Amen and the unity of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam

[reece1984]

If you were cognizant of what it takes to be a great EE designer, then you would know the importance of being able to back up your design with verifable theory down to the component-level which comprise your design.

Any EE could defend the components which make up his design.

However, you are unable to take the very scripture that you are using to make your 'argument', down to the component-level.

Why is that, Nick?

Were you a poor engineer to begin with...is that why you cannot defend the Greek word and grammar components that comprise the very premise of your 'argument', brother?

Your book is of poor design...and is a reflection of the quality of the work of the author.

Nick doesn't realize that he is contradicting himself.

[Bowman]

Nick doesn't realize that he is contradicting himself.

Right...

When engineers discover that they cannot design - they move into management.

Managing garbage.

Just like bother Nick.

[Tanakh Keeper]

To me, the Bible is a work in progress. It is not finished. There are many areas of improvement that can better enlighten mankind to lead truthful and righteous lives. There are thoughts within the Bible that I treasure but also, there are thoughts or ideas that I cannot agree with.

Hi Nick

I’m surprised that a logical fellow like yourself can’t see the flaw within your own argument. You state that the word of G-d is simply to love one another and you base your conclusion on the bible itself. However, you also state that much of the bible has been falsified by men. Then how can you possibly know which parts were falsified? Perhaps the parts that relate to “love one another” have been falsified. Once you state that one part of the bible is false, that renders any part of the bible to be subject to a claim of falsification. You have no valid argument if someone else claims the “love one another” part is false, but a part that you don’t like is true.

[Nick Ginex]

Ginex Responses, April 26, 2011

Reece, thank you for your research to explain the Torah was not written by several Hebrew priests after the death of Moses around 1210 BCE. Considering that the Torah was written around 950 BCE, about 260 years after Moses died, I found the J, E, JE, P, and D narratives to be plausible, especially since I used the religious work of an imminent Jewish scholar, Max I, Dimont; using his book, Jews, God and History. The scholars you referred to were ardent Jewish and Christian men who were strongly defensive in assuring that the Bible is not discredited. You have found that I do not discredit the existence of Moses and made certain that readers are aware it was Moses who wrote the Book of the Covenant. You seemed to have overlooked the fact that the opening lines of Genesis were not originally created but were an extension of the hymns written by the Egyptians. Please read on Pages 226 through 228, the extreme similarity between Ikhnaton’s Hymn and the Re-Isis Myth with lines used in Genesis. It is no accident that Genesis used the same nouns depicting heaven, earth, water, birds, fishes, cattle, creeping things and man. Also, it is considered plagiarism in the similarities of Psalm 104:24 and Ikhnaton’s, The Hymn to the Aton.

Apparently Reese, you have no faith in the Theory of Evolution and consider it to be a false theory just as the Church Fathers disputed the fact by Galileo that the earth revolved around the sun. You fault liberal scholars of the Evolution Theory as committed to Theological Naturalism - ruling out any possibility of a supernatural God; that they were set out to deconstruct the Old Testament and, were especially interested in the Torah since it appeared to contradict much of their dogma. This is a very unfair way to attack the scientists who have found archeological evidence that the earth and mankind have been around for millions of years. Many of these men were possibly ardent believers in God. Perhaps not the God you envision, but definitely a God that helps to shape their moral convictions to lead a righteous life.

Reese, you ended your long defensive dissertation that the Torah was a completed work by one person. Can you indicate who that person was? You then implied my book as bordering as a work of ‘garbage’ by stating about the Evolution Theory, “How odd that a system can continue to enjoy some kind of existence long after its very foundations have crumbled!! I won’t describe your book as “garbage,” but I will describe the JEDP theory as “garbage.”

You will find that I never used derogatory words against the religions or their proponents that have given us the belief in God. Future of God Amen was written to give a detailed account, based upon facts and findings, not suppositions and revelations, how man came to believe in one-universal God.

To support your argument about how the Torah was written, please provide the author(s) of this great work. Also, please provide when the Torah was completed and when it was taught to the Israelites. Perhaps you could help me correct portions of Future of God Amen.

[Nick Ginex]

Reece, that’s fine to not agree with many issues. You are still important to me because I do appreciate other points of view and am willing to modify mine in the search for truth.

[Nick Ginex]

Reece, I agree that Jesus is the Son of God. Where we differ is that I believe the accounts of Matthew and Luke who wrote it was the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of God) that conceived Mary to create the Son of God. I do not believe in the Trinity that infers Jesus is co-equal and co-eternal with God. This is truly a fabrication by John and the Church Fathers to raise Jesus to the level of a God. You forget that Jesus himself explicitly states in all four Gospels that he was the Son of Man 76 times and only in the Gospel of John does he say 5 times that he is the Son of God. I only believe what Jesus says and do not place any trust in the words of others.

There is no issue in believing Jesus as the Son of God but because Jesus first came into existence as a Son of Man. I believe Jesus and not the Church Fathers. God embraced Jesus as His Son because He gave Jesus to the world to deliver His Word, - love one another. Tell me Reece, do you see anything objectionable or incorrect by what I have written in these three sentences? Is it not amazing how few Christians praise the Word of God given as a Command 3 times? Jesus delivered the Word and is not the Word because God gave the Word through Jesus. This is a fundamental command most Christians are unaware of. I wonder why? Is it because the Church Fathers have misconstrued the opening thee lines of John’s Gospel? Let us repeat them for readers to understand the true meaning of those lines:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

John 1:3 All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.

John’s opening lines makes it clear that the Word is God and He is the Creator of all there is. This means that God created Jesus within the womb of Mary to deliver the Word of God – love one another.

Tell me Reece, is that so hard to accept? Yes it is hard if you still believe in the Trinity which was forced among Christians to believe or die of heresy. Thousands of Christians were killed and burned at the stake to believe this fabrication. How nice!! To believe the Trinity as existing of three ‘Persons’ is heresy because it promotes the belief in polytheism.

[Nick Ginex]

Reece, I thought you were going to give some very good critiques of Future of God Amen, instead you go on and on to espouse your belief that God taught mankind everything he needed to know about living a moral and righteous life. You have offered no evidence of God teaching mankind how to live a moral and righteous life. The only evidence man has are the writings by the Egyptians and Hebrew as recorded in their hymns and scriptures. If all you want to do is go with your beliefs that is fine; but when you do, provide evidence like I have in Future of God Amen. I do not try to convince anybody of my beliefs but only reveal knowledge about the beginnings of God very few people have been exposed to.

Tell me what did you think of the critiques given for the Hebrew, Christian, and Muslim scriptures? More importantly, there are many recommendations provided in the last chapter for all God-loving people to read and hopefully support. If believers of God do not accept the beginnings of their beliefs as did Jesus Christ, then it is true, the religions will crumble and die because of arrogant and stupid men who have lost their mission in life to teach the children of God to – love one another.

[Bowman]

Reece, I agree that Jesus is the Son of God. Where we differ is that I believe the accounts of Matthew and Luke who wrote it was the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of God) that conceived Mary to create the Son of God. I do not believe in the Trinity that infers Jesus is co-equal and co-eternal with God. This is truly a fabrication by John and the Church Fathers to raise Jesus to the level of a God. You forget that Jesus himself explicitly states in all four Gospels that he was the Son of Man 76 times and only in the Gospel of John does he say 5 times that he is the Son of God. I only believe what Jesus says and do not place any trust in the words of others.

There is no issue in believing Jesus as the Son of God but because Jesus first came into existence as a Son of Man. I believe Jesus and not the Church Fathers. God embraced Jesus as His Son because He gave Jesus to the world to deliver His Word, - love one another. Tell me Reece, do you see anything objectionable or incorrect by what I have written in these three sentences? Is it not amazing how few Christians praise the Word of God given as a Command 3 times? Jesus delivered the Word and is not the Word because God gave the Word through Jesus. This is a fundamental command most Christians are unaware of. I wonder why? Is it because the Church Fathers have misconstrued the opening thee lines of John’s Gospel? Let us repeat them for readers to understand the true meaning of those lines:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

John 1:3 All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.

John’s opening lines makes it clear that the Word is God and He is the Creator of all there is. This means that God created Jesus within the womb of Mary to deliver the Word of God – love one another.

Tell me Reece, is that so hard to accept? Yes it is hard if you still believe in the Trinity which was forced among Christians to believe or die of heresy. Thousands of Christians were killed and burned at the stake to believe this fabrication. How nice!! To believe the Trinity as existing of three ‘Persons’ is heresy because it promotes the belief in polytheism.

Right on cue, Nick.

You keep reposting the very same paragraphs over and over and over and over and over again.

Why don't you actually start defending them?

[Bowman]

Nick,

Is it safe to say that your 'investment' in your book is suffering from flagging sales?

[Nick Ginex]

Tanakh, you need to be realistic; not all parts of the Bible are untrue just because certain biblical authors committed errors and being overzealous created myths, like God’s (Noah’s) Flood. The Bible is a work in progress. It is not an infallible document because mankind is still evolving based upon the knowledge he has received from former generations.

What I have brought out is that there are infantile interpretations by people who have read the Bible, such as the Trinity. You, as a Judaic follower of God should be able to realize that the Son of God cannot be God the Father and precedes God in the beginning for that is a contradiction. To believe the Son of God existed before God and created all there is not only a poor interpretation of John’s Gospel but heresy because it promotes the belief in polytheism.

Just as the Egyptians made many false starts in evolving their conception of God, so have the scriptures of the Judaic, Christian, and Islamic religions have their faults, which consist of inconsistencies and myths. Only a fool will throw out the baby with the bath water. No, I have a deep respect for the scriptures written to improve the morality of mankind but improvements are always possible. It takes people who are courageous and perceptive who are willing to challenge ideas of the past and improve upon them. Nothing in life is fixed and cast in concrete; that includes the Scripturesof the Judaic, Christian, and Islamic religions.

I recommend that you read Future of God Amen for there is a wealth of facts and findings that will benefit your understanding of our belief in God, which is a good thing and is advocated in the book.

[Nick Ginex]

Reece, April 26, 2011 Response in BLUE: Ginex Responses in RED, April 28, 2011:

Originally posted by Bowman:

If you were cognizant of what it takes to be a great EE designer, then you would know the importance of being able to back up your design with verifable theory down to the component-level which comprise your design.

Any EE could defend the components which make up his design.

However, you are unable to take the very scripture that you are using to make your 'argument', down to the component-level.

Why is that, Nick?

Were you a poor engineer to begin with...is that why you cannot defend the Greek word and grammar components that comprise the very premise of your 'argument', brother?

Your book is of poor design...and is a reflection of the quality of the work of the author.

Reece: Nick doesn't realize that he is contradicting himself.

Reece, I am surprise that you would stoop to the level of Mr. Bowman who throws stones, is insulting, and derogatory about the book Future of God Amen. Mr. Bowman did not and would not read the book to make intelligent responses to refute those areas or conclusions presented. This man is afraid to deal with facts and findings that have been verified by respected religious scholars of history and Egyptologists. This is the sign of an arrogant and insecure man who thinks he knows it all but lacks the discipline and decency to read the book and challenge my conclusions. Actually, unlike you, he has no cause to make any judgments or comments about Future of God Amen because he does not have the courtesy to read it.

I admired your discipline to read and critique Future of God Amen. I hope you do not play second fiddle to Mr. Bowman. You are a better man than Mr. Bowman who has little or no integrity.

Let us continue our discussion of the issues you raise in the book for that is how we learn from each other. Please answer the following questions I raised in your responses to me.

• Tell me what did you think of the critiques given for the Hebrew, Christian, and Muslim scriptures?

• More importantly, there are many recommendations provided in the last chapter for all God-loving people to read and hopefully support. What did you think of the recommendations given?

• It is amazing how few Christians praise the Word of God given as a Command 3 times. Jesus delivered the Word. It was God who gave the Word to Jesus. This is a fundamental command most Christians are unaware of. I wonder why? Is it because the Church Fathers have misconstrued the opening three lines of John’s Gospel? Let us repeat them for readers to understand the true meaning of those lines:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.

John’s opening lines makes it clear that the Word is God and He is the Creator of all there is. This means that God created Jesus within the womb of Mary to deliver the Word of God – love one another. Tell me Reece, is that so hard to accept? The Word was from God for only God was in the beginning of time, not His Son – unless you believe in two Gods and are subscribing to a polytheistic belief. To say the Word is Jesus is saying the Son of God came before God and that is, if not heresy, an infantile interpretation of the first three lines of John’s Gospel. Some people, like Mr. Bowman, even claims Jesus is God!! How ridiculous; It is plausible to claim Jesus is the Son of God but to say he is God is a stretch of the imagination and shows how an intelligent man can be thoroughly brainwashed to believe anything. Mr. Bowman shows no respect for God the Father and Creator of all there is. This the the one-universal God Abraham and Moses spoke to.

• Reese, you ended your long defensive dissertation that the Torah was a completed work by one person. Can you indicate who that person was? To support your argument about how the Torah was written, please provide the author(s) of this great work. Also, please provide when the Torah was completed and taught to the Israelites. Perhaps you could help me correct portions of Future of God Amen.

• Reece, I would be interested to learn how you substantiate the 1513 BCE date for the Moses Exodus. You disagree with the 1250 BCE date; but I have provided factual evidence that supports it.

• Did Moses receive a command from God to kill 3,000 of his own people because of the golden calf episode? I believe it was Moses, not God that committed the abominable deed!

• Were the Egyptians guided by God or did they conceive of a system of justice all by themselves?

• Have you ever tried to count the number of people tortured, killed, and burned at the stake for heresy regarding the Trinity? I can give you some data if you are interested.

• Reece, are you surprised that the authors of the Bible could name the co-conspirators’ that assisted Abraham in his conquests but fail to name the Pharaoh who brought up and raised Moses for over 40 years? The authors of the Bible also failed to name the Pharaoh who appointed Joseph 2nd in command of his army. Are the authors hiding relevent information that could be embarrassing to the authenticity of their scripture?

• Reece, the Hebrews were a chosen people that only desired to keep God for themselves. If they were truly children of God they would spread His Word of truth, righteousness, and justice to all other children of God. But no, they were self-indulgent to believen they were better than their neighbors. Could this be one of the reasons people from other nations could not get along with God’s chosen people? Could this also be a reason why God has punished them for not spreading his name to all people?

• Yes, in 1.5 John says Jesus is the faithful witness. But in 3:14, it is Jesus who says it is Amen who is the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God. It cannot be Jesus because he could not exist in the beginning before God since he is the Son of God conceived by God’s Spirit within the womb of Mary. Two previous Gospels, Matthew and Luke, attest to the fact that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. How can two Gospels be inconsistent with the Gospel of John?

• What did you feel was worth learning about how the God Amen advanced from the Egyptian’s first belief in a creator god, Atum? You will note that it took over 2 to 3,000 years before the Priesthood of Amon wrote Amon As the Sole God.

• Are you impressed with the scriptures of the Egyptians and that there are ideas and phrases the Hebrew priests emulated in Genesis and some Hebrew hymns?

Well Reece, I believe there are enough questions for you to reflect on and where possible, challenge what I have written. I am always open to the truth. Let it be known that Future of God Amen was accepted for use in the Library of Alexandria in Egypt. Sales of the book is as well as can be expected and will rise much further in the future because it gives an objective presentation of how man first conceived one-universal God.

Nicholas P. Ginex

[Bowman]

Reece, I am surprise that you would stoop to the level of Mr. Bowman who throws stones, is insulting, and derogatory about the book Future of God Amen. Mr. Bowman did not and would not read the book to make intelligent responses to refute those areas or conclusions presented. This man is afraid to deal with facts and findings that have been verified by respected religious scholars of history and Egyptologists. This is the sign of an arrogant and insecure man who thinks he knows it all but lacks the discipline and decency to read the book and challenge my conclusions. Actually, unlike you, he has no cause to make any judgments or comments about Future of God Amen because he does not have the courtesy to read it.

If you bothered to read brother Reece's last comment, I believe that he is finished with you, Nick.

Further, if you were adult enough, you should address me directly, and not sideways such as your are presently doing.

Further still, yes, I have read the book of garbage that you keep promoting as if it were a work of art.

I have even presented direct quotes from your trash-bin and you refused to even reply.

As we can see, you have not come into this debate forum to debate anything - but rather you have come here just to promote your compost heap as if it meant anything at all, to anyone.

[Nick Ginex]

Amen and the unity of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam



Jump to Post Originally posted by Nick Ginex
Reece, I am surprise that you would stoop to the level of Mr. Bowman who throws stones, is insulting, and derogatory about the book Future of God Amen. Mr. Bowman did not and would not read the book to make intelligent responses to refute those areas or conclusions presented. This man is afraid to deal with facts and findings that have been verified by respected religious scholars of history and Egyptologists. This is the sign of an arrogant and insecure man who thinks he knows it all but lacks the discipline and decency to read the book and challenge my conclusions. Actually, unlike you, he has no cause to make any judgments or comments about Future of God Amen because he does not have the courtesy to read it.


If you bothered to read brother Reece's last comment, I believe that he is finished with you, Nick.

Further, if you were adult enough, you should address me directly, and not sideways such as your are presently doing.

Further still, yes, I have read the book of garbage that you keep promoting as if it were a work of art.

I have even presented direct quotes from your trash-bin and you refused to even reply.

As we can see, you have not come into this debate forum to debate anything - but rather you have come here just to promote your compost heap as if it meant anything at all, to anyone.

Yea!! Mr. Bowman I have underestimated your ability to read Future of God Amen and to give constructive comments instead of throwing stones, insulting me, and referring to Future of God Amen as “garbage.” I would love to join you in a debate about conclusions made in the book and why you think otherwise. I am not one to resort to name calling and throwing stones but enjoy dealing with facts and findings.

One request, if you would like to debate any portion of the book, please identify the Page No. or quote the passage as you see fit.

I am sorry that Mr. Reece appears to be incapable to carry on the debate by not answering the many questions I put to him, Response dated April 28, 2011, 3:39 PM. Perhaps, as a start, why don’t you try to answer the questions I provided for Reece. By doing so, it could clear the air of several issues. One thing we must agree on and that is to disagree amicably as gentlemen. No sense beating a dead horse. Alternately, if you like, and I would appreciate your efforts, please start with Chapter One with any issues that arise for you and work each Chapter to the end; in that way, I know you have read the book in its entirety.

I do want you to know that in spite of your past comments, I do respect your intelligence and knowledge of the Bible. I am willing to forget whatever stones you have thrown at me and begin a friendship with you. I know that there is much I can learn from you. Where I can, I will take your comments very seriously and try to work them into a greater understanding of my religious views. I hope you are capable of doing the same for we are trying to assist one another in the belief of God.

[Bowman]

One request, if you would like to debate any portion of the book, please identify the Page No. or quote the passage as you see fit.
.

As a former EE, you should be familar with FIFO.

As such, Rev 3.14 has been in queue the longest and seems to be the centerpiece Biblical verse for your 'argument'.

That being the case, you repeatedly mention this verse as truth all the way through your book (i.e. V, pp. 89, 163, 165, 166, 225, 321, 334, 341) however, you never bother to properly exegete the Greek.

In fact, you blatantly ignore grammar, syntax, and semantics altogether.

Let's give you a chance to redeem yourself by going over each and every Greek word in this verse so that we can see who has the best possible understanding of the original intent.

You have run from this challenge before.

Let's watch you run again.

[Bowman]

Where for art thou, brother Nick?