Few things are more important than figuring out what the “Mark of the Beast” is, so let’s try to clear up the confusion and make sense of it.The Winter Christian is reader-supported.
I read your book "Maybe Everyone is Wrong" after hearing you on Dan Fournier's podcast, then subscribed to this Substack some months ago. So by now familiar with your take on the Catholic church, and Orthodox, as well, as you are writing here once again today. I agree with you that a lot about these institutions is a continuation of Roman empire and very corrupted, political power more than spirituality. I assume these views extend to some Protestant denominations, Anglican for example which is just like Catholic except instead of the pope they substitute the English king or queen. Or United here in Canada, which is like an arm of the government.
But one thing I have not gotten from reading/listening is what you consider a good church. Is it better for Christians to be on their own; not attend any religious institution or adhere to the dogma of a particular denomination? Are only congregational type Christian gatherings good in your opinion? Also is it possible to be a good Christian but also be an attendee of a particular Orthodox or Catholic church? Does one have to decide based on a local church and behavior of its congregation? Curious to know your view.
First of all thank you for reading my stuff and understanding my general position. You're asking a good question but I don't think I have a good answer.
I haven't been a member of a church or attended one in many years. Part of that is because of my work schedule, which compels me to sleep Sunday morning, and part of that is because I think I grew out of that format.
I do believe that congregating in fellowship is important for Christians, especially early on in our walks. I don't think it's a "sacrament" or a ritual though, and I don't think it has to be a routine in a dedicated building.
I guess I'm more curious what you feel a regular church is needed for. What would an ideal church be?
I think the need (or not) of a regular church would differ for individuals. I like to attend church with my daughter, be in the company of other Christians, share in prayer and songs, and take communion. It is spiritually refreshing and a good start to the week. I do not feel attachment to a particular denomination and could find a issue with particular dogma in any denomination.
I was curious though after following you for awhile about your views re: a good church - you have answered my question saying you don't attend and may have grown out of that format, thanks.
I believe that denominational adherence is fine to a certain extent. The whole point of the mystery of God at the times before Messiah was revealed was to be shocking. That the God of Israel and who only deals with Israel would allow gentiles into another eternal covenant to be “grafted in” alongside the Jews.
Paul talks about this mystery finally throughout his letters. That the invitation is given to all those who believe on Messiah.
You even have the heavenly scene in Revelation where there were great multitudes from EVERY tribe, tongue, kindgom, and nation before the throne. This give evidence to the fact that real Christians can be found throughout all of the world. The body of Christ a is a decentralized operation and I think God has cleverly scattered his true followers throughout the world to be a beacon of light in their community.
Saying that to say that true Christians can be found in every denomination, alongside false one (because we know there are tares among the wheats).
Yes, even a faithful catholic can be saved. For salvation is not in a denomination, but is in your right hand and your forehead.
Just as there are those who use their right hands and forehead to serve the beast, Christians to the same to serve Christ. I believe Jesus Christ cares much more about how you treat your fellow man and how you rely and trust in him only in your daily life over some doctrines to follow.
I know in new creation, we won’t be following doctrines, but we will be in fellowship as a family as God intended from the beginning.
In conclusion, if you prioritize doing good to your fellow man and serving the kingdom by pondering on the heavenly things and putting them into consideration within your daily life, then you will be saved (even if you take the eucharist or go to confession).
A very pertinent question. I don't know what Terry would say but I suspect that all of the churches engaging in traditional, institutional forms of "worship" as initiated by Constantine are implicated. I can't offer a simple answer, but I am a member of one of these churches that at least has particular strengths, and this offers opportunities for "inreach".
The behavior of the congregation can be a concern, but the fidelity of the teaching is more important. None of these institutional churches resembles the biblical first-century assemblies of the saints -- the institutional traditions don't permit it.
All I can suggest is to pray continually and do as you are led. Doing so has me mentoring three other people and participating in a small group. Two of these activities are on-campus at my church, where I also have a volunteer job (ProPresenter operator) that provides a view of what goes on behind the scenes.
The "leading" can be different for each person. The focus must be on sharing the truth with others, and glorifying God. It must NOT be on oneself, or how to escape! The truth includes not only confession and repentance, but the need and means to negotiate the difficult path, to survive and engage in spiritual warfare -- interceding for others (and for each other) -- and to endure to the end. If you are feeling uncomfortable, that is a good sign. It is not easy, but this path leads to life eternal.
I appreciate you offering your views on this, and you’ve obviously given it a good deal of thought. Some excellent insights here.
There’s one transition in your interpretation that I’m really struggling with though. You outline a compelling interpretation regarding the first beast and the second beast wherein you identify the mark of the beast as “a system of international control” and say that we “are living in the age of the Mark of the Beast, and we have been for 500 years.” You then you point to Revelation 14 as signifying “that the punishment for taking the Mark of the Beast is not in effect yet.”
All that is compelling to me, but it seems to imply that the mark of the beast at some point must transition from a kind of generic system of international control to something more specific that forces each individual to make a choice for himself/herself. How else to make sense of Revelation 14:11: “And the smoke from their torture will go up forever and ever, and those who worship the beast and his image will have no rest day or night, along with anyone who receives the mark of his name.”
It’s difficult for me to see how the phrasing can just mean an intangible system that shapes global civilization, and it really seems to me to point to something more tangible that forces each individual to make a stark choice. But I don't know. Like I said, very compelling viewpoint that I'll be thinking about for a while.
Great question. I'm happy to flesh that out a bit more.
We see three angels visit the people of the world and spread three messages, right?
One preaches the "eternal Gospel" of fearing God and recognizing that He created everything. This tells us that some kind of Atheism (ie. the Mark of the Beast) will dominate the future. They will deny that God created everything, even when the cataclysms are happening. The Church will be killed by this point, so we won't be there to warn them. That's why the angels do it themselves.
The angel also says that "the hour of his judgment has arrived", meaning that this is the last warning. They will all hear the gospel in their own language, personally.
The second angel warns that Babylon (ie. Jerusalem) will be destroyed in judgment. So when we combine these two stories, we see a picture of the end days where the church is gone, Jerusalem is reigning as if it's untouchable, and everyone denies God and nobody fears Him.
That's why the third angel has the warning about what happens if they continue to deny God, and instead cling to their humanist efforts to control the world. I believe that the Roman Catholic Church will undergo massive transformations during this period as well, but that's another topic.
The punishments listed by the third angel are extreme because anyone who converts to Christianity at that point will probably be killed by the authorities. This is the "Aquarian Age" where people will worship demons. It will be a black and white choice of either ignoring the gospel that is preached by angels and surviving, or dying for Christ as a martyr. The "Mark of the Beast" is loyalty to the godless system created by Rome and Satan, but in those days it will be a matter of life and death. Christianity will probably be considered the worst thing in the world, so proclaiming faith in Jesus will be like calling yourself a terrorist.
Does that make sense? In my book I connect a lot of prophecies together, such as the sermon Jesus gave about the signs of the end, etc
χάραγμα (mark) is a precise term, indicating a physical mark made by a pointed object. It can and often did mean "snakebite". It was used for brands on slaves and for tokens of patronage, as well as any design etched into an object or person by a pointed object. I would be much more humble about this hyper-protestant allegorical interpretation, and less quick to denigrate the ancient historical churches, particularly the Orthodox, as "the Beast." Go to the Liddel and Scott lexicon and look up the word. It is not ambiguous the way "mark" is. And yes, I have degrees in Classics (Greek) and Religious Studies (early Christianity).
θηρίον (beast) is a precise term, indicating a wild animal. It is often used to refer to various creatures that walk around on the earth, typically on four legs. Dogs and lions could be considered "beasts".
κέρας (horn) is a precise term, indicating a physical protrusion from an animal. It often means the horn of a bull or ram.
I suppose by your logic we should be watching out for a gigantic four legged animal walking around with crazy antlers sticking out of its seven heads. Or do you not realize that specific terms are used in symbolism, even though they remain symbolic, metaphorical, and therefore requiring interpretation?
Or do you think that the woman who sits on many waters is going to be an actual gigantic female who sits in a big puddle while "she" rules the world?
Whatever studies you may have done, they did not teach you the most obvious and fundamental logic of interpretation, such as how metaphors work.
No, I don't see beast or horn or whore as literal animals, parts, or prostitutes, and in fact teach metaphor, symbol, and allegory as the intro to a class on mythology. Charagma is something a little different to my mind. In the Latin West, clients of wealthy patrons and citizens in the city of Rome were given tessara, inscribed tokens that granted access to the dole of bread, oil, and wine. In the East, in Greek, these were charagmai. In a certain sense I don't actually disagree with you very much: the charagma is a visible sign of allegiance/property. The Beast is clearly symbolic of an authority structure. But "it causes all...to receive a charagma...so that none may buy or sell" is readily and directly comprehensible from the Roman context as a visible and legible -- the word "character" comes from the same root-- mark that must in some way be shown to have access to the marketplace and government handouts. Those of us who lived through 2 years of being shut out of public places because we couldn't show the sign of our obedience and allegiance are not altogether nuts to imagine this as a prelude to the main act. To go backwards and extend the interpretation of the Beast, it arises out of the sea, often understood to represent in some way the undifferentiated mass of humanity, indicating something global in scale. With pandemic treaties, cbdcs, global structures of every kind under technocratic surveillance being erected, it seems a little much to ignore the parallels between us and the Romans and to instead believe that father Yakov in the Orthodox parish next door is what we really need to worry about. If I didn't think you both sincere and insightful, I wouldn't bother following you and recommending you to others. However, and with all due respect, I don't think that reviving 16th century Reformer rhetoric about the Catholic Church or the Romanian Orthodox Church is likely to give us the most comprehensive insight. The Beast and the False Prophet will arise, dazzle, deceive, and demand the submission of the world. I doubt some hairy little hermit from Mount Athos swinging his insense and venerating his icons -- no matter how this is repugnant to our Western reformed iconoclastic sensibilities -- is likely to seduce the people of Japan or Malaysia, for example. Nobody outside of a highly charged western European theological context is likely to care about who petitions the Virgin to ask her Son to ask his Father to help us through a difficulty. The pope and the ecumenical patriarch may well be caught up in the action. I think it probable. But if so, they will be participating in rather than directing the action. What is coming, I think, will have to deceive the whole world, hence the whole Alice Bailey, Benjamin Creme, Maitreya, Mahdi, "the Christ" porridge that I know you are aware of and have commented on. No mere pope will be able to accomplish this. So, to come to a conclusion, the whole of Revelation is a deep puzzle of symbol and allegory. But the charagma was known in the first century as an actual mark or token incised or engraved with a charax, one with visual legibility (cf character) either distributed as a favor to clients or citizens or imposed upon slaves, and which granted access to the market and the dole. The vaccine passports that were rolled out world wide had the same purpose and function. I don't see why this might not be type both of what was and what will be. I don't expect to be barred from recreation centers and jobs because I don't know the rosary or how to genuflect before the altar. But for not submitting to an incised mark or having records of the same tied to the facial scan on my digital ID? Didn't we just live through a beta test of just that? Didn't it and doesn't it apply to all people regardless of race, country, or confession?
I get where you're coming from now, but in that case, have you kept in mind that the elect 144,000 Israelites are going to be "sealed" in their foreheads as well (Rev 7:3)? It's a different word, but an obvious parallel metaphor for loyalty and dedication. God "seals" His followers in their foreheads. The Beast "marks" people in their forehead or right hand.
Remember, this is not a new set of metaphors:
Exodus 13:9
And it shall be to you as a *sign on your hand* and as a memorial *between your eyes*, that the law of the LORD may be in your mouth. For with a strong hand the LORD has brought you out of Egypt.
There has always been a symbolic meaning to being marked/sealed between your eyes, or on your hand. It just means being dedicated to a cause mentally and physically. God uses a negative metaphor of being scarred like a slave to discuss Satan's system, whereas He places a precious seal on them, to preserve and protect. But they're both equally spiritual.
Will the satanic conspiracy try to create a biometric control system with face-scanning and whatnot? Maybe. But Satan doesn't get to control the fulfillment of prophecy. I've written much about how the "opposition" to the New World Order control system is much more dangerous, because it will place Christians and New Age mystics in the same camp, fighting against the evil elites and yearning for a collapse of the corrupt technocracy, etc.
Finally, let me add that my background is Quaker, though I haven't been to Meeting for some time. My academic work, such as it was, was concerned directly with the fourth century consequences of Constantine and Imperial Orthodoxy on Christian ethics and spirituality. I think you might find me often in agreement with you.
Here though, I think the Beast(s) is/are bigger, and the charagma likely more literal and physical; and a CS Lewis style ecumenical embrace of other Christians seems more productive than reviving Luther's and Calvin's polemics. It simply can't even be understood by most of the present world much less matter to them.
Anyway, my intent is not and was not polemical. Sure, beasts and whores and 12s and 7s galore, but sometimes a mark is just a charagma.
Thanks to all for sharing your positions on the Mark. From what I understand about the character of God, I truly believe that the Mark will be something each person must make a specific choice about. The consequences are so dire, and He has described it so simply, I believe we will know it when it truly becomes The Ultimate Irretrievable Choice to be made.
Separately, yes, people will continue to reject God and not repent of their sins throughout the Days of the Lord, but the mark of the beast is something more.
I agree with you regarding Churches and Religions being put in place to dupe everyone and take them away from the true teachings of Jesus. Hence why we have people becoming Atheist or New agers..Have you ever considered the bible we read today may have been doctored a long time ago by Constantine or someone else to cause fear in all us and keep us in line so they can continue to rule their Empire. There is nothing wrong in living in accordance to the commandments and that's what I'll try and continue to do since deciding to leave the church I was baptised in. But this could be another of Satan's attempts to take me away from The Truth, The Way and The Life.
I assure you, nothing about the injection was sinful or even spiritually relevant. Were they a huge health risk? Sure. But God isn't going to judge anyone based on somebody trying to protect themselves from a disease (even if they are deceived about it).
I assume the Jehovah's Witnesses obeyed the government because the Bible does suggest we should obey the authorities. In Manitoba we had one official who even said that it was the "11th commandment" or something to that effect.
I know people who got 2 injections and never had any symptoms. I believe many nurses around here were wise to the game and only gave people saline.
I don't even know where I want to start with stating my disagreements :-)
First of all, I am not at all a Bible-literalist. I probably offend you by saying that, but I see all religious texts as pointing *towards* the truth, not necessarily the truth. (That doesn't mean I don't see the large amount of wisdom in the Bible)
I think Jesus himself said he expects his words to be twisted so I guess I already need to read the Bible with a grain of salt.
However, I do think Christianity and therefore the Christian God *is* the *truth*, but it is for all
to figure out exactly how we get there. I do think some atheists are sometimes closer to this than very devout religious rule-followers.
And, to be clear, my view on humanism "vs." God is a lot more liberal in the sense that I believe
God or our path to him is the highest and best we absolutely should be striving for *behind* and beyond all our free will and cognition and what what we can rationally see and describe. "Sensing higher order patterns and synchronicity" is one way I think I would describe as having more of a connection to God.
You have not said it outright, but in a lot of religious strictness and rule-following, I sense in itself frequently the erection of another fake god, a mock god which is too often the projection surface for tribal impulses from religious communities. Yes, I see it as something very personal and often (not always) far removed from all churches and collective prayers. In that sense, I would say humanism flows from God and is what is deeply growing in us since the more wrathful God of the old testament.
Now, before you are tempted to go down that route: That does not mean I believe in esoteric "Christ consciousness" or don't think that some ideas of the Gnostics might be deranged (mostly due to self-elevation).
I just think it is more complicated, abstract and God allows - even *wants* us to fulfill his will by
also becoming very, *very* free - much more so than I sense in many religious treatises.
Which brings me to what I believe the mark of the beast is and why I actually think your original
description of your circles discussion microchips is *closer* to the truth than your perspective.
We live in times where a lot of people have been propagandized into believing that what we see, what we describe, is the _full_ reality, is essentially *everything*, which the most effective part of that our "neurological self-description" leading to the kind of determism e.g. Harari believes in.
We are *becoming *our own incomplete beliefs about nature (though they might approximate much of the material world, they are still incomplete) and I wondered repeatedly if it isn't THAT which is described by "*eating* the apple from the tree of wisdom". In other words:
We must *not *become that what we (at times) might *believe* we see.
Essentially rampant scientism, but taken to such an extreme that it *exactly* leads to billions of us landing in learned-helplessness inner hell(!)holes of supercharged propaganda and the herd-following impulse on overdrive (especially also *because* people can't imagine anything else anymore so herd-following becomes a materialistic, self-fulling prophecy).
And I see those who are godless and those who are besouled mostly divided along this line but only if one goes into ones most inner thoughts, so something which also essentially unobservable about others.
I do believe many atheists are secret (sinful like we all) believers much as some (though more likely in former times) loudly proclaiming believers are not at all followers of God.
That I said, I see evil, I see the beast as the something which is, which MUST be, "nearly God", something which CLOSELY emulates God so as to fool people.
Which is, I think, yes, quite clearly nowadays, the modern state and secular society.
Compare how people derisively say "invisible sky daddy" though believe in the "invisible gov daddy". Only because it is partly more visible. One could even argue that in our "occultocracies" the invisibility is emulated!
There is a a whole huge set of parallels which one can draw to delineate the beast from God:
Modern medicine makes you live eternally, "just like God".
The NSA is striving to be all-seeing, "just like God".
And so forth. (If you think about it, there are MANY more of these parallels!)
But beneath all that, it is a *fake* world, is Satan. It is designed by folks who *know* that this
belief in a livelong, transcendent or spiritual non-material fatherly figure is exactly where we should go to become the best versions of ourselves (and, by the way, I think also to have a good life).
"They" have to *emulate* it. And, yes, I believe that Satans work in this world comes through the hands of his followers much as all good comes from _people_ who (in the end, if they are really honest to themselves) believe in the Christian God. So Satan's work is visible in satanic action of which we all have seen many, many instances.
And now we come to the mark of the beast:
What if your circles were exactly right in their predictions that it might -also- be microchips?
Technically, it is nowadays very feasible to RFID-chip people for tracking. It is furthermore feasible to implant devices which could be remotely triggered to explode or poison the wearer. I say this as someone with a university level STEM education. I also like to say that yes, there's a lot of technobabble B.S. floating around in conspiracy circles.
I do think that one feature of God, something we sometimes get a glimpse of even if we strongly disagree in our worldviews, is that there is some kind of higher order of *collaboration* between those who seek and do good under God.
The golden rule is a very strong principle that basically everyone on the planet understands (even though we all only follow it partially).
Then there is Love as the highest, which of course is not (in my eyes: not only which again might irk you) the maybe even lustful love between people but rather the kindof pure love of what is good which makes some people walk the hero's journey up to sacrificing themselves for a higher cause - so in the end: God.
*Also our connections between another which are severed and put into control-grids on purpose by technology.*
I am sure that aligning one's live fully with God and one's OWN personal connection to him is *one heck* of a powerful force which I think is closer to what Jesus tried to instill in people than detailed, daily rule following. If I remember correctly, the Romans were astonished by the sheer *moxie* of the early Christians. Basically, making us non-slaves to any false Gods.
IMO, we should all seek and feel that power, and we should live by it. The world is "going to shit" *because* people are comfortable slaves.
And now we come to the Mark of the Beast: What if evil, meek not in the good "sheath one's sword"-sense but rather in the sense of NOT having this burning individual sense for justice or more general, what is good, needs to emulate this as well?
And I think forming groups first through e.g. hazing, blood oaths etc. but maybe later also by creating physical links and "cut off switches" for people, is something that evil "likes" to do, MUST (in a broadly game theoretic sense) do to "match good" in the strength of their bonds and sense for what is good.
And yes, conspiracy me absolutely believes that this is happening already. I suspect some politicians (from their action and behaviors) to be already chipped.
Now, Musk's neuralink might not allow thought control, but I guess we can agree that TPTB are attempting thought control through *all means necessary*, starting with immersive propaganda elevated to a science but also all attempts that they can muster to try to get our neurons to fire to their liking in a more direct sense. The research *visibly* goes into that direction, Klaus Schwab and others *visible* talk along these lines!
And evil *always needs to emulate* god to fool people! Which dictates that their project is to essentially build a most-believable fake God.
And, yes, I do think the fight between good and evil will lead to this Beast, this Beast which also only exists because people are so ignorant and worldly (believing in the state and society mostly and not believing in "conspiracies" or "pitch black evil") to become ever more powerful over time.
And it is this extrapolation which makes me a believer in "endish" times. Not necessarily THE endtimes, but I sincerely and with hope believe that a worldwide awakening to the fact that our govs are indeed very dark mafias continuining everything they can imagine downstream from MKUltra, the Nazis, the Stasi and so forth DOES happen on a not-so-small, dare I say large scale.
Wasn't there something in the Bible about "seeking death but not finding it"?
Extrapolate modern medicine, transhumanism and so forth, and you might get right there...
Maybe that's exactly where we are going: "Modern medicine" and the collectivist, worldly beast eventually trying to force us to live in a material paradise, but metaphysical hell?
The beast is likely the whole of the corrupt world system, finding its fulfillment in technocracy. The mark signifies belongingness to the system. This, in our day, would seem to be facial biometrics (which includes a mark on the forehead).
Modernity is a plan by the 19th century global elites. It was authored by HG Wells
"
The book is, in Wells's words, a "scheme to thrust forward and establish a human control over the destinies of life and liberate it from its present dangers, uncertainties and miseries." It proposes that largely as the result of scientific progress, a common vision of a world "politically, socially and economically unified" is emerging among educated and influential people, and that this can be the basis of "a world revolution aiming at universal peace, welfare and happy activity" that can result in the establishment of a "world commonweal." This is to be achieved by "drawing together a proportion of all or nearly all the functional classes in contemporary communities in order to weave the beginnings of a world community out of their selection." This will ultimately "be a world religion." — Wikipedia
"
Read the book and tell me it wasn't. Audiobook on youtube:
I’ve been a proponent of studying Wells as the architecture of the 20th century. (Also, I would argue that “modernity” began around 1500 with the Renaissance, although it took a few centuries to blossom.)
He had the vision, the financial backing and the political connections. The Fabian society (Labour party) and the London School of Economics. This give them an ideological breeding ground for world leaders.
The Rockefellers were supporters. Kissenger worked for the Rockefellers. Klaus Schwab was a student of Kissinger's.
as someone who has premonitions which is what this sounds like someone had and wrote I find them often much more literal and obvious. I see the numbers 666 in the logo of the WEF, whether by accident or design it doesn’t matter. They are marked as the beast. They are the ones who also want to control everyone’s ability to buy and sell. Sure they grew out of all the other beasts as you so brilliantly explain but the ‘mark of the beast’ means the beasts mark, we will all have a mark and the beast will have one too so we must be wise and see his number
I definitely think this era of new age religion( you are your own god), technology ( keeping us away from scripture and living real lives) and science (medical poisoning and replacing biology with technology) plays a big part. Again if people have had a chip implanted via the vaccine and the bankers and the power that be decide to completely get rid of physical cash. Then those of us who did not take it won't be able to buy and sell. I believe the beasts are certain countries or cities. London, Vatican, Washington and Moscow or UK, Europe, US, Israel
Nothing like calling your readers idiots to get your point across. People that took the shots are full of nanotechnology and microchips. They’re chipped already, and their bodies are rotting from the inside out.
I won’t call you an idiot like you did everyone else that doesn’t agree with you, but I’m through reading your posts. Bye now.
I don't think the Pride that says 'look at me, smart guy who didn't take the shots', is any more attractive than any other kind of Pride. I took two shots, before I found out what was going on. I believed the narrative for an entire 15 months, probably largely because I'm married to a doctor (just belatedly retired). I believed that (a) there genuinely was a dangerous virus, (b) that I had particular risks for it doing me harm and (c) my husband was almost certainly going to bring it home from work, as he worked all through the fake plague. All of that was dumb. Thankfully Christ doesn't reject us for being momentarily dumb. I suspect He was more concerned that, for the 20 years prior to the covid scam waking me up and the sight of pure evil bringing me back into the fold, I'd drifted off pretty much into agnosticism, after decades of being a Christian, albeit certainly a faulty one. So, while I had to repent both things, I think repentance for the 20 years of going AWOL and wasting 20 years of my God-given time was more important than repentance for falling for a scam. And God appears to like lost sheep coming back to the fold. So there's that.
I don't care in the slightest what you think of me for taking two shots. I care what God thinks of me - nobody else's opinion matters. And I'm forgiven on all counts. AND, sorry to disappoint, but even though I've had multi-jabbed friends who've had heart attacks (one fatal) and cancers out of the blue, I see no evidence at all that I am 'rotting from the inside'. Perhaps you'd like me to be, to confirm your prejudices - if so, it's perhaps your turn for a bit of repentance. And my brain isn't rotting either. Since 'waking up' (for want of a less annoying metaphor), I've been down most of the rabbit holes and back up from the ones that don't matter. How long I'm here for was already up to God before I took two shots and it still is, so nothing's changed.
PS you can't get a microchip into a vaccine. End of. Wrong size. Micro is not nano. And Dr Ana Mihalcea, who's been doing a lot of the fearmongering about 'self-assembling nanoparticles' (simply nano-junk according to Sasha Latypova) apparently disappeared earlier this year and has come back reinvented as a hawker of a strange cure-all medical contraption that's going for $11,000 a pop. Non-refundable. And one reader commented that a friend of his, who'd taken several iterations of her EDTA chelation therapy, is now hypersensitive to 5G and can hardly leave the house.
So one is advised to be judicious about believing everything one hears, perhaps especially from the supposedly 'good side'.
That’s right, we have to admit we make mistakes and learn from them. The Lord is gracious to forgive us if we come before Him to ask of it.
I know, I was vaccinated three times and stopped. Not letting myself be nannied into more. I’m still here, having entrusted my lifespan to the Lord. And there’s so much fearmongering from both the left and the right, one wonder why they have yet to be hired by Hollywood as script writers for horror films.
Continue being humble, forgiving and to always tune into Jesus Christ, the author and finisher of our faith.
"As up-coming technology makes complex things simpler, *there might be a time* when the manufacture of microchips can be done with the help of molecular self-assembly. One of the main reasons for using self-assembly process for building nanomaterials is that they *tend to change back into individual molecules that can be broken down by the body*.
I'm not worried. They're spraying us with chemicals all the time, including aluminium, strontium and barium, so it's not just 'vaccinated' people who would be at risk, if the technology were up to speed.
I read your book "Maybe Everyone is Wrong" after hearing you on Dan Fournier's podcast, then subscribed to this Substack some months ago. So by now familiar with your take on the Catholic church, and Orthodox, as well, as you are writing here once again today. I agree with you that a lot about these institutions is a continuation of Roman empire and very corrupted, political power more than spirituality. I assume these views extend to some Protestant denominations, Anglican for example which is just like Catholic except instead of the pope they substitute the English king or queen. Or United here in Canada, which is like an arm of the government.
But one thing I have not gotten from reading/listening is what you consider a good church. Is it better for Christians to be on their own; not attend any religious institution or adhere to the dogma of a particular denomination? Are only congregational type Christian gatherings good in your opinion? Also is it possible to be a good Christian but also be an attendee of a particular Orthodox or Catholic church? Does one have to decide based on a local church and behavior of its congregation? Curious to know your view.
First of all thank you for reading my stuff and understanding my general position. You're asking a good question but I don't think I have a good answer.
I haven't been a member of a church or attended one in many years. Part of that is because of my work schedule, which compels me to sleep Sunday morning, and part of that is because I think I grew out of that format.
I do believe that congregating in fellowship is important for Christians, especially early on in our walks. I don't think it's a "sacrament" or a ritual though, and I don't think it has to be a routine in a dedicated building.
I guess I'm more curious what you feel a regular church is needed for. What would an ideal church be?
I think the need (or not) of a regular church would differ for individuals. I like to attend church with my daughter, be in the company of other Christians, share in prayer and songs, and take communion. It is spiritually refreshing and a good start to the week. I do not feel attachment to a particular denomination and could find a issue with particular dogma in any denomination.
I was curious though after following you for awhile about your views re: a good church - you have answered my question saying you don't attend and may have grown out of that format, thanks.
I believe that denominational adherence is fine to a certain extent. The whole point of the mystery of God at the times before Messiah was revealed was to be shocking. That the God of Israel and who only deals with Israel would allow gentiles into another eternal covenant to be “grafted in” alongside the Jews.
Paul talks about this mystery finally throughout his letters. That the invitation is given to all those who believe on Messiah.
You even have the heavenly scene in Revelation where there were great multitudes from EVERY tribe, tongue, kindgom, and nation before the throne. This give evidence to the fact that real Christians can be found throughout all of the world. The body of Christ a is a decentralized operation and I think God has cleverly scattered his true followers throughout the world to be a beacon of light in their community.
Saying that to say that true Christians can be found in every denomination, alongside false one (because we know there are tares among the wheats).
Yes, even a faithful catholic can be saved. For salvation is not in a denomination, but is in your right hand and your forehead.
Just as there are those who use their right hands and forehead to serve the beast, Christians to the same to serve Christ. I believe Jesus Christ cares much more about how you treat your fellow man and how you rely and trust in him only in your daily life over some doctrines to follow.
I know in new creation, we won’t be following doctrines, but we will be in fellowship as a family as God intended from the beginning.
In conclusion, if you prioritize doing good to your fellow man and serving the kingdom by pondering on the heavenly things and putting them into consideration within your daily life, then you will be saved (even if you take the eucharist or go to confession).
Let me know what you think.
A very pertinent question. I don't know what Terry would say but I suspect that all of the churches engaging in traditional, institutional forms of "worship" as initiated by Constantine are implicated. I can't offer a simple answer, but I am a member of one of these churches that at least has particular strengths, and this offers opportunities for "inreach".
The behavior of the congregation can be a concern, but the fidelity of the teaching is more important. None of these institutional churches resembles the biblical first-century assemblies of the saints -- the institutional traditions don't permit it.
All I can suggest is to pray continually and do as you are led. Doing so has me mentoring three other people and participating in a small group. Two of these activities are on-campus at my church, where I also have a volunteer job (ProPresenter operator) that provides a view of what goes on behind the scenes.
The "leading" can be different for each person. The focus must be on sharing the truth with others, and glorifying God. It must NOT be on oneself, or how to escape! The truth includes not only confession and repentance, but the need and means to negotiate the difficult path, to survive and engage in spiritual warfare -- interceding for others (and for each other) -- and to endure to the end. If you are feeling uncomfortable, that is a good sign. It is not easy, but this path leads to life eternal.
Regarding Canadian reformed denominations, you may find some helpful information in this search: https://search.brave.com/search?q=Reformed+churches+in+Canada.+What+is+a+reformed+church%3F&summary=1&conversation=1f6fcb8c19296ee0fd3dfa
I appreciate you offering your views on this, and you’ve obviously given it a good deal of thought. Some excellent insights here.
There’s one transition in your interpretation that I’m really struggling with though. You outline a compelling interpretation regarding the first beast and the second beast wherein you identify the mark of the beast as “a system of international control” and say that we “are living in the age of the Mark of the Beast, and we have been for 500 years.” You then you point to Revelation 14 as signifying “that the punishment for taking the Mark of the Beast is not in effect yet.”
All that is compelling to me, but it seems to imply that the mark of the beast at some point must transition from a kind of generic system of international control to something more specific that forces each individual to make a choice for himself/herself. How else to make sense of Revelation 14:11: “And the smoke from their torture will go up forever and ever, and those who worship the beast and his image will have no rest day or night, along with anyone who receives the mark of his name.”
It’s difficult for me to see how the phrasing can just mean an intangible system that shapes global civilization, and it really seems to me to point to something more tangible that forces each individual to make a stark choice. But I don't know. Like I said, very compelling viewpoint that I'll be thinking about for a while.
Great question. I'm happy to flesh that out a bit more.
We see three angels visit the people of the world and spread three messages, right?
One preaches the "eternal Gospel" of fearing God and recognizing that He created everything. This tells us that some kind of Atheism (ie. the Mark of the Beast) will dominate the future. They will deny that God created everything, even when the cataclysms are happening. The Church will be killed by this point, so we won't be there to warn them. That's why the angels do it themselves.
The angel also says that "the hour of his judgment has arrived", meaning that this is the last warning. They will all hear the gospel in their own language, personally.
The second angel warns that Babylon (ie. Jerusalem) will be destroyed in judgment. So when we combine these two stories, we see a picture of the end days where the church is gone, Jerusalem is reigning as if it's untouchable, and everyone denies God and nobody fears Him.
That's why the third angel has the warning about what happens if they continue to deny God, and instead cling to their humanist efforts to control the world. I believe that the Roman Catholic Church will undergo massive transformations during this period as well, but that's another topic.
The punishments listed by the third angel are extreme because anyone who converts to Christianity at that point will probably be killed by the authorities. This is the "Aquarian Age" where people will worship demons. It will be a black and white choice of either ignoring the gospel that is preached by angels and surviving, or dying for Christ as a martyr. The "Mark of the Beast" is loyalty to the godless system created by Rome and Satan, but in those days it will be a matter of life and death. Christianity will probably be considered the worst thing in the world, so proclaiming faith in Jesus will be like calling yourself a terrorist.
Does that make sense? In my book I connect a lot of prophecies together, such as the sermon Jesus gave about the signs of the end, etc
That does make sense. Very helpful — thanks for that reply.
χάραγμα (mark) is a precise term, indicating a physical mark made by a pointed object. It can and often did mean "snakebite". It was used for brands on slaves and for tokens of patronage, as well as any design etched into an object or person by a pointed object. I would be much more humble about this hyper-protestant allegorical interpretation, and less quick to denigrate the ancient historical churches, particularly the Orthodox, as "the Beast." Go to the Liddel and Scott lexicon and look up the word. It is not ambiguous the way "mark" is. And yes, I have degrees in Classics (Greek) and Religious Studies (early Christianity).
θηρίον (beast) is a precise term, indicating a wild animal. It is often used to refer to various creatures that walk around on the earth, typically on four legs. Dogs and lions could be considered "beasts".
κέρας (horn) is a precise term, indicating a physical protrusion from an animal. It often means the horn of a bull or ram.
I suppose by your logic we should be watching out for a gigantic four legged animal walking around with crazy antlers sticking out of its seven heads. Or do you not realize that specific terms are used in symbolism, even though they remain symbolic, metaphorical, and therefore requiring interpretation?
Or do you think that the woman who sits on many waters is going to be an actual gigantic female who sits in a big puddle while "she" rules the world?
Whatever studies you may have done, they did not teach you the most obvious and fundamental logic of interpretation, such as how metaphors work.
No, I don't see beast or horn or whore as literal animals, parts, or prostitutes, and in fact teach metaphor, symbol, and allegory as the intro to a class on mythology. Charagma is something a little different to my mind. In the Latin West, clients of wealthy patrons and citizens in the city of Rome were given tessara, inscribed tokens that granted access to the dole of bread, oil, and wine. In the East, in Greek, these were charagmai. In a certain sense I don't actually disagree with you very much: the charagma is a visible sign of allegiance/property. The Beast is clearly symbolic of an authority structure. But "it causes all...to receive a charagma...so that none may buy or sell" is readily and directly comprehensible from the Roman context as a visible and legible -- the word "character" comes from the same root-- mark that must in some way be shown to have access to the marketplace and government handouts. Those of us who lived through 2 years of being shut out of public places because we couldn't show the sign of our obedience and allegiance are not altogether nuts to imagine this as a prelude to the main act. To go backwards and extend the interpretation of the Beast, it arises out of the sea, often understood to represent in some way the undifferentiated mass of humanity, indicating something global in scale. With pandemic treaties, cbdcs, global structures of every kind under technocratic surveillance being erected, it seems a little much to ignore the parallels between us and the Romans and to instead believe that father Yakov in the Orthodox parish next door is what we really need to worry about. If I didn't think you both sincere and insightful, I wouldn't bother following you and recommending you to others. However, and with all due respect, I don't think that reviving 16th century Reformer rhetoric about the Catholic Church or the Romanian Orthodox Church is likely to give us the most comprehensive insight. The Beast and the False Prophet will arise, dazzle, deceive, and demand the submission of the world. I doubt some hairy little hermit from Mount Athos swinging his insense and venerating his icons -- no matter how this is repugnant to our Western reformed iconoclastic sensibilities -- is likely to seduce the people of Japan or Malaysia, for example. Nobody outside of a highly charged western European theological context is likely to care about who petitions the Virgin to ask her Son to ask his Father to help us through a difficulty. The pope and the ecumenical patriarch may well be caught up in the action. I think it probable. But if so, they will be participating in rather than directing the action. What is coming, I think, will have to deceive the whole world, hence the whole Alice Bailey, Benjamin Creme, Maitreya, Mahdi, "the Christ" porridge that I know you are aware of and have commented on. No mere pope will be able to accomplish this. So, to come to a conclusion, the whole of Revelation is a deep puzzle of symbol and allegory. But the charagma was known in the first century as an actual mark or token incised or engraved with a charax, one with visual legibility (cf character) either distributed as a favor to clients or citizens or imposed upon slaves, and which granted access to the market and the dole. The vaccine passports that were rolled out world wide had the same purpose and function. I don't see why this might not be type both of what was and what will be. I don't expect to be barred from recreation centers and jobs because I don't know the rosary or how to genuflect before the altar. But for not submitting to an incised mark or having records of the same tied to the facial scan on my digital ID? Didn't we just live through a beta test of just that? Didn't it and doesn't it apply to all people regardless of race, country, or confession?
I get where you're coming from now, but in that case, have you kept in mind that the elect 144,000 Israelites are going to be "sealed" in their foreheads as well (Rev 7:3)? It's a different word, but an obvious parallel metaphor for loyalty and dedication. God "seals" His followers in their foreheads. The Beast "marks" people in their forehead or right hand.
Remember, this is not a new set of metaphors:
Exodus 13:9
And it shall be to you as a *sign on your hand* and as a memorial *between your eyes*, that the law of the LORD may be in your mouth. For with a strong hand the LORD has brought you out of Egypt.
There has always been a symbolic meaning to being marked/sealed between your eyes, or on your hand. It just means being dedicated to a cause mentally and physically. God uses a negative metaphor of being scarred like a slave to discuss Satan's system, whereas He places a precious seal on them, to preserve and protect. But they're both equally spiritual.
Will the satanic conspiracy try to create a biometric control system with face-scanning and whatnot? Maybe. But Satan doesn't get to control the fulfillment of prophecy. I've written much about how the "opposition" to the New World Order control system is much more dangerous, because it will place Christians and New Age mystics in the same camp, fighting against the evil elites and yearning for a collapse of the corrupt technocracy, etc.
Finally, let me add that my background is Quaker, though I haven't been to Meeting for some time. My academic work, such as it was, was concerned directly with the fourth century consequences of Constantine and Imperial Orthodoxy on Christian ethics and spirituality. I think you might find me often in agreement with you.
Here though, I think the Beast(s) is/are bigger, and the charagma likely more literal and physical; and a CS Lewis style ecumenical embrace of other Christians seems more productive than reviving Luther's and Calvin's polemics. It simply can't even be understood by most of the present world much less matter to them.
Anyway, my intent is not and was not polemical. Sure, beasts and whores and 12s and 7s galore, but sometimes a mark is just a charagma.
Thanks to all for sharing your positions on the Mark. From what I understand about the character of God, I truly believe that the Mark will be something each person must make a specific choice about. The consequences are so dire, and He has described it so simply, I believe we will know it when it truly becomes The Ultimate Irretrievable Choice to be made.
Separately, yes, people will continue to reject God and not repent of their sins throughout the Days of the Lord, but the mark of the beast is something more.
Praying blessings on all of you dear ones.
χάραγμα is charagma in our alphabet. The ch is pronounced like the ch in "loch" or "Bach".
I agree with you regarding Churches and Religions being put in place to dupe everyone and take them away from the true teachings of Jesus. Hence why we have people becoming Atheist or New agers..Have you ever considered the bible we read today may have been doctored a long time ago by Constantine or someone else to cause fear in all us and keep us in line so they can continue to rule their Empire. There is nothing wrong in living in accordance to the commandments and that's what I'll try and continue to do since deciding to leave the church I was baptised in. But this could be another of Satan's attempts to take me away from The Truth, The Way and The Life.
New sub.
I grew up with Mennonites in Winnipeg.
My roommate Kelly would take me to the family farm on the weekends to work. I enjoyed the simple lifestyle.
Well reading your article a memory flashed.
A couple months ago I had 2 men arrive at the entrance to my property. Jahova witnesses. I'm not mean to these people.
We talked about the world's problems then I casually asked if they took the mRNA therapy.
They said yes to my surprise.
I said you will not take a blood transfusion yet you took something that said experimental. Why?
They said we resisted but had to take it.
I said you didn't have to take anything.
My mother is a religious lady.
I argued with her and begged her to resist the mRNA. I was ruthless in fact. I told her that she might be committing an unforgettable act.
I'm the end she took it along with 5.5 billion people.
For years I have quietly wondered if God will forgive them for what they have done.
I assure you, nothing about the injection was sinful or even spiritually relevant. Were they a huge health risk? Sure. But God isn't going to judge anyone based on somebody trying to protect themselves from a disease (even if they are deceived about it).
I assume the Jehovah's Witnesses obeyed the government because the Bible does suggest we should obey the authorities. In Manitoba we had one official who even said that it was the "11th commandment" or something to that effect.
I know people who got 2 injections and never had any symptoms. I believe many nurses around here were wise to the game and only gave people saline.
I don't even know where I want to start with stating my disagreements :-)
First of all, I am not at all a Bible-literalist. I probably offend you by saying that, but I see all religious texts as pointing *towards* the truth, not necessarily the truth. (That doesn't mean I don't see the large amount of wisdom in the Bible)
I think Jesus himself said he expects his words to be twisted so I guess I already need to read the Bible with a grain of salt.
However, I do think Christianity and therefore the Christian God *is* the *truth*, but it is for all
to figure out exactly how we get there. I do think some atheists are sometimes closer to this than very devout religious rule-followers.
And, to be clear, my view on humanism "vs." God is a lot more liberal in the sense that I believe
God or our path to him is the highest and best we absolutely should be striving for *behind* and beyond all our free will and cognition and what what we can rationally see and describe. "Sensing higher order patterns and synchronicity" is one way I think I would describe as having more of a connection to God.
You have not said it outright, but in a lot of religious strictness and rule-following, I sense in itself frequently the erection of another fake god, a mock god which is too often the projection surface for tribal impulses from religious communities. Yes, I see it as something very personal and often (not always) far removed from all churches and collective prayers. In that sense, I would say humanism flows from God and is what is deeply growing in us since the more wrathful God of the old testament.
Now, before you are tempted to go down that route: That does not mean I believe in esoteric "Christ consciousness" or don't think that some ideas of the Gnostics might be deranged (mostly due to self-elevation).
I just think it is more complicated, abstract and God allows - even *wants* us to fulfill his will by
also becoming very, *very* free - much more so than I sense in many religious treatises.
Which brings me to what I believe the mark of the beast is and why I actually think your original
description of your circles discussion microchips is *closer* to the truth than your perspective.
We live in times where a lot of people have been propagandized into believing that what we see, what we describe, is the _full_ reality, is essentially *everything*, which the most effective part of that our "neurological self-description" leading to the kind of determism e.g. Harari believes in.
We are *becoming *our own incomplete beliefs about nature (though they might approximate much of the material world, they are still incomplete) and I wondered repeatedly if it isn't THAT which is described by "*eating* the apple from the tree of wisdom". In other words:
We must *not *become that what we (at times) might *believe* we see.
Essentially rampant scientism, but taken to such an extreme that it *exactly* leads to billions of us landing in learned-helplessness inner hell(!)holes of supercharged propaganda and the herd-following impulse on overdrive (especially also *because* people can't imagine anything else anymore so herd-following becomes a materialistic, self-fulling prophecy).
And I see those who are godless and those who are besouled mostly divided along this line but only if one goes into ones most inner thoughts, so something which also essentially unobservable about others.
I do believe many atheists are secret (sinful like we all) believers much as some (though more likely in former times) loudly proclaiming believers are not at all followers of God.
That I said, I see evil, I see the beast as the something which is, which MUST be, "nearly God", something which CLOSELY emulates God so as to fool people.
Which is, I think, yes, quite clearly nowadays, the modern state and secular society.
Compare how people derisively say "invisible sky daddy" though believe in the "invisible gov daddy". Only because it is partly more visible. One could even argue that in our "occultocracies" the invisibility is emulated!
There is a a whole huge set of parallels which one can draw to delineate the beast from God:
Modern medicine makes you live eternally, "just like God".
The NSA is striving to be all-seeing, "just like God".
And so forth. (If you think about it, there are MANY more of these parallels!)
But beneath all that, it is a *fake* world, is Satan. It is designed by folks who *know* that this
belief in a livelong, transcendent or spiritual non-material fatherly figure is exactly where we should go to become the best versions of ourselves (and, by the way, I think also to have a good life).
"They" have to *emulate* it. And, yes, I believe that Satans work in this world comes through the hands of his followers much as all good comes from _people_ who (in the end, if they are really honest to themselves) believe in the Christian God. So Satan's work is visible in satanic action of which we all have seen many, many instances.
And now we come to the mark of the beast:
What if your circles were exactly right in their predictions that it might -also- be microchips?
Technically, it is nowadays very feasible to RFID-chip people for tracking. It is furthermore feasible to implant devices which could be remotely triggered to explode or poison the wearer. I say this as someone with a university level STEM education. I also like to say that yes, there's a lot of technobabble B.S. floating around in conspiracy circles.
I do think that one feature of God, something we sometimes get a glimpse of even if we strongly disagree in our worldviews, is that there is some kind of higher order of *collaboration* between those who seek and do good under God.
The golden rule is a very strong principle that basically everyone on the planet understands (even though we all only follow it partially).
Then there is Love as the highest, which of course is not (in my eyes: not only which again might irk you) the maybe even lustful love between people but rather the kindof pure love of what is good which makes some people walk the hero's journey up to sacrificing themselves for a higher cause - so in the end: God.
*Also our connections between another which are severed and put into control-grids on purpose by technology.*
I am sure that aligning one's live fully with God and one's OWN personal connection to him is *one heck* of a powerful force which I think is closer to what Jesus tried to instill in people than detailed, daily rule following. If I remember correctly, the Romans were astonished by the sheer *moxie* of the early Christians. Basically, making us non-slaves to any false Gods.
IMO, we should all seek and feel that power, and we should live by it. The world is "going to shit" *because* people are comfortable slaves.
And now we come to the Mark of the Beast: What if evil, meek not in the good "sheath one's sword"-sense but rather in the sense of NOT having this burning individual sense for justice or more general, what is good, needs to emulate this as well?
And I think forming groups first through e.g. hazing, blood oaths etc. but maybe later also by creating physical links and "cut off switches" for people, is something that evil "likes" to do, MUST (in a broadly game theoretic sense) do to "match good" in the strength of their bonds and sense for what is good.
And yes, conspiracy me absolutely believes that this is happening already. I suspect some politicians (from their action and behaviors) to be already chipped.
Now, Musk's neuralink might not allow thought control, but I guess we can agree that TPTB are attempting thought control through *all means necessary*, starting with immersive propaganda elevated to a science but also all attempts that they can muster to try to get our neurons to fire to their liking in a more direct sense. The research *visibly* goes into that direction, Klaus Schwab and others *visible* talk along these lines!
And evil *always needs to emulate* god to fool people! Which dictates that their project is to essentially build a most-believable fake God.
And, yes, I do think the fight between good and evil will lead to this Beast, this Beast which also only exists because people are so ignorant and worldly (believing in the state and society mostly and not believing in "conspiracies" or "pitch black evil") to become ever more powerful over time.
And it is this extrapolation which makes me a believer in "endish" times. Not necessarily THE endtimes, but I sincerely and with hope believe that a worldwide awakening to the fact that our govs are indeed very dark mafias continuining everything they can imagine downstream from MKUltra, the Nazis, the Stasi and so forth DOES happen on a not-so-small, dare I say large scale.
Wasn't there something in the Bible about "seeking death but not finding it"?
Extrapolate modern medicine, transhumanism and so forth, and you might get right there...
Maybe that's exactly where we are going: "Modern medicine" and the collectivist, worldly beast eventually trying to force us to live in a material paradise, but metaphysical hell?
The beast is likely the whole of the corrupt world system, finding its fulfillment in technocracy. The mark signifies belongingness to the system. This, in our day, would seem to be facial biometrics (which includes a mark on the forehead).
Modernity is a plan by the 19th century global elites. It was authored by HG Wells
"
The book is, in Wells's words, a "scheme to thrust forward and establish a human control over the destinies of life and liberate it from its present dangers, uncertainties and miseries." It proposes that largely as the result of scientific progress, a common vision of a world "politically, socially and economically unified" is emerging among educated and influential people, and that this can be the basis of "a world revolution aiming at universal peace, welfare and happy activity" that can result in the establishment of a "world commonweal." This is to be achieved by "drawing together a proportion of all or nearly all the functional classes in contemporary communities in order to weave the beginnings of a world community out of their selection." This will ultimately "be a world religion." — Wikipedia
"
Read the book and tell me it wasn't. Audiobook on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE9-gC8CjNI
https://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks13/1303661h.html
Wells was an executive of the Fabian society who members included the global elite
I assert that it was Wells and not Marx who had the model for Communism.
I’ve been a proponent of studying Wells as the architecture of the 20th century. (Also, I would argue that “modernity” began around 1500 with the Renaissance, although it took a few centuries to blossom.)
He had the vision, the financial backing and the political connections. The Fabian society (Labour party) and the London School of Economics. This give them an ideological breeding ground for world leaders.
The Rockefellers were supporters. Kissenger worked for the Rockefellers. Klaus Schwab was a student of Kissinger's.
https://bombthrower.com/the-wef-isnt-a-cabal-its-a-cult/
as someone who has premonitions which is what this sounds like someone had and wrote I find them often much more literal and obvious. I see the numbers 666 in the logo of the WEF, whether by accident or design it doesn’t matter. They are marked as the beast. They are the ones who also want to control everyone’s ability to buy and sell. Sure they grew out of all the other beasts as you so brilliantly explain but the ‘mark of the beast’ means the beasts mark, we will all have a mark and the beast will have one too so we must be wise and see his number
I definitely think this era of new age religion( you are your own god), technology ( keeping us away from scripture and living real lives) and science (medical poisoning and replacing biology with technology) plays a big part. Again if people have had a chip implanted via the vaccine and the bankers and the power that be decide to completely get rid of physical cash. Then those of us who did not take it won't be able to buy and sell. I believe the beasts are certain countries or cities. London, Vatican, Washington and Moscow or UK, Europe, US, Israel
Nothing like calling your readers idiots to get your point across. People that took the shots are full of nanotechnology and microchips. They’re chipped already, and their bodies are rotting from the inside out.
I won’t call you an idiot like you did everyone else that doesn’t agree with you, but I’m through reading your posts. Bye now.
Sincerely,
Your loving idiot that didn’t take Satan’s Shots.
I don't think the Pride that says 'look at me, smart guy who didn't take the shots', is any more attractive than any other kind of Pride. I took two shots, before I found out what was going on. I believed the narrative for an entire 15 months, probably largely because I'm married to a doctor (just belatedly retired). I believed that (a) there genuinely was a dangerous virus, (b) that I had particular risks for it doing me harm and (c) my husband was almost certainly going to bring it home from work, as he worked all through the fake plague. All of that was dumb. Thankfully Christ doesn't reject us for being momentarily dumb. I suspect He was more concerned that, for the 20 years prior to the covid scam waking me up and the sight of pure evil bringing me back into the fold, I'd drifted off pretty much into agnosticism, after decades of being a Christian, albeit certainly a faulty one. So, while I had to repent both things, I think repentance for the 20 years of going AWOL and wasting 20 years of my God-given time was more important than repentance for falling for a scam. And God appears to like lost sheep coming back to the fold. So there's that.
I don't care in the slightest what you think of me for taking two shots. I care what God thinks of me - nobody else's opinion matters. And I'm forgiven on all counts. AND, sorry to disappoint, but even though I've had multi-jabbed friends who've had heart attacks (one fatal) and cancers out of the blue, I see no evidence at all that I am 'rotting from the inside'. Perhaps you'd like me to be, to confirm your prejudices - if so, it's perhaps your turn for a bit of repentance. And my brain isn't rotting either. Since 'waking up' (for want of a less annoying metaphor), I've been down most of the rabbit holes and back up from the ones that don't matter. How long I'm here for was already up to God before I took two shots and it still is, so nothing's changed.
PS you can't get a microchip into a vaccine. End of. Wrong size. Micro is not nano. And Dr Ana Mihalcea, who's been doing a lot of the fearmongering about 'self-assembling nanoparticles' (simply nano-junk according to Sasha Latypova) apparently disappeared earlier this year and has come back reinvented as a hawker of a strange cure-all medical contraption that's going for $11,000 a pop. Non-refundable. And one reader commented that a friend of his, who'd taken several iterations of her EDTA chelation therapy, is now hypersensitive to 5G and can hardly leave the house.
So one is advised to be judicious about believing everything one hears, perhaps especially from the supposedly 'good side'.
That’s right, we have to admit we make mistakes and learn from them. The Lord is gracious to forgive us if we come before Him to ask of it.
I know, I was vaccinated three times and stopped. Not letting myself be nannied into more. I’m still here, having entrusted my lifespan to the Lord. And there’s so much fearmongering from both the left and the right, one wonder why they have yet to be hired by Hollywood as script writers for horror films.
Continue being humble, forgiving and to always tune into Jesus Christ, the author and finisher of our faith.
Microchips most definitely can be assembled in the body from nano-sized ingredients delivered via an injected serum.
Do you have some *reliable* references for that?
Full presentation:
https://youtu.be/h6lbbWasL6w?si=9DfcGY30zstZ1ZTJ
Thanks.
Ian Akyldiz is another source:
https://youtu.be/YAtQFkEg5-w?si=wU5DjWAAkBLelVU4
How about a TED talk from 11 years ago by an Israeli scientist?
https://youtu.be/GCgDmTvVxlA?si=rGLtvGPM8-8VveCh
I came across this:
https://www.circuitstoday.com/molecular-self-assembly-in-nanotechnology
"As up-coming technology makes complex things simpler, *there might be a time* when the manufacture of microchips can be done with the help of molecular self-assembly. One of the main reasons for using self-assembly process for building nanomaterials is that they *tend to change back into individual molecules that can be broken down by the body*.
I'm not worried. They're spraying us with chemicals all the time, including aluminium, strontium and barium, so it's not just 'vaccinated' people who would be at risk, if the technology were up to speed.
The date of that article or white paper is MARCH, 2011. The future it refers to is now.