Site hosted by Build your free website today!




            In chapter eight we proved that the Jesuits are the architectures of the dispensational futurist ideology pervading in much of evangelical Christendom. In dealing with an issue of this magnitude, we must ask a very important question:  Did the Jesuits develop futurism only in self-defense against Protestantism’s identification of the Papacy to the Antichrist? The answer to this question is an emphatic, NO!  Though self-defense was one of the reasons for futurism, the issue goes much deeper. As we analyzed, the Jesuits were personally involved in the Oxford Tractarian Movement (Puseyism), which shaped Anglicanism, Darbyism, and the latter reconstruction of the Baptist Church in America through Scofield.  In essence, the work of the Jesuits, in promulgating the Counter Reformation theologies (both Praeterism and Futurism), was to subvert the Protestants, not only in Europe, but also in America for a much greater cause—A Catholic New World Order

One should ask: Is the dispensational ideology this significant? This religious ideology is very significant if it can affect the political structure into working with Rome for her goals of world domination. The equation is simple: The politics of America will have its definitive essence by the most pervasive ideology.  In other words, the voter all the way up to the three-branch system of American politics possesses their own religious, political, and social ideologies. If Catholicism can place her dogmas into effect in American government, because evangelical interest groups—who are involved in politics—agree with Rome, then the Papacy is accomplishing her aims. 

The Oxford Movement was by nature…ecumenical. In other words, the dispensational futurist movement in Protestantism in its beginnings was by nature, ecumenical.  Many dispensationalists, today, are divided between working with Rome and maintaining distance from Rome. Dispensationalists who maintain distance from Rome do not understand the causality of their religion from its inception (Tractariansim), whereas dispensationalists who work with Rome are carrying out the function of their ideology—inculcated by Rome and the Jesuits to subvert evangelicals into making America an Evangelical/Catholic power structure.

This chapter and the following chapter will bring to light eight very important issues that will reveal the danger of dispensational futurism as a subversive and destructive ideology in the last days:

 Chapter 10 will cover the following:

(1)    The sea Beast of Revelation 13—leading up to the rise of the two-horned Beast;

(2)    Who the two-horned Beast represents in Bible prophecy;

(3)    How the two-horned Beast is connected to the sea Beast politically—elucidating on the political horn out of the two;

(4)    The religious aspect of the United States—elucidating on the religious horn out of the two—and how the religious aspect of America plays a major role in politics and the great deception of the False Prophet.  

Chapter 11 will cover the following:

(5)    The background of Paganism and subversive movements, which have laid the foundation for the New World Order through the United States;

(6)    Zionistic elements in the New World Order plan;

(7)    The mega blue print for three world wars for the subjugation of the Middle East to the control of the United States and the Vatican.

(8)    The negative outcome of the preceding operations and the Mark of the Beast.

It is our purpose to elucidate on each of these topics in detail as we gradually build up a panoramic view of the greatest deception the world has ever seen. Through this eight-fold analysis, we will demonstrate how the dispensational ideology has worked as a catalyst for the “Great Deception.” This and the following chapter bring to focus the most shocking truths about modern dispensationalism…truths that must be understood to see the great danger of this ideology. Modern dispensational futurism is not just an incorrect theological system; it is one of the primary ideological sources blinding multitudes of evangelicals to the great satanic conspiracy for world domination. 


Before we examine whom the two-horned Beast represents, we are going to demonstrate once again whom the sea Beast represents. This brief analysis of the sea Beast will place a chronology line in perspective so that identifying the second Beast will be clear.

Notice the structure of Revelation 13:1 – 10.  Open your Bible and compare each text with the following analysis.  (In this section also keep in mind chapter’s 5 and 6)

(Rev. 13:1) This Beast, like the beasts in Daniel 7, came out of the sea. The sea represents the “multitudes of people in the world” (see Isaiah 17:12, 13; Jeremiah 46: 7, 8; Revelation 17:15). In chapter 6 we discovered that this Beast is the Antichrist, and this Beast is the Roman Catholic Church.


(Rev. 13:2) The Roman Catholic Church has the resemblance of the beasts that came before her, for she has borrowed the Paganism of all these kingdoms.  The Papacy is the very system of the Dragon, which proceeded from Nimrod, and made its way through Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome.  The compound proposition: “The Dragon gave him (the Beast) his power and his seat and great authority,” indicates that the Papacy received everything it is from ancient Babylon, the source of Dragon worship. This proposition also indicates that Pagan Rome, which became very much the continuation and power of the Chaldean system, bequeathed its seat to the Papacy. Thus, this proposition has a two-fold meaning:

(1)   The seat of Pagan idolatry from ancient Babylon was bequeathed to Papal Rome;

(2)   Pagan Rome, itself, bequeathed all that she was to Papal Rome.

(Rev. 13:3) When this text says that “one of the heads of the Beast was wounded; and his deadly wound was healed,” this indicates that the heads are the seven successive kingdoms that Satan has used to accomplish his warfare against God’s people. The wounding of the head represents the wounding of the seventh head kingdom, which is the Roman Catholic Church. The Papacy received her wound at the end of the 1,260 years—in 1798—when France eliminated papal power and limited papal power to secular government.

Note:  Verse 3 indicates that the Papal head of the Beast was to receive a wound and the wound would be healed.  John used this two-fold proposition as an “all out” statement of what was to transpire with this power; meaning, verses’ 4 – 9 explain the career of the Beast up to the time that he receives the deadly wound in verse 10, while verses’ 11 – 18 explain the healing of his wound.  Thus, Revelation 13 on this point has the following structure:

Verse 3. General statement: Beast will receive a wound; and his wound will be healed.

                                    Career Of Beast Up To Wound                Healing Of The Wound

                       Verses’ 4 – 10                               Verses’ 11 – 18

(Rev. 13:4) The whole world will worship the Beast; and by doing so, they are worshipping the Dragon (Satan and his system—developed in ancient Babylon).

(Rev. 13:5) The Papacy speaks blasphemous words and rules 42 months (42 x 30 = 1,260 prophetic days, which are years).  This transpired between A.D. 538 –1798.

(Rev. 13:6) During the time frame of the 42 months, the Papacy blasphemed against God, His name, His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven (the host of heaven).  The following quotations are additional illustrations—with all that has been said in this course—concerning the Papacy’s blasphemy.


Bishops are also called pontiffsThis name is derived from the pagans, who thus designated their chief priests. 

Above all these, the Catholic Church has always placed the Supreme Pontiff of Rome . . .He sits in the chair of Peter in which beyond every shadow of doubt the Prince of the Apostles sat to the end of his days, and hence it is that in him the Church recognizes the highest degree of dignity, and a universality of jurisdiction derived, not from the decrees of men or Councils, but from God Himself.  Wherefore he is the Father and guide of all the faithful, of all Bishops, and of all the prelates, no matter how high their power and office; and as successor of St. Peter, as true and lawful Vicar of Christ our Lord, he governs the universal Church (Translated into English by John A. McHugh and Charles J. Callan. THE CATECHISM OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT: Fifteenth Printing. “Degrees of the Priesthood,” 332, 333. Emphasis mine).

According to these documents, the high bishop of Rome is the Chief Pontiff after the order of the pagans; we know this to be Nimrod’s succession (see Chap. 6).  Furthermore, they claim that the high bishop of Rome is the Head of Christendom. The Papacy, unambiguously, tells us in their documents that the Chief Pontiff after the order of Babylon (the order of 666) is the Head of the Church. They even go as far as to claim that they have power to forgive sins:

On this point of doctrine, then, it is the duty of the pastor to teach that, not only is forgiveness of sins to be found in the Catholic Church, . . .but also in her resides the power of forgiving sins; and furthermore that we are bound to believe that this power, if exercised duly, and according to the laws prescribed by our Lord, is such as truly to pardon and remit sins (THE CATECHISM OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT: “The Church Has the Power of Forgiving Sins,”113, 114).

Compare Revelation 13:6 with the description of the little horn in Daniel 8 (see chap. 4 on the little horn). They are undoubtedly the same power. The little horn of Daniel 8 represents both Pagan and Papal Rome. This interpretation makes complete sense, because the Chaldean system of Pontiffs, along with their tenets of worship, became concentrated in these two powers.  We learn in the History Of Romanism:

In their [the Papacy] very priesthood, they have contrived to keep up as near a resemblance as they could to that of pagan Rome:  and the sovereign pontiff, instead of deriving his succession from Peter, who, if ever he was at Rome, did not reside there at least in any worldly pomp or splendor, may with more reason and much better plea style himself the successor of the Pontifex Maximus, or chief priest of old Rome; whose authority and dignity was the greatest in the republic; and who was looked upon as the arbiter or judge of all things, civil as well as sacred, human as well as divine: whose power established almost with the foundation of the city (John Dowling, The History Of Romanism: From The Earliest Corruptions Of Christianity To The Present Time, Book 2, Chap. 6, 126. Emphasis mine).

Rome under the Caesars became the seat of Satan, the seat of that cursed religion from Nimrod; and this seat was transferred to the Roman Catholic Church. The description of the little horn in Daniel 8 reveals that his abomination would be against the host of heaven and the prince of the host—Jesus.  The little horn is described as a power that was to take away the daily (Heb. 7:24) of Christ’s priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. Revelation 13:6, like Daniel 8—when speaking of the blasphemies against God, his name, his tabernacle, and those in heaven—is undoubtedly referring to the “True tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man (Heb. 8:2).” Because the Church is the spiritual manifestation of the literal sanctuary in heaven, and because there is an intimate connection between these two sanctuaries, it is without doubt that the first phase of the Abomination of Desolation took place for the 42 months of Papal supremacy. The description of the Beast in Revelation 13:6 is in perfect correlation with the career of the little horn in Daniel 8 who attempted to take away the “daily” of the prince of the Host. No wonder the Lollard scholar, Walter Brute, a follower of John Wycliff, saw the position of the High Bishop of Rome as the “taking away of the daily”:

If the high Bishop of Rome calling himself the Servant of the Servants of God, and the chief Vicar of Christ in this world, do make and maintain many laws contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ; then is he of those that have come in Christs name, saying, I am Christ, and have seduced many a one, by the Testimony of our Saviour in Matt. Chap. 24.  And the Idol of desolation sitting in the Temple of God and taking away from him the continual sacrifice for a time, times, and half a time, which Idol must be revealed to the Christian people by the Testimony of Daniel.  Whereof Christ speaketh in the Gospel; When ye shall see the abomination of desolation that was told of by Daniel the Prophet, standing in the holy place; let him that readeth understand (Cited in Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, Vol. 2, 78).

Another follower of Wycliff, Sir John Oldcastle (1360 – 1417), was martyred for identifying the Pope with the abomination of desolation; he said:

But as touching the Pope and his Spirituality, I owe them neither suit nor service, forsomuch as I know him by the Scriptures to be the great Antichrist, the Son of Perdition, the open Adversary of God, and the Abomination standing in the holy place (Cited in Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, Vol. 2, 88).

(Rev. 13:7) We have already seen the fact that Papacy has killed multitudes of people. The papacy did indeed make war on the saints (see chapter 5).

