It's getting a bit late for me. I think you posted way too much to discuss. I do think Jesus will come again physically to this earth at the end of the Tribulation as it is told in Revelation 19. I do not believe he messed up the first time around nor that he must be born into the world again. But that he is alive and will return with tens of thousands of his saints. In the end of it all:
8And being found in fashion as a man, he (Jesus) humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him (Jesus), and given him a name which is above every name:
10That at the name of Jesus (not Moon) every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ (not Moon) is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2
Are you saying that God named Christ? Where in the Bible does it mention the name of Christ prophetically or otherwise that they may know his name before his coming? The people surrounding Jesus during his age did not know that their saviors name would be Jesus (Emanuel), if they had, wouldn't they have received him more graciously?
Do you believe revelations literally? Also, why did God create the Earth if he planned on literally removing every single good human being from it simultaneously and prematurely to their death? This is contained within Revelations as "the Rapture". Also, if God were to remove the good people from the Earth, but not Satan, does that not mean Satan would now have dominion over the Earth? Does this contradict the three blessings of Genesis. If God created Lucifer and Lucifer betrayed God, eventually to inherit the Earth, does that not make God a failure? The answer to all of this must be no, if you are to believe in the God of the Bible. How then, is it possible that God would abandon the Earth, which he has called "good".
Unification theology does not assert that Christ "messed up". They assert that his people failed him to a degree that rendered him unable to complete his mission of restoring God's true lineage. There is language in the Bible that must not be ignored, if one is to understand it fully. Why is Christ referred to as "bridegroom" only until he realizes he must walk the path of the cross? If Jesus came to die, why was this next passage written?
-
"The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born. -Matthew 26:24
"But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children." -Luke 23:28
Why would Jesus condemn the Jewish people with such words if it was his mission to die for their sins? Did God predetermine that the Jews would murder Christ and be damned for it? Is this all part of the providential plan of our creator? And, lastly, if the chosen people of God were condemned to eternal pain and suffering for murdering Christ -though it is asserted as being a prerequisite of salvation- why do the Christian people not believe that they will also be sacrificed, if that is the role that a chosen people is to play.
The reason that they don't believe this is because, based on Biblical evidence, it is clearly not the case that the chosen people are to be sacrificed. Why then, do they believe that it was predetermined that the Jewish chosen people were to be sacrificed? If you had been alive in the time of Christ, would you have recognized him? If you believed him to be the Messiah, would you have participated in crucifying him? This is a serious and relevant question that one must ask oneself before being able to understand the Second Advent.
Lastly, there are still massive numbers of Jews in the world today that do not believe Christ was the first coming, based on the description of what his coming would look like. As it must be remembered, that they were the original recipients of the scripture and prophecies that predicted his coming, is it not possible that the Christians -who consider themselves to be the chosen people of the next Advent- might also encounter a similar issue with understanding texts of archaic and unclear linguistic origin? Remember, even at the time of the coming of Christ, many of the prophecies predicting the First Advent were quite old.
You do not have to try hard to see the similarities between Reverend Moon and Christ. Both horribly abused by the chosen people of their age. Both born into absolute poverty. Both kept alive at certain points be their disciples. Both spreading messages of peace and love, rather than war and power. Both adamantly challenging the status quo. The followers of both were/are horribly persecuted and even murdered in many cases. Both betrayed by one of their closest followers and original disciples (Judas and Jeong Hwan Kwak 곽정환
.
I think in order to really elevate the dialogue, it would be necessary to dispute the Divine Principle, in whole or in part, as being true. If anyone can read this book, find a point within that they disagree with, and refute it effectively, I will concede and give up trying to express the truth I see in my faith on this thread. As the translations for most of his speeches are not done as carefully (many on the fly as the speeches are given), I would like to focus primarily on the Principle, as it's translation is as perfect as it is possible to do between two languages that are so vastly different.
