One World Order !

[ViaCrucis]

The Pope supports a one world system - governments have been thinking of one world currency for quite a few years - The WHO is already established - I personally believe not long before the one world system arises.

Vatican Called For a “Central World Bank”; Blamed Money Printing for the Financial Crisis

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/13/pop...-time-to-consider-a-universal-basic-wage.html

1https://akashictimes.co.uk/pope-francis-calls-for-one-world-government-to-fight-climate-change/

WHOOPS! Vatican Lets Slip Plans For One World Government

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sheila Davis]

If I had a nickel for every new world order that was supposedly about to happen next Monday, I may not have a million dollars, but I'd have way too many nickels.

Living in the terrifying alternate reality and terrible fiction of "Left Behind" theology isn't good for the mind or the soul.

-CryptoLuthearn

Yes, people have been speaking of the end of the world is near since the early churches. And I guess with each generation there is some talk of some kind of a new world order.
Do you think that it is possible a lot of prophecies were not considered, people were just looking at some. Matthew 24:33 states when you see All these things happening then end is near even at the door. Matthew chpt 24 & 10:34-36 .... Zachariah 14:12 ( which sounds like the use of nuclear weapons) .... Luke 17:26-37 .... Man has the technology now to issue the mark of the beast ..... Daniel 12:4 knowledge has increased vastly in the past few hundred years compares to the last thousands of years and people are moving around like ants ..... being fulfilled, all but maybe two, the days of Noe and the revealing of the Antichrist.
I feel that the New world order is at hand and when governments speaking of it and the Pope - I feel it's not too far in the very near future.
Something I don't think people of the past took into consideration 1 the gospel must be preached to all Nations then the end will come ... 2 must be able to initiate the mark of the beast ... Knowledge must increase ... 4 a huge division in family.

And the movie Left Behind I happened to watch it about 5 years ago - never had an interest in it, though it was widely broadcast on TBN - you are on point!

 

[The Liturgist]

I simply don't accept any part of the Dispensationalist Premillennial system of theology. I think it is wrong, from top to bottom, wrong. I don't think there is any part of it that can be salvaged.

Agreed. Its basically a series of errors stacked upon certain misinterpretations of John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren.

 

[The Liturgist]

Something I don't think people of the past took into consideration 1 the gospel must be preached to all Nations then the end will come .

Well considering the North Sentinelese tragically murdered the last missionary in 2018 before he had a chance (since no outsider knows their language) prompting the Indian government to increase security (out of fear that missionaries will infect the natives with a disease they lack immunity to; a prior incidence of their population being nearly wiped out by contact with foreigners is thought to account to their murderous lack of hospitality to outsiders), it seems likely that we have a fair amount of time on our hands, when you combine them with all the other uncontacted tribes in the Amazon and in New Guinea (including the cannibals), to the North Koreans and to the Muslims in countries like Saudi Arabia where it is illegal to import a Bible (and thus in many Islamic countries, although the Gospel was preached there at one time, and some were even Christian, before Muslims forcibly converted and/or slaughtered the population, for example, Socotra in Yemen, it would seem we have an uncomfortably long way to go.

I am more concerned that I might die tomorrow and be judged a reprobate and cast into the Lake of Fire than I am about the End Times. If a one world government rises up under the reign of anti-Christ my prayer is that I will have the courage to accept martyrdom, but its more likely an Islamic or Atheist or Socialist or other dictatorship with an extreme contempt for Christianity either because it disagrees with their religion, like with Muslims, or because it disagrees with worldly values like homosexuality, in either ruled by an anti-Christ figure who is not the anti-Christ but a type of anti-Christ, like Hitler or Lenin or Muhammed, jthat would put me in that situation.

We must at all times however work out our salvation with fear and trembling, and not count on the glorious death for Christ martyrdom offers. St. Anthony the Great tried repeatedly to get the Romans to martyr him, dressing in white and trying to block processions of Christians being taken to the arena in Alexandria to be killed, but the soldiers just shoved him out of the way and eventually, he pursued a path of solitary prayer in the desert that started the movement which became Christian monasticism.

His warning we should all heed: “Expect temptation until your last breath.”

 

[ViaCrucis]

Yes, people have been speaking of the end of the world is near since the early churches. And I guess with each generation there is some talk of some kind of a new world order.
Do you think that it is possible a lot of prophecies were not considered, people were just looking at some. Matthew 24:33 states when you see All these things happening then end is near even at the door. Matthew chpt 24 & 10:34-36 .... Zachariah 14:12 ( which sounds like the use of nuclear weapons) .... Luke 17:26-37 .... Man has the technology now to issue the mark of the beast ..... Daniel 12:4 knowledge has increased vastly in the past few hundred years compares to the last thousands of years and people are moving around like ants ..... being fulfilled, all but maybe two, the days of Noe and the revealing of the Antichrist.
I feel that the New world order is at hand and when governments speaking of it and the Pope - I feel it's not too far in the very near future.
Something I don't think people of the past took into consideration 1 the gospel must be preached to all Nations then the end will come ... 2 must be able to initiate the mark of the beast ... Knowledge must increase ... 4 a huge division in family.

And the movie Left Behind I happened to watch it about 5 years ago - never had an interest in it, though it was widely broadcast on TBN - you are on point!

Since the Bible never mentions a "one world order" the whole discussion is moot, and all speculations about it are moot.

From secret Vatican agents to lizard men to anti-Semitic conspiracies about Jewish bankers ruling the world, it's all codswallop.

The Bible at no point speaks of a "one world government" or "new world order". These are not ideas contained in Holy Scripture, but exists only in the paranoid imaginations of conspiracy theorists.

The Bible doesn't even clearly spell out that there will be a singular "The Antichrist" at the end. The only place in Scripture that mentions "antichrist" is found in the Epistles of St. John, who uses the term not to refer a single individual who appears near the end of history, but to speak of heretics going out and preaching false doctrine, specifically Docetism. The closest we get is, "you have heard that antichrist is coming" (1 John 2:18). What does St. John mean by this? Well he doesn't really tell us, but instead moves to tell us that "and now [even] many antichrists have come" describing them as false teachers who claim authority in the church but have none, these are schismatics and heretics preaching false doctrines.

One may then raise their hand to offer this rebuttal: "But what of the Beast in Revelation, or the man of sin in 2 Thessalonians, or the king of the north in Daniel?"

To which can be answered: none of these are called antichrist, nor are any of these presented as figures who appear at the end of history as some kind of ultimate bad guy.

The closest we get to that is perhaps the Beast mentioned in St. John's Apocalypse, (see Revelation ch. 13 concerning the second beast that rises out of the sea). But then, if the Apocalypse concerns itself not with a supposed "end times" but instead the time St. John wrote (probably around 95 AD during the reign of Domitian) then the answer to "who is the Beast?" is not "the antichrist that shows up at the end of history" but instead the power and tyranny of the despots who ruled from Rome and persecuted the Church through the power of the Roman state. We have "Babylon" in the 17th chapter of the Apocalypse, called the city that is on seven hills (that's Rome) who rides upon a beast (there's that beast again) colored the imperial scarlet or purple and is directly and explicitly called a series of kings (emperors). The final clue we can look at for the Beast is the number of his name which St. John gives us, which is six hundred and sixty six (very early manuscripts also contain the alternate reading of six hundred and sixteen). What is the significance of this? Well the number of the name of the Beast points out to what his name is, and the most sensible answer (and which actually fits both the 666 and 616 number) is Nero. Nero's name when using Hebrew/Aramaic numerals can add up to either 616 or 666 depending on which traditional variant of the name we go by, Neron Kaiser (the Greek form) adds up to 666, the Latin form Nero Caesar adds up to 616.

In Hebrew/Aramaic numerals:
NRWN QSR = 666
NRW QSR = 616

As it pertains to St. Paul's "man of sin" mentioned in 2 Thessalonians, it's not wholly clear what Paul intends to mean; nor is it clear what he means when he speaks of "that which constrains". Early Christian writers tended to understand that the "constrainer" was the Roman Empire (which is why the sacking of Rome in the 5th century was perceived by many a possible sign of the end of the world). And it is possible that the "man of sin" may also be Nero, but again it's not clear.

And as for the king of the north in Daniel? That's actually the easiest one to identify, it was Antiochus IV of the Seleucid Empire. The conflict between the king of the north and the king of the south refers to the Syrian Wars in which the Jews were caught in the middle of, and eventually became oppressed when Antiochus IV conquered the region and tried to force-Hellenize the Jews going so far as to install an image of Zeus in the Holy of Holies and having a pig sacrificed upon the altar. This act of abomination is "the abomination which causes desolation" that Daniel mentions; and which Christ echoes in the Gospels when He speaks of the coming destruction of the Jewish Temple, fulfilled in 70 AD when the Zealots took over the city and slaughtered the priests in the Temple (Eusebius tells us that the sanctuary was polluted and ran red with the blood of the innocent), following this the Romans under Titus came, took the city, murdered the inhabitants, and razed the Temple to the ground. Which is why the Christians of Jerusalem did as Christ had warned, "When you see armies around Jerusalem flee", so they did, they fled to Petra and waited out the conflict.

There are good reasons to not want a one world government. That it is a satanic plot to usher in the end times isn't one of them. The best reason to not want a one world government is that it it would lack the accountability that an international network of sovereign nations has, rather than there being a single structure of power that has absolutely zero oversight. To quote a comic book: Who watches the Watchmen?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sheila Davis]

Well considering the North Sentinelese tragically murdered the last missionary in 2018 before he had a chance (since no outsider knows their language) prompting the Indian government to increase security (out of fear that missionaries will infect the natives with a disease they lack immunity to; a prior incidence of their population being nearly wiped out by contact with foreigners is thought to account to their murderous lack of hospitality to outsiders), it seems likely that we have a fair amount of time on our hands, when you combine them with all the other uncontacted tribes in the Amazon and in New Guinea (including the cannibals), to the North Koreans and to the Muslims in countries like Saudi Arabia where it is illegal to import a Bible (and thus in many Islamic countries, although the Gospel was preached there at one time, and some were even Christian, before Muslims forcibly converted and/or slaughtered the population, for example, Socotra in Yemen, it would seem we have an uncomfortably long way to go.

I am more concerned that I might die tomorrow and be judged a reprobate and cast into the Lake of Fire than I am about the End Times. If a one world government rises up under the reign of anti-Christ my prayer is that I will have the courage to accept martyrdom, but its more likely an Islamic or Atheist or Socialist or other dictatorship with an extreme contempt for Christianity either because it disagrees with their religion, like with Muslims, or because it disagrees with worldly values like homosexuality, in either ruled by an anti-Christ figure who is not the anti-Christ but a type of anti-Christ, like Hitler or Lenin or Muhammed, jthat would put me in that situation.

We must at all times however work out our salvation with fear and trembling, and not count on the glorious death for Christ martyrdom offers. St. Anthony the Great tried repeatedly to get the Romans to martyr him, dressing in white and trying to block processions of Christians being taken to the arena in Alexandria to be killed, but the soldiers just shoved him out of the way and eventually, he pursued a path of solitary prayer in the desert that started the movement which became Christian monasticism.

His warning we should all heed: “Expect temptation until your last breath.”

From my studies there are maybe about what they consider 100 give or take, uncontacted tribes left in the world, that's not very many. They have been contacted they just refuse what is called the civilized world to come into their midst. Seems that means they have refused to learn of or to hear the gospel. I look at some of these pictures shown of uncontacted tribes and many of them are wearing somewhat modern clothes. I read about that missionary young man who was killed few years ago going into their land.

There's no such thing as an "uncontacted" tribe
How Many Uncontacted Tribes Are Left In The World?

Well I think about the one world government, considering my age, I seriously doubt if I'll be alive to see it come - though I would love to stand before the beast and his Antichrist and denounce them. Refusing the mark of the beast puts one in a terrible situation unless they know how to hunt, live off the land, start a fire without modern day aid, maybe hide in the wood lands. People raised in the city may have a difficult time accomplishing that.
You are right work out our salvation would fear and trembling and do not depend on martyrdom.

 

[Sheila Davis]

Since the Bible never mentions a "one world order" the whole discussion is moot, and all speculations about it are moot.

From secret Vatican agents to lizard men to anti-Semitic conspiracies about Jewish bankers ruling the world, it's all codswallop.

The Bible at no point speaks of a "one world government" or "new world order". These are not ideas contained in Holy Scripture, but exists only in the paranoid imaginations of conspiracy theorists.

The Bible doesn't even clearly spell out that there will be a singular "The Antichrist" at the end. The only place in Scripture that mentions "antichrist" is found in the Epistles of St. John, who uses the term not to refer a single individual who appears near the end of history, but to speak of heretics going out and preaching false doctrine, specifically Docetism. The closest we get is, "you have heard that antichrist is coming" (1 John 2:18). What does St. John mean by this? Well he doesn't really tell us, but instead moves to tell us that "and now [even] many antichrists have come" describing them as false teachers who claim authority in the church but have none, these are schismatics and heretics preaching false doctrines.

One may then raise their hand to offer this rebuttal: "But what of the Beast in Revelation, or the man of sin in 2 Thessalonians, or the king of the north in Daniel?"

To which can be answered: none of these are called antichrist, nor are any of these presented as figures who appear at the end of history as some kind of ultimate bad guy.

The closest we get to that is perhaps the Beast mentioned in St. John's Apocalypse, (see Revelation ch. 13 concerning the second beast that rises out of the sea). But then, if the Apocalypse concerns itself not with a supposed "end times" but instead the time St. John wrote (probably around 95 AD during the reign of Domitian) then the answer to "who is the Beast?" is not "the antichrist that shows up at the end of history" but instead the power and tyranny of the despots who ruled from Rome and persecuted the Church through the power of the Roman state. We have "Babylon" in the 17th chapter of the Apocalypse, called the city that is on seven hills (that's Rome) who rides upon a beast (there's that beast again) colored the imperial scarlet or purple and is directly and explicitly called a series of kings (emperors). The final clue we can look at for the Beast is the number of his name which St. John gives us, which is six hundred and sixty six (very early manuscripts also contain the alternate reading of six hundred and sixteen). What is the significance of this? Well the number of the name of the Beast points out to what his name is, and the most sensible answer (and which actually fits both the 666 and 616 number) is Nero. Nero's name when using Hebrew/Aramaic numerals can add up to either 616 or 666 depending on which traditional variant of the name we go by, Neron Kaiser (the Greek form) adds up to 666, the Latin form Nero Caesar adds up to 616.

In Hebrew/Aramaic numerals:
NRWN QSR = 666
NRW QSR = 616

As it pertains to St. Paul's "man of sin" mentioned in 2 Thessalonians, it's not wholly clear what Paul intends to mean; nor is it clear what he means when he speaks of "that which constrains". Early Christian writers tended to understand that the "constrainer" was the Roman Empire (which is why the sacking of Rome in the 5th century was perceived by many a possible sign of the end of the world). And it is possible that the "man of sin" may also be Nero, but again it's not clear.

And as for the king of the north in Daniel? That's actually the easiest one to identify, it was Antiochus IV of the Seleucid Empire. The conflict between the king of the north and the king of the south refers to the Syrian Wars in which the Jews were caught in the middle of, and eventually became oppressed when Antiochus IV conquered the region and tried to force-Hellenize the Jews going so far as to install an image of Zeus in the Holy of Holies and having a pig sacrificed upon the altar. This act of abomination is "the abomination which causes desolation" that Daniel mentions; and which Christ echoes in the Gospels when He speaks of the coming destruction of the Jewish Temple, fulfilled in 70 AD when the Zealots took over the city and slaughtered the priests in the Temple (Eusebius tells us that the sanctuary was polluted and ran red with the blood of the innocent), following this the Romans under Titus came, took the city, murdered the inhabitants, and razed the Temple to the ground. Which is why the Christians of Jerusalem did as Christ had warned, "When you see armies around Jerusalem flee", so they did, they fled to Petra and waited out the conflict.

There are good reasons to not want a one world government. That it is a satanic plot to usher in the end times isn't one of them. The best reason to not want a one world government is that it it would lack the accountability that an international network of sovereign nations has, rather than there being a single structure of power that has absolutely zero oversight. To quote a comic book: Who watches the Watchmen?

-CryptoLutheran

Okay
My view is just different than yours. From my view Revelation chpt 13 says he will cause the whole world will worship the beast (except those who have the name of God on them) and for me that means all the people in the world. And it seems to me there would have to be some type of ruling/governing system that the beast and the false lamb has - after all he is going to set it up where no one can buy sell or trade unless they had the mark of the beast.
And the last lamb and beast is right before the return of Christ in both Revelations and Daniels - and Daniel's he's called the Ancient of Days - so I just see the last beast rising in these modern days and not referring to the days of the Roman empire or even Alexander the Great as some has taught.

You are correct it is speculation.
You are correct, nowhere in the Bible does it use one world order, or any of the modern names.

Peace be with you!

 

[ViaCrucis]

Okay
My view is just different than yours. From my view Revelation chpt 13 says he will cause the whole world will worship the beast (except those who have the name of God on them) and for me that means all the people in the world. And it seems to me there would have to be some type of ruling/governing system that the beast and the false lamb has - after all he is going to set it up where no one can buy sell or trade unless they had the mark of the beast.
And the last lamb and beast is right before the return of Christ in both Revelations and Daniels - and Daniel's he's called the Ancient of Days - so I just see the last beast rising in these modern days and not referring to the days of the Roman empire or even Alexander the Great as some has taught.

You are correct it is speculation.
You are correct, nowhere in the Bible does it use one world order, or any of the modern names.

Peace be with you!

Just to offer some different perspective, you said "after all he is going to set it up where no one can buy sell or trade unless they had the mark of the beast". To which I would offer this bit of information:

Libellus - Wikipedia

There was, at one time, literally a certificate of loyalty to the Roman Empire that people had to acquire by offering sacrifice to the gods and to the emperor. Without this libellus a person was effectively cut off from society and a traitor to the state. The Decian Persecution paved the way for the absolute worst period of persecution in antiquity under Diocletian.

The use of the language of a mark or seal is found several times in Scripture. The first time is in the Torah where God instructs the Jews to mark upon their foreheads and right hands (sound familiar?) the holy mitzvot of God, which is what gave way to the tradition in Judaism to the wearing of tefillin. The forehead and right hand are symbolic, God wanted His covenant people to in thought and action be faithful to the Torah and the Covenant. In the same way, St. Paul says in Ephesians chapter 1 that Christ's Faithful have been sealed with the Holy Spirit. And even in the Revelation we see the Faithful marked upon their forehead with the seal of God. The mark of the beast and the seal of God are an intentional contrast: One can be loyal to the Beast or one can be loyal to Christ, but one cannot have both. When Caesar demands a pinch of incense and worship of false gods the Church said no, and by refusing to submit the Church paid the price time and again with the blood of the martyrs. The same martyrs who John says stand before God and are provided with white robes (Revelation 7:1-17).

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sheila Davis]

Just to offer some different perspective, you said "after all he is going to set it up where no one can buy sell or trade unless they had the mark of the beast". To which I would offer this bit of information:

Libellus - Wikipedia

There was, at one time, literally a certificate of loyalty to the Roman Empire that people had to acquire by offering sacrifice to the gods and to the emperor. Without this libellus a person was effectively cut off from society and a traitor to the state. The Decian Persecution paved the way for the absolute worst period of persecution in antiquity under Diocletian.

The use of the language of a mark or seal is found several times in Scripture. The first time is in the Torah where God instructs the Jews to mark upon their foreheads and right hands (sound familiar?) the holy mitzvot of God, which is what gave way to the tradition in Judaism to the wearing of tefillin. The forehead and right hand are symbolic, God wanted His covenant people to in thought and action be faithful to the Torah and the Covenant. In the same way, St. Paul says in Ephesians chapter 1 that Christ's Faithful have been sealed with the Holy Spirit. And even in the Revelation we see the Faithful marked upon their forehead with the seal of God. The mark of the beast and the seal of God are an intentional contrast: One can be loyal to the Beast or one can be loyal to Christ, but one cannot have both. When Caesar demands a pinch of incense and worship of false gods the Church said no, and by refusing to submit the Church paid the price time and again with the blood of the martyrs. The same martyrs who John says stand before God and are provided with white robes (Revelation 7:1-17).

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you -