Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Jesus, and why I need an Astrophysicist a/o an Archaeo-Astronomer regarding Him.  (Read 19324 times)

Offline Dan DAlimonte

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Advertisement
Biblical support for my theory plus support from my old buddy, Nostradamus

If you look at the life of Christ in the New Testament you will find that the word sign and Jesus is first
mentioned together when Mother Mary and Joseph presented the newly born Jesus in the Temple.
In other words, every male after 8 days old had to be brought to the Temple for the presentation before God.
After Mother Mary cleansed herself with a bath - all ladies who gave birth were considered unclean until they
took that ritual bath.  After the Holy Family entered the Temple, they were met by two people, one was, Anna, a prophetess
and the other was an elderly gentleman named, Simeon, who spent a great deal of time there because he was hoping to see the
Chosen One before he died.  Well, as soon as he and Anna saw Jesus both rejoiced.  This was the guy.  After that, Simeon,
made several prophecies one of which was  ... and for a sign that shall be contradicted.  Now, before I continue I have
to tell you a story. 

About twenty years ago, I tried again to get my theory investigated by an Academic with a Phd so I took a
correspondence course, entitled, Science From A Christian Perspective.  The guy running the course had a Doctorate.
I completed about three classes and then asked him politely if he would comment on a theory of mine, in the hopes he
would help me investigate it.  He said, Yes, so I mailed him a letter which presented all my academic reasons why my theory
should be investigated with a lead in being the statement by Simeon.  No more than five days later I got the letter back.
In it he stated that I spelled Isreal wrong ... Well, I saw it spelled both ways.  As stated and, Israel.  But, what really bothered him
was that I misquoted, Simeon.  It does NOT say - contradicted - it states - spoken against or opposed. So, he sent the letter
back to me saying it was basically unread.  What the .... heck was he talking about?  I went to my Bible and it said - contradicted. 
I went to a New Testament book and it said - contradicted.   I then went to the computer and it was stated the way he put it.
Spoken against or opposed.  Now, what?

You see I came to find that most Christians dislike that word because they are convinced that the Sign was the Resurrection 
and contradicted differs greatly from spoken against or opposed.   Contradicted could mean ... Well, put it this way, using
an event that took place a while back.  If I stated Al Gore should have been President in 2000 but it was contradicted. 
You do know what it means. Now, I'll be getting back to this in a minute.  Let's look again as far as Jesus is concerned.

If you look in the New Testament there is an event when Jesus first met John the Baptist to be baptized
and, as the process was about to begin or had begun, a dove alighted over the head of Jesus and please
note the word to - signify - who He was.  God spoke after that acknowledging who Jesus was.  Okay. Let's move on.

I began this whole post with the quote re The Sign of Jonah.  How Jesus stated an evil and adulterous generation asks
for a sign but no sign shall be given - but one, just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days
and three nights, so too will the Son of Man be in the belly of the earth for three days and three nights. Uh huh,
but did you ever read what was written in Mark regarding a sign.  He sighed deeply and said, Why does this generation
ask for a sign?  Truly, I say to you no sign shall be given to it .  What's He doing?  On the one hand He says  - one sign
shall be given and He also said - no sign - will be given to that generation.  Gees, if I didn't know any better, it sounds like
Jesus contradicted Himself.  Do you think He was telling us the sign would be contradicted?  The Sign of Jonah will be contradicted?
So, let's recap and please remember what I thought was the Sign of Jonah and how the earth was affected.  It stood still but kept
rotating on its axis for three days and three nights

Simeon speaks of a sign that shall be - contradicted.
A dove appears over the head of Jesus to signify - a derivative of the word, sign - who He was.
Jesus contradicts Himself when He said no sign shall be given that generation and then - one sign - will be given that generation.
He is saying, The Sign of Jonah, was contradicted.
Anything else?  Well, there is my old buddy, Nostradamus
Below, you will be reading a quatrain which was NOT in the Centuries but it was either one of his lost quatrains or it,
appeared in a letter to someone.   Either way,, given the style, I do believe it to be authentic.

The three brothers have died
And the evil one controls all
Then is a sign, a dove amidst heaven's stars
And the time for the Son is high.

You know, I'm in need if an Astrophysicist or an Aechaeo- Astronomer to investigate,
my theory re the Sign of Jonah, and he says, Then is a sign amidst heaven's stars.  Like a double play
on the word - then.  It happened - then - like way back when, and - then - it is revealed, amidst heaven's stars.
And he does seem to be talking about Jesus in the last line - And the time for the Son is high.
Wow ... the only thing I have to do is why he put the word - dove?  Really? 
If you translate the name, Jonah, from the Hebrew into English it does mean - DOVE 

What do you think?  Should someone investigate my theory.  I think they should.

Oh, yeah, (God, I loved, Columbo) just one more thing.  You will note I stated, that the words - sign and Jesus
first appeared when Jesus as a babe, was brought to the Temple and Simeon saw Him and made his statement.
That was in regards to the, Sign of Jonah, that ... shall - or - will be.  Technically the first time the words,
sign and Jesus, appear was during the Nativity scene as described by, Luke.  This will be a sign to you.
That sign had been - before Jesus was brought to the Temple.  In other words, Simeon, did use the words properly,
in the future tense in regards, to the ,Sign of Jonah.  Just thought I'd mention it.  And, oh yes, one more thing.

Jesus did contradict Himself re the Sign of Jonah and at the same time was telling the truth.
The sign did take place during the time of that generation but it didn't come to light.  If, I'm right
it will be revealed to the most evil and adulteress generation of all time which is ... Now?   
« Last Edit: June 21, 2019, 01:03:15 PM by Dan DAlimonte »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Denis Pointing

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
Dan, you're a good guy and you've worked so hard on this theory which you obviously believe in really strongly. I honestly take no pleasure in saying that, IMHO, most reading your theory would instantly dismiss it. You've fallen into the old cliche of putting the cart before the horse, of approaching the subject from completely the wrong angle. If you'd been reading/studying the bible and came across a passage which interested you or seemed to warrant more study and closer examination, then discovered more passages that appeared connected, then you may well have had the beginnings of a working theory. What you've done, is suddenly had what I call 'a light bulb moment', at least partly inspired by the coincidence of a Universal motion picture logo appearing on the TV at the same time! Developed a theory from it and then went searching, in the most ambiguous book ever written, to try and find references to back your theory up. The problem in using this backward 'method' is that as Baigent, Lincoln and Leigh convincingly proved, using the ambiguous bible as your source you can back up just about any 'theory' you want with this approach. Baigent, Lincoln and Leigh aren't the only ones guilty of this. Many other 'authors' have taken exactly the same liberties with the Bible, as a point of interest, most of them somehow also managed to work Stonehenge into the argument as well.
Dan, please don't think I'm comparing you with these cranks and conmen..I know you're not guilty of being either, but I do wonder/worry if you're not conning yourself. I'm sorry, I really didn't want to write this, I almost didn't. I sincerely hope I'm wrong and I'll see your theory proven in print one day. Good luck, mate. If you believe in it, stay with it.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2019, 12:23:58 PM by Denis Pointing »

Offline Dan DAlimonte

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Dan, you're a good guy and you've worked so hard on this theory which you obviously believe in really strongly. I honestly take no pleasure in saying that, IMHO, most reading your theory would instantly dismiss it. You've fallen into the old cliche of putting the cart before the horse, of approaching the subject from completely the wrong angle. If you'd been reading/studying the bible and came across a passage which interested you or seemed to warrant more study and closer examination, then discovered more passages that appeared connected, then you may well have had the beginnings of a working theory. What you've done, is suddenly had what I call 'a light bulb moment', at least partly inspired by the coincidence of a Universal motion picture logo appearing on the TV at the same time! Developed a theory from it and then went searching, in the most ambiguous book ever written, to try and find references to back your theory up. The problem in using this backward 'method' is that as Baigent, Lincoln and Leigh convincingly proved, using the ambiguous bible as your source you can back up just about any 'theory' you want with this approach. Baigent, Lincoln and Leigh aren't the only ones guilty of this. Many other 'authors' have taken exactly the same liberties with the Bible, as a point of interest, most of them somehow also managed to work Stonehenge into the argument as well.
Dan, please don't think I'm comparing you with these cranks and conmen..I know you're not guilty of being either, but I do wonder/worry if you're not conning yourself. I'm sorry, I really didn't want to write this, I almost didn't. I sincerely hope I'm wrong and I'll see your theory proven in print one day. Good luck, mate. If you believe in it, stay with it.

Hey, Denis, I really do appreciate your opinion because it's honest.  For nearly 50 years - on and off - I've been trying to get
my theory checked out and no matter what I used to support me, it was discounted esp, like you said using the Bible. 
One time, a rep from the U.S Naval Observatory actually responded - which was rare - and he told me the events I'm putting forth
would go against the laws of Physics.  I responded back . Well, I'm stating it was a miracle so certainly it would go against the
laws of Physics.  He then responded back, even if what I said did take place during the reign of Pontius Pilate, there would be
no firm connection it could be tied to Jesus anyway, because planets on their own have been known to move faster at times or
slower.  I countered back but not for a duration as I was proposing.  Anyway, he was always polite like you were and he did
respond.  I'll never forget that.  I even tried Religious groups hoping one of their members had a scientific background. 
When they responded. they kept telling me how, JeSUS, died for my sins and how the blood of, JeSUS, washed my sins away
and if I wanted to join their club so that the knowledge of, JeSUS, could be spread throughout the world.  If I mentioned
Astrological support (like I will be doing) both sides would cringe.  If I mentioned support from Nostradamus, like I did -  Oh, God -
both sides would not only cringe, but they would tell their kids to keep the pets indoors in case I wanted to sacrifice a cat to some
Armenian, Moon Goddess or, whatever.

Anyway, I'm going to keep on plugging and I do know I have to be lucky at least 3 times.  Lucky to find an individual with the
expertise needed to consider my theory.  Lucky enough, for him to do an investigation and lucky enough to be right.  I'm rolling
the dice.  Hope everything is going well with you.
   
« Last Edit: June 20, 2019, 11:37:41 PM by Dan DAlimonte »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Denis Pointing

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
Anyway, I'm going to keep on plugging and I do know I have to be lucky at least 3 times.  Lucky to find an individual with the
expertise needed to consider my theory.  Lucky for him to do an investigation and lucky enough to be right.  I'm rolling the dice.
Hope everything is going well with you.

Good for you Dan. I wish you all the luck in the world. Thank's for not taking offence at my critique. We spoke about Velokovsky, his supporters have their own web site, I'll post a link when I find it. I'm just wondering if one of the academics from there might be more responsive. Just an idea.

Here you go pal;  http://www.velikovsky.de/en/velikovsky.html

PS There are actually quite a few Velokovsky sites out there, I didn't realise. Here's a GOOGLE page link;  https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=contact+velikovsky%27s+website&spell=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj49o6ozPPiAhUUlFwKHRm8BE4QBQgtKAA&biw=1536&bih=750
« Last Edit: June 18, 2019, 06:58:56 PM by Denis Pointing »

Offline Dan DAlimonte

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Thx, Denis.  I appreciate that.

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Dan DAlimonte

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
More Biblical Support

Let's look back   

A sign that shall be contradicted - as stated by, Simeon
A contradictory statement from, Jesus, re the Sign of Jonah,  No sign.  One sign.
No sign from, the Son of God.  One sign, from the Son of God.
That sign involved three days and three nights.
And, in case you didn't know, when Jesus was crucified there was a placard over His head
which - mockingly - stated. words to the effect, Jesus, King of the Jews.
Three days later according to the Christian faith, He was Resurrected.
Now, I'm saying the earth was affected as stated during the time Jesus was in the tomb.
Now, look at the following.

There's a story in the Old Testament, about, Hezekiah, the King of the Jews who was dying.
He called for the Prophet, Isaiah, to find out through him, if God could extend his life by 15 years.
Isiah came, looked at, Hezekiah, and told him to get his house in order, no extension will be given to him.
Naturally this depressed the King and he turned his face to the wall.
Isaiah then left the palace and as he was in the courtyard, God told him to go back and tell, Hezekiah
the extension will be given.  Well, you can imagine Hezekiah's reaction.  What is this?  No extension and now an extension?
The King, who now wanted to be absolutely sure which event would occur asked, Isaiah, the following question -  What
shall be the sign that I will be healed and that I shall go to the Temple of the Lord on the third day?
To this, Isaiah, gave, Hezekiah, a choice.  Either see the shadow on the sundial in the courtyard go forward 10 degrees
or go back the same amount?  Old king, Hezzie baby, thought about it and considering it would be harder for God to do
the latter so, he asked for that.  And?  Well, it was stated that it happened.  All of it.  He was healed  He went to the Temple
and he did live an extra 15 years.  Now, look back.

King of the Jews.
No extension.  Then, an extension.
No extension from, God.  Then, an extension from, God.
A sign.
Three days.
A restoration after three days and ...

Well, could the earth have been affected and if wasn't in reality
could it be projecting that someday it would be happening?
Regarding another, KING?   

Btw ... I have my hands full trying to have one theory investigated
let alone another.   

« Last Edit: June 27, 2019, 06:47:52 PM by Dan DAlimonte »

Offline Dan DAlimonte

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Even more support from the Bible and my old buddy, Nostradamus. 

The way I see it there were only three times when the whole earth could have been affected by God,
in the Old Testament.  If I'm wrong, correct me. Now, going in chronological order these are.

1.  The three days of darkness which befell Egypt during the time of Moses.
You can research that, if you want.

2.  The long day of Joshua and I'll addressing that in a minute or two and ...

3.  The King Hezekiah story which I already mentioned. 

Now, again whether these events took place in reality or they were symbolically projecting an event which
would be really taking place re Jesus is a moot point to me.  Like I said, I have my hands full trying
to get one theory investigated let alone, if those above could have taken place.  Now consider the following
from, Nostradamus.  First two lines of Quatrain 31, Century 4.

The moon in the middle of the night over the high mountain.
The young wise man alone with his brain has seen it.


Well, since other people put in there two cents as to what those lines could mean, here's mine.

It was the moon, alright.  But it wasn't in the middle of the night, it was the middle of the day.
And, it wasn't over the high mountain, it took place over a valley  The valley of Ajalon, to be exact.
Check out the following.

On the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites to the Isrealites.  Joshua prayed
to the Lord and said in the presence of, Isreal.  Stand still, Oh sun in Gibeon  Oh moon in the valley
of Ajalon.  And the sun stood still and the moon stayed.  Is this not recorded in the, Book of Jashar?
The sun halted in the middle of the sky.  Not for a whole day did it resume its swift course.

So, first of all, why would Nostradamus focus on, Joshua and what does he have to do with. Jesus?
Well, when Jesus walked on this planet He was known as, Yeshuah.. That translate into, Joshua, and
over time, that became, Jesus.  Okay.  So why would Nostradamus put the line in a way, that is - contrary - to how it
appears in the Bible?  I don't know, maybe he was telling us that something in regards to Jesus (this Joshua) was contradicted?
Some celestial event which involved the earth and it didn't come to light?  Of course, if that happened he must have known that
the only person who would figure this out with his brain, would notice that.  And, also notice it had to be put right.  But, Dan,
when I checked out that quatrain it says the - new sage - not - a young wise man.  Yeah, I know.  Believe it or not,
Nostradamus, has been known to alter his own quatrains every now and then.  Then and now?  It could still fit. 
So, to recap.

1.  We have three days of darkness which could match the three days Christ would be spending in the tomb and the earth
could have been affected.

2.  We have a celestial event re Joshua whereby the sun and moon stood still which may be foretelling a real event
as it concerns a future, Joshua, which may have affected the earth and ...

3  We have the, King Hezekiah, story which, in several ways matches up with Jesus and what I believe was the, Sign of Jonah,
and how the earth could have been affected accordingly.   
 
Is there an Astrophysicist or Archaeo- Astronomer in the house who could do an investigation?  Do you know any?   
One with an open mind?  A definitive answer before I die would be greatly appreciated.

Btw ... getting back to Jesus when He was speaking about the, Sign of Jonah.  Afterwards,
He said the following and please note the slight variations.  ... and now, Something Greater than Jonah is here.
... and now, Someone Greater than Jonah is here ... and now, One Greater than Jonah is here.  No problem, as far as I'm concerned.
But you can add to it. as well,   ... and now, Someone Greater than, King Hezekiah, is here ... and now, Someone Greater,
than, Joshua, is here.  If Jesus surpasses all three, then the event itself should surpass all three together ... Well, I think it did. 
« Last Edit: June 20, 2019, 11:58:22 PM by Dan DAlimonte »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Dan DAlimonte

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
And?  Wouldn't you know it?  Back to the Gregorian Calendar again.

Believe me, I don't want to rehash this again but because it will support me, I have to mention it.
Pope Gregory dropped 10 days from the calendar to coincide with the Council of Nicea's documentation
of the spring equinox taking place on, March, 21st, in 325 AD.  His aim was to have a continuous spring equinox 
always appearing somewhere between, March 21st to the 22nd.   Yes - most sites I visited did state the Council''s
finding re the first day of spring was on the 21st in the year, mentioned above.  However, some sites maintain the first
day of spring was actually, on the 20th of March when registered by the Council.  Not, the 21st. They also state it was
Pope Gregory's desire to keep that spring equinox to always appear between the, 20th and 21st of March. 
Not between, the 21st and 22nd.  So, what's the big deal?  He still dropped the 10 days to readjust the calendar,
did he not?  What would change?

Nothing. Nothing at all, except, for one thing.  Do you remember the lag times, if you will, and how there
were three different equations as to how many days the real calendar would lose in a given point of time? 
It was, 1 every 130 years.  1 every 129 years and, 1 every 128 years.  Okay, I calculated it backwards to a March, 23rd
day of spring which accordingly and chronologically, for that matter, would have been, either, in the year, 22 AD  or, 34 AD or,
46 AD.  So?  Well, it wouldn't have been a, March 23rd first day of spring, it would have been a, March 22nd, first day of spring.   
And?  Here we go again

If Augustus adjusted the calendar to the way Sosigenes intended by, 3 - 5 AD, with a March 25th first day of spring,
how could it drift so quickly to the 22nd, in such a short period of time?  Btw ... that is three complete days, is it not?     
« Last Edit: June 21, 2019, 07:52:54 PM by Dan DAlimonte »