writings and also discussion on dilemmas associated with translation variations.
Modern Bibles are five removes in translation from early editions, and disputes rage between translators over variant interpretations of more than 5,000 ancient words. However, it is what is not written in that old Bible that embarrasses the Church, and this article discusses only a few of those omissions. One glaring example is subtly revealed in the Encyclopaedia Biblica (Adam & Charles Black, London, 1899, vol. iii, p. 3344), where the Church divulges its knowledge about exclusions in old Bibles, saying: "The remark has long ago and often been made that, like Paul, even the earliest Gospels knew nothing of the miraculous birth of our Saviour". That is because there never was a virgin birth.
It is apparent that when Eusebius assembled scribes to write the New Testimonies, he first produced a single document that provided an exemplar or master version. Today it is called the Gospel of Mark, and the Church admits that it was "the first Gospel written" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 657), even though it appears second in the New Testament today. The scribes of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were dependent upon the Mark writing as the source and framework for the compilation of their works. The Gospel of John is independent of those writings, and the late-15th-century theory that it was written later to support the earlier writings is the truth (The Crucifixion of Truth, Tony Bushby, Joshua Books, 2004, pp. 33-40).

Thus, the Gospel of Mark in the Sinai Bible carries the "first" story of Jesus Christ in history, one completely different to what is in modern Bibles. It starts with Jesus "at about the age of thirty" (Mark 1:9), and doesn't know of Mary, a virgin birth or mass murders of baby boys by Herod. Words describing Jesus Christ as "the son of God" do not appear in the opening narrative as they do in today's editions (Mark 1:1), and the modern-day family tree tracing a "messianic bloodline" back to King David is non-existent in all ancient Bibles, as are the now-called "messianic prophecies" (51 in total). The Sinai Bible carries a conflicting version of events surrounding the "raising of Lazarus", and reveals an extraordinary omission that later became the central doctrine of the Christian faith: the resurrection appearances of Jesus Christ and his ascension into Heaven. No supernatural appearance of a resurrected Jesus Christ is recorded in any ancient Gospels of Mark, but a description of over 500 words now appears in modern Bibles (Mark 16:9-20).
Despite a multitude of long-drawn-out self-justifications by Church apologists, there is no unanimity of Christian opinion regarding the non-existence of "resurrection" appearances in ancient Gospel accounts of the story. Not only are those narratives missing in the Sinai Bible, but they are absent in the Alexandrian Bible, the Vatican Bible, the Bezae Bible and an ancient Latin manuscript of Mark, code-named "K" by analysts. They are also lacking in the oldest Armenian version of the New Testament, in sixth-century manuscripts of the Ethiopic version and ninth-century Anglo-Saxon Bibles. However, some 12th-century Gospels have the now-known resurrection verses written within asterisksÑmarks used by scribes to indicate spurious passages in a literary document.

The Church claims that "the resurrection is the fundamental argument for our Christian belief" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xii, p. 792), yet no supernatural appearance of a resurrected Jesus Christ is recorded in any of the earliest Gospels of Mark available. A resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ is the sine qua non ("without which, nothing") of Christianity (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xii, p. 792), confirmed by words attributed to Paul: "If Christ has not been raised, your faith is in vain" (1 Cor. 5:17). The resurrection verses in today's Gospels of Mark are universally acknowledged as forgeries and the Church agrees, saying "the conclusion of Mark is admittedly not genuine ... almost the entire section is a later compilation" (Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol. ii, p. 1880, vol. iii, pp. 1767, 1781; also, Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. iii, under the heading "The Evidence of its Spuriousness"; Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, pp. 274-9 under heading "Canons"). Undaunted, however, the Church accepted the forgery into its dogma and made it the basis of Christianity.
The trend of fictitious resurrection narratives continues. The final chapter of the Gospel of John (21) is a sixth-century forgery, one entirely devoted to describing Jesus' resurrection to his disciples. The Church admits: "The sole conclusion that can be deduced from this is that the 21st chapter was afterwards added and is therefore to be regarded as an appendix to the Gospel" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. viii, pp. 441-442; New Catholic Encyclopedia (NCE), "Gospel of John", p. 1080; also NCE, vol. xii, p. 407).

__________________
«First  <  15 6 7 8 9  >  Last»  | Page of 9  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard