The UNITED NATIONS will turn against the world religions?

[JehovahsWitness]

• Do you think you will always remember that Jehovahs Witnesses are the only religion on earth that believes the "wild beast" of the book of Revelation is the United Nations ?

• Do you think you will remember that JWs alone believe the attack of Babylon the Great in the bible represents the total destruction of all religious organisations on earth and an attempt eventually to destroy that of Jehovah's Witnesses themselves ?

• What do you think your reaction would be if one day all religions institutons* were abolished?

*individuals remaining free to practice their religion in the privacy of their own homes

[2ndpillar2]

• Do you think you will always remember that Jehovahs Witnesses are the only religion on earth that believes the "wild beast" of the book of Revelation is the United Nations ?

• Do you think you will remember that JWs alone believe the attack of Babylon the Great in the bible represents the total destruction of all religious organisations on earth and an attempt eventually to destroy that of Jehovah's Witnesses themselves ?

• What do you think your reaction would be if one day all religions institutons* were abolished?

*individuals remaining free to practice their religion in the privacy of their own homes

The UN, Nato, as well as the EU, is a collaboration of states/beasts in itself, as with the 8th beast (Rev 17 & Daniel 2), whose present religion is in following the path of the World Economic Council, which is a woke Marxist construct, with Marx being their false prophet, as in the order of 5th head of the beast/dictator (Caesar), as in the present-day forms as Czar/Kaisar/Obama. The primary point of Marxism is that there is no God other than man himself, and that they don't have to keep the Laws/Commandments of God (Genesis 3:3-4), with Marx as their leader, and the dragon/Satan as their god. As the "nations" of Zechariah 14, in the form of the final iron (Rome) and clay (Muslims such as Turkey) combination of Daniel 2, they will turn against Jerusalem and Judah/Jews (Joel 3:1-2), and ultimately be defeated. The survivors of the nations will once a year, on the feast of Booths, come to Jerusalem to bow down to the king (Zech 14). As for the JWs, they are actually not that different from your ordinary Christians and will have to suffer the consequences of their choices, as will everyone else. The JWs seem to be less introspective, less meek, and more constraint in their dogma, so their pride may not work out well for them. It will be the "nations"/Gentiles who will be defeated by a double-edged sword and ruled by a rod of iron (Rev 19:15) and sold into slavery to Judah/Jews (Joel 3:8). It was the Roman emperor Constantine who turned the "Way" set up Yeshua, into the religion of Roman idol worship, in the form of worshipping the sun god Sol Invictus, whose day of worship is Sunday.

[onewithhim]

I'd like to pose the opposite (or something like the opposite) question to you, though: If, say, 30 years from now the United Nations has not abolished all religious institutions, should I conclude you were wrong in your prediction?

I'm not sure about the timeframe of "30 years" (that would cerainly put it all on the outer limit of the biblical time frame) but if in 30 years it hasnt happened, that would only mean it hasn't happened yet.

Our interpretations are not infallibile ; this understanding of prophecy is one we believe is as close to watertight as is humanly possible and it's a prophecy that has only gotten clearer and more likely with time. We firmly believe The bible on the other hand is NEVER wrong, so if we eventually need to reasssess our understanding, so be it.

Is there anything easier than being a religious prognosticator? Make any old claim, no matter how bizarre, then say (when it doesn't happen) "It hasn't happened... YET!"

roll eyes... c'mon....

No wonder people laugh at certain groups... Let's admit there are some pretty wild religious ideas out there.

Other religious adherents have said oh it will happen in such and such month, in such and such year or even such and such day, and when it doesn't happen they are embarrassed and basically overturned. JWs don't now say that the end will come in a certain year, never mind a certain day. 1975 is behind us, and we learned from it. Now we know and can discern the signs of the time and where we are in the general time frame, as the great image of Daniel has shown us. A specific year is not set forth. We just know that it will happen sooner than later, according to Bible chronology and the words of Jesus and his disciples. What is wild about that?

[2timothy316]

No wonder people laugh at certain groups... Let's admit there are some pretty wild religious ideas out there.

Indeed there are some laughable ideas out there. Like humans, on their own, being able to figure out how to end war, starvation, disease and there are some that say humans will beat death one day. There are some groups that believe that the UN is the key to solving many of these things.

From the UN Charter:
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and
to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and
to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and
to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,

It is laughable that some think that the a man driven UN is going to accomplish these goals. However, the UN might suddenly determine that corrupt religions are to blame for war and might decide to start dismantling them. I wonder how many will back them if they did?

[2ndpillar2]

No wonder people laugh at certain groups... Let's admit there are some pretty wild religious ideas out there.

Indeed there are some laughable ideas out there. Like humans, on their own, being able to figure out how to end war, starvation, disease and there are some that say humans will beat death one day. There are some groups that believe that the UN is the key to solving many of these things.

From the UN Charter:
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and
to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and
to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and
to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,

It is laughable that some think that the a man driven UN is going to accomplish these goals. However, the UN might suddenly determine that corrupt religions are to blame for war and might decide to start dismantling them. I wonder how many will back them if they did?

Well, you could reflect on how the governments of the world combined with the Roman religion under the popes, to solve the problems of the elites. Even today, the king of England is crowned by the church. You have the churches, in the form of the daughters of Babylon, combined with the kings (heads of the beast), combined with the "dragon" (Rev 13 & 17) which control this world. That will continue until all the nations come up against Jerusalem (Zechariah 14), whereas the kingdoms/nations of Daniel 2, are all crushed, all at the same time. At that time, you have a leadership of the righteous, who have died and arose from the graves to rule (Rev 20). Until then, one must "come out of her" (daughters of Babylon) to get around having the "plagues" of her (Rev 18:4). One doesn't need government to feed or be kind to their neighbors. But one does need the 2nd amendment to kowtow their governments into not taking away their free speech and to enforce law, when the governments refuses to do so. The present ruler of the world is Satan, and he does not have form, until he overtakes either a swine or a person of low character to produce physical actions. Until the introduction of swine flu, and Chinese produced viruses, we apparently had enough low character acters to get by. Now due to their herd mentality, the herds of swine are being thinned out.

[boatsnguitars]

I'd like to pose the opposite (or something like the opposite) question to you, though: If, say, 30 years from now the United Nations has not abolished all religious institutions, should I conclude you were wrong in your prediction?

I'm not sure about the timeframe of "30 years" (that would cerainly put it all on the outer limit of the biblical time frame) but if in 30 years it hasnt happened, that would only mean it hasn't happened yet.

Our interpretations are not infallibile ; this understanding of prophecy is one we believe is as close to watertight as is humanly possible and it's a prophecy that has only gotten clearer and more likely with time. We firmly believe The bible on the other hand is NEVER wrong, so if we eventually need to reasssess our understanding, so be it.

Is there anything easier than being a religious prognosticator? Make any old claim, no matter how bizarre, then say (when it doesn't happen) "It hasn't happened... YET!"

roll eyes... c'mon....

No wonder people laugh at certain groups... Let's admit there are some pretty wild religious ideas out there.

Other religious adherents have said oh it will happen in such and such month, in such and such year or even such and such day, and when it doesn't happen they are embarrassed and basically overturned. JWs don't now say that the end will come in a certain year, never mind a certain day. 1975 is behind us, and we learned from it. Now we know and can discern the signs of the time and where we are in the general time frame, as the great image of Daniel has shown us. A specific year is not set forth. We just know that it will happen sooner than later, according to Bible chronology and the words of Jesus and his disciples. What is wild about that?

Good gravy, why anyone would sign up for that religion willingly...

"learned from it"... I had a good laugh.

[onewithhim]

I'd like to pose the opposite (or something like the opposite) question to you, though: If, say, 30 years from now the United Nations has not abolished all religious institutions, should I conclude you were wrong in your prediction?

I'm not sure about the timeframe of "30 years" (that would cerainly put it all on the outer limit of the biblical time frame) but if in 30 years it hasnt happened, that would only mean it hasn't happened yet.

Our interpretations are not infallibile ; this understanding of prophecy is one we believe is as close to watertight as is humanly possible and it's a prophecy that has only gotten clearer and more likely with time. We firmly believe The bible on the other hand is NEVER wrong, so if we eventually need to reasssess our understanding, so be it.

Is there anything easier than being a religious prognosticator? Make any old claim, no matter how bizarre, then say (when it doesn't happen) "It hasn't happened... YET!"

roll eyes... c'mon....

No wonder people laugh at certain groups... Let's admit there are some pretty wild religious ideas out there.

Other religious adherents have said oh it will happen in such and such month, in such and such year or even such and such day, and when it doesn't happen they are embarrassed and basically overturned. JWs don't now say that the end will come in a certain year, never mind a certain day. 1975 is behind us, and we learned from it. Now we know and can discern the signs of the time and where we are in the general time frame, as the great image of Daniel has shown us. A specific year is not set forth. We just know that it will happen sooner than later, according to Bible chronology and the words of Jesus and his disciples. What is wild about that?

Good gravy, why anyone would sign up for that religion willingly...

"learned from it"... I had a good laugh.

So what religion would you "sign up" for? Explain why their mistakes are not a problem for you.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #1]

Yep. Just wait for it.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #46]
There was no response concerning post #46. The U.N. is becoming more and more evident on the world scene.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #46]
There was no response concerning post #46. The U.N. is becoming more and more evident on the world scene.

Totally, I dont know if you have heard about the Global Pandrmic Treaty but Its a proposed agreement that in the event of a global health emergency all the governments would for all effects and purposes submit to the WHO (The UN wearing a different hat). I think that they will push that envelope to see how far they can go.

[Purple Knight]

What do you think your reaction would be if one day all religions institutons* were abolished?

*individuals remaining free to practice their religion in the privant of their own homes

You're conflating two very different things. In the context of your symbolism, the difference between religious organizations and individual worship is the difference between prostitution and personal (amateur?) sexual activity.

I would lose little sleep if the institutions were abolished. Religious institutions in general exercise far too much temporal power over their members. A side-effect of this that I'd selfishly enjoy is that I'd no longer have to deal with the prostitutes sending current customers door-to-door to solicit new ones.

Privately you can't tell people what to believe. It's not just wrong; it's impossible. So I wouldn't lose much sleep over it either. But it would have to be all of them because I'm sick of this social double standard where some religions are supposed to be sacred to everyone whether they believe in them or not, where others are fine to blaspheme against. I think this social inequity hurts everyone, and standing against it helps everyone.

I would not pursue a religious ban, unless the religion was destructive - for example extreme Judaism and Santeria both have bloody, wasteful animal sacrifice. However I want people to have an enshrined and yes even protected from serious consequences right to say what they think. But when it affects me negatively like legalised marijuana does, there's a limit to how much I'll care. When people are all over the road because they're soaking themselves in it to the point that I can smell it coming out of their car, putting me in danger, I will stop voting for that person's benefit. I don't vote against them either but I leave it blank.

I feel I'm better than 99% of people if I simply refuse to be one of those bystanders who lets those who come for one group after another take everyone one-by-one when they are neutral to me. So that is my aspiration. And frankly, lately, the demands for more and more rights and more and more free stuff by the marginalised sexual minorities have become slightly more than just an annoyance because the insurance now must take it out of someone else's hide, so if there's a rebound they can't count on my help anymore.

I don't aspire to help people who are hurting me. And I think this is a good example of when people being selfish benefit everyone, and people being selfless are hurting everyone, because it's just numbers. If they're hurting me they're probably hurting others. If everyone just bows to the destructive influence because they don't count, they're letting other people not count, too. But if they stand up and say, "Hey, I count too!" they're also standing up for others the destructive influence may hurt later.