UFO Disclosure

[InTheLight]

@MJ33:
12 pt series by Chuck Missler
LA Marzullis 0.05$ on it

These guys dont have any physical Body in a sense we would describe it, and can just take on whatever form they want to in this realm.

Was with you all the way up to this point. The Bible doesn't say much about demons, but it says nothing about this ability to assume whatever form they wish. You are also suggesting that they can take on the form of a flying object and fly at incredible speeds. I don't find that in the Bible.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Since Enoch tells us that fallen Angels tought man how to forge weapons and armor(in short gave us technology), .............

Enoch didn't tell anyone anything. The book of Enoch is not written BY Enoch. Most sources you can find define it as being written between 300 BC and 100 AD.

Whoever authored the book of Enoch speaks of the angel Penume (sp?) bring evil to humanity with his ink and paper. That's not how the Bible says that evil came here. And there was no ink and paper in Enoch's day.

This author also recalls the commissioning of Noah and the subsequent Flood in chapter 10, but how could that be when Enoch had long since been gone before those events happened?

Mostly convincing of all to me is chapter 70 and 71 where this author speaking as Enoch describe Enoch's translation into heaven and how he saw all the "first fathers" and the "righteous" and he saw God and the angels showed him all the secret things. Jesus said that no one has ascended into heaven but the one who came down - Himself.

There a huge amount of the book of Enoch that contradicts the Bible. That's why it was not put in the canon of scripture. Yes, Jude possibly quoted from it. But Paul quoted from Greek poets and the author of the Chronicles referred many extra-biblical books. That does not make any of those writings scripture.

 

[Rolfe]

I was what I call a traditional Christian for 25 years then went through a huge personal crisis and became agnostic, then militant atheist. I am no longer an atheist because I saw the flaws in the logic. I began to search again and have found my way back to the light. I am always "open and searching" because, I feel to do anything else would be a waste of my time here on earth.

Who or what do you consider "the light"? "Always open and searching" suggests that you have not found your way, and that you are gambling with your soul's eternal fate.

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. - II Corinthians 11:14

 

[Rolfe]

@MJ33Prolly some lower ranks cannot mess with matter, and are restricted to mind games, idk...

"Prolly"?

Had to look that one up. *laugh*

Cheers.

 

[Scarlett O.]

That's irrelevant if they are already here.

It doesn't matter if they are already here. Giraffes are already here and quasars are already here. Native Americans are already here and meteorites are already here. None of these are in God's plan of end times.

Just because something is in existence doesn't make it a variable in God's plan to wrap up his plan for humanity on this earth. I encourage you - as you say your are seeking and learning - to seek and learn the bible stance on what comprises God's plans for the end times.

I was what I call a traditional Christian for 25 years then went through a huge personal crisis and became agnostic, then militant atheist. I am no longer an atheist because I saw the flaws in the logic. I began to search again and have found my way back to the light. I am always "open and searching" because, I feel to do anything else would be a waste of my time here on earth.

I'm not trying to bash you over the head or anything, but in your profile - you say that you are saved. I'm having trouble wrapping that around my brain because what you describe here is not salvation. I am not questioning your salvation - as that is against the rules here. I just wish I could hear you say that you believe on Jesus Christ and believe that God resurrected him from the dead.

I KNOW that not everyone who is saved can explain it to everyone else's satisfaction. And that's not a requirement to being saved. I know that in my early years, I could NOT really explain what happened to me in spiritually mature terms. And you have been around the world in terms of spiritual seeking.

I just worry about you.

 

[Dolour]

Enoch didn't tell anyone anything. The book of Enoch is not written BY Enoch. Most sources you can find define it as being written between 300 BC and 100 AD.

I was actually refering to "the Book of Enoch" instead of the guy himself, my bad for being unprecise here.
Mind you how its allso called "the Book for the last Generation", so i disagree on weather "they"
are here or not being unimportant.
Its there to help us identify and deal with theese guys, and it had to be important, otherwise we
wouldnt have been given something aiding us in doing so.

Whoever authored the book of Enoch speaks of the angel Penume (sp?) bring evil to humanity with his ink and paper. That's not how the Bible says that evil came here. And there was no ink and paper in Enoch's day.

Poor translation that refers to the knowledge they gave us, in particular lots of things like drug usage(sorcery), astrology, etc, explicitly
forbidden in the Bible. hence this stuff was "evil".
Id consider warfare and "advanced" weapons pretty "evil" too btw...
Its not talking about the fall or the concept of evil at all.

This author also recalls the commissioning of Noah and the subsequent Flood in chapter 10, but how could that be when Enoch had long since been gone before those events happened?
Mostly convincing of all to me is chapter 70 and 71 where this author speaking as Enoch describe Enoch's translation into heaven and how he saw all the "first fathers" and the "righteous" and he saw God and the angels showed him all the secret things. Jesus said that no one has ascended into heaven but the one who came down - Himself.

The Bible says God "took" Enoch, he was the only Human that technically never died afaik, to a place from where he could observe all
kinds of weired things, including accounts of something thats often interpretet as "time dialation".
So, either the ancient astronaut guys are right, and Enoch was abboard a Spaceship, or he got moved out of our spacetime frame, into
one of the multiple "heavens". Ill stick with the latter one.
The same way english translations use just one word for the several "hells" (Gehennas, Tartarus, Hades etc) they allso just use one term
for "heaven", of which theres more than just one.
In John 3:13 its ouranós, as opposed to shamayim and, taken the above into context, speaks of the "heaven" in which God resides.

There a huge amount of the book of Enoch that contradicts the Bible. That's why it was not put in the canon of scripture. Yes, Jude possibly quoted from it. But Paul quoted from Greek poets and the author of the Chronicles referred many extra-biblical books. That does not make any of those writings scripture.

Its been a while since i gave it a read, but i dont recall any passage that contradicts the Bible really. Theres accounts of violations of Gods rules by Angels who practice or teach witchcraft etc, but Angels being disobedient to God isnt a contradiction to the Bible at all.
What it does contradict is the heliocentric worldview, and most likely wasnt included in canon for reasons like that and/or the description of magical arts, but thats a different story...
Allso, Jesus too quoted the Book of Enoch(yes i will not use just "Enoch" anymore), and i sayd this before:
If it was good enough for Jesus, it sure is good enough for me.

@ITL:

Was with you all the way up to this point. The Bible doesn't say much about demons, but it says nothing about this ability to assume whatever form they wish. You are also suggesting that they can take on the form of a flying object and fly at incredible speeds. I don't find that in the Bible.

You have to discern between fallen Angels and familiar/unclean/evil spirits, which are all lumped up under the term "demon" today,
that originally was a pagan term describing benelovent spirits(more like guardian Angels really).
Note how Luke 11 and Matthew 12 speaks of "unclean spirits" in the KJV, not demons.
The bible remains silent on the origin of those, and theres a whole discussion going on weather theese are the earthbound-souls
of the Nephilim killed during the flood, or not, etc...
See what i wrote on different ranks, this allso applies here, demon=/demon.
They surely arent all just the same, and noone can be really sure what they can and cannot do.
Unfortunatly most of the stuff, like the Apocrypha, which could have shed some light on this, were sucessfully removed from canon.
There however IS a wealth of information talking about how powers granted by theese entities, enable warlocks and witches etc
to shapeshift into animal form or hideous looking creatures for example.
Note that, if they can grant theese abilities to a mere human, they are for sure able to utilize those themselfes.
Everything a warlock or witch can do, is really done by "demons". If you wanna know what exactly they can or cant do, give
"Demonology" by King James and other literature dealing with the topic a read.
I wouldnt recommend delving too deep into this realm, but i think we can agree on the Bible not really being very talkative on the topic.
It just says dont practice it, and dont mingle with those that do...

@Rolf:

"Prolly"?
Had to look that one up. *laugh*

Excuse my crummy english, its still a foreign language to me.

 

[InTheLight]

@ITL:

They surely arent all just the same, and noone can be really sure what they can and cannot do.
Unfortunatly most of the stuff, like the Apocrypha, which could have shed some light on this, were sucessfully removed from canon.
There however IS a wealth of information talking about how powers granted by theese entities, enable warlocks and witches etc
to shapeshift into animal form or hideous looking creatures for example.

Yes, this is validating my contention that demons always need a host, human or animal, to do these sorts of things.

Note that, if they can grant theese abilities to a mere human, they are for sure able to utilize those themselfes.

No, that does not necessarily follow.

It seems to me that going down this path that "UFOs are demonic" is an attempt to explain the disparate accounts of UFO witnesses, alleged abductees, government information (and disinformation), etc. into one unified theory to neatly explain it all. IMO, it does not neatly explain it all, it causes all sorts other problems which must be solved with yet another set of strange ideas consisting of contortions and extra-Biblical interpretations in order to get to a semi-coherent hypothesis. Each step is built on a tenuous conclusion with the end result being far from the likely reality. Thus you get this:

1. Nephilim are the offspring of fallen angels and human females.

2. a.) The children of these unions were killed in the Flood and their spirits became wandering demons.
and/or
2. b.) The Nephilim were not killed, they survived. They've been hiding out for centuries waiting until the end of days to help the Antichrist gain power.

3. As part of the upcoming deception of the Antichrist, these Nephilim:
a.) built technologically advanced spacecraft and have them hidden somewhere in our solar system
and/or
b.) assisted humans by 'inspiring' them to 'discover' how to build such devices, after all, they couldn't do it on their own
and/or
c.) the demons transform themselves into flying objects
and/or
d.) deceive people into believing there are flying objects that can do crazy aerial maneuvers.

4. They use these "flying saucers" to sow uncertainty and panic in humanity, the end goal being a way to explain away the Rapture--UFO's abducted all the close-minded, intolerant Christians off the Earth so mankind could evolve to the next step of spiritual evolution and become "little gods" themselves. Just follow the new leader that has appeared on the scene, the Antichrist.

So when you get to the end of the trail and look back to the beginning you see an incredible amount of assumptions, conclusion jumping, rationalization, and filling-in-the blanks, which causes most adherents to blithely state, "UFOS are demonic" because they can't concisely state their position without having to go through all the hoops I've detailed. An honest analysis of the UFOs are demonic idea yields a bunch of unanswerable questions and gaping holes in logic. I'm not buying it.

 

[Dolour]

it causes all sorts other problems which must be solved with yet another set of strange ideas consisting of contortions and extra-Biblical interpretations in order to get to a semi-coherent hypothesis.

Thats the main and underlying point of your whole argumentation, yet you completely fail to see the utmost important thing here.
The KJV, which is in fact the 7th and foretold english Bible-Iteration, the only one authorized by a King, i.e. God given authority, and the
only english Bible to which no human holds the copyright(which should ring a major alarm bell, as if God would allow a man to have any
rights over his word) in its original state DID include the Apocrypha, wheather you like it or not.
Similar things go for the Book of Enoch which Jesus himself approved by quoting from it.
Calling that stuff extrabiblical sources is just ignoring what was given to us, and drawing conclusions on an information basis, that has
holes as wide as the grand canyon in it.
Mind 2 Cor. 2:17 etc, which warns us about forces that are at work trying, and very sucessfully so, to mess up the Word.
And NO, its still available, and will last till the end, just as promised.
If you take this "messed up" state as your reference, instead of the 1611 KJV including(!) the Apocrypha(which isnt inspired scriptire, but
does indeed provide valuable information, as approved by the King, i.e. authority) and ignore the references named by Jesus and his
Apostles(the Book of Baruch and Enoch for example), its not suprising that alot of theese conclusions dont make any sense to you.
But thats a matter cherrypicking what you like, instead of sticking to the entirety of it, and not of wheater scripture does approve it or not.

 

[InTheLight]

Thats the main and underlying point of your whole argumentation, yet you completely fail to see the utmost important thing here.
The KJV, which is in fact the 7th and foretold english Bible-Iteration, the only one authorized by a King, i.e. God given authority, and the
only english Bible to which no human holds the copyright(which should ring a major alarm bell, as if God would allow a man to have any
rights over his word) in its original state DID include the Apocrypha, wheather you like it or not.
Similar things go for the Book of Enoch which Jesus himself approved by quoting from it.
Calling that stuff extrabiblical sources is just ignoring the sources given to us, and drawing conclusions on an information basis, that has
holes as wide as the grand canyon in it.
Mind 2 Cor. 2:17 etc, which warns us about forces that are at work trying, and very sucessfully so, to mess up the Word.
And NO, its still available, and will last till the end, just as promised.
If you take this "messed up" state as your reference, instead of the 1611 KJV including(!) the Apocrypha(which isnt inspired scriptire, but
does indeed provide valuable information, as approved by the King, i.e. authority) and ignore the references named by Jesus and his
Apostles(the Book of Baruch and Enoch for example), its not suprising that alot of theese conclusions dont make any sense to you.

1. The KJV was copyrighted for years and years. I believe it still is copyrighted in England, but no longer in the rest of the world.

2. Please provide the quotations where Jesus quoted the Book of Enoch.

3. The Book of Enoch and the Apocrypha IS extra-Biblical.

 

[Dolour]

1. The KJV was copyrighted for years and years. I believe it still is copyrighted in England, but no longer in the rest of the world.

Its the only Bible you can quote more than 200 words from without being charged, and doesent fall under "ordinary" copyright law.
The KJV is free to everyone...

2. Please provide the quotations where Jesus quoted the Book of Enoch.

http://www.nairaland.com/1080843/book-enoch-jesus-quoted-it

3. The Book of Enoch and the Apocrypha IS extra-Biblical.

Correction, its not in MODERN Bibles.
Where i really wonder how ppl can roll with them to begin with.
The Bible says "purified 7 times", not twenty-something...

 

[InTheLight]

Its the only Bible you can quote more than 200 words from without being charged, and doesent fall under "ordinary" copyright law.
The KJV is free to everyone...

No, the KJV is protected by copyright in the UK by Cambridge Crown Press. When the copyright expires on the NKJV, the NIV, ESV, etc. just like it had to expire on the KJV, these versions may be quoted for free as well.

http://www.nairaland.com/1080843/book-enoch-jesus-quoted-it

Yeah....I've heard of stretching things to make them fit before.

Correction, its not in MODERN Bibles.
Where i really wonder how ppl can roll with them to begin with.
The Bible says "purified 7 times", not twenty-something...

The apocrypha was never intended to be considered inspired and used for doctrine. It was included for instruction and education.

 

[TCassidy]

The KJV, which is in fact the 7th and foretold english Bible-Iteration,

Actually that proves not to be the case.

1. The Lindisfarne Gospels dating to about 700 A.D.
2. In about 1300 the Ormulum appeared.
3. John Wycliffe 1382.
4. Tyndale, 1525.
5. Myles Coverdale Bible 1535.
6. Thomas Matthew Bible 1537.
7. The Great Bible 1538 (a revision of the Coverdale Bible above.)
8. The Geneva Bible 1560
9. The Bishop's Bible 1568.
10. Rheims Bible 1582.
11. KJV 1611 (a revision of the Bishops' Bible, above).

the only one authorized by a King, i.e. God given authority,

Well, sorry, but wrong again.

The Great Bible of 1538 was Authorized by King Henry VIII.

The Bishop's Bible of 1568 was Authorized by Elizabeth I.

and the only english Bible to which no human holds the copyright(which should ring a major alarm bell, as if God would allow a man to have any rights over his word)

Sorry again, but wrong again. The KJV is now and always has been under copyright in England. Upon publication of the Authorized Version in 1611, King James I of England assigned to that great work a "Cum Privilegio" (Latin: with privilege). The Cum Privilegio was issued in the form of a "Patent" which is very much like our copyright. However, the King realized that patent (copyright) law stated that a patent or copyright was only good for the life of the person holding the copyright, plus 50 years, so, instead of placing the patent in his name, or the names of the translation committee members, he issued the patent in the name of the Crown (a "Royal Letters Patent in Perpetuity"). In this way, he was able to secure the patent for the duration of the British Crown, plus 50 years. This means that it will never come into the public domain unless HM the Queen or one of her successors releases the patent.

 

[Dolour]

No, the KJV is protected by copyright in the UK by Cambridge Crown Press. When the copyright expires on the NKJV, the NIV, ESV, etc. just like it had to expire on the KJV, these versions may be quoted for free as well.

https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/King-James-Version-KJV-Bible/
"The KJV is public domain in the United States." It doesent say anything about CR in the UK.
You should really stop just assuming things, and not bothering to doublecheck, you only make yourself look really, really ignorant.

Yeah....I've heard of stretching things to make them fit before.

Im more and more startled by your blatant denial of easily verifiable facts...
Ill take it your "modern bible" doesent contain those listed verses anymore?
That btw is the first result that comes up googling "Jesus quoting Enoch".

The apocrypha was never intended to be considered inspired and used for doctrine. It was included for instruction and education.

It was nevertheless approved as important part to understand scripture by the King, he even wrote a preface to the chapter.
When did you, or anybody else deciding it had to be thrown out, become a godgiven authority?
Its apparent by now, that you just ignore those parts of scripture which arent inline with what you believe.

But id like to sincierly thank you, without guys like you, becoming living prophecy themselfes, id have a hard time taking this stuff literal.

/edit: @TCassidy:
Oh nice, that quite doesent match the summary ive came across.
Good to know, im goina get myself a 1538 The Great Bible the next couple days.
Thanks.
/edit: now i see... That summary allso includes translations from latin, translations of translations so to speak.
My bad to not specify it correctly, the 7th translation from the hebrew, arameic and greek texts.

Sorry again, but wrong again. The KJV is now and always has been under copyright in England. Upon publication of the Authorized Version in 1611, King James I of England assigned to that great work a "Cum Privilegio" (Latin: with privilege). The Cum Privilegio was issued in the form of a "Patent" which is very much like our copyright. However, the King realized that patent (copyright) law stated that a patent or copyright was only good for the life of the person holding the copyright, plus 50 years, so, instead of placing the patent in his name, or the names of the translation committee members, he issued the patent in the name of the Crown (a "Royal Letters Patent in Perpetuity"). In this way, he was able to secure the patent for the duration of the British Crown, plus 50 years. This means that it will never come into the public domain unless HM the Queen or one of her successors releases the patent.

Interresting, but nevertheless theres no company or person holding the rights, but the "Crown" as you put it, or in other words the godgiven authority, right?
So this is kinda unprecidented, which imo is even underlining the point.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Jesus was quoting the book of Enoch? We don't even know when that book was written. As i said earlier, scholars place it in a range of somewhere between 300 BC to 100 AD. Perhaps the author of the book of Enoch quasi-quoted Jesus. Perhaps the author of the book of Enoch quoted quasi-quoted Jude. I say quasi-quoted as most of the quotes are not exact. There are a lot of unknown variables there.

As for the King James and the purification of "7 times". That particular psalm (Psalm 12) is not in reference to translations of the Bible - in English or otherwise. It's not an algorithm. Even if it were [which it is not], the King James is not the 7th English translation.

 

[InTheLight]

https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/King-James-Version-KJV-Bible/
You should really stop just assuming things, and not bothering to doublecheck, you only make yourself look really, really ignorant.

And the ad homenim attacks begin.

Your link states that the KJV is in the public domain in the USA. Previously I said:

1. The KJV was copyrighted for years and years. I believe it still is copyrighted in England, but no longer in the rest of the world.

So here ya go:
Rights in The Authorized Version of the Bible (King James Bible) in the United Kingdom are vested in the Crown and administered by the Crown’s patentee, Cambridge University Press. The reproduction by any means of the text of the King James Version is permitted to a maximum of five hundred (500) verses for liturgical and non-commercial educational use,
http://www.cambridge.org/bibles/about/rights-and-permissions

It was never theless approved as important part to understand scripture by the King, he even wrote a preface to the chapter.
When did you, or anybody else deciding it had to be thrown out, become a godgiven authority?

When did King James, confirmed homosexual, become a God given authority?

Its apparent by now, that you just ignore those parts of scripture which arent inline with what you believe.

The Apocrypha and the Book of Enoch are not inspired scripture, so no, they aren't in line with what I believe.

But id like to sincierly thank you, without guys like you, becoming living prophecy themselfes, id have a hard time taking this stuff literal.

You're welcome. I'd like to thank you for proving my point that a coherent argument for "UFOs are demonic" is impossible to make.

 

[Dolour]

Jesus was quoting the book of Enoch? We don't even know when that book was written. As i said earlier, scholars place it in a range of somewhere between 300 BC to 100 AD. Perhaps the author of the book of Enoch quasi-quoted Jesus. Perhaps the author of the book of Enoch quoted quasi-quoted Jude. I say quasi-quoted as most of the quotes are not exact. There are a lot of unknown variables there.

Jesus had supernatural knowledge of scripture, theres noumerous examples of that.
Not even the wealthiest Synagoges had complete copies of the Scriptures, yet Jesus could quote them all from memory.
Allso, God exists outside of time, therefore it isnt a nessity that those writings did allready exist. He was well aware of things that would
be written in the future as well.

As for the King James and the purification of "7 times". That particular psalm (Psalm 12) is not in reference to translations of the Bible - in English or otherwise. It's not an algorithm. Even if it were [which it is not], the King James is not the 7th English translation.

The Bible says however that "interpretation of tongues", translation, (1st Cor. if im not mistaken) is an act that can be guided by the holy spirit.
And i very well do believe god uses algorithms, as can be clearly seen in the hundrets of "7 codes" in the original writings.
I wouldnt be suprised if that pattern is applicable to any language the bible was translated into.

@ITL:

When did King James, confirmed homosexual, become a God given authority?

The Bible says authority is given by God.
He was the King, homo or not.
Since when did you earn the right to Judge Gods actions?

The Apocrypha and the Book of Enoch are not inspired scripture, so no, they aren't in line with what I believe.

With only your believes to back it up...
Its been in the KJV(and prior to that), and man deciding to take it out wont change anything about it.
If you think this through, you claim that believers used a faulty bible for about 1500years.

You're welcome. I'd like to thank you for proving my point that a coherent argument for "UFOs are demonic" is impossible to make.

The only thing youve prooven, is that taking the Bible literal is only an option for you if it doesent contradict your believes...
As soon as that happens, see above.

 

[Revmitchell]

I have to wonder about the username "Dolour". I am sorry but it is just disturbing. Further Demons did not procreate with women, Demons are not extraterrestrials, and there are no UFO's just as there are no bigfoots, and no abominable snowmen. Folks who purport such things will not be taken seriously.

 

[Dolour]

I have to wonder about the username "Dolour". I am sorry but it is just disturbing. Further Demons did not procreate with women, Demons are not extraterrestrials, and there are no UFO's just as there are no bigfoots, and no abominable snowmen. Folks who purport such things will not be taken seriously.

That statement actually explains the username...
Im deeply sadened by ppl who decide based on presumptions, with no time whatsoever spent to proove or debunk those, or any other claims, they consider ludicrous, just bc public oppinion says so.
Give that sieries ive linked on page 1 a watch, before dismissing it, just because it contradicts your worldview.
The first 5 minutes will give you a "certain" clue at why it sadens me, to read something like that from a christian.
"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him."
If even we dont act as the bible teaches us to do, how can we expect anyone selse to do so?

 

[InTheLight]

J
With only your believes to back it up...
Its been in the KJV(and prior to that), and man deciding to take it out wont change anything about it.

Yes, and it was man that decided to include it in the first place. So there ya go...

If you think this through, you claim that believers used a faulty bible for about 1500years.

Nice strawman. I said nothing of the sort.

The only thing youve prooven, is that taking the Bible literal is only an option for you if it doesent contradict your believes...
As soon as that happens, see above.

And you've shown in order to support your position (which has NEVER been clearly stated, just skirted around the edges) you have to resort to extra-Biblical sources to make it somewhat hang together.

 

[Revmitchell]

That statement actually explains the username...
Im deeply sadened by ppl who decide based on presumptions, with no time whatsoever spent to proove or debunk those, or any other claims, they consider ludicrous, just bc public oppinion says so.
Give that sieries ive linked on page 1 a watch, before dismissing it, just because it contradicts your worldview.
The first 5 minutes will give you a "certain" clue at why it sadens me, to read something like that from a christian.
"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him."
If even we dont act as the bible teaches us to do, how can we expect anyone selse to do so?

Let's get one thing straight. Just because you show up here all of the sudden and post these ridiculous things does not mean the following:

1. Others have not looked at the evidence.
2. Others need to prove to you they have
3. We need to take you and your so called trumped up evidence seriously
4. That this subject has not been talked about before on this board adnausium

You and your evidence is nothing new. It is a distraction from reality and Christians have no place giving it any further consideration. Also Christians have no business using name like "Dolour". That is not an example of the Christian walk. In fact it is just the opposite.