Will we love the darkness more than the Light?

you're asking a question that can't be answered, ot at least, i don't think it is possible to answer....hey, i don't want to remember my life

My first thought was to Rev. 21 (and agreement)
⁴ And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.


But now I'm wondering if that chapter is describing the end of the Millennial Reign, which makes me wonder.


There is one more period of confrontation with satan prior to the New Jerusalem which descends from heaven.

So just more pondering from me.

Dove wrote:

But now I'm wondering if that chapter is describing the end of the Millennial Reign, which makes me wonder.

There is one more period of confrontation with satan prior to the New Jerusalem which descends from heaven.

So just more pondering from me.

Some of the same pondering goes on with me too. I'm seeing this at the end after the New Jerusalem descends - AND - for as many times as I've heard the New Jerusalem described as the bride of Christ I just can't get around the pondering that WE are the bride and are INSIDE of the city.

Who in their right mind marries a city? Misunderstanding or translation error is my best guess?


Ponder, ponder, ponder.

I look at it this way......"A city is not a city without occupants."  Without life within it,it's deadsville.

The Church (The Body of Christ) will be occupants that help make up the city......"Which in fact is the city."(The Bride of Christ)

Jesus Christ is The Bridegroom

The Church is The Bride

God is with us,we are with him.

Speaking of life and 'deadsville', I was just reading Romans 8, a nicely confirming scripture.

But going back to heaven for a minute, I may have a piece of it anyway, as it was part of the experience of the Presence of the Spirit, which came about from Hopeful seeking...No, no..more than hopeful. I was convinced-sold out on the assurance of success, (doubt not) and 100% committed.

I refer to it as the "Fullness of the Spirit" because it felt to me that if there was "More" I could (too) easily step out of this life and not come back.  But I expect there is even More.
And truly that wasn't even a legitimate concern.  I was going to be wherever the Spirit intended me to be.
And when THAT Truth dawns, really, what's left to worry about? 

BUT, the pertinent thing here is the Fullness of JOY of the Spirit, along with the other attributes of the Fruit of the Spirit.  Besides the downright giddiness that comes from being SO LOVED!!! ACCEPTED!! And the dawning of the Greater Reality and that 'yes Virginia, it really is ALL REAL', there is mostly just the Nature of the Spirit as JOY.

I crossed a threshold and my Reality flipped.  The Bible says we are always under one spirit or the other.  And God very much desires that we choose His Spirit as we have done. But THIS surpasses all our 'trying' to be 'good', 'giving', righteous, etc.
THIS MAKES US Good, Righteous, etc., as it is NO LONGER US WHO DOES THE THING, and HE IS OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Glory to God!

So back to heaven.  In this Exalted, Higher, More Perfect Reality which we are told is the Kingdom of God, I didn't care.  My hurts, grievances, grudges, judgements, feelings of UNFORGIVENESS....the memory wasn't wiped clean, but they didn't matter anymore.  They fell away, they paled, faded, and lost all grip, all power, in the Light.
It's a choice, we can't entertain both darkness and Light at the same time. And the Light is what every soul yearns for. 
If I can say this right:  Up until that day let's say,  I struggled in my humanness towards forgiveness.
After that day, Forgiveness lived in me and became a natural part of who I am.
My attempts were feeble, and I had to work at them.  HIS Forgiveness removed the sting and healed the wound.  They basically became nothing to me, and certainly nothing to hang onto or bother about.

That's one little example of the FLIP.  There's so much more.  But maybe it explains a little of 'how it will be' during the Millennial as it to me still sounds like an interim step prior to the New Jerusalem.

Knowing good and evil comes with a price. I see it much like the conscience that resides in man. Before we attempt an evil or rebellious act it kicks in to alert us,but the rest is up to us. When we know good and evil there's no excuse,no back door,nobody or nothing else to blame our decisions on. We know what a good act is and what a bad act is.

The big question is can we ever get to the point of knowing of good and evil, and "Never" choose evil,but "Always" choose good?......."Having a free will to choose." Of coarse without a free will we have no choice......"The decision is made for us."

In my mind Heaven/Paradise can't be heaven/paradise if we are programmed to only do good....."Without a free will." If this be the case,then why all this?......."Why wasn't Mankind/Sons of God/Angels/All Creations programmed from the very beginning to "Only" do what is good?"

It's got to be that "Mankind/Sons of God/Angels/All Creations" will one day with a free will "Always" choose good. How can God be "Love" and "Love" his creation if we his creation can't "Love" him back? How is it possible for we his creation to love him without a free will? Without free will there is no love.

I' think that with the evil one removed, there won't be evil influence to corrupt our minds. We will have free will but there will be no evil - How awesome would that be - like picking out what color of shirt to wear that day. Evil defeated and wiped away. I can't hardly wait .

An elder Cherokee Native American was teaching his grandchildren about life. He said to them, “A fight is going on inside me...It is a terrible fight, and it is between two wolves. One wolf represents fear, anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, pride and superiority. The other wolf stands for joy, peace, love, hope, sharing, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, friendship, empathy, generousity, truth, compassion and faith. This same fight is going on inside of you and every other person too.” 

They thought about it for a minute and then one child asked his grandfather, “Which wolf will win?” 

The old Cherokee simply replied..“The one I feed.”

I'm one who believes one of the names of The Antichrist is the one referred to in The Bible as "The Assyrian" I believe The LORD will send him and use him as a rod of The LORD'S anger. I believe The LORD of hosts will use this person called The Assyrian (The Antichrist) with an evil heart for destruction to fulfill his will.

We can see from the underlined part of verse 7 that The Assyrian (The Antichrist) does not set out to meaneth not ( not so intend). Neither does The Assyrian (The Antichrist) heart think so. But it is in his heart even if he isn't aware it is there. He does not believe what he is doing comes from having an evil heart and does not recognize himself as evil.


Isaiah 10:5-7

O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation.


I will send him against an hypocritical nation, and against the people of my wrath will I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.


Howbeit he meaneth not so, neither doth his heart think so; but it is in his heart to destroy and cut off nations not a few.

i don't think that you are wrong and this could indicate one of the 7 leaders of 7 kings of revelation 17:10:And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. Christian Standard Bible Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes, he must remain for only a little while.


the link below, shows that most likely isaiah was speaking of the incoming assyrian ruler that was leading the invasion and resulting captivity of the northern kingdom,which would also be representative of one of the fallen kings


http://www.answers.com/Q/What_was_the_time_period_of_the_book_of_Isaiah

Michael371......I think you and I agree that the seven kings are really seven kings and not just nations as most teach. You must have been studing this for many years as I have. I'm a firm believer that the most popular teachings on Bible prophecy may not always be the true path.

I view "for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction"could fit for the most popular views on prophecy. Just as "narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it" also can fit well into those prophecy teachings that most turn a blind eye and deaf ear to. 

Why wouldn't The Adversary be all over the most popular of just about anything, including prophecy?


When I get a little free time I will lay out some of my thoughts on the subject of the seven kings.

I believe Nimrod was the first Antichrist type king. Jesus Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last. Revelation 2:8 spells it all out very well and reads,"These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive."

The Antichrist is a replacement (An instead of). He replaces the real deal in the minds of The World.."Those of The World will carry with them his mark." If Nimrod is the first then he will be the last also.

Revelation 17:10 speaks of seven kings that will arise in power and during the time John was writing the Book of Revelation five of those kings had fallen (Died),one was in power at that time, and another was yet to come in the future, and he would be in power only a short time. I believe  that these are Kings (Rulers),not nations as most believe. The text makes it very clear these are kings.

Revelation 17:10..."And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space." 

Then in the next verse 17:11 we read the beast (Antichrist) will be the eighth king to come to power and is of the seven. If he is of the seven,then I believe it is pointing to the fact that he once lived (Was),died (Is Not) and then lives again to be the eighth. In others words it will be the second coming of the Antichrist. Just as Jesus Christ will have a second coming so will the evil seed the Antichrist.

Revelation 17:11..."And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition."

I believe when the Antichrist comes into the picture once again, he has already lived in the past and will come up out of The Bottemless Pit (Abyss).

I have long wondered if Jesus gave us a clue in Matthew 24:25-26 when he spoke of not being deceived. We are not to believe what The World will be proclaiming. We are not to believe the Lord of lords and the King of kings is on earth until we see the sign of his coming......"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." (Matthew 24:27)

Matthew 24:25-26

Behold, I have told you before.


Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. 





I know a lot of people don't like using other ancient text if it isn't in the Bible. But I want to use the Book of Jasher to show something. In the Book of Jasher,Nimrod the first type of Antichrist certainly sounds like the Man of Sin......The Antichrist.


Jasher 7

And Nimrod dwelt in Shinar, and he reigned securely, and he fought with his enemies and he subdued them, and he prospered in all his battles, and his kingdom became very great. 


And all nations and tongues heard of his fame, and they gathered themselves to him, and they bowed down to the earth, and they brought him offerings, and he became their lord and king, and they all dwelt with him in the city at Shinar, and Nimrod reigned in the earth over all the sons of Noah, and they were all under his power and counsel.


And all the earth was of one tongue and words of union, but Nimrod did not go in the ways of the Lord, and he was more wicked than all the men that were before him, from the days of the flood until those days.

Nimrod was their lord of lords and king of kings......"Jesus Christ is Lord of lords and King of kings."

Nimrod did not follow the ways of The Lord. Nimrod was replacing The Lord in the peoples minds.

Nimrod was more wicked than all mankind that came before him......."The First in line of his type."


The Antichrist will be a king of kings as they the kings spoken of in Revelation 17:12-13 are about to receive their power as kings in one hour with the beast (Antichrist). Nimrod was a lord of lords and king of kings in the past and will he live again to be a lord of lords and king of kings once again?

Revelation 17:12-13

And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.


These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.


Notice above in the 13th verse of Revelation 17 how they (These ten kings) will have "One" mind. They will be in complete agreement,"They will be as One." They receive the mark in their minds and bow to the king. They now have become one with the beast (Antichrist,Nimrod). He gave them power,now they give their minds.

Where the mind leads the body follows. Just like Jesus Christ is the head (Mind) of The Church (Called out ones), the body consist of "Followers". We (The called out ones) are the many pieces (members) that make up the full complete body.

I don't believe the mark of the beast is a chip implant,bar code,or any type of tattoo placed on or underneath the skin of the forehead or the hand. I believe if you look at scripture you will find clues that the mark of the beast is a counterfeit of the Seal of God. 

Those who receive the mark will give their alliance to the system as well as the controlling force behind the system. They will carry with them his number which is a name,which is a mark in their minds.

This can also be seen with God also. Notice in Revelation 22:3-4 that those who serve God will carry with them his name in their foreheads just like those who serve The Beast (Antichrist).


Revelation 22:3-4

And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:


And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.

thank you scarz, you just verified my findings about nimrod.....using scripture, there can be no argument

michael371 wrote:

thank you scarz, you just verified my findings about nimrod.....using scripture, there can be no argument

Ditto that, what Mike said, for me too on Nimrod.

Ditto x 3 .  
  Years ago,Mike started giving me paths to study  and opened doors for me to research things  but  "think for  yourself" he said . When the subject of Nimrod came up , I had no idea where I was going but then Wham! it hit me .. Nimrod had all the credentials ..  Mike knew.. but didn't want to influence me . This part of my research has always fascinated me :
 The "coat of Adam"   that was with Noah during the flood was "taken"  by Ham then given to Cush and then to Nimrod _ who became a mighty hunter.  
 excerpt :This section is quoted and paraphrased from the Talmud page 27-30. The Talmud tells us that Nimrod signifies “rebellion,” as he was not a godly man.   We also learn that Nimrod had a coat of skins that gave him strength and might. How did Nimrod obtain the coat of skins? God made a coat of skins for Adam after he ate the forbidden fruit to cover himself (Genesis 3:21). When Adam passed away, it became the possession of  Enoch. Enoch gave it to his son, Methusaleh, and he gave it to Noah, who carried it with him on the ark. The direct lineage of Adam to Enoch to Noah is given in Genesis 5. When Noah and his descendants left the ark, Ham, Noah’s son, stole the coat and gave it to his son, Cush. Cush kept the coat for many years and gave it to Nimrod, the child of his old age. Nimrod was twenty years of age when he received the coat, and it gave him strength and might. In Genesis 10:8-10 we see that Nimrod was a “mighty one on the earth.” The Hebrew word for “mighty one” is “gibbowr” (Strong’s 1368) which means “warrior” or “tyrant.” He was also a “mighty hunter before the LORD.” The Hebrew word “before” is “paniym” (Strong’s 6440), which means not only “before”, but also “against, anger,” and comes from the root word “panah” (Strong’s 6437), which means “to turn,” as in “turn away from.” Nimrod was clearly a warrior tyrant who had turned away from and was against God. He not only hunted after game, but he hunted men and women, as well. He was the first man recorded in history to have done this type of horrible thing.
When Nimrod was forty years of age, he and his brethren, the sons of Ham, fought against the sons of Japheth (cousins). Nimrod and the sons of Ham were victorious over the sons of Japheth, and the sons of Japheth became Nimrod’s servants. After the battle, Nimrod became king over all of the earth (Talmud page 27). Once Nimrod became king, he appointed counselors, judges, chiefs, generals, and captains, establishing a world government. At that time, all of the world spoke one language, Akkadian (Arabic). Once the world government was established and Nimrod’s power was at its peak, he decided to build a city that would be the capital of his kingdom. He selected a land called Shinar, where the Tower of Babel would eventually be built. It is important to understand that Nimrod was not a godly man, and became the “father” of paganism, as he made gods of wood and stone, and created idols of himself. In fact, Nimrod and his wife, Semiranis, would become the origins of nearly every false deity and religion in the history of the world, and they still persist to this day in multiple forms. 

This is the source of what I posted  earlier ....  has lots of additional information worth a look .  https://faithfulperformance.com/the-mystery-of-the-tower-of-babel/

Thanks for the link bordercollie......"Very good material."

I'm glad others here can see things it took me several years to finally let sink in.

scarz, i'm probably a bit older than you and i have been chasing unicorn farts for over 4 decades....i went down many long roads that turned out to be dead ends, and i crawled down some really dark rabbit holes that led to nowhere, so it does make me happy to see someone find the same things as i did....i visited a shut in friend of mine last week, who used to be a preacher...good guy but a typical shallow, poorly informed preacher....he stays with his daughter and son in law, and the son in law studies the bible in the same way that tommy preached, very shallow and poorly informed due to the conditioning that took place over his entire life....you know the story.....we started talking bible and i laid a few things on his,such as the dynamics of DNA in the creation of adam,including mitochondrial DNA and the "seed of the woman",genesis 6 and other areas that he had never heard,including nimrod,the falicies of xmass and "ishtar" and mithraism.....he sat there with his mouth hanging open,lol...i talk much better than i type because my brain and mouth can be synced up better than my brain and fingers, although sometimes my foot gets involved with the brain/mouth relationship....now tyrone (yeah a white guy named tyrone) wants to come and spend time with me talking bible....there is no place in the "world of "Christianity" for a guy like me because i go against the company line....so, hell yeah, i smile when i see people like those on here, people that actually "get it!" and understand that a large part of what passed for Christian doctrine is utter false or at least, its misconstrued....lol, Judy did the work, most don't because they are lazy or won't because they are afraid of what they might find.....now, just look at her!....i know that she was confused,intellectually confused due to all of the bad teachings she had been subjected to, and highly suspicious of some old fart on the garden forum offering to teach her the truth....i warned her that it was a curse,and it is if you try to confront the "faithful" with something that is contrary to church doctrine,even if you read it straight out of the bible and then reference it with other scripture,along with historical fact or science,etc....the simple fact is most Christians are biblically illiterate, and they consider folks like us to be heretics.....so, yeah scarz, its kind of a big deal for me on verification......i have to get away for a while, my eye is twitching, so i am going to piddle in the garden and i want to continue of the 7 kings,empires and nimrod and lets compare notes....here is a book that i suggest that everyone read....this website provides it for free and i assume that you can blow it up to see better....this lady just may be closer to getting it than you might think....she is/was a lawyer so you know she is far from a dumbass
https://archive.org/details/HiddenDangersOfTheRainbow/page/n1

Great post Michael.....I'm with you and would love to continue with our thinking on the seven kings.

It was around twelve years ago when I really began my quest digging deep into scripture. I was nothing more than most believers when I started my journey. It didn't take that long before my whole world was shaken. Everybody I believe needs to be shaken......"We need to be awaken." From the time we were very young a safe candy coated message is what has been taught to each of us. The vast majority of we humans are lazy and want someone else to open The Bible for us. 

I have gotten into some conversations and I can tell by their faces they don't really want to hear anything more than the same old nothing. I believe a lot of people are afraid of moving forward,they never move. We can remain sucking milk instead of eating soft foods and eventually moving onward into the true meat.

During the time that John wrote the Book of Revelation, (Five of the Seven Kings had already died), (One was ruling and alive when John was writing the Book of Revelation),and (One King was yet to rule sometime in the future).

I believe a great clue was given that he "Was" (Once was) is speaking to John at that time in history. So if this king "Was" that means he had to be one of the first five not the sixth king that was alive and ruling in John's time and certainly not the seventh that would rule sometime in the future.

The Assyrian Empire stretched out into several modern day nations. Babylon was part of all these ancient empires.

http://www.science.co.il/Maps-Near-East-Empires.asp

No matter who this king/The Antichrist is,I believe he will come from this area or was ruler of this area. If he is indeed the second coming of Nimrod,he did rule in this area.

Nimrod carried with him many,many names as ancient cultures spread out upon the earth. If I conquered the Assyrian Empire I would be it's king, no matter where I was born.

There is one thing that is clear, the beast will ascend from the bottomless pit (The Abyss) at a certain time before the return of Jesus Christ.


Revelation 17:8........"The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is."


they that dwell on the earth shall wonder..."They will be astonished,marvel,be amazed."

one of the names used in the bible was "king amraphel"............Amraphel (keeper of the gods) perhaps a Hamite king of Shinar or Babylonia, who joined the victorious incursion of the Elamite Chedorlaomer against the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities of the plain.

I believe the bottomless pit (Abyss) is another realm that can and will be opened one day. The Sons of God (Watchers) that came before the flood,along with other demons and spirits are held prisoners in the Abyss. 

Something really amazes me and that's how many professing Christians refuse to believe in angels,evil spirits,unclean spirits,devils,demons and a spirit world. Many consider them nothing more than superstitions or myths from a distant past. The Bible tells a much different story if one really chooses to read the words written.

If one doesn't take the spirit side of the Bible as fact then how can we take the other as fact? You can't pick and choose or turn a blind eye and deaf hear to the fact that it's a huge part of the Bible. 


I most certainly believe the Antichrist (Abaddon,Apollyon,Nimrod) will ascend from the Abyss when this realm is opened. He and the others will go forth doing Satan's work. And what is Satan's work?.....To totally deceive mankind. If you aren't one of the sealed of God,one of the elect of God,you will be rolled over with great swiftness by this deception.

I believe Nimrod  is the first and the last of Satan's seven kings, with both appearances marking the beginning and the end of the pagan era that began at Babel.

I also find it very interesting how scripture appears to have a type of retelling of history many times. Think also of dual prophecy. Babel reminds me so much of Jesus Christ second coming back to earth. Just think about it and maybe you will see a connection. "Let us go down" written in Genesis 11:7 is The LORD coming down to put a stop to the tower as well as Nimrod. Flash forward and we can see Jesus Christ with his armies of Heaven coming down and causing "The World" to fall as well as vanquishing The Antichrist (Nimrod).


Now who are the other six kings of Satan?........"There are several candidates aren't there?"

you actually used the bible for this didn't you?...lol. most people make predictions and prognostications based on misconstrued scripture and wrong meanings....i agree with you on almost everything,scarz, but i vary a tiny bit....i am going to reread your post to make sure that i didn't read it wrong,which i am prone to do with these eyes......okay, i do have a slightly different take,with the same results.....
And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. 11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition
there is a good bit of debate of whether the 8th king is of #7 or if he is of all 7....i don't know, but i tend to be swayed by him being of all 7 and here is why.....the babylonian mystery school religion is what birthed paganism,particularily, mithraism which is better known as sun worship....nimrod,according to semiramis,was rebirthed in her illegitimate son,tammuz, after being killed by a head wound and becoming the sun god....lets look at the "world empires" of history.....egypt,assyrian,babylon,medo/persia, greece, and rome,which leaves a future kingdom that was to come....here, more debate takes place ranging from this kingdom being the ottoman empire to the united states....the ottoman empire,unbeknownest to most pew dwellers, was actually an extension of rome when the capital was moved to istanbul by constantine....my pet theory is actually based on two "kingdoms" combined,so hear me out before you throw tomatoes at me....it is why i want ya'll to read "hidden dangers of the rainbow" by constance cumbley that i posted on here for free.....the 7th kingdom only continues for a "short space"....define short space....5.10,15 years?....a hundred?....or has it not got here yet?....i submit that this kingdom is the USA,except not the one that we live in,but is slowly changing....here is where researcher needs to pop in and help me explain if i confuse ya'll....he and i both know that something is wrong as shit about WWII, the nazis,the jews and the whole thing....the story is that all of the great minds left germany and were resettled in america, and were few in number....one of the biggest lies that was told at that time...."operation paperclip" disputes everything that we were ever told...nazi's were resettled all over america and south america, as well as europe and have effectively taken over the governments of those nations.....they hide behind various names and groups and do not mind sacrificing their own people....i will stop right there with that, but i do believe the socialistic national goals will come to pass in america under the same idealistic goals that were in WWII germany.....my theory may not be the case but i do think it most likely will be....there are two babylons in revelations, literal and mystery....the 8th that is of the 7 is that literal babylon, and the mystery babylon,the woman that rides the beast, is the nimrodian religion of paganism/mithraism that headed up all of the world powers....from egypt to america, the sun worship has taken place under the guises of various religions....what the hell are these numbnuts doing going up to a hill on "ishstar" and worshipping the sun and equating it with the resurrection of Christ?....look at the &^&$#ing antichrist bastard in rome!....look at all of the symbols on his regalia of purple and scarlet....the man of sin, most definitely,is nimrod with his unholy antithesis trinity of semiramis(spirit) and tammuz( son or word)....i do think there are 7 kings,along with the 7 world empires....enough for now....if i did not make myself clear,chime in, because that is usually the case,lol....

I understand where you are going Michael. Many of the things you have brought up I have read about over the years of my deep study. 

I want you to lay out what you believe......"How you view things." I believe we all have much to learn. I certainly know I do. Each day can bring another piece of the puzzle to snap in place.

scarz, i am going to post some things for maybe some that don't know about them....i never mentioned them to bordercollie specifically early on because some folks that have not been exposed to anything but "the company line" are usually not able to understand and grasp it....there are still a lot of people around here, damn good,well-meaning people, that still think catholicism is Christian....some catholics may be,like my two friends who were raised that way by their mother though they know better and don't bow to statues,raise mary to goddess worship or observe catholic pagan rituals,etc.....their daddy was a methodist ( i know, daughters going back to mama now)...good people,all of them.....catholicism encompasses paganism and forms a bastardized version of false Christianity that is nothing more than nimrods sun worship...apollo of revelations 9 that you referred to?.....tammuz,horus,ba-al and one of the more intersting names is "allah" if you factor in "abaddon" because that means destroyer and one of the names of allah is "the destroyer".....now, the moon "landings" were called "apollo missions" because apollyon was actually used for the sun and the moon....thats from memory,so look it up for the whole story....start with these and then the pole on the planet saturn"

the fish god dagon and the medallion of the god shamash, and then the pineal gland

That's right, At first, Mike didn't want to scare me off   with that information I guess.. but later on, he started showing me these things.. Yes, It all falls into place -   What really got to my heart  was the palm waving for the pope...like was done for our  true Savior Christ as he came into town on the donkey.   There's so much staring us in the  face as pictured  in Mikes picture above,-- if one thinks and sees it for what it is.

I don't know how many here are familiar with the commentary on the book of Revelation by Victorinus. I do believe it dates back to around 260 AD and is the oldest. He was on the same line of thinking with the seven kings but he believed they would all be Roman Kings. Victorinus believed that Nero would be the Antichrist. 

Here below is how Victorinus explains Nero's resurrection.

"And one of the heads was slain to death, and his death-stroke was healed: speaks of Nero. For it is certain that when he was followed by the cavalry sent by the Senate, he cut through his own throat. This one raised, therefore, God is to send as a worthy king to those worthy, to the Jews and to the persecutors of Christ, a Christ of such a kind the persecutors and Jews have deserved. And because he will be bearing another name, and also beginning another life, so thus the same will be taken for Christ... Thus, he will make the faith of the people to him, so that by them he will be called Christ. For he has risen up from hell, as we also spoke of above in the words of Isaiah: Water, he says, nourishes him, and the abyss enlarges him." 





He got Isaiah wrong the verse comes from Ezekiel 31:4. Move up one verse and we see this is about The Assyrian a cedar in Lebanon. 

Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs.



The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high with her rivers running round about his plants, and sent out her little rivers unto all the trees of the field.






I don't believe these seven kings are limited to only the roman era.

I don't either BUT...BUT...BUT when it comes to prophesy there can be multiple strands to the web...Scarz, I do believe that you are right about "the assyrian" and i do agree 100%, but for a different reason....i go to daniel 8 and the selucid empire under antiochus IV,which would be right smack in the area of ancient assyria.....antiochus was a greek king, as you well know, that was the cause of the macabean rebellion,profaned the altar, and was the reason of the hannukkah celebration.....here is something that you might not know: his real name was >Mithradates<....here is one of your kings, scarzieboy!.....i don't think there is any doubt that nero is one of the kings and sennacherim( ain't no way that spelling is right but i ain't going to look it up because its too many letters to remember).....now, pharoaoh ramses II is my pick for one....now, i wasn't there so i don't know, but some scholars say that ramses II was who moses confronted,and if so, you have to give him the nod....nebochunezzar(i know, i should a' been a butcher and worked in a word shop) is obvious....the next one i am just not sure of, but the king for the medo/persian empire was king darius and cyrus was his general and was shocked when daniel showed him his name from jeremiah....then alexander, of course....that should be 7 with antiochus being the 7th and the prototype of the "man of sin"....if i remember correctly, antiochus the IV was not in power long....this is something that i am not dogmatic about and i threw it out there because it appears to match scripture....it could also be 7 roman kings,one for each hill and the final one being the damned pope....i don't think this is a case that we can place our finger on at this time and feel 100% confident about any of the possibilities....the pope fits the bill as the false prophet....they will build "an image" to the beast....i suspect that beast is the one in genesis 11 that nimrod built to circummvent God...and the last will attempt to finish it

I think we can agree with some of the first six satanic kings. In my opinion number seven isn't as clear to me. Antiochus would have to be one of the first five. I believe Antiochus IV Epiphanes would be number five and Nero Caesar or Domitian would be number six because one of them would have been in power when John was writing The Book of Revelation......."It's according to the timing."

The first five had already died......."five have fallen"

The sixth would be alive and in power......."one is"

The seventh was on in the future......."the other is not yet come"



1. Nimrod (King of Babylon)
2. Pharaoh (of Egypt )
3. Sennacharib ( of Assyria)
4. King of Tyre ( Ithobaal II of Tyre)

you're right....i got ahead of myself with one too many kings

constance cumbley made a great case for it being hitler and nazi germany as the 7th...she actually connected hitler to antiochus IV lineage, if i remember right....the prophets of the OT were not allowed to see the church age, so daniel would have seen antiochus and the antichrist, or man of sin, as being one and the same as his vision would have been like looking at a mountain range in the distance and then having the peaks separate as you get closer

I agree there is a very strong case for Hitler being number seven.

When I get some time I will lay something out I have thought about for a few years.

I have wondered for a few years now if Lucifer written about in Isaiah 14 is not Satan but rather The Antichrist (The King of Babylon=Lucifer=Nimrod).

Here below is the english translated version of the Greek Septuagint LXX (Isaiah 14:12-20).



