THE FAKEST RELIgION

miggidy · Jan 14, 2004

Revelation 6:

First Seal: The Conqueror

1) Now I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals; and I heard one of the four living creatures saying with a voice like thunder, "Come and see."
2) And I looked, and behold, a white horse. He who sat on it had a bow; and a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer.

Second Seal: Conflict on Earth

3) When He opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature saying, "Come and see."
4) Another horse, fiery red, went out. And it was granted to the one who sat on it to take peace from the earth, and that people should kill one another; and there was given to him a great sword.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think we're not undertanding one another here.
As you can see above, someone or something conquers the world (This is the 1st seal).
Revelation doesn't specify whether it's done by force or by peace. This conquering of the world is globalization.

After this, then the second seal is openned and conflict disrupts all over the world. I'm sure you agree this much.

Now let me jump ahead to Matthew 24: 3-14.

The Signs of the Times and the End of the Age

3) Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?".
4) And Jesus answered and said to them: "Take heed that no one deceives you.
5) For many will come in My name, saying, "I am the Christ,' and will deceive many.
6) And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet
7) For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places.
8) All these are the beginning of sorrows.
9) "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake.
10) And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another.
11) Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many.
12) And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold.
13) But he who endures to the end shall be saved.
14) And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong Heresy but isn't Matt 24: 4-14 a summary of the complete picture?

In Matt 24: 4-6
It says,
4) And Jesus answered and said to them: "Take heed that no one deceives you.
5) For many will come in My name, saying, "I am the Christ,' and will deceive many.
6) And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet
"

Can we agree that this is during or before the removal of the first seal?
I think so cuz up next in Matt 24: 7
you find this:
7) For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places.

That there is the openning of the second seal where peace is taken away from Earth and WW3 (You fill in the blank) breaks out.

Do you agree with me thus far?
If so then there's no point on debating because this is what I've been tryin to say for a while. The problem was that we weren't understanding one another.

I could give a shit if we don't agree on diseases or if globalization can happen tomorrow or not, as long as you agree with the above. That's what's important right now.

EDJ · Jan 14, 2004

HERESY,
YOU STRESSED, "@EDJ miggidy isn't calling YOU HERESY (me). From what I gather he is saying what you practice/believe/post/preach is heresy/heretical."

EXACTLY! I KNOW HE IS. BUT IT'S QUITE AN HONOR TO BE CALLED THAT, CAUSE IT SHOWS THAT I DON'T gO WITH THE FLOW, PLUS IT SHOWS THAT I'M THE REAL HERESY(NOT TO BELITTLE YOU, SINCE YOU DO AgREE WITH A LOT OF CHURCH DOgMA). AND IN HIM CALLIN' ME THAT, NOW YOU KNOW WHAT OTHA'S SEE AND THAT MY LOgIC IS NOT TYPICAL CHURCH DOgMA.

BY THE WAY, gET OFFLINE SO I CAN REACH YO ASS.

miggidy · Jan 15, 2004

^^^^
Oh damn! I didn't think it would feed your ego.
I take it back LOL!

HERESY · Jan 15, 2004

EDJ YOU HAVE JEHO...NAW FORGET IT.

@MIGG YOU SAID:

"I think we're not undertanding one another here. As you can see above, someone or something conquers the world (This is the 1st seal). Revelation doesn't specify whether it's done by force or by peace. This conquering of the world is globalization."

In some circles/groups/churches they teach this. They say the rider is the antichrist and conquers with peace because he does not have arrows with his bow. The REAL globalization starts in rev 13. Some even say the rider is jesus (insanity).

White horse=religious deception that conquers and apostasy.
Please study the apostate and the book of daniel.
compare matt 4 and 5 to the first seal.

"After this, then the second seal is openned and conflict disrupts all over the world. I'm sure you agree this much."

Compare the second seal with matt 24:6 and the first part of 7.

"Now, correct me if I'm wrong Heresy but isn't Matt 24: 4-14 a summary of the complete picture?"

Nope. It's NOT a summary of the complete picture. Read rev and compare those seals to matt 24:15-

"Can we agree that this is during or before the removal of the first seal?"

Read my last reply/post on page 14 and last reply on page 15. :shaking his head:

Migg lets go back to matt 24:4-5 for a second bro.

5."For many will come in My name,saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many.

Do you feel that verse is saying people will claim to be the christ OR that people will come In his name (and authority), will say that he IS the christ, BUT will deceive?

Whatever the case may be it's STILL religious deception.

@206 you said "I'm sure there are diseases/viruses that are a direct result of man, both accidental and most likely deliberate as well. "

Thats all im saying.

"I've read some interesting articles on the AIDS virus that suggest it is man made, very interesting but there is of course a lack of concrete proof. I wouldn't doubt it, but without evidence I cannot say it is or isn’t."

which is why i said its up for debate. personally i don't believe aids/hiv came from monkies.

"Of course you didn’t have any documented cases of sars and west nile because it didn’t exist…"

And thats the point i'm trying to make but you guys keep overlooking that.

"but at the same time they had different viruses that no longer exist today"

I agree with this BUT I believe we have MORE viruses and sickness in our time.

"Mad cow is a lot different then sars, this is a result from either cows eating themselves or another possible theory is it’s from certain hormones/drugs that are injected into the animals. "

I understand what mad cow is so why are you telling me about it? Have I implied that I didn't know what mad cow was?

"It’s really not rational to say sars/west nile/aids are man made without any concrete proof. If you have some, provide it."

WHO SAID SARS AND WEST NILE WAS MAN MADE? I SAID *SOME* PEOPLE BELIEVE AIDS/HIV IS MAN MADE . I SAID ***NOTHING*** ABOUT SARS OR WEST NILE BEING MAN MADE. WHY IS IT THAT YOU TWO CAN'T READ WHAT IS POSTED AND DRAW FROM THAT?????

"This is true for mad cow but it wasn’t always true for west nile until it did spread (traveling)."

The fact that it spreads is proving my point. More people being exposed to new dieseases which were normally confined to a specific area. So the fact that it wasn't always true for west nile is irrelevent. The fact that it spreads NOW is relevent.

"Well, that’s another statement without any concrete evidence. "

WHERE WAS THE FIRST STATEMENT WITHOUT ANY CONCRETE EVIDENCE? IF YOU WOULD PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT HAS POSTED YOU WILL SEE THAT IN THE CASE OF AIDS/HIV I SAID IT'S UP FOR DEBATE. I *NEVER* SAID MAD COW/SARS/WEST NILE WAS MAN MADE. WHEN I SPOKE ABOUT THE EARTHQUAKES I SAID ITS UP FOR DEBATE AND I SAID SOME SIDES THINK WE HAVE HAD MORE WHILE OTHERS DON'T.

"To say we are having more earthquakes now then ever is completely false."

:SHAKING HIS HEAD: DID I SAY WE ARE HAVING MORE EARTHQUAKES NOW THEN EVER OR DID I SAY:

"Earthquake increase has been up for debate for some time now. Some scientist say we have had no increase while others (non christian ones) have said they have increased. "

IF I SAID WE ARE HAVING MORE EARTHQUAKES CAN YOU CUT AND PASTE IT? HONESTLY I DON'T REMEMBER TYPING THAT BUT IF I DID PLEASE SHOW ME.

"You have to understand how the earth works and realize that earthquakes have been around since it’s beginning and will be around until its end. Common knowledge tells us that the earth crust is constantly shifting…Look at a globe. Can you see how S.America fits perfectly into Africa? Australia moves something like 2” a year. India is constantly pushing in further main land (this explains the Himalayas). California is shifting away from the main land and will eventually be it’s own Island. "

:SHAKING HIS HEAD:

WHY ARE YOU GIVING ME A SCIENCE/GEOGRAPHY LESSON? I KNOW THAT THE EARTH (IN REFERENCE TO LAND/CONTINENTS) FIT TOGETHER LIKE A "PUZZLE". NO ONE IS DISPUTING THAT EARTHQUAKES HAVE NOT BEEN AROUND SINCE THE BEGINING AND WILL NOT BE AROUND TIL THE END.

"The point is we earthquakes have always been around. How long has man been recording these earthquakes with great detail? How long has the earth been around? It’s not possible for anybody to prove we are having more earthquakes now then before, for one, simple lack of records and two, man hasn’t been around long enough to make this claim or assumption. "

:SHAKING HIS HEAD:

I UNDERSTAND THE WORLD DIDN'T HAVE SEISMOGRAPHY 2000 YEARS AGO. IT'S HOPELESS. WHY DO YOU TWO INSIST ON...NAW FORGET IT.

http://wwwneic.cr.usgs.gov/neis/eqlists/eqstats.html
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/faq//myths.html#7

JUST SOMETHING TO LOOK INTO.

:HGK:

PS WHEN I SAID "YOU HAVE MORE THINGS HAPPENING NOW THAN 2000 YEARS AGO." I WAS NOT TALKING ABOUT EARTHQUAKES ALONE. PLEASE RE-READ THE POST AND YOU WILL SEE WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

2-0-Sixx · Jan 15, 2004

I have read your statements and I have re-read them and re-re-read them. Heresy, the way you write your replies you IMPLY certain things. Any reader of your statements will agree with me on this. Why even mention earthquakes/viruses or anything else for that matter if you're just going to say, "I never said blah blah blah?"

You stated, "You have had MANY large earthquakes that have killed tens of thousands of people and it was documented. Earthquake increase has been up for debate for some time now. Some scientist say we have had no increase while others (non christian ones) have said they have increased. I have this book (can't find it now) on earthquakes, illnessess,ruthless rulers (khan, attilla, vlad etc etc etc) and all types of ill gory stuff. In it was a well documented earthquake chart. When I find the book I'll post it.”

Why state this? What is the purpose of even mentioning this?

EDJ · Jan 16, 2004

^CAUSE CUZZ WANTED TO.

HERESY,
DON´T START A SENTENCE AND DON´T FINISH IT. WHAT´S IN YOUR MIND AND HEART IS IN YOUR MIND AND HEART.

MIggIDY,
YOU SAID IT, I DIDN´T.

HERESY · Jan 16, 2004

"I have read your statements and I have re-read them and re-re-read them. Heresy, the way you write your replies you IMPLY certain things. Any reader of your statements will agree with me on this. Why even mention earthquakes/viruses or anything else for that matter if you're just going to say, "I never said blah blah blah?" "

1.I'M GOING TO SAY I NEVER SAID SOMETHING IF I NEVER SAID IT. I DON'T SEE HOW YOU FEEL I "IMPLY" ANYTHING WHEN I SAID (ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS) THAT THESE THINGS WERE UP FOR DEBATE. I GAVE *NO* HINT OF MAD COW, SARS OR WEST NILE BEING MAN MADE BUT YOU IMPLY THAT I DID. THE *ONLY* THING I SAID COULD HAVE BEEN MAN MADE (AND SAID IT COULD BE DEBATED) WAS HIV/AIDS. I *NEVER* IMPLIED THAT MAD COW OR WEST NILE WAS MAN MADE. HOW DO YOU DRAW THAT CONCLUSION? I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT MAD COW EXCEPT THE FACT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO TRAVEL TO CONTRACT IT. I SAID *NOTHING* OF IT'S ORIGINS AND HOW IT WAS SPREAD.

2.WHEN I MENTIONED EARTHQUAKES I SAID SCIENTIST DISAGREE ON IF MORE EARTHQUAKES HAVE BEEN HAPPENING OVER TIME. I SAID IT'S UP FOR DEBATE. HOW IS THAT IMPLYING *ANYTHING* OTHER THEN IT BEING UP FOR DEBATE?
THE FIRST LINK I GAVE WAS MORE FROM A "CHRISTIAN" PERSPECTIVE. IT HAD AN EARTHQUAKE CHART, TALKED ABOUT SICKNESS ETC ETC ETC. I SAID TO VALIDATE ON YOUR OWN TIME. THE OTHER TWO LINKS CAME FROM THE USGS AND HAVE CHARTS THAT SOME WOULD SAY ARE MORE CREDIBLE.

3.YOU SIMPLY SEE WHAT YOU *WANT* TO SEE AND REPLY. INSTEAD OF DOING THAT *READ* WHAT HAS BEEN POSTED AND STICK TO THAT. THE ONLY WAY A PERSON CAN FEEL I, AM, CERTAIN THINGS IS IF THEY AREN'T READING WHAT HAS BEEN POSTED. STATEMENTS LIKE THE FOLLOWING WILL PROVE IT:

"To say we are having more earthquakes now then ever is completely false."

SHOW ME WHERE I SAID WE ARE HAVING MORE QUAKES NOW. WHO SAID THAT?

"It’s really not rational to say sars/west nile/aids are man made without any concrete proof. If you have some, provide it."

IT'S REALLY NOT RATIONAL TO SAY THAT SARS/WEST NILE ARE MAN MAD WHICH IS WHY I SAID *NOTHING* ABOUT SARS OR WEST NILE BEING MAN. WHY YOU WOULD EVEN GROUP THEM WITH AIDS IS BEYOND ME. ONCE AGAIN THE ONLY THING I SAID/LISTED BY NAME THAT COULD BE MAN MADE WAS AIDS/HIV. I SAID PERSONALLY I DON'T BELIEVE IT CAME FROM MONKEYS. IF YOU HAVE ANY PROOF OF ME SAYING SARS/WEST NILE IS MAN MADE (OR IF I EVEN IMPLIED THAT) QUOTE ME.

"Why state this? What is the purpose of even mentioning this?"

1.THE PURPOSE OF MENTIONING IT IS RELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION AT HAND.
2.I STATED IT BECAUSE IT WAS IN RESPONSE TO SOMETHING YOU TYPED WHICH WAS:

"I’m not sure why you mentioned earthquakes. How do you know we are having more earthquakes now? Were you around 2000 years ago? Did they record detailed notes about earthquakes 2000 years ago in Europe, Asia, and the America’s?"

I'M MENTIONING EARTHQUAKES BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH WHAT MIGG AND MYSELF ARE DISCUSSING AT THE TIME. I DON'T KNOW (FOR A FACT) IF WE ARE HAVING MORE EARTHQUAKES WHICH IS WHY I SAID SCIENTIST DEBATE IT. I DO BELIEVE (MY OPINION) THAT THE EARTHQUAKES THAT HAPPEN NOW ARE ON A LARGER SCALE. NO I WAS NOT AROUND 2000 YEAR AGO BUT THE BOOK I HAD PRESENTED AN EARTHQUAKE CHART. THE ENTRIES WERE TAKEN FROM DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS FROM DIFFERENT PLACES ON THE EARTH. IN SOME CASES THEY RECORDED DEATH TOLL, HOW LONG IT LASTED AND THE RANGE OF THE QUAKE. THEY DID NOT RECORD IT LIKE WE DO TODAY BECAUSE THE TECHNOLOGY WAS NOT AROUND.

BTW DID YOU LOOK AT THE LAST TWO LINKS I POSTED?

:HGK:

2-0-Sixx · Jan 16, 2004

EDJ said:

What a great reply.

Hersey,

Show me where I specifically said that YOU said this. I was speaking on whomever said this (the scientists you were speaking of).

About the Sars/westnile/madcow/aids I THOUGHT that's what you were implying, but obviously you are saying this is not the case so I will drop it.

Briefly. I will check 'em out more thoroughly when I have more time (on lunch break).

In the mean time, you can check out this site http://www.bible.ca/pre-earthquakes-history-data.htm which indicates that over the last hundered years or so we are not having much or any increase.

miggidy · Jan 20, 2004

Heresy,
You said the following:
"The REAL globalization starts in rev 13. Some even say the rider is jesus (insanity)."
Maybe, if that was the case then we're still ways before globalization. Well at least globalization and conquer by force. I assume you're reffering to the Beast's rise to power as being real globalization.
What I get out of it thus far is that a one world government is already established before the beast even arrives.
It sure appears that way since there's greedy people making moves for a one world government as we speak. They might be setting the stage for the Beast.
I mean the biggest fear that people have about globalization is that "absolute power corrupts, absolutely".
I'm sure you won't agree with this idea but hey, anything's possible....

"White horse=religious deception that conquers and apostasy.
Please study the apostate and the book of daniel.
compare matt 4 and 5 to the first seal."
That makes sense.

"Nope. It's NOT a summary of the complete picture. Read rev and compare those seals to matt 24:15-"
Yeah I see that. Then I guess Matt 24: 4-14 is a summary of the removal of the seven seals only and not the 7 trumpets.

"Migg lets go back to matt 24:4-5 for a second bro.

5."For many will come in My name,saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many.

Do you feel that verse is saying people will claim to be the christ OR that people will come In his name (and authority), will say that he IS the christ, BUT will deceive?

Whatever the case may be it's STILL religious deception. "
Yeah this passage is pretty interesting. Sounds to me that there will be many claiming to be the Messiah.
You can interpret this in a few other ways as well.
Such as Islam's prophet Mohammed. Notice that at this point Jesus hasn't said anything about false prophets performing great signs yet. Mohammed fits Matt 24: 4-5 almost perfectly. He decieved many with out even showing any type of sign to his people. Then there's the Mormon Jesus whom Mormon's swear visited an early America, this could've been one of the cats Jesus was reffering to. LOL! You can even throw in Charles T. Russell in the mix with his end of the world prophecies. Not to mention the soon to come "dark" pope....

Man after having gone over Rev, Matt, and Daniel several times. I think I've had a change mind. Maybe we are living through the beginning of the end after all. Well I disagree though that we are as far as you said, but we're at hand nevertheless.
It appears to me that we are living through the times described in Matthew 24: 4-6. And if that's the case then it means that this is associated with the first seal, the horsemen riding a white horse who conquers the world....

Interesting....

miggidy · Jan 20, 2004

Naw....
I change my mind about Matthew 24: 4-5....
"And Jesus answered and said to them: "Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, "I am the Christ,' and will deceive many."

That to me sounds like Jesus is talking about someone who's specifically claiming to be the Christ....
Mohammed's foot doesn't fit the shoe, same can be said for Russell and this "dark" pope.
Only Koresh claimed to be Christ, but he only decieved a few hundred people....

Naw Heresy man, I just haven't seen this yet.
This Jesus wanna-be or wanna-be's are yet to come. According to Revelation 6: 1-2, these blasphemous characters will fool the world....

What do you think?

Dr. Curien · Jan 20, 2004

Your either with God and Jesus the son. Or your against, there is no other religion. And to be a satanist is like shooting yourself in the foot its a lose lose situation. All religions beside what the bible teaches are fake and lies spewed forth by the tongue of Satan. The only denomination there really is is that of the bible and the King James no other. And I know someone will say, but Dr. its been changed so much. Okay Ill say this why is it the most sold book and has stood the time so long over anyother book in existence.

Apocalyptic.

2-0-Sixx · Jan 20, 2004

lol. What makes you so certain you have chosen the "true" religion?

Wow! Is it really the most sold book ever?!?! That MUST make it real then!

Dr. Curien · Jan 22, 2004

you only believe in what you see I feel sorry for you.

Epidemic

2-0-Sixx · Jan 22, 2004

Dr. Curien said:

Good job on answering the questions! Playing it like a true theist.

Dr. Curien · Jan 23, 2004

^^^ That was in no way a response to my above statement.

Apocolyptic

2-0-Sixx · Jan 23, 2004

Dr. Curien said:

I don't need to respond to your above statement. You said, you "feel sorry for me". Fine, I don't give a shit. I feel sorry for your mother. I asked you a specific question. Let me ask again,

What makes you so certain you have chosen the "true" religion?

Locahontas · Jan 23, 2004

2-0-Sixx said:

I've been wondering that for years. Not about Dr. Curien, but about people in general. I do believe in God, and religion, but not organized religion. Religions have been twisted and distorted over the years to coincide with the beliefs, interpretations, and greed of the people in charge. So it's hard to consider one religion to be more "true" than the next.

2-0-Sixx · Jan 23, 2004

Yeah, I've always wondered that too. It's all very illogical...how one can believe in only one religion and dismiss all the others as false. There is a great quote by Stephen F Roberts....

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer gods than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Dr. Curien · Jan 23, 2004

2-0-Sixx said:

^^^ Because in my heart i know its right something tells me an intuition. Because i notice things from the bible that correspond with life and the future and it all fits.

Apocolyptic

miggidy · Jan 23, 2004

Locahontas said:

Loca do what I did. Research them all, their orgins and compare their philosophies.
It took me about a year to get a clear picture of the whole thing.
After all, Jesus said "seek and you shall find"....
Now I know what he meant by that....

THE FAKEST RELIgION

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

THE HIDDEN HAND...

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

THE HIDDEN HAND...

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG

Sicc OG