Responses to BA Goswami 1

[Guest guest]

>PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY, NEW AGE NEO-GNOSTIC RELIGIONS AND FRAUDULENT 'ANCIENT

>SCRIPTURES'

>

>Dear Mr. Deardorff,

>

>While I appreciate your obvious sincerity and desire to prove the objective

>reality of these texts by logical argument, neither yourself, nor anyone

>else has ever provided the world with any real proof that these texts

>existed or were genuine.  In fact, the original language texts themselves,

>or even authenticated COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE TEXTS have not been

>produced or safeguarded for analysis and comparison with other known-to-be

>ancient texts.  Instead there is an operative standard format for religious

>dis-information, for political control of religious populations, and for

>Rosicrucians, Masons, Theosophists and other 'esotericists' to

>conspiratorially pass-off fraudulent 'scriptures' and other literatures on

>the public.  The literatures that you are promoting fit that format

>perfectly.  Their content can not stand up to real scholarly (specialist)

>scrutiny either.  With all due respect to your own great endeavors regarding

>the so-called  "Talmud of Jmmanuel", it is also another one of these

>esoteric frauds.  You have been duped sir, and have invested years into the

>product of an esoteric conspiracy. 

Hello Bhakti,

That's your assumption, but you haven't investigated the matter while I and

others have. The Talmud of Jmmanuel (TJ) is only one translation and one or

two editings away from its original, while other "known-to-be texts," like

the Gospels, are much further from their sources. As you well know.

You haven't interviewed any of the many witnesses who know the

co-discoverer well and vouch for his integrity, while I have.

You haven't compared the TJ against the Gospel of Matthew, pericope by

pericope, to find that it is Matthew that's the fraud, with Mark being

formed mainly out of Matthew. So you haven't yet had to wonder how it is

that the TJ does not suffer from the over-300 criticisms that scholars have

leveled against Matthew, some of them more recenlty than 1978, and yet at

least half of Matthew's verses have parallels to the TJ. The TJ tells its

own story with its spiritual teachings straightforwardly, while it's the

Gospel of Matthew that suffers from rather obvious indications of

insertions, substitutions and inappropriate seams.

Of course it would seemingly be a good thing if the TJ's autograph had not

been destroyed due to the writing's terrible heresies for

Judeo-Christianity. But how could you expect them to have survived? In

their Aramaic form they were the "hottest potato" you ever heard of. The

co-discoverer has had over a dozen assassination attempts on his life since

1977 (the TJ came out in 1978), some no doubt due to his publication of the

TJ.

You need to come to grips with the facts and details, my friend, so as to

avoid jumping to false conclusions.

Regarding Notovitch and the confirmation of his findings by Swami

Abhedananda, I notice you are following the expected behavior of assuming

the Swami to have been some sort of great deceiver and liar. But the men

who traveled with the Swami trusted him, as did members of Ramakrishna

Vedanta Math and others.

   Jim Deardorff

   http://www.tjresearch.info