It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by WickettheRabbit
reply to post by Stormdancer777
I know that believers will be marked by God, but she was saying that taking the Mark of the Beast on the hand would be different from taking the Mark of the Beast on the forehead.
Originally posted by wonderworld
reply to post by Stormdancer777
I havent followed up much on Biblical archeology, with some exceptions to the dead sea scrolls, the Ark and a few other things.
Thanks for the link. It was interesting!
Originally posted by jam321
Just a curious question. I know a lot of what is in the bible is not mean to be taken literally.
Is there any way that the hand and forehead could allude to something totally different rather than literally?
Originally posted by wonderworld
reply to post by Stormdancer777
They may be able to take God out of our schools and public buildings. It is something they can never take from our souls.
I expect to hear more and more God bashing. This country was founded on Christianity.
Satan is hard at work. He knows his days are numbered!
Riding atop of the scarlet beast or UN is the prostitute/woman or "Babylon the Great" this is organized religion that is not acceptable to God because they opposed or killed "God's holy people" and they are accountable to him for that. In the end God's puts a plan into the scarlet beast head to turn on her, eat her and burn her dead remains with fire. Annihilating that entity for good.
Given that this will happen in the very near future the obvious question is how? All nations would have to give up a measure of their sovereignty to do this. And give it to the UN? The truth is the conspiracy theorist are not far off the mark when they talk about a planned New World Order. (NWO) It is a type of NWO via the United Nations that pulls this off. Some people especially Americans strongly oppose the UN because they see their sovereignty being taken away by this organization and those that support it. The events of 9/11 enable all plans to proceed in an accelerated way. It doesn't matter what the true reality of 9/11 is, only the accomplishments that came out of it, and how it is perceived by the world in general.
These comments were found in the Calgary Herald on Thursday October 18, 2001. (Sorry no link, I only have the hard copy)
UN Trying To Promote One-World Religion (Editoral)
Last week at the Untied Nations, the United Religious Initiative blamed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on - are you ready? - religion. Not Terrorists. Not a radical political ideology. Not a megalomaniacal secular corruption of Islam. Not even Islam itself But religion as such. All religions. "There's a lot of terror and violence in a lot of scripture", said URI founder and Episcopal Bishop William E. Swing(who's still holding on to his day job)"We have to hold religions' feet to the fire for the violence and terror within them." Charged another URI delegate."The whole problem is religion- the whole concept of religion requires conformity. Truth is different for every individual" Yet another "All religions have fanatical elements and we must delete those elements from their scriptures..." Note: the URI's reaction to the worlds religious diversity is not "live and let live." It's global administration."....The URI is NGO arm of the UN International advisory council of Religious and Spirtual leaders. Last year the advisory council's world peace summit funded by billionaire globalist Ted Turner ratified the pantheist Earth Charter...And like any true believers, what the URI proposes is not a "faith" but simple "rationality", the UN rationality...Their premise is the necessity of global administration. And their purpose -- under their administration -- is liberation, from religion."
And then there is this report. Insight magazine reported on October 2, 2000: Bawa Jain, secretary-general of the Millennium Peace Summit, says he thinks all religions and spiritualists, as well as assorted witch doctors, sha-mans and medicine men, draw their wisdom from the same source. But he applauds efforts to outlaw proselytizing since it matters little whether one worships a downed World War II airplane with a cargo cult, is a snake-handling Baptist or a Roman Catholic. That view has been met with strict opposition from the Vatican and mainline Protestants, who oppose the notion that all religions are equal. As host of the U.N.'s Millennium Peace Summit of Religious and Spiritual Leaders, Jain told an international meeting of 1,000 delegates that religions need to accept the validity of all beliefs to attain world peace. The summit, the first of its kind to be sponsored by the United Nations, was held in New York City Aug. 28-31 just before political leaders gathered for the U.N. Millennium Assembly. The timing was perfect, says Jain, as it allowed religious leaders to update their political counterparts on how to usher in the peace of the new world order through religious universalism. According to Francis Cardinal Arinze, president for interreligious dialogue at the Vatican and a speaker at the summit, the Catholic Church also would favor one religion in the world - if it were Roman Catholicism. Assorted grand muftis and other true believers hold the same view, again so long as it is their faith that is universally recognized. That each is out to convert the world is to be expected, so the proposed ban on proselytizing is surprising.... So what is the objective here? Is it religious tolerance, unification or subversion of religious faith? Jain tells Insight that he looks forward to a day when religious people no longer insist on a single truth. And the URI, in which Jain is active and which was one of the partners for the summit, takes it even further. URI president Swing says, "There will have to be a godly cease-fire, a temporary truce where the absolute exclusive claims of each [religion] will be honored but an agreed-upon neutrality will be exercised in terms of proselytizing, condemning, murdering or dominating. These will not be tolerated in the United Religions zone."
Originally posted by Thinkmore
First off, the USA was founded on the separation of Church and State.