Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Because of this, wrath has gone out against you from the Lord.

[Brakelite]

I understand your agenda

No, you don't. You have no idea of my agenda, presuming I have one, because you don't ask. You are presumptuous, defensive, and afraid of the truth.

 

[Chrysostomos]

You are correct. And they are the daughters of the harlot who have inherited the same profession. But you still haven't asked me. Why do I believe the things I do. All you do is repeatedly call me a liar and a slanderer. And again, I am not calling the Pope the Antichrist. Don't you read my posts? . Nor am I anti Catholic. . I have never been anti Catholic. You will never see me write anything that is critical of any individual Catholic. There are many Catholics who are genuine Christians, living in full harmony with what light they have. That's why God calls His people out. God has people in Babylon. My criticism is aimed at the institution itself that has deceived millions over many centuries, and has never changed. Can a leopard change its spots? Neither can one accustomed to do evil do good. Again, just as a reminder, I am happy to provide all the evidence you require if you are interested as to why I believe the Catholic Church institution is the Antichrist of Revelation.

You, @amigo de christo, and @Lizbeth have turned this thread into a smear campaign against the Catholic Church, using crude tactics: blatant lies and blasphemy.
You write nothing but this nonsense. That’s why I’m forced to constantly refute you and expose your lies and slander.

Second, you contradict yourself in a single post. You claim you never called the Pope the Antichrist, yet moments later say you can provide “all the evidence” to prove the Catholic Church institution is the Antichrist of Revelation.

The Pope is the head of the Catholic Church. Labeling the entire institution as the Antichrist is worse than targeting the Pope alone—it’s a broader, more vicious attack.

I’ve said it repeatedly: I’m not interested in your nonsense, slander, or blasphemous theories. Keep that garbage to yourself.

 

[Chrysostomos]

No, you don't. You have no idea of my agenda, presuming I have one, because you don't ask. You are presumptuous, defensive, and afraid of the truth.

You’re crystal clear to me.
Your goal is to discredit all of Christianity.

 

[amigo de christo]

You’re crystal clear to me.
Your goal is to discredit all of Christianity.

No , my goal is not to discredit all of christainity
it is simply to expose the false and their doctrines . Of which now there be many my friend .
The way you write , as if exposing a dangerous place is discrediting all of christanity .
Oh my friend many do not even begin to represent the first five letters in that CHRISTianity .
Many are wolves in wool who have become quite crafity indeed .

 

[Chrysostomos]

No , my goal is not to discredit all of christainity
it is simply to expose the false and their doctrines . Of which now there be many my friend .
The way you write , as if exposing a dangerous place is discrediting all of christanity .
Oh my friend many do not even begin to represent the first five letters in that CHRISTianity .
Many are wolves in wool who have become quite crafity indeed .

I don’t need to counter every single one of your antitheses. Some of your criticisms might even seem obvious—like the presence of "wolves in sheep’s clothing" in every church or the issues with ecumenism.

But your approach to critiquing Christianity is a textbook example of "poisoning the well." It’s a tactic where someone undermines trust in a group or idea from the start, framing their attacks as concern for truth or a warning.

Your sweeping negative generalizations, under the guise of exposing "false doctrines," come across as tendentious criticism or selective denunciation—focusing only on the bad to create a biased perception.
In psychology and social rhetoric, this aligns with manipulative moralizing, where a high moral tone is used to justify attacks while masking personal biases or ulterior motives.

Moreover, your posts should stay on topic. This discussion isn’t about the Catholic Church, yet you, @Lizbeth, and @Brakelite have turned it into an off-topic campaign to discredit Catholicism.

Let’s keep the conversation relevant and constructive.

Do you have anything to say on topic without criticizing Christianity? No? Thought so.

 

[Brakelite]

I don’t need to counter every single one of your antitheses. Some of your criticisms might even seem obvious—like the presence of "wolves in sheep’s clothing" in every church or the issues with ecumenism.

But your approach to critiquing Christianity is a textbook example of "poisoning the well." It’s a tactic where someone undermines trust in a group or idea from the start, framing their attacks as concern for truth or a warning.

Your sweeping negative generalizations, under the guise of exposing "false doctrines," come across as tendentious criticism or selective denunciation—focusing only on the bad to create a biased perception.
In psychology and social rhetoric, this aligns with manipulative moralizing, where a high moral tone is used to justify attacks while masking personal biases or ulterior motives.

