Sarah Palin belongs to a crazy church too! (video)

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Starred and Flagged Scientist.
Here's another video:





posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
...Obama is running against McCain not Palin.

Just an observation.


Personally I'm not so sure. I ran that one by some well-read folk in my neck of the woods and my point wasn't exacly disputed as to what is perceived. Sure, that's the official race but ever since palin stepped in who hears very much about McCain and Biden?

Even snippets of the news that unfortunately managed to graze my conciousness seem to play Obama against Palin more than McCain.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by justme2
 


wow, im wondering what the next step is myself...
could you imagine if John McCain died in office? This lady would just see it as god's will, and who the heck knows what would happen from there, the mix of inexperience, and fundamentalist arrogance is frightening.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


Not to trend on anyones beliefs..... well actually I honestly don't care.

Freaks. Seriously, the convulsing, the dancing around, the demon banishing and witchcraft banishing, God..

I find it repulsive, disgusting, and would prefer that the ones I elect into office are not crazy Jesus freaks.

I was on the edge of giving the Republicans my vote to "make it count" as I am Conservative, but now I will stick with my 3rd party choice, for I REFUSE to have someone who belongs to that circus be in the White House..



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 


Yes, and this is where I feel Obama is making his mistake. He and everybody is throwing everything they can at Palin while McCain continues to look good. Sooner or later people will begin to feel that Obama and his people are taking it too far by some of the things they are bringing up.

I know Obama isn't responsible for all of the dirt but it still reflects on him.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
...This lady would just see it as god's will, and who the heck knows what would happen from there...


Well, we can look to how she's governed in the past.

According to one of Palin's major critics, she clearly did NOT govern overtly by her religious positions.



CLAIM VS FACT

•social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill
that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships
(said she did this because it was unconsitutional).

•pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to
promote it.

•“Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby
BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life
legislation



Is it therefore reasonable to assume she would change that behavior now?



[edit on 9-9-2008 by loam]



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
Sooner or later people will begin to feel that Obama and his people are taking it too far by some of the things they are bringing up.


I think it's causing them votes by the minute.


I've complained in several threads that from my vantage point, Obama supporters are guilty of the very nonsense Bush supports dished out over the last eight years.

The ends may be different, but the means appear the same. Pathetic.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Are Americans honestly capable of choosing anyone sane ?

Is there anyone sane on offer ?


Truly, the US would fare far better if it were handed some other nation's leader instead of the choice before US voters.

Ex-Prime Minister John Winston Howard from Australia, for example. He's free and still has a few years left in him.

He's as corrupt as all the US candidates, but he's saner, more believable, less hysterical. And it's doubtful he could make any greater mess of the US economy than exists now.

The only way out of the US financial disaster would require an end to the handouts to Israel --- massive cuts in military spending -- and an end to government by Big Business. Not just an end to outsourcing, but massive taxes on all imported goods. And Mexicans back to Mexico. That would be a start.

The US would stand a chance most likely with Putin at the helm.
But would he take the job ? Would he even consider it ?

The fact remains though that it doesn't matter who's elected. They won't be making the decisions, just as Bush doesn't even decide which sox to wear.

The same thugs who've been running the US will still be running the US after the next election. Doesn't matter who's elected as 'leader'. And the world knows that. It will be just more government of the US via Israel.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative

During the Dem convention, members where supposed to call people and remind them to watch, and remind them to vote.



There was a vote? I missed it!!!



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 09:54 PM
link   
The crap is flying over the digital TV on the religious faith of both Palin and Obama. I had to turn off the darn TV after watching Greta Van Setern (misspelled) with her travel log of Wasilla, Alaska. (Beautiful fall weather was seen from the visitors center with Pioneer Peak in the background, clouds stacking up against the peaks)

Next I caught Bill O'Reilly interviewing Obama and more talk about Religion.

My question, Why is it important to Say "God Bless America" in all the political campaign speeches when prayer is illegal in public schools?



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 10:15 PM
link   

' Why is it important to Say "God Bless America"



Because the thugs behind this charade are s'n-word'ing as they insult and slap Americans' intelligence and faces

Americans are their Sheep -- their playthings -- their Golden Geese -- their cannon fodder.

Every time one of their puppet-candidates mouths 'God Save America' they are laughingly and cynically exploiting American values handed down from the TRUE patriots -- those devout, hard-working pioneers who built cabins by hand, tamed the wilderness to grow crops to feed themselves.

And those first and TRUE Americans built themselves a place of worship as a matter of priority. They found the time and energy, even though they were toiling 16 hours a day.

Now, a few hundred years later, slick zionist pimps scream 'God Save America' because they know it will stir something in the descendants of those first and true Americans. Exploitation and insult which they toss in American faces at the same time as they make promises they have no intention of honouring.

' God Save America' is candidate code for God F..k America '.

And they will.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 10:45 PM
link   
So it comes out that she used the pulpit of this church to ask people to pray for Gods will, which was to have a pipeline in Alaska.


Very interesting.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Quazga
 


How is this any different than what Obama says?

This, for example:




Barack Obama has put his religion back into the headlines, trumpeting the power and salvation of faith and asking a church audience in South Carolina to help him become “an instrument of God” and join him in creating “a Kingdom right here on Earth.

Link.

This source too.





EDIT:

And he didn't just say it once.

He did it here too in his prayer note he actually shared with the press.


[edit on 8-9-2008 by loam]



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 11:35 PM
link   
As a believer in the Bible and Jesus Christ as God, I would like to
apologize to everyone for both of these candidates.

God's will doesn't include Palin or Obama in office. His will is described
in the Bible only. For either one of them to claim His will is to have
them in office is not only self-serving bull****, but is bordering on
heresy according to Evangelical Orthodoxy, not to start a theological
argument or anything.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 11:48 PM
link   
I saw this same garbage criticism earlier today. How can you criticize someones positive beliefs? Is this what it has truly come down to, we now jump all over someone and bash them for being "Too" Christian? Pentecostalism is a Protestant based belief, and it follows along with Corinthians straight from the Bible. To me more specific, it follows this Core Verse of Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 14:2 (KJV)

"For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

For anyone who is well versed in Biblical Passages, this is NOT something new, or weird.

Also, this is NOT "wild", or "strange" like those in Appalachia who Play with Venomous Snakes as part of their Christian Beliefs, and I know that is exactly what many are attempting to compare it to. This is a Protestant Based Theology which takes its founding belief straight from a literal Bible passage.

I must also assume that many on here have heard of the term "Born Again Christian"? Well, to be "Born Again" means that you follow 1 Corinthians 14:2. Pentecostals are also not the only Christians who hold this passage as a core of their beliefs. Many Episcopalians are also followers of these beliefs.

In Conclusion, this is only new to those who do not follow the Bible, or at the very least Protestantism. For those who do not follow the Christian Holy Book, they should understand that the theology present through Pentecostals and many Episcopalians follows a very core Bible Passage. It is a belief which was around during the time of Jesus and his Disciples, but the Catholic Church essentially cast it out of their system (Nothing against Catholics).

The very founding idea of America and the explorers which first laid down the foundations for its settlement, was for the Freedom of Religion, and your ability to Practice your beliefs without fear from Persecution. If you truly believe in holding something like this against Sarah Palin, or anyone for that matter, then you should realize the fact that you are going against one of the very core ideologies upon which this Nation was created. This is absolutely petty at best, and an attack upon Christianity at worst. Something about this "issue" is quite reminiscent of Marxism.



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen
 


If you're going to quote scripture you should keep it in context.
Speaking in tongues was an Apostolic sign of the new church and
something that was to be done in a very ordered way. If you read
the chapters before and after that one verse you quoted you will see
that it is explained that speaking in tongues should not interrupt others
and should be interpreted, not just uttered over and over again.

Also, tongues is not based on Protestant faith. The Protestants held a
Reformed view of the Bible which believes that the spiritual gifts of the
early church have ceased with the death of the last Apostle.
To the Pentecostal, the "gift of tongues" is a sign of the "baptism of the
Holy Spirit" which is a heretical belief.
I could elaborate further if needed but I'm sure most people on here
don't want to hear about Protestant or Evangelical Theology.

Like I said, I wasn't trying to start an argument.



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quazga
reply to post by kozmo
 


Well if it isn't true then she should come out and distance herself from it shouldn't she?

I mean that's what Obama did when his Church was labeled crazy.

Tit for tat...




This is getting really pathetic quickly. So now your major arguement is "Mine candidate is just as crazy as your Candidate" when it comes to church?

What a weak argument!

I expected better from you.



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by holyTerror
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen
 


If you're going to quote scripture you should keep it in context.
Speaking in tongues was an Apostolic sign of the new church and
something that was to be done in a very ordered way. If you read
the chapters before and after that one verse you quoted you will see
that it is explained that speaking in tongues should not interrupt others
and should be interpreted, not just uttered over and over again.

Also, tongues is not based on Protestant faith. The Protestants held a
Reformed view of the Bible which believes that the spiritual gifts of the
early church have ceased with the death of the last Apostle.
To the Pentecostal, the "gift of tongues" is a sign of the "baptism of the
Holy Spirit" which is a heretical belief.
I could elaborate further if needed but I'm sure most people on here
don't want to hear about Protestant or Evangelical Theology.

Like I said, I wasn't trying to start an argument.




I am aware of the beliefs behind the "Speaking of Tongues", but I failed to see the reason behind why I should need to explain it any further. I put forth the Core Scripture of the Belief, and I stated it as such. It is only a "heretical" belief within the confines of Catholicism, as they attempted to portray it as a negative, something to be associated with "possession", and not a belief to be held as "Divine". When put into the core context of Catholicism, this makes complete sense seeing as the Catholic Church believes you must seek communion with God, and salvation, through a "medium", such as a Priest.

Protestants believe in self-salvation, and direct communion with God. This is also what Pentecostals and Episcopalians believe as well, so for all intents and purposes, they practice an interpretation of the Protestant Faith. "Tongues" is an ancient belief which for years had been forgotten and oppressed, but it IS well within the confines of Biblical Teachings, and that is what I am stressing here.

I do understand that Theology can be debated forever, from the very beginning to the end of time. However, someone whom is a Pentecostal or Episcopalian believer in such aforementioned aspects should not be seen as on the fringe, or as some "whacko". Interpretations differ from Church to Church, and even Individual to Individual, but this is a belief well versed in the Holy Book, and one which is seen as completely acceptable within the modern confines of the Christian Church.

BTW, I am a completely open minded individual, and I for one have many friends with not only different interpretations and beliefs of the Christian Church, but also different Religions as Well. I know Religion is such a controversial topic, as it is extremely sensitive to debate beliefs and customs. That however is one of the very reasons why I see it as extremely cynical and downright wrong to attack someone for their Positive Interpretation (Meaning Non-Extremist AKA Not Promoting Violence Against Non-Conformers). This Church is not calling for anyones head, and they are not following dangerous or violent practices, so they should be left alone. The same goes for any Mosque, Temple, or Tabernacle.



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


Looks like you are in the same ship I find myself in, or almost...

I supported McCain when he didn't have enough cash to enter a 1$ afternoon movie theater. I raised funds fopr his campaign, until he finally defeated all the Christian loonies...
Now, he goes and picks an even crazier Christian loony...and a blatant hypocrite, at that...

My only advantage is - I'm Canadian
so, I will not have to decide for which loony bunch my vote goes to...



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Arguing about Palin's church being a bunch of crazies seems kind of strange on a forum that features alien abductees, psychics, ghost hunters, conspiracy theories, global warming freaks, and people claiming they are from Zeta Reticuli or whatever ....





top topics
 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join