95 Comments on “ALL ROADS LEAD TO ROME / Hugo Talks”
Some interesting historical notes that I am unsure how they are impact the coronation’s significance (hopefully someone can): Prince Philip’s family is the Mountbattans. If you are not familiar with this wicked family, please research. His mother was a granddaughter to Queen Victoria and after her husband was exiled from Greece and left her for another woman she was declared insane by her family when she began making strange/ranting religious statements. I don’t believe she became a Christian, perhaps just openly rather than covertly demon possessed? She became a nun and was buried at the place where the oil is being made. However, this is not a Roman Catholic location or ceremony. This is a Greek Orthodox undertaking. The Roman Catholic church was a division of the Orthodox and then asserted it’s own rule, but The Patriarchs and the Orthodox Church still hold precedence over the Roman Catholic Church. Apparently in the ceremonial portion of the coronation as well. Also the Orthodox Church is Byzantine (Eastern Roman) which outlived Imperial Rome (Western Roman) as a Nation State. The Byzantines were connected to the Khazars, who many believe are the modern Ashkenazi Jews who appear to be the source of much deception, fraud, murder and tyranny, and the Venetians who are linked to European banking and control systems that spread directly to America, and the Persians which links to many infiltration and occult practices as well. So the Byzantine and Orthodox church seem deserving of more investigation.
I also find the passing reference to Thomas Becket and the Marian apparition of the eagle to be of great interest since the use of the eagle pre-dates Becket, there is no referenceable mention of this event historically (either a lie or hidden history), and Becket was only made a saint upon his murder and spilt blood. It is told that locals were healed by his blood that was on the steps of Canterbury and that it was collected and then sold for its healing properties which made Canterbury the most famous pilgrimage site. Becket’s life is problematic for being qualified for sainthood, but his blood which people washed themselves with and drank, etc is what made him a saint. These are mystical/occult uses for healing not Biblical ones. His was not a Holy sacrifice. So why is this bloody famous saint associated with the eagle and oil used at coronation???
I’m looking at the coming coronation of this man and this scripture came to mind ;
Revelation 6:5
5″ When He broke the third seal, I heard the third living creature saying, “Come.” I looked, and behold, a black horse; and he who sat on it had a pair of scales in his hand. 6 And I heard something like a voice in the center of the four living creatures saying, “A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius; and do not damage the oil and the wine.”
In a time where we are facing price hikes in food prices, wars and rumours of wars, and a man whose family say they are from the Davidic line.
May be off line, but it’s a thought.
“In 1983, shortly after coming to Texas, I was invited to testify
before a committee of the Texas Senate on a regulation that
forbade the teaching of the theory of evolution in state-purchased
high-school textbooks unless equal emphasis was given to creationism.
One of the members of the committe asked me how the state could
support the teaching of a scientific theory like evolution that
was so corrosive of religious belief. I replied that just as it
would be wrong for those who are emotionally committed to atheism
to give evolution more emphasis than would be otherwise appropriate
in teaching biology, so it would be inconsistent with the First
Amendment to give evolution less emphasis as a means of protecting
religious belief. It is simply not the business of the public
schools to concern themselves one way or the other with the
religious implications of scientific theories. My answer did not
satisfy the senator because he knew as I did what would be the
effect of a course in biology that gives an appropriate emphasis
to the theory of evolution. As I left the committe room, he
muttered that “God is still in heaven anyway.’ Maybe so, but
we won that battle;…..but there are many places (today specially
in Islamic countries) where this battle is yet to be won and
no assurance anywhere that it will stay won.”
Thus executed Weinberg the First Amandment in the name of scientific
theories which are metamorphosed into revelations of God by his
bewitchment.
> John Rickert writes:
> > In his Farewell Address, Washington said:
>
> > Of all dispositions and habits which lead to political
> > prosperity, RELIGION and morality are indispensable supports.
(political-prosperity,religion,support)
> > and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the
> > security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense
> > of RELIGIOUS obligation _desert_ the oaths, which are the
> > instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? …
(religious-obligation,justice)
> > [R]eason and experience both forbid us to expect National
> > morality can prevail in exclusion of RELIGIOUS principle.
(national-morality, religious-principle)
> … But notice that even the Washingotn quote cited above speaks
> of the value of religious values, not Christianity.
> That’s an important distinction.
INDEED SO :->
“The fourth major reform of the National Assembly was the Civil
Constitution of the Clergy. This had nothing to do with the doctrinal
matters but concentrated on the reorganization of the episcopal
structure and the status of the clergymen as civilians. Since the
National Assembly had taken over the church lands and issued bonds,
certificates, and paper money (_assignats_) with those lands as
security, it now assumed the obligation of clergymen’s salaries. In
return, the Civil Constitution required that the clergy be elected and
that they take an oath of loyalty “to be faithful to the nation, to
the law, and to the King, and to maintain with all [their] power
the Constitution decreed by the National Assembly and accepted by the
King [2].”
[2] Garraty, John A. and Peter Gay, ed. _The Columbia History of the
World_. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1981. pg. 767.
[Amendment of ARTICLE ONE]
CONGRESS shall make no LAW respecting an ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION…
(the Constitution of THE USA)
(key-words: Congress, law, establishment, religion)
I think it is time to make this Amendment more picturesque ? :->
[Further Amendment of ARTICLE ONE]
CONGRESS shall make no LAW respecting an ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION –
except of its own as it shall be ESTABLISHED by LAW made by CONGRESS….
(the Constitution of THE USA)
(key-words: Congress, law, establishment, religion)
Just because Pharaoh said :-> “Moses will alter your RELIGION.”
:->ROTFL
> Anatole Wilson
“the recent reform of the constitution in Costantinople
(i.e. the revolution) is entirely due to the American
mission.” They have so educated the country (without
touching the politics) that public opinion rejoiced
in reform. They have colleges all over Syria, and Asia Minor,
and in Constantinople (mostly self-supporting) and in
all of them the religious side is emphasised: also
every school is a mission station’.
Lawrence of Arabia; by J Wilson; pp.60.
Paul prepares Christians to give up their RIGHT to LAW to Roman Empire
As you know Thomas Aquinas wrote an extensive treatise on Law and in it he reflected the then common Christian understanding about law when he distinguished between human law and Divine law.
Human laws are those laws needed by governments to enforce good order and provide access to justice for those in a society etc., etc.
Divine laws are both natural laws and moral laws that do not originate from human governments, but constitute the being of both nature and humans.
There are other lesser laws, like statutes for example that set a level of taxation, or customary
practices about weddings and burials, or Church laws about liturgical procedures, etc., etc.
For Christians the Mosaic Law is seem largely as Divine moral laws including some statutes about religious practices, like resting on the Sabbath (food statute laws came later than Moses).
In living this human life, most Christians feel bound to follow properly authorized human laws and Divine moral laws (eg., no murdering, no stealing, no lying, no adultery, honour your parents, worship one God), but Christians do not feel they need to follow the Mosaic statute laws since they refer to Jewish practices that were abrogated for non-Jewish Christians, according Paul’s arguments.
However, when it comes to eternal justification in front of God, most Christians say that following any law is largely irrelevant, because God has already saved us from death and damnation, we only need to realize that we are already saved by the gift-grace of God love for us as shown in Jesus’ death and resurrection.
The issue of following laws was discussed at length in early Christianity under the debate about Pelagianism, which was the position that humans need to earn our way into eternal life by doing good works, this position was rejected by the Catholic community, though it keeps trying to make a come-back!
In James 2:24, St. James clearly says, “Man is justified by works and not by faith alone”
St. Paul’s discussion of justification in Romans, specifically Romans 3:28, where St. Paul says precisely the opposite of St. James: “We hold that man is justified by faith apart from works of law.”
Some interesting historical notes that I am unsure how they are impact the coronation’s significance (hopefully someone can): Prince Philip’s family is the Mountbattans. If you are not familiar with this wicked family, please research. His mother was a granddaughter to Queen Victoria and after her husband was exiled from Greece and left her for another woman she was declared insane by her family when she began making strange/ranting religious statements. I don’t believe she became a Christian, perhaps just openly rather than covertly demon possessed? She became a nun and was buried at the place where the oil is being made. However, this is not a Roman Catholic location or ceremony. This is a Greek Orthodox undertaking. The Roman Catholic church was a division of the Orthodox and then asserted it’s own rule, but The Patriarchs and the Orthodox Church still hold precedence over the Roman Catholic Church. Apparently in the ceremonial portion of the coronation as well. Also the Orthodox Church is Byzantine (Eastern Roman) which outlived Imperial Rome (Western Roman) as a Nation State. The Byzantines were connected to the Khazars, who many believe are the modern Ashkenazi Jews who appear to be the source of much deception, fraud, murder and tyranny, and the Venetians who are linked to European banking and control systems that spread directly to America, and the Persians which links to many infiltration and occult practices as well. So the Byzantine and Orthodox church seem deserving of more investigation.
I also find the passing reference to Thomas Becket and the Marian apparition of the eagle to be of great interest since the use of the eagle pre-dates Becket, there is no referenceable mention of this event historically (either a lie or hidden history), and Becket was only made a saint upon his murder and spilt blood. It is told that locals were healed by his blood that was on the steps of Canterbury and that it was collected and then sold for its healing properties which made Canterbury the most famous pilgrimage site. Becket’s life is problematic for being qualified for sainthood, but his blood which people washed themselves with and drank, etc is what made him a saint. These are mystical/occult uses for healing not Biblical ones. His was not a Holy sacrifice. So why is this bloody famous saint associated with the eagle and oil used at coronation???
I’m looking at the coming coronation of this man and this scripture came to mind ;
Revelation 6:5
5″ When He broke the third seal, I heard the third living creature saying, “Come.” I looked, and behold, a black horse; and he who sat on it had a pair of scales in his hand. 6 And I heard something like a voice in the center of the four living creatures saying, “A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius; and do not damage the oil and the wine.”
In a time where we are facing price hikes in food prices, wars and rumours of wars, and a man whose family say they are from the Davidic line.
May be off line, but it’s a thought.
Constitutions in loop
Steven Weinberg narrates :->
“In 1983, shortly after coming to Texas, I was invited to testify
before a committee of the Texas Senate on a regulation that
forbade the teaching of the theory of evolution in state-purchased
high-school textbooks unless equal emphasis was given to creationism.
One of the members of the committe asked me how the state could
support the teaching of a scientific theory like evolution that
was so corrosive of religious belief. I replied that just as it
would be wrong for those who are emotionally committed to atheism
to give evolution more emphasis than would be otherwise appropriate
in teaching biology, so it would be inconsistent with the First
Amendment to give evolution less emphasis as a means of protecting
religious belief. It is simply not the business of the public
schools to concern themselves one way or the other with the
religious implications of scientific theories. My answer did not
satisfy the senator because he knew as I did what would be the
effect of a course in biology that gives an appropriate emphasis
to the theory of evolution. As I left the committe room, he
muttered that “God is still in heaven anyway.’ Maybe so, but
we won that battle;…..but there are many places (today specially
in Islamic countries) where this battle is yet to be won and
no assurance anywhere that it will stay won.”
Thus executed Weinberg the First Amandment in the name of scientific
theories which are metamorphosed into revelations of God by his
bewitchment.
> John Rickert writes:
> > In his Farewell Address, Washington said:
>
> > Of all dispositions and habits which lead to political
> > prosperity, RELIGION and morality are indispensable supports.
(political-prosperity,religion,support)
> > and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the
> > security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense
> > of RELIGIOUS obligation _desert_ the oaths, which are the
> > instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? …
(religious-obligation,justice)
> > [R]eason and experience both forbid us to expect National
> > morality can prevail in exclusion of RELIGIOUS principle.
(national-morality, religious-principle)
> … But notice that even the Washingotn quote cited above speaks
> of the value of religious values, not Christianity.
> That’s an important distinction.
INDEED SO :->
“The fourth major reform of the National Assembly was the Civil
Constitution of the Clergy. This had nothing to do with the doctrinal
matters but concentrated on the reorganization of the episcopal
structure and the status of the clergymen as civilians. Since the
National Assembly had taken over the church lands and issued bonds,
certificates, and paper money (_assignats_) with those lands as
security, it now assumed the obligation of clergymen’s salaries. In
return, the Civil Constitution required that the clergy be elected and
that they take an oath of loyalty “to be faithful to the nation, to
the law, and to the King, and to maintain with all [their] power
the Constitution decreed by the National Assembly and accepted by the
King [2].”
[2] Garraty, John A. and Peter Gay, ed. _The Columbia History of the
World_. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1981. pg. 767.
[Amendment of ARTICLE ONE]
CONGRESS shall make no LAW respecting an ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION…
(the Constitution of THE USA)
(key-words: Congress, law, establishment, religion)
I think it is time to make this Amendment more picturesque ? :->
[Further Amendment of ARTICLE ONE]
CONGRESS shall make no LAW respecting an ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION –
except of its own as it shall be ESTABLISHED by LAW made by CONGRESS….
(the Constitution of THE USA)
(key-words: Congress, law, establishment, religion)
Just because Pharaoh said :-> “Moses will alter your RELIGION.”
:->ROTFL
> Anatole Wilson
“the recent reform of the constitution in Costantinople
(i.e. the revolution) is entirely due to the American
mission.” They have so educated the country (without
touching the politics) that public opinion rejoiced
in reform. They have colleges all over Syria, and Asia Minor,
and in Constantinople (mostly self-supporting) and in
all of them the religious side is emphasised: also
every school is a mission station’.
Lawrence of Arabia; by J Wilson; pp.60.
Paul prepares Christians to give up their RIGHT to LAW to Roman Empire
As you know Thomas Aquinas wrote an extensive treatise on Law and in it he reflected the then common Christian understanding about law when he distinguished between human law and Divine law.
Human laws are those laws needed by governments to enforce good order and provide access to justice for those in a society etc., etc.
Divine laws are both natural laws and moral laws that do not originate from human governments, but constitute the being of both nature and humans.
There are other lesser laws, like statutes for example that set a level of taxation, or customary
practices about weddings and burials, or Church laws about liturgical procedures, etc., etc.
For Christians the Mosaic Law is seem largely as Divine moral laws including some statutes about religious practices, like resting on the Sabbath (food statute laws came later than Moses).
In living this human life, most Christians feel bound to follow properly authorized human laws and Divine moral laws (eg., no murdering, no stealing, no lying, no adultery, honour your parents, worship one God), but Christians do not feel they need to follow the Mosaic statute laws since they refer to Jewish practices that were abrogated for non-Jewish Christians, according Paul’s arguments.
However, when it comes to eternal justification in front of God, most Christians say that following any law is largely irrelevant, because God has already saved us from death and damnation, we only need to realize that we are already saved by the gift-grace of God love for us as shown in Jesus’ death and resurrection.
The issue of following laws was discussed at length in early Christianity under the debate about Pelagianism, which was the position that humans need to earn our way into eternal life by doing good works, this position was rejected by the Catholic community, though it keeps trying to make a come-back!
In James 2:24, St. James clearly says, “Man is justified by works and not by faith alone”
St. Paul’s discussion of justification in Romans, specifically Romans 3:28, where St. Paul says precisely the opposite of St. James: “We hold that man is justified by faith apart from works of law.”