Bringing this kid to Rome... At all costs and it ain't a few judeans barbarians who could have stop Pilate... If you doubt what I just wrote it's because you don't understand anything. What does the Quran reports on those miracles... Good question...
Ps if you wanna see a miracle watch a bird fly and remeber it came in an egg ;-) like the alligator! (And the fish too).
You have first to understand Jesus's mission. He came to save not himself but all humankind. So, his goal never was to save only himself. In fact, his victory was spiritual, not external. We celebrate his resurrection, not death. What you don't understand is that the mission of Pilate was fucking clear. Official Manager of Rome in Barabarian country called Judea. now the guy had death and life power on anyone there. And you would make me believe that a guy who could do miracles wouldn't catch his attention? And that bringing him to Rome would be the pinnacle of his career? LoL... Understand the mission of Pilate. Once you can insert a lie in the mind of a human aka split him from his observation of the Creation of God you can make him believe what ever (included plants are drugs and must be illegal and genetically modified plant are safe and legal) what a joke! However, God, through his prophets and the record in the Old Testament, essentially said that Jesus would be crucified outside of Jerusalem... not in Rome. God's Word stands, not the desires of Roman officials. So, the miracle - the fulfillment of His Word - was done by God.  Quotes please 0 ref in Torah to my knowledge. Torah is first 5 books. Tanakh is Old Testament. Talmud is Hebrew priest corruption done mostly while in captivity in Babylon. Search on Bible prophecy. |
|
|
|
But all of a sudden fuel prices seem to be jumping right back up, higher than they were, and fast, too. |
|
|
|
Bringing this kid to Rome... At all costs and it ain't a few judeans barbarians who could have stop Pilate... If you doubt what I just wrote it's because you don't understand anything. What does the Quran reports on those miracles... Good question...
Ps if you wanna see a miracle watch a bird fly and remeber it came in an egg ;-) like the alligator! (And the fish too).
You have first to understand Jesus's mission. He came to save not himself but all humankind. So, his goal never was to save only himself. In fact, his victory was spiritual, not external. We celebrate his resurrection, not death. What you don't understand is that the mission of Pilate was fucking clear. Official Manager of Rome in Barabarian country called Judea. now the guy had death and life power on anyone there. And you would make me believe that a guy who could do miracles wouldn't catch his attention? And that bringing him to Rome would be the pinnacle of his career? LoL... Understand the mission of Pilate. Once you can insert a lie in the mind of a human aka split him from his observation of the Creation of God you can make him believe what ever (included plants are drugs and must be illegal and genetically modified plant are safe and legal) what a joke! However, God, through his prophets and the record in the Old Testament, essentially said that Jesus would be crucified outside of Jerusalem... not in Rome. God's Word stands, not the desires of Roman officials. So, the miracle - the fulfillment of His Word - was done by God. |
|
|
|
So should Mexico be a part of the US?
If illegals did two things, they couldn't be stopped from entering the States: 1. Learn to be fluent in English; 2. Understand the common law like Karl Lentz - Meet Karl Lentz https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1512214.0. Mexico is civil law. Most U.S. people act like the U.S. is civil law. The U.S. is common law. Common law means that in the States, a man or woman can overcome every governmental action and law in court, as long as they have harmed nobody, nor damaged any property. Potentially, if you use common law right, you can take up ownership of any public land for free, because the government will never be able to find a plaintiff to take the stand in court, and show how you damaged him or his property. The plaintiff is THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA can't place "his" hand on the Bible, take the oath or affirmation, get on the stand, and speak anything into the record. Yet the common law requires this to be done if you, the accused, demand it. In the case of illegals in the States, they are not required to to answer any government official. If they demand a common law trial, there must be harm or damage. There is nobody who will get on the stand and show some real kind of harm or damage. They are free. They don't have to state their land of citizenship. If they are living "here," they are domiciled here. It's time we start to put the brakes on government. |
|
|
|
A new Secession War would be awesome ! And maybe with the return of slavery at final ! Well, I'm dreaming too much...
Who told you, you couldn't become one? ;-) If he pays taxes, he already is one. |
|
|
|
She's scary looking. Reminds me of the people I work with.  |
|
|
|
it is a common views that USA is smuggling weapons in all over the world. according to new world order USA is in struggle to fulfill their goal. for this purpose they are selling weapon in all over the world and they are making money from that.
It has been concluded that America has a failed government. Whatever they may boast about it but it is still a failed nation because mass shooting has become so common in USA, where guns are bought and sold according to the will of the people and how easily are they licensed to keep fire-arms in their home. This is one system flaw they really have to check and fix as soon as they can. The incidents are getting more and more worrisome. Innocents after innocents are suffering due to this messy undertakes. Best way to fix it is to require by law that everybody carry a loaded gun when in public, off his/her own residence. If somebody disobeys the this law, his punishment is to be shot on the spot. |
|
|
|
no it is not a religion . it is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. and religion is the belief in and worship of a God or gods.
