ANSWERS: 59
  • No, but I am. So worship me.
  • In my eyes, no one is worthy of worship.
  • ...Yes...and you shouldn't have asked this question...ur asking for it...good luck..
  • If I HAD to worship anything or anyone, it would be Nature. The Sun, The Water, The Earth. And please don't say God created it. Maybe you are convinced. When I know who created God, then we'll talk.
  • Nope, I don't see the point of worshipping someone that came from several books and "history". If I would worship anyone it would be my gf. (part time of course XD)
  • So much interest in someone who has been dead for over 2000 years.
  • Yes for me worship is very powerful and these pictures took my breath away -- + 5
  • He's just not cool enough. Drunk
  • Get on your knees and worship me! I am Jesus! If you want proof, tell me to do something to proove it to you, anything I could do 2000 years ago I can still do now! Ask away.
  • Thank you, everyone for your helpful answers so far. Since a lot of people have answered so far, I'm going to answer if you all do not mind. I believe the Lord Jesus Christ is worthy of worship because He gave me life and has had mercy on me all of the time, even when I've sinned against Him and spat in His face. He bled and died for my sins on the cross of Calvary. He rose again for me, and He saved me from my sins as a child. He deserves my worship and love and praise. :) -In the Master's service. Thank you and God bless you!
  • To me he is but I'd never force my opinion on anyone
  • No. He was not god. He was a good, enlightened prophet.
  • I guess this would depend on who Jesus is to you. If He is a just a historical figure to you, why would you... Or worse, if you don’t even believe in Him, how could you possibly worship Him. Worship, to may people does not have any meaning any longer and it’s seldom practiced. Routine and dogma has taking oven many churches, making a participant feeling OK just by participating, so to many, attendance and ritual becomes “worship”. The scripture warns about this in: Matthew 15:9 and in vain do they worship Me, teaching teachings -- commands of men.' Matthew 15:8-10 (in Context) Matthew 15 (Whole Chapter) Mark 7:7 and in vain do they worship Me, teaching teachings, commands of men; Mark 7:6-8 (in Context) Mark 7 (Whole Chapter) Jesus never requested to be worshipped, instead He urges us to worship the Father. Bible speaks of “true worship” as being done in the spirit and the truth. (Notice?, both invisible to naked eye). Yet often the religious machinery will go to great lengths and hoopla “worshiping” God, which I feel it’s more like a celebration, which maybe OK, but it’s not worship… John 4:23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. John 4:22-24 (in Context) John 4 (Whole Chapter) John 4:24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth." John 4:23-25 (in Context) John 4 (Whole Chapter) To worship Jesus, requires sacrifice, none less then your life. It only then it becomes an offering of true worship. Is Jesus worthy to be worshipped??? Revelation 5:12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing. Revelation 5:11-13 (in Context) Revelation 5 (Whole Chapter) I guess if angels are shouting with a loud voice, “Worthy is the Lamb” I guess He is worthy of worship…
  • I can't be the judge of 'worthiness', but I do know to whom we should give praise and worship. Look at Matthew 4:10. Satan challenged Jesus to worship him, just once. Jesus replies by saying 'Get behind me Satan, for it is written....', and he then quotes from Deuteronomy 6:13. Deuteronomy 6:13 Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God; and him shalt thou serve, and shalt swear by his name. Jesus never wanted worship. He was here only to praise his father, Jehovah. We should do the same. There are many people worshiping Jesus that won't even recognize God. They have stripped God's name, Jehovah, from their Bibles and have done whatever possible to justify worshiping others instead...Jesus, the 'spirit', a mysterious/incomprehensible triune never mentioned in Scripture, Mary, Haile Selassie, etc......What did Jesus say of these people? Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. (Mat 7:21) "...HE THAT DOETH THE WILL OF MY FATHER..." Witnesses of Jehovah.
  • Worship? Only if you believe he is God. But read and study? Learn from? Yes!
  • Yes. We have been worshipping Jesus as God since the Apostle Thomas said, "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28) And John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." and John 1:14 "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." The Nicene Creed (from the year 325) talks about the nature of Jesus Christ: We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being with the Father. Through Him all things were made. For us and our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate; He suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day He rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures: He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains what we believe in depth: http://www.nccbuscc.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt2.htm For many Scriptures that refer to Jesus as God and the Trinity, see: http://www.cwo.com/~pentrack/catholic/Trinity.txt With love in Christ.
