The comments to my post about Stopping Abductions through prayer has me asking myself where the dialogue goes from here (or, from Roswell 2008). It’s not an easy question. I think there is a willingness on both sides to dialogue, but the issues (obstacles?) are significant:
1. Would any UFO conference deem the dialogue to be appropriate for hosting (or even tolerating)?
2. What is to be gained? It’s one thing to be able to sit down and express alternative views, but is there a specific goal beyond sitting and talking?
3. How many UFO researchers out there really care about the religious element?
4. Having been party to several such discussion, formal and informal, there is a fundamental problem with terminology. Each position tends to use terms like “spiritual”; “metaphysical”; “God”; “belief”; “religion”; “alien”; and “Christian” in different ways. Without some sort of pre-understanding, the dialogue may not only accomplish little, but may be unintelligible.
Any suggestions?
One way to advance the dialogue is to walk softly but carry a big stick. We do not want to seem overly arrogant because that is not the Christly thing to do. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with challenging the objectivity of non-Christian researchers if it is done respectfully. Dave Ruffino is right in pointing out that all sorts of New Age beliefs are mixed in with the supposedly scientific approach to abductions. Bishop and Redfern, for instance, believe in Tulpas. There is absolutely nothing scientifically verifiable about that mystical concept. And even those who attempt to stick with a strict scientific approach are still making large assumptions because this whole phenomenon of abduction, not to mention UFO’s in general, is based largely on guesswork. I would approach the dialogue then by pointing to the fact that all of us are bringing in pre-supposed notions from the get-go. Perhaps where we go from the Roswell 2008 incident is an examination of ourselves and what beliefs we are bringing with us to the discussion of UFO’s. And we have to be completely honest about doing so even if it makes us uncomfortable at times—and I mean Christians here as well as everybody else.
aeneas: Yes, owning up to presuppositions is necessary, and quite valuable. This is actually the tack I take on theological debates and within biblical studies – let’s put our presuppositions on the table and see which are coherent, and perhaps even more coherent.
Mike, I’ve never been to a UFO conference before. Have there been panels that discuss this sort of thing? What do people bring to the table as UFO investigators? The panel would not focus on what “evidence” anybody has found but on the world-view that they bring to this issue. But maybe it has been tried already…?
aeneas: Most conferences tend to focus on important cases, “new” approaches to untangling what’s going on, re-evaluation of old evidence, new witness testimony, that sort of thing. The Roswell event has been noteworthy for its forays into worldview and religion, but I think even this needs re-focus and (frankly) a more serious (read: academic) treatment. That said, I wouldn’t want to see “amateur” research displaced, because there are few academics who care about this or would risk their reputations (whatever they think they are) getting involved in the subject. In other words, it’s the amateurs that carry the inquiry in many instances, and many of them can be very good researchers. Ufology also tend to be “back-biter central” – so many people interested only in defending their own turf or pet views (everyone wants to be the person who unravels the Gordion knot).
Well, based on what you said in your last response, I don’t think there is anything else to be done at the moment to advance the dialogue among the UFO crowd. I think what you are doing here on this blog and through publications is the right thing. You are getting the message out to the regular folks, at least some of them. Perhaps by reshaping the paradigm of mainstream Christianity, you can aid future Christians in engaging in more persuasive dialogue with the secular crowd.
Hi Aeneas: Wow…”reshaping the paradigm of mainstream Christianity” seems to be a rather tall order! Are you referring to the “reshaping” as it relates to only the UFO enigma or in a sweeping 360 that “regular folks” and scholars alike can take up the gauntlet? Hmm…
Maybe I should have said late 19th to early 21st cent.’s paradigm of Christianity. Just in the U.S. alone, members of the Church do not seem well-educated about their beliefs. I should clarify that I do not mean to diminish non-academics by calling them “regular folks” (and I do not mean to elevate academics above them). My father, a rancher and businessman, is one of the smartest and wisest people I know, indeed much wiser than the majority of academics I’ve encountered over the years. However, his native intelligence does not give him the ability to discern ancient texts or complicated biblical criticism. I think we need better education in this country in general, but I especially think that we need better education within the Church. That does not mean that my father has to learn to read Hebrew, but we need to work to close the gap between people like my father and those with special training like Mike Heiser. I think it would be wonderful if at the local church level, people could be engaging with the issues like the ones on this blog. It certainly would make Sunday school more provocative! So, yes I mean a paradigm shift across the board.
aeneas: Boy, wouldn’t this be nice. Over on one of my other blogs I had to tell people I don’t care what degrees they have – clear thinking trumps degrees. But you are correct about the need for training (training and intelligence are separate items, but without training in biblical studies, native intelligence is not well served). Your wish is one reason I work where I work (www.logos.com), but I have to tell you, but most people and most Christians really aren’t interested in the Bible (probably stating the obvious, though it took me years to be dragged kicking and screaming to the realization). Most Christians are concerned about passing on their faith, which is VERY basic, and about raising their kids among and amid other like-minded believers, and about having close Christian friend. That’s pretty much it. Anything amounting to serious Bible study, even on the lay level, is viewed as odd or “impractical.” Trust me; I live with that frustration every day.
I am an educator so I know the frustration. But I think this leads us back to the original question of the post; however, maybe the question should be directed instead to other Christians and not secular UFO researchers. How about revising the question as, “Conservative Christian UFology and other Christian views: How Can a Joint Dialogue Be Advanced?”
Mike, i have experienced that same frustration with church members, i would get mad becuase they would be so ‘close minded’, or some would just simply wouldn’t care to learn or know anything ‘new’… all they care about is going to church, being a ‘nice christian person’, and converting people. which is great, but to me there is more than just that…hence why im here reading your blogs and books.
blessings
understood, but this wording would eliminate the non-Christian by definition.
rode: Yep; just trying to be useful here.
I guess I wonder what you mean by “advanced”. I was at the Roswell 2008 convention, and it was very interesting, but everyone seems to have their own agenda. I say just continue to “put things out there” like the current group of Christian ufologists are doing and “they will come.” While I think this is a very interesting subject, it affects very few people, so there isn’t really a pressing need for the churches to be prepped on this subject…I mean, how many pastors actually have to deal with someone in their congregation who has been abducted? The church as a whole has so totally de-mystified the Bible, that it will be a long road back to get them to open their eyes to this as being a real spiritual battle.
“Most Christians are concerned about passing on their faith, which is VERY basic, and about raising their kids among and amid other like-minded believers, and about having close Christian friend. That’s pretty much it. Anything amounting to serious Bible study, even on the lay level, is viewed as odd or “impractical.” Trust me; I live with that frustration every day.”
Boy, isn’t that the truth! I wonder what is up with the Christian church on this?! I hate to say this, but I can’t even go to church anymore, all they want to feed you is milk…I realize that not everyone is an egghead like me, but I honestly wish I could find some “real world” participation with other eggheads.
Yes, it would eliminate the non-Christian for now. However, as you pointed out in an earlier post, there is not much to be done at this point except continue to speak intelligently to the non-Christian about UFO issues. Debra asked if “regular folks” and academics would take up the gauntlet, and I think that is the only hope for the future. That’s why we need to focus our missionary work on the Church itself. So, how do we work to get the folks interested? It may seem like an insurmountable task but there must be a way. One wonders if a Mike Heiser radio program could go a long way in aspiring awareness (just one possibility). You could talk one-on-one with listeners and explain why it is important for everybody in the Church to be discussing these issues. If everybody became better trained to discuss issues like we find on your blog, then we would be in a better position to dialogue with the non-Christians.
anybody heard what jay bakker is doing these days…he’s calling it “agendaless christianity”.
good to witness if it comes up, but not beating everyone in sight over the head with man-made doctrine.
i think it’s a good way to look at this conversation and is in agreement with aeneas”Perhaps by reshaping the paradigm of mainstream Christianity, you can aid future Christians in engaging in more persuasive dialogue with the secular crowd.”
emphasis on dialogue with secular crowd…
as little as christians want to hear about this stuff…secular don’t want to hear ANY of it….
except richard dolan…sunday after the conference was over…dave flynn and i hung out with richard and karyn dolan and as fearfully as most of the lecturers reacted to christianity…the sublect was surprisingly almost entirely about that subject…a straight-up miracle in my book…rich was enthralled by dave’s material which led to an intimate discussion hours later…
so to back up an earlier statement, i think you(maybe not singlehandedly) ARE changing the paradigm from the inside out.
@Catherine_B: If you know me, this hits home. You’re certainly right about the Church “de-mystifying” (the scholarly word is de-mythologizing) the Bible. I’d go even further to say that the vast majority of good people in good churches don’t care to think deeply about much of anything, in part because their pastors can’t or won’t, but also because of laziness, worldliness, and they’ve been dumbed down by the broader culture.
I have had pastors contact me about abductees in their churches, though (but few).
@Catherine_B: Yep; that’s one of the reason for my blogs (they are as much for me as for you).
@aeneas: Interesting line “That’s why we need to focus our missionary work on the Church itself.” Makes me wonder how that would work (who would receive the topic?). I’ve also been asked many times about doing a radio show. I’m interested, but somewhat jaded. I don’t think any legitimate Christian radio network would want a “Coast to Coast AM meets Hardball for Christians” kind of show. It’s just not fluffy (insipid) enough. If you go to the internet, you basically hit the same crowd that C2C hits, which doesn’t reach the church in a substantial way. I have good reason to feel this way (I think). Although I have no publicist or anyone working for or with me in this arena, I would have to think by this time (15 Coast to Coast appearances) I would have been invited once to a mainstream Christian radio show. It’s never happened, and I never expect it to happen. I don’t even get invites for divine council stuff. They don’t want substance.
@free: Thanks, free. Rich is a great guy. I always enjoy him when I get to see him. (Same goes for Karyn, too). Thanks for the nod, too, but I honestly don’t feel that way. Mind, you, I’ll do what I do regardless of any acceptance or impact, just because I think it’s important and interesting. See my last reply to Catherine for why I’m jaded.
this brings back seperating “the church”(organized religion) from the body of “elect” separating from the world while living in it.
i think there is very little overlap…i see my generation going back to the underground idea.
owning and running a tattoo shop..you wouldn’t figure that would lend itself to this, but 80-90% of clients that sit in the chair bring up either(or both) aliens..(we do live in roswell) and faith/GOD.
it’s very humbling to pound out our day and just when you think the conversation couldn’t get interesting…..
the world is looking for ANY answer…and they’ve been so burned by “the church” that’s the last place they’ll go.
and that’s where i think alot of the tension from the secular side of the discussion is past experience.
i’ve seen the biggest mission field in america (maybe) and “the church” is reciprocating the fear of the seekers and just won’t touch it with a 10 foot pole.(even if it’s a measuring stick(cannon).
@free: yes, being “burned” by the church is a real and serious problem, and not just for this subject. I meet people all the time (both those who have left the faith and those who want to remain in it) who are very frustrated by the inability and unwillingness of pastors and Christians in general to really engage their questions and enter into thoughtful discussion. I could wax eloquent (or perhaps irritating) on why this is, from my perspective as a professor and now as someone who creates tools for serious Bible study, but I’ll shut myself off here. I go back to the lack of interest and ability to think deeply about much of anything that has so infected the church. I don’t want the solution to not include the organized church, but for *this* subject area, that’s asking a lot, since people are either spooked by the material or don’t see any value in it.
here’s another review of joe’s lecture.
it’s VERY even-keeled in my opinion, and brings up another facet of this discussion already touched on…presentation to the un(as yet)believers….
mike, if you remember what happened in 2003 when you, dave chris ward and richard c. were at the panel.
chris came off condesending and confrontational.
dave squared him away(meek dave) and everything blossomed from there..paola said it was the best panel she’s been on…
here’s that review…
Unholy Communion: An Unwanted Piece of the Puzzle or a Wholly Different Puzzle
Robert B. LeLieuvre, Ph.D.
H. L. Mencken once said that for every problem there is a simple solution that is usually wrong. This state of affairs may be playing out in ufology. That discipline’s almost obsessive reliance on the extraterrestrial hypothesis may turn out to be its Achilles Heel. A number of ufologists have argued for an expanded framework in which to locate the panoply of phenomena that are involved in sightings, contact, and abductions. John Keel, J. Allen Hynek, and Jacques Vallee are examples of those who have sought a broader and more inclusive way to understand and to explain UFO encounters, contact, and alien abductions. That these efforts were greeted with indifference at best and with hostility at worst had two major effects. First, the newer approaches were marginalized by mainstream ufology — ironic since that was the way science has treated ufology. Second, some of those who view anomalous phenomena in this newer manner sought more evidence and developed different models that may be suspect. It is in this second arena that the work of Joe Jordan and David Ruffino can be found.
Presented at the CE4 Research Conference in Roswell, New Mexico, as an adversarial trial procedure, Unholy Communion is a model that is based on fundamentalist Christian belief. It claims to be a reflection of the work of those authors mentioned above, as well as other writers, although one is hard-pressed to see those authors as proffering an exclusively Christian viewpoint. It bases its explanation of and approach to the abduction experience in biblical passages. While there is ample textual evidence in the Old and New Testaments that can be interpreted as contact with the alien other, this model interprets this evidence in demonic terms. It is this literal interpretation that is the basic problem — a problem that is inherent in all fundamentalist belief systems, be they religious, political, of ufological. As such, the model has several potential problems both as a scientific and as a therapeutic approach.
First, it lacks a sufficient database. Three hundred individuals make up its database. Given the estimated number of people who have been abducted, this number constitutes a small fraction of the total number of abductees.
Second, it argues that by invoking the name and authority of Jesus Christ, a person can terminate an abduction experience as it is occurring and can prevent its recurrence. Even if one reframes this process as a variant of the behavior therapy technique of thought stopping, this seems too simplistic. That it sets out one technique and allows for only one outcome may make it a clear example of what H. L. Mencken was talking about — a simple but possibly wrong solution. In so doing, the model ignores the vast array of approaches and outcomes that other abductees have discovered as they process their anomalous and often terrifying experiences.
Third, it ignores the many abductees who have called out to Jesus with little or no effect.
Fourth, its fundamentalist Christian focus excludes a large number of abductees and the vast majority of the world’s population who are not fundamentalist Christians.
Fifth, this model claims to be the only one that has been able to meet the scientific criterion of replicability (often seen as “the gold standard” of science). However, it does so in minimally controlled conditions and with few if any operational definitions necessary for making predictions about future efficacy.
Sixth, in an attempt to get a place at the ufological table, it argues for correlation as causation (tying increases in sightings and abductions to critical world events), mistakes its friends (other ufologists) for its enemies (aliens and the Ashtar Command), conflates reason with emotion and a good with a bad — the loose link of Vatican II with Hitler being a prime example of the latter.
Seventh, as is the case with “true believers,” the proponents of Unholy Communion run the risk of presenting with a certainty that can be seen as arrogance or hubris.
All this said, if Unholy Communion’s philosophy and approach make it attractive to some abductees and work for even a minority of abduction experiences, it must not be rejected out of hand. There are a number of abductees whose lives have been shattered by their experiences. They may not be the majority, who report finding meaning and solace in their experiences. If invoking the name and authority of Jesus Christ helps, then who is to say that this is wrong-headed and non-therapeutic. For this reason the work of Jordan and Ruffino should be viewed open-mindedly. If the findings can be replicated with other abductees, when treated by other clinicians, the model may hold promise for certain abductees. After all, Galileo was ultimately proven correct.
Roswell, New Mexico
July 2008
@free: I remember the 2003 panel well. Boy, if Greg Bishop’s description of Paola’s reaction was correct, her reaction to this recent event was 180 degrees from 2003. Something to think about.
The review does seem even-handed. The Mencken dictum is understandable, but by no means self-evident. It appears to be diametrically opposed to the oft-repeated dictum of another well known thinker, the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. Occam’s razor (or Ocham’s) goes like this: “All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best.” I’m not sure if “simplest” applies to abductions in the way CE4 would see it (or if it applies at all), but this is also worth thinking about.
I also couldn’t help be reminded as I read this of my own “odd” position in all this. Where do I fit in this dialogue when this is where I’m coming from:
1. I believe that alien abduction could very well be demonic, but I also believe it could be other things (false memory, sleep paralysis, night terrors, induced screen memory). The weakest view in my mind is the ETH, primarily because I first need evidence of ET before that option becomes coherent.
2. I believe that the Bible has a solution for abductees (whether deliverance or therapeutic in the sense of dealing with evil and focusing on God’s grace). And if ET ever enters into the mix, readers most likely know I don’t think that presents a theological problem either. This means by extension that I would not feel compelled to equate a genuine ET reality with demons or anything else evil. Alien life, if it exists, could be its own category, and therefore only evil by virtue of its behavior. The other side of the coin is also true: I would also not feel in any way compelled to see ET as an angel or any other divine being. It’s its own category.
3. I don’t think there are aliens, UFOs, or alien abductions in the Bible, even if alien abductions are demonic. I think this because I don’t see any evidence for it in the text. Possession and abduction are quite different. I don’t worry if other Christians disagree here. If that belief helps them process the issue, I guess that’s okay.
So where does that put me? What does that make me? (I usually opt for “stick in the mud”). Writing this makes me chuckle too, for it makes me think of Stanton Friedman’s ridiculous emails to me arguing that he sides with Ryan Wood’s opinion of me as a narrow-minded fundamentalist who sees the whole issue as demonic. Talk about not doing your homework. But I think we know where Stanton’s at in terms of objectivity in research. What a shame.
Greetings to all: Well Aeneas, you certainly got the “oomph” going in this thread =) And I also thank you for your thoughtful reply to my question. Frankly, I’ve never seen so much passion for knowledge and learning exhibited in one small place…all at once even! Before I get into the information I’m wanting to share I’d first like Mike and y’all to know one thing: I’m clueless about how-to-post-a-hypertext-link. But I’m willing to learn; thank you for tolerating this inconvenience until I do =) Today I read a tidbit claiming that the Christian majority knows little…if anything…about the “origins of their religion”. The implications here are really sad if true, and callously presumptuous if not, especially once you see where and how the statement is placed: it’s part of an ad for a movie called “The God Who Wasn’t There”. Yes Mike, and those who are interested, the movies’ claims are enormous, full of “quality” and “reputable” academic source research, testimonials, and various other fountains of knowledge. All this and more may be found at: thegodmovie.com Btw, about three months ago I also saw this movie ad placed next to something you wrote Mike, and I remember seeing it as a subtle juxtaposition, very odd and uncomfortable. Can’t recall the webpage though. *sigh* The other item I wanted to pass along relates to the crop circle that was allegedly and indirectly involved with David Flynn’s brother’s computer tech business; the circle in question being the one with the “Grey” entity holding an encrypted disk that was, at some point, “deciphered”. There’s quite a bit of information in this blog and you will find it at: eelrijuecircle.blogspot.com I know my post is sprinkled w/ several things. But it’s all put out here in hopes of urging the paradigm to shift =) And lastly: being that much of the information in “UFO Religions” and “PaleoBabble” interconnects, have you ever considered creating a comment area or something like it to accommodate these crossover topics? Blessings and Peace.
It’s interesting what you said in this last post–it all could be in the abductees’ dreams. I also wonder if malevolent beings (whether they are watchers, demons, Satan or whatever) could play around with people’s dreams; in other words, they manipulate dreams like a virtual reality program. And if that is so, could they possibility somehow externalize it into the outside world, thus creating some of what we see as UFO’s. It sure would be great if we could get rid of once and for all the whole blasted phenomenon, abductions and UFO’s (save for the military type of course) by simply learning how to control our dreams. Just a thought.
@Debra: I know of the page you note on the Flynn’s website; it was actually a focus of one of Dave’s AOD presentations at Roswell a few years back.
Regarding the Jesus and pagan origins of Christianity, the best recent book out on this (targeting James Price and other scholars on whom this idea depends) is by Boyd and Eddy – The Jesus Legend. Very good stuff. Both are evangelicals, and Boyd (a friend of mine) has debated Price a half dozen times. Here’s the link on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Legend-Historical-Reliability-Tradition/dp/0801031141/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217271075&sr=1-1
It’s interesting what you said in this last post–it all could be in the abductees’ dreams. I also wonder if malevolent beings (whether they are watchers, demons, Satan or whatever) could play around with people’s dreams; in other words, they manipulate dreams like a virtual reality program.
has anybody read “DMT: the spirit molecule” by rick strassman,M.D.?
backstory: did anybody ever see altered states…i think this is mostly about strassman….
did dmt experiments (i think in new mexico/albequerque)
in the 70’s with volunteers(some expericnced with psychadelics/some not experienced) that were looking for healing, better trip..etc.
i’ll quote…”the material in this and the next chapter is the most unusual and difficult to understand. it is the weirdest and the easiest for me to skirt when people ask-what did you find-” and “when reviewing my bedside notes, i continually feel surprise in seeing how many of our volunteers”made contact” with “them”, or other beings. at least half did so in one form or another. research subjects used expressions like entities, beings, aliens,guides and helpers to describe them. it is still startling to see my written records of comments like”there were these beings, i was being led, they were on me fast. it’s as if my mind refuses to accept what’s there in black and white”
he’s talking about his subject that encountered greys during a segment of their trip that wasn’t like the rest..in their words it was real, but during the experience.
not only did they see them, but also communicated 2 ways, recieved info. from them and in some horrifying experienced were “tested and experimented on” by them.
they said it was like a docking bay in a huge ship possibly where they were “waiting” for them.
there’s alot more to be said on this, but in a nutshell..
angels(or anybody with the technology for that matter) may have
the capability to induce this experience naturally at their whim.
here’s another to chew on…
what if YESHUA actually WANTS us to go thru the abduciton experience. now this may upset some at first, but isn’t what we’re going thru for the benefit of the angels… to show them something.
now personally, i don’t want it to happen to me, and i’m not saying that ANYBODY should…but what if we’re supposed to witness to them…not to save them, for everlasting chains and darkness…i know. but (this is for you, mike) maybe we have something to show them….just a weird thought that’s been going thru my head for awhile….
a story somebody told me was a woman in this pastor’s congregation was a christian just living their life, started being abducted, she tried everything, even using the name of jesus with no percievable change. so he told her to accept it and next time start witnessing to them…happened a couple of times and then abruptly stopped with no recurrence.
in 2 chapters called contact thru the veil
@free: interesting; I’ll have to look at the DMT stuff. Maybe RRR has read that already and can summarize it for us.
mike says-Where do I fit in this dialogue when this is where I’m coming from:
1. I believe that alien abduction could very well be demonic, but I also believe it could be other things (false memory, sleep paralysis, night terrors, induced screen memory). The weakest view in my mind is the ETH, primarily because I first need evidence of ET before that option becomes coherent.
**
i agree with you, big claims require big evidence(or ANY in this case).
you represent an overlooked point of view that some of the greats had(interdimentional).(vallee, etc.)
2. I believe that the Bible has a solution for abductees (whether deliverance or therapeutic in the sense of dealing with evil and focusing on God’s grace). And if ET ever enters into the mix, readers most likely know I don’t think that presents a theological problem either. This means by extension that I would not feel compelled to equate a genuine ET reality with demons or anything else evil. Alien life, if it exists, could be its own category, and therefore only evil by virtue of its behavior. The other side of the coin is also true: I would also not feel in any way compelled to see ET as an angel or any other divine being. It’s its own category.
**
again, this is a non-normal p.o.v.(much needed)
3. I don’t think there are aliens, UFOs, or alien abductions in the Bible, even if alien abductions are demonic. I think this because I don’t see any evidence for it in the text. Possession and abduction are quite different. I don’t worry if other Christians disagree here. If that belief helps them process the issue, I guess that’s okay.
So where does that put me? What does that make me? (I usually opt for “stick in the mud”). Writing this makes me chuckle too, for it makes me think of Stanton Friedman’s ridiculous emails to me arguing that he sides with Ryan Wood’s opinion of me as a narrow-minded fundamentalist who sees the whole issue as demonic. Talk about not doing your homework. But I think we know where Stanton’s at in terms of objectivity in research. What a shame.
**
stick in the mud, right…:( i don’t think so, you just deflate errant thinking and logic. then people just pile on unfounded assumptions to get back at someone with clear thinking.
actually i see you as more of a moderator in the discussion so far(not just in the blogs). you are helping all of us here to not just go with our emotions or preconceived notions.
i think this is INDISPENSABLE in the discussion.
i think people are just latching on to the “christian” label…
oh, i can’t agree with mike even though he’s logical…those christians…blah, blah, blah…i guess we could go right into great deception territory here…maybe this is how it’s going to play out.
@free: Thanks, Free.
Hi all,
I’m new here – please bear with me if I bring up what’s already been covered…
What Free (are you the “Alien Resistance” Free? ) said about all of this happening on earth being “for the angels” has been in my mind for a long time. I have been troubled by the fact that the omniscient God knew that the human race would betray its Creator, and that all of this suffering would come upon the world. I asked why God just didn’t forget about making the world when He first contemplated the idea, knowing that there would be so much evil and so much misery, misery beyond belief, that is so against his nature. I reasoned that the PURPOSE of Creation must be more important than anything we can imagine, even though we (and God) have to endure the world’s evil. I would think and think what such a monumental purpose could be. At one time, years ago as I was studying the Scriptures, I believed that I found a place in the epistles that suggested the reason for our creation: so that we(believers) could become a “Bride” for God’s Son. Obviously we cannot imagine the implications of that, i.e., why it is so important for God’s Son to HAVE a “bride.” Then I thought that it may be that God is trying to show the angels the Truth of who He is. He must be shown to be absolutely sovereign, yet abounding in the gift of free will (a seeming paradox). Without free will the “angels” could not have fallen. Perhaps God needs/wants/demands to or must show the whole of His creation (angels, “watchers” [fallen and not fallen], and any other intelligence that may be out there)that He is Lord. Even though mankind is now sinful, His grace allows man to serve Him with a free will, a better arrangement than when man was “favored” in the Garden (“It’s easy to serve God when things are good.”) What can be of such magnificent meaning, such tremendous importance, something we do not now know and may never know as human beings, that caused God to create us? I know that this question is nothing less than the “What’s the meaning of life?” question, but that only goes to show that people really want to know the answer (thinking people, i.e.). As you all have noted, so many do not care to think about these things, but if these things are truly of such cosmic proportions, should we not study very hard indeed? Shouldn’t we try to make righteous, INTELLIGENT sense of all these things? I don’t believe that we are meant to serve “blindly,” by “faith” without knowledge. God has given us the ability to ask: there must be an answer.
ashiya–
yes, i used to be associated with alien ressistance, but have since parted ways.
like what you had to say.
who are you?
free@roswellnmufoconference.com
feel free to drop me an e-mail.
but i would disagree on 1 thing, i don’t think (even thinking people) people REALLY want to know what’s up.
if it turned out to be something other than what they think is up, most would deny and keep looking elsewhere for their preconcieved notion until they just give up.
if we’re all looking for the ultimate truth, no matter where we start from, we should all end up in the same place. i just think all the fighting and what-not should stop ’till then.
IF there actually are “e.t.s” what would they think about how we are doing things now?
i hate to play into the nwo thing, but it’ll take 1 person selected by the planet as a whole(wonder who that could be;) as THE representative to work with.
by the looks of it…paris hilton???????
watch and laugh…
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2008/08/05/2008-08-05_paris_hiltons_new_attack_ad_fires_back_a.html
i’m crying from laughter and a little worried over this…
I do not know if I am In the right place or not
One Church told me we do not want any of this CRAZY talk in here,another will not talk to me
the one church i go door to door witnessing with one member was attacked where she could not move was 10 years ago ,I have been free 20+ years now I had to learn spiritual warfare as I went along
my experiences with fallen angels ,demons and HOLY ANGELS could help ,
alot of christians and other people are shaped by experiences rather than a bible first approach!!I know I could help I do not know where to GO I am on CE-4 reaserch group (poorly writen and alot left out) want to do more I am near washington DC
The truth is out there but it sure helps to know where to look.
This is a synopsis of truths I have discovered during my fifty year interest that began in the early 60’s with a book dad brought home called “Flying Saucers have Landed” by George Adamski. The full Pdf book is included on the DVD with many other hard to find pdf books. The real info is in the flv video documentaries linked to the synopsist is all on one DVD available on request. It also includes the keys to free energy and why this is denied us by the oil barons. It contains many other what may be called shocking truths,