In Notables for #16452 wrong notable:
>>12889230 Democratic Rep. Andy Biggs REVEALED Pelosi and Dems were AWARE OF THE THREAT TO THE CAPITOL days before Jan 6th
Should be:
>>12889230RepublicanRep. Andy Biggs REVEALED Pelosi and Dems were AWARE OF THE THREAT TO THE CAPITOL days before Jan 6th
>>>12890727
Ok, let's try that again:
In Notables for #16452 wrong notable:
>>12889230 Democratic Rep. Andy Biggs REVEALED Pelosi and Dems were AWARE OF THE THREAT TO THE CAPITOL days before Jan 6th
Should be:
>>12889230RepublicanRep. Andy Biggs REVEALED Pelosi and Dems were AWARE OF THE THREAT TO THE CAPITOL days before Jan 6th
And again:
In Notables for #16452 wrong notable:
>>12889230 Democratic Rep. Andy Biggs REVEALED Pelosi and Dems were AWARE OF THE THREAT TO THE CAPITOL days before Jan 6th
Should be:
RepublicanRep. Andy Biggs REVEALED Pelosi and Dems were AWARE OF THE THREAT TO THE CAPITOL days before Jan 6th
Marxism was invented by the Rothschilds and the Jesuits in the 1830's,
taught to Marx in a Jesuit founded school in Trier.
The Papacy had also received a loan from the Rothschilds in the 1830's.
The Holy Roman Empire,
having been controlled by the Papacy which had crowned or excommunicated its emperors,
was disbanded in 1806,
The Pope having been captured in 1796 by the French.
The ten dynastic families of Europe that had provided the 45 emperors of the HRE,
tossed the old Harlot off their backs.
In the gap stepped the Rothschilds,
gaining control over the banks of Europe,
and thus, those same families.
The Papacy made a deal with the Rothschilds in a bid to regain at least a portion of its former control it had lost.
So this lie about the Romish church having been "infiltrated" has no standing.
It knowingly did what it did.
>huh?
>you don't have some key dates and events in there.
Negative.
The key dates are the capture of the Papacy in 1796,
and the dissolution of the empire it controlled by crowning its kings and deciding which should not be kings when they did not comply with the Popish agenda.
>or that the Catholic Church is large and vast with many different orders.
It is certainly world-wide,
infesting all the waters of the earth,
high and low,
but it is controlled by one entity:
the Papacy.
>or were they not but from EAstern Euorpe and converted with in the last 40 or 50 years?
You are trying to compress it to merely the recent history.
The path the Papacy chose,
and that which was its crossroad to Marxism,
was when it partnered with the Rothschilds.
The Papacy has never deviated from that path,
even though it has feigned being against Marxism at times.
>knowingly you use the world knowingly in a psyop to smear one group as if they are the cause of all the problems when you don't even know the History of it, and don't include various important facts of historical note, well known, about Rome and what has happend, how many times it was sacked, and who was imprisoned there for a long number of years. A leader of a church.
Not quite.
It is not a "group" of which I am speaking.
It is the Papacy,
though you may want to point away from that inconvenient truth.
>and now we have infiltrators running it and you, a propagandist knowingly (glowingly) spreading fear and division.
Again, negative.
The agenda was laid out when the Papacy linked with the Rothschilds.
As for division,
the Papacy's crusades was the foremost divider when it destroyed whole towns and villages of non-catholic people,
using the very kings it crowned,
and deposing those leaders who refused to go that route,
who instead attempted to protect those innocent people,
a people of whom the Papacy rewrote history to pretend they were Manichaens,
simply because they refused their vile imagery and their fake Jesus wafer,
and their imposed "sacraments".
Those were the physical things those true believers hated.
The Papacy even slaughtered Catholics who tried to help them.
"Kill them all,
God will sort them out."
The "division" is actually of the apostates,
who divided from the Doctrine laid down by the Apostles,
which is the true Foundation of Christ's Congregation;
and instead went the way of corrupting that Doctrine,
with the three legged stool,
the other two legs being the Magisterium and tradition.
>Satan did not create the church. He stole it.
Actually,
he did.
He sowed tares among the wheat immediately when Christ started preaching His true Gospel.
Yes,
it truly is that old.
>We have to reclaim it, not just give it to him.
That's exactly what the Catholic Reformers tried to do.
Alas and Woe,
instead the Papacy had their magistrates burn most of them at the stake.
>I've been a student of Medeterrain History for quite a while and I can say that you still miss some key dates and events, and players.
Then perhaps you could spell "Mediterranean" correctly?
As to "key dates",
would those be dates key to you?
My discussion concerned the transition period after the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire,
the expulsion of the Papacy,
and the power gained by the Rothschilds,
with the Harlot Papacy making yet another deal with the Devil to keep her control over kings and nations.
>so I won't tell you because I've discovered that much of History is obscured just so people such as yourself who read from propaganda don't know all the real dates and facts, so when you talk about it you instantly look like a fool who is out of touch with the people in the very many cities that pepper the area.
Actually, much of that obscurity of history was caused by the Papacy itself,
as it controlled many of the universities throughout Europe.
>you need to learn more.
I am always open to learning more.
That will continue until the day I am removed from this plane of existence.
>you are difficent.
God knows that.
He also knows what I need.
>I know, I'm not giving you any details.
Yet,
you berate by leaving out "key dates".
>but why should I?
Perhaps because you really don't know as much as you profess about the history of the geography you didn't even know how to spell?
>you dont' deserve the real story, you'll abuse it.
God will be the judge of what I deserve or what I don't deserve.
Thank God!
>why tell you the real sanctuary places, the hidden valley mysteries, the many other details that choose to ignore, focusing instead on a poison narrative crafted in Central Asia in the 1930s or 40s . . .
Now you are rambling.
>whatever, you're a propagandist.
Says the propagandist.
>you perhaps miss the "love that moves The Sun and other stars"
Um…..
then something, something….
>History isn't so easy to comprehend when you are filled with partisan hatred.
Ah! So your omniscience has determined my motivation is "hatred"….
>you miss the subtle truths,the stuff that no one is willing to put in a book anymore for fear of retribution, but hte signs are all around if you care to see it and read it.
Don't you mean like that "subtle" creature,
the Serpent?
>but no, you shill in a chat room an anti-Papist rant and the world has heard it all before.
But let's ignore the Papist wars against non-Catholic Christians and their own Catholics who showed love towards them.
Seeking by a familiar spirit is anathema to God.
Christ Jesus taught to pray to the Father,
who is in Heaven.
'The meaning of "to pray" is "to ask".
Asking (praying to) any other entity in Heaven to intercede is disobeying Christ,
and opening one to demonic activity.
(NOTE: Though angels were sent from Heaven by God to speak to men,
NONE of those Saints anywhere in Scripture INVOKED them.)
The claim would be this is not praying to "her".
Why the "Amen"?
There is not even one instance in Scripture where any other being in heaven was invoked by godly folk.
They knew they were only to seek God for spiritual aid and mercy.
And this is not the same as asking someone on earth to pray for you.
Praying to any other entity in heaven is not the same as asking someone on earth to pray.
This is because when Christ taught prayers directed toward Heaven,
are to be prayed to the Father.
His teaching nothing to do with asking those on earth to pray for you.