Cat-among-pigeons time!
Peter Lemesurier
What it all seems to boil down to is this:
A. The book of Daniel isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
in the future, because most reputable scholars conclude on fairly good
evidence that it is obviously an opportunistic fake cobbled together
to encourage Jews suffering from the Greek oppression of 160-odd BC
(though parts of it turned out to be more successful than they had any
right to be, given that they helped provoke the immensely successful
Maccabean revolt).
B. St John's Revelation isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
in the future, because it is merely one of a number of contemporary
apocalypses cobbled together to encourage Messianists such as Jews and
Christians suffering under the Roman oppression of the late 1st
century AD (though parts of it turned out to be more successful than
they had any right to be, given the eventual fall of Rome).
C. Nostradamus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
future, because his Propheties are to a large extent a kind of
apocalypse cobbled together for the benefit of people suffering under
what they perceived to be the onset of the Last Times in mid-16th
century France (War, Plague, Famine, Death -- and the Antichrist, in
the form of John Calvin, sitting in Geneva), and also because his
measurable success-rate during his own lifetime was in any case only
some 5.73%.
D Astrology isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
future, because (as Nostradamus's professional astrological
contemporaries were always trying to tell him) astrology deals only
with influences and potentialities, not with actual events.
E. Paul isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
because he claimed (wrongly) that the end would come in the lifetime
of people then living (Thessalonians 4: 15-18, and again at I
Corinthians 15:51 -- "We shall not all die...") -- which means that he
meant it for then, not now.
F. Jesus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
because (if the texts are to be believed) he wrongly claimed much the
same (Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke21, and especially verses 34/30/32
respectively: "I tell you this: the present generation will live to
see it all" [NEB translation]) -- which means that he meant it for
then, not now.
Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
always possible if we don't watch out!).
Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
--
Peter
pldu...@my-deja.com
Can't you get anything right! It is!.......
Cats-among-pigeon time!
your pathetic!
Go back to school!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bjoernar
>Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
>What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
>become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
>ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
>always possible if we don't watch out!).
>
>Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
You're an even more of a debunker than i am!
Good thing I am not alone in this newsgroup!
I guess you've made a lot of dooomsday sayers
sad and disappointed now.
>Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
The rumors says that the secret is about Coca Cola which will go
bust in the year 2020 when Pepsi has taken over the soft drink market.
Bjoernar
Anonymous Sender
continued ignoring the Voice of One; instead, Peter continues to
blaspheme the Spirit, mocking His Word and His faithful prophets
to the bitter end. May the good LORD grace you with His presence:
>
>Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
>What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>
>become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
>ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
>always possible if we don't watch out!).
>
>Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
>
>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
>
>Peter
>
And so it is written lbb Nb: children of confusion by mixing.
But the rocks do not forget, neither does the spirit forgive,
not in the present age, neither to the perpetual age the 5th.
Enjoy the poleshift!
Daniel Joseph Min-
Nomen Nescio
lordm...@my-deja.com
n This
> Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
> become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
> ourselves,
Time an Time againg People Myth-alize Humans into Heros into Gods!
Zuez what ever religion was a normal man not a God or anything else!
But the collective people put him as a surreal God because some kind of
Majic spell as the Anagram Gospel/Go Spell is what keeps the infintile
brain occupied!
Figure "He-Brew" [ a majic spell ]\\
He "Je-Wish [ed]" on a majic star
He started a new "Coven [nant]" for his people!
> whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
> always possible if we don't watch out!).
You watch some already know!
>
> Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
What is encouraging?
>
> Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
Ronald McDonald will start Selling 25 cent Hambergers on a Monday thru
Friday Prophecised by Ronald Himself?
Oh the Pope likes Pokimon and will star in the next Movie as Super Blob!
The gas-iest visiter to the Wonder world of Hostess Cup cakes!
Got Milk?
Archangel
> --
>
> Peter
Shirley
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pqn9lsgf21o01f174...@4ax.com...
> Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
> Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
What a shame we won't be able to discuss it at this NG - after all, which
Nostradamus prophecy is it all about? :~)
Shirley
pldu...@my-deja.com
You sure nailed him on that one!:)
He all ways saying what does that have to do with Nostradamus here! To
people who post on non-topics to APN.
He! He! vary good girl!
King Of Tranquility
Peter Lemesurier wrote in message ...
<debunkery snipped>
>Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
>
>Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
Yes, no doubt it will be a real yawn for you Peter - much as all true
prophecy is.
--
KOT
'Consciousness reverts to contemplation;
the moon disk rests alone.'
http://kingofterror.theunusual.net
eo
even mentioned potentialities and implied that people would try to engineer
prophecy fulfillment because of being encouraged by prophecy interpretations
and the leanings of the original authors.
The other element though is the existence of psi. When people get in the
spirit, they are capable of tapping into the collective consciousness.
Although I don't believe much of what Paul created, he does have a knowledge
of what humans are capable of when they get in the spirit. He mentions
speaking in tongues and prophesying in 1Corinthians.
When scholars learn that psi exists, they may see that MANY different
methods can be used for divining future possibilities beyond what random
guessing or even guessing by looking at current trends should produce.
The future paradigms regarding human behavior and religions will have to
take into account scholarly critical analysis of texts, historical and
psychological views of good and malicious acts provoked by religion, and the
awareness or acknowledgment that psi does indeed exist. There are some good
scientists working at presenting irrefutable evidence for psi. My guess is
that the scholars will know that psi exists when the spirits want them to
know.
........................................
Peter Lemesurier wrote in message ...
>Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
>Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
>become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
>ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
>always possible if we don't watch out!).
>
>Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
>
>Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
>--
>
>Peter
maynard
time frame you are giving greece had been conquered by the romans by a good
many years and relegated to a province state
"Anonymous Sender" <nob...@noisebox.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:6678af6499230429...@noisebox.dhs.org...
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000, Peter Lemesurier<lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk>
> continued ignoring the Voice of One; instead, Peter continues to
> blaspheme the Spirit, mocking His Word and His faithful prophets
> to the bitter end. May the good LORD grace you with His presence:
> >
> But the rocks do not forget, neither does the spirit forgive,
> not in the present age, neither to the perpetual age the 5th.
> Enjoy the poleshift!
> Daniel Joseph Min-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Claude Latremouille
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote
*
>Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
So you say, Peter, so you say.
*
>What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>A. The book of Daniel isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
*
As I am no expert on the book of Daniel, I shall remain silent.
*
>B. St John's Revelation isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
*
Ditto for the book of Revelation.
*
>C. Nostradamus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
>future, because his Propheties are to a large extent a kind of
>apocalypse cobbled together for the benefit of people suffering under
>what they perceived to be the onset of the Last Times in mid-16th
>century France (War, Plague, Famine, Death -- and the Antichrist, in
>the form of John Calvin, sitting in Geneva), and also because his
>measurable success-rate during his own lifetime was in any case only
>some 5.73%.
See below for appropriate comments. Read on.
*
>D Astrology isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
>future, because (as Nostradamus's professional astrological
>contemporaries were always trying to tell him) astrology deals only
>with influences and potentialities, not with actual events.
I shall not comment here about astrology, as a.p.n. -- believe it
or not -- is a NewsGroup devoted to the understanding of
Nostradamus' prophecies, not about astrology *per se*.
*
>E. Paul isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
*
As I am no expert on Paul's writings, I shall remain silent.
*
>F. Jesus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
*
Although I've heard of the guy, I wouldn't dream of commenting
writings which he may never have seen in his own lifetime.
*
>Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
Let's create a paragraph G. under the same model, then:
*
G. The 25-line piece of handwriting of Lucia dos Santos to the
pope, also known as the Third Secret of Fatima, is not going to
tell you what's going to happen in the future, because she is not
a reputable scholar, was a poor Portuguese peasant girl in 1917
when she claimed to have had -- with her two cousins -- visions
of the Virgin Mary at the Cova da Iria, near Fatima.
*
Moreover, when she penned these 25 lines, in the early 1940's,
more than 20 years had passed since these so-called visions, so
she could not have noted exactly in these 25 lines what she said
she was told back in 1917.
*
On the other hand...
*
Back to Nostradamus. Yes, he is going to tell you what is to
happen in the future, because he was able to tell you for more
than 440 years what did happen since March 14, 1557, his stated
date for the beginning of his prophecies.
*
Although none of his most devoted commentators were ever able to
actually predict the future using his obscure quatrains, many of
the best did indeed *after the fact* find their meaning in light
of past events.
*
Which leads us to ask: If all of his now properly explained
quatrains were always understood *after the fact*, what would be
the purpose of a prophecy which is so obscure that it only allows
the best of its interpreters to figure out what it means *after
the fact*?
*
And the logical answer has to be: this prophecy *as it is
printed* is not intended to be understood before the fact. Far
from being merely a bunch of fools, the best of Nostradamus'
commentators only found what Nostradamus wanted them to find.
*
The purpose of this prophecy is to be understood *before the
fact* of the future destruction of Paris, provided it is read,
not as it is printed, but with the letters of each line of text
slightly displaced using the poetic (or hermetic) licence of
every word being written with all of its letters, or with only
one of its letters being replaced by another.
*
Once these letter displacements are effected, many hidden texts
appear, and one of these always deals with the circumstances of
the unintended destruction of Paris.
*
If you really want to test the prophecy, as a tourist just go
spend a magnificent weekend in Paris, on August 12-13, 2017. And
if you do not want to miss anything, have a seat in the first
row, that is -- after a short rest from your Saturday touring of
the most beautiful city in the world -- wake up at about 3:00
a.m., listen to the news on radio about the slaughter that day in
T'ienanmen Square by Communist revolutionaries of all 79 US male
diplomats duly accredited by the Chinese government to Peking,
and then go take a walk towards the Luxor obelisk, dead centre of
the place de la Concorde; and, at 3:53 a.m., you will be... dead.
*
Because, you see, the ICBM which would have just nuked you over
the head was intended for T'ienanmen, and not for the Concorde.
*
But an inexperienced and much too young recruit was on duty that
Saturday night in the US, when the order came to him to target
his missile for T'ienanmen. So he did. Or, he thought he did. But
he did not. He screwed up. Instead of programming his missile for
Beijing (or should I say Peking), he programmed it for Paris.
*
No one, absolutely no one knew this... until you got the missile
on top of the head that night over the Concorde in Paris.
*
This is the purpose of Nostradamus' prophecy: to warn the good
people of Paris to flee the city ahead of time.
*
Even though it might not be as popular as
A. the book of Daniel;
B. the book of Revelations;
E. the writings of St. Paul;
F. the teachings of Jesus; and
G. the Third Secret of Fatima,
*
Nostradamus' prophecy will be heralded *after the fact* by the
dying residents of that fateful night in Paris as the act of a
true seer. Too late, unfortunately.
*
Thanks to atheists repeating the same stupidities you have read
under C. and D., above.
*
--
**** ac...@freenet.toronto.on.ca ****
C L A U D E L A T R E M O U I L L E
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peter Lemesurier
(Bjoernar) wrote:
>You're an even more of a debunker than i am!
>Good thing I am not alone in this newsgroup!
>I guess you've made a lot of dooomsday sayers
>sad and disappointed now.
Highly unlikely. They're totally impervious to facts -- probably even
impervious to Coca Cola... ;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
<kingof...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
>>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
>
>Yes, no doubt it will be a real yawn for you Peter - much as all true
>prophecy is.
On your past record, KOT, you wouldn't recognise a true prophecy even
if it kicked you in the teeth!
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>This article is a definite keeper, Peter.
However, it's susceptible of some improvement. I'll update it and
repost after Fatima 3...
> Much of what you say is true. You
>even mentioned potentialities and implied that people would try to engineer
>prophecy fulfillment because of being encouraged by prophecy interpretations
>and the leanings of the original authors.
>
>The other element though is the existence of psi. When people get in the
>spirit, they are capable of tapping into the collective consciousness.
>Although I don't believe much of what Paul created, he does have a knowledge
>of what humans are capable of when they get in the spirit. He mentions
>speaking in tongues and prophesying in 1Corinthians.
He does indeed.
>
>When scholars learn that psi exists, they may see that MANY different
>methods can be used for divining future possibilities beyond what random
>guessing or even guessing by looking at current trends should produce.
>
>The future paradigms regarding human behavior and religions will have to
>take into account scholarly critical analysis of texts, historical and
>psychological views of good and malicious acts provoked by religion, and the
>awareness or acknowledgment that psi does indeed exist.
Makes sense -- if it does! (And a priori I don't see any reason why it
shouldn't...)
>There are some good
>scientists working at presenting irrefutable evidence for psi. My guess is
>that the scholars will know that psi exists when the spirits want them to
>know.
Which might be rather a long time, especially if they persist in
devising experiments that exclude all possible emotional or
motivational factors (card recognition, for example)!
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
<shi...@learthart.screaming.net> wrote:
>
>Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:pqn9lsgf21o01f174...@4ax.com...
>> Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
>> Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
>> to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
>
>What a shame we won't be able to discuss it at this NG - after all, which
>Nostradamus prophecy is it all about? :~)
Er... it has to be about the Nostradamus prophecy that prophesies that
the 3rd secret of Fatima won't say anything about the prophecies of
Nostradamus prophesying the 3rd secret of Fatima, surely?
You know perfectly well that it's bound to be there! If it's not,
somebody here will soon take steps to ensure that it is! ;)
--
Peter
shu...@hotmail.com
Most scholars don't believe in God, so what does what you wrote below
prove? It proves that there are many scoffers around looking to deceive
people and lead them astray just as the Bible told us; and you are among
those people.
You obviously don't believe that prophecy is possible so what are you
doing here? I know, just as I've been saying you're here to lead people
astray, that's what you've been about all along. I said this years ago and
you denied it, now you're much more in the open with your lies.
Tony
Peter Lemesurier wrote:
> Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
> What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>
> A. The book of Daniel isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
> in the future, because most reputable scholars conclude on fairly good
> evidence that it is obviously an opportunistic fake cobbled together
> to encourage Jews suffering from the Greek oppression of 160-odd BC
> (though parts of it turned out to be more successful than they had any
> right to be, given that they helped provoke the immensely successful
> Maccabean revolt).
>
> B. St John's Revelation isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
> in the future, because it is merely one of a number of contemporary
> apocalypses cobbled together to encourage Messianists such as Jews and
> Christians suffering under the Roman oppression of the late 1st
> century AD (though parts of it turned out to be more successful than
> they had any right to be, given the eventual fall of Rome).
>
> C. Nostradamus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
> future, because his Propheties are to a large extent a kind of
> apocalypse cobbled together for the benefit of people suffering under
> what they perceived to be the onset of the Last Times in mid-16th
> century France (War, Plague, Famine, Death -- and the Antichrist, in
> the form of John Calvin, sitting in Geneva), and also because his
> measurable success-rate during his own lifetime was in any case only
> some 5.73%.
>
> D Astrology isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
> future, because (as Nostradamus's professional astrological
> contemporaries were always trying to tell him) astrology deals only
> with influences and potentialities, not with actual events.
>
> E. Paul isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
> because he claimed (wrongly) that the end would come in the lifetime
> of people then living (Thessalonians 4: 15-18, and again at I
> Corinthians 15:51 -- "We shall not all die...") -- which means that he
> meant it for then, not now.
>
> F. Jesus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
> because (if the texts are to be believed) he wrongly claimed much the
> same (Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke21, and especially verses 34/30/32
> respectively: "I tell you this: the present generation will live to
> see it all" [NEB translation]) -- which means that he meant it for
> then, not now.
>
> Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
> become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
> ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
> always possible if we don't watch out!).
>
> Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
>
> Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
> --
>
> Peter
shu...@hotmail.com
> Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
> >
> >What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>
> >Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
> >become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
> >ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
> >always possible if we don't watch out!).
> >
> >Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
>
> You're an even more of a debunker than i am!
> Good thing I am not alone in this newsgroup!
> I guess you've made a lot of dooomsday sayers
> sad and disappointed now.
>
> >Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> >to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
>
> The rumors says that the secret is about Coca Cola which will go
> bust in the year 2020 when Pepsi has taken over the soft drink market.
>
> Bjoernar
If you're a debinker than why be here? Go on your way and leave us
todiscuss prophecy in peace without your and Peter's constant scoffing.
I don't understand people who go into a group with which they don't agree
just to cause chaos. You don't see me in groups that don't believe in
prophecy
trying to force my views on them. Get lost, the two of you.
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
You have written books interpreting prophecies and
made money from them, now you've turned to writting
books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
more and more. You no longer have anything but
scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
used to say about you has been true all along, you're
just trying to sell books and make money.
You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
every time you reply.
Tony
Bjoernar
Without Us Debunkers you Believers will go around living in your
Own Fantasy World without noticing The Real World.
Bjoernar
L Ballaam
Peter prophecy is a funny thing and many claim to have the ability to
interpret such usually to their own ends " The Antichrist" has been coming
since 250 AD and probably at Masara? well you forgot Ezekial Jeremiah Isaiah
not to mention the Merlin Prophecies aah but for this NG quite adequate.
But Nostradamus said hee could name and date each Quatrain I am always
surprised that more attention has not been given to the Presages and more
particualy to his letter which I believe holds the key to his quatrains
where he says you wont be able to interpret them but events are afoot and no
the Antichrist if he is coming is about at the earliest before he comes is
15 years but more likely 30+ so he is not my main consideration but the
Genghis Kahn type and the King of the North these two I believe turn over
the present Hegemony and impose their brand of Rule
nim
I vote for inclusion. Peter facilitates the thinking process,
confronting stale thinking that has gotten the world nowhere. Kick in a
few synapses and begin to think at a higher level. Try and see the other
side. It may irritate some, and cause the occasional headache, but how
else would you recommend growth? By NOT allowing contrary thought?
nim
Shirley
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 21:27:08 +0100, "Shirley"
> >
> >Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:pqn9lsgf21o01f174...@4ax.com...
> >> Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
> >
> >> Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> >> to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
> >
> >What a shame we won't be able to discuss it at this NG - after all, which
> >Nostradamus prophecy is it all about? :~)
>
> Er... it has to be about the Nostradamus prophecy that prophesies that
> the 3rd secret of Fatima won't say anything about the prophecies of
> Nostradamus prophesying the 3rd secret of Fatima, surely?
Yes, in the same way that the subject of loo paper quality can be related to
Nostradamus prophecy! :~)
Your bemoaning of the diverse subjects covered at the newsgroup seems
typical of the human tendency to label everything into little boxes. We like
to give borders to everything. We view our computer as one object and the
table as an entirely separate object to conform with our perception. In
reality the fascination lies with the unseen interconnectedness between
everything. Nostradamus (better mention him to keep you happy!) himself, in
a letter to his son, mentions how the past and future are incorporated with
the present. Cause and effect are never linear, the complex
interconnectedness
of everything forms a complex web. IMO diversity of subjects and views
should be encouraged. If Nostradamus was a poster here, I'm sure he'd agree!
:~)
Shirley
Peter Lemesurier
<shi...@learthart.screaming.net> wrote:
>Your bemoaning of the diverse subjects covered at the newsgroup seems
>typical of the human tendency to label everything into little boxes.
Such as the little box called alt.prophecies.nostradamus, you mean? ;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>If you're a debinker than why be here? Go on your way and leave us
>todiscuss prophecy in peace without your and Peter's constant scoffing.
How can you discuss prophecy without mentioning the negative side too?
Does 'discuss' mean 'agree with Tony'?
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
wrote:
>shu...@hotmail.com hollered from the outhouse...
>
>>Most scholars don't believe in God,
>
>You've surveyed enough to say this with certainty?
>
>> It proves that there are many scoffers around looking to deceive
>>people and lead them astray just as the Bible told us; and you are among
>>those people.
>
>There are a LOT of people who believe in God, but _not_ the God of the Bible.
Well, did I call this thread 'Cat-among-pigeons time', didn't I?! ;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>Peter,
>
>I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
Discussing prophecy and Nostradamus. Advancing hypotheses about
whether any of our favourite sources can actually tell us anything
specific about the future.
And (successfully, it seems) putting cats among pigeons.
>
>You have written books interpreting prophecies and
>made money from them, now you've turned to writting
>books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
>more and more. You no longer have anything but
>scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
>used to say about you has been true all along, you're
>just trying to sell books and make money.
If you say so. After all, you must know...
>
>You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
>start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
>of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
>every time you reply.
*You* are, you mean?
Trying not merely to regulate the agenda, but to regulate the
membership now, are we?
Dear, dear!
I've an idea Robert Mugabe is looking for an adviser. Care to apply?
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
wrote:
>shu...@hotmail.com hollered from the outhouse...
>
>>I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
>>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
>>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
>Debunker of FALSE prophecy, and THAT is a good thing.
I propose that we expel St Paul from the group, given that he wrote:
" Put everything to the test; keep hold of what is good and avoid
every kind of evil." I Thessalonians 5:21 [NEB translation]. ;)
--
Peter
MB
mike
==============================================================
shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
> I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
> You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> more and more. You no longer have anything but
> scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> just trying to sell books and make money.
>
> You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> every time you reply.
>
> Tony
Bjoernar
>Peter,
>
>I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
>You have written books interpreting prophecies and
>made money from them, now you've turned to writting
>books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
>more and more. You no longer have anything but
>scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
>used to say about you has been true all along, you're
>just trying to sell books and make money.
>
>You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
>start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
>of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
>every time you reply.
You're not very tolerant are you. Peter obviously knows more
about this stuff than you do. Even though he don't believe
in all of the prophecies his opinion should be appreciated because
he can give some alternative perspective on Nostradamus.
Because of your intolerance I suggest you leave the group.
There is a group called alt.usenet.kooks. Go there.
Bjoernar
Borisdan
L Ballaam <leig...@ultra.net.au> wrote in message
news:3955...@pink.one.net.au...
>
.
> But Nostradamus said hee could name and date each Quatrain I am always
> surprised that more attention has not been given to the Presages and more
> particualy to his letter which I believe holds the key to his quatrains
> where he says you wont be able to interpret them but events are afoot
Evidently each poem conatins the exact Year, month and day but as you
mentioned, not enough effort is spent in looking for Nostradamus' coding
method. As for the interpretation, even if the code was discovered we would
be hard pressed to know which individiual or event Nostradamus is refering
to as the poems are vague. This allows the prophecy to take its course not
allowing anyone to altler it.
Remember King Herod when he was told "A new King was born" and the
consequences which followed.
Boris
Claude Latremouille
: Peter,
*
: I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
: exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
: of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
The same thing all the others who do not accept the idea of
prophecy are doing here, namely, to systematically attack
Nostradamus' prophecies while contributing nothing original
of their own about the prophecies.
*
: You have written books interpreting prophecies and
: made money from them, now you've turned to writting
: books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
: more and more. You no longer have anything but
: scoffing and ridicule to add here.
If you were able to consult DejaNews for a longer period of time,
you would see that Peter -- at the time he did not know that the
prophecy had been decrypted -- was not systematically attacking
Nostradamus. Ever since he has known about the general content of
the decrypted prophecy, he has begun to attack both the prophecy
and Nostradamus in a systematic fashion.
*
At least, he is logical, for if you allow one tiny bit of prophecy
to creep in, you have to allow others to do the same. So, to stop
the whole thing, you must deny the whole thing. And so he does.
*
: I guess what Alef
: used to say about you has been true all along, you're
: just trying to sell books and make money.
I would not go as far as calling Peter a liar about everything he
posts in a.p.n. My general impression of his posts (I have not
read his books) is that he is guily of intellectual fraud of the
first order.
*
: You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
: start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
: of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
: every time you reply.
: Tony
*
Well, Tony, that is indeed the situation. And if you think about
it a little more, you will realize that the implications of
prophecy are enormous. As soon as you allow yourself to say: "This
man, Nostradamus, truly was a seer", you allow someone else to say:
"Yes, Nostradamus was indeed a seer, and he predicted [ fill in the
blanks ]".
*
Peter strikes me as an atheist who does not believe in anything.
Personally, I tend to view myself as a person who will not reject
anything, however strange, if it makes sense to me. Astrology, for
instance, is not very well accepted by the so-called scholars of
our times, and in France, it is even more laughed at than it is in
English-speaking countries.
*
And I have come to accept astrology, even though -- on the face of
it -- it does not make much sense. But I have come to understand
how it can be possible, and how it actually works. So, I accept it.
*
And it is astrology which led me to prophecy, and to Nostradamus'
prophecies. If one (astrology) is possible, the other (prophecy) is
possible too.
*
And thirty years ago, I read Nostradamus' prophecies for the first
time and I instinctively knew that all this gibberish was indeed a
prophecy (I had understood only three verses out of about a thousand)
and that -- if I had not understood the rest, it was because I was too
ignorant of French history.
*
Little did I know, back in 1969, that I would stumble almost by
accident -- twenty-five years later -- on Nostradamus' well hidden
secret.
*
But this is another story.
*
As to Peter, if he were to leave this NewsGroup, I would be the only
regular contributor left to have an very intimate knowledge of what
Nostradamus really wrote, which would be a pity. I much prefer to
keep reading Peter's shit than facing the prospect that -- if I left
this NewsGroup, nobody else in it would know what they are talking
about.
*
A very frightening thought, don't you think? :-)
*
Have a nice day, you all!
Carol
<lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
>What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>
>A. The book of Daniel isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
>in the future, because most reputable scholars conclude on fairly good
>evidence that it is obviously an opportunistic fake cobbled together
Have you ever heard of "Catur"?
Of not I will post the story.
Carol
lordm...@my-deja.com
shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Peter,
>
> I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
Hi, Greetings Tony,
We or I Have asked before It does no good!
He doesn't want to learn anything out side the said words of a verse.
He will not investigate how or history of Prophecy.
