The Hero Pattern (Could Jesus be fake?)...

Also another translation of rev 13;18 says humanity instead of man. 3 guesses what humanity =.

I understand looking back to events "manipulation" of words and numbers may take place. more reason to look forward. I also understand the probabilities become greater as the words or phrases become longer. what do you calculate the odds of the 2028 phrases to be?

reply to post by Tyler 720



Hmm very interesting, 2028. However I really really think that he returns in 2015/2016 kinda time frame. There is a Tetrad and all four of the moons fall on Jewish Holidays that year. I could be onto something that's not what I think though too. You might just be on to something.

Joel 2:31 "The sun will be turned into darkness And the moon into blood Before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes."

Which I think is after the Great Tribulation period. So we would have 1: The Tribulation for 1260 days then the Great Tribulation for 1290 days and finally the Day of The Lord Period when Jesus returns with his saints to do battle which will have been taken out and be with Him (ressurection). That corresponds with the sixth seal event.

Revelation 6:12 "I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood."

So when he comes He will gather His elect from the four winds, then the Day of The Lord begins.

[edit on 1-5-2009 by watchtheashes]

Or Maybe that period does signify the Day of The Lord up until 2028. The point is that he gave us the ability to discern the signs and now more than ever.

Further research might help us know. Let's try to figure out 2015 too.

STOP DERAILING MY THREAD!

You people are acting dispicable! This is not about your magic codes, this is not about revelation or prophecy.

You come in here with your 'agendas' The topic is "THE HERO PATTERN" Not mystical codes that ARE NOT PROOF.

I DO NOT USE THE BIBLE AS DEFENCE AGAINST JC, you need to stop lying.

I am now reporting this hyjacking to the mods, I do not appreciate you coming in here and continuing to deter the subject.

Final note, I complied the list of links DEBUNKING your codes; however, IT IS NOT THE TOPIC. If you want to start a thread about your magic-codes then do so, do NOT hyjack.

And you folks wonder why the Christian faith gets "persecuted" (Note quotation marks imply sarcasm)

I cant claim to know much about about alot of things. I have been "out of circulation" for many years and have had ample time to hand calculate words and phrases and ponder their meaning. what I realy want to do is crack this code somehow, and by "crack" I mean predict future events. the odds of predicting an end date for the world are not in anyones favor simply because everyone whos predicted date has passed has been wrong. I believe a first step to understanding the pattern would be to coordinate the World Almanacs history section, trying to find dates divisible by 6 and then calculating a statement about that event and date. Then if some sort of other pattern emerges perhaps future events may be calculated.

reply to post by Tyler 720


STOP!!!! THIS IS NOT ABOUT MAGIC CODES!!

I want this for proof:

1: ONE only ONE eyewitness account of Jesus
2: ONE only ONE official document

MAGIC CODES are neither of those things.

You are using your codes to try to hide my topic, THAT is a SHADY thing to do. Keep derailing, and I will keep hounding you for the proof.

Sorry for the content. I'm new at this. I was trying to contact watchtheashes but couldnt or didnt know how

reply to post by Tyler 720


That is okay, I understand. Under every one of our posts is a button called "message" that will send a U2U (Private message) to the poster.

The other person using the codes knows better, least I assume they do.

To the readers, sorry for all the de-railing. I will be using my ultra-skills to keep it on topic from here on out.

documents can be falsified, eyewitnesses can lie. I scarcely believe you would say I existed even if you saw me typing this.

Originally posted by Tyler 720
documents can be falsified

Isn't the Bible a collection of documents?

Originally posted by Tyler 720
eyewitnesses can lie.

Sure they can, but that doesn't change the FACT that one has not been produced (liar or not).

EDIT--
I used Bible in this instance, to show how the poster trusts those documents, while saying that the document(s) that I am looking for could be falsified.

[edit on 5/1/2009 by adigregorio]

reply to post by adigregorio


I'm sorry if you feel we hi-jacked the topic and if that is not good enough proof for you then I don't know what will be. Sodom and Gomorrah is one archaeological site as historical evidence for the validity of the Holy Bible. The Ark of the Covenant may be archaeological evidence that has yet to be found. The Bible is the most historically accurate ancient text to date. The accounts of the time of Egypt, Babylon, Iraq, Israel especially, Pakistan, and Iran, Russia, China. Historical accuracy and geographical knowledge. That is where everything took place, but it's fairly accurate about animals around the world and such as well. Any contradiction in it is simply a minute translation error or omitting a word that was in the original text, but minor minor discrepancies.

reply to post by watchtheashes


Good enough proof:

1: One just one eyewitness account
2: One just one official document

If you would have read the thread, you would have seen that was the topic.

reply to post by adigregorio


The Bible is indeed a collection of the most complete historical documents found to date. Dead Sea Scrolls. God would have made sure of it. Remember there was civilization before this biblical period of Exodus, and it does not give an exact exact reference to before this. On top of this Christianity provides evidence and credence to all of these conspiracies out there including Hurricane Katrina being artificially enhanced by Russia. All of the terms in that matrix are ENTIRE sentences. There is no possible way by THE SCIENTIFIC DEFINITION OF CHANCE IN THE UNIVERSE DEFINED BY SCIENCE that these are there by accident. I know you may or may not agree, but there is archaeological evidence for it.

reply to post by adigregorio


I don't want you to feel threatened by what we're doing at all. This is your topic but I want to provide evidence using the text because it all can be evaluated. The debunkers you mention probably have pathetic codes that don't match to a complete matrix.

Just look at the ruins of Babylon and Sodom and Gomorrah. Seriously.

I don't know for sure if that Ark on the mountain in South America is the ark itself but that proves the waters were above the mountains at some point. Science agrees with that point of view based on the receding oceans of pre-historic times.

[edit on 1-5-2009 by watchtheashes]

reply to post by watchtheashes

reply to post by watchtheashes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Good enough proof:

1: One just one eyewitness account
2: One just one official document

If you would have read the thread, you would have seen that was the topic.

this is a clasic example of the scientist saying prove it to me and the believer saying just believe. this thread may never end.

reply to post by Tyler 720


This is semi-correct.

The only way it will end is if those 2 pieces of proof surface. Until then Jesus of the Bible is very much a "Hero".

Hero=Fictional Character
(I can say this, because there has not been the proof required to counter act the argument.)

keptics have often pointed out that no archaeological evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ has been discovered. And they are correct, at least perhaps up until the present. A recent incredible discovery may put to rest that criticism. A secondary issue must first be considered. Is it reasonable to expect such artifacts or inscriptions? After all, the man Jesus was not a prominent governmental leader. He was essentially an itinerant preacher, with few possessions, and eventually suffered the death of a common outlaw. Would the Romans have recorded His life or death with an inscription or statue? Certainly not. Actually, Jewish archaeological evidence of the entire period is rather sparse. There are the remains of large and extensive Roman cities, and adequate inscriptions of leaders, including Herod, Pilate and Festus. There are also influential Jews such as Caiaphas, but almost nothing can be found recording the lives of ordinary individuals. And remember that in A.D. 70 Jerusalem was totally destroyed by Titus. What may still exist is buried under the thriving modern city. Certainly the odds are against an artifact's survival. The scarcity of archaeological artifacts can be contrasted, however, with the wealth of historical evidence for Christ. Soon the apostles had written letters detailing Christ's life and teachings, to be followed by the writings of Paul all widely copied and circulated, within the lifetime of eyewitnesses. The Roman historian Josephus mentioned Christ several times while relating noteworthy civic events, including the execution of one named "James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ/Messiah" referring evidently to Jesus' brother James, leader of the early church and author of the New Testament book bearing his name. The new artifact is an ossuary, a medium-sized box in which human bones were placed for permanent burial after the flesh had all decayed away. This practice was employed for only a brief period of time from about B.C. 20 to A.D. 70. The box is made of a soft, chalky, limestone, common to the area. The contents have long since vanished. Most remarkably, an inscription has been etched into the side which reads, "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" in the Aramaic script of the time. Careful studies, including scrutiny under a scanning electron microscope show the inscription to be genuine. The patina, or oxidized surface equally covers both box and the interior of the etched letters. The recognized expert on such matters, Dr. Andre Lemaire, concludes: "I am pleased to report that in my judgment it is genuinely ancient and not a fake." All three names used were common in that era, but seldom was the deceased's brother mentioned, unless that brother was noteworthy. To have all three listed, in correct Biblical relationship certainly supports the possibility of this being the ossuary of the Biblical James. With or without the ossuary or other archeological evidence, we can still be confident that the events are true. The Christian faith is a reasonable faith, well grounded in the facts of history, and the Bible is an entirely accurate document. On its teachings we can base our lives and eternal destiny.

reply to post by watchtheashes


I will have a more in-depth reply shortly. That "James brother of JC" incident was talked about earlier in the thread (If I remember correctly.)

I will say thank you for coming to the topic!