Lost Bible Books, anyone have sources?

Yes, the site has nice intros into the documents. Still, the website doesn't quite go into enough detail for my own taste.

What I meant was that the listing copied-and-pasted of itself proved nothing (much of the early stuff is hypotetical and/or fragmentary). You need the critical commentary to appreciate that. And you agree with that. And a taster of it is on that website.

I guess I am just cautious: you must know by now that in threads on here it is very hard to get people to (a) follow links, and (b) read and digest their contents! Exeprience implies that many people seem to skim over them, preferring the text of postings instead.

Cheers.

I'm still waiting sun matrix
anytime you'd like to point out the Gospel according to Jesus
or the Gospel according to Nimrod you let me know
til then I'll just assume like everyone else does (even the mod team) that you know absolutely nothing about anything and are just sounding off because of your own innate inadequacy to comprehend the real world



Mod Edit: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 11/2/2007 by Mirthful Me]

The best book with teachings I read was the Talmud of Jmmanuel,

Regardless of its authenticity - it makes total sense!

In the book, it has reference to 'god', 'God' and 'Creation'.

god: Religious leaders referring to 'God' as being 'Creation' (Father).
God: Celestial Beings that created the Human Lineage on Earth
Creation: Universal LORE, architect, creative energy of life itself - True 'GOD'

Basically talking that the scribes worshiped 'god', that they were mistaking the father (creation) for being a man of the heavens (God - Celestial). That the father/creation was a celestial being - which was not the case.

Jmmanuel states that the God(s) rule over the human lineage, but they are not creation for creation is higher than God(s), yet God(s) know their place under Creation and understand the LORE.

Talks about satan being 'ego' (left brain/analyitical) and Holy Spirit being in tune with Creation (Right Brain).

When Jmmanuel went to the desert to be tempted by satan, he was under internal conflict, at war with his own mind (satan/ego/left brain) over his spirititual quest (Holy Spirit/right brain). He was thinking to 'himself' stating "Turn that stone into bread" - basically getting angry at himself and saying to himself not to be tempted by his ego.

He understood there was no bad or good, but only good and evil, and to maintain a balance between satan and holy spirit was a must.

Good and Evil is based upon the foundations of Universal LORE/LAW, for to go against 'Creation' is evil, to go toward 'Creation' is good.

Those are the basic teachings, other than the chronological history of his drugging and 'staged' crucifixion which he was brought down to recover for 3 days. Quite an alternative view on the whole concept!

Just google Talmud of Jmmanuel - there's one site where you can download the PDF version. However I understand this is an altered version by the Israeli Gov.

Thx

yep its good but its also a very transparent hoax

According to the Swedish Lutheran-Episcopal priest Åke Eldberg: "This book is the work of 'Billy' Eduard Albert Meier who was born in Bülach, Switzerland in 1937. His obvious Biblical hoax has all the usual characteristics: no (original Aramaic) manuscript is available, the text only exists in modern translations, the 'find story' is unlikely, and it contains anachronisms and obvious 'prophecies after the event'."

'Billy' Eduard Albert Meier

"Billy" Eduard Albert Meier was born in Bülach, Switzerland on February 3, 1937. For over 56 years, he has maintained a series of physical and telepathic contacts with extraterrestrial beings who claim they come from the Plejares star cluster. Acting as a mediator and spokesperson for the Pleiadians / Plejaren from planet Erra, Eduard Meier imparts their fascinating, esoteric teachings and wisdom to us and assists them in their monumental task of guiding Earth mankind back to the path we have left so long ago.

i.e. loony tunes

as for its discovery
it was discovered in 1963 by Eduard Albert Meier in the tomb where Jmmanuel had laid for 3 days", or so he says

As I mentioned in my previous post, that regardless of its authenticity, it gave a profound message, and that is all that mattered to me when I finished reading it (already knowing the debate of its authenticity).

With regards to Nimrod, he was the grandson or great grandson of Noah, I believe Jesus came a long time after that, Nimrod was called the Great hunter, I don't think Jesus was classified as that, although i could be wrong.

However there are identical comparisons on Horus - The egyptian God.

Horus being one with the father (osiris), along with jesus being one with the father etc...

Horus/Osiris being the 'Sun God', Jesus being 'Son of God'.

Horus arch-rival is Set his Uncle and Brother
Jesus arch-rival satan - spiritual brother (More so in Mormon Faith)

Horus's wife and mother are the same (isis)
Jesus born of Virgin Mary, possible relations with Mary Magdelane

Horus dies going to hell for 3 days and rising - same with Jesus

Horus having 12 disciples - same with Jesus

Good thread anyway, i didn't know there were many books associated with it all

Thx

As I mentioned in my previous post, that regardless of its authenticity, it gave a profound message, and that is all that mattered to me when I finished reading it (already knowing the debate of its authenticity).

Lord of the Rings is better

With regards to Nimrod, he was the grandson or great grandson of Noah, I believe Jesus came a long time after that, Nimrod was called the Great hunter, I don't think Jesus was classified as that, although i could be wrong.

Jesus was the fisherman or the shepherd
both titles ripped off from mesopotamia

Horus being one with the father (osiris), along with jesus being one with the father etc...

Osiris was dead by the time Horus was born
Horus was god of the sky
Osiris god of the dead
Horus was never described as being one with Osiris

Horus/Osiris being the 'Sun God', Jesus being 'Son of God'.

Osiris was not the sun god he was the god of life and fertility when alive and god of the dead after that
Horus was not the sun god directly, his eye was said to be the sun only because as the sky god he contained it. the name associated with Horus in his incarnation of the sun is Harmerty

Horus arch-rival is Set his Uncle and Brother
Jesus arch-rival satan - spiritual brother (More so in Mormon Faith)

Jesus and Lucifer were brothers, in the sense of both being spiritually begotten by the Father, but it is a misrepresentation to say so without giving the contextual background
www.lightplanet.com...
the mormons apparently get quite upset about this comparison

Horus's wife and mother are the same (isis)
Jesus born of Virgin Mary, possible relations with Mary Magdelane
(isis)

The wife of Horus is sometimes said to be Nut never Isis
Jesus did not have relations with Mary Magdalene anywhere outside of the Da Vinci Code which is a work of fiction
lets face it the precendent is set by the virgin mary never having relations with Joseph (hence the name)

Horus dies going to hell for 3 days and rising - same with Jesus

Horus does not go to hell at any time
The egyptians didn't believe in hell


you know I could list the differences now between the two but it would cover several hundred pages
but anyway
whens this book coming out ?



[edit on 11-2-2007 by Marduk]

Heh, perhaps you should write it!

I only recently came across information that Osiris gets confused with Horus, and ppl studying egyptian culture sometimes get confused differentiating between the two.

With regards to Hell, I don't know much about that, but I just did a search on Google and came up with lots of Seth/Underworld literature.

Here's a good one

Horus Vs Jesus Comparison

I'll let you shred that one up, would like to know more on what others think than reciting info off websites.

Thx

I found and downloaded "The Book of Adam" the other day at this site

www.pseudepigrapha.com...


I found it to be very interesting.

I only recently came across information that Osiris gets confused with Horus

only by people like sun matrix who don't know who Horus or Osiris are so make it up as they go along

With regards to Hell, I don't know much about that, but I just did a search on Google and came up with lots of Seth/Underworld literature.

the concept of hell as a firey land of brimstone and treacle torture is a strictly common era delusion spread as a means of controlling the masses
in the ancient world each culture had its own version of what happened to the dead, in most cases they went to a land of plenty. there was no penalty in the next life for being bad in this one. People believed that if you were bad in this life you would be punished for it in this life.
Even kings
especially in Sumer
but basically Heaven has always been around and it is for God kings (who are gods in human form) and Gods
everyone else goes to a nice place with all their relatives.
in many cases they stay there until they come back

Here's a good one

excellent usage of sarcasm

You have voted Im a Marty for the Way Above Top Secret award.

Originally posted by Marduk
I'm still waiting sun matrix
anytime you'd like to point out the Gospel according to Jesus
or the Gospel according to Nimrod you let me know
til then I'll just assume like everyone else does (even the mod team) that you know absolutely nothing about anything and are just sounding off because of your own innate inadequacy to comprehend the real world

Marduk = Nimrod,

I was hoping just to ignore you as your weak personal attacks are really not worth responding to. The problem with trying to be nice to the weak is they always take that as fuel for their little bic lighter and think they have a flamethrower. In answer to your question there is no Gospel of Jesus which proves nothing. Further, there is no Gospel of Nimrod, which again proves nothing. I hope this answers your question. By the way. Bel = Baal = Nimrod = Marduk. The fact you don't know the history behind the name you use tells me all I need to know. I understand your problem, the truth brings fear in your world.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix

Originally posted by Nebankh

So don't believe anyone who tells you that anything outisde the Bible is out of date, or that 'Gnostics' or 'heretics' forged anything - the contrary is more true...the 'Bible' was forged by force, by those who wished to become more powerful and set the dogma in place that is still thought of as having being 'original' and 'fact' - far from it!!

Read everything you can get your hands on and make up your own mind why things were left out

Nebankh

I'm afraid you need to do a little research beyond the crumbs you are meant to find. I think it would be wise to understand that the Gnostic writings are an attack on the truth and were written outside the circle of the apostles. And yet they have names like the Gospel of Thomas even though it can be proven that they were written later. In summary, they baited the hook and you bit hard. Wake up.

Why don't you clear it up for us, if this man is wrong, point out why and why evidence you have to support this. It is the ATS way you know

Originally posted by Nebankh

Once again, the link is here:
www.earlychristianwritings.com...

You can go and translate as many as you wish Sun Matrix

Peace

Nebankh

What is this garbage supposed to represent. I guess I could create a web site with a bunch of BS also. This site seems to have quite a dating problem.


Lets go back to my question on the Old Testament. Are you saying that the writings have been changed????????????????? You said there was a problem. What is this problem?????????/

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Sun Matrix]

Originally posted by Sun Matrix

Originally posted by Nebankh

Once again, the link is here:
www.earlychristianwritings.com...

You can go and translate as many as you wish Sun Matrix

Peace

Nebankh

What is this garbage supposed to represent. I guess I could create a web site with a bunch of BS also. This site seems to have quite a dating problem.
[edit on 12-2-2007 by Sun Matrix]

No, the datings are fairly good. They show the earliest possible and latest possible dates for the documents. They don't show a period over which the document was composed or anything. The listed order is just an order of earliest possible date, not an actual chronology.

[For example, the Gospel of Thomas might date from as late as 140AD, and thus come 10 years after the Gospel of Judas (if that actually dates from as early as possible in 130AD). Or alternatively, the Gospel of Thomas might come as much as 120 years before it (using the other end of their respective date-periods).]

But mere antiquity was not really a deciding factor in the compilation of the Bible.

Cheers.

The fact you don't know the history behind the name you use tells me all I need to know. I understand your problem, the truth brings fear in your world

Don't you think its a bit odd that I can prove the truth of what I say with links but all we ever get from you is your uneducated opinion

Bel doesn't = Marduk
Marduk is a babylonian name
Bel Marduk is actually the name of the God

Bel is simply the babylonian word for Lord
Baal is the north semitic word for lord
en.wikipedia.org...

"Baal" can refer to any god and even to human officials; in some texts it is used as a substitute for Hadad, a god of the sun, rain, thunder, fertility and agriculture, and the lord of Heaven. Since only priests were allowed to utter his divine name Hadad, Baal was used commonly.

en.wikipedia.org...

Bel (Akkadian bêlu), signifying "lord" or "master", is a title rather than a genuine name, applied to various gods in Babylonian religion. The feminine form is Belit 'Lady, Mistress'. Bel is represented in Greek and Latin by Belos and Belus respectively. Linguistically Bel is an East Semitic form cognate with Northwest Semitic Ba‘al with the same meaning.

en.wikipedia.org...

Marduk (Sumerian spelling in Akkadian: AMAR.UTU 𒀫𒌓 "solar calf"; Biblical: Merodach) was the Babylonian name of a late-generation god from ancient Mesopotamia and patron deity of the city of Babylon, who, when Babylon permanently became the political center of the Euphrates valley in the time of Hammurabi (18th century BC), started to slowly rise to the position of the head of the Babylonian pantheon, a position he fully acquired by the second half of the second millennium BC.

what you are saying is that anytime anyone says the word "lord" in english they are referring to Jesus
which as any five year old could tell you simply isn't true

there is no fear in my world Sun Matrix
because I don't follow a God whos first act was an attempt at mass genocide (except ducks)

neithe ris Nimrod Bel Marduk
as Nimrod only originally appears in the religious texts of the Hebrews
there is no record of him existing anywhere else
this is quite normal though with fictional characters
in the same way that Darth Vader isn't mentioned outside of the context of Star Wars

but the way you talk it seems that you would believe that Darth Vader is a real person just because he appears in a sci fi film

how old are you anyway
people have studied mythology for less than six months would whip your ass in a debate

www.thelostbooks.com...

Here is the link that I use. I see marduk is in to this topic...Ha...Ha...

There is only one God and one religion for all of mankind since the beginning of time. If you get bogged down with dogma and human interpretation.....you will have a hard time figuring out the right path.

Seek the Kingdom of God first.

There is only one God and one religion for all of mankind since the beginning of time

ah you mean Enlil
actually hes only been around for about 8000 years
you probably know him better as YHWH
or if youre a real neo pagan you call him Jehovah

There is only one God and one religion for all of mankind

did you check that statement with the Moslems ?
how about the Hindus or the Buddhists


[edit on 12-2-2007 by Marduk]

Marduk....I actually got this information from the source....God himself.

I think he dates back a bit further than your mortal references. He is the original inspiration for all of the main religions in the world. The reason they differ is because humans have had time to infect God's teachings with their own agenda's.

It is so simple that children can understand this thought. They have not had enough experience with mature human manipulation to make them blind (brainwashed).

Do you not understand that there is only one God and Creator? This God has been in charge of things here on Earth since the dawn of time, as we know it.

Of course, if you don't believe in a God being in charge of things around here, there is no more use of discussing things further. First and most important, you need to have a basic belief in a Creator.

Do you not understand that there is only one God and Creator? This God has been in charge of things here on Earth since the dawn of time, as we know it.

well textually yes I understand that there has ever only been one power and no matter what name you call him by and what religon you follow its still the same thing. but he doesn't have a beard and wear sandals, and its impossible to write about him in a book and get it right

Of course, if you don't believe in a God being in charge of things around here, there is no more use of discussing things further. First and most important, you need to have a basic belief in a Creator.

that sounds like a cop out
so you're saying that if I were an atheist then you wouldn't be able to discuss things with me.
is this because you know you would lose ?

lucky for you then I'm not isn't it
I don't have a basic belief in a creator
I have a basic belief in the power of creation
A creator is a human attempt to name something that is unnameable
while creation can be observed every time you open your eyes
if you haven't realised it yet
I am a pantheist

that means I'm holding a full deck of cards because my faith isn't reliant on being spoon fed ignorance by priests

Marduk....I actually got this information from the source....God himself.

in what manner does God speak to you ?


[edit on 12-2-2007 by Marduk]

Pantheism.....Hummm....Your belief is only 300 years old and inspired by men.

There have been two ways God has spoken to me. Both are personal experiences, which makes proof difficult.

The voice of God, loud and clear in my head, is the most common revelation. Being a doubting Thomas, I had to put his voice to the test. The manifestation of God's word to me has proven sound and reliable. I trust His voice whenever I hear it. One test was to warn me of impending danger when I am operating a vehicle....so far since 1980, 100% accurate. Oh ya ...radar speed detection and no seat belt warning....100% accuracy with the voice warning me. People that know my sixth sense..so to speak....react to my warning, because they know that my warning can be trusted. You can ask my son...if I tell him to buckle up, he does right away, because he knows we will soon be seeing a police cruiser.

The revelation of being taken up in the spirit and given counsel by God, has hapened to me three times. The descriptions given to me in the last revelation (2005) have yet to show themselves in the world. They were for me to strengthen my belief as well as trust and would probably not mean anything to most people. I have to trust this revelation, because all that I am warned about by God, ends up becoming reality.

The only way to find out for yourself is to earnestly seek God for your answers. If you trust in the word of men, you will be let down.

Why - pray - would God want to warn special little you about possibly being caught breaking the law? If he's a moral God, he would rather see you get caught. If he's not a moral God, why would he give a ****?

And why would he not also be telling the police that you were evading the law, and enabling them to catch you?

Sorry, but your "revelations" so far sound like they are founded on delusions of your own importance. I don't know the details of your personal belief structures, but they might allow you to contemplate whether some other entity is lying to you. If they don't allow for that possibility, find some other way to critically assess what you are asserting.

I know that reads a bit rude, but the intent is to be assertive rather than rude.

Cheers.


[edit on 12-2-2007 by d60944]