Why Nothing will happen on September 23, 2017

originally posted by: davido
I have a friend, whom I met on Amazon, who is a retired seminary professor. He was on the first team to put the bible on a computer. He has spent more than 40 years studying eschatology, or the end-times. He believes that all Christians will ascend in the clouds on September 23, 2017.
On this date, there is an alignment in the stars, which sound a lot like Revelations 12. The only problem is that Revelations 12 was written by John of Patmos-not the apostle, who was more than likely Gnostic.
Sir Laurence Gardner, in "Bloodlines of the Holy Grail", offers this explanation for Revelation 12.
"According to Gnostic tradition, Mary Magdalene
was associated with Wisdom (Sophia), represented by
the sun, moon, and a halo of stars. The female gnosis of
- Sophia was deemed to be the Holy Spirit, thus represented
on Earth by the Magdalene, who fled into exile
bearing the child of Jesus. John, in Revelation 12:1-17,
describes Mary and her son, and tells of her persecution,
her flight into exile, and of the continued Roman hounding
of the 'remnant of her seed' (her descendants).
And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman
clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and
upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and
pained to be delivered.
And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and
behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten
horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
And . . . the dragon stood before the woman which was
ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it
wasbom.
And she brought forth a man child ...
And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath
a place prepared of God . ..
And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels
fought against the dragon; ...
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, ...
And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and
by the word of their testimony; ...
And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth,
he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man
child.
And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle,
that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place ..."

So, there's another view of Revelation 12, that has nothing to do with alignments.

PS. So far on ATS, there seems to be packs or conglomerates
that quickly invalidate new threads, especially from new users. They are like dive bombers who perform a scrafing run on the terrain, invalidating the information and the author. Usually, they don't bother reading anything other than enough info to insult/put down. Are there any grown-ups here? IF so, that's scary. The only reason I can fathom such behaviour is for stars? Or, more than likely they are of the type who feel they cannot
progress, unless someone else suffers, or, have low esteem and no other way to generate their own energy. For fun, if they show up, I bet that some will have no posts at all and are simply clinging to the flight leader.

Time for a staffing run
What a weird post
Mary Magdalena's skull, Gnostics, Sofia, tradition
John of Patmos not the apostle, am I just supposed to believe, are you really creflo dollar?
Wooo, my head is still spinning

Does your friend have a name this studier of the end times

Nice checker board

a reply to: DISRAELI

Thank You, I was not aware of this radio personality.

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: TobyFlenderson
a reply to: davido

I'm not a biblical or religious scholar however, I thought that a tenant of gnosticism was that Jesus was not divine. If that is the case, the Gospel of John is clearly not gnostic as it is replete with references to Jesus' divinity.

LOL,

Caught that one didn't you?

Gnostic crap is coming out of the woodwork lately and almost all of it is BS.

September 2017 may or may not be the Revelation 12 sign but it sure is a strong candidate. (And on the feast of trumpets no less).

Time will tell if it is the big kick-off to the finale.

Nice, very nice
Just a question
How do we know for sure a biblical generation is 70'years, not longer?

a reply to: davido

Regardless of which John it may've been, the writing shows him to believe that Jesus is divine, which gnostics do not believe.

a reply to: Raggedyman

creflo dollar? You can trust that I am no fan of any "organized religion"

My friend is a retired methodist seminary professor. I am keeping his name confidential, as he has his own posts throughout the internet. If you research the "Rapture Verdict" on amazon.com for negative reviews, you can find his email address like I did.

"am I just supposed to believe?" no, that's what a discusssion board is for. pardon me, but weird reply.
I am reading Lawrence Gardner right now. He is known as unconventional; however, he cites many references, and coorborates others. Whenever our conditionaing is challenged it does feel weird.

