Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christmas Star Explained
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 216 of 278 (429945)
10-22-2007 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by ringo
10-22-2007 10:29 AM


Demolition of a Case.
Absurd. It doesn't say followed a star, so applying a silly modern meaning to that is doubly unfitting!
It says, that the star 'WENT before' them!
And before, in the greek means, primarily this.
1. to lead forward, lead forth
Interlinear Search for '' - NAS with the BHS and NA26 - StudyLight.org
The followed a guide, in other words, that moved. Right to the house, no less. You can't get a star today to do that by any contorted imaginings. Your case is crushed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by ringo, posted 10-22-2007 10:29 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by ringo, posted 10-22-2007 6:03 PM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 218 of 278 (429950)
10-22-2007 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by Vacate
10-22-2007 10:49 AM


In this corner..
My attention is fine and my comprehension is fine. How is it that in reading what I wrote you assumed that I was unaware of the timeframe in question. I was referring to Babel, not "now". I said "now" because "now" it seems that you are saying Heaven in the time of Babel is no longer physical in such a way that the people of that time could not ascend to it. Is that clear? Do you understand?
You see you never did answer my question and hence it appears you are backing away from your previous stance that the people of that time could in fact reach Heaven by building a tower. I had thought the issue was settled but it no longer appears that way.
Let's be clear here, it depends on if you are talking about the first ting or the second ting.
The spiritual was close at hand before Babel. It was not in the present state, including the time of Jesus.
Just because the spiritual level was near, and could have been ascended to before Babel, does not make it physical. The physical bits would be the bodies and tower getting up to it. Once there, they would have encountered a spiritual level. That means that they would have had spiritual and physical together, and apparently that means, possibly they would have lived forever. get it?? It doesn't mean the spiritual level was physical. The spiritual is spiritual, and the physical is physical, and not till the new heavens will they meet. Then it will be eternal state.
If all that is too tough to chew on, just remember that the physical is not spiritual.
I never said he did. Do not attempt to twist my words - I will just quote them again. Here you are:
Vacate from message 192 writes:
This is the "abode" that I am curious about. This one that Jesus ascended to after "taking great lengths to prove he was still human". This place was obviously not removed/altered/transported during the time of Peleg.
Notice that I never said I was curious about "New Jerusalem"? I inquired about the place that Jesus ascended to before he created "New Jerusalem". Now that you cannot avoid the place that I am talking about (the Heaven that Jesus ascended to before creating New Jerusalem) can you finally answer the questions I had about this location?
Yes, it is beyond the realm of this physical only present state of man. A place where God's good spirits live. Not a place man could get to now at all. He went there, with the Father. It was while there, that He prepared New Jerusalem. Now, let's not pretend your questions were answered any more.
Do you believe in spirits??
Yes I was, I inquired about the Heaven that Jesus ascended to, I did not inquire about Babel Heaven nor New Jerusalem.
As clearly explained, it was not the spiritual level of the time of Babel, near earth. It was the other ting.
Good. Given that you are adverse to calling any of your versions of Heaven "Physical" I suggest semi-solid or some variation. The important point being that these semi-solid Heavens differ from New Jerusalem in that people could possibly build a tower to them or fly space craft to them. New Jerusalem is unlike Babel Heaven and Heaven V2 because it was never semi-solid.
Both are a place for spirits. Jesus was physical, and spiritual after He arose, so obviously His city accommodates that. After all, there are departed spirits from here living there as we speak. So, it can house merged or spiritual only, either one.
We will come back to earth, for the resurrection of our physical bodies, at the rapture. The dead believers shall rise first. Then, those that are alive will rise up physically, and get their eternal merged bodies.
The angels also had to have had some sort of bodies to marry women of earth at the time of Babel.
So, for the intents and purposes of this thread, we can consider the merged as spiritual as well. Because it does consist of the spiritual as part of it's make up.
As for a detailed study of what may or not have been only spiritual, that is off topic, and irrelevant.
What is relevant is that this spiritual is now separate from the physical only world of man! And has been for a long long time. The Starship Sceptre didn't have to worry about some spiritual level over Bethlehem, relax.
My beliefs are off topic in this thread. You have made many attempts to goad me into this line of discussion but I will not take the bait. I have explained in detail why my beliefs are unimportant for this discussion if you are unable to understand this I am at a loss to resolve the issue. Feel free to create a new thread directed at what my beliefs are, but my participation is unlikely.
No, they are on topic, because it involves a bible case, and your beliefs come into play. Or lack thereof.
I know you have no science or evidence to show that there was no bluish purple frogs. Stalemate.
I don't claim to have science, only to meet the evidence, which your fantasy doesn't do. It fails to meet history. It was not observed. It also is not biblical, and the star of Bethlehem is a bible documented thing. On all fronts, your frog fantasy flops. Checkmate.
Show me the quotes. Show me where I am displaying confusion that you have not deliberately forced upon me by refusing to answer questions, asking me to answer my own questions, attempting to change my words to avoid answering questions, and introducing elements that do not even relate to the questions I have asked. (I will provide evidence of all these accusations if you wish)
This paragraph of yours seems to do fine on that score. It is gibberish. You accuse me of not answering questions??? Absurd. If you want someone to relate to what you ask, stop mumbling, and hiding you true beliefs on the topic, and read the plethora of answers I gave, despite your childish behavior.
About damn time. Flash cards too?
No thanks, I don't need froggy flash cards to note a demented fantasy. I think all readers can get a handle on your little statement of faith. Thanks for that. Nice to see what I am up against in the way of well founded opposition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Vacate, posted 10-22-2007 10:49 AM Vacate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by arachnophilia, posted 10-22-2007 7:22 PM simple has replied
 Message 225 by Vacate, posted 10-22-2007 9:07 PM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 219 of 278 (429951)
10-22-2007 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by ringo
10-22-2007 6:03 PM


Re: Demolition of a Case.
Just like saying, "their hearts led them". Figurative.
Inapplicable Shakespearean drivel. You are trying to explain away the obvious meaning and content of a story. That is like saying the king was really a spider, and the wise men were the three blind mice, and the palace was the wall Humpty sat on. They all sang a chorus of twinkle twinkle Christmas star, how I wonder where you are.
The star didn't need to "do" anything. They saw the star months before, in their homeland. If the star had been "leading" them, they wouldn't have gone to Jerusalem at all.
So now the star was seen months before. We are making progress here, almost near the two year level. We assume they were in their homeland. How do you know that??? Could one of them have been traveling, and still have seen the star, and had to go back to his jomeland first??? We don't know. Why say it like you know??
The star led them from the palace at Jerusalem. It WENT before theme, and brought them to a house. That is leading if ever there was leading. We could deliver a pizza with that kind of bang on accurate leading.
You can't deliver a pizza with the big dipper!! Admit it.
Herod sent them to Bethlehem, so they didn't need the star to "lead" them there, either. "Following the star" to Bethlehem is just story-telling. It serves no other purpose.
The ignorant, just heard the news, asleep at the wheel, out of the loop Herod sent them on the strength of an old prophesy. A prophesy that was already fulfilled, according to the bible time frame, because Jesus fled to Egypt right after the wise men visited the house, (likely in Nazareth), because there was no time to do the things as they were fleeing by night, for their lives.
To top it off, the starship kicked into gear just at that leaving the palace moment, and went before them to the very house. Herod's silly directions are as irrelevant as his devious and dastardly diabolical designs to destroy the dear Deliverer. It was time to move over, Rover, and let the starship of the Almighty take over guiding the wise men to where Jesus actually was!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by ringo, posted 10-22-2007 6:03 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by arachnophilia, posted 10-22-2007 7:18 PM simple has replied
 Message 222 by ringo, posted 10-22-2007 7:52 PM simple has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 226 of 278 (430013)
10-23-2007 12:51 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by arachnophilia
10-22-2007 7:18 PM


Re: more projection
You admitted that God had a chariot in Ezekiel. Now you think He couldn't park it near the place where His son was born, for some reason. Despite the fact He said He would behold it afar off. Despite the fact a star can't fit the bill of the Christmas star.
You seem to have a problem with UFOs. Whether you have seen any or not, that gives you no right to pretend there is any reason to doubt the bible documented flying machine of the Ancient of days.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by arachnophilia, posted 10-22-2007 7:18 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 1:25 AM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 228 of 278 (430026)
10-23-2007 1:47 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by arachnophilia
10-22-2007 7:56 PM


Re: what isn't a UFO?
not just my opinion. your source agrees:
quote:it rather signifies dominion, power, and authority, as the sceptre always does, it being an emblem of it, see (Numbers 24:17) (Zechariah 10:11) and this intends either the government, which was in the heads and princes of the tribe, which commenced as soon as it became a tribe, and lasted as long as it remained one, even unto the times of the Messiah; or kingly power and government, which the sceptre is generally thought to be an emblem of, "
Yes it does signify power and dominion, now, tell us why that power and dominion can't be God's??!! After all He is the One with the sceptre. Part of HIS rule over Israel would be through kings. -To say it was nothing more than that is missing the Big picture.
yes, david died. do you fail to understand what a "house" is? "house of david" was a traditional way that prophets like isaiah adressed the king. because a "house" is a family, and the family of david was royal. david's son solomon sat on david's throne. solomon's son rehoboam sat on david's throne. get it? this verse is talking about government. just the same as the judah verse. not UFOs.
Isn't Jesus of the house of David, yet it is unto Him that the people will gather. The major player is Jesus, there, not David.
no, he didn't. he saw the city of shiloh close up and personal, when he brought the ark of the covenant from there to jerusalem.
So what?? That is a minor opinion, and I already gave the commentaries and broad agreement on what Shiloh is in that verse. You are trying to plug a hole the dike with your finger here.
again, here is the verse:
quote:2Sa 7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
there is nothing about a sceptre there. just a throne -- david's throne. this verse, however, is the same meaning as the verse about judah:
First of all, did I bring up the Samuel verse? David's throne will be forever, through Jesus. David personally will even be there helping to rule some bits, as a minor player.
there is nothing about a sceptre there. just a throne -- david's throne. this verse, however, is the same meaning as the verse about judah:
quote:Gen 49:10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
See, the sceptre is God's. as I said. David's throne, and house are localized things. The main reason David is important is because Jesus came from that house, and is the One that will rule all thrones, and dominions, and principalities, and powers. In heaven and on earth.
mine is not an opinion. mine is what the text says. and your opinion is one that runs contrary to that, and is disagreed with by the very sources you cite. the completely honest truth of the situation is that nearly everyone who read the text comes down somewhere close to my reading of it, except for you. you go and tilt at windmills, pretending they're giants.
Hey, I don't agree with every bit of all sources I cite, and usually cite them on a specific point. Your opinion that Shiloh mostly refers to the town is opinion, or that the sceptre refers primarily to God, as well as His agents prophets, and kings, and whatnots, is opinion.
The full meaning of that prophesy has never been understood. If you think otherwise you are ,making too much of your little favored opinion. Eat some humble pie.
no, simple, you're the one making stuff up. that "the sceptre" represents god's rule is your assumption, and one, again, contradicted by the very sources you cite. and "jesus" is not mentioned at all. that "shiloh" means the messiah is also your assumption. these are both things that you have pretty clearly invented. and then, on top of that, to interpret it as a UFO from those thing -- well, that's about loony as it comes when it comes to making stuff up.
The commentaries contradict your claims. They unanimously agree Shiloh is the savior. You are out flanked. The Almighty is documented to have wheels, as is widely widely known. To claim He could not see Shiloh at birth from afar up is pure nonsense. All that remains is your repeated incredulity about UFOs. That and a dollar and a half might get you a coffee.
no, we can't. peasant houses in the first century ad in israel were one and a half story deals. the main floor was raised and made of wood, and the space underneath was used for keeping animals inside during the colder months. during the warmer months (when shepherds slept outside with their flocks), the additional space could be used to house someone overnight if absolutely neccessary. not the greatest living conditions, but this was the barn that jesus was born in.
No matter how you glorify it, animals stink. It is reasonable to assume that Mary would not linger there after the baby was born. She would go home, or some place. Nazareth is not near Bethlehem, they were only there on business.
there was no such thing as a "hotel." guests and travellers were put up for the night in houses. people looking for jesus would have come to a house either way. the text does not say whose house it was.
The Greek word for Inn, means this
1. an inn, lodging place
2. an eating room, dining room
The lodging place was not normally a manger. Unless a cow wanted to rent a room for the night. Get serious. It didn't have to be the Ritz Carleton, to have good food, and sleeping accommodations, and facilities.
The wise men would no more have come to a house than the shepherds came to a house!! Nonsense. Not if they came to the manger of Bethlehem. But they didn't, that was long after, in another city, very likely.
We do not know how many wise men there were, or where they came from. Most assume Persia. But some of them may have come from further. That means that it took over a year.
"From Persia, whence the Magi are supposed to have come, to Jerusalem was a journey of between 1000 and 1200 miles. Such a distance may have taken any time between three and twelve months by camel. Besides the time of travel, there were probably many weeks of preparation. The Magi could scarcely have reached Jerusalem till a year or more had elapsed from the time of the apperance of the star."
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Magi
Herod also for some reason assumed that the appearing of the star was the birth of Jesus.
"Herod had found out from the Magi the time of the star's appearance. Taking this for the time of the Child's birth," (same link)
So the timing fits. You just can't get the wise men to the stinking stable the night He was born. Otherwise, we need to have them flee with the newborn, and forget going to the temple as He was recorded as doing.
A lot hinges on when that star appeared. If it was a star that heralded the birth of messiah, can you tell us why it would appear years before He was born????
But all that aside, the star WENT before the wise men, guiding them to a house!!! That star was hovering over the birth of God's son!!! We know that much.
you just go right on making stuff up, don't you? god was there, in a very strongly literal sense. he led the way through the desert -- and not in a UFO. he let moses see him, and spoke audibly to the congregation. follow this bit, he assisted the israelites in conquering the holy land.
God was also there in the starship at the birth of Jesus, and afterwards. He spoke audibly to many when Jesus was being baptized. See if you can guess who was speaking here
'This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased'
The fire on the mountain never consumed the bush, so we can say it was not PO fire. By extension, the smoke and fire pillar representing God can not be said to be PO either. Any more than the starship over Bethlehem.
jesus spoke ill of the people who wrote the bible? what book are you reading?! it's not the bible, that's for damned for sure. and let's be clear about this.
JESUS WAS A JEW!
your comments are pure ignorance, and are highly offensive.
No, He spoke very very ill of the Pharisees and rulers of Israel in His day. They wrote squat. To take their oversight of records as anything but suspect is offensive, and antchrist.
the fact is that you brought it up. here, in this thread. now, i'm saying the ark of the covenant was a UFO, and what they really saw in the sky on christmas eve was the ark of the covenant. afterall, jesus was the new covenant, and what better way to establish that than by leading people there with the old one.
you see, i can make up stuff too.
Ezekiel's wheels flew. The "f" in UFO means flying. Can you evidence that the ark flew?? You can't leave the F OFF.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by arachnophilia, posted 10-22-2007 7:56 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 2:35 AM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 229 of 278 (430029)
10-23-2007 1:58 AM
Reply to: Message 227 by arachnophilia
10-23-2007 1:25 AM


Re: more projection
"admit" is not the right word. i never claimed otherwise -- the merkabah is indeed the very first vision in the book of ezekiel.
OK, so you admit that the Almighty has wheels. The Suspect now just needs to be placed at the scene. I already had the Father right up above, talking down at the baptism. Done.
that is not what is described in the gospels.
It fits, He is admitted to have wheels by you. He was on the scene. He had the opportunity, the motive, the means. What the star is described as dong is moving, and guiding. We have a match!
...what part haven't you been listening to? a star is the only thing that can fit the bill. astrologers looked into the east sky and saw a star. not a UFO, a star. they knew what stars looked like. the information they gathered was "king" "born" and "israel." from that information, they went west, the opposite direction of the star.
Stars looked like a light in the sky. Get a grip. The information may have come from prophesy, among other things. Or, the starship flew over in the right area of the sky, on it's way to Bethlehem, in conjunction with other astral bodies, that triggered clear alarm bells in the magi. He knew how to pull their chain.
i have in fact seen a UFO.
OK. Me too. But I suspect that some UFOs are spiritual, some military. Since UFOs are not an issue, it is just the traits of the Christmas star, and what best fits. A flying, hovering spiritual vessel of the Almighty fits best by far. In fact, nothing else does!
but simple, that's just the problem. we're not talking about the bible. we're talking about your crazy made up idea of what it all means. there is no UFO in matthew or luke. there's just a star, seen by astrologers, who gathered astrological information from it.
Just a star does not lead men to a house. Face it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 1:25 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 2:46 AM simple has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 230 of 278 (430033)
10-23-2007 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by Vacate
10-22-2007 9:07 PM


Frog dreams flushed V2
Perfectly clear, thank you. As I said, I will refer to this as semi-solid and use this quote from now on if the need arises as the definition of this term.
So you want to call the spiritual level semi solid. OK. Remember, it is long gone now from the world of men.
Vacate writes:
How high up was this place? Is it still there? When did it become non-physical? (or alternately - when did it change to become a place that pilots cannot ascend to) What is this place? (Unless you wish to provide an alternate I would choose to use Heaven V2 from this point on)
The place before Babel was not that high up. Otherwise we could not build a tower up to it. You seem to think it changed. No. The universe we live in was separated from it. That means it is still the same, we are just not near it.
The New Jerusalem I think you call it V2, Is not in the universe of the physical. It is separate. That happened 4400 years ago, that the spiritual was separated, or divided from the physical.
Do you believe in spirits?
Based upon the story you have presented, no. Based on reality, unsure and off topic.
People do not believe in spirits because of a forum on the net. So, your answer is you are not sure. OK.
I know that, thats why I have asked about its qualities four times now.
The properties of heaven are that it is a spiritual place, now separate from this physical universe state we exist in. You can't get there. It will come to land on earth soon as the new heavens universe state starts. It will then be both physical and spiritual, as will we. The laws governing matter in the eternal, spiritual also state are not our laws of physics. They will pass away.
Of course its fantasy, I made it up for the purpose of placating your desire for me to present an alternate story. I said as much. What is under question is whether your story succedes in meeting history and biblical interpretation. .
My ideas are BASED on the bible, and fit history.
So explain the details of the Heaven that Jesus ascended to after his death (Heaven V2) so it can be ruled out as relevant to the Starship Sceptre.
The ascending was after the star of Bethlehem. So, it is not relevant to the topic. The starship of the Almighty will no doubt be in the future, as well as it was in the past. There is no reason to think it did not fly long before this universe was created.
Oh? I could divide it up for you to better understand. Thus far you have:
# Refused to answer questions
# Asked me to answer my own questions
# Attempted to change my words to avoid answering questions
# Introduced elements that do not even relate to the questions I have asked.
These four points are the source of my apparent confusion. Does that provide the clarity you had hoped for?
I answered the questions. You don't. If you can't answer your own questions, why think anyone else can? If your words were clear, no need to change them. As for what relates and what doesn't you are not the judge.
Many of your questions were as ridiculous as your froggy answers. One tries to answer them, and gets this sort of drivel.
The Christmas star had supernatural qualities. Like a ship, it moved to guide men to a house. What about it???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Vacate, posted 10-22-2007 9:07 PM Vacate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by Vacate, posted 10-23-2007 4:43 AM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 233 of 278 (430040)
10-23-2007 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by arachnophilia
10-22-2007 7:22 PM


Re: just what is a "ting" anyways?
I gotta admit, if you haven't seen the movie, it isn't that funny. The point is, when someone talks about one thing, and is not clear, sometimes things get mixed up. Get it??
Here is a snip of the silly dialog from the movie.
" BEN
Which thing are you talking about? The first thing or the second thing?
SINDONE
What second thing? I only know one thing.
BEN
Well, I don't see how we can discuss the first thing without bringing up the second thing. Didn't you talk to the guy? He tugs meaningfully on his earlobe.
SINDONE
What guy?
BEN
The guy with the thing.
SINDONE
What thing? What the fuck are you talking about?
BEN
How should I know? You brought it up. (gestures helplessly
to the others) This is the whole problem. You can't have an intelligent conversation with the man.
SINDONE
How about if I just break your fuckin' neck? What do you think of that?
BEN
It's not important what I think. What do you think?
SINDONE
What do I think? I think it's a good idea! Why would I say it if I didn't think it was good?
BEN
I don't know. Why would you?
SINDONE
(frustrated) I wouldn't! That's what I'm saying!
BEN
Have you always had a problem dealing with your anger?
SINDONE
What are you talking about?
BEN
What do you think I'm talking about?
SINDONE
(explodes) I don't know what the fuck you're talking about!"
That was where the ting came from. Don't make a federal case over it.
Edited by simple, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by arachnophilia, posted 10-22-2007 7:22 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 2:56 AM simple has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 235 of 278 (430045)
10-23-2007 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by arachnophilia
10-23-2007 2:35 AM


Re: what isn't a UFO?
because context matters. when they're talking about god, it's about god. when they're talking about judah, or egypt, or persia, or babylon, it's judah or egypt or persia of babylon, respectively. it's not "god" when it says "judah." get it? you have to read the verse, not make it up in your head.
Here is a clue, who is the One with the sceptre??? Who really ruled, above the kings?? Who kept on ruling, even if some king whathisname bit it?? Who was the Father of Shiloh??? Whoo was to look down from afar??
according to the gospels, jesus was of the house of david, yes. the problem isn't there. it's that the house of david was deposed from 586 BC until the present. jesus's people -- the jews -- did not "gather unto" him. jesus never sat on that throne in jerusalem, and never was literal king of israel. even supposing he re-fulfills this prophecy, it was broken during the exile.
He was still on the throne in that starship right over Shiloh. Who cares about deposed little kings??
uh, no, read samuel again. "shiloh" is the name of the city where the ark of the covenant resides until david brings it to jerusalem.
So what??? Having a village named something doesn't mean there ain't the real macoy elsewhere! Ever heard of a town called Zion??? It is in the US. So???
no, i did. it's called "content." i thought this thread should have some of it. the verse from samuel, about establishing david's throne, is the same as the verse about establishing judah's rule. the one you're pretending is about a UFO.
I was not pretending anything about a verse in Samuel. I don't argue that some mickey mouse kings ruled, and supposedly represented God in the so doing. So??
david is a minor player on his own throne. only you.
The ultimate fulfillment was not a dying flesh king there. It was speaking of some greater realities, having to do with the future.
Abraham, David, Noah, Adam, and the ass that spoke are all minor platers compared to the king OF kings. Yes.
again, you write as if 75% of the bible doesn't matter.
The king of all kings is more important than the little kings. They are important as well. Not even Elvis is as important!
no. why don't you. this is afterall all about your little favored opinion. the one that disagrees with common sense, the bible, history, science, and everyone else who can actually read. why don't you try some humble pie and admit that you're not being imparted special knowledge from god's UFO mind-control ray, and you're just making stuff up.
Face it, the star that moved and guided men is not made up. Admit it. What you seem to think is special is not ignoring the obviously stated facts of the bible, like the star.
i find it amusing when you post a source that disagrees with the specific point you cite them to demonstrate.
Too bad, I use a source for one ting, not all tings.
look, what i told came from knowledge and research about housing in first century ad israel. it doesn't matter what definition you pull up, "inn" would be the lodging place someone would have stayed in in 1st century israel -- someone's house.
The fact it was small does not matter. Long as it was clean, had good food, and sleeping quarters. The Inn was full. Deal with it.
sounds more like the content of revelation than matthew. "until shiloh come" is like "kingdom come" in english. it means "the end." it's an expression.
Based on reality. Part of the reality is that the messiah will bring and end to man's rule. precisely. In any language.
if the text describes a UFO, we might talk. ezekiel describes somethign strange, yes, but it's not a UFO. and it does not show up elsewhere
It describes God flying on something, sitting on a throne. To claim it never flew anywhere else is ludicrous. You have no idea where it went. If you saw it in Jesus' day, you might think it was a star.
"manger" comes from the french, meaning "to eat." a manger is a troph for feeding animals. jesus was born in a place for keeping animals -- the basement of a first century ad israeli house.
Maybe. Or maybe the animals mangered out in the back in a manger!?
uh, no. when it's talking about the town, it's talking about the town. when it's talking about the end-times, it's talking about the end-times. neither of those are opinions -- they're context.
And the context of the Christmas star prophesy is that it is the messiah. Period. So??
your sentance is not even internally consistent. and anyways. you're comparing two different stories. in matthew, joseph and mary are from bethlehem -- there is none of thise bit about herod's survey, and them having to travel and stay anywhere. the house there is probably their own. in luke. they are from nazareth, and travel to bethlehem for the census, and stay in a barn. but there are no magi in luke, only heralding angels.
Not every detail has to be mentioned in each gospel. Why do you think there are 4??? We get the details looking at the big picture. Mary had the angel appear to her in Nazareth. They had to travel for a census. That is another topic.
Wherever the house was, it was where the family now lived, and fled likely that night to Egypt. That rules out the manger.
persia was the only country that would have cared about a new king in israel.
Irrelevant , you will notice it was not countries that followed the star!!! It was men. It was what they cared about that is important. Get it??
it was about 400 miles from the closest point of the persia empire at that time. it probably took a while, yes. no more than two years. no one is debating that.
OK, you concede that part of the time frame. OK.
the bible does not say. and, in any case, stars stick around longer than UFOs.
Yes it does, the time frame is laid out. Certain things had to happen. Besides, this starship was here before the stars!!! So it did stick around longer. A lot longer, we would presume, because this universe is only thousands of years old.
and just how would you say that in klingon?
The people standing by heard it, so it was in human speech format.
and i suppose the destruction of jericho and the conquest of the holy land weren't "physical only" either. nor was the manna from heaven. not the water from a stone. nor the parting of the reed sea.
There were spiritual elements to some things, of course. The parting of the sea was likely more than physical only,
one more time. maybe big letters will help.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OVERSIGHT IN RECORDS FROM 500 BC, MADE BY THE PROPHET EZRA IN THE BOOK OF THE SAME NAME!
get that? the bible. not the pharisees. THE BIBLE! those suspect records you're talking about are
THE BIBLE
No you are talking about that. I was talking about any records that Israel controlled at the time. Supporting evidences. Ezra not listing it coming from Babylon, etc is not that important.
Can you show good records of the ark NOT being in the second temple!!!? Ha.
sure i can. there it is in the east sky on christmas eve. must be flying! how would it ascend to heaven with jesus if it couldn't fly? and noah's ark flew too. how else would it have been kept safe from the crashing waves?.
You are dreaming. The ark was a boat. The starship flew. I didn't make this up.
Edited by simple, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 2:35 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 1:41 PM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 241 of 278 (430188)
10-23-2007 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by Vacate
10-23-2007 4:43 AM


