Christians’ Worship the Moon God “Allah”!

Proof from the Bible itself.

 

By: Shahid Bin Waheed شاهد بن وحيد

 

My discoveries may shock many Christians, may disappoint many and perhaps anger many. But, again, facts cannot be denied especially when they are coming direct from Christian Bible. In this treatise we will discuss the following:

                                                                                                                                                                                         

1.     Jesus himself worshipped the Moon God “Allah”

2.     Moon God “Allah” is also the imaginary father of Jesus, and why?

3.     Even Christian scholars now admits the facts and have been attempting to correct false Christian’s belief

 

1

There will hardly few Christians who do not believe that Muslims’ worship the alleged Moon God “Allah.” On Internet Christian websites are full of so-called proofs of these absurd claims, while Christian missionaries have turned the world media upside down to propagate this claim. Many have become famous and sold their absurd audiotapes, videotapes, cds, and software not to mention books authoring about it and/or claiming that this is the truth. I have never written before on this subject, but I have been aware of all the claims that are being made 24/7/365 by Christians.

 

Perhaps, it may come as surprise to some that I am willing to take these claims as their face value for the sake of proving the astonishing fact that Jesus worshiped the Moon God Allah. And his imaginary father was also this Moon God Allah. Let me present the evidence from the Bible itself. Let us examine some passages from the English and Arabic Bibles. Readers are advised to note that Bible was centuries before translated in Arabic than it was translated into any other language including English. Therefore the Arabic Bible and Arab Christians’ belief is more correct than the English Bible and Christians’ belief in the West. I am saying that English Bible is more distorted than Arabic Bible.

1 Corinthians 1

1:1 Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:

1:3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

1:4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;

  بولس المدعو رسولا ليسوع المسيح بمشيئة الله وسوستانيس الاخ1

 2  الى كنيسة الله التي في كورنثوس المقدسين في المسيح يسوع المدعوين قديسين مع جميع الذين يدعون باسم ربنا يسوع المسيح في كل مكان لهم ولنا.

 3  نعمة لكم وسلام من الله ابينا والرب يسوع المسيح

 4  اشكر الهي في كل حين من جهتكم على نعمة الله المعطاة لكم في يسوع المسيح

1 Peter 1

1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

2  بمقتضى علم الله الآب السابق في تقديس الروح للطاعة ورشّ دم يسوع المسيح.لتكثر لكم النعمة والسلام

 3  مبارك الله ابو ربنا يسوع المسيح الذي حسب رحمته الكثيرة ولدنا ثانية لرجاء حيّ بقيامة يسوع المسيح من الاموات

Galatians 1

1:1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

1  بولس رسول لا من الناس ولا بانسان بل بيسوع المسيح والله الآب الذي اقامه من الاموات

John 1

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

1  في البدء كان الكلمة والكلمة كان عند الله وكان الكلمة الله.

 2  هذا كان في البدء عند الله.

Beside Christians, Jews also worship the Moon God “Allah.”

 

Genesis

1  في البدء خلق الله السموات والارض.

 2  وكانت الارض خربة وخالية وعلى وجه الغمر ظلمة وروح الله يرف على وجه المياه.

 3  وقال الله ليكن نور فكان نور.

1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Psalms 44

4  انت هو ملكي يا الله.فأمر بخلاص يعقوب

44:4 Thou art my King, O God: command deliverances for Jacob.

 

Points to be noted!

 

·        Readers can verify and reconcile all these verses quoted here from any Bible version be it in English or Arabic.

·        I have used color code or color matching system for simplification, thus, English speaking readers can choose a word in color and match the color in Arabic version for identical meaning or substitute in Arabic.

·        Notice that God is highlighted in Blue (English) and in Arabic the name or word Allah الله is highlighted and underlined in blue as well.

·        Citations from Old Testament and New Testament are the undeniable proof that Jews and Christian worships the Moon God Allah.

·        Bible was translated in Arabic before it was even translated in English. Thus, Jews and Christians were worshipping the Moon God Allah, long before the advent of Islam.

·        Another proof of Judeo-Christian worship of Moon God Allah, is that there is no denial from all these sides, neither non of the Arabic speaking Christian came forward and refuted Dr. Morey that he is wrong by alleging Muslims for worshipping the Moon God Allah. Since we Christians also worship the same Moon God.

·        Neither, we find any effort from Judeo-Christian side especially Arabic speaking Christians who got the Bible before Europeans that Allah is not a Moon God (Period).

·        Notice the name يسوع, we like to know that how this Yesu or Yessu became Jesus? Under what rule a noun especially a name has been changed into something totally different?

·        Notice for Paul we have in Arabic بولس this espouses the doubt that it is in fact “Police.” Since there is no “P” in Arabic, as there is no letter that makes sound of “P”. In Arabic, instead of “P” the letter “Baa ب” is used. For example Pakistan is written as Bakistan i.e. باكستان however, in Urdu and Persian (Both have letters sounding “P” i.e.  پ ) Thus, in both languages it will be written and sound both in “P” as پاكستان. Therefore, mentioning Paul as بولس Police may have the implication or suggestion that he was a corrupt cop. We know that he was a liar and he was a bounty hunter, who became all things to all people according to his own admission in the New Testament.

·      Paul in Urdu and Persian will be written as پال (with “P”) and in Arabic, in my opinion it will be written as بال (with “B”), therefore, Christians must explain from their own Bible that why they have this problem beside worshipping the Moon God Allah?

 

Moon God “Allah” is also the imaginary father of Jesus, and why?

 

Jesus and/or this يسوع was born in very strange circumstances and he grew up being raised by a single parent i.e. his mother. New Testament (the Christian Bible) tells us  (see Luke 1:28) that one guy came to Mary claiming to be an angel and had sex with Mary, resulting in pregnancy. Now we all know about smooth talking swindlers and/or con artists who dupe people leading them to believe in something that is not true. This con game is as old as the man on earth.

 

Now folks, picture a child who was born 2000 years ago to a single parent with a title to be a bastard and looked down by the society. This type of children becomes loners, sadistic, murders, daydreamers, psychopath, killers, who often have imaginary friends even in today’s’ society in the West, which is most tolerant to bastards and/or illegitimate children. For example, in USA alone 53% children each year are born out of wedlock. And we find often these children to be among those who I have highlighted in yellow. Therefore, when one’s illegitimate birth deprived him of his father's influence and one faces a harsh social boycott in a strict Jewish society than he is destined to be a loner and grow up playing with imaginary friends. In this case Jesus or يسوع neutralized his by his wild imagination that God is his father. This not only made him feel better, but rather superior to people of his township. Otherwise how one can justify a complete departure (of a Jewish boy was born to a Jewish mother out of wedlock) from his existing monotheistic religion to a complete bizarre rhetoric that is highly unintelligible. The only people dancing with joy then can possibly be the pagans, but certainly not the Jews. The most important reason such kind becomes psychopath, homosexuals, and bi-sexual because they are constant on an emotional roller coaster. They hate their mothers, as we learn from the Bible that this Jesus or يسوع was very disrespectful to his mother to a degree to be abusive as we read in,

 

John 2:1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
2:2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
2:3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
2:4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.
2:5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.

 

This is a typical and classic example to hating one’s mother, because person cannot forget and forgive what his mother did (even in some cases it was not her fault). Thus, we see that Jesus or يسوع is attacking his mother, perhaps thinking of his birth out of wedlock and for not having a father. Please read Behavioral Genetics and Freud--Life and Influences and Empirical Studies, this research documents indicate that most of the negative consequences that are encountered by children without father.

 

Finding: Adult children of divorced single mothers were significantly less likely than children from two-biological-parent families to complete high school and attend or graduate from college; they also had lower-status occupations and a significantly lower level of general psychological well-being. In contrast, children of widowed mothers were not significantly different from those from two-biological-parent families, with the exception of having ...

 

Timothy J. Biblarz
Journal of Marriage and the Family

 

Finding: Children who were born out of wedlock but who made the transition to an adoptive family or to a family with two biological parents were significantly more likely to complete high school than illegitimate children reared in other household arrangements. Among children who made the transition, 96 percent completed high school. Among children reared by a grandparent or other relative, 60 percent completed high school. Among those reared in ...

 

William S. Aquilino
Journal of Marriage and the Family
1996

 

Finding: Because it prevents subsequent marriage, out-of-wedlock childbearing traps many women and their children in poverty. "The adverse economic consequences of premarital childbearing . . . are not limited to the women experiencing such births. Their increased likelihood of future poverty is likely to have an intergenerational spillover effect: their children are less likely to complete high school, more likely to experience poverty, and more ...

 

Neil G. Bennett
Demography
1995

 

We read at Criminal Profiling Research Site. Scientific Offender Profiling that … More than half of those surveyed in the Criminal Personality Research Project (partially funded by the Justice Department, USA) had mental illness in their immediate family. Half had parents who had been involved in criminal activities. Nearly 70 percent had a familial history of alcohol or drug abuse. Every single one of the murderers were subjected to serious emotional abuse during their childhoods. All of them developed into what psychiatrists label as sexually dysfunctional adults, unable to sustain a mature, consensual relationship with another adult… From birth to age 6/7, studies have shown, the most important adult figure in a child's life under traditional circumstances is the mother, and it is this period that the child learns what love is. Relationships between the researched subjects and their mothers were uniformly cool, distant, unloving, neglectful, with very little touching, emotional warmth - the children were deprived of love. Sometimes the mother, even when nurturing, cannot balance out or offset the destructive behavior of the father. More than 70 percent said they had witnessed or been part of sexually stressful events when young. This percentage is many times greater than in the general population. The abuse that the children endured was both physical and mental. These children grew up in an environment in which their own actions were ignored, where there were no limits set on their behavior. That task of the first half-dozen years of life is socialization. Those who grow up to murder never truly comprehended the world in other than egocentric terms. It is true that most children who come from dysfunctional early childhoods don't go on to murder or to commit other violent antisocial acts - the reason might be that the majority are rescued by strong hands in the next phase of childhood, that of preadolescence.

 

At this point I like to remind the readers that we have no evidence of Mary being a loving and caring mother. We have no evidence that this Jesus or يسوع has an average and normal childhood, let alone exceptional. We have no evidence that Jesus or يسوع grew up in a very close-knit family where his uncle/s, aunt/s, or grandfather provided him love, affection and filled the gap of missing father.

Jesus or يسوع was born to a Jewish mother out of wedlock but it is safe to assume that his mother Mary may have raised him as a male Jew of that time. But Jesus or يسوع departure from Jewish monotheistic belief and passing on his imaginary father who is allegedly God is an obvious sign of his revolt against the faith and society of that time and Jesus or يسوع himself was a part of that. This attitude is a direct result of extreme sense of rejection. Saying, that if you don’t accept me than hell to you I reject you as well, which led to his attempt to start his own cult where he can make rules. This explains his rebellion against the Jewish norm when he attacked the temple with his gang. Jesus or يسوع  wanted to establish a sinless society by legalizing the sin and making them a norm. That is why Jesus or يسوع invited people to worship others gods like Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not the gods whom the Israelites knew; since they belonged to the category of ‘other gods.’ Whereas according to the Christians, Jesus or يسوع  invited the people of Israel to go after such other gods. A man-god or god-man who could be persecuted was also not known to the Israelites. The fact is that both (Christians & Jews) believe that Jesus or يسوع was put to death and his signs and miracles availed him not; as the Bible (Torah) tells us that ONLY the false prophet will be met with such fate.

We further read in Deuteronomy 034:010: And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face.

 

We read in Catholic Encyclopedia about illegitimate children, whether children born out of true marriage are illegitimate?

Objection 1. It would seem that children born out of true marriage are legitimate. For he that is born according to law is called a legitimate son. Now everyone is born according to law, at least the law of nature, which has more force than any other. Therefore every child is to be called legitimate.

Objection 2. Further, it is the common saying that a legitimate child is one born of a legitimate marriage, or of a marriage that is deemed legitimate in the eyes of the Church. Now it happens sometimes that a marriage is deemed legitimate in the eyes of the Church, whereas there is some impediment affecting its validity; which impediment may be known to the parties who marry in the presence of the Church: or they may marry in secret and be ignorant of the impediment, in which case their marriage would seem legitimate in the eyes of the Church, for the very reason that it is not prevented by the Church. Therefore children born out of true marriage are not illegitimate.

On the contrary, Illegitimate is that which is against the law. Now those who are born out of wedlock are born contrary to the law. Therefore they are illegitimate.

I answer that, Children are of four conditions. Some are natural and legitimate, for instance those who are born of a true and lawful marriage; some are natural and illegitimate, as those who are born of fornication; some are legitimate and not natural, as adopted children; some are neither legitimate nor natural; such are those born of adultery or incest, for these are born not only against the positive law, but against the express natural law. Hence we must grant that some children are illegitimate.

Reply to Objection 1. Although those who are born of an unlawful intercourse are born according to the nature common to man and all animals, they are born contrary to the law of nature which is proper to man: since fornication, adultery, and the like are contrary to the law of nature. Hence the like are not legitimate by any law.

Reply to Objection 2. Ignorance, unless it be affected, excuses unlawful intercourse from sin. Wherefore those who contract together in good faith in the presence of the Church, although there be an impediment, of which however they are ignorant, sin not, nor are their children illegitimate. If, however, they know of the impediment, although the Church upholds their marriage because she knows not of the impediment, they are not excused from sin, nor do their children avoid being illegitimate. Neither are they excused if they know not of the impediment and marry secretly, because such ignorance would appear to be affected.

Whether children should suffer any loss through being illegitimate?

Objection 1. It would seem that children ought not to suffer any loss through being illegitimate. For a child should not be punished on account of his father's sin, according to the Lord's saying (Ezech. 18:20). But it is not his own but his father's fault that he is born of an unlawful union. Therefore he should not incur a loss on this account.

Objection 2. Further, human justice is copied from Divine. Now God confers natural goods equally on legitimate and illegitimate children. Therefore illegitimate should be equaled to legitimate children according to human laws.

On the contrary, it is stated (Gn. 25:5,6) that "Abraham gave all his possessions to Isaac, and that to the children of the concubines he gave gifts": and yet the latter were not born of an unlawful intercourse. Much more, therefore, ought those born of an unlawful intercourse to incur loss by not inheriting their father's property.

I answer that, A person is said to incur a loss for some cause in two ways: First, because he is deprived of his due, and thus an illegitimate child incurs no loss. Secondly, because something is not due to him, which might have been due otherwise, and thus an illegitimate son incurs a twofold loss. First because he is excluded from legitimate acts such as offices and dignities, which require a certain respectability in those who perform them. Secondly, he incurs a loss by not succeeding to his father's inheritance. Nevertheless natural sons can inherit a sixth only, whereas spurious children cannot inherit any portion, although by natural law their parents are bound to provide for their needs. Hence it is part of a bishop's care to compel both parents to provide for them.

Reply to Objection 1. To incur a loss in this second way is not a punishment. Hence we do not say that a person is punished by not succeeding to the throne through not being the king's son. In like manner it is no punishment to an illegitimate child that he has no right to that which belongs to the legitimate children.

Reply to Objection 2. Illegitimate intercourse is contrary to the law, not as an act of the generative power, but as proceeding from a wicked will. Hence an illegitimate son incurs a loss, not in those things, which come to him by his natural origin, but in those things, which are dependent on the will for being done or possessed.

Whether an illegitimate son can be legitimized?

Objection 1. It would seem that an illegitimate son couldn’t be legitimized. For the legitimate child is as far removed from the illegitimate as the illegitimate from the legitimate. But a legitimate child is never made illegitimate. Neither, therefore, is an illegitimate child ever made legitimate.

Objection 2. Further, illegitimate intercourse begets an illegitimate child. But illegitimate intercourse never becomes legitimate. Neither, therefore, can an illegitimate son become legitimate.

On the contrary, what is done by the law can be undone by the law. Now the illegitimacy of children is an effect of positive law. Therefore an illegitimate child can be legitimized by one who has legal authority.

I answer that, An illegitimate child can be legitimized, not so that he be born of a legitimate intercourse, because this intercourse is a thing of the past and can never be legitimized from the moment that it was once illegitimate. But the child is said to be legitimized, in so far as the losses, which an illegitimate child ought to incur, are withdrawn by the authority of the law.

There are six ways of becoming legitimate: two according to the canons (Cap. Conquestus; Cap. Tanta), namely when a man marries the woman of whom he has an unlawful child (if it were not a case of adultery), and by special indulgence and dispensation of the lord Pope. The other four ways are according to the laws: (1) If the father offer his natural son to the emperor's court, for by this very fact the son is legitimate on account of the reputation of the court; (2) if the father designate him in his will as his legitimate heir, and the son afterwards offer the will to the emperor; (3) if there be no legitimate son and the son himself offer himself to the emperor; (4) if the father designate him as legitimate in a public document or in a document signed by three witnesses, without calling him natural.

Reply to Objection 1. A favor may be bestowed on a person without injustice, but a person cannot be damnified except for a fault. Hence an illegitimate child can be legitimized rather than "vice versa"; for although a legitimate son is sometimes deprived of his inheritance on account of his fault, he is not said to be illegitimate, because he was legitimately begotten.

Reply to Objection 2. Illegitimate intercourse has an inherent inseparable defect whereby it is opposed to the law: and consequently it cannot be legitimized. Nor is there any comparison with an illegitimate child who has no such defect.

 

Another source tells us a different story, which entertained the possibility of such happening as well. We read in the following  excerpts from an article by David Wolfe,

 

HOW WAS JESUS CONCEIVED?

DID MARY HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH ZECHARIAH?

 The Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ is extremely significant and precious to all who truly believe the Bible (Isaiah 7:10-14, Matthew 1:18-23, Luke 1:26-37). The Unification Church denies the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ. In fact, IT IS TAUGHT IN THE UNIFICATION CHURCH THAT JESUS WAS AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD, CONCEIVED THROUGH MARY HAVING A SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH ZECHARIAH THE FATHER OF JOHN THE BAPTIST!

Rev. Moon has taught:

"Jesus was born of a father and mother, just as any one else is...." "To satisfy your curiosity, I can explain very plainly. But since Christians believe that Jesus was born of a virgin by the Holy Spirit, and God's primary object of this dispensation is Christians...If I explain everything plainly about the birth of Jesus, it may stumble many Christians in accepting God's new dispensation. Therefore, I don't want to explain everything too plainly here. (Sun Myung Moon, Master Speaks-7:"Bible Interpretation," 1965, p.4.)

These statements were made in 1965. Through the years it has been a secret inner teaching within the Unification Church, passed on by word of mouth, that Mary had sex with Zechariah and that this is how Jesus was conceived. Many former Unification Church members have testified to this. But this was an "inner" teaching reserved for members, which they tried to keep hidden from outsiders, particularly Christians! Some Unification Church members have even lied--denying that this is taught in their Church. But in a recent Unification Church book, published by its own publishing company, entitled The Victory of Love, the Unification Church teaches under the heading of, "ELIZABETH AND MARY--THE FOUNDATION OF CHRISTIANITY":

"Elizabeth also showed her good heart in the way she supported Zechariah. She knew what happened to Mary and Zechariah, but she absolutely and unconditionally supported them." (Purportedly by the spirit of Heung Jin Nim Moon, The Victory of Love, New York, NY: The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, 1992, p. 210.)

 

On p. 251 of the same book, the Unification Church teaches:

"Elizabeth's child and Leah's children were in the elder son position while Mary's child and Rachel's child were in the younger son position. John and Jesus, as elder and younger brother, had to unite to indemnify the failure of Joseph and his brothers." (Ibid., p. 251.)

And on p. 17 of this same Unification Church book, the Unification Church teaches CONCERNING JESUS:

"He was so sensitive. The neighbors kept persecuting him because he was illegitimate. His younger sister was the only one who loved him, but she was not enough. Not enough for him to grow his heart to be the prince of heaven. His parents totally misunderstood him. Zechariah kicked him out and refused to have anything to do with him." (Ibid., p. 17.)

Putting these statements together we can see that the Unification Church teaches that something happened between Mary and Zechariah, that John the Baptist was Jesus' older brother, that Jesus was illegitimate and that Zechariah was his father!

Rev. Moon seems to be getting bolder lately. In a speech he gave to Unification Church members August 1, 1993 (with Unification Church members responding), Sun Myung Moon proclaimed:

"Who was Jesus' father? Christians say that Jesus was born to a virgin. Without man is it possible to conceive? [Impossible.] Who is Jesus' father? [Zechariah.] Who taught that? [You did.] Several times in six months I said that. Who is Jesus' father? Zechariah." (Sun Myung Moon, "Declaration of Return to the Home Country," speech given August 1, 1993 at Tarrytown, New York, translated by Sang Kil Han, from the Unification Church member magazine Today's World, October 1993, p.9.)

In a speech given February 7, 1995 Rev. Moon taught Unification Church members:

"Who was the father of Jesus Christ? [Zechariah.] Zechariah. ...The result of the relationship between Zechariah and Mary was the birth of Jesus Christ ....All these historical events led up to John the Baptist's younger sister being in the position to become Jesus' wife. With Jesus destined to be in the elder son's position, John the Baptist's younger sister would have become Jesus' wife and all of history would have been restored. ...Thus Jesus and John the Baptist's sister had the same father but different mothers. ...John the Baptist knew very well that Jesus Christ was an illegitimate child. When John the Baptist received the revelation that Jesus was God's beloved son, he could not accept that an illegitimate person was the Messiah. Under these circumstances, for Jesus to marry John the Baptist's younger sister was unacceptable. Although they had different mothers, they were both children of Zechariah. How could people accept such an incestuous relationship? (Sun Myung Moon, "A New Dimension Is Beginning," speech given February 7, 1995 at a Unification Church Leaders' Conference in Washington, D.C., and recorded in the Unification Church member magazine Today's World, April 1995, pp. 11-12.)

 

 

 

Even Christian scholars now admit the facts and have been attempting to correct false Christian belief!

 

Now even Christian scholars like Robert W. Funk (Founder of Jesus Seminar and author of many books to name couple are: The Five Gospels and Honest To Jesus) are saying that it is OK to accept the fact that Jesus was a bastard, let me quote from page 313 of Honest to Jesus:

 

“19. Redeem sex and Mary, Jesus’ mother, by resorting to Jesus a biological if not actual father. Virginity is not necessarily godly, except in an ascetic, pleasure-denying, dualistic world. And Jesus is not necessarily a more effective savior for having been born without a father. Celebrate all aspects of life by giving Mary her rights as a woman, even if it means acknowledging that Jesus may have been a bastard. A bastard messiah is a more evocative redeemer figure than an unblemished lamb of God.” …

 

On page 314 we read:

 

21. “Declare the New Testament a highly uneven and biased record of various attempt to invent Christianity. Reopen the question of what documents belong among the founding witnesses…”

 

Conclusion!

 

After examining the facts and evidence from the very Bible, it is obvious that Jesus or يسوع worshipped the Moon God Allah, and Christians subsequently following their sham god Jesus or يسوع also worship the same Moon God Allah, as quotes from the very Bible cited above are the proof. No Christian can deny this fact including Dr. Morey; I challenge him or any other Christian to prove me wrong. The proof is coming from the Bible itself not some false myth of archeology.

 

Tuesday, January 22, 2004

Home Page