[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse" "Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD" "Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy" Woodworking and Construction Hacks "CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination" "NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law" "Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing" Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn. After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending. Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar” "Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny" "Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is" Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner. Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally "It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive' (Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl "Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race" He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom! "Kamala’s Inane Talking Points" "The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics" Easy Drywall Patch Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind" Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’ Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer? hurricanes and heat waves are Worse 'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA. Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence. Status: Not Logged In; Sign In Bible Study See other Bible Study Articles Title: The 5th horseman Source: Revelation 19 URL Source: http://the5horsemen.com Published: May 6, 2016 Author: Me and John/Jesus Post Date: 2016-05-06 08:28:45 by interpreter Keywords: revelation, 5th horseman, Marriage Supper Views: 20077 Comments: 68 The 5th horseman (who appears in Rev. 19) Many Christians think the 5th horseman is Jesus, but I disagree for many reasons, first of all because the history books say Jesus returned in 312 AD. But at the same time, it can also be argued that the five horsemen are five dispensations of the second coming. The name of the 5th horseman is "Word of God" which signifies that the 5th horseman is a Slav. Slav is short for "Slovo" which means Word of God. The name of his horse is "Faithful and True" which is the definition of Orthodox and signifies that he rides the Orthodox Church into power as did the first rider of the white horse. The sharp two-edged sword coming out of his mouth represents the Word of God which he rules by, and judges and makes war. It also signifies that the 5th horseman is one of the seven golden lampstands established by the early Church to give light to the seven parts of the earth. When connected on a world map or globe, they form a sharp two-edged sword. (See it at 7stars7lampstands.com). I believe that the 5th horseman is Slobodan Milosevic and the Serbs. The name of the nation that no one recognizes except the fifth horseman is Republica Serpska. The president of Serbia is "king" of the Serbian kings and lords. As general Ratko Mladi hollered out to the birds of the air, standing in the sun on the World News, the Srebronica massacre he was about to carry out was the prophesied Marriage Supper of the Lamb which results in thousands of corpses for the birds of the air to feast on. His exact words are quoted in Rev. 19:18. That may seem unChristian-like to some Christians, but in Luke 19:27 Jesus commands His followers to kill His enemies, defined by Jesus as anyone who does not want a Christian nation to rule over them. That fits the Srebronicans to a T. And about half of the Srebronican's lives were taken, which fulfills the prophecy of Jesus in Luke 17:33-37 and Mat. 24:40-41. The Srebronica Massacre represents the proper marriage between Church and State. That is, in Republica Srpska, the Church and State are united as one. Also in Serbia, under Milosevic, the Church and State were united as one -- then in 2000 he was defeated at the pols, and was arrested and sent to the Hague. The Good News is (or the really bad news for the enemies of Jesus is) Milosevic's party is now back in power, and once again there is very little separation of Church and State in Serbia, and they are basically united as one. More so than any other Christian nation, the Serbs rule with a rod of iron, both figuratively and literally. That is, a “rod” can also mean a gun, which is made of iron. At times, Serbian martyrs lead the Serbs into battle, wearing white robes and riding white horses (as is well-documented by WW I historians). But the vast majority of the time since then, Serbian priests dressed in white robes lead the Serbs into battle riding on the turret of a tank. The False Prophet of ch. 19 The Muslim militants not killed by Milosevic and his generals, plus the false prophet(s) who have aided the Islamic invaders of their ancient homeland "will be cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone" (vv 20-21) . It deeply saddens me to have to finger a popular fellow countryman, but Bill Clinton best fits the description of the false prophet. Almost single-handily he enabled Muslims, the 7th head of Satan, to take over a Christian nation, which is a big No-No with God. It also saddens me that Clinton has many followers today, chief of which is his other half, who (according to some polls) is likely to be our next president. I hope and pray that we elect Trump who hates Muslim militants with a passion as every follower of God should. Otherwise , I fear that we will all go to hell in a hand basket riding on Clinton's coattails (as the Revelation may indeed be suggesting here). Also deserving mention is Britain, France, Germany and Italy, who voted with the US to recognize the new Muslim/Satanic nation in Kosovo while at the same time refusing to recognize the new Christian nation in Bosnia. The false prophet of ch. 19 should not to be confused with the two false prophets of ch. 14 who back the antichrist in the 42 months of great tribulation (known as WW II). Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Comments (1-28) not displayed.       .       .       . #29. To: nolu chan (#28) The accounts of the two contemporary authors, though not entirely consistent, have been merged into a popular notion of Constantine seeing the Chi-Rho sign on the evening before the battle. Both authors agree that the sign was not widely understandable to denote Christ (although among the Christians, it was already being used in the catacombs along with other special symbols to mark and/or decorate Christian tombs). Its first imperial appearance is on a Constantinian silver coin from c. 317, which proves that Constantine did use the sign at that time, though not very prominently. He made more extensive use of the Chi-Rho and the Labarum later, during the conflict with Licinius. Some have considered the vision in a solar context (e.g., as a solar halo phenomenon called a Sun dog), which may have preceded the Christian beliefs later expressed by Constantine. Coins of Constantine depicting him as the companion of a solar deity were minted as late as 313, the year following the battle. Seriously, some disagreeing dudes merging a popular notion of Constantine seeing a sign, is historical proof of the return of Christ on October 27, 312 A.D.??? Actually it says they are "not entirely consistent" meaning they are mostly consistent, that Constantine saw a Chi Rho in the clouds on Oct 27 312 AD, and thereafter put it on his coins and stuff. You need to read the entire article. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-06   17:54:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #30. To: All (#0) Also deserving mention is Britain, France, Germany and Italy, who voted with the US to recognize the new Muslim/Satanic nation in Kosovo while at the same time refusing to recognize the new Christian nation in Bosnia. The news today is, London has now elected a Muslim mayor which exemplifies what I have said about Britain being a false prophet. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-06   18:11:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #31. To: interpreter (#30) Britain being a false prophet "Britain" isn't a prophet. Britain isn't even a person. It's an island, a clod of earth in the sea. Nothing more. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-06   18:24:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #32. To: interpreter (#26) What is the first word of the Bible? In (in English)? But I suppose you mean In the beginning in Hebrew? You rounded on me and told me to "read my Bible", as though I haven't. Given the depth of my studies in the Scriptures, I found this irritating, so I replied with a direct question. It isn't a simple question, for it requires you to decide what the Bible IS, how you know, and think through language issues. And in the process of doing that, perhaps your eyes will open to the reality that crazy theories based on nuanced words in a single English translation is probably not the way a man should invest his religious energies. Of course you're free to do as you please, as is you're right. But the reason I challenge some of this nonsense is not because I am ignorant of the Bible, as your suggestion to me to "read the Bible" implied, but the contrary: because I have, I recognize nonsense that isn't in it. I'm actually trying to help you, not pick on you. Jesus instructed his followers not to spend their time dwelling on signs, but to do what he said. You will find a better and more rewarding relationship with God if you do that with your religious time, as opposed to studying and believing in nonsense. Let's say, for a moment, that everything you believe about prophesy, etc., is utterly true, that you see the future, and the identity of horsemen, etc. You have cracked the code and can prophesy! So what. Balaam was a true prophet. So was Caiaphas. He prophesied. Eli was a prophet, but God broke his neck. Being a seer, knowing, will avail you nothing if you don't do what Jesus said to do. Conversely, being utterly ignorant of prophesy will not harm you at all, as long as you do what Jesus said to do. That is the place to invest your religious money: read what JESUS said to do, and do it. If you're spending that time instead on the "game of prophesies", you're investing your time badly. Indeed, the sense of superiority that this secret, esoteric knowledge of things hidden gives you is more of a moral hazard to you than not knowing any of it. And in any case, if your nuances regarding prophesy depend upon nuances of 17th Century English, then you should know that you're wrong about what the words mean. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-06   18:36:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #33. To: Vicomte13 (#32) And in any case, if your nuances regarding prophesy depend upon nuances of 17th Century English, then you should know that you're wrong about what the words mean. My interpretation of the Revelation is based on the original Greek text, and not on any English nuances. I have found that most English Bibles are translated wrong, especially when it comes to the Revelation. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-06   19:04:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #34. To: Vicomte13 (#31) "Britain" isn't a prophet. Britain isn't even a person. It's an island, a clod of earth in the sea. Nothing more. Whole nations can be a false prophet. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-06   19:12:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #35. To: interpreter (#33) My interpretation of the Revelation is based on the original Greek text, and not on any English nuances. I have found that most English Bibles are translated wrong, especially when it comes to the Revelation. So you are calling God a liar. You're a very foolish person. A K A Stone  posted on  2016-05-06   19:28:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #36. To: interpreter (#27) You have boldly gone where no man has gone before. redleghunter  posted on  2016-05-07   1:46:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #37. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13, interpreter (#36) colonization of Mars You have boldly gone where no man has gone before. As it was reported (not in the Bible yet), the first man flight to Mars might be a one way trip because of technical and financial constraints. We need bold men! A Pole  posted on  2016-05-07   2:19:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #38. To: interpreter (#33) My interpretation of the Revelation is based on the original Greek text,, and not on any English nuances. I have found that most English Bibles are translated wrong, especially when it comes to the Revelation. Two questions: (1) Which Greek manuscript tradition, specifically? Patriarchal Text? Erasmus Text? Alexandrian Text? (2) Diabazete koine ellenike? Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-07   8:13:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #39. To: Vicomte13 (#38) They're always shocked to learn "the original Greek text" is actually a large set of varying texts. Then they usually continue referring to that imaginary "original Greek text" anyway. Roscoe  posted on  2016-05-07   8:22:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #40. To: Roscoe (#39) I'm not hostile to going through Greek texts, which really means looking at careful translations into English of Greek texts, because nobody speaks Koine Greek. I find the differences in the manuscript traditions to be interesting, because in a few cases the differences are material. The difference in canon between Eastern Orthodox and Catholic don't make a tinker's dam of difference, but the presence of Enoch, in particular, in the Ethiopian Orthodox Canon really does change either one's perception of what the Scripture is, or one's perception of human history. And of course the different views of what Scripture is between Catholics/Orthodox, on the one hand, and Protestants on the other, makes for an interesting divergence. I'm a Catholic who remembers that the Orthodox and Catholic Church were one, and that when they were, Enoch was iScripture in part of the Catholic Church without causing a schism, so I consider the theological world with and without that text. And I find Sola Scriptura to be an immensely powerful tool, though for a different purpose than Protestants use it. Certainly it's a fun tool for debate, but I find it useful in parsing the Scripture itself, for reasons that are of great importance to my approach, but that would probably bore most readers to tears. For example, the fact that covenants are contracts I knew generically, but that the contracts between God and men in the Bible actually have the terms of the contract within them, most particularly the PARTIES to the contract, suddenly brings clarity to one of thorniest issues of Scripture, an issue that the Apostles themselves fought over. When one sets aside all tradition and just READS the Mosaic Covenant as exactly what it is - a contract between parties, one immediately realizes that none of the laws in it, not any of them, ever applied to anybody but circumcised descendants of the Hebrews at Mt Sinai still living in the land of Canaan and its environs. It's a specific and quite narrow contract. The early Christians of the Bible were almost all Jews, and so THEY had an immense amount of difficulty taking what was for THEM a contract and a binding law, and realizing that that law, which had been their religion for 1500 years, had nothing to do with eternal life. They never quite got there. Instead, we have Paul and James wrestling with "The Law" and coming to different conclusions, and the Council of Jerusalem appearing to change the Law, and Jesus both saying that not a dot of the Law would change while then apparently changing vast swathes of it. This is real, non-trivial tension, until you realize that the law of Sinai pertained only to Hebrews, in the land of Israel, and only promised them a farm, and had nothing whatever to do with life after death or final judgement. Jesus' New Covenant did not replace the old one, it's the ONLY covenant with Gentiles (other than the covenant of Noah, which is even with the animals). And for Jews, it's the only covenant that promises life after death and life in the City of God. Christians have been conflicted about "law" since the First Century, because all of the anxiety of Jews on the subject of THEIR Law, which DID come from God, and its relationship to what Jesus said. But if one is very austere in applying Sola Scriptura, reading ONLY the text alone and completely disregarding two millennia of Christian theological tradition struggling with the question, one discovers that the answer is literally RIGHT THERE in the text of the covenant itself. Of course, THAT means that the Ten Commandments never applied to anybody but Hebrews in Israel, and still don't. (Of course "don't kill" and the like are indeed commandments of God that apply to all who want eternal life, but THOSE come to us through Noah, or through Jesus. They are IN the Mosaic covenant, but they are not law for the world BECAUSE OF the Mosaic covenant - because the Mosaci covenant never applied to anybody but Israelites, either before or after Jesus. That's what the text actually SAYS, read precisely. And it answers the question of "which law" or "ANY law" decisively. Unfortunately, that 2000 years of Christian tradition, based on struggling with the JEWISH perspective on the problem contained in Scripture written by Jews, does not come to the same conclusion. The Catholic/Orthodox conclusion is that the lawmaking power was transferred from the Temple to the Church, and the Church decides. The Protestant conclusion is that the Law of Moses DOES apply, but we're excused from its punishments if we follow Jesus. Both traditions are wrong. The text says what applies to what, and makes everything clear...but in the process vastly diminishes the authority of two millennia of Christian theologians and saints on the subject. I'm fine with that, but most Christians are not. Indeed, some call me Satanic for practicing Sola Scriptura TOO closely, as my form does not give any attention to what other Christians have said about the text. So, putting this all together with what Interpreter is speaking about on THIS thread, I am actually interested in doing real Sola Scriptura with him on the Greek. But on the way I already know I am going to have to deal with extra-Scriptural traditions of what Scripture IS, that we're going to have to use the text he prefers. I'm fine doing that, but only with the understanding that in doing so we have made a completely arbitrary decision based on a preference, and not on the authority of Scripture. Sola Scriptura does not, and cannot, tell you which books and which documents are Scripture. I've heard the argument made that Scripture DOES tell you, because Jesus and the Apostles only cited the books in Scripture. That's bogus, unless of course ENOCH is Scripture, because Jesus quoted Enoch over 10 times, Peter alluded directly to it, and Jude called it by name. The books of Jasher and Jubilees are quoted in Scripture, and those texts are also available to us, and are in the Ethiopian Canon, always have been, and of course the Ethiopian Orthodox Church was founded through the Apostle Philip, so it has the same age and authority as the Greek Orthodox of Roman Catholic Church - they all were once united and the presence of those books in the Ethiopian Scriptures was not a source of Schism. Most people want to accept their own cultural tradition (English, Protestant) as being de facto correct and start from there. But I see no basis for giving the English civilization any sort of defensce when it comes to morality or theological authority. England has been a violent society since Roman times, and has careened from one sort of vicious immorality to another. If I had to pick a race on which to stake the fate of my soul, it would not be the English! Since most Americans' religions come out of England, the traditions of the English Church are accepted without thought. I have no problem with that, as long as it stays latent. When it becomes the basis for the assertion of authority - the "British Israel' movement, then it becomes a preposterous joke, and I won't let that one go. The problem starts when somebody starts to teach a doctrine as important that I don't see in Scripture, or in the broad Christian traditions. That is what I see happening here. But it doesn't make me angry at all - people come at faith and Scripture in their own ways - until somebody takes a pop at MY head because I don't think like they do about religion. THEN I am provoked. Here, I was provoked. I was told to go "read the Bible". Well, I have. Many times through, and studied it. So if my lack of understanding of a subject is based on having MISSED something - well, that's interesting, SHOW ME. That's where I am here. I think that the book of revelation is the most important book of the Bible, but NOT because of the wild imagery. Rather, because it's the only book of the New Testament that God DICTATED, and that in which God insisted on perfection of transmission - 'whoever adds or subtracts a word is damned. It is the only book in which Jesus gives a list of what will get you damned to fire, twice! It's the only book that spells out exactly what happens to us at and after final judgment, and the criteria for being thrown into the fire. It's THE lawbook for distinguishing mortal sin from lesser sins. And it also is the book in which Jesus, speaking directly, demonstrates how Christians can lose their favor with God and be rejected, and how they can regain it. THAT is the theological essence of Revelation that makes it the greatest of all of the books. It's the only extensive lawgiving of Jesus, and it all comes AFTER the Resurrectiona nd Ascenion, from Jesus in power in the Throne Room of God. He spoke in parables on Earth. In Revelation, he speaks bluntly and clearly. But men get caught up in the imagery and look into it to divine the future. God says earlier in Scripture that this is a sterile exercise at best, and given what Jesus shows about the City of God and life after death and judgment in Revelation, it seems like a lot of effort on low-yield ore. However, others might same the same thing to me about my relentless and detailed study of the Jewish Law even AFTER I've said that it never applied to Christians, and it doesn't apply to Jews when it come to eternal life - that's a different covenant. Putting the best spin on it, it is important to interpreter to interpret Revelation in great detail. It strengthens his faith. That's ok. I wouldn't be digging in but for the "read your Bible" hit. Since I do read my Bible, I'd like to see exactly what he is looking at, in the text he's using, that makes him think that what he says is there. I'm genuinely interested. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-07   9:43:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #41. To: Vicomte13 (#38) Two questions: (1) Which Greek manuscript tradition, specifically? Patriarchal Text? Erasmus Text? Alexandrian Text? (2) Diabazete koine ellenike? The Received Text of course, received from the Greek Church. I don't trust anything written by the Alexandrians who were declared to be heretics and kicked them out of the Church in 451 AD about the time the NU and M texts were written. I am not sure exactly what you mean by Diabazete or ellenike but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-07   9:53:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #42. To: Vicomte13 (#40) Putting the best spin on it, it is important to interpreter to interpret Revelation in great detail. It strengthens his faith. That's ok. I wouldn't be digging in but for the "read your Bible" hit. Since I do read my Bible, I'd like to see exactly what he is looking at, in the text he's using, that makes him think that what he says is there. I'm genuinely interested. My bad but you started it when you said I need to read my Bible, and I simply responded in kind, plus I wrongly assumed that you and/or most Basques are not Christians. I'm sorry if I offended you. Now let's get down to the nitty-gritty and study the original Greek text of the Revelation if that's what you want to do. What verse do you want to start with? interpreter  posted on  2016-05-07   10:31:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #43. To: Vicomte13 (#40) (Edited) But I see no basis for giving the English civilization any sort of defensce when it comes to morality or theological authority. Then let me give you the Biblical/theological basis. The English Church is the third horseman to rule the earth for Jesus. And a branch of the English Church (the US) is the 4th Christian superpower to rule the earth. Before the English Church, your Church ruled the earth, but your authority has been replaced by the Anglican lampstand(s) as also predicted in the letter to Ephesus. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-07   11:54:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #44. To: Vicomte13 (#40) That's where I am here. I think that the book of revelation is the most important book of the Bible, but NOT because of the wild imagery. Rather, because it's the only book of the New Testament that God DICTATED, and that in which God insisted on perfection of transmission - 'whoever adds or subtracts a word is damned. t is the only book in which Jesus gives a list of what will get you damned to fire, twice! It's the only book that spells out exactly what happens to us at and after final judgment, and the criteria for being thrown into the fire. It's THE lawbook for distinguishing mortal sin from lesser sins. And it also is the book in which Jesus, speaking directly, demonstrates how Christians can lose their favor with God and be rejected, and how they can regain it. THAT is the theological essence of Revelation that makes it the greatest of all of the books. I will agree that the Revelation is the most important book of the Bible, but not for the reasons you give. It is the most important because it's wild imagery (as you call it) proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is a God and He knows the future (or as we are told in Rev 19:11, it is the proof of Jesus). interpreter  posted on  2016-05-07   12:29:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #45. To: All (#44) I will agree that the Revelation is the most important book of the Bible, but not for the reasons you give. It is the most important because it's wild imagery (as you call it) proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is a God and He knows the future (or as we are told in Rev 19:11, it is the proof of Jesus). Make that Rev 19:10 interpreter  posted on  2016-05-07   15:32:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #46. To: interpreter (#43) Then let me give you the Biblical/theological basis. The English Church is the third horseman to rule the earth for Jesus. And a branch of the English Church (the US) is the 4th Christian superpower to rule the earth. Before the English Church, your Church ruled the earth, but your authority has been replaced by the Anglican lampstand(s) as also predicted in the letter to Ephesus. Ok, so we're going to be using the Erasmus Text, also known as "Textus Receptus", the Greek manuscript underlying the KJV translation, That's fine. So, now, let me then ask - could you show me the Scriptural basis for your assignment of various Churches (such as the Catholic or Anglican) to horsemen of the Apocalypse? Whence does this connection come? Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-07   23:13:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #47. To: Vicomte13 (#46) (Edited) Ok, so we're going to be using the Erasmus Text, also known as "Textus Receptus", the Greek manuscript underlying the KJV translation, That's fine. So, now, let me then ask - could you show me the Scriptural basis for your assignment of various Churches (such as the Catholic or Anglican) to horsemen of the Apocalypse? Whence does this connection come? Well, I have never heard of it being called the Erasmus Text before, but I have the Greek Bible still being used by the Greek Church today, plus several transliterations and several Greek-English concordances. I am in the process of doing my own translation of the Revelation which is a very literal translation of the original Greek. Some of it (chapter 1) is now on the web at 7stars7lampstands.com I haven't got my translation of chapter 6 on the internet yet, but a brief summary of the 4 horsemen (and the 5th horseman of ch.19) is on the net at the5horsemen.com Here is the summary of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th horsemen: The five horsemen of the Revelation can be thought of as five dispensations of the second coming. Following the Byzantine Empire, the second horseman to rule the earth for Jesus was Roman Catholic kings who conquered with a great sword and took peace from the earth during the Crusades. The kings and knights of the Middle Ages generally rode stout red (or chestnut-colored) horses that are better able to support the added weight of the knight's heavy armor than white horses. The third horseman to rule the earth for Jesus was Great Britain, which was founded by King James who rode a black racing horse that England is famous for. The British Empire conquered with economics. The 4th horseman to rule the earth for Jesus is the US which was founded by George Washington who rode a pale horse. It should be noted that all of the horsemen of the Revelation are founded by a Church descended from St. Peter and the first century Church. That is, George Washington, like most of the US founding fathers, was an Episcopalian. And until Obama, most of our presidents have been members of a Church descended from the first century Church established by St. Peter. It is the only Church that has been granted to rule the earth for Jesus, and it can truly be said that the gates of hell cannot prevail against it. US weapons bring hell and death to the enemies of Jesus. The 2nd horseman is still around though, mostly in the Spanish world, and especially in South America. And it is evidenced in the fact that globally about half the world speaks English and the other half speaks Spanish, and especially in Texas where I live. I am just curious, do you live in Spain? interpreter  posted on  2016-05-08   8:41:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #48. To: interpreter (#47) I am just curious, do you live in Spain? Connecticut. I'm Basque in origin, partly. There are at least two Greek Churches today. There is the Greek Orthodox Church, and the Greek Catholic Church (the Byzantine Rite of the Catholic Church). The Greek Orthodox New Testament is based upon a specific manuscript, called the Patriarchal Text. It is not identical to the manuscript that Erasmus published in the 1500s, which was the basis of the Reformation-Era English translations. The Greek Catholics, for their part use the Septuagint also, but not specifically the Petriarchal Text OR Erasmus' Textus Receptus. This may or may not make a difference. In any case, I see that you've given me some online references to what you have been saying, so I will go there and look at those, and then perhaps return to continue our conversation. You've given me the links, and I can read what you've written there, instead of demanding that you reproduce your work for me here. Thank you. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-08   17:00:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #49. To: Vicomte13 (#48) (Edited) Connecticut. I'm Basque in origin, partly. There are at least two Greek Churches today. There is the Greek Orthodox Church, and the Greek Catholic Church (the Byzantine Rite of the Catholic Church). The Greek Orthodox New Testament is based upon a specific manuscript, called the Patriarchal Text. It is not identical to the manuscript that Erasmus published in the 1500s, which was the basis of the Reformation-Era English translations. The Greek Catholics, for their part use the Septuagint also, but not specifically the Petriarchal Text OR Erasmus' Textus Receptus. This may or may not make a difference. In any case, I see that you've given me some online references to what you have been saying, so I will go there and look at those, and then perhaps return to continue our conversation. You've given me the links, and I can read what you've written there, instead of demanding that you reproduce your work for me here. Thank you. Well I am part Jew so we have both been around a long time. I don't consider the Greek Catholic Church to be legit so I couldn't care less what text they use. Like I said, I'm going by the Greek Bible I bought at a Greek Church, which is the text underlying the authorized King James Bible. I learned to read by reading the King James Bible, but I am now discovering that many verses, especially in the Revelation, are translated wrong which tends to completely change the meaning of the verse in English. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-08   17:59:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #50. To: interpreter (#49) The text in a Bible in a Greek Orthodox Church is not the same text as that which underlies the KJV. It is close, but it isn't identical. If you want to see the differences, you can look up the differences between the Patriarchal Text and the Textus Receptus. That will lay them out for you. Both are Byzantine-style manuscripts, but they are not identical by any means. (Of course, no two manuscripts of any length are identical. Word-perfection is not a feature of handwritten language.) Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-08   18:12:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #51. To: interpreter (#49) Well I am part Jew so we have both been around a long time. Everybody on earth shares Adam, Eve, Cain, Noah and Naamah as common ancestors. Beyond that, the family tree divides a bit, but we all have three common grandfathers and two common grandmothers. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-08   18:14:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #52. To: interpreter (#49) I don't consider the Greek Catholic Church to be legit Why? Who founded Greek Church? Hint - you have description in NT. A Pole  posted on  2016-05-08   18:19:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #53. To: Vicomte13 (#50) The text in a Bible in a Greek Orthodox Church is not the same text as that which underlies the KJV. Wrong. On the first page it says "The Greek Text Underlying the English Authorized Version of 1611" interpreter  posted on  2016-05-08   18:40:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #54. To: A Pole (#52) Why? Who founded Greek Church? Hint - you have description in NT. St. Peter and the disciples of course. They founded a lot of Churches including the Church in Rome, but Rome was only given jurisdiction over the western Roman Empire. The Greek Church was given jurisdiction over the eastern Churches, i.e., the Eastern Roman Empire. Rome has no jurisdiction except in Rome and/or the west. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-08   18:52:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #55. To: Vicomte13 (#51) Everybody on earth shares Adam, Eve, Cain, Noah and Naamah as common ancestors. I will agree that Adam was the first civilized man. All archeologists and historians say the first civilization (and the first writing, etc.) sprang up in the Garden of Eden (now Iraq and Syria) around 4000 BC, which is exactly when and where the Bible says the first modern man appeared. But I was alluding to the fact that the Basques were around long before then in Europe (according to my latest Scientific American Mag). But they were overrun by (and intermarried with?) civilized man who originated in the Garden of Eden (except for a small enclave of you guys in Spain evidently but today you are civilized). You are like the Neanderthals whose blood is mixed up with modern man. Do you know what the first writing was? interpreter  posted on  2016-05-08   19:49:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #56. To: interpreter (#53) Vicomte13 The text in a Bible in a Greek Orthodox Church is not the same text as that which underlies the KJV. Wrong. On the first page it says "The Greek Text Underlying the English Authorized Version of 1611" No, interpreter, I am not "wrong". You bought a Bible in a Greek Orthodox Church, but the Bible you bought there, if it has that as the frontspiece, is not in fact suitable for liturgical reading in the Orthodox Church, as it is not based on the official Greek Orthodox Text. The official Greek Orthodox text for liturgical purposes (which, in the Orthodox Church, is the highest and purest purpose, as "lex orandi est lex credendi" - the way we pray is the way we believe) is the Patriarchal Text, not the Textus Receptus. I am not going to play games with you on the matter. You bought a study Bible in an Orthodox Church, and the standards for study bibles are not the same as the standards for liturgical use. The official New Testament manuscript of the Greek Orthodox Church is the Patriarchal Text, and that is NOT the Textus Receptus, and is NOT the text that underlies the 1611 KJV. They are close, but they are not the same. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-08   23:08:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #57. To: interpreter (#55) (Edited) The Garden of Eden was probably located on the Jerusalem Massif, not in Iraq and Syria. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-08   23:09:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #58. To: interpreter (#55) (Edited) Everybody died in the Flood, eight people excepted. Everybody descended from the four breeding pairs on the Ark. The Basques are descended from a woman or women who are descended from those on the ark, and who were then snatched away by angels and taken to the Sheep Hills (the Pyrenees) by the sea. We are like the anakim - descended of the nephilim. It's why Basque women have a difficult time having offspring with others. The Rh negative blood acts as a strong barrier to being submerged in invading cultures, as the invader can have only one child with a Basque woman, but the natives can have many children with each other. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-08   23:14:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #59. To: Vicomte13 (#58) I have rh negative blood. Do you? goodnessmarlok  posted on  2016-05-08   23:43:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #60. To: goodnessmarlok (#59) Yes. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-09   6:47:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #61. To: Vicomte13 (#56) No, interpreter, I am not "wrong". You bought a Bible in a Greek Orthodox Church, but the Bible you bought there, if it has that as the frontspiece, is not in fact suitable for liturgical reading in the Orthodox Church, as it is not based on the official Greek Orthodox Text. The official Greek Orthodox text for liturgical purposes (which, in the Orthodox Church, is the highest and purest purpose, as "lex orandi est lex credendi" - the way we pray is the way we believe) is the Patriarchal Text, not the Textus Receptus. I am not going to play games with you on the matter. You bought a study Bible in an Orthodox Church, and the standards for study bibles are not the same as the standards for liturgical use. The official New Testament manuscript of the Greek Orthodox Church is the Patriarchal Text, and that is NOT the Textus Receptus, and is NOT the text that underlies the 1611 KJV. They are close, but they are not the same. Well I have told you what Bible I have and what I go by (and what most of the world goes by). It was the Bible used in the liturgy in 1611, and as for what the Greek Church uses today, I don't know but I will have to ask the priest of the Greek Church down the road that I often attend. (I am still officially an Episcopalian, but I seldom go there any more because I dont want to catch AIDS from the communion wine). interpreter  posted on  2016-05-09   8:41:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #62. To: Vicomte13 (#60) Am I basque descend then goodnessmarlok  posted on  2016-05-09   8:50:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #63. To: Vicomte13 (#57) The Garden of Eden was probably located on the Jerusalem Massif, not in Iraq and Syria. Where do you get such tripe? The Bible and 100 % of historians say the first civilization sprang up in what is now Iraq and Syria, also called Mesopatomia and/or The Fertile Crescent. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-09   8:50:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #64. To: interpreter (#63) Where do you get such tripe? I tire of you. Enjoy your life. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-09   9:06:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #65. To: goodnessmarlok (#62) Am I basque descend then Who can say? Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-09   9:07:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #66. To: Vicomte13 (#58) Everybody died in the Flood, eight people excepted. Everybody descended from the four breeding pairs on the Ark. The Basques are descended from a woman or women who are descended from those on the ark, and who were then snatched away by angels and taken to the Sheep Hills (the Pyrenees) by the sea. We are like the anakim - descended of the nephilim. It's why Basque women have a difficult time having offspring with others. The Rh negative blood acts as a strong barrier to being submerged in invading cultures, as the invader can have only one child with a Basque woman, but the natives can have many children with each other. You greatly exaggerate things. You have to put the Bible side by side with a world history book to get the full picture. Yes, there was a big flood in Mesopotamia/Eden as all historians attest to, and many people died. But by that time, many Mesopotamians had left Eden and colonized other parts of the earth. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-09   9:08:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #67. To: interpreter (#66) You greatly exaggerate things. That would be you, not me. Believe what you want. I do not find conversation with you to be a conversation but a sword fight, and I am not interested. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-09   9:12:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #68. To: Vicomte13 (#65) Am I basque descend then Who can say? Actually, anyone's blood can be tested to see who they are descended from. I've never been tested but I would not be surprised if I have a little Basque blood in me. Probably from the German side. interpreter  posted on  2016-05-09   9:25:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com