Benjamin Netanyahoo Speech About How Zionists Descend From Old Testament Characters

[irosie91]

from Sherri>>>>

Netanyahu holds himself out as the leader of the tribe of the Maccabees,
and in in a tribal blood feud of biblical proportions with the tribe of the Persians.
(Is this for real?)



irosie>>>

I have not yet read Neyanyahu's speech-----I am not sure if sherri's comment
is her own or she is quoting some equally ignorant isa-respecter.

I am going to bet that Netanyahu did not claim to be like a MACCABEE ---
which was a family and not a "tribe" "feuding with the persians"
The Maccabees never fought the persians. The screw-up is either that
of sherri herself or of one of her fellow idiot isa-respecters

Netanyahu----like myself and most reasonably educated people---have at
least some grasp of history

Isa respecters DEPEND on the "IGNORANCE OF THE MASSES" whom
they strive to manipulate and exploit

Some time ago---I corrected a misinterpretation of a poem----
made by -----a person. The person was an ENGLISH LIT. major
and simply did not understand the biblical allusion in the old English
poem. The 'person' said with disdain "YOU READ THE BIBLE"????
yeah ---I did-------it is hard to interpret old english poety for one who
has no grasp on that book -------Looks like ignorance has screwed
sherri up ONCE AGAIN because she simply never read a book of
which she claims to be a scholar

for the record----the bible does not record a feud between persians
and some tribe of israel -----I will give sherri an opportunity to try to
remember whom the Maccabees fought. Someday ---that issue might
come up as a metaphor

 

[Sunni Man]

Bennie usually begins his presentations with an absurd summary of the Old Testament that leaves out the part of Yahweh hating the the 12 tribes of Israel. That oversight notwithstanding, the UN or whatever did not interrupt and point out the Old Testament is mythology and should not be a basis for public policy. A few minutes ago he described an agreement with a Persian king back in the old days and why can't the new guy be like the old guy.

Israelis count on Christians being ignorant about history and the Bible.

SO TRUE........

 

[irosie91]

Bennie usually begins his presentations with an absurd summary of the Old Testament that leaves out the part of Yahweh hating the the 12 tribes of Israel. That oversight notwithstanding, the UN or whatever did not interrupt and point out the Old Testament is mythology and should not be a basis for public policy. A few minutes ago he described an agreement with a Persian king back in the old days and why can't the new guy be like the old guy.

Israelis count on Christians being ignorant about history and the Bible.

SO TRUE........

I am fascinated ---I did not yet read Netanyahu's speech----but before I do---please
tell me what NETANYAHU said in his speech that depended on "christian ignorance
of history and the bible'??? I am addressing Sunni,, Truthseeker and Snouter

 

[Alfalfa]

You of course have no proof of this. In reality palestinians are recent 20th century invaders from Arab lands.

And what do you call the 20th century jewish immigrants to palestine?

Were they "invaders" as well?

In 1800 there were 7k jews in palestine. The zionist "aliyah" started in 1850 and by 1914 there were 94k jews. By 1930 there were 175k and by the establishment of the jewish state in 1947 there were 630k.

Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not that anyone with brains believes that you care about Palestinians or any Arabs in the Middle East. You are just playing "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" game like many two-bit anti-Semites do. Meanwhile, how come when other posters researched on other forums, they came up with people who besides Mark Twain visited the area, and basically all they saw were some Bedouins until they came to the cities and saw Jews. It's a shame that there aren't British Officials alive who were stationed in the area who noticed the Arabs coming in droves from their poor countries when the Jews had jobs for them, but no doubt in the British Archives you will find their description of what they observed, as reported by Winston Churchill. Are you that dense that you don't see the change of population in your own area because people from all around the world have come to the U.S., especially poor people whose countries don't have jobs for them?
Jews to no one's land

I don't care about the palis, or the arabs or the israelis. I don't have a dog in the fight which makes my opinions much more objective than just about anyone else on these threads.

BTW - I notice you didn't contest my historical population figures, just go on another personal attack. if you don't have an argument, why don't you just say so?

 

[Alfalfa]

You of course have no proof of this. In reality palestinians are recent 20th century invaders from Arab lands.

And what do you call the 20th century jewish immigrants to palestine?

Were they "invaders" as well?

In 1800 there were 7k jews in palestine. The zionist "aliyah" started in 1850 and by 1914 there were 94k jews. By 1930 there were 175k and by the establishment of the jewish state in 1947 there were 630k.

Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not that anyone with brains believes that you care about Palestinians or any Arabs in the Middle East. You are just playing "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" game like many two-bit anti-Semites do. Meanwhile, how come when other posters researched on other forums, they came up with people who besides Mark Twain visited the area, and basically all they saw were some Bedouins until they came to the cities and saw Jews. It's a shame that there aren't British Officials alive who were stationed in the area who noticed the Arabs coming in droves from their poor countries when the Jews had jobs for them, but no doubt in the British Archives you will find their description of what they observed, as reported by Winston Churchill. Are you that dense that you don't see the change of population in your own area because people from all around the world have come to the U.S., especially poor people whose countries don't have jobs for them?
Jews to no one's land

BTW, since you brought it up, I assume you are referencing the southwest US, tejas, new mexico, arizona and cali.

Let me ask you a question, one I doubt youwill answer, but readers will note your non sequitur.

If enough hispanics migrate, immigrate to the SW US, legally and illegally, enough that they become 1/3 of the population, do you think it would then be legal, fair and appropriate for them to just declare those areas a new country, "Aztlan a Hispanic Nation"?

Because that's exactly what jews, zionism and aliyah did. Remember, just a couple hundred years ago or so that land was part of Spain and then Mexico. Not 2400 years like israel.

 

[MHunterB]

Alf, you're forgetting a few things in your invalid comparison:
1) League of Nations
2) UN
3) SW is a part of US and its population are citizens thereof (mostly)
4) Mandate area was never under self-rule
5) No country of 'Palestine'
6) Israel didn't just 'declare' : the UN approved and accepted and recognized her as a state
7) 'Palestine' could just as easily have been declared the same day: it was the Arabs' choice not to, nobody else's


I could go on, but that should explain the silliness in which you have engaged......

 

[MHunterB]

Oh, and your very arbitrary '1850' date is entirely incorrect..... as is your idea of what 'Zionism' is.

 

[irosie91]

And what do you call the 20th century jewish immigrants to palestine?

Were they "invaders" as well?

In 1800 there were 7k jews in palestine. The zionist "aliyah" started in 1850 and by 1914 there were 94k jews. By 1930 there were 175k and by the establishment of the jewish state in 1947 there were 630k.

Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not that anyone with brains believes that you care about Palestinians or any Arabs in the Middle East. You are just playing "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" game like many two-bit anti-Semites do. Meanwhile, how come when other posters researched on other forums, they came up with people who besides Mark Twain visited the area, and basically all they saw were some Bedouins until they came to the cities and saw Jews. It's a shame that there aren't British Officials alive who were stationed in the area who noticed the Arabs coming in droves from their poor countries when the Jews had jobs for them, but no doubt in the British Archives you will find their description of what they observed, as reported by Winston Churchill. Are you that dense that you don't see the change of population in your own area because people from all around the world have come to the U.S., especially poor people whose countries don't have jobs for them?
Jews to no one's land

BTW, since you brought it up, I assume you are referencing the southwest US, tejas, new mexico, arizona and cali.

Let me ask you a question, one I doubt youwill answer, but readers will note your non sequitur.

If enough hispanics migrate, immigrate to the SW US, legally and illegally, enough that they become 1/3 of the population, do you think it would then be legal, fair and appropriate for them to just declare those areas a new country, "Aztlan a Hispanic Nation"?

Because that's exactly what jews, zionism and aliyah did. Remember, just a couple hundred years ago or so that land was part of Spain and then Mexico. Not 2400 years like israel.

Alfalfa-----you comment makes little sense---it is confused garble.

Your CONCLUSION ---that you described "exactly what jews and zionism and aliyah did"
is------therefore,, really idiotic

Please check the definition of non-sequitur. Part of your problem seems to be
trouble with english-----what is your mother-tongue?

 

[irosie91]

Israelis count on Christians being ignorant about history and the Bible.

SO TRUE........

I am fascinated ---I did not yet read Netanyahu's speech----but before I do---please
tell me what NETANYAHU said in his speech that depended on "christian ignorance
of history and the bible'??? I am addressing Sunni,, Truthseeker and Snouter

oh gee---Snouter and Truthseeker and Sunni ALL AGREED that "zionists depend
on christian ignorance of history and the bible" -----but NONE of them seem able to
substantiate that claim in any way. Sherri claims to be a christian american----
and does exhibit a remarkable level of ignorance of both the bible and history---
but zonists do not depend on sherri

 

[peach174]

Israelis are living on the Mountains of Israel in certain areas that no one wanted anything to do with for thousands of years because nothing could be done with the land. It was desolate. Arabs could not grow anything on them.
Those Mountains today are lush and green.

Zionist PR nonsense...........

The Palestinian people lived and farmed the land there for centuries.

Now the lying jews claim it was barren and they made it green.

What a pack of lies. ..

Well of course Palestinian people lived and farmed the land, they had to have crops in order to eat.

That is not what was said.
What was said, was that certain areas of Mountains were not able to be grow-en on.

 

[Hossfly]

And what do you call the 20th century jewish immigrants to palestine?

Were they "invaders" as well?

In 1800 there were 7k jews in palestine. The zionist "aliyah" started in 1850 and by 1914 there were 94k jews. By 1930 there were 175k and by the establishment of the jewish state in 1947 there were 630k.

Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not that anyone with brains believes that you care about Palestinians or any Arabs in the Middle East. You are just playing "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" game like many two-bit anti-Semites do. Meanwhile, how come when other posters researched on other forums, they came up with people who besides Mark Twain visited the area, and basically all they saw were some Bedouins until they came to the cities and saw Jews. It's a shame that there aren't British Officials alive who were stationed in the area who noticed the Arabs coming in droves from their poor countries when the Jews had jobs for them, but no doubt in the British Archives you will find their description of what they observed, as reported by Winston Churchill. Are you that dense that you don't see the change of population in your own area because people from all around the world have come to the U.S., especially poor people whose countries don't have jobs for them?
Jews to no one's land

BTW, since you brought it up, I assume you are referencing the southwest US, tejas, new mexico, arizona and cali.

Let me ask you a question, one I doubt youwill answer, but readers will note your non sequitur.

If enough hispanics migrate, immigrate to the SW US, legally and illegally, enough that they become 1/3 of the population, do you think it would then be legal, fair and appropriate for them to just declare those areas a new country, "Aztlan a Hispanic Nation"?

Because that's exactly what jews, zionism and aliyah did. Remember, just a couple hundred years ago or so that land was part of Spain and then Mexico. Not 2400 years like israel.

They can have the Peoples Republic of California.. The rest is off limits.

 

[peach174]

The Bible is not History, as one or more delusional posters here seems to think.

AND as for Prophecy, there are as many or more ways to interpret the words as there are drops of water in the ocean.

The bible is the written history of the Jews.
Just like the Sumerians had Sumerian Cuneiform script and wrote about what happened to them.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible

Exodus never happened and the walls of Jericho did not come a-tumbling down. How archaeologists are shaking Israel to its biblical foundations.Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Text.""The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan] in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."<< These statements correspond well with what was written by John Rembsburg:"In the 12th chapter of Joshua is given a list of 31 kingdoms which were conquered by Israel. This was in the fifteenth century B.C. From this time forward they are represented as a mighty nation by Bible historians.Rameses III overran Canaan and conquered it between 1280 and 1260 B.C. The Egyptian records give a list of all the tribes inhabiting it. The children of Israel-- the Hebrews-- were not there. In the 5th century B.C., when Herodotus, the father of History, was collecting materials for his immortal work, he traversed nearly every portion of Western Asia. He describes all its principal peoples and places; but the Jews and Jerusalem are of too little consequence to merit a line from his pen. Not until 332 B.C. do the Jews appear upon the stage of history, and then only as the submissive vassals of a Grecian king."John E. Remsburg,*The Bible*(1901), pg. 263.Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists for years and even decades.The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and Joseph among others -- were the first to go when biblical scholars found those passages rife with anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of enslavement, courage and liberation in human history, also slipped from history to legend when archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and the absence of evidence of large encampments in the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses brought the Israelites after leading them through the parted Red Sea).Finkelstein is an iconoclast. He established his reputation in part by developing a theory about the settlement patterns of the nomadic shepherd tribes who would eventually become the Israelites, bolstering the growing consensus that they were originally indistinguishable from the rest of their neighbors, the Canaanites. This overturns a key element in the Bible: The Old Testament depicts the Israelites as superior outsiders -- descended from Abraham, a Mesopotamian immigrant -- entitled by divine order to invade Canaan and exterminate its unworthy, idolatrous inhabitants.

The famous battle of Jericho, with which the Israelites supposedly launched this campaign of conquest after wandering for decades in the desert, has been likewise debunked: The city of Jericho didn't exist at that time and had no walls to come tumbling down. These assertions are all pretty much accepted by mainstream archaeologists."Research is research, and strong societies can easily endure

Archeology Demolishes the Bible

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

The Bible is not History, as one or more delusional posters here seems to think.

AND as for Prophecy, there are as many or more ways to interpret the words as there are drops of water in the ocean.

The bible is the written history of the Jews.
Just like the Sumerians had Sumerian Cuneiform script and wrote about what happened to them.

ARCHAELOGY proves much of what is recorded never happened.

AND books were likely written long after incidents portrayed in them.

The Bible is simply not a valid source to record History.

 

[Hossfly]

The Bible is not History, as one or more delusional posters here seems to think.

AND as for Prophecy, there are as many or more ways to interpret the words as there are drops of water in the ocean.

The bible is the written history of the Jews.
Just like the Sumerians had Sumerian Cuneiform script and wrote about what happened to them.

ARCHAELOGY proves much of what is recorded never happened.

AND books were likely written long after incidents portrayed in them.

The Bible is simply not a valid source to record History.

So! Then you're not really a Christian? I knew that all the time.

 

[MHunterB]

Of course if the same standards of historicity are applied to the NT - it doesn't fare even as well as the Hebrew Bible.....

No earthquake, no eclipse on the original Good Friday - and certainly no tombs and graves bursting open with their occupants strolling the streets of Jerusalem as "recorded" in the NT.

So if those rather hard to miss events were not even mentioned in any Roman or other contemporary sources, it's pretty obvious that none of the above ever occurred..... I believe the astronomers have gone back and not been able to locate a 'Good Friday' eclipse (which they could, yes, since the solar system is rather a 'gravitational clock-work').....

 

[MHunterB]

The Bible is not History, as one or more delusional posters here seems to think.

AND as for Prophecy, there are as many or more ways to interpret the words as there are drops of water in the ocean.

The bible is the written history of the Jews.
Just like the Sumerians had Sumerian Cuneiform script and wrote about what happened to them.

ARCHAELOGY proves much of what is recorded never happened.

AND books were likely written long after incidents portrayed in them.

The Bible is simply not a valid source to record History.

And that being the case, there's no reason to believe whatever's written in the NT, either - since it's part of the Bible (according to you).

 

[Hossfly]

Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible

Exodus never happened and the walls of Jericho did not come a-tumbling down. How archaeologists are shaking Israel to its biblical foundations.Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Text.""The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan] in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."<< These statements correspond well with what was written by John Rembsburg:"In the 12th chapter of Joshua is given a list of 31 kingdoms which were conquered by Israel. This was in the fifteenth century B.C. From this time forward they are represented as a mighty nation by Bible historians.Rameses III overran Canaan and conquered it between 1280 and 1260 B.C. The Egyptian records give a list of all the tribes inhabiting it. The children of Israel-- the Hebrews-- were not there. In the 5th century B.C., when Herodotus, the father of History, was collecting materials for his immortal work, he traversed nearly every portion of Western Asia. He describes all its principal peoples and places; but the Jews and Jerusalem are of too little consequence to merit a line from his pen. Not until 332 B.C. do the Jews appear upon the stage of history, and then only as the submissive vassals of a Grecian king."John E. Remsburg,*The Bible*(1901), pg. 263.Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists for years and even decades.The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and Joseph among others -- were the first to go when biblical scholars found those passages rife with anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of enslavement, courage and liberation in human history, also slipped from history to legend when archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and the absence of evidence of large encampments in the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses brought the Israelites after leading them through the parted Red Sea).Finkelstein is an iconoclast. He established his reputation in part by developing a theory about the settlement patterns of the nomadic shepherd tribes who would eventually become the Israelites, bolstering the growing consensus that they were originally indistinguishable from the rest of their neighbors, the Canaanites. This overturns a key element in the Bible: The Old Testament depicts the Israelites as superior outsiders -- descended from Abraham, a Mesopotamian immigrant -- entitled by divine order to invade Canaan and exterminate its unworthy, idolatrous inhabitants.

The famous battle of Jericho, with which the Israelites supposedly launched this campaign of conquest after wandering for decades in the desert, has been likewise debunked: The city of Jericho didn't exist at that time and had no walls to come tumbling down. These assertions are all pretty much accepted by mainstream archaeologists."Research is research, and strong societies can easily endure

Archeology Demolishes the Bible

Under the guise of a serpent, Satan uses reverse psychology, and knowledge of how our subconscious mind operates to influence Adam and Eve to eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Reverse Psychology is a technique that relies on reactance(psychological) to influence a behavior or trigger a belief totally opposite of what is actually being suggested or commanded.

Satan was already aware of what GOD commanded Adam and Eve to eat, but he starts the conversation with Eve, tempting to confuse her by asking "hath GOD said yea are not to eat of every tree in the garden"? It is clear that it was ok to eat of the trees in the garden except from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It is also clear in the scripture that they was not supposed to even touch the fruit from this tree, for they shall die.

Satan then applies Tricknology by mixing the truth with lies to make them seem ultimately true. Note: Tricknology is not a term you will find in a dictionary but it is derived from the term trickery. Placing the suffix -ology (the study of) at the end makes it mean the study of trickery, which is also a form of deception used by Satan.Satan told them that they would not die and their minds would be opened; that they would become as GOD's knowing both good and evil. That statement by Satan triggered their subconscious mind into believing this lie.


https://www.bible.com/notes/8306162...nology-and-knowledge-of-our-subconscious-mind

 

[Alfalfa]

The Bible is not History, as one or more delusional posters here seems to think.

AND as for Prophecy, there are as many or more ways to interpret the words as there are drops of water in the ocean.

The bible is the written MYTHOLOGY of the Jews.
Just like the Sumerians had Sumerian Cuneiform script and wrote about what happened to them.

Fixed it.

 

[Alfalfa]

Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible

Exodus never happened and the walls of Jericho did not come a-tumbling down. How archaeologists are shaking Israel to its biblical foundations.Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Text.""The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan] in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."<< These statements correspond well with what was written by John Rembsburg:"In the 12th chapter of Joshua is given a list of 31 kingdoms which were conquered by Israel. This was in the fifteenth century B.C. From this time forward they are represented as a mighty nation by Bible historians.Rameses III overran Canaan and conquered it between 1280 and 1260 B.C. The Egyptian records give a list of all the tribes inhabiting it. The children of Israel-- the Hebrews-- were not there. In the 5th century B.C., when Herodotus, the father of History, was collecting materials for his immortal work, he traversed nearly every portion of Western Asia. He describes all its principal peoples and places; but the Jews and Jerusalem are of too little consequence to merit a line from his pen. Not until 332 B.C. do the Jews appear upon the stage of history, and then only as the submissive vassals of a Grecian king."John E. Remsburg,*The Bible*(1901), pg. 263.Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists for years and even decades.The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and Joseph among others -- were the first to go when biblical scholars found those passages rife with anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of enslavement, courage and liberation in human history, also slipped from history to legend when archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and the absence of evidence of large encampments in the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses brought the Israelites after leading them through the parted Red Sea).Finkelstein is an iconoclast. He established his reputation in part by developing a theory about the settlement patterns of the nomadic shepherd tribes who would eventually become the Israelites, bolstering the growing consensus that they were originally indistinguishable from the rest of their neighbors, the Canaanites. This overturns a key element in the Bible: The Old Testament depicts the Israelites as superior outsiders -- descended from Abraham, a Mesopotamian immigrant -- entitled by divine order to invade Canaan and exterminate its unworthy, idolatrous inhabitants.

The famous battle of Jericho, with which the Israelites supposedly launched this campaign of conquest after wandering for decades in the desert, has been likewise debunked: The city of Jericho didn't exist at that time and had no walls to come tumbling down. These assertions are all pretty much accepted by mainstream archaeologists."Research is research, and strong societies can easily endure

Archeology Demolishes the Bible

Under the guise of a serpent, Satan uses reverse psychology, and knowledge of how our subconscious mind operates to influence Adam and Eve to eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Reverse Psychology is a technique that relies on reactance(psychological) to influence a behavior or trigger a belief totally opposite of what is actually being suggested or commanded.

Satan was already aware of what GOD commanded Adam and Eve to eat, but he starts the conversation with Eve, tempting to confuse her by asking "hath GOD said yea are not to eat of every tree in the garden"? It is clear that it was ok to eat of the trees in the garden except from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It is also clear in the scripture that they was not supposed to even touch the fruit from this tree, for they shall die.

Satan then applies Tricknology by mixing the truth with lies to make them seem ultimately true. Note: Tricknology is not a term you will find in a dictionary but it is derived from the term trickery. Placing the suffix -ology (the study of) at the end makes it mean the study of trickery, which is also a form of deception used by Satan.Satan told them that they would not die and their minds would be opened; that they would become as GOD's knowing both good and evil. That statement by Satan triggered their subconscious mind into believing this lie.


https://www.bible.com/notes/8306162...nology-and-knowledge-of-our-subconscious-mind

Only children believe in satan...