30 Comments

  1. ‘Your claiming the Pope is the Anti-Christ shows how ignorant you are’:

    Here are some other ‘ignorant’ men who have claimed that the Pope is the Antichrist: http://www.cai.org/bible-studies/historical-interpretation Never mind the source, I don’t know it, it’s not connected with us. I like this paragraph: ‘One of the great intellectuals of the English reformation was John Jewel (1522-1571). He listed some of the misconceptions held by the Roman Catholic church as to the Antichrist: that he would be a Jew of the tribe of Dan, born in Babylonia or Syria, or be Mohammed, or that he would overthrow Rome or rebuild Jerusalem, etc. Then he commented: “These tales have been craftily devised to beguile our eyes, that, whilst we think upon these guises, and so occupy ourselves in beholding a shadow or probable conjecture of the Antichrist, he which is the Antichrist indeed may unawares deceive us.” He was referring to the Papacy’.

    ‘Anti-Christ, according to the Bible, means denying Jesus Christ is come in the flesh’:

    You are craftily beguiling us again, trying to occupy us in a shadow or conjecture so that we miss the specific, narrow, proper sense of the term: that Antichrist is not a viewpoint, but a MAN: Vicarius Filii Dei (112 + 53 + 501 = 666) ‘Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a MAN’ (or a woman, if there is a future female Pope).

  2. Stephen ( I’m not “white” ) Dalton says:

    ‘Your claiming the Pope is the Anti-Christ shows how ignorant you are. Anti-Christ, according to the Bible, means denying Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.’

    According to the bible and in the original Greek Anti-Christ means not only against Christ, but- IN THE PLACE – of Christ.

    Scholars and theologians throughout the centuries have written extensively on the subject.

    Your understanding is limited. As usual.

  3. @Mosin and @Sam
    Your replies are the typical ignorant replies of traditional Anti-Catholic bigotry. I gave the Biblical definition of Anti-Christ. Your definition goes beyond the Bible, and isn’t valid. And as I’ve already pointed out, the Catholic Church has always taught Jesus is Christ come in the flesh. However, most of Mosin’s favorite ‘pilgrim churches’ (Cathars, Bogomils etc.) taught Jesus wasn’t Christ come in the flesh. It’s sad that in order for you to have some sort of ‘church history’ you have to claim perverse heretics as your spiritual ancestors.
    I’m well aware that the Anti-Christ will be a man. I was defining what Anti-Christ really meant as opposed to your silly error. BTW, what ethnic group will produce the Anti-Christ? Hint: Read John’s epistle’s and the eighth chapter of his Gospel.
    And Mosin, your Vicarious Filii Dei =666 is filiisticks! That’s not an official papal title. The official title is Vicarious Christi, which does not add up to 666. The number it adds up to is 214. You need to get your nose out of trash like”:The Two Babylons” and real some real history. To help get you and Sam started on some real history, here’s some links. Enjoy! http://catholicfaithdefender.wordpress.com/catagory/666 http://amazingfiction.org/666-pope.shtml http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarius_Filii_Dei http://web.archive.org/web/20110518172256/http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/2.2/mar_apr98_coverstory.html

  4. “(112 + 53 + 501 = 666)”

    Hahahaha! Now Mosin is a numerologist just like a lot of Talmudists! Does Mosin secretly study the intricacies of the ancient Kabbalah?

  5. Stephen ( I’m not “white” ) Dalton says:

    ‘Your definition goes beyond the Bible, and isn’t valid.’

    Why do you even pretend to be objective, unbiased.

    Anything handed down to you from your church authorities you accept as truth.

    Every dissent is dismissed as being heretical or invalid.

    Use your head for something other than a hat rack.

    Here is the latest from the anti-White ( not your people ) commie in chief, Dagon fish hat wearing dolt, feeding more garbage to the dumbed down masses.

    Pope urges ‘legitimate redistribution’ of wealth

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_REL_VATICAN_UN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-05-09-06-31-28

    VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis called Friday for governments to redistribute wealth and benefits to the poor in a new spirit of generosity to help curb the “economy of exclusion” that is taking hold today.

    Francis made the appeal during a speech to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the heads of major U.N. agencies who met in Rome this week.

    Latin America’s first pope has frequently lashed out at the injustices of capitalism and the global economic system. On Friday, Francis called for the United Nations to promote a “worldwide ethical mobilization” of solidarity with the poor.

    He said a more equal form of economic progress can be had through “the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state, as well as indispensable cooperation between the private sector and civil society.”

  6. @Sam
    Sam, the Pope is only infallible in matters of faith and morals, and only when he speaks in his official capacity from the chair. A lot of faithful Catholics (myself included) don’t buy his economic ideas. Go to this site http://the- American-catholic.com/ and surf through the PopeWatch posts and you will find one or two posts on his economics.
    BTW, your reference to the Pope being a “Dagon fish hat wearing dolt” is so “Two Babylonish”. Hislop and those that followed him, didn’t know what the heck they were talking about. Hislop was not a historian, and a critical analysis of his ‘masterpiece’ by a former booster by the name of Ralph Woodrow proves ol’Alex read things into his evidence that just wasn’t there. If you wish the educate yourself, pick up a copy of “the Babylon Connection” here: http://www.ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/babylon-connection.html

  7. Stephen E Dalton says:

    ‘a former booster by the name of Ralph Woodrow’

    I have corresponded with Ralph Woodrow. Bought several of his books 30 -35 years ago.

    Most of what he wrote about the Catholic Church is absolutely historically factual.

    He took a lot of HEAT from several groups and was under a great deal of pressure to soften his critique.

    If I remember correctly ( so many years ago) he wrote of having health issues relating to stress and workload. He may have left the ministry fro a while because of it.

    In the spirit of ecumenism and the sake harmony and a desire not be too divisive or judgmental he softened his criticism and extended an olive branch.

    Corrupt priests, indulgences, confessional practices, Papal decrees, instruments of torture, unbelievable brutality, swindling and much more that cannot be denied or swept under the rug by liars, frauds, cheats and sycophants.

  8. “Sam, the Pope is only infallible in matters of faith and morals, and only when he speaks in his official capacity from the chair.”

    And only since 1870 which seems awfully fuckin’ late in the game to me.

  9. @Sam
    Sam, I heard people make those accusations about Woodrow being pressured to “soften” his stance on Catholicism, and it’s all balderdash. He gives the actual reason in his “The Babylon Connection”. A schoolteacher he knew told him Hislop was unreliable as a historian. Woodrow started to check Hislop’s scholarship out and discovered that forced his own interpretation on the work of other scholars, such as Laynard and Rawlinson, interpretations that were not in the original texts of their works. IOW, he flat out lied. His work was so shoddy, even a Scottish literary review, that had a Anti-Catholic bias, said there was more truth in the fable’s of Rome than in Hislop’s book! BTW, if there was any pressure on Woodrow, it was pressure to keep publishing his former book, pressure he rejected, because as he stated, it was based on the bad scholarship of Hislop.

  10. ‘I’m well aware that the Anti-Christ will be a man. I was defining what Anti-Christ really meant’:

    No. You were caught red-handed ‘defining’ (distracting) the readers’ attention away from what it means.

    ‘Hahahaha! Now Mosin is a numerologist (…) Vicarious Filii Dei is (…) not an official papal title’:

    An inaccurate thrust and a failed parry.because I included the title, from one of the most notorious RC forgeries (‘The Donation of Constantine’), in my comment as a rhetorical ‘flourish’, NOT ‘numerologically’. I’m very non-mystical and NOT numero-illogical. And the ‘666’ title WAS canonical for centuries, until the aforementioned forgery was revealed, but not SINCE then — and by the way, whether it’s ‘the Vicar of Christ’ or ‘the Vicar of the Son of God’, it’s still the same blasphemy.

    ‘Mosin’s favorite pilgrim churches (Cathars, Bogomils etc.) taught Jesus wasn’t Christ come in the flesh. It’s sad that in order for you to have some sort of church history you have to claim perverse heretics as your spiritual ancestors’:

    And so, still wearing his sheep costume, Dalton lets his serpent fangs appear for just a moment — as he claims we associate ourselves with ‘heretics’, and embrace heresy as our history — and justifies centuries of Papal land-and-power-grab genocide of millions of Christian White non-RC so-called ‘heretics’ like us!

    Christian, non-RC Southrons take heed!

    Sam wrote: ‘Here is the latest from the anti-White ( not your people ) commie in chief, Dagon fish hat wearing dolt’:

    It appears that Popes are Vicars of the Fish God, too.

  11. North Korea’s state news agency KCNA resorted to sickening racist language to lash out at Barack Obama this week, calling the U.S. president “reminiscent of a wicked black monkey.”

    The editorial, which also called South Korea’s President Park Geun-hye an “old prostitute,” was published in English on Friday during Obama’s tour of Asian nations.

    Another KCNA article from that same day — this one in Korean — took the ugliness even further. According to North Korea blogger Josh Stanton, the second story said Obama “should live as a monkey in an African natural zoo licking the breadcrumbs thrown by spectators.” The article also calls Obama a “crossbreed with unclear blood.”

  12. Mosin Nagant says:

    ‘It appears that Popes are Vicars of the Fish God, too.’

    Yes, despite Dalton’s protestations and obfuscations.

    Catholicism borrowed heavily from ancient pagan religions.

    People don’t have the time or inclination to to do in depth studies. However, most will watch short videos or presentations that can be viewed on Youtube.

    A picture is worth a thousand words. Plenty of images.

    Dagon and the fish hat. Only 1:37 in length.

  13. @Sam
    Sammy, as usual, you don’t know what you’re talking about. If your mind wasn’t so jammed up with hatred, bigotry, and anger, you might be able to think in a logical fashion. Hopefully, that day will come.
    You expect a stupid YouTube video with a few pictures to convince or overwhelm me? Sorry Sam, a few picture carelessly strung together in a video lasting less than two minutes won’t sway me. What does sway me is a well put together article like this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitre This article shows the papal mitre came from the camelaucum, a conical cap worn by officials of the Byzantine court. Dagon had nothing to do with the mitre. How could he, since the worship of Dagon was wiped out 1500 years before any pope ever wore one? BTW, that video was so inaccurate, it called Dagon a Semitic god. Ahem, the Phillistines were not Semites. They were Hamitic. Please red your Bible sometime, you might not make so many mistakes. That’s really helped me in the past.

  14. Stephen E Dalton says:

    ‘ If your mind wasn’t so jammed up with hatred, bigotry, and anger, you might be able to think in a logical fashion. ‘

    Too funny. Coming from the ogre who has repeatedly defended the most barbarous acts of torture committed by his church. Never once showing any pity or compassion on those victimized. They deserved death … you have stated so repeatedly.

    Not to mention your high praise for the Inquisiton and Torquemada.

    You are twisted.

    Stephen E Dalton says: ‘This article shows the papal mitre came from the camelaucum, a conical cap worn by officials of the Byzantine court.’

    The conical hat does not resemble the Dagon mitre all. The fish head hat does not come from the jewish high priests either which was more turban like. That fish head design didn’t just evolve or manifest to them out of thin air. It was copied from the priests of Dagon as countless other pagan symbols and customs which were incorporated into the churches over the centuries.

    Stephen E Dalton says: ‘BTW, that video was so inaccurate, it called Dagon a Semitic god. Ahem, the Phillistines were not Semites. ‘

    I didn’t see any reference to Philistines. No matter.

    Ahem to you.

    http://www.biblicaltraining.org/library/philistines

    1) Dagon was a Semitic god. 2) The Philistines worshiped Semitic gods’

    While the Philistines seem to have taught the Hebrews technology, the Hebrews and Canaanites influenced their Philistine neighbors in other ways. Soon after migrating to Canaan the Philistines seem to have adopted the Canaanite language and Semitic names.
    The Philistines worshiped the Semitic gods Dagon (Judg.16.23; 1Sam.5.1-1Sam.5.7), Ashtoreth (1Sam.31.10), and Baal-Zebub (2Kgs.1.2, 2Kgs.1.6, 2Kgs.1.16)

  15. @Sam
    Sam, like I said before, your mind is twisted by hate, anger, and rage. The article I linked to shows the papal mitre came from the conical cap worn by the officials at the Byzantine Imperial Court. If you would have looked at the series of pictures on the right side of the article’s page, you would have seen how the papal mitre evolved over a period of time. None of those picture’s show any influence from the cult of Dagon. And since that cult died out with the disappearance of the Philistine’s 1500 years previously, there’s no way the mitre was borrowed from them. If you’re going to lecture me about Catholicism, I’d suggest that you stop using Anti-Catholic propaganda from froth at the mouth bigots from the fundamentalist-evangelical wing or the atheist wing of the ‘I hate Catholics’ groups. If you can put aside your rage, hate, and anger, start looking at objective sources like the one I just shared with you. But I doubt you will do it, because you have basically shown that your mind is made up, and doesn’t want to be confused with the real facts.

  16. Stephen E Dalton says: ‘ you have basically shown that your mind is made up, and doesn’t want to be confused with the real facts.’

    Enough of your drivel!

    I have schooled you over and over with facts and historical references. You are basically dishonest and conniving as evidenced by your claim to be non-white when it suited you.

    What is your present condition? White when posting here? Or do you persist in being of African-American heritage elsewhere?

    Here is a summary of Woodrow’s excellent book, Babylon Mystery Religion.

    http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/End%20of%20the%20World/babylon.htm

    Curious about the obelisk in St. Peter’s square? Where did it come from?

    (snip) The obelisk was popular in Egypt, associated with sun-worship. The erect upright pointed column represents the phallus, the male sex organ, of Baal (Nimrod).
    (snip)
    It was common to place an obelisk at the entrance of a heathen temple. And so it is, that at the entrance to St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican in Rome, there is an Egyptian obelisk. This is not a copy of an Egyptian obelisk, as is the Washington Monu­ment. It is the same obelisk that stood in Egypt in ancient times at the pagan temple of Heliopolis (city of the sun-god). Emperor Calig­ula, in 37-41 A.D., hauled it from Egypt to Rome at great expense, to his circus on Vatican Hill. Helio­polis is the Greek name of the Heb­rew Beth-shemesh (house of the sun), which was the center of ancient Egyptian sun-worship. Obelisks that stood there are called “images of Beth­shemesh,” Jeremiah 43:13. In 1586, Pope Sixtus V had the 83-foot high 320-ton obelisk moved to the center front of St. Peter’s square, where it resides today, symbolic of the merger of Egyptian sun-worship with professing Christian­ity. (snip)

  17. Your current rant proves my point. You’re a rage filled person who can’t think logically. Ralph Woodrow repudiated his Babylon Mystery Religion because his looking into Hislop’s book proved to him that Hislop’s research was biased and sloppy at best. IMO, ol’ Alex started his ‘research’ with prejudice, believing the Church was the Babylon Mystery Religion before he started to even gather his ‘evidence’. So if you think I’m going to be impressed with a book review written by a guy who has never read anything outside his narrow, sectarian, orbit you are sadly mistaken. And as long as you’re driven by rage, anger, and bigotry, I’m not about to take anything you say seriously. You’re not able to reason in away that makes sense.

  18. Dalton even defends the 83-foot Phallus, and the Pope’s mitre, and the mass murder of hundreds of thousands (and millions who died indirectly) of Whites who refused to bow, pay and obey.

  19. ‘ol’ Alex started his ‘research’ with prejudice’:

    Starting with the RIGHT prejudice will never lead anyone astray, and ‘open-mindedness’ is no virtue when it disarms the mind for clever indoctrination.

  20. Mosin, your “right prejudice” meme is stupidity on stilts. If anyone is doing serious research on any subject, he has to put aside previous assumptions, and look at the subject of his research with an open mind. If he’s observant, he might confirm what others have seen before him, he could discover something news that might strengthen previous discoveries, or he could discover something that could overturn previous thing on the subject. That’s the way real science works. You are obviously not a scientifically minded person if you allow prejudice to rule your thinking.

  21. ‘You are obviously not a scientifically minded person if you allow prejudice to rule your thinking’:

    We’re prejudiced against tyranny, for one thing — especially foreign tyranny from Rome or Jerusalem, or New York or Washington, etc. — and whether the tyranny is over our bodies only or if it corrupts the mind as well. OF COURSE our prejudice is not ‘scientific’! It is the conviction of blood.

  22. Stephen ( the self proclaimed non-white, jew, turk, arab and part-time negro) Dalton says: ‘Alex started his ‘research’ with prejudice, believing the Church was the Babylon Mystery Religion before he started to even gather his ‘evidence’.’

    Of course, Dalton is totally unbiased and without prejudice. As for evidence? No way in hell he accepts anything not approved by the phallus/obelisk devotees in Rome.

    Is it a wonder so many priests are homo/pedophiles?

    A link below to Woodrow’s complete book for all to peruse at their leisure. Readers are FREE to examine the voluminous historical references and decide for themselves what to make of it all.

    Sorry Dalton, way too much info to sweep under the rug.

    http://www.johnrothacker.org/downloads/Babylon%20Mystery%20Religion%20%28ralph%20woodrow,%201966%29%20web%20copy.pdf

    Quote from provider of the link: ‘Although Ralph studied The Two Babylons (like me and multitudes of Christians through the years who have been influenced by the scholarly work of brother Hislop), it is important to note that most of Ralph’s research recorded in his book was done by himself, not Hislop, as only about 10% of his references of the over 320 items, not counting the scriptural references, refer to The Two Babylons. Thus, Ralph traveled, taught, reprinted and distributed his own well documented book many times for 30 years.’

  23. Like R. E. Lee said in his mature wisdom: ‘We already have more than enough Romanism in this country’.

  24. Mosin and Sam, you have phallus’s on the brain! I’ll bet when either of you pass a church steeple you get very excited!
    All kidding aside, giving me a link to Woodrow’s BMR isn’t going to help your case. Woodrow reexamined his own book and Hislop’s and after checking out many of ol’ Alex’s sources, Ralph was able to see Hislop deliberately twisted his sources to fit the explanation he already had in mind. Even in Hislop’s own time, The Edinburgh Review, the premier literary magazine of Scotland, said Hislop’s TTB was so bad that there was more truth in the fable’s of Rome than in his book! The TER folks were obviously not Pro-Catholic, but they were honest and objective enough to see through Hislop’s shoddy scholarship. And as for your “conviction of blood’, that doesn’t mean a damn thing if the facts and the truth aren’t in your favor. It’s no more than the warm fuzzy thing the Mormons have when they talk about ‘the burning in their bosom’ when someone questions them about the truth of their cult.

  25. It sounds like Hislop’s heart was in the right place anyway, but yours isn’t. Who cares about the little mistakes of Hislop’s hasty polemics that no one’s ever heard of anyway, when the world is going to hell in a Romano-Talmudic handbasket?

    The Conviction that’s ‘in our blood’ is much more than a belief or settled opinion, and it has NOTHING to do with Mormons. It doesn’t change, can’t be eradicated.

Comments are closed.