A Man to Make Kings Stand Speechless
cteas...@gmail.com
amazed when they saw him--beaten and bloodied, so disfigured one would
scarcely know he was a person. And he will again startle many nations.
Kings will stand speechless in his presence. For they will see what
they had not previously been told about; they will understand what they
had not heard about. " NLT Isaiah 52:13-15
In Christ's love
Carol T
Jess
<cteas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111880854.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Holy s*** she's arisen!
>
Johannes H Andersen
If you see him, tell him to stop the war.
cteas...@gmail.com
Which ever war you refer to you can ask this yourself in faith to Him.
Isaiah went on to say....
"For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, And as a root out
of dry ground. He has no form or comeliness; And when we see Him, There
is no beauty that we should desire Him. He is despised and rejected by
men, A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it
were, our faces from Him; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed
Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted But He was wounded for our
transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement
for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed." NKJ
Isa 53:2-5
Johannes H Andersen
"cteas...@gmail.com" wrote:
>
> Dear Johannes,
>
> Which ever war you refer to you can ask this yourself in faith to Him.
I'm afraid that I'm not as well connected as you are to in those spheres.
The war I was referring to is the war that is on most peoples mind for
the last two years. Please use your influence and ask your boss to call
off the war and call the troops home.
cteas...@gmail.com
We all have a direct line to God, it's whether 'we' chose to use it, or
if we believe ourselves to be worthy of it.
Do you have someone away from home that you are worrying about?
Johannes H Andersen
"cteas...@gmail.com" wrote:
>
> Dear Johannes,
Maybe you do not want to use your special contacts on my behalf to call off
the war all call the troops home? Are you in favour of the war?
> We all have a direct line to God, it's whether 'we' chose to use it, or
> if we believe ourselves to be worthy of it.
Unfortunately, I'm not with you there. Which number do you dial?
kj
crap or read your badly written and translated little book
cteas...@gmail.com
I listen to those who have a direct line with Satan too you know, with
more tolerance than he demands of his minions :o) Although it takes
Christ's light for people to see his evil manipulation in their lives.
kj
cheap pamphlet has stripped you of any you did have and replaced it with
a robot
kj
Johannes H Andersen
Who do you never have any opinion of your own? Where is your soul?
cteas...@gmail.com
cteas...@gmail.com
If I am Satan, then turn yourself around and face your Lord God. Speak
with Him, not me.
cteas...@gmail.com
If I am Satan, then turn yourself around and face your Lord God. Speak
with Him, not me.
In Christ's love
Carol T
kj
cteas...@gmail.com
Johannes H Andersen
"cteas...@gmail.com" wrote:
>
I think you believe in something, but do not have a mind of your own
have an opinion with. Perhaps you sit back and leave everything to God's
decisions? Why do you not want to stop the war and call the troops home?
kj
cteas...@gmail.com
For now I shall assume that you are talking of the iraq war, and not
our spiritual battles.
I think about the woman on her knees who witnessed her child shot in
the back of the head before she was shot in the forehead. Then she fell
forward into the pit dug for her body, still clinging to the child, and
this is how she was discovered, as were so many defenceless women and
children in mass graves.
I did not pray for war, but maybe she prayed for help with her last
breath, maybe for such a thing never to happen to her neighbours.
Do you pray to have the war, or any war ended, even that of the mind or
Sprit? Do you have someone in Iraq?
"Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against
the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood,
but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the
darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the
heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may
be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the
breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the
preparation of the gospel of peace; " NKJ Ephesians - Chapter 6:11-16
Johannes H Andersen
OK, at last you have an opinion of your own. But why can you only express
it in such a convoluted way, always involving divine causes such that you
so you do not appear to take a stand. Try to think for yourself for once!
What has happened in regard to the war was very complicated and driven
by more than one agenda. Diplomacy wasn't allowed to run it's full cause.
The war was ill planned and caused countless unnecessary losses and
sufferings. As you are also aware, most of the relics from the oldest
Mesopotamian civilisation on earth was looted or smashed to pieces. Now
it is time to leave the poor people to themselves and to give them control
of their land back as was promised all along. I say, call the troops home.
However, we are where we are
john
Andersen <jo...@spamblockkksizefitter.com> writes
>
>
>
>
>
>However, we are where we are
That is exactly the Bush/Blair specious argument they try to make us
believe! Only fools do. The full argument goes;
"Well, perhaps the war wasn't quite legal, the WMDs perhaps did not
exist (but we believed the Intelligence wonks when they assured us they
did, so it's their fault!), and we didn't expect so much trouble after
the victory BUT surely it's better to have toppled Saddam and "we are
where we are", so let's draw a line under it, learn the lessons and move
on."
What the argument ignores is that Bush/Blair lied about the reasons for
the war, they are occupying Iraq on behalf of the
military/industrial/Zionist lobbies and will do so for some years to
come and now are making menacing noises about Iran.
What is the betting that in a year or so, Bush/Blair will be advancing
the identical specious argument about Iran? -"illegality justified by
toppling the regime, occupying the oil-fields, "we are where we are",
"draw a line", "learn the lessons" and "move on"?
It could even be Nigeria or another West African state, now than the
prime architects of US imperialism have got control of the World Bank
(Wolfowitz), State Department (Condi Rice) and anti-UN hard-liner, John
Bolton, has been appointed US Ambassador to the UN. The availability
of West African oil/gas reserves will not have escaped attention of the
business sponsors of the Bush Administration. All Bush needs is a
manufactured excuse to "liberate" those valuable energy reserves from
the "dictators that oppress their peoples"! [Churches leaders, in
general, and the Religious Right, in particular, are sycophantic in
their support of those in power, both in the US and the UK . They will
preach whatever is politically acceptable to their masters-, using the
Bible for their own ends.]
And it will happen, unless the US and UK electorate also "learn the
lesson" they have been lied to and that their leaders' credibility,
judgement and trust is at fault. Then they need to " draw a line"
themselves and "move on" by deposing the modern-day imperialists.
--
John
kj
you know...you are condemned as a war-monger and therefore an agent of Satan
kj
from power, the only unfortunate thing is that it wasn't done 10 years
ago...Saddam gave enough reasons for his removal.
If Iran continues on its course to produce WMD then they to should be
stopped, by peaceful means if possible, the same is true of N. Korea
Johannes H Andersen
john wrote:
>
> In message <424B0665...@spamblockkksizefitter.com>, Johannes H
> Andersen <jo...@spamblockkksizefitter.com> writes
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >However, we are where we are
>
> That is exactly the Bush/Blair specious argument they try to make us
> believe! Only fools do. The full argument goes;
Agreed, the above line was due to sloppy editing, sorry m8.
cteas...@gmail.com
Do you have someone serving over there?
cteas...@gmail.com
If the WMD didn't exist, then who killed all those people in the mass
graves?
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/27000.htm
cteas...@gmail.com
I have not prayed for war, only ever peace for the world. Killing is
never a means to an end. God is a creator, to kill wantingly is to
destroy His creations.
If God removes His blessings from people, who brings this about?
Perhaps you should explain your comments to others in the thread so
that you do not leave them confused. You see, you can show others how
to wear the spiritual strength of Christ and how He can bring about
peace. I see that you are prepared to wear a breastplate of
righteousness, but weaken in your choice of sword. Why is that Kevin,
what is it that you have in your hand that's stopping you?
john
"cteas...@gmail.com" <cteas...@gmail.com> writes
The Western chemical companies that provided the materials and delivery
methods to a dictator and ,the US Administrations that actively
supported that dictator until he foolishly threatened their oil supplies
in Kuwait.
[Stick to religion, Carol- politics is not your strong suit.]
--
John
john
<ke...@orchardcroft.co.uk> writes
>>
>or it could be that we were completely justified in removing a maniac
>from power, the only unfortunate thing is that it wasn't done 10 years
>ago...Saddam gave enough reasons for his removal.
>
against him. That is the role of the UN.
>If Iran continues on its course to produce WMD then they to should be
>stopped, by peaceful means if possible, the same is true of N. Korea
See above.
--
John
kj
riven with rivalry thay can't make a decision and if they do one party
or another veto's it. Who then should ensure mad dictators are removed.
Johannes H Andersen
kj wrote:
>
[...]
> and when the UN is completely in-effectual as its history proves or so
> riven with rivalry thay can't make a decision and if they do one party
> or another veto's it. Who then should ensure mad dictators are removed.
The UN is just an intermediary. Important heavyweight members such as
France, Germany and Russia had serious doubts about WMD. These doubts were
presumably based serious assessments and should not have been brushed aside.
Europe had dictators in Spain and Greece, but the countries got rid of them
without fighting a war.
john
<ke...@orchardcroft.co.uk> writes
You are right! The UN needs to sharpen up and be willing to take
military action to do such things- today cannot be too soon!. The UN
needs to be less dependent financially on the US- perhaps even expelling
the US for non-payment of dues?. So doing would sharpen the minds of
the Security Council, perhaps even creating the UN's own military force
to deal with such policing matters.
The danger of allowing superpowers like extant US and emerging China to
act unilaterally and pre-emptively is purely swapping one kind of
dictatorship for another.
As I have already pointed out, neither the US nor the UK will topple a
dictator unless there is direct and immediate benefit to either country-
in practice, as I have also pointed out, the US actively supports
dictators if there is strategic and/or commercial benefit in so doing.
--
John
john
<johs@spamblock^sizefitter.com> writes
Note that the US supported both Franco and the Greek Military Junta, as
well as Portugal's Salazar regime.
--
John
Johannes H Andersen
Naturally a lot has been said and done since 2003, but I have some sound
bites in my head from the beginning of 2003, which I'm surprised that we
don't hear much of these days:
1) Blair: "Saddam has 10000 Litres of Antrax"
2) Straw: "Saddam will have nothing to fear if he complies". Shortly after
that Saddam destroyed his long range missiles which had a range slightly in
excess of allowed. Dubya's reaction: "This shows that Saddam is bluffing".
kj
French did not have doubts about WMD otherwise they would never had
signed the original motion to inspect for WMD's..they had alterior trade
amd oil deals with Iraq.
Yet again if the UN is unable to deal with genecidal dictators (there is
nothing wrong with the political institution of dictatorship) who is?
Johannes H Andersen
kj wrote:
>
> Johannes H Andersen wrote:
> >
> > kj wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>and when the UN is completely in-effectual as its history proves or so
> >>riven with rivalry thay can't make a decision and if they do one party
> >>or another veto's it. Who then should ensure mad dictators are removed.
> >
> >
> > The UN is just an intermediary. Important heavyweight members such as
> > France, Germany and Russia had serious doubts about WMD. These doubts were
> > presumably based serious assessments and should not have been brushed aside.
> >
> > Europe had dictators in Spain and Greece, but the countries got rid of them
> > without fighting a war.
> when did Spain get rid of its dictator...when he died in 1975.. The
> French did not have doubts about WMD otherwise they would never had
> signed the original motion to inspect for WMD's..they had alterior trade
> amd oil deals with Iraq.
I remember well that people was living in fear of Franco just as the other
one. However, just like Saddam he had to rely of men around him that couldn't
tell him the truth. Sooner or later, such a system collapses as someone gets
stabbed in the back.
> Yet again if the UN is unable to deal with genecidal dictators (there is
> nothing wrong with the political institution of dictatorship) who is?
???
UN consist of its members, and in spite of Blair's spin, there was not even
a majority for a second resolution, so France's potential veto was irrelevant.
If you don't have international law, you have a free for all. Some people find
this interesting, others find it stupid.
cteas...@gmail.com
I suspect that many a man we have dealt with over the years have
delivered material things into our lives which haven't come for
anything else other than personal gain, what does this make us?
john
"cteas...@gmail.com" <cteas...@gmail.com> writes
intelligent debate.
--
John