But after that is science theory, which is not known to be fact just like many people don't know if God is fact or not. When people believe science theory to be fact, they are making science a religion for themselves. Since this includes many of the major scientists, science has become a religion. |
|
|
|
So with no gun control lets imagine the knife attacker survived this ordeal, Should he then be allowed to buy a gun and then more than likely do the same thing he did here except with a gun? Because thats what no gun control means. Again i dont think anybody (maybe some are ive not read every page) is saying your guns will be taken away completely, only that some form of control is put in place.
That's up to a jury, on a case by case determination. No, no, NO! No gun control MEANS NO CRIMINAL CONTROL! After the "knife attacker" was discharged from the hospital, he would not serve a single day of confinement, despite his attempted murder/"knife attack" being a crime worthy of life imprisonment! If some guy hauls off and hits you, are you going to press charges? Or are you going to simply forgive him, especially if he knocks a tooth out, and you have to spend $1,500 to get it fixed? Let the guy go if you want. Don't press charges if you want. An attack that doesn't do any damage is still a threat, and actual threats are punishable by law if the one who was threatened presses charges. Press charges with a jury trial, and let the jury make the law for the case in question. Essentially, the jury can do whatever it wants - no guns ever, prison term, fine, etc. The jury can say "no guns ever" but unless they're willing to personally hold the perp at gunpoint in 6-12 member, 24/7/365 rotation for the rest of his life, they're not going to be able to stop him from having a gun outside a prison. The flaw in your thinking is twofold at least: 1. The perp used a hatchet. This means he was not using a gun in the first place. So, he was not as bad of a crook as he could have been. Why would he be worse if he had lived? Besides, jury people aren't completely stupid. They would take into account the perp's history in their decision and judge accordingly. 2. The simple point of gun control is to take guns away. The extended point is to control the people. Already Chicago and New York are trying to control people based on what they think a person is going to do, that he might do a criminal act in the future. This is dangerous thinking on the part of officials. A person is innocent until he makes himself guilty. You and I just might be on a watch list, ready to lose our freedom for something we haven't done. Is that what you want? If we all armed ourselves, we would have mutual respect for each other. Those of us who didn't have this respect would be dead like the hatchet-perp. But there would be far fewer perps, because they would know that every next guy just might fight back with the gun that he had, because everybody had guns. The perps would all be dead, or too afraid to be perps, and they just might change their lives around to be honest people, just so they could live. But with some simple gun control you could save countless lives by not allowing people who are likely to commit atrocities from legally obtaining firearms. There will still be people with gun, just not those that are likely to use them to harm others. The main reason criminals can get hold of guns so easily is because you have no licensin. Isn't that exactly what the jury would be ordering in the case where it was necessary? Cops gun down more people than anybody else. Yet we don't take their property from them. Why take the property of anyone else? |
|
|
|
So with no gun control lets imagine the knife attacker survived this ordeal, Should he then be allowed to buy a gun and then more than likely do the same thing he did here except with a gun? Because thats what no gun control means. Again i dont think anybody (maybe some are ive not read every page) is saying your guns will be taken away completely, only that some form of control is put in place.
That's up to a jury, on a case by case determination. No, no, NO! No gun control MEANS NO CRIMINAL CONTROL! After the "knife attacker" was discharged from the hospital, he would not serve a single day of confinement, despite his attempted murder/"knife attack" being a crime worthy of life imprisonment! If some guy hauls off and hits you, are you going to press charges? Or are you going to simply forgive him, especially if he knocks a tooth out, and you have to spend $1,500 to get it fixed? Let the guy go if you want. Don't press charges if you want. An attack that doesn't do any damage is still a threat, and actual threats are punishable by law if the one who was threatened presses charges. Press charges with a jury trial, and let the jury make the law for the case in question. Essentially, the jury can do whatever it wants - no guns ever, prison term, fine, etc. The jury can say "no guns ever" but unless they're willing to personally hold the perp at gunpoint in 6-12 member, 24/7/365 rotation for the rest of his life, they're not going to be able to stop him from having a gun outside a prison. The flaw in your thinking is twofold at least: 1. The perp used a hatchet. This means he was not using a gun in the first place. So, he was not as bad of a crook as he could have been. Why would he be worse if he had lived? Besides, jury people aren't completely stupid. They would take into account the perp's history in their decision and judge accordingly. 2. The simple point of gun control is to take guns away. The extended point is to control the people. Already Chicago and New York are trying to control people based on what they think a person is going to do, that he might do a criminal act in the future. This is dangerous thinking on the part of officials. A person is innocent until he makes himself guilty. You and I just might be on a watch list, ready to lose our freedom for something we haven't done. Is that what you want? If we all armed ourselves, we would have mutual respect for each other. Those of us who didn't have this respect would be dead like the hatchet-perp. But there would be far fewer perps, because they would know that every next guy just might fight back with the gun that he had, because everybody had guns. The perps would all be dead, or too afraid to be perps, and they just might change their lives around to be honest people, just so they could live. |
|
|
|
So with no gun control lets imagine the knife attacker survived this ordeal, Should he then be allowed to buy a gun and then more than likely do the same thing he did here except with a gun? Because thats what no gun control means. Again i dont think anybody (maybe some are ive not read every page) is saying your guns will be taken away completely, only that some form of control is put in place.
That's up to a jury, on a case by case determination. No, no, NO! No gun control MEANS NO CRIMINAL CONTROL! After the "knife attacker" was discharged from the hospital, he would not serve a single day of confinement, despite his attempted murder/"knife attack" being a crime worthy of life imprisonment! If some guy hauls off and hits you, are you going to press charges? Or are you going to simply forgive him, especially if he knocks a tooth out, and you have to spend $1,500 to get it fixed? Let the guy go if you want. Don't press charges if you want. An attack that doesn't do any damage is still a threat, and actual threats are punishable by law if the one who was threatened presses charges. Press charges with a jury trial, and let the jury make the law for the case in question. Essentially, the jury can do whatever it wants - no guns ever, prison term, fine, etc. |
|
|
|
Weed has been around for a long time, and so has "bitcoin." In the old days in America, gold coins were quite soft. So, when anyone wanted to see if a gold coin was really gold, they bit it with their back teeth. If the bite left indentations on the coin, it was probably gold - bit-coin.  |
|
|
|
The southern states should combine, and break free from the corrupt bankers and politicians in the North. They could call it the American Confederation.  Actually, this can be done quite easily. If people had understood common law at the time of the Civil War, the War could have been completely avoided. What I mean is this. Neither the State nor the Federal governments have any authority over people where a person harms nobody in anything he might do. For example. If a State has complete gun control and completely outlaws guns, in court, if a person uses common law and requires a person he harmed with a gun to show up at the trial, if there was no harm to anybody, the case is dismissed or discharged, no matter what the gun laws are. Another example. You are doing 100 MPH on the highway in a posted 65 MPH zone. You get arrested. In court, you can require the plaintiff get on the stand and testify as to the harm or damage you did to him. In the first place, the plaintiff is the State, so "he" can't get on the stand. In the second place, you didn't harm anyone or damage any property. State loses. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twn96nj0jfw&list=PLHrkQxgz0mg6kUBciD-HIvTXByqjcIZ-D&index=10. The point is, if the people get together and inform themselves of their "New Organization," and simply bypass the laws of the State, and don't have anything to do with elections, the State capitol just sits there, and the few people remaining in State government have little if any authority. The New Organization is operated by contract between the people. Even the Federal government can't shut this down because we have the right to contract listed in the Constitution. |
|
|
|
From the viewpoint of many people who don't know about the proof that God exists, believing in God is religion, because they don't know for a fact that He exists or doesn't exist. In a similar way, science is religion for anyone who adamantly believes science theory to be fact. Science theory is not known to be fact. It might be or might not be. |
|
|
|
Concealed Carry Saves Clerk from Ax-Wielding Attacker at 7-Eleven Investigators said the shooting happened at the store in White Center at approximately 5:45 a.m. local time. Witnesses said the man entered the store and swung a hatchet toward the customer before turning his attention to the clerk.
As the assailant attacked, the customer pulled out a pistol and fired, hitting the suspect. The clerk suffered minor injuries to his stomach and the suspect was pronounced dead at the scene.
The customer who shot the suspect is described as a 60-year-old Seattle man who visits the store every morning to get coffee. His name was not immediately released.
Authorities said the man who shot the attacker had a concealed carry permit and likely would not face charges as a result of his action.
Read more at http://wearechange.org/concealed-carry-saves-clerk/. So with no gun control lets imagine the knife attacker survived this ordeal, Should he then be allowed to buy a gun and then more than likely do the same thing he did here except with a gun? Because thats what no gun control means. Again i dont think anybody (maybe some are ive not read every page) is saying your guns will be taken away completely, only that some form of control is put in place. That's up to a jury, on a case by case determination. |
|
|
|
Time for Texas to secede from the United States. Brexit is almost like Britain seceding from the European Union. Texit. |
|
|
|
Concealed Carry Saves Clerk from Ax-Wielding Attacker at 7-ElevenInvestigators said the shooting happened at the store in White Center at approximately 5:45 a.m. local time. Witnesses said the man entered the store and swung a hatchet toward the customer before turning his attention to the clerk.
As the assailant attacked, the customer pulled out a pistol and fired, hitting the suspect. The clerk suffered minor injuries to his stomach and the suspect was pronounced dead at the scene.
The customer who shot the suspect is described as a 60-year-old Seattle man who visits the store every morning to get coffee. His name was not immediately released.
Authorities said the man who shot the attacker had a concealed carry permit and likely would not face charges as a result of his action.
Read more at http://wearechange.org/concealed-carry-saves-clerk/.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
(leave me a small smile since all this makes me a bit sick, thinking we have no power over these muppets)
