The New Testament Of The Bible
There are enough truths in the Bible, though mixed with many errors, to lead men to the light and to salvation. Love is the great principle, and the fact that God is waiting to bestow that love on mankind, if they will only seek for it as it is the principle which is sufficient to lead men to the Celestial homes and happiness.
So, I tell you that while the Bible, even as now written, is a grand old book, yet it is not the true mouthpiece of God in very many particulars, and is a stumbling block to man's acquiring a correct knowledge of the truths of God.
These truths will not conflict with the reasoning of the normal man who is not prejudiced by views which are erroneous, either in the scientific or the religious world. While I wrote a Revelation or rather dictated it to another to write, I never wrote the words declaring the salvation of mankind through the blood of Jesus, which declared that the blood of Jesus washed away sins of mankind and redeemed them, for I did not believe any such doctrine and had never been taught such a belief by Jesus.
Much of the matter contained in the Revelation I never wrote; but men or scribes who professed to copy the description of my vision, added to it for the purpose of incorporating therein the views of the Christians of that early day, so that their views might be emphasized and in union with similar views that had been added to the Gospels and Epistles in the copies which these same persons or their predecessors in these views had made.
The Revelation is merely a vision which I had when in a trance and was undoubtedly intended to illustrate or predict those things which would be visited upon the believers and the nonbelievers in the truths of God as taught by Jesus and his Apostles.
St. John, the Book of Revelation
~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
So, I tell you that while the Bible, even as now written, is a grand old book, yet it is not the true mouthpiece of God in very many particulars, and is a stumbling block to man's acquiring a correct knowledge of the truths of God.
These truths will not conflict with the reasoning of the normal man who is not prejudiced by views which are erroneous, either in the scientific or the religious world. While I wrote a Revelation or rather dictated it to another to write, I never wrote the words declaring the salvation of mankind through the blood of Jesus, which declared that the blood of Jesus washed away sins of mankind and redeemed them, for I did not believe any such doctrine and had never been taught such a belief by Jesus.
Much of the matter contained in the Revelation I never wrote; but men or scribes who professed to copy the description of my vision, added to it for the purpose of incorporating therein the views of the Christians of that early day, so that their views might be emphasized and in union with similar views that had been added to the Gospels and Epistles in the copies which these same persons or their predecessors in these views had made.
The Revelation is merely a vision which I had when in a trance and was undoubtedly intended to illustrate or predict those things which would be visited upon the believers and the nonbelievers in the truths of God as taught by Jesus and his Apostles.
St. John, the Book of Revelation
~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
My Gospel was not founded on anything I had personal knowledge of, but upon the writings of others and the traditions which were the common knowledge of many Christians at that time. In my Gospel, as now contained in the authorized version, there are many things that have been interpolated.
This version was not based on what I wrote, but upon pretended copies of my writings; and the persons who made these copies did not follow literally my writings, but added to my text and gave their own interpretations of what I had written in such a way as to destroy the true meaning of what was intended to be conveyed by my writings.
I know that in some of the Gospels, as now contained in the Bible and adopted as canonical, it is said, in effect, that the Godhead consists of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost these three are one but such Gospels do not contain the truth in this respect and are not the same Gospels that were originally written.
These original Gospels have been added to and taken from in the passing of the years and in the copying and the recopying that occurred before the adoption of the same, they, the adopted ones, were compiled from many writings, and as the compilers in those early times differed in their opinions as men do now respecting religious truths, the more powerful of these having authority to declare what should be accepted, according to their interpretations of those manuscripts that were being copied, directed the copies to be made in accord with their ideas, and I may say, desires, and announced and put forth such productions to be true copies of the originals.
As these copies were successively made the preceding ones were destroyed, and hence the earliest existing manuscripts of these Gospels came into being many years after the originals from which they were claimed to be compiled, were written and destroyed.
And I, Luke, who did write a Gospel and who am acquainted with the present Gospel ascribed to me, say that there are many vital things and declarations, that I never wrote and that are not true, contained in it; and many truths that I did write are not contained therein and so with the other Gospels.
In none of our Gospels did the mystery of the Godhead appear, and that for the reason that there was not and is not, and we did not teach that there was any Godhead, composed of three personalities.
Only one God, the Father. Jesus was a son of man in the natural sense, and a son of God in the spiritual sense, but he was not God or a part of God in any sense except that he possessed the Divine Love of the Father, and in that sense was a part of His Essence.
The Holy Spirit is not God, but merely His instrument, a spirit, the Holy Spirit.
St. Luke of the Bible
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
This version was not based on what I wrote, but upon pretended copies of my writings; and the persons who made these copies did not follow literally my writings, but added to my text and gave their own interpretations of what I had written in such a way as to destroy the true meaning of what was intended to be conveyed by my writings.
I know that in some of the Gospels, as now contained in the Bible and adopted as canonical, it is said, in effect, that the Godhead consists of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost these three are one but such Gospels do not contain the truth in this respect and are not the same Gospels that were originally written.
These original Gospels have been added to and taken from in the passing of the years and in the copying and the recopying that occurred before the adoption of the same, they, the adopted ones, were compiled from many writings, and as the compilers in those early times differed in their opinions as men do now respecting religious truths, the more powerful of these having authority to declare what should be accepted, according to their interpretations of those manuscripts that were being copied, directed the copies to be made in accord with their ideas, and I may say, desires, and announced and put forth such productions to be true copies of the originals.
As these copies were successively made the preceding ones were destroyed, and hence the earliest existing manuscripts of these Gospels came into being many years after the originals from which they were claimed to be compiled, were written and destroyed.
And I, Luke, who did write a Gospel and who am acquainted with the present Gospel ascribed to me, say that there are many vital things and declarations, that I never wrote and that are not true, contained in it; and many truths that I did write are not contained therein and so with the other Gospels.
In none of our Gospels did the mystery of the Godhead appear, and that for the reason that there was not and is not, and we did not teach that there was any Godhead, composed of three personalities.
Only one God, the Father. Jesus was a son of man in the natural sense, and a son of God in the spiritual sense, but he was not God or a part of God in any sense except that he possessed the Divine Love of the Father, and in that sense was a part of His Essence.
The Holy Spirit is not God, but merely His instrument, a spirit, the Holy Spirit.
St. Luke of the Bible
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I desire to tell you that I am very anxious to disclose to you the true teachings of Jesus, and what the errors of my epistles are, as contained in the New Testament of the Bible.
I know now that it may seem strange that errors should have gotten into my epistles, but there are several reasons for their entrance.
First, the epistles as they now appear are not what I wrote - I mean many changes have been made in my writings - and second, when I wrote the epistles I did not know as much of the truths of God as I do now, and thirdly, I was not such a believer in the teachings of Jesus, as I am now.
These are sufficient reasons why my epistle should not be accepted as containing all the truths, or rather, that all they contain are truths.
There are apparent contradictions in these writings, and if what is said were true there would be no real contradictions.
I never taught that the Master was God, and neither did I teach the doctrine of the vicarious atonement or the sufficiency of Jesus' blood to save a sinner from the sins of his earthly deeds. I never taught that any man's sins would be borne and the penalty for same be paid for by another - and wherever these doctrines are set forth in my epistles, they were not written by me. No - no blood saves from sin, only the Divine Love of the Father does this.
St. Paul of the Bible
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
I know now that it may seem strange that errors should have gotten into my epistles, but there are several reasons for their entrance.
First, the epistles as they now appear are not what I wrote - I mean many changes have been made in my writings - and second, when I wrote the epistles I did not know as much of the truths of God as I do now, and thirdly, I was not such a believer in the teachings of Jesus, as I am now.
These are sufficient reasons why my epistle should not be accepted as containing all the truths, or rather, that all they contain are truths.
There are apparent contradictions in these writings, and if what is said were true there would be no real contradictions.
I never taught that the Master was God, and neither did I teach the doctrine of the vicarious atonement or the sufficiency of Jesus' blood to save a sinner from the sins of his earthly deeds. I never taught that any man's sins would be borne and the penalty for same be paid for by another - and wherever these doctrines are set forth in my epistles, they were not written by me. No - no blood saves from sin, only the Divine Love of the Father does this.
St. Paul of the Bible
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
There are some of the epistles credited to me, and I did write some to the members of the church, over which I had supervision, but the epistles as contained in the Bible are in many particulars untrue and conflicting with my beliefs, then and now, and I never wrote such conflicting statements. I never wrote that Jesus paid a ransom for mankind, or that his death on the cross saved men from the death which they inherited from Adam, or anything of the kind that insinuated that men were saved by any act of Jesus which satisfied the wrath of God, or, as the author said, satisfied Divine justice.
Justice was not an element in the Plan of man’s salvation, only Love and Mercy, and the desire of the Father that man become reconciled to Him - that is, come to Him and receive the Great Gift of His Divine Nature. No blood shedding or death of Jesus or vicarious atonement could have accomplished this, for none of these things would affect the soul development of a man. The matter of soul development is an individual matter, and can only be accomplished when man seeks for the Great Gift of Divine Love, and receives it in his soul and develops it. Then he becomes a partaker of the Divine Nature and one with the Father.
How deplorable that men will teach this erroneous doctrine of blood atonement. How very much harm it is doing to mankind and to Spirits as well, for many Spirits come into the Spirit World with their beliefs so firmly established in this doctrine that they frequently remain for years in that condition of belief, and consequent stagnation of their soul’s progress, and of their obtaining a knowledge of the truth. But some day men will know the truth, and the truth will make them free.
St. Peter of the Bible
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Justice was not an element in the Plan of man’s salvation, only Love and Mercy, and the desire of the Father that man become reconciled to Him - that is, come to Him and receive the Great Gift of His Divine Nature. No blood shedding or death of Jesus or vicarious atonement could have accomplished this, for none of these things would affect the soul development of a man. The matter of soul development is an individual matter, and can only be accomplished when man seeks for the Great Gift of Divine Love, and receives it in his soul and develops it. Then he becomes a partaker of the Divine Nature and one with the Father.
How deplorable that men will teach this erroneous doctrine of blood atonement. How very much harm it is doing to mankind and to Spirits as well, for many Spirits come into the Spirit World with their beliefs so firmly established in this doctrine that they frequently remain for years in that condition of belief, and consequent stagnation of their soul’s progress, and of their obtaining a knowledge of the truth. But some day men will know the truth, and the truth will make them free.
St. Peter of the Bible
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
|
I was once, when on earth, a man who suffered much because of my spiritual darkness, and not until late in life did I find the way to my Father’s Love through prayer and faith and even then I had many erroneous beliefs caused by the interpretations of the Bible then obtained in the church of which I was a member - but since coming to the Spirit Land I have learned the truth, and have gotten rid of any old erroneous beliefs; and thank God, I am in the way that leads to life everlasting.
I was a teacher when on earth of what I thought were Bible truths, and I know that some good resulted from my teachings, although they were mixed with errors but I have met many Spirits of men who listened to my teachings, and believed many things that I taught.
The Bible as now written and as I translated it, is full of contradictions and errors and makes the truth hard to ascertain. Take for instance that one subject of the blood redemption. No greater error was ever written than that the blood of Jesus saves from sin, or that his blood washes away sin. It seems to me now, so absurd that I wonder and am astonished that I could ever have believed in such an absurdity.
I know now that there is no efficacy in Jesus’ blood to accomplish any such results, and the pity is that many men do so believe, and, as a consequence, neglect the one vital and important requirement necessary to salvation, that is the New Birth. This and this only saves men from their sins and fits them to enter the Kingdom of God, which is the Kingdom of Jesus, for he is the Prince of that Kingdom, and the ruler thereof.
Jesus never said any such thing, for he has told me so. This saying that his blood was shed for man, is not true. He never said it, neither did he say “drink the wine,” being his blood, in remembrance of him, for the wine is not his blood, and neither does it represent anything that has to do with him or his mission on earth, or his present work in the spirit world. How unfortunate that this saying is made to represent something that he did not say.
So in order to understand the real truths of God and man’s relationship to Him and His plan of salvation, you must believe what the Master shall write you and what his apostles may write, for now they understand what his true mission was, and what he attempted and intended to teach when on earth, and what he is teaching now.
Your Brother in Christ,
Martin Luther
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I merely want to say that I am still a follower of Jesus, but a little different in my knowledge of what he was and is. I do not now look upon him as God, or a part of God, but as His true son, and the greatest of all the spirits in the spirit world. There are none to be compared to him in beauty or spirituality or in his knowledge of God’s truths.
I used to preach to thousands about his vicarious atonement and his blood sacrifice, but now I see his mission in a different light. it is not his death on the cross that saves men from their sins, nor his sacrifice that appeases the wrath of an angry God, but his life and teachings of the Divine Love bestowed on mankind and the way to obtain that Love, that saves men from their sins. There was no need to appease the wrath of an angry God for there was no angry God, only a Loving and Merciful God; and when men think that unless they turn from their sins they will be forever burned in a fiery hell, they are the dupes of preachers such as I was and will never get the Love of the Father by such teachings. God is Love, and men must know it - and His Love is for all of every race and clime.
I see now, what a great mistake I made in my conception of God and of Christ’s mission on earth, and how much harm I did to mortals in my preaching and how I slandered the Father of love. But I was honest in my beliefs and taught as I thought the truth to be, yet that does not alter the fact that many a mortal after he became a spirit, was retarded for a long time in his spiritual progress, because of these false beliefs, which in order to progress he had to give up and start anew in his efforts to find the truths of God.
And as I worked hard and preached eloquently to make mortals believe these injurious doctrines while on earth, so now I am working hard and preaching eloquently to make spirits who come over with these beliefs, unlearn them and see the truth as it is.
Your Brother in Christ,
George Whitefield
I was a teacher when on earth of what I thought were Bible truths, and I know that some good resulted from my teachings, although they were mixed with errors but I have met many Spirits of men who listened to my teachings, and believed many things that I taught.
The Bible as now written and as I translated it, is full of contradictions and errors and makes the truth hard to ascertain. Take for instance that one subject of the blood redemption. No greater error was ever written than that the blood of Jesus saves from sin, or that his blood washes away sin. It seems to me now, so absurd that I wonder and am astonished that I could ever have believed in such an absurdity.
I know now that there is no efficacy in Jesus’ blood to accomplish any such results, and the pity is that many men do so believe, and, as a consequence, neglect the one vital and important requirement necessary to salvation, that is the New Birth. This and this only saves men from their sins and fits them to enter the Kingdom of God, which is the Kingdom of Jesus, for he is the Prince of that Kingdom, and the ruler thereof.
Jesus never said any such thing, for he has told me so. This saying that his blood was shed for man, is not true. He never said it, neither did he say “drink the wine,” being his blood, in remembrance of him, for the wine is not his blood, and neither does it represent anything that has to do with him or his mission on earth, or his present work in the spirit world. How unfortunate that this saying is made to represent something that he did not say.
So in order to understand the real truths of God and man’s relationship to Him and His plan of salvation, you must believe what the Master shall write you and what his apostles may write, for now they understand what his true mission was, and what he attempted and intended to teach when on earth, and what he is teaching now.
Your Brother in Christ,
Martin Luther
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I merely want to say that I am still a follower of Jesus, but a little different in my knowledge of what he was and is. I do not now look upon him as God, or a part of God, but as His true son, and the greatest of all the spirits in the spirit world. There are none to be compared to him in beauty or spirituality or in his knowledge of God’s truths.
I used to preach to thousands about his vicarious atonement and his blood sacrifice, but now I see his mission in a different light. it is not his death on the cross that saves men from their sins, nor his sacrifice that appeases the wrath of an angry God, but his life and teachings of the Divine Love bestowed on mankind and the way to obtain that Love, that saves men from their sins. There was no need to appease the wrath of an angry God for there was no angry God, only a Loving and Merciful God; and when men think that unless they turn from their sins they will be forever burned in a fiery hell, they are the dupes of preachers such as I was and will never get the Love of the Father by such teachings. God is Love, and men must know it - and His Love is for all of every race and clime.
I see now, what a great mistake I made in my conception of God and of Christ’s mission on earth, and how much harm I did to mortals in my preaching and how I slandered the Father of love. But I was honest in my beliefs and taught as I thought the truth to be, yet that does not alter the fact that many a mortal after he became a spirit, was retarded for a long time in his spiritual progress, because of these false beliefs, which in order to progress he had to give up and start anew in his efforts to find the truths of God.
And as I worked hard and preached eloquently to make mortals believe these injurious doctrines while on earth, so now I am working hard and preaching eloquently to make spirits who come over with these beliefs, unlearn them and see the truth as it is.
Your Brother in Christ,
George Whitefield
|
|
Jesus Was Not Begotten By The Holy Spirit and His Mother Was Not A Virgin
Let no man believe that I was born of the Virgin Mary, or that I was begotten by the Holy Spirit, or that I am God, for all these things are not true.
That I came from the seed of woman is true in this sense: that the Jews attributed birth, as a physical fact, as belonging to the realm of woman, for in those days it was impossible to prove who the father was except as the child resembled the parent, and the one real basis for birth was that a child was the offspring of a given mother. Hence the expression, "born of the seed of a woman" did not have the interpretation given to it by the writers of theology, who thought erroneously that their expression meant born of a woman, only, and without a father. But it simply meant mankind in general, and no connection with parents in particular, for we must remember that the expression, "born of the seed of woman," is a physical impossibility, for the female does not carry the seed but the egg, and it is the male who carries the seed. So that, if the writer of Genesis had meant to convey the thought ,"born of a woman alone without a man," he would have said, "born of the egg of woman."
The entire meaning of this important Messianic statement has thus been distorted to mean the existence of Satan as a Divine power of evil and has given sin the status of a Divine being, which is abhorent and a blasphemy, and has also caused the beliefs that I was born of a virgin, which is utterly absurd and impossible.
In addition, the later New Testament writers turned to Greek mythology or some of their tales regarding my miracles and in that way they read that Poseidon, the God of the Sea, walked on the water, which was sufficient for their imagination to have me also walk on the water. And in this way they secured the idea for making my mother a virgin by their reading of the Greek legends that told of a number of goddesses who gave birth to sons although they themselves were virgins, and I can name such instances of Demetrius and Danae who gave birth to Perseus without the benefit of a mate, and several others.
It is true that I was not concerned during my mission on earth as the Messiah of God with the means of settling disputes in my so-called church. I had never at any time when on earth entertained the thought of establishing a new church. I was wholeheartedly attached to my own religious institution, the Temple at Jerusalem and to the Assemblies and Synagogues of my own religion, Judaism; and I was a religious Jew intent upon living up to the highest ideals of Judaism in the way of that ethical standard of life as preached by our Prophets and the Lawgivers, aside from my Mission as Messiah and bringing to mankind the availability of the Father's Love, I meant to work strictly within the established Hebrew Church and to affect needed reforms from within as well as to introduce the principle of the New Heart, and never did I at any time think of breaking away from Judaism and to establish a religious body separate from this religion.
I am today as I have always been, a Hebrew by religion and by race, and any such passages in the New Testament which imply or otherwise state that I ever instituted a new religion or thought to estabush a new organization for worship is false and entirely unfounded, and hence I never wrote those lines in Matthew allegedly giving instructions regarding disputes for members of a new religious group.
Let no man believe that I was born of the Virgin Mary, or that I was begotten by the Holy Spirit, or that I am God, for all these things are not true.
That I came from the seed of woman is true in this sense: that the Jews attributed birth, as a physical fact, as belonging to the realm of woman, for in those days it was impossible to prove who the father was except as the child resembled the parent, and the one real basis for birth was that a child was the offspring of a given mother. Hence the expression, "born of the seed of a woman" did not have the interpretation given to it by the writers of theology, who thought erroneously that their expression meant born of a woman, only, and without a father. But it simply meant mankind in general, and no connection with parents in particular, for we must remember that the expression, "born of the seed of woman," is a physical impossibility, for the female does not carry the seed but the egg, and it is the male who carries the seed. So that, if the writer of Genesis had meant to convey the thought ,"born of a woman alone without a man," he would have said, "born of the egg of woman."
The entire meaning of this important Messianic statement has thus been distorted to mean the existence of Satan as a Divine power of evil and has given sin the status of a Divine being, which is abhorent and a blasphemy, and has also caused the beliefs that I was born of a virgin, which is utterly absurd and impossible.
In addition, the later New Testament writers turned to Greek mythology or some of their tales regarding my miracles and in that way they read that Poseidon, the God of the Sea, walked on the water, which was sufficient for their imagination to have me also walk on the water. And in this way they secured the idea for making my mother a virgin by their reading of the Greek legends that told of a number of goddesses who gave birth to sons although they themselves were virgins, and I can name such instances of Demetrius and Danae who gave birth to Perseus without the benefit of a mate, and several others.
It is true that I was not concerned during my mission on earth as the Messiah of God with the means of settling disputes in my so-called church. I had never at any time when on earth entertained the thought of establishing a new church. I was wholeheartedly attached to my own religious institution, the Temple at Jerusalem and to the Assemblies and Synagogues of my own religion, Judaism; and I was a religious Jew intent upon living up to the highest ideals of Judaism in the way of that ethical standard of life as preached by our Prophets and the Lawgivers, aside from my Mission as Messiah and bringing to mankind the availability of the Father's Love, I meant to work strictly within the established Hebrew Church and to affect needed reforms from within as well as to introduce the principle of the New Heart, and never did I at any time think of breaking away from Judaism and to establish a religious body separate from this religion.