Moreover, your posts should stay on topic. This discussion isn’t about the Catholic Church, yet you, @Lizbeth, and @Brakelite have turned it into an off-topic campaign to discredit Catholicism.

Let’s keep the conversation relevant and constructive.

Do you have anything to say on topic without criticizing Christianity? No? Thought so.

What you are missing is that prophetically, God Himself identities the Catholic institution as the Antichrist. You are arguing against the inspiration of the prophets. Principally Daniel, Paul, and John. And you are yet to ask why.

 

[Brakelite]

@Chrysostomos

The Vatican's goal to unite all the world's religions into one body is one of the greatest deceptions in human history. All of the major world religious leaders, without exception, recognise the Vatican, the Pope, as the default over all ruler of spiritual humanity. When they agree to principles and agendas that unite governments with the church, you have Babylon. It wasn't so long ago that the Pope denounced any attempt to convert a member of one religion to another. This was a blatant attempt to stop protestant evangelism. I'm not talking about ancient history here, these things are taking place now, "all the world is wondering after the beast"... today as we speak.
The Pope went on to say, "God is a God for all. And if God is a God for all, we are all sons and daughters of God. Our religions are like different languages. Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Christian, but all lead to the one God".
In other words, he is placing Christianity, the Way, the Truth, and the Life, on the same level as all other religions which he claims are equally valid pathways to God, including Gaia, pagan worship of nature.
It would speak that rather than actually discuss these matters. You would prefer it that we simply shut up.

In talking about the last days, Jesus said

“9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. 10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. ”
Matthew 24:9-10 KJV

Do you understand why the nations will hate you? Why they will persecute you and be offended? Because you speak the truth. If you speak the truth. Otherwise you'll be saying the same things as all those nations, and siding with them against the only true followers of Christ speaking truth. Because we name the name of Jesus as being the only way to salvation. We talk about the true gospel and expose the false. We rebuke the false prophets among us, and expose their lies and their deceptions.
Jesus is coming soon. We are living in the very last momentous days of earth's history. Shall we pander to political correctness and the fear of offending people with the truth, and agree to the antichrist agenda to not preach the true gospel, not declare Babylon as fallen, not identify the true Antichrist that is demeaning and diminishing the true Christ?

The Protestant reformers were unanimous in their speaking of truth regarding the office of the papacy. They didn't condemn individual leaders except as they may have behaved themselves abominably, nor the church members, but the seat of power and authority upon which the Pope sat. The system. When they called the system antichrist, they were exposing the papal system as replacing Christ, exposing the system as being set up to exalt tradition and church dogma over and above the truths of Scripture.

In order to establish herself as principle spokesperson in religious matters, she had to resort to using the armies of governments that she convinced were going to hell without the Pope's recommendation.
Prophecy informs us of a time in the near future when an image to the medieval papal union of church and state would be erected in our time. This isn't a statue. It's another church state union that imposes religious law, and exacts harsh penalties against those who refuse. In other words, it persecutes just as the papacy did, and not that long ago, and enforces a mark or sign of loyalty to that papal system on her behalf. That's basically Revelation 13 in a nutshell.
Now. Of course some will, maybe many, will likely disagree with that prophetic picture. As you can see, if true, many millions of spiritual lives would be endangered. Ought we not talk about these things? This is prophecy. One cannot talk about a metaphorical beast with a dozen or so unique identifying markers without actually naming the institution that shares those criteria. That's the papacy. And that's just the first beast.

While it is true that Seventh Day Adventist are at the forefront of warning against this scenario while others are refusing to join them, we do have a long line of highly respected and learned men who went before us who agree on every whit our view. In fact it was their view, and we are merely continuing the conversation. Those reformers, many of them anyway, died because of that very testimony. They weren't doing so because of a fit of resentment or bad temper. They recognised that the papal system is not biblical, that tradition has overwhelmed biblical truth, and has swept Jesus aside by a morass of superstition and false doctrine. Jesus, Paul, John, warned this would happen. It has. If we don't speak out, we will be found guilty in the judgement of siding with the enemy. And others who were deceived, even some on this forum, will be asking of us,"You knew!! Why did you not warn us!!???"
Open and frank discussion of all these matters is essential for the true everlasting gospel to be preached in all the world.

 

[Brakelite]

You raise a fair point that Paul, writing in the 50s AD, likely referred to the temple in Jerusalem since it was the only "temple of God" standing at the time. But I think you're missing the prophetic depth here. Paul didn’t explicitly say the "man of lawlessness" would sit in the Second Temple, and history shows no such figure emerged before its destruction in 70 AD. Since the Second Temple’s destruction didn’t see an Antichrist figure, Paul’s words must point to a future temple—likely a Third Temple in Jerusalem, on or near the same site.

