Risen - from - the - Dead : Resurrected and Raptured

For Christ's Resurrected and Raptured Saints : The Elect : We look for the resurrection of the dead
 
HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Post new topic   Reply to topicShare | 
 

 NostradamusRG is not a research group especially as regards wikipedia attacking

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: NostradamusRG is not a research group especially as regards wikipedia attacking   Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:14 pm

NostradamusRG is not a research group.

It is a French terrorist organization due to the lack of integrity of at least two of its members : Mark Smith, owner, and Peter Lemesurier : as regards a respectful treatment to Nostradamus.

***

The Nostradamus Research Group is not, nor does it aim to be, factual.  The owner, Mark Smith, and at least one other editor there, Peter Lemesurier, are flagrantly anti-Jewish and anti-Catholic, and are in direct opposition to the writings of Nostradamus.  They use their plagiarism as a means to promote their own authority as experts in the field while using unnecessary force to enforce their own agenda of crime.  It is an insult and a disgrace to not only Wikipedia but to the family of Nostradamus to have such miscreants included in the article "Nostradamus".

They deride proven evidence of the fulfillment of the quatrains and all manner of judicial proceedings.

If within a period of 72 hours from the posting of this proposition there is not presented proven evidence to the contrary, NostradamusRG will be substituted with a research group which "is or aims to be factual".

Binding testimony against NostradamusRG is held in obedience to the guidelines and rules of Wikipedia at :

http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com/t135-nostradamusrg-is-not-a-research-group#162

The link will be substituted with :

http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com/c13-centuries-by-michel-de-nostradame-interpreted

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)


Last edited by Admin on Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Saturday, September 19, 2015 9:56 PM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:45 am

From the "three" there becomes the "two" in IV:95 :

"The realm left to two they will hold it very briefly,
Three years and seven months passed by they will make war:
The two Vestals will rebel in opposition,
Victor the younger in the land of Brittany."

And when there is none due to the war foretold in line two of IV:95, that begins the reign of the antichrist foretold in Daniel 12:11.

That makes IV:95 not only a mirroring prophecy (3 years, 7 months according to the Roman calendar mirroring the 3 years, 7 months lunar of Daniel 12:11), but a key to open that which was sealed (Daniel 12:4 & 12:9).

Thus can be ascertained the 1,335th day (Day of the Lord) of Daniel 12:12.

But unless one knows the "three" (cf. Daniel 11:2) personally, such ascertainment is impossible for man.

My three brothers have been those "three".

That second king of Persia became incoherent on February 12, 2009 A.D. due to an automobile collision, thus fulfilling the first line in IV:95.

And this is how God made possible for man to know the 1,335th day in advance.

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:59 PM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:46 am

The great king abandoned by the Physicians,
By fate not the Jew's art he remains alive,
He and his kindred pushed high in the realm,
Pardon given to the race which denies Christ.

No better place to start, then, where Michel preaches the Gospel, in only one line.

The great king here is the fourth King of Persia (cf. Daniel 11:2; 11:19), who sired the first three kings of Persia (cf. Daniel 11:2), and myself (cf. Daniel 11:3).

The great king was put to death by the oldest of the three, who is the same as the king of Daniel 11:20, the vile tyrant of which one finds in other quatrains.

After the great king was shot several times back in 1955 A.D., he hung on for almost 45 years.

The reference to fate is much a resignation to the inevitable fulfilling to that which was foretold more than 2,500 years ago, especially with regard to the dishonest death (IX:#Cool.

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Monday, September 21, 2015 1:05 PM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:48 am

And that's the human race, by the way.

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:52 AM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:52 am

VII:#24 - Cheetham
He who was buried will come out of the tomb,
he will make the strong one out of the bridge to be bound with chains,
poisoned with the roe of the barbel,
the great one from Lorraine by the Marquis du Pont.

sacred-texts (on-line)
He who was buried will come out of the tomb,
He will cause the fort of the bridge to be tied in chains:
Poisoned with the spawn of a pimp,
the great one from Lorraine by the Marquis du Pont.

The use of the word "foist", as in an unwelcome imposition, is not appropriate in that I happened upon your site from the wiki "Nostradamus" page.

I addressed wiki, which states that anyone can contribute, regarding this quatrain earlier :

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prophecy_of_the_Popes&diff=next&oldid=306312753

But that was their basic premise there, too, that I was writing about myself.

The current result : both entries at wiki of "Gloria Olivae" and "Petrus Romanus" are in error, yet the quatrains contain specific information regarding both of them.

What does this mean, besides treating Nostradamus with apparent disdain?

That an estimated 8 billion people are being swindled, but not by me.

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:19 AM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:57 am

First, please cite your sources. You're currently quoting Leoni (1961), which isn't always advisable, as he admitted to not being a professional translator. In future please quote and analyse the original French:
-----------------------------------------

VI.18. Original September 1557 text

Par les phisiques le grand Roy delaissé,
Par sort non art de l’Ebrieu est en vie:
Luy & son genre au regne hault poulsé,
Grace donnee à gent qui Christ envie.

Read as modern French:
médicaments

        For th’ mighty King all medicines being waived,
        By luck, not Hebrew’s art, his life is saved,
        He and his kin then in the realm raised high
        Preferment given to th’ folk that Christ deny.

Source: Pursuing the Jewish theme of the previous verse, presumably the story of one of the contemporary Jewish doctors at the Court in Paris - if not of Nostradamus himself. The expression 'the folk that Christ deny' makes it clear that the event referred to took place AFTER the time of Christ (since previously there was no known Christ to deny, apart from the Jewish kings from Saul onwards -- but then Nostradamus shows no sign of knowing about that).

Foisting your beliefs about Daniel and yourself (!!) on to Nostradamus is no way of ascertaining what he was really talking about .

Peter
Posted by: Peter Lemesurier <lemesurier@bengalvillas.demon.co.uk>

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:22 AM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:59 am

So the king promoted the entire human race as a reward for medical treatment? Come on! Don't be ridiculous!
Best

Peter

http://peterlemesurier.blogspot.co.uk/

Posted by: Peter Lemesurier <lemesurier@bengalvillas.demon.co.uk>

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:01 AM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 3:00 am

No.

It also means he died forgiving the trespasses against him.

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:28 AM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 3:02 am

I'm not sure I understand much of what you've written since joining this group John, so maybe you could clarify.

Are you claiming to be an angel (as one of your previous posts suggests)? Also, are you claiming to be the son of this "great king of Persia"?

Sorry if I'm being a bit slow here.

Posted by: Gavin Palmer <gavpalmer@googlemail.com>

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:32 AM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 3:05 am

It is Christ Who bears me witness that I am the angel sent to prepare His way (Matthew 11:10; Luke 7:27; cf. Exodus 23:20; Malachi 3:1), the same Christ as in quatrain #18 of Century VI.

As Christ taught that "The Father and I are One.", the Father bears me witness, too.

The Holy Spirit, Who gives us the spirit of prophecy, through which we have the quatrains, also bears me witness.

This is not beyond the comprehension of our fellow wikipedia editors, which is why the affront against the quatrains and other prophecy is a sign of neglect.

The fourth king of Persia in Daniel 11:2 sired the other three kings foretold in that same verse as well as myself, the king of Daniel 11:3-4.

He died March 30, 2000 A.D. from sepsis, complications from firearm assault committed against him on October 1, 1955 A.D. by the very first king of Persia foretold in Daniel 11:2 (the oldest of the group of three).

In quatrain, those three are described, "who murder".

You can read more of the interpretations at :

(site link)

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 12:01 PM   Fri Mar 25, 2016 3:09 am

On 22/09/2015 13:52, johntbelias@yahoo.com [NostradamusRG] wrote:
VII:#24 - Cheetham

Oh dear!

He who was buried will come out of the tomb,
he will make the strong one out of the bridge to be bound with chains,
poisoned with the roe of the barbel,
the great one from Lorraine by the Marquis du Pont.

sacred-texts (on-line)

Oh dearie dear!!
He who was buried will come out of the tomb,
He will cause the fort of the bridge to be tied in chains:
Poisoned with the spawn of a pimp,
the great one from Lorraine by the Marquis du Pont.

VII.24. Original September 1557 text
L’ensevely sortira du tombeau,
Fera de chaines lier le fort du pont:
Empoysoné avec oeufz de barbeau,
Grand de Lorraine par le Marquis du Pont.

Read as modern French:

l'homme puissant de la mer [gr. 'pontos' -- donc le chef anglais ?]
selon

       The buried one out of the tomb shall mount,
       And have the strong man from the sea chained fast:
       Th' Marquis du Pont shall say Lorraine’s great Count
       Was poisonéd with barbel roe at last.

Source: The report by Francois de Guise (who, as the House of Lorraine's traditional heir, was by definition the Marquis de Pont-à-Mousson), that his father, the famous and heroic Claude duc de Lorraine, who died in 1550, had been poisoned. The first two lines would seem to represent a hopeful prophecy that he would one day emerge again from the magnificent tomb that his widow then had built for him, to harry the English once more.

The use of the word "foist", as in an unwelcome imposition, is not appropriate in that I happened upon your site from the wiki "Nostradamus" page.

I addressed wiki, which states that anyone can contribute, regarding this quatrain earlier :

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prophecy_of_the_Popes&diff=next&oldid=306312753

But that was their basic premise there, too, that I was writing about myself.

The current result : both entries at wiki of "Gloria Olivae" and "Petrus Romanus" are in error, yet the quatrains contain specific information regarding both of them.

Really? I don't see any mention of them.

What does this mean, besides treating Nostradamus with apparent disdain?

That an estimated 8 billion people are being swindled, but not by me.

True, true...

Peter

Posted by: Peter Lemesurier <lemesurier@bengalvillas.demon.co.uk>

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 12:09 PM   Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:24 am

Anyone can contribute, certainly, but only with independently authorised 
and/or referenced material. For this reason your contribution is not 
suitable for an encylcopedia! Now if you wished to write a book off your 
own bat, you might find out whether anyone wants to read it...

Peter

On 22/09/2015 13:52, johntbelias@yahoo.com [NostradamusRG] wrote:
>
> I addressed wiki, which states that anyone can contribute, regarding 
> this quatrain earlier :
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prophecy_of_the_Popes&diff=next&oldid=306312753
>
>
> B ut that was their basic premise there, too, that I was writing about 
> myself.
>
Posted by: Peter Lemesurier lemesurier@bengalvillas.demon.co.uk

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 12:38 PM   Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:31 am

Re: [NostradamusRG] Century VI : #18

Further on this verse:

Line 2 says 'est en vie', not 'fust en vie' or 'sera en vie'. In other words, it's about a king who was contemporaneous with Nostradamus. That means Louis XII, Francis I or Henri II. Technically it ought to be Henri II, as he was on the throne when the verse was written in 1556/7. But it looks more like Francis I, who was always risking his health, constantly looking for a good Jewish doctor (text suppliable if required), raised himself and his family (genre) to pre-eminence in the kingdom and granted Nostradamus's father (Grace donnee à gent qui Christ envie) naturalisation papers on 22nd October 1540.

Meanwhile, given that the book of Daniel is a known fake, put about rather like the familiar 'Lost Book', in 167 BC, as its own internal evidence confirms (it gets history dead right up to that date, and dead wrong thereafter)I don't see how any sensible person can take it seriously, given that its predictions about what was going to happen various numbers of days and years later (and particularly in 164 BC) all proved wrong. Still this group isn't about Daniel...

Best

Peter


***

Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:52 PM

He was shot at point blank range with a .22 caliber revolver, four rounds.

I remember his yell just after the barrage, "Son, you've ruined me!"

It was such 'luck' 'fate' that he survived as long.

As to your crack about the quatrains being a fake, Nostradamus is a convert to that which you don't believe.

You at least need to be on the same page with him to interpret.

***

Wednesday, September 23, 2015 5:13 AM

I was referring to the book of Daniel.

Best

Peter

***

Wednesday, September 23, 2015 9:20 AM


But in Daniel 12:4 we read, ". . . and knowledge shall be increased", which includes the quatrains.


***

Wednesday, September 23, 2015 11:55 AM

OF COURSE knowledge will be increased! (actually it means 'Many shall be at their wits' end...' [NEB] or 'Many shall roam about, this way and that... [JB], but who cares?) But Daniel 12:4 is no less a fake than the rest of Daniel. See this extract from my The Holy Babble:

The book of Daniel
What happened was that somebody apparently ‘discovered’ an old scroll that had allegedly been written way back during the Babylonian exile by a young man called Daniel. (‘Discovered’, you understand – these ‘discoveries’ are getting a bit worrying, aren’t they?) And it turned out to be a truly revolutionary document. It contained a whole bunch of prophecies that exactly fitted the present circumstances (now what a coincidence!), and that were validated by the fact that all its earlier prophecies had seemingly turned out to be true. I say ‘seemingly’, because the whole thing was written in vague, cloudy, symbolic language such as prophets were by now pretty much expected to use, and so it could be fitted to almost anything you liked.
That was the whole idea, of course.
Thus, in his chapter 8, Daniel had apparently described how the Persian Empire would be shattered by the Greeks under Alexander, and how on the latter’s death his empire would be divided into four. (Bingo!) Subsequently one of these sub-empires would bear down on Israel from the north (that had to be the Seleucids, of course), abolish ‘true religion’ and desecrate the sanctuary of the Temple at Jerusalem by setting up there what Daniel calls – wait for it! – ‘the abomination of desolation’. It was almost too good to be true. But the sting was in the tail. You see, finally, after ‘2300 evenings and mornings’, or just over six years – ‘the Holy Place shall emerge victorious.’
Well, the expected events had duly occurred, and the ‘abomination of desolation’ – the statue of Zeus, presumably, which the pious scribe couldn’t actually bring himself to name – had been duly set up on the altar. And so the crucial event in Daniel’s prophecy had, by the scriptures’ own subsequent admission, duly taken place. The Divine reaction and take-over could thus be expected within2300 days – or, at the latest, by 160 BC.
At this point the nation, no doubt in consequence, became gripped by a sudden messianic fervour. A violent revolt was organised to such good effect that, by 164 BC, the Greeks had been unceremoniously kicked out and the celebrated guerrilla-leader Judas Maccabeus (Handel wrote a lot of music about him, too) was able to rededicate the Temple in Jerusalem . In accordance with the other messianic prophecies, it now needed only the advent of a royal leader of the stamp of King David to seal the deed and usher in the everlasting Kingdom of God .
Remember David?
Well, as you may have guessed, 160 BC came and went, and no such leader materialised. The promised Divine Kingdom still failed to overwhelm the earth. And by now the advancing troops of the rising Roman Empire were already on the northern horizon...
 From bad to worse
Meanwhile the successors of the Maccabees, known (for reasons best known to themselves) as the Hasmoneans, were becoming steadily more and more corrupt and quarrelsome (as usually happens with revolutions) until a brutal Roman client-king called Herod took over (yes, something like that usually happens, too) and conditions for religious Jews became almost unprecedentedly dire. And so, during the last few years before Christ, the stage was set for a whole rash of would-be rescuing Messiahs to announce themselves. One of them promised to lead his followers dry-shod across the Jordan – until the Romans executed him. Then people tried to pin the tag on a wild-looking figure known to us as John the Baptist – until he, too was executed. Much the same happened to one of his associates, a Galilean called Yeshua, or Joshua (subsequently known, ironically enough, by his name’s Greek translation, ‘Jesus’, as I told you earlier) – until he, too, was executed. Despite his followers’ belief that he had somehow survived death and would return to rule the world, most religious Jews simply refused to believe it. As you would, of course. And so, ungratefully declining to learn from the experience, they looked forward to the advent of yet another Messiah.
The real one, this time.
Best

Peter

***


Wednesday, September 23, 2015 12:05 PM


Oh, and...

THE NEXT DIVISION OF THE ORIGINAL JEWISH BIBLE after the Torah is called the ‘Prophets’. This contains the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the so-called Minor Prophets. But, for reasons that we shall be looking into later, it doesn’t contain the book of Daniel. While Jesus does seem to have regarded Daniel as a prophet (we shall be looking into that, too), when he talks about ‘the Law and the Prophets’ in the gospels, it is to these writings that he is referring.
And...
Daniel
The book of Daniel was evidently one of the last to be written, and one of the last, consequently, to be accepted into the official Jewish canon. It presents itself as a major prophetic book, and Christians have been making huge mountains out of its messianic molehills ever since. Yet it was never included among the books of the Prophets.

and...
So let’s come back and take a closer look at the book of Daniel. If it was so important, why do you suppose that it was never included among the books of the Prophets?
Well, there was good reason for this. You see, it is a late and rather obvious fake.
Reputable academic opinion nowadays is virtually unanimous about this. Allegedly written by a Jewish prophetic whizz-kid during the exile in Babylon , as I told you earlier, it somehow manages to get virtually everything wrong about it. It describes King Nebuchadnezzar as going mad for seven years, when he is known to have gone bonkers for only four. Belshazzar (the one who had the feast at which the disembodied hand allegedly wrote worrying graffiti on the wall prophesying regime-change) is described as Nebuchadnezzar’s son, when he was in fact his grandson, and as king, when he was merely Crown Prince. To top it all, the author has the Babylonian court specifically speaking Aramaic – the language, not of the Babylonian court, but of its Persian successor. And such veracity as the book possesses is not improved by the inclusion of an adulatory chapter allegedly contributed by Nebuchadnezzar himself.
I mean, can you imagine?
If the book wasn’t written at that time, then, when was it written? Here the evidence is intriguing. You see, while the author is pretty woolly about Babylonian history, he is absolutely bang-on about subsequent events – even though, being a supposed prophet, he naturally expresses himself in vague, cloudy, symbolic terms.
Much as you might expect, in fact.
So he gets the Persian take-over right, ‘anticipates’ Alexander the Great, ‘foresees’ the break-up of his empire, and finally ‘intuits’ the bloody conflicts that would ensue between the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, culminating with the brutal repression by the bloodthirsty Antiochus IV (remember him?) and his setting up of the ‘abomination of desolation’ within the Jerusalem Temple.
Well, that duly happened in 167 BC. The first book of the Maccabees says so, remember?
Bingo!
And so what was supposed to happen then? The big cash payout? No, there was to be a divine take-over within 2300 days – or, at the latest, by the year 160 BCIsrael’s God would at last take control of man’s affairs, finally setting up the long-promised everlasting kingdom on earth foretold by the prophets. The good times, in other words, were just about to begin.
And so a revolution promptly took place, just to make sure that they did.
That had been the real idea all along, of course. The book of Daniel was yet another in that long series of worrying ‘newly discovered’ documents that had played such a big role in Israel ’s past history. In other words, it was shameless propaganda. Dr Goebbels would have been proud.
But it had the desired effect.
The nation suddenly became gripped by a bout of messianic fervour. A violent uprising ensued. I told you that earlier, remember? By 164 BC the celebrated guerrilla-leader Judas Maccabeus was able to rededicate the Temple in Jerusalem . In accordance with the other prophecies, it now needed only the appearance of a royal leader of the stamp of King David – or possibly King David himself – to seal the deed and usher in the everlasting Kingdom of God .
But – surprise, surprise! – no such leader materialised. The promised Divine Kingdom still failed to overwhelm the earth. In fact, by now the advancing troops of the rising Roman Empire were already on the northern horizon. And you know as well as I do what disasters that was to lead to…
Or at least, you do if you have been paying attention.
So it was no good fiddling with the words or recalculating the various mysterious figures that the book of Daniel gave, as Christians have been attempting to do ever since. Whether ‘days’ meant ‘years’, or ‘seventy weeks’ meant ‘seventy weeks of years’ (i.e. 490 years), or ‘3½ years’ meant what it said or something much longer – all this was and remains irrelevant, given that the whole thing was and is a fake anyway. You might as well try to calculate the date of the End of the World by permutating the numbers in the Lottery.
Ah, but then possibly you have.
So the fact that ‘Daniel’ was woolly about Babylonian history, broadly correct about subsequent history up to 167 BC, but hopelessly wrong about history thereafter (apart from the temporary Maccabean ‘blip’ that it itself produced by way of a self-fulfulling prophecy) makes it perfectly clear when it was really written.
You can put your money on 167 BC, or a year or three after. Rather than on the Lottery, that is.
Which is why, almost to a man (or woman), the reputable scholars have.
Meanwhile, there is a curiosity to explore. In his ‘vision’ of the expected Messiah finally being presented to Yahweh in the Jerusalem Temple, Daniel refers to him as ‘one like a son of man’ – ‘like’ because, being purportedly part of a vision, the author didn’t want to seem too clear about it. Now there is absolutely nothing mysterious about the term – which is bar nash in Aramaic, ben adam in Hebrew. It’s a perfectly normal orientalism for ‘man’ – rather than ‘son of elephant’, say. In fact, Israelis still use ben adam to mean ‘man’ to this day.
But the curiosity is that the later Yeshuah of Nazareth – Jesus, to you and me – would habitually use the term to refer to himself. To his followers, at least, he would call himself ‘the man’. The term was perfectly innocuous. Even under the Romans, there was no law against a man calling himself a man. But the Jews, who knew their scriptures – and even the relatively new concoction that was the book of Daniel – would know perfectly well what he was talking about, whereas the ignorant Romans wouldn’t have a clue. This meant that they wouldn’t bother to interfere with him – which was the whole idea.
But the real curiosity is that Jesus knew that he was referring to the book of Daniel. We know this (or rather, we think we know this) because on one occasion In Matthew and Mark he mentions him specifically in connection with the ‘abomination of desolation’.Remember the ‘abomination of desolation’? He also calls him a prophet, for good measure – just as he also clearly believes that Moses wrote the Torah and that Abraham really existed.
Now if Jesus believed that Daniel was a prophet (argue the fundamentalists, who are still refusing to lie down), then the book of Daniel must have been genuine. It had to be, you see, because Jesus – being God – was all-knowing.
Well, this piece of characteristic cart-before-horse reasoning is rather unfortunate. After all, they didn’t have to associate Jesus with the book of Daniel, did they? I mean, nobody actually asked them to. But, alas for them, they did and do. As usual, they argue from belief to fact, instead of the other way around. And the result, I’m afraid, spells… disaster for their beliefs.
You see, there is not the slightest doubt that the book is a fake. You have seen the facts for yourself – if you were awake at the time, that is. Its ancient history is both wrong and anachronistic, its more recent history no more than anybody at the time could have told you, and its future history completely up the creek. That’s why the fundamentalists are so obsessive about re-calculating its figures to fit what they want to happen. Otherwise they wouldn’t bother, would they?
Thus, the book can only have been written in or around 167 BC, and not by some previously unknown prophet at the time of the Babylonian exile.
But if Jesus was God, and if Jesus believed that the book was genuine – and yet the book wasn’t actually genuine at all – then there is only one possible conclusion to draw. And so I will retire to a safe distance and leave you to draw it…
Ah me!
Best

Peter

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 7:32 AM


Daniel 11:14 addresses all manner of such rabble.


***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 7:35 AM


Jesus Christ quoted Daniel in Matthew 24.


***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:01 AM


... which is a fake book.



Best

Peter

***


Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:05 AM


He did. But perhaps you didn't read all of the lengthy extract I posted for you?

In which case, what is the point of these exchanges?

Are you sure you belong in this group?
Best

Peter

***


Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:13 AM


... and Mark 13. But if so, why didn't he mention him in Luke or John? Perhaps they didn't think it important? Or perhaps he didn't say it at all? After all, they weren't around at the time  to hear it...

Best

Peter


***


Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:11 PM

amos@placeoftheskull .com wrote :

Indeed, the gospel stories were written at least a generation (40 years) afterwards. In fact, none of the four authors can be said to have been eyewitnesses and the special names attributed to them, in all honesty, were most probably pseudonyms, just like author of the book of Daniel.

Now I'd love to discuss the origins of these 'cunningly devised fables', but this is a Nostradamus research group, not a Bible research group.

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:19 PM

Sorry, forgot to sign off.

Regards
Gary
http://www.placeoftheskull.com/

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 4:07 PM

Our Creator doesn't treat it that way.

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 4:17 PM

Most of it is deriding.

We have the opportunity to make the Internet a great place or go down with its demise.

Integrity comes to the forefront of my mind when it comes to discarding the demise and maintaining the great place.

Many regard the quatrains as something of the occult, but the Nostradamus movie helps the inquisitive to see how they could have been written without all the smoke and incense.

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 5:39 PM

ivanewton

Hi John

I belong to this group more than 10 years. The books about Nosty the majority are only to get money and say nonsense to theys readers. They can deform our mind. This group is very serious and if you stop to insist to argue about his pre-conceptions with an open mind you will learn a lot
 
Ivan

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 6:29 PM

The Four Gospels are called Harmonious because they blend together.
It is not by chance that Century VII only contains 42 quatrains.

The number seven is symbolic of perfection, and 42 months is half of a week of years as found in Daniel 9:27.

There is a quatrain about "reading the false promise" which alludes to the tampering through the past 500 years of Daniel 11:20 & 21.

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 6:36 PM

Continue in your research young buck, and you will see how there are many links in the quatrains to the Book of Daniel and the Holy Bible disproving your 'fable' conspiracy theories, unless your a fool.

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 8:46 PM

Posted by: Mark Smith :

Hi Johntbelias. I shall give you my take on the prophecies/predictions of Nostradamus. 

Before I joined this group, (a number of years ago) I was looking into the whole area of psychic phenomena and I wondered that maybe Nostradamus was a type of Remote Viewer. It was mainly a question of whether there was such a thing as being psychic and not much else. However, when I joined here I got to realize that most of the people making the biggest claims about Nostradamus, were not fluent in modern French let alone that of the 16th century and had missed (or been unable to read) a great deal of the inside information about his life and how he devised his prophecies. Leading on from this, the evidence seems overwhelming that he copied from either earlier or contemporary sources of information (including biblical ones). Sometimes he actually took 'exact quotes' from others and re-used them! The actual predictions themselves can be traced to earlier sources, either that or it would seem to be a massive coincidence.  Pretty much all the people who both understand the 16th century French and who subsequently have studied Nostradamus in depth, see him not as a mystic, but rather as a social commentator who worked on the principle that history repeats itself. This concept was common in his era. 

Finally, I would also add that nobody has appeared interested in challenging the above theory in a scholarly/academic manner. I invite you to seriously consider this point of view. 'I did' and found it to be by far the best and most complete explanation of Nostradamus's prophetical methods and thinking. As has been mentioned before, he did not consider himself to be a prophet. Even in this very outlandish Youtube video, (where someone is actually pretending to be Nostradamus!) it explains that he was 'not' a prophet and that he clearly stated as much in both the letters to his son Caesar and King Henri II. An attempt to get around this issue is made by saying he was a 'seer' instead, but as I said it is most far-fetched! (This can be heard 4:08 minutes in and it gets discussed amongst other things for 4-5 minutes).   

The Nostradamus Address

(link to YouTube)

Regards, 

Mark. 

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:08 PM

Today's Saint of the Day reading was that for Blessed John Henry Newman who wrote this prayer which applies to each one of us :

"God has created me to do Him some definite service. He has committed some work to me which he has not committed to another.

"I have a mission; I may never know it in this life, but I shall be told it in the next. I am a link in a chain, a bond of connection between persons; He has not created me for naught.
 
"I shall do good—I shall do his work. I shall be an angel of peace while not intending it if I do but keep his commandments. Therefore, I will trust him."

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 2:04 AM

Indeed there are links to the Bible, but these are made retrospectively by Nostradamus. However, what you seem to be suggesting is that there are links made by the author of Daniel and other Biblical characters to the quatrains written by Nostradamus, which is complete nonsense.

If you want to do 'real' research you need to clean your head of all this indoctrinated baggage and present your ideas through a process of logic and reason (critical thinking). 

And for your information, it is better to be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

Regards
Gary
http://www.placeoftheskull.com/

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 3:48 AM

The further insights into that conflict foretold but not interpreted concerning all of chapter 11 of the Book of Daniel which were given to Nostradamus were never linked by Nostradamus himself, Daniel 12:9 states so clearly.

As Holy Scripture attests that Nostradamus could only have had arrived at such knowledge through dream and/or vision, one needn't go into all manner of hypotheses as to what kind of sphere he used, or what type of incense, or various paraphernalia - the point, he had access to the same source as any one else.

For him to have been so successful Holy Scripture also attests that he would have to have been humble enough for the spirit of prophecy to be welcome in any way, shape, or form, for "pride preceedeth a fall."

Even as knowledge has increased, any knowledge added to that which was closed and sealed in Daniel 12:4 would not be interpretable until the time of the end which only began September 12, 2012 A.D.

Now links can be made, but previous to that date in terms of prophecy AND interpretation, only prophecy was allowed.

I see God as having done this for a variety of reasons, inclusive to other prophecies that said He would.

The Day of the Lord is only 225 days away, Ascension Sunday, May 8, 2016 A.D., yet it has been foretold more than 2,500 years ago.

Much like the argument in "A Few Good Men" concerning why Rodriguez hadn't packed a single item, yet he was going to leave Guantanamo for the rest of his life, God is pouring forth His Spirit in the glory of His Second Coming because we are going to Heaven for the rest of ours.

Would you not pack your bags to get ready?

It was given to Nostradamus only to write "the year in which the dead shall come forth from their graves."

Such a limitation is not added retrospectively, it was enforced upon all until the time of the end, see Daniel 12:9.

As the opening/unsealing date is a matter of public record in the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County, PA, USA, WE have been given a key to know exactly when the "time of the end" began.

EXACTLY PRECISELY

And it could not have been humanly possible without Century IV, Quatrain 95.

Century IV : #95











By arriving at the specific date of the Day of the Lord, we can also ascertain that the cleansing period of Daniel 8:14 began on January 20, 2010 A.D.

The arrival at this information can indeed be seen as indoctrination, but it is God Himself Who is doing the indoctrinating.

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 4:51 AM

And that would be Corporal Santiago, not Rodriguez.

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 5:13 AM

Absolutely!

Best

Peter

***


Friday, September 25, 2015 5:23 AM

What way? Please include the texts you are criticising.

Best

Peter


***

Friday, September 25, 2015 5:26 AM

He didn't use smoke or incense, but the Nostradamus movie is a complete 
con, based on Cheetham. See http://drgoebbelsprize.blogspot.co.uk/ -- 
and this time read it all!

Best

Peter

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 5:27 AM

Please stop dragging in Daniel.

Best

Peter

***


Friday, September 25, 2015 5:45 AM

Interesting video, but translations unfortunately very traditional and misguided (II.24, for example, where 'Rin' doesn't mean 'nothing'!). 
Best

Peter

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 5:48 AM

This group is a non-religious area.

Members are not here to be preached at.


Best

Peter

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 5:49 AM

Hear! Hear!

Best

Peter

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 5:51 AM

Unless John stops posting his nonsense, I'm afraid I am going to have to filter him out. I have better things to do than waste time reading re-hashed religious dogma.
Best

Peter

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 8:47 AM

And that would be Private William Santiago, not Corporal Santiago.

There, you've all been demoted.

That's what being at the bottom of my website is like.

To such a place gets thrown all the demise of the internet.

Wikipedia is there, but because I currently have an account, it is being spared.

Ironic as it is, those who do the worst damage at wikipedia will be the very editors who will want to report to everyone else how bad hell actually is, but won't be able to do so.

If one sins against knowledge, one sins against the Holy Ghost/Spirit.

***

[size=11]Friday, September 25, 2015 10:06 AM

Posted by: Gavin Palmer

I thought you were being pretty patient as it is Peter - he's the sort of contributor who reminds us that silence is indeed golden!

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 11:31 AM

Plonk! (first time I've had to say that since a.p.n...)

I'm hoping the group's Owner will intervene...
Best

Peter

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 11:32 AM

I think some of us are still assuming he's a reasonable being. Big mistake. I'm afraid. Sad
Best

Peter

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 2:41 PM

Posted by: amos@placeoftheskull.com

Can someone please flush the toilet!

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 6:02 PM

Posted by: Mark Smith

Hi all. Sorry I haven't been on e-mail much lately.  

Yes reading the posts and seeing the problems that are occurring, I shall remove Johntbelias from the group. The discussions aren't progressing despite the attempts of a few of us and it would just be a constant slagging match if things were to continue. Also some of what has been posted by Johntbelias, is strictly speaking not even on-topic and is coming across as a rant. 

It's a shame to remove people, but sometimes there is a need!

Regards,

Mark.
[/size]

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)


Last edited by Admin on Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:38 pm; edited 15 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:13 PM   Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:38 am

[NostradamusRG] Century V:#56

You wrote, "Really, I don't see any mention of them."

I'll show you, but you get first crack at this one (though you may have already discussed it here).

Speaking in tongues is fine (the various translations), but St. Paul also taught that prophecy with interpretation is better.

Please, if you will, provide your translation of choice.

***

Wednesday, September 23, 2015 5:08 AM

OK.

V.56. Original September 1557 text

Par le trespas de tresvieillart pontife,
Sera esleu Romain de bon aage:
Qu’il sera dict que le siege debiffe,
Et long tiendra & de picquant ouvraige.

Read as modern French:

Par la mort

        When dies the Pope who is so full of years
        They shall a Roman fairly old elect:
        Of him they’ll say the throne quite out he wears,
        So long he’ll reign, and to such fierce effect.

Source: The death of Pope Paul III in 1549 at the age of 81, to be succeeded by Julius III, then aged 63. Although he in fact only reigned until 1555 (as Nostradamus must have known when he wrote the verse, unless he had already written much of the second edition before publication of the first edition in that same year), he certainly made an impression, having presided over the opening session of the fiercely reactionary Council of Trent, as well as siding with the Holy Roman Emperor against France, until forced by the latter’s success to make peace in 1552.

***

Wednesday, September 23, 2015 9:13 AM


Now, if you would, (here again you may already be familiar with this) provide your own analysis/comment on the first three paragraphs after the subtitle "The Reign of the Five Popes" here (it's a short ways down from the beginning of the article) :

http://www.ccg.org/english/s/p288.html


***

Wednesday, September 23, 2015 11:42 AM


Nostradamus knew nothing about future popes -- or indeed about future ANYTHING! Please see, for a start,http://nostradamusrevolution.blogspot.co.uk/ 
Best

Peter

***

Wednesday, September 23, 2015 5:25 PM


That link reminds me of the quatrain about raising the theater again, with some pretty shabby acting (for a start).

But is also evidence of "truth being cast down".

All three analyses are incorrect due to greed, an impatience.

The error you introduce is astonishing.

John Paul II outlived the other 'candidates', and was visibly very aged because the devil himself fought John Paul II, who canonized more than 480 saints, beatifying ca. 1,400 others.

And in your original analysis, the quatrains weren't even yet in print.

And to show how error pervades these end times, the Roman of good age is not Bishop Ratzinger, yet that is what some 8 billion think is correct.

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 5:18 AM

You seem not to have understood my whole thesis.

If the quatrains were written retrospectively, they wouldn't have been 
in print yet, would they?

And, inevitably, Nostradamus couldn't have written retrospectively about 
any modern popes, given that he didn't yet know about them.

Best

Peter

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 5:20 AM

'Incorrect', says who?

Best

Peter

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 3:13 PM


You provided your translation of choice inclusive to a source analysis which includes error of thesis regarding, at least, the first two lines. (The error you provided to the first line I have already shown, as well as another error in thesis from another source concerning this quatrain.)

Before the king of the south (Daniel 11:40) came to grips with me on November 8, 2012 A.D., I had spoken with His Holiness via the telephone about a week prior to that date.

I had come into possession of a copy of "Journal of a Soul", the writings of John XXIII, and I had called the Vicar of Christ to see if he had read it, to which he replied that he did as it was required reading in the seminary.

So even at the time of our telephone conversation, His Holiness had "sat" longer than Julius III.

***

Thursday, September 24, 2015 3:51 PM

As Grisham says on CSI, "The evidence doesn't lie."

***

Friday, September 25, 2015 5:21 AM


Detail the 'errors of thesis'?

Nostradamus knew nothing about future popes.

Daniel is irrelevant to this group.
Best

Peter

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)


Last edited by Admin on Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:28 pm; edited 9 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Admin
Admin


Posts : 497
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 60
Location : Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, USA

PostSubject: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:25 PM   Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:32 pm

Re: Century VII:#24

Which is exactly what the gift of prophecy and/or interpretation is, yet the 'fool' applies a 'rule', as in the saying "Any fool can make a rule, and every fool will break it."
The proof is in the pudding.

* * *
sincerely,

St. Elijah (cf. §784, Catholic Catechism),
St. John the Baptist (cf. §785, Catholic Catechism),
Edward Palamar Popovich (cf. §786, Catholic Catechism),

  the Resurrected Prophet of the Most High (Luke 1:76),
  whom Jesus Christ calls "the Elias who was to come" (Matthew 11:14),
  enjoying the rapture of Christ's love in the duty of

Petrus Romanus (Peter the Roman, cf. St. Malachy Prophecy),

the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven (Matthew 24:30)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://risen-from-the-dead.forumotion.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: NostradamusRG is not a research group especially as regards wikipedia attacking   

Back to top Go down
 
NostradamusRG is not a research group especially as regards wikipedia attacking
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Springboard Research on IT procurement of Phils
» Multiple Sire group behavior
» Lake Albert - Wagga Wagga Walk Group
» 314 Transport Group
» Review of MK Group Ltd

Permissions in this forum:You can reply to topics in this forum
Risen - from - the - Dead : Resurrected and Raptured :: Satanic Websites on the Internet - the Satanic Titanic :: X thru Z :: https:// groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/NostradamusRG-
Post new topic   Reply to topicJump to: