Wednesday, January 13, 2021

America, Be Warned: Revolution in France and America Planned, Preached, and Promoted by Leftist Thugs! by Don Boys, Ph.D

 To my Readers:

I was impressed by the following article that was sent to me by Dr. Don Boys.  I originally hail from Indiana and Dr. Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives and ran a Christian school in Indianapolis for years.  I have been very concerned that a spirit of mob violence has been unleashed from both right wing and from left wing circles.  Qanon on the "Right" and "Antifa" and other forms of anarchy on the left.  I am currently concerned that the violence that transpired in Washington, D.C. last week will give abundant excuses to the left wing elements as well as globalist "reset" agenda forces to work to even further curtail Christian rights than what has already transpired with the transgender, same-sex marriage agendas.  I asked Dr. Boyd for permission to reprint his article and he graciously gave it.  I would appreciate your feedback and I am sure Dr. Boyd would as well.  There is an old saying:  "All revolutions eat their children."  That goes for the Christian Reconstruction" elements as well who believe they will undergo no persecution and "take the kingdom by force and violence."

Stay tuned,

Constance E. Cumbey



by Don Boys, Ph.D.     



Revolutions in France, Russia, or Cuba didn’t happen by accident because they were planned, preached, and promoted by leftist thugs. Those thugs did not know that all revolutions devour their own.
In the eighteenth century, some eloquent, highborn French wanted a national makeover that stemmed from their hatred of Christ and the Bible, Christian morality, property rights, orderly government, and strong father-led homes. There were some legitimate complaints against the government but none that justified anarchy and wholesale executions without a trial.

The promoters of the French resistance, rebellion, and revolution were willing to wait for the time to strike. It took decades, but it came.

It took decades in America, but it is here.

Waiting gives revolutionaries time to organize and gather their cadre of conspirators. The French were led to the guillotine by suave, sophisticated, and often sincere spokesmen such as Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and other brilliant, immoral, but arrogant conspirators who detested revelation and deified reason. With the passing years, the leaders who replaced Voltaire and Rousseau were more vicious and deadly. They spoke about liberty, equality, and fraternity while they mocked their essence.

Voltaire and Rousseau would have been horrified if they had lived to see the Reign of Terror—heads rolling hour after hour in the middle of Paris; thousands of innocent people killed, usually without trial; climaxing in the dictatorship of Napoleon Bonaparte. Voltaire was known for freedom, independence, and defense of the little guy as expressed in his alleged comment, “I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” He would not have approved of the revolution that became a repulsive river of blood emanating from the guillotine in the center of Paris.

Rousseau famously wrote, “Man is born free, but is everywhere in chains,” so he would have vetoed the revolution. Both men would have been aghast, even ashamed with the destruction, deception, and death. However, their humanism, secularism, and distrust, distaste, and disdain for the crown, the church, and the cottage set the stage for what followed decades after their initial attack.

But they started it and are stuck with it. That’s what happens when a nation rejects heavenly revelation and snuggles up to human reasoning.

I wonder what Voltaire and Rousseau would have thought of present-day America where one is condemned for what he did, wrote, or said 30 years ago! Where you can’t say, “All lives matter” or “Blue Lives Matter,” but must say, “Black lives matter.” Where historical monuments are being destroyed, and history is being rewritten to resemble a fairy tale. 

The French should have seen it coming over the decades as critics of the crown, the church, and the cottage became progressively louder, bolder, and shriller. 

Local and clandestine Jacobin clubs (consisting of Philosophers, Freemasons, and Illuminati) were the workhorses of the Reign of Terror in 1793 during the dictatorship of the revolution. At the time, there were up to 8,000 clubs in France consisting of about 500,000 members. They were no longer merely civic or social clubs but instruments of terror.

Their ostensible responsibility was to help with the running of local governments, policing the local markets, and raising supplies for the military and local police departments. They presented themselves as the epitome of public virtue and were quick to point out anyone suspected of disloyalty to the cause. And, with missionary zeal, they helped destroy all vestiges of Christianity. They became the tool of terrorist leader Robespierre whom he manipulated to his advantage.

Members of the Jacobin clubs were “snake in the grass” Frenchmen who had been radicalized over decades and were waiting for the signal to rebel, resist, riot, and revolt. All leaders of the plot had secret names for one another in their private correspondence. It was arranged so that no one knew many members.
Most historians smile at the suggestion that the French Revolution was promoted by conspirators decades before the streets exploded and the guillotine blade became dull with constant use. Just another conspiracy theory.
Those historians are wrong.      
Yale President Timothy Dwight was an American educator, Congregational minister, and President of Yale from 1886–1898. He documented the origin of the revolutionary Jacobin organizers who agitated for a brutal revolution. He declared, “About the year 1728, Voltaire, so celebrated for his wit and brilliancy and not less distinguished for his hatred of Christianity and his abandonment of principle, formed a systematical design to destroy Christianity and to introduce in its stead a general diffusion of irreligion and atheism. … With great art and insidiousness the doctrines of … Christian theology were rendered absurd and ridiculous; and the mind of the reader was insensibly steeled against conviction and duty.”

Dwight continued, “The fabrication of books of all kinds against Christianity, especially such as excite doubt and generate contempt and derision. … The being of God was denied and ridiculed … The possession of property was pronounced robbery. Chastity and natural affection were declared to be nothing more than groundless prejudices. Adultery, assassination, poisoning, and other crimes of the like infernal nature, were taught as lawful…provided the end was good. … The good ends proposed … are the overthrow of religion, government, and human society, civil and domestic. These they pronounce to be so good that murder, butchery, and war, however extended and dreadful, are declared by them to be completely justifiable.”

Note the similarities: There was a design to destroy, as today. There was an attack on Christ and the Bible, as today. There was an attack on property, as today. Horrible crimes were permitted if they were for a good cause, as today. If the end was desirable (to them), then the means were justified, like today. The worst crimes, even murder, were acceptable, as today.

The slow but sure erosion of the foundations of France began with Voltaire and was continued by the self-righteous philosophers and anti-crown, anti-church, anti-family fanatics over the following decades.
They dispensed with the corrupt Roman Catholic Church and installed the Cult of Reason. A prostitute was enthroned at the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris as the goddess of the French people. France was renamed The Republic of Virtue! The press and theaters were turned into tools for state propaganda. More than 2,000 churches were renamed Temples of Reason and became the voice of this cult. Crosses offended some people, so they were outlawed; religious monuments and statues were destroyed; public and private worship and education outlawed; Christian graves were desecrated. Churches were closed or used for immoral, lurid, licentious, scandalous depravities; and priests and ministers (along with those who harbored them) were executed on sight for a while.

What was their theme again? Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.

The Apostle Peter warned about this in II Peter 2:19 when he wrote, “While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.”
 
All secret societies are dishonest, deceptive, and dangerous to any society, whether it be the KKK, the Freemasons, or the elitist Order of Skull and Bones, a Yale University society originally known as the Brotherhood of Death. All sober people should flee such groups as if their hair was on fire. However, insecure elitists gravitate to such groups where they wallow in supposed superiority and delight in awarding and receiving honors. They spend much time patting each other on the back and stroking each other’s egos.
 
The secretive Jacobins (who met on Jacob Street in Paris) were sensitive to public virtue but thought personal virtue repugnant. They reported people who were suspects or who were not sufficiently pro-terror. It was an ideal time to take revenge on someone by suggesting to others about his or her suspicious political positions.

Many top-level aristocrats who had suspicious political views were beheaded or imprisoned, while those who remained alive lost all special treatment and privileges. The middle class took control following the much-touted program of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. That was great for a while, but when Robespierre took control, terror reigned. Civil war followed as believers of the monarchy (upper class) fought the revolutionaries (mainly lower-class except for leaders) for control. About half a million people were imprisoned between 1793 and 1794, and up to 300,000 were killed by firing squad and drowning. The bloody guillotine claimed 40,000 lives (without trial) in Paris, most of them because they held the wrong political views.

The basic philosophy behind and driving the Revolution was an attack on all authority—the church, the crown, the cottage. It was a deliberate conspiracy or plot to overthrow the throne, altar, and authoritarian family structure in Europe. The motive was the dissolution of all civil society. They would not need government because they believed in man's perfectibility; consequently, no government would be necessary. This belief resulted from the influence of the Illuminati, who became leaders in the Jacobin clubs.

America stands at the crossroads. Revolutionary leaders in the U.S. make their destructive contributions to national disruption as Robespierre and Denis Diderot did in France. All revolutionaries plan change, control, and chaos in their nation.

They must be stopped, but revolutions, once started, are almost impossible to stop.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning!  The eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don  Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog.  Send a request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his  articles, and click here to support  his work with a donation.)

721 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   401 – 600 of 721   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

"He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame to him."

Proverbs 18:13

Anonymous said...

Hey, 5:08 PM

Why would I want to HEAR what John Ankerberg (a Baptist and a known anti-Catholic!) has say that is in direct DISAGREEMENT with the WORDS of my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ???

If you disagree with Jesus... you are NO friend of mine!!!

By the way, the fact that you want me to hear it speaks VOLUMES about you... and not in a good way.

(And... 'folly and shame' right back atcha.)



Anonymous said...

To: All

Notice how the 5:23 PM poster REJECTS out-of-hand the very words of the Holy Bible itself?

(That tells you all you need to know!)

Anonymous said...

To 5:29 PM:

The words that Jesus Christ (the Son of God) SPOKE are IN the Bible.

Jesus said: "And I say to you, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build MY CHURCH, and the gates of Hell shall NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT." (Matthew 16:18)

AND THAT'S ALL that YOU ALL NEED TO KNOW!!!

It seems to me that you all are the ones who are doing the 'rejecting'!!!

Anonymous said...

The Lord came to set the captives free. He did not die on the cross, and then institute an evil cult!

WAKE UP!

Anonymous said...

8:41 PM

You are the 'evil' ones on this blog!!!

YOU WAKE UP.

Anonymous said...

The rabid 'evangelicals' are the real evil 'cult'... they have NO LOVE IN THEIR HEARTS!!!

Anonymous said...

4:27pm yesterday. Your timeline is off

The first breach of the Capital building occurred at about 2:08-2:12pm through a window smashed open with a shield by traitor insurrectionist Proud Boy, Dominic Pezzola, from Rochester, NY. (the video was uploaded to twitter at 2:39pm)

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2021/01/29/dominic-pezzola-had-bomb-making-manuals-feds-allege-rochester-ny-proud-boys/4311878001/

Pence is evacuated and the Senate recessed at 2:13
Hot mic picks up security indicating "protestors are in the building" 2:13

The House recessed & started to evacuate at 2:20

*Here's video evidence as it occurred streaming on CBS: https://youtu.be/3Fsf4aWudJk?t=7796

This final coordinated push towards entry into the building on multiple fronts occurred largely after the initial groups of aggressive Maga Insurrectionists arrived from the Trump rally after some pre-planted groups, like Proud Boys, cased the building throughout the morning, exploited and penetrated outlaying boundaries and capital police resistance outside the building.

Google Maps shows it as 1.6 Mile "walk" taking 33 minutes. Even if the speech ended at 1:11pm. --- that puts the arrival at 1:44pm. Surely the most aggressive left early and moved more quickly upon the Capital anxious to get in on the action and carry out orders. Note also - the speech was late and there were no bathrooms so large amounts of the crowd had dispersed early to beat the crowds to any restrooms they could find.

John Sullivan isn't a real leftest. He was simply pretending to be an out of control one over the last year as part of a documentary being filmed staring him and his proud boy brother. His seemingly true MAGA allegiances he actually catches well on film as he largely records the events therein. Leftest groups had figured him out and distanced themselves from the possier months prior to the Maga Insurrection. Is co-producer friend even asks him to delete the part where they seem giddy about the insurrection since he's NOT supposed to be liking it as a leftist.

The point is - it was undeniably at least 99.8% MAGA Trump Supporters.

x

Anonymous said...

Screenshots from ‘Insurrection USA’ BLM activist John Sullivan’s discord claim that the police let him in!!!

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-01-19-screenshots-from-insurrection-usa.html


Anonymous said...

Watch BLM Activist John Sullivan in action back in August, 2020... doing what he does best whipping a crowd against President Trump into shape . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo0IyHfdWkI

Anonymous said...

The true MAGA supporters have a 4 year history of being peaceful... and NOT being violent.

A leopard doesn't all of a sudden 'change its spots'!!!

Anonymous said...

RayB said "The day of the Capitol "invasion," I watched TruNews, where they had two reporters that were broadcasting live from the Capitol grounds. As the two TruNews reporters approached the front door, they filmed Capitol police allowing numerous people to casually walk right in, while others were leaving the building in equal numbers ... hardly what constitutes an "insurrection.""

I can't believe any Christian would watch heretic and anti-semite Rick Wiles TruNews Network deliberately. Wiles is a Laodicean false teacher/false prophet.

Below is the link to the Jan 6th MAGA Insurrection as covered by TruNews. Your portrayal of insurrectionists simply being allowed to "casually walk right in while others were leaving in equal numbers" is aa lie. The reporters were turned away and told they aren't letting anyone in while a paddywagon full of felonious intruders were being slowly escorted OUT the doors. This occurred at around the 41:00 mark.

Wiles commentary justifying and celebrating such criminal behavior is just so telling that this man has no truth within him.

https://www.trunews.com/stream/trunews-live-broadcast-from-washington-dc

x

RayB said...


The evidence continues to mount, illustrating that the Biden/Harris Administration is leading America into the abyss:

Secretary of State Antony Blinken Orders LGBT Flags Flown at U.S. Embassies, Will Name Special Envoy for Gay Rights

https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2021/01/31/secretary-state-antony-blinken-orders-lgbt-flags-flown-us-embassies-will-name-special-envoy-gay-rights/

"Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people."
- Proverbs 14:34

God will not be mocked. Just as it is true for individuals, so it is true for nations.

RayB said...


Left in Complete Meltdown Over Conservative Pastors Comparing Kamala Harris to Jezebel

From the article linked below:

" ... Kamala Harris wants to murder children, advance sodomy and promote sexual immorality in schools and public and force Christians to celebrate it."

https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/01/29/left-in-complete-meltdown-over-conservative-pastors-comparing-kamala-harris-to-jezebel/

RayB said...

Has Biden become a DICTATOR? He has, according to his own definition!

Joe Biden Has Issued 42 Executive Actions In One Week, A Practice He Recently Called ‘Dictator’ Behavior.

From the article linked below:

Speaking at an October 15th, 2020 town hall with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, then-candidate BIDEN INSISTED that PRESIDENTS WHO RULE BY EXECUTIVE ORDER ARE UNDEMOCRATIC:

"I have this strange notion. We are a democracy. Some of my Republican friends and some of my Democratic friends even say: well if you can’t get the votes, by executive order you’re going to do something, things you can’t do by executive order unless you’re a DICTATOR."

https://thenationalpulse.com/politics/bidens-executive-actions-dictator/

Anonymous said...

x here with today's profile of Maga Insurrectionists who weren't "just let in" and somehow both attended the Trump Rally AND managed to make it over to the Capitol Building and enter it illegally:

Jan 29, 2021 Washington Post:

"Dawn Bancroft and Diana Santos-Smith were identified by law enforcement after the FBI said it received a tip on Jan. 12 with a video purportedly capturing the two women as they left the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 amid a large mob of people, according to a criminal complaint.

We broke into the Capitol. . . . We got inside, we did our part,” Bancroft said in the video she sent to her children, according to the FBI. “We were looking for Nancy to shoot her in the friggin’ brain, but we didn’t find her.”

The women — who the FBI said initially lied to authorities — face three federal charges, including knowingly entering a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority and impeding in government business by engaging in disorderly or disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds.

..

Around Inauguration Day, Santos-Smith first told the FBI she attended Trump’s rally but did not enter the Capitol building, according to the complaint. When FBI agents showed her the video in which Bancroft remarks about Pelosi, Santos-Smith admitted she lied and said she was in the Capitol to protest but had not planned it, the FBI said.

Santos-Smith told the FBI that, before entering the building, she heard people in the crowd saying “they’re letting us in” to the Capitol. She then admitted to climbing over a wall, going under or through scaffolding and entering the building through a broken window, according to the FBI."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/01/29/dawn-bancroft-capitol-riot-pennsylvania-pelosi/

Here's some biography details on Dawn Bancroft:

https://conandaily.com/2021/01/31/dawn-bancroft-biography-13-things-about-cross-fit-sine-pari-owner-from-doylestown-pennsylvania/?fbclid=IwAR3wl5NRySfCi2xjVLk-EBQrsy7I8g5fYz7qJtG_N98wcpnsbDKNSQtcMyY

Anonymous said...

X here --- most of the Biden's executive orders are simply reversing the damage Trump has done to our country through his wrangling, shady deals and misguided executive orders. For example-- Killing the Keystone Pipeline was the right thing to do.

"The 10,000 union jobs Republicans and the fossil fuel industry claim Biden killed were, first and foremost, hypothetical. Keystone XL was still awaiting permits in several states before it could begin construction, according to the Montana Free Press, and other permits are still tied up in legal challenges. TC Energy also isn’t directly employing Keystone XL pipeline workers; it issued grants in October to construction companies to do so. There’s little evidence that those companies have employed many people so far.

The jobs Keystone XL were eventually going to support were also mostly temporary—one-to-two year construction jobs, at most. “Once Keystone is completed, only 35 permanent employees would be needed to operate the pipeline along with 15 temporary contractors,” CNN reported back in 2017. “So, the Keystone XL isn't expected to be a boom for the job market by any stretch.”

The pipeline was expected to be a boom, however, for the climate crisis. “Emissions associated with the production, refining, and combustion of the tar sands in Keystone XL would have resulted in 168 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year (equivalent to the emissions from 35.5 million internal combustion vehicles)—emissions we simply cannot afford to lock in,” wrote Anthony Swift at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The Biden administration rejected Keystone XL’s permit because it asserts the enormous economic consequences of climate change outweigh the economic benefits of 35 new permanent jobs." https://heated.world/p/the-conservative-climate-fear-mongering


I also think it's a horrible idea to pipe that nasty sludge over major aquifers.

"After narrowly being diverted from the Sand Hills region of Nebraska—an ecologically fragile zone characterized by grass-covered sandy hills—the Keystone XL Pipeline is slated to go through regions of the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides irrigation for nearly twenty percent of agricultural land in the United States"

Canada should just build a refinery on the much closer west coast of Canada and pipe it there. Oh, Canadians don't want that. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45972346

I don't think killing keystone is the issue. My question is why Trump, the supposed swamp drainer, would support it???

"HOUSTON/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top executive at the company behind the embattled Dakota Access Pipeline has donated more than $100,000 to Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump since June, according to campaign finance disclosure records"


Anonymous said...

To 'X here' @ 12:16 AM

Re: "Most of the Biden's executive orders are simply reversing the damage Trump has done to our country through his wrangling, shady deals and misguided executive orders. For example-- Killing the Keystone Pipeline was the right thing to do.

___________________________________________________________________________________________


Come back on here in 6 months to a year from now... and let us know how the DEVASTATING RESULTS of DICTATOR (and China's puppet) Joe Biden's Executive Orders are working for you... and the American people, since you obviously don't CARE how much THEY are going to SUFFER!!!

(History, unlike the lamestream news media, will be more than kind to Trump... and will one day see him as 'the greatest President in our lifetime'.)



Anonymous said...

HOW TO STEAL AN ELECTION -1- minute vid too effective. Immediately banned from Twitter

https://media.gab.com/systems/media_attachements/files/063/090/110/original/f0900600468...

Anonymous said...

X, you have great faith.
Great faith in everything going against the Lord.

You are christian in name only (like your president Biden) because the Spirit of God would not let you believe lies of the magnitude that you do.
You need a heart check pronto.

Everything you try to make sound moral and true (and fall extremely short) only proves the point further that you do not hear the Lord speak.

Your posts are not encouraging in the least to the Body of Christ, but the opposite.
Get a new gig. The jig is up on this one.

Anonymous said...

7:57 am

X responding

The NYT has a good article on executive orders and how Trumps over-reliance upon them is actually representative of his failure as a President to build coalitions & pass actual enduring legislation that would not be so easily be reversed by an incoming administration in the first few weeks of a new Presidency. Biden is just being administrative. Getting rid of Trumps ridiculous poorly conceived & poorly drafted edicts & then largely, because time is of the essence, actually doing something about Covid at the federal level. Biden is not trying to build a legacy on EO’s. He possesses more wisdom & political experience than that.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/01/22/us/politics/biden-executive-orders-trump.amp.html

Bigger news though — Q’s identity was disclosed yesterday. Jim Watkins, owner of 8chann.

RayB said...


I like to read "X" because it provides insight into how the radical left "thinks."
For example, here is this brilliant observation from "X":

"The jobs Keystone XL were eventually going to support were also mostly temporary—one-to-two year construction jobs, at most."

NOTE: Virtually ALL "construction jobs" are "temporary." They end when the project is completed (duh), and then, for the workers, hopefully, it's on to the next project and another job. When it comes to how the economy actually works, lefties such as "X" have a hard time understanding the basics. (Don't be too harsh on "X" ... he's the same guy that "thought" Biden was the "pro-life" candidate).

Another gem from "X":

"The pipeline was expected to be a boom, however, for the climate crisis."

NOTE: In contrast to "X", Dictator Biden's Climate Czar John "F" Kerry (JFK wannabe) recently stated that "if the emissions of the United States were to be reduced to ZERO," it would not "make a difference in climate change." !!!

Yet, Dictator Biden recently announced a *$2 TRILLION spending program to fight "climate change." (That translates into an awful lot of Chinese Yuans). How many Biden/friendly palms are going to be greased with all of that ? How much of that is going to find it's way back into the Biden Crime Family's off shore accounts? Don't doubt this! When it comes to government contracts folks, thievery abounds beyond the wildest of imaginations.

https://nypost.com/2021/01/27/kerry-zero-emissions-wont-make-difference-in-climate-change/

* Some fun facts about what constitutes a "trillion" ...

One million pennies stacked on top of each other would make a tower nearly a mile high.

One billion pennies stacked on top of each other would make a tower almost 870 miles high.

One trillion pennies stacked on top of each other would make a tower about 870,000 miles high ... the same distance obtained by going to the moon, back to Earth, then to the moon again.

RayB said...

Why did the *Neo-Cons HATE Donald Trump so much? BECAUSE Trump was the first President since 2001 that did not expand WAR in the Middle East. Recall the false flag operations in Syria and the persistent calls for war with Iran throughout Trump's tenure? Trump said "no" to all of this, which infuriated the warmongers.

Here is the latest "victory" for the Neo-Con warmongers that are now in control of Biden's foreign policies:

Trump’s **Afghanistan Troop Withdrawl Scrapped

US soldiers will remain in war zone

https://summit.news/2021/02/01/trumps-afghanistan-troop-withdrawl-scrapped/

* If you don't know the history of the Neo-Conservative movement, you should do some research on these radicals that promote the policy of American blood spilt "endless wars" in the Middle East (on behalf of an unnamed little country in the region).

** The Afghanistan War is the longest war in American history. To this day, the "mission" is ambiguous, at best. Coincidentally, since our involvement there, Afghanistan provides upwards of 95% of all the world's Heroin production. I personally spoke to a Marine that was stationed there. He told me: "You're not going to believe this; we are actually guarding the Poppy fields!" I did believe it, because I had already read numerous accounts stating the same.

Anonymous said...

me, X - "radical left"???...lol.

I read RayB to see how liars "think"... touche

I'm not big on the climate change being a "CRISIS" but did you at least consider it might not be a great idea to pipeline Canadian sand tar through America's heartland, through sacred Native American lands and over essential aquifers just for a few temporary construction jobs?

I just hope to add a little context to the all-too-often republican talking points posted here as fact.

As far as Biden and abortion. Here's an article discussing Biden's history on the subject of abortion. He remained pro-life far longer than maany republicans on the issue and we all need to pray that if the democrats do reshape and actually legislate the issue that Biden succeeds at limiting the procedure far more than the democrats anticipate it being restricted and even more than the republicans have ever accomplished in 50 years cutting back the republican backed Roe v Wade judicial edict in 1973 which opened up the window to unfettered abortion practically up to birth.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/biden-s-long-evolution-abortion-rights-still-holds-surprises-n1013846

God works in mysterious ways and only He can faithfully be called upon to end or curtail republican legalized abortion. Wouldn't it be a testament to His power if a Democrat were to finally accomplish this?

btw --- Right to Life is a roman catholic organization that is unGodly in that they no longer rely on God, the Gospel and the Bible to change the hearts of men and women (and politicians) and instead seek never-ending political compromise using worldly-based arguments. It's a big reason why they have failed for 50 years...probably by design.

RayB said...


"X is a complete, convoluted, deluded whack job.

Some of Biden's "abortion" history that "X" somehow failed to mention:

Biden Signs Executive Order Allowing the U.S. to Fund Global Abortions

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/biden-signs-executive-order-allowing-the-u-s-to-fund-global-abortions/

And ...

FACT: Joe Biden Supports Killing Babies in Abortions Up to Birth

https://www.lifenews.com/2020/10/06/fact-joe-biden-supports-killing-babies-in-abortions-up-to-birth/

And ...

Joe Biden’s Abortion Extremism

Joe Biden’s supposed campaign of unity now extends to forcing American taxpayers to subsidize abortion regardless of their moral qualms.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/joe-biden-e2-80-99s-abortion-extremism/ar-BB1dcIKJ

RayB said...

And ...

Joe Biden’s USAID Nominee Samantha Power is a Radical Abortion Activist

https://www.lifenews.com/2021/01/22/joe-bidens-usaid-nominee-samantha-power-is-a-radical-abortion-activist/

And ...

Abortion Radical Joe Biden is a Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

"... Biden attends mass daily. He invokes scripture in speeches. Biden is devout and observant so they say…

"If Biden is such a religious man, then why is the death cult Planned Parenthood celebrating their new “champion in the White House?”

https://teapartydailyreport.com/2021/01/abortion-radical-joe-biden-is-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing-2/

NOTE: This is the man that "X" thinks will "end abortion on demand."

RayB said...


"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

"Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"

- Isaiah 5:20,21

RayB said...


This is the "face" of the radical left. The very same "face" that "X" supports:

"Twitter Suspends Christian Group for Accurately Describing Biden’s Transgendered Health Official Dr. Levine’s Biological Sex"

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/30/twitter-suspends-christian-group-for-accurately-describing-bidens-transgendered-health-official-dr-levines-biological-sex/#

Anonymous said...

The 'war' in America these days is less about Democrats vs Republicans... and more about Globalists vs Nationalists... and Patriots vs Traitors.

Anonymous said...

I refer to God changing abortion laws and praying He uses Biden as His instrument and that Biden, based upon his history, is certainly a more likely instrument than Trump or any other Democrat to get that job done.

I do not worship Biden or call him (or believe him to be) "good". Only He is good and He can work through whomever He puts in power.

So right back at ya with "woe unto them" that worship Trump and call/believe he is/was "good".

Incremental abortion progress, especially by easily revokable Executive Orders is NOT real progress. Republicans have no true intent or desire to legislate, permanently restrict or reverse Roe. This scourge was brought upon our country by republican appointed supreme court justices in 1973 and continues today to be protected by republican appointed supreme court justices. This may come as a shock to you, even as Trump has been praised by abortion rights opponents as being the friendliest president to their cause. He, deliberately failed to keep his promise to defund Planned Parenthood.

Instead, federal funds to the women’s health-care and abortion provider grew during the first two and a half years of his administration. Government reimbursements and grants to Planned Parenthood hit record levels in the group’s fiscal years starting in 2017 and 2018, according to its most recent financial disclosure, even as the administration and Republicans in Congress and around the country endeavored — UNSUCCESSFULLY — to cut the provider out of government revenue streams wherever possible.

Medicaid payments have long formed the bulk of federal funds flowing to Planned Parenthood, reimbursing its clinics for providing birth control and preventive services to low-income Americans. The provider reported $616.8 million in government revenue in its most recent report, which was for the 2018-2019 fiscal year. That's up from $543.7 million when Trump took office in 2017. About half of Planned Parenthood's patients are on Medicaid, according to the organization.

GOP-led state legislatures have passed bills cutting off abortion providers' access to Medicaid funding, but courts have mostly blocked such legislation. In Oct 2020, the Supreme Court turned down South Carolina’s request to hear a case over its legislation blocking Medicaid funding for abortion providers, which was knocked down by a lower court. Only 4 justices need to vote to approve hearing a case but we don't know if it was even close as vote results are not public. https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/520811-supreme-court-declines-to-hear-south-carolina-attempt-to-block

It should be noted the 2 or 3 - 4th Circuit Appellate Judges that protected planned parenthood funding under Medicaid in South Caroline were republican-appointed federal judges -- 1 by Reagan (Wilkinson) and the other by Trump (Federalist Societies own Julius Richardson).

Finally, perhaps God won't work through Biden, but having lost so much power, perhaps the next republican candidate, like say a protestant like Kinzinger, might actually run on a pro-life platform and truly seek to criminalize abortion instead of just using it as a carrot to dangle in front of Christians and other religions like Mormons, Pentecostals and more conservative roman catholics.

x

Anonymous said...

Is a small number that worships Trump. Trump is not, like he was not, a savior, and knowing that, a large number that look past his mere humanity (whatever flaws, he like anyone else, can have) know that he has stood on principles that built this nation, upon what our founders knew and wisely enacted, and for that they, as myself, are grateful. Unlike malcontents and ingrates such as yourself.
The thanks goes to God for that major speed bump that was his 4 years in the presidency to reverse the tide to put America back on it's own sovereign feet, veering hard enough to turn back from the road to globalist dictators, who hate him for countering them, that you are so enthralled with, x (who believes in cancel culture and has cancelled himself by x-ing himself out by his own signature no less lol). God is allowing this regime now, because America, like the rest of the world, has caved to globalist aims. But the buyer's remorse is beginning to set in....

Your posts are only finger pointing nonsense (you must be smaller than what you hide behind) but more than that, how pretentious and fake you are (to claim you and those you voted to dictate to us now), that your's is the moral high road.

That is deluded, that is from the pit. Against God and His word.
A real christian could not sleep at night with that load on his conscience.
You seem quite convinced and confident in your choice that Biden is a savior.
Lotsa luck with that since you don't have actual faith in righteousness, but feel pretty lucky with puppet Biden.
Says everything we need to know about the tripe you post.

Anonymous said...

X's dithering is the very essence of what James 1:8 states.
Whatever "faith" he claims he has is filled with doubt so the verses proceeding verse 8 are the shoes that fit him. Unstable are his thoughts, his ways, and his posts.

Anonymous said...

To X:

Biden is not only NOT a 'savior'... he can't even save himself from the knowledge that he is only a 'seat holder' for VP Harris.

Evidently, he wants to sign as many Executive Orders as possible before that happens.

Anonymous said...

To X:

Trump may have been a flawed human being... but he LOVED this country, which is more than can be said for Biden / Harris and company.

Anonymous said...

X, Roman Catholics were Christians long before Luther et al came around.

Anonymous said...

To X @ 3:01 PM

Re: "I refer to God changing abortion laws and praying He uses Biden as His instrument and that Biden, based upon his history, is certainly a more likely instrument than Trump or any other Democrat to get that job done."

________________________________________________________________________________________


You are so out of touch!

God was actually 'using' Trump to put PRO-LIFE candidates in the Supreme Court... with the HOPE to one day overturn Roe v Wade.

Although Biden's views on a woman's right to choose have evolved over the years, Biden recently said, "Reproductive rights are a constitutional right. And, in fact, every woman should have that right."

Therefore, Biden's current views and voting record are AGAINST Catholic teaching.

So, NO... God would NOT be using Biden as His 'instrument' to 'get that job done' (as you say).

Anonymous said...

Pope to participate in first International Day of Human Fraternity

https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2021-02/pope-francis-to-join-first-world-day-human-fraternity.html

paul said...

So Joe Biden says:
"Reproductive rights are a constitutional right. And, in fact, every woman should have that right."

Sounds good. In fact it sounds so good that it overrides a child's right to live.

paul said...

2:22,
Yes, and third wave Feminism vs Sanity.

Anonymous said...

Posted on Newsmax (from a January 28, 2021 interview on EWTN) . . .

Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, called President Joe Biden’s pro-abortion actions a “sad day for the nation” and for Catholics.

Naumann, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, made his comments on Thursday during an interview on EWTN.

Asked what he would say to Biden, Naumann replied: “I would say, ‘Wake up. Think about what you’re really doing here.’ I mean, his soul is in jeopardy, I believe.

“You know, when they use euphemisms, when you’re violating fundamental human rights you use euphemisms, and so you say ‘this is healthcare for the poor.’

“What other healthcare procedure does two people go in, one comes out dead and the other one scarred emotionally, spiritually, and sometimes even physically?”

And he added: “It’s really tragic that anyone would do this, but particularly one who professes to be Catholic. I think it’s very contrary to what he campaigned on as being a unifying president. I mean, he’s obviously in debt to pro-abortion forces within his party and he’s just conforming to them.

“I wish he was as orthodox in his Catholic faith as he is in doing what Planned Parenthood instructs him to do.”

Naumann’s remarks came as Biden rescinded the Mexico City policy, which had stopped U.S. foreign-aid money from funding groups that provide or promote abortion in other nations.

tinyurl.com/tnuzco62

Anonymous said...

Everything About The Biden Administration Is Fake

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/79175/everything-about-the-biden-administration-is.html

Anonymous said...

NY TIMES CALLS FOR BIDEN TO APPOINT "REALITY CZAR" TO FIGHT "MISINFORMATION"

http://www.blacklistednews.com/article/79176/ny-times-calls-for-biden-to-appoint-reality-czar-to-fight.html

RayB said...


"X" claims that "god" COULD use Biden to end abortion, therefore "X" enthusiastically supported Biden, and continues to support him, in spite of Biden's LONG, well-documented history of being a radical pro-abortionist.

Applying "X's" logic, had he been alive during the Third Reich in Germany, "X" would have probably supported the Nazis and Hitler, because "god" could have used the Nazis to end anti-semitism. (There were MANY "professing christians," from ALL denominations, that supported the Nazis). America has legally slaughtered 62 MILLION innocent lives, and yet, "christians" such as "X" voted to expand that slaughter via their support for Biden!

Regarding "X," that's not as far fetched as it sounds. "X" supports the radical socialist programs of Biden/Harris. He supports the radical, NAZI like groups such as BLM & ANTIFA, as in, constantly making excuses for their violent behavior. What does NAZI stand for? NAZI = National SOCIALIST Worker's Party.

"A double minded man is unstable in all of his ways." James 1:8

RayB said...


Pope Francis infamously declared that Donald Trump "could not be a Christian" because Trump wanted to BUILD A WALL on our border.

Question:

Has Pope Francis declared that Biden & Harris "could not be Christians" because of their advocacy of slaughtering the unborn?

The radical Biden has gone so far as to state that he believes "abortion rights should be protected by LAW," meaning that the false Supreme Court ruling in '73 is not strong enough!

Trivia question: has the New World Order Pope Francis EVER declared that anyone, besides Donald Trump, could not be a Christian? Did he say that about the "son of the church" in Cuba when he visited the murdering Dictator, Fidel Castro? NO on both questions.

Anonymous said...

Conservative Catholics do not agree with many of the statements made by Pope Francis.

I am not responsible for his statements... I am only responsible for my own.

God will be the final judge of each and everyone of us.

Let go; let God. Amen.





RayB said...


"Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and EXHORT YOU THAT YOU SHOULD EARNESTLY CONTEND FOR THE FAITH WHICH WAS ONCE DELIVERED UNTO THE SAINTS." - Jude 3

Anonymous said...

Now, Dr. FAUX-CHI wants us to wear TWO masks??? Well, he knows what he can do with that second mask!!!

(China and the Globalists must be laughing their heads off seeing the whole world being 'muzzled'... as in sit down and shut up and do as you're told.)

Anonymous said...

X is the purveyor of falsehoods and hyperbole on this blog. He has knocked the 2 reigning champs out of the top spot for that award, so he takes the prize.

That is the M.O. of this "X" so-called concerned christian.
In the bizarre world of the perverse Democrats and RINOs, we find our former President Trump dealing with non-stop falsehoods and hyperbole that seek to impeach him for..you guessed it...supposed falsehoods and hyperbole, yet somehow what Trump said is wrong, and X thinks he is right for posting actual false statements and exaggerations, backing a regime that hates Mainstreet USA with a passion, to a global end, the work of the devil himself. Concerned X pretends he is standing on true convictions, the same ones of his perverse party, and the height of hypocrisy.
People are getting weirder by the day in that strange and nebulous place where no truth is allowed..the world according to "X" and his Nazi friends ruling over Washington D.C.



Anonymous said...

Communist China is collecting American DNA through coronavirus testing

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-02-coronavirus-testing-communist-china-collecting-american-dna.html


Aborted fetal tissue is routinely used in coronavirus vaccines to “code” spike proteins

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-02-aborted-fetal-tissue-coronavirus-vaccines-spike-proteins.html


Anonymous said...

President Trump has only gained influence and political support since his departure from the White House, according to a Politico reporter.

Politico reporter Tara Palmeri explained that after visiting Wyoming, she found the political reality on the ground totally contradicts the assumption in Washington D.C. that Trump’s power has diminished.

“A lot of people said they aren’t really Republicans, that like... they’re for Trump. That’s it,” Tara Palmeri warned during a Friday appearance on MSNBC. “I think the base is getting stronger, truly. I think an impeachment would make him even more powerful — a conviction, is what I mean.”

Palmeri then described the political disconnect between Middle America and Washington D.C., where many people believed election was stolen, that COVID was a scam, and that the Capitol riot was spearheaded by Antifa agitators.

“I hate that they’re so distrustful,” Palmeri lamented. “It feels like another world but that’s what’s on the ground and I don’t think that we can ignore it and I’m really happy that I went out there and saw it because I think that there’s a huge disconnect between Washington and the rest of the country.”

Palmeri admitted that Trump is far more popular than other Republican leaders in the Cowboy State, including Rep. Liz Cheney, who voted to impeach Trump in the house last month.
“I actually went out of my way to try to find someone who would defend her and I really could not,” she said. “She didn’t have that much name recognition, considering she’s a Cheney… I mean, I said her name at a hardware store, and someone shouted a threat.”

https://www.infowars.com/posts/politico-reporter-panics-trumps-base-getting-stronger-since-he-left-office/

RayB said...


Planned Parenthood CEO: ‘Completely Over the Moon’ with Kamala Harris as VP

"National pro-life leaders declared former President Donald Trump to be the most pro-life president in history, and Joe Biden and Harris to be the “most pro-abortion presidential ticket in history.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/02/02/planned-parenthood-ceo-completely-over-the-moon-with-kamala-harris-as-vp/

Anonymous said...

Doctors now warn about permanent damage and cardiovascular events following COVID-19 vaccination

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-03-doctors-warn-about-permanent-damage-covid-19-vaccination.html



Anonymous said...

Journalist Andy Ngo: Antifa aims to “organize society without a government,” abolish nations worldwide

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-03-andy-ngo-antifa-aims-abolish-nations-worldwide.html


(Anyone out there still believe that ANTIFA is a 'mostly peaceful' group???)



RayB said...

Anon @ 12:52 PM ...

Don't worry about ANTIFA. Our 'President' has assured us that ANTIFA "doesn't exist."

RayB said...

Watch this TruNews broadcast as they provide factual information on the ramifications regarding taking the COVID Vaccines ....

https://www.trunews.com/stream/covid-anal-swabs-china-launches-new-propaganda-scare-campaign

Anonymous said...

x here.

Sharing a tribute to a true "Antifa" patriot who died defending our country and our representative lives from a fascist insurrectionist Maga mob attempting a coup on behalf of un-elected would-be dictator on the basis of lies still be promulgated in this forum.


Loss of USCP Officer Brian D. Sicknick

January 7, 2021 Press Release - https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/loss-uscp-colleague-brian-d-sicknick

At approximately 9:30 p.m. this evening (January 7, 2021), United States Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick passed away due to injuries sustained while on-duty.

Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots on Wednesday, January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol and was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed. He was taken to a local hospital where he succumbed to his injuries. The death of Officer Sicknick will be investigated by the Metropolitan Police Department’s Homicide Branch, the USCP, and our federal partners.

Officer Sicknick joined the USCP in July 2008, and most recently served in the Department’s First Responder’s Unit.

The entire USCP Department expresses its deepest sympathies to Officer Sicknick’s family and friends on their loss, and mourns the loss of a friend and colleague.

We ask that Officer Sicknick’s family, and other USCP officers’ and their families’ privacy be respected during this time.

STATEMENT FROM THE FAMILY OF U.S. CAPITOL POLICE OFFICER BRIAN D. SICKNICK
January 11, 2021

There really aren't enough kind words in any language to describe how sweet Brian was. He was truly a lovely, humble soul. We are missing him terribly.

He was sweet natured through and through. Everyone who met him adored him. He also loved his dachshunds dearly, spoiling them, and ensuring they got the best care possible.

He loved his job with the U.S. Capitol Police, and was very passionate about it. He also had an incredible work ethic. He was very serious about showing up to work on time and refused to call out sick unless absolutely necessary.

Our loss of Brian will leave a large hole in our hearts.

The tremendous support we have received from the U.S. Capitol Police, the law enforcement community, and the community as a whole has been overwhelmingly warm and generous. We’re very grateful for everyone’s kindness during this difficult time.

We will have no further statements and will not be granting media interviews. We ask that our family’s privacy be respected during this time.

Anonymous said...

German nuns 'rented' orphaned boys to businessmen for 'gang bangs & orgies' - suppressed report seen by media

https://www.rt.com/news/514470-cologne-catholic-child-sex-abuse-report/

Anonymous said...

Thank you, RayB for sharing that video at 1:59 PM.

It is a must see (especially at the very end).

Constance Cumbey said...

Just what is a "vlog"??

Costamce

Anonymous said...

Does anyone even stop to question the absolute FRENZY of all of this???

Baseball stadiums turn into vaccine 'mega sites' and will give up to 6,000 shots a day to accelerate rollout that's seen just 8% of Americans getting their first dose - as cases plummet by 45% and deaths drop by 9% in three weeks

~ Oakland Coliseum, where the Oakland Athletics baseball team plays, will house one of the first vaccination sites operated by the federal government in California

~ Jeffrey Zients, President Joe Biden's lead COVID-19 coordinator, said 'these sites in California are just the beginning'

~ Governors Andrew Cuomo and Charlie Baker expect vaccination sites at Yankee Stadium and Fenway Park to soon start vaccinating thousands of people a week

~ On Wednesday, a total of 110,679 new coronavirus infections were reported with a seven-day rolling average of 135,904... a 44% decline from the average three weeks earlier

~ The decline appears to be a global phenomenon, with new infections falling worldwide for the past three weeks in a row, the World Health Organization said Monday

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9221901/Vaccination-sites-opened-Yankee-Stadium-Oakland-Coliseum-Fenway-Park.html

Anonymous said...

From Newsmax . . .

Why global warming is a LIE!!!

tinyurl.com/srlstyf9

Anonymous said...

Vlog: a social media site were people post videos

RayB said...

This appeared this morning in my local newspaper, under "Dear Amy."

The entire "question" has the air of contrived phoniness about it. Note too that the media NEVER encouraged BLM & ANTIF rioters, looters, etc. to be "identified" by the public, nor did the FBI set up a toll free report line. 99.99% of the Trump rally people were 100% peaceful, including those that were inside the Capitol, yet, the entire group is being categorized as "armed insurrectionists" intent on "overthrowing the government." Nothing even close to that happened, and they know it. This is nothing other than propaganda that is being used to destroy Trump's populist, America First movement.

"Dear Amy: I saw my next-door neighbor in the footage of the rioters at the Capitol on January 6."

"After the election in November, this neighbor moved out of his house and back in with his mother, and got involved in all the "stop the steal" efforts that culminated in him traveling to Washington, D.C., and storming the Capitol."

"After I showed the footage of him to his (Biden-voting) wife, she told me she'd been texting with him during the day, telling him to stay away, and telling him that it was a federal crime to go inside, etc., but that he'd gone inside, anyway."

"Later I heard that he was so excited about seeing himself on this video footage that he's planning to get it made into a photo and have it framed."

"He's been my next-door neighbor for nine years. When his tree blew down, I grabbed my chainsaw and helped cut it up. When my fence blew down, he came over and helped. He's jumped my car battery. I've cut his grass when they're out of town. Next-door neighbor stuff."

"I don't know if I should report him or not. On the one hand, if those people aren't punished, they might be emboldened to do something else. I also don't believe the penalty (if any) will be significant."

— Concerned in the South

RayB said...

Here is Amy's answer:

"Dear Concerned: As of this writing, over 200 people have been arrested for participating in what Republican (former) Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called "an armed and failed insurrection attempt" in the U.S. Capitol building by a "mob... which was fed lies, provoked by the president [Donald Trump] and other powerful people."

"The FBI has explicitly asked for the public's help in identifying participants (send online tips to tips.fbi.gov) or call 1-800-CALL-FBI (1-800-225-5324)."

"USA Today is publishing an updated list of those arrested, including details of their alleged crimes and how they were caught. Some have turned themselves in, but the Bureau has also reportedly received over 140,000 tips leading to arrests - the majority coming from family members, friends, neighbors, and people who went to high school with the rioters and recognize them from footage taken inside the Capitol."

"So yes, report your neighbor, unless you have reason to believe that doing so would place you in danger."

"If your neighbor is so proud of his crime and behaving so boldly now, there is a likelihood that someone else has also reported him (his wife or his mother, for instance)."

"Being a helpful neighbor to you does not preclude this person from also being a danger to the public - and the Republic."

RayB said...


Peruvian Court Rules That Bill Gates, George Soros Criminally Liable For “Creating” COVID-19 Pandemic

“No world government, individuals or legal entities, nor the defense of the accused can claim that this pandemic has the quality of ‘foresight’, except for the creators of the new world order, such as Bill Gates, Soros, Rockefeller, etc.” write the magistrates in a resolution posted on the portal LP Law."

"Judges without a shadow of a doubt declared that the coronavirus was “created by a criminal elite that rules the world.”

https://en-volve.com/2021/02/03/peruvian-court-rules-that-bill-gates-george-soros-criminally-liable-for-creating-covid-19-pandemic/

Anonymous said...

video blog
Vlog stands for a video blog or video log, and refers to a type of blog where most or all of the content is in a video format. Vlog posts consist of creating a video of yourself where you talk on a particular subject such as reporting or reviewing a product or an event.

RayB said...


Investigators Say Blunt Force Trauma Did Not Kill Officer Sicknick at Capitol Riot

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/02/04/nolte-investigators-say-blunt-force-trauma-did-not-kill-officer-sicknick-capitol-riot/

NOTE: I watched a video several times that purported to show a fire extinguisher hit Officer Sicknick in the "head." The extinguisher was thrown from about 10 feet away and grazed the head of the officer, who was wearing a riot helmet. His head barely moved, indicating that there was no serious "blunt force." The officer, who was standing among a number of fellow officers, did not even react. He was clearly not injured and did not fall from the glazing impact, etc. Yet, the entire main stream media leaped at the chance to say he was "murdered" by the "mob of insurrectionists."

Anonymous said...

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy - (Post Hoc fallacy) = supposing that two independent and consecutive things are somehow related

It's generally a fallacy of causation in that there is no shared cause between the two events or things though they may be correlated

BLM protests don't correlate with Jan 6 insurrection. BLM actually started before Trump during Obama's administration so they are not necessarily Biden supporters or democrats. They certainly were not caused, organized or logistically supported by Biden and/or Democrats. 99.99% of the BLM protesters were peaceful and were at times, in certain cities with longer-standing issues in the community with policing devolved into small pockets of senseless violence and looting by criminals who were sometimes "dox'ed" and arrested by local police.

Anger over excessive force and the gunning down/killing of men of color and specifically George Floyd, does not in any way correlate with, cause or correlate to mob anger over losing a fair election and the transition of power.

Trump was present for the Maga Insurrection. It was his 1,000's of his followers, from his rally, under his orders to walk down to Congress and take it. They were fired up by Trump and his allies and undertook violence in his name and directly under Trump flags, banners and slogans against a building his administration purposefully left under guarded and under equiped with orders to back down; and, unlike Biden and the Democrats, he was giddy about it and didn't denounce it right away until it was apparent later that it was a bad thing.

The idea that Democrats did not criticize the violent elements of the BLM and social justice movement last summer is false. They even identified violence as a far-right tactic:

1. President Biden on May 31 in Medium sympathized with the mistreatment of people of color, writing that “protesting ... brutality is right and necessary. It’s an utterly American response.” But he added: “Burning down communities and needless destruction is not. Violence that endangers lives is not. Violence that guts and shutters businesses that serve the community is not.”

2. In June, Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, said violence was hijacking the social justice movement: “Peaceful protest is our game. Violence is their game. Purposeful protest is our game. This looting and rioting, that’s their game. We cannot allow ourselves to play their game.”

3. In June, former President Barack Obama praised the BLM protests as they went nationwide, in a piece for Medium. But he wrote: “Let’s not excuse violence, or rationalize it, or participate in it. If we want our criminal justice system, and American society at large, to operate on a higher ethical code, then we have to model that code ourselves.”

4. August, Colorado’s Democratic Gov. Jared Polis tweeted: "acts of criminal terrorism.” He said: “An attack against any of our lives and property is an attack against all of our lives and property.”

5. September, Susan Rice said: “There have been elements that have come and engaged in violence which is reprehensible, condemnable, not acceptable under any circumstances, but they don’t define the protests,” she added she was against defunding the police.

6. California Gov. Gavin Newsom expressed strong sympathy for the BLM movement at a news conference in June but said he did not have the same “sensitivities” for people who “want to exploit this moment and (who) want to fan violence and fear.”

7. Activists and local leaders of Black Lives Matter and social justice movements across the country denounced violence as it sprung up over the summer, marring the vast majority of peaceful protests. The response of Rashad Turner, leader of BLM in St. Paul, Minnesota, was typical. In July, he called rioting and property destruction, “stupid stuff, and it’s something we don’t tolerate.” He added: “People are emotional. But we would never encourage violence. There are other ways to channel that anger.”

x



Anonymous said...

That is really pathetic at 9:44 PM.

You call evil good, and good evil.

Deceived much?

Anonymous said...

X completely fuxxxxxxed up

Anonymous said...

Renowned Mathematician Edward Solomon Determines the 2020 Election Results at the Precinct Level Are "Impossible" and "Cannot Occur Naturally"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/mathematician-edward-solomon-determined-2020-election-results-precinct-level-impossible-cannot-occur-naturally/

Anonymous said...

I posted a link to this video a while back, shortly after, it was removed from YouTube.

Catherine Austin Fitts in what could be the most important Interview of the last decade

https://banned.videos/watch?id=6015f75af3a1931739667ce6

J said...

If language were used clearly and to communicate, rather than loaded words being used manipulatively, perhaps then the media could consistently use the following words in the following ways while holding BLM, Antifa and patriots to the same standards. Or at least this would be a good start. No doubt editors could tweak it to improve it. (If they were really trying to be good editors.)

Protesters: show up to provoke change.

Rioters: show up to express anger.

Opportunists: show up to loot and take advantage of discord.

Agitators: show up to push an agenda that is unrelated, or at least tangential, to the cause they have infiltrated.


J said...

As I see it:

Most of the people at the Capitol on January 6th were peaceful protesters. Over and over again we heard of BLM protests while buildings were burning, "They are mostly peaceful protesters."

I noticed the media using the word "rioters" about all the people there on January 6th, and found it very ironic since they had assiduously avoided using that word for months while we watched news unfold regarding the weird autonomous zones, the looting, the burning, the harrasssment and intimidation during the mostly peaceful BLM protests.

Ample proof has been provided regarding a few agitators found in and around the capitol on Jan 6th. Let us not gaslight each other about it.

Of note: the Capitol building has been occupied before, historically. January 6th was not the very first time ever.

J said...

My son has been reading a book called, If You Were a Kid During the American Revolution. It is a Scholastic book. I wonder if it will be canceled at some point in the future?

Here is page 26 of the story:

Uncle Daniel shook the man's hand. "This is John," he told everyone. "He's with a local militia."

Uncle Daniel explained how Samuel and Molly had helped them escape the British soldiers at the house earlier that day. John smiled. He told the cousins that he was proud of them."

Oh my goodness! Local militia!

On page 25, a little box is highlighted and says under the heading, "BRAVE FIGHTERS,"

"A militia is a group of ordinary citizens who take on the role of an army during an emergency. In the early days of the revolution, American militias frequently fought battles against Great Britain. They were often outnumbered and outgunned. They also did not have as much training as the British soldiers."

My main point is how different normal history teaching is, compared to normal media now.

Anonymous said...

It must be scrubbed. Everything must be, to assist the rider with the corona. The New Order of the Ages. By the grace of our Savior, it won't last very long!

Anonymous said...

J,

Generally, the victors do get to write the history.

Militias were legal back then and mobilized by the Continental Congress to undertake war on foreign occupiers. Militias continued thereafter under various acts legally for many years under the authority of US Congress (or the President). However, the Militia Act of 1903, established the United States National Guard as the chief body of organized military reserves in the United States. So on the one hand, it isn’t illegal to create a group based upon shared political beliefs and call it a militia, all 50 states prohibit private, unauthorized militias and military units from engaging in activities reserved for the state militia (under the US Constitution), including law enforcement activities. Some states, including Michigan, also ban “paramilitary activity during or in furtherance of a civil disorder”.

The militia movement largely gained steam in response to the 2008 election of President Barack Obama and the financial crisis of the period, which energized right-wing fringes. For example, The Three Percenters, a prominent wing of the militia movement, emerged in 2008 and supports the notion that “patriots” must protect Americans from government tyranny.

Therefore, celebrating legal colonial militias who bravely resisted and fought off the British Colonial government is not inconsistent with denigrating & marginalizing unauthorized self-declared "patriot" militias largely comprised of white supremacists and other felons playing "dress up" who parade around under "militia", "proud boy", "patriot pride" banners, patches and flags essentially stealing valor from REAL historical legal militias that helped form our country.

x

p.s. - another distinction J about Jan. 6th. Trump and his most ardent supporters were excited and giddy as it was happening. Even RayB here, I believe I recall reading him say he would have entered the Capitol building himself were he there. Contrast that with myself and 99.9999% of all other democrats that cringed anytime we saw any violence (by the police and/or by the protestors) and denounced it immediately last summer. I didn't go to any BLM rallies nor did I ever wish I was here. This is doubly true for Biden and his campaign who could surely see that if anything, BLM was helping Trump change the focus from his Covid & political failures to "dangerous", unruly, angry black people who supposedly want to abolish the police and they could mislabel as Marxists. BLM is probably the only reason Trump got over 70 million votes and keep the election somewhat less of a landslide. Republicans, politically, were giddy also with BLM providing them a target to promote fear. Again, conflating local BLM protests with an attempted federal coup, led by a national politician/political party is inappropriate and disingenuous. Anger over losing a free and fair election is not comparable nor was it caused by/correlated with varied localized, largely legitimate, urban frustration and upset over real & perceived police violence.

J said...

X 12:17 PM,

The MAGA patriots at the Capitol on January 6th were mostly peaceful protesters.

A few individuals among them were opportunists.

A few individuals among them were agitators.

A few individuals among them were rioters.

J said...

P.S. I just realized that you took RayB's quote out of context, X. He wasn't expressing giddiness or glee at the violence. That was what you were implying in your context. Really, X? Really?

I remember RayB describing watching a video of the peaceful protesters being allowed and led inside with the whole overall look and feel implying normalcy. The impression was that it was no big deal.

RayB said...


Here's the proof that the 2020 Election was stolen. The evidence is overwhelming, and yet, the courts (Democrats) refused to even allow this information to reach the discovery stage!

Mike Lindell: Absolute Proof: Exposing Election Fraud and the Theft of America

1 hour, 59 minute presentation of documented facts ... see it here:

https://michaeljlindell.com/

Anonymous said...

J,

X again:

Here's an analysis of those arrested by the Atlantic (certainly left leaning) published Feb 2nd.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/the-capitol-rioters-arent-like-other-extremists/617895/

"The Capitol Rioters Aren’t Like Other Extremists: We analyzed 193 people arrested in connection with the January 6 riot—and found a new kind of American radicalism."

On January 6, a mob of about 800 stormed the U.S. Capitol in support of former President Donald Trump .... However, a closer look at the people suspected of taking part in the Capitol riot suggests a different and potentially far more dangerous problem: a new kind of violent mass movement in which more “normal” Trump supporters—middle-class and, in many cases, middle-aged people without obvious ties to the far right—joined with extremists in an attempt to overturn a presidential election.

....

First, the attack on the Capitol was unmistakably an act of political violence, not merely an exercise in vandalism or trespassing amid a disorderly protest that had spiraled out of control. The overwhelming reason for action, cited again and again in court documents, was that arrestees were following Trump’s orders to keep Congress from certifying Joe Biden as the presidential-election winner. Dozens of arrestees, court records indicate, made statements explaining their intentions in detail on social media or in interviews with the FBI. “I am incredibly proud to be a patriot today,” wrote a 37-year-old man from Beverly Hills, California, “to stand up tall in defense of liberty & the Constitution, to support Trump & #MAGAforever, & to send the message: WE ARE NEVER CONCEDING A STOLEN ELECTION.”

Second, a large majority of suspects in the Capitol riot have no connection to existing far-right militias, white-nationalist gangs, or other established violent organizations. We erred on the side of inclusion; we counted an arrestee as affiliated with such an organization if any court documents or news articles describe the person as a member, refer to social-media posts expressing an affinity for a certain group, or attest to patches or apparel that directly indicate support.

By these standards, 20 of the Capitol arrestees we studied— one-tenth—can be classified as supporters of gangs, militias, or militia-like groups such as the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and Three Percenters. The role that such groups played in the riot has attracted considerable news coverage. But 89 percent of the arrestees have no apparent affiliation with any known militant organization.

Third, the demographic profile of the suspected Capitol rioters is different from that of past right-wing extremists. The average age of the arrestees we studied is 40. Two-thirds are 35 or older, and 40 percent are business owners or hold white-collar jobs. Unlike the stereotypical extremist, many of the alleged participants in the Capitol riot have a lot to lose. They work as CEOs, shop owners, doctors, lawyers, IT specialists, and accountants. Strikingly, court documents indicate that only 9 percent are unemployed. Of the earlier far-right-extremist suspects we studied, 61 percent were under 35, 25 percent were unemployed, and almost none worked in white-collar occupations.

Fourth, most of the insurrectionists do not come from deep-red strongholds....more than half came from counties that Biden won; one-sixth came from counties that Trump won with less than 60 percent of the vote.

...

What’s clear is that the Capitol riot revealed a new force in American politics—not merely a mix of right-wing organizations, but a broader mass political movement that has violence at its core and draws strength even from places where Trump supporters are in the minority..."

Anonymous said...

x here.

My wife started this movie on her computer earlier while sitting at our kitchen table and I couldn't stop laughing. It's a MyPillow, sham-wow, home shopping network Maga infomercial of disinformation including all your favorite, rehashed, previously debunked, election fraud conspiracy theories. I can't wait to watch the rest sometime later. If anyone has any serious questions about any of the presented lies, I'll be happy to help you understand the debunking.

Apparently, the movie IS a must-see. Here's a review I stumbled upon:

"the Pillow Man has created a piece of absurdist art so unintentionally hilarious that I have absolutely no regrets about spending the better part of my morning watching it. And frankly, that's about the highest praise I can offer pretty much anything these days. If you have two whole hours to spare, and feel like diving head first down this incredibly stupid rabbit hole, I encourage you to check out Absolute Proof for yourself"




J said...

X 3:54 PM,

Could you summarize your main point that you believe is supported by the Atlantic opinion analysis piece?

RayB said...

"X" loves to point out how the "insurrectionist mob" of Capitol rioters sought to "overthrow" (uh, without weapons, by the way) the "federal government." Nothing even close happened that day.

I wonder if "X" would care to comment about this "mob" of looters, that, "upset" by George Floyd's death, decided to take their "protest" to the local WalMart, whereby, they "liberated" WalMart of over $100,000 worth of merchandise.

Uh, "X," shouldn't these "folks" be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? What effort was made in that direction? Were "neighbors, etc." encouraged to call law enforcement in order to identify the thugs that clearly appeared on video tapes? Any thoughts "X" ?

Below is just one of dozens of examples of the mob violence that raged on throughout this past summer. While the media continued to call it "mainly peaceful," Biden, Harris, Obama, et all refused to categorically, and, emphatically, condemn the violence. "X" did his part as well ... making excuses for these thieving thugs, while defending BLM throughout the long hot summer. Recall "X's" attempt to make excuses when a BLM member flat out murdered a Trump supporter? IMO, "X" has zero credibility ... as in NONE.

Video—Police: Nearly 200 *Looters Stole $100,000 Worth of Goods from Tampa Walmart

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/11/video-police-nearly-200-looters-steal-100000-worth-of-goods-from-tampa-walmart/

* AKA, "peaceful protestors"

RayB said...

What happened? I thought the "election" (wink, wink) of Joe Biden and Commiela Harris was going to lead us into a Socialist Utopia where everyone would be happy and live a long life?

Blue funk: US ‘satisfaction’ TAKES DEEPEST DIVE EVER RECORDED

From the article linked below:

"The liberal media told us that the election of President Biden was going to yank America out of its dark days plagued by the coronavirus, economic depression, and former President Donald Trump’s tweets, but a new survey shows that U.S. “satisfaction” has hit rock bottom."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/blue-funk-us-satisfaction-takes-deepest-dive-ever-recorded

Anonymous said...

Actually, Trump is more popular than ever... and the Trump haters are going through withdrawal since they don't have 'orange man bad' to kick around any more.

Anonymous said...

RayB,

Come on, man!

X posted and that makes it so?

Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'..

X + 0 = nothin'
X - 0 = nothin'
X x 0 = nothin'
X ÷ 0 = nothin'

X has nothin'....but he does have zero credibility.

J said...

X 4:09 PM,

"If anyone has any serious questions about any of the presented lies, I'll be happy to help you understand the debunking."

That's not condescending at all.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. We still haven't achieved election transparency.

There is content, and there is process. Content = arguments for and against, and evidence for and against, election fraud. Process = the election process, the legality of it, the transparency of it.

We can argue about content.

Regardless of arguments about content, the process should be transparent.

My argument in favor of greater election transparency can stand independently of conspiracy theories and their debunkings.

J said...

Regarding conspiracies, however, make sure you don't miss this story. It is straight from the horse's mouth, calling itself a "well-funded cabal", no less. Did the sinister old man on the Scooby Doo cartoons get caught and tied up by the Scooby Doo team, feel the need to boast and confess as soon as his mask was ripped off, and then get a Time Magazine author to write it up? What the?...

Time Magazine: ‘Secret,’ ‘Well-funded Cabal’ Worked to ‘Protect’ 2020 Election

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/02/05/time-magazine-secret-well-funded-cabal-worked-to-protect-2020-election/

J said...

X, if you read the Breitbart article, make sure to notice this part towards the end:

As Breitbart News reported at the time, there was a nationwide left-wing movement to unleash more unrest if Trump claimed victory in a close election. Ball’s reporting confirms that the “shadow” effort was coordinating such efforts. She adds that the “national mobilization network” was told to “stand down” after it appeared Biden would be the winner.

J said...

In case anybody missed RayB's post at 2:52 PM...

RayB said:

Here's the proof that the 2020 Election was stolen. The evidence is overwhelming, and yet, the courts (Democrats) refused to even allow this information to reach the discovery stage!

Mike Lindell: Absolute Proof: Exposing Election Fraud and the Theft of America

1 hour, 59 minute presentation of documented facts ... see it here:

https://michaeljlindell.com/

RayB said...


Biggest Gun Control Bill In History Targets The Poor, Will Make Millions Of Felons Overnight

From the article linked below:

"HR127, known as the Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act introduced by Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18], is, without a doubt, the most tyrannical gun control bill ever proposed."

"Like all gun control measures, this bill would hit the poor and minority communities the hardest. Its massive scope would also turn tens of millions of legal, law abiding gun owners into felons overnight."

"Requires an $800 annual government insurance fee for all current and future gun owners, to be paid to the Attorney General EVERY YEAR."

"There is no grandfather clause, meaning this applies to anyone that owns a gun at all, not just those who purchase a new firearm after this passes."

"Mandatory Nationwide Firearms Registration & Database"

"ALL firearms owned shall be registered under penalty of up to $150,000 and 15 years in prison."

"Serial, make, model, date, identity of owner, and the location of where the firearm will be stored to be collected and maintained in a database by the US Attorney General."

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/biggest-gun-control-bill-history-targets-poor-will-make-millions-felons-overnight

Anonymous said...

J,

Not trying 2 be condescending. I merely recognize that many here don’t leave their information bubbles and likely aren’t aware all the election fraud claims were debunked so I was offering to help such persons out if they had any questions about any specific claim pillow man makes. You had indicated previously u like getting some balanced info & with so many gish galloping election fraud claims it’s hard to see the forest for the trees.

Also, not surprisingly, Breitbart took a lot liberties quoting & paraphrasing the Time magazine article. It’s actually pretty fascinating and in alignment with some things I had indicated here prior to the election about legal ground games. The real Time piece was just outlying the bipartisan ground that was wisely undertaken to PROTECT our democracy from Trump, before, during and after the election. The post-election protests Breitbart tried to sensationalize were merely activists prepared to quickly counter Trump were he to prematurely & illegitimately claim victory before the absentee ballots were all counted (prior to election results statistically being called for Trump by legitimate media). Really need to read the actual article.

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

Finally, the main point of the article I linked was 2 demonstrate that the data indicates the MAGA insurrectionists were everyday normal (fully interchangeable) violent Trump supporters.

Anonymous said...

How Convincing Is the Roman Catholic View That Peter Was the First Pope?-Part 1

By: Dr. John Ankerberg & Dr. John Weldon

Is there biblical evidence that Peter was appointed Pope by Jesus? Is there biblical or historical information to show that he ever actually held the position of Pope?

Brief Of Issues

Is there evidence that Jesus Christ established the office of papal authority over His Church? The Catholic Church claims that Jesus conferred on Peter and his successors supreme power in faith and morals over all the other Apostles and over every Christian in the Church. But is this true?

This doctrine is supposedly based on Matthew 16:18-19 where Jesus says, “Thou art Peter and Upon This Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth it shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”

But Protestants and others reject the Roman Catholic interpretation. They point out that in the very passage before Jesus spoke to Peter, He had asked His disciples whom men were saying that He was. Peter replied, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus agreed with Peter’s statement and used it to teach that He Himself will be the rock, the foundation, upon which the Church will be built. Jesus said, “Thou art Peter”—petros, a small stone—“and upon this petra”—great rock or boulder—I will build my Church.” The petra refers to Peter’s truthful declaration of Christ’s deity—it is upon this truth that Jesus says He will build His Church.

Which of these interpretations best fits the scriptural record? What did Peter mean when he stated in his own epistle that Jesus was the chief cornerstone and all other Christians are living stones? Other questions surrounding the doctrine of the pope are: Why are there no Scripture verses that teach how the office of Pope is to be transmitted by Peter to his successors? Why is it that the Apostle Paul never mentions the office of pope in any of his epistles when he teaches about the offices in the Church? When Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom, doesn’t Scripture show that Jesus gave the same keys to the other Apostles? Does Scripture teach that the keys are a declaratory authority to announce the terms on which God will grant salvation, or, as Roman Catholics teach, an absolute power to admit or exclude someone from heaven?

Both sides admit that in the first chapters of Acts, Peter exercises the keys to the kingdom by declaring the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles, as Jesus said He would. But then, the other Apostles declare the gospel and Peter drops from sight in the scriptural account. When Peter does reappear, at the Council of Jerusalem, why is it that the Apostle James leads the Church and not Peter?

The New York Catechism says, “The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth. By divine right, the Pope has supreme and full power in faith and morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true Vicar of Christ, the Head of the entire Church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils, the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God Himself on earth.”

The Bull of Pope Boniface VIII, Unum Sanctum, says, “We declare, affirm, define and pronounce it necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff”—a decree that Cardinal Manning asserts is “infallible and beyond all doubt, an act ex cathedra.”[1]

Anonymous said...

This attitude toward the pope seems to rest on that which was stated by Cardinal Gibbons in his book Faith of Our Fathers (p. 95), “The Catholic Church teaches that our Lord conferred on St. Peter the first place of honor and jurisdiction in the government of His whole Church and that the same spiritual supremacy has always resided in the popes or bishops of Rome as being the successors of St. Peter. Consequently, to be true followers of Christ, all Christians, both among the clergy and laity, must be in communion with the See of Rome where Peter rules in the person of his successors.”

The opposite way of saying this would be, “If anyone says that the blessed Apostle Peter was not constituted by Christ our Lord prince of all the apostles and visible head of all the Church militant or that he, Peter, directly and immediately received from our Lord Jesus Christ a pri­macy of favor only and not one of true and proper jurisdiction, let him be anathema.”[2]

How Convincing Is The Roman Catholic View That Peter Was The First Pope?

Roman Catholicism maintains that the Apostle Peter was the first pope. Yet incredibly, for such a key office involving supreme power over all the Church on earth, the only proof text that can be marshaled is Matthew 16:18-19: “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and Upon This Rock I will build my church; and the gates of hades shall not overpower it….”

Although for purposes of argument, the Roman Catholic position may be conceded as a possible (although unlikely), interpretation of this verse, it is hardly the most likely interpretation given Roman Catholic papal history. And biblically, it is impossible that this Scripture alone can be logically extended to mean all what Rome teaches it to mean.

For Rome to establish its position, it must prove at least five things: first, that Peter personally was the “rock” that Christ spoke of and that Peter’s office was to constitute the essence of Catholic things: first, that Peter personally was the “rock” that Christ spoke of and that Peter’s office was to constitute the essence of Catholic papalism; second, more specifically, that Peter’s alleged primacy equals infallibility in doctrine and morals; third, that Christ Himself gave reason to believe He conferred similar privileges on Peter’s successors or future Popes and/or bishops; fourth, that Peter was actually the first bishop/pope of Rome; and fifth, that Peter himself and the rest of the Apostles recognized his divine appointment. The first four points will be covered briefly; the fifth point will be examined in depth with occasional comment on other points.

Anonymous said...

1. Is Peter The “Rock” Christ Spoke Of?

First, does this verse really say anything unique to Peter that must be restricted to him alone? Jesus said, “On this rock, I will build my church.” He did not say Peter would build His Church; He said He would build it. It makes more sense to conclude that the “rock” upon which Christ will build His Church is men’s confession of faith in Christ as the true Messiah—something Peter had just spoken. Personal confessions in so profound a truth as Jesus’ Messiahship—with all its personal and doctrinal implications—may certainly be described as something foundational, or rock (boulder)-like. So, this interpretation not only fits the context of the passage, it fits the facts of history and Scripture as a whole. If so, then verse 19 would also not be restricted to Peter alone, who first used these “keys” to open the “kingdom of heaven” to both Jew and Gentile alike in his preaching of the gospel (Acts 2, 10—something possible for every Christian believer.

Regardless, if indeed Jesus was establishing Peter as the first pope, it is incredible that neither Peter himself, nor Paul, nor any other apostle—and not one of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament—affirms the doctrine of papalism anywhere. Indeed, it is the absence of such a doctrine that is striking.

For example, both Mark and Luke record Peter’s confession of faith in Christ as Messiah, but they do not record Christ’s words about the rock. The Apostle John does not mention the inci­dent at all, something unlikely for one who was so close to Jesus and also a good friend of Peter’s. If the words of Jesus had the significance Rome attaches to them, all this is certainly a strange omission. For Christ to establish Peter as the first Pope and living head of the Church and for three of four biographers of Jesus to remain silent on so crucial an event is unlikely to say the least:

It must involve some very elaborate armchair gymnastics to prove from the Bible that the Lord Jesus appointed Peter to be the first pope, thus establishing the papal throne. If anything, the very fact that the Lord appointed twelve apostles is itself good reason to cast doubts upon the whole idea of one, and only one, pope…. If the Lord Jesus Christ had intended to establish the supreme authority of Peter, and to have that authority perpetuated in the bishops at Rome, then it is only reasonable to assume that He would have distinctly informed His followers. So important an office would surely have been mentioned in the clearest of terms. Other sacred offices are set forth in Holy Scripture, yet strange silence prevails with regard to that which would be the highest of all. There is not one jot or tittle, anywhere from Genesis to Revelation, about any man being a regal-sacerdotal king, who as viceregerent of Christ rules over the visible Church upon the earth.[3]

Further, Peter may have given us his own commentary on Matthew 16:18. He refers to Jesus alone as “the living Stone” and the “precious cornerstone.” If the Stone is Jesus, then men— including Peter—must be something less than the Stone itself. It was Jesus who designated Peter (petros) as a “rock” (petra) and Peter classifies himself and all other believers as one of the lesser “living stones” being built into a holy priesthood (1 Pet. 2:4-6). In essence, if Peter were really the first pope (with all that implies in Roman Catholic teaching), why does not a single New Testament writer ever designate his papal office anywhere?

Anonymous said...

2. Was Peter Supreme And Infallible?

Nowhere in the New Testament does Peter exercise the majestic functions of the pope con­cerning authority or infallibility. If Peter had such authority, would Paul have ever rebuked the first pope? Who is it that publicly rebukes a pope today? Yet, “When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong” (Gal. 2:11). It would seem that the Apostle Paul never thought of Peter as unique because he does not say to Peter, “If you, being the head of the Church,” but “If you, though a Jew…” (Gal. 2:11-14).

Peter himself wrote to all Christians (1 Pet. 1:1) and especially to “the elders among you” that “I appeal [to you] as a fellow elder …” (1 Pet. 5:1). If a generation earlier Jesus had commis­sioned Peter as the first Pope, the one having supreme authority over His Church, why does Peter now, 30 years later, identify himself to the Church merely as a “fellow elder” rather than the one who has all the authority and prerogatives of the supreme pontiff himself?

Further, neither does Peter encourage the Church with Roman Catholic theology concerning the sacraments, or Mary, or assisting in the forgiveness of our sins through Catholic practices or anything else distinctively Catholic. For example, he tells us that “Christ died for sins once for all” (1 Pet. 3:18) and—far from tradition being on par with Scripture, it is God’s power which “has given us everything we need for life and godliness, through our knowledge of him…” (2 Pet. 1:3). If the knowledge of God and Christ given in the Scriptures is sufficient for “everything we need for life and godliness” of what spiritual value is 2,000 years of extra-biblical Catholic tradition for “life and godliness”?

3. Did Christ Confer Papal Privileges On Peter’s Successors And/Or Bishops?

Whatever Matthew 16:18-19 may or may not say about Peter, it says nothing at all about his successors, real or imagined. Nowhere in the entire Bible do we find any basis for a doctrine of papal succession or bishop infallibility.

4. Was Peter The First Bishop Of Rome?

Historically, no one can prove Peter was the first bishop of Rome. Peter may have visited Rome, but to confer on him the position held by Catholicism is, as we will now see, at best an argument from silence and at worst, a complete rejection of the entire thrust of New Testament teaching.

5. Did Peter Himself Or The Rest Of The Apostles Recognize His Divine Appointment?

In this extended section we will argue the impossibility of the papal office on the basis of New Testament teaching.

But first, let us use this instance to illustrate a key principle for evaluating Roman Catholic doctrines: take any major teaching, study it until you understand it well, then study the Bible by itself. Examine every verse related to the topic, whether it is Mary, justification, Peter, etc. What you find is that the more you study the Bible, the more you see the truth of the Protestant view and the error of the Roman Catholic view.

Anonymous said...

Now study Roman Catholic Tradition on these topics. Here is where you begin to understand where these views developed and how the Bible can be made to seem to teach them. It is not at all that a Catholic has no possible means of seeing the many teachings of Roman Catholic Tradition in Scripture. It is that Scripture has been so thoroughly misinterpreted in Roman Catho­lic tradition and the arguments so detailed and subject to interpreter bias, that a Catholic usually doesn’t even see the error unless he has simply studied the Bible alone.

The subject of Peter will illustrate the principle we have just enunciated. Does the New Testa­ment view of Peter support or oppose the Roman Catholic office of the papacy? This is really the heart of the issue, especially concerning the life of Peter and what Peter himself says about Roman Catholic doctrine in his epistles.

Although we have already discussed Matthew 16, we may observe two more points here. First, even Augustine, considered one of the greatest Church Fathers by both Catholics and Protestants, interpreted this verse as referring not to Peter but to Christ as the Rock that Peter confessed. Second, Peter himself did this. Whether we are considering the preaching of Peter in the book of Acts or his writing in 1 and 2 Peter, Peter always refers to Christ as the one to whom he confessed and not to himself. In Acts 4:8-12 Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit says that the Stone that is rejected by the builders became the chief cornerstone and that there is salva­tion in no one else. Christ is the cornerstone here and this is the teaching we find throughout the New Testament. Nowhere, other than in the Catholic interpretation of Matthew 16, do we have even a hint that Peter is the Rock.

In 1 Peter 2:4-8, Peter refers to Jesus as the “living stone rejected by men” and “a choice stone, a precious cornerstone.” Further, “and he who believes in Him shall not be disap­pointed…. But for those who disbelieve, ‘The stone which the builders rejected, this became the very cornerstone.’”

Peter says that Jesus Christ is the chief cornerstone. Here would be a good point for Peter to mention his own papal office if, in fact, Christ had appointed him the first pope. In fact, from the time that Jesus allegedly first appointed Peter pope in Matthew 16 until the end of his life Peter consistently does things and says things which deny that he is a pope.

For example, in Matthew 16:16, after Peter’s famous confession, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus explained to the disciples that He was to suffer, be killed and rise from the dead. What was the response of Peter? He openly confronted Christ and told Him He was wrong: “God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You” (Matt. 16:22). Jesus’ response was, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s” (Matt. 16:23).

The difficulty is this: if Christ had just instituted Peter as the Rock of the Church to head the papal office, how could Peter be completely in the hands of Satan almost the next moment?

Anonymous said...

Nor does Peter improve with time. In Matthew 26, Jesus is telling the disciples that He is going to be crucified and that they will all fall away and be scattered. Jesus tells Peter that before the cock crows, he will deny Him three times (Matt. 26:31-34). What is Peter’s response? He says that he will never fall away and that he will never deny Jesus—even if it means his own death (Matt. 26:35).

In other words, Peter first tells Christ that he is wrong to go to the cross and wrong about his own fidelity. Then later under pressure he denies Christ three times, even with an oath. In his denial of Christ the third time, he even curses and swears, “Then he began to curse and swear, ‘I do not know the man!’” (Matt. 26:74).

This does not seem to give us great confidence in the initiation of the papal office. At the key moment of Jesus’ death, Peter is hardly in a central position of strength and spiritual power; he is cursing and denying his own Lord.

Nor do things improve. When Christ is resurrected from the dead, is Peter the first one to understand, accept it and explain to the Church the significance of what has happened?

When both Peter and John saw the empty tomb, the Bible says that only John “saw and believed” (John 20:3-8). Even later when Peter had accepted the truth of the resurrection, Jesus had to ask him three times, “Do you love Me?”

Again, we do not see Peter in a position of supremacy. In fact, “Peter was grieved” when the Lord asked him the third time “Do you love Me?” Peter knew this was somehow connected to his denial of Christ three times.

Later when Peter asked Jesus about the Apostle John, Jesus’ response was to not be con­cerned about John but to follow Him. Again, we don’t see Peter in any kind of position of papal authority or leadership. Instead, Peter is once again rebuked.

Nor do things improve in Peter’s future. When we get to the book of Acts, we find that signifi­cant chapters are oriented around Peter’s ministry. If ever the papal office of Peter were to be confirmed and of Peter’s going to Rome and there founding the papacy to be documented, it would have to be here. But all we find is complete silence.

In Acts 10 Peter does not understand the meaning of the vision God gives him. Given the importance of this vision, it is unlikely that, if Peter were the pope, he would not comprehend the message.

Neither did the Church recognize Peter as anything special. In Acts 11 he is opposed by others and has to argue his case. Peter’s argument is accepted, but it is a case of one man among equals, not one man in a position of papal supremacy.

Anonymous said...

In Acts 15 we find the great Jerusalem Council. Again, if anywhere Peter’s papacy should be recognized it is at the first great Christian Council, conceded as such by both Catholics and Protestants. First, Peter does not act like a pope; rather he and the others were involved in lengthy debate. Peter makes his defense but it is not Peter who has the last word, it is James. Peter gives his argument, but James concludes the matter and then the vote is taken.

So if any one has supremacy it is James, the brother of Christ, not Peter. Also note that in Acts 21 when the apostle Paul comes to Jerusalem it is James who receives him, not Peter.

Consider another problem. Catholic tradition holds that Peter went to Rome and founded the papacy. This would mean that Peter should already be in Rome when the Apostle Paul arrives. But in Acts 27, which involves very specific details about Paul’s journey to Rome, not a word is said about Peter. In fact, in Acts 28:30 it says that Paul spent two entire years at Rome in his own quarters, welcoming everyone who came to him. Now if Peter were in Rome partaking of the papal office, is it at all conceivable that Peter would not go and visit the Apostle Paul—at least once? If he did, would Paul fail to mention it—fail to mention that he was visited by the head of the Church? Why is it that Luke, the great historian of the early Church, who set down his record in exacting detail also never mentions even a hint that Peter is in Rome or that he has his papal office?

Why is it also that when the Apostle Paul actually writes to the Roman Church, he does not even mention Peter? Peter is supposed to have been in Rome around 42-67 A.D. If the book of Romans was written in 57 A.D., this means that Peter has already been in Rome for 15 years. Again, is it conceivable that the Apostle Paul would not mention Peter or the great office of papacy that he now occupies? This is impossible if indeed Peter is supposed to occupy the position of the vicar of Christ as the head of the Church. In Romans 16 Paul mentions 27 people by name—but he fails to mention Peter even once.

In Galatians 2 we find additional information that undermines the claims of the Catholic Church. First, the Apostle Paul did not recognize any supremacy in Peter. Peter at the time is in Jerusalem with the other apostles. Paul says of them, “But from those who were of high reputa­tion (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me” (Gal. 2:6).

Further, the next two verses state that Peter was entrusted with the Gospel to the circum­cised, i.e., to the Jews, whereas Paul had been entrusted with the Gospel to the uncircumcised, i.e., the Gentiles. Both preached the same message, but to different audiences. So then why would Peter go to Rome, the center of the Gentile world when the agreement of the whole Church had been that his ministry was to the Jews (Gal. 2:9)?

Further, in Galatians 2:11, we find another impossible situation if Peter is the pope, “But when Cephas [Peter] came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.” In other words, we do not see Peter in the position of papal strength; we see him rebuked by the Apostle Paul for compromising the very Gospel itself!

Anonymous said...

In 2 Timothy 4, Paul is writing from Rome in 67 A.D. He says that the time of his death is near (2 Tim. 4:6). Remember that according to Catholic tradition, Peter has already been in Rome for twenty-five years. But nothing that Paul does suggests Peter is even there. If Peter had been killed about 67 A.D., before Paul had written 2 Timothy, how could it be that Paul fails to mention Peter’s death? Why does he mention day-to-day details and instructions for individuals by name but fail to mention the death of the first pope who has ruled in Rome for twenty-five years (2 Tim. 4:10-14, 19-21)? Paul goes on to say that Demas, loving this present world “has deserted me” and that “only Luke is with me” and that, “At my first defense no one supported me, but all deserted me; may it not be counted against them” (2 Tim. 4:16).

If Peter has been in Rome for twenty-five years, why did not Peter ever come to Paul’s de­fense? Is this the exercise of papal authority and leadership?

Finally, if we look at Peter’s own writings, there is not a single verse that substantiates the Roman Catholic claims to papacy. Peter writes as an equal man among all other believers. Peter describes himself as “an apostle” and “an elder”—but not a pope (1 Pet. 1:3; 5:1). Peter also says that all believers constitute “a royal priesthood” (1 Pet. 2:9); he never speaks of a special priesthood who will mediate between God and the people.

Finally in 2 Peter, like Paul, he emphasizes that his death is near (2 Pet. 1:14). If at any time Peter is going to appoint a papal successor, it must be now. But all Peter does is tell his readers that they must accept the authority of the Holy Scripture as something “more sure” than even eyewitness testimony (2 Pet. 1:14-21). Has Peter just declared that Scripture has superiority over tradition?

Regardless, not only is there not a single Scripture in the entire Bible that supports the Catholic teaching on the papacy, Peter himself denies key Catholic teachings. None of this makes sense if the Roman Catholic position is true.[4]

We have now seen that an examination of the scriptural data fails to confirm the Roman Catholic claims concerning the papacy. So how did the papacy arise? If we look at Church history, we will see.

Notes

↑ Walter Martin, The Roman Catholic Church in History (Livingston, NJ: Christian Research Institute, Inc., 1960), p. 8.

↑ Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Rockford, IL: Tan Books and Publishers, 1974), p. 279, citing Vatican I.

↑ Henry T. Hudson, Papal Power (Welwyn, Hertforshire, England: Evangelical Press, 1981), pp. 99, 106.

↑ Most of this was taken from a lecture by Dr. Francis Schaeffer.

https://jashow.org/articles/how-convincing-is-the-roman-catholic-view-that-peter-was-the-first-pope-part-1

Anonymous said...

Correction:

But first, let us use this instance to illustrate a key principle for evaluating Roman Catholic doctrines: take any major teaching, study it until you understand it well, then study the Bible by itself. Examine every verse related to the topic, whether it is Mary, justification, Peter, etc. What you find is that the more you study the Bible, the more you see the actual truth of what Christianity is and in so doing see the errors of the Roman Catholic view.

Anonymous said...

Let's see... the WORDS OF JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF (THE SON OF GOD) vs. anti-Catholics and mere mortals like John Ankerberg & John Weldon???

Jesus WINS every single time...

And, YOU Anonymous @ 3:54 AM thru 4:41 AM LOSE every single time!!!

So much of a COMPLETE waste of your time (and OURS) with all of that copying and pasting. LOL


J said...

X 3:33 AM,

"Finally, the main point of the article I linked was 2 demonstrate that the data indicates the MAGA insurrectionists were everyday normal (fully interchangeable) violent Trump supporters."

You said Trump supporters are in your very own family. You said your very own wife is in the religious right and you implied she is a Trump supporter.

Do you think your wife and your extended family members are "fully interchangeable violent Trump supporters", too?

If so, it makes you a complicit accessory to insurrection (that was sarcasm).

Anonymous said...

J Trumps X

Anonymous said...

M S M Admits Bipartisan "Shadow Campaign" Engaged In "Conspiracy" To Prevent Trump Victory

https://www.newswars.com/msm-admits-bipartisan-shadow-campaign-engaged-in-conspiracy-to-prevent-trump-victory/

Anonymous said...

9:23 AM

The article was not really meant for you, it was by far primarily meant for the edification of those here who are NOT enslaved by circular reasoning thinking (i.e. "The RCC says that it's THE Church that Jesus says that He founded and others say the Biblical evidence, etc. says otherwise so of course therefore those people are wrong because they go against the words of Jesus!")

Anonymous said...

Secretive international banking group may enforce Great Reset 'green'agenda on world

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/secretive-international-banking-group-may-enforce-great-reset-green-agenda-on-world?utm_source=featured&utm_campaign=standard

Anonymous said...

To 10:59 AM

The Catholic (meaning 'universal') Church WAS founded by Jesus (choosing His beloved apostle Peter as His first Pope) in 33 AD... but, Jesus intended EVERYONE in the world to belong. If people CHOOSE to reject HIM over the centuries (like Martin Luther, King Henry VIII, plus their ancestors)... then, that is on THEM!!!

Please spare me from 'cafeteria christians' who choose to select and discard and misinterpret various passages of scripture to suit themselves and their own agenda!!!

(You people have tried and failed for the past 15 years!!!)

YAWN . . .


Anonymous said...

Correction: That should read: 'plus YOUR ancestors'

Anonymous said...

x again,

Yes J, Your comment was sarcasm. It was the kind of sarcasm which sneers, and attempts to condescend yet is dead in the sewer and can sink no further than its originator.

I'd throw a little satire and situational irony your way, yet I'd rather hold aloft such things, away from the cesspit wherein you writhe like a rag of maggots.

Anonymous said...

RayB 11:20 PM

The link I posted twice, will post again now, to the Catherine Austin Fitts video, tells how important it is for Mr. Global/The Deep State etc. to confiscate our weapons! It game over at that point! The digital currency is ready now. As Gregory Mannarino says "they just have to flip a switch". The DNA manipulation with nano particle/cloud interface will make for a nice partnership with AI robotics. Then they decide who is of use to keep, and who needs to be culled. Joe Biden is the perfect shell of a human to be of great service. Ear piece/teleprompter, and you have the Image of the Beast!

While the video has plenty of good info, I think it was poorly made, and a bit weird. She could have made a better video with her cell phone, and a white board.

https://banned.videos/watch?id=6015f75af3a1931739667ce6

RayB said...

Just a few points to consider in conjunction with Anonymous's excellent post in which Dr. Ankerberg & Dr. Weldon prove, beyond any shadow of doubt, that Peter is not the "rock" that Jesus was referring to, but rather, Himself.

Peter wrote only two epistles (I Peter & II Peter). You would think that Rome would emphasize these two epistles, but they do not. Why? Because Peter NEVER even mentions, in the slightest manner, ANY references to the peculiar doctrines and dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church. For instance ...

Mary is not even mentioned once. Not only that, Peter never mentions Mary's supposed "Immaculate Conception," her "Assumption into Heaven bodily," never instructs anyone to offer "Prayers to Mary," etc. Never refers to her as the "Queen of Heaven," never states that statues should be made of her, never states that she now "sits on the Throne of God with her Son," etc.

Also, Peter somehow missed all of these VERY important RCC doctrines & dogmas:

The Papacy ... not even hinted at.

Peter never claims to be "pope" or leader of the Apostles.

Peter never claims to be the "Rock" and, and or, the Head of the Church.

Peter never staters that he has the "keys" to heaven and hell.

Peter never claims that he is infallible.

Peter never mentions "Rome."



Anonymous said...

Seems as if too much reality upsets the fragile emotional state of poor little X!

It must really suck to be such a diseased mind! Your upside down soul, in a right side up Creation, is your torment!

RayB said...

(more)

Peter never mentions the Confessional.

Peter never mentions the office of the Priest.

Peter never mentions that Priests have the power to "forgive sins."

Peter never mentions Venial Sins & Mortal Sins.

Peter never mentions Purgatory.

Peter never mentions Indulgences.

Peter never mentions the Sacrifice of the Mass.

Peter never mentions the Seven Sacraments.

Peter never mentions Prayers to Dead Saints.

Peter never mentions Prayers for the Dead, along with Masses for the Dead.

I could go on ... you should get the picture. Rome does not emphasize the ONLY writings of Peter because Peter's epistles stand in direct contrast to the very bedrock declarations of the RCC !

Anonymous said...

10:16 AM

Yes, J did Trump X.

But then again, everybody Trumps X.
It's that zero credibility thing.

Anonymous said...

RayB:

This ongoing 'debate' will NEVER be settled (to your satisfaction) here on this blog.

It will only be settled by Jesus Christ HIMSELF after we pass on to 'the other side.'

I know that I am more than ready for the day when I will meet my Lord and Savior.

AMEN!!!

RayB said...

One more quick thought ...

Christine makes a big deal out of her claim that the RCC cannot be the Harlot in Revelation 17 because, as she claims, the Vatican does not reside inside the "city of seven hills, i.e. Rome.

For centuries, writers have referred to the Vatican as "Rome." "Rome" is also used universally in reference to the Roman Catholic Church. Historically, the Papacy came into existence in the early 7th. Century, when the then Bishop of Rome, Gregory, first declared Peter's primacy, and himself as the primary Bishop of the world. For over 1,000 years thereafter, the "little horn" (the Papacy) ruled, by proxy, over the monarchies of Europe (the then known world) which constituted the revised Roman Empire.

Anonymous said...

Martin Luther called the Letter of St. James: 'an epistle of straw'.

What does Holy Scripture say about Martin Luther and his ilk (such as RayB, etc.)?: 'And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book.'

Revelation 22:19

RayB said...

Anon @ 12:48 PM ...

Have you ever read, or better yet, studied, Peter I & Peter II ?

If you haven't ... why not? I would that think every Catholic would be interested in what the "first pope" had to say.

RayB said...

I'm not a believer, nor am I a follower of Martin Luther.

I believe only in the Lord Jesus Christ and His Word as my foundation for all faith and practices.

And by the way, Bible believers have ALWAYS been in existence. For over 1,000 years, Rome persecuted true Christians as "heretics." Their "heresy" was to rely solely on God's Word, what little of it they had in physical form. It DID live in their born again hearts, as God promised to "write it upon" their hearts. It is a ludicrous fallacy to proclaim that Bible believers did not exist until the days of the Reformation. Such a claim is not only not Biblical, it is not even remotely close to being historically true.

Anonymous said...


Doctor with bioweapons expertise calls COVID-19 vaccines “weaponized medicine”

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-05-covid-vaccine-weaponized-medicine.html





Anonymous said...

Rubella vaccine inventor admits dozens of babies were strategically aborted to establish a suitable cell line for vaccines

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-05-rubella-vaccine-inventor-admits-babies-were-aborted-to-create-vaccines.html



Anonymous said...

RayB @ 1:12 PM

Now, you know better than that... NO ONE IS 'proclaiming that Bible believers did not exist until the days of the Reformation'!!!

(As a matter of fact, if it wasn't for the Catholic Church and the 12 apostles that Jesus so carefully CHOSE to spread HIS message... you Protestants / Christian Evangelicals wouldn't even HAVE a Christian bible... period!!!)

What I am saying is that Jesus started HIS Catholic Church in 33 AD for EVERYONE... and over the past centuries, many (INLCUDING former Catholics like Martin Luther, King Henry VII, just to list two EXAMPLES!!!) turned their backs on the CHURCH that JESUS started for everyone. They REJECTED HIM!!!

Over the centuries, many went on to form their OWN MAN-MADE 'SPIN-OFF' RELIGIONS... and published more and more newer 'VERSIONS' of the bible. Under the guise of 'UPDATING' and removing all of the 'thees' and thous' (modernize?)... many passages ended up changed, re-interpreted and 'watered down' along the way... often changing the very MEANING of a particular original scriptural passage. (Also, YOU ARE a descendent of that 'group think' (anti-Catholicism) whether you want to admit it or not.)

WHO WOULD DARE TO CHANGE THE WORD OF GOD??? THE TRUTH HAS NO VERSIONS... ONLY ONE!!!

(Do you even KNOW how many versions of the bible are out there??? And WHY would that be???)

THAT is what I am saying . . .


Anonymous said...

Correct me if I'm wrong but it appears our resident Catholic heretic is playing games again posting as other posters.

12:10 pm post was not made by me.

I've never spoken to J or any woman in such manner.

x

*some in my family back home are definitely interchangeable. When you are fed lie upon lie that the landslide Biden election was somehow "stolen", stealing it back sounds logical and almost justifiable. Here's what I actually texted a cousin on Jan 4th: "we disagree politically but I'm still worried about u guys. You've got a wife and kids so I don't have to warn u but don't get caught up in the emotions of any crowd & risk your health & safety or freedom for a stupid politician (from either party)."

paul said...

Right.
When any and every so-called christian CULT is examined, it turns out that they all have a few things in common.
One main thing that they all do is take a single verse out of the Bible and then build an entire theology around that one verse.
In every case that single verse is in a symbolic language, as so much prophetic language tends to be. The Book of Revelations is probably the best example. St John TELLS US that it is visions and voices from heaven that he is writing about. It is filled with metaphors and symbols and any literate seven year old would probably understand that fact.
In Revelations chapter 5 we see St John weeping because "no man was found worthy to open and read the book." But then suddenly he is told that the LION of the tribe of Judah is found worthy to open the book. Then he looks and he sees a LAMB who comes and opens the book. In fact it's Jesus, who is THE lion and THE Lamb at the same time.
He's also a burning bush, and a scapegoat, and a councillor, and a rock, and a bright morning star, and a gate, and a word, and a balm of Gilead, and a conquering king, and a suffering servant, and a still, small, voice, and many many more things.
It's symbolic language.
If one were to take away the interpretation of the one verse in the Gospels where Jesus says "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church" etc., then the entire Nicolaitan Papacy would collapse, (not necessarily all the little people in the pews, many of whom believe in Jesus Christ), but the papacy, which hangs on this one verse, which clearly is not crowning Peter with anything.
By their fruits you will know them. The fruits of the Papacy are murder, deception, decadence and theft. The fruits of the papacy are enslavement to a man-made Corporation on fear of spiritual death.
Come out of her, everyone who, simply like a child, believes in Yeshua, Jesus. You don't need anyone else for salvation. To believe in him is to follow him and eat up all his words and internalize them.
Jesus calls the Holy Ghost the "Spirit of Truth".
Trust Him.
God knows who are his people.

J said...

X 4:07 PM,

I had missed that post from the person pretending to be you. I just went back and read it. I can tell the post was not written in your authorial style.

I see no reason to assume that poster is a Catholic, either.


Anonymous said...

Hey, Paul @ 4:38 PM:

Remove that spec (now the size of a boulder!) from your OWN eye... and SEE that that there is plenty of 'murder, deception, decadence and theft' to go around ALL over the world... even in YOUR so-called 'christian evangelical' smug little world.

Actually, you all BEHAVE more like a 'cult' right here on this blog (or, more like rabid dogs!)... and where is the 'love' in your heart? It is non-existent.

Satan is alive and well ALL OVER THE WORLD (as he has been since the time of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden)... as he knows that his 'time is short' here on this earth.

So, rather than self-righteously attacking Catholics (like you have been doing for the past 15 years... for your own 'amusement')... try kneeling down and asking God to grant you the gift of HUMILITY. Now, that would be a whole new experience for you. LOL

Anyway... only an IDIOT would judge 1.2 BILLION Catholics by the actions of a few.

Anonymous said...

FYI: We Catholics don't NEED to 'play games' (pretending to be someone else).

Now, I have long suspected that a few of you might be 'replying' to your own posts (e.g. first post with your usual name and then post anonymously... but, only YOU would know who is doing what to whom.)

I don't have time to play childish head games. I have too much to say... whether it's to post web links to various articles... or to keep dodging incessant attacks from 'rabid dogs' who go after Catholics for sport. LOL

Ruff, ruff.... grrrrrrr!!!




Anonymous said...

Amen, paul.

Typical of any man-made religion...complicated...unnecessarily complicated. Lots of man-made hoops, shutes, and ladders.
But God's way, and taught all through Scripture as you pointed out, that He makes clear, and when we don't cherry pick Scripture, it's so clear a child can understand it.
So it is those that repent because humble like a child, those who trust Jesus is God enough, good enough, merciful enough, that He does not need us to save us because He went to the cross alone and paid for our sin alone, rose and ascended alone, therefore deserves that we trust, simply believe Him alone...to save us sinners, it's those that will enter the kingdom of heaven just like He promised. That's not easy believism...humility is hard for the proud. And that salvation gives us power to walk it, not just talk it, in a daily walk, believing Him day in day out, surrendered to Him as Lord. It's about Jesus.

So sorry, no place for a pope instead, there is simply no need. No middle man, because the Son of God, Jesus, was the Middle Man, as the Son of Man, on that Cross.

Profoundly simple, simply profound...

Anonymous said...

The Protestants / Christian Evangelicals are the ones who have followed the MAN-MADE RELIGIONS... that have been formed over the centuries by former Catholics, like Martin Luther and Henry VIII (just two examples)... who stomped their feet and LEFT when they didn't get their way. Boo-hoo.

You can wake up now... or, you can always wait until you die and hear the TRUTH straight from Jesus Himself.

Your choice . . .

Craig said...

Anon 11:46 AM (and your other related posts),

While I won’t specifically discuss the “rock” in Matthew 16:18 at the moment, I do wish to address what appears to be a misconception on your part, related to “Church” and “Catholic”.

I’ll begin with “Catholic”. This term katholikos is not found at all in Scripture, though its adverbial form (katholou) is used once in Acts 4:18 (“…they [the council] charged them [Peter, John and other disciples] not to speak at all…”). In other words, Jesus never used the word “universal”, aka “Catholic Church” (or “catholic Church”) in Matthew 16:18, since katholikos is nowhere found.

Now to “Church”.

Jesus’ words are, “…and upon this rock I will build my ekklēsia.” In first century usage, the word ekklēsia, at root, essentially meant “assembly”. This Greek term is a compound word made up of ek (“from”, “out of”) and klēsis (some sort of special call, calling, invitation). Basically, the term means a group called from a larger group, i.e., a sub-group. In the context of Matthew 16:18, Jesus will ‘build’ a people-group of Christ-followers.

Though ekklēsia is used in Scripture primarily for Christ-followers, it is not exclusively so. In Acts 19 the term is used thrice in a row for non-Christians: an ad-hoc assemblage of pagans brought together by Artemis the silversmith in opposition to Paul and “the Way” (19:32), some sort of official legislative body (19:39), and Artemis’ group once again (19:40).

My point here is that it’s the fact that Jesus specifically “will build” this ekklēsia that indicates it is his group—and not some other group—though the word itself carries no special significance. The word pre-dates the NT in Greek usage and was still used during NT times in Greek culture for various assemblies, some official. So, this word as used by Jesus denotes a particular people-group, not a building or an institution. In other words, Jesus is saying he will ‘build’ a group of people from the larger group of all people.

These two terms are applied together in a Christian setting for the very first time (as far as I’ve found) in 380 by Theodosius I and the two were later put together in the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 (not in the 325 Nicene Creed):

[We believe] in one holy, universal (katholikos), and apostolic ekklēsia.

I have covered the NT usage of the term ekklēsia as well as the strange, Darwinian-like etymology of the term “church” in this blog post: Re-Assembly Required.

Anonymous said...

Craig ~

There is absolutely NO 'misconception' on my part about the WORDS of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

You (and several others on this blog) are WRONG in YOUR interpretation... period!!!

This 15 year old argument (ad nauseum) between the Evangelicals vs. the Catholics will NEVER be settled HERE. So, please STOP... and save your breath!!!

You will learn the TRUTH from Jesus Himself when you reach 'the other side'.

See you then . . .

Craig said...

Anon 8:15 AM,

Can you tell me where Jesus uses the word "Catholic"?

Anonymous said...

To 6:59 PM

To REDUCE the role of the Son of God to 'middle man' is extremely OFFENSIVE... to GOD.

It shows a DENIAL (by you) of belief in the Blessed Trinity: God, the Father; God, the Son; and God, the Holy Spirit are ALL ONE GOD (separate but equal).

J said...

X 4:07 PM,

"*some in my family back home are definitely interchangeable. When you are fed lie upon lie that the landslide Biden election was somehow "stolen", stealing it back sounds logical and almost justifiable. Here's what I actually texted a cousin on Jan 4th: "we disagree politically but I'm still worried about u guys. You've got a wife and kids so I don't have to warn u but don't get caught up in the emotions of any crowd & risk your health & safety or freedom for a stupid politician (from either party)."

I can't disagree with the main point of your text message, but it seems like the more likely risk to most individuals who were there on that day, is to be ratted out just for being a warm body standing there at that time and place and recognized on a camera -- despite having done nothing that hasn't been done by protesters at the Capitol repeatedly historically. Most people didn't steal anything. Most people didn't damage any property. Most people didn't commit any violent acts. Most didn't even know it was happening until they saw the footage of it later.

We keep being told by the media over and over what the intent of thousands of people really must have been. To me it seems like analysis by assertion -- which is to say no analysis at all but an attempt to convince us that only one "analysis" is reasonable. It is probably neurolinguistic programming or something similar.

Anonymous said...

To Craig @ 8:24 PM:

The word “catholic” means universal. Jesus created one universal church for all of mankind. The Catholic Church was established by Jesus with his words spoken in Matthew 16. Jesus asked his disciples “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” The disciples then offered various answers – “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” But the question that Jesus then asked was crucial: “But who do you say that I am?”

The answer provided by Simon Peter set in motion the formation of the Catholic Church by Jesus. “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” With this answer, Jesus established the Catholic Church with Simon Peter designated the first Pope.

“Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.“


Anonymous said...

8:27 PM


Seriously?


You missed it that He was crucified between 2 thieves? They represent the world Jesus died for. He died for all but not all believe Him. One of the thieves did and Jesus gave Him a forever promise on the spot because he repented, and called Him Lord. The other died not repenting, believing, though Jesus was there to save that thief too. Same opportunity right in the middle between this 2 men that day. Are you not seeing the big picture?

So, you seem to have missed it that that day He was in the middle between them, have you also missed it in the big picture, that He was in the middle between a sinful world and Holy God the Father? He was suspended on a cross hanging between earth and sky, as a Bridge in the gap, between God and mankind. Justice and Mercy were met right in that middle spot, He is the Very Crux of that matter for sinners to be reconciled to God! Jesus, the Son of God reconciled our broken relationship to God by His Body and Blood, and He called Himself the Son of Man, being the Perfect Man, judged in our place.

Just so you know, I can tell you there's no denial, as you judged that I have, because the Holy Spirit was how God the Father could and did place His Son in a human mother. So many other acts of the Holy Spirit are written in the Bible, front to back of the Book! There is absolutely God in 3 Persons. Beautifully unexplainable to our finite minds.

Why are you missing something so obvious to not see Jesus in the middle? Now I really wonder is it because according to your Catholic religion you have Jesus replaced by your pope, a mere sinning, sinful, man? Is Jesus just an icon or figurehead to you because I really don't know why you don't seem to know this???

So I have not been offensive to God because my Savior Jesus is the Lord. He was in the middle between me and God. He has paid my sin debt so I could be (and now am) a child of God the Father. His Holy Spirit brought this faith to my heart and mind so I could and did repent and gave my soul and life to His forever keeping..and no stop overs, just straight to my eternal Home with Him when I leave this life.
The whole matter comes down to choosing trying, or trusting.
And no other middle man, pope, priest, or preacher, just Jesus.
Your religion is full of try-try-try (and still trying!) to make your own self righteous, with the "help" of a mere man like yourself to bridge that gap between you and God?
Your religion is a not so merry go round with lots of hoops and chutes, and ladders.
Unnecessary and complicated.

No thanks.
The Bible teaches that I was not born righteous, I was born a sinner, (there is none righteous, no, not one, please look it up in the Bible for yourself) but I believed in my heart and confessed Jesus with my mouth by His Spirit, knowing in my heart that Jesus is Lord. He has taught me by His Word the Bible, that Jesus' righteousness is mine by faith because I was born again (over 40 years ago now), and He promises eternal life to those who trust Him...
....because God so loved the world that He gave His One and Only Son that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16

You really should simplify.




Anonymous said...

J

“Ratted out”??? Seriously??

I never once felt a kinship with rioters & looters to any extent -especially not to level where I felt protective of them NOT being ratted out. I even tried “Doxxing” a few Chicago looters & vandals searching college Facebook pages of students in the loop.

What happened at the Capitol was far worse. Opposing & reporting domestic terrorists to the police, FBI and Homeland Security Officials is a patriotic duty of all Americans. I have yet 2 see anyone arrested or even fired for having just gone for the speech & left (like my cousin & his buddies -who went back to hotel to eat and go to the bathroom & just wisely decided to leave). But anyone that step over barriers and onto Capitol grass and steps and building need 2 be held accountable (just as looters & vandals should be held accountable). I saw this afternoon that simple cell phone tracking data (available for consumer purchase on the internet so not Gov tracking) on Jan 6th indicate about 40% of the crowd at the speech proceeded directly to the Capitol and that that crowd that stormed the Capitol was almost exclusively made up of persons at the rally.

Again, looting of a Wallmart by non-political but upset urban youth not affiliated with or controlled at all by democrats is a serious local crime that should be prosecuted locally; however, it is not comparable to the Trump led domestic terrorism & attempted insurrection as there is/was way more at risk from an attempted bloodless coup upon our entire nation. Further, democrats played no part in BLM protests nor the decisions by police to focus on beating down peaceful protestors & instigating riots while leaving businesses unprotected vs the complicit promulgation of patently false & debunked election fraud lies by Trump supporters for weeks stoking the very misplaced anger that motivated the MAGA insurrection. In other words, Black people walking with white supporters airing legitimate grievances is not comparable to being sore losers trying to reverse a fair democratic election while oddly claiming 2 be patriots.

X

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

bind and loosing power of the keys given Peter, given also to the rest of the Apostles after the Resurrection. John 20:22, 23.
This BTW is the Scriptural basis for a priest orgiving sins a power transmitted from Jesus through the Apostles. Also available directly from Jesus, but confession brings humility.

meaning of the word ekklesia doesn't resolve the dispute. A formal official assembly has some order and structure. all RC buildings could disappear and the RC remain assembling outdoors or in tents or courtyards looking more like an "assembly."

the question is, does RC teach and practice the same as when established? or did it deviate from fellow Orthodox (i.e., non Arian) and finally break from us? is it the same assembly founded by Christ or did it mutate and separate?

anti RC - Vatican called Rome because a. that is the Bishop of Rome's HQ, chosen tobe on an out of town swampy dump site for humility reasons. b. the jurisdiction (and western empire of the time) is called Rome. The latter went to the bishops' and others' heads eventually sin of pride exalted itself. And if pope is antichrist where is the world empire he displaced the top three rulers to be 11 th and upstart horn? you cherry pick Scripture as much as RC does.

Roman Catholic defender you say ignoring historical fact is delusional, then reject historical fact that ROME IS NOT UNIQUE in having an unbroken Apostolic lineage and imply I setr myself up as the final authority on the RC. wellyou aren't that either. Both of us appeal to historicqal facts you use only some I use more.

I DO NOT ARGUE WITH JESUS' WORDS neither does Ankerberg we argue with you ignoring other verses that clarify more and you misapply "the church" to mean the Roman segment.

Paul told the christian colony in rome "For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established;" established is strengthened in Douay-rheims, but the Greek word is more like established - "strengthen
??????????? (st?richth?nai)
Verb - Aorist Infinitive Passive
Strong's Greek 4741: From a presumed derivative of histemi; to set fast, i.e. to turn resolutely in a certain direction, or to confirm." Romans 1:11

In other words, they had no bishop and no one to give them major spiritual blessing like an Apostle, so Peter hadn't been there yet. But other churches were thriving.

ROME WAS NOT THE FIRST ESTABLISHED NOR UNIQUE IN HAVING AN UNBROKEN APOSTOLIC LINEAGE NOR UNIQUE IN BEING ESTABLISHED BY AN APOSTLE except in the west, churches founded by Apostles were a dime a dozen in the east.

Rome was unique in having two Apostles martyred there. that's all.

What prots don't understand is that RC considers their church to be Jesus' Body, and to leave that organization is to leave Christ Himself. that's why they put up with anything from the hierarchy. Some realize this is a misinterpretation and do leave.

evangelicals, your denial of the real presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist and rejection of authority in the church, is shared by mostly heretics similar to Jehovah's witnesses and worse. Bogomils and athars in Landmark Baptist pedigree would be thrown out by baptists if they preached their blasphemies.

Anonymous said...

Christine @ 4:41 AM:

Re: "ROME IS NOT UNIQUE in having an unbroken Apostolic lineage"

Huh???

Christine, please show me ANOTHER nearly 2,000 year old 'APOSTOLIC lineage' than the one at the time of Jesus... from Pope Peter (in 33 AD) all the way up through the present day Pope Francis (in 2021).

(Crickets . . . and still waiting).

The unbroken line of popes (which is now DOCUMENTED HISTORY and can not be dismissed or ignored unless a person is yes, DELUSIONAL!!!) is not 'about' the city of Rome (and never has been).

It is historical fact that Peter began his Papacy in the ancient city of Antioch. (The Roman Empire at the time of Christ hailed Antioch as the new capital of the East over that of Alexandria. It became a pivotal city, one favored by the emperors of Rome and a vital part of the Empire.)

The city of ROME came into picture later on...

No, the Protestants / Evangelicals are the ones who love to 'entertain' themselves (and each other) with 'gotcha' questions about Rome... even going so far as to 'declare' Constantine the 'first Pope' LOL

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Since the name 'Peter' actually MEANS 'rock'... this is more proof that Jesus designated Peter as the first Pope as HIS words in Matthew 16:18 were: "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build MY CHURCH..." (not 'Thou art Constantine').

Moreover, we have biblical evidence—John 1:42—that also points to Jesus using Aramaic in the naming of Peter: “[Andrew] brought [Peter] to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, ‘So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas’” (which means PETER).
The name Cephas is an anglicized form of the Aramaic Kepha, which means simply “ROCK."

J said...

X 12:26 AM,

You make a lot of assumptions and use a lot of loaded language.

I will never doxx somebody unless I think they are actually a real terrorist or a real violent felon.

Not just somebody getting into some trouble by being unruly in public.

Not from pictures with poor resolution.

I would have to be certain, not just guessing.

To my mind, if I were to guess at things like that, I would risk becoming a busybody who was potentially hurting innocent people.

The Bible tells us God does not like busybodies.

paul said...

Kepha: Does it mean rock or stone?
Should we call the Kepha "Papa", or is he only a chip off the old block?
Why does Jesus say; "call no man on earth father, for one is your father which is in heaven" ?

J said...

I've been thinking about this some more. The best comparison of the Jan 6th Capitol crowd is not a comparison to BLM and Antifa. It's a comparison to the "p u s s y hat march" and so many other "color revolution" activities that began immediately upon Trump's inauguration.

It would be instructive to do a point by point comparison.

I remember Madonna in her black p u s s y hat making a speech, and her is an excerpt:

But this is the hallmark of revolution. My question to you today is, “Are you ready?” I said, “Are you ready?” Say, “Yes, we’re ready!” Say, “Yes, we’re ready!” One more time, you’re ready!

Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful thought about blowing up the White House (but I know that this won’t change anything).


I remember Kathy Griffin holding up a bloody Trump head. She was sort of held accountable but got away with a little bit of career damage and a slap on the wrist. She was not really ostracized and actually received a lot of celebrity support. The condemnations of her had a token look and feel.

That is only two examples. The problem is not the lack of enough examples to document in detail the main points. The problem that there are so many and we became desensitized to them and they were forgotten in the rush of news cycles bringing more herds of elephants to focus on, forgetting the last herd of elephants that was already gone.

I don't have the time to document it in great detail, and few would want to read a detailed list, but no doubt millions of people like me observed it over time, and it did not go down their memory hole.

As I think about it, what seems to happen is a cowardly use of outrageous women celebrities as proxies. Some people who are elite don't get their hands dirty.

Not conspiracy theory at all. Hollywood is full of w h o r e s who are just that, in many more ways than just one way.

Read this for proof. Don't call it conspiracy theory, because it is fact, not theory. It is well documented here. The challenge is the tedium of the many details. There are so many details to support it that it actually becomes dry and academic and difficult to absorb and retain.

Liberal CIA Owns Hollywood

https://www.isgp-studies.com/liberal-cia-hollywood

J said...

What is a "color revolution"?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=what+is+a+color+revolution&t=h_&ia=web

J said...

X and other interested readers,

It seems as foolish to blindly trust and follow a Liberal CIA-led insurgency, as it does to blindly trust and follow a QAnon insurgency (or rather a QAnon diversion? or trust operation?).



Anonymous said...

Paul, what does your name stand for?

COW CHIP??? LOL

RayB said...


This should make the New World Order, no-walls, no-borders "pope" deliriously happy:

Biden kills asylum deals with Central American nations, orders Border Patrol to let illegal aliens roam free

From the article linked below:

"President Trump had worked out deals with Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala that greatly reduced the number of migrants seeking asylum. The Biden administration took two weeks to unravel the deals and start the surge across the border for illegal aliens that concerns millions of American citizens."

"The Biden regime is withdrawing the U.S. from agreements with three Central American countries that restricted the ability of people to seek asylum at the southwest border."

https://noqreport.com/2021/02/07/biden-kills-asylum-deals-with-central-american-nations-orders-border-patrol-to-let-illegal-aliens-roam-free/

Anonymous said...

The only blindly-led INSURGENCY are the Deep State Globalists... e.g. 'Dementia Joe' and his VP 'Cruella'... plus Nancy, Chuck, AOL and Company... who, after a brilliantly successful COUP (stolen election!!!) are safely protected behind a very high wall... to keep the American Citizens from going after them with lighted torches and pitchforks... after our economy COLLAPSES, the banks FAIL, and the dollar is reduced to ZERO!!! And, further protected by at least HALF of the still-asleep, heavily INDOCRINTATED public... who doesn't have a CLUE... and will only 'wake up' AFTER it is too late... and after caravan after caravan of illegals (mostly strong, young MEN) become willing soldiers for China... and turn against 'the hand that feeds them'... the American people)!!!

(Nancy (heard talking her herself): "I believe that the paranoids may be out to get me."


Anonymous said...

The only blindly-led INSURGENCY are the Deep State Globalists... e.g. 'Dementia Joe' and his VP 'Cruella'... plus Nancy, Chuck, AOL and Company... who, after a brilliantly successful COUP (stolen election!!!) are safely protected behind a very high wall... to keep the American Citizens from going after them with lighted torches and pitchforks... after our economy COLLAPSES, the banks FAIL, and the dollar is reduced to ZERO!!! And, further protected by at least HALF of the still-asleep, heavily INDOCTRINATED public... who doesn't have a CLUE... and will only 'wake up' AFTER it is too late... and after caravan after caravan of illegals (mostly strong, young MEN) become willing soldiers for China... and turn against 'the hand that feeds them'... the American people)!!!

Nancy (heard talking to herself): "I believe that the paranoids may be out to get me."




RayB said...


In conjunction with J's 11:06 AM post ...

The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts

From the article linked below:

"When I received my briefing as staff associate, House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, which required top secret clearance, I was told by senior members of the staff that the Washington Post was a CIA asset. Watching the Washington Post’s takedown of President Richard Nixon with the orchestrated Watergate story, that became obvious."

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/08/18/the-cia-owns-the-us-and-european-media/

NOTE: Paul Craig Roberts has a long, storied career, including serving as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under Pres. Ronald Reagan. Few have experienced the Deep State operations close hand, and dared to talk about it, as has Dr. Roberts.

Anonymous said...

J at 9:49 AM,

Stop being a busybody then!

x

Anonymous said...

"I remember Madonna in her black p u s s y hat"

J., What shameless and crude language you use. Disgraceful!


x

RayB said...

Paul said (in part) @ 10:01 AM ...

Why does Jesus say; "call no man on earth father, for one is your father which is in heaven" ?

NOTE: The pope's title "Holy Father" is the ultimate in blasphemy, fore he takes upon himself the title reserved exclusively for God the Father. The term is used only once in the entire Bible, and it is used exclusively by Jesus while addressing His Father in John 17:11. In every aspect, by using the God's title "Holy Father," the pope is declaring himself to be "God."

Acting as a "god," The Papacy declares that the Pope is absolute King over Heaven and Earth, so much so that the Pope is above all Monarchs and laws. The Papacy declares that the Pope has the keys to Heaven and Hell, thereby having the god-like power to determine the eternal destiny of all souls. The Papacy is "drunk" with the blood of Christian martyrs, which suffered for over 1,000 years under Rome's dictatorial, religious oppression.

Study Revelation Chapter 17 in its entirety. It is clearly the history of the Papal system that is being described. Nothing else even comes close to matching this symbolic description of this abomination.

J said...

(Not X) 1:07 PM,

You do know cats are called p u s s y cats, right? You do know there is a children's story called P u s s in Boots, right?

The hats worn by women in the women's march were widely called just what I called them, and the term became a part of the popular lexicon.

It is but a supporting detail of a supporting detail, though.

The main idea is the idea of color revolution. The women's march was likely but one manifestation of what has likely been a sequence of events, with varieties of actors and several phases over time, and that eventually matched the patterns seen with color revolutions staged in other countries.

Main idea = color revolution.

J said...

RayB 1:00 PM,

Very interesting post about CIA ownership of US and European media. It explains a lot.

Anonymous said...

The Pope is merely God's 'representative' here on earth (nothing more, nothing less).

It is fun watching RayB, Paul and others constantly making mountains out of molehills though.

You people really do need to get a LIFE. LOL

Hey, take a break and watch the Super Bowl . . .

Anonymous said...

Clarification:

But first, let us use this instance to illustrate a key principle for evaluating Roman Catholic doctrines: take any major teaching, study it until you understand it well, then study the Bible by itself. Examine every verse related to the topic, whether it is Mary, Peter, justification (here was meant to keep embracing the book of James as crucial [rather than as "a book of straw"] BUT also not going to the other extreme of accepting as 'Christian' the concepts of such things as self-flagellation and Purgatory) etc.

What you find is that the more you study the Bible, the more you see the actual truth of what Christianity is and in so doing see the errors of the Roman Catholic view.

Anonymous said...

The only ERRORS I see are yours, 7:59 PM.

Anonymous said...

9:40 PM

To repeat:

These posts are not meant for you so you can, as you say, "spare us" your responses. They are meant for the edification of those here who, unlike yourself, are NOT enslaved by knee-jerk response circular reasoning thinking (i.e. "The RCC says that it's THE Church that Jesus says that He founded and others say the Biblical evidence, etc. says otherwise so of course therefore those people are wrong because they go against the words of Jesus!")

Anonymous said...

To 4:26 AM

Please stop YOUR 'knee-jerk responses'... to all of us Catholics, who have been defending our Catholic faith on this blog for the past 15 years!!!

For you to say 'these posts are not meant for you' is, of course, a LIE... because they always 'coincidentally' FOLLOW a post from one of the Catholics. LOL

When you continue to ARROGANTLY disagree with the WORDS OF JESUS... the consequences are that HE will be dealing with all of you soon enough. So, that is on YOU to answer for... and I just say, 'let go; let GOD' in response to your arrogance.

Meanwhile, I have every right to DEFEND my Catholic faith against all of the lies and disinformation about what Catholics believe... from those of you who continue to make it your life's mission to BULLY Catholics on this blog.

And Jesus would expect nothing less from me.

FYI: You are the ones who BEHAVE like a 'cult'... in your very AGGRESSIVE non-stop attempts (with no love in your hearts) to 'convert' Catholics to YOUR way of thinking (and refusing to take 'no' for an answer)!!!

Well, if you'll notice, it hasn't worked for the past 15 years... and it isn't working now.

Anonymous said...

5:30 AM said...

"For you to say 'these posts are not meant for you' is, of course, a LIE... because they always 'coincidentally' FOLLOW a post from one of the Catholics."

Am I supposed to have always scrupulously waited until others have posted just so that he won't imagine he is put upon? Ridiculous. And false accusing is a very serious sin.

5:30 AM said...

"When you continue to ARROGANTLY disagree with the WORDS OF JESUS..."

He ever conflates the RCC's INTERPRETATION of Jesus's words with Jesus's words themselves. They AIN'T they same!


5:30 AM said...

"Meanwhile, I have every right to DEFEND my Catholic faith against all of the lies and disinformation about what Catholics believe... from those of you who continue to make it your life's mission to BULLY Catholics on this blog."

There are no lies and misinformation to my knowledge that I personally have put, the Ankerberg information, for example, was extremely scholarly.

And as far as being a "BULLY", as you recall HE is the one who not only resorted to name-calling but to say the least was quite unrepentant about having done it.

I merely put information to further the understanding of those here who are intellectually honest (REGARDLESS of their belief system) of what the Holy Bible actually says as opposed to what some erroneously SAY it says.

And Jesus would expect nothing less from me.

Anonymous said...

8:27 PM and 5:30 AM (Don't know if the same person or not but either way..)

This.
"When you continue to ARROGANTLY disagree with the WORDS OF JESUS"

That finger pointing statement falls right back on you...and sticks like cement glue. So perhaps you have missed a lot that my children in Sunday School easily understand and believe that is straight up from Jesus' own words in the Bible, and what it plainly teaches? It's quite noticeable you rebuked and judged someone else but did not address the very well known point made from the Bible about Jesus crucified between 2 thieves and much bigger point about Jesus' mission on earth to begin with. Your failure to see common ground there is honestly, just sad. I thought we had that much in common but I guess we don't.

Failing to find any common ground in Jesus is why you still fight about your church and pit it against others as though it is much better because according to you is original and completely correct. Seriously? I think we all have some misunderstandings about the Bible, and the role of the church, so we have all, to some degree or another peed in that pool, but God will clear that up for us the moment we see His Holy Perfection.
Religious blather is useless. By your own words you have 15 years of practice in that arena...

Anonymous said...

In the year 33 AD (before He was crucified and died for the sins of ALL mankind), Jesus started HIS CHURCH... meant for EVERYONE. (Catholic means UNIVERSAL.)

During that nearly 2,000 years, there have been many who have REJECTED HIM and His words!!!

So, that is on YOU... and yes, it WILL all be sorted out and cleared up after we pass on.

J said...

X 3:33 AM,

The title should tip you off before you read a word of the weird Times article.

"The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election"

It has the words "secret" and "shadow" in it.

And if this sentence passes your smell test...

"There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs."

...I don't know what to say.

The thing speaks for itself.

Yes there are nice words sprinkled in: "...to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy."

The phrase "keep the peace" was juxtaposed, without any sense of irony, with "sometimes destructive racial-justice protests", in the full sentence:

"Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy."

Putting it under the microscope is child's play and would become tedious to everybody.

But before I leave the subject, just look at this sentence. Was this a Freudian slip? Was it a case of projecting and then justifying a pre-emptive strike? Or even if it was really accurate that Trump was running a campaign to spoil the election, how is an opposing campaign to spoil the election on a higher moral ground?

"For Trump and his allies were running their own campaign to spoil the election."

The logical meaning is that the shadow and secret campaign to "save democracy" was really an opposing campaign to "spoil the election".

How can you read a piece like this without noticing it's riddled with confusion?

J said...

X 3:33 AM,

"Not trying 2 be condescending. I merely recognize that many here don’t leave their information bubbles and likely aren’t aware all the election fraud claims were debunked so I was offering to help such persons out if they had any questions about any specific claim pillow man makes. You had indicated previously u like getting some balanced info & with so many gish galloping election fraud claims it’s hard to see the forest for the trees."

I do like to get balanced information, and lots of it, too. Often I have suspended my judgement and sought more information.

Lately it has become easier for me to make up my mind, because so many elites are telling us what they want to do or what they just did.

They are telling us they want a "great reset".

They are telling us about their cabal and conspiracy to control the 2020 election outcome.

They are telling us they want to cancel or "re-educate" Trump supporters, Christians and conservatives.

It's not a conspiracy theory when they are telling us themselves exactly what they want to do or exactly what they just did.

Not only that but actions are now quite transparent -- for example, the WHO immediately changed COVID testing and diagnosis guidelines to guarantee COVID stats will fall -- one hour after Biden was inaugurated.

All that is necessary is to take the openly stated facts at face value but then to disregard the babble that puts evil for good.

That, and consider Groucho Marx's joke: "Who you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?" Believe your eyes.

paul said...

Jesus said, to both the multitude and his disciples:
"The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be born, and lay them on men's shoulders, but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments. And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. But be ye not called Rabbi: for one is your master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
(Matthew 23: 2-9)

Why would Jesus have spelled these things out so clearly? It's right there in the chapter which precedes the Olivet Discourse, in which he spells out the significant events leading up to his return. He was speaking to first century people AND 21st century people...and everyone in between. Notice that the theology which the Rabbis taught was actually right and true. Even though they themselves were snakes in the grass; vipers, he called them, they HAD TO teach Moses and teach him correctly.
Why would he have condemned the Rabbis who held mastery over the people, to the point of causing mortal fear of losing a persons eternal soul, which they used to keep the people filling the coffers every week?
But why would Jesus go on to say, call no man "father" when that was not the usual title given Rabbis anyway?
Of course Jesus knew exactly who the Rabbis of the future would be. Every single RC "priest" has the FR. title in front of his exalted name. It's the exact same thing; the broad phylacteries and the chief seats at feasts, and the fear-mongering control over everyone, and the purple and the scarlet, the super-excessive wealth_ all while they practice sexual perversions ranging from bad to outrageously evil.
It's the exact same thing.
It's blasphemy. It's spiritual wickedness in high places.

Anonymous said...

God had sent Jesus to forgive sins, but after his resurrection Jesus told the apostles, “‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’” (John 20:21–23).

Anonymous said...

Christianity Got You Down?

EMBRACE THE NEW AGE!

Today, science tells us that the essence of nature is flow.

Nature requires exploration.

Flow is the driver of non-locality.

Consciousness consists of electromagnetic forces of quantum energy.

“Quantum” means an unfolding of the Vedic.

The cosmos is approaching a tipping point.

The quantum matrix is aglow with electromagnetic resonance.

We exist as bio-electricity.

Throughout history, humans have been interacting with the universe via bio-feedback.

Reality has always been buzzing with lifeforms whose lives are opened by flow.

It can be difficult to know where to begin.

You and I are pilgrims of the infinite.

By invocation, we reflect.

To embark on the story is to become one with it.

It is time to take knowledge to the next level!

Gaia will give us access to amazing knowledge!

Imagine an evolving of what could be!

Humankind has nothing to lose!

https://tinyurl.com/lgme3zu

Anonymous said...

1:18 PM

See what I mean? Still fighting about your church is the best, the one that has it all right, instead of finding reason to agree with me about Jesus...unless of course it is you who is rejecting Jesus' words and teaching in favor of your own version. You won't admit He was crucified the way I wrote of in the middle between 2 thieves, you can't find it in yourself to agree what His mission on earth was, and you can't see that I agreed with you about the Trinity yet said I was denying that?
Do you not read people's words at the face value of them but instead just go straight to arguing?

So I get it, you can't be found agreeing with a non-catholic, like, ever...for any reason...
Is it because you "lord" your church over people like it demands to "lord" over you...?...but JESUS is LORD, not your catholic church!
How can your church be higher than the Lord Jesus Himself? Mine isn't. He is higher. Is it you who is putting your religion ahead of God just as the Pharisee's did in Jesus day? (because that is the question you should be asking yourself right about now)

Paul's post at 2:35 PM points that out very well. How Jesus Himself called the Pharisees out for lording everything over people and we see the same pattern in the way RCC hierarchy operates, and sadly, some of you who belong to that religion. You argue about your church being the best and skip right over the things we should have been able to agree about.
That's messed up, 1:18 PM.

Anonymous said...

6:53 PM:

You are the one who is 'messed up'.

You and others on this blog continue to MOCK and REJECT the very words of Jesus... and ARROGANTLY continue to DISTORT His words... deciding how you THINK His words should be interpreted.

But... it WILL all be sorted out one day soon.

_______________________________________________


P.S. And I have never used the word 'best'... but if you think the Catholic Church is the 'best'... I won't disagree.

Anonymous said...

J (thanks for recognizing again that obviously wasn't me again)

"For Trump and his allies were running their own campaign to spoil the election."

I'm not going back to read but I understood that more like "I just described or I'm going to describe the campaign to make the election as efficient, open and fair as possible so Trump can't deny it IF/when he loses; but, understand that while the white knights [these brilliant Dems who foresaw the events post-election] are working for good, the dark knight [Trump] and his allies are running their own campaign to spoil the election so Trump can "win" either way or have plausible deniability ever having to have his ego face being a "loser"".

For it to have been a "Freudian Slip" it would necessitate the authors made "an unintentional error regarded as revealing subconscious feelings". They are journalists - they don't have feelings. lol -- I just see this piece as celebratory and braggadocious. Giving credit where credit appears to be due for some wise anticipatory democratic ground game. I think bragging is short-sighted considering the spin being put upon it in the darker corners of the right-wing; but there is nothing illegal about fighting for the rights of voters to vote more easily, making sure polls are sufficiently staffed & trained considering the demands of Covid and that most election staff in the past have been retirees who couldn't be relied upon this year, preparing for and countering Trump's publicity/perception moves, and genuinely attempting to make the election come off more smoothly than the primaries had in many states, and, of course, ensuring the electoral college process went smoothly if Trump lost and tried to circumvent it.

This isn't different than the strategies employed by Roger Airs for Nixon and every Repub candidate thereafter, nor Republican strategies to keep blacks & urban voters from voting for years and to limit the availability of absentee ballots. It's not even underhanded like the 8 or so different bogus "investigations" of Hillary over Benghazi that was orchestrated by Kevin McCarthy to help the Trump campaign. It certainly wasn't as bad as working with Russian operatives and intelligence to further one's campaign.

x



Anonymous said...

J,

When you say "they are telling us"--- it's usually right-wing media spinning a story picking and choosing lines here and there and making it nefarious.

The lies are on both sides. I've said it before - despite years of Gingrich brainwashing with Newt-speak - neither party has any moral high-ground. The pendulum of extremism is swinging and that's not good for our country either way. As Christians, we aren't supposed to be focused on that. Evangelicals disappointed in Trump’s loss should look for ways to work with the Biden administration, particularly on bipartisan issues like criminal justice reform and international religious freedom. On issues where disagreement is inevitable, it’s helpful to emphasize how policy that reflects Biblical teaching promotes the common good, not just self-interest. If Republicans truly are the moral high-ground - prove it.

Perhaps you've read stuff by Holly Pivac. Her takes is this: "It’s not clear what that cleaning up of the mess entails, but Holly Pivec, co-author of A New Apostolic Reformation?—a book about Christians claiming to be modern-day prophets—says the failed prophecies surrounding Trump brought “shame” to the Church: “They hurt its witness to the watching world, they’ve undermined the faith of believers, and they’ve made it more difficult for Christians to share the gospel going forward.”

Pivec thinks theology unmoored from the clear teaching of Scripture also makes followers vulnerable to the kind of conspiracy theories that have proliferated in movements like the QAnon fantasy."


Russell Moore says how Christians approach political engagement is key: “We have to be engaging in policy as people who know that our very survival as a church is not dependent upon whether we succeed or fail in civic initiatives.” He compares it to the posture of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in exile: “We’re asking God for help in this scenario. But even if not—we’ll trust Him. And we’ll be obedient to Him.”

Andrew Walker, a professor of Christian ethics and apologetics at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, says Christians should confront erroneous theology while also upholding faithful Christian teaching. "“Instrumentalizing religion for the sake of political power is indeed wrong,” Walker wrote in a column for Public Discourse. “Where theological systems or historians assert that Christianity is divinely fused with American destiny, correction is warranted.”

Source: "Crisis of Faith: How can Christians prevent political passion from turning to unholy furor?"
https://world.wng.org/2021/01/crisis_of_faith?fbclid=IwAR18sLtFeYW-tPb-uGelSeHY1a6YDixSYmvB7uHOzQZCwR3VZBWbQDqtykI#.YCCAe9d-KOI.facebook

Anonymous said...

Are we winning? Telecom companies losing ground in their battle to impose 5G

It’s easy to feel powerless when 5G towers are being installed right next to people’s homes, sometimes right outside their bedrooms, putting their families at untold risk from a technology that all signs indicate is very dangerous.

However, there are some promising signs that telecommunication companies may be losing their battle to impose 5G against people’s will, at least in some places.

For example, the Swiss government has appointed a group of experts tasked with probing the risks of introducing 5G. Meanwhile, the Swiss Federation of Doctors urged caution, saying that “as long as there is no scientific proof that raising the radiation limits will not impact health, one must refrain from raising them.”

In France, 60 mayors and other officials have petitioned to halt 5G, with the country’s federal health agency investigating the technology. In Lithuania, cell antennas have been banned on hospitals and kindergartens. The Health Council of the Netherlands has recommended against 26 GHz for 5G on account of a lack of safety data, and 600 Italian municipalities have passed resolutions halting 5G. Israel, meanwhile, has required cell tower setback of 100 meters from homes and schools.

Meanwhile, the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks announced that the lack of compelling evidence informing exposure guidelines for 5G means the possibility of unintended biological consequences cannot be ruled out.

Taiwan’s five wireless carriers said they would not be rushing to roll out 5G services due to concerns about the lack of a profitable business model for selling the technology. They said that they couldn’t find a business case that would enable them to recover their investments in 5G in the short term. Their motivation may not be health-related, but it does show that 5G might not be the game-changing technology proponents claim.

Bangladesh, meanwhile, has banned cell towers from being placed on homes, schools, playing fields and in populated areas, and many parts of India are taking a similar stance.

Anonymous said...

Continued...

American cities and states fighting back...

In the U.S., dozens of cities and regions have passed ordinances that restrict the installation of small cells, with some charging “recertification fees” that make doing so unprofitable for the telecommunication industry.

The New Hampshire Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology issued 15 recommendations, which included strengthening federal regulations and reducing public exposure. They said the state should take the initiative to move to protect its environment in the face of a lack of federal action, recommending a public education campaign on how to reduce exposure and replacing wireless networks in schools with wired networks.

Louisiana and Oregon have both passed bills requiring investigations into 5G, with Oregon’s SB 283 in particular requiring a review of health effects on children from exposure to wireless in schools.

Los Altos, California, has passed an ordinance that stops small cells from being installed on public utility easements within residential neighborhoods. In addition, it requires 500-foot setbacks for small cells in multi-family residences situated in commercial districts as well as 500 feet of separation from schools and 1,500 feet of separation between nodes.

In the state of California, fire stations lobbied for an exemption from having to install 5G antennas on their fire stations following investigations that revealed cases of brain damage from cell towers placed on fire stations in other locations. They succeeded in getting two bills passed related to the matter.

As encouraging as some of these stories may be, however, it would be a mistake to be complacent. People need to continue to work to protect their homes and neighborhoods from being exposed to dangerous radiation and stop 5G from harming life on this planet.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-02-08-telecom-companies-losing-ground-5g.html

Anonymous said...

"but if you think the Catholic Church is the 'best'... I won't disagree."


Of course I won't agree that the catholic church is the best, because no church is.

The Lord Jesus Christ gets that #1 spot.
Christians should be able to agree on that.
But you have a terrible time saying and believing that evidently. You don't even bring Him up in that way in your multiple redundant posts because all you can muster is to talk up your religion instead (ad nauseum).
Since you can not acknowledge God above all else to give Him that glory, then your church must be an idol in your heart???

And that is messed up because God said thou shalt have no other gods before Me. (don't take it from me, read that for yourself)
Just say'n..


Anonymous said...

Sadly J., like the vast majority here, is far too stupid, septic and twisted to see.

Anonymous said...

10:47 PM

If 'Jesus gets the #1 spot'... then you would have wanted to follow the Catholic (Universal) FAITH that Jesus began for EVERYONE in the year 33 AD... and NOT one of those MAN-MADE Protestant spin-offs started by disgruntled former Catholics who got mad because they didn't get their way (e.g. John Calvin, Martin Luther, Henry VIII).

And I don't care what their reasons were... because, if they were in opposition to the clear teachings of JESUS... they were in the WRONG to leave!!!

So obviously... Jesus is NOT #1 with you.



Anonymous said...

The following is a list of "marks" adopted and perpetuated by the
Roman Catholic Church. Many of the dates are approximations, as
many of the "marks" had been current with the church years before,
but only when they were officially adopted by a church council and
proclaimed by the pope as "dogma of faith," did they become
binding on Catholics:

A.D. 120—Easter Sunday began to be observed at Rome.

A.D. 310—Prayers for the dead, and the sign of the cross.

A.D. 317—The word "trinity" first formally used at Synod held at Alexandria.

A.D. 321—First edict concerning "Sunday" observance. Wax candles introduced in church.

A.D. 325—Nicene Creed adopted. Easter decreed to be the first
Sunday after Passover, and enjoined on all Christians. Doctrine of
the "trinity" formally stated.

A.D. 336—Roman Church officially switched from Sabbath to Sunday.

A.D. 353—Christmas first observed at Rome on December 25.

A.D. 354—Observance of Christmas ordered on December 25 by Bishop Liberius.

A.D. 375—Veneration of angels and dead saints.

A.D. 394—The mass, as a daily celebration, adopted.

A.D. 431—The worship of Mary, the mother of Christ, and the use of the term, "Mother of God," as applied to her declared by Council of Ephesus.

A.D. 500—Priests began to dress differently from the laity.

A.D. 554—A long-term union of church and state.

A.D. 593— The doctrine of purgatory was first established by Gregory the Great.

A.D. 600--- The Latin language was imposed by Pope Gregory I. Prayers began to be directed to Mary and to the dead saints.

A.D. 610—The title of pope first given to the bishop of Rome by
Emperor Phocas.

AD. 709—Kissing the pope's feet began. It had been a pagan custom to kiss the feet of emperors.

A.D 788---Worship of the cross (a pagan symbol) and images and
relics authorised—idolatry.

A.D 850---Holy water, mixed with a pinch of salt and blessed by the
priest was authorised.

A.D. 890—Veneration of St. Joseph began.

A.D. 965—The baptism of bells instituted by Pope John XIV.

A.D. 995 —Canonization of dead saints begun by Pope John XV.

A.D. 998—Fasting on Fridays and during Lent were imposed.

A.D. 1090—The rosary, or prayer beads, introduced by Peter the Hermit.

A.D. 1184—The inquisition of heretics was instituted by the Council of Verona.

A.D. 1190—The sale of indulgences, commonly regarded as a purchase of forgiveness and a permit to indulge in sin, began.

A.D. 1215—The dogma of transubstantiation was decreed by Pope Innocent III.

A.D. 1215---Confession of sins to the priest at least once a year instituted by Pope Innocent III, in the Lateran Council.

A.D. 1220—The adoration of the wafer (host) decreed by Pope Honorius.

A.D. 1229---The Bible forbidden to laymen and placed in Index of Forbidden Books by the Council of Valencia.

A.D. 1414---The Roman church forbade the cup to the laity (communion), Council of Constance.

A.D. 1439—The doctrine of purgatory proclaimed dogma of faith by Council of Florence.

A.D. 1545—Tradition declared to be equal authority with Bible by Council
of Trent.

A.D. 1550—"Secret rapture" theory taught by Jesuit Catholic scholars.

A.D. 1854—The "immaculate conception" of the virgin Mary proclaimed by Pope Pius IX.

A.D. 1870 -Dogma of "papal infallibility" proclaimed by Pope Pius IX.

A.D. 1951—Pope Pius XI reaffirmed the doctrine that Mary is the “Mother of God."

A.D. 1960—The dogma of the assumption of the virgin Mary proclaimed
by Pope Pius XII.

It is because of the many reasons listed above and others that such men as John Foxe, John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox, William Tyndale, King James, Sir Isaac Newton, and John Wesley have all recognised the papacy to be a fulfillment of being an anti-Christ.

Anonymous said...

'A.D. 317—The word "trinity" first formally used at Synod held at Alexandria.'


'It is because of the many reasons listed above ...'

So you deny the Triune Nature of God then, do you, 1::00 AM (P.S., ((seeing as you're so dumb)) rhetorical questions don't require question marks).

So you're a typical Protestant heretic, I see.

Anonymous said...

You see wrong.

And nice try at 'Divide & Conquer' to get everybody squabbling about the trinity doctrine and so then to DISTRACT from the FORTY other marks of the papacy.

Anonymous said...

But now that you mention it that line should read:

It is because of many of the reasons listed above and others that such men as John Foxe, John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox, William Tyndale, King James, Sir Isaac Newton, and John Wesley have all recognised the papacy to be a fulfillment of being an anti-Christ.

Obviously not all agree on every single point but rather the majority of them.

Anonymous said...

The Truth About Election Fraud

https://youtu.be/jsOXMi1E0tQ

Anonymous said...

How to Protect Your Local Economy From the Great Reset

https://alt-market.us/how-to-protect-your-local-economy-from-the-great-reset/

Anonymous said...

2:24 AM,

You put the list there, and in it you included, 'A.D. 317—The word "trinity" first formally used at Synod held at Alexandria', as part of your 'evidence' in your claims of the Roman Catholic Church as being, 'Antichrist' (that is, you used it to speak ill of the Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D., with Peter as its first shepherd).

Says you, a filthy heathen follower of Luther and Calvin, both of whom offered their own wicked and twisted notions as to the very nature of God. It is you Protestants that make God out to be a tyrant and it is the majority of you (though not all) who will be set aside as goats (as expressed in the Gospel as recorded by St. Matthew, Chapter 25). The vast majority of your rebellious ilk will be dismissed with the words: 'I never knew you; depart from me, you that work iniquity'.

You've been caught out in your heresies, 2:24 AM, and you know it. You're a heretic to the core, filled with rot and worm, and now you want to deceive, to lie as though you never wrote it. Well, for all your hatred and lies you have shown yourself to be: of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof.

Also, just who do you think you are with your comments? You jumped up little narcissist! You wrote it and yet you expect me not to address it? You vile thing! You shall not steer the conversation away from your remarks. You deny the Holy Trinity.

It is indeed you who is an antichrist, 2:24 AM, for in your denial of the Holy Trinity you do deny the Father and the Son, and be careful you are not blaspheming the Holy Spirit either!

Anonymous said...

For those who want to focus on the original issue WITHOUT distraction:

The following is a list of "marks" adopted and perpetuated by the
Roman Catholic Church. Many of the dates are approximations, as
many of the "marks" had been current with the church years before,
but only when they were officially adopted by a church council and
proclaimed by the pope as "dogma of faith," did they become
binding on Catholics:

A.D. 120—Easter Sunday began to be observed at Rome.

A.D. 310—Prayers for the dead, and the sign of the cross.

A.D. 321—First edict concerning "Sunday" observance. Wax candles introduced in church.

A.D. 325—Nicene Creed adopted. Easter decreed to be the first
Sunday after Passover, and enjoined on all Christians.

A.D. 336—Roman Church officially switched from Sabbath to Sunday.

A.D. 353—Christmas first observed at Rome on December 25.

A.D. 354—Observance of Christmas ordered on December 25 by Bishop Liberius.

A.D. 375—Veneration of angels and dead saints.

A.D. 394—The mass, as a daily celebration, adopted.

A.D. 431—The worship of Mary, the mother of Christ, and the use of the term, "Mother of God," as applied to her declared by Council of Ephesus.

A.D. 500—Priests began to dress differently from the laity.

A.D. 554—A long-term union of church and state.

A.D. 593— The doctrine of purgatory was first established by Gregory the Great.

A.D. 600--- The Latin language was imposed by Pope Gregory I. Prayers began to be directed to Mary and to the dead saints.

A.D. 610—The title of pope first given to the bishop of Rome by
Emperor Phocas.

AD. 709—Kissing the pope's feet began. It had been a pagan custom to kiss the feet of emperors.

A.D 788---Worship of the cross (a pagan symbol) and images and
relics authorised—idolatry.

A.D 850---Holy water, mixed with a pinch of salt and blessed by the
priest was authorised.

A.D. 890—Veneration of St. Joseph began.

A.D. 965—The baptism of bells instituted by Pope John XIV.

A.D. 995 —Canonization of dead saints begun by Pope John XV.

A.D. 998—Fasting on Fridays and during Lent were imposed.

A.D. 1090—The rosary, or prayer beads, introduced by Peter the Hermit.

A.D. 1184—The inquisition of heretics was instituted by the Council of Verona.

A.D. 1190—The sale of indulgences, commonly regarded as a purchase of forgiveness and a permit to indulge in sin, began.

A.D. 1215—The dogma of transubstantiation was decreed by Pope Innocent III.

A.D. 1215---Confession of sins to the priest at least once a year instituted by Pope Innocent III, in the Lateran Council.

A.D. 1220—The adoration of the wafer (host) decreed by Pope Honorius.

A.D. 1229---The Bible forbidden to laymen and placed in Index of Forbidden Books by the Council of Valencia.

A.D. 1414---The Roman church forbade the cup to the laity (communion), Council of Constance.

A.D. 1439—The doctrine of purgatory proclaimed dogma of faith by Council of Florence.

A.D. 1545—Tradition declared to be equal authority with Bible by Council
of Trent.

A.D. 1550—"Secret rapture" theory taught by Jesuit Catholic scholars.

A.D. 1854—The "immaculate conception" of the virgin Mary proclaimed by Pope Pius IX.

A.D. 1870 -Dogma of "papal infallibility" proclaimed by Pope Pius IX.

A.D. 1951—Pope Pius XI reaffirmed the doctrine that Mary is the “Mother of God."

A.D. 1960—The dogma of the assumption of the virgin Mary proclaimed
by Pope Pius XII.

It is because of many of the reasons listed above and others that such men as John Foxe, John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox, William Tyndale, King James, Sir Isaac Newton, and John Wesley have all recognised the papacy to be a fulfillment of being an anti-Christ.

Anonymous said...

Doctrinal disagreement?

Let us see (yet again) who the "BULLY" ACTUALLY is:

you, a filthy heathen

You're a heretic to the core, filled with rot and worm

you want to deceive, to lie

you have shown yourself to be: of your father the devil

You jumped up little narcissist!

J said...

X 10:20 PM,

I don't disagree with the words, but I wonder about the motives, of the people you've quoted.

I have a lot of thoughts and feelings about the subject. It can be difficult to imagine and to enact a Christian form of assertiveness or a Christian form of healthy conflict.

I worry Christians and conservatives are prone to becoming twisted through too much reactivity.

I also worry we are too prone to forgetting that Christ's kingdom is not of this world.

It's likely we can be at our best when our boundaries are a natural result of what we are for, and we pull the thorns of anger and resentment out of our hearts.

I see an opposite danger, too. It is the danger of "love covers a multitude of sins" type of thinking. There have been a few Christian battered wives who have learned the hard way that they eventually influenced their children to become ever more mature over time, while their husband became ever less mature over time.

In the children's story, The Secret Garden, the main characters were harmed by being spoiled and were helped by encountering other people who experienced healthy conflict with them.

If we don't help children by spoiling them, we don't help adults by spoiling them, either.

In the same way, any Christian can hurt the ones we enable, because when we enable people to sin against us, they don't grow emotionally or spiritually in this life, and they hurt their prospects for eternal life.

We have a responsibility not to hide our lights under bushels. We have the responsibility to be candles in the dark.

If the people you quote are so wise, why can't they tell me better answers to these things I wonder about?

Why does it feel like they are ending a conversation rather than starting a conversation?

Why can't they speak to my heart to give me any greater insight into the things I ponder and struggle to understand and live?

J said...

To be clear, when I said, "I don't disagree with the words, but I wonder about the motives, of the people you've quoted", recall that Satan quoted Scripture to Jesus in the desert.

In a similar way it is possible people can use Christian ideas against Christians in an Alinsky-like manner.


RayB said...

Slightly off the topic, but I found the following interesting:

For years, I've heard the Orwellian type claim that "blacks cannot be racists." The theory is, that in order to be a "racist," one must be a member of the majority (translation: whites are in the majority, therefore only they can be racists). Ergo, because Blacks make up a minority in numbers, they can't be racist. Illogical? Of course it is. Racism is a sin (i.e. blind hatred, and, the last time I checked, sin doesn't stop at the border of one's skin color).

Statistically, *Blacks commit a disturbingly high amount of acts of racism and crime against Asians. Asians are a minority in this country. They also happen to be high ACHIEVERS, making most of the educational and economic opportunities that are afforded them. Whatever the reason, Black thugs are targeting Asians and committing random acts of violence, for no apparent reason other than racism. Watch this short news report. As you watch this, try to imagine the outrage if the victims were Black and the attackers were White:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKZrD2orJFk

* https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/nevius/article/Dirty-secret-of-black-on-Asian-violence-is-out-3265760.php

PS: Many, many other accounts can be cited to illustrate the rampant Black on Asian racism that exists in this country.

Anonymous said...

"We Cannot Mince Words": San Francisco Education Official Denounces Meritocracy As Racist

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/02/07/we-cannot-mince-words-san-francisco-education-official-denounces-meritocracy-as-racist

Anonymous said...

All you have proven 1:00 AM is that RCC has poisoned your heart against others who claim Jesus Christ as Lord. So you and your religion are the "best" in your estimation and you self-righteously try to gag that down others throats. How Pharisee of you (Jesus' harshest words were for the Pharisees!!! You should take heed!)
Church traditions (anyone's) formulated over time (as you demonstrated) takes a back seat to HIM because Jesus is Original, first, highest, most worthy and the Glory is His. You give glory to the after, not to Him, the before...Wo is before everything else, anybody else.

The Creator came before the created! How do you not see this?
Jesus is Creator and the church is His creation. The creation took a fall but God did not so how can you and why do you, equate the two? God had to forgive sinful men, sinful but forgiven people make up the church, top to bottom, pulpit to pew.
You do not honor Him as #1 in that or your many many manyyyyyyy words would have concluded that but you put RCC in Jesus' place. I looked to see if you did anywhere in anyway give God the Glory and you did not. That is to your shame. You have chosen the lesser because God alone is the higher, the highest! That is entirely wrong and breaks the 1st commandment thou shalt have no other gods before ME.

I tried to find common ground with you that Jesus Christ is Lord above all, looking to see if you would admit as a christian but you can't seem to come along side that. You are determined that you and your RCC are superior to others. Your words reek authoritarian disdain....that makes you the proud bully.
God is no respecter of persons...but you clearly are. Partiality and prejudice is not of God.
You only prove my priority is right. Jesus is God and Lord, not any church, yours or any other, period.



Anonymous said...

(Wo is before everything else, anybody else). typo

Who.
And is all about Who is the Lord of all glory isn't it?

Anonymous said...

Tom Brady Called 'Racist' on Social Media for Winning Super Bowl During Black History Month

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2021/02/08/tom-brady-called-racist-for-winning-super-bowl-during-black-history-month-n1423916

J said...

X 9:58 PM,

"For Trump and his allies were running their own campaign to spoil the election."

I'm not going back to read but I understood that more like "I just described or I'm going to describe the campaign to make the election as efficient, open and fair as possible so Trump can't deny it IF/when he loses; but, understand that while the white knights [these brilliant Dems who foresaw the events post-election] are working for good, the dark knight [Trump] and his allies are running their own campaign to spoil the election so Trump can "win" either way or have plausible deniability ever having to have his ego face being a "loser"".


That was hard to follow, X, because it was one sentence composed of 97 words. Yet I slowed down to read it, anyway. As I did, I wondered at your choice of language: "white knights", "dark knight", "brilliant Dems who foresaw". You seem to be satirizing your own narrative with that choice of language. I can hardly believe you take your own narrative seriously when you describe it in that way.

I don't know what to argue with, because there are actually no arguments, just a collection of self-reinforcing assumptions. Because all of these many claims would take much work to disprove, and because no proofs have been offered, I have two options. I could ask for all the claims to be proven. Or I could do all the work of disproving them.

Or, to sum it all up, perhaps I could just call it a gish gallop.

I think you have all the proofs in your own mind from the media you have consumed over the past four plus years. You talk to us here, but do you ever listen? Do you ever consume other media? You seem to see yourself as the only non-echoing voice in the echo chamber; yet you are an echo of a different echo chamber.

It is a little disappointing not to be able to have a real conversation, one that is creative in a sense. By creative I mean able to flexibly take a variety of perspectives and able to put together words and thoughts in a way that goes beyond re-arranging the same old cliches. I mean an exchange of communication that might result in intellectual growth on both ends. I mean an exchange people might learn something from.

Anonymous said...

To 11:19 AM

My heart is not 'poisoned'... for DARING to call out the anti-Catholic rhetoric, misinformation, propaganda that has been going on on this blog for the past 15 years (regarding our Catholic beliefs).

My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ created the CATHOLIC (UNIVERSAL) CHURCH AND FAITH in 33 AD... so, don't you DARE even attempt to lecture me about Jesus!!!

All of you 'Christian Evangelicals' (whether you want to ADMIT it or not) are under the 'Protestant umbrella'... even though you try to distance yourselves from any link to organized religions.

A few of you on this blog show very cult-like BEHAVIOR... in your non-stop aggression toward Catholics every single day... as my Catholic friends and I have had 'a front row seat' right here on this blog for the past 15 years.

You can't even be honest enough to admit that you don't want a 'healthy discussion' with Catholics. Instead, you waste your time and ours by playing games of 'gotcha'... even though you manage to trip yourselves up every single time.

Over the years, Constance has reminded ALL of us that the New Age has entered ALL of the churches (Catholic, Protestant, Jewish).

Although we conservative traditional Catholics have no intention of LEAVING the Catholic Church (by 'throwing out the baby with the bath water')... because we have the PROMISE of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ... who has ASSURED us that 'the gates of Hell shall NOT prevail against it."

News flash: This is NOT a Protestant blog. Constance has ALWAYS welcomed Catholics here... especially my dear friend, Susanna. (Although I will not sit back and remain 'polite' while people like Paul and RayB try to run over me... or my other Catholics friends.)

Anonymous said...

X is flexible! Every morning he performs his 10 second yoga routine on a mouse pad.

Nice sentiments J, but your trying to pull a cement mixer out of the ditch with a Mini Cooper. It's not going to budge!

Anonymous said...

"All of you 'Christian Evangelicals' (whether you want to ADMIT it or not) are under the 'Protestant umbrella'... even though you try to distance yourselves from any link to organized religions."

Just so ya know...repeat, just so ya know------any true believer, the true church is under the Blood of Jesus Christ.
The Bible in all it teaches old covenant to new covenant, cover to cover, is distinct, and firm about that. too bad you are not.

You can keep your religious humbug and "umbrella" theory. Jesus does not give us religious games to play like your traditions demand.
I am on the solid ground of Christ The Rock. His name is not Peter. His name is Jesus.

I don't care if you defend your church, knock yourself out, your clang, clang, clang, is all anybody can hear coming from you so you missed the point entirely thinking that I am even interested in that because I don't even try to defend any religious institution. Christ Jesus is the Defender of the Church, not you. The church I attend is a blessing to me, but does not take the place of God in my life, like yours does, so any church affiliation is so after the fact, because whose NAME we should be defending and lifting highest is the name of JESUS.
And that goes right over your head!!! We should have that in common since you claim you are a christian, but evidently we do not.
So have a nice life...and make sure your soul is under the Blood of Jesus too because RCC, or Protestant, or any other anything, will not save you. But Jesus will. You would find soul rest in Him and not need the religious competition thing you have going on.
What a sad trade off you have made, in choosing less than the Lord Himself.

But you have your priorities, you have made them clear.
The Lord Jesus is mine.

J said...

X 9:58 PM continued,

For it to have been a "Freudian Slip" it would necessitate the authors made "an unintentional error regarded as revealing subconscious feelings". They are journalists - they don't have feelings. lol -- I just see this piece as celebratory and braggadocious. Giving credit where credit appears to be due for some wise anticipatory democratic ground game. I think bragging is short-sighted considering the spin being put upon it in the darker corners of the right-wing; but there is nothing illegal about fighting for the rights of voters to vote more easily, making sure polls are sufficiently staffed & trained considering the demands of Covid and that most election staff in the past have been retirees who couldn't be relied upon this year, preparing for and countering Trump's publicity/perception moves, and genuinely attempting to make the election come off more smoothly than the primaries had in many states, and, of course, ensuring the electoral college process went smoothly if Trump lost and tried to circumvent it.

That last sentence contains 110 words. You described a list of things that "there is nothing illegal about". That's not the highest standard, and it's not completely true of unvarnished reality. But even if it were true, for each one of those things on your list, we could contrast cover story with ground strategy. We could contrast appearance with reality.

This isn't different than the strategies employed by Roger Airs for Nixon and every Repub candidate thereafter, nor Republican strategies to keep blacks & urban voters from voting for years and to limit the availability of absentee ballots. It's not even underhanded like the 8 or so different bogus "investigations" of Hillary over Benghazi that was orchestrated by Kevin McCarthy to help the Trump campaign. It certainly wasn't as bad as working with Russian operatives and intelligence to further one's campaign.

The scope, scale and level are different. It's like saying Conan the Barbarian is just as bad as Thulsa Doom.

J said...

To be clear, it was a gish gallup so I'm not going to get down in the weeds about each specific claim. If the overall point was that Republicans are not pure as the given snow, I accept that premise. I know Trump is a carnal man, to say the least.

Just remember, the devil comes as an angel of light, so it's no surprise if his minions are wolves in sheeps clothing.

(Or, to return to the Conan trope, it's all good until the flower child gets eaten by the giant serpent.)

«Oldest ‹Older   401 – 600 of 721   Newer› Newest»