| Author |
Message |
   
Jim
Member
Post Number: 22
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 02, 2004 - 10:53 am: | 
|
Hello Siddhartha,
The short answer has to be "no." But here's the rest: From the TJ we see that Jmmanuel was born in Bethlehem, because Joseph was of the lineage of David; but that he was raised in Nazareth, the home of both Joseph and Mary. Keep in mind that Galilee was a region that encompassed the Sea of Galilee and its surrounding towns. Nazareth was just a town, actually located some 10 or 15 miles to the SW of Lake Galilee, according to biblical maps.
I now think that the discrepancy about Tiberia(s) is a very minor one. Billy (or Ptaah or Christian) omitted the usual "s" at the end of Tiberias. I've learned now that Tiberias was indeed a town situated on the SW shore of the Sea of Galilee, also called the Sea of Tiberias shortly after 17 CE. It was apparently then named after emperor Tiberius (Roman emperor from 14-37 CE). There's a nice history of the city of Tiberias at: http://www.ancientroute.com/cities/Tiberias.htm.
The biggest potential discrepancy is Billy's statement that Joseph and Mary were from Tiberia(s) while the TJ speaks of Nazareth as Joseph's home town where Jmmanuel was raised (TJ 1:100, 2:29, 15:67, 22:3, 22:9, 28:72, 33:35). The closest I can come to a solution of agreement is to postulate that Quetzal was only partially correct -- Mary came from Tiberia(s), and Joseph from Nazareth as a carpenter and boat builder may have spent much time in Tiberias, since it was on the shore of the Sea of Galilee whereas Nazareth wasn't situated on a body of water, and that Joseph met Mary while he was in Tiberias. The forementioned webpage says that Tiberias was a mostly non-Jewish town, which makes it plausible that Mary was non-Jewish. Possibly, Joseph was indeed born in Tiberia(s) but raised in Nazareth, then as a young teenager moved to Tiberia(s) to seek work as a carpenter and boat builder, then took Mary back to his home town in Nazareth to marry her. |
Siddhartha
New member
Post Number: 1
Registered: 04-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 03, 2004 - 02:25 am: |
|
Jim
Excellent! Thanks for the clarification. Billy’s statement does seem to indicate that Joseph was born in Tiberias. But he doesn’t imply that he lived in Tiberias, as he does with Mary. So I think it is possible that you are right, that Joseph lived much of his life in Nazareth (TJ 1:100), met Mary in Tiberias as a result of his search for work as a shipbuilder and carpenter, and then moved back to Nazareth to marry her (TJ 1:96).
But then again it doesn’t agree with the statement that Jmmanuel came from Tiberias. And now that I think of it maybe this is incorrect. Having re-read the statements I found on this forum, neither Christian nor Billy mention Jmmanuel as having come from Tiberias. Billy says nothing about Jmmanuel’s hometown. And all Christian says is that Joseph and Mary were both from Tiberias. He does not say that Jmmanuel was from Tiberias. I think what has happened here is that we have jumped to the conclusion, from these statements, that because Joseph and Mary were from Tiberias, Jmmanuel was also from there. But it doesn’t say this anywhere, not even in the TJ. What it says is that Jmmanuel was born in Bethlehem (TJ 2:1) and that his hometown, where he was raised, was Nazareth (TJ 2:29). I think, therefore, the actual situation was likely to have been that Joseph and Mary were both raised in Tiberias, grew up together for a time, after which Joseph moved to Nazareth, married Mary there (TJ 1:96), together they moved to Bethlehem to have themselves assessed for the census (TJ 1:98), gave birth to Jmmanuel, and finally returned to Nazareth.
Jmmanuel, then, according to this information, was not from Tiberias but from Nazareth.
|
Truthspupl
New member
Post Number: 2
Registered: 02-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 09:27 am: |
|
Memo00, your opinion is valuable and well respected. Thank You.
But one last thing I'd like to say here, not neccesarily regarding this particular issue in itself but an issue of finding TRUTH and THINKING for yourself. One of the MAIN things stressed by FIGU is to gain Knowledge by thinking for yourself and TESTING everything. Yet, it seems, that there is a certian lack of that going on within this group? It seems to me that what Billy Meier says, for many in this group, is the ONLY thing taken as TRUTH and most everything else is pushed aside??
