New evidence_________

[Gregory Matthews]

MT, to take the claims that you provided us at face value is much more than knowledgeable people do.

One major problem with Ron Wyatt is that he was operating outside of his basic knowledge.

I go back to my specific example: He judges a slide of blood to be alive due to his ignorance and inability to recognize Brownian Motion when he saw it.

There are major issues of fact with many of his claims.

[Gibs]

But Greg didn't Ron take the blood to a Jewish scientist and he did the evaluation and he is the one that told Ron, can't do anything with old dead blood but it is your money and so went about doing the test and was astonished at what he found.

I wouldn't be so quick to put Ron's findings down as false as he had a tremendous amount of people that worked to discredit all that he did.

Do always get any information only from and through the Wyatt Museum if you want the truth.

It is the one and only official site of the findings.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[nuff sed]

[quote name='

Yes folks' date=' As far as I know The Wyatt Museum people are still there excavating I believe you will find from their site.

[/quote']

It is interesting that the Wyatt people are trying to excavate the site in spite of their founder expressly forbidding further exploration. It is my understanding that the angel told Ron not to come back and that the passage would be open "when the time was right'. For further information you might check with Jerry Bowen at www.anchorstone.com. He took over Anchorstone after Bill Frye died. Nuff Sed

[M. T. Cross]

MT, to take the claims that you provided us at face value is much more than knowledgeable people do.

One major problem with Ron Wyatt is that he was operating outside of his basic knowledge.

I go back to my specific example: He judges a slide of blood to be alive due to his ignorance and inability to recognize Brownian Motion when he saw it.

There are major issues of fact with many of his claims.

Which claims did I provide? I ask just so I can respond correctly, not trying to bicker.

If you are referring to the quote - thats just the first post of this thread. I am not taking them at face value, I was just showing that even without digging any further into them they still prove nothing about the Red Sea story.

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

Which claims did I provide? I ask just so I can respond correctly, not trying to bicker.

If you are referring to the quote - thats just the first post of this thread. I am not taking them at face value, I was just showing that even without digging any further into them they still prove nothing about the Red Sea story.

I probably did not state my comment well.

No. I did not believe that you personally took the claims at face value.

Yes, I understood that you were simply making a point that if the claims were taken at face value, then there were still issues about them as to what they actually proved.

I was simply saying that they should not be taken at face value.

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

But Greg didn't Ron take the blood to a Jewish scientist and he did the evaluation and he is the one that told Ron, can't do anything with old dead blood but it is your money and so went about doing the test and was astonished at what he found.

I wouldn't be so quick to put Ron's findings down as false as he had a tremendous amount of people that worked to discredit all that he did.

1) Personally I do not believe everything that Wyatt has said.

2) Where/what is the evidence related to the Jewish scientist and what that person actually said?

3) What is the alleged competence of that scientist in the field in which that scientist is cited?

4) In many ways, Wyatt had successfully been discredited.

5) A fundamental problem with Wyatt is what he did with facts that he discovered. One can be correct as to a basic fact and still be wrong as to what is done with that fact.

6) A central issue for me is that as was once posted on the official Wyatt website, the alleged proof of life in that blood was Brownian Motion, which is NOT evidence of life.

7) Wyatt was simply wrong due to his ignorance of some very basic issues. All to often this is the problem.

[Gibs]

This is from the official Wyatt museum site, I copied and pasted this bit from it and one can learn more if you have the presentation video.

The Blood Tests

No one was any more surprised when Ron first publicly told about the results of the blood tests on the specimens he had taken from the broken top of the stone case, just above the Mercy Seat than I was. (All that he has stated about this can be seen in his talk on our "Presentation" video and will not be repeated here.)

The following link will take you to a read they have posted,

http://www.wyattmuseum.com/ark_of_the_covenant_special.htm

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[skyblue888]

You would think that this would have been

shown on CNN! :)

[Gibs]

I don't know Sky if his discoveries were very much on the news and probably the reason Ron was not a man with a lot o letters in front of His name.

