Introduction

On January 20th 2025 Donald Trump was sworn in as the 47th president of the United States of America. The swearing in was done by John Roberts. And the ceremony took place in the rotunda of the Capitol building –the seat of the US Congress– in Washington D.C.; at the same place where four years earlier the supporters of Donald Trump had revolted against the certification process of the 2020 presidential election result in favor of Joe Biden, because of massive fraud against the people of America –the true sovereign of the land– them being


We the people.

In his speech during the inauguration ceremony Donald Trump commemorated this historic moment by saying:

The people have spoken.


But regardless of whether the people speak or not, there is no voluntary drawing back of the Babylonians from their idolatry for as long as they can use the cover of their mystery to uphold it. Only by exposing the mystery (the secret) of their idolatry point-blank into their face can you achieve some result to make them draw back. But this exposing can only be done if people have eyes to see through the babylonian ambiguity, and become aware of how they do it.

So let me help you with another explanation to do just that.


Charlemagne

A statue of Charlemagne, probably from the 9th century a.D., Church of St. John the Baptist, in Munster, Switzerland.

Charlemagne was the king of the Franks from a.D. 768 til 814. The Franks were a Germanic-speaking people who invaded the western Roman Empire in the 5th century a.D. They ended up dominating present-day northern France, Belgium, and western Germany. Today's country of France (Francia) has its name from the Germanic Franks.

The Franks established the most powerful Christian kingdom of early medieval western Europe.

Charlemagne –also called Charles I is known by his byname Charles the Great or Karl der Grosse in German. Because of his achievements he was called King father of Europe. Some Slavic languages in Europe derived the term for king from his name ( for example in Czech: král, or in Polish: król ). About one thousand years later Napoléon Bonaparte –the emperor of the French during the 19th century even called himself Charlemagne's successor, to express his admiration for the accomplishments of this Frankish king.

Such has been the renown of this king Charlemagne.

The strength of Charlemagne's personality was evidently rooted in the unbroken conviction of being at one with the divine will. Without inward contradiction, he was able to combine personal piety with enjoyment of life, a religious sense of mission with a strong will to power, rough manners with a striving for intellectual growth,
and intransigence against his enemies with
rectitude.

from the Encyclopedia Britannica

Before the year a.D. 800 there were upheavals in Rome, rivalries between two different factions for the papacy of Rome. Pope Leo III had enemies, these accused the pope of many crimes –the proponents of the papacy call it misconduct in church terminology you would call it sins. In a.D. 799 on April 25th –during a Roman procession– pope Leo was physically attacked by assailants incited by the opposing Adrian faction, and was removed from the procession to be taken into imprisonment. His opponents intended to blind the pope and to cut out his tongue due to the crimes he was being accused of, in order to disqualify him from continuing his papacy.


The habit of blinding an opponent in order to prevent him from continuing as the emperor of Rome was not unique to the Adrian faction which opposed pope Leo III. Prior to that –in the year a.D. 797 the empress of the eastern Roman empire called Byzantine –her name being Irene did the same to her own son Constantine VI in order to disqualify him from his throne as the emperor of Byzantine in Constantinople. Seventeen years prior to a.D.797 the father of Constantine –emperor Leo IV of Byzantine– had died and the then ten year old Constantine had become emperor of Byzantine, with his mother Irene as his guardian and co-emperor until his adulthood. But Irene loved her reign so much, even more than the eyesight of her own son. She did not want to let go of it when her son Constantine began to complain that he wants to make decisions independently. Through skillful intrigue she organized a conspiracy with the bishops and the courtiers against her own son to usurp power. Constantine was arrested and blinded at his mother's behest. Hence she disqualified him –by that they mean to have rendered him handicapped for an effective reign– at the age of 27 as her opponent. After this misconduct she changed her title from empress to emperor and continued her reign –which she previously had had together with her son– for an additional 5 years, until she was deposed by another conspiracy involving officials and generals in a.D. 802. Such were the manners back then; today they call it lawfare and impeachment when they seek to disqualify an inconvenient opponent.

Irene is also known for having restored the cult of images for religious worship, which had previously been abolished in Byzantine. The prospective income from this form of idolatry may have been a motivating factor for those treacherous bishops who joined Irene's conspiracy against their own emperor of Byzantine, namely Irene's 27 year old son Constantine. The cult of images for religious worship persists until this day, be it in the Catholic Church, in the various Orthodox churches, the Russian Orthodox Church –which even declares itself to be the continuation of Byzantine– and also in the Armenian Apostolic Church –for as long as the corrupt babylonian priesthood can maintain a presence in the Church to make the decisions for it; they do not draw back voluntarily, no matter how much loss they cause for others.

Icons symbolize meaning, like for example the icon of St. George which I use at the end of my articles. But people are not supposed to worship these icons, nor to pray to those saints and angels which the icons represent. They who adhere to the cult of images –be it back then or up until now– do just that; they worship these icons instead of worshiping God the Father directly. Therefore it is a form of idolatry even if in appearance it seems to be Christian.


But lets get back to the western part of the Roman empire –the sixth head of the beast– after it was split in two as a consequence of the deadly wound which it received from the victorious resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.


In the western part of the Roman empire –after the misconduct of his abusers– pope Leo III fled from Rome across the Alps to Charlemagne at Paderborn. There he pleaded with this king of the Franks Charlemagne to protect him. Charlemagne disapproved of what had happened in Rome. He may have pitied the pope in his abused state, seeing what they had done unto him in Rome. He agreed to protect the papacy and to restore order in Rome for pope Leo.

So Charlemagne ordered the pope to be escorted back safely from the Frankish kingdom to Rome in November of a.D. 799. Consequently the accusations against the pope were discredited and the pope managed to have his accusers arrested and punished. Hence Charlemagne helped to restore the papacy in Rome to Leo III.

But after restoring the papacy to Leo III in November of a.D. 799, the confusion continued in Rome; the people were just not happy with this pope. In the following year, in autumn of 800, king Charlemagne personally went to Rome to quote: restore the state of the church, which was greatly disturbed.

Now, king Charlemagne had a son by the name of Louis. Arrangements were made for a coronation ceremony to crown the king's son Louis in Rome on December 25th in a.D. 800. Charlemagne himself –at the age of about 12 had been crowned by pope Stephen II near Rome; together with his father Pipin and brother Carloman they were consecrated by the pope as kings of the Romans. So this custom was not out of the ordinary for Charlemagne, he himself had received it as a child from a previous pope. And maybe pope Leo persuaded Charlemagne to accept this ceremony in Rome for his son Louis –during the pivotal time at the turn of a century as a gesture of gratitude and friendship for the help that the king had provided to secure for Leo the throne of the papacy. So the coronation of the king's son Louis was planned and organized to take place on December 25th in a.D. 800 in the old Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome.

On December 23rd pope Leo solemnly purged himself of the charges against him in the presence of king Charlemagne in Rome. In today's terms you would say pope Leo pardoned himself of the charges against him; similar to the presidency of the United States of America of today where the president has the power to pardon others –or himself as in the case of president Nixon. But even back then in the middle ages a charlatan like pope Leo III may not have conceived the concept of preemptive pardons, as it has been established in modern times for the presidency of the United States of America; where this power serves as an assurance for criminals that they can do whatever they want for as long as the president of the United States of America remains under the control of what people generally refer to as the deep state. Back then in a.D. 800 the concept of indulgence –the idea that people can pay money to the clergy to supposedly purge themselves of their sins– had not yet been established in the Catholic Church; they did big money after it was established: The more people sinned, the wealthier the Catholic Church became, which is the exact opposite of how the clergy is supposed to minster to the church of Jesus Christ; it goes against the commandment of Christ that true repentance is required for the remission of sins. But be it with or without indulgence, pope Leo III solemnly purged himself of the charges against him in the presence of king Charlemagne.

Pope Leo saw no other way for his survival –maybe even for the survival of the papacy of Rome– than to plead for the protection of this Frankish king Charlemagne; because his own people hated him in Rome and the eastern Roman empire called Byzantine sought to dominate the leftovers of the Roman empire. With the help of Charlemagne this pope Leo III managed to extend his reign –which had begun in a.D. 795 until 816.

But in order to secure the protection of this Frankish king Charlemagne, the pope needed more than just the exploitation of the king's empathy towards his mistreatment by those abusers.

The pope needed to make it official, and he
by using cunning craftiness
did just do that.

So the preparations for the coronation ceremony of king Charlemagne's son Louis had been made in Rome, and the king attended mass with his son in the old Saint Peter's Basilica on December 25th in a.D. 800.

But suddenly and unbeknownst to king Charlemagne –while he was praying in the basilica– pope Leo took the crown intended for the coronation of the king's son Louis and put it on the head of king Charlemagne, and thereby crowned this Frankish king to become the Roman emperor, having his allegiance to (dependency on) the papacy of Rome; something which Charlemagne had not aspired to become, because he was an independent king.

A depiction of the unbeknownst crowning of king Charlemagne by pope Leo III in Rome on December 25th in a.D. 800.

Here is another depiction of that event:

A medieval depiction of the unbeknownst crowning of king Charlemagne by pope Leo III in Rome on December 25th in a.D. 800.

Everything had been prepared beforehand for this underhanded ceremony to take place:

  • The festivities for a coronation event in Rome –assuming it would be the coronation of Charlemagne's son Louis– had been prepared and organized.
  • Important or relevant dignitaries had been invited, assuming they would be attending the coronation of the king's son Louis.
  • A crown was present in the Basilica for the coronation ceremony, without any suspicion about its purpose there.
  • And while Charlemagne was praying during the mass in the Basilica, it was assured that the king's head would not be covered by his own crown, in order to receive the crown as Roman emperor from pope Leo.

When the pope put the crown on the head of the unsuspecting king, he proclaimed in front of the large gathering within the Basilica that Charlemagne is the new emperor of the western Roman empire. The choir started singing, instruments started playing, and the astonished Charlemagne –after standing up from his kneeling position– would not even have been heard in the Basilica, even if he had known what to say about this unexpected incident with pope Leo III.

In so doing pope Leo III revived the imperial office of the western Roman empire. He reestablished prestige for the papacy of Rome, which it had lost previously due to misconduct, wrong-doings and corruption. The pope had no legal ground for doing this. In those days Charlemagne could have consecrated himself to become the Frankish emperor –after overcoming all opponents– if he had wanted to (as Napoléon did), without any pretense that he is subordinate to the reign of the papacy of Rome. The political ambitions of Rome were not Charlemagne's motivation. But by receiving the title of emperor out the pope's hand, a legal precedent was set which the papacy of Rome exploited. In the following centuries –even a thousand years the papacy of Rome used this legal precedent to involve itself in the affairs of the monarchies in Europe; to decide who should become king and who not, to even depose kings who did not want to remain subordinate to the papacy of Rome. In this wise the papacy exploited the potential of the various European nations for the advancement of its own goals.


The type of reign which pope Leo III revived for the papacy in Rome is describe in Scripture as:

The Great Prostitute and the Beast

And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

book of Revelation, chapter 17: verse 18 - KJV

But the history of this type of reign goes much farther back in history than the establishment of the papacy in Rome. This type of reign has been exercised throughout millenia:

The Great Prostitute and the Beast

And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:

With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

book of Revelation, chapter 17: verses 1 to 5 - KJV

I have already explained about the seven-headed beast in my article called: The beast whose deadly wound was healed.

And the cult of images which empress Irene reestablished in Byzantine –after it had been abolished, and after she disqualified her own son Constantine by blinding him in order to usurp power–
is described in Scripture in this prophetic passage:

The Second Beast

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,

And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

book of Revelation, chapter 13: verses 11 to 15 - KJV

What in the days of the byzantine empress Irene were just still images have in our times become

motion pictures with audio, generated by CGI , deployed for Virtual Reality,

amplified by what they call Artificial Intelligence powered by vast data-centers,

extended by means and methods of remote cognitive terrorism
to directly project it unto people's subconsciousness without any visual contact,

carried out by hateful religious zealots –who call themselves scientists

through the usage of victims who have been mentally subdued by their godless culture for to be used as their
scapegoats,

in order to carry out this sin against the Holy Ghost
which has no forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come
on their behalf.


That's how far this cult of images has come in the course of time!

Hence the Apostle John describing this revelation as:
And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.


And because the Babylonians seek worship for that which they desire to become reality, they depict their wishful-thinking with imagery which they put before other people –be it still images as during Irene's time, or Hollywood movies in our time– like for example this idol in the St. Sarkis church of the Armenian Apostolic Church in Tehran, Iran; where I –as a one year old child– was baptized:

What they depict with this idol is the dependency-relationship of MYSTERY BABYLON with whoever happens to hold the orb –an emblem of royal power– in his hand. And the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ –He who dealt the deadly blow to the beast-system– was supposed to be sacrificed for the realization of this babylonian wishful-thinking.

Which thing did not happen!

But let's get back to Charlemagne.


King Charlemagne felt offended by how pope Leo III took advantage of his piety with the underhanded trick on December 25th in a.D. 800 at the old Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome. Charlemagne was content with being the king of his Frankish kingdom and did not want to be involved in Roman politics between the western and the eastern part. The historian Einhard –who was the biographer of Charlemagne– recorded the king as having said: That he would not have set foot in that church on that Christmas if he had known the pope's intention. Historians who want to defend and uphold the official narrative in favor of the papacy will give you different interpretations for why Charlemagne said this. But you will find other confirmation for the disapproval of Charlemagne for what had happened on December 25th in the old Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome. When the time had come for the coronation of Charlemagne's son Louis, his father did not go to Rome to have this ceremony be conducted by the pope –who still was Leo III. Instead the coronation of Louis –also called Louis I, known by his byname Louis the Pious or Ludwig der Fromme in German– took place in a.D. 813 in the city of Aachen where his father Charlemagne had established his palace. In so doing Charlemagne broke with the family tradition of being crowned by the pope. The two elder sons of Charlemagne had died and therefore Louis became coemperor with Charlemagne in 813 –without any papal involvement– and the sole successor of Charlemagne. Only a few months later Charlemagne died in a.D. 814.


About one thousand years after the underhanded trick of pope Leo III, a Frenchman Napoléon Bonaparte stepped forward to set the record straight. Napoléon's coronation ceremony took place on December 2nd in 1804 at Notre-Dame cathedral in Paris, France. And it was arranged that pope Pius VII conduct the ceremony there, according to the already long-standing European tradition –based on the legal precedent which pope Leo III had established back in a.D. 800 that the pope conduct such ceremonies.

But this time it was the monarch who surprised the pope!

Just as the pope was about to put the crown on Napoléon's head,
the Frenchman simply took the crown out of the pope's hand and
crowned himself with it, proclaiming that he is
the emperor of the French:

The Coronation of Napoleon,
by painter Jacques-Louis David (1807)

Napoléon is quoted as having said:
I am the successor of Charlemagne


Charles III

In His name and after His example I come not to be served but to serve.


A more recent example of babylonian trickery took place during the coronation ceremony of Charles III on May 6th in 2023 at Westminster Abbey in London, England.

By exposing such trickery I do not express any intent of ridiculing or embarrassing anyone;
except the Babylonians of course.

But in order to dispel the belief that such ambiguous machinations only happened in past history, or that the instigators involved today have become more civilized than those during the time of pope Leo III with his underhanded trick against king Charlemagne, I would like to highlight the babylonian trickery which I observed during the coronation ceremony of Charles III in London, England on May 6th in 2023.

As a freelancer who makes a living with web-development work I neither pretend to be able to expound the centuries-old intricacies of the relationship between the British monarchy and the Church of England, nor is it necessary for the purpose of this article; professional historians are more suited for that. But when such professionals are constrained by the dogmas of the institutions they depend on, or are not motivated by the love of the Truth, or simply can not perceive circumstances according to the understanding which comes with the Spirit of God, then their explanations remain ineffective for the advancement of the Truth, or the edifying of the church thereof; and too many intentionally aim at just that.

The explanations of such biased professionals become like the doctrine of the Nicolaitans where the learned academics seek to keep the lay people in ignorance, and pretend that just because they have learned the nomenclature of their profession, that this alone would supposedly justify them in everything they say and do;

which thing Christ hates!
(book of Revelation, chapter 2: verses 6 and 15)


So the coronation ceremony of Charles III took place at Westminster Abbey on May 6th 2023. It surely was laden with symbology, as it is not surprising for such a place like Britain with its mythical history. Most of such symbology is ambiguous, for to cover it in mystery, for it to be used by those who hide themselves behind mystery.

But I will remain with the advice given in Scripture to avoid foolish questions and contentions when it comes to the interpretation of such symbology. The ambiguity of it is meant to waste people's time with it, and to eventually lead them in the wrong direction.

Nevertheless, that which is self-evident can not be denied, if one has eyes to see it. And furthermore it is the Spirit which reveals intentions –for those who can perceive it. In our times imagery is produced –on an industrial and global scale– to distract from perceiving truthfully. Explaining such matters the way I do helps others to see what is being hidden in front of their eyes, despite the imagery produced by the media do distract from it.

If you want to watch the coronation ceremony of Charles III you can do it for example here:
Coronation ceremony Charles
YouTube video, 3:52:31


During the coronation ceremony –which in appearance was a Christian ceremony– you had the sign of the inverted cross –it being the sign of anti-Christ– being displayed all the time (by those people in the background holding the swords in their hands pointing upwards). That's showing intent what the ceremony is all about; namely to not honor the Lord Jesus Christ, let alone any monarch who is made to pledge to follow the example of the Lord.

A pledge was prepared for the monarch, who –by reading it from a script– said:

In His name and after His example I come not to be served but to serve.
(in the above video at about 15min:30sec)

Surely there is nothing wrong with following Christ's example,
surely it is what we are meant to do.

Just not with the Babylonians as intermediaries!

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

Jesus Christ, book of Matthew, chapter 10: verse 16 - KJV

The English are famous for having produced the King James translation of Scripture in 1611, which I also use for my studies and do cite in the articles that I publish on my domain at prophet.am. That translation from 1611 does have unintentional and intentional errors –the latter skillfully crafted. It also denies the true name of God Yahweh by replacing it with Jehovah, as the Ararat translation of the Armenians unfortunately also does. Furthermore the duplicitous machinations of the Babylonians brought it about that in 1611 after the compilation of the King James translation, the book of Revelation ended up being the sixty-sixth book of the Bible, for the purpose of cursing it.

Another fiery dart which the adversary fired against the Truth in England is the fact that in the English language they refer to the Good news as the Gospel.


To clarify:

The Good news is the news

–spread by the Apostles, and by prophets, and by saints, and by the faithful
throughout all these centuries and a thousand years–

that Christ is risen from the dead.

That is the Good news.


But apparently some people in England –could you guess that it might be the Babylonians?– did not (and do not) like this Good news. They established the homonym Gospel in the English language in order for not having to call the good news –spread by the faithful of Christ– as Good news. They took the two words go and spell and put them together to form the word gospell (go-spell); as if the good news passed on to us about the New Testament and the consequent sending of the Holy Ghost –as promised by Christ– was some kind of spell that God cast on people, and which –according to babylonian thinking– needed to be removed by invoking the incantation: Go spell !

Godly people do not use the term Gospel with mal-intent,
but the Babylonians surely do.

That's the purpose why they fabricate such homonyms.


Another very famous homonym in the English language is the very word God itself.

Whether it be a Hindu, or a Buddhist, or a Muslim, or the money-man at the Federal Reserve who give reverence to Mammon by printing the slogan in God we trust on their Federal Reserve Notes called the US Dollar, or whether it be babylonian Rabbis who insist that themselves are gods, or whether it be so many other religious factions in this world: When it comes to them expressing what they mean to be god, they all use in the English language the word
God.

And Christians use it too.

This probably most famous homonym in the English language called God makes it very comfortable for the Babylonians to freely move like fish in water in order to weave duplicitous entanglements for others with the cover of ambiguity.


It is necessary to understand:

When Babylonians talk about god,
they do not mean Almighty God Yahweh,
to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen

When they talk about god they mean themselves.


Whether it be Leo III during Charlemagne's time, or whether it be Justin Welby during the coronation ceremony of Charles III, or whether it be John Roberts during the inauguration of Donald Trump
–about which I will explain in the section about the Americans in this article–
when they use the term god,

they mean themselves.


So much for the love towards our Saviour Jesus Christ in the English language. But do not think that the English are pioneers when it comes to such duplicitous machinations. The fingerprints of the sisterhood of the serpent –who are experts in this type of activity– go much farther back in history here in my fatherland of Armenia than they do on the British island.

But let's get back to Charles III.


During the coronation ceremony of Charles III he was required to give reverence to the head of the Church of England Justin Welby, and to swear what they call the Statutory Accession Declaration Oath; the English variant of what the Americans call the oath of office for an elected president.

But when you give reverence to someone or something,
you also give reverence to what he or it represents.
(The swearing in of Charles III begins in the above video at about 23 minutes.)

The following were the requirements for the British monarch in order for him to be pronounced king and to receive the coronation regalia –the emblems of royal power, including the crown which in England seems to be an independent institution in and of itself, not under the control of the British monarchy– from the religious authority of that country:

  • The monarch had to swear to maintain the settlement –by this they mean the continuation of the establishment– of this religious authority above him, which does not hide its intention that it is committed to the true profession of the go-spell, which includes to have peoples of all faiths and beliefs be able to do whatever they want in the land of the monarch with its traditional Christian culture, including the rampage of Muslim rape-gangs and the condemnation and imprisonment of any Christian who dares to speak up against it.
  • Then the monarch had to kneel in front of the head of this religious authority above him Justin Welby (instead of kneeling independently with inward direction towards the true God, God the Father in heaven) and to promise to maintain in the United Kingdom whatever allowances this religious authority has managed to occupy for itself in the United Kingdom throughout the course of centuries by enshrining it in what it calls Law ;
  • to maintain and preserve invariably the doctrine, worship, discipline and government of this religious authority as it sees fit, regardless of whether it is in contradiction with Christian doctrine or not;
  • to preserve unto the bishops and clergy of England and to the churches committed to their charge all such rights and privileges as by law due, which in England apparently includes the allowance for homosexuals and women with uncovered hair (in video at about 1h:44min:25sec) to show themselves as if being Christian priests and bishops, which is in direct violation of Scripture, be it the New Testament or the Old Testament;
  • and the monarch confirmed to perform all these promises that he gave by invoking God (presumably God Almighty and not the Babylonian in front of whom he was made to kneel) and saying: So help me God.

Such were the requirements during the coronation ceremony of Charles III,
in order for him to be pronounced king by this religious authority above him.

Does this look like Christian authority,
or rather
duplicitous babylonian ambiguity?


Now if you are worried that it may take a thousand years
until an Englishman steps forward in order to set the record straight
–as Napoléon did in 1804 to counter the underhanded trick of Leo III against Charlemagne in a.D. 800

then you don't know British monarchy.

In Britain they react much faster than that!


When I published my article “Anything but Jesus„ on August 28th in 2024 I remembered this pledge by Charles III which he made on May 6th in 2023. And in that article –in the section “Anything but Jesus„ - in Britain– I do hint at this type of babylonian trickery by cautioning:

Anyone who desires to follow Christ's example should remember what Christ explained about them who hate Him:

For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?

Jesus Christ, book of Luke, chapter 23: verse 31 - KJV

Two days after the publication of my article “Anything but Jesus„ it was announced on August 30th 2024 that the Armenian temple dedicated to the worship of the babylonian idolatry for downing kings in the city of Vagharshapat would be re-consecrated, because the cover of its mystery had been blown away by the revelation of the truth about it and by making people become aware of it.

But you should not rejoice yet by thinking that the Babylonians changed course. When the Babylonians say they re-consecrate, that is like zeroing the time-counter of a cassette recorder by pressing the reset button, only to then continue playing the same cassette all over again.

For as long a babylonian priesthood has its settlement,
they just do not change doing what they do,
which is blaspheming God.


Furthermore it was announced on November 12th 2024 –not yet three months after the publication of my article– that the head of the Church of England Justin Welby, who conducted the coronation ceremony of Charles III, has given his resignation due to some scandalous misconduct in his church,
which they apparently allow themselves to occur,

because of having their conduct enshrined in what they call Law,
and for which they require the pledge of British monarchs
that it be maintained and preserved by the monarch to the utmost of his power
in order for the monarch to receive the coronation regalia
out of their hand;

just as they depict it with their idolatry
based on their concept of the cult of images
which was reestablished by Irene back in Byzantine:

Such is the character of Babylonian machinations!

Let's get to the Americans.


Donald Trump

In America things are so much more modern,
including babylonian machinations.

There is no kneeling, there is no crown, ...

... just a simple handshake.


I have already explained how the Babylonians used Abraham Lincoln to bring about a civil war in America in order to nullify the Constitution of We the people, and to establish their Colorable Law with the appearance of a Constitutional Republic in its stead, in order to also have the sovereign of this land –which is We the people receive their allowances out of the Babylonian's hand, in exchange for being exploited by them. It was from after the civil war and onward that the influence of the Babylonians grew in America and was institutionalized for legal practice.

Wherever Babylonians establish themselves in a society
–be it in times past or in our modern times–
they strive to find a way how to make the people of that society worship them as if god.

They seek to derive for themselves the authority before God Almighty to rule over those people who acknowledge them as if being god. In so doing they bring the wrath of God Almighty upon those people, whom they exploit for the advantage of their selfishness.

And they could not care less about what becomes of those people
after they are done exploiting them.

Ever since the settlement of the Babylonians after the American civil war –and because the Americans do not have a monarchy like in Europe– the entry point for the Babylonians became the American presidency. In the presidency of America We the people –the sovereign of the land– has the executive power. If they can make the executive power acknowledge them as if god, then they can use that to form a legal justification in the spiritual context for usurping power for themselves when it comes to making the decisions for We the people –the true sovereign of the land.


In America it is necessary for an elected president –be it with or without remotely controlled voting machines– to take the so called oath of office before he can exercise his authority as the president of the United States of America. And this oath of office is set to be administered during the inauguration ceremony by a member of the so called Supreme Court –one of the three branches of government of the United States of America. And on January 20th in 2025 John Roberts did just that.

If you want to watch the inauguration ceremony of Donald Trump you can do it for example here:
Donald Trump Inauguration 2025
YouTube video, 2:03:42


During the inauguration ceremony two religious authorities were called to the podium to make their invocation: One was Franklin Graham and the other Timothy Dolan (in the above video at about 40min:30sec). Timothy Dolan having a crucifix hung around his neck –an idol for the worship of the killing of Jesus Christ instead of rejoicing about the Lord's victorious resurrection from the dead, which is the actual Good news of the New Testament did start his invocation by saying:

"Be still and know that I am god,
supreme amongst the nations, supreme amongst the earth."

And then he began a prayer by crossing himself with the sign of the
inverted cross:

Now if you want me to explain to you the meaning of what this man prayed as his invocation during the inauguration ceremony of his president in the rotunda of the US Capitol in Washington D.C. after he crossed himself with the sign of the inverted cross, so be it known to you that I can not explain it for you.

Because whenever I see such garbage,
I just skip the rest of it!


So I skipped forward to the invocation by Franklin Graham
and found what a Christian prayer can sound like.


Then came the swearing in of the elected president Donald J. Trump.
(In the above video at about 49 minutes)

Here is for you the exchange of words that was required during the swearing-in ceremony, in order for the elected president Donald J. Trump to be inaugurated as the 47th president of the United States of America, and thereby receive executive power for We the people of America –the sovereign of the land:

  • Roberts: Please raise your right hand and repeat after me:
  • Roberts: I Donald John Trump do solemnly swear
    Trump: I Donald John Trump do solemnly swear
  • Roberts: that I will faithfully execute
    Trump: that I will faithfully execute
  • Roberts: the office of President of the United Sates
    Trump: the office of President of the United Sates
  • Roberts: and will to the best of my ability
    Trump: and will to the best of my ability
  • Roberts: preserve, protect and defend
    Trump: preserve, protect and defend
  • Roberts: the Constitution of the United States
    Trump: the Constitution of the United States
  • Roberts: so help me god
    (the Babylonian John Roberts who is administering the oath of office in front of Donald Trump).
  • Trump: so help me God
    (presumably –I wish it for him– God Almighty who saved his life on July 13th 2024 in Butler, Pennsylvania).

So what is the meaning of what these two men are actually saying?

Donald Trump means that God help him to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States during the course of his presidency; and this is how the outward appearance of the oath of office is meant to be.

Contrary to that: John Roberts means that since he is administering the oath of office to the president –without which he can not be inaugurated during this ceremony in order to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States– that he is helping him to achieve just that; Roberts is directing Donald Trump's closing so help me God towards himself.

And Roberts seals this acknowledgment deal with a handshake ...

... and a friendly smile on his face.


Some may be bewildered when reading this explanation concerning the meaning of this inauguration ceremony for the president of America. And they who benefit from this type of dependency-relationship surely won't admit the truth of it. But such tactics and intentions are not new, as I have already explained with the few examples in this article.

If John Roberts was a Christian, there would be no ambiguity involved in this ceremonial inauguration. But since he chooses to be a member of the babylonian settlement which was established in America after the civil war, and since they in the so called Supreme Court choose to be called Justice instead of Judge –which is a form of babylonian idolatry as I already explained in my Armenian article, initially published on April 15th and 16th in 2024 on the Moon of Alabama website– they are putting themselves in front of American presidents in the service of this babylonian settlement. And if you give reverence to it –like kneeling during the coronation ceremony of a monarch– or if you seal their deal with a handshake –as it is done during the inauguration ceremony of American presidents– then that's an official sign of consent which you give to what they choose to represent; and they use such signs of consent to justify whatever they intend to do with you.

And according to the traditional babylonian thinking:

If the people are too dumb to get it,
it's supposedly the people's fault.

That's how this type of babylonian trickery works.


There are many ways how to conduct such a ceremony. When people are honest and upright this is not even an issue to be discussed. But being honest and upright is not what motivates Babylonians.

Surly the Americans can find a way how to solve this issue in a civilized manner –if they want to– and surely something does not become the will of God Almighty just because some Babylonians seek to have fun with such ambiguous trickery and underhanded machinations.

But it is a sign of weakness if it remains unnoticed, and such a sign of weakness serves the Babylonians as signal that there is opportunity to exploit.

However, the character of the Americans is such that they do not give in to weakness:

To the Church in Philadelphia

And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;

I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Lord Jesus Christ, book of Revelation, chapter 3: verses 7 to 13 - KJV

Such is the help from God
(if you choose to accept it).

But be it known to you that
there is no concord of Christ with Belial!
(Apostle Paul, 2nd book of Corinthians, chapter 6: verse 15)


In closing

Although the above segment is an appropriate way to bring this article to closing, I just can't bring my self to finish this article without mentioning another historical detail.

Since I briefly summarized in this article the story of Charlemagne –the Frankish king of Germanic origin who was called Karl der Grosse in the German language– I would like to bring to attention another historic circumstance related to this king; namely the looting of Germany in the 20th century.

The German people also had their time as a Christian empire (called: The Holy Roman empire of German nation) under the suzerainty (the dependency) of the papacy in Rome. The Germans also became a powerful nation in their time. Many Germans emigrated to America when the nation was at its beginning; there were so many Germans involved in forming America that at some point they were considering to make the German language the official language of the country instead of English. In the 20th century the Germans were set up for destruction –motivated by the Babylonians– and their civilization received a blow from which it still has not recovered.

As a consequence of losing the second World War –which actually was the continuation of the first one with a pause in between– large amounts of cultural heritage were pillaged and ransacked from the German people, which this civilization had accumulated during the course of its centuries-old history. The Germans have counted that the Red Army alone stole more than two million pieces of cultural works of art which it brought back to the Soviet Union; and these are just the officially counted numbers, the private robberies are not included here.

But neither did the westerners behave differently. An American clergyman by the name of Ludwig A. Fritsch gave this account about the ongoings of that time which he himself witnessed:

Millions of tonnes of stolen goods were brought as “Souvenirs„ to America with our transport means through the US Postal and Customs services. The silver dinner-set of the last Kaiser (emperor), a gift by the German cities for the 25th anniversary of his reign, it alone weighs seven tonnes, and the Colonel, who stole this magnificent work of art and who considered it to be a war-trophy, is a lawyer in his private life! ... What an abundance of art treasures of all kinds had been collected throughout the course of centuries in this first civilization of creative nations; in museums, castles, mansions and private collections as the property of the great historic families!

Each larger city in Germany had so much works of art as usually does an entire country.

This is the civilization which the descendants of Charlemagne's people had become
before they were set up for destruction in the 20th century.
(100 year war against Germany - PDF file part 2of3)


It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

The heaven for height, and the earth for depth, and the heart of kings is unsearchable.

Take away the dross from the silver, and there shall come forth a vessel for the finer.

Take away the wicked from before the king, and his throne shall be established in righteousness.

King Solomon, book of Proverbs, chapter 25: verses 2 to 5 - KJV

At some point of World War II the Americans reached the German city of Aachen, the very same city where king Charlemagne had established his palace and where the coronation of his son Louis took place in a.D. 813. And the coronation regalia of this Frankish king apparently fell into the hands of the Americans (although some say that these were just replica, which may not be true).

One way or the other, while preparing this article I just could not leave out this one image,
which depicts how fools look like who do not understand what they have been dragged into:

A man shall be satisfied with good by the fruit of his mouth:
and the recompence of a man's hands shall be rendered unto him.

The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.

King Solomon, book of Proverbs, chapter 12: verses 14 and 15 - KJV

Maybe some will heed to the counsel of this article.