[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 55chan / choroy / coz / dempart / lisperer / randamu / vichan / y2k ]

/christianity/ - Christian Theology

Free speech discussion

Catalog   Archive

Winner of the 81rd Attention-Hungry Games
/y2k/ - 2000s Nostalgia

Entries for the 2019 Summer Infinity Cup are now open!
May 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Subject *
Comment *
Verification *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

| Rules | Log | The Gospel |

File: bbe47bacc21cb82⋯.png (241.86 KB, 759x869, 69:79, 1554218284479.png)

891a33  No.2438[Reply]

>True traditional Christians believed in ghosts as evidenced by historical records and the language used in the Douay Rheims.

>Modern turboprots believe EVERYTHING paranormal is a demon.

>Weird modernist Christians believe in some kind of reincarnation or joining with the source.

>Most normie Christians see heaven and hell as two permanently immobilizing prisons and don't believe in ghosts.

Like seriously? Why such division? Saul communicated with the dead and tradition should be the default. Instead everyone seems to have their own unique fanfic about reality.

5 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

1d10c4  No.2454


Read it bitch

e71aaf  No.2455



fb0712  No.2986


>>In the Hebrew Bible, the Witch of Endor is a woman Saul consulted to summon the spirit of prophet Samuel in the 28th chapter of the First Book of Samuel in order to receive advice against the Philistines in battle after his prior attempts to consult God through sacred lots and prophets had failed. Samuel's spirit appears to Saul, however, the witch screams and is frightened by Saul's appearance because God is the one who summons his spirit in order to confront him for his disobedience against Yahweh.

31dd9a  No.2993


Sounds like protsplaining to pilpul around the fact the dead can hear our prayers.

842bb3  No.2994


>Doesn't commit your eisegesis

>He must be a sneaky jew

I'm falling for your bait

How does the account of the witch of endor prove that the dead hear prayers?

File: 6f120171d972372⋯.png (565.42 KB, 1185x1029, 395:343, Heretics.png)

e43598  No.1878[Reply]

If you are a christian and haven't read the entirety of the new testament at least then you should try and pick it up and read it for yourself. It is the basis for the entirety of our faith and the reason our religion is in its current state is because of a lack of knowledge of the foundations of our religion.

Never listen to pastors always read the bible for yourself and come to your own conclusions then we can actively discuss what they mean.

91 posts and 9 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

bfd8e1  No.2895


I recognize you now.

Matthew 3:11- I baptize you with water for repentance, but after me will come One more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

Pentecost - Baptized with tongues of fire of the Holy Spirit, no water involved; and other instances of this outside of Pentecost, such as Act 10: 44-48, not to mention the story of the jailer and his family who believed first, and then were baptized.

John 6 - Before, Jesus has referred to himself as many metaphorical titles - light of the world, door of the sheep, the true vine, etc. But as soon as he says Bread of Life, all of the sudden he's being literal? Even in the face of him obviously referring to himself as the true bread that man must live on (his words and commandments and being the Word incarnate), in contrast to earthly bread? Even as 6:53's "flesh and blood" is a Hebrew idiom referring to "the total person?" In other words, the imitation of Christ in deed, character and essence through belief?

John 6 28-29; 34-35

"What can we do to perform the works of God?" Jesus replied, "This is the work of God - that you believe in the one He has sent.

….Then they said, "Sir, give us this bread always!" "I am the bread of life," Jesus told them. "No one who comes to Me will ever be hungry, and no one who believes in Me will ever be thirsty again."

Utilizing the idiom of taking on his whole person: John 6: 53-58 Note that afterwards, many disciples desert Jesus due to trying to take his words literally in light of having been amongst the 5,000 who were recently miraculously fed, and still of the mentality of thinking of satiating their stomachs.

>This sort of view demands the logic of ananmesis Jews have for Passover where participants are in some sense reliving the Exodus narrative.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

19ce14  No.2898


As there are plenty of ground for me to cover here, I will address the last statement first. The problem is most scholarship on Mary's perpetual virginity or lack thereof are not as robust as the overall theology of the NT. For instance Richard Longenecker and Douglas Moo in Galatians simply presuppose the lack thereof without consideration of Bauckham's arguments or the naunces of the issue. The same for DA Carson himself too in his commentary on Matthew.

In contrast, there are always a lot of reasons given for how Baptism is like in the New Testament or why the Eucharist follows the Jewish Passover's concept of participation. In the exegesis on Matthew, John and Acts that will follow I will show the severe limitations of your eisegesis. Yes I say eisegesis as it doesnt bother to engage with the background and context of the passages as I will demonstrate beyond just mere surface reading from the regula of typical Evangelical pastors

19ce14  No.2904



Here the verse only tells us someone greater than John will come and Baptize. It doesnt establish the need for Evangelical wishy washy born again theology on this issue. How do we know this? Because in Matthew 28:18-20, Jesus provides the command to Baptize in the name of the Trinity.

In Matthew 28:18-20, Jesus commands the disciples to go out to all nations, teaching them and Baptizing them. Given the missionary theme of this verse to make disciples, what this already indicates is that a condition for one to be a disciple is not just to know the Gospel but also Baptism. Baptism is a necessary step to become a disciple being the act that initiates him into Christ and converts him into his sphere. As Beasley-Murray notes in "Baptism in the NT", that the Baptism in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as an "appropriation" to them(pg90). As dedication and submission. The language of "in the Name of" also has sacrificial conoctations where a sacrifice is offered to God in his Name. This entails that in Baptism, the one Baptized is being offered and given to God. It's entering into a relationship and where is this expressed clearly? In 1Peter 3:21 where the Greek for "appeal/answer for a good conscience" only finds use in establishing contracts of trade. This makes your attempt to explain the contract view a failure because it ignores the fact that it is akin to a document signed to enter into a relationship.

Of course what then about the Baptism in the Spirit anticipated by John earlier? We fortunately have Jesus' own baptism as an example where the Spirit and the Father are both present. The audience of Matthew who pays attention will see a connection between the Trinatarian name at the end and what happens at Jesus' Baptism and possibly see Jesus' baptism as a model and by doing that they will come into Christ, matching Galatians 3 for instance.

On John's prophetic statement which has sadly been abused and perverted by the Evangelical and Baptist pharisees, we can note how a "baptism" by fire in that verse ironically for you Pharisees, refer to God's judgement. There is a BaptPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

19ce14  No.2940


Next off Pentecost and Acts. Here I will agree lies the strongest case for the Baptist/Evangelical view because of how the Holy Spirit appears to be received even before water Baptism, such as in Acts 10 where the conversion of Cornelius and his household is recorded. The notion of believing and then getting Baptized or even receiving the Spirit prior to the act isnt proof that it isnt required or it is some empty naked symbol. After all that faith is a required condition for Baptism to be of any benefit is acceptable even to Baptismal Regeneration. Even Luther the Reformer does this, creating a superior view of assurance in contrast to the Evangelical who only ultimately have his own self as the source of it, not God or the external that leads inward.

In ignorance of the Acts Pentecost narrative of chapter 2, Evangelicals and Baptists miss the sequence explicitly told by Peter on how the same gift may be received. In fact it seems this basic point during Pentecost is missed out on them, as if they cut and chop Scripture to only take the parts they like and leave out the others as Peter anticipating the Evangelical eisegesis says,

37 Now when mthey heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” 38 And Peter said to them, o“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive sthe gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” 40 And with many otherwords he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, x“Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” 41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

Here we see it plain and simple that Baptism is part of coming into Christ and is the normative step in receiving the Holy Spirit. Later instances show that even those receiving the Spirit before will still get Baptized too, because it is essentially a normal part of conversion and the entrance into Christ. Here we are toldPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

e0d89a  No.2942


Arguing John 6 is just a metaphor doesnt work. Because ultimately the Eucharist can still be used to serve the purpose of Jesus' Disclosure, which is that he is the nourishment and faith in him is requored to access this. Although in that instance a view that will be the Eucharist wont make sense, John's readers will easily see a connection especially given the lack of the Last Supper narrative which the other 3 Gospels has. So where is it in John? Here's a hint, food and drink, body and blood. These are signals for readers to see the connection between the two.

Unfortunately for anti sacramentalists like the Evangelicals, this has implications for what the Eucharist is. It's literally part of how one will be nourished by Christ which explains Paul's language in 1Corinthians well and the participation concept of anamnesis. But given the Evangelical and Baptist ignore this, they are unable to grasp the context and hence oppose Scripture yet again. And no you Pharisee, the participation of Passover isnt the naked symbol in the way your elk typically think about. It is making the salvific past present in some sense. Not by an empty symbol although this naturally lends to symbolic language in the mimesis and rite not in the participation in the Exodus narrative.

Just as the lost disciples thought only with their stomachs fixating on the fleshy details, Evangelicals narrowly focus with their fleshy minds on thinking faith is just some shallow thing to feel good like their doctrine of assurance! The Bible says NO! as I have shown.

The thief on the Cross also provides no excuse for the Baptist or Evangelical to say Baptism is just a naked empty symbol because just as the one Baptized puts on Christ in Baptism as Paul says, the thief literally has Christ before his eyes and his own direct approval, the reality of Baptism is before him hence he doesnt need the water or the signs. This thief also says something that smashes apart Zwlinglianism because he is not telling Jesus to remember him as one remembers what one did in the past. He is telling him to let him into heaven. Shown by Jesus' immediatePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

File: 4114c82a945f6dc⋯.jpg (112.19 KB, 1024x1377, 1024:1377, maryelizabeth.jpg)

7c56e9  No.2646[Reply]

Ockham's razor: simpler solutions are more likely to be correct that complex ones.

To justify Mary's perpetual virginity, the following defenses are laid up:

>The jews in the synagogue who point out Jesus's brothers and sisters are actually referencing the Christian brotherhood (Mark 6:3, Matt 13:55-56)

>Joseph had a novel, unique marriage arrangement where one takes a wife without consummating

>"Until" in Matthew 1:25 (kept her a virgin until she gave birth) is a unique use of the word that doesn't mean it happened afterwards

>Roman catholics received alleged additional special revelation in the form of apparations of Mary that claim it's so, ultimately resulting in the Pope declaring the doctrine infallible in the 19th century (remember: an infallible declaration is one equal to scripture)

The alternative view, held by many Christians of many denominations in every era, is this:

>After the virgin birth, Mary and Joseph had children

Which of these options is more likely to be correct given Ockham's razor?

To really travel down the rabbit hole, investigate this:

What foundational beliefs of Catholics (and others) require them to bend over backwards in this way?

72 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

8c9ad3  No.2917


Revelation 12. Aside from that, In ancient Israel whenever a woman was wearing a crown, she was a Queen. So, not the wife of the king but the mother - the Queen Mother. She is the Queen of all things because of her relation to Christ, who is King of Kings.

459952  No.2919


The woman of revelation 12 is the church.


>whenever a woman was wearing a crown, she was queen, so if this is Mary then mary is a queen


>Mary is Queen because Christ is King

Conflation. Christ's role as king is unrelated to his birth mother.

8c9ad3  No.2928

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.


>The woman of revelation 12 is the church

The way Revelation is inspired by the Holy Ghost certainly allows for direct and indirect symoblism. She can represent the Church and tribes of Israel (and the 12 patriarchs of Israel, etc) while also being Mary–and the Catholic position that she is the new Eve (and was assumed) certainly lines up well with that passage. And you have to remember that the Apocalypsis was originally one free-flow writing, so it's undeniable that St John was showing this woman as the new Ark. Luke's Gospel also shows this, with the language he uses (see vid).

>Christ's role as king is unrelated to his birth mother.

I never said it was. She is Queen because of her relation to the King of Kings is what I said. And if you are a disciple of Christ, she is your mother.

The guy in this video is kinda queer but do watch it.

459952  No.2936


Bad hermeneutics. Your reading violates the law of non-contradiction. In the single event of Rev 12:1-2, the woman can not be simultaneously Mary and the Church. Mary can be typologically related to the woman, but not the same as.

Video is similarly just a bunch of assertions.

8c9ad3  No.2939

File: cea76f8ad2dd894⋯.png (4.38 MB, 2560x1440, 16:9, 2.png)


Why would a symbol literally give birth? The woman is giving birth to the Christ, because it's said that He will rule with an iron rod, a direct parallel to Pslam 2:9. And the rest is a parallel to Genesis, the protoevangelium–take note of how St John clearly identifies a woman (the new Eve, Mary), her seed (the Christ, Jesus) and the serpent (Satan) and the enmity between them (the followers of her Son). More proof it is Mary is, like I said before, how Revelation was a free-form writing, and that the description of the Ark in 11:19 would have continued into chapter 12 without a chapter break. Her crown can represent the 12 tribes of Israel, the 12 apostles, the 12 patriarchs, but it's absurd to say that the woman is the Church, or Israel, because the parallels to the protoevangelium don't make sense then, and a symbol would not need to literally give birth.

File: 0aade51b3ebe3d1⋯.jpg (81.7 KB, 746x461, 746:461, Anunnaki-Gods.jpg)

9b6ee2  No.2825[Reply]

<And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire.

<Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance; they had the likeness of a man.

<And every one had four faces, and every one had four wings.

<And their feet were straight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf's foot: and they sparkled like the colour of burnished brass.

<And they had the hands of a man under their wings on their four sides; and they four had their faces and their wings.

<Their wings were joined one to another; they turned not when they went; they went every one straight forward.

<As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side: and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four also had the face of an eagle.

<Thus were their faces: and their wings were stretched upward; two wings of every one were joined one to another, and two covered their bodies.

Was the book of Ezekiel describing the image of an annunaki god? We can't sit here and pretend like the annunaki thing is a myth.

5be9de  No.2826

File: 85c7be4712864f4⋯.jpg (90.68 KB, 960x690, 32:23, 96b6c4092473bbb4c9ab7f7837….jpg)


ayy lmao


0a4fd3  No.2827

8b4fb6  No.2829


6c44e3  No.2903

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

1603e8  No.2608[Reply]

What is your favorite hymn?

3 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

8d05d8  No.2644

"Lord I Lift Your Name On High" has been stuck in my head in a loop as of recent. "Awesome God" is also a classic that I look upon in fondness.

429560  No.2650

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

12b1b8  No.2653

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

7ea0fd  No.2887

File: d20f4ae7ec804ea⋯.jpeg (55.37 KB, 1024x975, 1024:975, 12805_FRONT_1_1024x1024.jpeg)


Not exactly what you're looking for but I listened to Johnny Cash's song "when the man comes around" and I really enjoyed it.

be6777  No.2896

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

Dies Irae, if it counts as a hymn, even though I can't stand Catholicism.

File: 6868e1ce6db2234⋯.jpg (402.25 KB, 2048x1422, 1024:711, eden.jpg)

de9fe0  No.2766[Reply]

The tangible world exists, created by God.

God charged mankind with the task of stewarding creation.

Part of God's design for our stewardship involves an affirmation of property ownership.

Transgressing property rights between people is a sin before God (theft).

Intangibles can be similar to tangible property

>hold value



They are not similar in one vital way: you cannot be confiscated of an intangible. If someone hears a sentence I write and repeats it, I still have that sentence in my head and the same ability to repeat it again. What is the relevant ethical difference between this and copying mp3 files from a cd that my friend lends me, or even copying movie files from strangers on the internet?

I see no Biblical reason to change this logic on any scale. Intangible "intellectual property" is not property at all in the sense that it can be stolen, so such copying is not theft.

13 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

60ab83  No.2811


God is the substance. One could say the Father is a person, as is the Son and Spirit. I'd personally consider Christ to be the closest to God's 'person'.

49cb48  No.2830

You are right in that nobody can hold an abstraction as a possession, however intellectual property laws are made out of economic practicality to safeguard the artist's right to profit from their art (a principle that is scriptural, see 1 Timothy 5:18) and regardless of whether intellectual property theft is or is not inherently wrong, copyright is the law of the land and God commands you to obey Caesar.

4db27d  No.2834


It it not a right to profit from art in the sense of inalienable rights, and 1 Tim 5:18 is a forced proof text to that point.

I went for a run. It was laborious. Am I entitled to be compensated for my labor by someone?

What about the artist who makes a piece and I choose not to go to the gallery. Am I sinning by not giving him reward for that?

1 Tim 5:18 is talking strictly about the work of elders.

a9dff8  No.2835

File: e264b5b0403da67⋯.jpg (404.17 KB, 1366x1000, 683:500, e264b5b0403da67ad3c2e59739….jpg)

7debb3  No.2861


>1 Tim 5:18 is a forced proof text


>Am I entitled to be compensated for my labor by someone?

No because you did not offer anything to anyone. Art is beneficial to more than just the artist.

>What about the artist who makes a piece and I choose not to go to the gallery. Am I sinning by not giving him reward for that?

You're sinning if you take the fruits of his labor without rewarding him for it.

>1 Tim 5:18 is talking strictly about the work of elders.

No it isn't. That was Paul's object at that time, but scripture is not inconsistent. It doesn't use one form of reasoning in one place and then contradictory reasoning elsewhere. If the scripture is valid, then the reasoning of it is valid too. The preacher did not give you a tangible product, he did not give you something that you could hold in your hand, he gave you a string of words, meant to express a string of thoughts, which could be spoken by anyone and thought by anyone, not dissimilar to art, yet scripture says he deserves wages for that labor.

File: 033a513d79e43bc⋯.jpeg (387.16 KB, 750x626, 375:313, D60F1058-D61D-44D3-B636-1….jpeg)

bb971c  No.2693[Reply]

Many claim to communicate directly with Jesus and hear His voice but how often is it just a demon larping as Jesus? Even the saints fell for such tricks.

35b264  No.2694

As often as the person isn't lying it's a demon, because the canon is closed. Christ is seated at the right hand of the father until he returns.

0ffeb6  No.2695


Or they're being figurative about Jesus speaking

b7920f  No.2696


>Even the saints fell for such tricks

Unfortunately it happens far more often with us Protestants.

7aed11  No.2753

"Test the spirits" is stressed by Christ by Christ and the apostles in the new testament many times…. those who fall for anything and everything are not testing the spirits.

d0024d  No.2848

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

1307ec  No.2770[Reply]

I am a student in Southern Baptist Seminary. I am here to tell you how many professors are actually very tempted to convert to Catholicism. This isnt something I make up. It's what Thomas Schiender told me in a privatr conversation. He said many professors want to go to Catholicism like Micheal Haykin but they are afraid of losing their jobs if they do. This is happening across the major seminaries

7 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

1307ec  No.2785


But Craig Blomberg a conservative is there…

302c08  No.2786


Notable exception

26e81a  No.2791


Article title:

>"I’m a Southern Baptist, Roman Catholic Child of Elegguá – Deal with It."

Liberal New Ager blogpost as smoking gun, along with…..uggghhh… why am I even responding to this bait? God help me.

6a303b  No.2831

Does Mohler know about this?

30e318  No.2833


The question is, does Mueller know about this?

File: 99f5b20e37e1c19⋯.jpg (113.34 KB, 640x360, 16:9, christian_shooters.jpg)

2ff6ef  No.1829[Reply]

Is it just me or are school shooters disproportionately white Christians? Please explain this phenomenon.

10 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

f9c43f  No.2292


im pretty sure the ayylium shape shifter nutter was a atheist

e18acb  No.2339




>Literally no Christian believes they are Christian. Only misguided fedoras and LARPagans think this.

I'd reckon literally no Christians believe any people who do things they dislike are Christian. Two of those people are clearly mixed anyhow, so obviously OP is retarded, but even so: You'd deny anyone who was inconvenient. Most of the time you'd deny anyone who doesn't go to your particular church, though some of you may make exceptions for people who are particularly cool and useful.

cada5f  No.2660

File: 23b148a2cd18161⋯.jpg (34.24 KB, 680x483, 680:483, g.jpg)



When you think about it no school shooter has been Christian.

da074a  No.2821


>I'd reckon literally no Christians believe any people who do things they dislike are Christian.

You make stupid posts but I'm not saying you aren't Christian. Statement disproven.

5a4aef  No.2822

d50730  No.2794[Reply]

1 Peter 2:13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bond servants of God.

File: 0191cbe81f6f844⋯.gif (671.25 KB, 273x322, 39:46, 1470349352623.gif)

37b8cb  No.2710[Reply]


6bc425  No.2711


Peace be to you, brother!

File: 1439831065303.jpg (921.73 KB, 1200x1600, 3:4, 1431110839191.jpg)

a18e2f  No.115[Reply]

And if so how much?

6 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

b853e9  No.1860


Oops! ha. Well, I’d still be interested.

3a092d  No.2664


You're absolutely right. There's a lot of subtleties that just can't be translated into English. Of course, the NT is originally Greek, so Latin is not the original language, but Latin is much closer to Greek than English of course.

This is not an example of that point, but one neat thing I've noticed in the Latin John's Gospel is that there's quite a few instances of V phrases there that stuck out to me. Just a few examples:

- Christ is the Verbum

- "Come and see" is "veni et vide"

- "Living" is "vivus"/"vivens"

- "I am the way, the truth and the life" is "Ego sum via et veritas et vita"

Also, if you're looking for a book to practice your Latin with, I recommend Hans Orberg's Lingua Latina per se Illustrata (LLPSI). It's by far the best textbook I've seen geared toward gaining Latin readi g proficiency. By the end of the first volume, you shouls be able to tackle the Vulgate, no problem, referring to an English translation only if necessary to figure out unfamiliar vocabulary. This Google Docs has some links to digital copies of the LLPSI texts.


3a092d  No.2665


That's only true if you are interested in reading translations of the relatively small body of "classical" Latin. Classical Latin would be more or less Latin from Ancient Rome. If you are interested in the vast body of Latin from the middle ages through modern times (Latin was still widely used until sometime in the 18th century), the vast majority of that has not been translated into English, and probably never will be.

b46217  No.2699

All that matters is English since the word of God is written in it.

32fcdf  No.2703


Sooth, thou hast maketh me to chortleth mightlieth.

84cac6  No.2524[Reply]

is it possible to have the spirit of a bibical figure?

The Mighty Shamgar killed 500 people with an oxgoad. Like how much cooler can you get?

I am now from this forward known as Shamgar

4 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

b46822  No.2546


lol muh power fantasy

3d54b4  No.2586



941e39  No.2587


I sexually identify as Jesus :^)

9af668  No.2605


Even if joking this is severely blasphemous. Repent

81d083  No.2654



File: 9eab00780b3e9e3⋯.jpg (80.24 KB, 800x642, 400:321, Gladio, Baby!.jpg)

d3bc4a  No.2534[Reply]

On the hot summer morning of Aug. 2, 1980 a massive explosion ripped apart the main waiting room of the Bologna railway station

Eighty-five people were killed and hundreds more injured. Though at first blamed on Italy’s legendary urban guerrillas, The Red Brigades, it soon emerged that the attack had, in fact, originated from within the ‘deep state’ of the Italian government itself.

The full nature of this secret parallel state would only come to light a decade later when the Italian premier, Giulio Andreotti, under questioning from a special commission of inquiry, revealed the existence of arms caches stashed all around the country and which were at the disposal of an organization which later came to be identified as ‘Gladio’.

The members of this group turned out to include not only hundreds of far-right figures in the intelligence, military, government, media, Church and corporate sectors, but a motley assortment of unreconstructed WW2 fascists, psychopaths and criminal underworld types to boot. And despite Andreotti’s attempts to airbrush the group as ‘patriots’ it appeared evident to much of the rest of the Italian polity that these seemed rather more like pretty bad folk indeed. Little did they know. Follow-up research by the likes of Daniele Ganser, Claudio Celani, Jurgen Roth and Henrik Kruger traced connections to similar groups spread throughout Europe of which all were found to be deep state terrorist organizations, and all of which were found, ultimately, to be subservient unto the highest levels of the CIA and NATO command structures.

The moniker ‘Gladio’ (after the two-edged sword used in classical Rome) was eventually broadened to include a bewildering host of related deep state terrorist structures including: ‘P2’ In Italy, ‘P26’ in Switzerland, ‘Sveaborg’ in Sweden, ‘Counter-Guerrilla’ in Turkey and ‘Sheepskin’ in Greece. This (hardly definitive) European list was then found to have connections not only to virtually every US sponsored secret state terrorist organization the world over (including the likes of Operation Condor in Latin America), but also to many of the global drug cartels that provided the secretive wealth needed to fund and otherwiPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

865375  No.2538


4406af  No.2642

Anyone got some info about the connection of Scottish Rite Freemasonry to the Fascist paramilitaries involved in Italy?

File: 516e7bbdcac9c74⋯.png (57.92 KB, 500x610, 50:61, pepe-had-a-makeover-he-is-….png)

423245  No.2434[Reply]

Steven Anderson says its ok to ask God for things that will help you.

Like I pray to God that I become a good juggler and pray for my family is this ok?

88e0d6  No.2436

File: dec07111fa74292⋯.png (187.96 KB, 680x680, 1:1, 6AF6898061464E2C9158074033….png)

Why wouldn't it be?

560147  No.2578


its ok, he will either grant it or not, God knows best fren.

0e4c04  No.2579


As long as you're keeping it balanced with prayers for others, praises to God and thanksgiving, and are praying for spiritually fruitful things (i.e. not praying to win the lottery so you can buy an island for hedonistic amusement), then yeah, pray for what will help you.

Delete Post [ ]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 55chan / choroy / coz / dempart / lisperer / randamu / vichan / y2k ]