Herein we continue, from part 1, considering the Billy Meier UFO alien case related claim that the true story of Jesus is told within the Talmud of Jmmanuel. This refers to a document to which the Pleiadians / Plejarens led Billy Meier.
Billy Meier claims to have, along with Isa Rashid, actually spelunked the cave in which the manuscript was found in 1963 AD and the locale is described as just south of the Old City of Jerusalem (but the location has never been cartographically described in detail and remains unknown and unexplored). Meier is said to have been walking along with Rashid and happened to glance up the slope to notice an opening in the ground which in 1997 AD (34 years later) be recalled was circa on foot wide.
In any case, here is an example of a text of Matthew versus a text of the Talmud Jmmanuel:
Pray then like this: “Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors; and lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil.”
Talmud Jmmanuel 6:11-17
Therefore pray as one who knows, and thus pray as follows: “My spirit (consciousness), you exist within almightiness. May your name be holy. May your world incarnate itself within me. May your power unfold itself within me, on Earth and in the skies. Give me today my daily bread, that I may recognize my wrongdoings and the truth. And lead me not into temptation and confusion, but deliver me from error.”
In part, a note by Jim Deardorff reads, “The first verse of the Lord's Prayer, Mt 6:9, was criticized by Robert Funk, a leader in the scholar's group called the “Jesus Seminar,’ for its lack of logic” and, pray tell, what was this lack of logic?:
He noted that God's name was considered too holy to pronounce by Jews, while the title of "Father" is not at all holy. "It is difficult to conceive of circumstances under which Jesus would have referred to God as 'Father' and then turned around and said, 'May your name be sanctified.'"
Well, this is exactly what is to be expected from the Jesus Seminar and my criticism of it is due to its lack of logic. It is no wonder that Rabbi Jacob Neusner (University of South Florida) stated that the Jesus Seminar is “either the greatest scholarly hoax since the Piltdown Man or the utter bankruptcy of New Testament studies.”
Even granting Robert Funk’s assertion note the following:
1) God's name was considered too holy to pronounce.
2) The title of “Father” is not at all holy.
3) Therefore, Jesus would have referred to God as “Father” in order to not utter YHVH’s name but made reference to it without pronouncing it by stating “May your name be sanctified.”
Also, by the way, while Robert Funk my personally find it “difficult to conceive of circumstances under which Jesus would have referred to God as ‘Father’” the fact is that—see if you can unravel this bit of logic—the incarnated Jesus is God’s Son and therefore God is His Father.
Moreover, Jim Deardorff notes:
Matthew's prayer is a group prayer, as seen by "Our Father," "our daily bread" and so forth. Yet, its preceding verses, Mt 6:5-6, apply to the individual, not to a group, and in Matthew they deal with praying in a room alone. Hence the collective format of the Lord's Prayer is inconsistent with these preliminary verses.
But we must ask how this is a problem? He is telling individuals how to pray and that when they are to pray they are to speak to the Father collectively as they are all a part of the eklesia aka the church which means “called out ones” aka the community of Christians. at of the Lord's Prayer is inconsistent with these preliminary verses.
As for the revised “Lord’s prayer” within the Talmud Jmmanuel—which is no longer a prayer to the Lord but to
“My spirit (consciousness)”—it is merely indicative of typical New Age phraseology which is either far too majestically spiritually evolved to comprehend or utter malarkey.
The Talmud Jmmanuel asserts that Jesus travelled to India before his ministry began and returned there after not having died on the cross. This is something that has been specifically investigated and is simply unknown to history and to the monks and priests of India—for details see Jurassic Ark - Christ's "Lost Years"
The claim that Jesus did not die on the cross is in keeping with Islamic beliefs which came about circa half a millennia after the time of Jesus—for details see Who Was Abraham Told to Sacrifice, Isaac or Ishmael?
In fact, the text predicts the appearance of Muhammad, by name and details that Jesus stated he would come in 500 years from His own time (which, of course, Meier knew).
Likewise illogical and uninformed is the article The Author of the TJ Scrolls which states:
When Isa Rashid started reading into the Talmud of Jmmanuel (TJ) scrolls, he soon learned that Judas Iscariot was listed as the author. This must have taken him very much by surprise, but with the aged Aramaic scrolls in front of him, he was in no position to doubt its truth.
Further in the TJ, Rashid could translate that Judas, who was the only one of the twelve disciples who could read and write, had been assigned the task of writing down Jmmanuel's ministry and teachings as well as being their treasurer (as indicated also in the Gospel of John).
Note the conclusion that since the, now non-existing, manuscript was “aged” Isa Rashid “was in no position to doubt its truth.” Well, this may come as a shock but, even if there was any such thing as an aged Aramaic manuscript, even if it dated to the time of Jesus and even if it was written by Judas; these presumed facts would not ensure the accuracy of the text’s claims—someone could have written something false long ago.
Also, that Judas “was the only one of the twelve disciples who could read and write” is inaccurate as Matthew was a tax collector in His life BC; Rome had appointed him the task of keeping meticulous records. Also, Matthew wrote the gospel of Matthew (which the Talmud Jmmanuel seeks to debunk and replace). Andrew and Peter may not have kept records but may have as they were fishermen and thus, businessmen. John wrote books/letters of the Bible. Others ought to be presumed to have been illiterate based on arguments from silence and/or arguments for looking down upon ancient people.
Feel free to take advantage of the free subscription to this page so that you will get an email notification when something is posted herein—see subscribe link above, next to my name…or just CTRL+F and search for “subscribe.”
Find us on: