George Washington's Prophecy

George Washington is one of those historical figures about whom it is easy to find reasons to admire. Perhaps the foremost two that spring to mind are his successful leadership of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, and his tenure as our country's first president. As children I'm sure we all grow up admiring him, given his preeminence among our founding fathers. No doubt we all remember the fable of him as a child himself, boldly admitting to cutting down a cherry tree rather than tell a lie. For me though, my deep and profound respect for the man comes from the recognition of the fact that he was able to do what very few people in history have done in his position. It is a feat which is based in historical fact and I think is so monumental that it completely justifies any myth of his legendary character. I am speaking of his refusal of absolute power in the service of the birth of our nation.

Toward the end of the Revolutionary War, many of the officers and men of the Continental Army had yet to receive much of the pay promised to them by Congress. In May of 1782 a letter was sent to Washington by Colonel Lewis Nicola who proposed resolving the situation by having the army support his appointment as King of the United States. Naturally Washington reacted very strongly against this suggestion, refusing a mantle offered to other important men of history such as Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte, who accepted it, and ultimately lead themselves to their own ruin. I mention this not only because I believe it earns him a position of prominence in the pantheon of historical figures, but to establish his exceptional integrity and single-minded devotion to the upright establishment and survival of the United States of America.

Over the course of his presidency, George Washington was keenly aware that as the first President of the United States, his every action would be precedents for his successors. Despite the widespread demand that he serve a third term he retired from the office after serving only two, thus establishing a peaceful transfer of power that exists in the Executive Branch of our government to this day. At this time, the two-party system was beginning to emerge. There was the Federalist Party, associated with John Adams, and the Democratic Republican Party, or anti-Federalists, led by Thomas Jefferson. Many of the differences between the two parties would be formed over the course of the Revolution and the ratification of the Constitution, and when Washington left office in 1797 they had become a potent force in the new America's politics. In these parties George Washington foresaw a danger to the new republic for which he fought, one he warned the country against in his farewell address:

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism."

Given the current state of affairs in our country, with party politics they way they are and the manner in which they affect our government; the accuracy of these passages that were delivered over two hundred and ten years ago is so profound that to me they border on prophecy. Look back over the last few election cycles and you can easily see our community having been agitated with poorly grounded jealousies. Although not having taken us to the point of riot and insurrection, yet, our political parties have most certainly kindled the animosity of one part toward another. Indeed, do we not now refer to ourselves as being a nation of blue states and red states?

I do not wish to promote the notion that just because one is involved with a political party it necessarily follows that they must be prone to corruption, or cannot be good public servants. Over the course of our history we have been fortunate enough to have had many fine statesmen from both parties serve us with both diligence and honor. Yet when you consider the never-ending cacophony of partisanship coming from the twenty four-hour news cycle, talk radio, and the internet coupled with the vast, potentially limitless sums of money that can be raised by either party from anonymous donors, even potentially by foreign governments; one has to wonder that if, particularly now, the two parties are more focused on securing their own power rather than furthering the best interests of the country.

I understand that when one believes a cause is just it is natural to want to see its goals carried to fruition. The question that must be asked is how far does one go in this pursuit? What is the maximum price willing to be paid in its fulfillment? There is no doubt that in pushing their respective agendas, both Democrats and Republicans do believe they have the best interests of the country at heart and in theory there is nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately though both sides have become so single-minded in the quest for power that it seems they are willing to sacrifice a functioning republic that promotes the general welfare for a dysfunctional one that, even in only a small measure, satisfies their rigid ideals. Put simply, the Democrat and Republican parties see themselves as enemies whose sole purpose is to destroy the other and to employ every possible advantage in doing so. If it means an unlimited, unregulated amount of money may be spent to influence our elections and legislative process to the detriment of us all then so be it. If it means that perfectly good legislation is killed in Congress by poison pill amendments for the sole purpose of securing political advantage, then again so be it. In these ways and others, both parties have served to, as George Washington put it: "distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration".

The solution to this problem is not the abolition of political parties. This is not something that Washington was advocating in his address. He said party spirit should be discouraged and restrained, not eliminated. I think his point was that even though people will always coalesce around certain ideals there comes a time when the passion for those ideals is counterproductive. Believe it or not, there are some genuinely good ideas that have germinated from both political parties, but because of the antagonism between the two they will never see the light of day. If our country is to see real solutions to our problems and continued prosperity this antagonism must end. Political jockeying has its place, but it must stop when mutual concern is involved.

If George Washington were to see the political landscape with which we contend today, then based on his final address I do not think he would be at all surprised. Although he may have predicted this present, his advice to restrain the passions of our political parties is certainly easier said than done. Yet in addition to his wisdom he also left his example. One that we, citizen and public servant alike, would do well to follow. He marshaled a fledgling army against the superpower of his day, refused absolute power over a new nation, and always put the well-being of his country first. We should endeavor to do the same and think of ourselves not as dogmatically inflexible Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans, first and always.

About The Author:
Jim Paquette lives in Indiana with his wife and two kids. He writes about politics, religion, movies, and television on his blog: jimdom.NET ( http://www.jimdom.net ).

George Washington's Prophecy

George Washington is one of those historical figures about whom it is easy to find reasons to admire. Perhaps the foremost two that spring to mind are his successful leadership of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, and his tenure as our country's first president. As children I'm sure we all grow up admiring him, given his preeminence among our founding fathers. No doubt we all remember the fable of him as a child himself, boldly admitting to cutting down a cherry tree rather than tell a lie. For me though, my deep and profound respect for the man comes from the recognition of the fact that he was able to do what very few people in history have done in his position. It is a feat which is based in historical fact and I think is so monumental that it completely justifies any myth of his legendary character. I am speaking of his refusal of absolute power in the service of the birth of our nation.

Toward the end of the Revolutionary War, many of the officers and men of the Continental Army had yet to receive much of the pay promised to them by Congress. In May of 1782 a letter was sent to Washington by Colonel Lewis Nicola who proposed resolving the situation by having the army support his appointment as King of the United States. Naturally Washington reacted very strongly against this suggestion, refusing a mantle offered to other important men of history such as Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte, who accepted it, and ultimately lead themselves to their own ruin. I mention this not only because I believe it earns him a position of prominence in the pantheon of historical figures, but to establish his exceptional integrity and single-minded devotion to the upright establishment and survival of the United States of America.

Over the course of his presidency, George Washington was keenly aware that as the first President of the United States, his every action would be precedents for his successors. Despite the widespread demand that he serve a third term he retired from the office after serving only two, thus establishing a peaceful transfer of power that exists in the Executive Branch of our government to this day. At this time, the two-party system was beginning to emerge. There was the Federalist Party, associated with John Adams, and the Democratic Republican Party, or anti-Federalists, led by Thomas Jefferson. Many of the differences between the two parties would be formed over the course of the Revolution and the ratification of the Constitution, and when Washington left office in 1797 they had become a potent force in the new America's politics. In these parties George Washington foresaw a danger to the new republic for which he fought, one he warned the country against in his farewell address:

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism."

Given the current state of affairs in our country, with party politics they way they are and the manner in which they affect our government; the accuracy of these passages that were delivered over two hundred and ten years ago is so profound that to me they border on prophecy. Look back over the last few election cycles and you can easily see our community having been agitated with poorly grounded jealousies. Although not having taken us to the point of riot and insurrection, yet, our political parties have most certainly kindled the animosity of one part toward another. Indeed, do we not now refer to ourselves as being a nation of blue states and red states?

I do not wish to promote the notion that just because one is involved with a political party it necessarily follows that they must be prone to corruption, or cannot be good public servants. Over the course of our history we have been fortunate enough to have had many fine statesmen from both parties serve us with both diligence and honor. Yet when you consider the never-ending cacophony of partisanship coming from the twenty four-hour news cycle, talk radio, and the internet coupled with the vast, potentially limitless sums of money that can be raised by either party from anonymous donors, even potentially by foreign governments; one has to wonder that if, particularly now, the two parties are more focused on securing their own power rather than furthering the best interests of the country.

I understand that when one believes a cause is just it is natural to want to see its goals carried to fruition. The question that must be asked is how far does one go in this pursuit? What is the maximum price willing to be paid in its fulfillment? There is no doubt that in pushing their respective agendas, both Democrats and Republicans do believe they have the best interests of the country at heart and in theory there is nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately though both sides have become so single-minded in the quest for power that it seems they are willing to sacrifice a functioning republic that promotes the general welfare for a dysfunctional one that, even in only a small measure, satisfies their rigid ideals. Put simply, the Democrat and Republican parties see themselves as enemies whose sole purpose is to destroy the other and to employ every possible advantage in doing so. If it means an unlimited, unregulated amount of money may be spent to influence our elections and legislative process to the detriment of us all then so be it. If it means that perfectly good legislation is killed in Congress by poison pill amendments for the sole purpose of securing political advantage, then again so be it. In these ways and others, both parties have served to, as George Washington put it: "distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration".

The solution to this problem is not the abolition of political parties. This is not something that Washington was advocating in his address. He said party spirit should be discouraged and restrained, not eliminated. I think his point was that even though people will always coalesce around certain ideals there comes a time when the passion for those ideals is counterproductive. Believe it or not, there are some genuinely good ideas that have germinated from both political parties, but because of the antagonism between the two they will never see the light of day. If our country is to see real solutions to our problems and continued prosperity this antagonism must end. Political jockeying has its place, but it must stop when mutual concern is involved.

If George Washington were to see the political landscape with which we contend today, then based on his final address I do not think he would be at all surprised. Although he may have predicted this present, his advice to restrain the passions of our political parties is certainly easier said than done. Yet in addition to his wisdom he also left his example. One that we, citizen and public servant alike, would do well to follow. He marshaled a fledgling army against the superpower of his day, refused absolute power over a new nation, and always put the well-being of his country first. We should endeavor to do the same and think of ourselves not as dogmatically inflexible Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans, first and always.

About The Author:
Jim Paquette lives in Indiana with his wife and two kids. He writes about politics, religion, movies, and television on his blog: jimdom.NET ( http://www.jimdom.net ).

George Washington's Prophecy

George Washington is one of those historical figures about whom it is easy to find reasons to admire. Perhaps the foremost two that spring to mind are his successful leadership of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, and his tenure as our country's first president. As children I'm sure we all grow up admiring him, given his preeminence among our founding fathers. No doubt we all remember the fable of him as a child himself, boldly admitting to cutting down a cherry tree rather than tell a lie. For me though, my deep and profound respect for the man comes from the recognition of the fact that he was able to do what very few people in history have done in his position. It is a feat which is based in historical fact and I think is so monumental that it completely justifies any myth of his legendary character. I am speaking of his refusal of absolute power in the service of the birth of our nation.

Toward the end of the Revolutionary War, many of the officers and men of the Continental Army had yet to receive much of the pay promised to them by Congress. In May of 1782 a letter was sent to Washington by Colonel Lewis Nicola who proposed resolving the situation by having the army support his appointment as King of the United States. Naturally Washington reacted very strongly against this suggestion, refusing a mantle offered to other important men of history such as Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte, who accepted it, and ultimately lead themselves to their own ruin. I mention this not only because I believe it earns him a position of prominence in the pantheon of historical figures, but to establish his exceptional integrity and single-minded devotion to the upright establishment and survival of the United States of America.

Over the course of his presidency, George Washington was keenly aware that as the first President of the United States, his every action would be precedents for his successors. Despite the widespread demand that he serve a third term he retired from the office after serving only two, thus establishing a peaceful transfer of power that exists in the Executive Branch of our government to this day. At this time, the two-party system was beginning to emerge. There was the Federalist Party, associated with John Adams, and the Democratic Republican Party, or anti-Federalists, led by Thomas Jefferson. Many of the differences between the two parties would be formed over the course of the Revolution and the ratification of the Constitution, and when Washington left office in 1797 they had become a potent force in the new America's politics. In these parties George Washington foresaw a danger to the new republic for which he fought, one he warned the country against in his farewell address:

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism."

Given the current state of affairs in our country, with party politics they way they are and the manner in which they affect our government; the accuracy of these passages that were delivered over two hundred and ten years ago is so profound that to me they border on prophecy. Look back over the last few election cycles and you can easily see our community having been agitated with poorly grounded jealousies. Although not having taken us to the point of riot and insurrection, yet, our political parties have most certainly kindled the animosity of one part toward another. Indeed, do we not now refer to ourselves as being a nation of blue states and red states?

I do not wish to promote the notion that just because one is involved with a political party it necessarily follows that they must be prone to corruption, or cannot be good public servants. Over the course of our history we have been fortunate enough to have had many fine statesmen from both parties serve us with both diligence and honor. Yet when you consider the never-ending cacophony of partisanship coming from the twenty four-hour news cycle, talk radio, and the internet coupled with the vast, potentially limitless sums of money that can be raised by either party from anonymous donors, even potentially by foreign governments; one has to wonder that if, particularly now, the two parties are more focused on securing their own power rather than furthering the best interests of the country.

I understand that when one believes a cause is just it is natural to want to see its goals carried to fruition. The question that must be asked is how far does one go in this pursuit? What is the maximum price willing to be paid in its fulfillment? There is no doubt that in pushing their respective agendas, both Democrats and Republicans do believe they have the best interests of the country at heart and in theory there is nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately though both sides have become so single-minded in the quest for power that it seems they are willing to sacrifice a functioning republic that promotes the general welfare for a dysfunctional one that, even in only a small measure, satisfies their rigid ideals. Put simply, the Democrat and Republican parties see themselves as enemies whose sole purpose is to destroy the other and to employ every possible advantage in doing so. If it means an unlimited, unregulated amount of money may be spent to influence our elections and legislative process to the detriment of us all then so be it. If it means that perfectly good legislation is killed in Congress by poison pill amendments for the sole purpose of securing political advantage, then again so be it. In these ways and others, both parties have served to, as George Washington put it: "distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration".

The solution to this problem is not the abolition of political parties. This is not something that Washington was advocating in his address. He said party spirit should be discouraged and restrained, not eliminated. I think his point was that even though people will always coalesce around certain ideals there comes a time when the passion for those ideals is counterproductive. Believe it or not, there are some genuinely good ideas that have germinated from both political parties, but because of the antagonism between the two they will never see the light of day. If our country is to see real solutions to our problems and continued prosperity this antagonism must end. Political jockeying has its place, but it must stop when mutual concern is involved.

If George Washington were to see the political landscape with which we contend today, then based on his final address I do not think he would be at all surprised. Although he may have predicted this present, his advice to restrain the passions of our political parties is certainly easier said than done. Yet in addition to his wisdom he also left his example. One that we, citizen and public servant alike, would do well to follow. He marshaled a fledgling army against the superpower of his day, refused absolute power over a new nation, and always put the well-being of his country first. We should endeavor to do the same and think of ourselves not as dogmatically inflexible Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans, first and always.

About The Author:
Jim Paquette lives in Indiana with his wife and two kids. He writes about politics, religion, movies, and television on his blog: jimdom.NET ( http://www.jimdom.net ).

George Washington's Prophecy

George Washington is one of those historical figures about whom it is easy to find reasons to admire. Perhaps the foremost two that spring to mind are his successful leadership of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, and his tenure as our country's first president. As children I'm sure we all grow up admiring him, given his preeminence among our founding fathers. No doubt we all remember the fable of him as a child himself, boldly admitting to cutting down a cherry tree rather than tell a lie. For me though, my deep and profound respect for the man comes from the recognition of the fact that he was able to do what very few people in history have done in his position. It is a feat which is based in historical fact and I think is so monumental that it completely justifies any myth of his legendary character. I am speaking of his refusal of absolute power in the service of the birth of our nation.

Toward the end of the Revolutionary War, many of the officers and men of the Continental Army had yet to receive much of the pay promised to them by Congress. In May of 1782 a letter was sent to Washington by Colonel Lewis Nicola who proposed resolving the situation by having the army support his appointment as King of the United States. Naturally Washington reacted very strongly against this suggestion, refusing a mantle offered to other important men of history such as Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte, who accepted it, and ultimately lead themselves to their own ruin. I mention this not only because I believe it earns him a position of prominence in the pantheon of historical figures, but to establish his exceptional integrity and single-minded devotion to the upright establishment and survival of the United States of America.

Over the course of his presidency, George Washington was keenly aware that as the first President of the United States, his every action would be precedents for his successors. Despite the widespread demand that he serve a third term he retired from the office after serving only two, thus establishing a peaceful transfer of power that exists in the Executive Branch of our government to this day. At this time, the two-party system was beginning to emerge. There was the Federalist Party, associated with John Adams, and the Democratic Republican Party, or anti-Federalists, led by Thomas Jefferson. Many of the differences between the two parties would be formed over the course of the Revolution and the ratification of the Constitution, and when Washington left office in 1797 they had become a potent force in the new America's politics. In these parties George Washington foresaw a danger to the new republic for which he fought, one he warned the country against in his farewell address:

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism."

Given the current state of affairs in our country, with party politics they way they are and the manner in which they affect our government; the accuracy of these passages that were delivered over two hundred and ten years ago is so profound that to me they border on prophecy. Look back over the last few election cycles and you can easily see our community having been agitated with poorly grounded jealousies. Although not having taken us to the point of riot and insurrection, yet, our political parties have most certainly kindled the animosity of one part toward another. Indeed, do we not now refer to ourselves as being a nation of blue states and red states?

I do not wish to promote the notion that just because one is involved with a political party it necessarily follows that they must be prone to corruption, or cannot be good public servants. Over the course of our history we have been fortunate enough to have had many fine statesmen from both parties serve us with both diligence and honor. Yet when you consider the never-ending cacophony of partisanship coming from the twenty four-hour news cycle, talk radio, and the internet coupled with the vast, potentially limitless sums of money that can be raised by either party from anonymous donors, even potentially by foreign governments; one has to wonder that if, particularly now, the two parties are more focused on securing their own power rather than furthering the best interests of the country.

I understand that when one believes a cause is just it is natural to want to see its goals carried to fruition. The question that must be asked is how far does one go in this pursuit? What is the maximum price willing to be paid in its fulfillment? There is no doubt that in pushing their respective agendas, both Democrats and Republicans do believe they have the best interests of the country at heart and in theory there is nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately though both sides have become so single-minded in the quest for power that it seems they are willing to sacrifice a functioning republic that promotes the general welfare for a dysfunctional one that, even in only a small measure, satisfies their rigid ideals. Put simply, the Democrat and Republican parties see themselves as enemies whose sole purpose is to destroy the other and to employ every possible advantage in doing so. If it means an unlimited, unregulated amount of money may be spent to influence our elections and legislative process to the detriment of us all then so be it. If it means that perfectly good legislation is killed in Congress by poison pill amendments for the sole purpose of securing political advantage, then again so be it. In these ways and others, both parties have served to, as George Washington put it: "distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration".

The solution to this problem is not the abolition of political parties. This is not something that Washington was advocating in his address. He said party spirit should be discouraged and restrained, not eliminated. I think his point was that even though people will always coalesce around certain ideals there comes a time when the passion for those ideals is counterproductive. Believe it or not, there are some genuinely good ideas that have germinated from both political parties, but because of the antagonism between the two they will never see the light of day. If our country is to see real solutions to our problems and continued prosperity this antagonism must end. Political jockeying has its place, but it must stop when mutual concern is involved.

If George Washington were to see the political landscape with which we contend today, then based on his final address I do not think he would be at all surprised. Although he may have predicted this present, his advice to restrain the passions of our political parties is certainly easier said than done. Yet in addition to his wisdom he also left his example. One that we, citizen and public servant alike, would do well to follow. He marshaled a fledgling army against the superpower of his day, refused absolute power over a new nation, and always put the well-being of his country first. We should endeavor to do the same and think of ourselves not as dogmatically inflexible Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans, first and always.

About The Author:
Jim Paquette lives in Indiana with his wife and two kids. He writes about politics, religion, movies, and television on his blog: jimdom.NET ( http://www.jimdom.net ).

Antichrist, False Prophet & The Mahdi in prophecy

Bashar al-Assad is having quite the time right now!

Syrian President Bashar Assad blamed a wave of protests on "conspirators" who are trying to destroy the country as well as "enemies with an Israeli agenda", giving his first address to the nation Wednesday since the demonstrations erupted nearly two weeks ago.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4048856,00.html

Edit: To clarify, Scot has his eyes on Assad as "the man".

View the original article here

The Last Prophecy: The Antichrist and the Dramatic Fall of a Publishing Empire

Finally, I found someone who answers several questions about religion that most people would hesitate to even consider asking in public. There's no doubt that The Last Prophecy: The Antichrist and the Dramatic Fall of a Publishing Empire is worth reading. Honestly, I have to say that I was skeptical at first that the book would deliver a new message, but somehow, after reading the subtitle, a certain curiosity made me order it. I was right. As soon as I turned the first page, I knew that I would not drop it until I have finished reading every word. Overall, the book is a flowing concatenation of puzzling questions and answers that will surely be compatible with any line of thought.

The most important element of the book for me is the introduction and explanation of a biblical principle called the Manifold Wisdom of God. This principle clarifies all the contradictions that people have supposedly found in the Bible. It is applicable to any paradox in life, including polemic topics in the church-a main cause of congregational diversity.

The second most important feature of this book for me is that even though the author claims to reveal the true identity of the antichrist and fulfillment of other end-time prophecies, unlike other modern prophets, Escalona predicts an incoming tragedy in the publishing industry-the collapse of the Zondervan company. The fulfillment of this prediction in the near future, as he states, will validate his testimony. In other words, if this prophecy occurs, we will have to watch the rest of his testimony closely and probably believe in him. This seems reasonable because Zondervan's collapse at this moment seems inconceivable. Yet it sounds more credible than other impressively creative apocalyptic predictions from other end-time writers.

Moreover, most of the author's claims in the book make sense to me. Generally speaking, I recommend this book not only to those interested in eschatology, but also to any person interested in understanding the true purpose of life.

A more credible prediction

How will you recognize the Antichrist?

Remarkably, from an extensive variety of predictions and interpretations of end time prophecies, the most credible that I found is from The New Church of the Manifold Wisdom. This church in its manifesto titled, "The Last Prophecy: The Antichrist and the Dramatic Fall of a Publishing empire, among many other interesting topics, predicts that around 2012 Zondervan, the publishing company, will collapse. The church sustains that this fall will validate the revelation of the Antichrist. They say that will be around 2012, no exact date, because it might happen anytime in a period of forty-two month (three years and a half) which is the time given to the Antichrist in the Bible to operate publicly. It is opportune to mention, that the New Church of the Manifold Wisdom does not accuse Zondervan of being the Antichrist, but as the vehicle promoting the Antichrist's doctrine through a series of corrupted texts

What do you think about this prediction? Does it sound more credible than other end times' predictions and interpretations?

http://www.zondervansfall.com

Russia in Prophecy and ET Relations

My Heart is full of Mercy.

Soon, I come to seek you with My Holy Angels who are ready to help you, and you will be placed in this shelter that I have prepared for you.

The Hour will not be announced, but I will call you in a way that you do not question in doubt.

With this dictation, Prepare yourself...

JESUS/JNSR February 26, 2011

View the original article here

European Union, The Islam Military Alliance - The Devastating Ancient Prophecy Unfolding Today

The European Union will soon reform into ten member states. This will see Britain withdrawing or being kicked out of the present European Union or common market as it was previously known. This creation will all take shape quickly and at the head of this new union of European members will be Germany. This will however be quite a different Germany to the one we see today. Also we will see an Islam military alliance take shape. Among the nations of this new Islamic military alliance will be Egypt, Libya, Ethiopia. When Egypt and Ethiopia falls into the hands of radical Islamists the vital Red sea shipping route for oil will be controlled by this large Muslim military alliance.

What is happening in Ethiopia and how is Iran inflaming the Islamists?

Vicious fighting is presently boiling over on the borders of Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia. Somalia's feeble transitional government is being ousted by the Islam Iranian -backed Al-shabaab terrorist militia, while Ethiopian forces battle their way to the Somali border to ward off the Islamic extremists.

One of the prominent officials of Al-Shabaab made a public announcement at a gathering convincing Muslims in both Kenya and Ethiopia to revolt against their governments. Sheikh Mahad Omar Abdikarim was quoted as saying that the. "oppressed Muslims of Kenya and Ethiopia need to liberate themselves from Christian domination"

The recent outbreak of anti-Christian hostility has brought about the displacement of 4,000 Christians within the Jimma Zone of Ethiopia. The brutal Muslim attacks started a day before the influential al-shabaab official proclaimed his orders. It all started when a local Muslim accused a Christian of defiling the Koran, hence resulting to the gruesome burning of Fifty-nine churches and twenty eight homes during the attack.

Ethiopian authorities sent out security troops but reports said that they were outnumbered by the Islamist invaders. The 2007 census reveals a statistic of forty four per cent of the population belongs to the Ethiopian Orthodox church, while 34 percent are Sunni Muslim. The rest are scattered to several protestant Christian denominations. As is usual in these type of conflicts there will be a refugee crisis as the christian population of Ethiopia clamours to escape. More than likely these refugees will head towards European Union countries instead of the nearby larger African countries.

The conflicts between the al-shabaab terrorists and the Ethiopian troops in Somalia plus the Muslim attacks on churches across the western Ethiopia have created havoc within and outside the state. The current uproar that has just started out as a Somali civil war might soon trigger an interstate war between the Islam-controlled Somalia and its western opponent.

Somalia's Islamic rebellion, stated in a UN report, is said to be a clear display of their support for the Iranian cause when they sent out 720 of their best-skilled fighters to Lebanon in the summer of 2006 to aid in overthrowing the Israeli forces. As a return for their assistance, the al-shabaab's parent organization, the Islamic Courts Union, received three consignments of arms, ammunition and medical supplies from Iran. To further show their gratitude, Iranian proxy Hezbollah provided Somali rebels with advanced training by sending five military consultants to Somalia.

The support of Al-shabaab terrorist troops to Iran provided the latter with more than extra soldiers in its battle against Israel. The objective of Iran to have power over the flow of oil through the red sea and the Mediterranean sea requires them to also be in control of both the Southern entrance to the red sea and the Mediterranean sea. The authority to implement a trade restriction would be a powerful weapon for Iran and Islam in their battle against the European Union and the rest of the western world. The domination of Iran over Somalia and Eritrea cannot be completed unless the Ethiopian resistance is totally annihilated. Hence, the Islam al-shabaab terrorist militia's battle against Ethiopia is very important.

If you want to understand why the radical Islam is so eager for an alliance or influence over these two countries (including Egypt and Tunisia), look at a good map of the Middle East with a focus on the European Union, Mediterranean Sea and in particular, the Red Sea and all will become clear. Indeed, these two seas cover the most significant trade route in the whole world!

Radical Islam will take control of Ethiopia and will also indisputably also take authority over the small areas of Eritrea and Djibouti on the coastline of the red sea. These areas are also noted to have only just become sovereign from Ethiopia.

Prophecy reveals that a restructured 10 nation European union led by Germany will be ready to confront a Muslim alliance of nations that include Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya and others. This will set off a devastating chain of events that will affect us all.

Find out more about this Devastating Prophecy here european union

Countdown to the End of the World in Daniel 2: A Clear Indictment Against Prophecy Speculations

The countdown of end-of-the-world events in the second chapter of the book of Daniel is one of the most significant prophecies in the Bible. What is remarkable about this prophecy is not only that it covers a series of events from the day of Nebuchadnezzar to the end of the world, but it also demonstrates in the simplest of ways how Bible predictions with symbols are is to be explained.

The circumstances surrounding Daniel's landmark end-time prediction provides a lesson in the importance of avoiding private interpretation. The whole thing started with Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon having this dream and didn't remember what he dreamed. Before the intervention of Daniel was sought, the wise men of Babylon were summoned by Nebuchadnezzar to tell him what he dreamed and to give him the interpretation thereof.

Nebuchadnezzar's unreasonable request is God's opportunity
This request seems to be grossly unreasonable on the part of the king of Babylon. It is one thing to be asked to interpret a dream somebody tells you, but it's another thing for you to be asked to tell what the dream is without being told the dream! However, when you examine this story from another perspective you will see where these wise men claimed to have the ability to give interpretation to any dream that the king tells them. They were able to give their "expert interpretation" to a dream in such a professional manner that caused the king to repose confidence in them.

Therefore, what the king is doing is merely to demonstrate his confidence in his counselors' ability to explain mysteries. But in the providence of God, this situation was to prove that what these "interpreters of dreams" have been doing all along was to concoct and conjecture some fanciful explanation that the king wants to hear. In other word, they were feeding him with their own private interpretations from the start. And to be fair to these wise men, they couldn't have done any better. They were being paid to do this job, and to tell the king the truth that they don't have a clue about his dreams is to put themselves in danger of being executed.

Prophecy comes only by divine revelations
The Bible clearly teaches that "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation" (2Pet. 1:20) and that "interpretations belong to God" (Gen. 40:8). Therefore, we are not supposed to know what an interpretation of a prophecy is unless we are so instructed by the Holy Scriptures. It is upon this observation that the prophet Daniel, when informed about the counselors' dilemma, went to God in prayer to have Him reveal the kings' dream and explain its meaning.

This is how every Bible student should approach the word of God in their study of end-of-the-world events. Too often we see a great deal of speculations that confuse rather than enlighten. We have seen many instances where big name theologians abuse the word of God by too much hermeneutics and theological gymnastics instead of accepting the simple communication of divine revelation.

Daniel declared the real Source of his revelations
When Daniel received the solution from the Lord it turns out to be a countdown of events from his time to the end of the world. Before he even began the tell Nebuchadnezzar what the he was shown, he made it very clear that he cannot reveal the king's dream by any ability of his own. He further told the king that what he is about to make known came to him through revelation by the God of heaven. And so the prophet proceeded to give a countdown of what God revealed to him in vision concerning the king's dream.

Standing before the Babylonian monarch, Daniel confidently declared that what he saw in his dream was a great image with a head of gold, the breast and arm of silver, belly and thigh of brass, legs of iron, and the feet and toes are part of iron and part of clay. The prophet continued by saying that as the king was beholding this scene a stone was cut out of the mountain and smote the image at the feet and break it in pieces. In giving the interpretation to this dream, the first thing that Daniel told the king of Babylon is that he is that head of gold that he saw on the image.

Daniel explained the meaning of the king's dream
Since the head of gold represents the king of Babylon, it, therefore, means that each of the other metals seen on this image represents the rise of a king or set of kings. Here is the outline below:

Head of Gold - King of Babylon
Breast and Arms of Silver - Kings of the Medes and Persians
Belly and Thigh of Brass - King of Greece
Legs of Iron - King of Rome
Feet of Iron and clay - Ten Kings in a divided Roman kingdom
Stone cut out of the mountains - God shall set up His kingdom

Prophecy was fulfilled to the highest degree of accuracy
The countdown to the end of the world in the prophecy of Daniel chapter 2 is very easy to figure out not because we are familiar with the historical developments but because God has provided the answer. The solution that the Bible provides to any prophecy is the most important factor in determining the accuracy of your conclusion. History is there to demonstrate the level of precision with which the utterances of Daniel was fulfilled and gives us the assurance that what we accept as God's answer is bang on target.

Following simple Bible instructions is the most fundamental rule in the prophecy interpretation. To avoid those common mistakes that even the most seasoned theologians are making today, click on: http://www.prophecyecourse.com to enroll for the FREE 7-DAY END TIME PROPHECY SEMINAR and download the advanced End-time Prophecy Ecourse.

Steve Sterling is a prophecy researcher who has been studying end-time Bible prophecy for over 25 years.

The 365 Prophecies Jesus Fulfilled: Prophecy 16

Whenever we set out on any serious study of Bible Prophecy, it is important to remember that within just one verse of scripture, there may be multiple predictions. Genesis chapter 49 is one of those places.

In this 16th old testament prophecy that Jesus fulfilled, we see that it was the intention of God that the tribe of Judah would be the line through which the Messiah would come. The obvious choice would have been Reuben, since he is the first born, but due to sexual sin with his father’s wife, Reuben was disqualified.

As with Reuben, all of us have lost our birthright.  As the sons and daughters of Adam we could not obtain eternal life because of our sin.  We needed a redeemer, someone who was righteous and could stand in the gap for us.

The spiritual choice from Jacob’s sons was Judah because of his many attributes that were pictures of what Jesus would be like when He came.

In these five verses of Genesis 49:8-12, there are seven references in Jacob’s description of Judah that point to Jesus:

Judah’s name means “Praise”, even as Jesus’ Name meant Praise to the Father for His obedience in laying down His life for all men:

Genesis 49:8 “Judah, you are he whom your brothers shall praise;

Judah shall overcome his enemies, even as Jesus will finally put down every enemy:

Genesis 49:8 Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies;

All of Jesus’ brothers in Israel will someday bow down to Him as their Messiah:

Genesis 49:8 Your father’s children shall bow down before you.

Judah is the “Lion” as Jesus is the “Lion of the Tribe of Judah”:

Genesis 49:9 Judah is a lion’s whelp; From the prey, my son, you have gone up. He bows down, he lies down as a lion; And as a lion, who shall rouse him?

The rulership for Israel is placed in the hands of Judah, as will be all Rulership be given to Jesus as Lord of the Universe:

Genesis 49:10 The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor a lawgiver from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes; And to Him shall be the obedience of the people.

Upon Jesus entrance into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, He was riding in as a King on the foal of a donkey, in fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9.

Genesis 49:11 Binding his donkey to the vine, And his donkey’s colt to the choice vine,

In the Book of Revelation, Jesus garments are said to be splashed with the blood of those He has slain and trampled in the valley of Armageddon:

Genesis 49:11 He washed his garments in wine, And his clothes in the blood of grapes. His eyes are darker than wine, And his teeth whiter than milk.”

Both Mary’s Genealogy in Luke and Joseph’s Genealogy in Matthew, show that Jesus came from the tribe of Judah.

According to the Gospel of Matthew, through Joseph’s genealogy, Jesus came from Abraham and David. The Messiah had to come from the seed of Abraham and be from the house of David. This genealogy in Matthew showing Joseph’s line, proves that Jesus has the Legal right to the throne of David.

Mary’s genealogy in the Gospel of Luke traces Jesus’ line all the way back to Adam, to prove that Jesus was qualified to be the Second Adam and Savior of all men, because He is from the first man, Adam. Mary’s genealogy proves that Jesus has the Physical right to be the Messiah.

Although Joseph was not the physical father of Jesus, He did convey to Jesus the legal right to the throne as the Messiah because Joseph as his stepfather was descended from David and Abraham.

If you carefully examine Joseph’s Genealogy that is given by Matthew, you will see a man by the name of “Jechonias”.

In the Book of Jeremiah 22:30 the Lord pronounces a curse upon the entire line of Jechonias:

Jeremiah 22:30 Thus says the LORD: “Write this man down as childless, A man who shall not prosper in his days; For none of his descendants shall prosper, Sitting on the throne of David, And ruling anymore in Judah.”

This presents a huge problem for the Lord in that the Messiah must come from the line of David. Jeconiah is from the line of David, down to Joseph who is the stepfather of Jesus.

If Joseph had been the birth father of Jesus, Jesus would have been disqualified from sitting on the throne of David because He is descended from the line of Jechonia.

One can imagine the jubilation in satan’s camp when God pronounced the curse of Jechonias’ line. Satan must have thought that God had made a mistake in curing this line because it would mean that everyone from the line of Jechonia was disqualified from being the Messiah, including Jesus.

Except for this fact: David had two sons, Nathan and Solomon.

Joseph came from Solomon’s line, from where Jeconiah was cursed and no son could ever be the Messiah.

Mary came from Nathan’s line, from where Jesus was qualified to sit on David’s throne.

This is why the Holy Spirit present to us two Genealogies in Matthew and Luke, so that we can see that Jesus is qualified to be the Messiah because He is from the Tribe of Judah, from where Genesis 49:10 states the ruler must come.

Jesus is also qualified to be the Messiah because He is descended from Adam, Abraham, and David.

For the sake of clarity and so that you have a visual reference of Jesus’ Genealogy, I included the complete lineage of Joseph and Mary.

The Genealogy from Adam to Jesus Christ:

ADAM (1)
“The Son of God” and The First Adam(14) DAVID (34)
m. Bathsheba (Luke 3:31)(14) JEHOIAKIM
(who had brothers, Matthew 1:11)Widowed daughter
husband deceased(Evidently Salathiel died childless and Pedaiah, his brother, married his widow according to Deut. 25,5,6)wife m. PEDAIAH
(Ouite legally according to the Mosaic law, Pedaiah’s name does not appear as the father of Zerubbabel in either Matthew or Luke.)(3) ZERUBBABEL (57)
(1 Chr. 3:19)daughter
SHELOMITH –> m RHESA (58)(14) JESUS (77)
The Son of God and the Last Adam

Rob Robinson

This entry was posted on Thursday, March 24th, 2011 at 12:15 am and is filed under 365 Prophecies, Rob Robinson. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

View the original article here

PROPHECY - The Next 1000 Years

Prophecies from the Egyptians, the Bible, the Mayans, Hopi Indians, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce all agree that the world will face a series of cataclysmic disasters over the next one thousand years. Drawing from an encyclopedic range of ancient and modern sources, as well as from interviews with scholars and political and financial experts, this program moves from the pyramids of Giza to the

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for the full story www.Trends2012.co.cc ]]

View the original article here

The 365 Prophecies Jesus Fulfilled: Prophecy 11

In order for the Lord to fulfill His word to Abraham, it was going to take some time. God does not often complete His work in us speedily. It usually requires many years for the Lord to work on us and in us, before He accomplishes His purpose for us.

This is not because the Lord cannot move quickly, but because of the frailty of man. God is always ready to move in us, it is we who must go through a long process of learning before the Lord can do what He is planning.

In Genesis chapter 20, Abraham arrives in Egypt out of fear. A famine has developed around the world that causes Abraham to worry that he will not be able to find food for his family while on the journey to the land that God had promised him.

Instead of trusting in the Lord, Abraham goes to Egypt where he learns that grain can be found. Upon his arrival, Abraham instructs Sarah to say to Abimelech, the king of Egypt, that Sarah is his sister.

The kings of Egypt were known to take a woman of beauty from her husband and have her husband executed. In fear of his life, Abraham allows his wife to lie for him.

At the end of Genesis chapter 20 we learn that as a result of Abimelech taking Sarah, the Lord had shut the wombs of all the women of his household. When Abraham prays for Abimelech, God opens the womb of his wife and female servants.

Genesis 20:17 So Abraham prayed to God; and God healed Abimelech, his wife, and his female servants. Then they bore children; for the LORD had closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech because of Sarah, Abraham’s wife.

As we come to chapter 21, we see that because of Abraham’s prayer for Abimelech, the Lord also now opens the womb of Sarah and she is able to conceive the son that was promised almost 26 years before.

Genesis 21:1-3 And the LORD visited Sarah as He had said, and the LORD did for Sarah as He had spoken. For Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him. And Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him—whom Sarah bore to him—Isaac.

This has been a very long process for Abraham, as God has been developing him and his trust in the Lord. From the beginning, God had chosen one specific line of descendants to bring His Son into the world. It would have to be a line who had developed faith in God. It was the ultimate intention of God to show that it was by Faith that a man can obtain the promises of God, not by his own works.

Abraham has made many mistakes, the greatest of which was to not wait on the Lord and allow God to bring to him the son that was promised. When Abraham took Hagar and had his son Ishmael, this became a work of Abraham’s flesh. God explained to Abraham that all those who will please the Lord will do so by faith.  All of their attempts at obtaining God’s promise by their own efforts will be rejected.

As Isaac was born to Abraham and Sarah, it becomes a point of increasing contention between Hagar and her son Ishmael and Sarah and her son Isaac. Sarah resents Hagar now and wants her and her son out of their household.

God tells Abraham to heed the wishes of Sarah and send Hagar and Ishmael away. This of course displeases Abraham because he loves Ishmael greatly.

As God instructs Abraham to do as Sarah wishes, He speaks into reality the 11th old testament prophecy that Jesus fulfilled:

Genesis 21:12 But God said to Abraham, “Do not let it be displeasing in your sight because of the lad or because of your bondwoman. Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called.”

In this very small verse of scripture we find an amazing prophetic promise of God. From the line of Isaac, a future “seed” of the woman that God first promised to Eve in Genesis 3:15, would arrive on the earth as the Savior of all men.

When we arrive at the Book of Romans, Paul who was an expert in the old testament, reveals that not all of the seed of Abraham are chosen of God, only those who are from faith:

Romans 9:7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.”

Jesus was born from a line of people whom God had slowly and methodically developed faith. It was not that there was anything wrong with Ishmael, except for the fact that he was born out of Abraham’s lapse in faith and was his attempt in his flesh, to help fulfill God’s promise.

The fulfillment of this 11th old testament prophecy is found in Romans 9:7 where Jesus becomes the one who came from that seed of Abraham, and his son Isaac. The son who came after a long period of waiting and the development of faith. The son who came by God’s work, not Abraham’s attempts.

View the original article here

2012 Mayan Prophecy End of an Age

2012 Mayan Prophecy End of an Age 2012 VIRGINIA BEACH VAMayan Date of DestinyEnd of an Age! What's Next?Annual Ancient Mysteries Conference Virginia Beach VA October 8- 11, 2009

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for the full story www.Trends2012.co.cc ]]

View the original article here