Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How many years after the tribulation does Jesus return?
YHWH, but since men determined what books go in the Bible, how can you be sure the message hasn't been lost or distorted? Not even Jesus wrote any of the Gospels or writings in general.
Think it suggest that there soon be space elevators, and people can live up there and give birth. Also there might come clones up there, so it will humans but not born on Earth.The basic idea is that the return of Jesus will likely to be viewed as an alien invasion and perhaps this is (at least partly) how the AC will convince (or trick or cajole?) the armies of the earth to gather against God to fight him.
MEDIA=youtube]AD-92L25FkM[/MEDIA]
And no, Jesus will not be an alien that comes, it's described that he will appear with 2 yellow garments on the Mount of Olives, and I've been there with 2 yellow garments, even walked around Jerusalem, but no one cared.
Depends on your perspective. Christians are described as "strangers" and "pilgrims" on the Earth. This usage suggests that we should be strangers in the context of the worldy system; the way "the world" behaves should be alien, strange, and different to how we Christians behave.
On the other hand, Jesus created this world. It belongs to him. He's "gone away" (or perhaps stepped back) for a time, but he will return. In that context, his return will not be that of an alien coming to Earth. But, from the perspective of those who are not expecting his return, his return will appear as though he is an invading alien.
This is a distinction I've been striving to clarify since my first post. If you simply disagree, that's another matter, but it would be nice to get confirmation from someone that they understand the subtleties of the distinction I'm making.
I totally get your POV, got it from the start. I just don't agree with it.
The 'alien invasion' is by design sold as 'the return of Christ'. What you are describing is how people are supposed to understand it. It is a set-up using propaganda to 'program' a certain preordained response in the masses.
Whisked away rapture movies, 2012/ end of the world ideas, alien invasion movies, vampire movies, zombies etc: all of these are of the same Satanic cloth. This is the mechanism by which the evil beast system has carte blanche to send innocent people to the death camps.
If you don't take the mark of the beast, you will be said to be infected with a 'mind controlling parasite' that will turn you into a: vampire/ zombie/ alien monster/ Nephilim demon. Ever see a 'vampire' beheaded on a tv show? (to ostensibly 'kill the parasite/ keep it from coming back from the dead) That beheading is programming people for the day when Christians refuse the mark of the beast and have to be beheaded 'because they have been infected'.
Jesus did not create this world, his father God did! That's a very clear distinction when:On the other hand, Jesus created this world. It belongs to him. He's "gone away" (or perhaps stepped back) for a time, but he will return. In that context, his return will not be that of an alien coming to Earth. But, from the perspective of those who are not expecting his return, his return will appear as though he is an invading alien.
This is a distinction I've been striving to clarify since my first post. If you simply disagree, that's another matter, but it would be nice to get confirmation from someone that they understand the subtleties of the distinction I'm making.
Jesus did not create this world, his father God did!
On the other hand, Jesus created this world. It belongs to him. He's "gone away" (or perhaps stepped back) for a time, but he will return. In that context, his return will not be that of an alien coming to Earth. But, from the perspective of those who are not expecting his return, his return will appear as though he is an invading alien.
This is a distinction I've been striving to clarify since my first post. If you simply disagree, that's another matter, but it would be nice to get confirmation from someone that they understand the subtleties of the distinction I'm making.
No, I am right you have quoted some feeble translated bible.You are wrong.
Col. 1:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
http://biblehub.com/colossians/1-18.htm said:
No, I am right you have quoted some feeble translated bible.
3) your silly video proves nothing.
I'll bet you any money man, nobody is going to think that they're fighting aliens. They'll only WISH that they were fighting aliens. Because then they might have a chance to win.
Why is it that everyone takes the Mark of the Beast literally but almost nothing else about Revelation like the beast with seven heads and ten horns? You'd think that it wouldn't be proper interpretation to pick and choose.
As an aside to the topic (but still kinda relevant in a general way) picking and choosing is wise. It's akin to discernment. We do this in normal conversation all the time, where we decide what is important, what is not, what is a joke, what is not, what is literal and what is not etc...
Imagine having a conversation which starts with some kind of humorous observation and then as a result you feel compelled to interpret every comment thereafter as a joke, too. You'd quickly find that such an interpretation just doesn't make sense.
It's the same when interpreting scriptures. The scriptures (especially Jesus' teachings) can wind back and forth through literal, parabolic, metaphorical, spiritual, and then back to literal again all in one chapter.
Good, wise discernment requires that we "pick and choose".
But what I'm surprised by is that the Mark seems to be one of the ONLY things that's taken literally.
Depends on who you chat with, I think. On the world wide web it's pretty easy to find a majority of people who have a fairly wonky idea of interpretation. I think the two witnesses will be literal, and the fire that comes out of their mouths, too.
I think the destruction heralded by the 7 trumpets will be literal. I think the return of Jesus will be literal. People dying for their faith will be literal. There is a lot to the Revelation that will be literal.
Getting a correct balance between the spiritual and metaphorical is an important part of discernment and interpretation. It's one of those amazing areas where God gives us free reign to exercise our ability to reason.
The problem is that people's ability to reason often comes up with wildly different meanings and interpretations, which is why there's so many denominations.
He says along the lines: Because the size of the New Jerusalem is so big that it HAS to be aliens that will descend, which is absurd.Hey ver. The point of the video wasn't to prove anything, but rather to present a concept for discussion. If you disagree with a particular assessment or conclusion, that's fine, since that is part of discussion, too, but it's helpful to give reasons for your disagreement.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?