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

I imagine we will see more stuff like this as we move forward through this process. Churches making statements about this and whatnot.

Pope Leo's astronomer took it farther by saying that they are "Children of God." Multiple Vatican astronomers have made statements to this effect.

It's a point I tried making earlier in the thread and elsewhere actually. These things aren't demons. Demons aren't corporeal beings. It appears the church agrees.

quote:

---

I take issue with you failing to properly understand questions, failing to respond properly, making straw man arguments, committing psychological projection of your faults onto others, and failing to do your own research.

---

I haven't seen any questions. Ask away.
It's hard to accuse me of making straw man arguments. I haven't made any arguments. I have challenged you premises., and attempted to show you that you are arguing with others using the same methods you accuse them of.
I am failing to research the premises that you espouse.
let me give you a quote from the article you linked about flat earthers.
“Don’t believe what I say, research what I say.” That's literally what you are asking me to do. You make an outrageous claim, and then put it on the hearer to verify. You think that is valid argument or discussion?

What exactly is "responding properly" in your mind? Tacitly agreeing with your every word? Accepting your "trust me. bro, I did some research" answers and clapping you on the back because you used some big words?

You embedded a picture that has no religious refence at all to support the idea that religious fundamentalists believe something. The you linked an article that also had not a single mention of religion. You see, I checked the claim because that is what any person should do, verify. The article does have this little nugget...
Yes, flat earthers do seem to place a lot of emphasis and priority on scientific methods and, in particular, on observable facts.
Sounds a lot like the claims you make.

Be honest. You did a quick google search and posted the first pic and article you came across. You assumed that would be that. You put forward false information. That is not even debatable. I put forward the slightest bit of effort you asked for and found that you tried to pass off something that wasn't what you claimed. You should either admit a mistake and apologize, and quite frankly, you should be embarrassed.


I said that you were trying to frame an absurd notion as a mainstream view by putting forward the idea that modern Christians all head a flat earth view.
You called that a straw man and then doubled down on that framing by saying " If you’d simply put reject biblical cosmology - that’s on you rejecting the word of God as ridiculous nonsense." You are literally doing exactly what I said you were doing.

Do you understand what a straw man is or do you just use the term when you think it might apply because it sounds academic?

Do you realize the article you linked at the bottom exactly opposes the stance you are taking? It is an exploration of what numerous ancient cultures thought about this notion (you might to read what it has to say about the Greeks) .You accuse me of not doing any research and then post an article that says this....
The divine intent of this picture was not to communicate natural science, but to teach the fact that the God of Scripture is Creator and absolute Sovereign over the supposedly independent forces of the natural world. This is an important revelation which men still need today. Of course, the ancient science employed in giving this revelation cannot be completely harmonized with modern science.(41) This gives us a clue, I think, as to why, as Davis Young has pointed out, neither concordism nor literalism has genuinely been able to harmonize modern science with
Genesis.(42) Nevertheless, the divine revelation endures.

It is jaw dropping that you linked this. Did you even read it?

quote:

---

It's hard to accuse me of making straw man arguments.

---

Let’s see in this very post of yours…

quote:

---

I said that you were trying to frame an absurd notion as a mainstream view

---

So there. And you have repeated the same straw man twice today now.

I never said acceptance of biblical cosmology was a majority or mainstream view. You attempted to put words in my mouth to say I was arguing something I never said so you could tear down an argument I wasn’t making.

I’m not embarrassed to stand up to foolishness. Sorry not sorry.

ETA: the post right above this one was meant for you but I accidentally replied to myself. I guarantee you will learn something new about scripture and it will be interesting even if you disagree with the interpretation.

ETA2:

quote:

---

It is jaw dropping that you linked this. Did you even read it?

---

Yes. The article was to show that there are “a lot” of people who believe that the earth is flat with a firmament on top holding back a heavenly ocean. Ask and thou shall receive!

quote:

---

It seems to me that before the flood people lived indefinitely and that this was changed when the gods tried to wipe out the giants. Even after the flood the lifespans only gradually reduced to the 120 years set forth in Genesis

---

Alternatively, it could be that people never lived indefinitely, and rarely, if ever, to 120.

quote:

---

It seems to me that before the flood people lived indefinitely and that this was changed when the gods tried to wipe out the giants. Even after the flood the lifespans only gradually reduced to the 120 years set forth in Genesis (and that modern science agrees with, btw, which might be interesting to see squirrel try to explain). In my view this gradual reduction in lifespans rather than a straight cut from indefinite lifespans before the flood to the hard line of 120 years God proscribes in Genesis 6 is most easily explained by a process of hybridization. Genetics makes sense of this whereas the alternative relies on magic. Magic that apparently took generations of gradual implementation to correct.

---

I don't consider God's supernatural governing of His creation "magic". That seems like a way to make the supernatural a childish or unintelligent concept.

With that said, I don't think it had to be an entirely supernatural element to the reduction in life spans. God could have made genetics more pure at the beginning, allowing for longer life, and with Noah and his family genetic bottlenecks, that could have resulted in subsequent generations having lesser lifespans. But even if it were a supernatural governing of lifespans based on the need to populate and repopulate the earth at earlier times, that's still within God's prerogative, and it isn't "magic". I don't think mixing of bloodlines through demons and giants and all of that necessarily results in the diminished ages of man.

Since you mentioned me, I’ll respond.

quote:

---

It seems to me that before the flood

---

Never happened, historically, in reality

quote:

---

when the gods tried to wipe out the giants

---

You are going to make Foo’s head explode. He thinks no Jews or Christians considered that material (Enoch, book of Giants, book of Noah, Jubilees, etc) to be scripture even though it was found preserved within the Dead Sea scrolls in Hebrew and Aramaic and was found all over the Mediterranean in 5 different languages.

quote:

---

Even after the flood the lifespans only gradually reduced to the 120 years set forth in Genesis

---

You must realize the Bible has dozens of people post flood living longer than that. Abraham lived 175 years. Hell recently a lady in France lived to be 122.

quote:

---

and that modern science agrees with, btw, which might be interesting to see squirrel try to explain

---

I’d like to argue, but I don’t know what you are asking of me.

quote:

---

In my view this gradual reduction in lifespans rather than a straight cut from indefinite lifespans before the flood to the hard line of 120 years God proscribes in Genesis 6 is most easily explained by a process of hybridization. Genetics makes sense of this whereas the alternative relies on magic. Magic that apparently took generations of gradual implementation to correct.

---

I guess you’re still talking about the bastard offspring of the watchers - the sons of El - who came down to earth and ended up fricking the beautiful human women to create a race of giant superhuman monsters - the Nephilim. That’s a fairy tale bro. Magic isn’t real. Watchers and angels and Nephilim aren’t real either.

So I have to ask. If sex between angels and humans is forbidden, and even angel to angel sex is taboo, and since they don’t need to procreate….

Why the frick did Yahweh or El or whatever give the angels/watchers penises and buttholes and balls that made genetic material compatible with human females? What a sick joke.


Would we expect anything any different from a deity who had just converted the Egyptians into believing in him and his power… and then drowned all his converts in the sea? Would we expect anything different from the deity who demonstrated to the 300 prophets of Baal that he was the one true God, and then immediately had Elijah kill them all instead of accepting them as converts? What an a-hole.

quote:

---

You must realize the Bible has dozens of people post flood living longer than that. Abraham lived 175 years. Hell recently a lady in France lived to be 122.

---

This was exactly my point. When God sets forth the age of man to now be capped at 120 years, this isn't a divine decree. It took many generations for that to take effect. Instead, if we look at the text literally, it is more easily explained through genetics.

quote:

---

I guess you’re still talking about the bastard offspring of the watchers - the sons of El - who came down to earth and ended up fricking the beautiful human women to create a race of giant superhuman monsters - the Nephilim. That’s a fairy tale bro. Magic isn’t real. Watchers and angels and Nephilim aren’t real either

---

I disagree. And again this very phenomenon can be explained through the same process of genetic hybridization. Through the phenomenon known as heterosis. Otherwise known as "hybrid vigor." It's when two closely related, but separate species, interbreed and their offspring end up being bigger and stronger than either of their parents. It is found all over the plant and animal kingdoms.

quote:

---

It's hard to accuse me of making straw man arguments.
Let’s see in this very post of yours…

---

Clipping quotes is a no no in real academic discourse.
Here is what you partially quoted.

quote:

---

It's hard to accuse me of making straw man arguments. I haven't made any arguments. I have challenged you premises

---

I am not arguing that you are making straw man arguments. I literally demonstrated it.

quote:

---

never said acceptance of biblical cosmology was a majority or mainstream view. You attempted to put words in my mouth to say I was arguing something I never said

---

quote:

---

seems logical you’d want to believe the “correct” thing - the message he’s trying to share. If you’d simply put reject biblical cosmology - that’s on you rejecting the word of God as ridiculous nonsense

---

This is you literally saying that rejecting biblical cosmology as you presented it is rejecting the word of God. That is what a straw man is. You are in fact trying to argue that a flat earth must be the mainstream view. I’m literally quoting you.

Are you really going to ignore the two “proofs” you offered that were not what you said they were? Do you not feel that is dishonest? I’m not asking you to be embarrassed about your views, AS I HAVE SAID SEVERAL TIMES. I’m asking you to be embarrassed about how you argue and linking things that don’t say what you say they do. I read both of them in good faith. I am beginning to think that you have no concept of basic terms like bad faith, straw man, and projection as you repeatedly use them incorrectly. You link things as “proof” from unrecognizable sources and simple google image searches that don’t say remotely what you claim they do.

quote:

---

Yes. The article was to show that there are “a lot” of people who believe that the earth is flat with a firmament on top holding back a heavenly ocean

---

Moving your own goalposts is a new move for you. Don’t get hung up too bad on the new term.

quote:

---

As explained, if you’d simply put forth the slightest bit of effort, you would understand it is incontrovertible that there are a lot of biblical fundamentalists who believe the earth is flat with a firmament covering it holding back a heavenly ocean

---

So when I asked you to prove this assertion that a lot of biblical fundamentalists hold this view, you linked an article completely unrelated to biblical fundamentalists to now show a lot of people. That seems totally legit.

As for the other article you linked, but failed to comment on…It’s a historical review of multiple ancient cultures and their beliefs in a firmament. It was an interesting read, so I can thank you for sharing it. I learned a couple of things about East Asian cultures I had no inkling of before. I’d encourage you to actually at least skim it.

If you are honest and open-minded as you claim, own up to mistakes rather than trying to reframe them. Take a moment and actually look at how you are presenting views and interacting with other posters. Correction and redirection are part of any open discourse. Unwillingness to honestly engage other views is not. In the end, I’m happy to let you have the last word. I am hopeful it will be meaningful. If not, I tried to help you see.