Brakelite
Well-Known Member
Out differences regarding Babylon aside, you are way too paranoid.Br.. Your major pillar doctrine of your religion drives you to believe in an extreme view and an incorrect Babylon, and also exclusively being a future event beyond our time. And my 3rd crime I'm now charged with is my association and support for an Italian Catholic for being AGAINST the NWO, as I am also.
Your religion and doctrine despises any association, in any manner, with at least any Catholic in a leadership role. That is a very extreme and unloving view Br...IMO And I believe your doctrine is in err anyway. It has the wrong Babylon! It is not Rome or the Vatican. Consider this as an example of another and a very biblically based Babylon, that make more logical sense than meaning Rome.
Major premise #1: Three times this Babylon is called “O great city” (Rev18:9, 16, 19)
Minor premise #1: “The great city” is “where also their Lord was crucified”(Rev 11:8)
Conclusion: Jerusalem is Revelation’s Babylon
Major premise #2: Babylon was guilty of “the blood of the prophets” (Rev17:6; 18:24)
Minor premise #2: According to Jesus and Paul, only Jerusalem killed the prophets (Matt 23:34–35; Luke 13:33; 1 Thess 2:15–16)
Conclusion: Jerusalem is Revelation’s Babylon
Major premise #3: John’s people are commanded, “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” (Rev 18:4)
Minor premise #3: The only city Jesus ever commanded his followers to flee from is Jerusalem—when they saw two specific signs (Matt 24:15–
16; Luke 21:20–21). Eusebius recorded that this departure happened and no Christians were trapped and destroyed in the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD
Conclusion: Jerusalem is Revelation’s Babylon
Major premise #4: This Babylon would be destroyed (Rev 18:2, 8, 10, 11, 17, 19–23)
Minor premise #4: The only city Jesus said would be destroyed was Jerusalem—it would be “left to you desolate” (Matt 23:38) with “not one stone . . . left on another” (Matt 24:2)
Conclusion: Jerusalem is Revelation’s Babylon
I hope you can see you are still barking up the wrong tree. And you cannot see I'm against the NWO?! I will support any voice that resists this global evil..and I see you have decided to run from it. That is your personal decision.
I do not blame or hold any malice towards you ever for what you have said to me Br. If anything, I blame your doctrine you have learned from your church.
Bless you...friend APAK
A. I didn't say anything against what the bishop was saying. I actually do agree with him.
B. I didn't say for you to disagree with him.
C. The Roman church, whether you think it Babylon or not, is still the principal power behind the NWO, of which ecumenism provides a vital role. The secret societies to which all the leading protagonists belong, are ruled over by one central oligarchy, which is intimately connected to the Vatican through a number of channels... The Jesuits, the Rothschilds and the Vatican bank, and Freemasons. Among others. Babylon or not... They are involved up to their neck.
D. I'm not asking you or anyone to stop revealing what these people are doing. Go for your life bro. Have at it. I'm simply warning everyone that to take an extreme side in these issues, whether to join with and fund Greta, or go the opposite track and recommend hide in the woods and stay am insurrection, as some do, is fraught with danger and not the way Christians ought to be behaving when more important issues are at stake. Like the gospel.
You can continue to believe I am attacking you personally if you like. That's up to you. But read mask on the last 3 or 4 posts. I'm not attacking you at all.
And finally,
D. The bishop you cured is spot on. That does not mean he is on our side. The Hegelian dialectic demands conflict in order to bring about the kind of peace the powers that be want. Even within the same organization. The lacrosse has long been known where Jesuits have taken both sides in a political debate in order to bring about synthesis. Even the devil himself will argue both sides simply to foment conflict. Just because someone of authority said something we like and she with does not mean he's on our side.