Who was Jesus?
Why is there no historic archaeological evidence of his existence?
Who wrote the Gospels?
Why were they written in Greek, rather than Hebrew or Aramaic?
How did the Christian religion come to be centered in Rome?
Why were the first Christian pope and earliest saints all members of the
Flavius Caesar ruling family?
The truth will set you free…
Increasingly science agrees with the poetry of direct human experience: we are more than the atoms and molecules that make up our bodies, but beings of light as well. Biophotons are emitted by the human body, can be released through mental intention, and may modulate fundamental processes within cell-to-cell communication and DNA.
Nothing is more amazing than the highly improbable fact that we exist. We often ignore this fact, oblivious to the reality that instead of something there could be nothing at all, i.e. why is there a universe (poignantly aware of itself through us) and not some void completely unconscious of itself?
Consider that from light, air, water, basic minerals within the crust of the earth, and the at least 3 billion year old information contained within the nucleus of one diploid zygote cell, the human body is formed, and within that body a soul capable of at least trying to comprehend its bodily and spiritual origins.
Given the sheer insanity of our existential condition, and bodily incarnation as a whole, and considering that our earthly existence is partially formed from sunlight and requires the continual consumption of condensed sunlight in the form of food, it may not sound so farfetched that our body emits light.
Indeed, the human body emits biophotons, also known as ultraweak photon emissions (UPE), with a visibility 1,000 times lower than the sensitivity of our naked eye. While not visible to us, these particles of light (or waves, depending on how you are measuring them) are part of the visible electromagnetic spectrum (380-780 nm) and are detectable via sophisticated modern instrumentation.[1],[2]
The eye itself, which is continually exposed to ambient powerful photons that pass through various ocular tissues, emit spontaneous and visible light-induced ultraweak photon emissions.[3] It has even been hypothesized that visible light induces delayed bioluminescence within the exposed eye tissue, providing an explanation for the origin of the negative afterimage.[4]
These light emissions have also been correlated with cerebral energy metabolism and oxidative stress within the mammalian brain.[5] [6] And yet, biophoton emissions are not necessarily epiphenomenal. Bókkon’s hypothesis suggests that photons released from chemical processes within the brain produce biophysical pictures during visual imagery, and a recent study found that when subjects actively imagined light in a very dark environment their intention produced significant increases in ultraweak photo emissions.[7] This is consistent with an emerging view that biophotons are not solely cellular metabolic by-products, but rather, because biophoton intensity can be considerably higher inside cells than outside, it is possible for the mind to access this energy gradient to create intrinsic biophysical pictures during visual perception and imagery.[8]
Apparently biophotons are used by the cells of many living organisms to communicate, which facilitates energy/information transfer that is several orders of magnitude faster than chemical diffusion. According to a 2010 study, “Cell to cell communication by biophotons have been demonstrated in plants, bacteria, animal neutriophil granulocytes and kidney cells.”[9] Researchers were able to demonstrate that “…different spectral light stimulation (infrared, red, yellow, blue, green and white) at one end of the spinal sensory or motor nerve roots resulted in a significant increase in the biophotonic activity at the other end.” Researchers interpreted their finding to suggest that “…light stimulation can generate biophotons that conduct along the neural fibers, probably as neural communication signals.”
Even when we go down to the molecular level of our genome, DNA can be identified to be a source of biophoton emissions as well. One author proposes that DNA is so biophoton dependent that is has excimer laser-like properties, enabling it to exist in a stable state far from thermal equilibrium at threshold.[10]
Technically speaking a biophoton is an elementary particle or quantum of light of non-thermal origin in the visible and ultraviolet spectrum emitted from a biological system. They are generally believed to be produced as a result of energy metabolism within our cells, or more formally as a “…by-product of biochemical reactions in which excited molecules are produced from bioenergetic processes that involves active oxygen species,” [11]
Because the metabolism of the body changes in a circadian fashion, biophoton emissions also variate along the axis of diurnal time. [12] Research has mapped out distinct anatomical locations within the body where biophoton emissions are stronger and weaker, depending on the time of the day:
Generally, the fluctuation in photon counts over the body was lower in the morning than in the afternoon. The thorax-abdomen region emitted lowest and most constantly. The upper extremities and the head region emitted most and increasingly over the day. Spectral analysis of low, intermediate and high emission from the superior frontal part of the right leg, the forehead and the palms in the sensitivity range of the photomultiplier showed the major spontaneous emission at 470-570 nm. The central palm area of hand emission showed a larger contribution of the 420-470 nm range in the spectrum of spontaneous emission from the hand in autumn/winter. The spectrum of delayed luminescence from the hand showed major emission in the same range as spontaneous emission.
The researchers concluded that, “The spectral data suggest that measurements might well provide quantitative data on the individual pattern of peroxidative and anti-oxidative processes in vivo.”
Research has found an oxidative stress-mediated difference in biophoton emission among mediators versus non-meditators. Those who meditate regularly tend to have lower ultra-weak photon emission (UPE, biophoton emission), which is believed to result from the lower level of free radical reactions occurring in their bodies. In one clinical study involving practitioners of transcendental meditation (TM) researchers found:
The lowest UPE intensities were observed in two subjects who regularly meditate. Spectral analysis of human UPE has suggested that ultra-weak emission is probably, at least in part, a reflection of free radical reactions in a living system. It has been documented that various physiologic and biochemical shifts follow the long-term practice of meditation and it is inferred that meditation may impact free radical activity.[13]
Interestingly, an herb well-known for its use in stress reduction (including inducing measurable declines in cortisol), and associated heightened oxidative stress, has been tested clinically in reducing the level of biophotons emitted in human subjects. Known as rhodiola, a study published in 2009 in the journal Phytotherapeutic Research found that those who took the herb for 1 week has a significant decrease in photon emission in comparison with the placebo group.[14]
In a previous article, Does Skin Pigment Act Like A Natural Solar-Panel, we explored the role of melanin in converting ultraviolet light into metabolic energy:
Melanin is capable of transforming ultraviolet light energy into heat in a process known as “ultrafast internal conversion”; more than 99.9% of the absorbed UV radiation is transformed from potentially genotoxic (DNA-damaging) ultraviolet light into harmless heat.
If melanin can convert light into heat, could it not also transform UV radiation into other biologically/metabolically useful forms of energy? This may not seem so farfetched when one considers that even gamma radiation, which is highly toxic to most forms of life, is a source of sustenance for certain types of fungi and bacteria.
It appears that modern science is only now coming to recognize the ability of the human body to receive and emit energy and information directly from the light given off from the Sun. [17]
There is also a growing realization that the Sun and Moon affect biophoton emissions through gravitational influences. Recently, biophoton emissions from wheat seedlings in Germany and Brazil were found to be synchronized transcontinentally according to rhythms associated with the lunisolar tide.[18] In fact, the lunisolar tidal force, to which the Sun contributes 30 % and the Moon 60 % of the combined gravitational acceleration, has been found to regulate a number of features of plant growth upon Earth.[19]
Even human intention itself, the so-called ghost in the machine, may have an empirical basis in biophotons.
A recent commentary published in the journal Investigacion clinica titled “Evidence about the power of intention” addressed this connection:
Intention is defined as a directed thought to perform a determined action. Thoughts targeted to an end can affect inanimate objects and practically all living things from unicellular organisms to human beings. The emission of light particles (biophotons) seems to be the mechanism through which an intention produces its effects. All living organisms emit a constant current of photons as a mean to direct instantaneous nonlocal signals from one part of the body to another and to the outside world. Biophotons are stored in the intracellular DNA. When the organism is sick changes in biophotons emissions are produced. Direct intention manifests itself as an electric and magnetic energy producing an ordered flux of photons. Our intentions seem to operate as highly coherent frequencies capable of changing the molecular structure of matter. For the intention to be effective it is necessary to choose the appropriate time. In fact, living beings are mutually synchronized and to the earth and its constant changes of magnetic energy. It has been shown that the energy of thought can also alter the environment. Hypnosis, stigmata phenomena and the placebo effect can also be considered as types of intention, as instructions to the brain during a particular state of consciousness. Cases of spontaneous cures or of remote healing of extremely ill patients represent instances of an exceedingly great intention to control diseases menacing our lives. The intention to heal as well as the beliefs of the sick person on the efficacy of the healing influences promote his healing. In conclusion, studies on thought and consciousness are emerging as fundamental aspects and not as mere epiphenomena that are rapidly leading to a profound change in the paradigms of Biology and Medicine.
So there you have it. Science increasingly agrees with direct human experience: we are more than the atoms and molecules of which we are composed, but beings that emit, communicate with, and are formed from light.
[1] Herbert Schwabl, Herbert Klima. Spontaneous ultraweak photon emission from biological systems and the endogenous light field. Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd. 2005 Apr;12(2):84-9. PMID: 15947466
[2] Hugo J Niggli, Salvatore Tudisco, Giuseppe Privitera, Lee Ann Applegate, Agata Scordino, Franco Musumeci. Laser-ultraviolet-A-induced ultraweak photon emission in mammalian cells. J Biomed Opt. 2005 Mar-Apr;10(2):024006. PMID: 15910080
[3] Chao Wang, István Bókkon, Jiapei Dai, István Antal. Spontaneous and visible light-induced ultraweak photon emission from rat eyes. Brain Res. 2011 Jan 19 ;1369:1-9. Epub 2010 Oct 26. PMID: 21034725
[4] I Bókkon, R L P Vimal, C Wang, J Dai, V Salari, F Grass, I Antal. Visible light induced ocular delayed bioluminescence as a possible origin of negative afterimage. J Photochem Photobiol B. 2011 May 3 ;103(2):192-9. Epub 2011 Mar 23. PMID: 21463953
[5] M Kobayashi, M Takeda, T Sato, Y Yamazaki, K Kaneko, K Ito, H Kato, H Inaba. In vivo imaging of spontaneous ultraweak photon emission from a rat’s brain correlated with cerebral energy metabolism and oxidative stress. Neurosci Res. 1999 Jul;34(2):103-13. PMID: 10498336
[6] Y Kataoka, Y Cui, A Yamagata, M Niigaki, T Hirohata, N Oishi, Y Watanabe. Activity-dependent neural tissue oxidation emits intrinsic ultraweak photons. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2001 Jul 27;285(4):1007-11. PMID: 11467852
[7] B T Dotta, K S Saroka, M A Persinger. Increased photon emission from the head while imagining light in the dark is correlated with changes in electroencephalographic power: support for Bókkon’s biophoton hypothesis. Neurosci Lett. 2012 Apr 4 ;513(2):151-4. Epub 2012 Feb 17. PMID: 22343311
[8] I Bókkon, V Salari, J A Tuszynski, I Antal. Estimation of the number of biophotons involved in the visual perception of a single-object image: biophoton intensity can be considerably higher inside cells than outside. J Photochem Photobiol B. 2010 Sep 2 ;100(3):160-6. Epub 2010 Jun 10. PMID: 20584615
[9] Yan Sun, Chao Wang, Jiapei Dai. Biophotons as neural communication signals demonstrated by in situ biophoton autography. Photochem Photobiol Sci. 2010 Mar ;9(3):315-22. Epub 2010 Jan 21. PMID: 20221457
[10] F A Popp, W Nagl, K H Li, W Scholz, O Weingärtner, R Wolf. Biophoton emission. New evidence for coherence and DNA as source. Cell Biophys. 1984 Mar;6(1):33-52. PMID: 6204761
[11] Masaki Kobayashi, Daisuke Kikuchi, Hitoshi Okamura. Imaging of ultraweak spontaneous photon emission from human body displaying diurnal rhythm. PLoS One. 2009;4(7):e6256. Epub 2009 Jul 16. PMID: 19606225
[12] Masaki Kobayashi, Daisuke Kikuchi, Hitoshi Okamura. Imaging of ultraweak spontaneous photon emission from human body displaying diurnal rhythm. PLoS One. 2009;4(7):e6256. Epub 2009 Jul 16. PMID: 19606225
[13] Eduard P A Van Wijk, Heike Koch, Saskia Bosman, Roeland Van Wijk. Anatomic characterization of human ultra-weak photon emission in practitioners of transcendental meditation(TM) and control subjects. J Altern Complement Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;12(1):31-8. PMID:16494566
[14] F W G Schutgens, P Neogi, E P A van Wijk, R van Wijk, G Wikman, F A C Wiegant. The influence of adaptogens on ultraweak biophoton emission: a pilot-experiment. Phytother Res. 2009 Aug;23(8):1103-8. PMID: 19170145
[15] H J Niggli. Artificial sunlight irradiation induces ultraweak photon emission in human skin fibroblasts. J Photochem Photobiol B. 1993 May;18(2-3):281-5. PMID: 8350193
[16] Hugo J Niggli, Salvatore Tudisco, Giuseppe Privitera, Lee Ann Applegate, Agata Scordino, Franco Musumeci. Laser-ultraviolet-A-induced ultraweak photon emission in mammalian cells. J Biomed Opt. 2005 Mar-Apr;10(2):024006. PMID: 15910080
[17] Janusz Slawinski. Photon emission from perturbed and dying organisms: biomedical perspectives. Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd. 2005 Apr;12(2):90-5. PMID: 15947467
[18] Cristiano M Gallep, Thiago A Moraes, Samuel R Dos Santos, Peter W Barlow. Coincidence of biophoton emission by wheat seedlings during simultaneous, transcontinental germination tests. Protoplasma. 2013 Jun ;250(3):793-6. Epub 2012 Sep 26. PMID: 23011402
[19] Peter W Barlow, Joachim Fisahn. Lunisolar tidal force and the growth of plant roots, and some other of its effects on plant movements. Ann Bot. 2012 Jul ;110(2):301-18. Epub 2012 Mar 20. PMID: 22437666
Sayer Ji is an author, researcher, lecturer, and advisory board member of the National Health Federation.
He founded Greenmedinfo.com in 2008 in order to provide the world an open access, evidence-based resource supporting natural and integrative modalities. It is internationally recognized as the largest and most widely referenced health resource of its kind.
Extracted from Nexus Magazine
Volume 14, Number 4 (June – July 2007)
from NexusMagazine Website
|
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. . |
What the Church doesn’t want you to know
It has often been emphasized that Christianity is unlike any other religion, for it stands or falls by certain events which are alleged to have occurred during a short period of time some 20 centuries ago. Those stories are presented in the New Testament, and as new evidence is revealed it will become clear that they do not represent 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 authorized the compilation of the writings now called the New Testament. After the death of his father in 306, Constantine became King of Britain, Gaul and Spain, and then, after a series of victorious battles, Emperor of the Roman Empire. Christian historians give little or no hint of the turmoil of the times and suspend Constantine in the air, free of all human events happening around him. In truth, one of Constantine’s main problems was the uncontrollable disorder amongst presbyters and their belief in 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, stabilizing religious splinter groups was only one of Constantine’s problems.
The smooth generalization, which so many historians are content to repeat, that Constantine “embraced the Christian religion” and subsequently granted “official toleration”, is “contrary to historical fact” and should be erased from our literature forever (Catholic Encyclopedia, Pecci ed., vol. iii, p. 299, passim). Simply put, there was no Christian religion at Constantine’s time, and the Church acknowledges that the tale of his “conversion” and “baptism” are “entirely legendary” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xiv, pp. 370-1).
Constantine “never acquired a solid theological knowledge” and “depended heavily on his advisers in religious questions” (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, vol. xii, p. 576, passim). According to Eusebeius (260-339), Constantine noted that among the presbyterian factions “strife had grown so serious, vigorous action was necessary to establish a more religious state”, but he could not bring about a settlement between rival god factions (Life of Constantine, op. cit., pp. 26-8). His advisers warned him that the presbyters’ religions were “destitute of foundation” and needed official stabilization (ibid.).