The state of Israel was reestablished in 1948, many Jews actively push to build a Third Temple (e.g., The Temple Institute), and there’s widespread expectation of a Jewish "messiah". These align strikingly with Paul’s prophecy, suggesting we’re seeing end-times events unfold with stunning accuracy (2 Thessalonians 2:3–4). If this Third Temple is built and a “messiah” is proclaimed, it would be the Antichrist, not Christ, sitting in it, as Jesus warned of false messiahs (Matthew 24:24).

So, why do Christian Zionists support Israel’s secular state and the push for a Third Temple?

So far, you may have forgotten that at least up to this point Amigo and Lisbeth had agreed with your points regarding the third temple and the potential blasphemous exercise, supported lock stock and barrel by American evangelical churches, of sacrificing animals in place of any recognition of the sacrifice of the Son of God. And I also concur.

I would like to make a point regarding the above post. It doesn't really matter when Paul was writing his letter to the Thessalonians, whether prior to it or subsequent to the temples destruction in 70ad. Paul specifically designated that the temple into which the man of sin, the Antichrist, would seat himself and declare his authority and position as being above God and all that His place in heaven represents, would be in the temple of God. I would suggest that anytime subsequent to Jesus's last visit to the temple immediately prior to Calvary, the temple no longer was God's temple. Jesus, on previous occasions, had said it was His Father's house, however on that last occasion, declared it to be your house, in direct reference to those He was speaking to, the Jewish rulers and elders. Therefore, after that time, there existed only 3 possibilities as to what actually constitute God's house, and the temple then standing in Jerusalem wasn't one of them.
1. There was/is the sanctuary or temple in heaven, the original of which the tabernacle in the wilderness was a miniature copy.
2. There is the individual Christian, in whom the holy Spirit resides, making the body "the temple of God".
Neither of the above 2 could be the answer to Paul's prophecy. Sigh both are assuredly temples of God, the man of sin could not set up throne in either. The third option however is greatly more likely, in that it harmonizes with John's declaration as to the Antichrist and from whence he came, the church.
Notice that the prophecy in Thessalonians speaks of a falling away. This falling away... Apostasy...or divorce... Speaks to a former right relationship between that which fell away, and the God from Whom he fell.
When one considers apostasy spoken of elsewhere, it speaks more often than not of a form of spiritual adultery. The rejection of exercising faith in a faithful loving God, to exercising faith in the kings of this world and their governments. (Note current relationship between the church and Trump's government), both of which are totally committed to the establishment of a temple as you've previously noted as the principle topic of this thread. So that union of church and state, is a common denominator throughout this thread, and which speaks ever so loudly to early Christian history. And that's where the Catholic Church comes in. Need I explain why, or are you familiar with that history and how it impacted the Christian landscape for the next 1500 years?

 

[Brakelite]

On one hand, MAGA supporters often criticize leftist ecumenism for uniting all denominations and religions into one. Yet, on the other hand, these MAGA folks tactically overlook that the secular state of Israel they fervently and unconditionally support is nearly half atheistic (~43% secular/atheists per CBS/Pew 2025, ~3.33 million), and the other half consists of religious Zionists (~23% religious + ~34% traditional, partially observant) who reject Jesus as Messiah and push to build a Third Temple to resume animal sacrifices. If we apply your critical logic against leftist ecumenism to MAGA's unconditional support for Israel, MAGA comes out as the worst ecumenists of all. Leftists at least try to unite Christian denominations—all of whom believe in Jesus as the Messiah and sole Savior—while MAGA supports atheists who deny God altogether and Zionists who blaspheme Christ by denying His atoning sacrifice and preparing for the Antichrist's "abomination" (2 Thessalonians 2:3–4; Daniel 9:27).

This double standard is glaring: MAGA condemns interfaith dialogue but embraces Abraham Accords (pushed by Trump himself), which unite Israel with Muslim nations in "peace" that ignores Christ's exclusivity. If ecumenism is antichrist for uniting believers in different ways, how much worse is uniting with outright rejectors of Christ? Be objective and non-selective—if you criticize ecumenism, then condemn Christian Zionists too for supporting secular Israel and especially religious Zionists in their temple-building ambitions, which is practical denial of Jesus' redemptive work. True faith prioritizes Christ over any nation (Galatians 3:28; Philippians 3:20), not the other way around. Why the hypocrisy—criticizing leftists while ignoring MAGA's own ecumenical alliances with Christ-rejectors?

If I remember correctly, amigo showed approval of your posts that spoke of blasphemy in the building of a third temple. So there's no double standard.

 

[Chrysostomos]

What you are missing is that prophetically, God Himself identities the Catholic institution as the Antichrist. You are arguing against the inspiration of the prophets. Principally Daniel, Paul, and John. And you are yet to ask why.

Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord?​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1871043754704216416

 

[Chrysostomos]

@Chrysostomos

The Vatican's goal to unite all the world's religions into one body is one of the greatest deceptions in human history. All of the major world religious leaders, without exception, recognise the Vatican, the Pope, as the default over all ruler of spiritual humanity. When they agree to principles and agendas that unite governments with the church, you have Babylon. It wasn't so long ago that the Pope denounced any attempt to convert a member of one religion to another. This was a blatant attempt to stop protestant evangelism. I'm not talking about ancient history here, these things are taking place now, "all the world is wondering after the beast"... today as we speak.
The Pope went on to say, "God is a God for all. And if God is a God for all, we are all sons and daughters of God. Our religions are like different languages. Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Christian, but all lead to the one God".
In other words, he is placing Christianity, the Way, the Truth, and the Life, on the same level as all other religions which he claims are equally valid pathways to God, including Gaia, pagan worship of nature.
It would speak that rather than actually discuss these matters. You would prefer it that we simply shut up.

In talking about the last days, Jesus said

“9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. 10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. ”
Matthew 24:9-10 KJV

Do you understand why the nations will hate you? Why they will persecute you and be offended? Because you speak the truth. If you speak the truth. Otherwise you'll be saying the same things as all those nations, and siding with them against the only true followers of Christ speaking truth. Because we name the name of Jesus as being the only way to salvation. We talk about the true gospel and expose the false. We rebuke the false prophets among us, and expose their lies and their deceptions.
Jesus is coming soon. We are living in the very last momentous days of earth's history. Shall we pander to political correctness and the fear of offending people with the truth, and agree to the antichrist agenda to not preach the true gospel, not declare Babylon as fallen, not identify the true Antichrist that is demeaning and diminishing the true Christ?

The Protestant reformers were unanimous in their speaking of truth regarding the office of the papacy. They didn't condemn individual leaders except as they may have behaved themselves abominably, nor the church members, but the seat of power and authority upon which the Pope sat. The system. When they called the system antichrist, they were exposing the papal system as replacing Christ, exposing the system as being set up to exalt tradition and church dogma over and above the truths of Scripture.

In order to establish herself as principle spokesperson in religious matters, she had to resort to using the armies of governments that she convinced were going to hell without the Pope's recommendation.
Prophecy informs us of a time in the near future when an image to the medieval papal union of church and state would be erected in our time. This isn't a statue. It's another church state union that imposes religious law, and exacts harsh penalties against those who refuse. In other words, it persecutes just as the papacy did, and not that long ago, and enforces a mark or sign of loyalty to that papal system on her behalf. That's basically Revelation 13 in a nutshell.
Now. Of course some will, maybe many, will likely disagree with that prophetic picture. As you can see, if true, many millions of spiritual lives would be endangered. Ought we not talk about these things? This is prophecy. One cannot talk about a metaphorical beast with a dozen or so unique identifying markers without actually naming the institution that shares those criteria. That's the papacy. And that's just the first beast.

While it is true that Seventh Day Adventist are at the forefront of warning against this scenario while others are refusing to join them, we do have a long line of highly respected and learned men who went before us who agree on every whit our view. In fact it was their view, and we are merely continuing the conversation. Those reformers, many of them anyway, died because of that very testimony. They weren't doing so because of a fit of resentment or bad temper. They recognised that the papal system is not biblical, that tradition has overwhelmed biblical truth, and has swept Jesus aside by a morass of superstition and false doctrine. Jesus, Paul, John, warned this would happen. It has. If we don't speak out, we will be found guilty in the judgement of siding with the enemy. And others who were deceived, even some on this forum, will be asking of us,"You knew!! Why did you not warn us!!???"
Open and frank discussion of all these matters is essential for the true everlasting gospel to be preached in all the world.

