Hey Knor,
I used to think there were certain things that had to take place that had not occurred yet. I don’t think so anymore. Waiting for a specific something to come about before He can return is paramount to saying we know He can’t return by such and such a date. The temple won’t be finished or this or that. Setting that kind of condition in order for him to reappear is not scriptural, at least I don’t think so. Do you see what I mean?
Yes, we might easily misunderstand something.
When He comes does not matter if we are always ready. I think it’s a wrong attitude to try to guess the right time and prepare for the return just before that time. Our personal end can happen any day, without warning. More important than waiting for His return is to ask: am I ready when my personal end comes? If the answer is yes, then we should be also ready for His return.
1 Like
That’s what I think, too. What a fantastic day that will be, either way. If I die first, I go to the next dimension I’ve longed for my entire life. If He returns first, We’ll hang out together for eternity.
I do want everyone on earth to find him first. I hate the idea that some won’t make it. I have to let go of that burden. It is more than I can handle.
That reminds me of a good sermon I heard years ago about The Parable of the Ten Virgins, the point being not at all that the wise ones were being selfish, but that preparedness is not transferable.
That’s not informed opinion. No they are not. You have no idea of what is required.
3 Likes
Unless it’s a dirty bomb and they got their hands on some plutonium somehow. (If they didn’t wash those hands, we don’t have to worry. 
) Iran as a terrorist state might be, though.
1 Like
The Southern Poverty Law Center is tracking many hundreds of hate groups in the U.S. These include the Ku Klux Klan, the neo-Nazi movement, neo-Confederates, racist skinheads, antigovernment militias, Christian Identity adherents and others.
1 Like
I want to thank you all for reading my comments! (I posted this and more information on this topic a while ago. Now, Biologos will probably excommunicate me for repeating myself!)
a terrorist attack using a nuclear weapon would be extremely destructive, potentially killing hundreds of thousands of people and destroying miles of infrastructure.
1 The resulting political, economic, and military effects would dwarf those of any past terror attacks. Many analysts believe that such an event is likely to occur. Graham Allison, for example, maintains “a betting person would have to” conclude that nuclear terrorism is “inevitable.”
2 According to Anna M. Pluta and Peter D. Zimmerman, the threat of nuclear terrorism is so serious that “we should plan for its reality.
”3 And Robert L. Gallucci argues that “more likely than not” terrorists “will detonate a nuclear weapon in a U.S. city within the next five to ten years.”
S. Paul Kapur
Thank goodness!
Are they tracking the folks who commit murders over the weekends in our big cities, too? I know someone very well who moved into a big city for the purpose of integrating neighborhoods, so that an atmosphere of brotherly love could germinate and grow. She’s located in one where the level of violence has scared her into thinking it is perhaps time to move out. What to do?
1 Like
Originally published in the Huffington Post April 5, 2012, MacArthur President Robet Gallucci cites evidence of terrorist groups’ desire to steal fissile material – necessary for the manufacture of a nuclear bomb – and calls on the U.S. to take the lead in ending production of such material.
recent presidents and presidential candidates have all said that nuclear terrorism poses the greatest threat to the national security
We should all be concerned that perhaps during one morning rush hour in a major American city, a nuclear weapon of crude and improvised design will be detonated. Such a device’s yield will be far smaller than that of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but still tens of thousands will die instantly from the blast, burns and radiation. Over the following month, thousands more will succumb to burns, injuries, or the effects of radiation. The blast area will be uninhabitable for months or longer.
This is not the stuff of pulp fiction or sensational television; it is a credible scenario.
Nations with nuclear material – whether military or civilian – must secure and eliminate stocks of highly enriched uranium and plutonium.
There is clear evidence that terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaeda, are interested in acquiring and using nuclear weapons. They seek to inflict maximum damage with an economy of means; nothing can accomplish this end more effectively and with more certainty than a nuclear weapon.
We have no reason to believe that a traditional defense against this threat will be effective. We cannot expect to prevent access to our territory, and we cannot expect to deter a terrorist who values our death more than his life.
The danger is not only to the United States or Western Europe, as terror attacks in Moscow, Mumbai and Bali demonstrate. Any nation that faces a threat from terrorism should be concerned.
The challenge for the United States is that only a very small amount of fissile material – think of a baseball – is required for a bomb. There are a couple thousand tons of fissile material spread out over 32 countries, stockpiled mostly in nuclear weapons and nuclear energy programs.
The threat of nuclear terror is not just possible, it is quite plausible; if effective action is not taken, over time, it is probable.
INTRODUCTION
MUF: NUCLEAR WEAPONS MATERIALS GONE MISSING
Henry Sokolski
In the case of U.S. MUF, (Material Unaccounted For) the
discoveries of tons of material missing came well after we originally lost track of the material. Most of it has yet to be accounted for.
That’s just the U.S. We know more than enough fissile material is missing from the former USSR to build bombs. Terrorist groups are well funded.
The point is not fissile material, but the engineering and technical production wherewithal to build a real nuke. The state of Iran, maybe, like North Korea, but a terrorist group independent of state support? Gallucci is a diplomat, not a nuclear physicist nor an engineer. Al-Qaeda managed to train some pilots and hijack some planes – that’s not rocket science, nor is it A-bomb science.
Iran would never do that. As in never. Look at Afghanistan. A dirty bomb in any NATO country claimed, or proved to be, by Iran would result in the beheading of that country regardless. And we’d never leave. They’ve got no friends at all except Russia and bits of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen. If a dirty bomb was necessary for ISIS-Al-Qaaeda it would have happened already. Smoke detectors. Soviet X-Ray equipment. If terrorism can happen, it will. And it’s a lot simpler than a dirty bomb. Box cutters, a truck, guns and explosives if you must. Why would Iran ever do such a bizarre thing? Iran is most at risk of nuclear terror.
Keep reading. He’s more than a diplomat. I quoted others, too. And there are many more. Presidential candidates and presidents all warn of this danger.
Also, terrorist groups have wealthy sponsors.
Somehow I get the feeling that you guys think I want this to be true.
Pretty much all the above deleted posts here can be summarized as:
Nukes are a problem. No they aren’t. Yes they are. No they aren’t. Yes they are. Nu uh. Says you.
[Will be happy to keep the bulk deleter handy for any more of the same if it doesn’t show new info.]
3 Likes
There are only few scenarios where weapons of mass destruction would be used - I mean weapons that are powerful enough to wipe towns. Here are those I could think:
-
a state with such weapons falls in a chaotic state, like when the Soviet union collapsed or a worse situation. Soldiers guarding the weapons may be tempted to sell weapons to terrorists, especially if they don’t get anymore decent salary.
-
spread of critical technology with instructions on how to use these to make weapons. Also most likely when a state is in chaos.
-
a fanatical new leader, political or military, is put in charge of weapons. I assume that the current leaders of states are sensible enough to not use such weapons but we don’t know who will rise to power in the future.
-
mistakes after getting false alarms. There have been false alarms about nuclear missiles being launched. It is likely that false alarms will happen in the future. If the threshold to respond is not high enough or if the leaders believe that the false alarm is true, they may push the button.
-
God allows evil (devil, demons) manipulate the leaders in charge of weapons. I believe that evil has the capability to manipulate humans but this level of manipulations only happen if God permits.
Especially the last alternative lifts up a critical question: does God allow such happen?
If He allows, in what kind of situations?
Isn’t that answered in the book of Job? And God is called ‘inscrutable’ in English translations in two places in the Bible, so we shouldn’t expect to be able to discern his thoughts in every detail. Overall, though, I think we know his purposes.
(Folks may be tired of my posting this 
):
You hit the nails pretty well. The former Soviets can’t account for missing fissile material that disappeared after the Union collapsed.
All the tech information needed to build a bomb is available on the net.
There are fanatical terrorist leaders who have stated repeatedly that their goal is to destroy Israel utterly and completely.
To set off a cataclysmic panic all terrorists have to do is feign a nuclear attack.
“If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.
Maybe all these messes are what it takes for the church to grow. American Christians have been praying for revival after all… maybe American Christians have had to first lose the idols of being in power, favor, and affirmation of being right by society… maybe this is a necessary beginning for the church in America, at least. Just a hopeful thought 
3 Likes