"12 How has Lucifer, that rose in the morning, fallen from heaven! He that sent orders to all the nations is crushed to the earth. 13 But thou saidst in thine heart, I will go up to heaven, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven: I will sit on a lofty mount, on the lofty mountains toward the north: 14 I will go up above the clouds: I will be like the Most High. 15 But now thou shalt go down to hell, even to the foundations of the earth. 16 They that see thee shall wonder at thee, and say, This is the man that troubled the earth, that made kings to shake; 17 that made the whole world desolate, and destroyed its cities; he loosed not those who were in captivity. 18 All the kings of the nations lie in honour, every man in his house. 19 But thou shalt be cast forth on the mountains, as a loathed carcase, with many dead who have been pierced with swords, going down to the grave. 20 As a garment defiled with blood shall not be pure, so neither shalt thou be pure; because thou hast destroyed my land, and hast slain my people: thou shalt not endure for ever, —thou an evil seed."




Could thou an evil seed be referring to the seed of the serpent written about in Genesis 3:15?....."And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."


The war of wars between two seeds......Jesus Christ The Seed of God The Father=(Good Seed) and The Antichrist (Nimrod) The Seed of The Serpent (Satan,The Adversary)=(Bad Seed,The Evil Seed).

Scarz, judy will tell you that i dove deep into "lucifer" a few years back, because something is very wrong with that passage...i love that you use the septuagint....i wish more folks did...let me get back to this and throw a couple of things at you that i found out after i refocus my eyes

before i start, i would like you guys to pray for my daughter-in-law,cindy.....she is going to have to have open heart surgery due to a defective heart valve.....she has other medical issues that will make this a difficult operation, in fact, she will have to have surgery so she can have the heart surgery...TY

the problem that i had with the name "lucifer" is that it is a latin word...now, what was a latin word doing in an ancient hebrew text?....and exactly where in history did lucifer have a name change to satan?....that is the "company line" and errrrrybody repeats the lie so much that they believe it....the answer is lucifer never was in the text and there was no name change....here is the story in a nutshell....the term "helel ben shakar" was a hebrew term that the KJV translators could not translate because they did not understand its meaning which was "son of the dawn" or bringer of light or "son of the morning star"....or in other words, the son of the planet venus, venus being the roman goddess that corresponds to the dianna of the NT that was said to be of asiatic origin,isis of egypt, ishtar of the sumerian/babylonian religion, and all of these reflect back to semiramis, wife of nimrod and mother of tammuz....the translators borrowed the term "lucifer" from jeromes vulgate that became the basis for the duoy-rheams version of the catholic bible, and inserted it into the KJV because they really could not understand the hebrew.....MY CONCLUSION IS AN OPINION!!!.....based on what circumstantial evidence i came across, it appears,at least to me, that the reference to "lucifer" in isaiah 14 is to a man first and then to a "god"....or an evil god-man....the bayloniam mystery school religion was started on a false resurrection of nimrod into his son tammuz....most scholarly atheist say that this was the basis of Christianity and that it was a plot of constantine which is utter bull....reckon the bible speaks all the words that were said in the garden?....like a school play where the kids step forward,say there line, and then step back to the back of the stage?...or did God tell them step by step, jot and title, what He was going to do?....did He describe it all, going down through the future that is now our history and lay out His failsafe plan for the redemption of man?....i betcha' He did just that...and told the devil that there ain't a damn thing he can do about it either....hence, satans attempt to create a religion "to be like the Most High" starring his "family"

scarz, i do agree with you because there is really no other choice to pull off of....the satan/nimrod/tammuz/antichrist connection to all of the ancient variations of the mystery religion is all it can be, in my opinion,and just too much to ignore

Well Michael I'm glad you have looked into this. I was just like most that view Lucy until reading the text over and over. We have heard about this Lucy character all our lives and it has been sealed in our brains. That's a very hard thing to let go of. Sometimes I wonder how many other things have we just let become part of us that we now need to question. 


I certainly pray everything goes well for your daughter in law.

one of those things is coming up shortly, christ-mass or my term, xmass....when america was in the process of becoming an independent nation, the celebration of xmass was against the law....of all the damn states, it had to be alabama that was the first state to recognize it as a "holy day" and oklahoma was the last state to legalize it in 1907....now, does that not prompt some questions as to why the people fleeing europe because of persecution due to their faith hated xmass so much?...it damn well should...the 21st of december is the shortest day of the year due to the position and angle of the earth on its axis in relation to the sun....it appears to stay at one place for 3 days or "died" and then on the 25th it begins its journey upward as the earth begins its change of angle toward spring....ithe sun has now been re-birthed....now, does that sound familiar...the 25th of december is the pagan high holy day and all of the xmass traditions are brought straight out of babylon...regarding Jesus/Yeshua,exactly where does the bible say to celebrate his birth?....this is just another example of the pagan religion of babylon bastardizing what used to be new testament Christianity...lets stick little 7 lb baby Jesus in a pagan holy day and make it okay...my wife and daughter have not spoken for years over this very issue and we are not backing down, though i suffer to see our 3 grandkids....we just could not do it any longer and they made the conscious effort to continue because of the kids...real Christians seem to always be depressed at this time of the year...reckon its because the thrice holy God is trying to tell them something?....you cannot eat at the table of devils and the Lord...my xmass rant for the year

Wow! Michael I can't believe someone is that much like me on the subject of christmas. I stopped everything to do with this holiday a very long time ago. The family didn't know what to think of me back then and some still don't. 

Some ask me.........'Why?" 

I explained why I took the stand I did. I lay out some of the same material as you spoke of but for the most part it fell on deaf ears. 

We don't have to wait until December 25th to give do we? 

If you give because you think you must,then you have lost the whole point. 

I'm thankful every day that Jesus Christ is my gift......."Our Gift".

why surprised?....anybody that does an honest investigation into things that don't seem quite right, and seeks only truth no matter the consequences, will find these things out...its right there hidden in the bible, right in plain sight where most can't see it....i've found a bunch of stuff that comtemporary Christolicism don't want folks to know....one does not have to be an idiot to be a Christian, although there i times that i don't have much of a defense...scarz, i am actually being nice in my depiction of my feelings toward saturnalia/christ-mass....same for the spring festival of "ishtar"

i am not a fan of francis bacon (william shakespere?) at all....he was a brilliant man,even though he was an  occultist, and he made one of the truest statements that any man has ever penned or uttered...he said "man prefers to believe what he prefers to be the truth".....scarz, what it boils down to is that people prefer to believe that its okay to mix the babylonian mystery school with the teaching of Christ....they mix it because they can't tell the difference...what passes for new testament Christianity is something that has been systematically weakened through over two millenia by the spirit of anti-christ "that worketh already!"....it is not a "belief" but a "system".....sansanoy hit on it in another thread about a civil system and if one backs up and looks at the big picture, one can see it, but if you look at things like most people quote acripture, a verse here and there and out of context to try to prove a point wrongly, then you can't see nor understand....using xmass as an example because its right here on us, it appears harmless to the naked eye of the average dumbass ( i was once one concerning this and still evidence mounts on just being a dumbass,period)but what it does is promote a generational culture of acceptance into the Body of Christ....every tradition of xmass either comes from nimrod or the druids who were some of the vilest human beasts that ever walked, and while the druidic customs are more used by secular observances of xmass, the "sacred" stuff is straight out of babylon and transferred down through the annals of history by the whore that rides the beast,the roman church/state....over and over God told IS-RA-EL to not mix the sacred with the profane, to not learn the ways of the heathen(pagans)....xmass is incorporated into the system of the "i'll be like the Most High", the anti-christ system......each generation continues to place Christ with anti-christ and call it "good and holy"....one subtle thing that makes me chuckle is the little test that i give the poorly informed about the manger setting....i ask them "how many "wise men" were at the manger for the birth of baby Jesus?"....errrrryboddddyyyyy says "3" and then i get to tell them they are wrong....i actually had a woman become my enemy because i embarrassed her one day trying to teach a bible class....i didn't care for her too much because she was "one of those" type....then i asked her to read it....i still remember her face flushing red with embarrassment....lol...they didn't get there until mary/joseph and Jesus had been placed in a house to allow them to recouperate for the journey back....funny how the "wise men" are depicted as such Godly dudes, considering they were magicians from herods court....they were "the magi"....do you think anydamnbody around here knew that?...one of the most amazing things is this book "gods of eden" concerning stuff like this...william bramley ain't got a clue about true Christianity, but he keeps pointing out the same stuff that we see and understand(most of it,anyway) from a wrong-sighted point of view and gets a lot of it right....he knows something is very wrong about human history,human government,church and media....he knows that there is a controlling force....this book was fascinating to me, to see him ferret out stuff, but not quite understand it all....the "control" that is the opposite of the freedom in Christ Jesus/Yeshua

At the end of the day, and within all the trappings of the world, when else other than Christmas and
Resurrection Day do we find the The Redemptive Act of God, the Name of Jesus exalted, and His Story so proclaimed?

Using the "knowledge of good and evil"  = the fruit of the forbidden tree, to embarrass another human who was attempting to serve God, likely from a place of innocence, is pleasing to God ?? 

Satan may have wrapped the Savior's birth in the boughs of a tree, but that's nothing compared to him successfully severing the Light and Celebration, the worship and song, the Reverence, Holiness,
and yes Joyfulness! and Brotherly Love that are especially available and VISIBLE to the world in this season.

What turns the heart of a person to God?  LOVE. And from that Love comes the Father's Desire that ALL might come to the knowledge of His True Nature and what He has prepared for those who Love Him. 
The commoners knew little but received Salvation.
The legalists, the scholars gained nothing.
It is one thing to understand the enemy, but another thing entirely to be ruled by his traps.
How do we overcome darkness by shutting down the lights, closing the churches, killing the hymns, denying the celebration of His birth?  Nothing would please satan more.

where are you told to do that dove?....why do it on the pagan high holy day?....why combine it with the profane?....xmass was illegal in america until 1836?....no where do the church fathers even mention celebrating the birth of Christ.....you are told to celebrate His death, not his birth...if folks want to celebrate xmass, that is their business,not mine....my house chooses not to do so

ScaRZ wrote:

I agree there is a very strong case for Hitler being number seven.

When I get some time I will lay something out I have thought about for a few years.

scarz, chronister does a great job on this lecture...give it a listen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipxfhp0uQrc&list=UUSobj4-zeNrxokV_tkgDWzQ&index=98

michael371 wrote:

where are you told to do that dove?....why do it on the pagan high holy day?....why combine it with the profane?....xmass was illegal in america until 1836?....no where do the church fathers even mention celebrating the birth of Christ.....you are told to celebrate His death, not his birth

There's alot to answer here.  On Christmas being illegal, thank the Puritanical Puritans.
And it appears it was infrequently and only locally enforced:
https://www.truthorfiction.com/was-christmas-illegal-in-the-united-states-until-1836/

https://www.historytoday.com/matt-salusbury/did-romans-invent-christmas
Saturnalia originated as a farmer’s festival to mark the end of the autumn planting season in honour of Saturn (satus means sowing). Numerous archaeological sites from the Roman coastal province of Constantine, now in Algeria, demonstrate that the cult of Saturn survived there until the early third century AD.

So I can't keep up with you in OT studies.  It's not my area.  But, God's "Forever Holy Feast Days" were agricultural as well.  And as they were in the same geographical climate, the dates were probably similar. 
It's probably safe to say that their importance in light of Messiah was not known at the time of recording in Leviticus.

That begs the question, was it a pagan date or a God ordained date at it's inception?
And as God is Creator and Ruler over all, why wouldn't there be overlap, such as a Roman selecting the same calendar date without knowing why?
But I digress, except to say that the wheat and tares grow together, then and now.

On celebrating the birth of Christ...I can't either think of a verse that says celebrate it.  Yet we study His Life and Times and glean many lessons and much understanding.  God wanted His birth to be known, placing a guiding star in the sky; the Wise Men brought gifts befitting a KING, the shepherds were told by an angel.  It was the most awaited for and prophesied event in history. Certainly the heavens were rejoicing.  Time was literally divided by His birth, by His Arrival, not His death and Resurrection.

https://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/17-bible-verses-about-the-birth-of-jesus/
Reading the scripture accounts, I wonder how the whole world could not celebrate it.
But of course we don't get drunk, strip naked and dance around a tree. 

Christ-mass is strictly a catholic undertaking.....unfortunately in 1836 alabama was the first state to allow xmass celebration and oklahoma was the last in 1907....a little leaven leaventh the whole lump...if you're okay with it, fine.....we are not , mixing Jesus and tammuz is not something that we even want to consider:
Nearly all aspects of Christmas observance have their roots in Roman custom and religion. Consider the following admission from a large American newspaper (The Buffalo News, Nov. 22, 1984): “The earliest reference to Christmas being marked on Dec. 25 comes from the second century after Jesus' birth. It is considered likely the first Christmas celebrations were in reaction to the Roman Saturnalia, a harvest festival that marked the winter solstice—the return of the sun—and honored Saturn, the god of sowing. Saturnalia was a rowdy time, much opposed by the more austere leaders among the still-minority Christian sect. Christmas developed, one scholar says, as a means of replacing worship of the sun with worship of the Son. By 529 A.D., after Christianity had become the official state religion of the Roman Empire, Emperor Justinian made Christmas a civic holiday. The celebration of Christmas reached its peak—some would say its worst moments—in the medieval period when it became a time for conspicuous consumption and unequaled revelry.”
Consider these quotes from the Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911 edition, under “Christmas”: “Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church…the first evidence of the feast is from Egypt.” Further, “Pagan customs centering around the January calends gravitated to Christmas.” Under “Natal Day,” Origen, an early Catholic writer, admitted, “…In the Scriptures, no one is recorded to have kept a feast or held a great banquet on his birthday. It is only sinners (like Pharaoh and Herod) who make great rejoicings over the day in which they were born into this world” (emphasis mine).
The Encyclopedia Americana, 1956 edition, adds, “Christmas…was not observed in the first centuries of the Christian church, since the Christian usage in general was to celebrate the death of remarkable persons rather than their birth…a feast was established in memory of this event [Christ's birth] in the fourth century. In the fifth century the Western Church ordered the feast to be celebrated forever on the day of the Mithraic rites of the birth of the sun and at the close of the Saturnalia, as no certain knowledge of the day of Christ's birth existed.”
There is no mistaking the origin of the modern Christmas celebration. Many additional sources could be cited and we will return to this later. Let's begin to tie some other facts together.
It was 300 years after Christ before the Roman church kept Christmas, and not until the fifth century that it was mandated to be kept throughout the empire as an official festival honoring “Christ.”

Can Christ Be Honored by Christmas?

The most common justification that one will hear regarding Christmas is that people have replaced old pagan customs and intents by asserting that they are now “focusing on Christ.” I have heard many say that they are “honoring Christ” in their Christmas-keeping. The problem is that God does not say this is acceptable to Him! Actually, He plainly commands against it! Keeping Christmas dishonors Christ! He considers everything about it to be an abomination! We will soon see why.
Christ said, “But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9). Christmas is not a command of God—it is a tradition of men. Christ continued, “Full well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition” (Mark 7:9). Every year, throughout the world, on December 25th, hundreds of millions do just that!
We will see that God plainly commands, “Follow not the way of the heathen.” But most people do not fear God, and He allows them to make their own decisions. Human beings are free moral agents—free to obey or disobey God! But woe to those who ignore the plain Word of God

You know how they want to merge Islam with Christianity? Catholicism with Protestantism? The laws of all nations into one? That's what they did with the pagan religions quite some time ago. They merged them in with Christianity and people had to join the "Christian" church, or else (not true conversions). It was done to make Christianity more "comfortable" for the pagans and is why today's version of Christianity is such a watered-down facsimile of its former self. If you're comfortable with that, you are well on your way to assimilating.

If I'm 'fine with that'?  If I'm 'comfortable with that'?   Are you guys joking?!?

Please tell me specifically what you think I do that you call a sin.  How do I mix Jesus and Tammuz, for instance.

These 'battles' for and against legalism suck Truth, Peace, Joy and Innocence out of everything they touch and for that I despise them.

So this morning I had to look up Tammuz, just as 99.9%  of every other Christian accused of pagan worship would have to do.  And having looked, I find it 100% irrelevant; old, stale, dead, dead, dead and meaningless.
The darkness of ancient ignorance is gone in the Light of Christ, the Light of Truth.

The secular commercialism of Christmas is massively objectionable, even profane, and I don't feed it.
But do we abandon Christmas because of it?  Heaven forbid.  It is a phenomenal opportunity to introduce the world to the Saviour, who is Altogether Lovely and deserving of every Praise.

God is in the business of Redeeming the time, Redeeming the days, setting the crooked paths straight. Any time we elevate Jesus we have done well. Any good we do, we do it in His Name, not our own.

As Paul addressed the Greeks over their 'unknown god', can't God say to the uninformed world in this season, 'LOOK!  THIS, in your vain worshipping, is what you truly seek.  THIS is My Son. My gift to My Creation. Listen to HIM.'

But if we go 'dark' what good have we done? If we silence the voices singing in Praise, if we pass on the occasion to gather together, or be more charitable; if we abandon such an opportunity to point to Jesus, who wins?