The False Healing Hand of Rome

Submitted by Lemuel
Pope Francis

Pope Francis

Recently, Pope Francis sent a video to a conference of Protestant Conservative Evangelicals. In the video, Pope Francis extols them to embrace a healing of the protestations enacted by Martin Luther’s 90 theses when he nailed them to the church door in his native Germany. Pope Francis contends in his video that the Lutheran Church has buried the hatch and returned to the mother church, the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) or the Papacy and that the children of protestation now have no more reason not to be reunited with the RCC. I must admit that given what has been said about the current Pope, only he could have made this video. For he has truly been a model of the real Francis, whose name he took.

The video with the conference has gone viral on YouTube (Kenneth Copeland and Pope Francis), and the Evangelicals are now planning a number of visits to Rome to set the criteria for their return to Rome. On the surface, this should be a time for all religious sects and affiliates to rejoice and clamor to the door of the nearest Roman Catholic Church to render their confessions and partake in Communion and Mass. But what exactly was Martin Luther protesting against and what are the implications for this return to the mother church of Rome.

Luther’s protest emanated from his reading of a Latin Bible which he found at his monastery; in it he discovered that indulgences (payments to secure one’s loved ones from the torment of Hell) were bogus and not founded on the Scriptures.

Confessions to a Priest went totally against the Scripture’s mandate to take/ confess your sins to God and God alone, for man has no power to forgive sin. The Pope’s infallible nature was a figment of the Papacy’s imagination. For at that time, even Kings were expected to crawl on their knees in abeyance when approaching the Pontiff (the Vicar of Christ, Christ Representative on Earth). Luther’s contention was that the Pope, as a man, was as sinful as every one of us who parade across this Earth. And these are only a few of Luther’s observations.

The important aspect of Luther’s protestation was that he was absolutely sure that the RC was the true church until he visited Rome. When he first arrived with deep emotion, he prostrated himself on the ground and cried, “Holy Rome, I salute thee”. Later having experienced Rome, he said, “No one can imagine what sins and infamous actions are committed in Rome; they must be seen and heard to be believed. Thus, they are in the habit of saying, if there is Hell, Rome is built over it: it is an abyss whence issues every kind of sin.”

The RC at that time and still today contends that she is the one with the key to Heaven and Hell and no one enters either without her permission. True to her form, the Pope prepared a papal bull and Martin Luther was excommunicated for not recanting the above sordid truths that were launched against the RC. He was denounced as accursed of Heaven.

To this day, Rome has not changed any of her doctrines in relation to any of her false or preposterous positions. She has yet to apologize to Martin Luther or withdrawn that papal bull which denounced him. Yet, by passing all of the above, Pope Francis is holding out a hand of healing to the protestant churches which in return are galloping in the direction of Rome.

96 thoughts on “The False Healing Hand of Rome

  1. @ Lemuel

    Lemuel you is a bold fellow you got alot uh dem tings man…

    Not content to try and brek up me marriage wid me wife uh all dese years while exposing my platonic engagement with you know who,

    Not content wid risking my wrath after i get put out uh me house becausing uh you,

    You now proceed to try to get the Holy See to issue them equivalent to the fatyah pun you life!!

    You mean dat you ent remember dis ” On February 14, 1989, the then Supreme Leader of Iran — Ayatollah Khomeini — called for the death of Indiaborn British writer Salman Rushdie, claiming his sensational novel The Satanic Verses was blasphemous and mocked the Islamic faith.”

    You heah pun BU invoking the lightning bolts and Fire upon yuh uh de Kafalic Church man, dem peeples does say a prayer pun de heathers and whaplax, it all over…

    Tell me whu times you plan to be pun heah man causing I doan want to be online reading you heresy bout de Hold See when a lightening bold hit BU and attack all uh we cuntputers.

    Lef dem peoples lone you hear me, dem is like de Lodge mens (not dem fellers up in Sin John, de masons and thulists) dem only gots to look at you and whaplax, it all ovah…

    But while i pun de topic why you hads to go and mash up de ole amn chances doah???

  2. Luther was totally floored by the book of Romans and Galatians, and came away with his concept of SOLO SCRIPTURA.That salvation was based on the truth of the scriptures alone. Luther translated the Latin Bible to German. He did such a good job in presenting it in the German vernacular, that there has only ever been one German translation of the BIble.

    However, Luther Calvin, Zwingli et al did not carry their “protests” far enough and their denominations continued to have many of the trappings of the Roman church.

    Eschatologists have for years predicted that many of the denominations that evolved from the RC organisation would return to their errant “MOTHER” PRIOR TO THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST.They predicted too that the Lutherans would be the first. The return of the Lutherans to Catholicism has been going on for a while now.

    In light of the pending destruction of the RC organism as predicted in Revelation 17, we seem to be on course.

  3. Piece:

    I was not trying to break up your home. I had a change of heart for that piece was too sweet it even had SSS revealing a bit too much.

    Georgie and Piece:

    It is predicted that the Church of Rome shall regain her dominance that she had right up until 1798 when Napoleon gave her the deadly wound. This step with her off spring is only the first step. She has been gaining power since 1929, and each President since Kennedy has gone to Rome to give their abeyance, even Obama and Michelle.

  4. Re It is predicted that the Church of Rome shall regain her dominance that she had right up until 1798


  5. There are no Protestant Conservative Evangelicals in Barbados, no Lutherans and very few Roman Catholics so why should we care?

    Why we always trying to get weself tie up in de white people religion?


  6. These criminals in Rome are the essence of Lucifer, Himself. They slavishly follow the Greek notion of love. A love model, which at its highest, promotes ‘sex’ between a grown man and a male child. They called it ‘agape love’. Of course, they also have a lesser value for storgeon, phileo and eros love. No wonder there criminal priests see nothing wrong with bulling young boys. Catholics represent the oringinal church and all ‘Christians’ are Catholics, whether they recognize that or not. So when our friend Bushie defends religion this has to be a large part of what must be included. The socalled ‘good’ cannot be separated from the bad. It is all bad!

    Frances is merely trying to market the lie that this wicked church is not the representation of Satan, himself. He is like the Obama of religion. A smiling face, washing peoples’ feet, but as dangerous as a serpent. The serpent of his bible – the anti-Christ.

  7. But Simple Simon don’t you practice and believe in the very same white people’s religion?

  8. GEORGIE PORGIE | May 4, 2014 at 10:08 PM |

    Re It is predicted that the Church of Rome shall regain her dominance that she had right up until 1798


    The Quakers were one of a group of many dissenters which arose when the Bible became available in languages other than Latin.

    They date from 1648, about the time when Barbados was beginning to grow sugar.

    Most historians speak of a minority of Quakers in Barbados oppressed by the plantocracy (whatever that is/was).

    My research suggests that by and large, the Quakers built Barbados. For a time they were no minority.

    My reading suggests they believed the Light of God shone in every man … and woman.

    They treated their slaves well.

    The first Quaker itinerants/missionaries to Barbados were two women, Mary Fisher …. I believe Fisher Pond or Fisher’s Pond gets its name from that family and Anne Austin …. could be Oistine.

    When they came in 1655 they found many Quakers. I believe but have not proved that both had family here.

    When George Fox came in 1671, he stayed at the plantation of Thomas Rouse, Halton and there was a reason.

    John Rouse, son of Thomas Rouse married Margaret Fell, the step daughter of George Fox. In fact there is a marriage settlement between Thomas Rouse and the mother of Margaret Fell in the archives.

    You will find the traces of the early but strong Quaker influence in naming of places in Barbados ……. Hope, Providence, Friendship, Harmony Hall, Garden Land, Silent Hall, Rock Hall to mention a few.

    John Rouse became a Quaker itinerant and in America was imprisoned for his beliefs!! I seem to remember they intended to burn him but they cut off an ear and let him go.

    The Rouse family owned Halton, Cliff and Clifton Hall. Their burial vault can be found at Halton. Quakers by and large were not buried in the Anglican Church but often in their “Gardens”.

    I believe that is where the graves of our slave ancestors lie, with our Quaker ancestors, side by side.

    There is so much more to the History of Barbados than is presented to us, and it has a far greater beauty than the ugly brutish past we get as daily fare.

    Many people became convinced Quakers in England after suffering the horrors of the Civil war. Many left for places of their own free will to look for the freedom of religion they were denied in England.

    Many came to Barbados and went on to America once Pennsylvania became available as a safe haven for them.

    We can learn a lot from their association with Barbados.

    I have found an 1805 Baptism at Christ Church of a 69 year old who is described as formerly being a Quaker. Thus some went back to the Anglican Church …. which is not that far removed from the Roman Catholic Church.

    I have also found Quaker burials in 1829/30 showing they had a presence in Barbados for far longer than you would imagine..

    I have read that there are about 300,000 Quakers in the world today, not many but if you google them and look at their impact in various causes you will realize their small number has never been a hindrance.

    Abolition of Slavery
    Prison Reform
    Mental Institution Reform
    etc. etc.

  9. We want to known from the so-called Roman Catholic Christians, all Christians, when the two young men who were murdered in a church on Bay Street, as they fought over the affections of a priest, when these murders would be investigated? What the vatican had to do with quashing the police investigations? And how come murder could be committed, even in the Vatican itself, and no one is ever brought to trial? These criminals even killed a Pope in the Vatican! How Francis, who says he is God’s vicar on earth could be part of this criminal organization. And the new age religious zealots are no better!

  10. Pacha

    Aren’t you a zealot?

    “They killed a Pope in the Vatican”

    You see, there you go – as you always do – stating as fact some idea you’ve got in your head or some theory you’ve got at second hand. And that’s why I’ve had a go at your contributions as intellectually thin.

    Yes, we’ve all read the Yallop book and others. And, yes, I agree, the case for murder is pretty strong. BUT that doesn’t mean it’s true. Doubtless we shall never KNOW – and my view is that were you to be intellectually honest you would recognize that and not try to mislead the rest of us to suit whatever purpose you have.

    • Ross

      You shouldn’t discount what Pachamama said about murder in the Vatican. Alexander vi vas poisoned at a dinner party in the Vatican. There were several other murders in the Vatican.

      That said, I would like to give a little titbit about a pope that was tried after death.

      Pope Formosus died in 896. Nine month after his death Pope Stephen ordered the exhumation of Formosus and place the corpse on trial for a number of offences:

      That Formosus had become pope illegally, that he had abused his position as pontiff, that he practised witchcraft and that he had taken bribes.

      Pope Stephen presided over the trial and appointed a deacon to answer the charges for the dead Formosus. Needless to say Formosus was found guilty. Whereupon he was stripped of his papal robes and had two fingers (with which he gave the papal blessing) broken and other pieces of the corpse were mutilated. The corpse was then thrown into the River Tiber.


  11. John | May 5, 2014 at 9:28 AM |
    There can be no dispute concerning your contribution on the Quakers, who were clearly true believers

  12. One of the frequent questions asked about the end times is: “Will the church go through the great tribulation?” I am not going to deal at length with that question now, but we have seen in many passages of Scripture, and especially in the seven letters to the churches of Revelation, several reasons to say, “No, the true church of Jesus Christ will not go through the great tribulation.” Those who truly know the Lord and who are alive when this period comes, will be caught up to be with him before the tribulation begins.
    Yet all the church today is not necessarily included in that promise. All of Christendom is not the true church, in other words. There is a church that goes through the great tribulation, and we come to that matter in our studies in Revelation Chapter 17
    There is a hint of this in the letter to Thyatira in the second chapter of this book, where the Lord describes a woman there named Jezebel who taught the people to commit immorality, and of whom the Lord said, “I will cast her and her children into great tribulation,” (Revelation 2:22 KJV). We get the full account of that here in Chapters 17 and 18. It is introduced in the first six verses of Chapter 17 thus:
    One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters. With her the kings of the earth committed adultery and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.” Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. This title was written on her forehead:
    I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus. (Revelation 17:1-5 NIV)
    The beast represents a western coalition of nations, headed by a great political leader who will dominate world economics in the last days. (We will see more of this beast later in this chapter). But now the apostle is called to focus on this woman who sat upon the beast. There are several clues, in fact ten of them, which are given to help us identify the woman. What does this symbol mean? Two full chapters are devoted to this. No symbol in the book of Revelation is given more identifying marks than this woman, therefore she must represent a very important factor. Here are the clues: First, we are told that this woman is a “prostitute.” She is a harlot, or, to put it bluntly, a whore. The use of a sexual symbol indicates that physical wrongdoing, which is bad in itself in the sight of God, is a picture of an even greater evil, that is, worship of God gone wrong! It pictures unfaithfulness to God by someone who claims to honor him. A harlot is one who offers sexual satisfaction, as a wife would, but does not otherwise fulfill that role. This clue points to some organization or group that claims to worship God but is actually unfaithful to him. The second clue given is that this woman has universal influence. She is described as “the great prostitute, who sits on many waters.” We do not have to guess what that means for in Verse 15 of this same chapter John says,
    Then the angel said to me, “The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages.” (Revelation 17:15 NIV)
    Many peoples all over the earth are affected by the teachings of this harlot organization. In Verses 1 and 2 we read, “With her the kings of the earth committed adultery.” She will have power over the leaders of nations — “the kings of the earth” — and she makes the common people “intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.” In other words, they are misled by the heady wine of religious illusion which results from the teaching of the woman. The third clue is that she is seated upon the beast. That pictures a relationship between them. It is clear that the woman dominates the beast for a period of time. She exercises tremendous power over the political leader of these last days, but eventually Verses 16 and 17 will be fulfilled.
    “The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. For God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose by agreeing to give the beast their power to rule, until God’s words are fulfilled.” (Revelation 17:15-17 NIV)
    All through these sections, we see constant reminders that God is in overall control. He allows things to happen, and they will actually accomplish his ultimate purposes. The fourth clue is that the woman is obviously very wealthy and expensively adorned. She was “dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls.” These are symbols, figures of divine and spiritual truths, but which are only outwardly held. They are not actually possessed, but outwardly adorn, thus making the woman very attractive to many people. She also holds, we are told as the fifth clue, “a golden cup in her hand.” Outwardly it is of gold, which is a symbol of divine activity — it looks to be divinely given — but it is filled with false religious concepts, “with abominable things,” with spiritual adulteries, filthiness of teaching. As many commentators point out, this is intended to be a contrast with the communion cup of the New Testament, “the cup of the Lord,” which is associated with the truth of God. This is a counterfeit of the cup of the Lord. It looks like it is the true thing but is not.
    Then the sixth clue is given: she is called “Mystery, Babylon the Great.” The word “Mystery” indicates there is something deeper here than appears on the surface. Babylon, of course, was the great city on the Euphrates River, the empire which dominated the ancient world. We see the founding of this city in the book of Genesis. It was begun as the city of Babel, founded by Nimrod, the great hunter of human souls. It became a source of idolatry for all of the ancient world. But this is not a reference to Babylon by the Euphrates because the title “Mystery” indicates something deeper. It is that which is spiritually identified with Babylon, i.e., with idolatry or spiritual adultery. Similarly, in Verse 8 of Chapter 11 we were told that Jerusalem is called “Sodom” and “Egypt” because it had become a source of wrongful teaching and corrupt practice.
    The seventh clue is that she is called “The mother of prostitutes.” Other religious organizations and groups follow the same errors and fall into the same idolatries and false religious teachings. She spreads wide the seeds of false doctrine throughout the world, and many groups will follow her. Then, the eighth clue is that she is a persecutor of the true believers in Christ: “I saw the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus.” She cannot tolerate any opposition that reveals the falsehood she is perpetrating. She opposes with violence and death all those who preach the truth contrary to the lie she promulgates. Two other clues appear elsewhere in this chapter which we will consider along with these to be sure we have properly identified this woman. One is found in Verse 9, and the other in Verse 18, the last verse of the chapter. These add further confirmation to the woman’s identity. Verse 9:
    “This calls for a mind with wisdom[i.e. it is not something easily identifiable. One must think about it.]. The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits.” (Revelation 17:9 NIV)
    More than dozen ancient writers describe Rome as the city built on seven hills. This was familiar terminology in the First Century. And that identification is further confirmed by what John is told in Verse 18:
    “The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.” (Revelation 17:18 NIV)
    In John’s day that could only be one city — Rome. “The great city,” which was the capital of the Roman Empire that dominated the whole known world of that day, literally ruled over the kings of the earth. But at that time the church in Rome was not a counterfeit church; it was a genuine Christian assembly. At the end of the First Century when John is writing this, it was the church of the catacombs. It was persecuted and hounded and had to hide in the caves of the earth underneath the city. That probably explains the last part of Verse 6 where John tells us that when he saw the woman seated upon the beast, “I was greatly astonished.” Why? Doubtless it is a great surprise to him to see that the church he knew in Rome would become a great harlot church, dominating the kings of the earth.
    When we put all these clues together it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that this pictures the Roman Catholic Church. It is a church that arises during the present church age, but comes to its greatest power in the last seven years of this age, after the true church has been raptured. When we say that, we must remember that we are not talking about Roman Catholic people. We think of the church as people, but the Roman church itself teaches that the church is the clergy — the papacy and the hierarchy — not the people. It is interesting that Catholic scholars themselves admit as they study this section of Revelation that it is Rome which is described here, but they say it is pagan Rome. The only problem with that is that John would not have been a bit surprised that pagan Rome persecuted the saints of God. He expected that for this was common by his time. But to see the church itself persecuting the saints of God is what astonished him so.
    It would be simplistic to say this describes the Roman Catholic Church and that church alone. We must remember, first of all, that there are many true saints within the Roman Catholic Church. There have been godly popes, bishops, priests and nuns through the centuries. I have met some of them; so, perhaps, have you. What we need to understand is that it is the teaching of the Roman church that is described here — the extra-biblical teachings from pagan sources that have been brought in under the name of Christendom. They involve a seeking of earthly power or status gained by religious authority. That is Babylonianism. That is what first arose in the city by the Euphrates — a search for earthly power and glory by religious means. The Tower of Babel was built unto heaven, and the people said, “We will make a name for ourselves.” That is Babylonianism.
    There are many religious groups and churches today that are afflicted by this taint. Not only the Roman Catholic Church, but also Orthodox churches, Anglican churches, Eastern churches, Western churches, Protestant churches, Independent churches, Charismatic churches, and Evangelical churches — many of them reflect this same error. Our good friend, Eugene Peterson, who has such a gift for putting things powerfully, says it well:
    Whoredom is sex connected with money. Worship under the aspect of the Great Whore is the commercialization of our great need and deep desire for meaning, love and salvation. The promise of success, ecstasy and meaning that we can get for a price is Whore-worship. It is the diabolical inversion of “You are bought with a price,” to, “I can get it for you wholesale.”
    Verses 8 through 14 are given to an interpretation of the beast. In Chapter 13 we saw that it describes a revived form of the Roman Empire: ten European nations who give their power to one man to rule. The startling fact that I promised you when we came to this section is that the Imperial form, the emperors or Caesars of Rome, did not pass away until 1917 (the year of my birth) when the German Kaiser and the Russian Czar were both overthrown in one year. Each of these titles are ways of spelling Caesar: Kaiser is the German form; Czar is the Russian. So the imperial form, which is described in this section as the sixth form of the beast, passed away only as late as 1917. A seventh would appear for only a short time, John is told, and then the eighth, which is the beast, will come into being. The end of that eighth form is described in verses 13-14:
    “They have one purpose[i.e., the ten kingdoms, the ten nations] and will give their power and authority to the beast. They will make war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will overcome them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings — and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers.” (Revelation 17:13-14 NIV)
    When the Lamb appears, the church will be with him. Several Scriptures predict that when Jesus appears in power and great glory, the church is already with him, for, as it says here, accompanying him will be “his called, chosen and faithful followers.” That is a brief anticipation of what we come to in Chapter 19, which we will look at next week. Chapter 18 now adds further details of the judgment of the great whore. It is self-explanatory, needing little interpretation. I shall merely read it and make a few comments as we go along: First, a great angel announces the fall of Babylon and gives reasons for it:
    After this[John says] I saw another angel coming down from heaven. He had great authority, and the earth was illuminated by his splendor.
    With a mighty voice he shouted:
    “Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great!
    She has become a home for demons
    and a haunt for every evil spirit,
    a haunt for every unclean and detestable bird.
    For all the nations have drunk
    the maddening wine of her adulteries.
    The kings of the earth
    committed adultery with her,
    and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries.” (Revelation 18:1-3 NIV)
    Three reasons are given for the overthrow of the great harlot. She is demonic: “She has become the haunt of every evil spirit and every unclean and detestable bird.” That is doubtless a reference to our Lord’s parable of the mustard seed, found in Matthew 13. There he speaks of this tiny seed, which is the church planted in the world, which grows to be a great tree and becomes a nesting place for evil birds. It pictures demonic ideas and teachings finding a place in the church. Also Mystery Babylon is said to be, as we have seen before, spiritually unfaithful (kings commit adultery with her) and materially seductive (merchants grow rich from her excessive luxuries), and for these reasons she is overthrown. Then, in Verses 4-5, an appeal is made to the true saints that are still within this false church in the last days to come out of her.
    Then I heard another voice from heaven say:
    “Come out of her, my people,
    so that you will not share in her sins,
    so that you will not receive any of her plagues;
    for her sins are piled up to heaven,
    and God has remembered her crimes.” (Revelation 18:4-5 NIV)
    This great religious system still retains much saving truth. One can become a true believer in the church though much error is found as well. There is enough truth there that, by the Spirit of God, someone can become saved, and some do even in that day. But now the appeal is made to come out of her, and further reasons are given for judgment:
    “Give back to her as she has given;
    pay her back double for what she has done.
    Mix her a double portion from her own cup.” (Revelation 18:6 NIV)
    This is simply the law of retribution. What you do to others will come back to you. “What goes around comes around.” In this case it is doubled because of the length of time that error is promulgated. Another reason is given in Verses 7 and 8:
    “Give her as much torture and grief
    as the glory and luxury she gave herself.
    In her heart she boasts,
    ‘I sit as queen; I am not a widow,
    and I will never mourn.’
    Therefore in one day her plagues will overtake her:
    death, mourning and famine.
    She will be consumed by fire,
    for mighty is the Lord God who judges her.” (Revelation 18:7-8 NIV)
    The second reason for judgment is her arrogant, self-indulgent pride. She lavishes luxuries upon herself and takes pride in the fact that she is a queen; she does not need help from anyone. There is something we must notice carefully here. We saw in Chapter 17 that the beast and the false prophet will turn against her and destroy her with fire. But beyond that hatred and destruction of the beast there seems to be a further judgment from God which is described in Verses 9-10:
    “When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. Terrified at her torment, they will stand far off and cry:
    ‘Woe! Woe, O great city,
    O Babylon, city of power!
    In one hour your doom has come!'” (Revelation 18:9-10 NIV)
    There seems to be a sudden judgment from God at the end here. In Chapter 16, this was announced as coming at the time of the great earthquake described there. The kings who destroyed her are now terrified at a sudden and total end that comes to this great city. They are mourning, of course, as the account goes on to tells us, not for the Whore but for their own loss.
    “The merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over her because no one buys their cargoes any more — cargoes of gold, silver, precious stones and pearls; fine linen, purple, silk and scarlet cloth; every sort of citron wood, and articles of every kind made of ivory, costly wood, bronze, iron and marble; cargoes of cinnamon and spice, of incense, myrrh and frankincense, of wine and olive oil, of fine flour and wheat; cattle and sheep, horses and carriages; and bodies and souls of men.” (Revelation 18:11-13 NIV)
    Their business is ruined by the destruction of this city. False religion has been good for business, but now it is all gone. It included costly ornaments, fine clothes, ornate building materials, expensive perfumes, incense, fine foods, expensive vehicles, and even slaves — fine young men and women who are bound to serve without pay and who give up every human right and liberty out of mistaken devotion to a false system. Verses 14-19 continues the lament of the peoples of earth:
    “They will say, ‘The fruit you longed for is gone from you. All your riches and splendor have vanished, never to be recovered.’ The merchants who sold these things and gained their wealth from her will stand far off, terrified at her torment. They will weep and mourn and cry out:
    ‘Woe! Woe, O great city,
    dressed in fine linen, purple and scarlet,
    and glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls!
    In one hour such great wealth has been brought to ruin!’

    “Every sea captain, and all who travel by ship, the sailors, and all who earn their living from the sea, will stand far off. When they see the smoke of her burning, they will exclaim, ‘Was there ever a city like this great city?’ They will throw dust on their heads, and with weeping and mourning cry out:
    ‘Woe! Woe, O great city,
    where all who had ships on the sea
    became rich through her wealth!
    In one hour she has been brought to ruin!'” (Revelation 18:14-19 NIV)
    The merchants and seamen seem terrified and amazed at this sudden judgment that comes upon this great city. Notice how many times “one hour” is mentioned. This destruction is very rapid. It seems to be a judgment by fire from God. It suggests enormous volcanic activity. Geologists have long known that almost all of southern Italy, from Rome down through the city of Naples, is volcanic in nature. Vesuvius, the great volcano behind Naples, has destroyed parts of that city in times past. So there may well be a tremendous volcanic destruction of Rome in the final days of Daniel’s 70th week. Now, in contrast to the reaction on earth, heaven rejoices. Verse 20:
    “‘Rejoice over her, O heaven!
    Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets!
    God has judged her for the way she treated you.'” (Revelation 18:20 NIV)
    Note that the cruel treatment by Mystery Babylon goes back to the time of the apostles. Religious error has come in that has created opposition to the truth, and unleashed attack upon prophets and apostles and the saints of God.
    Then a mighty angel picked up a boulder the size of a large millstone and threw it into the sea, and said:
    “With such violence
    the great city of Babylon will be thrown down,
    never to be found again.
    The music of harpists and musicians, flute players and trumpeters,
    will never be heard in you again.
    No workman of any trade
    will ever be found in you again.
    The sound of a millstone
    will never be heard in you again.
    The light of a lamp
    will never shine in you again.
    The voice of bridegroom and bride
    will never be heard in you again.
    Your merchants were the world’s great men.
    By your magic spell all the nations were led astray.
    In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints,
    and of all who have been killed on the earth.” (Revelation 18:21-24 NIV)
    We do not need to add anything to the solemnness of that final word.

  13. Welcome to the looney bin. Religious people border on insanity and depression. BEWARE OF THESE LOONIES!

  14. seems like some body(mankind) has a vested interest in executing .bible prophesy.. but be careful for the bible warned they will be false teachers in diverse places,,this would be a master stroke if it should all come about,,,,,,,,

  15. next pope francis might have to appoint copeland to be a cardinall,,,,,,,,copeland is one of the slickest snake oil salesman preaching god/s word……but then again the pope might believe copeland can be a saul and save the catholic church……..friggin bizarre,……..

  16. Even as recently as 1970’s, maybe 1975, we seem to remember, another murder of a Pope took place, in the Vatican. Then you had all the killing/suicides around the Ambrosini Bank and all that.

    What this one who calls himself richard ross is peeved about is the bulling that is being denounced by us. We will continue to denounce bulling because we understand what people like him with their gays rights agenda really want, is to subject all the peoples of the world to their nastiness. We calling an imperialism of bulling!

  17. Pachamama:

    I understand your position, but they are good people in the RC who believe the lie that the RC is the original first church and Peter was their Pope. This is the same Papacy which literally ran a man who was Pope out of Office because he was a Jew. You would not find him named because they erased that too.

    Currently, the UN is have a fight of its life with the Holy See which took NINE YEARS before it could even sum up the courage to get off its high horse to answer the allegations about those molesting priests who are still being protected by the Vatican.

  18. @ Lemuel
    And it is the RC Church that has done more evil than any other organisation. Priest can’t marry. They hate women. Cast women of prostitutes. Burn women. Promote bulling. All the four types of love these criminals support is man to man. And this is the program Robert Ross and those who want to trick us about gay rights really want to institute. Global bulling. Their boy Obama just went to Africa telling leaders that they should recognize bulling, we say no to him and Robert Ross!

  19. Pacahamama:
    The RC is so replete with their “deeds” that it represents or seem to be an easy target. Do not be fooled. I saw Granville moved from running around sheets on the ground and collecting money at night to a place of stature in Barbados where even our so called educated types were falling over themselves even at night to get an audience with him. The people who you saw turning up at his funeral especially the politicians were not there because he had a large church; they had dined at his table, a la carte Roman Catholic Spiritualism style. The RC as a system has a lot of power.

  20. Pacha

    I am surprised that you did not recognize the reference to Yallop’s book as referring to Albino Luciani. His death was in 1978.

    Your problem Pacha is that you turn fantasy into opinion and opinion into fact. I don’t know why you criticize RC priests for hating women. You seem to hate everyone. Get a life.


    Thank you. But it is abundantly clear to me that Pacha’s disordered brain was in fact referring to John Paul 1.

  21. Lemuel | May 5, 2014 at 8:21 PM |
    RE Pachamama:
    I understand your position, but they are good people in the RC who believe the lie that the RC is the original first church and Peter was their Pope.

    2 DEACON

  22. @ robert ross
    Who is talking about brain disorders. The homosexual mind represents the deepest psychosis. You are so minded!

  23. Pacha

    Keep going. The more you open your mouth the worse it gets.

    On the substance

    The Luther gesture at the Castle Church at Wittenberg was copied by the theologian Matthew Fox (the Cosmic Christ/Mass) a few years ago. Like many wonderful people (eg Tony de Mello) he found himself at odds with the Church of JP 2 and Benedict and so also nailed his articles (95 of them) to the church door. His point was, however, that both RC and protestant churches require reform (see ‘A New Reformation’). He continued this theme directly to Francis in his ‘Letters to Pope Francis’.


    How do you deal with “on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it”?

  24. Ross:

    The upon this rock theme has been dealt with when one considers the word rock in the original language. The statement by Jesus speaks not to the petra or the petros you would want it too. Those men you have been calling Pope for so long are neither petra or petros.

  25. Ross:

    There was once a Roman ruler who employed a man to walk close to him when he was receiving ovations. That man’s job was to simple say “You are only a man.” The Pope needs a fella like that.

  26. Robert Ross is a liar. Last night Caswell Franklyn cited one Pope that was murdered. We then cited another. All of a sudden Ross’s ‘twisted’ mind wants to suggest that we were refering to one Pope and not the other. In fact, several more Popes were murdered in the Vatican. But to create the lie as to which one we meant as the basis for a buller’s defense is breathtaking! So we have before called him a rabid racist, a liar, a buller. And we do so again and will continue every time we find it necessary to make contact with his lies.

  27. robert ross | May 5, 2014 at 11:01 PM |
    How do you deal with “on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it”?
    One of the first things we were taught as teenagers in Sunday school was NEVER YAKE A TEXT OUT OF CONTEXT OR YOU WOULD MAKE IT A PRETEXT
    13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
    14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
    15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
    16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
    17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
    18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
    Note that it was upon Peter’s declaration that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God, that Jesus called Peter a rock (or pebble).
    Catholics misunderstand this verse because you don’t know any Greek. To understand Matthew 16:18, we have to get behind the English to the Greek.” Jesus was teaching that HE WAS THE ROCK ON WHICH THE CHURCH WOULD BE BUILT, not SIMON. Certainly the main teaching of the TRUE is that JESUS IS THE CHRIST. This is what the early church taught as is clearly seen for example in Acts 16

  28. Ross… never struck me as being totally brainwashed, those vipers from old are still with us today albeit in a different body but wearing the same old dress of the vatican, they died but their evil has lived on to this very day.

  29. GP

    I see what you’re saying but I think you’re composing. But, yes, most of these things are a matter of interpretation if they were ever said or, in fact, happened.


    “These criminals even killed A pope in the Vatican…”A POPE” Now dear, darling, that is ONE – get it? I couldn’t imagine for a moment you’d do any research on the subject since you make everything up as you go along. When Caswell mentioned his little (and ancient) list you did not say ‘Yes that was the ONE I had in mind”. You mentioned the ONE that Caswell omitted, the one you had in mind all the while. Stop bluffing, you poor, sick twisted SOD.


    No matter the motive, Francis seems to be his own companion – as also JP 1.

  30. Pachamma

    I hope your analysis of Robert Ross character is incorrect. Because it never once crossed my mind that Robert Ross was a racist as well as a bullar. But, perhaps, then again, I was blinded by the emotionality that is associated with such a touchy issue like racism? And it’s therefore best that I make a proper judgment especially when someone’s reputation is in question. So it best that I suspend further judgment until I revisit such conversation to determining whether or not your allegations merit my consideration. Ross, and myself have had a common connection since the days, the both of us advocated for Raul Garcia released several years ago. And if these allegations are discover to be true, it would most likely stain this rather amicable connection we have developed through the Garcia fiasco.

  31. Well Well

    IF I was brainwashed I would have no difficulty with agreeing with everything I read on BU. Since, for the most part, I disagree I would have thought you might have contemplated the possibility that I am an independent spirit. But yes, the “vipers of old” are indeed with us.

  32. Dompey

    Of Garcia. I had forgotten that. But yes, I was there with him in court – shoulder to shoulder at one point.

  33. @ Dompey

    Yours is a fair judgement. We have closely watched his consistent responses on this blog and have reached the determined we have. And we SHALL not back away. For us, the breaking point came yesterday when this racist and buller found it fit to defend an institution that bulls young boys all over the world and deflowers young girls. On that matter, we had certain knowledge that two boys were murdered on the precents of a RC church in Barbados. Ross never seems to have any human feeling for these children or Black people, more generally, who continue to be harmed by his racism. We can cuss anybody in Barbados, who is Black, as much as we like and hardly a word in their defense, but when we turn our guns on COW or Bizzy or Kiffin this racist Ross come out of his hidding place.

  34. Ross

    I remember your daily commentary on the case, as well as Mr. Garcia’s brother. Now, I knew he gained his freedom after a strong moral outcry by a certain segment of the citizenry. Question: was he deported subsequently after his released? Or am I venturing into attorney and client privileges here?

  35. Pachamma, I had assumed from previous conversations with Ross that he was a black man? I mean, it doesn’t really matter if Ross is a black, white, yellow, brown or red man; so as long as he respect the dignity of every human being, he is okay in my book.

  36. Consider this

    COW was reported as saying that we needed a new hospital. Henry Frazer opposed him. RR wrote to the press and pointed out that it MIGHT just be the case that COW was self-interested. Get it loud mouth? When did you EVER put your body where your mouth is?. Well maybe at 3.0. Good


    He was sent to Cuba. I understand from his lawyer that he is happy.

  37. Oh dear….Pacha I have just read you again though dunno why I’m bothering. WHERE did I defend the RC Church? Please give chapter and verse.

  38. Pacha…sorry to say, you are a sick retard who is doing neither yourself nor BU any good whatsoever.

  39. @ Robert Ross

    But uh cussing you though. How much good do you do BU with your constant sniping, Mr Bullen?

  40. answer the question …where did I defend the RC Church? You can’t spin all your life Pacha. Sometime you gonna have to get real. Maybe at 3.0

  41. @ Robert Ross
    You rerally think that a Mr. Bullen like you. Whose every thought is predicated on racial supremacy can command us to answer your question. Mr. Bullen. Yuh pooch picker

  42. “Command US” – gee what a prick. Now Pacha….I just want you to know that I’m REALLY looking forward to seeing you at 3.0. Don’t disappoint me.

  43. Robert Ross
    You are a pooch picker. A racist. A suborner of crimes against children and Mr. Bullen himself.

  44. robert ross | May 6, 2014 at 10:27 AM |

    I see what you’re saying GOOD
    but I think you’re composing. NOT AT ALL


  45. Georgie:

    Those who looked at the original word for Peter indicate that it meant small pebble not the big hard rock (associated with the building of a foundation) that Ross would want us to believe. he or his priest friend can go to the greek text.

  46. Just another titbit. How many of you know that there were two popes with the name John XXIII? The first reigned from May 1410 – May 1415. He was deemed guilty of incest, adultery and homicide. He also kept his brother’s wife in the Vatican as his mistress. He was therefore deposed by decree of the Council of Constance and his name excised from the list of popes.

    He was demoted to Cardinal-Bishop as a punishment and sent to Tusculum, where he seduced over 200 nuns impregnating many of them.

  47. Lemuel | May 6, 2014 at 2:25 PM |

    Those who looked at the original word for Peter indicate that it meant small pebble not the big hard rock (associated with the building of a foundation) that Ross would want us to believe. he or his priest friend can go to the greek text.


  48. Georgie Porgie

    First and forth most: the office of the Pope is the instrument of the Devil on earth. I have two fundamental points to substantiate as well as corroborate the position that the office of the Pope is the office of the Devil. (1) The Bible tells us that man is head of wife, as Christ is the head of Church and yet the Pope is portray as the head of the Christian Church. (2) The Pope goes by the name Father or Holy Father and yet the Bible tells us: ” To call no man Father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in Heaven.”

  49. no matter how many times Rock is interpreted ,,there is no doubt that JeSIUS intentions were made clear when he promised peter that the gates of hell would not prevail against him,,,, too many have a twisted and self serving view when trying to decipher,,either Jesus is a liar,,,,or he was telling the Truth to peter ,,,,, if one take a close look at the relationship and iteractions between Christ and Peter…… would be hard press to challenge what Christ meant for his will to Peter,,, the history of Peter and Jesus shows that a bond of faith and trust had been built between them more so over the years after the crucifixion,,,, sealing PETERS approval in the eyes of jesus was when Peter more than all the other apostle recognized and confirm openly Jesus as THE CHRIST THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD<<,, it was then that JESUS had no doubt, or reservations about peters commitment to lead the flock,,,. and gave him the authority to do so,,,,,,,
    this issue has been a bone stuck in throat of many evangelicals especially baptist ,,who in there minds believe that a man Paul,,,the persecutor of the early Church was deserving of being the leader,,,what they forgot that PAUL was an evil man….who had killed thousands of the believers of Christ,,,and was forgiven nevertheless ,,,,,he fell short and still had an outstanding debt to pay for the innocent lives he had destroyed,,, ,,his redemption is to be admired and his works must be appreciated ,,,, but the destruction on those lives he crossed was horrific by all accounts,,,and might have been the hindrance in him not becoming a leader ,, not being chosen to be leader of the church was indeed a small price he had to pay,,,for GOD could have dealt with Paul in a much harder way,,,,

  50. Georgie Porgie

    Here is the two scriptures from the KJV:
    Matthew 23:9 And call no man your Father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in Heaven.

    Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the Church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.

  51. i meaning don;t you see how foolish you become on one hand you try to dispute jesus words when he says rock…now in your foolish stupor drags out another quote which jesus says to call no man FATHER,,,,,how childish and ridiculous can people be,,,in all my not so long years …i have been told out of respect to call my male parent father,,,,,,man stuepse,,,,the rock now father ,,what next,,,,,,,
    what is wrong with you people,,,,,,,,,,jesus is the head of the church,,there is not disptuing that according to christian teaching nevertheless he was a jew and died a jew,,,,,yet the christians has latched on to his every word,,,,,,, now from all the accounts to the pope being the heads i have never read inany cathoilic literature where jesus was denounced as being the head of the church,,,,,however ,,the church has relied on jesus commitment given to peter to be a leader or builder of the church,,,,,the pope is the leader of the church and the HEAD of vatican city,,,,,,,,,,,,,

  52. AC:

    Do not burst a blood vessel. Such thoughts as you are pondering may do you harm. But you too proud to ask Georgie for guidance!!

  53. I suspect that the use of the word Rock in place names is another example of early Quaker influence on naming conventions in Barbados.

    I think it is straight out of their interpretation of the Bible.

    There are not too many parishes that don’t have in a Rock Hall!!

  54. Georgie Porgie

    I am sure you have heard the news? U.S. Gay Magazine, names Pope Francis person of the year’ for famously saying he would not judge homosexuals. It really speaks to the moral as well as the religious decrepitudes of our modern age. Doesn’t it?

  55. The NT was first written in what language?
    When was the first English version?
    How long has the Bishop of Rome been acknowledged as ‘the Pope’ and head of the Church Universal?

  56. robert ross | May 6, 2014 at 9:06 PM |
    The NT was first written in what language?
    When was the first English version?
    How long has the Bishop of Rome been acknowledged as ‘the Pope’ and head of the Church Universal?


    the TRUE church has NEVER acknowledged never ‘the Pope’ as ANYTHING


    ONLY the RC organisation worships the Pope

    If you read the NT the church is always presented as LOCAL SELF GOVERNING independent CHURCHES e.g the seven churches listed in Revelation 1-3.
    The epistles were written to specific chuches

    All of the POPE bull and his bulling will soon come to and end as described in Revelation 17 & 18 as clearly set out in an earlier post.

  57. This is Basic Church History


    The translation of the Bible into the English language coincided with the invention of the printing press and the period of Reformation (15th -16th centuries). Before this time, the use of the Bible in the West was forbidden in any language other than Latin. The Latin translation, from the original Hebrew and Greek, was made by St. Jerome in the fourth century. It became the authoritative Bible for the Western Church and was known as the Vulgate. The reading of the Bible, even in the Latin, was forbidden the lay people without permission. This denial by the authorities of the Western Church was one of the main reasons for the Protestant Reformation. Therefore, the first act of the first reformer, Martin Luther, was the translation of the Bible into German in 1522, which translation was the main factor in the establishment of the German language. Before the Reformation and the printing press, various parts of the Bible had been translated into English from the Latin Vulgate.

    The Western Church was very strict in the use of Latin not only for the Bible, but also for the ritual worship of the Church, which was incomprehensible to the people. It should be noted that before the Reformation, there was no complete translation of the Bible in English. The only translation in English, from the Latin and not the original Greek language, covering only the New Testament and some parts of the Old, was that attributed to John Wycliffe of England. Despite the fact it was made with the knowledge of the authorities of the Church, its use was forbidden without special permission, according to the decision of the Synod of Oxford of 1407. The first translation of the Bible into English from the original languages, Hebrew and Greek, and the first which was printed was that of William Tyndale in c. 1523. Before this translation, the only printings of the Bible were the Vulgate (first printing, 1456), the Hebrew text of the Old Testament (1488), the text of the New Testament Greek by Erasmus (1516), with four revisions through 1535, and the literal translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Latin (1528). The translation of the New Testament into English from the original Greek text depended on the initiative of Tyndale (c. 1523), without the sponsorship or permission of the Bishop of London. Tyndale was denounced and forced to flee to Germany, where he probably met Martin Luther. Tyndale started to print the New Testament in English in Cologne, but was again forced to flee to another city, Worms.

    In Worms, he finally completed the printing of the English translation of the New Testament in its entirety. This translation was reprinted many times in Holland. Copies of this translation reached England, where it aroused the anger of his enemies. Nevertheless, Tyndale continued his work and undertook to translate and print the books of the Old Testament. He first printed the five Books of Moses, the Pentateuch, in Antwerp in 1529-30. Over the next few years, he printed the other books of the Old Testament. Tyndale later printed the New Testament and the Pentateuch together with marginal notes reflecting the Protestant views. This further incensed his enemies, who had him condemned as a heretic. He was burned at the stake in Holland in 1536. Tyndale’s translation, especially that of the New Testament from the original Greek, marked the beginning of many other English translations from the original Greek, using Tyndale’s translation as a guide. Unfortunately, the original Greek New Testament edited by Erasmus in 1516, which was used by Tyndale for his English translation, contained many mistakes. Still, Tyndale’s English translation of the Bible was a pioneer work and an independent effort. Much of his translation is used in the King James Version of 1611.


    Tyndale’s English translation of the entire Bible was the basis for the many other English translations that followed. The subsequent English versions are Coverdale’s Bible, 1535; Thomas Mathew’s Bible, 1537; the Great Bible, 1539; the Geneva Bible, 1560; and the Bishop’s Bible, 1568. Also the Rheims-Duae’s in 1582 was translated from the Latin Vulgate. Within approximately 50 years from the time of Tyndale’s first printed translations, the above six translations were made. It must be noted, however, that none of these English translations were accepted as an authorized English version because of general dissatisfaction with them and the many mistakes found in them. Therefore, after 30 years, another attempt to translate the Bible anew into English was made by a conference in England, where a new version of the Bible was suggested to King James. King James was convinced of the need for a new English translation of the Bible. He appointed 54 scholars to undertake the task. These scholars used the Bishop’s Bible of 1568 as a basis, but earlier English versions were also taken into consideration, especially Tyndale’s.

    These 54 scholars, appointed to translate a new, original English version, failed because they used the earlier English translation, which had many mistakes. Thus, theirs was a new revision, not a new translation. Regardless, this new version was received with great enthusiasm and happiness, and within a generation, it displaced all other English translations. This new version became known as the King James Version, or the Authorized Version. This King James Version was printed in 1611 and has become the familiar form of the Bible for many English-speaking generations. The King James Version was the only version that bore the royal authority and was “appointed to be read in churches.” It is characterized as “the noblest monument of English prose.” The King James Version has played a prominent role in forming the personal character of the church and institutions of the English-speaking people.

    Yet, even this King James Version was neither well-received nor free of criticism by some. Nevertheless, it has prevailed through the centuries and is still held in great esteem today, both by preachers and lay people, despite its defects, which were noted more clearly in the mid-nineteenth century and more so today. The Greek and Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible possessed today were unknown to the 54 scholars of the King James Version. The manuscripts of the Bible which were found later pointed out more clearly the serious defects of the King James Version. This fact convinced the Church of England in 1870 to make a revision of the King James translation. This revision was published in 1881 (N.T.) and 1885 (O.T.) and was known as the English Revised Version of the Bible, which included the Apocrypha, printed in 1895. However, to its detriment, this committee of revisers included only Anglican scholars. This version was not accepted by the vast majority of local churches and people, who cherished the King James Version.

  58. let me tell you something lemuel;;;;;;;jesus did not give the keys of interpretation to GP,,,furthemore jesus was a jew,,,,,,and all this bible doctrine is a whole lot of mixed up dogma and theories from several jewish and greek and a god knows what a bunch of different languages put together with man’s interpretations and influence to control,,,,,,Gp is so steeped in this hogwash that even though he knows that man’s heart is corrupt by nature,,,,,he does not have the commonsense to conclude that if man had anything to do with this literature it can;t be kosher,,,i meaning fuh god sake, after years of university and medical teachings,,,,don;t know the meaning of the word ,,rock,,,,,then you lemuel tell me i am proud ,,,hell yes when dealing wid neanderthals in2014, ;;;;;some say a rock is a pebble,,,,,,others say a pebble is a rock,,,,,,,,can;t u imagine a heaven with a bunch of clowns,,,,,, hell no……….

  59. the only part of the bible i pay homage to and deeply ,,where it say to love your neighbour as you would love yourself,,,,,,,all the other parts like who sleep wid who,,like the days of our lives soap opera,,i already shredded and threw in the garbage,,,,,my bible has two sentences and no chapers it is so small that a two year old can read it and understand it…….do you think i really care how old abraham was when he had his first child and with whom he had it,,,,or if jesus was resurrected from the grave,,do m you think that is important to being good,,,,it makes for good table talk,,,,,and back yard conversation……do u think i am looking for the heavens to open up and a man on a white horse coming out of the sky,,,,,,no,,,,,,,,people like you and GP wid limited time on yuh hands got nothing better to do,,,,,,but try to brain was people,,, i not having it,,,,,

  60. AC:

    In the judgement, how can you deny that Lemuel and Georgie tried they best with you. Whether you or whoever do not believe in the coming back of Jesus in glory, your unbelief shall not stop it happening.

  61. Poor GP…did a scissors and paste job.

    But thank you. You made my case. The NT was written in Greek NOT English. it was written by those who understood Greek. How then 2000 years on can you say they “mistranslated” when it’s clear that for the continuum the Church has consistently held the Matthew passage to mean as I’ve suggested it might?

  62. Are you a total moron?
    Can you read?


    WHICH “chucrch” has consistently held the Matthew passage to mean as I’ve suggested it might? ONLY THE rc ORGANISATION AND ITS OFFSHOOTS, WHERE THE BIBLE IS NEVER STOOD OR UNDERSTOOD.



  63. @ GP
    Bushie would not seek to hasten that end if he were you.

    You yourself identified during your long but interesting post above, that the great whore AS WELL AS HER DAUGHTERS comprise the “organization” of which you speak.
    This ‘family’ of HOs are identified by a series of blasphemous doctrines which can best be described as “ANTI-CHRIST” because they go against the very CORE of what the fella Christ said, stood for and promoted……

    The unshakable commitment to a “TRINITY” is one such flawed doctrine which fundamentally defines God as a CLOSED ENTITY…… When Jesus REPEATEDLY and CONSISTENTLY said otherwise.
    Indeed, by the VERY ACT of DYING, he demonstrated that GOD is NOT a closed entity…….then he reinforced this by becoming the “first begotten son”……

    Even to casual onlookers, the RC church is a wicked, corrupt, secret society that has no relevance to BBE, ….but practically ALL of the “daughters of that abomination” who are “Protestants” against various aspects of RC doctrines ……ALSO adhere to her basic wicked and misleading doctrines…..carrying the very same “mark”…

  64. The Church of Rome says that because the Aramaic/Syriac original of Matthew 16:18, underlying the existing Greek text, uses the word KE’PHA’ both as the proper name given to Simon bar Jonas and as the word for the Rock upon which Christ promised to build His Church, that therefore Peter (Aramaic, Ke’pha’) is the rock and the foundation of the Church. Rome bases many of its claims of papal supremacy on this identification of the Apostle Peter with the Rock mentioned by Christ in this passage of Matthew’s Gospel. If the defenders of Rome are wrong at this point then their argument that Peter is the Rock fails.

    1. The Greek text is the inspired original of the New Testament. No Aramaic underlying text is extant. Though there are Syriac/Aramaic translations of these original Greek texts they cannot be relied upon to accurately represent any supposed original Aramaic usage. They are merely uninspired translations of the original Greek text and may or may not represent any Aramaic/Syriac original.
    2. The Greek text of Matthew 16:18 uses two separate (different) Greek words in the passage.
      Petros, the name given to the Apostle
      Petra, the word used for rock
      Rome says that “Peter” (PETROS) is merely the masculine form of the feminine noun PETRA, and therefore means the same thing. But…

    3. Classic Greek authors (before the New Testament was written) treat the words PETROS and PETRA as two different words.
      According to Liddell and Scott:
      Petros, …(distinct from petra)…
      Hom. IL. 16.734; 7:270; 20.288
      E. Heracl.1002, “panta kinesai petron” …”Leave no stone unturned”
      cf. Pl. Lg. 843a
      X. HG 3.5.20 “Petrous epekulindoun” “They rolled down stones.”
      S. Ph 296 to produce fire “en petroisi petron ektribon”
      Id. OC 1595 of a boulder forming a landmark
      [the usual prose word is lithos]”
      from: A Greek – English Lexicon, complied by Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, pg. 1397- 8, Pub. by Oxford, at the Clarendon Press.)
      NOTE: Petros, a stone, a smaller movable stone (Heracletes uses it in the phrase “leave no stone unturned.”) So, a “PETROS” is a stone which can by turned over, hence, a movable stone.
      Petra, a large massive rock, a large boulder, a foundation stone.
      The word “Petros” is only used in the Greek New Testament as a proper name for Simon bar Jona.
      Petros is not merely a masculine form of the word petra, but is a different word with a different meaning, though both words are derived from a common root.

    4. The wording of Matt. 16:18 uses two different Greek words. If Jesus was referring the second word to Simon Peter he could have said “epi tauto to petro” (using the masculine gender in the dative case) the same word as “Petros.” But what he said was “Epi taute te petra” using Petra, a different Greek word.

    5. The usage of two different words in the inspired Greek original, if representing an Aramaic original (which is in no case certain) would seem to point to the usage of two separate Aramaic words in this passage.

    6. The Peshitta Syriac translation of the New Testament in Matthew 16:18 uses kepha’ for both Greek words petros and petra. Is this accurate, or could it be a mistranslation of the original Greek Text?

    7. The proper translation of Petros is Ke’pha’. On this we have the authority of the Word of God itself in the Greek original of the New Testament, where the name “Ke’pha” (in the English Bible “Cephas”) is six times given as the Aramaic equivalent to Petros for the name of Simon bar Jonas. (John 1:42; 1Corinthians1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5; Galatians 2:9) So, we can say, based upon the authority of the original Greek of the New Testament that Petros, the name given to Simon bar Jona by the Lord Jesus (John 1:42) is the correct translation of the Aramaic/Syriac word Ke’pha’. Greek: Petros = Aramaic: Ke’pha’ (“Cephas”)
      But what of the Greek word Petra? Is it correctly translated as Ke’pha’?
      There is nowhere in the Greek New Testament where the word Ke’pha’ is given as the correct translation of the Greek word Petra. In order to determine the Syriac/Aramaic word which best translates the Greek word Petra we will have to look at the translations of the Greek New Testament which were made in the first five centuries of the Christian Church to determine how the Greek word Petra was understood.
      Greek: Petra = Aramaic: ?

    8. In the Peshitta Syriac New Testament the Greek word “PETRA” is translated by the Aramaic word SHUA' as in Matthew 7:24-25 meaning a massive rock or a boulder.
      PETRA is used 16 times in the Greek New Testament:
      Of those times it is translated in the Peshitta Syriac
      9 times by the word SHU
      A’ ,
      6 times by the word KE’PHA’ and
      1 time by the Hebrew root word ‘ABENA’
      Of the ten times PETRA is used in the Gospels it is translated:
      7 times by the word SHU`A’
      (Mt.7:24, 25; Mk.15:46; Lk 6:48[2x];8:6, 13)
      3 times by the word KE’PHA’
      (Mt.16:18; 27:51; 27:60)

    Of the three times KE’PHA’ is used to translate PETRA in the Gospels:
    [1] in Mt. 27:60 the parallel passage in Mark’s gospel (Mark 15:46) more correctly uses SHUA' to translate PETRA.
    [2] in Mt. 27:51 the word KE'PHA' is used to describe the rocks (plural) which were broken at the earthquake when Christ died (and hence, these rocks became movable)
    [3] the other passage is Mt. 16:18 where KE'PHA' is used to translate both PETROS and PETRA.
    In all other places in the Gospels the Greek word PETRA is translated by the Syriac word SHU
    A’, meaning “a massive rock.”
    KE’PHA’ is used in the Syriac N.T. as the translation of both the Greek words LITHOS and PETROS.
    The Greek word LITHOS, which means “a stone” (generally of a size which could be picked up or moved) is ALWAYS translated by the Syriac word KE’PHA’.
    As LITHOS in classical Greek is the common prose word for “a stone” (see the quote from Liddle and Scott’s Lexicon, above) and PETROS is more common in poetry, this shows that the definition of KE’PHA’ as “a stone” is correct. The Syriac KE’PHA’ is equivalent to the Greek LITHOS, a movable stone.
    The Syriac word SHUA' is NEVER used to translate the Greek word LITHOS.
    Because a LITHOS is NOT a large massive rock, but a SHU
    A’ is.
    The Syriac KE’PHA’ is correctly used to translate the Greek words LITHOS and PETROS because these are movable stones.

    1. The fact that the Greek text of the New Testament uses two separate Greek words in the passage [Matthew 16:18] indicates that any underlying Aramaic/Syriac original (if there was one, AND THIS IS FAR FROM PROVEN) also must have used two separate words.


    a. A reconstructed Aramaic/Syriac of the passage would properly be:
    “You are KE’PHA’ (a movable stone) and upon this SHU`A’ (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”
    This is in exact correspondence to the original inspired Greek text:
    “You are PETROS (a movable stone) and upon this PETRA (a large massive rock) I will build my church.”

    b. The Peshitta Syriac New Testament text, at leaast in its extant MSS, mistranslated the passage in Matthew 16:18, incorrectly using the Syriac word KE’PHA’ for both Greek words PETROS and PETRA.

    c. The Church of Rome bases its doctrine of Peter being the Rock upon which the Church is built on this mistranslation and/or a falsely reconstructed Aramaic/Syriac original, ignoring the distinctions in the Aramaic language.

    d. The Greek text does not teach that Peter is the rock. The rock is either Peter’s confession of Christ, or Christ Himself, in Peter’s answer to Jesus’ earlier question “Who do men say that I the Son of man am?”

  65. Bushie:

    The warnings are being given to the RC and her daughters who have and will further blend into prophetic Babylon. Those who do not heed the warnings shall suffer their fate, but as usual we laugh all of this to scorn.

  66. @ Lemuel:

    Your scholarly contribution makes for interesting reading and has attracted the usual suspects of religious scholars.
    You, along with GP and BT, find it rather easy to attack the RC organisation. A very easy target for the coming post-Christian era.

    Isn’t it funny how an underground movement could have moved from being victims of Roman might and who suffered more atrocities than the Jews under Hitler to become the perpetrators of similar atrocities against other groups especially in the ‘New World’ while sitting in the Roman seat of imperial power in the Vatican, a city of paradoxical morality.
    Maybe we should put it down to retribution for a faith that grew out of a cult to become the biggest legally accepted practitioner of magic and “white” voodoo used to deprive millions of their lands and lives.

    Christianity in Europe is coming full circle and is becoming once more a cult today with its more ardent members from sub-Sahara Africa.
    Why not be more balanced in your criticism and save some of its harsher barbs for those religious bigots parading under the umbrella of religious fundamentalism?

    Why not express abject disdain and rejection for groups like the Islamist Boko Haram which find nothing wrong is perpetrating acts of brutal inhumanity in the name of the same god of Abraham that ‘protesting’ Christians like you and reformed Jews worship as a god love and life? Neither should you overlook the acts of the likes of Jim Jones and David Koresh.

    The RC Church under Francis would never condone such acts of brutality even if done by Cortes and Pizarro with the blessing of the Spanish Inquisition and the Vatican.

  67. Miller:
    I am not sure but are you contending that the RC is going to be saved and purged under Pope Francis? Are you aware that the RC is an institution like the Presidency of the US and that no one man shall prevail against it. Remember, Caswell has been revealing here that institution’s propensity for killing all who stand in its way, even if they are called Pope!

  68. @ lemuel | May 7, 2014 at 11:06 AM |

    Christianity- and by extension R C- will fade and eventually die, sorry disappear, like all major religions before it. Sol Invictus!

    The most likely contender for the throne, at least in the West (and Hal Austin can attest), is Islam a younger and passionately fitter religion. Someday that form of opiate too will suffer a similar fate as Christianity and her predecessors.

    Religion, like everything else including institutions, must evolve to survive.
    We bet you would never consider yourself to be in any way connected to chimps or bonobos even though you share 97% of their genetic makeup.
    Let’s see how you reveal, if not delude, your intellectual self by denouncing what has just been written.

  69. Miller:
    Why are you squeezing the Evolution argument into this conversation. Yes, humans are related genetically; that allows for biotechnology without that relationship that discipline would not be possible.

    The Islam argument has been going around for some time by the futurists. But the regimen of the religion is such that our rum drinkers would find it impossible to turn to Islam. Our women have lived in freedom for many many years. Do you see the gay and lesbian movement, which would have a voice, joining the ranks of Islam. Do you see the capitalists of this world embracing Islam. I could go on and on with the impracticality of the futurists assumption.

    Whereas RC gives a form of worship and some abeyance to religious custom, Islam calls for the complete ingesting of a culture, where the learning of the arab tongue is required. The RC is re-emerging!!

  70. @ GP
    Here’s a question for you, Doc…………………….

    Why would Jesus Christ want to build his church on the foundation of a mere mortal man?

    Matthew 16:17 says quote:-
    17 “And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
    18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Unquote.

    Now, my understanding of verses 17 – 18 is this……………

    Jesus Christ is saying that since Peter knew by revelation from His Father in Heaven that Jesus was The Christ, then He (Jesus Christ) would build His church upon that sure rock of REVELATION. We definitely cannot make any mistake when we go by revelation ( the best foundation, right?) from the Heavens but we can surely make a complete mess of things when we rely on man’s word. Jesus Christ Himself warned us that we should not “trust in the arm of flesh”! So why would He then want to build His church on a mere mortal even though this person happened to be Peter one of His Chief disciples? Peter was still made of flesh! And this was shown very clearly when the cock crowed the third time and Peter denied that he knew Christ.

    So it is my firm belief that Jesus Christ did not build His church upon any mere mortal but He built it upon the sure foundation of the Rock of Revelation! Revelation from the Heavens through the Holy Spirit.

    Hope you are following the gist of what I am trying to say.

    Keep up the good work.

  71. de hood | May 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM |
    @ GP
    Here’s a question for you, Doc…………………….
    Why would Jesus Christ want to build his church on the foundation of a mere mortal man?
    Now, my understanding of verses 17 – 18 is this……………
    Jesus Christ is saying that since Peter knew by revelation from His Father in Heaven that Jesus was The Christ, then He (Jesus Christ) would build His church upon that sure rock of REVELATION.
    Your interpretation is the same of sane serious students of the Scriptures

  72. you guys are a bunch of f up idolaters,,,,,can ‘t even get the meaning and understanding of what Jesus meant when he used symbolic language to execute the will he had for peter. using the rock as a symbol of strength,, jesus was not a liar,,,,,not unlike a will where family members devour and cat spraddle each other,,the mere thought by many evangelical charismatic born again believers ,,that jesus made peter chief executive officer and ceo of the living church,,,is blasphemy,,,,,well guys get use to it,,,,until kingdom come, not going change now,,,cause there is now way ..that born again evangelical christians going ever,,,did i say ever,,have a role in rewriting bible dribble,,,,,even kenneth copeland realize that,,and finally figured out ,,”if yuh can:t beat them join them: what a way to go copeland what a way to go,,,,,the end gotta be at hand,,,,Glory,,,,,,,

  73. ‘Sane and serious’

    Now I guess that counts as special pleading. And rooted in prophetical justification. Actually I think it’s called ‘superstition’ – as I suppose most of it is.

Leave a comment, join the discussion.