Mt 11:2-3    2Now when John heard in prison about the deeds of the Christ, he sent word by his disciples 3and said to him, "Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?"

TJ 11:2-3    2When Johannes in prison heard about the works of Jmmanuel, he sent forth his disciples to him and had them say, 3"Are you the one who is to come, the king of wisdom, as foretold by the prophets, or should we wait for another?"

TJ 11:2-3    2Da aber Johannes im Gefängnis über die Werke Jmmanuels hörte, sandte er seine Jünger aus und liess ihm sagen: 3«Bist du es, der da kommen soll; der Weisheitskönig, wie die Propheten sagten, oder sollen wir eines anderen warten?»

THE PROBLEMS.   1.) Beare (p. 256) pointed out that John had expected the mightier one who would follow him to be one who would exercise divine judgment by means of his wrathful power: through a baptism with fire, a "purging of the threshing floor," and "a hewing down of the tree to the roots." Since Jesus had not acted in this way, but had instead ministered to the sick and ailing, is John then to be considered a false prophet or Jesus not to be considered the Messiah? Either of these possibilities would constitute a contradiction with other Matthean text.

2.) John would not have heard of the deeds of "the Christ," or of "the Messiah," but rather the deeds of a man known by some given name (Jesus or Immanuel of Nazareth). It is not likely that Jesus was known by the Messiah appellation if his name had been "Jesus" instead of "Immanuel," and not likely in any event before his triumphal entry into Jerusalem.

3.) For John to have his disciples ask the question without including any clue of what they meant by "he who is to come" is quite unlikely. He wouldn't have wished his disciples' mission to fail merely because they asked an ambiguous question.

4.) Why would John ask Jesus this question, if, during the baptism, he had already seemed to understand just who Jesus was?

SOLUTION.  1.) John's prophecy as given in the TJ was for a time of fulfillment in the distant future, apparently in our own era, when false teachings would be purged and "trees" constructed out of false beliefs would come down. Jmmanuel laid the groundwork for this by his baptism with the fire of truth (teachings of truth about the human consciousness). Thus the actual prophecy of what the one coming after him would be like was considerably different from Matthew's highly abbreviated version of it. In the TJ (see TJ 11:5, below) part of Jmmanuel's response to the Baptist's question was that he was proclaiming the truth of knowledge to those seeking it. Thus with the TJ, there is no contradiction between what John had preached and what Jmmanuel was engaged in, since Jmmanuel's healings were not to the exclusion of his teachings.

2.) "Immanuel" was altered into "the Christ" by the writer of Matthew to emphasize his conviction that "Jesus" was the Messiah, or the "anointed one."

3.) The question John's disciples were to ask had included "as foretold by the prophets" and more, so that Jmmanuel could have had no doubt what John's question was about. Evidently the compiler of Matthew omitted the TJ's qualifier "king of wisdom" because for him Jesus was supposed to be much more a figure of worship than a dispenser of wisdom.

Why he also omitted "as foretold by the prophets" is more problematic, but was perhaps because he did not regard the prophesied messiah to be any "king of wisdom," though that is suggested by Is 9:6 & 11:2 (Wonderful Counselor; the one possessing the spirit of wisdom and knowledge), but rather as prophesied for the suffering servant in Is 53:12 (one who "bore the sin of many and made intercession for the transgressors"). However, Is 53 lies within the latter portion of Isaiah believed to have been written not by Isaiah but by some prophet who lived a couple centuries after Isaiah did.[1] Thus the writer of Matthew, if preferring to give priority to Is 53, might have wished at this point to avoid drawing attention to Isaiah or "the prophets" at all, lest Is 9 and 11 and their implications of messianic wisdom come to the reader's mind.

4.) It has long been suggested that one possible reason why John asked this question of Jesus, through his disciples, was, at least partly, so that the latter could learn for themselves that Jmmanuel, known later as "Jesus," was the prophesied messiah.[2] The TJ wording, although only slightly different than Matthew's in this respect, suggests this solution more strongly, as it indicates that John had his disciples ask the question, rather than just asking the question himself through his disciples. It seems likely that John wanted his disciples to learn about Jmmanuel and come to respect him, so as to be willing to become his disciples in case he, John, was never to be released from prison.

These problems, especially the last two, are quite obscure. Could a New Age hoaxer have thought of them, and then proceeded to cure or alleviate them in a simple, natural manner? Not at all likely. PHoax 0.25.

Mt 11:5    5"the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them."

TJ 11:5    5"The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise, and the truth of knowledge is proclaimed to those who seek it."

TJ 11:5    5«Blinde sehen und Lahme gehen, Aussätzige werden rein und Taube hören, Tote stehen auf und Suchenden wird die Wahrheit des Wissens verkündet.»

THE PROBLEM.   In previous Matthean verses relating to Jesus preaching to the people, we find that he taught in the synagogues (Mt 4:23, 9:35) or on the Mount (Mt 7:28). Thus he was preaching to all those who wished to hear him, not just to the poor. Verses that may seem to have singled out the poor (Mt 5:3 and 9:10) are themselves suspect of redaction, as discussed previously. Joseph of Arimathea is a key example of one who was rich yet became a follower of Jesus, undoubtedly through having heard him teach. Hence consistency indicates that Matthew's "the poor have good news preached to them" is also a redaction. This being the case, the preaching of good news (ευαγγελιον in Greek) also stands out as being a redaction—an anachronism—since evangelizing, or "spreading the gospel," was later terminology that developed after the appearances of the risen Jesus to his disciples and to Paul, following the crucifixion, provided the "good news."

SOLUTION.   The TJ verse indicates the unacceptable part of the writer of Matthew's source that required alteration on his part (TJ 11:5b). Here "truth of knowledge" apparently has a meaning of the truthfulness of the spiritual knowledge Jmmanuel had been teaching—knowledge about the human spirit.

This problem with Matthew is unknown or unattested to within New Testament literature. There is little chance that a literary hoaxer could have perceived it. PHoax 0.2.

Mt 11:11    11"Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."

TJ 11:16    16"Truly I say to you, among all those born of women, no one has arisen who is greater than Johannes the Baptist."

TJ 11:16    16«Wahrlich, ich sage euch: Unter allen, die von Weibern geboren sind, ist keiner aufgestanden, der grösser wäre als Johannes der Täufer.»

THE PROBLEMS.  Beare (pp. 259-260) commented on the illogic of the second half of Matthew's verse, saying that it is as remarkable a note of deprecation of John as the first half is a tribute. (In this comment, Beare was apparently treating Earth as a portion of "kingdom of heaven.") In an attempt to explain this illogic and degradation, Beare suggested that Mt 11:11b may have been in anticipation of Mt 18:4 (the humble child being the greatest); however, we shall find that that verse also contains a serious redaction.

SOLUTION.   One observes that often the latter portion of a TJ verse was omitted or altered by the writer of Matthew because the most heretical portion tends to lie near the end of a sentence, causing the Matthean verse to be the shorter of the two. On other occasions he added in his own statements, so that the TJ verse is the shorter. This latter occurred here, as the TJ verse does not include the illogical second part of Mt 11:11. It was apparently appended by the writer of Matthew to clarify that John was not as great as Jesus in stature. This it does without necessarily degrading John, since all personages in heaven might be thought of as greater than any alive on Earth.

One might also question why "born of women" appears, since allof us are born of women. However, Jmmanuel's use of "women" here might have been to designate Earth women as opposed to extraterrestrial (ET) women. Jmmanuel, with an ET father (of human-like appearance), might have been placing John at the top of the human race, but allowing for spiritually advanced ETs (born of ET mothers and fathers) to be greater still. Within the TJ framework, we must allow that Jmmanuel very much kept ETs in mind without, of course, calling them by that unknown name, but rather by "celestial sons" or "guardian angels."

