← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · ErikD
Thread ID: 16663 | Posts: 8 | Started: 2005-02-08
2005-02-08 20:11 | User Profile
Petr,
If you recall, we were having a discussion on The Phora about the Marcus Eli Ravage articles:
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/leaflts/ravage/ravage1.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/leaflts/ravage/ravage2.htm[/url]
In those articles, Ravage claimed that the Jewish "Christians" had used the Christian doctrine to undermine and destroy the Roman Empire, and he offered up the Book of Revelation to support his assertions.
Ravage specifically stated:
"You accuse us of stirring up revolution in Moscow. Suppose we admit the charge. What of it? Compared with what Paul the Jew of Tarsus accomplished in Rome, the Russian upheaval is a mere street brawl."
"Why throw up to us a patent and clumsy forgery such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion when you might as well confront us with the Revelation of St. John? Why talk about Marx and Trotski when you have Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus to confound us with?"
"a patriotic Jew named Paul or Saul conceived the idea of humbling the Roman power by destroying the morale of its soldiery with the doctrines of love and non-resistance preached by the little sect of Jewish Christians."
"If Paulââ¬â¢s own writings fail to convince you of this interpretation of his activities, I invite your attention to his more candid associate John. Where Paul, operating within the shadow of the imperial palace and half the time a prisoner in Roman jails, is obliged to deal in parable and veiled hints, John, addressing himself to disaffected Asiatics, can afford the luxury of plain speaking. At any rate, his pamphlet entitled "Revelation" is, in truth, a revelation of what the whole astonishing business is about.
Rome, fancifully called Babylon, is minutely described in the language of sputtering hate, as the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, as the woman drunken with the blood of saints, as the oppressor of "peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues" and- to remove all doubt of her identity-as "that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth." An angel triumphantly cries, "Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen." Then follows an orgiastic picture of ruin. Commerce and industry and maritime trade are at an end. Art and music and "the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride" are silenced. Darkness and desolation lie like a pall upon the scene. The gentle Christian conquerors wallow in blood up to the bridles of their horses. "Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her."
"Could anyone ask for anything plainer?"
Petr, at the time of our discussion on The Phora, you stubbornly refused to admit that Ravages claims had any merit, and you further maligned Friedrich Nietzsche, who made the same claims as Ravage, yet, when I look in the Catholic, Christian Bible I am holding in my hands, it says the following regarding The Book of Revelation:
"The Book of Revelation cannot be adequately understood except against the historical background that occasioned its writing. Like Daniel and other apocalypses, it was composed as resistance literature to meet a crisis. The book itself suggests that the crisis was ruthless persecution of the early church by the Roman authorities; the harlot Babylon symbolizes pagan Rome, the city on seven hills (Rev. 17:9)."
So, is the Catholic Bible I am holding in my hands, incorrect, and you Petr, are instead correct?
If so, perhaps you could be kind enough to explain to me why you think that is the case.
Sincerely, Erik D.
2005-02-09 00:19 | User Profile
Silly fool, have you not had enough punishment already?
You should know that Protestants and Catholics interpret the book of Revelation (and the rest of the Bible as well) very differently - why, several Protestants have seen "the Harlot of Babylon" being the Catholic church itself!
I also think that the commentary reeks of unbelief, not any real Catholicism - it implies that the book of Daniel would have been written during the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes, which no orthodox Christian source would dare to claim. I think it is written by an unbeliever or by some very liberal post-Vatican II Catholic.
[COLOR=Indigo][I][B] "Where Paul, operating within the shadow of the imperial palace and half the time a prisoner in Roman jails, is obliged to deal in parable and veiled hints, John, addressing himself to disaffected Asiatics, can afford the luxury of plain speaking."[/B][/I][/COLOR]
Paranoid bulldada. The two letters of Peter and three letters of John are also written to folks in Asia Minor, but you don't see any "revolutionary" talk there, now do you?
Besides, to talk about early Christians as "revolutionaries" spreading "pamphlets" is laughably anachronistic nonsense.
Ravage's scribblings have no historical merit whatsoever (how do you like the fact that he gots the chronology between Paul's mission and the destruction of Jerusalem wrong?) - the burden of proof is entirely upon [B]you[/B] to prove that they would.
Petr
2005-02-09 04:00 | User Profile
[center][size=6][color=#800000]POPE SEATED ON SATANââ¬â¢S High Priesthood the Prophet of Baal's THRONE[/color][/size][/center] [center][size=4][color=#800000]The coming false-Christ of the Babylonian Talmud, Moshiach ben Dovid will merge with his High Priest of Nimrod's Order soon, to establish the one world religion of their god, Satan.[/color][/size][/center]
[size=3]The Babylonian pagan worship of Nimrod, Semiramis, and the god-incarnate son extended throughout the entire world and eventually assumed the name of Trinitarian Christianity in Rome (Figure 3, pages 24, 25). Trinitarian paganism spread from Babylon to Rome by way of Pergamum. The Babylon Kings, who were descended from Nimrod, served as both king and priest of the pagan Babylonian Mystery religion. As priests, they bore the title "Pontifex Maximus"[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]125[/color][/size][size=3] or "Supreme Pontiff," meaning "supreme pathfinder" or "bridge maker," representing "the path or connection between this life and the next."[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]126[/color][/size][size=3] They ruled upon the throne of Satan, which is the throne of Nimrod as the "hidden god."[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]127[/color][/size][size=3] The last king to reign in Babylon was Belshazzar, who celebrated the pagan Babylonian ritual using the sacred Jewish temple vessels which his father King Nebuchadnezzar confiscated from the Jewish temple in 587 B.C.:[/size]
[indent][size=3]King Belshazzar made a great feast for a thousand of his wine in front of the thousand.[/size]
[size=3]Belshazzar, when he tasted the wine, commanded that the vessels of gold and of silver which Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken [in 587 B.C.] out of the temple in Jerusalem be brought, that the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines might drink from them. Then they brought in the golden and silver vessels which had been taken out of the temple, the house of God in Jerusalem; and the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines drank from them. They drank wine, and praised the gods of gold and silver, bronze, iron, wood, and stone.[/size]
[size=3]Immediately the fingers of a manââ¬â¢s hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall of the kingââ¬â¢s palace, opposite the lampstand; and the king saw the hand as it wrote. Then the kingââ¬â¢s color changed, and his thoughts alarmed him; his limbs gave way, and his knees knocked together....[/size]
[size=3]Then from his presence the hand was sent, and this writing was inscribed. And this is the writing that was inscribed: MENE, MENE, TEKEL, AND PARSIN. This is the interpretation of the matter: MENE, God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end; TEKEL, you have been weighed in the balances and found wanting; PERES, your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians....[/size]
[size=3]That very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was slain. And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.[/size]
[center][size=3]- Prophet Daniel[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]128[/color][/size][/center]
[/indent][size=3]After the death of Belshazzar in 539 B.C., the Persian Emperor Cyrus conquered Babylon and forced the Babylonian princes to flee to Pergamum. They continued their reign there as priest-kings of Babylonian paganism.[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]129[/color][/size][size=3] In 133 B.C., Attalus III, the last Babylonian King to rule in Pergamum, willed his dominions to the Roman Caesar, and the kingdom of Pergamum merged with the Roman Empire along with Satan-Nimrodââ¬â¢s throne and the title "Pontifex Maximus."[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]130[/color][/size]
[size=3]In 63 B.C., Julius Caesar, who had been elected Pontifex Maximus, became emperor of Rome and vested the office of Roman emperor with the priestly powers and functions of the Babylonian Pontiff.[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]131[/color][/size][size=3] Henceforth, the title Pontifex Maximus was used by the Roman Caesars as illustrated on a Roman coin depicting the image of Augustus Caesar (27 B.C.-14 A.D.) with his title "Pont. Max.," which is an abbreviation of Pontifex Maximus (Figure 4, page 26). Thus, the Roman emperors, like the preceding Babylonian emperors, now served as priests ofBabylonian paganism, and bore the title Pontifex Maximus.[/size]
[size=3]For centuries, Pergamum remained the site of Nimrodââ¬â¢s throne. With the appearance of Christianity, Babylonian paganism threatened the early Christian church of Pergamum as related in the Revelation given by Jesus to His Apostle John, who referred to Pergamum as the seat of Satanââ¬â¢s throne which is Nimrodââ¬â¢s throne:[/size]
[indent][size=3]"And to the angel of the church in Pergamum write: ââ¬ËThe words of him who has the sharp two-edged sword.[/size]
[size=3]"ââ¬ËI know where you dwell, where Satanââ¬â¢s throne is [i.e., Nimrodââ¬â¢s Throne]; you hold fast my name and you did not deny my faith even in the days of Antipas my witness, my faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells. But I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam [pagan Babylonian trinity of Nimrod], who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, that they might eat food sacrificed to idols and practice immorality. [/size]
[size=3]- Apostle John[/size][size=3][color=#ff0000]132[/color][/size]
[/indent][url="http://www.samliquidation.com/illuminati.htm"]http://www.samliquidation.com/illuminati.htm[/url]
[QUOTE=Petr]Silly fool, have you not had enough punishment already?
You should know that Protestants and Catholics interpret the book of Revelation (and the rest of the Bible as well) very differently - why, several Protestants have seen "the Harlot of Babylon" being the Catholic church itself!
I also think that the commentary reeks of unbelief, not any real Catholicism - it implies that the book of Daniel would have been written during the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes, which no orthodox Christian source would dare to claim. I think it is written by an unbeliever or by some very liberal post-Vatican II Catholic.
[color=indigo] "Where Paul, operating within the shadow of the imperial palace and half the time a prisoner in Roman jails, is obliged to deal in parable and veiled hints, John, addressing himself to disaffected Asiatics, can afford the luxury of plain speaking."[/color]
Paranoid bulldada. The two letters of Peter and three letters of John are also written to folks in Asia Minor, but you don't see any "revolutionary" talk there, now do you?
Besides, to talk about early Christians as "revolutionaries" spreading "pamphlets" is laughably anachronistic nonsense.
Ravage's scribblings have no historical merit whatsoever (how do you like the fact that he gots the chronology between Paul's mission and the destruction of Jerusalem wrong?) - the burden of proof is entirely upon you to prove that they would.
Petr[/QUOTE]
2005-02-09 19:42 | User Profile
Petr, are you, or are you not, a Catholic? I was under the impression that you were a defender of the Catholic Church, as your namesake, Saint Peter, is buried under the Vatican Cathedral.
What is your denomination, and what version of the Scriptures and/or Bible do you accept as true?
2005-02-09 19:59 | User Profile
I'm Finnish Evangelical Christian (NOT "Evangelical-Lutheran", a liberal sellout denomination).
What do you mean by "version of Scriptures"?
You must have been reading me quite sloppily if you thought that I was a Catholic.
Petr
2005-02-09 20:30 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr]I'm Finnish Evangelical Christian (NOT "Evangelical-Lutheran", a liberal sellout denomination).[/QUOTE]Is it this one? **"The International Evangelical Church in Finland" :confused: ** [url="http://www.church.fi/index.html"]http://www.church.fi/index.html[/url]
not The Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Mission [url="http://www.mission.fi/in_english/"]http://www.mission.fi/in_english/[/url]
2005-02-09 20:32 | User Profile
"Finnish Evangelical Christian" was just an overall description - what would be the English equivalent for "vapaaseurakunta" - "free congregation"?
Petr
2005-02-09 20:56 | User Profile
A Fellowship in Finland that is * Exploring the Jewish Roots of Christianity*
[size=5]SHORASHIM[/size] [url="http://members.surfeu.fi/shorashim/"]http://members.surfeu.fi/shorashim/[/url]
"You do not support the root, but the root supports you." Romans 11:18b