I was born on October 31st 1985 A.D.
I'm a Caucasian male who lives in Racine Wisconsin.

I'm a Christian, I take the Bible literally, I'm a 6 Day Young Earth Creationist. I don't Identify myself with any Denomination, the Churches I sometimes go to are Independent Baptist, but I'm a Member of none, I was raised Catholic but I'm not anymore. I believe Salvation is by Faith Alone, and I don't believe you can lose your Salvation. I'm definitely not a Calvinist or an Arminian.

I do not believe Homosexuality is a Sin, I've studied all the Bible verses cited as claiming that, and their only condemning certain Pagan practices. Even Pre-Marital sex all together I do not believe is as condemned as people assume.

My Political views are also complicated to explain, I voted for Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin in 2008. I'm liberation on about 95% of Issues, I despise both major Parties, I consider both the Libertarian and Constitution parties, but their flawed too.

I love reading books, including Comic Books. I like Video Games but mostly Nintendo. I consider The Dark Knight the greatest movie ever made.

I desire to be a writer. I have many kinds stories I want to write. From Young Adult Romance, to stories inspired by French Pulp Fiction and Comic Books and Anime, to Historical Epics, to Steam Punk SciFi/Fantasy. And plenty that merge some or all of those.

My beliefs have an effect on my writing. But I try very hard not come off a preachy, and I do want people who disagree with me to still find the stories entertaining and the characters likeable (or Love to Hate-able for the Villains).


The #EgualPay #EqualPayDay #EqualPayDay2014 issue is oversimplified be people on both sides

The Conservatives and fellow Libertarians who break down the statistics to claim the whole thing is a Myth are being disingenuous.  A Gap still exists and those circumstances they ignore are still influenced by Social norms, saying it’s only about Women’s own Choices is naive.

None the less it is frustrating how people on the Left continue to throw out that 77 cent to a Dollar statistic blindly as if it where legal for a Employer to pay his Male Employee end Female Employee differently for the same job.

But more importantly, it’s stupid to think Government can solve the problem with any kind of legislation, it”s a Gap that exists for various reasons, Progress is made by changing how people think, not by making new laws.

I’m growing more and more unsure I qualify as a Libertarian

I’m growing more and more unsure I qualify as a Libertarian.  But I ultimately don’t care if I’m a “True Libertarian” or not.  I’ll continue to be an ally of the Libertarian movement because I certainly identify with them more then I do either Democrats or Republicans, “Liberals” or “Conservatives”, Occupy Wallstreet or Tea Partiers, ect.  And ultimately more so then I do other 3rd Parties like the Green Party or the Constitution Party, but I certainly still respect those to more then I do the either major party.

In theory the Constitution Part should be perfect for me, because I am a patriotic American who thinks the American Government should have to follow the American Constitution, in allot of ways that overlaps with Libertarian ideals, but not always.  Problem is they have to many “Social Conservative” tendencies when it comes to issues like Drugs and Gay rights and Marriage and so on.

Now I know the Constitution isn’t perfect, but that’s why it includes a process by which it can be amended.  There are Amendments I’d like to make to the Constitution, starting with repealing the 16th, but also on issues like Term Limits and Common Law rights (not all of them are enshrined in the Constitution which surprises people) especially Jury Nullification,  But I would go through the proper procedures to Amend it, not simply ignore it as both Democrats and Republicans do when the Constitution doesn’t fit with their personal agenda.

I identify as a Libertarians mainly because I believe in individual rights.  I frankly hate the therm “non aggression principle” but that’s mostly semantics.  I believe all victim less Crimes should be legal, each individual person, regardless of gender, ethnicity, religion, or personal preferences should be allowed to do whatever they want so long as it doesn’t threaten the Life, Liberty or Property or another individual.  This makes me “Liberal” on drugs, postilion and gambling laws, as well as Gay Rights and Marriage, but “conservative” on Gun Rights and Hate Speech laws and Property rights.

Where I differ from allot of fellow Libertarians is I don’t consider the State to be the only threat to individual rights.  Corporations/Employers and religious institutions can be just as big a threat, even more so sometimes.  If you have the Money and/or charisma you can make your own personal army or police force just as powerful as any state sanctioned one.

So the thing is to me the State in addition to being restrained form violating our rights, they do have an obligation, as the only institution that is owned by the people(or is supposed to be).  To protect ti’s Citizens from other institutions that threaten their rights. That doesn’t mean I’m like a “Liberal” who thinks the state should provide for us and take care of all of our needs.  It just means I believe other institutions like other individuals should be restrained from abusing their power just as the State needs to be restrained.

So when Lew Rockwell said in his recent article.


Yes, we do believe in unfashionable things like the abolition of antidiscrimination law. If we didn’t, we would not be libertarians.

Well his is a definition of Libertarian I don’t fit nor would I want to.  I do support the Civil Rights act and Voting rights act, thought there may be details in them I don’t like, because the Federal Government is given authority on those issues by the 13th-15th Amendments.  To respond to other things in the article, I am a “Feminist” in it’s truest definition, as I feel all Libertarians should be, we want Women to have the same rights as Men.

There is one other institution that is popular to hate in Libertarian circles today just almost as much as the state, and that’s Unions.  But rather them simply being concerned with their abuse of power they become like radical “Conservatives” who think they shouldn’t exist.  I believe in Checks and Balances and Unions are an important check on the power Employers have over their Employees.  One of my arguments for legalizing Prostitution is that I’d like to see Prostitutes Unionize to protect them from Pimps.

I’m also not entirely against Safety Nets like Food Stamps.  But under the 10th Amendment I feel they should be handled by State and Local governments, not a once size fits all policy.

Basically I’m not an Anarchist or an “Anachro-Capitalist”.  True Capitalism means a Free Market, but a True Free Market does NOT mean NO regulations

"There can be no Freedom without the Law"-Charlton Heston as Moses in The Ten Commandments.

The Regulations the Democrats advocate for aren’t the ones that will solve any problems.  But breaking up Monopolies is important, and yes I know the lame argument that “the Government is a Monopoly” well unlike any corporation it’s supposed to be ran directly by us.  And under the U.S. constitution we do have a degree of competition between the various State and Local Governments.

I am always distrustful of Government, but that’s distinct from wanting to abolish government.

The Mystery of The False Prophet, Beast out of the Earth

The False Prophet is a key figure in The Book of Revelation, it’s number three villain. “And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.” Forming a sort of counterfeit Trinity. He’s first clearly introduced as the “beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.” After Chapter 13 this figure is called The False Prophet.

The only reference to either of the Beasts prior to chapter 13 is chapter 11:7 “the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. ” Chapter 17:8 makes the beast who ” shall ascend out of the bottomless pit” synonymous with the Beast who has 7 heads and 10 horns, and this the first beast of chapter 13. But the symbolism of the Beast is complicated, the 7 headed 10 horned Beats represents the individual of the Antichrist but also his Empire, his political system. Which is the Roman Empire, the Fourth beast of Daniel 7, which is now being rebuilt via the European Union but also via Western politics in the Middle East. The False Prophet as his both religious and economic overseer is part of that system, so you could argue during any section that seems to only have one of them The Beast could be seen as both together.

We commonly discuss allot of verses outside Revelation that are about The Antichrist. But I don’t see any other verses taken to refer to The False Prophet. False Prophets, plural, appear often as do False Christs. “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."-Matthew 24:24.

Many characters who serve as Foreshadowings or Types of The Antichrist do have a False Prophet figure with them. Adonijah had Abiathar the Priest, Ahab had the unnamed False Prophet who had that dramatic scene with Micaiah. Also if you study the history of Antiochus Epiphanies and the Maccabees, there is Menelaus, the Benjamite Apostate High Priest who presided over the worship of the Abomination of Desolation.

However, actual specific Prophecies of this figure outside Revelation our not well known. I have seen it suggested that maybe many Prophecies assumed to be about The Antichrist really refer to the False Prophet, or even that some refer to both together in some way. But those suggesting this never seem to elaborate on it.

Then I noticed this little detail of Isaiah 9, in verses 14&15. “Therefore the LORD will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush, in one day. The ancient and honourable, he is the head; and the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail.” The word translated “ancient” really means “elder”. So we have a political leader being paired with a lying prophet.

Small little reference, but once I had noticed this my mind’s floodgates burst open like one of House’s epiphanies, and I started getting all kinds of ideas. They begin with II Thessalonians 2:3. No words are mistranslated here, but it’s one of those occasions where the translators felt the need to change the order of the words for the sake of English grammar. Which is often needed, but here I would render it this way.

QUOTELet no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and the unveiling of the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition.

It appears we have two titles of the Antichrist listed side by side. He had many titles, often more then one used in the same chapter or even same verse, but simply listed in succession is unusual.

What if it’s really referring to the unveiling of two people? The following verses are clearly talking about a single individual man deifying himself in the Temple. But maybe that person is the first mentioned, and the second is his supporter facilitating him in this act? If the Son of Perdition is the False Prophet rather then The Antichrist as assumed, that could be interesting.

The term can also be argued to apply to both Beasts equally, along with the phrase “goeth into Perdition” in Revelation 17. Their the two individuals who are sent into “The Lake of Fire” first, before the Millennium rather then after it like everyone else destined to go there.

In verse 9 it talks about his coming being “after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,”. We know from Revelation 13 that the miracles are performed by the False Prophet. One could argue this reference to miracles is tied to how the Man of Sin is unveiled. I argue in my Rapture dissertation that the restrainer being removed refers to the unlocking of the Abyss is in Revelation 9, where Apollyon and many other entities are being restrained by chains.

The term “Son of Perdition” is used only twice, the above passage is the second time, the first was John 17:12 where it refers to Judas Iscariot. Because of that many have taught that Judas is the Antichrist. But to me that conflicts with too many other details about The Antichrist’s connections to Rome and the Seleucid kingdom and being Assyrian and so on. But no such details exist to conflict with Judas being The False Prophet.

There are two Old Testament prophecies cited in the New Testament as referring to Judas, yet when read in their entire context seem much grander then just Judas as we normally think of him, (and have been interpreted as referring to The Antichrist). Psalm 109 (in Acts 1:20), and the Idol Shepperd of Zechariah 11 (in Matthew 27:9). Many allege a Bible Contradiction in how this is attributed to Jeremiah, but Zechariah 9-14 is different from the first part of the book, when a date of when he had the vision is recorded at each one’s start. It could be he incorporated an early Prophecy of Jeremiah into his work.

Zechariah 11:17 calls him “the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock”, sounds like it could connect to the same terminology as the verse where Yeshua calls Judas the Son of Perdition. “I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

Psalm 109 actually has three evil personages are in mind, the subject of the Psalm (Who we are told is Judas) and verse 6 says “Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand.” Could it be another picture of the counterfeit Trinity?

In John 6:70 Yeshua refer to Judas as “a Devil”. In the Greek this is Diabolos, any time you see references to people being possessed by “a devil” “devils”, or any references to plural “devils” the Greek is Daimon or Daimonian. This is the only time Diabolos refers to anyone other then Satan himself, but in reference to Satan it’s always “the Devil” not “a Devil” so this is very unique.

The word translated Perdition is Apoleia. Apollyon from Revelation 9:11 is a related word, derived from the same roots. Apoleia means destruction (perdition is a King James English synonym for Destruction) and Apollyon means Destroyer. It would be accurate poetically to call Apollyon the Son of Apoleia. Acts 1:25 says when Judas died he went “to his own place”. What does that mean? Does it mean it’s not the same afterlife as normal people (Saved or unsaved) go to? could it be the Abyss?

The other name for Apollyon is Abaddon, his Hebrew name. Most people don’t know that this name does appear in the Hebrew Scriptures, it’s Strongs number is 11. The KJV always translates it “destruction” but it’s not the only word for destruction, so it’s important to differentiate. The verses it appears in are Job 26:6, Job 28:22, Job 31:12, Psalm 88:11, Proverbs 15:11, and Proverbs 27:20.

It’s used as the name of a place, not a individual. Being frequently linked with Sheol (Hell/Hades) I take it to be the Old Testament name of the place the New Testament calls the Abyss/Bottomless Pit and Tartaros (Translated Hell in 2 Peter 4). So if the place Judas went was “his own place” perhaps he took it’s name?

That Apollyon/Abaddon is called “the angel of the bottomless pit” causes allot of confusion. We’re used to using “Angel” as a quasi zoological term for immortal created beings, but it’s really just a noun that means messenger, as is the Hebrew equivalent Malak. The KJV translators were rarely willing to translate it rather then transliterate it in the NT. But three passages where there was no denying that it refers to a human being rather then an Angel are Matthew 11:10, Mark 1:2 and Luke 7:27 which all quote Malachi 3:1 in reference to John the Baptist. The word is indeed also affiliated with Prophets who are also messengers or God, and False Prophets who are messengers of false gods. Revelation 9:11 uses it in the same form as those passages.

Now back to Revelation 13. Some interpret “out of the Earth” as meaning Jewish, while “out of the sea” for the first Beast means Gentile. I’m not sure I understand that logic, but it happens to fit my interpretation here somewhat. (The Antichrist I do not believe will be a Jew, he might have a distant descent from Dan, but that won’t be enough to make him a true member of any Tribe as it won’t be directly pater-lineal.)

Having “two horns like a lamb” is thought to support the idea of him claiming to be Jesus. The word translated “lamb” here is used 28 times in Revelation, this is the only time it’s not in direct reference to Yeshua. But it’s not actually a lamb, it’s “like a lamb”. similar or resembling is what the Greek word here means. So some scholars (even without the intent of connection to any extra Biblical traditions I’ll mention latter) have theorized that it’s the second beast not the first who claims to be Jesus himself.

If the False Prophet does claim to be the returned Jesus, then him being Judas makes that lie related to the truth. He would be a First Century Judean, who died the exact same day, and was probably about the same age. Today scientists are pretty sure they know what a first century Judean would basically look like, between studying ancient artwork and skulls they’ve found. There have been specials on TV all about them trying to create on a Computer what Jesus might have looked like. So if someone wants to convince the world he is a specific First Century Judean, it would help to at least have been one of them.

What if among the lies told by this Pseudo-Jesus is verifying the claims of The DaVinci Code, Holy Blood, Holy Grail, The Bloodline of the Holy Grail by Lawrence Gardiner, and many others that he had children and that they became ancestral to various Royal houses of both Europe (and sometimes also the Middle East)? Including ancestors of this political leader he’s now promoting? It’d be one thing to make that claim, but what if he offered to prove it with a DNA test?

Judas would have to have had kids for that to have any chance of working. Well another detail Psalm 109 tells us about him in verse 9 is “Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.” So Judas did have a wife and at least two children. Could it have been his family who traveled to southern France and became ancestors of the Merovingian Dynasty?

Iscariot means “of Kerioth”. There were actually two cities named Kerioth, either makes Judas the only of the Twelve who wasn’t Galilean. Most people assume the Kerioth in southern Judah is what’s meant here. Which has been identified with the ruins of el-Kureitein, about 10 miles south of Hebron.

But there was also the Kerioth (sometimes call Kirioth) that was in Moab, mentioned in Jeremiah 48 and Amos 2:2. In New Testament times most of Moab including this city was part of the region called Peraea. Simon of Peraea was one of a couple of Messianic claimants to revolt soon after Herod’s death in 1 B.C. Judas is called “son of Simon” or “Simon’s son” in John’s Gospel three times, 6:71, 13:2 and 13:26.

Josephus doesn’t tell us where exactly in Peraea he came from. But if he is as some theorize the same would be Messiah of The Gabriel Revelation Stone, then it’s interesting that it was found pretty close to Kerioth if I recall correctly. So I shall hypothesize that Simon of Peraea (Who is also know as Simon ben Joseph) was the father of Judas.

Since he proclaimed himself King and had some decent backing at first, I think it’s likely he either had Davidic descent (possibly an Exilarch), or some connection to the Hamsonean Dynasty. Or perhaps both. John Hyrcanus had five sons, but only three are well known, the other two who where imprisoned with Alexander simply went on to live normal lives after they where freed. It’d be good here to cross reference this with my Genealogy of the Little Horn thread.

And “he spake as a dragon”, since the dragon in mind here is thought to be The Dragon. Judas is the only person who is ever known to have been indwelt by Satan himself, (Luke 22:3 and John 13:27). So he could easily speak with his voice.

Judas had the ability to perform miracles, just like the False Prophet will do. Matthew 10:1-8, all of the Twelve are listed including Judas. Even tough Judas wasn’t really saved he could perform divine miracles, including healing and raising the dead. In this period they’ll be Satanic miracles rather then divine as in Matthew 10, but the point is Judas has experience in doing this.

In 13:13 he can make “fire come down from heaven on the earth”. Satan had this ability in Job:12. But Luke 9:51-56 implies this was also in the arsenal of the Twelve, though Yehsua rebuked John and James them for desiring to use it.

The first Beast has a “Mortal wound” that is healed. We’re not explicitly told The False Prophet performs this counterfeit-resurrection, but it is the False Prophet who performs his miracles in general. Raising the dead was also among the miracle the Apostles could perform.

I don’t believe the life like behavior of “Image of the Beast” mean Satan can truly create life. I believe this is an illusion to modern technology. Many see a Robot or a Hologram, and that could be part of it. But I also like the 2000 film Revelation’s suggestion that it’s a sort of Computer program anyone on Earth can plug into directly relating it to the Mark.

The Second beast isn’t just the religious leader, he’s also in charge of the new economy. In verses 16 and 17 we’re told he makes everyone get the Mark and requires them to need it to buy or sell. John 12:6 tells us Judas was in charge of the moneybag during Yeshua’s ministry, he was the treasurer, so likewise he’ll over see the Beast’s economic policy for the whole world as well.

Since The Beast and The False Prophet are cast alive into the Lake of Fire without any reference to being killed in Revelation 19, at the start of the Millennium, some have argued that they are individuals who were allowed to experience the “Second Resurrection” (the resurrection of the damned) early, rather then at the end of the Millennium. The Beast’s Mortal Wound being healed could refer to his resurrection, not being termed as such because it’s not a true Resurrection like Yeshua’s. But what about The False Prophet’s? Perhaps after Judas’s soul-spirit (Apollyon) is released from the Abyss, he will then find whatever remains of his body and be resurrected. Remember, after death our bodies return to the dust of the earth from which we where formed. So maybe coming “out of the Earth” mean out of the earth that his body had decomposed into?

That’s the end of my Biblical argument. But there are some extra Biblical connections that are interesting to view in this context.

I have become very convinced of the theory that the Mahdi of Islamic prophecy was demonically inspired for the Antichrist to claim that title. Now part of that theory tends to be that Isa (Islam’s counterfeit Jesus) is the False Prophet. It being Isa who resurrects the Mahdi fits that well.

The Gospel of Barnabas, is an apocryphal work, the oldest surviving texts of which are Medieval. it purports to be written by Barnabas, but it’s clearly a Muslim forgery (it claims predict Mohammad by name, and claim the chosen line was of Ishmael not Isaac), or a Muslim revision of an older work with proto-Islamic ideas. Another claim of the Qurran it endorses is that Jesus wasn’t crucified but simply taken to Heaven alive, but it adds to this that it was Judas Iscariot who as crucified on the cross.

Also extra Biblical modern Rabbinic Jewish tradition has created the Messiah Ben-Ephraim, who will be a leader of Israel, but be killed by Armilus and then resurrected by Messiah Ben-David.

Now I return again to the subject of the name Apollyon. Apollyon was an ancient Homeric alternative name for the Greek god Apollo. It’s used for example in Aeschylus’s play Agamemnon, where Cassandra says repeatedly. “Apollo, thou destroyer, O Apollo, Lord of fair streets, Apollyon to me.”. Virgil’s fourth Eclogue records a pagan prophecy attributed to the Cumaean Sibyl.

QUOTE Now the last age by Cumae’s Sibyl sung
Has come and gone, and the majestic roll
Of circling centuries begins anew:
Justice returns, returns old Saturn’s reign,
With a new breed of men sent down from heaven.
Only do thou, at the boy’s birth in whom
The iron shall cease, the golden race arise,
Befriend him, chaste Lucina; ‘tis thine own
Apollo reigns. And in thy consulate,
This glorious age, O Pollio, shall begin,
And the months enter on their mighty march.
Under thy guidance, whatso tracks remain
Of our old wickedness, once done away,
Shall free the earth from never-ceasing fear.
He shall receive the life of gods, and see
Heroes with gods commingling, and himself
Be seen of them, and with his father’s worth
Reign o’er a world at peace.

Now I know full well that at the time this was written Virgil intended it to refer to Augustus, that this new Golden Age was supposed to be Augustus’s Pax Romana. But remember, among other things that the Little Horn’s kingdom will be a revived Roman Empire, I think he will present his peace plan as a new Pax Romana.

When Rome began being Christianized (or more accurately Christianity began being Romanized) which started even before Constantine, it became popular to reinterpret this as a prophecy of the Nativity of Christ, being made at very near the same time. Constantine, the first Christian emperor, in his first address to the assembly, interpreted the whole of The Eclogues as a reference to the coming of Christ, and quoted a long passage of the Sibylline Oracles (Book 8) containing an acrostic in which the initials from a series of verses read: “Jesus Christ Son of God Saviour Cross”. The books refereed to as the “Sibylline Oracles” are actually Jewish and Christian (often Gnostic), Apocrypha drawing on the Sibyl traditions of Greeco-Roman paganism.

That’s why Michelangelo prominently featured the Cumaean Sibyl in the Sistine Chapel among the Old Testament prophets, as had earlier works such as the Tree of Jesse miniature in the Ingeberg Psalter. And why Dante Alighieri chose Virgil as his guide in The Divine Comedy (Dante’s Inferno). So Catholic Christianity (and other apostate churches) have long embraced identifying Apollo with Jesus via this prophecy.

One of the Greek mythical figures associated with the constellation Ophiuchus/Ophiouchos (the Serpent-Wrangler) is Asklēpiós, he was one of Apollo’s sons, sharing with Apollo the epithet Paean (“the Healer”). The rod of Asclepius, a snake-entwined staff, remains a symbol of medicine today. In modern Neo-Paganism these lesser gods who where sons of major ones are usually thought of as really being aspects of the major god, or Avatars.

In astrology, Scorpio kills Orion, and then Ophiuchus kills Scorpio and resurrects Orion. Orion is The Hunter, clearly inspired by Nimrod, the oldest prototype of the Antichrist. But I also believe, to varying degrees, in the Mazzartoh/Gospel in the Stars Theory. That the constellations where originally telling the message of Salvation, before they began to be corrupted in Babel.

In that model, Scorpio represents the Seed of the Serpent, and Ophiuchus an aspect of Christ. Ophiuchus represents the Seed of the Woman engaging in battle with the Serpent, crushing Scorpio’s head as it strikes his heel, (Genesis 3:15).

Looks like allot of groundwork for a great deception has been laid.

The Two Witnesses are Enoch and Elijah


Revelation 11 is the focus of this study.

Before we discuss their identities, I want to discus what their role is.

First and foremost, to me their clearly in the first half of the Tribulation. Their 3 and a Half year ministry is linked to The Temple during a period when the “outer court" is given to the Gentiles.

QUOTE “And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.  But 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.”

During the second half, after the Abomination of Desolation occurs and the Jews flee to Edom the entire Temple will be under Gentile control.

This also means The Temple is already built when their ministry begins, so Perry Stone and others insistence that they will lead it’s rebuilding is false. I believe they’ll be be preaching what Paul teaches in Hebrews, that the Temple sacrifices are no longer needed because Yeshua paid the price for all Sin. And so they’ll be hated like Stephen was in Acts 6:13

QUOTE “And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law”

The witnesses are false because I’m sure they misrepresented what Stephen said just as the false witnesses against Yeshua did, but to me this still hints at why Stephen’s enemies were bothered by his preaching.

Elijah is obvious

Rarely some will even question Elijah’s status (claiming their not two literal individual, but symbolic), saying that to Christians the promise of Elijah’s return (Malachi 4:5&6) was fulfilled by John The Baptist. But this is an over simplification of what the New Testament says about the connection between John and Elijah (who due to Greek transliteration issues tends to be called Elias in the KJV of the NT).

Matthew 11:14 says “if ye will receive it" they didn’t however, John was rejected just as Yeshua was. Accounts of the Transfiguration likewise have allot of quotes that can be taken out of context to support this doctrine, but that discussion is particularly mystical in nature. John like Elisha preached with the "Spirit and Power" of Elijah, but that’s a separate thing from his literal return. In John 1:21 John clearly states that he is not Elijah. John could be viewed as a near fulfillment, like Solomon was of Nathan’s Prophecy, but the true ultimate fulfillment is still yet future.

Other circumstantial reasons to view Elijah as a witness will happen to come up as I discus the identity of the other one. So addressing the John issue is all I need to do for now.

Not Moses

So many scholars I respect, like Chuck Missler, who are right on so many other basic Eschatological issues still insist on this mistaken view that the other Witness is Moses. I’m going refute those arguments.

1. “The plagues parallel Elijah and Moses”. Miracles are truly performed by God, Elijah and Moses happened to be affiliated with some of the most basic and standard stuff. Truth is however it’s primarily Elijah’s ministry their description parallels, with stopping the rain for 3 and a half years and consuming their persecutors with fire. The only specific thing affiliated with Moses is the turning water to blood. But by this point in Revelation that’s already no longer unique to Moses, we saw it in the trumpet judgments twice and will again twice during the bowl judgments.

2. “It was Moses and Elijah at the Transfiguration”. The Transfiguration follows directly when Yeshua said to the Twelve “Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Matthew 16:28. My response to how that verse is used by Preterists and Amillennials is that it’s referring to the Transfiguration. Yeshua and his two visitors are transfigured into their post Resurrection states. I believe there is a deliberate bending of Space-Time here, and that the Elijah with Yeshua here has already experienced the events of Revelation 11.

3. “Moses and Elijah represent The Law and The Prophets”. For starters the term “The Law and The Prophets” isn’t used in Revelation 11. Also “The Prophets” in that sense refers to the Prophetic books of The Bible, Elijah didn’t write any of those. But at any rate, Enoch is from The Torah.

Those are the typical core three arguments, but I want to address now two I’ve heard chiefly from Chuck Missler.

First Chuck claims that the Prophecy of the coming “Prophet like unto Moses” from Deuteronomy 18 really implies a second coming of Moses but that’s simply lost in translation, but my own study of the Hebrew text lends it no support. At any rate he’s ignoring Acts 3:22 and 26:22 which define this as a Prophecy of Yeshua.

He also cites Jude verse 9

QUOTE"Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee."

Suggesting the reason defending Moses’s body from Satan was so important was because God still has a future plan for him.

I believe the reason was to be a witness to the Resurrection. Matthew 27:52&53 says

QUOTE"And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many."

As I’ve said elsewhere, this can’t be another temporary Resurrection like Lazarus, that wasn’t a special sign anymore. This is referring to the first phase of The First Resurrection. We know where Moses was buried, Mt. Nebo isn’t as controversial an identity as Sinai. Lots of excavations go on there, but the body of Moses hasn’t been found. I believe Moses certainly had to be among those Resurrected soon after Yeshua, which means he’s not capable of dieing anymore, which The Witnesses will have to do.

Why I view the other as Enoch.

I believe in the symmetry of The Bible. Exactly two people are recorded as being taken out of the Earth alive without ever dieing. One we are told specifically will come back. Then Revelation 11 speaks of Two Witnesses who operate like Old Testament Prophets, and definitely parallel the one confirmed to come back. And both will die and be resurrected in circumstances distinct from most of humanity. It seems to be like 1+1=2.

Chuck Missler argues against Enoch by saying “He’s not Jewish”. He’s one of those Pre-Tribbers who view the entire Tribulation as being uniquely focused on Israel, so clearly the other can’t be a Gentile, not even a pre-Abramanic gentile. But to me the Gentiles are still relevant during this period, the whole world is said to hate them, not just Jews offended by their Jewish message. I could add that Chuck also likes to say that the Woman of Revelation 12 is “Israel, in the sense that she starts with Eve” The Seed of The Woman, Enoch is part of that sense clearly, being in the Genealogy of Yeshua from Luke 3.

Hebrews 9:27 is often cited by Enoch supporters, though I hardly view my position as dependent upon it. “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”. The response to that however is that there are exceptions to this chiefly in those who will be Raptured. Because weather your Pre, Mid or Post Tirb, 1 Thessalonians 4 clearly describes people who will be spared “dieing” in the normal way when Yehsua returns to gather his people.

The Church is Resurrected at the Rapture “The dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain”, those alive still when it happens will be Resurrected without dieing. No one was truly resurrected before Yeshua in 30 A.D. So Enoch couldn’t have been Resurrected, he still needs to be.

John 3:13 is often cited by enemies of The Bible as a contradiction, for contradicting the accounts of both Elijah and Enoch by saying. “[color=red]And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.[/red]” The answer is that Elijah and Enoch were taken out of the Earth, but did not go all the way to the “Third Heaven” (2 Corinthians 12:2–4). But that answer leaves Enoch stranded if only Elijah comes back.

Given what we now know about the nature of Time thanks to Albert Einstein, about how if you travel past the Speed of light your also traveling through Time itself. What if Enoch and Elijah were taken to an Angelically inhabited Planet orbiting a distant Star? Both could have arrived at the same time despite being taken from Earth thousands of years apart simply by giving their “Chariots” different speed settings. They were briefed on what they needed to do, I suspect arrived after 100 A.D. so they could be given a complete New Testament and Hebrew Scriptures to study. Then left to Space-Time Travel again and will return when the Tribulation starts, but for them it’ll have only been like a few years tops.

I feel I should add, though it’s ultimately irrelevant to me. That them being Enoch and Elijah was virtually the unanimous opinion of early Christianity. Early Chuch fathers, such as Tertullian, Irenaeus, and Hippolytus of Rome state this view, the last two I know take the correct Futurist views on most issues of Eschatology and so are my favorites to read on that subject. The account of Christ’s descent into Hades from the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus features both of them identifying themselves as The Two Witnesses. The Pseudo-Prophecy from the late 4th Century attributed to the Tiburtine Sibyl also identifies them as Enoch and Elijah. This Moses popularity popped up much latter.

For open minded Jewish readers.

Now I want to go into reasons why I feel I can argue from the Hebrew Scriptures alone that Elijah will have a partner. And in the process will make some more interesting arguments in Enoch’s favor. (I wouldn’t worry about setting another cup at Passover though, I’m sure their Ok sharing.)

I’ll start with how witnesses going in twos is a common pattern in Scripture. Joshua sent two spies into Jericho, earlier the spies Moses sent were in six pairs of two (Joshua and Caleb being the only two to give a good report). Moses also had Aaron’s assistance when he went before Pharaoh. The pattern might be related to Deuteronomy 17:6 and 19:5 though that’s sickly in a legal procedure context.

The pattern does apply to Elijah himself, there was another Prophet of YHWH opposing the idolatry of Ahab and Jezebel. Micaiah, who spoke the truth in opposition to the false prophets in 1 Kings 22:19-23. You might be surprised I didn’t choose Elisha for this analogy. Elisha is the protege of Elijah who actually in a sense surpasses Elijah performing twice as many miracles. In a sense that anticipated Church Age believers, because Yeshua foretold the Disciples’ deeds would surpass his own in John 14:12. But in another sense I think in this context he represents those faithful of the second half of the Tribulation who will continue the work to the Two Witnesses after their Death, Resurrection and Rapture.

Next I will turn to a specific passage alluded to in Revelation 11, Zechariah 4. The two Olive Tress on each side of the Menorah, which represent two Anointed Ones who stand before YHWH. Standard interpretation is that they refer to Zeurbbable and Joshua, leaders of the first wave of Israelites returning from the exile. Of course that is true, in one sense they do foreshadow The Witnesses. But there is more to it. One of the layers of symbolism of the Seven Candlesticks of The Menorah to me is the Seven Angels who stand before the Throne of YHWH. So what we have is symbolically two men who are currently among the Angels.

What’s interesting is this passage is also often affiliated by Jews with Hanukkah and read during that festival. They see the two Olive Trees next to the Menorah as foreshadowing the nine candlestick Hanukkah Menorah. Hanukkah is linked to the history of Antiochus Epiphanies and his Abomination of Desolation, a precursor of The Man of Sin. So it does also have End Times significance.

It’s not noticed by us in English because of differences in transliteration, but in Hebrew the first syllable of Hanukkah is the name of Enoch. The Holy Spirit loves making puns like that, so I don’t think it’s a coincidence.

Rabbinic Tradition does indeed today expect more coming figures then just Elijah and The Messiah. I’ve written a study on Messiah Ben-Joseph and how that concept is both compatible with and incompatible with Christian understandings of Prophecy.

Some argue there are a total of four coming, Messiah Ben-Joseph, Messiah Ben-David, a Priest and a Prophet. The Prophet is typically Elijah’s role, but he could fit Messiah Ben-Joseph as well, some traditions about Ben-Jospeh have an interesting parallels to what Revelation 11 says about the Witnesses. Being killed by the villain(s) body left laying in the streets of Jerusalem for a time period until their Resurrected by Ben-David.

Some of the stuff I’ve read from Rabbinic Jewish speculation does consider the idea of one of the four specifically having a mission to the Gentiles and/or being a Gentile. Which is a decent response to Chuck Missler’s main argument against Enoch.

The Priest is often interpreted as a Levitical/Aaronic priest, sometimes using the term “War Priest”. But alternatively is sometimes considered a Priest “after the order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110). To Christians that is chiefly a title of Christ, but it also applies to The Church, as we’re also promised to reign as Kings and Priests with him.

In the strictly Jewish sense the Priests’ most important role was carrying out the Sacrifices. So in that context I view the Priesthood of Melchizedek as beginning with God himself in Genesis 3 killing animals to make coverings for Adam and Eve, then Able who’s offering was accepted over Cain’s, and then the entire line of patriarchs from Seth to Noah (which includes Enoch), and then was passed down many others including it’s namesake until it ended with Jethro the Priest of Midian and father in law of Moses who was contemporary with the Aaronic Priesthood’s birth. So Enoch is an interesting candidate.


I got inspired by that Harley & Ivy pulp-fictionesque art piece and thought I’d post a few covers from actual novels of that era.

There’s an absolutely amazing gallery of dozens of the things here - they’re really worth checking out! And bless whoever created it… it’s wonderful!

Obviously they are hugely problematic in being blatantly homophobic and misogynistic & the stories usually did not end well for the queer women in their pages.

But they are also so antiquated in their stereotypes and melodrama that they send me off into peal of laughters. 

And even still, the artwork is generally GORGEOUS.

All of that aside, from their unintentional hilarity to their sensationalist prejudice, to the pretty pretty pictures - these books were actually a lifeline for queer women of the times. They were written primarily as titillation for men (although their contents were actually very tame) or as cautionary tales reinforcing the status-quo (women left without men are bound to be seduced by each other and the whole world will fall apart!!!) - but large numbers of queer women would devotedly buy them - for many, it was their only access into a lesbian world for many years. Before the 60s brought about more and more sensationlist and explicit covers where the contents were in no doubt, women would have to interpret the cover coding, done in such a way to get past censors of the time. Pulp fictions were a huge industry and covered many racy topics so queer women looking for lesbian-themed books would watch for indictators such as, fairly obviously, two women on the cover - particularly if they looked distressed, a man looking agonised in the background was another sure clue, if he was in shadows even better - women at different levels - a petite blonde positioned lower in relation to a tomboyish-looking brunette was popular - women in states of undress in pairs or in a group, or a sole woman looking tortured and distressed, often turned away from the ‘viewer’, women in the military, boarding schools or prisons, and titles with the words like ‘twilight’, ‘lavender’, ‘sisters’ and ‘odd’ or ‘warped’ in them. 

Some of these books were even written by actual lesbians, often writing under a male pen name. Although as far as we know she was not a lesbian, Marion Zimmer Bradley (of ‘Avalan’ fame) also wrote several under a few different pen names. 

They had their hey-day between 1955-1965. Despite often suggestive covers the stories inside attempted in the most schlocky way to actually be a story. It was in the 60s they succumbed to soft-corn pornography and the cover art lost the mystique, artistry and sensuality of the earlier books, although often still skillfully executed. 

Odd Girl Out has a happy ending.  Yes the 2 girls don’t end up together and 1 marries a man, but the other makes it quite clear She’s Gay is going to stay that way and neither is ashamed of the Love they shared.

Most of these books were written by real Lesbians, so in-spite of their dated problems they did frequently prove very authentic.  And often the Unhappy ending were force don by Editors, like Spring Fire, where it’s pretty obvious what was changed before release.

RUMOR: First Spoilers Leaked From the 'Gotham' TV Series Pilot Script?! ~ Superhero Movie News | Comic Book Movie News 24/7

Bullock being more experienced then Gordon? Ugh.

Seeing a 14 year old Selina could be amusing, I like Fille Fatales, doubt she’ll be able to compete with Sasha as Alison though.

The handling of Montoya sounds potentially unintentionally offensive.

The means for referencing Ivy, Riddler and Joker all suck major balls. But I still have hope for The Penguin who’ll clearly be the main focus, with Fish.


Kaelyn and Lucy
I saw you movies first time less then year ago. I was shy, nerves, weak, and i couldn’t believe in love. People avoiding lgbt society becouse they are scared of unknown. 
 One day i saw you on YT and started to believe. I became more confident. I dont feel differend or misunderstood anymore. I came out to many people, i started to enjoy the life, thank to you.
 Of coure it wasnt so easy at the beginning but you are real. You ansver my list, you spoke with people on YouNow, you uploaded you ups and downs. It makes me believe in love, even long distance relationship. You can may not believe but you saved many lives. Soon you’ll be together forever, thats Amazing!! You Won yours life and love alreday

I think i can speak on behalf of all who ever wached your videos:
  Thanks for shearing your love, for makes people believe, for beeing real, and being altruist. Thank You! We Love you Luclyn<3

I really hope Ezra actually is Guilty

I know, rule number 1 of melodramatic serialized mystery shows is that whoever looks obviously guilty to the shows amateur detective will most certainly be exonerated.  And for Pretty Little Liar's magnificent Sherlock Holmes in trainer Spencer Hastings that is taken Up to Eleven.

But this Ezra situation really does feel different to me from Toby and Paige and so on.  Toby did only grunt work, but Ezra has been way to over the top.  In a sense though, whatever way it turns out, now feels like the perfect timing for Ezra to finally be a suspect in more then just Fan Speculation.

For 3 and a half seasons the greatest annoyance of fans has been how Aria’s story-lines seem to detached from the actual mystery.  How -A targets her the least, and she’s always safely doing mundane things with Ezra while her 3 friends endure “Follow Me End Up Like Me” torture.

But when you go back to the Pilot, the “Present” story begins with Aria, besides the Sleepover flashback we only see Aria prior to first rendition of the opening themes, and what’s it led into with but her and Ezra meeting adorably contrived Meet-Cute.  And she did receive the very first -A text.

The first Act of the Pilot combined with the Title Screen kind of sets things up as if Aria is the The Star of the show and the other 2 are her Willow, Xander and Giles. Logic says that’s only cause Lucy was the most famous actress of the three, she’s the only one they expected to have a built in fan-base (Special Agent Timothy McGee’s Sexy Leggy Nerdy sister and Benson’s adorably opposite Cheerleader characters be damned) so she’s the one who’s fans they needed to get hooked.

But so long after everything played just the opposite, making us wonder why ABC would bother giving the biggest star the least eventful role.  In a way whether we admired it or not we kind of did like Aria’s awkward shenanigans, kind of enjoyed getting a reprieve from all the murderous ephebophile drama with Aria’s Quasi normal teen drama.

The After Ellen recap of 4.12 says the scene with the Leger de main Magic box in Ravenswood. was like the premise of the whole show “Watching nothing happen to Aria while something horrible happens to Emily”.  But what a perfect time for such a metaphor, because it’s that very same episode that ends with the ezrA reveal.

So why in the Noir episode little filler play is such a major theme being how none of them have the guts to tell Aria what each of them has had to be told already?

Because as the time finally approaches for Aria to truly suffer the way the others have suffered endlessly, you start to fear that maybe, just maybe, she’s the one who can’t handle it?  And then you Hope that her proving she can will be the most awesome thing this awesome show as awesomely done yet.

And then Lucy will have finally earned the fact that she probably got paid more then anyone else for season 1.