Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Mystery Babylon

Mystery Babylon
Quoting: Mr. Rev. Clarence Larkin.
“When Attalus, the Pontiff and King of Pergamos, died B.C. 133, he bequeathed the Headship of the Babylonian Priesthood to Rome. When the Etruscans came to Italy from Lydia (The region of Pergamos), they brought with them the Babylonian religion and rites. They set up a Pontiff who was head of the Priesthood. Later the Romans accepted this Pontiff as their civil ruler. Julius Caesar was made Pontiff of the Etruscan Order in B.C. 74. In B. C. 63, he was made Supreme Pontiff of the “Babylonian Order,” thus becoming heir to the rights an title of Attalus, Pontiff of Pergamos…Thus the first Roman Emperor become head of the “Babylonian Priesthood” and Rome the successor of Babylon (p. 151-152).” ...Constantine the Great coinage carried the symbols of the sun-cult until 324. Even when he dedicated the new capital of Constantinople, which became the seat of Byzantine Christianity for a millennium, he did so wearing the Apollonian sun-rayed Diadem. Constantine was the Pagan High priest of the Babylonian Mystery cult.
Attalus III (in Greek Attalos III) Philometor Euergetes (ca 170 BC – 133 BC) was the last Attalid king of Pergamon, ruling from 138 BC to 133 BC.
Rev. Alexander Hislop states: “… There never has been any difficulty in the mind of any enlightened Protestant in identifying the woman sitting on seven hills, and having on her fore head the name written ‘Mystery, Babylon the great,’ with the Roman apostasy. No other city in the world has ever been celebrated, as the city of Rome has … for its situation on seven hills (p. 2).”
Mystery Babylon.

That city is Rome, and more specifically, Vatican City.

Catholic apologist Karl Keating admits that Rome has long been known as Babylon. Keating claims that Peter's statement "The church here in Babylon ... sends you her greeting" (from I Peter 5:13) proves that Peter was writing from Rome. He explains further:

"Babylon is a code word for Rome. It is used that way six times in the last book of the Bible [four of the six are in chapters 17 and 18 and in extrabiblical works such as Sibylling Oracles (5, 159f.), the Apocalypse of Baruch (ii, 1), and 4 Esdras (3:1).

Eusebius Pamphilius, writing about 303, noted that "it is said that Peter's first epistle... was composed at Rome itself; and that he himself indicates this, referring to the city figuratively as Babylon."

As for "Mystery," that name imprinted on the woman's forehead is the perfect designation for Vatican City. Mystery is at the very heart of Roman Catholicism, from the words "Mysterium fide" pronounced at the alleged transformation of the bread and wine into the literal body and blood of Christ to the enigmatic apparitions of Mary around the world.
Every sacrament, from baptism to extreme unction, manifests the mysterious power which the faithful must believe the priests wield, but for which there is no visible evidence. Rome's new Catechism explains that liturgy "aims to initiate souls into the mystery of Christ (It is 'mystagogy.')" and that all of the Church's liturgy is "mystery."
 
Opinions, opinions, opinions!.
This is just crazy stuff.
No evidence for any of it.
The evidence is in studying the history as you can clearly see by how it is presented according to history. Accept it, reject it as it doesn't matter to me. I just put it out there.
 
The evidence is in studying the history as you can clearly see by how it is presented according to history. Accept it, reject it as it doesn't matter to me. I just put it out there.
Most of that is not history. Just your opinions.
Take this: "These ten nations were the Anglo-Saxons (Germans in Great Britain)". Did you read my post #193.
Probably not so here it is again:
According to Wikepedia the period after the exit of the Romans, the next 400 years is known as the heptarchy.

By convention, the Heptarchy period lasted from the end of Roman rule in Britain in the 5th century, until most of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms came under the overlordship of Egbert of Wessex in 829. This approximately 400-year period of European history is often referred to as the Early Middle Ages or, more controversially, as the Dark Ages. Although heptarchy suggests the existence of seven kingdoms, the term is just used as a label of convenience and does not imply the existence of a clear-cut or stable group of seven kingdoms. The number of kingdoms and sub-kingdoms fluctuated rapidly during this period as competing kings contended for supremacy.[55]


Anglo-Saxon England heptarchy

The four main kingdoms in Anglo-Saxon England were:


Minor kingdoms:


Other minor kingdoms and territories

So you can get 10 kingdoms from Britain alone. Just think what continental Europe was like
 
The ten horns are ten kings who have not yet received their kingdoms as the Vatican's New World Order Headquarters and the United Nations Organization, One Security Council that claims authority over the world are waiting for ten permanent members. In 2009 the UNO divided the world into ten economic regions and each one will have a Jesuit Provincial set over them, but their end will come with the glory of the Lord striking them down when He returns with us His army. (Will study more about the army in Rev 19)

That is just anti-catholic bigotry.
 
That is just anti-catholic bigotry.
Like I have told you many many times it has nothing to do with the Catholic Church, but all about the Roman Empire. If I was a bigot then I would hate all my mom's side of the family. I could turn this around and say you are an anti-Protestant bigot. It seems both of us have used WIKI, but yet here we are. I do use other sources for history also besides using WIKI.
 
Like I have told you many many times it has nothing to do with the Catholic Church, but all about the Roman Empire. If I was a bigot then I would hate all my mom's side of the family. I could turn this around and say you are an anti-Protestant bigot. It seems both of us have used WIKI, but yet here we are. I do use other sources for history also besides using WIKI.
Nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"The Roman Empire is known today as Vatican City" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"The crowns on its heads show that this dragon claims royal authority against the true King who is God of all creation as he prepares to take his seat above all that which is Gods Kingdom claiming he is God as he prepares to deceive the world through that of an existing Roman Empire" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"the Vatican's New World Order Headquarters" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"In 2009 the UNO divided the world into ten economic regions and each one will have a Jesuit Provincial set over them" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

How stupid do you think I am?
 
Untrue.
Constantinople was founded in 324 and dedicated in 330 which is presumably when Constantine moved there.
However after Constantine died the empire was at times split and at other times united. After Constantine I, the empire was again split in two with Constantius II in the east and Constantine II in the west.

Constantine II was followed by Constans I and then Constantius II (from the east) became emperor of the west as well.

He was followed by Julian the Apostate (a pagan) and he was followed by Jovian (both sole emperors).

Then in east Valens and Theodosius I; in the west Valentinian II , Gratian and Valentinun II. And Theodosius I

In 379 Theodosius I became Emperor of the East. In 380 he and Gratian (in the west) made Christianity the state religion – some 43 years and many Emperors after Constantine (6 in the east, 8 in the west). But after the death of Valentian in 392 there was an attempt to restore paganism until Theodosius swept in and took power in the west to unite the Empire.

However this did not last long as in 406 the barbarian hoards crossed the Rhine and swept into Gaul and Spain, and three years later Italy was attacked and in 410 Rome itself was sacked by Alaric of the Visigoths.

Not exactly the Pope ruling after Constantine left.
The Popes didn't rule till the goths agreed to support him after they supplanted the Western Emperor. From the time of Constantine till then there had been no Emperor, the beast that was and is not. The papacy was finally given power in 607 with the decree of Phocas but it didn't come into effect till the death of Phocas in 610. The papacy's time of power was 1260 prophetic days, representing 1260 years which ran out in 1870, when the French troops protecting the Vatican left to defend their country from the Prussians. the sams time heed pope declared himself infallible, at midsummer at midday when there was a violent storm and the official who read the decree had to read it by candlelight. The same time when the Republican government in Spain were driving a new road through a small hill and uncovered the inquisition killing fields with hundreds of remains of murdered victims.

9
 
I know people love playing with numbers but ths nonsense. Did you just pick 10 kingdoms out of a hat to make the right number?



Just take Britain. The Romans left in 410 AD. After they left it was invaded by three main groups -the Saxons, the Angles and the Jutes. The Jutes were smaller than the other two and just occupied the south east coast and the Isle of Wight. They formed into multiple kingdoms.



According to Wikepedia the period after the exit of the Romans, the next 400 years is known as the heptarchy.

By convention, the Heptarchy period lasted from the end of Roman rule in Britain in the 5th century, until most of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms came under the overlordship of Egbert of Wessex in 829. This approximately 400-year period of European history is often referred to as the Early Middle Ages or, more controversially, as the Dark Ages. Although heptarchy suggests the existence of seven kingdoms, the term is just used as a label of convenience and does not imply the existence of a clear-cut or stable group of seven kingdoms. The number of kingdoms and sub-kingdoms fluctuated rapidly during this period as competing kings contended for supremacy.[55]

Anglo-Saxon England heptarchy

The four main kingdoms in Anglo-Saxon England were:

Minor kingdoms:

Other minor kingdoms and territories

So you can get 10 kingdoms from Britain alone. Just think what continental Europe was like
I did read your post and that has not a lot to do with the 10 kingdoms that succeeded the roman empire

Some commentators in the past have claimed that there were always 20 independent nations in Europe, but I think that is a forced interpretation.
 
The Popes didn't rule till the goths agreed to support him after they supplanted the Western Emperor. From the time of Constantine till then there had been no Emperor, the beast that was and is not. The papacy was finally given power in 607 with the decree of Phocas but it didn't come into effect till the death of Phocas in 610. The papacy's time of power was 1260 prophetic days, representing 1260 years which ran out in 1870, when the French troops protecting the Vatican left to defend their country from the Prussians. the sams time heed pope declared himself infallible, at midsummer at midday when there was a violent storm and the official who read the decree had to read it by candlelight. The same time when the Republican government in Spain were driving a new road through a small hill and uncovered the inquisition killing fields with hundreds of remains of murdered victims.

9
Total rubbish.
I showed you that 8 emperors ruled in Rome after Constantine.
Popes didn't rule in Rome before or after the barbarians sacked Rome.
The decree of Phocas was about spiritual authority not temporal. But the Pope had that before and after Phocas, before and after 1870.
Go and read some real history.
 
I did read your post and that has not a lot to do with the 10 kingdoms that succeeded the roman empire
It have everthing to do with that.

It showed that your "list" of 10 kingdoms was utterly false.
Some commentators in the past have claimed that there were always 20 independent nations in Europe, but I think that is a forced interpretation.

Less forced than your inventions.
 
It have everthing to do with that.

It showed that your "list" of 10 kingdoms was utterly false.


Less forced than your inventions.
Your post was about England, not about Europe. The 10 nations from the area of the western Roman Empire at its break up.

The mission of the little horn in Daniel 7 was to wear down the saints of the most high. The Papacy sure did that. And will do it again if he gets the chance.
 
Nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"The Roman Empire is known today as Vatican City" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"The crowns on its heads show that this dragon claims royal authority against the true King who is God of all creation as he prepares to take his seat above all that which is Gods Kingdom claiming he is God as he prepares to deceive the world through that of an existing Roman Empire" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"the Vatican's New World Order Headquarters" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

"In 2009 the UNO divided the world into ten economic regions and each one will have a Jesuit Provincial set over them" has nothing to do with the Catholic Church?

How stupid do you think I am?
Most religions are blinded to that of how and why they came to be. As I have said it has nothing to do with bashing Catholics even though you see it that way so please let it go.
 
Your post was about England, not about Europe. The 10 nations from the area of the western Roman Empire at its break up.
It broke up gradually as the barbarians gradually fought their way across Europe.
You are just making it up to try and support your failed claims.
Besides one the points about England was just how complicated the situation was. There were dozens of kindome in Europe large and small.,

The mission of the little horn in Daniel 7 was to wear down the saints of the most high. The Papacy sure did that. And will do it again if he gets the chance.

Do you have any evidence for that anti-Catholic bigotry?
 
It have everthing to do with that.

It showed that your "list" of 10 kingdoms was utterly false.


Less forced than your inventions.
My list was not false.
When Constantine removed the empire to the East, no Emperor ruled from Rome. The papacy filled the vacancy.

The Popes wear a triple crown signifying their claim to reign over heaven, earth and hell. Even the cæsars did not claim that.
 
Total rubbish.
I showed you that 8 emperors ruled in Rome after Constantine.
Popes didn't rule in Rome before or after the barbarians sacked Rome.
The decree of Phocas was about spiritual authority not temporal. But the Pope had that before and after Phocas, before and after 1870.
Go and read some real history.
Quit telling others what they post is rubbish as this is a violation of the ToS 1.1. Any more and you will be banned from this thread. Do not reply here take it to TWTS.
 
My list was not false.
When Constantine removed the empire to the East, no Emperor ruled from Rome. The papacy filled the vacancy.
Any decent history will tell you that after Constantine the empire split and rejoined more than once as I said.
When there was only one emperor he rules both east and west from Constantinople.
The Pope didn't rule.

When it split there were two emperors, one in the east and one in the west.
The one in the west ruled from Rome.


The Popes wear a triple crown signifying their claim to reign over heaven, earth and hell. Even the cæsars did not claim that.
Not true. There are various rationales attached to triple crown but that is not one of them..
Several rationales exist for the papal tiara formed by three crowns, thereby called the triregno: First, the crowns represent the popes universal office, his jurisdiction over the whole Church, and his temporal power. A second rationale is that the three crowns symbolize the popes authority over the Church militant on earth, the Church penitent in purgatory and the Church triumphant in heaven. Another rationale, which is most dominant today, is that the pope is the Vicar of Christ, who shares in His three-fold office of Priest, Prophet and King, and consequently shares in His work to sanctify, teach and lead others in the faith. (Catholic Education Resource Centre)

The Triregnum (the Papal Tiara formed by three crowns symbolizing the triple power of the Pope: father of kings, governor of the world and Vicar of Christ)......
.....Among the various interpretations, we shall mention the one that says that the three crowns represent the militant, the suffering and the triumphant Church.

From the Vatican web site

 
Most religions are blinded to that of how and why they came to be. As I have said it has nothing to do with bashing Catholics even though you see it that way so please let it go.
Catholic bashing may not be your intent, but.....
Perhaps you are blinded to it.
 
Catholic bashing may not be your intent, but.....
Perhaps you are blinded to it.
I have nothing more to say about this other then we see three different accounts from history as I can only see it is from various time frames. Each one of us has our own understandings by how we study and you need to start respecting those views and understandings as you keep violating the ToS 1.1.
 
Back
Top