I agree with most that he says. He uses the very papal phrase "for the common good" that is one of the catholic buzzwords for what is being pushed on us. My question is why has he not denounced catholicism since that is the beast of Revelation? Does he not recognize that or believe God when He says "get out of Babylon"? All the Reformers agreed that catholicism was the beast and to remain a priest in a an evil system is beyond me. For all the catholics out there...I am speaking against a "system" not the people who have grown up in this system. I do not mean to be offensive but at some point people will have to recognize the vatican's role in the endtimes and the book of Revelation. The rabbit hole is VERY deep here.
Reformed guy here.... first let me say I do NOT support Catholicism, just truth. When you say "All the Reformers agreed that Catholicism was the beast" this is not true. Neither is this "Catholicism since that is the beast of Revelation"
Simple question: If Catholicism was the beast why were they trying to reform it?
Reformers did NOT agree to what you are claiming and they certainly didn't hold to your position that Revelation was about something in the FUTURE and not the destruction and localized judgment of Jerusalem in 70AD which already happened just like Jesus said it would "This generation shall not pass till all these things take place"
The beast of Revelation was the ruler of Rome, Nero (yes, there can be other beasts) the number of the beast was 666 "let the reader understand" was something Jews at that time that spoke Hebrew could easily figure out....
*take Nero's name, Nero Cæsar and transliterates the Latin into Hebrew. An "n" is added to conform with the Hebrew spelling and usage of Nero's name, in a manner similar to the Greek adding an "s" (i.e., Jeremias, Jonas, etc.). Other names in scripture where the adding of an "n" may be seen are Abaddon, Apollyon, and Armageddon. Once Hebraicized, the Latin Nero Caesar becomes "nrwn qsr," which when using the numeric equivalent of the letters, then adds up to 666 *
Which was a way for them to warn against Nero without saying writing his name and being killed for going against him.
Nero was killing and torturing Christians in mass at the time and even burring them alive to light his dinner parties. Real beastly stuff. Dude HATED Christians because the wouldn't confess "Caesar is Lord" You could either say Kristos Kurios or Kaiser Kurios (Lord Jesus or Lord Caesar) to chose life or death and many chose death.
Babylon was Jerusalem clearly. The "abomination of desolation" Jesus mentions (Matthew 24:15) is the desecration of the Temple and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman armies in AD 70 after the Jews rebelled. The Temple was completely destroyed by the Roman legions, and not one stone was left on another, as Jesus prophesied (verse 2).
As Matthew 24:21 says, this act inaugurates the time of Great Tribulation. At that time, the saints in Jerusalem are told to flee to the mountains for safety (Matthew 24:16; Luke 21:20-21). And if we look at the Histories of Josephus Roman armies DID surround the city and then LEFT for some reason, Christians fled to the mountains, and the armies came BACK. Spot on. Also from external sources there were signs in the sky, a comet hanging over the city like a sword, the sun was blotted out, darkness, and earthquakes as well as horrific accounts of streets running with blood, cannibalism and demonic activity. Real wrath of God stuff.
Jerusalem was destroyed, the temple so much so "not one stone was left upon another "just as foretold" All when and where it was supposed to happen..
The viewing of Revelation at a future destruction of the world is NOT what Christians have traditionally believed up until the publication and widespread use of The Scofield Reference Bible, the 1st Bible with footnotes explaining this fringe view of end times which popularized dispensationalism at the beginning of the 20th century. The greatest lie the devil ever told IMO.
Need I remind you God wins? Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father making all His enemies His footstool. (God's fav Bible verse that appears more times in scripture than any other) When Jesus returns it will be final judgment. That's it. Game over. Those that are in Christ will be left and those that are outside of Christ will be destroyed..... " As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man" and we can clearly see the Ark was symbolic of Christ (one door and Jesus called Himself the door, those in it were safe from God's judgment, and about a dozen other parallels) So here's the question.... in the days of Noah who was swept of the Earth? The wicked.
‘The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. So the servants of the owner came and said to him, “Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?” He said to them, “An enemy has done this.” The servants said to him, “Do you want us then to go and gather them up?” But he said, “No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at [or during] the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, ‘First gather together tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.’ ” Matthew 13:24–30. NKJV.
The wheat is clearly Gods people and the tares are the wicked. Look at the order. Tares destroyed 1st, not after a tribulation.
Don't let a fringe idea that crept into the mainstream 200 years ago keep you from taking over every sphere of Earth, from Government to entertainment because you think you are gonna be raptured away. No one polishes brass on a sinking ship and the Devil knows this which is why he put this lie out.
Adam took something off a tree and sin entered the world and it decayed from the harmony of the garden.
Jesus (the perfect Adam) was put on a tree (the cross) and the Gospel entered the world and it's being restored to the harmony of the garden.
Heres a playlist with some great sermons, discussions, explanations, and debates on this topic of Pre-millennial dispensationalism vs Post-millennialism (Fancy words for different views of eschatology / the study of end times)
I know this is new for alot of people but it's very much traditional and strongly supported by scripture and historical events, far more so than the leaps of logic you need to perform to support a secret rapture and upcoming tribulation. Just check it out and test it against scripture. I use to be a dispy like many of you. It's what I was taught and what I grew up with. It's hard to admit you and the people you looked up to and respected that taught you something were wrong. I get it. But my outlook and view of the future now is SOOOOOO much better and I see the world differently and see how God is working this all together for His glory.
I will refute your statement saying I was wrong about the Reformers writing and speaking about catholicism. There are many more sources but this covers the views of many major Reformers. So you lose me when you don't even know what the Reformers said. They weren't trying to reform catholicism...they were denouncing it. Read what they said!!!
"I was wrong about the Reformers writing and speaking about catholicism"
Um, no that's not what I said. I said:
"All the Reformers agreed that Catholicism was the beast" this is not true. Neither is this "Catholicism since that is the beast of Revelation"
Of course they were speaking out against Catholic TEACHINGS which the Catholic church, instead of considering and changing, declared were a part of the church and any other view was heretical.
The reformers started in the 16th-century where Luther for example was trying to
discuss and make CHANGES to the church. You brought up a guy from about 1840, a couple of hundred years later.
Is REFORMING the teachings of the church not the origin of the Reformation? Yes or no?
Was it not until AFTER the church started persecuting and executing those people that that changed for many? Yes or no?
They were first discussing, then later denouncing TEACHINGS of the church and later AFTER the church refused and MURDERED many Christians for trying to honor God's Word, they became a beast like those before them, not the beast which was clearly Nero.
Address the rest of what I said supporting that and against your eschatological position.
PS And yes, I gave examples of type/anti-type in my comment although not labeled as such.
Dr James White is one of my pastors so you can imagine how much church history and how many discussions / sermons about the Reformation and reformers I am inundated with if you know who he is.(Who recently changed his end times position to Post-Mill btw)
maybe fan fiction but here is a good read about Luther if you have never looked into who exactly he was http://mileswmathis.com/luther.pdf
"Which just goes to remind us that Luther's mother's maiden name was Lindemann... They admit Luther's father was very wealthy, though they rush you by it as usual. He owned copper mines and smelters. They also rush you by Luther's mother, and misdirect by telling us of the rumor she was a whore and a bath attendant. They say it wasn't true, assuring us she was of “trading class
stock and middling means”. The usual sob story."...
I don't know if you have watched his previous videos or not but if you haven't you should. This man is the real deal I am not catholic but this guy brings it, and also check out the open letters to Trump. He calls the pope satin. This man should be the next pope.
This is pure faggotry. Do you know what he has gone through to carry the torch? He has been banished from the church and remains in hiding because he is fighting the same battle we are here. You should reconsider your opinion on this matter
Do you seriously believe the Catholic Church hierarchy would put all their eggs in one basket with the likes of Pope Francis and not have a backup plan??
Vigano is clearly the backup plan for when Pope Francis falls.
I like where your heads at, and would be happy to see Vigano swapped out for Francis even if he is controlled or whatever, simply because he espouses a very traditional take on things and that is a message people need to hear on a wider level. So even granting you that he is controlled oppo or whatever, I think that would at the very least be a great improvement over what is going on right now in Rome.
I look at it a bit differently, and my overall viewpoint is that the Catholic Church was the real deal but was infiltrated by they who have systematically waged a covert war upon the church, attacking as impostors and infiltrators who finally staged their coup-de-grace at the Vatican 2 council (1962), where they undid the traditional Latin Mass, instituted globalist and communistic policies, and expelled the traditional conservative priests. They smashed the traditional church altars and replaced them with card tables. They got rid of most of the prayers from mass, replacing them with new-age hippie dippy Jesus prayers. They installed and promoted homosexuals in the church, and allowed them to run rampant and cause massive pain and suffereng. Then, when these stories did come to light, they participated in the blackwashing of the entire church to make it seem endemic instead of isolated. They are taking the church down, but from within.
Not all who remained in the church were corrupt. There are still good men in the Vatican, just like there are good men in our own domestic agencies which appear to be likewise captured by the cabal.
One of those men was Vigano, who stood up to the pope and called him out publicly for supporting Cardinal McCarrick as a homosexual and an enabler of predator priests in the United States (also happened to be a big friend of Obama btw)
When Francis took control of the papacy, Vigano had to go into hiding and has been in exile ever since, living much like I imagine Julian Assange did while on the run.
Now he posts one of the most eloquent, inspiring, and ultimately uplifting messages which touches upon everything Q posted about, and takes it one step further to call for the formation of an alliance around the opposition to these forces based on a return to traditional values and a rejection of globalism.
So to me, and perhaps I'm wrong here and I certainly could be, but to me it seems like he is the real deal.
I agree with most that he says. He uses the very papal phrase "for the common good" that is one of the catholic buzzwords for what is being pushed on us. My question is why has he not denounced catholicism since that is the beast of Revelation? Does he not recognize that or believe God when He says "get out of Babylon"? All the Reformers agreed that catholicism was the beast and to remain a priest in a an evil system is beyond me. For all the catholics out there...I am speaking against a "system" not the people who have grown up in this system. I do not mean to be offensive but at some point people will have to recognize the vatican's role in the endtimes and the book of Revelation. The rabbit hole is VERY deep here.
Reformed guy here.... first let me say I do NOT support Catholicism, just truth. When you say "All the Reformers agreed that Catholicism was the beast" this is not true. Neither is this "Catholicism since that is the beast of Revelation"
Simple question: If Catholicism was the beast why were they trying to reform it?
Reformers did NOT agree to what you are claiming and they certainly didn't hold to your position that Revelation was about something in the FUTURE and not the destruction and localized judgment of Jerusalem in 70AD which already happened just like Jesus said it would "This generation shall not pass till all these things take place"
The beast of Revelation was the ruler of Rome, Nero (yes, there can be other beasts) the number of the beast was 666 "let the reader understand" was something Jews at that time that spoke Hebrew could easily figure out....
*take Nero's name, Nero Cæsar and transliterates the Latin into Hebrew. An "n" is added to conform with the Hebrew spelling and usage of Nero's name, in a manner similar to the Greek adding an "s" (i.e., Jeremias, Jonas, etc.). Other names in scripture where the adding of an "n" may be seen are Abaddon, Apollyon, and Armageddon. Once Hebraicized, the Latin Nero Caesar becomes "nrwn qsr," which when using the numeric equivalent of the letters, then adds up to 666 *
Which was a way for them to warn against Nero without saying writing his name and being killed for going against him.
Nero was killing and torturing Christians in mass at the time and even burring them alive to light his dinner parties. Real beastly stuff. Dude HATED Christians because the wouldn't confess "Caesar is Lord" You could either say Kristos Kurios or Kaiser Kurios (Lord Jesus or Lord Caesar) to chose life or death and many chose death.
Babylon was Jerusalem clearly. The "abomination of desolation" Jesus mentions (Matthew 24:15) is the desecration of the Temple and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman armies in AD 70 after the Jews rebelled. The Temple was completely destroyed by the Roman legions, and not one stone was left on another, as Jesus prophesied (verse 2).
As Matthew 24:21 says, this act inaugurates the time of Great Tribulation. At that time, the saints in Jerusalem are told to flee to the mountains for safety (Matthew 24:16; Luke 21:20-21). And if we look at the Histories of Josephus Roman armies DID surround the city and then LEFT for some reason, Christians fled to the mountains, and the armies came BACK. Spot on. Also from external sources there were signs in the sky, a comet hanging over the city like a sword, the sun was blotted out, darkness, and earthquakes as well as horrific accounts of streets running with blood, cannibalism and demonic activity. Real wrath of God stuff.
Jerusalem was destroyed, the temple so much so "not one stone was left upon another "just as foretold" All when and where it was supposed to happen..
The viewing of Revelation at a future destruction of the world is NOT what Christians have traditionally believed up until the publication and widespread use of The Scofield Reference Bible, the 1st Bible with footnotes explaining this fringe view of end times which popularized dispensationalism at the beginning of the 20th century. The greatest lie the devil ever told IMO.
Need I remind you God wins? Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father making all His enemies His footstool. (God's fav Bible verse that appears more times in scripture than any other) When Jesus returns it will be final judgment. That's it. Game over. Those that are in Christ will be left and those that are outside of Christ will be destroyed..... " As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man" and we can clearly see the Ark was symbolic of Christ (one door and Jesus called Himself the door, those in it were safe from God's judgment, and about a dozen other parallels) So here's the question.... in the days of Noah who was swept of the Earth? The wicked.
‘The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. So the servants of the owner came and said to him, “Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?” He said to them, “An enemy has done this.” The servants said to him, “Do you want us then to go and gather them up?” But he said, “No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at [or during] the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, ‘First gather together tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.’ ” Matthew 13:24–30. NKJV.
The wheat is clearly Gods people and the tares are the wicked. Look at the order. Tares destroyed 1st, not after a tribulation.
Don't let a fringe idea that crept into the mainstream 200 years ago keep you from taking over every sphere of Earth, from Government to entertainment because you think you are gonna be raptured away. No one polishes brass on a sinking ship and the Devil knows this which is why he put this lie out.
Adam took something off a tree and sin entered the world and it decayed from the harmony of the garden. Jesus (the perfect Adam) was put on a tree (the cross) and the Gospel entered the world and it's being restored to the harmony of the garden.
Heres a playlist with some great sermons, discussions, explanations, and debates on this topic of Pre-millennial dispensationalism vs Post-millennialism (Fancy words for different views of eschatology / the study of end times)
I know this is new for alot of people but it's very much traditional and strongly supported by scripture and historical events, far more so than the leaps of logic you need to perform to support a secret rapture and upcoming tribulation. Just check it out and test it against scripture. I use to be a dispy like many of you. It's what I was taught and what I grew up with. It's hard to admit you and the people you looked up to and respected that taught you something were wrong. I get it. But my outlook and view of the future now is SOOOOOO much better and I see the world differently and see how God is working this all together for His glory.
I will refute your statement saying I was wrong about the Reformers writing and speaking about catholicism. There are many more sources but this covers the views of many major Reformers. So you lose me when you don't even know what the Reformers said. They weren't trying to reform catholicism...they were denouncing it. Read what they said!!!
https://www.challies.com/articles/the-beast-of-revelation/
P.S. Have you ever heard of type/anti-type?
"I was wrong about the Reformers writing and speaking about catholicism"
Um, no that's not what I said. I said: "All the Reformers agreed that Catholicism was the beast" this is not true. Neither is this "Catholicism since that is the beast of Revelation"
Of course they were speaking out against Catholic TEACHINGS which the Catholic church, instead of considering and changing, declared were a part of the church and any other view was heretical.
The reformers started in the 16th-century where Luther for example was trying to discuss and make CHANGES to the church. You brought up a guy from about 1840, a couple of hundred years later.
Is REFORMING the teachings of the church not the origin of the Reformation? Yes or no?
Was it not until AFTER the church started persecuting and executing those people that that changed for many? Yes or no?
They were first discussing, then later denouncing TEACHINGS of the church and later AFTER the church refused and MURDERED many Christians for trying to honor God's Word, they became a beast like those before them, not the beast which was clearly Nero.
Address the rest of what I said supporting that and against your eschatological position.
PS And yes, I gave examples of type/anti-type in my comment although not labeled as such.
Dr James White is one of my pastors so you can imagine how much church history and how many discussions / sermons about the Reformation and reformers I am inundated with if you know who he is.(Who recently changed his end times position to Post-Mill btw)
We disagree. Have a good night. I have no desire to argue.
maybe fan fiction but here is a good read about Luther if you have never looked into who exactly he was http://mileswmathis.com/luther.pdf
"Which just goes to remind us that Luther's mother's maiden name was Lindemann... They admit Luther's father was very wealthy, though they rush you by it as usual. He owned copper mines and smelters. They also rush you by Luther's mother, and misdirect by telling us of the rumor she was a whore and a bath attendant. They say it wasn't true, assuring us she was of “trading class stock and middling means”. The usual sob story."...
I don't know if you have watched his previous videos or not but if you haven't you should. This man is the real deal I am not catholic but this guy brings it, and also check out the open letters to Trump. He calls the pope satin. This man should be the next pope.
Vigano is clearly the Vaticans backup if globohomo (or romohomo) falls. As always, it is smart to have people playing both sides.
This is pure faggotry. Do you know what he has gone through to carry the torch? He has been banished from the church and remains in hiding because he is fighting the same battle we are here. You should reconsider your opinion on this matter
Do you seriously believe the Catholic Church hierarchy would put all their eggs in one basket with the likes of Pope Francis and not have a backup plan??
Vigano is clearly the backup plan for when Pope Francis falls.
I like where your heads at, and would be happy to see Vigano swapped out for Francis even if he is controlled or whatever, simply because he espouses a very traditional take on things and that is a message people need to hear on a wider level. So even granting you that he is controlled oppo or whatever, I think that would at the very least be a great improvement over what is going on right now in Rome.
I look at it a bit differently, and my overall viewpoint is that the Catholic Church was the real deal but was infiltrated by they who have systematically waged a covert war upon the church, attacking as impostors and infiltrators who finally staged their coup-de-grace at the Vatican 2 council (1962), where they undid the traditional Latin Mass, instituted globalist and communistic policies, and expelled the traditional conservative priests. They smashed the traditional church altars and replaced them with card tables. They got rid of most of the prayers from mass, replacing them with new-age hippie dippy Jesus prayers. They installed and promoted homosexuals in the church, and allowed them to run rampant and cause massive pain and suffereng. Then, when these stories did come to light, they participated in the blackwashing of the entire church to make it seem endemic instead of isolated. They are taking the church down, but from within.
Not all who remained in the church were corrupt. There are still good men in the Vatican, just like there are good men in our own domestic agencies which appear to be likewise captured by the cabal.
One of those men was Vigano, who stood up to the pope and called him out publicly for supporting Cardinal McCarrick as a homosexual and an enabler of predator priests in the United States (also happened to be a big friend of Obama btw)
When Francis took control of the papacy, Vigano had to go into hiding and has been in exile ever since, living much like I imagine Julian Assange did while on the run.
Now he posts one of the most eloquent, inspiring, and ultimately uplifting messages which touches upon everything Q posted about, and takes it one step further to call for the formation of an alliance around the opposition to these forces based on a return to traditional values and a rejection of globalism.
So to me, and perhaps I'm wrong here and I certainly could be, but to me it seems like he is the real deal.