Part 1, the Futurist Apocalypse is Now

Though I am a regular listener to your colleague Atwill's indispensable "Principalities and Powers" talks with Tim Kelly, I am not convinced of the Flavian Hypothesis; Orthodox preterism seems to have a better interpretation of events when it paints Nero as the beast with the deadly wound, and the Flavians as the beast healed and worshipped, rather than as a Christ figure(s).

But this hardly invalidates the hypothesis that at least a quasi-apocalyptic script is being (repeatedly?) enacted to produce a quasi-Messiah. Agree to disagree (partially) and look forward to some interesting reading.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Hi Michael, welcome to the forum.

As a new member here you should understand that Jerry Russell and I have a generally more expansive POV on the Roman origins of Xianity than Joe does, albeit we all agree on the Flavian's key role - as per Joe's analysis in Caesar's Messiah (centrally tied to the intertwined nature of the gospel narratives with Josephus' Jewish War). On various threads here, we also discuss various new books by other authors, looking at different aspects, that come to the same conclusion that the Flavians played such a key role, and also the retired archaeologist John Bartram's analysis of epigraphy and such that lead to the same.

I agree with you that Nero seems a good candidate for that role, and in my opinion, he seems a nice real-life typological parallel for Donald J. Trump today. The latter of which, we all agree, seems to be playing a role as a so-called Lifetime Actor (discussed in my Trump thread as having two personas). I think I have mentioned several times that I think Nero was setting the stage for what was to come after, or at least being used for such - taking advantage of his inherent personal characteristics.

If nothing else, the Flavian contribution allowed a new theological vector away from the Roman imperial cult started by Augustus (and also honoring Julius). In my POV, starting with Julius, there was a long transitional process started for the 'new age' that really didn't effectively finish till Constantine's time when Xianity was made the official approved religion. It was a long process, for the same reasons that I claim we are now currently in the middle of the Futurist apocalypse, designed to support the next new age, or order.
 
Hi Michael, welcome to the forum.

As a new member here you should understand that Jerry Russell and I have a generally more expansive POV on the Roman origins of Xianity than Joe does, albeit we all agree on the Flavian's key role - as per Joe's analysis in Caesar's Messiah (centrally tied to the intertwined nature of the gospel narratives with Josephus' Jewish War). On various threads here, we also discuss various new books by other authors, looking at different aspects, that come to the same conclusion that the Flavians played such a key role, and also the retired archaeologist John Bartram's analysis of epigraphy and such that lead to the same.

I agree with you that Nero seems a good candidate for that role, and in my opinion, he seems a nice real-life typological parallel for Donald J. Trump today. The latter of which, we all agree, seems to be playing a role as a so-called Lifetime Actor (discussed in my Trump thread as having two personas). I think I have mentioned several times that I think Nero was setting the stage for what was to come after, or at least being used for such - taking advantage of his inherent personal characteristics.

If nothing else, the Flavian contribution allowed a new theological vector away from the Roman imperial cult started by Augustus (and also honoring Julius). In my POV, starting with Julius, there was a long transitional process started for the 'new age' that really didn't effectively finish till Constantine's time when Xianity was made the official approved religion. It was a long process, for the same reasons that I claim we are now currently in the middle of the Futurist apocalypse, designed to support the next new age, or order.

Agreed, Futurism was manufactured, whoever the actors, and historicism rationalized, leaving either some form of preterism or post-Flavianism as valid options. A good starting point is James Perloff's observation that there seems to be a three pronged assault of communism to sweep away the current nation-state order, globalism to lay the groundwork of world government, and Zionism to give it a capital (Temple and Messiah?), following a script dependent on futirist eschatology.

So far Occam's Razor convinces me that this involves "Jews whose circumcision is of the flesh" acting as if they were still the Chosen People, trying to bring about the reign of their World Ruler, and reverse Jesus' decision to disperse them...but I look forward to further study, and I thank you for your reply and your scholarship.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
As you will discover in reading more, I have a rather different interpretation of how these pieces fit together.

