Ricky Gervais | Religion VS Atheism, Colour TV Talk Show part + dialogue

Ricky Gervais | Religion VS Atheism, Black and White Stand-up part · Colour TV Talk Show part + dialogue

Starting video at limit:

Ricky Gervais | Religion VS Atheism
Entertainment Infinity | 16.I.2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYnjDCZUV6A&t=264s

I

5:12 "unlike religious people I look at all religions equally"

That's like me saying (not quite true either) "unlike scientific people, I look at all scientific theories equally". I wouldn't say that, since I actually don't, I prefer the ones that square with my religion, perhaps a bit like you disprefer the ones that most dissquare with your scientific theory.

Congrats to loving science, many people from a working class background a generation or two before yours do or did.

I found, Christianity could explain more than "science" as it is usually conceived of ("God did it" not being a scientific explanation, evolution, heliocentrism and big bang being "discoveries" and so on).

• 1) History
• 2) Man.

If historic sources go "a miracle happened" I don't have to go "were they hallucinating or lying?"

If computers can't think at all, and apes can't learn to speak (they can't learn the meaning of "not" even if they certainly have a "don't do it", nor of past tense, nor of future ...), that is cannot learn to think rationally, I don't have to pretend this is what man's mind ultimately is akin to, and developed from or along lines of.

II

5:55 OK, in other words, your parents were not totally convinced, intellectually, their Christianity had a direct pragmatic value overriding intellectual concerns, and perhaps that is the same with your atheism?

My grandmother was a lot like that, and she was atheist (or on and off such, sometimes quarrelling with God over not hearing a prayer prefaced with "God, if you exist" and sometimes dissing her daughter - my ma - for giving me a religious education and very outspokenly).

I think, part of her reason of being atheist was, like her dad, she was a social climber. With poverty, well, in a way I am too. But I am not willing to barter Christianity away to climb socially.

III

7:20 "you're saying you believe because the alternative is too terrible"

Well, that would be one extra reason. Annihilation is not very comfy as perspective. I believe there is eternal damnation, because I don't wish even my worst enemies total annihilation.

IV

7:30 "I can't help what I believe any more than you can"

It's a bit like what one could say of any other lifestyle choice.

Not true.

When I look for a future, and means to it, it is actually my choice not to look for employment, but for editors - in the sense of printers and commercial sellers of what I have written.

Those who don't agree with what I write would, if not necessarily remind me, all of them, definitely remind themselves of that.

Obviously, Calvinists don't agree, they think God has chosen for you.

At least Calvinists as popularly thought of.

Similarily, if you think you are "thinking basically as a computer thinks" - that being a complex arrangement in matter and the output not being thought in or to computer, but being thought (or thought content) to those reading the screen or subjected to its alarms and disturbances, as homeless people are, sometimes (like where light switches on if you move an arm), to us this is the content of someone's forethought ... - if you ignore that the "output" needs a non-computerlike you for it to be actually "thought" even subjectively to you, you will of course think the accidents which "programmed" you make free will impossible.

V

7:40 "there are two thousand seven hundred eighty odd gods"

How many of them would if transferred to Christianity look, not like an alternative view of God, but like an angel or a demon?

How many further would look very much like how Scots and Irish and Icelanders view fairies?

There is the God of the Bible (not too many alternative versions), there is the Ahura Mazda of Zoroastrism, there is Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva of Hinduism, there is the Platonic God, there is the Aristotelic God, there are the "retired creators" in Amerindian lore. Or in Lithuanian Paganism (where God is less important than Perkunas the Thunder-God, where Velnias is more Hades than Satan ...).

That's about it. Oh, there is of course the Muslim one as well ...

VI

8:32 If life is all there is, what do you do facing martyrdom?

I'm not saying all Christians do prefer martyrdom over apostasy, over changing sides, if given the choice, but some of us do, and on our view, rationally so.

VII

9:12 Injustice makes your blood boil? Sounds like a hangover from Christian morality.

VIII

9:24 Oh, religious intolerance is of course nothing you could be guilty of ... how about irreligious intolerance, then?

IX

9:47 "the other is an organised body that uses that for power and corruption"

Extremely bleak view of organised religion, you definitely have some intolerance against that.

If not a religious, perhaps an irreligious one.

But you know, would your distinction be sth you applied to science?

I respect the thirst for knowledge, as long as it's an individual need, you know, but there is a scientific establishment which is an organised body using that certainly for power and money and perhaps (at least against Young Earth Creationists) for corrupt cornering of opposed intellectuals.

X

Dialogue under I:

T Jones

Hans-Georg Lundahl you made a faulty analogy. Ricky is saying that he believes religion is all false, that’s how he treats it. Your analogy acknowledges you don’t treat all science as false. So not comparable.

Now Ricky does (as most atheists do) cherry pick the specific examples of religion he mocks - which means certain extreme views like creationists. He also disparages Christians much more than Muslims. So in truth his statement is false.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@T Jones There actually is one religion he believes is true : Western Atheism.

[T Jones]

[Hans-Georg Lundahl man that was one long strawman logic fallacy by you - you didn’t address what I actually said and instead made this entire fairy tale of my position. That’s two posts by you and two logic fallacies.]

[Hans-Georg Lundahl]

[@T Jones I posted a continuation of my previous post before seeing yours.

It was part of an ongoing comment on the video.]

XI

Dialogue under II

T Jones

Hans-Georg Lundahl now a black and white fallacy by you. It’s not a socially climb OR keep religion as you suggest.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@T Jones I was replying to his concern about his parents having a pragmatic reason for Christianity.

But it is often true that people raised lower class do have pragmatic concerns, somewhat overriding intellectual ones.

... on "Hate Speech" vs Freedom of Speech

Twitter Declares War on Ex-Muslims (Jack Dorsey vs. Apostate Prophet)
Acts17Apologetics | 10.II.2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgQ30cS3IJ4

I

1:00 "he would reply"

Did you check the image for Defne?

Doesn't look like "he" to me. Or is "he" the new gender neutral?

Now, I also checked the name:

http://www.babynamewizard.com/baby-name/girl/defne

Yes, Defne is Turkish for Daphne.

(Reservations, if it was only the subtitles that were garbled and you actually said "she").

II

2:47 Fact box:

4069 It was narrated from Anas that Ibn 'Abbâs said: "the Messenger of Allâh etc said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'" (Sahîh)

I have actually changed my religion twice mainly, and some minor ones apart from that:

• 1) from Evolutionist to Christian
• 2) from Protestant to Catholic

I have made these minor modifications between them:

• 1b) from Church hopper to Lutheran a few months before baptism
  
  
• 2b) from Novus Ordo Catholic to a preference for Le Barroux and Society of St Peter
• 2c) to a preference for SSPX
• 2d) to back to a conservative Novus Ordo
• 2e) to Palmarian Catholic
• 2f) to general sede
• 2g) to conditionally non-sede and even Novus Ordo, while I thought Ratzinger was a good idea
• 2h) to back to SSPX after St John of Malta parish gave an intro course on Kabbalah
• 2i) to Romanian Neo-Himerite, technically, with a preference for both Palaeo-Himerites and SSPX
• 2k) to SSPX again, but with Orthodox reservations
• 2l) dropping the reservations
• 2m) back to sede after being disgusted with Ratzinger for the second time (both times bc he endorsed psychiatry)
• 2n) to provisionally sede perhaps going to accept Bergoglio
• 2o) to accepting the other Argentian Antipope, Alexander IX
• 2p) to rejecting him over his endorsement of extreme Feeneyism (not just canonised Fr Leonard Feeney, but dogmatised his understanding of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus) and provisionally accepting Pope Michael, whom I knew since back in the Palmarian days
• 2q) to definitely (so far) accepting Pope Michael after "canonisations" in 2014 made me sure Ratzinger and Bergoglio were Antipopes.

In this context, I think, I do very well to avoid Muslim countries, and I also think, if Muslims are not out killing me, it is because they have agreed to stamp me as mad instead.

And a lot of people are complying who are not Muslims.

There are certain schools of psychiatry who think, if you are a convert, you are mentally challenged.

Are you one of these?

2:49 The Apostate Prophet resumes what was in above fact box as "Islam orders the killing of Apostates", and while that is true, the wording is such that it could be used of:

• Church Hoppers
• Converts to Catholicism
• Converts within Catholicism away from the Novus Ordo (away from the pseudo-saint Koran kisser).

I think I have a legitimate concern about Muslims, and telling me "they are understanding" is not very reassuring, since that could tend to mean, they take me as a madman to whom none of above applies, bc I totally or mainly lack responsibility for my actions.

So, how many others are going to join the ones who for this specific reason (very unwelcome to me) do not want to kill me?

III

6:52 I am reminded I was (if I recall correctly) banned from a forum in Sweden, Haket. Mainly for poetry and short story writing, but also debate.

I had told a girl, note gender, that if sodomy, lesbian acts, use of condoms and pills in "heterosexual" acts, abortions continue to be legal, when that generation gets old, there will not be sufficient Swedes around raised by them to take care of their financial needs by pension system (the pension system was reworked in 2003, I am not reassured about how it actually will work out, the change was cosmetic), or personal needs either at home or at caring homes. THEN Swedes of that generation will be dependent on immigrants, some of whom, very reasonably, are against sodomy, lesbian acts, use of condoms and pills in "heterosexual" acts, abortions in their mores more than Swedes are and who will therefore, understandably, if not sth I desire, be despising the old people they take care of.

Being in a caring home run by people despising you is not sth I would wish my enemies.

She called this Nazi hate speech. Immigrophobia (invandrarfientlighet).

From the other Forum, where I know I was banned, it was Sockerdricka, I was banned as "pedophile," for arguing to lower marital age back from 18 to 14/12.

All of this happened before I left Sweden back in 2004. I think there are some guys who have supported basically banning me, if not from forums (though I recently did get banned from Quora under one account), at least from being listened to and taken seriously.

And there are people among these guys who have stamped me as Muslim or as idealising Muslims, because I have said "they are right" on a few topics where I think they are right. There is no religion which is false on all topics, though some are false on more topics than others. I don't believe in singling out one religion as the false one as if all others were true, I believe there is one religion which is the correct one, founded by Jesus Christ.

IV

7:49 "It seems to me that people who have survived some sort of threat or abuse, or people who are under ongoing threat from a particular ideology, should have every right, on every platform that has any respect for human rights, to criticise the source of the abuse or threats"

I don't believe in "human rights" as defined by the UNO charter, or European Convention.

For one thing, European Convention says, homeless people can be locked up (one of the exceptions from right to liberty), and it also says police may shoot those legally (under national laws abiding by the convention, obviously) deprived of freedoms who are trying to run away.

It's a bit like what happened to [Amy] Winehouse, a bit before she overdosed on alcohol, since her tolerance had been lowered during desintoxication treatment. She ran away, and an armed guard pointed a gun at her to force her back. "For her own good" he would no doubt have said.

I think I have, on your principles, every right, including on your platform, to criticise Swedish feminism and psychiatry. I have not been giving threats to right or left, I have been under a rather outdrawn often implied threat to have my freedoms cut by psychiatrists who do not share my enthusiasm for Catholicism, and whose enthusiasm for feminism and psychiatry I do not share myself, and who just happen to coincide with some Muslims who would consider my conversions would normally be reason to kill me (which they can't very well do here) and who are taking my presumed mental problems as an excuse for letting me live and even being materially friendly to me.

I do however believe in the human rights that can be derived from the Ten Commandments, from the duties we have to God and to each other in these. And while I do not regret the Inquisition, I have stated it would be a mistake to bring it back, as far as death penalties for heresy and apostasy are concerned.

samedi 27 juillet 2013 = Saturday July 27th, YooL 2013:

Triviū, Quadriviū, 7 cætera : I do not agree with religious liberty in all cases for all religions
https://triv7quadriv.blogspot.com/2013/07/i-do-not-agree-with-religious-liberty.html

"often implied threat to have my freedoms cut by psychiatrists"

Not necessarily existing ones, not necessaily not so, but also definitely not just my imagination running wild, there is such a thing as giving broad hints.

V

8:02 Islam growing due to birthrates and Islam becoming violent ... well, why not fight for bringing Western birthrates up to competitive?

Both for that reason, and for saving old age pensions as long as they can be (I think the system as such is doomed).

By the way, in France I would not say "radical" in the context that Islam conveys certain threats in some adherents for terrorism, you see, in France, a Muslim saying a gay couple deserves death (which is true) even if he is not posing a threat, or who says he doesn't believe in Evolution (also fairly true) is seen as "radical".

Think of what a word means, and what it may mean to someone else, before you use it. If you catch me not doing so myself, be free to call me out on it. Oh, and "to someone else" doesn't necessarily mean to an easily triggered girl who was told killing spiders was a sin. But perhaps that is not the kind of people we should be taking on anyway .... not sure. She was there, and some were getting a kind of impression Islam is no threat at all.

Also, in France, your tirade is very easily answered by pointing to a long row of Muslims who are definitely not socially perceived as radical.

I can say for me, I have had kindness as to food and non-alcholic drink from both and perhaps a bit more friendliness as to freedom of my speech from "radical" ones. And you might perhaps prefer a radical who supports a Christian creationist over a radical who goes terrorist?

VI

8:51 "if your platform allows people to promote an ideology that calls for violent deaths of apostates and critics, but doesn't allow the targets of the violence to speak out in their own defense, some of the blood of the victims is on your hands."

Does "your platform" mean the platform you own and moderate?

Or does "your platform" mean the platform you use? Was some of the blood of Terrorist victims on Apostate Prophet's hands, as long a he had a twitter?

I think, for platforms we use, we have a right to be somewhat opportunistic.

VII

dialogue:

Maximillian Keyes

I only have two words: Asia Bibi.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Yes, she was recently NOT re-charged.

I specifically thanked Pakistan for that.

im GOG

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
I thank GOD that she is NOT killed

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@im GOG Good idea, but hardly a bad idea to be polite to those sparing her either.

Ricky Gervais | Religion VS Atheism, Black and White Stand-up part

Ricky Gervais | Religion VS Atheism, Black and White Stand-up part · Colour TV Talk Show part + dialogue

Ricky Gervais | Religion VS Atheism
Entertainment Infinity | 16.I.2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYnjDCZUV6A

Error on my part, you can read it in advance, St Lucy was not martyred at Catania, but at Syracuse. St. Agatha was martyred at Catania, by very enlightened Pagan Romans, one can presume?

I

1:39 three observations:

• earth being flat is not myth, it is false science
• earth being flat is not a stopgap, it is essentially part of Osiris myth (could have been a pre-Flood memory)
• earth being flat was not universally believed up to discovery earth is round.

It was believed by Osiris worshippers, since in their view, the Sun went to the land of the dead under the earth, when it was night.

However, it is easy for that myth to accomodate Round Earth, as long as not too much of it is discovered, just place the land of the dead west of the land of the living, that way the sungod also gets to sea the dead after seeing us.

The default option is actually not having a definite view of the overall shape of the earth. Definite flat earth views come about bc of descriptions that are accurate, leave out roundness as hard to detect, and then are overinterpreted, when you press the descriptions.

But pressing them is about as optional, pre-Eratosthenes and pre-Magellan, as beliving Osiris.

II

2:04 "We know it is fun to tell children"

Santa Claus, fairies, etc.

Since when do "we" know that?

A late nineteenth and early twentieth century acquired a lot of knowledge of paraphernalia of religions it (usually, in England) didn't believe, like St. Nicolas of the Catholics, fairies of the Irish and the Scots and so on. And the Protestant-to-Atheist Englishman, as well as American (though around 1900 the type was rarer in US) found these things fun, and found it fun to tell his children about the fun, and some of them found it fun to tell the children about it and wait to when the children figured out it was (on daddy's or mum's terms) just makebelieve.

And as this figuring out often came early, and as children's brains are like sponges, to some children this experience was a life lesson about scepticism, which they never got over.

This doesn't make it universal knowledge. Norwegian children don't hear all that much of the tooth fairy, I think (if I'm wrong, sorry søte bror!) and Swedish children also don't. And Lucia ... well, both Lucy's and starboys are too much rooted in Christian tradition to remain a cute fun falsehood to every Swedish child. After all, some Christians like Catholics and Orthodox do believe Lucy of Catania was killed for her Christian faith, and all Christians believe St Stephen was killed for it.

III

2:27 Yes, and famously, atheists are often enough born with the right atheist parents to tell them that Hindus are born in India and Muslims in Pakistan and Christians in America ... there are also exceptions.

There are ex-Fundie atheists. And here is an ex-Evolutionist, ex-Heliocentric, ex-Big-Bangist Catholic.

Either way, from a psychological rather then moral standpoint, these would be labelled "converts".

And either way, whether they come from the right or the wrong community, they risk being treated as apostates by it.

... or, by now, as victims of sectarian indoctrination!

IV

2:39 When you say "medieval beliefs" do you refer to beliefs believed in or about the Middle Ages?

And, by the way, so far you haven't defined what they believed in the middle ages, or why it would be wrong (or even just strange) to hold on to it.

Example, in the Middle Ages, certain rules of courtship prevailed and also in the Middle Ages, Chaucer tells how Troilus and Cressida became a couple. Now, that couple did not quite follow the Medieval rules of courtship, so Chaucer added:

"for to win love in sondry ages, there sondry been usages"

Do you think it is strange some hold on to a typically Medieval Belief (as in things believed in the Middle ages) like Cultural relativism?

Perhaps it would be more adequate to sane reason to stick only to one culture, the one taught by the parents, and interpret everyone else's culture according to it, and if someone was so unluckily Medieval as to learn cultural relativism from his parents, let him be an outcast! I don't think so.

V

2:45 Yeah, right.

When was the last time you challenged your belief that:

• there is no God?
• there is no serious reason for anyone to think there is a God?
• there is no Santa Claus (I mean outside the version that is made up for fun)?
• there is no reason to believe in any Saint Nicolas?
• socially embarassing (in your particular culture) has the last word?

VI

2:48 "that's what science does, it doesn't constantly try and prove itself right"

• And when did you last challenge your belief that scientists always live up to that?
• Or your belief that those who don't are found out by competing scientists?
• Or your belief there is never collusion among scientists not to be found out on some point (if for instance a creationist comes up with a good argument)? Do you also believe that free market left to itself never develops any kind of trusts?
• Or that a creationist who really has an argument for God could win the Nobel prize if he proves it, as if Nobel committee in Sweden were not hardline atheists and evolution believers? I mean, knowing Sweden, as I do, you should!

2:58 "it tries to prove itself wrong"

Name three studies where evolution believing scientists tried to prove Creationism was right or even possible, and then they stayed evolution believing scientists because they failed ....

3:24 "it would be the greatest scientific discovery of all time"

It has been made, Eratosthenes-wise by Aristotle, Magellan-wise by Adam, Noah, Moses and a few others since then.

But is your scientific expertise going to tell you openly about Aristotelic philosophy, or Thomistic philosophy, or Biblical history?

I think you show abstinence symptoms after being told the tooth fairy was just for fun, you are being childishly naive!

3:33 text in clip image

"the bible is not evidence, it is not a history book"

Are history books evidence of history?

To my best knowledge, historian analyticists and so on write history books, summaries about historic events with their filter on them, from historic sources.

Now, unlike the item "history book", it's a bit less easy to dismiss the Bible being a historic source, like, for instance, Anglo-Saxon chronicle.

3:39 Present history books are written by people sharing your bias about the supernatural. But apart from that bias, precisely history - historic sources, not modern history books - are very good evidence for the miraculous.

Tacitus and Anglo-Saxon chronicle also deal in it, not just the Bible.

And before you dismiss scientific side of evidence, take a look at medical doctors' commission in Lourdes.

VII

4:24 I am not the least agnostic about Santa Claus.

I am very sure he slapped the heretic Arius at Council of Nicaea, I am very sure he had been in prison for confessing Christ previous to Ponte Milvio, and also very sure (this is where the meme comes from) he once threw in bags of money to a poor household just in time to save the daughters from prostitution.

I am also sure the correct pronunciation is Saint Nicolas.

Just Promoting

A Saint in Hiding
St. Genesius Films | 4.I.2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLK6mUjcKpY

... on ISIS, Conversion, and End Times (ft. David Wood)

Featuring old friend David Wood:

How ISIS Is Converting Muslims to Christianity (David Wood)
Acts17Apologetics | 5.II.2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr0zBEkrIXI

I

2:16 Nice, perhaps 1 reason to presume ISIS will as such not be the Apocalyptical Beast.

They will end Islam before coming near to that ultimate try to end Christianity.

(OK, there are some Catholic prophets who have said it is actually The Great Catholic Monarch who will end Islam, Judaism, Protestant heresy so that only a few are left of each ... leaving sth darker, ultimately, to those who won't be Catholics, or to most of them ... yes, it will be darker than ISIS).

II

3:11 "Even under the Syrian régime before the revolution, it was strictly forbidden to change religion from Islam to Christianity or the opposite."

Wait ... is he talking about Bashir al Assad's Syria here?

III

As you mentioned Omar, can you imagine a Christian people beginning as all Christians when he arrived, and then major parts of it being forced to Islamise?

And now Christians being a minority in that people?

I can not just imagine that people, I know of one : Palestinians.

That's why I take Christian Palestinians as my umpire for right and wrong in Holy Land : if they complain more of Israel, I complain more of Israel, if they complain more of Hamas, I complain more of Hamas, and while they usually complain of both, I do so too.

There was an Orthodox priest (the nation is divided basically between Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholics), who about Galilaean Palestinians was saying, they had more than enough of the Jewish Islamic vendetta.

IV

I somehow believe you reading the Qoran is a form of torture, we went through that in Swedish school ... "religious studies".

Now, more to the point, since the Swedish school did not expose me to all that much of the Quran, so is being confronted to harbrained Protestant attacks on Catholicism ... not meaning you, but I have started dealing with one major torture monger; GotQuestions:

Great Bishop of Geneva! : Answering 83 Claims from Got Questions : Catholic Bible and Origin of Catholic Church
https://greatbishopofgeneva.blogspot.com/2019/02/answering-83-claims-from-got-questions.html

Note, the Christian or semi-Christian you just cited mentions a denomination from 18th C Germany.

What about the one from AD 33 Palestine? There are not all that many realistic claimants (RC, EO, Copts, Armenians, Assyrians or Nestorians).

Perhaps even more hairbrained than GotQuestions, what about this:

"The astonishing story from an ex-Jesuit priest, Alberto Rivera, which was told to him by Cardinal Bea while he was at the Vatican. When Cardinal Bea shared with Rivera in the Vatican, he said, these writings are guarded because they contain information that links the Vatican to the creation of Islam. Both sides have so much information on each other, that if exposed, it could create such a scandal that it would be a disaster for both religions."

Yadda, yadda, yadda ....

No one questions Alberto Rivera was a Jesuit. I just checked his credential for even being Spanish, yes, he has as full name "Alberto Magno Rivera Romero" that is one saint's name (Alberto Magno refers to the teacher of St Thomas Aquinas, there are other Alberts) and two surnames.

No one questions he was told things by Cardinal Bea.

No one questions Cardinal Bea was if so not simply testing him.

No one questions Cardinal Bea was if so and not testing him simply repeating fake news in "insiders knowledge" of some infiltrating actually AntiCatholic group (he has other connections to ending Catholicism in Catholicism, like being overecumenical).

Doesn't that and similar hogwash make you think twice about remaining a Protestant?

V

Radical Islam will fail.

However, moderate Islam (from the outset saying one does not believe the Quran 100% or the example of Muhammed 100% esp as applicable today) may one day be one part of the Beast, since liberals as well as Russia (supposedly conservative) will do nothing to beat it, and since it has confusion at the heart of its "message".

ISIS is clear on brutality and perhaps on a few more things probably less popular than brutality in today's world.

Salafis in France are being suspected of being ISIS sympathisers, are being deprived of rights over their children's education.

One of the terrorists had a wife who fled to ISIS in Syria, bc France had destroyed her life by CPS during her teens and even post-teen youth.

I kind of think that man paid a ticket to a haven for his wife by attacking the Hyper-Kacher (kosher supermarket).

This kind of thing may lead Salafists to continue supporting ISIS for some time. Instead of being duly disgusted and drawing the right conclusions.

... on Great Monarch and on End Times (ft. Coulombe)

The Great Catholic Monarch & the End Times
Tumblar House | 7.IX.2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKWHz9mNKQ8

I

2:33 "both Habsburg and Bourbon"?

As far as I know, that is not specified in Holzhauser.

Descending from both St Louis the IX and German Emperors is, but the Wittelsbach's in his day already fulfilled that criterium.

Obviously, Louis XVII fulfilled it in the shape of Bourbon descent from St Louis and Habsburg descent from German Emperors.

So, if Nauendorff should be genuine (that would mean a mitochondrial test on Karl Wilhelm Nauendorff and Marie Antoinette already conducted was either a fraud of bungled, but that is not quite impossible), that would perhaps be best candidate, after that you get Wittelsbachs (you know three Wittelsbach men and one Wittelsbach woman ruled Sweden, once? They are same branch as the Wittlesbachs now claiming Bavaria, next in line being as I recall a Liechtenstein, and that to the Stuart heritage as well).

II

4:58 Why wait for Game of Thrones?

I delight in Branduardi, but he was participating in an Italian emission which was very much referring to Hell (to his credit, as a faun kidnapped by demons, not as a demon, but still). Heard of Stryx?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stryx

Then again, False Prophet and Beast will definitely represent the Devil, and it is very probable they will be ... doing so on TV.

As for seeing, "ten horns" seems a bit like referring to cogwheels, then you have "teeth and claws of iron" ...

By the way, when it came to ASCII, I think St John both saw it and got it explained.

We know the numeric sum of the letters is 666 (at least if St Irenaeus is credible in discounting alternatives like 616), and we also know that while Greek, Hebrew and some Latin letters were used as numbers, by now (binary) numbers are used for letters in computers. The capital and lower case usually differing by 32.

13:18 is kind of a short resumé.

On my view, Moses when reading or hearing the recital of Babel from ancestors was asking "what where they trying to do?" and God showed him Cape Canaveral or Bajkonur, and he wrote "a tower, the top of which may reach heaven". You see, three step rockets are oblong long vertical axis, and only top "storey" reaches deep space ....

As I brought up Cape Canaveral, one can still see and hear Kennedy's speach "it's not because it is easy" ... in reference to that project.

Was the devil speaking through JFK that day?

III

7:31 I'd have to disagree on "that's not what it's for".

Why were people so desperate to save Roman Gaul from Franks up to when Clovis converted?

Well, the fact is, St Augustine and Orosius had commented on St Paul's prophecy in Thessalonians that the office of Roman Emperor was what held back. This meaning, that if a clearly non-Roman government came about, Antichrist would fairly well have an easy time.

Now, fast forward to 1917. Austrian Emperor was, via Charlemagne, a heir of Clovis. Similarily, the Charlemagne business may have inspired Russia to take over Imperial claim after 1453. So, Russian Czar Nicolas was also a heir of ... the guy who gave Clovis the dignity of Patrician.

Nicolas II and Charles I (Charles the Last) are taken out of the way.

And if Lenin was not Antichrist in person, he clearly prefigured him. In a longterm view of "seven kings", the list of "Seven Satanic Kings" starting with Nimrod ... as Nero and Domitian are both good candidates for the sixth King (after Antiochus and excepting Herod who was a corrupt Israelite), the candidates for "seventh" are either Hitler or Lenin. I think Lenin fits just a bit even better.

If you look at his first name, you can figure out who might be "the eighth and one of the seven". At present there is no politician with the first name Adolf, but if that's your preference for "seventh Satanic King" well, the guy has been somewhat likened to Hitler as well ...

Point is, when St Remigius thought opposing a Pagan and non-Roman Clovis so important that he even stepped into Syagrius' shoes, though resisting invasions was a lay office, he was precisely running his "business" on prophetic terms, and it turns out, he saved the world from the march on Harmageddon for 14 centuries or so.

Some guys think (as of John had his prophecy from Apollo and not from God) that believing the Apocalypse is likely to start a march to Harmageddon. Precisely not, by believing it, St Remigius was halting that downhill march to a precipice for centuries to come. While St Bridget and her more pious contemporaries or some of them were alarmed over Antichrist risking to come, the danger was less than it is now.

IV

9:00 In fact, those claiming St Augustine did prophecy the Great Monarch cite one place (which could also be spurious as far as I know as yet) of his saying the Roman Empire could come into the hands of a Frank ... in his time they were Pagans, and then comes Clovis.

Meaning of course, his view does not necessarily imply a Great Monarch now, since it could have been already fulfilled 1500 years ago.

"Mitis depone colla Sigamber" (that might even have been St Augustine's actual term) "incende quod adorasti, adora quod incendisti".

V

10:46 If you are around in Ireland (or possibly New York State), about seven years before Doomsday, St Patrick might be arranging for your drowning with a whole country instead of facing what you are talking about ... it seems he felt the Irish would be in need of about same kind of grace to be spared those days ...

... on Second Temple Priesthood

The untold reason why Jewish people do not believe Jesus is the Messiah!
ONE FOR ISRAEL Ministry | 2.IV.2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP_JGRHvsE8

I

8:52 - 9:05 "is proof of the poor condition the temple priesthood was in. According to Elior, scrolls written by the Zadokian priesthood describe how they had to flee for their lives and hide from the new priests"

Now read II Maccabees 12 from 42 up to the end.

[42] And so betaking themselves to prayers, they besought him, that the sin which had been committed might be forgotten. But the most valiant Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forasmuch as they saw before their eyes what had happened, because of the sins of those that were slain. [43] And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, [44] (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) [45] And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. [46] It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Now, re-read verse 44, it is a parenthesis, with the words in previous verse to which this parenthesis refers:

thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,)

As we know it, the priesthood in the temple in Jesus' time were in fact what we call "Sadducees" - deniers of the resurrection (among some other key concepts). This would mean that the author could be one of those fleeing from the new priests, or, at the very least, one who noted the difference.

And who preferred it the old way.

II

What do you think would have happened if in Our Lord's time there was one cohen, not John the Baptist (Yohanan ben-Zakhariah ha-Kohen, right?), but someone else, who actually also was against the corruption of Sadducee priests?

Would he have been a disciple of Our Lord?

What would Our Lord have thought of him?

Since St Irenaeus, most Church Father's have considered "John" and "the beloved disciple" as being John the son of Zebedee and the brother of James the greater. Look here at two texts from Gospels of St and of St John:

1) Now all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then the disciples all leaving him, fled. (Matthew 26:56)

2) And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. And that disciple was known to the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the court of the high priest. But Peter stood at the door without. The other disciple therefore, who was known to the high priest, went out, and spoke to the portress, and brought in Peter. (John 18:15,16)

We see a disciple who doesn't exactly look like fleeing. And one whom St Matthew, writing very early after the events, does not mention. Both say Peter (later a saint and martyr) was at the occasion half-brave, only one (the later writer) dares say how he even came in ...

Also, Matthew and Luke in Acts seem to contradict each other about how Judas Ischariot died - the John who was known to people in Asia Minor where St Irenaeus had spent early years (and perhaps misunderstood sth which early Church Fathers writing back there understood better) was able to tell what had happened. Judas didn't die from hanging, he was cut down. But he died from burst stomach when ploughing on Aceldama, trying obviously to "get things together" after a failed suicide and this not pleasing God. Or the guys who cut him down and saved him also killed him by giving him really too much comfort food. These explanations are not mutually exclusive.

How did this John know what had happened to Judas? Was he a fisherman - or a priest?

One man from Asia Minor, also an early Church Father, speaks of one John who had worn the "golden head plate".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestly_golden_head_plate