Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Wyatt's Ark of the Covenent
PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 30 of 307 (204017)
04-30-2005 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by mike the wiz
04-02-2005 8:49 PM


Perhaps this helps you.
Someone other (Uzza, David's servant) than specifically assigned 'personnel', a consecrated (Levite) priest, touched the ark of the covenant, and the result was instant.
1 Chronicles:
13:9 And when they came to the grain-floor of Chidon, Uzza put out his hand to keep the ark in its place, for the oxen were slipping.
13:10 And the wrath of the Lord, burning against Uzza, sent destruction on him because he had put his hand on the ark, and death came to him there before God.
13:11 And David was angry because of the Lord's outburst of wrath against Uzza, and he gave that place the name Perez-uzza, to this day.
13:12 And so great was David's fear of God that day, that he said, How may I let the ark of God come to me?
13:13 So David did not let the ark come back to him to the town of David, but had it turned away and put into the house of Obed-edom the Gittite.
13:14 And the ark of God was in the house of Obed-edom for three months; and the Lord sent a blessing on the house of Obed-edom and on all he had.
Revelation 11:19 suggests that the ark has been taken back to heaven.
11:19 And opened was the sanctuary of God in the heaven, and there was seen the ark of His covenant in His sanctuary, and there did come lightnings, and voices, and thunders, and an earthquake, and great hail.
The Ark is last mentioned when Jeremiah said it is to be forgotten and not missed.
And when you have multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, says the LORD, they shall no more say, The ark of the covenant of the LORD. It shall not come to mind, or be remembered, or missed; it shall not be made again. (Jer. 3:16)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by mike the wiz, posted 04-02-2005 8:49 PM mike the wiz has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 165 of 307 (205605)
05-06-2005 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by JimSDA
05-06-2005 10:50 AM


Re: The AofC was covered
The ark has/had awesome significance and importance and was treated with total fear and respect, and rightly so. No mistakes were allowed in the handling of it.
You need to provide evidence where the results of touching the ark are no longer the same and why John, the beloved disciple, did not see what he saw when he saw it in heaven. (Rev. 11:19)
Please use scripture for evidence, and give it a go!

Pascal's Wager......nice try.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by JimSDA, posted 05-06-2005 10:50 AM JimSDA has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 198 of 307 (206027)
05-08-2005 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 188 by Lysimachus
05-07-2005 6:07 PM


Re: Dr. Lennart Moller's pics of the petroglyphs....
[quote]satan has duped the world into thinking that Ron's discoveries are a fraud.

Pascal's Wager......nice try.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Lysimachus, posted 05-07-2005 6:07 PM Lysimachus has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 199 of 307 (206028)
05-08-2005 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 188 by Lysimachus
05-07-2005 6:07 PM


Re: Dr. Lennart Moller's pics of the petroglyphs....
quote:
satan has duped the world into thinking that Ron's discoveries are a fraud.
I'm not an atheist and the discoveries are a fraud.
Based on the qualities of the ark of the covenant and how deadly it was to handle it, and also based on Revelation 11:19.
To touch it meant death. To go near it when God's glory rested on it, was suicide. Enough evidence exists for that fact.
There's a lot of 'dupation' going on. No Christian with an understanding of the worth of this vessel, will believe that God left it lying around for the unconsecrated, unclean to find it.
Simple as that.

Pascal's Wager......nice try.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Lysimachus, posted 05-07-2005 6:07 PM Lysimachus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by Lysimachus, posted 05-08-2005 10:58 AM PecosGeorge has replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 207 of 307 (206387)
05-09-2005 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by Lysimachus
05-08-2005 10:58 AM


Re: Dr. Lennart Moller's pics of the petroglyphs....
quote:
You poor soul. I feel so sorry for you that you are deluded into thinking Ron's discoveries are a fraud. How little you know and how you will regret your opinion in the end. You will see that we were right in the end. Don't worry, I guarantee it.
This poor soul knows that God makes no mistakes and is not mocked, nor made a mockery of. So focus your pity on yourself, you won't get any from me.
How little I know is based on the many details scripture gives, and it gives the information that you do not have the ark of the covenant. The ark served a purpose while on earth, this purpose ended when Christ gave his life. The ark is in heaven according to Rev. 11:19. This is what the bible says and not based on my opinion.
Based on the 'little' I know, your guarantee isn't worth the time you took to mention it.
quote:
I know for a FACT that the Ark of the Covenant is down in that cave, and I know for a FACT that all 4 other discoveries are authentic. You never knew Ron Wyatt, nor do you know any of his family, that is why you come to your ugly conclusion. You obviously haven't read the evidence pointing to the important fact that the Ark of the Covenant STILL is within the walls of Jerusalem based on the sequence of events described in Maccabees and scripture. Ron Wyatt's theory of the location of the Ark is the most solid theory out there.
A solid theory is the same as two birds in a bush, even a MOST solid one. I say that John is correct in Rev. 11:19 and the ark was taken to heaven after it served its purpose here.
quote:
Ron Wyatt's theory of the location of the Ark is the most solid theory out there.
'Somewhere out there'? Sorry, but that's the best laugh I've had all morning.
I shall contemplate the sound reasoning behind the statement 'most solid theory'.
Done!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Lysimachus, posted 05-08-2005 10:58 AM Lysimachus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Lysimachus, posted 05-09-2005 11:46 AM PecosGeorge has replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 210 of 307 (206392)
05-09-2005 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by Brian
05-09-2005 6:02 AM


Re: Did he or didn't he?
quote:
Can anyone make sense of this?
I have read it about ten times and Ron seems to be contradicting himself.
Did he or did he not take the ‘tables’ of stone out of the Ark?
Q. I have heard that you took the tables of stone out of the Ark?
A. No. This is something that has amazed me. I can talk to a whole audience and I think we have a perfect understanding of what I have said, and then somebody will misquote me. I never said that. I said that the angel told me to take the tables of stone out of the Ark of the Covenant, and the four of them took hold of the corners of the Mercy Seat and lifted it so that I could get to the tables of stone. I took them out, backed away while they set the Mercy Seat back down on the Ark. I just stood there wondering what to do. The angel came and took the tables and put them on a stone shelf in the chamber. And that is where they are at this point in time, that is also where the video is.
Anyone any idea what Ron was on about?
Prolonged exposure to cave dust? Caveitis? A mockery of something of great meaning, a sad commentary on what some people are prepared to do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Brian, posted 05-09-2005 6:02 AM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by JimSDA, posted 05-09-2005 10:49 AM PecosGeorge has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 243 of 307 (206526)
05-09-2005 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by Lysimachus
05-09-2005 11:46 AM


Re: Dr. Lennart Moller's pics of the petroglyphs....
You don't have the ark.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by Lysimachus, posted 05-09-2005 11:46 AM Lysimachus has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 244 of 307 (206527)
05-09-2005 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by JimSDA
05-09-2005 12:56 PM


Re: Angels
quote:
Jar, sorry, it was Charles Knight who said he doubted angels in message #204, and I got the two of you mixed up -- thought it was you who said it --
(Isn't Charles one of your clones? . . . )
I know some angels who'd participate in a scam.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by JimSDA, posted 05-09-2005 12:56 PM JimSDA has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 245 of 307 (206528)
05-09-2005 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by JimSDA
05-09-2005 1:11 PM


Re: Jar is still lying about Ron Wyatt....
quote:
And here's yet ANOTHER guy on this forum -- ramoss -- who thinks there's absolutely "no" evidence to Ron's discoveries!
yes, there is! It's just bogus!
quote:
Amazing --
ramoss, why don't you show us all how "easy" it is to get something onto 20/20 or Dateline?
Go for it, my friend -- pick any of your pet projects, get in touch with the story editors of 20/20 and Dateline and SHOW US ALL HOW EASY IT IS TO GET YOUR STUFF ONTO NATIONAL TV
Queen Elizabeth' ingrown toenail would get on 20/20.
So there is your criteria for getting there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by JimSDA, posted 05-09-2005 1:11 PM JimSDA has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by CK, posted 05-09-2005 3:24 PM PecosGeorge has not replied
 Message 252 by JimSDA, posted 05-09-2005 4:46 PM PecosGeorge has replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 247 of 307 (206530)
05-09-2005 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by Lysimachus
05-09-2005 1:43 PM


you don't have the ark.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Lysimachus, posted 05-09-2005 1:43 PM Lysimachus has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 248 of 307 (206532)
05-09-2005 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by Lysimachus
05-09-2005 1:48 PM


Re: Is Wyatt a prophet to you guys?
quote:
Yaro
quote:You seem to take our critisim rather seriously. Do you think denying the verasity of Rons finds constitutes mortal sin?
I am in no way saying that anyone will go to hell fire or sin if they do not accept Ron's findings. Not in the least. But I do believe that any true Christian will not blatantly call them a "fraud" and call Ron a "liar". It will be a nuetral position, but I have not seen a nuetral position as of yet in this discussion board.
There is a big difference in saying "Ron was a big fraud and a liar" vs. "we'll just have to wait and see".
you mean neutral as in lukewarm. What is a true Christian?
Shall we hope it is someone who knows scripture and perhaps even God through knowing the scriptures and can, therefore, state with accuracy......you don't have the ark.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Lysimachus, posted 05-09-2005 1:48 PM Lysimachus has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 272 of 307 (206607)
05-09-2005 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by JimSDA
05-09-2005 4:46 PM


Re: PecosGeorge on 20/20???????....
quote:
PecosGeorge, the same goes for you -- let's hear what all you've managed to get onto national TV!
Show us how "easy" it is!
I'll give ya a holler when I have perfected a charlatanity!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by JimSDA, posted 05-09-2005 4:46 PM JimSDA has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by Yaro, posted 05-09-2005 8:39 PM PecosGeorge has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 289 of 307 (206819)
05-10-2005 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by Lysimachus
05-10-2005 2:11 PM


Re: Bernard Brandstater's letter....
quote:
Only those who are completely sanctified and cleansed from all sin can enter into the presence of the Ark of the Covenant. Ron Wyatt made it very clear that every time before he entered that chamber, he was not cherishing a single known sin in his life and confessed ALL to the Lord prior.
No, no, Ron Wyatt was a learning man himself. God was teaching him, and what God taught him was he did the wrong thing in bringing those men. Ron Wyatt was not perfect, and he made wrong decisions, but his life testified that he always did what he knew to be right. When he found out that he did something wrong, he always did all that he knew to correct it.
I suppose the utter contradiction in these two paragraphs escapes you?
This is stuff as I have never seen before and I have seen some stuff.
'Sanctified and cleansed from all sin'.....and 'Ron Wyatt was not perfect'.
Too bad god didn't tell him before he brought those men. So impossibly remiss and derelict in duty, didn't god know Ron would do such foolishness?
Made wrong decisions, did what he knew to be right???????
Small wonder non-believers are laughing their duchus off.
Built-in obsolescence and the ark go hand in hand. Its purpose was complete at calvary. It has no other function than what it did B.C.
(I need a drink. Ugh! I don't drink).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Lysimachus, posted 05-10-2005 2:11 PM Lysimachus has not replied

PecosGeorge
Member (Idle past 6872 days)
Posts: 863
From: Texas
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 305 of 307 (207177)
05-11-2005 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 304 by Lysimachus
05-11-2005 2:03 PM


Come let us reason together......means God and I understand what that means and that we can achieve reason together.
It means I am encouraged to question and question him...any and all his decisions, his ways, and upon due course, come to conclusions. One thing I have noticed during all and any discourse, he is an open book, and based on that book, your angle is foolishness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by Lysimachus, posted 05-11-2005 2:03 PM Lysimachus has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024