Posts Tagged ‘Bible’

Undergrounders ask who really is the Old Testament god known as Yahweh. Is it Jehovah…or Satan perhaps?

Posted: April 22, 2019 in Underground Knowledge
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
0

A lively debate is unfolding as members of our Underground Knowledge global discussion group on Goodreads postulate on the identity of Yahweh, the god of the Israelites, whose name was revealed to Moses as “YHWH” in the Hebrew language.

 

Yahweh

 

Undergrounders are divided in who exactly Yahweh is. Some suggest he, she or it is Aten, the disk of the sun in ancient Egyptian mythology; some insist it’s Satan, the Angel of Death himself; others say he’s the Christian God.

A sample of some of the more interesting comments follows:

-Yahweh is not the Christian god, and I propose to prove this. Here we go…

-My view is that Yahweh is the Aten, the very first example that I know of of monotheism, and when the Jews left Israel with the return of Amun and the other Gods of Egypt, they took the Aten with them and changed its name.

-A fictitious character. Prove me wrong.

-As for the father of Jesus, I can’t help but point the finger at Joseph.

-I agree that Yahweh is not the God of Christianity as it has been posited by many Christina theologians and priests.

-I also find it curious that within a supposed universe of there supposedly being only one God, it references in the very first book (Genesis) “older Gods”.

-Why does God speak of himself as “we”? Is he the Elohim or the one true God?

-Yahweh has been taken on or co-opted by Christianity as Jesus Heavenly Father and from my study of Gnosticism and proto-Christianity, this couldn’t be further from the truth. Jehova was also seen as a warlike God who also has co-opted other religious figures into his mythology like El, Ishtar, Baal, etc.

-Through my research, I found that Yahweh is not Jehova.

-Yahweh is the fallen angel, HE IS SATAN… who was expelled from heaven.

– The Hebrew perspective is that YHWH or Tetragrammaton was the name given to Ain Sof (the Infinite being/intelligence). The concept goes back at least to Akkadia/Sumeria/Babylon in the form of the titles “EL” (meaning God). Hebrew names for G-d like Elohim (God of many/Lord of Hosts), or ElShaddai (Almighty God) lend credence to this.

-The being called YHWH is not Jesus and is not related to Jesus directly in the Hebrew. The proper name given in Torah is Adonai (Lord). The Jewish encyclopedia has a lot of information on this subject. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/art…

 

To view all comments in this discussion thread, or better still to have YOUR say, go to: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/18618830-who-really-is-yahweh-the-god-from-the-old-testament?comment=191627554#comment_191627554

 

******************************************** 

Nearly two thirds of respondents believe Christ a real, historical person

Posted: March 14, 2015 in Underground Knowledge
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

Our latest ‘Underground Knowledge’ discussion group poll on the popular literary site Goodreads.com  asks: Do you believe Jesus Christ was a real historical person? Interim results show that 60% of poll respondents say Yes; 23% say No; and 17% are Unsure.

 Christ, by Heinrich Hofmann.jpg

Christ as depicted by artist Heinrich Hofmann.

The poll was inspired by a lively new discussion thread titled Forbidden history of the Bible in our group.

That thread in turn has spawned the following debates:

Earlier historical versions of Jesus Christ?

Extensive biblical revisions made by the Romans

Biblical conspiracy theory re Adam & Eve

Book of Genesis – not an original document?

and last but not least…

Banned books of the Bible

 

Before voting in the poll, members were advised, “For anyone wanting to read more on this subject before voting, here’s a discussion thread in the group on “Earlier historical versions of Jesus Christ”: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/…”

 

A selection of poll respondents’ comments follow (names withheld):

No offense but the question to me is nonsensical, so I didn’t weigh in. No genuine scholar denies that Jesus existed. That leaves pretty much only propagandists and pseudo-scholars, who know nothing about history, that deny that He did. There is way more proof for His existence than there is for many other people that we accept as historical. People can argue about what His significance is, but that He was a historical figure is unquestionably so.

 

I am obligated to be honest with respect to my Christian brethren and friends here. My “YES” Jesus existed is qualified by the separation of what is ascribed to him in the Gospel. It is problematic to align with Paul’s advocating that a Jew of the first century would claim divinity when the Jews challenged Rome over the same issue to the very end of a disastrous conclusion, and without surrendering their belief: they rather faced a holocaust than surrender their belief before Rome. The followers of Jesus rejected Paul, not Jesus.

 

I don’t ALTOGETHER believe Jesus Christ existed as such, but the question, with only Yes, No and Unsure options, imposes limitations on the answer. By that I mean that it’s perfectly plausible that a man, or many men existed at that time called Jesus of Nazareth, and it’s wholly plausible that one or more might have been regarded as Jesus Christ. What I don’t believe is that a ‘Jesus Christ son of God’ existed, any more than I believe God himself existed. I hope I’ve explained that clearly. (Gulps)

 

I believe there is a true person behind the legends and stories. Just not that every action, event, or saying ascribed to him in the canonical or other writings is 100% accurate.

 

Way too much historical evidence for him. See Josephus.

 

It’s my understanding that many (or most?) historians now believe Josephus’ documents that name Jesus are forgeries: http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

 

It is very possible the Church threw in the forgery. I don’t disagree with that. I do disagree that Jesus is a figment of some one’s story telling ability.

 

Are you aware of all the Pagan Gods who came before Christ – like Mithra, Horus and Osiris – whose lives are remarkably similar to the story of Jesus? I find the history (or lack of, depending on your take) surrounding Jesus gets really convoluted the deeper you research.

 

Agreed. Lot’s of stuff borrowed. There was even a second messiah around 100 AD.

 

To see all the comments, or better still to have YOUR say, go to: https://www.goodreads.com/poll/list/142309-underground-knowledge—a-discussion-group?type=group

 

**************************************

‘Forbidden history of the Bible’ discussion opens up debate on Christianity

Posted: March 9, 2015 in Underground Knowledge
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
4

Yet another interesting confab is unfolding in our ‘Underground Knowledge’ discussion group on Goodreads.com – this one relating to the authenticity of the Bible and the accuracy of the information contained within its hallowed pages.

1611 King James Bible Book

The discussion was sparked by one of the group’s moderators who claims it is historically proven many or all of the books in the Bible were edited (revised, rewritten, added to and subtracted from) at later dates. He refers to “the extensive Council of Nicea biblical edits in the 4th Century AD conducted by the Romans under Emperor Constantine.”

His post continues:

So to believe the Bible as we now know it is the pure “word of God” means one must also believe that the political and militant Romans who revised the Bible had no other agendas when they decided on what to include in the finalized Bible and what to remove from its content…

That belief would be a very big call when you think about it as it requires a faith in some very corrupt and militant Roman rulers…Today’s equivalent would be believing a spiritual text edited/revised by say George W. Bush, Oliver North, Henry Kissinger and Tony Blair retained the original word of God…

…The oldest bible ever found is the Sinai Bible which from memory was written on donkey skins in the 3RD Century AD. It differs radically from the modern (edited) Bible, which is further testimony to the changes Man has made to the “word of God” over the centuries. Apparently the Sinai Bible does not contain any mention of the Resurrection of Christ, which may indicate that was added later (probably in the Council of Nicea).

Here’s an article from VatiLeaks (January 02, 2013) about the Sinai Bible (headed) ‘A glaring omission in World’s oldest Bible’:

“It is a fact of Christian history that the earliest Gospels did not record a resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that claim is supported in the oldest known complete Bible available to mankind today. Called the Codex Sinaiticus, or Sinai Bible, it was named after Mt. Sinai, the location of St. Catherine’s Monastery where it was discovered in 1859 by Dr. Constantine Von Tischendorf (1815-1874). The discovery of the Sinai Bible provided biblical scholars with irrefutable evidence of wilful falsifications in all modern-day Gospels, and a comparison identified a staggering 14,800 later editorial alterations in modern Bibles…

“…With the Sinai Bible, Christian history is traced back as far as it can conceivably go, but it was still written, at best, more than 350 years after the time the Vatican says Jesus Christ walked the sands of Palestine.

“The ‘Catholic Encyclopedia’ agrees to this extraordinary late composition of the world’s oldest Bible: ’The earliest of the extant manuscripts [relating to Christianity], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD’.”

 

The group moderator concludes by saying, “For anyone who believes the modern version of the Bible is the irrefutable and pure word of God, I would simply ask them then what were the older Bibles? Surely the Bibles written closer to the time of Christ should be more precise?”

 

The above discussion thread runs under the heading Extensive biblical revisions made by the Romans

Under the umbrella heading of “Forbidden history of the Bible,” other discussion threads have been established including Banned books of the Bible / Earlier historical versions of Jesus Christ? / Book of Genesis – not an original document? / Biblical conspiracy theory re Adam & Eve

 

To view the discussions, or better still to have YOUR say, go to: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/group_folder/266160

 

*

Membership of our rapidly growing ‘Underground Knowledge’ group has now topped 650. Do visit the group at: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/142309-underground-knowledge—a-discussion-group

 

*************************************

 

 

Adam and Eve linked to Biblical conspiracy theory

Posted: November 14, 2014 in The Orphan Conspiracies
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

In the Afterword for our book The Orphan Conspiracies, renowned historian and Professor of History at the University of Idaho, Dr. Richard Spence, puts a unique conspiracy theory spin on the story of Adam and Eve, suggesting they “got the boot because they dared to acquire forbidden knowledge and, if not stopped, might have achieved the ultimate prize of eternal life.”

Bible facts adam and eve 10 Interesting Bible Facts

Dr. Spence claims, “The (Garden of) Eden saga is also relevant because, if taken literally, it can be interpreted as the Ur-Conspiracy against the human race.”

Here’s the relevant excerpt from Dr. Spence’s Afterword:

“Seeing Adam and Eve driven from paradise, the agent of their ruin, the Serpent, aka the Devil, was moved to pity. He asked God if he might bestow upon these pitiful creatures a gift which would make their mortal suffering and that of their descendants a little easier to bear.

The Lord consented, and so the Serpent granted humankind the “blessing” of self-delusion: the inability to see themselves, the world or their state as they really were.

The trick, of course, is that neither would they be able to see God or the Devil for what they really were either.

The Eden saga is also relevant because, if taken literally, it can be interpreted as the Ur-Conspiracy against the human race. Basically, Adam and Eve got the boot because they dared to acquire forbidden knowledge and, if not stopped, might have achieved the ultimate prize of eternal life.

It was that which prompted God—or Gods since the divine conversation is always in terms of “we”—to nip things in the bud lest the upstart creations become “like us.”

It’s enough to make one wonder just whose side the Serpent was on. Or could it be that the Serpent was just God in disguise? Maybe we’ve been in the dark from the beginning.

Mythology, heresy or whatever, I’ve often thought the “Devil’s Gift” story explained the human condition pretty well. Whether the Serpent is to be blamed or thanked, the simple fact is that we do possess a tremendous capacity for deluding ourselves—and others.”

 

An author in his own right, Dr. Spence specializes in Russian, intelligence and military history, and his university course offerings include Modern Espionage, Anti-Semitism and the Holocaust, History of Secret Societies and the Occult in History.

Richard B Spence

Dr. Richard Spence.

Dr. Spence is also the author of numerous articles in Revolutionary Russia, Intelligence and National Security, International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, The Historian, New Dawn and other publications.

He has served as a commentator/consultant for the History Channel and the International Spy Museum and was a key consultant-interviewee for the Russian Cultural Foundation’s 2007 documentary film, “Leon Trotsky: The Secret of World Revolution,” and its subsequent “Trap for the Tsar.”

Read more in The Orphan Conspiracies: 29 Conspiracy Theories from The Orphan Trilogy – available via Amazon at: http://www.amazon.com/The-Orphan-Conspiracies-Conspiracy-Theories-ebook/dp/B00J4MPFT6/

We have opened this and other controversial topics up for debate in our ‘Underground Knowledge’ discussion group on Goodreads. More members welcome! Go to: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/142309-underground-knowledge—a-discussion-group