Babylon USA and the Globalist Beast

[maelstrom]

Hi, I thought I'd share one theory... I'm not the only one who has come up with it, but it's my best guess about Revelation

Note that this is a premillennialist, post-trib theory, NOT dispensational

?: Babylon the harlot who makes the kings of the earth drunk with her wine

- Babylon is obviously the Western financial system that has reached its epitome in the United States of America and has funded Statism around the world with its fiat money (Federal Reserve Notes). She's called a harlot because of the wicked love triangle between the Banks, the Government, and the Church that have made the rise of the global Beast possible... the "wine" of her fornication is paper debt certificates, debt-based fiat "money"; she rides the Beast during its rise, but Babylon (USA) eventually falls and becomes naked and desolate; the 10 Horns suck her dry

?: the Beast with seven heads, five that have fallen, one is, one yet to come but remains only a while; one head recovers from a mortal wound

- the Beast from the Sea is obviously worldwide Statism, a global socialist government that makes up its own laws instead of obeying God's (this is the same thing as the Antichrist). Anyone with any sense can plainly see that the world is turning into a unified police state organized by the UN and other such organizations, at the behest of the global banking cartel so that it will be easier for them to make us all slaves to their empire of debt

5 heads = Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greeks (major empires that persecuted the people of God before the time of Revelation)

1 head that was = Roman Empire (the events of the end times will parallel the condition of Christianity at the writing, which was persecuted by Rome)

1 head yet to come = 20th-century Marxism (Jews were persecuted by German and Italian nationalist socialists, while the Christians persecuted by Communists in Russia and Asia), which only existed a short time

Mortal wound = Communism was allegedly defeated in the Cold War when the Berlin Wall fell, but the reality is that socialism is still thriving and is about to rear its ugly head again!

?: the Ten Horns that rise for a little bit but are defeated by Jesus

- the global Beast will consist of 10 regions, that is 10 Unions that make up the global government: the European Union, a North American Union, a Mediterranean Union, a Chinese Union, Russian Union, East Asian Union, and so on and so forth, you get the picture... there will be no more national sovereignty, no more USA, just a group of Unions controlled by one central banking system, but that will inevitably collapse and things will go to hell

?: the False Prophet (or Beast from the Earth)

- false belief systems, led by modern academia and the modern church, which encourage people to submit to slavery by the global government; also, the lure of secular humanism and material things--TECHNOLOGY

?: the Mark of the Beast that you need to buy or sell

- on the hand: probably a global ID, which will serve as a credit card, except it that it might actually be imbedded in the hand as a chip... they already did away with gold and silver currency, so the next step will be to do away with paper currencies and just have electronic "money" (so they have an infinite supply of it, all they have to do is make a computer entry and credit magically appears)

- on the forehead: brainwashing/indoctrination by a secular education system, i.e. a global accreditation system. Everyone will be forced to go to schools approved by the State, and if you don't get an approved diploma, you won't be able to participate in the economy... Your credit rating will be determined by how far you get in the "education" (brainwashing) process known as the college and university system.

-----
So you see, mainstream Christians are already participating in Babylon, and they're not doing anything at all to speak out against the Beast! They already use government fiat money, and they already participate in the secular education system.

Can anyone point out the Bible verses that say you should send your children to government schools or use paper money? The word for "money" in many instances in the Greek New Testament was SILVER, not paper! The Jews and Christians had their own silver--they didn't participate in the heathen economy! So why has it all of a sudden become OK for Christians to yoke themselves to non-believers? Don't say the Bible didn't warn you of this!

I won't feel sorry for anyone when the secular economy collapses. Don't come crying to God when the US dollar becomes worthless; He warned you, and you failed to listen because you were too busy pledging your allegiance to the flag and listening to phony preachers like Joel Osteen and company.

 

[Bible2]

maelstrom posted in message #1:

Babylon is obviously the Western financial system ...

The woman Babylon of Revelation 17:3-6 could include
the Western financial system (which has become the
global financial system), but she could also include
all other godless economic (Revelation 18:11),
political (Revelation 17:18), and religious systems
(Revelation 18:24) throughout the world and
throughout the history of mankind (Revelation
17:3b,9-10).

maelstrom posted in message #1:

5 heads = Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia,
Greeks...

That's right, the woman Babylon rode on the back of
all of those empires (Revelation 17:3b), which are
the five empires which had fallen by the time of John
the apostle in the first century (Revelation 17:10).

maelstrom posted in message #1:

1 head that was = Roman Empire ...

That's right, in the time of John the apostle in the
first century the woman Babylon was riding the back of
the Roman Empire, with its capital on seven hills
(Revelation 17:9b).

maelstrom posted in message #1:

1 head yet to come = 20th-century Marxism ...

Probably not, for the six prior empires were the
six empires which had taken control of the land of
Israel. That's why there's no mention of the empires
of China or India or Central and South America.
So the one empire to come (Revelation 17:10b) would
have been an empire that took over the land of
Israel after the fall of the Roman Empire. This could
be what could be called the empire of Islam, which
culminated with the Islamic Ottoman Empire.

maelstrom posted in message #1:

Mortal wound = Communism ...

That can't be, because the empire which died but will
be resurrected as the eighth empire, the empire of
the Antichrist (Revelation 17:11), was one of the
five empires which had fallen before the time of John
the apostle in the first century, and which didn't
exist in the time of John the apostle (Revelation
17:8). The Antichrist could declare his empire to be
the restoration of the ancient Babylonian Empire,
and move his capital to the ancient site of Babylon,
which Saddam Hussein had begun to rebuild.

maelstrom posted in message #1:

... the reality is that socialism is still thriving
and is about to rear its ugly head again!

Socialism, even Communism, in itself isn't ugly, for
those in the early Church were full-on Communists in
that they didn't have any private property, but "had
all things in common" (Acts 4:32).

Communism only has a bad name now because of how evil
atheists practiced it in Russia and China and
Cambodia.

Socialism could make a big comeback under the
Antichrist. He could begin his career on the world
stage by being given control over a Baathist
confederation of Iraq, Syria (including "Palestine",
i.e. a defeated Israel), and Egypt, which Baathist
confederation could have been put together by an
Iraqi Baathist General after defeating Israel and
Egypt (Daniel 11:15-17; in verse 17, the Hebrew
word translated as "daughter" is "bath").

Baathism is Socialist. It's ultimate aim is to create
a Socialist Union of all Arab states. So just as
the USSR was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
the Antichrist could first create a Union of Arab
Socialist Republics, a UASR.

The Antichrist will manage to peacefully take control
over the most oil-rich Arab nations (Daniel 11:24a),
such as Saudi Arabia and the other Arab states in
the Persian Gulf. Then, like any good Socialist, the
Antichrist will share the oil revenues with the Arab
masses (Daniel 11:24b).

He could say: "My Arab Brethren! Allah has blessed
each and every one of us with these oil riches. How
could we have let those vile 'sheikhs' and 'kings'
rob us of what we all possess in common? How could we
have let those greedy men hoard billions of dollars
to themselves while the masses of poor Arab brethren
barely scraped by? This was nothing short of criminal,
my brethren, nothing short of theft. But now I have
come to set things right. Now, instead of our oil
wealth being stashed into Swiss bank accounts and used
by a mere handful of us to purchase yachts and jewelry
and fleets of Rolls Royces, our oil wealth will be
used to build schools and hospitals and decent houses
for every last poor Arab man, woman, and child from
Yemen to Morocco. Let us unite, my Arab Brethren, let
us rise up together and cast off all the remaining
vile 'leaders' who have robbed us and oppressed us for
so long, and let us establish a Free and United Arabia,
where all our oil wealth will be spread evenly amongst
us all, just as our just God Allah had always intended".

In this way, the Antichrist could get the poor Arab
masses from Yemen to Morocco to unite and rise up and
overthrow all of the corrupt regimes which have ruled
them for so long, and then the Antichrist could present
himself as the selfless, godly, leader who will see to
it that they all get their just share of wealth,
which had been wrongly denied them for so long.

 

[Carey]

When the USA goes down is when Mystery Babylon will become the greatest power on earth.

The USA is not mystery Babylon.

 

[Breetai]

...Babylon (USA) eventually falls and becomes naked and desolate...

Why limit "Babylon" only to the USA? The financial system that you're talking about has covered much of the world, now; certainly the other European countries, as well as much of Asia, Africa and Oceania.

5 heads = Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greeks

Why do you put the Medes and the Persians as one? Many scholars separate them.

1 head that was = Roman Empire

Was? When the apocalypse was written, the Roman Empire IS.

I won't feel sorry for anyone when the secular economy collapses. Don't come crying to God when the US dollar becomes worthless...

Why do you centre on the US dollar so much? You started out by talking about the "western financial system", but then revert to an America-centric idea. You ought to get out of that box.

 

[Breetai]

Probably not, for the six prior empires were the
six empires which had taken control of the land of
Israel. That's why there's no mention of the empires
of China or India or Central and South America.
So the one empire to come (Revelation 17:10b) would
have been an empire that took over the land of
Israel after the fall of the Roman Empire. This could
be what could be called the empire of Islam, which
culminated with the Islamic Ottoman Empire.

I think this idea has great merit.

 

[maelstrom]

I don't think most people realize the extent to which the Anglo-American banking cartel orchestrates global events. You have to do a lot of research to find out about it, but the same people behind the Federal Reserve System pretty much control the world, and they are behind the Communism that spread around the world in the 20th century. The Bolsheviks were funded by the same banking system. So were the Nazis--paper "money" allows virtually unlimited power to those who create it and convince people to accept it. American wealth, which was thought to be a blessing from God, has financed the rise of socialist states all over the world.. They don't call it "Communism" anymore, but it's the same thing under the name of "social democracy." I can't imagine anything else being the Beast but that. It will enslave the people of Earth under the government of MAN, not the government of God as is right.

As for the empires controlling Israel, I'm definitely aware of the theories...
But I'm not so concerned about geography as people. The Gentiles who accept Jesus are grafted into Israel (says the Bible). It's not a place; it's the people of God who will receive His promised kingdom. The kingdoms prior to Rome persecuted the Jews only; but after Jesus, the people of God include Gentiles too.

Jews and Gentile Christians alike were persecuted by Romans. Jews were persecuted by German Nationalist Socialists; Gentiles Christians were persecuted by the USSR. The fact that the socialists didn't control the Holy Land is irrelevant because the people of God weren't occupying it during that time period anyway (prior to the state of Israel). Now socialism is creeping up on us again... America, the supposedly "most free" nation is quickly becoming a socialist state under the likes of Obama, McCain, Bush, Clintons--it's all the same people with the same agenda, the whole "bipartisan" game is just a ruse to keep people from figuring out what's really happening. China, the EU, a North American Union, a Mediterranian Union (also socialist in nature)... it is so easy to see how these could be the 10 horns of the Beast of global statism.

Babylon reached its epitome, its peak, with the American Fed (in this view), but it started in Europe (Britain and France mainly), and now includes East Asia and is encompassing the globe in debt by means of the World Bank, IMF, various trade agreements, etc. Once all of Earth's politicians realized, "Look, you can just print out this paper stuff and get an unlimited supply of credit; America is doing it, and they're the reigning superpower, so we should follow and be like them, there won't be consequences down the road." Of course, wealth has to come from somewhere; you can print debt certificates at leisure, but actual commodities have to be produced. The actual producers of it will be stripped naked and desolate by those who have the
power to usurp their commodities...

It's definitely an interesting point about what will happen in the Middle East. They've definitely got the commodity of oil... But the fact that it is in the hands of so few will only make the people all the more willing to acquiesce to this new world order of socialism. They're dumb enough to think that those in power will actually help the poor--but it never happens. They'll submit to a Mediterranean Union, thinking the riches of the sheiks will go to the people, but it won't. It will go to the bankers as always.

The Christian version of "socialism" in Acts was completely different. It was simply a voluntary sharing of community resources. There was no State involved, no secular, violent, forceful power of men. It's totally opposed to Marxism.

Why, I wonder, was the practice discontinued? Why don't Christians share their finances today as the early church did? Why don't all Christians give 100% to the church so that they can share with those in need? I'd definitely be in favor of that. But the rich church leaders wouldn't be so happy about it, that's why they don't do it anymore... Instead they make up some silly thing about having to pay 10% tithes to the church leaders; there's no Biblical mandate for Gentiles to pay tithes at all. If they followed the Bible, they'd demand everybody give 100% (including the church leaders themselves), not just the working class give 10% and then the church leadership live off of it without having to work. 2 Thessalonians 3, if a man doesn't want to work, don't let him eat! How much, I wonder, does the Vatican have that it refuses to share with the poor?

 

[Bible2]

maelstrom posted in message #6:

The fact that the socialists didn't control the Holy
Land is irrelevant because the people of God weren't
occupying it during that time period anyway (prior
to the state of Israel).

The fact that the socialists didn't control the Holy
Land is relevant with regard to whether or not they
were the seventh empire of Revelation 17:10, because
the Holy Land has always remained the Holy Land, and
there have always been a remnant of Jews and
Christians living on it since the fall of the sixth
empire, the Roman Empire.

The seventh empire of Revelation 17:10 was probably
what could be called the empire of Islam, which took
control of the Holy Land after the fall of the Roman
Empire, and which permitted Jews and Christians to
live in the Holy Land. So the seventh empire would
be like the previous six empires which had all
controlled the Holy Land, so that empires which
didn't control the Holy Land, such as the empire of
Japan in the 19th and 20th centuries, aren't included,
even though at times they may have been hostile to
Christians, such as missionaries.

 

[Bible2]

maelstrom posted in message #6:

It's definitely an interesting point about what will
happen in the Middle East. They've definitely got the
commodity of oil... But the fact that it is in the
hands of so few will only make the people all the
more willing to acquiesce to this new world order of
socialism. They're dumb enough to think that those in
power will actually help the poor--but it never
happens. They'll submit to a Mediterranean Union,
thinking the riches of the sheiks will go to the
people, but it won't. It will go to the bankers as
always.

What could happen is that the Antichrist could be an
Arab who will start his rise to world power in the
Middle East by being given control over a Baathist
confederation of Iraq, Syria (including "Palestine",
i.e. a defeated Israel), and Egypt, put together by
force of arms by an Iraqi Baathist General whom the
U.S. had entrusted with a huge Iraqi Army to defeat
Iran with instead.

Once the Antichrist manages to get control of the
Baathist confederation, he could somehow peaceably
annex Saudi Arabia and the other oil-rich Arab Gulf
states into the confederation (Daniel 11:24a). And
then, instead of just saying that he will give the
former wealth and oil-income of the Arab kings and
sheikhs to the poor Arab masses from Yemen to
Morocco, he will actually do it (Daniel 11:24b); he
will show himself to be unlike any Arab leader before
him, and so will convince the poor Arab masses that
he is for real and they will all follow him
wholeheartedly.

He could rail against the American banking system
and such entities as the World Bank and International
Monetary Fund as being completely evil, ultimately
set up for the benefit of the most wealthy 2% of the
people, who hoard something like 90% of the wealth
and land to themselves.

The Antichrist could unite all Arab states into a
new economic system based on the euro, and he could
kill the American dollar as the world's petrodollar
by requiring euros as payment for all Arab oil instead
of American dollars, thereby contributing to a total
death of the American dollar in the world economy.
Then he could offer all the oil reserves of the united
Arab states to the oil-thirsty European Union at an
extremely cheap price in euros, if the European Union
will agree to form a Mediterranen Union with the Arab
Union.

And having shown his Socialist bonafides by how he
treated the poor Arab masses with actual help and
wealth, the Socialist Europeans (as in "Democratic
Socialists", "Christian Socialists", etc., not
Marxist Socialists) could welcome him with open arms
as their leader. With them, he could form a "True
Socialist Party" in the Mediterranen Union unlike any
Socialist Party before it, in that it will actually
help the poor, actually break up the massive hoards
of wealth stashed away by the richest people.

A "Wealth Tax" could be instituted, whereby anyone
with more than a million euros in the bank must pay
50% of their wealth to the government of the
Mediterranen Union, to be shared with all those who
have unmet needs.

A "Land Tax" could be instituted, whereby anyone
with more than a thousand hectares of land must
hand over 50% of their land to the government of the
Mediterranen Union, to be given to all those who have
no land and want some.

So instead of making the mistake of the Bolsheviks
and the Maoists, who simply replaced corrupt non-
socialist governments which didn't help the poor with
corrupt socialist dictatorships which didn't help the
poor (despite mouthing platitudes of how they were the
"people's government"), the "True Socialist Party"
could remain truly democratic, without succumbing to
the trappings of power. It could continue to truly
help the poor and needy instead of just saying that
it will.

And it could prevent the return of plutocracy by
banning all large donations to political parties
and party members by anyone with more than a million
euros in the bank or more than a thousand hectares of
land, and by banning all donations to political
parties and members by any corporation, lobbying
group, political-action-committee, or anything else
but individual human beings.

And it could place the euro on a gold or proven-oil-
reserve standard, so that no more money can be
printed than is actually backed by gold in
Mediterranen Union government vaults or by proven
oil reserves owned by the Mediterranen Union
government. And anyone at anytime holding euros will
be able to exchange them for the equivalent amount
of gold or oil-reserve-ownership share-certificates.

This will cut the heart out of the banking system
whereby a cabal of plutocrats can print money backed
by nothing at all, and then through that money wield
control over the entire banking system, and so
ultimately over the entire economic system.

And all interest income could be abolished as it's
unearned income ultimately stolen from those who have
labored to earn the money to pay the interest.

And all dividend income could be abolished as it's
unearned income ultimately stolen from those who have
labored to create the profits out of which the
dividends are paid.

All profits could be shared equally with those whose
labor created those profits. For example, no longer
would a company be allowed to sell a pair of shoes for
a $100 profit when it paid a laborer only $10 to make
that pair of shoes. Now the laborer will have to be
paid 50% of the profit, or $50 for every pair of shoes
made.

In all of these ways, a truly fairer "Socialist"
system could be created, which will prevent the
exploitation of wage slaves, and the accumulation of
unearned income, and the hoarding of 90% of the
wealth and land of society in the hands of only 2% of
the people.

In all of these ways, a "True Socialism" could be
established, as in a system which is truly set up for
more equal benefits to all in society, and not just
barely-making-it benefits for those slaving away at
two jobs, and billions-of-dollars-of-unearned-income
benefits for a few plutocrats who have bought and paid
for all the politicians and political parties and
mass media in society.

And so the Antichrist could bring in a much more just
economic (and political) system, and so prove to not
only an Arab Union, and then to a Mediterranean Union,
but ultimately to the entire world, that he is the
leader the world can trust to bring about a truly "New
World Order", one that will bring much greater
benefits to all of mankind, and not, to an obscene
degree, allow the concentration of wealth and land in
the hands of just a few people.

But the Antichrist could be careful not to take the
next step of collectivizing property ownership, as
was done under the Marxists (at least as far as the
masses were concerned), so that all motivation to work
was eradicated, and collectivized farm production
plummeted to the point of famines, and collectivized
manufacturing production plummeted to the point of
total economic backwardness in relation to the
Capitalist countries.

And the Antichrist could be careful not to take away
all incentive for people to start companies and build
factories and such so that they can turn a profit. He
could let them keep half of any profits they make,
while giving the other half to the laborers who
produced that profit.

 

[Bible2]

maelstrom posted in message #6:

The Christian version of "socialism" in Acts was
completely different. It was simply a voluntary
sharing of community resources. There was no State
involved, no secular, violent, forceful power of men.
It's totally opposed to Marxism.

The Christian version of full-on Communism in Acts
4:32 was completely different than Marxism in that
the Christian version of full-on Communism in Acts
4:32 was a Theocracy ruled by the apostles of Jesus
Christ, so that people were killed under it only
by the Holy Spirit Himself, for holding wealth back
for themselves while claiming that they had given
everything to the Church (Acts 5:1-11). While Marxism,
on the other hand, as practiced under Stalin and Mao,
was an atheistic dictatorship under the control of
a single, evil individual who killed anyone who
threatened (or even might someday threaten) his
continued rule in the slightest way.

Also, the Christian version of full-on Communism in
Acts 4:32 was completely different than Marxism in
that the Christian version of full-on Communism in
Acts 4:32 was one truly shared by its leaders; the
apostles didn't make themselves wealthy (cf.
1 Corinthians 4:9-13), nor did they set up a Church
system whereby the church leaders got wealthy while
the rest of the Church remained in poverty. While
Marxism, on the other hand, as practiced under
Stalin and Mao, was not a Communism shared by its
leaders. Stalin and Mao and the higher echelons of
their Communist Parties lived in splendid wealth
while the masses were starving to death in the
collectivized farm fields, or living in vile
collectivized hovels and slaving away in squalid
collectivized factories.

maelstrom posted in message #6:

Why don't Christians share their finances today as
the early church did?

For one thing, the early Church was led by the
apostles of Jesus Christ, who could be trusted as
being truly appointed by God, and not self-appointed,
and who could be trusted not to embezzle any of the
money given to the Church to further their own
personal wealth, or to start boondoggle seven-
million-dollar "prayer center" construction projects
so that they could feel important, instead of just
having people pray together in their common-homes
and using the seven million dollars to actually help
poor people with adequate food, clothing, and shelter.

maelstrom posted in message #6:

Why don't all Christians give 100% to the church so
that they can share with those in need?

Because the Church as it's set up today may not share
with those in need more than a small fraction of the
money it's given. Most of the money could go to
benefit the personal lifestyles of Church leaders, or
to pay million-dollar child-abuse judgments against
Church priests, or to build and maintain fancy Church
buildings which are completely unnecessary. For
Christians can hold church meetings in their common-
houses (Romans 16:5; 1 Corinthians 16:19b, Colossians
4:15, Philemon 1:2), where the number of congregants
can be kept small enough to where everyone can
contribute something to every meeting (1 Corinthians
14:26), instead of sitting in the stadium-pews of
Mega-churches and merely watching an entertainment up
on a distant stage.

If we could just strip away all the unnecessary
Church buildings and rich lifestyles of Church
leaders, we could find that no collections of money
would ever need to be made at Church meetings.
Everyone in the Church who is able to work could
support themselves, and those unable to work could be
supported by alms donated by working Church members.
And if insufficient donations were received to support
all the needy in the Church, an "alms tax" could be
instituted by the Church on its members, but only at
a percentage of income which will meet the needs of
the poor who are unable to work, not a percentage
which will create a surplus which Church leaders can
then misuse on themselves and on unnecessary Church
construction projects to build buildings which will
help them to feel important.

 

[bluemarkus]

subscribing

 

[bluemarkus]

maelstrom, i think a lot of the things you write are right.

 

[maelstrom]

I think if we got rid of the idea of having paid church leaders, it would help a lot of the things in church.

Traveling missionaries should be paid, as they are obviously not able to work while they are going from one place to another to preach the Gospel, but people shouldn't get paychecks merely to give sermons. Anybody can stand up and give a sermon--it's not a job difficult enough to warrant a salary.

As for sharing of property... It's true, when you're using the philosophy of "to each according to his need," you raise the obvious question of "Who determines who needs what?" That's why Communism doesn't work--the people in charge of making decisions always decide that THEY need more of the goods than everybody else does.

So instead, I propose that each Christian man (including pastors) simply decides what he needs for himself and his family, and if he has any resources left after that, he should give the excess to whichever church he attends, and the elders should decide how it is spent.

That way, instead of everybody giving 10% (which isn't really mandated by the New Testament), some people might give more, and some people might give less, but there will be a spirit of fellowship, since there won't be any paid preachers, and what is given will be actually used for missionary work and helping the poor, instead of merely building fancy buildings and giving luxurious lifestyles to preachers.

In other words, my point is that every man in church should give 100% of his finances in excess of what he needs to run his family and business.

And if some men in church get greedy and don't want to help out, then let them be kicked out of church!!!

 

[maelstrom]

Yup I'm definitely going to get involved with a local house church movement, or start one of my own if I can't find a house church nearby. Enough with building ridiculous buildings for vanity, and enough with preachers who get paid ridiculous salaries to wear suits, make speeches and shake hands, as if they were politicians!

 

[AmericanCatholic]

Well, that was certainly a political reading of the Bible.

 

[onwingsaseagles]

I may be simplifying this a bit but isn't the harlot mystery Babylon the great ''city'' that rules over the Kings of the earth?

Revelation 17:5 And upon her forehead a name was written Mystery Babylon the Great Mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.

Revelation 17:18 And the woman that you saw is the great city that reigns over the kings of the earth.

I am just trying to understand like the rest of you but I try and keep it simple.

 

[Breetai]

IAnybody can stand up and give a sermon--it's not a job difficult enough to warrant a salary.

I suggest that you look at the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Watchtower Society, the Seventh Day Adventists, Oneness Pentecostals, Christadelphianism, Swedenborgianism, and so on, and still tell everyone that delivering sermons, theologically sound sermons, not a difficult enough job to warrant a salary (and a solid educational background in good Biblical theology, including study in the Biblical languages, supporting it!!!). I am not suggesting an extravagant salary, which does happen all too often, but a enough of one to support a pastor enough that he can fully focus on ministry and also support his family is he has one.

A simple look at history should show you that standards are needed, and that cult groups with their theology not just out in left field, but fully out in outer space, come from exactly the situation that you're proposing.

 

[maelstrom]

Why can't the whole congregation have a "solid educational background" in the Bible?

Paid preachers make for lazy Christians who think that since the preacher has read the Bible, they don't have to read it for themselves.

 

[maelstrom]

What is the Federal Reserve System? It is one system made up of 12 branches, each located in a major American city (New York, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Dallas, etc.)!!! So it is 12 big cities in one... Just a thought.

The concept of a "great city" certainly speaks of America to me, since it is America that popularized the skyscraper.

 

[maelstrom]

The Bible IS political in nature. Christianity is fundamentally political: It's all about the kingdom/government of God, versus that of Satan. The whole concept of the Antichrist is about man putting man's laws above God's commandments.
The kingdom of heaven is a political system--the political system ruled by God, as opposed to being ruled by some other leader. It's a monarchy.

None of the governments of the world recognize God as the supreme authority. They put their own laws above God's laws. Therefore, they are all inherently anti-Christian.

Being a Christian IS a political stance--it means you accept Jesus Christ as your monarch. Anyone or anything that says Jesus Christ is not KING is against the teachings of the Bible (and that includes all politicians).

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The Bible IS political in nature. Christianity is fundamentally political: It's all about the kingdom/government of God, versus that of Satan. The whole concept of the Antichrist is about man putting man's laws above God's commandments.
The kingdom of heaven is a political system--the political system ruled by God, as opposed to being ruled by some other leader. It's a monarchy.

None of the governments of the world recognize God as the supreme authority. They put their own laws above God's laws. Therefore, they are all inherently anti-Christian.

Being a Christian IS a political stance--it means you accept Jesus Christ as your monarch. Anyone or anything that says Jesus Christ is not KING is against the teachings of the Bible (and that includes all politicians).

Yea, sometimes politics and religions do not mix well as these OC Judean rulers found out later.

John 19:12 Out of this sought the Pilate to loose Him. The yet Judeans cried out saying "if-ever This-one thou should be loosing, not thou are friend of the Caesar. Every-one the one a king making is instead/anti-legei <483> to-the Caesar.

John 19:15 Those yet Cry-out "take-away! take-away! crucify! Him". Is saying to them the Pilate "the King of ye I shall be crucifying?". Answered the Chief-priests "not we are having a King except Caesar/kaisara <2541>