View Full Version : Writings of Russell and Colin STANDISH

05-21-12, 05:26 PM
The Final Unholy Alliance

By Russell and Colin Standish

The Papacy at its zenith of power ever allied itself with powerful states which agreed to do its biddings. By a mixture of threats, favors, and the dispensing of privileges, the Papacy adroitly achieved its aims. In the twenty-first century, no European power, not even the European Union, matches the United States in potency and influence. This situation developed in the last half of the twentieth century. It is only natural that the Roman Catholic Church would see it expedient to make every effort to form a liaison with the United States, despite that Protestants outnumber Roman Catholics in that nation.

Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, two and a half years before he was elected Pope Pius XII, sailed for New York on October 8, 1936. There he was met by the young auxiliary bishop of Boston, Francis Joseph Spellman, only thirty-seven years of age. Later Spellman became the powerful Cardinal Archbishop of New York. Already Bishop Spellman had experience as a Vatican bureaucrat. In thirty days, Cardinal Pacelli, then the Vatican secretary of state, traveled 6,500 miles in America, visiting numerous cities and Catholic educational institutions. Most of the nation?s major cities were visited, including Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, St. Louis, St. Paul, San Francisco, and Washington, in addition to New York.

It was during a visit with President Franklin Roosevelt that Pacelli received an assurance that the United States would once more forge diplomatic ties with the Vatican, ties that had been severed in 1867 before the Papal States were disbanded. But the Senate refused to permit Roosevelt's promise to become a reality. The President was forced to content himself with the appointment of Myron Taylor as his personal representative at the Holy See in 1940.

Thus de facto diplomatic recognition was accorded. The United States Senate had severed diplomatic ties after Pope Pius IX issued his Syllabus of Errors which was deeply offensive to Protestants. A future alliance between the United States and the Vatican seemed impossible at that time, but God had spoken, and once more His Word would be fulfilled. So sensitive were Protestants to the Papacy in 1936 that Roosevelt dared not meet Pacelli until after the 1936 Presidential election had secured him a second term in office. How different from the 1996 election sixty years later, when President Bill Clinton saw papal contacts as an enhancement to his prospects of reelection!

Pacelli, at that time, was the highest Vatican prelate ever to visit the United States. So great was the Vatican's confidence in the United States that it had invested heavily in Wall Street, only to see this means greatly reduced in the stock market crash of 1929. However, by 1935 it was again investing in blue-chip stocks in the United States (See J. F. Pollard, "The Vatican and the Wall Street Crash"). Pollard also claimed in his paper that in May 1939, the Vatican sent $7,665,000 worth of gold bars to the United States. This move provided cash for the Papacy during the war years. It was strange indeed that the predominantly Protestant United States was preferred to banks of Zurich, a city which is predominantly Roman Catholic.

It cannot be doubted that Rome, recognizing that the United States would be useful for its purposes, sought to increase its influence in that nation. Already the large number of Irish, Italian, and Hispanic migrants had bolstered the number of adherents to the Roman Catholic faith in the United States, providing Rome with no little influence there.

As early as the end of the nineteenth century, the Vatican had set its sights on the United States. The hundredth anniversary of the establishment of the Catholic hierarchy in the United States was celebrated with pomp and ceremony in the Cathedral of Baltimore on November 10, 1889. Archbishop Ireland gave an address entitled "The Mission of Catholics in America" which contains some statements of significance.

Catholics of the United States are called . . . to make America Catholic. . . .

The conversion of America should ever be present to the minds of Catholics in America as a supreme duty from which God will not hold them exempt. . . .

The value of America to the cause of religion cannot be overestimated. This is a providential nation. . . . In the solution of social and political problems, no less than in the development of industry and commerce, the influence of America will be dominant among nations. There is not a country on the globe that does not borrow from us ideas and aspirations. The spirit of American liberty wafts its spell across seas and oceans, and prepares distant continents for the implanting of American ideas and institutions. This influence will grow with the growth of the nation. . . . The center of human action and influence is rapidly shifting, and at a no distant day America will lead the world. . . .

We cannot but believe that a singular mission is assigned to America, glorious for itself and beneficent to the whole race, the mission of bringing about a new social and political order, based more than any other upon the common brotherhood of man, and more than any other securing to the multitude of the people social happiness and equality of rights. With our hopes are bound up the hopes of the millions of the earth. The Church triumphing in America, Catholic truth will travel on the wings of American influence, and encircle the universe. (John Ireland, The Church and Modern Society, 55-58)

In 1894, The Catholic Standard and Times of November 3 spoke forthrightly, stating,

The United States of America, it can be said without exaggeration, are the chief thought of Leo XIII. . . . A few days ago, on receiving an eminent American, Leo XIII said to him: "But the United States are the future; we think of them incessantly." . . . That is why Leo XIII turns all his soul, full of ideality, to what is improperly called his American policy. It should be called his Catholic universal policy. (Cited by Edwardson, Facts of Faith, 240)

The report of "the third Washington conference" says: "Our purpose is to make America dominantly Catholic."- " The Mission Movement in America," issued from the Catholic University, Washington, D.C. June 1909. (Ibid.)

Dr. Barrett, who was for many years in the Jesuit order, wrote in 1935 a remarkably frank account of the work of Catholic Action, which was established in the twentieth century. He left no doubt concerning its aims in America:

In theory, Catholic Action is the work and service of lay Catholics in the cause of religion, under the guidance of the bishops. In practice it is the Catholic group fighting their way to control America. (Boyd Barrett, Rome Stoops to Conquer, 15)

The effort, the fight, may be drawn out. It may last for five or ten years. Even if it lasts for twenty-what is twenty years in the life of Rome? The fight must be fought to a finish-opposition must be worn down if it cannot be swept away. Rome's immortal destiny hangs on the outcome. That destiny overshadows the land.

