End Times and Current Events
March 28, 2024, 09:29:26 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome To End Times and Current Events.
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Conspirianity

Shoutbox
March 27, 2024, 12:55:24 pm Mark says: Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked  When Hamas spokesman Abu Ubaida began a speech marking the 100th day of the war in Gaza, one confounding yet eye-opening proclamation escaped the headlines. Listing the motives for the Palestinian militant group's Oct. 7 massacre in Israel, he accused Jews of "bringing red cows" to the Holy Land.
December 31, 2022, 10:08:58 am NilsFor1611 says: blessings
August 08, 2018, 02:38:10 am suzytr says: Hello, any good churches in the Sacto, CA area, also looking in Reno NV, thanks in advance and God Bless you Smiley
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
View Shout History
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Conspirianity  (Read 6154 times)
FervorForFaith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 356


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 03, 2017, 02:13:06 pm »

1) A lot of Rivera's claims are unsubstantiated. For example, he claims that Rome invented Islam. Reading the history and development of Islam brings this claim into question. If I recall, he also claimed the Jesuits were behind the Inquisitions, which is impossible seeing as how the Jesuits did not exist in the Middle Ages when the Inquisitions started.

Whether Rivera was at one point a Catholic priest isn't so much the question. It's whether or not he's actually telling the truth. I find it very hard to believe someone when their evidence is either oral tradition or conveniently "lost to history." I call it the "Doc Marquis syndrome", because he tends to use "I learned it from the Illuminati" as some kind of proof of his claims. Again, the gospel and God's word must be taken by faith (and even those aren't without circumstantial evidence), but a person's claims about history or fact do not have to be taken by faith.

2) When did I say that was fake? The Inquisitions happened. That is a historical fact. Just because I don't believe Rome is the origin of all evil in the world doesn't mean I don't think they're responsible for some pretty atrocious things. They are. They're just not responsible for all of the atrocious things in history.

3) The only reason you have a King James Bible is the Protestant Reformation. The only reason you can meet openly without fear of persecution here in the West is the Protestant Reformation. This contrived attack on the Protestant Reformation by King James Bible belivers is very strange. Without the Protestant Reformation, the King James Bible wouldn't even exist, and that's a fact. Here's some more facts: King James of England was a Protestant. Oliver Cromwell was a Protestant. Jonathan Edwards was a Protestant. A lot of great Christian preachers and theologians were Protestant. They baptized infants, yes, but a lot of born again believers have done things wrong in the past. Also, and this is a MAJOR point that you didn't bring up: you glossed over some important quotes in the pages you linked to about the practice of infant baptism:

Quote
"Presbyterian, Congregational and many Reformed Christians see infant baptism as the New Testament form of circumcision in the Jewish covenant (Joshua 24:15). Circumcision did not create faith in the 8-day-old Jewish boy. It merely marked him as a member of God's covenant people Israel. Likewise, baptism doesn’t create faith; it is a sign of membership in the visible covenant community."

And what about the Methodists? What do they believe about infant baptism?

Quote
"Methodists contend that infant baptism has spiritual value for the infant. John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, held that baptism is a means of grace, but it was symbolic. Methodists view baptism in water as symbolic and believe that it does not regenerate the baptised nor cleanse them from sin."

Contrast that with the teaching of Rome, which states:

Quote
Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called . . . The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth"

All of that came courtesy of the links you posted.

Roman Catholics believe in "baptismal regeneration" or "baptism as a means of saving grace". Reformed Christians and Methodists, however, do not. It is merely symbolic. Now do I agree with infant baptism? No, I don't. I believe wholeheartedly in believer baptism because it's the only type we can get directly from scripture. But does that make them lost? They don't believe it regenerates you. It's no different than believing in post-tribulationism. It doesn't make you lost, it makes you wrong. It doesn't change the core message of salvation by grace through faith alone.

4) Those passages don't prove the Vatican is Babylon the Great. I can make a pretty airtight case solely from the Bible that the city of Jerusalem in the ToJT will be Babylon the Great. However, I think the point of divergence for us is that we have two different views on what that means. Whereas many Christians see Babylon the Great as the origin of all evil in the world, I see Babylon the Great as an adulteress joining herself with the Beast (Antichrist) and causing the world to do the same.

5) Honestly, as someone who believes the King James Bible is accurately translated from the correct original language manuscripts, a lot of the contention comes from our side, and believe me, I used to be VERY contentious about it. A lot of KJV believers won't even fellowship with believers who use new verisons, even if they line up doctrinally. They can be stalwart independent Baptists who hold identical doctrinal views, but if they read the NKJV, they're heretics who must be shunned.

How many good preachers get raked over the coals because they aren't "pure" enough on the Bible version issue? I know of some pastors/preachers who use both the KJV and the NKJV that are strong in the faith and are used of the Lord, but they are shunned for not being "pure" enough by men's standards. I know of pastors/preachers who are KJV-only but do not hold to the silly notion of advanced revelation that are shunned for not being "pure" enough by men's standards.

