Etherians claims

A spiritual perspective on phenomenon

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:13 pm

You seem to be a smart guy, but lately you aren't demonstrating it. A few days ago, you ran a highly respected member off this board with some childish boo hoo remarks. Someone who actually agreed that the Source A story was bogus.

Then you come after an ally who hung in there through thick and thin in the SCA story and so to gratify your ego, you turn on him and insult his sacred book by comparing it to something like the phoney Theilmann crappola put out by the Pickerings.
At the same time without provocation, you belittle a personal belief regarding what his God said regarding demons all in a fell swoop.
That, after teasing for him to come in and offer an opinion.
A reasonable discussion could have ensued, but you had to show off how much you disregard his religious beliefs.

Since this site is attempting to build membership(I reason), they must love you quite a lot.Etherian
In Search of Reality


You seem to be a smart guy, but lately you aren't demonstrating


Open with an insult, niiiiiiice

you ran a highly respected member off this board


Wrong, the boo hoo remark was AFTER he posted he was leaving the "latrine"

insult his sacred book


comparing it to something like the phoney Theilmann crappola put out


The comparison was a vehicle to illustrate the difference in standards.


You mean i insulted Your sacred book, dont speak for someone else, if scarz thinks i insulted his book thats for him to say.
And rather than having the guts to own that, you dress up your grief as a defence of someone else. cowardice

The obvious reality ive uncovered here is this is a Christian site, Im not an extreem athiest i just dont think religion has a valid place in the debate about UFO's.

What you people call faith, i call superstition and before you rear up in offense at that statement let me put it into perspective.

Eth and others say that they think the UFO question is more likely demonic than angelic in nature.

Lets look at this from another perspective.

The wandjina are a feature of the australian aboriginal religious tradition.

Image

Mowanjum Aboriginal people of Western Australia, Wandjina is a mighty creator spirit and the most supreme being.


If i were to postulate that the UFO's were piloted by wandjina (and the pic has some striking similarity to greys)

Your reactions (if you can be honest about it) would be to reject the idea as being a primative tribal superstition.
and as such unlikely to shed much light on the question of the nature of UFO's

From a christian perspective the wandjina spirit is superstition and paganism,
The AA creation myth is wrong, your creation myth is right, The AA spiritual memes are superstion, yours are truth.

Where i view all spritual traditions as superstition, you view all spiritual traditions as superstition expect one, your one.
In my world , science is the only mechanism which by its very makeup and methods is objective enough to answer the questions we have about the nature of the universe.
Spirits and gods and angels.......all primative tribal superstition, and worthless in providing real insight into the nature of reality.
I get that that offends you, they say the truth hurts, but thats why i am leaving, because its obvious that you choose to (have been brainwashed into) seeing reality through the filter of your cultural superstitions.

The world is full of creation myths, they cant all be right. but to my mind the odds that they are all wrong, are far greater than the premise that one of them is right.

where is the proof that your tradition trumps the others ?, that your tradition is the truth, and that the AA tradition is primative tribal superstition.
The AA records his tradition on cave walls , you in a book. He propagates his tradition orally (corroboree), yours via the sermon.
From an anthropologic POV there is little difference between these.

If your honest with yourselves youll know that you view the AA spiritual tradition as wrong, because its not the same as yours which you think is right.
You categorize it as pagan, being as it worships nature spirits and animal totems, You take the same view of the AA's "faith" that i do of yours.
The only differnce between you and i , is i believe in one less god than you.
You dont believe in the hindu gods, you dont believe in the aboriginal gods or the greek gods or egyptian gods, and you dont fault me for not doing so either, but if i dont believe in your god......... and i say so, words like baiting attacking, all the defensive emotive words come flooding out.

If the honest Truth is there are no gods, yours or anyone elses, and the alleged "visitors" were to say so, you would reject that answer as a satanic deception.
You will never be in a position to accept any answer that does not fit your preconceived world view.
And when i find even the mods here are of that POV, then i can only conclude you are not really searching for answers, passionate about the truth.
You already have your answers

You accuse ppl like salla (rightly so) of being true believers, but who are you to cast that stone ?
You accuse hastings (rightly so) of skewing the data to fit his preconceived notions, but again who are you to cast stones.
We are not entitled to a higher standard of objectivity in others.....that that we ourselves bring to the table
The objectivity and logic you claim as your Raison d'être , are only applied to others belief, your own "faith" is exempt

The only difference between us, is i believe in one less god than you, you consider the AA faith a pagan superstition
If you can recognise that, embrace what it feels like to have that POV, then you will understand mine.

The world has had thousands of gods, the only difference is i believe in one less than you do, and though that difference may seem small...... its an unbridgable gulf

Hoaxes should always be debunked. Truth is way better than fantasy and lies.......but as they say, sometimes the truth hurts.

All fantastical claims (including walking on water, turning water to wine, coming back to life after being dead 3 days) should be taken with a grain of salt and a high dose of skepticism. Especially when the claim is targeted and aimed at a particular group of folks.

Blindly believing every claim and tale just because the tale was told, is not beneficial to the reputation of Ufology. Rather that is what keeps the field giggled at and not taken seriously.


Fixed
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am


Re: Etherians claims

Postby Access Denied » Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:12 am

AussieMike wrote:The obvious reality ive uncovered here is this is a Christian site, Im not an extreem athiest i just dont think religion has a valid place in the debate about UFO's.

I can assure you I’m not a Christian and I’m pretty sure Steve isn’t one either but Ryan is and we do have a number of members who are Christian and there are even some I imagine who don’t talk about it for the same reason as you.

If you don’t think religion has a valid place in the debate about UFOs then feel free to discuss why as you appear to have done…

I personally believe it’s a valid point of discussion from a psychosocial/cultural perspective but I don’t believe we are being visited by aliens, demons, spirits or time travelers so go figure.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:54 am

Access Denied wrote:
AussieMike wrote:The obvious reality ive uncovered here is this is a Christian site, Im not an extreem athiest i just dont think religion has a valid place in the debate about UFO's.

I can assure you I’m not a Christian and I’m pretty sure Steve isn’t one either but Ryan is and we do have a number of members who are Christian and there are even some I imagine who don’t talk about it for the same reason as you.

If you don’t think religion has a valid place in the debate about UFOs then feel free to discuss why as you appear to have done…

I personally believe it’s a valid point of discussion from a psychosocial/cultural perspective but I don’t believe we are being visited by aliens, demons, spirits or time travelers so go figure.


Thank You,
In that case i apoligise for casting unwarranted aspersions.


Is religion part of the debate ? clearly it is, frankly it seems to find its way into any debate, and i find this deplorable, because the "religion" i refer to is the christian tradition, the other traditions dont seem to need to infuse themselves with just about every topic like this one does.
I dont give a rats arse if someone believes in christ, my panties dont get in a bunch if you do believe.
Christians on the other hand clearly do have a problem with those who dont.
I dont care if you believe christ is the son of a god, but they do care

etharian wrote:I won't say I don't care, because all men should come to Christ for salvation


as weve seen the last few days, any debate on the matter is one they have to "defend".

Ry says

I also hope that Mike finds the wisdom in the middle-ground position


But there is no middle ground in a true/false equation, and eths comment above shows this.

The inconsistancys is the SCA "story" were clues it was a hoax.

so lets consider

We are told to accept that Jesus existed based upon the Gospels of the Bible, yet the Gospels are so poorly written that a logical person is at best left to ponder if Jesus even existed. The Gospels are consistently contradictive, filled with mathematic errors and don’t compliment each other on very important details. This page shall serve as an example for just how unreliable the Gospels are.



Gospel Contradictions:

1) How many generations were there between Abraham to David? Matthew 1:17 lists fourteen generations. Matthew 1:2 lists thirteen generations.

2) Is Paul lying? In Acts 20:35 Paul told people "to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'" Since Jesus never made such a biblical statement, isn’t Paul guilty of deception?

3) When did the leper become not a leper? (Matthew 8:13 & 8:14) Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house. (Mark 1:29-30 & 1:40-42) Jesus healed the leper after visiting Simon Peter’s house.

4) Who approached Jesus? (Matthew 8:5-7) The Centurion approached Jesus, beseeching help for a sick servant. (Luke 7:3 & 7:6-7) The Centurion did not approach Jesus. He sent friends and elders of the Jews.

5) Was she dead or just dying? (Matthew 9:18) He asked for help, saying his daughter was already dead. (Luke 8:41-42) Jairus approached Jesus for help, because his daughter was dying.

6) Just what did Jesus instruct them to take? (Matthew 10:10) Jesus instructed them not to take a staff, not to wear sandals. (Mark 6:8-9) Jesus instructed his disciples to wear sandals and take a staff on their journey.

7) When did John find out Jesus was the Messiah? (Matthew 11:2-3) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the messiah. (Luke 7:18-22) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the Messiah. (John 1 :29-34,36) John already knew Jesus was the Messiah.

8) Who made the request? (Matthew 20:20-21) Their mother requested that James and John, Zebedee’s children, should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom. (Mark 10:35-37) James and John, Zebedee’s children, requested that they should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom.

9) What animals were brought to Jesus? (Matthew 21:2-7) two of the disciples brought Jesus an ass and a colt from the village of Bethphage. (Mark 11:2-7) They brought him only a colt.

10) When did the fig tree hear of its doom? (Matthew 21:17-19) Jesus cursed the fig tree after purging the temple. (Mark 11:14-15 & 20) He cursed it before the purging.

11) When did the fig tree keel? (Matthew 21:9) The fig tree withered immediately. and the disciples registered surprise then and there. (Mark 11:12-14 & 20) The morning after Jesus cursed the fig tree, the disciples noticed it had withered and expressed astonishment.

12) Was John the Baptist Elias? "This is Elias which was to come." Matthew 11:14 "And they asked him, what then? Art thou Elias? And he said I am not." John l:21

13) Who was the father of Joseph? Matthew 1:16 The father of Joseph was Jacob. Luke 3 :23 The father of Joseph was Heli. Christians shall try to LIE and tell you that one is the heritage of Mary and the other Joseph. This is utter b.s., the Hebrew and Greek cultures NEVER regarded the bloodline of the mother. They were patriarchal societies which only concerned themselves with paternal lineage.

14) How many generations were there from the Babylon captivity to Christ? Matthew 1:17 Fourteen generations, Matthew 1:12-16 Thirteen generations.

15) Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt. Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt.

16) Matthew 5:1-2 Christ preached his first sermon on the mount. Luke 6:17 & 20 Christ preached his first sermon in the plain.

17) John was in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. Mark 1:14 John was not in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. John 1:43 & 3:22-24

18) What was the nationality of the woman who besought Jesus? Matthew 15:22 "And behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, Have mercy on me, 0 Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil." Mark 7:26 "The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation, and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter."

19) How many blind men besought Jesus? Matthew 20:30 Two blind men. Luke 18:35-38 Only one blind man.

20) Where did the devil take Jesus first? (Matthew 4:5-8) The Devil took Jesus first to the parapet of the temple, then to a high place to view all the Kingdoms of the world. (Luke 4:5-9) The Devil took Jesus first to a high place to view the kingdoms, then to the parapet of the temple.

21) Can one pray in public? (Matthew 6:5-6) Jesus condemned public prayer. (1 Timothy 2:8) Paul encouraged public prayer.

22) If we decide to do good works, should those works be seen? Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works." 1 Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that ... they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation." This contradicts: Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them…that thine alms may be in secret." Matthew 23:3-5 "Do not ye after their [Pharisees'] works ... all their works they do for to be seen of men."

23) Who did Jesus tell the Lord’s Prayer to? (Matthew 5:1, 6:9-13 & 7:28) Jesus delivered the Lord’s Prayer during the Sermon on the Mount before the multitudes. (Luke 11:1-4) He delivered it before the disciples alone, and not as part of the Sermon on the Mount.

24) When was Christ crucified? Mark 15:25 "And it was the third hour and they crucified him." John 19:14-15 "And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour; and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your king…Shall I crucify your king?" John 19:14-15.

25) The two thieves reviled Christ. (Matthew 27:44 & Mark 15:32) Only one of the thieves reviled Christ. Luke 23:39-40.

26) In 1 Corinthians 1:17 ("For Christ sent me [Paul] not to baptize but to preach the gospel") Paul said Jesus was wrong when he said in Matthew 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them…" Clearly one of these people is wrong, either way, it’s a contradiction.

27) When did Satan enter Judas? Satan entered into Judas while at the supper. John 13:27 Satan entered Judas before the supper. Luke 23:3-4 & 7

28) How many women came to the sepulcher? John 20:1 Only one woman went, Mary Magdalene. Matthew 28:1 Mary Magdalene and the "other Mary" (Jesus’ mother) went.

29) Mark 16:2 It was sunrise when the two women went to the sepulcher. John 20:1 It was still dark (before sunrise) when Mary Magdalene went alone to the sepulcher.

30) There were two angels seen by the women at the sepulcher and they were standing up. Luke 24:4 There was only one angel seen and he was sitting down. Mark 28:2-5

31) How many angels were within the sepulcher? John 20:11-12 two, Mark 16:5 one.

32) The Holy Ghost bestowed at Pentecost. Acts 1:5-8 & 2:1-4 The holy Ghost bestowed before Pentecost. John 20:22

33) Where did Jesus first appear to the eleven disciples? In a room in Jerusalem. Luke 24:32-37 On a mountain in Galilee. Matthew 28:15-17

34) Where did Christ ascend from? From Mount Olivet. Acts 1:9-12 From Bethany. Luke 24:50-51

35) Can all sins be forgiven? (Acts 13:39) All sins can be forgiven. Great, I’m happy to know God is so merciful, but wait (Mark 3:29) Cursing or blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unforgivable.

36) The Elijah mystery: (Malachi 4:5) Elijah must return before the final days of the world. (Matthew 11:12-14) Jesus said that John the Baptist was Elijah. (Matthew 17:12- 13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come, and everyone understood him to mean John the Baptist. (Mark 9:13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come. (John 1:21) John the Baptist maintained that he was not Elijah.

37) Who purchased the potter’s field? Acts 1:18 The field was purchased by Judas. John 20:1 The potter’s field was purchased by the chief priests.

38) Paul’s attendants heard the miraculous voice and stood speechless. Acts 9:7 Paul’s attendants did not hear the voice and were prostrate. Acts 22:9 & 26:14

39) Who bought the Sepulcher? Jacob, Josh 24:32 Abraham, Acts 7:16

40) Was it lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death? "The Jews answered him, we have a law, and by our law he ought to die." John 19:7 "The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." John 18:31

41) Has anyone ascended up to heaven? Elijah went up to heaven: "And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." 2 Kings 2:11 "No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man." John 3:13

42) Is scripture inspired by God? "all scripture is given by inspiration of God." 2 Timothy 3:16 compared to: "But I speak this by permission and not by commandment." 1 Corinthians 7:6 "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." 1 Corinthians 7:12 "That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord" 2 Corinthians.



comparing as a single example (there are many more) the SCA "story" and the christ "story", we see the same patterns
Outlandish claims, walking on water, water to wine, life after being dead, hot rocks that talk, reptilians and modifications
Obvious inconsistancys (see above examples) and clear examples of borrowed memes

Why then should the religious fringe hope to offer us any more tangible data than the lunatic fringe.

In my world they dont.
Eth and scarz and ry dont make any more sense to me than dan does when it comes to the UFO question.

It seemed like it was ok for me to express that in regards to dan or jake, but not in regards to these guys.

I am happy to discuss this aspect of the phenomena in an unemotive rational manner, But i wonder if these guys can.
Mur says eth and ry expressed opinions, but no such caveat was given at the time, he says they didnt make extraordinary claims but thats relative, to me saying

I believe the phenomenon is demonic


Is an extraordinary claim, and the reaction when i said so, demonstrates a defence of a firmly held belief, not a flexible opinion.

Eth then proceeded to use emotivly charged metaphors to make this about personalitys and not the subject matter.
The usual diversionary tactic of the defender of the faith. Twsiting and distorting the facts in order to demonise me, unable to debate the facts he sought to discredit the author. (where have we seen these tactics lately ?)
He finishes his post by suggesting i am damaging the site with my opinions, speaking on behalf of the owners saying "they must love you" , using irony to suggest im not welcome. and no one batted an eye. i guess tactics like this are fair game when dealing with infidels
And then hiding behind the word faith itself as others did, faith is a relative term one mans faith is anothers superstition, a maxim those of the christian faith exercise all the time when talking about other cultures faiths.
The australian aboriginals nature spirit and animal totems being a classic example. to a christian these are superstitious pagan beliefs, the exact same pov they impose on others without a second thought, becomes a crime when applied to their cultural beliefs.

At the end of the day its the hypocrisy that galls me, you cant criticise the true believers and hoax promoters, when you yourself do the same

critical thinking should be a double edged sword, it must cut both ways
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:54 am

The short version

The SCA story was full of outlandish claims and obvious inconsistancys and contradictions.
It offers us little in regards to understanding the UFO question
The Christ story is full of outlandish claims and obvious inconsistancys and contradictions.
It offers us little in regards to understanding the UFO question
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby ScaRZ » Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:24 pm

AussieMike wrote:Wrong, the boo hoo remark was AFTER he posted he was leaving the "latrine"

if scarz thinks i insulted his book thats for him to say.

The obvious reality ive uncovered here is this is a Christian site, Im not an extreem athiest i just dont think religion has a valid place in the debate about UFO's.




Well Mike look who's "Boo Hooing" now......Hehehehe!!! Take a nice long look in the mirror.

It's not "My" book......"It's The Bible."

You call this a Christian site? :P

Maybe faith and religion to you hold no value in what you call a debate about UFO's,but so what.

Are you saying that nowhere at RU should there be a place for a faith and religious person/persons views on the subject?
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Re: Etherians claims

Postby Etherian » Sun Oct 24, 2010 6:48 pm

Thanks, AD. I much appreciate your point regarding this.

@Mike,

Sorry to see you get all worked up over this. I don't mean to chuckle, but it's kind of funny.
If something like this gets to you, life around you must be a joy to behold.

Apparently, in your mind only your world view of things is to be tolerated and none others.
That ain't the real world, baby.
Etherian
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:59 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:10 am

Im satisfied ive made my point, and the insults you post instead of arguments are the primary pointer

The Truth is If i were to posit that UFO's were the work of the Wandjina

Image

The typical christian reaction would be to dismiss the idea as rubbish, aboriginal nature spirits are not "real" and are just primitive superstitious nonsense, as such they offer us nothing of value in the UFO debate, just as hoaxers offer us nothing.........just as the bible offers us nothing.

We may as well bring santa claus and the tooth fairy into the debate.

Answers that are not the truth are not answers at all, and the truth is your faith is just one of a plethora of primitive superstitions

Are you saying that nowhere at RU should there be a place for a faith and religious person/persons views on the subject?


Correct, and for the same reason the pickles would not be able to push their BS here
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby Tim Hebert » Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:37 pm

Mike,

I've been glancing at this thread over the past three to four days. One would thought that this site was the Secularweb.com arm of RU. With that said, as a Christian, I tend to agree with your original thrust, "is this forum appropriate for debating religion." I'm assuming that was your initial concern? On the other hand, per the description of this particular forum, if religious ideation has legitimate answers or causes to the issues of UFOs, then the use of religion and its ancient texts/beliefs should be allowed. Of course, those individuals should be readily able to boister their case as per this forums rules. (Me included!!)

As per your "concerns" about the Christian Faith and the Bible, and with you being a fair/unbiased man of reason, your concerns would be with other religious faiths as well, I'm afraid that you and others came late to the "party" as early Christian writers (Papias, Irenaeus, Origen, Eusubeus and others) expressed concerns about most of your listed issues and grappled for reasonable answers.

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: Etherians claims

Postby murnut » Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:00 pm

Mike is mad at me because I repeatedly requested that we not have a religious debate in the "OMF and the hoax" section.

It's off topic.

He can have his debate, as far as I know, outside of that thread.

I'm not sure why that's a big problem
"The Conformers are hard to read. They are rocks."
User avatar
murnut
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:35 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:24 pm

murnut wrote:Mike is mad at me because I repeatedly requested that we not have a religious debate in the "OMF and the hoax" section.

It's off topic.

He can have his debate, as far as I know, outside of that thread.

I'm not sure why that's a big problem


LOL@Mur

Im not mad at Mur, He cant help his delusions any more than jake can.
All i can do is present the evidence and hope he's smart enough to see the truth.

What he calls religion i call a hoax, what we call a hoax, jake calls the SCA intel op.

All ive ever argued is that the standards we use to asses each case be on parity, Mur cant see the forest for the trees.
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby murnut » Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:59 pm

Delusions about what exactly?

You don't know what my faith is, nor is it any of your concern.

All I have said is that your "jesus hoax" is off topic in that thread.
"The Conformers are hard to read. They are rocks."
User avatar
murnut
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:35 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:10 pm

Tim Hebert wrote:Mike,

I've been glancing at this thread over the past three to four days. One would thought that this site was the Secularweb.com arm of RU. With that said, as a Christian, I tend to agree with your original thrust, "is this forum appropriate for debating religion." I'm assuming that was your initial concern? On the other hand, per the description of this particular forum, if religious ideation has legitimate answers or causes to the issues of UFOs, then the use of religion and its ancient texts/beliefs should be allowed. Of course, those individuals should be readily able to boister their case as per this forums rules. (Me included!!)

As per your "concerns" about the Christian Faith and the Bible, and with you being a fair/unbiased man of reason, your concerns would be with other religious faiths as well, I'm afraid that you and others came late to the "party" as early Christian writers (Papias, Irenaeus, Origen, Eusubeus and others) expressed concerns about most of your listed issues and grappled for reasonable answers.

Tim


Thanks Tim, yes i consider all "faith" superstition, As do christians with the exception of their own brand of faith.
Hence my use of the wandjina example.
Were i to Posit the Wandjina were the pilots of these alleged craft, the typical christians reaction would be to dismiss the idea as fanciful, aboriginal nature spirits cant be real......

But while we are on the subject of the australian aboriginal....... the bible says the earth is only 6000 years old, but the AA has been on this continent for 40,000 years.
The biblical flood killed off every one except for noah and his family..... so how do we explain the AA ?
The only answer that fits is the bible is wrong, the evidence contained the the AA's existance only makes sense in that context.
Is the bible the perfect word of god ? if so how come the noah story makes no rational sense in regards to the existance of the AA ?
The evidence is clear, that the noah "story" is just that (most likely poached from the epic of gilgamesh)
Thats the only explaination that fits the evidence
RT never served, and the great flood didnt happen
RT is a conman and fake, the earth is not 6000 years old

There is no definative proof in either example, but the preponderance of evidence is clear
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:12 pm

murnut wrote:Delusions about what exactly?

You don't know what my faith is, nor is it any of your concern.

All I have said is that your "jesus hoax" is off topic in that thread.



You have posted your religious beliefs in the past, i have an eidetic memory.

Your last post sounds like Jake, what jake believes about the SCA hoax is none of your concern from his POV.
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby murnut » Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:51 pm

AussieMike wrote:
murnut wrote:Delusions about what exactly?

You don't know what my faith is, nor is it any of your concern.

All I have said is that your "jesus hoax" is off topic in that thread.



You have posted your religious beliefs in the past, i have an eidetic memory.

Your last post sounds like Jake, what jake believes about the SCA hoax is none of your concern from his POV.



I'm not selling religion or that my views on faith or correct or not...I'm simply requesting that you not impose your religious beliefs, or the lack there of, in that thread

Why is that a problem?
"The Conformers are hard to read. They are rocks."
User avatar
murnut
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:35 am

Re: Etherians claims

Postby AussieMike » Mon Oct 25, 2010 11:29 pm

murnut wrote:
AussieMike wrote:
murnut wrote:Delusions about what exactly?

You don't know what my faith is, nor is it any of your concern.

All I have said is that your "jesus hoax" is off topic in that thread.



You have posted your religious beliefs in the past, i have an eidetic memory.

Your last post sounds like Jake, what jake believes about the SCA hoax is none of your concern from his POV.



I'm not selling religion or that my views on faith or correct or not...I'm simply requesting that you not impose your religious beliefs, or the lack there of, in that thread

Why is that a problem?


When someone posts IN THAT THREAD

However, that being said, I believe the phenomenon is demonic as opposed to angelic.

Supernatural or transdimensional is easier to accept than alien joes driving ships here all at once from all over the universe. What's so important about this mudball?


I should be able to debate that statement in that thread, in the context that from my POV the source of those "opinions" come from an obvious hoax.

The real question here is why is that a problem for you ?

The thread is called OMF and the hoax, and is about one site allowing an obvious hoax to be used as an explaination for the UFO phenomena.

the phrase

I believe the phenomenon is demonic as opposed to angelic
.

Is no different from my POV ,than the phrase
i believe the SCA story is an IC Op not a con


Ive gone to great lengths to point out the debate is not about religion, but about standards of proof for claims made.

Why is it when jake states his "opinion" that the SCA story is an IC Op thats delusional But when Eth states his "opinion" I believe the phenomenon is demonic as opposed to angelic, its not ?

Its ok for Eth to state that opinion (which has nothing to do with the title of the thread), but if i try and debate it im censored ?
Thats the same model we see at OM, do as i say but not as i do standards, threats of post deletion to those who dont subscribe to the hoax......
Its an obvious double standard and hypocrisy.

The real question here is why did you have a problem with it, the obvious answer (and you know its true) is that you subscribe to the same belief structure that eth and scars do

In that context your behaviour is no differnt to that of the mods at OM, using your status to protect a vested interest, censoring debate to favour your belief
AussieMike
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:14 am

Next

Google

Return to Spirituality and the Paranormal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron