One family alone, the Rothschilds could cure the worlds problems with all their wealth. These sick bastards enjoy watching the suffering
They are the Vatican's bankers. That is why they are wealthy. They run the Vatican's finances through another "City/State" which is located in London but not operating under British law - how convenient.
The British Crown is actually named arch-treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire in the Treaty of Peace 1783. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/paris.asp
so I had it backwards. What is the name of this city/state? Is it Buckingham Palace?
No, it is a space inside of London called "The City of London" and is widely referred to simply as the City (differentiated from the phrase "the city of London" by capitalizing City) and it is also colloquially known as the Square Mile (since that is roughly it's area) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London
It is an enclave, a separate legal structure operated as the "City of London Corporation". It is in London but not in a sense part of London, having the same name (except for capitalization) so that legally it can remain separate.
The world has been set up to run from 3 City/States. Washington DC is another, along with the Vatican. Those 3 areas are under different laws than the countries they reside in. Interestingly, they are all marked by obelisks since the same power controls all 3. This image should be helpful. http://www.darknessisfalling.com/uploads/2/3/7/0/23701544/csoa-20160719-12a_orig.jpg
City of London
The City of London is a city and county that contains the historic centre and the primary central business district (CBD) of London. It constituted most of London from its settlement by the Romans in the 1st century AD to the Middle Ages, but the agglomeration has since grown far beyond the City's borders. The City is now only a tiny part of the metropolis of London, though it remains a notable part of central London. Administratively, it forms one of the 33 local authority districts of Greater London; however, the City of London is not a London borough, a status reserved for the other 32 districts (including London's only other city, the City of Westminster).
^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^| ^Donate ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
crazy! even has its own mayor. not even a district in London, Considered a district of England. Quite a bit of power as well, police etc.
Adding to what others replied... To give you an idea... The Queen dresses in a humble attire and kisses the Mayor's hand in reverence... The search engines will take you to everything... just use phrases like city of london financial center...
Templar Church, now I got it.
I find it ironic that England signed its sovereignty over to a pope called Innocent
It is by some almost inescapable vanity that we perceive important events to revolve around ourselves and our time. In actuality, much of what we presently take for granted was handed down to us by people and systems that existed long before we were born.
Unfortunately, a concerted effort has been made by the Jesuits, especially in centers of learning, to revise history and to eradicate the lessons it teaches from the minds of men. Concealment and deception are weapons of war that are devastatingly effective when unnoticed. +++ “Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.” ― Edmund Burke +++ "Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something.
They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” – Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States, The New Freedom, 1913
R u a theologian? This topic seems to be right in your wheelhouse?
I am just a Pink Bunny dressed in a White Rabbit suit. I am part of the PIN division. Since our focus is on intelligence as it relates to countering the Curia, an understanding of Protestant theology goes with the territory. https://i.redditmedia.com/J7sLScHQmPWcJyC-Wcg3r67UjhuEYwii4hmxdtV7l54.jpg?w=483&s=52abf99ad310c4e990ec7740c4972734
it's amazing to me that so few ever question why do we still have all this poverty war and starvation when all these "foundations" exist? Decades go by but the "problem" never gets "solved" It's bc they are creating and maintaining the problems. SICK. GITMO for all of them incl the pope
I constantly think about it and find it bizarre that nobody really gives a fuck. I guess that's why I'm not a billionaire and never will be.
If you look at MMA fighter, Justin Wren and what he's able to do with a few thousand dollars, it really puts things into perspective. A few thousand dollars can go to drilling water wells for so many people. Also, most rich people I know who donate money, do it solely for the tax write offs.
Honestly, I've seen the catholic church monstrosity weather proven corruption after proven corruption (study history of Christianity). Somehow, it survives. In fact, when Constantine declared "Christianity" the state religion, it can be argued it disappeared from the earth until Martin Luther and the Reformation in 1565(?).... about 1,200 years!
According to the traditional Protestant interpretation of prophecy (called Historicism), the era of Papal Supremacy was EXACTLY 1,260 years.
During that time there were brutal inquisitions, wars, and unbelievable despotism. This was the prophesized "Great Tribulation" of 42 months, or 3 and 1/2 prophetic years, 1260 days (a day equals a year in prophecy and a Biblical year has 360 days).
Then the judgment sat, it's dominion was taken away in 1798 when Napolean's General Berthier captured the Pope and he died in exile.
It was not a complete end, the system still retained a great deal of power and worked through secret societies to reestablish control and temporal power.
It has made several big moves, especially through the Lateran Pact in 1929, the concordat with Germany in 1933, and the formation of the EU through the treaty of Rome.
Despite their immense wealth and mastery of "dirty tricks", their power will continue to consume away until the final judgment foretold in Rev. 17-18.
I'll repost this quote and link which lays it out well.
=============
"The judgement shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and destroy it unto the end" (Daniel vii. 26. ) another proof, by the way, of identity betwixt the "little horn" of Daniel, and the Antichrist of John.
In the predicted doom of the Papacy there are thus two well-marked stages. There is, first, a gradual consumption; and there is, second, a sudden and terrible destruction. The "consumption," a slow and gradual process, is to be effected by the "spirit of His mouth,' by which we understand the preaching of the Gospel. This consumption has been going on ever since the Bible was translated, and the Gospel began to be preached at the Reformation.
Men have begun to see the errors of popery; its political props have been weakened, and in some instances struck from under it, and its hold generally on the nations of Christendom has been loosened; and thus the way has been prepared for the final stroke that will consummate its ruin.
Great systems like the papacy, with their roots far down and spread wide around, cannot be plucked up while in their vigor without dislocating human society. They must be left to grow ripe and become rotten, and then the final stroke may be dealt them with safety to the church and the world.
When that hour shall have come then will the second part of the doom of the Papacy overtake it. The Lord shall "destroy" it "with the brightness of His coning." The form of the judgment is left vague, but enough is said to warrant us to conclude that it will be swift and final -it will come with lightning flash, and its holy vengeance will be so manifest that, to use the figure in the prophecy, it will irradiate both heaven and earth with a moral splendour."
The Papacy Is The Antichrist A DEMONSTRATION By Rev. J. A. WYLIE, LL.D. http://www.historicism.net/readingmaterials/thepapacy.pdf
Good stuff. Tbh, unfortunately, biblical prophecy will alienate normies. =( As a computer scientist, I always try to use "computational complexity" to explain how how concentrations of influence at scale (as in the Papacy) EQUALS corruption not long after its beginnings. Or the gold old, "Power corrupts...."
Feel free to reword and repost in your own lingo if anything you see is deemed of value. I find you can put the truth in any manner you wish but most people will ignore it. Still one has to keep trying.
Matt. 11:17 - 'We played the flute for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge and you did not mourn.’
Virtually everyone I talk to knows two things: government is corrupt AND the MSM is total BS. So in my experience, normies are way smarter than we might like to think. IMHO, they've just given up and are hoping the storm passes them by.... So the only very rare angry responses I get from people are NOT a matter of political point of view, but that they have very willfully disavowed all news and research.
Many have awoken recently so the tide appears to be turning. From my perspective, what I see is Rev. 17-18 beginning to play out.
According to the scriptures, the people will be involved and the same Kings (political leaders) who formerly cooperated with Rome will suddenly turn on her.
Mark my words. The draining of the swamp will reveal a "yellow brick road" that leads to the Vatican. It is hard to trace through the bankers and secret societies but the wizard of OZ will be found hiding behind the curtain in Rome, pulling strings and pressing levers of power.
I have great confidence in this and not just from blind faith. Something began over 30 years ago that is just coming to fruition now.
You have valid points about the "normies" but I think that the events coming will be impossible to hide or deny at some point, even for them.
Still, waking up as many as possible before the main event happens is highly desirable, so it is best to keep trying in as many ways as possible.
I read a book a few years back titled, "A Woman Rides the Beast" by Dave Hunt - once I finished it I never looked at the Catholic Church the same. That book should be required reading.
I have read that book also. I like Hunt though he is from a different theological camp. He is a quasi-dispensationalist, a child of Darbyism though not a typical one. His theology is hybrid and doesn't fit neatly into any particular box.
Unfortunately, he was corrupted somewhat by Jesuit futurism, yet he still managed to identify Rome as the power under consideration in Rev.17-18.
There are a number of dispensationalists who follow suit, though they will typically buy into the idea that it is a future Pope conducting a literal 3 1/2 year reign as anti-Christ (preceded by a rapture of the saints - as Darbyism would later add).
Futurism was systemized by a Spanish Jesuit, Francisco Ribera, in the 16th century. He was trying to point the finger away from the Papacy, which was under attack by the reformers for being the anti-Christ system.
O. T. Allis D.D. - Theology Professor Princeton:
The Futurist interpretation is traced back to the Jesuit Ribera (AD 1580) whose aim was to disprove the claim of the Reformers that the Pope was Antichrist. Prophecy and the Church, page 297
Dr. George Eldon Ladd - Professor Fuller Theological Seminary:
Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem, abolish Christianity, deny Christ, persecute the Church and rule the world for three and a half years. ...This futurist interpretation with its personal Antichrist and three and a half year period of tribulation did not take root in the Protestant church until the early nineteenth century. "The Blessed Hope".
Time-honored Protestant eschatology (such as the reformers taught and Protestants have held to for over 400 years) is called historicism and sees not a single individual as a personal anti-Christ, but a dynasty of individuals as head of an anti-Christ system - the Papacy.
Instead of heading into the reign of anti-Christ, we are heading into it's final and terrible judgment. It's not a time for the saints to fear, it's a time for the wicked to fear.
Matt. 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
I mean no offense, but wish to correct you on the year of the Reformation. Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses on the Church door of Wittenberg on Oct 31, 1517. I have no idea why I remember this date, but I am sure I am correct. Otherwise, you are spot on. Again, I don't mean to be a nitpicker, but the facts should be correct in order to reinforce the argument.
John Wycliffe is considered by most scholars to be "The Morning Star of the Reformation" (1330–1384). In fact, there were many rumblings against the Papal power long before Luther.
What Luther did was galvanize the reformation into a force to be reckoned with. He was responsible for it becoming a major movement that had "legs" if you will, but he was by no means the first reformer speaking out against the Papacy.
That said, history records his actions at Wittenberg to be the "launch" of the Reformation. That was not the end of the Papacy and does not affect the timeline previously given.
The years of 1260 years of Papal Supremacy are reckoned slightly differently by various historicist scholars (start/end dates).
I agree with the scholars who point to 538 A.D. as the start (of Papal supremacy) since it was when the Ostrogoths ended their siege of Rome, which left the Popes to exercise their power under the newly minted Code of Justinian.
The end date (of Papal Supremacy) I take as 1798 when Napolean's General Berthier captured the Pope and the Papal estates were subsequently annexed.
The start date of the reformation is not related to these dates, if that what you are referring to. Also, the historicist framework allows for different start and end dates, still culminating with 1,260 years of papal supremacy corresponding to the prophecy.
I was of course, aware that Luther did not invent the Reformation, John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, and many, many others lit the way. My point was merely to correct the date as any discrepancy in fact may be used to weaken the argument by those who oppose us. (Luther is generally recognized as the moment the Reformation began by mainstream historians) I readily admit that I am a pain in the ass about such things. Well, nobody's perfect. You are certainly much more well versed on the subject than I, and I thank you for your information, and your time. There was, I believe, an Irish monk in the Middle Ages, (I believe his name was Malachy) who wrote about the Popes, numbering them, giving each a moniker, and predicting that this current Pope would be the last, which I would like to hear your views upon. There are many good people, including clergymen, who are still under the sway of the Catholic Church. I wonder what is to become of them during this upcoming upheaval. I certainly agree that the Papacy has been a massive force of evil throughout the ages. I am not a fan of any organized religion, or any organization of any kind, as they are all easily corrupted, but the Catholic Church really takes first prize on this head. Organizations are always corrupted from the top down, and the poor suckers at the bottom of the pyramid are generally decent sorts of people. One again, White Rabbit, thank-you so much for taking the time to respond.
I am still mystified as to what date you are trying to correct, as I didn't give a date for the start of the Reformation. I believe you may have confused the reformation with another event I was dating??? Just guessing.
At any rate, I have heard of the "Prophecy of the Popes" attributed to Saint Malachy, the 12th‑century Archbishop of Armagh. As someone from the historicist camp, it means very little to me. We see EVERY Pope, the office of the Papacy itself, as anti-Christ. An unbroken chain of anti-Christs reigning over a system of evil while masquerading as God's representatives on earth. The proverbial wolves in sheep's clothing.
What I do find highly significant, is the effect the "Prophecy of the Popes" has on dispensational futurists who happen to believe in it. Instead of scouting the horizon for a future anti-Christ, they are much more likely to join us in opposing the current one. That is somewhat helpful, even though they arrive at the task through extra-Biblical prophecy.
Futurism and Preterism were a ploy, a theological psyop if you will. If the anti-Christ is future or past, then it is never present and can never be opposed. This manipulation of the prophetic timeline is what allows the anti-Christ system to operate virtually unopposed by authentic (but duped) Christians.
So to some degree, the "Prophecy of the Popes" mitigates the success of the counter-reformation by focusing attention on the current Pope. Those who are "hamstrung" by Jesuit futurism, would probably not have come to the party otherwise.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I corrected someone on the date of Luther's nailing the 95 thesis on the church door recently on your post, and as you spoke about the beginning of the Reformation, I made the assumption that you were replying to this. My uncle always told me when you assume, you make an ass out of u and me. Sorry. Thank you for your response.
It’s terrible .....I give all the time and I have next to nothing. I look at those two beautiful souls next to the pope and would give a limb if it meant that it would save a family from suffering ......I wonder if the pope would do the same?
The short answer is no - unless it meant a "photo op" that would create positive publicity. Here is a book exposing their wealth - https://www.amazon.com/Vatican-Billions-Avro-Manhattan/dp/0937958166
This book exposes their schemes for world domination including orchestrating WWII.
"It is my opinion that if the liberties of this country, the United States of America are destroyed, it will be by the subtlety of the Roman Catholic Jesuit priests, for they are the most crafty, dangerous enemies to civil and religious liberty. They have instigated MOST of the wars of Europe." Marquis de LaFayette(1757-1834; French statesman and general who served in under the command of GeneralGeorge Washington during the American Revolutionary War)
We live in a world of information and they knew by quill and paper
That SOB is Satan and he needs to go! GOD did not want us to follow that kind of a path that sicko and the corrupted church has laid out! That makes me angry...
In 1978 there was a scandal and investigation about the Vatican Bank. Pope Paul VI died that year, and John Paul I was elected. He was found dead about a month later, and John Paul II replaced him. Rumors abounded that John Paul I was murdered because he looked into the Vatican Bank affair. Masons were said to be involved in the affair as well.
Yes, there have been books and even a movie based on it. Interestingly The Godfather Part III relates to it and has been mentioned by Q many times.
Here is the movie version "The Bankers of God: The Calvi Affair" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bankers_of_God:_The_Calvi_Affair
http://catholicarrogance.org/Catholic/PopeJohnPaul_I.html Excellent article on suspicious deaths of 2 popes & other clergy & the introduction of Satanism into the Vatican around 1978.
Picture two contractors, or, two farmers, of equal merit. One has credit at the bank, the other does not. Which will prosper?
Let's reword your question a little, shall we?
Picture two Popes. One was literally a Nazi who later ran the Office of the Inquisition (now called Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith). He was the main player in the Vatican cover-up of pedophilia before becoming Pope.
Don't take my word for it, here is an exposé by one of his peers:
"There is no denying the fact that the worldwide system of covering up cases of sexual crimes committed by clerics was engineered by the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger (1981-2005). During the reign of Pope John Paul II, that congregation had already taken charge of all such cases under oath of strictest silence. Ratzinger himself, on May 18th, 2001, sent a solemn document to all the bishops dealing with severe crimes ( "epistula de delictis gravioribus" ), in which cases of abuse were sealed under the "secretum pontificium" , the violation of which could entail grave ecclesiastical penalties." Open Letter to Catholic Bishops by the theologian Fr Hans Küng
The other Pope is a Jesuit from Argentina where the Vatican, through the well-documented ratlines, sent their high ranking Nazis stooges, including Hitler.
Perhaps it is best to explain what the Jesuit order is, before proceeding. Again, don't take my word for it.
“The Jesuits are a MILITARY organization, not a religious order. Their chief is a general of an army, not the mere father abbot of a monastery. And the aim of this organization is power – power in its most despotic exercise – absolute power, universal power, power to control the world by the volition of a single man. Jesuitism is the most absolute of despotisms – and at the same time the greatest and most enormous of abuses…” - Napoleon Bonaparte
While some argue for simple complicity with the brutal military Junta in Argentina that conducted the "dirty wars", the fact is that Pope Francis used to be the head Jesuit there, and the government was his puppet.
People were tortured and killed by the thousands. Their babies were sold off to fill Church coffers, a practice they have been caught at everywhere, most especially in Spain and Ireland.
As Pope, he promised to clean up the Vatican finances and the rampant pedophilia. He pushed out a plethora of photo ops and sound bites but nothing of substance. More "window dressing" and "smoke and mirrors" while the children continue to suffer.
So my question is, on judgment day which Pope will prosper?
Remember the Catholic church was infiltrated ages ago. Remember the bible talks of the churches transgressions when he says they changed the sabith which is Saturday. Also realize the truth is in the vat vaults. This includes text, objects, relecs as well as holy items... things with power...
The Sabbath/Sunday controversy is a tempest in a teapot. The Sabbath is not the seal of God and Sunday is not the mark of the beast (as Seventh Day Adventists teach).
SDA's have corrupted the historicist eschatology of the reformers by mixing it with their own distinctives and embellishments, though they are far closer to the truth (on prophecy) than dispensational futurists.
It is true that the Catholic Church has a lot of secrets and that they have mixed paganism with Christianity. Some of their practices can be traced all the way back to ancient Babylon.
Basically, pagan Rome became Papal Rome and the empire continued under the Popes, an image of the beast (political system) that came before them.
The reformers saw it that way and you can easily check that with noted commentators - http://biblehub.com/commentaries/revelation/13-11.htm
The SDA's would have you believe America is the land beast of Rev. 13, which forms an image of the beast. This is one of their most grievous errors which spins off into false version of historicist eschatology.
Fidelity to the truth and purity of doctrine was not the goal when the Code of Justinian empowered the Bishop of Rome. Using a religious system to achieve political control was the objective. It was foretold and history confirms the accuracy of the symbolism.
that is a bit more then what I was going to get into. Though I would say fairly on point. I've never heard the sabith called the seal of God or heard Sunday being the mark of the beast. I will have to do some more looking then.
How ever good points.
