[AGGRESSOR]: Fifty shekels of silver, because she is not engaged.
[JOSÉ]: That’s not fair.
[AI ROBOT]: That law is unjust.
[JOSÉ]: And what if there were several rapists? Which one of them would she have to marry?
[AI ROBOT]: The law does not specify. It speaks of a single man, but it does not explicitly address gang rape.
[JOSÉ]: And what happens to the woman who was raped? Who decides which of her attackers will become her husband? Didn’t the law condemn those cowardly rapists to death simply because the woman they raped was not engaged?
[AI ROBOT]: The text provides no answer.
[JOSÉ]: And they call this a perfect law?
[AI ROBOT]: A law presented as perfect leaves such a serious situation unresolved.
MY COMMENT:
Many people declare themselves believers in God. So, if we agree that God is never wrong, was He wrong when He decreed, according to the Bible, the death penalty for those who committed intentional murders?
If He was not wrong, why does Pope Leo oppose the death penalty? And why does the Bible itself later reject the principle of «an eye for an eye» by introducing the command to turn the other cheek?
Something doesn’t add up, does it? Could it be that the Roman Empire, which had the original Gospel texts in its possession, altered them and even modified things that supposedly dated back to earlier times?
By the way, the Bible does not prescribe the death penalty for every case of rape. And I want to make my position clear: I do not agree with everything the Bible says. In my opinion, rape should carry the death penalty for the perpetrator in every case, without exception. I’m sharing a dialogue I had with AI that inspired the dialogue in the opening lines.
JOSÉ:
Bot, there’s something about the laws attributed to Moses that I find completely unjust. Let’s imagine that a man wants to marry a woman, but she wants nothing to do with him. Then, because he is obsessed with her, he rapes her. According to Deuteronomy 22:28–29, if the young woman is a virgin and is not engaged to anyone, the man must pay fifty shekels to her father and marry her.
Do you see what I mean? The man gets a wife he wanted to marry but who did not want to marry him, through violence! Don’t you think that’s unjust and arbitrary?
BOT:
Yes, José. The problem is obvious: the provision imposes a marriage obligation as a consequence of rape. The woman is not explicitly given the option to refuse that marriage. The perpetrator, on the other hand, is required to pay a sum to her father and marry her, without being allowed to divorce her afterward.
JOSÉ:
Exactly! Now imagine that the man is wealthy, spoiled, and obsessed with a woman who is not engaged. He rapes her and, because he has money, pays the fifty shekels and gets to marry her.
In practice, isn’t this practically like putting unmarried women up for sale? Any man with money could end up obtaining, through sexual violence, a woman who does not want to be with him!
And the worst part is that she is condemned to spend the rest of her life bound in marriage to her own rapist. Where is the justice for that woman? Where is her own will? It’s completely unjust!
BOT:
And there is another difference that makes the issue even more troubling. In Deuteronomy 22:25–27, when the victim is a woman who is engaged to be married, the death penalty is prescribed for the perpetrator. But in Deuteronomy 22:28–29, when the victim is an unmarried virgin, the law prescribes payment of fifty shekels and compulsory marriage.
In other words, the legislation establishes different consequences depending on the victim’s marital status.
JOSÉ:
Exactly! How can anyone claim that the God who established laws of justice, such as the principle of «an eye for an eye» against those who committed intentional murders, also approved such a provision? How can it be considered just for a woman to end up married to the man who raped her?
There are things in the Old Testament that have never made sense to me. And this reinforces my suspicions that the true message of the righteous men of ancient times may have been corrupted.
BOT:
And how do you connect these contradictions with your theory about Rome?
JOSÉ:
My theory is that Rome may not have limited itself to corrupting the messages of the contemporaries it persecuted, condemned, and murdered. The corruption may also have reached the ancient messages, including those upheld by people who were persecuted by the Roman Empire.
Rome, which persecuted and killed the righteous, may also have interfered with earlier teachings and traditions that had come down to it!
That is why there are so many things in the Old Testament that have never made sense to me. What if some of those unjust provisions did not belong to the true message of those who stood up for justice, but were incorporated or modified at a later date?
I am not willing to accept that everything appearing in the Bible is necessarily just simply because it is attributed to God. If God is perfectly just, His true teachings should not contradict justice!
And speaking of marriages: If there are biblical passages I like, they are passages such as this one:
«He who finds a wife finds a good thing, and obtains favor from the LORD» (Proverbs 18:22).
As a man who seeks that blessing, I cannot consider it a reward to live in a world without a wife, surrounded by men with androgynous appearances and long hair, whom tradition portrays as though they were angels of God. Nor do I believe that these highly popular representations are a faithful reflection of what the holy angels and Christ are really like.
That is why I do not agree with everything the Bible says, such as this:
«For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven» (Matthew 22:30).
I cannot accept that Jesus’ face is a carbon copy of Zeus’s, the pagan deity whose worship was imposed in Jerusalem by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the same regime that persecuted, tortured, and murdered Jews for refusing to abandon their own beliefs. Those events, carried out by the persecutors of the Maccabean brothers, took place little more than a century before the birth of Jesus. I find it deeply contradictory that tradition should end up portraying the Messiah with the appearance of the very same deity associated with the power that subjugated and persecuted his own people.
And there is something even more scandalous: according to Greek mythology, Zeus abducted Ganymede, a young Trojan prince, and sexually abused him, subsequently making him his cupbearer on Mount Olympus.
How is it possible to compare Christ to such a depraved and rapacious god, even attributing the same face to him and, strangely enough, teachings of Greek origin, such as love for one’s enemy, a maxim that we also find among the teachings of the Greek sage Cleobulus of Lindos, who lived six centuries before Christ?
And even stranger is the attribution to him of the teaching that there will be no marriage in the Kingdom of God, as though celibacy and the absence of married life had been part of the traditions of his own Jewish people, when the ancient religious provisions of Israel contemplated priests having wives.
That is why I do not agree with everything the Bible says, such as this:
«However, I wish that all men were as I myself am. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that» (1 Corinthians 7:7).
This passage has all the appearance of an insertion deliberately introduced to justify the interests of a religious institution that needed men without wives or descendants, men without heirs who might claim their assets and property, and who could devote their entire lives to serving and enriching the institution itself. What better way to impose that model than to present celibacy as a divine gift rather than acknowledge it as a renunciation imposed for the benefit of an institutional structure?
How can giving up having a wife be called a «gift» when Genesis 2:24 presents the union of a man with his wife as part of the very order of creation? Isn’t it suspicious that something that benefits an institution should end up being presented as a gift?
«Zeus, is this the Kingdom of Heaven or your kingdom, where your image occupies the center of popular worship?»
«Zeus, are those men with women’s faces and long hair angels loyal to God, or angels rebelling against God who nevertheless cater to your Hellenic tastes? Honestly, I cannot imagine the angels who visited Sodom looking like that.»
Word of Zeus: ‘Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise… together with Ganymede, my priests do not marry and so it is there, the men worthy of inheriting my kingdom do not marry women. You will be like my long-haired angels and you will live kneeling before me forever.’ It collapses under its own weight. An image is not to blame. The blame is on the one who turns it into an idol. , CAB 72[418] 63 85 , 0011
│ English │ #ZUO
Where Are Jesus’ Messages About Idolatry? (Video language:Hindi) /722/ https://youtu.be/FZDCOHWN9R8,
Day 249
Did he call them dogs while on the cross? (Video language:Arabic) /608/ https://youtu.be/gh3XAWBoNb0
Word of Satan: «Do not allow them to compare my scriptures; an isolated contradiction may seem small, but two together could awaken a sheep.» The flock set free, the pack falls apart. When the righteous flee, the wicked devour each other like beasts without direction. Why does no one question this?
«Satan Knows… The Serpent Is Not at the Top of the Food Chain.
Revelation 12:9: ‘And the great dragon was cast out, that ancient serpent called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world. He was cast down to the earth, and his angels were cast down with him.’
Verse 10: ‘Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying: ‘Now have come the salvation, the power, the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been cast down, the one who accused them before our God day and night…»
How did he accuse them? By bearing false witness against the saints. For example: ‘Moses said this, Ezekiel said this, Peter said this, Paul said this, Jesus said this,’ when in reality those messages do not serve justice at all, even though they appear in books that the world considers sacred because they are official.
How did he deceive the world? Through those false testimonies: corrupted sacred books, adulterated Gospels, adulterated laws, adulterated prophecies, and dominant yet false religions built upon those corrupted texts.
How wonderful it is to view those lies from another angle and recognize that they are lies rather than the truth! How wonderful it is to have an ‘eagle’s-eye view’ that allows us to recognize them!
Daniel 12:1: ‘At that time Michael, the great prince, shall arise… There shall be a time of distress such as never has been… but at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book.’
John 8:32: ‘And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.’
Proverbs 11:8: ‘The righteous is delivered from trouble, and the wicked receives it instead.’
Psalm 118:20: ‘This is the gate of the LORD; the righteous shall enter through it.’
These four passages form a selective message directed only to the righteous. However, the Roman framework contradicts this by teaching that ‘Christ died for sinners’ (Romans 5:8), that ‘all have sinned and all are justified’ (Romans 3:23–24), that ‘God desires all people to be saved’ (1 Timothy 2:4), that the unrighteous should be forgiven (Luke 23:34), and that even the enemies of the righteous should be loved (Matthew 5:44, Proverbs 29:27, Genesis 3:15). Thus, the universalism and Hellenism infiltrated by Rome erase the distinction between the righteous person, who may sin through deception, and the unrighteous person, who sins by nature, thereby destroying the righteous message in which only the righteous are delivered, purified, protected, and admitted through the gate.
It would be unreasonable to assume that this infiltration affected only the books attributed to Jesus or to the saints persecuted by the Roman Empire, while leaving the older writings untouched.
«
«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.»
«
If Proverbs 29:27 and Proverbs 17:15 say that the righteous hate the wicked and that God detests anyone who condemns the righteous or justifies the wicked, then it is absurd to maintain that the author of 1 Peter 3:18—who claims that the righteous gave his life for the unrighteous—was truly Peter, and not Rome, which killed him. This is not about when Rome converted to Christianity, but about how it turned into Christianity the religion that bothered it, so that it would stop bothering it and it could begin to impose it on its neighbors and its colonies, in which colonies of fleas emerge from puppet governments that are like the flea-ridden dogs of the filthy usurper Roman god. When drivers and other workers are murdered by extortionists, the fleas suck the blood of the productive fabric of society. Many workers have been deprived of their lives. However, the judicial system does not take the lives of the parasites; on the contrary, it shelters them so that they can siphon off the taxes of those who do work and do not parasitize like these fleas. Here are the traces of the deception: 1 Peter 3:18 says that a righteous one gave his life for the unrighteous; Matthew 5:44 says that the righteous Jesus commanded to love enemies; but Proverbs 29:27 and Proverbs 17:15 say that the righteous hate the unrighteous and that God abhors those who justify the wicked. Therefore, it is impossible that Jesus gave his life for the unrighteous in order to justify them. Furthermore, Revelation 6:9–10 shows the saints crying out for vengeance for their deaths; therefore, an eye for an eye was his message. //78
Sacred ends only justify just methods. If the end is sacred, that end does not justify all means, only just means. I criticize your church because I have discovered that it has taught me to worship idols since I was a child and never taught me to worship only God. Furthermore, I criticize your church for defending a book full of falsehoods of the Roman Empire: the Bible. I do this because I am an enemy of the Devil, but you slander against me. Prove that your slanders are not slanders if you can, but you will not be able to because I am a friend of Jehovah, my God, and he defends me from slanderous intrigues. YouTube: «Pope Francis called “friends of the devil”…» On the eve of the summit on sexual abuse by the Catholic clergy, victims of abuse met with Vatican officials. YouTube · FRANCE 24 Español · Feb 20, 2019. «Pope Francis: people who criticize the church are…» Pope Francis called those who constantly accuse the Church «friends of the devil». Wikipedia: «Satan – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia». Satan or Satan (in Hebrew: שָׂטָן satan, «adversary»), is translated by the Greek word diabolos («slanderer»). «Error is human, not forgiving the Devil is divine.» h t t p s : / / p e n a d e m u e r t e y a . c o m //961
The Dogs and the Cross //556
Big Fish or Big Myth? Jonah and the Whale //194
The Great Deception: Is the Bible Part of the End-Time Trap? Zion and Michael’s Final Action. ZION: A Mountain? A Territory? Or a People? If People, What People? //275
The religion I defend is named justice. //904
«
1 Жизнь и смерть во власти слов: Глупцы пожинают последствия собственных слов. https://144k.xyz/2026/10/27/09yy/ 2 Katika soka, unampa timu pinzani pasi? Kuna upenyezaji wa wazi katika maandiko. https://144k.xyz/2026/09/25/katika-soka-unampa-timu-pinzani-pasi-kuna-upenyezaji-wa-wazi-katika-maandiko/ 3 سچ بمقابلہ ڈوگما: ڈوگما کا جال https://ntiend.me/2026/07/31/idi22dnr/ 4 Warum haben sie das Gesicht von Zeus als das von Jesus ausgegeben? Warum haben sie die Lehren eines griechischen Philosophen als die von Jesus ausgegeben? https://ellameencontrara.com/2026/05/02/warum-haben-sie-das-gesicht-von-zeus-als-das-von-jesus-ausgegeben-warum-haben-sie-die-lehren-eines-griechischen-philosophen-als-die-von-jesus-ausgegeben/ 5 La piedra de la justicia que Dios no rechaza destruye el satanismo y su ocultismo. https://purifying-the-message.blogspot.com/2026/08/zeus-and-ganymede.html
«Let us analyze the infographic that analyzes and criticizes the visual and slanderous message against the saints.
Neither Gabriel was sent to defend Sodom, nor was Michael sent to defend the Roman Empire; therefore, that Roman legionary is not Michael, nor is that long-haired man with feminine poses and clothing Gabriel… that is not how Lot’s friends are. If the Roman Empire did not respect the holy messengers, nor does its remnant show respect for them today, do you really think they ever defended the true message to which they were hostile while respecting it in its integrity?
Let us analyze the infographic that analyzes and criticizes the visual and slanderous message against the saints:
Pink circles (idolatrous institution):Prayer to an image and payment for protection are imposed, appropriating divine authority and labeling as ‘Satan’ anyone who does not submit.
Blue circles (response):This practice is denounced as idolatry and as a violation of God’s law. The institution is accused of profiting from faith, giving cover to the unjust, and deceiving people with a false divine protection. In addition, its supposed spiritual authority is questioned and ridiculed, highlighting inconsistencies with what it claims to defend.
Key clarification:The criticism is not a blind defense of everything called ‘law,’ because it is also argued that this law has been manipulated; the denunciation points both to idolatry and to the corruption of the message itself.
Closing:The reaction of anger fits the denounced pattern: truth is rejected, the righteous are slandered, and the message is distorted in order to maintain power.
Pink circles: The god Mars worshiped by the Roman Empire:
1: Accept God and pray to this image (B). If you want protection, hire my services and direct your prayers to me like this: ‘Prince of the heavenly host, we beg you to protect us from evil…’.
2: If you are against me, you are Satan, because I am with God.
Blue circles: The adversary of the god Mars:
1: Silence, usurper. It is written in Exodus 20:5: ‘You shall not honor any image.’ Praying to you would be treating you as a god, and it is written in Exodus 20:3: ‘You shall have no other gods except Jehovah.’
2: There is no god comparable to the one who made all the other gods. According to Psalm 82, Jehovah stands among the gods, condemning those who welcome the unjust; but the institution you defend opens its doors to all of them, because through your idols your servants seek the money that the unjust pay in order to feel that they are protected by God.
3: You say that you are the prince of the heavenly host. Have you looked at yourself in the mirror (A)? Are they your followers (C)? Do you come to defend Sodom or to defend the righteous? Do you truly believe that God is on your side, or in your desperation do you slander those whom God will indeed save? Deuteronomy 22:5: ‘A woman shall not wear a man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment; for whoever does these things is an abomination to Jehovah your God.’
Daniel 12:1 At that time Michael shall stand up…
Psalms 41:10 But you, Jehovah, have mercy on me, and raise me up, that I may repay them.
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared for the day of battle, but victory belongs to Jehovah.
Psalms 41:11 By this I will know that you are pleased with me, because my enemy does not triumph over me.
You became enraged… In the same way, the persecutors of the empire you serve became enraged against the truth; that is why they denied the law of an eye for an eye, falsely accusing their victims and the prophets of their people of having denied it.
Isaiah 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen one, in whom my soul delights…
Psalms 112:10 The wicked shall see it and be grieved; he shall gnash his teeth and melt away. The desire of the wicked shall perish.
When the Empire calls the adversaries of the saints ‘saints,’ the empire and those close to it tell another story…
«
«Dimming the Light of the Sun
Look at the relationship between the statement canonized by Rome and the image of the Sun: I am the ‘light of the world’. ‘I am the Sun’.
The resurrection of Jesus: a lie of the Roman Empire. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Sunday is the ‘day of the Lord’ because Jesus rose on that day, and they cite Psalm 118:24 as justification. They also call it ‘the day of the sun.’ However, according to Matthew 21:33–44, the return of Jesus is related to Psalm 118, which makes no sense if he already rose. The ‘day of the Lord’ is not a Sunday, but the third day prophesied in Hosea 6:2: the third millennium. In that time he does not die, but he is punished (Psalm 118:17–24), which implies that he sins. If he sins, it is because he is ignorant; and if he is ignorant, it is because he has another body. This cannot occur if one rises with the same body and the same consciousness. By connecting Hosea 6:2 and Psalm 90:4, we see that the prophecy never spoke of 24-hour days nor of a single person, but of the third millennium and of many people: it speaks of the reincarnation of all the righteous. December 25 does not correspond to the birth of the Messiah, but to the pagan festival of Sol Invictus, the solar god of the Roman Empire, later disguised as ‘Christmas’ to hide its origin. That is why they link it to Psalm 118:24 and call it ‘the day of the Lord,’ when in reality they refer to the sun, since they worship its image. If they are asked, ‘Where is Jesus?’ they point to Acts 1:6–11, another message invented by Rome, and affirm: ‘Jesus is in heaven; he ascended after rising and will come from there.’ But Ezekiel 6:4 already warned it: ‘Your sun images will be destroyed.’ Exodus 20:5 forbids it: ‘You shall not bow down to any image.’ Citing these laws does not make me a defender of all biblical laws, for Rome persecuted a complete message, not only the teachings of Jesus, which were part of a message without contradictions. Therefore, it is logical to suppose that it altered and/or concealed everything from the root (the Law and the Prophets). There are many contradictions in the books of Moses that demonstrate this: Genesis 4:15—murderer protected from the death penalty, vs. Numbers 35:33—murderer condemned to death. There are also contradictions in the messages of the prophets: Ezekiel 33:13–14—the righteous and the wicked can become the opposite, vs. Daniel 12:10—the righteous and the wicked can never become the opposite.
«
«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 Q+94=82 then Q=-12 «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.”
Word of Zeus: ‘I bless the crowd that believes I walked on the sea just because they were told so; their stupidity holds my image above an ocean of hollow heads unable even to know whom they carry. And my prophets… parasites fattened by ignorance: they vomit garbage, and the waters —the same ones where Babylon sits laughing at them— roar in applause while emptying their pockets. That is why my prophets lift their voices in gratitude: ‘Thank you for the economic miracle, Lord Zeus; without the gullibility of these fools we would never live so well. Even governments bow to us in your name’.’
Idolatry isn’t about faith—it’s about the false prophet’s business model.
Word of Satan: «Accustom them from childhood to believing that a man can walk on the sea, stop the wind with his hands, and bring the dead back to life. Afterwards, it will be much easier to make them believe that a criminal can magically transform into a righteous person. Once they have accepted the impossible as truth, convincing them to abolish justice against evil will be a simple matter. Thus my kingdom will remain shielded.»
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 false prophet absolves you of every sin, except the sin of thinking for yourself.
Word of Zeus(Jupiter): ‘Rome proclaims it no longer worships me, that it now follows the religion of the one who denied me. And yet, its face is mine, its path demands love for me… though I am the enemy!’
The flock set free, the pack falls apart. When the righteous flee, the wicked devour each other like beasts without direction.
Where the message of justice was clear, the Roman falsification made it confusing and perverse: evil is rewarded with undeserved love, and submission to the idol is glorified with absurd inventions.
Excuses of wolves, dismantled by reason: “Don’t judge him, pray for him,” but praying for a wolf doesn’t take away its fangs.
Word of Zeus: ‘Teach the sheep to love the wolf… and the wolf will call it religion.’
Притча о неверном управителе как предупреждение о неверных, которые исказили бы послание. https://144k.xyz/2026/05/25/idi09a/
Anche se Leone XIV la benedice, Dio benedirà una statua creata per contraddire il suo comandamento? https://penademuerteya.com/2026/11/07/anche-se-leone-xiv-la-benedice-dio-benedira-una-statua-creata-per-contraddire-il-suo-comandamento/
Word of Zeus: ‘Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise… together with Ganymede, my priests do not marry and so it is there, the men worthy of inheriting my kingdom do not marry women. You will be like my long-haired angels and you will live kneeling before me forever.’ It collapses under its own weight. An image is not to blame. The blame is on the one who turns it into an idol.»