Constantine saw in this confused system of fragmented dogmas the opportunity to create a new and combined State religion, neutral in concept, and to protect it by law. When he conquered the East in 324 he sent his Spanish religious adviser, Osius of Córdoba, to Alexandria with letters to several bishops exhorting them to make peace among themselves. The mission failed and Constantine, probably at the suggestion of Osius, then issued a decree commanding all presbyters and their subordinates “be mounted on asses, mules and horses belonging to the public, and travel to the city of Nicaea” in the Roman province of Bithynia in Asia Minor.
They were instructed to bring with them the testimonies they orated to the rabble, “bound in leather” for protection during the long journey, and surrender them to Constantine upon arrival in Nicaea (The Catholic Dictionary, Addis and Arnold, 1917, “Council of Nicaea” entry).
Their writings totaled,
“in all, two thousand two hundred and thirty-one scrolls and legendary tales of gods and saviors, 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).
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 patronized the vilest abominations” (An Apology for Christianity, op. cit.).
It was that infantile body of men who were responsible for the commencement of a new religion and the theological creation of Jesus Christ.
The Church admits that vital elements of the proceedings at Nicaea are “strangely absent from the canons” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 160). We shall see shortly what happened to them. However, according to records that endured, Eusebius “occupied the first seat on the right of the emperor and delivered the inaugural address on the emperor’s behalf” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. v, pp. 619-620).
There were no British presbyters at the council but many Greek delegates. “Seventy Eastern bishops” represented Asiatic factions, and small numbers came from other areas (Ecclesiastical History, ibid.). Caecilian of Carthage traveled from Africa, Paphnutius of Thebes from Egypt, Nicasius of Die (Dijon) from Gaul, and Donnus of Stridon made the journey from Pannonia.
It was at that puerile assembly, and with so many cults represented, that a total of 318 “bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, acolytes and exorcists” gathered to debate and decide upon a unified belief system that encompassed only one god (An Apology for Christianity, op. cit.). By this time, a huge assortment of “wild texts” (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, “Gospel and Gospels”) circulated amongst presbyters and they supported a great variety of Eastern and Western gods and goddesses:
Jove, Jupiter, Salenus, Baal, Thor, Gade, Apollo, Juno, Aries, Taurus, Minerva, Rhets, Mithra, Theo, Fragapatti, Atys, Durga, Indra, Neptune, Vulcan, Kriste, Agni, Croesus, Pelides, Huit, Hermes, Thulis, Thammus, Eguptus, Iao, Aph, Saturn, Gitchens, Minos, Maximo, Hecla and Phernes
(God’s Book of Eskra, anon., ch. xlviii, paragraph 36).
Up until the First Council of Nicaea, the Roman aristocracy primarily worshipped two Greek gods -Apollo and Zeus- but the great bulk of common people idolized either Julius Caesar or Mithras (the Romanized version of the Persian deity Mithra). Caesar was deified by the Roman Senate after his death (15 March 44 BC) and subsequently venerated as “the Divine Julius”. The word “Savior” was affixed to his name, its literal meaning being “one who sows the seed”, i.e., he was a phallic god.
Julius Caesar was hailed as, “God made manifest and universal Savior of human life”, and his successor Augustus was called the “ancestral God and Savior of the whole human race”
(Man and his Gods, Homer Smith, Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1952).
Emperor Nero (54-68), whose original name was Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus (37-68), was immortalized on his coins as the “Savior of mankind” (ibid.). The Divine Julius as Roman Savior and “Father of the Empire” was considered “God” among the Roman rabble for more than 300 years. He was the deity in some Western presbyters’ texts, but was not recognized in Eastern or Oriental writings.
Constantine’s intention at Nicaea was to create an entirely new god for his empire who would unite all religious factions under one deity. Presbyters were asked to debate and decide who their new god would be. Delegates argued among themselves, expressing personal motives for inclusion of particular writings that promoted the finer traits of their own special deity. Throughout the meeting, howling factions were immersed in heated debates, and the names of 53 gods were tabled for discussion.
“As yet, no God had been selected by the council, and so they balloted in order to determine that matter… For one year and five months the balloting lasted…”
(God’s Book of Eskra, Prof. S. L. MacGuire’s translation, Salisbury, 1922, chapter xlviii, paragraphs 36, 41).
At the end of that time, Constantine returned to the gathering to discover that the presbyters had not agreed on a new deity but had balloted down to a shortlist of five prospects:
Caesar
Krishna
Mithra
Horus
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 Savior-god, Krishna (Krishna is Sanskrit for Christ), and thus Hesus Krishna would be the official name of the new Roman god.
A vote was taken and it was with a majority show of hands (161 votes to 157) that both divinities became one God. Following longstanding heathen custom, Constantine used the official gathering and the Roman apotheosis decree to legally deify two deities as one, and did so by democratic consent. A new god was proclaimed and “officially” ratified by Constantine (Acta Concilii Nicaeni, 1618). That purely political act of deification effectively and legally placed Hesus and Krishna among the Roman gods as one individual composite.
That abstraction lent Earthly existence to amalgamated doctrines for the Empire’s new religion; and because there was no letter “J” in alphabets until around the ninth century, the name subsequently evolved into “Jesus Christ”.
How the Gospels were created
Constantine then instructed Eusebius to organize the compilation of a uniform collection of new writings developed from primary aspects of the religious texts submitted at the council.
His instructions were:
“Search ye these books, and whatever is good in them, that retain; but whatsoever is evil, that cast away. What is good in one book, unite ye with that which is good in another book. And whatsoever is thus brought together shall be called The Book of Books. And it shall be the doctrine of my people, which I will recommend unto all nations, that there shall be no more war for religions’ sake.”
(God’s Book of Eskra, op. cit., chapter xlviii, paragraph 31)“Make them to astonish” said Constantine, and “the books were written accordingly”
(Life of Constantine, vol. iv, 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 Savior God” (Life of Constantine, vol. iii, p. 29) and official to all presbyters sermonizing in the Roman Empire. He then ordered earlier presbyterial manuscripts and the records of the council “burnt” and declared that “any man found concealing writings should be stricken off from his shoulders” (beheaded) (ibid.). As the record shows, presbyterial writings previous to the Council of Nicaea no longer exist, except for some fragments that have 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 Latinized name for Apollonius is Paulus (A Latin-English Dictionary, J. T. White and J. E. Riddle, Ginn & Heath, Boston, 1880), and the Church today calls those writings the Epistles of Paul. Apollonius’s personal attendant, Damis, an Assyrian scribe, is Demis in the New Testament (2 Tim. 4:10).
The Church hierarchy knows the truth about the origin of its Epistles, for Cardinal Bembo (d. 1547), secretary to Pope Leo X (d. 1521), advised his associate, Cardinal Sadoleto, to disregard them, saying,
“put away these trifles, for such absurdities do not become a man of dignity; they were introduced on the scene later by a sly voice from heaven”
(Cardinal Bembo: His Letters and Comments on Pope Leo X, A. L. Collins, London, 1842 reprint).
The Church admits that the Epistles of Paul are forgeries, saying,
“Even the genuine Epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of 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).
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 willful falsifications in all modern New Testaments. So different was the Sinai Bible’s New Testament from versions then being published that the Church angrily tried to annul the dramatic new evidence that challenged its very existence.
In a series of articles published in the London Quarterly Review in 1883, John W. Burgon, Dean of Chichester, used every rhetorical device at his disposal to attack the Sinaiticus’ earlier and opposing story of Jesus Christ, 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 summarize its conflictions, it should be noted that this old codex is by no means a reliable guide to New Testament study as it contains superabundant errors and serious re-editing. These anomalies were exposed as a result of the months of ultraviolet-light tests carried out at the British Museum in the mid-1930s. The findings revealed replacements of numerous passages by at least nine different editors.
Photographs taken during testing revealed that ink pigments had been retained deep in the pores of the skin. The original words were readable under ultraviolet light. Anybody wishing to read the results of the tests should refer to the book written by the researchers who did the analysis: the Keepers of the Department of Manuscripts at the British Museum (Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus, H. J. M. Milne and T. C. Skeat, British Museum, London, 1938).
Forgery in the 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 recognized by a simple comparative exercise that anybody can and should do. Serious study of Christian origins must emanate from the Sinai Bible’s version of the New Testament, not modern editions.
