A One-World Government

RV166-01

In the history of mankind, many political leaders have dreamed of ruling over a worldwide empire. This was tried by the Egyptians. It was tried by the Assyrians. It was tried by the Babylonians. It was tried by the Medo-Persians. The Greeks under Alexander the Great tried it. The great Roman Caesars tried it. Napoleon tried it, and scared the world half-silly. Mussolini tried it, and Hitler tried it. However, these all found that their conquests fell short of world domination. No leader has ever ruled over Europe, Asia, and Africa, which are centered around Israel, let alone the Western Hemisphere, North Central and South America. All attempts of world government in the past have indeed fallen short of that goal.

The world today is, in effect, smaller than it used to be due to instant satellite communication; the rapid means of travel from one place to another; ballistic missiles, which are able to target any place on the face of the earth; and, the computer control of world finances. The result is that nations are no longer isolated from one another as they were in the past. So, they are affected by what happens around them. The nations of the world now have, in fact, an increasing economic interdependence.

You may have followed in the news recently that current American policy is now seeking to establish a free trade arrangement between the United States and Mexico, which means that there won't be any duty; there won't be any penalties; and, there won't be any cost to producing something with cheap labor in Mexico and selling it up here in the United States at considerable profit. United States has this kind of an arrangement now with Canada. The reasoning behind the American government in doing this is to try to create a trading bloc which has the power to compete with the United States of Europe.

I remind you again that the United States of Europe comes into existence January 1, 1993. Then it becomes one country: with no more borders; one parliament; one government; and, one currency. It is a united force, with one military structure. It will be the greatest, and the most powerful economic, military, and every other kind of force in the world at that time. The United States will indeed be eclipsed.

Japan recently has declared that it no longer fears the United States. It no longer is concerned about keeping the United States happy in order for trade to be carried on between us and the Japanese, because we are now no longer the primary trading partners of Japan. Asia now trades with Japan far in excess of anything that the Americans do; and, what Japan has, the Americans need. So, here again is another one of those little elements indicating the factors that are going to be involved in the removal of the United States from being a world power, in addition to those we mentioned in the previous session.

Socialism

Governments find that they cannot raise taxes high enough to satisfy the greed of the indolence that they have raised. These unsatisfied demands are leading to violence, and it is tearing the social structure of all nations on the face of the earth. Socialism always creates shortages, and it reduces a nation's ability to produce food. So, countries which would be extremely prosperous; independent; and, self-reliant, can't even feed themselves, because of the political economic climate which has been created. Therefore, people are increasingly going to be looking for some strong man on the world scene to exercise political power because they are now fearful for their very survival.

Add to this the threat of nuclear weapons, in the hands of irresponsible fanatics, like Saddam Hussein, and fear is created in all nations. You may be sure that in the recent Gulf War, if Hussein had had nuclear weapons, he would have used them.

There are some genuine environmental problems, pollution, abuse, and destruction that are being used to justify the call for more government controls over people. There is a lot of Bunco on environment, such as the greenhouse effect – that the world is getting warmer, and that this is going to create a disaster. There are a lot of false environmental issues, but there are some genuine ones. But in any case, the whole point is that government has to come into the picture in order to control people.

Lawlessness and immorality are also raising the cry for more government by people who are victims. And what more government always does is restrict the personal freedom of the citizens of the nations. People of the world are increasingly receptive, therefore, to this idea of a new world order; that is, a world government, and very logically, that should be under the United Nations. Today this kind of a world government is technologically possible.

One-World Government

The Revived Roman Empire

The United Nations, and those who promote the United Nations, have always wanted such a military force to exist in the hands of an international organization in order to police the world, and to enforce its resolutions. The international one-worlders actually want to merge the American and Soviet military power, and to put it under the neutral control of a third party. That third party will be the shadow government of bankers and political leaders who will then have at their disposal the world's smart weapons. They will be invincible. They will be the real rulers of mankind.

Once the nations of the world are disarmed, Satan will be ready to establish his world empire and government of the antichrist. It is very important, if you're going to be a tyrant, that you do not allow people to have guns. Tyrants are always discouraged by guns in the hands of their victims. What are we hearing today? People in Congress, those human viewpoint men that always get into office, are falling all over themselves, trying to figure out how to impose more restrictions on Americans owning their personal weapons. Tyranny is always based upon restricting people from having a means to resist an aggressive, tyrannical government.

Well, Satan will eventually have the gun laws in place. He will eventually have everything under control so that the antichrist will be able to come on the scene with such a military force and such power, that all the world will yield obedience and allegiance to him. They will follow his New Age occult religion, as well.

The Roman emperors always connected political power with their personal deity. That's why, as you look at old Roman coins, you will see the image of the emperor of the time on the coin, but underneath it you will also see the declaration that he is deity. The antichrist will control all the commerce as the world ruler, and he also, like the emperors of old Rome, will declare himself to be God.

The Mark of the Beast

The time will come when people are going to have some kind of a mark like that on their person, and they will not be able to buy a sack of groceries unless they can show that, or unless they can run that under the scanner, or their foreheads can be read, and the antichrist has approved the transaction through the computer controls. You can go anywhere in the world with the Plus system of funding. Machines are centrally controlled by satellite hookups, and you can use your card to draw money, unless somebody puts into the computer: "Don't respond to this card."

The antichrist will be the world's military, religious, and financial leader, with undisputed control over all the world, and people will view him as the greatest genius that has ever lived. At that time, Satan will finally have what he's always wanted – a man fully dedicated to himself, and fully dedicated to Satan. He will be a man who will now be in a position to control the whole world, and who will be Satan implicitly. Anyone who opposes the will of the antichrist will be exterminated in the style of communist leaders today.

Muslims

The Gulf War

There has been a curtain like the Iron Curtain that you know about in Eastern Europe, and the Bamboo Curtain that you know about in the Orient, separating the communist world from the free world, so that people who are on the communist side of those curtains have been kept in the dark about what happens on the other side, and how great life is on the other side. There has been also a Muslim curtain. This curtain has also kept information from the followers of Islam about what's out there on the other side, in the world that they call "the infidel world." They have been out of contact with the Christian world. They've been shielded from the West. So, they've had a lot of distortions and mistaken ideas.

Thoughtful Muslims now are asking themselves some questions about what has happened through this Gulf War. They have been told, and they believe sincerely, that they have the true religion of God. But now they're wondering about that, and some of them are beginning to dare to say it out loud. They're asking themselves such questions as: why did Muhammad choose the chief idol (of the pantheon of idols which were worshiped by the desert tribes of Arabia) whose name was Allah to be the God of Islam? Many Muslims don't understand that. They're not aware of the fact that Muhammad swept in there; came on this sight of the shrine that was filled with many idols; he threw them all out; selected the one called Allah, which was the chief idol god that the Bedouin tribes worshiped; and, he called this the true God, Allah. As we know, behind every idol God, there is a spirit of a demon.

They are asking the question: why did Muhammad retain that black stone in the Kaaba shrine? This Kaaba was the shrine where the idols that the Bedouins (the nomads) worshiped were placed. This shrine in Mecca carried this black stone. This black stone, Muhammad said, was given by the angel Gabriel to Abraham. When the Muslims pray, they always face east to face the Kaaba, the shrine. Why did Muhammad keep this black stone, which the Muslims kiss today, when it was so prominent in the idol worship before he came on the scene?

Furthermore, why did Muhammad teach that Islam was to be spread by killing those who refused it? Muhammad himself conducted 27 campaigns of slaughter, and I mean bloody slaughters. Anyone who refused to be converted to Islam was killed on the spot. The Koran teaches that that's what you should do with infidels. What has it produced? You have the bloody terroristic people of the Arab world. These people seem very crazy and odd to us, but you must remember that they are the direct products of the teaching of Muhammad. Some more thoughtful members of the Arab world are wondering: what kind of a god would be a god of slaughter and blood?

They wonder about the claims that Allah will always protect and give victory to the Muslims. They found that that was quite false. The Muslims of Kuwait did not have victory. If it had not been for the infidels of the West, Saddam Hussein would have also conquered Saudi Arabia. How could Muhammad claim that the five books of Moses, the Pentateuch, were the true Word of God, and that the New Testament gospels were the true Word of God, and then say that the child of the promises to Abraham, who received the promises and passed them on to his posterity, was Ishmael, and not Isaac?

These Muslims are now beginning to think that Muhammad didn't know what was in the Old Testament. That is such an obvious statement that Isaac was the child of promise, and that Ishmael was definitely not the child of promise, and yet they've got it backwards. Muslims are saying, "How can that be?" Furthermore, they're saying, "How could you accept the New Testament gospels, and claim that Jesus was not deity – to suggest that Jesus did not claim Himself to be a God-man. They even wonder about a religion that claims to speak for God, that treats women as cattle. You can have four wives as a Muslim, and you can divorce a wife simply by stating that she is divorced. All you have to do is say, "I hereby declare that you are divorced. Shove off, baby." Then you can replace her with a newer model who maybe is not so creaky and worn out. That's a very attractive system. You can have four wives. That's all. But there are no limitations on concubines. You can have girlfriends galore. Who would not be attracted, in the lust patterns of the sin nature, to such a religious system? These thoughtful men are saying: what kind of a god of righteousness that we talk about would give us commands such as that – such a brutal system as polygamy always is?

This is always Satan's mark through the religious systems of the world. That's why we know that Mormons, the greatest, most moral people on the face of the earth, are engrossed in a vile satanic religion because their leader said, "God said you should marry multiple wives."

The League of Nations

Americans were very quickly indoctrinated to the need for a world organization to preserve world peace in the future. Entrance into the League of Nations was strongly promoted by President Wilson, but we still had a biblical society, and we still had people being sent to Congress (to the Senate) who had to ratify treaties such as this, who were oriented to the Word of God. These discerning minds in the United States Senate realized that the League of Nations, in the nature of the case, would have to supersede the authority of the United States Constitution. That would undermine our national sovereignty and independence. So, after nine long months of debate (nine months of wrangling about this in the Senate), they voted against the United States joining the League of Nations.

The people who were promoting world government were crushed. They drew their forces together and they said, "We have to think this through." It was a great defeat. What they did was that they proceeded to create organizations that would now start moving the government toward the concept of world unity by getting their members inside the American government. And an organization was formed, which was called the Council of Foreign Relations. The Council of Foreign Relations today has literally hundreds of men in an organization that has maybe 1,200 people around the world. You have to be somebody really significant to be invited to join the Council of Foreign Relations. Something like 250 or 300 are in the critical point positions of the American government today, especially in the State Department. Those people are constantly moving to acclimate the American mentality toward a one-world government organization.

President Bush himself was a very prominent, respected member of the Council on Foreign Relations until somebody began informing the American people (during the Reagan election) of what this organization was about, and what its history had been, and the lid was blown. The cover was blown, and President Bush very quickly resigned so that he could say, "No, I'm not part of that terrible organization."

The United Nations

President Truman expressed a willingness to have the United States place its military forces at the disposal of the United Nations without any approval of Congress. While it took nine months to reject the League of Nations, it only took six days of debate in the Senate for the Senate to accept the entrance into the United Nations. That's how much change had come in the time between the wars.

President Truman had to speak to the American people on this issue of the U.N. enforcing its rules – a world government that needs a military power. This is the same thing that the antichrist is going to have to have. Truman said this: "It is this administration's contention that if the Senate ratifies the charter (that is, the United Nations charter) in the first stage, they accept a moral obligation to all other signatories of the San Francisco charter to place at the disposal of the new organization an adequate supply of forces which will be available for use anywhere the Security Council, including the United States delegate, decides to send them (and note), without the authorization of the Congress in each case." For the first time in the history of American political life, a sitting president declared that Congress does not have to decide whether American military forces go to war, even though the Constitution says that they do. This new organization was viewed as superseding the Constitution of the United States.

United States senators who were approached about this (because there was a lot of furor over this) foolishly argued that they could control the use of American military forces by the United Nations' leaders. A New York Times editorial, the day after the Senate ratified the dream of a postwar super state, entailed: "The destruction of parts of the written Constitution without authorization from the American people. But that apparently is OK with Vandenberg and his cohorts." Senator Vandenberg was one of the leading proponents of accepting the United States into the United Nations. The New York Times said this, approvingly: "The administration is also convinced that under Article 43, the United States has no moral right to stipulate that our forces shall operate in only one sector of the world, or to demand that the Security Council hold up its decision pending approval of the US Congress of the recommendation of the American delegates."

This is the kind of thing that we were reading in the newspapers at the time (the people who were paying attention). Here was an organization into which our country was being drawn, while we were being told by our leaders in Congress that they can have our military forces, and Congress does not have to give its permission as to how they will be used by this world organization.

The use of American military might by the U.N. became an issue five years after we joined the United Nations. North Korea invaded South Korea, and immediately the United Nations turned to the United States and said, "We want your military forces." And President Truman placed our military at their disposal, and sent them to Korea. He was asked, "How can you do that without a declaration of war by Congress?" He said, "We are not at war. This is a police action. The United Nations charter has the right to police the world with our forces."

In our day, President Bush sent American troops into combat in the Gulf War under United Nations directorates. People complained about this, and suddenly, we were hearing on public television the debate over the question: can the president send us into a full scale war without the approval of Congress? The president argued that he did not need a declaration of war by Congress. He was implying that this was a police action, and that this was not a war. But finally, to silence the opposition, he called for a joint resolution of Congress to authorize the use of American armed forces in Iraq. But he said, "If they don't approve it, I can still do it." So, the Congress was sent a resolution of the United Nations calling for Americans to be sent to Iraq. Our Speaker of the House Thomas Foley said that the resolution of the United Nations had, "The moral, legal, constitutional, practical consequences of a declaration of war." The speaker of the House said, "If the United Nations says, 'Go to war,' that's the same as if our Congress had declared war."

A generation ago, you couldn't have gotten away with that. There had been such a furor in this country, it would have been unthinkable. Now, Americans are acclimated to world domination. They're acclimated to a world organization governing this nation. So, the resolutions of the Security Council of the U.N., speaking for the international community, sent Americans into battle in Operation Desert Storm.

All of this was done to justify the United States, acting as the world's policeman, to establish the new world order, which is just what the antichrist needs. It was amazing to hear the president use that term in view of what we know from biblical prophecy about where the world is going. At the heart of a nation's sovereign independence is the right to control your own military forces. Both Truman and Bush justified sending Americans into war, and to their deaths, on the authority of United Nations resolutions – not on the authority of the United States Constitution. Most of the United Nations members, incidentally, sent no forces (or very little) to fight either in Korea or the Gulf War. It was an American operation all the way down the line.

The proponents of world government were delighted with the involvement of the United States in the U.N. wars, both in Korea and in Iraq. It enhanced the authority of the U.N. over the authority of the United States.

Rules of Engagement

General MacArthur said that he was told by President Truman that he could bomb half the bridges going across the Yalu River – the bridges going across from China to North Korea on the Yalu River (separating North Korea from China), with supplies coming in, and troops coming in. Suddenly at the end of that war, as a new war began (with the Chinese entering it), he was told he could only bomb the North Korean side of the bridge (half of the bridge). General MacArthur said, "I have never been trained on a method by which one can bomb just half of a bridge." Yet, that was right there in the rules of engagement.

One of the officers in the air strikes noted that the communists were always waiting for the Americans in Korea when they came across. He suspected that that was because they were under United Nations authority, with information going to the U.N., and the communists passing it on back to North Korea. He became so fed up with our policies that he ordered one of the greatest strikes, and never told Washington that he was doing it. They didn't get the word to the United Nations, and it was a huge success. The Communists were not prepared. Boy, did he ever get reprimanded! Those of you who have been officers in the military know that a reprimand on your record is a very serious thing, especially if you're going to be a career officer. This man was reprimanded because he demonstrated what was happening in the information being given.

So, why would this country not want to defeat an aggressor like North Korea? Because the object is world government. If you don't understand that, all of this seems crazy. This has been in the minds of world leaders for a long time.

President Abraham Lincoln made an interesting observation on one occasion to his law partner, William Hendon. Lincoln said to him, "The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making power to Congress was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons: Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This our convention understood to be the most oppressive of all kingly oppressions, and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing to this oppression upon us." That's exactly what was in the minds of the writers of the Constitution – to keep one man from being able to take people to their deaths in a war, as kings have done for centuries.

The spirit for a powerful world government is increasingly attractive to Americans who know neither Scripture nor the meaning of the Constitution, and have no idea where all this is leading us.

So, when, in Revelation 13:3, we observed that one of these empires has been slain in the past (seemingly a fatal destruction); namely, the Roman Empire, suddenly it comes full-blown back on the scene with a new Caesar in the form of the antichrist, it is no wonder that the whole earth is amazed and is willing to follow the antichrist. He comes on the scene into a world which has already been prepared for world government; for the supremacy of one leader; and, for someone who can produce all of the things that people want government to do for them. When you understand this as your frame of reference from Scripture, then everything that we see taking place in our day is more impressive than ever.

In verse 4, we see the ultimate result of this attitude on the part of people of the tribulation era. They respond in two ways to a world leader. They worship Satan, who establishes this world leader, and they worship the antichrist himself. The details of that worship, and the significance of this devotion to Satan and his beast ruler, we shall take up next time.

Dr. John E. Danish, 1990

Back to the Revelation index