Were Rome to fail to dominate American thought and American lives, her civilization, her moral code, all her glorious incredible dogmas would perish from the earth. Should Rome triumph, she will ascend to a higher state than ever she has enjoyed heretofore. Therefore she must win-if it be given her to win what, as she claims, God has promised-what her Prophets have foretold. Then will the vast West be hers wherein to set up anew her earthly kingdom. And in the fight, as she has ever fought when battles were most desperate in the past, Rome will use steel, and gold, and silvery lie. Rome will stoop to conquer. (Ibid., 266?267)

At the time of Cardinal Pacelli's triumphant tour of the United States, the secular newspaper, the St. Paul Pioneer Press of November 4, 1936, commented,

Pope Pius [XI] feels that the United States is the ideal base for Catholicism's great drive. . . . The Catholic Movement, Rome's militant organization numbering millions all over the world, will be marshaled direct from Rome by Monsignor Pizzardo-next to Pacelli the Holy See's shrewdest diplomat and politician-instead of by the local bishops as before. (Cited by Christian Edwardson, Facts of Faith, 241.)


05-21-12, 05:28 PM

Pacelli had visited St. Paul in Minnesota, sited across the river from Minneapolis. This report indicated that even before the United States assumed its post-war drive for world dominance, the Vatican had its sights firmly focused upon that nation.

But not all Protestants were asleep to one successful means Rome employed in her quest for influence in the United States. United States Senator Thomas E. Watson in 1928 wrote,

In the public schools the Catholics have stealthily introduced textbooks written by Jesuits; and your children are being taught, that the Roman church was misunderstood in the past; that its doctrines are not fatal to humanity and gospel religion; that its record is not saturated with the blood of the innocent millions, murdered by papal persecutors, and that there never was such a monstrosity as the alleged sale of papal pardons of sins.

The Catholics denounce secular education and public schools?why? Because under the papal system, the child is never to be permitted to do its own thinking. . . .

Educate youth in this Catholic way, and the consequences are logical: the children graduate in obedience; feel no divine thirst for free knowledge; depend upon authority, rather than upon investigation; cringe to the priest; look to him for guidance and control; lose mental self-reliance, and gradually cease to be liberals, progressives, democrats, republicans, believers in the capacity of the people to govern themselves. (Roman Catholics in America, 5.)

There was no question that Rome had to alter Protestant perceptions in order to fulfill the prophetic word that the United States would become a tool of papal policy. The education system, in itself, could fulfill this role perfectly.

But the Roman Catholic Church had other means at its disposal. While the Roman Catholic priest, Patrick Henry O'Brien, may have let his Irish zeal run a little riot, nevertheless his letter to former priest and later Protestant minister, Dr. Domenica of Philadelphia, reveals what was in the minds and hearts of other priests.

We the hierarchy of the Holy Roman Catholic church expect all loyal children of the Church to assist the President [Franklin Roosevelt] with all our strength to see that the individuals comprising the United States Supreme Court shall obey the President's injunctions. And if necessary we will change, amend or blot the present Constitution, so that the President may enforce his or rather our humanitarian program on all phases of human rights as laid down by our saintly popes and the Holy Mother the Church. . . .

We are going to have our laws made and enforced according to the teachings of our Holy See, and the popes and the Canon Law of the papal throne. Our entire social structure must be rebuilt on that basis. Our educational laws must be construed to the end that atheism, the red peril of all blathering isms-Protestantism, Communism, Socialism and all others ilk and stamp, be driven out of this fair land.

The cross was planted on our shores by a staunch, loyal Roman Catholic [Columbus]. This land belongs to us by every right. Long enough have we compromised on every important question. Now we demand what is really ours, and we are going to have it. We will support our President in every way to obtain it, peacefully, honestly if we may. If necessary we are ready to fight and die for it. . . .

We want as cabinet members, children of the Holy Mother Church, holding important positions in the entire structure of our government. . . .

We elected our worthy President by the greatest majority ever recorded in history. . . .

We control America and don't propose to stop until America, or the Americans are genuinely Catholic and remain so. God help us. (Domenica, Is Washington in the Grip of the Roman Church? 23-24)

Thus the judiciary, executive, and legislature of the country has been targeted to assist the aims of the Roman Church. While Rome steadily pursued its agenda, much of Protestantism slept. A remarkable ally for the aims of the Papacy was found in Evangelical Protestantism when, largely through the sale of the Scofield Bible, especially in the Southern States of America in the early twentieth century, Cyrus Scofield's notes within that Bible were virtually accepted as truth. Those notes neutralized the Bible evidence that the Papacy is the antichrist and in its place promoted the Jesuit view invented by the sixteenth-century Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera-that the antichrist was a future evil individual who would pursue a vile agenda for three and a half years at the end of time.

Further, Scofield promoted another concept devised by a Spanish Jesuit priest. Manuel de Lacunza y Dias, using the pseudonym, Rabbi Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra, ministering in Chile, espoused the non-biblical theory of the secret rapture in the late eighteenth century. This fiction was grasped by Scottish evangelist, Edward Irving in 1827 and years later accepted by Cyrus Scofield via the teachings of John Darby, the founder of the Plymouth Brethren faith.

Blinded by these Jesuit-inspired errors, Evangelical Protestants were lulled to sleep. Losing their Scriptural moorings and cast adrift on a sea of error, they slept while Rome's agenda was pushed very successfully. (See The Evangelical Dilemma, by Colin and Russell Standish, listed in the back of this book.)

The renowned Roman Catholic scholar and prelate, Cardinal Alfred Baudrillart of France, after recounting the fearful history of papal persecution, then proceeded to quote the words of Monsignor d'Hulst:

The intervention of the secular power in the cause of heresy has left memories which haunt the imagination of our contemporaries like a nightmare. Many men of divers opinions find in this the great scandal of ecclesiastical history. Our deadly enemies find herein matter for furious assaults, whilst our kindly adversaries here encounter the stumbling-block which prevents their return to us. Indeed, even among our friends and our brothers we find those who dare not look this problem in the face. They ask permission from the church to ignore or even to deny all those acts and institutions in the past, which have made orthodoxy [Catholicism] compulsory. (The Catholic Church, the Renaissance and Protestantism, 183-184)

It is a grave sin to hate Roman Catholics. They are entitled to our love. They must be assured of the religious liberty to believe, practice, and promote their beliefs as long as such practice does not interfere with the same freedom of others. But it is a fearful mistake, with far reaching consequences, to blind ourselves to the Papacy's awful history and prophesied future persecution. In so doing, American Protestantism has denied its roots and ceased the mighty protest from which its very name is derived.

The British professor at Harvard University, Harold Laski, clearly saw the trends in these matters in the United States when he wrote in The Nation of December 13, 1947:

I add, with both hesitation and regret, my feeling that a good deal of what is most reactionary in the political and social life of America today is directly traceable to the influence of a militant Roman Catholic church, which is as much the expression of the purposes of a foreign power as any influence exerted by the Communist party. . . . No other body has devoted itself so consistently to poisoning the relations between Russia and the United States. It protects child labour; it is building, from infant school to university, its own educational imperium in imperio [empire within an empire]. It has immense influence over the movie industry, not least where films of a political complexion are concerned. It plays a major part in the repression of freedom of speech. . . . It is attempting with subtlety and skill to establish a concealed control of trade unions in cities where there is a large Roman Catholic population. I doubt whether there are three Americans today whose authority, direct and indirect, counts for more than that of the Cardinal-Archbishop of New York.

And to this must be added the curious and significant fact that the members of the Roman Catholic church seem able, like their co-religionists in Great Britain, to obtain pivotal posts in the foreign service, exercising a power of infiltration which must make members of the Communist party feel that they are infants at the game.

Anyone who measures Roman Catholic strength in the United States today with what it was a generation ago cannot fail to be impressed by its growth, as well as perturbed by its direction. Spain apart, I doubt whether there is any country in the world today in which its authority is greater than in America. (Cited in The Christian Century, December 31, 1947)

If these conclusions were true well over half a century ago, how much further has the United States progressed under the skillful posturing of Roman Catholic clerics toward the single-minded goals of the Papacy to control the political, legislative, and judicial agendas of the greatest nation of history!

Excerpt from the book Two Beasts, Three Deadly Wounds, and Fifteen Popes, by Russell and Colin Standish.

David Merrill
05-21-12, 08:05 PM
That explains a lot! Thank you.

05-22-12, 02:06 PM
Washington In the Lap of Rome, Justin Dewey Fulton (http://books.google.com/books?id=b_DPAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover)

Rome In America (http://books.google.com/books?id=wCIQAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover)

The pontifex maximus Sc?vola thought it expedient that the people should be deceived in religion; and the learned Varro said plainly, that there are many truths, which it is useless for the vulgar to know; and many falsities which it is fit the people should not suppose are falsities. (Note: Vid Augustin. de civ. Dei, B. 4 [...].) Hence comes the adage "Mundus vult decipi, decipiatur ergo."

Why do some or many lawyers deceive? If the policy of Roman State and Roman Religion were to deceive upon what of it can one safely believe?

Snippet from "The Divine Legation of Moses Demonstrated":

David Merrill
05-22-12, 03:18 PM
I am of the unequivocal mystery school - A Course in Miracles. Jesus led an apocalyptic mystery cult. I also study The Science of Mind.


Only Jesus' of those spoke in parables.

05-22-12, 05:19 PM
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the children of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12).

Key difference is that of (a) becoming God and (b) becoming sons of God.

Being a son of God or being the light (rather than bearing the light) seems to bring with it a habit of shining light rather than creating shadows. This is might be where the line of distinction is drawn between "children of darkness" and "children of light". As in the former lie so that the form and fabric of their lie goes undiscovered. The latter (i.e. "children of light") are all about truth in support of the expansion of the kingdom of heaven (i.e. "the more the merrier" as contrasted with the scarcity-based mindset).

On one hand, I get that there are some scientific concepts one might hope the most base man wouldn't figure out for all of the damage he might do if he knew. Similarly, there are those who are too lazy enough and could hardly be bothered with .. something 'pesky' like reading or learning anything more than how to stuff their pie holes and 'fulfill' various bodily functions. So yes this reminds me of a quote that has accompanied for a long, long time perhaps as a kind of 'mantra':

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings is to search out a matter.

On the other hand...an interesting snippet....

Debt and Grace: As Related to the Doctrine of a Future Life (Charles Frederic Hudson)

If Pilate knew of no kingdom of truth then of what kingdom was Pilate? One of light or one of darkness?

When "we ought protect the mysteries" is code for "I hope they don't ever find out that we're lying to them!"... well its pretty clear whether it would be of light or of darkness. At the same time, I consider many that I've encountered along the way who could care less about anything as stated above but things like bowel movements but yet who became envious because I was successful in applying truth.


But I have also encountered those who knowing full well what they are doing did place counterfeits, traps, snares who despise the kingdom of heaven and who despise truth but yet they might pose as 'truthers' or as being 'pious and holy'. That one Jesus who was raised from the dead and ascended into heaven lucidated why they do it!

Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Because they were 'hindered' they decided to 'return the favor' and hindered others. Perhaps they were led down an utterly false trail, found themselves stuck so 'passed it on' (i.e. "spreading the disease")?

And the LORD said unto Cain, Where [is] Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: [Am] I my brother's keeper?

On another note I'm reminded of a speech by a Ravi Zacharias (http://www.rzim.org/) that he related about a Muslim that came to him asking him questions. Ultimately Ravi Zacharias explained to him above all his questions something like this: BECAUSE YOU ARE OF THE TRUTH...THAT IS WHY YOU SEEK OUT THE TRUTH.

David Merrill
05-22-12, 08:39 PM

It is delightful to read your post Allodial.

05-23-12, 03:40 AM
The Second Beast of Revelation 13

By Russell and Colin Standish

The title of this book is Two Beasts, Three Deadly Wounds and Fifteen Popes.

We have spent a considerable time on the exposition of the first beast of Revelation chapter 13, initially so mystifying, and yet, with study, so clear. It is now proper that we turn our attention to the second beast depicted in the same chapter.

It is important that we do so, for these two beasts will unite in purpose at the end of this earth?s history to enforce terrible persecutions upon those who are true to God and His Word.

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. (Revelation 13:11?17)

Here we see that a universal death decree and an economic boycott will be enacted against those who will not endorse the worship of the first beast, the Papacy, through the efforts of these two powers. The great issue at the end of time is religious, for it is a matter of worship. Notice the references to worship in this chapter.

And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? (Verse 4)

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. (Verse 8)

And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. (Verse 12)

And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. (Verse 15)

God?s last message of love at this terrible time is also a call to worship Him.

Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. (Revelation 14:7)

Thus the end-time conflict is centered upon the worship of God and the worship of the beast.

Since the Vatican possesses no significant military or police powers to enforce such decrees worldwide, it will resort to a powerful ally to enforce its will. This is no novel strategy for the Vatican. For centuries she used the Holy Roman Empire and other nations in precisely this way. Thus there is a definite historical record of such collusion in the past.

But where, in these last days preceding Christ?s second coming, could the Papacy find such a powerful assistant? To discover the answer to this question we must turn to the clues of the identity of the second beast of Revelation 13. These clues are fewer than those of the principal party, the Papacy, but they are nevertheless quite specific.

Clue 1

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. (Revelation 13:11)

This beast is symbolic of a political power, for, as we have demonstrated, a beast in these prophecies represents a political entity.

Clue 2

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. (Ibid.)

We have seen that the Papacy arose from the ?sea? (Revelation 13:1), which refers to multitudes of people (Revelation 17:15). Thus the significance of the emergence of the second beast out of the earth may be discerned, by contrast, to be a power which arose on a sparsely inhabited continent.

Clue 3

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. (Ibid.)

Here youthfulness and harmlessness are symbolized. It was to be a new nation, one not born in the ages of antiquity. It was to arise as a mild nation. The other six beasts were ferocious, but the seventh was to arise as a meek lamb.

Clue 4

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. (Ibid.)

Here is a dramatic alteration from the lamb to the dragon, a fierce beast. This denotes that this nation, innocent in its foundation, would undergo a metamorphosis. The Scripture is precise in its identification of the dragon.

And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. (Revelation 12:9)

And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. (Revelation 20:2)

Thus this initially upright nation was later to become the agent of Satan just prior to the end of the world, for it represents also the last (seventh) head of the first beast.

Clue 5

If any man have an ear, let him hear. He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. (Revelation 13:9?10)

This text refers of course to the first beast, the Papacy, which was taken captive by the force of arms in 1798. But we notice that this infliction of the deadly wound is timed at the period of the rise of the second beast of Revelation 13, for verse 11 immediately follows. Thus this second beast would commence its rise to power during the late eighteenth century. But it would not then immediately succeed the Papacy as the sixth head of the beast of Revelation 17, for its emergence was lamblike, mild, inoffensive. Perhaps the lamblike nature of the second beast also indicated that it would initially follow the will of the true Lamb, the Lamb of God. Indeed, this meaning is strongly supported in that by contrast it later follows the dragon, Satan. There are only two leaders we can follow.

Now, which nation has fulfilled each of these criteria? There are only two contenders?the United States and Australia. Both arose in the late eighteenth century, the United States (1776), Australia (1788). Both were founded in regions of the world which were sparsely populated. At the time of the emergence of the United States there were estimated to be only about 1,000,000 American Indians occupying the vast territory of over 3,000,000 square miles. At Australia?s foundation only 300,000 to 500,000 Australian aborigines were scattered thinly through its territory of almost 3,000,000 square miles. Both were youthful nations. Both settlements developed into nations?political powers.

But here Australia?s claim falters. While the United States commenced as a haven for persecuted Christians from Europe?a sweet respite from difficult conditions?Australia could, by no stretch of the imagination, be deemed to have arisen as a mild nation. Rather than providing a respite from persecution, it was founded as a harsh penal colony. The pitiless treatment of convicts, many transported to Australia for trivial crimes which today would have been punished by the perpetrator entering into a good behavior bond (1), left a fearful scar upon the white settlement of Australia.

[1. ?Good behavior bond?: The perpetrator promises that they will stay out of trouble for a set time, usually at least several months. If the offender breaks the bond, they must return to court and may have to pay a certain amount of money decided by the court.]

Further, the prophecy of the second beast, as it unfolds, speaks of a nation which would develop into a power of worldwide dominance. In meeting this criterion the United States is unchallenged.


05-23-12, 03:48 AM

In the nineteenth century, the United States could not take its place as a world leader. It was decidedly inferior in power to the major nations of Europe, especially Britain, France, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Prussia and Russia. Even Spain and Portugal exerted more worldwide influence. In addition, fearing to become embroiled in constant European conflicts, President James Monroe in 1823 led the nation to adopt an isolationist stance which prevented any move toward the United States exerting a powerful influence in the world.

The Monroe Doctrine dominated United States policy until 1941, when the nation entered the Second World War following the Japanese bombardment of Pearl Harbor. It is true that adherence to the Monroe Doctrine had faltered in 1917 when for the last year of the First World War the United States became a combatant in Europe, but it immediately resumed its former stance after the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919, declining even to join the League of Nations which it had helped to establish.

But with the entry of the United States into the conflict of the Second World War, a new era arose. Soon the country was embroiled in wars around the globe, including Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo in Serbia, and Somalia, to cite only a few and to ignore its clandestine interference in sovereign states such as Chile and Nicaragua.

In 1989, within a period of four months, Poland, East Germany, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria and Hungary threw off the yoke of Communism, and two years later Communism in the Soviet Union collapsed. That mighty atheistic defier of the God of heaven disintegrated into fifteen independent nations: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.

Although Communism still held sway in China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba, its force as the great opponent of the God of heaven had petered out. Truthfully, President George Bush, Sr. could report to the United States Congress, the nation, and the world, that there was now only one (military) superpower in the world, the United States of America. The sixth head of Atheistic Communism had fallen, and the United States, 225 years after its creation, had stepped into its prophesied preeminence, for President Bush, Sr.'s boast was indisputably correct. Over a century of isolationism and three-quarters of a century of conflict with Communism could not alter God?s prophetic word.

The United States is the seventh head. Ominously it will continue only "a short space" (Revelation 17:10). Christ's return is nigh at hand. What a time to prepare our hearts in righteousness within a world which can justifiably be judged as wicked and vile! Only the power of the Holy Spirit can bestow purity of heart and life in these dark days of our earth.

But let it not be forgotten that the prophecy went on to declare,

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. (Revelation 17:11)

The eighth head unites with the seventh in the great last affront against God's truth and his people. This is a head which "is of the seven"-one of the previous heads, "which was and is not." In 1798 the Papacy received a deadly wound and could be then termed "is not." But verse 8 of chapter 17 of Revelation had stated not only that it "was, and is not" but that it "and yet is."

Only one of these seven heads has recovered from its deadly wound- the Papacy. Clearly the two great powers which unite in purpose to oppose God's law and persecute His people as this sinful earth's history closes, are the United States and the Vatican. The United States is unchallengeably the great military power of the planet and the Vatican the most powerful religious entity.

Thus the following will be fulfilled, speaking of the second beast, the United States:

And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. (Revelation 13:12)

Together these two quite diverse powers will act as did the Papacy and the military forces of Europe of the past, not now confined largely to Europe, but throughout the world. Their decrees will be universal.

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. (Revelation 13:8)

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads. (Revelation 13:16)

No deception will be spared mankind in order to beguile the citizens of the world into accepting the dictates of this final unholy alliance against the truth of God and His people.

And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. (Revelation 13:13-14)

Further, for the few who are not deceived, no coercive effort will be spared.

And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. (Revelation 13:15?17)

We are rapidly approaching momentous times, for this head will continue "a short space" (Revelation 17:10). Recent fulfillment of moves to seal a union between the United States and the Vatican, are examined and documented later. (See chapter entitled "George W. Bush is Romeward Bound.")

David Merrill
05-23-12, 01:18 PM
Global boycott?


05-23-12, 03:07 PM
Well what might not be well-known are writings about Nero having inflicted himself with a deadly wound and that such said to have been covered by the Roman State for the most part lest it be identified with "the beast". He was believed dead but yet still lived. During the 66 to 70 AD period, there was a requirement to have a "mark" in order to buy or sell--those who were trapped Jerusalem and who hadn't fleed. Is there actually any legitimate prophecy that says all that happened in Jerusalem during that period was to happen again thousands of years later? Where is there any prophecy about the physical temple at Jerusalem being rebuilt? Why would it be when the temple made without hands is in effect?

Not to mention the accounts of statutes of Caesar being set up in "every city and temple" two thousand or so years ago and having those beheaded who would not worship the statues.

Far, far more important IMHO: as for the kingdom of God or kingdom of Christ is such not already current right now? And hasn't it been since at least 33 AD (keyword: coronation (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/coronate)).

And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/endued) with power from on high. (Luke 24:49) AFTER THE RESURRECTION

Is followed by (April 33 AD):

And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

How many folks are looking for the kingdom with their physical eyes? Yet still how many are looking to build it with hands?

That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,

20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set (http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/kathizo.html) him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,

21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come

The word "set" there means to confer a kingdom rather than merely "Well done here's a comfy chair have a seat!". 'kathizo' means to CONFER A KINGDOM. This would have ocurred circa 33 CE/AD. The resurrection was followed by ascension which was perhaps followed by the conferring of a kingdom which followed by was the Promised Enduement (see above Luke 24:49) 'with power from on high'. Someone I know of did a great set of charts on this and gave it to a seminary or bible college and they were gotten rid of.

ONCE HE WAS CONFERRED THE KINGDOM HE PASSED IT ON!!!! (http://bible.cc/ephesians/2-6.htm)


Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.

What crown do you figure He was referring to at Revelations 3:11? If there was a crown to hold fast to them perhaps there was and is kingdom to go with it?

Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? Hath not my hand made all these things?

Consider how many people think a house to only be a brick building rather than the living husband, wife and children that comprise the household? How many think the "church building" to be "the church" itself?


05-23-12, 11:06 PM
"And what [is] the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set [him] at his own right hand in the heavenly [places],
Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
And hath put all [things] under his feet, and gave him [to be] the head over all [things] to the church,
Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."
Ephesians 1:19-23

We are still "in this world".
I believe that "that [world] which is to come" is coming very quickly now, as the last of the Bible prophecies are fulfilling fast before us.
Of course I cannot prove that.

Hindsight is 20/20, so everyone will just have to wait and see:)

05-24-12, 01:38 AM
We are still "in this world".
I believe that "that [world] which is to come" is coming very quickly now, as the last of the Bible prophecies are fulfilling fast before us.
Of course I cannot prove that.

Hindsight is 20/20, so everyone will just have to wait and see:)

Perhaps. However there are those that suggest the meaning of the word 'world' is worth lengthy study.

Frederick Burrell
05-24-12, 05:09 PM
Perhaps revelations represents an inward journey we must all take on the road to redemption.

Interesting post tree farmer. Just as the catholic church seemed to loosing its dominance in the US, we are experiencing an influx of catholic dominated immigrants. Perhaps behind the scenes one could imagine the hand of the church in metering out to a people who rejected the church and is now getting its just due, in form of financial catastrophe. Hmm interesting concept, to say the least. The question would seem to be who else is the catholic church in bed with to accomplish their ends.

The other thing I find amazing in light of all the things that the catholic church has under taken to remain and broaden it control, is it not the very body which brings to us our current version of the bible and the books it contains. hmmmm Makes one wonder what motivation they had for their choices, I'm sure of one thing it was not for the promotion of the truth. fB

05-24-12, 07:17 PM
Well there was someone that related this: a point in getting people to worship statues, icons or other physical artifacts was for collecting a kind energy not so well known outside certain circles. Relevantly, it was said that after the resurrection of Jesus, oracles around Rome stopped working. Hmmm wonder why.


P.S. Simon Magus (http://www.pointsoftruth.com/SimonMagus.html) was apparently referred to by some as "the Christ". The painting illustrates an alleged competition between Simon Magus and Peter whereby after prayer Simon Magus fell when the power supporting him ceased and his feet shattered. It is said that his bones were found near Rome during the 1940s (ca. 1942)..with thee bones of his feet missing. Peters bones having been found near Jerusalem (http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/peters-jerusalem-tomb.htm).

As Correnti continued to examine the bones one very curious factor leapt right out at him -- every part of the skeleton was represented EXCEPT FOR THE FEET! "Only THE FEET, from the ankles down, were ENTIRELY MISSING. Not a single one of the many small bones to be found in the human foot could be seen on the table" (The Bones of Saint Peter, p. 107). How curious! There has been little or no comment from the Catholic Church on this peculiarity of the graffiti wall cache. That these bones may have been lost because of their small size is no answer because many bones from the fingers of a similar size are present -- showing how much care and devotion was used with these relics.

As a reminder:

The pontifex maximus Scaevola thought it expedient that the people should be deceived in religion; and the learned Varro said plainly, that there are many truths, which it is useless for the vulgar to know; and many falsities which it is fit the people should not suppose are falsities. (Note: Vid Augustin. de civ. Dei, B. 4 [...].) Hence comes the adage "Mundus vult decipi, decipiatur ergo."


P.S. #2 One of the most fundamental 'magic spells' is that of summoning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evocation). A related word is 'apparitor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparitor)' (a lot like "apppear" or "appearance").


06-03-12, 04:27 AM

What is cognitive dissonance? Do Christians suffer cognitive dissonance? Is there an example of cognitive dissonance in the scriptures?

Let us begin by looking at the words ?cognitive dissonance?
? Cognitive ? A mental thing. Mentally aware
? Dissonance ? Not in harmony with. Is not ?resonance?.

We all hold ?core beliefs?, things which we have accepted as true. A body of knowledge in our minds we hold to be ?truth?. When new information comes along, we compare it to what we already know. If it agrees with our body of truth then, we like it, we agree with it, it resonates with what we know. Things are fine. But, if not, ??then we reject it???..?IF- we can.

Sometimes the truth cannot be rejected because it is ?self evident? and if it does not agree with what we already know, we suffer mental anguish. We suffer cognitive dissonance.

Perhaps this news story by Wray Herbert ?in the June 19, 2007 edition of Newsweek can help to illustrate:

?The Nuer and the Dinka tribes of southern Sudan share an unusual custom. Both of these cattle-herding societies remove several of their kids' permanent front teeth as soon as they sprout: two on the top and four to six on the bottom. It's a very painful procedure, done with a fish hook, and it leaves all tribe members with a distinctive slack-jawed look and speech impediments.
This practice probably started long ago, when tetanus was rampant in central Africa. Tetanus causes "lockjaw," but the tooth removal would have allowed children afflicted by this infectious disease to drink liquids even when their jaw muscles clamped shut. Although there has been no tetanus or lockjaw in the southern Sudan for ages, both the Nuer and the Dinka continue the custom of extracting the front teeth. Indeed, they believe the sunken jaw and lower lip are beautiful. People with front teeth, they say, look like jackals. Social psychologists Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson describe this odd custom in their new book, "Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)," as an example of the psychological process known as cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is the extreme emotional discomfort we feel when two important beliefs, attitudes or perceptions collide. Humans cannot tolerate dissonance for long, so they ease the tension by making a change in belief or attitude?and justifying the change. In the case of the Nuer and Dinka, they "choose" to believe that the toothless look is aesthetically pleasing in order to justify the infliction of such trauma on their children.?

Do you know anyone like the Nuer and the Dinka? Someone who just can?t see how things really are? ?they in effect "choose" to believe that the toothless look is aesthetically pleasing? By use of this mental trick, they avoid the effect of cognitive dissonance.

What follows is an example from the Scriptures where truth caused an extreme episode of cognitive dissonance. These people had not developed a mental process to deal with it and the result was a violent reaction.

From Luke Chapter 4: verses 17-30;

?And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears. And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

And he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, Physician, heal thyself: whatsoever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in thy country. And he said, Verily I say unto you, No prophet is accepted in his own country.

But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land; But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow.
And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian.

And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath, And rose up, and thrust him out of the city, and led him unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they might cast him down headlong.
But he passing through the midst of them went his way,?

Here we have a people that were presented with ?self evident truth?. Truth which they could not deny because it was right there in their own sacred writings! But, all along they had been taught that these stories were just an indication of the power of their God, the ?Jewish? God.
And, here was Christ, presenting this ?truth? to them. The truth that God took care of and healed people who WERE NOT Jews. And so you see the effect this bit of ?truth? had. It caused a significant event of ?cognitive dissonance?.

The rest of this article will give my Seventh Day Adventist friends the opportunity to personally experience cognitive dissonance. The depth of this experience will vary from one individual to another because; everyone has variations in their core beliefs.

Years ago the Adventist had a large Church and Health Institute at Battle Creek, Michigan and during this time, controversy had arisen regarding Sister White.
Sister White said God would help her provide an answer.
A.T. Jones and others took her at her word and wrote letters to her in which they listed their concerns which Sister White had said her God would help her to answer.
Let us read about the biblical Joseph?s God and contrast him with Sister Whites God.
We will also read excerpts from A. T. Jones letter to Sister White

The God(s) of Joseph and Sister White

Joseph's God
Joseph's God was dependable. He meant what he said. He carried through on his promise. Four hundred years did not diminish his promise. Your faith is increased when you read of this God?s faithfulness. Thousands of years later, bible writers would cite Joseph's relationship with his God as an example of faith.
Joseph's God never went back on his word. The following scriptures illustrate this relationship and example.

KJV Genesis 50:24-26
And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.
And Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.
So Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old: and they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.

KJV Exodus 12:40-41
Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.
And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.

KJV Exodus 13:19 And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him: for he had straitly sworn the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you; and ye shall carry up my bones away hence with you.

KJV Joshua 24:32 And the bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem, in a parcel of ground which Jacob bought of the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for an hundred pieces of silver: and it became the inheritance of the children of Joseph.

KJV Hebrews 11:22 By faith Joseph, when he died, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel; and gave commandment concerning his bones.

06-03-12, 04:29 AM
Part 2

Sister White's God
Sister White's god was different. When people did as he instructed. Followed his instructions to the letter, he changed his mind and did not do as he said. Instead he gave new instructions. Your faith is diminished when you read how this god could not be depended on to do what he said he would do. The following excerpts from A.T. Jones letter to Sister White reveals this.

Thus the whole case as your communication calling for the writing out of doubts and perplexities concerning your writings, as that case has been worked out, requires that we shall think of God things that are impossible.

Now please let me say a word on Gods behalf: In your communication of March 30th, 1906, calling upon certain men by name to place upon paper the statement of the difficulties that perplexed their minds, you wrote the following words:

"In the visions of the night ----- I was directed by the Lord to request them and any others who have perplexities and grievous things in their minds regarding the Testimonies that I have borne, to specify what their objections and criticisms are. The Lord will help me to answer these objections, and to make plain that which seems intricate.... Let it all be written out".

After having received in answer to that call what some brethren had honestly written, you wrote under date of June 3rd, 1906 the following words:

"I had a vision in which I was speaking before a large company, where many questions were asked concerning my work and writings. I was directed by a messenger from heaven not to take the burden of picking up and answering all the sayings and doubts that are being put into many minds."

Both of these communications profess to be as from God. As representing God, therefore, they present the impossible situation as to God, in truth, that God asked certain men by name that they put in writing a statement of all their difficulties, etc., with the promise of an answer, and then, after He got the statement, refused to answer.

I repeat, therefore, that as to God in truth, and to any mind that has ever received the revelation of God, that presents an impossible situation. For no person that knows God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent, can ever believe it possible of God that He would call men personally by name to Him, only that they should receive a slap in the face, or to be condemned.

Didn?t the Lord know what responses could be made to that call? Didn't He know what response might be made? Yea, didn't He know what responses would be made? Accordingly didn't He know before these statements were written, that there was to be no answer? And He knowing all that, then can anybody expect sensible Christian men ever to believe of God that He would deliberately resort to an unworthy trick of mere child's play with sober, well-meaning, manly men, believers, in His own Son?

Let us set these two statements of yours side by side:
March 30, 1906

"Recently in the visions of the night I stood in a large company of people .. I was directed by the Lord to request them and any others who have perplexities and grievous things in their minds regarding the Testimonies that I have borne, to specify what their objections and criticisms are. The Lord will help me to answer these objections, and to make plain that which seems intricate... Let it all be written out and submitted to those who desire to remove the Perplexities." June 3, 1906

"I had a vision in which I was speaking before a large company where many questions were asked concerning my works and writings. I was directed by a messenger from heaven not to take the burden of picking up and answering all the sayings and doubts that are being put into many minds."

Notice the dates! This particular God, Sister White's God, goes back on his word in 63 days!

Sister White, can you or anybody else believe it possible for any person who knows God or has respect for him to accept both these statements as coming from God? Can you or anybody else expect that Christian men will believe of God that He will act like that, or that He will treat men in any such way as that?
Can you or anybody else expect that Christian men will accept any view of inspiration that involves the holy, just and good God in any such a slim and unworthy trick as that? Are we to believe of God that he is such an underling and so irresponsible of himself, that He can be pledged to a thing that utterly fails? That He can be pledged and under pledged? That when under pledge He can be whiff led about, as the workings out, of this case show, so that His pledge shall be worse than nothing? And all this in order to be loyal to the Testimonies?"

Why, Sister White, to believe that and such as that, of God, the God of the Bible, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, would be nothing short of the utmost limit of irreverence.

The scriptures say circumstances may change, but the Word of the Lord does not change:
Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever. (Psalm 119:152)

The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. (1 Peter 1:24,25)

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
(Hebrews 13:8)

Now lets look at Joseph's God as the God of the Hebrews, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The one who "so loved the world that he gave". Is not this God of the Hebrews our God also?

Look how the Hebrews believed in him, look at the demonstration of faith of Jeremiah, when the Hebrews were being taken to Babylon serve the seventy years in captivity. See how he is so sure God will do what he says that he goes and buys land! He wants to reassure others, this God can be trusted

Look at Daniel, he knows from the study of the prophet of this God that it is time for the Hebrews to leave Babylon and return because ?God had said so?

Now compare this to what Sister White's god did on the matter of the reform dress

"God would not have his people adopt the so-called reform dress. It is immodest apparel, wholly unfitted for the modest, humble followers of Christ. . . Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman's rights and the so-called dress reform, might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. . . Let them adopt this costume, and their influence is dead. . . They [the sisters] would destroy their influence and that of their husbands. They would become a byword and a derision. . . God would not have us take a course to lessen or destroy our influence with the world" (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. I., pp. 421, 422).

Notice that she gives God as her authority here. "God would not have his people adopt the so-called reform dress." That was God's mind at that date
This was in 1863, and was clear and emphatic. But one year later, September, 1864, Elder and Mrs. White spent three weeks at Dr. Jackson's Health Home at Dansville, N.Y. It was here her God changed his mind about the dress. Listen to Sister White's God now!
"God would now have his people adopt the Reform Dress, not only to distinguish them from the world as his peculiar people, but because a reform in dress is essential to physical and mental health" (p. 525).
Here, again, she gives God as her authority for the new departure in dress. This dress was to be adopted by sisters, not only for health, but to distinguish them from the world as God's peculiar people. She quotes Num. 15:38-41, where God directed the Israelites to wear a "ribbon of blue" on their garments to distinguish them from the other nations.

Put the statements side by side and you have:

1863 NO 1864 YES
"God would not have his people adopt the so-called reform dress.
(Testimonies for the Church, Vol. I., pp. 421, 422).
"God would now have his people adopt the Reform Dress,
(Testimonies for the Church, Vol. I., pp. 525).

Are you suffering cognitive dissonance like those people in the synagogue did that day?
Do you want to throw someone down the brow of a hill?

And, what does the Scripture say?

God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

And what say you? Does this scripture apply? EVEN to Sister White?

Did God just change his mind, or did God lie ?or- did Sister White lie?
Did Sister White worship a different god?

If this has caused you to experience cognitive dissonance, how will you deal with it? Will you be able to develop some sort of mental trick, or mental process, such as the Nuer and the Dinka did regarding the pulling their children?s teeth, thus enabling them to avoid the unpleasantness of cognitive dissonance. If you are successful, oh please share it!

06-04-12, 02:49 AM
Inhisimage, I must admit that I completely fail to see how your commentary relates to the thread topic or the OP.

As to the content of your post:
the gist of it appears to be a partial rehash of some slanderous accusations which were published during the first half of the twentieth century by people seeking to disparage the writings and character of Ellen G. WHITE, and by extension the Seventh Day Adventist church and its members.

These accusations, plus a host of others, have been well documented and have been exposed as the libelous misrepresentations and lies that they are.
Volumes have been published on this matter, the most well-known of them probably being Francis D. NICHOL's book Ellen G. White And Her Critics (http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/EGWHCTOC.HTML).

The dress reform accusation is discussed here (http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/EGWHCc12.html#c12), and the matter about whether or not questions concerning testimonies had been answered by E.G. WHITE is documented here (http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/EGWHCc24.html#c24).

I sincerely hope that this will help to clear up the cognitive dissonance that you may have experienced.

Bright blessings

06-05-12, 02:03 AM
Farmer, I understood the topic to be "religious history in America" of which Russel and Colin Standish are a part as well as the foolishness propergated by the SDA Church. The so called "church" is actually a 30 billion dollar cooperation which spends tithe money to employ "Catholic" lawyers to defend it's "trade mark".
And no, by the way, the "eating of pork" has not produced Leprosy, contrary to what the favorite author of many people has stated.

Your answer to my post is no answer at all. Do a little research Farmer, The God Man's name was not "Jesus". Could not have been, as there was no "J" in the English alphabet in the year 1611. He was named after the one who "fathered" him. A being whose named remained completely unknown to Sister White, through out her entire life, in spite of her and her church's claim of a special relationship to him.

Get a new horse to ride Farmer. The one you are on is so lame, you can see his limp a mile away.

06-05-12, 03:22 AM
Inhisimage, the topic of my thread is "Writings of Russell and Colin STANDISH".
I started the thread in the "Religious History in America" category, because that's where it belongs, as you have also recognized.

So if you have something to say about the writings of Russell and Colin STANDISH, then this thread is wide open to you and you are welcome to do so.

If however you have an axe to grind with the writings of E.G. WHITE or the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, or you would like to discuss the spelling of the name of God, I strongly suggest you start your own thread in a forum category of your choice for that purpose.

My answer to your post is the only one you are going to get from me.
I recommend you cut out your straw-man arguments and the old reconstituted and inane slander and start bringing some truthful and edifying facts to the forum.

It is written:
"Judge not, that ye be not judged.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. "
Matthew 7:1-2


06-05-12, 09:21 PM

Post edited because of objectionable content and because there is no forum member named "Farmer".

06-07-12, 02:14 AM
Disparaging remarks about ethnic minorities who are unlikely to speak English and who probably don't have internet access will not be tolerated on this forum.

Inhisimage has been put on moderated status.