But you did in fact say "I have no evidence one way or the other"
Unless they guy in the book as clear evidence than all you got is speculation which is gossip.
Spare
- Thread starter Lanolin
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
But you did in fact say "I have no evidence one way or the other"
Unless they guy in the book as clear evidence than all you got is speculation which is gossip.
Methinks ZNP confused my thread with one in the Conspiracy and Corruption Forum but I clearly placed it in Christian News which looks at actual News headlines, not self-published books nobody's heard of. Or read.
Spare by Prince Harry is being exception of course, and I found absolutely nothing about him or his dad being a Mason. The only masons they know are Fortnum & Mason
Spare by Prince Harry is being exception of course, and I found absolutely nothing about him or his dad being a Mason. The only masons they know are Fortnum & Mason
This isn't news, its on the companies website.
But you could sign up to their newsletter ...if you want.
I've had their tea, it's quite nice. I like the Earl Grey
But really I just drink Bell Tea. Or Jasmine or Oolong from China (no particular brand)
I'd be more concerned with Starbucks if I were you. Their logo is somewhat satanic.
Or Hell Pizza.
Of the two I prefer Hells Pizza. Starbucks wants to take over the world, green washes their coffee hiding their slave labour origins and avoids tax. Unlike most cafes that give you a free coffee after you've bought 9 on your coffee card, Starbucks wants you to PAY extra to have a coffee card voucher that doesn't even give you any free coffees.
Hell Pizza just wants children to read books, and gives you a free pizza after you've read 7.
I am not a fan of coffee at all and resent the Starbucks on the corner which is overpriced and sugary. Their cabinet food isn't anything to write home about either.
Or Hell Pizza.
Of the two I prefer Hells Pizza. Starbucks wants to take over the world, green washes their coffee hiding their slave labour origins and avoids tax. Unlike most cafes that give you a free coffee after you've bought 9 on your coffee card, Starbucks wants you to PAY extra to have a coffee card voucher that doesn't even give you any free coffees.
Hell Pizza just wants children to read books, and gives you a free pizza after you've read 7.
I am not a fan of coffee at all and resent the Starbucks on the corner which is overpriced and sugary. Their cabinet food isn't anything to write home about either.
Is that speaking in the first person thing working out?
Some claim those who speak in the first person should be kept in one of those mental help facilities.
Like it's the slippery slope leading to the funny farm or something
No, the order of the garter is on His Heraldic achievement, try reading the book or listening to one of his interviews. The heraldic achievement is not speculation. The fact that King Charles is the order of the garter is not speculation and the connection of that to the Masonic order is also not speculation. In his book he provides further evidence supporting that assertion. What I say is speculation that I don't agree with is that King Charles is the Antichrist, I feel that is not true. However, to say that he is a key figure that the book of Revelation refers to and who serves the Prince of darkness, I don't think that is speculation.
You are conflating two different issues. One is whether or not King Charles is a 33 degree Mason, that is supported by evidence but the Masonic lodge makes this hard to verify so it is based on relatively good supporting evidence without being classified as verified.
The other issue is whether or not the main thesis of his book, that King Charles is the Antichrist, is true. That is what I am calling speculation, and not true. I agree with his evidence that King Charles Heraldic achievement is described in the book of Revelation. But I don't agree that this means he is "the antichrist".
How to identify the Spirit of Antichrist
False_Christ_vs_True_Christ_Table.pdf
drive.google.com
Do not confuse this with people who are trying to identify a single person with "The Antichrist". That is not my point of this document. My point is that there are many counterfeits today and we need to understand, based on the Bible, how to identify them. This gives you a table of 18 Biblical criteria for the true Spirit of Christ. Fail on any one criteria and you have identified a counterfeit the same way you would identify a counterfeit bill. This document will demonstrate how common it is to actually find counterfeits. Yes, Manson and Jim jones, but in reality the counterfeits are far more common than that. There is also a special section which applies this need of identifying the spirit of the antichrist to the tribulation period.
I have created a thread "How to identify the spirit of Antichrist" which I feel is far more important than trying to guess who "the antichrist" is.
If he is then he will be speaking favorably of that cult and would be exhibiting other signs he's in with them such as masonic rings, or artwork, etc.
You are conflating two different issues.
Any human being that has refused to submit themselves to the Lord is walking in the "spirit of anti-christ" which simply means their mindset, attitude, or opinion of Jesus is they don't want to follow Him and continue to reject Him which they due because evil spirits trained them to take that position.
This is totally different than THE anti-christ who will lead the coming one world government. This person will also have a mindset, attitude, or opinion of Jesus to not follow Him but this person will be possessed by satan and takes their opposition to the Lord obviously to a much higher level
Yes, it is two different issues, one is about what each person who is a believer will have to confront and the other is about what only those who are alive at the end of the age and failed to learn how to confront the spirit of antichrist prior to the tribulation will have to confront.
Farms are not funny in New Zealand. They are the backbone of our economy.Is that speaking in the first person thing working out?
Some claim those who speak in the first person should be kept in one of those mental help facilities.