I have, admitadly, not come to ANY conclusions as to the Truth, BUT, I can say with conviction that there are those who would be cult members gravitating to this group, because it is obvious that many of them DO NOT think nor research for themselves and hang on every word said by Billy. This goes AGAINST what this group Supposedly is.
On the issue of the Passion, for instance. I have a copy of the BIBLE which has been translated directly from the Peshitta by Dr. George M. Lamsa, from the Aramaic. Copyright - 1933. It is obvious, at least to me, that the account of Jmmanuel/Jesus/Eshoo therein, DOES NOT, differ so greatly from the TJ, which I have also read. As a matter of FACT, what is written in this volume actually adds CREDENCE to the TJ. Because the last thing that was uttered on the cross, before "It is finished", according to the Lamsa translation, is NOT "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me!", but instead it should have been translated as "My God, My God, for this I was Spared".
I accept this translation as the other one never made sence to me at all. It was completely out of character and had already been discussed with the "FATHER" in the Garden of Gethsemene. The situation had been ACCEPTED by Eshoo/Jmmanuel. NO, I am not saying that he 'sacraficed' himself, simply that he said, "Ah Heck!! I'm scre- - -! These sons of a guns are going to lynch me!"
So? Does this not indicate that not only was Jmmanuel SPARED his life from the Scourging, but isn't this also a possible indication that perhaps, his very life was, indeed, Spared?? This COULD indicate that he was not DEAD at all, could it not? This is what is written. But it DID NOT come from a translation by Billy Meier or anyone else associated with the group.
THINK. That is what FIGU is about. Or at least that is what is said it is about. I do not discount much of what Billy Meier says, but when you do use your head to Think and Research than things are not so cut and dry as it seems to be with this group. It seems to me that what is lacking here is the very PASSION that Jmmanuel had to have possesed in order to go through this torture. I do not speak of that which is associated with Lust or even traditional Love but that which is the sheer WILL to accomplish something, at all costs. This is truly PASSION, and it seems lacking when persons do not research and just hang on the words of one person.
True Passion is dangerous when misdirected. Perhaps this is 'one reason' why it seems to be discouraged.
As with 'Memo00', this is just my opinion.
Take care and Be well. |
Pureharmony
Member
Post Number: 116
Registered: 08-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 12:42 pm: |
|
Hello Truthspupl,
Yes alot of us here have done much research . Some will take others words for things, as alot of us have gotten to know each other over the years and share information on other disucussion boards and privately through emails. But as you say , it is very important to do ones own research and find the truth for oneself. I appreciate your information which you have shared concerning the Aramaic translation of the bible as you have read, thank you. We can help each other in this way, as some have done research in different areas than others have, so we share the knowledge accordingly.
But as James Truthseeker once mentioned to me, FIGU could be thought of as meaning "FIGURE" for short, in other words, figure things out for yourself.
*pureharmony*
|
Jim
Member
Post Number: 23
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 06:34 pm: |
|
For Truthspupl,
You wrote: "On the issue of the Passion, for instance. I have a copy of the BIBLE which has been translated directly from the Peshitta by Dr. George M. Lamsa, from the Aramaic. Copyright - 1933. It is obvious, at least to me, that the account of Jmmanuel/Jesus/Eshoo therein, DOES NOT, differ so greatly from the TJ, which I have also read. As a matter of FACT, what is written in this volume actually adds CREDENCE to the TJ."
Actually, the Lamsa bible contains just the same Christian material with only tiny differences all over from the more standard versions. This was my conclusion from having browsed it years ago. I can't find any copy of it online, but found this quote from Lamsa, within the context of discussing the Sermon on the Mount: "Now Jesus was introducing a new way - the way of meekness and peace." This promotion of meekness, whether or not meekness was appropriate, was the doing of the writer of Matthew, not Jmmanuel. The TJ doesn't lend any support to the Lhamsa Bible, nor vice versa. |
Joseph_emmanuel
Member
Post Number: 7
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:26 am: |
|
I don't remember if I asked this question before, or if anyone else did, so I shall ask it anyway, because I haven't an answer for it, and when I think of it, it frustrates me. I just can't understand why there is no record of Jmmanuel's existence. If he was so well travelled, as we can believe he was, having met so many different people, among whom there must have been some who knew how to write, how can it possibly be that no country he visited hasn't any record of his existence? It just doesn't make any sense. There must be something out there. Has to be. Somebody must know something. Maybe it has all been kept secret because, not being able to find any records of the existence of someone called Jesus, instead records of the existence of someone called Jmmanuel were found, which couldn't be made public because the world is so enamoured by a false prophet. But damn it, it frustrates me, this not knowing. |
Memo00
Member
Post Number: 58
Registered: 03-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 03:08 pm: |
|
hi
its supposed that Jmmanuel only preached to very few people
and even if he travelled to many countries in the world, that doesn´t mean that he was "famous". . .
there are always in this world, wise people who are completely unknown and who cannot be distinguished between other "normal" persons
just think about Billy. . ., only very few people in this world know about him, from all of this people who know about him, only very few recognize he is the true prophet of our time,
most only think about him like an ignorant Swiss farmer who for some reason has great UFO photos. . .
and that only because the internet has helped a lot, now imagine 2000 years ago. . .
since Jmmanuel was just a normal person with great spiritual knowledge and known to only very very few, there was no sense in making sculputures of him or that kind of things
in change there are some oral traditions about him in Egypt, India, Europe etc (and some even talk about the son of the great spirit in North America)
there are many books in which this kind of things are discussed
i think too that al least two or three wise men in some lonely place must know about him, but you can bet that they are not going to tell to the masses
there are many things in this world that can be faked and that can cheat even the greatest "expert",
but true knowledge,
that is something that just CAN´T be faked
anyone with enough intelligence can recognize the truth |
Jim
Member
Post Number: 33
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 03:51 pm: |
|
Hello Joseph,
I've had many years to consider this same question, and have come up with several reasons that I think are fairly plausible.
1) Saul/Paul pushed heavily for an alteration of Immanuel's name to "Jesus" during the period around 35 to 65 CE, because "Jesus" fit Paul's theology of the "risen Christ" being a savior figure. And because Immanuel's deeds had been so remarkable, and because at the crucifixion all but Joseph of Arimathea had thought him to be dead, they were swung over to Paul's nomenclature. We don't know to what extent the disciples, other than Judas Iscariot, may have been persuaded by Paul's argumentation. But evidently Paul won out.
2) When traveling in the Damascus area and through Anatolia around 33-38(?)CE Immanuel had to be careful to use an alias and not let his identity be known. (During his lifetime he would have been called Immanuel, not Jmmanuel.)
3) When traveling around there and also east to the India/Kashmir area he apparently felt he still had to keep his previous identity hidden. If he could travel to India in a year or two, so could a contingent of Pharisees! But I think he became known by several other names: Apollonius of Tyana, Yuz Asaf, and Avalokiteshvara. I've supplied some indirect evidence in support of this in:
http://www.tjresearch.info/legends.htm.
4) The writer of Matthew did seem to know that the man's name had been Jmmanuel. See discussions under: http://www.tjresearch.info/mt1-2.htm (scroll down to Mt 1:20 and then to Mt 1:23.
5) There are indications in several pieces of Gnostic literature that his name had been something other than "Jesus." See in:
http://www.tjresearch.info/hisname.htm . It seems to me that the early Christian writers in fact regarded the name "Immanuel" has taboo to mention, after "Jesus Christ" had supplanted it. So later literature that called him by the name "Immanuel" was not allowed to survive (I can't prove that, of course).
However, like you, I have hopes that someday some newly found ancient writing will come to light that will lend further support to his having been named Immanuel. |
Jim
Member
Post Number: 34
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:46 pm: |
|
Hello Memo00,
According to the Talmud of Jmmanuel, he was pretty well known. After his Sermon on the Mount, many people followed him down. When the herd of pigs plunged into the water, due to Jmmanuel's command, the whole town nearby heard of it. When he brought the daughter of Jairus back to life, or showed that she hadn't died, news of it spread though that entire land. When Jmmanuel visited Nazareth for awhile, news about him reached Herod in Jerusalem. With the feeding of the five thousand, about that many more people heard of him, I should think. In Gennesaret, word of his presence quickly spread, and throughout that area they brought the sick to him to be healed, which they were after touching the hem of his garment. When going to Jericho, many persons followed Jmmanuel and his disciples. Upon his entry into Jerusalem, the whole city became excited and learned about him. Later, in Ephesus after the crucifixion, some Essene in that somewhat distant city recognized him despite his attempts at anonymity. And according to all the evidence amassed by Holger Kersten and the Ahmadiyyas and others, Jmmanuel under different names was well known in a large part of Asia.
So I think he was pretty famous.
Jim |
Memo00
Member
Post Number: 59
Registered: 03-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 06:43 am: |
|
hi jim
yes you are right
but after the crucifixion many believed about his death
and about him in Asia that is something not necesarily known by the masses (or they just dont care since they are not christian)
i think that some written stuff existed
and some must exist today, unfortunately the monks and the members of "esoteric" groups are very jealous with their knowledge
anyway there is always hope,
according to the legend there is too written stuff from Atlantis, Mu, etc etc which will be discovered someday
time will tell |
Memo00
Member
Post Number: 59
Registered: 03-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 06:27 am: |
|
according to the legend (and supposedly to his archives) the rosacrucians are older than christianism and this is one of his symbols
maybe they know something, but maybe thay have twisted the truth as is usual in this planet. . .
in the "esoteric world" there are many gossip and legends about this man and "the Essenes", and yes, they have distorted the truth just like Jmmanuel had predicted. . .
in the book "The children of MU" (1931) (which is almost pure speculations with some interesting legends, oral traditions, and some pictures and maps (well the last chapter(16) is good)
there is some "esoteric gossip" about "Jesus"(who is called with other name and who is never called "Christ")
it´s supposed that there are some written texts about this man in a Monastery in Leh, Kashmir, as well as in other Temples
and there are many legends and traditions including one of him discussing about reincarnation with some monk,
in this chapter there are some other interesting things, like some demonstrations of the Rishi´s spiritual powers (including a little "travel" through the akashic records)
and few spiritual teachings (about telephaty, reincarnation, vibration, levitation and concentration)
the book could be very much better, but it seems like Mr. Churchward was not ready . . . anyway is always healthy to search everywhere without prejudices |
Joseph_emmanuel
Member
Post Number: 8
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:07 pm: |
|
Hello Jim and Memo
Thanks for your replies. After posting my question I decided to visit Matt Hurley's site and looked at the paintings and carvings with depictions of UFOs in them, which made me think that our last hope for evidence of Jmmanuel's existence lies with, and in, the Vatican. So it just remains for Christianity to breathe its last breath, whenever that will be. But maybe by that time we'll all be past caring. |
Memo00
Member
Post Number: 61
Registered: 03-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 06:40 pm: |
|
hi joseph
which is matt hurley´s website?? |
Joseph_emmanuel
Member
Post Number: 9
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 12:51 pm: |
|
Memo
It's www.ufoartwork.com. A very interesting site. I've just discovered a couple of the paintings are in the UK, one of which is the most impressive of them all: "The Baptism of Christ", painted in 1710. I'll be off to Cambridge to see soon. I wonder if Matt has seen this?
Happy viewing, Memo. |
Mhurley
Member
Post Number: 48
Registered: 04-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 12:14 am: |
|
Hi Joseph,
No I haven't been to Cambridge, maybe one day I will if I'm nearby
Matt |
Jplagasse
Member
Post Number: 321
Registered: 09-2000
| | Posted on Friday, August 06, 2004 - 09:12 pm: |
|
Just a thought... & pure speculation at that:
The cruxifiction may have weakened Jmmanuel's "energies" to where he could not produce the "miracles" as before. IF true, this could have been a contributing factor in why he did not gain the attention or recognition as before.
Just a thought,
JP |
Norm
Member
Post Number: 657
Registered: 02-2000
| | Posted on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 06:49 pm: |
|
I just finished reading Wendelle Stevens e-book called UFO Contact from the Dal Universe. Below is a quote from the e-book. Jmmanuel is talking to Billy.
Jmmanuel- For the scripts already are being searched for even now (year 32) to use them as accuser against me and to destroy them. Already a Scripture roll was stolen from the writer, and was handed over to the Pharisees and the Scribes. A Pharisees son by the name of Juda Iharioth took it secretly from out of the bag of Judas Iscariot, to sell it for 70 Silverlings to my pursuers, so that they could accuse me of blasphemy. Judas Iscariot has been advised by me to write the texts another time and to preserve them now very well, so that they will endure the time has planned.
Jmmanuel-I told you already that Judas Iscariot was deprived of a script, which contained part of my teachings. These teachings will be the basis for all falsifications. At present, they also will be continued by the priests and scribes and be completed from my teachings. This is done in reality only for that reason, to falsified them until indiscernible, and also to use them against me. While I speak of the Creation and teach of it, the scripts are being falsely changed to put other words into my mouth that I have spoken of a father in Heaven, and of hosts of Angels, and many other such wrong concerns. But I have never done this, because this does not conform to the truth.
Does anyone recall in other Meier English language writings that portions of what would be called the Talmud of Jmmanuel were stolen and given to the Pharisees? Now I wonder if any of these scrolls still exist even today. It sure explains the so-called Q-Gospel. |
Jim
Member
Post Number: 42
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2004 - 09:36 am: |
|
Hello Norm,
From the TJ itself one knows that what occurred in Jmmanuel's ministry, from the time Judas became a disciple until a short time before the events of TJ 14, lay within the portion that was stolen. All that came before this period and afterwards, therefore, was not stolen.
The big clue for me is that if one compares the order of the Gospel of Mark's events with those of Matthew, from Matthew's 12th chapter on they're essentially identical, while between Matthew 7 and 12 (from 8 through 11) they're quite different. E.g., see www.tjresearch.info/mksec2.htm. This is most interesting, along with the report by Clement of Alexandria that Peter in Rome, along with his interpreter John Mark, had a document that they made available to interested people but which they didn't try to promote. (E.g., see www.tjresearch.info/mksecond.htm.) It indicates to me that some years after the crucifixion Peter or John Mark must have recovered the stolen writing, which Peter couldn't read but John Mark could. By that time, the Pharisees and chief priests involved would have had little reason to keep it if they could sell it to someone.
Since Judas started writing the full TJ an unknown number of years after the crucifixion, probably with a lot of help and input from Jmmanuel, its order of events might not always have been correct in comparison with what Judas had written years earlier and had been stolen. Their memories of all those events were probably very good but as to exactly which occurred before or after others may not have been, and some of the vividness of the events written by Judas within a few days after they happened, would have been lost. So if the postulated recovered stolen document in Rome had been left with the church in Rome after the death of Peter and/or John Mark, it could have been available to a later Christian writer in Rome, around 120 A.D., as an aid in writing his own gospel after the Gospel of Matthew appeared on the scene. He could use the old recovered stolen writings with which to correct Matthew here and there, in Mt 8-11, for use in Mark 1 & 2. However, it appears to me that the writer of Mark messed things up quite a bit more with what he did with the stolen-writing material and where he placed some of it chronologically.
What Billy learned during his time-travel trip back to the 1st century seems consistent with this to me.
Jim Deardorff |
Lada78
New member
Post Number: 1
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 03:50 pm: |
|
hello everyone! this is my first post, so i don't know if i'm in the right area to ask a simple question.... is there a spanish version of talmud jmmanuel? or should i just expect to find the english edition? after having read talmud jmannuel i guess i'd me more prepared to post deeper questions, i have to figure out some points first.
thank you
art |
Marc
Moderator
Post Number: 189
Registered: 10-2000
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 06:38 pm: |
|
Hello Art,
A FIGU member named Brunhilde Koye should know about any Spanish versions of the Talmud Jmmanuel which may exist. As far as the English edition of the TJ, it is presently undergoing editing and layout by the American publisher Steelmark and will appear shortly in a new book (fourth edition). Check Steelmark's web site for updates on the production of the TJ.
Regards,
Marc |
Lada78
New member
Post Number: 3
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 09:46 am: |
|
thanks a lot marc! this information will be surely very helpful for me and many others.
i appreciate your time.
be well |
Kiwilove
Member
Post Number: 33
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 02:11 pm: |
|
Hello everyone
I wish to know if the following text is from an English accurate version of 'The Talmud Jmmanuel'.
I've included the beginning, a chapter and the end text.
I've downloaded it off a file sharing network, and don't know where this originally came from, and where it is presently available?
"
The Talmud of Jmmanuel
The Clear Translation in English and German
(German not available in this unauthorised copy)
third edition
Translation of the Aramaic scrolls written by Judas Iscariot, the disciple of Jmmanuel (Jesus), discovered in 1963 by Eduard Albert Meier in the tomb where Jmmanuel had lain for three days.
Translated into German by Isa Rashid and "Billy" Eduard Albert Meier
Edited and encoded
(German text only)
by "Billy" Eduard Albert Meier
Translated into English by Julie H. Ziegler and B.L. Greene
Updated English translation and revision 2001 by Dietmar Rothe, James Deardorff, Christian Frehner, Brian Crissey, Heidi-Lore and Robert E. Peters
Wild Flower Press
Columbus, NC U.S.A. 2001
Dedication
Dedicated to the man known to many as Jesus, known herein as Jmmanuel, in the hope that the truths that he shared may be heard clearly today. - .H.Z. and B.L.G.
...
81. Joseph was the husband of Mary, the mother of Jmmanuel, who was impregnated by a distant
descendant of the celestial son, Rasiel, who was the guardian angel of the secret.
82. When Joseph heard of Mary's secret impregnation by a descendant of the celestial sons
from the lineage of Rasiel, behold, he was filled with wrath and thought of leaving Mary
before he would be married to her before the people.
83. While Joseph was thinking in this manner, behold, a guardian angel, sent by Gabriel, the
celestial son who had impregnated Mary, appeared and said:
84. “Joseph, Mary is betrothed to you, and you are to become her spouse; do not leave her,
because the fruit of her womb is chosen for a great purpose. Marry her in all openness,
so that you may be husband and wife before the people.
85. "Behold, the impregnation of Mary occurred eleven thousand years after the procreation
of Adam through the celestial son Semjasa, to fulfill the word of god, the ruler of
those who travelled from afar, who conveyed these words through the prophet Isaiah:
86. "'Behold, a virgin will be impregnated by a celestial son before she is married to a man
before the people.
87. "'They will name the fruit of her womb Jmmanuel, which translated means 'the one with
godly knowledge,' as a symbol and honor to god. Through god's power and providential care
the Earth was made to bear intelligent human life when the celestial sons, the travelers
from the far reaches of the universe, mated with the women of Earth.
88. "Behold, god and his followers came far from the depths of space, where they delivered
themselves from a strong bondage, and created here a new human race and home with the
early women of this Earth.
89. "God deserves the honor of people of Earth, for behold; he is the true originator of the
white and of colored Earth humans, and to him honor should be given.
90. "Except for him there is nothing equal in form for these human lineages created by him.
Besides him, therefore, people should have no other gods who created other human lineages
in other parts of the Earth.
91. "Except for god there is nothing of comparable form worthy of veneration. Over him and his
celestial sons reigns only the omnipotence of all creation: Creation itself, which should
be revered.
92. "Behold, therefore; over the Earth reigns god, the master of the celestial sons and the
people of the white and colored terrestrial lineages.
93. "God is the lawgiver for these human populations and, therefore, his wishes should be
fulfilled by man and woman.
94. "God, the lord, is generous in his love, but also terrible in his wrath when his laws are
disobeyed.
95. "Mary's impregnation is god's law, and you, Joseph, are to be her husband in matrimony"
The Birth of Jmmanuel
96. When Joseph heard this, however, he was mindful of his devoutness to god's laws, so he
brought Mary home and married her before the people.
...
When Jmmanuel was about 45 years old he married a young and pretty woman, who bore him numerous children. He settled down, like any normal head of a family, in today's Srinagar in Kashmir, India. From there he undertook numerous trips and continued preaching his new teachings. He died at the age of between 110 and 115 of natural causes and was buried in Srinagar.
Judas Iscariot died at the age of about 90 and was buried near Srinagar. Joseph, Jmmanuel's first-born son, continued writing his father's story and left India after Jmmanuel's death. After a three-year's journey he returned to the land of his father and lived in Jerusalem until his death. From India he took along the original scrolls and hid them in the burial cave in which Jmmanuel had lain. He considered that place the safest.
As was explained in the Foreword, these scrolls were found there, 36 chapters of which are rendered here in translation.
Hinwil, September 20, 1974 -- "Billy" Eduard Albert Meier, editor
Harvey |
Jim
Member
Post Number: 45
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 21, 2005 - 06:28 pm: |
|
Hello Harvey,
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Where did you find it on the web?
All that you showed appears to be an accurate rendition of the 2001 3rd-edition English version of the TJ. I did notice that "traveled" was spelled with two l's, which differs from the printed German/English version. This suggests it was typed in, which is quite a task to do without making more errors/differences than just this one.
In past years a few others have posted the English version of the TJ, and had to be told that it violates both the copyright and Meier's explicit instructions that the German is to be published alongside.
Jim |
|
