• CFN has a new look, using the Eagle as our theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • CFN welcomes a new contributing member!

    Please welcome Beetow to our Christian community.

    Blessings in Christ, and we pray you enjoy being a member here

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

Blood moons and 8 super-signs in the heavens

well then if cant get Obama's idea of being very hesistant to the point of almost burying his head in the sand against war then he is no prophet. remember I called out the bombings on isis? ineffective? bog must be the way with air strikes.

Oh sorry TOG that was Jason. My mistake.

Jason, Obama is playing a game of deception. Obama was definitely looking to go into Syria.

Why would you think he is a prophet? He never said he is.
 
Taking this thread off to conspiracy land will get it quickly closed...
 
IDK, does anyone remember the passage in the Bible people relate to Russia invading Israel? I don't remember which one it is. I can't dismiss a claim without first examining it.
Actually I do the opposite. I don't accept a claim until I've examined it against scripture. That might not mean I have to an in depth study of everything I hear someone say about God. As long as I can think of scripture that supports what they say and what they say isn't going against traditional long held accepted theology, I'm fine. If what they say sounds strange for some reason, I'll need a lot more proof from scripture before I accept it. Accepting every claim you hear and not dismissing it until you examine it can lead you to a lot of error since, especially in this age of instant and plentiful information, it's just not going to be humanly possible to examine every claim you hear about.

As for the claim of Russia invading Israel, if I remember right, I think Hal Lindsey based it on Dan 11:40 (ESV) "At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through." That was in the early 70's and he claimed it was going to happen within just a few years then the end would come. Someone supporting this, maybe Hal himself, even pointed out as evidence for the horsemen and chariots part that at the time Russia was the only country in the world that still had a standing cavalry, the Cussaks of Northern Russia I believe they were called.

Of course, his time frame came and went a long, long time ago and he was proven a false prophet.
 
IDK, does anyone remember the passage in the Bible people relate to Russia invading Israel? I don't remember which one it is. I can't dismiss a claim without first examining it.
do a word search Russia is not in scripture .... the terms i remember people changing to fit the headlines of the day were Gog and Magog.. that is a guess
 
Actually I do the opposite. I don't accept a claim until I've examined it against scripture. That might not mean I have to an in depth study of everything I hear someone say about God. As long as I can think of scripture that supports what they say and what they say isn't going against traditional long held accepted theology, I'm fine. If what they say sounds strange for some reason, I'll need a lot more proof from scripture before I accept it. Accepting every claim you hear and not dismissing it until you examine it can lead you to a lot of error since, especially in this age of instant and plentiful information, it's just not going to be humanly possible to examine every claim you hear about.

As for the claim of Russia invading Israel, if I remember right, I think Hal Lindsey based it on Dan 11:40 (ESV) "At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through." That was in the early 70's and he claimed it was going to happen within just a few years then the end would come. Someone supporting this, maybe Hal himself, even pointed out as evidence for the horsemen and chariots part that at the time Russia was the only country in the world that still had a standing cavalry, the Cussaks of Northern Russia I believe they were called.

Of course, his time frame came and went a long, long time ago and he was proven a false prophet.

I do not believe that is the Scripture they use. I will look it up when I have a chance. That Scripture is normally said to have already come to pass, if what I read is correct. I do not know how to properly interpret that Scripture (wish I did, hopefully the Lord will reveal it to me soon).

I do not dismiss nor accept a claim without examination of the facts. It is neutral. Could be, or could not be.
 
I know some of you have been studying the end-times for a while and I was wondering what you think of this guy's assertions?

I just watched the whole sorry thing and this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He hasn't gotten anything right from the time he made the video up until now. He's just scratching itchy ears.:nonono
 
do a word search Russia is not in scripture .... the terms i remember people changing to fit the headlines of the day were Gog and Magog.. that is a guess

I know the term "Russia" is not in the Scripture. I will look it up when I have more time. Thanks for the tip though, that does sound familiar.
 
I just watched the whole sorry thing and this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He hasn't gotten anything right from the time he made the video up until now. He's just scratching itchy ears.:nonono

Is the next Blood Moon really a super-moon as well?

What about the 70 years?

You are drawing an assertion without examining the evidence, it seems. What do you believe he has gotten wrong and why? Is what you believe based on interpretation or concrete fact?

I have not been given sufficient evidence to dismiss his claims. I do not have sufficient proof to accept his claims. Hopefully someone who knows about astronomy will comment soon.
 
I should also note that we did send "Advisers" (SF, CIA, and private contractors) into Syria as well as Ukraine to arm rebels. But I think he wanted a full scale ground presence, in fact I know he did, and I do think the reason he didn't send one was to protect Israeli and American interests. Any time we send arms, we also send advisers unofficially. It is a necessity.
 
Oh sorry TOG that was Jason. My mistake.

Jason, Obama is playing a game of deception. Obama was definitely looking to go into Syria.

Why would you think he is a prophet? He never said he is.
hardly. Obama isn't big on war. he made it even harder for me to engage the enemy then bush had. If I see you running down the street and I don't know you and I see you have a gun in hand under the older realist laws of war and roe, I would shoot first. if you were friendly you wouldn't be running to me with a gun like that it would be down low.

if we wanted to go there we would have done it. the public doesn't wasn't us there. there is until prior isis no justification for us to go in.
 
hardly. Obama isn't big on war. he made it even harder for me to engage the enemy then bush had. If I see you running down the street and I don't know you and I see you have a gun in hand under the older realist laws of war and roe, I would shoot first. if you were friendly you wouldn't be running to me with a gun like that it would be down low.

if we wanted to go there we would have done it. the public doesn't wasn't us there. there is until prior isis no justification for us to go in.

This is a topic for another thread. I would like to discuss this with you, though, if you are interested in doing so. Send me a PM if you are interested in discussing this with me.
 
This is a topic for another thread. I would like to discuss this with you, though, if you are interested in doing so. Send me a PM if you are interested in discussing this with me.
no need. Robert gates said clearly that Obama has an aversion to war and didn't want to send in troops to stabilize Afghanistan.
 
But real quick I will add that my cousin was in Iraq as a 19d in the beginning (his second tour was spent driving an officer around) and the roe were terrible under bush. People were in constant fear of court marshall. But it was designed like that to keep people under constant threat of UCMJ

Anything that comes out of the White House is a lie. It is all a game. He is playing the timid hippy role. His execution squads are more brutal than Bush's were.

I should also add that he took a 7.62 to the chest because of bad ROE letting the insurgency flourish.

SOFA also seems to be intentionally written poorly.
 
But real quick I will add that my cousin was in Iraq as a 19d in the beginning (his second tour was spent driving an officer around) and the roe were terrible under bush. People were in constant fear of court marshall. But it was designed like that to keep people under constant threat of UCMJ

Anything that comes out of the White House is a lie. It is all a game. He is playing the timid hippy role. His execution squads are more brutal than Bush's were.

I should also add that he took a 7.62 to the chest because of bad ROE letting the insurgency flourish.

SOFA also seems to be intentionally written poorly.
I am an old 19d, yes it wasn't where I liked it to be, but understand that there is a lot of international pressure. we do have to please those that trade with us. sanctions are a son of gun. I hate that but we cant just say oh well, torture and rape them.i wasn't under any fear of court martial. I got fired upon at the fob 67 times by rocket and arty attacks. we just had to have positive id of the targets, some times we couldn't get one.
 
SOFA
I am an old 19d, yes it wasn't where I liked it to be, but understand that there is a lot of international pressure. we do have to please those that trade with us. sanctions are a son of gun. I hate that but we cant just say oh well, torture and rape them.i wasn't under any fear of court martial. I got fired upon at the fob 67 times by rocket and arty attacks. we just had to have positive id of the targets, some times we couldn't get one.

That was after u were being shot at. ROE changed throughout the war, though (right?), but having a clear ID on a weapon before you are getting shot is often a problem.

Thanks for serving as a 19d. 1/4 were killed or SEVERELY injured in Afghanistan. It was the highest mortality MOS through both wars. 19ds do all the work and get none of the credit. Much respect to you. By the way, nutt to butt HAS TO GO. Nutt to butt, short shorts, calling people BF - oh wow. That is just limp wristed. If you can do something about that, please do.
 
And as you know, people stopped trying to get clear IDs (rightfully so) in aoes with a high rate of conflict. A group of young men in a high conflict aoe holding things that could be rifles or rockets is ID enough. Then you had the flip side of idiots just killing civilians and fueling the insurgency. It was a mess.
 
SOFA


That was after u were being shot at. ROE changed throughout the war, though (right?), but having a clear ID on a weapon before you are getting shot is often a problem.

Thanks for serving as a 19d. 1/4 were killed or SEVERELY injured in Afghanistan. It was the highest mortality MOS through both wars. 19ds do all the work and get none of the credit. Much respect to you. By the way, nutt to butt HAS TO GO. Nutt to butt, short shorts, calling people BF - oh wow. That is just limp wristed. If you can do something about that, please do.
I wasn't a 19d then but a inleu of mp which has the highest rate of mortality. arty fire from a mountain at night. kinda hard to hit that, they were worried about killing civilains as they fired near homes.

if they are, even now, are setting up a round or taking aim you can shoot them. I should clarify some co were cowardly and didn't want to answer if we shot the wrong light at night. other times the sf commander didn't care and let her rip.
 
And as you know, people stopped trying to get clear IDs (rightfully so) in aoes with a high rate of conflict. A group of young men in a high conflict aoe holding things that could be rifles or rockets is ID enough. Then you had the flip side of idiots just killing civilians and fueling the insurgency. It was a mess.
I was in afghanstan , kunar provence depending on the month it was the highest rate of engagements or at times quiet. most of the time with us it was rocket position that was pre set and fired on a timer. seldom do I think when we returned the favor did we take out any of them.
 
That is part of why the execution squads ended up getting so brutal, i think. I don't agree with how our SOF was handling things, and they were leaving a huge trail of evidence as well. Killing innocents on purpose is not cool. There is already enough unintentional collateral damage.

I seem to remember hearing about a lot of FOBs and OPs at high elevations that were putting in a lot of work, though. Plus the Apaches.

You can't know. If you hit them, it wouldn't be worth the risk of going to find out. Thanks for serving as a 19d. I can't believe how 19ds got left hanging out to dry by Uncle Sam. Anyone who served as a 19d put in more work than infantry, medics, and artillery combined. And came under the most fire. And spent the most time riding in those humvees which leads to back problems after enough time.

Thanks. Your intentions were good. Even a 19d who gets a dishonorable served honorably if they were deployed. I don't care what anyone says.
 
That is part of why the execution squads ended up getting so brutal, i think. I don't agree with how our SOF was handling things, and they were leaving a huge trail of evidence as well. Killing innocents on purpose is not cool. There is already enough unintentional collateral damage.

I seem to remember hearing about a lot of FOBs and OPs at high elevations that were putting in a lot of work, though. Plus the Apaches.

You can't know. If you hit them, it wouldn't be worth the risk of going to find out. Thanks for serving as a 19d. I can't believe how 19ds got left hanging out to dry by Uncle Sam. Anyone who served as a 19d put in more work than infantry, medics, and artillery combined. And came under the most fire. And spent the most time riding in those humvees which leads to back problems after enough time.

Thanks. Your intentions were good. Even a 19d who gets a dishonorable served honorably if they were deployed. I don't care what anyone says.
I wasn't a 19d in a time of war. I was a 19d before Clinton finished his first time. I left that mos when I left the active army and then became a 14s for the national guard.
execution squad? what are those?
 
Back
Top