Daniel 11:37 - "the desire of women" - what is the meaning?

[OCTOBER23]

MOSLEM WOMEN DON'T HAVE MANY RIGHTS .

Do they ?????

 

[Nazaroo]

MOSLEM WOMEN DON'T HAVE MANY RIGHTS .

Do they ?????

Islam stands out as the the "False Prophet" and "Great Beast" of Revelation.

And Islam is extremely misogynist.

So there is certainly some parallel or connection to that.

But if in fact the Vatican actually concocted the Islam religion to attempt
to convert Arabs to Christianity, or at least manipulate and control them,
as has been suggested before*, Then its no surprise that
the "Great Beast" and the "Great Harlot" have strange similarities
and connections in the Last Days when they arise
and attempt to seize power over the earth.
________________________________________

*
Examples:

Pro-Vatican-created Islam:
http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/04apr/catholicislam.html

Anti-Vatican-Created-Islam:
http://shoebat.com/2014/02/04/catholic-church-invent-islam-2/

I personally think that Vatican priests did have a hand in the early formation of Islam (i.e., Quran/Mohammed),
but that Mohammed (like Hitler) asserted his independence later and added anti-Christian rhetoric.

The complex problem is best analyzed using historical information and the subsequent behaviours
of various parties:

http://www.reformation.org/vatican-and-islam.html

 

[RevTestament]

Islam stands out as the the "False Prophet" and "Great Beast" of Revelation.

And Islam is extremely misogynist.

So there is certainly some parallel or connection to that.

But if in fact the Vatican actually concocted the Islam religion to attempt
to convert Arabs to Christianity, or at least manipulate and control them,
as has been suggested before*, Then its no surprise that
the "Great Beast" and the "Great Harlot" have strange similarities
and connections in the Last Days when they arise
and attempt to seize power over the earth.
________________________________________

*
Examples:

Pro-Vatican-created Islam:
http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/04apr/catholicislam.html

Anti-Vatican-Created-Islam:
http://shoebat.com/2014/02/04/catholic-church-invent-islam-2/

I personally think that Vatican priests did have a hand in the early formation of Islam (i.e., Quran/Mohammed),
but that Mohammed (like Hitler) asserted his independence later and added anti-Christian rhetoric.

The complex problem is best analyzed using historical information and the subsequent behaviours
of various parties:

http://www.reformation.org/vatican-and-islam.html

Unfortunately, (or maybe by design) the muslim belief is beginning to infiltrate the American society. However, they have such a thing called Taqiyya in which their religion allows them to lie if it is for the glory of Allah. So unfortunately, one must take "converts" with a grain of salt. I personally believe some who claim to have converted from the Muslim faith are instead money launderers or just greedy frauds. I believe some may actually be taking Christian donations, and laundering them back home to support Muslim efforts. Those claiming to have miraculous visions or hearing the Lord speak to them are highly suspect to me so warrant close investigation. After researching Wally Shoebat, it appears he collects a lot of money in his "non-profit" organization doing lectures for the military, etc. Yet, when approached, he is not open about where that money goes.

Other than perhaps some of Mohammed's wives or family perhaps having Catholic affiliations, I personally see no credible evidence connecting Catholicism to the creation of Islam.
For the reasons given above I believe anything from Mr Shoebat's site is suspect, unless he becomes more forthcoming about the finances of his organization, etc, but in fairness to him, the article written by Theodore Shoebat does not support the Catholic-Islam connection.

 

[Nazaroo]

Unfortunately, (or maybe by design) the muslim belief is beginning to infiltrate the American society. However, they have such a thing called Taqiyya in which their religion allows them to lie if it is for the glory of Allah. So unfortunately, one must take "converts" with a grain of salt.

Yes we should be wary of muslim 'converts'.
However, Shoebat's case seems to be awfully elaborate and committed
for it to be a mere ruse to get a visa or collect money for muslim causes.
At least some of his effort is spent exposing muslim groups as violent extremists,
and immoral and dangerous offenders - this hardly glorifies or defends any form of Islam.
I can't see even extremists accepting Shoebat as a 'muslim covert operation'.
I think they would want to kill him.

I personally believe some who claim to have converted from the Muslim faith are instead money launderers or just greedy frauds. I believe some may actually be taking Christian donations, and laundering them back home to support Muslim efforts. Those claiming to have miraculous visions or hearing the Lord speak to them are highly suspect to me so warrant close investigation.

Are you saying Shoebat claimed to have miraculous visions? I missed that bit.

After researching Wally Shoebat, it appears he collects a lot of money in his "non-profit" organization doing lectures for the military, etc. Yet, when approached, he is not open about where that money goes.
Other than perhaps some of Mohammed's wives or family perhaps having Catholic affiliations, I personally see no credible evidence connecting Catholicism to the creation of Islam.
For the reasons given above I believe anything from Mr Shoebat's site is suspect, unless he becomes more forthcoming about the finances of his organization, etc, but in fairness to him, the article written by Theodore Shoebat does not support the Catholic-Islam connection.

Its confusing if not paradoxical that you side with Shoebat here,
while suggesting he is actually a fake 'Christian', collecting cash
like a televangelist, possibly even funding terrorism in the middle-east.

He seems to be one of the few actually reporting horrific Christian persecution,
and his denial of an RC origin for Islam is not being used by him
to give any credence or authenticity to it as a religion or as containing truth.

That is, his behaviour seems consistent with an honest Christian position.

His avoidance of transparency regarding money causes concern,
but the explanation that the lives that are at risk in the Middle East
require secrecy and discretion is not wholly implausible.

 

[Squeaky]

I don't understand your point. If it is whether or not we can give up our lust for women. The answer is yes. I gave up sex 25 years ago.

 

[RevTestament]

Yes we should be wary of muslim 'converts'.
However, Shoebat's case seems to be awfully elaborate and committed
for it to be a mere ruse to get a visa or collect money for muslim causes.
At least some of his effort is spent exposing muslim groups as violent extremists,
and immoral and dangerous offenders - this hardly glorifies or defends any form of Islam.
I can't see even extremists accepting Shoebat as a 'muslim covert operation'.
I think they would want to kill him.

Are you saying Shoebat claimed to have miraculous visions? I missed that bit.

No, he seems on the surface a fairly level headed guy, and at first I tended to believe him about Muslim tactics, etc. I do not believe all his theories. But I got antsy about him when he was confronted by Nightline about where the money goes. While I can understand him not wanting to jeopardize those he supports, it would be interesting to know how much money goes to support those persecuted by Islam.

Its confusing if not paradoxical that you side with Shoebat here,
while suggesting he is actually a fake 'Christian', collecting cash
like a televangelist, possibly even funding terrorism in the middle-east.

He seems to be one of the few actually reporting horrific Christian persecution,
and his denial of an RC origin for Islam is not being used by him
to give any credence or authenticity to it as a religion or as containing truth.

That is, his behaviour seems consistent with an honest Christian position.

His avoidance of transparency regarding money causes concern,
but the explanation that the lives that are at risk in the Middle East
require secrecy and discretion is not wholly implausible.

Perhaps I need to be more clear. I am not saying that all muslim converts are untrustworthy. There are some whom I believe are indeed working for Christ, like Nabeel Qureshi. But there are some whose personal lives don't seem to reflect their miraculous conversion stories. If they are looking for money, I would investigate them thoroughly.
I was trying to be fair to Mr. Shoebat. I basically have little reason to doubt his sincerity except for the non-transparency, and my perception of his defensiveness about it, which gives me pause. I suppose the military investigated him thoroughly enough to satisfy them before hiring him to speak to soldiers.

In my efforts to learn how to respond to Muslims regarding the Qu'ran and the Bible, I have researched a number of actual converts to understand how and why they converted, and what they had to face in order to do it. Basically all of them had to give up their entire prior lives in order to convert. Unfortunately, some strike me as shams leading me to question why they would construct such lies, and what happens to donations they ask for. Some claim to have been part of terrorist cells, etc, but "converted" in the process of being immersed among Christians. If they aren't true converts, are we being asked to support a terrorist? Are we being duped into supporting our enemies? After all this does seem to be a tactic of Islam.

 

[Nazaroo]

I don't understand your point. If it is whether or not we can give up our lust for women. The answer is yes. I gave up sex 25 years ago.

The main point of this thread was to clarify the meaning of
and the authenticity of Daniel's description in Dan. 11:37,
including especially the "desire of women" phrase.

As it stands in the light of common commentary,
there is confusion as to both the meaning and application.

I am sure that people can give up lust for women.
After all, the thrill isn't that great, and most are not that attractive,
if one is sober....

 

[Nazaroo]

No, he seems on the surface a fairly level headed guy, and at first I tended to believe him about Muslim tactics, etc. I do not believe all his theories. But I got antsy about him when he was confronted by Nightline about where the money goes. While I can understand him not wanting to jeopardize those he supports, it would be interesting to know how much money goes to support those persecuted by Islam.

Perhaps I need to be more clear. I am not saying that all muslim converts are untrustworthy. There are some whom I believe are indeed working for Christ, like Nabeel Qureshi. But there are some whose personal lives don't seem to reflect their miraculous conversion stories. If they are looking for money, I would investigate them thoroughly.
I was trying to be fair to Mr. Shoebat. I basically have little reason to doubt his sincerity except for the non-transparency, and my perception of his defensiveness about it, which gives me pause.

I think his vision is limited,
yet it does offer a perspective of the Middle East which
we would otherwise totally lack, and he does seem sincere
in regard to attempting to interpret and apply prophecy.

But I can't find him much different than any other preacher or teacher,
even some of the best. They all have blind spots, and iffy doctrines
in their arsenal.

They be humans.

I suppose the military investigated him thoroughly enough to satisfy them before hiring him to speak to soldiers.

This I think is significant, although maybe not clinching.

I would tend to rather believe that if he is some kind of fake,
he is then one of "ours", i.e., a CIA operated concession.
In that case, I have little concern about his money going to terrorists,
unless that is what our genius-strategists intend.

The fact he is even collecting money suggests he's not a connected terrorist.

The Muslim powers, be they Saudis or Iranians, have so much bloody money
that they fly around in private leer jets and give away boatloads of cash
to local mosques inside North America, and finance all kinds of operations
here. So they don't need our money, which will be SMALL compared
to what they waste on cocaine and child-trafficking.

In my efforts to learn how to respond to Muslims regarding the Qu'ran and the Bible, I have researched a number of actual converts to understand how and why they converted, and what they had to face in order to do it. Basically all of them had to give up their entire prior lives in order to convert. Unfortunately, some strike me as shams leading me to question why they would construct such lies, and what happens to donations they ask for. Some claim to have been part of terrorist cells, etc, but "converted" in the process of being immersed among Christians. If they aren't true converts, are we being asked to support a terrorist? Are we being duped into supporting our enemies? After all this does seem to be a tactic of Islam.

I think that there are plenty of covert ops, sleepers, fakes, and even just morons operating.

Don't give your donations easily, and follow up for sure.

But I'm not seeing much wrong with Shoebat,
although since he's supported by the US military,
he doesn't need my pennies and dimes.

 

[nonanomanon]

The main point of this thread was to clarify the meaning of
and the authenticity of Daniel's description in Dan. 11:37,
including especially the "desire of women" phrase.

(we do have an outstanding public safety issue that will be resolved shortly, but I guess its ok to voice a few things, especially if this problem sees this as some informal challenge, like whatever and everything, whoever claims the to be the Antichrist voices)

DANIEL 11:36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
DANIEL 11:37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, (1Samuel14:24-29//Daniel 11:39), nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.
DANIEL 11:38 But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.
DANIEL 11:39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge [and] increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.

The "Desire of Women is Highlighted in Red", God has ordained the Sons of God, specific periods assigned in his gospel to identify with "Joseph, the Blessing". God has not ordained, the Sons of God to decide, when the "Desire of Women is Revealed", so the argument is a snare, if you attempt to apply the argument to a "work based" gospel program. ... ... ... ... What I've highlighted in blue is euthanasia God applies for unlawful acts, of the greatest assaults on spiritual truths associated to the gospel, of the least attempted murder and murder. God is putting people down to illustrate his authority, he is not saving people to illustrate his authority so he is like a "Strange God". When you keep using "force" against the Sons of God, you will only keep experiencing euthanasia. When God finally eliminates all the threats to his gospel, at a particular stage, then God reveals the Desire of Women, accordingly and inline with his gospel. Right now suicide is the demand, God will allow them to entertain their own suicide until the "3 and a Half Days are Finished", then this portion having no value should be eliminated completely, then the last tiny bit is eliminated.

(What is the pattern of suicide and euthanasia, and have we been faithful in eliminating the problem, and in taking steps to prepare ourselves so we are not viewed sinfully in the eyes of the gospel ... ... ... ... the answer for all the nations on earth that would otherwise fall into some revealing of the blessing at this current stage, fail miserably, we do not have much longer to wait until this situation begins to be concluded)

 

[daqq]

Daniel 11:38
38 καὶ θεὸν μαωζεὶν ἐπὶ τόπου αὐτοῦ δοξάσει καὶ θεόν, ὃν οὐκ ἔγνωσαν οἱ πατέρες αὐτοῦ, δοξάσει ἐν χρυσῷ καὶ ἀργύρῳ καὶ λίθῳ τιμίῳ καὶ ἐν ἐπιθυμήμασι.

:sheep:

 

[glorydaz]

I didn't realize "many" identify this verse with the Vatican. May I inquire as to whom you refer? Are they historicists? Early Protestants? Commentators?

Antiochus is in the prophecy, but it is way up at verses 14-16

But I will address some reasons why the vile one who places the abomination which maketh desolate cannot be Antiochus.
First and foremost this cannot be because 200 years after Antiochus, Jesus said: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso readeth, let him understand Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains...." Matthew 24:15-16. What is Jesus prophesying about in the future if Antiochus was the vile one who placed the abomination which makes desolate?

Secondly, Rome, the third kingdom after Darius and the fourth king of Daniel 11:2, consumed the land of the Israelites which does not rise again until the end; Remember Alexander's kingdom "shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those [four]." Daniel 11:4. The Romans must be referenced to complete the vision, because they plucked up the 4 kingdoms of Alexanders 4 generals.

I didn't realize this Naz - thanks for pointing that out. For awhile their Bibles also replaced "Chittim" with ships of Italy, while Maccabees refers to Macedonia as Chittim.

Yep, some good points.


Wholeheartedly agree. We cannot change the text to try to fit our interpretations, but must understand the prophecy within the context of its language - otherwise we are subject to err.

Rome comes into the picture way up in verses 14-16 as the one who comes against the king of the north and stops him ie Antiochus Epiphanes.

Another reason verse 31 cannot be referring to Antiochus Epiphanes is that simply not enough years had passed if one accepts the day to year prophetic convention used in Daniel 9. Indeed 1290 yrs from the days referred to in Daniel 12:11 places the prophecy well past the time of Christ.

Well done. :thumb:

 

[glorydaz]

As is often the case in Scripture; the passage begins and ends with what it is talking about:

Daniel 11:

37. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

Who is the God of His father's people? Who is the desire of their women?

John 20:

28. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.

Luke 1:

28. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

41. And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
42. And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
43. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

The desire of their women was that they be the one chosen to bring the Christ into the world.

He shall not regard Christ as Lord God of his fathers for he shall magnify himself above all.

Guess what - it wasn't Antiochus. The guy is a Jew.

One in particular - John 5:

43. I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

And many of his kind - Luke 21:

8. And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.

Both - 1 John 2:

18. Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

22. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

2 Thessalonians 2:

3. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4. Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Tip of the iceberg on this...

Good points. :thumb:

 

[glorydaz]

Dear All,

The third angel that visited me spoke to me about this man, named Uri Geller, an Israeli man who, at the time the angel visited me, had said in the newspaper that his Mom said, 'When are you going to get a girlfriend, and he said he has no desire for that, but is more immersed with the power/abilities he has.

Oh my. I'd forgotten how nutty you are.

 

[glorydaz]

LOL. Oh, Michael, Michael.
Uri Geller had no "powers." He was a magician or illusionist and was exposed as such on Johnny Carson's "Tonight Show" where he said he couldn't do his stuff because he didn't feel "strong" that night.

:e4e:

 

[Nick M]

[Many have identified this verse with the Vatican RC 'priesthood',
because of their supposed celibacy vows,
long recognized by Protestantism as a perversion of God's intent.

He is a homo. :duh: He cares not about the desire of women. This means a normal woman, not the American feminist who does not want the man to give himself for her as Christ gave himself for the church. He cares not for her desires.

 

[patrick jane]

have you got an explanation for Daniel 11:37?

you're pretty good Nazaroo - in my limited view of that one scripture by itself and not in context -

i go with kjv or nkjv and it means he (Antiochus or otherwise) would not REGARD the gods of his fathers and/or ancestors OR the desire of women towards him and perhaps vice versa on the women deal. :wazzup:

 

[Nazaroo]

Daniel 11:38
38 καὶ θεὸν μαωζεὶν ἐπὶ τόπου αὐτοῦ δοξάσει καὶ θεόν, ὃν οὐκ ἔγνωσαν οἱ πατέρες αὐτοῦ, δοξάσει ἐν χρυσῷ καὶ ἀργύρῳ καὶ λίθῳ τιμίῳ καὶ ἐν ἐπιθυμήμασι.

:sheep:

Literally: "And a God to [of] War upon his place he honours..."

...with a meaning of "he honours the God of War in his Palace..."

Your quoting the Greek Daniel (LXX), so here is a translation by a Native Greek/English person:

' 36 And he shall do according to his will, and the king shall exalt and magnify himself against every god, and shall speak great swelling words, and shall prosper until the indignation shall be accomplished: for it is coming to an end. 37 And he shall not regard any gods of his fathers, nor the desire of women, neither shall he regard any deity: for he shall magnify himself above all. 38 And he shall honour the god of forces on his place: and a god whom his fathers knew not, he shall honour with gold, and silver, and precious stones, and desirable things. ' DaniEL 11, 36-38 ο ΔανιΕλ γραφει ΅36 καὶ ποιήσει κατὰ τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς ὑψωθήσεται καὶ μεγαλυνθήσεται ἐπὶ πάντα θεὸν καὶ λαλήσει ὑπέρογκα καὶ κατευθυνεῖ, μέχρις οὗ συντελεσθῇ ἡ ὀργή, εἰς γὰρ συντέλειαν γίνεται. 37 καὶ ἐπὶ πάντας θεοὺς τῶν πατέρων αὐτοῦ οὐ συνήσει καὶ ἐπὶ ἐπιθυμίαν γυναικῶν καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶν θεὸν οὐ συνήσει, ὅτι ἐπὶ πάντας μεγαλυνθήσεται· 38 καὶ θεὸν μαωζεὶν ἐπὶ τόπου αὐτοῦ δοξάσει καὶ θεόν, ὃν οὐκ ἔγνωσαν οἱ πατέρες αὐτοῦ, δοξάσει ἐν χρυσῷ καὶ ἀργύρῳ καὶ λίθῳ τιμίῳ καὶ ἐν ἐπιθυμήμασ顨 ¨ΔανιΕλ 11, 36-38

The link also contains some profanity because he translates his Greek literally into English with his crude and direct interpretations.
This is quite normal for Greek interpreters.

Caution: possible profanity:
http://fotobolostoxotis.blogspot.nl/?view=classic

 

[daqq]

Literally: "And a God to [of] War upon his place he honours..."

...with a meaning of "he honours the God of War in his Palace..."

Your quoting the Greek Daniel (LXX), so here is a translation by a Native Greek/English person:

' 36 And he shall do according to his will, and the king shall exalt and magnify himself against every god, and shall speak great swelling words, and shall prosper until the indignation shall be accomplished: for it is coming to an end. 37 And he shall not regard any gods of his fathers, nor the desire of women, neither shall he regard any deity: for he shall magnify himself above all. 38 And he shall honour the god of forces on his place: and a god whom his fathers knew not, he shall honour with gold, and silver, and precious stones, and desirable things. ' DaniEL 11, 36-38 ο ΔανιΕλ γραφει ΅36 καὶ ποιήσει κατὰ τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς ὑψωθήσεται καὶ μεγαλυνθήσεται ἐπὶ πάντα θεὸν καὶ λαλήσει ὑπέρογκα καὶ κατευθυνεῖ, μέχρις οὗ συντελεσθῇ ἡ ὀργή, εἰς γὰρ συντέλειαν γίνεται. 37 καὶ ἐπὶ πάντας θεοὺς τῶν πατέρων αὐτοῦ οὐ συνήσει καὶ ἐπὶ ἐπιθυμίαν γυναικῶν καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶν θεὸν οὐ συνήσει, ὅτι ἐπὶ πάντας μεγαλυνθήσεται· 38 καὶ θεὸν μαωζεὶν ἐπὶ τόπου αὐτοῦ δοξάσει καὶ θεόν, ὃν οὐκ ἔγνωσαν οἱ πατέρες αὐτοῦ, δοξάσει ἐν χρυσῷ καὶ ἀργύρῳ καὶ λίθῳ τιμίῳ καὶ ἐν ἐπιθυμήμασ顨 ¨ΔανιΕλ 11, 36-38

The link also contains some profanity because he translates his Greek literally into English with his crude and direct interpretations.
This is quite normal for Greek interpreters.

Caution: possible profanity:
http://fotobolostoxotis.blogspot.nl/?view=classic

Actually I disagree with the meaning of the word itself which I had highlighted, (though I understand my point went unstated because there was no reply to my first post anyway so I just thought I would have some fun and you snagged me on it, ). However the point to what I highlighted is that the word itself appears to be a direct transposition or transliteration from the Hebrew ma`uziym because whoever did this may have looked at that word as though it might have been a proper name, (and it is kinda sorta, imo, but at the same time a word play on a proper name). The Father is our Rock, (Tsuwr) of Defense or Stronghold, (ma`owz, ma`uwz, ma`oz, ma`uz, such as both are used together in Psalms 31:2). There is a particular Kohen Gadol of the twenty fourth and final course who seems to have only honored only himself. He put his trust in the wrong rock of defense, (himself a "hollowed out rock"). You may even find the name of his course in recent archeology. There was another at the same time honoring the true Father who is our maoz-stronghold.

Looking I was, and the daughter of the queen danced in the palace; and she danced before melek haTsaphon at a feast of celebration to himself, with his mighty ones, captains, rulers of thousands, and magistrates all present at the feast. And the dance greatly pleased melek haTsaphon; so he swore an oath, in the presence of all, to give her whatsoever she desired, unto half of his dominion. So the daughter inquired of her mother what she most desired so that she might request the same of melek haTsaphon: and the mother counseled her daughter to request the diary of Yochanan the Immerser, who was locked up in the Patmos prison at the Macherus fortress, and to bring her the diary on a pinaki writing table. Watching I was, and I wondered why the queen would want what was in the head of Yochanan so badly so as to have his head removed. And then it occurred that the old battle axe only wanted to find out anything else Yochanan may have said or written about her and the king, (for so they brought the head of Yochanan upon a pinaki writing table much like the one his father Zechariah wrote his name on when he was born). But after having read the first words of the pinaki, "ΑΠΟΚΑΛΥΨΙΣ ΙΗΣΟΥ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ", the queen handed the diary over to melek haTsaphon, (of the Galil, but without a crown) and as he began to skim over it, at a glance, he chanced upon a report of the kings of the Anatole Rising Sun having been written therein; and a chilling shiver went up his twisted spine, and the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another. And this rumor therefore spread abroad, and especially among the priesthood and the chief priests, (for some of them were present at the feast) for Yochanan himself was a priest, of the course of Abiyah, and the people held him as a prophet, (yea, greatest of all the prophets and of men having been born of nashiym). :crackup:

 

[popsthebuilder]

Seams to me that the final enemy and destroyer of man and true religion will not be of earthly desires or God. These things will be indifferent for it, as it will look for the best solution for advancement only.

 

[popsthebuilder]

It could mean no respect or love for woman. Just as he has no respect for God or anything else. As Satan he puts himself above all things.

The God of women in this context means what they worship, which near the end, like now, they worship material possessions, and money.