The truth is that most people who read new versions aren't like James White. He's a fanatic who I believe has an irrational hatred for the KJV. A lot of believers that I've encountered who read a new version have no desire to keep you from reading the KJV. Again, not saying they shouldn't read the KJV, I'm just saying that the vast majority of new version readers I've met are not anti-KJV. And a lot of the time they line up doctrinally with believers like us. Should they read the KJV? Yes, I believe they should. Are they lost because they don't? No, I don't think so. The gospel pertains to the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Who are the real church splitters, if we're being honest about it? It's the Ruckmanite crowd moreso than the new version readers. And it's those who push Conspirianity moreso than those who don't. That's generally what I've observed. Having been on both sides of the conspiracy theory argument, I know this to be true. I was very contentious and split over minor things, and now I've seen it from the other side, someone getting contentious and splitting with me over minor things.

6) What exactly do you find egregious about my videos? What is the doctrinal heresy being promoted here that I'll have to answer for?

It's funny, conspiratorial Christians can get away with practically anything: teach false doctrines, spread false history, self-aggrandize their "ministry" and falsely accuse one another all in the name of "exposing darkness" and nobody says anything about it. Yet someone who makes a video going against that grain, trying to get history right and providing tangible proof of what they're saying without accusing anyone of being a "Jesuit coadjutor" or an "agent of the Vatican" gets raked over the coals and admonished to "be careful what you post..."

Let me say again: I am NOT a pastor or an online ministry. I'm a guy who posts videos on YouTube in his spare time. Sometimes they pertain strictly to scripture, other times they don't. The scripture videos I take very seriously. I planned to do a video series about the doctrines of grace at some point. And I take that seriously. I tend to have a little more fun with my Conspirianity videos. I use more humor, more sarcasm, etc. but I try not to go overboard.

My whole goal with those videos is to lift the veil and get to the heart of the matter. These conspiracies are purported to be factual, but are they? Or do they fit more under confirmation bias? I explore these themes, and yes, sometimes I do name names. Only people who put themselves out there, though. You'll never see me bring up private people I know personally and give their personal info out on my YouTube channel to shame them. I'm not trying to throw everyone under the bus and I'm NOT calling their salvation into question, but yes I do sometimes highlight different YouTube channels as examples of what I'm talking about. At the same time, I think I'm far gentler than many other brothers and sisters out there, who blindly accuse when they don't have all of the facts.

You already falsely implied me to be a loner on the fringes who neglects his family and wastes his time putzing around on the internet looking for people to "expose" as heretics. I can name a few people who fit that bill much better than me, but for the sake of not beating a dead horse, I won't.

Needless to say I don't do that. This video actually took me months to do because I didn't spend a whole lot of time working on it. I have a wife and kids. I have a family. I have a job. I have a local fellowship I'm a part of. I have commitments and obligations and honestly, when people come at me like this, it burns me out.

7) Regarding the last link you posted, here's an interesting snippet:

Quote
Steinacher believes the Vatican's help was based on a hoped-for revival of European Christianity and dread of the Soviet Union. But through the Vatican Refugee Commission, war criminals were knowingly provided with false identities.

So the main reason this happened was because they feared the Soviet Union. This is actually a logical explanation, as the Soviet Union was even more anti-Catholic than the Nazis were. They didn't feign support, and Rome actually did receive support from other fascist regimes (such as the Francoist government in Spain).

However, as I documented in my video, the Nazis were a totally different animal. Hitler's ultimate goal was not spreading Catholicism, it was spreading Nazism. He needed to wipe away all Christian and Catholic influence in order to pave the way for his Nazi utopia. They were not like Franco's Spain or even Mussolini's Italy; both of which had better relations with Rome and with each other than with Germany. Have you ever heard the expression, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend?" I think that's what was going on. The Vatican would rather deal with a neutered Nazi than with a communist.

I'll close with this, since this is kind of what started the back-and-forth: I love David Daniels in the Lord. I love This Was Your Life and appreciate the work that Chick Publications does in spreading the gospel. I have no ill will toward them at all. But it would be a lie to say they don't push a false view of history in order to prop up their conspiracy-laced worldview, particularly in their tract Mama's Girls. This isn't an indictment on their salvation, their evangelistic outreach or on them as people. This is an indictment on their conspiracy theories.

If I came off harsh or rude here, I apologize, that isn't my intention. I just get frustrated sometimes and I start venting and thinking out loud. Maybe I'll just walk away from YouTube. Maybe I should. People there are becoming so hostile now anyway. They're splitting up into little cliques and insulating themselves from correction and any opposing viewpoints. It's aggravating.
Report Spam   Logged

God gave us minds, let's use them.
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy