Wed, 27 Feb 2008 03:30:40
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=4486...ionid=351020702
Raul Castro has held his first meeting as Cuba's new president with a foreign dignitary, meeting the visiting Vatican's secretary state.
Raul Castro on Tuesday met Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Pope Benedict XVI's secretary state behind-closed-doors in Havana.
Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque and Vice Presidents Esteban Lazo and Carlos Lage, as well as other top officials, also were in attendance.
Bertone's trip began coincidentally the day after Fidel Castro, 81 and ailing, announced he was retiring.
The visit marks the 10th anniversary of Pope John Paul II's trip to Cuba, the first to the island by a pontiff.
_____________________
Hi Eric
I got to listen to this interview sooner than expected.
First, it is good that this media outlet exists to broadcast this material - though we don't know for how much longer - especially when you think back to the efforts made 20 years ago to stifle Alberto Rivera's testimony. I believe that Mr Szymanski did a good job as moderator and that much valuable material was aired - also good that he plans to do another interview and that to judge by the incoming emails, many of the American public are informed about Vatican and Jesuit designs.
I believe that you were right to admonish Leo Zagami with respect to 1 Thessalonians 5:22 and to withdraw your initial charge. That concession should, in my opinion, have prompted Mr Zagami to apologise publicly for having acted unwisely. It was disappointing that he did not choose to, on this occasion.
You brought out the policy of no fellowship with the SJ and the Vatican very well, Ephesians 5:11. This is certainly wise. Relaxation of such a policy has spelt disaster for the Lord's people in the past, when you recall the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre of 1572, the Irish massacres of 1641 and the Waldensen massacres of 1655. Rome doesn't invariably make overtures of friendship towards her intended victims before inflicting an atrocity, e.g Croatia 1941 but when she does, it is always a prelude to atrocity.
Leo rejected the Vatican as the creator of Islam but as a Muslim, he would not understand Revelation 17:5, which identifies the Vatican as the creator of all abominations of the earth, including Islam. He thinks Islam was a popular movement and his stance probably reflects a desire not to offend his immediate family or to risk, as a Muslim, being tarred with the Vatican brush by default, since he is a witness against the Vatican.
But the scriptures never identify any belief system as a popular movement as such. The scripture always identifies individuals* as the instigators of belief systems, both godly and ungodly systems and further evidence to this effect is furnished from history. Noah, Genesis 8:20, renews a belief system embodying the principle of a burnt offering as pleasing to the Lord, instigated originally by Abel, Genesis 4:4. Nimrod is listed in Genesis 10 as the founder of ancient Babylon and therefore the Babylonian religious system, which ultimately finds expression as Roman Catholicism, historically started by Constantine in the 4th century AD, as you mentioned, but reviving the ancient ungodly works-based system that began with Cain, Genesis 4:5.
*i.e. human individuals, even if they are ultimately backed by Satan. The 7 heads of the dragon, Revelation 12 etc., are identifiable as individual rulers of successive world kingdoms.
Historically, even Marxism began with Marx, tutored as you reveal by Jesuits using the Paraguayan 'Reduction' model. It was never a 'people's' movement as such in the beginning.
Old Testament Judaism began with the call of another individual, Abraham, Genesis 12 and was codified under Moses, who received the Law, Exodus 20. The Lord Jesus Christ is our Founder. None of these belief systems could therefore be described as 'popular movements' and the scriptural verdict therefore is that Islam is no exception, because the scripture doesn't provide an exception.
Leo wouldn't see this, necessarily. But without dispute, Islam's founder is acknowledged to be Mohammed, i.e. an individual. He needed backing from somewhere because his ideology began in a hostile environment. He couldn't get support from most of the local Arabs, who were essentially polytheists at the time. He didn't get it from Christians. What other source of assistance was there? Only the Vatican, which had motive, opportunity and means, as testified by Alberto. On a related point, Mr Zagami is wrong to say that Islam is tolerant, as I think he did. Islam's attitude to non-Muslims, i.e. infidels inhabiting 'Dar-al-Harb,' 'House of War,' is uncompromising and set out unequivocally in Sura 9 and elsewhere in the Qur'an. (The verse in Sura 2 about "no compulsion in religion" was of course a (Vatican-based) ploy to deflect the opposition when Mohammed had few followers and was militarily weak. Things had changed radically by the time Sura 9 was recorded, as we know.)
I think the emailer was wrong to state that similarities between Catholicism and Islam is 'no proof' that the Vatican created Islam. It is the exact proof. First, as indicated, some powerful belief system supported Mohammed, the instigator of Islam, and it is difficult to find any other apart from Rome in the 7th century - see above. But also, all false religions, including Buddhism, which the emailer mentioned, stem from 'Mystery Babylon,' ultimately expressed until the Second Advent in the Roman system that the Lord condemns in Revelation 17. So again, Islam is just one of the abominations of Revelation 17 stemming in the Christian era from Rome, along with Buddhism, Hinduism and the rest, all offspring of 'Mystery Babylon' as Bro. David Daniels's book reveals. Mr Zagami should also read Queen of All by Jim Tetlow et al..
Re: Israel, your disclosures about Muslims being forced back into Israel by their co-religionists was revealing and agrees with material I've seen elsewhere. Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen, author of Middle East Diary, 1917-1956, was a British Army officer who served on General Allenby's staff and a strong supporter of the sovereign, independent nation of Israel - which should be emptied of Arabs, as you mentioned. He records speaking to a Lebanese contractor in 1956 about the then plight of Palestinian refugees. Col. Meinertzhagen urged that wealthy Arabs should help their co-religionists, e.g. by resettling them. The Lebanese described the Palestinians as "human rubbish, but a political goldmine!" That is why the current problems persist to this day.
Re: Israel itself, I believe that the Lord has relocated His people there in accordance with the endtimes, even if He used ungodly leaders to help bring it about, although I believe that General Allenby's conquest of the Holy Land and capture of Jerusalem (without firing a shot) was of the Lord, although much of what followed was not, as Col. Meinertzhagen reveals.
It is a worthy aim, to urge that professing Christians, Muslims and Jews work together for peace, in the Mideast and elsewhere but I think it has to be acknowledged that it won't happen until the Prince of Peace returns, Isaiah 9:6.
I believe that you make a strong case for the treachery of many of Israel's leaders but what is interesting is what an English engineer told my parents and I many years ago, during the 6-Day War. He had worked at the oil refinery in Haifa in the late 1930s and witnessed firsthand an unprovoked attack by marauding Arab Muslims who invaded the site and started literally hacking Jewish process workers to death. The mayhem was stopped when a British official drove into the site, standing up in the back of an open staff car. He brandished his swagger stick and ordered the Arabs in no uncertain terms to clear off, which they promptly did. Britain still had real power via the AV1611 in those days, though WW2 would just about finish it.
However, this engineer said, also giving the lie to the notion of British-Israelism, "The Jews will never give in now that they've got Israel back." He also dismissed the Arabs as "a hopeless lot," which again suggests, in agreement with your work, that Islam needs strong backing from somewhere and no other candidates apart from the Vatican, or Vatican-controlled politicians seem to be forthcoming.
I think that man's words are just as true today. Israel's Jews have not given in - a rebuke to multi-culti Britain and the US - but they could be, and will be, betrayed by those of their leaders who will make "a covenant with death" Isaiah 28:15.
In sum, a most valuable interview and encouraging that more is to come. But the full picture can't be seen apart from the scriptures, which also give a warning to any genuinely compassionate individual who thinks he can 'dialogue' with the enemies of God, Jeremiah 40, where the villain of the piece 'just happens' to be named after Mohammed's ancestor.
If that isn't a dire warning to anyone who would shake the bloody hand of Rome/Islam, in whatever form, I don't know what is.
Hope this helps. Feel free to use it however you wish.
Yours in the Lord Jesus Christ, 2 Chronicles 14:11
Alan
REST SNIPPED
____________________
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57415
_____________________________
The Investigative Journal
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
24kbps mp3
2 hours
Topic: Clarification Session, Part 2, between Leo Zagami
and Eric Jon Phelps, hosted by Greg Szymanski.
Part 2 of the Eric Jon Phelps and Leo Zagami clarification
debate of last week. They cover a lot of religious topics
including the difference between Christianity and Islam. -tkra
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=M6UDMBHM
No comments:
Post a Comment