We see that the writer of Matthew had definite reverential motivation for making an addition to the TJ verse (last part of Mt 11:11), while a literary hoaxer may or may not have deduced this. PHoax 0.35.

Mt 11:12    12"From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and men of violence take it by force."

TJ 11:17    17"But now, in the days of Johannes the Baptist, the Earth suffers from violence, and those who commit violence are expropriating it."

TJ 11:17    17«Aber von den Tagen Johannes’ des Täufers bis hierher leidet die Erde an Gewalt, und die, die Gewalt tun, reissen sie weg.»

THE PROBLEM.   The intention of Matthew's verse is especially unclear, since what could it mean to say that "heaven has suffered violence" at the hands of man, or that heaven could be taken by force? A typical Christian interpretation of this is that "heaven" here means "the church" or "the body of believers." However, such an interpretation is anachronistic and does injustice to the usual biblical meaning of the word "heaven" as a place to ascend to—and the abode of angels.

SOLUTION.   The TJ verse uses the word "Earth" here, and thus does not suffer from the criticism. However, its German version, of which the English translation above is but one interpretation, is rather ambiguous concerning the timing of "now." One inescapable interpretation, however, is that although John preached that mankind should follow the laws of nature and of Creation, as did Jmmanuel, those in authority continued to flout this teaching and commit violence while seizing land. It was quite likely due to the verse's ambiguity that the writer of Matthew made his alteration; in particular, he may have substituted "kingdom of heaven" for "Earth" so that this verse would connect with, and support, the redaction he had made in the previous verse, in which he brought in his favorite "kingdom of heaven" theme. On the other hand, by the hoax hypothesis, a literary hoaxer might have made Matthew more understandable here. PHoax 0.5.

Mt 11:14    14"And if you are willing to accept it, he [John the Baptist] is Elijah who is to come."

TJ 11:19    19"And if you wish to accept it, he is Elisa (Elisha), who was to come again in his next life."

TJ 11:19    19«So ihr’s also wollt annehmen: Er ist der Elisa, der da kommen soll in seinem Wiederleben.»

THE PROBLEM.   Within the Matthean context it is totally unexplained how John could be the same person as Elijah. The Christian concept of resurrection does not involve one person turning into another. Although Elijah was last seen disappearing towards heaven within a "whirlwind" (2 Kgs 2:11), and Mal 4:5 prophesies that Elijah would come again, it can make no sense that Elijah returned to Earth and at some moment displaced the body of John the Baptist and took over. According to Lk 1, which summarizes John's birth and childhood, John was known by his parents from birth onwards. There is no mention that at some point after he became an adult his bodily appearance and demeanor suddenly changed into that of another, namely Elijah, who had supposedly been "translated" into heaven and could return to Earth.

SOLUTION.   The writer of Matthew did not alter the TJ verse quite enough; thus its mention of an apparent reincarnation as applied to John the Baptist survived into Matthew's verse, causing the problem. With reincarnation, of course, the same spirit or soul of a past life that dwells within a future body enters that body during its fetal stage, stays with it until death, and continues to reincarnate again and again in future centuries. Upon altering the TJ's Elisha into Elijah, in keeping both with the concept of Elijah having been "translated" into heaven and with the prophecy of Mal 4:5, the writer of Matthew failed to realize that his altered verse still did not make sense.

Evidently the writer of Luke altered this thought into one that would not suggest reincarnation, by writing that John would go before the Lord (Jesus) "in the spirit and power of Elijah" (Lk 1:17). From a Christian viewpoint, this was an important improvement of Luke over Matthew, indicative of the Gospel of Luke having come after Matthew, with its writer well aware of Matthew.

With John's past life having been Elisha instead of Elijah, one sees that a remark within Mt 16:14—a guess that one of Jmmanuel's past lives had been Elijah—makes more sense.[3] That is, the spirits of John and Jmmanuel, who were alive at the same time, are quite unlikely to have both been the spirit of Elijah.

