because the mods thought I was being a big meanie and deleted it kek. Here is meme https://files.catbox.moe/czplnr.gif
It has been said that the real reason the US severed all diplomatic ties with the Vatican was because the pope & his Jesuit Order were the responsible party for the assassination of Lincoln, as well as key factors in the prolonging of the Civil War...
Well, that's not 'pure free speech' defined, however it's a potential of pure free speech.
I liken the 1st Amendment to 'vocal anarchy', and private entities may choose to further restrict it, or leave it wide open. Non-governmental websites are private entities, so they can limit speech how they see fit on their site. The same can be said for a bar owner kicking out someone who won't shut up about politics and is pissing off all their patrons. That speech is lawful speech, but they don't want it inside that private business in that instance.
I understand your sentiments on the chan culture. Like I said before, much of that is inorganic, nefarious intel agency psyops. But as we know, man tends to emulate his environment. Many real anons have been warped by those psyops 😞
Which is why it's good to go in there and post wholesome frenly stuff to offset the filth. Kek
Wholesome pepe is best pepe <3🐸
I find it unusually difficult to locate entertainment that isn't completely laced with demonic filth. It's like they force it to be in there somewhere. This is of course a hyperbolic statement and there is nuance to everything, but overall, say I want to watch something on Netflix... I spend almost 30 minutes wading through murder! murder! sex! drugs! kidnapping! terrorists! planetary destruction! alien invasion! before I finally land on something really dank and original, if ever.
Its the same with music... the same topics of partying, fucking & dumping, boasting one's ego and shitting on the competition... I sit back and laugh at how utterly devoid the devil is of anything worth while. But it also makes me sad. I've rewatched the Star Treks, Dresden Files, 2010 Merlin, considering rewatching Stargate SG1... there's some good scifi out there but the modern stuff seems more like mere excuses, fresh vectors through which to display graphic violence and degeneracy.
"What's the most scifi futuristic way we can horrify, torture and kill this man?" said the modern writer in his wicked heart...
I'll see your Epicurus and raise you a CS Lewis-
"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.
If you think of this world as a place simply intended for our happiness, you find it quite intolerable: think of it as a place for training and correction and it's not so bad.
If you read history, you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were precisely those who thought most of the next.
There are far, far better things ahead than any we leave behind.
The Christian is in a different position from other people who are trying to be good. They hope, by being good, to please God if there is one; or — if they think there is not — at least they hope to deserve approval from good men. But the Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it.
It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree helping each other to one or the other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all of our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations - these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit - immortal horrors or everlasting splendors.
Action, Drama, Horror ...
Dr. Alan Green an American Archelogist leads Danielle Noble an her team of cave divers on an expedition searching the Mayan ancient records. Instead of finding glory they will find hell ...
I personally wouldn't waste my time, nor subject my psyche to optional, fictional evil. It's endured plenty of hell already /:
Kek. Well I don't use reddit at all, they won't let me on the site with my VPN, which is absolutely unacceptable in my book. I post here and kun and some on Twitter but they already shadowbanned me so I haven't been there much. Like why would I sit there talking to myself in the Probable Spam section 🫠
I post on youtube comments a lot too now that I think about it. It's not a bad spot to drop quick redpills on people, and you truly seem to meet all kinds on there
Every now and again I hit the Notifications and am physically affected by how far out in left field someone's comment to me is. 😂 this one really got me. Definitely a first, hey, I'll take it! A christian chatbot, it's actually an honor
Eh, I hit waves of this or that, it depends what's being discussed. I'll jump on Catholic topics though. We call it a calling, I'm not paid to shill anything. Your comment is hilarious
So I take it your "hidden big scary truth" is some New Age woo, yeah? Annunaki astral projected into my DNA and nerfed my spoon-bending powers?
I feel like this comment is trying to put a walnut on the same level as the walnut tree it fell from. The Roman church is the primordial behemoth.
That they were largely fleeing their fellow Protestants.
The founders of America were fleeing two things: the tyranny of kings, and the tyranny of popes. Their spiritual predecessors (and perhaps some literal ancestors as well) were the original Protestant Reformers themselves. The very concept of "freedom of conscience" was a budding flower. It took many years to throw off the Papacy, and a few more to throw off their own zealous Protestant over-corrections. We even had a few states in America which were imprisoning people for not going to church on Sunday! Religious zeal minus genuine faith in Christ is a truly ugly thing, and no serious Papist can EVER be admitted into a position of power in America. They will NO DOUBT inch us back into the hands of Rome, covertly or openly, because at the very core of their belief system lies the idea that the Pope is the vicarious king of Heaven, Earth and Hell, and so all must obey his commands. What we have here is a fundamental disagreement that cannot be rectified. A man must choose one or the other--- their country, or the Pope.
If you want to get into Scriptural reasons why friendship with Rome is a spiritually lethal endeavor, see this comment https://greatawakening.win/p/19Bst3zBdl/x/c/4eVKTmbkjgq
*I'm also against Protestant theocracy. I oppose any attempt of the State to enforce a religion.
A few pointed segments of the article, how can you blunt these? :
Canon Law 212, section 1, states that the Christian faithful “are obliged to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith.” The Vatican is recognized by 183 nations as a sovereign state. It sends and receives ambassadors. It signs binding treaties. It maintains permanent observer status at the United Nations. There is no separation of church and state in Catholic theory. The Church is the state, or at least superior to it. This has not changed. It has only adjusted its tactics.
History bears out the dangers of this system. In 1801, Napoleon signed a Concordat with Pope Pius VII, allowing the Church to resume control over French education, clergy appointments, and public worship. In Spain, the Inquisition continued until 1834 under papal approval. In Austria, under Maria Theresa and her son Joseph II, the Church was used as an instrument of state control while still enforcing censorship, heresy laws, and forced conversions. Even in modern times, the Vatican retains the legal power to create binding concordats with civil governments—agreements which often exempt it from local jurisdiction and tax law.
This is not a passive ecclesiastical structure. It is an empire with centuries of precedent. Its very existence challenges the sovereignty of nations and the liberty of conscience. When the Founders viewed the Church of Rome, they did not see a denomination. They saw a foreign government that demanded the obedience of their citizens.
Americanist Catholics tried to adapt to liberal democracy in the late 1800s. Pope Leo XIII responded with the encyclical Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae (1899), condemning what he called “Americanism”—the belief in individual conscience, civic freedom, and the decentralization of church authority. He warned American bishops not to accommodate Protestant culture, not to prioritize freedom over obedience, and not to affirm any doctrine that diminished the supremacy of the Pope.
Even in the twentieth century, Catholic theology maintained its absolutist claims. The Second Vatican Council’s document Dignitatis Humanae (1965) appeared to affirm religious freedom, but carefully qualified it within “due limits.” It did not renounce prior doctrines. It did not retract the condemnations of the Syllabus of Errors. It merely rephrased them. The document also affirmed that all men are obligated to seek the truth and adhere to it once found, implying that true religious liberty is only possible through submission to the Roman Church.
This theological system has no room for Protestant liberty of conscience. It does not affirm the priesthood of all believers. It does not accept congregational self-rule. It does not believe Scripture interprets itself. Instead, it affirms that the Magisterium, led by the Pope, is the sole interpreter of divine revelation. That is not a spiritual conviction. It is a total claim of authority
Is there room for Papists in America's Re-founding?
NO. The two are antithetical. True papists are loyal to the Pope of Rome before they're loyal to anyone or anything else. If the Pope tell them to jump they ask how high.
As for the Catholics who honestly don't really care or take it seriously, yeah there's room. They have much more hope to leave that satanic cult than the zealots do.
Btw, your OP link is broken. Here: https://insighttoincite.substack.com/p/christian-nationalism-at-the-catholic
The following are a few of the papal maxims ascribed originally to Gregory VII:
“The Roman Church is the only one that God has founded. The title of universal belongs to the Roman pontiff alone. He alone can depose and absolve bishops. He has a right to depose emperors. All princes must kiss his feet. No chapter, no book can be reputed canonical without his authority. His name is the only one to be uttered in the churches. It is the only name in the world. He is to be judged by no one. No one dare condemn the one appealing to the apostolic see.”
And in the exercise of these fearful prerogatives, see the Roman Pontiff, from his lofty balcony, pronouncing from year to year, the awful anathemas of the bull “In coena Domini.” The following is one of these thundering curses:
“We excommunicate and anathematize in the name of God Almighty, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and by the authority of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own; all Hussites, Wickliffites, Lutherans, Zuinglians, Calvinists, Huguenots, Anabaptists, and apostates from the Christian faith, and all other heretics, by whatsoever name they are called, and of whatsoever sect they be; as also their adherents, receivers, favorers, and generally any defenders of them; together with all, who without our authority, as that of the apostolic see, knowingly read, keep, print, or in any wise, for any cause whatever, publicly or privately, on any pretext or color, defend their books, containing heresy or treating of religion; as also schismatics, and those who withdraw themselves, or recede obstinately from the obedience of us, or of the bishop of Rome for the time being.”
Does that mesh with America's founding principles? I think not! It would only be a matter of time and degree until our nation became a Papal vassal. And you could surely kiss your freedoms goodbye.
The idea seems to be that though they were of Jewish extraction, and professed to be Jews, they were not true Jews; they indulged in a bitterness of reproach, and a severity of language, which showed that they had not the spirit of the Jewish religion; they had nothing which became those who were under the guidance of the spirit of their own Scriptures. That would have inculcated and fostered a milder temper; and the meaning here is, that although they were of Jewish origin, they were not worthy of the name.
though they worshipped in a synagogue, and professed to be the worshippers of God, yet they were not worthy of the name, and deserved rather to be regarded as in the service of Satan.
Amen 🙏 I also prayed for you to overcome and heal. I'll check back in if I remember (kek)
That I got clean but didn't fully process things
I think I'm in the same boat. I asked Jesus a while ago to be restored to my state of mind from before I ever touched a drug or tried alcohol. I remember it but want to be in it again. The most I ever craved for back then was poptarts and Hot pockets lol. Now I have a list of things that my brain says "it sure would make this situation better if you injested ____. Why not go for some?" 😂 it's a real mess. I just want to feel freakin NORMAL again without vapes, beers, weed, even coffee. I wanna be free from it all entirely.
One thing I've learned from all this is just how depraved I am in the flesh! Even totally sober I found myself consuming food like a rabid glutton, or being impatient with people "because I want to do something. Me me me!"
In the hadith it says the Mahdi will make a 7 yr. peace treaty with Israel
That's in line with the Futurist school of thought. Like I linked to in the first comment (I edited it in not long ago at the top), that view was seeded by a Jesuit named Francisco Ribera. Its effect was to lead the Protestants into abandoning their stance on the popes being the anti-christs.
There is a misconception that the anti-christ is a single ultimate person, when it's actually a role held by many successive persons (ie. the Papacy and all popes) as well as other false teachers such as the gnostics.
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 1 John 2:18
... Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and which is already in the world at this time. 1 John 4: 2-3
If the popes claim to be "Jesus on earth" (they do, though they try to make it sound like something less nefarious than what it is), are they not in effect denying Jesus? An interesting take:
“From this, as well as from John 2:18, it appears that antichrist is not any particular person, nor any particular succession of persons in the church, but a general name for all false teachers in every age, who disseminate doctrines contrary to those taught by the apostles; especially if these doctrines have a tendency to derogate from Christ’s character and actions as the Saviour of the world.” — Macknight.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown says:
confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh—Irenæus [3.8], Lucifer, Origen, on Mt 25:14, and Vulgate read, "Every spirit which destroys (sets aside, or does away with) Jesus (Christ)." Cyprian and Polycarp support English Version text. The oldest extant manuscripts, which are, however, centuries after Polycarp, read, "Every spirit that confesseth not (that is, refuses to confess) Jesus" (in His person, and all His offices and divinity), omitting "is come in the flesh." ... ye have heard—from your Christian teachers. ... already is it in the world—in the person of the false prophets (1Jo 4:1).