Jumping to the point
I was not asking about the Heaven at the time of Babel or before it. For the fifth time now I am asking about the Heaven that Jesus ascended to after his death. Do you know that Jesus died after the time of Babel? I am sure you do, but if not I can give you a brief summary of the events in question. Can you seriously avoid answering a question for this long? I will repeat again:
Well, you seemed to think that the Christmas starship would have a tough time without bumping into a spiritual level that was gone thousands of years before that. So, try and be cohesive.
The heaven that we and Jesus ascend to after He died is not in the time of the Christmas starship visit, so ho is it relative??? I don'tt intend to fine tune a description of the spiritual, with someone that appears not to believe in it. You would be unable to get it. Enjoy your purple frogs belief.
quote:This is the "abode" that I am curious about. This one that Jesus ascended to after "taking great lengths to prove he was still human".
quote:How high up was this place? Is it still there? When did it become non-physical? (or alternately - when did it change to become a place that pilots cannot ascend to) What is this place? (Unless you wish to provide an alternate I would choose to use Heaven V2 from this point on)
How many times do you intend to avoid these questions?
I already did, and made it clear it was separate from the universe of man at the time of Babel. Further proof you cannot begin to grasp the basics here, so why get into an off topic 'trying to force a horse to drink, after he was led to the water' routine with you???
The natural mind can't get these things. Thanks for the vivid demo there. Carry on.
Do I actually have to quote yet again the time when you said Jesus created "New Jerusalem" after his death? Now you have switched to say this place predates him?
You can't do that, I and the bible said He prepared it. There already was a place spirits lived, just not the place He prepared. get over it.
I know that Jesus died after he was born. You can insist that I am confused all you want, but until you can provide a quote you are accomplishing nothing. I am up to five sepperate posts where I have asked about the attributes of the Heaven that Jesus ascended to after his death and you have refused on all other attempts to provide me with answers.
It was a place spirits lived,
Far from the realm of man
Somewhere over the rainbow,
Catch me if you can.
Where every dream comes true
And horses fly like men
And we all live forevermore
And girls are young again.
In heaven there is no decay
Angels guard the halls
Sinful man can not ascend
It's precious diamond walls.
I know thats what you believe. If I shared your view I would not be debating it. My idea on vampire frogs was based on nothing much at all, hence the reason I have continued to ask for this debate to be about your story and not mine.
It should also have something to do with the topic. The spiritual is not debatable, it is a well known reality. The bible is not debatable, it really exists. What it says is open to interpretation, but I don't see you doing that. I don't see any science evidence, or history from you towards one case or the other either. So far, just a strange obsession with learning secrets of the heavens above, you don't seem to believe in anyhow.
Glad you think you are doing well.
Do I actually have to quote yet again the time when you said Jesus created "New Jerusalem" after his death? Now you have switched to say this place predates him?
He prepared that place. Whether it was a part of what was there, and He spruced it up, or whether it is an addition He created, I don't know, or care. He was in that spiritual realm when He prepared the city. What about it??
You have settled, to my satisfaction the attributes of the Heaven at the time of Babel. You have settled to my satisfaction the Heaven that Jesus created after his death once he ascended to the mysterious version two. Further attempts to confuse, switch, or blend these seperate discussions is simply dishonest. Carry on if you wish, but I intend to persist until the questions are answered or you retract, run away, or change your story.
The spiritual realm that Jesus ascended to is not described that much. But it is above and beyond the realm of man. Deal with it.
You see? This is yet another example of you avoiding the questions. I did not ask for the attributes or timescales of the starship - I asked for the attributes of the heaven that Jesus ascended to before he created New Jerusalem. Version two! I have shown examples where you have refused to answer questions. Care to show where I have done the same? I refuse to answer my own, that is true. I also refuse to answer the ones that are off topic for the reasons that I have stated multipe times now.
I refuse your off topic junk too. Enjoy. If you were unable to perceive the answers by now, forget about it.
I still have a few outstanding questions regarding your story. Are you seriously suggesting that I should make shit up about the attributes of the Heaven that you have presented in your story? Why should I start making stuff up about your story? Thats the stupidest thing I have heard on these forums ( and I have seen plenty of stupidity)
No, the bible, and or science and history is fine. Give us your best shot.
Feel free to provide quotes and justification any time you are ready. I am simply attempting to understand your story and must ask questions that pertain to the topic. If you find the questions "ridiculous" perhaps it is due to the nature of your story? If you find the four points I presented to be drivel I am perfectly willing to provide examples, as I suggested when I posted them the first time.
Already done. I explained all levels of heaven, the future the past, and the present, as well as a bible case that meets all evidence for the Christmas star. Happy now??
Interesting story, will it stand up to questioning? Will you answer the questions if they are made?
Yes, it can take anything you got. Which, so far is nothing at all to do with anything at all about the topic of the star. Work on that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by Vacate, posted 10-23-2007 4:43 AM Vacate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Vacate, posted 10-23-2007 9:51 PM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 242 of 278 (430189)
10-23-2007 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by bluescat48
10-23-2007 9:35 AM


Re: Don't worry, its Simple
They thought angels were marrying women, and having babies as well. They had the little giants to prove it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by bluescat48, posted 10-23-2007 9:35 AM bluescat48 has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 243 of 278 (430197)
10-23-2007 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by arachnophilia
10-23-2007 1:41 PM


Spiritual zaps red sea
the thing is that not everything in the bible means god. some sentances have other subjects. you wouldn't say that isaiah condemnations the babylonian kings is really isaiah condemning god -- well, no actually, that is just what you said here.
But God spoke, for example to one king, and launched into talking directly to Lucifer. Jesus talked to Satan directly through Peter.
Also, there is this
"Luke 1:31-33
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
(KJV)
The covenant God made with King David, that from David's seed a righteous King would sit on the Throne of Israel and reign over Israel forever, was specifically applied to Jesus by Gabriel. .."
http://www.geocities.com/~lasttrumpet/pd_18.html
Can you explain to us all here, how it is you think you overrule the archangel of God on who sits on the throne?????
because the verse -- the first thing -- you mentioned is about judah being the father of earthly kings. not a spaceship.
Let's look at the first thing, then, shall we??
Verse 10. From Judah the sceptre shall not depart
The Jews have a quibble on the word shebet, which we translate sceptre; they say it signifies a staff or rod, and that the meaning of it is, that "afflictions shall not depart from the Jews till the Messiah comes;" that they are still under affliction and therefore the Messiah is not come. This is a miserable shift to save a lost cause. Their chief Targumist, Onkelos, understood and translated the word nearly as we do; and the same meaning is adopted by the Jerusalem Targum, and by all the ancient versions, the Arabic excepted, which has [Arabic] kazeeb, a rod; but in a very ancient MS. of the Pentateuch in my own possession the word [Arabic] sebet is used, which signifies a tribe. Judah shall continue a distinct tribe till the Messiah shall come; and it did so; and after his coming it was confounded with the others, so that all distinction has been ever since lost."
Genesis 49 - Clarke's Commentary - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org
So, the tribe, continued, according to this commentary.
Now, in Psalm 23 we see the word rod as well.
" Thy rod and thy staff
shibtecha, thy sceptre, rod, ensign of a tribe, staff of office; for so shebet signifies in Scripture. And thy staff, umishantecha, thy prop or support. "
Psalms 23 - Clarke's Commentary - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org
So, the sceptre is an ensign, or staff of office. Who's office?? In this case, God's. The spirit of the words here for staff are the word, I would think, and/or His Spirit. They comfort us.
God's office continued till Shiloh, the messiah came! In fact He went mobile for the birth!!! He has a mobile office.
Now, if the mobile office, or Sceptre was over Bethlehem, and was the sign, or ensign, if you will, that fits!!!!
The hebrew meaning for ensign is this--
" 1. something lifted up, standard, signal, signal pole, ensign, banner, sign, sail
1. standard (as rallying point), signal
2. standard (pole)
3. ensign, signal "
What was lifted up over Shiloh??? The star!! And boy can it sail. It certainly was a signal for the wise men! How much more clear could this stuff be?????
you really have complete and utter disregard for the bible, don't you? no one who's read samuel would call david and solomon "mickey mouse" kings. and again, you are literally attacking the very authors of the bible -- david (supposedly) wrote most of the psalms and solomon (supposedly) wrote song of songs. you really can't built any credibility for your case if you take every opportunity to speak poorly of the bible.
If they compared them to the Almighty, of course they would. You again miss the heart and soul of the bible, God was the One behind it the writer, the inspiration, the orchestrator, the king maker, the Head Honcho.
except that the prophecy had to do with real reality. "ultimate fulfillments" are excuses for the plainly evident truth of broken prophecy. god says david's family will rule forever -- but for 600 years, they did not.
No, you interpret it wrong. The throne that God gave David to sit on was from God, and Jesus sat on it. Ask Gabriel if you doubt that. That means His office was still in charge till messiah came. If some king messed up too bad, He sent a prophet! He was the Man in charge, not the little kingies. Get over it. He holds the sceptre. He holds the office.
...which has not happened yet, and will at the end of times. it's talking about the end of times.
Point??? We are in the end of times, and it has started.
so one verse in your OP has nothing to do with the other, except that jesus is from the tribe of judah.
False. ---
Gen 49:10 - The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.
Ps 45:6 - Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.
As brought out, HIS is the power, and the kingdom, and the glory, and the sceptre, and the office, and the throne, and the wheels!
because there were four different stories. more than four, actually. like i said, i knew you wouldn't understand this point -- you're basically asking at what point gilgamesh visited noah, before or after he got drunk.
No, Noah was first, Giggie came later. The dates are wrong. The gospels are harmonious, if you add the spiritual key to comprehend.
ezekiel saw something special. let me phrase this in a language you'll understand -- ezekiel's vision was spiritual only. there was no physical substance to it; it was in his head, shown to him by god, to teach some mystical point. it's not something god gets around in, it was something spiritual-only for ezekiel and ezekiel only.
nowhere else in the bible is it ever described again.
Ha. No. But FYI, the starship is spiritual, but it still really can appear in this universe.
so a UFO hovered over bethlehem (or nazareth, or wherever) for two years straight, and it took astrologers from persia to notice it? nobody else, not the king, not his court, not the pharisees, no one else saw it? why was it news to herod and his priests?
Can you prove that??? How do we know that it never disappeared as many commentators feel it must have?? That is why many feel, the wise men were so stranngely glad to see it again.
But, since we know the Father was close by all Jesus' life, like at the baptism, etc, we can assume His ship was not that far away.
if i saw it in jesus's day, i would have described it like ezekiel did.
Depends on how high up it was!!! The shepherds were dazzled by a great light from above. They never thought of that encounter as a star.
you just keep on making stuff up, don't you? now, you are discreditting miracles.
Not at all. When I say spiritual, that means the weapon or device used to part the sea was spiritual. Spiritual weapons work on things physical, you know. You simply seem to think of anything spiritual as unreal. There is a difference between unreal, and not physical only.
YES IT IS
because that's the point it stops appearing in records. not in jesus's time. it's like arguing that jimmy hoffa went missing yesterday. we know when he went missing because of when the evidence for his existence stops. that's the definition of "missing."
Great, so you admit there is nothing in the way of collaborating evidence to the bible.
Sorry, Ezra doesn't settle the issue, or even deal with it directly. You have no ark case. When they dredge it up, I will know what it really is. End of story.
i'm continually amazed at what you think passes for an argument. the astrologers were very likely sent as diplomats to visit the new king of israel, giving gifts from the royal treasury of persia. they were men, yes. who lived in a country. and were probably sent by that country.
Quite an active imagination. Dreaming stuff up, however doesn't quite cut it. We do not know they were from Persia, all of them, if any. That is assumed. We certainly don't know they were sent by some country. Is that supposed to pass for some argument??

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2007 1:41 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by arachnophilia, posted 10-24-2007 12:29 AM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 246 of 278 (430263)
10-24-2007 4:52 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by Vacate
10-23-2007 9:51 PM


As Simple as 1,2,3.
Sorry you missed it. I haven't had a problem with the starship bumping into The Babel Heaven for many posts now. It was cleared up when you said that it became non semi-solid several posts ago. It just took an absurd amount of posts for enough clarity to be sure of your position.
Good, so you clued in on that point.
Because this Heaven is a complete unknown in your story. It was certainly around at the time of the starship. Unless you are saying it was created after Jesus' birth and then upgraded shortly after his death. How can I be sure that its not relative when you refuse to give its location, height, etc?
It is too high for man to reach. It was out of your depth of the fishbowl. It was beyond your box of the physical only. It was where it was as the physical was separated from the spiritual. That means you, as a denizen of the PO, are in another dimension. It is way beyond your abilities. Etc. Are you getting some of this??? You just got the precise coordinates. My treat.
Why not? You haven't objected to examination of your story until I reached this portion of it. This mystery Heaven is much more intriguing than all the other Heavens combined!
Good. Get saved, and check it out. Well, you would end up in New Jerusalem, but there, you can get the information on what was before, and maybe still is.
I got the other ones once you finally decided to clarify. Need I quote again that the frog story was created for the purpose of placating your need for me to have an alternate story? Its not a belief, its a story. Keep repeating it though, it does add a lot to your side of the debate.
Since it is your baby, I can't take responsibility there.
Being that it is unclarified I am unable to decide if this Heaven is in conflict with any other portion of your story. Its attributes appear to only be "seperate" and possibly "spiritual". The longer you avoid answering these questions the more curious I become, this Heaven really sounds like reading material.
Let me try and reduce your agony here, all heavens are spiritual. But keep on pretending it isn't answered, it seems fitting for your stated beliefs.
The other Heavens have attributes that can be specified but this one cannot? I can accept that if that is the position you wish to present. Its not that I don't get your position, it just takes so long to get there. We are making progress, just this last speedbump and I think your story is fleshed out.
Our link with heaven is the messiah. Jesus. The details of heaven before He returned are not given. It is safe to say it was where good spirits lived, and was separate from the universe state of man.
Sure I can. You said it right here:
Simple in Language and the Tower of Babel writes:
Message 50
Heaven, or where the spirits live is now, as I understand it, is New Jerusalem. Since Jesus built that, I would think that there was another abode before that was complete, that He ascended to.
*Emphasis added.
Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Are you trying to say now that Jesus build something 4400 years before he was born? I was comfortable with your old version, but this new one is simply bizarre. If you arent saying that, then clarify what Heaven you are talking about. You had said:
No idea what you are talking about. New Jerusalem was a place Jesus prepared for believers after He ascended to heaven.
See the problem yet? Perhaps now you can understand why I stress the need for terms that you will use consistantly for the duration of this thread?
Babel Heaven (4400 years ago) --> Mystery Heaven V2 ---> New Jersualem
This is how you have presented the timeline from the onset of this discussion. Now, as I have shown in the quote, you have changed the timeline in such a way as to make everything fall apart. Its not good for the story.
Oh, so YOU call the heaven before NJ v2. Don't blame me. I was clear.
Think of it as 1,2,3! 1 = pre Babel. 2 = Babel till Jesus went there. 3 = New Jerusalem. Don't even need to use your toes to count that.
Correct. I am reading your interpretation that you have attempted to say is fact. I am debating your interpretation because I think you have pulled it out of your ass. I am not presenting/debating/discussing/preaching my interpretation because I am not presenting it as fact. At this point I see your interpretation as having just as much to do with reality as purple frogs. We are both able to pull stories out of our ass, I however do not pretend mine to represent reality. Do you need further clarification on my position?
No, thanks. You admit to reality being a stranger to you. I think many already knew that, but thanks for being honest. I think we now realize that asking you yo be topical is asking too much. Hey, how are the frogs doing??? We care. really.
I don't understand why discussing one version of Heaven is suddenly off topic while all the others did not merrit the same fate. I suspect that its because this version may have gotten in the way of your starship so its best to just rule the whole mess off topic. No need then to specify its location or elevation then is it! Its a cheap victory, but a victory non the less right?
I was being overly nice. But when you misuse my good nature, I must lower the boom. I already gave it to you as simple as 1,2,3. Yet you stumble.
Us? Your a plural now?
Yes, I am not the only one that reads this stuff. Surprise.
Great - What are the attributes of the Heaven that Jesus ascended to after his death? How high up was it? Was it semi-solid or totally spiritual?
The attributes are that it lasts forever, and there are spirits, and a whole lotta love there. It was not high as you measure things with PO rulers. And the spirits who lived there were spirits, except for Jesus, who was physical and spiritual, as we all will be soon. Maybe that is one reason He prepared a place specially for us. That all you got?? Piece of cake.
I am trying to, answer the questions. You ruled out Babel though clarity in its attributes, why the reluctance to do the same with V2? ( The Heaven that jesus ascended to after his death, and not the one he created after he got there)
Oh, you think that the spiritual dwelling of the time of Jesus could interfere somehow with the starship???!!!! What a scream! No. As I said many times, after Babel, the spiritual realm was SEPERATE. No where in the universe we call natural at all.
Give us a break. Pitiful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Vacate, posted 10-23-2007 9:51 PM Vacate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by Vacate, posted 10-24-2007 7:43 AM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 247 of 278 (430267)
10-24-2007 5:45 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by arachnophilia
10-24-2007 12:29 AM


Who Beamed up the Ark??
a common misreading. at least this is something you didn't make up on your own. "lucifer" is just the latin word for "provider of light" and generally refers to the planet venus. the planet venus, btw, is very often mistaken for UFOs. maybe the devil has a UFO?
Right, he was the bearer of the light of God. A physical interpretation has fallen to a planet, but there are older spiritual realities at play here.
in this case, it is a translation of the hebrew for "glorious." it's still talking about nebuchadnezzar, in an ironic sense. notice how it talks about ascending to the heavens? guess what nebby rebuilt? the tower of babel. babel. babylon. think about it.
No. God is talking through the king directly to the devil there. Naturally, any king that would be possessed by the devil would have traits that are similar. But the true meaning is not to a worldly king there at all. Natural man cannot understand that.
yes, but from the 500 years between zedekiah and jesus, no one was king. prophecy broken.{/qs
Only if the prohesy was supposed to be about mickey mouse kings. If I am right, it was not, and God and the bible are right! If you are right God and the bible are wrong, and mickey mouse.
Weight those scales, see which way they tilt, now will you??
first of all, that's wrong. "judah" became conflated with the other tribes after the return from exile. under ezra. notice a theme here? ezra seems to come up a lot. the reason they became conflated is actually rather explicitly because they survived -- no other tribe really did, except for half of levi. judah absorbed levi -- and today, people from the tribe of judah are called "jews." judah-ite = yehudi = jude = jew. their distinction was never lost; every other tribe's was.
and second, it's still wrong. the word shebet (with a shin not a sin) is related to tribes because of tribal authority. the word is about authority.
Then that makes me right, I said it was about God's office, throne, and authority. Thanks for that.
and it is indeed the same word. but look at the imagery -- god is called the good shepherd. the word comes from the curved stick a shepherd would use to keep his flock in line. it was the implement of power over the sheep -- a symbol of the shepherd's authority over them.
The word and Spirit are a symbol of the same. They comfort us. A stick comforts squat. The imagery is that His is the office, the throne, the ensign, and the....you got it...Sceptre!!! Over us no less.
context is everything. when it's talking about judah's authority, it's judah's authority. granted, in this case, by jacob. who was granted authority by isaac. who was granted authority by abraham. who was granted authority by god, according to the prophecy.
Right! By GOD. He is the One that has the sceptre.
the verse is about judah. judah's authority -- and jesus was from judah. jesus is the fulfillment of the prophecy, not the end of it.
No. It is about the SCEPTRE!!!!!!! God's office, throne authority, and including starship, and kings!
The hebrew meaning for ensign is this--
" 1. something lifted up, standard, signal, signal pole, ensign, banner, sign, sail
1. standard (as rallying point), signal
2. standard (pole)
3. ensign, signal "
What was lifted up over Shiloh??? The star!! And boy can it sail. It certainly was a signal for the wise men! How much more clear could this stuff be?????
it's pretty clear when you're drawing false connections, and making stuff up, yes.
No, the Hebrew really means that. And the Christmas star really was a sign. And more.
the point is that it's talking about something, idiomatically, that has not happened yet, and won't happen until everything else is over. it's talking about the stuff found in zechariah 9 -- not the donkey part, the peace on earth part.
What the Prince of peace brings in is related to His birth. It was not finished then, but in progress.
{qs sure. personally, i think gilgamesh and noah are harmonious too. gilgamesh just must have visited him some time later. i say after he got drunk and his son saw him naked. oh, and that bit in the bible about him dying? well, you can't trust those dirty rotten jews. clearly, gilgamesh says god granted him immortality, being a pure soul.
Of Giggy said that he was right. Noah was granted eternal life. I plan to have a beer with him.
there's no interpretation here. god said david's family would sit on the throne from that moment, until the end of time. in 586 bc, the last king from the house of david died. you can argue about whether or not jesus fits the bill, but it's irrelevent. for the 600 years between zedekiah and jesus, no one from the house of david was on that throne. god broke that prophecy because of judah's evil ways, with the promise that he would later restore it. this is a matter of, uh, whole books of the bible. like jeremiah.
You are missing something. If God was alive and well, and sitting on the throne, it is relevant in the extreme. You seem to assume He could only do sttuff after He came down as a man. False.
show me an instance where anything like it is clearly and unambiguously described in the bible. not just "a star." something that's definitely the same thing, described in enough detail to make it clear the author means ezekiel's merkabah. because i can show you quite a few instances where god shows up without it.
I never said He was chained to the thing!!??? But you show me where He showed up, and then show me it was the Father, not the son, and we can talk turkey. Even then, you need to show where the wheels were not simply just out of sight of man at the time.
stars disappear every morning. maybe you've noticed that it's hard to see them in the day time. just one really big one. they were glad that it HADN'T gone anywhere, after herod turned out to be a false lead.
Let's see them disappear every morning for over a year, and you got a case! Until then, be amazed.
so a UFO hovered over bethlehem (or nazareth, or wherever) for two years straight, and it took astrologers from persia to notice it? nobody else, not the king, not his court, not the pharisees, no one else saw it? why was it news to herod and his priests?
Can you prove that???
read the gospel of matthew. it was news to the king.
I meant that they came from Persia, all of them, for sure. Not that the king was as thick as bricks.
one more time. that's the point. that's where the story ends. that's where the evidence stops. not in records from jesus's time, covered up by jewish conspirators. in ezra's time. ezra does settle the issue, because something is defined as "missing" when it can no longer be found. at the point of 2 kings 25, the ark of the covenant is "missing."
it's really like claiming that jimmy hoffa's been around all this time, but nobody has seen or talked to him in the last 20 years, and any financial records or similar documentation has been obscured by the mafia conspiracy. oh, and if you look for him today, you won't find him: he disappeared yesterday.
tell us another one! something goes missing when there is no longer any evidence of its present existence, and nobody can find it.
Not at all. The stuff that the Babylonians took, or wrecked did not include the ark. Of course. The ark was safe. The people God called to deal with Israel did what they were to do. He was on top of the situation. He may have took it in the starship for a bit, for all we know.
and far away. make up your mind.
A starship can be far away, or closer, that has to do with moving. Unlike a star.
assumed with very good reason. rome would only care in the respect that herod was their king and israel belonged to them. the only other important country on the map at that time was persia -- who was on good terms with israel due to their former queen esther. they fit the bill for a place that would send royal gifts. no one else would really care all that much.
First you make stuff up, that a country, and not just wise men gave the gifts, then you play 'name that dreamed up country'. Foolishness.
they brought gifts that one king would give to another. poor sages do not have that sort of stuff laying around the house.
Who thought the wise men were poor??? The poor didn't generally go travelling around the world, following a star!
you wouldn't know an argument if you saw one.
Well, from this thread, you might have something. Work on that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by arachnophilia, posted 10-24-2007 12:29 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by arachnophilia, posted 10-26-2007 12:58 AM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 250 of 278 (430331)
10-24-2007 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by Vacate
10-24-2007 10:37 AM


Vacate Claims Bible Star is Real
# Semi-solid - The combination of both physical and spiritual simultaneously.
# De-Natured - The change in state from Semi-solid to totally spiritual. This is in reference to 101 years after the flood when God changed the nature of Heaven at the time of Babel.
# Version - The varieties of Heavens presented by simple, they differ either in location or in physical/spiritual characteristics
OK, I already had terms for that. The split was the new nature for man. Merged is both spiritual and physical. And version, really, doesn't matter much. Since it all is out of the realm of man. Even the pre Babel spiritual levels were, because we were never able to get there. That wasn't an option. God would simply not allow it.
Upon further clarification however this is not the case. The Heaven at the time of Babel was in fact semi-solid in nature and also de-natured before the events took place at the time of Jesus’ birth. No contradiction.
We really don't know that. We can assume that it was a place for spirits, as it still is, though separate from our heavens at the moment. New Jerusalem will be merged. Aside from that, the spiritual heavens do not really concern man. Spirits are spiritual, and the men living there are spirits, till they get their physical bodies resurrected. I see no value in guessing about the possible merged nature of heaven in general. For all intents and purposes that concern man, it is a spiritual place.
I was unable to know if this heaven was physical or if it existed not only at the time of Jesus death but also at his birth - I was unable to conclude if this was perhaps the contradiction that I had originally seen in the Heaven at the time of Babel Heaven. This was also not the case: This heaven was to be described as too high for man to reach, beyond the physical, in another dimension, way beyond mans abilities, etc (even though Jesus made attempts to show he was still human after his death).
Jesus was physical ans spiritual. But does that mean that heaven has to be as well?? Can you explain why a complete, eternal state man, in this case, God's son, could not live in a spiritual heaven?? If you can, maybe we can lock it down to having to be such. Otherwise, who cares??? I care about heaven when I get there, and how it will be for us in the coming eternal state new heavens.
Jesus lived at least three times in history. In Sodom, in the garden, and during his more well known years. ( Message 45 of Language and the Tower of Babel)
You can add the garden of Eden as well, if you like, and the creation of the universe to that. So??? He came down to earth as a man, that was not where He came to start to exist, in case you were thinking something like that.
Version one - Heaven at the time of Babel, This version had the unique attribute of being both physical and spiritual for a short time. It was 2-3000 feet above the ground and if it could be reached it granted eternal life to sinners. This version was short lived and was de-natured 101 years after the flood. ( Message 15 of Language and the Tower of Babel)
Version two - The Heaven that Jesus ascended to . This was a purely spiritual realm in a different dimension. It had the unique ability to transport a levitating Jesus from Earth to a distant realm. ( Message 50 of Language and the Tower of Babel)
Version three - New Jerusalem This 1500 square mile Heaven was created by Jesus after he ascended to version two. Soon to land on Earth this place is the new location for those that have been saved ( Message 50 of Language and the Tower of Babel)
Version four - Paradise under the Earth. The temporary resting place of souls before they had gone to the real Heaven. Currently not in use it seems. ( Message 182 of Christmas Star Explained and Message 208 of Christmas Star Explained)
Version four may still be there. It may have been there pre Babel as well. But, yes, it was there at the time of Jesus going to it. There is also hell down there, a place, like a prison, for spirits.
As for version 2 being spiritual more or less than pre Babel, we don't know that. It is out of our reach. As for it being able to transport the risen Christ to it, we don't know all the details. We do know that we can fly in our new bodies, and Jesus had His. We also know the Father was close at hand, for example, speaking at the baptism. Also, the topic is about the Father's ship being the Christmas star. If this ship was around, I don't see a better way to get home, than hitch a ride with Dad.
Oh, and about the heaven being de natured, after Babel. I thought I said separated?? Separated from our state universe. Again, the details of hell, and heaven, the place spirits live, I don't really know. Do you? I think that so far, what we can say is that a merged body can live there. I suppose we also saw that a merged body could even live here!!! As He did for, what was it a month or two, or some such after He rose from the dead?
Also, spirits can assume a body here, as they must have to have babies before Babel. What kind of body, who really knows?? A lot of movies picture spirits that come to earth, as forsaking their eternal state bodies, to become human. I have no idea. Hey, a funny thought! What if that little spiritual area near Babel was merged, because it was inhabited by the angels that liked to mingle with men?? So many mysteries, so little time.
As I say, I simply consider all heavens, and hell to be a spiritual place. At the moment. Don't think I am going to get locked into some guess as to that the spiritual is precisely like at the moment.
God is unable to contract a scribe to accurately describe a UFO and thus causing 2000 years of misunderstandings by Christians regarding the events described in the bible about the birth of Jesus
You attribute motives to God not revealing all things already. Eternity is a long time, and there will always be mysteries to explore, and uncover. Some things He takes His sweet time to reveal.
God zips around in a physical universe of his creation in a UFO. Unable to view his creation in total he must fly around like teens cruising on a Friday night. Though not stated - the imagery of long hair and sunglasses is unmistakable.
To say He is unable to do something, because He choses to do something else at times, is absurdly ignorant. We were made in His image, with choice. He takes pleasure in some things, and if He likes to cruise in God body, and fun starship at times, we can't assume that is because He is unable ALSO do a lot of other things, maybe at the same time. But that's another story.
The laws of physics that God created are not within a realm of study by humans. These laws are not constant and have changed in the past. The majesty of Gods creation is unknowable.
No, the laws are only constant since they came to be at the split. You assume they were 'created' as you say. They are a branch off, a change, a new state of the universe, or part we live in at least, from a created state that was different' Our laws were not the created state laws, but temporary state laws. We can study, and do study, about these laws, and how this universe now works. But we cannot pretend that this is how it will always be.
# God was unable to predict humans gaining knowledge about the location of Heaven 2-3000 feet above the Earth. Presumably the information was passed on from an angel that married a woman, as the only alternative is God informing them himself which is nonsensical.
That is all nonsensical guesswork. God told us lots of things. Maybe we could see it as well? Or maybe we could see UFOs coming or going from the area, or angels flying??
He has however managed to created a bumbling godlet unable to make one creation and stick to it.
It is man that messed up. Our sin was so great, as evidenced by the flood, that He possibly had to change the state of the universe to limit our lifespans, and keep the spiritual separate. After all, the universe was made for us. We are the reason it is in the state it is in.
I feel shame for those that could follow such a trivial religion.
So??? I feel sorry for those that think God is some inept liar.
I think it was a star, because it says so.
OK. So how could a star guide you to an exact house, moving precisely?? Remember also that almost any light in the night sky was called a star by the ancients, even planets.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Vacate, posted 10-24-2007 10:37 AM Vacate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Vacate, posted 10-25-2007 12:38 AM simple has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024