Similar posts

David J Stewart #fundie #crackpot jesus-is-savior.com

It is very simple to be saved and takes only a minute to explain. Please let me show you how to get to Heaven from the Bible, God's Word...

Man is a Sinner in the Eyes of a Holy God.
Isaiah 53:6, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.”
Romans 3:19, “Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.”
John 3:3, “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
Romans 3:10, “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one.”
Romans 3:23, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”
There is a Price For Our Sin―Burning in Hell Forever.
Romans 6:23, “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Romans 5:12, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
2nd Thessalonians 1:8, “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Revelation 20:15, "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.”
Revelation 21:8, “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”
Jesus paid that price by dying on the cross and shedding His blood; Christ was buried and bodily rose again the third day!
Romans 5:8, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
1st Timothy 1:15, “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.”
1st Peter 1:18-19, “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ...”
1st Corinthians 15:1-4, “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.” This is the Gospel.
By faith in Jesus Christ ALONE we are immediately saved.
Galatians 3:26, “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.”
John 11:25, “Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.”
John 6:28-29, “Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”
Ephesians 2:8-9, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”
John 14:6, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
John 6:40, “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Mark 1:15, “And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.”
Acts 26:18, “To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.”
Romans 10:13, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
1st Corinthians 3:11, "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”
Galatians 3:26, “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.”
Salvation is NOT found in a religion or good works, but in a Person... The LORD JESUS CHRIST!

Simply BELIEVE the Gospel and You Are Saved!

The Heresy Of Having To “Pray” To Be Saved

Fundamentalist Heresy! (In this awesome sermon by Pastor Jack Hyles, he explains that prayer, turning from sins, inviting Jesus into your heart, and other popular clichés are not necessary to be saved. They are not wrong to do, just so long as you don't do them to get or stay saved!)

My friend, for most of my Christian life I have led people to pray a sinner's prayer to be saved. Although this is not wrong to do, it is an extra step that the Bible does NOT require, which may confuse some people. You don't have to “ask” Jesus to save you, because God has already promised “TO SAVE THEM THAT BELIEVE” (1st Corinthians 1:21). We read in John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, THAT WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH IN HIM should not perish, but have everlasting life” [emphasis added]. The way to be saved is to BELIEVE THE GOSPEL!!!

Do you admit that you are a GUILTY sinner, under the condemnation of God's LAW, deserving of Hellfire?

Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God (God in the flesh) who died upon the cross, sacrificing His precious blood to pay for your sins? Do you believe that Jesus was buried and bodily resurrected three days later? This is the Good News of the Gospel... Jesus DIED ON THE CROSS, He was BURIED and He is RISEN! Believe it friend, make it your only hope for eternal life, and you are saved!!! Amen!

To be saved you simply come to God by faith, as a guilty sinner, and BELIEVE the Gospel.

You must know that you are a sinner. No man ever got saved who didn't know that he is a sinner. Repentance is that thing when you come before God and see yourself as you are, and see Him as he is, and say with Isaiah “Woe is me, for I am unclean!” Repentance is simply a change of mind, where you admit that you are a woeful sinner totally incapable of saving yourself. Thus, you believe the Gospel (Good News) of the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved.

Perhaps you'd feel comfortable praying a sinner's prayer as did the publican in Luke 18:13... “And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto Heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.” It doesn't matter exactly what you pray, because you're saved by BELIEVING, not by praying. But if you'd like to pray as an expression of your faith, you could pray something like this. ...

Dear Jesus,
I admit that I am a sinner deserving of Hell. I am guilty for breaking your holy commandments. I believe that you died on the cross to pay for my sins, were buried, and bodily resurrected three days later. Please forgive me of my sins and take me to Heaven when I die. I now believe upon You alone, apart from all self-righteous works and religion, as my personal Savior. Thank you. Amen.

Just as you were born physically to your parents, so you were born spiritually into the family of God when you received Jesus! John 1:12-13, “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”

Again, please understand that we are not saved because we pray a prayer, but because we BELIEVE upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is certainly appropriate to ask the Lord in prayer to forgive and save us, but it is our faith which prompts us to pray. You could just as easily believe in your heart upon the Lord to be saved, and not pray at all. Salvation is of the heart, as we read in Romans 10:10, “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness...”

Likewise, it is an extra unnecessary step in God's plan of salvation, to require a person to walk down a church isle to be saved. Why cannot people be saved right there in their pew seat? They certainly can! Only God knows how many millions of people have gone to Hell, because they didn't want to walk down a church isle to find out how to be saved. Preachers should always give people a chance to be saved right there in the privacy of the pew. If they hear the Gospel preached and gladly receive (believe) it, they are saved (Acts 2:41).

It's not what you're doing that gets you to Heaven, it's where you're looking. Look to Jesus!

You do NOT have to be water baptized nor doing anything to get to Heaven other than trust upon the Lord as your Savior. Romans 4:5-6 proclaims... “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him (Jesus) that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God Imputeth Righteousness without works.” What a wonderful truth! Our faith is COUNTED for righteousness! God's righteousness is IMPUTED (transferred) to us, and our sins are IMPUTED to Christ.

There is NO self-righteousness (human effort) involved in salvation. It is the gift of God. You see, we have no righteousness of our own to offer God. No amount of good can undo the bad we've done. Jesus paid a debt that He did not owe, because we owed a debt that we could not pay. Salvation is receiving, not giving. We are sinners and Jesus is the Savior. Jesus is precious! We are saved by trusting, not by trying.

And please BEWARE my friend of the horrible heresy of WRONG REPENTANCE that says you must turn away from your sinful ways to be saved, because THAT IS NOT A GIFT! Of course God wants everyone to turn away from sinful behavior, but only because YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN, and not to BECOME A CHRISTIAN. The purpose of God's LAW is to give men the KNOWLEDGE OF SIN, to bring us to Christ (the Gospel of GRACE).

Unbelief is the only sin which can keep a sinner out of Heaven. But remember, faith is not the absence of doubt, but the presence of trust. Even if you have 99% doubt, it is nothing less than 100% faith if you call upon the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13). To “call” means to place your complete confidence in the Lord's death on the cross, burial and resurrection to be saved. We are saved by completely resting in the Good News (i.e., Gospel) of Jesus Christ.

Just take God at His word and claim His salvation by faith. Believe, and you will be saved. No church, no lodge, no good works can save you. Remember, God does the saving. All of it!

Trusting Jesus is meaningless without the cross. You must believe that Jesus died on the cross for your sins. 1st Corinthians 15:1-4 teaches that the Gospel is the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

God's simple plan of salvation is: You are a sinner. Therefore, unless you believe on Jesus Who died in your place, you will spend eternity in Hell. If you believe on Him as your crucified, buried, and risen Savior, you receive forgiveness for all of your sins and His gift of eternal salvation by faith.

You say, “Surely, it cannot be that simple!” Yes, that simple. It is scriptural, it is God's plan. My friend, believe on Jesus and receive Him as Savior today.

If you've never been saved, then now is the time to believe upon the name of Jesus, the Christ, that your sins will be blotted out forever and you can know that your name is written in Heaven. Salvation is not doing your best, it is having Christ's best put to your account through receiving Him by faith. God will not save anyone who is trying to be saved, He will only save those who are trusting to be saved.

Christ died for your sins. You are a sinner by nature and by choice. Jesus took your sins and charged them to His own record. He went to the cross and paid the penalty for your sins. He says if you're willing to receive Him in faith; He will transfer His payment to your debt, and His righteousness to your sins. He will impute to you His goodness, and impute to His own record your sin; if you in faith will trust Him as your Savior.

Romans 8:34, “Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”

If you would like to search for a good church where you live, CLICK HERE.

Kindest regards, your humble servant in Jesus Christ...
David J. Stewart

Westboro Baptist Church #fundie #transphobia #psycho godhatesfags.com

Signs of the Times: Shining Bible Light on Current Events
The Lord has wrought many blessed judgments in the world this week which can be seen plainly by any who have been given eyes to see, ears to hear, and a heart to understand by the gracious hand of God. “Son of man, thou dwellest in the midst of a rebellious house, which have eyes to see, and see not; they have ears to hear, and hear not: for they are a rebellious house.” (Ezekiel 12:2) This entire world is a rebellious house! Therefore, the Lord, the God of Israel, is punishing the people of it! Let’s view some of this week’s judgments from the proper perspective:

This week, coronavirus continues to torment this world by the will of the Almighty God. The total known cases nearly equal 5.4 million and the total number of known deaths are approaching 350 thousand. Almost 100 thousand of those deaths have occurred in the united states, and this nation along with this world continue to wallow in their sin and mock the God of creation. “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.” (Galatians 6:7-8) You sow to the flesh, and so you reap corruption. Without the grace of the Lord there is only sin and eternal damnation. So repent and pray for mercy. “Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.” (Acts 8:22)

The Lord has also shown his wrath by sending a cyclone to India and Bangladesh this week. Cyclone Amphan killed more than 80 people in areas that were already having to deal with the coronavirus. This is the strongest cyclone ever recorded in the Bay of Bengal with homes, trees, and bridges washed away and strewn about by 100 mph winds leaving thousands without homes and no power or long-distance communication. This is yet another wonderful example of the power of God. This is not mother nature, and this is not an accident. “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.” (Deuteronomy 32:39) This verse clearly conveys the almighty and all-seeing nature of God, and there is nothing that any man, child, or beast can do about it. If you are the Lord’s, then trust that He will do as He wills. “In God have I put my trust: I will not be afraid what man can do unto me.” (Psalms 56:11)

The Hungarian parliament voted this week to ban people from legally changing their gender to stop transgender and intersex people from changing their gender on identity documents. Many considered this a violation of their human rights and would cause more discrimination towards them. However, their government stated that this “does not affect men's and women's right to freely experience and exercise their identities as they wish.” Although this is a step in the right direction, it is only a tiny step and doesn’t change the fact that you are enabling them to partake in their sin. Ban their blatant proud sinning because sin is death! “Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” (James 1:15) Woe to you who have hardened your hearts against the Lord and His word. The destruction of this world is imminent; you must believe on Christ, repent of your sins, and seek the Lord with humility. “For Gaza shall be forsaken, and Ashkelon a desolation: they shall drive out Ashdod at the noon day, and Ekron shall be rooted up. Woe unto the inhabitants of the sea coast, the nation of the Cherethites! the word of the LORD is against you; O Canaan, the land of the Philistines, I will even destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant.” (Zephaniah 2:4-5)

Repent or Perish!

MiserableSinner #fundie forums.catholic.com

I know the best reform for Islam. Convert them all. If St. Patrick could convert a whole country of pagans, we should be able to convert Iran and Saudi Arabia right? Pagans were even worse than Iran and SA!!!!

Our Faith is the only true Faith with the fullness of Truth. We literally have God on our side. If the Saints of old converted people in the WHOLE WORLD, why can't we convert our country? Why are we LOSING numbers of PRACTICING Catholics? You would be surprised how many don't know basic things like something I heard today - you can't receive the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin. I heard that over half of us don't believe in the real presence of the Eucharist, yet most people receive on Sunday. Maybe I am hearing false statistics. I hope so.
If I'm not, the answer is simple. WE HAVE TO CONVERT OURSELVES BEFORE WE CAN CONVERT ALL OF ISLAM AND SAVE THEIR SOULS AND THEIR CHILDREN'S SOULS!

"Everyone has their own beliefs."
"Muslims worship the same God as us. We don't need to try to convert them. Let them have their beliefs. We don't want to offend people."
"Don't talk about politics and religion."
"I don't want to be uncharitable. I must be prudent." (What is more charitable and prudent than saving souls from eternal Hell?)

We have so many excuses. If 99 people reject us and 1 person is converted - ONE PERSON WAS SAVED FROM HELL. And what if that 1 person converts 99 in the next decade?

But we can't save them if we ourselves are not converted. We need the whole body of Christ in a state of grace, praying and sacrificing!!!

God help us to serve you and do your Holy Will. Help us to place your Holy Will above our daily lives and our desire to feel comfortable and avoid confrontation. I love you and I trust you. In Jesus Name I pray.

Mother please help us. In Jesus Name I pray.

I ask you all to pray for me, because I have often avoided confrontation and desired comfort when I should have been speaking up for the Truth. I often see Muslims and instead of talking to them and trying to convert them, I pray for them sometimes. Ask God to give me boldness and a love for the cross and a love for their souls and their childrens souls.

I love you all and I salute you all
I salute your Guardian Angels (I love you all. Please ask God to give me this grace.)

Michael Flannery #fundie evolutionnews.org

What the Piltdown Hoax Tells Us, 104 Years Later

A curious anniversary falls this weekend. On December 18, 1912, the infamous Piltdown hoax was unveiled to an astonished audience of the Geological Society of London by lawyer and amateur archeologist Charles Dawson (1864-1916) and Arthur Smith Woodward (1864-1944) of the British Museum. What they showed was nothing short of amazing: the apparent remains of a human-like skull attached to an ape-like jaw. Allegedly unearthed at the Piltdown gravel pit in East Sussex, England, it was hailed as the missing link -- a truly history-making discovery!

It would take nearly 41 years to expose the artifact as a fraud. On November 21, 1953, officials of the British Natural History Museum revealed the shocking truth: Piltdown man was a hoax, the combination of three species, a medieval human cranium, the jaw of a centuries-old young orangutan, and some fossilized chimpanzee teeth. Various culprits have been proposed, including famed Jesuit philosopher Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) and physician/novelist Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (1859-1930). But most recent investigation suggests that the imposture was likely perpetrated by Dawson alone in an effort to gain recognition and election as a Fellow into the Royal Society (see "Piltdown hoax solved," Forbes, August 10, 2016).

Writing for Harper's on the second anniversary of the Piltdown exposure, paleontologist Loren Eiseley (1907-1977), not one to look at an event or a phenomenon superficially, asked, "Was Charles Darwin Wrong About the Human Brain?" Eiseley noted that Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913), co-discoverer of the theory of natural selection, was unimpressed with the Piltdown "find" from the beginning. Writing to a friend in August 1913 (just three months before his death), Wallace exclaimed, "The Piltdown skull does not prove much, if anything!" Why, asked Eiseley, had Wallace, almost alone among the scientific community, so summarily dismissed this apparently stunning missing link? The answer was simple: "he did not believe in a skull which had a modern brain box attached to an apparently primitive face and given, in the original estimates, an antiquity of something over a million years." The archeological "discovery" would have confirmed Darwin's Descent of Man in dramatic fashion. Indeed Piltdown man was, from a Darwinian perspective, even something that would have been predicted.

But Wallace's "voice of lonely protest," observed Eiseley, underscored "the abyss which yawned between man and ape" that Darwinians at the time blissfully ignored. Having observed primitive cultures in South America and the Malay Archipelago for more than twelve years, Wallace concluded (quoting Eiseley) that humans' "mental powers were far in excess of what they really needed to carry on the simple food-gathering techniques by which they survived." Certainly no process of natural selection was adequate to produce such superior powers of art, reason, and morals. For Wallace, the human brain freed mankind from the tyranny of natural selection:

Here, then, we see the true grandeur and dignity of man. On this view of his special attributes, we may admit, that even those who claim for him a position as an order, or a sub-kingdom by himself, have some show of reason on their side. He is, indeed, a being apart, since he is not influenced by the great laws which irrestistibly modify all other organic beings (Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection, 1870).

How, then, do we account for this impressive array of human attributes? Wallace thought that mankind might well have emerged comparatively recently, and that the rapid evolution of the modern human brain would confirm that "distinct and higher agencies" have been responsible for these mental attributes and attainments.

Eiseley confessed, "Since the exposure of the Piltdown hoax all of the evidence at our command -- and it is considerable -- points to man, in his present form, as being one of the youngest and newest of all earth's swarming inhabitants. . . . Today, with the solution of the Piltdown enigma, we must settle the question of the time involved in favor of Wallace, not Darwin." Although Eiseley thought some other wholly naturalistic explanation might account for the late and virtually saltationist expansion of the human intellect, he confessed that "science . . . has yet to explain how we have come so far so fast, nor has it any completely satisfactory answer to the question asked by Wallace long ago."

Today we still wait for an explanation, and it must be admitted that various speculations along the lines of blind chance and necessity or natural selection remain as unsatisfactory as when Eiseley was writing more than sixty years ago. A century after Wallace's dismissal of Piltdown man, science still confirms Eiseley's assessment and Wallace's vindication. The chart below shows the timeline for ascending brain size/body weight estimates for Sahelanthropus, Australopithecus afarensis, early Homo, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, H. heidelbergensis, Neanderthals, and H. sapiens.

[chart omitted]

This chart shows relative brain size as cm3 per 50 kg of body weight. Adapted with modifications from Robert Jurmain, Lynn Kilgore, et al., Introduction to Physical Anthropology, 2013-2014 ed. (Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2014), p. 357, and "Homo habilis," Encyclopedia Britannica, updated August 15, 2015.

Clearly brain size and capacity has not only increased, but increased at a very late and remarkably accelerated pace. Of course brain size is not the only measure of intellectual capacity, other factors may be involved. Some, for example, emphasize that Neanderthals, the closest historically to humans, possessed brains that were larger in absolute size to us. But as recent analysis has uncovered, the Neanderthal brain was quite different from its human counterpart. Being much more elongated than globular, the indications are that Neanderthals "reached large brain sizes along different evolutionary pathways." Their speculation that unique patterns of brain development in H. sapiens would have become "a target for positive selection" merely begs Wallace's original question (see Gunz et al., "Brain development after birth differs between Neanderthals and modern humans," Current Biology, Nov. 2010).

So the question remains: How did humans acquire such vast intellectual capacities so comparatively recently and so rapidly? Wallace called upon an "Overruling Intelligence" to explain human intelligence and many other features of complexity in biology and the cosmos. While Darwinians continue to search for some naturalistic cause, others, like British physician James Le Fanu, point out that the disappointments in high-tech solutions to the nature of the intellect and the human mind so touted by the human genome project and promised in the "Decade of the Brain" in the 1990s should force a reassessment of our species as truly unique (Why Us?: How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves, 2009).

Eiseley's long forgotten but intriguing article is fortunately now available as "The Real Secret of Piltdown" in a new 2-volume set of his collected essays. As we reflect on the 104th anniversary of arguably science's greatest fraud, Eiseley's conclusion rings is as pertinent today as when it was first written:

The true secret of Piltdown, though thought by the public to be merely the revelation of an unscrupulous forgery, lies in the fact that it has forced science to reexamine carefully the history of the most remarkable creation in the world -- the human brain.

If the Cambrian period of 530 million years ago poses serious challenges to Darwin's insistence upon slow, incremental change in the amazingly rapid proliferation of animals over a mere 5 to 6 million-year timespan (see Darwin's Doubt), then how much more should the transformational changes in the human brain over the past 100 to 200,000 years cause as serious reevaluation of the nature of human beings and the means by which they came to be. If the Cambrian "explosion" is just too much change over too little time to be explained by Darwinian processes, the human brain is way too much change over way too little time. Perhaps Wallace's view of the Piltdown hoax still holds an important lesson for us today. Maybe the most dramatic "explosion" of all is the one that rests within our crania.

Derryck Green #fundie derryckgreen.com


All Christians Should Support Capital Punishment.

Shane Claiborne- a social justice activist, a progressive Christian who runs the Simple Way community in Philadelphia, and an author who published Executing Grace earlier this summer about the death penalty- was recently interviewed by Relevant Magazine about what he claims is the Christian obligation to reject capital punishment.

Claiborne seems sincere in his religious opposition to capital punishment but his reasoning (in this piece but also his book) to support abolition are in conflict with biblical justifications for the death penalty, and don’t make much sense.

For example, Claiborne says-
“The consistent life ethic is beautiful. It says, “We are uncompromisingly going to stand for life.” The early Christians did that; they unilaterally spoke against violence in all forms. But what’s happened… pro-life has come just to mean anti-abortion… But it’s not the only life issue.
…The death penalty raises one of the most fundamental questions of our faith which is: Is any person beyond redemption? At the end of the day I think there are a lot of reasons to be against the death penalty, but for a Christian who believes that Jesus died to spare us from death and this idea of grace or as Scripture says “mercy triumphs over judgement.”

This is a bit convoluted and attempts to hide moral relativism posing as, but distorting, Christianity.

“Violence in all forms?” So murder, rape, and punishment for both are all morally equal and can be comparably defined as violence? How? Based in what functioning moral universe? The Bible and Christian orthodoxy are clear that gradations of violence, sin, and punishment exist precisely because of the morality attached to them.

The idea that one has to reject capital punishment to maintain pro-life ethical consistency is a false dichotomy, completely ignoring biblical teaching on the matter.
In my opinion- and based on the Bible, to be pro-capital punishment is to be pro-life.

It’s why the divine injunction of capital punishment (specifically related to intentional murder) is the only command repeated in each of the first five books of the Bible, beginning in Genesis 9:6, a universal proscription and application which predates the judicial and ceremonial laws of theocracy of ancient Israel. As such, this divine directive can’t be rationalized away as an injunction that was both historically and geographically explicit to the ancient Hebraic religious cultic practice.

So, why is supporting capital punishment equal to being prolife? The answer is found in the above scriptural passage: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.” This divine imperative foreshadows the language found in the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue- “You shall not murder.” It’s precisely because we’re created in the image of God, that (premeditated) murder must be punished with this kind of required severity. Murdering a fellow human is a moral offense to God and must be treated and responded to as such.

Capital justice rightly roots out the evil in our midst, preserving the lives of the majority. It’s a tool properly used by the government to protect and defend human life, not a course of cheap vengeance. As stated earlier, all ‘violence’ isn’t the same because of the morality attached and required response to it. Those who commit the most grievous of crimes and worthy of the death penalty are killed, preventing them from re-committing their reprehensible acts, which violate the safety and security of other people.

Sparing the life of one worthy of capital punishment, for example a murderer, increases the chances that he or she will murder again. Are Christian abolitionists of the death penalty willing to see another innocent person murdered by someone that should’ve been put to death? Shane Claiborne and other Christian abolitionists of the death penalty never confront the real statistical possibility that by ‘executing grace’ to a condemned murderer allows him or her the ability to commit more violent acts and committing murder again- of another inmate or a correctional officer while imprisoned, or another civilian if/when they’re released from the penitentiary due to shortened sentences. I’m not sure the consciences of these Christian abolitionists of capital justice confront the reality that their “compassion” facilitates more murders of innocent people, and they’re obligated to explain how this unsound position and gamble can be characterized as compassionate.

Furthermore, Claiborne’s petition that no one is “beyond redemption” doesn’t factor in the dispute against capital punishment. The argument is that no person- regardless of the moral depravity evidenced in the actions s/he’s committed- is beyond repentance, spiritual conversion and redemption. As such, a person shouldn’t be condemned to death via capital punishment, but should be spared and given opportunities to be spiritually rehabilitated and saved.

Unfortunately, there are some people who’re simply beyond spiritual repair. History is chockfull of examples of people who committed atrocities against others who never repented of their evil acts. History also testifies that many people sentenced to prison for a determined length of time- up to life in prison- didn’t express remorse or realize spiritual restoration.

The redemption of the felon on death row is between the felon and God. It’s up to God to have mercy on him/her; we on the other hand, have to do what’s right and necessary for the preservation of civil society by protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. Sparing the condemned doesn’t do that. It sends exactly the wrong message about life’s sacrosanctity to other violent criminals that have yet to be brought to justice. Abolishing the death penalty shows preferential treatment for the murderer at the expense of the murdered. Again, how is this grace or compassion?

Even still, the “beyond redemption” appeal by Christians as a religious protest misses a couple key points.

God works on his time- not ours. The potential of the condemned being redeemed isn’t predicated on his exemption from capital punishment- as if God needs as much time as possible to transform and save the lost.

What if the guilty rejects redemption? Life imprisonment, rather than death for the possibility of redemption is a huge moral gamble that doesn’t make sense.
Since the time-sensitive potentiality of the condemned being redeemed is considered, why isn’t the alternative? Rather than giving both God and the condemned inmate ample time to get to know each other, why don’t Christian opponents of capital punishment contemplate the prospect that the spiritual conversion of death row inmates might increase if the death penalty was more efficient and accelerated? Increasing the urgency of death could prompt a change of heart that 30 years on death row won’t.
To the point, being spiritually redeemed doesn’t revoke earthly punishment.

Claiborne continues-
“Today, black people are about 13 percent of the overall population, but they’re 34 percent of executions and 43 percent of death row.
We like to say it’s about the most heinous crimes, but really the biggest determinants in capital punishment are the race of the victim and the resources of the defendant.”
This is dishonest and Claiborne either knows it, or at the very least, he’s exceedingly naïve.

Claiborne completely ignores the severity of the crime(s) committed- the reason(s) why a person is on death row- and implies that the disproportionate numbers of blacks on death row and their executions are primarily the result of racial and economic factors, not (im)moral ones. Christians who share this position of disparate impact completely ignore or excuse the violent acts committed by black felons deserving of the death penalty, which are readily available from the FBI or the Bureau of Justice Statistics/Department of Justice.

Intentionally excusing blacks from human moral obligation and agency isn’t benevolence; it’s condescending racial paternalism used to advance a superficial agenda masquerading as justice.

Absolving blacks from moral standards and expectations that everyone else is subjected to might qualify as “compassion” or “justice” in the morally ostensible world of social justice activists. In the real world of cause and consequence, the majority of people on death row are there as punishment deserving of the crimes they’ve committed. If Claiborne is concerned about the disparate impact of capital punishment on black lives, he should instead focus on highlighting and condemning the contributing factors that facilitate the disproportional participation of blacks in violent criminality- the causative factor(s), which qualifies black felons for the death penalty.
Extending leniency to villains as compensation for their evil guarantees the actions of evil- including murder- will increase.

Sparing the life of the murderer doesn’t demonstrate compassion; it devalues it.
Of course, Claiborne and other Christian abolitionists argue that the ministry of Jesus in the New Testament has vacated the Old Testament moral and legal prescriptions for capital punishment. But this is a form of theological and biblical service buffet- simply taking away what one likes and ignoring what one doesn’t so as to reinforce one’s ideological predeterminations.

Despite arguments to the contrary, Jesus didn’t annul capital punishment in his Sermon on the Mount. During his Sermon in Matthew 5, Jesus says,
“You have heard it said, ‘An eye for eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.”

How exactly is this nullification against the divine command of killing a murderer? Clearly, Jesus is referring back to the Levitical law of proportionality (Ex. 21:24, Lev. 24:19-21a), meaning that punishments should fit the crimes committed rather than exceeding them. Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon isn’t rescinding the command to punish murderers by death. Rather, he’s teaching his listeners- first century commoners and other marginalized groups- how to respond to insults and offenses in interpersonal relationships. This subversive teaching regarding self-control instead of retaliation in the face of public humiliation had nothing to do with government, governmental authority or how government was to administer punishment.

Aside from misinterpreting and misapplying Jesus’ teaching from the Sermon on the Mount as an argument in favor of abolishing the death penalty, Christian opponents of the death penalty ignore or misinterpret Romans 13:1-5. Here Paul says that the government, being a servant of God, doesn’t bear the sword in vain. Rather, it rightly punishes criminals for committing evil. The Greek word for sword combined with the implication of the passage makes clear that Paul was indeed saying that civil government has a responsibility to protect its constituents, which included punishing by death those who commit evil, violence and threaten public safety.

A moral society that values life is duty bound to protect its citizens. It also has a moral obligation to prove the high value of life by punishing those who intentionally and without reservation, devalue it. In my opinion, contemporary Christian abolitionists of capital punishment undermine the sacredness of life by “compassionately” regarding murderers at the expense of the murdered, and future murderers at the expense of the future victims of murder. By seeking to end of the death penalty, they’re surrendering their responsibility to defend and maintain the inimitable value of human life using the pro-life teachings of Christianity to defend a pro-death position.

Capital punishment is a touchy subject and good arguments can be made to support both sides of the debate. But many of the arguments advanced by Claiborne- in addition to Pope Francis (here and here) and other Christian opponents of the death penalty, thus far, aren’t good arguments and they contradict and undermine the Bible in the process.

David Whitney #fundie rightwingwatch.org

David Whitney of the Maryland-based Institute on the Constitution delivered a sermon last weekend in which he blamed the murder of a young black man by a racist white student on the campus of the University of Maryland on the teaching of evolution.

Whitney dedicated his sermon on Sunday to blaming Sean Christopher Urbanski’s deadly racist attack on Army Lt. Richard Collins III on everything from legal abortion to gun control, but placed most of the blame on the teaching of evolution in public schools.

“As in all public schools, evolution is inculcated and it teaches that there is no Creator God and that everything in the universe came into existence by chance and mistake, accident and is wholly without purpose and without meaning of any kind,” Whitney preached. “He was taught that mankind, including himself, was nothing more than a long compilation of mistakes and mutations and chance occurrences.”

“We should not be surprised then if Sean, with that background and education, concluded that life is meaningless, without any purpose at all,” he continued. “Or, if there is a purpose in life, it would be to advance and further the process of evolution; a process in which the strong destroy the weak and indeed, ultimately, that is the purpose for existence. Survival of the fittest therefore has some rather dastardly consequences which we see in the murder committed by a secular humanist of a Christian young man.”

“Evolution is also the basis of racism, [and] many assert that racism played a role in the motivation for this murder,” Whitney said. “You see, evolution is essentially racist. So where did Sean Urbanski learn racism? He learned it in his classes on evolution at the local public high school that his parents sent him to and his parents funded that school by the payment of their property taxes.”

Unknown author #fundie hizb.org.uk

Crime is an unwanted feature in any society, and any system governing a society has policies to minimise crime and secure the rights of its citizens. In the modern world, criminal acts take on many appearances whether they be violence, abuse, fraud, theft and all of the above in a cyber environment.

Also in the modern world, the sense of insecurity felt by many, seems to be increasing as criminal acts come in so many forms as Assistant Commissioner, Martin Hewitt said in 2017, “Along with rises in traditional crimes, we are facing new challenges across London”. As with all proposed governing models, Islam offers a comprehensive solution towards achieving a society with very little crime.

Even criminal acts have a reasoning behind them. For theft, it is the wealth one can gain. For sexual offences, it is the desire that can be satisfied or with assault, it is the dominance one can feel.

Though these desires exist in human beings, not everyone chooses to satisfy them in a criminal way or by inflicting misery on others. There is no doubt that the actions of the criminal are ultimately his or her actions. The sheer volume of crime in Western society also shows that for many, the system simply does not work for them to satisfy their needs in a law abiding way.

Islam has a very world orientated view towards individuals, Muslim and non-Muslim, and their ability to break the commandments of Allah SWT or commit crime even in a society based upon Islamic laws. It does not expect people to behave like angels and recognises human capacity to do both good and bad.

At the same time, an Islamic system takes positive steps to reducing the risk of someone committing a crime.

Crime prevention starts at an aqeeda (creedal) level. Islam teaches life is a test and that good deeds and obedience to Allah’s commands gains Allah’s pleasure whilst sinning and transgressing Allah’s prohibitions earns His wrath resulting in either Jannah or Jahannam in the hereafter.

Hence, accountability is not to a judge, or the police and authorities, but to Allah SWT, the all Knowing, the all Punishing and the Just. If an individual does believe he can break the law and evade justice, it is unlikely for him to believe he will evade the inevitable accountability of Judgement Day. Thus, deterring people from committing unlawful acts, or entering lives of crime.

Making obedience to the rule of law a natural state of affairs is made easier when the state and its organs are at one with the basic philosophy of the Islamic system. There will be no glorification of violence or respect given to criminals or gangs.

Nor will there be a culture glorifying crime through movies and music as these are not the values which underpins an Islamic society. Rather, the Islamic Khilafah system would do the opposite. It would promote and pursue wholesome ideals such as described in the following ahadith,

“None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.” [Bukhari and Muslim]

“One who goes to sleep full whilst his neighbour is hungry is not one of us.” [Bayhaqi’s Sunan al-Kubra]

or

“A Muslim is a brother of another Muslim, so he should not oppress him, nor should he hand him over to an oppressor. Whoever fulfilled the needs of his brother, Allah will fulfil his needs; whoever brought his (Muslim) brother out of a discomfort, Allah will bring him out of the discomforts of the Day of Resurrection, and whoever screened a Muslim, Allah will screen him on the Day of Resurrection.” [Bukhari]

Therefore, selfish desires are not stoked, rather they are tamed.

The public opinion regarding criminal acts and the norms of behaviour will be synonymous with the principles of Islam. As the society is Islamic, their value judgments on actions will run parallel to the value judgments Islam provides. Thus, anyone breaking these norms would be shunned in society thereby acting as a powerful deterrent.

A person committing a crime, will therefore, not better his quality or standard of living, but be going against the grain of society, and challenging the status quo. As social beings, humans would rather seek acceptance and interaction with their neighbours, colleagues and families, rather than being excluded from them, again removing the mindset or potential for a person to be tempted to commit criminal acts.

A criminal will pursue a crime, only if he feels he will not have to face the consequences of his actions or the potential gains are greater than the punishment that would be served if he is caught. Only having accountability to fellow humans is flawed, as humans can be deceived and criminals can escape the wrath and the full extent of the law.

For those who do indulge in criminal acts or violate the law of the land, the Islamic punishments are severe. However, the severity of the punishment, is not to satisfy a bloodlust nor for lack of wisdom or desire to seek mercy. Rather, the punishment system is a preventative measure to reduce the temptation to commit crime. Knowing that the consequence of being found guilty of a crime will result in the loss of life or limb is an extremely potent idea which one cannot rid from his mind as the consequence stays with the criminal for life.

Furthermore, punishments take place with public knowledge and in a public setting. This, combined with the public opinion described before, would have a second effect. A person’s life would be ruined if he is found guilty, as not only has he paid for the crime with loss of limb, money or pain, he will also be known to have strayed from socially acceptable actions, resulting in the public having a negative view to him.

Nowadays, criminals who have committed a crime and escaped punishment, or are let off easily are incentivised to repeat offend; the price wasn’t too high to pay, so why not? An example of this is the swimmer convicted of rape in the UK who served a meagre three months for his crime which destroyed a woman’s life. This sentence is in no way fair, and is an example to other sexual offenders that the consequences of their crime is light. The reverse of this is also true.

Criminals who have committed a crime and paid a heavy price for it, would be an example to the people of what happens when the sanctity of the law is broken. A potential thief seeing a man without a hand is a fitting example of being “put off” from committing a crime.

Upholding the law and being seen to uphold the law is a key part of an Islamic judicial system. There is no one in society who is above the law. The law, procedure and punishment are applicable to everyone within the society. This is evident in the hadith,

“By Allah, if Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad stole, I would cut off her hand.” [Bukhari]

The judges are not selected based on their heritage, network or status. Rather they are selected due to their ability, knowledge and piety. Since this will be evident through their conduct, confidence in the system will be strong amongst the law abiding public. This in turn will minimise any rebellious or vigilante mindset, as the due process is fair, works and ensures the protection and safety of the citizens of the state.

It is important to note that the Islamic Justice system is not to be implemented in isolation from the rest of Islam’s governance. For example, if the Islamic economic system is not being implemented, or the rules governing men and women are absent then crimes of varying natures will occur.

The track record of the Khilafah Rashidah and Islamic state is a testimony to Islam’s ability to minimise criminal activity. In fact, throughout the history of the Khilafah lasting 1300 years, there existed seldom instances of theft deemed severe enough to result in a hand being cut. Truly, the only way to satisfy the problems the world faces, is by using the system the Creator of man revealed, and only through the Khilafah system, can justice be served and harmony be established.

godhatesireland #fundie godhatesireland.com

Ireland is notorious for being huge supporters of the evil monstrosity that is the Catholic "church." Some 92% of Ireland’s 4.1 million people proclaim themselves to be Catholic. You can't get much more demonic than supporting an institution that damns souls to Hell on a daily basis. These churches support adultery by granting annulments to husbands and wives who deal treacherously with each other, despite Christ's teaching on the subject: Luke 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. This is just the tip of the iceberg; the Catholic Monster also endorses idolatry/Mariolatry, the lie that God loves everyone (despite Ps. 5:5, Rom. 9:13, and many more), infant baptism, unmarried priests, and so many more anti-Bible doctrines.

However, the worst part of the Catholic Monster would definitely have to be the fact that the priests "secretly" rape little boys and girls, and their parents pay the priests to do it! Moreover, these rapists' fellow false prophets cover it up and are enraged by the fact that that this sick tradition is being exposed. Come and hear the sick saga of Father Ollie (Oliver O'Grady), who was deported back to Ireland from the U.S., after spending 7 years in prison for sodomizing hundreds of kids while a priest. O'Grady worked with Roman Catholic Archbishop Mahoney of the Southern California diocese, which recently settled cases of Priest Molestation for $640 million (2/3 of a billion dollars). "Father Ollie" was transferred from parish to parish for fresh supplies of kids to molest for many years. According to the film, "Deliver Us from Evil," "Father Ollie" is still a Catholic priest in good standing, well respected throughout Ireland where he lives on a pension and an annuity - a bribe, if you will - to keep him quiet about all the criminal molesting of little kids by the thousands.

You can bet Ireland is DELIGHTED to have this old pervert priest living out his retirement years in Ireland, where he is celebrated like a retired rock star celebrity. Jeff Anderson, an attorney representing hundreds of abused kids in litigation for more than twenty years, says in the film, "Deliver Us from Evil," as follows: "Every day, every week, I learn of another child molested by a cleric who hasn't been disclosed before this day, and my belief is, that there are not hundreds, but there are thousands of offenders yet to be exposed and disclosed still roaming the churches in the landscapes in this U.S., and tens of thousands worldwide." (And one of the biggest child-molesting-priest nations - worldwide - is Ireland.) Jeremiah 5:29-31 Shall I not visit for these things? saith the Lord; shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation as this? A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land; The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so, and what will ye do in the end thereof? For more on the Catholic Monster, see www.priestsrapeboys.com and this video on signmovies.net that explains the evil of Catholics.

Ireland is in so much trouble for their outrageous sins and lies. They are beyond salvation because they refuse to repent. Jeremiah 6:15 Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD. The time of Ireland's visitation by a raging mad God is nigh at hand. Ezekiel 7:3,4 Now is the end come upon thee, and I will send mine anger upon thee, and will judge thee according to thy ways, and will recompense upon thee all thine abominations. And mine eye shall not spare thee, neither will I have pity; but I will recompense thy ways upon thee, and thine abominations shall be in the midst of thee; and ye shall know that I am the Lord.

James R. Aist #fundie rethinkingtheology.com

The Homosexual Propaganda Campaign

The primary source material for this article is found in two publications, both authored by two gay activists, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen: 1) A 1987 article entitled “The Overhauling of Straight America” and published in Guide, a homosexual publication, in 1987 (for a synopsis with numerous direct quotes and a link to the article, click HERE); and, 2) a book, entitled “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s”, published in 1989. This book was so popular among gay activists that it made the New York Times Best Seller List (for an extensive, relevant excerpt from this book, click HERE). Keep in mind that the success of this homosexual propaganda campaign requires the eager cooperation of our overwhelmingly liberal media, in order to win over the heterosexual majority in America to their cause. The bulk of this information is presented here “in the authors’ own words”, via direct quotes.

This “planned, psychological attack” involves six distinct strategies, which can be summarized as follows:

Desensitization: Talking about Gays and Gayness as Loudly and as Often as Possible

And I quote: “To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of keen emotion. Desensitization aims at lowering the intensity of antigay emotional reactions to a level approximating sheer indifference. The principle behind this advice is simple. Almost any behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it at close quarters and among your acquaintances. The acceptability of the new behavior will ultimately hinge on the number of one’s fellows doing it or accepting it. The way to benumb raw sensibilities about homosexuality is to have a lot of people talk a great deal about the subject in a neutral or supportive way. The masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. Novelties cease to be novel if they just stick around long enough; they also cease to activate alerting mechanisms. You’ll have noted this in your own life: if you hear a protracted, earsplitting mechanical screech, you’ll either be so alarmed, or so annoyed, that you’ll be forced to take action; if you hear a softer–though, perhaps, nonetheless annoying–sound, like the ticking of a clock, and can’t shut it off, you will, eventually, shut it out, and may cease to hear it altogether. Apply this to the problem of homohatred. If gays present themselves– or allow themselves to be presented–as overwhelmingly different and threatening, they will put straights on a triple-red alert, driving them to overt acts of political oppression or physical violence. If, however, gays can live alongside straights, visibly but as inoffensively as possible, they will arouse a low-grade alert only, which, though annoying to straights, will eventually diminish. Straights will be desensitized.”

And I quote: “While public opinion is one primary source of mainstream values, religious authority is the other. When conservative churches condemn gays, there are only two things we can do to confound the homophobia of true believers. First we can use talk to muddy the moral waters. This means publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches, raising theological objections of our own about conservative interpretation of Biblical teaching and exposing hatred and inconsistency. We can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated and backwards, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology.”

Another popular strategy used to undermine the moral authority of Christian churches is to repeatedly point out the moral failings of churches and their leaders. Unfortunately, there are more than enough of such moral failings to keep the gay activists supplied with fresh ammunition.

Jamming: Creating an “Incompatible Emotional Response”

And I quote: “In Jamming, the target is shown a bigot being rejected by his crowd for his prejudice against gays. The ‘incompatible emotional response’ is directed primarily against the emotional rewards of prejudicial solidarity. All normal people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like one of the pack. The trick is to get the bigot into the position of feeling a conflicting twinge of shame, along with his reward, whenever his homohatred surfaces, so that his reward will be diluted or spoiled. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways, all making use of repeated exposure to pictorial images or verbal statements that are incompatible with his self-image as a well-liked person, one who fits in with the rest of the crowd. Thus, propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred–suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary. The attack, therefore, is on self-image and on the pleasure in hating. Remember, a bigot seeks approval and liking from ‘his crowd.’ When he sees someone like himself being disapproved of and disliked by ordinary Joes, he will feel just what they feel –and transfer it to himself. This wrinkle effectively elicits shame and doubt, Jamming any pleasure he might normally feel. Our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof.”

Examples of “Jamming” would include: 1) the repeated use of name-calling, e.g., “bigot”, “liar”, “fundie”, “bible-thumper” and “homophobe” to create a feeling of shame; and 2) the repeated use of potentially disturbing accusations, e.g., “you are part of an ever-dwindling minority”, “more and more churches are supporting gay rights”, “you’re losing” and “all of the mental health and medical associations say that there is nothing wrong or bad about being gay”, all of which are designed to make the opposition – such as born-again Christians — feel isolated, marginalized and out of the mainstream of society; 3) derogatory references to God as “your mythical sky fairy” and to His Word as the “buy-bull”; and 4) witness this trail of vitriolic comments from a single commenter concerning just one article re. homosexuality published on a Christian website…

•“You have no right to interfere with the secular political culture of this country.”
•“You can believe this nonsense all you like but do it behind closed doors and in the privacy of your own homes and churches.”
•“I don’t want to hear another word about your weird cultish beliefs in the streets and public squares.”
•“All religious evangelism is assault.”
•“Americans do not share your views anymore.”
•“You are a reactionary post-modern convulsion.”

Portray Gays as Victims, Not as Aggressive Challengers

And I quote: “Gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector. If gays are presented, instead, as a strong and prideful tribe promoting a rigidly nonconformist and deviant lifestyle, they are more likely to be seen as a public menace that justifies resistance and oppression. For that reason, we must forego the temptation to strut our ‘gay pride’ publicly when it conflicts with the Gay Victim image. A media campaign to promote the Gay Victim image should make use of symbols which reduce the mainstream’s sense of threat, which lower its guard, and which enhance the plausibility of victimization. In practical terms, this means that sympathetic figures of nice young people, old people, and attractive women would be featured.”

And I quote:“The mainstream should be told that gays are victims of fate, in the sense that most never had a choice to accept or reject their sexual preference. The message must read: ‘As far as gays can tell, they were born gay, just as you were born heterosexual or white or black or bright or athletic. They never made a choice, and are not morally blameworthy. What they do isn’t willfully contrary – it’s only natural for them. This twist of fate could as easily have happened to you! Straight viewers must be able to identify with gays as victims. To this end, the persons featured in the public campaign should be decent and upright, appealing and admirable by straight standards, completely unexceptionable in appearance.”

Witness here the bombardment of our visual media – TV, movies, comics, theater — with homosexual characters looking entirely normal and being fully approved and admired by heterosexual characters, and the continuing (bogus) claims that homosexuals are “born Gay.”

Give Heterosexual Protectors a Just Cause

And I quote: “Our campaign should not demand direct support for homosexual practices, but should instead take anti-discrimination as its theme. The right to free speech, freedom of beliefs, freedom of association, due process and equal protection of laws–these should be the concerns brought to mind by our campaign. It is especially important for the gay movement to hitch its cause to accepted standards of law and justice because its straight supporters must have at hand a cogent reply to the moral arguments of its enemies. The homophobes clothe their emotional revulsion in the daunting robes of religious dogma, so defenders of gay rights must be ready to counter dogma with principle.”

Familiar examples would include couching “gay marriage” in terms of “civil rights”, insisting on adoption “rights” for homosexual couples and demanding that openly gay boys and teens be welcomed into the Boy Scouts of America because “it’s not their fault” that they like boys. All of these issues are being promoted in the name of “equality”, and mainstream America is buying into it.

Conversion: Make Gays Look Good to the Public

And I quote: “In order to offset the increasingly bad press that these times have brought to homosexual men and women, the campaign should paint gays as superior pillars of society: ‘Did you know that this Great Man (or Woman) was ____?’ We are safest, in the long run, if we can actually make them like us. Conversion aims at just this. We mean conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media. In Conversion, the bigot, who holds a very negative stereotypic picture, is repeatedly exposed to literal picture/label pairs, in magazines, and on billboards and TV, of gay- explicitly labeled as such!–who not only don’t look like his picture of a homosexual, but are carefully selected to look either like the bigot and his friends, or like any one of his other stereotypes of all-right guys– the kind of people he already likes and admires. The image must be that of an icon of normality.”

Witness here the eagerness of the liberal press to publicize the gayness of popular celebrities, whether they are music stars, movie stars, TV stars, sports stars, politicians, etc. This tactic is designed to create an internal conflict within the fan: “Do I dislike the celebrity because of his/her homosexuality, or do I accept his/her homosexuality and continue to like the celebrity?” The average, uninformed or misinformed American is likely to choose the latter.

And I quote: “The objection will be raised that we are exchanging one false stereotype for another equally false; that our ads are lies; that that is not how all gays actually look; that gays know it, and bigots know it. Yes, of course–we know it, too. But it makes no difference that the ads are lies; not to us, because we’re using them to ethically good effect. In Conversion, the target is shown his crowd actually associating with gays in good fellowship. Once again, it’s very difficult for the average person, who, by nature and training, almost invariably feels what he sees his fellows feeling, not to respond in this knee-jerk fashion to a sufficiently calculated advertisement.”

Witness here the bombardment of our mainstream, liberal media – TV, movies, magazines, newspapers, comics, theater, billboards and the internet — with homosexual characters looking entirely normal and being fully approved and admired by heterosexual characters and/oror praised through rhetoric.

Make the Anti-gay Victimizers Look Bad

And I quote: “At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified. Our goal here is twofold. First, we seek to replace the mainstream’s self-righteous pride about its homophobia with shame and guilt. Second, we intend to make the antigays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types. The public should be shown images of ranting homophobes whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America. These images might include: the Ku Klux Klan demanding that gays be burned alive or castrated; bigoted southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred to a degree that looks both comical and deranged; a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.

A common tactic used nowadays to vilify born-again Christians is to claim that the Bible approves of slavery, polygamy, incest, etc., in order to portray Christians as rank “cherry picking” hypocrites for selectively condemning the practice of homosexuality. Another common tactic is “jamming”, as described above, where born-again Christians, in particular, are constantly subjected to name-calling, e.g., “bigot”, “liar”, “fundie”, “bible-thumper” and “homophobe.” And, of course, this strategy depends entirely upon the eager cooperation of our mainstream, liberal media – TV, movies, magazines, newspapers, comics, theater, billboards and the internet. And, as you will see below, even Christian online magazines are joining in.

The Legacy Lives On

Present day gay activists vehemently deny both any knowledge of Kirk and Madsen and the influence of Kirk and Madsen on the strategies of today’s homosexual movement. They do this because they don’t want the dark and sinister underbelly of the homosexual movement to be exposed to the heterosexual majority. That would hinder their goal of winning the hearts and minds of the heterosexual majority to their agenda. But much of what they are actually doing to further their “gay agenda” is proof positive that they are both the progeny and the legacy of these two pioneers of the homosexual movement. I cited many present day, and all too familiar, examples of this in the sections above, and you can read many, many more examples by clicking HERE and reading the comments at the end of the article. The actions and the words of gay activists themselves demonstrate that the legacy of Kirk and Madsen does, in fact, live on.

The Use of Christian Websites to Attack Born-again Christians

I have personally investigated more than a dozen Christian online magazines that allow readers to comment on their feature articles, and almost every one of them permits gay activists to freely use these very same psychological attacks, via their Comments, against the born-again Christians who are among their readers and commenters. These publications are free to filter comments any way they want to; the First Amendment does not prohibit them from doing so. Now, I don’t know if the editors of these magazines are simply not aware that the homosexual movement is using them in this way – as a Trojan Horse, in effect — to attack born-again Christians; or if, perhaps, they already know this, but have their reasons to permit it anyway. But I do know this: everything is done for a reason, but not everything that is done has an excuse. And I do know that born-again Christians should be able to read Comments on Christian magazine websites without being subjected to psychological attacks by gay activists.

The Antidotes

The Bible provides effective antidotes to help born-again Christians combat these psychological attacks. Jesus experienced similar psychological attacks and said: “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12); “If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.” (John 15:19); and “I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.” (John 17:14-15). And Hebrews 12:2-3 reminds us that Jesus, for the joy set before him, endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God, and then instructs us to consider Him (Jesus) who endured such opposition from sinners, so that we will not grow weary and lose heart.

Bible Man #fundie talkorigins.org

Were you in the garden of eden when God created the universe? If you weren't then how dare you act as if you know everything. Only God was there, and he wrote in the BIBLE exactly how he created the world. You have no right to challenge God and to mock his belivers. But mock us while you can! Like the rich man in the bible you will soon be saying, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send a Creationist that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.' You evolutionists will be begging Creationists for relief from the flames of hell. But Abraham will tell you evolutionists, 'now the Creationists are comforted and you are tormented. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.' One of the joys of heaven will be watching the unsaved burn in hell!!!! I can't wait to stand with God, Abraham, and Jesus on one side of the gulf, watching the skin of all the unsaved evolutionists burn for all eternity. Charles Darwin can't save you! Only the love of Jesus can save you. Repent now, admit evolution is a lie, while you still have a chance! And if you don't, someday the creationists will be rejoicing by watching you burn forever in hell, praise Jesus!!!!

Steven R. #fundie simplychristian.fandom.com

Sermon 19: License to Sin

By Bro. Steven R.

“ She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.”-John 8:11

Protestant founder Martin Luther is quoted as saying that Jesus died for nothing if we don’t sin! In a sense he is correct. Jesus would not have to have died if sin didn’t exist, but sin came into being in Genesis 3 when Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil! Therefore, we all sin, because we have a sin nature! However, we must TURN OR BURN!!!!!!!

It becomes necessary to turn from sin in your life! You can’t be saved without a sincere heart! It’s true we can’t save ourselves with our good works, because the Bible says that our righteousness is as RAGS! We can NEVER EVEN HOPE to come close to the sinless perfection that Jesus Christ did when He was on the Earth! He never had a sexual thought, never succumbed to temptation of the devil, never even did as much as steal anything! He never would’ve even stolen a ketchup packet from Burger King because He was not a sinner! We are! We have all sinned!

Even if we are all sinners and can’t get to Heaven on our own accord, Luther is still wrong! Being saved is NOT a license to sin! We shouldn’t get High on the devil’s lettuce, go to a strip club, place thousands of dollars on the breasts of harlots, drive a gin and tonic, and then go to Taco Bell to gorge on burritos and then go to a hotel room to fornicate! Christians MUST stay away from the sinful excesses of the world! Even if truly saved people can’t go to Hell due to the sacrifice of Christ, we cannot mock Christ by living as the world! The Bible says to congregate with other believers and to be in the world but not of the world! Set yourself apart from the world! If you’re not doing that, are you having a quality walk with Christ?! Doesn’t sound like it! If you’re not even saved, pray that Christ will save you from your sins and repentance will be what you need to do to show you’re truly a new creature in Christ! Don’t listen to former papist turned fecal fetishist Martin Luther! Listen to the KJV Bible and then a good local IFB preacher!

RemoveNormalfags #sexist #crackpot incels.co

[Blackpill] Lookism is the new racism

Racism doesn't really exist anymore.
Don't get me wrong, there are still a lot of racist people, but they don't admit it, because it isn't socially accepted anymore and they fear the consequences.
Meanwhile admitting lookism is totally fine.
There is even a lot of anti white propaganda in many countries (BLM, ...).

Lookism replaced racism and no one cares.
But the worst thing is, that it only affects men:
Calling a overweight woman ugly = body shaming
Calling a not good looking man ugly = totally acceptable

Even though the woman could just lose some weight...

We live in a time, in which discrimination based on superficial features is totally acceptable.

Anonymous MG #sexist incels.co

Cucks have always, and will always, be the main driving force behind social degeneracy and a decline in male conditions as long as they're allowed to keep existing in society. Before, these types of men would succumb to disease or be killed fighting a war, as the masculine men would survive and reproduce up until the advent of modern medicine and "the long peace".

These weak men will cause a societal collapse soon enough with their awful values and ideals, and we'll have to rebuild and try again soon enough. This is the cycle of civilization, and these are the unforeseen consequences of social reforms that enforce "equality".

Coronachan pls save us pewpew

Barbara Hendrix #fundie books.google.com

Some are gone so far into the darkness of sin that their conscience has been seared to the extent that they actually believe that wrong is right and right is wrong. If a man has nor lost his natural ability to reason, he instinctively knows that anal sex is wrong, but if he has indulged in that sexual perversion and has developed a desire to express himself sexually in an uncivilized manner, and becomes addicted to that behavior, he then experiences, unbeknownst to himself, the loss of his innate ability to reason, which is the punishment for his detestable sin.

Consequently, what once was wrong from his perspective, then becomes right because it is what he desires to do, and has grown accustomed to doing, so he justifies and redefines his sin as an alternative lifestyle, and does everything in his power to cause its
proliferation, and its general acceptance by societies at large. Rather than to repent of his gross sin, the defiant, disobedient homosexual attempts to change the worldview of his sin. So confident he is in his new position of rebellion against the Word of God, which he has to invalidate as irrelevant or call archaic, or some such notion in order to continue to believe the lie about the nature of his homosexuality.

He does not want to call anal and oral sex sin because sin is wrong and requires repentance, consequently, anal and oral sex, according
to his way of thinking, is no longer sin, therefore there is no need for repentance.

Thus we have the definition of a reprobate mind, a sinner who would rather make void the Holy Bible in order to accommodate the sin of
homosexuality, instead of simply repenting for what he or she innately know is wrong. 'l •heir redefinition of sin prevails, at least in their twisted mind it does, until they step over into the land of judgment where I dwell, then all pretenses and lies will come to naught in the light of my holy presence.

Homosexuals perpetrate the ultimate perversion; the consequence of their refusal to accept the truth that I am their God, their Father, and their Creator and as such my will is supreme. Therefore they will reap the harvest of the seeds of destruction that they have sown so callously and haphazardly; the abuse and misuse of their own bodies. Their rational minds are gone, having lost the ability to reason, thus they are not even remotely aware of their true condition, which is the price of sin; spiritual death that leads to eternal damnation, an exchange of fathers; from the Father of light, who I am, to the father of darkness, otherwise known as Satan, the illegitimate father of those who have fallen into the deep abyss of sin.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

But you say, surely Billy Graham must be in Heaven! A Christian lady recently said to me, that she has heard countless testimonies from people online, who said they were influenced and saved as a direct result of Billy Graham's preaching. May I say, I do not doubt that some people were led to God through Mr. Graham's influence, and at some point heard the Gospel from some other source and got saved. However, they didn't get the Gospel from Billy Graham, as I just evidenced to you. I have received testimonies from people who were drawn to a religious rock concert, or some ecumenical religious group, as their first step toward the light. But then over time they realized that something was wrong and they sought truth elsewhere, eventually finding their way to a good old-fashioned, Bible-believing, New Testament church. So, an unsaved person may feel drawn to a dynamic public figure like Billy Graham or John Hagee; or a fashionable person like Joel Osteen; or a persuasive man like Pat Robertson. But this does NOT necessarily mean these men are true men of God. In fact, all of these men preach a corrupted plan of salvation that includes works.

It is the same case with the modern Bible versions. I have heard some preachers claim that they were saved from a New International Version (NIV). No, you weren't. The truth is that many of the churches that use the modern corrupted seed, also use the incorruptible seed of the King James Bible (1st Peter 1:23), and so the truth is there mingled amongst lies! In such churches, as would be suspected, some people are saved and most others aren't saved. Those pastors will have blood on their hands for all the souls that spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, because they were deceived and misled by Satan's corruptible seed. Satan knows that he cannot completely get rid of the truth, so he does the next best thing, which is to obscure the truth in confusion. Satan publishes hundreds of English Bible versions to confuse everybody. The churches are confused today. People are confused on what it means to repent. They are confused on how to be saved. They are unsure about what God requires of them to be saved and stay saved. We know that once a person is saved, he is permanently saved and nothing else is required. Once a child of God, always a child of God!!!

I triple-dog dare you (and that's a serious dare!) to show me anywhere in the Holy Scriptures where following Christ is required to have eternal life. I triple-dog dare you to show me anywhere in the Word of God where it says to make a “vow” in order to be born-again. What is Billy Graham teaching: commitments, vows, following, surrendering to Christ? These are not the Good News (i.e., Gospel) of Christ's death on the cross, burial and bodily resurrection, by which we are saved through faith (1st Corinthians 15:1-6; Romans 1:16). I triple-dog dare you to show me anywhere from the Gospel of John, God's Gospel tract (John 20:31), where it mentions anything about making a vow, following, surrendering, or committing yourself to God to be saved!!! No, rather, we are taught to simply BELIEVE (trust) upon the name of Jesus. John 20:31, “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

We are all proud at times, which is why we gossip, talk about others and sin wilfully against God (Romans 7:14-25). May we all with God's help refrain from such awful things. The first step to overcoming such wickedness is to develop a hatred for it, especially in ourselves. I hate gossip. I hate pride. I hate hearing the Lord's name taken in vain. I hate wickedness. The reason why I hate these things is because of God's Holy Spirit Who lives inside of me as a child of God (Romans 8:9). I wish I could shut Hollywood down. I wish I could forever close down Sin City Las Vegas. The fear of the Lord is to hate evil. Psalms 97:10 commands us all to HATE EVIL, just as the Lord hates evil.

Again, the middle letter of the words “SIN” and “PRIDE” is the letter “i.” When I say “overcoming sin” I don't mean sinless perfection, which is impossible in this earthly body. Proverbs 24:16, “For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief.” Even the best Christians still commit sin, hurt others and mess-up at times. We all sin every day in deed and thought, whether it be failing to pray earnestly for our nation's leaders, gossiping, watching something unholy on television or taking our eyes off Jesus. When we become proud, we become blinded to our own sins and faults. There's nothing more disgusting than a self-righteousness person.

I'm a big sinner and I dare not condemn anyone for their sins. I preach against open wickedness in our degenerate American culture, and I earnestly expose falsehoods, but I judge no one. I once heard Dr. Jack Hyles say during a Sunday evening service, as I sat to his left listening intently from a pew in the back, that the best Christian in the auditorium probably felt like the worst Christian in the building. That made me feel better, because I did feel like the worst Christian in the building. You see, the closer you draw to God, the worse of sinner you'll feel like, as you see God's in His holiness. Hebrews 12:29, “For our God is a consuming fire.”

The dangerous thing about the sin of pride is that you often don't realize what's happening until it's too late and you're already deep-in-over-your-head. The Bible calls this dangerous tendency, “the deceitfulness of sin.” Hebrews 3:13, “But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.” This Scripture means that the more sin is tolerated, the less awful it seems. The preacher John Wesley wisely said, “What one generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace!” That is so very true!

In the 1930's we tolerated legalized booze in the United States. Then we embraced Hollywood in the late 1940's. Whereas only 6,000 U.S. households owned a television in 1946, by 1952 it was 22,000,000 households who owned a TV set. Our nation tolerated Hugh Hefner's sinister Playboy philosophy in the 1950's, which led to an epidemic of sexual immorality in the 1960's. Consequently, the abortion industry became federal law in the 1970's, to dispose of unwanted children. And now after decades of tolerating Hollywood's sexually perverse influence, our nation has embraced the morally reprehensible homosexual agenda. This is all the result of arrogant, stiffnecked, sinful, pride!!!

Sin must never be allowed to go unchecked in our life, our family, our church or our community. This is why I preach hard and uncompromisingly against the new modern corrupt Bible versions! Most churches have become hardened (calloused) through the deceitfulness of sin, embracing Satan's counterfeits.

It is because of man's wicked pride that he refuses to seek after God. Psalms 10:4, “The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.” As you just read, it is a sin not to include God IN ALL OUR THOUGHTS. When most people go on vacation, they usually leave God behind at home. They go to worldly places, don't pray, and forget about God while. God pity the backslidden believer that goes to Las Vegas (Sin City) for vacation. You couldn't pay me to go to Las Vegas, which is nothing but a place of sexual immorality.

Our nation's schools, universities and colleges are prisonhouses of ignorance, because they leave out God. Proverb 14:3, “In the mouth of the foolish is a rod of pride: but the lips of the wise shall preserve them.” An educator who leaves out God is a fool. 2nd Timothy 3:7, “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

The Bible has much to say about the sin of pride. Proverb 13:10, “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.” We read in Proverbs that “ONLY BY PRIDE” cometh contention—whether it be a rebellious wife filing for divorce, an abusive husband who mistreats his family, a greedy lawyer who bilks his clients, a dishonest salesman who cheats his customers, or a carnal believer who won't go soul-winning, et cetera. Proverb 13:10, “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.”

Proverb 13:10, “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.”
Proverb 13:10, “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.”
Proverb 13:10, “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.”
Proverb 13:10, “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.”

My friend, ONLY BY SINFUL PRIDE comes contention. We all struggle with contention because we are sinners by nature and by choice. Divorces are always caused by the sin of pride. When we sin, it is because of pride. I don't care how much you try to avoid arguments, fighting and contention, they will happen for the rest of your life, because we are all sinners struggling with pride. Romans 12:18, “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.”

It is not always possible to live peaceably with all men, because many people are wicked and unreasonable. 2nd Thessalonians 3:1-2, “Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you: And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all men have not faith.” That is very interesting that the Apostle Paul requested the prayers of the believers at Thessalonica, that God would deliver them from unsaved enemies who were wicked and unreasonable.

America is quickly descending into wickedness because of sinful pride. It was pride that compelled the U.S. Supreme Court to remove and ban the Holy Bible from all U.S. classrooms in 1962-1963. Since that horrible decision, our nation has deteriorated significantly. I need the prayers of my web visitors, that God would continue to give this Gospel preacher free course to preach THE TRUTH on the internet. Like John the Baptist, I am a voice crying in the wilderness of cyberspace. Proverb:11:2, “When pride cometh, then cometh shame: but with the lowly is wisdom.” We are losing our liberties and freedoms fast in the United States, because people are not fighting against the blatant encroachments against our God-given liberties. The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights do not grant us our rights, but merely outline our God-given inalienable rights. Give me liberty or give me death!!!

waiting1 #fundie rr-bb.com

I pray everyone repents and gets saved, but

we know that isn't what will happen, and for those who don't

you may be acting all high and mighty now,

BUT OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST IS COMING BACK AND THIS

TIME HE WON'T BE LIKE THE PUSHOVER LAMB "HE SEEMED" TO BE

BUT WILL BE THE AWESOME LION KING OF KINGS WHO WILL SMASH ALL VESSELS WHO

DO EVIL TO POWDER!!!!!!!!!!!

Creation Tips #fundie users.bigpond.com

So if habilis and rudolfensis were apes in every way, and ergaster (which followed them) was clearly human, where is the evidence that there was ever an ape-human between them? Absolutely none!

The evidence leads us to agree with creationists such as Marvin Lubenow and John Woodmorappe that “Homo ergaster, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, and Homo neanderthalensis can best be understood as racial variants of modern man — all descended from Adam and Eve, and most likely arising after the separation of people groups after Babel.”

Tom #fundie politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com

(Regarding Ann Coulter's latest media gaffe)

Why does thepagan/atheist left get upset if someone tells them they are going to hell, when they don't even believe in hell? Also, this must be exhibit No. 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,001 of CNN and the rest of the pagan/atheist left demonstrating their complete ignorance of the Christian faith. As a Christian, why would Ann Coulter wish that the pagan left, the atheist left, the earth worshipping left, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, or members of any other faith remain committed to their faiths rather than convert to Christianity? Hint for the pagan/atheist left: Coulter wouldn't wish for such a thing, and she shouldn't wish for such a thing. Got it? Otherwise, she would call herself an atheist.

Ted Nugent #racist wnd.com

Welcome to the Honest Society, be it ever so briefly, Mr. President. If I may quote the controversial one on Marc Moran’s “WTF” podcast recently:

“Racism, we are not cured of it. And it’s not just a matter of it not being polite to say nigger in public.”

Well, there you have it. The Honest Society is a rather large and growing club, clan if you will, that is not afraid of speaking honestly without fear of politically correct word nazi’s going berserk.

Along with President Obama and my hero Richard Pryor, we join Howard Stern, Johnny Cochran, Mark Furman, O.J. Simpson, Kid Rock, James Brown, the mighty Funkbrothers, Al not so Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Malcom X, Kanye West, Fifty Cent and pretty much every black rapper and hip hopper on earth, Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, a few thousand NBA, NFL, MLB sports stars, legions of famous and not so famous musicians, actors, politicians, media personalities and assorted celebrities of every color, creed, ethnicity and walk of life, along with a few million others around the world who have used and continue to use the word nigger at one time or another.

The dishonest referencing of the word by its first letter is the epitome of political correctness gone mad.

For those who have chosen terminal denial and have completely lost touch with the real world, the word nigger has historically been used in a powerfully positive way when describing the proud heritage and history of deeply respected, even revered “blackness.”

For my entire life, whenever I performed my most soulful and emotional guitar playing, I received the greatest compliment a musician could ever dream of when the word was used to describe my Motown touch.

The word is used constantly across America in a friendly, even tribal greeting and salutation with no hint whatsoever of negativity nor hostility.

It is foolish and dishonest to discuss a given word, or language overall for that matter, by not saying the word and sheepishly referencing it by a letter.

Does anyone truly believe the title “WTF” of Mark Maron’s podcast doesn’t stand for vulgar street slang? Does the swapping of the universal F-word colloquialism with the term “freakin’” really absolve one from vulgar language?

Like the ever resonate “MF” word, it can be used in every imaginable way possible. There is a difference when someone assaults you with a knife, demanding “Turn over your wallet MF’r!” and the ultimate compliment given to anyone performing to the absolute best of their ability when praised as a “stone cold MF’r!”

Anybody not get that? Anybody not aware of that? Anybody so insulated, ignorant and disconnected to claim otherwise?

Semantics is one thing. Context something else altogether.

For our society to dare claim that any and every use of the word nigger is hateful and wrong is just plain dishonest, foolish, denies the truth and only hurts those we wish to protect the most.

As blacks blow away blacks in record numbers in Chicago and other urban hellzones each weekend, does anyone have the audacity to believe that words play any role in this insane widespread criminality?

Who thinks if certain words could be eliminated that any lives would be saved?

What sort of politically correct zombie could actually believe that the elimination of a word or a flag would reduce the evil of racism?

What sort of goofball could possibly believe that certain words are OK for one group of people but forbidden by others?

That, by the way, is the definition of racism.

When discussing hate and criminally evil behavior, could it possibly matter what words are uttered or symbols are displayed when an innocent life hangs in the balance?

The president’s use of the word as stated was honest and useful. His statement, this time, should be respected and learned from.

Everybody knows that Richard Pryor’s use of the word in his award winning-comedy recordings and routines and in his “Blazing Saddles” movie was honest, harmless and clearly funny beyond belief. The iconic artist was rightly honored with the Mark Twain Award at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, all knowing how he used the word nigger in a non-threatening, non-racist way throughout his personal and professional life.

Until we as a people break free from the shackles of political correctness and honestly admit that words and context have meaning, we will continue to focus on nonsensical symbolism instead of meaningful upgrade.

I for one would rather save lives, not worry about hurt feelings.

Carl Winters #fundie quora.com

Garbage. I know what youre trying to do recruiting more weak gullible people with your mind control. Lemme tell you something. I know who runs your church. Not everyone is stupid here. We know what you stand for. There is many soldiers of GOD, true bold and righteous men out there exposing your garbage and your church and your teachings of Alister Crowley, Lavey , magick and withcraft and satanic ritual abuse. Jesus defeated your weak master and no matter what you do and what you believe you will lose in the end. You might get away with a lot here on earth but you will burn in hell for an eternity , Where there is weeping, moaning, gnashing of teeth, sorrow, pain an misery for 24/7 YOU BETTER repent you devil.

Isaiah 5:20–24 (KJV)

20

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!

21Woe unto [them that are] wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!

22 Woe unto [them that are] mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:

23

Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!

24

Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, [so] their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.

Acts 8:22 (KJV)

Repent therefore of this thywickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.

BoondocksHumbleFollow?er #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Leaked NWO Flawless plan That will End America.

Many folks have a one or two track mind when it comes to the reasons why everything seems to be unraveling in America. You have one side saying (the right) “finally real change has come” and the other side saying (the left) “the end is happening”

I am emailing this to tell you that one side is correct. It is the left.

And it has nothing to do with American social policy or social policy. Rather it has everything to do with the New World Order’s United Nation. The great Trap for America.

PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT I AM ABOUT TO SAY.

Many of us know about the elites but very few of us can separate what we know from what really is going on.

What I am about to tell you is the New World Orders plan to take down America and the WORLD will cheer.

Most people in America take sides. EITHER WITH THE LEFT OR THE RIGHT. If you are one of those individuals, no matter how sincere you may be, you have a closed mind.

How the Elites got into power in the first place was the ability to outthink nearly everyone on the planet.

Here we Go.

We will start with President Trump.

Even though we can confirm he is a man with good intentions this was all planned by the Elites.

They needed a man that was a nationalist in office in order to pull the trigger. Why?

For years we have had globalist puppets doing the bidding of the Elites. The two set up guys here are George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama.

George Bush got America into the Iraq war which reopened an interventionalist policy in the middle East and Obama continued that but morally conditioned the left and the right.

America entered into the war with Iraq without a real reason and this policy continued Into Syria, Libya etc.

The UN backed the war in Iraq but had “issues” (not really) with Syria and Libya.

This is very Important what I am about write, America backed rebels who wanted to topple a regime. That is very important to remember.

Remember what I have said above because we are going to change topics for a moment.

As you know America has been going through a period of protest. The folks on the right can see that these protests are absurd. The people on the left say these protests are necessary.

The protests are getting more and more violent and will continue to get more and more violent.

The left is in a losing battle. The lefts agenda has been shot down beyond repair. The right now has the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch. It is over for the left in America. BUT This was the NWO's intention all along.

We have seen the true colors of the left. They indeed will fight and terrorize to prove a point.

The left in Congress says nothing about this neither does the Elite Controlled Media. Why?

They need Chaos. ORDER OUT OF CHAOS.

The media will continue to push this chaos agenda over the next few years until it is beyond control. You are already hearing talking heads push the message that America is divided and we no longer have order in America.

The left is fighting a losing battle, but it's a winning battle for the NWO. Here's the plan.

Trumps agenda indeed will be pushed through infuriating the left population yet great delight to the right. Taking the minds far away from the real agenda

The riots are going to get to the point where burning blocks or not only common but rather miniscule. You will see entire cities and towns burn. We already have been conditioned for that. Remember Travon? You will see the rioters begin to murder Conservatives in Large numbers going into homes etc. The left will fire the first shot.

This will force Trump to call for martial law to save the Republic.

Forcing the rioters to form gorilla groups officially starting a civil war.

The media will push the Narrative that “rebel militant groups” are just trying to stop Trumps hate. The rights hatred against Muslims, LGBT etc

The world Narrative of “Trump the dictator” will be cemented.

This is where the UN will step in.

The nations inside the UN will say something very similar to this “America intervened in civil wars In the past...Why can't we?” “America backed Rebels Groups trying to topple a bad regime. . .Why can't we?”

You will then see nations come to the aid of these “leftist Rebels”.

AMERICA set the standard. No. . .The Elites set the standard using America as the puppet. But America and the right will be the scapegoat.

(This entire narrative of Abortion, LGBTQ, Muslim Integration is the effective tool that will bring down America not in the way you originally thought.) Exact quote from email. Not with God shooting lightning bolts from the sky down at people, but rather the elites swooping in to save the day. And the WORLD WILL cheer

“The Next World War will start in America's backward. The people were duped years ago and woke up too late. This is already set in stone” exact quote from email.

The email was taken apart and generalized but you get the message. Just follow the breadcrumbs.Folks get ready. Prepare yourselves. Prepare your families.

This IS the Agenda. Set in stone and operating like clockwork. The war drums are already beating and can be heard by those only awake to the real agenda that just got exposed.

This information comes at personal risk to a few different folks. Keep them in your prayers.

ExaltGod #fundie deviantart.com

If you're ashamed of being a Christian, Jesus is ashamed of you.

Requested by Starrceline.

I can't tell you how many times people have told me that I "make them ashamed to be a Christian."
Let's ignore for the moment that the only reason they say this is because I believe and proclaim the Bible, and let's instead zero in on the "I'm ashamed to be a Christian" part.
Let's see what the Bible has to say about people being ashamed of God, His word, and being called followers of God.


Mark 8:38
"Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation;
of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels."

Luke 9:26
"For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed,
when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the holy angels."


Yeah. Jesus doesn't take too kindly to cowards who proclaim their shame and embarrassment to be called His followers.
For the rest of us who don't want to be cowards, what instruction does the Bible have for us?


Romans 1:16
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation
to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."

2 Thessalonians 3:14
"And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man,
and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed."

2 Timothy 1:8
"Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner:
but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God;"

2 Timothy 1:12
"For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed:
for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."

1 Peter 4:16
"Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf."

anonymous #fundie dailykos.com

Hello "Kos",

I have prayed for God to smite(!) your homo site to for some time now.
It seems He is taking longer than I hoped to answer my prayers. That is fine, he works in mysterious ways, as they say, even if i don't understand them. Have you prayed to Him recently? have you? You should. He will answer your prayers if you truly believe. I know this, because he answers mine. Maybe he won't answer yours because you might have homosexual tendencies. He doesn't answer sinners prayers, and homoness is a serious sin. A spit in the face of our lord, our god. HE HATES HOMO SINNERS WITH A BURNING fiery PASSION. Are you a homo sinner? If you want your prayers answered i hope you are not. If you are a homosinner people will know. people can see through you faggot! So "Kos", i continue to pray, tormented inside, for you. I hope one day, your site goes off the air. Msnbc will go down with their ratings, and take your site, and Chris Matthew's, with it. God will answer my prayer, because i am not a homo. You mine as well not pray, because your homo human kind is not to his liking. He, like me, like women!!

At this point in the email i know what you are wondering: why is Kos in " " marks? Well i have a reason for that as well. It is because I do not believe your real name is "kos". I think that is the name you use at gay bars and such, so your parents do not know your gay. you and your best friend Chris Matthew's must have a great time hanging out at those bars. "discussing politics" i'm sure. Bullshit, you don't go into gay bars to discuss politics with Chris Matthew's.

Jim #fundie blog.jim.com

No woman in love ever wanted to hear her lover say “Honey, you can hang out at my place as long as you feel like it”

What she wants to hear is “I will keep you forever, and never ever let you go.”

Men want to have sex with women. Women want to submit to a man’s urgent and powerful sexual demands. Sex for women is just not very interesting unless it is an act of submission and obedience.

Moment to moment consent to marriage and moment to moment consent to sex just is not what women want, as every man who has seduced a woman knows. (Some of my progressive commenters claim to married etc, but I really find this hard to believe. Maybe they are married in the sense that they get to sleep on the couch in the garage and are graciously allowed change the sheets on the main bed after their wife fucks her lover, who visits at infrequent intervals, beats her up, beats her kids up, fucks her, drinks all the booze in the fridge, and takes the housekeeping money.)

What women want corresponds to what, in the ancestral environment, was a safe place to raise children, and that was a household where she was firmly and securely in the hand of a strong master. Or, as the Old Testament tells us: “thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

Equality requires fences between equals. To raise children together, must be one household, one flesh, and one household can have only one captain. If two captains, no safe place for children. If your household has two captains, your wife will abandon that household.

The vast majority of white converts to traditional Islam are hot fertile age single women. Very few converts from Islam to Christianity, almost none, are fertile age women. Traditional Islam gives women what fertile age women really want. Progressivism gives them what they foolishly ask for and gives it to them good and hard.

Because of hypergamy, a woman will always test you, always rebel. But she does not rebel because she wants to win, instead she wants to be overpowered, she wants to be dominated, she wants to lose. Because of hypergamy, there is no rest for men, no love that is secure and unconditional. We always have to perform, we are always on stage, even though the role we usually have to perform is one of relaxed and confident mastery. We read of emperors with ten thousand concubines, who could have any concubine tortured or executed for any reason or no reason at all, and yet still they had woman troubles. But women don’t want to know this and are not going to give you any sympathy for it. The show must go on! Women have to paint their faces, and men have to be brave and manly, so stop whining.

Women need discipline, supervision, authority, and punishment, and when they do not get it they become distressed, tense, disturbed, and act out disruptive and destructive misbehavior to force those around them to take charge. They start fantasying about men who will take charge of them, fantasying about men who are not the men who are letting them run wild.

Because a woman will always test you, and this testing will always irritate and upset you and likely piss you off, it will often happen that she feels, rightly or wrongly, that her testing has damaged the relationship, whereupon she will likely beg for physical punishment, corporal punishment, to expiate her wrongdoing. Or, if actually ditched, cut herself since you are no longer around to do it for her.

Which brings me to the subject of this post. When should you hit your woman with a stick?

Well firstly, Mohammed, not well known as a blue haired feminist, said that if at all possible you should avoid physically punishing your women. Petruchio, Shakespeare’s parody of a manly man, pick up artist, and natural, found other ways to punish Kate. So in general, most of the time, you should not physically punish women. If other measures can work. But this kind of assumes you are in charge and she is tolerably well behaved, assumes that other measures can work.

Obviously, if it is not broke, don’t fix it. You don’t hit a woman who is always sexually available to you, generally obeys your orders, and runs the household in general accordance with your will, even if she sometimes tries your patience with minor shit tests like backseat driving. I never hit my wife. On the other hand, I am pretty scary guy. That I potentially might have hit my wife if she had been badly behaved might well have had something to do with her good behavior. Or maybe she was just naturally a good woman. Unfortunately good women are rare as rubies. I have needed to hit other women quite often.

Obviously you should never punch a woman in the face. Female faces are quite fragile, you can easily kill them with a punch in the face. A light slap in the face is, however fine. That is a light slap. For heavier slaps, obviously you should smack them on the backside, which can take a very heavy slap with no risk of injury.

The best place for a moderate blow with a stick is probably the palm of the hand. For heavier whacks with a stick, backside, upper back and thighs. Hitting them in the lower back can kill them, women are very fragile and need to be punished with care and love.

A light slap in the face, followed by cold stare works great, though it is more in the stare than the slap. Recently I had a dispute with my girlfriend resulting from her denying me sex. I struck her with a stick on the palm of hand twice, after the style of the punishment of Amy in “Little Women”. Worked great, and inspired this post.

Obviously any behavior that is good reason for hitting your woman with a stick is good reason for dumping her. And in our society that is legally loaded against men, the sensible thing to do, the safe thing to do, the easy thing to do, the sane and obvious thing to do, is to dump her rather than beat her.

But in fact every woman prefers a man who would beat her for misbehavior to a man who would dump her for misbehavior, and every woman prefers both the man who would beat her and the man who would dump her, to the nice guy who politely endures her misbehavior. The laws are set up to empower woman, but revealed preference is that they wind up sleeping with men who disempower them, which revealed preference makes total sense in that the telos of sex is not so much reproduction directly as the creation of an environment suitable for raising children, which requires women to be disempowered. If fucking does not disempower her, she does not really like it.

An environment of no fault divorce results in a hell of a lot of stupid divorces in which everyone gets hurt, everyone loses. And at best, or rather the least bad, one partner benefits a little, and the children and the other partner suffer enormously. Which least bad outcome is readily observed to be mighty uncommon, compared to the usual outcome where everyone loses. But if husbands are socially and legally discouraged from beating their wives, you really have to have no fault divorce. What woman want, what everyone wants, is an environment suitable for raising children. Which no fault divorce fails to provide. And if divorce only for fault, then it needs to be socially and legally acceptable for husbands to beat their wives with a stick in moderate and proportionate punishment for misbehavior.

Kevin Rigby Jr. and Hari Ziyad #racist racebaitr.com

We want whiteness banished to history—to an other-space of that which is unknown and impossible. There is no way in which whiteness can move that is freeing or liberating for Black people, so there is no way for white people to free or liberate.

Whiteness is indivisible from white people. To identify as white is to claim the social structure of whiteness, is to always wade in the waters of anti-Blackness. Sociologist Anthony Giddens criticizes our general conceptualization of social structure for having “a tendency to view structure and symbols as somehow alien to the actors who produce, reproduce, and transform these structures and symbols” (The Structure of Sociological Theory, Turner 1991: 523). It is this tendency that so easily clouds our understanding of whiteness and motivates us to embrace white allyship. Black liberation would mean the destruction of whiteness, but whiteness is upheld by all white people. White people cannot escape upholding it.

Constitutive of progressive white people and spaces has always been the question; “How can I, as a white person, work affirmatively in the struggle for Black liberation?” People have engaged this question as a genuine possibility throughout history; of there being a way, however not-yet-understood, for white people to do whiteness well, and, in doing so, aid Black people in getting free. But on a very real level, Black liberation would radically necessitate the refusal of anyone knowing themselves as white. It would mean the actual end of white selves, including the well-meaning white selves seeking the answer to how they can address racism. Black liberation means that white people can only destroy their own whiteness or be destroyed with it. White people cannot exist as white and do anything to address racism, because whiteness in action is racism.

But as much as this argument is a stance against whiteness, it is also a deep affirmation of the totality of Blackness; a declaration that Blackness is enough. More than considering the place or non-place of whiteness, we are concerned with the dream-work of Black folks, that reflexive work we do and have always done trying to better know how to love and be with and in community with ourselves and each other. That work has forever been Black, has never needed whiteness, has best succeeded when we refused whiteness.

There is no answer to the question of what white people can do for Black liberation, but racism veils reality so easily and efficiently. It is anti-reality. It makes the impossible seem not only possible, but a worthwhile endeavor. It truly does keep you, as Toni Morrison said, “from doing your work. It keeps you explaining, over and over again.”

The dilemma of what white people should do to address racism has the same exhausting function of racism, because this dilemma is racism. Because for white people “to do” anything means that whiteness must be centered in a way that would perpetuate its oppressive essentiality.

There is nothing redeeming or redeemable about whiteness—by definition. Only the radical negation of it is helpful or freeing. And it is not enough for us as Black people to encourage or allow white people to try their hand at addressing racism. It is necessary instead to adopt a politic of exclusion. This is to build upon Malcolm X’s claim in The Autobiography of Malcolm X that “Where the really sincere white people have got to do their ‘proving’ of themselves is not among the black victims, but out on the battle lines of where America’s racism really is,” (X, Haley 1964: 383–384) with the vital understanding that Black victims exist everywhere whiteness does.

Therefore, white people should move comfortably in neither Black spaces nor white spaces. Even those who are well-meaning should drive themselves into the ground trying to figure out how to occupy a positive whiteness—because it is impossible. Only in this frenzy, when the sense of order that is critical to whiteness turns to chaos in every place, can the motivation to destroy it overcome the compulsion to reform it.

Contending that whiteness has no value or role in the struggle for Black liberation is an immense claim, but it is a necessary one if we are to be free. The sooner we take seriously that Black people are the best articulators, dreamers and fighters for the future in which we are liberated, the closer we are to the manifestation of freedom. Important to remember is what is made possible for Black people, is made possible for all people. There is no need to consider how whiteness can operate in this. It can’t. It shouldn’t. It won’t in any future in which we are free.

The question of “doing whiteness well” is a question which centers a discussion about Black liberation on the actions of white people. We know that white people maintain hegemonic presences in all institutional forms of power. So, to have a conversation about white people working for Black liberation is to have a conversation predicated on the need for white people to wield institutional power and influence to help Black people. In this context, white people maintain systemic power, and Black people are the recipients of their benevolence. That white people might maintain power in shaping and dreaming up Black liberation is counterrevolutionary. Black liberation must always center on the assault against and defiance of these institutions. “We do not negotiate with terrorists.”1)

Indeed, when we’ve seen white people try to do whiteness well, try to operate their spheres of power and influence well, we’ve also seen the martyrdom of Black women murdered by police to bring white people to reckon with their sins. We’ve seen white men starting campaigns professing the beauty of Black women, only to soon after realize it came hand in hand with the violent claiming of and sense of entitlement to Blackness and Black bodies.

This is all to say, importantly, that whiteness cannot be done well, cannot be done without violence or without being in opposition to Blackness and Black freedom. But the extent of this lies far beyond ashy campaigns and disturbing open letters begging other white people to atone for their sins using the blood of Black women. We must critically engage the possibility that whiteness is only violent to Blackness, is only and can only ever be antithetical to Black liberation.

That we conceptualize whiteness as having a positive operation in the fight for Black liberation is perhaps the single greatest success of the normative functions of a colonialist State. That is to say, we have been successfully hoodwinked to believe that which harms us most vitally might also be able to save us.

“Rather than emerging from a scientific perspective, the notion, ‘race,’ is informed by historical, social, cultural, and political values,” writes Teresa J. Guess in The Social Construction of Whiteness: Racism by Intent, Racism by Consequence, “thus… the concept ‘race’ is based on socially constructed, but socially, and certainly scientifically, outmoded beliefs about the inherent superiority and inferiority of groups based on racial distinctions.” What this means is that race is designed as a hierarchal structure, and whiteness is constructed for no other purpose than to occupy the space of racial superiority. Therefore, to exist and act as white is to reinforce the dominance of whiteness.

Indeed, there would be no white race, no “race” as we know it, if whiteness weren’t positioned in violent dominion. That is the only thing it can do. Whiteness cannot operate in any way that does not first perpetuate white supremacy.

This, of course, is not to say that white people have not been the conduits for necessary Black liberation work. White people surely played integral roles in the freedom rides, abolition movement and the Civil Rights movement. But those roles were meticulously crafted by the toils, lives, death and suffering of Black people. The energy forced through those conduits was painstakingly produced by Black folks. To credit it as anything else is to fall prey to the same tempting veil of racism that motivates us to seek the impossible from our white allies. White people playing a role in liberation work are always merely actors, and the work done with them always done entirely in spite of their whiteness, not because of it.

All ways of addressing Black liberation for which white people are praised is always work Black people—Black poor and working class women, trans, non-binary, disabled and queer people especially—have already done and been doing and have made possible for white people to know.

Even John Brown, the white abolitionist who was executed in 1859 after leading an insurrection against pro-slavery forces, furthered the legacy of the likes of Nat Turner and other Black folks who fought and died for their own freedom before him. We must be sure in recognizing that dying for freedom did not begin with Brown, was not his legacy to create. Though perhaps in death, in a significant sacrifice of self, he and those like him have shed light on what it could mean to give up whiteness for good. When whiteness is so seeped into your being, might giving it up necessitate a threat to one’s safety and existence?

And where do white people exist in safety? In settler colonial societies, positions of power are designated and protected for whiteness. Perhaps the only action white folks can take—barring physical disappearance—in the struggle for Black liberation, for them to successfully put an end to their own whiteness, is the absolute absolving of their places and power. Their literal disappearance from the State and its institutions. It is worth exploring what this would mean for the the persistence of capitalism and the State. Is demanding the destruction of whiteness from the State to demand the destruction of the State, which was created by and has only ever known itself in service to (and in tandem with) whiteness? Which, each together, have only ever worked to maintain capitalism, anti-Blackness, and the disappearance of Indigenous people?

As John Stanfield writes in Theoretical and Ideological Barriers to the Study of Race-Making, “Racism and race-making are part and parcel of the manner by which major industrial, European-descent nation states such as the United States have originated and developed” (Stanfield 1985:161-162). This is how capitalism, anti-Indigeneity and anti-Black racism are intrinsically tied. None can exist in any way that is good for Black people. The presence of each is specifically predicated on Black subjugation.

After whiteness is obliterated, at that point, what the people who now identify as white should do is a giant theoretical exercise: what comes after whiteness? How does someone become not white? That is the legitimate and critical work of many. But our focus is always on Black folks figuring out new and better ways to get free—independent of white people and capitalism and the entirety of western empires. We are confident that our dreamings of freedom can crumble whiteness, capitalism and empire without giving deep consideration to the question of “what do we do with it”. We’re only interested in the work of building past it.

Kevin Rigby Jr. and Hari Ziyad are Black, queer, non-binary dreamers who, in some reality not yet here, are married, gendered or ungendered without colonial restriction, and free.

Cindy #fundie fresh-hope.com

Rick Warren wants us to pray for the Catholic church council as they select a new Pope? Really? What should we pray, that they repent of their apostasy, and come to true saving faith that is found only in repenting of "good works" and placing their faith solely in Christ's finished work upon the Cross?

Vox Day #racist voxday.blogspot.com

I understand that three generations of Americans who have been raised to venerate the Civil Rights movement will find it hard, if not impossible, to grasp that history may ultimately prove to be firmly on the side of those they have always believed to be monsters of bigotry. But if what logic suggests is the most probable outcome indeed comes to pass, I suspect that forced segregation and non-violent ethnic cleansing will be the best case scenario in consequence of the damnable social engineering of the grand multicultural experiment that began in 1965.

Na7Soc #conspiracy reddit.com

[Comment under "Fact"]

Hitler was right and just.

Jewish commissars like Lazar Kaganovich, Genrikh Yagoda (Him and his Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system) and Yezhov had an active Jewish wife making all of their spawn racial Jews. Just Yagoda was responsible for killing at least 10,000,000 people. Their Cheka in total killed upwards of 80+ million people.

Yet FDR recognized the USSR his first year in office and immediately established aid programs to develop the troubled agrarian state into an industrial power which in turn supported Mao in the Chinese Civil War which the League of Nations said "Originated in Moscow" and cabled Roosevelt to ask him to "use his new ally Stalin to stop (the civil war in China).

Franklin Roosevelt actually demanded that Chiang Kai Shek allow Communists in government or lose all US economic and military aid. Chiang had an emergency meeting with his generals who said to commit an all out attack on Mao's forces and sent them on their 1000 mile march into Soviet territory thinking if they were no longer in China that would negate his demand but it just made FDR even more angry. FDR says "There is no threat here in Communism, some of my best friends are Communists" while Dean Acheson at Harvard literally says "There is no inherent obstacle to implementing (Marxist) Socialism in America through a series of New Deals".

The United States had it's first Communist President under Franklin Roosevelt. All of the damn near a hundred new bureaucracies he created were hotbeds of Communist recruitment, infiltration, and assignment. The 67th Congressional Investigation discovered that the Institute of Pacific Relations was a hotbed for communist infiltration, sending Communist Jews like Solomon Adler to back up Harry Dexter White and Henry Morgenthau with their plan to crush Chiang's economy by illegally fixing the price of gold and silver which they later had to legalize. Solomon Adler used US Embassies to pass out propaganda to the Chinese calling Chiang a "Dictator for not allowing ALL Chinese representation in government" (Denying Communists) and the only way to fix it is to side with Mao against Chiang and secure US Economic/Military aid again.

The media also didn't report it when Mao's bandits attacked Japanese controlled Manchuria (which was a big deal because without their mainland assets Japan would have to go back to being third world again unable to industrialize, so they had an emergency military meeting and decided that Chiang was not capable of dealing with the Communists and since he was refusing Japanese help since he saw that as the first step to China becoming a vassal of Japan they would deal with the Communists themselves.

Western media portrayed it as Japanese Imperialism/Expansionism and totally neglected to mention the Soviet troop/tank presence in China supporting Mao.

And so this is why they had to invent the holocaust in order to create the false argument that we had to ally with Stalin since he is the "lesser of evils. It was clear that we were not fighting a just war and Britain had to invent what their Ministry of Intelligence called "Atrocity propaganda. Here is their letter to the Church and BBC demanding that they act convincing and passionate pushing these lies

Sir, I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter: It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us. But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for. We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia and Bessarabia only recently. We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country. We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them — and ourselves — from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject. Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity propaganda directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of the “Corpse Factory,” and the “Mutilated Belgian Babies,” and the “Crucified Canadians.” Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry. Your expression of belief in such may convince others. I am, Sir, Your obedient servant, (signed) H. HEWET, ASSISTANT SECRETARY The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to this communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons.

This letter is reproduced in a 1958 book entitled Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland by Edward J. Rozek, the image above is captured from the first edition (pages 209-210).

You can learn more about this greasy British action and the history behind it here

Gally #racist eivindberge.blogspot.no

What follows is a guest post by a man who has recently joined the Men's Rights Movement after a run-in with one of the laws we fight to abolish because it constitutes an evil criminalization of male sexuality. His experience also highlights the importance of the emerging alliance between the MRA and MAP communities. We are in this together, because while most men are not primarily attracted to minors, most men are certainly attracted to minors to some extent well under the age of consent, down to and including what is sometimes called hebephilia. And it is just common human decency to oppose bad laws and persecution of pedophiles just for existing. Or should be.

My name is Gally.

I take this online handle in homage of "the greatest warrior who has ever lived," "Battle Angel Alita" (Yoko von der Rasierklinge), whose story of epic struggles with coming to terms with her past, understanding herself, and accepting what she is and also what she is not, has provided me with more inspiration than any other story I have ever read, real or fictional. It is a great manga, better even than Evangelion in my opinion, and for those interested you can find it here: https://www.mangareader.net/battle-angel-alita-last-order.

As such, I have a few reflections that I would like to share with you. First a disclaimer though: I am a minor-attracted person and most would consider me a pedophile. Although that is technically inaccurate; pedophiles are attracted to pre-pubescent children and I am attracted to pubescent minors, so the more precise term would be "hebephile," but in lieu of distinguishing the term "Minor Attracted Person" (MAP) is recommended.

So, if this upsets or triggers you, you are welcome to not read any further, but I would respectfully request that if you chose to comment, you do so after having read through what I have to say.
I would like to add though, that MAPs basically either think that contact with minors is okay or they don't think contact with minors is okay, and I'm mostly in the latter camp as I have found that personally it's hard for me to hide that I like somebody, and therefore I advice other MAPs to also not get too socially involved with minors that they find themselves having an attraction to, given that it might lead to contact that is too intimate and/or age-inappropriate.

So please consider that people can be and act sensibly and responsibly -- in fact, most people do act responsibly and considerately regardless of sexual orientation, kinks, or mere fantasies, fetishes, or paraphilias.

That aside, in a related issue it has been said that we are what we do, but I would argue that we are also information.

The DNA in all the cells in our body (only ten percent of which are actually human; 90% of "our" cells are bacteria without which we would be unable to digest carbohydrate-based food such as proteins, but only fat and sugar), if unraveled to a string, would reach to Pluto and back. Eleven times. The DNA of all human beings currently alive on our planet Earth could encircle the Milky Way (which is 130,000 light-years in diameter) 20 times over. The combinations of any one pairing of a sperm cell and an egg holds the potential of randomly mixing 43 chromosomes -- one half from the sperm, the other half from the egg -- in two to the power of 43 different ways (2^43).

The number of humans who have ever lived on our planet is thought to be only about 20 billion (counting from the last 10 million years of Homo sapiens thought to be a genetically distinct species), meaning that just by chromosomal pairing alone, only 1/3500-part of what we as a species, what humans are, has ever surfaced from the vast sea of potential humans that can be brought into existence.

The real number may be incalculable, considering that recent research has revealed that our DNA is actually not static, set from birth to death, but changes according to our environment -- and possibly even according to our experiences, influenced by brain chemistry -- our mood, whether we are happy or depressed, at peace or subjected to violence, if we experience freedom or oppression.

What was once thought to be mostly "junk DNA" may not be so after all, but like medical conditions such as heart disease, does not always manifest itself at all times but could be triggered by unknown, hitherto unpredictable and unimaginable combinations of events.

No longitudinal studies have been carried out on this as of yet, but as DNA sequencing becomes exponentially cheaper, we might discover connections between the environment and our evolutionary process that could be as shocking to science as the theory of evolution once was.

To quote a clip from the computer game Alpha Centauri (Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri Secret Project: The Human Genome Project):
"To map the very stuff of life; to look into the genetic mirror and watch a million generations march past. That, friends, is both our curse and our proudest achievement. For it is in reaching to our beginnings that we begin to learn who we truly are."
Genetic analysis (comparison of actual mutations to known rate of mutation of male and female chromosomes) has already revealed that throughout human history, only half of males have succeeded in reproducing, whilst almost all females have. Which, one could argue, means that evolution -- and thus, progress -- is almost exclusively a male endeavor. Which also explains why males have more variation -- there are more male geniuses than female geniuses, and more males who never find a mating partner (1/3 of all men in Norway) than females who never find a mating partner (1/6 of all females in Norway).

We are information above all, and there is nothing that is more Holy of Holies than Knowledge, for only knowledge can bring understanding, and only understanding can create with intent -- with a goal in mind. Be that evil, to gain power over the weak, or good, to bestow powers upon them.
To quote the science-fiction author Peter Watts:
Evolution has no foresight. Complex machinery develops its own agendas. Brains — cheat. Feedback loops evolve to promote stable heartbeats and then stumble upon the temptation of rhythm and music. The rush evoked by fractal imagery, the algorithms used for habitat selection, metastasize into art. Thrills that once had to be earned in increments of fitness can now be had from pointless introspection. Aesthetics rise unbidden from a trillion dopamine receptors, and the system moves beyond modeling the organism. It begins to model the very process of modeling. It consumes evermore computational resources, bogs itself down with endless recursion and irrelevant simulations. Like the parasitic DNA that accretes in every natural genome, it persists and proliferates and produces nothing but itself. Metaprocesses bloom like cancer, and awaken, and call themselves I.
Our interactions shape others, as theirs in turn also shape us.

Our identities, therefore, are in constant flux, as noted by many religions -- from the Bible's "Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another" to Buddhism's reflections on the transitory nature of man, to the Native American story of the struggle between the "good" wolf and the "bad" wolf that lives inside of our hearts, and how feeding the "good wolf" that is cultivating constructive and positive habits and behavior is recommended if you want him to win the struggle with the "bad wolf."

My point being, behavior is changeable, we are creatures of habit, we can change and we can improve ourselves and the lives of others and even the course of history by our participation in it.

We can learn from our mistakes, and for many this is the primary way of learning -- trying, failing, and improving -- but we cannot learn from mistakes that we are not able to make -- or that we are not allowed to make, as we fear an ever-watching, ominous presence of mass surveillance by people whose only intentions is to punish and harm us.

We can do good towards one another. But only if we understand the difference between good and bad. And we can seek peaceful, ethical solutions to problems that in the past may have seemed almost intractable, impossible to solve. We can think; not just feel. We can understand -- or at least accept -- reality as it is, not just condemn others, and by doing so, through proxy curse our common humanity. We can be generous; not just selfish. We can seek what is best for others, not just what we desire.
And we can have progress. Real, tangible, measurable progress, social growth, care for the weak and the confused and even for those with little self-control or ability to reflect upon consequences.

One of the oldest recorded stories is that of the "Fall from Grace," or as it is also called, the "Original Sin." Woman rebelled against a meaningless command by a dictatorial authority, allied with Man, and in the story it is said that God himself admitted that now they had both "become like God, knowing good and evil" -- by gaining experience-based knowledge of the difference between Good and Evil, through rejection of a meaningless "evil" as the eating of a piece of fruit from a particular tree was.

The price paid was to be cast out, and living a life of hardships and struggles.

A high price, that not many are willing to pay, but instead bend their knee and accept commandments to not think for oneself, but obey unquestioningly, even to meaningless absurdities.

Right now the world is in a dire state.

The level of freedom and independence of the press has never been lower, at the same time as we are manipulated by fake news, politically controlled propaganda, and an almost insane denial of the truth and a blatantly open disregard for empirically provable, reproducible, peer-reviewable scientific facts. Surveillance equipment is exported from western nations to repressive regimes all over the world, and Human Rights that were introduced after the second world war are being gradually rolled back for carefully selected minorities.

The ones whom it is easy to portray as evil.

As sick.

As disgusting.

As dangerous.

As abominations that are inhuman and must be purged, or locked away for as long as possible, as a way to frighten others not to commit similar crimes, rather than be offered any meaningful preventative therapy or harmless outlets.

People like me, whose crime is being different in that I am more attracted to teenagers than to women my own age, and whose rights to the liberal progress that other minorities have enjoyed to the betterment of society in general (such as homosexuals and transgenders), are being denied.

Many who experience such a degree of hatred, kill themselves -- especially young pedophiles, who would rather die than ever risk harming a child.

Others suffer through recurring depression, a feeling of alienation from society, despair and fear, and engage in substance abuse.

And then there are those whom the authorities succeed in convincing that they are evil, not in control of themselves, sick and destined to commit crimes sooner or later, and who chose to do so, fulfilling the only role that society prescribes for them.

They -- we minor-attracted people -- are being used as a spearhead to drive through changes in our societies that makes the rule of law become less based on objective and established principles, but more on subjective abuses of power. The argument being, exceptions must be made to the way the law is practiced, and one must punish harder because the current harsh punishment is clearly not working and therefore, the "logic" goes, it isn't harsh enough, because of course punishment -- in the eyes of those who see punishment as preferable -- is the only thing that helps.

They say that "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail", and also that "if you truly believe you can compensate for incompetence by increasing your efforts, there is no end to what you cannot do."

In the same vein, "Military Idiocy" is defined as "It didn't work, so we need to do more of it," and "Police Idiocy" isn't much different: "It doesn't work, so we need to continue doing it."

So with their incompetence the only solutions they understand are punitive, violent, cruel and sociopathically sadistic, and as a result they are in the process of causing changes that make governance of the people be more about control under the threat of punishment, than about preventative measures through guidance, acceptance, and inclusiveness. Changes that alienate us from each other, that make us wary of speaking our minds, thinking our independent thoughts and questioning others', and make us fear expressing ourselves in ways that we are uncertain could be used against us at some point in time.

Changes that are even measurable in how far from home children have been allowed to roam, as documented at http://freerangekids.com/. "Stranger danger" is a divisive tactic that splits local communities, and Divide & Conquer is the oldest strategy in the book. Make people fear their neighbors, and they will never be able to cooperate sufficiently to protest against exploitation.

In addition, surveillance makes everybody who is not rich enough to not have to work or obtain an education and build a career in cooperation with others too concerned with their employer's reputation and angsty about making mistakes, which makes it harder for the 99% of the population who are not born rich to ever learn from their mistakes and understand elementary facts of life such as that we cannot just eat cake if we do not have bread, and thus gain life experiences that makes us compassionate of others, tolerant, forgiving, and wise.

In comparison, the one percent who are born filthy rich can write books like Chicks O'hoi where they describe how they have an entire suitcase full of sex toys and love having their asshole rimmed and how their jaw is almost cramped from sucking dick for so long. The author of that book is anonymous, by the way, but let's just say I have a very strong suspicion I believe I know who she is. And if she is reading this: stylometric analysis revealed that J.K. Rowling was the author of a book she didn't want people to know she wrote, and your entire Instagram-account has been downloaded and I have no problems finding the programs that can do such an analysis.

The ignorance of the rich -- and their self-satisfaction from being "better" than others through having more money -- has always been a great comfort for the state, since if they really understood how others suffered from hardships that they themselves have never experienced, they could have made meaningful change towards and actually contributed to the betterment of society.

For the other 99% who are not as docile and indolent due to being spoilt rotten, surveillance is in effect a way for governments to be dumbing down the people, make them fearful and obedient, and above all: not protest against injustices and abuses of power. Lest our own lives comes under scrutiny, and every word we have ever written is combed through and analyzed, taken out of context or misrepresented, and used against us.

The plan is well underway to turn human beings back from free citizens with rights, to serfs who are under the control of whatever local official is effectively lording his power to define what "law" means and whom it applies to, under his personal jurisdiction.

The police and the military welcome this return to serfdom, as it caters to their psychopathic delusions of grandeur and dreams of powers over even the thoughts and feelings of others.

I recently had the pleasure of attending such a display of police psychopathy, as I was accused of downloading child pornography, what the police wants to define as "documentation of sexual abuse against children," while including cartoons, written stories, and defines "children" to include those over the legal age of consent.

One thing even the police managed to testify truthfully was that the vast, vast majority of the material in my possession involved teenagers posing in the nude. Pictures produced by a professional photo model studio, with the parents' consent, as documented at https://wikileaks.org/wiki/An_insight_into_child_porn.

In other words, at the very lowest level of what the law considers child pornography, and in my personal opinion very comparable to mere nudism -- which is not now, nor ever can, be made illegal.

Unless, of course, we adopt standards for morals that are applied in countries which have been the most reluctant to adopt human rights, to the point of actively working against their acceptance in their particular region of the world -- where workers are exploited as slaves and people in practice have no rights or protection under the law.

In the Western world, we have enjoyed human rights because we have been needed as workers in industry and production of commercial goods, and our labor and creativity has caused an economic growth of 3-4% annually since public education was instituted in Great Britain in 1876.

This is changing with the coming of the second machine age, where human cognitive labor is gradually being replaced by machines.

We are becoming less needed, and people without jobs are said to "have the Devil's idle hands," as they have time to think about the crimes, incompetence, and illegitimacy of those in power.

And question why we allow them to rule over us in all things, instead of being allowed to make decisions for ourselves.

Why some small group of people decide that our country (Norway) should support a war halfway across the world, why we should be subjected to decisions made by other countries (The EU, which we are not a part of but still subjected to), why our resources should be exploited at our loss (our country's hydropower generation exported at European market price), why we should invest in activities with no certain profitability (opening up of polar-circle oil fields) that contribute to environmental degradation (at least for the fisheries there and in turn the local communities).

It is easy to make people obey other, incompetent people in power, and accept their illegitimate rule.
Just tell them you are the only ones who can protect them from monsters.

Find some "useful Jews" that you can pretend are the monsters.

Pick out the worst of those who commit crimes, and relentlessly proclaim that they are representative of all of them, then crank up the propaganda and claim that you are now finding it to be even worse than what the public has been told in the past.

Describe the hideous crimes of the extremely few in as graphic, gory, and tabloid detail as possible. Do not encourage reflection by mentioning numbers such as how many percent of men are attracted to pubescent teenagers, and yet never do any harm.

Fuel the outrage and ride the waves of the moral panic. When people panic, they lose the ability to carefully think things through in a calm and rational manner.

And people will obey.

Because you will have convinced them that you are their Savior.

While in reality, behind the scenes a surveillance apparatus is being created that will put an end to social growth, destroy the middle class, and end human progress as we have known it.

A totalitarian police state is emerging, ruled by psychopaths and the most infantile, ignorant, incompetent, imbecilic, inept, insular, and spoilt rotten selfish rich people, positioning themselves to return society to a state of aristocracy and serfs, and we are letting it happen because in reality, we don't really care about the rights of others as long as we can have shiny things to play with.

How blind we have become. And how childish.

I am Gally.

I am a panzerkunstler.

I was born on the 6th of March, 2017, as that was when I decided to set my foot upon this battlefield. I did that with the full knowledge and acceptance that nobody voluntarily goes to war, expecting a long, prosperous, or happy life.

I still chose.

It has now been a year; I have met the Enemy, and He has taught me much.

I have risen from a mere "Lehrling" to now just recently, becoming a "Krieger" (http://battleangel.wikia.com/wiki/Panzer_Kunst).

I am now officially at war.

I do not expect my life to be a happy one.

Or long.

But I decided of my own free will, to join this battle, after hearing a story.

You can find it yourself, if you go look for it.

At the time, I used the handle "LytaHall" on quora.com.

The story was told to me by a retired police investigator, who for twenty years had specialized in cases involving the sexual abuse of children.

He told me of a man who had lured a ten-year-old girl from the neighborhood into his bedroom, where apparently he had made inappropriate advances that had been rejected, and due to the harsh punishments -- this was in the US -- he killed the girl out of desperation that she would tell on him.

I have never in my life experienced anything like what I experienced when I realized what an ABYSS of helplessness and powerlessness I was standing in front. There was nothing I could do, or say, that would change that innocent child's death, the investigator was retired and was only interested in idle conversation, the police are not in themselves drivers for policy or social changes, and if the development of the kind of harsh punishments for such crimes reach Norway, motivated by political posturing and moralistic-based virtue signaling, instead of us looking to nations such as Germany with their successful "Dunkelfeld" program, then that is going to happen in Norway too.

I can change that.

I can read books, I can argue the case for offering free mental health care and harmless outlets before somebody commits a crime, rather than merely waiting for them to do something wrong and then punish them afterwards.

And I am willing to do so.

Even at the cost of my own happiness and health.

Because I wish to do good.

I wish to help make this world a better place, and I am smart and knowledgeable enough to make a difference.

My enemy has taught me much.

I am still learning.

But although I may make mistakes, the true sign of a warrior is not to never suffer defeat, and not to never strike a blow that misses, but to keep on fighting, and to get up again after being defeated.
And to grow stronger.

I am Gally.

I am a panzerkunstler, klasse Krieger.

And I shall now use what I have left of my life to try my very best to prevent the kind of abominable, perverted criminal "justice" system that they have in America (Filling Up Prisons Without Fighting Crime: Mark Kleiman on America's Criminal Justice System), from reaching Norway.

Because looking at the numbers, in the US 13 times more children are killed than in Germany (http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1658-5-ways-were-making-pedophilia-worse.html), and part of that is undoubtedly that "two can keep a secret, if one of them is dead."

To quote parts of the philosophy of panzerkunst:
Panzer Kunst also provides a definite tactical advantage, since it gives its user the ability to analyze an opponent's fighting style and to retaliate accordingly. Therefore, a Künstler will rarely be defeated in a second combat with a given enemy. Künstlers also seem to have been imbued with a sense of fanaticism and willingness to sacrifice themselves if necessary to carry out a mission.
I am Gally.

And I am now (and until my death) at WAR.

Defiance. Because my Conscience does not allow me to stand idly by, as People in Power hurts others for their Personal Careers (Two Steps From Hell - Freedom Fighters).

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

You'll never hear Pat Robertson, Ray Comfort, nor Kirk Cameron speak evil against the hellish Catholic religion. Catholics believe in being born-again. Did you know that? Albeit, their understanding of the term is totally unbiblical, flawed, and a false gospel. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are publicly silent about Catholicism. I'm not. The Catholic Church is straight from Hell, and you're going to Hell if you think keeping sacraments, getting wet in a baptistery, or confessing your sins to some heathen priest saturated with sins himself will get you into Heaven when you die!

I don't condemn anyone, for the Bible condemns all mankind as guilty sinners (Romans 3:19; 14:10). The Devil is working relentlessly to bring damnable heresies into our churches, to corrupt people's minds and lead them into apostasy away from the Lord. I hate all modern Bible versions for that very reason. Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort use corrupt Bible versions, so it's not surprising that their doctrines are also corrupt. Corrupt Bibles lead to corrupt teachings, which leads to corrupt living, and eventually Hell if that person doesn't get born-again!

Kirk Cameron is without question an awesome actor and has starred in some amazing movies, like Fireproof. But the bigger picture is that all these ecumenical ministers and celebrities turned Christian, are supportive of the New World Order's agenda to unite the world's various religions into one. By remaining silent about the evils of the Catholic religion, they are all part of the problem. Kirk Cameron won't criticize the Pope nor the Catholic religion, which is blatantly a false religion one billion strong. Everyone is afraid to speak out against the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict XVI said in 2005 that people can be saved even without having any Biblical faith. It's sad, but true, in my opinion Ray Comfort is just trying to make a living, having found his niche in the religious world; but they won't tell the real truth, i.e., that Catholics are all going to Hell in their unbelief.

In The Evidence Bible, Ray Comfort says that there are millions of unsaved people amongst Catholics and Protestants. The false implication is that some Catholics are saved within the Catholic religion. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are weak-kneed when it comes to standing up against the almighty Catholic religion. You don't have to wonder where I stand... the Catholic Church is Satanic!!!

Lest he should offend any Catholics, on pg. 1358 Ray Comfort states...

“There are millions of Catholics and Protestants who have never been born again and need to hear the gospel”

SOURCE: THE EVIDENCE BIBLE, by Ray Comfort, pg. 1358; 2003, Bridge-Logos Publishers, Orlando, Florida

Although that is a true statement by Mr. Comfort, the fact of the matter is that Catholics by doctrine are ALL going straight to Hell, because they are trusting upon a works-based salvation (i.e., self-righteousness). In sharp contrast, most Protestant churches hold to a Free Grace view of the Gospel. I just don't understand why, or how, Ray Comfort would bring Protestant believers down to the same level as the damnable Catholic religion. The fact of the matter is that there are millions of saved Protestants; but there are NO SAVED CATHOLICS if they are genuine Catholics.

Why doesn't Ray Comfort speak the truth... there are over ONE BILLION unsaved Catholics in the world!!!

Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron Use Modern Corrupt Bibles

Romans 10:9 in the New International Version (NIV) deceitfully teaches the hellish doctrine of Lordship Salvation. Instead of teaching “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus”; the NIV says you have to “confess Jesus is Lord” to be saved. Blasphemy! So you see, the Bible that you are using means everything. The NIV preaches an entirely different Gospel than the inspired King James Bible does. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are using corrupted Bibles, as are John MacArthur, Max Lucado, Rick Warren, Pat Robertson, Billy Graham and all the other apostates and enemies of God today.

My goal is not to be unkind against Mr. Cameron. I did not publish this article to attack him on a personal level. I love everywhere, including Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron; but I love Jesus first and foremost and I must expose false prophets who corrupt the Gospel message. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron teach the heresy of Lordship Salvation. Cameron promotes John MacArthur's Study Bible on his website, Mr. Lordship Salvation himself. MacArthur is an unsaved Modernist.

The common denominator between all these men are that they all use modern corrupted versions of the Bible. I only trust and use the precious, preserved, and inspired King James Bible. They all use either the hellish New International Version [NIV] or the demonic New King James Bible [NKJB], which are BOTH based upon the heretical Greek text of Westcott and Hort (upon which the Jehovah's Witnesses demonic cult also base their New World Translation). The truth is in plain site if you want it. Most people don't want THE TRUTH.

Most of the false prophets teaching the heresy of Lordship Salvation are from California (John Mac Arthur, Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron, Jack Chick, et cetera). California is a hotbed of false prophets! Lordship Salvation is the teaching that a person must stop living in sin to be saved. In Jack Chick's case, he's a bit more subtle, teaching that it's not enough to admit one's sinnership to be saved; but a person must also be willing to stop living in sin to be saved. These are all damnable heresies that destroy the gift of God. You don't give up anything to be saved; Jesus gave up everything to pay for our sins. Jesus came into the world to SAVE SINNERS! If you want to be saved, then repent toward God by placing your faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, to forgive your sins. It's that simple. God will take care of the rest from there.

The issue is not about Kirk Cameron; but rather, the corrupt Bibles, corrupt religious teachers, corrupt plans of salvation, corrupt organizations, corrupt televangelists, corrupt Contemporary Christian Music [CCM] singers... as with most religious people today, kindly but truthfully said, Kirk Cameron is CORRUPTED!

W. F. Price #fundie web.archive.org

Given my current dilemma, which is pretty run-of-the-mill for a lot of fathers today, I thought a bit about how it relates to The Spearhead and its existence. On some reflection, it’s pretty clear to me that I never would have thought to start a site like this if I hadn’t been a father. It’s a direct result of a deep need and desire to be a father to my children.

But in addition, it’s also a result of the circumstances that were created when I did my best to create a life that would allow me to be a father to my children, despite all the roadblocks put up by the state, individual feminists, groups of feminists (they operate in packs, like hyenas), and the anti-family elite class. If I’d acted in my own and the system’s best interests, I would have forgotten about my children, and probably would be in a much more comfortable situation today. There is no blame whatsoever attached to men who totally ignore their children, so long as they pay the minimum fees. “Good men,” according to the system, are those who substitute a check for fatherhood.

Throwing a ball with your son, keeping an eye on the boys chasing your daughter and teaching your children are all meaningless to the state. What you are is a human resource — not a father. This is what I’ve rebelled against. It’s what has given me the psychological motivation to keep the site running.

A lot of this is no doubt personal. My father wasn’t there for me when I needed him, and that had pretty dire consequences for me. I don’t want that to happen to my children, so I struggle on, despite all the hatred from feminists, who, when it comes down to it, just want to fuck and get paid for it. That’s really all feminism comes down to: provision and protection for sex. It’s so deeply ingrained in primate psychology that it won’t change in a million generations. Children’s interests have nothing to do with it. Feminists are only the prostitute lobby writ large.

If I am to attach an honest epithet to this site and my efforts, I would have to call it a patriarchal site. I believe patriarchy is the one family system that works best in sum for all involved. It’s best for almost all children, for most women, and most men. For certain elite and standout specimens of both sexes it involves some sacrifices. It is not the best deal for extraordinarily attractive men or women, who can live a charmed life without taking on the responsibility of patriarchy. But why should they have priority over the rest of humanity? Does their pleasure and privilege raise the mean?

It does not, and this is the moral basis for patriarchy as a system for organizing families. If a few extremely attractive or powerful people can benefit, while the vast middle is dismantled, then a chasm develops between classes, and ultimately this is unsustainable for cohesive society. Sure, we want people to be more attractive on average, but giving all the power to the few extraordinarily attractive works in the opposite direction due to constraints on human female fertility and the non-selective nature of elite male sexuality (e.g. Arnold Schwarzenegger). What it does is limit reproduction in the middle and encourage low-investment r-selection in the hopeless lower class, which always outnumbers elites. We then become a disorderly society of a few aristocrats atop a vast mass of proles.

So, I think it’s time to come right out and say that The Spearhead is not equalist, nor does it support “reinvention” of traditional sex roles, but rather is committed to restoring patriarchy as a just, family-centered principle of social organization. And not the despotic form of patriarchy that prevails in slave societies, but rather a more democratic form in which men are held accountable to one another, and the law. It is the ancestral Western model, and it’s what made Western peoples strong, not to mention East Asians, Hindus, Jews and Muslims, who organized their societies on a similar basis, with varying degrees of success. The West prevailed in the 19th and 20th centuries not because of its racial, but rather its social superiority, which was closer at the time to the democratic patriarchal ideal than any other part of the world. Sadly, that has been lost, hence our Western decline.

The restoration of patriarchy should be the long-term goal of all righteous men who care about their families and people. It is the most just, humane and progressive form of social organization known to man. It’s the only system worth fighting and dying for, and that’s why it will ultimately prevail.

Dominic Bnonn Tennan #fundie bnonn.com

God would be quite unfair to save anyone.

Our intuition that God should save all people rather than just some is based in our false but natural feeling that all people deserve saving. Even after we are converted and know better, we still tend to think of people as basically good when of course they are the opposite. But once we look at human beings from God’s perspective instead of our own, we realize that he ought to punish us all in hell forever. He ought not let a single one of us into heaven. That’s why it’s called the “gospel of grace”: grace is undeserved favor.

In other words, not a single person ever has any claim whatsoever on God’s salvation. If God decides to give it to some people, he is being gratuitously kind to them. He is not giving them what they deserve. Commensurately, his failing to be gratuitously kind to other people is not a defect or imperfection on his part. He has utterly no obligation to those he didn’t pick for salvation—because they have utterly no basis to expect his favor. He is not unfair to give them what they deserve—hell—he is, in fact, perfectly fair.

TheNewKnightsTemplar #fundie deviantart.com

Hello and greetings from 2019. I am happy you have come upon this time capsule and have very deep hopes that humanity has survived and this is not being read by a caterpillar, if it IS, I guess it will eventually evolve into a human being someday, anyway. I know, right?

Our current President Donald Trump has made terrific strides in making American great again, but the only way the Left will acknowledge this is by trying to give Obama the credit. Trump DOES make a few blunders, but when we point out that President Obama made them as well, the Left blames President Trump for President Obama’s mistakes. In fact, the Left blames President Trump for everything. And if you think the Left hates the President, you should see how bizarre they get when they see a red hat.

The Democratic Left, which is pretty much all of the Democratic Party, in order to push their agenda, has been allowed to make up words, phrases, and concepts in this day and age. For instance, they say “toxic masculinity” needs to stop, we can’t have “boys being boys”, you know, like shooting guns or anything, but that is merely because the feminists don’t want girls being girls, they want girls being boys so they can shoot guns, even though they could very easily shoot guns being girls. It is somewhat like The Boy Scouts of America but with girls included, although I don’t think the Girl Scouts of America let Boy Scouts enter. But, I’m optimistic, both sexes are starting to take high school showers together in Florida.

In fact, according to the Left, girls CAN be boys all they have to do is to FEEL like a boy, and if a boy feels like a girl, he can be a girl and it is okay because that isn’t toxic masculinity it is “non-toxic masculinity” which is actually feminine masculinity. I know, right? How can all of this possibly be? Simple--Because gender is a social construct but you are born that way. And if someone feels like the opposite sex, you have to call them by “zip” or “zot” or something like that; or it is considered violence and even though you didn’t know they felt like the opposite sex or forgot to ask, they can kill you. And homosexuality is okay because the sex they have isn’t hurting anyone, but you are deranged as hell (maybe not by next week), if you have sex with the dead, even though THAT really isn’t hurting anyone either.

And socialism is the latest and greatest thing, even though it has been around as long as dirt. But it will work this time, even though it has never ever worked in the past; because it is DEMOCRATIC Socialism. And the difference is ... actually there IS no difference but who cares because things will be free! Free health care and college and vehicles and cell phones and we might as well throw in meals until things collapse and there is no more food. We will still have to work, though. I know, right?

And abortion is perfectly okay because a woman has a right to do what she wants with her body, although it ISN’T her body because it has its own DNA. And it isn’t alive although it has a heartbeat. And it isn’t her body after the baby is born, either, but that doesn’t matter as long as we keep the mother’s mental health intact. And the best WAY to keep the mother’s mental health intact is to kill her infant.

And infanticide is something Islamic extremists have been known to do, but we can’t say that out loud or we are an Islamophobe. Which actually doesn’t mean in inordinate fear of Islam anymore, it has been changed to mean “hater” of all and everything Islam and sometimes more than that. And note; we are still CALLING the baby an infant because the Left hasn’t, as of yet, had the chance to come up with a stigma-lessening euphemism like “external cellular expiration” or for the more socially elite, “Baby B Gone”. We can even revive the child and have a nice, extremely short and pressure-prone discussion with the already overwhelmed mother, so that if she does have regrets after the slaughter, which she will, she has been involved in the decision because it is all about “choice”. However, choice still means two or more options, but if you express opinions favoring THE OTHER option besides killing, you’re a racist. I am not really sure why you are a racist; almost everyone who does anything anymore is a racist, so I guess it just got included in the name of “diversity” and “love”. Maybe not love.

If this is all confusing for you, I have to admit is rather the same for most of us on the RIGHT, what comforts me is that we live in a tolerant society, that is unless you are Christian or Jewish, and then you don’t count, especially if you refuse to make certain kinds of wedding cakes.

Besides much controversy these days about war, we have a rather perplexing breed of individuals we call SJW’s or “Social Justice Warriors”. They don’t really DO anything or WEAR any ARMOR, they just lay in wait for people to say something offensive, which is pretty much everything they hear. These warriors believe in “all things civil” especially good productive discussion, as long as they get to scream and you don’t get to say anything at all. That is, unless you agree with them, and then you can all hold hands and go to a designated area called a “safe space”. Oddly enough, although you might think these spaces were designed for preschoolers, they are actually most prominent on our college campuses these days. They are even in the internet encyclopedia called Wikipedia, which is a rather “strange bird” in itself because anyone can add anything to it in the name of collaboration, so it changes a lot. Sometimes these SJW’s turn into a fantasy creature called a troll, but it amounts to the same thing, screaming and then running off to a safe space.

Our Mainstream Media are much the same as the SJW’s but we still have freedom of speech, unless you post anything conservative on certain social platforms like Facebook and YouTube and Twitter and a few others. But they apologize for taking things down, usually; some of the time; if they get caught; and they have been working on new algorithms and training their staff to not be so sensitive for the last decade or so, so things are looking promising. Our search engines like Google aren’t very reliable either, but who needs an honest search engine?

I hope this has cleared up what 2019 is like at the time of burying this time capsule. I am sure you wish you had science and history records, but they were all destroyed by the Left and replaced with pornography.

An SJW just told me to tell you to write when you can. I know, right?

Pamela Rae Schuffert #fundie #conspiracy #crackpot americanholocaustcoming.blogspot.com

“AND I SAW THE SOULS OF THEM BEHEADED FOR THE WITNESS OF JESUS AND THE WORD OF GOD..."
-From Revelation 20:4
WHY ARE THERE CONTINUING REPORTS OF MODERN GUILLOTINES CONSTANTLY RESURFACING ACROSS AMERICA?
As one continues to read this particular verse, Revelation 20:4, it becomes clear that it is referring specifically to those Christians to be beheaded under the an antichrist satanic world globalist government of Revelation 13, who will refuse the cashless 666 society and refuse worship of the false "god" of the NWO which is in reality LUCIFER, as former satanists admitted to me.
I can never forget praying with another Christian prayer warrior one night when the divine Holy Spirit spoke to us clearly and said, "I am pouring out MY SPIRIT upon my people in America now, because without His power, you will not be able to make it with what is coming to your nation!"
This was in 1976. Stunned, I asked, "Father God. What is coming to our nation?" He replied, " My child, if I were to show you now what is coming to your nation,you would NOT BE ABLE TO BEAR IT." Shock and silence as I pondered those heavy words.
And the next day, my prayer partner exclaimed, "you won’t BELIEVE what God showed me after we asked Him to show us what is coming! He gave me a VISION of Christians arrested and lined up in front of modern guillotines, to be BEHEADED FOR THEIR FAITH!"
I am ashamed now to admit I laughed within when I first heard this. Because now, many years later, I know through several decades of in-depth research that THE MODERN MILITARY GUILLOTINES ARE A GRIM REALITY OF THINGS TO COME.
Both intelligence and military sources have admitted to me during numerous interviews that highly covert training programs for select Army platoons have been taking place in US Army bases such as Fort Lewis, Fort Benning, Fort Hood. Fort Bragg and others.
I personally interviewed Staff Sergeant Donnie Boysel of Fort Lewis, Washington, while he was in full uniform and traveling home on leave. Previously warned by another military source stationed at Fort Lewis, that there was a covert guillotine training program going on there, I confronted Boysel that day.
He almost fell on the floor with shock when I mentioned this!
"How do you know about the guillotines at Fort Lewis? This is highly classified information! In fact, when I return from leave, my job will be to train the men in my platoon (64) in how to operate them, using practice dummies.The building is partly underground and we can't even bring cell phones inside because they don't want photos taken of the guillotines..."
I asked him if he was a Christian and he replied yes.I then informed him that the guillotines would be heavily used under martial when they begin to arrest Christians under martial law as " NWO resisters."
I said, "Donnie, they will drag these Christians before the guillotines and demand they RENOUNCE THEIR FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST and join the NWO...or be BEHEADED FOR THEIR FAITH. Now can you train your men to behead people...?"
He was silent as he thought about the implications of what I shared. He looked at me and said,"My superiors never told me they would be used like this! No...I can never train my men to do this now! I will tell them...we are not going along with this martial law agenda....I am calling my men immediately..."
We parted soon after this discussion of several hours.You can read my full interview with him in my 2009 reports on my website, AmericanHolocaustComing.blogspot.com. And of course a highly censored/controlled mainstream news media will never tell the American people the disturbing truth about this dark secret and hidden agenda.
I have written much more besides on my website about these interviews.Truck drivers I have personally interviewed across America have admitted to me that they have hauled loads of these mysterious modern guillotines to military bases across the USA...BUT they were never told what their dark clandestine purposes were.
But various former insider sources admitted to me they were a part of the future NWO/martial law agenda for America. They would be used to behead future "resisters of the NWO," with Christians heavily targeted.
In Holy Scriptures, we read one one woman of faith in God, Esther, who was to discover that there was a terrible plan to annihilate her Jewish people by a wicked adversary Haman, even as her uncle Mordechai, warned her.
Grieved and concerned for her people, she sought for a way to save them...ultimately marrying the King and then risking her very life by pleading with the King to SPARE HER BELOVED PEOPLE from genocide that Haman's evil law would create against the Jews.
Esther's tactics were successful, the king was angered over what Haman had plotted, and this whole plan of genocide against her beloved Jews was averted. Her people were rescued from certain death by her efforts.
Through my 25 years of in-depth research, I too have been compelled into a similar position, loving and caring deeply about my fellow Christians after being repeatedly warned of the NWO agenda to persecute to the point of genocide of the Christian's under martial law, frankly admitted to me in person by more than one former NWO planner and insider.
Crushed by what they told me awaited my beloved fellow Christian's under martial law ("...brutal rape,torture and death..." according to one intelligence source), I fasted and prayed, asking God what I could do to help save them and to wake them up to this horrific and heinous threat to their very existence.
My 25 years of relentless journalism to uncover the truth about this dark agenda of a very real, Biblically-prophesied NEW WORLD ORDER and it's ominous implications for my fellow Christians, all came forth following my prayers for God to show me what to do to warn my people.
No one has paid me to perform this journalism, and in fact it has cost me everything...and will someday ultimately cost my life for daring to expose the truth.
But even as Queen Esther, or Hadassah, I have also said in my grieved heart, "if I perish I perish..." but I must do whatever I can to warm and wake up my beloved people across America!
Body of Christ, God has sent faithful witnesses and "watchmen on the wall" like myself and others besides, to warn you of dangers to come.
What are you doing to prepare your hearts for future persecution and coming temptation to "DENY JESUS...OR DIE?"
The very salvation of your eternal soul depends upon your obedience to Jesus, "Be thou FAITHFUL UNTO DEATH,and I will give you the crown of life..." Jesus has warned us that IF we DENY HIM BEFORE MEN, He too will DENY US.
This means NO SALVATION, and eternity in eternal torments and everlasting destruction...for without Jesus you have NO SALVATION.
Remember this when martial law is declared and the persecution of Christians begins in earnest across America...and the guillotines of Revelation 20:4 are brought forth to fulfill End Time Bible prophecy at last...and the NWO advocates drag you before these guillotines and demand that you deny your precious Savior,or die...or you are thrown into prisoner boxcars with shackles to be hauled off to grim FEMA camps for elimination. Many of these prisoner boxcars also have the modern guillotines installed in them as well, according to eye witnesses I have interviewed.
Please, join with the saints and martyrs of Christ through the ages who have gone before you, and choose to confess Jesus faithfully unto the end.
They are among the great cloud of witnesses, watching from Heaven's ramparts with God Himself to see who will gain the glorious crown of LIFE and remain FAITHFUL UNTO DEATH!
Your sufferings in this world are but FOR A MOMENT..but eternity in Heaven is forever..and so is HELL.
Choose wisely your path, Beloved fellow saints and martyrs of Jesus, the Messiah! For you WIN or LOSE by the WAY YOU CHOOSE...

WikiMANNia #fundie #transphobia #sexist #conspiracy at.wikimannia.org

(Submitter’s Note: A few highlights from an incredibly long screed about “Genderism”, a lot of potential quote material is cut)
(Note 2: Site is in German, this is a translation)

Genderism is an ideology developed by feminists and homosexuals that focuses on sociological gender (gender) instead of biological gender (sex) when looking at people. This ideology has significant consequences for the image of man and gender roles. Genderism can be described as racial teaching of the 21st century. However, it is neither scientifically stable nor can it be substantiated with concrete facts.

introduction

The ideology of genderism has so far largely remained without media attention and therefore unknown to the citizen. The - sometimes - Marxist actors know that social change cannot be achieved without changing the language . That is why new terms are needed:

Gender (as a counter-concept to biological gender)
Gender mainstreaming (gender in politics, as a political strategy)
Gender Studies (gender in research, in the academic field)
Gender Budgeting [1] (gender in financial planning, budget law)
Gender Theory [2] (The theory underlying gender ideology)
Queer Theory (A theory developed by gays and lesbians that became part of gender ideology)
Sexual Diversity (gender diversity)
Social engineering (social construction, a social science tool of genderism)
→ Main article : Technical terms of genderism

Pioneers of genderism have been a. the American feminist Andrea Dworkin and her life partner John Stoltenberg . In Germany it was Alice Schwarzer .

[…]

Legitimation

These incomprehensible terms contribute significantly to the fact that a broad discourse on genderism has so far failed to materialize. Most people have not yet understood the content of this ideology behind these terms . This raises the question of legitimizing gender policy.

Genderism is a project that has secretly infiltrated not only our society but also politics in recent years , worldwide, without the people of the individual countries being aware of it at all. Because there has been large-scale media censorship here. It is still taking place. Not even politicians understood the fact that gender (or gender mainstreaming ) is even a political program.

It is about the attempt to equality enforce gender at all levels of society. For the first time the term was in 1984 at the 3rd UN World Conference on Women [ wp ] discussed in Nairobi and later promoted to the 4th World Conference on Women in Beijing. [8] The Amsterdam Treaty [ wp ] made the concept the official goal of the equality policy of the European Union in 1997/1999 . [9]

It is striking that there is no sign of democratic legitimacy . Genderists have established the term gender at international UN conferences and in the EU bureaucracy. With the Amsterdam Treaty, gender ideology became the basis of the equality policy of the European Union, and in Germany gender mainstreaming was installed with an administrative act and has since then decisively determined all levels of politics. [10]

Gender policy was not discussed in parliament, nor was the sovereign, the citizen, questioned. The gender ideology was thus installed undemocratically past the citizen. Politicians therefore expect citizens to accept gender ideology like a religion that has fallen from the sky .

[…]

Following the change in divorce law in 1977 , the introduction of gender mainstreaming is the second serious, illegal act in Germany in relation to the family.

Terms

The content of gender ideology is hidden behind a cloud of Anglicist [ wp ] terms that no one understands and that are not translated. The difficulty in understanding lies not only in the language , the so-called gender talk , but also in a rather cloudy ideology , in which little is clear apart from the claim that people would only convince themselves of "being a man" and "being a woman", the sexes have no biological causes and the gender roles are attracted to society (in gender terms: "constructed").

Attempting to clarify the rather vague terms in a vague ideology is already part of a criticism because the necessary determinations can hardly be made neutrally.

Quote: «The paradox of gender ideology is that on the one hand - in theory - it is disputed that there are rigid genders, and on the other hand - in political practice - all efforts of gender politics amount to privileging women based on their biological gender: support programs only for women, preference for women when recruiting, quota for women etc. »
The terms are sometimes used interchangeably because the speakers are not clear about the meaning of the terms themselves. In the following, the resulting Babylonian language confusion is to be resolved by assigning clear concepts of genderism to the terms. But the reader should know that the terms are used differently, then the listener has to guess from the context what the speaker actually means.

Gender Mainstreaming
[…]

Gender mainstreaming includes the obligation for all political and administrative systems to check their own programs, decisions and regulations to determine whether they are indirectly discriminating against a gender. Gender mainstreaming is a political concept with which gender-based disadvantages can be systematically identified in professional work.

[…]
Gender Studies

Gender Studies is a pseudoscience at universities - comparable to Scientific Socialism [ wp ] - and can be translated as "gender-compliant gender studies". The core business of gender studies is essentially the analytical deconstruction of gender. It is not the genes or any other biological essence that explains the gender of humans, but only social categories. Whoever is treated and treated as a man is a man; whoever is treated as a woman is a woman. A very crucial place where this gendering (" Doing Gender") takes place, is raising children in the family and other social institutions. [13]

Note: "Gender Studies is a gender science based on gender ideology."
Note: "In contrast to gender mainstreaming, gender studies is the academic program."

dave #fundie forums.myspace.com

The Ascent of man is ancient...

Alpha, Adam, an eponym for the whole species or developmental series of linkages from Ramaphitecus Man until Jesus, the completed Adam, the Omega
Homoousian sapiens
(1) Seth, (Australopithecus anamensis)
(2) Enos, (Australopithecus africanus)
(3) Cainan, (Australopithecus aethiopicus)
(4) Mahalaleel, (Australopithecus garhi)
(5) Jared, (a species concurrent with Homo rudolfensis)
(6) Enoch, (Homo habilis, walked with God towards the final evolution of Homoiousian man)
(7) Methuselah, (Modern Homo erectus: China, SE Asia H. Erectus)
(8) Lamech, (Homo antecessor)
(9) Noah, (a type of Homo sapiens’ forebearer)
(10) Shem, (Mongolian)
(11) Ham, (Negroid)
(12) Japheth, (Caucasian)

u/XXandangry #Sexist #Transphobia reddit.com

TIF classification project - open to feedback

While we classify TIMs as AGP and HSTS, I've noticed that there is a lack of consistent TIF typology. So, I went ahead and made one.

My sources: almost a year of undercover activity on trans forums (3 different characters, 2 TIFs, 1 TIM), 5 real life run-ins with TIFs (all types), a talk with a female victim of a predatory one, a predatory TIF in my extended family.

Warning: upsetting issues ahead - rape, fetishism, violence, mental illness

Self-hating

Motivated by societal distress caused by being female. Lesbians, tomboys and/or rape victims. The most known and arguably common type. Most of detransitioners come from this group.

Sexuality: Either homosexual (“straight” for them) or so obliterated by trauma so as to be completely non-existent (“asexual”). If not asexual, then either masochists/submissive, or “vanilla” (not perverted).

ID: Most are “men”, but there is a significant minority of those who ID as sexless (agender, nonbinary, neutrois etc.). They don’t really want to become men, as much as they want to stop being women.

Detransition rate: Very high. Feminism empowers non-conformists, lesbians, and victims, and so serves as a safe place for them to go. Furthermore, the general society views “I just wanted to be accepted” as an acceptable feminine motivation. The one exception are those who are 10+ years into it, didn’t get any nasty side effects from procedures, and have a partner and a job. They’ll stick with the devil they know.

Common mental disorders: Anorexia, dysmorphia, anxiety, depression, autism.

Interests: Vary a lot. Plenty of quiet, bookish types. Often some sort of stereotypically masculine sport. Not that many of them are otherkin or furries, but plenty are therians. They often shun stereotypically feminine hobbies they genuinely enjoy and push themselves into things men in their lives do.

Transition: Baggy clothes, short haircuts, binding breasts. Normal male or unisex names. Hormones. Mastectomy and hysterectomy are common, but phallus is usually not constructed. They mumble something about “not good enough yet”, but it’s actually because they want to desex themselves and find penises disgusting.

“Goals”: Either a normal, respectable dude, or a sexless being.

How to approach: Gentle conversation is the best. Affirm that loving women is okay, that any “masculine” interest is cool, that she didn’t deserve her assault/trauma – without calling her a woman outright. She has a lot of baggage attached to that word. Slowly build a friendly relationship, gently bring up side effects of hormones and surgeries. Once you see doubt, direct her towards detransitioners.

Kweer

Motivated by desire to be special and shallow aesthetics of the gender-special movement. Often there is a mild autoandrophilic element (caused by too much yaoi).

Sexuality: Straight (or “uwu gay boys”). Some of them identify as bisexual, but it’s hard to determine if it’s genuine bisexuality or attraction to manly men and she/her “femboys”. Fetish-wise, into a lot of weird stuff. Furries, tentacles, latex, transformation, this sort of thing, often as a switch (both the doer and the target of the act). Sometimes come across as pedophilic, due to inappropriate conduct around children, sharing NSFW information with them etc. This, however, usually comes from the “sex positive” ideology, rather than genuine pedophilia (this is more of a “predatory” thing).

ID: Actually, a minority of them are “men” (I’d say 20-30%). A lot of them call themselves half man, half woman (bigender, genderqueer etc.) or “genderfluid”.

Detransition rate: Complicated. Young and “out” only on tumblr? Will go away. 25+ and a head of a LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ organisation? Not likely to back down. With every IRL thing done in the trans direction (coming out, hormones, surgeries, legal stuff, joining organisations), the chance of detransition drops significantly.

Common mental disorders: Narcissism, borderline, schizotypal, maladaptive daydreaming, sometimes a mild form of psychosis.

Interests: Cartoons, especially anime, drawing, making jewellery (with various obscure flags, to sell on Etsy). Lots of them are otherkin – the more special, the better (fairies, dragons, deities etc.), furries are also well-represented among them. Some of them are self-proclaimed witches or “spiritual” types. Overall they have a very poor relationship with reality.

Transition: Loads of flag patches, colourful hair, either binding without packing or packing without binding (uwu androgyny). Batshit insane names, often neopronouns. Further transition varies, from all the way to “my body is a boy’s body because it belongs to a boy!” Often get tattoos and piercings.

“Goals”: Feminine bottom gay boy, handsome-but-still-pretty top yaoi boy with a hairless body of a Greek god, or a sparkling hermaphroditic alien who is adored by everyone.

How to approach: Don’t feed her delusions. Don’t give her undue attention. Allow her to talk about her gender fluctuations and kin memories, and just go “mhm”. No “omg, you’re so valid”, but no “you’re fucking crazy”. Include her in women-only spaces and events, keep her away from queer spaces/websites. Practical activities, like horse riding or camping are great ideas. The younger she is, the easier for her it will be to shake it off.

Predatory

A complicated, mostly invisible type. Born with psychopathic traits, which causes them to not socialise as female fully (as they lack empathy, enjoy hurting others etc.) and therefore relate to male culture strongly.

Sexuality: Orientation wise, all over the scale, mostly in the middle. Usually call themselves bisexual or “pansexual”, very often “aromantic” (incapable of feeling love). Sadist/dominant, with fetishes like rape, impregnation (with them in the male role), mutilation, cannibalism etc. Often pedos or into bestiality. Two huge elements in this type’s sexuality are what I’d call autohybristophilia – attraction to the image of oneself as a male killer/rapist – and corruption fetish – the fantasy of destroying someone, body and mind, and “remaking” them - they enjoy the thrill of exposing children to fetishes or “cracking eggs”.

ID: Almost all “men”.

Detransition rate: Zero, or at least very low. I've never met one that had any regret or doubt, and I've never met a detransitioner who used to be this type. They seem to more self-assured that the other types, have less interest in fitting in, women usually find their company repulsive or dangerous, mainstream society doesn't find "it got me off" a feminine motivation...

Common mental disorders: Psychopathy, various paraphilias.

Interests: There is always some strong interest in the grotesque/macabre, horror, gore etc. They like people getting hurt, and watch horror films or even real-life gore like most dudes watch porn. Some are otherkin (usually something vague like “monsterkin”, in stark contrast to kweer ones, who have entire characters), but they are less active in the community. Other interests vary wildly, they usually don’t obsessively hide “girly” interests like self-hating ones do.

Transition: Normal male fashion, packing (stuffing underwear) with or without binding. Names might be normal or batshit insane, they are usually less anal about pronouns, whatever they use. Go all the way – hormones, all surgeries etc. Very common of them to take up weightlifting and get tattoos. A lot of them use special huge strapons that transfer sensation or even ejaculate (anatomic autoandrophilia) instead of or before surgery.

“Goals”: The potential to hurt outweights aesthetics. Typically the “ideal body” has huge muscles and a big penis, but it might be very ugly or even nonhuman. Worth mentioning, this is not the same as a revenge fantasy some women (including self-hating TIFs) indulge in. That is “I don’t have power, but if I could hurt the people who hurt me, I’d have power at least over that situation”, this is “I like hurting people, and if I had power, I’d hurt them even more/without consequences”.

How to approach: sigh Tell me if you know. I'd argue it's better not to aproach them - you'll get laughed at at best, pulled into a weird mind game at worst. Stay away from them in real life. Out of 3 I met face to face, two were sex offenders and one beat me up. If one is your child - if she's really young, you might teach her empathy and emotional regulation, otherwise you're probably out of luck.

Notes:

It's possible for one to be two or all types at once. It's possible for one to pretend to be the other for various reasons. It's possible for a non-trans woman to have some traits of one or more type (if she's at risk of transition and/or a TRA ally).

There are two additional factors, both for TIMs and TIFs, - DSD/intersex conditions (which can cause weird socialisation) and actual delusions ("I'm a man on an astral plane" or "I have ovaries, but my doctor can't find them").

Hey, cynical lurkers - none of those are "true trans".

I'm open to constructive criticism.

I can talk about my experiences if you're curious.

ThePottersClay #fundie youtube.com

(Video Description of Flat Earth Sermon)

There are many reasons people begin looking into the "Flat Earth", whether it's just morbid curiosity, or to try and debunk it all together. But one thing is for sure, if you can be intellectually honest with yourself, and humble enough to actually examine the evidence, it no longer becomes a theory. We simply can't be living on a spinning ball because curvature and movement cannot and will never be detected.

NASA and the use of fish-eye lenses, along with indoctrination at every turn (schools, books, TV, movies, etc...) are the reasons humanity believes they live on a Globe. If we could all drop our pride long enough, the truth will surely reveal itself. The evidence as well as God's word point us directly to a flat stationary earth. Do your own research, the truth is important.

The Great Deception - Will You be Deceived?
https://youtu.be/yXstfcdGWMM

Having the Eyes to See the Whole World Deceived
https://youtu.be/9xinU9_0ZRo

The Top 10 Reasons I Don't Trust NASA
https://youtu.be/pEE7OPKLhaM

Curvature Website used in the Video:
http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index....

Curvature Chart:
https://i.imgur.com/6iwRYGY.jpg

-------------

How to be Saved - The Most Important "Truth"
https://youtu.be/4RSj-CMPBlw

Getting saved is the easiest and most important thing you can do :) You just have to come to the knowledge that you (like everyone else on earth) are a sinner in need of salvation or we would spend eternity in Hell. Salvation is not something we could ever attain on our own, that is why Jesus came to this earth and paid the ultimate price for our sins by allowing himself to be sacrificed for all mankind so through him we can be saved. Jesus led a sinless life and by doing so was able to take all of humanities sins they would ever commit on himself making one sacrifice that covered all sin.

To be saved you have to say a prayer something like this (and most importantly mean it because God reads your heart). Say "God I know I am a sinner. I know that because of my sin Jesus came to this earth and died for me making atonement for all the sins I would ever commit. I believe Jesus died on that cross and raised from the dead three days later conquering death and making a way for me to be saved by taking my sins upon himself. I pray Lord that you save me and come into my heart and life allowing me to be born again through Jesus, living in this world but no longer being of this world. Thank you Lord for saving my soul please lead me, guide me, and direct me all the remaining days of my life. In Jesus name I pray, Amen."

If you said that prayer and meant it you are saved and sealed and nothing anyone could ever say or do can take that away. I would continue to pray daily building a relationship with God, and read the bible some everyday as well. He knows you, but that's the only way to get to know him. Try your best to stop sinning (this is not possible by the way) but you have to make the effort because that is what true repentance means is that you will turn from your sin. Don't give up, this is not easy, I repent and ask God to forgive me for something or another every single day. He knows we aren't perfect, but if we truly love him we gotta try :)

God bless you, here are some scriptures that you might find helpful, and welcome to the family! :D

ChristineWJC #fundie talkwisdom.blogspot.com

It is also "written on our hearts." In our heart of hearts, not matter what the homosexual agenda tries to push on us, WE KNOW that same-sex sexual behavior is a sin and an abomination to God. The fact that certain people refuse to recognize that fact does not change the truth. As Roman 2:15 informs us - their thoughts will either accuse or excuse them!

The gay christian movement is in the business of excusing themselves. They have chosen "to exchange the truth for a lie."

And, what's more, they will do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to attempt to cover their sin and excuse themselves rather than what is truly needed - repentance! Why? Because whether one admits it or not, one's own conscience and God's Word accuses them.

Joshua Ude #fundie rapturewatcher.wordpress.com

I thank God Almighty who truly want to save all humanity, not willing that any should perish but come to repentance and be saved, belove, God want you to repent from your sin that He might forgive you, no mater how deep you have gone in your sin, no matter how long or years you have been living in those sins and no matter the name of the sin, God says come and let us reason together, come now let us settle the matter, God is full of mercy and forgives iniquty, yet cannot forgive unrepented sin, as far as you are a siner, God cannot 4give you exept you repent, and if you mistakenly die in your sin, you will be cast into hell fire 4ever. I dont know the sin you are into, it could be laing, anger, hatred, unfugiveness or bitterness, this things are terible sin, how about gossip, mormoring, backbiting, speeking evel of others or blasphemy, false witness, cursing people, this things are terrible sin. Masturbation is a gross wickedness, unlean or immoral thought, funicaton, adultry, homosexual or lesbian, this are terrible wickedness, man sleeping with animal is also a sin, i dont know the wickedness you are into, may be you belong to secreet or open cult, studdent cult, antichrist cult or church of satan, every kind of cult is sin, you must denounce it, gather there properties and burn then and give your life to Jesus Christ and God will show you mercy.you may be asking what is sin? Listen to me, 1st John 5:17a says all unritiousness is sin, going to the habalist to make cham i7 sin or may be you are a habalist, repent for 2morrow may be 2late, burn all those charms and surrender to Christ, are you into smoking? You smoke ciggarate, or marijuana, are you warking in tobaco company? You must resine, you dont neeed alcuholic drinks 1% or 2%, furieng or local or may be you are warking in brewry or sarving it in the hotel, you must resing, wemen wearing trauser is sin and men putting ö wemens garment is abormination Detronomy 22;5 says a man should not put on female7 garment and wemen should not put un males garment for it is aborminatiös unto God, putting earings and jewelries are sin,wemen pentting their mout, finger or putting artificial finger, heair is sin, you dot even need the bangles and rings in your hands, wedding ring is sin, the finger rossary and chaplate on your neck is sin, even the cross and skapula is idolatory, you cant enter heaven with those things, gather thøse things and burn them, you may be asking what is sin, listen, dressing to expose your laps is sin, cover your brest armpit and tommy properlly, a christian is n not a seducer and a seducer is not a christian amend yov ways Cirist is coming very very soon

A-Train #conspiracy stormfront.org

Excellent job, Nick. This is a great topic. Every White nationalist with a bookish bent should make himself an expert on this issue. The Holocaust Lie more than anything else keeps us down. The twin themes of White guilt and Jewish victimhood are inerwoven into this monstrous hate-religion that is now being foisted upon generations of White children around the world.

The research has already been done for us. The book I am referring to used to be hard to find, but now can be ordered right off the internet-- so there's no excuse for any of us not to have read it.

Some additions:

1. Motivations: Many people don't understand why anyone would have lied about exterminations of Jews. When a motive is presented for the lie, more people will be willing to consider they've been lied to. The Holocaust story is a massive bonanza for Jews worldwide. Financially, the payoff has been in the billions, and continues unabated. Psychologically, the story has the effect of giving a blank check for Zionist behavior around the world.

2. The concept of the Big Lie: Everyone should read the excerpt from Chapter X of Mein Kampf where the author explains how a massive lie will be believed simply because ordinary people cannot comprehend that such a huge, oft-repeated story can be anything but true.
Quote:

"In this they proceeded on the sound principle that the magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds they more easily fall a victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big. Such a falsehood will never enter their heads and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others; yes, even when enlightened on the subject, they will long doubt and waver, and continue to accept at least one of these causes as true. Therefore, something of even the most insolent lie will always remain and stick - a fact which all the great lie-virtuosi and lying-clubs in this world know only too well and also make the most treacherous use of."

-Mein Kampf Chpt. X

Hitler may not have been the greatest author, but he nailed this one pretty good. How ironic that the Holocaust story has become the greatest Big Lie of the present day.

3. Torture used at Nuremberg Trials: The greatest argument in favor of the Holocaust is that "the Germans admitted it." The best response is to point out that the Nazis who "admitted" the Holocaust at the war crimes trials were tortured by their (mostly Jewish) interrogators, usually by having their testicles crushed. Everyone understands what torture is, but few can believe it would have been used by the Allies on war criminals. This is documented in Butz's book

4. The Katyn Forest Massacre: That numerous German officers were hung for the murder of thousands of Polish nationalists by Stalin's NKVD demonstrates the fraudulence going on during the war years. President Roosevelt deliberately covered up the evidence of who really committed the crime. That such corruption could have been going on in high levels of the US government during the war years proves that we should not believe any of the official evidence of the Holocaust.

seeker42 #fundie rr-bb.com

Rather than admit that they are wrong, and that the evidence is not in favor of evolution, the converts don’t want to admit that they were conned. So they perpetuate the myths that got them hooked, even when they know that the evidence no longer supports those conclusions... Genesis is true, and evolutionists are simply wishful thinkers.

W. F. Price #sexist web.archive.org

There’s been a major shift in the public attitude concerning what is proper sex since the sexual revolution of the 1960s. When I was a kid in the 1980s, it was already taken for granted that sexual mores from earlier times were outdated, and only backwards dinosaurs adhered to them. For example, the idea that there’s anything wrong with extramarital sex has been laughed at for decades now. Additionally, old taboos concerning other sexual activities, despite clear evidence of their danger in the form of AIDS, divorce, etc., were portrayed as out of date and oppressive. Pornography was deemed legitimate political speech and therefore a right, and obscenity laws repealed.

To listen to the supporters of the sexual revolution, you’d think this would have led us to some sexual utopia where everyone’s sexual needs are met with no problem, but the human impulse to control sexuality returned in fairly short order, only in a different form. The result is that today, we still face a great – perhaps even greater – amount of control where sex is concerned, and a lot more people are locked up for sex crimes than in the bad old days of “oppression.” What compounds this problem is that it’s possible that even more men are sexually repressed now than a hundred years ago.

Today, there are essentially two kinds of bad sex: “nonconsensual” sex and sex with underage people. The bad actors in this regime are overwhelmingly male for a couple reasons. First, forcible rape is far more likely to be committed by males than females, for obvious reasons. Secondly, men generally prefer younger partners and women older. One could argue that prostitution remains in the “bad sex” category, but prostitution is increasingly held to be an example of male sexual exploitation. Examples from Superbowl sex hysteria and the Secret Service scandal highlight this. Essentially, prostitution has begun to fall under the nonconsensual or rape category. Pioneering Swedish legislation that only punishes johns for prostitution transactions will probably be introduced in the US soon, and then the process will be complete.

While only a few fringe characters have ever argued that rape or pedophilia is justifiable, what’s wrong with all this is that practically no female sexual behavior is currently seen as negative, whereas men are responsible for almost all of what’s deemed bad sex. Not all that long ago, this was far from the case. While rape has always been seen as the most serious sex crime, neither fornication nor adultery were held to be innocent activities, and women were seen as equal participants in these acts. In fact, in the majority of cases, a woman was just as responsible for “bad sex” as a man. Where prostitution was concerned, females were held to be more responsible than their clients, just as drug dealers are held to higher level of accountability than drug buyers, because they profit from the transaction.

However, lest we try to draw parallels, it should be recognized that most of what society considered bad sex was not criminalized until relatively recently. Fornication, sodomy, prostitution and adultery were definitely frowned upon, but they were not typically formally punished until the Victorian era. In the US, it wasn’t until the mid-20th century that these laws were widespread and regularly enforced. Nevertheless, people were a lot more careful about engaging in these activities, because social consequences could be severe.

Since then, aside from a brief period from the late 60s to early 70s when there was a sort of sexual free-for-all in the West, we’ve seen a steady crackdown on male sexuality combined with a loosening of restrictions on female sexuality. What has happened is that the entire burden of sexual control has been increasingly foist upon men, while women’s load has been lightened.

Probably the most important and liberating change for women has been the relaxation of the social prohibition on fornication. In the old days, fornication was definitely seen as bad sex. A loose woman was considered socially irresponsible and wicked for a number of reasons. She could lure a husband from his wife, seduce a young, naive man and capture him in a marriage against his interests, and have illegitimate children who became a burden on the community. Such a woman was not seen as marriage material. In general, men preferred virgin brides. Today, of course, the virgin bride is as rare as the horse and buggy.

A lot of men might say we have it a lot better than in those times, because “sex is easy and available” now whereas it used to be more difficult to obtain. I’m not sure I agree. Fornication is as much a risk for men as ever, and probably more so, because now only men are held responsible for the consequences. Get a woman pregnant and it’s on you. Sleep with a couple women, make one angry and jealous, and you risk a rape accusation. Sleeping with a married woman is another good way to get accused of rape if she changes her mind and decides to stay with her husband. Sleep with a woman who said she was 19, she turns out to be 17, and you’re in trouble. Visit a prostitute and you could be arrested or, if she tells the press, lose your career. There isn’t much of a difference from the old days, and you’re more likely to face jail time for slipping up. For men, fornication is clearly still bad sex. Possibly even more so than it was when it was generally recognized as such.

For women, on the other hand, the benefits are clear. Fornication has virtually no social consequences and the most minimal of risks. Pregnancies can be easily avoided, and if wanted the man will be forced to pay child support whether he committed or not. Male lovers can be easily controlled and kept in line, and as many taken as any woman pleases. Women even go so far as to proudly march in slutwalks to further demand rights to behave sexually in any manner they please. The slutwalk was actually very clear in demanding more of the status quo, i.e. less control of female sexuality and more control of male. For women, particularly young and attractive ones, this has been a real bonanza. But what has it done for society?

Let’s see…

Marriage rates dropping precipitously, men taking path of least resistance and dropping out, illegitimacy skyrocketing, class divisions hardening, children growing up fatherless and with fewer options. For most of us, it’s been quite negative.

I wish I could say there was a solution to the problem, but it looks pretty hopeless. The alternative to what used to be seen as bad sex – marriage – has been all but destroyed by the liberation of female sexuality and the redefinition of marriage as little more than a federal tax status; a sort of very risky corporation with arbitrary rules. The result is that for men, there is really no such thing as “good sex,” that is, socially-approved sex — it’s a risk no matter what. Furthermore, a society in which the overwhelming majority of women are fornicators gives men no choice; you just aren’t getting a wife in the traditional sense of the word, so why bother with marriage?

I think men ought to realize that we got suckered in this deal, and perhaps we should have listened to the old sages who have warned us over the centuries. We overreached in our naivete, thinking we’d get more of what we desire if we only tossed out the old attitudes, but all we ended up with was more responsibility and fewer rewards.

...

[Wait, aren't women supposed to be the uncontrollably lustful sex? Goddamn keep you misogyny lore straight]

Nah, she ruined herself. In a sane society (like most in the world), women are considered more responsible for sexual restraint, because they are better at it. It’s the same reason men are considered more responsible for fighting, carrying heavy things, etc.

caliphateonline #fundie caliphate.eu

Britain cannot PREVENT crime because ‘obeying the law’ is not a British value

Britain has appointed Sara Khan as its new Lead Commissioner for Countering Extremism. This part-time post earns a tax-payer funded salary of £140,000 a year + expenses. This is seven times more than a Police Constable who works double the hours without expenses. This raises a question of priorities. Is the British government and establishment more interested in curbing Islam than solving crime?


When the recorded crime figures were published in October last year, a surge in violent crime pushed recorded crime figures in England and Wales up by 13% on the previous year. Immediately after this figure was published Trump tried linking this increase to Muslims. He tweeted, ‘Just out report: “United Kingdom crime rises 13% annually amid spread of Radical Islamic terror.” Not good, we must keep America safe!’

Trump’s claim was quickly debunked, and while he and others attempt to blame Islam for societal ills, the reality is that western societies are becoming increasingly lawless and the cause is not Islam. The problem of crime is a problem of values.

The values underpinning this growing lawlessness is rampant individualism due to society’s belief in freedom and liberalism.

The British government defines its values as, ‘democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.’ Anyone who actively opposes these values is labelled an extremist and targeted by the security services and PREVENT officers.

An interesting point to note is that opposing the rule of law is not the same as obeying the law. If this was the case then the 9 million Brits with criminal records – including many lawmakers in Parliament – would be considered extremists which is not the case.

David Cameron, the former Prime Minister highlighted this when he said back in May 2015, “For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. It’s often meant we have stood neutral between different values. And that’s helped foster a narrative of extremism and grievance.” Cameron made a clear distinction between obeying the law and values. This means a law-abiding Muslim may be considered an extremist whereas a non-Muslim criminal wouldn’t be. The UK has no PREVENT or de-radicalisation programmes targeting criminals. Crime is blamed on poverty, social deprivation and other factors but never on secular values. This is because the root cause of crime stems from secular liberal values like individual liberty, which is a fundamental pillar of British society according to the government.

Police budgets in Britain are being slashed so much that in order to cut costs the Met Police will ignore burglaries, thefts and some assaults unless a suspect is identified. Deputy Assistant Commissioner Mark Simmons said: ‘We are having to balance the books with fewer officers and less money.’

Contrast this to the government’s counter-terrorism (CT) and counter-extremism (read counter-Islam) programmes which have huge ring-fenced budgets. While most Brits would support a PREVENT programme to tackle violent crime the government disagrees. Instead they divert funds and policing resources to PREVENT and CT officers, who then interrogate law abiding Muslims and school children on their political and religious views. They try and stop Islamic events by bullying venues in to closing them down, while crime goes ahead in the near vicinity without investigation. They pull over Muslims under Schedule 7 at airports, spoiling their holidays and upsetting their families when no crime or even suspicion of a crime has been committed.

So going back to the initial question. Is the British establishment more interested in destroying Islam than reducing crime? The answer is clearly yes. The societal elite or establishment which the Qur’an refers to as ???????? are rarely affected by the crime ordinary people face. They live in wealthy suburbs with private security. These elites are only interested in preserving the Capitalist status quo and destroying any opposition to it, which after the death of Communism is Islam. They would rather have Muslims committing crime but believing in man-made secular law than law-abiding Muslims believing in the superiority of sharia. The government’s counter-extremism strategy specifically mentions sharia and says, ‘There is only one rule of law in our country, which provides rights and security for every citizen. We will never countenance allowing an alternative, informal system of law, informed by religious principles, to operate in competition with it.’

In other words, following sharia is a red line despite the benefits it will bring to wider society in terms of accountability and lower crime rates.

Unlike British values, Islamic values are clearly defined and fixed within the Islamic texts. In the Islamic State obeying the law is a fundamental value and forms the basis of the bay’a contract between Muslim citizens and the state, and the dhimma contract between non-Muslims citizens and the state.

Allah (most High) says:

“O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you.”

(An-Nisaa, 4:59)

The Prophet Muhammad ? said:

“One who dislikes a thing done by his Ameer (leader) should be patient over it. For anyone from the people who withdraws (his obedience) from the sultan, even to the extent of a handspan and died in that condition, would die the death of one belonging to the days of jahilliyya (ignorance).”

(Sahih Muslim, 1849)

It’s hard find to find anyone living in western societies who is not the victim of crime in some form or another. This is a problem that will never go away without a fundamental change in societal values. As many commentators have said the UK government’s counter-terror and counter-extremism strategies will not make Britain safer because that’s not their aim. Their aim is to assimilate Muslims by destroying core Islamic values and replacing them with British secular values.

“They would like you to disbelieve as they disbelieve so that you will all be the same.”

(An-Nisa, 4:89)

Western countries have completely failed in imposing their values on Muslims whether at home or abroad. This is why we see ban after ban across Europe on Muslim women’s clothing, and ever-increasing laws aimed at curbing Islamic practices such as PREVENT. In the face of Islam’s high values, western secular values are doomed to fail.

Allah (Most High) says,

Rather We hurl the truth against falsehood and it cuts right through it and it vanishes clean away! Woe without end for you for what you portray!

(Anbiyaa, 18)

Samuel Huntington says, “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion (to which few members of other civilizations converted) but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.” *

drkresearch #fundie nodisinfo.com

It cannot be said that the believer is able by his position to prove the atheist wrong. That is left to the godless one alone, who has proven himself to be fully in error and will continue to do so: by his own actions and words. All that can be stated is that the believer has seen the evidence for the existence of the creator and has sensed it and therefore freely follows what he senses. Such a one knows full well that he cannot ‘prove’ that God exists with physical phenomena. He knows God exists because of the obvious, even without physical divine revelation.

Does the atheist, too, know he exists in the deepest recesses of the heart? What kind of cover, or deep darkness, must such a one apply in order to reject that existence, that is the existence of what is glaringly obvious, which is that there is a supreme Being who has absolute control over this vast universe, including the earth and all who reside on it?

The oddity is this. By rejecting him the denier of truth cannot hurt God but rather only hurts himself. Even so, God is so merciful that He gives such a one deliberate warnings, through His mercy: if those who reject Him only knew.

Commonly, atheists join the arch-enemies of Islaam, the Zionists, in riding hard against it. Why do so? Why condemn it so vehemently? It is because Islaam is the fount of truth, and the atheists despise this and so wage war against it, which is further proof the their error and corruption.

Anna Diehl #fundie 924jeremiah.wordpress.com

Why does God let children die of cancer?

image

AUDIO VERSION: YouTube  Podbean

Why does God let children die of cancer? To answer this question we need to understand some fundamental truths about how this world works.

THE INJUSTICE OF DISEASE

Why does it feel so wrong to us when a child slowly wastes away with disease? There are many reasons. It goes against the natural order of things: children aren’t supposed to die before their parents. It also hurts us and we hate things that cause us pain. We think that the things that hurt us must be evil, therefore cancer is evil. Who do we associate with evil? Satan, of course, therefore Satan is to blame for cancer. This is the theological trail many Christians go down: they end up blaming Satan or else they sigh heavily and say “It’s a fallen world.” Still others personify the disease itself and treat it like a conscious being. “#&%$@ cancer!” is a phrase we see posted on internet profiles by those who are feeling frustrated and helpless as their loved ones suffer in front of them. But is cussing out cancer really getting us anywhere? And is plastering colored ribbons all over the earth really rushing us towards a cure? Suppose they found a cure for all cancers tomorrow and began passing it out for free in every country. Do you know what would happen? A new, nastier, scarier disease would suddenly spring up in our midst. Why is this? Because the One who created this world wants disease to be a part of it.

THE ORIGIN OF DISEASE

The way Christians try to blame everything on the Fall is ridiculous. When we talk like Eve sent the universe spinning out of control the moment she bit into the fruit, we are completely denying what is right in front of our eyes. We need to start back at the beginning of Genesis and try again. No one forced God to curse Adam and Eve with pain, hardship, and physical death. He came up with the idea of making our lives a trial all on His own because this planet was always intended to be a place in which we grow through suffering. So what does this tell us about God? Is He some kind of ogre? No, He’s not. But from our perspective, His methods can seem very cruel.

GOD’S PRIORITIES

In order to understand why God inflicts kids with cancer, we need to understand what His priorities are. Keeping us comfortable, happy and healthy while we are on this earth is not at the top of His list of important things. If He had wanted this place to be a perpetual paradise He would have made it one. Instead, He made Heaven a paradise and arranged for almost our entire existence to be there, provided we properly submit to Him (see Understanding Salvation: Meeting the Demands of Three Gods). We’re only on this earth for a brief blip of time, and while we are here, we are supposed to be growing closer to God. Everything that He does to us down here is with our spiritual best in mind. That includes inflicting children with malignant tumors.

Whenever we find ourselves feeling enraged about some form of suffering, it is because we’ve zoomed the lens in far too close. When we get upset about kids dying of cancer, we are only thinking of ourselves and our immediate earthly happiness. We’re not considering the long-term view. We’re putting the temporary above the eternal in value and worth. God does just the opposite. He says the eternal health of souls is far more important than our momentary sorrow on earth. We say pain is pointless. He says pain is a catalyst for causing great change in people’s hearts. We see a child suffering and say that God is cruel. He sees one child’s experience affecting hundreds of lives and shocking souls out of a fatal stagnation. God hurts us in order to heal us. Everything He does is for our best, but too often we refuse to put any trust in His motives, even though He has proven Himself to be infinitely more loving, faithful, and wise than we are.

No one is more dedicated to the well-being of humans than the One who created them in the first place. This world isn’t something that God stumbled upon one day and took a mild interest in. We are His carefully crafted, intricate masterpieces. He hovers over us constantly, meticulously arranging every detail of our lives. Tumors don’t just happen to people because of bad genes or exposure to toxins. God creates tumors in bodies with the same precision as He creates all of our internal organs. Tumors grow because He makes them grow. They are detected late because He blocks us from finding them early. They are cured because He cures them, and they kill us because He wants them to. God works through medicines, doctors, and a host of other things, yet we must not get so focused on His methods that we miss seeing Him. No child comes down with cancer by random chance or because God abandoned them to the clutches of Satan. God personally selects all the victims of cancer with great care, and it is not because He hates them or is just trying to punish someone.

THE FATHER OF OUR CHILDREN

All children belong to God. He is their true Guardian and when He involves us in their care it’s understood that it will only be for a temporary amount of time. At some point, He takes all of His children back again to an eternal dimension where He parents them directly. On earth, we human parents are simply mediators whose primary job is to teach children who their eternal Father is. Sometimes He gives us a lifetime to love and care for His children on earth. Other times, He reclaims them after only a few years. Do we really have the right to accuse God of being unfair in taking back what is rightfully His? Yes, it hurts terribly, and we shouldn’t pretend otherwise. But to tell God that He was wrong to take what His own hands have made—well, that simply doesn’t work. Other souls are not our property.

DEATH

From God’s perspective, no one dies prematurely and no one dies late. We say they do because we have preconceived notions about how long people should live. We’ve decided that there’s a rule that all children are supposed to outlive their parents. God never gave us any such guarantee. We’ve decided that anyone who dies from diseases or violence has been cheated. This simply isn’t true. God is clear that He predetermines the number of days that each soul will live on this earth, and no one fails to complete their full assignment. This is because no one can end a life without God’s cooperation. He alone has the power to separate soul from body, and to withdraw the breath of life that He put into us.

Humans try desperately to control the lifespan of themselves and others, yet God says that no one can do anything without His cooperation. We can plot and scheme all day, yet it is God who ultimately decides whether our plans fly or flop. We come up with new miracle drugs for cancer, yet it is God who decides who they work on. Some survive chemo, others die from it. Some are cured and stay cured, while others get constant recurring growths. Why is every case so different? Why can’t we find a formula that always works? Because God is involved. He has a far more important goal in mind than curing our physical bodies. He is after our souls.

GETTING OUR ATTENTION

God wants creatures who willingly choose Him, He doesn’t want robots. So while He controls every atom in existence, He also gives us some degree of choice. On a soul level, we are given the option to accept or reject Him. God wants His relationship with us to be a two-way street, not something He rams down our throats. He then spends our whole lives arranging events and experiences that will entice us to seek Him out. What happens when we see a child dying in front of us? We start asking why. We start looking for a cosmic source of justice. We start wondering if life really is some random set of coincidences, or if there could be some purpose to it all. We reevaluate our own lives and wonder if we’re really living for what is important. When the child dies, we look for some external source of comfort that can fill the void in our hearts. We wonder what our child found on the other side of death. We wonder what we will find when our turn comes.

It is when we feel helpless and distressed that we remember God. Too often that is the only time we remember Him. If we had our way, we’d erase all pain from this world and thereby take away one of God’s most effective means of securing our attention. Then we’d all become completely self-absorbed and totally ignore His existence. Does God smile on this plan? Not hardly. Our Creator loves us too much to let us walk away from Him without a fight. He will do anything it takes to intensify our interest in Him

God is the One who makes pain feel stronger when children are involved. Any good parent would much rather suffer themselves than watch their children suffer. This is the way it is supposed to be. God has set up levels of suffering on this earth. All trials are not equal. Some we can easily cope with, others temporarily devastate us. God inflicts children with incurable tumors when He has determined that only extreme measures will accomplish the soul changes He is after. It doesn’t always mean people are fighting Him. Sometimes there is no rebellion at all, yet God has decided it is time to push souls on to the next level of maturity. In every case, He carefully arranges which lives will cross paths, and the intensity of each person’s exposure to the suffering child. Some will sit at the bedside in hospitals, up close to the agony, while others will only receive brief updates through the internet. Every position is carefully arranged by God to spark conversations between Him and us. When a friend of ours is hurting, our natural instinct is to pray for them and tell God to stop doing what He’s doing. Our advice is utterly useless, and our wishes often misguided, but by getting us to talk to Him, God hopes that we’ll be willing to do some listening as well. He has things He wants to teach us in these moments. He isn’t just stirring us up so we can tell Him how to better run His universe. If we want to grow from these experiences, we must be willing to let God lead us instead of trying to lead Him.

When souls cooperate with God beautiful things happen. We change into something better than we were before. Our trust in God deepens. Our perspective of life shifts closer to the eternal viewpoint. Our priorities improve. Even if the changes are only temporary, they are worth it, for we will be all the swifter to respond to Him the next time a crisis arises. It is only when we close our hearts to God that we stagnate. When we demand healing, and even threaten to walk away from Him unless He gives us what we want, we only end up harming ourselves. God is not going to take orders from us. He will continue to do what He knows is best for hundreds of people, even though we selfishly demand that He care only about our personal pain.

If we are to thrive through suffering, we must recognize that there is a bigger picture involved. God is a multitasker who is always accomplishing many things at once. Yes, our suffering matters to Him very much, but to ask Him to stop caring about every other soul who is being positively affected by our pain is going too far. Instead of accusing God of being cruel, we need to give Him the trust He deserves. God knows what is best for us. As parents, we should be well acquainted with the principle that what a child needs is not always what a child will enjoy receiving. It is the same with us and God. He has promised to do what is best for us, even when it requires some misery on our part. The question now becomes, are we going to trust His judgment? Or are we going to insist that we know better than He does and wallow in self-pity? If we are wise, we will not go through life defining ourselves by the pain we have gone through, and the loved ones we have lost. Instead, we will let pain accomplish its good work in us and then let it go. In this world, God uses evil to bring about a greater good. If we align with His Spirit, He will teach us how to thrive through all forms of suffering.

pfta2a #fundie reddit.com


Some children initiate adult contact and are active participants.

Sorry, just trying to get your facts correct. You and u/herrhiskelig imply that a child would never choose to initiate or willingly participate in a sexual relationship with an adult. Studies show that you are both wrong.

You imply (wrongly) that only a person who is not entirely sound of mind would believe a child want to have sex with them.

Quote from: http://www.mhamic.org/sources/constantine.htm

research and clinical reports leave little doubt that some children do initiate the contacts and many participate willingly. Nine studies in the review confirmed this, although initiative on the part of the child was rare in father-daughter incest.

Children can enjoy sex and masturbation, many do. Children can initiate sex and some do. Children can be willing and even enthusiastic participants.


you should understand that NO, a child does not want to have sex with you

Yes, sometimes a child does want to have sex with an adult


No, a child cannot make choices in sexual matters b/c he/she is not developmentally capable of understanding the consequences and complexities of adult sexuality nor the risks involved. He/she doesn't yet know who to trust and why, how to protect himself, how to advocate or be an equal partner, etc. In many cases, the child isn't even physically developed enough for that level of interaction.

No, a child cannot make choices in sexual matters b/c he/she is not developmentally capable of understanding the consequences and complexities of adult sexuality nor the risks involved. He/she doesn't yet know who to trust and why, how to protect himself, how to advocate or be an equal partner, etc. In many cases, the child isn't even physically developed enough for that level of interaction.


Many children know how to be quite firm with their opinions, many are more firm with their opinions than adults. Though not all do, the study I linked originally found that passively unwilling children were the most often harmed by an adult/child sexual experience, actively unwilling children generally sought help quickly and actively or passively willing children generally enjoyed the experience and thus were less often harmed (some even benefited from the experience).

The "consent" part it mostly just opinion. This Alderson would disagree.

Alderson performed seven studies (some in collaboration with other scientists) throughout the 1990s on children’s capacity to give informed consent to medical procedures, and concluded that children as young as 5 or 6 are capable of informed consent if adequately informed. Waites (2005) argued very convincingly that her work and its conclusions translate readily into the sexual sphere, though he argues (badly) that children are not adequately informed about sex in our society and therefore cannot give informed consent to sexual activity. (The answer to that is obvious.) As far as I know, Alderson’s work constitutes the only sustained and detailed scientific analysis of children’s capacity to give informed consent, and before the 1990s no such analysis existed. Ages of consent were certainly not set on the basis of such capacity, and Waites shows how consent was not a genuine factor in so-called ‘age of consent’ legislation until the second half of the 20th century.

So 5 or 6 year olds are capable of making decisions on medical procedures (including "informed consent") if adequately informed, but not of consenting to sex. The only reason for this is that our society tries very hard to make sure that children are not "adequately informed" when it comes to sex. Which ironically, can lead to higher rates of unsafe sex when young t(w)eens begin to engage in sexuality, but have not been educated on safe sex - though I'm assuming we both agree that "abstinence only" sex education is a terrible idea.

You make a few more assumptions/implications about the sexuality. One is that any adult/child interactions are "adult sexuality", but in reality only a small minority of "sexual abuse" involves actual penetration and intercourse; likely because when the child is a willing participant and respected by their partner, than the child will say no when they don't enjoy something (and many children are not physically ready for intercourse) and have that choice be respected.


"oh this 10 year old wants to have an adult sexual relationship"

Again, you seem focused on the "adult", but you don't know that they original subject (the pedophile from the podcast) was in or wanted an adult sexual relationship. As I said above, most child/adult sexual interactions do not involve intercourse. It is more likely that the adult was participating at the child's level in order to make it fun for the child, or because the child did not want to participate in intercourse.


There are quite a few online communities (including r/pedofriends) of pedophiles who don't harm anyone. I am a pedophile myself and would never harm a child. Over 50% of child molesters are not pedophile (they have some other mental condition that leads them to molest a child).

Many pedophiles avoid children to avoid sexual feelings. I am not part of that group, I actively associated with children and have one girl I am very close with. I love her and would rather hurt myself than hurt her.

That said, there is a question of what exactly constitutes "harm". What if the child is a willing participant (maybe even the one pursuing more), society would say that kissing a child; even one who wanted to be kissed by you, is harmful. I don't agree with that, but I do follow the social rules in order to avoid legal issues (and to be able to keep seeing her)

[unnamed] #fundie reason4living.com

What is submission?

There are a lot of misconceptions about submission and submissive people. Before we can intelligently consider what the Bible has to say on the subject of submissive wives we need to clear these misconceptions out of our way. Let me begin with a few simple statements about the nature of submission:

Only a strong person can be submissive.
Submissiveness is not timidity, it is not servility, it is not subservience, it is not docility, it is not degrading, it is not a sign of weakness.
Submission is a sign of strength, not of weakness and a greater degree of submission requires a greater degree of strength of personal character.

Submission is an act of the will — it is the result of a choice, a decision. The act of submission can only come from a choice that a person makes. Submission cannot be enforced upon a person. Either a person submits of their own free will or they do not submit at all. Submission is a gift that one person chooses to give to another person. By contrast oppression is the act of extracting something from a person against their will. Submission and oppression are, therefore, opposite qualities of a relationship and not even remotely similar.

The submission of a good wife is a glorious thing that is intended to help her and her husband to have a contented life together. Problems in life and in marriage are more or less inevitable but when a woman is submissive to her man it is much more likely that those problems can be resolved harmoniously, without unpleasant quarrelling and without bitterness and resentment. Those people who look down on submission as if it were something demeaning, degrading or humiliating are merely showing that they have no understanding of what submission is and that they are quite ignorant of its power.

If you are a Christian wife who has been feeling uncomfortable with the Biblical demand that you submit to your husband then, I hope, these statements have perked up your interest and given you a glimpse of the bright cheerfulness ahead. Being submissive to your husband does not mean, as so many ignorant detractors of submission seem to think, that you should be an empty-headed bimbo, or that you should have no opinions of your own, or that you should be like a doormat.

If you are a Christian husband I hope that you will take care to understand the nature of submission and be careful to understand your responsibilities in response to your wife's submission to you. A submissive wife is not a justification for an abusive husband. God commands men to love their wives with the same kind of love that he [God] gave to his people ... that's a pretty tough assignment to give a mortal man and it doesn't include the possibility of abuse.

Usually when I am asked to comment regarding the submission of wives, I find myself in a debate where somebody is trying to prove from scripture that women do not really have to submit to their husbands or obey them. In this article I will attempt to demonstrate the error in such thinking. The argument is not especially difficult but it does tend to focus on the negative side of life rather a lot and consequently doesn't make submission sound very desirable. So, before I get into the detailed passage-by-passage arguments I would like to try and explain why a wife who is submissive towards her husband is such a glorious and powerful component of an earthly family and of the Christian family at large. The Christian message is, after all, “good news” and hence a reason for delighted cheerfulness and joy, but in these focused theological debates it sometimes seems that the Christian life is all long faces and dour clothes and instructions towards restrictive behaviour.

A submissive wife is one whose heart is inclined towards satisfying her husband and who has made a choice to be led by her husband, to accept his authority and to be his helper in the broad biblical sense of that word. She does not seek to please her husband because she is afraid of his rebuke or rejection or punishment, but because she delights to please him and finds satisfaction in doing so.

For a man, a submissive wife is a pleasure to be around because she helps him to feel peaceful and contented, she is a reliable helper who can be depended upon. He can trust her with his deepest desires and fears because he is not afraid of her scorn or her rejection or her anger. He can relax with her because he knows that even when he makes mistakes, she will be working with him to put them right and minimize the consequences rather than using them to prove a point or as an excuse for rejecting him in some way. A man who has a submissive wife acquires a greater sense of self respect because he knows that she respects his authority in her life and she is not in any way trying to belittle him.

A submissive wife is one who makes a choice not to resist her husband's will. That is not to say that she cannot disagree with him or that she cannot express an opinion. Indeed the submissive wife is, by definition, a strong woman and will usually therefore have her own opinions and these may often be different to the opinions of her husband. Can she express them? Of course she can, and indeed it might often be wrong for her not to express them since she is, after all, supposed to be her husband's helper, not his slave or doormat. Expressing her opinions and giving advice and suggestions will often be a valuable part of the help that she gives her husband.

Let us see how this works in life by using an analogy of a road for life and junctions in the road for each of life's decision points of choices. The married man and woman set off walking along the road of life and at each junction they choose which road to take next. Sooner or later they will arrive at a junction where they each desire to take a different road and hence there is a disagreement:

In the disharmonious family there is a quarrel, there is cajoling or bullying, there is intimidation and bitter words. The quarrel might last for the rest of their lives with neither giving ground and thus they never move on or, finally, either the husband and wife continue along one road together with one of them feeling resentful and both of them feeling bruised and wary of the other, or if they could not even obtain an unpleasant agreement then the marriage might simply fall apart and they separate, each taking a different road. None of these outcomes is pleasant or desirable.

When a submissive woman finds that her wishes conflict with those of her husband she has little or nothing to fear. If her husband is respectful then they will discuss the matter together agreeable, frankly and cheerfully and through the discussion they might reach either a compromise or one of them might change their mind completely and accept the other person's wishes. If this happens then they can then continue along the road they have now agreed upon with no sense of bitterness and without having expressed any angry words. However agreement might not be reached so then what? If they cannot reach agreement then the submissive wife needs only to obey her husband and accept his wishes graciously. Having done this there are now only a few possible outcomes, all of which have positive aspects and none of which is particularly terrible. In the first possible outcome they will take the road the husband selects and, in due course they will discover that they have chosen a good route through life and both will be happy. In the second possible outcome they will take the road the husband selects but, in due course, they discover that it was not such a good choice after all. All they do is turn around, go back to the junction and take a different road; there has been no need for argument, nobody has felt disrespected or belittled and they have not bruised one another. Although the husband's choice turned out to be a bad one, they have discovered the mistake together, discovered it quickly, and swiftly got back onto a better road and, in the process, they have strengthened their bond by having been able to disagree with dignity and mutual respect. They are not stuck in a perpetual argument at the junction, they have not separated and the process of finding a mutually acceptable road has not weakened their marriage.

If the submissive woman has a husband who is not respectful and who is inclined to abuse her gift of submissive then still she has little to fear. The worst possible outcome is that they will travel a bad road together until the next junction. Although the road might be bad it is good to remember the positive aspects of the situation: They have still remained together, they have kept alive the possibility of improving their relationship as they make their way through the troubles of life, they have not wasted time and damaged one another in a bitter quarrel and they are not still standing at the junction locked in argument. They have moved on, and therefore given themselves the hope of another choice later. This, remember, is the worst possible outcome. Even with a selfish husband it is still possible that he will acknowledge that the road is bad and that they will turn back to take another route.

I have mentioned this example of a road journey to try and illustrate that submission can bring real and worthwhile benefits to a marriage. The scripture also indicates that the act of submission by a woman is able to influence a bad man to change his ways but even if he doesn't change, her choice of submission will still allow her to avoid the worst of the possible problems that a bad marriage and husband might bring.


The key text concerning the submission of wives to their husbands

Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church-- for we are members of his body. "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." This is a profound mystery -- but I am talking about Christ and the church.

However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Taken from Paul's letter to the congregation at Ephesus, chapter 5, verses 22 to 33.


Submission in the Christian world

Submission of one person to another is described in various forms in the Christian faith. There is the submission of wives to husbands, of slaves to masters, of Christians to one another, of Christians to the ruling authorities, and Christians to God. If my own experience is anything to rely on, then it seems that we Christians do not much like the idea of submission and, if we think about it at all, then we do so on order to reduce its application to our day to day lives. In this document I hope to redress the balance slightly.


We don't really like the idea though ...

In the “Western World” of the twenty-first century, the form of submission that is perhaps most frequently contested is that of wives to husbands. It has been pointed out on several occasions and by various people that the scriptures do not say that wives are to obey their husbands — only that they are to submit to them. Now, each of the clauses in the preceding sentence is true; the problem comes with the word “only” that is used to connect the two clauses. The women (and many men) who want to limit the authority of a husband over his wife are seriously mistaken if they think that a husband can expect less compliance from a submissive wife than from an obedient one; the truth is quite the reverse. Obedience is easy. Submission is hard. Obedience demands little. Submission demands much. It is not possible for a wife to submit to her husband without also being prepared to obey him; a submissive wife is also an obedient wife.


The meanings of the words "submit" and "obey"

If I obey then I do what those who have authority over me tell me to do. There must be an explicit command given before I can obey it and consequently if no command is given then it is not possible for me to be either obedient or disobedient. Obedience does not of itself require me to be cheerful, willing, co-operative or contented. I can be surly, rude, bitter and unhelpful and still be obedient. I do not have to be willing to be merely obedient because mere obedience can be forced upon me. For these reasons, obedience is easy when compared to full submission.

In order to submit to a person who has authority over me, I do not need to wait for an explicit command but instead I can attempt to anticipate the commands and thus avoid the need for them to be given. Anticipating the commands does not mean that I can substitute my own agenda or my own will but rather that I am trying to imagine what the person in authority will want me to do next; I am trying to make my will conform to theirs. Attempting to anticipate the commands does not allow me to disobey any command that has been explicitly given — those I am still required to obey. If I am to be truly submissive I must also learn to be contented, cheerful, willing and co-operative even if I do not like doing what is required of me. Finally submission is a choice that I must continuously make. It can be seen therefore that submission is far more demanding than merely obedience and requires much more of me than does mere obedience.

It is also worth repeating that submission is NEVER enforced upon a person. Submission is the opposite of oppression. In fact submission is a gift that one person gives to another. In a marriage, submission is the wife's gift to her husband. If the husband is wise he will treasure that gift and handle it very carefully because his own happiness depends on it. Submission is a gift that must be renewed each day or even each moment.


Trying to wriggle out of the obligation to obey

It has been claimed that a wife need only obey her husband when her husband's will conforms to the will of God and that is right for a wife to disobey her husband when what he commands is wrong. At first sight this argument seems to be very reasonable but unfortunately it leads into chaos and emptiness and also leaves the wives in a very cruel “no-win” situation. It is true that all husbands are fallen and sinful and it follows that they will make mistakes and that they might desire and command what they ought not desire and command. It is also true, but more frequently overlooked, that all wives are fallen and sinful and it follows that they will make mistakes and that they might desire what they ought not desire. God knew both of these facts when he arranged for scripture to be written and yet he still gave wives the instruction to submit to their husbands. He knew that husbands would wield the authority that he gave them imperfectly and he knew that wives would respond to that authority imperfectly. It is a terrible wrong for husbands to abuse their authority but it is no less terribly wrong for wives to reject or usurp their husband's authority.

Some of the people who claim that wives have the right to selectively submit to their husbands have put much emphasis on three New Testament passages - Acts 5:1-10, Acts 4:19 (and a similar passage in Acts 5:29) and Ephesians 5:21. It is worth looking at these to see what they add to the debate.

Dominic Bnonn Tennant #fundie bnonn.thinkingmatters.org.nz

Man’s major problem since the fall is that his notion of what is good and what is evil is fundamentally broken. Indeed, this is what it means to be a sinner: we judge what is good by what we want, and also (by extension) by what other people want. Good and evil for us are centered on ourselves. Because sinners reject God, man’s flourishing is the only and ultimate good we can conceive.

This attitude is repaired to some extent when God regenerates us; when he changes our dispositions to “aim” toward him, rather than toward ourselves. We come to realize that the standard of goodness we’ve been aiming at is too low. Far too low. We learn that there is none righteous—not one!—and that from our youth, every inclination of our hearts is only evil continually (Romans 3:10; Genesis 8:21; 6:5). This is what Jesus saves us from.

But old habits die hard. We continue to instinctively judge actions by how they affect us and other people. That’s our natural shortcut for telling what is right and what is wrong. We have to work hard to overcome it; we have to learn to change our instincts; to judge actions by how they relate to God. It is a steep learning curve to come to grips with Paul’s statement in Romans 14:23 that whatever does not proceed from faith is sin. That nice atheist helping the old lady across the road? Yeap, that’s sin. It’s not as bad a sin as Ted Bundy raping and murdering young women—but it isn’t done with the intent of honoring God, and so no matter how well it affects other people, it is done in rejection of goodness itself (God). So it is sin.

The trouble is, because as sinners we are naturally predisposed to reject God’s authority and goodness and substitute them with our own, we should actually expect to feel loathing—or at least unease—about how God deals with people. (Isn’t this why the doctrine of hell is so unpopular?)

As Christians, we should be careful to test our kneejerk reactions against the standard of God himself. But when it comes to election, we quickly see that our initial feeling of how unfair God would be to save only some people is 180 degrees to how we should feel:

/!\God would be quite unfair to save anyone.

Our intuition that God should save all people rather than just some is based in our false but natural feeling that all people deserve saving. Even after we are converted and know better, we still tend to think of people as basically good when of course they are the opposite. But once we look at human beings from God’s perspective instead of our own, we realize that he ought to punish us all in hell forever. He ought not let a single one of us into heaven. That’s why it’s called the “gospel of grace”: grace is undeserved favor.

In other words, not a single person ever has any claim whatsoever on God’s salvation. If God decides to give it to some people, he is being gratuitously kind to them. He is not giving them what they deserve. Commensurately, his failing to be gratuitously kind to other people is not a defect or imperfection on his part. He has utterly no obligation to those he didn’t pick for salvation—because they have utterly no basis to expect his favor. He is not unfair to give them what they deserve—hell—he is, in fact, perfectly fair.

Election and God’s end-game

I noted in the previous part of this series that God’s purpose in creation—his end-game if you will—is to glorify himself. And I argued that God’s glory is simply his revealed perfection. With this in mind, it is actually easy to see why God does not damn everyone, and why he does not save everyone either:

(>) God’s undeserved love and mercy is part of his perfection
(>)God’s holy wrath and judgment is part of his perfection

If God wishes to reveal his perfection fully, he must reveal his undeserved mercy and his holy judgment. Which means he must elect some sinners to salvation, and damn others to hell. It is only a man-centered moral calculus that finds this offensive. When we cast it in light of God’s revealed perfection, election is literally a glorious doctrine.

Matthew Gregory McLaughlin #fundie matthewgregorymclaughlin.wordpress.com

– – – For Christians Only – – –

BROKEN REEDS.

Stoning Sodomites with bullets is way too biblical for today’s self-professed champions of ‘moral-values’. While eagerly seeking donations from Bible-believing Christians, many are actually ashamed of the Bible.

“Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” (Mark 8:38)

Two so-called ‘Christian’ organizations that condemned the Sodomite Suppression Act are Save California and Pacific Justice Institute. Both refused to acknowledge the following:

1. God’s word says sodomy is a crime that deserves death (Romans 1:32); and

2. God will destroy nations that tolerate sodomites (2 Peter 2:6).

Both groups condemned the Sodomite Suppression Act without making any reference to those truths. In fact, both organizations officially voiced the exact opposite position, to wit:

1. Sodomites do not deserve death, and

2. We must live with sodomites in mutual tolerance.

What a shameful capitulation to the sodomites. Both those organizations now have their share of culpability in the deaths of all the people of the State of California who are surely going to be killed by God’s wrath.

“When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.” (Ezekiel 3:18)

CAN WE JUDGE? DEATH PENALTY?

A bewildering ‘Christian’ response to the Sodomite Suppression Act has come from those who seem to think that it dispatches souls into hell. They must think this is the case because they have objected to it by saying such odd things as, ‘Christ wants to save everybody‘ and ‘we are all sinners in need of forgiveness‘ and so forth.

Those are theological statements that pertain to the salvation of souls. They are inapplicable to the operation of a human criminal justice system so they are not valid objections to the Sodomite Suppression Act .

Those who engage in sodomy deserve death, just like those who commit any other capital crime. We can hope that criminals will get their souls saved, but even if they do, it doesn’t relieve them from the necessity of paying the penalty for their crimes.

This is common sense and good judgement. It is quite unfortunate that some mushy-headed Christians resist it, turning the grace of God into lasciviousness (Jude 4).

St Paul approved of the death penalty when he said, “For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die…” (Acts 25:11).

He also described the death penalty as being one of the essential duties of government:

“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil…. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” (Romans 13:3-4)

Please again note the distinctions between different sorts of judgements. The teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ pertain to lofty principles of heavenly righteousness and teach us to be kind and forgiving in personal dealings with our neighbours. Christ’s teachings occur between individuals and God’s judgement of the heart. These things are a quite different subject matter than Moses’ law which was the legal system governing the Jewish people.

Compared to God’s own perfect righteousness we all fall short and have no basis to think ourselves worthy to judge other men’s souls; yet this objection is inapplicable to civil magistrates in the performance of their earthly duties in which they must judge criminals and punish wickedness in the name of the law.

You may turn the other cheek and nobly forgive personal slights, but a government that turns the other cheek to let criminals go free is neither pious nor holy – it is devilish.

“¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:17-19)

“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet… Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.” (Romans 1:26-27, 32)

drealm #fundie coalpha.org

Consequences are the only way to ensure good behavior in women. Women need consequences for divorce in order to remain married. My assumption here is all women by default have no morals. A woman will choose to remain married on the basis of relative consequences. Below is my list of strategic consequences I see enabling marriage, in no particular order.

1. Date or "marry" an illegal alien. She'll have no legal recourse and will be afraid to approach the law. The consequence of her leaving you will be she'll have to expose herself more to chances of being deported.

2. Date or "marry" a woman who doesn't speak English. Similiar to above, she'll have no way to understand the legal system. She'll need translation. The biggest consequence here is she'll have to learn English.

3. Date or "marry" a devout religious woman, who's denomination includes some aspect of going to hell for committing divorce or infidelity. The consequence here: burning in hell.

4. Date or "marry" a woman and create a closed loop social network for her. Indian culture is good at this. In Indian culture divorce rarely happens because the women know they'll be shunned by their entire social network. So the consequence here are losing all her friends.

5. Date or "marry" a woman and live in their foreign country. By living abroad you're not giving them the standard of living in your own country. Doing so allows you to hold up citizenship as in incentive for remaining with you. The consequence here is withdrawing chances of citizenship.

Bible Man #fundie talkorigins.org

Evolutionsts Paul Mirecki [<a href="http://www.fstdt.com/blog/article.php?id_article=8" target="_blank">this guy</a>] now knows of the wrath of God. His put downs of creationists were exposed in an email he wrote. Then he wanted to take Creationism out of the science curriculum at Kansas and move it to a mythology class. But the Creator had other plans! God led two of his servants sent to give Mirecki the butt whipping he deserved! After getting out of the hospital with head injuries, Mirecki then was forced to resign his position at the University of Kansas! I pray that other evolutionists will repent or receive the same or worse fate!!! God is more powerful than the words of any darwinist. If you don't repent immediately and admit that God created the world exactly like He said He did in the Bible, don't be surprised if someday you wind up in a hospital - or in HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bob IN CHRIST #fundie ruthlessreviews.com

"Son, it is not too late! My God COMMANDS me to go unto the wicked (EZ 3:19) and "break heads" for Him. You have a lot of hatred in you, but can you LOVE??? Or are you just one of those who thinks that "love" is to be found in a bath-house with a line of all your "buddies"? Is not AIDS PROOF that God has had it with the wicked (EZ 33:8) and you are going to die screaming, like a scared little girl? Just wait until you get to Hell, Mr. Cale! THEN the real fun starts- but not for you! There are no trees to hug and there is none of your "happy pills" that you take to escape the truth of DEATH! None of that is in HELL! It is a BAD place, Hombre, and you will be there with all those who have denied Him and fornicated with thousands in despicable calumies against His Word and perhaps you can have a nice, cool glass of ice-water with Hitler and Stalin and Mao and Mother Teresa and maybe Bill Clinton will be there too- SHOCKED Mr. Cale? The Cult of Mary is no path to heaven, only Jesus is (JO 18:37) and that wicked whore of Baal will be there right with the adulturer and hater of virtue Slick Willie! But there will be NO ice water to slake your thirst- SATAN will laugh and you will cry but FOREVER you wicked venal black hearted child of wickedness!

GET SAVED Mr. Cale- repent, and repent HARD! Be honest and for true or...YOU'LL BE SORRY!!!!!!!!

And no matter what, I'mmaking it my business to get this trash off of the Internet. Free speech? Give me a break. Look at the Courts, Mr. Cale- WE'RE WINNING! Your "freedom" is numbered in days. I'm going to shut you down and prosecuted to boot! COUNT ON IT SLIME!

You have been warned. Now GET THEE TO JESUS, do not pass go, do not collect $200- WAKE UP AND BE IN HIS GLORY AND JOIN ME IN HIS AFTERLIFE!!!!!!!!!"


[this is just half of the post, by the way; the rest is basically more of the same]

natsumihanaki20 #fundie deviantart.com

A reply to TheEyeOfTheLight

I blocked you because you are crazy. In this world there are two type of persons: those whose values are defined by society and do not like to think (you) , and those whose value are defined by reality and like to think (me). You are amongst those whose values is defined by society and do not like to think. I warned you lovingly that what you do is wrong, but you keep on denying reality and God to satisfy your delusions. I can see which kind of person you are, and you are the type with whom talking about reality and showing proof is a waste of time. You are a hypocrite, and delusional. You are the kind who has blindfolded themselves from the truth. You claim to respect my beliefs. Yet, you came here with the purport to change them. You claim to believe in God, and yet in the comment you said that probably God is not true. You claim to be interested in learning, but when confronted with evidence you ignore it and plunge your head into the sand. I don't hate you, but I don't see the point in repeating the truth when you have unwilling ears. It seems you have not read the Bible. If you had read it, you wouldn't say such biblical myths.

I'm not being a hypocrite. All I'm saying is what is written in the Bible and what facts support. Facts show that asexuality is as healthy as heterosexuality, that's why priest practice it. Jesus himself said that being eunuch ( not interested in sex) is okay, whilst God condemned homosexuality in the New Testament and in the Old Testament and homosexuals were listed as those who will burn in Hell. God commanded his followers to hate sin, and to love the sinner. One can love a homosexual man whilst detesting his homosexuality. One can love a murderer whilst detesting the murder he committed. One can love a man without loving his sin. And, by 'love' God means that we should do our best to help the fella turn away from sin and to help him whenever his in trouble (for example, if a sinner is starving, we should give him food).

Sin is something that one can stop doing. We are all born wicked, and with a tendency to sin. But, through God we can all overcome sin. Homosexuality is not inborn; there's no evidence to support that. Homosexuality can be changed, and there are many studies which prove it. For instance, a study performed by Robert Spitzer ( a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, who was amongst the groups of psychologist whose efforts contributed to homosexuality stopping to be considered a disorder) showed that highly motivated homosexuals can change their sexual orientation. Thus, homosexuality is a condition which can be changed as long as the gay individual is has enough desire to change. In the same way a highly motivated drug-addict can stop being so, a highly motivated homosexual can change his sexual orientation. Thus, it is not a pointless battle to fight against addicting sin, but a battle that the one who perseveres will eventually win. God did not condemn people who suffer from homosexuality to the lake of fire, for he gave them the ability to change. It's up to homosexuals to decide whether they want to keep on committing atrocities with their bodies or change. It's up to them to decide whether they want to go to Hell or Heaven. Having said this, there's no such thing as homosexuals, but rather people who suffer from homosexuality. Since homosexuality is an illness with a cure, there's no such thing as homosexual, since homosexuals are neither born gay nor condemned to remain that way.

What's the point of the study? Not too long ago, many Christians believed whites were superiors to blacks, and thought the Bible supported their beliefs, when it is written that in God everyone is equal and that we are all descendants of Adam and Eve. The fact that a majority of Christians are being brainwashed by public schools since tender ages to accept homosexuality does not mean that homosexuality is accepted in the Bible. This shouldn't surprise you but, many studies have shown that an alarming number of Christians has never read the Bible, and believe myths about it. Many Christians even believe certain sins to be okay whilst they are condemned in the Bible, and other laughable falsehoods. Homosexuality is literally condemned in the Bible, by God, Jesus, and Paul. But since most Christians do not read the Bible, it's not surprising that they practice heresy.

What I told is the opposite of what you accuse me of. I said that our duty is to forever help sinners overcome their sins, and their worldly troubles. Look, we are all sinners, and we all forever be so. But only to those who forever try to overcome their mistakes, God will reward them with Heaven. Our duty is to eternally try to overcome our sins. Our duty is persevere as we walk the thorny path to Heaven, and at the same time lovingly help those who we find lost in the way to our destination. But, those who give themselves up to evil and practice it will burn in Hell (unless they repent). God loves all of his creation. But, He is just, and his love will not pervert His justice. There's Heaven and there's Hell, and wicked people will not go to Heaven (unless they repent since repentance will cleanse a man of all his evil and make him good) Those who sin are not forever cast away from God (whilst they live), as God is always willing to forgive them and help them overcome sin. I dare say, God weeps and feels sad when any individual chooses to sin and lives a sinful live without ever repenting of his mistakes. Men who suffer from homosexuality will burn in Hell unless they repent and try to overcome their illness. Men who steal will burn in Hell, unless they repent and try their best not to steal again.

The ten commandments do not state anything in relation to homosexuality, but there are other sins not mentioned in the Ten Commandments which God will punish people from. That is why, Christian should read the whole Bible, rather than cherry-pick a few parts of it. Homosexuality is condemned anywhere where it appears in the Bible as vile degrading feelings which are an abomination unto God, and God always punished homosexuals, who did not repent, for it. Homosexuality is condemned alongside zoophilia and adultery in Leviticus. It is condemned in a particular section dedicated to sexual immorality:

Leviticus: “If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. If a man lies with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed perversion; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man takes a woman and her mother also, it is depravity; he and they shall be burned with fire, that there may be no depravity among you. If a man lies with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal. If a woman approaches any animal and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

In the new Testament homosexuality is condemned. Besides the many verses condemning sexual immorality (as defined in the Bible), there are a number of verses exclusively condemning homosexuality. For brevity’s sake, I will include only one. Also as there’s a controversy over its accurate translations, I will include the original text as well.

Corinthian 1: “Or don't you know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor extortioners, will inherit the Kingdom of God. Such were some of you, but you were washed. But you were sanctified. But you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and in the Spirit of our God”

....

(arsenokoites): homosexual, men who sleep with men
Composition:
Arsen (variant of árrhen): male
Koíte (variant of koité): marriage bed, sexual intercourse, bed, mat.

Extra: arsenokoites was first used by Paul as a reference to Leviticus. So, claims that it does not mean gays do it being used later to describe other acts are invalid (though it was still used to describe homosexuality). The word clearly means homosexual, and is a reference to Leviticus.

?a?a??? (malakos): soft, effeminate, doing things that women do, acting like a woman, feeling or doing stuff appropriate for women.
Extra: malakos comes from a myth about a king named malakos who acted like a female by dressing like a woman, and did other things considered to be womanly. But, by Paul’s time it had come to mean other things. It came to describe any sort of action considered appropriate for women, or anything associated with the female sex. It meant cross dressing, women were considered morally weak thus it also meant morally weak, emotional, homosexual, and other stuff. Taking into account that Paul and his disciples were emotional and cried in a number of times (weeping was considered feminine, and thus; men who cried were considered malakos), and taking into account Paul’s statement that spiritually men and women are equal, in this case it refers to homosexuals (men who harbored homosexual feelings were considered effeminate since those were feelings women were supposed to possess) and transgenders. It could also mean being morally weak, but considering Paul’s statements that women and men were spiritually equal, it seems unlikely he meant morally weak. Taking into account Paul’s statements condemning homosexuality (both in emotions and actions just like adultery) and transgenderism, it must mean both of them. However, considering homosexuality is condemned in the same text (see arsenokoites), it could mean solely transgenderism. I myself believe that in this case, malakos means homosexuals and transgenders due to historical reasons. Contrary to a common myth, it does not mean catamite. The belief that it means catamite stems from a passage in which malakos (malakos can also means softness of clothes, and the like) is used to describe the softness of catamite’s clothes. But, this conclusion ignores the fact that it is also used to describe the clothes of the nobility and other figures who were not catamite.

Anyway, back to the given task of preaching the truth to delusional ears, judging is not a crime. Judging is not condemned in the Bible, hypocrisy is. Judging is essential for life, as it’s something necessary for every action we take. Unless we exercise judgement in every facet of our life, from going to the grocery store and when confronted with sin. Unless we judge, we will be weak before Satan, as we will be unable to distinguish righteousness from unrighteousness. In the Bible, one must take heed to the context of every passage. In this “judge not” passage, Jesus is preaching against hypocrisy. If he was condemning judgment (as determining whether one of our brothers is doing wrong or not), he would not have said that we can help our brother take the splinter out of his eye, if we have taken the log out of ours (in other words, implying that we can judge whether our brother has a splinter in his eye or not, whether he is doing wrong or not). In other words, we can help our brothers overcome sin and judge whether they are sinning or not (so as to help them turn away from the path to Hell), but only if we are not practicing the same sin (note how both men have wood in their eyes, the same sin). It is a sin and a crime to judge someone as evil and preach against their sin when we are committing the same sin (like a man preaching against adultery when he is committing adultery). But, when we are committing a different sin, it’s okay to determine that someone else is sinning and help them overcome sin whilst we ourselves try to overcome our shortcomings, but we have to acknowledge that we are both sinners. Judgement is fine when it is educated and founded on God’s words. Thus, it is perfectly okay for us to judge or deduce that homosexuality is wrong based on reason, studies that has proven its unhealthy nature, and condemnation by God. It is okay for us to judge homosexuals as wicked, as long as we remember that we both are. It is our duty to distinguish the evil people do to help them.

Ezekiel: “ 'O wicked man, you will surely die,' and you do not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require from your hand. But if you on your part warn a wicked man to turn from his way and he does not turn from his way, he will die in his iniquity, but you have delivered your life.”

We are all wicked, but only those who strive to overcome their sins will go to Heaven. Salvation is not solely through faith, as Jesus himself confirmed. One may believe in God as one pleases. But unless we try to follow his statutes, we’ll burn in Hell.
Mathew: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

If it’s a crime to execute or incarcerate humans who commit crimes against humanities, we should not punish murders. History has shown us that evil should be punished, as it affects all communities. Homosexuality is a depravity and a crime against humanity, thus it should be punished. However, they should only be punished for the crime of committing homosexuality if there’s any evidence against them, rather than due to a witness or mere accusation. I myself believe all sinners should be put in jail rather than executed, so that they have a chance to repent. I believe sinners should be put in jail and put to do labor. But, I understand if sometimes circumstances do not allow for such lenience.
Love as defined by God and reason is about helping your brother, not letting them walk to their death. There’s no love in allowing your brother to walk to his death by doing evil, without attempting to save them.

I hope God will help you understand what love is, and that He will free you from your delusions. Now, don’t misunderstand me and think I’ve called you crazy out of hate. I’m the kind who speaks the truth or their thoughts out loud, without meaning any form of aggression. I’ve concluded you are crazy due to your writings and denial of reality. However, a more accurate term to describe would probably be stupid. But, regardless, I’m going to pray and hope God’s frees you the demon in your heart, and that all goes well in your life. May you live a long happy life with God by you side!

Mark Ballenger #fundie applygodsword.com

Perhaps the hardest question I’ve personally asked about the Bible is, “Why does God kill babies in the Old Testament?” I’ve never doubted God’s goodness, but if I’m being honest, seeing God command the death of children in the Old Testament has been very difficult to grapple with.

We are taught from a young age at church that God is love. We are told he is the kindest being who has or ever could exist. But then as we grow older we begin to read books of Scripture like Hosea and we read that God condones “little ones” being dashed against the rocks and pregnant women being torn open. If people don’t fully reject God because they find these things repulsive, often times people come to the conclusion that the Old Testament and the New Testament are divided. The Old Testament is about the God of anger but in the New Testament God changes and becomes a God of love.

There is a better way, however, to interpret these difficult passages. Everything in the Bible becomes much clearer when we have Jesus and the Gospel in mind. Jesus said that all of Scripture is actually about him (Matthew 24:27, John 5:39). Therefore when we read about children dying in the Old Testament we must think, “How does this point to Jesus and the Gospel?”

Everything in the Bible points to Jesus Christ, even the death of babies.

Why Does God Kill Babies in the Old Testament? Answer: Man’s Sin

There are many places in the Old Testament where God commands people to wipe out other people, including women, children, and even infants. Common examples include the death of the first born babies in Egypt when Pharaoh refused to release the Israelites (Exodus 11:1-10), the total annihilation of Sodom and Gomora which included the children (Genesis 19:23-29), God’s command to Saul to destroy Amalek including “both man and woman, child and infant” (1 Samuel 15:3), and throughout Deuteronomy God commands the people to destroy the people in the lands they will be invading (Deuteronomy 2:34; 3:6; 20:16-18).

Why does he do this? Why does God kill babies throughout the Old Testament? When Moses receives the 10 Commandments, God said:

You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.” (Exodus 20:4-6)

The simple answer to why God killed babies in the Old Testament is because of their parents’ sin. When we do not understand the scope of sin and the punishment a holy God requires of those who transgress against him, we will not understand how God could command the Israelites to destroy whole nations, including their children and infants.

The Death of Babies Does Not Mean God’s Love Is Lower Than We Thought. It Means Man’s Sin Is Greater Than We Thought

We get upset and confused when we read about God commanding the Israelites to wipe out groups of people, including children and infants, because we think this is not fair. By “not fair” we mean those children did not deserve to be killed. The Bible affirms this. It never says God punished the children for the children’s’ sins. In fact, all those children who died all went to heaven.

2 Samuel 12 gives us some good context here. David and Bathsheba sinned in adultery. They had a child through that affair. It states:

13 Then David confessed to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”

Nathan replied, “Yes, but the Lord has forgiven you, and you won’t die for this sin. 14 Nevertheless, because you have shown utter contempt for the word of the Lord by doing this, your child will die.”

15 After Nathan returned to his home, the Lord sent a deadly illness to the child of David and Uriah’s wife. . . .

22 David replied, “I fasted and wept while the child was alive, for I said, ‘Perhaps the Lord will be gracious to me and let the child live.’ 23 But why should I fast when he is dead? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him one day, but he cannot return to me.”

24 Then David comforted Bathsheba, his wife, and slept with her. She became pregnant and gave birth to a son, and David named him Solomon. The Lord loved the child 25 and sent word through Nathan the prophet that they should name him Jedidiah (which means “beloved of the Lord”), as the Lord had commanded. (2 Samuel 12:13-15, 22-25).

The child dies because of David’s sin, not its own sin. But the child does go to heaven as we see in 2 Samuel 12:23. As we will talk about later in this article, all of this seems to foreshadow the death of Jesus. The first born died, which is a theme we see throughout Scripture. Surely this points to Jesus, who is the ultimate atoning sacrifice. When God chooses Solomon, David and Bathsheba’s second child, this shows God’s desire to restore what was lost because of sin, just as he restores those who put their faith in Jesus.

God “punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate [him]” (Exodus 20:5) is the law that was enforced when God commanded the death of babies in the Old Testament. This law does not cast a shadow on the love of God but a light on the sin of man. When we read about the deaths of babies in the Old Testament, the response should not be, “Wow, God’s love is so small.” Rather, we should say, “Man’s sin is so bad. Thank God Jesus came to pay this price so we do not have to.” When we read about the punishment of sin, we should say, “That’s why Jesus had to come.”

(Note: There is a biblical difference between “kill” and “murder.” Kill is used when you have the right to take a life. Capital punishment, war, and in other such contexts it is never murder since taking life here is appropriate. Murder occurs when you take a life and you do not have that right. God can never murder anyone since he is sovereign over all life. When and how we all die is God ordained. He decides when we will enter into our eternal destination. Whether it be at two weeks old our 102 years old, God is the one who decides when our time on this earth begins and ends.

Also, in the context of when these laws were given, Israel was a theocracy. Thus the commands were given literally by God himself. God lived with them in the tabernacle and the temple and showed himself in visible ways through incredible and miraculous ways (parting the red sea, appearing as a cloud of fire, producing water out of rocks, manna from heaven, etc.). These extreme laws were validated by God’s extreme clarity and manifest presence. As we will discuss next, the New Covenant changes our relationship with these laws. God is not dwelling among us like in a theocracy. Thus any argument to obey or recreate new laws like these old law are unbiblical.)

Children Should No Longer Be Punished for Their Parents Sin Because the New Covenant Replaced the Old Covenant

What makes this whole topic even a bit more confusing at first glance is that in other parts of Scripture God says that children should not be held responsible for the sins of their parents or ancestors. Ezekiel 18:1-4 states:

The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? 3 As I live, declares the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

So does Exodus 20:5-6 contradict with Ezekiel 18:1-4? No. It is important to realize that the Bible is a progressive narrative outlining God’s redemptive plan for humanity. The Bible has a story line and there are many seasons in the Bible which are different than other seasons. Exodus 20:5-6 is describing the penalty for sin. Ezekiel 18:1-4 is pointing to the ultimate solution for sin in the cross of Jesus Christ. Our children will not need to pay for our sins because our sins are paid for by God’s Son. Look at the movement found in Jeremiah 31:27-33, for example:

27 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man and the seed of beast. 28 And it shall come to pass that as I have watched over them to pluck up and break down, to overthrow, destroy, and bring harm, so I will watch over them to build and to plant, declares the Lord.29 In those days they shall no longer say:

“‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
and the children’s teeth are set on edge.’

30 But everyone shall die for his own iniquity. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge.

31 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. 33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.”

Ezekiel 18:3 says “this proverb shall no more be used” and Jeremiah 31:27 says “the days are coming” and Jeremiah 31:29 says, “no longer say.” Why were these proverbs about children being punished for their parents sins once relevant but then we have passages speaking about the day when they will no longer be relevant? Jeremiah 31:31 states, “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant . . .” Of course we know this New Covenant is accomplished through Christ. Christ is the reason the punishment of our parents’ sin should no longer affect us. 2 Corinthians 3:7-11 again shows us how the Old Covenant was never meant to last but was to be replaced by the New Covenant ratified by the blood of Christ:

Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? 9 For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory.10 Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. 11 For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.”

The Old Covenant brought through Moses “was being brought to an end.” In other words, no, the Bible does not contradict itself. When Exodus 20:5-6 says the children will be punished because of their parent’s hatred towards God, this reminds us of the terrible consequence of sin. That was the purpose of the law, to show us how terrible our sin is, “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20). Human sin was present before the law, but when we are given the law we become aware of how wrong our sin actually is.

While Exodus 20:5-6 and passages about God commanding babies and children to be killed in the Old Testament show us how terrible human sin is, Bible verses like Ezekiel 18:1-4 and Jeremiah 31:27-33 point to the coming solution in Jesus Christ. We are living in the days talked about in those Bible passages. Christ has come. Christ has died for our sins. Therefore no one needs to bear the punishment of sin anymore. Now the only people who will be punished for their own sin are those who refuse to allow Christ, God himself, to take their punishment on himself.

Jesus came to fulfill the law, including the law that children will have to pay the remaining balance on their parent’s sin.

The Death of Babies Mentioned in Hosea Remind Us of the Gospel

Hosea is a beautiful book that contains historical accounts that actually happened. However, this is clearly also a book that points to Jesus. God tells Hosea to marry a prostitute, Gomer. Hosea marries her, has children with her, but despite all his kindness and love towards her she returns to her life of prostitution. Instead of killing her as she deserves for her betrayal, God tells Hosea to purchase her back again (Hosea 3:1-5). Clearly this is a picture of Christ and his church. He saves us from our sin, he gives us good gifts, we still rebel, but he still pays the price of our sin and takes us back again and again because of the work of Christ on our behalf.

When you read further in Hosea, God begins to prophesy through Hosea about the sins and consequences of rebellious people. Notice in every passage where there is a promise of severe punishment like the death of children, there is also a very clear explanation that this consequence is due to sin:

. . . as Shalman devastated Beth Arbel on the day of battle, when mothers were dashed to the ground with their children. So will it happen to you, Bethel, because your wickedness is great” (Hosea 10:14-15).

“. . . Even if they bear children, I will slay their cherished offspring.” My God will reject them because they have not obeyed him; they will be wanderers among the nations (Hosea 9:16-17).

Notice that these massive consequences of sin are “because your wickedness is great” and “because they have not obeyed him.”

Sometimes It’s Not About Punishment. Sometimes God Allows Children to Die Because of the Choices of Their Parents

I’ve never heard an atheist or someone who despises God for the death of children in the Old Testament say something like, “God could have taken away the adults freedom and allowed their choices not to matter thus saving the children.” No, they want it both ways. They don’t like the idea of God being God but they also don’t like it when he allows people to feel the weight of freedom. When nations sin, God often removes his favor. When enemies invade, the children suffer because the parents’ actions caused God’s favor to be removed.

In Matthew 18:21-35 Jesus tells a parable where a servant could not pay a great debt owed to his master, “Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt” (Matthew 18:25). Here the Old Testament and the New Testament mirror each other in that it shows the consequences of our sins actually can affect other people, including our children. The wickedness of Nazi Germany brought Allie bombs to the whole country of Germany, killing not just soldiers but many innocent babies. The consequences of sinful adults in war often affect innocent children.

Human sin never happens in a vacuum. Your sin never just affects you. Just read through Joshua 7 and see how Achan’s sin caused God’s favor to be removed from his community. Eventually his sin caused the death of his whole family. Likewise, all humans have been given the weighty gift of real freedom. But real freedom has real consequences. No one could stand living in an existence where our choices really didn’t matter, where human freedom was just a mirage. And yet in our sin we also complain about human consequences.

Consequences are an essential ingredient to true freedom. We are free whether we like it or not, therefore our sin will hurt other people in our lives whether we like this truth or not. When you don’t go to work, your kids don’t have food to eat. When adults go to war with one another, children die. That’s the reality of our world. Likewise, that’s the clear takeaway when we see the how the parent’s sin caused the death of their children in the Old Testament. The parents were given a true choice to protect or not to protect their kids. When they forsook God, they forsook his favor and protection and the children suffered the consequences of the parent’s choices.

As horrible as this reality is, God uses this fact – the fact that our sin is so evil it will affect the innocent in our lives – to reveal to us just how evil our sinfulness really is. Nothing will awaken you more to the atrocity of your sinfulness than when you see it hurting those you love most.

In Matthew 18:27 it adds, “The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.” The way God cancels our debt is through the blood of Christ. The point God is making through the death of innocent children due to the sin of their parents is not to show that God is hateful but to show how great and wicked our sin really is. Only when we realize this will we rely on the sacrifice of Christ as we should.

Why Did God Kill Babies in the Old Testament? He Ultimately Didn’t, Man’s Sin Killed These Innocent Children. Sin Always Produces Death

Everything in the Bible is about Jesus and his Gospel. God even uses the sins of parents which bring great consequences of evil upon innocent children as a means of pointing everyone to our need for Jesus. The death of babies in the Bible is not because of God’s wrath, but because of God’s wrath in response to evil sins committed by people. Man’s sin brings God’s judgment and removes God’s favor, and often the result of this horrible atrocity results in children being affected.

But this is why Jesus came to save us. He came to save us from these awful sins and the consequences of them. So when we read of babies dying at the command of God, we must praise God for the gospel which is able to save us from such divine wrath towards sin. We must reexamine our poor understanding of how awful our sin really is. We mustn’t blame God, we must blame human sin for the death of babies in the Old Testament. This should then awaken in us a greater appreciation and love for the gospel of Jesus Christ which alone can save us from such wrath.

Next time you come to a difficult passage in Scripture, filter it through the lens of Jesus and the Cross and see if it does not become instantly clear. God killed his own son in the New Testament so none of us would have to see the effects of human sin that are so clearly displayed in the Old Testament.

Laura Medrano #fundie facebook.com

People of God please pray for this madness to end. We must pray and cry out to God and repent for are Nation this abomination is filtering the churches and endless murder of unborn children and drag queens to read to small children at Libraries telling them it's ok to want to be a man dress like a women! The true answer is PRAY and CRYING OUT TO THE LORD! Judgement will hit this land if we the church don't pray and cry out . We are a sleep church stop all this entertainment and hand clapping for each other in the church on sunday for are works . PRAY AND REPENT

H. Wayne Pyle #fundie 1timothy4-13.com

The wealthy liquor industry has so controlled the media over the past 50 years that most Americans today believe prohibition was a failure. They have literally been able to brainwash this country into believing that the out-lawing of booze hurt our citizens. It is an outright lie! Prohibition was a success. If liquor were controlled today, we would not need the massive amounts of tax dollars to build new prisons. Most crimes and accidents are committed "under the influence."

H. Wayne Pyle, chairman of the Central Baptist Social Action in Quincy, Illinois, has compiled a list of the benefits. They are impressive!

Wife beating and lack of family support decreased 82%
Drunkenness was down 55.3%
Assault was down 53.1%
Vagrancy decreased 525.8%
Disorderly conduct decreased 51.5%
Delinquency was down 50%
Cirrhosis deaths decreased 50%
Houses of correction had a 4 times reduction of inmates
General domestic complaints decreased 3 times
County hospitals had the lowest death rate in history
Many correctional institutions were closed
Alcohol almost disappeared
Even prostitution decreased
Crime throughout the nation, excluding Chicago, was down 38 %
Crime in Chicago was DOWN 25%
Savings accounts tripled
Insurance policies written were doubled
Real estate values increased
Families were better clothed

W. F. Price #sexist web.archive.org

Yep. Pattinson’s a younger guy who hasn’t yet developed the confidence and swagger that years of being in charge of hot young starlets gives a guy. As a director, Sanders is quite literally the boss of beautiful young women. For these girls, who are used to being catered to hand and foot by ordinary men, that’s erotic, and probably hard to resist. It’s yet another reason we should think twice about putting young wives to work with men who have higher relative status in the office than their husbands do at home. That’s obviously a recipe for marital disaster.

However, some may ask why this is such a big deal. Pattinson may have just gained the opportunity to be done with a slutty girlfriend, so what’s the problem?

Well, think about how this will play out. Pattinson is young enough that this will eventually be forgotten, but in the meanwhile he’s going to pay for it. Older, higher-status men taking women from their younger boyfriends/husbands is nothing new, and quite frankly it’s often how they put up-and-coming young men in their place. Nobody really feels sorry for a chump whose woman cheated on him — they tend to laugh at him. It’s unfortunate, but it seems to be human nature.

In a business like Hollywood, losing respect is not very good for your career. A guy whose girlfriend cheated on him is going to have a harder time landing a leading role. The girl, for her part, takes some punishment as well. But the alpha male cheater doesn’t really lose. In fact, he tends to gain respect (whether people admit it or not). Therefore, the woman who cheats betrays her man socially and professionally as well as sexually. It’s a very nasty thing to do to a guy, because unlike a betrayed wife, he gets ridicule instead of sympathy.

Cheating women don’t just make you feel bad; they make you look bad, too. And that does have real life consequences. When women betray men, it really is worse.

The one positive thing is that this will probably damage Stewart’s career more than Pattinson’s. He’s got decades to live this down, but by the time it’s forgotten she’ll already be over the hill for an actress.

Sluts just screw things up for lots of people. That’s why we shame them, and should continue to do so.

David Chase Taylor #conspiracy truthernews.wordpress.com

SWITZERLAND, Zurich — Although the apartheid State of Israel has been touted as the “First Jewish State” since its official inception in 1949, the evidence detailed herein confirms beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Central European country of Switzerland was in-fact the first Jewish State.

While this fact has remained hidden since Switzerland was secretly founded in 1309, it has now been exposed for all the world to see. Consequently, it’s highly likely that I, David Chase Taylor, will be targeted for assassination, kidnapping or arrest for alleged antisemitism or other crimes this December of 2016.

According to the Encyclopaedia Judaica, the first documentation of Jews living in Switzerland dates back to 1214, roughly 95-years prior to the secret formation of Switzerland in 1309. In other words. Switzerland was home to Jews even prior to its official formation as a country.

This notion was reiterated by Wikipedia which states that the “History of the Jews in Switzerland reaches back at least a thousand years. Jews and Judaism have been present in the territory of what is now Switzerland since before the emergence of the medieval Old Swiss Confederacy in the 15th century”.

As revealed in the shocking book entitled “Greenland Theory: Apocalypse Now” (2014), Greenland is home to the one and only Greco-Roman Empire. Consequently, the Jewish people act at the behest of the Greco-Romans which is confirmed in-part by the fact that 90% of Roman holidays are Jewish holidays.

That is why the Jews are “God’s Chosen People” because the term “G.O.D.” is an acronym for “Greenland of Denmark”, the official name of Greenland. In other words, the Jews are “Greenland of Denmark’s chosen people” for they were specifically chosen by the Greco-Romans to rule the Underworld in their absence.

1. Jewish Symbololgy of Switzerland
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that the country of Switzerland is rife with Jewish symbology. Firstly, the flag of Switzerland contains four “Up Tack” symbols (i.e., “?”), otherwise known as the Hebrew letter entitled “U+FB29”. In order to hide this secret association, Jewish tradition was altered in the 19th century to write the “+”symbol as an inverted “T” symbol. Coincidentally, like the flag of Switzerland, four “Up Tack” symbols are found within the seal of the Society of Jesus (see photo above) which is mainly composed of Jews. Secondly, the Latin name of Switzerland as well as its country code is “CH” (i.e., ISO 3166-2:CH) which is consonantly speaking the same as “Chai” (C+H), a sacred Jewish symbol meaning “Life” or “Life Force”. In the medieval Kabbalah, Chai is the lowest (closest to the physical plane) emanation of God (i.e., Greenland of Denmark). That is because Switzerland’s primary role is to keep the Greco-Roman Empire safe which is exactly why it’s home to CIA Headquarters (see below). The acronym “CH” (i.e., Confoederatio Helvetica) numerically equates to the number “38” which is the addition of “19+19” or “S+S” which is consonantly speaking the same as Suisse (S+S), the original name of Switzerland. Lastly, because Switzerland was the first Jewish state, scores of Swiss cities feature the Jewish Star of David on their respective coat of arms (e.g., Aesch, Binningen, Birsfelden, Brig-Glis, Erlach, Glarus, Glarus Nord, Huttwil, Maienfeld, Meilen, Montreux, Ostermundigen, Rheinfelden, Sarnen, Spreitenbach, Volketswil, Wettingen, Zollikon, etc.).

2. Switzerland Home to CIA Headquarters
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that it is home to the one and only Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). As originally depicted in the March 31, 2015, Truther.org report entitled “10 Reasons Why Switzerland is Home to the CIA”, evidence now confirms that Switzerland is in fact harboring the CIA. Exactly where CIA Headquarters was located within Switzerland remained a mystery until September 17, 2015, when Truther.org revealed that CERN is the secret entrance to CIA Headquarters beneath Lake Geneva. That is why the thorny-like cross found in the logo of the CIA is reflected in: a) the seal of Geneva, Switzerland, b) the seal of the Society of Jesus whose Jesuits evidently run the CIA; and c) the thorny-like ring shape of the Lord Shiva Statue at CERN, entrance to CIA Headquarters beneath Lake Geveva. Because Switzerland and her CIA’s job is to “sift” or “Siv” (i.e., Shiva) out potential threats to the Greco-Roman Empire in Greenland, she is worshiped above all, namely through the likeness of Jesus (see below), the modern characterization of ISIS. In Judaism, Shiva is the name for the week-long mourning period after death which is derived from the Hebrew word “shiv’ah” which literally means “seven”. Consequently, the name of Shiva is intimately associated with Israel, Jews and Judaism, namely: a) Arutz Sheva, the name of an Israeli media network identifying with Religious Zionism; b) “Sh’va”, the name for the “20(2)” decimal in the Jewish Gematria’s “Mispar gadol; c) Shva, Hebrew niqqud vowel sign written as two vertical dots underneath a letter; d) Yeshiva, a Jewish institution that focuses on the study of traditional religious texts such as the Talmud; e) Yeshiva University, a private university with four campuses in New York City; and f) Yeshiva.co, a Jewish website which is part of the institutions of Yeshivat Beit El. Lastly, the notion that the CIA is Jewish in origin was foreshadowed by the television series entitled “Homeland” (2011-Present) which features the Jewish character of Saul Berenson (Mandy Patinkin) as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Since art imitates life, real-life Directors of the CIA have also been of Jewish ethnicity, namely John M. Deutch who served from May 10, 1995 until December 15, 1996.

3. Switzerland Home to Society of Jesus
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that the city of Geneva, Switzerland is home to the Society of Jesus, a strictly male order of the Roman Catholic Church whose members are called Jesuits. The Jesuits are engaged in what they call evangelization in 112 nations on 6 continents, boasting Jesuit colleges and universities in over 100 nations around the world. In Eugène Sue’s best-selling book entitled “Le Juif errant” (1844), or “The Wandering Jew” in English, she states that the Jesuits are a “secret society bent on world domination by all available means”. Considering that Jesus Christ was of Jewish ethnicity, it stands to reason that the Society of Jesus is also Jewish. Although the Society of Jesus was purportedly founded in the General Curia of Rome, Italy via a Papal Bull from Pope Paul III on September 27, 1540, the seal of the Jesuits is found on the original flag and seal of Geneva, Switzerland. The thorny-like seal of the Jesuits is reflected in the Sacred Heart symbol which represents the most widely practiced and well-known Roman Catholic devotions, taking Jesus Christ’s physical heart as the representation of His divine love for humanity. The “physical heart” is representative Switzerland which itself is shaped like a heart (see below). Due to the inherently Jewish nature of Roman Catholic Orders, the term “Jesuit” was likely derived from the terms “Jew Suits”. Similar to playing cards, different suits serve different purposes as each suit or respective order is compartmentalized (i.e., not knowing what the other is doing and for what purpose). In short, it appears that the Jesuits are the military order of the Roman Empire who routinely carry out assassinations, conduct espionage, stage terror attacks and trigger wars. According to the book entitled “Vatican Assassins” by Eric Jon Phelps, the man responsible for ordering these nefarious deeds is none other than the “Black Pope“, the Jesuit Superior General. This notion is essentially confirmed by Wikipedia which states that “The Superior General of the Society of Jesus is the official title of the leader of the Society of Jesus—the Roman Catholic religious order, also known as the Jesuits. He is generally addressed as Father General. The position sometimes carries the nickname of the Black Pope…”. It is imperative to note that the Black Pope is the unseen hand of the Greco-Roman Empire in Greenland who retains command and control of the Underworld via CIA Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. The title of the “Black” Pope is self-evident for he is never seen, always remaining in the dark.

4. Switzerland is Jesus (Suisse is ISIS)
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that it is home to the the Society of Jesus (i.e., the Society of ISIS) in Geneva, Switzerland. In Latin, the name of the “Society of Jesus” is “Societas Iesu”. This is because the name “Iesu” (S+S) was originally derived from the Greco-Roman goddess of “ISIS” (S+S), the patroness of witchcraft and magic. Consequently, the seal of the Society of Jesus contains the letters “IHS”. Because the letter “I” was formerly an “S” in the Roman Score (i.e., the Roman alphabet), the seal of the Jesuits can also be read as “SHS”. Since the letter “H” in the Roman Score is pronounced “Ch” or “Chi”, meaning “Life Force”, the seal of the Jesuits can be read as “ISIS Chi” or “Chi ISIS”, meaning “ISIS is life” or “Life is ISIS”. That is why ISIS (i.e., Jesus) is worshipped above all other gods for the very life of the Greco-Roman Empire depends on it. Consequently, the goddess of ISIS (S+S) is consonantly speaking the same as “Suisse” (S+S), the original name of Switzerland. That is why Jesus is routinely depicted with the Sacred Heart (see above photo) which coincidentally contains a Swiss cross burning above a heart that is wrapped in thorns. The heart is symbolic of the country of Switzerland which itself is shaped in the form of an actual heart. The thorns are indicative of the aforementioned Society of Jesus (whose seal contains thorns in the form of Sun rays and spikes), as well as the CIA (whose logo contains cross flanked by thorny spikes). The name of “Jesus” (J+S+S), which may be an acronym that is pronounced as “Jew ISIS”, is consonantly speaking quite similar to Esus (S+S) and Hesus (H+S+S), a Celtic god worshiped in Scotland which coincidentally mirrors the Greco-Roman goddess of ISIS (S+S). That is why 18th century Druidic revivalist Iolo Morgannwg identified Esus (S+S) with Jesus (J+S+S) based on the strength of the similarity of their respective names. The Ichthys, a basic symbol consisting of two intersecting arcs that resemble the profile of a fish, was reportedly used as a Christian symbol in the first decades of the 2nd century. Its popularity among Christians was allegedly due to the fact that the five initial letters of the Greek word for fish (ICHTHYS) describes the character of Christ: “Iesous Christos Theou Yios Soter” (??s??? ???st??, Te?? ????, S?t??), meaning “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior”. In other words, “Iesous” (S+S) was the first word to describe the deity that is now called Jesus. The Catholic Church corroborated this notion a few hundred years later when Pope John Paul II published a declaration on August 6, 2000, officially declaring that the title of Dominus Iesus means “The Lord Jesus” in English. Although the vowels have been changed (the former alphabet known as the Roman Score did not contain vowels), the consonant letters of “S” and “S” stay the same. In other words, Iesus (S+S) is the official name of Jesus according to the Catholic Church who not only wrote the Holy Bible but are admittedly the “sole Church of Christ” according to the Nicene Creed. Naturally therefore, they have the final word on the official name of Jesus. Consequently the worship of Esus, Hesus, Iesous, Iesus or Jesus is the unintentional worship of the Greco-Roman goddess of ISIS. Lastly, the main progenitor and propagator of Jesus (i.e., ISIS) is non-other than the Roman Catholic Church whose Pope is protected by the Swiss Guard. That is why the flag of Switzerland and the flag of Vatican City boast the only square sovereign-state flags in the world, making them the only two sovereign nations on Earth. In other words, Switzerland and Vatican City rule the entire world. The notion that Switzerland is Greco-Roman in origin is corroborated by the fact that a Greek Cross adorns the flag of Switzerland. The notion that the Jews are acting at the behest of the Greco-Roman Empire is corroborated by the fact that the Jews wear a Yamaka or Kippah (i.e., a Roman Catholic Zucchetto) which symolize the Roman Dome found in virtually every city on Earth. Although these caps tend to vary in color, the Kippah and the Zucchetto are symbolic of the Greco-Roman’s domination (i.e., dome) over humanity, mostly due to their horrific use and abuse of the Jewish race.

5. Jewish Immigration to Switzerland via Scotland
Although Aristotle claimed that the Jews originally emanated from India where they were known as the “Kalan” (C/K+L+N), a term which is consonantly speaking is the same as “clan” (C/K+L+N), evidence now suggests Jews originally immigrated to Switzerland via the Isle of Ewe in Scotland. According to Wikipedia, “The earliest date at which Jews arrived in Scotland is not known. It is possible that Jews visited Scotland at the time of the Roman Empire‘s conquest of southern Britain, but there are no records of this”. This is likely because the history of the Jews in Scotland is secret and has therefore been erased from the history books. Since the term “Ewe” is alternatively pronounced “Yew” (\'yü\) as in “Jew” (\'jü\), there are two competing theories about the meaning of the island’s name. Either it was derived from the Old Irish “eo” meaning “yew tree”, a possible reference to the lineage of the Jewish race which was spawned from the island, and/or it was derived from the Gaelic “eubh” meaning “echo” for the island was responsible for echoing Greco-Roman policy in the Underworld. Interestingly, the term “clan” is defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary as: a) a Celtic group especially in the Scottish Highlands comprising a number of households whose heads claim descent from a common ancestor, b) a group of people tracing descent from a common ancestor, and c) a group united by a common interest or common characteristics. Although only conjecture, this is likely where the Scottish Rite (i.e., Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry) was originally derived from. Consequently, the links between the Jesuits and their Society of Jesus now headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland and the Scottish Rite are unmistakable. According to C. Lenning’s “Encyclopedia of Freemasonry” (c. 1822), King James II of England resided at the Jesuit College of Clermont in Paris where his followers “fabricated certain degrees [of Freemasonry] for the purpose of carrying out their political ends”. The boot-shaped Isle of Ewe, the boot-shaped Swiss canton of Bern, as well as the boot-shaped building of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland, are all a tribute to the original boot of Italy which is a tribute (no pun intended) to the boot of the Greco-Roman Empire which has been placed on the collective throat of humanity, namely through the use of fiat currency and theh practice of usury. This is likely where the terms “bank” and “banks” were originally derived from for gold and silver was delivered to the “banks” of the Isle of Ewe by the Greco-Roman Empire in Greenland. This notion is corroborated by the coat of arms of the Isle of Ewe which depicts a U-shaped Greco-Roman Clipper ship. Lastly, the term “I love you”, possibly the most famous three words ever spoken, were evidently derived from the Isle of Ewe which sounds like “I love you” when pronounced. The term “I Love You” could also mean “I Leave Jew” for the Greco-Roman Empire chose to leave the Jews to rule the Underworld in their absence.

6. Switzerland Home to First Zionist Congress
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that it was home to the First Zionist Congress which was held in Basel, Switzerland from August 29, 1897, until August 31, 1897. Since then, Switzerland has been home to 15 out of 22 Zionist congresses. The First Zionist Congress was the inaugural congress of the Zionist Organization (ZO) which later became the World Zionist Organization (WZO) in 1960. The founder and chairman of the inaugural event was Theodor Herzl who wrote in his diary on September 3, 1897, that “Were I to sum up the Basel Congress in a word – which I shall guard against pronouncing publicly – it would be this: At Basel I founded the Jewish State. If I said this out loud today l would be greeted by universal laughter. In five years perhaps, and certainly in fifty years, everyone will perceive it”. Needless to say, the creation of the alleged “First Jewish State” of Israel in Switzerland was a colossal hoax designed in-part to sell the fraudulent notion that Switzerland was not in fact the first Jewish State.

7. Switzerland Home to World Jewish Congress
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that it is home to the one and only World Jewish Congress (WJC) which was founded in August of 1936 in Geneva, Switzerland, home to the aforementioned CIA and Society of Jesus. According to its mission statement, the World Jewish Congress’ main purpose is to act as “the diplomatic arm of the Jewish people”. Consequently, the WJC has special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. The main aims of the organization are to create “a worldwide Jewish representative body based on the concept of the unity of the Jewish people, democratically organized and able to act on matters of common concern”. Exactly what role the WJC plays in international politics is not known, but the fact that it is never discussed publicly on radio or television suggests that it plays a vital role.

8. Switzerland Home to Jewish Intellectuals
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that it has long been a haven for Jewish intellectuals. In other words, Jews have always felt safe living in Switzerland. Russian Jew Chaim Weizmann stated in his diary from 1898 that “If Russian Jewry was the cradle of my Zionism, the Western universities were my finishing schools. The first of these schools was Berlin, with its Russian-Jewish society; the second was Berne, the third Geneva, both in Switzerland”. In other words, Switzerland has played a vital role in the global propagation of Zionist ideology. Consequently, Switzerland has been home to a plethora of notebale Jews, namely: a) Georgi Valentinovich Plekhanov, a Marxist theoretician who founded the social-democratic movement in Russia before fleeing to Switzerland in 1880 where he continued trying to overthrow the Tsarist regime in Russia; b) Leon Trotsky, a Marxist revolutionary and theorist who studied law in Switzerland prior to becoming a Soviet politician and founding leader of the Red Army who engineered the transfer of all political power to the Soviets with the October Revolution of 1917; c) Albert Einstein, a noted physicist and peace activist who grew up in Switzerland, received his doctorate from Federal Polytechnic Academy in Zurich, and was employed by the Swiss patent office; d) Zev Jabotinsky, a “reporter” in the Swiss capital city of Bern for the Russian press and was elected as a Russian delegate to the Sixth Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland in 1903; and e) Ruth Dreifuss, the first-ever woman President of Switzerland from January 1, 1999, until January 1, 2000.

9. Switzerland Home to Global Banking System
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that it is home to the global banking establishment, which rightly or wrongly so, has been accused of being Jewish in nature. Due to the wealth attained by the Knights Templar (who originally founded Switzerland along with the Order of Saint John), Switzerland began to develop a massive economic infrastructure within Europe, creating financial techniques that became the earliest forms of banking. Although the primary mission of the Order was militarial in nature, only 10% of its members were actual combatants. In 1150, the Templars in Switzerland began generating letters of credit for pilgrims traveling to the Holy Land (i.e., Israel). In short, pilgrims deposited their valuables with a local Templar preceptory (bank) in Switzerland before leaving. In turn, they received an official document stating the value of their deposit. When they returned from the Holy Land, they would use said official document to retrieve their funds in an amount of treasure of equal value. This innovative arrangement was an early form of banking that eventually led to the formal system known today as checks. In time, the Templars established financial networks across the known world. They acquired large tracts of land, bought and managed farms and vineyards, built castles and churches, became involved in manufacturing, both import and export, and purchased their own fleet of ships. Consequently, the Order of the Knights Templar arguably became the world’s first multinational corporation. The Templars involvement in banking grew to the point where they began to practice usury, charging interest on money lent. According to a Templar researcher, “Since they weren’t allowed to charge interest, they charged rent instead”. Templar usury in Switzerland is evident today in Basel which is home to the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the mother bank of all central banks. In short, the BIS creates money out of nothing and then charges countries (and their respective populations) interest on it, keeping them in a perpetual state of debt and economic slavery. Since interest rates can always be manipulated, no country can ever escape from their state of perpetual debt, no matter how hard they work. Admittedly “the world’s oldest international financial organization”, the BIS funds 60 central banks (e.g., Bank of China, Bank of England, Federal Reserve Bank, etc.), which collectively make up 95% of the world’s GDP (gross domestic product). Although the BIS bills itself as an international organization of central banks which attempts “to foster international cooperation in those areas and to act as a bank for central banks“, it is solely responsible for orchestrating the world’s financial crises simply due to the fact that it alone has the power to create fiat currency (i.e., “intrinsically valueless money used as money because of government decree”). In other words, the BIS is responsible for creating and distributing the world’s fiat money supply which is in turn used to fund the world’s respective governments, intelligence agencies and militaries, as well as the assassinations, terror attacks and wars they routinely engage in at the behest of the CIA. As the financial wing of the Central Intelligence Agency, the BIS is fiscally responsible for funding virtually all of the chaos and madness seen in our world today.

10. Israel Created as Political Cover for Switzerland
The notion that Switzerland was the first Jewish State is corroborated by the fact that Switzerland, more than any other country on Earth, was responsible for the creation of the State of Israel. After all, Israel was created in-part as political cover for Switzerland, the first Jewish State. According to the Swiss government, “The establishment of the State of Israel is closely linked with Switzerland”. That is why as of 2015, the Swiss community in Israel is the largest in the Asian region, totaling roughly 18,702 persons. This is also why Switzerland has represented Israel’s interests in numerous countries (i.e., Hungary (1967–1989), Guinea (1967–1973), Ceylon/Sri Lanka (1970–1976), Madagascar (1973–1994), Liberia (1973–1983) and Ghana (1973–2002)). Conversely, Switzerland has represented the interests of Iran (1958–1987) and the Ivory Coast (1973–1986) in Israel. The name of “Israel” was created using a combination of Greco-Roman gods and goddesses, namely Isis, Ra and El (i.e., IS-RA-EL). Consequently, the name of Israel contains the name of ISIS (S+S) which is consonantly speaking the same as Suisse (S+S), the original name of Switzerland. In order to draw attention away from Switzerland and her CIA, Israel was shaped in the form of a dagger, a modern tribute to the Sicarii and their terrorism committed at the behest of the Greco-Roman Empire in Greenland. The term Sicarii comes from the Latin word “Sica”, meaning “dagger”. Consequently, the Sicarii, or the “dagger men”, were Jews who carried out assassinations and murders with short daggers in crowded places before slipping away. They also committed attacks in villages which they raided, plundered and set on fire in order to create fear among those who acquiesced or collaborated with Roman rule. They also kidnapped notables as leverage for the release of their own members which were being held prisoner. In short, the Sicarii Jews were used to commit terror attacks in order to destabilize the Roman Empire after the 13 Bloodlines of Rome vacated to Greenland. Titus Flavius Josephus wrote the only account of the activities of the Sicarii, stating: “…a different type of bandits sprang up in Jerusalem, the so-called Sicarii, who murdered men in broad daylight in the heart of the city. Especially during the festivals they would mingle with the crowd, carrying short daggers concealed under their clothing, with which they stabbed their enemies. Then when they fell, the murderers would join in the cries of indignation and, through this plausible behavior, avoided discovery”.

Michelle Bachmann #fundie rightwingwatch.org

Bachmann: It’s no secret that our nation may very well be experiencing the hand of judgment. It’s no secret that we all are concerned that our nation may be in a time of decline. If that is in fact so, what is the answer? The answer is what we are doing here today: humbling ourselves before an almighty God, crying out to an almighty God, saying not of ourselves but you, would you save us oh God? We repent of our sins, we turn away from them, we seek you, we seek your ways. That’s something that we’re doing today, that we did on the National Day of Prayer, it’s something that we have chosen to do as well on another landmark day later this year on September 11. Our nation has seen judgment not once but twice on September 11. That’s why we’re going to have ‘9/11 Pray’ on that day. Is there anything better that we can do on that day rather than to humble ourselves and to pray to an almighty God?

Mr. Coulter #fundie godorscience.com

[In a thread that had nothing to do with homosexuals or homosexuality]

Let me refine that for ya, dipshit. AFTER unwavering rejection of homos and their lifestyles, it was determined that my adament stance was an 'obvious homosexual self-hatred' or something 'brilliant' like that. I used their 'superior intellectual diagnosis' to my favor, and therefore posted anti-homo tags as a 'person of the know'. They still rejected my claims and use the fact of admitting to homosexuality as way of homo-bashing me. But they seem to be immune to the bigot and racist tags because they are defenders of homosexuality.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Billy Graham Just Died and Went to Hell On February 21, 2018

How do I know Evangelist Billy Graham (1918-2018) went to Hell? It is because Mr. Graham taught a false plan of salvation. Instead of solely trusting upon God's righteousness, Billy taught that faith really meant following Christ. In a video presentation of a Billy Graham Evangelistic Crusade in Oklahoma, Billy says:

The word “believe” implies commitment, surrender. It doesn't mean that you believe everything, or just anything—You believe in the person of Christ. And that word “believe” means, that you commit your life to Him. You're not trusting anything for your future. The little boy that I heard about. He said, “You know, this life is short, but from what I've heard, eternity is awfully long,” and said, “we better spend our time getting ready for eternity.” So when you come to commit your life to Christ, you commit your mind, you commit your emotion, you commit your will, you commit your body. The whole person is involved in this act of commitment.

SOURCE: https://youtu.be/C5cfCpzjJ3M?t=20m10s

Folks, that is NOT the Gospel!!! Is this not what the workers of iniquity did in Matthew 7:21-23? Remember, they preached in Jesus' name. They did many wonderful works in Jesus' name. They cast out devils in Jesus' name. They even called Him their “Lord.” This is exactly what Billy Graham teaches! He says that to be saved you must commit your mind, emotions, will, and body to live for Christ. This is NOT the free gift of eternal life, which is without works! There is not one verse in the Holy Bible that tells a man to turn from sins to be saved. There is not one verse in the Bible that tells a man to commit his whole person to Christ to be saved. There is not one verse in the Bible that tells a man to make a full surrender to Christ to be saved.

Billy Graham, in the same crusade, stated to 50,000 people in Red River Valley, Oklahoma:

But the great decision of total surrender to the total Lordship of Christ, you must make. In which you say, “I would like today to reconfirm my confirmation vows. I would like to reconfirm what was promised at my baptism.”

...God has a set of tapes, in which everything you've ever said, and everything you've ever done, and everything you've ever thought, is there, and will be played at the Judgment; but if you come to Christ, and surrender totally to Him, He wipes out the tapes, He erases the tapes, and no one will ever hear them. Even God forgets!

...But the choice involves a price! It cost God His Son. ...

Yes, and it's a price for you to pay too! Because when you come to Christ with all your heart, you must repent of your sin, and that repentance means change—change your mind and change your way of living! [emphasis added]

SOURCE: https://youtu.be/K3S9PmhPwo4?t=22m51s

What a son of a devil!!! Mr. Graham is sadly burning in Hell this moment, realizing how wrong he was, for believing that salvation required a personal price to pay! Billy Graham often talks out of both sides of his mouth, contradicting himself in his sermons. He is a two-faced preacher, a chameleon who changes colors to fit with the particular crowd he is influencing. My friend, if you think that you are required to change your way of living to be saved, or to confirm that you are saved, YOU ARE NOT SAVED!!!

Tragically, we've got a bunch of deceived pastors in our churches today, who are serenading the Devil's modern Bible versions, which agree with Billy Graham's damnable heresy! Case in point is the Easy-To-Read-Version (ERV) used by Harvest Baptist Church on Guam, and other horrible churches. Apostasy has crept into most churches today! Billy Graham is burning in Hell forever!!!

David J. Stewart and David Hyles #fundie godlovespeople.com

Psalms 11:7, “For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.”

I very much admire the following words below, penned by David Hyles to address his army of internet critics; but first, let me give you some introduction. David is the beloved son of Dr. Jack Hyles (1926-2001), the legendary former pastor of the First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana for over 42 years. It is no secret that all humans are sinners by birth, inherent to our nature. David Hyles' has been much criticized for his sins and bad choices in life, but he has repented openly and apologized. Yet, the diatribes (thundering verbal attacks) from David critics are relentless, merciless and saturated with hated.

The Bible teaches that some people's sins are open (known) beforehand here on earth (such as David's). But the Bible teaches that everyone else's sins will follow them and be revealed in eternity, causing shame and reproach...

1st Timothy 5:24, “Some men's sins are open beforehand,
going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.”

David Hyles' alleged sins are openly known beforehand, just as the Bible teaches; but every person who has ever been born is a sinner and our sins will be made open for all to see in eternity. No one will be able to retain a cocky and arrogant attitude toward others who have sinned when we stand in judgment before God. If the truth be known, everyone is a horrible sinner. People who are fortunate enough to live above reproach find it easy to condemn others who openly sin (or their sins become openly revealed). If all of our sins were known, no one would ever be able to slander, gossip or criticize others who sin. NO ONE is a shining example to be held up as the standard of perfection, except the precious Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the spotless “Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).

In his own words, David Hyles appeals to his critics with God's love, pointing out five evils caused by their hurtful attacks...

“First you are hurting the lost. Several years ago I worked with a young man who knew I was a Christian. This young man was searching. He had dabbled into several religions in his search. He respected me and began to question me about Christ. God was working in his life and I felt he was very close to accepting Christ as his Savior. Someone, in an attempt to hurt my business began circulating an email through my workplace and he received it, anonymously, of course. He never again listened to me and eventually our paths parted. I pray every day for God to save him. It was not MY sins that turned him away. No, actually it was the evil spirit of those my accusers who claimed to be Christians. He wanted no part of that.

Secondly, you are hurting the fallen. Countless Christians have seen what you have done to me and to others who have fallen and decided to just disappear rather than being restored. I believe that there have been suicides and other tragedies that could have been prevented if a fallen brother or sister had felt there was hope. You diatribes on your filthy forums serve Satan’s purpose well.

Thirdly you are hurting those who I have hurt. Please hear me on this. Every fallen pastor or Christian leaves hurting people in their sinful wake. I did. I know that. It breaks my heart. David did too and his heart was broken. There is little we can do to repair the damage. Their deliverance must come from God and it will not come from revenge or retribution. It will come only from forgiveness. Please allow God to be God and to deal with his children as He will. Stay out of it and encourage those who have been hurt to find their peace from God not from your vigilante system of internet justice.

Allow me to elaborate on this just a bit more. People who are hurt by a sinner are destroyed by bitterness. No one’s sin can destroy your life. Our loving Father would not allow that. He stands ready as a loving Father to pick you up and mend your broken heart. Sinners (and that includes us all) do bad things that affect other’s lives. For all have sinned… However, if we get them to take their eyes off of the offender and place it on the Savior they can be healed. Closure does not come from our flawed idea of justice. It comes from letting God heal us even as He deals with the one who offended or hurt us.

Fourthly you are hurting you! The manure you are hurling fails to hit me but your hands sure do smell of the filth you have no business picking up. I am sorry for the pain that makes you feel that somehow you will gain some kind of satisfaction from trying to hurt me. I wish this book could give you the peace you are lacking but I sincerely doubt it will.

Finally and most importantly, you are hurting the Father. I have news for you that is not going to please you, but here goes. GOD LOVES ME and I AM SAVED AND FORGIVEN! I fell but, you see, when a Christian falls we do not fall away from grace, we fall into it, hence the name of this book. I am in His grace and one day I will stand before Him clothed in the righteousness of His Son and not the sin of my own. Why would you dare try and hurt the heart of God? Is it because there is unconfessed sin in your life? Are you so far from Him that you have lost the sweetness of His mercy and grace in your own life? That is sad.”

We are all sinners. Who are you, me or anyone else to condemn someone for their sins. James 4:12, “There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?” God is our eternal Judge, and we are cautioned to be careful how we judge others, for the Lord will treat us the same way that we treat others (Matthew 7:1-5).

I love what David Hyles says about “Fallen Into Grace,” rather than “falling from grace” as Calvinists errantly teach. When the apostle Paul speaks of falling from grace, he simply means that a person who rejects Christ cannot be saved any other way. Galatians 5:4, “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” False teachers say that a believer loses their salvation when they sin. The Bible calls them liars. Being born-again is a birth (a spiritual, second, new birth), and is as irreversible as the first, physical, natural birth. If saved, always saved!

Some people are so filled with malicious hatred that they have decided that David Hyles could never be saved. The Bible warns in Matthew 7:1-5 that God will one day judge critics and scorners by the SAME measure by which they have judged others. So if you mistreat someone and condemn them without mercy, God will treat you the same one day unless you repent. I would 10,000 times rather be a humiliated big sinner in men's eyes, than to be a self-righteous hypocrite who's filled with hatred and scorn toward someone who has sinned. To point a finger of condemnation at anyone is to have three of our own fingers pointing right back at us.

When a Christian sins, we are not fallen from grace; but rather, we have fallen into God's wondrous grace. God's mercy is abundant. The Lord promises to forgive those who come to Him. 1st John 1:9, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

I also love what David Hyles says...

“I am in His grace and one day I will stand before Him clothed in the righteousness of His Son and not the sin of my own.”

David Hyles as a genuine Christian fully realizes that salvation is only possible through Christ's imputed righteousness, and not by any self-righteousness of our own. Christ bore our burden of sins upon Himself on the cross. There's no way that you nor I, nor anyone else, could ever bear the weight of our own sins. Have you ever found yourself looking at an impossible situation, wondering how your life could ever become so messed up, realizing that there's no way humanly possible to ever make things right? I've been there! But when I had those thoughts the Lord impressed a truth upon my heart, saying, “You're right, you could never make things right, no matter how hard you try. That's why I went to the cross and paid your sin debt... so I could make things right!” It's Jesus precious blood that He sacrificed for our sins that makes everything right in God's eyes!

Many religious people are trying to make things right in their own human strength, as did Adam with his fig-leaf religion. God rejected Adam's fig-leaves and killed an innocent animal instead, shedding its blood which represented the coming Lamb of God, the Messiah, Who would one day die on the cross for the sins of the world. Thank you Lord Jesus!

Conclusion

When the truth is known, ALL PEOPLE will be exposed as wicked and shameful sinners. When asked to give the name of the worst and most horrible sinners we know, most people tend to think of people besides them self. This is the hypocritical nature of humanity. This is why all gossip is sinful and wrong, that is, because we are just as sinful as the people that we criticize. James 4:12, “There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?” No one has any right to talk bad in public about Christians who have fallen. Satan always brings up past sins to discourage us, but the Holy Spirit only convicts us about present sins that need to be confessed and forsaken.

A person is never more like Satan than when they point a finger of damnation toward others. Revelation 12:10, “And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.” Satan accuses believers round-the-clock before the throne of God, continually pointing out the hypocrisy, sins and failures of God's children. Most gossip is true, which is what makes it so dangerous. Proverbs 11:9, “An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered.”

David's enemies will condemn him to his grave, as did king David's enemies in the Bible; but thanks be to God, only God can condemn a person to Hell and there is no condemnation upon Christian believers who have faith in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). The Lord showed me one day while reading the Psalms that the reason for king David's enemies was his sins of adultery, conspiracy and murder. The words “enemy” and “enemies” appear 103 times in Psalms. David's enemies condemned him to his grave, continually trying to destroy him, but God protected him.

The Lord knows that I have many enemies as a fighting fundamental preacher, and many people slander and say garbage about me all the time. I don't read gossip, so it cannot affect me. I don't know what my critics say about me. I'm too busy serving the Lord to stop and see how I'm doing or what critics are saying about me. The only opinion that matters to me is God's. Revelation 4:11 says that we were all created for God's pleasure.

Thank God for the gift of His dear only begotten Son, Jesus, the Christ. If it weren't for God's love, mercy and grace that sent Jesus to Calvary to shed His blood for our sins, we would all be doomed to eternity in Hell.

Ironically, the very scorners who accuse fallen Christians of not being saved are likely not saved themselves. The Bible teaches that hatred for others is a sign that we've never been saved. 1st John 3:15-16, “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.” Dr. Hyles often stated in his sermons that, “The Christian army is the only army in the world that slays its wounded.” This is because most believers are carnally-minded, walking in the flesh instead of the Spirit. Galatians 5:25, “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.” Every Christian believer has the Holy Spirit living within their body (1st Corinthians 3:17-18; Romans 8:9). The Bible is saying in Galatians 3:25 that we ought to also walk in the Spirit Who indwells us. As Christians we continually have to decide whether we are going to walk in the sinful flesh or the Spirit of God Who came to live within us the moment that we were born-again (saved). It's a constant battle (Romans 7:14-25; 1st Peter 2:11).

All men and women are sinners. We are not sinners because we sin; but rather, we sin because we are sinners. Jeremiah 17:9 teaches that the human heart is desperately wicked and deceitful above all else. The Bible plainly teaches that all men are equally as guilty of sin in God's eyes. James 2:10, “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” Committing even one sin is enough to send a person to the Lake of Fire forever and ever. That's why God sent His Son into the world to die on Calvary's cross to pay our sin debt.

So please remember, whoever you may be, that when we sin as Christian believers we don't fall from grace; but rather, we fall into God's grace because of the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ.

UyiIredia(m),JeSoul, and the fundies referenced in the comment #fundie nairaland.com

Re: Why Is Necrophilia Immoral ? by UyiIredia(m): 5:34pm On Jan 23, 2012
@ JeSoul

How about the most unusual funeral?

One time this bunch of religious fanatics held a funeral for one of their members. They didn't want her embalmed, they just wanted her dressed and in the casket. We usually didn't do that, but we decided to be nice and put her up in the stateroom. We were standing outside of that stateroom and we heard someone saying, "Rise in the name of Jesus!" They were preying and slapping the body. They were talking in tongues. That was weird!


Do you agree with what the Christians did here ? Personally, I don't since Jesus way of going about faith healing wasn't that way. Would you say they were applying faith ?

JeSoul:

Exactly right I think. If a necro does it in the middle of the amazon jungle on corpse of which no one cares or remembers, it doesn't affect anyone, or any society but the necro him/herself - but he/she still has God to answer to - a God whom I hope we agree whose measuring stick does change or adjust according to human leanings.


Agreed.

JeSoul:
One of the foremost bullet-points used in the argument for homosexuality is that they are not 'harming' or 'hurting' anyone else so therefore its okay.


Yes.

JeSoul:
Certain actions 'hurt' the collective sensitivity of a society, sometimes enough for the society to institure laws against it - part of what I meant by societies determining what is/is not moral for themselves.


In fact, I am tired of just agreeing. It makes it seem like group-think. I need you-know-them to pose objections right now. I won't be available till tomorrow evening or the day after that to discuss this issue.


JeSoul:
Nicely put in this paragraph, though I would adjust that to say "a good portion of humans subscribe" rather than "almost all humans subscribe".


J'adoube.

Franzop #racist reddit.com

I know there's no cosmic caliper that can objectively discern which race is the "best," but through my (admittedly biased) lens, I'd rate ours as head and shoulders above the rest. European women are so beautiful that their bodies are coveted from across the globe. A testament to this is that men from Africa and Asia will grovel for the opportunity to be just in the presence of a white woman. Since antiquity, they'd pay premium prices for white sex slaves.. Women from other countries bleach their own skins, conveying clear envy towards their paler counterparts.

It was only through our genetic infusion that the Ashkenazim had their technological and scientific feats. Bene/Beta Israel, the Mizrahim, and the Sephardim are better models for what Jews actually are.

And, overwhelmingly, it was our people and our civilization that created the modern world. A world without whites is a world where blacks are still living in the stone age, practicing cannibalism, human sacrifice, and coprophagia. It's a world where the Orient is dominated by feudal societies, decadent empires, and brutish horsemen.

Our race is one of unparalleled conquerers, artists, visionaries, magnates, and inventors. Every form of modern transportation is the brain-child of someone of Euro-descent. WE conceived of the Autobahn and the interstate. WE revolutionized medicine, mathematics, and a plethora of other sciences.

Our race is filled with the most aesthetically-pleasing beings ever to grace this earth. Our race is as daring and fierce as it is kind and compassionate. Our spirits are fire; our convictions are held paramount.

We ARE the best race, and we shouldn't be ashamed to say it

adrift #fundie forums.catholic.com

I have never heard of a person who was "proud" to have an illness. A pedophile who remains chaste is the same as a homosexual who remains chaste there is no sin. It is when they engage in sex that it becomes sin and there is not a bit of difference between them. When you state that it is not a sin to be a homosexual that does not engage in it you are correct but that is equally true of a pedophile. It makes no difference who is hurt. I would postulate that there is no such thing as a sin not being harmful. Homosexual acts hurt the people involved. Look what it has done to our country. There is movement similar to the beginning of homosexuals to make pedophilia acceptable. I disagree strongly that it hurts no one. Do you believe committing a mortal sin doesn't hurt you?

Michael Brown #fundie charismanews.com

I have no desire to pile on with more comments about Josh Duggar, who appears to be a very serious and committed Christian and who has made no excuses for the sins of his youth and who deeply desires to make a positive impact for the Lord in the years ahead. I simply want to share some redemptive thoughts, supplementing some of the excellent statements made by others, including former governor Mike Huckabee and Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore.

1. Jesus really does change people. While critics of the Duggar family want to indict them (along with other evangelical Christians, especially those with large families) for Josh's actions, and while many seem ready to throw Josh under the bus, the fact is that while he did sin grievously, through repentance, faith and counseling, he became a new man. Jesus really does transform sinners.

How many of us did wicked things as teenagers? I was shooting heroin at the age of 15 and broke into some houses and even stole money from my own father before being radically converted at the age of 16. I was profane, filled with pride, anger and lust, yet the Lord had mercy on me and totally turned my life around.

Some of us continued to live like this into our adult years, only to find mercy and new life then, meaning that the transformation was even more dramatic.

For me, the first lesson from this story is this: Whoever you are, whatever you've done, there is hope in the Lord. As Mike Huckabee said, "'inexcusable' ... doesn't mean 'unforgivable.'"

As Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, and you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus by the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor. 6:9-11).

2. There's no excuse for sin, so own up to it. In today's culture, almost no one is guilty of anything. It's someone else's fault, someone else's responsibility, not our own. We're all victims, and the reason we do bad things is because someone else wronged us. Isn't that how we think today?

I've even heard athletes apologize for some really heinous actions by saying, "I'm not happy with the way things happened," rather than saying, "What I did was wrong and I have no excuses. Please forgive me. I'm seeking to get to the root of my problems and address them."

What a vast difference between the two attitudes.

As Proverbs states, "He who covers his sins will not prosper, but whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy" (28:13).

According to the accounts we've all heard, Josh confessed his sin to his parents as well as to the proper authorities, and as a family, they worked through the issues. Now, half a lifetime later (he's 27 and is married with four children), when confronted with a police report about his past, he did not minimize his sin nor did he excuse it. He also resigned from the fine Christian organization for whom he worked, not wanting to bring any negative attention to their work.

When I see someone respond like this, I am filled with hope. In fact, over the years, I've seen that people who committed uglier sins but took full responsibility and repented did far better than those who committed less serious sins and tried to sweep them under the rug.

3. Even godly families have kids who mess up badly. Nancy and I only had two kids, and we sought to be godly parents and set godly examples. Yet our older daughter went through a real period of rebellion in her teen years.

As parents, we felt miserable, and I would wonder what I was doing wrong.

Of course, we dealt with her rebellion head on and prayed like crazy for her to really encounter the Lord, but while it was happening, it was terribly deflating spiritually. What kind of father am I? How can I be so ineffective?

Today, we all laugh about those years, and our daughter, who is now 37 and is a devoted wife and mother, is so grateful for the way she was raised. (She and Nancy are the best of friends and are in constant contact.)

The fact that the Duggars, who successfully raised 19 children in the Lord (who can imagine that?), had to deal with one of their kids committing serious sexual sin at 14 should actually encourage other parents rather than discourage them. And perhaps, they can teach us today how this tragic incident helped them come together as a family and draw closer to the Lord.

4. Josh can be an ambassador on behalf of the abused, even helping the abusers, as well. While it can feel like your life is over when your past, largely private sins become public (how many of us would like for that to happen?), the fact is that Josh's future can be bright in the Lord.

He can call on others who are sinning to come clean and get help, using his own example redemptively. And he can encourage those who have been abused to realize that they are not guilty and should not feel shame, also encouraging churches to embrace those who come for help rather than making them feel as if there is something wrong with them.

Why should those who have suffered abuse be stigmatized? They should be our priority for healing and restoration.

5. We need to be careful how we judge. There are many fans of the Duggars who are upset with what they feel is a witch hunt against a godly family, representing one more attempt to remove them from reality TV. (Let me say without qualification that there is life after reality TV, and if the Duggars never do another broadcast, their lives can still be overwhelmingly blessed.)

But would we have had this same attitude of judgment if this was the child of a gay couple? Would we have said, "This proves that gay parents are no good!"?

I certainly believe that kids deserve a mom and a dad and that, optimally, they will do best with a mom and dad, but I don't indict all gay couples because of the failings of one of their kids

So, if you want to show mercy, be consistent. We can all fall into the trap of selective compassion.

6. There are consequences to our actions, but with God, our worst mistakes can become stepping stones to spiritual growth.

Most of us have done things we wish we could take back, and in some cases, the consequences of our bad choices and sinful actions last for decades. Yet with the Lord, no matter how great the stigma of our sin, if we will humble ourselves before Him, He can take those stumbling blocks and turn them into stepping stones, to the point that the worst things that ever happened to us become the best things that ever happened to us.

To the core of His being, God is a redeemer, and I'm personally praying and believing that for Josh Duggar and his entire family, God will turn this painful situation around for greater good.

Let's watch and see.

xoài phạm #moonbat everydayfeminism.com

3 Reasons It’s Irrational to Demand ‘Rationalism’ in Social Justice Activism

The scenario is always the same: I say we should abolish prisons, police, and the American settler state — someone tells me I’m irrational. I say we need decolonization of the land — someone tells me I’m not being realistic.

Whenever I hear this, I stop and think about the world we’d live in if previous European colonizers were berated with the same rhetoric about rationalism as we abolitionists are today.

Would it have been enough to stop them in their tracks?

What if someone had told them that the creation of the American nation-state of settler-colonizers who displace and murder the Indigenous inhabitants — and the development of the white supremacist, anti-Black, capitalist, cisheteropatriarchy — was a project too hefty to accomplish?

What if those imperialism-driven Europeans, all passionate and roused about Manifest Destiny, were encouraged to stop and reconsider whether their violent plans were rational?

We might possibly have a world that isn’t filled to the brim with oppression.

There may not have been the centuries-long (and still ongoing) ravaging of every continent and the development of anti-Black chattel slavery.

We many never have had the tentacles of the white supremacist patriarchy spanning the entire globe, regulating gender along a binary and fostering rape culture.

We may never have had carceral forms of justice that render certain people disposable.

And the Earth’s lands, skies, and water definitely wouldn’t be irrevocably devastated.

But it makes sense why many of those who are committed to social justice subscribe to the same language of rationalism as their oppressors. Marginalized folks are taught from infancy that they need to behave in a respectable manner to be treated with decency. We face so much violence, to the point where the violence becomes the norm and our resistance is what feels extreme.

We’re painted as aggressors even when we are consistently the victims. The media treats Black victims worse than white killers. People see trans and gender non-conforming people in bathrooms as threats rather than as targets of abuse.

When we are told repeatedly that everything we do is an attack, we internalize the idea that we need to quiet ourselves, to take up less space. And so we begin to limit ourselves to tactics of resistance that are easy to digest — and we create those limits under the guise of being rational.

Not only is this urge to be rational holding us back, it unintentionally validates the logic of white supremacy as natural and positions the desire to fight oppression as excessive and outrageous.

For those of us who are trying to burn the colonial project to the ground and build a new world, we have to stop placing limits on ourselves in a world that is already at our throats.

Abolitionists, those who are invested in abolishing police, prisons, the settler colonial nation-state, cannot afford to be held back by what is deemed rational. In fact, rationalism has no place in abolitionism.

This is not to say that there are many roles to be filled among those who resist, none of which should be placed in a hierarchy of value. People come from different places of knowledge, ability, and history which makes each person equipped to participate (if they so choose) based on their unique position in society.

But when those who are the loudest, the most disruptive — the ones who want to destroy America and all of the oppression it has brought into the world — are being silenced even by others in social justice groups, that is unacceptable.

Pushing the boundaries of how we can shape our resistance beyond what’s rational is urgent and necessary.

And here are three reasons why.

1. Being Rational Has No Inherent Value

When I talk about abolition, whether that be of prisons, immigrant detainment centers, the police, or the government, I am instantly derailed by strangers and even friends. They tell me that it isn’t rational.

They say this as if everyone seeks to be rational, as if prisons, themselves — which have grown more than 400 percent since 1970 and which has predominantly impacted communities of color, especially Black and Indigenous communities — are rational. As if being rational has indisputable value.

At first, I took their reactions to heart. I thought maybe being rational really is necessary if I wanted to achieve my goals of eradicating oppression.

If I’m not rational, then I must not be thinking correctly, which makes me incompetent and unqualified to even have political opinions.

Or so I thought.

The truth is, this constant emphasis on rationalism is a load of toxic garbage (and this is me being gentle with my words). It reeks of the rancid odor that develops when we squeeze our vast imaginations into tiny boxes labeled “pragmatic,” “rational,” and “reasonable.” Being rational can often mean being willing to accept some aspects of oppression and watering down my politics.

In fact, by American standards, my very existence is irrational. For many, I simply do not exist as a queer, Vietnamese femme who is neither a man or a woman. Living in my body, wading through my truths, is not a rational act. And I wouldn’t have it any other way.

Based on my experiences as a marginalized person, being rational just means going easy on my oppressors.

The narrow bit of room that rationalism gave me wasn’t enough for me to envision new possibilities for my gender, to escape the confines of impending manhood. It wasn’t enough for me to understand my personhood as infinitely more complicated than the models of personhood fed to me by white cis people.

From my vantage point, rationalism — or whatever you want to name it — did more harm than good.

Some of us place so much value on being rational that we’re unable to recognize that when someone tells you to be rational, they may just be telling you that their ideas weigh more than yours.

The rhetoric of rationalism can be used as a seemingly benign disguise for social control.

2. Rationalism Is a Tool Made to Hurt Us

In the context of anti-oppression work, limiting ourselves to rational thinking means that we’re choosing to use the tools that make sense to our oppressors, which are usually tools made to hurt us.

Rationalism means we’re working within the framework of a system that was built to harm us in the first place.

And that, for me, is completely irrational — and it’s violent and oppressive to expect that of anyone who suffers from the exploitation and abuse of this system.

But to take it a step further, rationalism is subjective.

For those who are most impacted by the prison industrial complex — Black and Indigenous folks, trans and gender non-conforming folks, people with disabilities, those who are undocumented, and those who sit at the intersection of multiple identities, among others — abolitionist politics are entirely rational.

When your life and the well-being of your family, chosen and otherwise, is under attack by the prison system, for instance, abolition is common sense. Investing in prisons only makes sense for corporations, for governments, for oppressors whose power is fueled by the abuse and deaths of marginalized people.

In a world truly committed to justice, nothing would be more rational than abolitionism.

Yet, social justice liberals who spew negative rhetoric about rationalism tend to be against abolition, instead preferring reformist politics over anything deemed too “radical.” Why are we trying to be steady and gentle with systems of oppression while the systems get to inflict violence among large masses of people?

When we limit ourselves in our dreams and our goals, the oppressor has less work to do.

When we restrict ourselves in the name of being rational, we create barriers for ourselves — we place the world we want to live in farther from reach.

Since what’s rational is subjective, it is thus indefinable. The only reason why rationalism is believed to have inherent value is because it echoes the oppressor’s way of thinking.

When oppressors have the power to decide what’s rational, they get to commit irrational acts and claim them as rational justifications for oppression.

Take colonialism as an example: Colonizers enjoy claiming that those they’ve colonized are less civilized, despite the fact that colonized peoples often come from older and more complex civilizations than those of the colonizer.

And non-binary people are told their whole identities are irrational, even though non-binary people have existed much longer than the American settler state.

When the state gets to decide what’s normal enough to be rational, they get to decide who becomes the reviled Other – the groups that are subjected to targeted abuse.

Moving beyond the logical confines of our oppressors is necessary for us to envision a world free from the systems that kill us.

3. We Are Enough Without Rationalism

As Assata Shakur has said, “No one is going to give you the education you need to overthrow them.”

We should be constantly interrogating why being rational has been presumed to hold inherent value, and we should be asking ourselves where we got that idea in the first place. The institutions that taught us what we know should be placed under suspicion.

For many of us, schools are where many people are conditioned to become either complicit or complacent to systems of oppression. In fact, one could argue that institutions of education are not to make the people more empowered, but to stomp out their autonomy and make them more likely to invest in their downfall.

And before school, we are socialized into being obedient through the ways that oppression influences the way we raise children and build interpersonal relationships.

This is exactly why people believe that police and prisons equal safety, when that is not the case.

People have been conditioned to believe that prisons will keep their communities safe, when carceral state is the very thing hurting them. And more police does not mean more safety, especially when the police get to murder people with impunity. What does it mean when we feel an inclination to trust the institutions that are killing us?

The extent to which we’ve been led to love and trust our oppressors is so deep that we’re entrusting ourselves to our murderers.

The longer we postpone abolition based on “logical” arguments, the longer we’re denied basic autonomy. It’s a fallacy to believe that we’ll be given a more opportune time to abolish prisons and decolonize, because the role of the state is to never provide that opportunity.

When we frame abolition and decolonization as “long-term” goals, we operate under the belief that these goals can only happen in the distant future. We need to instead reframe abolition and decolonization as urgent, immediate goals.

If we look back at history, we would recognize that there are tons of examples of movements that may have been deemed irrational but ended up succeeding, the Montgomery Bus Boycott being one of them.

Many people know the Rosa Parks from learning about the boycott but don’t recognize how radical is was for around 42,000 Black Americans to boycott the public transit system for over a year.

Their goal was to ensure that Black people had the same treatment under the public transit system as whites and they never compromised their goals, even as transportation was denied to them over the course of a year. Without transportation, Black lives were completely disrupted. They had to either walk (for those who had that physical ability), or they had to find other forms of transportation.

As a result, they found a new way of operating — they relied on one another.

Black taxi drivers lowered their prices dramatically, Black people with cars began supplying rides to those without cars, and churches bought cars and station wagons to help those who didn’t have access to a vehicle. They organized carpools and collectively established on pickup and dropoff locations.

That was how Black community members developed their own autonomous, sustained transportation system for thousands upon thousands of people that didn’t involve the American settler colonial government.

How rational do you think that was?

They of course encountered backlash and horrific violence throughout the boycott. Leaders were arrested and laws were created to justify their imprisonment. Homes, churches, and cars were riddled with bombs and bullets from snipers even after the boycott ended.

It’s important to recognize that there are people who face so much violence in their lives that they simply don’t want to subject themselves to the violence that comes along with protesting oppression. It’s important to understand that some people are so marginalized and have so much trauma that they may not have the capacity or desire to engage in ways that may trigger unwanted memories and emotions.

And the conditions of those of us who are farthest in the margins are another reason why these abolitionist goals are so necessary.

The Montgomery Bus Boycott didn’t intend to abolish the nation-state, but it had goals that were unheard of and it created its own system of transportation that allowed Black people to take care of each other without the state. The boycott is a model of possibilities. And there are many others.

There are possibilities that we haven’t dreamed of yet because we are too invested in resisting in a rational way.

Sure, there are ways to hold space for both the smaller policy changes and the large-scale structural changes. But when we choose to tell ourselves that destroying a violent system is too big of a task for right now, we willingly give up both our time and our power.

Every minute under the carceral, colonial project is inconceivable violence. We too often place abolition as something only possible in a far-off future, which means we’re allowing the right-now to be stolen.

The only logical time for abolition and decolonization is now.

Rather than spending time and energy worrying about whether our movements are rational, can we direct that time and energy towards recognizing our brilliance?

***

When we invest in ourselves, in our own power, we have no need for the oppressor and their rational politics. We can be strategic without holding ourselves back. We already have the tools we need in us to win.

We are already lovers, healers, artists, creators, and so much more.

We have the power to think far beyond the education we’ve been given, beyond the carceral state, beyond the gender binary, beyond capitalist relationships, beyond the colonial project.

We are dreaming up ourselves, each other, and the world we want to live in. We can’t let rationalism steal our dreams.

And we have to trust and love ourselves enough to make those dreams a reality.

Demerzel #fundie forum.gateworld.net

Every time I try to convince myself that torture is wrong, I remember the first scene in the first episode of season 7 of 24. Bauer is accused of torturing a terrorist for information. He admits that torture is wrong and illegal, but points out that said terrorist had targeted a bus with like 40 people and 12 children. So torturing that guy saved the lives of all those people.

Would you honestly prefer to see the terrorist, a guy that attacked your country and innocent citizens, unharmed, and see 50 people die, rather than inflicting him a little pain to make him admit the truth, so you can save innocent lives?

I think some things are wrong but yet may become necessary sometimes. Killing is wrong. Yet we do it in self-defense, or to protect others.

It's a weird world we live in. The SAD section of the CIA is authorized, by law, to assassinate people if needed to protect the country. So, ending someone's life is alright. But inflicting pain on them to try to get information is something that would go "against all this country stands for". Would be better if we simply killed him and didn't try to get intel out of him, then other people will also die. But hey, at least we can feel good about ourselves and our high moral standards, since we didn't torture anyone. Let's not interrogate terrorists anymore, let's just kill them. I mean, their numbers are bound to run out sometimes, right? Right? Oh wait.

We're talking about the country that dropped a nuclear bomb on a town filled with civilians and keeps putting its nose where it doesn't belong.

Torture is immoral. So is killing. Both are unfortunately necessary evils and are sometimes required to save lives. While people are busy being morally right, people die. Simple as that

[ Demerzel,Because it's a natural progression. If this is all about the ends justifying the means then perhaps the Terrorist will resist torture of their person. Thus, the next step is to torture people they care about, people who are innocent of any wrong doing and just happen to have a ******* for a mother or father.
To be clear, are you saying torturing the child of the terrorist (the child who has nothing to do with their mother or father's activities) is justified?
]

this is a difficult question. Personally, I don't think I would be able to do that unless, let's say, I knew that the lives of my family were threatened. That would be a direct enough threat to make me do about anything. Would it be "justified" to torture a child? I think it's wrong. But I also believe that our enemies don't follow any laws and don't care about the lives they take, and if we follow the laws to the letter while fighting them, we're going to lose. That's why the SAD exists, that's why we don't only fight enemies on the battlefield. President Reagan knew that some situations would come up that required soldiers to cross a line for the greater good.

I'm going to stop posting here, because the truth is that we can keep talking about this but none of us can know how it feels to be in such a situation, or what we'd do if such a situation presented itself. Presented with the chance to save many people at the price of one life, no matter be it adult or a child, I would do whatever is needed to save the most lives. That's my bottom line.

[ Becoming a monster to stop a monster will never, ever, make sense to me. In essence, you lost the 'war' before you've even started if you 'fight' that way. ]

it's interesting to see that killing people is fine, but hurting them makes you a monster.
Why the heck should we respect them and be nice to them?
I'd have an easier time living with torturing someone, than letting a lot of people die without trying to prevent it. When was the last time a terrorist nicely offered information when asked without being threatened?
Snd please, we can agree that torture doesn't always provide the right information, but it does work sometimes.

[ But is sometimes really worth the psychological, life long damage you are going to leave the victim with on the off chance of them having information which may, or may not save them?

TV Show or real life, no situation is acceptable. Except on TV or in Movies they know they have the bad guy and we are - at times - positioned to follow the hero torturing... except, I'm still unsure how that makes the act acceptable. ]

So let's say a terrorist has planted a bomb in a bus full of people. He doesn't care that they will all die, even children, since he does this to make a point and attack the country. So you'd sleep good that night, if you didn't torture him. Now ask yourself how the families of those murdered by the terrorist you protected, are sleeping that night.

You'd care about leaving a murderer and terrorist with psychological damage, while innocent people are dying? Why the heck shouldn't we at least try to make him talk? You respect a murderer and terrorist more than innocent lives? Good people die when the people in authority choose inaction and morals over what needs to be done.
So let's say a terrorist has planted a bomb in a bus full of people. He doesn't care that they will all die, even children, since he does this to make a point and attack the country. So you'd sleep good that night, if you didn't torture him. Now ask yourself how the families of those murdered by the terrorist you protected, are sleeping that night.

You'd care about leaving a murderer and terrorist with psychological damage, while innocent people are dying? Why the heck shouldn't we at least try to make him talk? You respect a murderer and terrorist more than innocent lives? Good people die when the people in authority choose inaction and morals over what needs to be done.

[ LMAO, no you don't. You assume they have the information you want, and if you are torturing an innocent person and they lie to you to get you to stop how does that save lives?

The simple answer is; it does not. ]

It doesnt. Risk of hurting some innocents wont stop me from doing something that could save lives in the future.

It's a shame I can't give you rep more often. I completely agree.

"Never let morals get in the way of doing what's right." - Isaac Asimov

Billy Stuart #conspiracy #quack psychologytoday.com

Psychiatric Drugs and Peter Gotzsche

It is disappointing that it is not acceptable to question or challenge the Medical / Pharmaceutical Establishment . It is shameful that in the country of Canada for example there is so little access to non psychiatric drug treatment for first episode or mild occurrences of anxiety/ depression. It is so clear that we are the victims of “ Doctors in Denial “ and manipulation by Big Pharma. For anyone and particularly Canadians I would recommend two Canadian books that document the corruption and collusion dominating the Psychiatric Industry, first is ‘ Doctors in Denial, Why Big Pharma and the Canadian Medical Industry are too close for Comfort ‘ by Toronto Emergency Room Doctor, Joel Lexchin and the second book is by former Oakville MP Terence H Young , ‘ Death By Prescription ‘ which records his ten year battles with the Pharmaceutical Industry, Health Canada and various Professionals to find the reason for his sixteen year daughter ‘ Vanessa ‘s ‘ death by mis prescribing and the eventual passing of new Canadian Legislation in 2014 called ‘The Protecting Canadians from Unsafe Drugs ACT. I acknowledge that Mr Shorter is correct about some drugs being of value in certain Mental Health treatments but he does not acknowledge that there is direct relationship to the exponential rises in all categories of Mental Disorders ( aka DSM ) and the sales of Psychiatric drugs by Big Pharma. There are also now more people than ever, including children and seniors who will be life long users ( addicted to) Psychiatric drugs and many of whom will face enormous problems
withdrawing from these drugs. It is absolutely shameful that an industry that sells potentially poisonous pills, have been fined billions of dollars in for fraud, bribing doctors, illegally promoting off- label uses, and manipulating clinical trials or publishing only positive clinical results has been placed on such an untouchable pedestal. I suggest to do your homework, read or watch or listen to the many well founded reports of Dr David Healy, Dr Robin Murray, Dr Ben Goldacre, Dr Peter Gotzsche, Robert Whitaker,Dr Joanna Moncrieff, Mad In The Uk Podcasts with James Moore,
and the many people who have lived experience with the Mental Health Industry. What happened to Dr Gotzsche and the Cochrane group is shameful and a case of the ‘elites’ protecting their territory. I applaud his efforts to establish on March 9 2019, his ‘Institute of Scientific Freedom ‘. There may still be a role for ‘‘Psychiatry” but a more humane, ethical profession that puts non drug treatments as a priority and stops being so beholden to the Pharmaceutical Industry. In addition governments should legislate that results of all clinical trials be made public. No more hiding the data! But this is going to be a major battle because too many people make a very good living from the misery of other people.
After all if there were really people getting better there would be a lot of people out of work! Count them if you want to try. All the best who are trying to demand the best rather than addiction and dependency on toxic chemicals and the straight jacket they come with.

Gordon Klingenschmitt #fundie rightwingwatch.org

(About the Crane accident in Mecca.)

"There are two different Gods," he said. "There is the true God, Jehovah, the father of Jesus Christ, and there is a false god, Allah, who is the father of the false prophet Muhammad. Now which one were they praying to when an 'act of God' dumped this crane on their heads and killed 107 people? I think they were praying to a false god."

"You could either say Allah wanted to kill them," he continued, "or you could say this is the consequence of their sin when they were really praying to Satan."

"Boy, these people really have a hard time discerning which God they should be praying to," he stated.

While admitting that accident may simply have been the result of natural causes, Klingenschmitt nonetheless proceeded to pray for the Muslims who "are bringing destruction upon themselves" by worshiping "the false God of Satan who has destroyed them, both physically and spiritually; physically in this horrible accident and spiritually when their souls are cast into Hell."

Anonymous Conservative #fundie anonymousconservative.com

The LGBTs want to take our rights:
"The Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ rights organization in the country, on Friday announced it is officially supporting stricter gun laws in the wake of the mass shooting at an Orlando gay nightclub last weekend.
The HRC’s Board of Directors made the decision Thursday evening during a special meeting, and agreed to support limiting access to assault weapons, expanding background checks, and limiting the ability of those on terror watch lists or with a history of domestic violence to obtain guns."

Rabbits don’t want conflict, and the powers that be don’t want a shit storm. Gun owners may, as a result of this type of action, genuinely create both – and they don’t even have to violate any laws to do so.
Most estimates are that there are around 8 million gays in the United States, though many question if that may just be an exaggeration designed to create an impression conducive to their goals. Personally I suspect it is closer to 3 million. Nevertheless, if these gays want to try and attack the rights of gun owners, all gun owners need to point out is that if they begin to feel hostile to gays, and begin to see gays as too emotional and illogical, they might begin to not believe the testimony of gays in trials.
If that happened, it would in effect jury-nullify all hate crimes laws, and possibly affect any trial involving a crime committed against a gay. Personally now, I am quite confident that nothing a gay says could be believed, if they cannot come to terms with the fact that Islamic fundamentalism, and not a gun, was the cause of the Orlando shooting. I can’t help but realize how that realization of their illogicality would contaminate any testimony from any gay in a trial setting. I would even question whether any physical evidence was manufactured by an overly emotional gay, unable to deal with simple reality as it exists.
To us, such an image of the future would be meaningless. But to an individual with an amygdala unable to confront even the slightest hardship, and terrified of the slightest threat, this realization would be horrifying.
There are about 102 million gun owners out there (32% of all Americans), and all a defense attorney would need to do is find one to put on the jury of a man who beat a gay guy, stabbed a transgender, or murdered a transvestite. Did a transgender man use the girls locker room when a pee wee swim team was changing, and get beaten to a pulp? Don’t think the beater is going to get convicted on the word of the gay. If gays think guns should be banned, then the gay’s testimony is meaningless, and I would assume any evidence had been fabricated in an overemotional meltdown.
I have to confront the fact that if gays are this unable to perceive simple reality, I could probably never vote to convict in any such case. I suspect if I had been on the trial of the Orlando shooter tomorrow, I am not sure I would have been able to vote guilty, given the stories of a second shooter, the gay holding the door shut, and the fact that the shooter himself appears to have been gay. It would all have been too convoluted, I suspect. I would probably have let him walk out the door of the courtroom a free man, and I would have felt it was the only moral outcome, given my convictions regarding the gay’s inability to perceive simple realties such as Islamic radicalism, and the fact guns reduce crime when the law abiding have them.
The potential consequences against gays would admittedly be dangerous. Millions of people who want to commit crime might begin targeting gays specifically, knowing that they would be unlikely to be convicted, given how all it would take is one of the 102 million gun owners to land on their jury – and the lawyers of the perpetrator would undoubtedly be looking for gun owners to put on the jury. Gang members, who need to kill somebody as an initiation might seek out gays as victims, thinking they would be a free kill, and sadly there would be nothing I could do about that. Those prone to engage in violence against gays specifically because of homophobia might be emboldened, and gay attacks could increase precipitously, and obviously all of those gay attackers going free without any consequence would be unfortunate.
However gays do not seem to consider our safety when contemplating their actions. They are all too happy to try and make us and our families less safe by preventing us from getting the guns we want to protect them. So the idea that gays would be less safe due to our realization that gays are too emotional and cannot be trusted, would not be of concern to me. I would have to vote my conscience – every time – and I suspect most other gun owners would as well. One thing we do well is vote.
If this idea were to spread widely, this development would have two effects. One, gays will be presented with an idea that advocating for gun control will bring real consequences they cannot control – something they are not designed to cope with. This is an open conflict stimulus which they are not designed to function in the presence of.
Two, the powers that be will realize they are bringing about a situation where the integrity of government will begin to be degraded. Once a group is, from a practical perspective, unable to appeal to the justice system for justice, it will not be long before the entire system’s foundation is in question. I suspect most politicians, rather than see this come to pass, would rather let everything cool off.
Perhaps this is the only path forward for the nation however – one step closer to Apocalypse.
If you as a gun owner feel this piece represents how you feel about this issue, please feel free to cut and paste this to your fellow gun owners, and publish it wherever you like – attributed or not, I couldn’t care less.

4Godisjust #fundie rr-bb.com

Hello, well I have known a lot of homosexuals that have told me, one in particular over the course of his life especially when he was a child that he was raped and molested by his uncles, and others in the family.

Many woman are also raped, molested and physically abused when they are a child then when they are adults they marry into a abusive marriage with a man who is the same as the male who abused them as a child, many of them divorce, then become lesbien because of the fear of abuse, there are 100's probably more of cases of this.

My poor friend as he told me his story, his boyfriend was so physically abusive, he always told me he never felt normal being gay, but it was all he knew in his life, I told him what happen to him was wrong, and no child should go thru their childhood with such abuse, then I asked why he he is alowing those abusers to win? He should take control back for his life and not allow those people to dictate his life! He said I never thought of it that way, through out the weeks I became his friend, he changed, he decided to leave his boyfriend, make a fresh start, find a job and heal, maybe marry and have a family, Jesus was starting, we had set up a time and place to meet to say goodbye, he was afraid his boyfriend would kill him and if I heard something it probably was true, a couple of days later, it happen just as he feared, he was beaten and brutally killed by his boyfriend, it was all over the news, I knew it was him, he told me a lot of stories that only insiders of the gay community would know about, and the male gay community is a little weirder and sicker then the lesbien community. But both is sad, these lost, hurting souls, desperately need Jesus to save them and to turn from the hurting and live, breath again!

Even with all that I know these people are humans but they need to be told the truth, and turn from there sin, asked God to Forgive them, change, repent and make a difference for God with there lives, and make a difference!Instead of being something their not and something they will never be.
with love, compassion, mercy, and Gods grace anything is possible!

Secret Secret #fundie groups.yahoo.com

(an email that my yahoo group received. We happen to be a pagan group)

All those who have sinned deserve to suffer in Hell forever.

Therefore...

1. Repent (be truly sorry for your sins and do your best to stop sinning).

2. Trust completely in the Lord only, and do not trust in your own self.

3. Love the Lord your God with all of your heart.

The Lord sent His only Son (the Lord Jesus Christ), to suffer and die on the cross, to pay for the sins of those who trust in Him. His blood poured out, and it can clean away our sins. He was buried, then lived again after three days. Human works and Human efforts cannot save your soul. The gift of God is eternal life to those who completely trust in Him.

Human beings are totally corrupt, but thankfully the Lord owns and controls all things. If He did not decide to save us from our sins, we will all be in Hell. Thank the Lord if He has chosen you unto salvation, and if His Spirit has transformed your "heart" so that you can trust in Him.

By the way, Spontaneous Generation is impossible. Therefore, God created the heaven and the earth, including all living things. Those who do not believe in God must also repent.

Repent, Trust, and Love. The Lord's will be done.

You may distribute or share this article for the glory of the Lord.

James Gregory #racist stormfront.org

The Jews have never been very interested in converts. They prefer killing off the native population of goyim and replacing us with Jews rather than accepting converts. The rabbis teach that a convert is like malignant sore upon Israel.

What converts they accept are turned into real monsters, worse than the Jews, themselves. For example, Jews are forbidden to have sex with their own mothers (unless they are less than nine years old, in which case it is perfectly okay). But converts are encouraged to screw their own mothers and sisters.

Even when the converts prove what "good and loyal Jews" they have become by having sex with their mothers, they are not considered to be "real Jews" until after ten generations.

Like Jesus taught, the Jews turn converts into twice the children of hell as themselves.

But for treason of someone pretending not to be a Jew, it's hard to beat Franklin Delano Roosevelt. This lying Jew got us into WWII and brought Jewish Communism into the USA.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

I was recently walking through a local shopping mall. I heard rhythmatic jungle music. I saw a group of dozens of children and a hundred or so observing parents. The kids were strutting to the music. The little girls were shaking their butts, gyrating to the music. They couldn't have been more than 7 or 8 years old. They were wearing revealing spandex. I walked away in disgust. What is wrong with parents today? The same thing that has always been wrong in a wicked society, people become weak and fleshly. When Christianity flourishes, people at best try to live right in the Lord. But when heathendom flourishes, people descend to the level of animals, doing what feels good, doing my own thing, “Do as thou wilt” as satanist Aleister Crowley (1875-1947) put it.

I've never seen so many effeminate young people as nowadays in the store, and they despise me when they see my “Jesus” hat. Homosexuals hate Christianity!!! They are hardened sinners. They're like Roman Catholics, in the sense that you first have to get them lost, before you can get them saved. Homosexuals have to repent, not in the sense of forsaking homosexuality, but in judging them self as a needy sinner, and that is something very few will ever do. You cannot get saved until you come to Christ, and only admitted ungodly sinners are willing to do that. That is exactly what John 3:20 means, “For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.”

Titus 2:5 plainly states that women are “to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” This is the exact opposite of what children are being taught today. Just as with homosexuality, dancing goes against everything which the Word of God teaches. Don't be fooled into thinking that dancing is just innocent fun, there is an immoral mindset that goes with dancing. If you love Jesus Christ and care about what God thinks, then it should matter to you what the Bible teaches. I care, do you?

straightisgood #fundie topix.net

Leviticus 20:13 (New International Version) 13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. In heaven, every person that has ever killed a homo or lesbo sits next to God on a golden thrown. They recieve constant love, and eternal peace knowing they did such a good thing to destroy homos and lesbos. Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, the ones who killed Matthew Shepard have seats reserved for them next to God. God is giving them courage to deal with the rest of their lives in prison. After that, God will reward them with eternal life. Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake. God laughs at those homos and lesbos who think that God lives them. He doesn't. Plain and simple. God hates them all. He did not create males to have their d*cks soiled in sh*t. He did not create the digestive system to be used for sex. He did not create the vagina to have anything in it besides a d*ck. He knows this. I pray that someday, the homos and lesbos learn to cope with the fact that God hates them, just so God can show him his true power. If he knows that people can deal with him hating them, he will hurt them worse. It is endless pain for homos and lesbos that God wishes to bestow upon them. Endless suffering. He enjoys watching them twist in pain forever. He gets his wish every time one dies ad goes to hell. Maybe, just maybe, if a homo or lesbo becomes normal and straight, God will think about loving them. And if enough prayer and begging is put forth, then maybe God will let them in heaven. But the longer they wait, the less likely it is. Do not insult me for this answer. I know in my heart that I am right. God hates disgusting homos and lesbos. They are demons. The devil loves demons. He wants them. And they are his if they keep up their disgusting lifestyle. Let's see how tough the lesbos will be when they stand up to eternal fire. They think they're tough "men" let's see how tought they are. What about the homos? They think they suffer now, being the "women" they are? Well they better learn to deal with it. Hellfire is NOTHING like anything they'll face. Getting their rights denied, getting beaten. NOTHING like hellfire!

Myluminaryking #fundie myluminaryking.tumblr.com

AQ

1. Q. Why do you comparing people who hate pedophiles with people who killed millions of people?

A. I do not compare pedohaters to Nazis by a number of victims. I comparing their believes. Nazis didn’t kill so many people until they come to power in 1933, and Holocaust was started only in 1941. But it’s obvious that pedohaters want to exterminate people they hate, just like Nazis wanted to exterminate people they hated.

2. Q. My sister, friend, relative was forced to have sex…

A. Just like you can’t hate gays because some people was raped in prison (and sex was completely homosexual), you cannot accuse all pedophiles, because of children raped by abusive adults (not necessary even pedos)

...


5. Q. Why do you compare sex to an ice cream? Eating ice cream is not a life-affecting choice.

A. Sex is not a life-affecting choice too. And the reason why do you believe it is, lies in you cultural background and moral believes. Like in some cultures you cannot touch a child’s head, because “you will suck his memories” or like-wise bullshit. Your believe that sex is harmful or important has the same meaning and reasons, literally - it’s a bullshit.

6. Q. Why do your grammar sucks?

A. English is not my native language, and I never learn it’s grammar. I just read texts and watch movies, never do any studies. But I will be grateful if you will show me most common errors, so I can avoid them in future.

7. Q. Sex is harmful for minors. It’s a scientifically proved?

A. Sex is not harmful for minors. And it was never proved scientifically. What traumatize
children is social attitudes, taboo and shame around it. Therefore, not pedophiles are ones who makes harm to children, but people spreading irrational believes regarding sex. Because of that I call them pedohaters and drawing them like monsters, because they really are.

8. Q. How child can decide to have sex. He don’t understand the consequences?

A. As I said sex is not something that is too important. You cannot have trauma from willing sex, unless you will be brainwashed to believe it was wrong, that is how social attitudes to some actions are causing harm rather than actions itself. Though anything in this world have it’s one consequences. Like you can be poisoned from an ice cream, or you can be harmed from eating it too lot. That is why children needs us, adults, so we can watch out for them to not allow them do anything dangerous or harmful. Certain risks in sex likes pregnancy risk or STDs should be prevented of course, but it’s not a child’s responsibility.

Some TERFs #sexist reddit.com

Re: Where Does Organized Male Evil Come From?

I just got finished reading this article about the rapes of Rohingya women and the persecution and slaughter of their people: http://www.thejournal.ie/rohingya-rape-3745266-Dec2017/

I know it's not uplifting to read this stuff, but it's also important not to turn away.

I want to know what causes such organized male evil. It doesn't matter whether it's a dispute over territory or religion or ethnicity, it is men who do this in an organized fashion. It has always been men.

Is it as simple as "patriarchy?" Silvia Federici's Caliban and the Witch describes the creation of capitalist evil through the weaponization of men and male sexuality, the formal institution of patriarchy, the enslavement of women, and the colonial/imperial ventures of the new world order.

Although it's true almost no corner of the human world has gone untouched by the Western project of colonialism and imperialism, other cultures have their own ancient histories of warfare, bloodshed and male rule that predate Western history.

I know the advent of agriculture and the dawn of land ownership have been cited as the reason for growing institutionalization of patriarchy and subjugation of women and expansion of territory--but really--I struggle to understand how men can commit such horrific atrocities in an organized fashion. If women ruled the world, would we do this? Would we?

I have never given much credence to notions of biological determinism and I still don't; if men are like this by dint of nature as well as nurture the power of human socialization can change them. So far is has mainly been used to cement these violent, hierarchical tendencies it seems.

I just never used to believe there could be this fundamental difference between men and women where under the right circumstances men could join together to commit such atrocities in a way that women wouldn't. Is it because women have been stripped of their power that we don't see them band together to exercise it in such horrific fashion? Or is there really a fundamental, biological difference between us that makes men more susceptible to committing violence?

I also struggle with the connection between sex and committing violence so often seen within cultures and among mostly male individuals across the world. Is it male or is it masculine?

(anxietyaccount8)
No it's not just as simple as patriarchy. I once believed that but now I don't. Men really are just more violent than women. Male sexuality is also very different than female sexuality (in general) and I don't think anybody could have socialized me into being interested in some of the crazy things they are interested in.

I think that the reason a lot of people dismiss these claims is because they are reminded of evolutionary psychology, which for the most part is not very scientific at all. But the thing is that just because things like "women are naturally better at cooking" are BS it doesn't mean that everything that sounds like evopsych is wrong. For example we know that male and female animals act differently. We know that males and females have different body types, hormone levels, and different ways of reproducing. Would it really be so insane to suggest there are mental differences too?

Now to be fair, I am not really sure if this is true, and none of us will be sure unless we have substantial evidence, but this is my personal theory. It just feels really obvious to me.

(Unabashed_Calabash)
This was my point to another poster. To what extent can the behavior of other mammals, including our closest relatives chimpanzees and bonobos (pygmy chimpanzees) be interpreted to reflect on our own?

Not only the male correlation of sex and violence but specifically the far greater incidence of male sexual fetishes (about the same as the disproportionate ratio of male vs. female violence, 10 to 1) causes me to believe there's something more than socialization going on here. Scientists who study human sexuality say it has to do with a more intense focus from males as a group on sexuality in general, heightening fetishes. But how often do you hear of women who like to pretend to be baby boys and wear diapers? (Seriously?) And like to be burped and breastfed and rocked to sleep? (I would really like formal studies of how often these bizarre fetishes occur in males as compared to females. I wouldn't necessarily say it's a result of porn and therefore male domination arising from social reasons because how much of porn is men pretending to be infant girls and breastfeed? Please don't tell me).

I am not saying this to be in favor of gender or against it. "Gender" as we know it is a social construct. Any innate evolutionary differences in the sexes--say, of violent vs. pacifist, or systematizing (from, say, hunting more often than women in most prehistoric societies) vs. integration (from the greater social relations of gathering and building)--need not be our fate if detrimental. We are highly social animals almost entirely at the whim of our socialization, which has been civilizing in some respects but in others greatly lacking.

I agree that just because evolutionary psychology has become a crutch of sexist males it does not mean absolutely none of it is true. It's more important than ever we separate the wheat from the chaff.

(anxietyaccount8)
Right, and it's important that people recognize radical feminism's criticism of gender actually does not contradict this existence of innate differences. We are all born into a society where we have to follow prescribed gender roles, and this social construct bleeds into all aspects of our lives and causes differences of its own. If some differences are innate this social construction makes them much more prominent and worse.

Also it doesn't mean that there is a distinct male or female brain, or that trans people really do have the brain of the opposite sex. Even if, hypothetically, a trans woman did actually act in ways that women are biologically supposed to, they are just proving that there is variation and a male can be that way too.

(Unabashed_Calabash)
Lol at the downvotes. I also don't understand how butthurt men get about this subject. It is quite clearly true (unless you prefer "violence" to "evil" because you don't believe in imposing moral values on human actions), and I am merely asking why and where it comes from.

Humanity will never change until men reckon with their own and their fellow men's actions.

(bigoltreehugger)
Ew. So many men came in caping for other men in response. I miss the days when this sub didn't have as many dudes hanging around. I'm sorry I can't engage your question properly but I just wanted to say that I've always appreciated your input on this sub.

(descending_wisdom)
fundamental biological differences. Sexual selection theory easily explains male violence. Watch some videos on organized warfare in some troops of chimpanzees.

(sunscreenonface)
Gonna leave this write up from notcisjustwoman here:

"Patriarchy pre-dates both the agricultural revolution and hunter-gatherer societies, because the basis of the oppression of women, indeed the very basis for oppression itself, is rape.

Male animals have been raping female animals since before the first humans, or even the first primates, appeared on earth. Events like the agricultural revolution codified male oppression of women into a more organized system, and religion has evolved over time to become an enforcer and moralizer of male violence, but neither of things things created patriarchy. Patriarchy began the first time a man raped a woman, and instead of being beaten to death by her tribal/family group, he was rewarded with fathership of her children.

It’s not comfortable even for most radical feminists to see this full and complete scope of the history of patriarchy, because it means that things are much more complicated than mere socialization, but it is a brutal truth we must confront in our analysis."

To expand upon this, here's a previous write up I did once I'd read notcisjustwoman's blog:

"I don't think this will make anyone feel better, but I've recently been thinking a lot about the various species of animals across this earth that have been known to rape...and it turns out most animal species have some form of rape. Ducks, squirrels, dolphins, dogs, gorillas, etc. all have observable males who rape and aggress females.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that aggressive males who rape will pass on their aggressive traits to their offspring that are conceived via rape. I don't think it's a stretch to say that male homo sapiens might be more likely to aggress and rape females since they inherited a tendancy towards violence from their male ancestors who were conceived via rape. (Reminder: I could be completely wrong about this!)

Does this make rape ok? NO!!!! Even if rape and aggressive sexual behavior is 'natural', 'natural' does not instantly equal something good or beneficial for a species. Homo sapiens dying of tooth decay at 22 is quite natural, but it's horrific and traumatizing for everyone involved.

All I'm saying is my understanding of men's GLOBAL and CONSTANT violence toward women became easier to understand once I started to think about sexual violence as an issue often found in primate species and not as something completely 100% culturally-bound.

Here's a link to a tumblr write-up that spawned my thoughts on this: http://notcisjustwoman.tumblr.com/post/175761393959/what-is-good-for-the-gander-is-not-always-good-for#notes

(Unabashed_Calabash)
I've read about the extremely complex history of rape among animals of all kinds (they have highly evolved methods of rape--an actual sexual arms race between males and females, as females also evolved to try to avoid rape--in fact, some believe the reason we walk upright is because women first stood up to avoid greater vulnerability to gang rape from behind, and that these gang rapes were so violent many of the females of our prehistoric ancestors who did not stand up did not survive). The species in which pair-bonding and good fatherhood are the norm are not the norm.

There's a reason that male sperm in all species is a complex chemical cocktail. In humans it's designed to lull/drug the mate and bond females to males even at their own expense.

My gut feeling and experiences tell me notjustciswoman is right.

There's a reason rape as committed by men is so normalized and also so easy for men to commit. Behavioral scientists have discussed the not-so-mythical "rape switch" and posited that all or most men have one.

Reading stories of men's mass raiding/raping parties, I'm inclined to agree. (My own experience aligns with this as well. I have actually witnessed a man struggle with his own desire to rape when confronted with a woman highly vulnerable to it. He had a low "rape threshold" certainly, but I don't actually think it's all that unusual. I think human men--because human beings can feel remorse and regret--may struggle with what they have done or the harm they have caused, if society or the victim force them to reflect on this, but they still did it and wanted to do it anyway). Neither the normalization of rape nor its prevalence despite official messages all over the world that it's wrong would be so common if rape were not somehow natural to the males of this species.

I remember an author saying "we cannot deal with violence until we admit uncomfortable truths, such as the thrill of war." The same is true of rape/sexual abuse; there's no way we can combat it without understanding it, and understanding why some men like to do it even when it's officially discouraged, or why men as a class can be easily encouraged to commit it under the right circumstances, is, I think, important if we ever hope to combat it.

(And yes, the history of conquest and invasion in our species is the history of rape. There's a reason so many men in the world carry the same Y chromosome).

Apologist #fundie iidb.org

[Here's a hypothetical scenario. In Nazi-occupied Poland or France, a Christian is involved in the resistance, getting Jews out of the country before they can be killed. This Christian is identified and captured. He knows that once he is interrogated and tortured, there's a good chance he'll talk and betray the resistance. Therefore, not wishing to put anyone else's lives in jeopardy, he commits suicide. He understands what he is doing, wills himself to do it, commits the act and doesn't repent. Does he still go to hell for trying to save his friends by his death?]

The ends does not justify the means.

David Chase Taylor #conspiracy sites.google.com

Isis was a goddess of Ancient Egypt (which is historical cover for the Greco-Roman Empire) who was admittedly worshiped throughout the Greco-Roman world. Her name means “throne” and she was the patroness of nature and magic who is often depicted as the mother of Horus, the hawk-headed god of war. Isis (S+S) or “SS” was evidently the goddess of the Greco-Roman “system” of war and fascism which was created by Minos on the Island of Crete. Although Chania (C/K+N) is known as the founding city of Crete, the city of Knossos (C/K+N+S+S) was likely the second. Based on the double “SS” found within its name, the city of Knossos was likely the first capital of Crete where Greco-Roman warship armed with cannon and gunpowder was birthed. According to modern historical accounts, the religion of Isis spread throughout the Roman Empire. Roman practitioners of Isis used a rose in worship, an apparent tribute to the Island of Rhodes, the primary military base of the Greco-Roman Empire’s which was responsible for developing the ship. The sun atop the head of Isis is likely a symbolic reference to fire of Roman cannons which gave the Greco-Roman Empire unrivaled naval supremecy. Because Isis was the god of the magical Greek Fire (i.e., Roman gunpowder), temples, where human sacrifices were held, and obelisks (i.e., gravestones) were erected in her honor. Neoclassical Greco-Roman temples to Isis include but are not limited to: the Temple of Isis at Philae (Agilkia Island, Egypt); the Temple of Isis (Delos, Greece); and the Temple of Isis (Pompeii, Italy).

Isis Symbology
The sacred image of Isis with her child Horus (which became the model for the Christian Madonna with the baby Jesus), appears to be an allegorical metaphor for the “system” (i.e., Isis) feeding the “baby” or Babylon, the former capitol of the Roman Empire. Interestingly, the symbol of Isis is a “tiet” or “tyet” (meaning “welfare” and “life”) which was also called the “Knot of Isis”. Tiet is an apparent reference to the tit or breast of Isis whose symbol coincidentally mimics a woman’s nipple. The “Knot of Isis” a likely reference to the aforementioned city of Knossos. Isis is always pictured holding the “ankh” which is alleged to be an Egyptian hieroglyphic character that is known as “key of life”. Although being “Egyptian” in origin, the “ankh” features the arrow shape of the Island of Rhodes intersected with the Greek cross of Tau which also doubles as the Crete-shaped fasces.

Isis & Zeus Comparrison
It is imperative to note that Isis (S+S) and Zeus (Z+S) are consonatly the same in Roman-English because the letter "Z" is often replaced with the letter "S" (e.g., close, confuse, easy, has, his, is, pose, president, raise, rose, use, was, etc.). Therefore, their names are in essence one and the same. While Isis means "throne", Zeus is often depicted sitting in a throne. While Isis is depicted with the sun atop her head (symbolizing fire), Zeus is depicted holding lightningbolts (symbolizing fire). Both the sun of Isis and the lightning of Zeus represent Greek Fire, otherwise known as Roman gunpowder which was vital in the Greco-Roman Empire's defeat of every nation and culture on earth.


Tributes to Isis
Modern tributes to “SS” are numerous, a few of which include the Swastika, the Nazi Waffen-SS (whose shape mimics Zeus' lightnight bolts), the SOS distress signal, the name of Israel (Isis+Ra+El), the “ß” (“SS”) letter in German, the ISS (International Space Station) and the “USS” title for all U.S. Navy ships (e.g., “USS Dwight D. Eisenhower”). Isis (Zeus) is also found on the wall of the U.S. Senate where two “S”-shaped-branches form an “SS” or an “SZ” around twin Greco-Roman fasces. This is fitting because the U.S. Senate has approved and funded more wars over the last 200 years than any government on Earth. That being said, the wars were planned by the CIA of Switzerland.

?eus
Zeus is "Father of Gods and men", the King of the Gods, and the King of Heaven who oversees the universe. In Greek mythology, he is the god of sky, thunder and lightning who rules over Mount Olympus which is located in Greenland. According to the Greek geographer Pausanias, "That Zeus is king in heaven is a saying common to all men". Symbols attributed to Zeus include the thunderbolt, eagle, bull, and oak. Zeus is frequently depicted in Greek art either standing, striding forward, with a thunderbolt leveled in his raised right hand, or seated on a throne. The thunderbolt of Zeus is a symbolic reference to Greek Fire (i.e., Roman gunpowder) which was used by the Greco-Roman Empire to conquer the world. With one exception, Greeks were unanimous in recognizing the birthplace of Zeus as the Island of Crete where he was worshipped at caves near Knossos. In order to dispel any notion that Isis and Zeus were gods of a city, Hellenistic writer Euhemerus reportedly wrote that Zeus was a great king of Crete who posthumously turned into a deity. Neoclassical Greco-Roman temples to Zeus found near the Mediterranean Sea include but are not limited to: the Temple of Olympian Zeus (Athens, Greece); the Temple of Zeus (Cyrene, Greece); the Temple of Zeus (Nemea, Greece); the Temple of Zeus (Olympia, Greece); and the Temple of the Olympian Zeus (Agrigento, Sicily).

Jesus = Esus = Isis
The name of Jesus appears to be the same as Esus or Hesus (an aspirated form of Esus), a Celtic god worshiped by the Imperial Cult of Rome which coincidentally mirrors the Greco-Roman god of Isis. Aside from the fact that in the language of Spanish the name of Jesus is pronounced “Hay-SOOS” (a possible tribute to the Greco-Roman god of Zeus which is the same god as Isis), the 18th century Druidic revivalist Iolo Morgannwg identified Esus (S+S) with Jesus (J/G+S+S) based on the strength of the similarity of their respective names. Predictably however, modern scholars state that the striking resemblance between Esus and Jesus is purely coincidental. However, the Ichthys, a basic symbol consisting of two intersecting arcs that resemble the profile of a fish, was reportedly used as a Christian symbol in the first decades of the 2nd century. Its popularity among Christians was allegedly due to the fact that the five initial letters of the Greek word for fish (ICHTHYS) describes the character of Christ: “Iesous Christos Theou Yios Soter” (??s??? ???st??, Te?? ????, S?t??), meaning, “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior”. In order words, “Iesous” (S+S) was the first word to describe the deity that is now called Jesus. The Catholic Church corroborated this notion a few hundred years later when Pope John Paul II published a declaration on August 6, 2000, officially declaring that the title of Dominus Iesus means “The Lord Jesus” in English. Although the vowels change (the Roman alphabet did not contain vowels) the consonant letters of “S” and “S” stay the same. In other words, Iesus (S+S) is the official name of Jesus according to the Catholic Church who not only produced the Holy Bible but are admittedly the "sole Church of Christ" according to the Nicene Creed. Therefore, they have the final word on the official name of Jesus. Consequently therefore, the worship of Esus, Hesus, Iesous, Iesus or Jesus is the unintentional worship Greco-Roman god of Isis.

Esus Symbology
Esus is most known for his depiction on the Pillar of the Boatmen (c. 100 AD) which also contains the Tarvos Trigaranus. The Pillar of the Boatmen is a stone block statue with multiple depictions of Roman and Gaulish deities, including the god of Esus. It originally stood in a temple in the Roman “civitas” of Lutetia which was located in modern day Paris, France. In both engravings, Esus is portrayed cutting down branches from a tree with his axe. Esus is accompanied on a different panel of the Pillar of the Boatmen by Tarvos Trigaranus, the ‘bull with three cranes’ or crowns. The imagery of the bull (B+L) is likely representative of “Baby Line” or “Babylon”, the former capitol of the Greco-Roman Empire. The bull’s three horns as well as the three cranes are likely representative of the number “33” which doubles “CC”, an numerical acronym for Chania, Crete, the birthplace of the Roman Empire. The three horns of the bull or Babylon individually appear to represent the three homes or dens of Rome (i.e., Island of Crete, Island of Sicily, and the Island of Greenland). Consequently, Eusu chopping down the tree with an axe likely represents the cutting of the 13 Bloodlines of Rome who vacated Babylon for Greenland, ending their family tree in the underworld.


Human Sacrifices to Esus
A well-known section in an epic poem “Bellum Civile” or “Pharsalia” (c. 60 AD) by the Roman poet Lucan talks about the gory blood sacrifice offered to a triad of Celtic deities (i.e., Esus, Teutates and Taranis. According to the Berne Commentary on Lucan, human victims that were sacrificed to Esus were suspended from a tree and flailed. The use of trees, particularly oak trees, in human sacrifice is rampant throughout the lore of gods associated with the Greco-Roman Empire (e.g., Odin, Thor, etc.). The Gallic medical writer Marcellus of Bordeaux appears to offer a second textual reference to Esus in his “De Medicamentis” (c. 400 AD), a compendium of pharmacological preparations written in Latin in the early 5th century, the sole source for several Celtic words. The work contains a “magico-medical charm” in Gaulish which appears to invoke the aid of Esus in curing throat trouble. Marcellus’s account of Esus is spelled Aisus (S+S), a name consonantly the same as Esus (S+S), “Iesous” (S+S), Iesus (S+S) and Isis (S+S). The strange medical reference appears to be an inside joke as the victims of human sacrifice carried out by the Imperial Cult of Rome routinely had their throats cut while being hung upside down from a tree. Consequently, due to gravity, the blood would gush out, providing a blood bath for those participating in the sacrifice. It is imperative to note that all religious denominations who worship Jesus (e.g., Baptist, Catholic, Christian, Lutheran, Jehovah’s Witness, Methodist, Mormon, Presbyterian, etc.) are Roman Catholic and therefore are, albeit unwittingly, worshiping the Greco-Roman god of Isis.

Global Worship of Esus
John Arnott MacCulloch, one of Scotland's pre-eminent scholars on Celtic religion and mythology, offered a summary on the scholarly interpretations of Esus in 1911, stating in part: “The whole represents some myth unknown to us…Esus was worshipped at Paris and at Trèves…a coin with the name Æsus [S+S] was found in England; and personal names like Esugenos, "son of Esus," and Esunertus, "he who has the strength of Esus," occur in England, France, and Switzerland. Thus the cult of this god may have been comparatively widespread. But there is no evidence that [Esus] was a Celtic Jehovah [another name for Jesus] or a member, with Teutates and Taranis, of a pan-Celtic triad, or that this triad, introduced by Gauls, was not accepted by the Druids.” MacCulloch’s reference to a Celtic god and the Druids is interesting for they are both part of the Imperial Cult of Rome who carried out the aforementioned blood sacrifices. The notion that Esus was a global deity is indicative of Isis who was worshipped throughout the global Roman Empire prior to the alleged Fall of Rome. Lastly, the fact that Switzerland is mentioned by MacCulloch is not just by chance for the small European country is the primary proxy state of the Roman Empire which is solely responsible for plotting and financing assassinations, terror attacks and wars on a global level. Therefore, the worship of Isis would not be possible by the Romans in Greenland if it were not for Switzerland doing her dirty work in the underworld.

Rev. Michael S. Heath #fundie barbwire.com

For over a decade I argued statewide in Maine that the addition of "sexual orientation" to the Maine Human Rights Act would have far-reaching consequences. I predicted that Maine would quickly destroy marriage by making sodomy an acceptable precondition for state-recognized marriages.

The government went further than I imagined possible.

In addition to "sexual orientation" they included the category of gender, "trans"gender to be more specific. This is more accurately described as cross dressing on steroids, just as "sexual orientation" is more accurately imagined as sexual perversion.

[...]

And now public school teachers are forcing all Maine children to begin thinking about the virtues of sodomy at 7 years of age.

[...]

[W]e find that the virus is spreading rapidly. It won't be enough to pervert the whole world with this evil anti-family worldview. Since the developed governments of the world aspire to colonizing planets we have to prepare for the export of sodomy to other worlds - to the entire universe!

[...]

It's like satan, a rabid dog, sunk his fangs deep into the donkey flesh of our nation's government. And now the deranged ass is infecting other nations.

[...]

Humans die from rabies unless they are given the vaccine before the symptoms appear. Paul the apostle points out in his letter to Roman Christians that you can tell when a nation has become a walking corpse when it has endorsed perverted sex.

Is it too late for America to take the vaccine?

Are the symptoms of judgment evident?

Nealreal #fundie letspleasegod.com

When you search out who runs and/or owns these corporations, you’ll find more men of so called Jewish descent. So what’s my point here? Well, Jews claim to be the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. American Christians are encouraged to send money and bless the people of Israel. But being Israelites, the chosen people of the most high God, there are consequences for such sins against humanity.

To destroy multiple countries with fornication, lies, abortion, violence, witchcraft, murder, drug abuse and homosexuality (with Tel Aviv, Israel being named the gayest city in the world)—don’t you think a holy God has a problem with that? Especially with a people he supposedly chose as his own? Don’t we read in the bible of multiple times where he sent his people into captivity for these sins against him?

The world’s media is immoral and they control it. If these were righteous men, they wouldn’t allow that kind of content. Yet sin prevails through their media. The bible says there are immediate consequences for such actions for the people of God, but nothing seems to be happening to these men or their people; and they continue to prosper. Where are the curses God said would be laid on their people for this kind of disobedience (Deut chapter 28)? There are none because these are not the real Jews. As expressed in my article about who the real Jews are, these people are imposters. The bible calls them out:

I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. (Rev 2:9)

Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee (Rev 3:9).

Now of course, not all the people who claim Jewish descent serve Satan, but from the content of the worldly media, it’s clear that these Jewish owners are of the synagogue of Satan. That’s just something to think about. Research Khazarian Jews and you’ll discover their true origins.

So next time, you wanna blame rap music and black people for their condition, don’t forget to point out the fake Jews behind it all. These powerful men could change the content of most of the world’s media tomorrow, but they won’t because they work for Satan while maintaining racism/white supremacy.

Who are the real Israelites? The so called black men and women suffering in the ghettos for their sins against the all mighty God; the ones racism/white supremacy/zionism hits the hardest, that’s who. Pray that they wake up; pray for their collective repentance and bless them if you can.

And please stop sending money to Israel.

ExaltGod #fundie exaltgod.deviantart.com

Why in the world do you call yourself a Christian if:

* You think the Bible is man-made, and not inspired by God
* You think evolution is true and Genesis is just a fairy tale
* You think something is only sinful if it hurts someone, and not if it's against God's law
* You think God is totally supportive of homosexuality
* You think God is totally supportive of other religions
* You think Hell is a ridiculous myth
* You think miracles are as real as invisible pink unicorns
* You think God just wants us to accept whatever lifestyles exist, even if they are incredibly sinful
* You think God loves pride parades
* You think God wants people to be homosexual
* You think it doesn't matter what anyone believes, because everyone's going to Heaven anyway
* You think God doesn't care how you live, as long as you say "I believe in God"
* You think God hates judging
* You think God loves tolerance for sin
* You think that when God returns to Earth to rule and reign, He's going to set up a democratic government, and that everyone will have a right sin as they please
* You think only a horribly evil God would ever punish people for breaking His law
* You think Jesus supports getting drunk
* You think pornography is totally fine
* You think prostitution should be legalized
* You think getting high is totally fine
* You think the Bible is outdated and bigoted, and should be ignored, except for John 3:16, and the very first part of Matthew 7, of course
* You think God doesn't hate anyone, ever
* You think Jesus died so that you could sin even more
* You think the most important thing is to be true to yourself, and be proud of who you are
* You think self esteem is more important than the fear of the Lord
* You think Jesus hates religion


Seriously...just, stop.
Just admit you're not a Christian already, would you?
Or rather, just admit that you hate God, you hate His word, and you hate Christianity.
Just admit it, and stop lying to everyone.

Mohamed Saeed #fundie voices.news24.com

In Pietermaritzburg, hundreds of Muslims gathered outside the city, on the Table Mountain Road, to pray for rain. Speaking to the faithful, on Saturday the 7th November, Moulana Ahmed Akoo, in his talk urged and appealed to the congregation to engage in self-reflection. He said: “look into your actions and deeds and see what is causing Almighty to become upset with us and withhold the rain.” Moulana Abdur Rasheed Goga who led the prayers for rain pleaded to The Almighty to forgive our sins and short comings and bless us with beneficial rain.

As Muslims we believe when society’s habits and practices becomes evil and moral decay sets in, Almighty withholds the rains. Therefore, Muslim scholars around the country are asking the faithful to repent and pray to Almighty for beneficial rain.

Paul M #fundie rr-bb.com

The worst sin of all is unbelief. It is the only sin that will keep people from heaven. God would have forgiven Hitler if he repented and asked to be saved.

I've mentioned this before, Jeffery Dahmer accepted Christ before being murdered in prison. I find that awsome. The despicable horrible crimes he committed were forgiven by the Lord and he was saved. That same day as he was ushered into heaven by the angels, others were thrown into hell who may have devoted their entire lives to charities, good works, etc. they did not need to be saved they thought, they were good enough. Nothing unclean can be in the presence of God. Only the blood of Christ can make it possible to be in His presence.

Robert Comeau #fundie plus.google.com

My Testimony :)

I grew up my whole life being a Jehovah Witness. I'm not going to say anything bad about them because it's not necessary I never got baptized there, although, i was studying since i was six to someday get baptized. Studying with them helped me realize within myself that i love God. I learned so much about him. I learned about what he liked and what he didn't like. I learned about his characteristics. He is loving, fair, powerful, and knowledgeable about everything that we are. I was amazed with him. Growing up i always had him in my heart. I just didn't know how to fully surrender to him. I was confused about how i should serve God. I was always taught to pray to him and talk to him, but how else could i really show him how much he meant to me? I found myself getting further and further away from him because to me, it became work. It became work to try to have this relationship with him other than it being easy to just love him. I felt like i had to try to walk a perfect life for me to be able to have any relationship with him. Well as perfect as i could. When i would fall short here and there, i would become ashamed and i didn't even want to pray to him. I felt like he wouldn't listen to me because i went against his word. Being in the Jehovah Witness organization was very difficult. I never felt his spirit there. I actually came to the point where i didn't even know it was possible to feel his spirit. I would deny anything like that. I was taught that if you felt a spirit of any kind it sure wasn't God. I would try to go weekly, but i would always end up being inconsistent not just with attendance but with my overall relationship with him. I would try my hardest to be into it for a couple of weeks, then i would stop going. One day, i had an opportunity to attend a Christian church called Revolution Church. This was a youth church. It was youth night and for the first time I opened myself fully to God. I wanted to feel him so bad. I was going through a hard time at the moment where, i didn't even know if God was there with me or if he was going to get me through this struggle. When i went to church i asked him to show me who he is. I wanted to feel his his spirit around me. That night was the first night i said to myself that God, is incredible. God loves me. I felt his presence for the first time. It was unbelieveable. So from then on i knew that where i had to be was there. In the Christian congregation. I finally was showed the truth not by a person but by God himself. I got baptised on Easter day of 2013. I will never forget how amazing it felt. I then knew that if i did fall short i could go to him and repent. I shouldn't have to feel ashamed for being human. He loved me no matter what. He loves all of us. I am proud to be a Christian and i don't have a problem telling that to anybody. I still have some things to get through in my life. But i am counting on God to help me get through everything. I have no doubts in him. Keep praying to him and remember that he loves you.<3 he can create miracles. With him anything is possible. God is Victorious.
?
c: God Bless -Itzee

Brenton Sanderson #racist theoccidentalobserver.net

In a recent article I explored the Jewish role in the hyper-sexualization of Western culture. I made the point that this phenomenon — the most obvious result of the Jewish takeover and virtual monopolization of the Western media and entertainment industries — represents the deliberate ethno-political application of psychoanalytic theory to a Western culture regarded as inherently authoritarian, fascistic and anti-Semitic due to its “repressive” sexual morality. This hyper-sexualization agenda, which has had disastrous social consequences for White people, operates in tandem with the Jewish-led “civil rights” movements which demand deference for non-Whites and sexual non-conformists — these serving as proxies for Jews as the prototypical outsiders in Western societies. With the legality of “gay marriage” seemingly secured (largely as a result of Jewish efforts) the focus of the “identity politics” agenda has now shifted to deconstructing traditional Western views about what it means to be a man or a woman.

As with the other “civil rights” movements dominated by Jews, the motivations underlying the “transgender” rights movement are ultimately grounded in the subversive doctrines of the Frankfurt School — and in particular The Authoritarian Personality which found that those who ranked highly on the ethnocentrism scale (i.e., those more likely to harbor “anti-Semitic” views) tended to live in worlds with rigid gender boundaries, where attractiveness was grounded in traditional conceptions of masculinity and femininity, and where sexual mores were clearly delineated. Kevin MacDonald notes that “Jews, as a highly cohesive group, have an interest in advocating a completely atomistic, individualistic society in which ingroup-outgroup distinctions are not salient to gentiles.”[i] It is therefore in Jewish interests to subvert all non-Jewish social categories — whether these be based on race, religion or gender boundaries and roles. Hence their recent championing of the concept of “fluidity” which is the very antithesis of anything separate, homogeneous, or with clear boundaries. All cohesive (and evolutionarily adaptive) social categories that have characterized Western civilization have been subverted by Jewish activists.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

We are going to see a lot more ecumenical apostasy creeping into the churches. Many churches have been hoodwinked by Pastor Rick Warren's Satanic Emerging Church deception. Mr. Warren also teaches the heresy of Lordship Salvation. Warren is a disgusting compromiser, who has apologized to many his “gay friends” for taking a stand against homosexual marriage. Warren is far more concerned what people think about him, than what God thinks about him (John 12:42-43).

[...]

John Calvin was a monster! It does not surprise me that a crypto-Jewish occultist, fraudulently named John Calvin, introduced a false plan of works-based salvation into the churches, which infectes many churches still today. There are Satanic forces at work to corrupt and transform the churches into spiritually dead religious centers, instead of an assembly of Holy Spirit indwelled born-again Christians. Spirituality is replacing theology in the churches! Without the sound doctrines of the inspired Words of God in the King James Bible, the churches are losing their foundation. Psalms 11:3, “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?”

Please beware of John Calvin's teachings, commonly referred to as, what else... “CALVINISM”! Please beware of Calvinist influenced ministers and institutions; such as (to name but a few), Evangelist Paul Washer, Dr. John Piper, Evangelist Ray Comfort, Dr. John MacArthur, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fuller Theological Seminary, Moody Bible Institute, any churches that support and promote John MacArthur, et cetera.

Satan knows that the best way to hinder truth is to confuse people by introducing lies into the mix. The Bible teaches us about “the simplicity that is in Christ” in the Gospel (2nd Corinthians 11:3-4; 1st Corinthians 15:1-4). In sharp contrast, there is nothing “simple” about having to surrender all to Christ to be saved. There is nothing “simple” about forsaking sinful bad habits and confessing Christ before men publicly to be saved. The lie of Lordship Salvation places extremely heavy burdens upon men's shoulders; whereas Christ bore the total weight of every man's sins upon the cross, so that salvation could be made freely available to all mankind, by simple faith in the Gospel.

The true Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ is free and simple to anyone who wants it, by simply receiving Christ's sacrifice upon the cross as the payment for one's sins, and believing that Jesus bodily raised up the third day for our justification. This is drastically different than the extra-biblical requirement to cease from sinful living, forsake the world, confess Christ before men and surrender all to Christ to be saved. These latter are all self-righteous works, which are forbidden in God's plan of salvation (Isaiah 64:6). The false doctrine of Lordship Salvation is also held (or a variation of) by Roman Catholics, Seventh-day Adventists, Mormons, Church of Christ and Jehovah's Witnesses, to name but a few Satanic cults.

Man has no part in God's salvation of man, except to BELIEVE the Gospel. When the Scriptures teach believers in Philippians 2:12, “...work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,” it does NOT say to work out God's salvation. 2nd Corinthians 4:3, “But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost.” The heresy of Lordship Salvation cleverly hides the Gospel behind a wall of holy living, teaching people that to be saved they must repent in the sense of changing their life, and then continue repenting for the rest of their life if they're really saved. This effectively requires a lifetime of good works, and abstaining from bad works, to be saved. I've heard this garbage theology taught on UNSHACKLED by Pacific Garden Mission in Chicago, Grace To You with Dr. John MacArthur, and also by Evangelist Chip Ingram, and also Seeking Him ministry online, to name just a few.

Wake up oh Christian from your spiritual slumber! We are in a relentless spiritual war for God!!! Thank you for reading this.

Corena Terral #fundie books.google.com

The Destruction of the Great Tribulation (Second Half of the Seven Years)

The greatest damage to the Earth will come in the second half of the tribulation, referred to by most as the great tribulation. That is why our Lord said that He did not appoint us to the wrath. The saints of God will be home. The Bride of Christ will be on a honeymoon with her Bridegroom.

All islands will disappear and all mountains will be leveled.

Every building in the world will fall. That means the grand old castles and palaces that tourists like to visit all over Europe won't be there anymore—they will be demolished, broken beyond repair, never to be restored.

The great cathedrals will all be a heap of rubble. Many arc mere monuments to religion and were never visited by God anyway.
The great monuments of the world will no longer be there as attractions for travelers—like the Empire State Building, the Great Wall of China, the United Nations building, the new glass headquarters for the European Union, the capital building in Washington, D.C.

The parliament buildings in London will be dust in the water, as well as the Tower Bridge and the Millennium Wheel—the biggest and grandest Ferris wheel in the world.

The great statue of Christ on the mountaintop in Rio dc Janeiro will be gone.

The Panama Canal and the Erie Canal will be damaged, probably beyond use. They may have been built strong enough to withstand the earthquake until the last big one happens. The same with the great dams of the world. The dam on the Euphrates may be spared so that it can flood Israel and then dry up to aid the marching two hundred million from the North, who afterward will then perish in the final and greatest quake, the granddaddy of them all.

Oil wells will bust open and spew their crude oil in the air and probably catch fire. Pipelines and gas lines all over the world will break open and turn into infernos. In many places the world will literally be on fire.

The new temple in Jerusalem will be tramped by the gentiles. Jerusalem will be destroyed by an earthquake and flood.

The great San Francisco Bridge will collapse into the bay. as will all bridges all over the world. People will be trapped in the Florida Keys when the long bridge collapses into twisted rubble due to earthquakes and then tsunamis. Florida will be totally underwater, as will many coastlands.

Airports and runways around the world will be so damaged that planes in the air will find it difficult if not impossible to land.

All emergency services—hospitals, police departments, fire departments, and utilities—will be hampered in their ability to assist anyone other than in the very closest areas. Moving around will become very difficult and even extremely dangerous.
Most governments will become dysfunctional, unable to control the chaos. So much equipment will be destroyed that it may become Impossible to get aid to people. There will be mass rioting in the streets, with looting such as there has never been seen before. People who think the)' are entitled will steal and rob any store they can break into, or attack any individual they can find.

Communication will be hampered, but wireless devices and satellite communication will still give many people the ability to know what is going on around the world and to be able to keep the public informed. This will be aided by those with cell phones that operate solely off satellite transmission.

People will die from heat, with no electricity to try to stay cool. People will die from plagues, with no hospitals available to help them. Eventually, people will die from starvation because land will be burned up or ruined by flooding, and just the logistics of getting food gathered and distributed will be almost impossible.

Sinkholes will appear all over the world. Small villages will completely disappear.

For God's children, no weapon formed against them shall prosper (Isaiah 54:17).

In what we call, 'third-world nations." these conditions will be the worst. In some larger, more advanced nations, it might not be as bad, but it certainly will be bad enough to destroy almost everything, and life as we knew it will cease.

Those who choose to laugh at God. His Word, and the prospect of the great tribulation will be the ones who, when facing the truth, would rather blaspheme and curse God when it really happens, than admit the truth, believe and repent.

Those who choose to come to God before this begins will be the fortunate ones who will be on the first train leaving Station Earth, destination heaven, in the first rapture. This happening will be the catalyst to bring about the seven-year peace treaty between Israel and the Arab nations and Europe. The USA will always be an ally to Israel. We will continue to stand with them no matter what happens. Those who believe and leave the Earth in the first rapture at the beginning of the seven years of tribulation will be the saints who will be the bride at the marriage supper of the Lamb. The guests will be the Old Testament saints who left paradise with Jesus, the resurrected saints who join the first rapture (those of the second and third raptures), and the martyrs. The martyrs' resurrection will happen just after Jesus returns, and they will be able to witness the judgment of those who killed them.

There will be supernatural protection for those who refuse the mark of the antichrist (the beast). Jesus will make many people invisible and provide shelter. They will see miracle after miracle of provision and protection.

Those spared who become believers will be able to touch the injured and see supernatural assistance and miraculous healings.
What the earthquakes don't destroy, the angry mobs will. The lands will be full of lawlessness that leads to mass, deliberate destruction. Mobs will become predators.

There will be great destruction of government buildings and national monuments.

Those who can find it will do drugs, or drink continuously to be able to numb themselves to the horror around them. But their anger at God will only grow. They will not repent, but become fools instead.

Todd #fundie queerty.com

You people are fucking pathetic. Are you even listening to yourselves? “Oh, he’s so self centered, he’s not getting tested for ME”. Seriously? Grow the fuck up and wear a condom. Accept that if you’re screwing strangers, some of them aren’t going to be the most savory people. Refusing to get tested for YOUR convenience is hardly the worst thing someone’s trick could do.

Let me get this straight: the average queerty reader is apparently engaging in sex with strangers. Rather than admit that strangers sometimes don’t behave as we’d like and respond accordingly, we’ve constructed an ideal in our heads that these people have an obligation to get tested and disclose for OUR protection. Then, when we’re presented with the reality that not everyone does this, it is somehow THEY who are selfish, stupid and mean? Wow. I mean, wow. All ideals aside, you people are fucking idiots. Would you also leave your doors unlocked and wallet out only to be horrified that someone took your stuff? As for selfish: I don’t think you even know the meaning of the phrase. To be offended that someone isn’t risking a legally subordinate position just so you can have the sex you want kinda takes the cake, doesn’t it? Wow. What part of Bizarro World do you people live on?
All these fucking girls sit here whining about how its a “deadly weapon”. We’re not talking about fucking rape here. If they’re so fucking terrified, they need to sit at home and jack off.

[ Assholes like you are the ones who spread the disease just cause you’re horny. Fuck that; if you have the balls to fuck another guy, have the balls to say whether you carry HIV, and let him decide for himself if some stranger fucktard like you is worth risking infection? ]

Oh grow the fuck up you sanctimonious asshat. I haven’t spread it to anyone. Between condoms and undetectable status, the people I sleep with are more likely to be crushed by blue ice falling from an airplane than infected by me.
For the record, I *do* disclose to everyone, mostly because I don’t want some crazed nutjob like the losers on this website to come after me when they inevitably test positive. And yes, many of them will inevitably test positive. Anyone who thinks that disclosure is an effective way to protect agains the virus is setting himself up for a rude awakening. Just because I disclose doesn’t mean I agree with these laws, and just because someone disagrees with these laws (or doesn’t disclose) doesn’t mean they spread the disease. They’re separate issues. It is only because people like you keep reinforcing the idea that they’re one and the same that people continue to operate under the delusion that disagreement=nondisclosure=infection=murder..

...

.
Disclosure isn’t about “someone else’s right”. We don’t disclose when we have any other STD, including HCV and HPV which each kill more people than HIV. We don’t disclose to everyone we walk near if we have TB, despite the fact that you’re more likely to get TB from a casual acquaintance than HIV from a condomed, undetectable trick. We don’t disclose our driving records to our passengers or our credit scores to our lovers. All of these things are “relevant risks”, but we don’t demand people talk about them. Why? Because in every other area, we concede that there is some small amount of risk, and we admit that sometimes people have to take responsibility for their own decisions. HIV and “disclosure” are special areas, detached from the actual complications of the virus or the liklihood of infection.
HIV Disclosure hasn’t been about anything noble since it became apparent that condoms were an effective way to stop the disease. Its about forcing people to wear a scarlet letter, ghettoizing those who are infected and covering the whole thing up with a cheap veneer of “personal harm reduction” or whatever the discrimination-disguised-as-prevention crowd wants to whitewash it as.
No one has trumpeted this horn as loudly, or as uncle-tomishly as you, and for that, I’m rightfully calling you out on the carpet as a jerk and a bigot of the highest order. You’re not “saving anyone”, you’re validating discrimination, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

tardisdoctor #fundie rr-bb.com

One thing that bothers me about the homosexual lifestyle that no one talks about these days because it's not politically correct, and may soon be a crime, is the mental health aspect of it. I have friends who are licensed counselors who have told me that the removal of homosexuality from the DSM as a mental illness/disorder was done for purely political reasons. Everything I have read and observed about homosexuality causes me to agree although psychology is not my field of work. The Bible's prohibition against homosexual behavior is because of God's love for us. Again, it's not a popular opinion these days, but I have personally never encountered an incidence of homosexuality that did not arise from trauma caused by sexual, physical, mental, or emotional abuse. Never. If you start looking at the life of a homosexual, the pattern is that the brokenness of a trusted adult or authority figure in one's life resulted in trauma, producing further brokenness that leads to homosexual behavior in a certain percentage of the population. I think the term "conversion" therapy is inaccurate; instead, what counseling actually does for the individual who experiences unwanted homosexual ideation or behavior is healing for a wounded soul. A soul wounded by sin. Underneath all the pride (shame) is a heart hurt by innumerable and severe grievances. This is why God hates sin and explains why we also cannot tolerate sin. Sin always damages; sin is contrary to God's natural order (which man corrupted and introduced to the human race back in the Garden of Eden).

Some may yet come to find healing in Jesus Christ when even "marriage" does not satisfy the longing in the homosexual's heart. I think it would help us in our prayer lives to understand that much of the push for societal acceptance (beyond the spiritual/demonic reasons for the push to accept sin as normal) is because of the rate of mental illness in the homosexual community. Many people think the incidence of mental illness in homosexuals is because society doesn't accept them enough and so it stands to follow, according to their logic, that acceptance of same-sex marriage will decrease incidences of suicide, alcoholism, promiscuity, etc. In reality, because the prevailing/majority religion of our day, secular humanism, says there's no such thing as sin, it never occurs to them that these behaviors and illnesses exist because the homosexual lifestyle is sinful and is one produced out of sin and is therefore under the curse of sin (I want to make it clear that it's not God who brings this curse...it is solely because of evil...but God does not rescue us from our consequences, that is, we reap what we sow). Same-sex marriage will not heal the emotional wounds in the homosexual's heart because covering up one sin with another does nothing to quell the damage dealt to the heart inside. Sin cannot, will not, and has never healed sin. Only the blood of Jesus can do that.

Since sin leads to suffering, I wonder if we won't see just the opposite effect - an increase in the co-morbidity of mental illnesses associated with homosexuality. When that occurs, the heart of man will continue to ignore the real factor - SIN - and instead will go after those who preach and teach - TRUTH. For all of their outward pride, the inward shame still eats them alive, not to mention the sadness they experience caused by past hurts and "old" wounds that have never really healed and, therefore, are still fresh in their hearts and minds, wounds that have not scarred over, wounds that still bleed. We need to pray for these hurting people, speaking the truth in love; and, in this way, we have compassion on the LGBT crowd more than the apostate church who seeks to approve their sin (which is not up to them but rather is up to God who, by the way, never changes. Never believe the lie of the world and the apostate church that we are "homophobes" or hateful people. We know and have a love of the truth). Not all the wandering hearts in the LGBT community have been overtaken by evil, and are just as lost and confused as we once were. Still, many hearts will be hardened because the SCOTUS ruling validates an invalid lifestyle/union not blessed by God.

This ruling has ramifications for our brothers and sisters in Christ doing God's work to undo the damage caused by sin. They will eventually be told that they cannot offer or provide their services to homosexuals, even to people who experience unwanted same-sex attraction, lest their licenses be revoked.

Jeanette Wessner #fundie youtube.com

I think the opposite....what a horrible people to reject the son of God and choose to perish when he offers u eternal life instead of eternal death...you are deceived and it breaks my heart for u and I'm not kidding..I don't even know u but I hate what the enemy has done to your mind and countless others....the only one that loves u the most u can ever be loved u slap in the face and trample the blood of Jesus and call it worthless basically...the one that hates u with the darkest passion laughs at u because he knows what he lost and he wants people to lose out and suffer right along with him...how can u believe this lie? you know what? thank you for your comments because u just allowed me to pray extra hard for you to receive Christ as your savior...lol...I've heard worse trust me...I've won't give disrespect back to u so hit me with your best shot...I consider it a good thing to pray for u...I'm not a conceited or haughty person I'm quite sincere, far from perfect but striving to be obedient to the Lord...even if that's not your real name posted that's ok...God knows who u are on here no matter what name u go by...if it is your name..well, even better

[snip]

a loving God paid the price with his own blood so u don't have to go..he doesn't send u to hell..u have free will...if u end up there u sent yourself there because u rejected his offer to save u....the only loonacy Is to say no to such a great offer to be saved....your right..a loving God has already been loving enough to pay for for your sins on a cross with his own blood and your telling him no...he has thrown you a life preserver but u would rather drown....a loving God has already told u in advance what is to come...he's already told u the way out and your denial of this is truly terrifying...I'm not scared into serving him...I love him...certainly I don't want to go to hell but I truly want to live for him...whoever u are I want u to really know the Lord for who he really is...he sure knows who u are and he's not a bit nervous at any mockery thrown his way...he is not sitting around stressed about all the hurtful and negative things said about him...he is God and the day is coming that your knee will bow to him whether u want to or not...I hope it will be because u repented and accepted the call...I pray u do...I'm not hating on you because I know the truth and I've heard all this before but it doesn't shake my faith because I've experienced him and no one can take that from me..?

IFBaptistGirl #fundie teens-4-christ.org

Before I was saved and I'm ashamed to say, for a time shortly after I was saved, I could have sung you any country song on the radio word for word. I've always been attracted to musical things...There came a time in my life after being saved that I was convicted and realized country music DID NOT glorify God. Your beliefs and values come from the things you associate with. Music especilly can have a profound effect on a person. The devil was a musically inclined angel the Bible tells us. Any coincidence that he's the "prince and power of the air?" What goes over the air? RADIO AND TV!!! I'm not saying the radio is bad...I go to a church that owns and opperates a wonderful radio station that I keep playing all day...I'm all for godly music. But I am NOT for music that dishonors the Lord...and songs about cheating wives and drinking DO NOT glorify the Lord. This is why I trashed the country music...and then set the trash can on fire...and no I'm not joking...

Harry H. Rogers #racist #wingnut #psycho heavy.com

A man who is an admitted leader of the Ku Klux Klan is accused of driving his truck through protesters during a Richmond, Virginia, demonstration June 7 as they peacefully protested racial injustice and excessive force used by police in the wake of the death of George Floyd, an African American who was killed by a white police officer on May 25.

According to Henrico County Police spokesperson Lieutenant A. M. Robertson, “several witnesses reported that a vehicle revved their engine and drove through the protesters occupying the roadway.”

The incident happened at about 5:45 p.m. on Lakeside Avenue. A 36-year-old man, Harry H. Rogers, was arrested for the crime and is currently being held at the Henrico County Jail.

[…]

Robertson said no one was badly injured, but one person was checked out at the scene by emergency medical workers and refused further treatment. That adult victim was the one who called the police.

According to someone who tweeted that she was a witness to Rogers disrupting the protest, he also followed protesters and filmed them.

[…]

According to Taylor, Rogers “by his own admission and by a cursory glance at social media is an admitted leader of the KKK and a propagandist for confederate ideology. We are investigating whether hate crimes charges are appropriate,” she said in a statement.

Taylor said they will prosecute Rogers to the “full extent of the law,” calling his alleged action “heinous” and “despicable.”

Rogers’ current charges are attempted malicious wounding and destruction of property, both felonies, and misdemeanor assault and battery, according to WTVR CBS 6. While the investigation continues, he is being held without bond. Law enforcement and Taylor’s office are both asking witnesses to come forward with any more information.

[…]

Rogers, who goes by “Skip,” stood outside the Colonial Heights War Memorial in March 2016 in a white robe with red trim and a KKK symbol on it while waving a confederate flag, according to the Progress-Index. At the time, Rogers wouldn’t say why he was doing it.

He told Progress-Index, “I’m exercising my First Amendment right,” he said, and that he planned to stand there “until my clothes get cold.”

In 2015, the Progress-Index ran a story about Rogers, who was an organizer of an NAACP (National Association for Awakening Confederate Patriots) “Confederate flag ride,” with about 20 vehicles waving the flag through the town of Petersburg.

The last public posts on the NAACP Facebook page are from 2015. One post reads that the group has one common goal, which is to “bring America back to the way it’s supposed to be.”

Jesse Powell #fundie secularpatriarchy.wordpress.com

Men and Marriage – Real Marriage – By Mark Driscoll
3:52 to 4:21; 10:06 to 11:54; 23:55 to 25:17

“This is what it means when the Bible uses the language of “head,” that we [as men] are responsible in the sight of God for the well being of our wives and children. And so men in this sermon on Men and Marriage you need to know that if your wife struggles or fails to grow in Godliness, if your children struggle or fail to grow in Godliness, it is your responsibility in the sight of God.”

“Your understanding of marriage has to be covenantal, not contractual. And if I had to break it down into its simplest form I would articulate it this way. Contract is about me [the man] negotiating terms that benefit me. It’s selfish. Covenant is about me giving myself to you for your well being. It’s servanthood. Covenant is about your [the woman’s] benefit. Contract is about my [the man’s] benefit. . . .Covenantal thinking says God wants me to become what you need. God wants me to love you as you need. God wants me to serve you as you need. God wants me to invest in you as you need. Covenant is about what is best for you. Contract is about what is best for me. It’s the difference between selfishness and servanthood. And in a covenantal marriage a husband and a wife are in covenant with God through faith in Jesus Christ and they are to be in covenant with one another and the Bible says as Jesus loves and serves the Church so the man as the covenant head is to similarly lovingly lead his wife. So that she flourishes and grows in the grace of God.”

“So men let me tell you what your responsibilities are. And these apply as well to the ladies. I’ll give you four responsibilities. Number one, your first responsibility. Christian! Repent of sin, trust in Jesus, death burial and resurrection. Read your Bible, grow in grace, pray. Be involved with God’s people in the Church. Christian. First things first. Your covenant relationship with God. You’re here today trying to fix your marriage and you don’t know Jesus? That is not your first priority. Your first priority is to get into relationship with Jesus and out of that relationship with Him He will change you so that you can be a better spouse. Your second responsibility is to your spouse. That means husbands, your wife; wives, your husband. Your next priority, your next responsibility is spouse. Then third, parent. If God should bless you with children; loving them, serving them, raising them, investing in them, and growing them. And let me say this, if you invert these you will destroy your children and your marriage. . . .And number four, your fourth responsibility is worker.”

Now onto the substance of Libby Anne’s critique. Libby Anne focuses on the idea of men protecting women from other men and how absurd this idea supposedly is. In reality men protecting women from other men is exactly how a civilized society works. Male headship in marriage and male authority in general is actually about supporting and protecting women globally from all hardships and dangers they may encounter; dangerous men being only one of the dangers patriarchy is meant to protect women from. Still one of the purposes of patriarchy is certainly to protect women from abusive male behaviors.

In how Mark Driscoll sets things up the father is supposed to guide and protect his daughters until the daughter is “handed off” to her husband who then serves to protect his wife. This makes perfect sense. Using the quote from Mark Driscoll that Libby Anne highlights:

“Let’s say for example there’s a daughter, and she’s got a close relationship with her covenant-head, Christian dad. That headship protects her from other boys who want to come along and be her head, tell her what to do, set an identity for her, abuse her, endanger her. It protects her from other young men who would come to take that place of headship in her life. Similarly with a wife, if the husband loves her like Christ loves the church, and he takes responsibility for her, that protects her from bad men, bosses, men who have ill intent or those who are perverted.”

In the way Driscoll is setting things up a young woman will be protected by her father from miscellaneous boyfriends who may be irresponsible or exploitative or even abusive in their behaviors towards women. Similarly a woman will be protected by her husband from men who might be exploitative or abusive towards his wife.

This makes perfect sense because a girl’s father has a strong connection and investment in his daughter and is also older and wiser than his daughter and is more intimidating than his daughter. This is compared to any miscellaneous guy who might be interested in the daughter but has not shown himself to be trustworthy or to be seriously committed to the daughter or to have good prospects to be able to provide for his future family. If a potential boyfriend passes through the various hurdles and shows himself to be the best man and commits to marriage then he has earned the status of the woman’s husband and can then play the role of protector himself. Until then however the man has not earned the right to take on the headship role in relation to the father’s daughter. Same thing regarding the husband protecting his wife from various men who might mean his wife harm or be exploitative towards her. The husband has already shown his high investment and trustworthiness towards the woman; otherwise he would not have been able to marry her in the first place. The husband then has earned the right to serve as the head and protector of his wife and is in the position to protect his wife from the various miscellaneous men who might harm her. The man who has committed to the woman and has shown good character towards the woman outranks all the other men interested in the woman or in lesser relationships with the woman.

Libby Anne is acting as if the concept of men protecting women from other men is an absurdity since if a man is dangerous by virtue of being a man then nothing is gained from an inherently dangerous man “protecting” women from other inherently dangerous men since the so called male “protector” is just as likely to turn around and attack the woman himself once he is given the trusted status of being the woman’s “protector.” The problem with this line of thinking is that some men are more dangerous than other men. The minority sociopath man is more dangerous than the majority socially well adjusted man. The man who has made a high commitment and investment in a woman is less dangerous than the man who only has a casual relationship with a woman. A man who can act as a neutral third party whose primary interest is the well being of the woman, such as a woman’s father, is more trustworthy than a potential suitor who has the obvious self-interest of trying to gain a relationship with the woman. Women are most protected when the most trustworthy and least dangerous categories of men are empowered over the least trustworthy and most dangerous categories of men. The whole point of empowering fathers to protect their daughters from potentially harmful boyfriends and empowering husbands to protect their wives from potentially harmful relationships with other men is so that the men who are the most trustworthy and protective of women’s interests will be in charge.

VenomFangX #fundie youtube.com

["Why won't God heal amputees?"]

People lose their arms because God is allowing us to feel the full consequences of sin (pain, death, suffering) so we understand the seriousness of it, so we can repent from it and come to saving faith in Jesus Christ. That is why God is not healing everyone all the time; it would be supporting our sin, rather than judging it, and showing us the need to repent from it. We will all die one day because our bodies have sinned, and all that matters is this; have you repented and received forgiveness