Of importance is the fact that the Sinaiticus carries three Gospels since rejected:
the Shepherd of Hermas (written by two resurrected ghosts, Charinus and Lenthius)
the Missive of Barnabas
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 asterisks-marks used by scribes to indicate spurious passages in a literary document.
The Church claims that “the resurrection is the fundamental argument for our Christian belief” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xii, p. 792), yet no supernatural appearance of a resurrected Jesus Christ is recorded in any of the earliest Gospels of Mark available. A resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ is the sine qua non (“without which, nothing”) of Christianity (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xii, p. 792), confirmed by words attributed to Paul:
“If Christ has not been raised, your faith is in vain”
(1 Cor. 5:17).
The resurrection verses in today’s Gospels of Mark are universally acknowledged as forgeries and the Church agrees, saying,
“the conclusion of Mark is admittedly not genuine … almost the entire section is a later 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).
“The Great Insertion” and “The Great Omission”
Modern-day versions of the Gospel of Luke have a staggering 10,000 more words than the same Gospel in the Sinai Bible. Six of those words say of Jesus “and was carried up into heaven”, but this narrative does not appear in any of the oldest Gospels of Luke available today (“Three Early Doctrinal Modifications of the Text of the Gospels“, F. C. Conybeare, The Hibbert Journal, London, vol. 1, no. 1, Oct 1902, pp. 96-113). Ancient versions do not verify modern-day accounts of an ascension of Jesus Christ, and this falsification clearly indicates an intention to deceive.
Today, the Gospel of Luke is the longest of the canonical Gospels because it now includes “The Great Insertion”, an extraordinary 15th-century addition totaling around 8,500 words (Luke 9:51-18:14). The insertion of these forgeries into that Gospel bewilders modern Christian analysts, and of them the Church said:
“The character of these passages makes it dangerous to draw inferences”
(Catholic Encyclopedia, Pecci ed., vol. ii, p. 407).
Just as remarkable, the oldest Gospels of Luke omit all verses from 6:45 to 8:26, known in priesthood circles as “The Great Omission”, a total of 1,547 words. In today’s versions, that hole has been “plugged up” with passages plagiarized from other Gospels. Dr Tischendorf found that three paragraphs in newer versions of the Gospel of Luke’s version of the Last Supper appeared in the 15th century, but the Church still passes its Gospels off as the unadulterated “word of God” (“Are Our Gospels Genuine or Not?”, op. cit.)
The “Expurgatory Index”
As was the case with the New Testament, so also were damaging writings of early “Church Fathers” modified in centuries of copying, and many of their records were intentionally rewritten or suppressed.
Adopting the decrees of the Council of Trent (1545-63), the Church subsequently extended the process of erasure and ordered the preparation of a special list of specific information to be expunged from early Christian writings (Delineation of Roman Catholicism, Rev. Charles Elliott, DD, G. Lane & P. P. Sandford, New York, 1842, p. 89; also, The Vatican Censors, Professor Peter Elmsley, Oxford, p. 327, pub. date n/a).
In 1562, the Vatican established a special censoring office called Index Expurgatorius. Its purpose was to prohibit publication of “erroneous passages of the early Church Fathers” that carried statements opposing modern-day doctrine.
When Vatican archivists came across,
“genuine copies of the Fathers, they corrected them according to the Expurgatory Index”
(Index Expurgatorius Vaticanus, R. Gibbings, ed., Dublin, 1837; The Literary Policy of the Church of Rome, Joseph Mendham, J. Duncan, London, 1830, 2nd ed., 1840; The Vatican Censors, op. cit., p. 328).
This Church record provides researchers with,
“grave doubts about the value of all patristic writings released to the public”
(The Propaganda Press of Rome, Sir James W. L. Claxton, Whitehaven Books, London, 1942, p. 182).
Important for our story is the fact that the Encyclopaedia Biblica reveals that around 1,200 years of Christian history are unknown: “Unfortunately, only few of the records [of the Church] prior to the year 1198 have been released”. It was not by chance that, in that same year (1198), Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) suppressed all records of earlier Church history by establishing the Secret Archives (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xv, p. 287). Some seven-and-a-half centuries later, and after spending some years in those Archives, Professor Edmond S. Bordeaux wrote How The Great Pan Died.
In a chapter titled “The Whole of Church History is Nothing but a Retroactive Fabrication“, he said this (in part):
“The Church ante-dated all her late works, some newly made, some revised and some counterfeited, which contained the final expression of her history … her technique was to make it appear that much later works written by Church writers were composed a long time earlier, so that they might become evidence of the first, second or third centuries.”
(How The Great Pan Died, op. cit., p. 46)
Supporting Professor Bordeaux’s findings is the fact that, in 1587, Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) established an official Vatican publishing division and said in his own words,
“Church history will be now be established … we shall seek to print our own account”
(Encyclopédie, Diderot, 1759).
Vatican records also reveal that Sixtus V spent 18 months of his life as pope personally writing a new Bible and then introduced into Catholicism a “New Learning” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. v, p. 442, vol. xv, p. 376). The evidence that the Church wrote its own history is found in Diderot’s Encyclopédie, and it reveals the reason why Pope Clement XIII (1758-69) ordered all volumes to be destroyed immediately after publication in 1759.
Gospel authors exposed as imposters
There is something else involved in this scenario and it is recorded in the Catholic Encyclopedia. An appreciation of the clerical mindset arises when the Church itself admits that it does not know who wrote its Gospels and Epistles, confessing that all 27 New Testament writings began life anonymously:
“It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the evangelists themselves … they [the New Testament collection] are supplied with titles which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those writings.”
(Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, pp. 655-6)
The Church maintains that “the titles of our Gospels were not intended to indicate authorship”, adding that “the headings … were affixed to them” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. i, p. 117, vol. vi, pp. 655, 656). Therefore they are not Gospels written “according to Matthew, Mark, Luke or John”, as publicly stated. The full force of this confession reveals that there are no genuine apostolic Gospels, and that the Church’s shadowy writings today embody the very ground and pillar of Christian foundations and faith.
The consequences are fatal to the pretence of Divine origin of the entire New Testament and expose Christian texts as having no special authority. For centuries, fabricated Gospels bore Church certification of authenticity now confessed to be false, and this provides evidence that Christian writings are wholly fallacious.
After years of dedicated New Testament research, Dr Tischendorf expressed dismay at the differences between the oldest and newest Gospels, and had trouble understanding…
“…how scribes could allow themselves to bring in here and there changes which were not simply verbal ones, but such as materially affected the very meaning and, what is worse still, did not shrink from cutting out a passage or inserting one.”
(Alterations to the Sinai Bible, Dr Constantin von Tischendorf, 1863, available in the British Library, London)
After years of validating the fabricated nature of the New Testament, a disillusioned Dr Tischendorf confessed that modern-day editions have “been altered in many places” and are “not to be accepted as true” (When Were Our Gospels Written?, Dr Constantin von Tischendorf, 1865, British Library, London).
Just what is Christianity?
The important question then to ask is this: if the New Testament is not historical, what is it?
Dr Tischendorf provided part of the answer when he said in his 15,000 pages of critical notes on the Sinai Bible that,
“it seems that the personage of Jesus Christ was made narrator for many religions”.
This explains how narratives from the ancient Indian epic, the Mahabharata, appear verbatim in the Gospels today (e.g., Matt. 1:25, 2:11, 8:1-4, 9:1-8, 9:18-26), and why passages from the Phenomena of the Greek statesman Aratus of Sicyon (271-213 BC) are in the New Testament.
Extracts from the Hymn to Zeus, written by Greek philosopher Cleanthes (c. 331-232 BC), are also found in the Gospels, as are 207 words from the Thais of Menander (c. 343-291), one of the “seven wise men” of Greece. Quotes from the semi-legendary Greek poet Epimenides (7th or 6th century BC) are applied to the lips of Jesus Christ, and seven passages from the curious Ode of Jupiter (c. 150 BC; author unknown) are reprinted in the New Testament.
