This study will reveal the meaning of the symbols, statues and attire used by the Pope and priests, as they reveal what the Papal Church is really worshiping.
For thousands of years Pagan religions have used symbols to show which gods they worshiped. These symbols were declared openly in Egypt, Babylon, Rome and other cultures.
These symbols are still used today, but their true meanings are hidden. Most people typically don’t notice the symbol or they have a positive impression of it.
The enlightened understand the meaning behind the symbols, and they use them to communicate with others.
Leaders of a Christian Church should not have anything to do with the symbols of pagan gods.
“For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God.” 2 Corinthians 6:14,16
If you’re Catholic, ask yourself why the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church are using all of these symbols of pagan gods.
The Zucchetti which is worn by Catholic priests, cardinals and the Pope, represents respect, fear and submission to Cybele, the Mother Goddess of Rome.
The Cap of Cybele is one of the oldest and most sacred pagan religious symbols of humanity, dating back to 2,000 B.C.
The skull cap was worn by the sun priests of Egypt.
It is a thin, slightly rounded skullcap now commonly known by various titles including the Yarmulke (Jewish) and Kufi (Muslims).
The Roman Catholic Church calls it the Zucchetti.
Vatican Hill was the site of the largest ancient temple to Cybele. Ashtoreth the goddess of fertility, sexuality and war; was known as Cybele in Rome.
The Bible warns against worshiping her, “Then the children of Israel again did evil in the sight of the LORD, and served the Baals and the Ashtoreths.” Judges 10:6
The Bible declares “For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God.” 1 Corinthians 11:7
Ask yourself, why do Catholic priests, Bishops and the Pope, wear the Cap of Cybele?
The Mitre hat that is worn by Catholic priests, cardinals and the Pope, represents Dagon the Babylonian fish god.
The ancient Babylonians worshiped Dagan, the god of agriculture, plenty (food) and good fortune.
The Babylonian priests wore a headdress that represented the worship of Cybele and Dagon. It featured an open-fish mouth on the head, with the rest of the fish body forming a cloak.
In the Roman Empire, it was worn by the head priest of Cybele (the Magna Mater) or the Great Queen Mother Goddess.
Today the Catholic Cardinals, Bishops and the Pope all wear the open fish-mouth mitre, which represents the worship of Cybele and Dagon.
The Mitre hat of Dagan is always worn over the Kippa of Ashtoreth/Cybele, as you can see in the picture of Pope Francis I.
God warned the Jews not to worship the gods of Babylon, ” I will pronounce My judgments on them concerning all their wickedness, whereby they have forsaken Me and have offered sacrifices to other gods, and worshiped the works of their own hands.” Jeremiah 1:16
Ask yourself, why do Catholic Cardinals, Bishops and the Pope, all wear the mitre of Dagan?
The Obelisk in St. Peter’s Square represents the worship of the Sun god.
Obelisks were prominent in the architecture of the ancient Egyptians, who placed them at the entrance of a temple, marking it as a zone of sun worship.
They represent the Sun God Ra, the Egyptians’ greatest deity; the creator of humanity, the source of all heat and light, the being on which man was totally dependent.
An Egyptian obelisk sits in front of the Pantheon of ancient Rome, which housed statues of their pagan gods. The obelisk was originally constructed by Pharaoh Ramses II for the Temple of Ra in Heliopolis. It was brought to Rome in ancient times where it was used near a shrine to the Egyptian god Isis.
The Pantheon was dedicated to pan theos, meaning “all the gods.” When it became a Roman Catholic Church, it was dedicated to the Virgin Mary and all the martyrs.
The most well-known Egyptian obelisk was re-erected in 1586 A.D., in front of St. Peter’s Basilica. It is surrounded by a sun wheel, with the points lining up with the Vernal Equinox, the Summer Solstice and the Winter Solstice.
.
During the sunrise on the Vernal Equinox, the sun causes the obelisk to cast its shadow towards the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica, which represents the sexual union of the sun god and moon goddess.
God’s 2nd commandment says, “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God.” Exodus 20:4-5
Ask yourself, why does the Catholic Church venerate pagan monuments to the Sun god?
The six-sided star is the supreme symbol of Satanic tyranny.
The hexagram has been used by people such as the pagan Babylonians, Egyptians and Assyrians, to directly or indirectly worship Satan.
Helena Blavatsky wrote that “Lucifer is the true God“, and she incorporated the hexagram in the emblem of the Theosophical Society, which she founded in 1875.
Satanists, Luciferians, astrologers and witches use it to invoke the power of demons.
The six-sided star numerically equals 666 (6 points, 6 triangles, 6-sided hexagon).
Christians pass it off as the ‘Star of David‘ but the truth is that King David never used a star, so calling it a nice sounding name hides what it really represents. King Solomon used it in witchcraft, magic and idolatrous worship to Ashtoreth and to Moloch.
Stephen accused the Jewish leaders, “And you took up the tent of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, the figures which you made” “in order to worship them.” Acts 7:43
Ask yourself, why does the Catholic Church use the Satanic six-sided star?
The eight-pointed star represents the pagan goddess Ishtar, the lightbringer.
In Babylonian symbolism, the goddess Ishtar is represented by an eight-pointed starburst, and she is associated with the planet of Venus.
Ishtar was the Babylonian High-Mother-Goddess, the goddess of fertility, love and war. Her cult was the most important one in ancient Babylon.
An eight-point star enclosed within a circle is the symbol for the sun god, as it’s points represent the solstices and equinoxes.
The “Babylonian star-cult is the core and the archetype of subsequent astrology.”
At the center of St. Peter’s Basilica, the Pope sits in the middle of eight 8-sided stars.
Ask yourself, why does the Catholic Church use the eight-pointed star of Ishtar?
The Maltese Cross represents Shamash, the god of the Sun and Justice.
In the image, an ancient Assyrian king is wearing a cross on his chest, just like the one seen on the Pope’s robe.
Shamash (Akkadian Šamaš “Sun”), was a native Mesopotamian deity and the sun god in the Akkadian, Assyrian and Babylonian pantheons.
Shamash was the god of justice in Babylonia and Assyria, corresponding to Sumerian Utu.
This cross was identified with a Sun god eight centuries before Christ and long before it was called the Maltese Cross by the Knights of Malta.
It’s also called the Iron Cross. Roman Catholic Adolph Hitler renewed use of the Iron Cross in 1939 and superimposed the Nazi swastika in its center.
Ask yourself, why does the Pope wear the cross of Shamash the Sun god?
Pine cones symbolize the worship of the solar god Osiris.
Pine cones are associated with spiritual enlightenment by ancient Babylonians, Egyptians and Greeks. They represent the mysterious link between the physical and the spiritual worlds, which can be found in the human brain, in the pineal gland.
The pine cone staff is a symbol of the solar god Osiris and originated in Egypt where he was their messiah who died for his people and whose Mother, Isis, was worshiped as the Virgin Mother.
The Vatican also has the world’s largest pine cone that once decorated a fountain in ancient Rome next to a vast Temple of Isis.
At the Old St. Peter’s Basilica, it was dedicated to Attis, son and lover of Cybele. The Catholic Church then relocated it to what’s now called the Vatican Court of the Pigna.
Ask yourself, why do Popes use pine cones which symbolize the solar god Osiris?
Revelation 13 says that Satan the dragon gives authority to the antichrist beast.
The Bible calls Satan the great dragon, who deceives the world.
“So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” Revelation 12:9
Revelation 13 tells us that antichrist beast is empowered by the dragon to deceive the world.
“So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?” Revelation 13:3
Ask yourself, why does the Catholic Church use images of the dragon which represents Satan?
Friend, it’s obvious that the Roman Catholic Church is worshiping other gods, which is forbidden by the Bible.
God’s 1st commandment says “You shall have no other gods before Me.” Exodus 20:3
The Roman Catholic Church and the Pope have fulfilled many Bible prophecies, as the antichrist beast of Revelation.
Read this study to learn the truth: What The Bible Says About The Roman Catholic Church
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_obelisks_in_Rome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archbasilica_of_St._John_Lateran
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_di_Santa_Maria_Maggiore
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigna_%28rione_of_Rome%29
http://www.whale.to/c/churches_ill.html#Zucchettos__
Maltese https://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/me/s/stela_of_shamshi-adad_v.aspx
All-seeing eye: http://www.whale.to/c/churches_ill.html#Maltese_Cross_
OK, David, let’s cut to the chase. Post one, just one, bit of proof that Catholics worship your god tammuz and I’ll be the first to turn to your side. Assertions won’t do. You need to provide just one documented proof that the Roman Catholic Church, in any way, shape or form, worships tammuz, and I’m with you.
In 1 Kings 18, Elijah taunts the priests of baal to call louder to their god. So it stands to reason that if the RCC worships tammuz, baal or whatever you assert that the liturgy of the Mass or some other prayers of the RCC should call out to those gods. So there should be some readily available evidence of this.
So put it up here. Your assertions are worthless. Show the documented evidence.
I’ll work on that for you Karl. In the mean time, let’s cut to the real chase. Show me the Bible verses which back up these statements which the Popes have made about Mary; that she provides salvation, that she is our mediator, that she redeemed the human race:
Pius IX said, “God has committed to the Blessed Virgin Mary the treasury of all good things in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace and ALL SALVATION.
Pope Leo XIII said, “O Holy Mother of God; to thee we lift our prayers for thou, powerful and merciful, art the MEDIATRIX OF OUR SALVATION.”
Pope Leo XIII said, “O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, OBTAINS SALVATION EXCEPT THROUGH THEE, none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.”
Pope Leo XIII said, “With equal truth it may be said that of the great treasury of all graces given to us by Our Lord—for grace and truth came by Jesus Christ—nothing comes to us except through MARY’S MEDIATION, for such is God’s Will
Pope Benedict XV declared, “To such extent did Mary suffer and almost die with her suffering and dying Son; to such extent did she surrender her maternal rights over her Son for: man’s salvation . . that we may rightly say SHE REDEEMED THE HUMAN RACE TOGETHER WITH CHRIST.”
David, first show me the Bible verse where Jesus says that everything necessary to understand Christianity is contained in the Bible.
Then, show me which book in the Bible tells me what books are supposed to be in the Bible, i.e., the Canon of the Bible.
Then tell me how you know what books are supposed to be in the Bible.
Read the home page of this website Karl, it shows you that those quotes from the Popes are contrary to Scripture. http://romancatholicbeliefs.org
Read this page which proves that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate gentile church, and not part of the true church. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/measuring-the-temple-of-revelation-11/
Read this page which proves that the Roman Catholic Church is the harlot church, called Mystery, Babylon the Great. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/revelation-17-the-harlot-roman-catholic-church/
Read this page which proves that the Popes have fulfilled Bible prophecy as the Little Horn of Daniel 7. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/the-little-horn-of-daniel-7/
Read this page which proves that the Popes have fulfilled Bible prophecy as the Son of Perdition of 2 Thessalonians 2. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/the-son-of-perdition-of-2-thessalonians-2/
Read this page which proves that the Popes have fulfilled Bible prophecy as the antichrist beast of Revelation. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/the-antichrist-sea-beast-of-revelation-13-is-the-popes-of-the-roman-catholic-church/
Are you seeking truth? Or to just defend the Roman Catholic Church?
I place no faith at all in your assertions or logic fallacies/errors.
So, answer the questions:
Show me the Bible verse where Jesus says that everything necessary to understand Christianity is contained in the Bible.
Then, show me which book in the Bible tells me what books are supposed to be in the Bible, i.e., the Canon of the Bible.
Then tell me how you know what books are supposed to be in the Bible.
Should be simple, no? No need to dodge these questions since they form the basis of everything you say you believe.
Are you seeking the truth or just trying to demonize the Catholic Church?
You say “I place no faith at all in your assertions or logic fallacies/error”, but then you ask me questions. That most no sense, for you’re not going to believe me.
As for asking about how many books should be in the Bible, the more important question is why did the Popes of Rome ban and burn the Scriptures, and kill the saints who had them?
They forbid Bible reading, as it testifies to salvation by faith in Jesus Christ, not by works through the Papal Church. And it testifies that they are the Little Horn of Daniel, the Beast of Revelation, and the Pope, the Son of Perdition.
Pope Innocent III declared, “to be reproved are those who translate into French the Gospels, the letters of Paul, the psalter, etc. They are moved by a certain love of Scripture in order to explain them clandestinely and to preach them to one another. The mysteries of the faith are not to (be) explained rashly to anyone. Usually in fact, they cannot be understood by everyone but only by those who are qualified to understand them with informed intelligence. The depth of the divine Scriptures is such that not only the illiterate and uninitiated have difficulty understanding them, but also the educated and the gifted.”
Pope Innocent III decreed, “We prohibit laymen possessing copies of the Old and New Testament. …We forbid them most severely to have the above books in the popular vernacular.” (meaning in their country’s native language, as the Papal Church only allowed their priests to read it in Latin).
Pope Pius IV said, “The Bible is not for the people; whosoever will be saved must renounce it. It is a forbidden book. Bible societies are satanic contrivances.”
Pope Leo XIII declared, “As it has been clearly shown by experience that, if the holy Bible in the vernacular is generally permitted without any distinction, more harm than utility is thereby caused.”
Prophecy proves that the Roman Catholic Church is the harlot, apostate church of the antichrist beast; so I testify to that, and can prove it out, to those who have eyes to see. But you sir have been blinded by the antichrist, as you you revere (mark on forehead) and obey (mark on right hand, actions) the antichrist Popes of Rome.
Popes have repeatedly claimed to be God. Friend, this can’t be any clearer.
Pope Pius V blasphemed, “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.”
Pope Innocent III said “We may according to the fullness of our power, dispose of the law and dispense above the law. Those whom the Pope of Rome doth separate, it is not a man that separates them but God. For the Pope holdeth place on earth, not simply of a man but of the true God.”
Pope Leo XIII declared, “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.”
The Popes claim the title of Vicar of Christ, which means “substitute Christ.”
The word antichrist doesn’t just mean “against Christ“, it means “in place of Christ.”
Pope Boniface VIII said “We declare, assert, define and pronounce to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every creature altogether necessary for salvation… I have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all, and above all, so that God Himself and I, the Vicar of Christ, have but one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do. What therefore, can you make of me but God?”
Pope Pius IX said, “I alone… am the successor of the apostles, the vicar of Jesus Christ. I am the way, the truth, and the life…”
Pope Pius X declared, “The Pope is not simply the representative of Jesus Christ. On the contrary, he is Jesus Christ Himself, under the veil of the flesh. Does the Pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who is speaking, hence, when anyone speaks of the Pope, it is not necessary to examine but to obey.”
Pope Pius XII said, “…recognize the Holy, Catholic, Roman Church to be the only true Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which neither sanctity nor salvation can be found. Call them to the unity of the one fold, granting them the grace to believe every truth of our holy faith and to submit themselves to the Supreme Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth.”
http://christianitybeliefs.org/end-times-deceptions/pope-quotes-verify-they-are-antichrist-son-of-perdition/
Well, let’s look at the ENTIRETY of what Pope Innocent wrote:
Cum ex injuncto (1199) [in part]
Truly our venerable brother the Bishop of Metz has signified to us in his letter that both in the diocese and in the city of Metz the multitude of laymen and women, drawn in no small way by desire, have had the Scriptures, Gospels, the Pauline epistles, the Psalter, the commentaries on Job and many other books translated for their own use into the French language, exerting themselves towards this kind of translation so willingly, but not so prudently, that in secret meetings the laymen and women dare to discuss such matters between themselves, and to preach to each other: they also reject their community, do not intermingle with similar people, and consider themselves separate from them, and do not align their ears and minds with them; when any of the parish priests wished to censure them concerning these matters, they stood firm before them, trying to argue from the Scriptures that they should not be prohibited in any way from doing these things. Some of them also scorned the simplicity of their priests; and when the Word of Salvation is shown to them by those priests, they grumble in secret that they understand the Word better in their little books and that they can explain it more prudently.
But although the desire to understand the divine Scriptures, and, according to the Scriptures themselves, the zeal to spread them, is not forbidden, but is rather commendable, nevertheless the arguments against it appear well-deserved, because those who do not adhere to such arguments celebrate their assemblies in secret, usurp for themselves the duty of preaching, mock the simplicity of the priests and reject their community. For God, the true light, which illuminates all men coming into this world, hates such works of darkness so much that when he was about to send his apostles out into the world to preach the Gospel to all creation, he ordered them clearly, saying: “That which I tell you in the dark, speak ye in the light: and that which you hear in the ear, preach ye upon the housetops”; announcing openly in this way that the preaching of the Gospel must not be carried out in hidden communities, as heretics do, but in churches in the Catholic manner. For according to the testimony of Truth, “every one that doth evil hateth the light and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved. But he that doth truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest: because they are done in God.”
Because of this, when the high priest “asked Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine, Jesus answered him: I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in the synagogue and in the temple, whither all the Jews resort: and in secret I have spoken nothing.” Furthermore, if anyone objects that according to the Lord’s command “give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine”, since Christ himself also said “unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables”, he should understand that dogs and pigs are not things which happily bring holiness and willingly accept pearls, but things which tear apart holiness and scorn pearls, just like those who do not venerate the words of the Gospel and the ecclesiastical sacraments as Catholics, but rather detest them as heretics, who are always chattering and blaspheming, whom the apostle Paul teaches should be avoided “after the first and second admonition.”
The mysteries of the sacraments of faith should not be explained everywhere to everyone, since they cannot be understood everywhere by everyone, but only to those who can conceive of them by their faithful intellect. Because of this the Apostle said to the simpler people: “As unto little ones in Christ I gave you milk to drink, not meat.” For “strong meat is for the perfect”, as he said to others: “we speak wisdom among the perfect;” “for I judged not myself to know anything among you, but Jesus Christ: and him crucified.” Such is the profundity of divine Scripture, that not only simple and illiterate men, but even prudent and learned men do not fully suffice to investigate its wisdom. Because of this Scripture says: “They have failed in their search.” From this it was rightly once established in divine law that the beast which touches the mountain should be stoned; that is, so that no simple and unlearned man presumes to concern himself with the sublimity of sacred Scripture, or to preach it to others.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cum_ex_injuncto_(1199)
So you presented an excerpt to support your own viewpoint.
The other quotes, the few I went into, reference Papal warning against’ crappy translations if the Bible, which were legion. There were already translations into the vernacular in all European languages.
“The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth”
Pius V never said this. It was said at the Council of Tent by one Petrus Bertanous 8 years before Pius V became Pope.
” We may according to the fullness of our power, dispose of the law and dispense above the law. Those whom the Pope of Rome doth separate, it is not a man that separates them but God. For the Pope holdeth place on earth, not simply of a man but of the true God.”
The issue about which Pope Innocent III was writing was the transferring of bishops from diocese to diocese. The pope is claiming he has the authority to do this not merely as a man and by human authority, but as God’s representative. In other words, it’s a limited claim, not a universal one. The pope claims to govern in ecclesial matters with authority entrusted to him by God. That does not make the Pope God; it does not entitle him to worship.
I’ll give you Boniface. Popes are, after all, men, and subject to error.
Vicar of Christ means only “earthly representative of Christ.” It doesn’t mean substitute except as “in the person of” or “agent for a superior.”
What proof do you have that the Popes banned or burned scripture?
Popes have forbid Bible reading, as it testifies to salvation by faith in Jesus Christ, not by works through the Papal Church. And it testifies that they are the Little Horn of Daniel, the Beast of Revelation, and the Pope, the Son of Perdition.
Pope Innocent III declared, “to be reproved are those who translate into French the Gospels, the letters of Paul, the psalter, etc. They are moved by a certain love of Scripture in order to explain them clandestinely and to preach them to one another. The mysteries of the faith are not to (be) explained rashly to anyone. Usually in fact, they cannot be understood by everyone but only by those who are qualified to understand them with informed intelligence. The depth of the divine Scriptures is such that not only the illiterate and uninitiated have difficulty understanding them, but also the educated and the gifted.” Pope Innocent III , Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum 770-771
Pope Innocent III decreed, “We prohibit laymen possessing copies of the Old and New Testament. …We forbid them most severely to have the above books in the popular vernacular.” (meaning in their country’s native language, as the Papal Church only allowed their priests to read it in Latin). Pope Innocent II, The Council of Toulouse, Canon 14
Pope Pius IV said, “The Bible is not for the people; whosoever will be saved must renounce it. It is a forbidden book. Bible societies are satanic contrivances.” Pope Pius IV, Catholic Church Council of Trent, Rule III
Pope Leo XIII declared, “As it has been clearly shown by experience that, if the holy Bible in the vernacular is generally permitted without any distinction, more harm than utility is thereby caused.” Pope Leo XIII, Great Encyclical Letters of Leo XIII, pp. 412-413
I suggest you go to this web site:
https://cathapol.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/false-citation/
To see how your “Pope Innocent III , Denzinger-Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum 770-771” is … less than accurate, euphemistically speaking.
I suggest you go to this web site:
http://www.guampdn.com/story/news/2017/09/07/groups-vatican-fails-state-plan-dealing-sexual-violence-against-children/636449001/
To see how your Pope has failed to offer a plan for dealing with sexual violence against children.
Your church is full of gay priests and pedophiles.
That’s your response, to change the subject? Very weak, David. Why not respond to the fact that you misquoted? Is that because you can’t?
Because you’re missing the elephant in the room. Why debate about quotes, which no doubt Catholics will dispute; when it’s clear that the Popes fulfill Bible prophecy as the Little Horn of Daniel 7, the Son of Perdition of 2 Thessalonians 2, and the antichrist beast of Revelation? http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/prophecy-points-to-the-leader-of-the-roman-beast/
I prove all of that out without any quotes.
It’s clear that the Roman Catholic Church is the harlot church of Revelation 17, and the gentiles of Revelation 11:1-2. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/prophecy-points-to-the-roman-catholic-church/
Her fruit reveals who she is. Her Popes are corrupt. http://romancatholicbeliefs.org/the-roman-catholic-popes-evil-behavior/
Many of her Cardinals, Bishops and priests, are gay and pedophiles. http://romancatholicbeliefs.org/the-sex-crimes-of-roman-popes-priests-and-nuns/
You argue about little things, all the while ignoring that you are following the antichrist, the one who comes in the name of Christ, the substitute Christ, the Vicar of Christ.
“Pope Pius IV said, “The Bible is not for the people; whosoever will be saved must renounce it. It is a forbidden book. Bible societies are satanic contrivances.” Pope Pius IV, Catholic Church Council of Trent, Rule III”
The ACTUAL Rule III from the Council of Trent:
The translations of writers, also ecclesiastical, which have till now been edited by condemned authors, are permitted provided they contain nothing contrary to sound doctrine. Translations of the books of the Old Testament may in the judgment of the bishop be permitted to learned and pious men only, provided such translations are used only as elucidations of the Vulgate Edition for the understanding of the Holy Scriptures and not as the sound text. Translations of the New Testament made by authors of the first class of this list shall be permitted to no one, since great danger and little usefulness usually results to readers from their perusal. But if with such translations as are permitted or with the Vulgate Edition some annotations are circulated, these may also, after the suspected passages have been expunged by the theological faculty of some Catholic university or by the general inquisition, be permitted to those to whom the translations are permitted. Under these circumstances the entire volume of the Sacred Books, which is commonly called the or parts of it, may be permitted to pious and learned men. From the Bibles of Isidore Clarius of Brescia, however, the preface and introduction are to be removed, and no one shall regard its text as the text of the Vulgate Edition.
Gee, doesn’t look at at all like what you assert. Why is that, David?
“Pope Leo XIII declared, “As it has been clearly shown by experience that, if the holy Bible in the vernacular is generally permitted without any distinction, more harm than utility is thereby caused.” Pope Leo XIII, Great Encyclical Letters of Leo XIII, pp. 412-413”
Again, David, let’s look at the above in context:
CHAPTER III. Of Vernacular Versions of Holy Scripture.
As it has been clearly shown by experience that, if the Holy Bible in the vernacular is generally permitted without any distinction, more harm than utility is thereby caused, owing to human temerity: all versions in the
vernacular, even by Catholics, are altogether prohibited, unless approved by the Holy See, or published, under the vigilant care of the bishops, with annotations taken from the Fathers of the Church and learned Catholic
writers.
8. All versions of the Holy Bible, in any vernacular
language, made by non-Cathohcs are prohibited; and
especially those published by the Bible societies, which
have been more than once condemned by the Roman
Pontiffs, because in them the wise laws of the Church
concerning the pubhcation of the sacred books are entirely
disregarded. Nevertheless, these versions are permitted to students of theological or biblical science, under the conditions laid down above (No. 5).
Gosh, he didn’t forbid Bibles in the vernacular as long as they were approved by the Holy See. Given the rash of errors in so many protestant Bibles, and even some Catholic vernacular versions, I can’t blame him.
Not sure why you insist on quoting stuff out of context. There was no period after “caused,” was there?
How about common sense and some reasearch .
http://romancatholicbeliefs.org/the-popes-cardinals-bishops-and-priests-of-rome-are-worshipers-of-the-babylon-sun-god-tammuz/
Myra, I have given Karl links to my studies, which proves that the Roman Catholic Church is the harlot church of Revelation 17, called Mystery, Babylon the Great; because it’s based on the Babylonian Mystery religion of worship of the sun god Nimrod, the moon goddess Semiramus, and their incarnate christ child, Tammuz.
Until he sees that truth, it’s difficult to see how they are using symbols to worship Tammuz, the sun god.
He excuses away the Egyptian obelisk in the middle of St. Peter’s Square, which is in the middle of the sun wheel, which on the spring equinox casts a shadow towards the temple.
