(06-30-2016 05:37 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Christians providing sanctuary to men from lands which are hostile to Christianity. Where have we heard that before?

We don't know who these men are, where they're from or what they want to do. They look pretty able bodied and healthy to me. Christians and their saviour complex will and always have been their downfall.

Too bad you have no idea what you're talking about. And the people who liked your post have no clue either.

The Bible is explicit on following the law, almost to a fault.

Jesus said "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's," and the Apostle Paul said that governments are installed by the will of God and the law is to always be respected.

Whether or not you accept Christ has nothing to do with the fact that a Church breaking laws like this is in direct violation of Biblical teachings.

(07-01-2016 08:51 AM)FebGun Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 12:15 PM)Parzival Wrote:  What you see there is ordinary bread that you can buy sliced in German supermarkets. My mate saw a couple that refuse to take this bread because the slices are not in order, they are mixed! The couple was shocked and said they demand new bread. Do you guys expect adults witch such an attitude be responsible for a positive culture?

Hm… interesting. That’s how you see Germans from inside?

From outside I see that legendary precision and punctuality that actually made the nation and the country. I learned with east Germans in USSR, I worked with American Germans here in US, heck … even Jews that came here from Germany in 1880s – 5 generations later they all retained that special character trait of discipline and punctuality. Yes, for me it’s crazy, but that’s how Germans are. And I respect traditions.

The inside and outside view are always different. With the post here I try to show some insight about stuff and many of the stereotypes have to some degree a true origin but some of those images where created a long time ago.

Had a talk with a German yesterday.

He said that Germany has already been flooded with migrants, going back as early as the 1970s and 1980s, and that the refugees are nothing new.

A sobering argument.

Germany even got cheap work migration since the 50s. But in the 70s we got Muslims - mainly turks. Add to that argument what did happen to the Spanish, Italian and Greece migrant and compare them to the muslim ones. Germany even got a huge wave of refugees in the 1990 but they did better integrate then the Turkish ones. Its not refugees or migration that is bad per se, its the question, who comes.

(07-01-2016 10:49 AM)storm Wrote:  Had a talk with a German yesterday.

He said that Germany has already been flooded with migrants, going back as early as the 1970s and 1980s, and that the refugees are nothing new.

A sobering argument.

Are you serious? So going from 100% Germans to 1% is fine every step of the way, except for the very first migrant, because after that "it's nothing new".

(07-01-2016 10:49 AM)storm Wrote:  Had a talk with a German yesterday.

He said that Germany has already been flooded with migrants, going back as early as the 1970s and 1980s, and that the refugees are nothing new.

A sobering argument.

Actually it sounds like the dude had too much to drink. A better analogy is like saying "I've already had 2 beers, what's another 8 going to do to me?"

(07-01-2016 01:13 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 10:49 AM)storm Wrote:  Had a talk with a German yesterday.

He said that Germany has already been flooded with migrants, going back as early as the 1970s and 1980s, and that the refugees are nothing new.

A sobering argument.

Actually it sounds like the dude had too much to drink. A better analogy is like saying "I've already had 2 beers, what's another 8 going to do to me?"

Another 8 beer will do nothing to him because he is a German!
Research have shown that the number is not important, its mostly the last beer that is bad!

Islamist extremists hide huge stockpile of weapons near German mosque

(07-01-2016 10:04 AM)Samseau Wrote:  Too bad you have no idea what you're talking about. And the people who liked your post have no clue either.

The Bible is explicit on following the law, almost to a fault.

Jesus said "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's," and the Apostle Paul said that governments are installed by the will of God and the law is to always be respected.

Whether or not you accept Christ has nothing to do with the fact that a Church breaking laws like this is in direct violation of Biblical teachings.

Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when you're not even in the UK and EU and probably know nothing about Christian communities here.

I am surrounded by protestant Christians, my mother is a pro-active Christian and a shit load of her friends and acquaintances are. and her family have always been religious.

This is naive people offering sanctuary to people who they deem to be innocent but who almost always turn out to be violent criminals.

Did Christians not hide Jews and others from the Nazis? According to you the law of the land made it illegal for them to do so and should have led to outright slaughter of all those people hidden by Christians.

Remember, Nazis ruled Germany and made plenty of laws.

The bible doesn't say you can sodomize and bugger small boys but lots of them did it anyway. Funny that.


Quoting fucking Caesar for a video showing Christians offering sanctuary

(07-01-2016 05:53 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 10:04 AM)Samseau Wrote:  Too bad you have no idea what you're talking about. And the people who liked your post have no clue either.

The Bible is explicit on following the law, almost to a fault.

Jesus said "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's," and the Apostle Paul said that governments are installed by the will of God and the law is to always be respected.

Whether or not you accept Christ has nothing to do with the fact that a Church breaking laws like this is in direct violation of Biblical teachings.

Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when you're not even in the UK and EU and probably know nothing about Christian communities here.

I am surrounded by protestant Christians, my mother is a pro-active Christian and a shit load of her friends and acquaintances are. and her family have always been religious.

This is naive people offering sanctuary to people who they deem to be innocent but who almost always turn out to be violent criminals.

And they are doing what is called "casting pearls before swine." The punishment is that they will be ripped to pieces and trampled underfoot. Matthew 7:6.

Quote:Did Christians not hide Jews and others from the Nazis? According to you the law of the land made it illegal for them to do so and should have led to outright slaughter of all those people hidden by Christians.

Remember, Nazis ruled Germany and made plenty of laws.

First of all, if a Government is requiring its members to do pure evil then we can argue not to follow the law. Although Christians are told to follow the law it does not mean they should follow totally unjust laws.

However, it's not like anyone had any idea what the Nazi's were doing with the Jews. All info was controlled back then and the official propaganda was that Jews were deported to Israel (and many actually were before the war started). So good Christians would have not hidden Jews in that time, and that's exactly how they behaved. Many Jews held a grudge against Catholic Germans after the war for this fact.

Quote:The bible doesn't say you can sodomize and bugger small boys but lots of them did it anyway. Funny that.

Yes, plenty of hypocrites and false prophets (inwardly a wolf) out there.

Quote:Quoting fucking Caesar for a video showing Christians offering sanctuary

In fact, you should go tell your Christians in the UK that the Bible says not to cast pearls before swine and that the law is to be obeyed. They should call the police for any illegal they happen to give food and shelter to, because the New Testament says to follow the law.

If they react with horror or anger, just tell them to take it up with the Bible and God, you're just the messenger.

(07-01-2016 06:04 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 05:53 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 10:04 AM)Samseau Wrote:  Too bad you have no idea what you're talking about. And the people who liked your post have no clue either.

The Bible is explicit on following the law, almost to a fault.

Jesus said "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's," and the Apostle Paul said that governments are installed by the will of God and the law is to always be respected.

Whether or not you accept Christ has nothing to do with the fact that a Church breaking laws like this is in direct violation of Biblical teachings.

Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when you're not even in the UK and EU and probably know nothing about Christian communities here.

I am surrounded by protestant Christians, my mother is a pro-active Christian and a shit load of her friends and acquaintances are. and her family have always been religious.

This is naive people offering sanctuary to people who they deem to be innocent but who almost always turn out to be violent criminals.

And they are doing what is called "casting pearls before swine." The punishment is that they will be ripped to pieces and trampled underfoot. Matthew 7:6.

Quote:Did Christians not hide Jews and others from the Nazis? According to you the law of the land made it illegal for them to do so and should have led to outright slaughter of all those people hidden by Christians.

Remember, Nazis ruled Germany and made plenty of laws.

First of all, if a Government is requiring its members to do pure evil then we can argue not to follow the law. Although Christians are told to follow the law it does not mean they should follow totally unjust laws.

However, it's not like anyone had any idea what the Nazi's were doing with the Jews. All info was controlled back then and the official propaganda was that Jews were deported to Israel (and many actually were before the war started). So good Christians would have not hidden Jews in that time, and that's exactly how they behaved. Many Jews held a grudge against Catholic Germans after the war for this fact.

Quote:The bible doesn't say you can sodomize and bugger small boys but lots of them did it anyway. Funny that.

Yes, plenty of hypocrites and false prophets (inwardly a wolf) out there.

Quote:Quoting fucking Caesar for a video showing Christians offering sanctuary

In fact, you should go tell your Christians in the UK that the Bible says not to cast pearls before swine and that the law is to be obeyed. They should call the police for any illegal they happen to give food and shelter to, because the New Testament says to follow the law.

If they react with horror or anger, just tell them to take it up with the Bible and God, you're just the messenger.

Good one, this once again proves just how nefariously the left hides information, including priests. They really read the Bible like the Devil.

(07-01-2016 06:04 PM)Samseau Wrote:  ...
First of all, if a Government is requiring its members to do pure evil then we can argue not to follow the law. Although Christians are told to follow the law it does not mean they should follow totally unjust laws.
...

Thereafter the only question is where the individual or the church determines the line lies before the government crosses over to "totally unjust".

Hoovering up your taxes to pay public schools to teach kids that there are 36 genders and that men dressing like women and fucking each other it to be celebrated?

Are we there yet?

What about if the government itself is not following the laws? Are Christians supposed to sit idly and follow the laws, even if the government tasked with enforcing them refuses to when special interest groups are involved? Or worse, when the government breaks the laws itself to crush people from Christian demographics (IRS targeted auditing ring any bells?)

No, there is no justification for a Christian in any western nation to honour the rule of law. Doing so was entirely predicated on the basis that Western nations were Christian nations and therefore there was rarely a wide rift between the laws of man and the laws of God.

That predication has dissolved. Western Christians are no more spiritually obligated to perpetually bare their necks to their governments than they would be if they lived in Communist China or Islamist Iran.

(07-01-2016 10:35 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 06:04 PM)Samseau Wrote:  ...
First of all, if a Government is requiring its members to do pure evil then we can argue not to follow the law. Although Christians are told to follow the law it does not mean they should follow totally unjust laws.
...

Thereafter the only question is where the individual or the church determines the line lies before the government crosses over to "totally unjust".

Hoovering up your taxes to pay public schools to teach kids that there are 36 genders and that men dressing like women and fucking each other it to be celebrated?

Are we there yet?

What about if the government itself is not following the laws? Are Christians supposed to sit idly and follow the laws, even if the government tasked with enforcing them refuses to when special interest groups are involved? Or worse, when the government breaks the laws itself to crush people from Christian demographics (IRS targeted auditing ring any bells?)

No, there is no justification for a Christian in any western nation to honour the rule of law. Doing so was entirely predicated on the basis that Western nations were Christian nations and therefore there was rarely a wide rift between the laws of man and the laws of God.

That predication has dissolved. Western Christians are no more spiritually obligated to perpetually bare their necks to their governments than they would be if they lived in Communist China or Islamist Iran.

Certainly, there is great deal of truth to what you are saying. But remember that even when Christ was alive he told people to keep paying their taxes to the Roman government even though the Roman government was not Christian at all.

There is the other component to his teachings; while we yearn for righteousness, we must also submit to a great deal of evil. Resist not evil, turn the other cheek, and love thy enemy means Christians must follow bad laws as much as possible until it becomes too much to bear.

You may say there is no wisdom is such teachings, but Christ's methods change hearts and minds like no other over the long run. Seeing your neighbors treated unjustly, or others seeing you wronged, shifts their point of view to your cause and seeks a remedy to that problem. Christians understand that those who are Evil or at least sinful may either be converted (i.e. saved) or the Evil will undo itself from creating so many enemies against it.

That said, the general rule is that Evil against your neighbors you must defend (with words before violence) but Evil against yourself you can choose whether or not to let it slide (for most minor things this is recommended) or fight by alerting your neighbors or if it's really serious get violent.

A lot of Christianity seems like common sense, which is exactly the main argument Thomas Aquinas used. "Why be a Christian? Because it's principles are true and just."

So to answer your first question, the individual or the Church - the answer is both. It's 50/50. The Church is to provide an alternative viewpoint to keep their flock grounded, but the individual must make sure the man he is receiving spiritual guidance from is blameless and faithful to the Bible. This is the stance the Orthodox Church takes because it's the most consistent with Paul's teachings - he repeatedly told his students to be faithful to the teachings, even if he himself were to disobey them.

Protestantism and Catholicism both fail as Churches because Protestantism puts too much focus on the individual - solo scripture sounds like the individual has 100% authority - while the Catholics give all authority to the Pope which has resulted in a Catholic Church having nearly 100% of the say on what Christianity is and is not. The reformation was an obvious backlash to such tyranny, but they went too far in the other direction. The Orthodox have always given 50/50 to this question.

Quote:Italy: Invaders Flee from CasaPound

Hundreds of nonwhite invaders squatting in the seaside town of Ostia, outside Rome, last night fled in the face of a mass show of force by Italian nationalist organization CasaPound, supported by hundreds of locals.

The invaders had turned the town’s park into a squalid shantytown, used it as a public toilet, and had terrorized locals for months with their criminal activities—and leftist authorities had refused to act.

CasaPound—which sprang to international prominence with a 10,000-strong anti-invasion march and demonstration in Rome in May this year—announced that they were going to “clean up” the Ostia Lido Centro area after residents had asked them to help.

They said that local authorities had refused to move the invaders—many of them Africans who had landed in Italy during the ongoing boat-invasion which is being encouraged and supported by the European Union.

https://redice.tv/news/italy-invaders-fl...um=Twitter

(06-30-2016 03:59 PM)Nineteen84 Wrote:  Meanwhile in Iceland:

Icelandic police drag two asylum seekers from church providing sanctuary

At least they learned Icelandic lol

(07-01-2016 11:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  ...
So to answer your first question, the individual or the Church - the answer is both. It's 50/50. The Church is to provide an alternative viewpoint to keep their flock grounded, but the individual must make sure the man he is receiving spiritual guidance from is blameless and faithful to the Bible. This is the stance the Orthodox Church takes because it's the most consistent with Paul's teachings - he repeatedly told his students to be faithful to the teachings, even if he himself were to disobey them.

Protestantism and Catholicism both fail as Churches because Protestantism puts too much focus on the individual - solo scripture sounds like the individual has 100% authority - while the Catholics give all authority to the Pope which has resulted in a Catholic Church having nearly 100% of the say on what Christianity is and is not. The reformation was an obvious backlash to such tyranny, but they went too far in the other direction. The Orthodox have always given 50/50 to this question.

A fair rebuttal. But Christians are facing something that is quite unprecedented in human history.

Before modern globalism anti-Christian forces could play at the edges of Christian society but the core of those societies remained, like an island being lapped at by waves. The tide could rise or fall, and even a storm surge could flood the low lying areas, but the island remained.

Now things are different. Anti-Christian forces have global power. They appear to have even bought out the leadership of most Christian organisations, or at least have successfully intimidated them into getting with the program.

I have limited skin in the religious game. I was raised as a Christian and respect that the principles of Christianity are one of the major factors that allowed us to succeed as a civilisation, but I quickly abandoned faith in Christian institutions for reasons that are becoming all too obvious these days.

But solid-core Christians are going to have to massively decentralise the operational facets of their worship if they want Christianity to survive this century. And they will not go overnight from bible-study groups to militant crusaders either. In other words they better nut up soon because neither islam, the progressives or the globalists are going to cut them any slack, no matter how hard they try to turn the other cheek.

(07-01-2016 11:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  A lot of Christianity seems like common sense, which is exactly the main argument Thomas Aquinas used. "Why be a Christian? Because it's principles are true and just."

