Elon Musk Calling out CERN for what it is...
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (113)
sorted by:
When the ‘aliens’ come. We will be told to embrace them, to accept them. Make no mistake. These ‘aliens’ are in fact demons. It’s just us out here. All the other figures are angels or demons.
Or it'll be a front for a depopulation scheme meant to unify us against an enemy that doesn't exist*
Look at the demon named Lam, drawn by Satanist Alister Crowley in 1918.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleister_Crowley#/media/File%3ASupposed_channeled_entity_by_occultist_crowley.jpg
Aliens are demons. Elites worship the sun & moon & believe the fallen angels are these celestial bodies; that’s why they need to warp the worlds Christian world view; to revert society back to Babylonian pagan worship.
If Aliens are demons what are Angels? They must be demons too right 😉
Demons are fallen angels. Disfigured and demented from corruption.
The fallen angels said they would not serve god, rebelled & came off their perch in Heaven.
Angels that stayed behind to serve God are still in their positions; the fallen ones are the ones that are worshipped by the Babylonian pagans.
Despite the downvotes, you're right. Angels and fallen angels are called "The Watchers". They're higher dimensional beings and they are shapeshifters. Angels and fallen are just 2 different factions.
When a painter makes a painting does he put loads of detail and focus on the background? Depends, sometimes, sometimes not. Sometimes they may put cool little secrets in the background whether they be big or small, meaningful or insignificant. And sometimes the background simply exists to fill in the picture and be a backdrop for the actual focus.
What kind of painter is God? Do we know?
Also,
Source?
To beings on other planets, wouldn't we be "the background"?
Only if beings on other planets exist, which we can't prove. All we can prove is that the universe is vast in size and contains an extreme number of planets, stars, etc. To make the jump to assuming they must contain life assumes a knowledge of God outside his word that we just don't have, unless, of course, I'm missing something.
Is the Mona Lisa the background to the mountain behind her? Or does the mountain exist to add to the focus (i.e. the woman in the painting)?
If the background appeared naturally through evolution along with the woman then you could claim they're equal and that there's no reason to think the woman is special. But when God is involved that all goes out the window and it becomes about understanding what he actually did, not what he maybe would have done when looked at through the human lens of what's "likely" or "feasible". It becomes about finding out his goal with the painting and there's no reason to assume the mountains behind us are anything more than empty rocks that exist solely as a background to us and for us.
The source for "unknowable number of planets" is our eyeballs and telescopes. "Species," though, I don't have a source. I do have a belief, however, that given how vast God's creations clearly are, that it'd be unlikely that there isn't a spirit son or daughter, or a living creation of His, whatsoever to be found anywhere beyond the Earth.
So as usual it's the conflation of actual fact with pure speculation (though to be fair you weren't the original poster I replied to). You may be right, I'm not 100% saying there isn't other life. But it's just as possible there isn't as there is. And to go back to my previous (likely imperfect analogy) we really have no idea what kind of painting God made outside of what He's told us.
As for unlikely, I don't know why it would be. We'd need perfect knowledge of God to know what He's "likely" to do in any given situation. In a universe with no God driven by evolution, I would agree that it's unlikely we'd be alone, which is what I used to believe. Now, though, I'm not really sure either way but currently see no need for aliens to exist or any reason they "should", though they still might.
Nevermind the high probabilities of life out there, there have been objects of unknown origins flying in our skies since at least the 1940s. And we now know from declassified WWII records (America, Germany, France, Russia, etc.) that it was not secret military aircraft. Point being, even if ET is real and already here, they are no more a threat or crisis than they were 70+ years ago.
Aliens are comms for foreign infiltration operatives...green creatures in spaceships are CIA deflection narratives, but their comms are imbeded within those narratives.
confirmed. I see people with eggplant heads walking around almost everyplace I go
Or our ancestors encountered predatory reptilian aliens and called them devils.
You should really look into theological research into the Pentateuch. Those original 5 books of Noah are interesting because people exist that can read the multi-thousands year old copies of copies. I'd tell you what they really said but you wouldn't believe me because of indoctrination.
You'll have to read about it yourself, because I'm a liar for exposing uncomfortable lies.
You'll have to find it yourself because I'll just be an idiot for linking you to a source that's wrong because it doesn't agree with the lies that don't match the book that's claimed to be the truth, but only the heavily edited and modified translation is true, not the original.
By original, I don't mean Hebrew even. The originals are older than Hebrew.
You know what, don't go looking.
You'll be happier believing lies.
Oh you mean the Sumerian tablets that we’ve known about forever some of which contain parts of what we know as the book of Genesis but pre-date Abraham? And etc, etc.
You do something. The story is passed down for 1000s of years before some guy decides to write the story down. Upon realizing that the story they wrote wasn't exactly correct and had morphed through the years due to human fallibility you, still being around of course, decide to correct the record with what actually happened.
Event takes place
v
Incorrect version of events written down a millennia later
v
Record corrected upon realizing the truth has been lost to time
I don't see the problem nor any validity to the argument that older = better when talking about things written after the original event took place, particularly when they weren't written by anybody who was there for it (well except for the fact God was there when he created everything but that leaves the scope of what I'm trying to argue here).
Most likely, but we'd both be liars if we mentioned what was originally written
You and I both know that when facts don't match deeply heald preconceptions that people will just deny the facts.
I'm being facetious because I know that there's absolutely nothing to be gained in saying it. I'm just hoping someone will read this and look and be undeceived.
We could both describe the reality of The Elohim and the common story telephoned gamed around the ancient world.
But it wouldn't do anything.
There is no reason for an indoctrinated person to trust us or anything we link to.
They must find it themselves because they are interested in the truth, not what they already believe.
Its getting harder and harder to find things on the internet that the powers that be don't want consumed by the masses. I for one would like to read into this if you would be so kind as to share a link to get me started.
Sounds like extreme liberalism. "Interested in the truth not what they already believe" so I should just go changing my opinion every 5 minutes or else risk being a big dumb boomer who doesn't change his opinions when presented with The Truth as determined by somebody else?
No, in reality, once you have the truth you don't need to change your mind anymore, unless something directly contradicts what you believe. In which case you didn't have the truth. Nothing that can be proven contradicts the bible. Just like nothing proven contradicts gravity. It's perfectly valid, then, to consider them both as true.
But if you have something to say, say it. I'm not going to go on some wild goose chase based solely on your pompous assertion that I'm dumb and brainwashed and you know some deep, hidden truth that you'll be othered for sharing. As if someone actually interested in the truth would care if people thought they were stupid.
I mean, you have nothing to lose considering at least a few people here already downvoted you and likely think you are an idiot for riding your high horse in here acting better and more enlightened than everybody else.
Hey there. I am currently doing loads of research. I believe what you are saying in a very big way. I have seen the evidence. I would love to have the links!!