Emperor Constantine: the second coming of Christ

WARNING: the following post is absolute horse shit…

Why do Christians still expect Christ to come again? Is it because they believe they still have a chance of going to Heaven, and they find that this world is anything but Heaven? What if Christ already came and left? What if the reason we experience this world to be so hellish to be because it is hell and we are the unlucky “rejected” ones.

But when did this happen? When did Christ come again? If there was a second coming already, and it is written in the history books, I think emperor Constantine had to be it. It is said that when Christ comes again, he will reign over the world as king. Well, Constantine was king, and he reigned over the world as Christians knew it at the time. The Roman empire at the time consisted of the bulk of Europe, plus half the Middle East, and all of Northern Africa. And he was the first to Christianize this world spanning empire. Even those nations not under the yoke of Roman authority eventually converted just out of following the trend. It is exactly what believers would expect of a second coming.

But, you may say, Constantine never presented himself as the second incarnation of Christ, and that he only converted to Christianity after having the vision of the Chi Rho the night before the battle at the Milvian Bridge. This may be true, but 1) one need not announce to the world that one is Christ (or anybody) to actually be Christ (or anybody), and furthermore even if one does announce this, it won’t necessarily be recorded in the history books. And 2) the term “Christ” doesn’t necessarily denote a person, as if the second coming of Christ must be Jesus the person himself reincarnated, but a title much like Caesar or President. It means: anointed one. So all that one requires in order to say that one is Christ is to be anointed. It would be much like saying: there will be another President of the United States. In that case, Constantine need not have any awareness at all that he would come to fill the role that Jesus Christ once filled. He just has to be anointed.

But what about the thousand years of Christ’s reign on Earth upon his second coming? We all know what happened after the reign of Constantine… the dark ages. The empire collapsed and the world went into darkness. Some may take this as an indication that Constantine could not have been the second coming of Christ, that Christ’s kingdom, when he comes again, will reign for a thousand years. But what if we are the rejected ones, the children of those who failed on judgement day? What if we’re the ones who inherited this Earth, God’s failed project, the one he rejected and threw into the cosmic waste bin? Maybe the reason there is so much atheism and nihilism these days is because this Earth continues to be thrown further from God, that God’s presence is no longer felt because he has abandoned the Earth, and it won’t be long now before it destroys itself, before we destroy it. Judgement day came and left, in other words, and we are the unfortunate children of the damned.


The way I heard it Jesus is not supposed to return until after Israel becomes a nation, which occurred in the past mid-century.

Yeah, there’s proly tons of holes you could poke in this theory. :smiley:

Oh gibbuginny, this place is not Hell, there’s still too much by the way of positive emotions such as happiness, joy, love, peace. Hell is the dimension of hopelessness and only that emotion. Is there any more of a debilitating emotion than hopelessness?

I wouldn’t think so. You’d be reduced to doing nothing. It’s forever, and it’s absolute. You’re fucked.

Like I said, Wendy, this thread is horse shit. :wink:

And yet, I’m back (having seen loads of souls in that hopeless dimension) wondering why they are there and how do I stay out of there myself. What if those souls were suiciders? Maybe you go to the dimension of emotion you most align with when you die? or the dimension that reflects your spiritual essence?

According to the Gospel of Mark, chapter 13, Jesus prophesied that they would “see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory” and “then He will send His angels, and gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest part of earth to the farthest part of heaven.” And he promised “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.”

Obviously, it didn’t happen during that generation and eventually the church grew weary of waiting and began to emphasize that the faithful would go to heaven when they die. Nevertheless, people read the Bible from time to time and when they came to doubt the authority of the church, they looked to the Bible as the unique authority. When they went to the Bible they found the claims that the Son of man would return.

Persons who read the Bible as the inerrant Word of God feel that God is speaking to them through it. So, they receive Jesus’ promised return as his personal word to them. Now they have only to explain the 2000 year delay which they try to do in various ways none of which is particularly persuasive.

Christianity is a Roman Flavian and Jewish fabrication, Judaism originated or evolved out of the Egyptian cult of Aten.

The desert death cult brings disastrous ruin to every corner of the world it spreads into. Abrahamism is a religious memetic virus much like cancer.

If hating Christianity, Judaism, and Islam makes me anti semitic so be it.

Do you think you were sent there or just caught a glance of it while just visiting?

That would be pretty precarious. It all hinges on your mood when you die. You could live an entire life of happiness and joy, but so happen to be in a bad mood when you die. Then you’re fucked.

I don’t think it makes you anti-semitic. From what I understand, anti-semitism is a race/ethnicity thing, not a religious thing. Judaism is one of the few religions around the world (or through history) which coincides with race, causing a bit of confusion about what anti-semitism really is. Add to that that the Jewish people explicitly tie their religion to their race–they are God’s “chosen people”–and the distinction becomes even more confounded.

In the case of hopelessness, taken there, three planes down below the Earth dimension, to bear witness but by who I have no idea. The desperation of all those souls lunging at me for help was overwhelming making for a quick ascent. I think that was the most shocked and scared I have ever been, even scarier than the two break-in attempts combined.

I’ll bet.

I can remember having visions of hopelessness when I was young. “Hopeless” is the perfect word. But at the time, I used the word “despair”. I remember being at a rave high on acid and suddenly seeing what I later called “the never-ending cycle of despair”. But it didn’t really terrify me until the morning after. At the time, a sick twisted side to myself kinda relished in it. But the next morning, my friend saw me lying on the couch, eyes wide open staring at the ceiling, and said: “G, you OK?” I slowly looked at him and said: “I saw the never-ending cycle of despair.” He said: “Ok, G’s out of it!” and walked away.

Later in life, I realized that the never-ending cycle of despair was just Samsara, the eternal wheel of death and rebirth that all souls are bound to. I think this is the Buddhist equivalent of hell. It’s what Buddhists strive to escape from.

I remember that time of my life (when I went to the rave) being one of the darkest; I remember being hit with dark visions and insights (with the help of the drugs) and having my awareness shoved into hopelessness–just this insistent insight that there was no hope, no escape, that eternal hell was destiny (it’s fuzzy whether this was for all of us or just me, but I know that whatever was worse was going to happen)–that knowledge, that there is no escape, was being forced upon me like a hammer driving a nail into my mind.

  • shudder *

Interesting ideas, Gib.

Or maybe just a slow, gradual version of Armageddon.

When I was quasi-religious, I used to think of the world as hell. I don’t think Wendy’s interpretation of hell would make much sense since hopelessness is the counterpoint to hope. I wouldn’t think you’d have one without at least the capacity for the other. Anyway, I saw things like joy, hope, love, etc. as far more transitory than what I saw as the default state of despair and longing.

The only capacity Hell has is suffering and hopelessness is that ride. How can one be quasi-religious? Don’t you either have a belief system based on faith or you don’t? Belief comes in degrees? It’s an either or.

What’s your source of information on hell? You seem to be an authority.

Of course belief comes in degrees, we aren’t talking about facts. You can have somewhat of a belief system that’s subject to change, or have varying degrees of strength in your beliefs. Being quasi-religious, for me, came from believing but being highly skeptical. I was essentially agnostic, but trying to convince myself that I believed at the same time. In other words, I wanted to believe more than I actually did I suppose. I didn’t know whether I was convinced or not at the time.

Not for me. Sometimes I think someone likes me, but I am not sure. I am pretty good at knowing, but have been wrong. My certainty levels tend to match my percentages.

Further, I have thought I believed things and then realized later for the most part I did not. When the belief turns out to be correct, I find I am surprised. I had an attitude. I thought I believed what I should believe, but deeper down I did not.

We are not binary. We can think so, but are not sure. We can think probably. We can be sure, like you are.

I’m not having much luck answering you and Karpel Tunnel, explaining faith is turning out to be more difficult than I at first thought. So far I have three drafts of answers, but none are complete and succinct. I’ll keep at it. :handgestures-fingerscrossed:

Realizing that you are an eternal being without realizing that that is what you are realizing sucks. Drugs may act as a portal allowing the transportation of partial truths back and forth between dimensions.

It sucks, but such teleportation would scare the s…t out of most mortals, they would loose their minds before loosing control over such helplessness. No, they need their gods to reassure themselves that everything is ok. If they are self professed atheists, they would deny everything but the ultra real

What inhabits a mortal human body, that soul of ours, is not mortal, Meno, that’s my point. Who says that being immortal makes you a God? It just means you continue indefinitely without supernatural powers to accomplish feats which defy the nature of this Earth dimension. The gullibility to believe that we are solely made of this dimension, that we beings originate from this dimension, is what flabbergasts me. People are mesmerized and stupefied by their human now. There’s so much more.

Indeed, it appears that Your bewilderment is justified! So lets suppose, that Your comment on other dimensions IS absolutely certain. If so, then , the relevant point must be in line with the idea, that such separate realities have some connection,and /or reflection of, and with, each other, even from the point of basic , primary logic.
You may, or might, question this corollary, but the phrase, as from above does that below, come to mind. This is more toward the reflective part , rather then the connective part that the argument adheres to.

As such, ’ the hierarchy of angels make more sense , in an afterlife. If our ‘souls’ survive, then at the most naive level of logic, Levii Strauss’ notion of a magical bonding makes sense. Not that it doesn’t make complete sense from the point of view of anthropology, but if the reflective sense with which the concept of soul is introduced, as another reality, using his method can only be understood as a conjuctive.

Wendy, I am digressing , but for a reason. That is, that even the idea of the argument for and against duality fits some parallel, between the naive totality which permeates the mind of elementary thought and post modern ventures into thought as : It’s Self.

If that opinion is held, then parallels would not fit the description, because by definition parallel lines never meet.
Therefore analogy would be as improper as well.

If the connection is a self prescribed tautology, then the connection is only based on a faux argument, and there really is no prior separation. It is an Absolute, because it requires an illumination, of reflective origins, and we, as individual souls are part of it.

By that I mean we are separate, while being part of it at the same time.

If one believes this form of argument, then we are both separate from God, and part of ‘IT’. And since I do not believe in transcendent beings, the conclusion ought to be obvious.

Then the primal connective at some point have a goal: an evolutionary goal: that of unifying with a reflective field to form a unity: as a proximate focus. This focus is the objective realization of the very basis of perception.

I touched on some things which may be tangential, but such bears on the pre-emphasis of perception on the realization of the (our) soul.

Then, we really can’t separate what is mortal from what is immortal.

A postscribed sense , as it were possible, could not have realized it, but then they held little store back then, in imminence and contemporality.