In the TJ verse, "who was to come again" refers to John as being the messenger or preparer-of-the-way for Immanuel (not the messenger mentioned in Malachi 3:1), with this John being the same soul as Elisha. Thus the interpretation here is not too different from one that can be drawn from Matthew, except for Elisha having been John's past life, not Elijah.

With the TJ verse, one may interpret Mal 4:5 differently, however, than did the writer of Matthew. The Malachi verse is:

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the LORD comes.

Here, the speaker, the first-person "I", is the Old Testament God, the LORD of hosts mentioned in Mal 4:1-3, and his coming (the LORD's coming) will occur after his Earthly messenger has prepared the way for him (Mal 3:1a). This messenger is to be the reincarnation of Elijah. The rest of this website indicates that Eduard Meier or his spiritual successor may be identified as the relevant reincarnation of Elijah, with the LORD of hosts being his contactor Ptaah or his Plejaren successor, in collaboration with other Plejarens and their alien allies. This coming would occur on the terrible day when they make an overt appearance worldwide in their flying saucers or beamships or UFOs, for which Meier or his successor would hopefully have helped prepare the world.

It should be mentioned that only after 1992 did Meier learn from one of his contacting ETs that in the TJ verse above, 11:19, "Elisha" had incorrectly been translated or typed in as "Elijah"—so he corrected it to read "Elisha" in the 1996 version. (Jmmanuel and John couldn't both be the reincarnation of Elijah.) This is a complication certain to upset the scholar, who must keep in mind that an error does occasionally happen, and the dedicated editor corrects it. In this case, the error was probably occasioned by familiarity with the Matthean verse and its use of Elijah rather than Elisha, reinforced by the similarity in the two names. Those who claim the TJ to be a literary hoax at the hands of Billy Meier must contend with the fact that it is unheard of for a literary hoaxer to be so concerned with accuracy that he corrects his initial editing some 18 years later. It is furthermore quite unlikely that a hoaxer would have thought of reasonable arguments why John's past life was Elisha rather than Elijah, or would have noticed a need for making the change, inasmuch as "LORD" in Mal 4:5 is commonly interpreted as being Jesus Christ. I view these considerations as outweighing the seemingly suspicious factor that at this point in the TJ, in 1996, a name was corrected. This leaves the reality of reincarnation, as finally known from present-day evidence, as a likely topic for a wisdom teacher to have spoken about as opposed to the irreality of the translation-into-heaven hypothesis for Elijah. In balance, I find PHoax 0.25.

If one reads Jn 1:21 one finds therein that John the Baptist, when supposedly asked if he was Elijah, denied it emphatically. The scene makes no contextual sense unless one is first aware of the above verse in Matthew. Then Jn 1:19-22 appears as a response to it. But from the TJ viewpoint we know that the writer of John had had access not only to Matthew, presumably, but to the TJ, in which case he learned that John had been Elisha, not Elijah. Thus, correcting Matthew on this important point, while not in any way affirming reincarnation, might have been what prompted the writer of John to invent those particular verses.

Mt 11:19    19"The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds."

TJ 11:25-26    25"But I have come, eating and drinking, and so they say, 'Behold, what a glutton and winebibber this man is, a companion of tax collectors and the unjust.' 26Yet wisdom is justified through the acknowledged deeds."

TJ 11:25-26    25«Ich aber bin gekommen, esse und trinke, und so sagen sie: ‹Siehe, wie ist der Mensch ein Fresser und ein Weinsäufer, der Züllner und der Ungerechten Geselle›. 26Doch die Weisheit ist gerechtfertigt aus den gegebenen Werken.»

THE PROBLEM.   Beare (p. 262) noted, regarding the final sentence about wisdom, that its meaning is not clear and that its subject matter is not related to the parable that began three verses earlier.

Even Craig Blomberg, who makes great efforts to resolve contradictions within and between the Gospels, admits that this Matthean "wisdom" sentence is somewhat enigmatic.[4] His suggestion is that wisdom here may refer to the wisdom of God's plan of salvation for his people. But where is the wisdom in a plan that leaves it uncertain regarding who will be saved, and what salvation, or being like "angels in heaven," consists of?

SOLUTION.   Within the Christian framework the verse makes little sense because there Jesus is pictured as a figure of worship who can bring about one's "salvation." The TJ cognate above is essentially the same, except "I" occurs instead of "Son of man." However its last sentence has clear meaning within the TJ context that Jmmanuel's deeds were performed through his possession of wisdom of the spirit within, and that one's deeds are what to judge by, more than one's demeanor. The TJ contains much more about Jmmanuel as a man of wisdom than do the Gospels, and makes it understandable that he became known as a teacher of wisdom. This wisdom sentence appears to have survived the compiler's editing process because it did not mention spirit, while it did refer to Jmmanuel's miraculous deeds.

The verse constitutes part of an instance of Matthean "fatigue." Previous Matthean text made substitutions for the spiritual wisdom within the TJ text, especially Mt 9:5-6 relative to TJ 9:5-6. Hence, from Matthew, the reader or listener does not know that one who is very highly advanced in spiritual wisdom is capable of performing miraculous deeds. Then, here at Mt 11:19, the writer of Matthew followed the TJ too closely, failing to omit the TJ's wisdom sentence or add an explanation for it that would be compatible with Christian theology.

The fact that within the Matthean context the wisdom sentence is scarcely understandable, suggests that it was derived from some source whose relevant context was omitted. Within the TJ context the sentence is fully understandable. This has to point more favorably to the TJ as being historical than as being any hoax, and to Matthew as being the fraudulent document. PHoax 0.35.

Mt 11:20-24    20Then he [Jesus] began to upbraid the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent... 23"And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades... 24But I tell you that it shall be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you."

TJ    [No cognate]

THE PROBLEM.   Beare (p. 263) stated that it was difficult to see why these verses were placed in this location of Matthew. They imply that Jesus had ended his ministry in Galilee, and they admit that it had not brought about any general repentance by the people. Beare concluded (p. 265) that the compiler of Matthew probably meant it to be a warning to the Jews of his own day that if they did not repent and believe in Jesus, they had to expect a worse fate than what Tyre and Sidon, or Sodom, received. Mt 11:24 is moreover almost identical with Mt 10:15, which itself was judged to be a redaction, thus further indicating 11:24 to be a redaction.

SOLUTION.   Relative to the TJ, these five verses of Matthew appear as an insert, in support of Beare's perceptive analysis. One may also notice that the threat of Hades is contained within Matthew here, which looks like the signature of the compiler.

The reason the verses are not in the TJ could be because: (a) they were invented by the writer of Matthew, or (b) a literary hoaxer omitted them. Since such a hoaxer might have included the Matthean verses, or altered them, the probability is less than 1, perhaps 0.85, that he would have omitted them entirely. However, the reasons favoring (a) are strong, giving a probability of perhaps 0.9 that the writer of Matthew invented the verses (i.e., a probability of 0.1 that their absence in the TJ is due to a hoax). The accumulation of these two probabilities (0.85 and 0.1) then gives PHoax 0.4.

Mt 11:25-26    25At that time Jesus declared, "I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; 26yea, Father, for such was thy gracious will."

TJ 11:27-28    27But at this time Jmmanuel began to speak, "Praise be to Creation, maker of the skies, the universes and the Earth for keeping the knowledge and power of the consciousness hidden from the unwise and the misguided, who spread the erroneous teachings, and for revealing this knowledge to sincere seekers now. 28Yes, it has been good of Creation, and of El and his celestial sons as well, that they have thwarted until now the misuse of power among human species."

