Sunday, April 29, 2012

The Ancient Greeks: The Tribes of Dan and Judah

Before you proceed further, please check out the newer and improved version of this article at this link:  Thanks.

The question of the tribe of Dan in relation to the Last Days is an interesting one.  Dan is not included with the other tribes of Israel--listed in Revelation 7.  An impression you get from reading scripture is that Dan (for the most part) never truly wanted to be a part of Israel; they wanted to be on their own, as witnessed by Deborah who asked: "...and why did Dan remain in ships?" (Judges 5:17)  At a time when they could have helped the rest of their Israelite brethren against their enemies, they chose not to.  Another indicator that Danites tended to think of themselves as being a people separate from the rest of Israel was their propensity to name places, rivers and towns after their father Dan.  Witness Judges 18:28-29, " And they built a city, and dwelt therein.  And they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father, who was born unto Israel..."

The Mycenaean Greek civilization came into existence around 1600 BC.  They originated in Egypt.  You see, the first Mycenaeans or Achaeans were Israelite colonists (of the tribes of Dan and Judah) who left Egypt in ships and came upon cities of the Greek peninsula (Mycenae, Pylos, Sparta, etc.).  These cities most likely dated back to the Upper Paleolithic era (45,000-10,000 BC as says), as witnessed by Plato in his account of a war between Atlantis and Athens--after which Atlantis was finally swallowed up by the ocean waters around 9600 BC.  The Athenians of that time were proto-Greeks.  These Proto-Greeks occupied Athens in the days of Atlantis. 

Now the Danites who left Egypt before the Exodus (under their leader Danaus) took the majority of the "Greek" cities: Argos, Pylos, Sparta, Mycenae and others.  The Judahites who left Egypt before the Exodus--were under the leadership of two brothers named Chalcol and Darda, whose father was Zarah, who was one of the two sons of Judah--took the city of Athens (in Attica, which is in eastern Greece) and the city of Troy (along northwestern Turkey).  Chalcol took Athens and Darda took Troy.  These two probably originated from the city of Sais in Egypt. 

The Greek cities at the time were occupied by the Prehistoric "Greeks" (who were once part of the Atlantean empire).  The Danite voyagers took over their cities.  They most likely also intermingled with the the natives.  In time these Danites came to call themselves "Danoi" or "Danaan" or "Achaeans," having completely forgotten that they were of Israel.  (We call them Mycenaeans, since Mycenae was the chief city among the Achaean Greeks.)  Apparently the Judahites who took Athens came to identify themselves with their Danoi brethren. 

And the Judahites who took over Troy probably mixed with the original inhabitants of that city--this probably happened about 1477 BC (time of the Exodus?).  You see, Darda (Dardanus) and his people were living on the island of Crete at first--after sailing from Egypt.  In time they too came to forget that they were Israelites.  (They probably arrived there after 1600 BC and then left for Troy contemporaneous with Moses leading Israel out of Egypt--or maybe some time after that (circa 1300 BC).)  It is plausible that these Judahites intermingled with the Cretans or Minoans of mainstream history--with their capital at Knossos--who dominated the Aegean Sea area.  The early Minoans were an advanced civilization (with household plumbing to rival our day).  Around 1700 BC they suffered an earthquake, which drastically affected their society.  It was sometime in the early 1400s that Dardanus and the people with him came upon the Minoans and helped them to become the dominant power in the eastern Mediterranean: Crete--from this time onward until the tsunami that hit the island (some time between 1477 BC to 1453 BC?)--entered the era in which it flourished the most.  The brethren of the Judahites on Crete--the early Mycenaean (Danaan) Greeks--were subservient to their fellow Israelites on Crete: as witnessed by the story of Theseus and the Minotaur.  The "Minoan" kingdom came to an end abruptly, resulting from the major volcanic explosion on Mount Thera around the date(s) given above (this info courtesy of that gave rise to a gigantic tidal wave. These Minoans (children of the Judahites who settled there under Dardanus) then sailed for Troy.  What could have made possible the Judahite conquest of Troy was: this same giant tsunami also severely devastated this city.  Now, this area of Northwest Turkey has been prone to earthquakes, so it may have been an earthquake that destroyed the Sixth Settlement of Troy.  According to Dr. C. Brian Rose of the University of Pennsylvania, Troy suffered a major earthquake about 1300 BC.  This disaster levelled the upper portions of the defensive wall (around the most important buildings) of the excavated level known as the Sixth Settlement (Troy VI).  (This was the Troy of Paris, also known by his political name, Alexandros--for he, being in his fifties (most likely), was the defacto ruler of Troy--since his father, Priam, was advanced in age, no longer having the stamina to preside over the affairs of state.)  Well, there is doubt as to an earthquake being responsible for the collapse of Troy VI.  And just as important, there is doubt as to the date of this destruction (of Troy VI): that it was not circa 1300 BC, but rather much later.  Now, if Troy VI was ruined by an earthquake, then that would leave the later level known as Troy VIIa as the candidate for the Troy of Homer's Iliad--for it too experienced a fiery end.  But now we have a discrepancy: Troy VIIa corresponds to the decline of the Achaean cities: the Mycenaeans of this time could not have carried out a military operation of such magnitude, seeing as they were in such decline.  So, Troy VI has no animal and human remains, which usually accompany an  earthquake.  The Sixth Settlement then must be the Troy of the Trojan War.  As for the chronology, it is becoming more obvious--with each passing day--that the events of the epoch in question have been pushed back in time, by a matter of 300 or more years.  What happened was that the dynasties of pharaonic Egypt were padded, so to speak: a given dynasty was made to last longer than it actually did, and all of this served to make every event appear to have occurred earlier on the timeline than it actually did.  You see, everything else was pegged by historians to the (erroneous) dating of the Egyptian dynasties.  This explanation for the mistake will have to suffice, seeing as I'm too lazy to elaborate any further on it.  The upshot--as far as the Trojan War is concerned--is that, more accurately, it was fought around 800 BC; this siege did not occur in 1184 BC, as the scholar Eratosthenes (of the latter half of the third century) said.  Furthermore, this posterior dating of the Trojan War explains how Homer could be so vivid in his portrayal of Troy and its surroundings (the land of Wilusa, as the Hittites called it).  The poet was a contemporary of Achilles, Agamemnon, Hector, Paris (Alexandros), Helen et al.  At most he lived a few decades after the events. 

