 |
PAGES 160-162: Sir Francis Bacon
Bringing us back to the nonsense mentioned earlier in this article, Bushby claims "Sir Francis Bacon and the
Mystery schools knew the full story of Rabbi Jesus Cunobeline's royal family adventures." Bushby then points out
the number 33 was often used by Bacon in his encryptions. Here are some examples that Bacon allegedly placed
into the King James Bible:
- The Temple of Solomon stood for 33 years in pristine splendor (Not so- the temple stood for
approximately 500 years before its destruction by the Babylonians. Second, the Bible states it stood
unused [pristine splendor?] for 13 years). - King David ruled over Jerusalem for 33 years. (But his total reign lasted 40 years. See: I Kings 2:10)
- Jesus Christ was crucified at the age of 33 (Bushby gets one right).
Regardless, we have already mentioned the theory of Bacon encoding the King James Bible as being irrelevant.
Earlier manuscripts that were never in Bacon's possession contain the same information.
 |
Note: The purpose of this chapter is to basically discredit the writings of the early church fathers. Though we will
show most of Bushby's claims to be false or distorted from their original context, it certainly makes one wonder
why Bushby (who accuses these writings of being unreliable) would reference them so many times as evidence
to confirm his theories!
PAGE 165: Bishops vs. Presbyters
Bushby claims the church fathers were not called bishops until the 3rd century (he claims they were only known
as presbyters). Allegedly, this title was later attributed to them in order to glorify their position. However, the
term bishop is frequently found in the works of early church fathers such as Ignatius (~ 110 A.D. See: here),
Polycartes (~ 190 A.D. See: here), and Irenaeus (~180 A.D. See: here) as well as many others.
PAGE 168: Eusebius: A Liar?
Alleged Quote: "It is an act of virtue to deceive and lie when by such means the interests of the church might be
promoted."
This quote has been proven to be spurious as it appears nowhere within the works of Eusebius (See: our article
here).
PAGES 171-172: Jerome: A Liar?
Bushby references various quoted fragments allegedly said by Jerome but does not quote any of his original
works. Bushby also states that Jerome accused St. Paul of being a liar but I can find no evidence of this. The
passage referring to Paul by Jerome may be found here under chapter 5.
PAGE 172: St. Augustine: A Thief and Sexual Deviant?
In Augustine's work, Confessions, he explains the various acts he engaged in before his conversion to
Christianity (hence, the title of his work). Augustine exposes his vulnerable side by frankly admitting one of the
things he found difficult after becoming a Christian was curbing his sexual appetite. Basically, this entire work
relays his Pre-Christian lifestyle in order to encourage other converts who were having a hard time adjusting
from paganism and the various acts that were once acceptable. However, in a distortion of context, Bushby
claims Augustine admitted he "lusted to thieve and did it." Though these words are not a direct quote, the context
of this passage may be found here in chapters 8 and 9.
PAGES 172-173: Miscellaneous Quotes
Because the following quotes are not referenced from the original works of the authors in question (and because
I could not find the quotes once I researched the original works myself), I will list them as spurious unless
someone can prove otherwise:
- "[Hippo Augustine] believed that Christ (Krist) resided in the sun. Many other church presbyters of the
same time taught the sun was Jesus Christ 'driving his chariot across the sky.'" (Bushby offers no footnote
for this allegation). - "The Bishop of Troy was one who confessed to this belief and also said he had always secretly prayed to
Jesus Christ in the sun." (Bushby refers to a second-hand source) - "St. Augustine said, 'I was already bishop of Hippo when I went into Ethiopia with some servants of
Christ... In this country we saw men and women without heads, who had two great eyes in their breasts.
And in countries still more southly, we saw people who had but one eye in their foreheads.'" (Again,
Bushby does not cite an original work of Augustine)
Note: The list of quotes continue with Bushby citing sources ranging from pseudographical and apocryphal texts,
to second-hand and non referenced sources. However, if you feel I have skipped over something important,
please let me know and I will respond to your inquiry (Or check out our discussion on Christian misquotes here
to see if it answers your question).
 |
PAGE 182: No External Evidence
Bushby cites a certain author as saying, "We must frankly admit that we have no source of information with
respect to the life of Jesus Christ other than the presbyters' writings." I will take this opportunity to disagree and
point the reader to our discussion here regarding extra-Biblical evidence which mentions Jesus Christ.
PAGES 185-186: Marcion the Heretic
Though I might be misunderstanding Bushby's allegation, he seems to imply the earliest Christian manuscripts
somehow fell into the hands of Marcion, in which the original Gospel accounts became distorted. Bushby's
reference for this is Tertullian (an author he just accused of being unreliable in the previous chapter!) in his work
Against Marcion, Book V. However, Tertullian does not seem to imply that Marcion obtained the original
documents but altered the copies in his possession in order to create his semi-gnostic gospels. But once again, I
may have incorrectly interpreted Bushby's comments.
PAGES 186-187: The Tampering of the Gospel of Matthew
Bushby contradicts himself by stating the Gospel of Matthew was altered in the 3rd century, with various
information later being added into the text. Bushby claims this forgery was loudly protested by Marcion. However
my question is, if these additions occurred in the 3rd century, but Marcion lived during the 2nd century, how is
this possible?
PAGES 188-189: The Gospel of John
Alleged Quote: "It [John] has been severely edited, as its closing words make clear. And there is evidence of
heavy tampering in the earliest manuscripts, obviously glosses and so forth, as well as sheer muddle. Thus
Chapter Five should follow Chapter Six and the final chapter is clearly an addition." - Encyclopedia Britannica, ed.
IX vol. 10 page 783.
I was immediately suspicious of this quote being that it is found in an encyclopedia (known to report "just the
facts" and not speculative opinion). Sure enough on page 783 in volume 10 there is an article on Greece. Giving
Bushby the benefit of the doubt, I also looked up The Gospel of John, The Gospels, and New Testament. Then,
just to be sure, I electronically searched the encyclopedia to see if these words appear anywhere within the text.
The result: this quote simply does not exist.
Bushby then quotes a few church fathers who allegedly admit to the Gospel of John being altered such as Bishop
Callistus and Eusebius. However, once again, Bushby only cites out-dated second-hand sources- not the authors'
original works.
PAGE 190: The New Testament Canon
Alleged Quote: "No New Testament canon, except a partial and unauthorised one existed until the latter half of
the Second Century AD, that is, till the idea of a universal church began to be entertained... One hundred and
seventy years from the coming of Christ elapsed before the collection assumed a form that carried with it the
idea of holy and inspired." - Encyclopedia Britannica, Ed. IX, vol. 5 pages 7-8
We are offered another bogus encyclopedia quote. The article found on the pages in question concern Guillen De
Castro Y Bellvis, a Spanish dramatist of the 16th and 17th centuries. The Gospels are not mentioned at all. Again,
just to be sure, I looked up articles where this quote might be found such as Canon, Canonization, and The
Gospels. I then performed another electronic search to see if this quote appeared anywhere within this edition (it
does not).
 |
In this chapter, Bushby echoes the long-since debunked theory that the stories of Jesus were plagiarized from
pagan beliefs. We examine this topic in depth on this page where we reference the actual religious texts of the
individuals in question.
PAGE 194: Other Virgin Births
Bushby offers us a list of other figures who were said to be born of virgins. However, none of the figures were
said to be born of virgins and I encourage anyone to provide evidence from an original religious text to prove me
wrong. We'll briefly list how the figures were actually believed to have come into existence:
- Hercules: Zeus impregnated Hercules' married mother the old fashioned way- through sex.
- Perseus: Like Hercules, Perseus was born from the union of dead-beat-dad Zeus and his mother- through
sex. - Buddha: Buddha's mother, married to Buddha's father for twenty years, was supernaturally
impregnated by a white elephant. There is no mention of a virgin birth within the Buddhist texts. - Horus: Horus was born from Isis who resurrected her deceased husband, Osiris, and became pregnant
from his semen. - Quetzalcoatl: An ancient God of Mexico was said to have been the son of the goddess, Coatlicue, who had
previously given birth on several occasions as she was said to be the "mother of all existence." - Mithras: Mithras was never said to have been "born" but to have emerged as an adult out of solid rock.
PAGE 196-197: Other Crucifixions
The fact that Bushby uses the proven-erroneous work The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors by Kersey Graves is
painfully obvious. Though we have already discussed this matter on this page, I'll give a brief run-down here:
- Osiris: Said to have been tricked by his enemy, Set, who sealed him into a chest.
- Bel: Often associated with Zeus, was never said to have died.
- Attis: Bled to death after castrating himself.
- Tammuz: Killed by demons sent by Ishtar after she discovered him on her throne.
- Dionysus: Killed as an infant by Titans who devoured everything but his heart.
- Krishna: Accidentally shot by a hunter's arrow while meditating in the woods.
- Esus: Often associated with Mars and Mercury, was never said to have experienced death.
- Indra: Swallowed alive by a great serpent but was later rescued by the gods.
- Bali: Was forced down bodily into the underworld.
- Iao: I can find no mention of Iao experiencing death.
- Alcestis: Agreed to die in the place of her husband after he struck a deal with the Gods. The gods took
pity on her and reunited her with her husband. She was described as being in bed when she died. - Quetzalcoatl: Either committed suicide or was incinerated by the gods for having sex with a priestess.
- Wittoba: See: here
- Prometheus: Was condemned to have his liver eaten by an eagle.
- Quirinus: Associated with the mythical Romulus, was never said to have died.
- Mithras: Never said to have died.
PAGE 197: The Crucified Orpheus
Bushby presents a picture of the "Crucified Orpheus" which depicts a figure on a cross. Bushby claims this relic
predates Christianity by more than 400 years. However, this artifact has been proven by scholars to be a 4th
century A.D. forgery.
PAGES 197-199: Parallels between Jesus and Pagan Figures
Though Bushby mentions other figures, he focuses his attention on parallels between Jesus and Krishna. It must
be noted that although Bushby quotes exactly where the "copy" can be found in the Bible, he never shows where
the "original" is found within the Hindu texts (in our article here, we dispel this allegation once and for all by citing
the Hindu scriptures):
- Krishna means Christ in Sanskrit. Actually, Krishna means Black in Sanskrit as Krishna was believed to
have dark skin. - Krishna was born from a virgin. Actually, Krishna was the 7th of 8 children born to a married couple.
- Krishna was visited by wisemen who were guided by a star. There is no mention of this in any Hindu text.
We are told Krishna was born in a prison where his parents were being held captive by a king who
planned to kill Krishna once he was born. It's unlikely such visitors would arrive only to alert the captors
to Krishna's presence. - An evil king issued a decree to kill all infant males. This is not so. We are told the wicked King Kamsa only
targeted the siblings of Krishna due to a prophecy foretelling his demise. He never issued a decree to kill
all infant males. - Krishna's parents fled to Mathura to protect Krishna. They never fled anywhere- they were imprisoned by
Kamsa. Bushby claims Jesus' parents also fled to such a place but the Gospels make it clear they fled to
Egypt. - Krishna atoned for mankind's sins. Not so- Krishna never held such a purpose. He was strictly seen as an
earthly "warrior savior" who saved the people from the tyrannical reign of Kamsa. - Krishna was crucified and is often depicted as being pierced with arrows. Krishna was never said to have
been crucified. He was accidentally shot by the hunter, Jara, who mistook him for a deer. - Krishna, after his death, descended into hell for three days. The Hindu texts make it clear Krishna
immediately returned to life and ascended into his own "inconceivable region" (Nirvana).
 |
PAGE 206: Emperor Constantine
In an allegation which contradicts known history, Bushby claims Constantine was born in Britain. Though he did
travel to Britain later in his life, it is clearly recorded that he was born near modern Yugoslavia. Regardless,
Bushby provides no evidence for his ultimate conclusion: that Constantine was a descendant of Rabbi Jesus.
PAGE 210-211: Confusion of Dual Nature
We are told the early church bishops "argued constantly about the dual nature of Jesus Christ, a concept they
couldn't understand because they were unaware that their writings now embraced two separate life stories." If
this is true, then this pretty much dismisses Bushby's whole premise that the life of the twins was purposely
concealed by these authors. Second, I feel we have sufficiently debunked every piece of evidence Bushby has
offered to confirm the existence of the twins. Bushby then claims this rift is what caused Constantine to order the
development of a canon. However, the actual reason for creating the canon had nothing to do with the confusion
over "the twins." After the onset of Christianity, bogus manuscripts began to circulate and were being passed
around as authentic. In order to avoid this and to keep the heretical texts from holding the same importance as
the true texts, a council was formed. There was no conspiracy to "hide" or "conceal" anything as the apocryphal,
pseudographical, and gnostic texts are readily available to anyone who has an interest in them.
PAGE 213-215: The Deification of "The Twins"
Again, I have a problem with Bushby's account of history. He claims that under Constantine, Christianity became
finalized as a religion. Though it is true Christianity was legalized under Constantine, Jesus was recognized as a
deity for centuries before Constantine's lifetime. Just because Christianity was now considered legal, it was not
new. Thus, Bushby's long-winded explanation of the Roman process of deification is meaningless. However he
goes on to say, "Constantine 'officially' decreed divine honors on the twins whose two separate names had now,
by a show of bishops hands, been combined as one entity." Pretty impressive considering Bushby just admitted
in the previous pages these individuals were unaware of the existence of the "Jesus twins."
PAGES 218-219: The Royal Bloodline of Constantine.
We are again brought back to Bushby's theory of Constantine's biological relation to Jesus. Bushby claims it was
"probable" that Constantine deified "the twins" in order to protect his family lineage. "The records" reveal all of
this. Of course, probable does not mean definite, the twins never existed, and a vague reference to the records
just doesn't cut it.
PAGE 219: The Forgery of Eusebius
Bushby accuses Eusebius of forging the Testimonium Flavianum into the works of Josephus. Bushby claims the
passage has definitely been "exposed as a priesthood forgery" but there is no conclusive evidence to prove this.
Though it is unlikely the passage is entirely genuine, pointing the finger at Eusebius is based solely on
speculation. To view our discussion of this passage, see here (under Jewish sources). Also, check out this article
and this article submitted by a reader (Thanks David!).
Alleged quote: "It will sometimes be necessary to use falsehood for the benefit of those who need such a mode
of treatment."
This is another bogus quote we discuss in our article on this page. Though this quote does appear in the later
works of Eusebius, it appears as a chapter summary which was later added into the text. The content of the
passage in question contains a quoted dialogue from Plato's work The Laws in which Plato and Cleinias are
discussing the concept of lying for the sake of religion. Eusebius neither condones or orders the act of lying.
PAGES 219-220: Origen on Josephus
Bushby claims the Christian author "admitted [to] adding to the Jewish historian's works." Bushby cites a bogus
reference to Origen's Contra Celsus because such a chapter does not exist. The chapters of Book I (cited by
Bushby) only go up to 71 but Bushby cites this admission as coming from chapter 100. The two references in
Origen's works that do mention Josephus contain nothing in regards to him altering the text (See: book II and
book IV).
PAGES 220-221: Constantine and Pagan Tradition
Bushby continues with more Pagan practices that were adopted by Christianity during the reign of Constantine.
Rather than dwelling on this, the point is such rituals and mergers (like Christmas trees, Easter eggs, December
25th, etc.) were instituted centuries after the onset of Christianity and were never taught by Jesus or the original
apostles.
 |
 |  |  |  |  |
| Bookmark Us (Ctrl + d) |