He getting old and is discurrage that his "Nostradamus Encyclopidia"
personal Prophecies are wako and totally wrong. So he is resentful and
has hatred for them.
>
> You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> more and more. You no longer have anything but
> scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> just trying to sell books and make money.
point out he has no personal web site to show case himself.
Just as James Randi does not show case himeself at his.. All debunkers
get these ideas from the "Communist Manifesto."
(Sorry for my spelling Im on a non-spellcheck computer:)
>
> You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> every time you reply.
I agree, iether be constructive and not condesending and negative.
Be well,
Archangel Michael
>
> Tony
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
lordm...@my-deja.com
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:17:26 GMT, shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >Peter,
> >
> >I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
> whether any of our favourite sources can actually tell us anything
> specific about the future.
>
> And (successfully, it seems) putting cats among pigeons.
Look their you go againg the thread was originally "a Cat among pigions"
LOOK at your post above..
first if you investigate Nostradamus don't change meanings in every post
to post. stay consistant.. That were you will succeed.
If you are the Cat. I agree you should leave. My correction was.
"Cats among a Pigion"
Can't you understand? Your post was intended that way that way!
Wars start because people change history.
Your thread confusses people because you wern't thinking!
You need to Come to America and live it up! and let out some fun.
Because England is wet and cloudy and mostly cool. You need Sun in the
Fun..
Archangel Michael
> >
> >You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> >made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> >books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> >more and more. You no longer have anything but
> >scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> >used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> >just trying to sell books and make money.
>
> If you say so. After all, you must know...
>
> >
> >You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> >start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> >of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> >every time you reply.
>
> *You* are, you mean?
>
> Trying not merely to regulate the agenda, but to regulate the
> membership now, are we?
>
> Dear, dear!
>
> I've an idea Robert Mugabe is looking for an adviser. Care to apply?
> --
>
> Peter
>
>
lordm...@my-deja.com
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 19:16:06 GMT, flyingcolou...@mail.com
> (Bjoernar) wrote:
>
> >Good thing I am not alone in this newsgroup!
> >I guess you've made a lot of dooomsday sayers
> >sad and disappointed now.
>
> impervious to Coca Cola... ;)
Did you note that you sent your Top- post ( Original under bad Planet
aspects and look at all this trouble you caused!
You sould have waited till today! At least! Oh Well,, Astrology does
work!
Archangel
Im not at my usuall Computer mind the spelling please!
lordm...@my-deja.com
flyingcolou...@mail.com wrote:
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >Peter,
> >
> >I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> >made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> >books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> >more and more. You no longer have anything but
> >scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> >used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> >just trying to sell books and make money.
> >
> >start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> >of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> >every time you reply.
>
> about this stuff than you do.
What stuff? Are you talking about?
Archangel
> Even though he don't believe
> in all of the prophecies his opinion should be appreciated because
> he can give some alternative perspective on Nostradamus.
>
> Because of your intolerance I suggest you leave the group.
> There is a group called alt.usenet.kooks. Go there.
>
> Bjoernar
>
lordm...@my-deja.com
Now NBC , and ABC are auditioning 10,000 people today for a new show!:)
It gone too far!
Archangel
>
> mike
> ==============================================================
>
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Peter,
> >
> > I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> > exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> > of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> > You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> > made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> > books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> > more and more. You no longer have anything but
> > scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> > used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> > just trying to sell books and make money.
> >
> > You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> > start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> > of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> > every time you reply.
> >
> > Tony
lordm...@my-deja.com
mail.gci.net wrote:
>
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Peter,
> >
> > I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> > exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> > of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> > You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> > made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> > books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> > more and more. You no longer have anything but
> > scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> > used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> > just trying to sell books and make money.
> >
> > You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> > start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> > of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> > every time you reply.
> >
> > Tony
>
> confronting stale thinking that has gotten the world nowhere. Kick in
a
> few synapses and begin to think at a higher level. Try and see the
other
> side. It may irritate some, and cause the occasional headache, but how
> else would you recommend growth? By NOT allowing contrary thought?
>
> nim
Unfourtunatly what Tony was saying is that Peter didn't give his post
much thought for recommend growth? Look at the POst you don't larn
anything new. He we refereing to Fatima will not be anything new
either..
Much better post by others inform the audiance! That the Vatican will
re-write the 3 d Secret as most History atest to! with ivestigation!
Thats why people think Jesus was on the cross when he wasn't..
Oh well,, So much for that!
Archangel
lordm...@my-deja.com
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 22:57:08 +0100, "King Of Tranquility"
> <kingof...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will
reveal
> >>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
> >
> >prophecy is.
>
> On your past record, KOT, you wouldn't recognise a true prophecy even
> if it kicked you in the teeth!
He He!
> --
>
> Peter
lordm...@my-deja.com
ac...@torfree.net (Claude Latremouille) wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 17:19:13 +0100,
> Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote
> >Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
> So you say, Peter, so you say.
Are you a Pigion Dude!
He HE Not me
Archangel
--
More like the Cat!
> *
> >What it all seems to boil down to is this:
> *
> >A. The book of Daniel isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
> >in the future, because [...]
> *
> As I am no expert on the book of Daniel, I shall remain silent.
> *
> >B. St John's Revelation isn't going to tell you what's going to
happen
> >in the future, because [...]
> *
> Ditto for the book of Revelation.
> *
> >C. Nostradamus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
> >future, because his Propheties are to a large extent a kind of
> >apocalypse cobbled together for the benefit of people suffering under
> >what they perceived to be the onset of the Last Times in mid-16th
> >century France (War, Plague, Famine, Death -- and the Antichrist, in
> >the form of John Calvin, sitting in Geneva), and also because his
> >measurable success-rate during his own lifetime was in any case only
> >some 5.73%.
> *
> See below for appropriate comments. Read on.
> *
> >D Astrology isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
> >future, because (as Nostradamus's professional astrological
> >contemporaries were always trying to tell him) astrology deals only
> >with influences and potentialities, not with actual events.
> *
> I shall not comment here about astrology, as a.p.n. -- believe it
> or not -- is a NewsGroup devoted to the understanding of
> Nostradamus' prophecies, not about astrology *per se*.
> *
> >E. Paul isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
> >because [...]
> *
> As I am no expert on Paul's writings, I shall remain silent.
> *
> >F. Jesus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
future,
> >because [...]
> *
> Although I've heard of the guy, I wouldn't dream of commenting
> writings which he may never have seen in his own lifetime.
> *
> >Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> >to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
> *
> Let's create a paragraph G. under the same model, then:
> *
> G. The 25-line piece of handwriting of Lucia dos Santos to the
> pope, also known as the Third Secret of Fatima, is not going to
> tell you what's going to happen in the future, because she is not
> a reputable scholar, was a poor Portuguese peasant girl in 1917
> when she claimed to have had -- with her two cousins -- visions
> of the Virgin Mary at the Cova da Iria, near Fatima.
> *
> Moreover, when she penned these 25 lines, in the early 1940's,
> more than 20 years had passed since these so-called visions, so
> she could not have noted exactly in these 25 lines what she said
> she was told back in 1917.
> *
> On the other hand...
> *
> Back to Nostradamus. Yes, he is going to tell you what is to
> happen in the future, because he was able to tell you for more
> than 440 years what did happen since March 14, 1557, his stated
> date for the beginning of his prophecies.
> *
> Although none of his most devoted commentators were ever able to
> actually predict the future using his obscure quatrains, many of
> the best did indeed *after the fact* find their meaning in light
> of past events.
> *
> Which leads us to ask: If all of his now properly explained
> quatrains were always understood *after the fact*, what would be
> the purpose of a prophecy which is so obscure that it only allows
> the best of its interpreters to figure out what it means *after
> the fact*?
> *
> And the logical answer has to be: this prophecy *as it is
> printed* is not intended to be understood before the fact. Far
> from being merely a bunch of fools, the best of Nostradamus'
> commentators only found what Nostradamus wanted them to find.
> *
> The purpose of this prophecy is to be understood *before the
> fact* of the future destruction of Paris, provided it is read,
> not as it is printed, but with the letters of each line of text
> slightly displaced using the poetic (or hermetic) licence of
> every word being written with all of its letters, or with only
> one of its letters being replaced by another.
> *
> Once these letter displacements are effected, many hidden texts
> appear, and one of these always deals with the circumstances of
> the unintended destruction of Paris.
> *
> If you really want to test the prophecy, as a tourist just go
> spend a magnificent weekend in Paris, on August 12-13, 2017. And
> if you do not want to miss anything, have a seat in the first
> row, that is -- after a short rest from your Saturday touring of
> the most beautiful city in the world -- wake up at about 3:00
> a.m., listen to the news on radio about the slaughter that day in
> T'ienanmen Square by Communist revolutionaries of all 79 US male
> diplomats duly accredited by the Chinese government to Peking,
> and then go take a walk towards the Luxor obelisk, dead centre of
> the place de la Concorde; and, at 3:53 a.m., you will be... dead.
> *
> Because, you see, the ICBM which would have just nuked you over
> the head was intended for T'ienanmen, and not for the Concorde.
> *
> But an inexperienced and much too young recruit was on duty that
> Saturday night in the US, when the order came to him to target
> his missile for T'ienanmen. So he did. Or, he thought he did. But
> he did not. He screwed up. Instead of programming his missile for
> Beijing (or should I say Peking), he programmed it for Paris.
> *
> No one, absolutely no one knew this... until you got the missile
> on top of the head that night over the Concorde in Paris.
> *
> This is the purpose of Nostradamus' prophecy: to warn the good
> people of Paris to flee the city ahead of time.
> *
> Even though it might not be as popular as
> A. the book of Daniel;
> B. the book of Revelations;
> E. the writings of St. Paul;
> F. the teachings of Jesus; and
> G. the Third Secret of Fatima,
> *
> Nostradamus' prophecy will be heralded *after the fact* by the
> dying residents of that fateful night in Paris as the act of a
> true seer. Too late, unfortunately.
> *
> Thanks to atheists repeating the same stupidities you have read
> under C. and D., above.
> *
> --
> **** ac...@freenet.toronto.on.ca ****
> C L A U D E L A T R E M O U I L L E
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
lordm...@my-deja.com
"Shirley" <shi...@learthart.screaming.net> wrote:
>
> Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:sflblsg8uj4ka77sb...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 21:27:08 +0100, "Shirley"
> > <shi...@learthart.screaming.net> wrote:
>
> > >
> > >Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >news:pqn9lsgf21o01f174...@4ax.com...
> > >
reveal
> > >> to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
> > >
which
> > >Nostradamus prophecy is it all about? :~)
> >
> > Er... it has to be about the Nostradamus prophecy that prophesies
that
> > the 3rd secret of Fatima won't say anything about the prophecies of
> > Nostradamus prophesying the 3rd secret of Fatima, surely?
>
> Yes, in the same way that the subject of loo paper quality can be
related to
> Nostradamus prophecy! :~)
> typical of the human tendency to label everything into little boxes.
> to give borders to everything. We view our computer as one object and
the
> table as an entirely separate object to conform with our perception.
In
> reality the fascination lies with the unseen interconnectedness
between
> everything. Nostradamus (better mention him to keep you happy!)
himself, in
> a letter to his son, mentions how the past and future are incorporated
with
> the present. Cause and effect are never linear, the complex
> interconnectedness
> of everything forms a complex web. IMO diversity of subjects and views
> should be encouraged. If Nostradamus was a poster here, I'm sure he'd
agree!
> :~)
> Shirley
Yes! You hit it ! On Target. Someone out their learned something!
That was one of the best post I've seen in a long time:o)
A good responce.
Archangel
Bjoernar
>In article <3955DC49...@hotmail.com>,
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Peter,
>>
>> I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
>> exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
>> of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
>Hi, Greetings Tony,
>
>We or I Have asked before It does no good!
>
>He doesn't want to learn anything out side the said words of a verse.
>
>He will not investigate how or history of Prophecy.
>
>He getting old and is discurrage that his "Nostradamus Encyclopidia"
>personal Prophecies are wako and totally wrong. So he is resentful and
>has hatred for them.
>>
>> You have written books interpreting prophecies and
>> made money from them, now you've turned to writting
>> books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
>> more and more. You no longer have anything but
>> scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
>> used to say about you has been true all along, you're
>> just trying to sell books and make money.
>
>point out he has no personal web site to show case himself.
>
>Just as James Randi does not show case himeself at his.. All debunkers
>get these ideas from the "Communist Manifesto."
You americans has an easy way of finding new enemies don't you?
Every one who don't support the american way of living(or whatever)
must be communists.
The rest of the world is well aware of the low IQ which most americans
have. Americans can only think in black or white. We(the world)
allways take that into account when dealing with U.S.A.
Bjoernar
lordm...@my-deja.com
we just lay it out on the line! It clear up missunderstandings that
impeade progress and compatability.. Did'nt you go to School?
> Every one who don't support the american way of living(or whatever)
> must be communists.
Or at least the other vailed term Socialist!
