Is the Catholic Pope the "Beast" 666?

[Cougarbear]

Now you're confusing Hezekiah with Jesus.

I don’t confuse anyone. But you certainly are confused.

 

[surada]

All the same guy. The Apostle John

Probably not. In the gospel John doesn't identify himself as the author. ... and his Greek is perfect. John of Patmos identifies himself as author and your brother in tribulation...and his Greek is full of errors.

 

[Cougarbear]

Probably not. In the gospel John doesn't identify himself as the author. ... and his Greek is perfect. John of Patmos identifies himself as author and your brother in tribulation...and his Greek is full of errors.

That’s only a matter of translation which is faulty on its own. John is attributed of it and if you don’t have concrete evidence otherwise then stop rumormongering. John wrote all the John books.

 

[surada]

That’s only a matter of translation which is faulty on its own. John is attributed of it and if you don’t have concrete evidence otherwise then stop rumormongering. John wrote all the John books.

Scholars disagree because there's so much difference in writing styles.

 

[Cougarbear]

Scholars disagree because there's so much difference in writing styles.

I don’t give a rats ass about your scholars. They are all frauds. You do know as people get older their vocabulary changes. Their word usage changes. Even their dialects often change too. Even styles often change as well. I look at my journals from when I was in my early 20’s through now and I can’t recognize my own early writing. John wrote all of the books of John including Revelation.

 

[surada]

I don’t give a rats ass about your scholars. They are all frauds. You do know as people get older their vocabulary changes. Their word usage changes. Even their dialects often change too. Even styles often change as well. I look at my journals from when I was in my early 20’s through now and I can’t recognize my own early writing. John wrote all of the books of John including Revelation.

All scholars are frauds?

 

[surada]

There is a case to be made that John, the son of Zebedee, had already died long before the Gospel of John came to be written. It is worth noting for its own sake, even though the "beloved disciple" need not be identified with John, the son of Zebedee.

In his ninth century Chronicle in the codex Coislinianus, George Hartolos says, "[John] was worth of martyrdom." Hamartolos proceeds to quote Papias to the effect that, "he [John] was killed by the Jews." In the de Boor fragment of an epitome of the fifth century Chronicle of Philip of Side, the author quotes Papias: Papias in the second book says that John the divine and James his brother were killed by Jews. Morton Enslin observes (Christian Beginnings, pp. 369-370): "That PapiasÂ’ source of information is simply an inference from Mark 10:35-40 or its parallel, Matt. 20:20-23, is possible. None the less, this Marcan passage itself affords solid ground. No reasonable interpretation of these words can deny the high probability that by the time these words were written [ca. 70 CE] both brothers had 'drunk the cup' that Jesus had drunk and had been 'baptized with the baptism' with which he had been baptized." Since the patristic tradition is unanimous in identifying the beloved disciple with John, at least this evidence discredits the patristic tradition concerning the authorship of the Gospel of John.

Gospel of John

 

[zaangalewa]

I guess the best will be to throw the book revelation out of the bible. The "discussions" about textes of this book - which anyway no one understands - are often very very absurde. 666 is a number: 2*3*3*37=666. That's it. Beasts = animals are part of gods wonderful creation. That's it. And even Satan (= the challenger) is part of gods creation and not an anti-god. It is said this fallen angel loves god and that's the reason why he hates us. We are not good enough for god in his eyes. And many absurde "discussions" around the book revelation seem to show he is right.

"John of Patmos" - the author of the revelation - is by the way not the Apostle John.

 

[surada]

I guess the best will be to throw the book revelation out of the bible.

It's always been controversial.

 

[zaangalewa]

It's always been controversial.

That's also a reason why I suggest to throw out the revelation from the bible. The orthodox church is not using textes from the revelation at all as far as I heard.



Mary went through a thorn forest,
Kyrie eleison.
Mary went through a thorn forest,
that has not borne leaves in seven years.
Jesus and Mary.

What did Mary carry under her heart?
Kyrie eleison.
A little child without pain,
Mary carried under her heart.
Jesus and Mary.

The thorns bore roses,
Kyrie eleison.
As the little child was carried through the forest,
the thorns bore roses.
Jesus and Mary.

 

[LibertyKid]

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

I've known about this for a long time. There are other things the Pope has worn that suggests he is.

Pope is not and will never be the anti-christ. Stop listening to TBN BS.

 

[surada]

Pope is not and will never be the anti-christ. Stop listening to TBN BS.

Such claims about the Pope are stupid and irresponsible ..based in ignorance of scripture and history .

 

[surada]

All yours are

It's just anti Catholic ignorance. Martin Luther was a bitter, vindictive, emotional person. And, more recently many churches have become deceived by the teachings of Darby and Hal Lindsey. Even some Catholic churches and the Mormons have come under the influence of the rapture ready futurists.

 

[hobelim]

Are you a futurist, hobelim?

I am a nowist.

 

[surada]

I am a nowist.

John Nelson Darby - SourceWatch

www.sourcewatch.org

 

[surada]

Now that you know he’s 666, he is the real deceiver.

In Revelation the beast is the emperor Nero who is also the antichrist.

 

[Cougarbear]

Pope is not and will never be the anti-christ. Stop listening to TBN BS.

I gave you the link to the fact that Popes have worn that crown of 666 for a very long time. I've never watched TBN.

 

[Cougarbear]

In Revelation the beast is the emperor Nero who is also the antichrist.

No he's not. Stop repeating the lie. It never names Nero as the beast. And, the Lord Jesus Christ did not and has not returned yet for His 2nd coming. So, it's not Nero.

 

[LibertyKid]

No he's not. Stop repeating the lie. It never names Nero as the beast. And, the Lord Jesus Christ did not and has not returned yet for His 2nd coming. So, it's not Nero.

Yes it does. Hebrew numerology spells Cesar Nero. Why do you think John wrote it in code? The entire book of Revelation is apocalyptic in nature using Hebrew apocalyptic language that the first century Jewish Christians would absolutely understand. John and Daniel were not writing to some future audience that would spend more than a century to trying to decipher the "code". In fact, if you lived in the first century during the Roman occupation and the reign of Nero, you would absolutely understand the "Code" because Daniel and John were writing directly to you.

Nero as the Antichrist

penelope.uchicago.edu

John Darby and his hermeneutic of dispensationalism has wreaked havoc on western and modern Christianity for far too long.

 

[surada]

Yes it does. Hebrew numerology spells Cesar Nero. Why do you think John wrote it in code? The entire book of Revelation is apocalyptic in nature using Hebrew apocalyptic language that the first century Jewish Christians would absolutely understand. John and Daniel were not writing to some future audience that would spend more than a century to trying to decipher the "code". In fact, if you lived in the first century during the Roman occupation and the reign of Nero, you would absolutely understand the "Code" because Daniel and John were writing directly to you.

Nero as the Antichrist

penelope.uchicago.edu

John Darby and his hermeneutic of dispensationalism has wreaked havoc on western and modern Christianity for far too long.

Bravo! Well done.