Home > Radical Islam, Theology and Eschatology, Wars and Rumors of War > The Man of Lawlessness and the Burning of the Qur’an

The Man of Lawlessness and the Burning of the Qur’an


By Jack Smith

Behind my desk is a newly framed picture that has special meaning to me. It is a picture of the Dome of the Rock, the Muslim religious shrine that memorializes Muhammad’s “night journey” and his heavenly rendezvous with Allah. Superimposed on the picture are the words, “…only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.  And then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth…” 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8.

It was in my study of 2 Thessalonians 2 that God revealed the first “piece” of the “Islamic Paradigm” puzzle, that is, Islam is the fulfillment of Bible prophecy of an antichrist empire that will rise up in the last days to wage “holy war” against the world (Revelation 13:1-10). The spiritual meaning behind the Dome of the Rock was the first revelation of that Paradigm (see “Introduction, p XI, Islam the Cloak of Antichrist). The Dome of the Rock is not an Islamic worship center, i.e., a mosque. The Dome of the Rock is an octagonal, domed structure that “stands over” a massive rock (“Rock”) located on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. There is nothing else located within the Dome of the Rock other than the Rock itself, and the marble, columned structure that foreshadows and encloses it.

Marble columns over the Rock

Marble columns over the Rock

When I began my personal study of Islam in the Fall of 2001, one of the first books I purchased on Muslim Holy War (and, in fact, the only book I found on the specific topic) was entitled, “Jihad,” by Paul Fregosi, Prometheus Books, 1998. The opening Introduction (page 19) states:

The Jihad, the Islamic so-called Holy War, has been a fact of life in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Near and Middle East for more than 1300 years, but this is the first history of the Muslim wars of Europe ever published. Hundreds of books, however, have appeared on its Christian counterpart, the Crusades, …. The Jihad has been the most unrecorded and disregarded major event of history. It has, in fact, been largely ignored. … In the New South Wales State Library, where I did part of my research while in Australia, there were 108 entries listed in their catalogue cards for the Crusades, but only two for the Jihad! The Jihad has been largely bypassed by Western historians, and this book is an attempt to right the situation, …   (Emphasis in italics, mine).

Jihad was published in 1998, three years before 9/11. Fregosi states, “this is the first history of the Muslim wars ever to be published… The Jihad has been the most unrecorded and disregarded major event of history.”  Why? Why have the Muslim holy wars not been reported in the same way that the Crusades have been reported? Why so meticulously report on the Crusades and use them as “fodder”  to malign Christianity, and report virtually nothing on Muslim holy war? Why have the pens of historians, both American, European, and Muslim omitted the murderous actions of the mujahideen of Islam for almost 1400 years?

In fact, it is embarrassing for me to admit it, but when I first began my study of Islam after 9/11, I was somehow either unaware of it, or had forgotten, that the Middle East at the time of the Quranic revelation to Muhammad (610 A.D.) was predominantly Christian. The land that Christ once walked, the lands that the Apostle Paul planted churches, the entire Middle East, north Africa, Iran, Iraq, and Turkey, were predominantly Christian. Certainly, not a “unified” Christianity, but Christian all the same. In fact, the seven churches of Revelation 2 and 3 were all located in modern day Turkey.  Then, jihad occurred.  And, Christianity was “killed off.”  Here is how historian, Phillip Jenkins describes it in his book, “The Lost History of Christianity” (p. 30):

Given that the destruction of Christianity has not been much studied, we can make certain general observations, stressing above all the role of states. Though churches may lose political influence under Christian states or in predominantly Christian societies, though they might be secularized, they do not vanish. … In most of these cases, churches collapsed or vanished because they were unable to cope with the pressures placed upon them by hostile regimes, mainly Muslim. While religions might sicken and fade, they do not die of their own accord:  they must be killed.  (Emphasis in italics, mine)

Christianity was “killed” in the Middle East.  By Islam. After 9/11, there was a mantra that frequently appeared in public: “We will not forget.”  We may not have forgotten 9/11, but we have forgotten the Christianity that once predominated the Middle East. How have we forgotten?  I propose that the reason is because the prince of darkness, satan, has “restrained” the world’s understanding; he has covered it up much like the spirit of the antichrist has veiled the minds of humanity to the only Begotten God, Jesus the Christ (2 John 2:18, 21-22). The Apostle Paul puts it this way:

2 Corinthians 4:3-4, 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

This is precisely the meaning of 2 Thessalonians 2:7, “For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work;” only “he who now restrains” will do so until he is “taken out of the way.” The one who “restrains” is the spirit of antichrist (satan and his “minions”). He “restrains” so that humanity will not know the identity of the instrument through whom he will practice his “mystery of lawlessness.”  The spirit of antichrist will continue to “restrain,” according to 2 Thessalonians 2:7, “until he is taken out of the way.” That occurred on September 11, 2001; when the world watched in unbelief as  the lives of thousands of innocent were taken.  On that day, President Bush referred to the perpetrators as “faceless cowards.” Not sure if I agree with that description. The “face” of the perpetrator was revealed that day: when the Islamists cried out in their last moments, “Allahu Akbar!” “Allahu Akbar!” “Allah is Great!” “Allah is Great!,” the face of the enemy was revealed, and, the mask that so completely covered his face was lifted ever so slightly — for the world was first made aware of the mystery of lawlessness that has so disguised itself in Islam for hundreds of years. The “restrainer,” having now been moved out of the way, will not only reveal the identity of satan’s instrument, but also use the very nature of the enemy, destruction, muck like a “fingerprint” left behind at a crime scene. The true nature of Islam will continue to be revealed to humanity – but only to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear (2 Thessalonians 2:10-11; Revelation 13:4), until the return of the Lamb of God.

Afghanistan has filled our news lately.

Afghanistan Protestors (Reuters photo)

Afghanistan Protestors (Reuters photo)

Why do I mention this event in the context of 2 Thessalonians 2?  Because it is evidence of exactly what I am stating. The mystery of lawlessness is not being restrained anymore. Evil is having its way — the holy book of Islam was burned, and people are killed! The evidence of the removal of restraint is not only in the killings, but in our expectation that death will soon occur and claim another victim in honor of Allah.  We know this happens when Islam, its Allah, or its ”prophet” is blasphemed.  This is why the apologies came so quickly from every place in the non-Muslim West — to try and pacify the lust of death by prostrating ourselves in subjection, and immediate pleas of apology. Perhaps, if we hold those accountable for such despicable acts, we can satisfy the lust of lawlessness.  We know that when Muslims get “lawless,” people die. People get killed.

Here is a post I received on my blog in response to the article — What Does the Qur’an Say About its Burning?  Blogger “Blickmancin James” wrote:

it is 2012, everyone knows by now that burning a koran would lead to violent protest… its like someone ‘accidentally’ drawing a cartoon of muhammad.  innocent people in places like nigeria would be killed over this (after friday prayers)

My point? Yes, we all know — after all, its 2012, not 9/11/2001.  It has taken us over ten years, but for the one who has “eyes to see and ears to hear,” the violence of the “mystery of lawlessness” is shouting loudly.

One last point.  Did you realize that of the over thirty who have died in retaliation for the Qur’an burning, only 4 (at least from what I read) were non-Muslims? How do you explain the 26 Muslim deaths at the hands of other Muslims? Afghanistan is Sunni Islam. The Taliban is also Sunni Muslim.  This is not sectarian violence where Sunnis kill Shi’ites and vice versa.  This is death for the sake of death.  It is not death to Americans, but death to anyone, because the objective is not justice, but death for death’s sake.  Why so?  Because the hand behind it all is satan. Pure evil.  Evil that is only satisfied by evil; and the more it is satisfied, the more it will lust for more. It is this evil that is the root of satan’s masquerade behind Islam.

The mystery of lawlessness and the man of lawlessness, the antichrist spirit of satan, will become more and more bold. This boldness will escalate until the end of the tribulation period. Then, the “… Lord will slay [the man of lawlessness] with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of his coming.” (2 Thessalonians 2:8).

Source – When The Pieces Fit

  1. Willard
    02/29/2012 at 1:41 PM

    Excellent article Jack – I have wondered many times why did Islam replace Christianity in the ME. Was it because the Christian community became non relevant or neglected God giving Satan the opportunity to replace it with Islam??

    And you are right right it has become simply death for deaths sake. Not only Afghanistan but Iraq, the PA suicide bombers. Even with what is happening in Syria today can only be Satan inspired.

    Like

  2. 02/29/2012 at 3:58 PM

    Good article. I was hoping you would discuss in more detail your thoughts on the Dome of the Rock – seems like you began to make a point and didn’t finish.

    Like

  3. 02/29/2012 at 4:24 PM

    Kurt – the full detail on the Dome of the Rock is at http://www.whenthepiecesfit.org, chapter 4. The entire chapter is devoted to the Dome of the Rock being the fulfillment of Matthew 24:15, the abomination of desolation that is “standing in the holy place.” The post already had 2000 words and so I had to limit my article to 2 Thess 2 rather than include Matt 24. I had started down that road, but had to change direction because of length. You are right on about the point about to be made.

    Like

    • 03/01/2012 at 12:15 AM

      Jack, its actually chapter 6, but I found it. A lot of good info you’ve put together, very insightful.

      There is a glaring omission however, and I want to ask you about it: Why have you ignored the events of 70 AD? THAT is the (visible) beginning of the AoD, and the rest of the realities you cited could not have occurred without it. The actual beginning, of course, is the Jews national rejection of their Messiah, and the desolation that became of it. The siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple is why the people were told to flee by Jesus, and needed to. He was talking to that generation. Your construct does not adequately address why Jesus told Jerusalem they needed to flee – because the Romans would go on to slaughter a million of them.

      And if you were to include it, it would negate one of your major points: That the 7th Century Christians living in Jerusalem gave away “the word of their testimony” by submitting to Islam and the dhimmi status – wouldn’t they be doing the same if they were to “flee” at the appearance of Islam and its Dome of the Rock? No the “fleeing” was to have occurred in 70 AD.

      Like I said, you’ve gotten a lot right; I appreciate that you’ve put your book on line for anyone to read it. The DotR is certainly a visible evidence of the AoD, but it is not the AoD itself. That came, as I said, with the rejection of the Messiah, seen visibly in the destruction of the temple; the Jewish system of worship, with that destruction, was left desolate. And yes, now an abomination sits in its place.

      Like

      • 03/01/2012 at 3:46 PM

        Kurt – one of the problems we have with Matt 24 is the time within which it is fuflilled. You mentioned v 24:16 “then those who are in Judea should flee to the mountains….” But notice 24:15, which refers to the “abomination of desolation that is … standing in the holy place.” I have considered whether this passage is referring to the fall of Jerusalem. My difficulty is that the passage refers to the AofD “standing in the holy place.” The Temple was standing in the holy place when the Romans destroyed it in the first Jewish rebellion. So how could the passage be referring to 70 AD? Verses 24:15-16 surely seem to be one unit to me. I do concur, however, that this event was the “first step” to fulfillment, but I do not see it as the major step (in spite of what so many very qualified prophecy students hold). The major event occurs only when the AofD is standing in the holy place. There are two possible fulfillments. The first was in 132 AD when Emperor Hadrian renamed Jerusalem, “Aelia Capitolina” (after himself). He build a Temple to Zeus on the Temple Mount and this event was the watershed event resulting in the 2nd Jewish rebellion. The Jews lost this rebellion also, and following this rebellion, Jews were no longer allowed in Jerusalem but under threat of death. This event more properly fufills Matt 24:15-16 because there is a blasphemous structure standing in the holy place when Jews must “flee to the mountains.”

        The second possible fulfillment of 24:15-16 is the Dome of the Rock’s construction in 692 AD. I see the latter event as the fulfillment because I interpret Islam, not Rome, to be the fulfillment of end-times prophecies. In order for 24:15-16 to apply to Rome (not Islam) then one must also hold to the Roman Paradigm. To me, all the “pieces must fit.” Rome doesnt fit the other pieces so the prophecy must be referencing Islam instead.

        Also, to demonstrate the difficulty of the “when” of fulfillment of Matt 24, notice 24:14 which states, “…the gospel…shall be preached in the whole world for a witness to the nations, and then the end shall come.” Certainly, the verses immediately preceding the prophecy of the AofD are not speaking of fulfillment with the Jews in the time of Christ, so why must 24:16 apply (solely) to the Jews in time of Christ? Verse 24:11 prophesies of the coming of many false prophets. Are you saying that this prophecy applies to the people at time of Rome’s destruction of Jerusalem and prior? Not sure I am with you there.

        Finally, it is not that the Dome of the Rock is itself the abomination of desolation, but it embodies and symbolizes that spiritual event wherein the Christians of the Middle East became bereft of the Savior who walked thier streets and died on Calvary on their behalf. Evangelism post 7th century A.D. did not occur in the Middle East. Christians “gave away their testimony,” and in the process the land was bereft of Christ. In the giving away of their testimony, the Dhimmis (Christians under Muslim dominion after 638 AD) gave away the “word of their testimony” (Rev 12:11), the specific means by which they overcame the dragon. They rendered this land absent of Christ just as Antiochus IV had done to the Jews in 167BC when he rendered the Temple “unclean” by his sacrific of a pig on the altar of sacrifice. Antiochus’ abomination of desolation became the “type” to identfity the next abomination desolation, but this one to Christianity, not to Judasim. The first Jewish rebellion was a Jewish rebellion, not a Christian rebellion. Rome attempted to silence the Jews not the Christians. Christians may have experienced hardship when Rome fell, but they were not the primary targets — Jews were. Christianity was not prohibited as a religion when Jerusalem fell to the Romans, nor were Christians ever expelled from Jerusalem. When the Muslims overcame Jerusalem, Christians were not expelled either; however, the prohibition of evangelism had the exact same impact — it just took a generation (or two) for the same thing to occur. It is not the “Jewish system of worship” that is the abomination; rather, it is Christianity. Othewise, why would Christ warn of “false Christs” that would come in the end-times (24:24)?

        The Dome is, first and foremost, a blasphemy of Jesus Christ (by denial of his Sonship). Christ is blasphemed in Muhammad’s “night journey” to talk with Allah. Muhammad passes Jesus Chrsit and John the Baptist who share the first rung of the heavenly ladder together. These two can ascend no higher, and only Muhammad is able to ascend all the way to heaven to speak with Allah. Not even Gabriel will join him for the final entry to heaven to speak with Allah. The Dome’s presence on the Rock is a blasphemy of God since God said that whomever approached him, improperly, would die. Muslims tread the Temple Mount daily.

        Like

        • Kurt J
          03/03/2012 at 9:38 PM

          Jack: But notice 24:15, which refers to the “abomination of desolation that is … standing in the holy place.” I have considered whether this passage is referring to the fall of Jerusalem. My difficulty is that the passage refers to the AofD “standing in the holy place.” The Temple was standing in the holy place when the Romans destroyed it in the first Jewish rebellion. So how could the passage be referring to 70 AD?

          Kurt: When the temple was destroyed, the Roman soldiers were crawling all over the mount in order to tear it down stone by stone; this is what “standing in the holy place” refers to. And then once the temple was gone, anyone could stand in the holy place (except a devout Jew). Also—how do you know that no other structure was constructed on the site between AD 70 and 132?

          Jack: Also, to demonstrate the difficulty of the “when” of fulfillment of Matt 24, notice 24:14 which states, “…the gospel…shall be preached in the whole world for a witness to the nations, and then the end shall come.” Certainly, the verses immediately preceding the prophecy of the AofD are not speaking of fulfillment with the Jews in the time of Christ, so why must 24:16 apply (solely) to the Jews in time of Christ? Verse 24:11 prophesies of the coming of many false prophets. Are you saying that this prophecy applies to the people at time of Rome’s destruction of Jerusalem and prior? Not sure I am with you there.

          Kurt: No I’m not saying that, but are you saying that verses 4-14 were fulfilled before 692? I KNOW I am not with you there. No, those verses are an overview of the time from then to the end of the age, and then Jesus goes back to the specifics of the answers to the questions that were asked.

          Jack: Finally, it is not that the Dome of the Rock is itself the abomination of desolation, but it embodies and symbolizes that spiritual event wherein the Christians of the Middle East became bereft of the Savior who walked thier streets and died on Calvary on their behalf.

          Kurt: The abomination IS the desolation, not that the land was desolate because of an abomination. The middle east is not desolate because of a structure built on the temple mount; the Jews are desolate, an abominable desolation, because they have rejected Christ.

          Jack: Evangelism post 7th century A.D. did not occur in the Middle East. Christians “gave away their testimony,” and in the process the land was bereft of Christ. In the giving away of their testimony, the Dhimmis (Christians under Muslim dominion after 638 AD) gave away the “word of their testimony” (Rev 12:11), the specific means by which they overcame the dragon. They rendered this land absent of Christ just as Antiochus IV had done to the Jews in 167BC when he rendered the Temple “unclean” by his sacrific of a pig on the altar of sacrifice.

          Kurt: That is all true, and is pictured by those prophecies, but is not the fulfillment of them.

          Jack: Antiochus’ abomination of desolation became the “type” to identfity the next abomination desolation, but this one to Christianity, not to Judasim.

          Kurt: No, Jesus was addressing his people, the chosen people, the Jews. It is not an AoD of Christians, but of Jews, at least “natural” Israel. This is the central error of your theory.

          Jack: The Dome is, first and foremost, a blasphemy of Jesus Christ (by denial of his Sonship). Christ is blasphemed in Muhammad’s “night journey” to talk with Allah. Muhammad passes Jesus Chrsit and John the Baptist who share the first rung of the heavenly ladder together. These two can ascend no higher, and only Muhammad is able to ascend all the way to heaven to speak with Allah. Not even Gabriel will join him for the final entry to heaven to speak with Allah. The Dome’s presence on the Rock is a blasphemy of God since God said that whomever approached him, improperly, would die. Muslims tread the Temple Mount daily.

          Yes, these are good points, I totally agree.

          Like

        • Kurt J
          03/03/2012 at 9:42 PM

          Jack, I also meant to say, you ignore the synoptic gospels related to the destruction of the temple, the topic at hand, and major points of the passage, such as the Jews are to flee, in the interest of trying to understand “standing in the holy place”. While admittedly this is a difficult phrase, you can’t throw out the other imploring statements of Jesus to satisfy only that one.

          Like

  4. ICA
    02/29/2012 at 10:33 PM

    I have a different take on the “restrainer” of 2 Thessalonians 2. Paul has two subjects in view:

    1) The “man of sin/lawlessness” (2:3 – Subject 1)
    2) A restrainer, (2:7 – Subject 2) — the principle here is described in personal terms as “he who holds back/restrains”

    2 Thess 2:3, “Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for [that day will not come] until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.”

    2 Thess 2:7, “For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.”

    The Greek for “taken out of the way” is “ginomai ek mesos” and the word “ginomai” is a deponent verb (middle for active voice), so it need not mean removal by an outside force, but rather removal through a determined act on the part of the subject. That is to say, the Restrainer moves himself out of the way or the midst by stepping aside or getting out from in between. To be “taken out of the way” does not mean to be completely removed as some suggest but simply means to cease from standing in between or to refrain from actively restraining. The closest English translation for 2 Thess 2:7 is found in the NLT:

    2 Thess 2:7, “For this lawlessness is already at work secretly, and it will remain secret until the one who is holding it back steps out of the way.”

    The word for “restrain” is katechō and it carries with it the sense of seizing, or detaining, or hindering. Paul’s language does not imply that the “man of sin/lawlessness” is seizing or detaining or hindering himself from being unveiled. Rather, the language strongly suggests in my view that it is a separate subject entirely that is performing this determined action. In fact, to seize or detain or hinder implies an action that is being done against the will of the one being seized/detained/hindered. It makes little sense in my mind for the man of sin/lawlessness to be seizing/detaining/hindering himself against his own will. Rather, the texts infers that someone greater than the man of sin/lawlessness is restraining him by force. This alone is a very good reason why a history of Greek translators, scholars and theologians understood two subjects in view and rendered virtually all translations the way that they did.

    But this begs the question: Who is restraining the “man of lawlessness”? Is it the Holy Spirit or the Church as some claim? I find no evidence for that in Scripture at all. But I do find strong evidence of something else entirely.

    When Paul told the Christians of Thessalonica about the revealing of the “man of lawlessness”, the one “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” (2:4) he was obviously alluding directly to the Prophet Daniel (Daniel 11:36-37) who spoke of the exact same event:

    Dan 11:36-37, “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 … for he shall magnify himself above all.”

    In fact, Paul even continues by saying, “Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” (2:5). Told them what things? The things that were written in the Book of Daniel. Keep in mind that up until then, the Old Testament was their only Scriptural reference to draw from. After Paul reminds them that he told them these things from the Book of Daniel, he then continues, “And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time” (2:6). So, given the fact that Paul references the end of Daniel 11, what else does Daniel say that Paul’s words would have caused them to remember? A few verses later Daniel writes:

    Dan 12:1, “At that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, Even to that time. And at that time your people shall be delivered, Every one who is found written in the book.”

    Here we discover that Archangel Michael has watched over the people of God throughout history and even today, but that a time would come when Michael will “stand up”. The Hebrew word for “stand up” in Dan 12:1 is “amad” (H5975) and it means “to stand aside or stand still, stop (moving or doing), to cease.” How do we know that this is the intended meaning? The context. We know because AFTER Michael does this we read about “a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time”.

    Bingo. This should immediately sound familiar to us. 2 Thess 2:7 says “For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.” As was mentioned above, the word “ginomai” need not mean removal by an outside force, but rather removal through a determined act on the part of the subject. The Restrainer moves himself out of the way or the midst by stepping aside or getting out from in between, and once he does this THEN the “lawless one” will be revealed (2 Thess 2:8). Look at what Jesus says in Matthew 24:15,21:

    Matt 24:14,21, “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place … then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.”

    This is exactly what the prophet Daniel said would happen when Michael steps aside, that “there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time,” and this is precisely what Paul reminded the Christians of Thessalonica about so that they would remember.

    Because of this, I believe that the restrainer is therefore Archangel Michael.

    Like

  5. 02/29/2012 at 10:46 PM

    Ultimately God is the restrainer, in either scenario. He commands that the restraint be removed in the case of Michael, and He takes the enemy out of the way if it is Satan. God determines when it is time for the man of lawlessness to be revealed.

    Like

  6. ICA
    02/29/2012 at 10:51 PM

    Kurt J. :

    Ultimately God is the restrainer, in either scenario. He commands that the restraint be removed in the case of Michael, and He takes the enemy out of the way if it is Satan. God determines when it is time for the man of lawlessness to be revealed.

    The early church believed that Michael was uncreated, eternal, the Theophanic “Angel of the Lord” (not to be confused with the created, corrupted version taught by Jehovah’s Witnesses). If Michael is indeed the Christophanic angel, then He is God Himself. It can be argued that there is very strong Scriptural support for that position.

    Like

  7. 03/01/2012 at 12:37 AM

    Jack I bought the book and it was a good read and point of view on the A/C

    Like

  8. AtHisFeet
    09/03/2012 at 3:11 PM

    I actually find the identification of satan and his minions as the restrainer quite compelling. I mean, think about it: Who has the most to lose when these final events are allowed to unfold? It isn’t out of the question to consider that satan himself would like to hold off the final countdown as long as possible, because once that begins “he knows his time is short”.

    Here is an article by Reggie Kelly that I think makes a good case and some really interesting reading:

    http://the.mysteryofisrael.org/2012/02/27/you-know-what-is-restraining/

    AHF

    Like

  1. No trackbacks yet.

The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of MidnightWatcher's Blogspot. Although differences of opinion are welcomed, please refrain from personal attacks and inappropriate language. This blog reserves the right to edit or delete any comments that fail to do so.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: