Posted on 08/29/2009 8:14:40 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
Members of the Aetherius Society from as far afield as Australia and Ghana joined the pilgrimage to the Old Man of Coniston.
They believe the mountain is one of 19 across the world which have been “charged” with spiritual energy by extra-terrestrials from Venus and Mars.
Members of the society say their founder, George King, was able to contact religious figure heads – including Jesus, Buddha and Krishna – who they believe to be aliens. He transmitted the energy from their messages of peace to the mountains in the 1950s.
Society member David Trimble, 70, who was among those who joined the trek, hailed the event as a great success, in spite of difficult weather conditions.
He said: “It was absolutely fantastic. We divided into three prayer teams – one at the bottom, one two thirds of the way up and one right at the top. We prayed for world peace and sent energy out to all the trouble spots of the world including Iraq, Iran and the Sudan.”
According to society members, the 2,635ft Old Man was “charged” by Dr King in December 1958. Since then, it has been a place of biannual pilgrimage for society members, who hope to use the energy to alleviate world suffering.
Mr Trimble, who recently moved from Dalston to Barnsley, added: “These alien beings are trying to help mankind and, in terms of the mountains, we can generate an enormous amount of power. We’ve literally been able to move mountains and stop wars.”
The pilgrimage was led by Mervyn Smith, a former Coniston resident who now lives in London and has climbed the fell more than 500 times before.
At the same time, similar meetings were held at other “charged” mountains around the world.
The Late Great Planet Earth by Hal Lindsey.
Your friend led you to the 70AD stuff? What did he say about the two witnesses?
No, actually he just help to lead me away from futurism.
I'm not sure we discussed the image of the witnesses.
That was excellent. Thank you very much for posting this. More people need to see this.
Oh no, quite the contrary!
I think He uses words like ‘shortly’ and ‘soon’ for a more profound reason than we can yet identify. Also, it ties in with two or three other concurrent stories, like the analogy to each person’s walk. This is where you can hold what is being said in an inner sense, where ‘soon’ can be seen in terms of your death. But that is not the whole story, just one layer. Also, I think it *was* meant to coincide with then current events in 70AD. I think the story is meant to be mirrored throughout history. The mirroring in 70AD was one layer, but not the whole story either.
If Christ says He is coming soon, but doesn’t come for thousands of years, it is not Him that is wrong, but our narrow view of what He means.
If you believe that the events of the Book of Revelation took place in 70AD, you need to point out a lot of things, for example, the two witnesses. Also, when did the resurrection of the dead happen? When did the whole world see Christ’s return? When did the whole world go on one knee to Him?
If His Second Coming did not happen yet, yet He said it would be “soon” thousands of years ago, then it is obvious that He is using a deeper and broader definition of the word soon than you are using in your analysis.
“The Late Great Planet Earth by Hal Lindsey.”
That is interesting. A lot of people mention Lindsey, but I have never heard of him or read any of his work. Was it any good?
“No, actually he just help to lead me away from futurism. I’m not sure we discussed the image of the witnesses.”
Do you still keep in touch? If so maybe you can ask him about the witnesses.
I would also love to know about Wormwood and the mountain falling into the sea back in 70AD. I really wish somebody would do a line by line Scriptural analysis of the Book of Revelation using 70AD.
“The Late Great Planet Earth by Hal Lindsey.”That is interesting. A lot of people mention Lindsey, but I have never heard of him or read any of his work. Was it any good?
So, get yourself a copy. "47 Used & new from $0.14", or available at fine garage sales everywhere. I don't want it said that I discourage reading this stuff, just from swallowing the whole dispensational hog without being aware of the issues and alternatives.
You could collect different editions, and chart the changes.
Bog standard pop dispensationalism, is my recollection. It's been a long, long time since I read Late Grate. The world was younger, I had hair and none of it was grey.
I've heard of more than one person coming to faith through reading that book, which is a fine thing. Nevertheless, I think the dispensational model is flawed, a bad root assumption leading to bad interpretation, and gets important things wrong.
Topcat and I have different perspectives, and would have different recommended reading lists.
I would also love to know about Wormwood and the mountain falling into the sea back in 70AD
One thing to remember about John's Apocalypse, is that it makes heavy use of images from and allusions to Old Testament prophetic texts. Look back to how the OT prophets spoke of things. Political upheaveals were sometimes spoken of using images of cosmic changes.
Also, any reason you'd take the Apocalypse as a simple linear narrative?
***Are Roman Catholics Christians? They are if they have trusted in Jesus alone for the forgiveness of their sins. ***
All Catholics believe in the forgiveness of sins by Jesus. I think that we have accord there.
***However, if they believe that the are saved by God’s grace and their works, then they are not saved — even if they believe their works are done by God’s grace — since they then deny the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice.***
Hmmm. Let us put the two in their appropriate position.
Point the first: Without God’s Grace, we have no hope or chance of salvation whatsoever. We are in accord.
Point the second: God’s Judgement will be on those who have been accorded Grace and squandered it. The Beatitudes, Luke’s Sermon and Matthew 25 talk to it fairly explicitly. In other words, which servant are we? Matthew 25:
14
6 “It will be as when a man who was going on a journey 7 called in his servants and entrusted his possessions to them.
15
To one he gave five talents; 8 to another, two; to a third, one—to each according to his ability. Then he went away. Immediately
16
the one who received five talents went and traded with them, and made another five.
17
Likewise, the one who received two made another two.
18
9 But the man who received one went off and dug a hole in the ground and buried his master’s money.
19
After a long time the master of those servants came back and settled accounts with them.
20
The one who had received five talents came forward bringing the additional five. 10 He said, ‘Master, you gave me five talents. See, I have made five more.’
21
His master said to him, ‘Well done, my good and faithful servant. Since you were faithful in small matters, I will give you great responsibilities. Come, share your master’s joy.’
22
(Then) the one who had received two talents also came forward and said, ‘Master, you gave me two talents. See, I have made two more.’
23
His master said to him, ‘Well done, my good and faithful servant. Since you were faithful in small matters, I will give you great responsibilities. Come, share your master’s joy.’
24
Then the one who had received the one talent came forward and said, ‘Master, I knew you were a demanding person, harvesting where you did not plant and gathering where you did not scatter;
25
so out of fear I went off and buried your talent in the ground. Here it is back.’
26
His master said to him in reply, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! 11 So you knew that I harvest where I did not plant and gather where I did not scatter?
27
Should you not then have put my money in the bank so that I could have got it back with interest on my return?
28
Now then! Take the talent from him and give it to the one with ten.
29
12 For to everyone who has, more will be given and he will grow rich; but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.
30
13 And throw this useless servant into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’
We must ask ourselves: Are we the servant with the one talent? Jesus is Judging him based upon his lack of works after he has been given talents (Grace).
31
14 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne,
32
and all the nations 15 will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33
He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34
Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35
For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me,
36
naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’
37
Then the righteous 16 will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
38
When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
39
When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’
40
And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’
41
17 Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42
For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
43
a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’
44
18 Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’
45
He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’
46
And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Eternal punishment for those who have received the Gospel and done nothing (or evil) with it. Grace is required; it is not enough according to Jesus since Grace alone is one sided. If Grace alone is sufficient, then men are only robot slaves or irresponsible infants and that is not how Jesus treated the people that He interacted with.
Matthew 16:
13
8 When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi 9 he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”
14
They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, 10 others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15
He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16
11 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17
Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood 12 has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.
18
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, 13 and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Jesus understood that He was creating a Church of irresponsible men, yet the Church was a perfect Creation (since He created it). Peter was given the keys to the Kingdom; Jesus nominated Peter as the steward on earth until He returns.
***Being a Christian does not mean being a member of the Roman Catholic Church.***
It may not; we have no explicit instructions from Him that it does not. Therefore we cannot act as if it is.
***It means being a member of the body of Christ which is accomplished by faith and trust in Jesus alone for the forgiveness of your sins.***
How can one be a member in the Body of Christ if one does not believe in the Christ of the Bible and of the Church that He created?
***It means that you do not add your works to His work. Sincerity doesn’t forgive sins. Membership in a church doesn’t forgive sins. Doing works of penance doesn’t forgive sins. Praying to Mary doesn’t forgive sins. ***
And it doesn’t. Who has been telling you that? Forgiveness of sins comes from Jesus and His appointed here on earth.
***Forgiveness is received in the faithful trust and acceptance of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. ***
No it is not. Forgiveness is first of all asked for in all sincerity through repentence of one’s sin. One may accept anything one wishes but without repentence, there is no forgiveness.
*** Even though Roman Catholic Church affirms the Trinity, the deity of Christ, and His physical resurrection, it greatly errors in its doctrine of salvation by adding works to salvation.***
Affirms? We were the ones who were there, recorded the fact of the resurrection, and developed the doctrine of the Trinity. Christ Himself tells us through the Gospels that we are Judged upon our conduct.
