Proof god is man made

[Willum]

A disturbing argument using Roman letters. Can anyone think of solid arguments against, not called into question by the assertions?

Jesus =, in Roman letters; Iezeus which means Ie = shining, Zeus = Zeus

He was made the son of “God� which means divine, which in Latin is IOVIS, or Jove.  I <--> J.

It is said that once a year the high priest of Judaism reaffirms bonds with god by reassembling his name into the true word of god, speaking his name.

Christianity was created and canonized officially by Titus.
The word of god became important.

In the 3rd century BC, a crude monotheistic religion was created by the Ptolemaic Kings to subjugate their peoples.

In the fifth century AD (?) Jewish put their stamp in the religion further by incorporation of Jove.

Jove = Iove = Iovea or Jehova, thus making Judaism the king of the Roman religion. Before this Jehovah had been a god very like Marduk in the Canaanite pantheon.

However, and the proof of the word of god comes in the pun and anagram:

JOVE is pronounced EIOVA rearranging the letters of god's name becomes, AEIOV or A-E-I-O-U..

Or the vowels of the Latin Alphabet. Which, at the time was still novel. Words were power, the revolutionized alphabet and its ability to communicate anything, was an analogy to god. Thus the word of god is just that, words. Apparently, the designers of Christianity had a sense of humor. The bible was made a study guide. The coincidence with the new Roman language and its revolutionary vowels allowed a unique opportunity.
Jewish people further enjoy the joke, because they believe they worship a true god, that Christians support them via the Old Testament, but have been tricked into believing in a false, or a least lesser one. Hence the Jewish expression, “Why talk to the son, when you can talk to the Father?�

It unified and controlled the Roman and Jewish world of the time so well, it plunged them both into the dark ages, where things that should not have been forgotten, were lost.

So how is this proof? It is the null hypothesis: If god existed, and allowed this “coincidence� it wouldn't be a test of faith, it would be a rape of it, that only a complete fool would follow. Now men on the other hand would think this was funny, an Easter Egg for the vellum word.

[Wootah]

If it is a trick and the payoff has been so huge for humanity why aren't you following along with the trick?

[AdHoc]

A disturbing argument using Roman letters. Can anyone think of solid arguments against, not called into question by the assertions?

Jesus =, in Roman letters; Iezeus which means Ie = shining, Zeus = Zeus

He was made the son of “God� which means divine, which in Latin is IOVIS, or Jove.  I <--> J.

It is said that once a year the high priest of Judaism reaffirms bonds with god by reassembling his name into the true word of god, speaking his name.

Christianity was created and canonized officially by Titus.
The word of god became important.

In the 3rd century BC, a crude monotheistic religion was created by the Ptolemaic Kings to subjugate their peoples.

In the fifth century AD (?) Jewish put their stamp in the religion further by incorporation of Jove.

Jove = Iove = Iovea or Jehova, thus making Judaism the king of the Roman religion. Before this Jehovah had been a god very like Marduk in the Canaanite pantheon.

However, and the proof of the word of god comes in the pun and anagram:

JOVE is pronounced EIOVA rearranging the letters of god's name becomes, AEIOV or A-E-I-O-U..

Or the vowels of the Latin Alphabet. Which, at the time was still novel. Words were power, the revolutionized alphabet and its ability to communicate anything, was an analogy to god. Thus the word of god is just that, words. Apparently, the designers of Christianity had a sense of humor. The bible was made a study guide. The coincidence with the new Roman language and its revolutionary vowels allowed a unique opportunity.
Jewish people further enjoy the joke, because they believe they worship a true god, that Christians support them via the Old Testament, but have been tricked into believing in a false, or a least lesser one. Hence the Jewish expression, “Why talk to the son, when you can talk to the Father?�

It unified and controlled the Roman and Jewish world of the time so well, it plunged them both into the dark ages, where things that should not have been forgotten, were lost.

Interesting, how did you discover this and why do you believe it? I view this as similar to how various people seem to be able to make any prominent world leader's name work out to 666. It's cute but I'm not going to assign a whole lot of weight to it.

So how is this proof? It is the null hypothesis: If god existed, and allowed this “coincidence� it wouldn't be a test of faith, it would be a rape of it, that only a complete fool would follow. Now men on the other hand would think this was funny, an Easter Egg for the vellum word.

Why would God care if there was a coincidence like this? And if we are not God how could we claim to know God's thoughts or ways? Wouldn't we expect them to be higher than our thoughts and His ways more mysterious?

I always find it interesting when people say they know what God would or wouldn't do if He hasn't expressly stated it.

I think to myself, "Really?... Are you God? Does He work by your leave."

[Elijah John]

Interesting, but a stretch, an amusing "conspiracy theory" IMO.

First, Jesus is a man, not God. So to disprove Jesus supposed Divinity in any way, does not disprove the existence of God. And his real name was Yehoshua, not Jesus, which is a Greek rendering.

2nd, It is not Jehova, it is YHVH in the Hebrew alphabet. The tetragrammaton.

Two distortions right off the bat.

The supposed linguistic connections of the Hebrew God to Pagan gods is tenuous at best with this theory.

[connermt]

[Replying to post 1 by Willum]

If god existed, and allowed this “coincidence� it wouldn't be a test of faith, it would be a rape of it, that only a complete fool would follow.

Word and letters games aren't needed for the 'fool' part to be true.
The christian concept, as accepted by most today, is foolish, illogical and easily seen to be man made - nothing more. Interesting way of going about it though!

Interesting, but a stretch, an amusing "conspiracy theory" IMO.

First, Jesus is a man, not God.

Not all christians would agree with that. So perhaps, you're wrong...?

[Danmark]

Interesting, but a stretch, an amusing "conspiracy theory" IMO.

First, Jesus is a man, not God. So to disprove Jesus supposed Divinity in any way, does not disprove the existence of God. And his real name was Yehoshua, not Jesus, which is a Greek rendering.

2nd, It is not Jehova, it is YHVH in the Hebrew alphabet. The tetragrammaton.

Two distortions right off the bat.

The supposed linguistic connections of the Hebrew God to Pagan gods is tenuous at best with this theory.

Agreed.
The word games and cute tricks are no more convincing when employed by non theists than when touted by theists.

I remember back in my Christian days in Jr. and Sr. high school, some special guest speaker would come in with one of these mathematical or word derivation arguments. One version was to the number of times this or that word appeared ore where it appeared. Even as a believer these approaches made me gag. The tricks seem so transparently designed to sway the unsophisticated. This is not precisely the approach of the OP, which calls for a historical-critical approach as well as linguistic analysis. But the evidence presented so far is at best, thin.

[Zzyzx]

.

The word games and cute tricks are no more convincing when employed by non theists than when touted by theists.

The tricks seem so transparently designed to sway the unsophisticated.

I agree 100%

AND, tricks are not necessary or convincing (except perhaps to the naive).

It seems to me very foolish to attempt to prove that "gods" do not exist (by any means) since proving absolute non-existence is impossible. There might be one of whatever is in question hiding behind a yet undiscovered planet in an unknown solar system.

A far more effective approach is to invite those who claim knowledge concerning "gods" to demonstrate their knowledge with verifiable evidence. Failure to do so is some indication of lack of knowledge and invalidity of claims.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 7 by Zzyzx]

I know it hasn't occurred to you, and I am not surprised, but you are using word games to disprove the word games. But since I am claiming word games are word games, and you are claiming word games are valid, you see where I have the advantage.

It is good if you want to side-step the issue, and pretend these transformations don't exist, despite your having read them.

I am showing the name, when rearranged in the holiest of holies, becomes AEIOU. You can claim it is something else, but it is, it is right there. AEIOU --> Eiova, Jehova. Pronunciation is not history's strong suit.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 3 by AdHoc]

It is similar to how people make world leaders name work out to 666.

However, you must admit, it is much more simple and powerful than those calisthenics. It is also the point of the argument. Not that someone can make Obama into a beast, but the god was made from the alphabet, and Jehovah, a pagan Canaanite god, was integrated into the falsehood.

Not being argumentative: Asking the question, do you see the difference, or at least see how the point is very different?

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 7 by Zzyzx]

I know it hasn't occurred to you, and I am not surprised, but you are using word games to disprove the word games. But since I am claiming word games are word games, and you are claiming word games are valid, you see where I have the advantage.

It is good if you want to side-step the issue, and pretend these transformations don't exist, despite your having read them.

I am showing the name, when rearranged in the holiest of holies, becomes AEIOU. You can claim it is something else, but it is, it is right there. AEIOU --> Eiova, Jehova. Pronunciation is not history's strong suit.

If we discount the personal remarks in this post, there remains no argument at all. All that is left is an inaccurate attempt at an anagram, with letters missing or added in each attempt. More important is the fact that Hebrew does not use vowels, and that is all you have used.