Nassim Haremin - Tetragrammaton, Arch of the Covennant

Not sure if anyone has already posted this. Apologize if so. I didn't see anything. I found this video on Youtube the other day and have been infatuated every since. The explanation of the Arch of the Covenant was very interesting. I have to admit I am an Atheist, but I also believe there could be some truth in this. But these stories seem more plausible. Especially with some of the miss interpretations cleared up.

He makes a claim that the dimensions of the Arch fit the dimensions of one of the chambers of a great pyramid. Not sure which one. But this makes me think of the Arch as some sort of device and not just a religious relic. Especially since the Copper scrolls describe exactly how to build it. I just wanted to share and see what your opinions are. It is an 1:08 long. I think its worth the watch.

Sacred geometry, in story form.

I thought it was all externally interesting. And as an atheist, I find this to be a plausible explanation for it all.

Neognosticism is in an upswing because we have a generation of know it alls. Very attractive to those who think they know better.

One of the oldest recognized heresies. 

Wow God is a heretic by that logic. I await for the special pleading fallacy, ad-hominem/name-calling or no comment. 

Nonsense

Okay. Everyone that doesn;t agree with you is just a know it all. Because your truth is apodictic.

On the money

Thanks it is not difficult to outsmart Mopac. Just have him talk about what he believes and he traps himself. All I do is point it out. If you know what to look for it is easy.  

That is the type of response I would expect from an immature and insecure person, not a wise guy.

The fool always thinks they are outsmarting everyone.

I can be what ever you want to call me, it wont change your behavior in past debates. Multiple people have called you out for ad-hominem without my involvement. Maybe you should listen to what people are telling you. Your only comment on the OP was basically an insult so, if thays all you had fell free to ignore this thread. 

What is it that I am being told that you say I should listen to, eh?

Gnosticism is "knowingism".

What you posted in the OP is the kind of stuff the so called gnostics use to convince people.

Neognosticism is actually a very prevalent heresy today. It's probably what a youtube education will end up dragging you in to.

Gnostics are also not very consistent with eachother. They tend to believe in different things, as we all know differently.

So what you called an ad-hom in my original response was maybe not as much of one as you think.

Unless you are making something false a matter of identity.

Not about to get into all this. Your ability to ration is just not developed enough to have a logical debate.

How pretentious.