Quote# 116370

Imagine all of the things that we wouldn’t do if we were really aware that Hashem and the NSA were recording all of our actions, 24 hours a day. Imagine all of the sins that we wouldn’t do, simply because we would be afraid of having to pay the price later! How much more righteous would we be??

So there you have it: more awareness of Hashem = less sinful behavior = less harsh judgments. Go ahead and say it. I’m a genius.

Racheli Reckles, breslev.co.il 21 Comments [1/28/2016 4:14:32 AM]
Fundie Index: 14

Quote# 116366

Cameras swarmed around abortion supporters trying to interrupt this year’s annual March for Life, but will journalists report an event that shows groups like Planned Parenthood in a bad light?

During the 2016 March for Life Friday, a few dozen pro-abortion activists staged a “die-in” by lying down outside the U.S. Supreme Court to represent women dying from back-alley abortions. It was the second year straight where radical protesters tried to halt the thousands who came to D.C. to speak for the voiceless. Last year, the group’s behavior caused arrests at the march.

The group Stop Patriarchy took credit for this year’s event. Surrounded by tens of thousands of marching pro-lifers as well as police, abortion supporters wearing white pants stained with red dye dropped down on the sidewalk.

The pro-abortion demonstration, held on the 43rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, ironically followed in the footsteps of the pro-life movement, which often organizes die-ins for the millions of babies destroyed by abortion since United States legalized abortion.

While women who had endured having abortions shared stories of regret into a microphone, the pro-abortion activists tried to drown them out with a megaphone. The radical protesters couldn’t dedicate a second of respectful silence to the women in grief from losing their babies.

Mocking pro-lifers, they chanted, “pro-life, your name’s a lie, you don’t care if women die,” along with the typical slogan, “abortion on demand and without apology!” They also held up signs reading “Keep your rosaries off my ovaries” and “keep your theology out of my biology.”

Last year, eight of the group’s frenzied members were arrested by police after blocking the peaceful march. Major media outlets predictably failed to report it.

No arrests were made this year, but police held out handcuffs while facing the activists, many of whom wore Planned Parenthood and NARAL paraphernalia.

MRC Culture (MRCC) asked one woman with a Planned Parenthood sign, “When you do think a baby becomes a person?”

“I’m not sure,” she responded. “I’m positive I believe in first trimester abortions. And that is when the majority of abortions happen, and that is what I’m here to fight for.”

When asked about third trimester abortions (“Do you think a that the baby is a person then?”), the abortion supporter called abortion a “personal healthcare decision”.

“That’s not my call,” she said. “I think that’s up to the woman and her doctor.”

Another abortion supporter told MRCC, “Raising a child is not a joke. Being pregnant is not enough reason to bring a child into a world where it is not wanted. … We’re not about killing babies. We’re about freedom. We’re about the choice.”

“We’re about the continuation of life, after life already happens,” she continued. “A baby is not a fetus is not baby is not a fetus. Period.”

When asked when the baby does become a person, the woman said, “When a child is born and living outside of its mother.” The woman declined to describe the difference between a baby inside and a baby outside the womb.

A third pro-abortion woman declared, “We’re protesting for every woman’s right to be able to choose what happens with their body and to eliminate the oppression by the patriarchy and the sexist system that we life in.”

She also said she believed a fetus “becomes a baby when it’s born.”

“The baby inside, when most women get an abortion, it is not a child yet, it is a clump of cells,” she insisted. “So you can’t really say that we’re killing babies.”

Katie Yoder and Malread McArdle, Newsbusters 28 Comments [1/27/2016 4:04:20 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Demon Duck of Doom

Quote# 116361

Yeah, research like the fraudulent "gay gene". The old "science" label, the most effective propaganda tool in use today.

"There has been no single gene identified as a basis for sexuality - either homo or hetero. If you would like links to various research efforts that have been, and are currently being, done on determining the basis for sexuality, i'd be happy to provide them."

I didn't say there was, just a fraudulent claim there was by some sodomite "scientist" desperate for acceptance.
Had enough propaganda on the subject in psychology class."

Goodness knows people make claims all the time that are not backed by actual science. The one you mentioned is an example, as is the claim by some that sexuality has been proven to have no genetic basis. Those claims, however, do not change the fact that the basis for sexuality is unknown. What 'propaganda on the subject' did you receive in psychology class?"

Ex-gays have the genetic thing covered. There was perfectly good science before gays had it removed.
Psychology class: "Here is a CT scan of a hetero male, here is one of a gay male, see the difference? That proves they were born that way." No, there could be many explanations for the difference, perhaps one guy had a head ache, maybe addictive personality shows up differently, maybe...

Oboehner, Christian News Network 16 Comments [1/27/2016 4:03:11 PM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 116358

David J. Stewart Is Not Saved:
His “Jesus-Is-Savior” Denies “Jesus-Is-Lord”!

David J. Stewart is a very gifted individual. Without a doubt! I mean, after all, he is a prophet, and his Web site bears it out! Why not check it out… that is if you can take the heat:

What a scorcher of a Web site! However, all is not well with David J. Stewart, and that’s what this expose’ is all about. In fact ‘Brother’ Stewart has a very serious problem with his neck… and the following is only a sample of what he’s had to say about it (http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Testimonies/no_one_knows_your_pain.htm):

“In March of 2004, I began to experience pain in my neck in the back of the lower neck, where the bone is located. The pain persisted. When the pain hadn't gone away after two weeks, I knew something was wrong. My neck was also VERY tense 24/7. I had NEVER experienced anything like this before… I finally had neck surgery in July of 2009. Unfortunately I've had ZERO improvement as far as pain relief and tension in my neck… The bony area of the back of my neck feels like it's ready to burst all the time, from within. I'm suffering in so much pain, even with the medications.”



Thermal Chart
August 2006 thermal scan - black bar pinpoints location and intensity of problem.

So, now that you’ve been shown ‘Brother’ Stewart’s physical problem, please allow me to show you (from God’s Holy Word) the spiritual problem that caused it:

“The yoke of my transgressions is bound by his hand: they are wreathed, and come up upon my neck: he hath made my strength to fall, the Lord hath delivered me into their hands, from whom I am not able to rise up.” (Lamentations 1:14 KJV)

That’s what “thus saith the Lord” about ‘Brother’ Stewart’s neck problem. And the following is a picture of the typical “yoke” that fits around the neck at the base of the skull (in the same location that ‘Brother’ Stewart is experiencing all of his pain):

Yoke


That’s a yoke, and this is what Webster’s 1828 Dictionary has to say about it:

Yoke, n. [G., L., Gr.]
1. A piece of timber, hollowed or made curving near each end, and fitted with bows for receiving the necks of oxen; by which means two are connected for drawing. From a ring or hook in the bow, a chain extends to the thing to be drawn, or to the yoke of another pair of oxen behind.
2. A mark of servitude; slavery; bondage.

So, are you starting to see a clear picture of ‘Brother’ Stewart’s neck problem in Lamentations 1:14? Well, let me help you out. In general terms the word “transgression” means “sin, revolt, or rebellion”. And with that in mind, we have the following simplified version of God’s Word to ‘Brother’ Stewart: “The yoke of ‘Brother’ Stewart’s sin is come up upon his neck.”

"fmh", FMH Children's Club International 29 Comments [1/27/2016 4:02:31 PM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: whatever

Quote# 116357

[On the attacks on women by Muslim men in Cologne on New Year's Eve:

What happened is inevitable and it will go on happening. More surveillance cameras and patrols won't stop it. Instead, as in the UK, it will go underground. Muslim men will groom and abuse troubled girls. The authorities will turn a blind eye until a decade later the story gets too big to be covered up. And by then thousands of lives will be ruined. The only way to stop it is to keep it out of Europe and America.

Islam was a declaration of war against women and non-Muslims by Mohammed and his followers. From the mob outside the Cologne cathedral to the rape rooms of the Islamic State, Mohammed's followers continue fighting the dead warlord's brutal and ugly war against women.

[...]

Merkel made this mess. And the only way to undo it is to undo Germany's asylum policies and likely its membership in the European Union. The migrant wave has fundamentally altered Germany's demographics in a way that makes the country hostile to women. The only way for women in Europe to have a future is to fight the migration mob. Otherwise what happened outside the Cologne cathedral, what happens to 99% of women in Egypt and what happens to the Islamic State will be their future.

Daniel Greenfield, Frontpage Mag 9 Comments [1/27/2016 4:02:14 PM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 116355

Can A Man Still Lust After A Woman That Dresses Modestly?



YES! If a woman wears a long dress, I believe a man can still lust after her. If the woman honestly followed the Biblical guidelines on modest living and a man were to lust after her, obviously, the man is committing the sin and NOT the woman living modestly. BUT! If the woman dresses modestly the best possible way she can, but she wants the man to look at her, then yes, both the man and woman are sinning together. When a woman wears pants, subconsciously, she wants the man to look upon her with lustful thoughts. Whether she that's her intention or not. Just because a woman dresses modestly doesn't mean men won't lust after her. According to 1st Timothy 2:9, a woman should:

"In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;"

Notice that a woman should also adorn herself with shamefacedness and sobriety. That, then, must mean that if a woman dresses modestly, she can still have men to lust after her if she isn't conscious of her appearance! A woman that embellishes herself in modest apparel (dresses modestly), must embellish herself with shamefacedness ( or humble herself tremendously), must also embellish herself with SOBRIETY (or be very conscious of her appearance and surroundings)! Just because a woman dresses modestly, doesn't mean she isn't guilty of committing Adultery with other men as stated in Matthew 5:28. She has to also ADORN herself (embellish, make beautiful in the sight of God her virtue) shamefacedness and sobriety! No two ways about it!

If a woman sits improperly, she has made it possible for men to lust after her even if she is wearing a long dress! If a woman so as much looks at a man improperly, so as by means of enticing him, she will have committed adultery with the man. If a woman walks improperly, she can cause other men to sin. Just because a woman dresses modestly, doesn't mean that she can't commit other men to lust after her body. In order for the woman to be guiltless before God if other men lust after of her, she must not only adorn herself in modest apparel. But, ALSO adorn herself with shamefacedness and SOBRIETY--She must be conscious of everything she does. How she walks, talks, looks, or when she sits down.

I believe if a man can still lust after a woman even when she followed Bible guidelines to a T, the sin is on the man’s part. Which means, that the man is a total pervert that can’t control himself and needs Jesus Christ to save him from his curse! (2nd Peter 2:14) Let me also assure you, if a woman follows Bible guidelines on modesty, the chances of a man lusting after her are extremely slim and I doubt it would happen once if not at all in her entire lifetime!

That doesn't mean, though, that a woman can get away with sin if she wears pants and follows Biblical guidelines! When a woman wears pants, the chances of a man to lust after her are GREATLY increased whereas if a woman simply wears a modest dress! That is why I'm against a woman wearing pants. It not only violates moral decency, but also destroys themselves! The same goes for miniskirts. I advise you to hear Dr. Jack Hyles sermon on "Miniskirts." You will see why wearing miniskirts are just as bad--if not worse, when a woman wears pants! The Bible clearly tells us in Matthew 5:28 that if a man will lust after a woman, then she is just a guilty of sin as he is! If a woman follows Bible guidelines on modest living, I HIGHLY doubt a man will lust after her. If a man were to lust after her, then, I believe, the sin is on the man’s part; NOT the woman's!

"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery WITH her already in his heart."

Humbly, in Jesus’ name,

robert j. stewart, diveded by the truth 27 Comments [1/27/2016 4:00:49 PM]
Fundie Index: 16

Quote# 116354

As we have noted in the past, much of environmentalism and its stepchild global warming/climate change is based upon religious belief rather than scientific data. With the statements of Pope Francis, which align with similar Buddhist/Hindu/Islamic, etc. statements, there is one more reason for "people of faith" to come together in common cause.

TBC Staff, The Berean Call 11 Comments [1/27/2016 4:00:41 PM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 116352

[From an article titled, "Will Twitter Declare War on Religious Conservatives?" on Twitter's new guidelines banning promotion of violence or direct attacks against others on the basis of "race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability or disease."]

What if someone perceives my post of disagreement to be a personal attack, some kind of "micro-aggression" against them? Will Twitter find it necessary to discipline me? And what happens when religious affiliation comes into conflict with sexual orientation? Will sexual expression trump religious freedoms?

[...]

Lest you think I'm manufacturing concerns out of thin air, it is well-known that Facebook has worked with major gay activist organizations to ensure that the LGBT community feels protected.

[...]

At the same time, Facebook has taken action against religious conservatives, shutting down their Facebook pages for being in violation of community standards - sometimes for simply differing with LGBT activism - while the most anti-God, anti-Christ, blasphemous Facebook pages are deemed to be in harmony with those standards.

[...]

The best thing we can do is commend Twitter for seeking to clean up their corporate act while calling them to account for double standards and hypocrisy should they occur.

Only then will we know for certain if, in the language of Animal Farm, all Tweeters are equal, but some Tweeters are more equal than others.

Dr. Michael Brown, Rapture Forums 13 Comments [1/27/2016 4:00:25 PM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 116351

(Obama) is demonic. He is headed for an awful Judgment Day - just awful. I cannot imagine what his Hell will be like, if he does not repent.

"You will be clapping and joyous when you see people tortured for all eternity?"

Nope. I will be clapping and joyous to know that people have been given their choice to spend Eternity away from the God they so hate - and that I will not be forced to spend Eternity with Hitler, Stalin, and unrepentant abortionists and pro-aborts.

WorldGoneCrazy, Christian News Network 14 Comments [1/27/2016 3:58:26 PM]
Fundie Index: 13

Quote# 116350

[The Top Ten Reasons Modesty Gets a Yawn]

My family and I have had the privilege of hanging out with some unbelievably awesome single guys lately. A big reason I say they are so awesome is that they actually care about winning the battle with lust. Most men gave up long ago. Titus talks about Cretans whose “god is their belly.” In our culture, deity seems to have migrated several inches south.
But these guys have a problem, and it’s a problem that we have to own as their sisters in Christ. Everywhere they go, women are unbelievably unhelpful. Flaunting. Revealing. Immodest. Out in the world, we wouldn’t really expect anything else, but when it’s women in the Church, that’s a different story. Over and over, our friends have lamented that Christian women just don’t seem to understand what they’re doing to their brothers. I think that’s because no one is out there trying to teach them. And guess what, ladies, that’s OUR job. The Bible says that it’s up to women to teach other women how to be discreet and chaste (Titus 2:5).But so many women can’t muster much passion about this issue. It conflicts with other values, or it just isn’t on the radar screen. So, in honor of awesome guys everywhere, I would like to present my Top Ten Reasons Why Modesty Gets a Yawn in hopes that all of us ladies can wake up, start being “teachers of good things” and consider how to provoke other women to love their brothers by making the gathering of the saints a safer place for battle-weary soldiers of purity.
10. I’m too old to be a problem.
You’re never too old to be discreet and chaste. Just because you don’t look like a teenager doesn’t mean that you don’t still need to be careful. When you’re bending over in tight jeans, your crow’s feet don’t show anyway. And if your cleavage is spilling out of your neckline, it’s likely to be a challenge whether or not you have a few gray hairs.
Even if, for the sake of argument, you really are too old to ever cause anyone to struggle, you’re still not too old to set an example for the younger women who are naively exhibiting themselves. After all, if their mothers and grandmothers are doing it, why shouldn’t they?
9. I don’t have a body like a Victoria’s Secret model, so who would ever lust after me?
This one is similar to #10 and reveals a way in which most women don’t understand men. Women think that they have to have a perfect total package to provoke anyone to lust. Actually a man will feel a twinge of arousal from seeing anything that is hyper-accentuated and immodest about a female body–even if something else is less than perfect.
8. But my husband wants me to dress immodestly.
Usually, when husbands express this, it’s because one of two things is happening (sometimes both at the same time). Either you are not paying attention to satisfying his deep desire for visual stimuli when you are alone (and wives, when you’re alone, go ALL OUT!); or he’s a lust junkie who’s getting a buzz anywhere and everywhere he can and is annoyed that he isn’t getting the same buzz from you. A man that is fighting hard will not want you to be as inconsiderate and unloving as all the women he has to put up with all day. But a man who’s wallowing in other women’s immodesty will want to pull you down into the pit with him with absolutely no regard for how many men you cause to stumble along the way. If your husband doesn’t care if other men are lusting after you, it is a huge red flag that he is probably lusting after everyone else.
7. Are you saying that if a man is lusting after a woman, that it’s her fault?!
Nope. Not even close. Lust is a sin. And if a man is committing it, God holds him and him alone accountable. I’m not advocating the Islamic stereotype “blame the woman for her own rape” kind of mentality that says that men are not responsible for themselves in the presence of a beautiful woman.
But we can help our brothers. Being immodest is like throwing a party for a bunch of recovering alcoholics and deciding to have an open bar. If your guests got totally smashed it would, of course, be their fault, but no one is going to think for a minute that you really loved them or cared about their struggles.
6. But my husband never has any trouble at all with immodest women.
Apparently, there really are a few men out there who are totally oblivious. I don’t personally know any of them, but I’ve gotten enough comments from wives insisting that their husbands are in this category that I’m willing to acknowledge the possibility. However, just like I am taking your word for it that your husband has no difficulty, you might want to consider taking my word for it that a lot of other men do.
5. If Christians look like freaks no one will want to be a Christian.
People who don’t want to be Christians don’t want to because the Gospel sounds outlandish, or because they firmly believe something else, or even sometimes because they don’t understand their own sinfulness and what they need to be saved from. That “Christians are too weird” is just an excuse, as evidenced by the “Christians are no different from anyone else” excuse that we hear equally often. God frequently asks His people to do things that make us look weird (turning the other cheek, not lying, esteeming others as better than ourselves, for example). We need to be concerned with what’s right, not what’s normal.
4. But I want to dress like my friends.
Sure, but somebody has to be a leader. Imagine how much easier it would be for your friends to be considerate in their dress if you were already doing it.
3. I want to look cute and stylish.
This is a hard one. Probably every woman really wants to have everyone think she’s beautiful, but at what cost? Is following fashion so important that it’s worth placing a stumbling block in your brother’s path? Now someone’s going to jump in right about now and say that we can be cute and stylish and modest, and, of course, that’s lovely when we can achieve it. But modesty needs to be the first priority. So often it’s the other way around, and “cute and stylish” trumps modest. When we decide that our own sense of style matters more than helping men avoid lust, fundamentally, it is just selfishness on our part.
2. Guys won’t pay attention to me if I’m dressed in a sack.
Yeah, a lot of them probably won’t. But you have to ask yourself what kind of attention you really want. Are you looking for a godly husband or a long trail of panting, drooling puppies who will abandon you in a heartbeat just as soon as another piece of meat strolls by? Quality men want virtuous women. The problem is that the world is mostly populated by non-quality men, so virtuous women necessarily get less attention. This isn’t really a problem when you consider that drooling puppies make lousy husbands (assuming they ever quit playing video games long enough get around to marrying you). You’re wasting your time if you’re trying to appeal to them.
1. But I don’t see any men lusting after me!
Ha! Yes, there are a few creepy guys out there who ogle women openly, but 99.9% of the men out there are much more subtle. They know that it’s socially unacceptable to stare, so they don’t. In fact, most men will not look at your body when you are looking at them. If your attention is on them, they’ll look at your face, nod politely, play the gentlemen. But turn around to talk to your friends, and they’re watching you out of the corners of their eyes, and it is not your face they’re looking at this time. You have no idea how many surreptitious second (and third and fourth…) looks are being stolen. You also have no idea how many of your brothers in Christ are fighting hard not to take those second looks and are feeling really beaten up by how aware they are of your body.
Our brothers’ fight deserves much more than a yawn. Be modest yourself. Share the truth with your sisters. Let’s wake up and help each other out.

Mrs. Parunak, ladies against feminism 16 Comments [1/27/2016 3:58:20 PM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 116349

[From an article titled, "Myth of the 'Moderate Muslim'":]

When it comes to the global scourge of orthodox Islam, the Western world, which Islamists expressly seek to "destroy from within," is an upside-down realm wherein objective facts, logic and reason must yield to multiculturalist make-believe, "progressive" propaganda and political correctness run amok. Faithful Muslims want to kill you, and faithless progressives seem all too happy to help them along. Look at the ongoing Muslim invasion of Europe. This progressive paradise, a burgeoning multicultural dystopia, is beginning to look an awful lot like hell on earth.

Fact: Islam is about control. The word itself means "submission." It is a socio-political pseudo-religion based upon the incoherent scribblings of one man - the "prophet" Muhammad, a warring tyrant who, as even the Quran concedes, was a murderous misogynist and pedophile. This unholy book is loosely plagiarized from the Bible's Old and New Testaments - Scriptures that, by contrast, were transcribed over centuries by roughly 40 men under the direct and divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

[...]

To be sure, "moderate Muslim" is a contradiction in terms. It is intrinsically oxymoronic. Whereas "moderate" (read: liberal) "Christians," such as those belonging to the PCUSA, embrace certain apostasies that run directly counter to the biblical teachings of Christianity (e.g., the pagan embrace of homosexual sin and child sacrifice by way of abortion), "moderate Muslims" likewise embrace an apostate version of Islam that runs directly counter to the clear teachings of the Quran.

While devout followers of Jesus Christ, who is Life - God incarnate - are, like He, characteristically peaceful; devout followers of Muhammad, the dead, child-raping, woman-beheading founder of Islam - demon incarnate - are, like he, characteristically violent. Whereas "Muslim extremists," that is, faithful Muslims, kill people extremely; "Christian extremists," that is, faithful Christians, love people, including their enemies, extremely,

Islam explicitly requires a worldwide caliphate (global domination and the violent imposition of Islamic Shariah law). This fact is not open for serious debate and is available for all to read, hear, see and, tragically, experience. Islam, therefore, is inherently at odds with freedom, democracy and the United States Constitution. While devout followers of Muhammad readily admit this reality, the suicidal left yet remains hell-bent, head in the sand, on "tolerating" itself, and the rest of us, to death.

Matt Barber, Barb Wire 5 Comments [1/27/2016 3:57:43 PM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 116347

Obsessed with his legacy, President Obama is determined to unravel America's immigration system in order to flood the country with desperately poor, illiterate peasants from the Third World, especially those from Mexico, who come to the U.S. and depress labor markets while they suck the nation's welfare state dry. Obama wants to do this in order to wash away the rule of law tainted as it is by Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence, along with whatever stubborn residue of American Revolutionary enlightenment that remains deeply embedded within the tissues of our culture and free institutions.

[...]

Progressives have long complained that the immigration system is broken, but they attach a special meaning to the word broken.

They mean it is functioning in a less than optimal manner, failing to lure every single prospective illegal alien available to wade across the Rio Grande or walk across the nation's largely undefended border with Mexico. To them, the immigration policy is a taxpayer-subsidized get-out-the-vote scheme for Democrats and the best reform they could imagine would be to abolish America's borders altogether.

Obama's amnesty plan is a step in that direction.

Matthew Vadum, Frontpage Mag 16 Comments [1/27/2016 3:53:57 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 116346

Middle East Refugees Will Destroy American Culture!

I have problems with much of American culture - movies, television, music, etc.; however, America is still the best place in the world. Our culture has degenerated for many years and it is only reasonable to attempt to slow its decline. Illegal and poorly managed legal immigration has had, is having, and will have a divisive, debilitating, and destructive influence on America.

[...]

Moreover, it is not racist but realistic to declare that accepting immigrants from most European nations would have less negative impact on America than immigrants from non-white and non-English speaking nations. Now, if my critics will stop screaming incoherently and try to stop the knee jerking (left one, of course) they will be forced to admit the statement is true. My motives can be legitimately questioned but the accuracy of the statement cannot be.

If potential immigrants have never used an indoor toilet; or never driven an automobile; teach that women are inferior to men; believe in multiple wives; think it is normal to behead a "loved one" for being raped; think it acceptable to mutilate baby girls; have no experience with freedom and no desire to be taught such; are committed to sharia law not American law; believe that death is acceptable for one who leaves "the only true religion"; have no money, skills, or desire to attain them; then only a fool would suggest they can be absorbed in American life as easily as people from European nations. Why welcome such people knowing what it will do to our nation?

Any who disagree with the above should take a trip to Dearborn, Michigan as soon as possible. Seeing is believing - except to the willfully blind.

Legal immigration should be halted for a few years although I think exceptions should be made for those Americans who marry foreigners. In addition to temporarily ending immigration we should raise our standards requiring all new citizens to recite the Preamble to the Constitution and whistle "This Land is Your Land, This Land is my Land" at the same time! Well, maybe not quite that extreme, but almost!

Stop all legal immigration now; build the wall and penalize any US business that hires an illegal alien; fine and deport all foreigners who overstay their visas; and demand that Muslim nations absorb the "refugees" fleeing from other Muslim nations.

Hey, if unlimited immigration is good, then let European and Muslim nations take in the immigrants who are "yearning to breathe free...." If it is noble, kind, and compassionate to take in an unlimited number of foreigners, then let the other advanced nations get the "blessings" of immigration. Furthermore, if Muslims are offended when I sing patriotic songs, fly the American flag, and pray to Christ, then tough luck. This is a big world so they can find somewhere else to live. There is plenty of empty space on the Arabian Desert!

If America continues to permit massive legal and illegal immigration we will eventually become a banana republic - without bananas and without a republic!

Dr. Don Boys, Don Boys 17 Comments [1/27/2016 2:52:58 PM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 116345

Why is it commendable for Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and others to loudly proclaim their ethnicity and boast of past achievements, but when a white Christian does so, everyone treats him like a bigot?

[...]

Last night I saw a video of a young Martin Luther King Jr. declare, "I am proud to be black. Black is beautiful. Someone needs to say it." That was fantastic but why was it right for him to say it about being black but wrong for me to say the same thing about being white? I will expect an answer from my critics.

[...]

Of course, I don't want to be identified with the white supremacist crowd or the clowns of the KKK because they are obvious haters. I do think it is not only right but also desirable to be proud of our heritage - whatever our heritage. Mine happens to be white Christian.

[...]

The desire to keep our nation historically American with our language, customs, values, religion, etc., is admirable and nothing to be ashamed of. Why should we want a major shift in the racial ratio, language, customs, and religion?

Dr. Don Boys, Don Boys 25 Comments [1/27/2016 4:36:12 AM]
Fundie Index: -1

Quote# 116343

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY support Erin Pizzey’s views on how feminism is undermining family life (Mail). <–Link Warning, Mature Readers Only, Explicit sidebar, I was one of the people (who went with Erin (who opened the world’s first refuge for battered women) when we confronted the feminists in the Chiswick Refuge for the first time. We were hit by a hissing, Doc Martin-booted, crew-cutted gang who had totally neglected their femininity. It was frightening. I certainly saw the writing on the wall: men would no longer know what their true role was in the family. Now — many years later– it has come true.
Men don’t know where they stand in the scheme of things, particularly when they are in a family.
Things got so bad that some refuges wouldn’t even take in male children, and girls grew up believing that all men were bad. The knock-on effect has completely undermined the whole loving balanced view of family life. Men are faced with bolshie women who don’t believe they should have to cook clean or contribute to life at home in any way.
All I can see is feminism is ugliness–the sooner it stops, the better. Let’s bring back the gentle, loving, pretty female who is proud to be a woman.

Diane Core, ladies against feminism 20 Comments [1/27/2016 4:27:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 116338

Last year, Franklin Graham joined James Dobson at an event in Colorado where the two warned against allowing gay people into churches because, according to Graham, they are representatives of "the Enemy" who wants to "devour our homes" and "devour this nation."

On his radio program today, Dobson played excerpts from his discussion with Graham at the event, in which called for Christians to keep their kids away from gay people and to take over school boards across the nation in order to remove gay-friendly programs.

"We have allowed the Enemy to come into our churches," Graham said. "I was talking to some Christians and they were talking about how they invited these gay children to come into their home and to come into the church and that they were wanting to influence them. And I thought to myself, they're not going to influence those kids; those kids are going to influence those parent's children."

"What happens is we think we can fight by smiling and being real nice and loving," he continued. "We have to understand who the Enemy is and what he wants to do. He wants to devour our homes. He wants to devour this nation and we have to be so careful who we let our kids hang out with. We have to be so careful who we let into the churches. You have immoral people who get into the churches and it begins to effect the others in the church and it is dangerous."

Graham then went on to lament that "homosexuality is taught to be okay" in schools and "that is why I want to get the school boards back" before insisting that he loves gays and therefore feels obligated to tell them that "you cannot stay gay and call yourself a Christian."

That eventually promoted Dobson to rail against the entire LGBT agenda by once again absurdly misunderstanding bisexuality.

"You know what the 'B' stand for?" Dobson asked. "Bisexual. That's orgies! That is lots of sex with lots of people!"

Franklin Graham and James Dobson, Right Wing Watch 30 Comments [1/27/2016 4:25:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 12
Submitted By: Ibuki Mioda

Quote# 116332

Satan's End Times Surgery

Academia, it is becoming more apparent each day, is serving as the devil's workshop. Specifically, for example, Yale University is being sought out to serve as the devil's operating room for carrying out an excision of truth in an area that is most troubling to him in restricting his end of days stratagem.

[...]

Lucifer has "enlightened" (seduced) the world's religionists to a large extent to his seductive whispers proclaiming God is love. Anyone who denies that God is love must be put within the theologically and politically correct detention camp - the gulag - where haters must be dealt with appropriately. Anyone who claims that God condemns is a hater, a bigot, a person filled with an inhuman phobia of one sort or the other.

[...]

This is the surgery Satan is attempting to perform - cleaving the love portion of religiosity from the judgmental.

Terry James, Rapture Forums 17 Comments [1/27/2016 3:58:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 116330

In the wake of brutal police murders of young Black men, a popular resistance began to form. This movement was known as “Black Lives Matter” (BLM) Officially according to the organization it began in July 2013 after the acquittal of George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin. In June of this year I said that the movement was nearing its end; and that it had only a few months left to it. This appears to be the case now. The movement is on its last legs, the steam it came on with has blown itself out.

Don’t mistake my words here for some kind of celebration. Most leftist groups in the U.S. are still in denial over the movement’s fate. What was once a loud and proud resistance has become little more than a part of the “cuck” jokes about Bernie Sanders. What was once a declaration of war against oppressors has become little more than the obnoxious behaviour of a few self-involved individuals.

So what happened? Essentially what I predicted would happen: liberals took over the movement. It was born out of a radical need to fight killings by police. A real physical defense against police oppression was being organized. Truly radical ideas like self-defense forces were being organized. Unfortunately the mass of the movement are liberals, not radicals. The majority of Black people in America aren’t leftist radicals, they’re liberals who vote Democrat. BLM is made up of liberals with a few radical elements around the fringes. These fringe radical elements are the exception, not the rule.

I said that liberals were going to overtake the movement and co-opt it. Once that took place the movement was sabotaged. Liberals are not interested in radical change, they’re interested in getting concessions. Radical elements were deliberately purged from the movement. This is what the Austin chapter of BLM did:

That’s a consideration that’s come into question since news broke that the city would host three discordant rallies at the same time this Saturday morning. Members of the 1312 Project did not respond to calls from the Chronicle, but Margaret Haule, who spoke on behalf of Black Lives Matter, quickly made it known that her organization is “not to be confused” with the 1312 Project. “We don’t do things that are considered illegal,” she explained. “We’re not trying to get a bad rap. We’re more transparent and open. It’s important that people see there are people playing an active role in the community.”

Essentially the 1312 Project opposed (and rightfully so) the Police Lives Matter (PLM) movement. However, the BLM wanted to support the PLM. This collaboration is with Police Chief Art Acevedo:

Acevedo said he spoke with members of Black Lives Matter about national and local policy changes they want implemented to ensure equality, and added he agrees with the majority of them. He also said what the group would like to see in regards to police relations is only a small part of the entire movement.

“All they want is to have police officers that are respectful, that treat people as part of the community and don’ treat them like they’re an occupying army and we get that,” Acevedo said.

This act is an outright collaboration with the enemy. The 1312 Project was purged from BLM because it had a radical agenda that challenged the police. There were not without comment on the matter:

On Monday morning, Sept. 14, an anonymous member of the anti-police-brutality activist group the 1312 Project – shorthand for “All Cops Are Bastards” – posted a message on Facebook announcing a change of plans. This Saturday, Sept. 19, the group will send its membership to rally at the Capitol rather than APD headquarters. “It appears as though some organizers’ desire to control this movement has resulted in, at best, police collaboration and, at worst, the active selling out of other organizers,” read the note. “We see this as a breach in camaraderie that puts those of us who were planning on meeting at APD headquarters in far more danger.” The seven-paragraph message concluded with an edict: “Fuck the cops, fuck politicians, and stay savvy,” it read.

The fact is in the first world the more successful you are, the more you’ll be co-opted. At this point BLM is an empty shadow of what it was intended to be. The mainstream media and political establishment aren’t even opposed to it. News networks are now using terms like ‘white privilege’ and going over the recent history of police violence. Politicians are voluntarily meeting with the group, including presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. If the establishment doesn’t see it as a threat, you’re not challenging the system.

Why did this happen? Long story short: there is no social base for revolution in the first world. Radicals begin resistance groups to challenge the power of an unjust system. The problem is that the masses of the American people don’t want to do revolution. Often they face very oppressive conditions, such as the police killings of young Black people. However, they have no desire to overthrow the system which causes that oppression. They only wish to have that oppression stop. There is no social base for these radical groups to lead. There are only liberal Democrat Party supporting reformers. The liberals co-opt these radical movements because there isn’t any significant number of radicals to follow them.

The truth radical groups are not accepting, is that Black people in America don’t want a civil war to bring about a whole new society. All they really want is the same wealth and privileges that White people have. Radical groups however, continue to pull quotes from the 1960s Black Panthers and act as though we still exist in those times. Just because radicals want to take radical action, does not mean that the mass of Blacks in America want to take radical action themselves.

There definitely needs to be a coordinated radical action against the racist U.S. police state. Unfortunately there isn’t the social base, nor the organization for such a thing to happen.

Jason Unruhe, Maoist Rebel News 15 Comments [1/26/2016 5:50:59 PM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: Yuu

Quote# 116329

An uncomfortable truth that must be acknowledged, Trotskyists have more influence in the first world than Maoists do. If we are honest with ourselves, we’ll see that Troskyists are a growing influence in the U.S., while the Maoists are declining. We must see past the vitriol, and our feelings towards the reactionary Trotskyism to see the truth.

Where are the Maoists in the Untied States? Immediately we think Bob Avakian’s RCP, or even the Kasama project. Of these two groups, the RCP is still alive, however reactionary. Outside of these two groups we have collage activist circles trying to pass themselves off as legitimate revolutionary movements. The New Communist Party (a.k.a. the New York Maoists) has proclaimed itself to be “the leaders of the Maoist rebellion of New York.” The Revolutionary Communist Party of Canada literally claims to be doing People’s War. Both of these statements are utter nonsense, there is no war going on, there is no rebellion or armed struggle taking place. At best each is a few handfuls of people. They’re both collage activist groups composed of mostly upper-middle class twenty-somethings, whom one would be surprised if they even owned a gun.

Now, contrast this with the strength and popularity of Trotskyist groups. The ISO (International Socialist Organization) is a primary example. They’re a very large political group that stretches across many countries. They can even be found in places like Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Take a look at all the noise being made around Kshama Sawant in Seattle. A minor position in a city council is significant when compared to the influence and power Maoists have in the U.S. Socialists all across the first world are enamoured with her victory and it has garnered her Trotskyist group (Socialist Alternative) a lot of support. Her actions have also driven a lot of people towards Bernie Sanders (even though he’s not a Trotskyist). They have legitimate union connections all across the country, while the Maoists have none. This disparity in influence and power is plain to see, if people but only look. Are these Trotskyists revolutionary groups? No, they call for social democratic reforms.

Does that mean Trotskyism is correct and Maoism is wrong? Absolutely not. Trotskyism is a terrible reactionary, racist ideology, and social imperialist on a theoretical level. All I am pointing out here are their levels of popularity. Trotskyism clearly does wield much more influence in the real world. It does this over Marxist-Leninists as well. This is by no mean a failing exclusive to Maoism. What is important here is to acknowledge the reality of the situation. One group merely pretends to be revolutionary and have no support, while the other is openly reformist and enjoys large support.

Why is this happening? Essentially, this is a symptom of First Worldism. As there is no significant presence of a proletariat in the first world, people tend towards reform not revolution. The revolutionary potential is not there. Almost all activist groups openly reject the idea of revolution, while the Maoists promote revolution over reform. It should come as no surprise that Trotskyists have more support.

First Worldism is a reactionary tendency, it must be rejected.

Jason Unruhe, Maoist Rebel News 21 Comments [1/26/2016 5:50:27 PM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: Yuu

Quote# 116327

I'm a Christian first, American second, conservative third and Republican fourth.

Ted Cruz, Yahoo! 33 Comments [1/26/2016 5:50:01 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Yuu

Quote# 116326

The cause of homosexuality, and all aberrosexuality is DIABOLICAL NARCISSISM.

The further one descends into Diabolical Narcissism, the freakier and freakier the aberrosexuality becomes. Think Charlie Sheen. Think Miley Cyrus and Linsey Lohan. Think all musloid cultures – musloids openly screw blood relatives, children and infants, animals and dead bodies, and islam ratifies this.

Celibacy and chastity have nothing to do with it and are red herrings. Don’t fall for it for a second. There is NOTHING harmful or risky about a psycho-spiritually normal person, fully and normally capable of love and thus BY DEFINITION heterosexual, directing the energy of their sexuality toward a life espoused and in service to Christ and His Holy Church.

Taking a vow of celibacy does not make a man or woman “asexual”. ASEXUALITY IS HIGHLY DISORDERED, AND A RED FLAG SIGNAL OF CEREBRAL DIABOLIC NARCISSISM. Asexuality, or CLAIMS of asexuality – which are frequently a cover for homosexuality – should be a DISQUALIFIER for the priesthood and holy orders.

The one and only normal “sexual orientation” is HETEROSEXUALITY. Period. Everything else is diabolical. There is no such thing as a “benign” homosexuality, asexuality or aberrosexuality of any stripe. ALL are derivatives of Diabolical Narcissism, and thus extremely dangerous to souls, not only of the individual, but also to the people the Diabolical Narcissist comes in contact with.

Ann Barnhardt, Barnhardt.biz 25 Comments [1/26/2016 5:49:47 PM]
Fundie Index: 16

Quote# 116323

It was meant as a humorous poster to promote a secular society during a university start of term event, but the image of Michelangelo’s famous ‘Creation of Adam’ fresco featuring the satirical deity the Flying Spaghetti Monster has sparked an unlikely freedom of speech row.

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster came about as a humorous response to the teaching of intelligent design in American schools in 2005. It has since caught on as an anti-religion statement and become popular with secular societies on British university campuses.

The offending poster was put up at London South Bank University last week by non-religious students from the South Bank Atheist Society, only for it to be reportedly removed by student union officials for being “religiously offensive”.

Initially the secular student society reported it was told that “Adam’s genitals” were the issue before union officials allegedly told them the posters caused “religious offences” and their stall was banned from the start-of-term student event.

South Bank University Student Union, The Independent 19 Comments [1/26/2016 5:47:00 PM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 116321

Jews vs. Israelites

Q) ARE THE SO-CALLED NEGROES IN AMERICA AFRICANS? NO!
A) THEY ARE THE REAL HEBREW ISRAELITES (JEWS)!

Read Exodus 11:7 "...That ye may know that the Lord doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel. It's not about COLOR it's about BLOODLINE. The Africans (dark skinned people) descend from Ham;
read Genesis 10:6 while the Israelites come from Shem, Genesis 10:22 (chapter 11 shows the lineage from Shem to Abraham). THE REAL JEWS ARE BLACK (referring to people of brown color) ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE.
Read Jeremiah 14:2 - "Judah mourneth (in sorrow) and the gates (the leaders) thereof languish (grow weaker), they are black unto the ground (meaning different shades of brown).
Read Isaiah 29:22 "...Jacob (Israel) shall not now be ashamed, neither shall his face now wax pale (meaning the Jews would never be Caucasians). We went into slavery because we broke the laws of THE MOST HIGH,
read Deuteronomy 28:15-68. (Read verse 68 especially; it describes the Israelites being sold into slavery by way of "ships") And the Lord shall bring thee into Egypt (bondage) again with SHIPS, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shall see it (Jerusalem the homeland) no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your ENEMIES (the whiteman) for bondmen and bondwomen (slaves), and no man shall buy (save) you.

THE ONLY WAY TO GET OUT OF THE CURSES IS TO REPENT AND KEEP THE LAWS. Read Deuteronomy 28:1-14, 2 Chronicles 7:14.

Q) IS CHRIST A SO-CALLED NEGRO ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE?
A) YES!

Read: Hebrews 7:14 - 'For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood'.
Jeremiah 14:2, Revelation 1:1, 13-15, Daniel 10:5-6: ALL OF THE PROPHETS THAT WROTE THE BIBLE WERE OF SO-CALLED NEGROID OR SO-CALLED INDIAN DESCENT.
Also read Lamentations 4:2, 8, Job 30:30, Song of Solomon 1:5-6, Jeremiah 8:21, Exodus 4:4, 6-7, Acts 21:37-39. THEY CALLED THE DISCIPLES NIGER!
Read: Acts 13:1 "NIGER" is a latin word that means black (refering to people of brown color.

Does Jesus (Yahawashi) color matter? Yes. Do not let any wolf-in-sheep clothing, slick willy, preacher in a cheap suit fool you.

Read: St. John 8:32, 17:17, 4:24: If Christ color doesn't matter why do all the ghetto churches in the hood (especially in the south) have a image of a white Jesus. For hundreds of years he was potrayed as being 'white' but as soon as the truth comes out that he is a very dark skinned negro all of a sudden color doesn't matter. CHRIST IS A BLACK MAN - accept it or not the truth is the truth. The brothers in the street teaching the Word will testify that the people who have a hard time accepting this is not the so-called white people or other nations; it's the so-called blacks and hispanics (Israelites) in the ghettos of Amerikkka. Read Hosea 4:6 - "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy GOD, I will also forget thy children."

Other negroes (JEWS) in history: King James, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Shakespeare, the pharoahs of Egypt from the 14th to the 18th dynasties, King Author and the Knights of the round table, Robin Hood, Beethoven, Constantin the great, Spartacus, Hannibal, and Nostradamus just to name a few, whose true images have been changed and white washed.

Q) DOES THE HOLY BIBLE PROPHESY THE ENSLAVEMENT OF THE 12 TRIBES OF ISRAEL?
A) YES!

Read: Deuteronomy 28:15, 47-48, and especially 68: "And the Lord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for BONDMAN (slave men) and BONDWOMAN (slave women), and no man shall buy (save) you. When you research the original name of the land of Egypt, it was called MIZRAIM. It is a Greek word meaning BONDAGE.
Read Exodus 20:2: We went into slavery because we broke the laws of The Most High (YHWH) and the only way to get out of the hellish conditions that we are in is to come back to the laws, statutes, and commandments of The Most High.
Read 2Chronicles 7:14: Instead of humbling ourselves, confessing our transgressions, and coming back to The Most High (YHWH) we still continue in our wicked ways, and continue to follow esau (the white man) the devil and father of all lies. Our people are rebellious and stiffhearted (read Ezekiel 2:3-6).

Q) WHAT MUST THE 12 TRIBES OF ISRAEL DO TO SURVIVE AS A NATION?
A) RETURN TO THE HOLY LAWS, STATUTES, COMMANDMENTS & GATHER TOGETHER

Read: Zephaniah 2:1 "Gather yourselves together, yea, gather together, O nation not desired",
Isaiah 34:16 "Seek ye out of the book of the Lord, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them".
Also read: Job 8:8, Deuteronomy 32:7, 2 Chronicles 7:14, Jeremiah 4:1, Malachi 3:7-18, 1st John 3:10-24, and Zephaniah 3:8 "Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the Lord, untill the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy."

Q) WHO ARE THE TWELVE TRIBES OF ISRAEL TODAY?
A) See Below...
1. JUDAH.................AFRICAN AMERICANS
2. BENJAMIN............WEST INDIANS
3. LEVI....................HAITIANS
4. SIMEON...............DOMINICANS
5. ZEBULON.............GUATEMALA TO PANAMA
6. EPHRAIM.............PUERTO RICANS
7. MANASSEH..............CUBANS
8. GAD.........................AMERICAN INDIANS
9. REUBEN...................SEMINOLE INDIAN
10. NAPHTALI...............ARGENTINA
11. ASHER.....................COLUMBIA TO URUGUAY
12. ISSACHER...............MEXICANS

Lions of Israel, The Real Jews Are Black 30 Comments [1/26/2016 3:46:03 AM]
Fundie Index: 26

Quote# 116320

JESUS CHRIST (YAHAWASHI) IS A BLACK MAN

Read: Revelation 1:1, 13-15, Daniel 10:5-6: If Christ walked the Earth today he would be known as a so-called 'black' man. That is the truth that esau (so-called white man)and some of our ignorant people (Israelites) always run away from. They use the cliche 'what does Jesus' color matter'; it matters for truth sake.

Read St. John 4:24, 8:32, and 17:17: Our people (Israelites) cling to a false image of a dirty blond hair, blue eyed, hippy looking, rock star homo that the world considers to be JesusChrist found hanging on the walls of ghetto churches, bodegas, homes, cathedrals, kingdom halls, and just about anywhere they feel the need to post up that graven image. In reality that man's actual name is Cesare Borgias, a murderer, pervert, liar, and the second son of pope Alexander the 6th of Rome. It is a false image of Christ painted by Michelangelo during the renaissance period. The picture to the right is a more accurate depiction of Christ that can be found in the King James 1611 version of The Holy Bible.



Revelation 1:14-15 "His head and his hairs were white like wool (the wooly textured hair of the negroes - black people), as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace." Jesus Christ skin color is so dark that the Bible compares it to brass that had been BURNED in furnace! SO JESUS CHRIST IS A VERY DARK SKINNED BLACK MAN.

What about the 12 tribes of Israel? Yes, they are black too.

Read Isaiah 29:22, Jeremiah 14:2, Lamentations 4:8, 5:10, Job 30:30, Song of Solomon 1:5, Acts 21:37-39, Exodus 2:17-19, Numbers 12:9-12.

Are the angels black? Yes, read Ezekiel 1:7, 27-28.

For hundreds of years the white man (esau) has tried effortlessly to white wash the true image of Christ and the saints. But in these last days the truth is being revealed more and more. The information age; with books, the world wide web, and knowledge at everyone's fingertips, has made ignorance no excuse for those who seek The Most High (YHWH) through Christ.

This is the image our people love to post up in their homes and businesses. If only they knew that the man on the left is the same as the one on the right. His name is Cesar Borgias and he is a filthy, stinking, incestuous, homo, murdering, adulterer who had syphilis. That man was beneath the status of a dog yet the 'history' books paint a valiant and shrewd picture of the damn faggot. He posed as the image of Christ and to this day the world still believes it. Our people need to read more and do their research instead of getting caught up with the distractions of the world. Do not worship this image - you are breaking the first commandment (Exodus 20:2-3) Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

HOW TO REPENT FROM SIN



TAKE THESE IMAGES OUT OF YOUR HOMES, FROM AROUND YOUR NECKS, AND WRISTS, OFF YOUR SKINS, AND WHEREVER ELSE YOU HAVE THEM. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!!! (EXODUS 20:3-4)

Repentance: Repentance is the confessing, forsaking, and amending of sin and returning to keeping of the Laws, Commandments, Judgements, Ordinances, and Testimonies of The Most High (YHWH). Proverbs 28:13, Ezekiel 33:14-16

Sin: Sin is the breaking of the Laws, Statutes, Commandments, Judgements, Ordinances, and Testimonies of The Most High (YHWH) which are found in the bible 1 Samuel 15:22-24.

The Most High (YHWH) commands that we, His people Israel, repent from sin, 2 Chronicles 7:14: "If my people which are called by name (Israel) shall humble themselves (put away pride and confess sin) and pray (to The Most High YHWH not false gods) and seek my face (search scriptures and find out what The Most High YHWH says is right or wrong on every matter) and turn from their wicked ways (stop breaking His Laws, Statutes, Commandments, Judgements, and Ordinances) then will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins. This clearly shows that if we, Israel, repent when we make an error, mistake, and committ sin then The Most High (YHWH) himself will forgive us. This proves repentance (turning from sin) is an actual commandment given to Israel by The Most High (YHWH).

Read Jeremiah 18:8, Proverbs 24:16. Further evidence of this is found in Ezekiel 14:6: "Therefore say unto the house of Israel thus saith The Most High (YHWH), repent and turn yourselves from your idols. Repentance from breaking His laws is commanded by The Most High (YHWH) to his people Israel.

Read Ezekiel 18:30-31. Repentance in the past was done through the sacrifice of an animal for sin Leviticus 4:1-35. Repentance today is done through the Messiah's sacrifice for the sins of Israel, Matthew 26:26-28, Acts 5:29-31. What this basically means is that if a sinner takes all of these steps and actions then they have a chance that their sins will be forgiven by The Most High (YHWH). If not, then The Most High (YHWH) will not forgive their sins.

Read Leviticus 26:14-19, 1 Samuel 15:22, Proverbs 28:9, 13-14, 18, Proverbs 29:1, Ezekiel 3:19, 33:9.

Lions of Israel, The Real Jews Are Black 25 Comments [1/26/2016 3:45:51 AM]
Fundie Index: 19

Quote# 116319


So here is the idea.....science does not yield or even observe morality since it only observes behaviour and yet we still have the issue of morality. Since it is beyond natural explanations it is supernatural

On stage before it wore off., Religion and Ethics 22 Comments [1/26/2016 3:45:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 19
Submitted By: Nearly Sane