Like it's the slippery slope leading to the funny farm or something
Think before you type.
I always thought Muhammad (the prophet) was anti-christ.
I mean he spawned an entire religion that has been taken up by governments and opposes the truth of gospel. But what do I know what anti- means. It just seems to be the opposite of what anything means.
I don't think you need to worry tho, if you a believer in Christ you will be saved and protected from the wiles of the enemy. Even if you live 120 years and still alive by then.
You can always overdose them with scripture. Seems to work, as Jesus said to love your enemies. do good to those who persecute you, and things like that. Love conquers all.
Lol the Order of the Garter is just the most senior rank of knighthood in Britain. Charles is literally the Sovereign, meaning you can only be a knight of the order of the Garter if Charles makes you one (or his mum made you one before he became king.) This is something Harry could have attained to but probably never will now after the fall out with the royal family, though we still push for the reconciliation to fulfil Malachi 4 and strengthen the realm.
en.wikipedia.org
Charles is not a freemason as far as I am aware, but even if he were it be redundant or obsolete compared to his real rightful inherited royal titles anyways. As far as the Knights of the Order of the Garter this is a separate thing, it's the highest rank of knighthood, but remembering our tables on the earlier pages knights are the lowest rank of British nobility. It's not secret society or nothing eithe, just lore heavy nerd reading though. The wiki link gives the full list of the current Knights of the Order of the Gareter as well as living past members are public knowledge. To this end technically Charles is one of these but he's the Sovereign, literally he has as part of his Crown powers the ability to invest new knights whom the knights of this Order serve most closely. The Knights of the Order of the Garter are his closest knights hence why its the highest knight order. Literally just kinda think a little medieval it's not really a great mystery why the list of names was chosen. You'll notice our personal fan favorite Princess Anne is actually the second most senior knight of the Garter, remembering the earlier pages of discussion about our Anne fandom and how she had eschewed the greater titles of nobility so this is her actual highest formal title of nobility Dame Anne of the Order of the Garter, arguably Britain and Commonwealth's strongest knight currently in the modern era.
List of current knights and ladies of the Garter - Wikipedia
Charles is not a freemason as far as I am aware, but even if he were it be redundant or obsolete compared to his real rightful inherited royal titles anyways. As far as the Knights of the Order of the Garter this is a separate thing, it's the highest rank of knighthood, but remembering our tables on the earlier pages knights are the lowest rank of British nobility. It's not secret society or nothing eithe, just lore heavy nerd reading though. The wiki link gives the full list of the current Knights of the Order of the Gareter as well as living past members are public knowledge. To this end technically Charles is one of these but he's the Sovereign, literally he has as part of his Crown powers the ability to invest new knights whom the knights of this Order serve most closely. The Knights of the Order of the Garter are his closest knights hence why its the highest knight order. Literally just kinda think a little medieval it's not really a great mystery why the list of names was chosen. You'll notice our personal fan favorite Princess Anne is actually the second most senior knight of the Garter, remembering the earlier pages of discussion about our Anne fandom and how she had eschewed the greater titles of nobility so this is her actual highest formal title of nobility Dame Anne of the Order of the Garter, arguably Britain and Commonwealth's strongest knight currently in the modern era.
I'm a fan of Anne
Anne Fans unite...Gatcombe Club this-a-way.
Love the bouffant hair do. Why can't my hair do that?
Anne Fans unite...Gatcombe Club this-a-way.
Love the bouffant hair do. Why can't my hair do that?
In other news...my church friend who's caregiving had her client turn 100 years old!
So her client got a card from His Majesty the King. It had their photo on it - Charles and Camilla and Happy Birthday wishes.
She also got a card from the Prime Minister of NZ - Mr Christopher Luxon, which he signed and wished Happy Birthday too.
A friend or family member needs to apply for you https://www.govt.nz/browse/family-and-whanau/congratulatory-messages/
My brothers (twins) turned 44 two days ago. I didn't send them any card, we just had dinner and birthday cake, and presents..they need to wait another 66 years to turn 100.
My grandad lived to 99, just one year short from 100, so he never got any birthday card from the Queen. So close...
So her client got a card from His Majesty the King. It had their photo on it - Charles and Camilla and Happy Birthday wishes.
She also got a card from the Prime Minister of NZ - Mr Christopher Luxon, which he signed and wished Happy Birthday too.
A friend or family member needs to apply for you https://www.govt.nz/browse/family-and-whanau/congratulatory-messages/
My brothers (twins) turned 44 two days ago. I didn't send them any card, we just had dinner and birthday cake, and presents..they need to wait another 66 years to turn 100.
My grandad lived to 99, just one year short from 100, so he never got any birthday card from the Queen. So close...
I have just started reading a new book about Royal women, called 'Divide and Rule'
It was published this year.
It features Queen Anne, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Elizabeth II of which I am up to.
After that the chapters are going to be on Diana, Camilla, Kate and Meghan
It's very interesting to read the history, or rather, all the stories that have come out about the royals spanning centuries. Like somehow, the Church of England got started by King Henry the eighth's desire for a son and heir (which he never got) . That instead of Lutherism, the Church of England leaned more toward Calvinism. That Catholics are protested against, and the French Catholics were sort of at loggerheads with the Hugeanots , just as the Irish Catholics butted heads with the English Protestants, who tried to take over their land.
