Most don't know the history of the Jesuits. And, in the minds of many, the Jesuits are associated with good rather than bad. So a person really has to remove that veil in order to see clearly. Some aren't ready to yet.
They've been conditioned to reject competing information. They immediately think you are a liar or a 'conspiracy theorist' and reject your information.
I told my parents (both roman catholic) that the new pope was a jesuit (one rank below 'black pope' in fact) and they just shrugged. I told them that he will make sweeping changes that reverse course on a lot of principles. They shrug again. I told them that Pope Francis has already changed the church's stance on freemasonry and has now allowed Catholics to join Freemasons. They shrug again.
I have done all I can to convince them that Freemasons are alchemists--that is, they are gnostics that believe in enochian magic and consider themselves to be the children of Enoch, son of Cain. That our founding father 'Deists' (John Dee "-ists") were freemasons, which are rosicrucians, which are gnostic alchemists, which believe that you 'become god' through a jungian transpersonal psychological refinement of the spirit (ie: psychedelic experience) be via mentalist dissociation or sacramental perturbation of the normal state of consciousness...
again shrug
I point them to fulcanelli, rossyln chapel, I tell them dan brown's books are 90% historical.
again shrug.
My conclusion is they don't want to know about the secret religion of the aristocrats. They just want to keep calm and derp along with their derp religion. And continue to think I'm a batshit lunatic who deserves to be a lone gardener in a cabin in the woods writing conspiracy crap every day. What they don't get, is I'm having the time of my life doing this.
I have to correct you about the founding fathers, only 2 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were diests (Jefferson and Franklin); the rest, besides one Catholic were all Bible-believing Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and Episcopalians.
all these people were deists, and founding fathers because of involvement with DoI or US Constitution
alexander hamilton
john quincy adams
thomas jefferson
thomas paine
james madison
george washington
Keep in mind, that's just what i know, there may have been more that were deists but this is not a topic I acutally care about that much so I haven't thoroughly researched it.
There were other founding fathers but since they aren't very well known then whatever they contributed to our history isn't as important as those you recognize. Sorry I made a general statement that you took to mean that meant 'all founding fathers were deists' I actually did not mean that and didn't mean to imply it either, but rather something like, all the founding fathers you KNOW from your history books were mostly deists. look at the list
John Quincy Adams never signed the Declaration of Independence, he was only 9 years old. He is not a founder of America. But even though he was Unitarian, he wrote a book on Bible lessons and was devoted to the Book, even if his doctrines were misguided.
Alexander Hamilton was Presbyterian/Episcopalian. He was tutored by a Presbyterian clergyman and moved to Christiansted, with its Protestant Cay, to be an apprentice. He was only 19 when the declaration of independence was signed.
James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights at the behest of his Baptist preacher John Leland. He attended St. John's Episcopal Church while he was President. He considered becoming a minister for a career and did a postgraduate study in theology. He studied under Calvinist John Witherspoon. Witherspoon, along with John Quincy Adams and others, opposed the deist Thomas Paine.
George Washington was given a believer's Baptism by John Gano in the Hudson River before the witness of a hundred people. He called on Gano after the Revolutionary War to lead prayer.
The only man to have signed all four great state papers of the U.S., they being the Continental Association, the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation and the Constitution was Roger Sherman who was a Bible-believing Calvinist. He was author to the Declaration of Independence.
I repeat that only 2 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were deists while some of the most vital founders like the Calvinist Roger Sherman are kept buried by atheistic agendas wishing to undermine the Protestant Baptist/Calvinist foundations of America. Similarly, only 1 outright deist, out of 55 total delegates was present at the Constitutional Convention. So you're right; these ONE or TWO deists (Franklin and Jefferson primarily) are always shoved in peoples' faces to make you not even look into the true history; that history being that ALL of the founders were Bible-believing. That's right, ALL. If these atheists want to say that ALL of the founders were deists when only 2-3 were, then it is well within the bounds of reason to say ALL of the founders were Protestant Christians because virtually ALL of them - the ones who signed the laws and declarations - were.
Your statement that they "believe that you 'become god' through a jungian transpersonal psychological refinement of the spirit (ie: psychedelic experience) be via mentalist dissociation or sacramental perturbation of the normal state of consciousness" is how I have thought about the overall purpose of life. Do you think that that is an erroneous way of operating?
I think it's good to strive to become more like God if your god is good; but it's the height of conceit to think you can become God or that you are god. I do think we have a very very special privilege of being on earth and that if we treat each other like we are each a mythical hero--like hercules or zeus or prometheus or haephestus--instead of a 'number' or 'boot on the ground' or somesuch, the world would be so much better. To exalt our fellow man as a god unto himself, rather than denigrate him as an insect trespassing in your house. Such a culture would naturally create utopia. Because utopia would then a state of operation and social construct, not a system of legal and financial instruments, because by creating a culture that respects each other as sovereign, things would naturally 'sort themselves out'--I truly believe this, and no government would be needed. I guess you can call this anarchy of sorts, but I call it cooperationalism which is kind of a dumb term I know.
Anyway, I think the drive to perfect oneself with jungian psychology, or alchemy or substance assistance are all good drives. You don't see the catholic church or any christian church really pushing this. They only have this 'believe in a union leader and that's the end of the story / or you're going to hell' mentaility. Only the 'new age' which is of course part of the 'occult gnosticism' and part of the 'illuminati' seems to be concerned with self improvement (and scientology). I dont' think new age is as nefarious as people wnat to believe. I mean, crystals and astrology have been for many: inspirational to 'what's beyond'. Seems positive to me.
I think it's a safe bet to just "get real" and admit that "we really don't know" whats beyond. So we can choose what to think what it is, but we should stop there and not try to convince others of whatever of the competing unproven models is the truth we cannot possibly know. I guess that makes me kind of an agnostic? I like to study them all and come up with my own thing.
I agree with you completely. I've been reading r/romerules and study a lot of what u/Veritas_Aequitas speaks of. Very interesting and helpful content. It is a shame more aren't on board.
It doesn't seem to provide much beyond blaming a vaporous group for something. More importantly, unless I'm seeing names of people that are involved in this in some measurable way, it is a waste of time.
A monolithic group opposes the things we cherish. We know that. How about we secure our communications, THEN discuss them...
This is a funny explanation. The only problem is that I've been conditioned to think of funny internet cats instead of the Jesuit who was about to throw the bag of cats into the river. (Keep calm and here's internet cats)
I think a large part of it is because of the anti-theist strain of atheism that has emerged over the last couple of decades: God is fantasy, religion is bullshit, and the faithful are stupid, therefore nothing to do with religion is worth bothering with, so let's talk about something real instead... like the flat earth. Simply put, some people just have an aversion to topics with religious content and the Jesuits are inescapably religious.
Quote: The first Jesuits were crypto‑Jews. Ignatius Loyola himself was a crypto‑Jew of the Occult Cabala. A crypto‑Jew is a Jew who converts to another religion and outwardly embraces the new religion, while secretly maintaining Jewish practices.
As John Torell explains: "In 1491 San Ignacio de Loyola was born in the Basque province of Guipuzcoa, Spain. His parents were Marranos and at the time of his birth the family was very wealthy. As a young man he became a member of the Jewish Illuminati order in Spain. As a cover for his crypto Jewish activities, he became very active as a Roman Catholic.
On May 20, 1521 Ignatius (as he was now called) was wounded in a battle, and became a semi‑cripple. Unable to succeed in the military and political arena, he started a quest for holiness and eventually ended up in Paris where he studied for the priesthood.
In 1539 he had moved to Rome where he founded the "JESUIT ORDER," which was to become the most vile, bloody and persecuting order in the Roman Catholic Church.
In 1540, the current Pope Paul III approved the order. At Loyola's death in 1556 there were more than 1000 members in the Jesuit order, located in a number of nations."
Ignatius of Loyola's secretary, Polanco, was of Jewish descent and was the only person present at Loyola's deathbed.
James Lainez, who succeeded Loyola as the second Jesuit General, was also of Jewish descent.
Jews were attracted to the Jesuit order and joined in large numbers.
Lacunza was no exception. He was a Jew, which explains why he introduced the eschatological teaching of a return to the Jewish animal sacrifices during the Millennium.
In a book titled The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty published in 1812, 11 years after the death of its author, Jesuit Emanuel de Lacunza who, wrote under the fictitious pen name of a purportedly converted Jew, Rabbi Juan Josaphat Ben Ezra, in order to conceal his identity and to make his writings more palatable to the Protestant readers. He promoted the writings of sixteenth century Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera, developing a futuristic perspective which restricted the prophetic fulfillments in the book of Revelation to the end of the world.
Lacunza also wrote that during a millennium after the tribulation the Jewish animal sacrifices would be reinstated along with the Eucharist (the mass) of the Catholic Church.
Lacunza has followed after Jewish fables and replaced the commandments of God with the commandments of men. That doctrine gives the Jews primacy in God's plan and relegates Christians to a prophetic parenthetical to be supplanted by the Jews during the thousand year earthly reign of Christ.
Now I don't know about you, but my God does not want animals or humans to be slaughtered by primitive half-wits in supposed 'sacrifice' to him. My God (who is the ONLY god, by the way) is FAR more advanced than that
Also, my God does not have 'favourites'
Those who claim to be chosen favourites obviously worship a completely different god. And their god can have them and they it
The first Jesuits were not crypto-jews that is a lie. Loyola was a Spanish Templar alumbrados and even said he wished he were a Jew; the Jesuit Order was sanctioned by the Farnese Pope and funded by Francis Borgia, neither of whom were Jewish. And there was a rule put in place after the second Superior General which banned Jews from joining the order.
Both of you are right, it's semantics, their favorite weapon to use.
The fact people forget is that the REAL JEWS will not be known until after the return of the messiah. There is not a Jew alive today who can rightfully say anything else.
If you believe in God, no matter what, you have to believe in the book. The book sings a song, and that song is prophecy. Prophecy directly interacts without reality. There is a reason everyone throughout history said "it's the J00s."
Revelation 3:9King James Version (KJV)
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
They are converts, google King Bulan.
Jesus was a Hebrew by blood, not by religion (today's Jews) which means Jesus does have a race.
Meaning, at the end times, there would be a group of people claiming to be Jews who were really not Jews.
Hence why the converts backs in that time (Khazars, Rothschilds) would crucify Jesus.
The Jewish Encyclopedia (Vol. 2, p. 497) admits that:
“It is a somewhat curious sequel to the attempt to set up a Catholic competitor to the Rothschilds that at the present time (1905) the latter are the guardians of the papal treasure.”
They jesuit were created around the same time as a very bloody period in the church history.
Before and after Luther, many people trying to do similar things were killed. They tried kill Luther too.
The agenda of the jesuit is to help te pope do unchristian like things ... Knowing historical facts I'm not sure how you can think otherwise. It's widely accepted the church has been involved in some unethical activities historically
The "Fourth vow" is a religious solemn vow that is taken by members of various religious institutes of the Catholic Church, after the three traditional vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. It usually is an expression of the congregation's charism and particular insertion in the apostolic field of the Church.
In reality, this means murder - guy Fawkes trying to kill king james of England and his translators
People that were valuing reform or protesting were killed or tried to be killed
Looking at the reformation is a fascinating starting point to try understand today?
I'm not entirely sure if Fawkes himself wasa jesuit or a 'agent' or puppet. Yet that is sort of the point. From a conspiracy sense tey are often behin the scenes.
I'll accept the idea of a group jesuits conspiring to conduct the gunpowder plot, but the Society of Jesus does not have any malicious intentions, unlike the global elite, NWO, and zionists.
They jesuit were created around the same time as a very bloody period in the church history.
Before and after Luther, many people trying to do similar things were killed. They tried kill Luther too.
The agenda of the jesuit is to help te pope do unchristian like things ... Knowing historical facts I'm not sure how you can think otherwise. It's widely accepted the church has been involved in some unethical activities historically
I'll accept the idea of a group jesuits conspiring to conduct the gunpowder plot, but the Society of Jesus does not have any malicious intentions, unlike the global elite, NWO, and zionists.
45 comments
7 Pologrounds 2016-05-19
Most don't know the history of the Jesuits. And, in the minds of many, the Jesuits are associated with good rather than bad. So a person really has to remove that veil in order to see clearly. Some aren't ready to yet.
8 911bodysnatchers322 2016-05-19
They've been conditioned to reject competing information. They immediately think you are a liar or a 'conspiracy theorist' and reject your information.
I told my parents (both roman catholic) that the new pope was a jesuit (one rank below 'black pope' in fact) and they just shrugged. I told them that he will make sweeping changes that reverse course on a lot of principles. They shrug again. I told them that Pope Francis has already changed the church's stance on freemasonry and has now allowed Catholics to join Freemasons. They shrug again.
I have done all I can to convince them that Freemasons are alchemists--that is, they are gnostics that believe in enochian magic and consider themselves to be the children of Enoch, son of Cain. That our founding father 'Deists' (John Dee "-ists") were freemasons, which are rosicrucians, which are gnostic alchemists, which believe that you 'become god' through a jungian transpersonal psychological refinement of the spirit (ie: psychedelic experience) be via mentalist dissociation or sacramental perturbation of the normal state of consciousness...
again shrug
I point them to fulcanelli, rossyln chapel, I tell them dan brown's books are 90% historical.
again shrug.
My conclusion is they don't want to know about the secret religion of the aristocrats. They just want to keep calm and derp along with their derp religion. And continue to think I'm a batshit lunatic who deserves to be a lone gardener in a cabin in the woods writing conspiracy crap every day. What they don't get, is I'm having the time of my life doing this.
3 Veritas__Aequitas 2016-05-19
I have to correct you about the founding fathers, only 2 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were diests (Jefferson and Franklin); the rest, besides one Catholic were all Bible-believing Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and Episcopalians.
1 911bodysnatchers322 2016-05-19
I have to recorrect your record
all these people were deists, and founding fathers because of involvement with DoI or US Constitution
Keep in mind, that's just what i know, there may have been more that were deists but this is not a topic I acutally care about that much so I haven't thoroughly researched it.
There were other founding fathers but since they aren't very well known then whatever they contributed to our history isn't as important as those you recognize. Sorry I made a general statement that you took to mean that meant 'all founding fathers were deists' I actually did not mean that and didn't mean to imply it either, but rather something like, all the founding fathers you KNOW from your history books were mostly deists. look at the list
1 Veritas__Aequitas 2016-05-19
John Quincy Adams never signed the Declaration of Independence, he was only 9 years old. He is not a founder of America. But even though he was Unitarian, he wrote a book on Bible lessons and was devoted to the Book, even if his doctrines were misguided.
Alexander Hamilton was Presbyterian/Episcopalian. He was tutored by a Presbyterian clergyman and moved to Christiansted, with its Protestant Cay, to be an apprentice. He was only 19 when the declaration of independence was signed.
James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights at the behest of his Baptist preacher John Leland. He attended St. John's Episcopal Church while he was President. He considered becoming a minister for a career and did a postgraduate study in theology. He studied under Calvinist John Witherspoon. Witherspoon, along with John Quincy Adams and others, opposed the deist Thomas Paine.
George Washington was given a believer's Baptism by John Gano in the Hudson River before the witness of a hundred people. He called on Gano after the Revolutionary War to lead prayer.
The only man to have signed all four great state papers of the U.S., they being the Continental Association, the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation and the Constitution was Roger Sherman who was a Bible-believing Calvinist. He was author to the Declaration of Independence.
I repeat that only 2 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were deists while some of the most vital founders like the Calvinist Roger Sherman are kept buried by atheistic agendas wishing to undermine the Protestant Baptist/Calvinist foundations of America. Similarly, only 1 outright deist, out of 55 total delegates was present at the Constitutional Convention. So you're right; these ONE or TWO deists (Franklin and Jefferson primarily) are always shoved in peoples' faces to make you not even look into the true history; that history being that ALL of the founders were Bible-believing. That's right, ALL. If these atheists want to say that ALL of the founders were deists when only 2-3 were, then it is well within the bounds of reason to say ALL of the founders were Protestant Christians because virtually ALL of them - the ones who signed the laws and declarations - were.
3 metabolix 2016-05-19
Nice. Rock on!
2 Pologrounds 2016-05-19
Your statement that they "believe that you 'become god' through a jungian transpersonal psychological refinement of the spirit (ie: psychedelic experience) be via mentalist dissociation or sacramental perturbation of the normal state of consciousness" is how I have thought about the overall purpose of life. Do you think that that is an erroneous way of operating?
1 911bodysnatchers322 2016-05-19
I think it's good to strive to become more like God if your god is good; but it's the height of conceit to think you can become God or that you are god. I do think we have a very very special privilege of being on earth and that if we treat each other like we are each a mythical hero--like hercules or zeus or prometheus or haephestus--instead of a 'number' or 'boot on the ground' or somesuch, the world would be so much better. To exalt our fellow man as a god unto himself, rather than denigrate him as an insect trespassing in your house. Such a culture would naturally create utopia. Because utopia would then a state of operation and social construct, not a system of legal and financial instruments, because by creating a culture that respects each other as sovereign, things would naturally 'sort themselves out'--I truly believe this, and no government would be needed. I guess you can call this anarchy of sorts, but I call it cooperationalism which is kind of a dumb term I know.
Anyway, I think the drive to perfect oneself with jungian psychology, or alchemy or substance assistance are all good drives. You don't see the catholic church or any christian church really pushing this. They only have this 'believe in a union leader and that's the end of the story / or you're going to hell' mentaility. Only the 'new age' which is of course part of the 'occult gnosticism' and part of the 'illuminati' seems to be concerned with self improvement (and scientology). I dont' think new age is as nefarious as people wnat to believe. I mean, crystals and astrology have been for many: inspirational to 'what's beyond'. Seems positive to me.
I think it's a safe bet to just "get real" and admit that "we really don't know" whats beyond. So we can choose what to think what it is, but we should stop there and not try to convince others of whatever of the competing unproven models is the truth we cannot possibly know. I guess that makes me kind of an agnostic? I like to study them all and come up with my own thing.
5 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
The reformation was a critical part of history. 'the church' were powerful and rich for 1000 and some years.
It's funny to dismiss it so easily
I have only come across some of this information recently and it's mind blowing... I recommend r/romerules or search this subreddit for 'jesuit'
5 Pologrounds 2016-05-19
I agree with you completely. I've been reading r/romerules and study a lot of what u/Veritas_Aequitas speaks of. Very interesting and helpful content. It is a shame more aren't on board.
5 jarxlots 2016-05-19
It doesn't seem to provide much beyond blaming a vaporous group for something. More importantly, unless I'm seeing names of people that are involved in this in some measurable way, it is a waste of time.
A monolithic group opposes the things we cherish. We know that. How about we secure our communications, THEN discuss them...
4 The-Internets 2016-05-19
When you handle a bag with cats its a struggle not to let the cat out the bag.
3 911bodysnatchers322 2016-05-19
This is a funny explanation. The only problem is that I've been conditioned to think of funny internet cats instead of the Jesuit who was about to throw the bag of cats into the river. (Keep calm and here's internet cats)
4 SokarRostau 2016-05-19
I think a large part of it is because of the anti-theist strain of atheism that has emerged over the last couple of decades: God is fantasy, religion is bullshit, and the faithful are stupid, therefore nothing to do with religion is worth bothering with, so let's talk about something real instead... like the flat earth. Simply put, some people just have an aversion to topics with religious content and the Jesuits are inescapably religious.
2 poruss 2016-05-19
Why not let existing sources deliver the news
http://new.euro-med.dk/20150226-jesuits-1890-masters-of-jewish-elite-created-zionist-tool-antisemitism-jewish-nwo-elite-infiltrating-and-using-masonry-to-destroy-christianity-and-the-west.php
http://thisiszionism.blogspot.com.au/2010/05/jewish-jesuits.html
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/127310/is-a-jesuit-good-for-the-jews
https://reptiliandimension.wordpress.com/2015/11/18/how-the-jesuits-use-the-jews-to-disguise-the-fact-that-the-jesuits-control-and-lead-the-new-world-order-and-illuminati/
http://zioncrimefactory.com/2013/11/09/are-jews-propagating-anti-jesuit-conspiracy-theories/
https://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/Ignatius_Loyola.htm
Those were the first off the rank on Google
There's a ton more for those interested in the subject
The last link is clear and to the point
1 poruss 2016-05-19
Re: that last link ... here it is
Quote: The first Jesuits were crypto‑Jews. Ignatius Loyola himself was a crypto‑Jew of the Occult Cabala. A crypto‑Jew is a Jew who converts to another religion and outwardly embraces the new religion, while secretly maintaining Jewish practices.
As John Torell explains: "In 1491 San Ignacio de Loyola was born in the Basque province of Guipuzcoa, Spain. His parents were Marranos and at the time of his birth the family was very wealthy. As a young man he became a member of the Jewish Illuminati order in Spain. As a cover for his crypto Jewish activities, he became very active as a Roman Catholic.
On May 20, 1521 Ignatius (as he was now called) was wounded in a battle, and became a semi‑cripple. Unable to succeed in the military and political arena, he started a quest for holiness and eventually ended up in Paris where he studied for the priesthood.
In 1539 he had moved to Rome where he founded the "JESUIT ORDER," which was to become the most vile, bloody and persecuting order in the Roman Catholic Church.
In 1540, the current Pope Paul III approved the order. At Loyola's death in 1556 there were more than 1000 members in the Jesuit order, located in a number of nations."
Ignatius of Loyola's secretary, Polanco, was of Jewish descent and was the only person present at Loyola's deathbed.
James Lainez, who succeeded Loyola as the second Jesuit General, was also of Jewish descent.
Jews were attracted to the Jesuit order and joined in large numbers.
Lacunza was no exception. He was a Jew, which explains why he introduced the eschatological teaching of a return to the Jewish animal sacrifices during the Millennium.
In a book titled The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty published in 1812, 11 years after the death of its author, Jesuit Emanuel de Lacunza who, wrote under the fictitious pen name of a purportedly converted Jew, Rabbi Juan Josaphat Ben Ezra, in order to conceal his identity and to make his writings more palatable to the Protestant readers. He promoted the writings of sixteenth century Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera, developing a futuristic perspective which restricted the prophetic fulfillments in the book of Revelation to the end of the world.
Lacunza also wrote that during a millennium after the tribulation the Jewish animal sacrifices would be reinstated along with the Eucharist (the mass) of the Catholic Church.
Lacunza has followed after Jewish fables and replaced the commandments of God with the commandments of men. That doctrine gives the Jews primacy in God's plan and relegates Christians to a prophetic parenthetical to be supplanted by the Jews during the thousand year earthly reign of Christ.
https://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/Ignatius_Loyola.htm
Now I don't know about you, but my God does not want animals or humans to be slaughtered by primitive half-wits in supposed 'sacrifice' to him. My God (who is the ONLY god, by the way) is FAR more advanced than that
Also, my God does not have 'favourites'
Those who claim to be chosen favourites obviously worship a completely different god. And their god can have them and they it
3 Veritas__Aequitas 2016-05-19
The first Jesuits were not crypto-jews that is a lie. Loyola was a Spanish Templar alumbrados and even said he wished he were a Jew; the Jesuit Order was sanctioned by the Farnese Pope and funded by Francis Borgia, neither of whom were Jewish. And there was a rule put in place after the second Superior General which banned Jews from joining the order.
3 FREETHOUGHTSOPEN 2016-05-19
Both of you are right, it's semantics, their favorite weapon to use.
The fact people forget is that the REAL JEWS will not be known until after the return of the messiah. There is not a Jew alive today who can rightfully say anything else.
If you believe in God, no matter what, you have to believe in the book. The book sings a song, and that song is prophecy. Prophecy directly interacts without reality. There is a reason everyone throughout history said "it's the J00s."
Revelation 3:9King James Version (KJV)
They are converts, google King Bulan.
Jesus was a Hebrew by blood, not by religion (today's Jews) which means Jesus does have a race.
Meaning, at the end times, there would be a group of people claiming to be Jews who were really not Jews.
Hence why the converts backs in that time (Khazars, Rothschilds) would crucify Jesus.
JESUS WAS A BLACK MAN.
2 Pologrounds 2016-05-19
Weren't the Borgias originally Murano Jews?
3 Veritas__Aequitas 2016-05-19
No that was a rumor started by Alexander VI's papal rival Giuliano della Rovere.
1 Pologrounds 2016-05-19
Ah ok, thanks.
1 [deleted] 2016-05-19
[deleted]
1 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
http://tapnewswire.com/2016/05/the-rothschilds-are-jesuits/
0 Amos_Quito 2016-05-19
From your link:
Wikipedia on Evelyn de Rothschild
So the Rothies control the money of both the Vatican and the British Royals?
Sweeeet!!
2 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
"Gaurd"
2 911bodysnatchers322 2016-05-19
Gourd!
what game are we playing again?
-2 Amos_Quito 2016-05-19
"Guard".
Oh, so they're just security guards for the Vatican?
I'll bet their uniforms are VERY stylish, lol!
Which one works the graveyard shift?
4 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
Gaurd implies they are looking after it. Investing it. Tax havens.
"guardians of the papal treasure.” Implies the owners of the wealth is the pope. And that the pope is above the rothschilds
0 Amos_Quito 2016-05-19
Not likely.
Two heads on the same Hydra, perhaps.
0 Apoplecticmiscreant 2016-05-19
The better question is why this tripe is being foisted on everyone as of late?
-1 Fisheater19 2016-05-19
the Jesuits used to be a very holy order that helped the poor and build schools, albeit controversial but have since been corrupted :(
2 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
What?
No they used to kill Protestants
0 Fisheater19 2016-05-19
the individual actions of certain Jesuits doesn't represent their agenda.
0 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
They jesuit were created around the same time as a very bloody period in the church history.
Before and after Luther, many people trying to do similar things were killed. They tried kill Luther too.
The agenda of the jesuit is to help te pope do unchristian like things ... Knowing historical facts I'm not sure how you can think otherwise. It's widely accepted the church has been involved in some unethical activities historically
0 Fisheater19 2016-05-19
The Jesuits were crated by St. Ignatius of Loyola to evangelize the gospel and promote social justice.
1 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
The "Fourth vow" is a religious solemn vow that is taken by members of various religious institutes of the Catholic Church, after the three traditional vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. It usually is an expression of the congregation's charism and particular insertion in the apostolic field of the Church.
In reality, this means murder - guy Fawkes trying to kill king james of England and his translators
People that were valuing reform or protesting were killed or tried to be killed
Looking at the reformation is a fascinating starting point to try understand today?
1 Fisheater19 2016-05-19
source? from a Catholic perspective, guy Fawkes committed the mortal sin of murder.
1 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
I'm not entirely sure if Fawkes himself wasa jesuit or a 'agent' or puppet. Yet that is sort of the point. From a conspiracy sense tey are often behin the scenes.
http://www.end-times-prophecy.org/occupy-anonymous.html
1 Fisheater19 2016-05-19
I'll accept the idea of a group jesuits conspiring to conduct the gunpowder plot, but the Society of Jesus does not have any malicious intentions, unlike the global elite, NWO, and zionists.
2 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
Why did they change?
from the reformation period when they were very malicious, to more recent times?
1 Fisheater19 2016-05-19
In what ways did they change? tbh I'm not very familiar with the history of the Jesuits and their controversial aspects.
1 giantfrogfish 2016-05-19
/r/romerules
-3 HeyImCallingTheCops 2016-05-19
Because of what YOU OBVIOUSLY ARE and who you obviously work fork. Stop spreading disinfo, for fuck’s sake.
1 [deleted] 2016-05-19
[deleted]
-2 HeyImCallingTheCops 2016-05-19
Except that’s not at all what it is.
1 [deleted] 2016-05-19
[deleted]
-2 HeyImCallingTheCops 2016-05-19
Almost as though the argument directly relates to the character of the person making the statement or something...
PAY ATTENTION.
0 giantfrogfish 2016-05-19
Oh the irony
0 HeyImCallingTheCops 2016-05-19
Reported.
1 giantfrogfish 2016-05-19
Wut
0 NaoTapar 2016-05-19
They jesuit were created around the same time as a very bloody period in the church history.
Before and after Luther, many people trying to do similar things were killed. They tried kill Luther too.
The agenda of the jesuit is to help te pope do unchristian like things ... Knowing historical facts I'm not sure how you can think otherwise. It's widely accepted the church has been involved in some unethical activities historically
1 Fisheater19 2016-05-19
I'll accept the idea of a group jesuits conspiring to conduct the gunpowder plot, but the Society of Jesus does not have any malicious intentions, unlike the global elite, NWO, and zionists.