The youtube channel, Tovia Singer, is rub by a rabbi who likes to attack Jesus as a false Messiah. He claims that, if Jesus were the true Messiah, the Old Testament would at least say that the nation of Israel will be saved by Him. He says that Old Testament does not say so, even though he knows that Isaiah 53 has the Messiah dying for the sins of the nation, and then, not many verses later, He's implied resurrected to become the eternal king of both Israel and the world. Last I heard, acting as a Sacrifice for sins is the salvation of Israel. Why doesn't Mr. Singer accept this fantastic news? Because, he's evil, a partner with darkness. That's what Jesus would tell you.

In the same way that many Christians do not wish to disown Christmas for fear of what the family will think of them, many Jews do not wish to risk conversion to Jesus for fear of being disowned by the rest of Jews, and especially immediate family. Jesus said that, unless one turns against family members, if those members turn against him/her for faith in Jesus, he/she is unworthy of Him. This is the division that Jesus said He was bringing to the earth, not divisiveness, but salvation, which itself would cause the division when the evil family members disown, persecute, ridicule, or disrespect the one saved. Jesus is inadvertently bringing division, but He's not the one being divisive. It can be a lonely life for a Christian, which is why it's a good idea top invite a couple of friends over weekly or bi-weekly for fellowship.

Sitting in pews listening to a one-way "conversation" is NOT fellowship. This is why people in the pews can feel sleepy, because there's no inter-action. Week after week after week, sit still and listen, but do not talk. That's not fellowship. Christians need fellowship because they work amongst the unGodly week after week, and it's very tough to have meaningful or comfortable times with some or most of these people. The spirits don't mix if the UnGodly insist on leading the conversations.

I recoil from many video owners because they are unGodly; they rub me the wrong way, and if they tell me they're Christians while rubbing me the wrong way, they will also tell me that they like unGodly video owners. What's wrong with that picture? Is it me who's being judgmental, or are they sickening and disgusting in God's sight? It's a good question. We should deal with it, because if God sees us enjoying the videos of the unGodly, He may Judge us as being the unGodly. Some people who laugh now will weep later, and you don't want to be one of those.

If those who profess Jesus don't get deeper with him, they are in mortal danger of becoming the three bad seeds that die or fall away. There are snares all over the Internet, and youtube has no bones about airing videos of such morons as those who attack even the apostle Paul. Some call him a "narcissist," the new bad word described akin to a sociopath. You didn't know that your own mother is a narcissist until you watched a video from a podcaster trying to cash in on the narcissist movement.

As Paul used the word, "I," quite a bit, he's a narcissist too. But God in the Old Testament used "I" much-much more, and describes Himself in glowing colors, and so those morons who call Paul a narcissist based on using a personal pronoun will now need to accuse God of being a super-narcissist. Or, there is another explanation that makes wicked morons of these morons. These morons will now need to call Jesus a Narcissist for saying, "I am the Truth, the Light, and the Way, nobody comes to the Father but by Me."

Paul can be described as an energetic man, zealous to perform for Jesus, zealous for his particular brand of Christianity, zealous to protect his flock. How does that remotely look like a narcissist? He showed urgency in travelling from church to church, and he at times begged his flock to remain loyal to his message. But it wasn't his message alone. He was conveying what He thought best to be the attributes of God. He listed the evils of mankind to avoid, but he also listed the beautiful things that man can attain to with the help of the Spirit of God. He's never been accused of living in luxury or dressing like a rich man, which is what we expect a narcissist to attain to if possible. Instead, he placed his own life in danger due to zeal for fulfilling the mission Jesus granted him, which he considered an honor.

When Paul embarrassed Peter to his face in front of others, someone could accuse Paul of plotting to acquire supremacy in the Church. Or, somebody could see it differently, that Paul was zealous for the churches he was building, not wanting a bad attitude to come in the from the top -- from Peter and other apostles -- to divide and cripple his churches.

Paul had a special disgust for the Jewish Christians who wanted to go back to things-Temple, which he called "the law." He saw their teachings as crippling. There is enough burden already for Christians, to remain steadfast to the humanity that Jesus wanted to grow, but adding the burden of things-Temple was indeed crippling. We Christians are very happy to have the Jesus-way of atonement as opposed to the bull-way of the Temple. When Paul said that salvation is in faith alone, he meant faith and obedience to Jesus -- the whole package -- as opposed to Jesus tacked onto the things-Temple, physical circumcision, and other Jewish customs that had developed from the religious leaders. Paul's gospel is salvation by remaining in the Vine, and progressing to a perfected humanity, the "new man" built by the Spirit of God.

There are podcasters who call themselves Christians but know nothing of what I've just told you. They don't know it because their hearts are not close to the concept of becoming the new man. The podcasters concern themselves with freedom of speech, the American flag, and winning elections in order to protect their lifestyles from the communistic left. They will praise Trump like baboons even if he protects pedophiles. Christians, in the camp of these baboons, seem to have forgotten what they were called too by Jesus. If they were truly grounded in Jesus, they would know when to call it quits with praising Trump, but as they remain evangelists for Trump even now, they are in mortal danger, I am afraid. Beware the avid pro-Trumper podcaster who slips in a comment, now and then, to identify himself/herself with Jesus, because this looks like an attempt to draw Christians into the baboon camp. I don't use X or other such platforms, but I'm sure they are filled with warring baboons. Alex Jones of INFO WARS is a "Christian" baboon whose Christianity is heretical. He seeks to draw in Christians. Many have accused him for years of being a stooge of Israel, and that's what he's looking like right now, possibly because the Israeli lobby is demanding it of him without concern for his exposing himself.

And we then have Candace Owens, the vatican ape (or parrot) seeking to hook you up with a catholic "theology," rosary and all. There are very strong Christians you can cling to who will not partake with these apes, but beware whom you're clinging to because they can have a great podcast, Biblically sound, only to turn around and reveal that they believe is some nutty thing like preterism, or something so destructive as Zionistic pre-tribulationism. Or, if you are Joel Richardson, you are a Zionistic post-tribulationist who believes that current Israel is the doll of God.

The apostle Paul had a special disgust for the Jews. If Paul had a special disgust for Jewish Christians seeking to get Christians back to things-Moses, how much more did he fear the snares of the Christ-less Jews? Yet, modern Israel is majorly "liberal" without even Moses. Modern Israel may as well be Gentilic or pagan. How does Joel Richardson excuse himself for embracing this house of satan? He doesn't excuse himself; he doesn't apologize. Instead, he wants you to embrace this rot.

The correct Christian approach to Israel is to do it no harm. Don't persecute the Jews, as is the wish of some White supremacists or other anti-Semites. Don't be anti-Jewish, but have the wisdom and the righteousness not to become like them, not to appreciate them as a people of God, for they will never be a people of God unless they embrace Jesus appropriately. This is New-Testament 101 which we have from Paul. Pray for the Jews because, if you wish them to be dead as a lot, it will displease God. I advocate God's punishment on the wicked and super-rich Jews who seek to create an Israeli-based globalism without Jesus, with they themselves as the masters of the universe. Trump is, or at least has been, in this camp. He may be changing his mind right now. Musk is in that camp.

People who attack Candace without grounds, because they wish to stand with Israel as a Biblical rule, are shallow, failing to realize that God's greatest passion, in the lead-down to Armageddon, is his disgust with Israel. Armageddon is rooted in God's murderous campaign against Israel. There is nobody more anti-Israel than God at this time. He is about to murder them. But we are not to gloat, or we can suffer the Winepress of His Wrath. The nations who trample Jerusalem will gloat, and then suffer a worse fate than Israel, so says Old-Testament prophecy which the Israelis are not reading. Don't gloat, don't wish for God's wrath on Israel. Let Him work this out, for this is His business, to provide Abraham with a people washed through the fiery furnace of affliction, where the impurities are smoked out.

Am I saying that the abomination of desolation is about to appear now? I wish it were so because I can't tolerate this world any longer. The "abomination" is not a pig slaughtered in the Jerusalem temple, as most world-class prophecy "scholars" claim. These sorts of scholars cling to worldly historians more than they do the prophetic text. Daniel and Jesus clearly identify the abomination as the anti-Christ himself. Jesus said that he will be "standing"...on a wing of the temple site, and Daniel 11 reveals that his armed men will conquer both the temple site and the city. It's not going to be granted to him, apart from war, by the Jordanian king. This military invasion is good reason to believe that Jordan (owns the Temple Mount), at the royal level, will not be supporting him.

There is no prophecy saying that the anti-Christ will be pro-Israel at any time, only to betray Israel in the end. There is no prophecy saying explicitly that the anti-Christ will make a peace treaty with Israel, for "the many" with which he does make a pact does not necessarily include Israel. Besides, this "covenant" is not called a "peace treaty," but you have the bulk of prophecy scholars insisting that it will be a peace treaty. That idea, I feel sure, originates with daft prophecy scholars, the wicked pre-tribulationists who rebel against the words of Jesus in Matthew 24:29-31, against the words of Paul in II Thessalonians 2:1-8, and against the timing of the rapture in Daniel 12:1-2. If you are new to Paul's prophecy, here is some of it:

Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. (II Thessalonians 2:1-8).

A normal reading of those words shows that the Church will not be gathered in the rapture of Matthew 24:29-31 until after the full (42-month) mission of the abomination of desolation. NOBODY says that this abomination will form a peace treaty with Israel. Break away from pre-tribulationist and dispensationalist teaching, or you may suffer horribly from it. If you see that the 666 system is imminent for your area, start saving plenty of long-lasting foods, wisely, to get you through those 42 months. "Imminent" can be viewed differently. Some would say that it's imminent now, and others would prefer to wait, before storing foods, until they see the first stages of implementation.

The key to knowing the timing best is to cast off the pre-tribulationist scholars who claim that the anti-Christ first appears in Daniel 11 at verse 26. Dead wrong. He first appears at verse 21, and then successfully invades Egypt in verse 25. When you see this, it will be a very good time to hurry, to store foods, if you think that the 666 system is global, or imminent for your area. Unfortunately, we have no Biblical details as to how far spread it will be, but if the powers could unleash a global-reaching vaccine scam, they can do the same with a forced 666-purchasing system.

Th mark of the beast could turn out to be, no vaccine, no food; no fix your water pump', no fix your car;, no get a paycheck. We already saw a ghost of that very sort of system, with our own eyes. The global beast was trying to make it harsher than what they got away with, and so perhaps that was the first stages on the implementation of the mark. Hearken ye, stay loyal to Jesus, stay wise.

I'm perplexed by Christians disregarding the scandalous ways that Turning Point is behaving, but who love the organization just because it's leaders speak Bible-speak. There are all sorts of money-grubbing ex-pastors who have turned into wolves, who yet call themselves pastors, who use Bible-speak well at times, slipping up only on rare occasions. We've got to be sharper when deciding who to label authentic. Turning Point is not going to advertise itself by showing quotes from Charlie when he slipped up badly, like when he said he loves to have Mormons on his team. That's a slap to the face of Jesus. I don't care if Turning Point is purely a political organization, no follower of Jesus would say they're proud of Mormons on the team. Instead, you show distance from them, excuse yourself from them, show disdain for their being on the team, tell the people the heresy of Mormon roots and the falsifications in the fraudulent Book of Mormon. It seems to me, so to speak, that Charlie Kirk, and especially Turning Point under Erika, would be proud to have Pharisees and Sadducees on the team if they could garner 100,000 new voters and a few million dollars in donations.

Back to Tovia Singer, who's calling the Gospel writers, and Paul, outright liars, fabricators of a Messiah, just because Luke 24:26, for example, has Jesus telling that Scripture foretells that He would be risen on the third day. Granted, we know of no prophecy specifying the Resurrection on the 3rd day, but Tovia is very ungracious with this accusation, for he knows that, when more than one Gospel relates the same event, the words are not exactly the same. Tovia understands that the Gospel records are from recollections, wherefore not every word will be the same in describing a certain event or conversation.

Tovia also understands that anyone whatsoever, decades or centuries after Luke's death, could have put words in Jesus' mouth that Luke never penned. A gracious person would allow for such a possibility, that someone may have entered into the record a descriptive add-on which Jesus did not in fact speak. But Tovia is trying to be as gracious as a kamikaze pilot, destroying his own soul in the process of bombing the roots of Christianity. Way to fight, Tovia, stabbing yourself to critical over a gnat while ignoring the 800 pound camel.

He claims, as do all the rabbis, that Isaiah 53 is not the Sacrifice and Resurrection of Jesus, but the only reason they deny it is because the "Servant of that text looks glaringly like Jesus. This fact is sitting in plain sight, in the prophet Isaiah, the most-beloved prophet of the rabbis. The prophet says that God is sending a servant to die to the sins of Israel, but that, after the suffering of His soul, He will be alive again as the global ruler. It's Tovia's own Messiah, but he, like a BIG STUPID, rebels against the very God he claims to love and respect. This is the shameful folly of the modern Jews multiplied millions of times over.

This folly lives on the streets of Israel, in New York, and in Washington. It is indeed a stench on humanity which God Himself despises. He will make a mockery of it, and bring it down in shame. But woe to me if I paint all Jews with this same brush. I praise God for His Israeli Remnant, I rejoice when Jews come to Jesus. I look forward to God's destruction of the zillion-dollar Ashkenazi / Khazarian thief, the monster with the bottomless stomach.

Tovia is in another video lambasting modern Christians as "liars" because Bible translations capitalize "messiah" or "anointed one" at the end of Daniel 9. He pretends that it's some sort of terrible violation when he knows the reason: Christians think that this text is referring to Jesus, and they have good reason for it. But Tovia insists that, as the same Hebrew word used in Daniel 9 is elsewhere in Scripture but not referring to the Messiah that Christians are compelled, by some concrete law-of-words he imagines, not to interpret Daniel 9 as the messiah. Ya-but, why not? If the shoe fits, why not? Why can't God call the Messiah, "the anointed" while also calling some human man, "the anointed"? Why not, Tovia? Why are we compelled to deny the Messiah in Daniel 9 just because there's a anointed human in previous Scripture? Are you too stupid or something? He makes this sham argument because the Anointed One in Daniel 9 is predicted to be "cut down" at the time of Jesus. The STUPID MAN disowns his own Messiah, and calls His people liars. "Cut down" carries the connotation of "murdered."

When has God ever spoken of merely an anointed man 483 years to the future? Daniel 9 is speaking on the eternal restoration of Israel, and Tovia is TOO STUPID to fathom that the Messiah might be involved. Oye, such an idiot box.

As even Tovia believes that the Messiah will be central to the eternal restoration of Israel, and as he can see that the Messiah is "cut off" near the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, why doesn't he get with the program: God intended to sacrifice the Messiah, to death, and then to raise Him to life such that He becomes the ruler of the universe? Is Tovia too stupid? No, that would be too kind. Rather, Tovia is a satanic bastard without a Father in heaven. His fate is worse that the fate of the typical atheist who has no knowledge of the Scriptures. Tovia has no excuse because he's very familiar with the Messianic prophecies by his own admission.

If ever Tovia becomes a Christian, he will cease to be a bastard, and I'll be the first to holler with joy for him.

Isaiah 53 says that the Messiah will be "CUT OFF from the land of the living." The end of Daniel 9 says that the Messiah will be "CUT off." What doesn't Tovia understand about this? Why is he protesting like a skunk, like a child in a tantrum who refuses eternal life just because Jesus rebelled against the priesthood? What sort of a beast is Tovia that he would even attack his own savior? That's what God is dealing with. That's the stink we're talking about in Zionist Israel. That's the cancer that needs to be cut out, especially if the cancer is advancing like an activist fool in the guise of a Bible expert. Tovia will not prevail. You'll need more than a high-school education to watch a Christian show Tovia that he's not the smartest cookie in the jar:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-TMe9qv9D4

Tovia, I love Wonderful Counselor. Why don't you? Is it because he attacked your beloved priesthood? By the way, I know nothing of Ash Maiz, the owner of the video above. I hope he's solid all-around. Here's Tovia's worst nightmare:
https://www.youtube.com

I watched two Tovia videos, and youtube stacked me with 10 more. See? youtube is an anti-Christian platform that, although it gives us Christian videos, it also gives half of them from heretics, and probably buries the best ones. This is a gradual process; the worst is yet to come. Almost half the videos it feeds me are leftist podcasters I NEVER click on. Whether I like it or not, I see Young Turk videos daily, as well as a slew of others I NEVER CLICK. youtube gives them to me knowing I don't want them, but may not be treating leftists in the same way. This is election cheating. I never click on CTV, CBC, CBS, CNN, ABC, and MSNBC, but youtube still feeds me a steady flow, and thus cuts in half, or more, my choices. This is election cheating for those who follow politics.

If you want a short treatment of Isaiah 53 by Mike Winger:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDpV2SYAxoc

Another video by Ash Maiz, but only for fast listeners:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z1eLy_rAXo

Epstein-Clinton Files

This week, I learned that part of the Massie-Khana law is that the DoJ is required to explain all redactions where they occur in the release of the files. However, the DoJ did not include such explanations. It's an excellent part of the law because the DoJ should not be able to redact things for self-protecting reasons, and then claim they are redacting for other, justifiable reasons (that do not exist). Therefore, due to the DoJ not including reasons for redactions, it's going to sink Trump deeper into the deep-state quagmire.

I've also learned that fully 500 pages of the release was blanket redacted, but this cannot be justified based on the just redaction of merely the names of the victims who do not wish to be revealed. Plus, some of the victims do wish to be revealed. If only the names are to be redacted, then we would see the odd redaction amid the full disclosure of the text, not blanket redaction of the text. I assume that these 500 pages are as per transcripts and/or comments of/about in a court case, but this sort of redaction is now no longer justified by the law.

Trump said that he is displeased to see Clinton's pictures publicized, but this is a ruse because, surely, Trump wanted those pictures released, which is exactly why he's showing displeasure, to hide that he wanted them released. He wants those pictures of Clinton out to move Democrats to oppose further releases. Surely, the DoJ would not release the Clinton pictures apart from Trump's permission. Surely, the DoJ would not release anything until after talking to Trump on his parameters of the release.

Surely, we realize that Trump has chosen to protect the Epstein-guilty men in spite of the damage it will do to 2026 elections. Imagine that. Praise be to those who are willing to see a lame-duck Trump (after these elections) on behalf of jailing the Epstein-guilty. Let's get our priorities right. Always do the right thing in order to get God on our side. God is not now on Trump's side. Those seeking to avoid going downhill by doing evil will go downhill eventually. Those going downhill by doing right will go uphill eventually.

Trump had the audacity to praise Clinton when everyone else saw a pedophile. Imagine that? Not one raw word against Clinton, as if Trump is the demon from Hell Hole. It should be clearer now than ever, that Rump has not wanted to violate the reputation of Clintons for fear that Bill would snitch on Trump's secrets with Epstein.

Trump told the world this week that Thomas Massie is down to 19-percent in a poll, and even if this is a correct figure, I expect Massie to go uphill eventually for the hard choices he's making against his wicked president. An Newsweek article this past August:

According to a new internal poll by McLaughlin and Associates, posted by Donald Trump on his Truth Social account, Massie's favorability rating dropped from 54 percent in June to 43 percent this month, while his unfavorability rating rose to 54 percent from 40 percent. His overall job approval slipped from 52 percent to 39 percent.

The poll attributed Massie's falling support to a barrage of ads from MAGA Inc, a pro-Trump super PAC that spent $800,000 on a recent TV campaign in his district, following an earlier $1 million ad buy targeting him.

There are people polled who know nothing of Massie but what they see in these ads, and so he's not as unpopular as these numbers show, amongst the in-the-known voters. The obvious mutation in Democracy is that the rich get to put out more ads than the poor. Plus, roughly 40-percent of the polled could give him an automatic bad report just because they're Democrats. By mid-October, there was this headline: "Massie posts best fundraising quarter ever as Trump challenge looms." However, he's reportedly way down against his Trump-sponsored Republican challenger. This is not nearly pure democracy, but more like top-down authoritarianism.

I don't know whether I should sympathize with Christians who give Trump a thumbs-up on this issue. I understand their fear of giving power back to Democrats, but I think aligning with God is the greater priority, per issue, than aligning with Trump for fear of Democrats. If we side with Trump on the issue of pedophilia, we should perhaps start fearing the tying a giant millstone around our necks, by Jesus, to be drowned at the bottom of the ocean. I don't want to risk anything like that, and so I'm opposing Trump on this issue. What about you?

When Christians support Trump on this issue, Trump becomes emboldened such that his DoJ becomes brash in withholding, trashing or redacting criminal elements in the files. I would not want to be on this side of the issue, especially as Epstein is an agent of the Israel whom God is about to wipe out, if we are about to embark on the last seven years. Surely, if God is to wipe Israel out at any time, Christians should not support that particular Israel as a God-blessed entity, yet there are Trump supporters doing this even on their own podcast shows. It's making me unsettled. It's starting to make me think that there are some very-shallow believers who are not much on-target in their Biblical thinking.

We understand that there are anti-Israelis in the Republican camp who are such aside from these issues, but we should not take a contrary position for that reason alone, lest we appear to be anti-Israel as deep as our spines. We have also got to consider that Jesus Himself will be anti-Israel in the great tribulation, not because He opposes the Promise to Abraham, but because he supports the Promise while modern Israel is a heresy toward It. Therefore, Christians who support end-time Israel in its wars and customs, even in its forced vaccinations, are in danger of opposing Jesus. Yet, shallow Christians, many undoubtedly pre-tribulationists, think that the will of Jesus for us is to support end-time Israel as if it were identical with supporting the Promise to Abraham.

I rejoice that Israel is back on the map as of the mid-20th century, but I also know that there is a final act of God to purge its leaders and its obstinate people, and so I have the on-target view that I cannot support those people. I detest a Netanyahu-Trump alliance, especially as it touches Gaza and the West Bank. The latter includes the walled Old Jerusalem.

God is not only going to allow the anti-Christ to desolate Jerusalem, as if He's only tolerating it, but is Himself at the charge of this desolation. Apparently, there are some shallow-thinking Christians in podcastland who do not know it. It would be better if they did not know as opposed to knowing and yet supporting end-time Israel as if it were a righteous nation. It's not enough for people on the Israeli streets to be nice people; they must also take the side of God on the issues. Isaiah says that when God is poised to bring the anti-Christ to them, they will party instead of calling out to Him for salvation. They don't want the true God over them, for if they truly did, God would not bring the desolation, duh.

It's a total shame that we've got to go to leftist podcasters to get details on the Epstein-file fiasco:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx9Jw4KozCA

I'd like to share a quote from my last update where the DuPonts, mentioned by Candace Owens and others in potential relation to Erika Kirk, were to topic along with their branches (you can click Parrs, which loads them on another tab in order to load other surnames, to better follow the heraldic links).

:

The Sola's (Derbyshire) in the [the Larcher / Archer] motto share the black border with Furness' and Parrs, both of whom I trace to the Pontus' royals (see "Furness" in my last update for that trace). Furness' and Parrs are first known in Lancashire with black-border KIRKhams.

That quote is here because I heard in the video above that Jeffrey Epstein's partner in money-laundering crimes, Les Wexner, lived in Ohio. It reminded me of Erika's claim that her mother moved to Arizona from Ohio. I therefore loaded the Wesner surname because houseofnames doesn't list Wexners. Wesners are listed with Wesenhams, and they are said to have named Wesham in KIRKham. Coincidence, or is God hinting that Erika's Frantzve Kirk's Intelligence-steeped mother was in the Epstein crime ring? If so, why? Isn't it true that Trump himself put Erika on the model-type map as per her beauty pageant?

The Wesner write-up tells that Wesham was owned by Westby, and Wess' are listed with Westons (Wesner and West colors). Suddenly, we can be on the Waistells/Wessels that were in my last update as per a pointer to crisis actors faking Charlie Kirk's murder. The entire Turning-Point team that was present were turned into temporary crisis actors. Wesners are in the colors and format of Wedge's, first known in Somerset with early Frants/Friends and Whistle's/Wissels.

Wex's/Wax's/Waxands are first known in Middlesex, where Fiers are first known, and where Eppstein-branch Apps'/Epps were formerly first known. The APSus river was at Albania's Fier county. The Wex/Wax Coat shares the black cross of Stage-branch Eustace's, and Stage's, who were a pointer to the same crisis actors under discussion, are first known in Devon with Dove-loving Page's and Wests. The latter have the DANCEtty-fesse of Waistell-beloved Dove's in colors reversed, and Italian Dance's are also Donnas' (Piedmont with the Cottian capital), whom I trace to king Donnus of the Cottians, grandfather of Waistell-like Vestalis. Apps'/Epps are now first known in Huntingdonshire with English Cottons.

The Wex's/Wax's share the crescents of English Deans/Dene's, first known in Sussex with the Vise's who share the Wex/Wax / Eustace cross. Vise's and Stacy-branch Eustace's put their cross between antlers, as do Stage's.

To better assure that we are not shallow, we shouldn't read the Bible only, but we should ask with all of our hearts for God to gift us with His Spirit within us. Anyone without the Spirit within is not a Christian at all, according to Paul, and Jesus affirms this when He said that we need to be "born again." To receive the Spirit, we need to show God that we mean business i.e. you've really got to want "it" with a broken heart showing loyalty. This is the gift that we give God, our willingness to make him our Father. This is what God lives for. He is able to give us much, but we can't give Him anything that He appreciates unless our loyalty is the gift. When we speak to Him, we should be loyal to Him, otherwise what are our words to Him but some trick to get something?

Try not asking for anything when you pray. Not always, but sometimes, try forbidding yourself from asking for anything. Tell Him what you would like to see in this world, things you know He would like to see. Your kingdom come, your will be done, in Israel, everywhere. Wonderful Counselor is coming, and the world government will be on his shoulders, meaning He's got a lot of work to do. Ask Jesus if He's excited about this? Ask Him if he's ready to lead, so much work. Ask Him if you can be his helper, maybe a door man at his house, or the crown cleaner, or the weed killer. Ask if you can be a weed killer even now. I am very sure that you can be light-hearted at times. At times I've said, "Lord, I know you're there i.e. you can't hide." Start talking, see where it goes. Practice talking to God, try to understand Him, to KNOW His mind. I think a few words only, nightly, are good, and the rest can be contemplation on what He might be thinking in regards to your words. Sometimes I remind Him, "not everyone in the world is talking to you right now, but I am; I hope you appreciate it." The Spirit should let you know in your conscience when you speak rightly, wrongly, or perfect in love. You know you're hitting the ball out of the park when you find yourself speaking perfect in love. This can't be done in corporate prayer. He need to be alone with Him.

I ask him a lot of difficult questions, and contemplate. I think the reason that faith is necessary in an INVISIBLE God is because He decided He needed to remain invisible to all, especially to those who hate Him, to test every soul, and that He makes up for this difficulty by approaching those He chooses with showing them subtle evidences of His existence in their lives. Each one of us has a slightly "different" God attending because he treats each one of us a little differently, depending on what's needed, and what our characters are like.

The reason Jesus needed to die in order that God would forgive us is because we would not love Jesus anywhere near as much had forgiveness been offered without such a sacrifice, if all that was needed is repentance. He died for us that we might not die. How can you not Love Him? This sacrifice is what compels us to repent, if we have the character enough. Most people do not. Most people don't appreciate what Jesus did. They won't even consider it. Some people do appreciate it, then betray in some delusional state.

The reason why our relatives don't like Jesus is that His followers come to love and respect Him more than they do the family circle. Suddenly, with Jesus, we start to minimize the importance of the family circle, and we see it as naked, especially when it tries to get us to give up on Christianity. It's no contest; the lame family loses. It can't match what God means to us. This is the true Christian, the loyal one, shunning family if that's what it takes, and it's so easy because God makes it easy, if He moves within us. But if we don't have the Spirit, we're one of the three seeds in the parable of the four seeds, a plant that will soon die upon sprouting.

Jesse on Fire is another sewer-mouthed, tattoo-toting podcaster coming out of the Kirk woodwork like a rash. Ditto for the Valhalla VFT channel. Guys like these are prime, Intelligence-operator candidates for insinuating themselves in bad gangs. I'm wondering about Jesse because he was adamant on his Tuesday show when insisting that Mitch Snow could not possibly have seen Brian Harpole at Fort Huachuca on the morning of September 9. Jesse came across like a raw nerve tasked with debunking that claim with fervor. Why?

Ditto for Valhalla. He was waaaay over-reacting against Candace over a wrong licence-plate number that she reported, as well as a typo on a building number, suggesting to me that Valhalla is an Intelligence / military operator tasked with debunking Mitch Snow no matter what it takes. In short, Valhalla did not contact Candace first, to get her opinion on these wrong numbers, before he did a video, wasting no time, to call her out as a fraud.

Jesse did not provide evidence that Brian was not at Huachuca at 8 am, September 9th. The best he could do is tell that Harpole possibly had a flight from Dallas to Salt Lake City on the 9th, at 1:42 pm, roughly eight hours after 8 am. It's a flight of only a couple of hours from Huachuca to Dallas, plenty of time left over within that eight hours, but Jesse insisted that the back-to-back flights were impossible. Huh? Why is he so on-fire against Candace for this "problem" only?

A pro-Trump podcaster could be just a lowly Intelligence operator whose podcast flow$ along in agreement with some conspiracy theories in order to better have the ears of his audience when it comes time to guard against anyone coming too threateningly close to a vital truth. Alex Jones has struck me as one of these, and he too, instead of celebrating Mitch Snow for being the guy who caught the government drug running, are hastily calling him a fraud now before hearing back from Candace. It's not necessary that these types work full-time for Intelligence, and, a non-brainer, Intelligence helps to get these guys high up on the youtube algorithm so that they become super-rich, and of course influential for when it's really needed. Fort Huachuca is an Intelligence hub. In the case of Huachuca, the criminality of concern may not be the Charlie event only, but there may yet be drug smuggling taking place by government gangsters to this day. They would have a special animosity against Mitch.

The flight from Dallas to Salt Lake was for Harpole to go see Charlie Kirk on the 10th. There is absolutely nothing difficult for Jesse to fathom that Harpole may have been summoned to Huachuca the day previous in order to work out some final details on the shooting event, for it's dangerous to work those things out by email / phone. So, as this was a big-deal event, once in a lifetime, it's not at all difficult for Jesse to fathom that Harpole would fly to Arizona on the evening of the 8th, only to fly back out to Dallas the next morning to secure his reserved afternoon flight to Utah.

Business people fly back-to-back flights often, and so Jesse's repeated insistence, with a beggerly, trust-me-trust-me attitude, that the back-to-back flights were impossible makes me wonder whether he's protecting the gangsters on this issue. If there is no record of Harpole's flight from Phoenix to Dallas, he could have been flown by a military plane. "Yes, Fort Huachuca has military aviation facilities, primarily Libby Army Airfield, which is a joint-use field shared with Sierra Vista Municipal Airport (FHU)..."

In short, why doesn't Jesse remain open, for a few days at least, to the possibility that Harpole was at Huachuca? What interest does he have in trying so passionately to deny that Mitch Snow saw both Harpole and Erika Kirk at Huachuca? Alex Jones made the same denial the day before without teeth.

Candace did come out to address Valhalla, but not in a video. She's on video-vacation at this time, and so I will need to wait-and-see what she says about the over-done gripes of Valhalla, a sewer-mouthed piece of human trash, in my opinion, akin to Ian Carroll. Valhalla could have simply stated that Candace made a couple of mistakes in her reporting, but not only did he talk like he's got a prickly cactus in his pants, she's not backing down in any way in her text of December 24/25.

Brian Harpole did not provide his whereabouts at 7 am September 9, the morning that Mitch claims he saw him. Why did he provide record of his plane flights, to Alex Jones, without also stating where has was at 7 am??? He looks guilty, for if he were not, there would be no risk in saying, "I was at home in Texas at 7 am?" A home security camera across the street from his house could prove that Harpole never stepped foot on his driveway on that morning, perhaps not at all that day. He might have been flown from Arizona to Dallas airport by the military, or by Turning Point's private jet, which Erika would have taken if she too was at Huachuca that day.

People were trying to figure why Charlie flew to Salt Lake City on the morning of the 10th, instead of to Provo just five miles from his event. Perhaps Charlie flew with Harpole to Salt Lake. But why there? Harpole was at the event with Charlie on the 10th? Why did they go to Salt Lake only to drive much further than five miles? Mikey's father said that Mikey was staying at a Salt-Lake hotel on the 10th. WHY? How much sooner than the 10th did Harpole reserve his flight to Salt Lake?

Harpole probably can't reveal his phone-call logs for the 9th because there are incriminating things on it, for surely he was setting up the faked killing of Charlie with others on that day. Tulsi Gabbard could easily get Harpole's phone calls on paper, and of course who could forbid her from accessing those calls now but Trump alone? Tulsi has reason to spy out the phone calls of the entire Turning Point team, and Trump alone has the official authority to stop her, though we could expect a slew of deep-state gangsters who could try on his behalf to keep her out of it. My prayer is that, finally, God will reveal the head of the swamp serpent. My bet is, it's a "Jewish" serpent.

Paramount Tactical, suspect by many as a tattooed government supporter, had a video, "The Case Against Tyler Robinson," with only 16K views after two weeks, what Candace supporters do is six hours. This goof has never changed, has always supported the FBI narrative, and so the mystery is how he could even get as many as 16K views. Maybe curious people wanting to see how daft and evasive he is in his arguments. Sure, he puts out a respectable persona, helpful for the task of falsifying.

The following video shows that the wrong license plate, and the wrong number for the driver's license, was the fault of the person who made a report from Fort Huachuca. What Valhalla and others are claiming is that Candace fabricated this report on behalf of Huachuca, which, in my mind, is unthinkable. Therefore, we will need to wait and see what the problem is with these wrong numbers. There's no need to watch after about a third-way through; what this fellow is doing is what Valhalla and others should have done first before spouting off.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jijkzjLOBUw

George Webb thinks that Mitch is working for Huachuca to "play" Candace to her ruin, but this sounds off because there was nothing to incriminate Huachuca until Mitch came along. Webb, who seemed happy to hear Candace focus on Huachuca (that's an important point), thinks that Mitch is trying to distract from the Egyptian planes and/or the Duponts. It does make sense that Huachuca would give wrong plate and license numbers for Mitch if the two are working together. Candace being played is not the same as calling her out as a fraud, keep that in mind. Webb is not calling her a fraud, just showing cold feet about Mitch.

Those calling her out as a fraud could be working with Mitch, if he's a fraud too, but the price Mitch pays for it is to more than ruin his reputation with his friends and family members. For example, if we say that Mitch never visited Huachuca on the 8th and 9th, but that the military just fabricated a report to "prove" that he was there, what would be the point of fabricating and publicizing the witnessing of two Turning-Point members plus one from Daily Wire? That can't be helpful to Turning Point even if the plan is to make Candace look nuts for trusting Mitch.

Or, if Mitch is working for Huachuca and did make the trip down on the 8th, knowing that the plan was to fake Charlie's murder, what would be the point in publicizing what he did? No matter how we cut this, it doesn't seem logical for the plotters to use Mitch in the way he's done things. It may be true that he's seeking some limelight for himself as the motive for fabrication the sightings of Brian Harpole and Erika, but so far, neither has presented an alibi, though both have tried.

Paramount Tactical seems to have so much information on Mitch, by merely the 26th, that I get the impression the military supplied him for to denounce his character as badly as possible. For example, Paramount shows some paperwork as per what Mitch was involved with 35 years ago, at the border, but there's nothing about a drug bust in that report, Paramount says. However, that can be explained as per the military scrubbing the drug bust because the military was supporting the drug running.

Also, where Mitch claims he fell 80 feet and broke many bones in his body, the thing coming to mind is that he was pushed over a cliff to keep him quiet, but he survived. He's not telling that he was pushed over a cliff, probably because he was warned not to, or else.

In any case, no matter what his faults, the question is: what was he doing at Fort Huachuca two days before the Kirk event, and did he or did he not see Turning-Point people there? Paramount Tactical can bad-mouth Mitch until he turns blue in his face, but what we want to see is proof from Erika, for example, that she was not there on the 8th? She can provide that proof from her phone logs, but instead provided some debatable proof, a photo taken from her phone, that she was not there on the 9th.

Her security boss was seen there on the 9th, which wouldn't be so critical if not for the faked murder of her husband the next day on the 10th. This is why we expect Erika to provide FAST proof that she was not there. She's now facing another a Streisand effect, and she's not yet over the Egyptian-plane scandal.

She sent this photo to Andrew Colvet (Turning Point leader), but told him not to share it with the public. It seems she wanted only Paramount Tactical to know about it in order to keep him on-board with her side versus Candace. That is, Colvet sent it to Paramount Tactical apparently at Erika's request, yet Erika directed Colvet to tell Paramount not to share the photo with the public. How do we explain this? Why not with the public, and why only with Paramount? It seems that the latter is a secret, military operative who can be trusted to stay on her side.

George Webb claims that Mitch's ex-wife, who in turn claims he's lying about falling off an 80-foot cliff / hill, may be working in the military. In that case, because they are going through a nasty divorce, she could be lying about the nature of his injuries. This Mitch is being turned into a distraction by a small army of suspect podcasters.

Here's a video showing that "PIZZA" is tattooed on the inner lip of Cabot Phillips, the man who reportedly dated Erika Kirk, who was seen with Erika on the 8th by Mitch, and who works for Daily Wire (Ben Shapiro). In my opinion, this lip tattoo tends to make me believe that Erika and/or her mother were in Romanian Angels to traffic children to atrocious military perverts using a Christian disguise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tg2eeTypUe4

The following information not only serves to show that Tyler Robinson has a fraudulent defence team serving Turning Point, but that the contractor of the Turning-Point camera team could be in cahoots with a Turning-Point related task of the Egyptian planes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibh2cgcE3uQ

In the meantime, the defence team is asking that the prosecution team be disqualified, which looks like a ruse to give appearances that it, the defence team, is not a kangaroo-court team.

On a run-down of this story as of the 27th, here's Coach Colin, who likes to portray himself as a clownish bacteria; sorry, but youtube algorithm doesn't bring up many respectable characters on these issues:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9a2tgrCPuI

Baron Coleman is now telling his audience that he's leaning heavily toward the mic-exploding theory, with no bullet entering Charlie. When a viewer suggested the squib theory, Baron dismissed it as a non-starter, probably because it'll bring him less money to admit that Charlie faked his death. I'm making that accusation against Candace too, because the faked-death theory is by far the best one, but podcasters don't like it, obviously.

In the video below, from one who thinks the killing was faked in order to pace Charlie in a witness-protection program, the owner tries to show how the shirt may have been raised very momentarily. Sure, one can find ways to raise a shirt using upward-directed air pressure, but this doesn't mean that this method was used on Charlie. I can't see clearly why a shirt needed to be raised on Charlie to feign a bullet-cavitation event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBOtwV43tUM

This second video below, with the same owner as above, claims to have solved the neck-chain mystery, but I don't see a solution at all, especially as the one doing the experiment admits that the chain cannot be blasted off the neck by air pressure unless the cross on the chain is placed INTO a gun. He has a highly unlikely theory in which the cross on the chain was directly blasted out of a gun of some sort, DELIBERATELY to strike and slice the fake-skin on the neck that hides a squib (shoots fake blood). That seems ridiculous, for how in tarnation is a gun under the clothes going to be aimed so perfectly that it would slice the fake skin, get-out. Hollywood can do much better than this i.e. it can pierce the fake skin with the fake blood itself under pressure, no need to slice it with an projectile.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13BIAcKnL2Y

The chain is at least 24 inches long, in which case it's more than 8 inches in diameter when in a circular shape like the neck. If the neck expanded as much as eight inches in diameter, due to bullet cavitation, oye, it would rip the skin. Try an experiment: stretch your neck skin so that it's eight inches round, see if your skin stays intact.

I'm open to the possibility that the device needed to push fake blood out of a squib (placed "invisibly" on his neck) malfunctioned such as to explode under the shirt rather than to push all the fake liquid out the squib. If that happened, then the original plan was to show a longer gusher than what was seen.

Charlie's shirt puffed up to form a sharp-peaked mountain shape about four inches high at the front shoulder, beside the neck wound, which is a logical location to place the pressure device if it's flat enough not to be seen through the shirt. Such a device would not be powerful enough to rip a hole through the shirt.

But if there was a pressure device, using bomb material, which idea Baron is pushing, such that it first broke the chain, then flung it out of the shirt, it's expected to rip a hole in the shirt, because the power needed to do that to a skinny chain is incredibly high, enough to puncture the skin even. I therefore maintain that the chain seen flung from Charlie's neck is a doctored scene. The motive, I think, is to provide "evidence" for cavitation. The plotters then arrange for some podcaster to popularize (or try to) the cavitation theory, which makes Peak Prosperity suspect as a secret-government operator, or a paid-off podcaster, though not necessarily.

Baron has given himself the problem of explaining the FBI v. Tyler Robinson, when Baron says there was no bullet wound intended by the killers. When trying to explain how a mic on the left side of Charlie's chest could make a wound on the right side of the neck, Baron would say that the jewel on the neck chain done it. But how possibly could the plotters risk a wound by the chain's jewel from an explosion of a mic several inches from the chain? Besides, not only does the mic move toward the chain and neck when it's supposed to be exploding (recoiling) away from the neck, if it indeed shoots air pressure toward the chain, but the mic can be seen still on the shirt after the shirt has gone way up. That is, the mic did not explode. So, then, why is Baron being this STUPID? Apparently, it's because he's probably thinking that he's making a lot more money than if he and everyone else concludes that Charlie is still alive. I'm not so sure that would be true, because Charlie faking his death is a huge story predicting as many views, all over again, as the assassination story.

Secret-government podcasters do not always favor the government narrative, but only when it's serious enough. The trick is to garner long-term trust with the audience for when it's really needed in deceiving it. In the meantime, the government (probably Intelligence / FBI) arranges that they get high on the youtube algorithm, to keep them happily swimming in easy money. They can feign the anti-government position in order to hijack the issue away from what Intelligence wants it away from. In the meantime, these podcasters collect mountains of personal information about, and the political positions of, their audiences. I'm not the only one by far who's suspected Alex Jones as one of these operators, who, like so many others, tries woefully to cloak himself as a Christian, as if Christians are their targets secretly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCsU4NHiZWY

Podcasters are a dream come true for Intelligence because they don't need to be paid all-year long to be war / false-flag propagandists. Pay them only when they are used. In the meantime, own or "own" the Internet platforms where they operate. This is a mean machine for any future Christian persecution. The only good news now is that the Jewish cabal badly needs Christian Zionists on their side i.e. not a good time to persecute Christians. Thus, those who sympathize with abused Palestinians are working in our favor, because we are in fact a prime enemy of the Jewish cabal. It is this cabal which defiles society as the house of satan, which has for decades opposed Christian values. If the leaders of that cabal become murdered tomorrow, don't weep for them. It should come as no surprise that the Jewish cabal despises Turning Point's Conservative and Christian positions, but will use its money, and will therefore feign friendship with the organization. It's the devil, and Christian nationalists are unwittingly hunkering down with him.

In the same way that politicians are not genuine, but calculate the best message for winning / retaining power, so podcasters are, generally, calculating schemers for making the most money. This trap is especially grievous for sincere Christians. Even Ken Ham is using click bait now, great shame. He likes "shocking" and similar words in his video titles. It's all making me feel sick. Podcasters are becoming sickening because any one video could go viral to the tune of 10s of 1000s of dollars. This potential will change a podcasters sincerity until the audience is no longer the friend, but the object to be manipulated at the heart strings.

Megyn Kelly this week tried to move "fellow" Christians into praying to Charlie Kirk. You see, she's a fake-Christian podcaster, like so many other walking graves, traps. You will know them by their fruits. I regularly wonder whether there is a vast podcaster conspiracy, in league with Trump, to lull Christians into hypocritical / damning lifestyles. Erika Kirk fits that description. Megyn Kelly supports Turning Point's Tyler-Robinson "theory." Keep your eyes on the alliances on certain issues involving Christians, to know who's who. Or, lucky you if you don't watch podcasters, the best way to stay clean from their filth. Many are seeking to normalize f-bombs, in my opinion, in Christian camps. I especially despise these types when they come with dragon-skin tattoos. Imagine the immaturity of a man who thinks his tattoos are attractive, praiseworthy, the mark of a man, who shows them off on every podcast, who doesn't apologize for having them, for showing them. You look like a hideous snake, buddy, maybe try wearing some long sleeves, maybe show some shame once in a while. The youtube channel, Harsh Reality, MAKES ME SICK, I can't help myself. He opens every show sounding like a smooth-tongued snake flattering his audience. HE MAKES ME FEEL SICK, I can't help myself...unless I don't click on his videos, and if I do because I'm wanting his topic matter, I could get a f-bomb, typical of low lives in podcasterland who wish we were all de-sensitized like them, all foul-mouthed like them. It's about time somebody said, PUKE.

Put it this way, that if these podcaster were reading this, they would pretend to be sincere Christians accusing me of being over-the-top judgmental. But if they were truly Christians, conscious of Jesus, they would apologize to the audience for using f-bombs. Instead, they prefer to attract like-minded ones, not to evangelize them, but because they are more comfortable with them than they are with Jesus. I see no evidence whatsoever from these podcasters that they are typical, mind-conscious Christians. They don't talk like Christians, and they rub me the wrong way. My concern is only: why do they call themselves Christians? Are they trying to evangelize Christians for darkness?

When Candace told that she saw footage from the camera behind Charlie's head, she didn't tell, so far as I recall, so far as I've seen her talking about it, how long she saw the footage for, whether just two or three seconds to merely see Charlie fall toward the ground. If she saw it for 15-20 seconds, she should know that nobody was doing anything that looked like they believed Charlie was shot. As far as I know, Candace did not say anything in regards to how the men treated Charlie as he lay on the ground.

Therefore, we could start with: either she didn't see that footage, or she's a fraud who knows Charlie is still alive. If the latter is true, then her attacks on Turning Point are scripted in partnership with one another, and they could therefore be milking the public together for cold lucre. However, that theory doesn't ring true because it's harmful to Turning Point to play the guilty party while Candace alone win$-win$-win$.

A third option is that she saw the video's evidence that Turning Point wasn't treating the wound, but she denied it to her audience because she thought there would be more money to be made, and no apology needed, by not revealing it. If she saw the video, and confessed publicly that Turning Point looked like they let Charlie bleed out, she'll be opening her audience to the possibility of a faked killing, which calls for apologizing for misguiding her audience. The sooner she opens to the possibility of a faked killing, the more I will respect her hunt for truth.

NEWS

Chinese Buddhists are invading a major island in canada facing out to sea toward Europe, at the river entry to Quebec and Ontario. Those who want a federal inquiry are bound to be disappointed because it's likely that the Liberal government is in support of this invasion. The Liberal government may be in the throes of betraying Prince-Edward-Islanders, allowing the Chinese to buy off the island's politicians. This organization may have the mission of training monks for to send them throughout the country as part of the Liberal quest to de-Christianize the country, or at least to make Christianity more minor than it has already been made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oYEy--X5-8

Here's some Epstein files, as revealed by a disgruntled, former Trump supporter, telling that Trump was in the Lolita Express many, many times, but it's after the 10-minute mark:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyOiE70yqGI

Where it says that Trump was on Epstein's plane with some of his family members, is there evidence for the members being there, or was that fabricated by his DoJ to protect him?

Trump's Gaza plan is "Project Sunrise." The New York Post this week: "The White House representatives who secured the Gaza peace deal now have a $112 billion plan to turning burning rubble into beach resorts." Trump is an arch-enemy of God by his daring to procure this project that is even way off-limits to his election platform? Since when did he promise the voters that he would expend himself nation-building on behalf of his immediate family and rich friends? This is conflict-of-interest 101. The Promise to Abraham was land from the Nile to the Euphrates, which includes Gaza. Therefore, Gaza is reserved for King Jesus.

If you thought that spy equipment built into some of your appliances was a hoax, nope, it's a tragedy, and people need to be jailed for it, but Trump's a snake without a moral spine, it's obvious by now. He may as well be a "progressive," for he loves 5G, 6G, AI futurism, and he loves the spies too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dehzLA4kFqM

---

NEXT UPDATE

Here's all four Gospels wrapped into one story.

For Some Prophetic Proof for Jesus as the Predicted Son of God.
Also, you might like this related video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3EjmxJYHvM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efl7EpwmYUs

Pre-Tribulation Preparation for a Post-Tribulation Rapture

---