TJ 11:27-28    27Zu der Zeit hob Jmmanuel aber an und sprach: «Gepriesen sei die Schöpfung der Himmel und der Universen und der Erde, dass sie das Wissen und die Kraft des Bewusstseins allen den die irre Lehre verbreitenden Unweisen und Unklugen verborgen hat und es nun den ehrlich Suchenden offenbart. 28Ja, dies ist also wohlgefällig gewesen von der Schöpfung; also auch von Gott und von seinen Himmelssöhnen, die sie missbräuchliche Macht bisher unter den Menschengeschlechtern unterbunden haben.»

THE PROBLEMS.   The first Matthean verse makes very little sense. If the "wise" were really wise, would they not already understand these hidden things? And just what are "these things?"[5] The phrase should refer back to the preceding several sentences, but surely Jesus' upbraiding of Tyre, Chorazin and Capernaum, and a prophecy of doom for the latter city, do not constitute important things to have revealed to babes. And why reveal enigmatic things to babes, who would neither be capable of understanding any of it nor remember it in later life? Interpretation is thus necessary, but why then did Jesus not say what he meant, or explain it as he supposedly explained the parable of the weeds? The usual interpretation is that "the wise and understanding" refers to the chief priests, scribes or rabbis who only thought they were wise, and "babes" refers to the unschooled disciples and the working people (Beare, p. 265). Yet the preceding questions persist.

The second verse is subject to the same criticism, as it adds nothing of substance and nothing that brings any understanding to the first verse.

Davies & Allison remark that after Matthew's upbraiding of the cities, we might expect a complaint to follow.[6] Instead we see an unexpected prayer of thanksgiving.

SOLUTION.   The usual interpretation of Matthew, given by Beare above, comes surprisingly close to the TJ's meaning, but fails to answer the several questions posed. That is, "these things" referred to the knowledge and power of the spirit or consciousness, it was the unwise and unintelligent from whom it was kept hidden, and it was sincere seekers to whom it was being revealed. It would seem, however, that there were pitifully few sincere seekers who could understand this knowledge and none who could at that time successfully promulgate it. Otherwise, Christianity would have turned out quite differently, and would not even have had that designation.

Unlike Mt 11:26, the TJ's following verse (TJ 11:28) does add new substance, though of ambiguous meaning. It would seem to be referring to spiritual power, not physical or military power, due to the reference to "power of the consciousness" in TJ 11:26. However, no clue is given as to how or why this power was purposely withheld from humans by the ETs.

Nevertheless, the compiler's reason for editing here is again evident. As has already been noted, the concept of power of the individual's spirit was totally unacceptable, as only the power of God's spirit or the Holy Spirit could be endorsed. Nor did the compiler wish there to be any implication that church scribes dispense false teachings. Also, the mention of Creation as being distinct from El was totally unacceptable. Thus, both verses demanded heavy editing.

TJ 11:27 appears to represent the only instance recorded in which Jmmanuel outwardly prayed, or gave thanks to, true God (Creation). He apparently prayed to his own consciousness frequently, however, as suggested by the discussion of Mt 6:9-13, and by TJ 9:46.

TJ 11:28 suggests that the thwarting of misuse of power is among the information Jmmanuel learned during his 40 days of instruction under the tutelage of the celestial sons.

The expectation of Davies & Allison was not borne out because the writer of Matthew had resumed following the TJ, although in so doing making small editorial alterations. The Matthean insert of 11:20-24 caused the swing in subject matter. With the TJ, the subject is not changed as abruptly, moving from wisdom justified by deeds to knowledge newly being revealed.

That the TJ uses the word "universe" is not surprising, since Jmmanuel was taken up in his contactor's spacecraft and given 40 days' of education that included the information that some persons came from other worlds (TJ 4:26-27). That it uses the word in the plural is more surprising, since modern astronomy has only recently, circa 2000, come to view it likely that many other universes exist; Jmmanuel could have been tutored about that. To express "the universes," the Aramaic word for "all" might have been used in the form of a plural noun with article.

The fact that the TJ does not suffer from Matthew's little known problems here, despite the verses being parallels of each other, suggests Matthew's dependence upon the TJ. PHoax 0.35.

Mt 11:27    27"All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."

TJ 11:29-30    29"All things have now been given over to mankind, and no one knows the secret of Creation, not even one person, and therefore neither El nor his followers. 30And all things have now been given over to me by El, whose guardian angels taught me the laws and knowledge of nature and the laws emanating from Creation."

TJ 11:29-30    29«Und alle Dinge sind nun dem Menschen übergeben, und niemand kennt das Geheimnis der Schöpfung, so also nicht ein Mensch und so also nicht Gott oder sein Gefolge. 30Und alle Dinge sind nun mir übergeben von Gott, dessen Wächterengel mich die Gesetze und das Wissen der Natur lehrten, und die Gesetze, die von der Schöpfung ausgehen.»

THE PROBLEMS.   The verse seems too mystical to interpret clearly. Does no one know the Son except the Father? This caused Beare (p. 266) to surmise that Matthew's verse here was a reflection of theology from the Gospel of John, composed by a mystic of the early church.

The term "the Son" presumably refers to Jesus as being the Son of God. However, we have seen earlier how improbable the "Son of God" phrase itself was as a term authentically applied to Jesus during his ministry (e.g., inauthentic within the Temptation story, which is one large redaction; see also under Mt 26:63 and 27:43). Hence, a reference to himself as "the Son" is all the more improbable of being genuine. Instead, it was a later church formulation, being an abbreviation for "the Son of God."

SOLUTION.   We see that the TJ verse is quite mystical in various ways; enough of its mysticism was carried over into Matthew's gospel to cause the scholar to wrongly assume a connection with Johannine verse. Only in one other spot in Matthew (24:36) is "the Son" used by itself in this manner, that is, without being followed by "of," whereas in the Gospel of John "the Son" by itself is used over and over. Though this caused Beare to be misled, he did recognize the verse as being non-genuine.

TJ 11:29 may seem paradoxical in first saying that all things have been given to mankind and then saying that the secret of Creation has not. However, this appears to be simply a way of saying that the secret of Creation is the one exception to "all things" having been given over. This giving over of all things to Jmmanuel by El's guardian angels evidently occurred during his 40 days and nights of intensive learning at their hands.

It is easily seen how and why the writer of Matthew would have made the alterations to the TJ he appears to have done, in order to eliminate the unacceptable thought of Creation (or the Creator) being distinct from El. It is less easily seen how a literary hoaxer would have been creative enough to have altered Matthew in this fashion. PHoax 0.35.

Mt 11:28-29    28"Come to me, all who labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls."

TJ 11:31-32    31"So come to me, all you who are seeking and thirsting for knowledge and truth; I will refresh you. 32Take upon yourselves the yoke of having to learn the new teachings, for they offer enlightenment; within them you will find peace for your life."

TJ 11:31-32    31«Also kommet zu mir her alle, die ihr suchend und nach dem Wissen und der Wahrheit dürstend seid; ich will euch wohl erquicken. 32Nehmet das Joch auf euch, das Erlernenmüssen der neuen Lehre, denn sie ist die Erkennung, so ihr werdet Ruhe finden in ihr für euer Leben.»

THE PROBLEMS.   To come to Jesus to have rest sounds nice, but what would it have meant to the people listening to him if he had said it? Twelve disciples had come to him, and they were kept very busy just accompanying him all around the region, with apparently very little rest. And if he had meant "rest for your souls," what could this have meant to his listeners? He never taught about one's soul growing weary; can one's soul become tired? The closest Jesus comes to talking about this is later, at Mt 12:43, where an unclean spirit, presumably one which had possessed some person, is driven out and "passes through waterless places seeking rest" but finds none. However, this concerns a possessing spirit, not one's own spirit or soul. A teacher who wishes others to learn from him needs to utter teachings that his listeners can either understand or figure out upon thinking about them, as with parables. The present case does not fit into either category, yet Jesus' listeners were expected to learn here.

It must also be asked, what does giving rest from labor have to do with the previous verse and its emphasis upon all things having been delivered to Jesus by the Father? Only in the following verse is "learn from me" stated, but even there the context is one of rest for the soul rather than of learning.

In addition, Jesus had earlier attracted sinners and tax collectors (Mt 9:10-13), and stated that he "came not to call the righteous, but sinners." Now in the present verse he is calling those who labor and are under burden. That could include the righteous more than sinners. Such inconsistency is highly suggestive of redaction.

Finally, it must be mentioned that the preferred Greek text of Matthew contains "meek" where the Revised Version reads "gentle." Jesus was not meek, however, but confronted the scribes, Pharisees and chief priests in no uncertain terms. The man was thus neither meek nor meek of heart.

SOLUTION.   The TJ's verses here flow straight out of its preceding ones, as Jmmanuel urges people to come to him for the knowledge and truth that was given to him by El's guardian angels.

The TJ verses are consistent with Jmmanuel's theme of teaching spiritual truths, the learning of which can indeed be refreshing for those of open mind. Jmmanuel's new teaching is here described as being "enlightenment" (which stems from the German "Erkennung"). The peace that is mentioned here is then interpreted as being the peace of mind that stems from the enlightenment that will enable you to fulfill the purpose of your life.

The consistency of the TJ verses as opposed to the inconsistency of the Matthean verses indicates that only the former stemmed from a teacher of wisdom. PHoax 0.35.

Mt 11:30    30"For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

TJ 11:33    33"because the yoke of consciousness-related development is gentle, and its burden is light."

TJ 11:33    33«Denn das Joch der Bewusstseinsentfaltung ist sanft, und seine Last ist leicht.»

THE PROBLEM.   Beare (pp. 267-268) questioned whether Jesus' teachings could be considered any easier a yoke or burden than that placed upon the Jewish people by the scribes and Pharisees. In Mt 5:17-18 we find Jesus saying that the Old Testament laws must be fulfilled down to the last iota, and this is a terrific burden. Thus, much interpretation must be done to make sense out of this Matthean verse in the light of Mt 5:17-18.

SOLUTION.   With the TJ verse, the burden is light because it refers to spiritual development, which occurs naturally upon partaking of life's opportunities, and is satisfying. And since the TJ's parallels to Mt 5:17-18 are quite different in meaning, this TJ verse does not bring about a contradiction. From the rest of the TJ, we gather that spiritual development involves seeking and learning truths, listening to one's conscience, and periodically getting in touch with one's spirit through sincere prayer or meditation.

It is quite unlikely that a literary hoaxer could have anticipated Beare's criticism and then have avoided it in such a simple, straightforward way. PHoax 0.2.

Upon accumulating the individual probabilities against the hoax hypothesis from the verse comparisons of Mt 11 versus TJ 11 we find the summary probability for hoax here to be 0.00021. (These subjective estimates are not, of course, accurate to two digits; the 2nd digit is retained only for the purpose of later reduction of round-off error upon further accumulation.)

Go Back to:
Make Comment in: Go On to:
Verse Comparison, Introduction & Index                                    my Blog                                         Matthew 12


1. Friedman, Richard Elliott, Who Wrote the Bible? (New York: Summit Books, 1987), p. 29.

2. Broadus, John A., Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1886), p. 236.

3. In the 1978 and 1992 versions of the TJ, it reads "Elijah" here instead of "Elisha," just as in Matthew. Only around 1992 did Eduard Meier learn from one of his ET contactors that this was an error incurred either by the man who translated the Aramaic TJ into German, or by the later typist whom Meier employed to set the TJ manuscript into print.

4. Blomberg, Craig L., The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1987), p. 124.

5. Davies, W. D. and Allison, Dale C., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), p. 276.

6. Davies & Allison, A Critical Commentary, p. 273.

hit counter