Will be Queen Elizabeth II the longest ever reigning monarch in British history?

originally posted by: artistpoet
Here is a link to Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett ... Two Forensic Archeologists

Where did they get their degrees from?

beechwood44.wordpress.com...

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: randyvs

I do not, nor do I consider 'god' a male if any sex at all, more of an infinite energy.

I often wonder if god has a navel.

Pope means Father. I don't know if you knew this, but it does. In Spanish the Pope is known as el Papa. That is, the Father.

Pontiff means priest.

Now Jesus said this:

(Matthew 23:9) 9 Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One.

The fact that the head of the Catholic Church holds a title strictly forbidden by Jesus, the founder of Christianity should let you know something.

Now, back before there was a "pope" There were bishops of different areas.

In Jesus day a bishop was merely an elder, there was no difference between him and any other brother in the faith. It was only after a couple of centuries after Jesus' death, did the bishops (elders) begin to elevate themselves, in an unchristian manner, over their fellow brothers, until there was a clergy and a laity, completely unscriptural, a great apostasy, foretold Jesus and others had arrived:

(Matthew 23:10-12) . . .Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ. 11 But the greatest one among you must be your minister. 12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.


There are no priests among Christians today. The title Pontifex Maximus (high priest) that the pope holds is a pagan title that came from Rome.

The Roman Emperors were worshipped as gods and they, since Julius Ceasar, held the title Pontifex Maximus, or supreme high priest of the pagan roman religion. It was bequeathed to him by the conquered Persians. And if you follow the line, it goes all the way back to Nimrod. So really all the title is saying is that the apostate pope is the unholy sucessor in the line of Nimrod.

The title Pontifex Maximus was bequeathed to the bishop of Rome by Constantine. That pagan Emperor fused apostate Christianity with pagan Rome, and made the unholy bishop of Rome the Pope, and leader of his unholy Catholic (universal) religion.

No unholy "pope" (anti-biblical, Christian) title was successor to the apostles. Rather to Jehovah's enemy, the pagan Nimrod, from which sprout the ancient mystery religions, as well as false religious dogma such as the unholy Trinity doctrine, a God-dishonoring Hellfire dogma, as well as the lie that the soul is immortal.

a reply to: hellobruce

Where did they get their degrees from?

Why do you think a degree is necessary in order to research history

I should also add that when Christianity was founded by Jesus Christ, the elders of the Christian congregation were to be husbands of one wife.

That is pologamy was condemned by God in the Christian Church.

But if you understand it you would know that bishop is just a transliteration for elder. In fact the King James Bible translates the Greek as: A bishop must be the husband of one wife:

"A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach." - 1 Timothy 3:1 KJV (taken from bible.cc)


Also scripture tells us that in later periods, teachings of demons would enter into the Christian congregation, and one of them would be the teaching forbidding to marry:

(1 Timothy 4:1, 3) However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demon. . .They forbid marriage and command people to abstain from foods. . .


The Catholic teaching of celibacy among the clergy is demon inspired, the Bible itself tells you that. Also their traditions of forbidding people to eat certain foods at certain times, these too are demonically inspired, the Bible shows us clearly that the are demonic teachings.

a reply to: JackReyes

Sorry, but no. The title of Pontifex Maximus has nothing to do with the Persians, but dates back to the Regal Era of Rome, with the first attested one being Gaius Papirius in 509BC. Constantine did not bequeath the title to anyone - it was by then a part of the office of the Emperor in the West. We don't know when the Bishop of Rome took it up, but it might well have been as a political gesture after the fall of the Western Empire.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Completely understand, and know about your revised history.

Hmmm...I've not the time or inclination to go further, so I looked this up. Read it if you want:

www.piney.com...


And this:

books.google.com.mx... _&sig=HO_vbcoMniDhsVTI1iGITuxz508&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DgI-Vd3dMMzTsAWeh4GQBQ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=alexander%20hislop%20the%20two%20babylons%20pontiff %20persian&f=false

originally posted by: JackReyes
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Completely understand, and know about your revised history.

Hmmm...I've not the time or inclination to go further, so I looked this up. Read it if you want:

www.piney.com...


And this:

books.google.com.mx... _&sig=HO_vbcoMniDhsVTI1iGITuxz508&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DgI-Vd3dMMzTsAWeh4GQBQ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=alexander%20hislop%20the%20two%20babylons%20pontiff %20persian&f=false

I'm sorry but I found your sources to be deeply speculative at best and amusingly bizarre at worst. They also quoted from the Bible a lot. The Bible is not an accurate original source. It's been tweaked too much by various people over the years.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: JackReyes
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Completely understand, and know about your revised history.

Hmmm...I've not the time or inclination to go further, so I looked this up. Read it if you want:

www.piney.com...


And this:

books.google.com.mx... _&sig=HO_vbcoMniDhsVTI1iGITuxz508&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DgI-Vd3dMMzTsAWeh4GQBQ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=alexander%20hislop%20the%20two%20babylons%20pontiff %20persian&f=false

I'm sorry but I found your sources to be deeply speculative at best and amusingly bizarre at worst. They also quoted from the Bible a lot. The Bible is not an accurate original source. It's been tweaked too much by various people over the years.

This statement is false.

The Dead Sea Scrolls found in the middle of the twentieth century prove that the Bible has not been "fiddled with" many times over the years.

There were many sections of the Bible found in it, along with an almost complete copy of the book of Isaiah, dating back to the 3rd century B. C. E. (300 years before Jesus was born).

Comparing it to existing manuscripts which were a thousand years older showed that the more recent manuscripts faithfully preserved the writings, almost down to the letter.

History and archaeology prove your assertion as completely false. Although I don't think you knew this. You probably read somewhere that it was and wanted to believe it.

There are actually people who know and still lie about it. But I doubt you are one of them.

Who cares, I just wish somewhere and someone along the blue lizard bloodline have a child and they christen that child Spiderman....how cool would King Spiderman the 1st sound....Awesome.

a reply to: JackReyes

You're talking about the Old Testament, which has indeed been fiddled with. The story is Noah is copied from the Epic of Gilgamesh, the story of Jacob seems to be a dim and distant echo of the Hyksos invasion of Lower Egypt, the story of Moses is not backed up by archaeology and the Kingdom of Solomon was nowhere near the size that the Bible claims. Oh and why are there next to no references to of the Middle East's superpowers, the Hittites, beyond one or two mentions? There is evidence of a female consort to God who vanishes after a certain period, the Ark of the Covenant completely vanishes - the list is endless. As for the New Testament, don't get me started. I would love to know what Christianity would have been like if Paul of Tarsus had not taken over after the original Christian leaders were all slaughtered at the sack of Jerusalem. I'm betting that it would have been like a small Jewish sect, rather like the Essenes.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Who cares, I just wish somewhere and someone along the blue lizard bloodline have a child and they christen that child Spiderman....how cool would King Spiderman the 1st sound....Awesome.

Rubbish! Batman's a far better name!

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

The history of Noah as found in Holy Scripture is accurate and true. It is true, that hundreds of cultures around the world, after the flood have their own world-wide deluge stories. But that is only because it has its roots in truth.

Noah was a worshipper of Jehovah, the true God.

Everyone on earth today owes their lives, and are descendants of a worshipper of Jehovah.

originally posted by: JackReyes
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

The history of Noah as found in Holy Scripture is accurate and true. It is true, that hundreds of cultures around the world, after the flood have their own world-wide deluge stories. But that is only because it has its roots in truth.

Noah was a worshipper of Jehovah, the true God.

Everyone on earth today owes their lives, and are descendants of a worshipper of Jehovah.

Oh dear, not more Flood-related posts. No. There is no evidence at all for a global flood. Here's a cite.
Oh and here's a little chat from the ever-brilliant Bill Nye.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Who cares, I just wish somewhere and someone along the blue lizard bloodline have a child and they christen that child Spiderman....how cool would King Spiderman the 1st sound....Awesome.

Rubbish! Batman's a far better name!

Each to their own...i prefer spiderman...he casts webs from his wrist skin fur christ sake. all Batman has is a utility belt and deep menacing voice...Web spinning Spidey is believable, Batman is crap.

originally posted by: JackReyes
Everyone on earth today owes their lives, and are descendants of a worshipper of Jehovah.

This is of course not backed up by the evidence, or rather, there is no evidence to suggest this is true.

There is plenty of evidence in the historic record. Your denial of it is a reflection of your personality.

There is plenty of evidence in the historic record. Your denial of it is a reflection of your personality.

originally posted by: JackReyes
There is plenty of evidence in the historic record. Your denial of it is a reflection of your personality.

If you're referring to the flood then no, there is no evidence of a global flood. Local floods affecting local people, yes. A giant flood covering the entire Earth, no. And don't say it did because the Bible says so. The Bible is not an accurate historical record.

a reply to: hellobruce

Well, it is not strange at all that the churches are not in their best time on these days, after all we are living under a collective mirage created by the spells of who is aspiring to be the next Queen.

Camila Parker-bowles is acting with the spirit of Morgana Le Fay inside, the so powerful pagan enchantress . That evil archetypical woman has come back again with all her dark witchery after many centuries from ultra tomb, since she wants again to give the great Battle for the Throne of England.

Morgana ( Camilla) is aware that Prince William is the chosen great King of Britain, who is reincarnating with the spirit of Arthur Pendragon that is returning from his long exile on Avalon, and she is sick of jealousy, she can't resist the temptation to destroy the possibility of a new Camelot.

Her husband, who is absolutely under the control of her perverse sorcery, Prince Charles, is acting with the spirit of King Uther inside, and he is coming also to rule Britain with the Three Great Enchantments he has shared with his friend the wizard Menw.

The evil wizard Menw on this time has reincarnated in the person of Mark W Boland, the Public relations executive who worked for the Advertising Standards Authority and the Press Complaints Commission before serving as Deputy Private Secretary to Charles, Prince of Wales from 1997 to 2002. This man, who is homosexual, was credited with rehabilitating the prince's public image and enhancing the public image of the relationship between Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, still remain as one of the best friends and confidents of Prince Charles.

In this new Camelot of course can't be missing the spirit of Merlin, who has reincarnated in the person of Reverend Rowan Williams, the Ex-Archbishop of Canterbury who during years represent the most balanced, respectful with the traditional values and leading the most sensate trend in the Church of England, opposing drastic changes that the radical liberals want to obtain to destroy the authentic Christian values based on the Tradition.

Rowen Williams is going to perform a key role in the Institutional crisis that Charles Mountbatten will create when he will try ascend to the Throne. He will oppose the Apostasy in the Church and be a principal advocate of Prince William to arrive to the Throne through abdication of his Father. He will censor and control so crucial decisions in the synod of the Church advising and sometimes opposing the Archbishop Justin Welby.

Archbishop Welby will be along this incoming national drama in the eye of the hurricane in great part overwhelmed by the terrible challenge of to try to find a solution in the confrontation between Prince Charles and Prince William for the Crown, but also at times seduced by the schismatic reforms that Charles wants to boost in a Church that he would try to transform in a modern Druid cult, ending 1500 years of Christian faith in England.

He is the only figure in this new Camelot that will not be acting under a reincarnate spirit but will be under so much pressure and affronting terrible episodes of complete personal confusion. Nevertheless, on the worst moments of the monarchic succession crisis the Spirits of St Patrick, St Andrew and St George will come in dreams, yes, like in the Diken's Christmas Carol tale, to him to unveil the intentions of the other characters of this drama, and giving him strength to follow the fair path and reject the evilness.

Prince Harry has inside the spirit of Lancelot, who certainly will perform a very important role in future in supporting his brother , King William Arthur, against the terrible conspiracy arranged by the evil Morgana (Camilla).

Of course in the background of all these human affairs, we will feel all the time the protective role of the Spirit of the Queen mother Diana, who is the reincarnation of the lady of the lake Ninianne, the ruler of Avalon and who gave Excalibur to Arthur.

Finally, the role of Excalibur in modern times is acted by a kind of very personal and beloved object Prince William has that was given to him by his mother, and that he use to check every time he feels on trouble.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 4/26/2015 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)

You are really wrong, this is not a mere fairy tale, but a good sketch of the battle in between the Light and the Darkness for England, and many spirits of the past have been called to take part on it.

Princess Diana Tomb is surrounded by water, that is a clear signal that she was incarnating the Lady of the Lake. Now, the second name of the future King William is Arthur, another signal of his role in History, to make reality the so announced return of this Monarch that was written in many ancient Celtic prophecies.

Charles Mountbatten was not invested as Prince of Walles in the Parliament building, as all the others in history, but in Caernarfon Castle, with the only exception of his Grand Uncle Edward VIII , other King that abdicated for the same reason he is going to do so.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness