Only 30.000 legitimate Arab Palestinian refugees

People still living displaced during Israel’s War of Independence stands at about 30.000.

Islam and the United Nations have joined hands, creating a “refugee problem” to defame Israel and remove Biblical Zionism.

Arab Palestinians were breathing fire and brimstone this week following reports that a new US Senate amendment mandated official scrutiny of the accurate number of legitimate Palestinian Arab refugees.

According to the overwhelmingly Muslim staffed UNRWA (United Nations Relief Works Agency) – the body responsible for providing “assistance, protection and advocacy” exclusively for the Palestinian Arab refugees – five million “registered Palestine refugees” live in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, Samaria and Judea.

Starkly opposing this figure are numbers arrived at by a researcher for the US-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Jonathan Schanzer has reportedly found that the number of people still living who were actually displaced during Israel’s War of Independence stands is just about 30,000.

UNRWA has a biennial budget of USD 1.2 billion. The United States is the largest single donor, giving about USD 280 million to the agency every year.

The UN have given Radical Islam statues as “refugees” and feeds terrorism.

Reports say the Senate amendment was mandated by the need to determine how much of the American taxpayers’ money goes toward supporting real refugees.

Congress is obligated to keep track of where and on go the millions of dollars America spends annually on this problem. A Republican aide quoted in The Jerusalem Post Tuesday said the new bill would puncture the “UNRWA myth” of millions of refugees.

Angry Arab responses were immediate in coming. Blustering from the ‘Palestinian’ leadership included dire predictions that the bill would “set back efforts to reach a peace deal with the Israelis.”

A former foreign policy advisor to Palestinian Authority “president” Mahmoud Abbas was quoted as calling the amendment “very dangerous.”

 “It can have a bad reaction on the ground [and] will just make any US ability to push for a responsible solution [between Israelis and Palestinians] suspect in the eyes of the Palestinians and refugees in particular,” warned Ghaith al-Omari.

Source: Jerusalem News Wire

My comment:

Many people will die and be taken to heaven by Jesus, not even knowing where to place Israel on a map.

But for all who have been told the truth about the rebirth of Israel, and rejects it, there is no excuse for the stern judgment waiting for them.

A lie is a lie,  even if it has been told a million times.

A lie is lie, even if it is promoted by the United Nations and sunder by a billion dollar a more every year.

A lie is a lie, even if all Churches and nations on Earth starts to distribute it.

Of the 600,000-750,000 Arabs displaced by the 1948 Israeli-Arab war, as few as 30,000 remain alive and nation-less today.

And yet, the “Palestinians” somehow claim over five million refugees, with the support and blessing of the international community.

There were also 900.000 Jews who was expelled from Muslim nations from 1948 onwards.  Non of them wants to return to the totalitarian and despotic regimes in the Middle East, Persia and North Africa.

The Bible explains that God can only be worshiped in spirit and truth.

 Psalm 31:5
Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth.

 John 4:23
Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks.

It is absolutely impossible that the Holy Spirit will back up all who starts to believe in lies, and curse Israel and the Jewish people.

Out of such worship, comes only religiosity. There are no blessings from heaven.

Copy-cats of “Jesus” have always been the worst enemies of the gospel.

Are you a follower of a false Messiah, a “god” who support those who lie and cheat?

Written by Ivar

32 thoughts on “Only 30.000 legitimate Arab Palestinian refugees

  1. Amazing that the Arabs, want and claim so much, yet I’ve never heard of any groups, agency or government within their own, to help, support, educate, medical housing etc for their own people, other than ‘Borrow, Beg, Steal, take from Israel, United States, and other countries, all the while they claim they want a nation, country of their own, when any small or large amount they get, they still don’t run it like any normal nation that wants the freedom of their own cultural and/or heritage…just hate, and try to destroy Israel..that says a lot about a leach!

