I HATE THE ANTICHRIST

I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
>what are the political implications of it?

Attached: 1642776020505.png (668x748, 1.16M)

PRAY AND FIGHT AGAINST THE WORLD

There's no evidence Yahweh is real.
There's evidence race is real.

To ignore Yahweh, you might risk a Hell.
>(a place invented by Greek Hellenic polytheists that is never mentioned once in the original Hebrew, but whatever, nobody actually reads their bible)
To ignore race, you risk with certainty a total and pointless extermination.

Any Forums's Wager therefore suggests racial egalitarians are unhinged enemies, because they're intent on destroying a sure thing for an unsure thing. There are NO logical or tangible positions to being a racial egalitarian. The only reason one would support this is because they hate Whites and want them dead. Thus no accord can ever be reached with them.

Realize this whenever you discuss anything with a christian.

The political implications are that you're a blasphemor who doesn't even know his own supposed religion

being retarded

>what are the political implications of it?
>what are the political implications of being schizophrenic?

You're a schizo Harry!

Useful idiots shitting up the "right wing". News at 11.

Niggers, moors and gypsies are real

>THE ANTICHRIST
Who is it? I want to know who I'm supposed to be hating.

ITT:
>I've been discovered

Attached: 1644038150875m.jpg (1024x975, 118.46K)

read 1 john 2:22-23
it's all non-Christians

The psychology of uncanny valley has to do with corpses and disease. This is reddit tier creepy pasta garbage.

top kek

Attached: A NIGGER.webm (1920x1080, 2.64M)

>From Non-Being I will not allow you
to say or to think: in fact What Is Not is absolutely
unutterable and unthinkable. What necessity would push it,
if it originated from nothing, to be born after or before? So it is necessary or that it is entirely or that it is not at all

Attached: 1550324107198.jpg (610x773, 53.22K)

It trannies, they were the priests of Moloch and Baal

should be the NWO leader. Maybe it's AI?

Based fellow spain-chad

>22 Who is the liar but the person who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This one is the antichrist: the person who denies the Father and the Son.
>23 Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either. The person who confesses the Son has the Father also. (1 John 2:22-23)
it's jews and their legions of atheist minions

Attached: leaders of atheism.png (640x466, 429.04K)

This is what happens when you've spent your entire childhood on post-pede Any Forums

Though this Word is true evermore, yet men are as unable to understand it when they hear it for the first time as before they have heard it at all. For, though all things come to pass in accordance with this Word, men seem as if they had no experience of them, when they make trial of words and deeds such as I set forth, dividing each thing according to its kind and showing how it is what it is. But other men know not what they are doing when awake, even as they forget what they do in sleep.

Attached: 1644577815624.gif (220x220, 904.94K)

At least in Catholicism, you don't talk of evidence, you approach the question using "Reason". As in rational.
>racial egalitarians
Christianity is not for nor against racial egalitarianism. We do believe all of us have souls if you mean that?

>I've been found out

Attached: 1644534106382.jpg (503x730, 79.23K)

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH
Prepare for the one who will come after me, because he won't be schizo, but truth and insanity.
The world is a lie. They're laughing at us. We will dance as buffoons around them, and will they will get high on their own arrogance, intoxicated by their own lies, then, we will drink their blood, and perish for their sins, burning everything with us, purifying the veil for the next reality

You can lie to yourself but you can't unsee
All makes sense now

Kek this post is peak non-STEM graduate. Note that it claims something as fact while providing no evidence, and if asked he would likely say "well it is the most likely" or "the others are stupid" which is not evidence at all lmao thats a hypothesis.

Real science doesnt make claims like that since the Middle Ages. People forget it wasnt just the Church but the whole world's scientific community that ganged up on Galileo.
Becuase guess what, Galileo's theory made LESS sense with the data, and the args were stupid. Issue was Galileo mixed schizo args with valid stuff, and promoted perfectly circular orbits which fit absolutely no historic records of star movement.