Based on Stephan A. Schwartz, Why Couldn’t Jesus See the Future. OBJECT to Scholars Saying: Dismiss Jesus Was Unable to Remote Heal and See the Future
Who is Stephan A. Schwartz?
Scientist, futurist, and award winning author Stephan A. Schwartz is the columnist for the journal Explore, and editor of the daily Schwartzreport.net.
Current academic and research appointments:
Distinguished Consulting Faculty of Saybrook University
a Fellow of the William James Center for Consciousness Studies, Sofia University, and
a Research Associate of the Cognitive Sciences Laboratory of the Laboratories for Fundamental Research.
Prior academic appointments:
Senior Samueli Fellow for Brain, Mind and Healing of the Samueli Institute; BIAL Fellow;
founder and Research Director of the Mobius laboratory;
Executive Director of the Rhine Research Center; and
Senior Fellow of The Philosophical Research Society.
Government appointments:
Special Assistant for Research and Analysis to the Chief of Naval Operations,
consultant to the Oceanographer of the Navy.
Author of more than 130 technical reports and papers, 20 academic book chapters and four trade books:
– The Secret Vaults of Time
– The Alexandria Project, Mind Rover
– Opening to the Infinite, and
– The 8 Laws of Change
Winner of the 2016 Nautilus Book Award for Social Change, as well as a novel Awakening – A Novel of Aliens and Consciousness.
He is the recipient of the 2017 Parapsychological Association Award for Outstanding Contributions, and
was selected by OOOM Magazine (Germany) as one of the 100 most Inspiring People in the World.
He is listed in: Who’s Who in the World, Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in the West, Who’s Who in Science and Medicine.
Steefen
The historical Woe-Saying Jesus did not reference our current day biblical Jesus. He did not say, Jesus of Galilee of the late 20s/early 30s or the Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius said this, that, or the other thing.
James, the Brother of Jesus, did not say, Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius said this, that, or the other thing.
Jesus of Galilee who went to war against Vespasian and Titus did not say, Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius said this, that, or the other thing.
King Agrippa II did not say, Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius made an impression on my father, King Agrippa, because he said or did this, that, or the other thing. My father never told me he knew the pharisees and priests tore their garments when Jesus predicted the future.
I am NOT wrong.
And the Temple Establishment–did anyone remember how the Biblical Jesus scared them into such sadness that they cried and ripped their clothes? Did High Priest Ananus and High Priest Jesus of Gamala remember Jesus when the Romans were at their Temple’s doorsteps or better yet when the rebels used the Temple as their base of operations?
No.
The historical Woe-Saying Jesus did not reference our current day biblical Jesus. He did not say, Jesus of Galilee during the time of Emperor Tiberius said this, that, or the other thing.
James, the Brother of Jesus, did not say, Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius said this, that, or the other thing.
Jesus of Galilee who went to war against Vespasian and Titus did not say, Jesus of Galilee (time of Emperor Tiberius) said this or that.
King Agrippa II did not say, Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius made an impression on my father, King Agrippa, because he said or did this, that, or the other thing. My father never told me he knew the pharisees and priests tore their garments when Jesus predicted the future.
And the Temple Establishment–did anyone remember how the Biblical Jesus scared them into such sadness that they cried and ripped their clothes? Did High Priest Ananus and High Priest Jesus of Gamala remember Jesus when the Romans were at their Temple’s doorsteps or better yet when the rebels used the Temple as their base of operations?
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Bear in mind that Schwartz breaks a cardinal rule of remote viewing, as explained by men like Ingo Swann, Lyn Buchanan, Paul Smith and others in the government’s Stargate Remote viewing program.
That rule? The remote viewer is NEVER to be told the nature of the target. NEVER! Instead, protocols were set up primarily by Ingo Swann where the target was never identified to the remote viewer. Instead, the remote viewer was given a code, this being perhaps a sequence of numbers and alphabetical characters that represent the target.
This is the only way the remote viewer’s observations can be validated as coming from either an innate psychic ability of some sort.
Schwartz ignores this totally and tells each remote viewer the target upfront. This immediately subjectively invalidates all the results, since if any person is told to visualize the future, all sorts of religious and scientific and media influences will come into the results. Schwartz simply does not seem to care less about this invalidation of all his results. In a recent interview, he said he was going to just start bringing in lay people with no training in remote viewing at all. He would simply tell them to visualize a future year such as 2050, and provide results. Does the average person think that 2050 will be an apocalypse of global warming impacts, a technological dystopian state where AI runs everything, or a wonderful JETSONS world of flying cars? Perhaps as a sociological evaluation of the mood of the American public, this might be valid, but it says NOTHING about the actual future. Instead, it simply tells us where the public is getting its information regarding future trends. From End Times religion? From science? From conspiracy theories? From science fiction?
I find Schwartz infuriating for ignoring the cardinal rule of remote viewing and for refusing to even respond to such issues. But what is worse is the media giving him carte blanche.
“Jesus was a composite character of historical fiction”
Evidence?
Noooooooo…
David, FYI, Steefen is our resident proponent of the Flavian Jesus hypothesis, that the Flavian Caesars, Vespasian and Titus, invented Christianity. Evidence is revealed in a proper understanding of both the gospels and the writings of Josephus. I provide this information to give you some background and to show Steefen that I’ve been paying attention.
DavidFord
What evidence is there that Jesus was a composite character of historical fiction?
Steve Campbell, author of Historical Accuracy
I spent more than 17 years researching and publishing manuscripts not only about Jesus but about
– Moses and the Exodus
– How can God deliver the Hebrews from Egypt when where the Promise Land was was under the influence or dominance of Ancient Egypt
– Dating of Walls of Jericho using Biblical Archaeology Review
– King Saul vs Labaya and the Amarna Scrolls
– Similarities between Julius Caesar’s funeral and the Easter Fire Ceremony
– Augustus Caesar as Son of the Divine and Jesus as Son of God
– Jesus E-man-u-El and the Manu Kings / Monobazus and Helena Queen of Edessa (line of Manu royalty)
– Jesus in the milieu of Antiquities and Wars of the Jews by Josephus (no oral tradition made it to the Jesus of Galilee who battled Vespasian and Titus at the Battle of Galilee; and as Jesus was somewhat non-violent neither Agrippa II, nor High Priest Jesus of Gamala, nor Josephus referenced the man more popular than John the Baptist and James the Just when they spoke against rebelling against Rome)
– Gospel of Mark and the Homeric Epics
– Jesus and The Bacchae
– Jesus as an atoning sacrifice harkens back to to the Father and Son named Decius Mus, both sacrificed their lives so others may live (based on the Decius Mundus passage in Antiquities by Josephus)
– Paul exploited the pious (as suggested by Josephus)
and more
But my position isn’t just the above. It includes:
Jesus was a false prophet because he asked to be remembered by metaphorical cannibalism and in the Gospel of John is quite insistent about the literal food of his body and blood
Cannibalism is a sign of siege and defeat
Jesus was no where near the King of the Jews that Herod the Great was. Jesus lacked the military/diplomatic resume to be a messiah within the Roman Empire (as compared to Herod the Great).
2nd, Jewish Apocalypticism, whether Zechariah, John the Baptist, Jesus, and Paul, did not live up to its claims, hence it is a failed belief; and, as such, its proponents were all false prophets.
What STEPHEN? No, that is a mischaracterization of my work. See the breadth of my studies and writing as I just explained.
Noooooooooo evidence? Yessssssss evidence and argumentation in Historical Accuracy by Steven Campbell.
“Jesus was a false prophet because he asked to be remembered by metaphorical cannibalism”
What’s meant by “false prophet”? (someone who makes bogus prophecies?)
What is “metaphorical cannibalism”?
“in the Gospel of John is quite insistent about the literal food of his body and blood”
Did Jesus want ‘literal cannibalism’– not “metaphorical cannibalism”?
“Cannibalism is a sign of siege and defeat”
When Pacific Islands cannibals engage in cannibalism, is that “a sign of siege and defeat”?
“Jesus lacked the military/diplomatic resume to be a messiah within the Roman Empire”
What resume was needed to be the Old Testament-promised Messiah?
“Jewish Apocalypticism, whether Zechariah, John the Baptist, Jesus, and Paul, did not live up to its claims, hence it is a failed belief”
What are 2 “failed belief[s]” of:
Jesus?
Paul?
John the Baptizer?
Zechariah?
Daniel, if any?
Hi Bart,
Did Emperor Hadrian (reign: 117-138) or Emperor Antinoninus Pius (reign: 138 – 161) know of Marcion’s Evangelikon and Apostolikon?
I am asking because it is possible Josephus, Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian knew of the gospels and the Book of Revelation. The gospels were created during the Flavian Empire and it is possible that Emperor Hadrian and Emperor Pius knew of Marcion’s collection.
Do you think Josephus and Domitian knew of the Book of Revelation?
Steefen
“brenmcg?”
I don’t know what that means.
“and added a little bit of material”
“You mean deleted a lot of material, don’t you?”
A little bit of material is unique to Mark, and was incorporated into Mark by Mark.
When meandering through Matthew and Luke, Mark selected material from Matthew and Luke to incorporate into Mark’s account.
I wouldn’t say Mark “deleted” material.
If I write a paper and quote a lot from 10 different books and articles, I selected material from those 10 items to incorporate into my paper.
I wouldn’t say I “deleted” material from those 10 items.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert