3
CuomoisaMassMurderer 3 points ago +5 / -2

You're referring to Latin.

0 parts of the Bible were written in Latin.

It's entirely possible to translate directly from the original Greek into English, which bypasses everything you've referring to.

Not nearly enough work has been done to group original manuscripts into families. That work is ongoing right now. Each family of manuscript needs to be translated separately. Westcott and Hort prevented that, and Nestle Arland is only starting to recognize the massive problems caused by that; hopefully they will actually take corrective action.

All your claims about Constantine are false, and written by idiots.

2
CuomoisaMassMurderer 2 points ago +4 / -2

Thank you.

What you're missing is the whole Church knew what books were inspired,by 180 AD at the latest.

The whole idea of "Canonization" is misunderstood, and blown entirely out of proportion.

The Church preserved Scripture, and handed it down to us. Constantine had basically nothing to do with that, except to end persecution for a while.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +2 / -2

What if I told you that 'Rapture' aka the 'resurrection of the dead in Christ' is actually spiritual/mental and not a physical zombie apocalypse..

You're ignoring Scripture:

" Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." (Acts 1:11)

What you're talking about absolutely has validity, but it's important to distinguish flesh from Spirit:

"That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." (John 3:6)

To think that only Spirit is good and flesh is inherently bad is gnosticism, denies the Incarnation, and misses everything about Christianity. Scripture absolutely does enable us to tell what things are referring to flesh and physical reality, and which things are wholly Spiritual. Most often it's both.

the age of Aquarius

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb8luHdpR84&pp=ygUpaGFpciBhZ2Ugb2YgYXF1YXJpdXMgbGV0IHRoZSBzdW5zaGluZSBpbiA%3D

Watch it. Has nothing to do with what was on the radio.

You're trying to talk about theosis. Kundalini is demonic possession.

Do not be deceived.

-1
CuomoisaMassMurderer -1 points ago +2 / -3

Imagining an elephant is not a Spiritual endeavor. You're a little clumsy with your language there.

God's thoughts come to pass. Ours? Not so much. It's a theme in sci-fi, and usually it's pretty horrible.

3
CuomoisaMassMurderer 3 points ago +5 / -2

The information overload is that everything in Revelation is based on OT Prophecy. It's not for us to speculate, but to find the connection.

And the main theme is Faithfulness through difficulty: "she that endures to the end shall be Saved."

satan doesn't want anyone hearing that, and our flesh is entirely too eager to agree with him:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QWNh1IyFdvM&pp=ygUncGV0cmEgZG9uJ3QgbGV0IHlvdXIgaGVhcnQgYmUgaGFyZGVuZWQg

-1
CuomoisaMassMurderer -1 points ago +2 / -3

I have a very firm grasp of every position held,

No you don't.

Before 1800 there was no "rapture," just the Day of Judgment.

Jesus returns. There's a second coming, not a third fourth and fifth.

I dont believe in the bible in the traditional sense. I believe it in a spiritually significant sense.

That IS the traditional sense.

Good grief!

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

No, I'm not a Catholic.

Duh.

I have never been a Catholic. I will be never be a Catholic.

Every word Paul wrote is based on the OT. If Paul's satanic, so is Moses. Then Jesus is too.

You have utterly no clue what it means for Jesus to build His Church. You should get that much straight before you go thinking you know better than everybody over the last 5,000 years.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

It's your direct statement.

The Church Jesus builds preserved Paul's writings as Scripture, and handed them down to us.

You say that's the work of Satan.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

You claim the Church Jesus builds is wrong.

While you are right.

Have fun with that.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yes. Fed first, 1913. CFR, 1921. These were the main subversive elements that installed the corruption at the top. FBI created to enforce prohibition. When was the CIA created? Purely nefarious purposes to begin with.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +2 / -1

It's also possible to go about your life and not realize you're actually working for the CIA, especially if you have a job as a spokesperson for VOA. They deal in unknowns and less than total control. The main objective was to have the broadcast going, and this one guy wasn't 24/7.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

Paul doesn't preach against righteousness. Bad interpretation pretends he does.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

I like the book of James!

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +2 / -1

John 17 is the best sermon ever preached! IMHO. Yes, it's a prayer.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

The entire premise is ahistorical. The matter was settled by John, the last living Apostle of the Lamb, who was finished writing circa 96 AD. He only had to do that because there were upstarts, there was no raging controversy then, and there wasn't in 325 either.

Take a good cross section of the literature of the period and you will see that this was always clear.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +2 / -1

Nope. We have records of this. You might try those who wrote before 150 AD, instead of authors after 1950.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +2 / -1

Ok. We say Abraham Isaac and Jacob. You skipped a generation.

Faith precedes righteousness. Legalism can do serious damage, right behavior never does.

Keep the Faith! (That expression literally means keep the commandments)

2
CuomoisaMassMurderer 2 points ago +3 / -1

To an extent, yes. In this case, he could've done his thing independently of the CIA, and they filtered it and released what they saw fit. Or, they could have completely dictated terms and he cucked, Idk.

Livestreamers aren't CIA controlled. O'Keefe is basically a tier up from that. Small independent media outlets can grow bigger. At some point of funding they get corrupt, this is why I use the term MSM. So I'd offer the counterpoint that all MSM is D's controlled or at least influenced, and we have to find other sources.

Speaking of which, is O'Keefe back to doing good stuff? RSBN? OANN?

Newsmax was about as bad as Faux, but somebody said they've improved?

3
CuomoisaMassMurderer 3 points ago +4 / -1

Christianity is who do you say Jesus is.

You're saying Jesus is someone other than who Christianity says He is.

That's the definition of a cult.

5
CuomoisaMassMurderer 5 points ago +6 / -1

This needs to be stickied! Put on the sidebar, even. 1:15:00 gets really good.

Here's some highlights so far:

The records in question are his. Per US Constitution, statute, and precedent. He cannot violate the law by being in possession of them, nor by talking about them. With anyone. AG told us this indictment came from the intelligence committee. They're saying THEY have the power to decide what THEY can keep secret from you, and that you can be locked up for telling the truth.

The entire indictment is designed to shape public opinion, and is made for TV. Indictments aren't supposed to be this detailed, neither are there legitimately 37 different charges; the whole purpose is to be able to say “he was impeached, twice, indicted twice, with X outlandish number of charges" and thus poison people's minds.

What this whole thing comes down to is Milley was saying he stopped DJT from attacking Iran, and DJT demonstrated that it was he who stopped Milley from attacking Iran. The rest is Kabuki theater and regardless what fool thing the next Judge might do would never survive appeal. So it should never have been presented to a grand jury, but the process is the punishment

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +2 / -1

First quote is not Scripture.

3
CuomoisaMassMurderer 3 points ago +4 / -1

Jesus in flesh was not there in the beginning, not until the Incarnation.

God the Son was there in the beginning.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›