Introduction

Hard to believe, but we are already here. This is our last night for the Collision With Prophecy meetings. But here we are. I'm glad you've come and let us share with you. Make sure you stay in touch after the meetings. At our last meeting we took a deeper look at Jesus and we explored the number of the beast. Tonight as we finish we'll do two things. First, we'll complete our "event-line" from CWP#16, and then we'll give some thought to the last night on earth.

Event Line, pt. II: 1962 to the Present

Let's begin by taking up our event line where we last left off. We left off with the Supreme Court decision sustaining Sunday laws as supposedly constitutional in McGowan v. Maryland. We were shocked by that development. But it is only the beginning. Let's proceed to 1962.

Vatican II. Vatican II, held in four sessions from 1962-1965, brought a giant shift to the RC Church, one that has had a massive effect on the world that you and I live in. The meeting was hailed as the scene of a vast "updating" of Catholicism. It paved the way for great changes in Catholic liturgy--how worship is conducted. It reached out to non-Catholics, officially sanctioning their being called "separated brethren." Such phrasing appears some 20 times in the "declaration on Ecumenism" released through the Council in 1964. However, what's interesting, is that although the wording has changed, some things have not. Consider this observation by Catholic author Paul Blanchard:

Although the irenic title "separated brethren" was adopted at the Council with papal sanction, all Protestants are still rated as heretics in official teaching. Paul Blanchard, Paul Blanchard on Vatican II, p. 154.

There was something new and different at Vatican II time though. Through the great increase in the power of the media, world opinion on Catholicism underwent a grand reversal. Again, hear from Blanchard:

Vatican II's accomplishment in transforming the world Catholic image from an image of defeat to an image of victory and progress was a spectacular triumph . . . . The world was given the impression, through papal pageantry and its accompanying inflation in press and television, that the [Roman Catholic] Church was in a position of regal leadership in the moral life of the west. The Pope suddenly became for many the most prestigious individual alive. In terms of institutional accomplishment the Council thus achieved more than a hundred thousand missionaries could have effected in a hundred thousand years. Paul Blanchard, Paul Blanchard on Vatican II, p. 334.

Vatican II changed the basic relationship between Catholics and Protestants. It was a watershed. The papacy came to the costume party robed in white, but underneath she was still the creature she had been for two millennia. Protestants think she has changed. But how wrong they are!

Billy Graham's Rise to Prominence and His Friendship With Rome. Many have said to me that the famous evangelist Billy Graham is a great man, even a great man of God. And who would wish to take issue with this? Graham has been hailed from one end of the globe to the other for his crusades attended by millions, and for his "The Bible says," approach to preaching. How sorry I am today friends, to have to share some items with you that have been a shock to me. I hadn't known.

See, when Billy Graham began his work he was a pretty firm character. But soon, with his rapidly increasing popularity, there was a change. Graham, a celebrated Protestant, began to speak and act in ways unabashedly un-Protestant-like. At first, Catholics were warned by their leaders not to attend the Graham crusades, but, as Graham's attitude toward Catholicism softened, Catholic opposition to his crusades diminished. It wasn't long before some Catholic leaders spoke approvingly of the Graham crusades, especially when he began referring Catholic "converts" back to their own churches for follow-up.

What happened in 1972? Dr. Graham received the Catholic International Franciscan Award for 'his contribution to true ecumenism' and his 'sincere and authentic evangelism.' It didn't take long for the benefits of his increasingly ecumenical attitude to surface in print, either. For also in 1972 the official Vatican view of Graham's ministry was presented in the following words of Rev. Charles W. Dullea, Superior of the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome:

Because he [Graham] is preaching basic Christianity, he does not enter into matters which today divide Christians. He does not touch on Sacraments or Church in any detail. This is, for us Catholics, a loss. But from another point of view it is a gain. For he is preaching basic Christianity, not Protestantism per se. True, he implicitly assumes certain Protestant positions in his own preaching, assuming for example the 'Bible as the sole rule of faith' and Ôprivate interpretation of Scripture' but these assumptions are not obtrusive and in fact influence the main thrust of his sermons little, if at all. The Catholic will hear no slighting of his Church's teaching authority, nor of Papal or Episcopal prerogatives, no word against the mass or sacraments or Catholic practices. Graham has no time for that; he is preaching only Christ and a personal commitment to Him. The Catholic, in my opinion will hear little, if anything, he cannot agree with. Perhaps occasionally a too literal interpretation of Scripture will be heard or a too rigorous stricture on gambling or drinking or smoking, but nothing against his faith.

Shortly before Pope John Paul II's visit to the United States in 1979, Dr. Graham said that the Pope's coming "could start a new wave of spiritual revival in our nation which we desperately need. In the short time he has been pope, John Paul II has become the moral leader of the world. My prayers and the prayers of countless other Protestants will be with him as he makes his journey. His uncompromising moral stand and his warm human personality have won the admiration of many from different religious backgrounds and his visit will be of great significance for all Americans as well as the world." But friends, if the Pope preaches a false gospel, as from Scripture we've seen that to be the case, how could he possibly start a "genuine spiritual revival?"

How did the more mature, kinder and gentler Graham conduct his crusades by the closing decades of the last century? Here's how. In 1984, at the Vancouver, British Columbia [Billy Graham] crusade, the vice-chairman of the organizing committee, David Cline of Bringhouse United Church, said, 'If Catholics step forward there will be no attempt to convert them and their names will be given to the Catholic church nearest their homes' Vancouver Sun, Oct. 5, 1984.

Not so sure about what we are saying here about Mr. Graham? Consider some more of his own words:

"The gospel that built this school [Belmont Abbey College--A Roman Catholic Institution] and the gospel that brings me here tonight is still the way to salvation." Billy Graham, quoted in "Belmont Abbey Confers Honorary Degree," Paul Smith, Gazette staff reporter, The Gastonia Gazette, Gastonia, North Carolina, Nov. 22, 1967.

"We only differ on some matters of later church tradition. I find that my beliefs are essentially the same as those of orthodox Roman Catholics." Billy Graham, quoted in McCall's, Jan. 1978.

"Pope John Paul II is one of the greatest moral and spiritual leaders of this century. He is an evangelist." Billy Graham Saturday Evening Post, Jan.-Feb. 1980.

"There was a pause in the conversation, suddenly the Pope's arm shot out and he grabbed the lapels of my coat, he pulled me forward within inches of his own face. He fixed his eye on me and said, `Listen, Graham, we are brothers.'" Billy Graham, Today newspaper, June 8, 1989.

"World travel and getting to know clergy of all denominations has helped mold me into an ecumenical being. WeÕre separated by theology and, in some instances, culture and race, but all that means nothing to me any more." Billy Graham, quoted in U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 19, 1988.

Just because I think you'd be interested in knowing, here's how Graham's ministry ended. In June of 2000 he led his last great crusade in the Minneapolis Metrodome. The effort was a joint operation, representing 1075 churches, including 119 Catholic parishes. One report of the event said that "Directors said there was a new receptivity, more openness, and more ecumenical spirit. Music was cited as the driving force for youth. Musicians are usually billed as 'special guests,' but publicity for 'Youth Night' advertised it as a DC Talk/Michael W. Smith concert 'with Billy Graham.' On the last night of the meetings, rock star Amy Grant provided the music. Ninety-five thousand souls attended those meetings. There was no preparation for the end-time. Just sleeping Protestants with waking Catholics, while the attending crowd of humanity jived to the beat. And so it goes.

How saddened I was to learn of Graham's decline. How little had I known that before I was born, already he was turning Catholics back to Catholic churches, Jews back to Synagogues, and would finally incorporate the sensual music of the rock culture into his work. What a sad end to such a promising beginning. What a high price to pay. But then, as the Pope had said to him, "Graham, we're brothers!"

The Rise of Pope to Prominence, and the Unholy Alliance. And speaking of the Pope, what a rocket ride John Paul II has taken to the top. Since his rise to Pope-hood in 1978 he has played a scintillating role on the world stage. Few people know that this pope spent many years as a actor before his entrance into the priesthood and finally accession to the throne of St. Peter. Truly he has made all the world his stage as he shrewdly weighed the capacity of modern media to advance his purposes for his church.

Wojtyla saw the chink in the armor of communism. Poland, with its long history of thorough Catholicism had never given its heart to its Soviet masters. With a population nearing 100% Catholic makeup, the election of a Polish Pope opened the door for an enormous impact. The USSR was already reeling from its attempt to keep up with the accelerated arms race forced upon them by the United States. Added to this, their troops were deployed in troubling situations near the Afghanistan border. Their economy was spiraling into decline, and now unrest in the workforce in Poland was perculating. Repeated visits by the Pope fired the imagination of the Polish, alarming the Soviets to no end. They didn't know quite how to deal with the Pope.

Meanwhile in America, newly elected U.S. President Ronald Reagan also saw the opening.

As investigative reporter Carl Bernstein drily notes in his book on the Pope (His Holiness: John Paul II and the History of Our Time), "Other presidents had waited anxiously at their desks for bombers to return from their mission: Reagan waited for reports from the pope" (His Holiness, p. 269). Bernstein also points out that "almost all the men Reagan appointed to the most important or visible foreign policy positions early in his administration were Catholics" (Ibid., p. 261). National Security Advisor to Reagan, Judge William Clark said of the administration's collaboration with the Papacy and the situation in Poland that although his conversations with the President tended to be short,

'We had our own code of communication. I knew where he wanted to go on Poland. And that was to take it to its nth possibilities. The president and [CIA Director] Casey and I discussed the situation on the ground in Poland constantly: covert operations; who was doing what, where, why, and how; and the chances of success.' "And the role of the Vatican" as well, adds Bernstein (ibid. p. 267).

Still it hardly seems possible to many of us that the USSR is no more, that the Berlin wall has come down, that communism has collapsed in virtually every corner of the globe, and that the Papacy's sway in world affairs continues to increase. We live in a changed world. In almost reverent tones, Bernstein closes his book on this man with the following lines: "The world has become aware that he [Pope John Paul II] is the last of the giant on the global stage--that there are no other great heralds of broad vision or principle, whatever their cause or ideology. He has defined his time as perhaps no other leader has, even while railing against the age itself" (Ibid., p. 534).

That's a bit overstated, but it reminds us how some view him, this man who heads the religious structure that we have carefully and soberly identified as the antichrist system of Bible prophecy (See Big Words, Little Horn). One has to go back 1000 years to find popes equally capable and aggressive in advancing the agenda of that religious system.

Today, the Pope's fingerprint is all over the Roman Catholic Church. As of the October 9, 1995 Time magazine article on the Pope, "Keeping Faith in His Time," Speaking of America alone, John Paul II had appointed 297 of the countries 383 Bishops and nine of its 11 Cardinals (Time, October 9, 1995, 75). And according to the article, "all are intensely loyal" to him.

Very recently (2001) he appointed 44 new cardinals--placing a considerable impress upon the churches highest body, and that which shall elect the next pope. He cannot assure his successor, but he can move the overall philosophy of his church leadership closer to his own; and he has. Truly, the deadly wound that began to heal in 1929 is arriving at wellness. Bulging muscles ripple and flex as this unique religious system ventures forward, well along in its plan to recover power anciently wielded. Malachi Martin has put it well:

What captures the unwavering attention of the secular leaders of the world in this remarkable network of the Roman catholic Church is precisely the fact that it places at the personal disposal of the Pope a supranational, supracontinental, supra-trade-bloc structure that is so built and oriented that if tomorrow or next week, by a sudden miracle, a one world government were established, the church would not have to undergo any essential structural change in order to retain its dominant position and to further its global aims. Malachi Martin, Keys of This Blood, pp. 142-143.

U.S. Changes Foreign Policy at Insistence of Papacy. Bet you never thought this would be done so openly. It would be too-hot a potato to juggle. But it happened not many years ago, and has just happened again! Time magazine, Sidebar, "The U.S. and the Vatican on Birth Control," February 24, 1992, 35 reported then that "In response to concerns of the Vatican, the Reagan Administration agreed to alter its foreign-aid program to comply with the [Roman Catholic] church's teachings on birth control . . . . 'American policy was changed as a result of the Vatican's not agreeing with our policy,' [William] Wilson [The first U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican] explains. 'American aid programs around the world did not meet the criteria the Vatican had for family planning. AID (the Agency for International Development) sent various people from (the Department of) State to Rome, and I'd accompany them to meet the president of the Pontifical Council for the Family, and in long discussions they finally got the message. But it was a struggle. They finally selected different programs and abandoned others as a result of this intervention.'

