Did the world powers ban the use of nuclear weapons too?
Yes. They cause the loss of jewish power. That’s why they haven’t been used since their first use to create the global jewish world.
Or did international law (which is a joke) ban invading independent countries?
Why would it do that? It has never done that. That would prevent jews keeping their slaves in line.
When was going to the moon and setting bases there banned exactly?
It wasn’t. Keep your strawmen to yourself.
Do you have the document?
How about you provide the one that says it never happened. Oh right, despite literally every event in world history eventually leaking, including the hoax of the holocaust itself, you have absolutely nothing anywhere under any circumstances that shows the Moon landings were a hoax. Every. Single. Fucking. Event. Leaks.
So where are your documents. Where are your pictures of the studios. Where are your work orders for the materials they bought to assemble the stages. Where are the blueprints for the satellites they sent to the Moon itself to broadcast radio signals of people talking back at earth, which were clearly picked up by hundreds of independent radio astronomers during the Apollo missions. When were those satellites launched. What flights. What rockets. What days. Because clearly those have to exist, otherwise it wasn’t a hoax and people went to the Moon, because those voices had to come from somewhere.
Where is your fucking evidence, you filthy subhuman yid.
they didn't come back to the moon because they've lost the technology
Nope.
and don't have the money
You’re purposely lying about my responses.
even though they literally printed 3 trillions in two weeks for a fake pandemic.
Thanks for admitting you don’t understand economics. You just made my argument for me.
Makes total sense. You're a certified retard dude.
Irony.
But at least you're a true 'Murican patriotic retard, which is the good kind.
Don’t worry; you’ll be killed by your owners as a reward for parroting their lies.
oy vey goyim you never accomplished anything; your people don’t even exist!
our conquest of the global economy totally has nothing to do with any of this!
ignore that it’s only now cheap enough to return without hundreds of billions in government funding, thanks to advancements in methalox propulsion!
also it makes no sense not to weaponize space because every country regularly uses chemical and biological weapons on each other and there’s absolutely no way anyone would simply agree to ban them from use because… uh…
Did you think at all before posting?
yet we never EVER turn them towards the moon to see if we can see the debris left by all of those Apollo missions
- You physically can’t do that with those telescopes. Your personal lack of knowledge of optics has nothing to do with objective reality.
- You were saying?
you’re a jew because I can’t read your posts
you’re a jew because you posted truth that I can’t refute
you’re a jew because truth hurts my feelings
you’re a jew because I have no argument against what you said
you’re a jew because I have no refutation for what you said
you’re a jew because I don’t like what you said
you’re a jew because everything you said is against jews
you’re a jew because you want every jew on Earth exterminated
you’re a jew because you say things jews are forbidden from saying
you’re a jew because I am too weak and cowardly to accept reality
Thanks for admitting the white man walked on the Moon and that nothing you say or do will ever change this.
The Moon landings are independently verifiable. You have absolutely nothing to defend yourself. Your video is a hoax produced by someone lacking 6th grade knowledge of optics and physics. You, personally, are too mentally defective to comprehend how light works, which is why you’re physically incapable of comprehending how white people—your gods—could ever do anything more impressive than you.
You are just cognitively dissonant.
The jew cries out in pain as it claims your greatest achievement–which they could never even dream of accomplishing–never existed.
I showed you the documentary
No one cares. The Moon landings have been independently verified both contemporaneously and in modernity. It is physically impossible for them not to have happened.
presents hours of evidence
It presents no evidence whatsoever.
You just won't look
Because I under no obligation to prove 2+2=4 to every single paid jewish shill that claims otherwise.
or consider any evidence because you're a closed minded
“An open mind, in questions that are not ultimate, is useful. But an open mind about the ultimate foundations either of theoretical or of practical reason is idiocy. If a man’s mind is open on these things, let his mouth at least be shut. He can say nothing to the purpose.” ~ C. S. Lewis
Scream for me, yid.
you’re a jew because I can’t read your posts
you’re a jew because you posted truth that I can’t refute
you’re a jew because truth hurts my feelings
you’re a jew because I have no argument against what you said
you’re a jew because I have no refutation for what you said
you’re a jew because I don’t like what you said
you’re a jew because everything you said is against jews
you’re a jew because you want every jew on Earth exterminated
you’re a jew because you say things jews are forbidden from saying
you’re a jew because I am too weak and cowardly to accept reality
Thanks for admitting the white man walked on the Moon and that nothing you say or do will ever change this.
you’re a jew because you say the opposite of what jews say
Neat, your video is a hoax.
The white man walked on the Moon and nothing you say or do will ever change this.
If our grandfathers could go to the moon in the age of transistors, slide rules, and adding machines
Which they did.
we would have gone back long before now.
Almost as though a certain outside force took control of the country around that time and redirected its efforts toward something else.
NAAAAAAAAH CAN’T HAVE HAPPENED, GOY, THAT’S A CONSPIRACY THEORY! I GUESS THE WHITE MAN IS JUST WORTHLESS AND PATHETIC, RIGHT?
It still represents the best we can do.
Not even remotely close.
It’s not. They’re party to all economic globalism.
When we’re 60 years past the point where they publicly admit it, you can tell that they know no one’s ever going to do anything to stop it.
“With the exception of the USSR as a federated Eurasian state, all other continents will become united in a world alliance, at whose disposal will be an international police force; armies will be abolished and there will be no more wars. In Jerusalem, the United Nations will build a shrine of the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents; this will be the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah.” ~ ✡David Ben Gurion✡, prime minister of Israel; Look Magazine, January 6, 1962
new
You mean “what jews have always done”? But yes, you’re completely correct about everything else.
Presented without evidence = dismissed without argument.
NOOOOO IT DIDN’T HAPPEN BECAUSE I SAID IT DIDN’T HAPPEN I AM GOOOOOOOOOOD
The white man walked in the surface of the Moon and nothing you say or do will ever change this.
You’ve been so poisoned by judaism—so utterly psychologically and physically damaged by poisons in your body and mind—that you can’t even recognize an adult and adult behavior when you see it. You expect everyone to hop around like feral nigger children and bow to their slightest emotional whims because it’s all you’ve even known and all you’ve ever seen in your entire life.
The first half of the recorded audio and video history of humanity is still full of sane people with healthily reactions to things. You’re so addled by social media that you think explosive emotional outbursts are normal.
The white man walked in the surface of the Moon and nothing you say or do will ever change this.
“Communism can work in a society with perfect matter transmutation that also ignores the problem of waste heat!”
True. Thankfully, the laws of physics exist.
the planets
Ignored as clinical insanity.
No, he’s a christkiller-worshipping pile of shit and he knows it.
Mutiny against what? Extinction of whom?
- Personal friend of the president
- Promotes zionism
- Not doing so would leave his connections open for discovery in court, and those connections would harm the ZOG
Cool, he’ll be pardoned immediately.
Thank you, uh… I think this might be what you’re after. Let me know if it’s not.
~:~
Besides the desired outcome of the extermination of the peoples of the Western world, the secondary reason for immigration is the average Westerner has $20,000 in debt. That’s a lot. They are what economists call “debt saturated.” They can’t take on any more debt without being unable to afford to repay the interest alone. These people cannot drive the economy because they can barely spend any currency. What do immigrants not have? Debt. What can you do when an immigrant enters a country? You can give him loans! Loans with interest rates he’s too stupid to understand but which he has to pay off nonetheless. For each immigrant who takes a loan to buy a car, a TV, a house, or a new pair of shoes, bankers can make currency out of thin air (through the process of fractional reserve banking) and put it straight into their own pockets. They can also count both the loan itself and the items the immigrant buys in the country’s GDP calculations. This allows politicians to claim the GDP is growing and use the media to celebrate their “success.”
This pyramid scheme only works with a steady influx of new debt-free people. If immigration slows or stops, the nation’s economy slides into recession. This happened in Japan. They adopted the West’s economic policies while maintaining racial purity. With their economy currently in shambles, they believe they’ve “made a mistake.” Talks have begun to bring non-Japanese immigrants into Japan. Sweden, too, is importing more immigrants because they have compounding economic problems… because they imported immigrants.
There was a point somewhere before the era of mass immigration when intelligent people said, “Immigration won’t solve the fundamental issues with our banking and economic systems. We must instead change how our economy works.” They were ignored or discredited by the media. If they had enough influence to solve these problems, they were killed. People who benefit from unlimited immigration don’t care they’re ruining entire nations. They don’t care about the destruction of entire cultures and millennia of racial achievement. These people aren’t part of the nations they’re destroying. They feel nothing in their actions–no social obligation to end immigration and no moral obligation to do unto others as they would have done to them. Their only concern is for their personal pleasure. They’ll destroy it all–all of civilization–for a single lifetime of hedonism and debauchery funded by the suffering of billions.
When sophists claim that immigration is good–or even acceptable–in a location with a decreasing population, there is a disconnect between the statement and the desires of the people living there. People are not–and do not see themselves as–interchangeable parts. The society, economy, and civil structure of a nation–such as Germany–does not remain the same simply by “maintaining” its population at 80 million with an arbitrary ethnic makeup. People do not want to be replaced by strangers who do not look like them, and certainly not by strangers who share neither their language nor culture. It terrifies sophists to consider this, but people are tribal. We prefer our own kin.
Arguments such as “we should encourage immigration to maintain population levels” can only be entertained if you ignore natural inclinations. It doesn’t make sense to claim Germany can be “saved” by importing Turks and Algerians because a Germany inhabited by Turks and Algerians wouldn’t be Germany. When this argument fails, sophists invariably turn to an imagined “responsibility”–moral or otherwise–of the invaded nations to allow immigrants due to conditions in their homelands. “You should allow your nation to be invaded while simultaneously paying to rebuild the lands whence the invaders came. Will they return home after their nation is fixed with your money? Of course they won’t! That would be racist!”
Neither Germany nor the EU can solve all the crises that affect the world. Nor can the United States, Canada, Australia, and the rest of the West. Nor should we. Is the West supposed to dismantle Boko Haram, bring democracy to Eritrea, a stable government to Somalia, peace to Syria, and prosperity to Morocco–to say nothing of quadrupling the GDP of the developing world? Saying “eliminate the causes of mass migration!” is a platitude. Under the current international paradigm, it cannot be done, nor is it the responsibility of individual or collective citizens of the West to suffer economic hardship and criminal violence in their streets because the government wasn’t able to wave its magic wand and turn Namibia into Switzerland. In a time in which people are worried about demographic replacement, crime, and terrorism, leftists trot out 18th-century solutions, imagining that the same dynamics still apply.
Back then, industrialists imported people from a nation’s countryside to work in its cities’ factories, not from across the world. Majority illiterate countries have no place or use in the West’s high-tech industries, nor even its services. The overwhelming majority of invaders do not work now, nor will they ever work in the future. As drains on the welfare state and bolsterers to crime statistics, they don’t even have use as “wage slaves” for oligarchs. Their purpose here is exclusively demographic replacement. Even if we accept the claim that the West has caused “everything bad in the world,” that gives us no solution to the present crisis. These people–whose IQs are in the 80s and 90s and who harbor a hostile attitude to the very concept of Western civilization–will never be educated or assimilated. But governments still don’t want to send them back. They don’t even want to stop them from coming! Nor do the governments of the West even care how they come here, legally or illegally.
Not in evidence.
Bible says so. Glad to see you’re at least consistent in your “I have never read the Bible and don’t care what it says because it’s not Christian law” position.
without it being present
Scream for me.
just like anyone had a right to question extratextual tradition.
Glad to hear you support my right to question your extratextual heresies involving the killers of Christ being “already saved” and going to heaven.
He fulfilled the Mosaic law
Neat, thanks for destroying your own argument yet again.
we are (still today) deemed to have fulfilled the Mosaic law
Neat, thanks for destroying your own argument yet again.
The standard hasn't changed.
Right. No matter how many times your postmodernist heretical propaganda gets spewed–Christian standards haven’t changed and the killers of Christ are not saved, nor are their laws valid.
The point is that we serve in newness of spirit (7:6, i.e. obey the law of Christ).
The law of Christ says the exact opposite of what you say about who is and is not saved.
My first request for evidence was for what you say God "directly stated" about something superseding something. I pointed out there is no text
Already posted.
There is no text saying the new covenant supplants the old
Already posted.
it was always the new covenant supplements the old.
Replaces, yeah; that’s what the text says.
You argue supersession is directly implied but you can't show from the text
Already posted.
bypassing for now the degree to which you have responsibility for your words being clear
Someone not paying as close attention would have let this go, but I’m not letting it go. It’s quoted explicitly (and solely) to show that I noticed it and that you’re not getting away with it, even though digging through our shared history for direct citations as to why you’re a subhuman pile of jewish shit and how I have already directly cited, sourced, and defined every word I have used, in context, in all previous conversations is impossible (solely because the site doesn’t let you search user comment history or sort it by board). Again, you’re being called out on this specifically for the libel that it is.
if you want to say you do have evidence that I'm not taking your meaning, spell it out.
Did. A dozen times. You continue to copy and paste the same propaganda only dispensationalists post.
When I said your supersession "tends to exclude one race of humans from Christian salvation”
- Nope.
- Maybe they shouldn’t have killed Christ, then. Or blasphemed against His law. Or continue to purposely and consciously act in diametric opposition to that law.
What is your evidence
The fact that you keep lying about the contents of the Bible after having been given direct quotes.
Jesus has a second and better priesthood, not a replacement.
Oh, so there’s more than one way into heaven? Shut the fuck up, retard.
The point of the earthly is to reflect the heavenly
And yet you’re totally fine with it when it reflects the demonic.
The text literally says the new covenant is "established" in a better "place", so it contradicts the idea of replacement as if established upon the same promises without change.
replacement
same promises
without change
Words don’t mean whatever you want them to mean.
So, when you repeat "Bible says" removal and replacement, the fact that that is never said, and you present no evidence that it is logically implied
Your inability to read English is not my problem. The text was cited. What was that about "the degree to which you have responsibility for your words,” again?
I have said nothing against some Jewish branches being broken off
Neat, so you’re incapable of refuting anything I’ve actually said. Why are you still paid to spam this site, again?
the right of Pharisees to interpret Moses.
lol, that’s a bold one. I see why you love this idea, of course; it implies the “validity” of the papacy in exalting a human woman as sinless.
they were saved by belief in the Messiah to come
So the ones who don’t believe He came… They’re definitely still saved, though, right? Because they definitely still believe a mashiach will come (even though He already has), and they’re still waiting, to this day… They’re saved? Still?
So I'm unaware
Yeah.
What is it you're trying to preserve as a picture of Christianity?
The Bible tells you. It’s pretty damned simple to understand.
still desire to keep some Mosaic laws for themselves out of Christian liberty
Okay. The Bible is solely truth. It is not exclusively truth. That is, it is only truth, but not the only source of truth. Therefore anything outside the Bible which contradicts it is not true, but other things–which may not matter beyond opinion–are fine, as long as they don’t do so. That’s fine.
We’re not talking about that, though. We’re talking about the other laws being kept that the Bible says aren’t anymore.
the first still has power to foreshadow today as Col. 2:16-17 says.
“A shadow of things to come” here does not mean “foreshadow;” it means “pales in comparison to.”
there are many legalists (more Christians and Muslims than Jews) who try to obey some Mosaic rules for salvation
Mmm, nah, see, total fucking bullshit. Again. THE ENTIRE BODY OF JUDAISM obeys the Mosaic rules for salvation, denying Christ, denying the Gospel, denying the Spirit, denying the sole way to eternity. To be a jew is to deny Christ, and to deny from knowledge, rather than mere ignorance. This is easily the twelfth time we’ve had this discussion and you’ve been axiomatically incorrect every single time.
as long as they do they are damned thereby
Great, so sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and never reply to anything I post ever again. You’ve openly admitted the old covenant doesn’t exist anymore, because Christ fulfilled it. You’ve openly admitted that jews are damned for all eternity because they deny Christ. There are no relevant points of argument or disagreement between us anymore. It’s over. You’ve wasted years and spread countless lies, but it’s finally over. We’ve reconciled.
So as an evangelist to a difficult people I hold out hope that it can happen organically again.
Neat. That’s neither here nor there.
But that goes to our usual discussion about your hopelessness
Yeah, that’s fair.
which I say is belied by your fighting spirit.
lol, this isn’t spirit, my dude. Neither Holy nor human. I’m way too pathetic for ’spirit’ to describe me. If this is what you consider fighting, no wonder Christendom (and the white race) are already extinct. He needs to return already. Now. His kingdom has fully abandoned Him. I don’t look twice my age for no reason.
He says it's not in Matt. 5:17 ESV. You're taking his statement of "fulfilled" and interpreting it as "abolished" contrary to his own words.
Here we return to the pop quiz that you ignored with no justification whatsoever. To say that the old was not fulfilled by the new implies that you demand male genital mutilation for the sake of salvation, the abstention of pork for the sake of salvation, the non-mixing of fabrics, the “no spitting through your teeth on a Wednesday,” the… *The old laws are gone, my dude.
Now it's an interesting study to review his word for abolish, "kataluo", and the other word translated abolish, "katargeo", and review what is abolished and what is not said to be; it would be interesting to find what "fulfilled" covenants look like in Scripture
Found it. It means destroy, dissolve, overthrow, or abolish. Within the context of this specific verse, it means “annulling authority.” As in “it doesn’t have authority anymore.” As in “the old covenant has no power over you.” As in “there is a new covenant and Christ is it.” As in “the entirety of Christian doctrine from 33 AD to ~1900 AD, when the religion was exterminated.” As in, “not whatever jewish bullshit you’re pushing here.”
Now I get to have a pop quiz! Will he…
- admit that words mean what they actually mean–irrespective of personal beliefs–and not what jews tell him they mean.
- pivot hard and claim the New Testament was “written in Hebrew first” and therefore “the Greek isn’t an authoritative source.”
Oh boy, what will I choose!
you don't seem interested in learning from the Scriptures as you constantly have presented them as if they mean only what you say
The jew cries out in pain as it strikes you.
and your view is incapable of improvement.
Now that you’ve been given a direct citation for that Greek word and its meaning in context, both in the Bible at large and within that specific verse, will you improve your view? Or are you incapable?
If you are willing to stop accusing me of being dispie then that passes.
Only if you continuously state henceforth the two things you’ve said in this very comment–that
- Christ fulfilled the old covenant, which has been abolished thereby and replaced with His teachings.
- Jews–as jews–are damned for all eternity because they explicitly reject Christ and their actions and beliefs are hollow mockeries of salvation.
But since you immediately went back to repeating the same lies WITHIN THIS SAME COMMENT even after you were found out and forced to admit these two things, I don’t see anything but the shadow of Scofield still in you.
I'm only an enemy of error.
Stop making them, then.
We'll eventually need something beyond your sticking to what you think the Bible says when it doesn’t.
Pain, striking, etc.
You've presented as someone who is willing to take the Bible literally on everything it teaches
Nowhere has this been made indicative. Next you’ll claim that I support “immediate capitulation to all evil” because [insert the verse you know I’m talking about here], or that I demand the "enslavement of all civilians to military logistics programs” because [insert other verse you know I’m talking about here]. That’s not going to fly.
does Col. 2:16-17 KJV literally say that meat, drink, holyday, new moon, and sabbath days are a shadow of things to come (even after the cross)? Because that would imply they were also a shadow of things to come before the cross.
You can hardly use the same example again (in the same post) when the definition of the word ‘shadow’ is still up in the air.
Okay. The joke is finally over. We got it. Please go back to sane posting.
Not this Qult bullshit again.
It remains law in the sense that Christ kept and is still keeping it
Held fulfilled. Contract’s over. Christ explicitly went outside it, repeatedly, as shown in the gospels, because He had already held it fulfilled and it had no power over him. Either you’re saying Christ sinned or you admit the Old Covenant is no longer law and was not kept from the coming of Jesus.
because he said he doesn't abolish it, and fulfill doesn't mean that it stops being law.
POP QUIZ: When you submit your last payment on a loan under the terms of the agreement, do you
- A. KEEP SENDING IN PAYMENTS
- B. STOP SENDING IN PAYMENTS
It’s not a hard question.
There's no Scripture about God's law ceasing to be law
No Christian has ever upheld it, then. Or maybe you’re just mentally ill and there is, directly from Christ Himself.
Not in evidence.
Directly stated by God.
Not in evidence.
[citation needed]
Except Jesus said otherwise
Not in evidence.
Already posted. Enjoy hell.
There's no evidence the old covenant is removed
Bible say so.
There's no evidence the new covenant between Christ and men replaces this
Bible says so.
Perhaps you're afraid
You’re shitting your pants in fear of actual Christianity, yeah.
we're bound to act all Mosaic
Expressly not, as Christ Himself said and acted.
we are freed by the new covenant
Thanks for admitting there’s a new covenant. Argument over. You’ve conceded the point.
The rest of your comments are wild strawmen about your imagination
The jew cries out in pain as it strikes you.
At the same time the covenant between God and Israel is the same as the covenant between God and Christ
“OY VEY YOU’RE BEING “LEGALISTIC” BY SAYING DISPENSATIONALISM IS BAD ALSO WATCH ME BE THE MOST TALMUDIC KIKE IMAGINABLE AS I PILPUL MY WAY AROUND IGNORING WHAT THE BIBLE EXPLICITLY SAYS!”
Amazing, really.
You act as if the first is logically incompatible with the second, but they're both in the text.
The text which says the first is done and the second is law, you mean?
You act like the old covenant is gone when Scripture (like your own Heb. 8) says it's fading but not gone
Fulfilled, yeah. It’s gone. Personal opinions don’t matter. There are a few people damned to hell for eternity who still try to follow it while waiting for the Messiah (who has already come), so if that’s how you want to shit the bed over your pedantry, feel free. There are, in fact, a “fading” number of “jews” who still obey just the old rules. They’re irrelevant to objective reality.
Jesus says it's not abolished.
Explicitly said it.
You act like the new covenant is a replacement
Fulfilled, yeah. Words have definitions.
yes, it might be logically possible that Christ kept the same covenant given to Israel…
…but He didn’t.
Scripture doesn't say or imply the old covenant is gone…
…but it does.
Scripture doesn’t say or imply the new covenant is a replacement or supersession…
…but it does.
But instead of even opening your mind to the logical possibility
Because there is no debate about matters of objective truth. I’m not going to waste my time with someone who says, “But what if 2+2=17?”
you seem to have some deep need, possibly monetary
The jew cries out in pain as it strikes you.
to fight that at every turn
You’re the eternal enemy of Christ, yeah.
because you think my adherence to the initial millennial view
Never said a word about it.
Thanks for conceding the argument. Just don’t spam jewish lies next time and you won’t be publicly humiliated by stating things you can’t prove.