For one, ironic that the Futurist apocalypse from Revelation would have the (second) so-called Third Temple (yet to be built) destroyed (I suggest in 2070 CE), and those Jews who don't accept Christ getting spanked.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
So far Occam's Razor convinces me that this involves "Jews whose circumcision is of the flesh" acting as if they were still the Chosen People, trying to bring about the reign of their World Ruler, and reverse Jesus' decision to disperse them...

Hello Michael, there seems to be a lot of information about you packed into that little statement, and I want to make sure I'm hearing you correctly. Then I have a few follow-up questions.

It seems that you believe that Jesus was a real, supernatural deity, with the power and authority to decide which people are the Chosen People and which ones aren't? And that the oligarchy of the New World Order is made up of Jewish people?

I've never listened to more than a few minutes of the Powers & Principalities series, but I've seen commentary to the effect that Tim Kelly is a Catholic. Considering that the other regular guests on his podcast are Jay Dyer and E. Michael Jones, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic respectively, this seems to add weight to the rumors. Do you agree that Tim Kelly is a Catholic, and does he share the negative views of traditionalist Catholics regarding Jews?

In the "Principalities and Powers" podcasts, would you say that your "Occam's Razor" analysis about the Oligarchs is generally accepted by Kelly, Dyer, E. Michael Jones and Joe Atwill as well? E. Michael Jones, in particular, has been identified as a radical traditionalist and anti-Semitic Catholic by the Southern Poverty Law Center, see:

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2007/12-anti-semitic-radical-traditionalist-catholic-groups?page=0,2

But, as you might know, Rick and I do not share this radical Catholic analysis about the Jews.
 
Last edited:
They will certainly pass off their impostor as Messiah, but I think it is the Orthodox (Torah) Jews who will reject him; they are the ones who excoriated Zionism and Israeli statehood as against Torah, insisting that they should still be dispersed. Also, there is the "Maitreya" factor; of deep ecumenism/syncretism producing a Messiah no Orthdox Jew or Christian (never mind the Catholics and Christian Zionists) would accept. (I don't think its Trump, although I am not on the Trump train.)

This was a nice back and forth, but I think I will take the time to read more if your work before I comnent further.
 
Hello Michael, there seems to be a lot of information about you packed into that little statement, and I want to make sure I'm hearing you correctly. Then I have a few follow-up questions.

It seems that you believe that Jesus was a real, supernatural deity, with the power and authority to decide which people are the Chosen People and which ones aren't? And that the oligarchy of the New World Order is made up of Jewish people?

I've never listened to more than a few minutes of the Powers & Principalities series, but I've seen commentary to the effect that Tim Kelly is a Catholic. Considering that the other regular guests on his podcast are Jay Dyer and E. Michael Jones, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic respectively, this seems to add weight to the rumors. Do you agree that Tim Kelly is a Catholic, and does he share the negative views of traditionalist Catholics regarding Jews?

In the "Principalities and Powers" podcasts, would you say that your "Occam's Razor" analysis about the Oligarchs is generally accepted by Kelly, Dyer, E. Michael Jones and Joe Atwill as well? E. Michael Jones, in particular, has been identified as a radical traditionalist and anti-Semitic Catholic by the Southern Poverty Law Center, see:

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2007/12-anti-semitic-radical-traditionalist-catholic-groups?page=0,2

But, as you might know, Rick and I do not share this radical Catholic analysis about the Jews.

And we're not sure that we're doing ourselves any favors by affiliating ourselves with Joe Atwill, if these are the beliefs he truly holds and is openly espousing in other venues.

I excoriate the SPLC, and I consider "anti-Semite" to be Orwellian double-think, meant to stigmatize inquiry into just who the elite are; but even by that definition I would not consider Atwill, Jones, Kelly, or Dyer anti-Semitic. Kelly is explicitly Catholic, and sees Jewish power linking with the Anglophile WASP Eastern Establishment, but coming out on top, Jones writes of the Jewish revolutionary spirit derived from rejecting Christ/Logos/Reason and thus rebelling against the order of the world, Dyer sees the Liberal Imperium born of British Imperial mysticism and Masonic enlightenment thought as the "real Illuminati" (his words), and Atwill writes in his treatise on "Will Shake Speare" (advertised on this site, I believe!) that the nom de plume is a martial declaration on the part of Jewish power upon Roman/European Christendom; all think Jewish power is at least a component of the oligarchy/technocracy.

But my thoughts are my own; I am not Catholic or orthodox or any denomination. The point of the new testament is the Israelites/Jews kept pissing God off until he was done with them and lets their city and Temple be destroyed and their people dispersed, the last straw being that they kill the Messiah. (BTW the reason there was an Abrahamic "people of God" in the first place is that YaHuWaH was once mankind's god, but mankind kept pissing him off until he disinherited them, handed them over to middle-management "principalities and powers", and started over with just one nation for Himself. The last straw was the attempted tower of Babel).

But many Jews transitioned from the Old to the New Covenant ,"whose circumcision is in the heart", and are part of God's people, including obviously that bunch if Heebs who wrote the NT about their beloved Rabbi. This is not "anti-Semitism", but Christianity 101.

Ir follows that carnal Jews, still not having got the memo that there is a new covenant and spiritual kingdom (the spiritual equivalent of running around in a Confederate uniform in the year 3865), want a carnal Messiah and temporal power; "I came in my Father's name, and you did not receive me; if another shall come in his own name, him shall you receive".

Or as Russian Jew James Perloff puts it (and not out of anti-Semitism): there seems to be a three-pronged attack, of Communism to tear down nation-states, Globalism to lay the groundwork for the world-state, and Zionism to provide a capital for the world state. I would add: because the false Jewish hope, shat upon with great fervor by that pesky Jesus fellow, of a temporal World Ruler, is useful to the oligarchy in finally cementing their power.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Atwill writes in his treatise on "Will Shake Speare" (advertised on this site, I believe!) that the nom de plume is a martial declaration on the part of Jewish power upon Roman/European Christendom;

Yes, and I helped Joe put that book together, and wrote an introduction. So I know what Joe was saying. But I've argued that there was another level to the shell game. Shakespeare the man presented himself as a Catholic subversive under a Protestant government, and was trained as a Jesuit. And I see no reason to doubt that he was involved in writing the plays, along with Bassano.

So just because the plays contain a martial declaration of Jewish revenge (and I do agree that's a component), doesn't mean that the revenge plot had any tangible, separate reality apart from its utility as a propaganda device.

all think Jewish power is at least a component of the oligarchy/technocracy.

We also see it as a component. Specifically, the Jewish rank and file are a scapegoat class, ready to be blamed when things go wrong; and the Hofjuden (Court Jews) are assistants to the Crown, taking on less reputable tasks that many oligarchs would prefer not to.

But compared to the Catholic Church, the US and European governments, intelligence agencies, giant corporations, and military forces of the world, the Jews are not that important. The dog is wagging the tail, not the other way round.

The point of the new testament is the Israelites/Jews kept pissing God off until he was done with them and lets their city and Temple be destroyed and their people dispersed, the last straw being that they kill the Messiah.

Yes, and that is a profoundly anti-Semitic story, meant to inspire generations of Catholics to hate and despise the Jews. And we say it was intentionally written as such.

(BTW the reason there was an Abrahamic "people of God" in the first place is that YaHuWaH was once mankind's god, but mankind kept pissing him off until he disinherited them, handed them over to middle-management "principalities and powers", and started over with just one nation for Himself. The last straw was the attempted tower of Babel).

And that seems to have been a story written to inspire Jews to hate the rest of mankind. This could only lead to a reaction. We say that this was a religion imposed on the Jews from outside, much to their detriment.

obviously that bunch if Heebs who wrote the NT about their beloved Rabbi.

At least I'm reasonably sure Joe still disputes this part. The New Testament was not written by Jewish people, but by the likes of Paul or Josephus (or perhaps I repeat myself), that is, Herodian collaborators of the Romans.
 
Interesting. It can be debated who is wagging what, but in any event the promise of a Jewish messiah on the throne of earth, even if he were simply a puppet figure like Herod, is enough if an inducement for Jewish elites to be part if the game, and the messianic mythology /imnanent eschaton/new paradisaical order is useful to opiate the masses.

Then again they might get fooled like the Bene Gesserit and Imperium in "Dune" when the puppet messiah cuts his strings and turns his holy war on those who created him...of course that is only possible if supernaturalism is true.

At any rate I do not harbor "anti-Semitism" in the sense of irrational hayred of ethnic Hebrews or any idea of racial supremacy versus them or anyone rlse (although the European "Jews" who dominate Israel seem to, just ask Jews native to the Holy Land" ), nor do I cause Atwill, et al of harboring such.

But if one defines "Semitism" as "a religious philosophy of racial supremacism and xenophobia, regarding non-Semites as subhuman cattle to be herded, milked, and slaughtered for the benefit of Semites, ultimately inent on genocide and Semitic planetary dominion", yeah I'm anti-THAT.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
the promise of a Jewish messiah on the throne of earth, even if he were simply a puppet figure like Herod, is enough if an inducement for Jewish elites to be part if the game, and the messianic mythology /imnanent eschaton/new paradisaical order is useful to opiate the masses.

I thought that orthodox Judaism denied that there is going to be any earthly Jewish Messiah. Isn't it only the Lubavitchers and other Hasidics and Sabbateans who are still expecting such a Messiah, or who believe he's come already?

But if one defines "Semitism" as "a religious philosophy of racial supremacism and xenophobia, regarding non-Semites as subhuman cattle to be herded, milked, and slaughtered for the benefit of Semites, ultimately inent on genocide and Semitic planetary dominion", yeah I'm anti-THAT.

Yes, of course, and we're opposed here to all forms of fundamentalist religious bigotry. The views you describe can indeed be found in the Old Testament as well as the Talmud.

But in general, I believe that most ordinary people are better than the religions they were raised in. They generally don't even know that these hateful ideas are lurking in the religious texts they claim to revere. If you tell a typical Jewish person that they are supposed to regard their Christian neighbors as "subhuman cattle to be herded", they'd wonder where on earth you came up with such a crazy idea about them.

You can find very intolerant stuff also in the Koran and the New Testament. I won't get into a debate over which form of Abrahamic fundamentalism is the most toxically xenophobic.
 
I thought that orthodox Judaism denied that there is going to be any earthly Jewish Messiah. Isn't it only the Lubavitchers and other Hasidics and Sabbateans who are still expecting such a Messiah, or who believe he's come already?



Yes, of course, and we're opposed here to all forms of fundamentalist religious bigotry. The views you describe can indeed be found in the Old Testament as well as the Talmud.

But in general, I believe that most ordinary people are better than the religions they were raised in. They generally don't even know that these hateful ideas are lurking in the religious texts they claim to revere. If you tell a typical Jewish person that they are supposed to regard their Christian neighbors as "subhuman cattle to be herded", they'd wonder where on earth you came up with such a crazy idea about them.

You can find very intolerant stuff also in the Koran and the New Testament. I won't get into a debate over which form of Abrahamic fundamentalism is the most toxically xenophobic.

True that the Jewish laity is unaware of this, the "elite" I refer to is the general Frankist-Sabbatean stripe of toxic xenophobes. But I diverge in that the OT supports this, though the Rabbinical Writings (Talmud/Zohar/Kaballah) may interpret it that way, just as Klansmen and rednecks interpret the egalitarian NT as supporting "hatin' Jews and queers (and also niggers)". My premise is that God did not pick Israel in the first place because of racial preference, but because of Abraham's trust and obedience (vs. the rest of humanity pising in His face), nor are they rejected (temporarily and conditionally) in tbe NT out of racial prejudice because they do not behave as Abraham did. But like the builders of Babel, they want to relate to God on their terms not his.

Nor is supremacism limited to them; in fact it truly began when they were exposed to Babylonian religion/occultism, what I call "esoteric supremacism", which infects others under occult influence (e.g. Nazis, new agers); Jewish supremacism comes mainly from interpreting Scripture through that lens of occult thought. A lens which Jesus uncomfortably demanded be discarded. These are precisely the "traditions of men" which He complained had supplanted the word of God.

As for the Koran, that is a cynical cobbling together of Jewish and Christian thought into a rationale for killing Jews and Christians, so I suppose in a sense it is "Abrahamic"...though "Allah" was originally a name for a polytheistic moon-god.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Wow, I leave to watch one baseball game and all this happens.

True that the Jewish laity is unaware of this, the "elite" I refer to is the general Frankist-Sabbatean stripe of toxic xenophobes. But I diverge in that the OT supports this, though the Rabbinical Writings (Talmud/Zohar/Kaballah) may interpret it that way, just as Klansmen and rednecks interpret the egalitarian NT as supporting "hatin' Jews and queers (and also niggers)".

Do you think Jesus was a Christian? How about his disciples (as opposed to Paul)?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
They will certainly pass off their impostor as Messiah, but I think it is the Orthodox (Torah) Jews who will reject him; they are the ones who excoriated Zionism and Israeli statehood as against Torah, insisting that they should still be dispersed. Also, there is the "Maitreya" factor; of deep ecumenism/syncretism producing a Messiah no Orthdox Jew or Christian (never mind the Catholics and Christian Zionists) would accept. (I don't think its Trump, although I am not on the Trump train.)
Who is "they" in this case?

In my Apocalypse How, Part 1, I claim that Trump is the Beast of the Sea BTW, and not a messiah (unless a false one that is). Besides, if millennial typology is to hold true then The Donald is premature.

As we later discovered, there are indeed some Christian fundamentalists who see Trump as a type of Samson, and I have made these comparisons in the following thread (when I get to my discussion of the OT judges): http://postflaviana.org/community/i...freemasonry-the-inner-cult-of-the-kings.2058/

In this latter case, I argue that Samson, Saul, David, and Solomon et al. form a transitional millennial construct prior to the Christian one. (Samson, like later 'Jesus' was a Nazarite.)
 
Was Jesus a Christian? Well as Christ he believed, taught and practiced what Christ taught so, um, yeah. (I almost said "Is the pope Catholic?" but the current one isn't, really.) As for Paul vs. the originals, I see no conflict other than a bit of pro-Jewish prejudice among the big three, Peter, James and John, knocked out of Peter by his vision as well as by Paul himself.

As for your construct, it presupposes weaponized falsification of the old testament as well, which I am, at least not yet, prepared to consider. And a Nazarene is not a Nazirite, though some make the connection. (Surely you know Jesus as a Rabbi would have cut his hair once every thirty days, no more no less? And his opponents would have raked him over the coals had he broken that tradition, as they did for breaking all their other ones?)

I was equating the "beast" figure with a false Messiah, but I see that you interpret the beast as a scripted antagonist of a scripted messiah.

And "who is they" is the question we are here to explore; though I meant the mafia of elite groups with overlapping interests and parallel goals, including a powerful "Jewish" element, whose common bond is "esoteric supremacism" ("Let's all become gods by one definition or another, use our 'inferiors' to get there and kill most of them once we've arrived") as I call it.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
As for your construct, it presupposes weaponized falsification of the old testament as well, which I am, at least not yet, prepared to consider.
Perhaps you should consider it? As I discuss in my OT analysis series on the blog, in reviewing the foundation of the tribe of Judah it has a rather ignominious beginning, with Tamar having to induce procreative sex with Judah by pretending to be a prostitute. The moral narrative for the tribe doesn't get much better throughout, yet your god chooses 'them'? This god doesn't seem to have any better hiring judgement than Donald Trump does with his jet-setting secretaries.

But this negative theme regarding the tribe of Judah continues on into Christianity, where Roman Catholic theology from Augustine on, till only decades ago, insists that the Jews should be kept around breathing ... only to serve Christians as negative examples. Good coverage of this is by James Carroll, a former Catholic priest, in his Constantine's Sword.

This is the cynical dialectic system underlying all of Western Civilization, and which most people (including most Jews) are oblivious as to its implications, preferring instead to either ecumenically ignore or to continue to play the blame game, the ultimate shibboleth. It's an Identity Scam, and humorously the Bible even tells us so. But, believers believe only what they want, and filter out the rest.

And a Nazarene is not a Nazirite, though some make the connection.
That would include me. In any case, if you are willing to consider the NT as weaponized, then why should you accept, verbatim, that this character, Jesus, was not really a Nazarite, only humorously depicted as a Nazarene? A village which likely didn't exist at the necessary time, as it is not mentioned outside the Bible texts, all of which are known to have been heavily redacted.

The militant sect that the Romans were worried about was called the Nazoreans, see: http://postflaviana.org/community/i...ristianity-by-roman-counterintelligence.1979/

This is the reason for the dichotomy between the disciples in the Jerusalem Church and Paul, the Roman 'agent'.

Maybe there is a Creator, or maybe not, but IMO your god is a human contrived, yet profitable fraud, just like Trump.

I almost said "Is the pope Catholic?"
If you read Barbiero this would be a very good question indeed.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I just watched two well argued Christian presentations on the Mark of the Beast, and 666. Together they confirm my identification that Trump is indeed being presented as the scripted Beast of the Sea, sponsored by the Roman Church.

The first makes a powerful exegetical argument that the central issue is regarding the Roman Church's unBiblical change of the Sabbath to Sun-day. Constantine was high priest of the Sol Invictus cult (Mithraism). The video showed how the Church considered this as their 'mark' (of the Beast). And then was discussed that coming down the road that this practice would be mandated, and so this is what the faithful 'remnant' of the Lord is to resist - regarding accepting the mark of the Beast. It seems this view is becoming quite popular, or perhaps only among Seventh Day Adventists? Unfortunately, I can't yet relocate the video, but there are a lot out there on this theme.

The second explicitly identified Trump as the Beast of the Sea antiChrist, and relates various aspects and symbols back to the various Sun gods, and back to Nimrod, including some interesting aspects of Trump Tower. However, the address 666 is related to Kushner's tower at 666 5th Avenue. And the height of Trump Tower is supposedly 664 feet, instead of 666 as the video claims.


Being a non-believer, my contention with all of this is that the Roman Church damn well knows all of this, and as they are fulfilling the Revelation script, they will also control the outcome. In other words, they supply Satan's Beasts, and the Savior (announced in NYC on 9/25/2015 after the Pope's visit to the Bottomless Pit at Ground Zero), per the script.

Here below, Morgan Freeman (and the scholar) decode the number of the Beast as referring to Nero. The key was the finding of an alternative document fragment (I believe from the Oxyrhynchus refuse pile) using the number 616, which translates to an alternate spelling of Caesar Nero from 666 (Caesar Neron). Of course, Nero was a real estate scammer (Rome burning) like Trump.

 
Preterist eschatology identifies Nero as the sea beast with tbe deadly wound, Vespasian as the one healed and worshipped, Titus as making war on the saints for 42 months, all of them aspects of Rome (which we agree in a sense continues in one form or another to this day). So possibly the Flavian script is being recycled as you say, or perhaps the Apocalypse really occured back then and is being reenacted (and unintentionally, antitypically fulfilled?) now.

So far every president at least since Reagan is supposed to have been a beast/antiChrist figure but wasn't. Though I don't discount one being used as a straw man in a pseudo-apocalypse (one figure on St. John's notorious script-in-stone edifice looks a lot like Obama).

But the Adventists have been screaming about a "national sunday law" since the 19th c., supposedly to be imposed "any day now" by the "second beast with two little horns" which they view as a bison (!) and identify as the U.S.A., acting as the "false prophet" proxy of papal Rome. Then again an infamous Catholic article, "Rome's Challenge" (with which Adventists have had a field day) on immaculateheart.com/Maryonline in 2009 went out of its way to prove that there is no Biblical basis for Sunday worship. So the Protestant cry of "Sola Scriptura" rings hollow when they trapse off to church every Sunday in obedience to a Papal edict (a controversy which goes back to the Council of Trent).

But it added that since the SDA do what Scripture says, and the Catholics obey the alleged Vicar of Christ who is "God upon earth" to them and as such would have a higher authority than Scripture, only one of the two can be the true church--no room for the hypocritical Protestants. Make of that assertion what you will...I make another false dichotomy/managed dialectic.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Preterist eschatology identifies Nero as the sea beast with tbe deadly wound, Vespasian as the one healed and worshipped, Titus as making war on the saints for 42 months, all of them aspects of Rome (which we agree in a sense continues in one form or another to this day). So possibly the Flavian script is being recycled as you say, or perhaps the Apocalypse really occured back then and is being reenacted (and unintentionally, antitypically fulfilled?) now.
Don't forget that Revelation accounts for 24 1,000 year periods, each represented by one of the 24 elders that surround your god. This is where the concept of Millennialism comes from. And I have identified the Norman Conquest beginning in 1066 CE as the following 1,000 year marker to the beginning of the Jewish War. The NC effectively was ended during 1070 CE, 1,000 years after the destruction of the Temple. The NC was memorialized by the Domesday Book, meaning: the Doomsday Book for Doomsday of Revelation.

So far every president at least since Reagan is supposed to have been a beast/antiChrist figure but wasn't. Though I don't discount one being used as a straw man in a pseudo-apocalypse (one figure on St. John's notorious script-in-stone edifice looks a lot like Obama).
Well, of course there have been plenty of miscalls of the Apocalypse, including the original one of the Adventists. Millennialism was discredited when such events didn't occur with the calendar millennium changes, albeit I have linked 9/11 as being ritually tied to the current process. There was no year Zero, so 2001 was the correct year, by the calendar. I identified 9/11 as being a Mithraic mass even before I read Barbiero's analysis of Mithraism as being run by the extended Hasmonean (Maccabee) family of Josephus Flavius.

So the Protestant cry of "Sola Scriptura" rings hollow when they trapse off to church every Sunday in obedience to a Papal edict (a controversy which goes back to the Council of Trent).
Well, they are all Nicene Christians after all, aren't they. Yet dupes of Rome all along. This is why I asked if you were a Nicene Christian, because the Holy Bible that is used by all, passed through the hands of Rome, at least from the time of Eusebius. If there was an original, real Jesus, only hints of such remain in the gospels (such as the Cynic like Beatitudes), the rest has been twisted to Rome's benefit, e.g. "Render unto Caesar ..."

Speaking of the Council of Trent, did you know that the Catholic bishop of Venice, who helped sponsor the formation of the Jesuits, was also encouraging the Calvinists? And that John Calvin turned the unitarian Michael Severtus over to the Catholic Inquisition, who burned him at the stake? There's more.
 
Yes, a lot of chicanery in the Reformation. I am not one of those that masturbates to Fox's Book of Martyrs. And of course manipulating both sides of a conflict is a time-honored elite tradition, including the Aluhambra--oops "Jesuits".

As for claims of manipulation of Scripture most of those come from the likes of Elaine Pagels, and the money behind her and her ilk should tell you the intent. I see a clear provenance back to at least the late first century in doctrine and scripture.

And "Render unto Caesar" simply means Caeasar thinks everything is his, so let the baby have his bottle. Everything belongs to God, and Caesar will find that out soon enough; "remember Caesar, thou art mortal". Just don't insult God by rendering worship or moral obedience. Pragmatic if anything.
 
And the Catholics would not have burned people at the stake for attempting to read the Bible if it agreed with their doctrine and practice/had been manipulated to appear to do so. Of course it pays to look at it in the original languages whenever possible..
 
Top