What must come? This is an important question in these times but how does this question differ from the question "what will come?" It's the element of speculation. Whatever will come will come. Simple and yet profound. But what must come is supported by arguments of logic.

Now interestingly on Twitter the last written is latest posted. Well that make sense unless you're trying to write a treatise or a book in which what's last written appears last in the book from beginning to end. So before this tweet is a prefacing tweet that appears after.

So for the writer it matters not because what's written appears to them correctly in the form of a line of tweets but for other readers (followers) the tweets appear backwards but the reader can hit ... what's it called? A line or is it a thread? Not sure so I better check hear.

Um, Doesn't say oh well doesn't matter because the reader need only read from last to first to follow the line of reason or the story. It's like a book written from end to beginning. Like the movie the Titanic with Kate Winslet as an old woman telling her story about getting ...

Knocked up by what's his face, with him dying but she survived, carrying the baby inside her to continue their relationship with him dead. Pretty good movie, love story. I like a good love story but unfortunately most stink like yesterdays catch at the fish market, zero chemistry

So I like to write to share ideas and feelings ( two different things; one head and the other heart being a word used for emotions as opposed to ideas or thoughts for head. So there's that. And the thing is good love stories real and fictitious have both in balanced proportions.

This is more complicated then I thought because each time the message is tweeted that completes the thread & whatever is added is a new thread connected to the previous thread if that makes any sense; so after each tweet is done it should be tweeted then go on to add the next ...

Now a thing about this social media phenomena is that it's a electronic connection to others that creates the largest social structure ever and more interestingly is this huge writhing sea of minds is mentioned in the Revelation of Jesus Christ last book of the Christian bible.

In the Revelation this huge thing of social media is referred to as the sea and out of this sea rises the entity called the Beast and the beast is a man. Now the question arises, is Trump this beast for certainly in many ways he fits the bill. For the bible describes him as evil

Well as you can tell by all this I'm a judgemental believer in Jesus Christ i.e. I believe the gospels accounts are truly written by honest men who witness all the events recorded rather than a myth that deceivers made up to take advantage of the hopes and desires of other ...

So I wrote judgemental when I meant to write fundamental (incorrect spell check correction). Anyway what I've noticed on twitter concerning Trump is there's a huge divide between those believers who think him "God's man" and those who perceive him to be evil to the extreme.

So which is it? Is Trump good or evil? For me it seems like a no brainer; he's evil to the extreme as a pathological liar etc... well described as a malignant narcissist by a group that goes by Duty to Warn, warning being 45's diabolically insane. I suggest following @duty2warn

I just had a notification from an obnoxious atheist the type of which find meaning in life from belittling faith in Jesus Christ, good thing they have Jesus to put down for something to do with their miserable existence. They never talk about meaning in life? Have they none?

If a person doesn't want to believe in Jesus Christ I don't try to convince them otherwise. The gospels speak for themselves in the perfection of logic. If they don't believe the gospels they certainly aren't going to believe me. But why is it so important to them what I believe?

Okay so trying to pick up where I left off after discussing an "alternate" gospel with someone who believes we're not owned by Jesus as believers which is fine if they want to believe that but it doesn't agree with a basic tenet of the gospels being; a Master servant relationship

So looping back to the beginning of this writing I'm doing. Subject; what's coming from 2 perspectives. 1 is biblical and 2 is scientific humanism. One will prevail and the other fade away. I just block an atheist not for being an atheist but for being rude and disrespectful.

Okay so here we go again in a new morning with a little recapping. So I'm writing about what seems to be coming from two different direction on a collision course and what a smashup it will be. One coming from the biblical word view and another coming from the secular world view

I posted this GIF in my last tweet alluding to the word smashup, of colliding worldviews coming on the horizon. But also the hammer smashing the clock represents the declared biblical eventuality in which time will be no more. Eternity's coming and there shall no long be time.

I wonder if any will read this thread other than I? The subject of what logic dictates what must come from a biblical perspective and the scientific humanist perceptive. Most people know but far from all that the gospels assert the return of Jesus Christ at the end of the world.