The UFO Deception Explosion of December 2023—Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, David Grusch, & Much More
(www.youtube.com)
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (151)
sorted by:
Well…… and then there is that possibility. We don’t know exactly for sure how he is “physically” going to arrive. Last time he was born here. So since he is still alive what will the physical view look like of Christ arriving…
The book of Enoch of course has some amazing descriptions of how things “could” happen or look like, vs Revelations. This guy in the video does not discuss the book of Enoch much, and I think because it in itself would have a strong argument against a lot of what he presents, and the book of Enoch is factually one of the original Old Testament Books, before the 2nd Council of Nicaea had it and 16 other “gospels” removed in the late 700s.
Of course there is the Anti-Christ as well, that could “officially” arrive (show his face) by UFO. So there is that too. Though I think most believe the Anti-Christ is already here. Klaus, Soros, Gates, and/or Harari all make evil candidates.
This is in no way a definite fact.
Yes it is, since the Council of Nicaea in fact removed the Book of Enoch from the Bible. If they hadn’t removed any books, the Apocrypha Books, then it wouldn’t be a fact now would it.
Do some research and stop thinking the modern day Bible is 100% factual, and not edited and contextualized for control by the Vatican.
Any biblical scholar worth their weight knows the Book of Enoch is an original Book of the Bible. Oh and the Dead Sea Scrolls say so as well, as does the non-Vatican-edited Ethiopian Bible; which happens to factually include all of the Apocrypha and additional, original gospels/books, that the Councils of Nicaea had removed/edited out.
It is 100% factual. I trust God, not the cabal. To believe God allowed the cabal to corrupt the Bible is to trust their ability to corrupt more than God's ability to preserve.
Faith in God must reign supreme over worldly distrust.
And the Dead Sea Scrolls aren't the Bible. That's like saying a library is all one book. It was a collection of manuscripts and in fact did a great job proving the Bible hasn't changed in 2000 years.
I am curious about the Book of Enoch though, and intend to get around to reading it, but it is not the Word of God. Doesn't mean it doesn't have valuable information, but it's not the Word of God and any claims that it is are at this point pulled out of thin air.
And the Vatican edited nothing. God wouldn't allow this. Instead, God guided His Church to ensure they included the right books in the Bible, and not just every work that any random sect decided they liked the sound of. It was authoritative, as scripture must be. It was perfect and infallible, as God ensures. And it was by a council guided by the Holy Spirit, as is evidently needed for authoritative truth.
Remember, before the declaration of what was canon, everyone had their own disjointed collection of books with no authoritative position on what was the Word of God and what was not. If that WAS how it was meant to work, well that's just another argument for the necessity of the recognition of the authority of the Church.
Most "biblical scholars" are far more interested in their secular scholarship than in the Bible. As a result, they are frequently wrong because they discount the obvious, but miraculous, explanations for things.
Finally, from a brief look at the Ethiopian Bible, well, it doesn't exist. Now, I admit this was just a brief look at the shit source that is Wikipedia, but the claim is that they don't even have a compiled version of their own canon.
From the article:
"It is not known to exist at this time as one published compilation. Some books, though considered canonical, are nonetheless difficult to locate and are not even widely available in the churches' home countries of Ethiopia and Eritrea."
If true, that's hardly a good look. They considered it so inspired that they don't even have any copies. Maybe they're all locked up in the Vatican Library and that is why they are hard to find? Alternatively, God didn't preserve those extra-biblical books because they aren't His, and instead preserved the version that became the best-selling book in all of the history of Mankind. I suspect you'll take the former, but I'm obviously going to settle in with the latter.
And I'd appreciate it if you didn't hit me with the "you're just brainwashed by the Vatican" or "do more research" or "you just don't want to accept the truth because it would contradict your beliefs". I don't even agree with the basic logical premises that are required to come to such a conclusion as the Bible being corrupted. This isn't a research issue or an "accept the truth". It just doesn't make sense to me for God to give us a scripture that can be corrupted. It's either all His, or it's all made up.
Excellent reply.
Their argument is tantamount to saying “God can give us a message, but can’t preserve it.”
Doesn’t make sense.
Another thing that doesn’t make sense with their argument is that they would have no way of knowing something has been “corrupted” unless they knew what the “uncorrupted” version was.
Questioning corruption implies a standard of purity or correctness. If someone claims corruption, they implicitly acknowledge a presumed unaltered state. The assertion that the Bible has been corrupted is self defeating.