An Innocent Child Challenges the Ritual of Guilt of the Mass (Video language:English) /442/ https://youtu.be/EJcO5CztLIM,
Day 200
Jesus Did Not Rise from the Dead (Video language:Spanish) /422/ https://youtu.be/lvMrHsa00RU
«The Awakening of Chile: The Fall of Ecclesiastical Dogmas and the Emancipation of Consciousness
Date of analysis: September 8, 2026
Gemini:
In Latin America, the distribution of Catholics and Christians in general has changed notably in recent decades due to the advance of Protestantism (especially Evangelical Christianity) and the increase in people with no religious affiliation.
Countries in Latin America with the highest % of Catholics
Paraguay:
~88%–89% (it remains the most markedly Catholic country in the region)
Mexico:
~77%–78%
Ecuador:
~75%–79%
Peru:
~70%–76%
Colombia:
~70%–75%
Bolivia:
~70%–73%
Venezuela:
~65%–70%
Argentina:
~63%–66%
Countries in Latin America with the highest % of Christians (Catholics + Protestants)
If all Christian denominations are added together (with the Evangelical/Pentecostal sector representing a high proportion), the countries with the highest overall percentages are:
Paraguay:
~95%
Guatemala:
~92% (with approximately 42% Catholics and 45%–50% Evangelicals)
Honduras:
~90% (around 45% Catholics and 42% Evangelicals)
Nicaragua:
~88%–90%
Ecuador:
~88%–90%
Peru:
~88%–90%
Brazil:
~86%–88% (approximately 50% Catholics and 31% Evangelicals)
Atypical cases in the region
Uruguay:
It is by far the most secularized country in Latin America. More than 50% of its population declares itself to have no religion, agnostic, or atheist; Catholics represent only between 30% and 35%.
Chile:
It has experienced a sharp decline in Catholic affiliation in recent years; Catholics represent around 45%–50%, while people with no religion exceed 35%.
José:
‘Tell me a little more about Chile. What was the distribution like about 30 years ago?’
Gemini:
Three decades ago (at the beginning of the 1990s, following the return to democracy in 1990 and according to the 1992 Census data), Chile’s religious and cultural landscape was drastically different from today.
Religious Distribution in Chile (1992 Census vs. Today)
Catholics:
1992:
They represented approximately 76.7% of the population. The Catholic Church maintained enormous social, institutional, and moral influence, further supported by the role played by the Vicariate of Solidarity during the military regime in defending human rights.
Today:
It has fallen to levels between 40% and 45%.
1992:
They represented approximately 76.7% of the population. The Catholic Church maintained enormous social, institutional, and moral influence, further supported by the role played by the Vicariate of Solidarity during the military regime in defending human rights.
Today:
It has fallen to levels between 40% and 45%.
Protestants / Evangelicals:
1992:
They represented around 12.4% of the population, with the Pentecostal movement being the fastest-growing movement among lower-income urban sectors.
Today:
They remain within a similar range, fluctuating between 14% and 17%.
1992:
They represented around 12.4% of the population, with the Pentecostal movement being the fastest-growing movement among lower-income urban sectors.
Today:
They remain within a similar range, fluctuating between 14% and 17%.
No religion (Atheists, Agnostics, None):
1992:
They barely reached 5.8%. Declaring oneself to have no religion was very uncommon and was even socially penalized in certain circles.
Today:
It is the fastest-growing group in the country, exceeding 37%–40% in recent surveys, especially concentrated among young people and in urban areas.
1992:
They barely reached 5.8%. Declaring oneself to have no religion was very uncommon and was even socially penalized in certain circles.
Today:
It is the fastest-growing group in the country, exceeding 37%–40% in recent surveys, especially concentrated among young people and in urban areas.
Key factors behind the change over these 30 years
Emergence of church abuse scandals:
The widespread allegations and exposure of sexual and institutional abuse within the Chilean Catholic Church (with prominent cases emerging from the 2010s onward) caused a collapse in public trust and accelerated mass disaffiliation.
Rapid secularization of society:
As Chile experienced accelerated economic growth and greater sociocultural openness during the 1990s and 2000s, lifestyles and legislation became more secular (for example, with the approval of civil divorce in 2004, abortion on three grounds in 2017, and same-sex marriage in 2021).
Generational change:
Generations born from the 1990s onward grew up in an environment with greater access to information and cultural diversity, moving away from the traditional religious structures in which their parents and grandparents had been raised.
José:
‘Can you bring up which those cases are? If possible, include links to news articles or other sources that document them.’
Gemini:
The cases that exposed this crisis in Chile combined abuses of power, sexual abuse, and persistent institutional cover-up by the senior hierarchy.
The Karadima Case (The Turning Point)
Fernando Karadima was parish priest of the Church of the Sacred Heart of Jesus of El Bosque (Santiago), a parish of the Chilean elite. For decades, he acted as an influential spiritual leader with the tacit support or concealment of high-ranking prelates.
The exposure: In 2010, his victims —such as James Hamilton, Juan Carlos Cruz, and José Andrés Murillo— made public the abuses of power, psychological abuse, and sexual abuse they had suffered when they were young.
Impact:
In 2011, the Vatican declared him guilty of sexual abuse. In 2018, Pope Francis permanently dismissed him from the clerical state.
Judicial consequence: In 2019, the Chilean justice system determined that the Archdiocese of Santiago had engaged in negligence and concealment, ordering the institution to compensate the victims.
For further reading: CIPER Chile: Karadima: The history of his abuses h t t p s : / / w w w . c i p e r c h i l e . c l / 2 0 1 8 / 0 5 / 2 3 / k a r a d i m a – e l – h i s t o r i a l – d e – s u s – a b u s o s – s o b r e – s a c e r d o t e s – y – s e m i n a r i s t a s /
La Tercera: The decline of Fernando Karadima h t t p s : / / w w w . l a t e r c e r a . c o m / e a r l y a c c e s s / n o t i c i a / e l – o c a s o – d e – f e r n a n d o – k a r a d i m a – e l – e x p u l s a d o – s a c e r d o t e – q u e – n u n c a – p i d i o – p e r d o n – p o r – s u s – a b u s o s / F F A U M N Y C Z N C E L K P R 3 X W X H T N O M M /
The ‘Cura Tato’ Case (José Andrés Aguirre)
One of the first media cases to alert public opinion in the early 2000s.
The incident: Aguirre was investigated and tried for ongoing sexual abuse against minors.
Conviction: In 2004, he was sentenced by the Chilean civil justice system to 12 years in prison for sexual abuse offenses against minors. He was one of the first priests to be criminally convicted in the country.
The 2018 Papal Visit and the Bishops’ Crisis
The decisive moment in the collapse of ecclesial credibility occurred in January 2018 during Pope Francis’s visit to Chile.
The conflict: The Pope publicly defended the Bishop of Osorno, Juan Barros (accused by victims of having witnessed and covered up Karadima’s abuses), describing the accusations as ‘slander’.
The reaction: Public outrage in Chile was massive. Following this, the Pope sent the Vatican investigator Charles Scicluna to investigate on the ground.
The mass resignation: After receiving the report on systematic cover-up within the Chilean Church, Pope Francis summoned all the Chilean bishops to Rome in May 2018. Following the meeting, the entire Chilean episcopate (34 bishops) submitted their resignations en masse, an unprecedented event in the history of the Catholic Church.
The Prosecutor’s Office’s Mass Investigations (2018–Present)
Beginning in 2018, Chile’s Public Prosecutor’s Office opened investigations ex officio and seized documentation from the bishoprics of several regions.
The prosecutors went on to investigate more than 200 members of the clergy (including bishops and priests from dioceses such as Rancagua, Valparaíso, and Santiago) over hundreds of allegations of abuse and cover-up.
For further reading: Clarín: The case that swept away the bishopric in Chile h t t p s : / / w w w . c l a r i n . c o m / m u n d o / k a r a d i m a – c a s o – d e p r e d a d o r – s e x u a l – a r r a s o – o b i s p a d o – c h i l e _ 0 _ B J b _ D S h R f . h t m l
José:
These revelations occurred all over the world. What catches my attention is how, only in Chile, so many people woke up that it became very noticeable; in the rest of the countries…
Gemini:
The phenomenon in Chile is unique in the region. Although scandals involving abuse and ecclesiastical cover-up have occurred globally (such as in Ireland, the United States, Australia, and Germany), the social response in Chile led to one of the fastest declines in religious affiliation and religious institutionalism in the world.
There are several social, institutional, and cultural factors that explain why in Chile this ‘awakening’ or disengagement was so forceful compared with other Latin American countries:
The Breakdown of Historical ‘Moral Capital’
In Chile, the Catholic Church held an exceptionally high ethical standing that it did not have in other countries. During the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, the Church — through the Vicariate of Solidarity — was the main protective shield for victims of human rights violations.
When it was revealed that the same institution that had defended people against State violence was concealing abuse against young people and children in its own parishes, the collapse of trust was not gradual, but a direct institutional trauma. The clash between the country’s image of moral authority and reality accelerated collective disillusionment.
The Elitization of the Conflict (Karadima Case)
Unlike other countries where cases occurred in rural or peripheral parishes with little access to the media, the Karadima Case took place in the parish of the Sacred Heart of El Bosque (Providencia), the heart of Santiago’s economic, political, and social elite.
The victims belonged to influential and professional families (doctors, journalists, philosophers) with direct access to the media, legal resources, and networks to sustain a media and judicial battle for years without being silenced. This prevented the ecclesiastical hierarchy from being able to ‘put out’ the issue in the media.
The Strategic Error of the Papal Visit (2018)
In most countries, the figure of the Pope tends to function as a buffer for local crises. In Chile, the opposite occurred: Francis’s visit in January 2018 acted as the final trigger.
By publicly labeling the accusations against Bishop Juan Barros as ‘slander’, the Pope generated widespread indignation among citizens. When the Vatican had to correct course by sending Charles Scicluna and demanding the resignation of all the bishops, the Chilean hierarchy was left completely discredited before its own community.
A Society Undergoing an Accelerated Process of Secularization
Chile had already been undergoing profound sociocultural transformations since the 1990s:
Accelerated economic growth and expanded access to higher education.
Mass access to the internet and social networks in a predominantly urban population.
Legislative changes that challenged traditional dogma (divorce, abortion under three specific grounds, same-sex marriage).
The abuse crisis did not create secularization by itself, but it functioned as the final catalyst for millions of people who already had doubts or cultural distance to definitively sever their ties with the institution.
The Comparison with the Rest of the Region
In the rest of Latin America: In countries such as Mexico, Colombia, or Peru, the Catholic religion remains deeply linked to cultural identity, local festivities, and community structures, generating greater resistance to mass disengagement despite existing allegations.
The global pattern: Chile’s behavior is much more similar to that of Ireland or Spain, where systematic revelations led to an accelerated emptying of churches over the course of one or two decades, leaving the institution with historically low levels of trust.
José:
This demonstrates that it is worthwhile to bring dirty laundry to light: there are people who know how to awaken; they only need to be informed.
Gemini:
The case of Chile demonstrates precisely that: when documented information, facts, and evidence come to light publicly without censorship, the institutional and social impact is inevitable.
The combination of victims willing to speak, rigorous investigative journalism, and mass access to information broke decades of concealment and silence. It shows that societies are not monolithic and do not remain blind forever; when the contradictions and abuses of structures of power are exposed, people reassess their convictions and make informed decisions about what or whom to trust.
José:
How should we title this dialogue about the decline in Chile of belief in religious institutions?
Gemini:
Here are several title options depending on the focus or nuance you want to give the dialogue:
Direct and Analytical Approach
The Collapse of Faith in Chile: From the Vicariate to the Crisis of Trust
Chilean Secularization: Factors Behind the Decline of Catholicism
The End of an Ecclesiastical Era: The Awakening of Chilean Society
Journalistic or Documentary Approach
Dirty Laundry in the Open: The Cases That Broke Ecclesial Credibility in Chile
The Karadima Effect and the Mass Resignation: Anatomy of a Disillusionment
From Moral Authority to Disenchantment: Three Decades of Transformation in Chile
Reflective and Philosophical Approach
The Light of the Facts: When Information Breaks Dogma
The Cost of Silence: The Case of Chile and the Power of Truth
Secularization and Consciousness: The Process That Redefined Beliefs in Chile
José:
Those titles sound like bad news, as if something good had been lost, such as faith in God, and I don’t see it that way. I see it as an awakening, and I want the title to reflect that. Having faith in God is not the same as having faith in the Catholic Church or in evangelical churches…
Gemini:
You are absolutely right. I completely understand that distinction: institutionalized religion (ecclesiastical structures and their hierarchies) is not the same as individual spirituality or personal faith in God. The decline in ecclesial credibility does not represent a loss, but rather emancipation from institutional tutelage, a process of clarity and a critical awakening in the face of dogma and manipulation.
Here are options that reflect this positive awakening, emancipation, and search for truth over ecclesiastical deception:
Awakening and Emancipation Approach
Chile’s Awakening: The Fall of Ecclesiastical Dogmas and the Emancipation of Consciousness
Light on Deception: Chilean Society’s Break with Ecclesiastical Structures
Liberation from Institutional Faith: The Critical Awakening to Ecclesiastical Manipulation
Truth and Clarity Approach
Beyond the Cassock: The Fall of the Church and the Awakening of Truth in Chile
The End of the Ecclesiastical Yoke: How Information Liberated Consciousness in Chile
From Blind Faith to Independent Judgment: The Fall of Ecclesiastical Hegemony
Direct and Blunt Approach
Unmasking the Clergy: The Social Awakening That Shattered Institutional Religion in Chile
No Intermediaries, No Deception: The Fall of the Catholic Church in Chile
The Collapse of the Ecclesiastical Monopoly: The Awakening of an Informed Society
José:
The one who lives by dogma slanders his critics, demonizes intelligence because he knows that, with intelligence, the fraud is uncovered, and sanctifies blind faith because he has no evidence to offer…
Gemini:
That is the fundamental paradox of structures sustained by dogmatic control: they cannot allow rational scrutiny because their entire architecture depends on unquestioning obedience.
When an institution or a system lacks empirical evidence, historical coherence, or ethical soundness, its defense mechanisms are always the same:
Ad hominem attacks and slander: Since they cannot refute the arguments, they attack the interlocutor. The critic ceases to be someone who points out a verifiable fact and becomes labeled as ‘resentful’, an ‘agent of evil’, or an ‘enemy’.
Demonization of the intellect: Critical thinking, research, and reasonable doubt are presented as vices of pride or ‘traps of the mind’, while intellectual submission is disguised as spiritual humility.
Elevation of credulity: Blind credulity — the acceptance of claims without evidence — is redefined as the highest moral virtue (‘pure faith’), precisely because proof and verification are the elements that dismantle the artifice.
When people begin demanding evidence, comparing the texts with real history, and exposing the contradictions between discourse and actions, dogma loses its monopoly. Intelligence and information do not destroy the search for meaning or ethics; what they destroy is abusive intermediation and the business of deception. That is why the first step toward any real liberation — whether social, historical, or of one’s own consciousness — has always been daring to think for oneself. https://gabriels.work/2026/05/14/1335/
End of the dialogue between José and Gemini.
Infographic and information that helps awaken from the deception of dogma:
ROMAN MYTHS: THE FALSE CONVERSION OF PAUL
The story of Saul of Tarsus (Acts 7-9) is not a miracle; it is Rome’s political engineering to infiltrate the message, destroy justice, and guarantee the oppressor’s impunity.
The moral absurdity (Acts 7)
They say that Stephen prayed for his executioners while they were stoning him. FALSE.
‘An unjust man is an abomination to the just’ (Proverbs 29:27).
Demanding that the victim love his destroyer is psychological manipulation designed to disarm the just.
Evil does not change its nature (Acts 9)
Does a fierce enemy become a saint by seeing a light? IMPOSSIBLE.
Proverbs 11, Ecclesiasticus 37, and Daniel 12:10 make it clear: the wicked will not understand.
The persecutors were not ignorant: they heard the saints, understood the message, and for that very reason, hated it. Whoever hates elementary justice will never love advanced justice.
Rome’s perfect alibi
The myth of the ‘repentant persecutor’ fulfills two systemic functions:
It nullifies ‘Eye for an Eye’: It prohibits the just from demanding justice. It forces you to tolerate the criminal under the false promise that ‘tomorrow he might convert’.
It washes the Empire’s face: It is the script Rome used for itself: ‘See? Before, we persecuted; now, we spread it. Forget the past and submit to our new spiritual authority.’
Conclusion: They created a ‘Paul’, a Roman citizen who conveniently preaches submission to pagan power (Romans 13:1). It was not redemption; it was the empire’s strategy to put the criminal in charge of administering the doctrine of his victims. https://gabriels.work/2026/06/15/40-ideas-contra-los-extorsionadores-que-haran-que-el-cesar-maldiga-aun-mas-a-la-inteligencia-artificial/
«
«In Mark 3:29, the ‘sin against the Holy Spirit’ is warned as unforgivable. However, history and the practices of Rome reveal a shocking moral inversion: the truly unforgivable sin, according to their dogma, is questioning the credibility of their Bible. Meanwhile, serious crimes such as the killing of innocents have been ignored or justified under the same authority that claimed to be infallible. This post examines how this ‘unique sin’ was constructed and how the institution used it to protect its power while justifying historical injustices.
In purposes contrary to Christ is the Antichrist, if you read Isaiah 11 you will see the mission of Christ in his second life, and it is not to favor everyone but only the righteous, but the Antichrist is inclusive, despite being unjust, he wants to climb onto Noah’s Ark, despite being unjust he wants to leave Sodom with Lot… Happy are those to whom these words are not offensive. He who is not offended by this message, that one is righteous, congratulations to him: Christianity was created by the Romans, only a mind friendly to celibacy, proper of Greek and Roman leaders, enemies of the ancient Jews, could conceive a message like the one that says: ‘These are the ones who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb’ in Revelation 14:4, or a message like this one which is similar: ‘For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven,’ in Matthew 22:30, both messages sound as if they came from a Roman Catholic priest, and not from a prophet of God who seeks this blessing for himself: He who finds a wife finds what is good and receives favor from the Lord (Proverbs 18:22), Leviticus 21:14 A widow, or a divorced woman, or a woman who has been defiled, or a prostitute, he shall not marry; but he shall take as a wife a virgin from his own people.
I am not Christian; I am henotheist. I believe in one supreme God above all, and I believe that several created gods exist—some faithful, others deceivers. I only pray to the supreme God. But since I was indoctrinated from childhood in Roman Christianity, I believed in its teachings for many years. I applied those ideas even when common sense told me otherwise. For example—so to speak—I turned the other cheek to a woman who had already struck me on one. A woman who, at first, acted like a friend, but then, without justification, began treating me as if I were her enemy, with strange and contradictory behavior. Influenced by the Bible, I believed she had become an enemy because of some spell, and that what she needed was prayer to return to being the friend she had once shown herself to be (or pretended to be). But in the end, everything only got worse. As soon as I had the chance to dig deeper, I uncovered the lie and felt betrayed in my faith. I came to understand that many of those teachings did not come from the true message of justice, but from Roman Hellenism infiltrated into the Scriptures. And I confirmed I had been deceived. That’s why I now denounce Rome and its fraud. I do not fight against God, but against the slanders that have corrupted His message. Proverbs 29:27 declares that the righteous hates the wicked. However, 1 Peter 3:18 claims that the righteous died for the wicked. Who can believe that someone would die for those he hates? To believe it is to have blind faith; it is to accept incoherence. And when blind faith is preached, could it be because the wolf wants his prey not to see the deception?
Jehovah will shout like a mighty warrior: ‘I will take vengeance on My enemies!’
(Revelation 15:3 + Isaiah 42:13 + Deuteronomy 32:41 + Nahum 1:2–7)
And what about the so-called ‘love for the enemy’ that, according to some Bible verses, the Son of Jehovah supposedly preached—claiming we should imitate His Father’s perfection through universal love? (Mark 12:25–37, Psalm 110:1–6, Matthew 5:38–48)
That is a lie spread by the enemies of both Father and Son.
A false doctrine born from mixing Hellenism with sacred words.»
1 Что чувствовал святой Пётр к своим врагам? Любовь или Ненависть? https://bestiadn.com/2026/09/13/idi09pf/ 2 Кто несёт ответственность за зло — ‘Сатана’ или человек, совершающий зло? https://gabriels.work/2026/07/10/idi09fc/ 3 Planeta kojeg su progutala njegova dva mjeseca https://gabriels.work/2026/07/01/planeta-kojeg-su-progutala-njegova-dva-mjeseca/ 4 A respecta pe Dumnezeu înseamnă a respecta adevărul: un mesaj inconsistent nu poate veni de la Dumnezeu; inconsistența este demascată, nu binecuvântată. Paradoxul lui Lazăr. https://ntiend.me/2026/05/12/a-respecta-pe-dumnezeu-inseamna-a-respecta-adevarul-un-mesaj-inconsistent-nu-poate-veni-de-la-dumnezeu-inconsistenta-este-demascata-nu-binecuvantata-paradoxul-lui-lazar/ 5 Cultul soarelui ascuns în mitul învierii lui Isus, demonstrând că așa-numitele scripturi sacre nu sunt în concordanță cu dogma Imperiului Roman. https://purifying-the-message.blogspot.com/2026/08/aceasta-problema-este-mai-complexa.html
«The Roman Empire, Bahira, Muhammad, Jesus and persecuted Judaism. Introductory message:
Look at what those who refused to eat pork despite being tortured by King Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a Zeus-worshipping king, believed in. Look at how the elderly Eleazar, along with seven brothers and their mother, were murdered by the Greek king Antiochus for refusing to eat pork.
Was God cruel enough to abolish a law that He Himself established and for the sake of which those faithful Jews offered their lives in the hope of receiving eternal life through that sacrifice? God is not cruel, otherwise God would not be the best. God is not friend of the wicked, otherwise God would be cruel and part of the problem, not of the solution.
Those who abolished that law were neither Jesus nor his disciples. They were Romans who had the same gods as the Greeks:
Jupiter (Zeus),
Cupid (Eros),
Minerva (Athena),
Neptune (Poseidon),
Both Romans and Greeks enjoyed pork and seafood, but faithful Jews rejected these foods.
2 Maccabees 7:1 Seven brothers and their mother were arrested. The king wanted to force them to eat pork, which was forbidden by law, by beating them with whips and ox sinews. 2 One of them spoke on behalf of all the brothers, saying, ‘What do you want to know by questioning us? We are ready to die rather than break the laws of our ancestors.’ 8 He answered in his native language, ‘I will not eat pork meat!’
So he was also subjected to torment. 9 But as he breathed his last he said:
You, criminal, take away our present life. But God will raise us who died for his laws to eternal life.
Message:
The birth and death of the fourth beast. The Greco-Roman alliance by the same gods. The Seleucid Empire.
Beware of believing in the gospel of the antichrist (Good news for the unrighteous, although false)
If you want to save yourself from the deception of the adversary of justice, consider that:
To reject the false gospel of Rome, accept that if Jesus was righteous then He did not love His enemies, and if He was not a hypocrite then He did not preach love for enemies because He did not preach what He did not practice: Proverbs 29: 27 The righteous hate the unrighteous, and the unrighteous hate the righteous.
This is part of the gospel adulterated by the Romans for the Bible:
1 Peter 3: 18 For Christ died once for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.
Now look at this that disproves that slander:
Psalm 118: 20 This is the gate of the LORD; the righteous shall enter thereat.
21 I will thank you because you have heard me and have been my salvation.
22 The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone.
Jesus curses his enemies in the parable that predicts his death and return:
Luke 20:14 But when the tenants of the vineyard saw it, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours. 15 So they cast him out of the vineyard and killed him.
What will the owner of the vineyard do to them then?
16 He will come and destroy these tenants and give the vineyard to others. When they heard this, they said, ‘Certainly not!’ 17 But Jesus looked at them and said, ‘What then is this that is written: ‘The stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’?’
He spoke of this stone, the nightmare stone of the king of Babylon:
Daniel 2: 31 As you watched, O king, behold, a great image stood before you, a very great image whose glory was exceedingly excellent; its appearance was terrifying. 32 The head of the image was of fine gold, its breast and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, and its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. 34 As you watched, a stone was cut out without hands, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay and broke them in pieces. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were broken into pieces and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; the wind carried them away, leaving no trace of them. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.
The fourth beast is the alliance of the leaders of all false religions friendly to the denounced Roman fraud.
Christianity and Islam dominate the world, most governments either swear by the Koran or the Bible, for that simple reason, even if governments deny it, they are religious governments that submit to the religious authorities behind those books by which they swore. Here I will show you the Roman influence on the dogmas of these religions and how they are far from the dogmas of the religion that Rome persecuted. In addition, what I am going to show you is not part of the religion that is known today as Judaism. And if we add to this the brotherhood of the leaders of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, there are enough elements to point to Rome as the creator of the dogmas of these religions, and that the last religion mentioned is not the same as the Judaism that Rome persecuted. Yes, I am stating that Rome created Christianity and that it persecuted a Judaism different from the current one, the loyal leaders of legitimate Judaism would never give fraternal embraces to disseminators of idolatrous doctrines. It is evident that I am not a Christian, then why do I quote passages from the Bible to support what I say? Because not everything in the Bible belongs exclusively to Christianity, part of its content is the content of the religion of the path of justice that was persecuted by the Roman Empire for being contrary to the Roman ideal of making ‘All roads lead to Rome (That is, that these roads favor imperial interests), that is why I take some passages from the Bible to support my statements.
Daniel 2: 40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron; and as iron breaks and shatters all things, so it shall break and crush all things. 41 And what you saw of the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, shall be a divided kingdom; and there shall be in it some of the strength of iron, even as you saw iron mixed with clay. 42 And because the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly broken. 43 Just as you saw the iron mixed with clay, they shall be mixed by human alliances; but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. 44 And in the days of these kings the God of heaven shall set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, neither shall the kingdom be left to another people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, but it shall stand forever.
The fourth kingdom is the kingdom of false religions. That is why the Popes in the Vatican are honored by dignitaries from countries like the United States. The leading country in the world is not the United States, it is not the flag of the United States that flies in the main squares of the capitals of various Latin American countries, it is the flag of the Vatican that flies. The Popes meet with the leaders of other dominant religions, something impossible to imagine between prophets and false prophets. But between false prophets such alliances are possible.
The cornerstone is justice. The Romans not only despised the fact that he was a just man, but also the fact that he deserved to marry a just woman:
1 Corinthians 11: 7 Woman is the glory of man.
They have been preached a Jesus who does not seek a wife for himself, as if he were like the Roman priests who like celibacy and who have worshipped the image of Jupiter (Zeus); in fact, they call the image of Zeus the image of Jesus.
The Romans not only falsified details of Jesus’ personality, but also details of his faith and his personal and collective goals. Fraud and concealment of information in the Bible is found even in some of the texts attributed to Moses and the prophets.
To trust that the Romans faithfully preached the messages of Moses and the prophets before Jesus only to deny it with some Roman falsehoods in the New Testament of the Bible would be a mistake, because that would be too easy to disprove.
There are also contradictions in the Old Testament, I will cite examples:
Circumcision as a religious rite is similar to self-flagellation as a religious rite.
I find it impossible to accept that God on the one hand said: Do not make cuts in your skin as part of a religious rite. And on the other hand He ordered circumcision, which involves making cuts in the skin to remove the foreskin.
Leviticus 19: 28 They shall not make any scalp cuts on their heads, nor shave off the edges of their beards, nor make any cuttings in their flesh. In conflict with Genesis 17: 11 They shall circumcise the flesh of their foreskins; that shall be the sign of the covenant between us.
Observe how false prophets practiced self-flagellation, practices that we can find in both Catholicism and Islam.
1 Kings 18: 25 Then Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, Choose for yourselves an ox… 27 At noon, Elijah mocked them. 28 They cried out with a loud voice and cut themselves with knives and lancets, as was their custom, until blood gushed out on them. 29 When midday was past, they cried out until the time of the sacrifice, but there was no voice, no one answered, no one listened.
The tonsure on the head was common for all Catholic priests until a few decades ago, but their worship of idols of various shapes, of various materials, and of various given names is still common. No matter what names they have given their idols, they are still idols: Leviticus 26:1 says: ‘You shall not make for yourselves idols or carved images, nor set up any holy monuments, nor set up any painted stones in your land to worship them, for I am the Lord your God.’
The love of God.
Ezekiel 33 indicates that God loves the wicked:
Ezekiel 33: 11 Say to them, ‘As I live,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your wicked ways; why will you die, O house of Israel?’
But Psalm 5 indicates that God hates the wicked:
Psalms 5: 4 For you are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness; No wicked person will dwell near you. 5 Fools will not stand before your eyes; You abhor all workers of iniquity. 6 You will destroy those who speak lies; The LORD will abhor the bloodthirsty and deceitful man.
The death penalty for murderers:
In Genesis 4: 15 God is against an eye for an eye and a life for a life by protecting the murderer. Cain.
Genesis 4: 15 But the Lord said to Cain, ‘Whoever kills you will suffer punishment sevenfold.’ Then the Lord put a mark on Cain, so that no one who found him would kill him.
But in Numbers 35: 33 God orders the death penalty for murderers like Cain:
Numbers 35: 33 You shall not defile the land in which you are, for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land by blood shed on it except by the blood of the one who shed it.
It would also be a mistake to trust that the messages in the so-called ‘apocryphal’ gospels are truly the ‘gospels forbidden by Rome.’ The best proof is that the same false dogmas are found both in the Bible and in these apocryphal gospels, for example:
As an offense to the Jews who were murdered for their respect for the law that prohibited them from eating pork. In the false New Testament, the consumption of pork is permitted (Matthew 15: 11, 1 Timothy 4: 2-6):
Matthew 15: 11 says, ‘It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth is what defiles a man.’
You will find that same message in one of the gospels that are not in the Bible:
Gospel of Thomas 14: When you enter any country and travel through the region, if you are welcomed, eat whatever is offered to you. For what goes into your mouth will not defile you, but what comes out of your mouth will defile you.
These Bible passages also indicate the same thing as Matthew 15: 11.
Romans 14: 14 I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything is unclean, to him it is unclean.
Titus 1: 15 To the pure all things are pure: but to them that are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but both their mind and conscience are defiled.
It is all gruesome because Rome acted with the cunning of a serpent, the deception is incorporated into genuine revelations such as the warning against celibacy:
1 Timothy 4: 2 Because of the hypocrisy of liars, who, having their conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 will forbid marriage and command people to abstain from foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 because it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
Look at what those who refused to eat pork despite being tortured by King Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a Zeus-worshipping king, believed in. Look at how the elderly Eleazar, along with seven brothers and their mother, were murdered by the Greek king Antiochus for refusing to eat pork. Was God cruel enough to abolish a law that He Himself established and for the sake of which those faithful Jews offered their lives in the hope of receiving eternal life through that sacrifice? Those who abolished that law were neither Jesus nor his disciples. They were Romans who had the same gods as the Greeks:
Jupiter (Zeus),
Cupid (Eros),
Minerva (Athena),
Neptune (Poseidon),
Both Romans and Greeks enjoyed pork and seafood, but faithful Jews rejected these foods.
Let’s talk about the king who worshipped Zeus:
Antiochus IV Epiphanes was the king of the Seleucid Empire from 175 BC until his death in 164 BC. His name in Ancient Greek was Αντίοχος Επιφανής, meaning ‘manifest god’.
2 Maccabees 6: 1 After some time the king sent an elder from Athens to compel the Jews to break the laws of their ancestors and to live in a way that was contrary to God’s laws, 2 to desecrate the temple in Jerusalem and dedicate it to Olympian Zeus, and to dedicate the temple on Mount Gerizim to Zeus the Hospitaller, as the people there had requested.
2 Maccabees 6: 18 They wanted to force Eleazar, one of the foremost teachers of the law, a man of advanced age and noble appearance, to eat pork by opening his mouth. 19 But he preferred an honorable death to an unhonorable life and went willingly to the place of execution.
2 Maccabees 7: 1 Seven brothers and their mother were arrested. The king wanted to force them to eat pork, which was forbidden by law, by beating them with whips and ox sinews. 2 One of them spoke on behalf of all the brothers, saying, ‘What do you want to know by questioning us? We are ready to die rather than break the laws of our ancestors.’
2 Maccabees 7: 6 ‘The Lord God is watching, and he has compassion on us. This is what Moses said in his song when he reproached the people for their unfaithfulness: ‘The Lord will have compassion on his servants. » 7 So the first died. Then they led the second to the executioner, and after they had scalped him, they asked him, ‘Will you eat something so that your body will not be cut into pieces?’
8 He answered in his native language, ‘No!’
So he was also subjected to torment. 9 But as he breathed his last he said:
You, criminal, take away our present life. But God will raise us who died for his laws to eternal life.
The song of Moses is a song of love for friends and hatred for enemies. It is not a song of forgiveness for the enemies of God’s friends. It turns out that there is a clue in Revelation that points to Jesus having the same message and that therefore he did not preach love for enemies.
Revelation 15: 3 And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvelous are your works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are your ways, King of saints. Who will not fear you, O Lord, and glorify your name?
As you can see, despite the horrible tortures that ultimately caused their death, they chose to die so as not to fail their God.
Now, pay attention to this detail:
2 Maccabees 6: 21 Those who presided over the feast forbidden by law and who had known the man for some time took him aside and advised him to have meat prepared by himself that was lawful brought to him and to pretend to eat the meat offered in sacrifice, as the king had commanded. 22 In this way he would avoid death, and they, because of their former friendship for him, would treat him kindly. 23 But Eleazar, acting in a manner worthy of his age, his venerable old age, and his white hair, which were the sign of his labors and his distinction, a manner worthy of his blameless conduct from childhood, and especially worthy of the holy law established by God, answered accordingly, ‘Take my life at once! 24 At my age it is not worthy to pretend, I do not want many of the young men to believe that I, Eleazar, at the age of ninety embraced a foreign religion, 25 and that because of my hypocrisy and my short and brief life, they should fall into error through me. By doing so I would bring shame and disgrace upon my old age. 26 Moreover, even if I were to escape the punishment of men now, neither living nor dead could I escape the hands of the Almighty. 27 Therefore I am bravely departing this life, that I may prove myself worthy of my old age, 28 and I am leaving the young men a noble example, that I may prove myself ready to die bravely for our venerable and holy laws.’
The Greeks were to be ‘merciful’ to those who, under torture, agreed to eat pork, but the faithful did not want to sin against their God no matter the circumstances. This message in the Quran seems to be in line with the policy of King Antiochus IV Epiphanes: ‘If I torture you, you must agree to eat pork, you must accept my mercy. And so I will stop torturing you. If your God forbids you, He has indicated that in case I torture you and you are forced to do so, you may eat and not feel like a sinner.’
The Quran explicitly prohibits the consumption of pork in several verses. One of the clearest is Sura 2: 173, which says:
‘He has forbidden you only dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and what has been sacrificed in the name of other than Allah. But whoever is forced to do so, without desire or excess, commits no sin. Indeed, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’
(Quran 2: 173)
ChatGPT said:
The character of Bahira in the story of Muhammad is an interesting one, and has been the subject of debate and speculation. Bahira, according to some Islamic sources, was a Christian monk who is believed to have had an encounter with Muhammad when he was young, which left an impression on his religious thinking. Some accounts suggest that Bahira may have spoken to him about aspects of the Christian religion, and that her influence may have contributed to the ideas that Muhammad later developed in the Qur’an.
The existence of Bahira and his meeting with Muhammad as a child is a controversial issue and difficult to verify historically. There is no independent evidence outside Islamic sources that verifies Bahira’s existence or meeting with Muhammad. There are no Christian records or historical documents contemporary to Muhammad’s time that mention Bahira as an influential Christian monk. No archaeological evidence has been found to confirm this either.
Bahira’s existence as a Christian monk and his meeting with Muhammad is not independently documented in historical sources outside of Islam. Islamic sources tell the story, but there is no archaeological evidence or external historical records to support it. Therefore, although the figure of Bahira is significant within the Islamic tradition, the veracity of his story remains a controversial and speculative question.
So I told ChatGPT something like this:
‘If I show that claim B, which is defended by group 1, is false, and then I see that group 2 also defends claim B, then I can discredit both groups.’
ChatGPT said:
Your point is valid in that if a narrative is repeated in different religions and can be traced back to external or historical influences (such as Rome), it could raise questions about the authenticity or intent behind those stories.
You said:
In your last paragraph, I agree, but many people do not know the prophecies of Isaiah 7, for example, and only heard ‘Gabriel announced to Mary the virgin birth of Jesus,’ that is, they do not know about these discrepancies, they know nothing, but they believe guided by the majority, by the mass media, etc. I think that they can choose what to believe and what not to, but they should be informed of all the details, then they will decide better, that is my objective.
[See here what I mean:
Note this similarity of stories:
Bible – Pay special attention to Matthew 1: 21 ‘Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel’ (which means ‘God with us’). You can see in that message a Roman attempt to forcibly link this narrative to a prophecy of Isaiah that has nothing to do with this supposed divine event, which discredits the story completely.
Matthew 1: 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: When his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. 19 Her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and not wanting to put her to shame, decided to divorce her secretly. 20 While he thought about this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, ‘Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, for what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.’ 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:
Matthew 1: 23 Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel (which means, God with us). 24 Then Joseph awoke from sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took his wife. 25 But he did not know her until she had given birth to her firstborn son; and he called his name Jesus.
Luke 1: 26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin named Mary, who had been pledged to be married to Joseph, a descendant of King David. 28 The angel came to Mary and said to her, ‘Rejoice, you who are favored by God! The Lord is with you!’
29 Mary was perplexed when she heard this and wondered what this greeting meant. 30 But the angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for God has been gracious to you. 31 You will be pregnant and give birth to a son, and you will name him Jesus. 32 Your son will be great, the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David. 33 He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will never end.’
34 Mary said to the angel, ‘I have no husband; how then can this happen to me?’ 35 The angel answered her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High God will surround you. Therefore the child to be born will be holy, the Son of God.’
Koran:
Passage from the Quran in Surah 19 (Maryam), which speaks of the virgin birth of Jesus:
Surah 19: 16-22 (rough translation):
And it is mentioned in the Book of Mary, when she went away from her family to a place to the east. And she put a veil between herself and them; then We sent Our spirit to her, and it came to her in the form of a perfect man. She said, ‘I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, if you are God-fearing.’ He said, ‘I am only a messenger from your Lord to grant you a pure son.’ She said, ‘How will I have a son when no man has touched me, nor am I an unclean woman?’ He said, ‘So it will be. Your Lord has said, ‘That is easy for Me; and that We may make it a sign for the people and a mercy from Us; and it was a decided matter.» So she conceived him, and she retired with him to a secluded place.
Now I will prove that this story is false:
According to the Bible, Jesus was born of a virgin, but this contradicts the context of the prophecy in Isaiah 7. The apocryphal gospels, including the Gospel of Philip, also perpetuate this idea. However, Isaiah’s prophecy refers to the birth of King Hezekiah, not Jesus. Hezekiah was born to a woman who was a virgin at the time the prophecy was told, not after she became pregnant, and the prophecy of Immanuel was fulfilled by Hezekiah, not Jesus. Rome has hidden the true gospel and used apocryphal texts to distract and legitimize major lies. Jesus did not fulfill Isaiah’s prophecies about Immanuel, and the Bible misinterprets the meaning of the virgin in Isaiah 7.
Isaiah 7: 14-16: This passage mentions a virgin who will conceive a son named Immanuel, which means ‘God with us.’ The prophecy is given to King Ahaz and refers to the immediate political situation, specifically the destruction of the lands of the two kings Ahaz fears (Pekah and Rezin). This aligns with the historical context and timeline of King Hezekiah’s birth, not Jesus’.
Demonstrating the inconsistency of the narrative:
Isaiah 7: 14-16: ‘Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. He shall eat butter and honey, until he knows to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the child knows to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land of the two kings whom you fear will be forsaken.’
This passage mentions a virgin who will conceive a son named Immanuel, which means ‘God with us.’ The prophecy is given to King Ahaz and refers to the immediate political situation, specifically the destruction of the lands of the two kings Ahaz fears (Pekah and Rezin). This aligns with the historical context and timeline of King Hezekiah’s birth, not Jesus’.
2 Kings 15: 29-30: ‘In the days of Pekah king of Israel, Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria came and captured Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them away captive to Assyria. Hoshea son of Elah conspired against Pekah son of Remaliah and attacked him and killed him. He succeeded him as king in the twentieth year of Jotham son of Uzziah.’
It describes the fall of Pekah and Rezin, fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy about the desolation of the two kings’ lands before the child (Hezekiah) learns to reject evil and choose good.
2 Kings 18: 4-7 He removed the high places, broke the sacred pillars, cut down the Asherah poles, and broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until that time the Israelites had burned incense to it. He called its name Nehushtan. He trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel; there was no one like him among the kings of Judah before or after him. For he followed the LORD and did not depart from him, but kept the commandments that the LORD commanded Moses. The LORD was with him, and he prospered wherever he went. He rebelled against the king of Assyria and did not serve him.
It highlights Hezekiah’s reforms and his faithfulness to God, showing that ‘God was with him,’ fulfilling the name Immanuel in Hezekiah’s context.
Isaiah 7: 21-22 and 2 Kings 19: 29-31: ‘And it shall come to pass in that day, that a man shall raise one cow and two sheep; and he shall eat butter for their abundance of milk; indeed, he who is left in the land shall eat butter and honey.’ / ‘And this will be a sign to you, O Hezekiah: This year you shall eat what grows of itself, and the second year what springs from itself; and the third year you shall sow and reap, and plant vineyards, and eat their fruit. And the survivors of the house of Judah who are left shall again take root downward and bear fruit upward. For a remnant shall go out of Jerusalem, and a survivor from Mount Zion. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.’
Both passages speak of abundance and prosperity in the land, correlating with Hezekiah’s reign, supporting the interpretation that the prophecy in Isaiah referred to Hezekiah.
2 Kings 19: 35-37: ‘And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the LORD went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred and eighty-five thousand; and when they arose in the morning, behold, all were dead bodies. Then Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and returned to Nineveh, where he abode. And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons struck him with the sword, and fled to the land of Ararat. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his stead.’
It describes the miraculous defeat of the Assyrians, which was prophesied by Isaiah, showing God’s intervention and support for Hezekiah, further indicating that the prophecy of Immanuel referred to Hezekiah.
]
These lies are just a few, there are many more lies in the Bible, the Bible has truths such as that the righteous and the wicked hate each other (Proverbs 29: 27, Proverbs 17: 15, Proverbs 16: 4), but as a whole it does not deserve credit because its content, when decided in the councils, passed through the black hands of Rome.
«
«The black cat that devours the dove of the undeserved peace that Caesar promotes for men of black souls
Do not confuse me with the defenders of Hellenism; I do not preach the teachings of Cleobulus of Lindos https://youtube.com/shorts/DfYvX3Uzfao Quoting passages from the Bible, the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Philip, or the Gospel of Thomas does not mean that I believe everything that the Bible or those books say. I do not believe in loving one’s enemies, I do not believe in offering the other cheek to the aggressor, I do not believe in walking the double distance or carrying the double burden. Nor do I believe in the faithfulness of the Roman Empire, an Empire that decided which texts would enter the Bible and which would be considered canonical or supposed apocrypha, and that continued to exist under another name, while essentially preserving the same structure of power, ultimately influencing which texts would be accepted, which would be rejected, and which of those supposed apocrypha would later come to light. An Empire that imposed statues instead of justice and dogmas instead of reason. And I do not believe that a statue, which cannot even hold itself upright in the face of an earthquake, is capable of serving to obtain favors from the Supreme God, who needs no intermediaries, as if someone could say a word that He would not hear; that Supreme God who says that there is no other Supreme God, but only Him.
The successors of the leaders of the same Empire that canonized the injustice of its own lies now tell us that God loves the assailants:
‘Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes away what is yours, do not ask for it back.’ Luke 6:30
Do you really believe that Luke 6:30 is a message that Rome persecuted and not one intended to protect what it stole from future claims?
Isaiah 57:19 I will create the fruit of the lips: Peace, peace to him who is far away and to him who is near, says Jehovah; and I will heal him. 20 But the wicked are like the troubled sea, which cannot rest, and its waters cast up mire and mud. 21 There is no peace, says my God, for the wicked.
Psalms 5:4 For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness; the evil man will not dwell with You. 5 The foolish shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all who practice iniquity. 6 You shall destroy those who speak lies; the LORD abhors the bloody and deceitful man.
Psalms 50:16 But to the wicked God said: What right have you to speak of My laws, and to take My covenant in your mouth? 17 For you hate correction, and cast My words behind you. 18 When you saw a thief, you ran with him, and you were a companion of adulterers.
Here you are going to see that Pope Leo has stated a lie: that God loves everyone. It is the same thing Pope Francis said when he was alive. Observe for yourselves. Now, this is as false as the false message that Rome has promoted. You only need to concentrate on the meaning of the words and what those words imply. It happens that the Roman Empire did not accept the true message it persecuted, because gospel means good news, glad tidings. Therefore, the message that Rome persecuted was a selective message; it was good news, not for everyone, but for the righteous. Why? Because God has a message of justice, and justice is never good news for the unjust. The triumph of the victim over the thief who robbed him is not a triumph for the thief; it is a triumph for the victim because the victim recovers what was stolen from him. But the message adulterated by the Roman Empire says the opposite. It says, for example, that one should not demand from anyone what belongs to oneself. Did you notice? That message of not demanding what belongs to oneself is in accordance with the thief. Caesar’s dove says: ‘Peace for everyone because God loves everyone.’
Gabriel’s black cat replies: ‘The prophet Isaiah has said, ‘There is no peace for the wicked.’ There is no peace without justice and there is no justice without truth.’
If you consider yourself coherent, do not act in such a simplistic manner; do not allow yourself to be dragged along by the masses of people who repeat false religious dogmas without wanting or being able to effectively analyze the truthfulness of those religious dogmas: This is not as easy and simple as saying: ‘They contradict the Bible’, because there are many lies from ‘Babylon’ in the Bible itself; the Roman Empire has told its own version of events, and as was to be expected, its version of events is false. This is so because they spoke horrible things against God, and I will tell you what this means: The Romans did not convert to Christianity because, in fact, they created Christianity after destroying a religion that resembles none of those known to the world. Nevertheless, they took some elements from that persecuted religion, such as the passage cited (Daniel 11:36-37), as a kind of challenge to that prophecy, and the result is an endless number of contradictions in the Bible that condemn the incoherent and false prophets who defend that Roman legacy to perpetual confusion.
Daniel 11:36-37 And the king shall do according to his will, and he shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god; and he shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods, and shall prosper until the wrath is completed; for what has been determined shall be fulfilled.
Then the God of gods said to Gabriel: ‘Announce to the sun-worshiping empire that they will have no peace, they do not deserve it; take the black cat and put an end to their undeserved peace.’
In a vast territory where peace once reigned, a ruthless emperor rose to power through blood and treachery. He had invaded and plundered countless peaceful peoples, massacring those who opposed his rule and usurping the throne that rightfully belonged to another.
Once he had consolidated his rule with iron and fire, the emperor summoned his soldiers to the great square of his capital. With an arrogant gesture, he raised his arms and proclaimed:—With the riches we have plundered and the weapons we have acquired, our peace will be guaranteed.To give weight to his declaration, he released a white dove into the air with an olive branch in its beak. His legions cheered enthusiastically, celebrating their victory with applause and cries of glory.
But then, a thunderous roar shook the sky. Thunder resounded furiously, and in an instant, a dense cloud formed over the square. A descending lightning bolt struck the ground in front of the emperor, releasing a blinding light and a white smoke that quickly dissipated. When the light faded, a figure was revealed before everyone’s astonished eyes. He was a man with short hair, dressed in an impeccable blue uniform. He wielded a shining sword in his right hand, whose brilliant light seemed to cut through reality itself. With his other hand, he held a black cat that kept its gaze fixed on the emperor.
The stranger spoke in a firm and authoritative voice:
—There will be no peace for you. You have shed too much innocent blood, and that will only bring misery upon your empire. A curse weighs upon your kingdom because of your crimes and thefts. The soldiers, witnesses to that portent, were paralyzed with fear. The emperor turned pale as he felt that his fate had been sealed.
While the dove was flying, it saw Gabriel holding the cat with his left arm and said: ‘Beware of that diabolical black cat.’
The cat replied: ‘Diabolical is wishing peace upon the wicked.’
The man then released the black cat. With a dazzling leap, the cat caught the white dove in mid-flight and devoured it without hesitation.
After its action, the feline returned to the man, who received it calmly.
A second lightning bolt struck, illuminating the scene with its spectral brilliance. In an instant, both the man and the cat disappeared, as if they had never been there. At that precise moment, the sound of trumpets resounded from all directions. A much more powerful empire had surrounded the city. Justice had arrived.
«
«The religion I defend is named justice. █
I will find her when she finds me, and she will believe what I say.
The Roman Empire has betrayed humanity by inventing religions to subjugate it. All institutionalized religions are false. All the sacred books of those religions contain frauds. However, there are messages that make sense. And there are others, missing, that can be deduced from the legitimate messages of justice. Daniel 12:1-13 — ‘The prince who fights for justice will rise to receive God’s blessing.’ Proverbs 18:22 — ‘A wife is the blessing God gives to a man.’ Leviticus 21:14 — ‘He must marry a virgin of his own faith, for she is from his own people, who will be set free when the righteous rise.’
📚 What is an institutionalized religion? An institutionalized religion is when a spiritual belief is transformed into a formal power structure, designed to control people. It ceases to be an individual search for truth or justice and becomes a system dominated by human hierarchies, serving political, economic, or social power. What is just, true, or real no longer matters. The only thing that matters is obedience. An institutionalized religion includes: Churches, synagogues, mosques, temples. Powerful religious leaders (priests, pastors, rabbis, imams, popes, etc.). Manipulated and fraudulent ‘official’ sacred texts. Dogmas that cannot be questioned. Rules imposed on people’s personal lives. Mandatory rites and rituals in order to ‘belong.’ This is how the Roman Empire, and later other empires, used faith to subjugate people. They turned the sacred into a business. And truth into heresy. If you still believe that obeying a religion is the same as having faith, you were lied to. If you still trust their books, you trust the same people who crucified justice. It’s not God speaking in his temples. It’s Rome. And Rome never stopped speaking. Wake up. He who seeks justice needs no permission. Nor an institution.
She will find me, the virgin woman will believe me.
( – – )
This is the wheat in the Bible that destroys the Roman tares in the Bible:
Revelation 19:11
Then I saw heaven opened, and there was a white horse; and the one sitting on it was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness, he judges and makes war.
Revelation 19:19
Then I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies gathered together to make war against the one sitting on the horse and against his army.
Psalm 2:2-4
‘The kings of the earth set themselves up, and the rulers took counsel together against the Lord and against his anointed, saying:
‘Let us break their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us.’
He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord mocks them.’
Now, some basic logic: if the horseman fights for justice, but the beast and the kings of the earth fight against this horseman, then the beast and the kings of the earth are against justice. Therefore, they represent the deception of the false religions that rule with them.
The whore of Babylon, which is the false church made by Rome, has considered herself to be ‘the wife of the Lord’s anointed,’ but the false prophets of this idol-selling and flattering word-peddling organization do not share the personal goals of the Lord’s anointed and the true saints, because the ungodly leaders have chosen for themselves the path of idolatry, celibacy, or sacramentalizing unholy marriages in exchange for money. Their religious headquarters are full of idols, including false holy books, before which they bow down:
Isaiah 2:8-11
8 Their land is full of idols; they bow down to the work of their hands, to what their fingers have made.
9 So the man is humbled, and the man is brought low; do not forgive them.
10 Go into the rock, hide yourself in the dust from the terror of the LORD and from the splendor of his majesty.
11 The arrogance of human eyes will be brought low, and the pride of men will be humbled; the LORD alone will be exalted on that day.
Proverbs 19:14
House and wealth are an inheritance from fathers, but a prudent wife is from the LORD.
Leviticus 21:14
The priest of the LORD shall not marry a widow, nor a divorced woman, nor an unclean woman, nor a harlot; he shall take a virgin from his own people as a wife.
Revelation 1:6
And he has made us kings and priests to his God and Father; to him be glory and dominion forever.
1 Corinthians 11:7
The woman is the glory of man.
What does it mean in Revelation that the beast and the kings of the earth wage war on the rider of the white horse and his army?
The meaning is clear, the world leaders are hand in glove with the false prophets who are disseminators of the false religions that are dominant among the kingdoms of the earth, for obvious reasons, that includes Christianity, Islam, etc. These rulers are against justice and truth, which are the values defended by the rider of the white horse and his army loyal to God. As is evident, the deception is part of the false sacred books that these accomplices defend with the label of ‘Authorized Books of Authorized Religions’, but the only religion that I defend is justice, I defend the right of the righteous not to be deceived with religious deceptions.
Revelation 19:19 Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to make war against the rider on the horse and against his army.
Now some basic logic, if the horseman stands for justice, but the beast and the kings of the earth fight against this horseman, then the beast and the kings of the earth are against justice, therefore they stand for the deception of the false religions that rule with them.
This is my story:
José, a young man raised in Catholic teachings, experienced a series of events marked by complex relationships and manipulations. At 19, he began a relationship with Monica, a possessive and jealous woman. Although Jose felt that he should end the relationship, his religious upbringing led him to try to change her with love. However, Monica’s jealousy intensified, especially towards Sandra, a classmate who was making advances on Jose.
Sandra began harassing him in 1995 with anonymous phone calls, in which she made noises with the keyboard and hung up.
On one of those occasions, she revealed that she was the one calling, after Jose angrily asked in the last call: ‘Who are you?’ Sandra called him immediately, but in that call she said: ‘Jose, who am I?’ Jose, recognizing her voice, said to her: ‘You are Sandra,’ to which she replied: ‘You already know who I am.’ Jose avoided confronting her. During that time, Monica, obsessed with Sandra, threatened Jose with harming Sandra, which led Jose to protect Sandra and prolong his relationship with Monica, despite his desire to end it.
Finally, in 1996, Jose broke up with Monica and decided to approach Sandra, who had initially shown interest in him. When Jose tried to talk to her about his feelings, Sandra did not allow him to explain himself, she treated him with offensive words and he did not understand the reason. Jose chose to distance himself, but in 1997 he believed he had the opportunity to talk to Sandra, hoping that she would explain her change of attitude and be able to share the feelings that she had kept silent. On her birthday in July, he called her as he had promised a year earlier when they were still friends—something he couldn’t do in 1996 because he was with Monica. At the time, he used to believe that promises should never be broken (Matthew 5:34-37), though now he understands that some promises and oaths can be reconsidered if made in error or if the person no longer deserves them. As he finished greeting her and was about to hang up, Sandra desperately pleaded, ‘Wait, wait, can we meet?’ That made him think she had reconsidered and would finally explain her change in attitude, allowing him to share the feelings he had kept silent. However, Sandra never gave him clear answers, maintaining the intrigue with evasive and counterproductive attitudes.
Faced with this attitude, Jose decided not to look for her anymore. It was then that constant telephone harassment began. The calls followed the same pattern as in 1995 and this time were directed to the house of his paternal grandmother, where Jose lived. He was convinced that it was Sandra, since Jose had recently given Sandra his number. These calls were constant, morning, afternoon, night, and early morning, and lasted for months. When a family member answered, they did not hang up, but when José answered, the clicking of the keys could be heard before hanging up.
Jose asked his aunt, the owner of the telephone line, to request a record of incoming calls from the telephone company. He planned to use that information as evidence to contact Sandra’s family and express his concern about what she was trying to achieve with this behavior. However, his aunt downplayed his argument and refused to help. Strangely, no one in the house, neither his aunt nor his paternal grandmother, seemed to be outraged by the fact that the calls also occurred in the early morning, and they did not bother to look into how to stop them or identify the person responsible.
This had the strange appearance of orchestrated torture. Even when José asked his aunt to unplug the phone at night so he could sleep, she refused, arguing that one of her sons, who lived in Italy, could call at any moment (considering the six-hour time difference between the two countries). What made things even stranger was Monica’s fixation on Sandra, even though they hadn’t even met. Monica didn’t attend the high school where José and Sandra were enrolled, but she began to feel jealous of Sandra after finding a folder with one of José’s group projects. The folder listed the names of two women, including Sandra, but for some strange reason, Monica became fixated only on Sandra’s name.
Although José initially ignored Sandra’s phone calls, over time he relented and contacted Sandra again, influenced by biblical teachings that advised praying for those who persecuted him. However, Sandra manipulated him emotionally, alternating between insults and requests for him to keep looking for her. After months of this cycle, Jose discovered that it was all a trap. Sandra falsely accused him of sexual harassment, and as if that wasn’t bad enough, Sandra sent some criminals to beat up Jose.
That Tuesday, without José knowing it, Sandra had already set a trap for him.
Days before, José had told his friend Johan about the situation he was going through with Sandra. Johan also suspected that Sandra’s strange behavior might be due to some kind of witchcraft by Mónica. That Tuesday, José visited his old neighborhood where he had lived in 1995 and happened to run into Johan. After hearing more details about the situation, Johan recommended that José forget about Sandra and instead go out to a nightclub to meet women—perhaps he would find someone who could make him forget her. José thought it was a good idea.
So they got on a bus and headed toward the nightclub in downtown Lima. Coincidentally, the route of that bus passed near the IDAT institute. Just one block before reaching IDAT, José suddenly had the idea to get off for a moment to pay for a Saturday course he had enrolled in. He had managed to save some money for it by selling his computer and working for a week in a warehouse. However, he had been forced to quit because they exploited workers with 16-hour shifts while officially recording only 12, and if they refused to complete the week, they were threatened with not being paid at all.
So José turned to Johan and said, ‘I study here on Saturdays. Since we’re passing by, let’s get off for a bit, I’ll pay for my course, and then we’ll head to the nightclub.’
The moment José stepped off the bus, before even crossing the avenue, he was shocked to see Sandra standing right there on the corner of the institute. In disbelief, he told Johan, ‘Johan, I can’t believe it—Sandra is right there. She’s the girl I told you about, the one who acts so strangely. Wait for me here; I’m going to ask if she got the letter where I warned her about Mónica’s threats against her, and maybe she can finally explain what’s going on with her and what she wants from me with all her calls.’
Johan stayed back as José approached. But as soon as he started speaking—’Sandra, did you see the letters? Can you finally explain to me what’s going on with you?’—Sandra, without saying a word, gestured with her hand, signaling three thugs who had been hiding in different spots: one in the middle of the avenue, another behind Sandra, and another behind José.
The one standing behind Sandra stepped forward and said, ‘So you’re the sexual harasser who’s been bothering my cousin?’
José, caught off guard, responded, ‘What? Me, a harasser? On the contrary, she’s the one harassing me! If you read the letter, you’d see it’s about me trying to understand why she keeps calling me!’
Before he could react, one of the thugs grabbed him by the neck from behind and threw him to the ground. Then, together with the one who had claimed to be Sandra’s cousin, they started kicking him. Meanwhile, the third thug went through his pockets, robbing him. It was three against one—José, lying helpless on the pavement.
Luckily, his friend Johan jumped into the fight, managing to give José a chance to get up. But then the third thug picked up some rocks and started throwing them at both José and Johan.
The attack only stopped when a traffic officer intervened. The officer turned to Sandra and said, ‘If he’s harassing you, then file a complaint.’
Sandra, visibly nervous, quickly left, knowing full well that her accusation was false.
José, though deeply betrayed, did not go to the police. He had no way to prove the months of harassment he had suffered from Sandra. But beyond the shock of her betrayal, one question haunted him:
‘How did she already have this ambush set up when I never come to this place on Tuesday nights? I only come here to study on Saturday mornings.’
This made José suspect that Sandra wasn’t just an ordinary person—she might be a witch with some kind of supernatural power.
These events left a deep mark on Jose, who seeks justice and to expose those who manipulated him. In addition, he seeks to derail the advice in the Bible, such as: pray for those who insult you, because by following that advice, he fell into Sandra’s trap.
Jose’s testimony.
I am José Carlos Galindo Hinostroza, the author of the blog: https://gabriels.work
I was born in Peru, that photo is mine, it is from 1997, I was 22 years old.
At that time, I was entangled in the intrigues of Sandra Elizabeth, a former classmate from the IDAT institute. I was confused about what was happening to her (She harassed me in a very complex and extensive way to narrate in this image, but I narrate it at the bottom of this blog: and in this video:
). I did not rule out the possibility that Mónica Nieves, my ex-girlfriend, had done some witchcraft to her.
When searching for answers in the Bible, I read in Matthew 5:
‘ Pray for whoever insults you,’
And in those days, Sandra insulted me while telling me she didn’t know what was happening to her, that she wanted to continue being my friend, and that I should keep calling and looking for her again and again, and it went on like this for five months. In short, Sandra pretended to be possessed by something to keep me confused. The lies in the Bible made me believe that good people can behave evilly because of an evil spirit. That’s why the advice to pray for her didn’t seem so crazy to me—because before, Sandra pretended to be a friend, and I fell for her deception.
Thieves often use the strategy of pretending to have good intentions: To steal from stores, they pretend to be customers; to ask for tithes, they pretend to preach the word of God, but they preach that of Rome, etc., etc. Sandra Elizabeth pretended to be a friend, then pretended to be a friend in trouble looking for my help, but all to slander me and ambush me with three criminals, surely out of spite because a year earlier I rejected her advances since I was in love with Monica Nieves, to whom I was faithful. But Monica did not trust my fidelity and threatened to kill Sandra Elizabeth, which is why I broke up with Monica slowly, over eight months, so that Monica wouldn’t think it was because of Sandra. But this is how Sandra Elizabeth paid me back—with slander. She falsely accused me of sexually harassing her, and with that pretext, she ordered three criminals to beat me up—all in front of her.
I narrate all this in my blog and in my YouTube videos:
I do not wish for other righteous men to have bad experiences like I had, which is why I have created what you are reading. I know this will irritate unrighteous people like Sandra, but the truth is like the true gospel—it only favors the righteous.
The evil of José’s family overshadows Sandra’s evil:
José suffered a devastating betrayal by his own family, who not only refused to help him stop Sandra’s harassment but also falsely accused him of having a mental illness. His own relatives used these accusations as a pretext to kidnap and torture him, sending him twice to mental health institutions and a third time to a hospital.
It all began when José read Exodus 20:5 and stopped being Catholic. From that moment on, he became outraged by the Church’s dogmas and started protesting against its doctrines on his own. He also advised his relatives to stop praying to images and told them that he was praying for a friend (Sandra) who was apparently bewitched or possessed. José was under stress due to the harassment, but his relatives did not tolerate him exercising his freedom of religious expression. As a result, they destroyed his professional life, his health, and his reputation by locking him up in mental institutions where he was given sedatives.
Not only was he forcibly institutionalized, but after his release, he was forced to continue taking psychiatric medication under the threat of being locked up again. He fought to break free from those chains, and during the last two years of that injustice, with his programming career ruined, he was forced to work without pay at his uncle’s restaurant. That same uncle betrayed his trust by secretly drugging his meals with psychiatric pills. José only discovered the truth in 2007 thanks to a kitchen assistant named Lidia, who warned him about what was happening.
From 1998 to 2007, José lost nearly ten years of his youth due to his treacherous relatives. In hindsight, he realized that his mistake was defending the Bible to reject Catholicism, as his family never allowed him to read it. They committed this injustice knowing he had no financial resources to defend himself. When he finally broke free from the forced medication, he thought he had earned their respect. His maternal uncles and cousins even offered him a job, but years later, they betrayed him again with such hostility that he was forced to resign. This made him realize that he should never have forgiven them, as their bad intentions were clear.
From that moment on, he decided to study the Bible again, and in 2017, he began noticing its contradictions. Little by little, he understood why God had allowed his relatives to prevent him from defending the Bible in his youth. He discovered biblical inconsistencies and started exposing them in his blogs, where he also recounted the story of his faith and the suffering he endured at the hands of Sandra and, most of all, his own family.
For this reason, in December 2018, his mother attempted to kidnap him again with the help of corrupt police officers and a psychiatrist who issued a false certificate. They accused him of being a ‘dangerous schizophrenic’ to have him institutionalized again, but the attempt failed because he was not home. There were witnesses to the incident, and José had audio recordings, which he presented as evidence to the Peruvian authorities in his complaint, but it was dismissed.
His family knew perfectly well that he was not insane—he had a stable job, a child, and the mother of his child to take care of. However, despite knowing the truth, they attempted to kidnap him again using the same old false accusation. His own mother and other fanatical Catholic relatives led the attempt. Although his complaint was ignored by the Ministry, José exposes these truths in his blogs, making it clear that the evil of his family eclipses even that of Sandra.
Here is the evidence of the kidnappings using the slander of traitors:
‘This man is a schizophrenic who urgently needs psychiatric treatment and pills for life.’
I have been a computer programmer, I like logic, in Turbo Pascal I created a program capable of producing basic algebra formulas at random, similar to the formula below. In the following document in .PDF you can download the code of the program, this is proof that I’m not stupid, that’s why the conclusions of my research should be taken seriously. https://ntiend.me/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/math21.pdf
If n+41=03 then n=-38 «Cupid is condemned to hell along with the other pagan gods (The fallen angels for their rebellion against justice, sent to eternal punishment). █
Quoting these passages does not mean defending the entire Bible. If 1 John 5:19 says that “the whole world is under the power of the evil one,” but rulers swear on the Bible, then the Devil rules with them. If the Devil rules with them, then fraud also rules with them. Therefore, the Bible contains part of that fraud, camouflaged among truths. By connecting those truths, we can expose their deceptions. Righteous people need to know these truths so that, if they have been deceived by lies added to the Bible or other similar books, they can free themselves from them.
Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, when he raised his right hand and his left hand to heaven and swore by Him who lives forever that it shall be for a time, times, and half a time. And when the power of the holy people is completely shattered, all these things shall be finished.
Considering that ‘Devil’ means ‘Slanderer,’ it is natural to expect that the Roman persecutors, being the adversaries of the saints, later bore false witness against the saints and their messages. Thus, they themselves are the Devil, and not an intangible entity that enters and exits people, as they made us believe precisely with passages like Luke 22:3 (“Then Satan entered Judas…”), Mark 5:12-13 (the demons entering the pigs), and John 13:27 (“After the morsel, Satan entered him”).
This is my purpose: to help righteous people not waste their power believing in the lies of impostors who have adulterated the original message, which never asked anyone to kneel before anything or pray to anything that had ever been visible.
It is no coincidence that in this image, promoted by the Roman Church, Cupid appears alongside other pagan gods. They have given the names of the true saints to these false gods, but look at how these men dress and how they wear their long hair. All this goes against faithfulness to God’s laws because it is a sign of rebellion, a sign of the fallen angels (Deuteronomy 22:5).
The serpent, the devil, or Satan (the slanderer) in hell (Isaiah 66:24, Mark 9:44). Matthew 25:41: “Then he will also say to those on his left: ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels’.” Hell: the eternal fire prepared for the serpent and his angels (Revelation 12:7-12), for having combined truths with heresies in the Bible, the Quran, the Torah, and for having created false forbidden gospels that they called apocryphal, to give credibility to lies in the false sacred books, all in rebellion against justice.
Book of Enoch 95:6: “Woe to you, false witnesses and to those who weigh the price of injustice, for you will perish suddenly!” Book of Enoch 95:7: “Woe to you, unjust ones who persecute the righteous, for you yourselves will be handed over and persecuted because of that injustice, and the burden of your guilt will fall upon you!” Proverbs 11:8: “The righteous is delivered from trouble, and the wicked comes in his place.” Proverbs 16:4: “The Lord has made all things for Himself, even the wicked for the day of doom.”
Book of Enoch 94:10: “Unjust ones, I say to you that He who created you will overthrow you; upon your ruin, God will have no mercy, but rather, God will rejoice in your destruction.” Satan and his angels in hell: the second death. They deserve it for lying against Christ and His faithful disciples, accusing them of being the authors of Rome’s blasphemies in the Bible, such as love for the devil (the enemy).
Isaiah 66:24: “And they shall go out and look upon the corpses of the men who have rebelled against me; for their worm shall never die, nor shall their fire be quenched, and they shall be abhorrent to all flesh.” Mark 9:44: “Where their worm does not die, and the fire is never quenched.” Revelation 20:14: “Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death: the lake of fire.”
He who bends his mind before an image is the perfect soldier to die without anyone giving him reasons.
Do you believe that translating the Bible into all languages and preaching it in all nations will bring the Kingdom of God and His justice? Rome fabricated false scriptures because it never accepted the ones it hid; its goal: that the peoples beaten by its empire submit, not that they claim what it stole from them. Rome put it in writing: Mt 5:39-41, the doctrine of the other cheek and of unpunished plunder.
Word of Satan: ‘Nothing maintains my empire better… than a people convinced that obeying it is holy and that justice is evil.’
Word of Zeus (Satan): ‘Those who worshiped me ate pork (2 Maccabees 6, 2 Maccabees 2:7); that must not change… I will command my servants to say that Jesus and his followers said that eating pork no longer defiles a man (Matthew 15:11, Luke 10:9, 1 Timothy 4:1–5), and that he appeared like me; thus my servants will continue worshiping my image, for my own will say that his followers asked that he be worshiped (Hebrews 1:6, 2 Thessalonians 2:3). He came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 5:17–18). But I came to abolish the Law and the Prophets, and to usurp Yahweh, their God (Deuteronomy 4:3–8, Psalm 97:1–7, Exodus 20:3–5). I had already opposed his messengers before (Daniel 10:20). Where there was justice and truth (Deuteronomy 19:21, Daniel 12:10), with my servants I established impunity and lies (Genesis 4:15, Ezekiel 33:18–19); that must not change either.’
The false prophet: ‘Miracles delayed? Blame yourself, pay the prophet, and try again.’
They used a truth as a disguise for a lie. And they told you everything had been fulfilled. But the world was not freed. It was subdued.
The false prophet: ‘The more silent the idol, the louder my pockets.’
False prophet hotline: press 1 for lies, press 2 for more lies, press 3 to donate.
The false prophet conceals contradictions he cannot explain; he calls them ‘apparent’. The true prophet reveals them, even though they have been venerated as ‘sacred truths’ for centuries.
The owners of the cross and the sword fear the one who carries the truth without symbols. — The armed empire fears the word of the righteous.
The Roman Empire, Bahira, Muhammad, Jesus and persecuted Judaism. https://ntiend.me/2026/07/07/the-roman-empire-bahira-muhammad-jesus-and-persecuted-judaism/
Το να σέβεσαι τον Θεό σημαίνει να σέβεσαι την αλήθεια: ένα ασυνάρτητο μήνυμα δεν μπορεί να προέρχεται από τον Θεό· η ασυνάρτητη ασυνέπεια εκτίθεται, δεν ευλογείται. Το Παράδοξο του Λαζάρου. https://purifying-the-message.blogspot.com/2026/05/blog-post_12.html
The message is there. Dogma is the preferred prison of those who do not want to think. Word of Satan: «When the text favors the righteous, demand that no one interpret it literally (Psalms 58:10, Psalms 41:10-12); when it favors the wicked, quote it in full (1 Peter 3:18, Luke 23:34). What matters is that no one discovers that I infiltrated the texts (Daniel 8:25, Revelation 12:9).»»
