But men (i.e. AcesSilver) will twist them to meet their needs.
Stephen [I] . . . boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundations of the Church were laid [Mt 16:18]. . . . [Pope] Stephen . . . announces that he holds by succession the throne of Peter [Firmilian of Caesarea quoted in St. Cyprian’s Letters 74:17 (c. A.D. 255)].
Who is twisting scripture? AcesSilver (2024AD) or Firmilian of Caesarea? (255AD)
Here is Eusebius in 312AD quoting the Bible talking about Peter's successors to the episcopate, i.e. Linus.
Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul [2 Tm 4:10], but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Letter to Timothy [2 Tm 4:21] as his companion at Rome, was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown. Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow soldier [Phil 4:3] [ibid., 3:4:9–10]. - Eusebius of Caesarea, Church History, 312AD
Is Eusebius in 312AD quoting the Bible more or less credible than AcesSilver in 2024AD quoting the Bible.
AGAIN, THE TEXT IS WHAT MATTERS NOT WHAT A MAN (i.e. ACESSILVER) SAID. LOOK AT THE PRESERVED WORD OF GOD!
Strange, Eusebius in 312AD seems to understand reality different than AcesSilver in 2024 AD who is 1700 years removed from the actual events.
Victor . . . was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter [Eusebius - Church History 5:28:3 (c. A.D. 312)].
"no evidence that Peter was a Pope in history other than this misconstrued verse"
Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the apostles. . . . He wished him who had been received into partnership in his undivided unity to be named what he himself was, when he said: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church” [Mt 16:18], that the building of the eternal temple might rest on Peter’s solid rock, strengthening his Church so surely that neither human rashness could assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it [Pope St. Leo I - Letters 10:1 (A.D. 445)].
The early Christians were pretty clear on the Chair of Peter. I trust they had a clearer understanding of what exactly Christians believed as opposed to us nubs 2000 years later
The Lord says to Peter: “I say to you,” he says, “that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . .” [Mt 16:18–19]. On him he builds the Church, and commands him to feed the sheep [Jn 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were also what Peter was [apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, by which it is made clear that there is one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he think that he holds the faith? If he deserts the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he be confident that he is in the Church? [Unity of the Catholic Church 4; first edition (Treatise 1:4) (A.D. 251)].
https://exsurgedomine.it/240620-attendite-eng/ - Ab. Vigano's response in english
From a Catholic perspective, the mothership is a clown show so we have to get out into little life boats for a few years. After the muslims and russians board and slaughter the clowns on-board, we can forcibly retake the vessel.
he should get that framed. would look nice on his wall.
They mastered cloning probably decades ago and each puppet like Biden, HRC, Ryan Gosling have multiple clones who take their place whenever necessary.
It's actually a pretty good movie but basically in order for their magic shows to work, they need to have multiple disposable clones that are murdered in order for the trick to work and for the audience to remain fooled and entertained.
Whether they can accelerate growth or just have batches of like 20 clones at a time, I do not know, but of this I am fairly certain.
Both Jackman and Bale are freemasons also.
It's a failed experiment, because it does not adequately account for human sinfulness.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams
Secularism just kinda assumes that people will vote for what is good and leave each other alone because RELIGION IS THE PROBLEM. Which is the exact opposite, Jesus Christ is the protective hedge and by excluding Him from the public space and uncrowing Him as the King and Sovereign ruler we have given space for wicca, islam, sataism, feminism, communism, and all sorts of unholy horrors. The modern world is in a much worse state than when it was under Roman paganism. Say what you want about the Romans, they did not industrialize child sacrifice or mandate child mutilations or allow women to rule or mass traffick children for sex
Luke 11:24-26. “When an unclean spirit goes out of a man, he goes through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes, he finds it swept and put in order. Then he goes and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man is worse than the first.”
I think Monarchies are inevitable, elected Monarchies (NOT hereditary monarchies) historically are the most stable. Best example, the good emperors during Rome's golden age.
Nerva -> Trajan -> Hadrian -> Antoninus Pius -> Marcus Aurelius
Each emperor handpicked by their successor. And notice how it all goes to sh*t after Marcus Aurelius has his son Commodus become emperor.
Greek democracies like athens eventually reduced to anarchy and mob rule. Roman Republic ruled by extremely rich secret factions (first triumvirate) who pull the strings behind the scenes before succumbing to massive civil war where you have a politician who wins the game of politics become the monarch.
Bukele made an extremely profound comment that power eventually will be vested in either a Monarch or Merchants. Right now, we are being ruled by merchants, i.e. the banksters.
Democracy and Republics can still work on a small scale (like a city state -- kinda) or like fan clubs or corporations. But for large and diverse countries, it might work for a while but they break down eventually.
It is important to note that Christ is in fact a King, the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords and thus, the universe, rightly ordered, is a Monarchy, not a democracy or republic. I think the entire episode where the crowd is manipulated into voting for Barabbas shows what God thinks of popular democracies. Instead of choosing the rightful king and heir, the vote for revolution.
WW1 and WW2 as well as all these Bolshevik revolutions in China, Russia, Spain, France and elsewhere are about uprooting these Christian Monarchies and replacing them with Republics and Democracies that can be easily manipulated and corrupted by money.
Case in point, the Mexican election of 2024 where almost 40 candidates were murdered by the cartels so they can bring in a jewish communist. Or the 2020 election manipulated by main-in ballots, a fake pandemic, and electronic voting machines to bring in their puppet. All this made possible by infinite amounts of money.
WW1 and WW2 were entirely contrived conflicts to cause chaos because only in chaos can they forcibly push people into the direction they want them to go. WW3 will be the final part of their plan where the chaos from that will displace the current world order and replace it with their NWO.
Again, the text is what matters not what a man said. Look at the preserved word of God. And seriously consider this thought. On Judgement day we will all be judged individually. You must read and understand for yourself.