Has the Bible been Changed? Part Two: The Ten Words

Abstract: At the first council of Nicaea it was declared that Jesus Christ, God the Son was co-eternal with the Father. What this meant was there never was a time when Jesus wasn’t the Son of God, but not only is Jesus God’s eternal Son he is equal to God which in fact makes Jesus God since they are of the same substance according the the Nicene creed. This has been the dogma of the church for the past 1700 years, but what if I told you there are ten words that could change Christianity forever, ten words that are so deadly that it strikes at the very heart of the post-Nicene church and would bring this religion of two billion plus members crashing down upon it’s very foundation. Would you believe me? Well contrary to popular thought the earliest biblical witness show this to be the case, using the earliest biblical manuscripts in conjunction with several quotations of the pre-Nicene Church Fathers, it can be demonstrated that the very same scriptures that we use today read differently prior to the adoption of Christianity as the state puppet religion of the Roman government.

The Ten Words

The baptism of Jesus

The Holy Spirit anointing the mind of Jesus

Preserved in our oldest biblical manuscripts and the writings of the pre-nicene church fathers there are ten words that are no longer in the gospels they have been removed from the scriptures, but thanks to textual criticism the truth has been uncovered. Not only are these ten words preserved in our oldest manuscripts and pre-nicene church fathers but paradoxically they are perserved in another part of the New Testament, the book of Hebrews which proves the forgery.  In one of the oldest existing biblical manuscripts known as Codex Bezae the words spoken to Jesus at his baptism by God isn’t the words we find in our biblical text today, it contains ten words that can change the Christian religion forever. To understand how this is so we must begin with the baptism of Jesus for it is here that we shall discover why these ten words are so dangerous.

Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented. As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:13-17)

What if i told you that the underlined words in this retelling of the baptism of Jesus wasn’t the original wording but it was something else. Would you want to know what the original wording was? Would you even care? If you’re a Christian you should care because the true words that were spoken by God himself have been censored by the church of Rome. The words spoken to Jesus by God at his baptism was NOT, “This is my Son whom i love; and with him I am well pleased” the true words spoken to Jesus were, “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.”

Evidence from Early Church Fathers

Christian philosopher, apologist and martyr Justin Martyr who lived from A.D. 100-165 wrote concerning Jesus in his work known as ‘Dialogue with Trypho a Jew’, Justin said:

“He was in the habit of working as a carpenter when among men, making ploughs and yokes; by which He taught the symbols of righteousness and an active life; but then the Holy Ghost, and for man’s sake, as I formerly stated, lighted on Him in the form of a dove, and there came at the same instant from the heavens a voice, which was uttered also by David when he spoke, personating Christ, what the Father would say to Him: `Thou art My Son: this day have I begotten Thee’” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho a Jew)

Justin then goes on to explain to Trypho:

“For this devil, when [Jesus] went up from the river Jordan, at the time when the voice spake to Him, `Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten Thee,’ is recorded in the memoirs of the apostles to have come to Him and tempted Him, even so far as to say to Him, ‘Worship me;’ and Christ answered him, ‘Get thee behind me, Satan: thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve’”. (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho a Jew)

The great theologian and mentor to Origen, Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 150-215) in his writing known as The Instructor’ wrote concering the baptism of Jesus:

“For at the moment of the Lord’s baptism there sounded a voice from heaven, as a testimony to the Beloved, ‘Thou art My beloved Son, to-day have I begotten Thee’” (Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor)

In his commentary on the gospel of John, Origen (A.D. 185-254) writes that:

None of these testimonies, however, sets forth distinctly the Savior’s exalted birth; but when the words are addressed to Him, Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee‘, this is spoken to Him by God”. (Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of John)

The church father Methodius (A.D. 260-312) was a Bishop, author and a Martyr. In his work titled Banquet of the Ten Virgins’ he wrote that:

“Now, in perfect agreement and correspondence with what has been said, seems to be this which was spoken by the Father from above to Christ when He came to be baptized in the water of the Jordan, ‘Thou art my son: this day have I begotten thee’”. (Methodius, Banquet of the Ten Virgins)

Lactantius (A.D. 240-320) was a Christian author and adviser to the Emperor Constantine and a tutor to his son. In his The Divine Insitutes Lactantius writes:

“Then a voice from heaven was heard: ‘Thou art my Son, today have I begotten Thee,‘Which voice is found to have been foretold by David. And the Spirit of God descended upon Him, formed after the appearance of a white dove. From that time He began to perform the greatest miracles, not by magical tricks, which display nothing true and substantial, but by heavenly strength and power, which were foretold even long ago by the prophets who announced Him; which works are so many, that a single book is not sufficient to comprise them all” (Lactantius, The Divine Institutes)

Unless these early leaders of the Church were reading from completely different gospels the words,“Thou art my son, today have I begotten thee” have been removed from our gospel’s and replaced with, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

Evidence from the Epistle to the Hebrews

There is biblical evidence from outside the gospel’s where it is confirmed that the words spoken to Jesus by God was, “Thou art my son, today have I begotten thee.” This evidence can be found in the epistle to the Hebrews chapter one verse five, i am going to quote verses one through five so you can see the whole thing in it’s context, it says:

“Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. For to which of the angels did God ever say, “Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee.” (Hebrews 1:1-5)

To understand why these words clash so violently with modern Christian dogma I will quote from the Adam Clarke commentary. Commenting on the phrase “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee,” found in Hebrews chapter one verse five the Adam Clarke commentary says:

“This most important use of this saying has passed unnoticed by almost every Christian writer which I have seen; and yet it lies here at the foundation of all the apostle’s proofs. If Jesus was not thus the Son of God, the whole Christian system is vain and baseless: but his resurrection demonstrates him to have been the Son of God; therefore everything built on this foundation is more durable than the foundations of heaven, and as inexpugnable as the throne of the eternal King.” (Adam Clarke Commentary on Hebrews 1:5)

The Adam Clarke commentary exposes it’s Christian bias when it claims:

“The words, This day have I begotten thee, must refer either to his incarnation, when he was miraculously conceived in the womb of the virgin by the power of the Holy Spirit; or to his resurrection from the dead.” (Adam Clarke Commentary on Hebrews 1:5)

This is a forced way of interpreting this passage, when God told Jesus, ‘this day have I begotten you’ he was referring to that moment in time which means at his baptism in the river Jordan Jesus became the Christ/Son of God for the first time. This contradicts the doctrine of the trinity which says Jesus was eternally God but as we saw in part one, the trinity concept was added to the bible centuries after the bible was finished. What this means is that Jesus was a man who became the Son of God, this of course goes against Christian dogma that Jesus is divine.

Is Jesus God?

If Jesus was God then surely Jesus’ chief disciple would have taught Jesus was God right? According to Acts chapter 2 Peter told his fellow Israelites that:

Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know” (Acts 2:22)

Here Peter confirms that Jesus was a man accredited by God, and a man whom God did miracles, wonders and signs through. If Jesus was God then how could God work miracles through himself? This shouldn’t be surprising because this is the same Jesus who said many times throughout his ministry:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself…” (John 5:19)

“…I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.” (John 8:28)

The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works”(John 14:10)

Here Jesus himself tells his detractors that it is the father who dwells in him that does the works.

“Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'” (John 20:17)

If Jesus was God or co-equal with God from all eternity how could he ever call mere mortals his brothers? Moreover, how could he return to God if he was God? These biblical verses along with the proof that the trinity concept was added to the bible at a later date should cast doubt on the modern Christian belief that Jesus was God.

Ancient Unorthodox Views of Jesus

Not all early Christians believed in the trinity or that Jesus was divine. The early church theologian Hippolytus of Rome (A.D. 170-236) in his principle work ‘Refutations of all Heresies’ he describes the beliefs of a first century sect of Jewish-Christians called the Ebionites. He says they believed that Jesus;

“was justified by fulfilling the Law. He was the Christ of God, since not one of the rest of mankind had observed the Law completely. Had any one else fulfilled the commandments of the Law, he would have been the Christ.” Hence “when Ebionites thus fulfill the law, they are able to become Christs, for they assert that our Lord Himself was a man in like sense with all humanity.”(Hippolytus of Rome, Refutation of All Heresies 7.22)

Church Father Epiphanius of Salamis (A.D. 320-403) also writes about the Ebonites, he says;

For since they wish Jesus to be in reality a man, as I have said before, Christ came in him having descended in the form of a dove and was joined to him (as already we have found among other heresies also), and became the Christ from God above, but Jesus was born from the seed of man and woman. (Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 30.14.4-5)

These hostile witnesses attest to the fact that there were believers in Jesus who believed he was simply a man who became the Christ, not someone who was always the Christ/Son of God as Christians claim today.

Historian Edward Gibbon’s most important work, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire’ was published in six volumes between 1776 and 1788. This is a grade A quality work because Edward Gibbon used primary sources to gather his information. In this work Edward Gibbon describes the beliefs of early Christians, he writes that in Jesus they believed there was a;

“…supernatural union of a man and God… In their eyes, Jesus of Nazareth was a mere mortal, the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary: but he was the best and wisest of the human race, selected as the worthy instrument to restore upon earth the worship of the true and supreme Deity. When he was baptized in the Jordan, the Christ, the first of the aeons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry” (Gibbon; The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, V.4, P.366).

Here we see even more evidence that early Christians believed it was at the baptism of Jesus where he became the Christ/Son of God.

The second century writer Irenaeus (A.D. 110-202) describes the beliefs of a Gnostic Chrsitian named Cerinthus, (A.D. 100) he believed the same thing as the Jewish-Christians, the Ebonites, Irenaeus writes that Cerinthus;

“represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of human generation, while he nevertheless was more righteous, prudent, and wise than other men. Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles” (Irenaeus, Bk 1, Ch 26, doctrines of Cerinthus)

All of these early christian beliefs of Jesus have one more thing in common, the denial of Jesus being born of a virgin. Most Christians overlook this one fact, the gospel of Mark was the first gospel written, but guess what? Mark’s gospel has no virgin birth story in it, the gospel of Mark starts out with the baptism of Jesus. In Marks gospel Jesus isn’t special because he was born of a virgin but because when he was baptized the holy spirit came upon him and made him the Christ, the Son of God. Then God spoke from heaven saying, “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.” This is why the words spoken to Jesus by God had to be changed from, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee” to “This is my Son whom i love; and with him I am well pleased.” This had to be edited out of the bible because it confirmed the beliefs of early Jewish and Gentile Christians who were considered heretics by later Christians because they didn’t believe in the divinity of Jesus.

More damning evidence comes from the fact that the original gospel of Matthew had no virgin birth story in it. The gospel of Matthew was first written in the Hebrew language before it was written in Greek which is where our translations of the Bible come from. This Hebrew version of the gospel of Matthew is lost. Edward Gibbon writes:

“But this Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew is most unaccountably lost; and we may accuse the diligence or fidelity of the primitive churches, who have preferred the unauthorized version of some nameless Greek”.

Gibbon rightfully calls our copy of Matthew the “unauthorized version of some nameless Greek”, because the only true Gospel attributed to Matthew is the original Hebrew version which was never given to the Gentile Church, and we no longer possess today.

Of this Hebrew original of Matthew, St. Jerome wrote to the Bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus:

“A difficult work is enjoined, since this translation has been commanded me by your Felicities, which St. Matthew himself, the Apostle and Evangelist, did not wish to be openly written. For if it had not been Secret, he would have added to the evangel that which he gave forth was his; but he made up this book sealed up in the Hebrew characters, which he put forth even in such a way that the book, written in Hebrew letters and by the hand of himself, might be possessed by the men most religious, who also, in the course of time, received it from those who preceded them. But this very book they never gave to any one to be transcribed, and its text they related some one way and some another”.

It is this copy of Matthew that the Ebionites used and like i mentioned before this version of Matthew is lost we just have the Greek version which is in our Bibles today. But it is interesting to note that the enemy of the Ebionites Epiphanius noted that:

“The two first chapters of St. Matthew did not exist in the Ebionite copies (Epiphan. Haeres. xxx. 13″

As any Christian should know the first two chapters of the gospel of Matthew deal with the immaculate conception and virgin birth of Jesus Christ. If this is true then this is more evidence that the doctrine of the virgin birth was added sometime after the gospel of Matthew was originally composed. There is sufficient reason to question whether in its original form, Luke contained the narrative of the Virgin birth. That the original version of Luke did not contain the first two chapters of the birth narrative is further demonstrated in the allegation of the church father Tertullian that the heretics used copies of Luke that did not contain these chapters.

Conclusion

I have shown you that the earliest biblical manuscripts, early church fathers and The Apostle Paul himself record that the words spoken to Jesus by God was “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee” which proves Jesus was a man who became the Christ at his baptism, this view fits perfectly with what the Ebonites believed about Jesus.

I have also shown you biblical verses which state Jesus was not God and that God was working miracles through Jesus. Peter said in the book of Acts chapter 2 that Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God, Jesus himself said he did nothing it was the father who dwelled in him that did the miracles.

The question is who are you going to believe Jesus and his first century followers (The Ebonites) or the puppet church of Rome who three centuries after Jesus they declared him to be God, then went on a mass crusade and killed off the Ebonites and other “heretics” and then proceed to tamper with the scriptures to hide the truth. Elaine Pagels was correct when she stated:

“It is the winners who write history — their way.” (Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, pg. 142)

Advertisements