It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Seeking 'New Ager' help to better understand full meanings of some buzzwords

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 10:29 PM
reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Here we go... what does this have to do with "new age buzzwords"

The Father and Son are in eachother, that makes Yeshua God.


That makes him a part of God...

8 Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.”

9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Read the entire chapter....

14 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

Gee, all that belongs to teh Father belongs to the Son. That includes, worship and praise, the Mercy Seat, the White Throne, all of Heaven and Earth and all Creation.

33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?

34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?

35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Doesn't sound like this is his world to me...

Who did Jesus Glorify, himself or the Father?

Here's a nice one, lets kick it old school with the book of Daniel:

Must we...

Daniel 7:9

9 “I watched till thrones were put in place,
And the Ancient of Days was seated;
His garment was white as snow,
And the hair of His head was like pure wool.
His throne was a fiery flame,
Its wheels a burning fire;

Fascinating, the Ancient of Days has white hair pure as wool and white garments. Now lets see who shows up in Revelation looking like the Ancient of Days.

Revelation 1: 14-17

Not interested in either book honestly....

Ah yes and when Yeshua was crucified they wrote: "Yeshua of Nazareth, King of the Jews" and the jews wanted the sign torn down, not because of the claim he was their King, but because in Aramaic it had the Tetragrammaton YHVH imbedded in it. Irony? Hows this look for ya?

Yes... imagine how they felt when they saw a bloody and beaten, innocent dead man hanging there... with the name of their God over his head.

Then ask yourself... is your God... the God of the living, or the dead?

Heres a few hints...

Matthew 22:32
I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Mark 12:27
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

Luke 20:38
For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by Akragon

This is a pointless excersice in futility because all we're going to do is keep throwing scripture back and forth and neither one is going to see it the other's way so i am just gonna let it be.

Good day.

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:15 AM
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

I tryed to get that point across on the last page...

To many thread turn into this debate in the religious section

I gave up arguing it long ago... and try to avoid it at all costs, which doesn't always work as you can see...


Lets find some "new agers" and beat on them for a while

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by Akragon

Actually it's not even debate.

It's nothing more than a series of:


That's the thing about the Bible, for every verse there is an equal but opposite verse.

It really shouldn't be that way.

If the Bible were truly perfect there would be absolutely no contradictions in it of any sort.

Sorry folks but what a person believes is none of your business. Let them be and stop trying to convert them.

We need to stop derailing this guys thread.

That's the thing about Christians is they always attempt to dominate discussions with their bull crap proselytizing and conversion attempts and can't understand common courtesy and respect.

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:17 AM
And it always amuses me to see non-believers use the Bible verses in the exact same way Christians use them to support their beliefs.

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:30 AM
reply to post by Azadok2day

If you believe this then your reading and comprehension skills are childlike or you never read the bible and have repeated what you heard or just out and out prevaricated.

No trying to parrot you, but that statement shows very clearly that it is you who have not read, or performed your research on the Bible, but in fact, you are either guessing, or repeating what someone told you to say and believe.
The Two Gods, the OT one and the NT one, and vastly different, and have different names too, if, that is, you can tell from all of the Gods that are listed in the bible, but, you would know that if you had actually read it. Here. let me be of help:
The Gods Of The Bible

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:58 AM
Want to know the "New Age" buzzwords? Here are a few:

You see, Christianity is the New Age religion here, because Paganism has been around for more years than the Christians believe the Earth existed.
Paganism is a blanket term that covers any non-Abrahamic (Jewish, Christian, and Islam) religion. There are many Polytheistic religions (Pagan) that have origins much older than Christianity. After all Christianity is only 2000 years old, + or - a few years. Many polytheistic religions were around for thousands of years before Jesus ever was conceived of, and a Goddess was worshipped for thousands of years before the Church.

The first shrine to the Goddess Artemis was probably built around 800 B.C. on a marshy strip near the river at Ephesus. The Ephesus Goddess Artemis, sometimes called Diana, is not the same figure as the Artemis worshipped in Greece. The Greek Artemis is the goddess of the hunt. The Ephesus Artemis was a goddess of fertility and was often pictured as draped with eggs, or multiple breasts, symbols of fertility, from her waist to her shoulders.

So there you have it, the real New Age Religion!

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:48 PM
reply to post by autowrench

I didn't ask what you perceived to be new age buzzwords. I ask for specific understanding of the words I listed. Try to stay on topic. Or try to answer some other questions I posed about the channeled messages or Ben Fulford stuff.

The spirit of Jesus was with Adam and Eve in Eden and the burning bush of Moses....(Christianity from the very beginning....before even goddess, sacrifice your child to Ishtar/Tanit at the Tophet or prostitute young girls to the priests in the Temple of Isis, worship)

Unfortunately for paganism they can't prove conclusively the world is older than 8,000 years old......
edit on 17-6-2012 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:20 PM
There is overwhelming scientific evidence that the oldest rocks on the Earth are 3.6 to 3.8 billion years old, that the oldest rocks on the Moon are 4.4 to 4.6 billion years old, and that the Earth, the Moon, and meteorites all formed about 4.5 to 4.6 billion years ago. In addition, these same dating techniques have conclusively verified by science. There can be no doubt about the Earth’s Antiquity; the evidence is abundant, very conclusive, and available to and and all who care to research and examine it. To believe Mother Earth is but 8000 years old is absurd, and we at ATS are all about the denial of ignorance, not the furtherance of it.

Goddess worship: that real "old time religion?"

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 03:08 PM

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

The Father and Son are in eachother, that makes Yeshua God.

But you are forgetting the fact that, according to the bible, anyone who lives in love lives IN God.

"God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him." - (1 John 4:16)

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 04:11 PM
reply to post by JesuitGarlic

Unfortunately for paganism they can't prove conclusively the world is older than 8,000 years old......

I guess you missed the mighty "Slayer's" latest thread....

Ancient Flute

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 04:18 PM
Dark side is the negative polarity, or shadow, or LEGION, some are entity, some revelations 9/11 the abyss, some are corporal ETs and those hybrids and black ops serving them here.

Duality, similar and classic gnostic understanding, kabbala and Christian (at least the leaders). the black and white checkerboard floor of the Solomon's temple, of mason halls, of the Vatican's buildings, even: the choices we have, light as a feather, graduation, angel wings, or heavy base, gravity, the black hole of murder. Infinite frequenceis and channels in this universal school, the heavy ones go to winterlands and hellzones.

Duality is programmed into our body and the school. And is the exam as well: love/hate, charity/greed, non-reaction/retaliation, kind/cruel.


The Galactic Federation: well, many different cosmic organizations. That one is claiming to be the GLF, and actually like the name, its a human term. But it doesnt hurt. I know they're in organizations. Plus there are many councils.

The universe is Heaven, the schools of heaven, a matrix, hologram, in infinity, there is no time, space fabric could be seen as infinite flm or snapshots of time.

Stars mirrors, and this world school, which has been hijacked by the dark side and annanuki, or a branch of them, is actually a reflection of our home.
edit on 17-6-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:00 PM
reply to post by autowrench

Rock dating is not considered reliable enough to be conclusive. The examples are legion of rock samples of known age (formed by recent volcanic eruptions) have dates with ages of 50 million years or whatever old when it is known they are only a few years old.

According to wiki:

Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event, occurred approximately 65.5 million years ago

And yet we know that the Cretaceous layer, also known as the chalk layer, is the only universal layer around and had to form in water (to create all the soft shelled, calcium carbon, sea creatures). We know from the chronology in the bible that the said 'universal flood' occurred around 2900 B.C. (if my memory serves me correct) and that the oldest living things in existence with verified ages date no older than this supposed time of the flood event.

list of oldest verified trees

Which date is correct for the Cretaceous layer, 65.5 million years or 4900 years old!

I could show geological features created from the Mt St Helen's volcanic eruptions and resulting flood that conventionally would be said to have taken millions of years to create and yet the features were created over the span of a known time of only a few days and some times a few hours under these extreme flood conditions
edit on 17-6-2012 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:25 PM
reply to post by JesuitGarlic

You do know theres absolutely no proof that a "global flood" ever happened...

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:41 PM
reply to post by Akragon

Deny Ignorance and watch.....Presentations by top zoological professor

101 - The Earth in Time and Space
Description: In this video, the big bang theory of origins and its plausibility are discussed. The catastrophic origin of the geological column is presented in full multimedia format. Evidence for rapid water deposition of the layers of the geological column, canyon formation, erosional features, paraconformites(missing time zones,) are discussed together with their age implications. The standard geological view is contrasted with the Biblical view enabling the viewer to make a choice between the two models.

102 - A Universal Flood
Description: Science today denies a universal flood, as it would destroy the continuity of the fossil record in the geological column. In this video, evidence for precisely such a universal phenomenon is presented with fascinating video material from modern day catastrophes on a smaller scale. The origin of the petrified forests and their flood implications are also discussed.

Title: 103 - Bones in Stones
Description: The fossil record is discussed and a catastrophic origin is constrasted with the standard paradigm of evolution over long time periods. Alternative models for the apparent order in the fossil record are presented together with evidence for the sudden appearance of all life forms during the so-called "Cambrian explosion." The origins of dinosaurs, their demise are also discussed, as well as evidence for the simultaneous appearance of numerous life forms are presented in support of the Biblical model.

104 - Where Mammals Reigned
Description: In this lecture, the ice ages are discussed and reasons for mammalian distribution and appearance in the upper portion of the geological column are presented. The evolution of man and the time constraints in terms of recolonization of the post flood Earth are also discussed.

105 - The Genes of Genesis
Description: Darwinism and natural selection as models for the evolution of life are contrated with origin by design. Biochemical evolution, speciation, and the origin of variety are presented in full multimedia format. This fascinating lecture includes examples of irreducible complexity, discusses the core of genetic problems involved in the evolutionary process, and is presented in simple terms so that even non-scientists can understand the principles involved.

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:00 PM
reply to post by JesuitGarlic

Rock dating is not considered reliable enough to be conclusive.

Neither is your book, if that is what you are using for a source on how old the Earth is. And we all know that book is full of myths and tall tales, don't we? This world and Human Beings have been around for a few billion years, my friend, wake up will you? We are now living in the Fourth World since the beginning. Soon we will be living in the Fifth World. At least some of will, don't know about you religious types. Most will go to the Christian Hell, I suppose, for nothing else but threatening everyone else with it.

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:21 PM
reply to post by autowrench

Unfortunately your paradigm of earth age does not fit the observed data. Your age range definitively does not fit observed erosion rates (this is the most obvious factor that the age measurement is wrong or else all the landmass would have been eroded away in the the ocean already), does not fit observed stalagmite and stalactite growth rates and does not fit growth rates of ice layers. If the observed data does fit then the paradigm is wrong.

Why is the age of the Cretaceous layer given as 65.5 million years?
It is an extinction level event and for evolutionary theory to have a hope to work back from square one they have to alter the age. The only furtherance of ignorance going on are people who swallow the BS of macro-evolution. There is no evidence observed or in the fossil record of macro-evolutionary processes leading to transitions in species. What is observed in the fossil record though is every phylum present and fully developed at the time of the Cambrian explosion leading no time in the geological layers for macro-evolution to have any say. The most common evolutionary process we observe is at the micro level leading to differentiation between kinds but this process does not involve an increase in genetic complexity, rather either an alternate expression of existing genes or devolutionary genetic mutations making organisms less complex.

It is ironic that Christians or religion gets the blame for holding up science when it is science fudging the numbers and producing poor fitting models of observed data instead. It is ironic that leaving it up to the 'scientists' led American's to have an average age expectancy of only 39 years around the 1850's (doctors prescribing smoking to cure bronchitis, arsenic like in rat poison for other ills, never washing the blood from their hands as they went from one patient to the next). It is ironic that using cleanliness principles inspired from teaching in the Old Testament that a Christian, Joseph Lister, almost by himself raised average age expectancies by 10 years (despite people thinking his practices crazy at the time) and is credited as being the Father of modern surgery. It is ironic that dietary and health practices that many people in my church follow derived from basically Old Testament teaching has made Adventists the longest living culture in the entire world and only in 2005 with the most comprehensive study ever undertaken, the China study does it affirm the diet that is best for us being the one recommended to us in the Old Testament. That's that I can ironic and completely ignorant on the part of the scientific community.
edit on 17-6-2012 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:23 PM
reply to post by autowrench

Please list for me all the myths and tall tales you can come up with from the Bible. Put your money where your mouth is...

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:30 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

Thank you for your post....I will have to go over it a few times to take it all in I think

posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 04:08 AM
reply to post by autowrench

This world and Human Beings have been around for a few billion years, my friend, wake up will you? We are now living in the Fourth World since the beginning.

So we have basically full chronicled histories back for almost 7 thousand years. We have the the Cambrian explosion showing every creature appears suddenly and fully developed in the fossil record. If our history can only be verified back less than 1% of your proposed Earth time then what the heck was everyone doing (fully intact with no effect of macro-evolution to speak of) for the rest of the time?

Hmmmm....what event happened perhaps 7,000 years ago which provoked people to keep written histories in an ongoing fashion all of a sudden. What happened 5,000 years ago that all of a sudden population growth starts conforming to reasonable steady states of doubling to get the population to where it is now. What happened to the oceans for those few billion years having no impact on shoreline erosion (surely we have had the moon causing tides and healthy oceans for that time right).

It's funny that Christians are made fun of for their date setting and yet our dates encompass multiple times more scientific data to show it fits and that it all agrees with each other whereas your approach comes out to be the least scientific of the lot (because you have to ignore so much devastating contradictory evidence) and yet I am called to 'wake up'. Perhaps a strong mirror needs to be in fact reflected right back on you when you say that....

Is it not surprising that for things like rock dating or carbon dating which are shown through observation to be unreliable methods that these are the ones at odds with young earth creationism but as we approach methods considered more reliable and verifiable through observation that the data agrees with Y.E.C alone...

You can put your trust in the unreliable, I will put mine in the reliable... thanks

edit on 18-6-2012 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in