http://sites.google.com/site/christadelphianinfo/articles/apologetics/dbhislop
http://ezinearticles.com/?Book-Critique-of-Alexander-Hislops:-THE-TWO-BABYLONS&id=6196808
http://mdcalexatestblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/rebuttal-of-hislops-two-babylons.html
http://newprotestants.com/2babylons.htm
http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2011/06/two-babylons-alternate-history.html
http://www.ukapologetics.net/1hislopbaby.html
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ct_babylon.html
http://thehive.modbee.com/node/22477
http://www.diggingsonline.com/pages/rese/books/comment/genesis01.htm
http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/5267-is-catholicism-pagan/
//strictandparticular.blogspot.com/2009/08/bad-ways-to-argue-against-roman.html
http://42976.activeboard.com/t38028845/beware-of-all-doctrines-test-every-faith-according-to-the-bi/?page=1
http://www.thejournal.org/issues/issue95/herman-hoeh-tribute-2.html
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Semiramis
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Catholics-955/Faith-correct-church.htm
http://aheathensday.com/2011/03/odin-is-not-yhwh.htmlThere's a lot more, most of in further along in search engines than the advertising for the book and the blather references to it by anti-Catholics and ignorant or stupid people who don't care about the truth. If you haven't seen Hislop torn to shreds, it's because you don't want to. I think it's very interesting that it was actually Garner Ted Armstrong who pretty much introduced the book to the US, and He Who Cannot Be Named who keeps it in print even though it's free to download all over the place. Hislop had to be revived because he was so completely debunked in the early part of the 20th century that only the Jehovah's Witnesses ever referred to it. Garner Ted figured everyone had forgotten the book had been totally debunked and used it to butress his own personal religion just like Hunt copied a ton of his work for his own personal religion, and He Who Cannot Be Named figures no one will bother to check the facts rather than accepting the lies.
But somehow, the vile liars who are anti-Catholic rather than Christian just can't seem to find any of the references that tore Hislop apart in the early nineteen hundreds as having lied about all the archaeological digs he referred to, lied about the various ancient language translations he referred to, and picked up copies of anti-Catholic propaganda leaflets from Islamic Turkey along with then popular British-Israel books to incorporate into his brochures that later became a book.
It just goes to show you, those who don't want to know the truth won't find it because they won't look for it. That's typical of people who cannot accept that His flesh and His blood are present in our remembrance of him and by refusing to accept that, call Jesus Christ a liar. As Scripture says, they have no life in them and with no life in them, they're always adopting anti-Christian sources. It's the same way with Scripture for those sorts of folks, quoting Scripture to them is like throwing pearls before swine.
http://sites.google.com/site/christadelphianinfo/articles/apologetics/dbhislop#TOC-Was-there-a-Deliberate-Adoption-of-
Are the Ornaments, Symbols, Rituals and Images of the RCC Borrowed from Pagan Idolatry?
No. While it is true that the RCC is an idolatrous system indeed, her ornaments, symbols, rituals and images are (for the most part), the result of man-made traditions which arose from within the Catholic system itself. They are not purloined from pagan mythology.