> WHY יהושע, I.E. JESUS, IS NOT THE JEWISH MESSIAH IF יהוה is the LORD
>
> Many Christians claim that יהוה is the LORD and Elohim, while his son
> יהושע is the Messiah.
>
> All Jews reject this and rightfully so.  If it were true, don't you
> think there would be at least one passage in the old testament to that
> effect, saying, oh, by the way, יהוה has a son named יהושע and he will
> come as the Messiah?
>
> But there is no such passage, not even the hint of such a passage, and
> so the theory of these “Christians” is rightfully rejected by almost
> all Jews as unfounded according to the Jewish religion.
>
> Now, my hypothesis, however distasteful it may be to Jews, is a
> possibility they cannot altogether deny if they wish to be thought of
> as rational human beings.
>
> I claim that Moshe did not know the true identity of the LORD, and
> this is signified by the fact that the LORD would not allow Moshe to
> see HIS face, according to the account of Moshe's enlightenment
> experience that is given in Exodus itself.
>
> I claim that the true name of the LORD is יהושע or JHVSA or Jehoshua
> Moshiach, aka Jesus Christ.  I claim that JHVH is the Divine Name of
> the angel Gabriel, even as I AM THAT I AM = EHYEH ASHER EHYEH = AHJH
> ASR AHJH is the Divine Name of the angel Michael, who is the angel of
> the LORD seen by Moshe in the burning bush.  When it says that the
> LORD knew Moshe face to face, it means that HE knew him face to face
> through HIS angel, namely Michael as I AM THAT I AM.  It is from
> Michael that Moshe received his prophetic utterances, known
> collectively as the Torah, even as Mohammed received his prophetic
> utterances, known as the Koran, from the angel Gabriel.
>
> The LORD HIMSELF was very clear that Moshe could not see HIS face,
> i.e. know who and what HE truly is, and live.  That is why the
> teaching of Jehoshua Moshiach emphasized the willingness to die to see
> G-D.  Even Jesus Himself had to die in order to return to His own
> rightful estate as the LORD G-D.  The angel of the LORD, Michael =
> Mahavatar Babaji = ABBA = the Heavenly Father of Jehoshua Moshiach,
> while He was incarnated as Jesus Christ.  Hence the statement of
> Jesus:  "Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or
> else believe me for the very works' sake."  (John 14:11)
>
> My conjecture, if true, points to the reconciliation of the three
> great monotheistic religions.  The alternative is endless fighting,
> for none of the three will relinquish their claims.  The Jews suffer
> more than anyone from the sin of Moshe in fabricating the name of the
> LORD.  The penalty for that sin, multiplied by the ongoing
> participation of all Jews, was the destruction of the Temple and
> diaspora, i.e. sangsara, that will last forever, unless the Jews
> somehow discover the Truth and repent.
>
> As a half Jew myself, I am not just proselytizing or evangelizing.  I
> am simply sharing what seems to work for me in finding a Truth of the
> Bible that is not monstrous, but is instead both believable and
> intelligible.  Moreover, as a physicist interested in the foundations
> of quantum theory, I am interested in finding a Truth that will answer
> our deepest questions about reality.  I believe I have found it.
>
> THE SIMPLE ABBREVIATED TRUTH ABOUT G-D
>
> The simple abbreviated truth is that Moses could only see the backside
> of the LORD he saw in the burning bush, and so he could not discern
> His true identity.  You can't identify someone from behind, especially
> if you don't already know who they are.  The true name of the LORD was
> and is JEHOSHUA, or JHVSA, not JHVH.  The entire Torah and all
> secondary literature is in a sense a great big fraud, and you can see
> that if you go back to its origin in the actual experience of Moses as
> described within the Torah itself.  Dogma is only as good as the depth
> of enlightenment of the one or ones fashioning the dogma.
>
> BTW, Moses did see the angel of the LORD in the burning bush, and it
> was the LORD through that same angel who knew him face to face. Never,
> according to the Torah, was there face to face contact between the
> LORD Himself and Moses.  The LORD absolutely forbade that.
>
> SCRIPTURAL PROOF OF MY CONJECTURE
>
> From:  http://www.answering-christianity.com/godtitle.htm:
>
> “Mighty God” in Isaiah 9:6 is “El Gibor”.  This is not exactly “Mighty
> God,” but close.  “Strong" is more correct (but it is different from
> strong of “hazak”).  Here both El and Gibor are nouns – this is short
> full spell is “El Hu Gibor.”
>
> Anyway “El Gibor” and “Gabriel” are same thing.  They both mean
> “Strong God.” “Gabriel” is an angel's name in the Bible.
>
> The word “Gibor” in Isaiah 9:6 and the word “Gibor” of Gabriel have
> exactly the same root, and they are both the same word.  The word
> itself can also be translated as “Man of God.”  [END QUOTE]
>
> So, the very passage used by Christians to prove that Yeshua is the
> Jewish Messiah, instead proves that Jews and Christians alike worship
> the Antichrist, the Abomination of Desolation, namely the angel
> Gabriel in the holy place of the LORD, where he ought not to sit.
>
> Now the Gabriel that responds to the invocations of Jews and
> Christians alike is NOT the holy angel Gabriel, for he would not
> imposter the LORD.  Rather, it is an astral plane imposter of the
> angel Gabriel, who is himself a fallen angel of the worst sort.
>
> All of the monstrosities of the old testament, as well as those same
> monstrosities carried over into the new testament by the
> misunderstandings of the disciples of Jesus, are the work of this
> fallen angel imposter of the LORD.
>
> Now, this is not to say that the formula in Isaiah is entirely false.
> In Judaism the usual designation for the one that is worshipped is
> “LORD God.”  God, or El, aka Eloah, aka Elohim, is the suffix found in
> the name of each Archangel:  Micha-el, Gibor-el, etc.  Furthermore, it
> is well-known that ALLAH comes from AL ILAH, where ILAH is equated to
> ELOAH.
>
> So, Islam is that religion wherein the angel of the LORD can actually
> be the LORD, but that is not the case with Judaism, which is a
> Messianic religion geared toward the advent of Jehoshua Moshiach, the
> LORD, designated by the letters JHVSA.  One can only conclude that the
> child referred to in Isaiah 9:6 is Mohammad.  He is called a child in
> the same sense that Moshe is sometimes referred to as a child.  There
> may be a reference by implication to Moshiach, yet another child, but
> the passage literally refers to Mohammad, the messenger of ALLAH
> through the angel Gibor-el, whose Divine Name is JHVH.
>
> Moshe was confused about this and all subsequent Jewish prophets and
> rabbinical commentators were also confused.  Moshe's confusion began
> with his enlightenment experience, wherein he saw the LORD in the
> burning bush, but only HIS back parts could he see.  From that limited
> experience, he could not properly identify the LORD.
>
> HOW THE DELUSION THAT JHVH IS THE LORD BEGAN
>
> I don't see a contradiction between the fact that Eve said she had
> gotten a man from JHVH and the fact that the Patriarchs did not know
> the name JHVH.  Eve's delusion was that the LORD was JHVH.  She got
> that from the serpent.  Moshe ben Adam inherited that delusion from
> his line of Jewish mothers.  What could be more natural.  The delusion
> had gone into remission at the time of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but
> resurfaced again with Moshe.
>
> Eve's belief that JHVH is the LORD is like an Oedipal complex.  Its
> remission at the time of the Patriarchs is like the period of
> latency.  Its re-emergence at the time of Moshe is like puberty, where
> the Oedipal complex resurfaces, but this time resolved and integrated
> into the social aspect of life.  The question is whether the
> integration into social life is adequate or psychotic.  That is a
> matter of personal judgment.  I believe that the monstrosities of the
> old testament tip the balance scale toward the psychotic.  It would be
> far better from the spiritual point of view to just uproot the Oedipal
> complex altogether and establish a new foundation for the structure of
> the psyche.  That is the idea of a new testament and covenant.
>
> THE SECRET DOCTRINE OF MONOTHEISM UNVEILED
>
> Exodus
> 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh
> unto his friend.
> 33:18 And he said, I beseech thee, show me thy glory.
> 33:19 And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I
> will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious
> to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show
> mercy.
> 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man
> see me, and live.
> 33:21 And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou
> shalt stand upon a rock:
> 33:22 And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I
> will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand
> while I pass by:
> 33:23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back
> parts: but my face shall not be seen.
>
> Deuteronomy
> 34:10 And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses,
> whom the LORD knew face to face...
>
> Now, how are we to understand this apparent contradiction?  It is
> essential, for the understanding of who and what G-D is depends upon
> it.  On the one hand, the LORD speaks to Moses face to face, and yet
> Moses cannot see His face at all, but only His backside.  Before we
> make an attempt at an exegesis, we must consider also the following:
>
> Exodus
> 3:2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out
> of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned
> with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
> 3:3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight,
> why the bush is not burnt.
> 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto
> him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said,
> Here am I.
> 3:5 And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy
> feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.
> 3:6 Moreover he ...
>
> read more »