Pulpit Commentary has:
Every spirit (not so much the personal teacher as the principle or tendency of the doctrine) which confesseth not Jesus. This is the true reading, the words Ξριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα being a spurious addition from verse 1. As so often, St. John states the case both negatively and positively for emphasis. There is an ancient variant reading of much interest, probably of Latin origin, which can be traced back to the second century, being known to Tertullian and Iranaeus. For μὴ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν it gives λύει τὸν Ἰησοῦν, solvit Jesum. This corruption of the text was evidently aimed at those who distinguished the man Jesus from the Divine Christ, and thus "dissolved" his Personality. The Greek manuscripts are quite unanimous against the reading.
I have found an interesting anecdote from an ex-Jesuit who claims that the Catholic church actually created Islam. It's posted here if you want to read it: https://anotepad.com/note/read/xie4222w
This is the goal of the Cabal, as you know the Rothschilds of the 13 bloodlines created False Israel & they are false jews. They want the 3rd Temple for their false messiah (Our anti-christ)
I definitely believe the cabal are USING the fact that most christians today believe in Futurism. How easy would it be to manipulate us just by building a stupid temple in Jerusalem! I thank the Lord Jesus Christ for inocculating me against that psyop. Regardless, if they do end up going that route, as you rightly say, God wins in the end!
Barnes has a good commentary on that verse-
which say they are Jews - Who profess to be Jews. The idea seems to be that though they were of Jewish extraction, and professed to be Jews, they were not true Jews; they indulged in a bitterness of reproach, and a severity of language, which showed that they had not the spirit of the Jewish religion; they had nothing which became those who were under the guidance of the spirit of their own Scriptures. That would have inculcated and fostered a milder temper; and the meaning here is, that although they were of Jewish origin, they were not worthy of the name. That spirit of bitter opposition was indeed often manifested in their treatment of Christians, as it had been of the Saviour, but still it was foreign to the true nature of their religion. There were Jews in all parts of Asia Minor, and the apostles often encountered them in their journeyings, but it would seem that there was something which had particularly embittered those of Smyrna against Christianity. What this was is now unknown.
It may throw some light on the passage, however, to remark that at a somewhat later period - in the time of the martyrdom of Polycarp - the Jews of Smyrna were among the most bitter of the enemies of Christians, and among the most violent in demanding the death of Polycarp. Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. 4:15) says,. that when Polycarp was apprehended, and brought before the proconsul at Smyrna, the Jews were the most furious of all in demanding his condemnation. When the mob, after his condemnation to death, set about gathering fuel to burn him, "the Jews," says he, "being especially zealous, as was their custom - μάλιστα προθύμως, ὡς ἔθος αὐτοῖς malista prothumōs, hōs ethos autois - ran to procure fuel." And when, as the burning failed, the martyr was transfixed with weapons, the Jews urged and besought the magistrate that his body might not be given up to Christians. Possibly at the time when this epistle was directed to be sent to Smyrna, there were Jews there who manifested the same spirit which those of their countrymen did afterward, who urged on the death of Polycarp.
But are the synagogue of Satan - Deserve rather to be called the synagogue of Satan. The synagogue was a Jewish place of worship (compare the notes on Matthew 4:23), but the word originally denoted "the assembly" or "the congregation." The meaning here is plain, that though they worshipped in a synagogue, and professed to be the worshippers of God, yet they were not worthy of the name, and deserved rather to be regarded as in the service of Satan. "Satan" is the word that is properly applied to the great evil spirit, elsewhere called the devil. See the Luke 22:3 note, and Job 1:6 note.
Comparing this list with the one Comer put out.
🥫 https://greatawakening.win/p/19Bt2QCet0/press-release-aug-5-chairman-com/c/
Names in bold are on OP anon's list:
Loretta Lynch and James Comey. Initial vectors?