But under the latest U.S. presidential administration it has happened again. In the article "Bush Reinstates Pro-Life Mexico City Policy," released on Jan. 23, 2001 by the Zenit News Agency (http://zenit.org/english/archive/0101/ZE010123.htm#2006), we read the following:

President Bush signed a memorandum Monday reinstating the pro-life Mexico City policy that prohibits taxpayer money from funding organizations that promote or perform abortions overseas . . . . Meanwhile, Deal Hudson, publisher of Crisis Magazine in Washington, D.C., reported that on Thursday, Bush and his wife Laura will have dinner with Archbishop Theodore McCarrick, Cardinal James Hickey, and Auxiliary Bishop William Lori at the chancery of the Washington Archdiocese. 'For the president to have dinner with a cardinal of the Church only five days after his inauguration is truly historic,' Hudson said in a press statement. 'It demonstrates his commitment to understanding Catholics, working with them, and addressing their concerns.'

The Bush Memorandum went to--guess who?--the U.S. Agency for International Development, which you noticed from the Reagan-era policy change, was directly linked to Vatican "intervention."

The Rise of the Religious Right. Remember the "Moral Majority" and Jerry Falwell? Protestants [so-called] of the United States began to work at the grass-roots level to assert their political views. Eventually it was all retooled, now coming largely under the heading of the [so-called] "Christian Coalition." In a backlash against the rapid secularization of life in the closing decades of the past century, evangelical Christians across the USA have begun to combine their efforts. Key targets have included abortion, homosexuality issues, prayer in school, and so forth. Uniting upon common points of concern and teaching, repeated efforts have been made to exert pressure. The election of congressmen and presidents now hinges largely upon the support of the religious right. And while in much of what the religious right makes issue of, it is right, the use of coercion is troubling. As is the fact that in light of their practice of uniting on common points, we can only observe their common observance of Sunday rather than the Sabbath of Scripture as sharply foreboding of evil.

Supreme Court Attack on the Wall Separating Church and State. Key laws sustaining the separation of church and state have been struck down in recent years, leaving the functionality of first amendment rights of Christians in America very much in question. One Supreme Court Justice even said that the separation of church and state was a metaphor based upon bad history that should be dismantled. All of these developments bode darkly for the future of freedom of religion for religious minorities in America.

Evangelicals and Catholics Together Document. Beginning in 1992 and culminating just a few years ago in a document signed by numerous individuals whose names you'd instantly recognize, the document "Evangelicals and Catholics Together" marked an unprecedented coming together of two antithetical groups. Historically, the Protestant Reformation arose because of the terrible apostasy within the Roman Catholic Church. The Council of Trent declared Protestants heretics in 1560, and marked the fact that the two philosophical directions of these opposing groups were forever unreconcilable. And yet here they are, four centuries later, saying I'm OK and you're OK. Consider for example a few lines from one section of the document, titled "We Witness Together." Here are lines mutually agreed upon:

In many instances, however, such efforts at recruitment ["evangelicals and Catholics attempting to win 'converts' from one another"] undermine the Christian mission by which we are bound by God's Word and to which we have recommitted ourselves in this statement . . . Christian witness is of necessity aimed at conversion . . . (Evangelicals and Catholics Together, para. 50.).

Did you catch that? Your evangelism, outreach, mission--whatever you care to call it--has to, under the principles agreed upon in this document--be directed toward those who are outside of the church. Protestants are thus urged to stop any attempts to work for those who are presently members of the Catholic Church and only evangelize the "unchurched." And Protestants have entered into this agreement willingly. It boggles the mind. Consider these lines from the same document:

We as Evangelicals and Catholics affirm that opportunity and means for growth in Christian discipleship are available in our several communities. Second, the decision of the committed Christian must be assiduously respected. Third, in view of the large number of non-Christians in the world and the enormous challenge of our common evangelistic task, it is neither theologically legitimate nor a prudent use of resources for one Christian community to proselytize among active adherents of another Christian community. (Ibid., para. 53.

In other words, to live Protestantism is not theologically legitimate anymore. Those lost in the fog of a religious system that puts the commandments of men above the commandments of God must be left in place. That power which spoke great words against the Most High must be left a-speaking great words against the Most High. That tool of Satan that took away the daily must be allowed to keep its soul-destroying counterfeits in place. God help us and preserve us from these sorrowful apostate developments. The truth of God stands unadulterated, and no amount of political-correctness can assuage the guilt of those who call evil good and good evil.

Dies Domini: The Pope's Sunday-Law Letter. Just a few years ago the Pope released his tremendous Sunday Letter titled "The Day of the Lord." The steadily increasing influence of the Papacy is demonstrated by her increasing openness about her goals. Where she wants to take the world is more than hinted at in the document she released in late 1998, the Papal letter Dies Domini. One or two quotes from this very significant document published worldwide by the Vatican help us understand what is the attitude of the Papacy, and what it will be, towards those who persist in keeping the seventh day Sabbath, refusing to bow down to the so-called "vicar of Christ . . ."

Consider these lines taken directly from that letter, and consider them in the light of what you have heard and learned in this series about the truths of Scripture, God's commandments, and the power that has consistently stood against heaven throughout history:

[In the time of Constantine] Wise pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the Christianization of the notion of Sunday as "the day of the sun," which was the Roman name for the day and which is retained in some modern languages. Para. 27.

We know otherwise. It was not wise pastoral intuition, but smooth Satanic deception that merrily consented to incorporate a pagan day of worship into the religion of the living God. But John Paul II was here only beginning. He continued by stating that:

Only in the fourth century did the civil law of the Roman Empire recognize the weekly recurrence, determining that on "the day of the sun" the judges, the people of the cities and the various trade corporations would not work. Christians rejoiced to see thus removed the obstacles which until then had sometimes made observance of the LordÕs day heroic. Para. 64.

Christians did not rejoice to thus see God's law trampled in the dust and a pagan day inserted. They did not rejoice when the first Sunday law--a required religious observance of Sunday--was enforced upon them. Obstacles were not removed, but emplaced against the keeping of God's law and truth. But John Paul continued:

Therefore, also in the particular circumstances of our own time, Christians will naturally strive to ensure that civil legislation respects their duty to keep Sunday holy. Para. 67.

The handwriting is already on the wall. Rome has not deviated. The Sunday movement is still moving; only moving in darkness. As circumstances shift to make acceptable Sunday legislation's eventual rise to the surface, we will see the very things that have been foretold.

Are you ready?

See, for years people have thought that since the beliefs of the various churches have differed so widely throughout Protestantism and evangelicalism, no effort to meaningfully unite the churches could ever be made. But for many years now there has been a steady drift downstream, toward Rome. How has such a movement advanced? By focusing on points of common belief. The discussion of subjects upon which all are not agreed--however important they might be from a Bible standpoint--is waived. Not so sure are you? Then hear these words offered by Pat Robertson in the Forward to Keith FournierÕs book, A House United?

When I was invited to sign the historic accord "Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium," I didnÕt hesitate. I am convinced of the importance of such united efforts. Not "humpty-dumpty solutions," which Keith also mentions in this book, but true alliances rooted in our common faith in Jesus Christ and dedicated to serving him together for the sake of our country and our world. There are many theological issues I, a Baptist, differ on with Roman Catholics. These differences are very important. But even more important is the common ground on which we stand and the vital mission we share at the close of this century and into the next. We have a moral imperative to join together in our efforts to oppose the killing of the unborn, the hostility toward and censorship of the Christian message, and the wholesale assault on the traditional family. The next seven years are crucial if we are going to make any inroads against the pressing darkness of our age. The lives of 31 million children alone, killed in the womb by legalized abortion, cry out for judgment. But, if we have any hope of turning the tide, we must come together in our efforts. A House Divided, p. 8.

Notice several things in RobertsonÕs letter: He claims to be a Protestant, and that the differences that separate himself from Catholicism are important. But to him there is something yet more important: joining together to fight abortion and other moral evils bludgeoning our society. But Robertson is not a Protestant in actuality; he utters no protests against RomeÕs false-teachings, but instead coddles and adores her for her power. He thinks that she represents a body holding a "common faith in Jesus Christ" with himself. This is such a farce and a lie that it is laughable. Robertson holds out to us a supposed "common ground" battle which supercedes the battle for the truth of salvation from sin, religious freedom of conscience, and salvation by grace through faith. Indeed, Satan is the source of the Roman Catholic religion, just as he is the source of the evils of abortion, the assault on the family, and the suppression of the Christian message. If Robertson is a Protestant, what fellowship can his light have with RomeÕs darkness? What unity could he or we have with a religious system that has enslaved, tortured, murdered, plundered, and accelerated all wickedness in this earth, even teaching that the Pope is infallible and that Mary was immaculately conceived? Does Robertson covet much more the favor and power of Rome than the lonely light of conscience and truth?

On page 14 of his book, Fournier writes "we face a multi-faceted crisis at the end of this twentieth century that also brings with it an incredible opportunity to see a new outpouring of the Spirit. One of the signs of this movement of the Spirit in our age is, I believe, renewed efforts between Protestants and Catholics to cooperate in their fight against the culture of death."

And yes, I agree. We do face a multi-faceted crisis today, a "kulture-kampf" (culture war) even against Christian beliefs. Yes, the "renewed efforts between Protestants and Catholics to cooperate in their fight against the culture of death" is a sign of a movement of spirit in our generation--but it is the spirit of demons moving us toward a united work. Think friends, think: how can two walk together unless they be agreed, asks the Bible, and I say to you, how can Catholics and Protestants walk together unless they be agreed? How can they walk together unless either Catholics give up the soul-destroying errors of Catholicism, or Protestants stop Protesting them? And I am sorry to tell you that now we know the answer.

It is the Protestants who have stopped protesting.

It is the Protestants who have caved. Catholicism is today ascendant and Protestantism is gray with its own death.

Do you know what is going to happen? I can tell you what is going to happen. There are two great errors upon which today's popular Christendom is founded. They are the immortality of the soul, and Sunday sacredness. These are areas where the Bible speaks very clearly, but still people have persisted in believing their own traditions that are not founded upon the Bible. Satan will use these two great errors to deceive everyone on the planet that he can.

We havenÕt rally focused on the immortality of the soul teaching in these meetings so far. We have focused where we said we would--on the issues of the mark of the beast, which include the Sabbath and salvation. But let me tell you, the idea that humans have immortal souls--that idea needs to be examined under the searching light of Scripture. But I want you to realize that this teaching lays the foundation of spiritualism.

I've spoken to person after person who has seen, they think, their dead father or mother or other friend or relative or even a figure from history. They have talked with these supposed spirits. Now think about this. The devil knows that God has unchained the Bible. He knows that it has gone everywhere. He has a lot of tangling and wrangling to do to get people not to believe it. And he spends a lot of time doing that. But how much better for him if he can go around the Bible, if he can get people to replace its spiritual authority for them with a different kind of authority--one that he fully controls. And so he wants us to believe that the spirits of the dead come to us with information from beyond the veil. Why pray and study the Bible and obey God's laws if some supernatural presence comes to us personally and tells us that God's laws aren't really so strict? Thus many have reasoned, and thus many have been trapped. And Satan has taken them over into eternal destruction.

Because you see someone that looks like your deceased father, or hear someone that sounds like your deceased mother, does that mean it is them? Come on. Humans can reproduce images very, very lifelike; voices very, very lifelike. The evidence for that? Every day on your TV, on your radio, on your telephone. All electronics and illusions. When I call you on the phone, you don't hear my voice. You hear a simulation of my voice reproduced electronically by your telephone. My voice speaks into the phone on my end, is transformed into zeros and ones, and the signal zooms down the wire to your end. See, if we can do this, shall we be surprised if Satan can reproduce our voices, if he can reproduce the nuances of how someone long dead once spoke--their gestures, their look, even the rich emotion-laden voice? Don't be deceived or naived! Oh, I believe many of these folk have had supernatural encounters, I do not doubt it. I only doubt whether they actually spoke with the dead, for the Bible tells us that "the dead know not any thing" (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6). Watch out, because the devil goes about like a roaring lion to destroy you. He thinks he's got your number. He's been laying the foundation for this deception since Genesis three.

But what of the other error I spoke of? The teaching of Sunday worship? It creates a bond of sympathy with Rome. It is a point of belief in common, a place where doctrinal teachings converge. And since the Protestants of the United States and of the world have stopped protesting, you and I can well foresee that it shall be they who will be foremost in stretching their hands across the gulf. They will reach over the abyss to clasp hands with the Roman power; we've seen it night by night as we've considered these things. And finally, under the influence of this threefold union (Roman Catholicism, apostate Protestantism, and spiritualism), this country will follow in the steps of Rome in trampling on the rights of conscience. These developments are no fairy tell. They are coming into full blossom.

The Lutheran--Catholic Joint Declaration on Justification of 1999. If the Pope's Sunday Letter weren't enough, the crescendo just kept on building. In 1999, and at Augsburg Germany, the heart of the territories where the Protestant Reformation launched from. Consider these shocking excerpts from the Joint Declaration:

We know that the problems of the world are so great that we cannot solve them alone. Therefore there is an urgent need for inter-religious collaboration.

Collaboration among the different religions must be based on the rejection of fanaticism, extremism and mutual antagonisms which lead to violence.

We appeal to the leaders of the world whatever their field of influence: --To refuse to allow religion to be used to incite hatred and violence. --To refuse to allow religion to be used to justify discrimination. --To respect the role of religion in society at international, national, and local levels, etc . . .

Don't misunderstand. We are not for a moment in favor of fanaticism, extremism, hatred or violence or discrimination. But shall we invite the secular nations of this world to use the force at their disposal to incorporate religion into the world at international levels? Is this not asking for the religious majority to enforce Sunday laws again, which the Pope says--not 1000 years ago only, but this very day--that "Christians will naturally strive to ensure that civil legislation respects their duty to keep Sunday holy"?

As Robert Sungenus notes, "The Lutheran Church, by and large, has changed significantly since the time of Martin Luther 475 years ago. The change had started soon after Luther died . . . . After the first Lutheran/Catholic dialogue in the mid 1960's, John Paul II had noticed such sweeping changes in the Lutheran church that in 1980 he suggested the Catholic Church might remove some of the anathemas issued at the Council of Trent." You see, It wasn't the Catholics that changed; it was the Protestants. And everyone in the know knows it.

The Great Jubilee of 2000 and the So-Called Apology of the Roman Catholic Church. With great fanfare the Papacy declared a Jubilee year for 2000 and launched into the sell of indulgences (indulges had been the precipitating factor that spurred the launch of the Protestant Reformation). But more than this, The Papacy issues its "apology" for centuries of persecution of the faithful. But was it all that it was hailed as being?

An interesting term was used by the Pope in this document presented in St. Peter's Basilica on March 12, 2000: 'purification of memory'. It first appeared in the Bull of Indiction of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000 (Incarnationis mysterium), dated November 29, 1998. The same term is purposefully employed again in the study Memory and Reconciliation: The Church and the Faults of the Past, which was proposed to the International Theological Commission by its President, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, in December, 1999. Ratzinger himself provides the following definition:

This purification aims at liberating personal and communal conscience from all forms of resentment and violence that are the legacy of past faults, through a renewed historical and theological evaluation of such events. This should lead--if done correctly--to a corresponding recognition of guilt and contribute to the path of reconciliation. Such a process can have a significant effect on the present, precisely because the consequences of past still make themselves felt and can persist as tensions in the present. The purification of memory is thus 'an act of courage and humility in recognizing the wrongs done by those who have borne or bear the name of Christian.'

What this carefully concocted gibberish really means is that the 'heretics' whom the Church of Rome is in the vigorous process of embracing through the Ecumenical Movement, with the ultimate purpose of subjugating them to the Pope, are being asked to forget the atrocities which she committed against them in the past. Having feigned remorse, while in actual fact apologizing for nothing and still claiming her inerrant supremacy, she is now continuing her age-old tactic of whitewashing the facts of history. The atrocities of the past are to be re-designated as "faults" and subjected to a new "historical and theological" evaluation.

In the secular world you have to watch the money, hence the saying "follow the money." But in the theological world you have to watch the words and definitions. The papacy never changes. She adapts to the times in which she lives. Certain lines from the apology document (titled "Memory and Reconciliation: The Church and the Faults of the Past") are trumpeted through the world by the Press, but others most significant are left ignored. For example, if the church was truly repentant for its past use of torture and violence, well might it have anted up and admitted the evil of the work of the inquisition and other atrocities freely committed by herself in the past. But instead we read in the document that

"The purpose of the text is, therefore, not to examine particular historical cases but rather to clarify the presuppositions that ground repentance for past faults."

That is, the document speaks generally and not specifically. It is nothing more than a clever and wretched pile of theological words piled to the sky and trumpeted as if meaningful, while in reality nothing has been conceded, nothing admitted, nothing changed--just a new coat of white paint applied to the sepulcher. Want more evidence? Read this from the document:

The purification of memory can never mean that the Church renounces proclaiming the revealed truth that has been entrusted to her whether in the area of faith or morals.

That is, they won't admit they've really done anything wrong. Read the document thru, and read it carefully. Did you hear these lines repeated in the media?:

It must be kept in mind that the historical periods are different, that the sociological and cultural times within which the church acts are different, and so, the paradigms and judgments proper to one society and to one era might be applied erroneously in the evaluation of other periods of history, producing many misunderstandings . . . ways of thinking and conditioning are different.

Why undertake this grand subterfuge and call it an apology? Because of "those who feel injured by words and deeds of the past," because the Roman Catholic Church strongly desires to be about the work of changing "false and unacceptable images of herself." Her history of atrocities drags along ever behind her leaving a smeared trail of blood from which she longs to extricate herself. So she apologizes even if only accompanied by a string of qualifiers and exceptions. The whole matter is pitiable in the extreme, but yet moreso those who gullibly buy into the deception. For in closing, let none forget that this supposed landmark document also states:

Her request for pardon must not be understood as an expression of false humility or as a denial of her 2,000 year history, which is certainly rich in merit in the ideas of charity, culture and holiness.

Indeed, the Roman Catholic Church insists that unique in all of history, she possesses an extraordinary solidarity with her past, that she is forever linked to her history and refuses to repudiate it. But the world thinks she has changed. Let every soul be warned. The persecutions of the past will be repeated. The deadly wound is far along in its healing.

And now, the Future . . .. So. What follows? The developments of prophecy are far advanced. We stand today on the brink of tomorrow. The economies of the world are rumbling, the earth is reeling under the increasing impact of disasters in the weather and the natural realm. Protestantism is fading fast. The "daily" is still being substituted by the Roman Catholic Church. Apostate Protestantism is joining with her. New initiatives are ever arising. All the world is wondering after the beast. The Sunday movement is moving in darkness. It is slithering to the forefront. And we are here, on the scene. This tomorrow is not going to be put off forever. One day we'll see with our own eyes everything slide into place, and we'll stand trembling before the fact that for us, the last night on earth has come.

The Last Night on Earth

Friends, brothers and sisters, men, women, and children, Protestants, Catholics, Americans, postmoderns, others--Listen:

The end is coming. It is marching. The mark is coming. It is not a computer chip from Intel or a barcode or a scanner. It is a moral issue. Everything centers up around the law of our God. The Ten Commandments still stand unchanged. The Sabbath on the seventh day is still binding, still blessing, and still defining the horizon-line between good and evil.

All around us on every side, filling every nook and cranny of our world are constant promotions, advertisements, urgings to buy this or buy that. We have been well prepared for slaughter. We've been desensitized, immobilized, passive-ized, homogenized. But tonight brothers and sisters--tonight could be your last night on earth. Where are you with God?

Will you be like the nation of Israel standing on Mt. Carmel, confronted by the prophet of God, limping between two opinions? Will you leave this place tonight in just the same place you entered it those few weeks back: still undecided on obeying Your God? Will you go out from here to transgress God's law--to break His holy Sabbath--to spit in the face of Jesus your Savior who died to free you from your sins? Will you leave this place and carry on as before, only now more guilty, for you see the truth but have not acted on it?!

Oh I speak to every soul here tonight: hesitate no longer. Make your stand. I am going to ask you in a moment for the last time in these meetings, to decide to follow Jesus fully. For some of you the door is opening for the last time. Some may never have opportunity again to choose Jesus and His truth. Your probation may close.

Are you ready?

Are you ready I say, to meet your Maker?

Is tonight the last night on earth for you?

Make tonight your beginning. If you've not stepped out to follow Jesus, to keep His commandments, to experience His faith, then do so now. May God help you now--even right now--to go against your grain, to run against the tide, to strain against your training. To choose to serve the Most High God.

Night by night here we've laid out the truths of Scripture. We've outlined God's workings past, present, future. We've opened the pages of history. We've followed the time-line right down thru to this evening's twilight. We know the end is coming. We know there will be a last night on earth. The lines of prophecy have all but run out. The threads of reality have drawn to a point. And here we are. Here I am. Here you are. This is no coincidence that we are here this night together, in this place. There is no coincidence that even now for many seated in this room your conscience is calling out and saying "This is the moment of decision for my life."

If so, listen to that voice. All these nights past God has set before you death and life. Choose life.

Choose it now.

As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the day of the coming of the Son of Man. Get on the ark of truth. Make your choice. Step out and get onto and into the platform of the third angel's message. This is its finest hour. Hear the call of your God and choose life. This collision of prophecy will not be stopped. Jesus is about to come. If it is your purpose to let Jesus be your personal Savior, to obey God's law including the seventh day Sabbath, to receive the seal of God rather than the mark of the beast, and until now you've not come forward, then while this song plays, step out of your pew and come forward here and stand with me. Let each one being praying for the soul next to you. Let's stand everyone, and know that eternity is here tonight. It's time to decide.