Tischendorf‘s conclusion also supports Professor Bordeaux‘s Vatican findings that reveal the allegory of Jesus Christ derived from the fable of Mithra, the divine son of God (Ahura Mazda) and messiah of the first kings of the Persian Empire around 400 BC. His birth in a grotto was attended by magi who followed a star from the East. They brought “gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh” (as in Matt. 2:11) and the newborn baby was adored by shepherds. He came into the world wearing the Mithraic cap, which popes imitated in various designs until well into the 15th century.
Mithra, one of a trinity, stood on a rock, the emblem of the foundation of his religion, and was anointed with honey. After a last supper with Helios and 11 other companions, Mithra was crucified on a cross, bound in linen, placed in a rock tomb and rose on the third day or around 25 March (the full moon at the spring equinox, a time now called Easter after the Babylonian goddess Ishtar). The fiery destruction of the universe was a major doctrine of Mithraism – a time in which Mithra promised to return in person to Earth and save deserving souls. Devotees of Mithra partook in a sacred communion banquet of bread and wine, a ceremony that paralleled the Christian Eucharist and preceded it by more than four centuries.
Christianity is an adaptation of,
Mithraism welded with the Druidic principles of the Culdees
some Egyptian elements (the pre-Christian Book of Revelation was originally called The Mysteries of Osiris and Isis)
Greek philosophy
various aspects of Hinduism
Why there are no records of Jesus Christ
It is not possible to find in any legitimate religious or historical writings compiled between the beginning of the first century and well into the fourth century any reference to Jesus Christ and the spectacular events that the Church says accompanied his life.
This confirmation comes from Frederic Farrar (1831-1903) of Trinity College, Cambridge:
“It is amazing that history has not embalmed for us even one certain or definite saying or circumstance in the life of the Saviour of mankind … there is no statement in all history that says anyone saw Jesus or talked with him. Nothing in history is more astonishing than the silence of contemporary writers about events relayed in the four Gospels.”
(The Life of Christ, Frederic W. Farrar, Cassell, London, 1874)
This situation arises from a conflict between history and New Testament narratives. Dr Tischendorf made this comment:
“We must frankly admit that we have no source of information with respect to the life of Jesus Christ other than ecclesiastic writings assembled during the fourth century.”
(Codex Sinaiticus, Dr Constantin von Tischendorf, British Library, London)
There is an explanation for those hundreds of years of silence:
the construct of Christianity did not begin until after the first quarter of the fourth century, and that is why Pope Leo X (d. 1521) called Christ a “fable”
(Cardinal Bembo: His Letters…, op. cit.).
About the Author
Tony Bushby, an Australian, became a businessman and entrepreneur early in his adult life. He established a magazine-publishing business and spent 20 years researching, writing and publishing his own magazines, primarily for the Australian and New Zealand markets.
With strong spiritual beliefs and an interest in metaphysical subjects, Tony has developed long relationships with many associations and societies throughout the world that have assisted his research by making their archives available. He is the author of The Bible Fraud (2001; reviewed in NEXUS 8/06 with extracts in NEXUS 9/01—03), The Secret in the Bible (2003; reviewed in 11/02, with extract, “Ancient Cities under the Sands of Giza”, in 11/03) and The Crucifixion of Truth (2005; reviewed in 12/02) and The Twin Deception (2007; reviewed 14/03).
Copies of these books are available from the NEXUS website and the Joshua Books website http://www.joshuabooks.com
As Tony Bushby vigorously protects his privacy, any correspondence should be sent to him care of NEXUS Magazine, PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560, Australia, fax +61 (0) 7 5442 9381.
reblogged from One of the Most Shocking CIA Programs of All Time: Project MKUltra.
When the extent of the U.S. government’s domestic spying program was revealed this past summer, many were surprised and outraged: how could a government which so prizes liberty of its citizens covertly collect data on its own people?
Yet, sadly, this is not the first time Uncle Sam, without permission or notice, secretly gathered information on its people and wasn’t even close to the greatest atrocity. For that, there are numerous other examples such as when the government intentionally poisoned certain alcohol supplies they knew people would drink, killing over 10,000 American citizens and sickening many thousands others. (Despite this, the program continued for some time, though it was hotly debated in Congress when the death tolls started rolling in.)
One other such “interesting” program, was from 1953 to 1964, when the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) conducted dozens of experiments on the effects of biological and chemical agents on American citizens without their knowledge in Project MKUltra. These covert tests included subjecting the unwitting subjects to hallucinogenic drugs and other chemicals, among other things.
It is difficult to find official documents about this program; however, in 1976 and 1977, the U.S. Senate conducted investigations and even held a joint committee hearing on Project MKUltra, then published much of what was discovered; you will not believe what they found out.
MKULtra’s Purpose
According to the hearing report, the project was intended to “develop a capability in the covert use of biological and chemical materials.”[1] The motivation was also defensive, in that many were afraid during the Cold War that the Russians and Chinese had already developed weapons in this area. As the project’s proponents noted:
The development of a comprehensive capability in this field of covert chemical and biological warfare gives us a thorough knowledge of the enemy’s theoretical potential, thus enabling us to defend ourselves against a foe who might not be as restrained in the use of these techniques as we are.[2]
Officially authorized in 1953, by 1955, project creep had expanded the CIA’s authority under MKUltra to include the following:
Discovery of the following materials and methods [including those]:
LSD experiments
Senator Edward Kennedy dominated the hearing. In his opening remarks, he noted there was:
an “extensive testing and experimentation” program which included covert drug tests on unwitting citizens “at all social levels, high and low, native Americans and foreign.” Several of these tests involved the administration of LSD to “unwitting subjects in social situations.”[4]
For many of these drug tests, especially early on, there were “no medical personnel on hand either to administer the drugs or observe their effects.” Often, the randomly selected subjects had “become ill for hours or days, including hospitalization in at least one case.”[5]
Even more troubling, some of the tests proved lethal, but that did not stop the CIA from continuing their experimentation:
The deaths of two Americans can be attributed to these programs; other participants in the testing programs may still suffer from the residual effects. . . . The fact that they were continued for years after the danger of surreptitious administration of LSD to unwitting individuals was known, demonstrate fundamental disregard for the value of human life.[6]
One of these lives belonged to Dr. Frank Olson, himself a researcher with the U.S. Army who studied “developing techniques for offensive use of biological weapons . . . [and] biological research for the CIA.”[7]
Along with a group of 9 other such scientists, he attended a conference in a cabin at Deep Creek Lake, Maryland in November 1953. Once there, ironically, CIA operatives spiked the researchers’ Cointreau with LSD. Only after the scientists had finished their drinks were they informed that they had been drugged.[8]
Most of the researchers handled the experience well and had no aftereffects, but not Dr. Olson. He never recovered from the ordeal and shortly after the experiment, began to show “symptoms of paranoia and schizophrenia.”[9]
Dr. Olson’s superior and the CIA who ran the experiment arranged for him to get treatment in New York City. While spending the night in a hotel room with the CIA officer, and after requesting a wake-up call for the next morning, Dr. Olson somehow managed to fall to his death. As the CIA officer (Lashbrook) reported:
At approximately 2:30 a.m. Saturday, November 28, Lashbrook was awakened by a loud “crash of glass.” . . . . Olson “had crashed through the closed window blind and the closed window and he fell to his death from the window of our room on the 10th floor.”[10]
There is no indication that any investigation of foul play, particularly by the CIA officer (who was both responsible for the experiment and alone in the hotel room with Olson) was ever conducted.
Universities, Prisons and Hospitals Conducted Experiments
In the hearing, Senator Kennedy noted that many otherwise respectable institutions were fraudulently incorporated into MKUltra projects:
What we are basically talking about is . . . the perversion and corruption of many of our outstanding research centers in this country, with CIA funds, where some of our top researchers were unwittingly involved in research sponsored by the Agency in which they had no knowledge of the background or the support for[11]
According to the hearing report, “eighty-six universities or institutions were involved,”[12] and “185 non-government researchers and assistants” worked on these projects.[13] “Physicians, toxicologists, and other specialists in mental [and] narcotics” were lured into MKUltra through the provision of grants that were “made under ostensible research foundation auspices, thereby concealing the CIA’s interest from the specialist’s institution.”[14]
For some of the 12 hospitals that participated in Project MKUltra, tests were conducted on terminal cancer patients – presumably because the experiments were anticipated to have long-lasting detrimental, if not lethal, effects.[15]
Sadly, to get the hospitals (and perhaps the patients) to agree to these experiments, the CIA often paid the institution. For example, Subproject 23, authorized in August 1955, worked as follows:
The project engineer . . . authorized the contractor to pay the hospital’s expenses of certain persons suffering from incurable cancer for the privilege of studying the effects of these chemicals during their terminal illnesses.[16]
Likewise, many of the experiments conducted at the three prisons were done secretly: “We also know now that some unwitting testing took place on criminal sexual psychopaths.” [17]
Not all testing was done unwittingly, although that did not make it any more ethical. For example, in a prison experiment conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health Addiction Research Center at the Lexington Rehabilitation Center (a prison for convicted drug addicts), prisoners who volunteered to participate in a hallucinogenic drug experiment were promised (and received) doses of “the drug of their addiction.”[18]
Miscellaneous Other Experiments
An unknown number of other experiments in “such areas as effects of electro-shock, harassment techniques for offensive use . . [and] gas propelled sprays and aerosols” to be used as “assassination delivery systems” were also being conducted.[19]
In addition, MKUltra scientists were authorized to research “additional avenues to the control of human behavior” including “radiation . . .[and] paramilitary devices and materials.”[20]
Heinous Covert Experiments: By the Numbers
Project MKUltra consisted of 149 subprojects “many of which appear to have some connection with research into behavioral modification, drug acquisition and testing or administering drugs surreptitiously,”[21] including as follows:
The CIA Lost or Destroyed All Records of Project MKUltra
Sadly, but not surprisingly, almost no records remain of the 10 years of covert activity. As Senator Kennedy noted:
Perhaps most disturbing of all was the fact that the extent of experimentation on human subjects was unknown. The records of all these activities were destroyed in 1973, at the instruction of then CIA Director Richard Helms.[23]
Notably, however, some records were overlooked during the CIA’s destruction because new records were found in 1977, as noted by Senator Kennedy:
We believed that the record, incomplete as it was, was as complete as it was going to be. Then one individual, through a Freedom of Information request, accomplished what two U.S. Senate committees could not. He spurred the agency into finding additional records . . . . The records reveal a far more extensive series of experiments than had previously been thought.[24]
Nonetheless, these records still leave an incomplete record of the program.
No Accountability
Two lawsuits arising out of MKUltra activities made it to the Supreme Court, but both protected the government over citizen’s rights:
In 1985, the Court held in CIA vs. Simms that the names of the institutions and researchers who participated in Project MKUltra were exempt from revelation under the Freedom of Information Act due to the CIA’s need to protect its “intelligence sources.”
In 1987, in United States v. Stanley, the Court held that a serviceman who had volunteered for a chemical weapons experiment, but who was actually tested with LSD, was barred from bringing a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
DID YOU KNOW THE US GOVERNMENT WAS FOUND GUILTY BY A FEDERAL COURT OF KILLING MARTIN LUTHER KING JR? If not that’s because the mainstream media was also found guilty in the conspiracy.
Anyone who wants the most important history of the Vietnam war, and American history, must be briefed of this stunning and game-changing “current event”:
Dr. Martin Luther King’s family and his personal friend and attorney, William F. Pepper, won a civil trial that found US government agencies guilty in the wrongful death of Martin Luther King. The 1999 trial, King Family versus Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators, [70] is the only trial ever conducted on the assassination of Dr. King.
The King family’s attempts for a criminal trial were denied, as suspect James Ray’s recant of what he claimed was a false confession was denied. Mr. Ray said that his government-appointed attorney told him to sign a confession in order to receive a trial. When Mr. Ray discovered that his signature meant no trial, his and the King family’s subsequent requests were denied.
The US government also denied the King family’s requests for independent investigation of the assassination.
Therefore, and importantly, the US government has never presented any evidence subject to challenge that substantiates their claim that Mr. Ray assassinated Dr. King.
US corporate media did not cover the trial, interview the King family, and textbooks omit this information. Journalist and author, James Douglass: [71]
“I can hardly believe the fact that, apart from the courtroom participants, only Memphis TV reporter Wendell Stacy and I attended from beginning to end this historic three-and-one-half week trial. Because of journalistic neglect scarcely anyone else in this land of ours even knows what went on in it. After critical testimony was given in the trial’s second week before an almost empty gallery, Barbara Reis, U.S. correspondent for the Lisbon daily Publico who was there several days, turned to me and said, “Everything in the U.S. is the trial of the century. O.J. Simpson’s trial was the trial of the century. Clinton’s trial was the trial of the century. But this is the trial of the century, and who’s here?” ”
For comparison, please consider the media coverage of O.J. Simpson’s trials: [72]
“Media coverage of the Simpson trial, which began in January 1995, was unlike any other. Over two thousand reporters covered the trial, and 80 miles of cable was required to allow nineteen television stations to cover the trial live to 91 percent of the American viewing audience. When the verdict was finally read on October 3, 1995, some 142 million people listened or watched. It seemed the nation stood still, divided along racial lines as to the defendant’s guilt or innocence. During and after the trial, over eighty books were published about the event by most everyone involved in the Simpson case.”
The overwhelming evidence of government complicity introduced and agreed as comprehensively valid by the jury includes the 111th Military Intelligence Group were sent to Dr. King’s location, and that the usual police protection was pulled away just before the assassination. Military Intelligence set-up photographers on a roof of a fire station with a clear view to Dr. King’s balcony. 20th Special Forces Group had an 8-man sniper team at the assassination location on that day. Memphis police ordered the scene where multiple witnesses reported as the source of shooting cut down of their bushes that would have hid a sniper team. Along with sanitizing a crime scene, police abandoned investigative procedure to interview witnesses who lived by the scene of the shooting.
The King family believes the government’s motivation to murder Dr. King was to prevent his imminent camp-in at Washington, D.C. until the Vietnam War was ended and those resources directed to end poverty and invest in US hard and soft infrastructure.
Please watch this six-minute video of the evidence from the trial, [73] and this eight-minute video [74] on the FBI’s disclosures of covert operations against Dr. King, including confirmation from his closest friends and advisors.
Coretta Scott King, Dr. King’s wife, is certain of the evidence after 30 years of consideration from the 1968 assassination to the 1999 trial:
“For a quarter of a century, Bill Pepper conducted an independent investigation of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. He opened his files to our family, encouraged us to speak with the witnesses, and represented our family in the civil trial against the conspirators. The jury affirmed his findings, providing our family with a long-sought sense of closure and peace, which had been denied by official disinformation and cover- ups. Now the findings of his exhaustive investigation and additional revelations from the trial are presented in the pages of this important book. We recommend it highly to everyone who seeks the truth about Dr. King’s assassination.” — Coretta Scott King, Dr. King’s wife.
The US Department of Justice issued a report in 2000 that explains their investigation into their own possible guilt in the assassination found no evidence to warrant further investigation. Dr. King’s son issued the following statement [75] rebuking a “self-study” rather than the independent investigation the King family assert the evidence demands:
“We learned only hours before the Justice Department press conference that they were releasing the report of their results of their “limited investigation,” which covered only two areas of new evidence concerning the assassination of Dr. King. We had requested that we be given a copy of the report a few days in advance so that we might have had the opportunity to review it in detail. Since that courtesy was not extended to us, we are only able at this time to state the following:
1. We initially requested that a comprehensive investigation be conducted by a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, independent of the government, because we do not believe that, in such a politically-sensitive matter, the government is capable of investigating itself.
2. The type of independent investigation we sought was denied by the federal government. But in our view, it was carried out, in a Memphis courtroom, during a month-long trial by a jury of 12 American citizens who had no interest other than ascertaining the truth. (Kings v. Jowers)
3. After hearing and reviewing the extensive testimony and evidence, which had never before been tested under oath in a court of law, it took the Memphis jury only one (1) hour to find that a conspiracy to kill Dr. King did exist. Most significantly, this conspiracy involved agents of the governments of the City of Memphis, the state of Tennessee and the United States of America. The overwhelming weight of the evidence also indicated that James Earl Ray was not the triggerman and, in fact, was an unknowing patsy.
4. We stand by that verdict and have no doubt that the truth about this terrible event has finally been revealed.
5. We urge all interested Americans to read the transcript of the trial on the King Center website and consider the evidence, so they can form their own unbiased conclusions.
Although we cooperated fully with this limited investigation, we never really expected that the government report would be any more objective than that which has resulted from any previous official investigation.”
Let’s summarize: Under US Civil Law, covert US government agencies were found guilty of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. King was the leading figure of the Civil Rights Movement, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and widely recognized as one of the world’s greatest speakers for what it means to be human. The family’s conclusion as to motive was to prevent Dr. King from ending the Vietnam War because the government wanted to continue its ongoing covert and overt military operations to control foreign governments and their resources.
It is therefore a factual statement that under US Civil Law, the US government assassinated Dr. King.
This is similar that under Criminal Law, both O.J. Simpson and the US government are not legally guilty for murder, but both parties are guilty for killing innocent victims under Civil Law.
Let’s apply some critical thinking skills to this history of Dr. King that is probably new to you. People of sufficient intellectual integrity and moral courage to apply critical thinking skills will embrace the trial evidence and testimony, jury conclusion, and King family analysis as appropriate and helpful information in seeking the facts.
People who at least temporarily reject challenging information out of fear might say something like, “The government killed Dr. King? That’s a crazy conspiracy theory!”
Let’s consider that statement.
When someone says that a body of evidence is “crazy,” or a “conspiracy theory” (meaning an irrational claim easily refuted by the evidence) that’s a claim. With a claim comes a burden of proof. In this case, the person would have to demonstrate command of the facts to explain and prove why the evidence from the civil trial is somehow “crazy” and easily refuted.
If the person can do this, it would be tremendously helpful in understanding the facts. However, we know from our experience that such statements almost always have zero factual support, and that the person making such a claim literally doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
We also know from our experience, a person making such a statement is really voicing an emotional reaction something closer to the spirit of, “The government killed Dr. King? Ok, I read and understood the paragraphs about the trial and evidence. I read Mrs. King’s and her son’s statement. I haven’t invested the time to verify how valid that information is. I’m not stupid, but because the implications of what that means is so disturbing, I’m going to deny anything about it could possibly be true as my first response. If I’m going to continue being in denial and refuse to discuss the evidence, I’ll attack the messenger.”
We also need to consider the lack of coverage by US corporate media of this compelling evidence, trial verdict, and King family testimony from over 30 years’ analysis of the facts. Recall the evidence of US corporate media reporting being infiltrated by CIA agents to propagandize Americans’ access to information. This included the Director of the CIA’s admission to Congress that they have over 400 agents working in corporate media to make the US public believe what the CIA wants them to believe.
In 2006, George Washington University used a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain the US military’s “Information Operations Roadmap.” This formerly secret and approved document details present US government strategies to generate propaganda, and then attack Internet alternative media that provides dangerous facts and discussion. The military promoted the term, “Fight the net.” [76]
Although I won’t enter the burden of proof here, you may know that there are similar and related bodies of evidence that the US government assassinated other American leaders who opposed key policies of an apparent violent faction within US government. The 1975 Senate Church Committee disclosed that the US government initiated and helped assassination attempts on multiple foreign heads of state. [77]
If we were discussing how the population of some other nation could employ critical thinking skills to understand current events from anytime in history, we would certainly understand the importance to anticipate disinformation from government, danger of controlled media, and assassination as a political weapon.
Failure to do so would appropriately elicit the label attributed to the first dictator of the Soviet Union, Vladimir Lenin. Such people who believe what their government tells them when the history and present have overwhelming objective evidence to explain, document, and prove that the government is typical of so many other historical self-serving oligarchies are:
“Useful idiots.”
To the extent the United States today is any different from all other nations and all other times is up to your exercise of critical thinking skills.
Your choice of a current event to research and consider will provide you with helpful evidence to answer that question for yourself.
via The New Movement – Dr. Martin Luther King assassinated by US govt: King Family civil trial verdict.
Learn about all the things you can’t find in the books. This is one of the best videos on ancient egypt and its origins you will find. Hope you enjoy.
Our history is wrong, our science is stymied, religion goes nowhere and our heads are filled with bullshit. Ask any professional what happens when they have the nerve to think outside the box! Ridiculed, ostracized and shunned until they conform or simply don’t care what others think and end up changing the world for the better. Stephen Mehler has the keys to the past, and it’s not what we’ve been told. I’ve watched this video twice, the last time was last night. I don’t know why this isn’t common knowledge, but it certainly can be known to a few. I’m glad to be one of them. Who knows? This video might be gone tomorrow and the Internet downsized to regulated cable TV channel. Cheers …
“It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows.”
– Epictetus
Over the past decade, the documentary genre has become a bad joke. Fact is no longer a factor. As technology has developed, sights like youtube and vimeo make it possible for anyone to broadcast information, even if the information they express is based on lies. In an academic environment, a paper must have detailed references according to a set of university standards, but in a film, anything goes. The Art of Deception is an explanation of how a documentary is constructed to communicate truth, brainwash the audience and push an agenda.
The Art of Deception explains the way the media has become a puppet for certain people. For example, Al gore used his documentary ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, as a puppet to persuade people that climate change is a real problem. The convenience of Gore’s investments is where the truth really lies, and not in his movie (Which is banned in UK schools because of its blatant lies and disrespect for science).
The US government used Kony 2012, or the invisible children, as a puppet to invade Uganda after they discovered huge amounts of untapped oil. This is explained in great detail in the documentary.
How can we ever KNOW if what we think we know is really a fact? How can we prevent being manipulated into believing lies? Why is there a need to lie and keep secret certain things about science, politics, religion, history etc? Do we live on the Devil’s playground? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts! Opinions based on lies aren’t worth much, are they? Or perhaps they are … to someone. How important is it to YOU to know what’s true and what’s not?
“The mark of a stupid man is not that he does not know,
it is that he chooses not to know!”
“The mark of a stupid man is not that he does not know,
it is that he chooses not to know!”
You are a natural being, born of natural parents. Your parents “gave” you a natural name, then they unwittingly “granted” by means of commercial exchange (a legal contract), a duplicate version of that same name to the province. This duplicate “name” was also created by your parents, thus it was their private property, to do with as they desired.
Subsequently, because they did not know of exactly what they had done, and because therefore they were unable to properly explain to you what they had done (because much of what they had done was induced upon them by trickery), you unwittingly pretended to be that duplicate name, or pretended that you could be identified by that duplicate name, every time you allowed yourself to be identified by it, and or every time you effectively operated as it, by acting or behaving as if you were it, or could be identified by it.
Your copy of the birth certificate is not a contract, it is merely a copy of a receipt, evidencing the irrevocable gift (grant) of THEIR name made by your parents. They created/made that duplicate name, thus they had the right to grant it to whoever, or whatever “state” they desired. You do not qualify to hold an original receipt, because you were not a party to the original contract, nor did you make the original grant – they did.
They willingly made a legal transaction and reversing any legal transaction is subject to statute limitations – in other words, just because I have a receipt for my car, does not entitle me to go back to the dealer after 30 years and say, “I made a mistake, here is your car, give me my money back.” Such a notion surely is even less realistic, if I were thinking of trying to undo a contract that I was not even a party to.
via Sovereign & Admiralty Law | Grand Delusion. FREE PDF: http://www.natural-person.ca/pdf/A_Little_TRUTH_shall_set_free.pdf
Absolutely INVESTIGATE THIS MATTER FULLY ON YOUR OWN. The dates and reasons for this massive trickery are on the web. Jim Marrs explains it very well in his book Trillion Dollar Conspiracy (also see his video posted on this website and/or youtube). This was the beginning of the end of the old United states of America and the new corporate entity called UNITED STATES. I recommend Black’s Law Dictionary, a book of legal, just to see how perverse this legal language is. This word trickery ensures all humans are born into slavery as collateral for debt to the Central Bank. (Two Presidents printed interest free US money, Lincoln and Kennedy, and bother were shot in the head in public). You and I are a fictitious corporation, a ‘person’ is a fictitious entity in legal terms.
DC Code: § 7-201 “Person” means an individual, a trust, an estate, a partnership, a corporation (including associations, joint stock companies, and insurance companies), the District government, or an agency or instrumentality of the District government.
Go down the rabbit hole fearlessly, only the truth will set us free.
“In school, you’re taught a lesson and then given a test. In life, you’re given a test that teaches you a lesson.” ~ Tom Bodett
Life has a very interesting way of teaching us many of the many things we need to learn, don’t you think? It seems to me that the more we hold on to this idea of how life should be, how events should unfold, how people should treat us and how happiness should be packaged and delivered to us, the more we suffer. Happiness is nothing more than a balance between holding on and letting go but this is a different story.
What I will share with you today are 9 simple yet powerful truths we learn as we go through this beautiful journey called life.
We go through life to find ourselves, to become ourselves.
Don’t be afraid to make “mistakes”. Don’t be afraid to “fail”. Have fun in all that you do. The more things you do in life, the more things you’ll learn from life. Enjoy the journey because that’s what life is all about. It’s not about rushing towards a final destination, its about enjoying the journey…
“When you meet anyone, remember it is a holy encounter. As you see him you will see yourself. As you treat him you will treat yourself. As you think of him you will think of yourself. Never forget this, for in him you will find yourself or lose yourself. ” ~ Helen Shucman
If you’re in a really dark place right now, chances are that you’ll not be too pleased to know this, but the truth of the matter is that
“Life will give you whatever experience is most helpful for the evolution of your consciousness. How do you know this is the experience you need? Because this is the experience you are having at the moment.” ― Eckhart Tolle
You can either choose to accept or resist what is, and based on your choice you will find the clarity and the strength to move forward in life, or stay stuck. It’s all up to you. The power is in your hands.
May sound like a cliche, but the truth of the matter is that LOVE is all you need. Love is the only thing that’s real, the only thing that matters. By closing the door to your heart and by building walls between you and the whole world, you won’t keep suffering away from your life, you will keep it in your life!
Can’t you see?
It’s that closed door and those fearful walls that are causing you to experience all that pain. Open the door to your heart. Let go of fear. Tear down the walls you have built and allow trust, light and love to govern your heart.
“Fear condemns and love forgives. Forgiveness thus undoes what fear has produced.” ~ A Course in Miracles
Who cares how young or old you are? It’s not your age that’s standing between you and all the wonderful thing you long for, it’s you! Your thoughts, your beliefs, your excuses and your self imposed limitations are the ones that keep you from acting on your heart’s desire. Age has nothing to do with it. If you inner fire is still burning and if you’re really passionate about crafting the life of your dreams, worrying about your age will be the last thing on your mind.
“Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don’t mind, it doesn’t matter.” ~ Mark Twain
Life is good with those who think they deserve to receive good things, and “bad” with those who think they deserve to receive “bad things. Life gives you whatever you ask of it. It doesn’t discriminate.
If you want to receive great things from life, you have to ask for them, but not only that. You also have to feel worthy of receiving them, and you have to be willing to take the necessary steps that will help you achieve the things you want to achieve. None of the things you want will just fall into your lap – you’ve got to go out and work for them.
“I bargained with Life for a penny, and Life would pay no more, however I begged at evening when I counted my scanty store. . ‘For Life is a just employer, he gives you what you ask, but once you have set the wages, why, you must bear the task. ‘I worked for a menial’s hire, only to learn dismayed, that any wage I had asked of Life, Life would have willingly paid.” ~ My Wage by Jessie B. Rittenhouse
We all have crazy thoughts running through our heads but that doesn’t mean we have to believe everything we think. Whenever a negative and toxic thought runs through your mind, replace it with a positive one. That’s how it’s done. That’s how you go from negative to positive thinking. One step at a time, one thought at a time.
“Thoughts are like an open ocean, they can either move you forward within its waves, or sink you under deep into its abyss.” ~ Anthony Liccione
The world is not against you, it really isn’t. It’s not the world that’s against you, it’s you that’s against the world and by rebelling against the world you are in fact rebelling against yourself. Make peace with yourself and the whole world will make peace with you.
“Nothing external to you has any power over you.” ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
What does this mean? it means that if you are constantly criticizing and complaining about everything and everyone, pointing fingers and expecting the whole world to change just so you can finally be happy, your future will be an identical copy of your present reality. It’s not the world that needs to change so that you can finally be happy, it is you. Nothing changes until you do…
“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.” ~ Leo Tolstoy
Do you really think that the things you are now stressing and worrying about will even matter one year from now? I doubt that. Let go of stress. Laugh in the face of chaos. None of it will matter in the end.
Your life has an expiration date and so does mine. None of us is going to live forever. Stress less, live more. Detach from all the drama that your mind is constantly trying to create. Focus on the things that truly matter and start laying the foundation to the wonderful life you say you want to live. You’re not going to live forever. If you don’t start living your life fully now, chances are that you never will…
“People wait all week for Friday, all year for Summer, and all life for Happiness…” ~ Ritu Ghatourey.
Get unstuck and get going. I will be cheering for you all the way.
With all my love, Luminita Saviuc, Purpose Fairy
Christianity was the ultimate product of religious syncretism in the ancient world. Its emergence owed nothing to a holy carpenter. There were many Jesuses but the fable was a cultural construct. The nativity yarn is a concatenation of nonsense. The genealogies of Jesus, both Matthew’s version and Luke’s, are pious fiction. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century AD – the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs. With multiple authors behind the original gospel story it is no surprise that the figure of “Jesus” is a mess of contradictions. Yet the story is so thinly drawn that being a “good Christian” might mean almost anything. The 12 disciples are as fictitious as their master, invented to legitimise the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was not a virgin, that idea was borrowed from pagan goddesses. The pagan world knew all about virgins getting pregnant by randy gods: The Mythical “Virgin Mother”. Scholars have known all this for more than 200 years but priestcraft is a highly profitable business and finances an industry of deceit to keep the show on the road. “Jesus better documented than any other ancient figure”? Don’t believe a word of it. Unlike the mythical Jesus, a real historical figure like Julius Caesar has a mass of mutually supporting evidence.The case for a mythical Jesus – Nailing Jesus. Book review: Ehrman – Did Jesus Exist? Popular scholar recoils from the abyss. A rescue mission for the “Jesus of history” – The New Apologists. – See more at: http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/index.html#sthash.rWgYQsQW.dpuf
“Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite,” writes Joy.
If the elite consists of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race,” writes Joy. “They will see to it that everyone’s physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes “treatment” to cure his “problem.” Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or make them “sublimate” their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they will most certainly not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals.”
As Jean Guilfoyle writes, “NSSM 200 was a statement composed after the fact. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the U.S. had worked diligently behind the scenes to advance the population-control agenda at the United Nations, contributing the initial funding of $1 million.
A Department of State telegram, dated July 1969, reported the support of John D. Rockefeller III, among others, for the appointment of Rafael Salas of the Philippines as senior officer to co-ordinate and administer the UN population program. The administrator of the UN Development Program reported confidentially that he preferred someone such as Salas who had the “advantage of color, religion (Catholic) and conviction.”
A comprehensive outline of what is contained in the National Security Memorandum document can be read at http://www.theinterim.com/july98/20nssm.html
*********************
– See more at: http://asheepnomore.net/2014/02/01/will-humanity-survive-singularity/#sthash.aDU76JF2.29rGPDYw.dpuf
via Will Humanity Survive The Singularity? – A Sheep No More.
Jim Marrs-9/11 And Other Mysteries
Jim Marrs – The Trillion Dollar Conspiracy & the NWO
hipmonkey 