Glenn Beck not only a Mormon but now promoting New Age religion

The pieces seem to be coming together for the final Antichrist Religion as various channels unite toward one mega-belief system. The Catholic church has been preparing the ground for the incorporation of primitive religions for years as they embrace the pagan practices of the peoples where they dominate -- such as Haiti's voodoo -- and treat Islam as worshipping the same God as Christians. There is also a trend toward refusing to give the gospel based on the false teaching that all religions lead to God, Mother Teresa being a major proponent of that false teaching.

Now New Age beliefs such as promoted by Oprah Winfrey are getting a boost by Glenn Beck, as discussed in this article by Brannon Howse: Glenn Beck's New Book Reveals He Embraces New Age Theology, Is a Knowledgeable Mormon, and a Universalist .

Apparently Mormonism has a lot in common with New Ageism. Here's Brannon Howse on this subject:

In August of 2010, I predicted on my national radio program that it was only a matter of time before Glenn Beck would release a distinctively religious book that would promote his New Age Mormonism and universalism. I sensed that Glenn was setting himself up to be the politically conservative alternative to Oprah.

Many self-professing Christians cannot see what Beck is up to but there are those in the unsaved world that seem to be exhibiting more worldview understanding than some in the Christian community. The Business Insider published an article on January 4, 2011 entitled, Glenn Beck's New Year's Plan Sounds A Lot Like Oprah's New Network.

Last week (second week of January 2011) Beck released his latest book entitled The Seven Wonders That Will Change Your Life. The book is co-authored by psychiatrist Dr. Keith Ablow.

Beck's new book is nothing less than the promotion of universalism, postmodernism, and pagan spirituality, also known as the New Age Movement.

The whole article is interesting, and here's another from his site that's equally interesting Glenn Beck and Oprah Winfrey Launch New Age Programming for 2011:

I tried to warn Americans in 2010 that I believe Glenn Beck is guilty of performing a bait and switch on millions of Americans. Beck went from being a TV and radio talk show host that discussed public policy, history, and current news to preaching the same Universalism and New Age theology that Oprah Winfrey has being been preaching for years. In fact, On Saturday, January 1, 2011, Oprah launched her New Age programming for the year with the Oprah Winfrey Network. Oprah drew more than 1 million viewers for its first night on the air.

Glenn Beck has clearly become the Oprah Winfrey of the right and many Christian authors and pastors are eager to appear on his radio and television program despite his heresy because, like Oprah, Beck has taken little known authors and made them a lot of money by promoting their books.

Many Christians continue to defend Beck despite the fact he is becoming more and more blatant in his New Age preaching. I expect Beck will continue to gather around him a huge audience that is looking for a spiritual experience that tickles the ears.

I would never have guessed that there are so many Christians who could fall for this kind of thing. That's at least as disturbing as the fact that the One World Religion is taking shape before our eyes. I hope their fall into deception is temporary.

O Watchman, clean those glasses (Cathy O'Brien's outrageous empty accusations)

In one of my posts about the Bohemian Grove I touched briefly on Scott Johnson's acceptance of the allegations by one Cathy O'Brien against many government leaders in her book, Trance: Formation of America. I decided to see if I could find out more so I went to You Tube and found a speech she gave divided into seven parts. I managed to get through five and a half at this point. If after posting this I listen to the rest and it substantially changes my view of things I'll be back to correct anything I say here that needs correction.

What's amazing about these videos is how much of absolutely nothing she actually says. She just rambles on and on in an abstract way about generalities. A lot of theoretical hoo ha about how the mind supposedly works, how mind control is possible with really nothing at all to show that she actually experienced anything of the sort. She speaks of all the "abuse" she experienced without giving a single fact you could pin it to.

Perhaps the biggest giveaway that this woman is mentally deranged is that her naming of names includes only BIG name politicians. No assistants or secretaries or second-stringers for her, no mere grunts in the service of the One World Order, they are all well known public figures she identifies as her acquaintances and tormenters. Why should such top-level people involve themselves with a mere guinea pig in some experiment, which is of course what she claims to have been. Why are there no names of subordinates at all?

If she actually heard George Romney talk about using mind control methods in global education (part 4), surely such a speech should be publicly available. Why doesn't she reference it? Or was this a private meeting in which he spoke only to a few special chosen such as herself?

Without identifying a single policy of Robert C. Byrd's she broadly claims

"He has made sure that more and more states' rights are lost. He manipulated the Constitution,"

but gives not a single quote, and makes not the slightest attempt to explain why she brings him up.

It's just a hodgepodge, in fact basically nothing more than a word salad of half-baked pseudoscience plus accusations against name after name, skipping from one to another with no point to any of it.

"The different criminal operations that I was forced to participate in during the Reagan-Bush administration are detailed in our book Trance Formation of America. That information was compiled for Congress as testimony."

Wouldn't you think a fact or two might nevertheless be forthcoming in a speech of such length as this one to support such an outrageous accusation as "criminal operations"?

"I've known Dick Cheney through Gerald Ford since 1975. He is the most brutal person I've ever encountered personally by far, but it's his attitude and his agenda that is so frightening." (part 6).

Wow, she gets away with that sort of general statement without the slightest attempt to back it up, and then she just goes rambling on to the next subject. And people take this woman seriously!

"I've known Bill Clinton since 1979 when he was governor of Arkansas ... through some CIA blackops ...cocaine operations going through Arkansas."

As with all her references to public figures in this part of the speech the information goes nowhere. She tosses out an allegation, really nothing more than namedropping, giving no more information than is already public knowledge, and passes on to something else.

"Schwarzenegger wants to change the Constitution to make it possible for himself to run for President. He's a good friend of Bush's."

Again, completely irrelevant information. No point to it, no context. Just throwing names out to smear them all with vague hints at terrible complicities in who knows what. She just skips from one thing to another. Again, it seems to be merely name-dropping.

She also heard "Bill Bennett" talk about this and that, worked with him she says.

Where are the people she accuses? Isn't it normal to expect that the accused be heard? Well, probably she's so obviously off center that nobody thinks she's worth answering. But at least shouldn't there be some whistleblowers against such craziness?

Or if they're her friends shouldn't they offer a word in her behalf?

Isn't it normal to expect that a FACT OR TWO be produced in support of an allegation of such terrible things as she imputes to various men? (And women, even Hillary Clinton apparently). DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT EVIDENCE IS ANY MORE?

You can even see her struggling for what to say next at times as she loses her thread of thought. She seems to count on being able to produce some sort of gobbledygook and she does indeed manage to do that but there are times when she looks a bit frightened that she doesn't know what to say next, but then she comes up with some more word salad and all is fine again. I think this must be because it's mostly made up, it's not from knowledge or even memory at all.

That anyone takes this stuff seriously is the tragedy here. This woman is seriously deluded. I think there is a medical category for her particular kind of derangement. "Delusions of grandeur" came to mind. Google led me to "megalomania" and "delusions of persecution." The entry at Wikipedia is being questioned but it is at least descriptive of what I was trying to get at. It's not a mental disorder in itself although it may be part of a psychosis.

The amazing thing is that anyone sat through over an hour's worth of her delusional ramblings, that anybody takes her seriously at all.

The Watchmen who have set themselves to expose frauds and delusions in these last days should be working to expose THIS sort of fraud instead of falling for such pernicious nonsense hook, line and sinker.

Unfortunately she's a very sad case and probably was abused. A few others doubt her testimony but apparently think she and her husband are doing it for money. My impression is that she's doing it for more psychological reasons. And for all I know there's a GRAIN of truth in some of her testimony but there is simply no way to find out because she's so untrustworthy a witness. In any case, her testimony is so far from reliable you have to start with protecting the victims of her accusations.

Bohemian Grove Pt 3 & "watchman" type exposes in general

One last remark about the Bohemian Grove: It's none of our business. It's none of a Christian's business what people do on their vacations, whether they are the wealthy and powerful or anybody else. Hasn't it occurred to anyone that if such men are plotting political actions we object to they could do it anywhere, they don't need the Bohemian Grove for the purpose? High level political talks go on behind closed doors all the time, what's the big deal about some of them going on in the woods?

If it's the pagan ceremonies that bother you, it's SO clear that's just theatrical and nobody engaged in them believes they are invoking supernatural powers, but if anybody is, it's a very few who put on the show, the guests have nothing to do with it. Besides, this country is full of pagan rites of all sorts now anyway. If you want to kindly warn the guests that they might be exposing themselves to occultic influences that's fine, though I doubt they'd listen because they take it all for entertainment, but that's not what these self-appointed exposers are doing, they are fingerpointing at the attendees and even the invitees as if they are committing some sort of crime even to be on the BG's list.

I believe all this applies to the Skull and Bones society as well. How silly to make so much of the childish pranks of fraternity boys. Why should we be surprised if they play with devilish things -- the world is full of devilish things.

ON THE OTHER HAND: Exposing the occultic influence of Disney productions or Hollywood IS our business because they directly affect the public. Exposing heresies in Christian movements is our business because they can mislead Christians. Exposing the claims of anti-Christian religions and leaders is our business too, for the same reason. We are supposed to be watching for signs of the times, such as counterfeit Christs in these last days, to avoid being led astray. There are "watchman" ministries that focus on helping us do that, but some subjects they get into are not helpful toward that end.

When it comes to specific accusations of specific political leaders some who delve into these things are not fearful enough about smearing a person's reputation with little cause. They forget the Biblical rule of charity and that we are not to judge others, especially those who are not believers. These slandermongers have no sense of restraint, and believe the worst against a man on the flimsiest of evidence. Some of the most hideous accusations are made in these "ministries," so hideous that you'd think a person would want to think twice, three, four times before even hinting that they might be true. When proof is there, that's one thing, I'm talking about cases where the proof is mostly somebody's emotional "witness" and mere suspiciousness based on a few scattered impressions that can be misinterpreted.

I also have a problem with the claims about the Illuminati and that sort of thing. I don't know if half of what is said about this group is even half true. I just don't know. You'd think with all that's said about them I'd have a clearer idea but I don't. There's a lot of heat but little light, a lot of bald assertion backed up by little real evidence. "The Illuminati do this, the Illuminati do that." Where's the evidence? Some of the powers attributed to them are laughably beyond the human. Many assertions are made, but the quality of evidence is really questionable. I'm not sure it even matters, either. Why do we care if Satan has some powerful people in his employ? We know he has power in this world and for that matter power over all unsaved human beings. What good does it do us to know such specific things if true? All we are to do is live according to Christ. He didn't tell us to delve into the doings of the nonbelieving world.

Bohemian Grove Pt. 2

I keep finding these feverishly serious discussions online -- apparently by Christians -- about the Bohemian Grove, as if it truly is believed that what goes on there is Satan-possessed world movers and shakers plotting the demise of us all to take over the world etc.

Hey, I have no doubt there are conspiracies in this world, perhaps some very high-level ones, I also have no doubt that many of our world leaders are determined to bring about the One World Order, I also have no doubt that Satan has his hand in these things, but you can't just go around taking mere appearances for fact the way so many are doing. Some people are misguided enough to think one world government is a good idea without feeling any need of participating in occultic rites to bring it about.

In the case of the Bohemian Grove, the productions of actors for the sake of entertainment, philosophical ponderings, and even just silly amusements are getting taken for reality in a way that would be laughable if it weren't that such suspicions contribute to the world's spiritual evils in themselves. Put "Bohemian Grove" in Google Image and you'll find many old pictures of theatrical events that have been staged there, including Shakespearean productions among others, all in full costume. There are also pictures of the supposedly "religious" ceremonies that get people so upset about satanic goings on, one for instance of "priests" and "cardinals" in robes kneeling before a cathedralish stage setting as some sort of ritual is enacted. Is it really a "Black Mass" as some say? Catholic ritual is a favorite subject of such mockery because of all its pomp and regalia, but some actually take such a performance as implying a serious Catholic influence among the participants or a serious satanic influence -- WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?

In the context of the Bohemian Grove's founding by actors, and the many theatrical performances they put on during the summer event, WHY IS THIS TAKEN FOR ANYTHING MORE THAN JUST ANOTHER THEATRICAL PRODUCTION?

They may think they are making a profound moral statement in their productions, or they may simply be performing a mockery of religion. They probably do both at this summer event. Mockery of religion is FUN for some people in this fallen world. There is also the fact that sometimes a pseudo-solemn religious enactment is intended to capture what worldlings wrongly think is the essence of religion, ritual itself, for the sake of comfort or a sort of therapy, although nothing in it is taken for genuine reality. Don't we know this about fallen human nature by now?