  • Hero worship? Why not. He was a great man. Anyway, let’s examine the’worship’ claim more seriously. The linguists tell us that the translators have been a little, shall we say, careless(?) The word they’ve translated as worship is “proskuneo” in the Greek manuscript, more a show of respect and greeting like the kissing of the pope’s hand or kneeling down as before a king, like they did to Jesus when they mockingly dressed him up in purple as a king of the Jews. The same Greek word “proskuneo” is used in three other instances in Acts 10:25 Cornelius worshiped (proskuneo’ed) Peter, in 1 Samuel 25:23 Abigail proskuneo’ed (translated “fell on her face before”) David, and in 2 Kings 4:37 a Shunammite woman proskuneo’ed to Elisha (translated as “fell at his feet, and bowed to the ground”) So if proskuneoing to Jesus can be taken as evidence that he is God then Peter, David and Elisha should also be considered God by the SAME argument.
  • Obviously. There are so many believers, it helps them...
  • No. He was a very enlightened man for His time. Yet, He was but a man. He is no more worthy of worship than Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Susan B. Anthony, or Martin Luther King, Jr.
  • No. Don't worship people, worship abstract concepts and such. It's much more equalising that way.
  • no, he was a ordinary man, nothing more
  • Yes, indeed.
  • Personally, I don't belief that a charismatic Jewish carpenter with delusions of grandeur (or possibly some other form of delusional mental illness) who managed to BS a few other people is worthy of worship or starting a religion that advocates aggressive proselytizing (and genocide against those who refuse to convert) or of taking the assets of those who have something they want or covers up the molestation of children really IS worth worshiping. In fact,it only cements my non-belief and makes me more devout in my Agnosticism. If that is right, that I WANT to be a sinner. I WANT to be wrong. I am not an intolerant, murderous pedophile, and neither are a majority of Christians despite the actions/example of their clergy.
  • To the few chosen, yes!
  • He is...as you purpose. Me? Well, I've got better things to do, and I'm sure Jesus is very busy himself. I'm sure we'll both be content enough if we just go on ignoring eachother.
  • I'm sure a Buddhist, Muslim or Wiccan would strongly disagree.A few other religions as well.What makes your belief any better or more correct than theirs? As an agnostic, no...why?
  • OF COURSE He is. One day Satan and Jesus were having a conversation. Satan had just come from the Garden of Eden, and he was gloating and boasting. 'Yes, sir, I just caught the world full of people down there. Set me a trap, used bait I knew they couldn't resist. Got 'em all!' 'What are you going to do with them?' Jesus asked. Satan replied, 'Oh, I'm gonna have fun! I'm gonna teach them how to marry and divorce each other, how to hate and abuse each other, how to drink and smoke and curse. I'm gonna teach them how to invent guns and bombs and kill each other. I'm really gonna have fun!' 'And what will you do when you get done with them?' Jesus asked. 'Oh, I'll kill 'em, and send 'em to hell.' Satan glared proudly. 'How much do you want for them?' Jesus asked. 'Oh, you don't want those people. They ain't no good. Why, you'll take them and they'll just hate you. They'll spit on you, curse you and kill you. You don't want those people!!' 'How much?' He asked again. Satan looked at Jesus and sneered, 'All your blood, tears and your life.' Jesus said, 'Done.'
  • No more so than Ghandi, Nelson Mandela or my dad...
  • absolutely... he died for us... It was OUR sin that he carried on his shoulders... He's worthy (in my opinion)
  • Same answer as - is God worthy of worship?
  • Jesus loves you! :o)
  • Well, He is The LORD JESUS CHRIST. That would make Him that "Light That Shineth on all men" John 1. In Him dwelt the fullness of The Godhead bodily. He made available to men healing, deliverance, and overcoming power.
  • Oh My ,Yes, Yes, and more yes. Its all about Him. I love to worship him in Spirit and in Truth.
  • whew what a question, one that I almost reluctantly answer because it will be a minority answer and more than likely just get people fired up but here goes. (For brevitiy and argument's sake we will assume Jesus and God are the same being) To answer this question one has to ask themselves, what is the criteria for making one worthy of worship? Are there clear guidelines? Although there are a number of divine attributes which receive a lot of attention, there is none quite so important for traditional believers as the general principle of absolute perfection and the narrower implication that, therefore, God is worthy of our worship. These are, in many respects, the very reason why the existence of God is the subject of so much debate — if it weren’t for them, there wouldn’t be any religions centered around God and perhaps people wouldn’t be divided. The concepts of worship and perfection are deeply intertwined, each feeding off of the other and each influencing how the other is understood. The relevancy of worship is reasonably obvious, because gods have been the objects of worship for as far back as our record of gods goes. Indeed, gods have generally demanded worship and sometimes it was understood that humans were created for the purpose of worshipping the gods. But of course there is a question which people can ask: why should we bother worshipping gods? Worship involves total and absolute devotion. If we truly worship God, then we have totally dedicated ourselves to God: we dedicate ourselves to God’s praise, to God’s values, and to God’s purpose. There are no compromises and there is no effort to get God to meet us “halfway,” to take our values or our desires into consideration. We worship, and that means we give up whatever of ourselves is required. But what sort of god merits such devotion? The principle of perfection has been emphasized, at least in part, to answer that question. Over the course of time, people decided that it wasn’t quite enough that a god be really powerful, really jealous, or really knowledgeable. Such attributes sufficed in ancient polytheistic religions, but even when they were still popular there were a few who questioned whether that was sufficient. Philosophers and theologians gradually developed a principle of greater and greater perfection. And it wasn’t just enough that God simply be the greatest being we could think of or just theoretically the greatest being. Instead, God, to be worthy of worship, has to be the greatest possible being on absolutely every possible level — nothing greater, in any fashion, can possibly exist. Thus, God is an absolutely perfect being; to use the language of Christian theologian Anselm, God is a being greater than which no being can be conceived (even by God). All of the other attributes of God ultimately tie into this one — God’s perfection is so absolute that there is nothing more powerful, more loving, more knowledgeable, etc. Unfortunately, this understanding of God is not without its problems. For one thing, it’s a bit circular. The idea that God is absolutely perfect was partly derived from the premise that God is worthy of worship (no one really asked if perhaps God might exist but might not be worth worshipping), but now the idea that God is worthy of worship is based upon the premise that God is absolutely perfect. It’s a nice argument, but if either premise is questionable (and they are), then the position collapses. Actually questioning the premises offers us further problems. Even if God is absolutely perfect, why does that necessarily entail that it merits worship — our absolute, unfettered and unadulterated devotion? What is it about “absolute perfection” that requires, morally or logically, that we completely give ourselves over to this being? Indeed, should we even assume that this being desires our worship? Should we assume that this being even cares what we do with our lives? Take into consideration that should a god require complete devotion wouldn't he make himself known to everyone so as to prove his existence and worthiness of praise being gained through his works as opposed to his myths. For example, people talk of God giving man free will. But in truth man does not have free will to believe in God or not because even those who believe have no absolute way of proving he exists and a God that does not exist is of course not perfect and not worthy of worship. If God wanted to truly give man free will he would make his existence known with 100% validity and then allow men to decide whether or not to follow and worship him. Over time the argument of free will has gone from man having a free will to worship God or not, to turning into man having free will to believe in God or not, 2 completely different things fundamentally. So in my opinion, an ambiguous God is not worthy of worship. Would we as humans give birth to our children and leave them a rule book to live their lives by and just allow them to grow up and go through life never knowing us, seeing us, or hearing from us but still expect that child to respect, honor and even believe we exist? No, and that's just the moral creed of being a parent, not even close to the expectations of being a God that requires worship. In a much simpler sense, anything that requires worship should earn it and make themselves worthy of worship through deeds. We don't elect government officials because of what we as a society will do for them do we? No, we elect them for what they will do for us, they must make themselves worthy of their power and right as a leader, as should a God.
  • I sure think so.
  • Only God should be worshipped. It says in the Bible to pray directly to God. Jesus was a prophet.
  • Absolutely
  • In a word, no.
  • God is worthy of my worship cause he has healed me & saved me from different situations that i shouldn't have been in!
  • NO, even HE said, "all the Glory goes to HIS FATHER"...Our Father, who art in heaven , Hallowed be thy name....though art the Glory, the Power, the Kingdom of heaven...isn't this what HE said when HE was showing the Apostles how and what to pray to and for...Amen.... We should honor HIM as the Son of the ALMIGHTY ...but the glory is God's...
  • Nope. No fictitious character is. +5
  • He should be revered but only God should be worshipped.
  • ONLY IF YOU WANT TO BELIEVE IN A COMIC BOOK. THE BIBLE IS ONLY A LIE, COPIED FROM THE ORIGINAL FIRST BOOK SEVERAL HUNDRED YEARS AGO TO STOP BLOOD SHED IN ONE COUNTRY. IT DID JUST THAT, BUT EACH THAT READ IT WROTE THEIR OWN AND CHANGE PARTS OF IT TO SUIT THEM AND WHEN THROUGH THE YEARS REWRITTEN OVER AND OVER, IT BECAME A BUNCH OF FAKE STORIES OF THE PEOPLE THAT WROTE THEM AND NOW YOUR BELIEVING IN A BUNCH OF DEAD PEOPLE THAT WROTE LIES. EVEN THE MUSLIMS. LIVING IN DESERTS WITH VERY LITTLE TO DO, BUT READ IT OVER AND OVER REALLY BURNING THESE LIES INTO THEIR BRAINS FOR WHAT. ITS NOT WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN, BUT WHAT YOU DO TO EXPAND YOUR LIVES. PRAYING IS WISHING AND THATS ALL. HAVE A NICE DAY. MIKE
  • jesus (NOT "lord" jesus!) does not deserve even the slightest amount of worship! IF it (yes, I called your precious jesus an "it"...and I meant it that way!) existed, it never did anything to earn worship. It is the cause of wars, battles, murders, and general chaos. NOTHING like that deserves to be worshipped---just reviled and rejected, which is what I did to your worthless "lord" many years ago! I have never once regretted kicking this piece of shit out of my life and I never will! It is gone out of my life and I'm glad to be rid of it! Good riddance to rotten trash!
  • Here is just 100 Names for the Lord Jesus Advocate (1 John 2:1) Almighty (Rev. 1:8; Mt. 28:18) Alpha and Omega (Rev. 1:8; 22:13) Amen (Rev. 3:14) Apostle of our Profession (Heb. 3:1) Atoning Sacrifice for our Sins (1 John 2:2) Author of Life (Acts 3:15) Author and Perfecter of our Faith (Heb. 12:2) Author of Salvation (Heb. 2:10) Beginning and End (Rev. 22:13) Blessed and only Ruler (1 Tim. 6:15) Bread of God (John 6:33) Bread of Life (John 6:35; 6:48) Bridegroom (Mt. 9:15) Capstone (Acts 4:11; 1 Pet. 2:7) Chief Cornerstone (Eph. 2:20) Chief Shepherd (1 Pet. 5:4) Christ (1 John 2:22) Creator (John 1:3) Deliverer (Rom. 11:26) Eternal Life (1 John 1:2; 5:20) Faithful and True (Rev. 19:11) Faithful Witness (Rev. 1:5) Faithful and True Witness (Rev. 3:14) First and Last (Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13) Firstborn From the Dead (Rev. 1:5) Firstborn over all creation (Col. 1:15) Gate (John 10:9) God (John 1:1; 20:28; Heb. 1:8; Rom. 9:5; 2 Pet. 1:1;1 John 5:20; etc.) Good Shepherd (John 10:11,14) Great Shepherd (Heb. 13:20) Great High Priest (Heb. 4:14) Head of the Church (Eph. 1:22; 4:15; 5:23) Heir of all things (Heb. 1:2) High Priest (Heb. 2:17) Holy and True (Rev. 3:7) Holy One (Acts 3:14) Hope (1 Tim. 1:1) Hope of Glory (Col. 1:27) Horn of Salvation (Luke 1:69) I Am (John 8:58) Image of God (2 Cor. 4:4) Immanuel (Mt. 1:23) Judge of the living and the dead (Acts 10:42) King Eternal (1 Tim. 1:17) King of Israel (John 1:49) King of the Jews (Mt. 27:11) King of kings (1 Tim 6:15; Rev. 19:16) King of the Ages (Rev. 15:3) Lamb (Rev. 13:8) Lamb of God (John 1:29) Lamb Without Blemish (1 Pet. 1:19) Last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45) Life (John 14:6; Col. 3:4) Light of the World (John 8:12) Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5) Living One (Rev. 1:18) Living Stone (1 Pet. 2:4) Lord (2 Pet. 2:20) Lord of All (Acts 10:36) Lord of Glory (1 Cor. 2:8) Lord of lords (Rev. 19:16) Man from Heaven (1 Cor. 15:48) Master (Lk. 5:5; 8:24; 9:33) Mediator of the New Covenant (Heb. 9:15) Mighty God (Isa. 9:6) Morning Star (Rev. 22:16) Offspring of David (Rev. 22:16) Only Begotten Son of God (John 1:18; 1 John 4:9) Our Great God and Savior (Titus 2:13) Our Holiness (1 Cor. 1:30) Our Husband (2 Cor. 11:2) Our Protection (2 Thess. 3:3) Our Redemption (1 Cor. 1:30) Our Righteousness (1 Cor. 1:30) Our Sacrificed Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7) Power of God (1 Cor. 1:24) Precious Cornerstone (1 Pet. 2:6) Prophet (Acts 3:22) Rabbi (Mt. 26:25) Resurrection and Life (John 11:25) Righteous Branch (Jer. 23:5) Righteous One (Acts 7:52; 1 John 2:1) Rock (1 Cor. 10:4) Root of David (Rev. 5:5; 22:16) Ruler of God’s Creation (Rev. 3:14) Ruler of the Kings of the Earth (Rev. 1:5) Savior (Eph. 5:23; Titus 1:4; 3:6; 2 Pet. 2:20) Son of David (Lk. 18:39) Son of God (John 1:49; Heb. 4:14) Son of Man (Mt. 8:20) Son of the Most High God (Lk. 1:32) Source of Eternal Salvation for all who obey him (Heb. 5:9) The One Mediator (1 Tim. 2:5) The Stone the builders rejected (Acts 4:11) True Bread (John 6:32) True Light (John 1:9) True Vine (John 15:1) Truth (John 1:14; 14:6) Way (John 14:6) Wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24) Word (John 1:1) Word of God (Rev. 19:13) Yes, He is worthy
  • yes he is god and here is a proff theory of gods existence if you doubt him.im not quit sure if you are or not.(1) Everything that exists has a cause of its existence. (2) The universe exists. Therefore: (3) The universe has a cause of its existence. (4) If the universe has a cause of its existence, then that cause is God. Therefore: (5) God exists. This argument is subject to a simple objection, introduced by asking, “Does God have a cause of his existence?” If, on the one hand, God is thought to have a cause of his existence, then positing the existence of God in order to explain the existence of the universe doesn’t get us anywhere. Without God there is one entity the existence of which we cannot explain, namely the universe; with God there is one entity the existence of which we cannot explain, namely God. Positing the existence of God, then, raises as many problems as it solves, and so the cosmological argument leaves us in no better position than it found us, with one entity the existence of which we cannot explain. If, on the other hand, God is thought not to have a cause of his existence, i.e. if God is thought to be an uncaused being, then this too raises difficulties for the simple cosmological argument. For if God were an uncaused being then his existence would be a counterexample to premise (1), “Everything that exists has a cause of its existence.” If God exists but does not have a cause of his existence then premise (1) is false, in which case the simple cosmological argument is unsound. If premise (1) is false, i.e. if some things that exist do not have a cause, then the cosmological argument can be resisted on the ground that the universe itself might be such a thing. If God is claimed to exist uncaused, then, then the simple cosmological argument fails. Each of the two forms of cosmological argument discussed here is more sophisticated than the simple cosmological argument presented above. Each draws a distinction between the type of entity that the universe is and the type of entity that God is, and in doing so gives a reason for thinking that though the existence of the universe stands in a need of explanation, the existence of God does not. Each therefore evades the objection outlined above.
  • Absolutely and positively NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Only God is worthy of worship.
  • Yes, of course. He is the Son of God. We will all know for sure in 1000 years~ Romans 14:11 "For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God."
  • Well yeah, Jesus IS God.
  • by Robert Adams Article first published in New Dawn Magazine No 71, March 2002 6-21-5 from Rense Website When I first spoke to a close Christian friend of mine about the publishing of Tony Bushby’s The Bible Fraud, her reaction was one that many Christians have expressed, and one that made me aghast. She didn’t want the book available because it would "persuade them away from the Bible and the word of God." Further discussions with her and many other Christians around the world about The Bible Fraud all result in the Bible being quoted as the ultimate reference for the apparent "words of God," and therefore the basis for their arguments. The problem lies in that they believe the Bible is infallible. If we examine the oldest known Bible to date, the "Sinai Bible" housed in the British Museum (I believe that, during his many years of research, Tony had a private viewing of this priceless book), we find a staggering 14,800 differences from today’s Bible and yet it still remains the word of God? As Tony points out, the history of our ’genuine’ Bibles is a convoluted one. Firstly we cannot be sure that we have the full version as it was originally intended. In 1415 the Church of Rome took an extraordinary step to destroy all knowledge of two second century Jewish books that it said contained the true name of Jesus Christ. The Antipope Benedict XIII firstly singled out for condemnation a secret Latin treatise called "Mar Yesu" and then issued instructions to destroy all copies of the book of Elxai. The Rabbinic fraternity once held the destroyed manuscripts with great reverence for they were comprehensive original records reporting the life of Rabbi Jesus. Later, Pope Alexander VI ordered all copies of the Talmud destroyed, with the Spanish Grand Inquisitor Tomas de Torquemada (1420-98) responsible for the elimination of 6,000 volumes at Salamanca alone. Solomon Romano (1554) also burnt many thousands of Hebrew scrolls and, in 1559, every Hebrew book in the city of Prague was confiscated. The mass destruction of Jewish books included hundreds of copies of the Old Testament and caused the irretrievable loss of many original handwritten documents. The oldest text of the Old Testament that survived, before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls was said to be the Bodleian Codex (Oxford), which was dated to circa 1100 AD. In an attempt by the church to remove damaging Rabbinic information about Jesus Christ from the face of the earth, the Inquisition burnt 12,000 volumes of the Talmud. In 1607, forty-seven men (some records say fifty four) took two years and nine months to re-write the Bible and make it ready for press. It was, by the order of King James, issued with a set of personal ’rules’ the translators were to follow. Upon its completion in 1609, it was handed over to the King James for his final approval. However, "It was self evident that James was not competent to check their work and edit it, so he passed the manuscripts onto the greatest genius of all time... Sir Francis Bacon" The first English language manuscripts of the Bible remained in Bacon’s possession for nearly a year. During that time ... "he hammered the various styles of the translators into the unity, rhythm, and music of Shakespearean prose, wrote the prefaces and created the whole scheme of the Authorized Version. At the completion of the editing, King James ordered a ’dedication to the King’ to be drawn up and included in the opening pages. He also wanted the phrase ’Appointed to be read in the churches’ to appear on the title page. The King James Bible is considered by many today to be the ’original’ Bible and therefore ’genuine’ and all later revisions simply counterfeits forged by ’higher critics’. Others think the King James Bible is ’authentic’ and ’authorized’ and presents the original words of the authors as translated into English from the ’original’ Greek texts. However, as Tony points out, the ’original’ Greek text was not written until around the mid fourth century and was a revised edition of writings compiled decades earlier in Aramaic and Hebrew. Those earlier documents no longer exist and the Bibles we have today are five linguistic removes from the first bibles written. What was written in the ’original originals’ is quite unknown. It is important to remember that the words ’authorized ’ and ’original ’, as applied to the Bible do not mean ’genuine’, ’authentic’ or ’true’. By the early third century, it became well noted that a problem was occurring in politics! In 251AD, the number of Presbyter’s (roving orator or priest) writings had increased dramatically and bitter arguments raged between opposing factions about their conflicting stories. According to Presbyter Albius Theodoret (circa 255), there were "more than two hundred" variant gospels in use in his time. In 313, groups of Presbyters and Biscops (Bishops) violently clashed over the variations in their writings and "altar was set against altar" in competing for an audience and territory. When Emperor Constantine conquered the East in 324, he sent his Spanish religious advisor, Osius of Cordoba, to Alexandria with letters to several Biscops exhorting them to make peace among their own. But the mission failed and Constantine, probably at the suggestions of Osius, then issued a decree commanding all Presbyters and their subordinates "be mounted on asses, mules and horses belonging to the public and travel to the city of Nicaea" in the Roman province of Bithymia, the country of Asia. The Presbyters were instructed by the Emperor to bring with them the manuscripts from which they orated to the rabble (that’s us!) "wrapped and bound in leather". Constantine saw in this developing system of belief the opportunity to make a combined state religion and protect it by law. The first general church council was thus convened and the year was 325. On 21 June 325 DC, the day of the Summer Solstice, (and under those cult conditions) a total of 2048 "presbyters, deacons, sub-deacons, acolytes and exorcists" gathered at Nicaea to decide what Christianity really was, what it would be, what writings were to be used and who was to be it’s God. Ancient church evidence established that a new ’god’ was to be approved by the Roman Emperor and an earlier attempt (circa 210) to deify either Judas Khrestus or his twin brother Rabbi Jesus (or somebody else) had been ’declined’. Therefore, as late as 325, the Christian religion did not have an official god. After a long and bitter debate, a vote was finally taken and it was with a majority show of hands that Judas Khrestus and Rabbi Jesus both became God (161votes for and 157 votes against). The Emperor effectively joined elements of the two individual life stories of the twin brothers into a singular creation. The doctrine of the Celtic / British church of the west was democratically attached to the Presbyters stories of the east. A deification ceremony was then performed ’Apotheosis’. Thus the deified ones were then called ’saviours’ and looked upon as gods. Temples, altars, and images with attributes of divinity were then erected and public holidays proclaimed on their birthdays. Following the original example set by the deification of Caesar, their funerals were dramatized as the scene of their resurrection and immortality. All these godly attributes passed as a legal right to Emperor Constantine’s new deity, Jesus Christ. The Emperor then instructed Bishop Eusebius to compile a uniform collection of new writings "bound together as one" using the stories from the large collection of Presbyters as his reference source. Eusebius was to arrange for the production of "fifty sumptuous copies ... to be written on parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient portable form, by professional scribes thoroughly accomplished in the art". This was the first mention of finished copies of a Christian ’New Testament’ in the history of mankind. As one can imagine, to condense the real life of the Jesus Christ, the Church and His teachings with supporting evidence into a short article is very difficult. It is therefore wise for those who wish to have supportable evidence to read and study Tony Bushby’s epic work, The Bible Fraud, along with it’s detailed blood lines (family trees) and over 869 references. (see www.thebiblefraud.com) However, attempting to summarize what Tony has written..... in 325 AD, the first Christian council was called at Nicaea to bring the stories of twin brothers, Jesus ’the Rabbi’ and Judas Khrestus into one deity that we now know as Jesus Christ. Tony says they were not born of virgin birth but to Nabatean Arab Mariamne Herod (now known as the Virgin Mary) and fathered by Tiberius ben Panthera, a Roman Centurion. The brothers were raised in the Essene community and became Khrists of their faith. Rabbi Jesus later was initiated in Egypt at the highest of levels similar to the 33rd degree of Freemasonry of which many Prime ministers and Presidents around the world today are members. He then later married three wives, one of whom we know as a Mary Magdalene, a Druidic Princess, stole the Torah from the temple and moved to Lud, now London. Tony believes the reason Jesus stole the Torah was that he said it contained "a very special secret", which he was going to reveal that secret to the world. He was stoned to death and the Torah taken from him before he could. The elder brother, Judas Khrestus, with his "Khrestian" followers conspired to take the throne of Rome, his royal birthright, and was captured, tried, and was sentenced to be crucified. (The "Khrestians" and the Essenic army, the Nazarenes, would today be likened to terrorists.) At the trial, Judas exercised his royal birthright to have a replacement in Simon of Cyrene (Luke 23:41) and then was sold as a slave to live out his days as a carpenter in India. Rabbi Jesus spent a considerable amount of time at the Palace of the British in Rome and sometime around 48 AD, he left for Egypt to pursue his greatest esoteric goal. The spiritual knowledge from his secret education in the Essene and Druid movements was soon to be elevated to the highest level possible - initiation into the innermost rite of the Egyptian temples. It was probable that Rabbi Jesus’ earlier initiation into both the Essene and Druid schools played a major part in his acceptance into the Egyptian school. The Druids could claim a very early origin and the essence of their wisdom was also that of the Essenes. In the case of the Essenes, it is possible to show that their movement was specifically established to preserve secret information, for they knew and used the sacred writing of the Initiates. The full meaning of the point being made by Bushby is that in the case of all Secret Schools, the inner and ultimate Mystery was revealed only to a High Initiate. Those who were initiated into the Ancient mysteries took a solemn oath never to reveal what had passed within the sacred walls. Every year only a comparatively few Egyptian initiations were conducted, and the number of persons who knew their secrets was never at any time large. The initiations always took place with the onset of darkness and the candidate was entranced for periods of varying length, depending upon the level of the degree for which he had entered. The first initiatory step involved a forty-day procedure that basically involved purification, not only in physical form, but dissolving all tendencies to evil thoughts, purifying the mind as well. It appears that he would have fasted, alternatively on vegetables, juices and very special herbal concoctions. The New Testament recorded that this happened to Rabbi Jesus who "was led into the desert.... and he fasted forty days and forty nights" (Matt. 4:1-2). This trial period involved more than just fasting. During the forty days and nights’ ordeal, Tony says the candidate was required to study astronomical charts to supplement his skills in astronomy and memorize charts of the heavens. They were also given a particular ritual from which to memorize certain passwords, secret signs and handclasps, skills that are still practiced to this day in Freemasonry. These initiations were not limited to Egypt. The ancient civilizations inherited these Mysteries from a remote antiquity and they constituted part of a primitive revelation from the gods to the human race. Almost every people of pre-Christian times possessed its institution and tradition of the mysteries. The Romans, the Druids of Britain, the Greeks, the Cretans, the Syrians, the Hindus, the Persians, the Maya and the American Indians, among others, had corresponding temples and rites with a system of graduated illuminations for the initiates. The modern world knows little of these ancient rites yet they were conducted in a huge variety of buildings the world over. The ’Towers’ that are found throughout the East in Asia were directly connected with the Mystery-initiations. The candidates for initiation were placed in them for three days and three nights, whenever there was no temple with a subterranean crypt close at hand. In this aspect of the initiatory procedure, Tony points out a direct Gospel parallel with Rabbi Jesus saying, "After three days I shall rise again", for he knew the finishing process he was to undertake would take three days being a symbol of the period of time required to complete a condition of development. The ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic texts speak of an initiate as ’twice-born’, and he was permitted to add to his name the words ’he who has renewed his life’, so that on some ancient tomb-inscriptions archaeologists still discover these phases descriptive of the spiritual status of the deceased person. So little did the later Gospel writers understand the initiatory process that they never perceived they were developing a story that included a Rabbi’s (and Arch Druid of Britain) experience in an Egyptian Mystery School. St Austin (c. 380) asserted that it was generally known in church circles that Rabbi Jesus had been initiated in Egypt, and that "he wrote books concerning magic". In the Gospel of Nicodemus, the Jews brought the same accusation before Pontius Pilate, "Did we not tell you he was a magician?" Celsus (c. 178) spoke of the same charge. In the Clementine Recognitions, the accusation was brought against Rabbi Jesus that he did not perform any miracles but practiced magic and carried about with him the figure of a seated skeleton. Jewish tradition invariably asserted that Rabbi Jesus learned ’magic’ in Egypt. Bushby says the kernel of this persistent accusation may perhaps be reduced to the simple historical element that Rabbi Jesus went to Egypt and returned with far wider and more enlightened views than those of his former religious associates. Now, I’m sure that many of you are having trouble grasping some of the ideas presented in this article and I congratulate you on taking the effort to read this far. We all need to demand our local Church, the Church scholars, theologians and media make an open examination of the evidence compiled in Tony Bushby’s The Bible Fraud. It may rattle some core beliefs but what is more important to you . the truth or what sits comfortably because it’s what you’ve known all you life? I leave you with a quote from one of the conspirators "How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)
  • Although Jesus never demanded or asked for worship, He is more than worthy of it. Being the Son of God gives Him that right. :)
  • I believe in the one true god, THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER. It threatens us and hates us when we're wrong, it does EVERYTHING the christian god does, except it's spaghetti, so if you get hungry you can eat it. ...It's clearly the superior choice for anyone who may be god shopping.
  • No, no person, real or fictional, is worthy of being worshipped. Jesus Christ is the subject of some extremely bad fiction with a poor story line.

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy