11,141
edits
Destruction of Los Angeles: Difference between revisions
→Los Angeles was too sink soon after
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
Why does William Branham compare the sinking of Los Angeles to the sinking of Capernaum when, in fact Capernaum did not sink? Rather, it was simply abandoned, and its ruins are on the shore of the sea of Galilee to this day. We know because we've been to Capernaum. The ruins are still there. | Why does William Branham compare the sinking of Los Angeles to the sinking of Capernaum when, in fact Capernaum did not sink? Rather, it was simply abandoned, and its ruins are on the shore of the sea of Galilee to this day. We know because we've been to Capernaum. The ruins are still there. | ||
==Los Angeles was | ==Los Angeles was to sink soon after== | ||
In 1965, while relating a story about the Alaska earthquake, William Branham stated that Los Angeles would sink shortly thereafter - ''In a few days a great earthquake's going to strike on the west. And it won't stop. California, Los Angeles will sink. It's going down.'' | In 1965, while relating a story about the Alaska earthquake, William Branham stated that Los Angeles would sink shortly thereafter - ''In a few days a great earthquake's going to strike on the west. And it won't stop. California, Los Angeles will sink. It's going down.'' | ||