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

reply to post by choos

so are popes meant to be appointed by god or just men with an agenda.

The College of Cardinals seek counsel with the divine and (allegedly) receive guidance.

Same as every other religion when it comes to decisions like these.

Likewise when my Mormon friend was sent to Puerto Rico for his Mission. That was ultimately god's selection, through guidance of the Holy Spirit, and not The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

God helps all the religions with decisions, and views them all as his Word. Apparently

Originally posted by MarkJS
reply to post by randyvs

 

Nice.

I've got one as well, IYDM....

here's my offering

If I was ever summoned by a higher power to read over the bible, and make an honest judgement on the roles of Satan and God, with out bias, I'd honestly have to say the god of the bible seems like the worse of the two, by far.

The character that plays the role of God in the bible is a genocidal tyrant with a flawed sense of morals. He has so many qualities that I don't find admirable in anyway. Worshiping him would be like worshiping Kim Jong il or a sociopathic cult leader.

The worst thing Satan ever did was rebel against this god (who acts like a tyrant) and give man knowledge. What else? I don't think either of those come any where close to the bad stuff the god character does. It seems like the god of the bible is running a successful propaganda campaign.

basically what I'm trying to get to is the idea that maybe we will be better off after satan takes over? The previous rulers of the Vatican haven't done to well, and they are very corrupt.

Originally posted by choos
late to the thread but curious about one thing..

I dont know much about catholicism, but wasnt pope alexander IV quite the nefarious character?

so are popes meant to be appointed by god or just men with an agenda.

Good question. There are what's called "antipopes". It's a rather bizarre practice within the church which allows the practice of contesting the rightful pope by appointing themselves??

An antipope (Latin: antipapa) is a person who, in opposition to the one who is generally seen as the legitimately elected Pope, makes a significantly accepted competing claim to be the Pope,[1] the Bishop of Rome and leader of the Catholic Church. At times between the 3rd and mid-15th century, antipopes were supported by a fairly significant faction of religious cardinals and secular kings and kingdoms. Persons who claim to be pope, but have few followers, such as the modern sedevacantist antipopes, are not classified with the historical antipopes.

Antipope

.

reply to post by mahatche


knowledge meant procreation.

adam knew (had knowledge of) his wife, and she gave birth.

the tree of knowledge is that part of dna responsible for procreation.
before that, they had no sex drive because they were cloned, copied.
no pain in childbirth because apparently, cloning doesn't hurt.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by randyvs

 

Those videos being a response to my questions, coupled with "I'll put my neck out and say your question should read when Peter becomes Pope". I can infer you believe:

The next pope will be Satan. Satan will usher in the end of times. World wide apocalypse. The undead will walk. This will happen soon.

I'd say that's accurate.

I'd like to show some appreciation by saying thank you to first the OP, for presenting this excellent thread in a totally unbiased manner. And while doing so call attention to the oddity of this post coming from someone who describes himself as a non believer. OP have you even considered how odd that seems to me ? And also how odd it should seem to all the members here who believe ? If they haven't thought of it they should.

Also thanks to Undo for his/her unbiased knowledge. Also thanks to After Infinity and every member of ATS for allowing this to be the thread it has become.

Edit for gendre

reply to post by randyvs


randyvs

no problem. always like to discuss this topic.
by the way, undo is an old lady, with 3 kiddies and a hubby. .

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by randyvs

 

randyvs

no problem. always like to discuss this topic.
by the way, undo is an old lady, with 3 kiddies and a hubby. .

I already realized my fopah and acted on it accordingly. Beat you to it even.
And might I ad you have a mind I would never describe the way you did.

Satan does not exist so therefore he can't reside anywhere. Except in the heads of people that believe they have no control over their own life. Sad really.

Originally posted by Logman
Satan does not exist so therefore he can't reside anywhere. Except in the heads of people that believe they have no control over their own life. Sad really.

Hey there's something we haven't heard before.

Originally posted by zyrktec
catholic religion is a false religion. designed and built by satan himself

Can you please demonstrate how this is even remotely true?

Originally posted by Joneselius
I'm sorry but praying to a god that's not God himself is a sin. Praying FOR someone or something isn't a sin, unless it's done out of malice. But praying to other entities is not praying to God, and they don't have the power to answer prayers.

Do you ever ask your fellow believers to pray for you? Is that a sin? So why is it a sin to ask Mary or dead believers to pray for you?

reply to post by randyvs

Well then I have a proposition. If I may be so bold.

I feel something much greater then a reappearance on ATS with an "oops my bad, I was wrong, I admit" is in place should these events not unfold.

Instead I say long periods of serious self-reflection, and an intimate date with doubt.
Or more succinctly, 'repentance'

reply to post by undo


I look at it like this....In the beginning.... There was a choice.

The fruit of knowledge or the fruit of life.

Out of ignorance the choice of knowledge was made.

Out of ignorance there is death.

When you have knowledge you are aware.. it's a knowing.

With this knowing comes an awareness of choice with or without ignorance of said choice's outcome.

With each choice there is an effect/outcome.

Again.... Being knowledgeable of the choices allows one to decipher good from bad as the outcome is evident.

Was the outcome good or bad??

Ask the wise and then ask the ignorant one and they will have different answers.

The saying goes "ignorance is bliss".

Is it?

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by randyvs

 

Well then I have a proposition. If I may be so bold.

I feel something much greater then a reappearance on ATS with an "oops my bad, I was wrong, I admit" is in place should these events not unfold.

Instead I say long periods of serious self-reflection, and an intimate date with doubt.
Or more succinctly, 'repentance'

reply to post by randyvs

But if you put yourself in my shoes ? You would see this as a blowout win win for you and an unabated lose lose for me

Quite the contrary That's predicated on the notion being a non-believer is a 'loss'. You view it that way because you're wearing your shoes. Just as I don't understand your position, you don't understand mine. We will be swapping shoes should this occur or not occur in other words. It's a win win.

Really this shouldn't be thought of in any terms other then truth, and the desire to be sitting along side it. Winning or losing is erroneous and trivial to truth.

I won't press this further or question you on this particular thing. You stated your belief honestly and I appreciate that much.

Do you think the End of Times is Near?

Has anyone listened to this video?



It seems as a lot of prophecies coincide with the Third Secret of Fatima.

Even though he doesn't come out and say it... others have and he gives enough clues to know what is foreseen.

This is in my opinion why the Pope is exiting and allowing a new one in... for the age we are living in.

If thats the case???? Then??? Will it be Peter?

If Peter comes in... my eyes will bug out... and I will then prepare a bug out bag.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Really this shouldn't be thought of in any terms other then truth, and the desire to be sitting along side it. Winning or losing is erroneous and trivial to truth.

I often grow tired of saying I agree and sometimes resort to BINGO. Other times I say both.

Side note I'm not catholic and have some reservations where the Vatican is involved.

reply to post by undo


Thank you

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

 

Really this shouldn't be thought of in any terms other then truth, and the desire to be sitting along side it. Winning or losing is erroneous and trivial to truth.

I often grow tired of saying I agree and sometimes resort to BINGO. Other times I say both.

I figured you would like and relate to this line

Means something to both of us right?