Etherians claims

[murnut]

"I believe" is different than "I claim"

Religious beliefs are based on faith.

There are no hard facts about 100% of all ufo sightings, so.... no one in the world can back up their opinion regarding the ufo phenomena.

No one in the world can back their claims regarding the faith that they believe.

I asked that there be no religious debate in that thread because there can be no winners.

UTH cannot be proved, nor can it be disproved. It is debatable
.
ETH cannot be proved, nor can it be disproved. It is debatable

RT can be proved a hoax. Not debatable

Religion cannot be proved or disproved. It's debatable.

However, religion and one's faith is highly personal unlike those examples above and it can quickly deteriorate into a mess I want no part of.

It is clear to me that ......after I made numerous requests of you to take it out of that thread.... in my board.... you were unable to respect my request.


If you want to debate it outside of my board, be my guest, but I don't want any part of it.

Fair enough?

[AussieMike]

Typical avoidance,
And your actions belie your words

but I don't want any part of it.

And yet here you are debating away, your 4th post in this thread, but you dont want any part of it ?

You had no problem when Eth used a religious platform to posit an opinion

asked that there be no religious debate

Yet eth posted an opinion based on a religious POV, isnt it more accurate then to say you didnt want any anti religious debate.
Clearly opinions of a religious nature were OK, as per Eth and scarz and Ry's posts, The problem was only when i introduced anti religious elements.

Thats hypocrisy. case closed

[Etherian]

I stated an opinion of relativity regarding what they were. That was an opinion. I don't have to defend that opinion that they are that, any more than you can defend that they aren't.
Neither is provable for that matter. It's one man's opinion versus another's

A couple of pages earlier you said you theorized that they were the dead. No one bothered at the time to do a tirade on your beliefs in the manner of a Pol Pot junior trainee.
Your insults to the Bible and comparing it to theTheilmann issue was very low and insulting.

Yet, like a baby you keep whining about personal insults when you threw out the bait and then the insults first. I don't care to debate someone who is acting like a child. That's why I am not going to bother wasting my time doing it with you.
Why don't you go on a Christian site and straighten them out with your vaunted wisdom as you seem to claim dissatisfaction with how this site is managed and Mur's thread moderated.
Or why don't you take on Norio Hayakawa since that was part of your bait plan and you apparently disagreed with him. Or do you?

And by the way, it's Etherian, not Etherians. Check your keyboard on the right about half way down. They call that an apostrophe.

Oh, and the Bible does not say the Earth is 6000 years old, so you are wrong on that count as well.

[AussieMike]

And there is more evidence to suggest that the jesus myth is borrowed from an older myth, than there is he was the actual son of a god incarnate who could walk on water and turn water into wine



The whole christ story is a rehash of an older astrotheological one, just as the SCA story is a rehash of a star tek episode.

There is no evidence JC was real, and plenty of evidence he was not, I get that thats as hard for the true believers of that myth to swallow as it is for jake and droid and Pman to swallow that RT was also a con job.

In both examples the vast bulk of the evidence points to a con

There is as much proof JC was divine as there is that SCA was an intel Op, that is to say there is none.

There is more evidence that the JC story is just a story, than there is he is the son of god, even judaeism says hes not
The dead sea scrolls predate the christ story, but contain a "sermon on the mount", the obvious answer is the christ story is a cut and paste job
The earth is not 6000 years old
The biblical flood didnt wipe out the australian aborigine

There is only one reality that can reconcile these glaring inconsistancys

There is far more evidence pointing to this reality, than to the one you embrace as "truth"

Delusional is an apt description for those who cling to a fantasy in the face of the obvious evidence
Like jake does.....................

[AussieMike]

Yet, like a baby you keep whining about personal insults when you threw out the bait and then the insults first. I don't care to debate someone who is acting like a child. That's why I am not going to bother wasting my time doing it with you.

And yet here you are using insults instead of facts to debate.

http://www.missiontoamerica.org/genesis ... years.html

The Bible says the world is about six thousand years old. How do we arrive at that number?

The Bible provides a complete genealogy from Adam to Jesus. You can go through the genealogies and add up the years. You'll get a total that is just over 4,000 years. Add the 2,000 years since the time of Jesus and you get just over 6,000 years since God created everything.

Is there anything wrong with figuring out the age of the earth this way? No. There is nothing to indicate the genealogies are incomplete. There is nothing to indicate God left anything out. There is nothing in the Bible that indicates in any way that the world is older than 6,000 years old.

The Bible does tell us, however, that the fossils we find could not have been buried before God created Adam. The animals whose bones became fossilized had to have died after God created Adam. That means those fossils must be less than 6,000 yers old.

You resort to the same tactics that the SCA believers did when confronted with the facts, insults and picking on grammar.....

Your insults to the Bible and comparing it to theTheilmann issue was very low and insulting

Regarding the book of Theilmann...funny adaptation...

Its all relative

[jeddyhi]

Mike, you're fighting a no win situation in regards to religious debate. It is virtually impossible to convince a religious person that their faith is based on man made storylines and that their religion is false, incorrect, incomplete, or just plain wrong.

And there is no joy even if you do convince someone that their belief in God is wrong. Religion (christianity at least) provides comfort and peace to those that believe. It allows for an afterlife where perhaps we are reunited with loved ones.....I wouldn't want to take that away from anybody.

A person becomes an atheist on their own. You cannot convince, debate, or argue someone into dumping their religion. It just doesn't work.

[AussieMike]

This from the baut forum rules (i know its not a rule here, but its pertinant)

Attack the ideas, not the person(s) presenting them. If you've got concerns with what someone is saying, feel free dismantle their arguments, but do not resort to ad hominem or personal attacks

life around you must be a joy to behold

Why bring the people in my personal life into this, they dont post or read here

That ain't the real world, baby

Im of the mind the use of the word baby is a personal attack

Yet, like a baby you keep whining about personal insults

Ditto,

Rather than debate the ideas you attack the person

[AussieMike]

Mike, you're fighting a no win situation in regards to religious debate. It is virtually impossible to convince a religious person that their faith is based on man made storylines and that their religion is false, incorrect, incomplete, or just plain wrong.

And there is no joy even if you do convince someone that their belief in God is wrong. Religion (christianity at least) provides comfort and peace to those that believe. It allows for an afterlife where perhaps we are reunited with loved ones.....I wouldn't want to take that away from anybody.

A person becomes an atheist on their own. You cannot convince, debate, or argue someone into dumping their religion. It just doesn't work.

Thats a matter of perspective Jed, one mans faith is anothers hoax.

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.

Its all relative

I dont care what people believe, but if they want to bring that belief into the UFO debate, i should be able to debate a contrary opinion if i feel its warranted.

Nick redferns new book is an example, the collins elite are saying thet the UFO phenomena is demonic in nature, should i say nothing if i dont feel that conclusion is warranted, or should i debate it, if i were trying to myth bust religion id take Eths advice and go to a christian site and do so, what i debate here is the validity of the religious worldview in the context of interpreting the UFO question.
Personally i dont thinks its helpful to the reputation of ufology for it to be seen through that filter, i find it absurd

[Access Denied]

Well put J.

Mike, I think your idea of time traveling aliens is absurd. How is that any different than you thinking that the idea of the UFO phenomena being demonic in nature is absurd?

Is it because you don’t believe in demons? I don’t believe in demons either (at least not literally, or time travelers) but who’s to say the archaic idea of demons isn’t based on the same phenomenon as the idea of aliens today?

Or is that you think they’re good guys that’s the real problem here?

You’re ideas are clearly influenced by science-fiction, other’s ideas are clearly Biblically influenced.

What if one’s existing faith in God has the ability to make the abduction or contact phenomenon go away for someone who’s experiencing it by becoming convinced it’s demonic in nature and they should reject it? Is that a bad thing?

What if trying to convince that same person of the Scientific explanation for these same phenomena doesn’t make any difference? Proceed to Plan B: Attack their faith?

What makes you think the religious perspective is necessarily intended for you to “digest” anyway?

What does your explanation of the phenomenon offer in the way of helping anyone?

I’m not saying they’re aren’t hoaxers out there trying to advantage of people’s religious faith for fun and profit like the “Collins Elite”. In that case I’m right there with you.

What I’m saying is one size does not fit all. Hell, some in the Catholic Church think ET would be God’s creation too and should be considered our brothers.

[but not our sisters apparently, religious joke]

Discuss…

[AussieMike]

I think you are being deliberatly obtuse Tom,
I posted an absurd idea to make a point.

but who’s to say the archaic idea of demons isn’t based on the same phenomenon as the idea of aliens today?

Ive addressed this already, i dont disagree with the premise, what ive said is if they are describing the same thing, its done using the same limited language and lack of technical clarity we see in ezekiels descriptions.

Ezekiel could describe my 50 inch LCD TV, but that description would not be as useful as the users manual in troubleshooting problems.

I dont have an explaination of the alleged phenomena, Ive always gone to great lengths to include that caveat.

But go over to OMF and read scarz's rambling diatribes re the Bible and UFO's.........
These people dont include the "i dont know" caveat , on the contrary, they are just another branch of the collins elite.
There is no debate in those threads, just the same sort of arrogant postulations we saw in the SCA threads.

What makes you think the religious perspective is necessarily intended for you to “digest” anyway?

What makes you think Sala's or Salla's or hastings or LMH's ......Perspective is intended for you to "digest" anyway ?

If someone makes an extraordinary claim, its open for discussion.
Im no exception, never made out i wasnt.

God doesnt do heart transplants, surgeons do
Do i find it more likely then that if mankind is to have "life after death" it will be by his own hand, and not that of some flying spaghetti monster ? Yes i do think thats a more likely scenario.
Is it the reality ? my usual caveat I DONT KNOW the three most honest and useful words we have for the question.
But dont take my word for it, go over to OM and read the drivel Scarz and jake post, "i dont know" is not a factor.
Like the collins elite these guys will tell you with smug arrogance they do know, anyone expressing a contrary opinion is tag team insulted out of the discussion
Bit like what we saw in the SCA hoax

What does your explanation of the phenomenon offer in the way of helping anyone?

I dont do "explanations", ive made that patently clear, i dont post answers, just ideas. Clearly youve missed something in reading my posts

[AussieMike]

heres a classic example

Mount Hermon is where The Watchers were said to have descended. Some also believe the Transfiguration may have taken place here also.

Why Jesus chose this spot very well could have been to take a firm stand against the god that was the most worshiped through out the world in the days he walked this earth.

Jesus Christ is the stone cut out without hands. In Daniel we see this mighty stone is the one that causes the great image to crumble to the ground. I see this image much in the same light as I do Nimrods Tower of Babel. It crumbled to the ground by the power of God. I also believe the crumbling of the walls of Jericho paint a picture once again of a world system falling as Jesus Christ takes back this earth from the dark forces.

Once Jesus Christ died on the cross the powers of the heavens were shaken. The stand was made, then fulfilled as he rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven. Now all that remains is the mop up.

Everyone that is to be born must be born,everything must be fulfilled to the letter. It's not about my will,or your will,it's the will of The Father.

Keep in mind the "dark forces" are the occupants of UFO's....................

How bloody tragic that if Sentient beings were to visit us (not saying they are, Jeds POV is high on my list of probability) But if they did exist and were here, how bloody tragic that we would use primitave labels and superstition as an explanation of their existance. Which is what the collins elite have done

There is more than just one Jacob's ladder to Heaven. Maybe you know what I'm saying. The key in this life is choosing the most direct ladder.

We 3d humans can't really go much lower in the levels of Heavens, than what we're already in. (he that has an ear) As earth is the prison of the Light Bearer. He owns it. It's his abode, by way of contract with Yahweh. Just ask Jesus, he's already confirmed that.

So... you think you love your councilors? Sure, they know a lot more than mere mortals. But learn their intent and purpose before writing your grave stone epitaph.

There is more than one ladder. May you pick the right one.

Etherian.....If you only have time today to listen to any of "Tom Horn - Transhumanism - Science & Supernatural Conference", be sure and listen to video's 6-8.

When Tom gets going he can paint a picture that I think I understand much better. This isn't something I believe might occur one day,I believe it will become a reality. You and I may not be around to see the full blown product,but I believe we are already in the stages that lead to the final product.

When you come forward with this kind of material,you will draw many enemies and people who will try anything and everything to stop you. But as Tom talked about Noah and "The World" that surrounded him. It certainly opened my eyes and ears to "The World" that surrounds us today as well as on into the future.

Are we going to be giants of the faith, or be silenced by the giants that rule with dark spirit forces? It's not all about what we see,but what we don't see is what's stirring the pot.

If we think back to the time before the flood we can quickly see that all had a type of mark upon them. The mark of corrupt (DNA,Genetics) was in those who were swept away in the flood.

The true human-man (Adam) only genetics remained in Noah and his family. Eight souls rode the judgment out. Also all the animals and creatures that were saved had to be true to their genetics or they would not have been saved either........."Every thing after it's own kind."

So I see not only a type of mark upon the ones drown in the flood but also a type of seal upon those who were saved.

The Flood story is not supported by the evidence (australian aboriginal been here 40,000 years) was noah aboriginal ?

Yet these guys belive the fable lock stock and barrel, anyone who says they believe the biblical flood story has little or no critical thinking skills.

Eight souls rode the judgment out

That cant be true in light of the existance of the aboriginal on this continent for 40,000 years

And these people are going to have answers about the nature of ET ?

Give me a break

[AussieMike]

One of my favourite songs/artists . i have all of his albums on CD, as well as the soundtrack to sister act, and masses of gregorian chant on CD



make of that what you will

[ryguy]

But if they did exist and were here, how bloody tragic that we would use primitave labels and superstition as an explanation of their existance.

I actually agree with this. I think the mythology of demons and the literal view of them in this context (entities) is unfortunate. With that said, I also think the mythology of aliens (either benevolent or violent) and the literal view of them in the same context is equally unfortunate. That's the skeptic in me.

The believer in me further stipulates that there's an element of truth to the phenomena that incorporates a little bit of both of those beliefs. Unfortunately, human nature seems to be to oversimplify things when there's a strange and unknown event. Such as the disease of consumption mutating into vampires.

-Ryan

[ScaRZ]

Well Mike I was going to just let it ride but now I've grown sick of your words. Yesterday I came to RU and read your post and thought why should I give this guy the time of day.

I'm going to post what I want to post here and at any other forum I choose to be a member of. If the staff at any of the forums don't want we there all they have to do is ask and I will be gone. If you don't like what I post,then don't read it. I don't give a crap what you like......."Do you understand?" You may think this old boy is just one of those Christians that you can run all over......."Think again."

Mike....Maybe The Bible offers you nothing,but does that mean it doesn't offer others something?

You don't think I have the right to lay out my thoughts,my beliefs,my ideas "Anywhere" at RU just because I'm a follower and believer in Jesus Christ. Not even in one small thread on this forum should my and others views be posted if our views don't meet up to your standards. If you don't care for the content......."Who is forcing you to enter?"

If I don't like the content of a thread then I can stay out of it. This was the reason I said what I did in Mur's thread about it being time for me to leave. Mur also doesn't want off topic material in there and I don't blame him......"I agree with him 100%." People that want to take part in it,that's their choice and I'm not in there trying to shut it down. Nobody held a gun to my head and forced me to come inside Mur's thread did they? I was given the free will to enter and exit as I desired.

Mike I've grown tired of the endless debates with atheist and people who don't believe. I've been involved in this for years and after a few years of the same old head banging I saw no need continuing to bang my head. I do believe enough blood has ran down of face. I enjoy discussing,and laying things out, but care nothing about a never ending food fight.

As far as the earth only being 6,000 years old in my eyes,this shows you haven't read but a few snippets of the material I've posted at OM and RU.

Tons of my material has absolutely nothing to do with UFO's and Aliens. I say over and over "IF" there are then this could be what it's about. I have never had "Any" encounters with UFO's or Aliens......."That I know of." If I've been among them then I was without any knowledge of them.

Where in any of "My on material" have I ever said that (Aliens,ET)......."Are Demons?"..........."I haven't."

Before you toss my name into something be sure you know what you're talking about.

[Etherian]

Typical avoidance,
And your actions belie your words

but I don't want any part of it.

And yet here you are debating away, your 4th post in this thread, but you dont want any part of it ?

You had no problem when Eth used a religious platform to posit an opinion

asked that there be no religious debate

Yet eth posted an opinion based on a religious POV, isnt it more accurate then to say you didnt want any anti religious debate.
Clearly opinions of a religious nature were OK, as per Eth and scarz and Ry's posts, The problem was only when i introduced anti religious elements.

Thats hypocrisy. case closed

And yet, here you are running on like a Magfry with diarrehea of the mouth.
Are you sorta worried that maybe not everyone is going to line up and bow down to what you arrogantly propose?

Ain't going to happen baby.

I consider you a baiter and not worth debating.
By the way, you seem intent on dictating the operation of the site.

Are you by any chance the new owner? If not, you know what to do.