Re: dark times

Dear Friends, 

 

Please read Bill's comment and my response.   In Christ, Carol

----- Original Message -----

From: Bill Miller

To: carol wolman

Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:09 AM

Subject: Re: dark times

Though I've been out of the Christian camp for a couple decades, I recall the end times prophecy about the "star that falls into the sea and poisons a third of the waters". Sounds like a nuclear incident to me. Unfortunate, but I get the sense that a showdown of that magnitude still has to occur before the evil is sufficiently exposed and rejected - so that we can finally return to sanity. I hope I'm wrong, but if there's any sort of divine direction to the universe, we have to believe we can survive this and eventually thrive again.

 

Bill Miller

 

I believe that star fell in 1945, and humanity woke up enough to create international treaties and bodies to control these horrible weapons.  Ever since 1945, there has been a fierce battle, the spiritual battle of Armageddon, between the warmongers and the peacemakers.  The weapons of the warmongers are ever more fearsome nuclear weapons.  The peacemakers' weapons are those of the Prince of Peace, as described in Rev: 19 (KJV)   ¹⁵And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

 

The sharp sword coming out of the mouth is, of course, the tongue, which speaks the truth and exposes the lies of the warmongers.  The rod of iron is the fear of all-out nuclear war, which keeps the nations in check and forces them to cooperate in order to prevent this.  The wrath of Almighty God is at our greed, carelessness with His creation, and lack of compassion for one another and for our fellow creatures, for which we are suffering ecodisasters.

 

In the name of the Prince of Peace,  Carol Wolman

----- Original Message -----

From: carol wolman

To: peacemakers

Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 3:18 PM

Subject: dark times

 Dear Friends,

 

Today I had a new patient, a depressed young man.  He did not want to take antidepressant medication because "the Lord has laid this burden on me, and He will heal me if He wants to".  He is an ardent fan of the LEFT BEHIND series, and wishes the rapture would come soon, although he denies feeling suicidal. 

 

I just sent out an email about how high school students are being bombarded with recruitment messages.  The recruiters hound them in the lunchroom, the guidance counselor's office is plastered with recruitment posters, and Channel 1, the school news channel which they watch each morning, is full of ads from the armed services.  We are quickly becoming a militarized country.

 

Bush is pushing for a new generation of nukes and an end to the ban on nuclear weapons testing.  No mainstream politician will touch the depleted uranium issue with a 10 foot pole.   It's easy to lose hope.  If we escape a nuclear conflagration, the slower nuclear war may destroy the gene pool.

 

I derive hope from my own story.  I went to Jerusalem in 1978 to talk about the psychic numbing Americans were manifesting then about the threat of nuclear war.  Why would God answer by sending Jesus to walk with me and promise that He would use me to prevent nuclear war?  Why would God have sent an angel to tell me, in Jerusalem, that I would have children, when I was almost too old?   Why would He fulfill the prophecy about children so thoroughly and faithfully if He didn't mean to fulfill the promise as well?

 

I take comfort from His constant presence in my life, and keep my faith.

 

  Psalm 23: ⁴Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

 

In the name of the Prince of Peace, Carol Wolman

Fw: HOW KERRY INTENTIONALLY THREW THE ELECTION TO BUSH

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Cahill"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 4:19 PM
Subject: HOW KERRY INTENTIONALLY THREW THE ELECTION TO BUSH


Dear All,

Some of you may recall I was saying the same thing as Carol Rawle below
about Al Gore and the 2000 election. Both 2000 and 2004 were "fixed
fights" in which Gore and Kerry each "took a dive" in boxing parlane. How
the bloody hell else could an absolute criminially insane buffon like Bush
win the White House?

And how else does "military/industrial complex" translate but into pure
and simple "FASCISM?"

Ralph Nader and those of us who voted for him suffered a lot of abuse from
Democratic Party faithful. And some of us have long memories.

Tom Cahill

____________________________________________________________________________
__

> SEE THE LINK BELOW FOR HOW THE GANNON SCANDAL LEADS TO LINKS BETWEEN
>DEMS AND REPS. HELLO!!!!! THERE IS ONLY ONE POLITICAL PARTY IN THE
>USA!!!!!

http://www.unknownnews.org/050104a-cr.html

The Democratic Leadership Council's role in losing the 2004 election

by Carol Rawle,
Unknown News
>
>Jan. 4, 2005
>
>Maybe I've finally arrived at complete and total cynicism, or even
>turned the corner and become a conspiracy nutcase. But there's been
>something about the way Kerry conducted his campaign and his
>post-election behavior that has been nagging at my mind for weeks.
>
>I've always considered myself to be a reasonable person, not given
>to jumping to conclusions on flimsy evidence, nor am I easily swayed
>by sensational sentiment. However, when things don't seem to add up, I
>can't rest until I find out why, and I'm now ready to admit that I
>strongly suspect that John Kerry threw the election, and the Democratic
>Leadership Council (DLC) was behind it.
>
>Let's look at some basic facts. The DLC had, and still does have, a
>stranglehold on the Democratic Party. It was formed back in the '80s
>to counteract the liberal bent of the Democratic Party. Who controls
>the DLC, though? Big corporations with major-big money. In fact,
>many of the same big Fortune 500 corporations that control the
>Republican Party are major backers of the DLC. Some conspicuous card
>carrying members of the DLC are Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore,
>Dick Gephardt, Bob Graham, Joseph Lieberman, John Edwards, and John
>Kerry. However, Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean do not normally
>associate themselves with this outfit.
>
>Dean had the nomination practically sewed up until "The Scream," but
>it could easily have gone the other way and energized the party if
>only they had wanted to play it that way. I think it's possible that
>the DLC was ordered by the corporate elite to use it as a way to get
>rid of Dean because he doesn't fit into their long range plan.
>
>That plan happens to be interchangeable with the one the
>conservative right has, and that is to favor big business with tax
>breaks and loosening regulation so it can dominate world economics. So
>Kerry got the nomination by default, I believe, because the DLC thought it
>would be simpler all the way around if they ran a candidate who was so
>like Bush on major issues he'd stand a good chance of losing, or if he did
>win, it wouldn't make much difference to their grand scheme.
>
>Here's some circumstantial evidence to tally up. Everyone was
>disappointed in the piss-poor way Kerry ran his campaign. He blew it
>on so many levels that if it were an NFL football game, you can bet
>there'd be an investigation into point shaving. I won't go into the
>whole list of his campaign disasters, but didn't someone say at one
>point, that the election was "Kerry's to lose"? Yet he seemed bent
>on doing almost everything exactly wrong.
>
>Well, just maybe it wasn't simply a case of bad campaign management
>from his DLC handlers. Maybe it's because Kerry had agreed not to
>try too hard to win the election, and he was just following orders to
>accomplish this.
>
>Look at the election polls. Kerry appeared to have a lead on Bush
>right up to election day, and the exit polls were unmistakably in
>Kerry's favor. If the corporate rulers wanted Bush to win, something
>had to be done if Americans insisted on, god-forbid, VOTING FOR THE
>WRONG CANDIDATE! If the vote was indeed corrupted, perhaps all of the
>blame may not belong to the Republicans.
>
>There's more that doesn't make sense. Kerry surprised everyone by
>conceding the election much too early and before all of the
>provisional ballots were counted. Then when, almost immediately,
>there emerged mounting evidence of election fraud in all of the key
>states, Kerry was conspicuously silent. When it was discovered that
>Kerry had $51 million left in his campaign war chest, he tried to
>cover it up by saying it was only $15 million, and the rest was
>given to the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
>
>The truth is, there was $51 million, and Kerry had a moral and
>fiduciary obligation to all the people who donated money to elect him
>and voted for him to use that money for investigating and contesting the
>vote in Ohio, Florida, and New Mexico, where it is obvious that a fair
>election did not occur.
>
>But he has only been involved on a token level, and he has
>maintained that there was no fraud in the election and Bush won
>fairly. Why is this, when there's so much evidence to the contrary?
>
>And at the very least, you'd think he would want to know why,
>without exception, every single discrepancy occurring in the voting
>process favored his opponent and not him.
>
>The question that bothers me most about this theory is probably the
>one you are asking now. Why would Kerry go along with the DLC and
>its corporate masters and agree to throw the election? I believed,
>and still do, that John Kerry is basically a principled and decent
>man. But he's a politician who grew up as part of the "ruling
>class." He is also a member of Scull and Bones, that secret Yale
>fraternity that George W. Bush also belongs to, who, as adults, call
>themselves The New World Order which controls the purse strings and
>politics of most of the world and are all loyal to one another, first and
>foremost. He was promised, no doubt, that he'd get his real chance in
>2008, which could account for his not wanting to spend all of his campaign
>war chest on an election he'd agreed to lose. And why waste the money on
>contesting this same election when he has no intention of being president
>until 2008?
>
>There are entirely too many coincidences. So it's just a matter of
>adding up all the evidence and drawing some obvious conclusions. I
>believe, given all I now know and understand, that it was in the
>best interest of this consortium of big corporations that Bush
>continue as president. Even though he's made a mountain of embarrassing
>mistakes, he has been flawless in delivering for the corporate ruling
>class. Big business hasn't enjoyed this level of pampering and privilege
>for the better part of a century.
>
>Maybe at the end of four more years of Bush, things will be on track
>enough for the corporate elites to permit the Democrats, under the
>leadership of the DLC of course, to have another crack at the White
>House. And I'm sure that Kerry really believes they'll make him
>president.
>
>I know this all sounds like some whacko conspiracy theory, but I
>don't know how else to make sense of this truly bizarre election. I
>think there is enough circumstantial evidence that we can and should
>begin to ask some hard questions about the true agenda of the DLC,
>and expose them for what they really are -- a group more loyal to
>the conservative right than to traditional Democratic ideals.
>
>And if there might be even a shred of truth to any of this, it would
>be a leadership betrayal of epic proportion, a leadership who, for
>all practical purposes, has sold the loyal supporters of the
>Democratic Party into the slavery of the conservative right.
>
>One only needs to follow the current enterprise to install a new
>leader of the DNC for evidence of this. This could turn out to be
>the most important reason we have for stopping at nothing until we
>get rid of the DLC.
>
>I do not envision the DLC giving up control without an awful fight,
>so I think it's naive for liberals and progressives to entertain the
>notion of anything less than an all out battle to rescue the party
>from this corporate-owned, conservative-pandering faction. Then, after we
>take back the Democratic Party, the next step will be to take back
>America.
>
>To learn more about why we have to get rid of the DLC, check out a
>gutsy new website, Get Rid of the DLC.
>
>
>
>© 2004, by the author.
>
>

Fw: The Rapture Index by Jon Carroll

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Karch"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 6:41 AM
Subject: The Rapture Index



Published on Friday, February 11, 2005 by San Francisco Chronicle

Fasten Your Seatbelts
The Rapture Index
by Jon Carroll

Let us consider the Rapture Index. This is a real thing prepared by
serious people. If it makes you laugh, you have not gotten the memo. You
probably have not read any of the 12 volumes of the "Left Behind" series,
the best-selling books in America today.
Those Left Behind are those who did not experience the Rapture, which is
an instant in time when all the truly holy people are taken directly to
heaven, leaving their clothes in small neat piles behind them. The rest of
the ungodly losers are left to deal with natural disasters and wars and
the armies of the Antichrist, after which they die in various colorful
ways while the ranks of the saved watch with compassion tempered with an
understandable sense of satisfaction.

The Rapture Index, as of this writing, stands at 153. Anything over 145 is
labeled by the Rapture Actuaries as "Fasten your seat belts." In other
words: Repent for the End Is Near. You may see all this for yourself at
www.raptureready.com/rap2.html, should you think I'm making it up.

The Rapture Index is based on 45 prophetic categories, things like
drought, plague, floods, liberalism, beast government and mark of the
beast. "Beast government" is apparently the European Union; the news that
the EU is looking for a new president is seen as a sign that the end time
is drawing nearer. The latest "mark of the beast" is a plan by the
Antichrist that will result in said mark being implanted in the right hand
or forehead of unbelievers. The relatively high number of this indicator
is explained thusly: "Wal-Mart is falling behind in its plan to bar code
all products with radio tags." There are some parts of this belief system
I have not yet grasped.

The Rapture is a good thing, and therefore floods, famine, drought and all
that are also good things because they portend the coming of end times.
Even liberalism is a good thing, because there need to be a lot of Christ-
deniers for the end times to come. (Among the prophesied Christ-deniers:
the pope. That part is pretty much played down in the pamphlets.)

The end times begin when Russia (also known as the ancient nation of Gog)
and Iran join forces to attack Israel. Before this can happen, however,
the old temple must be rebuilt. Peace between Israel and the Palestinians
is necessary for that to happen, so the Rapture Index sees the peace talks
as a good sign. Not as a good as the tsunami, but definitely positive.

I am not the first one to notice this. The environmental Web site
www.grist.org has been covering it; Bill Moyers also wrote a column about
it. Alas, the quote attributed to James Watt, the secretary of the
interior under Ronald Reagan ("after the last tree is felled, Christ will
come back"), is not verifiable, although it's been reported many times.
Probably the liberal media again, taking time out from promoting the
homosexual agenda.

So read the Rapture Index. Consider its implications: One of George Bush's
core constituencies is actively praying for environmental degradation. Its
members are in fact praying for the end of the world, because the end of
the world is the beginning of the fun part of salvation.

Let's look at the new budget through this lens, which is (I emphasize)
neither fanciful nor satirical. Money for clean water: down. Money for the
cleanup of old nuclear sites, including the massive job at the Hanford
(Wash.) Nuclear Reservation: way down. Number of Forest Service and Bureau
of Land Management acres open for logging: up. Amount of territory in
Alaska declared OK for oil drilling: way up.

You might even consider the impact of the Rapture on deficit financing.
Who cares how much debt we accrue? Christ will come and forgive it all.
Why not borrow against the future to pay for the present? The future is
gonna be a whole different deal. We're just placeholders for God's own
totalitarian state.

For us secular humanists, us gay-marrying, porn-reading, prayer-mocking
harbingers of doom, all this seems incredible. We are still in the
reality- based paradigm; we have not yet crossed over into the faith-based
paradigm. In the faith-based world, the apparent inconsistencies within
the Bush administration fade into nothingness.

Millennial Christians have somehow convinced themselves that the founding
fathers would have approved of all this because they were all old-time
Christians following that old-time religion. Because Rapture theology was
mostly cobbled together in the 19th century based on very selective
readings from parts of the New Testament, it is unlikely that the founding
fathers believed anything of the sort. Not important: Once again, I'm
indulging in reality-based thinking.

Like the prophet said: Fasten your seat belts.

The thing about the Rapture Index is this: If you're part of the problem,
you're part of the solution, because it's no good smiting sinners if there
are no sinners to smite.


© 2005 San Francisco Chronicle


###
AntiChrist candidates list: http://www.raptureready.us/antichrist.htm

Even includes the Pope!