Witchcraft, Satanism, and other Leftist cult religions.

[n_huffhines]

Kamala insinuated that Christians didn’t belong at her rally. All the people said were “Christ is King. Jesus is Lord”

Kamala straight up said “y’all are at the wrong rally.

Not “hey guys this a political rally, not a church”. She

She’s not friendly to people like you or me. I’m an independent, but Christian.

Wait, are you talking about this? If it smells like BS^, it usually is. Jesus don't like liars and deceivers

 

[VOLS INC.]

Wait, are you talking about this? If it smells like BS^, it usually is. Jesus don't like liars and deceivers

Christian students in Wisconsin speak out after Kamala Harris told them they were at the ‘wrong rally’

A pair of Christian students trolled by Kamala Harris and mercilessly mocked by the crowd at her rally at the University of Wisconsin-La Cross last week insist they were “there for the right …

nypost.com

The NY post had the Hunter Biden story shut down. Maybe this story will be shut down as well. Clearly not a credible source. Let’s wait for Salon.com to comment.

 

[n_huffhines]

Christian students in Wisconsin speak out after Kamala Harris told them they were at the ‘wrong rally’

A pair of Christian students trolled by Kamala Harris and mercilessly mocked by the crowd at her rally at the University of Wisconsin-La Cross last week insist they were “there for the right …

nypost.com

The NY post had the Hunter Biden story shut down. Maybe this story will be shut down as well. Clearly not a credible source. Let’s wait for Salon.com to comment.

Maybe watch the video instead of reading people's opinions about it. They were heckling her and she made an innocuous quip. Only the most sensitive of nancies would take offense to this. Nothing in the video suggests at all that her comment had anything to do with their faith. I love the part in the article where the guy said she gave him an evil smirk. But I think my favorite part of the article is where they compare themselves to Jesus getting persecuted. Chef's kiss.

These people are an embarrassment to a good faith.

 

[VOLS INC.]

Maybe watch the video instead of reading people's opinions about it. They were heckling her and she made an innocuous quip. Only the most sensitive of nancies would take offense to this. Nothing in the video suggests at all that her comment had anything to do with their faith. I love the part in the article where the guy said she gave him an evil smirk. But I think my favorite part of the article is where they compare themselves to Jesus getting persecuted. Chef's kiss.

These people are an embarrassment to a good faith.

I’m not reading people’s opinions. I’m listening to 2 personal accounts of what occurred. And yes, they could be lying, but it’s telling how quickly you dismiss them. Though no one on this board is surprised.

Carry on.

 

[n_huffhines]

I’m not reading people’s opinions. I’m listening to 2 personal accounts of what occurred. And yes, they could be lying, but it’s telling how quickly you dismiss them. Though no one on this board is surprised.

Carry on.

Most definitely calling it an "evil" smirk is an opinion. They're editorializing. They're selling you ********.

Do you honestly have a problem with someone getting heckled by supporters of the other candidate and then responding "You're at the wrong rally." Please answer.

 

[just bob]

Most definitely calling it an "evil" smirk is an opinion. They're editorializing. They're selling you ********.

Do you honestly have a problem with someone getting heckled by supporters of the other candidate and then responding "You're at the wrong rally." Please answer.

^ Doesn't know what heckling is.

 

[Vol8188]

Morality doesn't imply God. I can say that murder is objectively wrong without an authority confirming it.

Everybody's gotta decide for themselves what is "good."

“Murder is objectively wrong without an authority confirming it”-not sure people throughout history would agree

“Everybody’s gotta decide for themselves”-that’s the opposite of your objective morality claim above

 

[DinkinFlicka]

“Murder is objectively wrong without an authority confirming it”-not sure people throughout history would agree

“Everybody’s gotta decide for themselves”-that’s the opposite of your objective morality claim above

Code of Hammurabi.

 

[volbound1700]

Morality doesn't imply God. I can say that murder is objectively wrong without an authority confirming it.

Everybody's gotta decide for themselves what is "good."

Where did the concept of good come from in the first place? What makes people think something is "good" and something is "bad"?

 

[volbound1700]

This stuff does exist but it has always existed.

If these people don't change, God judges them and sends them to Hell. We can leave it at that.

 

[creekdipper]

Code of Hammurabi.

Tenets of Bundy

 

[creekdipper]

Where did the concept of good come from in the first place? What makes people think something is "good" and something is "bad"?

That is a fascinating topic for debate with religion deniers (and should be a fundamental question).

The responses which I have encountered generally revolved around concepts of "evolutionary biology" that results in ever-changing "standards" of "morality.". Basically, it boils down to pragmatism and utilitarianism. Whatever aids the perpetuation of the species is "good," and the purpose of life is to exist. Human life has no more significance than the existence of a pebble of sand...or so I've been told by the true believers in evolutionary biology. What we call "good" and "bad" are defined by our genetic wiring and are mere labels carrying no actual permanent, objective meaning.

 

[Vol8188]

Code of Hammurabi.

That was an authority that had to confirm it. Theres a lot of morality that atheists and agnostics take for granted and will try to proclaim are self evident.

But the truth is many of these ideas historically (like sexual consent) are likely relatively new concepts in comparison to how long homosapiens have been around

 

[volbound1700]

That is a fascinating topic for debate with religion deniers (and should be a fundamental question).

The responses which I have encountered generally revolved around concepts of "evolutionary biology" that results in ever-changing "standards" of "morality.". Basically, it boils down to pragmatism and utilitarianism. Whatever aids the perpetuation of the species is "good," and the purpose of life is to exist. Human life has no more significance than the existence of a pebble of sand...or so I've been told by the true believers in evolutionary biology. What we call "good" and "bad" are defined by our genetic wiring and are mere labels carrying no actual permanent, objective meaning.

Possibly, but there are items that are classified as "good" by people today that don't help evolutionary biology. Logically, it would totally make sense for the United States to kill off other people for our own benefit and prosperity for example.

Also, to add to the point, where did the concept of "God" come from? How did mankind even invent the idea of a higher being and why did every ancient culture seem to gravitate towards the existence of God or gods rather than Evolutionary Theory?

 

[marcusluvsvols]

That was an authority that had to confirm it. Theres a lot of morality that atheists and agnostics take for granted and will try to proclaim are self evident.

But the truth is many of these ideas historically (like sexual consent) are likely relatively new concepts in comparison to how long homosapiens have been around

I agree that atheists and agnostics adhere largely to Christian morals and standards all the while incredulous and sometimes blasphemous in what they say towards the very God that established right and wrong to begin with.

I do however strongly believe in the argument of "malum in se" versus "malum prohibitum" and that both are real and self evident among the sane anyway. When a sane man beats, rapes, or kills a woman for example, I believe that is "malum in se" and that a man inherently knows that what he is doing is deeply wrong or "evil" if you will. Where I differ from a nonbeliever is that I believe that the very reason a man committing those heinous acts, or even a man or woman witnessing those acts; inherently knows them to be wrong is because when God gives people souls at conception that our souls themselves are each imprinted with a conscience that inherently knows right from wrong when it comes to certain acts.

I also believe that because of mankinds fallen and worldly nature, we are predisposed to commit relatively minor sins from very early in life. You never have to teach a small child to lie, to steal, to get angry when they do not get their way. They do this automatically. All of them. Every child. Babies and small children are naturally the most selfish creatures on Earth. They want everything and they want it NOW, and if they do not get it they will cry or act out...until they are trained how to properly act. Its human nature. Conversely the vast majority of children AND adults cannot look a person in the eyes and tell a bold faced lie...at least not without certain "tells" such as staring at the floor, fidgeting, blushing or blinking excessively. Absent mental illness, it takes a lot of practice to become an effective liar. Most people, like both of my kids and myself, are terrible liars and should never even try...because whomever we lie to is 100% going to know we are not being honest with them. This is also because of the conscience of our soul, disagreeing with our brains decision to try and deceive others. We are internally conflicted when doing this, which is why there are outward signs. A sociopath, psychopath etc does not have that internal strife, because part of their brain is malformed or malfunctioning. IMO it doesnt mean that person lacks a normal soul, they just have a damaged brain that short circuits their conscience. This is of course just my opinion, i am certainly not an expert in any field related to these conclusions. Just my 2cents.

 

[volbound1700]

Going back to OP since we are way off topic, I find it odd that Hasbro has sold Ouija Boards for generations now. I do wonder about playing with occult and the evil around it. Too many people out there talk about odd experiences around that stuff.

I find it funny that D&D was call Satanic (which it isn't), but there wasn't a backlash to the selling of Ouija Boards (which very well could be Satanic or definitely something people shouldn't mess with).

 

[marcusluvsvols]

Going back to OP since we are way off topic, I find it odd that Hasbro has sold Ouija Boards for generations now. I do wonder about playing with occult and the evil around it. Too many people out there talk about odd experiences around that stuff.

I find it funny that D&D was call Satanic (which it isn't), but there wasn't a backlash to the selling of Ouija Boards (which very well could be Satanic or definitely something people shouldn't mess with).

Some here may laugh and I do not care...Ouija boards, seances, any attempt at trying to communicate with "spirits" or the dead opens up that dwelling and those inside it to demonic influence and even posession. Its not that cardboard or plastic that came in the box...its opening up your surroundings and consciousness (mind, body) to things that are not of this world. The Bible specifically forbids it and calls it witchcraft for a reason. The Bible also states that there is a war going on around us between angels and demons that God shields us from seeing, because our minds cannot handle it otherwise.

Its logically inconsistent to believe in angels and not demons...demons are angels. Fallen angels, 1/3 of the angels in Heaven fell in a single event along with their leader. Who knows how many have fallen since, perhaps none...perhaps many. Regardless, if you believe in angels you should certainly believe in demons as well. To not is as illogical as believing in the God of Isaac and Jacob, but not in satan. To believe in good, but not evil. If one of them exists, surely the opposite does as well according to Judeo-Christian beliefs anyway.

There exists and its easy to find the audio recording from one of the exorcisms of Anneliese Michel who sadly died after about a year of demonic posession and some 67 attempts by Catholic priests to cast the demons out of her. She suffered horribly and died tragically. In the audio recording, which is very disturbing and clearly not the voice of a young teenage girl, demons claiming to be Hitler shreik in German, others speak latin and other languages that she did not know herself. I will not link the audio here in good conscience, if you would like to hear it there are videos on youtube containing backstory and the audio. I recommend the Mr. Ballen video, but honestly I prayed before and after listening to the audio because I dont want demonic influence anywhere around me or my family. Here is the link to the of course slanted Wikipedia about the girl, which tells only a small portion of the story and is flat out deceptive in parts. Fwiw...I am not a Catholic, and have no idea how effective exorcism is. I firmly believe in demons though, and audio of them is downright scary to be honest.

Anneliese Michel - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[creekdipper]

Possibly, but there are items that are classified as "good" by people today that don't help evolutionary biology. Logically, it would totally make sense for the United States to kill off other people for our own benefit and prosperity for example.

I agree, but the standard response I've gotten is that "empathy" genes have evolved so that we don't kill each other off, discard the weak, descend into anarchy, etc. In other words, they say that rules are necessary for societies which are necessary for human survival...or something along those lines.