It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

what will be the topic after they arrive?

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedigirati
My wife and I have read this thread 3 times each, I guess I DID miss it doc, please quote it for me, thanks


Here you go, this was my first reply to you:


Originally posted by Doc Velocity
It is no secret that there is prophecy in the Old Testament of the coming of a Jewish messiah. This messiah is not named in the Old Testament, they only knew (or were told) that he would come from the bloodline of David. Throughout the latter books of the Old Testament, God was preparing the Jews for this coming, in an attempt to keep the bloodline pure. To this day, the Jews are still waiting for that messiah, because they don't believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ. No, Jews do not accept the New Testament's accounts of Jesus as the coming of The Christ.


— Doc Velocity

P.S. Oh yeeeeah. I got the top of the page. I win.


[edit on 2/28/2007 by Doc Velocity]




posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Don't you understand that Jesus was not universally recognized as the prophecized Jewish messiah? He was rejected by the Jews, for the most part. His following was negligible during his lifetime, although annoying enough to piss off all the wrong people. His "divinity" was proven to the apostles through his words and deeds, not through Old Testament prophecy, or else he would have been universally accepted.


Originally posted by thedigirati
your statements fall on themselves like a house of cards in the wind Doc. you sound like a Hoaxer that you loath so much. Engarde' defend yourself.............

Defend myself against a dog chasing his tail?


— Doc Velocity


external source

However, the claim to use the New Testament alone for authority is pointless if it is not applied. Thus, we must, in our service before the Lord, do and teach what is commanded and taught in the Scripture, neither going beyond (1 Cor 4:6) nor falling short (Jms 4:17) of that which is given. We should expect book, chapter and verse to be given for such things as are practiced and taught; for this we shall know the source is of God and not of man.

(Your source)
www.lookinguntojesus.net...


His birth and childhood are not mentioned in "Mark," and although he is claimed in "Matthew" and "Luke" to have been "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill prophecy." He is said in the first three (Synoptic) gospels to have taught for one year before he died, while in "John" the number is three years. "Matthew" relates that Jesus delivered "The Sermon on the Mount" before
"the multitudes," while "Luke" says it was a private talk given only to the disciples.

www.atheistwa.org...

Houston, we have a problem,
either the new testament church is wrong or the new testament is wrong, which is it, why would it matter about his birth at all if it was only his words and deeds that are requred for his divinity, I see a conundrum here.
So much for me chasing My tail..........



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedigirati
Houston, we have a problem

Well, I knew that as soon as you started talking.


Originally posted by thedigirati
either the new testament church is wrong or the new testament is wrong, which is it, why would it matter about his birth at all if it was only his words and deeds that are requred for his divinity, I see a conundrum here.


I see no conundrum. I see that you're fishing for a conundrum, but I'm not biting. I suppose it's enough for Christians to accept John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (King James)

That seems to be enough proof of divinity for most Christians. And it stands without the Old Testament.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmeartifacts
Im wondering what will everyone be doing after the ships show up in the sky or on the white house lawn.
Will we continue distrustfull conversation, this time regarding the alien agenda?

```````````````````
fixed title spelling

[edit on 27/2/07 by masqua]


I think they are calling the shots right now, don't you think that
the way things are right now.

The Might Hand wins, you listen to them.

They already flu around Washington DC, and did not have to land.
That was Hollywood following their direction to show a landing,
they didn't have to land.

What power they must have.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Originally posted by thedigirati
Houston, we have a problem

Well, I knew that as soon as you started talking.


Originally posted by thedigirati
either the new testament church is wrong or the new testament is wrong, which is it, why would it matter about his birth at all if it was only his words and deeds that are requred for his divinity, I see a conundrum here.


I see no conundrum. I see that you're fishing for a conundrum, but I'm not biting. I suppose it's enough for Christians to accept John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (King James)

That seems to be enough proof of divinity for most Christians. And it stands without the Old Testament.

— Doc Velocity


well of course you wouldn't you take it as chapter and verse regardless how it reads

However, the claim to use the New Testament alone for authority is pointless if it is not applied. Thus, we must, in our service before the Lord, do and teach what is commanded and taught in the Scripture, neither going beyond (1 Cor 4:6) nor falling short (Jms 4:17) of that which is given. We should expect book, chapter and verse to be given for such things as are practiced and taught; for ths we shall know the source is of God and not of man.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Doc Velocity's Number 1 Claim: That 99% of atheists have not read the Bible.

Fact: When asked to support this, he claims personal contact with enough atheists to arrive at this figure. When challenged about his lack of verifiable evidence he uses me as an example of an atheist who has not read the whole Bible to strengthen his case.

Doc Velocity's Revised Number 1 Claim: That 99.9% of atheists have not read the Bible. A stronger claim stated with less proof. Any researcher making a 99.9% claim, with authority, would of course be able to support this with the thousands of data required to support such a conclusion to a level of significance. Doc Velocity offers none.


Doc Velocity's Number 2 Claim: I was selling Christian Audio Books (plural) on eBay.

Fact: I was selling Christian music cassettes on eBay. They were not audio books. There is a distinct difference between music cassettes and audio books.

Doc Velocity's Revised Number 2 Claim: That I sold Christian tapes on eBay, supported by posting a link to the eBay add that does not mention the words 'audio books'. The add mentions that they are Christian cassette tapes and that they have 'tranquil music on offer'.


Doc Velocity's Number 3 Claim: I have not read the Bible and gave up part way through Genesis.

Fact: I have read Genesis and Revelations. I gave up through Exodus. I have never, ever stated anything to the contrary. I have not read the whole Bible, only the parts that I stated above.

Doc Velocity's Revised Number 3 Claim: ??? (He must have accepted that he got this wrong)


Doc Velocity, you take semi-truths and you perturb them with enough of your fertile imagination to transform fact into fiction. You are a disinformation specialist. You can't supply verifiable data to back up the significance of your 99.9% claim and you can't accurately recall facts as they have been previously written.

You contend to know that 99.9% of atheists are 'malcontents' without supplying verifiable data for the claim. Being an atheist yourself does not give you the authority to speculate that 99.9% of atheists 'seek to attack the Bible to support their beliefs'.

You also assume that I leave in a 'petulant huff' when a thread isn't going my way. False. There are only so many hours in the week. I don't follow every thread that I type. I let threads die when I don't follow them for a day or two. This forum is not the be-all-and-end-all of my life. The presumption of you to insert emotional overtones into my writing is dangerous. I mostly write with a dispassion to the subject material. However, there are a few threads in this forum where I write with comical overtones - those threads are for the most part comical by nature.

In the controversial field of UFO discussions and research, your lack of methodical research and eagerness to distort facts is typical.

I don't need to continue writing to you in this thread, as you have been shown to misinterpret the facts on more than one claim.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
I don't need to continue writing to you in this thread, as you have been shown to misinterpret the facts on more than one claim.


And with that, Tezz leaves in a petulant huff, as predicted, as usual. Although he typically says something about "beating his head against a wall" before caving in.


— Doc Velocity



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Personally it would be the topic of conversation for about 6 months and then it would die down like everything else does.. But as far as the world falling apart because of it, well I just can't see that happening.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Originally posted by tezzajw
I don't need to continue writing to you in this thread, as you have been shown to misinterpret the facts on more than one claim.


And with that, Tezz leaves in a petulant huff, as predicted, as usual. Although he typically says something about "beating his head against a wall" before caving in.


— Doc Velocity


No, Doc. tezzajw never leaves in a petulant huff. He realises the futility of trying to drag-out a topic by trading blows with a proven disinformation specialist like you.

I'm hardly caving in. I stand by proving your three claims for what they are - bunk.

[edit on 28-2-2007 by tezzajw]



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
What would be the topic of conversation? What was the thread topic again?
Anybody have a good recipe for hamwinkies?

Am I in the right thread?



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeahright
What would be the topic of conversation? What was the thread topic again?
Anybody have a good recipe for hamwinkies?

Am I in the right thread?


Yeah, true that.

I wonder how the aliens might have dealt with their disinformation specialists?

It might be worth challenging them to some simulated combat in some on-line first-person-shooter internet games. Without needing total warfare, we could battle them in simulated combat instead!



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   
» Aliens & UFOs » what will be the topic after they arrive? »

Please focus your responses on the Actual topic of discussion and NOT on a fellow member's person or character.


Thank you.





... and now we return to:

» Aliens & UFOs » what will be the topic after they arrive? »



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Me. I will be home with my wife and kids sitting in front of the TV with a big and I do mean BIG glass of Jack Daniels. I will try my best to keep my wife and kids calm while Jack is trying to keep me calm. All that I thought was true will come true. Seriously I would not let my kids out of my sight. Not for the fear of the aliens but for the fear of humans who will be out on the prowl to shoot anything that moves.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Sorry I forgot to mention the Topic. How all the people of earth reacted to the invasion or landings. From politicians to religous groups, fanatics, etc........



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stale Cracker
...that that'll even be enough to convince the die-hard skeptics. So we'll probably still be on here, trying to make a case for their existence.



Oh, do give us some credit. I'll be convinced when it's pretty darn obvious that aliens have landed, they're right there on all the major news networks (not on video sent in by yokels, but *live*), etc. I'll be convinced when the evidence is no longer made up of lens flare, zoom-lens bracket shadows, insects, seagulls, hoaxes, ice particles, planes on a landing glide-path, sleep-paralysis hallucinations, meditative religious experiences, etc.

When they get here, we will know it. And even us "die hard skeptics" will be asking not whether they exist, but why they're here and what's going to happen next.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   
You are so right. I will be talking to everyone I know and asking all those questions. Why are they here now and not earlier. Why did the government lie to us if that is the case. What are they wanting us to do? Or why us? So many questions to ask. The president will come out and speak to the nation and people will ask questions and want answers.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
No, Doc. tezzajw never leaves in a petulant huff. He realises the futility of trying to drag-out a topic by trading blows with a proven disinformation specialist like you.


I've been called a lot of things in my time, but never a "specialist"


— Doc Velocity



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 03:14 PM
link   


what will be the topic after they arrive?

Im wondering what will everyone be doing after the ships show up in the sky or on the white house lawn.
Will we continue distrustfull conversation, this time regarding the alien agenda?


What WOULDN'T be the topic???

What's their agenda?
How much did the government know?
Will they share technology?
Do they too taste like chicken?




top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join