Wow, you took 5 days to write a response that doesn't include any Bible verses?
I try to limit social media use. One way I do that is by waiting to respond to replies every few days. Also, I don't have to use Bible verses, as I explained, there are 2 works of God. And as you've shown thus far, Bible verses can be manipulated to support one's false view point, when in reality it's in contradiction to God's will (and reality).
What does it say then, about you, that you responded to me in less than 30 minutes, on a 5 day old comment? Is that more telling of you, than me? What then will you say, when I respond to this reply, in short order, because it's at a time when I'm handling replies?
You pretend to be a Christian, but you are obviously just a "wolf in sheeps clothing".
How so? Be specific.
Who are you trying to convince here?
Is everyone like you stupid, that you can divine no other purpose for this? Here, I'll explain it, again (and just copy/paste from a previous comment):
There's several purposes to debate.
-
It enables two parties to pursue truth, if both parties are civil, honest, logical, and prioritize truth above themselves. This currently isn't happening here.
-
It enables the disagreeing parties to air their thoughts to anyone listening, who might be swayed by what they hear. This isn't happening here, either, as it's just you and me here.
-
It enables one to learn about their opponent, and themselves. Just like exercise trains the body, just as tempering and working steel hardens and sharpens it, so too does debate and questioning hone a man's ideas and philosophies. Even if the disagreeing party isn't pursuing good debate, even if no one else is listening, partaking in such an endeavor has benefits. Weak men never exercise, weak men are never challenged, weak ideas are never questioned. Strength is derived from adversity, which debate provides for ideas.
I know demons like you stay away from the Bible. That's exactly why I use it against you.
You have provided exactly 2 Biblical passage to assert your view that good people, Christians, should remain peaceful and never fight back, and of those, they can be interpreted the other way, and there are other Biblical passages with refute your way of interpreting it.
If you so much want to perish in Hell, then don't be surprised that no one follows you there.
Why would I go to hell? For fighting back against evil, for stopping it from hurting that which is good? Would you levy the same judgment against God, for doing the same thing, and for the same reasons? Is God in hell, according to your reasoning?
"Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall." - Proverbs 16:18
Look, another Biblical passage that is more applicable to you, than me. Please, by all means, keep quoting scripture. Maybe at some point you'll realize you are advocating for a position that is of the devil, who is the father of lies.
So you have 0 evidence of your previous claim
There are 2 divine works. The Bible and creation (the universe) itself. God worked truth (His will) into both. That's why when people ignore God's commandments/will in the real world, they always fail, are hurt, or die. The Bible doesn't contain the sum total of all information, truth, and logic. But, the universe does. We can test what works and what doesn't, to determine God's will. We can figure out sound logic and consistent logic on our own. This is widely speculated as to how we were made in God's image, that we have the divine ability to reason, to determine truth through logic.
You say "us, as Christians" - yet, you lie about Christianity. You are a fake Christian at most, and a shill at least.
How did I lie? How am I a fake Christian. Be specific.
"Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.”" - Matthew 15:14
Interesting, as this is what I'm arguing against with you. You are blind to the bigger picture, completely ignoring the wider scope of God's creation and His divinely ascribed will in this universe (i.e. the truth), so you can use cherry picked Biblical passages to support your false assertions which don't align with reality. You are the "blind" in the passage you quoted.
And btw Jesus gave us the sword of Truth. Not any imaginary thing that you are using to incite violence among Christians.
The truth acts like a sword because God's will (truth) in this universe punishes those who ignore it, whether intentionally or by naivety. However, this doesn't mean good people, Christian or otherwise, should remain peaceful no matter what.
"you're a fool, you're weak, and you deserve nothing" - All your insults show me that you are a violent and unbalanced person.
I'm not a violent person. It's just that I see the fruits of evil all around me, the lies, the malicious violence, the greed, the sin, and it's hurting everything I love, impugning on everything truthful, and I want to stop it. Your way is what led us here, through good men doing nothing, remaining peaceful no matter what, which enabled evil to prosper and spread. My way would stamp out evil.
You need help.
I agree only insofar as that more good men need to wake up to the kind of lies you're espousing. Peace, for the sake of peace, is a failed philosophy, and as such, is not what Jesus/God argues. Any Biblical passage which you posit to the contrary is a perversion of scripture (i.e. of the devil).
Shills? No, we're just Christians who have rejected the (((judeo))) part. Christianity isn't the weak cowardly churchianity that's currently being pushed. That's a corruption of the God's commandments and logic, of Jesus' teachings.
Any conspiracy theorist worth his salt will realize the jewish subversion of Christianity and White lands. The most vociferously anti-Christian people on earth are jews, and have been since Jesus' time. Christianity progressed throughout the White world largely through warfare and conquest.
Most people, even Christians, seem to forget that we have more than the Bible to learn what God's laws are. Logic/truth itself was formed and dictated by God. When you position yourself against logic/truth, you position yourself against God, which will result in failure, harm, and/or death. The Bible, and Jesus himself, often said, explicitly and implicitly, that God/Jesus are truth, and that their primary opponent, Satan, is the antithesis of truth (i.e. lies). Jesus called the Pharisees sons of the devil, who is the father of lies, and they do as their father.
Thus, it's up to us, as Christians, to determine what truth/logic is, and act in accordance with it. Logically, humans are sexually dimorphic. Logically, men fulfill the role of protector and provider, not just for their wife and children, but for every community they're a part of, including nation/people. Men are hardwired, physically, mentally, and philosophically, to be capable of inflicting great violence to protect what they love, what is good, what is truthful. If men don't protect these things, they're not men, and becoming undeserving of them, as they'll be killed, raped, and stolen away. No good man would allow such things to happen while he has the power to stop it.
Just as God can pass down righteous judgment and violence upon those that have transgressed against his laws, so too can man, who understanding of God's laws, can pass down similar righteous judgment and violence. Anyone saying that we're incapable of understanding God's laws is a fool or a liar. It's obvious to anyone with eyes to see and a brain to think.
Anyone advocating for perpetual peace, for the sake of peace, will eventually be destroyed by evil people. Such people will attempt to build, to multiply, but all of it will be taken from them. Their kingdom can't last, because they've rejected God and his laws. God doesn't ask us to lay down and let evil destroy everything we love, everything good, and blaspheme all truth. That's the wish of satan.
If you continue to advocate for perpetually peaceful Christianity, you're a fool, you're weak, and you deserve nothing, because you fight for nothing.
You didn't answer my questions.
What crimes are we, as humans, allowed to punish on earth? What crimes do you only relegate to God for punishment? Why? What's the dividing line? What's the reasoning?
Weird, as Jesus also told us to sell our cloaks to buy a sword.
Are you really suggesting that God/Jesus demand Christians not punish earthly sins? All sins, or just some of them? Where do you draw the line, and why?
Also recall how Reddit flipped from mostly being Ron Paul libertarian supporters...to hardcore leftist Hillary supporters, the day after she won the DNC in 2016. ActBlue/ShareBlue/CorrectTheRecord shill farms got the DNC funding.
There's a really easy way to disprove the things we're seeing are due to incompetence or greed.
If what we're experiencing was due to incompetence, we'd see a lot of variation. We don't. Every single corrupt institution is pushing the exact same things, the same ideas, arguments, ideas, philosophies, and policies, applied to the same people, in the same hypocritical ways. It's an entirely unified front. That's not incompetence.
If what we were experiencing was due to greed, we'd see the people in power motivated entirely by money. They're not. Many, many of their ventures which push their ideas and policies lose massive amounts of money, and have been for decades. There are also numerous examples of the antithesis being true as well, where companies and organizations which express the opposite of globalist positions make a lot of money (when not cancelled). Thus, it's not greed.
The only motive that makes sense is malice. It explains why the people in power are pushing destructive, degenerate, and evil things, and are willing to lose a lot of money doing it. Incompetence and greed are a part of the cabal we're facing, but they're subservient to the malice, which is the root of the rotten tree.
Let's see which countries on earth don't have central banking...
Hmmmmmmm. They're all demonized by the media and government.
There have apparently been at least one person trolling online that they're the "real" Crooks guy, which is making investigation a bit muddy, as they look alike.
Time to play their game
What do you think the entire breadth of mainstream right wing politics has been for over 100 years? It's been White men playing by (((their))) rules, in (((their))) game, pursuing (((their))) interests, using (((their))) words, arguments, and tactics. What's been the result? A non-stop assault on White people.
You don't beat liars by lying yourself. You beat them with truth.
At 37:35 in OP's video it shows the angle of the bullet that hits the railing, passing through a man in a white shirt and light khaki pants on its way to hit that railing. The trajectory for that bullet leads to the water tower (and not the closer roof where the supposed assassin was). Weirdly, though, is that trajectory is nowhere close to hitting Trump, which means the people that planned this wanted extra casualties.
Decent video. Four thoughts:
-
I really don't like it when normies (especially people into conspiracy theories) can't tell the difference between a gunshot and the echo. The guy in this video, when analyzing how many shots were fired (starting at 13:20 in the video), was counting echoes from the gunshots, as gunshots. For clarity, I heard 8 gunshots (plus/minus 1, given the spurt of latter gunshots making it difficult to count).
-
Many eye witnesses were reporting gunshots coming from multiple directions. It's entirely possible those eyewitnesses were also being confused by the echoes. However, this doesn't rule out multiple shooters.
-
It's possible more shots were fired than are heard. The patsy shooter could have been using an unsilenced rifle, and the other shooter(s) could've been using suppressed rifles. While suppressors aren't nearly as quiet as Hollywood depicts, they can be masked enough during unsilenced gunfire where they won't be heard (or more difficult to hear), where the loudness of the unsuppressed shots masks the suppressed shots.
-
The best evidence for a shooter on the water tower (starting at 37:35 in the video) is where it shows a bullet impacting the railing in the rear bleachers (behind and to Trump's left), and it clearly looks like that bullet passed through a man (the guy in the white shirt and light khaki shorts, that immediately drops to the ground) to hit that railing. The trajectory of that bullet lines up with the water tower, and not from the closer roof where the supposed assassin shot from. There's zero chance the guy in white was reacting to the sound of the bullet, as he starts to drop immediately when the gunshot is heard (human reaction time isn't that quick). Weirdly, though, is if that shot came from the water tower, it came nowhere near to hitting Trump. If true, it looks like the people that planned this wanted extra casualties.
Reddit is actually better than this place.
A profound and mocking laugh. What an absolutely astounding statement.
At least they are self-aware that they are on Reddit.
The NPC meme is real, and you're apparently one of them.
The true irony of your response, which you are too dense to see, is that your entire response is literally the EXACT stuff you find on the front page of Reddit. It's laughable.
At the probable result of another laugh, why do you suggest this?
He's c/conspiracies's resident deny-everything shill. I've tried having actual debates with him here until I noticed the pattern. In every single thread, he denies the conspiracy and/or just defends the mainstream. Browse through his profile as evidence.
Best to just downvote and ignore him. He adds zero substance to any legitimate discussion, diverts attention away from actual discussion, and actively tries to be as abrasive as possible to drive away legitimate users.
He's a fake populist, a controlled opposition "outsider" to reign in an neuter any resistance from people who've escaped the controlled right wing.
There is no nuance or discussion.
Yes, there has. There's been lots of it over the years, on this platform and others. It's just that many people get tired of repeating the same things over and over and over and over, year after year after year. This is why many people fall back to simplicity.
It reminds me of unhinged reddit.
Dude. You made a front page Reddit tier comment, here of all places, and never once retracted, explained it, or said it was sarcasm.
Its counter to the very purpose of the community.
Not necessarily. The pursuit of conspiracy theorists is with the truth. We see that official explanations don't make sense, that there are numerous holes, which we try to poke through, to see the truth. We try to find alternative explanations that better fit the evidence at hand. We theorize when we can't make definitive statements.
Many of us believe Q is a controlled opposition asset, meant to keep people complacent, because "the good guys are in charge, just wait 2 more weeks". That makes genuine Q supporters, depending on their interaction with the community, dangerous to said community, because they're espousing stuff from a controlled asset, meant to divert people away from the truth.
Known shooter was on a roof 150 yards away from Trump. 150 yards is an easy shot. 300 yards isn't too much more difficult, but you need some training, and some rifles won't be able to do it accurately.
Why is disliking Trump and Q embarrassing?
From what I've seen there are still Trump supporters here, although their numbers have dwindled with his handling of things like Covid, the vaccines, and J6, as well a the jewish question becoming more well known.
In general, though, I agree that I prefer conspiracy boards going deeper into subjects, especially stuff outside the political arena, as it can get tiring.
What's been working thus far? Honesty? The only honest politicians we've had thus far have been assassinated (JFK), had their families killed (Massie), or had their lives ruined (Nixon). And why would that kind of tactic continue, unchallenged? Because good men did nothing to stop it. We're rapidly approaching a point where that will no longer be an option.
We don't live in the world we live in because good people aren't better at utilizing the enemy's tactics. We live in this world because good people don't stop the enemy.
Ever since the "official" narrative of WW2 started being taught in school and media (in combo with slavery and the Civil War narrative) they began brainwashing White people that we can't collectivize, even in mutual defense, because that would be "literally Hitler" and "Nazism". Thus, we're left with the false option of trying to elect leaders, who are good, or we're merely told are good, to try and root out the systemic evil of government and all of civilization, by themselves. If they fail, by intention or lack of support, or are backstabbed, ruined, or killed, no one raises an army to punish the perpetrators. We expect individuals to do the work of armies. This is why individualism, by itself, is a self destructive philosophy, and why it's an obvious control mechanism pushed on the political right, which is almost entirely comprised of White people.
Unless you're inferring something else, in which case I would appreciate clarification.
He agreed to go there. He agreed to wear the tiny hat. He agreed to be photographed doing it. He could've said no.
A man of principle would say no. You don't beat subversives and liars by being more subversive and lying more than them. You beat them with the truth.
Butt hurt? No. It's predictable. A race traitor and jew worshipper isn't an ally, and if you think otherwise, you're the moron. Jews controlling both sides of politics is a really, really old conspiracy, with tons and tons of evidence. Do you even belong here?
So you shit on the board and spout Reddit tier takes. Out of curiosity, what made the board change 2 years ago?
Yep. He's who Trump picked.
On that, I agree. There's clearly a disagreement on how it's applied.
No. I only want good people, truthbound people, Christians, to resist evil, to espouse truth in the face of lies, to fight evil when it attempts to harm what they love (if what they love is truthbound).
Oh look, another passage that has other ways of being interpreted, but which you use to advocate for peace, for the sake of peace, no matter what, and which you refuse to address on its face, because you know the position is ridiculously false.
According to your own translation of that verse, it means you should accept the slights of others. So, why are you ignoring your own interpretation of that passage, and being hostile toward me? Shouldn't you, according to the Bible, accept my refutations, my "slaps"? Why are you being unChristian to rebuke me, who you claim to be unChristian? Are you a hypocrite, or just a bad Christian?
For the sake of argument, here are alternative arguments for Matthew 5:39:
https://www.gotquestions.org/turn-other-cheek.html
In essence, according to this interpretation, it means that we shouldn't escalate an evil, for fear of growing the evil. We should meet evil with love, so that we deescalate it, and grow the kingdom of Christ on earth. However, pertaining to this argument, if who we're facing won't back down, and will escalate no matter what, this lesson is null and void, and there's no reason for us to turn the other cheek.
This means, essentially, to act in a way which facilitates peace, against honorable opponents. However, as I've repeatedly been arguing, if our enemy doesn't want peace, we have zero reason to turn the other cheek.
Uh oh, not your heckin' pacifism. This here, just like above, is advocating for acting/reacting in a way which leads to peace (when our opponents/aggressors are honorable). Our opponents aren't honorable, and seek the death of each and every one of us. Thus, we aren't obligated to turn the other cheek.
Oh look, historical applicability to the Biblical passage in question. Shocking! This aligns with the previous parts of Matthew 5 (like in 5:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’"), that Jesus is merely advocating for instilling more peace upon people seeking needless violence (among honorable opponents). And, repeatedly, our opponents are honorable, and seek violence regardless of what we do, thus we aren't obligated to turn the other cheek.
Keep in mind that Jesus knew that his opponents would be met with failure, harm, death, and hell, regardless of what they did to him. He didn't need to seek immediate retribution, as he knew what awaited them should they continue on their course. He prayed for their change of heart, but knew what awaited them should they continue on their path. This doesn't necessarily mean that someone should never fight back, however.
Here's another link:
https://www.thebubble.org.uk/culture/philosophy-religion/the-path-of-most-resistance-what-does-it-mean-to-turn-the-other-cheek/
This would indicate Jesus is advocating for the victim to force the attacker to treat/view him as an equal. This is completely contradictory to your assertion that God/Jesus advocates for us to be pacifists in the face of our own destruction.
So, what interpretation is correct? Is it yours? Why? Are you asserting it's yours because it supports your positions, or because it's what God intended? If so, what is the reasoning for why God and Jesus advocates for us to remain peaceful even when evil threatens to destroy us and everything we love? Is that truly a logical and just position?
You also asked for other Biblical passages which support the position that Jesus/God support righteous violence. Here you go:
Pretty much the entirety of the Old Testament is God commanding the Israelites to war with and destroy various people so they can inhabit a specific area. Are you arguing that God was wrong throughout all of the OT period? Why would God/Jesus command us to be pacifists but completely contradict Himself when commanding the Israelites to go the war?
This is probably referring to the fact that someone defending their home, in the dark, is more understood to self defense (and defense of family) in the dark/night, than in the day. However, again, this is probably swayed by variations in customs of the time, which alter interpretation.
Was God blaspheming himself here?
Was God blaspheming himself here, opposing your divine edicts? How dare God oppose your assertions?!
Was God blaspheming against your divine decree here?
Why would God command us to be pacifists, when He Himself holds the sword?
Oh look, the Bible espousing EXACTLY what I've been arguing this entire time, that good men (truthbound men) are righteous in their violence and wars, and if they are truthbound, they will surely find victory, and that God approves of it.
Do you need more examples, or will you continue to argue that Jesus/God advocates for us to remain peaceful no matter what?