ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
The answer is always racism.


FKKQXbmVUAgnRrb
I love these stories because it just shows a complete lack of awareness of who you're talking about--- who ignored it? Media. Politicians. No one else controls what media and their masters choose to cover.

The person who discovered this variant preached to the moon that there was no reason to be alarmed by it yet media and politicians went bananas and used it to justify the next round of mandates and lockdowns.

But like I mentioned, this reminds me of the media bitching about Gabby Petito being covered by...media.
 
@AustinTXCat

How bout those RECORD SETTING stock markets?
We just can't stop winning under Biden.
Greatest President in US history!
Everyone getting paid more. Millions of new jobs. 401k's worth more than ever.
MAGA BABY!!!
* KA - BOOM *

CNBC: NASDAQ has not fallen 5 straight weeks since 2012.

Build back better, eh? Go jump your loon ass into the Pecos River and STFU.
 
I love all the talk of democracy from those on the left, always wanting majority to rule, but when it comes to trans issues (which majority says we don’t want men to be put in bathrooms and prisons because most women would feel uncomfortable) suddenly that doesn’t matter anymore and the 98% must cater to the 2%.

When are we going to stop this charade of “identifying as”? If a grown man who raped a ten year old girl can suddenly identify as a woman… what won’t be accepted and allowed?

Mentally ill people, their sympathizers and those trying to take advantage for politics or corporate greed, have infiltrated positions of power and made this craziness a reality.

Again, a rapist of a ten year old girl was allowed into a female prison because he simply said “I identify as a woman”. Just hit the fcking reset button already. What a fcking tragedy.
Not to mention, the rapist is 26 years old now and going to a JUVENILE FACILITY!!
 
The distinctions between Biblical Christianity and Catholicism are vast and irreconcilable.

1. The Mass as a continuing perpetual sacrifice of Jesus is unBiblical (John 19:30, Hebrews 9:25-28, Rev 1:18)...And the heresy of "receiving Christ" through "Holy Communion," believing that a priest has the POWER to yank the Lord Jesus Christ out of heaven and put him into a wafer (Transubstantiation) Faithful Catholics believe in the true presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist; Body & Blood, Soul and Divinity. Out of love for mankind Jesus instituted this sacrament at the Last Supper - Matthew 26: 26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 21:17-20. The command to partake in the Body and Blood of Christ was clearly established by Christ in the passage John 6:52-58
2. Works added to faith for salvation is not Biblical (Ephesians 2:8-10, Titus 3:5-8, Galations 2:16, Romans 4:4-5 Works are generally understood to be a fruit of our personal faith, not a means of achieving salvation in the absence of faith. Refer to James 2: 14-20. I'm not aware of any Catholic doctrine that states a person is saved by their works alone. So on this point we are in agreement.
3. Infant Baptism: From John the Baptist through the book of Acts, only believers are baptized, no exception. The concept of infant baptism is admittedly not firmly rooted in Scripture. From my understanding, it was St. Augustine and other leading theologians of his time that advocated for infant baptism to address the issue of souls perishing without the saving grace of Baptism. Catholic Church teaching on this matter is that parents have responsibility for the spiritual upbringing of their children, to instruct them in the faith, etc. The Sacrament of Confirmation is when a young person re-affirms their faith as a Christian and receives the grace of the Holy Spirit to live out the Christian witness. Confirmation is ultimately derived from the descent of the Holy Spirit to apostles at the First Pentecost; whereby the apostles received the gift of the Holy Spirit and were empowered to lay hands and transmit these gifts to other believers.
4. Peter as the first 'pope,' the 'rock' on which Christ allegedly established his church: Acts 4:8-12, 1 Peter 2:6-9, Deut 32:3-4, Ps 18:1-2, 1 Cor 3:11. (The 'rock' in Matt 16:18 is found in v 16b - it's the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God) Peter was initially known as Simon, and his name "Peter" is derived from the Greek word for rock "Petros". Throughout the Gospels, Peter is clearly the leader of the 12 apostles, confirmed in the passage of Matthew 16:16 you quoted, and culminating in the command from Jesus to Peter to "Feed my lambs" (John 21:15-18). When Peter was martyred, what was the early church to do? The leaders of the church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit discerned St. Linus to take his place. Ultimately, the Catholic Church can ultimately trace its lineage back to Jesus himself.
5. Priests vs. priesthood of the believer: 1 Peter 2:9, Rev 1:6, Heb 7:25, Heb 4:14-16 The priesthood is another Sacrament of the Church, instituted by the early church fathers to be Altus Christus (Another Christ),to celebrate the Eucharist, forgive sins in the name of Christ, etc. That said, I agree we all have a personal priesthood to bring the witness of Christ into the world.

Additionally, Catholics pray to idols and to Mary, and the Bible is explicit about whom to pray to: God alone. Catholics ask Mary to pray them; to seek her intercession for her son Jesus. Per the passage in John 19:25-27, Jesus gave his mother to the Church in person of St. John, and gave the Church to his mother. Catholics praying to idols is absolutely false. Furthermore, prayer for the dead borders dangerously close to necromancy (see Revelation 22:8-9) John was seeking to pray to an angel in this passage, not to a dead person. Catholic prayers for the deceased are essentially a prayer of trust for God to have mercy on that person’s soul.

I never see Catholics caring enough about others to actually share something about their faith. I and my fellow Catholics share our faith with each other and those around us, and I assure you we want others to share in our gospel joy. Could we do better? Absolutely. Perhaps you spend too much time in your theological bubble, or perhaps your apparent anti-Catholic prejudice prevents you from seeing anything positive about the Catholic faith. But in the Bible, Jesus says an amazing thing..."Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature." And..."I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh unto the Father, but by me." I agree with this….

The official Catholic position, proclaimed by all the popes for the last 1,000 years, is that salvation is found only in the Catholic church, through the sacraments, by the priests, under the cardinals and pope. Catholic teaching has recently evolved (somewhat) in this matter. Here is the most recent position on this topic I could find, from Section 846 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: https://www.usccb.org/sites/default/files/flipbooks/catechism/226/#zoom=z

But the Bible says that salvation is only in Jesus Christ. The apostle Peter said... "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved." I agree with this….

Saved from what? Judgment is coming - for you and me - and Jesus preached that most people are on their way to hell...the broad road to destruction. And that the road to life and heaven is narrow and few find it. OK, I agree with this also.
My response to your post from last night as shown in BOLD text.

Peace and God Bless
 
Up until now i’ve never held any contempt for a pope, but this guy is a straight up commie socialist.
I profess to be a faithful Catholic, and while I generally hate to see anyone speak ill of the church and its institutions and leaders, let's just say that traditional conservative Catholics such as myself are not enamored with our current pope.
 
Progressives are desperate for a win.....


Given the recent news of the gangbuster economy (look at that 2021 GDP Growth!!!), I don't see why we need even more government spending..... The government is already living well beyond its means, thank you.
 
Spent a lot of time down there, both for work and for vacations. my ex-inlaws had a place on Fort Myers Beach. Know the area well. (Best wings on the beach are at the Beached Whale, by the way). Haven't been down that far south in about three years though, My new wifes brother lives in Clearwater so I've moved my vacations further north, and unfortunately the company I work for sold all the Florida market restaurants. We used to have about 45 of them up the Gulf Coast from Naples to Sarasota.

But seriously, The Beached Whale had the best wings on the beach in my opinion. Never had a bad meal there.
I love Buffalo wings. The best wings I can get here in Orlando are in my air fryer. Just fantastic.
 


Jews practice tribalism more than anyone while pushing migration and mixing races. They promote the most anti-white hatred you'll ever see but they on the other hand, are never allowed to be criticized nor are you to ever accurately discuss what they are doing or it's "anti-sematic."

This group calls everyone a white supremacist the moment they're exposed doing shady shit. Without fail. The group is so unbelievably overrepresented in every mega influential industry is always the first to play the victim. They're 2 percent of the population yet look at what they control. Imagine like a small town in Kentucky controlling the movie industry, all media, and banks. It would be pretty hard to cry "I'm oppressed."

What's bizarre to me are the Christians that think Jews like them. Uh, no, they do not. That's a one-sided relationship, buddy. Oh, and everyone's relative is always Holocaust survivor and the number of Holocaust victims always grows.

This is more accurate than anyone wants to admit
 
My response to your post from last night as shown in BOLD text.

Peace and God Bless
"Peter was initially known as Simon, and his name "Peter" is derived from the Greek word for rock "Petros". Throughout the Gospels, Peter is clearly the leader of the 12 apostles, confirmed in the passage of Matthew 16:16 you quoted, and culminating in the command from Jesus to Peter to "Feed my lambs" (John 21:15-18). When Peter was martyred, what was the early church to do? The leaders of the church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit discerned St. Linus to take his place. Ultimately, the Catholic Church can ultimately trace its lineage back to Jesus himself."

Jesus was not referring to Peter. He was referring to Himself.

The Roman Catholic Church has used this and verse 19 which speaks of the authority of the church to claim that Peter was the first Pope. Their claim is that Peter is here given the first place of honor and authority within the church and that each successive Pope has received this same honor and power, so that to be a true follower of Christ all Christians must be in submission to the Church of Rome where Peter rules in the person of his successor, the current Pope.

Such an argument is absurd at face value and even more so as you look at the details. First, the authority given in verse 19 was also given to all the apostles, not just Peter. Second, Peter never claimed nor do any of the other apostles give Peter such place of prominence or authority in the Church. In fact, Peter refers to himself it is as a “fellow elder” (1 Peter 5:1) and a “bond-servant” of Christ (2 Peter 1:1).

Third, every opportunity in which Peter’s supposed supremacy could have been reinforced by Jesus, Peter himself, or one of the other apostles, it was not. He is prominent among the apostles but he has no supremacy over any of them. And fourth, neither in this passage or in any other passage is there any evidence for apostolic succession by which any supposed superiority Peter had his transferred to anyone else. To put it simply, the Roman Catholic interpretation of this passage is unbiblical. Jesus Christ is the foundation of and the only head of His church (1 Corinthians 3:11, Colossians 1, etc.).

Furthermore, there is zero Biblical evidence that Peter even visited Rome, let alone established a church there. In fact, there isn't any historic evidence outside of strong assertions by the Catholic church itself. Conversely, there is a ton of evidence including Biblical that the apostle Paul visited and died in Rome. And we know he didn't found the Catholic church, NOR did he mention Peter, which would have been a GLARING omission if Peter was there starting a church! The assertion that the Catholic church can be traced directly to Jesus through Peter is just a myth.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sawnee Cat
My response to your post from last night as shown in BOLD text.

Peace and God Bless
On prayers for the dead, I got this from a Catholic website:

The Catholic Church has taught for centuries that our prayers are of assistance to those who have died. We commend their soul to God’s mercy and pray for them. We can help them not only by our prayers, but also by offering a Mass in their name, by giving alms, by indulgences or other works of penance done for their benefit (CCC 1032).

You left this part out. Catholics are taught that their prayers and MONEY can get someone out of Purgatory. How can you not see this as heretical? There is nothing in the Bible about this. Nor does Purgatory exist in the original canon. The Latin Vulgate added the Apocrypha but it was not accepted by the church originally. And the Latin Vulgate was derived from a corrupt manuscript that was found in the Pope's library.

Frankly, when I look at the size and magnificence of the Vatican and most Catholic buildings, it's no wonder they teach about giving 'alms' for the dead. What a great way to fund their empire!
 
Jesus christ. You one of them next level brain washed imaginary friend dopes.
My friend had a nonbeliever tell him there was no heaven or hell and that he was wasting his time worshipping God. He simply told the guy what if I’m right and you’re wrong. I’ll pray for you Plat, I don’t think you want to be wrong.
 
Last edited:
And a lot of libnuts think it's just a catchy slogan Biden came up with for his plan.
What to you think that the whole world is in on some conspiracy?

No, just the whole first world.


MayorPete talking zero traffic fatalities like zero covid ought to open eyes. Banning travel by car because of pollution and safety would get you to zero, but he probably misspoke, was taken out of context, or he was just starting a conversation.
 
Man I hate to see this Catholic versus Protestant feud here . I'm protestant who sent my kids to private Catholic school . I'm familiar with their teachings . I disagree with many of them , but I know many a Catholic who follow the teachings / instructions of the Holy Bible far better than I .. so I dont attempt any judgement . God knows the heart , He can do as He wills at judgement day , I dont have that capability . I'll leave it at that .
 
What to you think that the whole world is in on some conspiracy?

No, just the whole first world.


MayorPete talking zero traffic fatalities like zero covid ought to open eyes. Banning travel by car because of pollution and safety would get you to zero, but he probably misspoke, was taken out of context, or he was just starting a conversation.
Yeah, it is clear as day. All of this is intentional. All of this is a step-by-step thing. Their environmental shit and the "concern for safety" is a license to do the global reset they want. Politicians don't magically adopt the same catchphrases and talking points and agendas at the exact same time without coordination and collusion.

Kind of like a basketball official doesn't reach the college and NBA levels and be incompetent unless it's intentional. Biden's admin making everything worse isn't because they're oblivious. It's because that was the goal.
 




This is why I don't get all the Mitch hate. Ya I'm not a huge fan either and this is a giant long shot, but literally noone else could pull this off.

I thought he was nuts when he blocked what appeared to be a moderate garland, but boy did it pay off.
You're a complete & total RINO by the definitions of this thread with thinking like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
"Peter was initially known as Simon, and his name "Peter" is derived from the Greek word for rock "Petros". Throughout the Gospels, Peter is clearly the leader of the 12 apostles, confirmed in the passage of Matthew 16:16 you quoted, and culminating in the command from Jesus to Peter to "Feed my lambs" (John 21:15-18). When Peter was martyred, what was the early church to do? The leaders of the church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit discerned St. Linus to take his place. Ultimately, the Catholic Church can ultimately trace its lineage back to Jesus himself."

Jesus was not referring to Peter. He was referring to Himself. Matt 16:18 "And so I say this to you, you are Peter, and upon this this rock I will build this church." Again, Jesus is referring to Peter ("Rock" ), not himself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confession_of_Peter From this link: Most Christian denominations agree that the statement applies to Peter, but they diverge on their interpretations of what happens after Peter. You haven't stated what denomination (if any) you belong to, but your interpretation seems to be in the minority here.

The Roman Catholic Church has used this and verse 19 which speaks of the authority of the church to claim that Peter was the first Pope. Their claim is that Peter is here given the first place of honor and authority within the church and that each successive Pope has received this same honor and power, so that to be a true follower of Christ all Christians must be in submission to the Church of Rome where Peter rules in the person of his successor, the current Pope. The Catholic Church believes the Pope, selected by the College of Cardinals under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is Christ's enduring representative here on Earth. The Church doesn't believe that "Peter rules" through the Pope; not sure where you're getting that from.

Such an argument is absurd at face value and even more so as you look at the details. First, the authority given in verse 19 was also given to all the apostles, not just Peter. Second, Peter never claimed nor do any of the other apostles give Peter such place of prominence or authority in the Church. In fact, Peter refers to himself it is as a “fellow elder” (1 Peter 5:1) and a “bond-servant” of Christ (2 Peter 1:1). In the Church, the Pope refers to himself in his communications to bishops and cardinals over whom he has authority as the "Servant of the servants of God". In other words, he is at one level equal to them (or even lower in a sense if he truly serves them in humility). Nevertheless, the Church has always recognized the constancy of papal succession, notwithstanding unfortunate periods in the Middle Ages where there was "dueling" multiple popes.

Third, every opportunity in which Peter’s supposed supremacy could have been reinforced by Jesus, Peter himself, or one of the other apostles, it was not. He is prominent among the apostles but he has no supremacy over any of them. And fourth, neither in this passage or in any other passage is there any evidence for apostolic succession by which any supposed superiority Peter had his transferred to anyone else. To put it simply, the Roman Catholic interpretation of this passage is unbiblical. Jesus Christ is the foundation of and the only head of His church (1 Corinthians 3:11, Colossians 1, etc.). See my other comments in this post.

Furthermore, there is zero Biblical evidence that Peter even visited Rome, let alone established a church there. In fact, there isn't any historic evidence outside of strong assertions by the Catholic church itself. Conversely, there is a ton of evidence including Biblical that the apostle Paul visited and died in Rome. And we know he didn't found the Catholic church, NOR did he mention Peter, which would have been a GLARING omission if Peter was there starting a church! The assertion that the Catholic church can be traced directly to Jesus through Peter is just a myth. Peter was martyred in Rome by Emperor Nero in AD 67. According to church tradition, he initially fled from Rome to avoid his impending martyrdom, but was confronted by Christ in a powerful personal vision, and returned to Rome. He chose to be crucified upside down because he didn't consider himself worthy to die in the same manner as Jesus. Just because it's not explicitly in the Bible doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Please see my reply.

Peace and God Bless
 
He stuck it to Obama on the SCOTUS nominee and Obama was way more the adversary.

Alot about Mitch I don't like but 1) no politician out there (except maybe desantis) they I ever 100% agree with and 2) who else would do better? He's the longest tenured party leader in history and proven time and again to be excellent at his job
Yep, but Mitch's wiggles fail the Trumpster purity test. You just have to accept that he's never ever gonna be conservative enough to satisfy them. He might as well announce he's gonna huddle with the Dims.
 
Ancient life was brutal. Life today can be brutal, check a mine in Africa. That's the very reason we've progressed over the millennia and strive to continuing progressing every day into the future. The Founders were learned men who knew humanity's long complicated history and did their part to progress into a better world for future generations. It's time we do our part and show some of that true patriotism.
More freedoms & fewer laws is progressing.
 
On prayers for the dead, I got this from a Catholic website:

The Catholic Church has taught for centuries that our prayers are of assistance to those who have died. We commend their soul to God’s mercy and pray for them. We can help them not only by our prayers, but also by offering a Mass in their name, by giving alms, by indulgences or other works of penance done for their benefit (CCC 1032). The concept of Purgatory is difficult for many people to grasp, even among Catholics. Basically, church doctrine teaches that souls must be fully sanctified before they can enter in heaven. In summary, when a person obtains forgiveness for their sins, God's justice still demands reparation. That reparation can made on earth or in Purgatory. Saints and other holy souls who have had visions of Purgatory describe an intense purifying fire that cleanses the souls to make them worthy to be in God's presence. I will concede that the buying and selling of indulgences was an abuse of the Church, particularly in the Middle Ages, but that's not current church practices.

You left this part out. Catholics are taught that their prayers and MONEY can get someone out of Purgatory. How can you not see this as heretical? There is nothing in the Bible about this. Nor does Purgatory exist in the original canon. The Latin Vulgate added the Apocrypha but it was not accepted by the church originally. And the Latin Vulgate was derived from a corrupt manuscript that was found in the Pope's library. The Apocrypha has always been accepted by the Church; it was Martin Luther and other Protestant factions who chose not to accept it. You've missed out on a lot by not accepting the Apocryphal Books.

Frankly, when I look at the size and magnificence of the Vatican and most Catholic buildings, it's no wonder they teach about giving 'alms' for the dead. What a great way to fund their empire! Sorry you feel that way, but that's not how I see it.
Peace and God Bless
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDC8888
Please see my reply.

Peace and God Bless
Jesus said Thou art Peter, and upon THIS rock I will build my church. If he was referring to Peter he wouldn't have said 'this rock.' Also there is a difference in the Greek word Peter which means little stone. The context of the fact that Peter never is given any authority over the other apostles is significant. In fact, the apostle Paul mentions that he actually REBUKED Peter to his face in Galatians 2. Nobody talks to the pope like that. If anyone was the head of the 12, it was Paul, not Peter.
 
Yep, but Mitch's wiggles fail the Trumpster purity test. You just have to accept that he's never ever gonna be conservative enough to satisfy them. He might as well announce he's gonna huddle with the Dims.

No matter the side, if people only like politicians they 100% agree with, it's going to be a very small pool. Imo it's just inherent in the beast I won't agree with all of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: augustaky1
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT