An Urgent Message

If you go by Revelation... then we are under constant threat of the end of the world as we know it - so, at some point, one of these predictions will come true. There have been thousands, probably more, in the past - there will be thousands more in the future.

Why pay more attention to Wilkerson than any of the other prophecies regarding the 'end of the world as we know it'?

I was pointing out he has done this lots, and guess what? We are still here. His track record obviously isn't that good.

Maybe Wilkerson and God have their communication lines a bit mixed up. Perhaps he is off by a millennium or two or a thousand...

And Calabrio - one of the prettiest places on earth are the Berkshires in the fall - they are magical. Hopefully Wilkerson's fires won't stretch that far.
 
And Calabrio - one of the prettiest places on earth are the Berkshires in the fall - they are magical. Hopefully Wilkerson's fires won't stretch that far.

I was up there for thanksgiving, in Williamstown, MA.
 
If you go by Revelation... then we are under constant threat of the end of the world as we know it - so, at some point, one of these predictions will come true. There have been thousands, probably more, in the past - there will be thousands more in the future.

Why pay more attention to Wilkerson than any of the other prophecies regarding the 'end of the world as we know it'?

I was pointing out he has done this lots, and guess what? We are still here. His track record obviously isn't that good.

Maybe Wilkerson and God have their communication lines a bit mixed up. Perhaps he is off by a millennium or two or a thousand...

And Calabrio - one of the prettiest places on earth are the Berkshires in the fall - they are magical. Hopefully Wilkerson's fires won't stretch that far.
I wasn't paying attention to Wilkerson until Shag brought it up and you haters started taking potshots at him. Maybe you should think twice about attacking Christians reflexively. But 'having communication lines mixed up' is a far cry from needing medication. Perhaps if you leftoids stopped using so much hyperbole, you wouldn't get such a strong reaction.

probably about 4 billion or so more years. that's about the time the sun will become a red giant and either engulf the earth, or come very close to it. congradulations. you found a prediction within the bible that will come true at a time nobody will be left to see it.(well, at least not on earth)
Uh-huh. Not. The Bible is very specific about prophecy, and although I don't know if it will happen in my lifetime, it will certainly happen sooner than 4 billion years, or 4 million, or even 40,000. And it's not the sun that will do it.
 
I wasn't paying attention to Wilkerson until Shag brought it up and you haters started taking potshots at him. Maybe you should think twice about attacking Christians reflexively. But 'having communication lines mixed up' is a far cry from needing medication. Perhaps if you leftoids stopped using so much hyperbole, you wouldn't get such a strong reaction.

I never said that he needed medication or that he was on drugs... best not to lump all of us liberals in one boat... Each of the conservatives here travels in their own little skiff... I have names for each of your tiny vessels...;)

I thought Wilkerson did great work in New York early in his career dealing with kids and drugs and gangs. He should return to those early successes, because I think that is where his real calling is. Not doom and gloom prophecies that don't really help anyone.

And I would never reflexively attack Christians. I know you don't think I am a Christian, Foss, but I am.
 
I wasn't paying attention to Wilkerson until Shag brought it up and you haters started taking potshots at him. Maybe you should think twice about attacking Christians reflexively. But 'having communication lines mixed up' is a far cry from needing medication. Perhaps if you leftoids stopped using so much hyperbole, you wouldn't get such a strong reaction.

Uh-huh. Not. The Bible is very specific about prophecy, and although I don't know if it will happen in my lifetime, it will certainly happen sooner than 4 billion years, or 4 million, or even 40,000. And it's not the sun that will do it.

as stated, bible prophecy has been wrong before and will be wrong again. so much for truth in the bible.

but technically, you are correct.(possibly) could be a big a$$ meteor comes ripping through the sky at any time between now and then. but the sun engulfing the earth(or nearly engulfing) is a given.

and WE HATERS(your words. i'd use skeptic or similar) aren't taking potshots at him. you tell me the difference between him and any other loon that has said the world was going to end in the last 1000 years. when you make such claims, you open yourself up to ridicule. considering he's been wrong before, it would be a fair assumption to admit he's crying wolf.(some people always seek attention, whether it be good or bad).

and it's not attacking a christian reflexively, it's going after yet another doomsayer who falls in a long history of doomsayers who have all 1 thing in common. they were wrong. but in this case, not the first time wrong.

besides, can't happen until the temple is rebuilt on the temple mount.:N
 
as stated, bible prophecy has been wrong before and will be wrong again. so much for truth in the bible.
Name one.


and WE HATERS(your words. i'd use skeptic or similar) aren't taking potshots at him. you tell me the difference between him and any other loon that has said the world was going to end in the last 1000 years. when you make such claims, you open yourself up to ridicule. considering he's been wrong before, it would be a fair assumption to admit he's crying wolf.(some people always seek attention, whether it be good or bad).
No, I'm comfortable using the word 'haters.' You've spewed enough vitriol to suffice.
 
there is no reliable/irrefutable historical evidence of jesus written within his time. there is no definitive proof he ever existed. but then we were talking prophecies, and was asked to name one that failed.

jesus himself was a prophecy. and fails to live up to the points of the prophecy.(there are many, which many he fails to be tied to)
 
there is no reliable/irrefutable historical evidence of jesus written within his time. there is no definitive proof he ever existed. but then we were talking prophecies, and was asked to name one that failed.

jesus himself was a prophecy. and fails to live up to the points of the prophecy.(there are many, which many he fails to be tied to)
There is plenty of evidence Jesus existed. There were many eyewitnesses from whom we have written accounts. You might as well demand physical proof that George Washington existed.

Even the notoriously anti-Christian mainstream media admits He existed.

But even if there weren't, absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.
 
eyewitnesses? that lived in the day of jesus? the accounts of jesus don't appear until after his death. not from people who would have personally known or seen him in life.

and absence of evidence is very telling of a man who was supposed to have such a following. there should be lots written from historians of the day.
 
eyewitnesses? that lived in the day of jesus? the accounts of jesus don't appear until after his death. not from people who would have personally known or seen him in life.

and absence of evidence is very telling of a man who was supposed to have such a following. there should be lots written from historians of the day.
Moving the goalposts again? Based on your 'burden of proof,' nobody can prove that Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar existed either.

[hrmwrm stamps foot] But I want proof!!!!!

Matthew 16:4 - A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were eyewitnesses, as was the apostle Paul, who saw Jesus and wrote several books of the Bible.

Flavius Josephus wrote a lot about Jesus, as did several other Roman and Greek historians, such as Juvenal, Tacitus, Seneca, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Lucian, and Celsus, none of which were Christians.

The Jews acknowledge the existence of Jesus in the Talmud, despite rejecting Him as the Messiah. The fact that the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament is preserved from hundreds of years before Christ in Hebrew, coupled with the fact that Jesus appeared in Greek manuscripts exactly according to prophecy hundreds of years after the Old Testament was written, is strong evidence as well. The Greek New Testament verifies the prophecies in the Old Testament, and the Greek New Testament has been shown to be historically accurate.

According to the generally accepted historical record, Christians in the first and second century were persecuted and fed to the lions within the lifetime of people who knew Jesus. The fact that they believed He was real and chose to be tortured to death under Nero rather than deny the gospel lends strong credibility as well. Most people would not choose a violent, tortuous death to defend a lie. Most wouldn't choose it to defend the truth.

I've offered evidence, but not proof. You, on the other hand, will be unable to prove Jesus didn't exist.

Now, it's your turn to 'offer' some evidence. And just saying 'baloney' to mine won't cut it. Nor will continuing to move the goalposts.
 
Fossten he lacks the faith to believe, I believe that Jesus existed and that is enough for me.
 
mattew, mark, luke , and john were NOT eyewitnesses. all writings are of a much later date.

julius caesar and alexander the great have lots written in history about them. nice try, but lame arguement.

josephus flavius, has a passage in "antiquities of the jews" about jesus, brother of james. hardly telling.
the "testimonium flavinius" is highly disputed, and considered since the 18th century to be at a minimum an embellishment, if not an outright forgery.

juvenal also is late in the 1st to early 2nd century. hardly an eyewitness.

seneca is not an eyewitness, but had correspondance with paul. this was also during nero's reign. that puts it after the supposed death of christ. sounds like paul was trying to get him to become christian within the letters.

tacitus wrote in his "annals" about 116ce about the roman fires in 64 during nero's reign. written as late as it was does not make for an historical account.

i can continue, but as i said, we WERE discussing prophecy, and whether christ fulfilled the prophecy, not whether he existed or not. that was the arguement you created. look back, and you will see. i stated bible prophecy has been wrong before, and will be wrong again. you even quoted it from me.