The levels of settlement on Hissarlik Hill go back to around 3000 BC.   According to Manfred Korfmann's book, "Troy and the Trojan it was "Greek colonists" who settled Troy VI (whose end we now date to about 800 BC). If  this is true, in the sense that the Achaeans and the Trojans were brethren.  The ten-year long Trojan War commenced about 800 BC, a few hundred years later.  Though the Mycenaeans won this conflict with the Trojans (by way of stealth: Odysseus' brilliant idea for the Trojan horse), they paid a heavy price for their triumph.  All the great Mycenaean leaders had been gone from their Greek homeland for ten years by the time Troy finally fell.  A theory says that Mycenaean society collapsed due to the great stress placed upon it because it had to support a siege of a major city that was on the other side of the Aegean Sea.  After all, legend has it that the Achaeans launched a thousand ships to recover Helen for Menelaus King of Sparta: the Achaean army that landed along the shore of Troy numbered around 500,000 men, according to speculative fiction author Dan Simmons--and were not 50,000 warriors as we were taught in school.  This was no minor war: it would have massive consequences for the centuries of European history to come: for one thing the Romans were descended from Trojan refugees making their home along the banks of the Tiber River on the western side of Italy and establishing a settlement--along with some of the local people of Latium--that would later become known as the city of Rome.  Another group of Trojan refugees settled along the northern shore of the Black Sea.  They founded a city called "Asgard" (the City of Iron).  They were the people of iron: the "Aesir" and from which the Sea of Azov gets its name (the Sea of Iron).  In the 2nd century AD, in advance of the approaching Roman army (their brethren of Trojan descent), the Aesir--under their leader Odin--immigrated to Scandinavia.  These Aesir (Trojans) founded Sweden, to simply put it.  And from Sweden came the Varangians who settled among the Slavs to the east (in the 9th century AD)--forming the early Russian nation, around the city of Novgorod. 

Getting back to the Trojan War, the weary Danaan army returned to their homes, but they would soon find that peace was not to be their reward for their hard-won victory.  (Something that should be noted is that this was a society whose top men had an attitude of machismo.  These great "heroes" felt that they had to prove themselves, and they believed that they could achieve immortality through having their names persist--by way of martial accomplishments--through the centuries: Achilles, Hector, Odysseus and others.)

So not long after the occurences narrated by Homer in the Iliad and the Odyssey the Mycenaean cities underwent a major upheaval.  All the Mycenaean citadels were destroyed (by slaves revolting? along with the Dorians swooping in?).  It's not totally clear what happened.  Well, all of them were destroyed except for Athens.  Apparently the Achaeans living in the Peloponnesus fled into Attica (to Athens) for refuge--to escape the onslaught of the Dorian invaders.  (Centuries later, during the Classical era of the Greeks, the Athenians would claim that of all the Greeks they were the only ones left who were of pure Achaean stock.) 

Also at this time we have the rise of the Sea Peoples (Whenever there were catastrophic deluges, earthquakes, and comet strikes (the Phaethon Event of 3,102 BC) you got the after-effect phenomenon of the movement of "Sea Peoples."  Social/political chaos throughout the centuries in the Mediterranean also led to major displacements of peoples, as was the case this time: shortly after the Trojan War.).  The Sea Peoples who came into being after the Trojan War were predominantly Israelites.  It was they who attacked and crushed the Hittite empire in central Asia Minor.  My thinking is that the Mycenaeans or Achaeans (including veterans of the Trojan War?) were the greatest constituent of the Sea Peoples: 1) Mycenaeans fleeing the collapse of their cities (citadels) (and thus for a while the Greek peninsula was sparsely inhabited), 2) possibly Trojans and their allies likewise leaving behind their collapsed cities, 3) Danites living in the north of Israel (in the Bashan area) who decided to take to the sea and maybe other peoples looking for new coastal areas to plunder.  (Egypt at this time became an irresistable target for these piratical Sea Peoples.  The Egyptians were successful at repulsing this attempted invasion.)  These Sea Peoples claimed that their homeland was called "Ahhiyawa"--meaning Achaea (Greece) most likely.  Note how the "yawa" in "Ahhiyawa" resembles the Tetragrammaton: YHWH, which becomes Yahweh.  It could be that the name "Achaea" was pointing to the God of Israel: YHWH may mean "being" in that the Creator is the true being, for the Godhead is the only one who must exist--has to be. 

And what may have also begun at this time was the invasion of the Dorians--as touched on above--who came into Greece from the north.  Also around this time a group of Trojans--led by Helenus, son Priam (a form of "Ephraim"), elderly king of Troy--fled the destruction of their beloved city on ships and came upon the coast of Epirus (northwest of Greece).  They mingled with the natives (Illyrians).  And it is from Helenus that Greece got the name "Hellas," and the Greeks started to call themselves the Hellenes: starting in northeast Hellas, known as Thessaly.  (It was these Trojans or Dardanians, in combination with other Trojan refugees along the western shore of the Black Sea, who would move westward into Europe to become the federation of tribes known as the Franks.  But that is for another post perhaps.)  Going back to the Dorians--where did they come from?  Scripture gives the answer.

Over in Canaan--from around 1413 BC to about 1050 BC--was the time of the Judges.  We are told of Dan's predicament in Judges 1:34, "And the Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountain: for they would not suffer them to come down to the valley."  Further on in Judges 19:47, "And the coast of the children of Dan went out too little for them: therefore the children of Dan went up to fight against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelt therein, and called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father."  Judges 18 tell us this about Dan in the land of Israel: "27And they took the things which Micah had made, and the priest which he had, and came unto Laish, unto a people that were at quiet and secure: and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and burnt the city with fire. 28And there was no deliverer, because it was far from Zidon, and they had no business with any man; and it was in the valley that lieth by Bethrehob. And they built a city, and dwelt therein. 29And they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father, who was born unto Israel: howbeit the name of the city was Laish at the first. 30And the children of Dan set up the graven image: and Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land."  (What Micah had made were idols: the Danites showed quite a willingness to embrace paganism.)  Previously in Deuteronomy 33:22 we have Moses saying: " And of Dan he said, Dan is a lion's whelp: he shall leap from Bashan."  "Leshem" appears to be the same as "Laish."  Part of the Danites living in the Bashan area left for Greece, where their Danite brethren the Mycenaean Greeks were living.

These Danites that left Bashan most likely were the Dorians that are spoken of as moving into the Greek peninsula from the north, in the wake of the decline of the Mycenaean cities.  (Apparently the name "Dorian" comes from an area north of the collapsed Mycenaean empire called "Doris": which means "woodland." (Thanks to Wikipedia.)  More likely "Dorian" is related to the Gaelic (The Irish are of Greek origin.) word "doran," which means "exile" or "wanderer."  Danites from the upper Levant (Bashan) had migrated to this mountainous area full of trees.  They may have mixed with the locals, thus becoming the "Dorians."  And they may have come into the Mycenaean lands both by land and by sea--and may very well have had been closely involved with the Sea Peoples.  These Dorians took over the city of Sparta and most of the Peloponnesus (the southern part of Greece connected to the north by the isthmus of Corinth.  (It was Dorian Sparta that would later send out about 300 Spartans (aided by a few thousand auxiliary troops from some other cities) to withstand Xerxes' Persian army at the narrow pass called Thermopylae in 480 BC.) )

As for the Mycenaeans (who became the Sea Peoples) and their fellow pirates, what became of them?  Some of these Mycenaeans probably settled along the southern coast of Canaan and changed their name to the "Philistines."  Other Mycenaean raiders probably settled along the western shores of the Black Sea--later taking the name of the "Vanir" because they hooked up with a group of Gauls calling themselves the "Veneti" ( the same Vanir who, along with the Aesir (the Trojan refugees who settled along the northern shores of the Black Sea), immigrated to northern Europe in the centuries to come.  These Vanir would become the Daner of Denmark: again the name of "Dan" morphing through "Danaan" and into "Denmark."  And that's where the Danube River got its name: The Vanir (Danaans/Achaeans) named it after their father, Dan, when they traveled up that river to reach Northern Europe.

Another branch of the Dorians became the northern Greeks of Macedonia.  And Alexander became king of Macedon in 336 BC. 


Monday, April 23, 2012

The Reformation, Dan, and the Sons of Cain

Was John Calvin a Christian?  I can only judge him by his actions and his words.  Only God knows what was in his heart.  Judging by his words/actions, I have concluded that Calvin was not a Christian.  I know of
 the five points of Calvinism: 1) total depravity of man, 2) irresistable grace, 3) once saved always saved, 4) predestination of the elect?, and 5) I don't know (maybe this: free will=God causes people to do both good and evil).  Calvinists like to emphasize how man does not have free will.  God wills all things that happen, whether good or evil.  Men do good because God made them do it; likewise men do evil because God forced them to do it.  Is there a parallel between the five points of Calvinism and the "five I wills" of Lucifer in Isaiah 14?: "13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."  Five times Lucifer says, "I will..."  And Calvin's philosophy can be summed up in five points, all of which are hinged on God's will manifesting itself on earth through the genocides of the twentieth century (from the Turkish massacre of about 1,500,000 Armenians (1915-1918) to the most likely over twenty million who died during the 1920s and 1930s in the Soviet Union)--as well as God's will showing up as the brave Christian missionaries who went into Eastern Europe and Communist China to share the Gospel with oppressed people.  In the above passage of Isaiah we are shown the Light Bearer's (who was a Morning Star and who ruled Tiamat) motive: to exert his will above the will of the Creator.  Could it be that John Calvin--whether a spiritual and/or literal son of Cain--was reflecting in a subversive way the the five point objectives of the Serpent of Old?  Is God also the author of wickedness?  (This is a rhetorical question.)  Calvinism is another form of dualism, which says that good and evil are opposites and also equal to each other.  Calvin tweaked this Luciferian idea to portray the True God or YHWH as working both good and evil (wickedness) on the earth.  This is a lie, for God's ways are above our ways, and his thoughts are above our thoughts.  We are the created; God the Father and his Holy One--the Son of God--are the creators. 

This ties in with the doctrine of "original sin," which truly is not in the King James Bible.  We are not by nature sinful.  However, we are not perfect and tend to commit sinful acts.  Adam and Eve were given knowledge of both good and evil.  Man was enlightened by Lucifer in the Garden; this enlightenment was antithetical to the righteousness of the Creator.  To say that Adamic man acquired a sin nature is to make God culpable for the state that we're in.  For Yaweh Elohim warned Adam that he would die if he ate (allegorically) from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (dualism).  He never said that a foreign element--sin---would permeate their "man" nature, thereby being passed down to their offspring, thus in effect being like a curse on their descendants for millenia to come.  Furthermore if the Lord God knew that their (Adam and Eve's) nature could potentially become sin nature, then he should have acted to make sure that the serpent did not have access to them.  But since Calvinists believe that the True God causes both good and evil--he has to because that is in essence his divine nature because nothing happens without his involvement--we have righteousness that is twisted, warped.  And sin nature is theologically justified (unjustly), and God is administering justice when he punishes those evildoers whom he has determined in the beginning to become "the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction." (Romans 9:22)  Then it follows that the Judahites would have been right when Ezekiel 33:17 says of them in their conclusion about God's judgment: "Yet the children of thy people say, The way of the Lord is not equal..."  What it comes down to is that Adam and Eve were given a choice to make: to figuratively eat from the tree of life or from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The bankers (sons of Cain/Edomites) were planning on taking over England back in the 1500s.  This was part of their father's (Lucifer) plan to bring about the Antichrist: Satan in the flesh ruling over a revived Atlantis.  John Calvin's version of Christianity was just the right Trojan horse by which the Kenites could infiltrate the British Isles--to then establish a world-wide banking empire that would continue unhindered to today: Babylon (particularly the economic aspect thereof).

And Calvin was one of them: a "Crypto-Jew" (Jews forced to publicly convert to the Catholic faith).  His was given the task of fracturing or dividing the body of Christ--that the enemies of the church could render it of none or very little effect in the world.  The Khazar Jewish cabal had successfully taken over the Vatican.  They set about to force a split between Northern and Southern Europe.  So they funded the Reformation movement: it started to pick up steam in the 1500s.  The man that they chose was Martin Luther, the monk--he was probably an unwitting pawn, though he demonstrated gnostic tendencies: witness his crest, a black cross inside a heart shape: clearly an occult symbol.  The other pawn of significance they chose was of course Calvin.  Satan knows that the divide and conquer strategy is the best one, for Jesus says in Mark 3:26 this: "And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end."  And Satan has his agents within the church today, whose job it is to keep Christians feuding with one another--these wolves pretend to take sides among the factions within the body of Christ, holding positions of leadership.  These false/deceived leaders are working deceit and/or manipulation in one way or another.  Some of the more subtle pastors/teachers/leaders today are Hank Hanagraaff of the Christian Research Institute, Kirk Cameron, Billy Graham and his son Franklin Graham, Chuck Smith, John McArthur, Paul Washer, Chuck Missler, among others (Some just seem plain deceived, like Ronald Dart of the "Born to Win" program.).  The more obvious ones (seemingly) are John Hagee, Kenneth Copeland, Joyce Meyer, T. D. Jakes, Joseph Prince, TBN (the Crouch family, for the most part), Doug Batchelor and pretty much all of the leaders of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, all the mega-church pastors, Benny Hinn, Paula White, Sid Roth and others.        

Within decades of the launch of the Reformation by John Calvin and Martin Luther, the Thirty Years War was fought (1618-1648).  It was a conflict between Catholic Southern Europe and Protestant Northern Europe.  Many (Israelite) Europeans were slaughtered.  The Reformation was one massive psy-op (psychological operation).

The Vatican was selling indulgences (forgiveness of sins).  The sons of Esau would divide and conquer.  They set up the controlled opposition to the Catholic Church: the Reformation.  They would get the peoples of Europe to choose sides; thus Catholics fighting Protestants that would carry on for centuries.  Jan Hus had stood up to the corruption of the Catholic Church before Luther and Calvin came on the scene.  He was the real thing; and for it he was burned at the stake on July 6, 1415.  The numerology of this date is interesting.  First we have the 6th day of the 7th month: 7+6=13.  Thirteen is a symbolic number for the Luciferians, and Jesus together with his twelve disciples comes to thirteen.  The year 1415 is 1+4+1+5=11: eleven is another Satanic number: 11+13=24.  Twenty four may signify the pure, living (active) blood of Jesus Christ that was found on the Mercy Seat on the Ark of the Covenant by Ron Wyatt (Illuminati servant) in the 1970s.  Wyatt said that this blood was found to have 23 chromosomes from the mother--Mary when she was still a virgin--and one chromosome from the father--being God and not a man.  Also 24 can be seen as 2+4=6.  The hexagram is a six-pointed star: a powerful occult symbol.  And 24 can be seen as 42, as in "the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." (Revelation 11:2) 

So what we have is that the sons of Esau succeeded on the European mainland.  And by way of Calvin, the bankers were able to make Christian Europe accept usurious banking.  Calvinists paved the way for the Edomites to take over Britain and make London the capital of their banking empire.  Through money they have come to control the world today.  As I've said before England is the land that has a special place in the hearts of the Khazar bankers.  For that is where they will bring about the fruition of their millenia-old work: the incarnation of their father the Devil.

It is said that the tribe of Dan will give rise to the Antichrist.  Israel (Jacob) prophesied of his son Dan in Genesis 49: "16Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel.
17Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward."  Notice the serpent symbology here.  Some say that God will use Dan to judge the Israel nations in the last days.  In Revelation 7 where we have the sealing of all the tribes of Israel--except for Dan.  It could be that the descendants of Dan will be in the employ of the "son of perdition" when he takes over Babylon (NWO)--after the US falls.



Saturday, April 21, 2012

The Kenites, the Sons of God, and Perversions Against God's Temple

Some believe that the serpent's seed (Genesis 3-4) is related to the sons of God and their nephilim offspring in Genesis 6.  I don't think a connection exists.  As far as I can see scripture does not say or imply that the sons of Cain were the sons of God in Genesis 6.  Jude verse 6 sheds light on whom these sons of God were: "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.  Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."  So it's as I said the previous post: the sons of Cain were living in an area far enough away from the civilization Noah was part of (somewhere in the Middle East--could've been the land that is now under the waters of the Persian Gulf, for it may be that the post-flood cities of Mesopotamia were most likely the re-establishment of earlier, submerged cities).  Neither can we equate the sons of God with the line of Seth: there's just no indication in the Bible that this is so.

The sons of God were the fallen angels, most likely.  They were/are our "genetic cousins."  They were not related to the Devil and his rebel angels.  The serpent's seed is mentioned first in Gen. 3:15, where it is implied that they would persist as a lineage; they wouldn't be wiped out--as the "giants" (the children of the sons of God) were by Noah's flood.  Of course the nephilim were brought about again after the flood--by other fallen angels.  Now Satan may not have planned for the sons of God to contaminate the genetic pool of man (living in the Persian Gulf in Noah's day), but you can be sure that the enemy found it to his advantage--for Noah's line (through whom the Messiah would come) became threatened with DNA contamination by the half man/half angelic creatures that were running rampant in the land.  Not to mention the overall corruption among all the people in that region (except for Noah).

A theme that runs through scripture is this: it has been God's will that the seed of Cain (son of the serpent) be preserved throughout time--from Cain himself to his present-day descendants who run the world today--and who (working with the corrupt House of Windsor) will bring forth the long-awaited "son of perdition" soon.  In Genesis 4, reading from the middle of verse 12 we have: " a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. 13And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear. 14Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. 15And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him."  Why would God want and made sure that Cain was not killed by anybody he ran into?

The Kenites (This name means they were sons of Cain) came into the land some time after the flood resided.  In Gen. 15:18-19 God promises to give Canaan to Abram (later Abraham): "In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
19The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, 20And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, 21And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites."  Note that the Kenites are listed first.  And later the Kenites mingled with the Amalekites, who were descended from Esau: " And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.  And Saul came to a city of Amalek, and laid wait in the valley.  And Saul said unto the Kenites, Go, depart, get you down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them: for ye shewed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites." (1 Samuel 15:5-6)

Making our way to the present we find (If we can wake up from the spell cast by TV sets) that the sons of Cain have been committing abominations inside the Temple of God: our bodies.  Going back to the previous book of Judges, we have the story of a Levite and his concubine who "passed on and went their way; and the sun went down upon them when they were by Gibeah, which belongeth to Benjamin.  And they turned aside thither, to go in and to lodge in Gibeah." (Judges 19:14-15)  Eventually these two found lodging in the home of an elderly man.  But "as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him." (Judges 19:22)  It was for good reasons that God commanded Israel to slay all the Canaanites when they went in to take the land: the nephilim being one reason and wicked practices--such as sacrificing children to the god Molech--the other.  The Israelites, however, allowed some of the Canaanites to live.  Then you wonder where the Benjaminites of Gibeah learned a vile practice as sodomizing strangers.  Further on in this account it says that these sexually corrupt men would not let up in their demand, so the Levite took his concubine and pushed her out the front door--that these "sons of Belial" could have their way with her all night long.  By morning--after these local sodomites had retreated--the concubine's lord opened the doors to find her dead, "her hands were upon the threshold."

(As an aside I like superhero comic books, though I don't read them much now that we are entering into very dangerous days.  Among comic book readers you have those who despise superhero comics and accuse consumers of such comics of harboring juvenile power fantasies--of also having homo-erotic tendencies.  Speaking for myself, I have enjoyed superhero adventures because I find the idea of men and women going around dressed in bright, form-fitting costumes (often with masks to protect their true identities) to be intriguing.

And as an artist/cartoonist myself, I like to draw the man/woman form.  Though I haven't been doing much of that either these days.  I don't have a hang-up with the potential eroticism of woman's body or man's body--as far as I can tell.  I'm sure that most people who like to read superhero comics are not fixated on homo-eroticism. 

As another aside, you have Christian pastors and teachers who--when it comes to sexuality--teach other Christians that masturbation is a sin.  That is definitely not true: nowhere in scripture does it say that masturbating is something that is displeasing to God.  Pornography, on the other hand, can be and often is dangerous/unhealthy.  I've looked at my share of Penthouse and Playboy magazines.  I've seen some porn movies and have (recently given into sexual lust and thus) looked at pornography on the internet--and have seen pornographic comics.  Fortunately for me, I've never become addicted to porn; there were times when it was hard to resist coming under its control.  Anyway, masturbating is not perverted--not dirty.)

What is perverted is all the unnatural practices being carried out today--particularly among the members of the Illuminati.  Paul says in Romans 1:26-27, "... for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

And we have talk of cannibalism becoming more frequent when the Antichrist comes on the scene.  Some of the nephilim in ancient times ate the flesh of men and women.  That's why they were killed off for the most part.  I've heard that Enoch--the one who was Cain's son--was a vampire.  Today some say that Jesus was being literal when he said in John 6:51, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever..."  His audience, "The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" (verse 52)  Continuing on we have: "53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 57As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. 58This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever." (John 6)

The island of Britain is to be turned into the new Atlantis, where the horrendous things that were practiced by the Atlanteans of yore will be revived--things that I touched on in this post and also sorcery, witchcraft, ritual magic, etc.  The British Isles will become a nightmare kingdom, and it will spread to the rest of the world.  Many servants of Jesus Christ are still asleep and need to wake up to what is about to come upon the earth.    

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Israel and the Antichrist

Before I discuss the subject for this post I would like to discuss how the sons of Cain survived Noah's flood.  It's quite simple: Noah's flood was a regional flood; it was a super-flood but it was not worldwide: "And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.  Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered." (Genesis 7:19)  The word "earth" here means land; not all the landmass of the entire earth.  For we have in Daniel 4:1 this: "Nebuchadnezzar the king, unto all people, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth."  Clearly Nebuchadnezzar did not rule over the entire planet; "all the earth" in that verse must mean all the land of his dominion--a hyperbolic way of speaking of the greatness of the 2nd Babylonian empire (the 1st one being under Nimrod, circa 4000 BC).  

Now the sons of Cain were not living in the area that the people--among whom Noah dwelt--occupied.  (I like to imagine Noah building the Ark in some giant hangar within the city he lived in, thereby concealing his special project from any onlookers.)  The date of this flood may have been around 5100 BC.  (It is believed that planet Nibiru came into our solar system around 1500 BC, which was the time of the Exodus of Israel from Egypt.  Nibiru's orbit brings it into our vicinity every 3,600 years, so you just do the math.)

This society that Noah was living in the midst of had become very wicked.  Fallen angels had come in and--having taken for themselves wives from among the daughters of men--produced the nephilim or giants.  These were not necessarily literal giants.  Most of them were normal sized (average height about 5'8'') but they became the heroes of legend: "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." (Genesis 6:4)

Meanwhile the sons of Cain were off in the east, having formed their own separate society: "And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden." (Gen. 4:16).  It appears that the Cainites were keeping themselves apprised of Seth--the son Adam and Eve had after Abel was murdered by Cain--and his descendants.  Enoch (of the line of Adam) was the seventh generation from the latter.  Enoch had a son named Methuselah.  And Methuselah had a son named Lamech (All this in Genesis 5).  Now Gen. 4:18 says this about the other Enoch (son of Cain): "And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech."  The similarity between the names of some of these sons of Cain to the names of some of the sons of Seth: Enoch, Methuselah and Lamech.

So, onto the subject of this post: Israel and how she relates to the soon-coming Antichrist.  We are seeing socio-economic turmoil ramping up in the West--among the nations of Scattered Israel.  Much of Europe, the US, Britain and the British Commonwealth of nations are Israel today--including the Sephardic Jews (the true descendants of the remnant of Judah that was not taken captive by the Assyrians) in the State of Israel and other parts of the world.  It is the money-worshiping, justice-despising, blind and mad Western nations that are the whore of Babylon.  And the US--being the place for the greatest regathering of Israel (alluded to in Revelation 12 as the woman fleeing into the wilderness--is the heart of the whore today.

And the Federal Reserve is the most visible--to those who have eyes to see it--aspect of that heart of the whore: the American people being the life blood that keeps her going.  The nations of the world have partaken of the whore's benefits.  Witness what Ezekiel 16 says: "30How weak is thine heart, saith the Lord GOD, seeing thou doest all these things, the work of an imperious whorish woman; 31In that thou buildest thine eminent place in the head of every way, and makest thine high place in every street; and hast not been as an harlot, in that thou scornest hire; 32But as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband! 33They give gifts to all whores: but thou givest thy gifts to all thy lovers, and hirest them, that they may come unto thee on every side for thy whoredom. 34And the contrary is in thee from other women in thy whoredoms, whereas none followeth thee to commit whoredoms: and in that thou givest a reward, and no reward is given unto thee, therefore thou art contrary."  The Federal Reserve has given "gifts" to the US politicians.  On a more macro level the Israelite nations have--by way of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank--given "gifts" to the other nations.  Then it is demanded that the citizens of these nations slave away to pay back the loans.  Not that Americans and Britons aren't having to slave away to pay back the money borrowed from the private banks (owned by the Edomites: Cainites). 

Another way of seeing the dynamics of the whore of Babylon is how Americans (who are of Israelite extractrion and including strangers--such as myself--who've joined themselves to Israel: "For the LORD will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land: and the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob." (Isaiah 14:1)) have made themselves beholden to money--thereby the Federal Reserve Notes (notes of debt) have become filthy lucre.  Money has taken the place only the most High should have, in the US and in the world; and so judgment must come--by way of the ten kings that serve the beast.

As for the Antichrist, this is the world he will inherit (for a short time), which has been set up for him (over millenia) by the sons of Cain (the children of Esau).  Satan has, through commerce, corrupted the world before: "By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned..." (Ezekiel 28:16)  And further on in verse 18 it says, "Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick..."  Money is the medium by which commerce is carried out.  It's gotten to the point where we have lost touch with what money is supposed to be: since it is the easiest and most obvious standard by which to measure wealth, we have (over time) come to equate money with wealth.  Which led to us seeing money as the source of our sustenance--thus taking the place of the true God.  We have committed iniquity.

We know that the Antichrist is supposed to be the counterfeit Jesus Christ.  Jesus, when he was here on earth--the Word becoming flesh (John 1)--God coming down to dwell among men, became sin for us; so that we would not have to be punished for our sin (rejecting the truth, which leads to other lesser sins).  When Israel was in the wilderness Moses was told by God to do something strange: "And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived." (Numbers 21:9)  Why would God choose to have people--who had been bitten by poisonous snakes--healed through them looking on brass serpent?: serpents being symbolic of evil, of wickedness, of sin.  That brass serpent was foreshadowing what Jesus would do later when he was raised on a stake: he took onto himself the sins of the world.  This dynamic interrelationship (reciprocal relation) goes all the way back to Genesis 3:15, where God said he would "put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed."  The seed of the serpent versus the Messiah (the woman's seed).  And if we accept that the seraphim are serpentine in nature, we have in Isaiah 6:6-7 another serpent/sin dynamic: "Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged."  (Not all of the seraphim are evil.)  The Antichrist is--from what I can see in scripture--the physical copy of Jesus (as I've touched on in my series about Barack Obama and the Antichrist).  This being--in their eyes--the supreme achievement of the sons of the serpent. 


Friday, April 13, 2012

Barack Obama and the Antichrist in 2012 7

I would like to elaborate further on what the first part of verse Daniel 11:37 says, "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers..."  Now Jesus was born from Mary when she was a virgin.  Mary was a physical descendant of King David.  And David was a worshiper of the true God.  The man who (is alive right now) will become the Antichrist is a clone (counterfeit) of Jesus; therefore this clone will also be of the House of David.  (Even if this man is not truly a clone made from DNA drawn from Jesus' blood, he would still be of the House of David: Queen Elizabeth is of the lineage of King David.  It is said by some that she and the entire royal family are reptilians but that is debatable.) 

New Agers talk about reptilian creatures called "Dracos."  There was a time when these Dracos or Draconians comprised the interplanetary civilization that existed in this solar system.  I'm not sure how they were related to the dinosaurs.  It could be that the dinosaurs were a smaller group within the group of angels (being 1/3 of all the angels) called "seraphim."  (Over at it says that the Dracos and the dinosaurs were actually two factions that were hostile to each other: if memory serves.)  Anyway the other name that I will use for the Dracos is this word "seraphim," which means "serpent."  This word also means "burning ones."  I agree with Zen Garcia that the 1/3 of the angels who rebelled at the beginning were serpentine angelic creatures known as the Serpahim.  These seraphim were led by Lucifer, and their home planet was called "Tiamat" or (in scripture) "Rahab"--which now is the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.  This rebellion--concerning where it is spoken of in Genesis--occurred between verses 1 and 2 of Gen. 1: the gap theory, which is alluded to by other passages in scripture. 

Note that it was a serpent that seduced Eve in the garden in Eden.  This serpent was a member of the "divine council," according to Michael Heiser.  Serpent symbolism is found all over the world: a testament to something deap-seated within the memory of mankind.  So long ago Lucifer came to think that he could be as God.  He then set about to wage war with all those on Rahab who would not worship him: "That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?" (Isaiah 14:17)  Then the Lord of Hosts smashed (literally) Lucifer's rebellion.  Rahab was blown into pieces, and a large chunk of it flew off and settled into a new orbit, becoming the earth.  Lucifer and his fellow rebel seraphim were thrown down to the earth.  Interestingly Isaiah 14:29 says, "...for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent."

It appears that Satan is a different creature from Lucifer: a different personality.  Ezekiel 28 speaks of the power behind the ruler of Tyre: "12Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
13Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
14Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire."  We see here that Satan is a cherub--an entirely different kind of angel than a seraph.  Many Christians say that Lucifer and Satan are one and the same.  I tend towards the idea that that these two names refer to two completely separate entities.  I could be wrong; nonetheless I'll continue to hold this view of the Devil until somebody shows me otherwise.  It could be that Satan was the leader of the 2nd rebellion--ocurring millions of years after the 1st one (and millions of years before our time)--which rebels this time were of the class of creatures called cherubim.  The name "Satan" means "adversary."  I wonder if he had a different name before he rebelled: "Apollo" perhaps?   

(We have a symbolic dragon in Revelation 12: "3And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. 4And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth..."  This passage may be referring to the 1st rebellion under Lucifer/Leviathan.  Further on in Rev.12 we have this: "7And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."  The battle depicted here is most likely happening now or about to happen.  Right after the Devil ("that old serpent" and Satan) and his angels are thrown down to the earth, we are told what will happen next in Rev. 9: "1And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. 2And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit. 3And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power. 4And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads. 5And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months..."  The Devil comes crashing to the earth, then is given a key that he uses to unleash the "locusts" (Nephilim/so-called "Pleiadians") from the abyss (inner earth).  And as I've already said in another post, the five months alluded to in Rev. 9 most likely will begin near the end of July of this year.

Atlantis was a civilization that came into existence after the solar system-wide civilization of the seraphim was obliterated by God.  (It could be that Mu or Lemuria (in the South Pacific) was a remnant of this first seraphim-led civilization (on this planet).)  Satan was the founder of Atlantis and possibly its first king.  He was known by another name: Poseidon.  And that's how the cities of Tyre and Zidon (this name being derived from "Poseidon")--which were Phoenicia--were connected to Atlantis.  When the island of Atlantis went below the ocean waves for good around 9,600 BC, some survivors fled to the shores of Canaan; thus they entered into biblical history.  (The Atlantean empire experienced several judgments throughout its existence--perhaps spanning hundreds of thousands of years--and one of those judgments happened around 50,000 BC--when much of the island was swallowed up by the ocean, leaving a smaller Atlantean homeland.  It just happens that a super-volcano exploded on the Italian peninsula around 50,000 BC.))

It is said by some that the Dracos (seraphim) feel that the earth belongs to them.  They were here first, so we (mankind) are the usurpers who must be crushed.  It is said that the highest levels of the Illuminati is made up of reptilians.  I'm becoming more and more convinced that the sons of Cain are the reptilian/man hybrids that many people are speaking of when they discuss the grand conspiracies.

It is the serpent's seed (Illuminati) that have been laboring immensely to bring the "son of perdition" into this world to be in the place of Christ Jesus (Genesis 3:15).  As I've said before, Lucifer wants to counterfeit what God has already done.  I'm sure that he would want his counterfeit Jesus to be born of a virgin woman, just as Jesus was born to Mary when she was a virgin.  And the name that the Devil would give to the counterfeit Mary would be meaningful--for him and his children (the sons of Cain).  It may very well be that the name he gave to the girl whom he chose to be his Mary was "Diana."  The goddess goes by many names and goes back to Satan.  Beginning at Jeremiah 44:15 we have an account of the ancient Judahite women worshiping the "queen of heaven."  And in Acts 19:34 we have: "But when they knew that he was a Jew, all with one voice about the space of two hours cried out, Great is Diana of the Ephesians." 

The theory goes like this: Princess Diana, being a virgin, was artificially inseminated with an embryo that was made from DNA extracted from the blood of Jesus--that was found on the Ark of the Covenant.  This embryo became the baby that was removed from her womb--by Caesarian section--on the Summer Solstice (June 21) in 1982.  The baby was given the name "William."  And William is about to turn thirty this upcoming Summer Solstice.      

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Barack Obama and the Antichrist in 2012 6

     Some Christians believe that verse 21 of Daniel 11 is when this passage switches to the future (our near future) to speak of the Antichrist.  This verse is actually refering to Antiochus IV (Epiphanes).  In the previous verse: "20Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle."  This speaks of Seleucus IV Philopater; Barack Obama is not being referred to here--he's not even the double-fulfillment of this verse. 

For it was this Seleucus, having inherited a weakened Seleucid kingdom (Syria) from his father Antiochus III (the Great), who set about to strengthen his realm.  He became king in 187 BC, one year after the peace of 188--the terms of which were devastating for the Seleucid kingdom: Antiochus III, upon his defeat by the Romans (following his bid to dominate Asia Minor), agreed to pay an indemnity of 15,000 talents of gold to the victor: the largest penalty the Roman republic had ever leveled against a defeated foe.

Seleucus IV thus raised taxes in an effort to restore financial soundness to the kingdom.  He was assassinated in 175 BC by a court official named Heliodorus, who had been sent out by the former to raise money in Judea.

Seleucus' younger brother, Mithradates, ascended the Seleucid throne.  Once king, he took on the name of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.  He is the one spoken of in Daniel 11:21, "And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries."  Antiochus had been a hostage in Rome, and he had learned to present a facade of pleasantness.  So when he moved to consolidate power in the Seleucid kingdom--which involved the execution of Heliodorus--he was agreeable with people, and by this he won the kingdom to himself.

Verse 22 says: "And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant."  This "prince" was the high-priest Onias III.  His opponents, backed by Antiochus IV, had the high-priest deposed.  Working deceptively, Antiochus had the next high-priest, Jason, replaced by Menelaus (as verse 23 relates).  Antiochus became "strong with a small people."  These people are the Judahites.

Now moving onto Daniel 11:29-31 we have, "At the time appointed he shall return, and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter.  For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant... and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate."  The ships from Chittim refers to a Roman fleet coming to rescue the "king of the south" (Egypt).  This time in his move against Egypt Antiochus ran into Roman intervention.  Antiochus knew that he could not take on the Romans.  On his return to Antioch he stopped in Jerusalem to vent his anger at being interrupted during his siege of Alexandria.  He did so by sacrificing pigs (unclean animals according to the Torah) on the brazen altar.  This act drove the Judahites to rebel against his rule--the events of which are described in Daniel 11:32-35.

From verse 36 on is an account of the acts of the soon coming Antichrist.  Note what it says in verse 37: "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers..."  This clearly indicates that the Antichrist will come from a Christian background.  He will be from Europe--specifically from England.      

Now this account of the "man of sin" in Daniel is paralleled in Ezekiel 38-39.  As I see it, Magog in Ezekiel 38-39 can be read both figuratively and literally. The bankers in the district in London known as the "City of London" are the descendants Khazar Jews; these people came from that area in the Black Sea region today known as Georgia. Could it be that Magog symbolically refers to the Khazar/ZionistsFreemasons who run this Babylon system? They are running NATO right now--until the Antichrist takes over. And Magog can be read literally as Georgia, which joined NATO not long after fighting a war with Russia.

The seed of Cain--also known as the serpent's seed--most likely mixed in with the Kenites.  And the Kenites were living with the Amalekites (descendants of Esau) for a time, as related in 1 Samuel 15:6, "And Saul said unto the Kenites, Go, depart, get you down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them: for ye shewed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites."  By the time of Jesus, these sons of the serpent had, through the Edomite Jews, worked their way in among the Judahite population of Jerusalem: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do." (John 8:44)  Thus the seed of the serpent came to be part of the line of Esau, which controls the world today (Genesis 27:40).  Some may cite what John the Baptist said in Matthew 3:9 as proof that Cain's father was not truly the serpent: "And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham."  It appears that John the Baptist was saying that these Jewish leaders (many of them being the seed of the serpent) thought of themselves as being children of Abraham).  It was impossible for these Cainites to have Abraham's blood in them; it was not impossible for God to turn the nearby stones into literal children of Abraham. 

These sons of Cain have been working very hard for millenia to bring their father (Lucifer) into this material plane: in the form of the Antichrist, who interestingly enough will not actually be of the serpent's seed; but rather will be a clone of Jesus--and therefore of the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15).  The seed of the serpent would--through their rituals (using signs and symbols)--bring about Satan's main objective: a man's body by which he would establish his Babylon kingdom in the world--Atlantis revived.  Lucifer's seed began with Cain, whom he had with Eve.  The serpent has been quite busy throughout the centuries--before the 1st coming of Jesus--trying to corrupt the woman's seed (especially described in Genesis 6 when he employed a group of fallen angels) so that that Christ Jesus could not be born among men: "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman..."  Satan failed in this work, so he has been laboring on the next best thing (to him): to bring about the man who would be in the place of Jesus Christ: their god on this earth (for a short time), the Antichrist--through whom Satan will incarnate.

Monday, April 9, 2012

Barack Obama and the Antichrist in 2012 V

This coming war with Iran can be seen in Daniel 8.  It's true that this chapter has already been fulfilled by Alexander the Great and his Macedonian/Greek army when they swiftly demolished the Persian Empire in 331 BC.  Notwithstanding, this passage (like a number of other prophetic passages) has a double-fulfillment: the 2nd one is about to occur.

Daniel 8:4-9 says, "I saw the ram pushing westward...And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground...And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him...Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.  And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land."  Foreshadowing the coming "man of sin" the "little horn"--starting out as Alexander but ending up as Antiochus Epiphanes--moved south and east (from Macedonia) and eventually went into the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem and defiled it in 169 BC: "And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven..." (Dan. 8:10)

Of course Alexander, being the 1st fulfillment of the "little horn," conquered Persia: "...the goat had a notable horn between his eyes...7And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand. 8Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven" (Daniel 8).

Now NATO (whose foremost member is the US) is preparing to attack Iran--with help from the State of Israel.  From what I gather from Daniel 8--read in light of Ezekiel 38 to 39--the US is going down in a big way.  As the greatest symbol for Babylon as of this writing, America is about to be judged by the Creator.  Her sins have reached unto heaven: over 50 million abortions since the murder of unborn people was legalized, the worship of money, among other trespasses.

The torch of the pagan Statue of Liberty will be passed onto England during this imminent war with Iran--or to be exact, with the successor to Queen Elizabeth II: the Antichrist.  He moves south and east, thus becoming the 2nd fulfillment of Daniel 8:9 (quoted above).  Perhaps he will sudue and kill people in Europe who resist him, once he is declared to be the king of the whole world.  He will personally take over command of Turkey's army, along with all the NATO forces.  He will subdue Iran (Its leaders are Satanists, and they are setting up their people for a fall.).  And so the "man of sin" will fulfill Daniel 8 the 2nd time; the first fulfillment by Alexander the Great/Antiochus Epiphanes was a shadow of what is about to befall the earth.           

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Barack Obama and the Antichrist in 2012 IV

2 Thessalonians 2:4 speaks of the Antichrist: " that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."  This verse has several layers of meaning, hinging on the word "temple."  You can read it literally: the Antichrist will enter into the rebuilt Temple (3rd Temple) on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.  You can read it figuratively: this "temple" is referring to that man's body that Satan will enter into, transforming him into the one whom John saw: "...he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon" (Rev. 13:11) (After all, we're supposed to be (as physical creatures) temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19)).  The Antichrist will (literally) look like Jesus, but he will speak the words of Satan--the one who controls him.  We see that Jesus is "the lamb" in Rev. 6:1.  John "beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes..." (Gen. 5:6)  This is symbolically speaking of none other than Jesus--that John saw.  Thus I say we can find another, deeper layer of meaning in what Paul meant by the word "temple" (in his 2nd letter to the Thessalonian brethren): it may very well be that this host body that Satan enters is a clone of Jesus, in that this host body was created from DNA that was extracted from the blood of Jesus found on the Ark of the Covenant.  Thus the words "temple of God" refers to Jesus' body.  (Jesus is a man, and he sits at the right hand of God right now.)  Or rather, "temple of God" refers to this other man who is a clone of Jesus.  So this man resembles Jesus--when he was here on earth a little over two thousand years ago.

A theory about the Antichrist has to do with the Merovingian dynasty of Medieval France.  The Merovingian kings believed that they were descended from the offspring that resulted from the union of Jesus and Mary Magdalene:  Jesus and Mary Magdalene became husband and wife.  So Jesus was not God and did not return to heaven; he was a mere man who lived and died as all other men do.  And those who could (supposedly) trace their lineage back to Jesus became the monarchs of the Frankish kingdom for a time.  Thus the Antichrist will be a descendant of the Merovingian kings--and so he has Jesus' blood in him: this is known as the "Grail bloodline."  The cup from which Jesus drank at the last supper has come to be known as the "grail."  This grail is symbolic of the supposedly pure blood that runs through the descendants of the Merovingian dynasty: the blood of Christ, which these children--of the Merovingian kings--falsely claim runs through their veins.

This next theory is plausible; what if there is another, more potent way for the Illuminati to bring about the Antichrist?  We already have the Shroud of Turin.  They've been able to extract a blood sample from this cloth.  And the Ark of the Covenant was found--by Ron Wyatt, who's no longer living.  Jesus' blood was on the Mercy Seat, which sits atop the Ark of the Covenant (which I've stated in the first post in this series).  So as Rev. 13:11 (quoted above) indicates, the Antichrist will be someone who is a substitute for Christ Jesus.  The former will take the place of the latter on earth (for a short time).  For Satan that is the ideal goal: for he says--through the ruler of the ancient city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2), "Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God."

Now when that time comes when the man (who will become Satan in the flesh, if you will) is presented to the world as its deliverer--a man of peace--Satan will then indwell him.  Upon this happening this "man of sin" will be called upon to present his credentials, as it were: he will have to prove that he is the Messiah, the one who has the right to sit on the throne of David (today located in England, which Queen Elizabeth II currently sits upon).  As I see it they will bring out the Ark of the Covenant, which they've had hidden in a special place--waiting for that special day when they will bring it out to both show it to the world and to prove that they have the DNA of the Son of God (the blood on the Mercy Seat).  They'll probably extract some blood from the Antichrist to compare his blood with the blood of Christ.  This test will show that the Antichrist is the Son of man: the one long prophesied to return has indeed returned.  The Savior of the world has come back.  I think this hypothetical scene--though it sounds quite fantastic, like the plot from a sci-fi novel--is the best explanation for what all the verses (I've quoted in this series so far) appear to say.  The Merovingian theory is in reality based on a falsehood: that the descendants of the Merovingians today are of the lineage of Jesus.  I am aware of the popularity of "The DaVinci Code" novel, and I suppose that it is a proponent of the Merovingian theory (since I haven't read it).  This most likely is part of a major campaign of deception.

Barack Obama is an antichrist, whose role is to prepare the way for the Antichrist.  He has been employing the US military in breaking to pieces some nations of the world.  And the US is the regathering of much of Scattered Israel.  This was prophesied in Micah 5: "
8And the remnant of Jacob shall be among the Gentiles in the midst of many people as a lion among the beasts of the forest, as a young lion among the flocks of sheep: who, if he go through, both treadeth down, and teareth in pieces, and none can deliver.
9Thine hand shall be lifted up upon thine adversaries, and all thine enemies shall be cut off."  The "remnant" spoken of here refers to the Israelites of the last days.  Israel (US, Britain, and France along with some other Israelite nations) have been going through the "third world" nations and slashing many of them up, like some sort of ferocious carnivore pouncing on a gazelle and tearing out its innards.  (By the way, Paul's letter to the Galatians was written to the Christians in Gaul (France today); it was not written to Galatians who were living in Asia Minor (Turkey) in Paul's day.  For it has been revealed that Paul traveled to Spain and Britain.  So he must have visited France also.) 

Further on in Micah 5 we have: "
10And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD, that I will cut off thy horses out of the midst of thee, and I will destroy thy chariots:
11And I will cut off the cities of thy land, and throw down all thy strong holds:
12And I will cut off witchcrafts out of thine hand; and thou shalt have no more soothsayers:
13Thy graven images also will I cut off, and thy standing images out of the midst of thee; and thou shalt no more worship the work of thine hands.
14And I will pluck up thy groves out of the midst of thee: so will I destroy thy cities.
15And I will execute vengeance in anger and fury upon the heathen, such as they have not heard."  The US and Britain have been waging preemptive wars (and therefore against God's ordinance for going to war that he established for ancient Israel: in the Old Testament) across the earth.  I'm sure that in the last decade alone the innocent civilians (of these target nations) who've been murdered (as part of a mass ritual sacrifice to Satan) numbers well over a million.  And God will not let this bloodshed go unpunished for very long.  Judgment is coming to the US and soon.  New York city figures prominently in this fast-approaching judgment.  After that happens Obama will be painted as a bloodthirsty man of war; another man will come forward--the one who has been prepared to become the "man of sin"--to be presented to the peoples of the world as a man of peace: the hero they've been desperate for.  Sometime this year.

Isaiah 28:15 sums up well why the US will be judged: " Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:"  The American people are deceived and deceiving their fellow Americans to such a great extent.