It was very much divide and rule.
On a lighter note, who remembers this ditty?
It was published this year.
It features Queen Anne, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Elizabeth II of which I am up to.
After that the chapters are going to be on Diana, Camilla, Kate and Meghan
It's very interesting to read the history, or rather, all the stories that have come out about the royals spanning centuries. Like somehow, the Church of England got started by King Henry the eighth's desire for a son and heir (which he never got) . That instead of Lutherism, the Church of England leaned more toward Calvinism. That Catholics are protested against, and the French Catholics were sort of at loggerheads with the Hugeanots , just as the Irish Catholics butted heads with the English Protestants, who tried to take over their land.
It was very much divide and rule.
On a lighter note, who remembers this ditty?
Please note, Prince Harry's real name is Henry. Not Harold.
If Prince Harry succeed or ascended or jumped on the throne, he'd be known as King Henry the 9th.
If Prince Harry succeed or ascended or jumped on the throne, he'd be known as King Henry the 9th.
Ok the morning news is that Prince Harry lost his court case.
It was against the Daily Mail and he alleged this newspaper/press bugged him or invaded his privacy.
As well as Elton John's and Elizabeth Hurleys.
I am not sure how or what they did or what part of Harry's privacy they invaded, but I don't recall any private phone conversations being broadcast to the world like Camillagate and Squidygate... I don't even know why someone would be listening into those..or how. Charles and Di did not sue the papers who published those.
? I don't read the Daily Mail as we don't have it in my country, but they seem to defend the integrity of their journos and quashed the case. Maybe it was just a matter of, Harry or Meghan invited some people into their home and they blabbed or passed on some private info to the Daily Mail. Then they published it. I don't know.
I don't think they are above sifting through the Royals trash but they could shred documents before discarding them, and things like postcards and letters, can be copied without anyone actually opening their mail. Or emails...can be easily fwded. I don't think emails are private, if they fall into the wrong hands or someone it's not meant for, not everyone's going to delete them.
Unless they make all staff sign NDAs, but they can't really make the case if they are let go and no longer working for them, that they can't talk about anything to do with them.
What do people think? It's probably not that important, but I guess they care about their reputations when so much has been written about the royals already, so I guess it's to be expected. Unless it's in a locked red box and marked confidential or a safe, someone's going to blab.
Catherine's medical records someone tried to sell - to a paper?? I don't know. If the Daily Mail operates like royal PR, which it doesn't have to, it might buy that kind of info from someone willing to sell it. As far as I know, she hasn't sued.
But that's really a lot of money to take someone to court.
Nobody's interested in invading my privacy or wanting to steal my identity, and I don't have staff working for me, so I wonder what the issue is. If I write to someone, they will get my letter, and they can then do what they like with it, I can't stop them fwding it or talking about it to others.
It was against the Daily Mail and he alleged this newspaper/press bugged him or invaded his privacy.
As well as Elton John's and Elizabeth Hurleys.
I am not sure how or what they did or what part of Harry's privacy they invaded, but I don't recall any private phone conversations being broadcast to the world like Camillagate and Squidygate... I don't even know why someone would be listening into those..or how. Charles and Di did not sue the papers who published those.
? I don't read the Daily Mail as we don't have it in my country, but they seem to defend the integrity of their journos and quashed the case. Maybe it was just a matter of, Harry or Meghan invited some people into their home and they blabbed or passed on some private info to the Daily Mail. Then they published it. I don't know.
I don't think they are above sifting through the Royals trash but they could shred documents before discarding them, and things like postcards and letters, can be copied without anyone actually opening their mail. Or emails...can be easily fwded. I don't think emails are private, if they fall into the wrong hands or someone it's not meant for, not everyone's going to delete them.
Unless they make all staff sign NDAs, but they can't really make the case if they are let go and no longer working for them, that they can't talk about anything to do with them.
What do people think? It's probably not that important, but I guess they care about their reputations when so much has been written about the royals already, so I guess it's to be expected. Unless it's in a locked red box and marked confidential or a safe, someone's going to blab.
Catherine's medical records someone tried to sell - to a paper?? I don't know. If the Daily Mail operates like royal PR, which it doesn't have to, it might buy that kind of info from someone willing to sell it. As far as I know, she hasn't sued.
But that's really a lot of money to take someone to court.
Nobody's interested in invading my privacy or wanting to steal my identity, and I don't have staff working for me, so I wonder what the issue is. If I write to someone, they will get my letter, and they can then do what they like with it, I can't stop them fwding it or talking about it to others.
Here's the headline news...from RNZ (Radio New Zealand)
www.rnz.co.nz
Prince Harry loses lawsuit against Daily Mail
Prince Harry on Tuesday lost his high-profile case against the Daily Mail's publisher for alleged unlawful information gathering in yet another blow to the estranged royal as he begins a fraught five-day trip back to the UK.
www.rnz.co.nz