Templar crosses. An expression of papal loyalty.
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (177)
sorted by:
(This implies a narrative where the earth is less than 6,000 years old. Others have called this oft-repeated narrative his fanfic.)
This is just the first one that is easy to reference, let me know if you need more. Now we could claim u/TallestSkil doesn't actually believe his fanfic, but he doesn't deny that he believes it either. He doesn't make clear that he certainly believes in the billions either; so I don't know what he believes. He throws all kinds of garbage out upon us without concern and declines to resolve the issues or commit to a position. He seems to be a Christian but he's not one who easily gets along with others who follow Christ alone.
Anyway, if you haven't been exposed to his unique style, now you have, and you've gotten a fair warning about it. Use good judgment.
The first quote is his theory/prediction. So?
Like how jEWs keep kveeching about the hollycast garbage? That garbage?
Like how the Christkillers didn't get along with Christ?
So it's unclear if Skil believes young earth or old earth and speaks out of both sides of his mouth. Another one is the meaning of supersessionism where I haven't found him to enunciate a clear position.
Yes, Skil's rants about being white-genocided without recourse are very reminiscent of those Holocaust exaggerations that have been caught from time to time. I need not remind him of this because it's well-known that I regard an irrational presentation of anti-Semitism as potential evidence of being pro-Semitic (shilling to make one's opponents look bad). The test of the evidence if if the person continues being irrational.
I'm not sure I'd compare his standoffishness to those Jerusalem Jews who called for Jesus's death. He does get along a bit with whitists and with sycophants, and there are probably points where we generally agree; but he is aggressive to root out what he disagrees with and to ridicule it dramatically, possibly for his own psyche's sake.
Incidentally, if you're interested in a number of Biblical points about covenant history, my views are unique and incisive.
Okay, then defend the people who criticize jEWs as hard as you defend jEWs. J-pill normies who don't know and debate them openly where everyone can see.
Or are you afraid of getting JFK'd or Charlie Kirked?
I'm equal opportunity. I affirm balanced criticism of Jews, and I give context to imbalanced criticism of Jews because its imbalance harms the stated intent of providing balanced criticism. People say I defend Jews because I attempted to pursue the mission of elite research board, i.e. getting things right. But I'll criticize anyone who deserves it.
All for it. Pick an objective thesis and start a new post and I'll tell you what I think.
Of nothing. People who project fear to speak may be shilling to get others to say certain words without saying them themselves.
Correct, it's not often and when so it's often colorable as self-serving. A lot of folks here don't believe the Lifeway survey that suggests 1 million Jews accept Jesus as Messiah, but since I know a couple such folks I can characterize them. When you speak of rabbinically accepted Jews who defend Christians, most of what Netanyahu says on the subject is self-serving and that is indeed representative.
I know the various indoctrinations including the Christian one. So (and pardon me for any hiccups in our conversation), when you speak of "the jEWs" as acting problematically, such as by tossing Trump around, that would be a case where the collective inclusion would be read to apply. Now it's not 90% of Jewish kids that are pushing Trump around, it's the Kushners and Witkoff and Netanyahu and other nameable individuals. So, as per my initial comment, I'd counsel you to watch when you use collective language and actually mean nameable individuals and organizations.
The sockpuppets we've had don't claim to be Jewish, they just rabble-rouse like community organizers and fail to contribute meaningfully. So, not really, but if people act like they're shilling for Jews then I ask if they're Jewish and they generally don't answer.
No shit. It’s almost as though you’re pretending you don’t know what jews are.
Good job proving what I said—that I don’t randomly change my views like you openly and admittedly have with respect to the age of the universe. Your own links take viewers directly to the conversation where you do this. Spectacular job.
That’s because you’re paid to post lies on this website.
The jew (or is it jew? or maybe even jew?) cries out in pain as it strikes you. Reported for libel.
Given that you openly lied about it—and every single other thing you have ever said on any topic—I can’t imagine why.
Good ol’ libel.
Why would you write a narrative as if you believe the universe is (now) 5,786 years old when you don't believe that? What other impression should one take from your narrative?
How old is the universe in your opinion? Can you point to some clear statement where you took a position on it without equivocation anywhere else?
Do you object to my very consistently saying the universe is (now) 6,018 years old but I recognize that many young-earth proponents use a larger number, up to the range of perhaps a million, and in any case they are united against a number in the billions range? Did I say something to vitiate my own beliefs when I'm engaging the debate against the science mainstream but not the intramural debate among the young earthers?
What is your evidence that I'm doing anything here but volunteering my personal time for SwampRangers.com? Are you making guesses about how I provide for my family?
Are you merely judging that my position proves I must be inorganic? Did you want to debate a binary proposition so we could resolve the status of my position?
Do you object to my characterizing our interactions briefly with evidence? Do you object when I step in after you repel a newcomer "with a weak reed"?
Why don't you get along with me when I follow Christ alone? Where is your evidence of getting along with fellow believers, as I don't recall you ever speaking of attending church or being in communion with others?
What have I said untruly? Are you committed to truth?
A white person can figure this out without asking.
Truth isn’t a matter of opinion.
Yep. I can.
Yep.
“Any number is fine as long as it’s not the number it actually is!” Yes, I already accurately characterized your position in an earlier reply.
The website clearly costs something to host. There’s always a price.
Not really.
I mean, you say things that only inorganics say.
I object to the objectively false characterizations.
Because you don’t.
Why would I be so stupid as to post my personal life on the Internet?
There’s a character limit.
A white person wouldn't promote a fanfic where Jews eliminate all white nations and then get their chronology supernaturally validated, while those few whites that remain must resort to such inbreeding as to suggest to a reader (who stated it publicly) that the fanfic's author sounds like he has an incest fetish.
Visualizing your own doom to such degree as you constantly do has not been held to be an effective technique for victory.
That's why I say I didn't follow it. You express disinterest in my following you, which is also neither white nor Christian.
Would you please?
Yes, we can thank Scott Lively for his public commitment to defraying costs, in this case ranging into the tens of dollars, as I said 5 years ago when we were founded.
Fascinating how you choose to answer nothing and support nothing. But there's always hope.