Archive for November, 2016

The mark of the beast

  • Revelation 14:9-11, 14. In the closing era of earth’s history just before Christ appears on the cloud at the last day to reward every man, God will send a special message warning every person not to receive the mark of the beast. The terrible punishment of which God warns should make us purpose never to receive the mark of this beast, even if our faithfulness to God should cost us our lives.
  • Revelation 13:18. This beast power, whose mark we are warned to avoid, is the Catholic power. The pope’s leading title, VICARIUS FILII DEI, when counted according to the Roman numerical value of the letters, equals exactly 666. Since the beast is symbolic of the Catholic power, the mark of the beast must be some intuition of Catholicism, which will distinguish those who adopt it as obeying her authority in preference to obeying God on that point.
  • Romans 6:16. Whatever power we obey in religion, his servants we are. Two questions will show plainly what is involved in this matter of the mark of the beast:

1. When a person keeps the seventh day, Saturday, as the Sabbath, whom does he obey? There can be only one answer: that person is obeying God, for that is what God has commanded in the fourth Commandment of the ten. Exodus 20:8-11.

2. When a person keeps the first day of the week, Sunday, as a so called sabbath, whom is he obeying? He is not obeying God by keeping the first day, because God has never told anybody to keep the first day of each week. Whom then is he obeying? He is obeying the command of the Catholic power, which has attempted to substitute the first day as a holy day in place of the seventh day, which the Lord Christ sanctified or set apart for man in the beginning of time. Genesis 2:1-3. Thus it is made plain in the light of God’s message that, when we choose to keep the seventh day, we are marked as worshipers of the Creator, the only true God (Ezekiel 20:12); while if we choose the Catholic Sunday in the place of God’s seventh day Sabbath we are marked as followers of the beast power.

  • Matthew 15:9 When we substitute a human ordinance in place of what God has ordained, our worship of Him is vain.
  • Revelation 13:16, 17. An attempt will be made to enforce the mark of the beast on all people. So each one will have to decide whether he will obey God and keep the seventh day, or obey the beast power and keep the first day, which this power has sought to put in the place of God’s day.
  • Revelation 13:8. All the world will obey the beast power, except a few, who will be loyal to God, as the three Hebrews were in the vast throng of Babylon. The book of Revelation shows that in the testing time every person will have to choose whether he will receive the seal of God on his forehead, or whether he will receive the mark of the beast on the forehead on in the hand, for Christ or antichrist, will seal our eternal destiny. God holds out the Sabbath as the sign of His power. Exodus 31:16, 17. The beast power holds out Sunday as the sign of its power. Which one do you choose?
  • Acts 5:29. We should decide now to obey God rather than man.
  • Revelation 14:12. The only way we can avoid the mark of the beast is to keep the Commandments of God and faith of Jesus. If you have made that decision, then stick to it. If you have not so decided, then put yourself on God’s side this moment by deciding to obey Him and keep His day.

In the Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, we read:

Q. Which is the Sabbath day?
A. Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Q. Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
A. We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea, (AD 336) transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday….
Q. Why did the Catholic Church substitute Sunday for Saturday?
A. The Church substituted Sunday for Saturday, because Christ rose from the dead on a Sunday, and the Holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles on a Sunday.
Q. By what authority did the Church substitute Sunday for Saturday?
A. The Church substituted Sunday for Saturday by the plenitude of that divine power which Jesus Christ bestowed upon her!
—Rev. Peter Geiermann, C.SS.R., (1946), p. 50.


Updated 4:48 PM ET, Tue November 22, 2016

Washington (CNN)The increasing dominance of Republicans inside statehouses across the nation has spurred talk that a constitutional convention — the very meeting that crafted the US Constitution — could be more than just a Hail Mary thrown to conservatives.

Conservative groups and Republican lawmakers have been planning for the possibility for years, although it picked up steam three years ago after a group of state lawmakers met at George Washington’s Mount Vernon estate, just outside Washington.
The issue found a bit of light in the Republican primaries, after Sen. Marco Rubio said he would support a convention and has even won the support of some liberals, like Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig, who wants to use a convention to undo the Citizens United ruling.
The requirement that 34 state legislatures approve of any convention has long seemed too high a hurdle. But a series of surprise wins for Republicans in statehouses across the country on Election Night — including taking control of both legislative chambers in 32 states — has put the possibility within reach.

What is a constitutional convention?

We’ve already had one constitutional convention — literally The Constitutional Convention, in 1787, which gave us the Constitution — and there hasn’t been one since.
The document itself lays out the rules for calling a convention — two-thirds of the states, or 34, have to petition Congress to call the meeting, according to Article V of the Constitution. But from there, it’s open to interpretation — and battling. Does each state get two delegates to send to the convention or do they get a number proportional to their population? Those are the kinds of questions that could make agreeing to a convention almost impossible.
Despite the long odds, a group of lawmakers — mostly Republicans — have been meeting since 2013 to come up with guidelines to prevent total chaos.
That group, The Assembly of State Legislatures, approved a detailed package of rules this year — outlining everything from who would lead the group to how proposals would be debated.

What do they want?

The effort is being driven by conservative lawmakers and groups, who want a federal balanced budget amendment added to the Constitution (which would limit spending) and a broad decentralization of powers, sending more control to statehouses.
The issue has gotten broad support from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) — a conservative group that helps state lawmakers craft legislation — and groups supported by the Koch Brothers.
Throughout the administration of President Barack Obama, the movement gained steam as Republicans railed against Washington, although it’s unclear whether the effort would lose steam with Republicans now in control in Washington.
“Our task is to lay the foundation of this building as solidly as we can, so that it can stand tall for future generations,” Indiana’s Senate leader, Sen. David Long, said in 2014, at a meeting of the group of lawmakers in Indianapolis. “So it can provide a shelter necessary to protect those who use this building for the advancement of state’s rights, whether today, tomorrow, or at any time in the future.”

Would it be successful?

The short answer is: It’s hard to tell.
Under the current Constitution, if they could get enough states to approve opening a convention, any changes made in the convention would still have to be approved by at least 38 states — the three-fourths majority of states.
That limit, put in place specifically to guard against any swift, radical changes in the government, would guard against supporters of the new convention completely overhauling the Constitution, said Karla Jones, director for international affairs for ALEC.
But they could also rewrite the rules entirely — like the original framers of the Constitution did in 1787. Mike Klarman, Kirkland and Ellis professor of law at Harvard Law School and a constitutional historian, notes that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention in 1787 had rules they had agreed on and were only supposed to tinker with the existing Articles of Confederation.
Of course, they did a bit more than tinker …

Delegates gone wild?

… This is why some lawmakers and constitutional experts are apprehensive about re-opening the Constitution, via a convention: anything could go.
“It’s not obvious most Americans would support freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or due process,” said Klarman, who recently wrote “The Framer’s Coup: The Making of the United States Constitution.”
The framers at the first, and only convention, made it hard for any one person to wrest away the reins of government on purpose, installing numerous checks on power like setting term-lengths.
“The framers were very shrewd about political power, they were always trying to constrain actors who were acting in their self-interest,” he said.
One of the things they were fighting at the time, he said, was a populist uprising among state and local leaders in the former colonies.
But supporters of the efforts say those concerns are unfounded and say that any movement would be limited to the one topic that states petitioned for, e.g. a constitutional amendment mandating the government no longer run deficits.
Jones, with ALEC, said that any successful petitioning of Congress would result in a “convention of the states” and not, specifically, a broad-sweeping constitutional convention.
“The applications are very specific, the leaders in the movements have drawn up a very detailed set of rules,” Jones said. “The chances of a convention running away, so to speak, are minimal.”
A Constitutional Convention would open up the US Constitution to anywhere from a minor to full re-write depending on the will of the legislators. This Dangerous Move would truly give voice to the Speaking as a Dragon! (Revelation 13:11)
When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism, when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvellous working of Satan and that the end is near.–5T 451 (1885).
Please click on image to study: The USA in Bible Prophecy


Posted: November 23, 2016 in Uncategorized

Published on Nov 22, 2016

A recent report from CNN exposes the TRUE character and role of The Pope.
TEXT @ 417-693-6995