Posts Tagged ‘God’

Atheism, agnosticism: My “absence of belief” in “materialist sufficiency”

October 12, 2014

Is there any meaningful difference between “official atheism” and “atheism as an officially enforced ideology”?

Plus, from the reports I have seen out of North Korea by escapees, and even a few mainstream reports, clearly demonstrate an attitude of worship. One video clip taken by the only Western team I know of allowed some access, showed one poor lady thanking the now late Kim Jung-Il for everything she had, in soulful worshipful tone.

In my opinion, honest agnosticism can make a claim for “an absence of belief”. However, atheism is the negation of a belief (“said belief is not true”). Therefore atheism is a positive belief.

I have an “absence of a belief” that something comes from nothing. Carl Sagan said “The cosmos is all there is, all there ever was, all there ever will be”. That is quite a statement.

Check your assumptions

September 14, 2014

The common Christian definition of God is a being that is all-knowing. If this conjecture is true, then God knew the final outcome of the Universe & of all life in it before the Creation took place. So why did She bother to go to all this tremendous effort if the final conclusion (and all the intermediate stages) were known to Her beforehand?


First off, you expose your motivation in writing this as a troll trying to provoke hysterical response, a self-arrogant exercise in which you think yourself smarter than the audience while in reality showing folly.

You start off addressing yourself to the “Christian definition” then pull a fraudulent bait and switch by saying “She”, an obvious reference to some false god.

You then ask a question that is not a question so you can jump into an ignorant argument you think is new that you just picked up off some Internet forum or atheist website or other self-mockery. You were planning to mock whatever came back from it, I’m sure, because your use of “She” does not apply to the “Christian definition” and you obviously know that.

A perverse sense of humor comes to mind, to just sit back & watch wars, plagues, cancer, disease, famine & death torment the human race over millennia.


You think you’re funny, with your foolishness you think is wit. It’s just witlessness. This claptrap has been answered in a thousand different ways for millenia, for serious questioners.

That seems pretty silly. An all-powerful God should have better things to do than to just set up experiments where the conclusion was known before the start. So there either is no God & things just happened according to natural laws or God is not all-knowing & just wants to watch things play out.


Silly is to think your wit is better than God’s or Isaac Newton’s.

It all boils down to faith, and a lot of assumptions about the nature of God and its powers that have no basis. And to try to prove the existence of a God and a Creation by citing endless bits of quasi-scientific ‘proofs’ is an exercise in futility. Just like the Bible is not a science textbook. you will never be able to ‘prove’ the existence of things that are, by definition, unprovable articles of faith.


You have your own faith in your own unfounded dogmas and “a lot of [your own] assumptions about the nature of God and its powers that have no basis. It’s a foolish faith where you get something for nothing, a whole universe popping into existence from a singularity (another word for “nothing”. You probably even think Stephen Hawking is clever for saying we don’t need God because we have gravity.

He didn’t say why he thought gravity did not need a Creator.

Surely he had some course in Logic along the way?

Bible believers, followers of Christ, bane of tyrants, have laid down their own lives spreading the gospel of love and freedom

August 30, 2014

This is my reply to a vicious slur against Christ and against the Bible found here and all to common even among liberty-minded writers sometimes. Keep in mind that even self-described atheist Rothbard recognized that many religiously inclined believers were often better defenders of freedom than fellow atheists. Ron Paul is a good example.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/danger-religious-fundamentalists-just-muslisms.html

This article is worse than a cruel slur. The biggest victims of the abuses of the Roman persecutions, the Inquisitions, Roman Catholic armies. Papal decrees, Muslim fatwas, and holy wars have been  BIBLE-BELIEVING CHRISTIANS who have been the ones who paid with their own blood not only in their efforts to share eternal life and love and freedom found in Christ from guilt, sin, death and hell.

And you forgot to mention that the Popes put the BIBLE as the number one BANNED BOOK. Libraries should be pushing the BIBLE as history’s number one book banned by religious tyrants. John Knox is one who was a priest who first found out there was such a book when he saw it in their banned list.

From St. Patrick’s “crusade” against Irish and British slavery (“Is it our fault we are born Irish?”), to David Livingston’s and William WIlberforce’s campaigns against slavery, through the Christian abolitionists’ attacks on slavery, Christians have taken the beatings for people like the ones who taught the writer of this historical ignorance.

