Constantine’s Bible

“Finally, when the evidence is actually overwhelming, we draw our conclusions. We find the Council of Nicaea to be a hatchet job by Constantine to renovate, update and create a New Political State Religion out of the doctrines and writings of the Mithraic religion called Christian and the Jewish and Greek religion called “The Way.””

Here is a very interesting essay I found recently. I would probably argue with Blaylock about the supremacy of rationality or “thinking”, which itself is a very Roman notion, however I find his analysis of Church tradition is most enlightening.

By Thomas E. Blaylock, Jr.

Now let’s roll up our sleeves and get serious about the Christian Bible. This study about the Bible will help you understand how some of your beliefs got to you and how most religious people view the Bible today. The purpose is to help you know and understand the difference in the Clear Thinker’s approach to the Bible and the religious believer’s approach to it.

If you were a sculptor with great talent and had a beautiful block of marble, what would you make with it? The block of marble is six feet by four feet by four feet. You may describe what you would make out of it in as few as one word, or you may describe it in detail, or even draw a picture if you wish. So stop right here and decide what you would make out of that block of marble before reading any further.

In asking a group of thirty people there will usually be at least twenty or more different objects or uses for the block of marble. A few typical uses for the marble will be such items as large praying hands, beautiful woman, hunting dog, athletic man, a vase, a rooster, a horse, a bird, a book (the Bible), some type of cat, a bath tub, the ten commandments… Even in the ones that are alike, let us say a beautiful woman, the image that the maker has in mind will differ. One will have the woman with a baby in her arms, another will have her in a nude pose, one will have her doing something, others will have her sitting, or standing, or praying, or singing or even in some sexy pose. There will be no two who have seen the same identical thing in the block of marble.

Someone asked me what I saw in the stone. I saw a tombstone in it with this epitaph.


You have seen what each person saw in the block of marble will be different from what others saw in it, and all people use the Bible in the same manner as we used that block of marble. A sculptor approaches the block, looks it over and sees something in it. Different sculptors see different images (pictures) in it. So the sculptor begins to discard and chip away at everything that doesn’t conform to the image he sees in it.

That is exactly how denominations, religions and individuals use the Bible. They approach it with the image already in their heads. They chip away, discard or ignore everything that does not agree with and conform to the image (doctrines) they see in it.

Think for a moment of all the Christian denominations, sects and cults, all of which get their teachings straight from the same one and only Holy Bible. Yet some of the doctrines they see in it are so diverse that some of the things they see in it are mutually exclusive. That is, if one doctrine is correct the other one cannot possibly be true. So they all chip away everything that doesn’t agree with the preconceived image, picture or notion (belief) that they bring to this Holy Book.

Take a look at a few parts of the Bible that different denominations chip away, explain away, distort the meaning of, or refute and discard. Some chip away the ban on women speaking and teaching in church, foot washing, Mary having other children, God telling lies to his people. Some chip away speaking in tongues, salvation by works, salvation by faith, salvation by marriage. Did you know that according to the Bible, women are to be saved by bearing children? (1 Timothy 2:15.) Is that chauvinistic or what?

Others chip away some of the miracles or permanent salvation. Some chip away national salvation or universal salvation. Some chip away this prophecy or that prophecy. Some even chip away the divinity or the humanity of Jesus. Some denominations chip away the creation of the universe, or even the whole of the Old Testament. And of course some chip away whole books or parts of books of the New Testament. The Jews chip away the whole of the New Testament. Some leading church denominations chip away, or ignore, all of the writings attributed to someone called Paul, or of someone called James, or of books called Peter or John. Some chip out the earth standing still, or this miracle, or that one and some exclude the book of Revelation of Saint John, or all the miracles in the whole Bible. Some chip out (explain away) all literal references to hell.

In fact, if there were only one Bible and each Christian denomination were allowed to remove the parts that they do not believe, that they believe to be in error, that they believe do not apply to them, or that they ignore, there would hardly be a scrap of the Bible left. And that is what happens when we listen to all the Christian denominations that say they believe in the Holy Bible, who tell us it is the Word of God, and some who tell us they believe it from cover to cover.


Can you imagine ten sculptors all working on the same block of marble? One is trying to chip out a bird, another a woman, one a flower, others a dog, a child, a vase, one a book, one a star, a horse or a hand. What happens? Before anyone has a chance to do a bit of work they all start protecting the image that they see in the marble by chipping away at one another with their hammers and chisels.

If you can see that, you now have the best seat in the house for watching the Council of Nicaea (Nice) set up by Constantine in 325 AD. In establishing his state religion, Constantine needed to bring several feuding and persecuted religions together, all of which worshiped a Jesus Christ (a Saviour Anointed) into one strong central organization that could be controlled from the top by the state. The idea was to bring together all these large and small, scattered religions that worshiped a Saviour Anointed (a Jesus Christ), incorporate their sacred writings, unite their leadership and form a single strong organization that would have a deep and broad appeal.

This new composite, federated religion would become the official state (political) religion. It would be coequal and fused with the Mithraic religion (worship of God through his crucified, anointed, saviour Son, Mithra). It would also be fused with the official Roman derivation of the Mithraic religion, the Sol Invictus religion. This was the worship of God through Apollo and/or Mithra as the Saviour Anointed (the Jesus Christ). Apollo and Mithra were symbolized as the Son of the Sun. The Sun was the visible sign of the invisible God. The soldiers and Greeks worshiped through the Persian name, Mithra, while the elite Romans worshiped through his Roman name, Sol Invictus.

Sol Invictus was the religion that worshiped God through Apollo or Mithra. This saviour God also carried the title of Saviour Anointed (Jesus Christ in English). Constantine’s new religion would become the only religion the state would recognize. All other religions that refused to join would become outlawed, persecuted and eradicated – and it became so.

Now Constantine (who was a Sol Invictus worshiper) attached himself, as a student, to the Eastern part of the early Jewish church called “The Way.” They taught a Spiritual Jesus. He became friends with Eusebius of Caesarea who worshiped this Spiritual Jesus, and with Hosius of Rome, who worshiped a materialized Human Jesus. Note this conflict!

These men were interested in solving the question of the divinity of the Saviour. Was this Saviour (Jesus) just a regular man with special powers, or was he a spiritual being of God who did his work in the spiritual realm? Was he from God, or was he God himself? Eusebius was in favor of the reasoning of one, Arias, who said the Spiritual Jesus was begotten. He was coequal with God but was not the God himself. Jesus was the Son of God. Therefore, he could not be The God. This Spiritual Saviour did all his work in the spiritual realm.

However, the religion of Mithra, whose doctrines were being studied by the leaders of The Way, also worshiped their Jesus Christ (Saviour Anointed) named Mithra. They had already solved this problem. Their Saviour Anointed (Jesus Christ) was Mithra, a human man divinely born, in whom God (at his baptism) had been incarnated into his flesh to suffer and die for the sins of man. Thus, Mithra died in the flesh to save the world from sin and Satan. Up to this point in time the church of The Way never claimed that their Spiritual Jesus or their human Jesus was a God.

It is said that Constantine, while in battle, looked up one day and saw a sign in the heavens. That sign was a “Cross ” (the Persian instrument of death upon which Mithra died). Then into his head came the notion (or revelation) that said, “In this sign (of the cross) conquer.” Without doubt Constantine was well acquainted with the Mithraic Church because he was also a soldier and Mithras was known as the soldier’s religion (the earlier form of Sol Invictus). They worshiped God through Mithra, the Persian crucified Jesus Christ (Saviour Anointed).

The problem Christians of today must face at this point is this: the sign of the cross was not used at all by the early Jewish church (called The Way). They worshiped the Jewish Spiritual Saviour Anointed (Jesus Christ) who resided and acted only in the spirit world and they used the symbol of the Lamb or the Fish. The only religion in the Roman Empire that used the cross (the Persian instrument of death) as its symbol of faith was the Mithraic religion, called “Christian” (little anointed ones) by their enemies. Christians were “little-know-it-alls” who worshiped a Saviour Anointed (Jesus Christ). The Sol Invictus religion used the image of a sun spray that looked a bit like a cross but it was never intended to represent an instrument of death. Rather it symbolized the divine connection between heaven and earth with Apollo at the center.

Even before the Council of 325 AD, leaders of The Way were envious of the Cross used by the Mithraic church because it indicated a physical life for Mithra, their Jesus (Saviour). The Mithraic religion worshiped Mithra, their Persian human, crucified Jesus Christ (Saviour Anointed). Mithra physically died on a cross in the old Persian method of execution several hundred years before the Jewish Jesus Christ was later claimed to be executed in the Roman method of execution. The Romans executed their victims by “poling” (impaling).

Constantine was a worshiper of Sol Invictus, Apollo being their Saviour Anointed (their Jesus Christ). He wanted to combine all the saviours to make One Soul Saving Saviour (one Jesus) and make him into a Christ God Man, that is a Christ or Saviour like Apollo or Mithra. In fact he wanted to name the new saviour Apollo and worship him as The God (The Deity) to give status to his New Church. This New Church would then mesh with his own religion and become one with it.

To deify someone was a legal process and was not difficult for a king or emperor. Constantine had his subjects call him “Son of God” because he had recently deified his own father and expected the same to be done for himself. Thereafter, “Son of God” was added to the titles of Constantine. So, he summoned the leaders of the church called The Way and the church called Mithraic (or Christian) along with other scattered sects and churches that worshiped a Saviour Anointed (a Jesus Christ). He was going to choose, or create, a single saviour, settle this question of the divinity of the saviour once and for all time and build a strong single State Church.

Constantine began immediately to lay the groundwork for his New State Church. In 321 AD he enacted the Edict of Tolerance. This gave Christians (Mithraic, The Way, Sol Invictus and other Saviour worshipers) new freedom. In addition, he declared that all businesses, courts, shops, transactions and entertainments were to be closed on Sun-day in honor of the Sun God (Apollo and/or Mithra). All Saviour Gods were to be worshiped on that day. He also declared that all Saviour Gods’ birthdays (including Mithra, the Jewish Saviour and Apollo) were to be celebrated on the third day after the winter solstice. That is when the sun begins to return north (by our calendar, December 24th – 25th) and is the first day astronomers can observe the return north of the sun. All of the Gods were to be celebrated at that time with festivals and worship.

The leaders of The Way refused to stop their Jewish Sabbath worship because their Saviour (Jesus) had not yet been declared as a God. Only after the Council of 325 AD did they claim their Jesus was a God and change their day of worship from Friday to Sunday. Since the regular Jews did not worship a Jesus Christ they were allowed to continue their worship on the Sabbath.

Constantine even decided on a name for his new religion. It was to be known (by literal translation into the English language) as the Divine Universal Assembly. Think about the meaning of those words as they relate to the Divine Roman Empire. Don’t forget, the Roman emperor was considered to be a Son of God and soon to be a God, (but not a Saviour God). The Roman Empire was also considered to be Holy, that is, divinely appointed and sustained by God.

The religious and political language of that period was Greek. The Greek word for “Divine” can also mean, “separate” and transliterates (brings the sound of the Greek word) into English as Holy. “Universal” comes into English as Catholic. “Assembly” comes into English as Church. Thus was born the new conglomerate (confederated and amalgamated) religion of all religions that worshiped a Jesus Christ. Together they became the New Holy Catholic Church.

Literally hundreds of priests and leaders from many other religious organizations throughout the vast Roman Empire came to the Council at the command of Constantine. He was the Emperor of the Roman Empire and one did not defy the Emperor without a good reason, or even with a good reason. So all who were able were furnished secure public transportation. They all came together to take part in the new “political” experiment designed to make one Divine Church organization out of several varied religions that worshiped a Saviour Anointed.

Also the fact that the Assembly was held in the East made it easier for those of the Eastern Church of the Way and the Mithraic “Christian” Church to be well represented. Constantine also wanted to hide the truth of his plan from the Romans in Rome (who would surely object – and did!) until it was an accomplished fact.

Hundreds who originally came to the council were killed, some before they got there. Others were driven away, or were put in prison by those who finally succeeded in getting the upper hand. The most ruthless were obviously the winners in that struggle. Those who were driven away, including Arias, recorded many fights, screaming, nasty words, objects thrown, books burned and hostilities. Almost all of those killed, driven away or put in prison were worshipers of the Jewish materialist Human Saviour of “The Way.” Why just them? Because they were the only ones who did not yet claim that their particular Saviour Anointed (Jesus Christ) was a God himself. Who was in charge here anyway? No one even knows who presided over the Council. It was a free-for-all. But in the end, Constantine got exactly what he wanted.

Those who were left were to decide on a creed for the new church. They were also to decide on New Gospels and which (and what parts) of over three hundred gospels and writings would go into the new Divine Book (Holy Bible) and which would not. They fought and fussed among themselves until Constantine finally stepped in, appointed a head man, his friend Eusebius and said, “What he says goes in, goes in. What he says stays out, stays out.”

Very early it was agreed that they would not name the Saviour Anointed, that is, Mithra, Apollo or the name of the Jewish saviour (Judas, Jeshu, Thomas or Issa, whichever it was). They soon found out a personal name would be too divisive. (Many scholars think the original Jewish Jesus was based on the Man of Light written about in the Dead Sea Scrolls about 125 BC). The Council decided that instead of using the personal name of one of the saviours, they would simply use the title, (Saviour Anointed) or transliterated (bringing the sound) into English, “Jesus Christ.” That is how the Jesus of the Bible got his name. It is the title of All Saviours Anointed! This way all Saviours would be included into the new church and new holy book.

One man who is thought to be the Jewish Jesus was called Issa (or Jissa) in the Far East. Still other scholars claim that the only man that actually fulfills some of the claims about the Jewish Jesus in Jewish history of that time was a man named Judas or Jeshu of Gamla (in Galilee). This man was a Nazarene – a title for a religious rabble type of militia that opposed Roman rule. He is officially listed as Judas Bar Abbas, or in another place as Jeshu Bar Abbas (Son of God), and yet again as Judas Krist. He was called a rabble “Nazarene” in all three accounts.

There is no record of a town called Nazareth during the time of the Jewish Jesus! The term ”Jesus of Nazareth” is a mistranslation of the literal original, “Jesus the Nazarene.” This means Jesus belonged to a religious rogue militia that sought by war to overthrow Roman rule in Judah.

The present town of Nazareth was established after the Jewish and Roman war (70 AD) and later named Nazareth by the Catholic Church’s Knights Templar. The Jewish histories claimed this Judas Jeshu was an anointed Messiah or Christ (there have been many). A woman who used a fortune in prized spices anointed him and dried his feet with her hair. He led a strong and costly rebellion against the Romans. He was supposedly “impaled” by the Romans and the only charge against him was: “The King of the Jews.” He is also rumored to have escaped (a secret legal provision for those of royal birth who then lost their birthright). A substitute was allowed to take his place. In all of Jewish or Roman history, no other person has ever been killed by the Romans under the charge, “The King of the Jews.”

This Judas had a contractor father, Joseph, of royal Davidic blood, a mother named Mary, brothers named James, Joses, Simon and Judas Thomas and sisters not named. (See Mt.13:55-56.) He also had sons named Jacob and Simon (both later arrested by the Romans) and a son named Menahim. This son was the one who led the final rebellion against Rome that ended the nation of Israel in 70 AD. (See: The Wars of the Jews by Josephus Flavius, Book XVIII.)

Meanwhile back at the Council (the free for all), the hostility and problems continued. They finally solved the problem by agreeing on a creed. This gave them a standard by which to discuss the divinity of the New Jesus (the Saviour) and to make selections of those books and sections of books that could be updated (rewritten) or created to conform to the new creed and that were not too offensive to the majority of those who were left. As a result we have a book that says drinking is good and one that says drinking is bad. It says making money is good and making money is bad. It says charging or paying interest is good and it says paying and charging interest is bad.

This Book says everyone will be saved and it says no one will be saved. It says follow the orders of your political leaders and it says not to follow the orders of your political leaders. It says to leave all and follow God and it says to stay where you are. On every issue of life except one, it takes both sides of the question. The only issue about which the Bible is certain (and I might mention the one issue that Rome could not do without) is the issue of slavery. Slavery is regulated, defended and supported by the Almighty, the Holy Ghost, the Holy Bible, the Jesus and the Divine Universal Assembly, according to Constantine’s Bible.

In other words there is something for everyone in the Bible. You can “prove” anything by it and you can “disprove” anything by it. Where do you think all the many sects and denominations in Christendom came from? They came straight out of the Bible, every last one of them. Even the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Latter-day Saints, Seventh Day Adventist and Christian Science Practitioners, who wrote their own holy books, still use the Bible to “prove” many of their doctrines.

I am trying to make a point. I am trying to show you the Clear Thinking philosophy as it examines the founding of the Catholic Church and the Holy Bible.

The first thing the Clear Thinker notices when he approaches a problem, whether it is religious, political, social or personal is that few people actually study the facts or look in the right places for the truth of the matter. If you want to find out if a man (a group or an organization) is a thief and a liar, you don’t ask his family and his buddies, you ask the victims! Ask yourself, “Who were the victims of this un-Godly movement and the conglomeration of these various churches and religions?” Are people still made victims of this confederation of churches?

Most people read the Bible or any reference work for only one purpose. That purpose is to prove a preconceived point of view. They will search the Bible, the newspaper, reference books, any source, looking for those statements that back up or tend to “prove” their views and beliefs. They will even lift out of context, they will distort, they will misread, so determined are they to prove themselves right. They will also ignore and hide those things that prove, or tend to prove they are wrong.

Religious people believe they are right and cannot possibly be wrong. Therefore, any contrary evidence must be in error and is something that the Devil is using to try to deceive the faithful. These same people believe it is also permissible for them to use a lie, or to tell a lie to “prove” that their belief is correct. After all, since their belief is correct, in the long run it is not really a lie. Once the whole truth is made known, the lie is really just an insight into a truth that others have not yet clearly seen. That is another type of chaos that Belief produces.

On the other hand, the Clear Thinking philosophy demands of its followers that they find and know what the correct position is, not that they prove some position to be correct. So we study the surrounding histories of that period of time. We study what the religious leaders had to say and what the civil authorities had to say. We study what the opposition had to say. We study what individuals wrote about the issues. We compare, we analyze and we stand flabbergasted and in awe at the differences between the historical records of the civil authorities and the claims and writings of the religious authorities of the church.

Finally, when the evidence is actually overwhelming, we draw our conclusions. We find the Council of Nicaea to be a hatchet job by Constantine to renovate, update and create a New Political State Religion out of the doctrines and writings of the Mithraic religion called Christian and the Jewish and Greek religion called “The Way.”

Many Clear Thinkers have died or been tortured because they revealed and proved these same things in the past. Truth is sometimes a very dangerous commodity to possess. The Clear Thinking philosophy does not necessarily demand that an honest Clear Thinker puts his safety in danger in order to explain or follow the position he finds to be correct. It does demand that he knows what he is doing and what the facts are.

Truth is always hated by the lie. Read any history book and find out who it was that tortured and killed whom. Why? It would have been simple enough to produce evidence showing the truthfulness of the Church’s position and claims. But when you have no truth on your side and no evidence, the best you can do is to kill the messenger, the truth teller and hope thereby to prove your point. Of course it does prove one point. That is, there is no proof of the claims, or of the truthfulness of the official church records about the Council of Nicaea of 325 AD (and this includes most other claims).

The big question now is: “How can we know the facts?” Half of the answer is summed up in the word “Honesty.” The other half is found in locating and testing the various claims against each other and against known science, facts and good acceptable morals. One could use the words “research” and “thinking” to describe the second half. First, honesty demands that one looks in the right places for the truth of the matter. This is actually harder than the work of research. It also means one will accept the answer once it has been laid open. One must lay aside preconceived notions, beliefs and biases. It is hard work, but it is right!

As for how the Clear Thinker sees the Bible, he must honestly conclude that it is the work of many men. No one knows who wrote a single line of it. The Bible has been revised, edited, added to and subtracted from since the inception of each of its many little books. A short study of the Babylonian Tablets, Dead Sea Scrolls, the Gnostic and Mithraic writings and literature prove beyond doubt there is little conclusive original work in the New Testament or Old Testament. Every major aspect of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ (the Jewish one) in the New Testament was written hundreds of years earlier about Mithra in the Persian and Indian Holy Books.

Many of these same things were also written around 125 BC about the Man of Light in the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the New Testament miracles and the Sermon on the Mount. Many scholars think the Man of Light in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the model for the Jewish Jesus Christ, miss- dated and modified by using known names of political leaders of the later period. Some scholars conclude, with ample evidence, that the Man of Light was not even a Jew.

The last writings of the Jewish histories of that period were stored about 100 AD. They include the history of Judah through the supposed lifetime and death of Jesus and the claimed beginning of the early church of the Jews, called The Way. They wrote about every other religion, every other God and every other political and religious movement. Yet not one word is mentioned about a human Jesus, or the apostles, or the church. Not one single word! They wrote about everything else but not the early church, or this Jewish Jesus Saviour. Why?

It is claimed Mithra did many of the same things that the New Constantine Bible claims a human Jewish Jesus did. And that claim for Mithra was made hundreds of years before the Jewish Jesus was supposed to have lived. In fact the Crucified Saviour, Mithra, was called Iesus Christos (Jesus Christ) or “Saviour Anointed” (his title). Mithra also instituted all of the so-called Christian ordinances and sacraments such as the Eucharist (Communion or Lord’s Supper), Baptism, Foot Washing, Forgiveness of Sin, Unction, Holy Matrimony, Mass and all the rest of the modern Christian sacraments. All of this was no less than eight hundred years before the Jewish Jesus was supposed to have been born. Crishna (one of the Indian Jesus Christs) also did these same claimed things over four thousand years ago as did Hesus (Jesus by modern translation) in the west a bit later.

For that matter, anyone buried under the sign of the cross before the fifth century AD was buried as a Mithra worshiper (called Christian). Those of the early Jewish and Greek church (The Way) were buried under the sign of the fish or the lamb. From my studies, it seems the Jewish Jesus was not crucified. If he actually lived and was killed at all by the Romans, then he was probably poled. The Romans usually poled their victims. The Persians were the ones who crucified. Mithra was the Crucified Saviour. There are tile floors, murals and pictures in Iran, Iraq and India that are more than three thousand years old. They show a crucified God (or man) on the cross with a hole in his side, nails in his hands and feet and thorns on his head.

The Jewish Jesus was the “Poled” Saviour. The word translated “crucified” in the English Christian Bible is the word that literally means “poled” (or impaled). Why did they not use the Greek word for crucified? Look it up! There is little historical evidence that the Romans ever crucified anyone. However, they poled or impaled thousands and later the church called that poling, “crucifixion.” I will leave to your research or imagination the type of death this was. Count Dracula of the Balkans was the last to use this Roman method of execution.

The Mithra celebrations of Christmas, All Saints day, Lent, Easter, etc., were incorporated into the New Christian mythology by Constantine’s New state church. The early pre-Nicean Jewish church (The Way) held only Jewish ceremonies and holidays. Their worship on the Jewish Friday evening or Sabbath was replaced by the Mithraic Lord’s Day or Sun-day worship. This too came from Constantine and the Mithraic religion when many Mithraic doctrines were incorporated into Constantine’s new religion called the Holy Catholic Church.

However, the early Jewish church had already been drawn to some of the Mithraic teachings since that church also worshiped a Jesus Christ (Saviour Anointed). Mithra worshipers suffered the same tortures and discriminations that the Jewish and Greek worshipers of The Way suffered under the Romans. The Romans made little or no distinction between the two religions. Both worshiped a “Saviour Anointed” (Christ) and both were called “Christians” by the Romans.

At the time Constantine was forming his new church at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, other than Sol Invictus (Emperor worship of the Sun as the symbol for God), Mithras was the largest religion in the Roman Empire. Its doctrines had also begun to intermingle with the early church of the Jews. It is known they often swapped guest priests. At first in Rome, Mithras was known as the “Soldier’s Religion,” brought to them from Persia to Rome by the Greeks. Constantine’s plan was to so integrate the religions of Mithras, The Way and Sol Invictus that all their symbolism, creeds and history became one. This enabled Constantine to now possess the one and only “Soul Saving” religion in the Roman Empire. Though he wanted the saviour’s name to be Apollo, he did settle on the title “Saviour Anointed” (Jesus Christ) to obtain unity.

Following the Council of Nicaea, the New Holy Catholic Church did everything in its power to stamp out all old records and histories of both the earlier Mithraic church and the earlier Jewish church, The Way. They substituted new records to give Constantine’s new Church both a “Divine” book and a “Sacred” history.

Even today one must go to translations of scholarly works by Jews, Germans, Greeks, Persians, Indians and the Dutch to find information on the Mithraic Church. Catholic Rome did a good job of destroying and hiding the information. [See: The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge and its Bibliography. Early editions (pre 1900’s) of Encyclopedia Britannica have some of this information, as do early Catholic Encyclopedias. Read the life of Constantine by at least two different authors.]

Some scholars say there is no record of these things in the Christian writings of that day. Certainly there isn’t! They were destroyed! But there are many non-Christian records. Besides, if the Mithraic church had nothing to do with the Council of Nicaea, why did the new church go on a five hundred-year campaign to destroy every record of both the Mithraic church and the early Jewish church? And why did they even destroy or hide the records of the Nicean Council itself?

One of the most difficult historical events to research is the 325 AD Council of Nice (Nicaea). The accounts are conflicting and many were written one or two hundred years after the Council. The letters from Council attendees to friends or other ministers or church leaders give differing dates, differing accounts, differing numbers, differing results and differing information.

There are no official public reports from the meetings – only Eusebius’ book. The council lasted two months or three months or four months depending on whose account one reads. Many clerics and Bishops came early and/or stayed late while they worked on writing or rewriting and compiling the new, New Testament books.

Some of the letters written by priests to each other were supposed to be written before the Council, but there is proof that some were written much later after the Council. The lowest number of official attendees is given as two hundred and eighty, the highest number as one thousand eight hundred. The unofficial attendees (scribes, grooms, students, lesser clergy, sons, friends, cooks, grooms, etc.) numbered into the thousands. This was a big “blowout” and extravaganza to show off Constantine’s new city (Constantinople) that he was building. He also built his new temple and it is reported by some that this was the eighth wonder of the world. Constantine wanted a new religion to go along with his new temple and his new Capitol City of Constantinople. He got all three.

In many of the accounts there is criticism over the fact that not one single prayer was offered during the entire Council (two or up to four months). Constantine’s opening remarks did use the name of God in a general way, but no one counted it as prayer. Even Eusebius notes, “There were no prayers.” This prayer business was one of the meanest and hotly contested debates at the Council as recorded by the dissenters. Why? Because they had not yet settled on to whom they should pray and in whose name to do it.

After the Council, the winning Church destroyed thousands of letters and accounts. To possess a letter, an account or a record about the Council of Nicaea was punishable by death, and large numbers were killed. The church established a reward system for anyone turning in such letters and accounts, or for turning in a friend or enemy for possession of some of this material. This diabolical attack on truth lasted well over five hundred years! Thank goodness numbers of the accounts survived. Is this religion? Has it changed any since then? Or is this something else?

The Holy Catholic Church was not trying to hide the information that they tell us today about the Council. What they were trying to hide was the truth about the Council: why it was called, who attended, what went on and what the results were. I hope the true account is hidden somewhere in the Vatican and some brave and honest priest will show it to the world.

We can be sure that the official information given to us by the church today about the Council has very little truth in it. We must glean for the real purpose by studying the powerful political and religious forces prior to the Council. Religious power was in the hands of the state religion, Sol Invictus, the Mithraic church and to a smaller degree in the hands of The Way of the Jews. Both of the latter religions were called “Christian.”

It is interesting that scholars, who have not bothered to examine these facts, are very confused over how and why such a strong and prolific religion as the Mithraic Church should fade from western history in less than fifty years. They attribute the demise to the fact that the new Divine Universal Assembly (Holy Catholic Church) simply overshadowed it. Not so! The old Mithraic Church “became” the New Holy Catholic Church. It was the Jewish sect called “The Way” that was absorbed and disappeared.

Before the new conglomerate church became the official Holy Catholic Church, the Mithraic priests had been baptizing in the name of their Father, Son (Mithra their Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit of God for several hundred years. They had been calling themselves followers of the Christ for centuries. Those who opposed their religion also called them “Christians” as a derogatory term. Centuries ago these Mithraic priests had adopted the term Christian for themselves and simply continued to call themselves and their church members, Christians.

Constantine wished to separate Mithras from its Persian roots and reform it into a Roman religion so it would be more easily accepted and propagated among the Romans. The Mithraic priests, seeing the advantage to enlarge their church, fully accepted the rewrite of their religion. And the amazing thing about it was they did not lose any of their doctrines, claims or ceremonies. In fact, we still have them today. They are still called Christianity.

The Mithraic priests preached the same sermons they had been preaching for hundreds of years, used their same Christian symbols, read some of the same sacred writings that were now being called the New Divine Book (New Testament) or Holy Bible. Their Bible stories were reworked so that the Persian stories and Jewish stories were mingled and now set to read as though they happened in more recent times rather than hundreds of years earlier. They preached the same Jesus Christ that they preached in Persia for hundreds of years, changing only the time and place of his life and death and some names of his followers and officials. They incorporated the stories of their Jesus Christ (Mithra) into the gospels and letters of the New Testament. They also incorporated some of the teachings of Appollonius, called Pol of Tyana. In 325 AD Mithras went from a religion where they worshiped mostly in secret caves and homes (due to the persecutions) to a Temple religion called The Holy Catholic Church.

There were many manuscripts circulating in the early Jewish church of “The Way” and some of them were writings by Gnostic and Mithraic priests or clerics. Nearly illiterate traveling preachers wrote some of the others. There were several different Matthews, Marks and Lukes. There were about two hundred gospels. There were letters written by leaders of the various congregations (both Mithraic and The Way) that were read and discussed. But the Mithraic church refused most of these and only those that could be rewritten to conform to the New Creed and new sacred history were accepted. The others were hunted down and destroyed, often along with the owners.

Now it was not the power or influence of the Mithraic priests that caused their doctrines to dictate the outcome of the Council. It was not the power or influence of the church called The Way. It was the power and will of Constantine, who had already decided what the outcome should be. It was he who had decided that the Saviour (the Jesus) must be The Highest God in order to give great and holy status and prestige to his New Holy Catholic Church, his new Holy Temple and his new Holy City, Constantinople (now Istanbul).

In other words, the worshipers of Mithra did not change anything much, except to change the date and place of their Jesus Christ and give their allegiance to the new official state Holy Catholic Church that the emperor Constantine had formed. It also meant that the Mithraic priests now had new bosses from the former church of The Way.

On the other hand, those who had been a sect of the Jewish religion, called The Way, had to change everything. They had to change every single one of their Jewish holidays. They had to adopt the new (old) symbolisms of the Mithraic church including the cross. They had to change their day of worship from Friday evening to Sunday morning (Apollo, the Sun God’s day). They had to change their terminology to conform to the new terminology adopted from the Mithraic religion. They had to allow sculpture in their churches as well as paintings. Up to this time such imagery was forbidden by their God and considered one of the worst kinds of sin. They had to change their doctrines and accept the New Creed of the Holy Catholic Church. Many, many who didn’t were killed or banished.

One thing the Jewish sect won was the inclusion of the Old Testament in Greek into the New Divine Book. The Old Testament was the only Bible that the early Jewish church possessed. Since the Mithraic priests held the Jewish writings in high esteem, there was little opposition to its inclusion. It was from this Old Testament book and from the spiritual writings of the Hellenistic and Gnostic philosophies that the early Jewish church first evolved.

For more than seventy-five years after the fall of Judah and the scattering of the Jews in 70 AD, there was no human Jesus Christ known. Up until this time, these displaced and disillusioned Jewish Holy Men studied their Old Testament Bible. There it was revealed to them that this Jewish Christ was a spiritual being who could bring hope and salvation to them. As they understood it, the deeds of this Spiritual Christ happened and existed only in the spirit world. This Spiritual Christ defeated death and Satan in the spiritual world. It was the ignorant preachers and converts who thought that what God did in the spirit world, he must or should have also done on the physical earth.

Another thing the leaders of the earlier church (The Way) accomplished was to get their own self-appointed bishops and leaders into the highest places of the new church. They were able to do this because they were wealthier, more educated, more ruthless, more determined and already had a system of hierarchy in place. There were few Mithraic priests who had the experience of ruling over a large organization. The early church of The Way exchanged their Spiritual Saviour (Jesus) for a Human Jesus Christ God. These Jewish leaders swapped their historical foundations and their claimed apostolic teachings for new power over their own people and those not yet in their new religion. Power quickly becomes oppressive – and wealthy.

The Clear Thinker looks at all of this and reaches a conclusion: the Bible and the religions are man made. Much of the Bible, the gospels and some of the letters, were just a fusion and rewrite of accounts about Mithra, Crishna, Apollonius and the Man of Light known to us from the Persian, Gnostic and Escene writings.

We will stop here and look at some of the other claimed Jesus Christs of the world. These Saviours Anointed have about the same evidence for their claims as do the Christian religions for the claims of their Jesus Christ.


One of the problems that Bible Christianity must face is there is not a single precept or claim in the Christian Bible that was not already being taught by ancient religions for thousands of years prior to the advent of modern Christianity. They even had their “plans of salvation,” usually called, The Path, The Way or The Mysteries.

The early historical records in India and Tibet tell of the Hindu Jesus Christ who was claimed to be a God. He descended to be born of a virgin. He worked miracles in his youth and early life, including the raising of the dead. He preached moral concepts, said he was God’s Son, had twelve students who followed him, was betrayed by one of them, was killed on a tree, run through with a spear, rose again on the third day, was seen by many people and after preaching for forty days he ascended into heaven from the top of a mountain in full view of hundreds of people. This would be no less than four thousand years ago.

His “gospel” was preached in Israel many years before and even during the time the Jewish Jesus Christ was supposed to have been born. The Escenes carried on debates (and recorded them) with these teachers of Hinduism and they taught each other their doctrines and beliefs. The Escenes were looking for a Jewish Messiah, not a universal Messiah. Is there a connection? This Hindu Jesus Christ died “once and for all time” to redeem all mankind from their sins and the evils of life. By believing in this Hindu God, when one died and qualified, he would go to the judgment and then to heaven to be with Chrishna, the Saviour Anointed for eternity. If one had not received Chrishna and his teachings, he was reincarnated again.

The paintings and murals of this God Man show that soon after his death he was pictured with nail holes in his hands and feet, and a spear hole in his side, as were earlier saviours. Yet secular civil accounts claim that an arrow went through his heel and penned him to a tree. He was speared in the side and died penned to the tree. This hearkens back to an even earlier saviour (about 8000 BC). Of this saviour we have little knowledge except that he died on a cross for the sins of the world and is pictured the same as the Jewish Jesus. He was depicted as being black. One of these Hindu Saviours Anointed was named Chrishna (Krishna). Some say in one Indian dialect Chrishna, means, “anointed or appointed.” There are sculptures and paintings (some are over three thousand years old) of Chrishna nailed on the cross that are exactly the same as modern pictures of the Jewish Jesus Christ. Chrishna was often pictured as blue (representing the alien blood line of the Gods). Is this not “copy cat” or what?

Mithra was also crucified on a cross, first in the spirit world and later it was claimed the deed was done in the real world. He likewise did all of these God-like things. He is also pictured the same as Chrishna. In one mural he is pictured as hanging in the heavens on a cross, arms outstretched and with a caption saying, “Come unto me all you who are burdened.”

In fact, including Chrishna and Mithra, there are known to have been many crucified anointed saviours claimed. They were killed on a cross, pole or tree. All were claimed to be Gods who were born in some divine way to a virgin on or about the third day after the shortest day of the year (December 24th or 25th). Each was saved in infancy from some evil death, showed divine genius in youth, later taught divine precepts, worked miracles (healed the sick and raised the dead), had twelve students or followers, was betrayed by one of them, was killed on a cross (tree or pole), entombed, raised again on the third day, appeared to their followers and told their followers of their divine sacrifice for the evils and sins of the world. They then ascended into the sky where they intercede on the right hand of God on behalf of all men. Here is a short list of those Saviours, copied from the book Sixteen Crucified Saviors, by Kersey Graves. There is some dissension over the proper names of some of these God Men and over the dates. These are not here to defend the claims, but just to show that many have made the same claims as were later made for the Jewish God Man. There are many more, some of local origin, but many are of more general reputation. The names and approximate dates of death of some of these claimed God Men (Christs) in English are:

Chrishna (Krishna) 2000 B.C. (2500 B.C. or before)

Sakia 600 B.C.

Thammuz 1160 B.C.

Wittoba 552 B.C.

Ioa 600 B.C.

Hesus 834 B.C. (Jesus, by new translation.)

Quexalcote 587 B.C. (Claimed not to have died.)

Quirinus 506 B.C.

Aeschylus Prometheus 547 B.C.

Thulis 1700 B.C.

Alcestos 600 B.C.

Atys 1170 B.C.

Crite 1200 B.C.

Bali 725 B.C.

Mithra 1800 B.C. (OR EARLIER)

Jesus Christ 34 AD

Appollonius (Pol of Tyana) 98 AD

There were also many lesser or more local saviours and this list does not include the Egyptian Gods. Osirus should be included because he seems to have been the first western God who did most of these Christ-like activities.

We need to look at Apollonius of Tyana (known as Pol of Tyana) because some of his many deeds, travels and teachings are preserved for us in the Holy Bible. Pol was the Cappadocian Saviour who worked miracles, preached morals, preached a Gnostic Spiritual Christ who was a spiritual being in the world, who did not ever become corruptible flesh. Instead, this spiritual Christ, as taught by Pol, entered Mithra the Christ as a dove at his baptism and left him at his crucifixion. He then became the sacrifice of God’s Son, the Christ, for all mankind.

Some reports said Pol himself died (upside down) to save mankind. Much of his activities are recorded in the Bible as those things attributed to a man called Paul of Tarsus in the New Testament. Some of Pol’s known letters (to the same towns listed in the Bible as letters from Paul) were known and quoted in the fourth century by Greek historians. These fourth and fifth century historians claimed Pol’s letters are the basis for the letters that the (possibly fictitious?) Paul of the Bible was supposed to have written. They accused the Christians of plagiarism and denied that there was any evidence that a Paul of Tarsus ever lived!

Many of these writings that are attributed to someone called Paul in the New Testament, came straight out of known Gnostic texts and other writings. It has been well demonstrated that the Paul of Tarsus in the New Testament is claimed to have done many of the same identical deeds, spoke some of the same words and made the same claims as were earlier attributed to Apollonius, who was called Pol of Tyana (a suburb of Tarsus).

Pol was a real man, a Mithraic and/or Gnostic philosopher written about in a number of official court histories by both the Romans and the Greeks. Also recording him were the Egyptians and others. Pol preached his Gospel all over the Middle East, Europe and even over in India and Persia. The Holy Catholic Church succeeded in destroying much of this material, or of infusing Paul’s name where Pol was listed. Today we must depend on the writings of Philostratos, several others who eulogized Pol and the Christian writers who tried to discredit the claims of Pol and his works and teachings. These defenders of Christianity tried to show that there really was a Paul even if he did do some of the same things credited to Pol of Tyana.

Many of the events that were supposed to have happened to the Paul of the New Testament, were events that were known (and recorded) to have happened to Pol of Tyana. There is not one single scrap of non-Christian evidence that Paul of the New Testament was a living person. (There is some disputed genealogical evidence in early Jewish and British manuscripts of a man that escaped to Britain called Saul who may have been the Paul of the Bible.) There are no civil historians who record him as they do Pol of Tyana. Yet, in spite of the extensive efforts of the early Holy Catholic Church to wipe out every trace of Pol of Tyana, they did not completely succeed. His deeds, his travels and even some of his teachings have been saved in the East from the censorship and destruction that the Holy Catholic Church pursued for several hundred years.

Some scholars say that not only did Paul not exist, but that all of the original writings and teachings attributed to him in the New Testament are the teachings of Pol of Tyana. Pol is known to have traveled widely. It may have been Pol who preached and wrote all of the letters to the early church that claimed to help the early church of The Way to understand Jesus (the heavenly spiritual saviour, whose work was all done in the spiritual world, not as a physical presence on earth). He is credited also with helping the church of The Way understand the teachings of the Old Testament and the spiritual truths of The Way. Without doubt, whoever wrote these letters (or if they were copied by Paul of the New Testament), they certainly diverted the whole course of the early church and created doctrinal differences that still exist today.

I am not saying that a man called Paul, mentioned in the New Testament, did not live, though many scholars do give strong evidence that Paul was only a mythical character patterned after Pol. Nor am I saying that a man called Paul did not do some of the things written about him. I am saying that another well-known man, Pol of Tyana, also did many of the same things. He did these things during the same period as credited to Paul. He did these things for another Gnostic religion, possibly Mithras, whose followers were called Christians, whose symbol was the cross, who worshiped a divine Jesus Christ who did all of his deeds in the spirit world. There are secular and civil records that give details of Pol, his letters, sermons and life. Pol was worshiped as a Saviour in Cappadocia. There is no mention of the Bible Paul in any civil writings or accounts.

Finally, the Clear Thinker discovers, as he studies the Bible, that any short honest effort in the Old Testament or the New Testament will uncover scores of errors there. To open a real can of worms on the subject, there is not one single bit of substantial Western evidence that the Jewish Jesus Christ or Joshua Messiah of the New Testament ever lived or did what is claimed for him (especially during the period claimed). The only remaining possibility is that his commonly used name was Judas Thomas (meaning twin), Jeshu or Judas Krist. Of those there is a record.

This was a telling blow to the early Holy Catholic Church. It’s adversaries, especially among the Jews, denied and still do (doctrinally) that the Jewish Messiah (Christ) ever lived. Constantine’s New Catholic Church did the three things that it could to stop their adversaries. They killed those whom they could catch. They tried to destroy all of the writings that tended to oppose the falsehoods of the new church. Finally, they “manufactured” what proof they thought would be accepted by their own worshipers and tried to use this new “Proof” in support of their newly created religion.

The Holy Catholic Church inserted an account about a human Jesus into the work of the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus. They did the same thing with Tacitus, Pliny the Younger and later to the writings of Suetonius among others. These forgeries are blatant, bold and obvious, written in language and styles unknown to the earlier historians. The forgers used words, spellings and town names that did not come into vogue until centuries after the original historians were dead. The term “Christian” was used in some of the forged passages. This could have made them Mithraic or Gnostic worshipers, not members of the Jewish sect called The Way who worshiped the Jewish Saviour Anointed.

Also, these civil histories and works, before they were altered, were well known to the early defenders of the Holy Catholic Church. Yet for more than seven hundred years not one single Christian writer ever mentioned these interpolated (fake) passages in defense of Jesus being a real person. It was only in the eighth century AD and later in the sixteenth century when they were first used. However, before the eighth century, those who opposed the new church spoke and wrote often of the fact that of all the historians who covered the supposed period of the life time of Jesus Christ and the early church, not one ever even mentioned Jesus, Paul, or the Apostles. Neither did they find any mention of the great turmoil that was claimed to surround Jesus, his disciples, or the early church. And these were scholars of the histories of that period. The defenders of the early church used the most outlandish arguments one could imagine trying to prove that Jesus was a real person and not just a composite of several mythological “Christ” characters as the Jewish and Greek scholars charged.

In the final analysis, the Christians had to rely on the new Holy Bible that Constantine got the Council of Nicaea to put together. All these religious defenders of the faith could say was, “The Bible says that the disciples, who would not lie, said Jesus lived and did this and that.” Thus, it remains today! They said you must believe and not doubt. It was the late Seventh Century AD before the church found the first “proof” that Jesus was a real person. That is when the old copies were destroyed and updated versions written to conform to the new “facts.”

It is interesting that there was no Holy Bible for years and years after the Council of 325 AD. There was simply a list of approved texts and writings that floated among the clergy. Many clerics had some copies of the letters or gospels in scroll form. It was much later that all the letters, gospels and writings were bound together in book form for some special churches, clergy and scholars. Individual copies of the scrolls differed widely from each other and it was only with the advent of printing in the 1600’s that the church got serious about making all the texts the same.

In old Persia, Tibet and India there exists ample evidence that Jesus (the Jewish one) was a real historical person. They do give an earlier date for him (that might make him the Man of Light in the Dead Sea Scrolls). There exist books, scrolls and legends concerning the teachings and activities of this Jesus (called Issa or Jssa in the East). He sojourned in the East from his fourteenth year through to his twenty-ninth year. He first spent his time at the feet of Brahman priests whose doctrines he rejected. They sought to kill him because he insisted on teaching the common people (the untouchables). He escaped, possibly to Britain. Returning, he was next accepted by early Buddhist type priests and learned their language and holy books. He became a great Buddhist type teacher and is referred to today as Saint Issa. Until the 1700’s there was no “J” in the English language. Thus, “I” and “H” in the old languages are generally translated with a “J” today. So Issa would be Jssa, their word for “saviour.”

When Jesus left these Holy Men it is recorded that he said, “I must be about my Father’s business.” When he was thirty years old (the earliest age for a Holy Master, or Buddhist priest) he went back to Judah, raised such a stink with the Pharisees that within three months they sought to have him killed. The Buddhist’s accounts agree on this. They also say that Saint Issa (Jesus) was of royal blood or a King.

Some accounts claim there were two Jesus’, that they were twins and the new Sacred Book combined both of their lives, making the two different lives into one account. One Jesus escaped and went west to Britain and the other escaped to the East. The Buddhist’s accounts do not agree on whether Issa was actually killed or not. Some say he escaped to the west, married and had children. Those who say he was killed, say it was reported to them hundreds of years later that he was killed by the Pharisees against the will and law of the Romans. They know nothing of a resurrection or ascension (stories added later, after 325 AD.)

In fact, the Buddhists in Japan insist to this very day that Jesus (one of them) left his family in Europe (Spain), came to Japan, married and they can point you to the very house in which he lived out his last years and the place where he is buried. This they claimed before western men and Christianity arrived in the Orient. They maintain that claim today.

The Christian churches in the west still seek to deny and hide this valuable proof of a Jewish Jesus as a real historical person. Such evidence, publicly accepted, would undercut their doctrines, destroy their plans of salvation and contradict large portions of Constantine’s Holy Bible.

Not a single book in the gospels can be honestly and confidently attributed to the person whose name appears at the beginning of each book. All these books were written by persons unknown. Many Christian scholars say the names at the beginning of these books were simply to whom the books were dedicated, not who wrote the books. Not a single eyewitness to any of the marvelous tales told about Jesus in these books wrote a single word of the Bible. To give testimony or to be a witness, one must tell what he has personally seen or heard. He may not officially tell what someone told him about the event. He cannot say it is the truth because he cannot know. The only book really claimed by some religious scholars to be by an eyewitness is the book John. We will examine that shortly.

In addition, these books about Jesus disagree not only with each other but even with statements made in one part of the book with statements made in a later part of the same book. Jesus stayed in the grave three days and three nights (from sundown Friday night, which was Saturday to the Jews, until before sunup Sunday morning). Add those religious numbers up. There was an angel at the tomb. There was not an angel at the tomb. Jesus first appeared to one. He first appeared to two. He first appeared to the eleven. Which account tells the truth? Are they all wrong? Look it up.

Matthew, Mark and Luke (the synoptic gospels) record the ministry of Jesus as being about three months long (from his baptism to his death). Also, say the Buddhists, in three months Jesus had to escape being executed. If the Buddhist’s records and the synoptic gospels are true, the ministry of Jesus in Judah lasted just three months. “Synoptic” means “in agreement.”

The Gospel of John, on the other hand, claims the ministry of Jesus lasted over three years. All four accounts make separate and opposing claims as to when Jesus was poled (crucified), who was there when it happened, what time he died, who was at the tomb, who saw the apparitions of Jesus and under what circumstances. All disagree over whether Jesus ascended or not. Those who say he did, differ on where it happened, when it happened and who was present.

All these death and resurrection accounts were added later, some even after the Council of 325 AD. The earliest known Christian writers claim Jesus lived over fifty years, well into manhood, before he died, presumably stoned or in some normal way. They were disputing the claims of some that Jesus was poled (crucified) buried and resurrected. They claimed Jesus was a man, the Jews or the Romans did not kill him and he did not rise from the dead.

(This came to my attention just before publication. There are accounts in old Medieval English manuscripts that claim Jesus was stoned in London for stealing the Torah from the Rabbis. See The Bible Fraud, by Tony Bushby.)

If Jesus was a real living person, how is it even possible that close friends of his could have differed so wildly in their account of his life, ministry, teachings and death? The only honest conclusion at which one can arrive is that the writers neither knew him personally, nor did they have any first hand information from anyone who did know him. If we were to say one of them knew him personally it would be impossible to say which one. The one who can be eliminated for sure is the writer of the book called John. He didn’t even have a third hand account of a human Jesus. Is the Holy Spirit responsible for these differences? If not, who is guilty of it?

One could go on and on with the different accounts of the genealogies of Jesus, the time of the poling (crucifixion), the copying from the Gnostic texts, the copying of the miracles, the copying of the teachings of Jesus, the copying of the sermon on the mountain from the Man of Light, the earthquake that caused the saints to wake up out of their graves and walk around Jerusalem, the killing of the children of Bethlehem, the copied Lord’s Prayer, Jesus going into Egypt, etc. All said to be true in one book and contradicted in another one. Not one single Roman or Jewish record confirms or even mentions a single one of these tales. There are hundreds of items like these and you should read the mishmash written by priests, professors and preachers who try to find some acceptable explanation for these inconsistencies and errors. They avoid even talking about the fact that there is no civil record or evidence at all. Not one line! Not one word!

The Bible is only a book of Testimony, or as some have called it, “A book of gossip.” That is, the writers are testifying to certain things and events as though they personally experienced them. They testify to certain events as being true and therefore, they are asking you to believe that what was written by them are the true accounts of those events. Let us interview some of those who are giving witness and testimony about these unusual and wonderful religious claims.

It is claimed that you wrote the book called, Matthew. Why did you use spellings in your book that did not come into practice until after the third century AD?

The Holy Spirit led my writing.

Why in Matthew 28:15 did you write, “And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.” Doesn’t that indicate the story was written a long time after the man called Matthew was dead? If you were not at least two hundred years old, you were not an eyewitness to any of the events in Matthew. Only an eyewitness can give testimony about an event.

It is claimed you wrote the book called Mark? Were you an eyewitness to any of the events described in this book? How do you know those things are true?

No, I was not an eyewitness. Peter, Paul and Barnabas told me.

You were not a witness? Was Paul a witness?

No, Paul was told by God who whispered in his ear – in a vision.

Why did you use so many Latin words in your gospel and why are several of these words spelled as they were spelled in the third century and not as they were in the first century?

I was writing to the Romans.

Then the book that bears your name was written much later than is claimed. Unless you lived to be well over two hundred years old, you could not have written the book called Mark.

No need to call the writer of the book called Luke. He got all of his information from Paul (possibly a fictitious character) who got his information in a vision – in his head. Luke was not an eyewitness.

So next, we call the writer of the book called John. It is claimed that you wrote the book called John. Were you an eyewitness to what you wrote?


You said Jesus was God?


Did you say a man must believe what you wrote about the Saviour Jesus and if he did not believe in Jesus, he would be condemned by God and forever cast into hell and separated from God? And why are these the very same words used by the Mithraic Church about their Jesus Christ called Mithra?

I don’t know.

Then we must look deeper into what you have said.

The Gospel of John begins with, “In the beginning was the Word . . .” This and many more sections of John are direct quotes from the Hindu and Buddhist holy books. These quotes were also copied by some of the Greek religious writers and philosophers at least two centuries before the Christian era. Other parts of John come from Gnostic writings, many of which were also copied from Hindu or Buddhist scriptures. What do you have to say about this?

You must believe and not doubt!

There is a major problem with the Gospel of John. It is an altogether different religion than Matthew, Mark and Luke describe. John’s religion is almost totally Mithraic and follows Hindu, Buddhist and Gnostic texts, while the other gospels are somewhat more Jewish in nature. The combination of Hindu, Buddhist and Gnostic philosophy is Mithraic in tone and fact. It is the Gospel of John that sets the theology of most Fundamental Protestant doctrines. All scholars agree that John was written much later than the other gospels and letters and that it does not conform to the other books of the gospel, or to the letters of other Bible writers. It is very, very different.

There must be a reason why the book, “John” follows the Mithraic doctrines so closely. Why? No eye witness to the life and teachings of Jesus could have accidentally, or even on purpose, changed those Jewish accounts into a different Mithraic type of religion as happened with the book called John and certainly not if he ever knew the man Jesus. It is interesting that the ministry of Mithra lasted three years. According to John, the ministry of Jesus lasted the same amount of time. Is there a connection?

Someone who did not know the truth about the New Testament events in the life of Jesus, or who sought to change those events, wrote the book called John (whatever those events were, if there were events). He may have been a Mithraic or Gnostic priest. He may have written the book called John as late as the beginning of the fourth century AD and certainly not earlier than the middle of the third century. The Mithraic doctrines began to penetrate the religion of “The Way” quite early in its history.

The New Testament gives us three different religions.

First, there is the Jewish type found in Matthew, Mark and Luke. That is a type of new covenant between God and all the Jewish believers as a whole. Then there is the Gnostic and Mithraic type found in John. That is a despotic and rigid type of religion with magic formulae and dire threats against disbelievers. Finally, there is the religion of Paul that is sort of a middle of the road between the other two. It is a spiritual and philosophical religion between God’s Spiritual Son, Jesus Christ and the individual believer. There is no evidence that Paul (or Pol) knew of a physical man called Jesus who lived on earth. Paul’s (Pol’s) Christ was a divine Son of God whose work and sacrifice happened in the spiritual sphere. The Holy Scriptures (Old Testament) revealed this Spiritual Christ through whom the believers could find salvation. Later additions to the writings attributed to Paul, attempted to add the element of a physical Jesus. Most scholars agree that these additions were much later and were not added until after the sixth century.

Clear Thinkers accept the Bible as a unique book that has widely affected western culture of the past and present. They see no evidence that a God inspired a single word of it. They do see a great deal of evidence that the Bible was copied from earlier accounts, from different religions and from men who lived a long time before the Christian era. They do see a multitude of errors in it. They also find many added bits of information and statements that were not even present in Constantine’s first Holy Book, from which many other sections were later deleted.

All in all, Clear Thinkers find the New Testament unreliable in the areas of history, ethics, morals, science, economics, education, psychology, political science, social relationships, justice, family relationships and yes, even in religion. The Holy Bible is the work of many men; therefore men must judge it.

Why are there so many errors still in the Bible? The leaders of the religions have had hundreds of years to rid their Holy Book, their doctrines and their teachings of those things that are “dead giveaways” that the Bible and their religion itself are simply man made. Why have they not taken out those internal statements that expose their stories as being false? The reason is, because they haven’t had to. The believers have been quieted and kept in servitude by the simple fear that to honestly and seriously study these things would be to doubt, and to doubt is to Sin Unpardonably. To commit this Sin is to lose their salvation and all of the good things that their religion has promised.

The gullible, the fearful and the guilt ridden shall inherit the Holy Bible and the Holy Catholic Church and its offshoot – Protestantism (and maybe they deserve it).


To rid yourself of fear and guilt, learn to think honestly. To embrace the Clear Thinker’s philosophy one must desire to know the truth over and above any emotional attachment that he or she may have to any belief. In fact, there are Clear Thinkers in many of our churches today. Good work can be done almost anywhere, in or out of religious organizations. But before anyone can embrace honesty and the philosophy of the Clear Thinker, they must honestly ask and honestly answer some questions.

“If I found out much or even all I have been taught by church, priests, preachers, Bibles, mother, etc. was proven false, could I stand up under the emotional strain? Could I stand up under the bitterness of finding out I have been lied to and deceived? How would I react if I suddenly found there is no heaven or hell as taught by the religions? If I am one who makes my living from those who support the church (a priest, minister, teacher, professor, etc.), could I give up my job, or stay on as a Clear Thinker? Could I work things out with my spouse, children, parents, friends and others?”

There are only two reasons or drives for being a Clear Thinker and actually they are one in the long run. You must be honest, at least with yourself. And you must have a strong desire to know the truth about God, religion and those things called spiritual. You must use your mind the best you can. The key phrases to a Clear Thinker are, “Honest Doubt” and “Logical Thought.” No one will ever know all the answers, so forget a lifetime hunched over reference books in dozens of foreign languages.


What you will be looking for are the principal criteria or standards for judging life within you and around you. You will be looking for the standards by which you can judge the claims of the past and the present. You will be looking for the moral and ethical standards that will be the correct and compatible guides for your activities as long as your life shall last on this earth. And in any hereafter you will do the same there. Here is that standard.

Do not do to others that which you would not have done to yourself!

If you are looking for the philosophy that will allow you to be the best person you can possibly be, you will find it in Clear Thinking. If you are looking for the philosophy that will set you free from all the garbage that controls your actions and inhibits your logical thinking and creativity, you will find it in the Clear Thinking philosophy. Honest Clear Thinkers shall inherit freedom, justice, peace of mind and above all, sanity.

Sanity is a nice, desirable commodity to posses. But if a person has a delusion, or makes one up (false concept or lie) that the normal cultural sanity does not accept as being true, then that person is considered to be somewhat insane (a disbeliever) by that culture. However, if that deluded person can convince others that the delusion is real, then that delusion becomes a Religious Belief and is tolerated. If more and more accept the lie, then soon it becomes a Religion and is granted status. If enough people over time can be convinced that the delusion is true, then that delusion becomes a Culture Truth. That delusion then becomes a standard culture norm by which sanity is now measured.

Finally, the cycle becomes a full circle. The person who does not believe that delusion is now considered as insane to some degree by that new modified culture. Christians consider Atheists to be somewhat insane because they do not accept their Christian delusions as being true.

So by our Christian cultural norm, I am considered to be somewhat insane. I have a question about this. Does Honest Clear Thinking make a person insane? Or does believing (instead of thinking) make one insane? Honest Thinking provides stability for the mind. Believing removes all protective filters and rationality from the mind. Believing mingles reality with delusions to such an extent that it produces fear, guilt and delusions of all sorts – just like drugs. No! Worse than drugs, because druggies know they are on drugs.


Men created the Holy Bible and the Holy Catholic Church for selfish, political, economical and personal reasons. What a powerful bunch!



Copyright: September 1989
Renewed: January 2004
By: Thomas E. Blaylock, Jr.


5 responses to “Constantine’s Bible

  1. Victor Rivera

    This is very interesting. It’s what I was looking for. What I would like to know is how to substantiate what you are saying here. As a common practice, confirmation is the seal of my facts. i would appreciate your help in this matter. than you very much.
    Victor Rivera

  2. First, the Messiah’s name is Yahushua not Jesus. Second, you do not list any references to support your assertions. That must be done before you can be considered credible by anyone.

  3. John Cornelsen

    The gospels and tthe testimonies of the Apostles are filled with referenceds to the Old Testament. Some changed or shortened as if taken from memory and not corrected to the original scriptures in the claimed re-writes. .Makes little sense that these references would occur if they were were of Mithraic or Oriental copycats.

  4. It’s going to be finish of mine day, however before ending I am reading this great piece of writing to increase my know-how.

  5. Richard Ferguson

    Constantine committed the biggest hoax the world has ever known – but beautiful in the way it creates a vital need (salvation) while providing itself as the only solution. The world DOES need morality . . . But not under false pretenses! Our hope for the future is plenty enough reason in itself!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s