|
|
Post by rcnoe71 on Dec 7, 2011 16:12:57 GMT
I agree with Bradwatsonmiami. The antichrist is that of a man, not the sun.... but what form of man? Scripture tells us that there are beings here who are "wolves in sheep's clothing." Meaning they look like us, live among us, but are not of human origin. The Bible also tells us that, "the head of every man is Christ."
In studying mind control methods, and how our food, vaccines, flu shots etc. have manipulating chemicals added to dumb humanity down, and keep us from attaining our natural state of enlightenment, it's evident that the antichrist is better stated as being anti-human.
|
|
|
|
Post by rcnoe71 on Dec 7, 2011 16:32:51 GMT
While the inner reflects the outer, I personally am more attuned and thus more knowledgeable of the inner or Self. When the inner is understood then change can occur in the outer world. Is love is the answer we're seeking as it radiates outward from the center of our being? Is love one of the great mysteries? If so, why is so difficult for us to understand? It's difficult because the "ego" gets in the way. Speaking in Biblical terms, "Love thy neighbor as you love yourself." This depicts, "inner reflects the outer." Therefore can be equally stated as "One cannot love their neighbor, if absent love for ones self." It also states in 1 John 4:16, "God is love, whoever abides in love, abides in God and God in him." 1 John 4:8, "Whoever does not love, does not know God because God is love." I believe a key to understanding love is to first understand that the ego is of this world, whereas ones inner being is not of the physical world. In James 4:4 it states, "You adulterers and adulteresses, know you not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." Therefore it is evident that where we allow our ego to depict our state of being (which creates depression, fears, and anxiety), we are then separated from truth. So looking deep within ourselves is where love exists, and is too not a physical manifestation, but rather an inner knowing, although love can be experienced in our physical existence, as long as we kick the ego aside, and allow love to consume our being. |
|
|
|
Post by nventr on Dec 13, 2011 17:20:25 GMT
Look people, the antichrist was the Emperor Nero. The Revelation of John is an apocalypse (a common form of literature in the Hellenized world) written after the fact about the fall of the province of Judea by the hand of Rome. It does not foreshadow any event occurring in modern times, no matter how much some wish it to be so. You are responsible for your own lives, and by extension, the choices you make now will effect the lives of others, for good or ill. There is no set future! I concur!!! |
|
|
|
Post by vajranagini on Dec 21, 2011 4:26:41 GMT
Actually there IS a "set future". It's called "astrology". I can look at my ephemeris, and choose a date for a solar or lunar eclipse far in the future, when I can be 100% certain that I will not be alive, and KNOW that that eclipse is going to occur, no matter what is happening on the earth below it. I often gaze at the Full Moon and think about how it has passed on that same immutable course for uncountable ages prior to my scrutiny, and how it will be making its round for many more ages; it is a very good method for putting one in a "magickal" state of mind! The technique is called 'making dhyana", I belive.
|
|
|
|
Post by bradwatsonmiami on Dec 21, 2011 18:27:57 GMT
Look people, the antichrist was the Emperor Nero. The Revelation of John is an apocalypse (a common form of literature in the Hellenized world) written after the fact about the fall of the province of Judea by the hand of Rome. It does not foreshadow any event occurring in modern times, no matter how much some wish it to be so. You are responsible for your own lives, and by extension, the choices you make now will effect the lives of others, for good or ill. There is no set future!
You are obviously WRONG! The last book of the Bible is all about the return of the Christ - everybody knows that!! The 666 "1st Beast" appears at the same time of the Second Coming of 'god incarnate' which did NOT happen during the reign of Emperor Nero!
Now if you don't won't to believe in the Bible, that's your choice, but please don't spread misinformation/lies about it. NO religious leader agrees with your poorly thought-out, illogical interpretation. |
|
cwhite
Member
Too much attention to subtleties makes you oblivious to the obvious.
Posts: 55
|
Post by cwhite on Dec 21, 2011 19:08:32 GMT
"Dig deeper Watson...."
|
|
|
|
Post by offramp on Dec 22, 2011 15:10:52 GMT
That is correct: the beast of Revelations is Nero. An alternative spelling of his name would give the number 616 and this number is sometimes seen in old bibles.
There was a real fear among early Christians that Nero would come back to life - or was not really dead, hence the fear and loathing.
|
|
|
|
Post by choochoo808 on Dec 22, 2011 15:22:09 GMT
Lately I've been coming back to what Jefferson said regarding future perceptions of faith. We look at the Greek pantheon as mythology now, but its adherents were no more or less devoted than present-day believers.
|
|
|
|
Post by bradwatsonmiami on Dec 22, 2011 15:58:49 GMT
"To unlock the scroll (of Revelation 5:1-10:10), someone must be found that's worthy." "The breaking of the '7 seals'." "Jesus will come again and do the job right the 2nd time." "Jesus (upon his retrn) is now a warrior king, he is wielding God's Word and has a sword in his mouth." - History Channel, God vs. Satan
HC just aired this program this morning 12/22/11 8-10 am. It will be aired again this afternoon.
- Brad Watson, Miami
Non-coincidental synchronic reaction: 12/22/11 10:58 "a man on a mission" - HC's The Real Face of Jesus?
|
|
|
|
Post by bradwatsonmiami on Dec 22, 2011 16:20:24 GMT
That's a pretty inclusive statement. Where is your proof of our 'knowing'?
Are you saying that you didn't know The Revelation is about the return of the Christ? An honest answer, please.
Anubis,
I see you changed your wording to admit that you realize that the Apocalypse of John details the Second Coming of Christ through visions that John the Evangelist received on the Island of Patmos c. 70 AD.
You have judged me by calling me a "nutjob". That is against the rules of this forum. "Judge ye not lest ye be judged" - Jesus. For my judgment of you, follow 7seals.yuku.com .
- Brad Watson, Miami"Only Christ II can produce the "book/scroll" with the '7 seals' on its cover" Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by bradwatsonmiami on Dec 22, 2011 16:33:31 GMT
C White, Do you have any comments or questions re: the "7 seals"/theories? DIG = 417, Jesus 74 was born on 4/17. Matthew 4:17 is Jesus' first teaching (he reats what John the Baptist said in Mt 3:2), "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand". Non-coincidental synchronic reaction: 12/22/11 11:31 "The kingdom of heaven is spread out all over the world, but people don't see it." |
|
|
|
Post by bradwatsonmiami on Dec 22, 2011 16:54:41 GMT
That is correct: the beast of Revelations is Nero. An alternative spelling of his name would give the number 616 and this number is sometimes seen in old Bibles. There was a real fear among early Christians that Nero would come back to life - or was not really dead, hence the fear and loathing.
Every Revelation scholar has heard that "Nero was the '1st Beast", but they also know that since the Christ didn't return and defeat him, then that doesn't make sense! Every Revelation scholar has also heard about the "alternate 616", but I question that this is "seen in old Bibles". I bet you can NOT provide an example of a particular Bible version that says, "616".
Since at least 1978, when Ronald6 W1. Reagan6 was the leading candidate for RepubliCON Presidential candidate, many have identified him as the 666/616 - google it! |
|
cwhite
Member
Too much attention to subtleties makes you oblivious to the obvious.
Posts: 55
|
Post by cwhite on Dec 23, 2011 17:59:54 GMT
Brad,
Do you honestly believe that you are Jesus??
|
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Dec 24, 2011 14:22:54 GMT
If Brad Watson wants to come on here and say whatever and the moderators allow him to do that, and if others think that there's some value to it, great. I'm into gematria, but I don't pretend to understand what he's trying to say. I have little patience for it. I think a lot of it is pounding square pegs into places they don't fit well. Again--who cares what I think? He's having a blast and is happy, so go to town with it. If someone wants to get into this business with Mary Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, or George Carlin and Frank Zappa, fantastic. That's not my thing. The poster may be right or he may be wrong, whichever it is not the place of the Moderator to challenge opinion. A Mod can not be an expert on all subjects, well in my case I say that loosely. So therefore can not pull posters on actual facts. That is your job. Counter the argument with facts, and support them with evidence. Otherwise it is one opinion verses another. |
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Dec 25, 2011 16:22:16 GMT
Goat Rider hurts my feelings with his posts. He should be stopped, and flogged.
|
|
|
|
Post by vajranagini on Dec 26, 2011 0:06:52 GMT
Amazing! I had never made that correlation before. Thanks! Keep in mind that the Tarot was developed in the time of the Medieval, and not during the period when Jerusalem was being occupied by Rome, so don't read too much into this. According to Idries Shah, "tarot cards" were a common Sufi teaching device, likely introduced to the West through Moorish-ruled Spain. It is an observable fact that the West absolutely and entirely IGNORES the historical influence on Europe, of one of the greatest civilizations known to humanity, no doubt because of the RC Church's antipathy to "the Saracen"However, there are definitely some references to what we would regard nowadays as "archetypes" that are clearly recognized in some of the Keys, such as the reference to the Empress as a fertility goddess complete with the familiar headdress description. The Empress card is attributed to Venus, who is NOT a 'fertility Goddess" on ANY level; it is the MOON that rules "fertility". Interestingly, the planet Venus has its own "crescent" phase, hence the 'crescent" seen on the card.There are many other esoteric components to the text. I'm not much for predictions or fortune telling. If you're worried about what's going to happen in the future, look in the past. Personally, I don't regard the text as an oracle. Any book can serve as an "oracle"; reading and writing was once considered to be a "magickal ability", hence the terms "spell", and "gramarye" in reference to magick. Using a written text as an oracle is referred to as 'bibliomancy"Since my beliefs about the nature of Christ and Yeshua are heretical, I prefer to keep them to myself and not broadcast them, but I guess I could safely say that, yeah, I believe that "Christ will come" although it's not in the fundamentalist bible-thumping sense. I also believe that "the Christ" has been... and gone already; one has only to read the information that exists on "Shri Ramakrishna" (1836-1886) to see that this is so. India is the ONLY place that 'the Christ' could have "arrived" in a new incarnation; anywhere else, he would have been tossed into an insane asylum at an early age!
However, Shri Ramakrishna said of himself that he WOULD be returning one more time "to collect his devotees. Many will be liberated at this time. Those who are not liberated at this time will have to wait a very long time after that".
Obviously he was referring to the upcoming END of the present Kali Yuga (Black Aeon), which signals a return to the Sat Yuga (Aeon of Truth). It takes a very LONG, LONG time indeed for the NEXT Kali Yuga to cycle round again, as in "millions of years"! Curiously, Crowley's doctrine states plainly that after the current"Aeon of the Child" comes the "Aeon of Truth", AS WELL.This is an example of Apocalyptic-type literature, which abounded during the period of time when the other gospels, as well as when many of the texts associated with the Nag Hammadi library, were composed (although a few of those are a little older). A lot of the Apocalyptic literature deals with themes relating to a sense of impending catastrophe, apocalyptic expectation, alienation, doom and gloom, etc. The entire region was part of this new burgeoning and militaristic empire; the people had been assimilated into the Borg, and even Herod was just a small cog in the Roman machine. Exactly right. It is absolutely ridiculous for anyone who wants to be taken seriously to not take into account what was going on in Jerusalem/ the Middle East at the time things like this were being written...plus, don't forget: there was a GAP of FORTY YEARS between the crucifixion of Jesus and the fall of the Temple.What I'm saying, is that the context of what was going on during this time period influences the nature of the work. Yes, we insist upon reading it with a modern mindset; most do. Is that "wrong"? YES. And absurd, too. I'm uncomfortable stating that anyone's experiences are necessarily "wrong". It's not how I would personally choose to interpret the text. Also, because of the particular context and when it was written, there are symbols that are hard to understand today for other reasons. Perhaps things were written in such a way to mask the author's identity. Perhaps the author just was a whack-job. Who knows. All this sort of thing must definitely be taken into account. Imagine applying a similar method to a scientific experiment! One would be laughed to scorn!I don't think the text is all that well-written, and although there is a revelation of information, exactly what is being revealed isn't all that clear. If this is about transmutation of consciousness, then there are other texts that do a better job. But this is just my opinion, and really--who cares anyway? If Brad Watson wants to come on here and say whatever and the moderators allow him to do that, and if others think that there's some value to it, great. I'm into gematria, but I don't pretend to understand what he's trying to say. I have little patience for it. I think a lot of it is pounding square pegs into places they don't fit well. Again--who cares what I think? I am always glad to read an "informed opinion" He's having a blast and is happy, so go to town with it. If someone wants to get into this business with Mary Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, or George Carlin and Frank Zappa, fantastic. That's not my thing. I get some of the other gematria relationships but I'm just more personally interested in other things. I stuck my nose back in b/c somebody raised a good point about Nero being the Anti-Christ, then Anubis bar fed, and when he bar fs, I listen! Also, Brad made a comment I felt to be over-general, and sometimes I like to test/try/prove that stuff by challenging it. Helps show where the "weak spots" are.Now that I've met him more than half way and have answered his question that he asked me, and have answered it honestly, btw, I'm still waiting to see if he will ever answer mine, and frankly, I'm not holding my breath because I just don't think he handles challenges very well. Most 'born-again' types don't. Back in the day, there was a term used for these people that pretended to know alchemy; they called them "puffers" and so I think Brad is puffing and blowing a lot. Which is fine, really. This is a forum where people can do that, and I get a kick out it because it's good entertainment. Also, I just like stirring up stuff just to see what will come to the surface, and sometimes there is useful stuff to talk about. Bingo. Sorry if I make people mad. I know EXACTLY where you are coming from! >evil grin< Why apologize? If a hypothesis can't stand up to a challenge or two, then what good is it? |
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Dec 26, 2011 6:30:44 GMT
Brad,
Anytime that you would like to go math to math on your grandiose claims let me know.
Brandt
|
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Dec 27, 2011 1:58:41 GMT
The poster may be right or he may be wrong, whichever it is not the place of the Moderator to challenge opinion. A Mod can not be an expert on all subjects, well in my case I say that loosely. So therefore can not pull posters on actual facts. That is your job. Counter the argument with facts, and support them with evidence. Otherwise it is one opinion verses another. Most of the time Brad is so far beyond facts/opinion I really don't care one way or the other, though when he says that he's Jesus Christ come back to lead us to New Jerusalem I might ask for some kind of proof before I follow him into the Lake of Fire.  Revelation? It's a mish-mash. There are some ancient ideas in there mixed in with contemporary (at the time) politics. You have missed the point you said "If Brad Watson wants to come on here and say whatever and the moderators allow him to do that" Brad Watson or whoever - you can not place it at the feet of the Moderator to allow or disallow opinion. Lets say I did not like you comments on a subject and deleted them , there would be an almighty uproar , I am confident of that. |
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Dec 27, 2011 2:38:58 GMT
Idries Shah was a wanker and a fraud. He sold a lot of books to unsuspecting and ignorant readers though. Things should not be taken on any particular persons word - not mine nor Shah's. Please, research the man and his dealings on your own. If he is still your paragon of virtue and the voice of Tassawuf then by all means continue in darkness. Just don't trust the halal chicken.
|
|
|
|
Post by vajranagini on Dec 27, 2011 3:36:38 GMT
I have never at any time taken him as a "paragon of virtue"; i also respect Aleister Crowley for his knowledge, too, remember! Just because YOU have a problem with him, it does not follow that EVERYONE should have "a problem' with him!
There is a saying: "S.hit is no saint, but where it falls, it works miracles!"If I, myself, have gained enlightenment, knowledge and an introduction to the 'great minds' of the world through having encountered his writings, then he, like sh.it, has served a higher purpose in the world, no matter what the likes of YOU might think about him.
|
|
