https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j491kPpcMk&t=249s

Although Christ Was Born Into A Jewish Family, There Are No Verses That Explicitly Identify Him As Jewish. For Example, Being Born Into A Mormon Family Does Not Necessarily Mean That I Will Follow The Mormon Faith Myself. Similarly, Christ's Lineage Does Not Automatically Define His Beliefs Or Identity. He Is The Son Of God And Cannot Be Limited To Any Particular Ancestry.
The God You Worship In Judaism, Whom You Refer To As Your Savior, Is Different From The Christian Understanding Of God As Depicted In The Holy Bible. The God I Worship Is The God Of The Holy Bible, While The Deity You Follow In Judaism Is Not The Christian God And Is Regarded As An Entirely Different Deity. This Distinction Is Well Supported By Some Of Your Postings At Your Last Days Watchman Channel Were You Constantly Favor Your Jewish God Of The Underworld.

The matter of Jesus's identity, particularly concerning his Jewish heritage and the theological implications thereof, presents a complex subject. While it is undeniable that Jesus was born into a Jewish family, as historical accounts and biblical narratives attest, the assertion that this automatically defines his beliefs or restricts his identity is a point of contention.

From a purely genealogical perspective, Jesus's lineage is traced through Jewish ancestry. However, the mere fact of birth into a particular family or community does not inherently dictate an individual's faith or spiritual allegiance. To draw a parallel, one might consider the example of an individual born into a Mormon family. While the familial context may provide exposure to Mormon teachings and traditions, the individual's ultimate acceptance and adherence to Mormonism remain a matter of personal choice and conviction.

In the case of Jesus, the central tenet of Christian theology revolves around his divine nature as the Son of God. This understanding transcends the limitations of earthly ancestry. The Christian perspective posits that Jesus's identity is not confined to his Jewish lineage but rather encompasses a divine essence that transcends cultural or ethnic boundaries.

Furthermore, the nature of God is a fundamental distinction between Judaism and Christianity. While both faiths share a common historical and scriptural foundation, their respective understandings of the divine differ significantly. The Christian conception of God, as revealed in the Holy Bible, is distinct from the Jewish understanding of God. This divergence extends to the roles and attributes ascribed to the deity, leading to differing theological interpretations and practices.

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kotBhrGIAQA

It Is Easy For Those Whose Faith Lacks A Solid Understanding And Compassion For The Beliefs Of Others To Criticize The Roman Catholic Church And The Alpha Course, Pointing Out Their Flaws And Failures While Ignoring The Shortcomings In Their Own Belief Systems. In This Instance, B.M. From The Last Days Watchman Channel Has Once Again Vehemently Attacked Catholics To Promote The Sale Of His Questionable Books, Despite His Own Significant Involvement With Satanic Judaism And The Questionable Practices Of The Pentecostal Movement Such As Speaking In Tongues And The Fake Rapture. Speaking Of Last Days Deception.

The relationship between the Vatican and the Alpha Course presents a complex interplay of faith, tradition, and modern evangelism. The Alpha Course, an eleven-week program designed to introduce participants to the fundamentals of the Christian faith, has gained popularity across various denominations, particularly within Protestant circles. However, its reception within the Catholic Church has been met with considerable scrutiny and caution.

From a personal perspective, one might find the appeal of the Alpha Course compelling. It creates an inviting environment for individuals to explore their faith, engage in discussions about Jesus, and foster community among participants. The course is structured to encourage open dialogue, allowing attendees to ask questions and express doubts in a supportive setting. This approach resonates with many who seek a more personal and relatable experience of faith, especially in an era where traditional religious practices may seem distant or irrelevant.

However, the Vatican's stance on the Alpha Course reflects a deeper concern regarding the integrity of Catholic doctrine. The course, while well-intentioned, is often viewed as a Protestant initiative that simplifies complex theological concepts. Critics argue that it presents a diluted version of the Gospel, which may lead to misunderstandings about core Catholic beliefs. This perspective is not merely a matter of preference; it is rooted in a commitment to preserving the richness and depth of Catholic teaching.

In examining this tension, one must consider the broader implications of introducing programs like Alpha within a Catholic context. The Vatican has historically emphasized the importance of catechesis that aligns with the Church's teachings. The concern is that the Alpha Course, despite its positive aspects, may inadvertently promote a form of Christianity that lacks the sacramental and communal dimensions that are central to Catholicism. This raises questions about the effectiveness of such programs in fostering genuine spiritual growth among Catholics.

Moreover, the dialogue surrounding the Alpha Course invites reflection on the nature of generalization in contemporary society. As individuals increasingly seek authentic connections and meaningful discussions about faith, the Church faces the challenge of adapting its approach without compromising its foundational beliefs. The Alpha Course, with its emphasis on personal experience and relational engagement, highlights a potential pathway for evangelization that could resonate with a modern audience. Yet, it also necessitates a careful examination of how such initiatives align with the Church's mission and teachings.

In conclusion, the relationship between the Vatican and the Alpha Course encapsulates a broader conversation about faith, tradition, and the evolving landscape of Christianity. While the Alpha Course offers a valuable opportunity for exploration and dialogue, it also raises critical questions about the preservation of Catholic doctrine and the nature of evangelization. As one navigates this complex terrain, it becomes evident that the challenge lies not only in fostering engagement with faith but also in ensuring that such engagement remains rooted in the rich tradition of the Church. The ongoing discourse surrounding this topic serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between innovation and fidelity in the pursuit of spiritual truth.

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j491kPpcMk 

Is It Not True That France, The U.K., And Canada Have Called For A Palestinian State, Or Else? This Statement Represents A Significant Misrepresentation By B.M. Of The Last Days Watchman Channel, Aimed At Distorting The Truth And Creating Sensationalism. This Posting Exposes B.M. As Someone Who Can't Be Trusted With The Truth. In Reality, These Nations Have Warned Israel To Cease Its Actions Against The Palestinians, Or Else More Significant Measures May Be Taken Against Israel That Could Go Beyond Economic Sanctions. Moreover, B.M's Suggestion That Emmanuel Macron Is The Biblical Antichrist Is Another Distortion Of The Truth That No Basis In Reality.

The assertion that France, the United Kingdom, and Canada have unequivocally called for the establishment of a Palestinian state, accompanied by threats of dire consequences, warrants a nuanced examination. It is essential to recognise that such statements can often be misrepresented or sensationalised, as seen in the discourse surrounding the actions of these nations. The reality is more complex and reflects a broader geopolitical context.

In recent discussions, leaders from these three countries have indeed expressed their support for a two-state solution, emphasising the necessity for a viable and independent Palestinian state. This position is rooted in a long-standing commitment to peace in the Middle East, which they believe can only be achieved through dialogue and mutual recognition. The call for Israel to cease its military operations against Palestinians is not merely a rhetorical flourish; it is a reflection of growing international concern regarding the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza. The leaders have articulated that continued aggression could lead to more severe repercussions, potentially extending beyond economic sanctions to diplomatic isolation or other forms of intervention such as the use of the military.

From a personal perspective, it is disheartening to witness the distortion of such critical discussions. The suggestion that Emmanuel Macron, the President of France, is the Biblical Antichrist is an extreme interpretation that lacks any credible foundation. Such claims serve to distract from the pressing issues at hand and undermine the serious diplomatic efforts being made to address the conflict. It is crucial to approach these topics with a sense of responsibility, recognising the human suffering involved and the complexities of international relations.

The statements made by France, the U.K., and Canada should be viewed within the context of their historical positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These nations have consistently advocated for a peaceful resolution that respects the rights and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians. Their recent warnings to Israel are indicative of a shift in international sentiment, reflecting a growing impatience with the status quo and a desire for tangible progress towards peace.

In conclusion, while the call for a Palestinian state is indeed part of the discourse among these nations, it is essential to approach such claims with a critical eye. The narrative surrounding these discussions can often be manipulated for various agendas, leading to misunderstandings and misrepresentations. It is imperative to focus on the underlying issues and the urgent need for a resolution that honours the dignity and rights of all parties involved.

Blessings

Trump Is Given A $400 Million Jet As A Bribe By Qatar. He Then Travels To Saudi Arabia, Where He Is Treated Like Royalty By Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, Who Clearly Has His Own Agenda With Trump. As A Result, There Are Claims by J.K. That Trump Is Rapidly Establishing A New World Order Which Is A Complete Fabrication. Essentially, He Is Perceived As Selling Out The United States To Arab Nations While Betraying Netanyahu, Just As He Has Done With Many Others Who Been Unfortunate Enough To Cross His Path.

The Prince Of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salem 

The recent developments surrounding Donald Trump’s international dealings, particularly his alleged acceptance of a $400 million jet from Qatar, raise significant questions about the intersection of politics, ethics, and foreign relations. Observers note that this transaction, viewed by many as a bribe, sets a troubling precedent in the realm of political conduct. The implications of such actions extend beyond mere financial transactions; they suggest a deeper entanglement of personal interests and national policy.

Upon receiving the jet, Trump’s subsequent visit to Saudi Arabia further complicates the narrative. There, he was reportedly treated with an unprecedented level of hospitality by Prince Mohammed bin Salman. This royal treatment is not merely a gesture of goodwill; it is indicative of the strategic interests that Saudi Arabia has in aligning itself with Trump. The prince’s agenda appears to be multifaceted, aiming to solidify his influence in the region while leveraging Trump’s position to further his own goals. This dynamic raises concerns about the potential for a New World Order, as Trump’s actions may be perceived as aligning U.S. foreign policy more closely with the interests of Arab nations, potentially at the expense of traditional allies such as Israel.

From a subjective viewpoint, one might argue that Trump’s dealings reflect a broader trend of prioritizing personal gain over national integrity. The perception that he is “selling out” the United States to foreign powers is not merely a political critique; it resonates with a significant portion of the American populace who feel that their interests are being compromised. This sentiment is exacerbated by the notion that Trump has betrayed figures like Benjamin Netanyahu, a leader who has historically relied on U.S. support. Such betrayals, whether real or perceived, contribute to a narrative of instability and mistrust in international relations.

Moreover, the implications of these actions extend into the realm of domestic politics. Critics argue that Trump’s acceptance of gifts and favors from foreign entities undermines the ethical standards expected of a leader. The notion of a “public corruption tour,” as some have described his Middle Eastern visit, suggests a troubling normalization of unethical behavior in political life. This perspective invites a broader discussion about the standards of accountability that should govern political leaders, particularly in an era where transparency is increasingly demanded by the electorate.

In conclusion, the intertwining of personal ambition and national policy in Trump’s dealings with Qatar and Saudi Arabia presents a complex and troubling picture. The implications of these actions are profound, suggesting a shift in the balance of power and influence in international relations. As the narrative unfolds, it remains to be seen how these developments will shape the future of U.S. foreign policy and its relationships with both allies and adversaries. The ongoing discourse surrounding these events will undoubtedly continue to provoke debate and reflection on the ethical dimensions of political leadership in the modern world.

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wazKpSTQYOk&t=88s

The Headline From The J.K. YouTube Channel Reads: "TRUMP’S NEW WORLD ORDER EMERGES QUICKLY NOW!" J.K. Has Maintained For Several Years That Trump Is The Biblical Antichrist. Furthermore, J.K. Claims That The Ten Kings Mentioned In Revelation Chapter 13 Represent Ten Super Nations Into Which The World Has Been Divided. However, This Scenario Lacks Logic And Coherence, Making It Unrealistic.

The assertion presented in the headline from the J.K. YouTube channel, "TRUMP’S NEW WORLD ORDER EMERGES QUICKLY NOW," invites a multifaceted examination of the intertwining narratives surrounding Donald Trump and the apocalyptic imagery often associated with him. J.K.'s long-standing claim that Trump embodies the Biblical Antichrist reflects a broader trend in contemporary discourse where political figures are frequently cast in a light that transcends mere governance, entering the realm of prophetic interpretation. This perspective, while compelling to some, raises significant questions regarding its logical foundation and coherence.

From a subjective viewpoint, one might consider the emotional and psychological underpinnings that drive individuals to associate political leaders with apocalyptic figures. The notion of Trump as the Antichrist resonates with those who perceive a profound moral and existential crisis in the current global landscape. This interpretation suggests that the world is on the brink of a transformative upheaval, wherein traditional structures of power and morality are challenged. However, such a perspective often relies on selective readings of religious texts, particularly the Book of Revelation, which is inherently symbolic and open to various interpretations.

J.K.'s assertion that the ten kings mentioned in Revelation Chapter 13 symbolize ten super nations into which the world has been divided further complicates the narrative. This interpretation presupposes a specific geopolitical framework that may not align with the complexities of international relations. The idea of a neatly divided world governed by ten super nations lacks the nuance required to understand the multifarious and often chaotic nature of global politics. In reality, the world is characterized by a multitude of nations, alliances, and conflicts that defy such simplistic categorisation.

Moreover, the claim that a singular figure, such as Trump, could orchestrate a new world order raises questions about agency and the nature of power. While it is undeniable that Trump has wielded significant influence during his presidency and beyond, attributing the emergence of a new world order solely to his actions diminishes the role of other political actors, social movements, and historical forces. It is essential to recognize that political change is rarely the result of a single individual; rather, it is the product of a complex interplay of factors, including economic conditions, cultural shifts, and technological advancements.

In reflecting on these themes, one might consider the implications of framing political discourse through a lens of prophecy and apocalypticism. Such narratives can serve to galvanize certain segments of the population, fostering a sense of urgency and purpose. However, they can also lead to polarization and a detachment from pragmatic solutions to pressing issues. The challenge lies in balancing the emotional resonance of these narratives with a commitment to rational discourse and critical analysis.

Ultimately, while J.K.'s claims may resonate with a specific audience, they invite scrutiny regarding their logical coherence and practical implications. The intersection of politics and prophecy is fraught with complexities that demand careful consideration. As individuals navigate these narratives, it is crucial to engage with them thoughtfully, recognizing the broader context in which they arise and the diverse perspectives that shape our understanding of the world.

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hLEG-ZF4dE

B.M. is at it again, promoting more sensationalism. On his Last Days Watchman YouTube channel, he has suggested that Trump will announce a Palestinian state. If this happens, what would it mean?

In recent discussions surrounding the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, the potential announcement by former President Donald Trump regarding the recognition of a Palestinian state has emerged as a significant topic of interest. This development is particularly noteworthy given the historical complexities and sensitivities associated with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As I reflect on the implications of such an announcement, it becomes evident that it could represent a pivotal moment in U.S. foreign policy and regional diplomacy.

Reports from various Gulf diplomatic sources suggest that Trump may formally recognise the State of Palestine during his upcoming tour of the Gulf region. This potential recognition is framed within the context of broader diplomatic efforts, particularly in relation to the Abraham Accords, which aimed to normalise relations between Israel and several Arab nations. The recognition of a Palestinian state could be perceived as a strategic move to expand these accords, thereby reshaping the dynamics of Middle Eastern diplomacy.

From a subjective viewpoint, one might consider the motivations behind Trump's potential announcement. It is plausible that he views the recognition of a Palestinian state as a means to solidify his legacy in the region, particularly after his administration's previous initiatives that favoured Israeli interests. By acknowledging Palestinian statehood, Trump could position himself as a mediator seeking to balance the interests of both Israelis and Palestinians, a role that has historically been fraught with challenges.

Moreover, the timing of this announcement is critical. With a Gulf-US summit scheduled for mid-May, the geopolitical landscape is ripe for discussions that could lead to significant shifts in policy. The backdrop of ongoing tensions, particularly with recent escalations in Gaza, adds urgency to the situation. Trump's recognition of a Palestinian state could serve as a catalyst for renewed dialogue, potentially paving the way for a ceasefire and a more stable regional environment.

However, the implications of such a recognition are multifaceted. On one hand, it could foster a sense of legitimacy for Palestinian aspirations, encouraging further diplomatic engagement. On the other hand, it risks exacerbating tensions with Israel, which has historically opposed unilateral recognition of Palestinian statehood without a negotiated peace agreement. The delicate balance of interests at play necessitates a careful consideration of the potential consequences of this announcement.

In conclusion, the prospect of Trump announcing the recognition of a Palestinian state encapsulates a complex interplay of historical grievances, diplomatic aspirations, and strategic calculations. As I contemplate the potential outcomes, it is clear that this development could significantly influence the trajectory of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and the broader quest for peace in the region. The coming days will undoubtedly reveal the extent to which this announcement, if made, will reshape the landscape of Israeli-Palestinian relations and the role of the United States as a mediator in this enduring conflict.

However, this nothing new. The last time he was president he proposed to give the Palestinians a separate state which turned out to be a small piece of land tucked away in the middle of nowhere. Anyway, they told him what to do with it. What this is all about is disposing Palestinians from their land to allow the Jewish criminals who inhabit Israel to posses the whole of the Gaza strip. It wont be accepted. Furthermore, it may be best for everyone is you were to stop sensationalizing current events to sell your books full of misinformation.

Trump is a demented pathetic individual. A brilliant liar and con man who obtained the office of the presidency under false pretenses.

Added to that: Believing that confessing sins without true repentance leads to salvation, as you teach, does not guarantee one's salvation. This belief is very similar to what the Roman Catholics, whom you criticism so harshly, promote.

No one can achieve salvation by following this misguided idea. You are potentially leading the unsuspecting astray and into hellfire with your false doctrine. While you may identify as a Jew, you do not align with Christian beliefs, and more importantly, you do not adhere to what the Bible teaches regarding repentance.

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-IXSwTeSkY

I find it incredible that J.K. has stated on his YouTube channel that he has been studying Bible prophecy for 50 years yet seems to have learned so little. I'm not sure where he got the idea that the False Prophet is a Roman Catholic Pope named Sixtus VI. What he presents is merely an interpretation that may or may not be accurate. The Bible does not support this assertion; it identifies the Antichrist as 666—not the False Prophet.
Some people interpret Revelation 17 as referring to a Roman Catholic Pope, but I still don’t see how the ten horns and seven heads align with the concept of a Pope. While the seven heads might refer to Rome, which is often described as sitting on seven hills, many cities worldwide have similar geographical features. But what do the ten horns represent?
J.K. is adamant that Trump is the Antichrist. However, since the False Prophet grants authority to the Antichrist, they must appear on the world stage simultaneously. Currently, this hasn’t happened with the Pope named Leo XIV. Therefore, J.K. is either mistaken about Trump being the Antichrist and correct about the Pope named Sixtus VI, or he might be accurate about Trump and incorrect about the Pope. Common sense suggests it can't be both.

His current perspective indicates a level of confusion, which may unintentionally mislead those who are new to the faith.

It is with a measure of consideration that I address the observations presented. The complexities inherent in the study of biblical prophecy necessitate a cautious approach, one that acknowledges the subjective nature of interpretation. J.K’s assertion regarding the identification of the False Prophet and the Antichrist warrants careful examination.

The identification of Sixtus VI as the False Prophet, a figure often associated with the Book of Revelation, appears to stem from a specific interpretive framework. However, the scriptures themselves offer no explicit designation of a particular individual or institution as the False Prophet. The Book of Revelation, particularly chapter 13, does indeed describe a figure known as the False Prophet, but the text primarily focuses on the False Prophet's role in supporting the Antichrist, rather than providing a definitive identity.

The association of the Antichrist with the number 666, as stated in Revelation 13:18, is a widely recognised element of biblical prophecy. However, the interpretation of this number, like other aspects of prophecy, remains a subject of debate. The individual's focus on this numerical designation, while valid, does not preclude the possibility of other symbolic interpretations.

The interpretation of Revelation 17, which describes a woman riding a beast with seven heads and ten horns, is a particularly complex aspect of prophecy. The association of the seven heads with Rome, a city known for its seven hills, is a common interpretation. However, the presence of ten horns presents a challenge to this interpretation. The horns are often understood as representing ten kings or kingdoms, but their specific identity remains a matter of speculation.

The assertion that the False Prophet and the Antichrist must appear simultaneously on the world stage is based on the scriptural account of their relationship. The False Prophet, according to Revelation, exercises the authority of the Antichrist. The J.K’s assessment of the current political and religious landscape, including the potential identification of Donald Trump as the Antichrist, is a matter of personal conviction. However, the absence of a corresponding False Prophet, as understood by this individual, does present a logical inconsistency.

The potential for confusion among those new to the faith is a valid concern. The interpretation of biblical prophecy requires a careful balance of faith, reason, and humility. A dogmatic approach, particularly one that relies on specific identifications of individuals or institutions, can potentially lead to misinterpretations. A more open-minded approach that acknowledges the symbolic and often veiled nature of prophecy is often beneficial.

In conclusion, the study of biblical prophecy is a challenging endeavour. While specific interpretations can provide a sense of clarity, it is essential to remain open to alternative perspectives and to recognize the limitations of human understanding. The individual's perspective, while sincere, may benefit from further reflection on the complexities of biblical prophecy and the importance of maintaining a spirit of intellectual humility.

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWtwrUIHqcY

 The Jesus Strand: A Search for DNA

The narrative surrounding the lineage of Jesus Christ presents a unique challenge when considering the concept of direct descendants. The historical and theological accounts detail a life marked by a singular purpose, culminating in a crucifixion and resurrection. Within this framework, the absence of a marital union or biological offspring is a central tenet.

Mary, the mother of Jesus, is portrayed as having subsequent children, a detail that complicates the genealogical quest. Records indicate the birth of three daughters and four sons following the birth of Jesus. However, these individuals, while siblings to Jesus, do not represent a direct line of descent from him. This is because Jesus's conception is understood as immaculate, a divine intervention that bypasses the conventional biological processes of procreation.

Therefore, the pursuit of direct descendants of Jesus is inherently futile. The very foundation of his existence, as presented in religious texts, precludes the possibility of a biological lineage in the traditional sense. While it may be feasible to trace the ancestry of Joseph and Mary, the absence of a marital union or offspring for Jesus creates an unbridgeable gap in the genealogical record. The concept of immaculate conception, which is central to the narrative, serves as the primary reason why a direct line of descent from Jesus is unattainable.

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-IXSwTeSkY

J.K. runs a YouTube channel where he claims that Donald Trump is the Antichrist, despite having no scriptural evidence to support this outlandish assertion. He also predicted before the election of the new Pope that he would be referred to as "Sixtus VI," and he made several YouTube posts to back up this false claim. This prediction has since been proven wrong. In his comments regarding the appointment of the new Pope, he appears to take a stance that supports Trump. He expressed his support for Trump by stating the following:

MAGA world unleashed a barrage of blistering attacks yesterday against the new American pope. Pope Leo XIV sparked the ire of MAGA commentators after he was revealed to have taken aim at Donald Trump, JD Vance and a number of key Trump policies online. Cardinal Robert Prevost, who is now Pope Leo XIV, has multiple posts on his X account that criticize or outright rebuke the words and policies of Donald Trump. Having weighed in on issues from gun control to migration and the death of George Floyd in the United States, Prevost was bound to be anathema in MAGA America. Vocal MAGA figures immediately rejected Pope Leo as head of the Catholic Church, hurling curses at him and branding the new pope a 'Marxist.' Steve Bannon, Trump's former White House Chief Strategist, derided the new pope as the 'worst pick for MAGA Catholics' and deemed him the 'anti-Trump pope'. Mike Cernovich, a MAGA commentator called Pope Leo an 'open borders globalist' and said, “Sorry, Catholics. You can scroll his X account and see what he’s been up to." It didn’t take long for MAGA media figures to cry out in rage over the election of Robert Prevost as Pope Leo XIV after it was revealed that he’d publicly criticized Vice President JD Vance and expressed sympathy for immigrants and George Floyd. Trump loyalists fumed over the “WOKE MARXIST POPE” and complained that he is “worse than Pope Francis.” Another MAGA Trumpian, Vince Langman, said, “In case you're wondering why they picked an American to be a Pope for the first time in history, he's a WOKE Never Trumper liberal. That's why!” Laura Loomer, the MAGA personality who has the president’s ear, spent much of Thursday afternoon raging on social media about the newly elected pontiff’s views on immigration and social justice. “Just another Marxist puppet in the Vatican,” she wrote in a post on X. “Catholics don’t have anything good to look forward to.” In another post, she simply wrote, “WOKE MARXIST POPE.”

Now that you have spewed your guts out to vilify the new Pope in support of Trump and to detract from your own inadequacies, let's face the reality of some of the false statements you have made in the past from which you were adamant the next Pope would be called Sixth VI. That assertion has now proven to be completely inaccurate. The facts of the matter are that you are a False Prophet who makes unsubstantiated claims without any accurate Biblical truth to back up your erroneous statements. If you lack credibility about the Pope then you certainly cannot be taken seriously when you call Trump the Antichrist. So how about if you were to step away from your keyboard and find another more honest way to make a living other than the sensationalist garbage you are so fond of spitting out? 

Blessings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgLQLf5xHFk 

From the BM Last Days Watchman Channel, the headline reads: "Rome Elects Pope for the End Times." That statement alone is a fallacy designed to attract subscribers. Pope XIV is not the end times Pope.

BM has also released a statement regarding the new Pope. Here is what he said:

“Well, it was none of the ones being touted. It is Cardinal Robert F. Prevost. He has chosen the name Pope Leo XIV. The first American Pope. Let's see what he turns out to be. I'll make a video about him in a day or so”.

I find it quite perplexing when anyone makes statements like the one B.M. just made, especially when he said, "let's see what he turns out to be." There’s no need for you to make any more videos filled with sensationalism that is rarely accurate. We already know who he is: the leader of the world’s 1.6 billion Catholics, which is a significant achievement by any standard. His appointment must hold some importance, considering that news broadcasts worldwide featured it as the top news item of the year. This contrasts sharply with your tendency to fabricate things—anything, really—to attract subscribers.

It is with a degree of bewilderment that I consider the pronouncements made, particularly the phrasing, "let's see what he turns out to be." Such expressions, in my estimation, introduce an unnecessary element of speculation, especially when the subject's identity is already established.

The individual in question holds a position of considerable influence: the leader of the world's 1.6 billion Catholics. This is, without qualification, a noteworthy accomplishment, a testament to his influence and the significance of the institution he represents. The global attention his appointment garnered, as evidenced by its prominence in international news broadcasts, underscores its importance. To suggest that his role is somehow uncertain or subject to conjecture seems, to me, to misunderstand the settled nature of his position and the established order it reflects.

This perspective is further complicated by the apparent inclination to sensationalize, a tactic that seems designed to attract attention rather than to illuminate. The construction of narratives that priorities subscriber engagement over factual accuracy raises concerns. It is my belief that such an approach, while potentially effective in the short term, ultimately undermines the credibility of the information presented. The focus should remain on the substance of the subject matter, not the manipulation of audience perception.

I find myself advocating for a more balanced and considered approach to the presentation of information. Acknowledging the established facts and the significance of the subject matter, rather than seeking to create intrigue through speculation, is crucial. The value of accurate reporting and analysis should be paramount.

Blessings