"Whereas Providence...has...adorned our lives with the highest good: Augustus...and has in her beneficence granted us and those who will come after us [a Savior] who has made war to cease and who shall put everything in p[eaceful] order...with the result that the birthday of our God signaled the beginning of Good News for the world because of him... therefore...the Greeks in Asia Decreed that the New Year begin for all the cities on September 23...and the first month shall... be observed as the Month of Caesar, beginning with 23 September, the birthday of Caesar."
- Decree on marble stelae dedicated to the Roman Empire and Augustus, its first emperor Julilus Caesar, while pursing his affair with Cleopatra, had been declared a god in Egypt. After Caesar's death, Octavian ascended the throne as the Emperor Augustus. He was worshipped as the "son of god" and the Roman people celebrated his birthday as a holiday.

The Babylonian Empire ceased to exist, but the ancient pagan Babylonian Mystery religion thrived under the guise of Roman Catholicism and survived to this day as Trinitarian Christianity. The Babylonian Mystery religion is represented as a whore because the pagan Trinitarian Christian religions prostituted the teachings of Jesus the Christ in order to politically and economically control all nations of the world. Trinitarian Christianity officially adopted the pagan triune-god dogma with the Nicene Creed.

The Nicene Creed, however, was never taught by Jesus nor His apostles. It was not even conceived until 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea. The Holy Roman Emperor Constatine convened the Council of Nicaea for the sole purpose of politically unifying his empire under one religion, regardless of whether or not that religion was pagan. Roman Catholicism subsequently emerged as the mother of the daughter-harlot religions by giving birth to the numerous Protestant sects of Trinitarian Christianity.

"Which of the Gods now shall the people summon To prop Rome's reeling sovereignty?... Whom shall Jupiter appoint As instrument of our atonement?... thou, (Mercury), winged boy of gentle Maia. Put on the mortal shape of a young Roman; Descend, and well contented to be known As Caesar's avenger, Stay gladly and long with Romulus' people, Delay thy homeward, skybound journey."
- Horace, ode to Caesar Augustus as the God Mercury

"Descent as son of a god appointed by the chief deity to become incarnate as a man, atonement, restoration of a sovereignty, ascension to heaven - a gospel indeed, and so like the pattern of the Christian Gospels."
- Randal Helms, Gospel Fictions (1988) p. 25

The religion evolved into this..

"There are three major foundations for understanding the covenants and the Old Testament law. All three give the same conclusion. They are;
The old covenant is obsolete, and the new covenant has been established."
Christians are not obligated to keep "the law of Moses." When Paul discussed "the law," he was often concerned with the entire law of Moses, and he wrote that Christians were not under the authority of that law. Our obligation to obey God is defined by a different law, a spiritual law, which in some cases overlaps Old Testament laws but in other cases supersedes them. Let's examine each of these points and show that they all support the same conclusion. The New Testament is consistent. First, the matter of covenants. They are discussed in detail in the book of Hebrews, especially chapter 8. There, the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ is contrasted with the Levitical high priesthood. The ministry Jesus received is far superior to the Levitical ministry, and his covenant is far superior to the old covenant (verse 6)".

The only Heretic in this message is Paul and the writer of this NT nonsence.

When Moses received 'the word of God', the doctrine was entirely Gnostic in the context of Masada and are of dualist origin. Nothing written by any other human supersedes this law.
What the message contained were these rules; The supremacy of spirit over matter, the union with God in death, and the condemnation of life as evil. These attitudes derive, quite unequivocally, from a mystery tradition. Judiasm never spoke of a 'soul' - still less of it's 'immortal' or 'imperishable' nature.

The first set of Tablets Moses was given were the oral law or Secret doctrine which revealed the higher order of liberation and mercy that was encompassed in the Tree of Life. The Inner meaning of the tablets remained with the elders, and all the secrets were passed down orally. Moses' intention was to deliver the truths that set man free, but the people's actions resulted in Moses giving a surrogate law, that is, the Ten Commandments.

Moses was not the first to be given the secret doctrine. The secret doctrine was originally given to Abraham by The angel Raziel. It contained the source of all knowledge including the Hebrew letters. The holy mystery of wisdom was embodied within it, as the secret doctrine described the power resident in the devine names of God. Abraham was instructed to keep the knowledge concealed, but when he sinned, it was lost. The angel Raphael eventually gave it back to him. Abraham passed it on to his son Seth, who passed it on to other emmissaries, who spread it throughout the land. It became known as The Book of Enoch.

"New Testament uses the phrase "law of Moses." "This term will also help us understand the difference between the Old Testament era and the New". "The Jerusalem council (Acts 15) met to discuss this very question. "Some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, `The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses'." (verse 5).

"The council concluded that gentiles did not have to obey the law of Moses. The New American Bible, for example, says this: "The Jerusalem `Council' marks the official rejection of the rigid view that Gentile converts were obligated to observe the Mosaic law.... Paul's refusal to impose the Mosaic law on the Gentile Christians is supported by Peter on the grounds that within his own experience God bestowed the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his household without preconditions concerning the adoption of the Mosaic law."

This is completely and overwhelmingly refuted in the Nag Hammidi, 'writings of Thomas'. And then when you consider that the Jerusalem council sided with Rome, the lie connects with our findings.

More 'Copying', A Child Born of Woman

The image of mother with child in her arms was so firmly entrenched in the pagan mind that by the time Christianity appeared on the scene in 30 A.D., these statues and paintings were merely renamed and worshiped as the virgin Mary with her god-incarnate son Jesus. Thus, the pagan mother and child entered Christianity as the Roman Catholic worship of Mary with the infant Jesus. In fact, in Tibet, China, and Japan, Jesuit missionaries were astonished to find the counterpart of the Madonna and child as devoutly worshiped as they were in Rome. Shing Moo, the holy mother in China was portrayed with a child in her arms and a glory around her, exactly as if she had been fashioned by Roman Catholic artisans.
see.. MOTHER AND SON WORSHIP

"When Christ wished to come upon the earth to men, the good Father summoned a mighty power in heaven, which was called Michael, and entrusted Christ to the care thereof. And the power (soul) came into the world and it was called Mary, and the Christ was in her womb seven months."
(From Cyril of Jerusalem)...This description is ecohed in the Nag Hammidi writings, in
the Second Treatise of the Great Seth.
The seven month pregnancy also indicates twins were born, ie. Thomas the twin..

The Jews, however, believed that someone born of woman could not bear the glory of God. Hence they never believed in Jesus. They never believed he existed at all.

"Blessed be thou my God, who hast opened the heart of thy servant to thy knowledge. Direct all his actions in righteousness, And give to the son of thy servant woman that which it hath pleased thee to accord to thy Chosen, To serve thee among men eternally! ... Who could bear thy glory? What is the son of man [human] among thy wonderous works? How could a child born of woman bear thy presence? For he is made of dust and his body shall be food for worms. He is made but of molded clay and will return to dust. What could this clay, shaped by the hand, reply? What plan could it understand?"
- Community Rule 1QS 11.15-17, 20-22

Sun worship dominated Egypt. Egyptian priests practiced "transubstantiation", claiming to be able to transfer the sun god Osiris into a circular wafer. The letters IHS on the sun-shaped wafers stood for Isis, Horus, Seb
(later, Roman Catholics claimed they were the first three letters of Jesus' name in Greek).

The Empire of Rome had many religions and cults which squabbled amoungst themselves constantly. The Christains seemed to be gaining the most power and momemteum so Constantine devised a plan to organize and have control over the group. Constantine was a worshiper of Sol Invictus and he continued this worship up until his death. What the Christian sect did was immaterial as long as he had complete control of the people. The Christians were gaining an unfavorable presence so he called every church leader from every part of the ancient world together in Turkey. He staged himself in the center of the group and declared himself the 'current' Christ who would be the founder of the New Church . He told the group that the 'Holy Ghost' was in attendence and he who was the 'sun god' was going to win God's war where Jesus had failed. Though he declared publicly that he and his soldiers were Christian, he still secretly worshipped Sol (Baal). Constantine then took over the Roman government and issued the Edict of Milan, a decree of tolerance for Christians, "baptized" his troops, and presided as the first Summus Pontifex (the official title of the Pope).

In June 325 AD the council of Nicea opened and continued for two months, with Constantine attending. The bishops modified an existing creed to fit their purposes. The creed, with some changes made at a later fourth century council, is still given today in many churches. The Nicene Creed, as it came to be called, takes elaborate care by repeating several redundancies to identify the Son with the Father rather than with the creation.
..from The Council of Nicea

The council resolved its self into the 'Nicene Creed' which was meant to stop the bickering. However the question arose as to whether Jesus was a god or man or if he indeed was God himself. This became very confusing to the point of the council taking a vote on the question.
The 'Jesus as God' vote carried. After the council of Nicea, Constantine made it absolutely clear that the benefits and privileges which he had granted to the Christian Church 'must benifit only adherents of the Catholic faith'.
Rex Deus

The finished creed was preserved in the writings of Athanasius, of the historian Socrates and of Basil of Caesarea and in the acts of the Council of Chalcedon of 451 (Davis 1987, 59)." When the creed was finished eighteen Bishops still opposed it. Constantine at this point intervened to threaten with exile anyone who would not sign for it. Two Libyan Bishops and Arius still refused to accept the creed. All three were exiled.

Roman Catholicism transferred Baal worship into an already corrupted Christianity. The icon of the virgin mother and child with halos (representing the sun), Mary as the queen of heaven, confessionals, wafer worship, transubstantiation, and priests as exclusive mediators of God were all derived from the old satanic Babylonian religion. Roman Catholicism became a mixture of witchcraft, Judaism, paganism, and perverted Christianity. Witches thrived and were ordained by the Vatican. Meanwhile, true Christians spread the word that the Vatican was the Whore of Babylon (of the Book of Revelation). Rome was outraged, and staged the Holy Inquisition, torturing and murdering "heretics" to eliminate both Christians and Jews, and to fill the coffers of the church.
Later, in response to the Vatican's oppressive dogma, Martin Luther, a former Augustinian monk, nailed his 95 theses to the wall of a church in Germany, heralding Protestantism. The Vatican is shaken as Protestantism spreads rapidly through Europe. In order to stamp out the spiritual rebellion, Pope Paul III ordered Ignatius de Loyola to found the Order of Jesuits, which would act as the intelligentsia and secret militia of the Vatican. Loyola had already founded the occult Illuminati, which he then placed under the umbrella of the Vatican.

Side Note;
The Illuminati was created by super-evil Ignatius Loyola before founding the Order of Jesuits, which would later become the Vatican's CIA. The original goal of the Illuminati (a "Satanic organization") was "to control the minds of European leaders through hypnosis, witchcraft, and mind control". Loyola communed with demonic spirits for advice in setting up the organization, who "illuminated his mind", hence the name. Once Loyola became powerful in the Vatican hierarchy as the Jesuit General, the occult Illuminati became "the most important branch of the Jesuit order, eventually coming to control the world economy, international banking, military forces, all branches of witchcraft, and the religions of the world, putting humanity on its knees to serve the Pope."

The dying-and-rising-god tradition was carried forward as Osiris died on a Friday at the hands of the wicked and was magically 'resurrected' after being in the underworld for three days.
Dionysus' mysteries were celebrated in ingesting the god through a magical meal of bread and wine, symbolizing his body and blood.
The resurrection is a 'copy' of the ancient dying and rising God Osiris.
When Osiris dyed, the sun turned black.
The Egyptian mystery school commonly declared their initiates, 'born again', so they adopted that too.

In 1994 the Pope admitted this was true and went on to point out that these 'gods' were also heralded in by great signs and wonders, including the sighting of a bright star. The date of December 25th was chosen because it was already the mid-winter festival for the old pagans. This announcement caused something of a shock. To most Christians this came as a great revelation and that this announcement came as late as 1994 is barely credible.. But it is only the tip of the iceberg, for theologians have know for a very long time that the whole Christmas story is a myth.

When Constantine claimed the throne. He was challenged by another Roman general, Maxentius. During a battle with Maxentius' army, Constantine "became a Christian". This campaign was the prime moment of opportunity to establish his personal affiliation with christianity and he announced he had seen the vision of a cross in the sky, accompanied by the words, "In this sign conquer" He painted the ankh (cross) on his army's shields, and was victorious. Constantine then summoned the ageing Bishop Miltiades. The Emperor's purpose was not to join the faith under the authority of the Bishop of Rome, but to take over the faith in its entirety. Amoung the first instructions was that the nails from the cross of Jesus be brought to him - one of which he would have affixed to his crown. His related pronouncement to the bewildered Miltiades was then destined to change the structure of christianity for all time: 'In the future, We as the apostle of Christ, will help choose the Bishop of Rome'. Having declared himself an Apostle, Constantine then proclaimed that the magnificent Lateran Palace was to be the Bishops' future residence.
Bloodline of the holy Grail

Many of the existing "Christian" churches he legitimized had been earlier infiltrated by spies under Nero, and had become corrupt. Over the years, these counterfeit churches, under Constantine's guide, eventually evolved into Roman Catholicism.
Constantine ordered Eusebius, the Bishop of Caesarea, to have fifty Bibles assembled. False Christians had assembled the corrupted word (NT) of God in Antioch, Syria.
Eusebius chose the correct Alexandrian texts from Egypt, which they contend had been translated by the Gnostic scholar Origen.These were not allowed to be used. The new Bibles were the foundation of the Roman Catholic church. The Vatican later created the Latin Vulgate from the original fifty, and all other versions were outlawed.

see Pit of Serpents for more corruptions created by the False Church.

When Miltiades died in AD 314, he was the first Bishop of Rome in a long succession to die in natural circumstances. Quite suddenly Christianity had become respectable and was approved as an Imperial religion ( in fact, as The Imperial religion ) Constantine subsequently became Caesar of all the Roman Empire in AD 324, thereafter known as Constantine the Great.

When Christianity became the state religion, many people adopted it for political reasons. Others adopted it without truly understanding it. Under these circumstances ,what they called heresy found fertile ground. One of the most powerful heresies was Arianism which claimed that Jesus was not God (a heresy according to them, that has never completely died out). The Arians were powerful people, including nobles, generals, emperors. They commanded armies and senates. Their version of Corrupted Christianity was never in danger of being stamped out because they would kill anyone who opposed it..

Arius Versus the Alexandrian Bishop

Arius, an aged Libyan priest of Alexanderia, opposed the new dogma of the catholic church. Arius disagreed with the notion that Jesus and God were merged into one entity as Father and Son. The council had the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as One being. When Arius rose to speek at the council of Nicaea, Myra punched him in the face and that swiftly dealt with the opposition.

This was the resolve; A second and very important term used by the Council was homousios. At that time this word could have three possible meanings. "First, it could be generic; of one substance could be said of two individual men, both of whom share human nature while remaining individuals. Second, it could signify numerical identity, that is, that the Father and the Son are identical in concrete being. Finally, it could refer to material things, as two pots are of the same substance because both are made of the same clay (Davis 1987, 61)." The Council intended the first meaning to stress the equality of the Son with the Father. If the second meaning for the word was taken to be the Council's intention it would mean that the Father and Son were identical and indistinguishable - clearly a Sabellian heresy. The third meaning gave the word a materialistic tendency that would infer that the Father and Son are parts of the same stuff.

The Roman Church held steadfastly by tradition. Under these circumstances, when Gnostic schools had passed away with their "conjugations" of Divine powers, and "emanations" from the Supreme unknowable God (the "Deep" and the "Silence") all speculation was thrown into the form of an inquiry touching the "likeness" of the Son to His Father and "sameness" of His Essence. Catholics had always maintained that Christ was truly the Son, and truly God. This is the most nonsensical statement ever made. It defies human logic.

Arius' views began to spread among the people and the Alexandrian clergy. Alexander the Bishop called a meeting of his priests and deacons. The Bishop insisted on the unity of the Godhead. Arius continued to argue that since the Son was begotten of the Father then at some point He began to exist. Therefore there was a time when the Son did not exist. Arius refused to submit to the Bishop and continued to spread his teaching. Alexander called a synod of Bishops of Egypt and Libya. Of the hundred Bishops who attended eighty voted for the condemnation and exile of Arius.

With the decision of the synod Arius fled to Palestine. Some of the Bishops there, especially Eusebius of Caesarea, supported him. From here Arius continued his journey to Nicomedia in Asia Minor. The Bishop of that city, Eusebius, had studied under Lucian of Antioch. He became Arius' most influential supporter. From this city Arius enlisted the support of other Bishops, many of whom had studied under Lucian. His supporters held their own synod calling Arius' views orthodox and condemning Bishop Alexander of Alexandria. Arius seemed to have good grounds for this condemnation. The term homoousios was rejected by Alexander's own predecessor Dionysius when arguing against the Sabellians (who claimed the Father and Son were identical). All this controversy was taking place just as the Church was emerging from Roman oppression.
from.. Arianism Versus the Council of Nicaea
Once again Votes change the cource of religious history.

In 376 A.D., Gratian became the first Roman emperor to refuse the idolatrous title of Pontifex Maximus. He presented the Babylonian Throne, or Satan-Nimrod’s Throne to the bishop of Rome.
POPE SEATED ON SATAN’S THRONE
By this time, the Roman bishops had advanced in political power, and in 378 A.D., Bishop Damasus was elected Pontifex Maximus, becoming the official pagan Babylonian priest seated on Satan’s throne in Rome. As such, the bishop converted the pagan Babylonian temples of Rome into Trinitarian Christian churches and introduced the worship of Nimrod, Semiramis and the god-incarnate son under the respective titles of "god the father," "god the son" and "god the holy spirit." All the pomp and ceremony that existed in ancient Babylon was now practiced as Roman Trinitarian Christianity.

The first Imperial Bishop was Silvester. He was crowned with great pomp and ceremony - a far cry from the shady back-room proceedings customary to previous christian ritual. Gone were the days of fear and persecution, but the high price for this freedom was veneration of the Emperor - precisely what the christian forebears had struggled so hard to avoid. The rank and file had no choice in the matter and the existing priests were quite simply instructed that their church was now formally attached to the Empire. It was now the Church of Rome.

An alliance was formed when Constantine's father married Britin's Christian Princess Elaine ( St. Helen ). Silvester and his colleagues in Rome may have considered the new alliance to be a politically sound manoeuvre, but the emissaries in the field viewed it for precisely what it was; a strategic buy-out by the enemy. They claimed the spiritual message of St. Peter had been subverted by the idolatry of a self-speeking power striving to prevent its Imperial demise. In real terms the very purpose of Christianity was nullified by the new regime. After nearly three centuries of strife and struggle, Jesus' own ideal had been forsaken althogether-handed over on a plate to be devoured by his adversaries.

The Romans had worshiped the Emporers in their capacity as Gods descended from others like Neptune and Jupiter. At the Council of Arles in AD 314, Constantine retained his own divine status by introducing the omnipotent God of the christians as his personal sponsor. He delt with the anomalies of doctrine by replacing certain aspects of christian ritual with the familiar pagan traditions of sun worship, together with other teachings of Syrian and Persian origin. In short, the new religion of the Roman church was constructed as a hybrid to appease all influential factions. By this means, Constantine looked towards a common and unified world religion. (Catholic meaning Universal) with himself as head.
Bloodline of the Holy Grail

Nazis & World War II

Hitler's brown shirts rose to power, and the Vatican backed him, giving him the Masonic swastika as a national symbol. Hitler and many of his top aides, including Goebbels and Himmler, were Roman Catholic. Rome signed a concordat with Hitler in 1933, officially recognizing Nazi Germany. To complete the Fascist Catholic triumvirate, the Vatican put Franco in control of Spain, squashing Communist uprisings in the process. In Germany, Roman Catholic Germans infiltrated Protestant churches, spreading anti-Jewish sentiment, in order to insure that the Jews would blame Protestants, not Catholics, for the coming Holocaust. see New Age Nazi's

The Ecumenical movement (a Vatican II creation to recognize, and eventually subsume, all world religions) and the New Age movement are precursors of Satan's One World Religion, controlled by the Pope (another Antichrist) in preparation for the One World Government of the Beast, as prophesied in the Book of Revelation. This one world religion will prevail, but under the guidance of Christ. The Vatican and it's leaders and it's followers will be destroyed.

Prophecy: World War III begins when Russia invades Israel --a one day nuclear war that kills one fourth of the world's population. One third of the earth is destroyed. Russian troops fall at the mountains of Israel by God's intervention. The political leader of Europe, the Beast, takes credit for the destruction of Russia. The Beast is "charming, a military genius, a master politician, and the most evil dictator the world has ever seen". His charisma wins over the world's remaining population. "A trinity of evil is set up on the earth--the Devil, the Beast, and the False Prophet".

The Superchurch (the Whore of Babylon) supports the Beast and secures his world domination. The Beast stabilizes the world economy, and unites the world religions--the world loves and worships him. The Beast then makes an announcement that no man shall be able to buy or sell without receiving his mark, the notorious 666. "With the use of computers, the Beast will be able to control every person on the globe". A great statue of the Beast is constructed in the holiest of Jewish temples in Jerusalem. The False Prophet causes the statue to move and utter blasphemies. Anyone who refuses to worship the image is killed. The Jews flee to the ancient walled city of Petra, in Jordan. Around the world, many refuse to take the mark of the Beast and are murdered publically for their faith in God. The Superchurch is no longer of any use to the Beast, so he destroys the Vatican. J.Click

The Romans under the Vatican have tried hard to destroy the old religions that threatened their claim to be devine rulers. The patriarch of Constantinople at the end of the fourth century, St . John Chrysostom, thought that the battle had been won by saying; Every trace of the old philosophy and literature of the ancient world has vanished from the face of the earth.
Fortunately they did not destroy all of it.

The orthodox catholic church was deeply and profoundly influenced by the struggle against Gnosticism in the second and third centuries. Formulations of many central traditions in orthodox theology came as reflections and shadows of this confrontation with the Gnosis. But by the end of the fourth century the struggle with the classical Gnosticism represented in the Nag Hammadi texts was essentially over; the evolving orthodox ecclesia had added the force of political correctness to dogmatic denunciation, and with this sword so-called "heresy" was painfully cut from the Christian body. Gnosticism, which had perhaps already passed its prime, was eradicated, its remaining teachers murdered or driven into exile, and its sacred books destroyed. All that remained for scholars seeking to understand Gnosticism in later centuries were the denunciations and fragments preserved in the patristic heresiologies.
Introduction to the Nag Hammidi

How the Nag Hammadi manuscripts eventually passed into scholarly hands, is a fascinating even if too lengthy story to here relate. But today, now fifty years since being unearthed and more than two decades after final translation and publication in English. "A last extant testament of what orthodox Christianity perceived to be its most dangerous and insidious challenge, the feared opponent that the Patristic heresiologists had reviled under many different names, but most commonly as Gnosticism. The discovery of these documents has radically revised our understanding of Gnosticism and the early Christian church.

Our fear is that the so-called schollars once again deleted parts they wanted to keep from the public. This is evidenced by many words that THEY say were not in the text or they were 'missing'. This is too convenient.

As Constantine spoke, the Scottish line of Cunedda, which , ruled Scotland, Wales and the north of England, was being converted to Celtic Christianity by St. Ninian. Celtic Christianity was closer to Enochian Judiasm than it was to the rebranded Mithraism that passed for Christianity in Rome.
Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, Urieal's Machine- 2000...

The oldest written records in Wales were collected by monks of the church of Wales. These stories are called, The Triads of the Isle of Britain. These stories date back to 450BC, but the information in them has been largley ignored, because they stem from verbal traditions and were written down long after the events took place. They were written in Welch rather than Latin.

Triad # 35 says that Christianity came to South Wales in AD 58 when King Brad of Glamorgan brought the new faith to the land.

Three English bishops are known to have been present at the Council of Arles in 314. Others attended the Council of Sardica in 347 and that of Ariminum in 360, and a number of references to the church in Roman Britain are found in the writings of 4th-century Christian fathers.

The ritual and discipline of the early English church were largely introduced by the Celtic and Gallic missionaries and monks, but after the arrival of St. Augustine and his missionary companions from Rome, in 597, and the ensuing fusion of Celtic and Roman influences, the Celtic forms gradually gave way to the liturgy and practices of the Roman West. During the next four centuries, the church in Saxon England exhibited the same lines of growth and development that characterized the church everywhere in the early Middle Ages.

St Augustine of Hippo created the guilt inducing doctrine of Original Sin, also formulated justification for religious coercion and the most vigorous investigation of heresy. The first person executed for heresy in the West was Priscillian of Avila in 393. Rex Deus

After the Norman Conquest (1066), continental influence in England strengthened the connections between the English church and the papacy. In the 11th century the Norman Conquest of England (1066) united England more closely with the culture of Latin Europe. The English church was reformed according to Roman ideas: local synods were revived, celibacy of the clergy was required, and the canon law of western Europe was introduced in England.

The vigorous assertions of power successfully made by popes from Gregory VII to Innocent III between the late 11th and the early 13th centuries were felt in England, as elsewhere, and clerical influence and privilege were widely extended in secular affairs. Several times during the medieval period, English kings sought to limit the power of the church and the claims of its independent canon law, but without success until the reign of Henry VIII.

The acts of Parliament between 1529 and 1536 mark the beginning of the Anglican church as a national church independent of papal jurisdiction. Henry VIII, vexed at the refusal of Pope Clement VII to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragón, induced Parliament to enact a series of statutes denying the pope any power or jurisdiction over the Church of England. He thus reaffirmed the ancient right of the Christian prince, or monarch, to exercise supremacy over the affairs of the church within his domain. He cited precedents in the relations of church and state in the Eastern Roman Empire and until the 9th century under Charlemagne. Although his action was revolutionary, Henry VIII received the support of the overwhelming majority of Englishmen, clerical and lay alike. Support was given chiefly because no drastic change was made in the Catholic faith and practices to which England was accustomed. After Henry's death, the influences of religious reform were felt more strongly in England ..from..
The Church of England - Encarta

After the accession of the first Stuart monarch, James I, as king of England, in 1603, this agitation for religious change became closely associated with the struggle of Parliament against Stuart absolutism. By 1645, the Parliament party was strong enough to outlaw the use of the prayer book; in 1649, Charles I, king of England, was executed, and the monarchy was temporarily overthrown.

In 1662, after the Restoration of Charles II, the use of the prayer book, revised to essentially its present form, was required by a third Act of Uniformity. One more attack was made on the establishment of the Anglican church when King James II attempted to reintroduce the practice of Roman Catholicism in England. James lost his throne to William III and Mary II in the ensuing revolution of 1688.

The doctrine of the Church of England is found primarily in the Book of Common Prayer, containing the ancient creeds of undivided Christendom, and secondarily in the Thirty-nine Articles, which are interpreted in accordance with the prayer book. Appeal is made to the first four General Councils of the Christian Church, as well as generally to Holy Scriptures as interpreted by "the Catholic Fathers and ancient and discipline. Also, unlike the Roman Catholic church, the Church of England allows women to become priests.

The Church of England has maintained the episcopal form of government. It is divided into two provinces, Canterbury and York, each headed by an archbishop, with Canterbury taking precedence over York. Provinces are divided into dioceses, each headed by a bishop and made up of several parishes..
...from ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA

So the authors in charge of revisions the New Testament of the King James Bible, was King James himself because of his connection with the Stuarts. He was from Scotland. The Stuarts of Oakney are the forefathers of the Sinclares ( St.Clair, a Templar Knight ). As kings were overthrown, religion changed from the Church controlled to King controlled. England stood fast on Hanoverian Christianity which was not under the 'Stuart' influences.. Essentially, the difficulties are noted as the Church 'controlled the State' of affairs of the government of England. Christianity is seen `as a tool for ideological domination ...of non-Europeans'. What often happens though not always is this ignores the prime reason in the eyes of contemporaries for religious writing or action promoting, a religious cause, namely the imperative to save souls. Often the approach is a quasi-Marxist one: the evolution from aristocratic to bourgeois hegemony, `an emergent bourgeois imperialist ideology'.

As we approach the third millennium, church leaders are working on plans for a new, ecumenical coronation service, one in keeping with Prince Charles's proclaimed desire to be defender of faith, rather than defender of THE faith. Unlike his mother, he will not be required to swear to "maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law" or to "maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline and government thereof, as by law established in England".

Dissestablishment is now being discussed openly at Lambeth Palace and Buckingham Palace and in the Palace of Westminster. But not in Downing Street. For all his determination to "modernise" Britain in other areas, Tony Blair appears to shy away from the subject. It is time the Prime Minister grappled with it. For disestablishment is an historical inevitability. The Prime Minister must start planning for a Britain in which church and state are separate. Sooner or later that is going to have to be part of any new constitutional settlement.

But the inherent contradictions in establishment are becoming so obvious that they can no longer be ignored. At a time when the Nonconformists and Roman Catholics keep the Sabbath with greater rigour than do Anglicans, the special position of the Church of England is hard to defend.

There always were historical anomalies, but now they are beginning to nag. The Queen owes her title Defender of the Faith to Pope Leo X, who bestowed it on Henry VIII for his attacks on Protestantism - the very religion the Queen swore to uphold at her coronation. She owes her throne to Henry's later rejection of papal supremacy and his decision to nationalise Christianity. If it had not been for Henry VIII and the establishment of the Church of England - ratified by the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the imposition of the Hanoverian monarchy in 1714 - Elizabeth, heir of the Hanoverians, would not be their Queen. The Church of England is her raison d'etre. The vast majority of her subjects neither know nor care about these things, though they retain their affection for the Queen.

The future of the monarchy will be called into question once more. James I, when urged to abolish the episcopate, said: "No bishop, no king." Is it now a question of: "No church, no queen"? Disestablishment need not be a threat to the integrity of the church, however. On the contrary. With the separation of church and state, unencumbered Christianity, whether Anglican, Nonconformist or Catholic, can flourish, but will other faiths so far unwelcomed, creep in also? We think they will and for the very reason we have stated over and over. Perhaps the people are tired of the 'control over their so-called salvation', by the church.

The King James Bible, New Testament, the Testimonium Flavianum - who wrote them?

Here is a link that will take you to A brief History of the King James Bible. This is further proof of the revisions and changes that clearly took away the Enochian traditions. Brief History Here unfortunately too, are 'Bishops' involved in the translations and they are told to 'use the Analogy of the faith' ( rule 4 ). This may or may not be a problem, but when it calls for the 'judgement of a man' to decide what should be written, it is most likely that they 'voted' once again to take out, omit or change things as they saw fit.. You will also see that 'the Bishops Bible' was to be used as a guide ( rule 14 ). The Kings and Queens of the time were, Henry, Edward and Elizabeth , all of the Roman Catholic faith.
The work began in 1604 and was completed in 1611 and printed by the Kings 'royal' printer. There were four more revisions, in 1629 ,1638 ,1762 and 1769. The origional Greek of the New testament ( written by Romans ) was also revised . Christians of today claim the work is now correct and complete.
[ We doubt it ]...
As for the New Testament, its current twenty-seven book form derives from the fourth century CE, even though the constituent parts come from the first century. Christians did not agree on the exact extent of the New Testament for several centuries.

The problem of the Testimonium Flavianum, by Josephus

Proving content changed by Romans.

In the books of the prophets we find it announced beforehand that Jesus our Christ would appear, be born through a virgin, grow up, heal every disease and sickness and raise the dead, and be despised and unrecognized and crucified and die and be raised and ascend to the heavens and be called the Son of God, and that some would be sent by him to every nation, and that the Gentiles would believe.
Quantitative Content Analysis of Jesus TextsThis in effect is exactly what the Romans wanted to have happen. This would then be the foundation of the 'Control' the Church wanted over the people. They would then be able to threaten the followers with ex-communication and have them killed for hearasy at a whim.

Louis Feldman, the pre-eminent Josephus scholar, has succinctly discussed the problem of the Testimonium Flavianum (TF) in several works.
1931 R. Eisler, in his influential The Messiah Jesus, suggests Christian censors deleted large portions of the original text, and offers a reconstruction by inserting new text into the passage..1963
Feldman writes: "The most probably view seems to be that our text represents substantially what Josephus wrote, but that some alterations have been made by a Christian interpolator."
(p. 49, Loeb edition)93 CE
The book Jewish Antiquities by Josephus is published in Rome. It contains at least one reference to "James, the brother of Jesus called the Christ." Manuscripts surviving today also contain a description of Jesus. But was this description present in the year 93? c. 230-250
The Christian writer Origen cites Josephus' section on the death of James "the brother of Jesus" in Book 20 of the Antiquities; but states Josephus did not believe in in the divinity of Jesus, and does not cite the TF passage in Book 18... from.. More proof

from... Josephus' Account of Jesus The Testimonium Flavianum
This account has been embroiled in controversy since the 17th century. It could not have been written by a Jewish man, say the critics, because it sounds too Christian: it even claims that Jesus was the Messiah (ho christos, the Christ)!

The critics say: this paragraph is NOT AUTHENTIC. It was inserted into Josephus' book by a later Christian copyist, probably in the Third or Fourth Century.
We have come to believe that Josephus is a 'Matthias' or a relative close to Jesus, possibly a younger step brother. We also believe that Joseph knew things about Jesus that no one else knew. In his effort to 'protect' what he knew, he would have been carefull in what he wrote about him or it was deleted by Christian censors. You can see in the following paragraph, things have been modified greatly or they are absolutely false according to what we actually do know. Jesus was not Christian.
"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared."
Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63

"there is no proof of the existence of the famous testimony before the time when Christianity as a state religion was able to suppress all writings hostile to its founder or its teachings, a power officially conferred upon it by an edict of Constantine and re-enacted by the Emperors Theodosius and Valentinian after the brief Pagan revival under Julian."
The Controversy over the so-called ... 'Testimony to Jesus'..., a party possessing the power to destroy obnoxious books will ipso facto be in a position to enforce minor omissions and alterations in works in which only individual passages were felt to be objectionable.

It is equally clear that owners of valuable manuscripts, whether private individuals, book-vendors, or officials in libraries and synagogues, should have preferred the excision of a few lines or certain alterations to the alternative of seeing their treasures devoured by the flames. Add to this the loss involved in the destruction of a whole Josephus in manuscript, and the laws imposing capital punishment on the concealed possession of writings hostile to Christianity , and the natural consequence will be obvious to every one. As a matter of fact, not a single Greek, Latin, Slavonic, or other Josephus text has come down to us which has not passed through the hands of Christian scribes and Christian owners. The numerous glosses and marginal notes, abounding in every single manuscript , fully bear out this statement.

The genuineness of the 'precious jewel' has been admitted only in circles wholly dominated by the Church. The beautiful 'testimony' has somehow never made an impression on the Jews, although they, too, certainly knew it well. When mediaeval Christian scholars taunted them with the argument that the Jewish historian Josephus, whose works they possessed and held in high honour, had freely admitted that Jesus was the Messiah, they stubbornly replied (as we may gather from certain pages of Giraldus Cambrensis [11]) that this testimony was not found in their own Hebrew manuscript of the author. The Christians would then retort that the Jews had erased the passage from their manuscripts, and such manuscripts showing manifest erasures were indeed not wanting, and were repeatedly pointed out to the Jews to show that it was they who were in error.

The absence of the term such as 'tumult' Eisler more strongly attributes to its deletion by a Christian censor. The speculation is that originally the Testimonium did describe a 'tumult', and it was hostile to Jesus; therefore it was censored. Eisler proposes a reconstruction of the Testimonium that follows not unnaturally from the hypothesis that some text was deleted by Christian censors.

There were many such deletions made in Jewish works, Eisler notes. Given that something was erased, it must be that the deleted text was hostile to Christianity (else no one would have bothered to censor it). Therefore, Josephus' original description of Jesus must have been antagonistic. Eisler then proposes a certain small amount of hostile text that could have been deleted from the original to leave the existing version.
Eisler's proposal for the original form of the Testimonium is as follows. (The dots […] are Eisler's and indicate what Eisler he believes are irrecoverable deletions.) Controversy

(For a discussion of these fragments, see New Testament Apocrypha, ed. W. Schneemelcher, vol. 1, p. 153f and 158f.) Finally, the Elchasaites are a very interesting group. Their later traditions said they were formed around the year 100. They too seem to have been a schismatic Jewish sect close to the Essenes. According to Hippolytus, they also believed in a Son of God who was an angelic being (a giant one), and that he had granted to the founder Elchasai visions and knowledge. (The Holy Spirit was also a giant female angel.) In the writings of the Nag Hammidi library, When Christ speeks of humans, he calls them the 'little ones'. The Giants then are the Angles, which we saw on the. .. Atlantis Page

(This brief anology was found on an obscure web page with no other information except for the names of the family members involved in the writings. ) "The writers of the New Testament were 'The Roman Piso family'. It is said they invented 'Jesus' as a part of their war against the Jews. They then had family members to write into 'history' that the Romans did not like the Christians, so that Rome or Romans would never be suspected of having done this. The fact is, that Christianity is an entirely Roman friendly religion. Arius Calpurnius Piso wrote as Josephus, played 'Jesus' in the first three Gospels, ect. His sons and his decendents then did the rest of the work on the making of Christianity and the destruction of the Jews to the Diaspora.. His cohort was Pliny the Younger, who wrote some of the books of the New Testament." Did Saul/Paul play Jesus also?
There seems to be enough proof that this may be true. Gnostic, Essene and Templar legend seems to point in a direction that says Jesus did not die on the cross. Add this with the tomb that is in India and the one in France, and you understand the length the church went to have total control. Three people helped Jesus fake his death and escape. One was a Roman guard. The others were Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. We cover this at length on 'the Resurrection' page.

Now we can certainly say that what Jesus taught was probably not 'invented' in some instances, and no one disputes his claim to be the "Son of God", as the incarnation of the 'Logos', However this is not what he meant. A 'Son of God' was someone who taught the Laws of Moses to the people. So it also may be true that the Romans did invent, twist and rewrite the scripture in places that suited their purpose, because this does tie in with the rule and demand of control by Constantine and Paul's lies that led to the hunt for the disciples and the stoning of James. As you have seen above The truth has been 'hidden' delibertly...

The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm there was a teacher of the Righteous, the Nag Hammidi collection confirms true gospel writings omited, ect. Essene legend confirms some and the grave in India confirms the rest. The Spirit of Christ ( the Logos ) left Jesus's body after he suffered pain and torture on the cross and he again was a mortal man. The spirit entered him at the first Baptism by John, when the dove decended. The legend says, He was born of a perfect body, of a virgin to be pure enough to except the spirit of the Father and the Holy spirit of the Mother.
'Father' is a term he himself used after he reappeared to the disciples. ( "Am I not a Father?" )The spirit had reintered someone's body again to Teach them further. "And five hundred and fifty days since he had risen from the dead, we said to him, "Have you departed and removed yourself from us?" But Christ said, "No, but I shall go to the place from whence I came. If you wish to come with me, come!

This phrase emphasized; "I shall go to the place from whence I came". What did Osiris say?, What did Thoth say?

So Mote it Be.

Continued on.. False Church 2

These Books and several others led me to do extensive research on Masonry.

False church, page 2	Moses
The real mission of Christ	Christ's Mission cont.
Site Map Page	The Murder of James
The Essenes	The Real Jesus
Jesus' Secret	Jesus, the Kaballah and the truth, page2
Masonic Rules in The Dead Sea Scrolls	part 3, of the Real Jesus
Mystery Schools 'initiation'	The Knights Templar
John the Baptist	Abraham
Adam and Eve and the Truth	God's Wife
Isis - Imenhotep	The virgin Mothers - The Light of your soul
Archeological connections	The Shroud of Turin - More Lies
Abraham	Gnostic knowledge, the true teachings of Jesus The Gnostic truth
Masonic Organizations and the Catholic Church	www.nostradamus
Shroud of Turin	Jesus Silenced
The Lies of Paul	Widow's Son
Books - Anti-Christianity

powered by FreeFind

Our search Engine does not search for the links in this site, only words in the text.

We lost our previous guest book with no warning. Please sign this one.

Guestbook

NO PART OF THIS SITE MAY BE COPIED OR REPRODUCED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE WEBMASTER... © COPYRIGHT 1999 - 2012 c.i.c.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

This page has been visited Times since November 22, 2001