NationStates Jolt Archive

Let's say the Christian end of the world takes place. You know that part of Revelation that says Satan will lead the nations astray and make people accept his mark of obedience to him.

I just though't I'd ask who you think would be corrupted first?

Satanists are obviously already gone, so my vote goes, oddly enough, to Christian Fundamentalists. They tend to be intolerant of people with beliefs or practices different from theirs, and preach that they will burn in hell for their rejection of the true way. All the while they preach acceptance of all people in Christ. I think their hypocracy and intolerance will make them easy targets for Satan.

All views welcome.

well that would make sense, who is it that condemns the hypocrite as the worst of all sinners, oh yeah that would be Jesus, or was it God?

Religion will have nothing to do with it in my opinion. Satan will take all who have lived "immoral" lives, regardless of faith.

Thankfully, I don't believe in an apocolypse. But just in case...I'm building a 8.75mm x 103 Rail Gun.

Why, the neocons, of course!
Now that that's outta my system ....
Probably the pseudo-pious bastards who are just looking for a singular happenstance to vindicate their warped and thorny egos.

fundies, no contest.
but the apocalypse wont be caused by satan, it will be a human.

The Scientologists.

Religion will have nothing to do with it in my opinion. Satan will take all who have lived "immoral" lives, regardless of faith.

Thankfully, I don't believe in an apocolypse. But just in case...I'm building a 8.75mm x 103 Rail Gun.

Religion will have plenty to do with it! He will send forth Antichrists to corrupt the faithful, and will twist and warp persons beliefs to serve him.

Religion is the most powerful unifying force on this earth-most people are more strongly committed to their faith than their country. Satan would and, in my opinion, will make use of any and all means to drive us from the straight and narrow path. What better way than by turning a persons' most dearly held beliefs against them to further his cause?

Plenty of people have lived immoral lives that are/were overall good people-look at Mary Magdelane. She was supposidly a prostitute, but became one of Jesus' most devout followers. Just because one has sinned does not condemn them to hell.

Then again, you may not be Christian, so your views are your own.

fundies, no contest.
but the apocalypse wont be caused by satan, it will be a human.

Is not Satan more man than any other otherworldly being? He represents to us all of man's sinful and earthly desires and creations, the opposite of heavenly and divine good.

Satan is lust, is greed, is war, is nuclear weapons, is all things that exist to bring misery and a general lack of well being to us.

Satan is lust, is greed, is war, is nuclear weapons, is all things that exist to bring misery and a general lack of well being to us.
bush?

bush?
Don't you mean "Bush"?
The thing-that-must-not-be-named ... ?
;)
Well, someone had to do it.

In my humble Catholic opinion, I think it will be God's Fan Club that's first on the chopping block, as far as religion goes. Not all Christians, just the freaky ones. Christian as I may be, I think maybe the Japanese are on to something with their overwhelming belief that it doesn't matter what you believe in, as long as you stay true to that and believe for your own reasons (heard that on late-night Bible television, which I sleep to better than I ever slept in Church as a kid :D ). So though I'm a Christian, and I do hope that I'll be one of the ones going to Heaven, I think it's more important to live a good life and have strong morals and ethics than it is to go around spouting off that "Christ is the Saviour!" bull that seems to get rubbed into faces.

But maybe that's why I'm so bad at converting :rolleyes:

Also, along these lines, I read a very great book recently called Good Omens, which was described as "The Book of Revelations had it been written by Monty Python". It put a great spin on it, and from a non-religiously oriented point of view. I mean, two of the focal characters were an Angel and a Demon, but it's really a great read. Especially because I, having thought it over, realize it makes perfect sense that the set-up described therein could lead to the end of the world. I mean, where else could it happen but Tadfield?

Let's say the Christian end of the world takes place. You know that part of Revelation that says Satan will lead the nations astray and make people accept his mark of obedience to him.

I just though't I'd ask who you think would be corrupted first?

Satanists are obviously already gone, so my vote goes, oddly enough, to Christian Fundamentalists. They tend to be intolerant of people with beliefs or practices different from theirs, and preach that they will burn in hell for their rejection of the true way. All the while they preach acceptance of all people in Christ. I think their hypocracy and intolerance will make them easy targets for Satan.

All views welcome.
Actually, Fundamentalists will be the first to spot the Anti-Christ, IMNSHO. Personally, I believe religious moderates (mainly Protestants and Catholics) will be the first to be corrupted by the Anti-Christ.

Actually, Fundamentalists will be the first to spot the Anti-Christ, IMNSHO. Personally, I believe religious moderates (mainly Protestants and Catholics) will be the first to be corrupted by the Anti-Christ.
I don't know if I exactly agree, and not just because I'm a Catholic. It seems that a lot of the more rabid Christians will take up arms in any matter that they find a foothold, and it's not like we're talking about just some average Joe. The Devil is a master at deception, and I think in the case of the End Times, there's probably more to it than just "spotting" his pawns.

That's all I really have to say for tonight, though I'd like to discuss it further. I have a job interview and a whole lot of 21-year-old birthday partying to do with some friends of mine tomorrow :rolleyes: so I should probably be getting to bed, it's 2 AM here.

Let's say the Christian end of the world takes place. You know that part of Revelation that says Satan will lead the nations astray and make people accept his mark of obedience to him.

I just though't I'd ask who you think would be corrupted first?

Satanists are obviously already gone, so my vote goes, oddly enough, to Christian Fundamentalists. They tend to be intolerant of people with beliefs or practices different from theirs, and preach that they will burn in hell for their rejection of the true way. All the while they preach acceptance of all people in Christ. I think their hypocracy and intolerance will make them easy targets for Satan.

All views welcome.

who falls first? Well look to the ground..whoevers on it is your answer!

Actually, Fundamentalists will be the first to spot the Anti-Christ, IMNSHO. Personally, I believe religious moderates (mainly Protestants and Catholics) will be the first to be corrupted by the Anti-Christ.

But what happens when Jesus really comes? Will the fundamentalists have such firm and uncompromising expectations of Jesus that they will not recognize Him because He will not be what they want?

That's what happened when He came the first time.

As an Episcopalian, I am minorly offended by your comment, but then again someone has to be, and I can see where you're coming from.

America - it's sitting on Hell (ie Yellowstone park).

Texpundistan, how on earth, above it or below it can Catholics be described as moderates?

I concur with the sentiment that the "neo-pharisees" (my own term) will fall first. It's not like Satan will actually let all and sundry know who he is... evil always disguises itself as good since it is inherently flawed by definition.

whats funny is if im not good enough belief wise and alive at the tribulation ill probaly be made a martyr.

What a silly thread. May as well debate what we'll do when the fairies rebel against their overlords.
Satan is a construct of a worried church designed to contol the masses.
It worked well in the middle ages when people were ill educated but why you all fall for it today I can't begin to understand.
I'm going to hide under my bed clothes in case the bogie man comes :rolleyes:

Texpundistan, how on earth, above it or below it can Catholics be described as moderates?
Well, the "moderate" standings of the American Catholic Church shown during the most recent Papal Conclave (openly wanting a "moderate" pope in order to "modernize" the Church and Church doctrine) pretty much defines what I consider to be the best example of "moderate" Catholics.

Notice that I did not say "all Catholics are moderates".But what happens when Jesus really comes? Will the fundamentalists have such firm and uncompromising expectations of Jesus that they will not recognize Him because He will not be what they want?

That's what happened when He came the first time.

As an Episcopalian, I am minorly offended by your comment, but then again someone has to be, and I can see where you're coming from.?Well, my definition of "fundamentalist" differs a little when concerning Christianity. I consider myself a fundamentalist, but not what most people call "Fundamentalist", i.e. the nutcases that bomb abortion clinics, handle snakes/drink strychnine and think that "God hates fags". I follow the Bible's/God's/Jesus' teachings as a whole, not only the parts that conform to some twisted view of what Christianity should be. (IMNSHO, hardcore Baptists are just as guilty of compartmentalizing their beliefs with their "no drinking and no dancing" lunacy, as well.)

...neocons...
...
pseudo-pious bastards who are just looking for a singular happenstance to vindicate their warped and thorny egos.

Redundancy.

fundies, no contest.
but the apocalypse wont be caused by satan, it will be a human.

Those are my thoughts.

Assuming that there would be one megalomaniacal genius anti-Christ person that would mastermind worldwide dominion, the answer is found not by the easiest people for the anti-Christ to convert (either consciously or unconsciously on the converted's part) but by the order that is most advantageous to HIM. (I'm going to refer to this anti-Christ as "HIM" [or HE, HIS, ETC.] from now on. That does not mean HE is necessarily male.) In example: I doubt HE would connect with Satanists publicly early on simply because of the stigma that would bring his reputation. That being said, it does get easier to conquer the world the more people you have supporting you, so working your way from the easiest converts to the ones that will require "peer pressure" to convert seems the most logical route.

Assuming HE would start HIS campaign the moment he was conscious (in other words, as a child,) he would probably "convert" those closest to him first - schoolmates would make ideal targets.

Assuming that there would be one megalomaniacal genius anti-Christ person that would mastermind worldwide dominion, the answer is found not by the easiest people for the anti-Christ to convert (either consciously or unconsciously on the converted's part) but by the order that is most advantageous to HIM. (I'm going to refer to this anti-Christ as "HIM" [or HE, HIS, ETC.] from now on. That does not mean HE is necessarily male.) In example: I doubt HE would connect with Satanists publicly early on simply because of the stigma that would bring his reputation. That being said, it does get easier to conquer the world the more people you have supporting you, so working your way from the easiest converts to the ones that will require "peer pressure" to convert seems the most logical route.

Assuming HE would start HIS campaign the moment he was conscious (in other words, as a child,) he would probably "convert" those closest to him first - schoolmates would make ideal targets.people will worship him and wuill suffer for worshipping the anti-Christ

Redundancy.
Probably. I've got the chorus and the bridge, obviously, i'm just fishing around for the hook.
*tappa tappa*
;)

I'm noting that i posted a little while back an article that Rolling Stone did on "the dominionists" that, according to what i'm interpreting from the rules, i probably don't need to grave-rob about .....
but they're my second pick if i'm being asked to point fingers. Second and first, come to think of it.

Everywhere, I'd say. No group would be "quick pickings" more than others, other than simply by rates. Like a cancer, HIS following would grow in random places, corrupting throughout the world's body, until HE held sway over the vast majority and the aparati of control.

Oh, and the people claiming Bush is the antichrist. Sorry, but it says in the Bible that the A-C would be popular beyond belief. Obviously now W, so us Republicans are safe for now.

If some government leader ever gets something stupid like 98% loved by the entire world, I'll go hide in a bunker.

Oh, and the people claiming Bush is the antichrist. Sorry, but it says in the Bible that the A-C would be popular beyond belief. Obviously now W, so us Republicans are safe for now.

By that same discernment, obviously HILLARY CLINTON ISN'T EITHER!!!!
:eek:
Some partisan folk might appreciate that.

If some government leader ever gets something stupid like 98% loved by the entire world, I'll go hide in a bunker.
Well, let me know if you're interested in one of the many newsletters i possess but don't currently expend the energy on reading/digesting. I could forward a few!!

Newsies?

Oh, and yeah, on the H.C. I only worry about her when I here about Newt saying "She's not so bad."

GAH! THEY GOT GINGRICH!

;)

I would say those who compromise their beliefs and the will of God in the name of modernism. AKA, many of those whom you see condemning the "fundamentalists" ;)

Newsies?

Oh, and yeah, on the H.C. I only worry about her when I here about Newt saying "She's not so bad."

GAH! THEY GOT GINGRICH!

;)
There's a good quote from her on that deal with Gingrich in last week's TIME magazine. That is certainly shiversome happenings.

And as for newsies .... well, you know how it is that someone tells you they've got great news and as it turns out it really isn't news at all but a sweet gesture, not unlike a lightly glancing kiss on the cheek followed by a knife seperating the ribs?
Never mind, i'm not sure why i typed that. ;)
I do bother to read my SciAm, Science and Nature journal subscriptions, as well as my horoscope at times, so i guess it's kinda broad what might be inferred by the term "news".
I come here for news! Here, and of course, Paul Harvey. Keeps me in the loop!

I do bother to read my SciAm, Science and Nature journal subscriptions, as well as my horoscope at times, so i guess it's kinda broad what might be inferred by the term "news".
I come here for news! Here, and of course, Paul Harvey. Keeps me in the loop!

In a complete hijack:

I work at a retail store, so I read mags on break, and I learn a ton of absolutely useless crap. Did you know that putting a funnel for your clip on a 1911 Gov't Model can get you extra time in the clink if you get in a situation? Or that Forza is almost like real life? That they think suspended animation is possible for humans? That there are tri- and quad-band GMS phones, as opposed to CDMA? Or how about that lying is good for you? Or how LIDAR jammers are legal, but RADAR jammers are not, in the US?

Oh, and learn "The Ropes". That's what every ad section tells me. God, I hate those ads.

[/hijack]

In a complete hijack:

I work at a retail store, so I read mags on break, and I learn a ton of absolutely useless crap. Did you know that putting a funnel for your clip on a 1911 Gov't Model can get you extra time in the clink if you get in a situation? Or that Forza is almost like real life? That they think suspended animation is possible for humans? That there are tri- and quad-band GMS phones, as opposed to CDMA? Or how about that lying is good for you? Or how LIDAR jammers are legal, but RADAR jammers are not, in the US?

Oh, and learn "The Ropes". That's what every ad section tells me. God, I hate those ads.

[/hijack]
*shares hijack*
Well, the suspended animation article is cool although i'd read about the sulfur dioxide treatment a little earlier than they wrote about it - got into an interesting discussion IRL about it since obviously the first thing they thought was the tissue damage due hydro-crystalization at low temperatures - but as for the rest of them, it might be "NEWS" but not quite a knife in the ribs, as yet. ;)
.....AND i didn't mention the Art Bell Newsletter, After Dark.
Ropes? Soap-on-ropes? Popes-on-ropes? Get on the ropes and tag out??? ;)

I'm pretty sure i'll be one of the last to go since my loyalties are seldom bought & sold - i spend too much time debating intrinsically and extrinsically every minute detail of my oft-sordid affair of a life, much to the chagrin of the few people "privileged" enough to have to deal with me on a daily basis. *antihijack*

First to fall?

Atheists, muslims, every other religion.

It is the "Anti-Christ", not the "Anti-God".

heh.

that reminds me of a study lesson a little while ago, when a teacher called mrs smuts was on duty in the study room. she is an extremely devout christian, and we wouldn't shut up each time she told us to, so, at the end of the lesson when she dismissed us, she also condemned us to hell. (she said, "go to Hell", to be more specific) :D that is also bearing in mind that neither me, nor my friends, are in the slightest bit christian.