The religious aspect of the New World Order - new age deception

If I were trying to take control of the world I would start with God. If I can control what you believe about your eternal soul, I can control your life.

Don't take that wrong, I believe dearly in a higher power, but I know without a doubt you will never find that power by looking out there. It must come from within. God has never dwelled in a book or theology, He has always been in your heart and very being.

Turn away from the teaching of man or the false prophets of religion and turn only to your own hearts knowing.

God will never lead you wrong......

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Read the first sentence of my opening post. If that doesn't apply to you, fine. There are others who might be interested, I made a brief summary (which I can see you didn't read) because people asked me to and they asked me to for a reason... For those who think this is propaganda: no one is forcing you to watch it or to read it. It's simple, really. I don't know why you get so enraged and start yelling "YOU" this "YOU" that...

a reply to: Emma3

So, for those who might be interested, I think the following series does a great job explaining the religious aspect of the New World Order.

That's your first line. I AM interested in this. Particularly in the evidence you can present that says the bible is true that can prove the foundation of this conspiracy theory is true. If you can't start there, what's the point of pursuing it further?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

That's why I was saying you don't seem to have read my summary. I highlighted what seemed to me to be the most important parts in each video, and one of those parts is when they explain the prophecy in the book of Daniel about the empires. Most people just refuse to believe the book was written before it happened, because of its accuracy.

a reply to: Emma3

It wasn't written before then. The accuracy is just made up propaganda from the Catholic church. The whole bible can be easily debunked through traditional scientific methods. I know that you don't want to admit that because you've been brainwashed to believe that the bible is true so you can't question it, but it's true. The bible is a book of lies and embellishments.

Failed biblical prophecies

A prophecy should be obvious as predicting an event before the occurrence of the event. If the prophecy is not obvious as having predicted the event even after the occurrence of the event, then it suffers from vagueness.

Daniel interprets Nebuchadnezzar's dream

In Daniel 2:31-33 the prophet is asked to interpret the king's dream. The vision is described as follows:
You looked, O king, and there before you stood a large statue—an enormous, dazzling statue, awesome in appearance. The head of the statue was made of pure gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of baked clay. (NIV)

Daniel explains that the gold head of the statue apparently represents the Babylonian Empire and the remaining parts represent kingdoms that would follow.

The 100prophecies.org website claims Daniel herein predicted the rise of three specific historic kingdoms. They claim the silver chest and arms predicted the Medo-Persian Empire, which conquered the Babylonian Empire. They offer as evidence the observation that the two arms represent the Medes and the Persians. [14]

The proper name for the Medo-Persian Empire is the Achaemenid Empire, an empire formed when Persia conquered Media and other nations. [15] With this understanding it becomes unclear why the chest and arms should suggest this empire more than any other. Daniel describes this second kingdom as being "inferior" to the first in Daniel 2:39. It is not stated why this contextual observation or that this part of the statue is made of silver should suggest the Achaemenid Empire.

The website claims the brass belly and thighs predict the Grecian Empire, which conquered the Medo-Persian Empire. They offer as evidence the observation that the empire started out united under Alexander the Great but was divided up after his death.

The proper name for the Grecian Empire is Macedonia, a kingdom existing since well before Persia defeated Babylon, which included many but not all Greek city-states. It grew to briefly take over territories previously controlled by the Persian Empire under Alexander the Great before falling under the control of a series of smaller dynasties. [16] Ultimately it was absorbed by the Roman Empire although its society and culture remained largely unchanged through the birth of Christianity. [17] With this understanding it becomes unclear why the concepts of unification and division should suggest Macedonia more than any other empire that has risen and fallen or why the observation that this part of the statue is made of bronze should suggest this empire. In verse 39 Daniel predicts this third kingdom "will rule over the whole earth."

The website claims the iron legs and feet partly of iron and partly clay predict the Roman Empire, which conquered the Grecian Empire. No evidence is presented to support this claim.

In Daniel 2:40 Daniel predicts that the fourth kingdom "will crush and break all the others." No attempt is made to show that the Roman Empire defeated the Babylonian or Achaemenid empires. Daniel further predicts that the fourth kingdom "will be a divided kingdom" (Daniel 2:41) and "will be partly strong and partly brittle" (Daniel 2:42) and its people "will be a mixture and will not be united." (Daniel 2:43) It is not stated why either these contextual observations or that this part of the statue is made of iron and clay should suggest the Roman Empire.

It is unclear why the alleged prophecy should suggest the mentioned empires more so than any other kingdoms. The kingdoms of Egypt, Phoenicia, Edom, Media, and Ptolemy and the various Persian empires, for example, had great influence on the region of ancient Israel as well and all, in addition to many subsequent empires, would seem to as adequately meet the criteria of the Bible verses. In fact some of these kingdoms are included in several alternate interpretations that have been proposed by various Christian, Jewish, Mormon, and Jehovah's Witness camps as to which empires Daniel might have been predicting. [18] If this passage were unambiguously predicting the rise of future kingdoms why then can not, at the least in retrospect after the occurrence, the precise identity of the kingdoms be determined?

Daniel's Seventy Weeks Prophecy

Dispensationalists claim the seventy weeks prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27 predicts the crucifixion of Jesus and the Antichrist, in which the Antichrist will enter a third temple and commit a blasphemous act. This is false. According to Daniel 12, the Day of Judgement was supposed to happen 3 and a half years after Antiochus' persecution of the Jews in the 2nd Century BC. This would make Daniel a false prophet but most Christians still insist that it's describing a future Great Tribulation.

Instead of predicting Jesus, most contemporary scholars think The Messiah in verse 26 (In Hebrew Translations, Messiah is translated as Prince) is Onias the third, a pious religious leader who opposed the Hellenization of the Jews and was murdered. Jews considered religious leaders and rabbis to be "annointed ones".

The coming prince that will destroy Jerusalem and commit the Abomination of Desolation is describing Antiochus Epiphanes' reign of terror against the Jews during the Maccabean Revolt, not the Antichrist. Historical data shows that Antiochus committed the "abomination that causes desolation" when he sacrificed a pig to a statue of Zeus in the 2nd temple and forced the Jews to end their daily sacrifices. This occurred 3 and a half years after he established a covenant with the Jewish people and subsequently annulled it. The Books of Maccabees describes Antiochus Epiphanes in greater detail and goes so far as to describe Antiochus in the same manner as the coming prince in the seventy weeks prophecy. The entire chapter of Daniel 11 is obviously describing Antiochus Epiphanes. Antiochus considered himself divine and God incarnate.

All references to the Abomination of Desolation in the New Testament are basically rehashes of the Book of Daniel. Paul wrote an epistle around 50 AD that said the "man of lawlessness" would enter the second temple and declare himself divine. However, since the temple was destroyed in 70 AD and none of Paul's prediction came true as Paul said it would, Christians have reinterpreted the prophecy to mean that the Antichrist would enter a revived 3rd temple and declare himself divine. This proves that Paul was oblivious about the temple's imminent destruction and was probably a false prophet.

Book of Daniel

Daniel is not technically a Prophet in the Jewish sense since he talked with angels not God, and since he talked to future generations not the current generation. The last half of Daniel describes the destruction of the world and the coming of the Messiah. For Christians, this carries important events that must pass before Jesus can come to the earth.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't care about the catholic church. Catholicism =/= Christianity. And I wasn't brainwashed to think anything, I wasn't even raised in a Bible believing family. I became a Christian because of my research. Like I said on a past comment, you can't just read the supposed rebuttal of something and leave it at that. If the subject interests you, you'll research and read the responses of both sides to everything, and only then, take your conclusions.

a reply to: Emma3

Christianity COMES from Catholicism. Just about every belief and superstition you hold about Christianity comes from Catholicism. THEY made them up. So you HAVE to look at Catholicism to look at where this stuff comes from. So regardless of which branch of Christianity you are from you are STILL believing Catholic propaganda and repeating it in this thread. You are just refusing to acknowledge that fact. I don't have to be a Republican to believe and spout Republican propaganda. Propaganda effects anyone who wants it to equally regardless of their predisposed beliefs.

As for your other points about both sides of the argument. You don't know what you are talking about. Anyone who believes that anything supernatural in the bible is true, doesn't look at both sides of the argument. If you TRULY did that, you'd be able to acknowledge that humans are liars and humans wrote the bible. They also wrote it back during a time when quality control of history was non-existent. All of the stories in the bible were told orally for a LONG time and as we all know from the telephone game, that means that the stories have gotten embellished to the extreme. The ENTIRE bible is a terrible source of history because of those reasons. So don't talk to me about looking at both sides of the argument, you clearly haven't done that, or at least your standards for what you consider "quality evidence" are VERY loose.

Do you know what a confirmation bias is? Because if you don't, you should read up on it. It's ok to have one, most people do. But if you want to truly seek the truth, you have to be able to recognize and abandon your confirmation biases. To do that, you must forget everything you know as true and JUST look at the evidence using reason and logic. And reason and logic says that the bible can't be true as written.

originally posted by: Emma3
I became a Christian because of my research. Like I said on a past comment, you can't just read the supposed rebuttal of something and leave it at that. If the subject interests you, you'll research and read the responses of both sides to everything, and only then, take your conclusions.

Friendly suggestion here, from an opposing position. I became an ex Christian because of my research and general interest in various subjects. My suggestion is, if you are someone who honestly cares about the truth, keep researching. The Bible really can be shown to be nothing more than historical fiction. It's built upon lies and myths. It can be largely damaging and in fact has been used as a control mechanism for centuries.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. -Lucius Annaeus Seneca the Younger (4BC-65AD)

One only needs to study the history of the church to understand this. I realize you don't equate Catholicism with Christianity but Krazysh0t is right when he says Christianity comes from Catholicism. I'm sure you're familiar with the reformation. Martin Luther said that reason is faith's greatest enemies, and he believed telling lies for Christ was acceptable.

What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church ... a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them. - Martin Luther

Remember Constantine? Eusebius of Caesarea, his bishop understood deception.

How it may be lawful and fitting to use falsehood as a medicine, and for the benefit of those who want to be deceived. -Eusebius of Caesarea

Don't you find it interesting that the supposed Christian holiday of Christmas has its roots in Saturnalia? Or that much of Easter traditions are also of pagan origins? What else has influenced Christianity? Perhaps older myths, traditions and religions? Such as Zoroastrianism?

Some scholars believe that key concepts of Zoroastrian eschatology and demonology influenced the Abrahamic religions. On the other hand, Zoroastrianism itself inherited ideas from other belief systems and, like other "practiced" religions, accommodates some degree of syncretism.

In Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda is the beginning and the end, the creator of everything that can and cannot be seen, the Eternal, the Pure and the only Truth. In the Gathas, the most sacred texts of Zoroastrianism thought to have been composed by Zoroaster himself, the prophet acknowledged devotion to no other divinity besides Ahura Mazda.

Sounds a lot like the alpha and omega, eh? Indeed, if you do some comparative religions studies you will find many things that you may have previously thought were unique to Christianity. Virgin births/divine conceptions, being born under a star, deaths and resurrections, miracles, ascensions to a heaven, and second comings. These things are scattered throughout religious beliefs. In case you're thinking that maybe they stole those concepts from Christianity, that is not always the case. They can all be found in older religions in one form or another.

So either:
The earlier Gods and heroes existed and had these traits, rendering Jesus run of the mill and uninteresting in a long line of Gods. Or, somehow the earlier stories are myths, but not Jesus, and God in creating this Jesus story lacked any imagination. -Don Baker (in Atheist Experience #798)

By the way, the Atheist Experience is a great resource for Christians and theists in general, to get a better understanding of an opposing view. Aron Ra is another favorite of mine. Just throwing those out there since you claim to be interested in exploring all sides and coming to your own conclusions.

Hope you found my post encouraging. Thanks for reading.

a reply to: Emma3

I cannot speak for Krazy and Beer, but you can believe in the Creator, without one of man's religion to hamper you. I recognize you are probably only trying to share information you feel is important. If I was a follower still, I'd probably thank you, and be in my way. I might even think Krazy and Beer were the lost ones.

Please understand, some of us, saw, or see right through the ruse. It is not reality. Well, at least not this one. If you sit down, and are truly honest with yourself, that is the conclusion you will reach. This leaves only the morality of Christianity to consider. But, much of Christianity is very outdated as a moral code.

My advice? Take the best of the philosophy, and bring it with you. Like, love thy neighbor as thyself, or Paul's dissertation of what love is. Bring those two forward, and you would have peace on earth.

Ironically, I have much more respect, love, etc towards God, or as I prefer to call it, the Creator since doing so. Your mileage may vary.

Krazysh0t:

If Christianity had come from Catholicism, what would be the point of them in creating a book that they contradict so blatantly? How would my thread be "Republican propaganda" when I'm not even American? I know what a confirmation bias is, that seems to be what you hold on to.


WakeUpBeer:

I do keep researching. I know about Christmas and the virgin Mary, etc.. That's Catholicism and it is based on pagan religions. And that's not in the Bible.

a reply to: Emma3

“The Church no more gave us the New Testament canon than Isaac Newton gave us the force of gravity.” ~ J.I. Packer

The Bible was BANNED by the Catholic Church for centuries and was actually on the list of banned books.

They tried to take credit for what the Lord did without their help.

The Roman Catholic church has had only one aim from its earliest, pagan and political origins: To destroy the true Christians, and to destroy their Bible. That is why they substituted the corrupt Alexandrian perversions of scripture, instead of using the preserved, prophetic and apostolic Words of God as found in Antioch of Syria, where "the disciples were first called Christians" (Acts 11:26).

That is why they used their Jesuits to infiltrate the Protestant Seminaries, Colleges and Bible Schools. Their Jesuits became the "teachers" and planted seeds of doubt in the Christians' minds. These doubt-ridden Christians then taught at other colleges and schools. All the while they planted that same seed of doubt of God's word in their students.

Did the Catholic Church give us the Bible

a reply to: Emma3

Maybe you should clarify exactly what you believe because, as is usual with Christians, it seems you have your own idea of what it is and means. Tell us what you think is so unique about Christianity so that we may have a better understanding of your position. You say you've researched "virgin births etc. That's Catholicism and it is based on pagan religions. And that's not in the Bible." When you say "etc" are you referring to the other things I pointed out about Jesus? Being born under a star, deaths and resurrections, miracles, ascensions to a heaven, and second comings?

By the way, you might want to read Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:34-38, in regards to Mary's virginity and the divine conception of Jesus.

Slightly Irreverent Bible Study
Noah's Ark is Plagiarized. Here's how we know...

Not sure what this is about, but TO ME it seems like (another) thread of someone demonizing a new order of the world (which we would certainly need), New Age thinking in general....BUT AMAZINGLY has no problem with the bible and Christianity since those, allegedly, tell the truth?

Edit: And a bunch of "Satan(ists) did it!"-blah blah mixed in. In other words: LIES as spread by the ruling elite since millennia.
Ever wonder WHY the Illuminati were called that way? Maybe start your research there...

originally posted by: Emma3
They explain the new age movement and its origins, its connection with aliens (ascended masters...) and that it basically comes down to the thinking that we will evolve to become a superior being (which is connected with the lie of the serpent in the garden of Eden that "ye shall be as gods").

Just an FYI for you and others that may not be aware of it. You say that the serpent lies to adam and eve about how they shall become as gods and know good and evil. This is true, the serpent does in fact say this. However, so does God. So why is it that when the serpent says it, it's a lie, but when God says the same exact thing it's not?? Either they were both lying or they were both telling the truth.

Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Gen 3:22 ¶ And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

originally posted by: mrwupy
If I were trying to take control of the world I would start with God. If I can control what you believe about your eternal soul, I can control your life.

Don't take that wrong, I believe dearly in a higher power, but I know without a doubt you will never find that power by looking out there. It must come from within. God has never dwelled in a book or theology, He has always been in your heart and very being.

Turn away from the teaching of man or the false prophets of religion and turn only to your own hearts knowing.

God will never lead you wrong......

And be wary of those who forbid you this exact thing. Ask yourself why the church has a very vehement stance against anything spiritual or "New Age"....ask yourself!! And then slowly start going down the rabbit hole. Slowly, because it might be shocking what you might find ...

Wakeupbeer: You're missing the entire point. This thread is not about my religious position, the videos are not about me... Anyway... No, I was not referring to Jesus' parts, I was referring to all that's pagan that's not in the Bible. I thought I made it clear when I said "that's not in the Bible"... The whole New Testament is about Jesus, so how would Jesus and His teachings not be in the Bible? And another point you seem to be missing: "after this, therefore because of this" is wrong, as well as "correlation means causation". And I never said the Bible doesn't teach the virgin birth, I was referring to the state of adoration Catholics have for Mary as being equated to the ancient pagan religions.


Norulesallowed: the Illuminati are called that way because they believe they receive the light of knowledge from Lucifer. That's very much related with searching for the light in Masonry, gnostic teachings, chakras, kundalini energy and so on. Which all leads to the idea that we are our own gods. If you want to "go down the rabbit hole", you're free to do it. I've been there.

mOjOm: false dilemma. God condemns the action, and there's a major distinction to be made between God and gods (one is capitalized and the other is not for a reason).

____

Like I said, I started the thread to provide information to those who might be interested in this issue (and are willing to actually look it up). If that's your case, very well, I know the videos are long and I provided a brief summary that highlights the parts I find to be the most relevant. Feel free to discuss what's addressed.

If that's not your case, and you can't even respect other people (saying this is dumb, YOU this, YOU that, etc.., by the way, if I were you I wouldn't waste my time with something I thought was dumb...), it doesn't seem to me those sorts of "discussions" will lead anywhere. Always assuming this is wrong and that if someone comes to those conclusions it is because they were brainwashed by some religion. The same old of "Christianity is outdated and I refuse to believe it, therefore when people say it was created by the Vatican to control people, it has to be true because it agrees with my pre-conceived idea" doesn't add anything to the discussion. Catholicism =/= Christianity. Trying to pin-point me to a group so that I'm supposedly guilty by association, undermining the information presented should be an eye opening for anyone reading this... There's no point in making it personal and accuse me that this is propaganda, since no one is forcing you to read what I wrote or to watch the videos. No one is forcing you to accept what the videos are suggesting, but an opinion can't be made without access to information from all points of view. (Seeing there's so much information about the new age already, I started the thread so that people would also see the other side.) As simple as that. Why are you so enraged?

a reply to: Emma3

Actually I almost wrote 2 lengthy reply's in this thread. I decided not to, because it is a waste of time. You sound like me 4 years ago.

I've noticed a lot of these kinds of threads lately. Christian internet marketing campaign? Last dash to sell spiritual debt slavery?

Time will tell.

originally posted by: Emma3
Wakeupbeer: You're missing the entire point. This thread is not about my religious position, the videos are not about me... Anyway... No, I was not referring to Jesus' parts, I was referring to all that's pagan that's not in the Bible. I thought I made it clear when I said "that's not in the Bible"... The whole New Testament is about Jesus, so how would Jesus and His teachings not be in the Bible? And another point you seem to be missing: "after this, therefore because of this" is wrong, as well as "correlation means causation". And I never said the Bible doesn't teach the virgin birth, I was referring to the state of adoration Catholics have for Mary as being equated to the ancient pagan religions.

Actually you weren't very clear at all. "virgin births etc. That's Catholicism and it is based on pagan religions. And that's not in the Bible." Just made it sound like you were referring to the characteristics of Jesus that I mentioned. I thought it was a little strange that you were doing that so thank you for clarifying that you were not. The thread is about the religious aspect of the new world order. I was not attempting to make it a personal attack on you. I did ask for more specifics on your position to better understand it. Not to attack you, but to better challenge the position. For a lot of this conspiracy to be true requires the Bible to be accurate. Which it is not. It's based on myths and legends, lies and embellishments (see some of my points in this post). My point is that you can see how cultures influence each other! When I pointed out that characteristics of Jesus and Christianity can be found in older mythologies and religions I wasn't implying "after this, therefore because of this" or "correlation means causation". My point was that these there are common themes.
So if Christianity is correct,

The earlier Gods and heroes existed and had these traits, rendering Jesus run of the mill and uninteresting in a long line of Gods. Or, somehow the earlier stories are myths, but not Jesus, and God in creating this Jesus story lacked any imagination. -Don Baker (in Atheist Experience #798)

Again, I'm not trying to attack you. I'm challenging the Christian position. Often with subjects like these people can feel it's personal, but it is not. You can believe whatever you want for all I care.

Like I said, I started the thread to provide information to those who might be interested in this issue (and are willing to actually look it up). If that's your case, very well, I know the videos are long and I provided a brief summary that highlights the parts I find to be the most relevant. Feel free to discuss what's addressed.

I did not watch the videos but that is mainly because I am familiar with the new age deception and new world order conspiracies. I used to be really into them for a long time. Chances are I have seen those videos at some point in the past. Maybe you've heard of a guy called Dr. Scott Johnson? I was really into his perspectives for a long time and he covers subjects like these.

In regards to Biblical prophecy, as has been pointed out, it is not 100% accurate. Here are some examples you can peruse through. Krazysh0t linked to the part of this page about Daniel already. Failed biblical prophecies. Here is a question I've always wondered. If Bible prophecy is 100% accurate, why did the Jews reject Jesus as the messiah?

As for the NWO. Certainly many politicians and people in power (or who have had power) use those very words when talking about the global community and their aims. I do believe that there are groups working together, conspiring to bring about a one world system though I disagree with a lot of claims made about their motives and capabilities.

Catholicism =/= Christianity. Trying to pin-point me to a group so that I'm supposedly guilty by association, undermining the information presented should be an eye opening for anyone reading this... There's no point in making it personal and accuse me that this is propaganda, since no one is forcing you to read what I wrote or to watch the videos. No one is forcing you to accept what the videos are suggesting, but an opinion can't be made without access to information from all points of view. (Seeing there's so much information about the new age already, I started the thread so that people would also see the other side.) As simple as that.

I hope you don't feel that I have tried to make you "guilty by association" or of "spreading propaganda" or the like. I also don't think you're stupid or brainwashed. Yes I think some of the things you believe are stupid but so what? I used to believe in a lot of the same stuff. If you wanted to dive into my brain I'm certain you would find things I still believe that are stupid. I try to question them but honestly, probably haven't gotten around to them all. I respect your right to believe whatever you want! I'm sorry if you feel the focus my posts wasn't entirely on topic. Religion, specifically the accuracy of prophecy and by extension the Bible was part of the topic. That's what people decided to focus on and there is nothing wrong with that as it is a key component in the New World Order/New Age Deception conspiracy theory.

As for this Catholicism =/= Christianity thing. Catholics are Christians but Christians aren't Catholics, if that makes any sense. I know what you mean though. Essentially that the Catholic church is the Great Apostasy or Whore of Babylon and is rife with un-Biblical tenets. If much of what is in the Bible shares common themes with other religions etc. (like I've pointed out) what does that mean? That's why I had asked what you thought was unique about Christianity. You don't have to answer that, I'm just sayin'.

To clarify something I said before: When I said that Christianity came from Catholicism I was referring to the Reformation and not a conspiracy of one kind or another.

a reply to: Emma3

I wasn't even raised in a Bible believing family. I became a Christian because of my research. Like I said on a past comment, you can't just read the supposed rebuttal of something and leave it at that.

I see so you have put so many of us through degrees of you,re strident rebuttals however as it turns out you are not even a Christian?
There is no such thing as a Christian outside of religious organisation! At least officially you do not have claim to the title.

a reply to: mrwupy

Don't take that wrong, I believe dearly in a higher power, but I know without a doubt you will never find that power by looking out there. It must come from within. God has never dwelled in a book or theology, He has always been in your heart and very being.

Exactly amen to that!