Did Jesus Already Return? Are we in the Satanic Era of Revelation 20?

[Winston]

@Winston
My grandmother had stories passed down in the family from her grandparents. My dad knew his grandfather and we know who his parents were, and theirs. We can find the patralineal line going back to the 1500s. I can go to graves going back past the orphan train times.

You are listening to revisionist history. During the industrial revolution, grain was cheap, making it hard for English farmers to compete. Theoretical free traded makes nations wealthier, so as the 1800s progressed and the corn laws were repealed, English farmers had to compete with the cheap grain from the glut if farmers with large plots of land in the midwest.

Couples has sex without modern birth control and had lots of kids. Doctors hadn't learned to wash their hands after touching cadacers and infected wounds before delivering babies, so women would die in childbirth. One parent gone. If dad died in his 70 an hour a week dangerous factory job, the kids were orphaned. Lindon gad workhorses and child pickpockets on the streets.

In the late 1800s, thousands of orphans were sent on 'orphan trails' by charities trying to place street kids in New York. Some of them had families too poor to take care of them. They adopted them out to families that wanted them--some were farmers toward the west who had huge farms

Tartaria was used to refer to Mongol lands for centuries. Mongol rather than Tartar probably became the preferred ethnic designation along the way. But Europeans with fuzzy information used the term for those under what had been the Mongol Empire, sometimes including China, for centuries.

Yeah but MrMan, just because something is revisionist history doesn't mean it's false. What about all the evidence above? You can't just ignore it. Also we all know that the victors write history and a lot of our history doesn't make sense and is falsified and a lot of data doesn't fit into it. Reality may not be as solid and logical as you think. The reason revisionist history exists is because the official narrative doesn't make sense. Didn't you get that? That Christian woman above, Shelly, made that point in all her videos above. Didn't you see any of them? Why can't you at least admit partial truth here rather than dismiss it all whole cloth 100 percent?

If there was no evidence for revisionist history, then the books and videos above wouldn't exist. Did you think about that? What you gave above is the official narrative but there is a lot that doesn't fit into it. Didn't you get that? The truth is not 100 percent on one side or the other, because both positions have problems.

[Pixel--Dude]

@Winston
My grandmother had stories passed down in the family from her grandparents. My dad knew his grandfather and we know who his parents were, and theirs. We can find the patralineal line going back to the 1500s. I can go to graves going back past the orphan train times.

You are listening to revisionist history. During the industrial revolution, grain was cheap, making it hard for English farmers to compete. Theoretical free traded makes nations wealthier, so as the 1800s progressed and the corn laws were repealed, English farmers had to compete with the cheap grain from the glut if farmers with large plots of land in the midwest.

Couples has sex without modern birth control and had lots of kids. Doctors hadn't learned to wash their hands after touching cadacers and infected wounds before delivering babies, so women would die in childbirth. One parent gone. If dad died in his 70 an hour a week dangerous factory job, the kids were orphaned. Lindon gad workhorses and child pickpockets on the streets.

In the late 1800s, thousands of orphans were sent on 'orphan trails' by charities trying to place street kids in New York. Some of them had families too poor to take care of them. They adopted them out to families that wanted them--some were farmers toward the west who had huge farms

Tartaria was used to refer to Mongol lands for centuries. Mongol rather than Tartar probably became the preferred ethnic designation along the way. But Europeans with fuzzy information used the term for those under what had been the Mongol Empire, sometimes including China, for centuries.

Yeah but MrMan, just because something is revisionist history doesn't mean it's false. What about all the evidence above? You can't just ignore it. Also we all know that the victors write history and a lot of our history doesn't make sense and is falsified and a lot of data doesn't fit into it. Reality may not be as solid and logical as you think. The reason revisionist history exists is because the official narrative doesn't make sense. Didn't you get that? That Christian woman above, Shelly, made that point in all her videos above. Didn't you see any of them? Why can't you at least admit partial truth here rather than dismiss it all whole cloth 100 percent?

If there was no evidence for revisionist history, then the books and videos above wouldn't exist. Did you think about that? What you gave above is the official narrative but there is a lot that doesn't fit into it. Didn't you get that? The truth is not 100 percent on one side or the other, because both positions have problems.

The problem with Christians like @MrMan is that the objective truth is whatever they want it to be. Case in point the story of the Bible could well be a work of fiction with the front page "to my darling Mary. This is a work of fiction, all characters portrayed in this novel that represents people living or dead is purely coincidental." The book was written by other MrMen who wanted to pass certain agendas.

So why are you appealing to the above posted evidence when MrMan believes the Bible is evidence of its own authenticity. MrMan doesn't care about evidence or facts. He only cares about what he wants the truth to be.

[WanderingProtagonist]

@Winston
My grandmother had stories passed down in the family from her grandparents. My dad knew his grandfather and we know who his parents were, and theirs. We can find the patralineal line going back to the 1500s. I can go to graves going back past the orphan train times.

You are listening to revisionist history. During the industrial revolution, grain was cheap, making it hard for English farmers to compete. Theoretical free traded makes nations wealthier, so as the 1800s progressed and the corn laws were repealed, English farmers had to compete with the cheap grain from the glut if farmers with large plots of land in the midwest.

Couples has sex without modern birth control and had lots of kids. Doctors hadn't learned to wash their hands after touching cadacers and infected wounds before delivering babies, so women would die in childbirth. One parent gone. If dad died in his 70 an hour a week dangerous factory job, the kids were orphaned. Lindon gad workhorses and child pickpockets on the streets.

In the late 1800s, thousands of orphans were sent on 'orphan trails' by charities trying to place street kids in New York. Some of them had families too poor to take care of them. They adopted them out to families that wanted them--some were farmers toward the west who had huge farms

Tartaria was used to refer to Mongol lands for centuries. Mongol rather than Tartar probably became the preferred ethnic designation along the way. But Europeans with fuzzy information used the term for those under what had been the Mongol Empire, sometimes including China, for centuries.

Yeah but MrMan, just because something is revisionist history doesn't mean it's false. What about all the evidence above? You can't just ignore it. Also we all know that the victors write history and a lot of our history doesn't make sense and is falsified and a lot of data doesn't fit into it. Reality may not be as solid and logical as you think. The reason revisionist history exists is because the official narrative doesn't make sense. Didn't you get that? That Christian woman above, Shelly, made that point in all her videos above. Didn't you see any of them? Why can't you at least admit partial truth here rather than dismiss it all whole cloth 100 percent?

If there was no evidence for revisionist history, then the books and videos above wouldn't exist. Did you think about that? What you gave above is the official narrative but there is a lot that doesn't fit into it. Didn't you get that? The truth is not 100 percent on one side or the other, because both positions have problems.

The problem with Christians like @MrMan is that the objective truth is whatever they want it to be. Case in point the story of the Bible could well be a work of fiction with the front page "to my darling Mary. This is a work of fiction, all characters portrayed in this novel that represents people living or dead is purely coincidental." The book was written by other MrMen who wanted to pass certain agendas.

So why are you appealing to the above posted evidence when MrMan believes the Bible is evidence of its own authenticity. MrMan doesn't care about evidence or facts. He only cares about what he wants the truth to be.

I really don't know if I believe in that stuff anymore...I mean there's proof that the Titantic exist and that it actually sunk. We know that Dinosaurs use to live on earth and they were killed off by a massive impact from an asteroid. But there is zero proof that Noah's ark ever existed at all, not even a small piece of it....There is no evidence that Adam and Eve actually existed, if they did where were they buried? And if Sodom and Gomorrah existed, shouldn't there still be remnants of it there?

[Winston]

The problem with Christians like @MrMan is that the objective truth is whatever they want it to be. Case in point the story of the Bible could well be a work of fiction with the front page "to my darling Mary. This is a work of fiction, all characters portrayed in this novel that represents people living or dead is purely coincidental." The book was written by other MrMen who wanted to pass certain agendas.

So why are you appealing to the above posted evidence when MrMan believes the Bible is evidence of its own authenticity. MrMan doesn't care about evidence or facts. He only cares about what he wants the truth to be.

True. However, keep in mind that the elite usually mix truth with fiction, or truth with lies. It's part of the cosmic law they have to follow. Saying 100 percent lies doesn't work. It's also against cosmic law. That's why they have to give you truth too, which is why they put the inflated tire at the bottom of the WTC rubble on 9/11, which they didn't have to do. Or why they gave away the moon landing hoax when they showed Nixon phoning the astronauts and talking to them with no delay even though they were allegedly 240,000 miles away. They have to give away their ruse in some form. So it seems to be a cosmic law they have to follow. My point is not to claim that Christianity is true. Just that the Bible is not 100 percent false. It probably contains a mix of truth and lies. That's part of the witches brew that the Notnilc matrix has to follow. So the Bible does contain valuable info and insights about what's going on too. it's not 100 percent true or false like Christians and Atheists assume, both of which is a false dichotomy, so neither side has the truth. Truth tends to be somewhere in the middle, as wise people know. Also the Bible has to contain some truth that resonates with people otherwise Christianity would not exist at all. You cannot control people or recruit people with 100 percent lies. Every controller knows this.

[Winston]

I really don't know if I believe in that stuff anymore...I mean there's proof that the Titantic exist and that it actually sunk. We know that Dinosaurs use to live on earth and they were killed off by a massive impact from an asteroid. But there is zero proof that Noah's ark ever existed at all, not even a small piece of it....There is no evidence that Adam and Eve actually existed, if they did where were they buried? And if Sodom and Gomorrah existed, shouldn't there still be remnants of it there?

Actually the foundation of history is based on very shaky ground in general. Some people claim to have found Noah's Ark on Mt. Arayat. There are photos of it too, but the government of Nepal refused to allow expeditions up there for some reason. This was back in the 70s and 80s and was featured on an episode of "In Search Of' hosted by Leonard Nimoy. Didn't you see it? This is old news and is considered an unsolved paranormal mystery in the files of history's mysteries. Creationist Kent Hovind even did a video on it. How do you not know this? Haven't you watched paranormal documentaries before? Yes Sodom and Gomorrah are claimed to have been found several decades ago. Didn't you know this? This is well known by archaeologists. They also finally found Nazareth too, which was only recently found, so critics thought it never existed. You don't seem to be up to date with the latest findings in archaeology. Geez. You seem to have not done the research before jumping to conclusions. You should also hear both sides first, not just one side. Come on. You guys are supposed to be smarter than that.

I'm not saying the Bible is true, but it's not all false either. The movie "Wizard of Oz" contains Kansas, which is a real place, but that doesn't mean the movie is a true story. Just that it contains truth and wise esoteric truths too. You guys need to drop such binary thinking.

[Winston]

@MrMan

Check out that Christian plastic surgeon Jason Jack again who looks very smart. Here he talks about how the Catholic church added 1000 years to our history. He shows you ancient coins and books as proof. Notice how the conspirators altered the dates by claiming that the I is a 1. So I 500 which means the year of our Lord 500 is now the year 1500. Because in the past, there was no J so Jesus was Iesus with an I. So they put an I before the date to signify the year of our Lord. Now that I has been changed to a 1 to add 1000 years to the timeline. When you see the photos, it is clear that the year has an I in front of it and not a 1, because I and 1 are very different. Furthermore, other parts of the book or coin have 1 on it and it looks different than the I so they were not written the same way in the past. This is hard evidence. Not fantasy or guesswork. See below.

He also explains why he thinks the Millennial Reign of Christ has already happened and we are now in Satan's "Little Season" mentioned in Revelation 20. It's very interesting and worth exploring. It's very chilling too, like a great spooky story, whether you believe it or not. lol. This guy also looks pretty smart and brainy for a Christian. lol

[WanderingProtagonist]

I really don't know if I believe in that stuff anymore...I mean there's proof that the Titantic exist and that it actually sunk. We know that Dinosaurs use to live on earth and they were killed off by a massive impact from an asteroid. But there is zero proof that Noah's ark ever existed at all, not even a small piece of it....There is no evidence that Adam and Eve actually existed, if they did where were they buried? And if Sodom and Gomorrah existed, shouldn't there still be remnants of it there?

Actually the foundation of history is based on very shaky ground in general. Some people claim to have found Noah's Ark on Mt. Arayat. There are photos of it too, but the government of Nepal refused to allow expeditions up there for some reason. This was back in the 70s and 80s and was featured on an episode of "In Search Of' hosted by Leonard Nimoy. Didn't you see it? This is old news and is considered an unsolved paranormal mystery in the files of history's mysteries. Creationist Kent Hovind even did a video on it. How do you not know this? Haven't you watched paranormal documentaries before? Yes Sodom and Gomorrah are claimed to have been found several decades ago. Didn't you know this? This is well known by archaeologists. They also finally found Nazareth too, which was only recently found, so critics thought it never existed. You don't seem to be up to date with the latest findings in archaeology. Geez. You seem to have not done the research before jumping to conclusions. You should also hear both sides first, not just one side. Come on. You guys are supposed to be smarter than that.

I'm not saying the Bible is true, but it's not all false either. The movie "Wizard of Oz" contains Kansas, which is a real place, but that doesn't mean the movie is a true story. Just that it contains truth and wise esoteric truths too. You guys need to drop such binary thinking.

I'm still not buying any of it. I need proof to know if something is for real or not. And quite frankly a majority of stuff in the bible lacks physical evidence of any of it ever existing. Why keep all that stuff hidden from people? I wasn't jumping to conclusion. @Lucas88 we always talk about religious stuff, and he told me some things about the bible that I had to look into...And really it just seems like a big ass blue print for Jews to manipulate Christians with, getting their hopes up for nothing. Do you honestly believe a man once walked across water and then another one parted the sea? Or that a boy knocked out a Giant with a little rock? I need to see proof that this ark existed not archaelogist telling me what they THINK they saw or what they THINK they believe what they discovered, and even if the ark did exist. The story about it still sounds ridiculous. Especially the part about having all those animals on it and how it was built by one man alone in so little time. Hell even the Titanic took multiple people to build it. The ark wasn't even big enough to accommodate all those animals, and there is no proof that a great flood ever happened that wiped out the world. You want to know the truth, everything bad that's happening in this world especially this prophecy end of days shit is because of stupid assholes and their psychotic religions.

https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/hi ... r-be-found

[MrMan]

@MrMan

Check out that Christian plastic surgeon Jason Jack again who looks very smart. Here he talks about how the Catholic church added 1000 years to our history. He shows you ancient coins and books as proof. Notice how the conspirators altered the dates by claiming that the I is a 1. So I 500 which means the year of our Lord 500 is now the year 1500. Because in the past, there was no J so Jesus was Iesus with an I. So they put an I before the date to signify the year of our Lord. Now that I has been changed to a 1 to add 1000 years to the timeline. When you see the photos, it is clear that the year has an I in front of it and not a 1, because I and 1 are very different. Furthermore, other parts of the book or coin have 1 on it and it looks different than the I so they were not written the same way in the past. This is hard evidence. Not fantasy or guesswork. See below.

This sounds really crack pot to me. I have limited time. I can participate in some discussion, but I cannot watch hours and hours of conspiracy theory videos like this. Anyway, that first video has some debunking evidence in it, because he is pointing at one part of a graphic to point out the use of two letter I's for the number 1 in 3II right after 300 and 310.

Also, if you look at the KJV, just a few decades after one Bible he mentioned, it has Roman numerals. Some dates were in Roman numerals. The US constitution writes out the date long hand.

Also, typical post-mil takes some passages about the coming of Christ takes them allegorically, not for a literal actual coming of Christ. This is it's own eschatology, so they would have to rename it. How about crackpot conspiracy millennialism?

[Winston]

Interesting but scary theory by Jason Jack about 9/11. The logic goes as follows. If Jesus was born in the year 1, since there is no year 0, and reigned for 1000 years, then the end of his reign would be year 1001. Now if the elite added 1000 years to our timeline as a hoax and called it the "Dark Ages" then that means that the 9/11 event happened on the true year of 1001. If so, then perhaps 9/11 was a celebration ritual of Satan's release from prison or the pit, per Revelation 20. There's even a clip of Jeffrey Daugherty talking about this. See below. A very chilling theory, and very scary if true.

[MrMan]

@Winston Do you believe, or kind of believe, any of this?

[MrMan]

@Winston Do you believe, or kind of believe, any of this?

Btw, I saw a I6II KJV Bible with I's for all the ones, not just the one in the front.

At what period in history did people run around and create all the fake history and archeology for the invented time periods?

[MrMan]

I watched part of this. A claim early on in the video is that various mapmakers in the 1500's showed Pompei on their maps, so supposedly it's destruction was more recent.

So I looked up the picture it shows on

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHCq5JMGKW0&t=420s
of one of the maps and compared it to a Google map with the discovery of Pompei based on this Google map.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Nola,+8 ... ?entry=ttu

As you can see, the site for Pompei is to the south and a bit to the South East of Mt. Vesuvius, just west of Scafati. The village on the map from the 1500s is south of Nola, east of Vesuvius and west of Scafati. Similar name, different location apparently. Maybe this isn't something Wikipedia writers pay enough attention to to put it in Wikipedia. It doesn't mean there was a conspiracy to create a thousand years of history.

I suspect the other bits of evidence will be similarly misleading. Again, this is a waste of my time, actually. While it is theoretically possible that historians, archeologists, mainstream media are either deceived or in cahoots to add centuries of history, it seems much more likely to me that individual YouTubers who have no real special training or expertise, but with either a gullible disposition towards outrageous conspiracy theories, a desire to get hits for their content, or both, come up with half-baked theories. And lots of other conspiracy theorists latch on and make their own theories.

I've got a relative who thinks that Biden and Hillary Clinton have been executed at Guantanamo, that a double is running the country, that Trump got loads of gold from beneath the Vatican which is going to be given to us, when Trump, who is really the president, takes the country back before the election, and restores the country to the 18 hundred something version of the constitution before it became a corporation, and they started making money by selling our birth certificates. And it must be true because 10s of thousands of people are 'awake' and watching videos through telegraph. Whole communities form around conspiracies, usually people not well trained or experienced in digging up the necessary information.

I just don't have the time to watch all this stuff and debunk it. Looking up the fact that Mongolia and what used to be Mongolia was Tartari or Tartaria and seeing this city wasn't he same Pompeii is enough for me for now.

[TruthSeeker]

No, He didn't already return.

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

When He comes you are going to know it. Even so come Lord Jesus.

[Winston]

@MrMan

This eloquent pastor explains why Jesus already returned in 70 AD. See his lecture or sermon below. Wow. Holy cow. So everyone's been waiting around for nothing? Doesn't that make everyone look like a fool? lol

[MrMan]

@MrMan

This eloquent pastor explains why Jesus already returned in 70 AD. See his lecture or sermon below. Wow. Holy cow. So everyone's been waiting around for nothing? Doesn't that make everyone look like a fool? lol

If you actually listen to the video, your last question there looks kind of ironic. He was debunking a theory vaguely similar to the one you are promoting. Full preterism would be the closest theory to this strange Tartarian theory in some ways. He warns about that. He doesn't talk about the theory of revisionist history idea you are mentioning.

I do wonder if you believe any of this.

He made some good points, and IMO, he was off on a number of things, too. I don't like the disdain with which he said 'rapture.' The term was used for the I Thessalonians 4 event prior to John Darby's pre-trib rapture theory, as seen in English language Bible commentaries. The passage does say they that are alive and remain will be 'caught up' to meet the Lord in the air. He also seems to think that Christians will be in heaven forever, but I do not see that in the Bible. In Acts 1, the men say Jesus will return as He went up. He left from earth. He didn't go up half way, in that passage, then come back to earth. He will come in flaming fire executing vengeance on them that obey not the Gospel.