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:
i.
the Shepherd of Hermas (written by two resurrected ghosts, Charinus and Lenthius)
ii.
the Missive of Barnabas
iii.
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, andthis 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 Matthewand 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).
evious page 2
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 "atabout the age of thirty" (Mark 1:9), and doesn't know of Mary, a virgin birth or massmurders 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 theearly 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 around1,200 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 notGospels 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 disillusionedDr 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? , DrConstantin von Tischendorf, 1865, British Library, London).

Hmm.... U expect us to belive this

Obviosly copy and paste frm whateva source. Anyway @ poster u really get time. What moral or lesson is dis teachin us. Rubishhhhh.

more mumbo jumbo , anyone can paste any nonsense and call it an 'article'.

Leave us Christians alone.

Thanks.

tobechi20: Hmm.... U expect us to belive this

no.i expect that it would arouse in you the urge to learn more about your faith.do your own independent research,read through them with an unbiased mind and form your own opinion

Delafruita:
no.i expect that it would arouse in you the urge to learn more about your faith.do your own independent research,read through them with an unbiased mind and form your own opinion

How does learning more about my faith affect you? If I decide to believe in something else as a result of your pointless post, how does it benefit you? Epic fail. Please, go and look for something more positive to do.

Here we go again. Another copy & paste work from Delafruita in his continuous futile attempts to discredit christianity.

Mr_Anony: Here we go again. Another copy & paste work from Delafruita in his continuous futile attempts to discredit christianity.

i started another thread on the discrepancies between the books of matthew and luke.its all from the Bible and you should take a look

Good read.. thats nice

Delafruita:
i started another thread on the discrepancies between the books of matthew and luke.its all from the Bible and you should take a look

Guys delafruita is right in a way. I'm not an atheist but I hate been taken for a joy ride by text in which I do not know its oringin. Let's face it. Our objective opinion counts a lot and everyone should individually assess themself. Religion is a powerful tool of enslavement and it should be followed wisely