This is the reason so many think he didn't know enough to find what he found. I have his disc and the earlier VHS tapes of the total of all the discoveries and it has been many years since I've watched it all, don't even at present know where they may be.

I may have passed the VHS tapes on, but I should have the disc or discs.

According to the story in Maccabees 2 chap.2: Jeremy kid it in a cave and even those who followed shortly after could not find them, but I believe that account is accurate and it was hidden here in this earth in a cave and for the reason they belong here and not needed to be taken into heaven as quite a few believe.

It may be I wonder that they are to be here with the redeemed in the earth made new but in a way I doubt it because, are we to have any remembrance of this terrible reign of sin.

I say to hang in there and not be hasty drawing any conclusions on conjecture as I'm very sure we do not have long to wait.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[nuff sed]

I am not a scientist nor an archaeologist but it is amazing what I learn when I study both. I think many analogies have been made concerning Ron Wyatt that if applied to some of the characters of the Bible would be laughable. Gideon was not a soldier but God used him because he was willing. I don't know anything about the Brownian principle but does it really have anything to do with the missing chromosomes? Oh, yeah I forgot. We must dismiss this because we don't know anything about the Credentials of the Israeli scientists who supposedly made the statements. We can't prove nor disprove many things in life which we accept. If Ron is right... I wonder who among us who have scoffed in derision will be held accountable for turning 'seekers' from the correct patch. Nuff Sed (writing from Hong Kong)

[phkrause]

Hows Hong Kong?

[ClubV12]

IF that "so called" blood was actually alive, CNN would have to stand in line to get the report. It would be absolutely earth shaking, explosive news and it would be all over the world in a heart beat.

No way you could hide something like that. Wait,,, no way it's real either! Chromosone count is a tiny fraction of this compared to the more outrageous and mind boggling claim,,,

"IT'S ALIIIVVEEEE". gimme a break. Satan is pretty good with his deceptions, but he can't create life. Like the fake snakes he did for Pharoah, they weren't alive.

[Gibs]

ClubV12, you need to realize R Wyatt was no dummy even though he had no acclaim in this world. Who would believe such a one such as he was the thinking of the popular media.

The blood sample opened the eyes of the technician Ron took it to and no you don't have to believe it, for me I'm standing aloof.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

That technician? HE would be on the cover of Newsweek and every magazine in the world. That guy would be famous for making the discovery of,,,, the world!

And yet, we don't even know his name! This is ridiculous, I can't believe people even suggest this is serious science.

[Kevin H]

According to the story in Maccabees 2 chap.2: Jeremy kid it in a cave and even those who followed shortly after could not find them, but I believe that account is accurate and it was hidden here in this earth in a cave and for the reason they belong here and not needed to be taken into heaven as quite a few believe.

There are several problems with the second Maccabees issue. First, while First Maccabees tends to be historically accurate, the author of Second Maccabees was not a careful scholar like the first one was and what you read in Second Maccabees tends to be taken with a pinch of salt by scholars.

Second, Jeremiah was of the priesthood of Moses, not the priesthood of Aaron. Jeremiah was to have been the high priest of the Northern Kingdom had it not fallen a century before. He was of the disgraced house of Eli and the High Priest who backed the wrong king and was exiled from the temple under penalty of death by Solomon. The Ark, after being taken by the Philistines and returned, became special to the Aaronite Priesthood, and lost meaning to the Moshite Priesthood. The Moshite Priesthood and the Aaronite Priest hood were two different denominations in Yahwehism. While the Ark was important to the Aaronites, it had no more interest to the Moshites than say the shroud of turan would have to the typical Seventh-day Adventist.

Jeremiah's background had the ark of no big interest to him. He was banned under the penalty of death from having anything to do with the temple, and could not have gotten near the Ark, nor would he have had much interest in the ark.

A number of my professors from AUC, Andrews and Hebrew University's Jerusalem Center for Biblical Studies, independent of each other, say that the evidence in the Biblical text indicates that the ark was destroyed by Manhasset and the gold given in tribute.

[Gibs]

We will see won't we. The men folks trust in this world in most cases the most are most generally the most untrustworthy.

Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Oh how true that verse is in these last years.

I don't trust in the men that would cut R Wyatt down anymore than I would him.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

don't know anything about the Brownian principle but does it really have anything to do with the missing chromosomes?

No!

Brownian Motion has nothing to do with chromosomes.

But, Brownian Motion is not evidence of life as Wyatt first claimed it to be. At that claim was false, why should I believe, or anyone else believe, his claim about that chromosomes?

I will further ask: Why should anyone believe a claim about chromosomes that has no documentation? All it has is his word. There is nothing else to support it.

Belief should be based upon evidence.

[Windsor]

Originally Posted By: Gibs

According to the story in Maccabees 2 chap.2: Jeremy kid it in a cave and even those who followed shortly after could not find them, but I believe that account is accurate and it was hidden here in this earth in a cave and for the reason they belong here and not needed to be taken into heaven as quite a few believe.

There are several problems with the second Maccabees issue. First, while First Maccabees tends to be historically accurate, the author of Second Maccabees was not a careful scholar like the first one was and what you read in Second Maccabees tends to be taken with a pinch of salt by scholars.

Second, Jeremiah was of the priesthood of Moses, not the priesthood of Aaron. Jeremiah was to have been the high priest of the Northern Kingdom had it not fallen a century before. He was of the disgraced house of Eli and the High Priest who backed the wrong king and was exiled from the temple under penalty of death by Solomon. The Ark, after being taken by the Philistines and returned, became special to the Aaronite Priesthood, and lost meaning to the Moshite Priesthood. The Moshite Priesthood and the Aaronite Priest hood were two different denominations in Yahwehism. While the Ark was important to the Aaronites, it had no more interest to the Moshites than say the shroud of turan would have to the typical Seventh-day Adventist.

Jeremiah's background had the ark of no big interest to him. He was banned under the penalty of death from having anything to do with the temple, and could not have gotten near the Ark, nor would he have had much interest in the ark.

A number of my professors from AUC, Andrews and Hebrew University's Jerusalem Center for Biblical Studies, independent of each other, say that the evidence in the Biblical text indicates that the ark was destroyed by Manhasset and the gold given in tribute.

Simply put, a number of your professors were wrong. Number one, I don't even know who Manhasset is. Did you mean perhaps mean King Manasseh? Anyone who opened the ark who was not a descendent of Aaron would have been killed in an instant, and I doubt any descendent of Aaron would agree to destroy such a sacred object. Secondly, could you please provide some documentation where it states the descendents of Moses had no interest in the ark despite the fact that it was made under the direction of Moses and was where the glory of God sat within the Most Holy Place?

Thirdly, for those who trust the Spirit of Prophecy is the following quote:

Among the righteous still in Jerusalem, to whom had been made plain the divine purpose, were some who determined to place beyond the reach of ruthless hands the sacred ark containing the tables of stone on which had been traced the precepts of the Decalogue. This they did. With mourning and sadness they secreted the ark in a cave, where it was to be hidden from the people of Israel and Judah because of their sins, and was to be no more restored to them. That sacred ark is yet hidden. It has never been disturbed since it was secreted.

Prophets and Kings Page 453

[ClubV12]

Windsor, the above quote still leaves room for Wyatts claim because the ark hoax takes place after she penned the above statement.

There is another quote, dealt with already in this thread somewhere, that says the tables of stone will be brought forth and displayed for all to see. What that really means is for ALL to see, every person who ever lived on earth, good and evil. When ALL are resurrected at the time of the judgment. That will take place a 1,000 years AFTER Christ returns. Gods sacred law is revealed and this is the standard used to judge and reward all men accordingly.

Some Wyatt believers misinterpret the quote as meaning the tables will be displayed to mankind sometime BEFORE Christs return. Some say Wyatt will be resurrected to help display them, on CNN and Fox, etc.

Once you start down the road of delusion there is no stopping the freight train of darkness.

[Gibs]

The ark was never opened and the story in 2 Maccabees rings true, many want to trash R Wyatt's findings for a reason.

Believe none of the stories from other sites but only of Ron Wyatt's own, the Wyatt Museum.

It isn't for any of us to condemn anyone, time only will tell the truth, I choose to wait.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Kevin H]

Simply put, a number of your professors were wrong. Number one, I don't even know who Manhasset is. Did you mean perhaps mean King Manasseh? Anyone who opened the ark who was not a descendent of Aaron would have been killed in an instant, and I doubt any descendent of Aaron would agree to destroy such a sacred object. Secondly, could you please provide some documentation where it states the descendents of Moses had no interest in the ark despite the fact that it was made under the direction of Moses and was where the glory of God sat within the Most Holy Place?

Thirdly, for those who trust the Spirit of Prophecy is the following quote:

Among the righteous still in Jerusalem, to whom had been made plain the divine purpose, were some who determined to place beyond the reach of ruthless hands the sacred ark containing the tables of stone on which had been traced the precepts of the Decalogue. This they did. With mourning and sadness they secreted the ark in a cave, where it was to be hidden from the people of Israel and Judah because of their sins, and was to be no more restored to them. That sacred ark is yet hidden. It has never been disturbed since it was secreted.

Prophets and Kings Page 453

typing late at night was a mispelling of Manasseh.

Under his reign the temple fell into disrepair, and in Kings and Chronicals we find that Manasseh did some horrible things to the temple that good king Josiah had to fix. The king is who paid the priests and at times the priests were not always that faithful, especially when wicked kings would limit their influence.

Linguists tell us that the phrasiology about the Ark in Jeremiah indicates the ark no longer existing when it was written. The Ellen White quote was not a part of her "white" writings, but was copied by her assistants in their reading, for a smooth reading from what she saw as important to her next poing of importance. She tells us that she does not want her writings to be viewed as an authority answer questions about history and exegesis. You are quoting her in a way she asks us not to use her.

As you study the Deuteronomic history, Chronicals and the different begats in the Bible, you will learn how the Moshite Priesthood became sepperated from the ark, how it became a part of the Aaronite priests, and how the family of Moses ended up under the death penality from having anything to do with the temple and ark. Your arguments are built more on what you expect the Bible to say based on tradition, and a more careful review does not always support what we are expecting.

[Aliensanctuary]

In my experience, the biggest talkers are the biggest liars, especially in politics and religion. Mr. Wyatt is not the only scammer in these parts. Mt. Sinai will never be located on Earth, because there are some important clues left to us in the KJV Bible.

Note:

Thunderous roaring and earth-shaking accompanied the descent of the LORD in the presence of Israel

Moses went "into" the "mountain"

Moses built an altar underneath the "mountain"

The people were warned not to touch the edge of the "mountain"

Although few, I suspect, if any, see this, this "mountain" that the LORD arrived on, with a great display of power, was one of the pyramid-like starship cities, elsewhere mentioned in the Bible. The effects of the propulsive force needed to power a craft so large would indeed create fear and trembling among those unfamiliar with space travel. Perhaps it would be like being up close during a space shuttle launch...the shaking, the deafening roar, the terror... The 70 elders and Moses were guests on one of the "porches", and they dined in amazement while the LORD observed them from the apex of the ship.

If we all had our very own Baloney Detectors, we would not so easily be taken in by the rubbish of religious adventurism.

[phkrause]

GP

Talking about evidence, check this out. Its not the video I recall seeing a few years ago, but its very interesting and has some of the same places that I recall. Anyway give a look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh2_63Ss1t4