Is God giving America up?
- Thread starter MOC
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
George Washington bowed his knee to the papacy, and sent Ben Franklin to secure the help of France in the revolutionary war against England, Lafayette and his forces, who was awarded the area of Louisana for his efforts.
France was subordinate to the rule of the pope at the time
Maryland a (Catholic) colony donated the land the Capitol is built on, a French freemason Pierre Charles L'Enfant designed and built the building
Wikipedia: Maryland Toleration Act,
The Calvert family, who founded Maryland partly as a refuge for English Catholics, sought enactment of the law to protect Catholic settlers and those of other religions that did not conform to the dominant Anglicanism of Britain and her colonies.
France was subordinate to the rule of the pope at the time
Maryland a (Catholic) colony donated the land the Capitol is built on, a French freemason Pierre Charles L'Enfant designed and built the building
Wikipedia: Maryland Toleration Act,
The Calvert family, who founded Maryland partly as a refuge for English Catholics, sought enactment of the law to protect Catholic settlers and those of other religions that did not conform to the dominant Anglicanism of Britain and her colonies.
Well, what do you think it means that God has "given up America?" America is just the name of the nation we live in. America isn't defined by the governmental bodies or the the actions of people in places like Chicago or New York for example.
Each individual will give account of his or herself on the day of judgement. God won't say "Because you're from America and great sins occurred within the borders of that country you are given up!" Judgment will hinge solely on whether or not we have faith in Christ's sacrifice to satisfy the wrath not God against wickedness.
I think you're trying to say that America is in a position to be given up as if it was ever entered into an exclusive covenant with God as a people and nation.
Israel is in a unique position before God as a people and a nation who entered into the covenant mosaic law with God, America never did anything like that.
Sin enters the world through people and the consequences of that sin can effect others. Take Adam and Eve for example; we still feel the effects of their sin.
God may bring divine judgment on wickedness, but it's the amount of good people present who are restrainers of wrath. Was Sodom and Gomorrah spared? No, but if there would have been at least 10 righteous people it would have spared.
Each individual will give account of his or herself on the day of judgement. God won't say "Because you're from America and great sins occurred within the borders of that country you are given up!" Judgment will hinge solely on whether or not we have faith in Christ's sacrifice to satisfy the wrath not God against wickedness.
I think you're trying to say that America is in a position to be given up as if it was ever entered into an exclusive covenant with God as a people and nation.
Israel is in a unique position before God as a people and a nation who entered into the covenant mosaic law with God, America never did anything like that.
Sin enters the world through people and the consequences of that sin can effect others. Take Adam and Eve for example; we still feel the effects of their sin.
God may bring divine judgment on wickedness, but it's the amount of good people present who are restrainers of wrath. Was Sodom and Gomorrah spared? No, but if there would have been at least 10 righteous people it would have spared.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
What really cracks me up most is how CHRISTIANS think George Washington and the Founding Fathers of America were Christian hahahahahahahahaha
Need I only mention one needs to read the Thomas Paine Article called "Age of Reasoning" to see the Founding Fathers were in line with VOLTAIRE and the FreeMasons.
In the Age of Reasoning, Thomas Paine explains how the Founding Fathers went to the local CHURCHES and presented, "{give us your men to fight against the British for Religious Freedom and breaking away from the English Church}. They CONNED the Christian Settlers here to go to war thinking it was about Religious Freedom, when it was always about a New Nation birthing out of the hands of England.
Perfect Example:
We have back n forth letters from Thomas Jefferson to John Adams who reveal making fun of those who believe in a MYTHICAL GOD.
In fact, John Adams himself in his Treaty of Tripoli
[The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion...]
— U.S. Treaty with Tripoli, 1797!!
^ If that doesn't explain that America is not founded on God, then nothing does!
Need I only mention one needs to read the Thomas Paine Article called "Age of Reasoning" to see the Founding Fathers were in line with VOLTAIRE and the FreeMasons.
In the Age of Reasoning, Thomas Paine explains how the Founding Fathers went to the local CHURCHES and presented, "{give us your men to fight against the British for Religious Freedom and breaking away from the English Church}. They CONNED the Christian Settlers here to go to war thinking it was about Religious Freedom, when it was always about a New Nation birthing out of the hands of England.
Perfect Example:
We have back n forth letters from Thomas Jefferson to John Adams who reveal making fun of those who believe in a MYTHICAL GOD.
In fact, John Adams himself in his Treaty of Tripoli
[The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion...]
— U.S. Treaty with Tripoli, 1797!!
^ If that doesn't explain that America is not founded on God, then nothing does!
-
2
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Globalism is the sin that got God so annoyed that He destroyed a tower, scattered people over the globe and confused their language. This is in part how God established nations in the first place. There is nothing wrong with nationalism. It is the antidote to globalism.
But what is a nation? A nation is NOT some arbitrary political boundary that demarcs whether you pay tax to this or that overlord. A nation is a group of people, bound together by race, religion, heritage, ethnicity. It's really just your very extended family. Nothing wrong with love for your family. Nothing at all.
Don't give in to satanic globalism. Don't listen to their whisperings. Libertarianism is a siren's call.
But what is a nation? A nation is NOT some arbitrary political boundary that demarcs whether you pay tax to this or that overlord. A nation is a group of people, bound together by race, religion, heritage, ethnicity. It's really just your very extended family. Nothing wrong with love for your family. Nothing at all.
Don't give in to satanic globalism. Don't listen to their whisperings. Libertarianism is a siren's call.
-
2
- Show all
Facts About the Maryland Colony
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-517357098-5b97e84bc9e77c0050db4821.jpg)
Bettmann / Getty Images
By
Martin Kelly
Updated June 26, 2019
The Province of Maryland—also known as the Maryland Colony—was founded in 1632 as a safe haven for English Catholics fleeing anti-Catholic persecution in Europe. The colony was established by Cecil Calvert, 2nd Baron Baltimore (also known as Lord Baltimore), who also governed the Colony of Newfoundland and the Province of Avalon. The Maryland Colony's first settlement was St. Mary's City, which was built along the Chesapeake Bay. It was the first settlement in the New World to guarantee religious freedom for all Trinitarian Christians.
Fast Facts: Maryland Colony
The idea for an English colony along the Chesapeake Bay where Catholics could live and worship in peace came from George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore. In 1632, he received a charter from King Charles I to found a colony east of the Potomac River. That same year, Lord Baltimore died, and the charter was given to his son, Cecil Calvert, 2nd Baron Baltimore. The first settlers of the Maryland Colony included a mix of about 200 Catholics and Protestants who had been promised land grants; they arrived on the ships the Ark and the Dove.
Why Was Maryland Founded?
Following the Protestant Reformation, Europe experienced a series of religious wars in the 16th and 17th centuries. In England, Catholics faced widespread discrimination; for example, they were not allowed to hold public office, and in 1666 they were blamed for the Great Fire of London. The first Lord Baltimore, a proud Catholic, envisioned the Maryland Colony as a place where English people would have religious freedom. He also wished to found the colony for economic gain.
Sir Anthony Van Dyck's painting of King Charles I and Queen Henrietta Maria. Heritage Images / Getty Images
The new colony was named Maryland in honor of Henrietta Maria, the queen consort of Charles I. George Calvert had previously been involved in a settlement in Newfoundland but, finding the land inhospitable, hoped this new colony would be a financial success. Charles I, for his part, was to be given a share of the income that the new colony created. The first governor of the colony was Cecil Calvert's brother, Leonard.
Interestingly, although the Maryland Colony was ostensibly founded as a refuge for Catholics, only 17 of the original settlers were Catholic. The rest were Protestant indentured servants. The settlers arrived at St. Clement's Island on March 25, 1634, and founded St. Mary's City. They became heavily involved in the cultivation of tobacco, which was their primary cash crop along with wheat and corn.
Over the next 15 years, the number of Protestant settlers steadily increased, and there was fear that religious liberty would be taken away from the Catholic population. The Act of Toleration was passed in 1649 by Governor William Stone to protect those who believed in Jesus Christ. However, this act was repealed in 1654 when outright conflict occurred and the Puritans took control of the colony. Lord Baltimore actually lost his proprietary rights and it was some time before his family was able to regain control of Maryland. Anti-Catholic actions occurred in the colony all the way up until the 18th century. However, with an influx of Catholics into Baltimore, laws were once again created to help protect against religious persecution.
Timeline
Bettmann / Getty Images
By
Martin Kelly
Updated June 26, 2019
The Province of Maryland—also known as the Maryland Colony—was founded in 1632 as a safe haven for English Catholics fleeing anti-Catholic persecution in Europe. The colony was established by Cecil Calvert, 2nd Baron Baltimore (also known as Lord Baltimore), who also governed the Colony of Newfoundland and the Province of Avalon. The Maryland Colony's first settlement was St. Mary's City, which was built along the Chesapeake Bay. It was the first settlement in the New World to guarantee religious freedom for all Trinitarian Christians.
Fast Facts: Maryland Colony
- The Maryland Colony was founded in 1632 after its charter was approved by King Charles I. It was a proprietary colony of Cecil Calvert, the second Lord Baltimore.
- Like other settlements in the New World, the Maryland Colony was established as a religious refuge. Although it was created as a haven for English Catholics, many of the original settlers were Protestants.
- In 1649, Maryland passed the Maryland Toleration Act, the first law in the New World designed to encourage religious tolerance.
The idea for an English colony along the Chesapeake Bay where Catholics could live and worship in peace came from George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore. In 1632, he received a charter from King Charles I to found a colony east of the Potomac River. That same year, Lord Baltimore died, and the charter was given to his son, Cecil Calvert, 2nd Baron Baltimore. The first settlers of the Maryland Colony included a mix of about 200 Catholics and Protestants who had been promised land grants; they arrived on the ships the Ark and the Dove.
Why Was Maryland Founded?
Following the Protestant Reformation, Europe experienced a series of religious wars in the 16th and 17th centuries. In England, Catholics faced widespread discrimination; for example, they were not allowed to hold public office, and in 1666 they were blamed for the Great Fire of London. The first Lord Baltimore, a proud Catholic, envisioned the Maryland Colony as a place where English people would have religious freedom. He also wished to found the colony for economic gain.
Sir Anthony Van Dyck's painting of King Charles I and Queen Henrietta Maria. Heritage Images / Getty Images
The new colony was named Maryland in honor of Henrietta Maria, the queen consort of Charles I. George Calvert had previously been involved in a settlement in Newfoundland but, finding the land inhospitable, hoped this new colony would be a financial success. Charles I, for his part, was to be given a share of the income that the new colony created. The first governor of the colony was Cecil Calvert's brother, Leonard.
Interestingly, although the Maryland Colony was ostensibly founded as a refuge for Catholics, only 17 of the original settlers were Catholic. The rest were Protestant indentured servants. The settlers arrived at St. Clement's Island on March 25, 1634, and founded St. Mary's City. They became heavily involved in the cultivation of tobacco, which was their primary cash crop along with wheat and corn.
Over the next 15 years, the number of Protestant settlers steadily increased, and there was fear that religious liberty would be taken away from the Catholic population. The Act of Toleration was passed in 1649 by Governor William Stone to protect those who believed in Jesus Christ. However, this act was repealed in 1654 when outright conflict occurred and the Puritans took control of the colony. Lord Baltimore actually lost his proprietary rights and it was some time before his family was able to regain control of Maryland. Anti-Catholic actions occurred in the colony all the way up until the 18th century. However, with an influx of Catholics into Baltimore, laws were once again created to help protect against religious persecution.
Timeline
- June 20, 1632: King Charles I grants a charter for the Maryland Colony.
- March 25, 1634: The first group of settlers, led by Leonard Calvert, reach St. Clement's Island in the Potomac River. They established St. Mary's City, the first Maryland settlement.
- 1642: The people of the Maryland Colony go to war against the Susquehannocks; fighting will continue until the two groups sign a peace treaty in 1652.
- 1649: Maryland passes the Maryland Toleration Act, which guarantees religious freedom to all Trinitarian Christians
- 1767: A border dispute between Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Delaware results in the drawing of the Mason–Dixon line, which marks Maryland's northern and eastern borders.
- 1776: Maryland joins the rest of the 13 American colonies in a revolution against England.
- September 3, 1783: The American Revolution officially comes to a close with the signing of the Treaty of Paris.
- April 28, 1788: Maryland becomes the seventh state to be admitted to the United States.
T
-
1
- Show all
L
Not to derail this thread, but you might want to go back and reread Exodus chapter 19:
[3] And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;
[4] Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.
[5] Now therefore, IF ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, THEN ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
[6] And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
The possibility of Israel being "an holy nation" was an IF/THEN proposition from the beginning, and they rarely ever kept their end of the agreement.
Not only this, but this proposition DEFINITELY includes Gentiles.
For example, in direct correlation to this proposition, we read:
I Peter chapter 2
[2] As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
[3] If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
[4] To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
[5] Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
[6] Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
[7] Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
[8] And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
[9] But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
[10] Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
Immediately after rightly describing how many/most Israelites had stumbled over the "stone of stumbling, and rock of offense" by rejecting Christ, Peter said "but YE ARE a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, AN HOLY NATION", and this "ye", in context, definitely included GENTILE BELIEVERS IN CHRIST or those "which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy".
[3] And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;
[4] Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.
[5] Now therefore, IF ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, THEN ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
[6] And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
The possibility of Israel being "an holy nation" was an IF/THEN proposition from the beginning, and they rarely ever kept their end of the agreement.
Not only this, but this proposition DEFINITELY includes Gentiles.
For example, in direct correlation to this proposition, we read:
I Peter chapter 2
[2] As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
[3] If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
[4] To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
[5] Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
[6] Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
[7] Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
[8] And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
[9] But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
[10] Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
Immediately after rightly describing how many/most Israelites had stumbled over the "stone of stumbling, and rock of offense" by rejecting Christ, Peter said "but YE ARE a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, AN HOLY NATION", and this "ye", in context, definitely included GENTILE BELIEVERS IN CHRIST or those "which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy".
-
2
- Show all
B
What, "race, religion, heritage, ethnicity". Is the United States?
This country is exactly what you described, "arbitrary political boundary that demarcs whether you pay tax to this or that overlord." Prove other wise.
Globalism is also idolatry just as much as nationalism, if that is where you place your hopes, and ascribe worship.
Your family may be your pagan neighbors, I am a foreigner to them. My family are the children of God in Christ Jesus where ever they are.
This country is exactly what you described, "arbitrary political boundary that demarcs whether you pay tax to this or that overlord." Prove other wise.
Globalism is also idolatry just as much as nationalism, if that is where you place your hopes, and ascribe worship.
Your family may be your pagan neighbors, I am a foreigner to them. My family are the children of God in Christ Jesus where ever they are.
what
i thought it was they were trying to get away from the church of ENGLAND...those rebellious americans just wanted to worship any way they pleased, even making up their own religions, eg. mormonism, jehovahs witness, christian science.....and scientology!
UK isnt any better...but they have a QUEEN not a king currently on the throne lol.
i thought it was they were trying to get away from the church of ENGLAND...those rebellious americans just wanted to worship any way they pleased, even making up their own religions, eg. mormonism, jehovahs witness, christian science.....and scientology!
UK isnt any better...but they have a QUEEN not a king currently on the throne lol.
L
For those of us who live in the USA, I trust that, as I have, you’ve often heard that this nation “was founded upon Judeo-Christian beliefs or principles”, “was a Christian nation from its inception”, or something very similar.
I’m here to tell you today that, contrary to popular belief, such claims couldn’t be further from the truth, and I will seek to prove my assertion from both the Bible and the words and works of this nation’s very own founding fathers.
Let’s begin with God.
If this nation truly was founded as a “Christian nation”, then nobody would be more aware of the same than the Christian God himself.
One of the ways in which God distinguishes himself from “other gods” is by accurately foretelling the future or through prophecy that is ultimately fulfilled in the precise manner in which God himself forecasted.
In the context of denouncing idols or “other gods”, God says the following about himself:
“Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:” (Isa. 46:9-10)
Has God truly “declared the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done”, and do any such declarations pertain directly to the USA?
You tell me.
Firstly, I'm going to present a specific prophecy from scripture which I fully believe, in part, pertains to the USA in which many of us presently live.
Secondly, seeing how certain prophecies within the Bible are cryptic in nature, I'm going to allow the Bible to define its own terminology so we can properly assess exactly what was prophesied of God.
Lastly, we'll look to history to see if there's any validity to both the prophecy itself and the God who uttered it.
With that introduction behind us, here is the prophecy:
Revelation chapter 13
[1] And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
[2] And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
[3] And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
[4] And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
[5] And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
[6] And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
[7] And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
[8] And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
[9] If any man have an ear, let him hear.
[10] He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.
[11] And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.
[12] And he exercises all the power of the first beast before him, and causes the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
[13] And he does great wonders, so that he makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
[14] And deceives 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.
[15] 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.
[16] And he causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
[17] And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
[18] Here is wisdom. Let him that has understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
In verse 11, we read of "another beast", and, in verse 12, we read of "the first beast before him" or "the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed".
We’re given several different descriptors of “the first beast” in verses 1 through 8, verse 12, and also in verses 14 through 18.
Before we discuss any descriptors that we’re given in relation to these “beasts”, let’s determine what a “beast” represents in Bible prophecy.
Like John, the prophet Daniel also had visions concerning “beasts”, and this is what they represent:
"These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth." (Dan. 7:17)
Again:
"Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces." (Dan. 7:23)
Seeing how a "beast" in Bible prophecy is representative of a "king" and his "kingdom", God showed John a "first beast" (vs. 12) or of a first king and his kingdom with “seven heads” (vs. 1).
John then “saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed” (vs. 3), or "the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed" (vs. 12), or “the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live” (vs. 14).
John also saw "another beast" (vs. 11) or another king and his kingdom which would come after “the first beast before him” (vs. 12) or after “the first beast” (vs. 12).
Although this "another beast" is the primary focus of this post, please allow me to quickly point out something about "the first beast".
This prophecy pertaining to "the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed" (vs. 12) was perfectly fulfilled in precisely the manner in which God foretold when the Papacy regained its power after the signing of the Lateran Treaty back in 1929.
In other words, in 1870, the Papacy was stripped of its power, and this is when “the deadly wound” was received.
Then, 59 years later, in 1929, “the deadly wound” was healed at the signing of the Lateran Treaty which placed the Papacy back in power.
IN FACT, both the newspapers of that day and Roman Catholics of our day referred/refer to this event as "the deadly wound being healed", and I can easily provide documentation to back my assertion.
Turning our focus away from “the first beast”, let’s now see if we can properly assess who this “another beast” or another kingdom is.
Again, we read:
“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.” (Rev. 13:11)
Seeing how we’ve already determined that a “beast” in Bible prophecy represents a “king” (Dan. 7:17) and his “kingdom” (Dan. 7:23), we know that this “another beast” truly is another king/kingdom.
This is CLUE #1 towards assessing its proper identity.
Also, seeing how “the first beast BEFORE HIM” or “the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed” (vs. 12) is the Papacy, we know that this “another beast” or another kingdom must appear on the world scene AFTER the Papacy appeared.
This is CLUE #2 towards assessing its proper identity.
The prophecy also declares that this “another beast” or another kingdom” has “two horns” (vs. 11), so what do “horns” represent in Bible prophecy?
We read:
“And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.” (Dan. 7:24)
Again:
“And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.” (Rev. 17:12)
In the same manner that a “beast” is representative of both a “king” (Dan. 7:17) and his “kingdom” (Dan. 7:23) in Bible prophecy, so too are “horns” representative of a “king” (Dan. 7:24, Rev. 17:12) and his “kingdom” (Rev. 17:12) in Bible prophecy.
(continued in my next post)
I’m here to tell you today that, contrary to popular belief, such claims couldn’t be further from the truth, and I will seek to prove my assertion from both the Bible and the words and works of this nation’s very own founding fathers.
Let’s begin with God.
If this nation truly was founded as a “Christian nation”, then nobody would be more aware of the same than the Christian God himself.
One of the ways in which God distinguishes himself from “other gods” is by accurately foretelling the future or through prophecy that is ultimately fulfilled in the precise manner in which God himself forecasted.
In the context of denouncing idols or “other gods”, God says the following about himself:
“Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:” (Isa. 46:9-10)
Has God truly “declared the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done”, and do any such declarations pertain directly to the USA?
You tell me.
Firstly, I'm going to present a specific prophecy from scripture which I fully believe, in part, pertains to the USA in which many of us presently live.
Secondly, seeing how certain prophecies within the Bible are cryptic in nature, I'm going to allow the Bible to define its own terminology so we can properly assess exactly what was prophesied of God.
Lastly, we'll look to history to see if there's any validity to both the prophecy itself and the God who uttered it.
With that introduction behind us, here is the prophecy:
Revelation chapter 13
[1] And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
[2] And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
[3] And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
[4] And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
[5] And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
[6] And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
[7] And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
[8] And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
[9] If any man have an ear, let him hear.
[10] He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.
[11] And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.
[12] And he exercises all the power of the first beast before him, and causes the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
[13] And he does great wonders, so that he makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
[14] And deceives 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.
[15] 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.
[16] And he causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
[17] And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
[18] Here is wisdom. Let him that has understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
In verse 11, we read of "another beast", and, in verse 12, we read of "the first beast before him" or "the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed".
We’re given several different descriptors of “the first beast” in verses 1 through 8, verse 12, and also in verses 14 through 18.
Before we discuss any descriptors that we’re given in relation to these “beasts”, let’s determine what a “beast” represents in Bible prophecy.
Like John, the prophet Daniel also had visions concerning “beasts”, and this is what they represent:
"These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth." (Dan. 7:17)
Again:
"Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces." (Dan. 7:23)
Seeing how a "beast" in Bible prophecy is representative of a "king" and his "kingdom", God showed John a "first beast" (vs. 12) or of a first king and his kingdom with “seven heads” (vs. 1).
John then “saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed” (vs. 3), or "the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed" (vs. 12), or “the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live” (vs. 14).
John also saw "another beast" (vs. 11) or another king and his kingdom which would come after “the first beast before him” (vs. 12) or after “the first beast” (vs. 12).
Although this "another beast" is the primary focus of this post, please allow me to quickly point out something about "the first beast".
This prophecy pertaining to "the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed" (vs. 12) was perfectly fulfilled in precisely the manner in which God foretold when the Papacy regained its power after the signing of the Lateran Treaty back in 1929.
In other words, in 1870, the Papacy was stripped of its power, and this is when “the deadly wound” was received.
Then, 59 years later, in 1929, “the deadly wound” was healed at the signing of the Lateran Treaty which placed the Papacy back in power.
IN FACT, both the newspapers of that day and Roman Catholics of our day referred/refer to this event as "the deadly wound being healed", and I can easily provide documentation to back my assertion.
Turning our focus away from “the first beast”, let’s now see if we can properly assess who this “another beast” or another kingdom is.
Again, we read:
“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.” (Rev. 13:11)
Seeing how we’ve already determined that a “beast” in Bible prophecy represents a “king” (Dan. 7:17) and his “kingdom” (Dan. 7:23), we know that this “another beast” truly is another king/kingdom.
This is CLUE #1 towards assessing its proper identity.
Also, seeing how “the first beast BEFORE HIM” or “the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed” (vs. 12) is the Papacy, we know that this “another beast” or another kingdom must appear on the world scene AFTER the Papacy appeared.
This is CLUE #2 towards assessing its proper identity.
The prophecy also declares that this “another beast” or another kingdom” has “two horns” (vs. 11), so what do “horns” represent in Bible prophecy?
We read:
“And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.” (Dan. 7:24)
Again:
“And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.” (Rev. 17:12)
In the same manner that a “beast” is representative of both a “king” (Dan. 7:17) and his “kingdom” (Dan. 7:23) in Bible prophecy, so too are “horns” representative of a “king” (Dan. 7:24, Rev. 17:12) and his “kingdom” (Rev. 17:12) in Bible prophecy.
(continued in my next post)
-
1
- Show all
L
(continued from my last post)
In fact, we have another clear-cut example in scripture where a “beast” with “two horns” represented a “kingdom” comprised of “two kings”.
In relation to the same, we read:
Daniel chapter 8
[1] In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first.
[2] And I saw in a vision; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai.
[3] Then I lifted up my eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
[4] I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.
[5] And as I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
[6] And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had there seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.
[7] And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and broke his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
[8] Therefore the he-goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
In verse 3, we see a “beast” or “a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last” or we see a kingdom comprised of two kings.
This is not merely my own interpretation.
Instead, when Daniel was given the interpretation of his vision by the angel Gabriel, this is what he was told:
Daniel chapter 8
[19] And he said, Behold, I will make you know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.
[20] The ram which you saw having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
[21] And the rough goat is the king of Greece: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
[22] Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
The “ram” or “beast” that Daniel saw “having two horns” was “the kings of Media and Persia” (vs. 20) or what we would call the Medo-Persian kingdom.
As we previously read in relation to these “two horns” or two kings, “the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last” (Dan. 8:3).
Daniel was in Babylon when he had this vision, and it was fulfilled precisely how God had foretold.
If you know history, then you know that Babylon initially fell to the Medes, the first “horn” of this “ram having two horns” (Dan. 8:20), only to later be ruled by the Persians, the second “horn”, or “the higher” king, or the stronger king, which “came up last” (Dan. 8:3).
You can read about the same here:
https://ajourneythroughworldhistory.weebly.com/medo-persian.html
Furthermore, exactly as God had foretold, this “ram having two horns”, or the Medo-Persian empire, was ultimately defeated by “the king of Greece” (Dan. 8:21), Alexander the Great.
Further still, when “the great horn was broken” (Dan. 8:8), or when Alexander the Great died, “for it came up four notable ones” (Dan. 8:8), or Alexander the Great’s kingdom was divided between his four generals, Cassander, Ptolemy, Antigonus, and Seleucus.
If you’d like to, then you can read about that here:
https://www.ancient.eu/Alexander_the_Great/
God has been accurately foretelling the future FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, so we really ought to pay attention to what is being shared now.
In light of what we’ve just covered, we know that this “another beast” having “two horns” (Rev. 13:11) is representative of a “kingdom” that is comprised of “two kings”.
This is CLUE #3 towards assessing its proper identity.
In relation to this “another beast”, again, we read:
“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.” (Revelation 13:11)
This “another beast” or another kingdom not only “had two horns”, but, more specifically, “had two horns like a lamb”.
Is this significant information?
Yes, it is.
For one thing, unlike “the first beast before him” or “the first beast” (Rev. 13:12) who was depicted as a compilation of ADULT ANIMALS (“a leopard”, “a bear”, and “a lion” – Rev. 13:2), this “beast” or this kingdom is depicted as “a lamb” or as A YOUNG SHEEP:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lamb
lamb noun
1a: a young sheep
especially : one that is less than one year old or without permanent teeth
In other words, this “beast” or kingdom is a new kingdom in its infancy.
This is CLUE #4 towards assessing its proper identity.
Furthermore, the word “lamb” appears twenty-seven times in the book of Revelation, with this being but one of those twenty-seven times, and in each and every instance it is clearly a reference to Jesus Christ.
I won’t type out every verse for you because this post is already almost a book, but here are the scriptural references:
Rev. 5:6, 8, 12, 13, 6:1, 16, 7:9, 10, 14, 17, 12:11, 13:8, 11, 14:1, 4 (2X), 10, 15:3, 17:14 (2X), 19:7, 9, 21:14, 22, 23, 22:1, 3.
Seeing how a “lamb” is always representative of Christ in the book of Revelation, we can safely conclude that this “another beast” or another kingdom, which appears on the world scene in its infancy after the Papacy appears, is not only a composite of two kingdoms or made up of “two horns”, but it also is a composite of two kingdoms which profess to be CHRISTIAN KINGDOMS.
This is CLUE #5 towards assessing its proper identity.
Wait a minute…
Why did I say that this “beast” or kingdom which is comprised of “two horns” or two kings only PROFESSES to be Christian in nature?
Well, the answer to that question is right before us.
Once more, we read:
“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.” (Rev. 13:11)
Although this “another beast” or another kingdom “had two horns like a lamb” or appeared to be a composite of two professing Christian kings or kingdoms, in reality, “he spoke as a dragon” or was SATANIC in nature.
The word “dragon” appears twelve times in the book of Revelation in the following portions of scripture:
Rev. 12:3-4, 7, 9, 13, 16-17, 13:2, 4, 11, 16:13, and 20:2.
In all 12 instances, the word “dragon” is a direct reference to none other than Satan himself, and you can easily verify the same by simply checking the references for yourselves.
This is CLUE #6 towards assessing its proper identity.
(continued in my next post)
In fact, we have another clear-cut example in scripture where a “beast” with “two horns” represented a “kingdom” comprised of “two kings”.
In relation to the same, we read:
Daniel chapter 8
[1] In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even unto me Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first.
[2] And I saw in a vision; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai.
[3] Then I lifted up my eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
[4] I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.
[5] And as I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
[6] And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had there seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.
[7] And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and broke his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
[8] Therefore the he-goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
In verse 3, we see a “beast” or “a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last” or we see a kingdom comprised of two kings.
This is not merely my own interpretation.
Instead, when Daniel was given the interpretation of his vision by the angel Gabriel, this is what he was told:
Daniel chapter 8
[19] And he said, Behold, I will make you know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.
[20] The ram which you saw having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
[21] And the rough goat is the king of Greece: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
[22] Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
The “ram” or “beast” that Daniel saw “having two horns” was “the kings of Media and Persia” (vs. 20) or what we would call the Medo-Persian kingdom.
As we previously read in relation to these “two horns” or two kings, “the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last” (Dan. 8:3).
Daniel was in Babylon when he had this vision, and it was fulfilled precisely how God had foretold.
If you know history, then you know that Babylon initially fell to the Medes, the first “horn” of this “ram having two horns” (Dan. 8:20), only to later be ruled by the Persians, the second “horn”, or “the higher” king, or the stronger king, which “came up last” (Dan. 8:3).
You can read about the same here:
https://ajourneythroughworldhistory.weebly.com/medo-persian.html
Furthermore, exactly as God had foretold, this “ram having two horns”, or the Medo-Persian empire, was ultimately defeated by “the king of Greece” (Dan. 8:21), Alexander the Great.
Further still, when “the great horn was broken” (Dan. 8:8), or when Alexander the Great died, “for it came up four notable ones” (Dan. 8:8), or Alexander the Great’s kingdom was divided between his four generals, Cassander, Ptolemy, Antigonus, and Seleucus.
If you’d like to, then you can read about that here:
https://www.ancient.eu/Alexander_the_Great/
God has been accurately foretelling the future FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, so we really ought to pay attention to what is being shared now.
In light of what we’ve just covered, we know that this “another beast” having “two horns” (Rev. 13:11) is representative of a “kingdom” that is comprised of “two kings”.
This is CLUE #3 towards assessing its proper identity.
In relation to this “another beast”, again, we read:
“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.” (Revelation 13:11)
This “another beast” or another kingdom not only “had two horns”, but, more specifically, “had two horns like a lamb”.
Is this significant information?
Yes, it is.
For one thing, unlike “the first beast before him” or “the first beast” (Rev. 13:12) who was depicted as a compilation of ADULT ANIMALS (“a leopard”, “a bear”, and “a lion” – Rev. 13:2), this “beast” or this kingdom is depicted as “a lamb” or as A YOUNG SHEEP:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lamb
lamb noun
1a: a young sheep
especially : one that is less than one year old or without permanent teeth
In other words, this “beast” or kingdom is a new kingdom in its infancy.
This is CLUE #4 towards assessing its proper identity.
Furthermore, the word “lamb” appears twenty-seven times in the book of Revelation, with this being but one of those twenty-seven times, and in each and every instance it is clearly a reference to Jesus Christ.
I won’t type out every verse for you because this post is already almost a book, but here are the scriptural references:
Rev. 5:6, 8, 12, 13, 6:1, 16, 7:9, 10, 14, 17, 12:11, 13:8, 11, 14:1, 4 (2X), 10, 15:3, 17:14 (2X), 19:7, 9, 21:14, 22, 23, 22:1, 3.
Seeing how a “lamb” is always representative of Christ in the book of Revelation, we can safely conclude that this “another beast” or another kingdom, which appears on the world scene in its infancy after the Papacy appears, is not only a composite of two kingdoms or made up of “two horns”, but it also is a composite of two kingdoms which profess to be CHRISTIAN KINGDOMS.
This is CLUE #5 towards assessing its proper identity.
Wait a minute…
Why did I say that this “beast” or kingdom which is comprised of “two horns” or two kings only PROFESSES to be Christian in nature?
Well, the answer to that question is right before us.
Once more, we read:
“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.” (Rev. 13:11)
Although this “another beast” or another kingdom “had two horns like a lamb” or appeared to be a composite of two professing Christian kings or kingdoms, in reality, “he spoke as a dragon” or was SATANIC in nature.
The word “dragon” appears twelve times in the book of Revelation in the following portions of scripture:
Rev. 12:3-4, 7, 9, 13, 16-17, 13:2, 4, 11, 16:13, and 20:2.
In all 12 instances, the word “dragon” is a direct reference to none other than Satan himself, and you can easily verify the same by simply checking the references for yourselves.
This is CLUE #6 towards assessing its proper identity.
(continued in my next post)
-
1
- Show all
L
(continued from my last post)
Although there are other descriptors given to us of this “another beast” in the book of Revelation, I’m addressing its inception at the moment, so let’s do a quick review of what we know in relation to the same.
1. This “another beast” (Rev. 13:11) is another kingdom.
2. This “another beast” or another kingdom appears chronologically AFTER “the first beast before him” (Rev. 13:12) or after the Papacy.
3. This “another beast” or another kingdom has “two horns” (Rev. 13:11) or is a composite of two kingdoms.
4. This “another beast” or another kingdom is depicted as “a lamb” (Rev. 13:11), which is A YOUNG SHEEP, so it is representative of a kingdom in its infancy.
5. This “another beast” or another kingdom is, once again, depicted as having “two horns like a lamb” (Rev. 13:11), and everywhere in the book of Revelation a “lamb” is representative of Jesus Christ. Therefore, this another kingdom, in its infancy, is comprised of two kingdoms which profess to be CHRISTIAN in nature.
6. This “another beast” or another kingdom, although it “had two horns like a lamb” or although it professed to be a composite of two CHRISTIAN nations, actually “spoke as a dragon” (Rev. 13:11) or was SATANIC in nature.
Whether you want to accept it or not, this “another beast” or another kingdom is none other than the USA in which many of us here live.
It truly is a kingdom which arrived on the scene, in its infancy, after the Papacy, and it truly is a composite of two nations, England and America, which both profess to be Christian in nature, but are actually Satanic in nature.
In fact, we’ve got a whole region in the USA that is known as “NEW ENGLAND”.
Furthermore, states such as NEW Hampshire (which is part of New England)…
https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-...pshire/state-name-origin/origin-new-hampshire
…NEW York…
https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-...ate-name-origin-state-quarter/origin-new-york
…and NEW Jersey…
https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-official-item/new-jersey/state-name-origin/origin-new-jersey
…were all named after places in ENGLAND.
Further still, there are many today who claim that the USA has been under control of the British Crown since 1871.
If you’re not familiar with such claims, then the following website does a pretty good job of explaining the same:
https://freedom-school.com/the-united-states-is-a-corporation.html
Whether or not the USA truly is still under the control of England, it is NOT, in accordance with THE CHRISTIAN GOD’S WORD, a “Christian nation”, nor has it ever truly been.
That’s reality, and if you’re a professing Christian who believes otherwise, then, I’ll tell you plainly, YOU ARE GREATLY DECEIVED!
Let’s shift our focus from God to the actual words and works of our founding fathers.
Were our founding fathers Christians?
The correct answer to this question is a resounding “NO!”.
At best, they were Deists, and NOT Christians.
If you don’t know what deism is, then this brief definition should help:
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/deism
deism
NOUN
Belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. The term is used chiefly of an intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that accepted the existence of a creator on the basis of reason but rejected belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind.
Don’t miss the “intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries” part because that is precisely the timeframe in which the USA was founded.
Also, don’t miss the part about how deists “reject belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind” because this perfectly describes several of our founding fathers.
For example, Thomas Jefferson, one of the signers of “The Declaration of Independence”, wrote his own Bible…a Bible that denied the deity of Christ, and a Bible that removed all supernatural occurrences:
https://www.history.com/news/thomas-jefferson-bible-religious-beliefs
If you’d like to know what our founding fathers truly believed in relation to Christ/Christianity, then I would highly recommend the following documentary, “The Hidden Faith of the Founding Fathers”, which details their actual beliefs from their own writings and the writings of those who knew them personally:
If you don’t want to take the time to deprogram yourselves from that which you’ve more than likely been brainwashed into believing by watching this 3-hour documentary, then, hopefully, you can at least take a moment to look at “The Great Seal” that our founding fathers designed which currently is printed on the back of a “One Dollar” bill.
Looking at the same, we see an unfinished pyramid, with its capstone not yet in place, with the Roman numerals “MDCCLXXVI”, which translate into “1776”, the time of this nation’s inception, at its base.
Inside of the capstone we see an eye, which, according to the official narrative, is representative of “the eye of Providence”:
https://www.greatseal.com/symbols/eye.html
Our founding fathers hated the Christian God so much that they deliberately used words like “Providence” while describing their “god”.
Encircling the pyramid and its capstone which is not yet set in place, we see the Latin words “ANNUIT COEPTIS NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM”, which translate into English as “He has approved of our undertakings: A New Order for the Ages” or, what many call it today, “A New World Order”.
For those of us who live in America, our forefathers have told us, albeit in a cryptic manner, precisely what their true desires were from this nation’s inception way back in 1776:
A NEW ORDER FOR THE AGES or A NEW WORLD ORDER.
That’s reality…whether you like it or not.
In fact, if you watch the following video entitled “New World Order Quote Compilation”, then you will both see and hear many of our nation’s leaders, some past and some present, both Republicans and Democrats alike, plainly tell you that a “New World Order” is precisely what they are after…just as our forefathers were.
Better (worse?) still, if you simply skip to the 7:27 mark of the video, then you will see and hear Nancy Pelosi say the following, and I quote:
“As I’ve told you before, because I love it so much, they also created ‘The Great Seal of the United States’. And that ‘Great Seal of the United States’ has on it ‘Novus Ordo Seclorum’…a ‘New Order for the Centuries…for the Ages…Forever’.”
This is what Nancy Pelosi LOVES SO MUCH, and she’s not alone.
Although our founding fathers and present-day politicians would have us to believe that God is the one who “approves of such undertakings”, the Bible tells a completely different story.
For starters, in scripture, Jesus Christ, the epitome of humility, is symbolized as “the chief cornerstone” (Psa. 118:22, Isa. 28:16, Matt. 21:42, Mark 12:10, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11, Eph. 2:20, I Pet. 2:6-7), or as the one upon whom all things are built, and NOT as the capstone.
Furthermore, God’s desire has NEVER been “A New World Order”, but rather a “new heavens”, a “new earth”, and, ultimately, a “new Jerusalem” which will all be set in place after Christ’s coming Millennial Reign.
Well, if Jesus Christ isn’t the capstone of this “New Order for the Ages” or “New World Order”, then who is?
The antichrist.
That’s who.
Who has ears to hear, let them hear.
Although there are other descriptors given to us of this “another beast” in the book of Revelation, I’m addressing its inception at the moment, so let’s do a quick review of what we know in relation to the same.
1. This “another beast” (Rev. 13:11) is another kingdom.
2. This “another beast” or another kingdom appears chronologically AFTER “the first beast before him” (Rev. 13:12) or after the Papacy.
3. This “another beast” or another kingdom has “two horns” (Rev. 13:11) or is a composite of two kingdoms.
4. This “another beast” or another kingdom is depicted as “a lamb” (Rev. 13:11), which is A YOUNG SHEEP, so it is representative of a kingdom in its infancy.
5. This “another beast” or another kingdom is, once again, depicted as having “two horns like a lamb” (Rev. 13:11), and everywhere in the book of Revelation a “lamb” is representative of Jesus Christ. Therefore, this another kingdom, in its infancy, is comprised of two kingdoms which profess to be CHRISTIAN in nature.
6. This “another beast” or another kingdom, although it “had two horns like a lamb” or although it professed to be a composite of two CHRISTIAN nations, actually “spoke as a dragon” (Rev. 13:11) or was SATANIC in nature.
Whether you want to accept it or not, this “another beast” or another kingdom is none other than the USA in which many of us here live.
It truly is a kingdom which arrived on the scene, in its infancy, after the Papacy, and it truly is a composite of two nations, England and America, which both profess to be Christian in nature, but are actually Satanic in nature.
In fact, we’ve got a whole region in the USA that is known as “NEW ENGLAND”.
Furthermore, states such as NEW Hampshire (which is part of New England)…
https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-...pshire/state-name-origin/origin-new-hampshire
…NEW York…
https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-...ate-name-origin-state-quarter/origin-new-york
…and NEW Jersey…
https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-official-item/new-jersey/state-name-origin/origin-new-jersey
…were all named after places in ENGLAND.
Further still, there are many today who claim that the USA has been under control of the British Crown since 1871.
If you’re not familiar with such claims, then the following website does a pretty good job of explaining the same:
https://freedom-school.com/the-united-states-is-a-corporation.html
Whether or not the USA truly is still under the control of England, it is NOT, in accordance with THE CHRISTIAN GOD’S WORD, a “Christian nation”, nor has it ever truly been.
That’s reality, and if you’re a professing Christian who believes otherwise, then, I’ll tell you plainly, YOU ARE GREATLY DECEIVED!
Let’s shift our focus from God to the actual words and works of our founding fathers.
Were our founding fathers Christians?
The correct answer to this question is a resounding “NO!”.
At best, they were Deists, and NOT Christians.
If you don’t know what deism is, then this brief definition should help:
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/deism
deism
NOUN
Belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe. The term is used chiefly of an intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries that accepted the existence of a creator on the basis of reason but rejected belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind.
Don’t miss the “intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries” part because that is precisely the timeframe in which the USA was founded.
Also, don’t miss the part about how deists “reject belief in a supernatural deity who interacts with humankind” because this perfectly describes several of our founding fathers.
For example, Thomas Jefferson, one of the signers of “The Declaration of Independence”, wrote his own Bible…a Bible that denied the deity of Christ, and a Bible that removed all supernatural occurrences:
https://www.history.com/news/thomas-jefferson-bible-religious-beliefs
If you’d like to know what our founding fathers truly believed in relation to Christ/Christianity, then I would highly recommend the following documentary, “The Hidden Faith of the Founding Fathers”, which details their actual beliefs from their own writings and the writings of those who knew them personally:
If you don’t want to take the time to deprogram yourselves from that which you’ve more than likely been brainwashed into believing by watching this 3-hour documentary, then, hopefully, you can at least take a moment to look at “The Great Seal” that our founding fathers designed which currently is printed on the back of a “One Dollar” bill.
Looking at the same, we see an unfinished pyramid, with its capstone not yet in place, with the Roman numerals “MDCCLXXVI”, which translate into “1776”, the time of this nation’s inception, at its base.
Inside of the capstone we see an eye, which, according to the official narrative, is representative of “the eye of Providence”:
https://www.greatseal.com/symbols/eye.html
Our founding fathers hated the Christian God so much that they deliberately used words like “Providence” while describing their “god”.
Encircling the pyramid and its capstone which is not yet set in place, we see the Latin words “ANNUIT COEPTIS NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM”, which translate into English as “He has approved of our undertakings: A New Order for the Ages” or, what many call it today, “A New World Order”.
For those of us who live in America, our forefathers have told us, albeit in a cryptic manner, precisely what their true desires were from this nation’s inception way back in 1776:
A NEW ORDER FOR THE AGES or A NEW WORLD ORDER.
That’s reality…whether you like it or not.
In fact, if you watch the following video entitled “New World Order Quote Compilation”, then you will both see and hear many of our nation’s leaders, some past and some present, both Republicans and Democrats alike, plainly tell you that a “New World Order” is precisely what they are after…just as our forefathers were.
Better (worse?) still, if you simply skip to the 7:27 mark of the video, then you will see and hear Nancy Pelosi say the following, and I quote:
“As I’ve told you before, because I love it so much, they also created ‘The Great Seal of the United States’. And that ‘Great Seal of the United States’ has on it ‘Novus Ordo Seclorum’…a ‘New Order for the Centuries…for the Ages…Forever’.”
This is what Nancy Pelosi LOVES SO MUCH, and she’s not alone.
Although our founding fathers and present-day politicians would have us to believe that God is the one who “approves of such undertakings”, the Bible tells a completely different story.
For starters, in scripture, Jesus Christ, the epitome of humility, is symbolized as “the chief cornerstone” (Psa. 118:22, Isa. 28:16, Matt. 21:42, Mark 12:10, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11, Eph. 2:20, I Pet. 2:6-7), or as the one upon whom all things are built, and NOT as the capstone.
Furthermore, God’s desire has NEVER been “A New World Order”, but rather a “new heavens”, a “new earth”, and, ultimately, a “new Jerusalem” which will all be set in place after Christ’s coming Millennial Reign.
Well, if Jesus Christ isn’t the capstone of this “New Order for the Ages” or “New World Order”, then who is?
The antichrist.
That’s who.
Who has ears to hear, let them hear.
-
2
- Show all
And where did I say that the United States is a nation? It used to be. It could be again. Understand that a country is not the same aa a nation. But right now, it is merely a country held together by force. That force is currently in the process of failing. So there will likely be a split up.
Nationalism is not the enemy. It is the defense that God has given us against globalism ever since the tower of babel. The people telling you otherwise want you to withdraw into libertarianism. They want this because they know very well that the group will always defeat the individual.
A nation restricts its membership in order to strengthen those ties that bind its members together. A nation MUST excise infiltrators. Those who don't belong need to go back to wherever they came from. Doesn't even matter if they happened to be born here. I would gladly support doing this by force.
Nationalism is not the enemy. It is the defense that God has given us against globalism ever since the tower of babel. The people telling you otherwise want you to withdraw into libertarianism. They want this because they know very well that the group will always defeat the individual.
A nation restricts its membership in order to strengthen those ties that bind its members together. A nation MUST excise infiltrators. Those who don't belong need to go back to wherever they came from. Doesn't even matter if they happened to be born here. I would gladly support doing this by force.