Catholic End of George Washington

Since I mentioned a state of being unsure between Judaism and Christianity, as one possibility about George Washington, that is not sth one can attribute reasonably to me. I'm Christian and look forward to the Conversion of the Jews.

Was George Washington Religious?
ReligionForBreakfast | 20 April 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O1nvDfgRX0

It seems to be certain that Washington was a Freemason, and converted to Catholicism just before dying.

Now, the Freemason which he still was at the time of the War of Independence, might have had a problem with publically divulging his religious beliefs, since part of the point of that sect is neutrality between publically accepted Creeds, and part of the point is making their "real spirituality" sth that goes on behind the walls of their lodges, between people who are already initiated (apart from family members).

THAT he was a Freemason, well, so was his admirer and mentoree Lafayette. I just read a book* about Madame Lafayette, and she, on the other hand, remained a faithful Catholic.

It's my opinion that her prayers are behind the conversion of George Washington.

* André Maurois, Adrienne ou la vie de Mme de La Fayette, éditions Hachette 1960

I just found the evidence for George Washington's Catholic conversion:

The most compelling evidence of George Washington’s conversion comes from the Jesuits. The story is that a Fr. Leonard Neale, SJ was called to Mt. Vernon on the night of Washington’s death. Tradition holds that the priest spent several hours with Washington just before he died. Fr. Neale’s written account of the evening was sealed in a letter and given to his superior who eventually sent the documents to Rome.

President’s Day Blog – George Washington’s Catholic Conversion
February 9, 2024
https://www.malvernretreat.com/george-washingtons-catholic-conversion/

5:50 Did you say "great ruler of events"?

That is pretty incompatible with Deism.

A Deist could call "God" "great ruler" but more likely "great maker of the system" but by definition, the events that do not by absolute necessity follow from the system would be outside "his" scope. For instance, human freewill.

Great ruler of events is at least as explicitly Theistic as Gandalf's expressed religion. I suppose you did read LotR.

5:55 Providence?

Again, totally incompatible with Deism.

8:05 It is possible that he was unsure between Christianity and Judaism.

It is also very possible that he would have felt about Anglican communion like a Russian orthodox, explicitly acknowledging the supremacy over his own obedience as belonging to Patriarch Kirill, while serving in the Ukrainian Army. So, like, he could have felt that an US Anglican was "raising altar against altar" and thereby schismatic against Westminister, which, if you recall, is a fairly patriotic religious leader historically, about as patriotic as a Narnian (CSL's famous heptalogy involves a simplification of the Christian story transposed to another universe, in which the true religion and the chosen nation coincided to a very large degree, much more than the New Covenant "in our world" ....).

On the Most Holy Name of Jesus

What was the REAL Name of Jesus?
29th of Sept. 2022 | ReligionForBreakfast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocWmAg1iaYc

4:50 "especially from Greek transscriptions"

Like IHCOYC?

Have you checked out what the masculine genitive of a first declinsion IHCOYAC would have been?

8:27 I differ on the analysis of what happened.

Take the pronunciation Yeshua. What would that have regularly given in nominative or accusiative in Greek?

IHCOYAC, IHCOYAN (we have in fact IHCOYC, IHCOYN).

No problem there, there we have a masculine name ending in A + case endings. In the vocative, you get the whole thing : IHCOYA - basically the exact transliteration of Yeshua, except for the "sibboleth" accent of the target language.

But the genitive of that declinsion was replacing the -AC with -OY. This wold make the genitive a fairly clumsy IHCOYOY. Instead we have a simpler genitive, IHCOY, which is obtained by changing the declinsion by dropping the A.

Alternative.

The furtive A was back then a furtive O.

And in Greek grammar for the second declinsion, IHCOYC would be a perfect standin for IHCOOC - and obviously for IHCOYOC too. And by perfect, I mean obligatory. Non-optional.

10:33 Yeshu is a nickname we find in the Talmud. Or those who look there, I don't pretend to do so myself.

Thing is, I have a candidate for the wayward disciple of Joshua ben Pekharia - Odin.

1) not very chaste (his mentor had asked "is that all that you can think about?") - Odin is a better match than Jesus;
2) went away and learnt magic - Odin is shown as doing actual magic - shapeshifting, turning around what people actually see.
3) founded an idolatrous sect - Odinism is indeed idolatrous as in polytheistic.

The only non-match would be the execution narrative, based on that of Jesus.

11:00 Yeah, right ... that this refers (from beginning to end) to Jesus is the idea which earned the Jews 777 years before the Notre Dame fire a public Talmud burning.

Unfortunately, I can't exonerate the Talmudic accounts of the execution, or even less the Toledoth Yeshu, from this blasphemy, so, I basically don't see it as wrong that the Talmud was burned in a country where blasphemy was punishable.

But this doesn't make the Talmud a more credible source about Jesus, either name or what He did, than the Christian sources, of the true Israel.

11:43 It so happens, in Galilee, unlike Judaea, Christians were the majority outcome of religious quarrels in the first century.

Would perhaps make sense to see the Babylonian Talmud as mocking the region for that reason, if no other?

Plus could have been an answer to Christians knowing about the Yeshu who did found an idolatrous sect in centuries before Christ, namely Odin if they said "why do you mix them up?"

14:37 "no vowel length" (after Bar Kokhba revolt, I suppose you mean?)

This became a common feature at this time, or a little later, shared with Latin and Greek. At first diphthongs were an exception, but this tended to disappear from most of Romance (except au > Port. ou).

The first beginnings in Latin could be even a bit earlier : in Virgil, Golden Latin, a final -o is always long, but in Silver Latin poetry it could count as long or short according to the demands of the metre. It seems to my recollection this was also the case with final -i.

15:37 Why would we want a strong Galilaean accent in the Christian community?

The Holy Family was more or less equally at home in Nazareth and Bethlehem and other cities of Judaea (like St. Elisabeth).

St. Matthew was a Levite from Judaea.

A priest has argued that St. John the Beloved, the Gospeller, was not the son of Zebedee, but a Cohen (the disciple who was known to the priests).

It would arguably have been more likely to suppose they pronounced the Aramaic language with a "Mid Atlantic accent" as you say of people who want to be equally at home in London and in Boston. In this case a both sides around Samaria accent.

Discussion of Number of the Beast

666: What Does It REALLY Mean?
ReligionForBreakfast | 13.VI.2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-PqevqQEQ4

1:52 "both Greeks and Hebrews believed that every letter had a corresponding number"

In fact, it is not a matter of belief but of a then current usage. They didn't have Arabic numerals, and Roman numerals were clumsy for the purpose, since most letters had no number value.

As current as in our day ASCII, which for each visible sign (and some non-screen visible ones, commands) has a binary number with a number value ... the visible signs generally reaching from 32 (space) and upward. A to Z have values 65 to 90, a to z 97 to 122. Accented letters have higher values.

2:03 You know one other guy whose name gave 666 in gematria of the Greek alphabet?

Or, if you prefer, isopsephia.

Now, here is a vocative, possibly also genitive.

M.NEPOYA.

Yes, modern Greek spells him NEPBAC, but back then it was NEPOYAC.

He was emperor when St John was captive on Patmos, and it was his predecessor, Domitian, who had put St John there after failing to kill him by boiling in oil.

Now, Nerva did not become a very eager persecutor. He freed John from Patmos and he abdicated before dying.

He was probably also the first recipient of the text of Apocalypse, and he probably made the copies to the seven Churches (St. John himself carrying the one to Ephesus).

How so? If you are emperor or other ruler and exile someone to an island, who is a communicator you don't like, it makes sense to allow letters from him only to yourself.

He should be able to apply for grace ... not communicate with the guys you want to suppress.

So, first reader of Apocalypse should have been Nerva. And he seems to have got nervous about persecuting Christians, so, St. John was a free man, and letters were delivered.

3:39 "there is no evidence" - discounting Eusebius, of course ... going along with evaluations by Merrill, Thompson, Willborn.

4:26 Yes, there are manuscripts writing 616 instead of 666.

However, this reading is explicitly refused by St Irenaeus, who came from Asia Minor, where St John had died.

Nero himself back then being the culprit is also excluded by Sts Irenaeus and Hippolytus both referring to a future Antichrist near the end of time.

If Nero were a real candidate to St Irenaeus, why was he excluding 616?

Here are the thing with Hebrew / Greek gematria.

Nero 666 or 616.
Nerva 666.
Domition, scot free.

And ASCII : Nero and Nerva scot free, Domitian has a vocative DOMITIANE

5:18 "conspiracy theories and predictions of the future"

1) You don't know St John meant Nero, it is an educated guess, but still a guess
2) Predictions of the future are NOT conspiracy theories.

It's a huge difference between believing in Illuminati and believing in Harmageddon.

You may believe in both, I tend to do so, but they are two different types of belief. Believing in Illuminati is a conspiracy theory, believing in upcoming Harmageddon is a prediction of the future. Believing the one is believing some people have been clever and justified in their second guessing of events and known networks, believing the other is believing Christ revealed Apocalypse to St. John.

5:51 The one actually brushing aside the historical context is in fact you.

St Irenaeus and St Hippolytus are near contemporaries to Apocalypse, they take it as precisely a prediction of the future.

You live 1900 years later, you believe it was a polemic with only back then current events being relevant, no predictions of a far future which could be coinciding with our time.

You are not the historical context, neither are the guys second guessing it, Sts Irenaeus and Hippolytus are.

RFB on three subjects ... or four ...

Where Did Ancient Christians Meet?
ReligionForBreakfast | 17.XII.2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnJ0komM8tU

Did Emperor Decius Target Christians?
ReligionForBreakfast | 10.V.2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeKiF_7eZ4A

I think Decius may have refrained from openly targetting Christians, rather giving them a chance (as the modern language goes) to show themselves reasonably non-fundie about certain anti-idolatry canons ....

Once many Christians refused that chance, Decius may have seen them as hard core malcontents and had no qualms about killing them.

Obviously, neither did he have any qualms about sparing "sensible" Christians.

Who were of course condemned by the Church.

I have a certain feeling this fact and the fact that "sensible" Christians rallied around the hard core martyr friendly hierarchy was part of the reason why Diocletian came out as more directly Antichristian.

Two refugees went to the Egyptian desert, one under each, St Paul the First Hermit under Decius, St Anthony the Great under Diocletian.

Göbekli Tepe: The World's Oldest Temple?
ReligionForBreakfast | 17.I.2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhUIHsZXDCo

I

Pre-Pottery Neolithic A ... 9500 - 8500 BC, carbon date wise.

What would a recalibration look like?

I might want to fine tune a bit where I place Babel in the Genesis 11 chronology in the corresponding space of time in Roman Martyrology.

But my at least preliminary hunch is, this is sth like 2602 - 2562 BC. Babel.

Carbon 14 levels going up from c. 42 to c. 47 percent modern carbon in this era, explaining why the fourty years expand to 1000, bc earlier date has more extra years or instant age.

No pottery ... perhaps experimentation with bricks, though ... wonder when one will find that one.

Either way, "no pottery" = prepottery era. Not a specific date. Oh, obviously within thespace of dates available before pottery and historically dated such.

II

2:49 wall plaster

Any specifics on what it is made of?

Plaster does suggest experimenting with mortar as well ... so, wonder if we'll find bitumen used as mortar ...

Thank you for the link btw!

III

7:23 One piece of evidence you have not discussed.

Skulls pierced and piled on top of each other on a string.

Human sacrifice? Gruesome burial honours? Or .... demonstration of one's power to kill?

Like skulls around Celtic cities' pallissades, celebrating killing of enemies .... or like skulls of executed criminals displayed for making a fearful impression.

We have recently had a century in which people were executed for refusing to work in camps or even at Red Army's taking of Budapest (a Jew was killed after refusing to work on a Saturday, he was treated better by the frightened German soldiers).

If there was a "project" (rocketry, though Nimrod would not have been equipped to make good choices for fuel), those refusing to work on it may have been executed.

And if the work was in defiance of God, this may have been real martyrdom in some cases.

IV

8:14 Yes, the intentional filling of the site with sand ... perhaps the thing to do after seeing that the linguistic changes were irreversible ...

Genesis 11:[7] Come ye, therefore, let us go down, and there confound their tongue, that they may not understand one another's speech. [8] And so the Lord scattered them from that place into all lands, and they ceased to build the city. [9]And therefore the name thereof was called Babel, because there the language of the whole earth was confounded: and from thence the Lord scattered them abroad upon the face of all countries.

Note, Babel is of course a pun ... one alternative meaning being embraced by those considering it as Bab-Ilu.

Babylon is c. 5.5° E and 5.5° S from GT. Nearly due SE within Mesopotamia ....

V

8:22 We ultimately do not know why these enclosures were built, etc.

Which at least leaves my hypothesis or theory an alternative possibility ...

8:39 Predates pottery, writing, metallurgy.

Pottery - possible.

Metallurgy - predates the post-Flood recovery of it. Tubal-Cain was well proficient well before this.

Writing - have you checked out the late palaeolithic signs studied by Genevieve Petzinger?

Intriguingly, 32 symbols is the right number either for a very phonetic alphabet or for an alphabet with some extra signs.

And as they are not deciphered, we cannot rule out them being in Hebrew, the pre-Babel language.

Same goes for any proto-writing later on around Göbekli Tepe.

Les écoles publiques devraient-elles enseigner la religion ?
(probably in English, despite title as shown in France, automatic subs were in English)
ReligionForBreakfast | 23.X.2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBx3qaIm1Qc

I

3:46 You don't even have the answer 42?

II

I have been to school in both Sweden and Austria.

Sweden has basically religious studies, except in very early grades it verges a bit on catechism.

Austria has catechism - if you are Catholic, Protestant or Jewish, you decide which catechism your children get, by now probably also if you are a Muslim.

Religious studies tends to stereotyping lots of religions and making students more or less equally ignorant of all.

While my ma was technically Protestant, she decided I have Catholic catechism.

Church of Sweden of High Church type is a bit closer to Catholicism than to usually Calvinism, as Protestantism often is in Austria.

I wasn't in Austrian school long enough to see the effect on other students (considering Conchita Wurst perhaps "not too much" effect = not sufficient), but it helped me have a Catholic outlook on two key questions for my conversion later on : St Peter was the first Pope and Eucharist = Real Presence.