So to answer your first question, the individual or the Church - the answer is both. It's 50/50. The Church is to provide an alternative viewpoint to keep their flock grounded, but the individual must make sure the man he is receiving spiritual guidance from is blameless and faithful to the Bible. This is the stance the Orthodox Church takes because it's the most consistent with Paul's teachings - he repeatedly told his students to be faithful to the teachings, even if he himself were to disobey them.

Protestantism and Catholicism both fail as Churches because Protestantism puts too much focus on the individual - solo scripture sounds like the individual has 100% authority - while the Catholics give all authority to the Pope which has resulted in a Catholic Church having nearly 100% of the say on what Christianity is and is not. The reformation was an obvious backlash to such tyranny, but they went too far in the other direction. The Orthodox have always given 50/50 to this question.

(07-01-2016 04:04 PM)budoslavic Wrote:  Islamist extremists hide huge stockpile of weapons near German mosque

This will be happening all over Europe.

Regarding the stockpile of weapons found near a mosque in Northern Germany. I just performed a search with relevant German keywords and this is what I found:

   

Which basically means NOTHING. There is no mention of this AT ALL in:

• Stern
• Bild
• Spiegel
• Die Zeit
• Frankfurter Allgemeine
• Süddeutsche Zeitung
  

The names listed are the major news organizations in Germany, equal to heavy hitters like the Times, the BBC, New York Times, L.A. Times, Le Monde, El País, etc.

This is a fucking travesty and PROVES that open and unbiased journalism is effectively DEAD in Germany.

It makes you wonder how many of these caches have been found without anyone in the media getting wind of it at all.

The first priority of a burgeoning resistance in Europe should be to get intel on these weapon caches and capture them.

Stockpiles of weapons at Mosques and Refugee centers is nothing new. I'm pretty sure this forum documented it back within the first 50 pages of the this thread.

Quote:Protestantism and Catholicism both fail as Churches because Protestantism puts too much focus on the individual - solo scripture sounds like the individual has 100% authority - while the Catholics give all authority to the Pope which has resulted in a Catholic Church having nearly 100% of the say on what Christianity is and is not. The reformation was an obvious backlash to such tyranny, but they went too far in the other direction. The Orthodox have always given 50/50 to this question.

Orthodox Churches have not been immune to problems. For instance, the Russian Orthodox Church was heavily infiltrated by the KGB during the Soviet era.

(07-02-2016 10:27 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  

Quote:Protestantism and Catholicism both fail as Churches because Protestantism puts too much focus on the individual - solo scripture sounds like the individual has 100% authority - while the Catholics give all authority to the Pope which has resulted in a Catholic Church having nearly 100% of the say on what Christianity is and is not. The reformation was an obvious backlash to such tyranny, but they went too far in the other direction. The Orthodox have always given 50/50 to this question.

Orthodox Churches have not been immune to problems. For instance, the Russian Orthodox Church was heavily infiltrated by the KGB during the Soviet era.

Being persecuted is not the Church's fault.

More evidence that the EU is funding the migrant invasion.

Quote:The European Union (EU) has announced plans to spend 62 billion euros tackling mass immigration from North Africa, with officials admitting that migrant flows have “not decreased in comparison with last year”.

In a paper from the European Commission, the EU speaks of setting up migration “compacts” with certain African countries in order to control the number of migrants making their way across the Mediterranean.

Euractiv reports that nations including Mali, Nigeria and Sudan will be put in charge of filtering migrants before they get anywhere near Europe. In return, the EU will give them 62 billion euros worth of aid and development programmes.

EU leaders hope that the deal will reduce the number of migrants entering the continent after record levels of migration last year saw millions cross into Europe from the Middle East and northern Africa, creating a humanitarian and social crisis.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been widely criticised after effectively opening her country’s borders to the migrants, with critics arguing her decision encouraged many more to make the dangerous journey than would otherwise have been the case.

Germany alone saw well over a million new arrivals last year alone, an unprecedented number.

Breitbart London reported in March how a potential 800,000 migrants are now residing in Libya, with officials in the war-torn country threatening to “open the floodgates” unless the EU provided more money.

Colonel Mohamed Bourgiba, head of the Gweea detention centre, which holds hundreds of migrants, said: “The state is very weak and there is no money. Most of us here aren’t even getting paid.” If things do not improve, he said: “We will just stop working and open the floodgates. Because at the moment we are doing all of this for nothing.”

A Nigerian man involved in people smuggling also commented: “The Libyans are ready to give up. So is Europe ready to take these people? While there is poverty and war in Africa, there are going to be people who want to get on those boats.”

Don't forget that this payment does not include the payments that the EU has made to Turkey, to the Middle East, and the remittances by the rapefugees to their native countries.

Along with the loss of American manufacturing to China, what we are seeing here is one of the biggest transfers of wealth from one culture to another. The remarkable thing about the transfer is that it is occurring nonviolently.

The leaders of the West are simply giving everything away.

(07-02-2016 01:40 PM)quino_16 Wrote:  More evidence that the EU is funding the migrant invasion.

Quote:The European Union (EU) has announced plans to spend 62 billion euros tackling mass immigration from North Africa, with officials admitting that migrant flows have “not decreased in comparison with last year”.

In a paper from the European Commission, the EU speaks of setting up migration “compacts” with certain African countries in order to control the number of migrants making their way across the Mediterranean.

Euractiv reports that nations including Mali, Nigeria and Sudan will be put in charge of filtering migrants before they get anywhere near Europe. In return, the EU will give them 62 billion euros worth of aid and development programmes.

EU leaders hope that the deal will reduce the number of migrants entering the continent after record levels of migration last year saw millions cross into Europe from the Middle East and northern Africa, creating a humanitarian and social crisis.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been widely criticised after effectively opening her country’s borders to the migrants, with critics arguing her decision encouraged many more to make the dangerous journey than would otherwise have been the case.

Germany alone saw well over a million new arrivals last year alone, an unprecedented number.

Breitbart London reported in March how a potential 800,000 migrants are now residing in Libya, with officials in the war-torn country threatening to “open the floodgates” unless the EU provided more money.

Colonel Mohamed Bourgiba, head of the Gweea detention centre, which holds hundreds of migrants, said: “The state is very weak and there is no money. Most of us here aren’t even getting paid.” If things do not improve, he said: “We will just stop working and open the floodgates. Because at the moment we are doing all of this for nothing.”

A Nigerian man involved in people smuggling also commented: “The Libyans are ready to give up. So is Europe ready to take these people? While there is poverty and war in Africa, there are going to be people who want to get on those boats.”

Don't forget that this payment does not include the payments that the EU has made to Turkey, to the Middle East, and the remittances by the rapefugees to their native countries.

Along with the loss of American manufacturing to China, what we are seeing here is one of the biggest transfers of wealth from one culture to another. The remarkable thing about the transfer is that it is occurring nonviolently.

The leaders of the West are simply giving everything away.

It's time we built a Berlin style wall - and I mean guard towers manned by armed personnel. Orders to shoot anyone who crosses. Several layers of fences/walls separated by no-man's land that has been plastered with sensors and mines.

There is a way and it's not really that complicated - very easy to set up various choke points and send them all back. The problem is that there is zero will to do this. Thus far. Give it ten years and it'll be a completely different story. But by then Islam may already have taken over most of Norther Europe. The current crop of Europeans simply has no concept of the sort of problems and generational conflict they are inviting into their countries. If they truly understood the magnitude of what waits them they would take action immediately.

But that's part of human history. After too much wealth and peace there always must come a period of strive and conflict as the new generation rests on the laurels of its forefathers and does not understand that peace and prosperity comes at a cost. And it does not EVER involve playing charity or taking care of complete [hostile] strangers half a planet away.