(Rev. 13:8) John saw that the whole world would follow the Beast, accept for those who were saved from its errors. Why would the whole world follow the Beast? The Papacy subjugated whole nations to its obedience, as we demonstrated in chapter 5, and this control is again on the horizon.

(Rev. 13:9, 10)  These texts are the confirmation of a temporary end to Papal Power.  The Papacy ruled as supreme over much of the earth from A. D. 538 – 1798.  In the year 1798, France eliminated the Papal supremacy.  H. W. Crocker III tells us:

The occupying French declared Rome a Republic in 1798, and the aged Pope Pius VI was taken prisoner.  He died in 1799 in Revolutionary France, where the constitutional clerics treated him as an unimportant old man, a heretic from the Enlightenment’s new religion of Reason, Nature, and the State (TRIUMPH: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church—A 2,000-Year History, 351).

In 1798 Napoleon’s General, Bertheir, dethroned Pope Pius VI on Feb. 15, 1798 and put papal power to rest.  We learn from George Trevor:

The territorial possession of the clergy and monks were declared national property, and their former owners cast into prison.  The papacy was extinct: not a vestige of its existence remained; and among all the Roman catholic powers not a finger was stirred in its defence.  The Eternal City had no longer prince or pontiff; its bishop was a dying captive in foreign lands; and the decree was already announced that no successor would be allowed in his place (Rome: From the fall of the Western Empire, 440).

General Berthier put forth a Bill to restore Italian power back to the people in the format of government—based on the French Republic.  Alexander Berthier’s Bill states:

The Roman People are now again entered into the rights of sovereignty, declaring their independence, possessing the government of ancient Rome, constituting a Roman Republic.

The General-in-chief of the French army in Italy declares, in the name of the French Republic, that he acknowledges the Roman Republic independent, and that the same is under the special protection of the French army.

The General-in-chief of the army acknowledges, in the name of the French Republic, the provisional government which has been proposed by the sovereign people.

 In consequence, every other temporal authority emanating from the old government of the Pope, is suppressed, and it shall no more exercise any function . . . .

 The Roman Republic, acknowledged by the French Republic, comprehends all the country that remained under the temporal authority of the Pope, after the treaty of Campo-Formio. “Alexander Berthier” (Cited in Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, Vol. 2, 756).

(The following web site from Michael Sheifler is a good reading on the present topic: The Deadly Wound of Revelation 13:3 )

After 1798, Napoleon set out to codify law into a more unified structure for the French Government.  The Code of Napoleon is dated 1801 – 1804.  Will Durant explains that in 1804 “the Code Civil des Francais, popularly the Code Napoleon—became the law of France” (The Age Of Napoleon, 182).  Napoleon’s code was the greatest codification of law since the days of Justinian’s “Corpus iuris civilis.” Why is this code important to our study? Durant shows:

Finally, after a session that lasted till 2 A.M., the representatives of the Roman Church and the French state signed (July 16, 1801) the Concordat that was to govern their relations for a century (The Age Of Napoleon, 183). 

Revelation 13:3 says: “the Beast received a wound to death,” and verse 14 says, “the Beast had a wound by the sword and lived.” The stroke of this sword was intended to kill, but it did not kill.  The stroke of the French sword in 1798 was intended to kill, but Napoleon came to the conclusion that the Church had a very effective system for social order—at least—in comparison with the disorder caused in the French Revolution. Napoleon realized the importance of the Church as a pervasive element in society for morals; thus, he realized that it would be foolhardy to eliminate the Church totally.  The Code of Napoleon, in effect, was not only for France; this code was designed to regulate the Papacy.  As Durant says, this Code was to regulate the Papacy for a century.  Durant further explains:

The historic document pledged the French government to recognize—and finance—Catholicism as the religion of the Consuls and the majority of the French people, but it did not make Catholicism the state religion, and it affirmed full freedom of worship for all French, including Protestants and Jews.

Napoleon unilaterally added to the Concordat 121 “Articles Organiques,” to protect the preeminence of the state over the Church in France.  No papal bull, brief, or legate, no decree of a general council or national synod, was to enter France without explicit permission from the government (The Age Of Napoleon, 184). 

This history is very significant. France surrounds the 1,260 years of Papal power. Clovis, the first King of France, made it possible for the Papacy to eliminate the Arian threat, which hindered Papal supremacy.  France also was the power that inflicted the wound on the Papacy. Also notice the fact that the 1,260 years exist between the Code of Justinian and the Code of Napoleon. Justinian’s Code initiated and promulgated the Papal supremacy for the 1,260 years, while Napoleon’s Code set the stage for a century of Papal submission to the Government.  In essence, Napoleon gave the Papacy a stroke of death by the sword, and Napoleon’s code created the political situation that kept the Papacy in a wounded state for over a century.  It is not difficult to see that history possesses clear and important landmarks around the 1,260 years to identify this period of time to the career of the Papacy.  God has given us more than enough evidence to identify the Papacy as the Beast. 

Note: We have just analyzed what Revelation 17:8 describes as, “the Beast that WAS and IS NOT.” We will analyze whom the Beast that YET IS after we find out who the second Beast in Revelation 13:11 – 18 represents.



(Rev. 13:11) Who is the beast with two horns like a lamb?  There are two things that we should immediately notice about this beast: (1) He came up when the Sea Beast was going down; (2) This beast came out of DRY LAND, whereas the first beast came out of the sea.  

When both “sea” and “earth” are used together in symbolic prophecy, the term earth—like sea—can possess a symbolical meaning. Because the “sea” represents “peoples, multitudes, and nations,” the “earth” can represent the opposite. Dry land is the opposite of water; thus, the “two horned Beast” came up out of an era of the world that was scarcely populated. This Beast rose up out of an area that was, by nature, an undiscovered country. The “two-horned Beast” rose up out of the New World.  And notice that the “two-horned Beast” was rising up in the New World when the sea Beast was going down into his wounded state.  Said another way, when the Papacy was going down into its wounded state after 1798, the two-horned Beast was in the process of rising up in a place where there had never been a country before.  John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church, knew that the Papacy is the great Antichrist. In his note on Revelation 13:11, in the year 1754, he said: “He (the two-horned Beast) is not yet come: tho’ he cannot be far off.  For he is to appear at the End of the forty-two Months of the first Beast” (Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament (1791 ed.), Vol. 3, 299: Cited in Bible Readings For The Home).

The second Beast in Revelation 13 is undoubtedly the United States of America.  In 1798 America was “coming up (Gr. Anabaino: “ascend” “to rise” “be born up” “spring up”)” in the New World.  In 1798 America was in the process of “springing up.”  According to COWLES VOLUME LIBRARY:  “In 1776 the declaration of independence was adopted”; “In 1783 England and Europe acknowledged American independence”; “In 1789 [came] organization of the executive, legislative, and judicial departments of the new government.  The first Congress meets in New York” (COWLES VOLUME LIBRARY, “Parallel Outlines Of American History,” 1060, 1061).  America as a nation was in its beginning stages when the Papacy submerged into its wounded state.

The second Beast has two “lamb-like” horns with no crowns. The Lamb is indicative of Christ (John 1:29). Horns represent kingdoms (Dan. 8:22), but horns can also represent institutional power (Rev. 5:6). Well did Luther S. Kauffman define America:

A few centuries ago, men and women, oppressed and persecuted by both civil and religious authorities looked across the sea to this virgin land and came here to escape from these persecutions, and to, if possible, establish a government in which there might be civil and religious liberty (Romanism as a World Power, 10).

The two horns on the second Beast of Revelation 13 are indicative of “civil” and “religious” power.  The term “lamb,” as applied to these two institutions, indicate “civil liberty” and “religious liberty.” These are the two great pillars of the United States.  Kauffman brings attention to the “dry land” aspect of Revelation 13:11 where he says that America was a “virgin land.” Moreover, his statement brings attention to the two lamblike horns.  Kauffman goes on to say:

So, it will be seen, that even before the formation of our present Government, the question of the Union of Church and State occupied a very prominent position in the minds of the Colonists. At the very beginning of this Government, the founders thereof saw in the then existing governments of the world the disastrous effects of the union of church and state, because in all the governments of that time, whether they were Roman Catholic or Protestant, if there was such a union, it worked injury to the general welfare of the people (Romanism as a World Power, 15, 16).

In other words—according to Revelation 13—the two-horned Beast would not be a monarchical country with a king over it, for there are no crowns on the horns.  The two-horned Beast was to be a country ran by the people, and this country was to have its inception with the appearance of Christian principles. That the United States, in its inception, had the appearance of Christianity, is seen in the 1787 Constitutional Convention when George Washington was addressed by Benjamin Franklin in the following way:

Mr. President—The small progress we have made . . . is, methinks, a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the human understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running all about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of government, and examined the different forms of those republics, which, having been originally formed with the seeds of their own dissolution, now no longer exist; and we have viewed modern states all around Europe, but find none of their constitutions suitable to our circumstances.  In this situation of this assembly, groping, as it were, in the dark, to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it, when presented to us, how has it happened, sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father Of Lights to illuminate our understanding? . . . . I have lived, sir, a long time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proof I see of this truth, that God governs the affairs of men.  And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?  We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings, that except the ‘Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.’  I firmly believe this; and I also believe, that without his concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of the tower of Babel. . . . I therefore beg leave to move, that henceforth prayers, imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this assembly before we proceed to business; and that one or more of the clergy of the city be requested to officiate in that service (Cited in Romanism as a World Power, 20, 21).



                                                                (The Political Horn Out Of The Two)

 (Rev. 13:11, 12)  These texts indicate that there would be a coalition between the United States and the Roman Catholic Church. This coalition would take place sometime during the healing process of the Papacy.  Now, before we prove the existence of a coalition between the Vatican and the United States, we must establish with more clarity the date of the Papal wound in conjunction with the date when the Papacy began its healing process. It is important that the reader clearly see these dates and the fact that there was a period of time when the Papacy was subdued from being a world power. In other words, we must visualize a three-fold depiction in Papal history: (1) The wound; (2) the period of submersion; and (3) the beginning of restoration.  When this threefold historical reality is understood, then it becomes clear whom the two Beasts in Revelation 13 represent…in light of a visible fulfillment of prophetic chronology—homogeneous to world events.

The Three-Fold Depiction Of Papal Decline, Submersion, And Restoration

When did the Papacy receive a wound?  We have discovered in the first section of this chapter that, in 1798, Napoleon put an end to the Papal supremacy.  The year 1798 is unequivocally confirmed in history. Crocker says, “Napoleon had risen to power on the back of an atheistical revolution, conquered Europe, and tried to extinguish the power of the papacy, even imprisoning the pope” (TRIUMPH: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church—A 2,000-Year History, 355). We have discovered that the Code of Napoleon placed the Papacy under the power of secular government. Durant explains that Napoleon’s code set in motion secular power as the guiding norm for governing the Papacy for a century. This period of Papal decline is known in history as the “Roman Question.” A good definition for this term is defined as follows: A period of time in which Papal power, when it has the potential to rise, immediately falls, a process that repeated until the 20th century.

The Code of Napoleon (1801 – 1804) allowed the Papacy to resume its religious functions—though under the power of the state.  But as the 19th century progressed, the Papacy was in a constant flux of loosing and gaining privileges. Crocker shows that under Italy’s king, Victor Emanuel II, “The pope’s holdings were reduced to a citadel—the immediate environs of Rome—guarded by French troops” (TRIUMPH: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church—A 2,000-Year History, 360). This transpired because of a big conflict of interest between Catholics—who wanted to defend the Papal States—and the secular government.  Crocker continues:

In 1870, the French withdrew to fight the Franco-Prussian war.  The pope’s own volunteers were no match for the Italian army—a phrase not often heard in history—which seized Rome for the king and for Italy, whose capital it now became.  The pope, in his own words, became a prisoner of the Vatican (TRIUMPH: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church—A 2,000-Year History, 360).

Malachi Martin explains that preceding the 19th century, whenever “external” or “secular” powers threatened Papal power; the Papacy always had countries to defend her.  However, in 1870 the Papacy was in a different situation. Martin says, “There was no more help from any secular quarter, no temporal power to turn to. All the major powers and many lesser powers of Pius’s [Pius IX] day have decided the papacy must go” (The Decline And fall Of The Roman Church, 248). The Papacy did not begin to exercise political power—as she did prior to 1798—until the 20th century.  Crocker shows:

In Italy, the Church achieved its biggest breakthrough.  In 1929, after three years of negotiations, the Church regained a temporal status with the creation of Vatican City, all 108 acres of it, along with the Lateran Palace, Castel Gondolfo, and a few other holdings.  In addition, Italy paid the Church a substantial sum in cash and government bonds to compensate it for the loss of the Papal States.  Equally important was that the Church was restored to Italian life. Crucifixes returned to public schools, as did the teaching of the Catholic doctrine.  Catholic priests could conduct religious marriages.  The war of Italian liberals against the Church was over, thanks to the Church’s newfound ally—Benito Mussolini (The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church—A 2,000-Year History, 387).

Martin agrees with this interpretation of history, as follows:

After Pius IX died, three more popes remained “prisoner” in the Vatican.  In 1928, the up-and-coming dictator of Italy, Benito Mussolini, decided for the sake of national unity that the “Vatican question” should be solved amicably.  After protracted negotiations, in 1929, Mussolini’s government and the Vatican of Pope Pius XI signed the Lateran Pacts, thus ending the sixty-year-old official enmity between the Vatican and Italy (The Decline And fall Of The Roman Church, 257).

Note: The wound to Papal power initially took place in 1798, and more completely in 1870. The submersion of the Papacy in its wounded state is dated 1798 – 1929. The beginning of the restoration of the Papacy or the healing of the wound is dated between 1929 to the present day.  Notice the following statement:

The deadly wound to the papal head of this beast was inflicted when the French, in 1798, entered Rome and took the pope prisoner, eclipsing, for a time, the power of the Papacy and depriving it of its temporalities. Again in 1870 temporal dominion was taken from the Papacy, and the pope looked upon himself as the prisoner of the Vatican.  By 1929 the situation had changed to the extent that Cardinal Gasparri met Premier Mussolini in the historic palace of Saint John Lateran to settle a long quarrel—returning temporal power to the papacy, to “heal a wound of 59 years” (The Catholic Advocate [Australia], April 18, 1929, p. 16; Cited in Bible Readings For The Home Vol. 1)

The San Francisco Chronicle on February 12, 1929 said, “In affixing the autographs to the memorable document, healing the wound which has festered since 1870, extreme cordiality was displayed on both sides” (The Catholic Advocate [Australia], April 18, 1929, p. 16; Cited in Bible Readings For The Home Vol. 1). In 1929 Papal power began the process of restoration, and the world has seen the Papacy grow magnanimously since that day.   Now that we have established the three fold historical depiction of decline, submersion, and restoration in the Papacy, we can now proceed to analyze the alliance between the Vatican and the United States—in fulfillment of Revelation 13.

The Vatican And American Alliance

According to Revelation 13:11, 12, the two-horned Beast would have an alliance with the sea Beast some time during its restoration process.  In other words, the United States would develop a coalition with the Papacy sometime after 1929. Notice that in Revelation 13:12, the “two-horned Beast” is the power that finishes what was started in 1929.  This prophecy shows that America would be the power to completely restore the Papacy. This means that there must be a coalition between the Papacy and the United States.


 Thomas Patrick Melady reveals:

The opportunities for the United States and the Holy See to cooperate in the promotion of human rights, religious freedom, and political pluralism are benefiting from the full diplomatic relations now existing between the two powers.  This cordial and cooperative framework did not always exist.  In fact, it took 208 years for the United States to enter into full diplomatic relations with the oldest international personality in the community of nations (The Ambassador’s Story: The United States And The Vatican In World Affairs, 41)

Melady points out that through American history, there have been different attempts—through different presidents—to establish a solid diplomatic relationship between Rome and the United States. Attempts by presidents, such as Roosevelt and Truman, to establish FULL diplomatic relations (for there has indeed been relations before Reagan) did not come into being until Ronald Reagan became president.  Melady says:

On January 10, 1984, President Ronald Reagan announced the establishment of formal diplomatic relations with the Holy See…The 1984 announcement by President Reagan, however, gave full recognition to the unique international sovereign role of the Pope and his government, not only in Vatican City State but throughout the world where the Pope and his government exercised their spiritual and political authority.  There was no equivocation in this announcement. The United States was extending full recognition for the first time to the government of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Once the announcement was made on
January 10, 1984, that the United States would establish diplomatic relations with the Holy See, and that the President would nominate William A. Wilson to serve as the first Ambassador became public. The announcement implied the acceptance of the international law principle that the Holy See is a bona fide international personality.  Thus the announcement by President Reagan acknowledged the papacy as a religious organ with international rights and duties.  This was not a qualified recognition of Vatican City State.  In previous times it would have caused a firestorm of protest.  But it immediately became evident, both in tone and substance, that there had been a major change in domestic U.S.political opinion (The Ambassador’s Story: The United States And The Vatican In World Affairs, 50, 53. Emphasis mine)

Melady is very correct where he says that there is a policy change in the United States.  That Ronald Reagan created the platform for the Papacy to increase its influence in the United States is emphasized by Michael de Semlyen:

Over fifty percent of the recruits to the United States military academies are now Roman Catholic according to 1988 figures released by the Catholic Chaplain Recruitment Vicar for the military services.  The number of Catholics in the United States House of Representatives increased from 82 in 1950 to 142 in 1986.  Catholics occupy key positions in the Executive Branch, the Judiciary, the State Department, the delegation at the United Nations, in the CIA, FBI and the Department of Immigration (All Roads Lead To Rome: The Ecumenical Movement, 116).

The growing influence of Catholic policy in the United States government continued after President Reagan. After explaining Reagan’s “close relation to the Vatican and its influence on American policy,” John M. Swomley says, “His successor George H. W. Bush, was also responsive to the hierarchy.” Swomley, quoting the National Catholic Reporter, says, “He has been more sensitive and more accessible to the needs of the Catholic Church than any president I know of in American history” (Catholic Power VS. American Freedom, 204).

The following are some deductible propositions based on what has been analyzed up to this point:

(1)    At the end of the 42 months, the sea Beast receives a wound (Rev. 13:1 – 10).

(2)    While the sea Beast is going down into his wounded state, a Beast with two horns like a lamb is coming up out of dry land (Rev. 13:10, 11).

(3)    The two-horned Beast will speak like a Dragon and cause the world to follow the sea Beast when the sea Beast’s wound is healed (Rev. 13:11 – 18).

(4)    The preceding compound proposition implicitly states that there will be a coalition between the sea Beast and the two-horned Beast.

Question: When did the sea Beast receive a wound?

Answer: In 1798, the Papacy received a wound by the French.

Question: In 1798, was there another world power rising up out of dry land—opposed to the sea.

Answer: The United States was rising up in the NEW WORLD in 1798.

Question: When did the wound of the sea Beast begin healing?

Answer: The Papacy began to come into power again in 1929.

Question: When did the coalition between the sea Beast and the two-horned Beast officially take shape?

Answer:  The “official” coalition between America and the Papacy took shape under Reagan’s presidency and continues to grow.



God has given us a clear depiction that the United States and the Roman Catholic Church are the main players in earth’s closing events. The issues that have been analyzed up to this point are based on clear historical proofs—correlated with the Historicist method of interpreting prophecy. There is nothing ambiguous in these correlations. The reason many evangelicals cannot see these correlations is because they teach doctrines (Preterism and Futurism) which were created to blind the minds of people from perceiving these realities.

The Danger Of The Papacy To America

            The Vatican is very serious in its aims to maintain a coalition with the United States, because the Papacy plans on ruling, not only America, but the world through the United States. Any Protestant with a competent knowledge of History should question Rome’s relationship with the United States. John W. Robbins in his book Ecclesiastical Megalomania explicitly defines the purpose of the Papacy:

The Roman Church-State is a hybrid—a monster of ecclesiastical and political power. Its political thought is totalitarianism, and whenever it has the opportunity to apply its principles, the result has been bloody repression.  If, during the last 30 years, it has softened its assertions of full, supreme, and irresponsible power, and has murdered fewer people than before, such changes in behavior are not due to a change in its ideas, but to a change in its circumstances… The Roman Church-State in the twentieth century, however, is an institution recovering from a mortal wound.  If and when it regains its full power and authority, it will impose a regime more sinister than any the planet has yet seen (Ecclesiastical Megalomania:The Economic and Political Thought of the Roman Catholic Church, 195. Emphasis mine).

In the past America realized the threat that Papal power poses to our liberty in both politics and religion.  The “Rev. Charles Chiniquy, in his autobiography, on page 715 in describing an interview with President Abraham Lincoln, in Washington, D. C. in June, 1864, quotes the President as follows:

You are almost the only one with whom I may speak freely on the subject.  But sooner or latter, the nation will know the real origin of those rivers of blood and tears, which are spreading desolation and death everywhere. And, then, those who have caused these desolations and disasters will be called to give an account of them. I do not pretend to be a prophet. But though not a prophet I see a very dark cloud on our horizon. And that dark cloud is coming from Rome.  It is filled with tears of blood.  It will rise and increase, till its flanks are torn by a flash of lightning, followed by a fearful peal of thunder.  Then a cyclone such as the world has never seen, will pass over this country, spreading ruin and desolation from north to south.  After it is over, there will be long days of peace and prosperity: for Popery, with its Jesuits and merciless Inquisition, will have been swept away from our country. Neither I nor you, but our children, will see those things (Cited in Luther S. Kauffman, Romanism as a World Power, 6).

President Lincoln maintained this attitude towards the Papacy, not because he was a bigot, but because he—unlike many today—understood the true policies of the Catholic Church—that they are incompatible with the American Constitution. Robbins acutely emphasizes:

 What the Roman Church-State accomplished on a small scale during the Middle Ages is what it desires to achieve on a global scale in the coming millennium.  If it fails to reach its goal within the next hundred years, it will not quit. It will continue to work relentlessly for world power, even if it should take another millennia or two (Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 187).

The following statement from Martin demonstrates that the Roman Catholic Church seeks to gain control of the whole world:

As both papacy and Jesuits know, the effects of their policies go far beyond the confines of the Roman Catholic; even far beyond the nearly one billion Catholic men and women around the world.  Almost everything that happens in this war (conflict of interest between the Jesuits and the Roman Catholic Church) bears directly and immediately on the major dissensions that wrack every nation and people in the world.  It is involved in the very heart of the rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, for example.  It bears right now on the fate in misery or happiness of 350 million people in Latin America.  It affects the deeply changing public moral and national consensus of the American people; the imminent preponderance in human affairs of the People’s Republic of China; the fragile persistence of a free Western Europe; the security of Israel; the still rickety promise of a viable Black Africa just aborning.  All of these things, separate and unconnected as they may seem, are not only interwoven with one another, but are and will be profoundly influenced by the tides and outcome of the global collision between the papacy and the Society of Jesus (The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, 14. Emphasis mine).

Martin clearly says that all the world issues revolve around the relationship between the Papacy and the Jesuit Order. This implicitly says that Romanism wields much of the power over the nations.  Let us raise the question: Why is the coalition between America and the Vatican dangerous?  Martin emphasizes:

Nevertheless, the brute fact is that many Jesuits wish to see a radical change in the democratic capitalism of the West, in favor of a socialism that seems inevitably to come up smelling just like totalitarian Communism.  And the fact is as well that there is no lack of individual and influential Jesuits who regularly speak up for the new crusade. 

Because the “new kind of society” cannot be “democratic capitalism as we know it,” the United States as the leader and most successful exponent of democratic capitalism comes center stage.  Indeed, as early in the war as the 1960s, when Jesuits in the United States established a “Jesuit national leadership project,” their Working Paper was explicit about their intention to change the fundamental structure of America from that of a capitalist democracy (The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, 16, 17. Emphasis mine).

The mission of the Papacy is to make the United States into a Catholic communist system?  In fact, the Papacy desires to accomplish this throughout the whole world.

The new mission of the Society—for it is nothing less than that—suddenly places them in actual and, in some instances, willing alliance with Marxists in their class struggle. The aim of both is to establish a sociopolitical system affecting the economies of nations by a thorough—going redistribution of earth’s resources and goods; and, in the process, to alter the present governmental systems in vogue among nations (The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, 15).

Is the policy of the Papacy Marxism?  Robbins reveals:

One of the Roman Church-State’s most influential statements on economic matters is the 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum, On the Condition of the Working Classes. In this encyclical the Roman Church-State allied herself with the proletariat, which in Marxism is the great and final enemy of the capitalist order.  The encyclical’s Marxism is so blatant that one Roman Catholic writer declared that “much of the encyclical [Rerum Novarum] appeared only to repeat in more orthodox language what Marx said ten years before (Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 43).

There are those who make the mistake in disbelieving that the Papacy’s policy is communism; such are uninformed!  Robbins reveals that the economic policies of the Papacy throughout the centuries have been congruous with the dogma of Thomas Aquinas—the Papacy’s greatest and official philosopher—who taught that LAW was manifested in the following:

(1)    Eternal Law: God’s purpose for the universe;

(2)    Natural Law: the part humans play in the eternal law—the natural function of man in society;

(3)    Positive Law: the application of customs and regulations by rulers in society; and

(4)    Divine Law: The Ten Commandments. 

Aquinas emphasized that natural law demands “the possession of all things in common” (Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 30, 31) in order for the other laws to work congruously with each other. Robbins further elucidates on this issue in the following:

In Thomas’ philosophy, need is the moral criterion for the rightful and lawful possession of property:  Whoever needs property ought to possess it.  Need makes another’s goods one’s own.  Need is the ultimate and only moral title to property. Neither possession, nor creation, nor production, nor gift, nor inheritance, nor divine commandment (with the exception of Roman Church-State property) grants title to property that is immune to the prior claim of need.

The Thomistic notion of original communism—the denial that private property is part of the natural law, but the common property is both natural and divine—is the foundation to all the Roman Catholic arguments for various forms of collectivism, from medieval feudalism and guild socialism to twentieth century fascism and liberation theology.  The popes refer to this original communism as the “universal destination of all goods (Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 32, 38).

This ideology, described by Robbins, is precisely what the Jesuit Malachi Martin says is to reshape America and the whole world.  Now, we have no doubt why Nicolini, back in 1854, said:

When once the Jesuits had raised up a generation so devoted and obedient, they then brought into operation their system of government, and made a successful attempt to realize that republic preconceived of old by Plato, and which, with perhaps more interested views, is held out to us by the Socialists of our own day.  In fact, their form of a republic was nothing else than Communism which the famous Cabet is now trying to establish in nearly the same regions; the only difference being, that the Jesuits substituted themselves for the state or community (History Of The Jesuits: Their Origin, Progress, Doctrines, and Designs, 303. Emphasis mine).

The Jesuits and the Roman Catholic Church envision a Catholic Communism as being the policy of America under their control. They are already succeeding, and very few Americans realize that their Country has been subverted.  Well does Des Griffin point out that Socialism has become America’s policy:

As a 1973 Senate Report (Number 93-549, 93rd Congress, Ist Session, Emergency Powers Statues) states in its Foreword: “Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.”  This continuing “State of … emergency” confers “enough authority [in the federal government] to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional processes . . . .[and to] control the lives of all American citizens.”  These emergency powers—under which the United States has been virtually transformed from a Republic into a Socialist democracy—have never been challenged by any recent “republican” administration (Fourth Reich Of The Rich, 117, 118).

We should raise the question: Who or what caused the United States to adopt these policies?  Robbins makes the following observation:

In the United States, the influence of Roman Catholic economic thought has resulted in the creation of a redistribute state, in which the government intervenes in the economy and society in order to protect the “common good” and establish “social justice.” Of course, it was not Roman Catholic economic thought exclusively that ushered in interventionist government in the twentieth century, but by the last third of the nineteenth century, the Roman Catholic Church had become the largest religious organization in the United States.  By lending its moral authority to interventionist policies, the roman Church-State played an indispensable role in the centralization, politicization, and socialization of American society and economy in the twentieth century (Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 81).

The reason that the United States has developed relations with the Papacy is because the Jesuits have been in the United States for the last 200 years gradually changing America’s policies to match the objectives of Rome.  R. W. Thompson explains precisely the situation that America faces:

If it be true that “history repeats itself,” and that nations, moving in fixed cycles, follow each other in their courses, the remembrance of the fact that many of them, once prosperous, have passed out of existence, admonishes us to inquire with exceeding caution into the relations which these same Jesuits have created between themselves and our institutions.  They have not changed, but are still the infatuated and vindictive followers of Loyola, and it is well for us to know whether there are not evidences that, if permitted, they may repeat here what their society, at the command of its founder, attempted in Germany, under the pretense that God had appointed them to conspire against any free and independent nation they could not otherwise subjugate.  The people of the United States spend their time in the pursuit of a thousand objects, and in the investigation of a thousand questions, not the thousandth part as important to them as this (The Footprints Of The Jesuits, 118, 119. Emphasis mine).

Too many Americans live in a dream world; they don’t perceive the big reality of this controversy.  We agree with W. C. Brownlee: “The Jesuits [have always] aimed at an universal dominion over the souls and bodies of men, to bind them as vassals to the pope’s chariot wheels” (Secret Instructions Of The Jesuits, 7. Emphasis mine). Americans need to wake up to the fact that “the Jesuits were [and are] the soldiers of the pope: they knew no law but the will of their general; no mode of worship but the pope’s dictate; no church but themselves” (Secret Instructions Of The Jesuits, 7. Emphasis mine). The Papacy and her Jesuits have no intention on allowing America to remain a religious and politically free country; they have and are in the process of completely changing America into a power identical to themselves.  It is clear that America is the two-horned Beast who restores the wound of the first Beast.  And why is this the case?  This is the case, because the Catholic Church has had the Jesuits over in America long before Ronald Reagan set up the coalition. The Catholic Church had her soldiers in America, long ago, to get into high places in the government so that they could wield the change of America. Luigi Desanctis tells us the extent Jesuit subversion has infiltrated nations around the world:

The Jesuits exist in all Protestant countries under the name of missionaries, with the habit of priest, and also with the habit of layman; they exist there under other names.  Also, to those countries the Father-General sends men of the greatest ability, who make themselves all things to all, to gain all to the sect. . . . Take England, for example, there they do not legally exist; nevertheless, they have not given up that country, and I assure you that they are more numerous in England than in Italy . . .They proselytize in all classes of society, so there are Jesuits in the parliament, amongst the Anglican clergy, amongst the Bishops, and perhaps also still in higher circles.  There are Jesuits among the Protestants . . .Yet they say that all things are pure to the pure; that to feign yourself Protestant, to lead Protestants back to the Church, is a holy work (Popery, Puseyism, and Jesuitism, 135).

President Abraham Lincoln was well aware of what Desanctis describes as being the subversive work of the Jesuits.  Lincoln emphasizes:

The Protestants of both North and South would surely unite to exterminate the priests and the Jesuits, if they could learn how the priests, the nuns, and the monks, which daily land on our shores, under the pretext of preaching their religion . . .are nothing else but the emissaries of the Pope, of Napoleon III, and other despots of Europe, to undermine our institutions, alienate the hearts of our people from our constitution, and our laws, destroy our schools, and prepare a reign of anarchy here as they have done in Ireland, in Mexico, in Spain, and wherever there are any people who want to be free (Charles Chiniquy, Fifty Years in the Church of Rome, 499).

What is the danger of the Papacy to the United States?  The danger is thus: The Papacy is a totalitarian religious system that desires to enforce a religious communism on the world and the United States.  The Papacy undoubtedly has been working through the subversive enterprise of the Jesuit Order long before the political alliance set up by President Reagan. The alliance that Reagan brought into being has, as we are going to see, only accelerated the speed at which the United States will make an image to the Papacy. Prophetically speaking, we are living in the time frame of the Beast that “yet is” (Rev. 17:8), and the United States—most definitely—has a political coalition with the Papacy that is, by nature, assisting her resurrection to power. This is precisely what the prophecy of Revelation 13:12 foretold: “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.”

Up to this point, we have analyzed Revelation 13:1 – 12. In the next section, we are going to establish how mainstream Protestantism in America has and is fulfilling the attributes of the False Prophet described in Revelation 13:11 – 15.


(The Religious Horn Out Of The Two)

 ;                                                                                                                                                                               According to the prophecy of Revelation 13:11 – 15, supernatural elements would cause the people of the United States to follow the Papacy. This leads us to the religious horn of the two-horned Beast. Verses’ 13, 14 tell us:

And he does great wonders so that he makes 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 the sword and did live.

Notice: These texts illustrate that the sea Beast had the wound by the sword and did live. The Beast “that was” ruled from 538 – 1798.  The Beast “that is not” was the Papacy from 1798 – 1929.   The Beast “that yet is” is the Papacy from 1929 all the way to the present day.  According to verses’ 13 and 14—sometime after 1929—the two-horned Beast would restore the sea Beast. The political horn of America has indeed been doing this very thing as we have seen.  Now, coupled with the American political alliance with the Papacy, we have and are seeing a growing religious alliance with the Papacy. The fire that produces the miracles (Gr. Semeion: “an unusual occurrence transcending the common course of nature.”) in the two-horned Beast represents the religious element of the United States; this is Protestantism. In other words, Protestant America—like the government—will have an alliance with the Papacy. 

The Christian Right

 (The following web sites contain information that compliments this section: Christian Coalition and the Hyjack of the Christian Church and The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party)

            In the United States, many fundamental Protestants have witnessed the decay of American society in favor of liberal ideologies, such as: guy rights, abortion, the decline of the right to pray or use the Bible in school, and an overall trend towards more immorality and violence in society.  Postmodernism, the belief that truth is relative, in the eyes of Christian fundamentalists is one of the main ideological proponents of the decline of the United States into a society that is ever becoming more like Sodom and Gomorrah; which inevitably, will bring God’s wrath on the United States.  The Christian Right first emerged under the leadership of Jerry Falwell, a fundamentalist, who sought to combat the modernity or the growing trend towards a secularizing society, which obviously is leaving behind Christianity. One of the main purposes of the Christian right was to develop a conservative political majority of Christians who could apply partisan politics for the sake of preserving Christianity as a foundation of the United States.  The Christian Right gained support from denominations, such as: Presbyterians, Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, or fundamentalist evangelicals in general (See Justin Watson. The Christian Coalition: Dreams of Restoration, Demands for Recognition, 9). Justin Watson shows that the Christian Right has gone through three periods of development. Concerning the first period, Watson says:

The first, or expansionist, period lasted from the inception of Christian Right organizations in 1978 until 1984.  During this period of rapid growth and high public visibility, figures such as Falwell of Moral Majority and “God’s Angry Man,” James Robinson of Religious Roundtable, influenced the political agenda by bringing moral and family issues to the forefront of public discussion. Despite its influence, the Christian Right failed to get much of its legislative agenda enacted and did not seem to secure much more than rhetorical support from the Reagan administration (The Christian Coalition, 26). 

Watson says that between 1985 – 1986 (the second period), the Christian right seemed to fade away from large public visibility, as a result of their political amateurishness, to reorganize their agenda with a more workable plan.  In 1987 (the beginning of the third period), after examining their mistakes, the Christian right emerged again with more force and determination to bring their political agenda to success (See The Christian Coalition, 26). What allowed the Christian Right to achieve more progress?  We are told that in 1988, Pat Robertson campaigned for the Republican nomination, but was defeated.  Robertson is well known as the founder of the Christian Broadcast Network (CBN) with his popular 700 Club program—used to propagate his political and religious ideologies abroad. In 1989, Robertson founded the Christian Coalition. Watson tells us: “The discussion of the purpose, structure, and activities of the CC has demonstrated that the CC has been an attempt to institutionalize the Christian Right” (The Christian Coalition, 80).

Watson reveals: “When the Christian Right emerged as a political force, it was quickly accused of wanting to use government to impose intellectual, moral, and religious uniformity on the American people” (The Christian Coalition, 21). Why would people come to this conclusion about the Christian Right?  People have come to this conclusion largely because of things said by the leaders of this movement.  For example, in 1979, Robertson told U.S. News & World Report that, counting both Catholics and Protestants, “we have enough votes to run the country.  And when the people say, ‘We’ve had enough,’ we are going to take over” (Cited in The Christian Coalition, 34). In 1991 Robertson said, “The Christian Coalition will be the most powerful political organization in America” (Cited in The Christian Coalition, 77). Ralph Reed who was the executive director of the CC—under Robertson—has been charged with saying, “We think the Lord is going to give us this nation back one precinct at a time, one neighborhood at a time, and one state at a time” and “I honestly believe that in my lifetime we will see a country once again governed by Christians” (Cited in The Christian Coalition, 77).

Watson also points out in different places that these men have denied a desire to create a theocracy, by which the United States would be governed by religious dogma. Watson shows several statements from Robertson and Reed in which their focus is on Restorationism—without religious totalitarianism; meaning, these men want to return America back to, what they believe to be, a time when America functioned on Judeo Christian principles, as Watson describes: “the recapture of an idealized past in an imaginary future.” The following is good explanation:

What Robertson and Reed want is a return to a supposed golden era in which it would not occur to anyone to question the propriety of public school prayer, the Ten Commandments on the wall of a government building, unabashed mixtures of evangelical piety and patriotism, or the assertion that this is a Christian nation (The Christian Coalition, 23, 121).

Is restoration possible without enforcing religion on the populace? Watson tells us that there is another Protestant counterpart to the CC called Reconstructionism. We learn: “The people of God, according to the reconstructionists, should exercise dominion using biblical law as the ‘blueprint’ for a totally ‘reconstructed’ and holy social order.  Reconstructionists propose a society that would be not merely reformed, ‘but rather razed and rebuilt’” (The Christian Coalition, 110). We must ask: Are the leaders of the CC double talkers; meaning, individuals who say on one scale that they want “to take over”—as the Reconstructionists do—and on another scale say that they don’t want to create “a religious theocracy.” Watson brings to view that there have been “many reports” and “many allegations” of Robertson having connections with the Reconstructionists, such as: “Robertson’s Regent University [hiring] professors with Reconstructionist ties and views;” Robertson’s book The Secret Kingdom having a chapter, “The Law of Dominion” being in accordance with Reconstructionism; and Robertson saying and doing things in politics that resemble Reconstructionism” (The Christian Coalition, 113). Watson demonstrates on different accounts that Pat Robertson denies having the same agenda as the Reconstructionists. However, when one reads Watson’s book, one can easily gain the impression that the leaders of the CC are either “double talkers” or confused in their purpose.  E. G. White told us long ago about what is happening with the CC.  She emphasized that these leaders are “making their way in darkness. The leaders are concealing the true issue, and many who unite in the movement do not themselves see whither the current is tending” (Last Day Events, 125). 

We need not attempt to grapple with internal, mental debate as to what the true intentions of the CC are, for Revelation 13:11 – 18 shows that the two-horned Beast will make an image to the sea Beast.  The only way this can be fulfilled is if both politics and religion in the United States are united to enforce the institutions of the Papacy.  E. G. White predicted:

When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result (The Great Controversy, 392).

Religious Ecumenism

There are those who believe that the United States could never become a Christian totalitarian system. As we are seeing and will continue to see, this is exactly what is taking shape in the United States through the Christian Right. A Christian totalitarian system in America is only possible, because of the growing religious ecumenism between evangelicals and Catholics. In a general definition, what is ecumenism? Semlyen tells us: “The aim of the ecumenical movement is to achieve one world communion; to bring all churches, denominations, and ultimately all religions together” (All Roads Lead To Rome: The Ecumenical Movement, 20). Let us ask: Where did the modern ecumenical movement originate?  The modern ecumenical movement has its inception with Pope John XXIII—in the Second Vatican Council (1962 – 1965).  Therefore, any attempt to understand ecumenism should be accomplished through an understanding of the Vatican’s policy of ecumenism. What is Vatican policy on this matter?  Swomley reveals:

The Vatican view of ecumenism is that all Christians should be unified in one Christian body.  During the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI announced that such unity cannot be attained except by identity of faith, by participation in the same sacraments, and in the organic harmony of a single ecclesiastical control.  He also asserted that only the Catholic Church can offer these elements.  This is also the position of the Second Vatican’s decree on ecumenism (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 160).

In other words, the whole religious ecumenical movement—from its inception—was the goal of the Papacy to ultimately win all Christian denominations back to the fold of the “Mother Church.” Over a hundred years ago—when American Protestants had great animosity for the Papacy—we were told that evangelicals and Catholics would unite in ecumenism:

The Protestants of the United States will be foremost in stretching their hands across the gulf to grasp the hand of Spiritualism; they will reach over the abyss to clasp hands with the Roman power; and under the influence of this threefold union, this country will follow in the steps of Rome in trampling on the rights of conscience…Papists, Protestants, and worldlings will alike accept the form of godliness without the power, and they will see in this union a grand movement for the conversion of the world, and the ushering in of the long-expected millennium (E. G. White, The Great Controversy, 515. Emphasis mine)

 When Mrs. White made this assertion over a hundred years ago, many Protestants thought she was crazy, for it was inconceivable to them that such a union could take place. Obviously, as we are going to see, her understanding of last day events was very precise.  The Protestant churches, we were told, would clasp hands with the Papacy in the focus of the approaching Millennium.  How true is this?  G. Edward Reid’s research on the Ecumenical movement is revealing. He explains that in the 1990’s two ECT documents were created, one of them being a 25-page document developed by 40 well-known Evangelical and Catholic leaders. This document was called: Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium.  Reid explains that on March 30, 1994, USA Today reported the document in the following:

In what is being called a historic declaration—though not an official stance of either denomination—evangelicals including Pat Robertson joined with conservative Roman Catholic leaders Tuesday in upholding the ties of faith that bind the nations’s largest and most politically active groups . . . .The leaders, in a statement are urging the nation’s 52 million Catholics and 13 million evangelicals to no longer hold each other at theological arm’s length and stop aggressive proselytization of each other’s flocks—in short, to turn their theological swords into a recognition of a common faith (Cited by Reid in Sunday’s Coming, 32, 33).

In the book ECT, Charles Colson says:

The document “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” was drafted by believing Catholics and believing Protestants, people at the center of their communions, who realize that they have more in common with one another than with the borderline liberals of their own traditions.

Christians do not have the luxury of limiting their energies to theological debate.  True believers must reach across theological divides and embrace one another as brothers and sisters in Christ.  Our obligation is nothing less than to join together in a defense of the truth of our shared faith.  All Christians who confess that Jesus is Lord must unite for the sake of our Lord and for the sake of our culture (Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission, 36, 38).

The underline portion of Colson’s statement looks similar to Mrs. White’s statement: “The Protestants of the United States will be foremost in stretching their hands across the gulf to grasp the hand of Spiritualism; they will reach over the abyss to clasp hands with the Roman power.”  Colson argues—like the other writers in this document—that the Papacy and evangelical Protestants will not agree on every point of doctrine, but rather they will unite on common doctrines of agreement. Well did Mrs. White emphasize:

The wide diversity of belief in the Protestant churches is regarded by many as decisive proof that no effort to secure a forced uniformity can ever be made.  But there has been for years, in churches of the Protestant faith, a strong and growing sentiment in favor of a union based upon common points of doctrine.  To secure such a union, the discussion of subjects upon which all were not agreed—however important they might be from a Biblical standpoint—must necessarily be waved (The Great Controversy, 391).

Mark A. Noll emphasizes the fact that evangelical Protestants and Catholics are uniting regardless of theological differences:

Once upon a time—in fact, within the memory of many people who are still very much alive—Catholics and evangelical Protestants regarded each other with the gravest possible suspicion… While Roman Catholics and Protestant evangelicals are still divided by many important differences, the possibilities that now exist for communication, theological and social cooperation, and mutual encouragement are so much greater than even a generation ago as to constitute a minor revolution (Evangelicals and Catholics Together, 83).

 Pat Robertson says:

The moral crisis facing society today and the obvious social breakdown mandates a closer cooperation between people of faith.  The time has come where we must lay aside minor points of doctrinal differences and focus on the Lord Jesus Christ . . . .This statement lays the groundwork for moving forward in a spirit of cooperation.

I am lending my support because I believe it’s imperative that we work to bring the body of Christ together (Christain American, May/June, 1994: Cited in Sunday’s Coming, 34).

Political Ecumenism 

The religious ecumenism between Evangelicals and Catholics is ultimately leading to a political ecumenism. We are told that in 1995, a “Road To Victory Conference” was held in Washington D.C. in which the Christian Coalition further developed their relations with the Catholic Church, and they planned to work together for the election in 1996. Ralph Reed who was the executive director of the Christian Coalition spoke at this conference. 

“I believe that the emerging alliance, the emerging partnership of Catholics and Evangelical Protestants, is going to be the most powerful force in the electorate in the 1990’s and beyond –and anybody that ignores that alliance is going to make a big mistake.

“We are at an historic time in our nation and in our relationship as Protestants and Catholics.

“The change we are seeing in America is not just a political change.  It is more deeply a spiritual shift that is shifting the plates of the American political landscape.  And Catholics have been at the very center of that.  According to exit polls taken after the 1994 election, for the first time in American history Roman Catholics, a majority of them –56 percent of church-attending Catholics and 51 percent of all Catholics –voted Republican in an off-year election.

 “And I believe that, just as the Evangelicals have become the base vote of the Republican party, Catholics are now today the swing vote in American politics.  Any candidate who wins the Catholic vote will be able to govern America.  No president has been elected since John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960 without winning the Catholic vote. . . . .The Catholic vote holds the key to the future of America . . . . .I believe if Catholics and Evangelicals can unite there is no person who runs for office in any city or any state in America that can’t be elected and there is no bill that can’t be passed in either house of Congress or any state legislative chamber anywhere in America.  It is the emerging force in the electorate today.

The truth my friends is this, Catholicism never has been, is not today, and never will be a threat to American democracy.  It was and remains the most colorful and the most vibrant thread running through the tapestry of American democracy (Cited in Sunday’s Coming, 70 – 72).

Watson also agrees that Evangelicals and Catholics are uniting in politics:

From the beginning, the CC has attempted to enlarge its ‘market-share’ by including ‘pro-family Catholics’ in its statement of purpose.  In October 1995, the CC formed the Catholic Alliance, a division of the CC geared specifically to Catholic Voters. ‘If Catholics and evangelicals can unite,’ Reed told the first meeting of the Catholic Alliance, ‘there is no person who cannot run for any office in any city or any state in America that cannot be elected’” (The Christian Coalition, 67).

In these statements, we see the transparent admission that if Catholics and Evangelicals unite, they can place their policies in both the state and federal government.  It is not difficult to see why so many critics have charged the Christian Right as seeking religious authoritarianism in the political arena. But these statements are only confirming what Revelation 13 predicted would take place. Reed is sadly mistaken where he says, “The truth my friends is this, Catholicism never has been, is not today, and never will be a threat to American democracy.” The Catholic scholar George La Piana has a far clearer perspective on Rome’s ecumenism than Reed:

If you search after Christian unity, Rome has said, there is only one way of attaining it: Come to Rome, and accept Catholic uniformity within the Catholic authoritarian and totalitarian system.  Likewise, the tolatarian regime of Moscow answered the appeal for peace and security of the surrounding nations by annexing them to Soviet fold, and telling all other nations that peace and security could be established only on Soviet terms.  This striking parallelism of claims and policies of a totalitarian state and a totalitarian church is not a casual coincidence.  It is the logical consequence of their absolute premises which, though they differ one from another in content and aims, stand in both systems upon the same firm belief that they, and they alone, are right while the others are wrong, and that they, and they alone, have a universal mission entrusted to them either by God or by destiny which must be fulfilled (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 20, 21).

Where Reed says, “The Catholic vote holds the key to the future of America,” does he really know the magnitude of what he is saying?  In the context of growing Catholic power in America today (vs. where they were a century ago), the intentions of Rome are defined by Piana: “The time had come for the Church to come out of the trenches and to take the offensive in the great undertaking of conquering the United States to the Catholic faith, for the salvation of the souls, for the greater happiness of the country, and for the glory of God” (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 113).

Piana further elaborates:                                                                                           

American Catholics under the orders of their hierarchy have the religious and moral duty to undermine, by all means, the American system of religious freedom and equality of all religions before the law, and to bring about a union of the Catholic Church and the state in this country (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 71).

No wonder J. Wayne Laurens made such a big emphasis on what the Jesuits say to the Americans who believe they have control of America through their votes:

“Now,” said the Jesuit, “listen to me a few moments and I will tell what I know.  Your president is elected by the conclave of cardinals at Rome, the same who elected the pope.  Your people nominate the candidates. Our confidential agents select from the number, the one whom they believe to be the most favorable to the interests of the church.  His name with those of the other candidates is reported to the cardinals and the pope.  When their decision is announced to the confidential friends of the pope and the cardinals, in the United States, they send forth their orders through the priests, and the whole Roman Catholic vote is thrown for the candidate who is favored by the church.  He, of course, is always elected.  Your parties are so equally divided on politics, that this Roman Catholic vote, which is cast on purely religious considerations, is always sufficient to turn the scale” (The Crisis: Or, The Enemies Of America Unmasked, 13).

If Laurens thought this was a problem in his day, what would he say in light of the Evangelical and Catholic political alliance today?  Reed is either blindly believing that the alliance between evangelicals and the Papacy will preserve American freedom, or he is apart of this conspiracy.  Why is this the case? Swomley reveals:

The overall mission of the Catholic Campaign for America is “to activate Catholic citizens, increase the Catholic electorate’s influence in formulating public policy, and focus the public’s attention on the richness and beauty of Catholic teaching.” A 1992 newsletter of the Catholic Campaign declared that “seperation of church and state is a false premise that must finally be cast aside (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 166).

We completely agree with Swomley where he says, “Nevertheless, with few exceptions, the Vatican has succeeded in forcing the administrative and intellectual leadership of the American Church to become thoroughgoing agents of papal totalitarianism” (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 64). Very clearly did E. G. White define the work of the Christian Right:

They are working in blindness.  They do not see that if a Protestant government sacrifices the principles that have made them a free, independent nation, and through legislation brings into the Constitution principles that will propagate papal falsehood and papal delusion, they are plunging into the horrors of the Dark Ages (Last Day Events, 126).

Was Mrs. White correct in believing that Papal falsehoods will be propagated in politics through the work that the Christian Right is accomplishing?  Swomley agrees:In the United Staes, once the bishops and their allies became dominant, legislative and judicial interpretations would reflect the morals, customs, educational values, and other demands of the Vatican” (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 261).

Reed’s speech demonstrates that Catholics and Protestants are working together in politics. Their focus is to place their religion in Politics—meaning religious views they have in common. When this is fully accomplished, this will prophetically constitute the two-horned Beast making an image to the first Beast. 

Protestants and Catholics are now working together to gain control of the Political structure of America, but the Papacy, as we have analyzed, has already been doing this very thing since the days of the Founding Fathers.  The Christian Right is blind, for Rome has not changed; America has gradually changed by the subversive activities of the Jesuits.  Many evangelicals have only grown accustomed to the already Catholic policies that are governing the nation.  Those who support the CC and those are willing to work with Popery, are like the frog that sits in a stew pot while the pot heats up to a boiling temperature over a long period of time. They have been sitting in the insidious stew pot of Jesuit and Catholic subversions for decades.  Evangelicals are being cooked, but yet they think the water is normal. We need not be deceived like the Christian Coalition, for we were told over a hundred years ago that Protestants would do the very thing they are doing:

 As the Protestant churches have been seeking the favor of the world, false charity has blinded their eyes. They do not see but that it is right to believe good of all evil; and as the inevitable result, they will finally believe evil of all good. Instead of standing in defense of the faith once delivered to the saints, they are now, as it were, apologizing to Rome for their uncharitable opinion of her, begging pardon for their bigotry (E. G. White, The Great Controversy, 500. Emphasis mine).

What does Mrs. White mean by “False Charity?” Semlyen demonstrates a perfect example of the definition of False Charity:

Many critics of Ecumenism predict that Church unity under the supremacy of Rome will rapidly lead to a fresh outbreak of bigotry and persecution. They believe that the behind-the-scenes political power of Catholicism is greatly underestimated already, and that when Church and State are reunited, such power will become irresistible (All Roads Lead To Rome, 64).

 Neuhaus agrees that there are evangelicals who view ECT “as part of a vast conspiracy by which evangelicals are being seduced into betraying the Reformation and returning to Rome” (Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission, 178, 179). Neuhaus continues, “Some of the promoters of this conspiracy theory evidence a mindset that is aptly described as paranoid” (Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission, 179). The problem with Neuhaus is he does not understand the true policy of Papal ecumenism. Concerning Vatican II, Swomley shows:

However, official Vatican control of the Church and official Roman Catholic doctrine did not change on any crucial points, so the purpose and program of the Vatican remained that of authoritarian control of Catholics and of governments.  Religious liberty, democracy, and ecumenism were not authorized by the official documents of Vatican II.  Both non-Catholics and Roman Catholics who have not read the documents have accepted erroneous assumptions that the Church had changed its position on these issues…The traditional position of the Church, as formulated by Pope Leo XIII (1878 – 1903) and circulated in the United States in 1960 just before Vatican II, was that the state must not only have care for religion but must “recognize the true religion professed by the Catholic Church.”  It was a logical position if its premises were accepted.  If the state is under moral compulsion to profess and promote religion, it is obliged to process and promote only the religion that is true; for no individual, no group of individuals, no society, no state is justified in supporting error or in according to error the same recognition as to truth (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 157. Emphasis mine).

The signatories of the ECT document are either not ascertaining Rome’s policies or they are part of the religious conspiracy. Why? The Papacy is a totalitarian system.  If she gains control of the United States, she will persecute those who differ from her beliefs.  Semlyen agrees with this outlook:

In Protestant countries such as Britain and the USA, the Roman Church appears moderate and tolerant, but in Catholic countries such as Peru, Chile, Argentina, Columbia and Mexico, and countries in Africa like Uganda and Zambia, also short on experience with democracy but where the Catholic Church is strong, Rome’s other side has shown itself in intolerance and cruelties towards Protestants (All Roads Lead To Rome, 64).

Let us ask: Why does the Papacy persecute Protestants in countries where it has the most power?  La Piana emphasizes:

Likewise, in totalitarian Catholicism the fundamental rule is ‘Nothing against the Church, no salvation outside the Church.’  No tolerance of heretical errors or of disciplinary schisms are theoretically admissible in the Catholic system.  By the principle that there is no salvation outside the Church (because the Church, in the person of the bishop of Rome, successor of Peter, holds the keys of Heaven, so that whatever he binds or loosens on earth is bound or loosened in Heaven), the totalitarian power of the Church extends over all aspects of human life.  It extends to all actions of people from the beginning of their existence in the womb of their mothers to the grave.  Indeed, it extends beyond the grave, in Purgatory, where the Church can hasten the process of expiation; and even in Heaven, where the decrees of the infallible pope are duly registered as divine decrees and where the Church can obtain special favors through the cult and the intercession of the saints (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 21, 22).

The Papacy seems mild to the signatories of the ECT document, because the Papacy is extremely crafty in her diplomatic skills.  She appears to be apologetic, but underneath the threshold of appearances she has other plans. Very factually E. G. White observed:

Popery is just what prophecy declared that she would be, the apostasy of the latter times. [2 THESS. 2:3, 4.] It is a part of her policy to assume the character which will best accomplish her purpose; but beneath the variable appearance of the chameleon, she conceals the invariable venom of the serpent. "We are not bound to keep faith and promises to heretics," She declares. Shall this power, whose record for a thousand years is written in the blood of the saints, be now acknowledged as a part of the church of Christ? (The Great Controversy, 500. Emphasis mine)

Semlyen shows that E. G. White was not the only one who discerned this deceit in Popery.  Semlyen cites the Catholic Research Information Bureau (CRIB) as giving the world a strong and sober warning:

Don’t be deceived.  The Roman Church is like a chameleon.  Tolerant, friendly, highly moral and authoritative in Protestant England and America; but where there is a Roman Catholic majority, she is very different and no friend of freedom, always blending in with the landscape, but never quite what she seems to be (All Roads Lead To Rome, 127).

Robbins takes this whole matter to its logical conclusion:

The world will know that Rome is genuinely repentant only when its mind changes (for that is what the word repentance means), and the world will know that its mind has changed only when its theology, monarchy, episcopacy, economic thought, and political pretensions have been explicitly repudiated.  Anything less than such a repudiation is merely another subterfuge in a long tradition of frauds, forgeries, and deceptions intended to mislead the world (Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 198, 199).

 But as Wylie argues: “It will one day be told the world, and the nations will clap their hands at the news, that the Papacy has fallen; but it will never be told that the Papacy has repented.  She will be destroyed, not amended” (The Papacy: History, Dogmas, Genius, And Prospects, Book 1, 153. Emphasis mine).

 One Of The Main Elements Of Religious Deception

What is one of the main reasons that many evangelicals develop working relations with Rome with a false sense of impunity? Concerning the book The Condemnations of the Reformation Era: Do They Still Divide? Noll says:

The European Catholics and Protestants who published this book concluded that the condemnations of the Reformation were based on misconceptions, were aimed at extreme positions on the other side, and no longer apply to today’s situations (Evangelicals and Catholics Together, 108. Emphasis mine).

Noll says that the conditions, which divided Catholicism and Protestantism in the past, no longer apply to today’s situation. What conditions is he talking about? The conditions, which no longer prevail, are the evangelical emphasis of the Papacy being the prophesied Antichrist of Bible Prophecy. The dogma that the Papacy uses today is the same dogma that came out of the Council of Trent. That Council totally and unequivocally condemned Protestantism. Has the Catholic Church changed? Piana explains:

The modern Catholic Church, its dogmatic system and its institutional discipline, are still based on the canons and regulations of the Council of Trent.  Since then, there has been in the Catholic Church no further theological development of any major importance, but only the unfolding of all the implications of the doctrine of the monarchical absolutism of the constitution of the Church… (Catholic Power Vs. American Freedom, 30).

The Catholic Church has not changed; Protestants have changed.  Semlyen declares:

In a real sense, in the year of the anniversaries of J. H. Newman and Ignatius Loyola’s Jesuit Order, the Counter-Reformation, the comeback of Roman Catholicism, was complete. The Protestant Reformation has now effectively been abandoned by the visible Church in Britain and is widely represented as a tragic mistake (All Roads Lead To Rome, 15).

 This statement says it all! The Counter Reformation with its futurist system of Prophetic interpretation has been very successful in subverting Protestantism in Europe and America.  Semlyen very factually says:

Many Protestant commentators point out that the interpretation of Biblical prophecy is now almost all “Futurist,” the system which they believe was evolved by the brilliant Jesuit theologians Ribera and Bellarmine after the Council of Trent.  They see futurist scholars as evolving eschatological theories and systems faster than theological colleges can absorb them.  The view that the antichrist is still to come, and that therefore the passage of Scripture relating to him are not for today, has undermined the faith of Bible-believing Christians, they believe, and is the principle reason why so few now recognize the office of the Papacy in Scripture as the false church which has opposed the true faith for almost 1500 years…There is no question, however, that Futurism and Praeterism have made a profound impact on Bible colleges and pulpits alike during this century and most of the last century (All Roads Lead To Rome, 193, 194).

Both the Preterist and Futurist systems of prophetic interpretation have filled evangelical Protestantism today. Though Preterism has not been the focal point of this course, it still functions as a blinder to the fact that the Papacy is the Antichrist. We have not focused on Preterism because it does not have the popularity of the Futurist system.  It is a weaker device of the Jesuits overall in the great scheme of world domination. Ultimately, much of evangelical Protestantism is teaching Catholic doctrine now. This is why in the Second Vatican Council (1962 – 1965), Pope John XXIII focused on ecumenism and called the evangelicals: “Separated Brethren.” It was legal for the Papacy to come to this conclusion about much of Protestantism, because much of the Protestant churches gave up the prophetic views of the Reformers and enjoined the Catholic systems from Trent.

The False Prophet

 (The following web site compliments this section: The Shocking Truth about the False Prophet by Michael Bunker)

In Revelation 13:11 – 14 we find that the Protestant movement of the United States, which develops an alliance with Rome, is very successful in, not only its political deceptions, but also in its religious deceptions.  The religious aspect of the two-horned Beast has another name in prophecy: The False Prophet (Rev. 16:13).  False Prophet in the Greek is Pseudoprophetes” and this means: “One who, acting the part of a divinely inspired Prophet, utters falsehoods under the name of divine prophecies.” 

In Matthew 24:31, Jesus warned that there would be false Christs and prophets who would show great signs and wonders; insomuch that if it were possible, the very elect would be deceived by them. 2 Peter 2:1 – 3 warned that these prophets would privily (Gr. Pareisago: “to introduce or bring in secretly”) bring in damnable heresies, and through their destructive ways the way of truth would be evil spoken of; and through covetousness shall these prophets with feigned (chicanery, pretended words) make merchandise of the people. These counterfeit Bible teachers would deceive people, because they would have the appearance of righteousness (2 Cor. 11:13 – 15). Too many people focus on image rather than looking into the real issues, which lie hid underneath the threshold of appearances. 

What is the False Prophet aspect of the two-horned Beast? It is the work of Evangelical Protestants who are supporting this whole conspiracy, for their theological monstrosity of Jesuit Counter Reformation teachings—especially dispensational futurism—has conditioned them to work with Rome for her great objective for World Domination. 

The way in which the False Prophet deceives the world into accepting the religion and politics of the sea Beast is by means of his supernatural manifestation of “bringing fire down from heaven” and “deceiving people through miracles.” Question: What is the fire of the False Prophet?  Fire is indicative of God’s presence: Exodus 3:2; 13:21, 22; 19:18; 2 Kings 1:10 – 14; 2:11; Psalm 50:3; Fire was brought down from heaven to the earth in the days of Elijah the prophet (1 Kings 18:38); The Holy Spirit is likened to fire (Luke 3: 16); On the day of Pentecost, Cloven tongues like as of fire were poured out on God’s people (Acts 2:3).  (The following web site from Michael Sheifler Benny Hinn - A False Prophet is a perfect example of the “fire” of the False Prophet.)

The False prophet is described as following the first Beast and deceiving the world through counterfeit miracles produced by fire. (Revelation 13:13) Fire is a term representing the Holy Ghost (Look at Acts 2:1-6 and Luke 3:16).  Protestantism, today, is speaking out “False Prophecy” about the end times, they are teaching Jesuit doctrine. They are leading people back to Rome, and people think that they are led by God because of the “Fire” (Counterfeit Holy Ghost), which produces false manifestations of healings and tongues and prophecies and every gift mentioned in scripture. 

What happened in the ecumenical, futurist Irvingite Movement in 1830 – 1832 was a prototype of what was to happen in America (see chapter 8). The “so called” manifestation of tongues in the Irvingite Church, not only authenticated the futurist system, but also gave birth to the “secret rapture.” We ask the reader to note this historical correlation with today’s situation in deep contemplation.  The acceptance of dispensational futurism amongst the Anglican Church (The Oxford Movement) was unequivocally an ecumenical movement back to Rome.  Today, we are seeing a larger movement back to Rome with much more of a Charismatic experience than in the days of Irving. 

Is the Charismatic or Pentecostal spirit in evangelical Protestantism the MIRACLE DECEIVING FIRE that causes many Protestants to believe the Jesuit doctrines and work with Rome for a false alliance? Noll says, “More generally, the spread of the charismatic movement (and then of songs, prayers, and worship styles going well beyond officially charismatic circles) has done a great deal to reduce the barriers between Catholics and evangelicals” (Evangelical And Catholics Together, 98). Semlyen says, “The Charismatic movement, which began in the 1950’s with so many apparent virtues, had rapidly swept across the Christian world.  It was widely seen as capable, with a great outpouring of the Holy Spirit, of transforming the whole church” (All Roads Lead To Rome, 23).  Semlyen argues that Pentecostalism became prominent in the United States through the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship International (FGBMFI).  Semlyen says, “Like other ‘para-church’ groups which led the charismatic movement in the 50s and 60s, the FGBMFI brought Roman Catholics and Protestants together in the ‘unity and love of the spirit,’ placing emphasis on experiential testimony rather than on Scripture” (All Roads Lead To Rome, 24). Let us ask for emphasis: Where did the modern ecumenical movement come from?  Answer: The Vatican II conference brought into being the great wave of ecumenism between evangelicals and Catholics.  What did Vatican II think of the new Pentecostalism? We are told: “At the Second Vatican Council, the Roman Church, responding to the heady atmosphere and the promise of submergence of old differences, gave its blessing to this new movement of the Holy Spirit” (All Roads Lead To Rome, 24). 






































We ask the reader to diligently analyze the preceding diagrams.  In chapter 6, we demonstrated how the devil always emulates God.  In the wounding, submersion, and restoration of the Papacy (the Beast), the devil has emulated the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.  Why is this significant?  When Jesus resurrected, 50 days latter there was Pentecost—the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon God’s apostolic Church.  The outpouring of the Holy Spirit followed the resurrection of Christ (John 14:16-18, 26; 16:7 – 15; Acts 2:1 – 47; Joel 2). The Gospel shows that, in the Christian life, resurrection is to follow crucifixion (Rom. 6; Gal. 2:20; 2 Peter 1:4), and resurrection is only possible through the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the concept of resurrection has two meanings: (1) An actual resurrection that took place with Jesus Christ—with Pentecost following that event; and (2) an experience that Christians have by means of the indwelling Spirit of God. 

            The preceding diagrams illustrate how the devil has emulated these two principles of resurrection through the Beast and the False Prophet.  How did the devil emulate the first principle of resurrection?  Notice that the Papacy received a deadly wound in 1798 and then went into submersion until 1929.  Between 1798 and 1929, the Jesuits were deceiving the English Protestants through the Oxford Futurist Movement.  Underneath the umbrella of this movement, there was the Irvingite Futurist Movement—with its Pentecostalism—and the Plymouth Brethren Movement. These movements inspired Scofield to bring the Jesuit system to America (the two-horned Beast).

Just prior to the creation of Scofield’s Jesuit bible, there was the birth of the American Pentecostal movements.  Roland R. Hegstad tells us:

Pentecostalism—as distinguished from neo-pentecostalism—received its “baptism” on January 1, 1901, at a small Bible school in Topeka, Kansas…The emerging movement came to national attention in 1906 through reports of healings and other wonders at the Azusa Street Mission in Los Angeles.  Most Pentecostal bodies trace their spiritual heritage to one or the other of these places (Rattling the Gates, 9).

In other words, all the main elements of the false Pentecost were being constructed prior to the resurrection of the Papacy. After 1929—prior to Vatican II—a resurgence of Pentecostalism began to move in America. This outbreak of Pentecostalism is often called, “Neo-Pentecostalism.” When the ecumenical, Vatican II conference came into being, the Pope blessed this Pentecostal movement as a means of unifying the evangelicals back to the Papacy. After some time, a political alliance was formed between the United States and the Vatican. Then came the CC with their focal point of both political and religious ecumenism for the approaching millennium—with the new Pentecost confirming to both Evangelicals and Catholics that God is favoring this union. 

In looking at the preceding diagram, we find that from 1929 to the present day, the Papacy has been in the process of resurrection; and a false Pentecost has and is following the Papal resurrection. The spirit so popularly believed to be the Holy Spirit in “Neo-Pentecostalism” is the fire of the False Prophet and is the catalyst that makes the Jesuit systems of prophetic interpretation register as “THE VOICE OF THE FALSE PROPHET.” What is extremely interesting about the whole picture is that the most pervasive Pentecostal bodies today—the main bodies—still carry Dispensational Futurism. 

As far as the second principle of resurrection, as is applied to the counterfeit Pentecost, this is a false experience which leads people not into obedience to the truth, but into obedience to the traditions of Rome.  The fire that is to seal peoples minds in the doctrine of the False Prophet—which leads back to the Beast—is the Charismatic spirit, which are miracle-working demons.  Revelation 14:1 – 6 show that God has sent three angels to tell the world to do three things: (1) Worship the Creator; (2) Come out of Babylon; and (3) Don’t accept the Mark of the Beast.  Revelation 18:1 describes the fourth angel as the final and loud cry for those who are in Babylon to come out before the seven last plagues come. [In the following chapters, we show how these four calls are being fulfilled through God’s remnant message.] The devil has also attempted to counterfeit God’s three angels. Revelation 16:13, 14 describes three unclean spirits (demons) like frogs coming out of the mouth of the Dragon (Paganism), out of the mouth of the Beast (the Papacy), and out of the mouth of the False Prophet (apostate Protestantism).  These three unclean spirits are described as miracle working demons.  This description, of course, coincides with the FIRE (counterfeit Holy Spirit) in Revelation 13.  It has been argued that John used the image of “Frogs” coming out of the “Mouth” of each system in the “Trinity of Evil” to depict the means by which the miraculous deceptions will take place; namely, the way frogs catch their prey with their “tongues.” There is no doubt that the ecumenical Charismatic renewal extends to all three of these religious systems.

These three unclean angels—through the false Pentecost—tell the world to do the exact opposite of what God’s three angels tell the world: (1) Worship Lucifer through the sun (the 666 god); (2) Stay in Babylon; and (3) receive the Mark of Popery, which in essence, is a tradition that goes back to the sun.  Finally, Satan will attempt to counterfeit God’s fourth angel by personally manifesting himself on the earth—pretending to be Christ—to tell the world that the Great Ecumenical Religion is the true Church. What is our “safe guard” against the counterfeit Pentecost, which is taking place within the trinity of evil?  E. G. White says:

To the law and to the testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. [ISA. 8:20.] The people of God are directed to the Scriptures as their safeguard against the influence of false teachers and the delusive power of spirits of darkness. Satan employs every possible device to prevent men from obtaining a knowledge of the Bible; for its plain utterances reveal his deceptions. At every revival of God's work, the prince of evil is aroused to more intense activity; he is now putting forth his utmost efforts for a final struggle against Christ and his followers. The last great delusion is soon to open before us. Antichrist is to perform his marvelous works in our sight. So closely will the counterfeit resemble the true, that it will be impossible to distinguish between them except by the Holy Scriptures. By their testimony every statement and every miracle must be tested. [Great Controversy, 520]

Notice the underlined portion of Mrs. White’s statement. Our only safe guard must be the Bible because of how closely the counterfeit resembles the true Spirit of God. Does the new Pentecost of ecumenism follow this principle set out in Isaiah 8:20?  Semlyen, citing the Anglican Renewal Leader Michael Harper, emphasizes:

The Charasmatic Renewal does not have a particularly good track record when it comes to concern for the truth. I am chiefly here referring to the truth about Christianity.  Because of its emphasis on “testimony” at least in its formative years, it has tended to softpedal, even ignore truth, largely out of fear that it will divide Christians rather than unite them (All Roads Lead To Rome, 27).

On this point, I must make a personal note about my own experiences. Often I come across individuals who claim they have this Charismatic or Pentecostal spirit only to watch them make a bunch of noise rather than intelligently contemplate truth.  In my experiences, that spirit emphasizes ignorance as a blessing.  Too much I hear people say, “The Lord spoke to me” when the Bible is contradicting their testimony.  I have found that spirit to be one to lead people away from investigating the truths, which have been emphasized in this course.  Many of these individuals are quick to ignore discussions of this kind. I must say, that the Holy Spirit is not a coward like that spirit is. The Holy Spirit proves all things by the SCRIPTURES (1 Thess. 5:21; 2 Timothy 2:15; Acts 17:11).  When the Christian is confronted by possible false theories, he is commanded to “try the spirits (1 John 4:1),” not evade the issue and seek ecstatic unity.

There are those who will get extremely irritated when hearing the things that have been said on this matter.  But this is the logical conclusion based on the whole picture of Prophecy. The Charismatic spirit does not lead people out of the False Prophet, it compels them to stay in the movement.  It is a spirit that confirms people in the false movement of a unified Church under Popery towards the goal of placing Lucifer on the throne of this world during the millennium.

We can now proceed to the second part of this study.

Works Cited

 Bible Readings For The Home: A Studyof Vital Scripture Topics in Question-and-AnswerForm. Contributed by a Large Number of Bible Scholars (Published Jointly by Review And Herald Publishing Association: Washington, DC; Hagerstown, MD; and Pacific Press Publishing Association: Boise, ID; Oshawa, Ontario, Canada, 1963, 1967, 1980)

COWLES VOLUME LIBRARY (488 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10022: Cowles Education Corporation, 1968) “Parallel Outlines Of American History,” 

Translated into English by John A. McHugh and Charles J. Callan. THE CATECHISM OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT: Fifteenth Printing (Rockford, Illinois 61105: Tan Books And Pub. Inc., 1976, 82) “Degrees of the Priesthood,”

Brownlee, W. C: D. D. Secret Instructions Of The Jesuits (New York: American And Foreign Christian Union)

Crocker III, H. W. TRIUMPH: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church—A 2,000-Year History (Roseville, California: Forum, An Imprint of Prima Publishing, 2001)

Colson, Charles. & Neuhaus, Richard John ed. Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission. (Dallas Texas:  Word Publishing, 1995)

Chiniquy, Charles. Fifty Years in the Church of Rome (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1968; published originally in 1886)

Dowling, John. The History Of Romanism: From The Earliest Corruptions Of Christianity To The Present Time (New York: 1845)

Durant, Will and Ariel. THE STORY OF CIVILIZATION: PART XI: The Age Of Napoleon (New York: Simon And Schuster, 1975)

Desanctis, Luigi. Popery, Puseyism, and Jesuitism (London: D. Catt, 1865, 1905)

Froom, LeRoy Edwin. The PROPHETIC FAITH OF OUR FATHERS, The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation, Volume II, Pre-Reformation and Reformation Restoration, and Second Departure, published by the Review and Herald Publishing Association, Washington D.C., Copyright 1948,

Griffin, Des. Fourth Reich Of The Rich (Clackamas OR.: Emissary Publications, 1976)

Hegstad, Roland R. Rattling the Gates (Washington D.C.: Review And Herald, 1974)

Kauffman, Luther S. Romanism as a World Power, (Philadelphia, Pa.: True American Publishing Company, Second Edition – August 1, 1922)

La Piana, George & Swomley, John W. Catholic Power VS. American Freedom (New York: Prometheus Books, 2002)

Laurens, J. Wayne The Crisis: Or, The Enemies Of America Unmasked (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: G. D. Miller, 1855)

Martin, Malachi. The Decline And fall Of The Roman Church (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1981)

Martin, Malachi. The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church. (New York: The Linden Press/ Simon and Schuster, 1987)

Melady, Thomas Patrick. The Ambassador’s Story: The United States And The Vatican In World Affairs (Huntington, Indiana: Our Sunday Visitor Publishing Division, 1994)

Nicolini, G. B. History Of The Jesuits: Their Origin, Progress, Doctrines, and Designs (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1854)

Robbins, John W. Ecclesiastical Megalomania:The Economic and Political Thought of the Roman Catholic Church (Published In The United States: The Trinity Foundation, 1999)

Reid, G. Edward. Sunday’s Coming,

Semlyen, Michael de All Roads Lead To Rome: The Ecumenical Movement. (England: Dorchester House Publication, 1993)

Thompson, R. W. The Footprints Of The Jesuits (Cincinati: Cranston & Curts. New York:  Hunt & Eaton, 1894)

Trevor, George. Rome: From the fall of the Western Empire. (London: The Religious Tract Society, 1868) Cited in Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers Vol. 2, 48)

Watson, Justin. The Christian Coalition: Dreams of Restoration, Demands for Recognition (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997)

Wylie, J. A. The Papacy: History, Dogmas, Genius, And Prospects: Being The Evangelical Alliance First Prize Essay On Popery. 4 books (London: Hamilton, Adams, And Co. Edinburgh: Andrew Elliot. 1867)




Web Hosting · Journal · Guestbooks · Message Boards · Mailing Lists
Sell Custom T-Shirts · Free Business Cards · News Headlines · Audio, Fonts, Clipart
· powered by a free webtools company NEXT CHAPTER