  2. Look Ivar, this is racism at its best.

    Just because the jews are historically the inhabitants of the land Israel does not mean that all modern Jews are historically Israelites. You will be surprised as to find out how many of them are purely european and not one ounce of Hebrew blood is in them. That’s ok though.

    Just as we can not ignore the appeals of some Palestinians who are truly descendants of the ancient Israelites. Some of the Palestinians are Hebrews and deserve to stay in Israel. However most are purely Arab which is ok too. Who said you have to be Hebrew to stay in Israel?

    Also a key point to remember is that some Palestinians are our Christian brethren and we must do well to look after them. They did not decide to be born palestinian.

    We must remember that they are human beings too and despite the atrocities committed by some Palestinians and some Israelis , we need to take care of our human brothers and sisters. THAT Is true Christian charity. We do not judge others on their identity for we are not in the position to judge. We should use this as an opportunity to spread the gospel. Not to alienate helpless people who are caught in between a war.

      1. I think that more appropriately applies to you. Tell me how have I been deceived?

        Have I been deceived into thinking Palestinians are human?

        Have I been deceived into thinking that some of them are our Christian brethren?

        Have I been deceived into believing that humans should help one another in acts of charity?

        Have I been deceived into thinking that a lot of Israelis are not Hebrew at all?

        Have I been deceived into thinking that some Palestinians are in fact hebrew?

        Please enlighten me oh wise Andrea?

      2. ~~>Please enlighten me oh wise Andrea?<~~ Sweetheart I doubt very seriously I can enlighten you of anything..? Thus the 'sad, yet much deceived'..You ask one you claim is already deceived for any enlightenment…strange indeed!! When in reality you have no desire to be told the Truth, while Easily claiming others make a 'racist statements' …..that speak The Truth…"You are prayed for"

      3. Hmmm I sensed a reply like this would come. I’m all for the truth. As I’m a Christian. I’m just tired of the level of ignorance that I have witnessed on this blog. You guys claim a lot of wacky things with no evidence to back it up.

        Then again, I’m a Catholic so whatever I say is not gonna get through to you as you have already decided that I am hell bound and spew lies and that I support the AntiChrist Aka bishop of Rome who in reality is the successor of Saint Peter. Oh well I’ll keep you people in my prayers

        God bless you all

      4. Make up your mind….Are you a Christian? or Are you a Catholic? As for ‘anyone saying you ‘are’ going to hell’…is unscriptural…we may say ‘you will IF you don’t repent’ …also you can not ‘be a witness to this Blog’ if you don’t know the Truth, you can only ‘repeat what you feel is against your own chosen misguided beliefs’…A ‘Real Witness’ witnesses Truth…though it be even against their own hurt, they will ultimately only witness Truth. You like the ones ‘who were paid’ to witness against Jesus Christ, spoke lies. (Whether you speak these lies because you are most deceived, which I also suspect, and/or your own hatred against any who would dare NOT to lift up the Catholic Church and/or “it’s Leader the Pope” which is not a direct descendent of Peter, nor any Apostle or Disciple of The Lord Jesus Christ, for the followers of The Lord Jesus Christ would never do, say, believe, teach, dig up graves, nor approve of such blasphemy towards anyone who The Precious Blood of Jesus Christ was shed for which also includes YOU as well as ‘all man-kind’..including your Self Appointed Pope..in all his worldly lusts for power, greed, and numerous other desires of the flesh. Yet he too can Repent and Believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ, if so he also could be ‘a Christian’…(smile)

  3. I’m both! The two cannot be separated despite what you may think. I’m a Christian who expresses my Christianity in the form of the Latin Rite of Catholicism. The true biblical Christianity that has its roots steeped down in history all the way back to 33AD.

    You should read the early church fathers. FYI they were Catholic… (smile)

    I by birth accepted Jesus, by baptism accepted him, by communion accepted him, by confirmation and by the Sacraments as a whole accepted Jesus as my Lord and God.