> The rest of the world is well aware of the low IQ which most americans
> have.
I couldn't agree with you more! But the Key is " Most."
> Americans can only think in black or white.
It makes the world much funner.. You should try it!
> We(the world)
> allways take that into account when dealing with U.S.A.
Because America is the Most free and the rest isn't! ( To varient
degrees)
We have a Constatution that garantees our personal freedoms and human
rights..
You basically can do what you please here! And that is just great!
we are protected by our laws!
With more freedom more progress and happiness..
Look at the comparison to Master/Slave societies of the last 12,000
years and the progress they made.. Then look back to the last 2000 years
of America! I do nort need to explain any more.
They Killed Socrates for asking qustions of corrupted government so when
the highest free society that ever lived till America. I try to do the
same with this corrupted Government that wants us to be like you! A
socialist unemplyed, useless, unhappy society!
America is No. 1 because we have choices not restrictions..
out!
Archangel Michael
>
> Bjoernar
lordm...@my-deja.com
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:01:54 GMT, Bud the Real <the...@san.rxyzr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >shu...@hotmail.com hollered from the outhouse...
> >
> >>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
>
> I propose that we expel St Paul from the group, given that he wrote:
>
> " Put everything to the test; keep hold of what is good and avoid
> every kind of evil." I Thessalonians 5:21 [NEB translation]. ;)
Ok ..,,Lets do that..
He was Greek you know and not Hebrew a Myth at that!
neither was Jesus a Hebrew!
Archangel
>
> --
>
> Peter
28SW2 (Michael Cecil)
Peter Lemesurier wrote:
> Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
> What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>
> A. The book of Daniel isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
> in the future, because most reputable scholars conclude on fairly good
> evidence that it is obviously an opportunistic fake cobbled together
> to encourage Jews suffering from the Greek oppression of 160-odd BC
> (though parts of it turned out to be more successful than they had any
> right to be, given that they helped provoke the immensely successful
> Maccabean revolt).
Clearly you do not understand what is happening here.
It makes NO difference if the Book of Daniel was written
before OR after the events. There is a fractal repetition of
similar structures over what is referred to as historical 'time'.
This was understood by Daniel as it is understood by anyone
who receives the Vision of the "Son of man".
You are simply in the category of those believing that if
YOU don't understand it, it MUST not be real.
>
>
> B. St John's Revelation isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
> in the future,
Not PRECISELY, no.
> because it is merely one of a number of contemporary
> apocalypses cobbled together to encourage Messianists such as Jews and
> Christians suffering under the Roman oppression of the late 1st
> century AD
Bu this is NOT the reason.
It is because it should be understood, FIRST, as a description
of the different structures of the normal human consciousness.
You would have to be THOROUGHLY versed in archetypal
psychology and the psychology of the normal human conscious-
ness to begin to perceive the relationship between the symbols.
> (though parts of it turned out to be more successful than
> they had any right to be, given the eventual fall of Rome).
>
> F. Jesus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
> because (if the texts are to be believed) he wrongly claimed much the
> same (Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke21, and especially verses 34/30/32
> respectively: "I tell you this: the present generation will live to
> see it all" [NEB translation])
'Piss process' POOR translation.
What is being referred to here is the "generation of vipers"--a
symbol for the normal human consciousness and what MUST
be experienced by the normal human consciousness before
it is destroyed, giving rise to the consciousness of the Knowledge
of Truth.
> -- which means that he meant it for
> then, not now.
Nonsense. But I am NOT surprised that you think so.
Michael Cecil (
web page at:
lordm...@my-deja.com
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:01:54 GMT, Bud the Real <the...@san.rxyzr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >shu...@hotmail.com hollered from the outhouse...
> >
> >>I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> >Debunker of FALSE prophecy, and THAT is a good thing.
>
> I propose that we expel St Paul from the group, given that he wrote:
>
Paul rips of Socrates;
> " Put everything to the test; keep hold of what is good and avoid
> every kind of evil." I Thessalonians 5:21 [NEB translation]. ;)
>
> -
A Socrates rip off if I ever seen one!
Archangel Michael
Junito
From: ac...@torfree.net (Claude Latremouille) wrote:
>shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>Peter,
>*
>>I am asking you to leave the group, you have
>> fully exposed yourself as nothing more than
>> a debunker of prophecy, so what are you
>> doing here? *
>The same thing all the others who do not
> accept the idea of prophecy are doing here,
> namely, to systematically attack
> Nostradamus' prophecies while contributing
> nothing original of their own about the
> prophecies.
>*
<snip>
Not to mention all those that bring personal insults that are totally
inappropriate and out of subject.
Junito
--
The Man Who Saw Tomorrow Nostradamus
http://community.webtv.net/prowlersand/TheManWhoSaw
eo
leave. I believe that precognition exists, but is very difficult to explain
or verify, since it is rarely perfect when contained in prophecies. And I
think your interpretations of most of the prophecies which 'might' apply to
these times are ALL WET. Peter's views are far more germane to Nosty's
material than yours. Why don't you go reside in alt.bible.prophecy because
you do far more Bible quoting than Nosty quoting.
..................................................
shu...@hotmail.com wrote in message <3955DC49...@hotmail.com>...
>Peter,
>
>I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
>You have written books interpreting prophecies and
>made money from them, now you've turned to writting
>books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
>more and more. You no longer have anything but
>scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
>used to say about you has been true all along, you're
>just trying to sell books and make money.
>
L Ballaam
Shirley <shi...@learthart.screaming.net> wrote in message
news:8j5aeu$5vf$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:sflblsg8uj4ka77sb...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 21:27:08 +0100, "Shirley"
> > <shi...@learthart.screaming.net> wrote:
>
> > >
> > >Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >news:pqn9lsgf21o01f174...@4ax.com...
> :~)
> Shirley
like Brad Pitt or Bill Gates no one would take any notice of him
shu...@hotmail.com
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >Bjoernar wrote:
> >
> >> Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
> >> >
> >> >What it all seems to boil down to is this:
> >>
> >> >Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
> >> >become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
> >> >ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
> >> >always possible if we don't watch out!).
> >> >
> >> >Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
> >>
> >> You're an even more of a debunker than i am!
> >> Good thing I am not alone in this newsgroup!
> >> I guess you've made a lot of dooomsday sayers
> >> sad and disappointed now.
> >>
> >> >Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> >> >to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
> >>
> >> The rumors says that the secret is about Coca Cola which will go
> >> bust in the year 2020 when Pepsi has taken over the soft drink market.
> >>
> >> Bjoernar
> >
> >If you're a debinker than why be here? Go on your way and leave us
> >todiscuss prophecy in peace without your and Peter's constant scoffing.
> >
> >I don't understand people who go into a group with which they don't agree
> >just to cause chaos. You don't see me in groups that don't believe in
> >prophecy
> >trying to force my views on them. Get lost, the two of you.
>
> Without Us Debunkers you Believers will go around living in your
> Own Fantasy World without noticing The Real World.
>
> Bjoernar
No we'd spend our time discussing prophecy instead of arguingabout whether it
is possible or not.
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:11:07 GMT, shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >If you're a debinker than why be here? Go on your way and leave us
> >todiscuss prophecy in peace without your and Peter's constant scoffing.
>
> How can you discuss prophecy without mentioning the negative side too?
>
> Does 'discuss' mean 'agree with Tony'?
> --
>
> Peter
Wrong again, you do not believe prophecy is possible so how can you discuss
it?
You can't, you can only tell us that we're wrong which is not a discussion
of prophecy.
It's like me going over to an Astrology group to tell them that it is
senseless and a
waste of time. Would I be welcomed there? Would I be encouraging discussion
or
would I become as disruption as you have become?
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> shu...@hotmail.com hollered from the outhouse...
>
> >I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
> Debunker of FALSE prophecy, and THAT is a good thing.
No, he is a debunker of all prophecy.
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Peter,
> >
> > I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> > exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> > of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> > You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> > made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> > books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> > more and more. You no longer have anything but
> > scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> > used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> > just trying to sell books and make money.
> >
> > You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> > start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> > of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> > every time you reply.
> >
> > Tony
>
> I vote for inclusion. Peter facilitates the thinking process,
> confronting stale thinking that has gotten the world nowhere. Kick in a
> few synapses and begin to think at a higher level. Try and see the other
> side. It may irritate some, and cause the occasional headache, but how
> else would you recommend growth? By NOT allowing contrary thought?
>
> nim
It's not about contrary thought, he totally rejects prophecy, he doesn't
believeit at all. Imagine me going into an Astrology group and telling them
it is useless
and futile as Peter tells us prophecy is. Would them welcome me? Would I be
encouraging discusssion? No, I'd be a distraction as Peter has now become.
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:01:54 GMT, Bud the Real <the...@san.rxyzr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >shu...@hotmail.com hollered from the outhouse...
> >
> >>I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> >Debunker of FALSE prophecy, and THAT is a good thing.
>
> I propose that we expel St Paul from the group, given that he wrote:
>
> " Put everything to the test; keep hold of what is good and avoid
> every kind of evil." I Thessalonians 5:21 [NEB translation]. ;)
>
> --
>
> Peter
You're not testing anything, you've thrown prophecy out the window
and concentrate on selling books. You have no use here other than to
pad your back account.
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:17:26 GMT, shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >Peter,
> >
> >I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
> Discussing prophecy and Nostradamus. Advancing hypotheses about
> whether any of our favourite sources can actually tell us anything
> specific about the future.
No you don't, you make claims that this happened in 1555, this
happenedin 1557, this was about an old French painter etc. whenever
someone
brings up a prophecy an wants to discuss the possibilities. You reject
the very notion of it being prophetic right from the start.
And then you post your complete rejection of all prophecy which is what
started this thread. You wouldn't think of going into an Astrology goup
and
doing the same to them.
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> This "Survivor" thing has gone too far.
>
> mike
LOL!!!!!!
> ==============================================================
>
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Peter,
> >
> > I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> > exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> > of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
shu...@hotmail.com
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >Peter,
> >
> >I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> >You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> >made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> >books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> >more and more. You no longer have anything but
> >scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> >used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> >just trying to sell books and make money.
> >
> >You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> >start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> >of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> >every time you reply.
>
> You're not very tolerant are you. Peter obviously knows more
> about this stuff than you do. Even though he don't believe
> in all of the prophecies his opinion should be appreciated because
> he can give some alternative perspective on Nostradamus.
>
> Because of your intolerance I suggest you leave the group.
> There is a group called alt.usenet.kooks. Go there.
>
> Bjoernar
Do you think you can go into say the Astrology group and constantlysay
that there is nothing to astrology that it is totally false and be
welcomed
there? Of course not, but here is seems to be alright to have people
running
around saying that prophecy is a fairy tale with no merit.
Peter may at one time have believed that prophecy was possible, he no
longer
does therefore he should leave and go discuss something else. I wouldn't
think
of going into a group to express my disbelief in what the group was
there
to discuss. Get it?
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> : Peter,
> *
> : I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> : exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> : of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> *
> The same thing all the others who do not accept the idea of
> prophecy are doing here, namely, to systematically attack
> Nostradamus' prophecies while contributing nothing original
> of their own about the prophecies.
Exactly.
> *
> : You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> : made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> : books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> : more and more. You no longer have anything but
> : scoffing and ridicule to add here.
> *
> If you were able to consult DejaNews for a longer period of time,
> you would see that Peter -- at the time he did not know that the
> prophecy had been decrypted -- was not systematically attacking
> Nostradamus. Ever since he has known about the general content of
> the decrypted prophecy, he has begun to attack both the prophecy
> and Nostradamus in a systematic fashion.
I do know that his tone has completely reversed over the last few years.
> *
> At least, he is logical, for if you allow one tiny bit of prophecy
> to creep in, you have to allow others to do the same. So, to stop
> the whole thing, you must deny the whole thing. And so he does.
Yep, exactly.
> *
> : I guess what Alef
> : used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> : just trying to sell books and make money.
> *
> I would not go as far as calling Peter a liar about everything he
> posts in a.p.n. My general impression of his posts (I have not
> read his books) is that he is guily of intellectual fraud of the
> first order.
Basically what I meant, he wrote about prophecy and talked aboutit here
mention his books, now he discredits it here so that he can
plug his latest book which debunks prophecy.
> *
> : You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> : start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> : of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> : every time you reply.
> *
> : Tony
> *
> Well, Tony, that is indeed the situation. And if you think about
> it a little more, you will realize that the implications of
> prophecy are enormous. As soon as you allow yourself to say: "This
> man, Nostradamus, truly was a seer", you allow someone else to say:
> "Yes, Nostradamus was indeed a seer, and he predicted [ fill in the
> blanks ]".
> *
> Peter strikes me as an atheist who does not believe in anything.
> Personally, I tend to view myself as a person who will not reject
> anything, however strange, if it makes sense to me. Astrology, for
> instance, is not very well accepted by the so-called scholars of
> our times, and in France, it is even more laughed at than it is in
> English-speaking countries.
> *
> And I have come to accept astrology, even though -- on the face of
> it -- it does not make much sense. But I have come to understand
> how it can be possible, and how it actually works. So, I accept it.
> *
> And it is astrology which led me to prophecy, and to Nostradamus'
> prophecies. If one (astrology) is possible, the other (prophecy) is
> possible too.
> *
> And thirty years ago, I read Nostradamus' prophecies for the first
> time and I instinctively knew that all this gibberish was indeed a
> prophecy (I had understood only three verses out of about a thousand)
> and that -- if I had not understood the rest, it was because I was too
> ignorant of French history.
> *
> Little did I know, back in 1969, that I would stumble almost by
> accident -- twenty-five years later -- on Nostradamus' well hidden
> secret.
> *
> But this is another story.
> *
> As to Peter, if he were to leave this NewsGroup, I would be the only
> regular contributor left to have an very intimate knowledge of what
> Nostradamus really wrote, which would be a pity. I much prefer to
> keep reading Peter's shit than facing the prospect that -- if I left
> this NewsGroup, nobody else in it would know what they are talking
> about.
> *
> A very frightening thought, don't you think? :-)
> *
> Have a nice day, you all!
> *
> --
> **** ac...@freenet.toronto.on.ca ****
> C L A U D E L A T R E M O U I L L E
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well other have knowledge about Nostradamus, I'm not about tosay who is
better than another, and Peter does have great knowledge
about him, which is all the more why it is a shame that he has decided
to discredit Nostradamus and prophecy.
Tony
Jean Guernon
shu...@hotmail.com a écrit :
>
> Peter,
>
> I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>
> You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> more and more. You no longer have anything but
> scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> just trying to sell books and make money.
>
> You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
> start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
> of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
> every time you reply.
>
> Tony
Can't believe you Tony., Ask Peter to leave this newsgroup. you
do admit he contributed a lot. Me I know very well that each and
every quatrain will occur as is written, but I wouldn't know
tyhat if I hadn't find out over time... it seems that Peter never
got to see wxactly what the quatrains mnean, or even psome
prophecies for that matter.
You, you still think that the ACs are around already. So Do I ask
you to leave this group because I don't share your peception of
what N wrote and meant?
And talk about tolerance for miniorities... Right even if
Buchannan is a minority he doesn't have mnuch tolerance for them
(much like his buddy Hitler)... But I don't get you. Alef oges
around l;utting the same blamnk shit in every other posts (at
times now, not all the time) that Peter has put out, which are
somnething basical in many cases and which are his own two bits
opinion in others. He still is the authority here until soemone
does at least half the incredible work he has done top establish
facts. I or you could argue some of these facts, many, probably.
Well do, don't reject everything in block and side with the
stupidity of Alef.
What's the matter with you?
Becasue he doesn't share you're view of a prophecy or even that
some the books of the bible are genuine? Once again this group is
about Nostradamus. And he is an authorityy on the subject even if
he doesn't get the prophetic part, he is entitled to have his
opinion that it is bullshit. No one contributes as much to this
NG than he.
Now you're free to argue about that with him anytime. Those that
will be right will win, but no one can judge but logic, the logic
of each individual. I.e. you can knopw you're right and someonbe
else can know Peter is right and finally only God knows who is
right. And tim,e will tell. He did interpret prophecies in his
own way and they tuyrn out misinterpreted as dates pass by. Well,
he may be disillusioned, he may go through a phase as well. You I
don,t know what's your damn problem.
If you consider that you, even, can accept the behavior of the
likes of Alef and discard the somewhat way more cvivilized
behavior of Peter, for a matter of ideas, instead of discussing
these ideas, you're ready to eliminate those that think otherwise
than you, this is really fascism BTW, it bogggle the mind. Can't
believe you act like that. And you were amongst the ones that
weren,t in his killfile. I mean try explain to Alef what humor
is, but to you?!!!
Big baby.
J.
shu...@hotmail.com
> lordm...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >In article <3955DC49...@hotmail.com>,
> > shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> Peter,
> >>
> >> I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >> exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >> of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> >Hi, Greetings Tony,
> >
> >We or I Have asked before It does no good!
> >
> >He doesn't want to learn anything out side the said words of a verse.
> >
> >He will not investigate how or history of Prophecy.
> >
> >He getting old and is discurrage that his "Nostradamus Encyclopidia"
> >personal Prophecies are wako and totally wrong. So he is resentful and
> >has hatred for them.
> >>
> >> You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> >> made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> >> books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> >> more and more. You no longer have anything but
> >> scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> >> used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> >> just trying to sell books and make money.
> >
> >point out he has no personal web site to show case himself.
> >
> >Just as James Randi does not show case himeself at his.. All debunkers
> >get these ideas from the "Communist Manifesto."
>
> You americans has an easy way of finding new enemies don't you?
> Every one who don't support the american way of living(or whatever)
> must be communists.
> The rest of the world is well aware of the low IQ which most americans
> have. Americans can only think in black or white. We(the world)
> allways take that into account when dealing with U.S.A.
>
> Bjoernar
The cumlative IQ of your nation would plummet as well if your
leadersallowed 30 million+ 3rd world immigrants into your country in the
past 10 years.
Think about it.
Tony
shu...@hotmail.com
> What's next...Asking people who don't believe your version of prophecies to
> leave. I believe that precognition exists, but is very difficult to explain
> or verify, since it is rarely perfect when contained in prophecies. And I
> think your interpretations of most of the prophecies which 'might' apply to
> these times are ALL WET. Peter's views are far more germane to Nosty's
> material than yours. Why don't you go reside in alt.bible.prophecy because
> you do far more Bible quoting than Nosty quoting.
So you go and do what you accuse me of wanting to do next? Interesting.
My point is that if you don not believe in prophecy and you come right and
and call all sources of prophecy false, then you have no reason to be here.
Go to any other group that believes in something and likes to discuss the
possibilities
and tell them that they're all full of crap (basically what Peter is saying to
all of us)
and see what you get there.
Tony
>
>
> ..................................................
>
> shu...@hotmail.com wrote in message <3955DC49...@hotmail.com>...
> >Peter,
> >
> >I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
> >exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
> >of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
> >
> >You have written books interpreting prophecies and
> >made money from them, now you've turned to writting
> >books to debunk prophecies and your posts show it
> >more and more. You no longer have anything but
> >scoffing and ridicule to add here. I guess what Alef
> >used to say about you has been true all along, you're
> >just trying to sell books and make money.
> >
Peter Lemesurier
>Have you ever heard of "Catur"?
Nope.
>
>Of not I will post the story.
Do!
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
>exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
>of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
Even if I *were* suggesting that all prophecy is bunk, as you seem to
suggest (though where you got the idea from I'm not sure, given that
it isn't what I wrote), and even if I were doing 'nothing more' than
that (which suggests that you're not very good at reading what's
actually on the screen or page in front of you), it would be perfectly
legitimate to do so here.
This is a discussion group. Discussion-groups are for discussing. All
discussions have at least two sides, or they are not discussions.
There has been a huge amount of fundamentalist biblical propaganda
here recently, most of it hammering away at Daniel and the book of
Revelation. But that's just one side of the argument. I would have
thought that some sort of riposte was long overdue. Somewhat daringly,
I even thought that it might be a good idea actually to inject some
facts into the discussion.
You don't have (as a given) to believe in myths to discuss and
research mythology. You don't have (as a given) to believe in fascism
to discuss and research fascism -- not even yours. So why should you
have (as a given) to believe in traditional prophecies to discuss
traditional prophecies?
--
Peter
28SW2 (Michael Cecil)
Peter Lemesurier wrote:
> Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
Don't you ever get ANYTHING right???
It is pigeons-in-cat's-*stomach* time.
Michael Cecil (
Sarah-Mohammed-Elizabeth Cecil (Daniel 12:13)
Peter Lemesurier
>No we'd spend our time discussing prophecy instead of arguingabout whether it
>is possible or not.
The difference being?
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>> How can you discuss prophecy without mentioning the negative side too?
>>
>> Does 'discuss' mean 'agree with Tony'?
>> --
>>
>> Peter
>
>Wrong again, you do not believe prophecy is possible so how can you discuss
>it?
How do you know what I believe?
>
>You can't, you can only tell us that we're wrong which is not a discussion
>of prophecy.
You mean everybody has to say you are right?
>
>It's like me going over to an Astrology group to tell them that it is
>senseless and a
>waste of time. Would I be welcomed there? Would I be encouraging discussion
Depends on how much you know about astrology.
>or
>would I become as disruption as you have become?
A disruption to whom?
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>It's not about contrary thought, he totally rejects prophecy, he doesn't
>believeit at all.
I suggest Tony set up a Newsgroup entitled
'alt.whatpeterbelievesaboutprophecy'
I might even read it sometime, to find out what I really believe... ;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>You're not testing anything, you've thrown prophecy out the window
>and concentrate on selling books. You have no use here other than to
>pad your back account.
How might throwing prophecy out of the window in a.p.n help to promote
my books which discuss it, would you suggest? ;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>No, he is a debunker of all prophecy.
Makes we wonder why I bother to think about it, then... :(
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>> >I am asking you to leave the group, you have fully
>> >exposed yourself as nothing more than a debunker
>> >of prophecy, so what are you doing here?
>>
>> Discussing prophecy and Nostradamus. Advancing hypotheses about
>> whether any of our favourite sources can actually tell us anything
>> specific about the future.
>
>No you don't, you make claims that this happened in 1555, this
>happenedin 1557, this was about an old French painter etc. whenever
>someone
>brings up a prophecy an wants to discuss the possibilities. You reject
>the very notion of it being prophetic right from the start.
Are you sure they taught you to read at kids' school, Tony?
What you have just written is a complete travesty of my 'historical
repetition' or 'comparative horoscopy' thesis, as everybody else here
knows perfectly well.
Which, of course, is merely a thesis anyway.
I would suggest that you read it carefully again -- but for the fact
that you can't possibly bring yourself to do so...
You really can't bear for anybody to have views other than your own,
can you --let alone to explain them with actual evidence?
So much so that it is impossible for you to read what they have
written other than through a kind of red, bloodshot filter than
prevents you from taking in and understanding what is actually
there...
No wonder you can't see the scriptures for what they actually are,
either!
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
> I wouldn't
>think
Yes, that just about sums it up... ;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>The cumlative IQ of your nation would plummet as well if your
>leadersallowed 30 million+ 3rd world immigrants into your country in the
>past 10 years.
>
>Think about it.
>
>Tony
And where did you say your ancestors came from, Tony? ;0
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>Go to any other group that believes in something and likes to discuss the
>possibilities
>and tell them that they're all full of crap (basically what Peter is saying to
>all of us)
>and see what you get there.
Would you like me to send you all my future posts for forwarding,
Tony, so that you can mistranslate all those into idiotspeak, too? ;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
saying:
>> I would not go as far as calling Peter a liar about everything he
>> posts in a.p.n. My general impression of his posts (I have not
>> read his books) is that he is guily of intellectual fraud of the
>> first order.
Well, Claude, I defer to your greater expertise in the field... ;)
>
>Basically what I meant, he wrote about prophecy and talked aboutit here
>mention his books, now he discredits it here so that he can
>plug his latest book which debunks prophecy.
It does, does it? Maybe I should inform the publishers, then? ;)
>
>> *
>> : You don't believe that prophecy is possible, so go
>> : start your own group that is against prophecy, we're tired
>> : of hearing "well that prophecy can't happen because......."
>> : every time you reply.
>> *
>> : Tony
>> *
>> Well, Tony, that is indeed the situation. And if you think about
>> it a little more, you will realize that the implications of
>> prophecy are enormous. As soon as you allow yourself to say: "This
>> man, Nostradamus, truly was a seer", you allow someone else to say:
>> "Yes, Nostradamus was indeed a seer, and he predicted [ fill in the
>> blanks ]".
>> *
>> Peter strikes me as an atheist who does not believe in anything.
Hmm -- not too bad an assessment, Claude, if over-simplistic...
Thank you for those few kind comments, Claude! ;)
And don't, whatever you do, forget to push that new book of yours...
;)
--
Peter
Ted Johnson
> >>
> >> >Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
> >> >
> >>
> >> >Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
> >> >become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
> >> >ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
> >> >always possible if we don't watch out!).
> >> >
> >> >Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
> >>
> >> You're an even more of a debunker than i am!
> >> Good thing I am not alone in this newsgroup!
> >> I guess you've made a lot of dooomsday sayers
> >> sad and disappointed now.
> >>
> >> >Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
> >> >to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
> >>
> >> The rumors says that the secret is about Coca Cola which will go
> >> bust in the year 2020 when Pepsi has taken over the soft drink market.
> >>
> >> Bjoernar
> >
> >todiscuss prophecy in peace without your and Peter's constant scoffing.
> >
> >just to cause chaos. You don't see me in groups that don't believe in
> >prophecy
> >trying to force my views on them. Get lost, the two of you.
>
> Without Us Debunkers you Believers will go around living in your
> Own Fantasy World without noticing The Real World.
>
> Bjoernar
Yes, yes. You are so superior to people that have belief systems
that you do not agree with. Too bad that you are blinded by the log
in your own eye and fail to recognize that you are dogmatically
espousing a belief system of your own. But that is fine. At least
you are reading and writing so there is hope that you are thinking a
bit along the way. I 'believe' that is possible that *all* Believers
have the potential to realize at some point that what they call The
Real World is simply their own personal perception of their environment
filtered through their life experiences.
Meanwhile, you and all the other six billion of us will go along with
the perception of the Real World that works for us in the particular
evironment we are in.
Ted
IGot4
>it
>>is possible or not.
>
>The difference being?
>--
>
>Peter
Actually, Peter doesn't say prophecy isn't possible, does he? It's just that
people look in all the wrong places.
Your reading comprehension must not be very good.
IGot4
>confronting stale thinking that has gotten the world nowhere. Kick in a
>few synapses and begin to think at a higher level. Try and see the other
>side. It may irritate some, and cause the occasional headache, but how
>else would you recommend growth? By NOT allowing contrary thought?
>
>nim
>
I agree. You do need to see both sides of the coin to come to a knowledgeable
conclusion about such matters.
Erin
IGot4
>
>" Put everything to the test; keep hold of what is good and avoid
>every kind of evil." I Thessalonians 5:21 [NEB translation]. ;)
>
>--
>
>Peter
>
LOL!!!! ;)
IGot4
>
>> " Put everything to the test; keep hold of what is good and avoid
>> every kind of evil." I Thessalonians 5:21 [NEB translation]. ;)
>>
>> -
>
>
>
> Archangel Michael
Actually, Paul ripped off Plato much more than Socrates.
Heck, between Plato, Philo, and Zoroaster's contribution to religion (among
others), not to mention the anti-Arians at the Nicene Council, I can't believe
that there's much truth left in the religion of "Christianity".
IGot4
>
>Makes we wonder why I bother to think about it, then... :(
>--
>
>Peter
>
Hey Peter. Didn't you prophecy that this would happen when you made your
original post? ;)
IGot4
>either!
>--
Peter, it IS rather difficult to track down the original legends that worked
their way into religion and then to trace them back to the original and learn
that it was all completely different than what was proclaimed at the Nicene
councils and as we are being taught today. I wish there was an easy way to
piece it all together and put it out there for people like Tony to read and
learn from.
Of course, that only works if they follow the admonition of the true prophets
of the Bible and other scriptures. That is, to open their eyes and see and
open their ears and hear.
They need to desire the truth and seek the wisdom. As James said in his
epistle in 1:5 : If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to
all men liberally, and upbraideth not: and it shall be given him. (KJV).
Unfortunately, many are afraid of the Truth or that seeking it may be like
turning away from God. I think that God wants us to seek him and not rely on
other mens scriptures (especially those that are completely untrue or
adulterated these days).
Take Care, Erin
IGot4
>longer
>does therefore he should leave and go discuss something else.
What makes you think that?
IGot4
>Every one who don't support the american way of living(or whatever)
>must be communists.
>The rest of the world is well aware of the low IQ which most americans
>have. Americans can only think in black or white. We(the world)
>allways take that into account when dealing with U.S.A.
>
>Bjoernar
>
Communism? The Essenes (the sect that Jesus was probably raised in) lived a
very communistic life and yet the historian Philo said this about them:
"Our Lawgiver (Moses) trained in community-living thousands of disciples called
Essenes, probably because of their holiness. They live in large societies
located in many Judean cities and villages.
"Their organization is not based on family kinship, in which a man has no
choice, but on zeal for virtue and love of all men ...They enjoy the only
genuine liberty, as is proved by their way of life. None of them is striving to
get possession of any private property ... or anything to get rich by, for
everything is put into the common pool, which supplies the wants of all alike.
"Dwelling together in one place, they therefore study together, eat together
and associate with one another, expending all their energies for the common
good. There is division of labor, different men to different kinds of work, but
whatever may be their work, they do it with vigor, patience, and good cheer,
never excusing themselves from labor on account of cold, heat, or changes of
weather. They are at work before sunrise and after the sun has set, considering
their work to be the best sort of gymnastic exercise, pleasanter and of more
advantage than mere athletics.
"If any man falls sick, whatever medical treatment or resources are available
are devoted to his cure, and his care and recovery are the concern of the whole
community. Old men, though they may be childless, are thus assured of happiness
and tender care in their old age, just as if they were the fathers of children
both numerous and affectionate. Even more, they are honored and cared for from
the free good will of the many, rather than from the bounden duty of
blood-relatives....
"So enviable, then, is the Essene way of life, that not only private citizens
but also mighty kings are filled with amazement and admiration at them, and
have honored the fraternity by lavishing praise and honor upon these respected
and venerated men."
---------------
I wouldn't mind this type of secular communism and I'm an American.
Unfortunately, there aren't enough righteous leaders to pull off true
communism. The leaders are all too power hungry and greedy.
IGot4
IGot4
>
>Zuez what ever religion was a normal man not a God or anything else!
>
>But the collective people put him as a surreal God because some kind of
>Majic spell as the Anagram Gospel/Go Spell is what keeps the infintile
>brain occupied!
This is what happened:
In the ancient times heroes, political leaders, and even heads of families who
died prematurely sometimes were declared gods. Plutarch wrote that some Romans
believed that their deceased ancestors became gods: "... honoring the tombs of
their fathers as they do the shrines of the gods; and when they have cremated
their parents, they declare that the dead person has become a god ..." Plato
wrote, "The women ... call good men divine; and the Spartans, when they
eulogize a good man, say ‘He is a divine person.’ " A divine person was
often called "a god." Obviously, people in those days used the term "god"
differently than we use it today.
Euhemerus, a Greek mythographer (ca. 300 BCE), taught that all gods used to be
rulers who died and then became deified. Cicero wrote, "... those who teach
that brave or famous or powerful men have been deified after death ... this
theory was chiefly developed by Euhemerus, who was translated and imitated ..."
Plutarch describes the stages of becoming a god: "... from men to heroes, from
heroes to demi-gods, and from demi-gods, after they have been made pure and
holy ... and have freed themselves from mortality and sense {i.e. after their
death}, to gods ..."
There are a few exceptional men who became gods or sons of gods during their
lifetime. When Alexander conquered Egypt he declared himself the son of god
Zeus-Amon. Diodorus mentions that Alexander’s military commanders in his
funeral made obeisance to him as to a god: "... all the commanders would make
sacrifice from a golden casket, presenting frankincense ... and making
obeisance to Alexander as to a god."
King Ptolemy V Epiphanes (210-180 BCE) of Egypt portrayed himself as the son of
the god Helios. The famous Rosetta Stone, discovered by the Nile delta in 1799,
contains an announcement proclaiming the divinity of King Ptolemy V:
Ptolemy, the image of Zeus ... the god visible
"... king like the sun, ... child of the Gods ... living image of Zeus, Son of
the Sun {son of the god Helios}, Ptolemy the immortal ... the god visible, for
whom thanks be given."
Jesus, the image of God, made visible
"Who {Jesus} is the image of the invisible God ..." (Colossians 1:15 KJV) "God
... granted that He {Jesus} become visible ..." (Acts 10:40 NASB)}
Julius Caesar’s heir, Caesar Augustus Octavian, in 40 BCE began to call
himself "Divi Filius," that is, son of god. The philosopher Seneca praised
Caesar Augustus as "one who was said to be born from gods ..." Virgil (70-19
BCE) wrote, "Augustus Caesar, offspring of a god ..." The emperors who
followed Caesar Augustus Octavian bore the title "son of god" (Divi Filius) or
"son of Zeus."
Celsus said, "... the Dioscuri, Heracles, Asclepius, and Dionysus, {were} men
who were believed by the Greeks to have become gods." An Egyptian pyramid
inscription addressed to King Pepi I (ruled during the 6th dynasty, ca.
2345-2182 BCE), reads, "O Pepi, you have gone away {died} to become a spirit,
to become powerful as a god ... among the spirits, the Imperishable Stars."
After a person died his spirit became a "god." This was a common belief. A
Roman memorial inscription dating a few decades before the death of Jesus
(between 63 BCE to 14 CE) mentions an uncle lamenting the death of his young
nephew. The nephew comes down from Heaven as a god and appears to the uncle
saying, "Honored uncle, why are you weeping that I have been taken to be among
the stars of heaven? Stop crying, for I have indeed become a god."
It was the era when men became saviors. At the Isthmian Games at Corinth in 196
BCE Flamininus proclaimed that all Greeks in Europe and Asia were to be free
and governed by their own laws. For this deed he was hailed in many Greek
cities as "a savior" and accorded homage alongside the gods. Antiochus I was
called "Soter" ("Savior"); he was identified with the god Apollo, the savior
god of a Greek mystery religion. Antiochus II was "Theos" ("God") and Antiochus
IV was called "Theos Epiphanes" (God Manifest) on his coins.
The Romans deified several of their deceased emperors. They erected statues in
their honor. They poured libations, burned incense, and performed public
sacrifices in front of their statues. Archaeologists found various
inscriptions, which refer to Roman emperors as "god," "son of god," and
"savior." In an inscription found in Ephesus, the Greek cities of Asia honored
Julius Caesar by calling him "the god and dictator and savior of the world." He
became a god and savior of the world because of his great deeds. Diodorus
wrote, "but at least Gaius {Julius} Caesar, who has been pronounced a god
because of the magnitude of his deeds ..." His statue was set up in the temple
of Quirinius and bore the inscription "to the invincible god." The Romans
believed that Julius Caesar ascended to Heaven after his death and became
"Julius Divus": the Divine Julius. Justin Martyr confirms this belief: "And
what about the emperors who die among you, whom you think worthy to be deified,
and for whom you produce a false witness to swear that he saw the burning
Caesar rise from the funeral pyre and ascend to heaven?" (Notice, Justin
Martyr discredited their belief by calling their witnesses "false.")
At about 9 BCE the Provincial Assembly of Asia Minor passed an edict in which
they referred to Caesar Augustus as "god" and "savior":
Augustus Caesar’s birth: "the beginning of the gospel"
"Augustus Caesar, whom it {Providence} ... sent to us ... as a savior {Gr.
soter} ... the birthday of the God {Augustus} has been for the whole world the
beginning of the gospel {Gr. evangelion} ..."
Jesus’ birth: "the beginning of the gospel"
"The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." (Mark 1:1 KJV)
In the Greco-Roman era "savior of the world" was a common title. An inscription
in Halicarnassus praises Augustus Caesar as "savior of the common race of
mankind." The writer of the Gospel of John portrayed Jesus as savior of the
world: "... I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." (John 12:47
KJV) On an Halicarnassus altar piece of the year 67 CE Nero is called the
deliverer: "Nero, God the Deliverer {Savior} for ever."
Gaius Caligula (emperor from 37 to 41 CE) was called "Jupiter Capitolinus," the
highest god of Rome. Philo wrote, "Gaius {Caligula} puffed himself up ...
actually believing that he was a god. Then he found ... the Alexandrians to
confirm his extravagant and unnatural ambition." The Romans built sanctuaries
and altars in his honor. The city council of Ephesus passed the following
resolution: "The Council and the people of cities which dwell in Asia and the
nations {acknowledge} Gaius Julius, the son of Gaius Caesar as High Priest
{Jesus was called the High Priest} and Absolute Ruler ... the God Visible
{Jesus was the visible god } who is born of {the gods} Aris and Aphrodite, the
shared Savior {Gr. "Soter"} of human life." Vespasian and his son Titus became
divine after their death. Domitian demanded to be called "Dominus et Deus"
(Lord and God).
The Church father Eusebius wrote, "... the most ancient of the barbarians, and
especially the Phoenicians and the Egyptians, from whom the rest of mankind
received their traditions, regarded as the greatest gods those who had
discovered the necessaries of life, or in some way done good to nations.
Esteeming these as benefactors and authors of many blessings, they worshipped
them also as gods after their death, and built shrines and consecrated pillars
and staves after their names." Legend offered many examples of men who, by
their benefactions after their death they were declared gods. Cicero (106-43
BCE) wrote, "... general custom ... has made it a practice to confer
deification ... and gratitude upon distinguished benefactors." Diodorus wrote,
"there are other gods, they say, who ... having been mortals, but who, by
reason of their sagacity and the good services which they rendered to all men,
attained immortality {became gods - gods were called "immortals"}." Cicero
wrote that the Greek hero Amphiaraus was honored as a god: "As for Amphiaraus,
his reputation in Greece was such that he was honored as a god ..."
Diodorus wrote, men turned the king of the Atlantians into the god Uranus: "...
the man {Uranus} who taught such things partook of the nature of the gods, and
after he had passed from among men they accorded to him immortal honors, both
because of his benefactions and because of his knowledge of the stars." The
Roman scientific writer Pliny the Elder (23-79 CE) wrote that men became gods
through their great deeds: "To assist man by man is to be a god; this is the
pathway by which the Roman princes attained deity ... This was the ... ancient
mode of recompensing those who deserve it, to ascribe them divinity."
The Roman poet Lucretius (94-55 BCE) called Epicurus a god, whose gospel was
broadcasted around the world: "... he was a god ... a god he was, who first
discovered that reasoned principle of life that is now called philosophy ..."
Also, Gaius Valleius, a member of the Roman Senate, considered Epicurus
(341-270 BCE) a god: "Anyone pondering ... ought to regard Epicurus with
reverence, and to rank him as one of the very gods ..."
Hercules was originally a demigod. After his death he ascended to Heaven in a
cloud and became a full god because of his great deeds and because he brought
well being and contentment to the world. Diodorus of Sicily wrote, "The
Athenians were the first of all to honor, with sacrifices, Herakles as a god
... they persuaded first all the Greeks and, after them, all the men of the
inhabited world to honor Herakles as a god." The expression "all the men of
the inhabited world" indicates the widespread worship of Hercules. Diodorus
also wrote, "... others say they were earthly men who became gods, attaining
immortal honor and glory because of their benefactions toward man, such as
Herakles, Dionysos, Aristaios and others similar to them." Similarly, Cicero
wrote, "They will worship as gods ... those whose merits have admitted them to
Heaven: Hercules ... Aesculapius ..." There is no doubt that the New Testament
writers knew about Hercules and Asclepius; their fame was widely spread around
the Roman empire.
Gods were "dime-a-dozen," so to speak. During that era anyone could be called a
god if he performed an unusual, improbable, or unexplainable act. For example,
Paul was shipwrecked on an island, and the local people started a campfire to
warm up. As he was throwing some brushwood in the fire a snake bit him. The
people were expecting him to die: "But after they had looked a great while, and
saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god."
(Acts 28:6 KJV) They looked upon Paul as a god because the snake bite had not
harmed him. The common people of that period (not the philosophers and the
intellectuals) were predisposed to believe in gods coming down from their abode
in the from of man. Here is another example: "And when the people saw what Paul
had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaeonia, The
gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. And they called Barnabas,
Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker." (Acts 14:11-12
KJV)
The Righteous after Their Death Became Angels: Gods
In interpreting Genesis Philo wrote that Abraham after his death became
immortal and equal to angels: "Abraham ... left mortal things {he} ‘was added
to the people of God’ {died}, received immortality, and became equal to
angels." Being immortal, angels were also called "gods." Jesus, too, believed
that the righteous become immortal and equal to angels: "but those who are
considered worthy to attain ... the resurrection from the dead ... they cannot
even die anymore {they become immortal}, because they are like angels ..."
(Luke 20:35-36 NASB) Angels do not die. "For in the resurrection they {the
righteous}... are as the angels of God in heaven." (Matthew 22:30 KJV) Angels
were spirits and spirits were often called "gods." Jesus after his death became
a spirit : "... the last Adam {Christ} was made a quickening {life-giving}
spirit." (1 Corinthians 15:45 KJV) "For Christ also died ... having been put to
death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit." (1 Peter 3:18 NASB) Jesus
was resurrected as a spirit. He left the mortal things and became an angel. The
Essenes called the angels "gods." One of the fragments found among the Dead Sea
Scrolls in Cave 4 reads, "He {God} caused some of the sons of the world to draw
near (Him) ... to be counted with Him in the com[munity of the ‘g]ods’ ...
(sharing) the lot of His holy ones ..." (4Q181) The phrases "the community of
the gods ... his holy ones" refer to divine beings, such as angels, seraphim,
and cherubim.
Angels and the spirits of the dead were called "gods." With this understanding
Jesus after his death was called "a god," by John, by Paul, and by the write or
Hebrews. Even Celsus the critic of Christianity had no objection in accepting
that Jesus became a god after his death. He wrote, "But when he {Jesus} had put
off this flesh {died}, perhaps he became a god." No one acknowledged Jesus as
a god during his life. But sometime after his death, because he became a
spirit, an angel, and because of his great deeds, the Hellenist Christians
called him "a god." Origen wrote, "... him {Jesus} who accepted death for
mankind ... worthy of the second place of honor after the God of the universe,
the position given to him after the great deeds which he did in heaven and on
earth." This position, a god in "the second place of honor after God" was
given to Jesus a some time after his death.
In Greek mythology, the god Apollo to expiate a murder he had committed had to
become a man, come down to the world, and serve Admetus. After he finished
serving Admetus he went up to Mount Olympus (the Heaven of the Greek gods) and
from then on remained by the side of the glorious throne of Zeus. He became a
god again. This myth was widespread before the writing of the New Testament.
Similarly, the Hellenist Christians, believed that Jesus, the Archangel of God,
came down to the world, became a man, and after his servitude and sacrifice
went back to Heaven to sit by the throne of God. The deification of Jesus took
place gradually after his death. The claim that he was the offspring of God
born by a mortal woman was added to his story after his death. "Offspring of
god" was a common motif in many legends of that era. Eusebius wrote, "Here
observe, I pray you, how many gods born of women were deified by the Greeks, to
be brought forward ... to mock at our Savior’s birth." However, those
stories of gods born by women were widespread before the legend of Jesus.
Jesus was not the only person mentioned in the New Testament who became a god
after his death. His mother Mary became a god a long time after her death. In
the New Testament Mary appears to be merely a pious human being, without
super-human abilities. She performed no miracles. She was not even part of
Jesus’ movement. Yet, after her death, she was turned by the Catholic and
the Orthodox Christians into a divine being, with god-like character. Today
millions of Catholics and Orthodox pray to her. They believe that she hears
their prayers and performs miracles. They believe she has the ability to hear
simultaneously millions of prayers from around the world. This implies that
Mary is somehow omnipresent. Omnipresence used to be an exclusive
characteristic of God. Also, many Catholics and Orthodox pray silently to her.
They believe that Mary has the ability to read their minds. They worship her
and pray to God through her. In other words, she is also a mediator to God,
like Jesus. By the first half of the 5th century the obscure and unassuming
Mary had become a goddess, so that the prophet Mohammed in the 7th century
could suppose that the Christians were polytheists, having besides God, the
goddess Mary, and her son Jesus, yet another god. The Koran reads: "Then Allah
will say: ‘Jesus, son of Mary, did you ever say to mankind: ‘Worship me and
my mother as gods beside Allah?’ ‘Glory to you,’ he {Jesus} will answer,
‘how could I say that to which I have no right? If I ever said so, You would
have surely known it. You know what is in my mind, but I cannot tell what is in
Yours. You alone know what is hidden. I spoke to them of nothing except what
You bade me. I said: ‘Serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’ " In 1854 Pope
Pious IX declared that Mary was exempt from the "original sin" (the original
sin that all human beings are born with). He declared that she was not only
pure in her life and in her birth, but "at the first instant of her conception
was preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin, by the singular grace
and privilege granted her by Almighty God, through the merits of Christ Jesus,
Savior of mankind." Gradually, Mary was turned into a god, like Jesus.
(excerpt taken from www.prudentialpublishing.com)
IGot4
>Bu this is NOT the reason.
>It is because it should be understood, FIRST, as a description
>of the different structures of the normal human consciousness.
>You would have to be THOROUGHLY versed in archetypal
>psychology and the psychology of the normal human conscious-
>ness to begin to perceive the relationship between the symbols.
>
[snip]
Allegorical interpretation became the tool for justifying the unfit acts of
gods. In his instructional book How to Study Poetry Plutarch mentions a case
where many people allegorized the discredited account of Homer, where the god
Hephaestus found his adulterous wife Aphrodite in bed with the god Ares. They
changed the meaning of the passage by interpreting it as an astrological
allegory: "... those stories which have been most discredited. By forcibly
distorting those stories through ... ‘allegorical interpretations,’ some
persons say that the Sun {symbolizing Hephaestus} is represented as giving
information about Aphrodite in the arms of Ares, because the conjunction of the
planet Mars with Venus predicts births conceived in adultery, and when the sun
returns in his course and discovers these, they cannot be kept secret."
Origen confirms that the Greeks salvaged the unfit passages about the early
Greek gods by turning them into allegories: "When people read the theogonies of
the Greeks and the stories about the twelve gods, they make them sacred by
allegories." What Origen accused others of doing, he did himself. He wrote,
"... the statements about God’s wrath {in the Old Testament} are to be
interpreted allegorically ..."
In the 18th chapter of Genesis God appeared with two men (angels) to Abraham.
Abraham offered them food and God and the two men ate. Philo could not accept
this story literally because if God had eaten, then he had to defecate: "God
has no need for food ... he who consumes food must first of all experience
need. And in the second place, he must have organs adapted for the reception of
it, by means of which he can receive the food that comes in, and then discharge
it from him when he has digested it. These things are not in harmony with the
blessedness and happiness of the First Cause. They are utterly monstrous
inventions of men ... representing Him as having the form and passions of
mankind. So we must turn to allegory, the method dear to men with open eyes.
Actually, the sacred oracles {of the Pentateuch} provide us the clues for the
use of the method." How could Philo believe that Moses was inspired by God and
call his descriptions of God "utterly monstrous inventions of men?" According
to Philo, Moses provided clues on how to allegorize these "utterly monstrous
inventions."
A god who eats is a needy god. Philo would not worship a needy god. He wrote,
"Why need we speak of the organs of nourishment? If He has them, He eats and is
filled, rests for a while and after his rest has need again; I will not dwell
on the context of this. These are mythical fictions of the impious, who,
professing to represent God with human form, in reality represent Him as having
human passions." Philo interpreted allegorically the food that God ate in
front of Abraham but, he had a difficult time allegorizing the body (image) of
God. "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him."
(Genesis 1:27 KJV) If God was a spirit and created man in his own image then
how do we explain the fact that Adam had a physical body? Philo wrote that "in
his own image" did not refer to the body of Adam, but to the mind of Adam: "For
neither is God a being with the form of a man, nor is the human body similar to
the form of God; but the resemblance ... spoken of ... {is} the mind {of Adam}.
For the mind which exists in every person has been created after the likeness
of the ... mind {of God} ..." But the mind of man feels anger and is full of
perturbations, anxiety, etc., and Philo wrote, "God does not feel anger, but is
exempt from, and superior to, all such perturbations of spirit."
In another passage he denied that man was made in the image of God. He wrote
that man was made in the image of the Word: "For it is impossible that anything
mortal should be made in the image of the most high God the Father of the
universe; but it could only be made in the image of the second god, who is the
Word of the other {god, the Father} ..." He repeated this in the following
passage: "No mortal being could have been formed on the similitude of the
supreme Father of the universe, but only after the pattern of the second deity,
who is the Word of the supreme Being." Trying to explain away the human body
of God, Philo run into the following contradiction: if God made man in the
image of the Word and not in the image of himself, then, the Word cannot be in
the image of God. But Philo wrote, "The Divine Word ... is Himself the Image of
God ..." "... the heavenly man {the Word} ... was shaped according to the
image of God." Philo was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. In this
process, he invented the doctrine of Christianity, that the Word, is a god, the
perfect image of God.
This has happened throughout the Bible and Revelations is now turned into
allegory in order to explain away the fact it didn't happen when John said it
would and to explain the wrath of God, the lake of Fire, etc. What happens IF
we don't use allegorical interpretation and instead use our brains and our
insight to see the truth? Prayer helps of course.
lordm...@my-deja.com
I know where he told me,, But the question is why don't you know?
And what the hell does that have to with it! Its the process of living
thats involved and the ideal and philosophy. Not your ancestors !
America is Free and England is less then Free!
Thats the point!
\Maybey your great Grandfather was Barny the Dinosaur! And Tony's was
GOd himself! I know his backgroung and remembered because it was
important. you don't remember because you are an idiot!
Archangel
>
> Peter
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
lordm...@my-deja.com
ig...@aol.com (IGot4) wrote:
> >Paul rips of Socrates;
> >
> >> " Put everything to the test; keep hold of what is good and avoid
> >> every kind of evil." I Thessalonians 5:21 [NEB translation]. ;)
> >>
> >> -
> >
> >
> >A Socrates rip off if I ever seen one!
> >
> > Archangel Michael
>
> Actually, Paul ripped off Plato much more than Socrates.
No Plato ripped off Socrates,
>
> Heck, between Plato, Philo, and Zoroaster's contribution to religion
(among
> others), not to mention the anti-Arians at the Nicene Council, I
can't believe
> that there's much truth left in the religion of "Christianity".
You forgot King Hosiah ( Note Jeroboam Prophecy about Josiah )and
possibly Moses also and the redactors,, But most Josiah who found the
old Teast.. Under the temple and had it re-writen to say he was as
important as Moses impossed by God! And that King Davids line would
live forever as Kings... Then the Sirians killed him and heirs's!
Oh well,, So much for truth,, In Jesus Christ the musical they have a
line that goes " Is Truth and ever changing law".
Somes it up Erin,
But still we look!:)
Be well,
Archangel Michael
lordm...@my-deja.com
their were writen as " after the fact" Propaganda and wich is real that
may have failed or come true.. Instead of throughing the Baby out with
bath water as your original post under Moon square Mars.. Bad timing!
I thought you said Astrology doen't affect the future,, Look what you
did! A useless wast of two days with a negetive unthoughtful post about
nothing!
Tony was right! If your are going to post junk like that then leave.!
I know you must have been in a bad mood especially after that one.
you tried to score big, but you didn't watch the sky, Oh well,,..
And you arn't the cat and I'm not a pigion. You may be though a pigion!
Archangel
> --
>
> Peter
lordm...@my-deja.com
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 08:30:42 GMT, shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
except for a few Nostradamus quatrains!:)
>
> Makes we wonder why I bother to think about it, then... :(
Uhh Money ! Maybey! You sure didn't do it for free?
But their is passion involved! I'm sure of it!
lordm...@my-deja.com
> >
> >Peter
> >
>
> Hey Peter. Didn't you prophecy that this would happen when you made
your
> original post? ;)
Erin its more like a repetition when he post those periodical post
Check the archives he did many times more of common sense!
I bet Nostradamus used Common sense!
Archangel
Claude Latremouille
: Claude Latremouille wrote:
: > As to Peter, if he were to leave this NewsGroup, I would be the only
: > regular contributor left to have an very intimate knowledge of what
: > Nostradamus really wrote, which would be a pity. I much prefer to
: > keep reading Peter's shit than facing the prospect that -- if I left
: > this NewsGroup, nobody else in it would know what they are talking
: > about.
: > *
: > A very frightening thought, don't you think? :-)
: > *
: > Have a nice day, you all!
: > *
: > --
: > **** ac...@freenet.toronto.on.ca ****
: > C L A U D E L A T R E M O U I L L E
: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*
: Well other have knowledge about Nostradamus, I'm not about tosay who is
: better than another, and Peter does have great knowledge
: about him, which is all the more why it is a shame that he has decided
: to discredit Nostradamus and prophecy.
*
: Tony
*
Correct, Tony, many others have knowledge about Nostradamus. This
is why I chose my words very carefully. To repeat myself: "As to
Peter, if he were to leave this NewsGroup, I would be the only
regular contributor left to have an very intimate knowledge of
what Nostradamus really wrote, which would be a pity."
*
I am not merely speaking of persons who have read Nostradamus'
prophecies, or who have read about Nostradamus' prophecies. I am
speaking of persons, like Peter and myself, who have such an
intimate knowledge of it that we can almost quote it from memory.
*
Unfortunately, in this NewsGroup, there appears to be only Peter
and myself to have acquired that deep level of knowledge. And the
fact that Peter and I view these texts differently is not
relevant to the present discussion; for, in order to have a
different view of something, we need to know what the something
is. And, so far, amongst the regular contributors to this
NewsGroup, only Peter and I have shown that knowledge. This is
not bragging, it is a very regrettable fact.
*
The fact that Peter began to discredit both Nostradamus and his
texts is merely in my view the realization that -- if he did not,
he would be willy nilly sucked in the vortex of that prophecy,
for better or for worse. And he has apparently decided that it
would be for worse. :-)
*
However, as I have pointed out more than once already, I would
welcome his translations of Nostradamus' original texts, provided
that he would place, side by side, line by line, these originals
and his translations into English, if he insists.
*
Posting English-language translations by themselves is in itself
an editorial view which can be summarized as: "What Nostradamus
wrote and how he did it does not really matter, as *I* am going
to *tell* you what he wrote, so you won't have to worry your
little brains about these original texts."
*
Therein lies the intellectual fraud.
*
Have a nice day, you all!
*
--
*** cla...@freenet.toronto.on.ca ***
C L A U D E L A T R E M O U I L L E
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
IGot4
>>allegory in order to explain away the fact it didn't happen when John said
>it
>>would and to explain the wrath of God, the lake of Fire, etc. What happens
>IF
>>we don't use allegorical interpretation and instead use our brains and our
>>insight to see the truth? Prayer helps of course.
>
>;)
>--
>
>Peter
>
>
Peter,
Ask and you shall receive.. again...
Plato mentions a river of fire in his description of Hell. "This is the river
{under the earth in Hell} which is called Pyriphlegethon {meaning: ablaze by
fire}, and the streams of lava which spout up at various places on earth {the
volcanoes} are offshoots from it." Plato’s river of fire fell into the lake
of fire. As a result of Plato’s writings, during the Hellenistic era many
believed in the existence of the lake of fire, except for the Stoics, who,
according to Seneca, they refuted it.
Plato: lake of fire
"The third river ... falls into a vast region burning with a great fire and
makes a lake larger than our Mediterranean sea ..."
Seneca: no lake of fire
"{The Stoic philosophers say} there is no prison house, no lake of fire or
river of forgetfulness, no judgment seat {throne}"
Revelation: lake of fire
"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire ... And
whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of
fire." (Revelation 20:10, 15 KJV)
The bottomless pit
Plato: the pit is bored through the whole earth
"One of the chasms of the earth is greater than the rest and is bored through
the whole earth. This is the one which Homer means when he says: Far off, the
lowest abyss beneath the earth."
Revelation: the pit is bottomless
"And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit
{abyss} ..." (Revelation 9:11 KJV) "... the beast that ascends out of the
bottomless pit ..." (Revelation 11:7 KJV)
The idea that all the righteous will abide with God in the afterlife does not
appear in the Old Testament. Plato wrote about it, and the Greek mystery
religions taught it. This idea appears in the New Testament.
Plato
"But the soul that has passed through life in purity and righteousness, finds
gods for companions ..."
Revelation
"... Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them,
and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them, and be their
God." (Revelation 21:3 KJV)
The idea of a heavenly city with the perfect pattern does not appear in the Old
Testament, but it appears in the New Testament. Plato was the one who
introduced it:
Plato
"... the city whose establishment we have described, the city whose home is in
the ideal {world}; for I think it can be found nowhere on earth ... perhaps
there is a pattern of it laid up in heaven ..."
Revelation
"And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of
heaven ..." (Revelation 21:2 KJV)
The New Jerusalem of Revelation is a symmetrically perfect city: "The city lies
foursquare, its length the same as its width ... its length and width and
height are equal." (Revelation 21:16 NRSV) This city is built with precious
stones.
Maybe you should get hold of some of Bensons work. I've thoroughly checked it
all out and it's accurate and extensive. He is quite the scholar.
Take Care, Erin
Claude Latremouille
Peter Lemesurier <lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk> wrote about what
*
On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:17:26 GMT, shu...@hotmail.com wrote:
*
[ my snip ]
*
[WORTH FRAMING]
*
>This is a discussion group. Discussion-groups are for discussing. All
>discussions have at least two sides, or they are not discussions.
*
So, let's see how the two sides of the issue of whether or not
Nostradamus wrote an entire prophecy in cryptic anagrams has been
dealt with recently by Peter in this NewsGroup: He says he has
placed me in his killfile. So much for discussion.
*
Of course, I am not saying that he has *never* discussed it, he
has. But not recently.
*
Even if his 'discussion' were nothing but the endless repetition
of what he has already posted, given that he is prone to post the
same old tired FAQs, one would not be able to say that he is
afraid of repeating himself! :-)
*
There is also a so-called Nostradamus Research Group on this
NewsGroup. Funny that it should be 'researching' the mail
Nostradamus allegedly received, as if this could enlighten us as
to the nature of Nostradamus' prophecy. It does not.
*
What else have we seen recently in this NewsGroup? Translations
into English of 16th century vituperations about Nostradamus and
his published texts. Is this going to assist us in understanding
Nostradamus' prophecies? Absolutely not.
*
In this NewsGroup, the only positive contribution to the issue of
what Nostradamus really wrote is by an Italian guy who apparently
does not even speak French, but who has posted for the whole
world to see many originals from what Nostradamus wanted us to
see.
*
Thanks, Mario, continue the good work. Nostradamus would be very
happy to see his originals on the Web.
*
And so that this post be more than yet another *ad hominem*
digression, let's see what looking at Mario's site led me to
discover yesterday:
*
------------------------------L E S
----------------------P I R E S A T H É S
-----------------------D E L A C H I N E
---------------------S I R V D E A I A N T
-----------------------------NYÉ LA
-----------------------Bombe cachée en mon
------------------------------"VIL
-------Oracle" (selon Paris) tuent bien des Gens de l'U S
-----------------Q V I S E V E N G E I C Y !
*
Where does this come from?
*
Peter would know... but he ain't talking! :-)
*
Too bad.
No User
On Sat, 24 Jun 2000, Peter Lemesurier<lem...@bengal.demon.co.uk>
continued ignoring the Voice of One; instead, Peter continues to
blaspheme the Spirit, mocking His Word and His faithful prophets
to the bitter end. May the good LORD grace you with His presence:
>
>Well folks, it's cat-among-pigeons time!
>
>What it all seems to boil down to is this:
>
>A. The book of Daniel isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
>in the future, because most reputable scholars conclude on fairly good
>evidence that it is obviously an opportunistic fake cobbled together
>to encourage Jews suffering from the Greek oppression of 160-odd BC
>(though parts of it turned out to be more successful than they had any
>right to be, given that they helped provoke the immensely successful
>Maccabean revolt).
>
>B. St John's Revelation isn't going to tell you what's going to happen
>in the future, because it is merely one of a number of contemporary
>apocalypses cobbled together to encourage Messianists such as Jews and
>Christians suffering under the Roman oppression of the late 1st
>century AD (though parts of it turned out to be more successful than
>they had any right to be, given the eventual fall of Rome).
>
>C. Nostradamus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
>future, because his Propheties are to a large extent a kind of
>apocalypse cobbled together for the benefit of people suffering under
>what they perceived to be the onset of the Last Times in mid-16th
>century France (War, Plague, Famine, Death -- and the Antichrist, in
>the form of John Calvin, sitting in Geneva), and also because his
>measurable success-rate during his own lifetime was in any case only
>some 5.73%.
>
>D Astrology isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the
>future, because (as Nostradamus's professional astrological
>contemporaries were always trying to tell him) astrology deals only
>with influences and potentialities, not with actual events.
>
>E. Paul isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
>because he claimed (wrongly) that the end would come in the lifetime
>of people then living (Thessalonians 4: 15-18, and again at I
>Corinthians 15:51 -- "We shall not all die...") -- which means that he
>meant it for then, not now.
>
>F. Jesus isn't going to tell you what's going to happen in the future,
>because (if the texts are to be believed) he wrongly claimed much the
>same (Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke21, and especially verses 34/30/32
>respectively: "I tell you this: the present generation will live to
>see it all" [NEB translation]) -- which means that he meant it for
>then, not now.
>
>Not, at least, in any kind of definitive way -- and not unless we
>become so mesmerised by their magic as to put them into effect
>ourselves, whether consciously or unconsciously (which of course is
>always possible if we don't watch out!).
>
>Which isn't too encouraging for the present exercise, is it?
>
>Ah well, I wonder what horrors the Third Secret of Fatima will reveal
>to us on Monday (yawn)? ;)
>--
>
>Peter
>
And so it is written lbb Nb: children of confusion by mixing.
But the rocks do not forget, neither does the spirit forgive,
not in the present age, neither to the perpetual age the 5th.
Enjoy the poleshift!
Daniel Joseph Min-
Peter Lemesurier
wrote:
>I 'believe' that is possible that *all* Believers
>have the potential to realize at some point that what they call The
>Real World is simply their own personal perception of their environment
>filtered through their life experiences.
In other words, we can't in fact get any further forward than the
backs of our own eyeballs -- and some of us have quite a job even
getting that far!
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>This has happened throughout the Bible and Revelations is now turned into
>allegory in order to explain away the fact it didn't happen when John said it
>would and to explain the wrath of God, the lake of Fire, etc. What happens IF
>we don't use allegorical interpretation and instead use our brains and our
>insight to see the truth? Prayer helps of course.
I do wish you'd give chapter and verse sometimes, though, Erin... !!
;)
--
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>>>No, he is a debunker of all prophecy.
>>
>>Makes we wonder why I bother to think about it, then... :(
>>--
>>
>>Peter
>>
>
>Hey Peter. Didn't you prophecy that this would happen when you made your
>original post? ;)
Why else do you suppose I headed it 'Cat-among-pigeons time'?! ;)
Peter
Peter Lemesurier
>Unfortunately, many are afraid of the Truth or that seeking it may be like
>turning away from God.
I'm afraid there's more than a grain of truth in that. The
fulminations of people like Tony are usually just an expression of
fear -- fear of having what they have hitherto regarded as reliable
life-props kicked away from beneath them.
Granted, it might hurt -- but it might just result in their learning
to stand on the two feet that the God they believe in gave them, and
to start using the independent brain that equally they were given!
--
Peter