Christian ☦ happily married 😊. Telling the truth about the Bible and Christian history ⛪ Church Fathers, Saints, etc.
United States
Joined May 2011
- Tweets1.3K
- Following628
- Followers1.4K
- Likes15.6K
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
Seeing God wondrously incarnate, let us shun the vain world and set our mind on things divine; for God came down to earth that He might raise to heaven us who cry to Him: Alleluia! 🤍☦️
Seeing God wondrously incarnate, let us shun the vain world and set our mind on things divine; for God came down to earth that He might raise to heaven us who cry to Him: Alleluia! 🤍☦️
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was "composition"—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up.
So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we're going to shock the world? "No," he told me. "We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us."
Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.
There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true.
But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone.
Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were:
1) End the war
2) Focus on cost of living/inflation
3) Put America First
4) Change our relationship to Israel
Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.)
In the next few months, there's going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I'm open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you.
The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night.
If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest.
But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there.
I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
Thanks for acknowledging these things. Better late than never. I’ll send you the hat.
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
Tonight was a total referendum on Trump.
He told people to vote like he was on the ballot and they did.
Trump covered up the Epstein files protecting rapists and pedophiles, started a foreign war no one wanted and killed a school full of kids, put his rich elite donors before the struggling Americans who put him in office, made life unaffordable with his tariffs, and caused gas and diesel prices to skyrocket while he played the market and sold crypto.
And Republicans stood behind him silently clapping like trained baby seals.
And Trump ran me and Thomas Massie out of the Congress and our Republican colleagues stayed silent.
But really it’s what Trump did to the American people.
And tonight they sent him a clear message.
But it’s the rest of Republicans that need to learn the lesson and drastically change course.
And I’m not sure if they’re capable of that.
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
People's whose fault this is:
AIPAC
Mark Levin
Laura Loomer
Will Chamberlain
Ben Shapiro
All of these Israel-First Traitors should be completely ostracized from any Conservative movement.
O Christ Jesus, ten thousand times have I, the passionate one, promised Thee repentance, O my Jesus, but wretch that I am, I deceived Thee.
Wherefore, I cry unto Thee, my Jesus: Enlighten my soul which remaineth unfeeling; O Christ, the God of our fathers, blessed art Thou 🤍☦
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
ELITE THEORY: Narratives, Operatives & Meta Level Insanity nitter.cf/i/broadcasts/2dKYmEBbY…
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
The Protestant response to my post about the Canon captures the historical dilemma facing Protestantism.
It's a psychological mechanism driven by a structural necessity. Because their entire theological system rests on Sola Scriptura, any challenge to the history, origin, or contents of the Bible threatens the very foundation of their faith, forcing a defensive retreat into historical revisionism.
If the collection of books they rely on is historically proven to be a 16th century subtraction rather than the original apostolic standard, their foundational rule of faith cracks. To prevent that crack, they have no choice but to rely on alternative historical narratives like the "added at Trent" myth or the "Hebrew truth" narrative.. Even when those claims are flatly contradicted by primary historical documents.
The Irony of the "Hebrew Superiority" Argument.. Lol. The Hebrew canon they defend was preserved, edited, and finalized centuries after the Resurrection by the Masoretes, rabbis who explicitly rejected Christ.
In contrast, the Greek Septuagint was translated by pre-Christian Jews centuries before Christ, meaning its translators had zero anti-Christian bias when translating messianic prophecies, such as Isaiah 7:14 rendering "virgin" instead of just "young woman," or the explicit crucifixion imagery in Wisdom 2.
By choosing the post-Christian rabbinical canon, they are unknowingly trusting the textual curation of a community that actively sought to define itself against the early Christian Church.
When they mock my view of scripture, call me illiterate, or tell me that I don't know how to read, they are implicitly projecting that onto the baseline of the ancient Church.
They are calling St. Athanasius, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. John Damascene illiterate.
They are claiming that the Holy Apostles who penned the New Testament in Greek while heavily quoting the Septuagint text did not understand scripture.
They are dismissing the Ecumenical Councils that codified the liturgical use of these books.
As an Orthodox Christian, I don't have to carry the burden of inventing a novel historical theory to justify my Bible. I simply stand in the shade of an unbroken, 2,000 year old tree. It requires a massive amount of historical gymnastics to bridge the gap between 1st century Jerusalem and 16th century Germany while bypassing everything in between.. It requires zero gymnastics to trace the liturgy of the Orthodox Church straight back to the upper room ☦️🤍
The Protestant response to my post about the Canon captures the historical dilemma facing Protestantism.
It's a psychological mechanism driven by a structural necessity. Because their entire theological system rests on Sola Scriptura, any challenge to the history, origin, or contents of the Bible threatens the very foundation of their faith, forcing a defensive retreat into historical revisionism.
If the collection of books they rely on is historically proven to be a 16th century subtraction rather than the original apostolic standard, their foundational rule of faith cracks. To prevent that crack, they have no choice but to rely on alternative historical narratives like the "added at Trent" myth or the "Hebrew truth" narrative.. Even when those claims are flatly contradicted by primary historical documents.
The Irony of the "Hebrew Superiority" Argument.. Lol. The Hebrew canon they defend was preserved, edited, and finalized centuries after the Resurrection by the Masoretes, rabbis who explicitly rejected Christ.
In contrast, the Greek Septuagint was translated by pre-Christian Jews centuries before Christ, meaning its translators had zero anti-Christian bias when translating messianic prophecies, such as Isaiah 7:14 rendering "virgin" instead of just "young woman," or the explicit crucifixion imagery in Wisdom 2.
By choosing the post-Christian rabbinical canon, they are unknowingly trusting the textual curation of a community that actively sought to define itself against the early Christian Church.
When they mock my view of scripture, call me illiterate, or tell me that I don't know how to read, they are implicitly projecting that onto the baseline of the ancient Church.
They are calling St. Athanasius, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. John Damascene illiterate.
They are claiming that the Holy Apostles who penned the New Testament in Greek while heavily quoting the Septuagint text did not understand scripture.
They are dismissing the Ecumenical Councils that codified the liturgical use of these books.
As an Orthodox Christian, I don't have to carry the burden of inventing a novel historical theory to justify my Bible. I simply stand in the shade of an unbroken, 2,000 year old tree. It requires a massive amount of historical gymnastics to bridge the gap between 1st century Jerusalem and 16th century Germany while bypassing everything in between.. It requires zero gymnastics to trace the liturgy of the Orthodox Church straight back to the upper room ☦️🤍
✟ proxy 🇺🇸 retweeted
PROTESTANTS are LITERALLY reading a Bible edited by the very people who CRUCIFIED CHRIST .
By adopting the Masoretic text and rejecting the Deuterocanon, Luther and his followers chose the authority of 16th-century Christ-hating rabbis over the infallible authority of the Apostles and the early Church. They gutted the Word of God to hide clear prophecies like Wisdom 2, which exposes the exact mindset of the Pharisees who condemned Jesus.
The 66-book canon is a hollowed-out shell of the true Christian Scripture. Protestantism is built on the arrogant assumption that they could "purify" the Bible by aligning it with the traditions of men who explicitly denied the Messiah. If you are using a Bible that omits Wisdom, Sirach, and Maccabees, you are participating in a Jewish subversion of the Christian faith.
There is no salvation in novelties. The only grace found in Protestantism is the vestigial Catholicity they haven't managed to strip away yet. Schism does not lead to truth; it only leads to further fragmentation and eventual damnation. If you want the whole truth, you must return to the one true faith that protected the complete Canon for 1,500 years before the reformers decided to play God with the text.
The 66 book Protestant Canon was compiled by Pharisees and rabbis who rejected Christ and wanted to get away from the Christian Church's canon.
Those "extra books" are the true Christian Canon that the Apostles believed.
Wisdom 2:12-22 is a prophecy of Jesus.
OF COURSE they didn't want this in there!
