God (Cont.)

By definition, God is more than one deity. In the beginning there was nothing except the “Elements.”

Therefore, the God that the bible speaks of, at least in the book of Genesis chapter one, are the “Elements!”

God is, the “Light and the Darkness;” the “Earth and the Water:” “God is the face of the “Deep and the Spirit.”

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. (Genesis:1:6)

Firmament – properly an {expanse} that {is} the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky.

Divide – A primitive root; to divide (in various senses literally or {figuratively} separate.

Waters – figuratively juice; by euphemism {urine} semen: – + {piss} {wasting} water ({-ing} {[-course} {-flood} -spring]).

And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. (Genesis:1:7)

And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. (Genesis:1:8)

Firmament – properly an {expanse} that {is} the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky.

An expanse; a space between the waters.

A space between the waters?! What waters?!

The only way God (The Elements) could have, “Divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament” is if everything that existed in the universe, was under water…

Now hold on there, hear me out.

If all the “Elements” in the universe were under water, what would that look like?

It would look like a gigantic bubble!

Imagine a giant bubble under extreme pressure from all sides by crazy amounts of water.

That bubble would be flattened and spread out in all directions but, with space between its top and bottom created by its own pressure from the heat of the stars trapped inside, thereby creating a “Firmament.”

A firmament is called, “Heaven.” Heaven at this point, is made of the only elements in existence, at least the only elements with any tangible evidence of its existence, “Stars.”

Let’s say, one of those stars, a very tiny star pierced that bubble at a point somewhere at its outer extremity.

Outside the bubble, the star’s fiery surface is extinguished by the crazy amounts of water outside.

The elements fueling the fire of the tiny star solidifies, creating an outer layer which thickens until the tiny star is buried deep inside.

The surface of this, now mass of minerals from the water mixed with minerals from whatever fueled the flames of what was once a tiny star, travels back inside the bubble.

The mass of matter with a tiny star inside is frozen from the extreme cold of outer space, but its interior still an inferno.

The tiny frozen star journeys inward until it reaches the first and tiniest star nearest the firmament’s outer extremity.

The frozen star begins to melt on the side facing the “Sun.” The liquid turns to mist which is forced into a sphere by the “Vaccum” of outer space, creating an atmosphere or “Heaven” of its own, like a tiny, tiny, tiny bubble inside a gigantic, galaxy size bubble!

According to a Google search, the Earth’s atmosphere is made up of the troposphere, the stratosphere, the mesosphere and the thermosphere. A further region, beginning about 500 km above the Earth’s surface, is called the exosphere.

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. (Genesis:1:9)

And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis:1:10)

Be gathered together – to bind together (perhaps by {twisting }) that {is} collect; (figuratively) to expect: – gather ({together}) {look} {patiently} {tarry} wait ({for} {on} upon).

Place – properly a {standing} that {is} a spot; but used widely of a locality (generally or specifically); also (figuratively) of a condition (of body or mind): – {country} X {home} X {open} {place} {room} {space} X whither [-soever].

In the beginning, it seems that the Earth was one solid piece of land surrounded by waters.

And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. (Genesis:1:11)

And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis:1:12)

Brought forth – to go (causatively bring) {out} in a great variety of {applications} literally and {figuratively} direct and proximate: – X {after} {appear} X {assuredly} bear {out} X {begotten} break {out} bring forth ({out} {up}) carry {out}.

After his kind – to portion out; a {sort} that {is} species.

And the evening and the morning were the third day. (Genesis:1:13)

When a verse starts with, “And God said,” the next verse repeats exactly what “God said,” but without saying God said it.

It’s some sort of “Literary Device,” designed to turn the word “God” into a “Character.”

The word “God,” given the only scientific evidence available, could easily be understood as “Elements.”

Anyway, one has to be very careful when reading the next three verses. It is no wonder to me that preachers, who claim they have been “Chosen” and teachers, who have studied the bible in college courses and for most of their adult lives, have misinterpreted the bible.

There is no shame in that; the shame is in continuing to misinterpret God’s word!

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: (Genesis:1:14)

Lights – properly a luminous body or {luminary} that {is} (abstractly) light (as an element); figuratively {brightness} that {is} cheerfulness; specifically, a chandelier: – {bright} light.

Signs – (in the sense of appearing); a signal (literally or {figuratively}) as a {flag} beacon; {monument} omen; {prodigy} {evidence } etc.: – {mark} {miracle} (en-) {sign} token.

Seasons – properly an {appointment} that {is} a fixed time or season.

Here in Genesis chapter one verse fourteen, the author spells out what the “Lights” in this verse are used for:

To divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years. These lights are sun and moon…

And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. (Genesis:1:15)

Lights – properly a luminous body or {luminary} that {is} (abstractly) light (as an element); figuratively {brightness} that {is} cheerfulness; specifically, a chandelier: – {bright} light.

Abstractly – pulled away; detached; the basic idea is of something detached from physical, or concrete, reality.

Light – to be (causatively make) luminous (literally and metaphorically): – X break of {day} {glorious} {kindle} ({be} {en-} {give} show) light ({-en} {-ened}) set on {fire} shine.

Here in Genesis chapter one verse fifteen, the author spells out what the “Lights” in this verse should do:

Be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth. These lights are “Entities…”

In my mind, a sun and moon “Shines” light and an entity “Gives” light.

And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. (Genesis:1:16)

Great – great (in any sense); hence older; also insolent.

Insolent – showing a rude and arrogant lack of respect.

Lights – properly a luminous body or {luminary} that {is} (abstractly) light (as an element); figuratively {brightness} that {is} cheerfulness; specifically, a chandelier: – {bright} light.

Rule – rule; also (concretely in plural) a realm or a ruler: – {dominion} {government} {power} to rule.

Lesser – {abbreviated} that {is} {diminutive } literally (in {quantity} size or number) or figuratively (in age or importance): – {least} less ({-ser}) little ({one}) small ({-est} {one} {quantity} {thing}) young ({-er} -est).

Stars – a star (as round or as shining); figuratively a prince: – star ([-gazer]).

In Genesis chapter one verse sixteen, the word “Lights” mean; properly a luminous body or {luminary} that {is} (abstractly) light (as an element); figuratively {brightness} that {is} cheerfulness; specifically, a chandelier: – {bright} light.

And,

The word “Light” means; properly a luminous body or {luminary} that {is} (abstractly) light (as an element); figuratively {brightness} that {is} cheerfulness; specifically, a chandelier: – {bright} light.

Only here in Genesis chapter one verse sixteen, does the word “Lights” and the word “Light” mean exactly the same thing!

The words “Lights” and “Light” are found under the reference number H3974, which means information for both words can be located in the Hebrew section of the Strong’s Concordance under number three thousand nine hundred and seventy-four.

Everywhere else in the book of Genesis the word light is found under the reference numbers H215 or H216.

The strongest evidence given for Genesis chapter one verse sixteen to be talking about the lights and the light as being, “Entities” is at the end of the verse:

“He made the stars also.”

He Made the Stars Also?!

If “He” made the stars also, then he can’t be calling the lights or the light the sun and moon, which they are by the way, because the sun is a star…

And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, (Genesis:1:17)

And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis:1:18)

So, lights that rule kingdoms?  I don’t think so…

And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. (Genesis:1:19)

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. (Genesis:1:20)

Creature – From H8317; a {swarm} that {is} active mass of minute animals: – creep (-ing {thing}) move (-ing creature).

H8317 – to {wriggle} that {is} (by implication) swarm or abound: – breed (bring {forth} increase) abundantly (in {abundance}) {creep} move.

Life – From H2421; alive; hence raw (flesh); fresh ({plant} {water} {year}) strong.

H2421 – to {live} whether literally or figuratively; causatively to revive: – keep ({leave} make) {alive}

Fowl – From H5774; a bird (as covered with {feathers} or rather as covering with {wings}) often collective: – {bird} that {flieth} {flying} fowl.

H5774 – to cover (with wings or obscurity).

The firmament of heaven in verse twenty is the troposphere of earth.

Troposphere – the lowest region of the atmosphere, extending from the earth’s surface to a height of about 3.7–6.2 miles (6–10 km), which is the lower boundary of the stratosphere.

And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis:1:21)

Whales – a marine or land {monster} that {is} sea serpent or jackal: – {dragon} {sea-monster} {serpent} whale.

So, the first creatures as well as the first fowl, came from the waters.

The jackal (or other hideous land animal): – {dragon}, which is included in the definition of the word “Whale,” also came from the water.

What’s interesting is, I always thought of a whale as well, a whale! You know, a giant fish-like mammal, not a dragon…

Also, in my mind, when God says that every living creature and every winged fowl was created after its kind, that means, that they didn’t evolve over time. They were created that way. There is no such thing as “Evolution!” Evolution is just a theory.

Question:

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

Answer:

The chicken, because “God,” (The Elements) created every winged fowl after his kind.

And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. (Genesis:1:22)

Blessed – to kneel; by implication to bless God (as an act of {adoration}) and (vice-versa) man (as a benefit).

And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. (Genesis:1:23)

And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. (Genesis:1:24)

Living – alive.

Creature – properly a breathing {creature} that {is} animal or (abstractly) vitality.

Cattle – properly a dumb beast; especially any large quadruped or animal (often collectively): – {beast}.

Creeping thing – a reptile or any other rapidly moving animal: – that {creepeth} creeping (moving) thing.

Beast – same as living; alive; hence raw (flesh).

And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis:1:25)

Made – primitive root; to do or {make} in the broadest sense and widest application.

There are only two types of living creatures. Those that come from the waters and those that come from the earth.

They didn’t evolve over time; they came forth or was brought forth after their kinds. They were either “Created” or they were “Made.”

Notice, on the “Fifth Day,” the waters brought forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

The phrase, “And the evening and the morning were the fifth day,” although describing a common event in the minds of its readers or listeners, also, but more importantly, separates “Ages!”

What am I saying? I’m saying that the creatures that “God” (The Elements) said, “Let the waters bring forth” and the waters brought forth were on the planet or at least in the waters and in the air, long before the earth brought forth the living creature after his kind.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Genesis:1:26)

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (Genesis:1:27)

Man was different. The waters didn’t bring forth abundantly man. The earth didn’t bring forth man.

God (The Elements) made man in “Their” image after “Their” likeness.

God (The Elements) created man in “Their” own image, in the image of God (The Elements) created he “Them”; male and female created he “Them.”

What exactly does it mean to be “Made” in the image and likeness of “God?” (The Elements)

One thing’s for sure, that image and likeness was “Male” and “Female.”

How can a (one) image be male and female? (Two)

What exactly did God (The Elements) look like back then?

I imagine, only because nothing existed except stars and space, that “God” resembled stars and space: Under crazy amounts of water! (The Elements)

That is until a tiny, tiny, tiny little star, frozen underneath a solid mixed mass of minerals floated into the picture.

That mixed mass of minerals added more elements to all that existed. It created a perfect place, an environment, where “God” (The Elements) and man (Made in the image and likeness of “God” (The Elements)) could and did “Thrive.”

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Genesis:1:28)

Replenish – to fill or (intransitively) be full {of} in a wide application (literally and figuratively): – {accomplish} {confirm} + {consecrate} be at an {end} be {expired} be {fenced} {fill} {fulfil} ({be} {become} X {draw} give {in} go) fully ({-ly} -ly {set} {tale}) [over-] {flow} {fulness} {furnish} gather ({selves} {together}) {presume} {replenish} {satisfy} {set} {space} take a [hand-] {full} + have wholly.

This is the kind of thing that angers me. The authors of the Strong’s Concordance defined the word “Replenish” with the above definition; to fill.

Yet, at the same time, when one looks up the word, “Replenish” under its reference number H4390, one finds that the word, “Replenish” is used only two times in the entire bible.

It’s used once in Genesis:1:28 and again in Genesis:9:1.

I can understand someone making the mistake of thinking that the word “Replenish” means to fill or be full of, if there was only the one verse; Genesis:1:28.

And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. (Genesis:9:1)

But, to have the only other time the word “Replenish” is used, in the entire bible, read the above, in Genesis:9:1?!

Remember, the story of Noah was when God (The Elements), in this case the “Water,” destroyed every living thing on earth except Noah, his family and the animals that Noah took with him on the ark.

After the flood, God said to Noah, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.”

It’s obvious that the word “Replenish” means; fill (something) up again!

Or

Restore (a stock or supply) to a former level or condition, right?!

I said all that to say this, if God (The Elements) blessed them, and God (The Elements) said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, then that means that there was something on earth that’s wasn’t there any more…

Also, if on that “Day,” God (The Elements) said, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,” then that tells me that the word “Day” is being used figuratively.

A “Day” refers to a space of time; an “Age;” not literally, from sunrise to sunset or from one sunset to the next.

Day – to be hot; a day (as the warm {hours}) whether literally (from sunrise to {sunset} or from one sunset to the {next}) or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated {term}) (often used adverbially): – {age} + {always} + {chronicles}.

Age – a distinct period of history.

Anyway,

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. (Genesis:1:29)

And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. (Genesis:1:30)

Verses twenty-nine and thirty of Genesis chapter one, were written, just like before, to not only make the word, “God” a character, but to also make that which was made in the image and likeness of “God” into a character.

The phrase, “Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat, coupled with the phrase, “And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat, is an attempt by the author to draw parallels between the man, who resembled “God” and the creatures.

It’s like the author is saying that man, who was like “God;” a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny little star inside a bubble, (A spark) inside a tiny, tiny, tiny little bubble, (The Earth) inside a gigantic, galaxy size bubble, (The Universe) actually ate like creatures from the water and creatures from the earth!

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. (Genesis:1:31)

Sacred Secrets

The Sacred Secrets

Preface

 

I submitted what I considered a screenplay, the title, “Which Christ” to a “Professional” critique in the industry whose feedback started like this:

“One of the main questions I have about this script is about the necessity to retell this subject matter.  This may, indeed be the so-called “Greatest Story Ever Told,” but it is also the Single Story Told Most Often.  As interesting as the story of Christ may be, it is one that is told every Sunday in church, and has been the subject of an overflowing handful of movies.”

Boy was I crushed…  I could feel the tears welling up in my heart.  It went on:

“In order to make a retelling of this oft-told tale marketable, you would need to provide an angle so fresh or a rendering so expert that it would shed fresh light on the legend.

I’m not convinced that you’ve accomplished that here in asking the question, “What if Judas weren’t guilty in exactly the way we thought?’ to the degree necessary.

Also, when you make comedic changes to Biblical matters, there are certain things that seem easier to get away with than others.

One thing you might have some trouble with is your portrayal of the Virgin Mary as someone who almost instinctively used a four-letter word.

When reworking Bible stories, there is a fine line between artists’ license and the perception of sacrilege.”

Wow, at this point I was understandably, super excited!  He called me an “Artist!”

Seriously, I did a lot of research and I read the four Gospels over and over and over again for years, then decided that the authors must have been writing about two different people, both named Jesus!

Don’t get me wrong, I am in total awe of the Bible.  It’s the only book I know of that begins with, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” and then goes on to tell the history of mankind! Wow!

There’s a story in the Bible, which is told in church every Sunday about a man whose birthday marked the change of the calendar to what it is today.

This calendar is based on the traditionally reckoned year of the conception or birth of a man named Jesus; of Nazareth.

I say “reckoned year” because, there has been considerable controversy over what that date was.  No one knows when Jesus was born.

The historical evidence is too sketchy to “Know” just about anything concerning this Jesus.

In the Holy Bible there are four books that make up what is called the “Gospels,” that talk about a Jesus.  They are the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Magi (Wise men) found Jesus in a house with his mother Mary.

In the Gospel of Luke, Shepherds found Jesus, his mother Mary and Joseph in a manger.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus heals two demon possessed men.  In the Gospels of Luke and Mark, Jesus heals only one demon possessed man.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the son of a carpenter.  In the Gospel of Mark Jesus is a carpenter.

Are you starting to get the picture?

There is a list of Jesus’ disciples in all four of the Gospels.

In the Gospels of Matthew and Mark there is a disciple named Thaddaeus.

In the Gospel of Luke, there is not a Thaddaeus, but there are two Judas’.

There are two Judas’ in the Gospel of John and a disciple named Nathanael.

I know what you’re thinking.  I thought the same thing at first, “Whoever translated the Gospels those hundreds of years ago must have made a mistake, no one’s perfect, right?”

Well, here’s another mistake.  When Jesus was arrested in Matthew:26:47 which reads, “While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, arrived.  With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people.”

Someone forgot to mention the fact that it was night, because in the Gospel of John it reads, “When he finished praying, Jesus left with his disciples and crossed the Kidron Valley.  On the other side there was an olive grove, and he and his disciples went into it.  Now Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples.

So, Judas came to the grove, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and Pharisees.  They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons.”

A blind man could see that one Jesus was arrested during the “day,” and the other Jesus was arrested at “night.”

In the Gospel of Matthew, Joseph the husband of Mary of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ, is the son of Jacob; who was the son of Matthan; who was the son of Eleazar; who was the son of Eliud, etc., etc., etc…

In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus was the son, so it was thought of Joseph, son of Heli, son of Matthat, son of Levi, son of Melchi, son of Jannai, son of Joseph, etc., etc., etc…

Which is it?  Is Joseph the son of Jacob, the son of Martthan, the son of Eleazar or is Joseph the son of Heli, the son of Marrhat, the son of Levi?

Some scholars explain the difference between the two genealogies by saying that the one written in the Gospel of Luke is for Mary’s side of the family.

I don’t think so.  I think that after considering the discrepancies in the information written in the four Gospels, especially the two different genealogies, there is no other choice but to conclude that; there were either two men, both named Jesus or someone changed the scriptures!

I found out the hard way that if you take all the information presented in the “Four Gospels of the King James version of the Holy Bible” as inspired by God, then attempted to live your life by the lessons derived from that information, your life would resemble an abstract painting and yet, millions of people on earth continue to do just that.

Is there any wonder as to why the world is in such a confused and conflicted condition?

According to Bart D. Ehrman, an American New Testament Scholar and Author of “Misquoting Jesus, The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, who uses a “Historical Critical Method” for examining the Holy Bible says, “Scribes copied scripture and sometimes changed it.”

Using a process called, “Textual Criticism” which is the process of attempting to ascertain the original wording of a text, scholars have found, to my surprise, that there were not two Jesus’.

Before I ever heard of Bart D. Ehrman or Textual Criticism, I discovered discrepancies in the writings of the “Four Gospels.” I wondered, if there are discrepancies in the New Testament of the Holy Bible, could there also be discrepancies in the Old Testament? Yes, there are.

What I discovered while examining the Old Testament, the book of Genesis, was amazing!  I wrote about it in my book, “Genesis II.”

How I found out that there was something terribly wrong with the New Testament is kind of a not so funny story.

I tried, with all my heart, body and soul, to live my life according to the words written in the scriptures of that New Testament.

I failed miserably.  Of course, being the “Perfectionist” that I was, I blamed my failure on what the author wrote in Matthew:26:41:

“Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

My flesh was weak…

I was so convinced that the scriptures were inspired by God and therefore inerrant, that when I found out differently, I decided to expose to the entire world the “Fact” that there were TWO men named Jesus:  Two Christs, hence, the screenplay, “Which Christ!”

Who would have thought that “Scribes” would have had the audacity to take it upon themselves to alter the words of the Holy Bible or that the authors of said Gospels would make up stories?

I later decided that regardless of what changes, additions and/or deletions were made to the scriptures, I believe the overall message would not and could not be lost.

I now believe that the Holy Scriptures are in fact, inerrant. I now believe that the changes, additions and deletions are all “Divine Intervention!” I believe this because, if it wasn’t for the so-called mistakes, no one would have bothered to investigate the so-called problems.

If no one bothered to investigate the so-called problems, well let’s just say, the incredible story you’re about to experience would have never been written.

No amount of man’s meddling with the words of the Holy Bible could take away from the purpose for which the “Author” (God) intended.

According to most scholars, the Gospel of Mark was the first of the Four Gospels written.  It is believed that the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke used the book of Mark as one of their sources of information.

The Gospel of Mark was written between AD 66 – 70.  It was only in the 19th century that Mark came to be seen as the earliest of the four gospels, which now that I think about it, is pretty crazy.  Eighteen hundred and some years, and it was just figured out the Gospel of Mark was the first of the Four Gospels?

Most scholars believe the Gospel of Matthew was composed between AD 80 and 90.

The most probable date for Luke’s composition is around AD 80–110, and there is evidence that it was still being revised well into the 2nd century.

If the authors of Matthew and Luke used the Gospel of Mark as a reference, how is it that the Gospel of Mark starts with this Jesus character being a grown man and in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke the character Jesus is a baby?

Mark

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. (Mark:1:9)

Matthew

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. (Matthew:1:18)

Luke

And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. (Luke:1:30)

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (Luke:1:31)

The answer is, the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke invented their stories!  That’s right, total fiction!

I want to know the facts about everything concerning Jesus, don’t you? I want to know the truth!

What is “Truth?”

Truth – properly to build up or support; to foster as a parent or nurse; figuratively to render (or be) firm or {faithful} to trust or {believe} to be permanent or quiet; morally to be true or certain; once; stability; figuratively {certainty} {truth } trustworthiness: – assured ({-ly}) {establishment} {faithful} {right} {sure} true ({-ly} {-th}) verity.

Verity – true principle or belief, especially one of fundamental importance.

At this point, I feel it necessary to tell you that if you are sensitive about your religion, “STOP” reading this blog right now!  What I’m about to reveal will be disturbing to those of a sensitive nature.

It will be extremely difficult, but I think if we look hard and long, I believe we can find some truth in the “King James version of the Holy Bible.”

Bart D. Ehrman  wrote in the conclusion of his book, Misquoting Jesus, The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, “For God to inspire the bible would be so that his people would have his actual words, but if he really wanted people to have his actual words surely he would have miraculously preserved those words, just as he had miraculously inspired them in the first place.  Giving the circumstance that he didn’t preserve the words, the conclusion seemed inescapable to me that he hadn’t gone to the trouble of inspiring them.”

I totally disagree with Bart. I believe that the King James version of the Holy Bible as well as any other version of the Holy Scriptures, were “Inspired by God!”

It is the purpose of this blog to make this “Revelation” perfectly clear.

Whose bright idea was it to put four books about the same event together with a bunch of letters from who knows who, into a collection anyway?

From this “mixed bag” of misinformation, grew a major mess; a wayward way of life; a radical and at times ridiculous religion called “Christianity” was formed.

The “Author” (God) must have had a reason for allowing the bible to remain, until today, in the odd order that it is in.

The “Author” must have had a reason for allowing the discrepancies to remain until now.

That’s the focus of this blog.  Why did the “Author” allow the Holy Bible to remain in the messed-up condition that it is in?

Didn’t the “Author” know that someday, someone, would actually read the bible and discover all its mistakes?

After reading Bart D Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus The Story Behind Who Changed the Scriptures and Why,” I do not trust a single (English) word written in the King James version of the Holy Bible.

I do however, trust the Hebrew and Greek definitions of the English words in the King James version of the Holy Bible.

In the Old Testament of the King James version of the Holy Bible the words, when reverse translated from the English language to the Hebrew definitions tell a completely different story from the one that the English words tell.

The intention of this blog is to see if the same phenomena exists when reading the New Testament using the Greek definitions of the words reverse translated into English.

I believe the King James version of the Holy Bible when reverse translated, “Is the Inspired and Inerrant Word of God.”  The so called, “Discrepancies” were put there intentionally, not by the human beings who deliberately altered the scriptures, but by their “Creator,” who inspired their mischievous misdeeds.

The name Matthew means; gift of Jah; {Mattithjah} the name of four Israelites; an Israelite and Christian.

Mark –  properly to {come} that {is} (impliedly) to assent: – consent; (in the sense of appearing); a signal (literally or {figuratively}) as a {flag} beacon; {monument} omen; {prodigy} {evidence } etc.: – {mark} {miracle} (en-) {sign} token.

Luke – Contracted from the Latin Lucanus; Lucas a Christian: – Lucas Luke.

John – Of Hebrew origin; Jehovah-favored; {Jochanan} the name of nine Israelites: – Johanan.

Three out of the four titles have a spiritual meaning; Matthew, gift of Jah, Mark, to {come} that {is} (impliedly) to assent: – consent; (in the sense of appearing); a miracle and John, Jehovah – favored.

That leaves Luke; a Christian.

If it were left up to me, I would take the Gospel of Luke out of the bible for just that reason:  The word Luke doesn’t have a spiritual meaning when reverse translated.

The King James version of the Holy Bible was left in the condition that it is in for a reason.  So, I will leave Luke alone, for now.

After Jesus died, his followers expected him to return at any minute, certainly before they themselves died, therefore no one felt it necessary to write anything down. As eyewitnesses began to die, someone thought it would be a good idea to write about the character Jesus and His teachings.

In defense of the authors of the Gospels as well as the organizers of the Cannon of Scriptures, none of them knew that the writings would be studied by scholars 2000 years in the future.

I’m almost sure that at least one of the anonymous authors thought they were just preserving history for posterity’s sake. My gut tells me some of the anonymous authors wanted history to read the way “they” wanted it to read.  I will discuss who “They” are in the conclusion of this blog.

According to most modern-day Scholars, only a very small percentage of the people back in the days of the character Jesus could read and write.

I believe everything written in the New Testament of the Holy Scriptures was passed on for decades via letters written by priests to other priests reporting the miraculous things happening during the times of the character Jesus.

The writing of letters from one priest to another explains the consistency in story-line.

Scribes changed the text at will, putting whatever suited their fancy.  We don’t know what’s real from what’s “Scribed!”

I guess that’s why they call it “Faith.”

Modern day scholars tell us that the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, written some 20 – 30 years after the book of Mark, used the book of Mark as a reference.

For that reason alone, I would disregard both the Gospel of Matthew and Luke, but, like I said about the Gospel of Luke, the “Author” (God) left them in the “Cannon of Scriptures” for some reason, so I’ll leave them alone, for now.

Mark, Matthew and Luke are called the synoptic gospels because of the close similarities between them in terms of content, arrangement, and language.

 

Each gospel writer portrayed the character Jesus and his divine role in different ways.

The Gospel of John and the synoptic gospels present completely different pictures of the character Jesus.

According to several sources found in a Google search, the character Jesus stood for a lot of different things to a lot of different people.

The synoptic gospels represent the character Jesus as an exorcist and healer who preached in parables about the coming Kingdom of God. He preached first in Galilee and later in Jerusalem, where he cleansed a temple.

He states that he offers no sign as proof of his divinity in the book of Mark and only the sign of Jonah in the books of Matthew and Luke.

In the synoptic gospels the Jesus story takes up a single year.

In the synoptic gospels the “Last Supper” takes place as a Passover meal, while in John it happens on the day before Passover.

In the Gospel According Matthew, apparently written for a Jewish audience, the character Jesus is repeatedly called out as the fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy.

Matthew reinterprets Mark, stressing the character Jesus’ teachings making subtle changes to the narrative in order to stress his divine nature – Mark’s “young man” who appears at the character Jesus’ tomb, for example, becomes a radiant angel in Matthew.

In Mark, apparently written with a Roman audience in mind, the character Jesus is a heroic man of action, given to powerful emotions, including agony. The character Jesus preaches in Jerusalem, launching his ministry with the cleansing of the temple.

Mark never calls the character Jesus “God” or claims that the character Jesus existed prior to his earthly life, never mentions a virgin birth (the author apparently believes that the character Jesus had a normal human birth), and makes no attempt to trace the character Jesus’ ancestry back to King David or Adam.

Mark’s description of the second coming is made up almost entirely of quotations from scripture.

Mark had no post-resurrection appearances of Jesus. The miracle stories in Mark confirm Jesus’ status as a “Messenger” of God (which was Mark’s understanding of the Messiah).

In the Gospel According to Luke, apparently written for Gentiles, the character Jesus is especially concerned with the poor.

Luke expanded on the source and eliminated some passages entirely; most of chapters 6 and 7, which he apparently felt reflected poorly on the disciples and painted Jesus too much like a magician.

Luke emphasizes the importance of prayer and the action of the “Holy Spirit” in the character Jesus’ life and in the Christian community.

In Luke the character Jesus is portrayed as a stoic supernatural being, unmoved even by his own crucifixion.

Unlike Matthew, Luke insists that salvation offered by Christ is for all, and not only for the Jews.

The Gospel According to John is the only gospel to call the character Jesus, God. In the Gospel According to Mark, the character Jesus hides his identity as messiah, in the Gospel According to John he openly proclaims it.

In the Gospel According to John, the character Jesus is an incarnation of the eternal Word, who spoke no parables, talked extensively about himself, and did not refer to a “Second Coming.”

The Gospel According to John has no baptism, no temptation, no transfiguration, no “Lords Supper” and no stories of the character Jesus’  birth.

In the Gospel According to John the Jesus story takes three years, the cleansing of the temple is at the beginning of his ministry and he performs several miracles as signs, most of them not found in the synoptic gospels.

The Gospels provide a good idea of the character Jesus and His teachings.  Hopefully, Historical Critical Study can distinguish the ideas of Jesus from the ideologies of the authors and scribes who changed the text!

Matthew and Luke have frequently edited Mark to suit their own ends, and the contradictions and discrepancies between John and the synoptic gospels make it impossible to accept both as reliable according to scholars, but I believe taken as a whole, contradictions and discrepancies included, the four Gospels are not only reliable, they reveal the “Truth.”

To get to the truth about who the character Jesus was, what he did and did not do and what it all, “Really” means for Religion as well as what it “Really” means for mankind, it is necessary to examine each book of the Gospels individually, keeping in mind the fact that each author has a separate message and that message is, “Inspired by God!”

I  learned from studying Bart D. Ehrman’s books, particularly, “Jesus, Interrupted Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don’t Know About Them)” that there is a better way of reading the bible.  He calls it, “Horizontal Reading.”

In horizontal reading, you read a story in one of the Gospels, then read the same story as told by another Gospel as if they were written in columns, next to each other.  Reading the stories in the bible this way, you’ll find a lot of the discrepancies. That is how I will write this blog.

The very first thing that shows up as an addition to the Holy Scriptures, according to most modern day scholars; Bart D. Ehrman being one of them, is the “Virgin Birth of the character Jesus.”

I believe a lot of non-believers remain non-believers because of what is written about the birth of the character Jesus in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.

I remember when I first read that the mother of the character Jesus was a virgin. I was only twelve years old. I had to look up the word virgin in the dictionary.

I thought to myself, “It’s impossible for someone to have a baby and be a virgin!”

Then I remembered what I had read or heard in church, “And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.” (Mark:10:27)

And so, I believed. Imagine my shock when I heard that the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke fabricated their stories!

Away in a manger
No crib for His bed
The little Lord Jesus
Lay down His sweet head

The stars in the sky
Look down where He lay
The little Lord Jesus
Asleep on the hay

The cattle are lowing
The poor Baby wakes
But little Lord Jesus
No crying He makes

I love Thee, Lord Jesus
Look down from the sky
And stay by my side
‘Til morning is nigh

I remember singing that song when I was a kid going to my uncle’s church. Every Christmas my siblings and I would be snuggled around the fireplace, roasting marshmallows and eating popcorn, oh wait, that was a family on the television!

Whatever, the point I’m trying to make is, I believed every word of that song.

Bart D. Ehrman tells us that the character Jesus was not the miraculously born child of a “Virgin” Mary born in a manger, no crib for his bed.

Mary was a virgin, but not in the way that most “Believers” think.

She was a maiden; by implication an unmarried daughter, which is the Greek definition of the word virgin found in the Strong’s Concordance of the “King James version of the Holy Bible.

The Hebrew definition is, a lass (as veiled or private): – {damsel} {maid} virgin.

Lass – a girl or young woman.

In both the Hebrew language and the Greek, a virgin is a young, female human being.

The belief that the character Jesus was the “Messiah; God’s Son; the “Christ,” prompted the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke to create a “Holy Ghost” pregnancy.

Matthew

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. (Matthew:1:18)

Luke

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man (Luke:1:34)

And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. (Luke:1:35)

Wow, the lengths to which some people would and did go to push their religious agendas!

My question is, “Why did the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke create fictitious “Virgin Mary” stories?”

There are no independent historical records that support either Matthew’s or Luke’s stories. It seems that both authors improvised. They lied, but why?

Matthew created his story to coincide with so-called Old Testament prophecies.  It’s clear that Matthew made up these stories to lend credibility and to impress readers, even though the so-called prophecies were taken out of context and misquoted.

Luke tried to give his account of a virgin birth a “Back Story,” like, the birth of John the Baptist; the character Jesus’ cousin and Mary was a virgin; her husband was named Joseph, and the character Jesus was born in Bethlehem, nice try Luke!

According to Bart D. Ehrman and his textual criticism, Jesus was born in Nazareth.

If it were left up to me, I’d take out of the Holy Scriptures, any and all references to the character Jesus being born of a virgin.

For the Gospels of Matthew and Luke to have ended up in the “Cannon of the Holy Scriptures” and for the fictitious stories about the birth of the character Jesus to a “virgin” to have remained until today, intact, creates, in my mind, so many questions I don’t know where to begin asking.  Yes, I do…

The authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke used their very fertile imaginations to mislead readers.

The question is, “Why did the Gospels According to Matthew and Luke end up in the Cannon of Scriptures?”

My guess, which is really more than a guess, is, to compete with the Gospel of Mark!

The Gospel of Mark was the first Gospel written. Back in those days, when you wrote a book the only way to make a copy was to hand copy it yourself or hire someone to hand copy it for you.

The Gospel of Mark had a 20 to 25-year head start in circulation. There was no way “They” could get a hold of all the copies to destroy them, so it was necessary to write competing Gospels.

According to Wikipedia, “The book of Mark was apparently written with a Roman audience in mind.  In it, the character Jesus is a heroic man of action, given to powerful emotions.”

Heroic? The character Jesus was being spoken of as a hero by all the people of his time, no doubt by all the souls he healed, gave sight and those whose limbs he restored.

They” probably thought to themselves, “The followers of this character Jesus will soon forget about all this nonsense, then everything will go back to normal.”

When someone decided to write about the character Jesus their whole world changed. No longer was the character Jesus a folk tale, soon to be forgotten.

Now, the story of the character Jesus would and could be told to everyone, for generations.

Stories about this heroic character Jesus and His miraculous deeds would be remembered forever!

People were probably leaving the synagogues, forming groups, listening to fellow believers read the Gospel of Mark and giving the readers of those “Inspired words of God” all their money!

They” couldn’t have that, so, “They” wrote a Gospel of their own! “They” created their own hero! A Jewish hero! A hero for the Jews! “They” wrote the Gospel According of Matthew!

The new and improved Gospel with the “Virgin Birth” and “Genealogy” was the new craze!

Soon, anyone who could read and get a group of people to listen, was getting paid!

The “Made up” story about that character Jesus had become a “Cash Cow!”

The Gospel of Matthew which featured a “Jewish” hero, the character Jesus and a “Virgin Mary Baby Mama Story” would make way more money than Mark’s, “Grown Ass Man Story!”

Jews had a hard time believing that a carpenter from Nazareth who died on a cross could be their “Messiah.”

No problem! Then came the Gospel of Luke. A hero for everyone! Yes, even the Gentiles!

The problem that existed over 2000 years ago seems to me to be the same problem that exists today, that is, “What to believe?”

What is the truth and more importantly, what does it have to do with today?

The “Ultimate” purpose of this blog is to reverse translate the English translation of the four Gospels. The English translation is the story or stories read and understood only on the surface. The reverse translated stories get down underneath to the “Real” stories that have been hidden for centuries.

God

God
 
Who or what is God?
 
The first verse, Genesis:1:1 can be understood as being a “Summary.” A summary in the sense that it is a brief statement or account of the main points of something.
 
In this case, the summary describes to the reader or listener exactly what’s going to happen in the story that’s about to be told; sort of…
 
The stories in the book of Genesis are written in a very special way. They are the words written as well as the Hebrew meaning of the words written. For example:
 
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis:1:1)
 
Simple, right? Not so simple…
 
God, in chapter one of the book of Genesis is a “What,” not a “Who.” What was God? God was “Plural.”
 
According to the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, God is plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural {thus} especially with the article) of the supreme God; {angels} X {exceeding} God (gods) ({-dess} {-ly}) X (very) {great} {judges} X mighty.
 
The letter/number H433 stands for “Hebrew four hundred thirty-three which means information can be found in the Hebrew section of the Strong’s Concordance at number 433.
 
The word God is plural of the meaning found after the letter/number H433.
 
H433 – prolonged (emphatically) from H410; a deity or the deity: – {God} god.
 
God is plural which means more than one, of a deity. God is two or more deities! God is also:
 
H410 – Shortened from H352; strength; as adjective mighty; especially the Almighty (but used also of any deity): – God ({god}) X {goodly} X {great} {idol} might (-y {one}) {power} strong.
 
H352 – From the same as H193; properly strength; hence anything strong; specifically a chief (politically); also a ram (from his strength); a pilaster (as a strong support); an oak or other strong tree: – mighty ({man}) {lintel} {oak} {post} {ram} tree.
 
H193 – From an unused root meaning to {twist} that {is} (by implication) be strong; the body (as being rolled together) also powerful: – {mighty} strength.
 
God is strength. God is strong. God is twisted, as in the body being rolled together and God is also powerful!
 
It’s important to get a complete understanding from the very start when trying to define who or what God is!
 
The above definitions are the Hebrew understanding of God. The Greek understanding of God is similar, but a little different.
 
The definitions of God are limited to these two languages because the King James version of the bible was written in these two languages.
 
God in the Greek language is a deity especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding God god [-ly -ward].”
 
The letter/number G3588 stands for Greek three thousand five hundred and eighty-eight, which means information can be found in the Greek section of the Strong’s Concordance at number 3588.
 
G3588 – The masculine feminine (second) and neuter (third) forms in all their inflections; the definite article; the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc…
 
The difference between the Hebrew definitions and the Greek definition is exactly that, that the Hebrew has many definitions while the Greek only has the one.
 
The second verse of the book of Genesis begins with the story of the creating of the earth:
 
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Genesis:1:2)
 
Again, simple right? Read normally, from top to bottom; from left to right, the above verse is easily understood, but when read using the Hebrew definitions of the words and connecting verses by way of their meanings, is a whole other story!
 
Example:
 
Earth – From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at {large} or partitively a land): – X {common} {country} {earth} {field} {ground} {land} X {nations} {way} + {wilderness} world.
 
The word “Earth” in the opening verses of the book of Genesis wasn’t the name of our planet. How could it be?
 
There were no human beings. No human beings, no names!
Earth was something “Firm.” It had no form. It was “Void.”
 
And darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
 
Darkness – the dark; hence (literally) darkness; figuratively {misery} destruction; {death} ignorance; {sorrow} wickedness: – dark ({-ness}) {night} obscurity.
 
Face – the face (as the part that turns); used in a great variety of applications (literally and figuratively).
 
Deep – (Usually feminine) an abyss (as a surging mass of {water}) especially the deep (the main sea or the subterranean water supply): – deep ({place}) depth.
 
Spirit – wind; by resemblance {breath} that {is} a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively {life} anger; unsubstantiality; by extension a region of the sky; by resemblance {spirit} but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions): – {air} {anger} {blast} {breath} X {cool} {courage} {mind} spirit.
 
Waters – water; figuratively juice; by euphemism {urine} semen: – + {piss} {wasting} water ({-ing} {[-course} {-flood} -spring]).
 
In the beginning, there existed earth, which was something firm: Darkness, which, figuratively speaking, was {misery} destruction; {death} ignorance; {sorrow} wickedness: Spirit, which was wind; breath; figuratively speaking, {life} anger; {spirit} but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions): – {air} {anger} {blast} {breath} and water, which was figuratively juice; by euphemism {urine} semen: – + {piss}, only.
 
The words in verse two of Genesis chapter one, alone, paint a picture in the mind of dirt, wind and water hanging out in outer space!
 
According to the actual words found in the verse, the “Deep” and the “Waters” had a “Face.” Face being defined in the Strong’s Concordance as the part that turns, indicates that these things which at first glance seem to be descriptions of an ocean or a sea, are to be understood as being some sort of entities.
 
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. (Genesis:1:3)
 
Light – From H215; illumination or (concretely) luminary (in every {sense} including {lightning} {happiness } etc.): – {bright} {clear} + {day} light ({-ning}) {morning} sun.
 
H215 – A primitive root; to be (causatively make) luminous (literally and metaphorically).
 
Then there was “Light…” What can be said about the light?
 
One could say that the light, written about here in verse three of the book of Genesis is the sun.
 
If one read the verses in the normal way, from top to bottom; left to right, it would make perfect sense that the “Light” would be the sun shining on the earth, but that would be way too easy.
 
Metaphorically speaking, in the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.
 
Created (1) – A primitive root; (absolutely) to create; (qualified) to cut down (a {wood}) select; feed (as formative processes): – {choose} create ({creator}) cut {down} {dispatch} {do} make (fat).
 
Created (2) – Apparently contracted from H226 in the demonstrative sense of entity; properly self (but generally used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or {preposition} even or namely): – (As such unrepresented in English.)
 
H226 – Probably from H225 (in the sense of appearing); a signal (literally or {figuratively}) as a {flag} beacon; {monument} omen; {prodigy} {evidence} etc.: – {mark} {miracle} (en-) {sign} token.
 
H225 – A primitive root; properly to {come} that {is} (impliedly) to assent: – consent.
 
The word “Created” has two meanings, which when combined literally describes, at least in my mind, a process of “Becoming.”
 
“In the sense of appearing; in the demonstrative sense of entity; properly self; feed, as formative processes, in my mind, all points to something becoming “Something!”
 
A becoming something greater than the sum of its parts. What am I saying?
 
I’m saying that God in the Hebrew understanding of the word is more than one strong deity:
 
God – plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense.
 
H433 – from H410; a deity or the deity: – {God} god.
 
H410 – Shortened from H352; strength.
 
H352 – From the same as H193; properly strength; hence anything strong.
 
I’m saying, Earth, Darkness, Spirit and Water are all deities. Powerful deities that combined: Twisted; rolled together to form a body!
 
H193 – From an unused root meaning to {twist} that {is} (by implication) be strong; the body (as being rolled together) also powerful: – {mighty} strength.
 
I’m saying that this “Becoming” something greater than the sum of its parts happened when “God” said, “Let there be light: and there was light.”
 
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. (Genesis:1:4)
 
Light – From H215; illumination or (concretely) luminary (in every {sense} including {lightning} {happiness} etc.): – {bright} {clear} + {day} light ({-ning}) {morning} sun.
 
H215 – A primitive root; to be (causatively make) luminous (literally and metaphorically): – X break of {day} {glorious} {kindle} ({be} {en-} {give} show) light ({-en} {-ened}) set on {fire} shine.
 
Everything written in the Holy Bible was written by men to explain the unexplainable!
 
Something those men called “God” inspired those writings!
 
The writings that “God” inspired where recorded in the form of “Metaphorical” stories!
 
Metaphorically speaking, “God” saw the light.
 
The phrase, “that it was good” would indicate that the light is being spoken of metaphorically since “Light” is neither good or bad, but just light.
 
If the word “Light” is being spoken of metaphorically, then the light, like the earth, the darkness, the Spirit and the water is a deity.
 
The phrase, “And God divided the light from the darkness,” could mean different things depending on which definition of the word, “Divided” one uses:
 
Divided (1) – to divide (in various senses literally or {figuratively} separate.
 
Divided (2) – from H995; a distinction.
 
H995 – A primitive root; to separate mentally (or {distinguish }) that {is} (generally) understand: – {attend} {consider} be {cunning} {diligently} {direct} {discern} {eloquent} {feel} {inform} {instruct} have {intelligence} {know} look well {to} {mark} {perceive} be {prudent} {regard} (can) skill ({-ful}) {teach} {think} ({cause} make {to} {get} {give} have) understand ({-ing}) {view} (deal) wise ({-ly} man).
 
If one were to use the first definition of the word “Divided,” one would picture the earth and the sun. The sun would be shinning on one side of the earth while the opposite side of the earth would be dark.
 
One would imagine that the difference between the two sides of the earth were what is considered light on the one side and darkness on the other side.
 
If one used the second definition however, one would be inclined to understand the word “Light” and the word “Darkness” not as elements, but as living beings because elements couldn’t:
 
Be {cunning} {diligently} {direct} {discern} {eloquent} {feel} {inform} {instruct} have {intelligence} {know} look well {to} {mark} {perceive} be {prudent} {regard} (can) skill ({-ful}) {teach} {think} ({cause} make {to} {get} {give} have) understand ({-ing}) {view} (deal) wise ({-ly} or be a man!
 
The Holy Bible, written by men to explain the unexplainable, was inspired by something those men called “God” and was recorded in the form of metaphorical stories disguised as “Literal” accounts!
 
What am I saying?
 
I’m saying that over, who knows how many thousands of years ago, something inspired someone to write stories that at the time of their writing were supposed to be actual events, but now, using the definitions of the pertinent words and names, prove to be metaphoric stories.
 
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. (Genesis:1:5)
 
Day – From an unused root meaning to be hot.
 
Night – From the same as H3883; properly a twist (away of the {light}) that {is} night; figuratively adversity: – ([mid-]) night (season).
 
H3883 – From an unused root meaning to fold back; a spiral step: – winding stair.
 
Truly amazing stuff!
 
Read “Normally;” from top to bottom; from left to right, one would imagine the “Light” as day light and the “Darkness” as night.
 
Why? Because that’s what “God” called them! That’s how it reads!
 
When read using the Hebrew definitions of the words and connecting verses by way of their meanings, the light is hot and the darkness twists away the light.
 
The “Darkness” is folded back like a spiral step; a winding stair.
 
The image of darkness being folded back like a spiral winding staircase twisting away the light, in my mind at least, indicates that the light, which is hot (Day) is also spinning.
 
The spinning hot light causes the darkness (Night) to fold back, eventually forming a spiral that resembles a winding staircase.
 
In time, the darkness completely covered (divided) the “Light from the darkness. (Genesis:1:4)
 
The darkness that was upon the face (the part that turns) of the deep, the Spirit (Breath; air) of God (Two or more deities) and the waters (Juice; semen) all “Mixed.” (Genesis:1:2)
 
The mixing created something greater than the sum of its parts: Heaven and earth: God is, in the beginning, in the first five verses of the book of Genesis what human beings call, the Earth… (Genesis:1:1)

Jesus

Matthew

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. (Matthew:1:1)

And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. (Matthew:1:16)

Mark

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (Mark:1:1)

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. (Mark:1:9)

Luke

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (Luke:1:31)

And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. (Luke:2:21)

John

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. (John:1:17)

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. (John:1:29)

Above are the first two verses of each of the four Gospels where the name Jesus is mentioned.

In the Gospel of Matthew, it reads:

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. (Matthew:1:1)

And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. (Matthew:1:16)

It starts, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” What does that mean?

Let’s see. The word generation is found in the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. It means nativity; figuratively nature: – generation nature (-ral).

Nativity – the occasion of a person’s birth.

Help me out here, is the author of the Gospel of Matthew saying that what is being written is the book of the “Occasion of the birth” of Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ is the son of David and the son of Abraham?

Or

Is the author of the Gospel of Matthew saying that what is being written is the book of the “Nature” of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham?

My guess, it’s meant to plant the idea in the mind of the reader and listener from the very start that the character Jesus Christ is of Jewish descent.

After a very misleading first mentioning, the author of the Gospel of Matthew lists names until:

And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. (Matthew:1:16)

Well, I’m glad the author of the Gospel of Matthew cleared that up!

In the Gospel of Matthew chapter one verse one, the author is writing about someone named Jesus Christ, not the person that Jacob begat whose name was Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

The name Jesus is of Hebrew origin found in the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible under the reference number H3091.

Jesus (that is Jehoshua) the name of our Lord and two (three) other Israelites.

H3081 – From H3068 and H3467; Jehovah-saved.

H3068 -; (the) self Existent or eternal; {Jehovah} Jewish national name of God: – {Jehovah} the Lord.

H3467 – properly to be {open} wide or {free} that {is} (by implication) to be safe; causatively to free or succor: – X at {all} {avenging} {defend} deliver ({-er}) {help} {preserve} {rescue} be {safe} bring (having) {salvation} save ({-iour}) get victory.

The name Jesus means; Jehovah-saved, notSalvation” like most preachers, “Fathers” and teachers of the bible would have you believe.

The word “Christ” is found in the Strong’s Concordance it means; anointed that is the Messiah an epithet of Jesus.

It’s from reference number G5548 which means; to smear or rub with oil that is (by implication) to consecrate to an office or religious service: – anoint.

Epithet – an adjective or descriptive phrase expressing a quality characteristic of the person or thing mentioned.

The phrase, “That is the Messiah” written after, “Anointed” in the definition of the word “Christ” sends up a “Red flag” in my mind, body and soul…

The word Messiah means; anointed. The word Christ means; anointed.

The word Messiah is used twice in the entire bible. The word Christ is used five hundred and fifty-five times in the New Testament.

The word Messiah is capitalized for no apparent reason in both of the only two cases where it appears to be referring to a “Prince.”

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. (Daniel:9:25)

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. (Daniel:9:26)

The reason this fact sends up a “Red flag” in my mind, body and soul is because the authors of the four Gospels took the Hebrew word “Messiah,” which only appears in the entire bible twice, which means; anointed and translated it into Greek; Christ, which also means; anointed, then made it into the last name of Jesus!

That’s just not right…

In the Gospel of Mark, the first two verses that mention the name Jesus reads:

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (Mark:1:1)

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. (Mark:1:9)

The author of the Gospel of Matthew called what was being written about this “Jesus Christ” a book.

Book – Properly the inner bark of the papyrus plant that is (by implication) a sheet or scroll of writing.

The author of the Gospel of Mark called what was being written about this “Jesus Christ’ a “Gospel.” The definition in the Strong’s Concordance is:

Gospel – From the same as G2097; a good message that is the gospel:

G2097 – to announce good news (evangelize) especially the gospel: – declare bring (declare show) glad (good) tidings preach (the gospel).

The definition found in a Google search from an English dictionary is:

The teaching or revelation of Christ; the record of Jesus’ life and teaching in the first four books of the New Testament.

So, which is it, a “Book” or a “Gospel;” a good message or to announce good news; the teaching or revelation of Christ or the record of Jesus’ life and teaching in the first four books of the New Testament?

Regardless of what it is, the author of the Gospel of Mark writes in chapter one verse one:

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (Mark:1:1)

The author of the Gospel of Mark also called Jesus, “Jesus Christ.” What’s up with that?!

The author goes on to write, the Son of God. Notice that the word “Son” is capitalized, for no apparent reason.

It’s not the first word of a sentence. It’s not a proper noun. So why is the word son capitalized?

The next time the name Jesus is mentioned in the Gospel of Mark is:

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. (Mark:1:9)

Again, the character “Jesus Christ” turns back into just Jesus. It’s amazing how that happens.

Anyway, in those days, Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan.

By now, I hope it’s obvious that every definition is from the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, unless I say otherwise.

Nazareth – Of uncertain derivation; Nazareth or Nazaret a place in Palestine.

Galilee – Of Hebrew origin [H1551]; Galilaea (that is the heathen circle) a region of Palestine.

H1551 – a circle (with the article); Galil (as a special circuit) in the North of Palestine: – Galilee.

Baptized – to make whelmed (that is fully wet); used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism: – baptist baptize wash.

John – Of Hebrew origin [H3110]; Joannes (that is Jochanan) the name of four Israelites.

H3110 – A form of H3076; {Jochanan} the name of nine Israelites: – Johanan.

H3076 – From H3068 and H2603; Jehovah-favored; {Jehochanan} the name of eight Israelites: – {Jehohanan} Johanan.

H3068 – (the) self Existent or eternal; {Jehovah} Jewish national name of God: – {Jehovah} the Lord

H2603 – A primitive root; properly to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior; to {favor} bestow; causatively to implore (that {is} move to favor by petition): – {beseech} X {fair} ({be} {find} shew) favour ({-able}) be ({deal} {give} grant (gracious ({-ly}) {intreat} (be) {merciful} have (shew) mercy ({on} {upon}) have pity {upon} {pray} make {supplication} X very.

Jordan – Of Hebrew origin [H3383]; the Jordanes (that is Jarden) a river of Palestine.

H3383 – a descender; {Jarden} the principal river of Palestine.

The word descender is not found in the Strong’s Concordance, but I was able to find it with a Google search. Initially, the Google search only talked about letters like a small g and a small p; the parts of the letters that extended below the line when written on lined paper.

Eventually, I found:

Descender – someone who descends.

Descends – move or fall downward.

The first two times the name Jesus is mentioned in the Gospel of Luke reads:

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (Luke:1:31)

And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. (Luke:2:21)

The very first thing one notices is that the name Jesus is written in all capital letters. What’s up with that?!

My guess? It’s because the author of the Gospel of Luke wants to emphasize the fact that an “Angel” is saying the name JESUS.

That’s quite obvious, because the second time the name Jesus is mentioned in the Gospel of Luke that’s exactly what the author writes:

And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. (Luke:2:21)

Notice, the word son in the Gospel of Luke chapter one verse thirty-one is not capitalized.

The author of the Gospel of Luke went, “Out of the way” to make sure, “Beyond a shadow of a doubt,” that the reader and the listener were aware that the birth of Jesus was a “Perfectly” human birth; complete with a ceremonious circumcision, but foretold by an ANGEL…

Last, but not least, the Gospel of John. The first two times the name Jesus is mentioned the author writes:

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. (John:1:17)

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. (John:1:29)

Again, with calling Jesus, “Jesus Christ!” Jesus Christ! Once and for all, Jesus’ last name is not Christ!

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. (John:1:17)

Law – From a primary word νέμω nemō (to parcel out especially food or grazing to animals); law (through the idea of prescriptive usage) generally (regulation) specifically (of Moses [including the volume]; also, of the Gospel) or figuratively (a principle).

Moses – Of Hebrew origin [H4872]; drawing out (of the {water}) that {is} rescued.

Grace – graciousness (as gratifying) of manner or act (abstract or concrete; literal figurative or spiritual; especially the divine influence upon the heart and its reflection in the life; including gratitude): – acceptable benefit favour gift grace (-ious) joy liberality pleasure thank (-s -worthy).

Truth – From G227; truth: – true X truly truth verity.

G227 – true (as not concealing): – true truly truth.

Jesus – Of Hebrew origin [H3091]; Jehovah-saved.

Christ – through the idea of contact; to smear or rub with oil that is (by implication) to consecrate to an office or religious service; anointed.

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. (John:1:29)

The second time the name Jesus is mentioned in the Gospel of John, the John being written about is the same John who baptized Jesus in the Gospel of Mark chapter one verse nine.

Notice, the word lamb is capitalized for no apparent reason, just like the word son is capitalized for no apparent reason in the Gospel of Mark chapter one verse one. What’s up with that?

Anyway, the next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

I’m guessing, at least in the case of the word lamb, that the reason the word lamb is capitalized for no apparent reason is to emphasize that the, “Lamb of God” taketh away the sin of the world, not Jesus, “Taketh away the sin of the world,” which many teachers, fathers and preachers of the “Word of God” would have you believe.

Lamb – a lamb.

God – a deity especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding God god [-ly -ward].

Sin – properly to miss the mark (and so not share in the prize) that is (figuratively) to err especially (morally) to sin: – for your faults offend sin trespass; sin (properly abstract): – offence sin (-ful).

World – (to tend that is take care of); properly to provide for that is (by implication) to carry off (as if from harm; generally obtain): – bring receive; orderly arrangement that is decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense including its inhabitants literally or figuratively [morally]): – adorning world.

Did You Know?

According to modern day scholars, as well as a Google search, (Bible.org; April 16th 2008) “Ancient scribes who copied the handwritten texts of the New Testament frequently changed the text intentionally.

Although unintentional changes account for the vast majority of textual corruption, intentional alterations also account for thousands of corruptions. In some cases, to be sure, it does seem that the scribes were being malicious.”

The above statement is not a recent discovery. Scholars have known about deliberate alterations to the New Testament of the Holy Bible for decades.

Although it “Cracks me up” to think about all the people I’ve witnessed get caught up in the “Holy Spirit;” shouting; speaking in tongues and praising the name of “Jesus Christ,” it’s not funny that these people, after hearing the “Word of God” preached by some human being, had such a reaction to what amounts to “Something a scribe wrote…”

While I believe with all my heart, and with all my soul, and with all my might that the Holy Bible is inspired by God, I cannot ignore the fact that the scriptures have been “Corrupted.”

Bart D. Ehrman, an American New Testament scholar focusing on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus and the origins and development of early Christianity, has written and edited 30 books, including three college textbooks, six New York Times bestsellers and is currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the Hill says, “One of the most amazing and perplexing features of mainstream Christianity is that seminarians who learn the historical-critical method in their Bible classes appear to forget all about it when it comes time for them to be pastors.

They are taught critical approaches to Scripture, they learn about the discrepancies and contradictions, they discover all sorts of historical errors and mistakes, they come to realize that it is difficult to know whether Moses existed or what Jesus actually said and did, they find that there are other books that were at one time considered canonical but that ultimately did not become part of Scripture (for example, other Gospels and Apocalypses), they come to recognize that a good number of the books of the Bible are pseudonymous (for example, written in the name of an apostle by someone else), that in fact we don’t have the original copies of any of the biblical books but only copies made centuries later, all of which have been altered. They learn all of this, and yet when they enter church ministry, they appear to put it back on the shelf. Pastors are, as a rule, reluctant to teach what they learned about the Bible in seminary.”

While I certainly agree with Bart D. Ehrman on most of what he writes in his books, we part ways when it comes to “Textual Criticism.”

Textual criticism, the process of attempting to ascertain the original wording of a text can only go so far.

According to Wikipedia, “The objective of the textual critic’s work is to provide a better understanding of the creation and historical transmission of the text and its variants. This understanding may lead to the production of a “critical edition” containing a scholarly curated text. If a scholar has several versions of a manuscript but no known original, then established methods of textual criticism can be used to seek to reconstruct the original text as closely as possible. The same methods can be used to reconstruct intermediate versions, or recensions, of a document’s transcription history, depending on the number and quality of the text available.”

I have a problem with the phrase, “As closely as possible.”

God inspired the Holy Bible. There is no amount of man’s “Meddling” that can take away from that!

Scribes may have changed the words, Christians may have added and subtracted verses and stories, but two things have remained constant throughout the centuries, the names of the characters and the meanings of the pertinent Hebrew and Greek words.

With that in mind, let’s continue analyzing the first two verses of each of the four Gospels where the name Jesus is mentioned:

Before we continue, it’s important to correct a few things. The Gospel of Mark was the first Gospel written.

It is believed by most scholars that the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke used the Gospel of Mark as a source, that’s why most of the stories in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are the same.

They’re called the synoptic Gospels because they include many of the same stories, often in the same sequence, and similar wording.

This degree of parallelism in content, narrative arrangement, language, and sentence structures can only be accounted for by literary interdependence.

The Gospel of John was written long after the synoptic Gospels. It is quite different with hardly any of the same stories.

Mark

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (Mark:1:1)

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. (Mark:1:9)

Matthew

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. (Matthew:1:1)

And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. (Matthew:1:16)

Luke

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (Luke:1:31)

And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. (Luke:2:21)

John

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. (John:1:17)

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. (John:1:29)

Now that the Gospels are in the correct order, let’s examine the scriptures using the “Pertinent Words and Names Method.”

Notice, three out of four of the authors of the Gospels introduce a character called “Jesus Christ.”

The author of the Gospel of Luke only alludes to the character “Jesus Christ” by putting the name Jesus in all capital letters. (JESUS)

Two of the authors of the Gospels introduce a man named Jesus and two of the authors introduce a child named Jesus.

The character “Jesus Christ” is said to be the “Son” of God in the Gospel of Mark. The word son being spelled with a capital (s) for no apparent reason.

In the Gospel of Matthew, the character “Jesus Christ” is said to be the son of David, the son of Abraham. The word son being spelled with a small (s).

According to the author of the Gospel of Luke, an angel foretells the birth of a male child whose name was called Jesus. Jesus being spelled with all capital letters for no apparent reason. (JESUS)

The author of the Gospel of John declared:

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by the character “Jesus Christ.”

The author of the Gospel of John called the man Jesus, “Lamb of God.” Lamb being spelled with a capital (L) for no apparent reason.

Let’s use the “Pertinent Words and Names Method” to interpret the Holy Scriptures. Starting with the character “Jesus Christ.”

Jesus is defined as “Jehovah-saved” and Christ is defined as “Anointed” or the Greek translation, “Messiah.”

I believe, in His infinite “Wisdom,” God hid His “Word” in plain sight.

We are only analyzing the first two verses of each of the four Gospels where the name Jesus is mentioned, but if you apply this method to the rest of the bible verses you will be amazed at its consistency!

The phrase, “Jehovah-saved” which is the meaning of the word Jesus in Hebrew, can be understood in two ways.

First it could be understood as, “Jehovah saved Jesus,” as in Jehovah raised Jesus from the dead.

Or

It could be understood as, “Jehovah, saved” as in Jehovah was saved from dying by God.

Using the “Pertinent Words and Names Method,” the word “Christ” means; anointed; or “Christ” could be a “Messiah;” a “Prince or King.”

Remember earlier, when I said, “Christ” is not Jesus’s last name? My reason is made clearer here.

When translated to its original language, Hebrew, the phrase “Jesus Christ” would mean; Jehovah-saved anointed.

It just doesn’t make sense…

One could argue that in the Gospel of Mark chapter one verse one, where the author wrote, “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” could be translated, “The beginning of the gospel of Jehovah (was) saved; Messiah, the Son of God.”

I believe that would be a “Stretch.”

Or would it?

One thing I can say with confidence is, as far as the four Gospels are concerned, they are referring to two different entities!

One, the character “Jesus Christ” and the other a human being (man) named Jesus.

The character “Jesus Christ” is said to be, “The Son of God; son of David, the son of Abraham. They shalt call his name JESUS; his name was called JESUS and grace and truth came by “Jesus Christ.”

The man Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan; Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ; John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Lamb being spelled with a capital (L) for no apparent reason.

The author of the Gospel of Mark wrote that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee.

The word Nazareth is defined as a place in Palestine.

The word Galilee is defined as Galilaea (that is the heathen circle) a region of Palestine.

If Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, according to the “Pertinent Words and Names Method” of analyzing the scriptures, Jesus was a “Nazarene” from the “Heathen Circle.”

A Nazarene from the heathen circle is a “Heathen.”

Jesus was a “Heathen!”

That explains why the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, who used what the author of the Gospel of Mark wrote as their source, changed the “Narrative.”

They added “Birth” narratives to each of their stories.

The problem is the birth narrative in the Gospel of Matthew is completely different from the birth narrative in the Gospel of Luke.

The author of the Gospel of Matthew or a scribe, whichever you want to believe added the birth narrative, had Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

The author of the Gospel of Luke wrote, “When eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.”

Because we’re only analyzing the first two verses of each of the four Gospels where the name Jesus is mentioned the difference in birth narratives are not that obvious, but you can compare them for yourself.

Jesus being a “Heathen” would also answers the question, “Why did Jesus need to be baptized by John the Baptist for the remission of sins?”

In the Gospel of John, the author contrasts the word or name, “Moses” with the word or name, “Jesus.”

The word “Moses” means; drawing out (of the {water}) that {is} rescued, which verify the statement I made earlier that if you apply this “Pertinent Words and Names Method” to the rest of the bible verses you will be amazed at its consistency!

Let me add, “Moses” was rescued from the water way back in the Old Testament of the Holy Bible in the book of Exodus:

And the child grew, and she brought him unto Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water. (Exodus:2:10)

“And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water,” could it be said, “She called his name Jesus: Because Jehovah-saved him from death?!”

The fact that the word “Moses” is defined as drawing out (of the {water}) that {is} rescued and that’s exactly what happened in the story in the Old Testament, reminds me to say, the only way to fully understand the New Testament, one has to use the “Pertinent Words and Names Method” to analyze the Old Testament!

The author writes, “The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

The word Lamb means; lamb.

The word God in the Greek language means; a deity especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding God god [-ly -ward].

G3588 – the this that one he she it etc…

The word God in the Hebrew language means; Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural {thus} especially with the article) of the supreme God.

H433 – a deity or the deity: – {God} god.

In the New Testament (Greek) the word God is singular.

In the Old Testament (Hebrew) the word God is Plural. Two different entities

Because we’re only analyzing the first two verses of each of the four Gospels where the name Jesus is mentioned, it’s understandable if some of my claims sound unbelievable.

Don’t trip, this is only lesson two!

Why We Suffer

The “Root” cause of all suffering on planet Earth is the Holy Bible!

Imagine what the world would be like if the bible had never been written.

You can’t. Can you?

So, if you can’t imagine a world where there is no bible, then the bible is the “Root” cause of all, including suffering.

Don’t be ridiculous you say, okay tell me a story about this world, without the bible in it.

Again, you can’t. Where would you begin?

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis:1:1)

According to the Strong’s Concordance of the King James version of the Holy Bible, the word God means; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural {thus} especially with the article) of the supreme God.

The word God means;  gods, that is; more than one.

The word God is plural for Deity or the deity. Plural, that means; more than one.

The word Deity, found in the Oxford dictionary is; a god or goddess (in a polytheistic religion); divine status, quality, or nature; the creator and supreme being (in a monotheistic religion such as Christianity).

When I said that the bible is the “Root” cause of all suffering on the planet earth I really meant to say:

The misinterpretation of the bible is the “Root” cause of all the suffering on the planet Earth!”

Before I told you, did you know that the word God was “Plural?”

God is many “gods.”

That is to say that when one speaks of God, one is not speaking of a he or a she, but of a “They!”

In essence, “In the beginning, “They” (God) created the heaven and the earth, which makes way more sense to me than one personage creating an entire world.

What is heaven?

The word heaven means; to be lofty; the sky (as aloft; the dual perhaps alluding to the visible arch in which the clouds {move} as well as to the higher ether where the celestial bodies revolve).

If one were inclined to put heaven into a “Physical” framework, that is to say, being able to point at heaven and say, “There it is,” then the above definition would do, but I discern heaven as being more a state of mind rather than a particular place. (Conscious)

The word lofty means; to be high;  actively to rise or raise literally or figuratively.

What is earth?

The word earth means; to be firm; the earth (at {large} or a land) {ground} {land} X world

So, what does any of this have to do with the question of suffering?

Hold on, I getting to that.

God or “They” also created “Man.”

Could there be any suffering if there was no man?

Suffering is a strictly “Human” construct.

We have human beings, therefore, and only therefore, we have suffering.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Genesis:1:26)

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (Genesis:1:27)

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.

The words “Us and Our” after the words, “And God said,” indicates that God is, at least, more than “One.”

Image – to shade; a {phantom} that {is} (figuratively) {illusion} resemblance; hence a representative.

According to the Hebrew definition of the words image and likeness, both God and man resembled something shaded; like the form of a phantom.

In the book of Genesis, the word “Man” is interchangeable.

It could be an individual at times or it can be many men, the species, at other times.

So, God (They) created the heaven and the earth which was in essence something lofty and something firm; air and ground; mind and body; spirit and flesh: Two separate things.

At that point in time, that is, “In the beginning” there was very little difference between God and man.

Man even had dominion (power) over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Genesis:1:26)

The word dominion means; to tread {down} that {is} subjugate; specifically to crumble off: – (come {to} make to) have {dominion} prevail {against} {reign} ({bear} make to) {rule} ({-r} {over}) take.

Then things changed in chapter 2 of the book of Genesis!

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Genesis:2:7)

Gone were the days when “man” enjoyed God like existence!

The word LORD means; (the) self Existent or eternal; {Jehovah} Jewish national name of God: – {Jehovah} the Lord.

There is no LORD in chapter 1 of Genesis.

Where did this LORD God come from?

Ask yourself this, where did your mind; imagination; reason come from?

The best way to describe this development in terms that we humans can understanding is to say, “They” (God) gave birth to (begat) a baby God called LORD or God begat a Son.

This LORD God showed up and for whatever reason, decided to form man from the dust of the ground!

Let me say here and now, the “Holy Scriptures” are a collection of ancient “Stories” written by men for men. They were written to explain the unexplainable and in ancient times, almost everything was a mystery.

These stories, although inspired by God, the God of chapter 1 of the book of Genesis, should not be understood literally!

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Genesis:2:7)

What the LORD God did was to take some dust from off the ground, probably mixed it in some water, shaped it and then blew it up like a balloon.

The LORD God combined heaven (the breath) and earth (the dust of the ground) which the God of chapter 1 created, into a being; man.

The combination of breath, (Heaven) water and dust (Earth) became a living “Soul.”

Dust – (as powdered or gray); hence {clay} {earth } mud: – {ashes} rubbish.

Breath – a {puff} that {is} {wind } angry or vital {breath} divine {inspiration} intellect or (concretely) an animal: – {soul} spirit.

The LORD God blew angry, divine inspiration, intellect and spirit into rubbish.

That rubbish (man) became a living soul!

Life – alive; hence raw (flesh); fresh ({plant} {water} {year}) strong; whether literally or figuratively: {appetite} (wild) {beast}.

Man – to show blood (in the {face}) that {is} flush or turn rosy: red; a human being (an individual or the {species} {mankind } etc.).

Living – same as Life.

The life given to man was the same life given to everything living.

Plants have it, trees have it, even bumble bees have it, but only man became a living “Soul.”

Soul – properly a breathing {creature} that {is} animal or (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a {literal} accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental): – {any} {appetite} {beast} {body} {breath} {creature} X dead ({-ly}) {desire} X [dis-] {contented} X {fish} {ghost} + {greedy} {he} heart ({-y}) ({hath} X jeopardy of) life (X in {jeopardy}) {lust} {man} {me} {mind} {mortality} {one} {own} {person} {pleasure} ({her-} {him-} {my-} thy-) {self} them (your) {-selves} + {slay} {soul} + {tablet} {they} {thing} (X she) {will} X would have it.

That’s a mouth full I know, but very important.

If every living thing has the “Breath of Life,” and the author of the book of Genesis felt it necessary to write, “And man became a living soul,” it sounds to me that man was something else before he was mixed with dust…

That something else was a “God” like phantom or a little god, spelled with a small g.

Look carefully at the meaning of the word Breath:

A {puff} that {is} {wind } angry or vital {breath} divine {inspiration} intellect or (concretely) an animal: – {blast} (that) breath ({-eth}) {inspiration} {soul} spirit.

Most notable are intellect, divine inspiration, soul and spirit.

Now look at the meaning of the word soul again. (Above)

In chapter 2 of the book of Genesis, that thing (man formed of the dust of the ground) that the LORD God made was, for lack of a better phrase, an emotion driven monster! (Sort of like man is today)

Man, in the beginning, in chapter 1 of the book of Genesis, was in the image and likeness of God.

The God that created the heaven and earth in the beginning ( in chapter 1) is not the same as the LORD (Jehovah) God who formed man of the dust of the ground. (Chapter 2)

Why is there suffering in the world?

The short answer is, “Because the LORD God mixed man (a God like phantom) with dust of the ground!

And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. (Genesis:2:15)

And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: (Genesis:2:16)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Genesis:2:17)

I’m pretty sure that the LORD God meant well. I’m going to say “He” because I don’t think any mother would ever do this:

He put a “Toddler” (man) in the garden of Eden.

The word garden means; fenced.

The word Eden means; pleasure : – {delicate} {delight}.

Like I said, I believe the LORD God meant well. He did put man in a fenced or protected place, like a “Play Pen.”

He put man in a fenced area of pleasure:

And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: (Genesis:2:16)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Genesis:2:17)

The LORD God formed these emotion driven monsters; man; little gods then put them in a fenced area of pleasure, alone, then expected them to obey a command not to eat from a tree?!

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. (Genesis:2:18)

The bible doesn’t tell us how much time had gone by, but the next time the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is mentioned the man has given names to all the animals; the man now has a name and the man has a wife.

And the serpent said unto the woman (the man’s wife), Ye shall not surely die: (Genesis:3:4)

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, (the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. (Genesis:3:5)

And when the woman (wife) saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. (Genesis:3:6)

The LORD God commanded man, “Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it!”

What did man do?

They did eat of it…

What happened?

They didn’t die, at least not in the literal sense, like the LORD God said they would.

Those “Living Souls” mixed with the dust of the ground ate from the tree, their eyes were opened and now they “Know” good and evil, that’s what happened!

The word knowing means; to know (properly to ascertain by seeing).

Good – a good {thing} a good man or woman.

Evil – bad (naturally or morally).

I believe that before man, the living soul; eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they were just like every other living creature enjoying the fruits and vegetables of the garden of Eden: Foot loose and fancy free!

Then, all of a sudden, BAM! Feelings, emotions and opinions oh my!

The Old Testament of the Holy Bible is filled with stories of suffering caused by terrible acts of the LORD God and of man.

Some; many; most people think, if not just come right out and say it, that our all powerful, all knowing and all loving LORD God is the reason there is suffering in the world.

That man’s sinning against the LORD God is the cause of man’s suffering.

The writers of the Old Testament of the Holy  Bible sure thought so!

In the beginning when “God” first created the heaven and the earth “They” (God) also created “Man” in “their” image and likeness.

Men were created little “gods!”

They had dominion over every living thing on earth!

Then came the LORD God… He formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Genesis:2:7)

Becoming a living soul was far from being a good thing. As a matter of fact, becoming a living soul was the opposite of a “Good” thing. It was a “Bad” thing.

I mean really, what did the LORD God think would happen when God like phantoms became mixed with dust of the ground?

The LORD God put little gods inside bodies of dust, put them in a garden then told these little monster gods not to eat from a tree in the middle of said garden?

What was the LORD God thinking?

My guess?

The LORD God was thinking, “These little creatures that my “Father” created are loved more than I am. They are a pain in my … As soon as I get the chance, I’m going to… I know what I’ll do. I’ll tie them to the earth by mixing them with dust. That’ll keep then far from my “Father” and I, then I’ll be the favorite. I am the Son after all.”

Of course, there is no way for me to know what the LORD God was thinking, but if what happens next is any indication…

And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. (Genesis:3:7)

Naked – nude; to be cunning (usually in a bad sense): – X {very} {beware} take crafty {[counsel]} be {prudent} deal subtilly.

Their eyes were opened and they “Knew” they were naked?

They became “Cunning,” (usually in a bad sense).

They became “Prudent.”

They started acting with or showing care and thought for the future. (What we going to eat? How are we going to live?)

What were they when their eyes were closed?

They were footloose and fancy free, like all the other animals.

These words, like all the words written in the Holy Bible are not and cannot be understood literally!

Figuratively speaking, the man created in the image and likeness of God (the God of chapter 1 in the book of Genesis) did die like the LORD God (the God of chapter 2) said.

Even though physically, man was mixed with dust of the ground; with eyes “Closed,” man maintained the image and likeness of God.

Once the eyes were “Opened;” spiritually and mentally they became as LORD Gods!

Fast forward:

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: (Genesis:3:22)

Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. (Genesis:3:23)

So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Genesis:3:24)

The stories written in the book of Genesis of the Holy Bible are not to be understood literally.

I have said this several times already, but without offering any concrete proof. Here is the proof:

He (the LORD God)  placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life, otherwise:

Man,” who had become as one of them, (the LORD God) knowing good and evil:

And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever…

The LORD God was really concerned that the “Man” might eat from the tree of life and live forever, so the LORD God put Cherubims, and a flaming sword to keep the way of the tree of life.

Cherubims is plural for a cherub or an imaginary figure.

A cherub is an imaginary figure?!

The “Guardian” of the tree of life is a figure of the imagination!

The only way an imaginary figure could prevent anyone from putting forth their hand, and taking also of the tree of life, and eating, and living for ever, is if that someone was also a figure of the imagination…

Think about that for a minute…

Our world has grown up on these stories written in the Holy Bible.

Our world has and continues to imitate characters and stories of God and gods; talking serpents; men formed of the dust of the ground and a woman made of a man’s rib!

All fantastic stories, yet believed by millions to be absolutely “Real” events.

Every story written in the book of Genesis as well as the entire holy bible is to be understood figuratively or metaphorically!!!

The Hebrew definitions of the pertinent words however, should be taken, “Literally!”

By translating the English version of the King James version of the Holy Bible into its original Hebrew language, we get a totally different understanding of the stories.

There is “Suffering” in the world because, “God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them:

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

The problem:

Creatures created in the image and likeness of God are gods.

When the LORD God breathed into the nostrils of man the breath of life, there was created something not like God, but like the LORD God: Little lord gods!

Not God; not Lord God, but some sort of hybrid: A “Soul.”

A soul is a creature with breath or life inside of it.

To be filled with breath is to be; angry, to have divine inspiration and intellect: To be (concretely) an animal: Soul: Spirit.

The characteristics of a soul are; appetite, a beast, deadly, desire, discontented, greedy, mortality and pleasure: Emotional Monsters!

The ancient Israelites were aware of the nature of man. They weren’t being read translations. They were hearing and being taught in their own language.

As strange as it may sound, there is suffering in the world today because “Man” (human beings; little lord gods) have created a world based on “Parables!”

Parable – in some original sense of superiority in mental action; properly a pithy {maxim} usually of a metaphorical nature; hence a simile: To rule: – ({have} make to have) {dominion} {governor} X {indeed} {reign} ({bear} cause {to} have) rule ({-ing} {-r}) have power.

Human beings have been and continue to imitate concise and forcefully expressive metaphorical, imaginary and figurative characters and stories from the holy bible, which is full of terrible acts; wars, murders and complete destruction of neighboring races, committed by the LORD God and by man.

That’s why there is suffering in the world, today.

Imagine what the world would be like if the bible had never been written.

You can’t. Can you?