The Bible and UFO Connection

Sacredstar

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Essex, UK
This is a fascinating website www.bibleufo.com


The Work on the website includes the following:

The prime purpose of this work is to present evidence concerning a glaring deception concerning the return of the Christ. The Bible clearly presents evidence that the God of the Bible, and the beings associated with God, travel in flying vehicles strikingly similar to those witnessed in our skies, which are known in this modern age as UFOs, Unidentified Flying Objects. We believe that the enemy of God, now on this planet, is rapidly convincing its inhabitants that these UFOs are either his own vehicles, thus making them appear evil, or are controlled by an aggressive alien force. This deception, as predicted in scripture and will result in the rejection of the "Second Coming" of the Christ by the world.

It is also our purpose to identify the true deception that will result in world dominance by a corporate empire, controlled and inspired by the forces of Satan, which will bring the entire world to the brink of destruction. As the churches of this world are described as participating in that deception and control, we have presented the doctrines of the church and exposed glaring contradictions in comparison to true biblical doctrine. Ancient megalithic structures, evidence of ancient technology, modern phenomena, anomalous artifacts, and the wonders of the human creation are also brought into the equation.
   
Our research has revealed much more than a vague possibility that God and UFOs are connected. It is important to state at this point that, where we make definitive statements it is from evidence, were we speculate, and that is always stated, it is from careful consideration and applied logic. We are always open to correction where the solid evidence warrants. We have organized the main points into brief statements, with links to the pages that contain the conclusions of our research by category.

This could make for a wonderful discussion when we have time.

Love beyond measure

kim xx
 
Macdonalds and Starbucks have always put the willies up me, now I know why ;-)

My God lacks the physicality of a UFO and it would certaily not want to land in some strange outback of the countryside and stick probes in anyone's nether regions. God is (or is not, if you are so inclined), that is all there is to it. I have a NIMBY approach - live as best you can, just don't do the nasty stuff and expecially not near me (or even say it).
 
Ezekial is sometimes quoted as the first UFO experience in UFO history - though the problematic issue here is that the sky has often been associated with the realms of the spiritual.
 
I've long believed that much of the Bible can be interpreted as a series of encounters with extraterrestrials. This is not to say that I necessarily believe that to be so, just that it is one interpretation of many of the happenings reported there. In fact, one day I might sit down and do a full analysis of the Bible in that light. Parts of it have already been given that treatment ("The Spaceships of Ezekiel" for example, which I believe was actually written by a NASA scientist, or a former one), but I'm not aware of anyone who has looked at the Bible as a whole with that thesis in mind.

Anyway, even if you look at God and the Bible in thoroughly conventional Christian terms, it must be said that God is an extraterrestrial. After all, he isn't from here. Therefore, by definition, he must be an extraterrestrial. Right?
 
For another view of the religious significance of UFOs, see Carl Jung's
Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Sky. Whether one puts stock in the physical reality of extraterrestrials or not, Jung's take on the issue is illuminating.


"In the threatening situation of the world today, when people are beginning to see that everything is at stake, the projection-creating fantasy soars beyond the realm of earthly organizations and powers into the heavens, into interstellar space, where the rulers of human fate, the gods, once had their abode in the planets.... Even people who would never have thought that a religious problem could be a serious matter that concerned them personally are beginning to ask themselves fundamental questions. Under these circumstances it would not be at all surprising if those sections of the community who ask themselves nothing were visited by `visions,' by a widespread myth seriously believed in by some and rejected as absurd by others."--C. G. Jung, in Flying Saucers

Jung's primary concern in Flying Saucers is not with the reality or unreality of UFOs but with their psychic aspect. Rather than speculate about their possible nature and extraterrestrial origin as alleged spacecraft, he asks what it may signify that these phenomena, whether real or imagined, are seen in such numbers just at a time when humankind is menaced as never before in history. The UFOs represent, in Jung's phrase, "a modern myth."
 
The throne of God is the mothership.

The chariot of God is a low-flying alien spaceship.

The malachim are beings who were designed by their masters to look like us and thus manipulate us.

The seraphim are aliens who care for the master aliens and serve them directly.

The ophanim are galactic creatures created in order to control the cosmos.

The cherubim are mechanized legos that can be assembled as destructive weapons or vehicles or whatever might be useful.

The chayot are energy beams that relay messages between the mother ship and angel-units on the ground. Sometimes they are accidentally intercepted by a human being and perceived as a white light.

Jesus was really a spacesuit worn by 6,200,310 of the master aliens in an attempt to contact man directly without the need for the other creatures or robots, but this proved unsuccessful as the suit went haywire at the Temple, knocking over a number of tables. The suit self-destructed, but not before the aliens erased the memories of all present and replaced them with something that would better serve their plan. The aliens do not really exist in our dimension and so no trace of them was ever found. They were so decimated by this failed experiment that they have been unable to try again, as they gestate over a period of 80 years with a mating practice that involves 10 individuals, only yielding 3 aliens each time. They need exactly 6,200,310 aliens to run the Jesus-suit, but then they will return.

Yes. Ho. Now I have figured it all out. So simply really. Yes. Ho. Ho.

Dauer
 
Kindest Regards!

While I realize this is a very controversial topic, the subject has crossed my mind on more than one occasion. I think LittleMissAttitude said it well, "...in thoroughly conventional Christian terms, it must be said that God is an extraterrestrial. After all, he isn't from here. Therefore, by definition, he must be an extraterrestrial."

I have seen mention of Ezekiel here, but no mention of Elijah or Elisha. Even in considering the creation of Genesis, particularly the Garden of Eden, I can see the distinct possibility of "alien" interference as it were. Doesn't "alien" mean, when translated, "stranger?"

I realize this is a subject that draws a lot of criticism, and like many things associated with belief and the spiritual, really tough to attempt to prove. Just ask Von Daniken! Or Fox "Spooky" Mulder! <ooo-eee-ooo!>
 
What I find most interesting about subjects like this is a simple question. Have we, in our own search for "enlightenment" managed to make the mysteries of faith mundane? Do we need to search for things out of the normal realm of belief to make religion interesting?

It seems to me, when we contemplate subjects like this that we are looking outwardly to find inspiration. Many faiths stress the inward struggle to overcome the disunion with God.

the janitor.
 
Kindest Regards, janitor, and welcome to CR!
janitor said:
Have we, in our own search for "enlightenment" managed to make the mysteries of faith mundane? Do we need to search for things out of the normal realm of belief to make religion interesting?

Hmmm. I can't speak for any others, I go where the evidence leads. So, I guess what you might be inferring is not normal, to me is quite possibly normal. I guess I have no set boundaries in my thinking as to just what "normal" is. Oh, just thought of one; philosophical feedback loops. If a particular line of thought becomes a dead end or a stagnation, then I jettison it from my reasoning (before it does any further harm). ;)

It seems to me, when we contemplate subjects like this that we are looking outwardly to find inspiration. Many faiths stress the inward struggle to overcome the disunion with God.

Yes, many faiths do stress an inward search, and that is a good thing. Many faiths stress an outward search, and that too is a good thing. In my opinion, some things cannot be contained inwardly, and so cannot be found there. Likewise, some things are too small to be noticed in the outward picture, but are more easily discovered within the inward picture. Does this help? :)
 
Thank you for the warm welcome Juantoo3,

I will try to clarify some of my points so as not too be misunderstood. The normal that I refer to is basically what is accepted by most of the major religions. I do not have a problem with thinking outside these lines, but I do think that one needs to be careful as to not get too away from themselves and the relationship with God. Sometimes the "evidence" we recieve is not entirely accurate, so I think that caution is needed when following that evidence. Deciding to take no path is bad enough, but being unsure of a path is worse because we only have to back up and try something different.

You missed my point with the inward search. One of the things that we are all trying to achieve is some for of enlightenment, wether that be with reuniting with God, nirvana, or whatever we wish to call the end of the journey. Generally that search begins within, if we begin by looking outward that search becomes just a bunch of tail chasing because we did not start at the center. The center that most religions teach is is following what God we believe in, but in reality we are all selfish creatures, and we really should start with the inward approach, even though at some points it is difficult, so we can be sure of what we search for. Hence we need to start withing ourselves before we can truly search the outer limits of spirituality. Hopefully that helps clairify the thought.

the janitor
 
Kindest Regards, janitor!

BTW, I like your screen name. I learned long ago to get to know the janitor too. :)
janitor said:
I will try to clarify some of my points so as not too be misunderstood. The normal that I refer to is basically what is accepted by most of the major religions. I do not have a problem with thinking outside these lines, but I do think that one needs to be careful as to not get too away from themselves and the relationship with God. Sometimes the "evidence" we recieve is not entirely accurate, so I think that caution is needed when following that evidence. Deciding to take no path is bad enough, but being unsure of a path is worse because we only have to back up and try something different.
OK, I see your point. I think I said something similar when I mentioned philosophical dead-ends. The concept is the same, having to back up and re-group. It is a good thing to have a basis in a major religion, it just seems to me that each major religion has a tendency to overlook something, sometimes many somethings, so that no one religion has all of the answers. I don't know if this was deliberate on the part of God or not, or perhaps something within the power drive of men. It just seems to me to be, whatever the reason.

You missed my point with the inward search. One of the things that we are all trying to achieve is some for of enlightenment, wether that be with reuniting with God, nirvana, or whatever we wish to call the end of the journey. Generally that search begins within, if we begin by looking outward that search becomes just a bunch of tail chasing because we did not start at the center. The center that most religions teach is is following what God we believe in, but in reality we are all selfish creatures, and we really should start with the inward approach, even though at some points it is difficult, so we can be sure of what we search for. Hence we need to start withing ourselves before we can truly search the outer limits of spirituality. Hopefully that helps clairify the thought.
Ah! OK, I think I see what you mean, to be grounded in some belief before venturing off to discover elsewhere. That is good advice in my opinion, and I would certainly be hesitant (especially in this day and age with all manner of flaky non-conformist traditions out there), were I not grounded well in my own tradition. Of course, one does need to be able to let go for a moment in order to explore, even if one returns. The nature of exploration is to broaden one's horizon. Sometimes that means letting go of things that are no longer relevent (or better said, discovered to be not relevent to begin with). This is the fluff, the baggage, the "traditions of men" that is added on to a belief. In a way I guess, searching the outer limits for me has been the attempt to whittle away the excess baggage in an effort to get to the foundation, the reality, the core essence. I know that seems contradictory, but words fail me here. :)
 
juantoo3 said:
Kindest Regards, janitor!

BTW, I like your screen name. I learned long ago to get to know the janitor too. :)

OK, I see your point. I think I said something similar when I mentioned philosophical dead-ends. The concept is the same, having to back up and re-group. It is a good thing to have a basis in a major religion, it just seems to me that each major religion has a tendency to overlook something, sometimes many somethings, so that no one religion has all of the answers. I don't know if this was deliberate on the part of God or not, or perhaps something within the power drive of men. It just seems to me to be, whatever the reason.


. :)
i know this is true & i wonder sometimes if that is how God wanted it to be also. Funny thing is, so many who are only in view of there own organized religion cannot see that there is true & false teaching in them all.

power drive of men is good :) & i think a basis in religion is ok too. could be what people find important to themselves..not sure there.
 
Juantoo, I do not think that the explanation is contradictory at all. I understand and pretty much agree with your explanation. I was glad that I got my point across this time. One of the things that concerns me is that there are so many who do not pick a point of reference, and just go off hap hazardly, they never really form a basis for their own discussions on matters of faith. I have no probelem with a reasonable starting point and carving the edges off untill you get to the center of the tootsie roll pop.

janitor
 
Kindest Regards, janitor, and a hearty nod to Bandit!

Those you speak of, if I understand correctly, are those who build their own "smorgasbord" religion as I like to call it. Yes, they trouble me. Picking and choosing what one wants to hear and ignoring the unpleasantries pretty much defeats the purpose. One can't survive on a diet of ice cream...you gotta eat your veggies too, like it or not!
 
Back
Top