The Great Revelations Cover UP

REVELATIONS DECODED

When Revelations was first translated from the Greek, a wrongful translation of a single word took place as those doing it could not understand it. Using the logic of the day, they replaced it with a word that made sense, even though it was wrong despite there being a clause in Revelations making it clear not to remove or add a single word or face damnation for certain. This has carried on for centuries.

However, in today's world, if that word is now correctly substituted back in, a huge portion of Revelations now makes sense and brings an ominous warning.

In Revelations 6.8, it is not a "Pale" horse. The green word used is khloros, which is GREEN.


THE BIG WHY

Biblical scholars never ask the key question about scripture which is WHY. In this case, the question is... WHY are they horsemen not just warriors? Hoardes of Professors with loads of letters after their names with give you BS about that question, but the conclusion is clear... Not only are the horsemen relevant, but so are horses themselves... and their colours are CRITICAL.

CONCLUSION

Each of the riders is a disaster for the world, but... more importantly...
Each of the horses is the DELIVERY SYSTEM for the relevant disaster.

So, what is associated with white, red, black and green

Which now unlocks who the horsemen and riders are:-

- WHITE HORSE and RIDER - SECULARISM and its delivery system is SCIENCE
- RED HORSE and RIDER - WAR and its delivery system is SOCIALISM
- BLACK HORSE and RIDER - STARVATION and POVERTY its delivery system is NEW WORLD ORDER, ATHEISM AND SATANISM
- GREEN HORSE and RIDER - DEATH and its delivery system is ENVIRONMENTALISM and GMO TINKERING

...which makes the end of the world, just a few months/weeks away.

Yeah, the end of things is not far off, idiots are modifying lots of things which is going to bite us in the Arse in the end. The creation of a microbe that eats everything, live and dead can take out the whole ecosystem...... They are messing with evolution when they genetically change things, they are overriding the evolutionary defense systems of things, that can effect other life forms that cannot metabolize the resulting chemistry properly and also these changed things might cause harm to our immune systems. We live in a reality based on throwing caution to the wind. Science still does not have enough knowledge to properly assess how these alterations can change things and lead to unexpected consequences.

originally posted by: GraceBrothers

...which makes the end of the world, just a few months/weeks away.

How many months are we talkin’?

Let me know a number and I guarantee I’ll be back in that amount of months still alive on a planet orbiting the sun.

a reply to: GraceBrothers

Have you sold your house yet?

a reply to: 19Bones79

Prolly not, but if he's buying this, I have a bridge in the desert to sell...

CAreful of false prophets who claim to know the end when only God knows.

a reply to: GraceBrothers

Colourology eh?

At least its a breath of fresh air and somewhat different from numerology.

a reply to: Terpene

It's never about being right, it's about managing their own expectations after the fact.

a reply to: GraceBrothers

Theory:

The green horse represents the Auroras in the sky generated by the Magnetic pole flip,which some believe will happen when our wandering magnetic North reaches the magic 40 degree flip point..which is supposed to happen in March 2023.

originally posted by: GraceBrothers
REVELATIONS DECODED

In Revelations 6.8, it is not a "Pale" horse. The green word used is khloros, which is GREEN.


CONCLUSION

Each of the riders is a disaster for the world, but... more importantly...
Each of the horses is the DELIVERY SYSTEM for the relevant disaster

- GREEN HORSE and RIDER - DEATH and its delivery system is ENVIRONMENTALISM and GMO TINKERING

.

i respectfully submit this thought about the real meaning of the 'GREEN' horse & rider


Green .... According to Islam, GREEN flags is the color of the banner in which warriors of Islam are to fight under

'Green' is the Official Proclaimation of Faith to Islam & Allah, & that's the real/intended Revelation of the Green horse & rider


related: www.bing.com... C=EDGEDB

a reply to: GraceBrothers

Not everyone believes in the Bible, Jesus or Revelations.

You gotta respect the billions of people who do not.

So are you right for the believers, or wrong in the billions who haven't heard, received the "Word"?

You can claim righteous....but the other 1/2 claims foolish.

Me, I'm Christian....but I do respect Budda.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: GraceBrothers

Not everyone believes in the Bible, Jesus or Revelations.

You gotta respect the billions of people who do not.

So are you right for the believers, or wrong in the billions who haven't heard, received the "Word"?

You can claim righteous....but the other 1/2 claims foolish.

Me, I'm Christian....but I do respect Budda.

well there will be time for the people who honestly do not know Jesus and God to know them and accept them before the throne judgement from what I have read.

a reply to: yuppa

I tend to agree with that. I was just putting that out there...

I think said n.t prophesies were more or less based of history and it repeating itself to an extent. The whole mystery of Babylon " which was, is an is yet again", while Babylon being the focus.

It was often described as great kingdom/city almost similar to Rome in its glory, but it seems it was almost common knowledge when they made the N.T.

Seems like Babylon had first world issues.


Where the Kaijus anyways?

a reply to: IAMALLYETALLIAM

No way of knowing that till Antichrist stands in the Temple and proclaims himself God Then you are still not sure of exact day and hour.The people behind the WEF and Great Reset might have a timetable. ,. .

originally posted by: GraceBrothers
...
- RED HORSE and RIDER - WAR and its delivery system is SOCIALISM
...

Could it be that you've been listening a bit too much to nationalistic propaganda promoted by self-professed patriots. Surely there's a bit more to it than pinning it on socialism?

... A century ago, French writer Guy de Maupassant said that “the egg from which wars are hatched” is patriotism, which he called “a kind of religion.” In fact, The Encyclopedia of Religion says that patriotism’s cousin, nationalism, “has become a dominant form of religion in the modern world, preempting a void left by the deterioration of traditional religious values.” (Italics ours.) By failing to promote true worship, false religion created the spiritual vacuum into which nationalism was able to pour.

Nowhere was this better illustrated than in Nazi Germany, whose citizens at the beginning of World War II claimed to be 94.4 percent Christian. ...

...

Equally significant is what finally solidified lagging Catholic support behind Hitler. German historian Klaus Scholder explains that “by tradition German Catholicism had especially close ties with Rome.” Seeing in Nazism a bulwark against Communism, the Vatican was not averse to using its influence to strengthen Hitler’s hand. “Fundamental decisions shifted more and more to the Curia,” says Scholder, “and in fact Catholicism’s status and future in the Third Reich was finally decided almost solely in Rome.”

...

Of course, religiously motivated wars are nothing new. But in contrast with the past when nations of different religions warred with one another, the 20th century has increasingly found nations of the same religion locked in bitter conflict. The god of nationalism has clearly been able to manipulate the gods of religion. Thus, during World War II, while Catholics and Protestants in Great Britain and the United States were killing Catholics and Protestants in Italy and Germany, Buddhists in Japan were doing the same to their Buddhist brothers in southeast Asia.

...

Source: Part 21—1900 onward—Skirts Splattered With Blood (Religion’s Future in View of It’s Past)

War​—Why?

HAVE you ever wondered why nations go to war? If we discover the answer to that question, we may also discover the key to peace.

Maybe you react somewhat like John Stoessinger, professor of political science: “I read that wars were caused by nationalism, militarism, alliance systems, economic factors, or by some other bloodless abstraction that I could not understand. . . . I wondered if this could be true. . . . After all, wars were begun by men. Yet this personality [human] dimension was seldom given its due weight in traditional books on war.” (Italics ours.) Obviously, the human element in war cannot be ignored.

In his book The Evolution of War, Professor Otterbein comes to a similar conclusion, saying that “wars are caused by the decisions of men as members of organizations, whether they are military organizations or governing bodies.” But what are the motives for war? According to his study, they are basically: political control, territory, plunder, prestige, defense, and revenge.

War​—In Our Genes?

Many theories are offered to explain the causes of war. For example, those who believe in evolution see man only as a higher form of animal life that still retains the aggressive and defensive reflexes of the animal world. They argue that aggression is innate in man, that it is in his genes. Zoologist Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt wrote in The Biology of Peace and War: “Our closest relatives, the great apes, have considerable aggressive potential and are also territorial. . . . This strongly suggests that our human aggressivity may be an ancient primate heritage.”

Konrad Lorenz, Austrian founder of modern ethology (the study of animal behavior) asserts that man has an aggressive drive that is his “most powerfully motivating instinct [that] makes him go to war.”​—On Aggression.

On the other hand, Sue Mansfield, a professor of history, challenges that conclusion, saying: “Though the majority of cultures in historic times have engaged in war, the majority of human beings have not been participants.” The fact that governments have to resort to obligatory conscription into the armed forces would also suggest that aggression and killing are not necessarily viewed with great enthusiasm by people in general, nor can they be seen as reflex reactions. Professor Mansfield adds: “Indeed, the historical record suggests that warfare has usually been a minority experience.”

...

The Role of Propaganda

Sometimes neighbors quarrel. But seldom does it lead to bloodshed. In the first place, the law of the land prohibits assault and murder against fellow citizens. But in time of war, that prohibition does not apply to citizens of an opposing country, even though people in general really do not know their “enemies.” All that they know about the enemy is what they have been led to believe by the spoon-feeding of their politically controlled media.

This is a fact of life in every nation. As Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt wrote: “Public opinion is formed by interest groups (politicians, arms manufacturers, the military) that deceive the electorate by giving them false or one-sided information.” In a similar vein, historian H. E. Barnes wrote: “Since the wars of the French Revolution . . . copious and compelling propaganda [has] been continued and greatly increased to protect warfare against popular dissent, opposition, and factual analysis of issues.”

As a consequence, “practically anybody can be persuaded and manipulated in such a way that he will more or less voluntarily enter a situation wherein he must kill and perhaps die.” (War, by Gwynne Dyer) Thus, by reason of their political and economic power, the “elite” can control the media in order to prepare the masses for the bloodbath.

...

Thus it is clear that a motivation has to be generated to make a nation rise up against another. But what are the key elements in generating war fever?

Who Make the Decisions?

Austrian economist Schumpeter wrote: “The orientation toward war is mainly fostered by the domestic interests of ruling classes but also by the influence of all those who stand to gain individually from a war policy, whether economically or socially.” These ruling classes have been defined as “elites [that] are at all times involved in trying to manipulate other elements of the population, or the public mood itself, so as to perpetuate themselves in power.”​—Why War? by Professors Nelson and Olin.

Every nation has its ruling class, even though that group may be divided into different political factions. However, many observe that the power of the military elite in every nation should not be underestimated. Former U.S. Ambassador John K. Galbraith describes the military establishment as “by far the most powerful of the autonomous processes of government.” He continues: “The power of the military embraces not only the significant sources of power but . . . all the instruments of its enforcement. . . . More than any other exercise of power in our time it is the subject of grave public unease.”

Galbraith illustrates his point by reference to the United States military institution, which has property resources that “far exceed any similar source of power; they embrace not only what is available to the armed services and the civilian military establishment but what flows out to the weapons industries.” A like situation no doubt exists in the Soviet Union and many other countries. And therein lies a danger that could lead to a war of mutual annihilation​—that the power of the military establishment comes to exceed that of the political.

How Does Religion Influence War?

...

Nationalism​—The “Sacred Egoism” That Divides

Sometimes the people are not in favor of a war. On what basis, then, can the rulers most easily persuade the population to support their aims? This was the problem that faced the United States in Vietnam. So, what did the ruling elite do? Galbraith answers: “The Vietnam War produced in the United States one of the most comprehensive efforts in social conditioning [adjusting of public opinion] in modern times. Nothing was spared in the attempt to make the war seem necessary and acceptable to the American public.” And that points to the handiest tool for softening up a nation for war. What is it?

Professor Galbraith again supplies the answer: “Schools in all countries inculcate the principles of patriotism. . . . The conditioning that requires all to rally around the flag is of particular importance in winning subordination to military and foreign policy.” This systematic conditioning prevails in communist countries as it does in Western nations.

Charles Yost, a veteran of the U.S. Foreign Service and State Department, expressed it thus: “The primary cause of the insecurity of nations persists, the very attribute on which nations pride themselves most​—their sovereign independence, their ‘sacred egoism,’ their insubordination to any interest broader or higher than their own.” This “sacred egoism” is summed up in divisive nationalism, in the pernicious teaching that any one nation is superior to all others.

Historian Arnold Toynbee wrote: “The spirit of nationality is a sour ferment of the new wine of democracy in the old bottles of tribalism.” In Power and Immortality, Dr. Lopez-Reyes wrote: “Sovereignty is a major cause of contemporary war; . . . unless altered, the system of sovereign nation-states will trigger World War III.” The emphasis on nationalism and sovereignty denies the basic concept that we all belong to the same human family, regardless of linguistic or cultural differences. And that denial leads to wars.

Yes, the experts can come up with all kinds of explanations of why man systematically sets out to destroy those of his own kind. Yet there is one primary factor that most commentators ignore.

The Hidden Cause of War

...

Source: War—Why? (Awake!—1986)

a reply to: GraceBrothers

And with that background information, this video (presidential speech) can have some more impact in light of the foregoing about the "military elite" ("military establishment"). Mind you, the president in question is a promoter of nationalism and patriotism to serve the agenda of “all those who stand to gain individually from a war policy, whether economically or socially.” (quoting Schumpeter from before) So he won't give you the type of information as can be found in my previuos comment (and that article that quoted Schumpeter). Actually, there's little of value being discussed by Eisenhower without the background from my previous comment, he's actually working for the military elite, as has every president since JFK got shot (i.e., they know better now not to cross the military elite, and their main supporting terrorist organizations, the CIA and the various branches of military intelligence; 'working for' can also be described as 'playing ball' or 'going along', this includes presidents Obama, Trump and Biden, they know how to play ball, and the first and the last manage to do it while getting votes from the anti-war crowd, the hypocrites that they are, they have very cunning excuses why they still end up doing things according to the agenda of the military elite and arms industry; JFK was the last one that got in their way, possibly also the first*, at least that I know of. Had to think about that because I'm watching JFK on the background now, and they start that movie with Eisenhower's speech. It is quite clear that they killed JFK. *: if we're talking about presidents):