|As you probably
know, we do not link with other Christian websites; most
of these sites very obviously are not in favor of the eschatological
viewpoint that Antipas is purveying to the world, and are
- in fact - very much opposed to it. These are websites
that purvey an "escapist" mentality insofar as the "end
of the age" is concerned, and/or seek to link the church
to right-wing Christian circles in the United States. HENCE,
WE NEED YOUR HELP IN GETTING THE MESSAGE OF ANTIPAS OUT
TO THE WORLD. We urge you to take an active part in doing
so by emailing this article to your friends and loved ones,
and by doing so, fulfilling the Word of God in Ezekiel 33:2-6.
BECOME A WATCHMAN ON THE WALL; it may cost you everything,
but that's a small thing in the light of eternity. PRESS HERE.
THE DOCTRINE OF
THE SEARCH FOR
MORAL PURITY, AND MISOGYNY
[I.E., THE FEAR OF WOMEN]
February 18, 2000
by: S.R. Shearer
INTRODUCTION: A GROWING
WAR BETWEEN THE SEXES
A very wonderful and dear friend of mine, Constance Cumbey, once told
me that Satan's greatest ruse is to first create a problem, and then
offer the solution: the poison is not so much in the problem as it is
in the solution. That is very true of all that follows.
There is a war afoot between men and women in this country and throughout
the West that is slowly building to a crescendo. One sees it everywhere
today - a hatred of one sex for the other: women who are tired of being
BRUTALIZED by men, and men who are weary of women PUSHING themselves
into heretofore sacrosanct, all-male preserves where the presence of
women defies all logic and rationality. It's most extreme form has manifested
itself in the effort by women to enter the military. Indeed, for some
time now, radical feminists have been pushing to open military combat
assignments to women; hard-line feminists believe that unless women
can be admitted into the "combat arms" (i.e., into what they consider
to be the "warrior class") they will always be considered "less than
equal" to men, not only in the military, but in society at large - never
mind the fact that the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of
Women in the Armed Forces recommended in November 1992 that women NOT
be assigned to combat.
Testimony before the commission overwhelmingly indicated that differences
in physical capabilities between men and women could not be tolerated
in a combat situation in which the physical strength of EVERY member
of a "combat team" is imperative to the team's success and safety -
and this is to say nothing concerning the dangerous likelihood of inappropriate
interpersonal relationships between the sexes, all the training to the
The conclusions were based on evidence from Desert Storm, where men
serving alongside women close to the front were required to set up tents,
dig latrines and carry heavy loads for their female counterparts; the
situation led to EXTREMELY bad feelings on the part of the men; that
- combined with a pregnancy rate which approached 10 percent among enlisted
women (coupled with family/child-care problems) - meant the non-deployability
rate among military women was three to four times greater than men.
The scuttlebutt among the men concerning these rates was that their
female counterparts were getting pregnant in order to avoid deployment
- and evidence suggests that in many instances, the men's suspicions
were not wholly without merit.
Indeed, surveys indicate that much of the problem of sexual harassment
in the military stems in part from the men's resentment over double
standards favoring women insofar as physical strength is concerned,
such as the gender-norming of test scores [in the army - push-ups, chin-ups,
carrying back packs, running, etc.; in the airforce - the inability
of female pilots to withstand high "G-forces" in tight turns in combat
aircraft, etc.; in the navy - the inability of women to handle the heavy
lifting of machinery and fire hoses in emergency combat situations,
etc.] which lead to the false assumption that women are not having a
problem staying up with men physically in a military environment - WHEN,
IN FACT, THE EXACT OPPOSITE IS TRUE. Elaine Donnelly, president of the
Center for Military Readiness and a former member of the Presidential
Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces, writes, "It
is hard to imagine a better prescription for future conflict between
military men and women."
addition, and on a much more somber and cheerless note insofar as radical
feminists are concerned, a great deal of collateral evidence has been
gathered which also suggests that women are not psychologically equipped
to deal with the horror, barbarism and brutal shock of savage and violent
physical combat - which is not the same thing as taking care of the
wounded in a MASH unit, where there can be no doubt women have acquitted
themselves honorably. In both Panama and Desert Storm, women close to
combat in non-medical roles (both enlisted and officers) tended to freeze.
The evidence suggested that women reacted to the horror of brutal physical
combat in exactly the same way women have always reacted, and would
react today if caught in a gang fight in east Los Angeles between the
Bloods and the Crips: they froze and were reduced to a whimpering, terrified
mass of humanity - and it didn't seem to matter how much training they
had been given.
But despite all the evidence which tends to indicate that women are
physically and psychologically not suited for combat, combat roles are,
nonetheless, being opened to women. The reason? - the "Tailhook Scandal"
of some ten years ago. The Tailhook Scandal gave a boost to the efforts
of the feminists that no amount of lobbying could - it was the proverbial
"foot-in-the-door" which then Congresswoman Pat Schroeder and others
used to force the door open for women. Following the release of the
report on Tailhook, then (i.e., 1993) Secretary of Defense Les Aspin
announced that women would immediately be assigned to combat-aviation
training. Repeal of the law exempting women from combat ships came next,
and the Pentagon began moving to allow women into more dangerous positions
in or near land combat sites - and the military fell into what amounted
to as a pell-mell rush to accommodate women in these new roles, an effort
which has cost the Pentagon millions and millions of scarce dollars
to retrofit ships, tanks, etc. for females.
WHY THE RUSH?
Why the rush? - the fear by male officers to be perceived as "politically
incorrect," a charge which today ruins careers. For example, Donnelly
- reporting on what's happening in the navy - writes, "This (i.e., the
"politically correct" navy) is the new Navy: a man's career depends
on having the 'correct' view on women, as defined by feminists who know
how to exploit sexual politics to get their way." She goes on to
retell what she describes as the "fatuitous" transformation of former
Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Kelso; she writes, "... Kelso said
he started to change his mind about women in combat when the Clarence
Thomas/Anita Hill hearings caused him to realize that 'there really
is a jungle in the workplace'. Kelso also now suggests that the answer
to any 'execution problems' with women in combat (e.g., the "love boat"
phenomenon and getting men to do the "heavy-lifting" for women, etc.)
... is 'the right kind of training' ... (i.e., training designed to
deal with interpersonal sexual problems through the use of condoms,
abortions, etc. and to prompt men to be more willing to help their women
compatriots out physically)."
Kelso's change of heart evidently saved him from the aftermath of Tailhook;
when Navy Secretary Dalton - who by then had become nothing more than
a "water carrier" for the feminists - moved to fire Kelso for his so-called
"lack of leadership" in the Tailhook affair, Defense Secretary Aspin
intervened to save him, at least in part because he had changed his
mind about women in combat.
Donnelly concludes that the Defense Department - under intense political
pressure from the feminist lobby - now finds itself "... condoning a
new policy of (feminizing the military) that is ... demoralizing to
men ... (The military) has capitulated on issues that will affect its
combat readiness for decades to come."
These are the kinds of policies which lead one to the belief that the
liberal elites are out of touch with reality. When "push finally comes
to shove" in the military, when women are finally tested in a physically
violent and brutal combat environment, THEY WILL FAIL (and I speak here
as a combat veteran of the Vietnam War) - and all the Pat Schroeders
of the world will not be able to hide that failure. And when that happens,
it could begin a chain reaction against feminism which may not end until
women are driven back into the kitchen, bare foot, pregnant, and stripped
of all their many otherwise legitimate social and workplace gains.
THE NAIVETÉ OF THE ELITES
One is left breathless at the naiveté of the liberal elites - what
they're doing here (and in other places - such as pushing a radical
homosexual agenda, multi-lingualism, multi-culturalism, etc. - agendas
which clearly fly in the face of the cultural values of ordinary Americans)
is playing right into the hands of the Religious Right. They're forcing
a showdown on issues which they cannot possible win over the long run.
By pushing their agenda into the absurd, by challenging the Religious
Right on turf they are ill equipped to fight on, they are making it
easy for advocates of the Religious Right to paint them as just that
And, more ominously and forebodingly, if extreme elements in the Religious
Right have their way, in the end, what they may be doing is signing
their own DEATH WARRANTS; after all, when well-known Reconstructionists
can cavalierly suggest that "... the divorce problem will be solved
in a society under God's law because any spouse guilty of capital crimes
(adultery, homosexuality, Sabbath desecration, etc. - parenthesis in
the original) WOULD BE SWIFTLY EXECUTED, thus freeing the other party
to remarry," execution for supporting homosexual rights, radical
feminism, etc. may not seem as far fetched as it now appears.
Absurdity in the one direction (the left) can - more often than we
care to admit - lead to absurdity in the other direction (the right);
the problem here is that right-wing absurdity [i.e., absurdity carried
out "in the name of God"] has led in the past to the crematoria of Hitler's
A COMING REACTION AGAINST WOMEN
There are some, of course, who believe that such a reaction is unlikely;
that things have gone too far insofar as "secular-humanism" is concerned.
After all, one has only to see the way Bill Clinton got off with regard
to his sexual perversions in the White House. This is certainly what
people like Tim LaHaye, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, etc. are saying.
But the Bible seems to indicate that such will not always be the case.
The Bible alludes to a coming REACTION to all this, a REACTION that
the Antichrist will ride into power on proclaiming the sanctity of "Traditional
Values." This is the DECEPTION of the end of days: Antichrist appearing
as Christ and in the name of Christianity (Matt. 24:24 and I Tim. 4:1-2).
This is especially true insofar as the status of women is concerned
- this is precisely what Dan. 11:37 seems to indicate when it says that
he (i.e., the Antichrist) will oppose the "desire of women." While there
are some who insist that this particular verse refers to the desire
of women to "bring forth the Messiah," such an interpretation requires
an inordinate amount of convolution and seems to imply that women are
more desirous of this than men. The more likely interpretation is the
"common sense" one - i.e., that he will oppose the "modern-day" desire
of women to seek "equality" with men in the world of business and politics.
This is the common view. Almost all evangelical interpreters of about
every kind of persuasion concerning "last things" (eschatology) agree
that such is the case - although you would never know it insofar as
the pronouncements of James Dobson et. al. are concerned. [Please see
J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come; Robert Duncan Culver, Daniel and
the Latter Days; and Sir Robert Anderson, The Coming Prince).
What this indicates, then, is that sometime between now and the coming
of the Antichrist a reaction against the "liberalism" and "secular-humanism"
of today will set in. You ask me, How? Well, we are not told exactly
what well precipitate this reaction (a financial meltdown? A war? Social
unrest? - we are left to speculate on this matter. But such reactions
are common in the history of the West in the face of panic and when
secularism and "liberal excess" have over-reached itself. This is exactly
what happened in Rome when Augustus Caesar seized power "in the name
of religion and decency" from the Senate just prior to the birth of
Christ; this is what happened in France when Napoleon seized power from
the Jacobins "in the name of 'right religion';" and this is precisely
what happened when Hitler seized power in Germany from the socialists
while proclaiming that he was doing so in the name of Christianity:
"Today Christians ... stand at the head of Germany ... We want to fill
our culture AGAIN with the Christian spirit."
And God help women when this happens. There is a history here of male
brutality against women which is both very frightening and extremely
horrifying - and although this brutality has historically been carried
out in the name of Christianity and "right religion," it has nothing
to do with true Christianity. It is absolutely non-biblical and reaches
back for its legitimacy into ancient Western myths which lie at the
foundation of Western Civilization; specifically, the Grail Quest.
NOW. PAY CLOSE ATTENTION HERE - because some of you may have unwittingly
become involved in this kind of thinking, and if you have, it has the
very real potential of ruining your marriage and destroying your walk
with Christ - and all this "in the name of 'right religion'."
THE EXCALIBER LEGENDS
At the very root of Western mythology lie the Excaliber legends which
revolve around the theme of the "Grail Quest;" they form the basis of
much of our story telling and the way we view ourselves as a culture,
EVEN TODAY: for example, the "Star Wars" trilogy, the "Highlander" series,
the "Super Hero" comic books, "Angel," "Buffey the Vampire Slayer,"
"Star Trek," etc. And while many so-called devotees of these stories
and myths would be hard-pressed to explain their origins, they all stem
from the same source: the Grail Quest.
According to L'Enchanteur by French author Rene Barjavel the Grail
was originally a cup made by Eve to receive the blood flowing from Adam's
side; after the Fall, an angel broke the Grail, which was later repaired
and became the cup of the Last Supper and the vessel used by Mary to
catch Christ's blood when his side was pierced by the "Lance of Longenius"
(which is today housed in the Hofburg in Vienna); this, supposedly,
was the vessel carried by Joseph of Arimathea to England and which later
became the object of the "Grail Quest" in Tristan and Isolde, Parsifal,
and the Excaliber legends. Of course, all this is non-biblical and has
nothing to do with the Bible!!
THE HOLY GRAIL: THE PIVOT OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION
Richard Wagner (whose operas did so much to inspire Hitler) used the
Holy Grail as the central pivot around which flowed the whole history
of Western Civilization. Grail Christianity (as opposed to Biblical
Christianity) teaches that divinity is transcendent: that man has the
potential to become divine - to be joined in intrinsic oneness to his
Creator. ["Grail" means "step-by-step" or "by degrees" - i.e., to achieve
divinity by achieving "inner perfection" by degrees and by the work
of man; to ascend by steps up a pyramid or a mountain towards "godhood"
According to Grail Christianity, the Old Testament holds that God had
concluded a Covenant (and consequently, a relationship) with a certain
people (i.e., the Jews). None others enjoyed this privilege; it was
unique. As a result, a relationship to God was possible only through
membership in this group.
In the New Testament the church comes to replace Israel as the vessel
through which man may be joined to divinity - and only through baptism
(spiritual birth) into membership in Christ's church is it possible
for man to attain this divinity [i.e., only through social identification
with the church (extra ecclesiam nulla salus)].
But the church has now been splintered into a thousand pieces (just
as the Grail Cup was splintered after Adam's fall) and is, thus, no
longer able to fulfill its divine mission. As a result, it awaits someone
[or some super, magical, spiritual group of "Grail Seekers" (i.e., the
Templars, the "bondage breakers" of "Latter-Rain," the "Apostles &
Prophets," etc.)] to piece it back together - just as the angels pieced
the cup together after the Fall. Only when this has been accomplished
can man resume his ascension towards the divine.
WOMEN AS THE ADVERSARY
The problem, then, is for this magical, mystical group of "bondage-breakers"
to rise up and piece the church back together; but this can only occur
when enough men (no women need apply) achieve the necessary "inner perfection"
required for a "Vision of the Grail" - which vision alone brings true
spirituality; spirituality, then, leads to the "magic" necessary to
piece the church back together. Once the church is pieced back together,
the world will be united and peace achieved.
it is precisely this - i.e., their perceived need to achieve "inner
purity" in order to stimulate the movement toward church unity - that
accounts for the growing emphasis on "moral perfection" in those churches
that are a part of today's ecumenical movement - and it is exactly in
these churches that ACCOUNTABILITY has taken on such an inordinate importance
- i.e., the submission by individuals to others in a small group for
the purpose of enforcing rules of behavior designed to cause "perfection"
in the conduct of one's daily life. The dynamic involved in such groups
resembles the "dialectic" that is implicit in small communist cell groups
where each member is constantly subjected to tests of one sort or another
designed to examine one's "reliability" and to enforce "GROUP-THINK"
- much like what occurred during Communist China's "Cultural Revolution."
And it is EXACTLY here that women fall prey to the dynamic. Why? - because
nothing causes men so much grief and turmoil than the temptation of
sexual sin!! - and so much so that men who are aiming at "moral perfection"
find it easy to come to the view that women are the enemy insofar as
their ability to achieve that perfection. THUS, WOMEN BECOME THE ADVERSARY!!
- and this is easily discernible in the literature of groups that are
involved in this dynamic, for example: the Promise Keepers (please see
our article, "George Bush, The 'Promise Keepers' And The Principles
Of Messianic Leadership").]
Wagner portrayed this dilemma in Parzival through the medium of the
"Grail King:" the Grail King, Anforta, had been appointed to his sacred
office as a mere boy - having done nothing to achieve it. Wolfram von
Eschenback explains" He reached the years when his beard began to grow,
the age when Love turns her malice upon youth ..." She (i.e., Love)
then urges the king to turn aside from his divinely appointed duties
to pursue female companionship, and "... in riding in quest of adventure
(i.e., sexual fulfillment) ... he is pierced, wounded in a joust, by
a poisoned spear through his testicles, so severely he could not be
healed." As a result, the kingdom is thrown into confusion and desolation
- becoming a wasteland. Anforta's moral collapse (and, hence, the collapse
of his kingdom) is caused by sexual sin.
In the unfinished Perceval by the Frenchman, Chretien de Troyes (born
@1160), Perceval observes the Grail procession: a youth enters a hall
with a bleeding spear or lance and is followed by youths carrying candelabra.
Then "a beautiful maiden entered, holding a grail in her hands ... The
grail was worked with fine gold and was encrusted with many precious
stones, which were among the richest and most expensive in the world."
The procession excites Perceval's curiosity, but having earlier been
instructed not to talk excessively, he refuses to ask about the Grail.
He later learns that, had he inquired, his question would have cured
the maimed Grail King. Importantly, he learns that his failure to ask
was due to an earlier sexual sin.
SEXUAL SIN, THEN, IS THE BESETTING HINDRANCE WHICH ALL GRAIL SEEKERS
MUST OVERCOME IN THEIR QUEST FOR THE "VISION OF GOD." Sexual sin beclouds
Perceval's moral vision and ruins his quest. Lancelot and Tristan also
fail in their quests because of sexual sin - their adulterous love for
women (Guinevere and Isolde) who belong to other men. The destruction
of Grail Searchers through sexual sin is a never ending theme running
through the entire fabric of the Grail Quest. The massive, even colossal,
gravity of sexual sin in the mythology of the Grail Quest has no parallel
in the Bible. So great does the fear of sexual sin loom in the eyes
of the Grail Seekers, that strict forms of chastity come to encompass
all those who enter the quest - a chastity under which the Templars,
the Hospitalers, the Teutons, etc. all labored - and, again, it's interesting
to note in this connection that one of the hallmarks of the coming "anti-messiah"
is his hatred and loathing (one might even say, fear) of women. (Dan.
It's no accident, therefore, that the same chastity - THE KIND THAT
LEADS TO THE ACTUAL FEAR OF WOMEN AS A CONTAMINATING INFLUENCE - has
come to encompass many Christian sects; but again, the fear so generated
has nothing to do with the Bible and everything to do with the Grail
Quest - and the extensive degree to which this kind of thinking has
trickled into Christianity gives some indication as to the influence
that Grail thinking has had on Western Christianity. Leaving aside the
obvious example of the Roman Catholic Church, with its refusal to let
its priests marry, take William Branham. Branham's influence on American
Pentecostalism cannot be over estimated. C. Douglas Weaver has written,
"Branham's ministry must ... be considered ... as (the) precursor of
the Faith/Confession movement (to say nothing of Latter Rain) ... Kenneth
Hagin ... is the founder, and is the acknowledged 'prophet' of the movement.
Other prominent voices - all of whom consider Hagin their spiritual
father - include Kenneth Copeland, Fred Price, John Osteen, Kenneth
Hagin, Jr., and Charles Capps."
WILLIAM BRANHAM, "LATTER RAIN,"
AND THE HATRED OF WOMEN
Throughout his entire career as a minister and as a faith-healer, Branham
- like all Grail Seekers - exhibited a paranoid fear of women; it was
woven into his entire ministry and was the main topic of one of his
most repeated sermons, "The Serpent's Seed," a sermon in which he wove
a truly lurid tale of female treachery, impurity, and seduction - and
a sermon which paralleled in its conceptual form almost every aspect
of Wagner's Parsifal. All of these men - i.e., Hagin, Copeland, etc.
- exert powerful influences on today's charismatic movement, and most
are at the forefront of the Christian Unity movement which today is
encompassing both conservative Catholics and evangelicals.
Now there is a very earnest and somber reason that we have taken the
time here to dwell on this subject. As Catholics and evangelicals move
ever more closely together, this kind of thinking will come ever more
to the forefront in the "Organized Church." One sees its subtle influence
everywhere - in the literature of James Dobson (carefully hidden behind
"Christian-speak" and "Psycho-babble"), the Promise Keepers (where it's
cleverly concealed behind a rather vacuous "praise" of women, etc.,
etc. In the end, however, all this leads to domination of women in the
worst sense of that word - a domination that is both cruel (because
it is ultimately based on a fear of women as a "contaminating influence")
and ruthless (because such passions must be ruthlessly suppressed, meaning
- ipso facto - that women must be mercilessly bridled and constrained.
Needless to say, this kind of thinking does not lend itself to a good
marriage. Such thinking is UTTERLY unbiblical and extremely heartless
and unfeeling; it inevitably destroys families and turns the relationship
of a man with a woman into a connection that resembles more the relationship
of a cruel master to a lowly servant than anything else.
SUCH THINKING IS UTTERLY UNBIBLICAL
The Bible says, however, that such "master / servant" relationships
are an abomination to God and have no place in the church. Jesus said:
"... Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over
them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall
not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him
be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be
your servant: even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto,
but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." (Matt. 20:25-28)
Jesus said, "IT SHALL NOT BE SO AMONG YOU," and He continued by saying,
"WHOSOEVER WILL BE CHIEF AMONG YOU, LET HIM BE YOUR SERVANT ..."
Some would retort that these verses are in contradiction to Ephesians
5:22-25. Much is made of that portion of these Scriptures which calls
upon wives to submit to their husbands, but very little attention is
paid to the admonition that husbands are to love their wives even as
Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it. LOVE IS NOT CRUEL!
It is not unkind; it is not fierce and severe; brutal and inexorable;
devilish and heartless. Love is kind and gentle; good-hearted and compassionate;
generous and sympathetic. Believe me when I say, "moral perfection"
- when it leads to the kind of cruelty that is inherent in the Grail
Quest - is not of God, but TOTALLY of the EVIL ONE - and people that
become involved in such a quest have truly been deceived!!
I have been blessed far beyond the imaginings of my youth, far beyond
what most men ever touch in this life by my wife of almost forty years,
my beloved Lucy. It has been a wonderful life that we have shared together,
and although there has been much poverty and physical stress, I wouldn't
change even one iota of it now that I am old. I have loved and been
loved by her more than any man could ever hope - both in my youth when
she was young and beautiful and I was a soldier, and now that I am old
and youth has faded away. It has been a PARTNERSHIP of love and mutual
respect - and in all those many years I don't think that I have ever
once ORDERED my wife to do anything. I have never LORDED it over her,
and I have never taken DOMINION over her. We have just never operated
on that plain. I believe that men who operate at that level don't understand
the first thing about human relationships.
A CURRENT FLOWING IN
TODAY'S CHURCH: BE CAREFUL!
Nonetheless, there is a current flowing in the church which says that
men should take dominion over their wives as a master would take dominion
over his servant; and the clear implication here is that they (i.e.,
women) are a contaminating influence. It's still half-hidden and obscured
behind a great deal of "love-speak" and "psycho-babble," but it's there,
and most of you who are reading this article know what I mean. Moreover,
the Bible indicates that this will grow even to the extent that there
will come a time when those who want to "live holy lives" will be encouraged
not to marry (I Tim. 4:3) and to avoid women all together - and all
this under the illusion that they are doing God a service.
You must resist this current. If you don't, you will end up destroying
your marriage and destroying what the church is really all about. The
church is about love; it is about kindness and compassion; it is about
tenderness and mercy; it is not about force and it is not about threats.
The world longs to see such love! People everywhere long to see it!
This is our testimony in the end of days; not force and not threats.
God bless all of you!
- Elaine Donnelly, "The Tailhook Scandals" in National Review, March
7, 1994, pg. 59.
- Ibid., pg. 59.
- Ibid., pg. 59.
- Ibid., pg. 59.
- Mark Rushdoony, Chalcedon Report #252, 1986.
We need your help to spread the word concerning Antipas Ministries and the
eschatological viewpoint it represents; WE NEED YOUR
HELP BECAUSE WE DO NOT "LINK" WITH OTHER SO-CALLED "CHRISTIAN"
WEBSITES which are, for the most part, "in the tank"
insofar as their loyalty to the United States is concerned
- a loyalty that has made them partners in the BLOODY
trail the American military has left in its TERROR-RIDDEN
rampage throughout the world, as well as making them partners
in the abject poverty that American corporations have
imposed on the peoples and nations the American military
machine has ravaged - A BLOODY, TERROR-RIDDEN RAMPAGE
THAT HAS TO A LARGE DEGREE BEEN CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME
OF THE "PRINCE OF PEACE." [Please see our articles,
"The Third World
as a Model for the New World Order," Inside
the American New World Order System" and "The
American Empire: The Corporate / Pentagon / CIA / Missionary
YOU CAN HELP BY EMAILING
THIS ARTICLE TO
YOUR FRIENDS AND
If you wish to SUBSCRIBE
to our website, please feel free to do so; the subscription is free; all you
need to do is give us your email address. There is no need for you to give
us any other information. Your email address will NEVER be shared
PS Have the courage of your convictions! Contribute to
the ministry by making out a check to "Antipas Christian Ministry"
and sending it to -
1112 Long Rd., #40
Centralia, WA 98531
Or donate through Paypal by clicking the Paypal image below:
We DESPERATELY need your continued SACRIFICIAL
financial help. Time is short - and we need to be about the Lord's
business as quickly as possible.
If you have any questions, please email us at firstname.lastname@example.org.