Originally Posted by
ClaytonB
I'm not disputing any facts. The difference in our views is that I am following the principle of charity, in abundance, in interpreting Trump's actions as 45, because we know that God has provided a way of escape (1 Cor. 10:13) and I want to believe that is Trump. Aka I have hope.
Matthew 7:16-20
King James Version
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
If you are judging Biden or Clinton or Obama with the same "charity" that's one thing. I haven't noticed you do that. Obama, for all of his faults, at least put the brakes on gain of function research. It was restarted December 2017 under Trump.
No real argument except that this is absolutely run-of-the-mill in DC. I don't do litmus-testing, we're a trillion lightyears beyond the point where litmus-testing would be relevant. The hurdle is so low that
Trump not starting a new war for four years is itself a Herculean accomplishment. Litmus-testing on the legalities of an EO ban on this or that firearms accessory is just not important. I understand all the slippery-slope arguments but it just really is not important.
I don't see what not starting a war has to do with setting the precedent, that Biden followed, of banning a gun accessory via executive order after the ATF said the accessory was legal. (And note that I didn't even bring up the bumpfire stock ban in this thread and Whitney Webb didn't bring it up at all in the video). If we're going to play the irrelevant good fact over comes the bad fact game, Obama stopped gain of function research in 2014, he allowed via executive order for guns to be taken into national parks and on Amtrack trains. He aslo allowed schools to opt out of Bush's "No child left behind" nonsense. And for the record I've been open on this forum and others for agreeing with Trump on the First Step Act (ending the racist 1993 Clinton/Biden crime bill and freeing a lot of non violent prisoners), permanent funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities and proposing the Plaintium Plan which is the closest a Republican president has ever come to endorsing reprations. So I don't see why you're playing the "Trump did something good" game. I never said he didn't. I put up a video that showed some specific things Trump did, either directly or indirectlhy through proxy's that he put in power. Are you interesting in actually addressing the video?
I'm going off rusty memory here, but I recall
Trump saying that Americans have the right to choose how they will be treated and that the vaccine is the best option but it shouldn't be mandatory. I don't know if there were any official acts or just speeches, either way, he took a lot of heat for espousing HCQ and other alternatives as viable options. He talked up the vaccine as the best, but said there were other options and they practically wanted to nuke the White House for him saying that.
I fairly certain that Trump never saying anything about whether or not a vaccine should be mandatory, but you're ignoring the fact that in 2020 NOBODY was saying the vaccine that Trump was championing should be mandatory! In fact during the debates, both Biden and Harris both said they would NOT take the vaccine if Trump said to take it. And again, the vaccine wasn't even ready for all of the people who wanted it until after Trump was out of office. This is like saying "Elon Musk is pushing to develop brain chips but he isn't talking about mandating them." Of course he isn't. Nobody is. The brain chips aren't even ready for voluntary mass adoption at this point. As for Trump's statements about hydroxycloroquine or ivermectin, none of those medicines have ever been conclusively proven to be effective against COVID. And yes I've read the studies. You know what has been conclusively proven to fight COVID? Sunlight, exercise and fresh air. And Trump, on advice of Dr. Fauci, pressured governors to shut down parks, beaches and exercise gyms at the same time that liquor stores were left open. As late as April 2020, Trump was tweeting against the governors of Florida and Georgia opening up. Both of those states are warmer than most of the country, especially Florida, and sunlight and heat kill all coronaviruses and Fauci knew that but lied and covered it up. That was the point of the press coference about ultraviolet light killing the virus qucikly that Trump derailed when he started talking about taking light "inside the body" and then talking about how disinfected killed the virus and there "I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning." I will give Trump credit for saying churches could be open in May 2020. But he never said anything about vaccine mandates while he was in office because it simply wasn't an issue.
My point is not irrelevant at all.
Nobody ever thinks their point is irrelevant.
The billionaire class are not our enemy, this is a standard Marxist talking-point and Webb is falling for it, starting from a different angle, i.e. that the tech-billionaires have become private extensions of the MIC.
The oligarch billionaires, tech or otherwise, that push the bailouts are the enemy and that's not a "Marxist talking point." Blackrock is not a tech company. It's a finance company that uses the levers of government for their own ends. It's corporatism that's the problem and corporatism is fascism. Fascism is the problem. People who mis-use the government for their own financial gain.
It is true that many of these tech billionaires are just fronts for the MIC but wealth by itself doesn't tell you who is on which side. And the reason for that is that our war is not against flesh and blood. So, I'm not saying to look to the government for salvation -- you will be hard-pressed to find a more anti-State participant on this forum. As for the word "block", I admit my memory is rusty and it may have been the backlash against
Trump's support for alternatives (leaving open the option to
not take the vaccine) that I'm recollecting.
Trump's actions here are actually heroic in that, at the time, the Left was treating anything less than 100% vaxx-compliance as outright murder, but
Trump and DeSantis set the stage to prick that bubble. Once Red-states saw that there was an option to not go along with the vaxx-mandate insanity, that whole line of attempted tyranny collapsed across Red-state America. And it was
Trump who was the first to make that politically possible by making sure to educate the public on alternatives to the vaxx. As far as I can tell, the only reason he wanted credit for "Warp Speed" was that they were forcing the vaxx through no matter what, and so he wanted to at least get credit for getting the job done quick.
So....you're just going to ignore the fact that the COVID bailout started before COVID and instead focus on a vaccine mandate that Trump never had the opportunity to implement even if he wanted to because the vaccines weren't ready? Seriously?
Okay. Let's go back to Ron Paul 101. End The Fed. The Federal Reserve isn't directly tied to the MIC. But it indirectly funds the MIC. But that's not ALL it funds. It's the private/public partnership that funds everything through counterfeiting that's the issue. The MIC is merely a symption of the problem, not THE problem.
Right, but there is a pattern to
how God works. Those rulers who are neutral or even friendly to God's kingdom are sometimes used as a King Cyrus, a friend of God's people who himself may be pagan. Those rulers who are openly hostile to God are dealt with in one of two ways: (a) they are ground to powder and replaced or (b) they are struck with madness, plagues, etc., humbled, and converted to belief in God, then used by God. In no case has God ever delivered his people by the hand of a wicked ruler. Pharaoh fought to the bitter end and his army was drowned in the Red Sea. Sennacherib came against Jerusalem threatening to topple Almighty God himself, and 185,000 of his army died overnight. So, an open blasphemer in the White House can only result in one of two courses of action if God is to deliver us from this present evil: (a) God grinds them to powder and replaces them, or (b) God strikes them with a plague and converts them by force. In no case will God orchestrate deliverance of his people through the hands of a blasphemer. That makes no sense at all.
This is what I call an "open blasphemer."
https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/18/polit...ess/index.html
Moderator Frank Luntz asked Trump whether he has ever asked God for forgiveness for his actions.
“I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don’t think so,” he said. “I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.”
Seriously, where is Sola Fide when you actually need him? What Trump said in ^that interview is diametrically opposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ!
Galations 2:16
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 1:8-9
King James Version
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Trump thinks he can "make right" his own sin? He can try to mitigate the consequences of hs own actions, but that's got nothing to do with God's forgiveness. That's a different "gospel" than what is in the New Testament. According to Paul anyone who spreads such a gospel is "accursed." You cannot make your sin "right." Only Jesus can do that. To claim that you can do what only Jesus can do is by definition blashemy.
Except one thing, even more irritating: online partisan hacks who are so myopically focused on the Trump-is-evil-incarnate narrative, that they don't even read or pay attention to the actual post they're responding to.
Please quote where I said Trump is evil incarnate. Because I didn't.
Nowhere have I said that
Trump is a person I "align with". Of all Presidents in recent memory,
Trump is the first to take a real stab in the direction of the heart of tyranny in DC, and he did that by starting no new wars, by starving the MIC.
You've sought to undercut Trump's actual appointments of evil men to positions of power and his acquiesance to the actions of those evil men are somehow just "litmus-testing Trump's social network" and somehow that's okay because Trump didn't "start any new wars." But your claim that Trump was "starving the MIC" is provably false.
Adjusted for inflation Trump increased spending for the MIC over Obama. Anyhow, you give Trump credit for not starting any new wars. I give Obama credit for putting the brakes on gain of function research for 2014 until the ban was lited in December 2017 under Trump. Which cost more lives? Obama's wars in Libya and Syria or the COVID-19 pandemic?
So yes, that got my attention, and I will acknowledge that was a brave course of action. I could list 100 different things that
Trump could do to improve, but if he gets in and accomplishes only
one thing as 47,
do more of what he did as 45 and keep starving the MIC. Another 4 years of no new wars would be a great continuation of 45!
Except it's an absolute falsehood that Trump was "starving the MIC."
God "works through" all things without exception, Romans 8:28, including actual evil. But when it comes to the way in which God works for the deliverance of his people, it's not merely a question of whether God is sovereign over history, or not. Rather, it's a question of
honor. Will God honor Biden in anything whatsoever? Absolutely not. Will he give him even the honor of being a pagan that allies with believers to orchestrate the deliverance of believers? No way! Anyone who is in open blasphemy of God can be used by God as a public figure in any way, shape or form. They can only be destroyed or ignored by him. God has clearly been ignoring POTUS for all the time I've been voting age (late 90's) and probably long before that. A POTUS that will at least acknowledge God in a minimal way ("go through the motions") and refrain from espousing openly blasphemous views/policies, perhaps that is someone God would publicly use. Otherwise, God does not need even POTUS, he has 100 million harvest angels (Rev. 5:11), chomping at the bit to torch this entire planet and sift the ashes.
Trump has stated open blasphemy and has not acknowledge God's sole role in atoning for or "making right" his sins.
I don't think he even understood the question. I have no opinion whatsoever about
Trump's standing before God. He may be the worst man on earth, or the best, only God knows that. What I do know, is that
Trump is not openly blaspheming God (supporting abortion, while claiming the mantle of "Christianity"), he is not actively oppressing the church (Wokism), and so on. As a citizen, this is the minimum requirement I have for any civil servant, and the rest is between that individual and God.
Matthew 15:9 "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Supporting abortion rights is NOT blashpemy! In fact it's borderline blasphemy to call it blasphemy. Have you ever actually read the Roe v Wade opinion? I'm guessing you haven't. The opinion itself actually looks at all of the major U.S. religous traditions at the time, Protestantism, Catholocism and Judaism, and wrote that into the opinion. Protestantism has never as a whole taken a position that abortion is murder. Judaism doesn't take that position etither. It's Roman Catholocism that takes the exteme position that life begins at conception and that position leads to some absurd results. For intance recently in Alabama the IVF industry was thrown into chaos because the Alabama judiciary concluded that since abortion was banned from conception, that must mean the destruction of embryos was akin to killing human beings which opened up IVF clinics to wrongful death lawsuits. The Republican controlled legislatture scrambled to pass a bill to block this obviously logic, but wildly unpopular result. Republican U.S. Senator Kate Britt of Alabama also introduced leglislation to strip federal funding from states that restricted IVF clinics, but ironically it's only Republican states that ended up doing that.
There is no scripural basis for your belief that disagreeing on aboriton is blasphemy. It's not attributing to oneself the power of God like Trump did when he claimed he could fix his own sin. People can disagree on when life begins and still be Christians People can't claim to be able to fix their own sin problem and still be Christians. You're substituting belief with your position with blasphemy. And for the record, JD Vance has confirmed that Trump would veto a national abortion ban.
Correct. However, they are each the face/front of something else behind them. That "something else" is the thing that I'm talking about.
It's not that simple, either. Many people get involved in occult, and later escape it. So, our battle is
truly not with flesh and blood, meaning, not with other humans-as-humans. There is no group of humans that, if we could just wipe them out, would finally restore peace in this world. Thus, we are not called to that. Rather, we are called to spiritual warfare, which begins with Scripture, prayer and fellowship with other believers - the church. While Satan's strongholds have a lot of overlap with the secret societies, it is not a 1-to-1 map.
Read the entire verse.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
You know what is an example of "spiritual wickedness in high places?" What you dismissively call "social networking." William Barr being put in a position to cover up the murder of his associate's daughter's boyfiend Jeffery Epstein is an example of "principalities and powers" and "spiritual wickedness in high places." But you're just going to ignore that because you're thankful for what Trump did regarding abortion.
Nope. I actually use my brain and don't settle for partisan factionalism, which is why you can't understand anything I say.
I can't understand what you say because some of what you're sauying is PROVABLY false! Like claiming Trump blocked the vaccine mandates or claiming Trump starved the military industrial complex when he actually increased military spending! And that's even worse considering that Trump increased the spending without a new war to justify it! But I get it now. Abortion is your big issue and you'll ignore Trump's blaphemous statements, his elevating evil men to positions of power, his going along with what those evil men did and everything else because....abortion. Okay. Got it. I understand now. I just disagree.
Right. You're anti abortion. I get it. Trump accomplished something really important to you and you're ready to overlook other issues. Okay. The topic of the thread isn't "Trump is evil incarnate." It's litteally about issues that I feel are important. One of the most important issues is how COVID happened. And to unravel any conspiracy to have to folllow the money trail. And the money trail goes back to 2019 and how one of Trump's advisors got the bailout going prior to thw WHO even declaring COVID an emergency. That's the entire reason I posted this. And Kamala Harris is tied to the same people.
Rather, I can envision a scenario in my mind in which God uses
Trump 47 to facilitate an exodus of believers from the jaws which are already clamping down upon them, jaws which started to snap shut right after 9/11, and which are just now almost at lockjaw position.
Trump supporting face scanning cameras at the border as a "virtual border wall" (something that Biden and Harris support) helps people "escape the jaws" of the post 9/11 police state how exactly?
Edit : At at 25 minutes in, Whitney Webb makes the exact same point I'm making about the border issue and militarizing the border as another way Trump is feeding (not starving) the MIC! She talks about how calling what's going on an "invasion" is a way to manufacture consent. You're arguing against the tech billionaires? Trump is feeding (not starving) them. And she specifically ties the border militirzation, by labeling it an invasion, to inccreasing the post 9/11 surveilance state. Sorry @Anti Federalist, but @PAF has a point, regardless of how legitimate your concerns are about illegal immigration, that it's being used to set up a police state. It doesn't matter if you disagree with the face scanning cameras at airports. They're going forward because Trump and Harris both agree on that. And that's the point that people keep missing. "I love what Trump did on (abortion, his remain in Mexico policy, 2A friendly judges, partially built physical border wall) so much that I'm going to straight up ignore what's right before my very eyes of Trump putting deep state actors into his proposed SECOND cabinet as "social network litmus testing." Forget for one freaking minute which "lesser of two evils" you're willing to accept and look BEYOND November 2024 and January 2025 and see what actual policies that are going to be proposed by the principalities and powers behind both Turmp and Harris and be ready to sand against them. Don't stick your head in the freaking sand and convince yourself that it's all going to be okay....because it's not.
Connect With Us