It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Beast and The Antichrist Have Been Revealed!

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:02 PM
reply to post by pthena

I feel you ma man, and that is the reason why I quit ~5-6 years ago. But then I thought: who else will do something about it? If I have conscience, I have the responsibility...

Let's not wait on anyone else, we still have everything in our hands man, and I'm really sorry because people like thegoodearth only respect you for being frustrated

I felt, like you do, that them 10 virgins are still sleeping, WE are. By wake up time there's still one difference, only 2 paths...

I just hope you'll be ready to make the right decision when that time comes, because we both know that the other side is getting ready, we should too... It's all going to come down to the sat vs. sun thing, there's a lot of people selling their souls and preparing for the end, but on the wrong side...

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:52 PM
reply to post by HSDA83

I just hope you'll be ready to make the right decision when that time comes, because we both know that the other side is getting ready, we should too... It's all going to come down to the sat vs. sun thing, there's a lot of people selling their souls and preparing for the end, but on the wrong side...

I don't think you get where I'm coming from yet. I'm not even a Christian. I'm an apostate, all the way out of the fold. Sat vs Sun. Not my fight.

The other side isn't getting ready, it's already killing and dispossessing, and has been for a long time. As long as you consider yourself a follower of that character in Exodus who claimed to be the El of Abraham you are on that side. I'm sorry, that's the way it is.

Do you think the One Jesus called Heavenly Father is the same as the one who ordered wholesale massacre of humans so as to occupy their land? That was the original Zionism, which after taking the land would become the capital of the world. All other nations would pay tribute as vassal states to the empire of Zion, the king in Zion would be ruler of the world. It's all right there in the Old Testament. All the kingdoms of the world! Isn't that what Jesus was tempted by? Then Jesus quoted a verse to confirm who the temper was. Of course no one seems to interpret Jesus' scripture use in that way.

That last paragraph of course marks me as opposed to all things Jewish and Christian. Apostate to the core. All these Christian Trinitarian teachings that assume that pretender to worldwide godhood is the Father are on that side too.

Let me put it this way. That one started out as a fiction, but has gained substance through worship. It does not exist outside of the OT, except in how many followers are willing to carry out wholesale human slaughter on its behalf. That's how the Nazis justified killing the Jews, and that how the Zionists now justify killing everyone who stands in their way. They get their power from the delusion and give power to the delusion through human sacrifice. The U.S. is the current dumb beast carrying out the will of the fiction. The fiction is fiction, yet real people of flesh and blood are being sacrificed.

I'm not an Atheist, but I will not worship Mr. genocide in exchange for rulership of the world.

I hope that clarifies. I have a negative theology, in that I can identify who isn't God, but the positive statement about who God may be eludes me.

Therefore I consider that Jews and Christians who aren't all ate up in zealousness for "the Lord" are on the correct side, leading to care for people.

After reading the gospels I came to the conclusion that the personal religion of Jesus could be stated thus, "The Father cares about people, not religion." May we all some day become children of that Father.

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 11:07 PM
reply to post by pthena

In writing, instead of speaking, it is hard at times to know if one comes off the way intended.
Though we obviously do not share the same theological views, I do respect the way that you share the way you feel without being rude, insulting, belligerant, smug, or condescending. I do respect your posts, their delivery, and the intelligent thought behind them. And, seriously, I am not one who takes secret glee in frustrating others... I leave that to others here. I state my beliefs pretty simply and go my way.
Take care~

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 01:16 AM
reply to post by thegoodearth
Thank you. I'm quite certain that whoever God really is, He/She (I say that because of a verse that says man in the image of God, male and female) cares for all people. I think people who would rather see another person suffer than risk their own sanctity are cutting themselves off from God. (think the Good Samaritan story)

I've got a friend who grew up in Albany Georgia, seeing some of the worst that white American Christianity has to offer. After years and experience she doesn't blame Jesus for it any more. She has a saying she uses for email signature. "Life's a Journey, share the road".

[edit on 5-8-2010 by pthena]

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 06:46 AM
The name I used in an earlier post is a registered trade mark of a 501c3 type institution and it could be that I was infringing on their rights of the use of it. I mentioned that I felt myself affiliated with that name but I meant it in a philosophical sort of way, as opposed to actually having any more attachment to the organization other than being a member of a local affiliated church.
The thing is that people might find someone who does not share in their particular interpretation of theology to be a general "non-believer". The fact is that a lot of people are still believers but have a different sort of religious background that may seem so unusual as to be outside the pale, so to speak.
The US Supreme Court, in the now kind of distant past, ruled twice to affirm the constitutionality of state's Sunday laws, saying that it was the "Christian Sabbath", so someone who does not believe in it may seem to be just not Christian. Well, there are a lot of Christians who look at history and don't see anything in particular to commend the practice of Sunday keeping but do not feel like they are following some sot of Judaism, but feel like the Sabbath does commemorate and thus specifies the true god who is worthy of worship, which is who created us and the world and everything that exists. Sunday does not do that and in no way can logically be considered a Sabbath substitute but a bringing into existence a new thing which commemorates what? I guess something about a renewal of some sort. That may be all good and feel free to have a church service every week to celebrate it, for all I care, but it should not be mistaken for a sabbath.
There are a lot of things that we can have knowledge of that can be sensed in this material existence, but none of it is god in particular and the real god is who is what allows everything to exist and what gives us life in it. We can experience all those things and recognize an intelligence must be constantly at work, but we can not fathom what it is.
The identification is built into the Ten Commandments, as The Creator, and is part of the Sabbath law, so there really isn't much going on in that revelation about worship than that, including some sort of name to invoke the god.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 07:03 AM
reply to post by pthena

. . .teachings that assume that pretender to worldwide godhood is the Father are on that side too.

I think in general you are on the right track and Jesus did not glorify his race as being in particular superior or that their history gave them a higher status before God. I think his intention was to reset everything to where everyone is the new Abraham and need to make a decision based on the new revelation of God, represented by his teachings and the inner spiritual experience through the Paraclete that he paved the way for.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:10 PM
reply to post by jmdewey60
There is a reason that I call myself an apostate, which means someone who went out or away. Being a wolf, I don't particularly relish being called a wolf in sheep's clothing, just wolf will do.

I was born in the U.S. and lived here most of my life. I'm familiar with the mobile society. To me, denominations serve the function of tribes for mobile people in a multi-cultural country. Where ever you go, you can hook up with a group that shares your basic understandings and myth, as in tribal narrative. Tribes are useful in human development. Denomination = pseudo tribe.

I will use the Baptists as an example of tribal identity. Their greatest pride is that they were not participants in the imperial council of Nicea. That's their distinguishing mark. "We don't follow any government's idea as to what we ought to believe. We have the Bible, that's all we need. We follow God, not man."

That is, by most standards, a wonderful myth(identifying narrative). It has produced good examples of independence. Such as Roger Williams who founded a colony that provided safe haven for Jews and Catholics in America, where the choices were otherwise limited to Church of England only in the south, and Puritan in the North.

Baptists are not a homogenous group by any means, each congregation still maintains independence with broader affiliations which can be likened to tribal federations. A co-worker once invited me to go to his independent Baptist Church. In the Sunday School they were still talking about Roger Williams, I thought that was pretty cool.

But now lets talk of the Southern Baptist Convention. Some time during the 1970s or 80s they affiliated themselves with the American Fundamentalist movement, a sort of uber federation, which linked together, for political power purposes a large and varied group of denominations and congregations. By doing this, they lost their pride, their sign, their seal, of independence from TPTB, and shared in what is shaping up to be the largest pressure group in government.

They may say that they have no creed, yet they all believe and speak the same way. Independence of thought is suppressed and ostracized. Woe to anyone who dares to vary one jot or tittle from the party line. By becoming what they have become they are no longer Baptists. That's my opinion and I'm not seeing any thing to change it.

I've heard tell that in the south it's becoming quite a trend for people to fly Israeli flags. It might have something to do with Hagee's influence.

Denominations and congregations are a good in the world, when they have a good myth and keep it, rather than lose it for the sake of gaining worldly power.

I really don't have a fight about days. If the Sabbath represents for you the creator who rested from creating that's still a strong theological statement.

As for me, I think in terms of the Father who Jesus said "is still working, and so am I."

On the other hand, in the Book of Hebrews, there is mention of a future Sabbath rest to look forward to. If Sabbath observance is tied with a looking forward rather than a looking back, as Hebrews indicates, then good. For the theme of Hebrews is looking to Jesus who is so much greater than any angel appearance, as in where the 10 commandments came from. SDAs do identify themselves to a great degree with the Book of Hebrews, and as EG White wrote, the day will come when the Sabbath will be taught more fully.

I hope that helps


[edit on 5-8-2010 by pthena]

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 05:02 PM
reply to post by pthena
Anything helps and thanks for giving your valued opinion.
I did not migrate to my church to find like-minded people but was born into it and never found anything that seems better.
The SDA's used to pride themselves in not participating in groups or leagues or organizations of churches and I think that was a good policy.
I went to my local Southern Baptist Convention church and was surprised by how uncomfortable they became with the most basic questions about Christianity in general. At least the SDA's have an answer to everything, which might seem funny but it at least means they are willing to take on all questions, which is the important thing.
Back to my comment above; I am not in any hurry to condemn people to Hell because they believe in what they were taught since I have not abandoned all the beliefs I was raised to have. I recommend that everyone ask themselves some serious questions about what they think and why.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by jmdewey60]

posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 10:00 AM

The Beast that Once was and now is not

I admit that I find the book of Revelation very disturbing. It seems to me that it stands as a self-fullfilling prophecy, in that when groups of people decide to bring it about, they end up doing and becoming that which is warned of. That's a very serious problem as far as I'm concerned. On the other hand, it does warn. It is dangerous. I recommend then, that it be viewed as a warning, not as a handbook to be followed.

The American students of prophecy to a great extent ignored the goings on in Europe in the between war years, 1920s and 1930s. That was a symptom of a general isolationist climate in America, "European chaos is a European problem, not mine."

The "German Christian" Movement and the Project to Usher in the 1000 year peace also known as the Third Reich, or Dominion of God on Earth.

I came to an understanding in about 2006 that the current movement of the American Christian right, with its increasing political power can be seen as a movement making of the US into a mirror image of what Nazi Germany became. I have discovered that David Alan Black wrote about at least two years ahead of me. See Read the Barmen Declaration (While You Still Can) December 19, 2004

The reason I say mirror image is because in Europe, the popular view of Bible prophecy was known as "post-millennialism" in that, the 1000 year peace would precede the return of the Christ. In popular American dispensational thinking, the Christ is to come before the 1000 year peace, pre-millennialism.

The German Christian experiment of bringing in the kingdom of god through Aryan identity, state power, and military might is history, so I won't go into it too much except to say that 92% of Christians went along with it. The minority is reflected in the Barmen Declaration.

I found a timeline on Shoahrose, A Website for the study of the Church in the Shoah, or Holocaust.

I need to research this thing a bit more. Don't be fooled! American pandering to the most radical militant form of Zionism does not equal love for Jews. The Christian Zionists at the top imagine that they will be safe in heaven while the Jews and everyone else are going through the meat grinder, that they (Christian Zionists) are actively working to set up.

I'm posting this now, and hope you do your own research into the motives behind all the false Jew loving that's going on.

posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 04:32 PM
The Shoahrose site I linked to above has been suspended, along with three other websites directed by the same person. What is it about the German Christian Movement which became Nazi Christianity that someone doesn't want people looking into.

Here are some book titles:

Theologians Under Hitler, Ericksen (Author)

Twisted Cross: The German Christian Movement i... by Doris L. Bergen

The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 [Paperback]
Richard Steigmann-Gall

I find the very idea of a state religion quite disturbing. Although I may disagree with the website's balance against racial/national/religious thinking, it did seem the best source on the internet for studying the phenomenon.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:39 PM
Dates Are Wrong!
I heard Jeffrey Grupp talking about this but I never got around to checking it myself, this theory that there was no "Dark Ages" because the 16th century historian, Scalegeri expanded history by sliding concurrent events to seem like a series of events, to fill in a gap of dating history that happened because of a misunderstanding of the dates used in older histories.
This can be found in Google Books under History: Fiction or Science by Anatoly Fomenko.
the letter I stood for Jesus and X stood for Christ and the old system was a formula stating that such and such happened the whatever century after Jesus Christ. These formulas became abbreviated and by the time the Renaissance writers started compiling a modern history, they misunderstood the abbreviation and figured it meant one thousand, so all historical dates before the time of Scalegeri are off by close to a thousand years and closer to eleven hundred years. So the Romans had their empire fairly recently and Jesus was crucified in 1186.
To get to how any of this matters, people spouting off dates for the End Times are really full of bad stuff because the whole dating scheme is seriously out of whack and it makes all these wonderful calculations about Times worthless.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 08:38 PM
reply to post by jmdewey60
I don't think I'd give much weight to History: Fiction or Science by Anatoly Fomenko. Apart from other criticism I just read, it seems to be a rather Russo-centric theory, with the Renaissance as the beginning of history, with a conspiracy to back date every story in order to minimize the greatness of the Russian horde.

I find it rather incredible that Renaissance architects would traverse the world building "ancient ruins" and planting "ancient coins" in order to maintain the fiction they needed to maintain their chronology. It's incredible Eurocentrism to posit that no history written or lived any where in the world counts for anything unless it fits into some European scheme.

It rather reminds me of the creationist theory that the Earth really is only slightly over 6,000 years old, but the creator created billion year old stones and 200,000 year old fossils, as a test to determine who would believe written authority and who would use other means of determining reality, such as observation and scientific methods.

The reason I brought up the Nazis was to demonstrate the blindness of American prophecy students, SDAs and some independent Baptists who thought the Beast would be the joining of "apostate Protestant" with the Papacy in order to kill Sabbath keepers. What I'm saying is, "Hellllooo! that already happened, in Europe, while we were all focused exclusively on America, there isn't going to be an exact repeat in America.

Currently, the power brokers are Zionists, not associated with the Vatican or the Reformation, but rather the "Bible only, dispensational interpretation" Christian Zionists and the radical Jewish Settler movement. In Israel and the US, they are appeased for perceived political power and money. Many others, including the Vatican and social conservative Christians join themselves to the alliance for the perceived strengthening of anti-gay and anti-birth control issues. The regular Jews go along because they see it as the best chance for an enduring homeland, (many are beginning to realize that it's really counter-productive)

Watch some John Hagee films. It becomes clear that Jesus is reduced to merely "the rapture man" who takes the Christians away so that the mass destruction of human life that the Zionist Christians put into operation won't touch them, the perpetrators. There is no love for man in the teaching at all. I'm pretty sure that a quick search of the Bible will show that no blessing is given for those who dig pits and snares for others to walk into.

The only way Sabbath keepers will be persecuted in America would be as a massive backlash against those perceived as those who brought such destruction to the world. Some people actually are saying just this. And focus on this as the big thing to expect and guard against.

My point of view is that if people stopped supporting this destructive teaching now, before the destruction, no backlash need occur.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by pthena]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 12:52 AM
reply to post by pthena
Sorry but I am not going to listen to John Hagee because I know enough about this guy from more conventional Christian radio shows on the internet. I would not even consider him a Christian.
Fomenko's book is something I heard about on a couple of Jeffrey Grupp's shows and he kind of gave credence to it to back up his idea that we are still in the time of the Pharaohs. What he means is that the system of government we live in is the same as what was going with the pharaohs which really was not so long ago.
I just got into reading it today when I found out you can read it online and I jumped around to find parts that are understandable, to figure out what his theory was of what went on. A lot of his methodology he spells out should be skipped and look for the conclusions, which are small, scattered about little sections in comparison.
I think there is reason to be concerned about proper dating, whether Fomenko is right or not about what he thinks, and I have to reject out of hand any weird prophetic sounding explanation of when the tribulation or something is supposed to happen based on a biblical based formula involving counting years.

[edit on 11-8-2010 by jmdewey60]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 01:27 AM
reply to post by jmdewey60

I have to reject out of hand any weird prophetic sounding explanation of when the tribulation or something is supposed to happen based on a biblical based formula involving counting years.

You must listen to a lot more radio than I do, cause I don't hear anybody making those sorts of long term counting of years. The people I'm talking about just figure it starts after the anti-Christ gets the temple(some guy in their thinking).

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:32 AM
reply to post by pthena

I have read a few on abovetopsecret, I have not heard them on the radio. Someone has to be teaching this sort of thing, somewhere, for people to pick it up and repeat it on a forum. I can't think of any real recent example of it but I kind of mostly stay off the conspiracies in religion side, anymore.
I mentioned earlier on this thread about being SDA and the Jehovah's Witnesses too, have a timeline supposedly going from Cyrus the Great and the return from exile of the Jews from Babylon. This was made up in the early 1800's and I guess presupposes that science got it right as far as fixing all the dates in distant history. Well these dates may not be right, so what good are these forecasting schemes unless it can be unquestioningly proven that the dating is accurate?
As for the NAZI religion, I have heard about an American Army religion, from listening to internet radio, that could be a version of the Dominionist type that seems ideally suited to empire building.

[edit on 11-8-2010 by jmdewey60]

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by jmdewey60

I mentioned earlier on this thread about being SDA and the Jehovah's Witnesses too, have a timeline supposedly going from Cyrus the Great and the return from exile of the Jews from Babylon. This was made up in the early 1800's and I guess presupposes that science got it right as far as fixing all the dates in distant history. Well these dates may not be right, so what good are these forecasting schemes unless it can be unquestioningly proven that the dating is accurate?

Many Christians interpret the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 as indicating the Messiah appearance in the 1st century.
As far as I know, the SDAs are unique in interpreting Dan 8:14 as an event fulfilled in the 1800s.
The Jehovah's Witnesses are unique in interpreting the 7 times of Daniel 4 as a significant future event(can't recall offhand what it was). They do see themselves in several portions of Revelation, with dates set in the early 1900s. They, at least never had any illusions that the Nazi machine(supposedly Christian) was anything but terrible and paid for their lack of obedience, 1,000 executed in 1933, and another 1,000 died in camps between 1933 and 1945. [stand by for shameless plug] Of all the groups I disagree with theologically, they have my deepest respect. I trust they will continue to resist offering undue obedience to the state, no matter what religious trappings the state wears. I wish they would vote in nominal democracies, but I sure wouldn't want to be caught trying to force them to vote.

I need a break right now, but I'll get to the US militaristic Christians when I get back.

[edit on 11-8-2010 by pthena]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:11 PM
Because of the US concept of separation of church and state based upon the First Amendment, the means by which a person is allowed to be a chaplain in the US military is through "Endorsement" by a designated "Endorser" ostensibly representing a particular faith group. In other words, be found acceptable by some official, (not acceptable, no endorsement). If a chaplain steps out of the acceptable parameters set by the endorser, one person, the endorser can cancel the chaplain's chaplaincy by removing the endorsement.

These Endorsers have formed a private organization called the
National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces

As the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces, we go by our acronym, NCMAF. We began in 1982 as a private organization, but our roots go back to 1901 when the decision was made by the War Department (predecessor to the Department of Defense) to require ecclesiastical endorsement for clergypersons who serve as chaplains in the armed forces.

Our members, as endorsers for particular bodies, are the point of contact between the armed forces and over 220 religious denominations and faith groups. Our common goals are to recruit, endorse and provide oversight for clergypersons who desire to serve as chaplains in any one of the branches of our armed forces.

This private organisation of endorsers has a Covenant and The Code of Ethics for Chaplains of the Armed Forces which reads:

The Covenant

Having accepted God’s Call to minister to people who serve in the armed forces of our country, I covenant to serve God and these people with God’s help; to deepen my obedience to the commandments, to love the Lord our God with all my heart, soul, mind and strength, and to love my neighbor as myself. In affirmation of this commitment, I will abide by the Code Of Ethics for chaplains of the United States Armed Forces, and I will faithfully support its purposes and ideals. As further affirmation of my commitment, I covenant with my colleagues in ministry that we will hold one another accountable for fulfillment of all public actions set forth in our Code of Ethics.

This covenant seems carefully crafted to me to be acceptable to the majority of Christians and Jews. I can't imagine any one from any other faith group repeating such words without at least having their fingers crossed.

Suppose for a moment that I was a US military chaplain in a combat zone, and a soldier said,

"I just got these orders to go to a village and kill some guy and leave no witnesses. I have this feeling that doing this would be killing innocent men, women, and children. Chaplain, what should I do?"

"Don't do it."

"But that would be failure to follow orders. I'd get in big trouble, go to the stockade, get Court-martialed."


"But all my buddies will hate and despise me, maybe even kill me."

"That doesn't sound like a very good group of buddies to me."

Any way, such a conversation could go on for a long time. It's a pretty good bet that when the Colonel went to talk to the soldier in the stockade as to "just what the hell kind of unpatriotic hair brained stunt" he was pulling, and the soldier replied, "Well, the chaplain said. . ." the word would get to the endorser pretty darned fast and I would instantly no longer be a chaplain but rather a former chaplain charged with giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

I'm guessing the endorsers are fairly well stacked toward a mentality that following official US orders based on official spinning of data to come up with delusional rational for killing some how trumps personal moral compass.

So yes, I would agree that the US military is ideally suited for US dominion of the world.

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 02:58 PM
See here for my identification of the false prophet and the image that is given life to speak.

posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 11:18 AM
Using Ugarit as a witness, who some think of as being related to Canaan, the Canaanites were considered foreigners and they did not distinguish anyone by the name of Hebrews out of them and never mentioned Yahweh as a known god.
The modern Israelis are a little ticked off because they are unable to prove the existence of an ancient Judea or Israel through archeology.
There seems to have been some sort of fabrication of history and it would be difficult to put a limit to the extent that it went on. It might be compared to England believing in the divinely enthroned Arthur of legend and looking for evidence that he really existed.
I created a little uproar in my Sabbath-School class suggesting that knowing the Bible is a material thing and does no good unless spiritually discerned. Having a pile of names and dates and geographical locations in your head does no good if you don't get past the basic physical nature of what amounts to so many stories.
The way of Christ is important, not where he walked, as if we can go find his steps and touch the stones and have a revelation of truth. Jesus scoffed at such notions.

posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by jmdewey60
When I was in college back in 1975, I decided to write a piece called The Elusive Date of the Exodus as my English 101 assignment to do a research paper. I read all the works I could find in the university library that would touch on the subject. Two time periods were largely focused on; one in the 1400sBCE and the other in the 1200sBCE.

The archeological evidence presented was sketchy to say the least, mostly a couple of Egyptian stele references which in no way confirmed the historical reality of such an event, but rather set a reasonable date for when certain tribes happened to be in a certain region. All the date setting, I realize now, was based on a presupposition that the Exodus occurred as claimed by the book of Exodus. Without that presupposition there really is nothing. For the conclusion of my paper, which I got an A+ on, I left it unresolved, even though I had started out trying to prove the 1400sBCE date.

My conclusion now is that the Zionist claim to a long established ownership of Palestine would be completely ignored by the governments of the world if it were not for the great political clout coming from Christian Fundamentalism. Religion then becomes the force pushing political policy toward the so-called Jewish State of Israel and all those standing in the way of a homogenous Jewish only "Greater Israel".

You have heard it said that what Jesus meant about people forsaking the Law of God and following the words of men was in regards to extra-Biblical material. But I tell you today that he referred to Biblical material also.

There is a Psalm which is becoming quite common for people to say these days:

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. Psalm 122:6

This is a rather insidious saying, because who can not say amen to that? Wouldn't a person be instantly exposed as a hater if no Amen is said? That of course is the purpose for using this verse. I did a google search to see how this verse is being used, and read a few sermons. Based on what I read I will not say Amen to this, but rather in the tradition of Jesus, say:

Tell me: If this is a Psalm of David, and he was going to the house of the LORD, and the temple wasn't built until years after his death, where was he going?

And I hereby give permission to any body to use this question as a response to the above quoted verse.

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in