Why are you dumping this anti-Catholic screed here? This thread isn’t about the Catholic Church. Yet, every single time someone critiques the modern state of Israel, Christian Zionists like you launch a full-on campaign to trash Catholicism. I’m not even Catholic! Why are you shoving this nonsense in my face? I get it—you’re following a script, sticking to the playbook without deviating an inch. You and your crew, hiding behind the “Christian” label, seem to think that attacking the Catholic Church is some kind of revenge for criticism of Zionism, Talmudic Judaism, or Israel’s policies.

Let me say it again: I’m not Catholic. Why are you punishing Catholics for my views on Zionism? It’s not just unfair—it’s absurd. I’m tired of hearing this drivel about Catholics. It’s not only baseless, but it’s also completely off-topic. Why drag this irrelevant rant into a discussion that has nothing to do with it?

 

[Chrysostomos]

So far, you may have forgotten that at least up to this point Amigo and Lisbeth had agreed with your points regarding the third temple and the potential blasphemous exercise, supported lock stock and barrel by American evangelical churches, of sacrificing animals in place of any recognition of the sacrifice of the Son of God. And I also concur.

I would like to make a point regarding the above post. It doesn't really matter when Paul was writing his letter to the Thessalonians, whether prior to it or subsequent to the temples destruction in 70ad. Paul specifically designated that the temple into which the man of sin, the Antichrist, would seat himself and declare his authority and position as being above God and all that His place in heaven represents, would be in the temple of God. I would suggest that anytime subsequent to Jesus's last visit to the temple immediately prior to Calvary, the temple no longer was God's temple. Jesus, on previous occasions, had said it was His Father's house, however on that last occasion, declared it to be your house, in direct reference to those He was speaking to, the Jewish rulers and elders. Therefore, after that time, there existed only 3 possibilities as to what actually constitute God's house, and the temple then standing in Jerusalem wasn't one of them.
1. There was/is the sanctuary or temple in heaven, the original of which the tabernacle in the wilderness was a miniature copy.
2. There is the individual Christian, in whom the holy Spirit resides, making the body "the temple of God".
Neither of the above 2 could be the answer to Paul's prophecy. Sigh both are assuredly temples of God, the man of sin could not set up throne in either. The third option however is greatly more likely, in that it harmonizes with John's declaration as to the Antichrist and from whence he came, the church.
Notice that the prophecy in Thessalonians speaks of a falling away. This falling away... Apostasy...or divorce... Speaks to a former right relationship between that which fell away, and the God from Whom he fell.
When one considers apostasy spoken of elsewhere, it speaks more often than not of a form of spiritual adultery. The rejection of exercising faith in a faithful loving God, to exercising faith in the kings of this world and their governments. (Note current relationship between the church and Trump's government), both of which are totally committed to the establishment of a temple as you've previously noted as the principle topic of this thread. So that union of church and state, is a common denominator throughout this thread, and which speaks ever so loudly to early Christian history. And that's where the Catholic Church comes in. Need I explain why, or are you familiar with that history and how it impacted the Christian landscape for the next 1500 years?

Your attempt to tie 2 Thessalonians 2:4 to the Catholic Church doesn’t hold up.

Paul says the “man of sin” will sit in the “temple of God” (ναός, naós in Greek), which in his time unmistakably referred to the Jerusalem Temple—the Second Temple, still standing when he wrote around 50–52 AD.
The Greek word ναός is used consistently in the New Testament for the physical temple in Jerusalem (e.g., Matthew 23:16, John 2:16), not for the church as a community, which is called ἐκκλησία (ekklēsía). If Paul meant a Christian community or institution, he’d have used ἐκκλησία, but he didn’t. He said ναός, pointing to the only “temple of God” his audience would’ve known: the one in Jerusalem.

Your claim that Paul’s “temple” refers to the Catholic Church is an anachronism. The Catholic Church as an institution didn’t exist in Paul’s day—Christianity was just a collection of small ἐκκλησίαι, not a centralized system. Suggesting Paul was prophesying about a future Catholic “temple” is baseless and ignores the historical context. The Thessalonian readers would’ve understood ναός as the Jerusalem Temple, period.

This thread isn’t about the Catholic Church, yet you keep dragging it in. As I’ve said, I’m not even Catholic, and I’m tired of this off-topic nonsense. Every time someone critiques Zionism or Israel’s policies, you and your crew pivot to bashing Catholics, as if that’s some kind of rebuttal. It’s irrelevant, unfair, and absurd. Stick to the topic—your anti-Catholic rants don’t belong here. Can you engage without derailing into this tired script?

 

[Chrysostomos]

Even the social network "X" doesn't want to help translate from Hebrew.​

Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord?​

Because of this, wrath has gone out against you from the Lord.​

 

[Jesussaves150]

How can any of them be converted to Christ if you hate them all?

 

[amigo de christo]

How can any of them be converted to Christ if you hate them all?

and now a word my friend .
MANY have no idea that the love they follow IS HATE .
Many have bought into what is actually hate yet think its actually love .
AND you can bet NO ONE gonna be converted TO CHRIST with their love either .
It wont even correct unbeleif now . Just a big ol interfaith we all serve the same GOD lie .
OH YEAH it allows sins and UNBELEIF upon them all now .
With a judge not here and a correct not there , here a judge not , there a judge not .
BUT many have forgotten or never knew .
YE SHALL INDEED not hate your neighbor in your heart , THAT YOU S HALL CORRECT HIM and NOT ALLOW SIN upon him .
HELLO ecuemincal incluisive interfaith of anti christ . WHAT A LIE it is and what hate and murder it is .
BUT MOST SEE only lovey lovey , lets not judge ,lets all be one . Something we better all pray about .
WE gots many wolves dressed in wool and false love these days . And boy do they hate on the sheep who do correct .

 

[lforrest]

Isaiah 6:10
"Make the heart of this people dull,and their ears heavy,and blind their eyes;lest they see with their eyes,and hear with their ears,and understand with their hearts,and turn and be healed."

Romans 11:25
"I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in,"

The Father gave the Jews hearts of stone and it would appear to have been to the benefit of the gentiles. As gentile believers should we in turn harden our hearts? No for God said in Ezekiel that he would give us hearts of flesh and a new spirit.

 

[amigo de christo]

Isaiah 6:10
"Make the heart of this people dull,and their ears heavy,and blind their eyes;lest they see with their eyes,and hear with their ears,and understand with their hearts,and turn and be healed."

Romans 11:25
"I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in,"

The Father gave the Jews hearts of stone and it would appear to have been to the benefit of the gentiles. As gentile believers should we in turn harden our hearts? No for God said in Ezekiel that he would give us hearts of flesh and a new spirit.

only the unbeleiving jews .
FROM the moment THE GREAT AND MIGHTY GOD sent the SON
and He began to finish and to complete the works of the FATHER ,
OH i say
from the moment even JOHN had come to prepare the peoples UNTO HIM
Oh from the moment he began he preached to the jews HIS Message .
The same message as did the jewish apostels preach to the jews
as well as later to the gentiles .
But beware lest that come upon you which is written
BEHOLD ye despisers wonder and PERISH
for i work a work in your days that you will no way BELEIVE
though it be declared unto you . There is no place safe
there is no salvation that man can give
There is no h ope of man that can save . JESUS CAN . And we both KNOW ITS HIGH TIME we preach that NAME
with a serious reminder of JUST HOW important , how dire important , IT IS TO BELIEVE ON HIM .
Just a friendly reminder to us all to never once supporte ecumenical interfaith and its so called savoir and solution
which darn sure DID DENY JESUS THE CHRIST . that solution wont bring them the beloved peace n safety
Always remember JESUS did not come to bring peace on earth .
AND HE darn sure WOULD NOT HAVE REJECTED THE DIRE NEED TO BELEIVE ON HIM
either .
But they did that . And this sheep do not heed the call of any anti christs . WE HEED JESUS THE CHRIST . be encouraged my friend .

 

[amigo de christo]

Think that i came to bring peace on earth
I tell ye nay but rather divisions .
BUT i sure know who does come to bring peace on earth
and by PEACE will darn sure destory many .
Does anyone here ever get the feeling WE BEEN LIED TOO these days
WE HAVE BEEN . they are leading us as one by men of anti christ
RIGHT TO ITS PEACE SOLUTION , RIGHT TOO even the day of their own destruction
WHEN GOD ALL MIGHTY and the LAMB cometh to pour down wrath upon THEM ALL .
satan is a liar .
He cares not for the sheep
HE desires ONLY the worship and THE DESTRUCTION OF ALL of humanity . But boy he sure can decieve all right .
The sheep must do exploits my friends . THE SHEEP will follow CHRIST .

 

[Chrysostomos]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1990507819007877538

 

[Chrysostomos]

How can any of them be converted to Christ if you hate them all?

What can you do? The luck just wasn't on their side with this.