In Egypt, an obelisk marked a temple of sun worship. And what do we see in St. Peter’s Basilica? A huge sun symbol, and a priest holding up a sun-shaped disk and revering it.
Wake up Karl, your destiny depends on it!
David,
A reputable bible study would approach Revelations from multiple viewpoints. I have looked at Revelations using a Bible commentary that present multiple viewpoints, and includes documented sources. Needless to say, your supposed “bible study” does nothing of the sort. It’s just “David’s Opinions” and that’s it. It’s opinion, and as such, has no more weight than mine. To claim it’s “truth” is the height of arrogance. Where does the Bible say that David is the final decider of truth. You won’t even recognize that any else has a differing opinion. Suit yourself.
Now, I’m still waiting on the references to tammuz in ANY Catholic prayers, liturgy, worship, etc. I’m sure you’re still working on it. Yeah…
And I’m still waiting on these:
Show me the Bible verse where Jesus says that everything necessary to understand Christianity is contained in the Bible.
Then, show me which book in the Bible tells me what books are supposed to be in the Bible, i.e., the Canon of the Bible.
Then tell me how you know what books are supposed to be in the Bible.
Again, if you’re speaking “truth,” it should be easy to provide answers. What are you waiting for?
Now, you’ve changed your wording to this: ” which on the spring equinox casts a shadow towards the temple.”
So you admit that your website is wrong in stating that the obelisk casts a shadow ON the dome representing some assumed, on you part, sexual connotation? So when are you going to update your site to correct these errors?
BTW, in Egypt, it took a PAIR of obelisks at the ENTRANCE to a temple to signify anything. A PAIR. Not one. A single obelisk used as a sundial hundreds of feet in front on St Peter’s hardly constitutes a pair at the entrance.
So perhaps we’re done here. In any case, I’m moving on to some others gross errors on your site.
But still, have a nice Labor Day weekend!
Well Karl, obviously you didn’t really read the studies, because the viewpoints expressed on this website are from:
Albert Barnes’ Notes on the New and Old Testaments.
John Calvin’s Commentaries.
Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible.
Commentary from the 1599 edition of the Geneva Bible.
John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible.
Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary.
Matthew Poole’s Commentary on the Holy Bible.
John Wesley’s Bible Notes.
Henry Grattan Guinness, who wrote Romanism and the Reformation: From the Standpoint of Prophecy which gives the explanation for the prophecies in Daniel, in 2 Thessalonians 2, in John epistles and Revelation.
Charles A. Jenning’s book “The Book Of Revelation: From An Israelite And Historicist Interpretation“
Victor McGowan’s book “The Revelation and the History of Christendom: Prophecy Fulfilled to the End of Our Time“
Pastor Steve Wohlberg, End Times Delusions about the rapture, tribulation, antichrist and Israel.
Robert Carignola’s book “The Present Reign Of Jesus Christ” explained much of the fulfillment of Revelation.
All of these saints witnessed against the antichrist Popes of Rome, and you ignore their testimony.
The Church of England declared that the Papal Church of Rome is the Babylonian beast.
The Church of Scotland Confession of Faith declared the Pope as the Antichrist, the man of sin and son of perdition.
The Lutheran confession of faith 1603 testified that “the Pope is the very Antichrist, who exalteth himself above, and opposeth himself against Christ.”
The Irish Articles of Religion of 1615 testified that the Bishop of Rome is the Man of Sin.
The London Baptist Confession of 1689, proclaims that the Popes of Rome is the antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ.”
Westminster Confession of Faith states that the Popes of Rome is the antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ.
http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/historic-witnesses-against-the-antichrist-beast-the-popes-of-rome/
On the study which proves that the Popes of Rome fulfill Bible prophecy as the antichrist beast, there are these testimonies, so obviously it’s not just my opinion.
Quotes from our forefathers of the faith, about the Antichrist Popes of Rome:
Eberhard II (1240), archbishop of Salzburg, affirmed that the Pope was the antichrist.
“Stated at a synod of bishops held at Regensburg in 1240 that the people of his day were “accustomed” to calling the pope antichrist.” (LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers)
The history of the persecutions and wars against the people called Waldenses or Waldois, in the valleys of Angrogne, Lucerne, St. Martin, Perouse, and others, in the country of Piedmont, from A.D. 1555, to A.D. 1561.
“For who would ever have judged or suspected in his mind, that the bishop of Rome (commonly received, and believed, almost of all men, to be the vicar and vicegerent of Christ here in earth) to be antichrist, and the great adversary of God, whom St. Paul so expressly prophesieth of, in these latter days to be revealed by the brightness of the Lord’s coming, as all men now, for the most part, may see it is come to pass?” Foxes Book of Martyrs: The Waldensian martyrs of Peidmont
John Wycliffe said Antichrist, the head of all these evil men, is the pope of Rome.
John, (1330-1384), called the Morning Star of the Reformation, spent most of his life teaching at Oxford University and was recognized by John of Guant (The Duke of Lancaster) as extraordinarily gifted in theology. He translated the Latin Vulgate Bible into English and placed it in the hands of the people.
Wycliffe said of the Pope:
“When the western church was divided for about 40 years between two rival popes, one in Rome and the other in Avigon, France, each pope called the other pope antichrist – and John Wycliffe is reputed to have regarded them as both being right: “two halves of Antichrist, making up the perfect Man of Sin between them.”
“We suppose that Antichrist, the head of all these evil men, is the pope of Rome.” (Ibid, p. 90)
Matthias of Janow said the Pope is the most wicked Christian, falsely styling himself by that name.
Matthias was a fourteenth-century Bohemian ecclesiastical writer. Matthias came to be known as the Bohemian Wycliffe. He received his doctorate from the University of Paris and in 1381 became the canon in the Cathedral of Prague. His writings paved the way for the Hussite movement.
Janow based his conclusions about the Antichrist on II Thessalonians 2, Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 and 17. Here is one of his statements:
“The Antichrist has already come. He is neither Jew, pagan Saracean nor worldly tyrant, but the ‘man who opposes Christian truth and the Christian life by way of deception;—he is, and will be, the most wicked Christian, falsely styling himself by that name, assuming the highest station in the church, and possessing the highest consideration, arrogating dominion over all ecclesiastics and laymen;’ one who, by the working of Satan, assumes to himself power and wealth and honor, and makes the church, with its goods and sacraments, subservient to his own carnal ends.” Froom, PFF, volume 2, p. 40.
John Purvey said the Papacy was the kingdom of the Antichrist.
John (1354 – 1414) was one of the leading followers of the English theologian and reformer John Wycliffe during the late fourteenth and early.
Luther said “We are not the first who interpret the Papacy as the kingdom of Antichrist…He (John Purvey in 1390 AD) rightly and truly pronounces the Pope “Antichrist” as he is…a witness indeed, foreordained by God to confirm our doctrine.” (Martin Luther, Commentarius in Apocalypsin reprint).
William White said that the pope… is nothing else but a devilish estate and heavy yoke of antichrist, and therefore he is an enemy unto Christ’s truth.
William was a follower of John Wycliffe, and he was well learned, upright, and a well-spoken priest.
“That the wicked living of the pope, and his holiness, is nothing else but a devilish estate and heavy yoke of antichrist, and therefore he is an enemy unto Christ’s truth.”
William Tyndale said the Pope is the antichrist and his doctrine sprung of the devil.
William Tyndale (1493-1536) was an English scholar who became a leading figure in Protestant Reformation in the years leading up to his execution.
Tyndale translated the Greek Bible into English, but the Roman Catholic Church fought against him publishing it. The Catholic church believed that only the mother church is able to rightly interpret the Bible.
‘The Jews look for Christ, and he is come fifteen hundred years ago, and they not aware: we also have looked for antichrist, and he has reigned as long, and we not aware: and that because either of us looked carnally for him, and not in the place where we ought to have sought. The Jews had found Christ verily, if they had sought him in the law and the prophets, whither Christ sendeth them to seek. John v. We also had spied out antichrist long ago, if we had looked into the doctrine of Christ and his apostles, where, because the beast sees himself now to be sought for, he roars.’ (Ibid, p. 46)
Tyndale was caught, arrested, tried, and sentenced to death.
Huldreich Zwingli proclaimed the might and power of the Devil, that is, of the Antichrist… the Papacy has to be abolished.
Zwingli (1484-1531) was a great Swiss Reformer who remarked about the Papacy:
“I know that in it works the might and power of the Devil, that is, of the Antichrist… the Papacy has to be abolished… But by no other means can it be more thoroughly routed than by the word of God (2 Thessalonians 2), because as soon as the world receives this in the right way, it will turn away from the Pope without compulsion.” Principle Works of Zwingli, Vol. 7, p. 135.
John Calvin said we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist.
John (1509-1564) was an influential French theologian and pastor during the Protestant Reformation. Trained at the University of Paris for the priesthood, he later studied at Bourges where he became converted, and joined the reformation cause against the Roman Catholic heresy.
John Calvin declared,“I deny him to be the vicar of Christ, who, in furiously persecuting the gospel, demonstrates by his conduct that he is Antichrist–I deny him to be the successor of Peter..I deny him to be the head of the church.” “Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt…I shall briefly show that (Pauls words in 2 Thessalonians 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy” John Calvin, Tracts, Vol. 1, pp. 219,220. John Calvin, Institutes.
Martin Luther declared “We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist.”
Martin Luther was an Augustinian monk, who the Lord called out of the Papal Church.
“Nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist….For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny.” Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196-197
“I know that the pope is Antichrist, and that his throne is that of Satan himself.“ D’Aubigne, History Of The Reformation Of The Sixteenth Century, Vol II, Book VI, Chapter IX
Nicolaus von Amsdorf said that the pope is the real, true Antichrist.
Nicolaus (1483-1565) was a friend and ardent colleague of Martin Luther. Notice his words on the identity of Antichrist:
“He will be revealed and come to naught before the last day, so that every man shall comprehend and recognize that the pope is the real, true Antichrist and not the vicar of Christ. . . .Therefore those who consider the pope and his bishops as Christian shepherds and bishops are deeply in error, but even more are those who believe the Turk is the Antichrist. Because the Turk rules outside of the church and does not sit in the holy place, nor does he seek to bear the name of Christ but is an open antagonist of Christ and His church. This does not need to be revealed, but it is clear and evident because he persecutes Christians openly and not as the pope does, secretly under the form of godliness.” Froom, PFF, volume 2, p. 305., Furnemliche und gewisse Zeichen, sig.A2r.,v.)
Philipp Melanchthon, a German Reformer, said that the Roman Pontiff is the antichrist.
Philipp (1497-1560), born Philipp Schwartzerdt, was Martin Luther’s closest collaborator, though of a calmer spirit. His concept of the Antichrist is unmistakable:
“Since it is certain that the pontiffs and the monks have forbidden marriage, it is most manifest, and true without any doubt, that the Roman Pontiff, with his whole order and kingdom, is very Antichrist. Likewise in II Thes. 2, Paul clearly says that the man of sin will rule in the church exalting himself above the worship of God, etc. . . . But it is certain that the popes do rule in the church, and under the title of the church in defending idols. . . . “Wherefore I affirm that no heresy hath risen, nor indeed shall be, with which these descriptions of Paul can more truly and certainly accord and agree than with this pontifical kingdom. . . .The prophet Daniel also attributes these two things to Antichrist; namely, that he shall place an idol in the temple, and worship [it] with gold and silver; and that he shall not honor women. . . .That both of them belong to the Roman Pontiff, who does not clearly see? The idols are clearly the impious masses, the worship of saints, and the statues which are exhibited in gold and silver that they may be worshiped.” Translated from Melanchthon, Disputationes, No. 56, “De Matrimonio”, in Opera (Corpus Reformatorum), vol. 12 col. 535
Ulriucus Zuinglius said the Pope is the Antichrist whom Paul described.
Ulriucus was a zealous reformer, born at Wildehausen, in Switzerland. In regard to 2 Thessalonians 2 (answering the papal application of it to the Protestants,) he said:
“Let our doctrine be examined, and it will appear that they are false. We preach Jesus Christ and him crucified, and that he is the only Reconciler and the only succour of man, but the Papists preach the Pope, the Antichrist, whom here Paul so accurately describes.” (Ibid, p. 47)
John Hooper said the Pope is the capital enemy of Christ and his religion.
John was the Bishop of Gloucester from 1551-1554. He was a proponent of the English Reformation, he was martyred during the Queen Mary Persecutions.
He spoke strong words about the identity of the Antichrist:
“If godly Moses and his brother Aaron never acclaimed this title [to be God’s vicar and lieutenant] in the earth, doubtless it is a foul and detestable arrogancy that these ungodly bishops of Rome attribute unto themselves to be the heads of Christ’s church. . . .“Because God hath given this light unto my countrymen, which be all persuaded (or else God sent them to be persuaded!), that the Bishop of Rome, nor none other is Christ’s vicar upon the earth, it is no need to use any long or copious oration: it is so plain that it needeth no probation: the very properties of Antichrist, I mean of Christ’s great and principal enemy, are so openly known to all men that are not blinded with the smoke of Rome, that they know him to be the beast that John describeth in the Apocalypse.” Froom, PFF, volume 2, p. 382.
Master John Bradford, who was martyred in 1555, said “the usurped authority of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome is undoubtedly that great Antichrist.”
Master John, a faithful Minister and pillar of Christ’s Church, valiantly and cheerfully gave his blood in the name of Christ. In a letter to Lady Vane, he wrote,
‘ The usurped authority of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome is undoubtedly that great Antichrist, of whom the apostles do so much admonish us.’
In his Sermon on the Lord’s Supper, he said,
‘ It is a plain sign of Antichrist to deny the substance of bread and wine to be in the Lord’s Supper after consecration; for in so doing, and in granting transubstantiation, the property of the human nature of Christ is denied ; for it is not of the human nature, but of the divine nature, to be in many places at once.
Now grant transubstantiation, and then Christ’s natural body must needs be in many places, which is nothing else but to confound the two natures in Christ, or to deny Christ’s human nature, which is the self same thing, St. John says, to deny Christ to be come in the flesh.’ (Ibid, p. 45)
“Wherefore I now am condemned and shall be burned as an heretic. For, because I will not grant the antichrist of Rome to be Christ’s vicar-general and supreme head of his church here and every where upon earth, by God’s ordinance.” Froom, PFF, volume 2, p. 378.
In 1555 Hugh Latimer said before being burned to death, “What fellowship have Christ with Antichrist?“
He attended Cambridge University and in 1535, he was appointed Bishop of Worcester. He began to preach publicly on the need for the translation of the Bible into English.
This was a dangerous move as the first translation of the New Testament by William Tyndale had recently been banned by the Pope.
Latimer was called before Cardinal Thomas Wolsey and he was given an admonition and a warning. For his witness, Latimer was burned to death in 1555 by the Catholic Church next to Nicholas Ridley. Latimer said of the Pope;
‘ What fellowship hath Christ with Antichrist ? Therefore it is not lawful to bear the yoke with the Papists. Come forth from among them, and separate yourselves from them, saith the Lord.’ (Ibid, p. 45)
Nicholas Ridley said before being burned to death that the See of Rome is the seat of Satan.
He was the English Bishop of London, he received his Master’s degree in 1525 from Pembroke College, Cambridge. He played a major part in many intellectual discussions on religion, primarily Anglican doctrine. He also ordered the removal of images from churches under his jurisdiction.
Ridley, in his farewell letter, before he suffered, he said;
“The see of Rome is the seat of Satan, and the bishop of the same, that maintaineth the abominations thereof, is Antichrist himself indeed. And for the same causes, this see at this day is the same which St. John calls, in his Revelation, Babylon, or the whore of Babylon, and spiritually, Sodom and Egypt, the mother of fornications and abominations upon earth.” (Ibid, p. 45)
Thomas Cranmer said before being burned to death that the Pope is Christ’s enemy, and the antichrist.
Cranmer (1489-1556) as the Archbishop of Canterbury, he was responsible for establishing the first doctrinal and liturgical structures of the reformed Church of England.
At his execution on March 21, 1556, he withdrew his forced confession, and proclaimed the truth of the Protestant faith, and testified against the Pope;
“Christ biddeth us to obey the king. The bishop of Rome biddeth us to obey himself: therefore unless he be antichrist, I cannot tell what to make of him. Wherefore if I should obey him, I cannot obey Christ.”
“Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons.” (Works by Cranmer, vol.1, pp.6-7)
‘ As for the Pope, I refuse him as Christ’s enemy and the Antichrist, with all his false doctrine.‘ (The Testimony of The Reformers, E. Bickersteth, 1836, pp. 44,45)
“After all these sprung up the pope, that triple-crowned monster, and great antichrist, which took upon him authority, not only over the clergy but also climbed above kings and emperors, deposing them at his pleasure, and settled himself in the temple of God, that is, in the consciences of men, extolling himself above God, dispensing with good laws, and giving men leave to break them, and to regard more his decrees than the everlasting commandments of God.” Froom, PFF, volume 2, p. 392.
Master Bullingham said the pope is antichrist, Rome religion from hell.
‘I tell thee plainly, Bullingham, John Calvin (whose Institutions I have perused since our departure) telleth me plainly, by God’s word, that it is an idol; and that the pope is antichrist, and his clergy the filthy sink-hole of hell. And now I believe it; for I feel it sensibly. O that God had revealed these matters unto me in times past! I would have bequeathed this Romish religion (or rather irreligion) to the devil of hell, from whence it came.” From Bridgewater, April 26, anno 1562.
John Hullie was burned to death for proclaiming that the Pope is the Antichrist.
John (1520-1556), a minister, who, being first brought up in the school of Eton, was afterward scholar, and then conduct in the King’s College, at Cambridge.
“Mark well here, good Christians, who is this beast, and worshippers that shall be partakers of that unspeakable torment. The beast is none other but the carnal and fleshly kingdom of antichrist, the pope with his rabble of false prophets and ministers, as it is most manifest; which, to maintain their high titles, worldly promotions, and dignities, do with much cruelty, daily more and more set forth and establish their own traditions, decrees, decretals, contrary to God’s holy ordinances, statutes, laws, and commandments, and wholly repugnant to his sincere and pure religion and true worshipping.”
John Wesley said that the whole succession of popes from Gregory VII. are undoubtedly Antichrist.
John (1703-1791), an Anglican cleric and Christian theologian, was largely credited, along with his brother Charles Wesley, as founding the Methodist movement.
“The whole succession of popes from Gregory VII. are undoubtedly Antichrist. Yet this hinders not, but that the last pope in this succession will be more eminently the Antichrist, The man of sin, adding to that of his predecessors, a peculiar degree of wickedness from the bottomless pit.” (Explanatory notes upon the New Testament, John Wesley, Vol. II, 1813, p. 431)
http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/the-antichrist-sea-beast-of-revelation-13-is-the-popes-of-the-roman-catholic-church/
Sorry, David. Looks like one of my links wasn’t liked. I fixed it and posted in 2 parts.
Part 2:
So, let’s lay this out on a piece of 8×11 paper. We’ll use a conversion of 1.5 inches = 600 feet to keep it all on one page. Put the paper on its side and drawer a line all the way across the bottom, and mark off one-inch increments. Starting at the left, at the 1 inch mark, draw a vertical line 3-3/8 inches long. Now, at the 7-3/4 inch mark, draw another vertical line 1 inch long. Now, from the top of the long line at the 1 inch mark, draw an angled line down to the top of the shorter line at the 7-3/4 mark and then down through the horizontal line. That’s your problem.
The long line at the left of the page is the top of St Peter’s dome. The shorter line is the obelisk, and the intersection of the angled line with the horizontal line at approximately the 10-1/2 inch mark is where the sun would have to rise in order for the obelisk to cast a shadow onto St Peter’s dome.
Here’s a picture taken from the top of the dome looking at the obelisk and the square:
help-tourists-in-rome.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/St.-Peters-Square-seen-from-the-dome-of-St.-Peters-Basilica-in-Rome.jpg
(you’ll have to add the http:// at the front. this site won’t let me post with that included)
That shows the problem we just laid on the 8×11 paper. The sun would have to be at the entrance of the square at dawn on the spring equinox to cast the necessary shadow. Isn’t going to happen.
BTW, there’s a nifty simplistic formula for calculating how far away the horizon is from an object given that there’s nothing blocking line of sight. It’s most effective on flat plains or when standing on the coast looking out to sea, but not all that effective inland given hills and such. The formula is
Horizon = Square root (height/0.5736)
Where horizon is in miles and height is in feet above the ground. For example, a 6-foot-tall man can see a little over 3 miles to the horizon. A 134-foot-tall obelisk can “see” 15 miles to the horizon, and a 453-foot-tall dome can “see” 39 miles to the horizon. And that’s really your problem. The dome of St Peter’s would have to be 24 miles (39-15=24) away from the obelisk for the sun to cause the obelisk to cast a shadow high enough to cover the dome.
Truth: this formula is a bit simplistic. It doesn’t account for curvature of the Earth, atmospheric distortion, and that Earth’s gravity can bend light so that you can actually see the horizon further away. Some estimates are that the formula is off as much as 20%. But even at that error, the distances would be much larger than the actual separation between the obelisk and the dome.
But perhaps you only meant that the shadow has to touch the bottom of the dome? How tall a shadow could the obelisk cast on St Peter’s? Given the above dimensions, and the 15 miles to the horizon, and assuming a flat plain with no mountains between the obelisk and the horizon (not even close), the tallest shadow would be a whopping 136 feet. Even adding 20% only gets you to 163 feet. That might get you part way up the front façade of the basilica, but not even that given the terrain to the east.
Ever hear of a sun dial?
That’s some interesting information Karl. Even if the shadow of Baal’s shaft never falls on the dome; the symbolism is there.
Can you explain to me why the Popes choose to have an Egyptian Obelisk, which represents the sun god, in the middle of St. Peter’s Square? In Egypt, Obelisks were placed in front of temples that were designated as temple of sun worship. So t designates St. Peter’s Basilica as a sun temple, and when you go inside, what do you see? A large sun symbol!
It’s not that easy, David. You asserted that the shadow falls on the dome. How can there be “symbolism” if that can’t happen?
But now it’s Baal? I thought the assertion was Ra, or on another page, Nimrod?
Neither the pope or the designer of St Peter’s Square brought the obelisk over from Egypt. It was already in Rome, and it was probably used as a cheaper alternative to transporting an alternative to the site.
But the cross on top is a cool symbol: the victory of the Son over the silly sun god, whatever name you want to give it.
I believe it’s the only known Egyptian obelisk with no hieroglyphics on it.
The sun has been used as a symbol for the Son of God since early Christianity. It has no more meaning in regards to sun worship than my wife’s garden gnome “symbolizes” she believes in fairy creatures.
Yes, that’s what I asserted, and I don’t trust your supposed evidence proves it wrong. Baal’s shaft represented the sun god. In Egypt, where the obelisk was made, the sun god’s name is Ra. Try looking up the word Baal in your Bible.
It’s interesting that you think that it’s okay to have a sun god symbol at the Vatican. In the middle of a sun wheel.
The cross on top of the obelisk is ultimately for Tammuz, the incarnate sun god of Babylon; and of the Roman Catholic Church; which in the Bible is called Mystery, Babylon the Great. . Your bishops and cardinals wear purple and scarlet, just like Revelation 17 says that it would. Your Pope/priests use a golden cup, just like Revelation 17 says that it would
The T on the Eucharist wafer is for Tammuz too, as he is what is symbolically born out of the Satanic Eucharist ceremony, where the Pope/priest is clearly revering a round wafer, which represents the sun god. Then he puts the round sun god wafer into the Monstrance, on a crescent moon holder; which represents the moon goddess; and their symbolic sexual union; which symbolically produces Tammuz, their Christ.
Your sick church does this every day, in every church around the world, and it is blasphemous!
Gotta go to work for the week so I’ll get back to you next weekend.
You don’t trust geometry? That’s what I used to disprove your shadows on the dome. If I’m wrong, use geometry to prove that. Either I’m correct or you are. It’s that simple.
And this “+” is a funny looking “T.” But like like I said, I’ll get back with you.
Have a great week!
Here’s a link to a picture that is taken from St Peter’s Basilica, looking toward the obelisk and the rising sun. It seems pretty clear that when the sun comes over the horizon, that it can hit the top of the obelisk and cast a shadow onto the dome. http://romancatholicbeliefs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/321-1225.jpg
This image shows that the street leading up to the obelisk and St. Peter’s Basilica, is in perfect alignment with the rising sun of the equinox. http://romancatholicbeliefs.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/church3.gif
Even if the shadow of the obelisk can’t hit the dome, there is no mistaking the Egyptian phallic symbol in St. Peter’s Square, in the middle of a sun wheel.
Here’s a Bible study about how the Pope of Rome fulfills Bible prophecy as the antichrist beast of Revelation. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/the-antichrist-sea-beast-of-revelation-13-is-the-popes-of-the-roman-catholic-church/
Here’s a Bible study about how the Pope of Rome fulfills Bible prophecy as the The Little Horn Of Daniel 7 http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/the-little-horn-of-daniel-7/
Here’s a Bible study about how the Pope of Rome fulfills Bible prophecy as the Son Of Perdition Of 2 Thessalonians 2 http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/the-son-of-perdition-of-2-thessalonians-2/
Here’s a Bible study about how the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate church, and not part of the true church, the true temple of God. http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/measuring-the-temple-of-revelation-11/
Here’s a Bible study about how the Roman Catholic Church fulfills Bible prophecy as the harlot church, called ‘Mystery, Babylon the Great’, as she is dressed in purple and scarlet, and has a golden cup of abominations (the Eucharist ceremony cup) http://revelationtimelinedecoded.com/revelation-17-the-harlot-roman-catholic-church/
You simply have no ground to stand on, for you are defending the antichrist, and the church of the antichrist.