Implications for Today -  the Vatican Ambitions 

 to rule over Jerusalem 

  Gaza and The Bible 

http://www.israelnn.com/tv.php

Map of Israel Showing Who Wants What for Land

News about ISLAM

New Vatican-Israel Section - Click Here

  Implications for Today -  the Vatican Ambitions to rule over Jerusalem 

Vatican: Parts of David’s Tomb to Be Under Papal (Vatican) Control 
11:22 Oct 20, '05 / 17 Tishrei 5766
By Naomi Grossman


INN - Oct 20/05 - An official Vatican newspaper has reported that during his upcoming visit to the Vatican, President Moshe Katsav will sign an agreement giving parts of David’s Tomb over to papal control.


If such an agreement is signed, it will put an end to drawn out negotiations that began in 1998. The Foreign Ministry told Arutz Sheva correspondent Shimon Cohen about the negotiations a year and a half ago. 

Israeli and Vatican representatives began discussing issues of jurisdiction over certain sites around seven years ago. These sites include various buildings and parcels of land that the Catholic church claims that it used to control. The church is now seeking to reclaim its ownership of these sites. Among the places under debate is an area that the church refers to as the site of the “last supper,” which is situated at the burial site of Kings David, Solomon, Rechavam, Assa, Chezekiyahu and Amatzia.

The Vatican newspaper, El Messagero, reports that President Katsav is expected to sign an agreement during his visit that will give the church control over the upper part of David’s Tomb. The church has already shown Israel a trial agreement 

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=91526

 to rule over Jerusalem 

 Implications for Today - The Implications of the Roman Catholic Council known as VATICAN I, and what this means both a) About the Pope and his authority to rule Politically, AND what this means b) about the Vatican Ambitions to rule over Jerusalem 

[Note: We have noted in the past that control of Jerusalem remains one of the key foreign-policy objectives of the Vatican. Some have disputed this, not understanding that while the Vatican - religiously - is about certain doctrines, legally - in the world at large - the Vatican is a SOVEREIGN INTERNATIONAL STATE, with its own Country, its own passports, its own diplomatic corp, its own embassies around the world, its own relationships with governments, and its own leader [the Pope]. We have noted in the past that one of the main objections to the Reformation of the 1500s - for the Vatican - was the insistence of Protestants that leaders are accountable to their congregation. 

The Vatican position has always been the opposite, that leaders can rule over their subjects as they see fit. While the Vatican has [for now] given way to the acknowledgement of "Democracy" - that only happened after it gained FORMAL legal status as a Sovereign Nation State thanks to its 1929 Agreement with Mussolini. Prior to this, the Vatican had a record of excommunicating any leader - around the world - who sponsored or helped democracy, a practice that the Vatican has continued to oppose, literally, since the days of the original "Modern" Bill of Rights, the Magna Charta of the 1200s.  ]

The Vatican was constrained to its own small state of 29 Acres, which it accepted in 1929. But keep in mind that this was the "fall-back" position of the Vatican. Prior to this, for hundreds and hundreds of years - the Vatican had its own troops, and controlled Large areas of Physical Territory in Italy of more than Seventeen Thousand Square Miles. On that territory, it collected revenues and enforced its own canon law. (For centuries before that, the Vatican had a policy of forcing Roman Catholic kings to send immense sums of money to the Vatican as Annual Payments, which in turn made those nations much more poor). The Italian Revolutions in the 1800s were a response to Vatican Corruption.

The Vatican response to the Italian Revolutions was predictable. If the People wanted to chose their leaders and have those leaders accountable to the public, the Vatican would go its own way, and not only continue its past tendencies, but actually assemble a Church Council that would declare the Pope - to be able to speak for God Himself. This Church Council actually took place, when - After the Revolutions in Italy, the Vatican launched its own "Church Council" called VATICAN I in 1869-1870.

LETS REMEMBER THE IMPORTANCE OF THE VATICAN CHURCH COUNCIL, known as VATICAN I. 

The Purpose of Vatican I (1869-70) was to RE-AFFIRM the doctrines & Decisions of the Council of Trent. 

The Purpose of Vatican II (in the 1960s) was to RE-AFFIRM what was decided at VATICAN I. 

(In other words, the Doctrinal and Political Positions of the Vatican are that it STILL agrees to the Decisions and Doctrines of the Council of Trent).

Four significant outcomes of VATICAN I (Roman Catholic Church Council)

It was in the aftermath of surviving the Italian Revolution of the 1800s, that the Vatican convened their own Church Council known as VATICAN I in 1869-70. There were Four significant outcomes to this: 

1. Vatican I council - affirmed the authority of the Pope to rule  POLITICALLY  over all of Mankind.

Far from repenting about its own Oligarchic and Monarchic tendencies, or from renouncing Temporal Power ("Temporal Power" meaning Political Rule instead of only Spiritual Advice), VATICAN I sought to justify the Vatican and in particular the claim of the Vatican to have the authority to rule over mankind in the Political Sphere. 

2.VATICAN I sought to justify the Vatican and in particular the claim of the Vatican to have the authority to decide what is accurate theology and what is not, for all of Christianity, whether those Christians would recognize either the authority of the Vatican or its altered Vatican Bibles. 

The Council of Trent (Back in the 1500s) forbade anyone from reading the works of either Martin Luther or Calvin, and further eternally condemned anyone who subscribed to the doctrine that "salvation through Faith alone in the Atonement of Jesus Christ, plus nothing" was to be allowed, especially where the inference was that there was only One Mediator between Man and God, who would be Jesus Christ rather than the Vatican. 

The Roman Catholic Council known as Vatican I re-affirmed the decisions of the Council of Trent. [It was this Council of Trent from the 1500s which gave new encouragement to the Inquisition, where RCC Priests killed those who disagreed with them, the Catholic Head in Spain placing the number of Killed in Spain - officially - at more than three million (the vast majority of whom were protestants)]. 

It was also the Council of Trent that for the first time in Roman Catholic History formally declared that the books known as Apocryphal - from that time Forward - would be included in Vatican-issued Bibles. The main reason for this is that Changing the Text of the Bible (by including Books that did Not belong) was the only way to refute the Biblical teachings of Calvin and Luther that salvation by works is a moral affront to God. Salvation by works is a doctrine that dates to the 1500s and as such, is a New and Recent Doctrine. 

Even The Roman Catholic Theologian JEROME explicitly rejected the books of the Apocrypha as being canonical, something most Roman Catholics are never told.

Salvation by works remains - historically & Biblically speaking - a False Doctrine. Luther and Calvin both explained that the Early Church Councils REJECTED salvation by works.  

It comes as a Shock to many Roman Catholics that the Protestants even MENTION Church Councils, because they (the Roman Catholics) have been informed that Protestants did not look at history, or defend their position with historical argument, this despite the fact, that Protestants arguments, books and commentaries have been FILLED with History , and the exposition of the Historical Record - for hundreds and hundreds of years, and THAT was why many Protestant Works were banned. It was not only the Theology explanations that the Vatican could not Control, but rather the demonstrations of how Un-Historic the Vatican positions were. 

(The work of the Inquisition was finally stopped in 1868-69, because of a Revolution in Spain refusing to allow the Roman Catholic Church to rule in the government). 

3. The Council of 1869-70 Affirmed the authority of the Pope to speak as the voice of God, as though he had the authority to speak - literally - as God on the planet Earth. Roman Catholics sometimes attempt to downplay this by suggesting that the Pope does not formally exercise this "all of the time" - while other have pointed out that even the TEMPORARY exercise of this claim is actually Blasphemy, the implication being that the Pope would have the authority to change the Canon of the Bible merely by his own pronouncements which He would declare to have been "under divine inspiration". 

This may seem like a small detail (to a few) - but the point is that THIS was the response of the Pope and the Vatican - to Democracy. While Nations declared that governments ruled by the consent of the governed, the Vatican took the opposite view. Having recently survived Mazzini, Garibaldi and the Italian Revolution, the Vatican declared not that it would be subject to the laws of men, but that its own Vatican leader had the power to speak - literally - as the Voice of God. (It should be noted that although the Pope was able to get this view formally adopted by the Vatican, many Roman Catholic priests and archbishops formally objected to this, and spoke out Against this doctrine, understanding it was a betrayal of the Early doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. However at the Vatican I council, those who objected to the doctrine...were outvoted). 

4. Mary is Substituted for Jesus. The Council of 1869-70 formally adopted the doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary. People sometimes think - mistakenly - that this refers to Jesus Christ being born of a Virgin. That is not what the doctrine of the immaculate conception means. 

The Doctrine of the Immaculate Concept is a doctrinal statement on the position of Mary. The doctrine of the immaculate conception holds that MARY was born without Original Sin and never sinned. (Obviously if Mary never sinned, then Mary never needed Jesus Christ as her savior...since only Sinners are in need of the Redemption by Jesus Christ). In effect, the doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary is the doctrine that formally elevated Mary to the position of being the Mediator between God and Men (mankind). 

Some have disputed this by trying to sound as though they agreed with the Bible. The Bible says that there is only One Mediator between God and Men who is Christ Jesus. The vatican position has been that even if this were the case, it would still be Mary who would be Mediating between Jesus Christ and God. 

In the practice and teachings of Roman Catholic Missals and Catechism, Jesus is almost always made out to be the bad guy, so that Mary is the one who is left to intercede for humans, both to Jesus and to God the Father.

However the fact remains that this doctrine of the perfection of Mary, this doctrine that Mary is sinless and was born sinless remains a False Doctrine which has been written about before, often by Roman Catholic theologians, REFUTING the notion that Mary is Sinless. But that particular information has been kept from Catholics, who otherwise would understand that the elevation of Mary to the same position of deity as Jesus Christ effectively substitutes Mary for Jesus Christ. 

Mary was the Physical - the PHYSICAL - mother of Jesus during the time of Jesus on Earth. The Vatican took this fact, and decided that Mary would be THEOLOGICALLY the Mother of Jesus. That cannot be true and is not accurate. But Mary is not Mother of Jesus THEOLOGICALLY. Theologically, Jesus Christ is the Pre-existent member of the Triune Godhood - whose existence predates Mary by Millions of Years. Jesus Christ as a member of the Trinity - has always existed. 

Note: We agree that pages on Israel are not the best place for the exposition of these points. However, these points are crucial in the explanation of the Global Vision which the Vatican has and retains. 

   How the Vatican gets the Eastern Orthodox Church to submit itself to the Will of Rome     

What the Vatican (Roman Catholic Church) has...that the Eastern Orthodox Church does not. 

The Problem is that it is the Eastern Orthodox Church that still holds a great amount of land - in Israel, and Jerusalem in Particular. This fact irritates the Vatican as it tends to prove that the Eastern Orthodox Church claims to be the successor to the Crusaders in Jerusalem. But If the Eastern Orthodox Church were 1) to revise its theology to Agree with the Vatican, and 2) were to agree to Vatican Control of spiritually significant sites in Israel, then the Vatican would gain ascendance (the Top Spot).

The Problem for the Eastern Orthodox Church is that although significant in the areas of the former Eastern Roman Empire, the Eastern Orthodox Church is not a Nation-State. The EOC - can make agreements, but it cannot do so as its own sovereign State, as an equal state with Sovereignty like other Nation States. 

However, the same limitation is Not true for the Vatican. The Vatican IS a sovereign Nation State (whether it should be or not). Legally It can make agreements with other Nation States. That is why it is much easier to give control of certain Sites in Jerusalem to the Vatican, than it is to do this for the Eastern Orthodox Church. 

The Vatican standing as a Nation-State has not been challenged much in the 20th Century, and was further re-affirmed by its Treaty with Italy in 1929. This means that the Vatican has a level of status and bargaining power that the Eastern Orthodox Church comes nowhere close to having.

The Eastern Orthodox Church (Specifically the Greek Orthodox Church) - still holds the Legal Title to some of the most important land in Israel and Jerusalem. However, the Vatican - through its treaties and agreements with Israel will subsume [take over and assimilate] the interests of the Eastern Orthodox Church. 

The goal of the Vatican has always been to have itself triumph Diplomatically, Legally, and Theologically in order to be recognized as THE main branch of Christianity (Which is itself historically - a fable). However, its main rival in theological terms has been the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Vatican will continue to outmaneuver the Eastern Orthodox, while the Eastern Orthodox Church will eventually accede (give in) to the Vatican demand of being sole leader of the Roman Catholic Branch of Christianity (this encompassing both the Roman Catholic Church AND the Eastern Orthodox Church). 

The Eastern Orthodox Patriarchates will oppose this, especially "officially". However, it should be noted that theological shifts often precede diplomatic ones. For the first time in its history, the Eastern Orthodox Church is already changing its BIBLE and Bible version away from its own Historic position (and ancient Greek Manuscripts) to now start lining up in Agreement & Cooperation with the Vatican. 

         Afraid of being left out of International Bargaining -   How Changing the Greek Text Underlying its Bible will Align The Eastern Orthodox Church with the Vatican - something the Eastern Orthodox Church has - until now - Always Refused to do  

Step 1  - The Eastern Orthodox Church rejects its own Historic Bible Manuscripts

That may not seem like much. But it is the Greek text of the Bible that is being discarded as well as the one being adopted, which speaks loud and clear. 

Regardless of its doctrinal views, it is the Eastern Orthodox Church that - until now - have agreed with Protestant leaders that their own mutual history - as found in the Greek Manuscripts - is what gave the Eastern Orthodox Churches their historic claim to legitimacy. 

There are other ancient Greek textual sources that fall OUTSIDE of the scope of the Eastern Orthodox Churches. That is no doubt true - {referring to areas such as the Original African Church}. However, an overwhelming majority of byzantine manuscripts of the New Testament (both the copies of the New Testament as well as the Church Lectionaries [compilation of Bible passages] ) have historically agreed with the Textus Receptus, the Greek Text used by Beza, Calvin, and those who came much earlier. In other words, Protestant leaders have often depended on the Manuscripts of the Bible used by the Christians in the Eastern Half of the Roman Empire, and this was a substantial basis - (in addition to others) - by which Protestant leaders knew that their own Bibles were correct and that Vatican Bibles were incorrect, in their content. The Eastern Orthodox Church of today has strayed very far from its original beginnings, this point however being an "unimportant" one ever since the Eastern Orthodox Church reversed its own doctrines at their own local [so-called] Seventh Church Council. 

The Vatican Bibles were the ones that departed from the earlier accurate copies of the New Testament. Jerome Acknowledged that his own Latin Vulgate was replacing a MUCH OLDER latin Vulgate, and that his new version would take a very long time to gain acceptance. (Copies of the Bible in Latin that are OLDER than the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate still survive, not that Roman Catholics are informed of this either). 

Intentional or not, Jerome gave the Roman Catholic Church a New Testament that was based on the forged work of Origen, who was himself excommunicated by the 5th Church Council, and His works were prohibited by the Early Church Councils. [Yet Origen remains one of the most quoted, most approved and most-used theologians within the Roman Catholic Church].

The Vatican insistence on relying on the work of Origen in Codex Vaticanus (through the version of Jerome) was in error, and later resulted in FURTHER theological errors, (the underlying basis being the thousands - literally - thousands of discrepancies - between Codex Sinaiticus and the rest of the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament. )

Step 2 - The Eastern Orthodox Church ADOPTS The Vatican Greek Text (for its New Bible Translation - Instead)

However, fearing it would be perceived as "behind the times",  the Eastern Orthodox Church has been in a hurry to be able to demonstrate its own competence in the area of textual criticism, textual analysis and Biblical manuscripts. It is not hard to understand why: Both the Vatican and the Protestants have each guarded their own history and historic records rather well. Both the Vatican and the Protestants can prove their own theology and the use of that theology in Earlier times. (The Protestants can actually prove how the RCC CHANGED its theology over time, but that is for a different day). 

How the Eastern Orthodox Church lost the keys to the Byzantine Empire and to their own History

The Eastern Orthodox Church however had several problems. The first is that it allowed itself to be silence during the Moslem conquests of formerly Eastern Orthodox Areas of Control. The Eastern Orthodox Church became far too acustomed to dealing with the rich and powerful - at the expense of their own congregations. Because of this, the EOC relied on their Patrons and Sponsors among the Nobility within the Roman Empire. 

As this occured, the Eastern Orthodox Church neglected to teach and instruct its own congregations in the Doctrines of Christianity. Because of Eastern Orthodox Neglect, their own congregations were no longer taught how to read, and the Eastern Orthodox Church took advantage of this. The result was the Doctrinal Changes made at their own Seventh Church Council. This was opposed by other Christians, but not much in the Eastern Orthodox Church because too few laymen knew how to read. 

The Eastern Orthodox Church continued this approach so that by the Time of the Byzantine Empire, very few of the laymen could even participate in Eastern Orthodox Churches. The HIERARCHY of the BYZANTINE CHURCH however continued to deal with the Nobility and neglected the People. 

The Eastern Orthodox Church Loose both RIGHTS and HISTORY (ITS OWN HISTORIC RECORDS) under the Moslems

By the time that the Moslem conquests came, the Eastern Orthodox Church was totally unprepared to defend itself or to teach the People how to stand up for their faith, which the Eastern Orthodox Church Bureaucrats had already altered. The result was the Moslem conquest of almost all areas under the influence of the Eastern Orthodox Church. 

When the Islamic Conquest of the Eastern Orthodox Areas happened, this brutal conquest accelerated the demise of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Moslems forbade (outlawed) the right to WITNESS - using Islamic Sharia law. 

The Eastern Orthodox Churches should have rebelled, and should have kept on Witnessing in Any Case, as the New Testament Commands in Matthew 28. But the Eastern Orthodox Leaders were offered deals: The Moslems would actually work with the Eastern Orthodox Leaders, if they would agree to administer the Moslem Lands. 

Many Eastern Orthodox Bureaucrats took up this offer, and many nominal (Fake) Christians agreed to administer the Islamic empires. The Result of this was that the Eastern Orthodox Church continued to loose its church records, its documents, its manuscripts and its identity. 

There are more records of history about the Eastern Orthodox Church among Protestants and Protestant Kings and Nations, than there are in the Eastern Orthodox Church. 

That is why the Eastern Orthodox Church cannot prove their lines of succession (as opposed to the succession of the Archbishop of Cantebury that dates to the 500s), or the counterfeit line of successions in the Roman Catholic Church. 

The Eastern Orthodox Church could not prove almost anything...by the time it slowly began even trying to recover from Islam in the late 1800s. Remember that the Ottoman Islamic Empire did not fall until 1919. Until then, Jerusalem had been under Ottoman control, even though there were very few Moslems who lived in Palestine, because under the Ottoman Empire, there was almost no right to private property, there were no courts, there was no independent judiciary, and there was no such thing as Civil Rights. Israel was a desert. The Ottoman Empire was ruled by the Physical and Literal Descendants of the Prophet Mohammed, a practice that has continued in many Moslem nations even until today. 

Today, one hundred and twenty thousand (120,000) Islamic Arab "head of families" receive a paycheck - every month - from the World Bank through the Palestinian Authority, for living in historic Judea, Samaria and Galilee. And people think that those demonstrations in Israel are "spontaneous"...[everything in Islam is ruled by the Clan, if your Clan tells you to Go out and throw rocks and demonstrate against Jews ,then THAT is what you go and do...unless you want "problems"] 

But - back to the main point: Since the Eastern Orthodox Church has almost no historic records of its own (and the 6 Church Councils were kept by the Roman Catholic Church and by Protestants, NOT by the Eastern Orthodox Church) - IT (THE E.O.C.) knows this - It understands its own Lack of History, and is eager to demonstrate its own RELEVANCE as well as its Legitimacy to the Religious world. And THAT is what motivates the Eastern Orthodox Church to come out with its own "improved" Bible, which will ...just happen to agree with the Roman Catholic Church, and using the Roman Catholic altered Greek texts that came from Origen.

 DETAILS ON THE UPCOMING EASTERN ORTHODOX TRANSLATION  

 FAKE BIBLE - FAKE SEPTUAGINT 

As it understands it own role, those within certain Eastern Orthodox seminaries have now decided to translate a new EASTERN ORTHODOX Bible in English, a translation project which is currently in progress. 

It is important to keep in mind that there are no actual copies of the Septuagint that exist today. The best thing that could be said about the Septuagint is that if copies existed, they have not survived into today. (copies have never been found, and there has never been a way to establish which text was the "Septuagint" text). There are ancient Latin texts that agree with the Textus Receptus, and in fact, most early versions of the New Testament agree with the Textus Receptus far more than they agree with Codex Vaticanus (the ratio being about 99 to 1).

However, it has been the Vatican position that their Codex Vaticanus would be called the Septuagint. They simply took the Codex Vaticanus, and Renamed it " the Septuagint". This procedure was actually started by Textual Critics who opposed both Christianity AND the Bible. but the Vatican adopted their methods in the 1800s, after the Vatican began cooperating (and sponsoring Expeditions) with select Textual Critics in an attempt to find manuscripts that would agree with Codex Vaticanus.  

There are several advantages to this name-change for Codex Vaticanus. The first is that by calling it that, it implies that Codex Vaticanus has a degree of legitimacy that it otherwise would not have. Never mind that it contains apocryphal books, since this works out well for the Vatican decision made at the Council of Trent to canonize the Apocryphal books. 

[Students of manuscripts understand however that the Septuagint refers not to the New Testament but to the Old Testament. But Vatican officials get around that  - by saying that Codex Vaticanus is the Septuagint in any case, even though the books within it are either apocryphal or from the New Testament]

The implication is that regardless of what the Eastern Orthodox Church says, it will adapt its theology and its politics to those of the Vatican. With the historic habit of bowing to Islam and teaching Eastern Orthodox converts to forgo the Bible and Not Witness to others (such as Moslems) - the Eastern Orthodox Church has prepared its own role of subservience to Vatican Interests with particular diligence.

 The Position of the Eastern Orthodox Church in the Middle East soon to be subsumed by Rome 

The Eastern Orthodox Church remains a player in International events because of its control through the Russian Orthodox Church [Remember Russia is a part of the Quartet] and because of the Greek Orthodox Church control of the areas of Land in Jerusalem. 

However the Vatican will continue to co-opt the Eastern Orthodox Church, and will have to do so...in order to gain control of the Holy Sites of Jerusalem. This is happening right now, and will set the stage for the Vatican Control of the Holy Sites in Jerusalem as an International Custodian.  

Any change to the status of the Holy Sites in Israel - Such as giving custody of them to a government such as the Vatican would have to be approved of by the Quartet. But there were ALREADY plans during the Clinton Administration to have the Holy Sites of Israel be placed under an "International Custodian" since the Arabs and the Jews could not agree on who should control the Holy Sites in Israel. As we are now seeing, that - as previously planned, the "International Custodian" is the Vatican. 

[Select Protestants - Textual Critics today - must not have wanted to be left out of this either.  The Christian Standard Version published by Holman, is the latest protestant version to substitute Codex Vaticanus for the historic Textus Receptus].

First  Vatican Custody of a few sites in Jerusalem will be announced, then a few more. Finally the Major Change will happen when the New Custodian (Vatican) Announces the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple, side-by-side the Islamic Mosque that currently stands on the Temple Mount.

Vatican Ambitions for Jerusalem ?   -   Protestant Bible Good Enough for Eastern Orthodox Church 100 Years ago   -  Problems in the Eastern Orthodox communities   -  Questions we had (and still do) for those who claim to be Eastern Orthodox  -   For those who know very little about the Septuagint   -  Historic Eastern Orthodox versions  -   HISTORY OF ARABIC VERSIONS of the BIBLE  ARMENIAN GOSPEL of JOHN The Word of Jesus Christ - What he says about himself   -  Pontifex Maximus: Pagan Title or Christian Title - Historical Records   -  Apocrypha Free New Testament in LATIN   -  Free New Testament PDF in SPANISH   -  BUSH & RICE to PRESS FORWARD WITH PALESTINIAN STATE in JUDEA, SAMARIA & GALILEE   -  Uncovering the Secrets of the Septuagint   -  Creed of the Council of Nicea - Our QUESTIONS about the LATIN VULGATE

Main Website Page

Vatican Abuses - Pontifex Maximus - stigmatta - Mother Teresa - Power Grab

Pope Appoints Cardinal - Apocrypha - Donation of Constantine

other material @ by respective @ holder

Original Content @ 2004/2006