I am today as I have always been, a Hebrew by religion and by race, and any such passages in the New Testament which imply or otherwise state that I ever instituted a new religion or thought to estabush a new organization for worship is false and entirely unfounded, and hence I never wrote those lines in Matthew allegedly giving instructions regarding disputes for members of a new religious group.
|
|
|
The Truth Regarding The Miracles Performed By Jesus
The first supposed miracle is that of my having fed thousands of hungry listeners who were without food and who simply by my supposed powers were supplied bread and water on the occasion of my preaching to them in the hills of Trans-Jordan.
Well, I must say that the many people who ate with me that supper, ate fish and bread and wine and even figs and dates as well, which the New Testament does not mention, but this food had been either brought along with them or that as in the case of fish, had been caught by the fishing boat of my Disciples and then cooked by some of the women who were present at the time; in other words, the meal which we all enjoyed at the time was a substantial one and was one that was retained in the recording of my activities in Trans-Jordan by later writers who received it from my Disciples, but this meal had nothing miraculous about it except that all food is miraculous as it comes from the Heavenly Father for the sustenance of His children, but it was not a miracle in the sense that the New Testament interprets it and conceives it to be.
To continue along these lines, I wish to add that during that evening, my Disciples took their fishing boat and turned their way back to Galilee in the vicinity of Capernaum, and I remained behind to dismiss the multitude which was not four or five thousand but considerably less, and I then withdrew to pray. I later took one of the little boats of the many that were anchored near the shore and made my way in it that night. As the wind was strong I was eventually able to catch up with them.
They were happy to see me and took me into their fishing boat, but with the moonlight shining on my white robe, it appeared as they later told me that I looked like a ghost and that standing up near the mast of the boat, it seemed that I was walking on the waves. From this episode has come the unfortunate story of my having walked on the waters and I say that this too has had a deterrent effect upon my Mission as the Messiah to all men.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Wedding at Cana
Another is the supposed miracle of the water changed to wine at the marriage feast at Cana. At this time a cousin of mine, on the side of my mother, was being married and as the wine gave out, I was able to procure wine from a nearby wine dealer by simply paying for it and using the water jugs that are mentioned in the New Testament.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Raising Lazarus from the dead
I wish to explain more thoroughly and with textual references my visit to the house of Lazarus and my healing him of the unconscious state, which has been erroneously described as death by the gospel copyists, as I have already written through Mr. Padgett I did not say, "This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of Man might be glorified thereby," for this meant that the sickness would not end in death, only because I might be glorified by raising him from death.
Rather did I say, "This sickness is not unto death, for through the power of God will the Son of God heal and be glorified," which simply meant, I would show I had been sent by God by curing Lazarus of his illness. Furthermore, I did say, as recorded in John, Chapter 11, and verse 11, "Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep." Now the gospel of John, which at this point was not written by John, declares that by sleep, I meant death, and this is not true, for had I meant that Lazarus was dead, I would have used the expressions which were used to indicate death, and these were, "To sleep with one's fathers," or "To sleep in the dust," or "To sleep a perpetual sleep."
Hence when I said, "Lazarus was asleep," I meant that he was in that unconscious state, when one is dying in sleep. In the same, way, Thomas the Twin did not say, "Let us go and die with him," meaning Lazarus, (verse 16) nor did he have in mind to go and die with me, on the supposition that I might be taken by the Temple hirelings, for this too was inserted many years after the Crucifixion to exaggerate the danger which beset me and my resolution in confronting them, although it is true that I was aware of the animosity with which they regarded me.
When I wept, and this is true, for I did weep, it was because I was touched and my emotions of love for him aroused more because he had been entombed as dead and brought to such a pass, and not because I thought he was dead, for I knew he was not.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
There are more things that I would like to write about and that is regarding the words; "It is easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven."
I did not use the word "camel" for it has no association with the word "needle," and it never occured to me to use it, as it is found in many versions of the New Testament.
Neither did I say a rich man would find it difficult to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, for if I had, then it would be understood that the poor man could do so more readily than the rich man, and this was not my meaning, for entry into the Kingdom is an individual matter and depends upon the soul's desire or dormant state, although a superficial consideration would suggest that the rich man, being addicted to his earthly treasures would be less interested in the things of the soul.
As a matter of fact, I said; "It is easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a mortal man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven," and it was because of this seeming impossibility for a man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven that evoked from Peter the question; "Who then can be saved?"
The first supposed miracle is that of my having fed thousands of hungry listeners who were without food and who simply by my supposed powers were supplied bread and water on the occasion of my preaching to them in the hills of Trans-Jordan.
Well, I must say that the many people who ate with me that supper, ate fish and bread and wine and even figs and dates as well, which the New Testament does not mention, but this food had been either brought along with them or that as in the case of fish, had been caught by the fishing boat of my Disciples and then cooked by some of the women who were present at the time; in other words, the meal which we all enjoyed at the time was a substantial one and was one that was retained in the recording of my activities in Trans-Jordan by later writers who received it from my Disciples, but this meal had nothing miraculous about it except that all food is miraculous as it comes from the Heavenly Father for the sustenance of His children, but it was not a miracle in the sense that the New Testament interprets it and conceives it to be.
To continue along these lines, I wish to add that during that evening, my Disciples took their fishing boat and turned their way back to Galilee in the vicinity of Capernaum, and I remained behind to dismiss the multitude which was not four or five thousand but considerably less, and I then withdrew to pray. I later took one of the little boats of the many that were anchored near the shore and made my way in it that night. As the wind was strong I was eventually able to catch up with them.
They were happy to see me and took me into their fishing boat, but with the moonlight shining on my white robe, it appeared as they later told me that I looked like a ghost and that standing up near the mast of the boat, it seemed that I was walking on the waves. From this episode has come the unfortunate story of my having walked on the waters and I say that this too has had a deterrent effect upon my Mission as the Messiah to all men.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Wedding at Cana
Another is the supposed miracle of the water changed to wine at the marriage feast at Cana. At this time a cousin of mine, on the side of my mother, was being married and as the wine gave out, I was able to procure wine from a nearby wine dealer by simply paying for it and using the water jugs that are mentioned in the New Testament.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Raising Lazarus from the dead
I wish to explain more thoroughly and with textual references my visit to the house of Lazarus and my healing him of the unconscious state, which has been erroneously described as death by the gospel copyists, as I have already written through Mr. Padgett I did not say, "This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of Man might be glorified thereby," for this meant that the sickness would not end in death, only because I might be glorified by raising him from death.
Rather did I say, "This sickness is not unto death, for through the power of God will the Son of God heal and be glorified," which simply meant, I would show I had been sent by God by curing Lazarus of his illness. Furthermore, I did say, as recorded in John, Chapter 11, and verse 11, "Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep." Now the gospel of John, which at this point was not written by John, declares that by sleep, I meant death, and this is not true, for had I meant that Lazarus was dead, I would have used the expressions which were used to indicate death, and these were, "To sleep with one's fathers," or "To sleep in the dust," or "To sleep a perpetual sleep."
Hence when I said, "Lazarus was asleep," I meant that he was in that unconscious state, when one is dying in sleep. In the same, way, Thomas the Twin did not say, "Let us go and die with him," meaning Lazarus, (verse 16) nor did he have in mind to go and die with me, on the supposition that I might be taken by the Temple hirelings, for this too was inserted many years after the Crucifixion to exaggerate the danger which beset me and my resolution in confronting them, although it is true that I was aware of the animosity with which they regarded me.
When I wept, and this is true, for I did weep, it was because I was touched and my emotions of love for him aroused more because he had been entombed as dead and brought to such a pass, and not because I thought he was dead, for I knew he was not.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
There are more things that I would like to write about and that is regarding the words; "It is easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven."
I did not use the word "camel" for it has no association with the word "needle," and it never occured to me to use it, as it is found in many versions of the New Testament.
Neither did I say a rich man would find it difficult to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, for if I had, then it would be understood that the poor man could do so more readily than the rich man, and this was not my meaning, for entry into the Kingdom is an individual matter and depends upon the soul's desire or dormant state, although a superficial consideration would suggest that the rich man, being addicted to his earthly treasures would be less interested in the things of the soul.
As a matter of fact, I said; "It is easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a mortal man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven," and it was because of this seeming impossibility for a man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven that evoked from Peter the question; "Who then can be saved?"