Thank you for responding.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson

cool with me. I am not proselytising. You are free to believe whatever you want.
That's one difference between the gnostics and the Roman Catholics I spot right off the bat. The Romans demanded under threat of force the way they 'legislated' religion, and the divinity of Christ, indirectly by claiming that the Roman Emperor was God. Constantine' grandmother supposedly had jewish royal blood.
Elaine Pagels, Head of the Religion Department at Purdue, put it succinctly in her book, "The Gnostic Gospels".
"Elaine Pagels, the renowned scholar says this, in her book, “The Gnostic Gospels”
“The Tripartite Tractate, written by a follower of Valentinus, contrasts
those who are gnostics, "children of the Father," with those who are
uninitiates, offspring of the demiurge(creator) The Father's children, he
says, join together as equals, enjoying mutual love, spontaneously
helping one another. But the demiurge's offspring—the ordinary
Christians—"wanted to command one another, outrivalling one
another in their empty ambition"; they are inflated with "lust for power," "each one
imagining that he is superior to the others.”
"
Sounds a lot like our narcissistic society of today. Could it be that a jealous God, that dimininishs our self image, by declaring that we are as rags,
creates the type of ego as described by Pagels above? Or, is the Creator, just too large to be concerned with behavior and being praised? we have graduated from the "flat earth" idea maybe? We need to continue by admitting that we are not the center of a multi-verse and that the "universe/God" is wiser than us and more loving with more faith, free from the fear of ego.
peace bro.

originally posted by: davido
He has spent more than 40 years studying eschatology, or the end-times. He believes that all Christians will ascend in the clouds on September 23, 2017.

Goes to show how much time one can waste if one doesn't heed the advice in my signature and description under my name. 40 years without learning anything useful about God or his word (including prophecies). What a waste of a perfectly good mind.

Rapture: Reasoning

Definition: The belief that faithful Christians will be bodily caught up from the earth, suddenly taken out of the world, to be united with the Lord “in the air.” The word “rapture” is understood by some persons, but not by all, to be the meaning of 1 Thessalonians 4:17. The word “rapture” does not occur in the inspired Scriptures.

When the apostle Paul said that Christians would be “caught up” to be with the Lord, what subject was being discussed?
...
Who are the ones that will be ‘caught up in the clouds,’ as stated at 1 Thessalonians 4:17?
...
Will Christ appear visibly on a cloud and then take away faithful Christians into the heavens while the world looks on?
...
Did Jesus say whether the world would see him again with their physical eyes?
...
What is the meaning of the Lord’s ‘descending from heaven’?
...
In what sense, then, will humans “see” the Lord “coming in a cloud”?
...
Is it possible for Christians to be taken to heaven with their physical bodies?

1 Cor. 15:50, RS: “I tell you this, brethren: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.”

Does the experience of the prophet Elijah contradict this? Not at all. It must be understood in the light of Jesus’ clear statement centuries later: “No one has ascended into heaven but he who descended from heaven, the Son of man.” (John 3:13, RS) Although Elijah was seen as he “went up by a whirlwind into heaven,” this does not mean that he went into the spirit realm. ...
...to lift Elijah off the ground into the heaven where the birds fly and to transport him to another place.—Compare Genesis 1:6-8, 20.
...

originally posted by: pthena
The mental picture is one guy holding a curtain open showing the John character a play being played out. The messenger holding the curtain is wearing a god mask. So John (the watcher of the show) falls down to worship. The messenger drops his mask and says, "No, no, I'm just a servant" but he's also an actor, and part of the show. He puts the god mask back on and cries out, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End".

So anyway, as far as I can tell, it's a play, the meaning of which eludes me, ...

Perhaps this information can help:

a reply to: davido

I do not easily trust what anyone says on the internet.

Many do not believe even my claims and actual credentials so why would you trust him.

Give us his name if all is true he would not mind your revealing who he is.

a reply to: davido

I'm not believing anything relative to these issues. I don't believe the world will end on September 23, I'm not a Christian, a gnostic, nor a Catholic. I simply asked a question about one of your underlying assumptions. You refuse to answer it, go on to say you're not proselytizing , and then spend several paragraphs doing just that.

Your broad-brush statements relative to Catholics are pretty intolerant for someone preaching trying to be free of ego.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

I sent you a private message.

Did you read the op? I simply said that a friend believs in the rapture, but I do not. The identity of my friend has nothing to do with the thesis, or what I am saying. So, I give you his identity, which is disrespectful on my end, because I only found it by googling his email address. I disagree with the man, but that does not mean that I am going to post his name on a forum that he is more than intelligent enough to do for himself. Also, he is considering publishing his research, which I venture will probably happen when he is dissappointed on September 23rd. If I am correct, the bible says,"No one knows but the Father". Additionally, it says that if someone makes a prophecy and it is wrong, that the prophet is not of God. This man is a good man who deeply cares about others. I originannly agreed with him, but ya know what? I changed my mind after he was wrong about last year.
So, the point is not that I have a freind that believes the rapture is happening. The point is that the rapture is not going to haapen and the observation that Revelation , not the Gospel of John, may be speaking of a different event. I do not know, but neither does anyone else for sure. It's a supposition that does not hang on my first sentence.

So, using the Golden Rule, would you like it if someone found your identity on this forum and then posted it on another forum to clarify a statement that had nothing to do with you? Hope that makes sense.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson

Sorry, what was your question? I am at a public wifi.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson

Oh. your question. I am stating an opinion. I am not trying to "convert you". I do not care what you believe. I do believe God gave you free will. Who would I be to take tha away.

Ok. If anyone wants to discuss Lawrence Gardner and his interpretation of Revelation 12, then PM me.
I see that this subject is very contentious to some folks and I don't have to defend my personality or intentions to anyone.
This discussion was not intended to become a shouting match. Criticising suppositions defeats the purpose of them-no one grows. They are designed to spur the imagination-not engender competition. If you don't want contention-don't create it.
Obviously, I am creating contention, but not intentionally. No one here can read my mind or do anything but guess my intentions. Therefore, Mods you may close this thread, as I am not in this for a debate. Maybe ATS is not for me, but we will see. Feels to much like a game and I am not competing with anyone, nor do I care to. So, I am sitting the rest of this out. I consider it a mistake to reach out to this community on this issue.

done with rant. bash away.

Thank you all for responding. Mods, please close.

a reply to: davido

I did get the PM. Thanks for that and I fully understand your not wanting to post it.

Mt 25:13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

They can not know the hour or the day. I often wonder if they could know the month. So many people have tired to put a date to it and you are correct if it does not come to pass then that person is a false prophet.

Why would anyone try to figure out a time based on perception. Neither time nor perception are constants . That stuff in space is all far away. Different distances, vast differences within the same constellations. Don't look at it though, says the Bible. Okay maybe just a peak... says the Bible. Does the world end when the stars align? Or some time after, when the light actually reaches earths observers? Does this mean we can delay the end of the world with space smoke and galactic mirrors?

Takes the "sun" 8 minutes to send its light. Meaning it could already burn out before we know it. Would the solar system wait 8 minutes, to make sure we were aware, before unraveling? And other reflected light sources too? How courteous of them.

Fairly certain once the plug is pulled, power shuts down. Ending the simulation, cant get any more "end of the world" than that. I dont think you get an announcement from the simulation. It just happens. The twinkling of an eye..

a reply to: davido

Wait, You are saying, Mary Magdalene was Jesus's mother?

Identity: Marys in the New Testament

Mary (Mariam in Aramaic) was a very common name in New Testament times, held by a number of women in the canonical Gospels. The reception history of Mary Magdalene has been greatly affected by different interpretations that biblical references actually refer to her, beyond those where she is identified by the toponym "Magdalene". Historically, the Greek Orthodox church Fathers, as a whole, distinguished among what they believed were three Marys:[8]

The Virgin Mary, mother of Christ
Mary of Bethany, the sister of Martha and Lazarus Luke 10:38–42 and John 11 John 12.
Mary Magdalene
In addition, there were Mary, the mother of James and Mary Salome.

In the four Gospels, Mary Magdalene is nearly always distinguished from other women named Mary by adding "the Magdalene" (ἡ Μαγδαληνή) to her name.[2] This has been interpreted to mean "the woman from Magdala", a town on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Luke 8:2 says that she was actually "called Magdalene". In Hebrew מגדל Migdal means "tower", "fortress"; in Aramaic, "Magdala" means "tower" or "elevated, great, magnificent".[9] Talmudic passages speak of a Miriam "hamegadela se’ar nasha", "Miriam, the plaiter of women's hair" (Hagigah 4b; cf. Shabbat 104b), which could be a reference to Mary Magdalene serving as a hairdresser.[10]

In the Gospel of John, Mary Magdalene is also referred to simply as "Mary" at least twice.[11] Gnostic writings use Mary, Mary Magdalene, or Magdalene.

Mary Magdalene's name is mostly given as Μαρία (Maria), but in Matthew 28:1 as Μαριάμ (Mariam),[12][13] both of which are regarded as Greek forms of Miriam, the Hebrew name for Moses' sister. The name had become very popular during Jesus' time due to its connections to the ruling Hasmonean and Herodian dynasties.[14]

Mary Magdalene

a reply to: EasternShadow



Thank You for your question. I am reading Lawrence Gardner's, "Bloodline of the Holy Grail" the premise
is that Mary Magdalene was Jesus's wife. The reason for the suppression was the fear of the original Roman
Catholics, that the people would follow the family instead of the institutional church. Any children of Jesus would
be of royal descent. This is where the Merovingians came in. They were "of the blood" The book is open source now on
archive.org where it can be freely downloaded. Gardner jumps right into the Magdalene debate within the first few chapters.
There was some controversy with Gardner and Nicholas De Vere. De Vere claimed to be of an ancient Dragon Court dating back to Atlantas. In the controversy, De Vere allowed Gardner access to the family achives.
I had more, but I am at a public wifi with the sunshine creating too much glare on my screen. I hit preview, but I could not find the submit button, therefore some sources wer e lost. I am not retyping them.

Both authors cite the Annunaki as the original source of a ruling bloodline. Other authors state that it is common knowledge academically that the Hebrew Old Testsmant was written during the Baylonian Exile. De Vere, was rather dark,
but the Grail Code, is where chivalry began. Gardner traces the Grail Code not only through the grail legends, but in other books connects the Arthurian and even Tolkein tales.

“A lot of the stories in the Old Testament are in fact plagiarized material, particularly from the rich mythical heritage of the Sumerians – the inventors of writing. The story of Noah and the flood story, the creation of man out of clay, Cain and Abel, the gardens of Eden, the tree of knowledge, creation of Eve from Adams rib, and numerous other myths, like the throwing of Moses in the river after he was born, are all but stories found recorded on Sumerian clay tablets dating 5000 years back in time” … This has long been common knowledge amongst the scholars of history, archeology and anthropology, but I find it extremely necessary today, in the so called information age, to drag it out of the academic realm and expose it in the open before the public eyes.

originally posted by: davido
a reply to: EasternShadow
Thank You for your question. I am reading Lawrence Gardner's, "Bloodline of the Holy Grail" the premise
is that Mary Magdalene was Jesus's wife.

Then below premise is illogical,

originally posted by: davido
The female gnosis of
- Sophia was deemed to be the Holy Spirit, thus represented
on Earth by the Magdalene, who fled into exile
bearing the child of Jesus.

since Sophia was refering to Mary the Virgin Mother the one "who fled into exile bearing the child of Jesus". John stated "the other Mary" and obviously it's not Mary Magdalene. ( "the other Mary" written by John is a poor word to describe Jesus's mother. I guess ancient writers had very weird writing comprehension and cause many bad translations. Another example of weird ancient comprehension is "goat with horn" which King James edition translated as unicorn. LOL. )

“A lot of the stories in the Old Testament are in fact plagiarized material, particularly from the rich mythical heritage of the Sumerians – the inventors of writing. The story of Noah and the flood story, the creation of man out of clay, Cain and Abel, the gardens of Eden, the tree of knowledge, creation of Eve from Adams rib, and numerous other myths, like the throwing of Moses in the river after he was born, are all but stories found recorded on Sumerian clay tablets dating 5000 years back in time” … This has long been common knowledge amongst the scholars of history, archeology and anthropology, but I find it extremely necessary today, in the so called information age, to drag it out of the academic realm and expose it in the open before the public eyes.

I agree. It's an evidence that Bible was not an inspiration from God, unless Bible's God plagiarized material from ancient Sumerians or Eyptian Gods.

a reply to: EasternShadow

Many scholars have suggested that the wedding at Cana was the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene - but this was not the wedding ceremony as such, being simply the pre-marital betrothal feast. The marriage is defined by the quite separate anointings of Jesus by Mary at Bethany. Chronologically, these anointings (as given in the Gospels) were two-and-a-half years apart.

Source