re: Religious Leaders Told to 'Prepare Now' for UFO Disclosure and 'Bible-Changing' Revelation

quote:

---

But I could. Yahweh or whichever god could just become visible and active and I’d have no choice but to acknowledge his/their existence. Aliens though could come out of the sky, show us how the universe cosmically expanded 14 billion years ago, and show us how life developed naturally on earth, and even give us superhuman genetic powers or insane technology, and the religious fruitcakes would reject it all because they need to protect their dogmas.

---

This right here is a display of close mindedness. You assume only the best of your own actions and responses while assuming the worst of those you disagree with. You can’t imagine a situation where a hypothetical spiritual being appeared and was active and you didn’t question the reality of your experience? Assume you had been dosed with something? Wonder if you had a hallucination caused by any number of things? Everyone argues from a bias. Quit pretending you don’t have one.

quote:

---

Theists on the other hand believe whatever they want including untestable unsubstantiated assertions

---

You have made a number of these in this very thread. Quit holding yourself to a lower standard. Case in point:

quote:

---

For a lot of biblical fundamentalists, they believe the earth is a flat disk supported by giant pillars with a solid rock/glass-like transparent dome above our heads supporting a heavenly ocean of water

---

quote:

---

What I can tell you with 100% certainty though is the Canaanite war/storm/volcano deity called Yahweh is a made up mythical fantasy

---

quote:

---

Aliens though could come out of the sky, show us how the universe cosmically expanded 14 billion years ago, and show us how life developed naturally on earth, and even give us superhuman genetic powers or insane technology, and the religious fruitcakes would reject it all because they need to protect their dogmas

---

Prove any of these assertions of yours by testing and substantiation.

quote:

---

extraterrestrial beings from other planets.

---

You're the one saying this. The OP talks about UFO disclosure. Not extraterrestrials from other planets.

I think the narrative will end up being that they jumpstarted our development by tweaking the genome of homo heidelbergensis about 200,000 years ago.

I should say that it could be.

quote:

---

The one thing I will commit to is that I find the whole release of information very suspect. When, how, and ostensibly, for no reason.

---

Disregarding everything above this quoted portion here because I can find you tons of accounts that say just the opposite. As you said yourself, what you spent about 5 paragraphs talking about shouldn't be given any more credence than any other subset of abduction literature, or any less.

But about this quoted portion, I can understand why people might feel this way, but I personally disregard it for no other reason than I personally have been telling people for 8 damn years that it's coming and it's coming during the Trump presidency. Hard for me to consider it "suspect" when it's exactly what I have been expecting to happen.

This is pretty interesting...

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

JUST IN- Chief Exorcist of Washington has been FIRED for his statements on demons and UFOs

“Statement from Cardinal Robert McElroy, Archbishop of Washington, on Monsignor Stephen Rossetti

The Archdiocese of Washington announced today that Robert Cardinal McElroy has removed Monsignor Stephen Rossetti, a priest of the Diocese of Syracuse, N.Y., as an exorcist of the Archdiocese of Washington, and ended all affiliation between the archdiocese and the Saint Michael Center for Spiritual Renewal located in Washington, D.C.

Cardinal McElroy said that statements made by Monsignor Rossetti linking UFOs to demonic presence and the Center’s recent use of social media gravely undermine the Church’s very precise teaching on the devil, demons and exorcism.”

---

The X post is slightly misleading. He wasn't "fired", but he was removed as an exorcist.

quote:

---

As I said, I'm moving on. Good luck with whatever you're bitching about.

---

If you wanted an honest discussion, you'd stop deflecting, telling me I don't know what I'm talking about, telling me you could say more but won't bother, and telling me that you're moving on, and you'd actually engage with what I am saying that directly challenges the point of this thread that you started.

You posted a link about "pastors" claiming to have been briefed by intelligence officials. I'm telling you that never happened, and it has been proven, and I urged you to watch Mike Winger's video about it. I wouldn't recommend anything for you to watch if it were just a guy giving his opinion. I recommended it because he spends nearly an hour and a half going through video evidence of these guys, themselves, saying one thing, and then later denying what they said. They go from claiming they were briefed by people in government, to suddenly claiming that they never said government was involved, or saying they misspoke. The guy that actually organized the meeting of the "pastors" flat out refuted the others and stated emphatically that there was no involvement with the government.

So here is the video, if you haven't watched it: LINK

The Tim Burchett guy you keep mentioning is even shown at the end of this video, on Joe Rogan's show, saying he doesn't believe these pastors. Again, these are known grifters who have been caught making things up before, and Perry Stone, in particular, has a VERY troubling history.

Burchett claims to have had his own briefings, but frankly, he comes across as someone who, himself, is just looking for attention, and who is purposefully distancing himself from these "pastors" because their grift has already been publicly exposed. Regardless of his intentions or anything he may or may not know, you started a thread about these pastors, and I responded to that, but you keep mentioning Tim Burchett, who has nothing to do with them.

This is all I have to say on the matter. If you watch the video, I'd love to hear your reply. If you don't, then you need not pretend to care about truth.

quote:

---

If you wanted an honest discussion, you'd stop deflecting, telling me I don't know what I'm talking about, telling me you could say more but won't bother, and telling me that you're moving on, and you'd actually engage with what I am saying that directly challenges the point of this thread that you started.

---

You don't know what you're talking about and you already proved it. Look, this thread has been ongoing for a month now and has over 1,000 posts in it. You came in here yesterday or whenever it was, for the first time and challenged the validity of the thread itself claiming to be an expert on it, able to prove a negative (this isn't possible) and then got the frickin location of the supposed meeting wrong (and it actually matters in this case because lying and saying that the meeting supposedly happened at the white house actually does give you the ability to prove it didn't happen as if it had it would have been logged). The OP of this thread which you say you took care to read as you knew the participants of the supposed meeting is very clear to say this meeting supposedly happened in Tennessee, not the frickin White House. This was supposedly between intelligence agents and pastors. Intelligence operations/briefings aren't generally a matter of public record.

But even if you're right, who the frick cares? Again, you have a congressman who is in the middle of this disclosure effort saying the same thing. Exactly the same frickin thing. That the Intel community is stonewalling the disclosure efforts citing religious upheaval. So at the end of the day, it doesn't fricking matter. You are bitching to bitch and for no other reason. About a thread that has been ongoing for a month and you're a brand new participant to. And this is why I tell you that I don't give a shite what you think and I'm moving on. It's because I do not care what you think or feel about it.

Understood?

quote:

---

You don't know what you're talking about and you already proved it. Look, this thread has been ongoing for a month now and has over 1,000 posts in it. You came in here yesterday or whenever it was, for the first time and challenged the validity of the thread itself claiming to be an expert on it, able to prove a negative (this isn't possible) and then got the frickin location of the supposed meeting wrong (and it actually matters in this case because lying and saying that the meeting supposedly happened at the white house actually does give you the ability to prove it didn't happen as if it had it would have been logged). The OP of this thread which you say you took care to read as you knew the participants of the supposed meeting is very clear to say this meeting supposedly happened in Tennessee, not the frickin White House. This was supposedly between intelligence agents and pastors. Intelligence operations/briefings aren't generally a matter of public record.

But even if you're right, who the frick cares? Again, you have a congressman who is in the middle of this disclosure effort saying the same thing. Exactly the same frickin thing. That the Intel community is stonewalling the disclosure efforts citing religious upheaval. So at the end of the day, it doesn't fricking matter. You are bitching to bitch and for no other reason. About a thread that has been ongoing for a month and you're a brand new participant to. And this is why I tell you that I don't give a shite what you think and I'm moving on. It's because I do not care what you think or feel about it.

Understood?

---

You're a real piece of work. You don't care what I think because I'm a new participant? YOU have been posting in this thread constantly. What does that say about you? If your position is that my posts don't matter because the thread is a month old, then why are you still posting in it?

We both know the real reason you "don't care" has nothing to do with how long this thread has been around, or your level of interest in what I have to say. It's that you have a belief, you want to be proven right, and it means everything to you to be able to wag your finger and say "I told you so", because you've been religiously committed to this nonsense for years. And for that reason, you refuse to acknowledge direct evidence that this meeting was a lie.

You just repeated yourself in saying "you can't prove a negative". I don't have to prove anything. These men are on VIDEO, which I just posted to you from Mike Winger, where they crawfished and changed their story. Their OWN WORDS debunked themselves. That isn't proof? Oh, so you still haven't watched the video? Of course you haven't. And I never believed you would. But I want everyone else in this thread to be a witness that you were given proof and you rejected it, because you are dishonest and argue in bad faith.


My earlier comments about a white house meeting were based on other rumors I've heard regarding this "meeting", as I hadn't read or thought about this topic for weeks until I spotted this thread. Frankly, I didn't remember hearing the claim that it was in Tennessee, as I noticed the names in your original post and responded to that, knowing the meeting did not happen. So I made a mistake with the white house comment, and I have no problem saying that. You know why? Because it wasn't done intentionally, and it does not affect, whatsoever, anything I said about the meeting with intelligence officials not taking place. And the reasons why, as I have already stated, are because these men are on video telling everyone that there were no government officials involved (after originally insisting upon their involvement).

And if you had done your research, you'd know that Tim Burchett isn't saying the same things as these pastors. You stated, correctly, that Tim Burchett is claiming that the government is suppressing information (which he provides nothing but his word as evidence). These "pastors", meanwhile, are claiming that information is going to be RELEASED, which will supposedly shake everyone's faith, and that the intelligence officials briefed them about it and told them to "prepare" their congregations for it. These grifting pastors also claim that the government will spin a narrative upon the release of these files that paints aliens as our friends who, according to the "pastors", are really demonic figures who are here to deceive us.

The only part I partially agree with, in theory, is that IF any of these sightings are real, which cannot be explained naturally, then it is likely demonic. However, I do not agree, at all, that this will be the thing that causes the great falling away, as these men claim will happen. I don't think anything will come of these files.

quote:

---

No, as I was very clear in saying, it's not simply because you're a new participant. It's because regardless of who it is coming from whether it be the pastors saying the Intel guys are saying it, or the government official who sits on the oversight committee charged with releasing this information, they are both frickin saying it and the result is the same either way. So your complaint about this meeting, whether it happened or not, does not move the needle one bit in regards to this thread. It is you coming in after a months long discussion and trying to raise a point of contention that doesn't make one iota of difference.

---

It makes no iota of difference, even though it is about the very people the article is about, and is false? That is irrelevant, because someone is saying it, even though I pointed out to you that the pastors are saying very different things? Got it.

quote:

---

It is happening. Like, they're in the process of it now whether you recognize that or not. And it is not about being able to wag my finger about it either. It's because I enjoy discussing the shite and it is pertinent to the theme of this discussion board which is political discourse.

---

WHAT is happening? Once again, this is about a meeting that didn't take place with intelligence officials, as was claimed. Files being released, if that's what you're talking about, is not being refuted by me, or anyone, and I, for one, don't really care either way. Nothing interesting is going to happen. You have your opinions on that, but that's not what my response was about.

quote:

---

Yes he is. The claim he is making is that the Intel agencies are stonewalling citing religious upheaval.

---

I know that's what HE is saying. He isn't what this thread is about. I responded to your original post, and those people are saying very different things about what the government is doing. If you don't want to talk to me about that, and would rather change the subject to what Tim Burchett says, then you could acknowledge what I said, and move on, but instead you deflect.

quote:

---

Do you even realize how ridiculous this sounds? If they're NOT saying that the information is going to be released, why would they need to prepare their congregations? Dur. Yes, they're saying the same thing, just from different angles.

---

"Not" was a typo. I just corrected it. The context of what I said should have been a dead giveaway that it was a typo but, nonetheless, I'm afraid your "gotcha" wasn't what you thought it was.

quote:

---

Maybe next time you enter a thread that's been ongoing for a month don't come in asking why the thread is still going since the OP is inaccurate. Maybe if you had just read through it instead you would have realized that even if that was the case, and the meeting didn't actually happen, the same shite is still playing out the same way either way.

Maybe consider all of the rude attacks that this sort of thread material generates from the average window licker around here and think, "man, maybe I don't want to come across as yet another person who comes into a thread after a month and attacks the OP for the 50th frickin time in this thread - or at least not appear to."

In other words, I'm pretty tired of fending off attacks against a topic I and others are actually interested in discussing. And again, if you don't like the way the discussion went,, I don't give a shite.

---

There you go again. I don't care how long you've been discussing it. you haven't corrected yourself. So why should I be concerned how others perceive you based on my "attacks", as you put it, on your original post? Since when did you get to decide that there is a time limit for correction?

If you amended your original post and made a note that said something like "edited to correct that the original article turned out to be false information", then while I would still disagree with the overall theme of your beliefs about this matter, you would have at least shown the integrity of admitting an error, and I could have respected that. But you haven't corrected anything.

So, no matter how many times you deflect by telling me that the thread is a month old, it's not going to make any difference to me, as I have every right to correct a false narrative, when you, yourself, won't do it. If you don't want to talk about the pastors in question, start a new thread. You say you're "tired" of responding to people about it, but you are always in this thread. you seem to have a deeply narcissistic need to respond to everything and everyone, and never admit being wrong about anything.

When people constantly come at some post I make in a thread, I will go a day or two of replying here and there, and then if people are still replying, I just let it go. I don't have that kind of time. I already feel that I've spent way too much time on this, as it is, but I've been checking in for maybe two days in this thread. Not a month.

I already know you're going to poo poo everything I said, as you won't even look at the evidence in the video, and claim everyone else is talking about the "same thing", even though you've got Burchett claiming the government is trying to suppress information as to NOT cause religious upheaval, and the "pastors" claiming the government WILL release information for the purpose of causing upheaval, and that intelligence officials had a secret meeting to "warn" them. I guess out of defiance of their overlords. That is the part that did not happen. And being how different those two claims are, I find it quite relevant. Is the government trying to "protect" us from some perceived problem, or are they trying to destroy everything we believe, somehow? Two very different narratives, no?

But, again, I guess I'm speaking to the four walls. Good day.