We discussed the conditioning process that must be
necessary in order for the antichrist to accomplish all
that the Bible sets out for him in a brief seven years.
It is one thing to control the global economic,
governance and religious systems, it is another thing
altogether to centralize it first.
It takes no time at all to assume power over
something, provided that something is fully developed to
that purpose. The antichrist doesn't have the time to
develop the systems or prepare the public to accept
The Scriptures say that he takes control of the
levers of power, he doesn't create them. While the
Scriptures say that he has a "look more stout than his
fellows" and a "mouth speaking great things" -- he must
first have a willing and receptive audience, or he is
just another fierce-looking politician.
When the One was elevated to office in 2008, he
certainly looked and sounded pretty fierce. And he had a
willing and receptive audience. But what he didn’t have
at his disposal in 2009 was the necessary global
Nonetheless, the practices and policies of the Obama
administration are so similar to those outlined by the
Scriptures for the last days that he's made a lot of
people to wonder aloud, "Could the One be THE One?"
Not likely. Some of the stuff ascribed to the
antichrist for the last days will require real
leadership, not just empty words and lofty rhetoric
(although he will be good at that, too.)
So on that score, Obama isn't likely to be THE One.
But it could be argued that he has done more to move the
world in the direction necessary than any leader of any
nation since World War Two.
One of the main obstacles holding back the revelation
of the man of sin is public acceptance. While the
conditioning process is complete across much of the
world, America has, to this point, remained a stubborn
The Russians, Chinese, Europeans, NATO and the UN are
more than merely prepared to turn over the
reins of power to a strongman, they are actually
The EU has been attempting to create a
super-dictator to impose the EU's will on an
unwilling population since the Treaty of Rome set
European reunification as its ultimate goal back in
The Euro-planner's chief difficulty is in creating a
leader powerful enough to impose his will on the people
but NOT one powerful enough to impose his will on
The UN and NATO are equally eager to put their bets
on some kind of global authority that can cut through
national self interests and impose solutions to such
problems as global climate change or threats to the
Unfortunately for them, America has always been a
main obstacle to their globalization plans. No global
system could be "global" without the inclusion of the
world's only military and economic superpower. It would
take a lot of time and conditioning to convince
Americans to surrender their sovereignty to a central
Over the years, we've gradually come to accept the
truth of the statement that a politician only lies when
his lips are moving. But it wasn't that long ago that
lying to the public was the kiss of death.
Richard Nixon assured the nation; "I'm not a crook."
Until the country learned that he was lying, making
Nixon the first President to resign from office in
The One has conditioned much of America and the world
to accept that there is nothing exceptional about
America and that it needs UN supervision as much as does
Russia, China or any of the other hegemonic
dictatorships around the world.
America has been conditioned to accept the idea that
laws are only applicable to certain segments of society
and that other segments are exempted based on their
color, creed, national origin or sexual predilection.
Americans are constantly bombarded with propaganda
highlighting their differences. America is more
race-conscious today than it has been at any time in the
past fifty years. The new racial epithet is direct and
to the point . . . the new, all inclusive "n" word is
Call someone a 'racist' and he is immediately
moved to the back of the intellectual bus, to be
isolated and ignored as a person whose views are
intolerant, which is the socially-acceptable word
used to exclude that person from having any influence in
It doesn't matter if the label is accurate once it
has been made; the damage has been done. What can one
say in response? "Some of my best friends are black?"
(We could call that argument, the Zimmerman
To my point, there is zero evidence in Florida
shooting defendant George Zimmerman's background to
Zimmerman is himself a mixed-race registered Democrat
who mentored black kids. One of his defenders was a
personal friend and former local TV reporter who scoffed
at the notion Zimmerman might be racist and
who incidentally happened to be black.
The only reason that Zimmerman was ultimately
arrested and charged with murder was because of race.
Zimmerman was accused of gunning Martin down because
Martin was black and Sanford officials were accused of
letting Zimmerman go because he was white.
Remove the racial elements and you have a
legally-armed citizen using deadly force to stop an
attack in which Zimmerman was clearly injured by Trayvon
Martin. His use of deadly force was in accordance with
Florida law, and was one of nearly 200 similar instances
since the law was passed in 2005.
America has been conditioned to accept the tyranny of
the minority as a sort of 'penance' which it owes to
special interest groups wronged by previous generations.
Consequently, parents must allow their children to be
indoctrinated into gay culture, Islamic culture, black
liberation culture, or any other culture (except
Judeo-Christian culture) or face the social consequences
of exclusion meted out by the Left to anyone so hateful,
intolerant and racist as to dare to object.
Meanwhile, the most lawless administration in
American history continues to scoff at subpoenas, Acts
of Congress, federal immigration laws, states' rights
and demands for impartial investigations.
This is pretty much exactly the way the Bible
predicts the last days will unfold.
"Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many
shall wax cold." (Matthew
But wait! While all those things apply to
the current administration, all the political signs
point to "the One" as the nickname for his historical
legacy, as in the "one term" Obama administration.
Most of the national political headlines show him
slipping against Romney, while a recent global
Pew Poll showed his approval slipping on a global
basis. It seems increasingly clear that any resemblance
between Barack Hussein Obama and the prophesied
antichrist are merely coincidental.
What caused Obama to fail? Where did he go wrong?
Let me put it another way. If there is one segment of
American society that you could point to and say that
segment is THE most responsible for the failure of
Obama's policies, which would you choose?
Let me throw out some choices for the one segment
most responsible for Obama's failure.
The list can be infinite, but I'll get the ball
rolling with; 1) Republicans; 2) Islamic terrorists; 3)
the Tea Party; or 4) the Blood-bought Church.
Everything in American politics is about
compromise. The public demands political compromise
between Republicans and Democrats.
The White House is compromising with terrorists in
order to extricate the US from Afghanistan. Even the Tea
Party's staunchest stalwarts recognize the need for
compromise in order to get anything done.
To which of the groups in my little list is
"compromise" a dirty word?
How much room does a Blood-bought, born-again
Christian have to compromise on such issues as abortion,
gay marriage and other matters of faith and conscience?
The answer, of course, is zero. Which is why the One
is so close to zero now.
"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together
unto Him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be
troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by
letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at
The Apostle went on to explain that that Day (of the
Rapture) shall not come until there is a great falling
away, a period of great apostasy, that must come first.
Clearly exasperated, Paul even
reminds them that he explained this to them in his
first teaching of the Rapture.
"Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you,
I told you these things? "
Having brought his earlier teaching to mind, Paul
"And now ye know what withholdeth that he might
be revealed in his time."
What withholds the antichrist from being revealed
prematurely, which would result, not in his becoming the
One, but being revealed as the Zero, Paul reveals in the
"For the mystery of iniquity doth already work:
only He who now letteth will let, until He be taken
out of the way."
The "what" is actually a "Who" and that "Who" is the
Holy Spirit. Since He is God, the Holy Spirit can't be
literally removed -- He is "taken out of the
way" figuratively, by removing the vessels He
It isn't the Holy Spirit that votes in elections or
writes letters or answers polls -- it is the vessels
that He indwells that do that. Strictly speaking, it
isn't the Holy Spirit that revealed the One to be a big,
It is the vessels that He indwells that did that. And
the Bible says that it is those indwelt vessels (you,
me, the Blood-bought Church) that will withhold the
revealing of the antichrist until his time.
What does it mean? It means that the Enemy dare not
tip his hand for fear the Church will recognize his man.
We've already demonstrated our vigilance with a test
case. The next guy would get the same scrutiny.
The Enemy can't move forward until his rear is
secure. And that won't happen as long as the indwelt
Church is on the job.
"For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven
with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and
with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall
rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall
be caught up together with them in the clouds, to
meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be
with the Lord."
Until that happens, the Church will be here to reveal
when the One is really just a zero.