    I’ve noted that on this site you guys always say we proclaim a different Jesus… (Perplexed face)
    Please tell me more about this Jesus that we proclaim? Coz last time I checked, we believe in the Jesus of the Gospels, the Carpenter from Nazareth who was conceived by Mary the virgin the power of the Holy spirit. The same Jesus who was crucified, died and was buried and who rose again on the 3rd day in accordance with the scriptures. Who ascended into heaven and who us seated at the right hand of the Father. Who will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and who’s kingdom will have no end.

    Is this not Jesus of the gospels? The same Yeshua of Nazareth?

    1. How many Children (approximately) did Mary the Mother of Jesus give birth to? If possible name them? Also ‘saying’ about Jesus, that’s good, however the Devils know what you just said and more so..they even tremble in fear, Do you? Since ‘this Jesus’ you mention on a ‘factual level’…yet your Catholicism as on ‘a loyal level’…if you care to answer this fine if not fine also…I still do not believe you give a ‘real Hoot’ what anyone in here that is aware of the great grace shed for them believes…since you have condemned the very ONE in favor and defense of your denominational favorite choice…you praise before the World..

    2. Interesting, you accepted Jesus by being born???? And then AGAIN accepted Jesus when you were sprinkled as an infant??? Amazing. Were you a child prodigy???

      And then, who is this Jesus of the gospels, the carpenter from Nazareth who was conceived by mary the virgin the power of the holy spirit. Even as you try you can’t remove the veneration of mary “the mother of god” when you speak. Sorry, Mary was “a” virgin, not “the ” virgin. And she is NOT the mother of God, only a god can be the mother of God, and yet you put that god before God. OOOOPS! Bad move.

      Hate to inform you but God conceived Jesus, God, and Mary conceived Jesus, the Son of Man. Mary brought the sin of man to Jesus, without which Jesus could not have born our sins on the cross.

      And here’s a news flash, Jesus ate, drank, peed and pooped like the rest of us, as did Mary who also all her life had the uncleanness of the menstrual cycle.

      Sorry to disillusion you…

  4. “God’s fingers”

    A Catholic priest once said :

    “There are only 100 people in the world who hate the Catholic Church. The other people simply hate what they THINK the Catholic Church is”

    Another Catholic priest once said :

    “If the Catholic Church was exactly what all its detractors claim it to be, I too would hate it”

    Now to reply to what you said.

    “Interesting, you accepted Jesus by being
    born???? And then AGAIN accepted Jesus
    when you were sprinkled as an infant???
    Amazing. Were you a child prodigy???”

    I was born Christian. My baptism was a re-affirmation of my acceptance of Jesus as Lord. The same goes for the other Sacraments. Its not rocket science.

    “Even as you try you can’t
    remove the veneration of mary “the mother
    of god” when you speak. Sorry, Mary was
    “a” virgin, not “the ” virgin.”

    Two sides of the same coin? Lol

    The definite article indicates uniqueness. Mary was not just a virgin but was the chosen virgin and hence she is THE Virgin as that is her title to imply or uniqueness among her fellows.

    ” And she is NOT
    the mother of God, only a god can be the
    mother of God,”

    Who gave you the authority to decide whether God’s mother should be divine or human????

    Its simple friend; Jesus is God. Jesus is the Son of Mary. Mary is the Mother of Jesus = Mary is the Mother of God (Jesus). She is the Mother of God the Son.

    ” and yet you put that god
    before God. OOOOPS! Bad move.”

    Ummm I think you’ve mistaken the Catholic Church for something else. God is our head. There is only One God. Unless you’re affirming that there is another god which I pray you are not.

    “Hate to inform you but God conceived
    Jesus, God, and Mary conceived Jesus, the
    Son of Man. Mary brought the sin of man to
    Jesus, without which Jesus could not have
    born our sins on the cross.”

    The Son of Man was a divine being you do know that right? The Messiah was fully man and fully God simultaneously. This is the doctrine of hypostatic union which was formulated by the Catholic Church.

    The whole Mary brought the sin of man thing is a bit vague. Please expand on that so I can understand what you are saying?

    “And here’s a news flash, Jesus ate, drank,
    peed and pooped like the rest of us, as did
    Mary who also all her life had the
    uncleanness of the menstrual cycle.”

    No one denies that. They were both human. Lol again you have mistaken the Church to teach something that it actually doesn’t.

    “Sorry to disillusion you…”

    God be with you and have a blessed day.

    1. Hate to break this to you, but my information comes from my wife, a former RC who accepted Jesus Christ as her Savior and ONLY.

      Now, pray tell, explain to us ignorant HOW you can be born a Christian. And how can you reaffirm something when you can’t speak? Truly a prodigy, I can tell.

      You can’t be the mother of God since God the Father and His Son were there before man was created. Mary brought the sin of man into the Son of Man , Jesus, a necessity. She was/is not holy in the venerated state. Holyiness comes from God, Mary was needed to bring the sin, otherwise there would have been no need for the woman, He would have just shown up. “This is the doctrine of hypostatic union which was formulated by the Catholic Church. ” BINGO!

      “Who gave you the authority to decide whether God’s mother should be divine or human???? ” That would be the Bible, a point you seem to have missed. Again, she is not the mother of God.

      “” and yet you put that god
      before God. OOOOPS! Bad move.”

      Ummm I think you’ve mistaken the Catholic Church for something else. God is our head. There is only One God. Unless you’re affirming that there is another god which I pray you are not.” I believe that would be you RCs, performing miracles, in particular after her death. Including the tradition you’ve developed because someone forgot where she was buried.

  5. “How many Children (approximately) did
    Mary the Mother of Jesus give birth to?”

    1

    “If possible name them?”

    “Also ‘saying’ about Jesus, that’s good, however the Devils know what you just said and more so..they even tremble in fear, Do you?Jesus

    No I don’t. In stark contrast I rejoice in happiness for the Lord is my saviour who is coming very soon and I look forward to that day 🙂

    “Since ‘this
    Jesus’ you mention on a ‘factual level’…yet
    your Catholicism as on ‘a loyal level’…if
    you care to answer this fine if not fine
    also…”

    I don’t understand what you’re trying to say.

    “I still do not believe you give a ‘real
    Hoot’ what anyone in here that is aware of
    the great grace shed for them believes…”

    I do care actually for you guys believe a lot of false things that I am obliged to correct in order to spread the truth. However my job is not to convince you but just to let the truth be known. The Holy Spirit will guide you to the fullness of truth if you let Him.

    “since you have condemned the very ONE
    in favor and defense of your
    denominational favorite choice…”

    This may come to you as a shock, but I have not condemned anybody.

    “you praise before the World..”

    I praise before God and God alone.

      1. ““How many Children (approximately) did
        Mary the Mother of Jesus give birth to?”

        1”

        So which parts of this did you miss?
        Matthew 1:25 (New International Version 1984)
        25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

        Matthew 12:47
        47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.”

        Mark 3:31-32
        31 Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”

        Luke 8:19-20
        19 Now Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.”

        Acts 1:14
        14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

        Sorry, but Mary had sex. Her womb (or vagina) was not supernaturally closed. God blessed her with children.

        And hate to break it to you, but (as you posted elsewhere) the “church fathers” do not go back to 33AD. Peter ceded ministry to the Gentiles to Paul. So, unless the RC ministers to Jews you lose. And as to your favorite assignment of Peter by Jesus, sorry but the Word isn’t buried in Latin anymore. When Jesus referenced Peter ( or Cephas) , in the original Greek, he called him petros or little stone, he then referenced Petra, the rock, meaning Himself.

        Your traditional dogma has no footing in the truth, and sir, it is the truth that will set you free…

      2. I will list what The Scriptures tell us since the translation you used does not mention the sisters and/or was not listed in response to the question of How many children did May give birth to?

        King James Version….Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

      3. Since you don’t know ‘how many children Mary gave birth to, of course you can’t name them…Neither will I…!!!

      4. To the both of you :

        neither the Gospel accounts nor the early Christians attest to the notion that Mary bore other children besides Jesus. The faithful knew, through the witness of Scripture and Tradition, that Jesus was Mary’s only child and that she remained
        a lifelong virgin. An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of
        her life were still vivid in the minds of many.
        According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: “The principal aim of the whole writing [Protoevangelium of James] is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and
        after the birth of Christ” (Patrology, 1:120-1).

        To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam.
        1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke
        2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity.

        However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated “virgin of the Lord,” to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and
        since Mary is entrusted to John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion).

        According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a
        virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having
        forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other
        than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit. The perpetual virginity of Mary has always been reconciled with the biblical references to Christ’s brethren through a proper understanding of the meaning of the term “brethren.” The understanding that
        the brethren of the Lord were Jesus’ stepbrothers (children of Joseph) rather than half-brothers (children of Mary) was the most common one until the time of
        Jerome (fourth century). It was Jerome who introduced the possibility that Christ’s brethren were actually his cousins, since in Jewish idiom cousins were also referred to as “brethren.” The Catholic Church allows
        the faithful to hold either view, since both are compatible with the reality of Mary’s perpetual virginity.

        Today most Protestants,like you, are unaware of these early beliefs regarding Mary’s virginity and the proper interpretation of “the brethren of the Lord.” And yet, the Protestant Reformers themselves—Martin Luther, John
        Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli—honored the perpetual virginity of Mary and recognized it as the teaching of the Bible, as have other, more modern Protestants.

        For early Church father’s views on this issue :

        http://www.catholic.com/tracts/mary-ever-virgin

      5. So Wandile93 you are claiming that the book of Matthew is a lie? Which part of the words ” no union with her until she gave birth” don’t you understand?

        And mind you, this is an English translation from original Greek with Catholics on the translation team.

        It’s time for you to lose “tradition” and get right with God. Jesus has a position on tradition.

        Mark 7:6-13

        6 He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

        “‘These people honor me with their lips,
        but their hearts are far from me.
        7 They worship me in vain;
        their teachings are but rules taught by men.’[b]

        8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.”

        9 And he said to them: “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe[c] your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’[d] and, ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’[e] 11 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God), 12 then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

      6. About the Primacy of Peter :

        “And as to your favorite assignment
        of Peter by Jesus, sorry but the
        Word isn’t buried in Latin
        anymore. When Jesus referenced
        Peter ( or Cephas) , in the original
        Greek, he called him petros or little
        stone, he then referenced Petra,
        the rock, meaning Himself.”

        The proof that Christ constituted St. Peter head of His
        Church is found in the two famous Petrine texts,
        Matthew 16:17-19, and John 21:15-17.
        Matthew 16:17-19 In Matthew 16:17-19

        The office is solemnly promised to the Apostle. In response to his profession of faith in the Divine Nature of his Master, Christ thus addresses him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

        “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh
        and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father
        who is in heaven.” The prerogatives here promised are
        manifestly personal to Peter. His profession of faith was
        not made as has been sometimes asserted, in the name of the other Apostles. This is evident from the words of Christ. He pronounces on the Apostle, distinguishing him by his name Simon son of John, a peculiar and personal blessing, declaring that his knowledge regarding the Divine Sonship sprang from a special revelation granted to him by the Father (cf. Matthew 11:27).

        “And I say to thee: That thou art Peter. . .” He further
        proceeds to recompense this confession of His Divinity
        by bestowing upon him a reward proper to himself:
        Thou art Peter [Cepha, transliterated also Kipha] and
        upon this rock [Cepha] I will build my Church.
        The word for Peter and for rock in the original Aramaic is one and the same; this renders it evident that the
        various attempts to explain the term “rock” as having
        reference not to Peter himself but to something else are
        misinterpretations. It is Peter who is the rock of the
        Church. The term ecclesia (ekklesia) here employed is
        the Greek rendering of the Hebrew qahal, the name
        which denoted the Hebrew nation viewed as God’s
        Church

        The passage, using the Greek for
        rock would be rendered as Thou art Petros and upon
        this petra I will build my church.
        The problem arises from the fact the petros in Greek
        refers to a small stone, but petra means a massive rock
        or boulder. The answer lies in the fact that Greek nouns
        have gender (petros is masculine, petra is feminine). It
        would have therefore been appropriate to translate rock as petra, since it refered to a man (Simon Peter).
        To find the answer one must look to the original
        Aramaic, a language without genders for nouns. In
        Aramaic, the verse would be rendered as Thou art
        Kephas, and upon this kephas I will build my church.
        Seen in this light the “rock” is most certainly Peter.
        Further, if you look at translations into different
        languages, you get the same result. For example, in
        French, the passage is Thou art Pierre, and upon this
        pierre I will build my church. The meaning of the
        evangelist is clear. It’s only in English that this becomes
        an issue.

        I wish I could say more on this but I haven’t got the time

        God bless you all

      7. Dear wandile93

        Sabbath Shalom.

        You have obviously come to the wrong website. You are not here to debate, nor to learn anything.

        I will not permit distribution of Roman Catholic booklets on this site.

        Please leave.

        May Jesus the Messiah one day open your eyes, so you stop distributing fabricated stories and lies of the Papal clergy Amen.

      8. Dear all readers.

        Dear wandile93 has been spammed.

        Please do not publish ling booklets in the comment field, but debate the conserved topics.

        Editor.

      9. Apparently you don’t listen. Original Greek:

        Cephas-Simon barJonah- Peter—->>> petros= small stone.

        Petra=Rock, solid ———>>>Jesus, the Christ

        Or maybe you meant by your explanation below that Jesus was referring to Peter as a man and that His church will be built on a woman, wow, then you could explain away Maryology.

        You really are blissfully ignorant. Holding on to the traditions of men all the way to hell…

    1. ….”How many Children (approximately) did Mary the Mother of Jesus give birth to?” 1 <~~~ Your answer in the first sentence was 'more than enough' to reveal you and the one you serve…The answer to that question is…Brothers several, Sisters more than one..all conceived by Mary through Joseph….all born after Jesus ….without going any further…though I did read all of what you spewed out…Again I repeat…"YOU" are most deceived….However if your heart were opened to The Truth, you'll be like the 5 foolish virgins who will want the 5 wise virgins to give you their oil, another selfish trait of the lost..no matter what they went thru to keep theirs, yet you will go to the 'world' to get light ..while you are gone The Master will return…Please repent and believe The Gospel of Jesus Christ that you may be saved…Ohh that you would adhere to The Word of the Lord and not the word of a false religion!

      1. Did you ever notice that some of these posters seem to far, far too well versed in RCC history and dogma? My wife eventually got tired of “trust me” from the priests. She got out a Bible and read it for herself. This could be why the push to go back to Latin…

      2. Yes, I have very much so noticed some of these posters seem too far, too well versed in the Catholic Church. Thus an easy witness within, they are either ”paid” to come in here and spout lies, claiming a debate…and/or a deceiver like brother Paul said some will slip in unawares…and to be ”warned” ..thus being warned we call it like we see it…FALSE (smile)…I have no patience after the 3rd admonition to these and any who lift their-self up and not Jesus Christ…however they too will reap their rewards..but those trying we can utterly spend any amount of time -long-suffering..These that are Catholic are another group that would really ‘kill you thinking they are doing ‘God’ a service…they have a very mean spirited spirit..that spirit hates Jesus and whoever is a ‘Christian’ which Catholics ‘are not’…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s