Exposing the hoax of Christianity: Jesus was a Buddhist monk & ET contactee
WEBINAR: “A BBC documentary & the Talmud of Jmmanuel agree on this: ‘Jesus was a Buddhist monk who died in India in his 80s’, though the Talmud mentions Jesus’ ET abduction & the BBC does not” with Maurice Osborn & Alfred Lambremont Webre
ACCESS FULL WEBINAR & LINKS: http://ift.tt/2E4q8H0
WATCH WEBINAR ON ExopoliticsTV https://youtu.be/5y93TsgYorE
WATCH ON OmniverseTV http://ift.tt/2nJL2jr
WATCH WEBINAR LIVE ON FACEBOOK http://ift.tt/2E5b248
Sunday Feb 4, 2018 at 7pm PST, 8pm MTN, 9pm CST, 10pm EST
I. BBC Documentary: “Jesus was a Buddhist monk“
II. Comparison with Talmud of Jmmanuel: Differences in the Book of Matthew
by Maurice Osborn
On March 18, 1975, Semjase stated, “The Talmud is not to be used as a means of creating a new belief system or for the worshiping of Emmanuel as an idol. Emmanuel was only a human being like everyone else. Although he had very great knowledge, he does not embody any symbol, idol, or anything else. He was only a teacher and prophet of spiritual knowledge and wisdom. No creature should ever be idolized or adored as is done on Earth.
“The only reason for taking the Talmud Emmanuel from its hiding place after 2,000 years was because the time for truth had come. The lessons of Emmanuel were not his lessons, but were of Creation and its laws, which Emmanuel had to learn, recognize, and acknowledge. He only revealed what the natural laws demanded. He never intended for the delusion to be committed of having him seen as the embodiment of his lessons and be idolized for them.
“The truth of the Talmud should be learned and acknowledge for its own worth without the attraction of his name and his glorification. Only the truth and laws are important, not the person who has brought them. If another cult were to be constructed around Emmanuel, then his purpose would not be accomplished. Only the truth and the laws are of absolute importance.”
After more than 20 years of research and analysis of the roll text by Jim Deardorff, Research Professor Emeritus, he reported in his website at http://tjresearch.info/ that, “The rolls were written by Judas Iscariot who traveled with Emmanuel to India, along with Emmanuel’s brother Thomas and his mother Mary, several years after the crucifixion. However, the full story was only completed in India in the early second century, with a transcription of the rolls apparently having been penned there.
“Upon Emmanuel’s eventual death in the Kashmir region in early 2nd century, the rolls and their transcription were carried back to the Palestinian or Anatolian region by Emmanuel’s oldest son. He hid the original rolls in the tomb where Emmanuel was laid after his crucifixion, just south of the Old City of Jerusalem, and released the transcription where it eventually found its way into the hands of the writer of the Gospel of Matthew.
“A majority of scholars nowadays no longer believe that the Gospels were written by their namesakes, that is, by the names attached to them. This is due to indications that the Gospels appeared too late to have been written by any of the twelve disciples, or to the fact that Mark and Luke were not eye witnesses to any of the events of Jesus’ ministry yet the Gospels are written from the point of view of the eye witness. Nevertheless, such scholars speak and write as if they thought that the writer of Matthew was the disciple Matthew himself.”
Professor Deardorff has reported that he “determined that the rolls were the source for the Gospel of Matthew and that the Matthean verses are only partly genuine and pure invention. In over 100 comparisons of parallel passages, the arguments pointing to the Book of Matthew’s dependence upon the text of the rolls are seen to be difficult to reverse, and in all other instances, the differences between the two are also consistent with the Testament of Emmanuel as being genuine.