I too was deceived by the lies they taught me in the anti-Christian “secular” godless government indoctrination centers K-12 and then Ivy League professors who promoted the ideology of the biggest regimes on the earth of history that said the same things and tried to “cure” their societies and bring freedom FROM religion. 

Beware because when the voracious anti-Christian propagandists take control, the ones in clear and present danger will be the ones closest to their power and ideology. Stalin first had all his Politburo friends murdered, then he went after the fellow socialist Mensheviks and other socialists, and then of course the Christians. 

Like Christ said, what is whispered in secret will be shouted from the rooftops, and nothing and no one can stop the truth, shared with the love of Jesus Christ. 

Look at this great breach of logic. And they say this is “reason”, “enlightenment”??!

How can anybody say it’s all the same?

Jesus Christ laid down his OWN life for unbelievers to spread the message of the God of love, Muhammad laid down the life of unbelievers to spread his message of Allah.

The earliest Christians laid down THEIR OWN lives to spread the gospel of the God of love, while the early followers of Islam laid down the lives of resistors in North Africa and Arabia and Turkey and southern Europe to spread their message. 

Impostors and tyrants and rulers use any excuse they can use to justify power: atheism, the Pharisees with the laws of Moses, the money changers in the Temple, the evil kings of Israel, the wicked priests Ezekiel exposed in Ezekiel 8 that worshipped the sun in secret and kept idols to devils within.

With Christians came opposition to such tyrants. The Amish and the Puritans simply refused to cooperate with the Anglican mandates. The threat to appoint Anglican bishops over the colonies, known for “drawing-and-quartering” punishments, added fuel to the fire of the American Revolutionary War. Oh yeah, and the greatest scientists of history, including the greatest one, Isaac Newton, a young-Earth creationist. 90 percent of the founding members of the first society founded for the study of science, the Royal Society, were Puritans. 

Around the world, Christians shamed the world into ending child sacrifices, cannibalism, gladiator spectacles, slavery, and all manner of evils. They began the institutions of universities, orphanages, charities, clinics then hospitals, reflected to this day in names like Red Cross. 

Even Charles Darwin, of  “The Origin of Species and… the Preservation of Favoured Races”, once wrote a scathing rebuke to critics of missionaries, defending them and their influence. He told how world travelers like himself on the high seas, when they came to the shore of a South Pacific island, breathed a great sigh of relief when they saw the cross atop a steeple, knowing that the missionaries were here and instead of becoming somebody’s dinner they would be dining in peace with new friends. 

And today’s strongest and loudest anti-slavery crusaders are Christians, and it is Christians who are setting fire to spread the strongest message of freedom today, the anarcho-capitalist message, because THAT is what the Bible teaches, starting from Thou Shalt Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself, and Thou Shalt Not Steal, and Neither Do I Condemn Thee.

And the biggest call against tyranny of all is coming, and Bible-believers have been leading the charge for almost 2,000 years. The Mark of the Beast looks more than ever to be the embedded chip, that will be required by a new tyranny and one-world government. They might not even declare themselves as a government, but it will be required to buy or sell, and “really bad” penalties will apply to the freedom-minded. Many resisters will not be Christians. 

But there is a reason the present world rulers hate Christianity. They will be one strong element in those who stand firm in their faith, like in North Korea right now (see helpinghandskorea.com) and in Muslim nations.

Some of them who are prepared will feed and clothe you when you realize what’s happening. But that’s okay.

I once believed the lies myself. Welcome to the love of the truth. “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”. 

 

Reaction to “Conservative to Anarchist”; Me, Communist to Missionary to Anarchist

August 24, 2014

My reaction to Steve Patterson’s post, From Conservative to Anarchist:

http://steve-patterson.com/conservative-anarchist/

Back when I joined a “new religious movement” during the Jesus People thing in the 1960s, we got educated by the founders in the future consequences of bubble fiat dollars (“green paper pigs”–think inflated piggy bank balloon) and the stupidity of getting off a gold standard, and the way the rest of the world will also get punked for counting on the dollar. We were “dropped out” of “the system” and “turned on” to the truth.

Before that, in college, all that indoctrination turned me into a Communist because ever since LBJ invaded the Dominican Republic I remembered thinking about helping the poor and being “fair” and all that. But that led to being a sort of “syndicalist anarchist”, which sounds leftish but it also sounded right. My rationale then was: If you can’t trust people to govern themselves, you can’t trust them to govern anybody else. I didn’t have a clue what label that would have other than anarchist.

Then I discovered the way certain now well-known cliques and “secret societies” manipulate things, became minarchist finally, and through a Bible-discussion forum discovered Ron Paul when a fellow believer mentioned hanging Ron Paul banners over bridges. The rest is the same history as Steve’s.

This verse means so much more to me now:

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;–Isaiah 61:1

July 26, 2014

D. James Kennedy(*) did a program once around “St. Patrick’s Day”. He said the Pope had to “send an army” to subjugate the Irish to Papal hegemony. (as late as the 10th or 11th century?). (And maybe more than once?)

* — I have significant differences with him on many things he said theologically, and some of his political viewpoints. In his favor, when he spoke in one program about war, during the Afghan and Iraq invasions, it seemed like he deliberately avoided even the appearance of endorse that war, but did talk a lot about St. Augustine’s theories about justifiable war.

“How the Irish Saved Civilization” also told about the years following Patrick’s ministry in Ireland. In those years, he tells us, there arose “convents” all around the island, with men, women, families, babies and all living communally, and often the guide, or leader, of the group was female. (“..There is no male nor female.. in Christ Jesus..”, spiritual equals but individuals).

By the way, Thomas Cahill also wrote about Patrick’s blast at the British clergy for their silence before the slave traders. Born a Brit, but having “become all things to all men”, Patrick wrote to in a scathing letter bishop, “Is it our fault we are born Irish?”.

In a famous prayer by Patrick, also, it was all Jesus and no other intercessor. “Jesus in me, Jesus above me, Jesus around me…..”

Cahill went easy on the Catholic version by saying it was just a matter of one meeting where “our apostle” (Peter) “can beat up your apostle” (Patrick) that brought them into Papal rule. This is evidence also that they were independent.

 

What’s wrong with witchcraft and witch hunts? Christians are the major victims of them.

July 4, 2014

In modern times, and times past, Christ has been defamed  through the device of attacking self-proclaimed “Christians” acting like power-mad human-sacrificing pagans. Bible-believing Christ-sharing Christians have been the biggest victims of witch hunts and heresy trials of *nominal* Christians. History is full of examples of this, of whom Martin Luther is only the best known of tens of thousands.

But now, it has become cultural heresy to tell the truth about witchcraft. I oppose anybody breaking down your door because you’ve been accused of witchcraft, but the truth is still the truth. There are those who “dabble”, but like the three kids in Mexico who were thrown around and abused by “demonic” forces while playing with a Ouija board, they are dabbling with things they know nothing of.

One repentant Satanist said that Satan doesn’t bother much with atheists and intellectually unmovable agnostics because they’re already in his pocket.

Most Satanists pretend to be just another somebody just like us.

Witchcraft is just like government enforcer positions and political office. They draw in people seeking a cheat for more power over other people. That’s true also for many clerical positions. But remember, Elmer Gantry gets the press, but there are thousands, even millions, of little unsung versions of Mother Theresa and Underground Railroad abolitionists who just want to help people, to share God’s blessings and Christ’s salvation from death and hell.

 

Evidence-based Christianity

June 14, 2014

I’m one Bible believer who got there through science, history, facts, reasoning and logic. The tautological circle is true of many Christians who don’t think much, and much Christian evangelical media. But even they are allowing the evidence-based arguments. Christianity is the one related by way of historical events. “The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”, not tautologies. “Global cooling is part of global warming” is a tautology. You should put “scientists” in there. Michael Crichton did. See his essay “Aliens cause Global Warming”, from a talk at Cal Tech, where he totally demolished “Drake’s equation”, the blind-faith basis for SETI. Thomas Kuhn’s “Structure of Scientific Revolutions” should have convinced them to “Question everything”, which they don’t.

History has hundreds who sought evidence against Christianity and ended up as believers, including thousands of scientists today who renounced Darwinism based on science. An archaeologist once set out to falsify the Bible by checking on the place names in Acts and dug them all up. The Jewish rabbis showed Alexander the prophecy that Greece would trounce Persia and conquer shockingly fast and then his empire divided to four. As happened. And that was after he fulfilled other prophecy by throwing the old Tyre literally into the sea.

A student once challenged atheist Harvard dean of Law Simon Greanleaf to apply his own rule (no conclusions without first considering the evidence) That in turn is held up by the evidence of history, archaeology, and logic, and the rules of historical evidence as detailed by the atheist-turned-Christian Simon Greanleaf, author of “Testimony of the Evangelists”. To this day a man’s dying testimony has weight, and to die for it proves belief. An archaeologists looking to disprove Acts, for example, excavated so much of it he became a believer. Lew Wallace is another one. Isaac Newton said the fact that (true) science is reliable shows design. It was his version of the “anthropic principle”, in the NON-circular definition of it.

It’s much more fact-based than Darwinism, for sure. That’s where the lack of evidence of “punctuation” in fossils (and only equilibrium) is offered as evidence for “punctuated equilibrium”. Mendel’s experiments were ignored at length and DNA made it so incredible a co-discoverer postulated aliens.

Amish family flees the United States to avoid medical dictatorship

March 12, 2014

An Amish family has fled the United States to avoid medical dictatorship:

http://reason.com/reasontv/2014/03/11/amish-family-defends-medical-decisions-f#comment

There have been a number of communities in history who were “sort of” libertarians, although the Amish are outstanding examples of living without the “heavy hand of the law”. Their culture could thrive splendidly with a lot less interference.

There are cultures where the rules have been self-enforcing. In the time of the judges (book of Judges), there was no government, no police force, no king, no tribal chief. Elders might emerge esteemed for advice and counsel, Thou shalt not steal was revered as a command from the hand of God himself, so property rights were SACRED.

Even the much-maligned laws of Moses, including the more “draconian” measures, were avoidable by simply opting to live outside of them, and many did. Plus, it was all on the honor system.

When they were conquered, there would be a leader gather an army, kick out the invaders, then disband back to the farms. s

But “the people” demanded a king. Prophet Samuel warned them: A king will put insufferable burdens on you, he will take your good harvests for himself, he will send your sons to war. God DOES NOT WANT A GOVERNMENT MIDDLE-MAN FOR ENFORCEMENT!

//

Answers to quotes by famous atheists and agnostics

January 26, 2014

“We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.” -Gene Roddenberry

My reply ==> We must question the irrational logic of someone admitting to being a faulty human, who then fails to wonder why an omniscient and omnipotent God would create him, as if it made no sense to him. Of course it makes no sense to him, as he does not want to consider the answers to this question that he would know exist if he were to only have an open mind.

We must question the intellectual honesty of someone who wants to blame a Creator for his own decision to be faulty in his logic.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” -Edward Gibbon

My reply ==> An amazingly historically ignorant comment coming from such a historian, who must know that all of the major areas of study of modern science were men much wiser than he, and who believed in the Creator God as a fact of reality not always concomitant with what the ignorant know as “religion”. Let us see who is wiser among: Gibbons, Isaac Newton, Francis Bacon, Michael Faraday, Johann Kepler, Blaise Pascal, Robert Boyle…

So does Gibbon determine truth by a majority vote of the smarter-than-thou elite, selected by degree of hubris? Sounds kind of “useful” for such an arrogant class.

Speaking of the wise, take it from the wisest man who ever lived, outside of Jesus Christ:
Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise
Isaiah 5:21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” -Epicurus

This from one of those brilliant idol-worshipping scholars of ancient Greece? No wonder they believed in pagan gods that were no better than men, said women were lower than men but higher than slaves. They were so smart. Just like today’s version of the same intellectual smugness:

Acts 17:16 Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry.
18 Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoics, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.
19 And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?
20 For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean.
21 (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)

“A man’s ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.” Albert Einstein

That sounds like the common protestation that “I’m not so bad”, or the very wrong commonly cited myth that “All people are basically good”. Look at toddlers in a day care. Some bigger ones walk around biting the others (I know two toddlers personally that were bitten, hard, unprovoked, while they were toddlers in day care). Some are born aggressive, others not so much. Jacob and Esau fought in the womb; Jacob emerged grabbing at Esau’s feet.

The best universal guide for ethical behavior does not need so much of any of what Einstein said. It’s a universal rule that has been expressed in many different ways everywhere even outside of Judeo-Christian philosophies, and that is expressed in the libertarian refrain, known as the non-aggression principle:

See the best definition at http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Principle_of_non-aggression:

…an ethical stance which asserts that “aggression” is inherently illegitimate. “Aggression” is defined as the “initiation” of physical force against persons or property, the threat of such, or fraud upon persons or their property. In contrast to pacifism, the non-aggression principle does not preclude violent self-defense. The principle is a deontological (or rule-based) ethical stance.

This much can be expected and indeed required of everyone. As a college student, my first disillusion with Marxism was a realization that came to me one day while musing on the issue of how to change the world for better, and wrestling with the self-contradictions of a dictatorship and the proletariat and the idea that a state would just fade away.

The idea that burst into my head was this: If you cannot trust a man, or group of men, to govern themselves, how can you trust them to govern other people? Of course some people you cannot trust with either situation, to either govern themselves or to govern others, and this is one of the biggest questions people have. Such questions have their answers, for those who seek them or accept them.

There is a much stronger ethic required of Christians, however. One of the Ten Commandments orders us to “Love thy neighbor as thyself”. No, you don’t have to “love yourself first”, that is the opposite of the principle, because “no man yet ever hated his own flesh”.

Jesus made it stronger still in the Golden Rule, paraphrased as “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

The non-aggression principle, for example, says you have no right to steal from the poor. The Christian ethic says, take care of the poor that come across your path. That also means you don’t steal from others to do it, because the only legitimate source you have for helping others is what’s your own. In other words, Help the poor with your own money, not somebody else’s money.

Okay? If you don’t want anyone to steal from you, then don’t steal from others. Taking without the owner’s permission is stealing. To “steal”: “to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch”. from http://dictionary.reference.com/.

Andrew Napolitano clarified that last point. If you don’t have the right to steal from your neighbor, you cannot designate any representative to steal from your neighbor either.

NOW THE SECOND ISSUE FROM THE EINSTEIN QUOTE:
THE WAY OF MAN IS ALREADY THE “POOR WAY”

“….Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.” -Albert Einstein

The elephant in the logical room that Einstein missed is the fact that all men everywhere are already “restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death”. Is Einstein saying that he needs neither government nor self-defense to prevent attacks or theft by his neighbors? In the places where people are most conscious of posthumous rewards and punishments, of course, we already know that those selfsame places are where you have less need to lock your doors.

Did Einstein’s actions match his words? No he did not. Because he was visiting in the United States when Hitler came to power in Germany, and Hitler did not go back. Instead, he opted to live in a society where the regime did not embrace such a philosophy. For when the atheist has power, he does not believe in having to answer for his actions here or there, so self-delusion drives them to force everyone else into their box.

 

//

Taki Mag says A&E dirty trick is (“just”?) a publicity stunt

December 25, 2013

The takimag article is here.

It’s an unlikely event, though, unless the idea was to subtly promote an LGBT-friendly brand among the lucrative “gay market” for the long term.

Maybe some execs there have seen the future coming with an officially sanctioned persecution of Bible-believers that will rival those of Rome at least, if not the much worse mass murders of same under leftist and fascist regimes in the 20th century and continuing today, to follow on the heels of the censorship of speech favoring Jesus Christ out of government.

Right on, except that there is a little more to this story, “this story” being A&E’s duplicity and hypocrisy and according to this story, simply pulling a PR stunt. In spite of some independent souls actually producing spiritually and culturally healthy fare from there, the figurative Hollywood “establishment” cares more about muzzling criticisms of its orgiastic contortions, than it does about the money you know they want.

In March 2013 they had already apparently requested the Duck folks accept cutting out the “Jesus” word or bleeping it out. The producer of the show apparently once did a “gay porno” thing.

So we can safely conclude that they treated at least one gay with enough respect to work together with him for many months (years?) on this show.

What this takimag article also misses is also that the “martyr” description is not just part of a nefarious A&E plan, unless they gambled on successfully getting Jesus actually expunged from the show. Or, put it this way, dilute the Christian witness by getting the “patriarch” out and the rest of them eating humble pie.

This has been happening all over Hollywood for a generation or two already and has been creeping into the rest of society as well.

A&E got exposed naked in the snow with this trick, for sure. (Who owns A&E, by the way?) Be it a PR trick, or a trick to throw Phil Robertson “under the bus”, they shot themselves in the foot.

But this is part of the “ethnic cleansing” that certain Christ-haters are doing throughout the country. The haters hate Christ and cannot stand that word “sin” next to actual “sins”, even though Christians can insist “I’m a sinner like anybody else just like you”.

Revelations 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:

With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

And upon her forehead was a name written, Mystery, Babylon The Great, The Mother Of Harlots And Abominations Of The Earth.

And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.

The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

// <!–[CDATA[
function DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw”); if(null != object) { object.DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url);} };
function Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw”); if(null != object) object.Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url); };
function NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw”); if(null != object) object.NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url); }
function Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw”); if(null != object) object.Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url); };
// ]]>

//


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 186 other followers