Bible Believers' Newsletter 376

"We focus on the present Truth – what Jesus is doing now. . ."
ISSN 1442-8660

Christian greetings in the precious Name of our Lord Jesus Christ; May you be blessed.

Our guest contributor, Jill Cohen Walker, is a student of legal history and the US Constitution; she began to study current events and Bible prophecies in March 1985. Her deep interest in and awareness of American politics started during the 2000 elections when she realized the prophetic time clock was ticking fast.

Her research confirms how the broad course of history is planned centuries ahead of events, and fine-tuned by applying strategic intelligence with advances in science and technology, as Christians see the broad prophetic vision and hone their understanding to the present truth. It portrays how the banksters employ international law that prohibits repudiation of national debt to guarantee their loans to both sides of a conflict whereby they transfer the wealth of both parties to their arm. Without subterfuge Christians trust God's unfailing and unchanging Word, knowing that all things work together for good to those who love God and are elect according to His purpose.

The United States is transparently depicted as the image of the beast of Imperial Rome in the political realm as we know Papal Rome's apostate (once) Protestant daughter churches constitute her image in the spiritual realm. Jill's research also confirms that under the plague of the Sixth Vial Judaeo-Communism and the Judaeo-Masonic United Nations are gathering the kings of the earth and the whole world to Armageddon as the Prophet taught us.

It demonstrates Satan is Prince of this world, ruling all nations through the "Hidden Hand" of the Money Power now as he did when Jesus walked this earth (Matthew 21:10-17). This explains why there can be no democracy so long as there are party political systems, and why petitions and mass rallies by millions as for instance against the War in Iraq are ignored by party politicians although they express the clear will of the majority of voters in "democratic" nations, because their agenda is that of the "Hidden Hand" and their Communistic United Nations.

This Newsletter serves those of like precious faith. Whoever will receive the truth is welcome to feed their soul from the waters of the River of Life. Everything here presented should be confirmed personally in your own Bible.

Your brother-in-Christ,
Anthony Grigor-Scott

Bilderberg Banner exposes US Roman Heritage and Future

Bilderberg logo

The Israeli and the American flag (mirrored) with the yellow Admiralty border are on the left signifying the relationship between the US and Israel. The Janus-faced US flag with golden border was the patch on flak jackets of the 101St Airborne Regiment that fought in Iraq. On the right are the US and UN flags. Over all is the Roman Eagle encircled by twelve pentacles or pentagrams of the Roman Catholic New World Order. Full story:

Bilderberg's Secret Agenda, 2005

Bilderberg 2005 will be a decisive conference. The way Europeans will vote to the Constitutional treaty is vital to its future. . . As America is fighting for more and more democracy outside its borders, there are less and less freedoms and liberties inside their own borders. (Patriot Acts I & II). What is called democracy is effectively representing the force and influence of a little class of American, European, Turkish, Asiatic elite. This force is helped by a hyper bourgeoisie force working as the waiters of this elite or knowing carefully what not to do and say to upset their masters. Full story:

What Chemtrails Really Are


January 22, 2005 — These weapons involve beams. When you cross two different beams, you can create scalar energies. These energies can be used as untraceable weapons for nuclear size explosions or for defense. These crossed-energies can also be used to cause a person's physical electrical system to fail or for mind control. Scalar energies can be utilized in hand-held military guns and on tanks and can dud-out electronics or cause large electrical blackouts. Scalar energies are practically impossible to shield against. You need lead, ceramics and a deep underground facility to not be affected by these weapons. Or you need to be up and above the field of battle. (Test devices for scalar waves are designed to give off around 60MW whereas a mobile phone gives off over 3,000MW).

People who are working on these issues hear tones and hums. If you hear persistent tones and static, have neurological damage, body vibrations, burning sensations, immune system damage, are hearing electronic voices, or other anomalous activity then you may be being targeted by directed energy mind control weapons. The weapons could be on helicopters, jets, stealth fighters, or on satellites. These directed energy weapons can be sent to you via hand-held devices or piggy-backed in on cell phone and satellite towers. Full story:

Iran & Syria Armed with Russian S-300 Missiles

During a visit to Ramallah in Palestine on April 29, 2005, President Putin commented: "Expecting Mahmoud Abbas to fight terrorism effectively, we have to realize that a slingshot and a handful of stones won't do the job." Then Putin paused, before adding, "Which Israel clearly understands." Full story:

Comment: In 1961 Brother Branham said, "The handwriting's on the wall. All the time that we've been spending our money, and . . . we become just a big bunch of jokesters, laughing at religion, making fun of it. And all the time, Russia has been putting things in the air that's so far ahead of us, till they're years and years and years ahead of us. You remember the Medo-Persians was at the gate, waiting, when these things happened; and they [the Babylon of that day] knowed nothing about it" (Uncertain Sound, #61-0415E).

Smart Cars

Bill Gates and the leader of Ford outlined a future in which software will enable cars to fix themselves and avoid accidents.

Gates and Bill Ford Jr., said high-definition screens, speech-recognition technology, cameras, digital calendars and navigation equipment with directions and road conditions will set car companies apart from their competitors. Eventually, Gates said, there could be a car that wouldn't let itself crash. Full story:

self-driving carComment: In 1933 the Lord showed Brother Branham a vision and he prophesied, "Science will progress in such a way until they will make a car that will not have to be guided by a steering wheel, and the cars will continue to be shaped like an egg until the consummation," the end time. I seen American family going down the road in a broad way, riding in a car with their backs turned towards where the wheel should be; looked like they were playing checkers or cards. And we got it. It's on television. Popular Mechanics, have it; we got the car. It's controlled by remote control by radar. They won't even have to have any steering wheel in it. Just set your dial like you dial your phone—your car takes you right on to it, can't wreck nor nothing. No other cars—the magnet keeps the rest of them away from you. See? They got it. Oh, my. Think of it. Predicted thirty years before it happened" (Daniel Seventy Weeks, p. 134:205).

Ford and General Motors Credit Rating Disaster

May 6, 2005 — In the United States, two of the world's biggest car companies, Ford and General Motors, have had their credit ratings downgraded to junk status. Hit by falling sales and falling profits, the credit agency Standard & Poors said overnight the one-time leaders of the global car industry are no longer worth an investment grade. Big investors around the globe are expected now to dump the stock of the motoring giants after the downgrade. Full story:

The Road Map to War

Targeting Iran is a bipartisan project, which broadly serves the interests of the Anglo-American oil conglomerates, the Wall Street financial establishment and the military-industrial complex.

The broader Middle East-Central Asian region encompasses more than 70% of the World's reserves of oil and natural gas. Iran possesses 10% of the world's oil and ranks third after Saudi Arabia (25%) and Iraq (11%) in the size of its reserves. In comparison, the US possesses less than 2.8% of global oil reserves. . .

The World is at an important crossroads.

The Bush Administration has embarked upon a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity.

Iran is the next military target. The planned military operation, which is by no means limited to punitive strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, is part of a project of World domination, a military road map, launched at the end of the Cold War.

Military action against Iran would directly involve Israel's participation . . . Israel and the US rather than Iran constitute a nuclear threat. Full story:

Comment: This is likely to produce major divisions between Western allies, between the US and its European partners as well as within the European Union. And the three existing war theaters in which America is currently involved raise the specter of a broader conflict and a successful Russian invasion of mainland USA in perhaps thirteen months.

How the IRS Controls Christian Churches in the USA

According to Rev. Texe Marrs there are thirty-five prohibitions on churches and ministries, demonstrating how the IRS and the federal government now control churches and ensure politically and religiously "correct" behavior. Liberal Christian churches and false religions such as Hinduism, Witchcraft, and Scientology are not affected by these rules—only Bible-believing, Christian ministries and churches. And keep in mind these things are not prohibited by law or by the Constitution. The IRS considers itself above the law and the Constitution. Full story:

Devil Companies, Devil Products, Devil Logos?

What messages are some of the world's top corporations sending with their choices for names of products and companies? In my book Project LUCID, I uncover the curious, occultic overtones of the Lucent Technologies' logo—a fiery red circle. The name "Lucent" is itself questionable. Some say it stands for Lucifer's Enterprises. Of course, the corporation's spokesmen vociferously deny it.

Lucent Technologies is touting its newest software innovation, brand-named "Inferno." Inferno! What message is this mega-giant company—formerly known as AT&T's Bell Labs—trying to send us? Full story:

Swish! – Horrific Media Spikes

The belief that truth is easily realized was one of the great misconceptions attributable to our Founders when Jefferson wrote in The Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident. . ." Equal in importance as regards truth is the timing of its realization, the reputation of the source, its believability in terms of common acceptance, and the degree of importance to the public. For truth, to be of any real value, must have all these elements.

Another way to describe "importance to the public" would be to use the term "impact." Consider the impact of a known news event: 9/11. We are at war in Iraq and Afghanistan because of such impact. And yet, we now know that the reason for our invasion of these sovereign, self-governing nations was based upon a series of manufactured and fraudulently media-hyped lies.

Clearly, an operation whose central mission is the communication of news events must be cognizant of those factors relative to truth, ensuring not only the conveyance of highly relevant news events, but guaranteeing their accuracy as well. As a watchdog of government actions, truth is the press's chief weapon not only in fighting the State's fraud, waste, abuse and corruption, but most importantly, the State's lies!

Zionist domination of the media has been repeatedly proven, and this domination is evident in both the electronic and print media. The commonality of "news" reporting in all the news media, to include major leading newspapers and both network and cable TV journalism, was definitively exposed in Bernard Goldberg's two best-selling books: Bias and Arrogance. And indeed, the common thread throughout the media is its "Jewishness" as opposed to the ongoing bigger-fish-eats smaller fish corporate centralization and the dominance of The New York Times. Full story:

How Communism and the UN Set Out to Destroy America

2005 – by Jill Cohen Walker 150; All Rights Reserved

Part 5

The Commanders of America's Military Forces

I've heard politicians debate "winning the war" vs. "winning the peace." Conservatives prefer a combination while liberals want to dialogue us into "peaceful" concessions with everyone. (Maybe they should start dialoguing with unborn babies—their most ardent enemies, considered good only for spare body parts.) Sorry . . . truthful digression . . .

Winning the war first is not exactly rocket science, but something bugged me about both positions. A little research proved that dialoguing and the "win the war, then the peace" methods are used by the UN to secure world domination through alleged "wars of liberation." First they allegedly liberated everyone from Communism, even though they're all Communists, and now they're on a campaign to liberate humanity from Christianity and God. Thanks, but no thanks. Check this out . . .

According to Maj. Arch E. Roberts AUS (Ret), an 18-year veteran and author of Victory Denied . . . Why Your Son Faces Death in "NO-WIN WARS" (which exposed the real goals of the United Nations and those in the Pentagon and State Department who were driven to destroy the United States), the Hon. John T. Wood of Idaho spoke before the US Flag Committee in New York (October 10, 1951). Regarding the UN Charter, he said, ". . . a perusal of articles 43 to 51, inclusive, will reveal the fact that it was designed as an instrument of force." He was right. The UN is not a playground for peaceniks. It's a not-so-new-age world body that destroys individual liberty and vanquishes national sovereignty by force.

Perhaps that's why it's been so hard to fight back. Late in the UN's gestation period, Maj. Roberts saw most Americans "gripped by a paralysis of indecision," which stopped them from taking action. He said "the surrender program of the Planners" had to be defeated. Obviously, "we the people" were supposed to surrender, not them. Maj. Roberts also studied the office of UN Undersecretary for Political and Security Affairs (hereinafter undersecretary). That person was also the Executive Officer of the UN Security Council and the head of UN military forces in Korea and Vietnam. Through at least 1987, he was a (Soviet) Communist . . . and he commanded our military.

Of course, most Americans believed the President of the United States acted as Commander in Chief during those wars. Not true. And if the UN is still in command, then an interesting conundrum exists for liberals who want to lay the blame for every war on the US government. It's a game for them-like blaming the current administration for the alleged prison abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. Dare they blame the UN and admit who's really in charge?

Americans should have protested Communist rule over our military long ago. After all, the media made it no secret. An article in the May 22, 1963, edition of The New York Times, "Russian Named to High UN Post," confirmed Maj. Roberts' research. "The post for political and Security Council affairs traditionally has been held by a Soviet national. The undersecretary is a senior advisor to the Secretary General." As Maj. Roberts wrote, "The UN Undersecretary certainly is a "Senior Advisor:"—He is also Commander-in-Chief of the UN Army." UN records confirm this information:

Most Americans were caught up in the prosperity that permeated the two decades following World War II and had no idea their government sold them out. However, some voiced serious concerns about the power of the UN undersecretary over US military forces. For example, on January 17, 1957, Congressman Usher L. Burdick (R-ND) spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives. His speech was titled, "The Russians are and will continue to be on the Inside of any Military Action taken by the Security Council of the United Nations." He said, "This means that since the Security Council was organized, the Russians, through the Secretary, have had close touch with all military plans. The directives to MacArthur and the reports coming from him passed through the hands of this secretary. Now can you realize what MacArthur was up against in trying to win the Korean War?" (Must be why the Vietnam War was such a fiasco for the US military. They were like sitting ducks for the enemy. Remember that when you visit the war memorial in Washington, DC).

Congressman Burdick's words didn't stop the UN. As Maj. Roberts noted, they sped up their "usurpation of military power for subversive purposes. Today the [UN] Security Council is a prime instrumentality for global conquest." He wrote those words during the 1960s. So, ask yourself again if the global gymnastics that took place at the UN before the invasion of Iraq were a charade. Note also that the war-making power of the UN is exactly what those who authored the Charter had in mind. If a nation wouldn't join peacefully, it would be dragged in using force. The UN created the right political reasons and media propaganda convinced the world it was the right thing to do. It's almost a form of brainwashing.

The real question is: How did the UN co-opt our military power and put a Soviet in charge without opposition from the US government? Maj. Roberts followed the power trail. A quote from In the Cause of Peace by Trygve Lie, the first Secretary General of the UN, reveals: "Mr. Vyshinsky did not delay in this approach. He was the first to inform me of an understanding which the Big Five had reached in London on the appointment of a Soviet national as Assistant Secretary-General for Political and Security Affairs." As Maj. Roberts said, it was "international collusion that placed a Communist in supreme command of the UN military."

Additional proof was found in a letter from Mr. Wallace Irwin, Jr., the UN's Director of Public Services, in response to an inquiry from Admiral de la Houssaye, Sons of the American Revolution. He wanted to know if the Soviets controlled the US military. In his reply (April 7, 1961) Irwin wrote, ". . . both Mr. Stettinius and the French stressed their agreement to the Soviet Post was a limited one, designed to get the Secretariat off to a good start." (Now there's an oxymoron: "get off to a good start" with Communism in charge)?

Irwin also said the Secretary General had the authority to choose his staff based on "the highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity." Color me foolish and call me naive, but if the Communists possessed such sterling qualities, why did our media make us fear them during the Cold War? Maj. Roberts wrote, "Well—it may be that by UN standards only Soviet nations have the efficiency, competence, and integrity to take charge of the military of all nations, including ours. But their standards are not our standards and I denounce the men and the system which has forced our whole military establishment into this intolerable position."

The selling out of the US was cleverly disguised under the banner of world peace; and who was going to tell us the truth? The media? The politicians? Not a chance. The sooner the UN took over America, the sooner their global government would become a reality. Remember, they had that little surrender plan that designated "we the people" as the surrendered (or surrenderees).

Now go a step further: If the UN was really created to promote world peace, why does Chapter VII deal directly with military action and the use of military force? Maj. Roberts said "the legalistic language simply means . . . that the Security Council of the United Nations has the authority to declare "peace"—and to go on shooting—as was the case in Katanga" where hospitals [were bombed] and civilians were murdered by UN forces. (So, if things go well, the UN gets the credit; if not, the US gets the blame, i.e., Korea, Vietnam . . . and now Iraq. It's another "win-win" for the UN and a black eye for us).

For the record, there's no Military Staff Committee, just a Chairman who rotates out of the five original signers. The "committee" language was inserted to "fool the American people." Even Trygve Lie called the committee "stillborn," which means the undersecretary had (still has?) all the control. As Maj. Roberts wrote, this includes "the American defeat in Korea, the rape of Katanga, and our military and economic hemorrhage in Viet Nam." The UN didn't have to join us in Iraq because their "man" was already in charge. (Once again, the hired "peaceniks" have been protesting the wrong leaders).

This also explains why the US Congress stopped declaring war as proscribed by Article 1, section 8 of the US Constitution—the UN usurped that power as well. This was admitted during the MacArthur hearings before a joint Senate Committee made up of members of the Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees. "The United States should never again become involved in a war without the consent of Congress . . . For the first time in the history of our nation the Constitutional authority of Congress to declare war was bypassed." (It may have been the first time, but it won't be the last time our Constitution is bypassed or recreated. It's been happening for more than a century. Let's all take a moment to pay homage to Cecil John Rhodes).

The UN used the Korean War to justify placing American military forces around the world. Now, ponder the recent news stories about reinstating the draft and you'll see who really wants your sons and daughters in the "US" military. It's not specific high-paid American politicians who want another draft; it's the UN that wants it. Politicians who support the impending Tower of Babel are the UN's lackeys in Congress. If this were not true, we'd have been out of there decades ago . . . or we wouldn't have been there in the first place. It was the Congress of the United States that ratified the UN Charter (probably before it was even written), and it's the US Congress that still bows a knee to this anti-American organization.

Maj. Roberts said: "Its objective is to overthrow the government of the United States and of the several states, by peaceful means if possible; by force and violence if necessary." The enemy "circumvented our Constitution" and designed a program that would "redirect the allegiance" of our military. This would leave "we the people" without a defensive fighting force against the UN, which is now stealing our land. Using "managed news," Americans were never told about the "re-molding of the role and mission of our armed forces"—to "debase and destroy the concept of 'Honor-Duty-Country' as outmoded and outdated, and replace it with a new military attitude that embraces "international responsibilities." That leaves our troops "brainwashed to accept mercenary service in the UN army led by Communists." (Gives new meaning to the tours of duty of Al Gore and John Kerry).

The good Major also wrote about the creation of the "Military Government Reserve Units," which trained thousands of American soldiers as "specialized elements in so-called 'Logistical Commands'." The training they received was first exposed in 1951 by Dr. V. Orval Watts in his book, The United Nations—Planned Tyranny. Their first "sally" occurred in July 1951 with "simulated invasions and seizures of nine California cities, i.e., Compton, Culver City, Inglewood, Hawthorne, Huntington Park, Long Beach, Redondo Beach, South Gale, and Torrence."

They didn't fly the American flag when they arrived; they flew the flag of the UN. According to the July 16, 1951, edition of the Culver City Evening Star News, they arrested "the mayors and police chiefs of the liberated cities" because they refused to "collaborate with the occupying forces." (Do you see the big picture? American soldiers arrested Americans for not complying with the UN and the UN military).

The article also referred to the soldiers as a "Military Government, United States Army," and held it was the first time that "the combined Military Government reserve units of an army area embracing six western states [was ever] deployed in a single field exercise." It must have been horrifying to see the American flag lowered and "the enemy flag flying over the city with American Military Government officials directing the ceremony." By 10:30 that morning, the M.G. was already investigating . . . [municipal] operations, had taken control of the newspapers, public utility companies, and produced a "detailed study of the industrial capacity of [each] community." (Perhaps the deindustrialization of the US had more to do with the UN's eventual takeover. Industrial facilities can be used to produce weapons and oil refineries produce the fuel to make them run. It's odd that the President now wants to build refineries on defunct military bases).

Lt. Col. Thomas M. Mullen told the Los Angeles Times that "Military Government troops remove civil and business leaders from their positions, keep them incarcerated, and eventually try them on charges of collaborating with the enemy which has been in power." Local papers documented the manifesto issued by the Lt. Col. which included: "by virtue of the authority vested in me by the United Nations Security Council." Maj. Roberts said the exercises were "arrogant notice to the American people that the US Military establishment is no longer an extension of their will." He added: "With brutal force the Security Council revealed that the US Army is now a coercive weapon of the United Nations, and is to be employed in consonance with the concealed objectives of the . . . Charter."

How many US states, cities, towns, and even corporations have caved to this plan to destroy America? Are most corporate CEOs and political leaders in power through UN appointment? It's an abominable understatement to say we've been duped. Truth is we've been totally asleep while they did their little "simulations" in Lampasa, Texas, (April 3, 1952) and Watertown, New York (August 20, 1952) "in case there was another civil war in America"—a war they planned to create or foment at the right time. During civil rights struggles, they invaded Little Rock, Arkansas, and Oxford, Mississippi. And remember, they told "we the people" that they were there "by the authority vested in them by the United Nations."

During the "Military Muzzling" investigations, Dr. Robert E. Beerstecher, a professional witness, said, "The Communist theory of revolution holds that the power of the state rests upon the military, so that in order to achieve the Communist take-over they feel it is essential to destroy the military establishment and replace it by one of their own manufacture" (See: Military Cold War Education and Speech Review Policies, p. 109). Well, they didn't destroy or replace our military . . . they stole it out from under us. As Maj. Roberts noted, there's a "shocking parallel between the Communist theory of 'Revolutionary Anti-Militarism' and the Internationalizing of our military establishment."

Now read the words of Mrs. Mary Davidson from a Council for Statehood release: "Secrecy and duplicity are keystones of the United Nations. They could not exist otherwise." She also said that during the Korean War, the UN was fearful that field commanders would find out that everything filtered back to the undersecretary at UN headquarters. To cover their tracks, they formed a committee (Executive Military Authority) that would answer to the Soviet undersecretary and had the power to fire and replace the UN Commander-in-Chief, the title assigned to General MacArthur. (See Senate Document Number 87, January 7, 1954, "Review of the United Nations Charter" p. 569-653) Page 646 reveals the "Military Measure" that would be taken under UN Security Council Authority and proves the UN runs our military. It was the non-existent Committee that maintained security and peace were "guided by the principals set forth in the preamble to the 'Uniting for Peace' resolution."

It all came back to Article 43 of the Charter, which gave the UN the right to use our military as it pleased. The UN military is organized and controlled by the Security Council with "advice and assistance of the Military Staff Committee." Since there was no committee, the power stayed in the hands of the Communist undersecretary. All military decisions in "limited wars of liberation" are based on the goals and objectives of the UN, not those of any one nation.

By the way, it was not President Truman who fired General MacArthur. He had no authority to fire him. Only Constantine E. Zinchenko, the Communist undersecretary from 1949-1953, had that authority. Our politicians in Washington and "we the people" had no control over the Korean or Vietnam Wars. During Vietnam, Vladimir Pavlovich Suslov, another Soviet Communist, had the power. He knew the number of troops that were deployed, their locations, and every move they made. He then relayed that information to the Communists. (Pity the deluded protesters . . .)

Maj. Roberts was bitter about the "unconstitutional and illegal acts" that transformed "our military forces into agencies of aggression for a UN take-over. He said, ". . . there can be no small coincidence in military and political leadership which would surrender American soldiers to exploitation by a United Nations authority-the same authority which cost us 157,350 casualties and a 'no-win' stalemate in Korea." And how many died in Vietnam?

Well, I'm the real kind of patriot-the kind that believes we are a constitutional republic and that "we the people" must never surrender. I support our troops who are truly loyal to this nation. However, I will not support the US military or any military action that is overtly or covertly under the control of the UN. If our military is no longer operating to defend this nation, I want to know. If they're not . . . we better start forming a real American army that will defend us when these "perilous times" become even more perilous. I hope you're still polishing that uniform . . . Further reading: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, The Shadow Government of the United States, 600 US Civilian internment Camps.

Comment: If the relationship between Christian Western Civilization and the International Communist Conspiracy (Red Fascism) were called, and treated as, War, instead of Cold war, or Peaceful Coexistence, this situation so succinctly summarized by Sister Walker (and Professor Burnham in his book, Suicide of the West) would be recognized as a series of most devastating defeats for the West. . .

Fifty-five years have passed since Dimitri Manuilsky, a one-time Russian delegate to the UN, spoke of "launching the most spectacular peace movement on record." The object of this was to be to "put the bourgeoisie to sleep," so that the final take-over of the entire world by the Communists would succeed through the element of surprise.

This "peace offensive" was launched by Khrushchev in 1956—the year of the jubilee of the Azusa Street, Los Angeles, Pentecostal Revival and the United States' last opportunity for national repentance. The vital importance of Khrushchev's speech at the Twentieth Party Congress was that it inaugurated the strategy of "peaceful coexistence" as the means of achieving world-wide Communist dictatorship—an objective which clearly could not be gained by a conventional military confrontation. nl376.htm

Pass it on . . . please send this article to someone you know
Brother Grigor-Scott is a non-denominational minister who has ministered full-time since 1981, primarily to other ministers and their congregations overseas. He pastors Bible Believers' tiny congregation, and is available to teach in your church.

Bible Believers' Church
Currabubula NSW
Australia 2342
e-mail Bible Believers URL Bible Believers' Website
PowerPoint presentation The Second Coming of Christ
Subscribe to Newsletter Unsubscribe from Newsletter