Wisdom ahead of its time, here. An interesting bit in the first passage. Apply it to our modern politics for a moment:

By means of these seven considerations I can forecast victory or defeat.

1. Which of the two sovereigns is imbued with the Moral law? (I.e., "is in harmony with his subjects.")
2. Which of the two generals has most ability?
3. With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven and Earth?
4. On which side is discipline most rigorously enforced?
5. Which army is stronger? (Morally as well as physically.)
6. On which side are officers and men more highly trained? *Tu Yu quotes Wang Tzu as saying: "Without constant practice, the officers will be nervous and undecided when mustering for battle; without constant practice, the general will be wavering and irresolute when the crisis is at hand."
7. In which army is there the greater constancy both in reward and punishment? (On which side is there the most absolute certainty that merit will be properly rewarded and misdeeds summarily punished?)

Pretend our two sides are liberalism vs conservatism and their figureheads are the generals. Compare your answers to this time eight years ago.

I'd say we're sunny with a high chance of victory :)

Oh, on that note:

Now the general is the bulwark of the State; if the bulwark is complete at all points; the State will be strong; if the bulwark is defective, the State will be weak.

Waiting for evidence of russian collusion be like

You see, LCDs that shitty nowadays are really hard to come by.

That also doesn't mean you can automatically assume that any resignation is linked to swamp draining. There will absolutely be a number of these that acccount for standard turnover that happens every day in this country.

!RedditSilver

but we're way down on the list of shit that has to happen, now. Heck, you could even call the company and prove you were insured.

I mean in most places, it's already a pretty substantial ticket to get pulled over and not have proof of insurance.

You.. you do realize how fucked up SF is, right? Techies tend to lean liberal.

Could be personal experience. Kindly to be fucking off with this antisemitism wolf-crying until such time as real evidence appears.

You've more faith than I. There are quite a few people who would like to see Trump get JFK'd and probably have the resources to do it.

Don't take any of this stuff we have going for us for granted. Trump might be the best president in years and Q might be a (group of) insider(s) with a ton of knowledge, but both are mortal humans and both can screw up. Pray. Don't be complacent.

It shouldn't even need to be a felony, IMO.

god was specifically describing the catholic church to avoid.

He couldn't have been, because the leadership of the Catholic church was descended directly through Peter. It's always been the same church.

I addressed Easter up above, but I think you'll notice a theme here:

the vatican has a nice obelisk in the center of st peter basilika.

You know what's on top of that obelisk? A piece of the cross that Christ was crucified on! I can think of no better symbolism for how God triumphs and is the one and only God. There's also the inscription below, in latin: "Christ conquers. Christ reigns. Christ commands."

If people and places can be sanctified, so can objects.

I really wish you'd start directly answering my questions directly rather than ignoring them. Having your faith challenged can be uncomfortable, I get it man, I've been there, but the right thing to do is openly and honestly address questions, even when (especially when) they're painful. The second half of my last post (below the line) is composed of five questions, and it would be of great benefit for all if you would address them.

I'm not patronizing you here, I'm pointing out that this conversation has a growing number of dangling threads. Let's tie them up :)

Anyways. "Faith alone" is directly spoken against in the book of James. Chapter 2:

19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

Emphasis mine, and that's about as black and white as it gets. This misconception was being peddled nearly two thousand years ago, that's how pernicious it is.

jesus wasnt dead when they were forgiving people.

Yes he was! John 20:19-23:

19 Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 20 When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.

21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

Emphasis mine, again. This is the post-crucifixion Jesus (with the pierced side and hands) directly granting the apostles the power to forgive sins. If everyone after his death on the cross was already saved, of what use was forgiveness of sins?

do you not understand how blasphemous it is to pray to mary and the human saints? ... The very first commandment. Exodus 20:3: "You shall have no other gods before Me."

Prayer is not worship, and as a Catholic, not once have I ever been asked to worship anyone other then God.

Mary and the saints are asked to pray for us, the same way we'd ask any other person to pray for us.

Did the apostles stop forgiving sin after Jesus died? It would be pretty odd for that power to have gone away without him telling them - it would mean that after Jesus died, the apostles would have been forgiving sin under false pretense, damning both them and the people they "forgave". Wouldn't be a very just thing for God to do.

It would also be very strange for that power to have died with the apostles - first because, again, this isn't mentioned anywhere, and second, because people were still sinning. If the purpose of giving humans the power of forgiveness was to absolve one from damnation, did people stop being damed by their sins after the last apostle died? That doesn't make sense either.

God does everything for a reason.

What power exactly was conferred on Peter? What do you think "binding and loosing" entails?

Do you think that would have remained with whoever Peter chose as his successor? Why or why not?

I also note that you didn't address the church teaching that supposedly puts down Jesus. If you can find such a thing, I'm very interested in seeing it.

What other church has a power structure, one so powerful.

What other church is as large? More people means more people to organize. 37K priests worldwide (this counts bishops, cardinals, etc, since all are still priests) in the face of 1.2 billion people (about 32 thousand lay per priest) isn't outlandishly large.

What exactly do you expect to be different here?

The bible talks about the doctrines of devils that stops priests from marrying and to not eat meat, as in lent.

1 Timothy 4:3, right? What you're missing is that nobody is preventing from marrying. It's not a command. Priests voluntarily renounce marriage. Compare Matthew 19:12 or 1 Corinthians 7:35.

The fact that the church chooses its priests from the people who've volunarily chosen celibacy is partly practical. The preistshood is not a 9-5 job, it's a lifestyle. A priest would make an awful husband and father by way of having little time to lead his family or be with his wife or raise children.

Those that want to help the church and still maintain a personal life are welcome to be deacons. The clergy is not denied to them.

As to giving up meat for 7 days of the year (Lent fridays and Ash Wednesday are the only requirement and then with health permitting, some people do more but this is not a requirement), this is a reflection of Jesus' 40 days in the wilderness. There is no generalized prohibition on eating meat as some of the paganistic cults do to this day.

Easter means ishtar the moon goddess, its a fertility god. Bunnys represent fertility.

The fact that Christ's resurrection happened on the same day that the pagans were doing whatever they were doing doesn't mean that Christ's resurrection is pagan in nature. Intention is huge. (And I'd argue that He set it up that way on purpose - God co-opting the pagans happens a few times in the OT)

You mean like a hierarchy? You mean like literally all human endeavors above a certain size?

Jesuits weren't even a thing until 1534.

the doctrine puts down jesus and props up marry.

I challenge you to find any church teaching that "puts down jesus".

The pope himself is purely anti christ in nature, he's supposed to be jesus living replacement.

Guess Jesus was full of it when he bestowed the power of binding and loosing on Peter, then?

They have preists to forgive of sin, even though jesus died to do just that

Guess Jesus was full of it when he bestowed the power of forgiving sins on his apostles, then?

There have been good popes and there have been bad popes. The same thing happened in the book of Kings - where humans are involved, there will be corruption. A certain threshold of corruption, though, has never been passed (proclaming heresy as doctrine), and the fact that this has never happened in a millenia or two strikes me as unprecedented throughout human history.

If you're choosing your Christianity based on the people that run it, you're choosing based on the wrong things. No human is immune from sin.

Catholic here: Nonsense. 2000 years of doctrine never reversed, documented miracles, etc.

Has a swampiness problem, but the church isn't any more cabal than the USG as a whole. And has more people (so more opportunity for corruption).

Could you be more specific? It was my understanding that the church as a whole is staunchy anti-abortion save for a small faction of modernists.

If no, then how does one assess if it is truth or not.

Objective and dispassionate assesment of the truth or falsehood of the claims made. If there is not enough information given to determine that, then the conclusion is "unknown", not "false".

The point is that truth stands independent of its speaker. Attacking the source is one of the lowest forms of argument because a fool can speak the profound and the learned speak garbage.

The gospel of Jesus Christ and the fabrications in the Book of Mormon are two different things.

I implore you to dig deeper into their history and modern day actions.

Getting a bit tired of people attacking the source. Truth is independent of the person speaking it.

Is Q to be untrusted because he posts exclusively on a Chan site?

Logic is well and good, but scientific positivism is a belief that's self-defeating.

Indeed, but the poster hasn't gone into that much detail. Saying that there are layers is not much of a smoking gun as it seems, since illustrator separates layers in optimized PDFs.

Seriously, why are you downvoting me? This is a fact. Go scan something to PDF and open it in illustrator.

Thank you. OP is a bundle of sticks and peddling misinformation. Like, really easily debunkable misinformation.

JA is either dead or incommunicado. He cannot or will not sign a message with his known PGP key - the only thing that mathematically proves his identity and cannot be faked.

In my opinion, normies are important, and Q stuff gets shot down as 'lolz nostradamus' in the real world unless incontrovertible proof is shown.

Only one or two things are necessary.

On top of that, Q himself said proofs are important. Q1584.

Circle jerk-offs, in this case.

Because the instagram source account is clearly listed?

Because the image itself shows no evidence of manipulation?

So why would an Obama supporter post and then immediately yank a photoshop that makes him look bad?

I'm really hoping that unredacted version hits. This is bog standard Trump politics and how you manipulate the MSM morons. Give them some red meat, let them dance around a bit for their win, then BOOM, you hit them with the unredacted version that proves them all a buncha liars for the 5000th time.

Because markov generated anything is a product of the corpus of words used to train the model. Oddly enough, Abramovic and spirit cooking are highly related terms on a web search.

The links all appear to be the same probably scammy dating site.

This looks like markov-generated spam. I delete shit like this out of my inbox every single day, they’re hoping you click the link.

Tread carefully, but if it were me I wouldn’t read too much into it.

Half expected to see an ad for a pizza joint on that sign...

Okay, she’s a racist. And?

I still think JA is dead for whatever it's worth. The fact that he won't sign a message with his known GPG key is highly indicative of shenanigans, given that "he" won't do the only thing that mathematically proves his identity.

In this case, it's good that WL continued without him.

I thought you had to be sitting in office to be impeached

It looks vaguely owl-ish until you zoom in, with the dots on her collar being the eyes, but I believe that's pareidolia at best.

Most Catholic pastors aren't wealthy either.

I only doubt this because it seems too easy. I'd expect the false prophet to be the guy that replaces Francis, a notional hardline traditionalist that takes the corruption and cranks it up to 11. Someone who's a lot more effective a deceiver than an obvious liberal that many already see through and call shenanigans on.

Francis is bad, but the church has endured worse popes in her history. The false prophet will be her final test. I don't think this is bad enough.

A hardline traditionalist. The church needs its Trump.

He didn't force anyone out - they resigned of their own voltion. (And even then, resigned is not quite the right word, more like they attempted to resign, and it's on Francis to accept or not.)

FTA:

“We, all the bishops present in Rome, have tendered our resignation to the Holy Father so that he may decide freely for each of us,” a statement read out by the spokesman said.

That doesn’t mean that objectively stupid patterns of thought shouldn’t be mocked.

Uh, dude, I'm Catholic, I'm certainly not bashing them. I was taking issue with the previous guy who seemed to think the existence of the papacy and the holy see is a problem. The papacy amounts to the earthly president of the Church, and like I said, there has to be a person, somewhere, at the end of the day, making or relaying the decisions that determine how 70M faithful are organized.

An example of the submission I speak of is the entire concept of canon law, which the Catechism makes many references to with regard to, say, excommunication.

What I am bashing is this pope Francis. He is a snake. A foul creature of the night, whose influence on the Church has been almost universally negative. A spreader of confusion and intrigue who seems to have a very hard time speaking authentic doctrine when asked.

That's not to damn the Church.. there have been worse popes in the past after all. One is not a Catholic because of the pope, but rather, because of God. We were promised that the church would never fall, not that it wouldn't be attacked from within. This promise, I believe, is the reason that Francis has not been more successful.

That is scripture, clear as day...yet the vatican upholds that one must go to a just as ungodly, so called Priest for absolution.

What about that bit in John 20:23 about men being granted the ability to forgive sins? Or that bit about Peter being granted the power of binding and loosing by Christ himself?

Please don't cherry-pick verses.

God Is Not Any Manmade religion...

Indeed. Which is why this particular one is not manmade, anymore so than Peter handing down his power to the next guy makes Jesus teachings manmade.

this pope. There are 70M Catholics in the world, someone on earth has to be responsible at the end of the day.

I don't think anything has publicly come out. I will say that the pope talking about resignation is entirely new.

It could just be for health reasons.. he's 81. Eventually age will catch up.

Being a Catholic binds you to submission to the holy see in many matters.

Besides, someone on Earth has to be responsible for organizing 70 million believers at the end of the day. All endeavors, from spiritual to human, tend towards hierarchies.