Christ Conspiracy_ The Greatest Story Ever Sold - Acharya S [227]
Eusebius further explains that the gospel fable had to occur at that particular time in order to fulfill the prophecy at Genesis 49:10: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs," i.e., "Shiloh," or the Messiah, who, according to the next passage, would have garments washed in wine and eyes "red with wine." Eusebius states that Herod was the "first foreigner to become king of the Jewish nation," thus fulfilling this prophecy and ending the rule of Jewish leaders. This deposal, of course, spurred messianic fever, since it meant "Shiloh" would come. In fact, Eusebius is applying Jesus over the history of Herod, because, Herod himself was thought to be the long-awaited Shiloh. As Larson says, "Galilee teemed with fanatics, including Essenes, Pharisees, and Zealots, as well as Herodians, who believed Herod was himself the Christ . . ."38 Obviously, Herod was not the messiah, but the historicizers in hindsight determined that Christ must appear to have come during his rule. In fact, the Shiloh passage refers to no "prophecy" at all, as Judah, the "lion's whelp," is in reality the constellation of Leo, and the wine-drenched ruler to whom Judah passes his scepter is that of Virgo, the time of the grape harvest.
Moreover, in attempting further to affix Christ's advent to this era, Eusebius later admits that there was a debate as to when it really occurred. What is the need of such debate and attestation if the tale found in the gospel depicted real history? Why so much confusion and murkiness, particularly after three centuries of alleged continuous apostolic lineage? Had Eusebius, the keeper of records, no testimonies of the many purported eyewitnesses who surely would have repeatedly talked about Herod and Pilate's dreadful actions? At the time of Eusebius, it was claimed that the Church had immediately sprung up with established hierarchies, a great deal of money and power, and a continuous lineage to his era, yet the Church's own historian evidently had no records at all except for the gospels, which were not sufficient to demonstrate when-and if-Christ's advent occurred. In his writings, Eusebius in actuality was fulfilling his task of creating the bogus history not only of Christ himself but of the Church. As Walker says, "The church never did have any continuous record of popes or 'bishops of Rome' from the beginning; most of the early popes were fictitious."39 Regarding his forged history of the Church, Eusebius says, "As for men, I have failed to find any clear footprints of those who have gone this way before me; only faint traces, by which in differing fashions they have left us partial accounts of their own lifetimes."40 Could there be any clearer admission that there was no "apostolic lineage" representing a "historical" savior?
Where the Bodies are Buried
We have already seen a tremendous amount of evidence as to the mythological nature of Christianity and its founder. Further proof may be found in a variety of places, although it may not be wise to make them public, because fanatics have forever destroyed such evidence, burning and looting temples and libraries, and desecrating and defacing sacred images and symbols. A number of these sites may also have been destroyed in various wars, including the two World Wars. In addition, some areas are so forbidding that it will even today be difficult both to access them and to convince the keepers of their secrets to release them. It is reported that priests, high-ranking Masons and members of other such brotherhoods are informed about the real origins of Christianity but are sworn to a blood oath against revealing the truth. Perhaps some of these individuals will be encouraged that others not thus bound are exposing this allimportant information.
The evidence of the Christian myth may still be found in libraries in many parts of