1
Zi0ns_walls 1 point ago +1 / -0

Altered, you have no proof of that.

If you know Scripture well enough then explain the 'tradition of the elders' to me.

Were the Jews correct in creating new rules and laws for themselves and giving them the status as if God said them?

Even if it creates a new bastardised religion?

Do you not see your roman religion is guilty of that?

0
Zi0ns_walls 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yet Holy Scripture is on our side

Why dont you catholics just do and believe what God tells you to

2
Zi0ns_walls 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yh who else can afford to live in a hotel and eat 3 meals a day at the hotel while not working.

Living well beyond their means

1
Zi0ns_walls 1 point ago +1 / -0

Your post reminded me of this movie clip from "Ali G In Da House"

This needs to be made into a meme with walz face imposed on it and a MAGA hat on Ali G, but I don't know how to do it. Perfect opportunity though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQT7600TAVo

3
Zi0ns_walls 3 points ago +3 / -0

All satan has is lies and deceit, he has no creative powers like God. Nor can he see into the future, else he would of stopped Christs atoning work on the cross.

His lies are very subtle and crafty, slowly diverting you away from God bit at a time. Even the gnostic heresy is dangerous, it slowly makes God the bad guy (demiurge) that satan has freed us from.

I think that corrupted view of reality is extremely dangerous.

What you said is best advice, why not just go to God the Father and trust him. God will not give us magical powers or tricks to get what we want but he has given us a path to forgiveness and an unimaginable world in the future.

1
Zi0ns_walls 1 point ago +2 / -1

It's generally accepted that blessings are to the person and their descendants, look at Jacob wanting to take the blessings from Esau. Or Israel blessing his sons, a large part of the blessings are prophecies for the future tribe.

That blessing in Gen 12 was given to Abraham (Abram at the time) not Jacob.

Later on in Genesis God continues with his blessings to Abraham, with land (Gen 12), with descendants (Gen 15) and then finishes the blessing and establishes it in Gen 17

“I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee” (Gen. 17:7).

God clearly says it includes Abrahams descendants

6
Zi0ns_walls 6 points ago +8 / -2

Not all of us are the children of God, only those who accepted Christ as their saviour are.

1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father has bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knows us not, because it knew him not.

Anyone who hasn't been forgiven by Christs atonement on the cross are still subject to Gods wrath

John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.

5
Zi0ns_walls 5 points ago +5 / -0

Where I live in the Midlands of the UK we have a food called faggots. You get them in chip shops. Its pork offal, herbs and breadcrumbs then deep fried.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faggot_(food)

Faggot is also a bundle of sticks

It is an English word

2
Zi0ns_walls 2 points ago +2 / -0

Found this article

https://yle.fi/a/3-10188676

"The Pirkanmaa District Court and the Turku Appeal Court both convicted the man of aggravated sexual abuse of a minor and sentenced him to a three-year custodial sentence. Both courts found that the man had had sexual intercourse with the child and had performed sexual acts with her by sending messages about sexual matters.

Both courts threw out charges brought against the man for aggravated rape. The courts ruled that there was no evidence to indicate that the sexual encounter involved violence or that the child was overcome by fear or incapacitated in any other way."

2
Zi0ns_walls 2 points ago +3 / -1

I understand Allah is the word God in Arabic that Arab Christians use. I didn't specify in my post clearly that I'm refering to allah of the quran.

I lowercase the muslim allah and to be honest I believe this might be the first time I've ever typed the Christian Arabic Allah for God

5
Zi0ns_walls 5 points ago +6 / -1

Interesting that it's the Guardian, though the left have taken a more anti-Semitic stance since the muslims became the new darling of the left.

It looks to me like the israelis and jews have been given special status for years, with that they have done evil deeds with the protection of the elites and unknowingly been painting a target on their own backs for years.

The elites might of wanted the muslims to win all along and have painted the jews into a corner.

I'm becoming convinced that the satan the elites worship is allah. I wish there were more research done into the muslim deepstate and secret societies. We see the same red pinky ring on the satanists and a lot of the arab leaders.

2
Zi0ns_walls 2 points ago +2 / -0

I posted that before I went to sleep, I've just woke up but you interested in the city which is good they need to be highlighted a lot more. Here's another fact about them I watched on a Oxford Uni lecture.

The conquest of Ireland

Cromwell cut off the king's head, in retaliation the catholic Irish under guidance of the Jesuits committed an attempted genocide of the Ulster protestants in 1641, tens of thousands were killed in a small population.

Cromwell was enraged about that and knew that Britain needed a reliable army so he created 'the new model army'. He needed funding for it so he negotiated with the city for his invasion and subjugation of Ireland.

They agreed but in return they wanted a third of Irish land, preferably the eastern and southern coastlines, so they can get a foothold, it's more densely populated and good port cities.

So Cromwell started his invasion in 1648 but soon ran out of money due to military setback and underestimate Irish resistance. So he had to return to the city a further two more times for funding, each time the city wanted another third of the island. So the city came to own all of the land.

There the city created the 'penal laws' against the Irish to make them third class citizens. One of the laws they passed was no Irish could come within 5 miles of a city or town that has a city of London business in it.

Cromwell died in 1658 and king Charles 2nd took over after Cromwell son failed to secure his rule. But to all the lord's of Ireland after still had to pay the city the taxes not to king Charles.

The monarchy kept their mouths shut and enforce the laws and held an army in Ireland for the city.

Irish still believed up to 1922 that it was the monarchy because the Norman's were the first to conquer Ireland. Though the real conquest and subjugation happened when Britain didn't even have a king.

2
Zi0ns_walls 2 points ago +2 / -0

I agree with you, even during the British Empire the City ran things through different child companies like the east India co.

People think the British Empire entirely conquered by force but it was the merchant navy that made the empire. The royal navy primarily protected the trade ships.

It was arbitrage, buying goods at one place and selling somewhere else for a profit. It was the first world trade organisation.

The city were at the head of all the trade and corporations, the monarchs were the enforcers.

The army would go to a new country/city find friends there and the city would begin trade, part of the contractual agreements was for the British to fight the new friends rivals that opposed the new alliances.

Sometimes they would give an financial advance to the local producers and artisans that produced good quality produce or wares so they can make more of it next time they return to sell them.

The idea that we conquered with force is wrong, it was built on trade. The monarchs took the glory and blame of the empire and the hidden hand remained hidden.

5
Zi0ns_walls 5 points ago +5 / -0

How we pass laws in Britain has a big difference to the American system. You have congress and senate, we have commons and lords. It passes through the lower house through the higher house and then signed by our monarch

But the big difference being our lords (our senate) are not voted in but are chosen by appointment by the monarch.

They are Charles' men. He could order the lord's don't pass this law or make this law pass. With the right prime minister and yes men he almost has absolute control over Britain.

He could stop it all but he allows it to happen, putting WEF men in the Lord's.

Complete piece of shit

3
Zi0ns_walls 3 points ago +3 / -0

It's reached 100,000 now so it'll be debated on, it might not work immediately but it moves the overton window.

They were not mentioning the gangs of Muslims roaming the streets attacking white people because they want to only highlight the "far right".

But because everyone saw the videos online and saw the BBC were hiding it caused a backlash, so now they're mentioning it.

Stuff like this does help.

As Gen Flynn always says "Local action has a national impact"

British people kept making complaints to the BBC for ignoring the Muslim mobs and they had to concede.

We can continue speaking our voice and hope the enemy continues making mistakes that anger more people.

Now is not the time to be silent, we need to keep escalating everything, and draw a bigger divide between us and them.

How does being quiet, like you suggest, help? We have been quiet for decades now people are starting to give a shit and are voicing their anger, you suggest we be quiet again

Did you vote in the general election that just happened?

Or were you one of the 30,000,000 that didn't because "it doesn't" change a thing?

Those 30M apathetic voters is a landslide victory!

If it doesn't do anything explain Trump for me. How did he get into office?

3
Zi0ns_walls 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think it could be that it was a spelling mistake on some message the white hats intercepted. Trump playing with them saying he knows what they are doing.

Bit of a stretch, I know

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›