TJ Comments

Comments are welcomed on the comparisons between the verses or passages shown from the Gospel of Matthew and their TJ parallels. TJ stands for Talmud of Jmmanuel, discovered in 1963 by Eduard Meier and Isa Rashid.

Tuesday, May 06, 2014


Below is a recent addition to the rear of this web page of mine.

The 2011 edition of the TJ, though its English translation is still underway as of this update (May, 2014), is quite different from the earlier editions. It contains very lengthy “explanations” throughout involving a mixture of truth and fiction. I would conclude that it contain too much disinformation, supplied by Meier's ET contactors, to be at all reliable. Among many other things, it leads the unwary reader to believe that the Gospel of Matthew was written well before the packaged TJ (and a transcription of it) were brought from India to the Mideast; consequently one is led to believe that the writer of Matthew did not have the TJ on hand when penning his gospel. This last edition of the TJ seems designed to undermine any scholarly analysis that finds the early editions of the TJ to be basically genuine, and to dispel any thought that Matthew was dependent upon it. The earlier editions of the TJ have now become extra valuable.

This total revision -- indeed trashing -- of the TJ's earlier editions   may have been deemed necessary by the Plejarens if they had decided that through my own efforts and those of other Meier-case supporters, New Testament scholars:
(a) were coming close to being persuaded, through evidence they can accept,  that "Jesus" had originally been named "Immanuel," with the name change initiated by Paul, and that this change was successfully accomplished and covered up in the first few centuries CE; and
(b) might then connect the name "Immanuel" with the "Talmud Jmmanuel" and then explore the TJ sufficiently to learn its apparent truth and the Gospels' falsehoods ; and
(c) then journalists and certain media would, relatively suddenly,  spread the word to Christians and atheists, causing great and unacceptable turmoil.

 If so, the situation seems similar to the Plejarens having destroyed (trashed) the portion of the hillside in Jerusalem where the tomb site had been located in which Jmmanuel spent three days and nights. . 


  • At 3:41 AM , Blogger Bruce said...

    Jim, those are some harsh words and accusations - "involving a mixture of truth and fiction. ... disinformation .." I am sure you did not put them out here in knee-jerk fashion, iow, a lot of time & thought went into such a decision to go public with that assessment.

    Have you spoken to Meier himself, because you are listed as a proponent of the case and as such, I would think that Meier would speak to you directly about your concerns, suspicions, conclusions, questions, etc?

    I assume you've read enough of a translated version that leads you to these conclusions?

    With your a, b & c, are you saying the Plejaren concluded that earthly humanity was not yet ready for the truth and so they introduced disinformation to further the plausible deniability of the case and leaving Meier to live out his current incarnation in peace & relative seclusion without the masses travelling to Hinterschmidruti, over-running the place like a pilgrimage to Mecca type scenario, in addition to great and unacceptable turmoil?

  • At 12:40 PM , Blogger Jim Deardorff said...

    Hello Bruce,

    Thanks for the comments.
    No, I haven’t accosted Meier about it. He obviously goes along with Ptaah’s wishes on this, that it is necessary that the TJ be revised in this fashion, whether or not he personally sees the fictions and contradictions as being such.

    So far I’ve only read the New TJ’s voluminous Introduction, and five chapters.

    A spot in the New lengthy Introduction that contradicts the TJ itself is where they say that shortly before Saul had his conversion experience (fireworks on the Road to Damascus) , he had been pursuing Jmmanuel in Syria. But No, according to the TJ (earlier editions), Saul had been in Israel persecuting Jmmanuel's disciples. Besides, Saul couldn't have been persecuting Jmmanuel in Syria shortly before his conversion experience because for some two years he had believed Immanuel was dead, having supposedly died on the post at the crucifixion. So Saul would not have been pursuing Jmmanuel in Syria while he thought him dead and gone from the scene.

    An example of a less obvious problem is that now one reads that there had been four Magi, not three. Although that certainly would have been possible even though their gifts involved only three types of things, would Rashid have mis-translated three as four? More than once it is now mentioned that there were four. And why wasn’t that error noticed and corrected in much earlier versions of the TJ from1992 on? On the other hand, one might argue that Rashid was following popular belief that there had been three wise men. However, if Rashid were that bound to tradition, he could not have gone along with the rest of the TJ and Jmmanuel’s survival of the crucifixion, etc.

    Another is that although the Baptism was at the Jordan River, the New TJ has it that the ritual didn’t involve water at all.
    To believe all of the new apparent fictions would mean having to believe that Rashid was totally incompetent, which of course contradicts earlier statements from Semjase.

    Send me your email address and I will send you many other examples, if you have the time to look through them all.

    Save your old editions of the TJ!!

    The Plejarens have probably introduced a few fictions even into the previous editions of the TJ – this to ensure that we do not just accept whatever they say, and whatever additions they give Meier to add to the TJ, as truth without thinking them through. One example may be at TJ 25:45 appearing soon after the end of the Gulf War in 1990.

    Yes, the plausible deniability, not only for the TJ but for the Meier case as a whole, helps make it possible for Meier to continue on the Mission, as well as serving other purposes.

  • At 2:46 AM , Blogger Bruce said...

    Good morning Jim.

    I haven't read any of the 2011 TJ but going by what you write, the Saul discrepancy from previous editions needs explaining as even do the 3 or 4 Magi, as your point about Rashid seems well reasoned.

    I have one question for you concerning Rashid; He was an ex-Greek-Orthodox lay priest, the key word being "ex". From what I can gather, he was also 1/2 Palestinian on his father's side? Therefore he likely explored Islam to some degree. Coincidentally enough, I believe Rashid's given first name 'Isa' is also the name of Jesus in the Quran. And though I am not 100% sure, I think Moslems believe that Isa/Jesus survived the crucifixion, migrated to the east, where he lived to a ripe old age and that he was a human being, not a deity. Since Rashid was an EX-priest, I am guessing his search for the truth was not satisfied i.e. was still ongoing, and he likely had some Islamic influence as well, and so he was open to other interpretations of events, at least up to a certain point. So, he could have been open to the fact the Jesus/Isa/Jmmanuel survived, that Judas was not the betrayer, etc. He did leave out the female disciples and we know that women also took a back seat in the Islamic thinking of Rashid's time. I'm just throwing a few things out there to try to explain how Rashid may have been open enough to reveal certain heresies but not open enough to go all the way, which doesn't reconcile the Saul discrepancy. So Rashid may have translated the Aramaic 'Ischwisch' as God and somehow he left out the female disciples, I don't know.

    Also, regarding the whole plausible deniability thing, Meier was asked a question recently, where you were referenced:

    Posted by Mahigitam on Sunday, March 23, 2014 - 07:17 pm:

    Dear Billy,
    Retired Professor James Deardorff has proposed a theory which you may already know, its called as "Leaky Embargo Hypothesis". According to his hypothesis, advanced ethical ETs would not reveal their existence as it would create shock to lower civilizations from sudden disclosures. So these ETs like Plejaren would select a contactee on a planet and through him pass on the message to the people who are ready or interested.
    As a part of this strategy, Deardorff seems to have stated the "negative" aspects of the case like - missing original negatives, films, slides, outerspace photos, Asket-Nera issue, letting MIB, CIA,..etc manipulate or steal the original evidence, absence of & negative evidence of astronomical details(Malona, destroyer comet, origins of venus & moon, dark star in SOL system,..etc), Clear contradiction of values with scientific results, Cave men photos still being in PPKB,..etc - are purposefully introduced or let them to exist by Plejaren in order for people to spot these & give the chance to refuse the reality the case so that they can save them from the shock of ET existence.

    I would like to know, if such a strategy(not necessarily related to the above details) was being used or has been used by Plejaren with or without your knowledge ?

    p.s: Everything above may not be attributed to deardorff.

    Meier: The „Leaky Embargo Hypothesis“ is pure nonsense. The Plejaren always informed openly and honestly, of course only within the limits of their directives. And when at some later time they learned that formerly given information turned out as being erroneous (due to a lack of certain knowledge on their side, etc.), they always corrected their former incomplete or false information. What can be stated with certainty: They never lied.


    So, Billy says the Plejaren never lied although they can only do what their directives permit which probably allows for leaving certain bits of information blank but purposely misleading or deceiving is not done.

    I have yet to go through your email with further examples and will do so shortly.

  • At 5:50 PM , Blogger Jim Deardorff said...

    Hi Bruce,

    Most of what you suggest about Rashid seems possible. But some seems quite unlikely to me. It does seem likely that he knew that the Aramaic Ischwsch referred to YHWH and so translated it as “God.”

    Re that email query to Billy Meier, he didn’t say which part of the 1986 Leaky Embargo Hypothesis he thought was nonsense. One part of it was that the ETs in charge of the sightings, and/or other occasional alien intrusions into our awareness, were NOT maintaining a strict embargo around Earth such that we wouldn’t have any idea that they might exist and be in our presence – as opposed to the embargo hypotheses of that day, which prohibited, as in Star Trek’s “advance directive,” an advanced alien race from showing themselves or their craft in any way to the inhabitants of a much less evolved, emergent civilization. The Plejarens obviously DID let some of us know, though Billy, that they exist and what some of their capabilities are and their ethics.

    On the other hand, the Leaky Embargo Hypothesis assumed that these contacting aliens would not be so brash and unethical as to show themselves in no uncertain terms to the whole populace that could cause great panic and chaos.

    So, the Leaky Embargo Hypothesis assumed that the aliens would contact us only covertly and gradually so as to avoid either extreme above. That way they would slowly be conditioning us and educating us for the day when the ethical ETs would deem it unnecessary to remain covert any longer, but could bring about open disclosure. They could best work this strategy through using a single primary contactee.

    In choosing this middle course, they would need to follow a careful strategy. This strategy could include (and this part was not mentioned within the Leaky Embargo Hypothesis) semi-plausible deniability. I.e., their actions towards their contactee could at times contain deceptive aspects, which negative skeptics could grasp upon so that they could maintain their existing belief that ETs could not be involved, and so instead the contactee could be blamed as carrying out a giant hoax. Others who could accept it, on the other hand, could see that the actions need not, or could not, have been due to a hoax.

    I suspect that it is this latter strategy, of semi-plausible deniability, which includes that the ETs (Plejarens) could at times create fictions, fibs and even lies that would be blamed on the contactee, that Meier referred to as being pure nonsense.

    So I think the New TJ, if other evidence hasn’t already shown it, indicates that the Plejarens’ directives can permit lies at times. It might be, however, that these lies contain telltale features that give them away as being more like fibs, for those who should know better. I.e., the information is already at hand, within our literature and science and logic, to enable us to figure out that they could be considered as fibs not lies.,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home