***The official Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation is that the grace of God is infused into a baby at baptism — making him/her justified before God.1 This justification can be lost through sin and must be regained by repeated participation in the many sacraments found in the Roman Catholic Church. These sacraments increase the measure of grace in the person by which he or she is enabled to do good works which are in turn rewarded with the joy of heaven:***
I am grateful that you are finding true Christianity handed down from our fathers for the last 2000 years rather than the concoctions of men occupying booths in taverns or huddled with other plotters in Geneva.
***Notice that justification by faith alone is denied and heaven is the reward for doing good works. This is the problem. The RCC does not teach the biblical doctrine of justification by faith. It teaches justification by faith and works.***
What is the RCC?
If you mean the Catholic Church, then if you would put away misunderstandings of Paul for a short time and concentrate on the Gospels, you may arrive at the same conclusions that the Church Fathers and Doctors did all those centuries ago. If you start with Paul and view the Gospels through them, then you will come up with far different viewpoints than if you start with the Gospels and view Paul and the NT through them, and the OT through the NT.
I view the words of Jesus Christ far more than any man, even such as Peter and Paul. I suggest that any Christian should as well, otherwise one risks becoming a Paulian.
***I gave Petronski a link to that page way back when I first posted it on this thread. He knows where it came from and told you where it came from because I told him.
Because he is lying and saying that I did not do this, then it shows that he does not bear the fruit of a Christian.***
I will ask him as a fellow Christian.
***My beliefs agree with the document I posted. As for it being a man made doctrine, this is incorrect. It is clearly spelling out the Gospel.***
It most certainly does not spell out the Gospel. It relies on snippets of Paul, rather than swathes of the Gospel. And it is a relatively newly man made belief system, created from the splinters of the splinters of the splinters of the Reformation.
***It is the RCO that follows man made doctrines of what they call “tradition” instead of what is written in the Bible.***
Will you please tell me what the RCO is?
That's not enough.
You need to source it whenever you use it.
You didn't even use quotation marks to let the reader know it might be the work of another.
Either you are in fact Matt Slick, or you are a plagiarist.
Here you see again Mark a post by Outership (#811) using the words of another without attribution.
Pick a sentence from that post and search for it in Google. You’ll find it taken directly from carm.org...
Plagiarism.
And for pointing that out, I’m called a liar.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
***Here you see again Mark a post by Outership (#811) using the words of another without attribution.
Pick a sentence from that post and search for it in Google. You’ll find it taken directly from carm.org...
Plagiarism.
And for pointing that out, I’m called a liar.***
Sigh. Outership, please respond. Earth to Outership, come in please. Earth to Outership, are you receiving?
Thanks.
“Topcat and I have different perspectives”
What differences do you have?
“it makes heavy use of images from and allusions to Old Testament prophetic texts”
Not sure how this would factor in to the 70AD theory. Yet another reason I would love to see a line by line.
“Also, any reason you’d take the Apocalypse as a simple linear narrative?”
It is written as one. How do you see it?
Your calumny does not make my argument invalid.
Your calumny will not make my argument invalid.
The thing is, I told Petronski where it came from. He told you. It is attributed in this very thread. Saying my argument is invalid because I didn’t not reattribute it every time I reposted to Petronski in this thread is calumny.
I know that Petronski does not have an argument and can only resort to personal attacks. You, however, actually presented an argument and I am working on a response. I thank you for that. Hopefully you won’t prove to resort to calumny if I make a good rebuttal.
“I will ask him as a fellow Christian.”
Thank you. You are honorable.
“It most certainly does not spell out the Gospel. It relies on snippets of Paul, rather than swathes of the Gospel.”
I will formulate a rebuttal to the other post you made where you listed these swathes that were missing.
“And it is a relatively newly man made belief system...”
As apposed to the RCO which is a relatively old man made belief system.
“...created from the splinters of the splinters of the splinters of the Reformation.”
It was created by Scriptural analysis of which I posted to you. It drew only from the Scripture it referenced and not ‘splinters of the Reformation’ whatever they are.
***Thank you. You are honorable.***
Not all FReepers believe that...
***“And it is a relatively newly man made belief system...”
As apposed to the RCO which is a relatively old man made belief system.***
What is the RCO?
***“...created from the splinters of the splinters of the splinters of the Reformation.”
It was created by Scriptural analysis of which I posted to you. It drew only from the Scripture it referenced and not ‘splinters of the Reformation’ whatever they are.***
The Reformation devalued the Gospels and drew from various heretical groups of the first millennium in several ways, most notably including the idea that Paul was the premiere and, sometimes the only, source of theology. It is that mindset that leads to the prism of the Gospels being viewed through Paul, rather than vice versa, which is not only non Christian (Paulian, rather), but also goes against Peter who cautions about Paul being easily misunderstood.
Double plagiarism. Own it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.