I don't know how all this is taken, it's just obvious it's theatrical and not intended as a religious rite as such. I'm not arguing that all this is "just good clean fun" either. They are worldly entertainments with a worldly philosophy behind them, and there is also apparently a big homosexual presence there, among the actors at least (which is often associated with false religion). I'm just saying it's not serious Satanic invocation. It's metaphor or symbolism of psychological and philosophical import to some people. That's bad enough. Don't reify it and compound the problem.

As for the secrecy, I can't think of it as any more sinister than wanting to keep a private men's club private.

From the Wikipedia article:

Many of the notable participants have been politically conservative, leading conspiracy theorists to speculate that the club is actually being used as a meeting place to secretly determine important public policies. However, the majority of the members and guests who are targets of such attacks meet only over the middle weekend of the encampment, and the club largely remains a haven for artists and art lovers. [Also at the link there's a description of an event by an attendee that gives the flavor of the place -- an attempt to recreate an actual Druidic rite -- again, as theater -- along with plenty of pranks and practical jokes]

"High jinks" and "low jinks" are terms the club uses to describe its events:

HIGH JINKS: antic, caper, escapade, frolic, fun, horseplay, larks, mischief, monkey business, monkeyshines, practical joke, prank, shenanigans, stunt, tomfoolery

It has some of the flavor of the Renaissance Faire, also a theatrical event, in which costumed actors go about recreating a Renaissance festival where you can get interestingly different "fast food" and watch Shakespearean performances in the setting of a Renaissance village. This IS more like "good clean fun" than the Burning Man event I mentioned as comparison in my last post on the Bohemian Grove. The Faires are fun entertainments, which is all I think the BG performances are meant to be. But they ARE worldly entertainments so leave it at that. There's no need to invoke demons on top of it.

==============
Later: I posted this news report from 1981 about the Grove at the other blog entry on this subject but I think I'll repost it here, because it's a lot more realistic than all the conspiracy stuff about the place:

The Symbols of the Council of Europe

Stumbled on the Council of Europe recently, because of its declaration against creationism (there's a post on it at my blog, Fantasy of Evolution), and found it to be an even more interesting sign of the last days than the European Union. Here's their official website.

The symbols associated with this organization are very interesting, starting with their Flag of Europe that has a blue ground with a circle of twelve stars on it. I immediately thought of the woman in Revelation 12:1:

And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

This passage is understood by Protestants to refer to Israel (sometimes the Church) as the mother of the Messiah, the stars representing the twelve tribes...

Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

...but the Roman church interprets it to refer to the Virgin Mary. And I thought of Alexander Hislop's conclusion that the Image of the Beast will be this Catholic notion of "the Virgin Mary" which has been making demonic appearances here and there over the last century.

The symbol makers for the Council of Europe have other ideas about its meaning, but the flag's designer admits that the image in Revelation -- as understood by the Roman church -- was part of his conception:

The circle of stars bears a striking similarity to the twelve-star halo of the Virgin Mary seen in Roman Catholic art. The flag's designer, Arsène Heitz, has acknowledged that the Book of Revelation (which is where the twelve-star halo of the Virgin Mary was first mentioned) helped to inspire him.

Of course anything that reflects the uniting of European states suggests the common Protestant interpretation of the ten toes of the great image in Nebuchadnezzar's dream interpreted by the prophet Daniel, along with the ten horns of the fourth beast of Belshazzar's dream in Daniel 7 (The Council began with ten members).

Dan 7:23 ¶ Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom [are] ten kings [that] shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

The first dream describes the rise of four empires starting with Babylonia under the figure of the great statue made of different metals, the second dream symbolizes them as different beasts. The fourth beast is the Roman Empire, and Europe is regarded as the ten toes or ten kings to arise from that empire.

Another symbol I find interesting is this coin which was issued in Armenia to commemorate that nation's joining the Council in 2001. I couldn't find a discussion of its imagery but I have to suppose that the ten curved strokes that fan off the logo of the twelve stars with the e for Europe represent the first ten states of the Council at its formation.

Then there is the Council's Anthem, Beethoven's Ode to Joy, based on the poem by Friedrich Schiller.

It's kind of the Romantic Classical period's version of Michael Jackson's We Are the World, We Are the Children, which could be the anthem of the reign of the Antichrist with its world worship, self-salvation and brotherhood of fallen humanity. I'll leave your taste in the music itself up to you but I have to say that once I grasped the meaning of the words the music might as well have had all the beauty of the Corpse Flower. (Well, that's a bit harsh, isn't it? The music remains beautiful, but the words do spoil it for me, celebrating the antichrist view of happiness as they do. Kind of like that proverb about the pig with the golden ring in its snout).

The Corpse Flower ought to be the CoE's National Flower.

Anyway, here's Beethoven's Ode to Joy, with English subtitles, conducted by a very elderly and pain-wracked Herbert von Karajan .



Here's Part Two, the ending of that performance, in which we are exhorted to "seek the Creator, far above the starry vault." Jesus Christ does not figure in the account, it is truly an ode to "joy," not to God, and the "divinity" mentioned is not the true God. This is a deistic and universalistic message that blasphemes God by denying the Son. (1 John 2:23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.)

And here is Michael Jackson's "We are the World, We are the Children" with a huge cast of pop luminaries:



(Hm, listening to this again a while later I noticed the line that says God turned stones into bread. But God didn't do that. Not that He couldn't have, but in the Biblical context it would have been a cheap self-serving trick. The devil tempted Jesus after His forty-day fast in the wilderness, to turn the stones to bread to satisfy his hunger, and He refused. Just kind of interesting that that sort of mistake would be in this sentimental man-exalting song).

Mystery Babylon, Catholicism and Nimrod the Black Man

I've been pondering the possibility of Obama as Antichrist. At first thought, despite his ability to attract a worshipful following, and Oprah Winfrey's shockingly adulatory endorsement of him as "the One," and his great talent for lying through his teeth, it doesn't seem likely -- there don't seem to be any obvious connections to the usual expectations about the Antichrist. But the thought keeps growing on me.

Then it started dawning on me that the fact that he is black has interesting implications, although I don't know how to put it all together yet.

When I started studying up on the Antichrist last year because I had this sense of it all being so close, I reread a book written in the 19th century called The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop, which is a revelation of the Catholic Church's legacy from ancient heathen religions. Hislop traces them all back to a religion that made a god of Nimrod, "the mighty hunter before the Lord" of Genesis 10. His study covers many cultures and religions and is quite a work of synthesis. Of course he's dismissed by scholars and especially Catholics, but that's only to be expected.

There are many different strands of connection here and how to reconcile them all isn't obvious at first, to say the least. It took me a while to accept the connection with Nimrod at all.

One connection that's obvious, though, is that the mitre worn by the Pope looks like a fishhead -- right? (A frontal view of it adorns the top of Pope Benedict XVI's coat of arms in the illustration above).

It has an obvious fishhead shape from the front and an open-mouthed fishhead shape seen from the side. Hislop says that goes back to an ancient religion about a fish-god (Babylonian god Oannes, but also see Dagon), and he shows sketches of the priests of that fish-god wearing fish costumes with that exact same fish-head headdress.* So this is one aspect of the connection between the Catholic Church and the ancient mystery religions.

Then he traces the religion of Nimrod through many religions of different cultures with different gods and a variety of different symbols, that he claims are really about this one original god under different names, ALL of them Nimrod according to him, the "mighty hunter before the Lord" and THE BUILDER OF BABEL.

(The "Virgin Mary" and the Mother and Child images so familiar in Catholic lore are also to be found in other religions, which I hadn't known at all: Hinduism, Japanese religion, Egyptian and others, and Hislop traces them all back to the religion of Nimrod too. It's fascinating.)

But the point of connection with Obama that's been going through my head the last couple of days is that Nimrod was a black man.

Mystery, Babylon the Great is the name of the Antichrist religion according to the Book of Revelation. This is interpreted by many to be the Catholic Church (which I discuss here), as the heir of the old mystery religion, which Hislop says is all about Nimrod, the first deified man, the "god" of all the heathen religions. Again, a black man.

Now note this, something I found out in my researches last year: On this current Pope's coat of arms shown at the top of this post (apparently each Pope designs or chooses the elements of his own coat of arms) there is an image that is not very often used, something called the "Moor's head" which is the head of a black man, also called Caput Aethiopum (the Ethiopian's head). It's also pertinent that the Moors are usually Muslims. In fact it's a term I've associated mostly with Spain when it was under the control of Islam, so the image of a black man on the coat of arms came as a surprise to me.

Of course there is no lack of other ways of understanding the symbolism of the Moor's head and other images on the Pope's coat of arms but after reading Hislop Nimrod just naturally comes to mind. One of the interpretations of the Moor's head given by this Wikipedia article, here called the Moor of Freising, refers to Ethiopia, so, again, it's possible an investigation into the origins of the Freising image would take us back to Nimrod through his father Cush, also known as the founder of Ethiopia.

How does all this tie together? At this point there is nothing obvious to link Obama with the Catholic Church. But here's a thought: I guess if he's the Antichrist the Last Pope could be the Prophet of the Antichrist. Or maybe it's not about Obama and there is yet to be a black Pope?

Some references:
====================================================

Genesis 10:8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. 10:9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD. 10:10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel,
and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.

1 Chronicles 1:10 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be mighty upon the earth.

Micah 5:6 And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.

Nimrod is the son of Cush. Cush is considered the father of the Ethiopians, a black-skinned people.

Here's what a Bible dictionary says about Cush:

1. Eldest son of Ham and grandson of Noah. Ge 10:6-8; 1Ch 1:8-10. His descendants are called in the A.V. Ethiopians, though the Hebrew is the same: Cush . The district also occupied by the above people, Isa 11:11, is mostly called in A.V. Ethiopia, q.v. It will be seen by the genealogy that the descendants of Cush were numerous:-

And about Nimrod:

Nim'rod
Son or descendant of Cush, the son of Ham. He was 'mighty upon the earth,' and 'a mighty hunter,' using force and craft to bring man as well as beasts under his sway. The words 'before the Lord' probably signify imperial energy and usurped authority in independence of Jehovah. "The beginning of his kingdom was Babel " with other towns in the land of Shinar . And "out of that land went forth Asshur," or 'he went out to Assyria ,' and built Nineveh and other cities. So that Nimrod and his descendants were those who founded both Babylon and Nineveh . Babylonia was also called the land of Nimrod , which shows that the descendants of Ham settled in the East as well as in Egypt in the South. Those in the East afterwards gave place in a great measure to the descendants of Shem. Ge 10:8-11; 1Ch 1:10; Mic 5:6.

And of course, "Mystery Babylon the Great" -- Revelation 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. This "mother of harlots" is considered by many to be the Catholic Church, the inheritor of the Babylonian mystery religions.

=========================================================

Did you know that the Hindu god Krishna was black? Hislop of course says Krishna is one of the many versions of the original god based on Nimrod. According to the Wikipedia article on Krishna,

'The Sanskrit word kṛṣṇa has the literal meaning of "black", "dark" or "dark-blue",[5] and is used as a name to describe someone with dark skin. Krishna is often depicted in murtis (images) as black, and is generally shown in paintings with blue skin.' **

I always wondered why Krishna has blue skin in the usual depictions. So now I know: it's a way of indicating that his skin was very dark.

A couple of images of the black Krishna and a couple of the blue-skinned version:









Then notice the head-dress in the image to the left. Krishna is shown with many different kinds of head gear, but this one is reminiscent of the Pope's miter. The first black Krishna above has a head dress a bit more reminiscient of the Pope's tiara -- the shape is clearer on the tiny figure at the feet of the taller Krishna -- zoom in for a close-up.

Why would the Pope's head-dress be so similar to those of the old heathen gods?



















=======================================================
* Later it occurred to me the shape is more reminiscent of a snake's head than a fish head because it narrows at the neck, and snakes are very common elements of heathen religions. But Hislop made his case for the fish-head meaning very well so I'll just put this notion on the back burner for now. Symbolism sometimes has multiple references anyway.

** A little language lesson: Krishna + Murti would apparently mean Image of Krishna? There was a famous teacher of an earlier generation known as Krishnamurti, still big in the 60s and 70s though by then only one of a dizzying array of Hindu gurus who had descended on America. So I guess the name designates him one of the god Krishna's avatars or incarnations. As I recall, Krishnamurti never seemed quite happy with his anointing by the Theosophists for the job of World Teacher (Antichrist to a Christian of course) they had in mind for him, although he did do quite a bit of spiritual teaching.

"Progressive" Politics and the Antichrist

Here's a You Tube video about Antichrist candidate, Maitreya, heralded by one Benjamin Creme -- You can find out more about them by listening to Scott Johnson's talks I linked in a post below, the first one at least, or the first two. (Lord Maitreya, the Antichrist? Also Mars, Lord Maitreya, the Ascended Masters & Strong Delusion Also the PDF file that goes with it.)

Maitreya is presented by Creme as "The Teacher," but also The Christ or the Imam Mahdi or The Messiah and so on, the fulfillment of expected messianic figures of all religions. "Maitreya" is the name of the Buddhist expected leader. He's to be a spiritual AND political world leader who has plans for setting the world right. The idea is that we're in such a mess it's going to take such a leader of course. He also predicted a worldwide economic collapse, by the way, but then many of us have been predicting something along those lines.

Creme CHANNELS Maitreya, who speaks to him inwardly, the way a familiar spirit communicates with a medium. Maitreya "chose" Creme for this function back in the 70s, the same way a demon chose Helen Schucman and dictated the New Age teaching A Course in Miracles to her. As I've pointed out before, A Course in Miracles is one of Oprah's favorite pieces of demonic wisdom which she is sponsoring for this entire year.

Well, guess what Maitreya's message is? SHARING with others. Share International is the name of his site, and it has connections to the United Nations.

Soft Marxism. The Progressive line. Leftist economics.

Capitalism, according to him, here represented by his channeler Creme, is inherently evil. Just look around the world, he says. America has great wealth but so much of the rest of the world lives in dire poverty and we're going to have to learn to SHARE. Then everything will be set right, and the whole world will live in peace.

That's pretty much the Leftist idea, right? Obama represents it too. First an American socialist antichrist will get himself elected with help from powers and principalities, and then the Satan-possessed world leader will appear with supernatural powers, and we'll all come under socialism. By force, of course, because that's how it's always done. The change Obama has in mind sure has nothing to do with freedom.

Creme speaking for Maitreya also said that the message of 9/11 is that we have to share with the underprivileged, implying that 9/11 was justified revenge on the wealthy nation. Yup, wealth is not produced by hard work, nor is it a blessing from God, and poverty is not the result of bad practices and bad governments. No, the inequities are all just a terrible natural accident of capitalism. Creme's talk is straight Leftist (just as Obama's is). We're all so "intolerant" and "divisive." This is what has to "change" in our world of course. Evil capitalism.

Aside from the fact that America is already the most generous nation in the world and has been for a long time, this explanation of the causes of wealth and poverty is just insanity, as Marxism always has been.

Just what we need, right? A supernaturally endowed religious figure coming to impose socialism on us. It isn't just a national political platform, it's the program of the United Nations, it's the program of the New World Religion, it's the program of the Antichrist.

A Biblical comment on leftist politics

Thought I'd post Edward Hills' short political remarks in his book about the King James. Anyone up on the current political situation has to recognize how prescient such a comment was back in 1956. The passage was updated, but he died in 1981 so that's as far as the updating went. They knew more about the real threat of the Communists even in 1956 than they are given credit for, and today the same threat has just about taken us over from within and people remain blind to it still. The leftist propaganda mills have been only too effective.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdcha2.htm

Adam Smith's famous book had far-reaching effects. For one thing, it transformed economics from a practical concern into an academic matter. Soon economics was taught in universities and written about in scholarly publications by theorists, many of them with little actual experience in commerce and industry. Then, as the years rolled by, these scholarly "economists" grew more ambitious. No longer content merely to teach and write but desiring to rule, they gravitated more and more toward socialism. Discarding Adam Smith's principle of laissez-faire, they founded organizations and political parties to work for state ownership and control of economic resources. One of the best known of these socialistic associations was organized in 1884 by a group of English radicals. Since their strategy was to bring about social changes gradually, they named themselves the Fabian Society after the ancient Roman general Fabius, who won a decisive victory through the policy of delay. Not less sinister, all through the later 19th century there lurked in the background the communist party of Marx, Engels, Bukharin, and Lenin, who developed Adam Smith's emphasis on the importance of labor into a program of world-wide revolution and world-wide governmental ownership and control allegedly for the benefit of the workers.

The catastrophic changes of World War I fanned all these smoldering embers into flames which reached our own country in 1933. Since that date the government of the United States has fallen increasingly under the domination of subversive elements (socialists, Fabians, communists) commonly called the "Liberal-left." With this Liberal-left at the helm, our American ship of state has met with disaster after disaster, especially in the international sphere. Since World War II communists have taken over Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, and parts of other regions such as Indochina, the Near East, Africa, and South America. More than one billion human beings have been enslaved. And when we come to armaments, the situation is still more frightful. In 1962 the United States had 2 1/2 to 10 times as much nuclear firepower as the Soviet Union. (102) In 1972, after the signing of the Salt I armament agreement in Moscow, Dr. Henry Kissinger acknowledged that the Soviets had a 3-to-1 advantage over the United States in explosive tonnage. (103) But the only response of the Liberal-left to this terrible danger has been to cancel the B-1 Bomber, delay production of the neutron bomb, and give away the Panama Canal.

For many years it has been evident that the long-term objective of the Liberal-left leaders is to bring about the surrender of the United States to the Soviet Union. This drastic step, they believe, is necessary in order to establish a World Government. In 1958 the U. S. Senate was thrown into furor by tidings of a book entitled "Strategic Surrender," which had been prepared by the Rand Corporation, the first and greatest of the federal government "think-factories," and distributed to the U. S. Air Force. (104) In 1961 a bulletin was prepared by the State Department proposing surrender of military power to a United Nations Peace Force. (105) This also was discussed in the Senate, but this time there was no furor. Instead the bulletin was defended by a liberal Senator as "the fixed, determined, and approved policy of the Government of the United States of America." (106) In 1963 a study was made by a group of 60 scientists and engineers headed by Nobel-prize-winning physicist Eugene P. Wigner in the area of civil defense. The group proposed a tunnel grid system which for the price of $38 billion would provide all U. S. cities of over 250,000 population with protection against nuclear attack. Their report was submitted to the Defense Department and placed in storage. (107) Similarly, on Feb. 9, 1967, the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended a plan providing a thin anti-missile defense for the entire United States and added protection for the 50 largest cities. (108) A bill endorsing this plan was passed by the Senate 86 to 2 on Mar. 21, 1967, but Defense Secretary McNamara said it would be too expensive ($4 billion a year for 10 years), and so nothing was done about it. (109)

In 1969 appropriations were voted for two anti-missile sites, but only one was constructed, and even this was abandoned in 1975. In contrast, the Russians have a fully operative anti-missile system around Moscow. Most of their new factories are built away from large urban areas, and Russian society is now equipped to go underground at short notice, with immense shares of foodstocks buried. Missile sites also have been hardened to about 15 times the strength of those in the United States. (110)

If the projected "strategic surrender" of the United States to a Russian dominated United Nations actually takes place, Bible-believing Christians everywhere will be facing persecution and death, and the preaching of the Gospel will well nigh cease. Until Jesus comes, therefore we must do our duty as Christian citizens. We must expose and oppose the evil program of the Liberal-left and work for the re-armament and security of our country. All available resources must be allocated to this end. Wasteful programs must be discontinued.

Does this mean that we are to return to the economic doctrines of Adam Smith? Not quite. For Smith was a skeptic, a friend of David Hume, and because he was a skeptic he failed to appreciate, or even to consider, the most important of all the causes of the wealth of nations, namely, the blessing of God and the influence of Christian Truth. But seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you (Matt. 6-33). Even earthly interests prosper best under the sunlight of the Gospel. This is why even unbelievers, even those who reject the Saviour whom the Gospel proclaims, prefer to live in Christian countries rather than non-Christian countries and in Protestant countries rather than in Roman Catholic countries. And the testimony of history is to the same effect. The Near East, for example, was once the richest region in Christendom, but after the Mohammedan conquest it speedily became poverty stricken. At the time of the Reformation Spain and Italy were the most wealthy nations in Europe, while England was poor and Scotland barbarous. Then the Gospel came to Britain, and this relationship was reversed. And in all North and South America the only wealthy nation is our own United States, in which alone (with the exception of the Protestant provinces of Canada) the preaching of the Gospel has had free course.

While defending our country, therefore, we must not forget to defend the Bible, for this is still more basic. Honesty, moral purity, and trust in God are the foundations of national and personal prosperity, and these fundamentals are taught only in the holy Scriptures. Two things have I required of Thee; deny me them not before I die: Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me (Prov. 30:7-8). But my God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:19).