The Excluded Middle of Mystry Babylon - Pangaea

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvanB
What a fantastic and for me personally well timed read.. I know the truth when I hear it and the situation I currently am in will testify to the truth in your words!

Thank you very much.

Very well received and understood


It's odd how these things happen. I typically get into a fit of questioning with God in prayer, only to be followed by a flood of evidence appearing out of nowhere. After years of seeing this happen, I have learned to see the synchronicity. God speaks. We just need to learn to hear him.

I am glad you found value it this. Personally, I get the same value. I am hearing it for the first time as well.




posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
The plate tectonics theory should be just as much an unknown quantity as an axiom as the expanding earth theory. The evidence suggests that both are accurate.


No, the evidence points quite clearly that the expanding Earth hypothesis has no scientific validity based on zero observational evidence.


You can keep reading the WIKI and get more.


You mean like this?


The theory had never developed a plausible and verifiable mechanism of action, but neither had any of its competing theories.[1] By the late 1970s the theory of plate tectonics made all other theories obsolete following the discovery of subduction, which was found to be an important part of a mechanism of action.



One thing we can both be sure of: The continents fit together, which suggests they were once one land mass.


No one is disputing that. Plate tectonics nicely explains this observed geologic occurence. Expanding Earth does not and offers no viable and proveable theory on the mechanisim that could produce such a phenomenom. This is purely psuedoscientific mumbo-jumbo.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 




The theory had never developed a plausible and verifiable mechanism of action, but neither had any of its competing theories.[1] By the late 1970s the theory of plate tectonics made all other theories obsolete following the discovery of subduction, which was found to be an important part of a mechanism of action.


And yet, the rest of my treatment of Osiris as Nimrod stands clearly from the overall story. If we have learned nothing from living on a planet where we learn by hearing, seeing and doing, it's this: No Axiom we possess can have a proof. This is the nature of our own perception problems and the nature of bent space and time. There are no straight lines, therefore the ones we observer are not what we are really seeing. To know, we must step outside the thing we know.

Goudel agrees with me.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
The plate tectonics theory should be just as much an unknown quantity as an axiom as the expanding earth theory. The evidence suggests that both are accurate.


No, the evidence points quite clearly that the expanding Earth hypothesis has no scientific validity based on zero observational evidence.


You can keep reading the WIKI and get more.


You mean like this?


The theory had never developed a plausible and verifiable mechanism of action, but neither had any of its competing theories.[1] By the late 1970s the theory of plate tectonics made all other theories obsolete following the discovery of subduction, which was found to be an important part of a mechanism of action.



One thing we can both be sure of: The continents fit together, which suggests they were once one land mass.


No one is disputing that. Plate tectonics nicely explains this observed geologic occurence. Expanding Earth does not and offers no viable and proveable theory on the mechanisim that could produce such a phenomenom. This is purely psuedoscientific mumbo-jumbo.





Either way, what of the cutting of Nimrod and Osiris as a companion to the story of languages being cut, continents drifting apart and Mystery School religion being the ugly twin brother?



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
And yet, the rest of my treatment of Osiris as Nimrod stands clearly from the overall story.


If you say so, I stopped reading once I came across the nonsense from the comic book guy.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
And yet, the rest of my treatment of Osiris as Nimrod stands clearly from the overall story.


If you say so, I stopped reading once I came across the nonsense from the comic book guy.


If I'm not mistaken, don't the Masons go crazy over the hollow earth theory?



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
If I'm not mistaken, don't the Masons go crazy over the hollow earth theory?


You are mistaken. Again.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
If I'm not mistaken, don't the Masons go crazy over the hollow earth theory?


You are mistaken. Again.


There is a silence here. Why do the Masons not defend their story with a version that can be compared? Where is the context to deny what you clearly see as my ignorance? Is there some reason that keeps you guys from sharing your side?



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
There is a silence here.


Silence on what?


Why do the Masons not defend their story with a version that can be compared?


Defend what story?

Most of your threads are targeted at Masons and then devolve into scripture quoting about a topic that has nothing to do with Masonry. There is no other 'version' to compare.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
There is a silence here.


Silence on what?


Why do the Masons not defend their story with a version that can be compared?


Defend what story?

Most of your threads are targeted at Masons and then devolve into scripture quoting about a topic that has nothing to do with Masonry. There is no other 'version' to compare.



I would agree with your last statement. Apart from the Biblical description of approaching the material temple or the temple of the heart, no other story can compare to that of truth. Christ is in the temple of the heart. Man is in the temple of the material world. We must choose between them, as in a mirror.

My point was to notice that a diverging context, apart from incredulity, is not being presented. If I am incorrect, then it seems there would be something to offer from the literature. The one thing you have on your side is a mountain of literature supporting your views as a Mason. Where is the context that would deny ignorance? That's all. The web is filled with Masons describing their faith with page after page of reflections.

My suspicion is that they would not hold up here against what has been presented.



edit on 6-8-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
The web is filled with Masons describing their faith with page after page of reflections.

My suspicion is that they would not hold up here against what has been presented.


They would not hold up to your suspicions because not everyone thinks 'Jesus is the way'.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
The web is filled with Masons describing their faith with page after page of reflections.

My suspicion is that they would not hold up here against what has been presented.


They would not hold up to your suspicions because not everyone thinks 'Jesus is the way'.


I share from my perspective and others are free to do the same. I see it as ignorance to deny the obvious. This thread alone is verifiable---> L I N K How can it be denied? We know it was written well before 1948, yet there it is. It's an evidence that what God says can be verified as accurate. We only really need on item, yet this is one of thousands that we know about. A reading of my posts over the years should give you at least 200 others.

Did Jesus say he was the only way? Why is He the only way? He's the word that we study.



edit on 6-8-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Did Jesus say he was the only way?


According to someone who wrote that long after his death.


Why is He the only way?


What you fail to realize is that 'why' or 'if' has absolutely ZERO importance to me.

If being someone who follows Christ's word is ending up like you then I have serious doubts about your whole viewpoint. The last thing I want in my life is to end up like you. Actually, I take that back, it would not even be the last thing, it would never even make my list.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Did Jesus say he was the only way?


According to someone who wrote that long after his death.


Why is He the only way?


What you fail to realize is that 'why' or 'if' has absolutely ZERO importance to me.

If being someone who follows Christ's word is ending up like you then I have serious doubts about your whole viewpoint. The last thing I want in my life is to end up like you. Actually, I take that back, it would not even be the last thing, it would never even make my list.


When God called Abraham, he asked him to give up his Son, the very thing that God said Abraham would receive to be the Father of a great nation. When Abraham followed God's request, the thing he loved was kept. God was not after what he loved or who he was, but the obedience to God's authority from a mind of faith and trust. God's plans are always an improvement over our own. Abraham was willing to kill his son at God's request, yet God was not taking away his son. God never asks anyone to be untrue to themselves, but only to give it to him first. When we do, God returns it back to us in the proper context. What we love is shown to us on the right side of truth. That one thing we don't want to give up is different for all of us.

edit on 6-8-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
When God called Abraham, he asked him to give up his Son, the very thing that God said Abraham would receive to be the Father of a great nation. When Abraham followed God's request, the thing he loved was kept. God was not after what he loved or who he was, but the obedience to God's authority from a mind of faith and trust. God's plans are always an improvement over our own. Abraham was willing to kill his son at God's request, yet God was not taking away his son. God never asks anyone to be untrue to themselves, but only to give it to him first. When we do, God returns it back to us in the proper context. What we love is shown to us on the right side of truth. That one thing we don't want to give up is different for all of us.


*yawn*

Maybe you can quote some more scripture now since you obviously do not hear the crickets chirping.



new topics
 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join