|[Contact, Search]||World History - Yahoo! - Help|
|: H O M E :|
Apokálypsis; "lifting of the veil" or "revelation"
bookoflife.org © Archangel Michael: 01 October 2010.
Book of the Apokálypsis!
Topic: The Apokálypsis Empire in Context
1 October 2010
From 66-77 A.C.E. Rome made war against the Jews and after many battles finally destroyed Jerusalem their capital and main homeland, and destroyed the Jewish temple built allegedly by King Solomon. It is from this war that John may have been a refugee from the region of Palestine; he ends up in Anatolia, modern day Turkey, where he has his first vision. Later the text attributed to his authorship intends on an islet of Patmos, It is written in Greek: Apokálypsis. Its literalist connotation most often used pertains to 'a lifting of a veil,' and of the closest of infinitives, 'to reveal,' perhaps something that was well hidden.
It is later transcribed by some disciples and passed around, being commented on by certain authorities affirming the numerical value of 6,60 and 600 by patrine fathers ( e.g. early Church fathers before the Catholic Church!).
As recent as 2005, parchments dated to centuries later have 616, which would then identify Caligula. However, take a look at Domitian. The Julius line of Caesars were no different than the Spanish World Conquerors, the 10 - 16 th century wave of Moslems from Arabia to both ends of the Earth, nor the Mongalis, indigenous Tatars, a mass wave of violence erupted across earth, and for what to adorn the Roman Temples, and Coliseum, with large bill-boards bragging that Romans just go to other lands and take what is there with absolutely no thought at all!
ROMAN EMPIRE NOT A REPUBLIC
During the early fourth century Rome experienced explosive religious wars. At that time, there were competing versions of Christianity, as well as a traditional state religion based upon a Roman progenerated ancient Greco pantheon. During the first to second century, Christianity remained the underdog religion to which the commoners had progressed their protests toward the state economic-structures by refusing to the worship at state temples (the foundation of the civil Roman economic system). Overtime Christianity became the novel fad as a rebel ideology against elitist state nobles, per say, and it achieved a replacement of the older stale-system of statist-politics. So by the beginning of the fourth century, there were sects that fought over the intricacies of Christian doctrine. However, there were only a few scholars of the Biblical traditions the headed up these sects to which they influenced masses of people. Most persons who ascribed to Jesus’ followers only understood the role of the Jesus as a bringer of the concept of peace, a bringer of the concept love and brotherly love and a bringer of the concept understanding our collective human nature – he was the son of the only true God who came to redeem the imperfect humans.
It was a movement without a headquarters or an established doctrine. Think of it as an ancient period of the likes of the European Reformation and of the later Religious Wars’ period. Yet think of it as a reverse outcome. That is to say, there were many sects, and by the end of the First Council of Nicaea, there was only one version of Christianity which the state adopted as the only viable economic and the only viable political religion. The other religions were allowed to exist, yet now the leader of the world’s most powerful state was a supporter of this new sect called Christianity. However, personally, it is alright to argue that Constantine cared little for Christianity. His objective was to bring peace to the empire. He achieved that, but first he had to have Christianity doctrinized.
A former General and Now new leader of Rome, Constantine set out to gather supporters for his rule. Christians at this time in Roman history became the majority party. Think of them as a legitimate modern-day voting block or in this case a massive rallying force of voices for a particular lifestyle ideology. Constantine politically savvy backed the Christian factions of the Empire and in return the various sects annoyed their allegiance to his legitimacy of rule. On the first order of the ruling agenda was to end the factional fighting between the sects. So Constantine called for a council of all the Bishops in the Empire and from all over to represent what books should be introduced to a standardized cannon.
The Roman state periods can be summed up as follows for easy categorization purposes. From Julius Caesar to Trajan was the expansion period ( imperialism) which took up the first century of the Roman Empire. During the second century globalization took place were we get the phrase ‘all roads lead to Rome.’ and this period is called Pax Romana. The third period describing the third century is called the Century of Crisis because tribes, groups and other world states all came to Rome to take its spoils. In 325 A.C.E., emperor Laexander Severus was murdered by his own troops for appeasing forigne enemies, and this led to a series of Roman provinces breaking up and a string of military generals (20-25 claimants to the throne) ruling scattered lands of the Roman Empire (Imperial Crisis 235-284). By 258, the Roman Empire became fragmented into three large competing states, The Roman provinces of Gaul, Britain and Hispania broke off from Gallic Empire, and two years later in 260, the western provinces of Syria, Palestine, and Aegyptus became independent as the Palmyrene Empire, leaving the remaining Italian-centered Roman Empire proper in the middle. Then two massive Scythian tribes invaded the Roman lands between 267 and 269 and united the Roman people who battled at Naissus (268 or 269 near Niš, modern day Serbia). At a second and more massive invasion led by the Heruli, consisting of Germanic people whose roots were from Ostrogoths, Huns (Asian) and Byzantines ( middle easterners) of the 3rd to 5th centuries, ( one prominent and later Heruli was Odacer, who deposed the last Roman leader Romulus Augustus on 4 September 476 (cal. Jul.)) help forge a new military leader spirit to which the Roman Emperor position was to be restored – but this time with four rulers. Upon Aurelian who led the first victory against these invaders at Naissas had placed the frontier boarder soldiers now back under a united Roman land, the Curia decided that the next ruler should place into effect regional rulers. Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus (b. Diocles ( Greek) probably near Salona in Dalmatia (modern day Solin in Croatia) 22 December 244 – d. 3 December 311 Jul., r. 284-305, the first to abdicate by choice) appointed 1 March 293 Galerius and Constantius as Caesars, junior co-emperors, and prior he had appointed fellow-officer Maximian Augustus, as his senior co-emperor in 285. Dividing up his ‘Tetrarchy’ ( rule by four) each with a quarter of the Empire to rule and orders to kick-out the foreign militaries these co-emperor and generals became powerful celebrities within the empire – and soon they would compete to see who was the leader. Diocletianus was a leftist and formed a massive bureaucracy with his Edict of Maximum Prices (301 A.C.E.).
In 294 A.C.E., Narseh ( Seventh Sassanid King of Persia (usurpation 293-301, abdicated), a son of Shapur who had been passed over for the Sassanid succession came to power in Persia. He like his predecessors ( Shapur sacked Rome Antioch and skinned the Emperor Valerian (r. 253-260) to decorate his temple (Williams, Stephen, “Diocletian and the Roman Recovery ( New York: Routledge, 1997), pp. 69-70.) in 296, fed up with the incursion made by the Armenian monarch Tiridates III, Narses invaded Armenia and Tiridates fled. Diocletianus sent a general Galerius who after some defeats then reinforcement subdued the Persians and forced a humiliating treaty, The Peace of Nisibis, in 299. Up until the 330s when the Peace Treaty was ended by Persian resurgence of Shapur II, the Christian affect resulted by the cultural influence into Armenia and Caucasian Iberia ( in modern Georgia, laying ground work for the later 800 A.C.E. acceptance of Christian Kivan Rus’), and parts of upper Mesopotamia, even extending beyond the Tigris, to which later the dissemination of Syriac Christians resulted. Diocletianus liked to pass himself off as a ‘restore to the state of Rome, the sole identity. Perhaps he wanted to become as Augustus, and prior Caesar and the other first and some second century Roman Emperors saw themselves as mere gods or alive deities. He almost implemented a new ideology of autocrat to his rule. He certainly emphasized the centralization of the state and the expulsion of the barbarians, but he did not do this. In fact, most of the credit belongs to the Tetrarchy, to which explains his reason for abdication.
As these co-emperor –generals conquered they bore military sons who became strong leaders. Sons of Maximian and Constantius became powerful and seeing the economic instability of massive left-wing programs forged plans to take the throne. This was because as a leftwinger, Diocletianus did not work alongside his consilium, which traditionally were cooperative affairs between the emperor, army, the Senate and various intellectual and economic advisors. Lactantius explains in chapter seven of his letter to Donatous that Diocetian was motivated by avarice and overturned the Roman Empire. Besides militarizing the state to attempt more plunder by the traditional imperialism part of his plan was to make money for himself. As with most autocrats who pass themselves off as socialists part of their plan is to become famously wealthy by placing their names on new job-works. Lactantius tells us that Diocletian proceeded to extort the provinces, people, towns, and if they did not submit his three co-rulers would shed their blood and take their wealth. This was to create a massive central controlling bureaucracy. Lactantius spent most of his life in poverty (penury) according to Jerome (Latin, Eusebius Sohronius Hieronymus b. circa 347 – 30 September 420), until he met Constantine I who provided him with some type of lively hood. He was not a Christian, but became one, and when Diocletian’s first “Edict against the Christians (24 February 303) Lactantius had to escape to the safe side of the political spectrum as all other Christens had to do or die. This is how Constantine finally understood what side of the social issues to stand on and what side was weak. Yet, do we know why Constantine chose Chrsitanity rather than from one single copy preserved from Lactantius who Nicolas Copernicus chastises over the ignorance of the earth’s shapes, and for the fact that from Lucii Caecilii liber ad Donatum Confessorem de Mortibus Persecutorium we have the story of Constantine’s miraculous conversion after from seeing in a dream the Chi Rho, one of the earliest forms of the promulgated christograms – symbols to others that one or a group belong to the community of Christ. In chapter XLIV (44) Lactantius writes “Constantine was directed in a dream to cause the heavenly sign to be delineated on the shields of his soldiers, and so to proceed to battle. He did as he had been commanded, and he marked on their shields the letter X, with a perpendicular line drawn through it and turned round thus at the top, being a cipher of CHRIST.” Yet I will tell you the secret of this riddle. Constantine understanding that the leftwing Diocletianus supporter of Maxentius policies were heavily hurting the common people placed the Chrstianic symbol on his soldier shields to rally the common to his cause. Lactantius does not directly tell you this, but if you read between the lines of what Lactantius is telling you, his audience, it becomes apparent that this was the case. As the armies met on a bridge that connected to Rome proper suddenly, Lactantius writes but without elaboration, “In the meantime a sedition arose at Rome, and Maxentius was reviled as one who had with one voice, ‘Constantine cannot be overcome!’ Dismayed at this, Maxentius burst from the assembly, and having called some senators together, [sic] ordered the Sibylline books to be searched. In them it was found that: One the same day the enemy of Rome should perish.” I interpret this as Constantine understanding the political realities of the ascension of Christian literacy during this period of Roman times and the fact that they made up the common work force of Rome had decided upon himself to symbolize the common with a Christian symbol emblem on his soldiers’ shields. Certainly Lactantius is writing with Christianity as victorious when he writes, “The hand of the Lord prevailed, and the forces of Maxentius were routed.” Later the Roman Church would take this myth further and state that Constantine had questioned the Lord and told him he would only believe in Jesus Christ if that day of battle he and his troops prevailed. Yet, the real battle was social and bottom up control. For dualism of Christianity was a rather simplistic program of a populous sentimentality. Whereas the ruling elite had been bogged down by corporate gods that are admitting to evil for good; many scholars I had read certainly blame Christianity as destroying Rome. It is because it put into the social fabric morality and ethics, which was anachronistic to a military state based upon bully and imperialism or suppression. Yet, Lactantius motive for writing this was to explain who persecuted harshly during his day the Christians.
Diocletianus like a modern extreme socialist perhaps, according to historian Warren Treadgold estimates that under Diocletianus the number of men in the civil service doubled from 15,000 to 30,000 ( Treadgold, Warren “A History of the Byzantine State and Society (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 1997), p 18). Lactantius claimed “There began to be fewer men who paid taxes than there were who received wages; so that the means of the husbandman being exhausted by enormous impositions, the farms were abandoned, cultivated ground became woodland, and universal dismay prevailed.”
As many leftists do, they start to blame others as their policies crumble around them. So Diocletianus decides to blame the Christians for all the troubles in the world. He begins a massive execution of Christians. Instead of being assassinated, Diocletianus abdicated. [ edit for sections on this , see below]
Lactantius ( pupil of Arnobius, according to Methodius, (Chastity 9.2) and early Christian author, c. 240-320, and tutor of the first son of Christian Roman Emperor Constantine I) believed that Nero was “the forerunner of Antichrist!” (Lactantius [ addressed to Donatus], “De Mortibus Persecutorum” Chap VII), and Lactantius repeats the common history that applies to the Sibylline verses concerning, “The fugitive, who slew his own mother, being to come from the uttermostboundaries of the earth.” Lactantius believed what others had said during perhaps John’s period and after that Nero would [return] ( here Lactantius implies a) reincarnate as did the two prophets Enoch and Elias have been translated.” Although these passages are cryptic as the Biblical assessments and mystics corroborate in the eastern blending of a reality of life. Here, again, like Nostradamus, cyclical applications of history are applying to reincarnated individuals.
Roman Leftist Destroys Israel & Leftwing Academic Adoration
So Scholars claim that John is writing on Nero. However, it is not Nero who destroys the temple or Jerusalem. Lactantius writes, “After an interval of some years from the death of Nero, there arose another tyrant no less wicked (Domitian), who, although his government was exceedingly odious, for a very long time oppressed his subjects, and reigned in security, until at length he stretched forth his impious hands against the Lord. (Lactantius, Ch III) as noted above, Lactantius tells us Nero precedes the AntiChrist. Are we to assume John knows nothing of Domitian? It is Domitian’s orders against Christians that sends John, perhaps, to Patmos in exile. Titus Flavius Domitianus ( b. Rome, 24 October 51 cal. jul. d. 18 September 96) commonly known as Domitian ruled Rome from 81-96. Domition was the third and last of the Flavian Dynasty. He also ruled longer than any previous Roman Emperor besides Tiberius. It was under Domitian’s general Argicola who could not take Scotland, the Scots besides the Germans were the only westerners who fought off imperialism successfully against the imperialist Roman machine. Domitian’s reign came to an end in 96 when he was assassinated by court officials. The same day his advisor Nerva succeeded him. Domitian’s memory was condemned to oblivion by the Curia ( Roman Senate), while the Senatorial authors Tacitus, Pliny the Younger and Seutonius published histories condemning Domitian as an inhuman tyrant. Modern leftist academics revised this view and gave credit to Domitian as a great statesman and effective autocrat. Many leftwing academic who are also anti-Semitic prefer to elevate him, however Lactantius holds sway with the senatorial historians.
Like the Tetrarchy in cyclical manner, on 9 June 68 when Nero committed suicide, and the Julio-Claudian dynasty came to an end, and four leading generals admits a civil war vied to take the Roman throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius and Vespasian, Domitian’s father. Vespasian wins and Lactantius sees history repeat itself in some similar fashion. Here, during John of Patmos’ middle aged years, Domitian openly rendered the Curia’s power obsolete. The Roman Empire now was ruled by a deity that was a despot. The Chinese have the concept of the Mandate of Heaven, and in the west, beginning not in the middle ages of Divine Right of Kings, but during the fallout between the citizens of Rome and Julius Caesar’s memory, the concept of ‘divine monarchy’ came into play in the Roman Empire. But unlike Augustus who called himself the son of god, actually co-ruled Rome listening and directing policies by the consilium. Domitian is saying, look I’m god on earth. It is like Mao Tse-tung who the leftwing academes adore and perhaps behind close doors have alters of worship too paying homage to the horrific mass murderer of the twentieth century – it is all about worshiping money and power! Mao Tse-tung was the richest person in China and had nearly total control of the Chinese government until he died naturally. That’s worthy of leftwing academic fealty. Mao Tse-tung represented an animal that could have sex with whomever he wanted, murder whomever he wanted and conduct endless scientific experiments on another animal/humans – an academic Scientifics’ dream come true. Since the Chinese communist state keeps the archives almost closed off to the public, and for the fact academics use others’ letters written to Mao as their sources and not his inner cabinet members, or the fact they will not visit the Chinese archives and research these facts for themselves indicates the fear of moving away from the fantasy narrative first concocted by Tse-tung himself. The Chinese refuse scholars a paper or pencil to take notes when looking at the Communist Chinese past. Whatever you remember you take with you later to your hotel room to record. This way, they always have an option of denial. You could not take notes, therefore it is your faulty memory that makes your claims wrong, they would intend. Domitian, like Mao Tse-tung, was born with his Saturn in conjunction aspect to Spica. Both were extreme autocratic – socialists who killed groups of people who they irrationally believed were hurting them.
However, to the common and particularly the poor and middle class Jews, Domitian was the devil; not the predecessor like Nero, but the actual devil. He implements the plans to put an end-all to all of the end alls of Israeli knowledge. Domitian’s plan is to wipe the memory of Israel off-the map –completely. If you destroy the center of worship, or the central command you destroy most of the tentacles. So the Roman leftist plan was to destroy the temple to force Jews to economically visit the Roman temple festivals and contribute money to their lavish leftwing building programs which consist of placing their images and names on monuments to note to the world that they are god on earth and you better submit. So can Domitian be linked to the number of the Beast? It must be remembered that John is living through this time frame. So this numerical value of 6,60, 600 is of course a qualified identifier.
Domitian, as a leftist , forced paganism back into Roman society and as the paganistic economic civil economy (i.e. temple festivals). Eusebius of Caesarea, writing about 300 years later describes the reign of Domitian as the first large-scale persecution of Christians and Jews. Perhaps this absolves Nero his position as the qualifier. Note the reality to why leftwing academics adore this tyrant. Lactantius is seeing similarities in extreme leftist Diocletian and his promulgation of several edits that took away all rights from Christians until they converted to paganism of the Roman Religion. When the Christians refused he put to death at least 3,000 humans ( 303-311). He brought back crucifixion and he also beheaded Christians, and proceeded to burn Christian Churches to the ground. He took all the jobs away from the Christians to starve them to death, and imprisoned countless Christians many awaiting execution. Many Christians escaped, fearing this was the end and began ardently too proselytize Christianity. So Diocletian implemented sever torture and abducted Christians to be thrown to the lions in the Circus Maximus and Colosseum, to much of the delight of the imperialistic leftwing pagan citizens. It is not until Constantine in 324 came to power that these murderers of Christians stopped.
What are the roles of the sacrifices?
What are the roles of the sacrifices? Well, besides the ritual of the sacrifice to the local or ethereal deity, it is time like the dinner table or out door barbeque, although where everyone from the community is invited (a time to entertain, contribute the monetary system, and to promote oneself as the most important person for the society). This seems innocent enough until you factor in the ‘cult-or-personality’ and, the shame and reward society. Pagans control Rome, thus they control the means of production and the means to satisfy hunger. Yet, they also love to promote how gracious they are in front of acquaintances. They also like to gloat and make fun of the less fortunate at their expense – even while they are in their company. Christians under the traditional leftist Roman period of imperialism are subjected to humiliation at these sacrifices. “Oh, he is a Christian, do you keep him in an iron cage at night?” A Roman important would ask another Roman important about their slave wage earners – the Christians. It was humiliating to be a festival or community sacrifice and be subjected to this type of emotional treatment. Lactantius simply tells us that Christians chose not to attend and chose rather to starve, passing-on the excuse for fasting and religious observance. However, without the Christians there were no-one to make fun of at their expense. So where was the entertainment going too? This was a problem, which seem to progress to such an extent that Diocletianus took action siding with his leftist party – the social controllers of the provinces and regions. Christianity was the blame when it really was not the factor, only the polite way to excuse oneself from the humiliating sacrifice dinner events. Diocletianus set about destroying all religious paraphernalia and buildings. Yet, we can use the model in reverse and place it not only back to Zarathustra, but also Roman occupation of Palestine during Jesus’ time. Romans knowing what powerful military they possessed in their modernity probably saw themselves as intellectually superior. Therefore, when they ate dinner or attending a scouting of Hebrew celebrations the humiliation episodes probably commenced for boredom entertainment of the common Roman soldier. However, this is a hypothetical model. The facts of the entire second century A.C.E. these are no longer hypothetical models but in fact the emergence of this Christian coalition against the ruling class of the Romans. The suppression ‘periodically’ takes place against the Christians as they boycott the temple festival and sacrifices. While Christians are doing this out of protest, it also economically hurts the Roman civil monetary system. Christians are not the in crowd of leftists so they are seen as a dangerous cult. Like in America dangerous cults are stopped by the federal government, be it peacefully and honestly or by any means possible – including deadly force and unethical propaganda. Breakaway cults do not contribute into the massive socialistic monetary system; therefore they are seen as an economic threat to the state. This is how Rome saw the early and emerging Christianity within their realm.
Counting as the historians had done, that Julius Caesar was the first real Roman Emperor, which makes the academics happy because that places Nero as the sixth – so if we continue with this chronology this makes Titvs Flavivs Caesar Vespasianvs Avgvstvs the ninth and Domitian the tenth. If we count actually in reality as Augustus as the first who bore the voted title of Roman Emperor, claimed to be the son of God ( Julius Caeasar voted as God by the Roman People) implemented in the correct chronology beginning with the Julio-Claudian dynasty, which makes Nero the fifth Roman Emperor, then Domitian is actually number nine. 6,60 and 600 in Babylonian and Chaldean resolve to the numerical number of nine. 6 + 6+ 6+ drop the zeros adds up to 18 and as a resolve of 1+8 = 9.
Yet, if we count the actual significant first Roman Rulers, Nero is the sixth and Domitian is the ninth. First we add in Julius Caesar as the scholars do too. So that counts as number one. The we have Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero as the sixth. Then we have Galba, Otho, Vitellius, all who did not really hold the seat of emperor as the timeline suggests: Galba seized the throne at Nero’s suicide at 8 June 68 – 15 January 69; then Otho was appointed by the Praetorian Guard 15 January 69 and committed suicide 16 April 69; Vitellius then seized power on 17 April 69 and was murdered by Vespasian’s troops on 20th of December of 69 and the emperor’s position laid in wait until 1 July 69 when Titvs Flavivs Caesar Vespasiansvs Avgvstvs I seized power. Vespasian then holds power until 24 June of 79. His son Titvs Flavivs Caesar Vespasiansvs Avgvstvs II a.k.a. Titus comes to power on the 24 th of June of 79 and holds power until 13 September 81. Then Titvs Flavivs Caesar Domitianvs Avgvstvs the last of the Flavian dynasty, another son of Vespasian, comes to power 14 September 81 and rules to 18 September 96 ( all Jul. cal.), and is assassinated by court officials and his name is banished by the Curia on 18 September 96 A.C.E. Domitian was born on the 9th of the kalends of November ( otherwise our 24 October today). So if we take out the year of the four emperors and apply only the emperors who held the seat of power for significant amount of time to implement changes in society then this makes Domitian number nine, which numerological under the contemporary systems resolves to nine of the symbolism of the number of the Beast.
Nostradamus takes the Century 6 quatrain 100 +1 the soothsayer quatrain from Lactantius ( Chpt. X, 4-5.), “There are profane persons here, who obstruct the rites.” It is during this time of Dioclecian in whcih Nostradamus is referring too here that the avarice emperor forces upon penalty of death for the Christians to spend their money at the temple worshiping the Roman gods. Again, like during the first and early Christians time Rome is under economic pressure to have all the poor contribute into the large left-wing bureaucracy. Nostradamus who links history in reincarnational cyclicivity we can surmise that this is also happing in cyclical formation under the northern Ural area where Zarathustra had his clash with the sacrificial temple episodes. [ Note should move this, but re read these sections on Lactantius so I get the context!]
Calendar & HISTORICY
John perhaps feeling glum about the plight of his people losing their home and now refugees tells us about his visions. Jesus sends an angel to tell him about the future of humankind. He continues to tell us that Jesus is the only one that can decode the book, he being able to break the seals on the scrolls to reveal the timing of the things to come. The controversy comes in the form of Jesus being upset with the humans and ushers in a chastisement of the earth that projects him as the greatest murderer of all time. He nearly wipes-out the earth because of the sins of the human beings. And in the meantime he saves an elect few who believed in him. Perhaps it is these passages that Martin Luther expresses as the book was insane. That is because Luther is working under the literary-paradigm of dualism. Empirically scientists see good people as continuously losing in the historical narrative. Tse-tung was a bad man, a really bad man, but the geek academics worship him as a deity – because he had money and unspeakable power to control his environment and have pleasures at his whim.
John uses the number seven a lot: seven Churches, seven candles, seven vials, seven trumpets, seven plagues, so certain persons have tried to understand time, citing what is the seventh millennium? Why is this important? It is because the seventh millennium seems to be correlated to the number seven-themed tribulations. Bishop James Ussher (b. 4 January 1581 – 21 March 1656, Ireland Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of all Ireland) proscribed the year of Adam as 23 October of the year of 4,004 B.C., which means 2003 A.C.E. is the beginning of the seventh millennia. However, timelines are constructs. So consensus building prepares us for this period. Prior to this the middle age mystics used 1 January 4713 B.C., at Noon from UTC [Meridian of Alexandria, chosen by C. Ptolemy] as the first year. This was introduced by Julius Scaliger, in the introduction of Book V of his Opus de Emendatione Temporum (“Work on the Emendation of Time”). This of course referred “to the commencement of the era Nabonassar, the basis of all his calculations, Scaliger intends.” ( trans., John Hershel, 1849, “Outlines of Astronomy”). But this was not Neo Babylonian’s work, as Julius Caesar did not formulate he Julian Calendar, only taken credit as often imperialist left-wingers do thusly. Astronomers adopted this calendar in the late nineteenth century, England did not conform to the Julian Calendar system until the nineteenth century anyway – they at the time were the world’s superpower. France converted to the Julian New Years Date after Nostradamus had died, and it was corrected for the leap-year discrepancies of the Gregorian reforms, decreed by papal bull 24 February of 1582 of the Julian Calendar. It dropped eleven days and its motivation was to re align the celebration of Easter for the Catholic Church which had been decreed as the New Year at the First Council of Nicaea, upon agreement in 325 A.C.E. Although Bede in 725 A.C.E. had known the drift of the days, the plan was to realign the vernal equinox to the 21 of March which had been taking place then around the 11-13th of March each Calendar year. The Catholic Church maintained a tabular calendar, so the New Year was primarily calculated to Easter. This is why in the French sources up until the late 1660s, French persons born before Easter had numerical birth years one year earlier than if a baby was born after Easter, all in March. If a baby was born in February of 1519 his birth year was different than a baby born in April, which would be recorded as the baby was born in the year of 1520. Under the readopted Julian calendar where the New Year begins on 1 January these two babies would have the same numerical year-count.
Daniel claims these tribulations will come when ‘knowledge greatly increases.’ No –one doubts today with the Internet, portable hand-held-phones, and globalization of the our commerce we have not progressed to an unprecedented age of information. At our fingertips, we can get almost any information we want. Is it correct is a matter of dispute and often propaganda – but this is not an exegesis into Daniel’s observance of what is information?
Matthew 24:24, "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."
In the Jewish Bible, 2 Samuel 7:4-16 claims that a messiah will come from the house of David in the future. However, Jews do not accept Jesus as this messiah. Gospel of Matthew begins with the genealogy, claiming that Jesus descended from the line of David. However, Mark, Matthew and Luke, scholars have concluded probably worked off the same sheet of paper or the same source-notes, as John’s gospel makes no claim of these sorts. Also, these genealogies in each gospel differ to each other adding suspicion to that of legitimacy. Certainly there is no consensus of the three gospels. So in the view of the war with Israel certain Jews were awaiting for a militant savior was duly desired at least by some groups proscribing Jesus’ mission to earth. Since the Bible has discrepancies, and all the prophecies do not agree with each other, it perhaps is permissible to chose one and call this the authoritative book. While biblical personalities of Daniel, of Isaiah, and of Ezekiel are dealing with the future in their sections of prophetic writings, many have forwent these books and placed their lot into the squabbled, cryptic, surreal, mysterious, book of John of Patmos.
Academics who are wed to leftwing financial institutions, be it private or public, had to communicate that under The Republic of Rome imperialism began, so blame the modern republicans for all the evil in the world. This website does not deal with this type of blatant idiocy or personal interests of propaganda. They like to say all patricians, who were of the noble Roman class were all right-wingers, compared to the Modern U.S. Republican Party. However, this is shoddy or blatant misinformation, used as a propaganda tool to appease special interests of the world’s elite in the academic institutions of today. Most U.S. Republicans are poor farmers, U.S. Veterans, and the lower class commoners. There are rich republicans, but they are heavily outnumbered by the elite left-wingers. The left wing claims it works for the commoner and poor however, it works for its own self interests, based upon irrational insanity which they confuse as rationalism or blatantly lie to keep control. One can identify them by their double-speak and their refusal to give up power without a fight. This is why unionists are violent and live better than 99% of the human population. They continually protest in industrialized states – claiming they are disrespected, suppressed by the ‘man,’ and treated uncivilized by the ‘man.’ In other words, they are avarice induced biological organisms bent on suppressing the world’s populations to hold on to power.
In the Bible, there are four gospels, Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John. All of these gospels provide a radically different character of Jesus. In Mark, Jesus is secretive. It is the story of a mysterious Jesus who does want one to know too much about him. Jesus is depicted in Mark as a healer, and someone that is not in control and unsure of his purpose. In Mathew’s Gospel, Jesus is symbolic of the Old Testament warrior king, who had returned to become the New King David, the militant Empire builder of the Jewish faith. Here, Jesus is aggressive and not a pacifist at all. Luke’s gospel holds many similarities to Mathew’s. He wrote to a Greco audience and seeks to present Jesus as a universal savior to a Roman audience. The Gospel of John, written during the virulent battle between the competing Gospels and their splintered groups, offers the most idealized version of Jesus. In John’s version, Jesus is an esoteric genius, in search of truth. So what is the character of Jesus in the Apokálypsis?
Jesus is unique in this book. He is stained with the blood of humankind. In fact, he purposely destroys most of the world because of its wickedness, taking a personal involvement. Apokálypsis was very controversial even during its promulgation in the second century A.C.E. Jesus the gentile and pacifist teacher of love seeks in the Apokálypsis to mass murder much of the population of the earth, because the people do not accept him. Therefore, the increased academic backlash against Christianity is not the gospels, or the books on the acts of the apostles and followers after Jesus resurrected, but upon John of Patmos who claims Jesus has more power than these world leaders during the end times who will seek to gain control over the bodies and minds (the souls, perhaps) of the world’s populations. The leftwing academics, I have gotten to know well desires one-thing: not to help humans but how to become the world leader with total control. They believe they have the best chances because they of course are more intelligent than the right-wing masses. The Apokálypsis says, ‘hold on a minuet, do you really think you have that power?’ Thus there is a war in heaven, heaven implying the higher institutions of the power structures. Jesus murders these power structures and the collateral damage takes much of the world with it.
Some have ascribed Jesus as a King of Terror or the person that kills more people than anyone in history. In the Apokálypsis John writes, “His [ Jesus’] eyes are a flame of fire and he is clothed with a robe dipped in blood.” This scenario fits well with the academics who claim ‘all is power,’ and no free speech can stop the armies of the worlds that protect their power structures of truth – which is in fact suppression of the common people’s speech. Their role is of the scientific kings, what we may ascribe to classical Greece as the Platonic philosopher kings. So apparently in the future Jesus gives up upon the idea of pacifism and changes to aggressive violence to get what he wants. If you cannot beat them, then join them is the modern resolution.
John tells us Jesus comes again ( perhaps reincarnation!) to break the seals of a scroll , which is of a mystery to the timeline of the homo-sapien existence and thus ushers in a horrific and terrible chastisement of humans – this time without mercy. Some people have concerned themselves with the Third Secret of Fatima by Sister Lucia, who intends she did give the full meaning to the Catholic Church. However, it was not until after she had died that the Catholic Church revealed the ‘supposed’ original document in her hand – which apparently some say have discrepancies. Some believe that Sister Lucia tried to understand the mystery to why Jesus would come back and slaughter most of the people on earth, due to their wickedness – to which these same people claim the Catholic Church is covering it up because it also implements these wicked people destroying the Catholic Church in the process. Sister Lucia related in her third secret that God (Jesus) will not take the blame for the chastisement or sins of humans in this apocalypse. Rather, Jesus ushers it in and delegates the blames to humans. This is in a stark contrast to Jesus suffering on the cross for humanity’s sins by absolving them if they accept his grace. In some sense Jesus is more violent and unforgiving of humanity than the anti-Christ or all the tyrants of all of history combined.
The Chinese who believe mainly in Heaven but not saviors will intend they have the number one mass murder or bad guy in history, therefore Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Persian ancient historical saviors are of no consequence. They are nobodies. The Chinese are number one. However, their language is built upon pictographs of the story of the Garden of Eden. However, Apokálypsis was sent by John to seven churches in Anatolia. During this time one of those churches comprised of mainly Asian people. In some sense they are linked.
corrections and technical inquiries to