and if you wish, i can make an arguement against paul, who seems to be the only original source of a messiahship. this of course gets into the dead sea scrolls and proves there was a sect of believers in a messiah within the jewish community dating before jesus as well. so it was not a new concept.

should try a read of "the messiah before jesus"by israel knohl. could send it pdf by email(7.44mb) pm if you wish.
 
mattew, mark, luke , and john were NOT eyewitnesses. all writings are of a much later date.
Yes they were. They were his disciples.

julius caesar and alexander the great have lots written in history about them. nice try, but lame arguement.
So does Jesus. Lame comeback.

josephus flavius, has a passage in "antiquities of the jews" about jesus, brother of james. hardly telling.
the "testimonium flavinius" is highly disputed, and considered since the 18th century to be at a minimum an embellishment, if not an outright forgery.

juvenal also is late in the 1st to early 2nd century. hardly an eyewitness.

seneca is not an eyewitness, but had correspondance with paul. this was also during nero's reign. that puts it after the supposed death of christ. sounds like paul was trying to get him to become christian within the letters.

tacitus wrote in his "annals" about 116ce about the roman fires in 64 during nero's reign. written as late as it was does not make for an historical account.

i can continue, but as i said, we WERE discussing prophecy, and whether christ fulfilled the prophecy, not whether he existed or not. that was the arguement you created. look back, and you will see. i stated bible prophecy has been wrong before, and will be wrong again. you even quoted it from me.

and if you wish, i can make an arguement against paul, who seems to be the only original source of a messiahship. this of course gets into the dead sea scrolls and proves there was a sect of believers in a messiah within the jewish community dating before jesus as well. so it was not a new concept.

should try a read of "the messiah before jesus"by israel knohl. could send it pdf by email(7.44mb) pm if you wish.
As I suspected, your entire argument is 'nuh-uh.' You still haven't specified which prophecy Jesus didn't fulfil.

You FAIL.

If you really want to learn something, try this book.
 
one he didn't fulfill, is to be from the line of david. he was born of a virgin, through immaculate conception. so joseph was not his father. yet they use joseph as the line to gain descendency from david.(i won't get into the discrepancies of geneology between matthew and luke, like was jesus's grandfather jacob(matthew 1:16) or eli?(luke 3:23))(thought the bible was truth with no discrepancies)

he was to be born of a virgin, prophecy filled isaiah 7:14
7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

i don't remember mary ever referring to jesus as immanuel. there are many, but you get the point.

but then, i don't know if you take prophecy seriously, or just the last prophecies that suit your ideals.

and outside of christian texts, penned many years after, there is not alot written about jesus, sorry to say.
the writings of matthew, luke and john's earliest manuscripts date well after the passing of jesus, and haven't been attruibuted to being written by them.


funny nothing can be dated to during jesus life. if they were eyewitnesses, why wait til after death to write.
 
truths of the bible

after the nicene decree celsus wrote of the church leaders" you utter fables, you do not even possess the art of making them seem likely. you have altered three, four times and oftener the texts of your own gospels in order to deny any objection to you".


"Thus, unless one supposes the argument of Irenæus to
be other than ridiculous, we come to the conclusion that the gospels are of unknown origin and
authorship, and there is no good reason to suppose they are eye-witness accounts of a man named
Jesus of Nazareth."


It is clear that the gospels of Matthew and Luke could not possibly have been written by an
eye-witness of the tales they tell. Both writers plagiarize (largely word-for-word) up to 90% of the
gospel of Mark, to which they add sayings of Jesus and would-be historical details. Matthew and
Luke contradict each other in such critical details as the genealogy of Jesus - and thus cannot both
be correct. It is significant that it is only these two gospels that purport to tell anything of Jesus'
birth, childhood, or ancestry. Both can be dismissed as unreliable without further cause. We can
know nothing of Jesus' childhood or origin!

fossten stamps foot "but it is truth"


Philo-Judæus
Seneca
Pliny Elder
Arrian
Petronius
Dion Pruseus
Paterculus
Suetonius
Juvenal
Martial
Persius
Plutarch
Pliny Younger
Tacitus
Justus of Tiberius
Apollonius
Quintilian
Lucanus
Epictetus
Hermogones Silius Italicus
Statius
Ptolemy
Appian
Phlegon
Phædrus
Valerius Maximus
Lucian
Pausanias
Florus Lucius
Quintius Curtius
Aulus Gellius
Dio Chrysostom
Columella
Valerius Flaccus
Damis
Favorinus
Lysias
Pomponius Mela
Appion of Alexandria
According to Remsburg, "Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list
remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged
passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman
writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ." Nor, we may add, do any of these authors
make note of the Disciples or Apostles - increasing the embarrassment from the silence of history
concerning the foundation of Christianity.
 
Ah, but mr Worm, have you read Lamb, The Gospel According to Biff? I think most of your questions regarding Christ's childhood could be answered there. I especially like the game of 'bring the lizard back to life' and how they always argued on who got to be Moses when they played 'parting of the Red Sea'.
 
Must have taken you days to find that baloney on the net. Yawn. hrmwrm, you cut and paste and don't link, and your cut and pastes are filled with incoherency.

If you try to deny the genealogy of Jesus, you must accept the virgin birth. If you deny the virgin birth, you accept His genealogy.

You can't have it both ways.

Joseph’s paternal grandmother, Estha, married Mathan, a descendant of David, through Salomon, and gave him a son; Jacob, whereupon Mathan died. Estha married Mathat, another descendent of David, through Nathan (a less known son of King David). According to the tradition she gave her second husband a son, namely Heli.

So, according to the tradition, Jacob and Heli, who both have been named fathers of Joseph, are half-brothers, having the same mother.

Heli married, but died, having had no children. Following Jewish custom, Jacob married Heli’s widow, in order to give posterity to his brother, which he also did. One of these children was Joseph.

This ancient tradition, if it be true, would render both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies of Jesus absolutely spot on correct, even though they differ dramatically since one might describe the family line with the biological father (Jacob), while the other makes the description with the father according to the law (Heli).

EITHER WAY, Jesus is a descendant of David.

Neither the Bible nor the Talmud differentiate between adoptive sons and biological sons. The lines are based on inheritance.

You FAIL.
 
"If you try to deny the genealogy of Jesus, you must accept the virgin birth. If you deny the virgin birth, you accept His genealogy."


that is the point fossten. if you accept the virgin birth, you can't accept the geneology, which makes jesus not a descendant of David. in which jesus does not fit the prophecy of a messiah. YOU can't have it both ways. that is what christianity does.

i don't link because it's from an ebook on my computer. ever read the nag hammadi library? just starting on that. it has a very different outlook of christianity. from the same era, but deemed heretical by iraneus.


just wondering fossten. how does your faith deal with the similarities of all previous son's of god's deemed myth by christians? when jesus has the same qualities of them?
this is from "the origins of christianity", although similar info can be found elsewhere.

Buddha
Although most people think of Buddha as being one person who lived around 500 B.C.E., the
character commonly portrayed as Buddha can also be demonstrated to be a compilation of godmen,
legends and sayings of various holy men both preceding and succeeding the period attributed to the
Buddha.
The Buddha character has the following in common with the Christ figure:
Buddha was born of the virgin Maya, who was considered the "Queen of Heaven."
He was of royal descent.
He crushed a serpent's head.
Sakyamuni Buddha had 12 disciples.
He performed miracles and wonders, healed the sick, fed 500 men from a "small basket of
cakes," and walked on water.
He abolished idolatry, was a "sower of the word," and preached "the establishment of a
kingdom of righteousness."
He taught chastity, temperance, tolerance, compassion, love, and the equality of all.
He was transfigured on a mount.
Sakya Buddha was crucified in a sin-atonement, suffered for three days in hell, and was
resurrected.
He ascended to Nirvana or "heaven."
Buddha was considered the "Good Shepherd" the "Carpenter", the "Infinite and
Everlasting."
He was called the "Savior of the World" and the "Light of the World."
Horus of Egypt

The stories of Jesus and Horus are very similar, with Horus even contributing the name of Jesus
Christ. Horus and his once-and-future Father, Osiris, are frequently interchangeable in the mythos ("I
and my Father are one"). The legends of Horus go back thousands of years, and he shares the
following in common with Jesus:
Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Meri on December 25th in a cave/manger, with his birth
being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
He was a child teacher in the Temple and was baptized when he was 30 years old.
Horus was also baptized by "Anup the Baptizer," who becomes "John the Baptist."
He had 12 disciples.
He performed miracles and raised one man, El-Azar-us, from the dead.
He walked on water.
Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
He was crucified, buried in a tomb and resurrected.
He was also the "Way, the Truth, the Light, the Messiah, God's Anointed Son, the Son of Man,
the Good Shepherd, the Lamb of God, the Word" etc.
He was "the Fisher," and was associated with the Lamb, Lion and Fish ("Ichthys").
Horus's personal epithet was "Iusa," the "ever-becoming son" of "Ptah," the "Father."
Horus was called "the KRST," or "Anointed One," long before the Christians duplicated the
story.
In fact, in the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the virgin mother Isis
- the original "Madonna and Child"- and the Vatican itself is built upon the papacy of Mithra
who shares many qualities with Jesus and who existed as a deity long before the Jesus character was
formalized. The Christian hierarchy is nearly identical to the Mithraic version it replaced. Virtually
all of the elements of the Catholic ritual, from miter to wafer to water to altar to doxology, are
directly taken from earlier pagan mystery religions.


Mithra, Sungod of Persia
The story of Mithra precedes the Christian fable by at least 600 years. According to Wheless, the cult
of Mithra was, shortly before the Christian era, "the most popular and widely spread 'Pagan' religion
of the times." Mithra has the following in common with the Christ character:
Mithra was born on December 25th.
He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
He had 12 companions or disciples.
He performed miracles.
He was buried in a tomb.
After three days he rose again.
His resurrection was celebrated every year.
Mithra was called "the Good Shepherd."
He was considered "the Way, the Truth and the Light, the Redeemer, the Savior, the Messiah."
He was identified with both the Lion and the Lamb.
His sacred day was Sunday, "the Lord's Day," hundreds of years before the appearance of
Christ.
Mithra had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, at which time he was
resurrected.
His religion had a Eucharist or "Lord's Supper."


Krishna of India
The similarities between the Christian character and the Indian messiah are many. Indeed, Massey
finds over 100 similarities between the Hindu and Christian saviors, and Graves, who includes the
various noncanonical gospels in his analysis, lists over 300 likenesses. It should be noted that a
common earlier English spelling of Krishna was "Christna," which reveals its relation to '"Christ." It
should also be noted that, like the Jewish godman, many people have believed in a historical,
carnalized Krishna.
Krishna was born of the Virgin Devaki ("Divine One")
His father was a carpenter.
His birth was attended by angels, wise men and shepherds, and he was presented with gold,
frankincense and myrrh.
He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
He was of royal descent.
He was baptized in the River Ganges.
He worked miracles and wonders.
He raised the dead and healed lepers, the deaf and the blind.
Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love.
"He lived poor and he loved the poor."
He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven.
Krishna is called the "Shepherd God" and "Lord of lords," and was considered "the Redeemer,
Firstborn, Sin Bearer, Liberator, Universal Word."
He is the second person of the Trinity, and proclaimed himself the "Resurrection" and the
"way to the Father."
He was considered the "Beginning, the Middle and the End," ("Alpha and Omega"), as well as
being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent.
His disciples bestowed upon him the title "Jezeus," meaning "pure essence."
Krishna is to return to do battle with the "Prince of Evil," who will desolate the earth.

Prometheus of Greece
The Greek god Prometheus has been claimed to have come from Egypt, but his drama took place in
the Caucasus mountains. Prometheus shares a number of striking similarities with the Christ
character.
Prometheus descended from heaven as God incarnate as man, to save mankind.
He was crucified, suffered and rose from the dead.
He was called the Logos or Word.
Five centuries before the Christian era, esteemed Greek poet Aeschylus wrote Prometheus Bound,
which, according to Taylor, was presented in the theater in Athens. Taylor claims that in the play
Prometheus is crucified "on a fatal tree" and the sky goes dark:
"The darkness which closed the scene on the suffering Prometheus, was easily exhibited
on the stage, by putting out the lamps; but when the tragedy was to become history, and
the fiction to be turned into fact, the lamp of day could not be so easily disposed of. Nor
can it be denied that the miraculous darkness which the Evangelists so solemnly declare
to have attended the crucifixion of Christ, labours under precisely the same fatality of an
absolute and total want of evidence."
Tradition holds that Prometheus was crucified on a rock, yet some sources have opined that legend
also held he was crucified on a tree and that Christians muddled the story and/or mutilated the text,
as they did with the works of so many ancient authors. In any case, the sun hiding in darkness
parallels the Christian fable of the darkness descending when Jesus was crucified. This remarkable
occurrence is not recorded in history but is only explainable within the Mythos and as part of a recurring play."




so what would lead one to believe jesus was nothing more than a re-creation of any of these gods within the jewish faith. an amalgamation, if you will.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top