Some Significant Problems with the Bible's Contents That Prove Christians Have been Duped

Editor/Author’s Note:

In view of the present bruhaha over the Fascist Papacy and errant frocksters, I hope to capitalize on the moment by offering irrefutable evidence that Christians have been duped and that Catholic Prelates, in particular, know they are lying.

_____________________

The discovery of the oldest known Bible in existence called the “Sinaiticus” — a verified copy of the official Nicene Bible of Eusebius from the mid 4th Century — provides an indication of the heresy of all subsequent massive re-edits of the scriptures of Christianity since.

On forensic comparison of just the New Testament between the Vulgate created by Jerome and the Sinaiticus Bible (almost certainly an original of the official Constantine Nicene Bible), there was discovered approximately 14,800 editorial alterations.

Importantly, the first official Bible of Christianity 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).   This can only mean one thing: not only is the concept of the “only son of god” a universal myth borrowed by Christianity, but it was inserted sometime after the first and official New Testament was promulgated by Emperor Constantine in the 4th Century CE.

Any reference, including the alleged Nicene Creed that claims otherwise is a transparent fraud that is untenable when challenged by even a modest amount of the existing evidence. It is also probably one of the first heresies against the foundation of Christianity. Only one conclusion can therefore be drawn upon this overwhelming factual evidence: that key elements of scripture were deliberately added well after the 4th Century.   No credence can be given then to the accuracy of any of the stories within Bibles edited and published since the 5th Century.

Frank O’Collins, Evil Acts, Beliefs: The Son of God; 2007,
UCADIA Books Pty Ltd, Perth, Australia.

__________

From Dr. Omar

• “Trinity”: a term denoting the specific Christian doctrine that God is a unity of three persons.  The word itself does not occur in the Bible.  It is generally acknowledged that the Church Father, Tertulian (AD 145-220), either coined the term or was the first to use it with reference to God.  The explicit doctrine was thus formulated in the post-Biblical period … Attempts to trace the origins earlier than the New Testament, in Old Testament literature, cannot be supported by historical-critical scholarship, and these attempts must be understood as retrospective interpretations … in light of later theological developments.  The formal doctrine as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the NT.”             (Harper’s Bible Dictionary)

This authoritative excerpt dates from the 19^th century, updated in 1985, and exhibits the Trinitarian imaginative scale by clearly stating there is no OT Biblical precedent and that the formal doctrine is also not found in the NT.  The traces of its supposed NT references are extrapolations taken mainly from Paul’s letters.  One famous extra-Pauline passage is from the gospel of John 1: 1, and refers to the term logos, which is a Platonic term used in the Greek Mystery Religions. However, this is now known to be directly plagiarized from the Hebrew scholar, Philo, who wrote in the first century BC.  Even the translation of the plagiarized text is spuriously accomplished to favour the Trinitarian view, as there are two Greek words used:

1. one for ‘God the Creator’ (which is Hotheos),
2. and the other ‘a god’ (which is Tontheos) referring to Christ.[9]  Translators have conveniently expressed both words as God the Creator (Hotheos).

Hence they achieved the required precedent of equating Christ with God the Father.  Even so, the lesser term ‘a god’ is definitively equivalent to all ancient pagan conceptions for the several Redemptors who were said to be sired by respective paternal divinities.  But even this is not the true import of this use of ‘little god’, as I explained elsewhere (see: Trinity, The Metamophosis of Myth).

We must return to Philo Judaeus (20 BC – 54 AD), for a brief moment.  He was an Alexandrian Hebrew of ancient priestly stock, who made it his life’s work to reconcile the Hebrew Theology with Greek Mythology and Plato’s philosophy.  It was he, Philo, who coined the phrase: “the first-begotten of God’ in direct reference to the ‘logos’ being God’s ‘offspring by the virgin Wisdom’.  This is taken from his book: DE CONFUSIONE LINGUARUM page 28, re-copied during the time of Isa, and which original predated the copied gospels by at least 200 years!  This contemporary temporal relationship and word-for-word inclusion in the NT Canon cannot be ignored or apologized away! It is exceeding evidence of blasphemy rather than divine revelation!   This singular fact also unveils the mythical Christian Trinity’s ‘smoking-gun’, unless you wish to include Philo in the cadre of canonized Apostles!?

This additional and irrefutable evidence presents us with collusion between the pious latter Church Fathers and their zealous scribes, who either believed the myth or were consciously working for Zeus, another pantheonic Christos!  Philo had simply used the typical Semitic allegorical poetry, so common in his time, to illustrate his concept of Allah’s revelatory process.  He did this in order to explain Hebrew theology to Greek intellectuals.  And feasibly, that is what John also attempted; but the later Church fathers utilized this metaphor to make Isa an incarnate god acceptable to non-intellectual pagan myth lovers, as a conversion tool for power politics!

Instead of plainly teaching that the gift of wisdom was ultimately manifest as being bestowed by God upon the final Hebrew Prophet, Christian Gnostics taught that Isa was God’s wisdom Incarnate, and thus co-equal with God as His Only Begotten[10] Son, the first and sole incarnate son divinely patented with infinite wisdom because he was God!  May Allah have mercy, for I believe many did not know what they were doing.

To aid this formula for a unified polity, the NT verses of 1 John 1:5-7, referring to the Trinitarian blueprint, were also spuriously added but exposed by 19^th century German Scholars and consequently, removed from the Revised Standard Edition of the Bible in 1902.  Nevertheless, under immense pressure from American Evangelicals, they were restored in 1952 without explanation!  The Editorial Interpolators of this re-revised version of RSV did admit however, that the King James Version had over 50,000 errors, many of which were serious in nature.  For a broader expose’ of their creative work, I refer you to Mr. Deedat, as well as to the Codex Sinaiticus which unequivocally demonstrates the metamorphic mythical process, and, as Al Qur’an elegantly states  ‘they know it not.”

• “Codex Sinaiticus was worked over by correctors long after it was first written, one can actually see this process of alteration for doctrinal reasons at work.” [11]

This ‘oldest’ copy of the complete Bible also lacks any of the now published NT references to Christ’s Resurrection!  It bears absolutely no mention of a ‘Resurrected Body’ of Christ, or of any of the later additions referring to his many apparitions before his ascension.  Even the ascension itself is absent!  But let us return to the horse’s instruction:

• “While NT writers say a great deal about God, Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no NT writer expounds on the relationship among the three in the detail that later Christian writers do.  The earliest NT evidence … comes in 2 Cor 13 … it is possible that this formula derives from later liturgical usage and was added to the text as it was copied.  The word ‘holy’ does not appear before ‘spirit’ in the earliest copied manuscripts for this passage.  There are other NT passages where God, Jesus, and the Spirit, are referred to in the same passage, and it is important to avoid reading the Trinity into places where it does not occur … later Trinitarian perspectives diminish the important use of the spirit of human beings e.g. (1 Peter 3-4. 19)”

                    Daniel N. Schowalter, Oxford Companion to the Bible, 1993

• “… The word Trinity, first used in AD 180, is not found in Scripture.  Tertulian taught that the divine Word [12] existed originally in the Father’s mind, and first became a distinct person when the world was created.[13]  The Holy Spirit’s Personality was subsequent to that of the Word, and thus not strictly co-eternal with the Father.  This view and that of Origen, echoed those of contemporary Platonists, who envisaged three eternal divine powers arranged in descending order of dignity.[14]  In the 7^th century, the doctrine of mutual indwelling of the three Persons of the Trinity, implicit in the works of Cappadocian Fathers and of Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite[15] was developed.”

                                      Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1997

The sad truth is that Christian Scholars know these facts but fail to teach them to the average Pastor, especially those among third world nations.  Why? Let us read some thoughts from Church Fathers: the prime formulators of Trinitarian Dogma and Persecution during the 3^rd to 5^th centuries AD:

• “Investigation of natural phenomena is superfluous and beyond the human mind, and the learning and study of these matters are impious and false.”

Eusebius, c. 340 AD Church Historian

• “Let us Christians prefer the simplicity of our faith which is stronger, to the demonstrations of human reason.”       St. Basil

• “St. Augustine called the sum total of imported paganism among his congregation their ‘mother’, while what he himself taught was their ‘father’.  …  He conceded they must be allowed some latitude in their manner of worship.”

 Ramsey MacMullen

• ‘Better worship of the Saints in the pagan manner than none at all.’   -St. Jerome

• “The reason the Fathers of the church moved the Jan 6^th celebration of Epiphany (Baptism of Isa) to Dec 25^th  was this: it was the custom of the pagans to celebrate on this same Dec 25^th the birthday of their sun-gods, and they lit lights then to exalt the day, inviting Christians to these rites.  When the Fathers of the Church saw Christians inclined to this custom, their strategy was to set the true Sunrise on this day, and this usage is maintained to the present day, along with the lighting of lights.”
• – Dionysius Bar-Salibi, Bishop of Amida, Syria, 12^th Cent.

________________