Q&A:I’m From New Jersey And I Visit Your Site From Time To Time But I Have Been Blocked From Accessing The Site Why Am I Not Able To Access Your Site?
The Exodus Of High Profile Liberal Celebs To Conservatism?: A Genuine Transition Or A Ploy To Negatively Influence Destroy And Undermine Christian And Conservative Values?
If I Were An Open And Proud Lesbian Or Homosexual But Helped Save Many Lives By Giving And Helping Many Will God Have Mercy On Me When I’m Judged?
You Speak Often About Homosexuality Being An Abomination But If You Eat Certain Foods You Would Be Considered An Abomination According To The Bible As Well.How Do You Respond That?
Why Do You Demonize Gays And Ostracize Them When Many Of Them Are Talented And Educated People Who Can Contribute To Society?
Why Do You Speak Out So Forcefully Against Homosexuality They Say Those Who Do That Are Normally Homosexual Or Bisexual Themselves?
The Bible teaches us there are two significant and profound days of wrath coming from God.One is in a physical context which is referred to in scripture as The Great And Terrible Of The Lord.And is a time when God will pour out his wrath on a sinful world, because of their abominable sin and rebellion…Isaiah 2:10-22,1 Thessalonians 5:2-3.
The other is in a spiritual context when God’s wrath will be expressed in a resurrection to judgment against those who have sinned in abominable ways while living in this physical life,unrepentant.This day of wrath will focus on a spiritual destruction and a physical destruction of the wicked and ungodly.
As opposed to a physical destruction exclusively which The Great And Terrible Of The Lord will be focused on.Some self proclaimed ministers deceptively,dishonestly and inaccurately, teach that a simple verbal acceptance of Jesus Christ frees us from this punishment.
Others teach that this event will be in the context of a judgment, and wont involve destruction or punishment but will simply be a day when God informs men of there offenses and then informs them that Christ sacrifice paid the penalty for those sins.
But are these beliefs right and in line with scripture? The truth of the matter is the judgment is the day of wrath upon ungodly men because of their sin and abominable evil.Something that’s clearly outlined by the word of God.Let’s examine scripture to determine what the day of judgment is, and what it involves. Today’s audio is entitled “Judgment Day:The Day Of Wrath.”.This audio was recorded on Febuary 3,2018.
This is actually a remake of a previous version I did on January 28,2018 but I had to redo it because I inserted Jesus Christ as the Revelator or speaker in Luke 3:7 when in actuality it should have been John the baptist being emphasized as the speaker.A slight error on part as a result of rushing to get the audio done but I will try to insure I don’t make that mistake again.
I also mention that Christ mentions in Revelation that men will be judged by their works but in the context of the Bible as a whole being Christ in print… because Christ is the word of God in print,flesh and in spirit.John wrote the text but it was revealed to him to write by Christ through visions.In this context Christ is revealing it to John.I also mention the ungodly will see God face to face but in terms of witnessing the glorious presence of God.Sort of like Moses when he witnessed God’s glory in the burning bush.
In other words, in this case, they wont see his face but will probably see his glorious presence in the form of his body sitting on his throne, but in all likelihood his face will be hidden or cloaked in some way.Because no human can see God’s face and live…Exodus 33:17-23.But they will still be frightened none the less…Hebrews 10:31.
Judgment Day:The Day Of Wrath.
Listen: Judgment Day:The Day Of Wrath.
This audio was recorded on January 28,2018.
Q&A:If The Unrighteous Are Going To Be Spared And Take Part In The Second Resurrection Why Are There Verses In Scripture That Emphasize Unrighteousness Will Be Punished Also?
I Don’t Need The Bible Or God To Define, Or Be Moral Or Empathetic To Others. So What Real Purpose Does Either Serve?
Why I Stopped Believing in Man-made Global Warming and Became a Climate Skeptic.
When I was in my late 20s, I was living in San Francisco and playing in a reggae band. At the time, I fervently believed that global warming was a real, man-made problem. And I was vocal about it. Among other things, my friends and I would slap bumper stickers on SUVs that said: “I’m Changing The Climate, Ask Me How.” I didn’t like yuppies, and I resented their big SUVs struggling to climb the city’s steep hills, needlessly warming our planet.
It seemed obvious to me that there was a climate change problem. I heard about it—and read about it—every day in the news. Eventually, I started to study the issue, thinking that I needed to understand it better to write informed articles on the subject.
The first time I experienced a twinge of climate change doubt was when I learned that carbon dioxide (CO2) comprised less than 0.04 percent of the atmosphere. In truth, such a seemingly small amount shouldn’t be underestimated since CO2 starts trapping heat quite effectively at far more minuscule concentrations. But at the time, I thought, “That’s strange. I would have thought it was a lot more.”
The point is I had been barraged with so much global warming hysteria that I figured CO2 must comprise one percent or five percent or 10 percent of the atmosphere. But since it was only 0.04 percent, it seemed to me that the people making the case for global warming should be more careful, and not exaggerate their claims—to not lose credibility.
Regardless, I continued to believe that man was changing the climate. And I was unhappy with friends who seemed like stubborn, cranky holdouts when they disputed this indisputable fact—that humankind was indeed warming the planet.
The years rolled along and I still assumed global warming was a man-made catastrophe—until I finally started to study the science of the issue. At that point, two minor pieces of information helped to trigger a real curiosity for me—and led me to realize that the issue was far more complicated than I had always believed.
The first was learning that man produces only a tiny portion of all CO2 released into the atmosphere each year. In contrast, for example, termites alone release far more CO2 annually (and by several orders of magnitude) than all the burning of fossil fuels. The second was learning that there had been a global cooling scare in the 1970s.
After stumbling across these two seemingly random nuggets of information, I started to really read—and with an open mind. And it was then that I began to profoundly change my opinion. Simply put, I went from wholeheartedly believing in man-made “climate change” to viewing the science undergirding the case as very questionable. Overall, I became resentful that I’d been naively indoctrinated by a daily, one-sided media barrage. And I started to look at myself as something of a freedom fighter—someone who was pushing back against misinformation—and making people aware that they were being manipulated.
If asked why I don’t believe in the theory of “anthropogenic” (man-made) warming, I try to list some very simple points. I explain that, yes, the Earth has warmed by roughly 0.8 degrees Celsius over the past 150 years—and I agree that surface temperatures have warmed, that the oceans have warmed, and that glaciers have retreated. But I disagree with the root cause of this warming.
For starters, CO2 is actually a rather flawed “greenhouse gas.” When CO2 is first introduced into the atmosphere it rapidly absorbs as much heat (in the form of infrared radiation) as possible. But it doesn’t take long for CO2 to become “optically saturated.” This means that after reaching roughly 0.0020 percent (20 parts per million) of the atmosphere, CO2 starts fading. From then on, it takes ever-doubling amounts of CO2 to trap the same amount of heat. By the present concentration of 0.04 percent (400 parts per million), CO2 is essentially saturated—and can’t meaningfully trap much additional heat.
This limitation of CO2 actually runs completely counter to the prevailing notion that adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will continue to trap ever greater amounts of heat. In truth, basic science demonstrates exactly the opposite, which is why climate scientists actually base most of their projected warming on “positive feedback” from water vapor.
Significantly, water vapor functions as the predominant heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere. And so, when climate scientists use computer models to predict future warming due to man-made climate change, they are essentially saying the following: We know that CO2 rapidly fades as a greenhouse gas. We think that before CO2 becomes saturated, it will raise global temperatures enough to add more water vapor to the atmosphere. This added water vapor will trap more heat, which will raise temperatures more, which will add more water vapor. The result will be a feedback loop that keeps driving a rise in temperatures.
There’s a major flaw in this theory, however, and one that climate scientists have never been able to solve. Simply put, water vapor in the atmosphere inevitably transitions to clouds. And cumulus clouds not only reflect solar radiation back into space but also produce rain—which not only lowers surface temperatures but also scrubs CO2 from the atmosphere.
Regardless of the cloud problem, this presumed climate “sensitivity” to CO2 is the overall engine of man-made warming and continues to be programmed into computer models. But it remains a tenuous argument. So the real question should be: Well if CO2 isn’t driving global warming, what is?
And that brings us to the second point that I try to make—the issue of solar variability. Over the past 150 years, the sun’s output has increased quite significantly—to levels not seen in as much as 2,000 years. Many people assume that the sun’s output is constant, but in fact, it ebbs and flows on various short- and long-term cycles. And so, not only did solar activity increase sharply during the 20th century, but this same increase in output corresponds quite closely with other warm periods recorded over the past few thousands of years.
Sadly, advocates of man-made climate change essentially discount solar activity as a meaningful contributor to global warming. Their reasoning is that changes in solar irradiance (“brightness”) are quite small compared to the overall, observed warming of the 20th century. However, this view overlooks the related—and larger—impacts of solar variability, including atmospheric ionization and cloud formation. And so, when considered together, these associated factors demonstrate a more complete picture of solar variability’s relevance.
Compounding the impact of increased solar activity in the 20th century is the issue of ozone depletion. From the late 1950s until the mid-1990s, ozone concentrations in the stratosphere steadily diminished. As ozone levels declined, the amount of ultraviolet radiation (UV) reaching the Earth’s surface steadily increased. UV radiation is the primary source of atmospheric warmth, which helps to explain why increased UV penetration during the latter portion of the 20th century contributed to a rise in temperatures. Notably, the ozone layer began to stabilize after 1996, when the Montreal Protocol (which banned chlorofluorocarbons) was fully implemented. In fact, since the late 1990s, both satellite data and weather balloon measurements show a net flatlining of global temperatures.
This “pause” in the rise of global temperatures since the late 1990s has become the focus of serious debate within the climate community. Simply put, the theory of man-made warming cannot account for a halt in the overall rise in temperatures, or why computer models (programmed to emphasize a high climate sensitivity to CO2) are continuing to diverge from actual, observed temperature measurements.
The flatlining of net temperatures observed by satellites is also at odds with recent adjustments to surface measurements issued by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and adopted by NASA. By revising its temperature collection methods to include measurements taken from the engine manifolds of oceangoing vessels, and by estimating Arctic Ocean readings based on neighboring land masses, NOAA was able to announce in 2015 that there has been no “pause” in temperatures and that recent years are the “warmest on record.” The fact that NOAA’s findings continue to conflict with satellite readings has not received much attention.
What’s really interesting to study about climate change is the pattern of warming and cooling seen over the last few thousand years of the current interglacial period. It’s somewhat ironic that claims of a “warmest year on record” only include the “modern” instrumental era of 1880 to the present. But studying 100 or 150 years yields only a partial glimpse of recent temperature trends. If one actually looks back over the past 2,000 years, for example, a far more complete—and complex—landscape emerges.
Thanks to proxy measurements of carbon, beryllium, and oxygen isotopes, geologists can estimate both temperatures and solar activity going back many thousands of years. And so, we know that from roughly 250-400 AD, the global climate was warmer than today, in what was called the “Roman Warm Period.” Solar output at the time was high, which helps to explain the temperate conditions that aided the expansion of the Roman Empire. However, solar activity plummeted during the middle of the first millennium, leading to several centuries of brutal cold during the Dark Ages, culminating in the Nile River actually freezing in 829 AD.
One hundred years after the Nile River froze, however, solar activity started climbing back toward more comfortable levels, leading to a “Medieval Warm Period” that spanned roughly 950-1250 AD. Historical and geologic records indicate that, globally, the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today, with balmy weather allowing the Vikings to farm on Greenland (hence its name), and the British to raise vineyards and produce wine.
From 1350-1850, though, solar activity plummeted several times, leading to a colder era nicknamed the “Little Ice Age.” Millions of people died of famine and disease during this inhospitable time, and it was only with the rebound of solar activity in the latter part of the 1800s that temperatures climbed back to a more comfortable climate.
And now we’re in the “Modern Warm Period,” the latest in a succession of warm/cold episodes that track closely with solar variability. Something to consider when reviewing these alternating periods of climate is that it is during warm phases that civilizations flourish. While millions of people starved during the Dark Ages and the Little Ice Age, global agriculture thrived during the Medieval Warm Period.
Overall, and as noted above, there are valid reasons to conclude that CO2 is not the primary forcing agent of global climate. Thus, it’s unfortunate that the media often ridicules climate critics rather than spend more time investigating their views. Clearly, there’s a media bias involved, and one that reinforces notions such as “the science is settled,” or that “97 percent of scientists agree.”
However, the idea of an overwhelming consensus on global warming not only conflicts with the more than 30,000 scientists who have signed the “Petition Project” rejecting man-made warming but relies on spurious assumptions. The 97 percent figure stems from a May 2013 Tweet by President Obama stating that “97 percent of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.” As his source, the president linked to a newly published study by John Cook at the University of Queensland. However, a closer look at Cook’s study reveals that of the 11,994 research papers examined, only one-third actually took a position regarding the causes of global warming.
There are various instances of this exaggeration and hype in the climate change debate. But nothing could be as troubling as the prescriptions currently being formulated by climate alarmists. In the service of preventing a future catastrophe based solely on flawed computer modeling, public figures are calling for an 80 percent (or even 100 percent) ban on the future use of fossil fuels. While seemingly well-intentioned, these policies overlook two real-world problems.
First, a mass reduction in fossil fuel use would forfeit the lives of hundreds of millions of people in developing nations. Currently limited to the barest of medical aid and technical infrastructure, these populations already exist at a poverty line, barely supported by sporadic power generation. It is only through the introduction of water and sewage treatment (powered by natural gas and coal plants) that some areas of the Third World are attempting to raise living standards.
Second, a presumed switch to wind and solar generation overlooks the glaring deficiencies of both forms of power: Wind and solar are inherently intermittent means of electricity production (because the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine). And both are also low-yield and expensive—in part because their unreliability still requires ample backup generation from “spinning reserves” of either natural gas or coal.
If the United States were to actually make the transition to a partially or fully wind- and solar-based power infrastructure, the failures of Europe and Australia’s green energy experiments show that the nation would experience an ongoing series of power shortages and blackouts. The result would be a consequential loss of health and safety measures. Hospitals would fight to prioritize available power. Water treatment and waste systems could fail. Foods would spoil due to lack of refrigeration.
The overall point is that there are valid reasons to question both the assumptions and policies advocated by climate change activists. It would be helpful if those who take a stand against presumed man-made warming were given a chance to expand on their reasoning, rather than face criticism and scorn. And so, at a time of political uncertainty and economic difficulty, it would make sense to fully study all the potential ramifications of such a complicated issue.
Question: Why do you judge others when the bible condemns judging? Matthew 7:1-3
Donald Bohanon: The bible commands and instructs and has always commanded and instructed the righteous to judge in righteousness.
In other words…the person who is doing the judging must be righteous themselves and must use the word of God when applying judgment to gauge if the behavior is deemed righteous or offensive/wicked in God’s eyes.
The verse you provided in Mathew 7: 1-3 is in the context of judging in hypocrisy and or in unrighteousness. Something that’s further confirmed in Matthew 7:1-5 and Romans 2: 1-6.If you read carefully you see the condemnation the bible speaks about is in the context of being immersed in sin yourself while judging another person.
It states in In Matthew 7:5 to get the beam out of your own eye(or depart from your own sin first) and you will be able to see clearly to remove the beam out of another persons eye or judge another persons situation. It emphasizes in Romans 2:1-6 that you are inexcusable because you judge while being guilty of the same things yourself.This is the context in which judging is condemned.
Christ judged and condemned the Pharisee and the Scribes every chance he got because of their wickedness and hypocrisy. And warned them there would be a consequence for their behavior.. Matthew 23:23-33. Christ judged and the bible and Christ instruct the righteous to judge in righteousness and that still applies today.
Christ even went as far as warning the Pharisee and the Scribes that they were behaving hypocritically because they would not adhere to the three weightier/more important matters of the law, one of which included the importance of judgment…Matthew 23:23.Jesus Christ also commanded and instructed his disciples not to judge according to the the appearance but to judge righteous judgment…John 7:24.
God emphasizes in Isaiah 61:8 that he loves judgment.God implores the prophet Ezekiel in Ezekiel 20:4 and Ezekiel 22:2..to judge the house of Israel and show them the abominations of their fathers.Important emphasis is placed on the abominations their fathers had engaged in and they themselves were engaging in.Imploring Ezekiel to judge that evil behavior by exposing it,calling it what it was and condemning it.In hopes of preventing God’s wrathful and destructive punishment for the abominable sin.
The purpose of judging is to expose evil for what it is before it ultimately spreads to the physical and spiritual destruction of millions. That’s why righteous judgment is crucial especially in this day and age. Mathew 7: 1-3 is often used and taken out of context as a way to deter people from speaking out against evil and perversion.
It’s also important to note that you don’t need to be righteous / living righteously which is expressed by living in accordance with the commandments and word of God as a whole, to call evil what it is. Calling evil, evil, is not necessarily considered judging but simply speaking the truth something that’s strongly encouraged by scripture. But calling evil good and good evil is considered lying an abomination and is condemned by scripture and is deemed punishable by death in the lake of fire when judged. Isaiah: 5:20-25, Proverbs 17:15, Revelation 21:7-8.
4 Wilt thou judge them, son of man, wilt thou judge them? cause them to know the abominations of their fathers:
King James Version (KJV)
2 Now, thou son of man, wilt thou judge, wilt thou judge the bloody city? yea, thou shalt shew her all her abominations.
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
2 Timothy 4:2-4
King James Version (KJV)2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Question: LOL You Said Republicans Would Retain Control Of Both The House And Senate What Happened?
Donald Bohanon: I actually prayed they would but God’s plans were obviously different and his will takes precedence over my will or any mans will.I actually initially saw what was unfolding.I explained to the President in an article right after he was elected that he would be blessed if he followed what was clearly outlined in that article.But if he didn’t act on what was outlined he would be cursed,hindered,and eventually brought low.
But he didn’t act immediately on the more serious abominable moral issues and he was subsequently hindered and plaqued with all kinds of problems and political opposition.I’m convinced if he had acted he would have been much more successful.I was praying and hoping he would retain the house so he would be better equipped to fulfill God’swill.
But the word had already gone out and is obviously being fulfilled.I think God allowed the House Of Representatives to be taken to convince this President he means business. But at the same time gave Republicans an even larger majority in the Senate so they would be better equipped to get things done with no excuses.
But obviously at the same time a House turnover is hovering over their heads as a warning of what’s to come if they don’t act on the more serious abominable,moral issues,that face the nation.I’m convinced God is giving him/them another opportunity to do what he requires while at the same time letting him/them know he (God) is poised to fulfill and bring about what was originally prophesied.I’m convinced this is what’s taking place.
But he can prevent it by doing what God requires.God knows what he’s doing. I probably would have been better served in this situation to just keep silent and allow God to work out his will.Which is originally what I started to do. Instead of getting in my own way as it relates to what was originally prophesied.You can’t prophesy one thing and then come back and prophesy something contrary to what you originally prophesied.If the conditions for what was originally prophesied haven’t been met.It doesn’t work that way.I should have known better.
I felt the original prophecy is what God was working out but still felt if I prayed and acted on faith God would hear and allow the House to be retained. But obviously he had other plans.I’m convinced this is a sign to the President that he means business and expects what was originally outlined to be acted upon.
And if not I’m convinced they may be on the verge of losing in other ways.I would also advise the President to tone it down a bit and be more humble and act more Presidential and to give God the credit for his successes as opposed to attributing it all to himself and his efforts.This is very important as well and will insure he wins even bigger in the near future. You can read the original article below.
By Donald Bohanon— Published October 30,2018
Kanye West in a recent strange rant claimed he put out the greatest music and was the best living recording artist.He also claimed the spirits of dead artist like Tupac Shakur,Bob Marley and Fela,manifest themselves through him and in so many words operated through him.
He also recently met with President Trump and in a strange articulation of his message began to talk about hydrogen powered planes,alternate universes and the abolishing of the 13th amendment…Among other things.
That meeting immediately received backlash from many liberals,the black community, and some support from conservatives.Many who claim he’s being wrongfully targeted and criticized because of his support for Donald Trump.
And I agree,that may be the case as it relates some of the criticism.But I believe everyone who is criticizing him is not necessarily doing it because of his support for President Trump.I honestly believe some genuinely think he has some psychological issues.
And I agree with that segment.Not just because of his irrational behavior, but also because of his own admission that he was diagnosed with an emotional and or psychological disorder.I also understand how demonic influence can mirror mental health problems and vice versa.
Based on my knowledge of scripture as well as the spiritual discernment that comes from being led by, or filled with the holy spirit….I have no doubt he is being influenced by demonic forces.If you’re not being led by the holy spirit and don’t have spiritual discernment and insight.. you unfortunately can’t and won’t be able to see and interpret the deeper spiritual issues..But common sense alone should tell anyone this behavior is alarming and disturbing.
Because of his statements, as well as his behavior in many videos, and the video above.In the video above he has a spaced out look in his eyes as if he’s somewhat detached from the physical realm and is being influenced by some unseen force.He claims in so many words to be possessed by the spirits of dead musicians and rappers.
There was a demon in the Bible named “Legion” that Christ had to cast out of a man.This demon claimed it went by that name because there were many demons inhabiting the man at once…Mark 5:6-13.
This kind of demon possession (although not to the extent outlined in the Bible)has been documented but in many cases referred to as multiple personality disorder or some other term by psychiatrist and psychologist. I can also see why it would be advantageous for Satan to influence Kanye West to mention Tupac as one of the spirit sources of his self proclaimed musical genius.
Considering how many rappers and people in general esteem Tupac in high regard.And some may even say have elevated Tupac to “God status”.Those who worship Tupac as a God would no doubt be influenced by such a statement and drawn to it.
Kanye may even be able to exercise major influence and control over them to some degree because of it.The Bob Marley and Fela statements also possibly producing a similar affect on those confused,lost and wayward fans,who are looking for answers and a savior in all the wrong places..
Kanye’s claim to be possessed by several spirits of dead musicians is very troubling and is indicative of some one who is being influenced by demonic spirits.It makes it that much worse when you embrace the thought of being possessed by the evil spirits.We as Christians know he is not possessed by Tupac, Bob Marley or Fela,because they are all dead.And God condemns all forms of sorcery and communication with the supposed spirits of the dead who have passed on.Because in actuality you are communicating with and summoning demonic spirits.And not the spirits of dead artists or relatives.
The Bible emphasizes in Ecclesiastes 12:7 at death the flesh or body goes back to the dust and the spirit goes back to God who gave it.It also emphasizes in Ecclesiastes 9:5 that the dead know nothing and even the memory of them has perished.In other words they don’t exist any more and have no knowledge of anything.The body separate from the spirit is unconscious.And the spirit separate from the body is unconscious. Kanye West, simply put, is being influenced by demonic forces.I’m convinced that’s what a major part of the problem is.The level of demonic influence is sure to get worse the more he embraces and or relishes the thought of having spirits operate through him.
The Bible warns us about putting absolute trust in mentally stable men to cure what ails societies and the world.It goes as far as saying cursed is the man who trusteth in man.Much less demon influenced and mentally unstable individuals.
Because they don’t have all the answers.Because the problems stem from mans carnal spiritual condition. Many Conservatives have jumped on the Kanye West band wagon because they feel he will be an asset to them in the midterms.
I honestly think he will do more harm than good.It’s also very dangerous to put faith in some one who is exhibiting this kind of strange behavior while also claiming to be possessed by spirits.
If Satan is actually influencing him,(and I’m convinced he is to some degree)Satan will be operating through him.I’m convinced most of the people who are witnessing what’s happening don’t know what they are witnessing.Neither do they understand the gravity of the situation because of how influential this individual can be…if allowed.And how misguiding and destructive that can be.
So,much of the advice he offers, may very well be coming from Satan,and in that case to heed that advice can and will prove to be catastrophic.It may even, in the beginning, yield what appears to be some positive outcomes.But if he allows himself to be influenced by evil spirits it will eventually blow up in his face and the faces of others.
Kanye West will not be the savior of the Conservative Party or the Nation.In fact,a number of policies he promotes and supports,will most certainly result in the destruction of the nation by the hand of an angry God.He is not God nor does he represent him.He is ego driven,arrogant,pompous and the list goes on.All Satan inspired characteristics and very offensive characteristics to God.
He is,based on my observations of him, and the statements he’s made,motivated by his own selfish agenda and goals.It’s all about him.If it’s all about him let’s see what happens when the fans stop buying his products.
Let’s see if he will still claim to be the sole reason for all of his success?He exhibits feelings of grandeur and a very profound grandiose attitude which is the pipeline to Satan’s influence.Because of the extreme level of pride that is on display and being exhibited by him and through him.Which is one of the primary tools which Satan uses to manipulate,corrupt and destroy men.
He is not the person to look to for salvation.He is not God.And I don’t believe his support of President Trump will help one bit in the midterms or primary elections.Nether will his advice be fruitful but quite possibly very detrimental depending on what he’s saying and promoting.I will be making a statement in a day or so in regards to the midterm elections about the outcome.So that “God” may be praised and glorified not “Kanye West”.
So you will keep your focus on “God”, and what he requires.Not what “Kanye West” requires.The message of love Kanye promotes is no different than the message of false love many false ministers promote.Which is to essentially support and embrace detestable behaviors that God despises.In actuality,its a message of hate for God and mankind….and not love.Because what it promotes is open and outright defiance of God and his word and the terrible consequences for mankind which will result from that.
I will be making a statement in a day or two about the midterm elections so you may witness God’s power and so he may be glorified and so you know what really must be done to save the nation and advance prosperity for all of it’s citizens.And when it happens it wont be by the hand of Kanye West.You can bet your life on that.
Kanye West is a rapper and not the savior of the Conservative Party,the Nation or the World.Money fame and celebrity,are not synonymous with wisdom,knowledge and leadership ability.Many people are blinded by his musical accomplishments and material gain,but are not paying attention to his condition and intentions.Following Kanye West may very well get you destroyed not saved.Following God’s instruction will get you saved and not destroyed.
Kanye West, based on his behavior in my opinion, is an ego maniac who appears to be influenced by demonic spirits and is possibly on the brink of running amok.To follow him at this stage is to follow Satan to your eventual destruction.And if he’s embracing and encouraging spirit possession it can only get worse and pick up momentum while going down hill.He needs help and the right guidance.But how can you help a person who doesn’t acknowledge God and who feels he is God and has all the answers separate from God?
I have stated on a number of occasions “God” not “Kanye West” is responsible for your success and requires that you reciprocate in terms of fulfilling his will regarding abominable behavior and practices.And if not remember the primary election is fast approaching.
Focusing on Kanye West as the reason for the success of the Conservative Party is done as way to further a liberal agenda in regards to the promotion of sexual perversions and satanic devil worshipping which he obviously appears to be a proud spokesman and supporter of both abominable practices.. Stay tuned for an announcement regarding the midterms that will be fulfilled in accordance with God’s will and not because of anything Kanye West does.