I'm aware of pretty much all of those. They show a link between Israel and 9/11. They don't really do anything to answer my question, which is much more specific: did the leaders of Israel do 9/11 because in part they believe that Sep. 11 was the birthday of Jesus?
You seem to know a lot more than me about this stuff, but I don't fully understand your argument.
Martin's argument can be traced back in Planetarium software today, precise to the minute, all the way to Sep. 11, 3 BC. This software shows that the relevant celestial bodies (Jupiter, etc.) lined up on that specific day, at that specific time.
Are you denying that the planetarium software correctly calculates the time of when the bodies converged? Or are you arguing that the software is correct, but Jesus was born at a different time?
See the end of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNTcsxRcsO4
I don't know how to DM here, but this is now long enough to switch to a different channel (better yet, videochat - face to face will ease tension and improve understanding). If you want that (I don't care either way) let me know a way to contact you directly.
"The evidence is that Revelation was written centuries before the Bible was codified," And so was Daniel and ezekiel. That's not evidence it means something else.
This is a non sequitur. I think you are misunderstanding my argument.
When you write "something else" - you're starting from your default assumption that your interpretation is correct - the default. I'm saying: before you can even have a default assumption, you have to decide which one is the default. There are only two candidates (if you think there is another - let me know):
A. The Rev. cite is about deviating from the entirety of the canonical Bible B. The Rev. cite is about deviating from the prophecies in the book of Rev.
Before you can have a default, you have to decide which one of these will be the default. I say B is obviously the better default, for all of the reasons that I explained (i.e., the canonical Bible didn't exist yet and so it wasn't likely the target of these statements). I realize that you are probably immersed in a church culture that prefers interpretation A. Interpretation A might even be more popular around the world. In my view, that is the result of a trick or deception campaign, and you need to reevaluate that assumption and think independently to see through it.
"so it makes much more sense for Revelation to be referring to deviations from its own prophecies," Why? What "deviations"?? Do you have the original copies? I dont believe so. I doubt you've read Revelation, and just believe what gnostics wrote over what God had people write. It describes EVENTS not "deviations". It only "makes sense" if youre a Gnostic - which you are.
I'm barely a gnostic. My views are extremely weird (for example, I draw a lot of connections between Hollywood movies and religion - because I think the Jews who make Hollywood movies put coded messages in them, similar to the Bible). You are correct that I'm not deeply versed in Revelation - I just became a Christian (to the extent I am) about four months ago. I am pretty smart, though, I can give you about 5+ data points proving that, but it will sound really crass and arrogant to you.
If you see my interpretation of the Bible as some kind of threat (which is the vibe you give), then reject it. I don't care. I want you to be happy.
" rather than referring to deviations from the canon structure of the Bible, which wouldn't be codified until centuries later. " Your premise is that its referring to deviations AT ALL. Messed up premise = messed up conclusion. Bad tree, bad fruit. Just like Jesus said!! You dont need to make up fairy tale belief interpretation speculation guesses about what Jesus meant by that.
The Rev. verses that you cited a long time ago (I'm not going to scroll back and dig them up) literally refer to some kind of deviation. Maybe they don't use the word "deviation" but the gist was "to the extent that someone says something different than what the author of Rev says... then that person is a bozo." Go back and read the verses (I don't remember the numbers) you will see what I'm talking about.
"Gnostics are like darwinian evolutionists, they make up guesses and extrapolations galore. Two wings same bird. Gbosticism is the real truth hider because it confuses people. The Gospel is so simple, sensible, and God-focused."
I think it would make you more comfortable if I was a Darwinist, because you hate Darwinists and gnostics, and then if you could pin both on me, you would feel more confident rejecting me. Unfortunately for you, I am a hardcore creationist - a hybrid between intelligent design and downright "we live in a simulated universe" theology.
"But your beliefs are a confusing mess, which is a red flag. Sign it was manmade. ""What a tangled web of lies we weave if we set out to decieve."" you seem to believe the stuff, telling your actual beliefs, but IDK the motives of the inventors of gnosticism."
If my beliefs bother you, reject them. I want you to be happy.
"Next youll be telling me gnosticism was made confusing by ""them"" (whoever they are) to make gnosticism look stupid??"
I think gnosticism is complicated and confusing, because life is complicated and confusing. Orthodox Christianity - which you seem to prefer - is simpler and more childlike. I think we outgrow it with time. I believe you will eventually outgrow it, even if you do so kicking and screaming. If you don't believe me, that's ok.
"So many take mans word literally (like how you probably take some gnostic teachings literally) but wish to reinterpret the Bible."
I don't feel strongly about any particular gnostic text. Most of them contradict each other in certain details, so they can't all be right.
"I believe the Bible is true in all history. I believe that history is history, metaphor is metaphor, poetry is poetry, and prophecy is prophecy. They are in their respective zones and do not launch incursion into other zones. But you believe otherwise im sure. I believe we only need the Bible to know what is what. Not interpretations, not gnostic beliefs, nada."
If it works for you, keep it up then.
"Where is Genesis stating its flat?"
It doesn't say "flat" explicitly, but it refers to a circular land with a firmament over it, with water over the firmament, and this is essentially the same cosmology as most ancient religions (e.g., Mayan). NASA is the only big outlier.
"Nope. Timezones, math, the kola borehole, the mechanics of eclipses, the circular shadow on the moon, why stars look like a blurred circle in some pics, ISS and satellite mechanics, pendulums that prove gravity, the fact airplanes falling down get you in freefall, etc. etc. DEBUNK flat earth."
If you're trying to bait me into trying to prove to you how wrong you are, I don't have the time or energy. Today I am: taking my son to buy a present at Target, writing a letter to Owen Benjamin with a $1000 donation thanking him for his honesty and bravery, buying an expensive Christian gift for Mother's birthday (we always had estranged, difficult relationship, and now we can bond after I switched to Christianity), taking my son to jujitsu, and then doing office work to pay for my family. If you want to learn about FE (it seems like you do), just watch any 1-2 hour Eric Dubay video on bitchute. He has good stuff. If you want to keep believing that your interpretation of Genesis (I have no idea how you square NASA with Genesis other than ignoring half of what it says), then don't watch those videos, and keep doing what works for you. I want you to be happy, very sincerely.
"actually, the Bible seems to promote a round earth. It does not target a specific earth shape, but leans toward round. Would you like to learn how?"
It's a round circle with a dome over top.
"1.Yes there is. It's God Word. If God had other written Words they would be in the Bible. God lacks neither the Power nor the Character, despite your pessimistic view of God."
There is no law of physics or religion or philosophy that says, whatever God wants you to know, has to be in the Bible ALREADY, like a perfect little present with a bow on top. There is no law that says God didn't trick you on purpose, like a parent telling their child that Santa Claus exists. God will tell you and reveal to you, exactly what he wants you to know, exactly when he wants you to know it, and he reserves the right to tell white lies to you - even MASSIVE white lies, and there is no way ever to prove that he hasn't done that.
"You believe that mans fallible authority is the beall endall."
Know I don't believe that or anything close to it.
"Gnosticism is mans word not God's Word."
Actually you have no way to prove that either way. Your claim here otherwise is based on emotion, not logic, and if you really want to fight (you seem like you do), I'll logic you onto the ground until you submit.
"God inspired the Bible so human error never entered the first instances."
Arguably, God inspired a large number of different texts. Some of them went into the Bible, and some didn't, and you have no real way, right now, to prove which are which.
"The devil wants to hide the Christian Truth from us. But he didnt succeed, the Bible is the bestselling book now. So if your belief was "truth", then it would be promoted, not hidden. Humans can easily fall to the allure of "secret knowledge" -- and youve just been SCAMMED!! Plus, didnt they dispute and debate more and not "hide" as much?"
The Bible - including the books that you already love and respect - already includes multiple stories where YHWH tricks people. He hardens the Pharoahs heart. And the Bible says that he tricks the prophets - repeatedly. So, the book you already trust and believe in, already says that your God can trick people. I don't even need to look to the gnostic texts. I can just point to your own Bible and prove to you that God is a trickster.
Yeah. I understand why you think that's but you're just 100% wrong. It's written in a cryptic style to suggest Pompeo is trustworthy, but Q used last names for the others, not for Pompeo. I gave a bunch of reasons to show that the simple interpretation - although it has superficial appeal - is just wrong. It's not just one reason, there are 10+ reasons to think this. It's ok if you disagree. We'll probably find out at the end of Trump's 10 days dark off Twitter.
Pence and Vance are both CIA plants that Trump flipped.
They were both widely accused of being closed homosexuals - giving the CIA blackmail control over them.
Vance looks like he's wearing a mask half the time.
The question is who will replace them when Trump drops the hammer. I'm guessing Kushner.
Pompeo is OBVIOUSLY the old agency head that Trump installed because he didn't trust him. There are a thousand reasons to think this.
- Trump allies Tucker and WIkileaks have brutally attacked Pompeo all month.
- Pompeo doesn't even look like himself any more - he looks like an actor wearing a mask.
- Trump's speech at the CIA referred to a fifth column being removed.
- Wikileaks and others tie Pompeo to Israel - Israel is the keystone of Qanon.
- Pompeo was replaced by Haspel - who was clearly aligned with anti-Trump deep state actors in London before 2016.
- Flynn has been attacking the CIA for years
- Q constantly attacked Clowns in America
- Everyone knows the CIA is the biggest tumor in the deep state
The list is endless people. There is no room for interpretation.
I'm expecting something soon. There are already B-52 Bombers in Qatar. And the deadlines to dispute the electoral vote would be mid-December for counting and early January for certifying, triggering the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022. There also has to be enough time for Trump win on appeal and at the Supreme Court... so has to start soon.
-
I genuinely believe that you can pinpoint the time of his birth down to the minute.
-
If it was some random day in 3 BC, then I would agree that it's not important. But it isn't. It's September 11, 3 BC, will coincides with Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year on the first of Tishri on the Jewish calendar. It also coincides with the terror attack on 9/11/01, which was done by the state of Israel, which I expect Trump and Wikileaks to reveal any day now, maybe even tonight. Sep. 11, 3 BC also coincides with the Feast of Trumpets, and this is also not a coincidence, because Trump is the little horn of the book of Daniel (Trump is short for trumpet).
I understand why you would want to minimize this, but it's actually fascinating. I derive great pleasure from watching the stars line up perfectly to pinpoint the time of his birthday - it's an excellent Bible proof for skeptics or newbies.
I'm starting to think it's a *double psyop." First they're real. Then they're fake. Then... surprise they're really real again.
But who knows. Real or fake, there are many signs indicating that they are part of the future story unfolding over the next few months.
Nope. Looks like good stuff to me.
There is something big that is going to happen with nukes. I don't know what, but it's obvious. There are 5+ data points in this direction, the least of which isn't Oppenheimer winning best picture. I hope one doesn't actually go off.
If you think the stars are aligned now, wait until you learn about Jesus' birthday.
"There is no interpretation needed. Revelation 22:18 is clear. There is no evidence it means something else."
The evidence is that Revelation was written centuries before the Bible was codified, so it makes much more sense for Revelation to be referring to deviations from its own prophecies, rather than referring to deviations from the canon structure of the Bible, which wouldn't be codified until centuries later.
"So many take mans word literally (like how you probably take some gnostic teachings literally) but wish to reinterpret the Bible."
One of the advantages of my view of the Bible is that you can take much of it literally, including Genesis and creationism. It was always awkward how Christians would say that Genesis is true, but then most would say that the Earth isn't really flat with a dome over it. I really believe it is flat with a dome over it and I can explain how. Gnostics can do this too.
"Scripture interprets Scripture. Let the Bible influence your thoughts on the nonBiblical. NOT foreign content influencing your beiliefs on the Bible. The Bible should be your highest authority."
That works as long as the Bible is the be-all-end-all, but there's no reason to think that. The early Church wanted you to believe that - it was hiding the truth from you.
"If there is any evidence my "interpretation" of 22:18 is wrong, please do give it. Until there is evidence otherwise, we assume it is literal."
My interpretation is far more consistent with the literal text than yours, and your traditional explanation doesn't even make sense because Revelation was written long before the Bible was codified, as I explained.
"This is how its always been done. Otherwise you can make up anything, and contradictions will abound and confuse people. The enemy loves gnosticism because it resulted in confusion. Ever wonder why gnosticism was wiped out?"
It was wiped out because some, including YHWH, wanted to hide the truth from you.
"If gnosticism was true it wouldnt die out so hard. Do you really believe truth is that weak that it dies so easily? Yeesh."
It didn't quite die out. It went dormant, like Trump from 2020-2024. I'm expecting a big resurgence, as with Trump.
"What would you expect from evil forces? Them wanting you to think that truth is Weak? or that it is STRONG?? please answer this, thx."
Bible interpretation, especially gnostic interpretation, gets so weird and complicated fast that it's hard to see who is the "good" guy or the "bad" guy. If you're looking for simple, cookie-cutter answer, us-vs-them cartoons... then gnosticism is not for you. To answer more directly: I think the forces hiding the truth from you want the gnostic truth to look weak to you so that you will find it unattractive, which is exactly what happened.
Just because you say it's the same God doesn't mean it is. If you want to learn more - and I bet you don't - watch an interview with Litwa about the Evil Creator on youtube. Your messages to me, and your username, show that you know what you're talking about, so maybe you're smart enough to research it with an open mind. I can list about 20+ advantages of this interpretation of the Bible - the least of which is not that an Evil Creator helps solve the problem of evil.
I could debate you line by line, but there's a big philosophical problem at the start:
"Yes, the conjunctions are correct, but the idea that God wants us to date things via methods that nobody knew about at the time and that were not visible to the magi is suspect to me."
Of COURSE he would want us to do that. If the methods didn't even exist yet, then this shows that God was working in a predetermined, time-travel-y sort of way.