It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Has Satan Taken Over The Vatican, Is The End of Times Near?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 03:43 AM
This is the type of stuff that brought me to ATS but don't seem to find too often anymore. This was very interesting.

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 03:51 AM

Originally posted by undo
i think you can prove satan exists by first establishing the link between ancient egypt and mesopotamia via their shared history and word usage. both egyptian hieratic and hebrew were missing most vowels and share similar root word etymology. it's pretty evident the exodus occured during the hyksos expulsion and that many things about torah, written by moses, would be more understandable if viewed from the perspective that moses was raised as an egyptian royal. these two cultures are intimately entangled with each other, off and on through out the torah.

if you follow the connections between biblical nimrod and egyptian narmer, you learn he was the first pharaoh of post black sea flood egypt, and the first post flood pharaoh to hold the title osiris, upon death. this is established in several ways including the texts on the shabaka stone. once you know the identity and story of osiris you learn about an evil guy named
SET. set had a temple in egypt, called, unremarkably, the temple of set.

the temple of set is what jesus means when he refers to the pharisees and saducees to be the synagogue of satan.

the etymology is, SET (the serpent god) + AN.
AN is the sumerian-akkadian ANU,, who was the head god of the sumerian divine council, also referred to as heavenly father.

to determine who satan was, you merely have to follow the trail of clues. who was the brother of narmer / nimrod (he was also called enmerkar in akkad). and is satan also a mesopotamian figure? yep, he was.

satan was the accuser. according to the new testament, the accuser was the law. but which law? why is it we never hear of this word "satan" in text, before the time of king david (there's a reason but i don't want to talk about that yet)

let's back track to the three main guys in the sumerian divine council.

there was ANU=Heavenly Father
and EN.LIL=Lord of the Command
and EN.KI=Creator of humans and various other lifeforms on Earth

EN meant LORD. LIL meant Air, Storms, Sky

EN.LIL was the god who cursed man's flesh with a shortened life span and decreed the flood. He was presumably the god who gave Moses the law at Mt. Sinai.

So EN.LIL was the god of storms, who was this guy

Enlil (nlin), 𒂗𒇸 (EN = Lord + LÍL = Storm, "Lord (of the) Storm")

So we've established that EN.LIL the accuser is referred to in EGYPT as SET.
Why was SET figured in the old testament of the bible as a god powerful enough
to decree the flood and give the law to Moses?

This is a complicated thing but if there's a temple of set in egypt and if set is enlil, then
there must be a mesopotamian equivalent, and of course, there is. enlil had temples erected to him in ancient sumer, akkad and babylon. in fact, the name LIL in EN.LIL is the generic god word in mesopotamia, laying the foundation for its usage in words like EL.

if you're a christian, youre probably scratching your head right about now. i just want you to stop and consider the difference between jesus' approach to humanity and the old testament. and those moments in the old testament where jehovah actually appears to like humans. i believe this is because there are 3 different jehovahs/yahweh's interacting with humans in the old testament. one is like the prosecuting attorney (enlil) and one is like the defense attorney (enki). what are they prosecuting and defending? human beings. enki defended humans because he created them. he saved them from the flood. enlil prosecuted humans because they were on his planet and he didn't much like them, in fact, he pretty much hated them.

so how does this prove satan was real? well if you know that narmer was real, and that he was called osiris, then you just need to search out who his brother was. since he was also known as enmerkar and nimrod, surely one of those will tell you who the synagogue of satan leader at the time of nimrod was, who would be the founder of the temple of set in egypt and thus jesus' reference to the synagogue of satan, aka the temple of set.

I would be interested to learn more about this. Where would you suggest I begin?
edit on 17-2-2013 by stopbeingnaive because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 03:55 AM
reply to post by stopbeingnaive

which thing in particular?
cause i covered alot of territory in that post.

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 04:03 AM
I just hope it's the end of Catholic Times.
Then we can really start to deny ignorance all over the world!

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 05:03 AM

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by stopbeingnaive

which thing in particular?
cause i covered alot of territory in that post.

An understatement!!

Your history is good, conclusions, interesting, definitely new to me

This is a great thread, there are a lot of signs to suggest that we are on the cusp of something monumental. Curious how divided we are. I don't believe satan has recently taken over the vatican, the creation of the RC church was an attampt to hi jack the increasing popularity of christianity.

What is happening, as was prophesied in the bible, is that we are becoming aware of this fact. We are being shown in clear terms that the people at the top are evil, the system is evil, the way of life is evil. And we must accept that with the knowledge that it is not good. The only constant throughtout history has been the decisions we make between good and evil, either grow crops, or steal the crops from the guy next door.

This leaves the question: so what is good? That there is a bad too. And whether you want to call satan an entity or a personification, it's a very real force that affects us all.

Thanks OP, look forward to more thoughts on this subject.

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 05:21 AM
reply to post by randyvs

I don't think it is dubious. I'm a firm believer that everything is connected. I think it's odd to see someone of your obvious intellect carry on the way you do. By the way, I look pretty damn good in your mirror. What's dubious to you might mean a lot to someone else. You need to respect that and realize it's not all about you.

Shouldn't you by your own logic realize and respect how his posts are connected?
Have your cake and eat it too?

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 05:28 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

If the next Pope is named Peter.

What would you think, believe, and do?

Just genuine curiosity

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 05:35 AM

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
If the next Pope is named Peter.

The pope doesn't have to take the name 'Peter' to have the prophecy fit. EVERY pope sits on the Chair of Peter .. stands in the shoes of Peter ... that kind of thing. Every pope is a 'peter'. So instead of the focus being on the name Peter, it should be on 'Roman'.

My guess is now narrowed down to two -
1 - Cardinal Angelo Scola .. age 71 ... From Milan.
2 - Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone .. age 78 ... Vatican Secretary of State
And whoever it is will most likely take the name Pius XIII IMHO
ATS Prediction Thread

To address the OP ... Has Satan taken over the Vatican?
Dude .. look around .. Satan has taken over the world.
Watch a Jerry Springer show and tell me that he hasn't ...

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 05:50 AM

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Catholic mythology has been a passing interest of mine for quite some time ... ... ...

... ... ... for those who are unfamiliar the legend goes that in 1139 a Irish Archbishop we know today as Saint Malachy was summed by Pope Innocent II to head to the Vatican.

There is no such thing as Catholic mythology and Catholic prophecy has nothing to do with legends.

A word of advice. You should also rid yourself of the demonic avatar. No respecting Catholic or religiously minded person would ever listen to a word you say while harboring or clinging to, and displaying as your own images of a Satanic nature such as you are doing.
edit on 17-2-2013 by EequalsMC3 because: xxx

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 06:14 AM
The Vatican has always been evil. Torturing people and covering up child rape. It's an evil establishment, always has, always will be.

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 07:06 AM
SnF for a thought provoking thread...

Has Satan Taken Over The Vatican, Is The End of Times Near?

I was born and raised a catholic and later learned better that organised religion was nothing more than a tool to control and suppress the general populace of achieving oneness with all there is.

I would agree with some of the other posters, that the devil has been around a midst us for centuries, but suppressed all the while.

I have nothing to prove that, but the sheer acts of immorality out from the Vatican otherwise, that seems to fit the buck for me. But then again, actions of some may ruin the general outlook of others and hence the whole organization. Thus not all are as bad as some may think they are. There is always good in all that is evil to set the balance of nature.

This is all an illusion and a falsehood reality, a deterrent from the true teachings of self fulfillment.

Observing all there is from a neutral perspective is as innocent as a frog observing it's surroundings, the nothingness.

Enjoy the show while it unfolds.

edit on 17-2-2013 by InnerPeace2012 because: spelling and clarity

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 07:40 AM
Wait, why do people say Catholicism is completely "made up" Can someone actually answer this?

Matthew 16:18 : "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it" First Pope - Peter.

Literally looking for an answer here. Why is Catholicism false?

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 07:48 AM
reply to post by MrConspiracy

When you quote from the bible to prove the existence Catholicism, all you get is the bible is made up.

You don't really need a bible quote to prove the existence of the Pope and his cardinals in Vatican, the headquarters of Catholicism.


edit on 17-2-2013 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 08:59 AM
"Has Satan Taken Over The Vatican"

i thought he was the one that started it?

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 09:28 AM
Since around 2009 I've been convinced in one of the weirdest visions of my life that yes, Satan has persuaded the Vatican to be led astray to the point of failure. Actually in that oddball vision, Benedict was in the presence of a leader of the serpent race who you might call Satan, but I think the Serpent would be more appropriate. Well, so was Obama in the presence of this thing, and in order to observe a setting like that, so I was there enough to see it, even though I was revolted at the sight, so what can you make of visions like that?

I had forgotten about the potential of aliens in the expression of our universe and it's layers of dimensions. The crazy vision reminded me. In a nutshell, Benedict and Obama sit down for dinner over the soul of a child with the Serpent. Yuck, I have to say again.

You forget how polite the people in the Vatican are regarding their leadership hierarchy. Isn't there already secret knowledge in the Vatican about alien races? Would not it be possible for a man to be seduced by power and technology in the hands of another race of beings? The Serpent in the dream was an expert in the holographic technology, or manipulation of light by thought. Maybe the clothed lizard person -- or I should say something like a soldier or barterer of his kind, this one was in military style garb -- had some technological enhancements.

But why should this be news to ATS readers? Has nobody heard of Area 51? Don't some already say that government projects and technology is reverse-engineered alien artifacts? Perhaps the deal with the Serpent is a real exchange. Like all humans can rationalize themselves into a state of compromise for whatever reasons that would advance their collection of persons past some other perceived enemy, sometimes erroneously marketed a sacrifice, so maybe the Pope (in that crazy vision) was making a deal to make some money and get his morally-compromised employees out of an economic pinch without having to resort to selling indulgences.

So has Satan "taken over"? No, I think, in my limited range of perception about what is going on at the Vatican, that the group has submitted to the Serpent to get them out of problems. Personally I believe that individuals have the capability to say no to the Pope and still say yes to Christ, so just because your Pope had a meal with the Serpent and seems to be getting away with it doesn't mean you can too.. And yes, we are going through End Time things. Kids awestruck by an invisible woman somehow doesn't need to be put into this mess.

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 09:29 AM
Before everybody gets worked up on the Prophecy of the Popes ask your self this .....Is there one prophecy out of the many thousands, that have actually come to pass ? HELLO WAKE UP CALL!!!
There is plenty of evidence to suggest that since 1595 the lack accuracy of the prophecy even suggesting they were fabricated to suit the times ...even the Roman Catholic Church denounces the alleged prophecies as both forgery and manipulated ....

Some people believe that the prophecy in recent times is more scripted to suit an agenda ...though i don't follow that view ....for all those who are religious it clearly states in bible that no man will know the end time
and further more do you really believe one mans vision ....

As for Satan ... he would be hard pushed to make the world any more terrifying than it is today ...all you have to do is switch on the news to see how wicked man has become ..


posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 09:49 AM
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Shouldn't you by your own logic realize and respect how his posts are connected? Have your cake and eat it too?

What ? Oh cake ?

edit on 17-2-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 10:21 AM
I think Satan has been in control Catholicism since it's inception. But this is just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth.

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 10:25 AM
the problem with the word serpent, is that it has at least 3 different meanings in the bible.


1. the nachash (serpent in the garden of eden, which is related to medicine and genetics)
2. the dragon (see also #3 below)
3. the seraph, plural seraphim, which is a race of angels, some of which are around the throne of god. a seraph is a serpent, a flying serpent, a fiery flying serpent, a poisonous snake, etc. take your pick. how do we get a race of angels, who are around god's throne, from this ? just add "im" to the end of seraph, which is then translated as a plural.

somebody is holding out on us and that just adds to the confusion and allows our perceptions of what is good bad or indifferent, to be manipulated, perhaps in ways it was not meant to be. the english translation doesn't help as they tend to make generalizations, such the word for man in the old testament is not just adam, it's also iysh. these two are actually different, descriptively, as well, but the english translation just calls them man.

edit on 17-2-2013 by undo because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2013 @ 10:32 AM

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by stopbeingnaive

which thing in particular?
cause i covered a lot of territory in that post.

I enjoyed that post as well. I also find it creepy as hell that a man walked the earth and was referred to as Heavenly Father. That is very much a trait of Satan.

edit on 17-2-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in