Religion, the Foundation for the New World Order
Mr. Brannon S. Howse
Click on your favorite TV news channel or surf to online news site of your choice, and the headlines that greet you will likely blare something about the economy, the latest natural disaster, a speech by the president, but probably not much about religion. Sure, there’s a religion section buried in the website somewhere and an occasional report on the subject, but unless a clergy sex scandal or televangelist financial corruption story has just surfaced, or someone is bold enough to mention Islam in a report about the latest terrorist attack, you won’t find it on the home page. Religion is second-class news.
Strange. The most influential force in creating a new world order and transforming life on earth for the majority of its people stays off the radar screen. It’s almost as if there’s a conspiracy to keep it out of view. And there’s a good reason for that: religion will be the foundation for the new world order, and those perpetrating that are not interested in publicity. The Bible is clear, though, that a one-world religion will be established—and it’s not a good thing. Second Thessalonians 2:3-4 makes it very clear:
Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. [Emphasis mine.]
So, there’s going to be an apostasy, a falling away from traditionally held biblical truths, and then a one-world religion will be established: “All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8).
Another part of the plan is to establish a one-world economy. The Bible again is ahead of the game in recognizing that this will happen. Revelation 13:16-17 prophesies: “He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one beast, or the number of his name.”
We also see in the Scriptures there will be a one-world government, as noted in Revelation:
- 13:2-4—The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority. And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed.
- 13:7—It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.
- 17:12-13—The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.
The one-world religion will be the vehicle that brings about the one-world economy and one- world government. My goal in this chapter is to explain exactly how religion will be the vehicle that brings about the one-world economy, one-world government, and eventually a one-world leader.
At the core of economic functioning lies the currency of each nation, yet there has been much discussion and promotion in recent years of conslidating national monetary systems. The prime example, of course, is the creation of the euro. What is generally lacking from secular, left- leaning analyses of the situation is that a nation’s sovereignty depends on the country having its own healthy currency. When a sovereign currency is dissolved into a “group currency,” national sovereignty is seriously undermined.
The transition to a one-world economy begins with a change in currency. As countries switch to a different currency, sovereignty goes away. If the American dollar ceases to exist (and I believe it will by design) and America agrees to a regional (i.e., North American) currency, or a global currency, America thus surrenders its national sovereignty. This holds true for any other nations that give up their national currency and transition into a regional or global currency.
For many years there has been the discussion of regional currency modeled after the euro of the European Union. However, it is possible that a global financial crisis could become so severe that regional currencies are bypassed and the world transitions directly to a global currency. A one-world economy naturally lays the foundation for a one-world government through a common currency.
But the picture grows in intrigue. Once the one-world religious system has been turned to the advantage of the antichrist and his ten assistants as described in Revelation 17, the antichrist and his minions will turn and devour the woman riding the beast and will eat of her flesh. I believe the beast the woman is riding is a symbol of the one-world system. The Bible tells us that at some point, the antichrist and his ten assistants will turn against this one-world religious system and destroy it—eat its flesh—and then the antichrist will set himself up to be worshiped.
Creeping, Creepy Socialists
One of the greatest forces behind a one-world religious system may at first seem surprising. I believe Fabian socialism or communitarianism will be at the heart of the new way of things. If it seems odd that a secular worldview would embrace religion, simply consider that the evolutionary doctrines of infiltrating cultures to make them socialist is based on an ideology that will use any and all means available to secure their ends. The Fabians know that cloaking their actions in religiosity will accelerate the acceptance of their ends among many people.
Communitarianism and Fabian socialism are twin sisters, but we generally do not call communitarians by the label of Fabian socialist because most have never belonged to the Fabian Socialist Society. But make no mistake, communitarians and Fabian socialists are united in the common goal of merging capitalism with socialism, promoting social justice, and establishing a new world order. Later, we will look at such popular communitarians as Peter Drucker and Rick Warren (yes, the Rick Warren!).
Fabian socialism started in London in 1883. Fabians pursue socialism by evolution, not revolution (as compared to communists who advocate revolution). One Fabian socialist who has greatly damaged America is John Maynard Keynes, from whom we get Keynesian economics. (For a more in-depth look at John Maynard Keynes, read Grave Influence.)
Keynes is likely the world’s best-known economist. Yet, the values represented by Keynesian economics are contrary to much of what makes for healthy financial living for individuals or nations: love of debt and hatred of savings. The wholesale implementation of his ideas caused the Great Depression to be much deeper and last much longer than was necessary. He believed that during an economic downturn or recession, government should borrow or inflate the currency and dump large amounts of cash into the economy by being the primary source of spending and employment. The end results are inflation, the devaluation of currency, and debt.
Many members of America’s two dominant political parties are committed to socialistic Keynesian economics, and many are likewise Fabians. The true goal of Fabian socialism is not merely national socialism but globalism. Fabianism dovetails well with corporate fascism, the merging of big government and big business. In my second book, published in 1995, I predicted that America would jump on a fast track toward corporate fascism. As is now obvious, that has happened, and the pace is increasing.
John Strachey, a long-time communist and author of the pro-Marxist/Leninist The Theory and Practice of Socialism, entered the British Fabian Society in 1943 and became war minister in the Labor Government of Great Britain in 1950. He explains Keynesian economics this way:
The positive part of Keynes’ work was a demand that capitalism should now be regulated and controlled by a central authority….The principal instruments of its policy should be variations in the rate of interest, budgetary deficits and surpluses, public works and a redistribution of personal incomes in equalitarian direction. This positive side of Keynes’ work requires an authority to do the regulating, and that authority can be, in contemporary conditions, nothing else but the government of a nation state.1
Keynes himself admitted that by:
…a continuous process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method, they not only confiscate, but confiscate arbitrarily: and while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The process engages all of the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner that not one man in a million can diagnose.2
Keynesian economics is tied directly to Fabian socialism. Keynes’s observation that “not one man in a million can diagnose” what they are doing fits perfectly with the social evolution tactics of the Fabians. As the controllers inflate currency and steal money from the people, they cease to be capitalists.
In America, the Federal Reserve has been the institution used to inflate our currency. While it has achieved that unspoken goal, the Federal Reserve has failed to accomplish what it was supposedly created to do. According to economics writer Walter Williams:
The justification for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was to prevent bank failure and maintain price stability. Simple before and after analysis demonstrates that the Federal Reserve Bank has been a failure.
In the century before the Federal Reserve Act, wholesale prices fell by 6 percent; in the century after they rose by 1,300 percent. Maximum bank failures in one year before 1913 were 496 and afterward, 4,400. During the 1930s, inept money supply management by the Federal Reserve Bank was partially responsible for both the depth and duration of the Great Depression.3
America’s Early Warning
Americans cannot say they were never cautioned about the dangers of a central bank. As long ago as 1832, President Andrew Jackson worked to abolish the Bank of the United States, which at the time operated much like today’s Federal Reserve. During his tenure, Jackson vetoed a bill that would have re-chartered the bank, and in his farewell address President Jackson cautioned Americans never again to allow the creation of a central bank. But less than a century later, we ignored his warning and created the Federal Reserve System. In the portion of Jackson’s speech noted below, see if you recognize the degree to which we are suffering the consequences he outlined and that resulted when our elected officials created the Federal Reserve and eventually ceased to back our currency by gold or silver:
In reviewing the conflicts which have taken place between different interests in the United States and the policy pursued since the adoption of our present form of Government, we find nothing that has produced such deep-seated evil as the course of legislation in relation to the currency. The Constitution of the United States unquestionably intended to secure to the people a circulating medium of gold and silver. But the establishment of a national bank by Congress, with the privilege of issuing paper money receivable in the payment of the public dues, and the unfortunate course of legislation in the several States upon the same subject, drove from general circulation the constitutional currency and substituted one of paper in its place.
It was not easy for men engaged in the ordinary pursuits of business, whose attention had not been particularly drawn to the subject, to foresee all the consequences of a currency exclusively of paper, and we ought not on that account to be surprised at the facility with which laws were obtained to carry into effect the paper system. Honest and even enlightened men are sometimes misled by the specious and plausible statements of the designing. But experience has now proved the mischiefs and dangers of a paper currency, and it rests with you to determine whether the proper remedy shall be applied.
The paper system being founded on public confidence and having of itself no intrinsic value, it is liable to great and sudden fluctuations, thereby rendering property insecure and the wages of labor unsteady and uncertain.
The corporations which create the paper money cannot be relied upon to keep the circulating medium uniform in amount. In times of prosperity, when confidence is high, they are tempted by the prospect of gain or by the influence of those who hope to profit by it to extend their issues of paper beyond the bounds of discretion and the reasonable demands of business; and when these issues have been pushed on from day to day, until public confidence is at length shaken, then a reaction takes place, and they immediately withdraw the credits they have given, suddenly curtail their issues, and produce an unexpected and ruinous contraction of the circulating medium, which is felt by the whole community. The banks by this means save themselves, and the mischievous consequences of their imprudence or cupidity are visited upon the public. Nor does the evil stop here. These ebbs and flows in the currency and these indiscreet extensions of credit naturally engender a spirit of speculation injurious to the habits and character of the people.
My humble efforts have not been spared during my administration of the Government to restore the constitutional currency of gold and silver, and something, I trust, has been done toward the accomplishment of this most desirable object; but enough yet remains to require all your energy and perseverance. The power, however, is in your hands, and the remedy must and will be applied if you determine upon it.
Our growth has been rapid beyond all former example in numbers, in wealth, in knowledge, and all the useful arts which contribute to the comforts and convenience of man, and from the earliest ages of history to the present day there never have been thirteen millions of people associated in one political body who enjoyed so much freedom and happiness as the people of these United States. You have no longer any cause to fear danger from abroad; your strength and power are well known throughout the civilized world, as well as the high and gallant bearing of your sons. It is from within, among yourselves—from cupidity, from corruption, from disappointed ambition and inordinate thirst for power—that factions will be formed and liberty endangered. It is against such designs, whatever disguise the actors may assume, that you have especially to guard yourselves. You have the highest of human trusts committed to your care.
In March 2009, David Noebel, of Summit Ministries and frequent guest on my radio program, described Keynesian economics to my radio audience. Notice how much his warning sounds like that of President Jackson:
Keynesianism or interventionism or socialism is contrary to nearly every aspect of the Christian worldview in economics. Today, Keynesianism is called interventionism. Interventionism is where the government itself gets involved in the economic sphere and passes laws that destroy what we would call sound, basic economics. And what we had with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the whole deal of going now into debt by trillions is nothing more or nothing less than Fabian, Keynesian economic philosophy. So this is what every Christian needs to get a handle on, … or we are finished as a nation. Austrian economics was just basically classical economics. …. For 6,000 years, the economics of the world was basically money, sound money. You’ve got to have something that you can judge by, and even though over the history of the world for the last 6,000 years we’ve tried various things, they always ended up with gold and silver as being the standard of money. And you could judge it. The dollar itself comes from the word thaler, which was a measurement of what an ounce of silver would entail, or a percentage of a gold piece would entail….in fact, the U.S. Constitution identifies money as gold and silver.
Keynesian economics is unbiblical for many reasons, but even a quick reading of the Ten Commandments reveals two. The commandments against coveting and stealing are broken when the government covets what you own and seeks to steal it from you through inflation. Further, in Deuteronomy 25:13-16, God declares His hatred of unjust weights and scales used to cheat people. Our government and the Federal Reserve use the “unjust weights and scales” of monetization (printing money) of our national debt to steal from Americans for the government’s self-serving financial gain and harvesting of power.
Note, too, that according to the Bible mere “consumer confidence” is not considered adequate backing for a currency. Haggai 2:8 proclaims, “‘The silver is mine, and the gold is mine,’ saith the LORD of hosts.” Real wealth is not stored or found in paper but in gold and silver.
Keynes was also a blatant pervert. Zygmund Dobbs, who conducted research for the book Keynes at Harvard, describes Keynes and his socialist buddies this way:
Singing the Red Flag, the highborn sons of the British upper-class lay on the carpeted floor spinning out socialist schemes in homosexual intermissions….The attitude in such gatherings was anti-establishmentarian. To them the older generation was horribly out of date, even superfluous. The capitalist system was declared obsolete and revolution was proclaimed as the only solution. Christianity was pronounced an enemy force, and the worst sort of depravities were eulogized as “that love which passes all Christian understanding.” Chief of this ring of homosexual revolutionaries was John Maynard Keynes….Keynes was characterized by his male sweetheart, Lytton Strachey, as “a liberal and a sodomite, an atheist and a statistician.” His particular depravity was the sexual abuse of little boys.4
Notice that Christianity was pronounced an “enemy force.” Fabian socialists hate Christianity. But that does not mean they will not call themselves Christians or be friendly to Christians as they build the religious Trojan horse.
Joan Robinson, a Marxist economist who worked with Keynes, declared that “the differences between Marx and Keynes are only verbal.” I contend that many elected officials at the state and federal level are Fabian socialists committed to a social revolution in America by deliberately creating an environment in which chaos and crisis can flourish for the purpose of bigger government—and moving us toward globalism. The end game for a Fabian socialist is global governance. So, whether you call it Fabian socialism or communitarianism; whether you call it internationalism or statism—whatever you want to call it—they’re all working together. The worldviews vary, but all are headed toward the same goal of global governance, a one-world economic system and a one-world government.
George Bernard Shaw was a famous Fabian who observed:
I as a socialist have had to preach as much as anyone the enormous power of the environment. We can change it. We must change it. There’s absolutely no other sense in life than the task of changing it. What is the use of writing plays? What is the use of writing anything if there’s not a will which finally molds chaos itself into a race of gods.
That sounds a lot like Genesis 3:1-5, when Satan appears to Adam and Eve in the form of a serpent and says, “You will be like gods.” Shaw is preaching that Fabian socialism will help change man into “a race of gods.”
But where does religion fit in the Fabian scheme? In his book, The Open Conspiracy: Blueprints for a World Revolution, H. G. Wells, another, declares:
This is my religion, the way of salvation, the political work of the Open Conspiracy must weaken, efface, incorporate and supersede existing governments. The character of the Open Conspiracy will now be plainly displayed. It will be a world religion.
What an amazing confession of the Fabians’ ultimate goal: a world religion just as the Bible predicted thousands of years ago. How exciting it is that we are watching this biblical prophecy being fulfilled even in our lifetimes. Predictive prophecy reveals the supernatural nature of God’s Word, and so much of what is happening in the world today is daily confirmation of the Bible’s trustworthiness. Fabian socialism dovetails with the progression to the one-world government foretold in God’s Word.
In 1895, Fabian Society members Sidney Webb, Beatrice Webb, and George Bernard Shaw founded the London School of Economics. The school taught Fabian socialism and Keynesian economics and is still at it today. The school currently “has around 8,700 full-time students and 1,300 academic staff.”5 The Sunday Times profile on the London School of Economics for the 2008 Sunday Times University Guide stated:
There are many who have achieved in the world of politics, business or academia who can trace their success to the years they spent at LSE. Inspired by tuition from academics who are often familiar faces, if not household names, LSE students take their first steps to greatness in the debating chambers, cafes, bars— and even occasionally in their seminar groups—during three or four years of studying.6
During the Egypt crisis in the winter of 2011, Fox News interviewed a man who, at the end of the interview, was revealed to be a guest commentator from the London School of Economics. Most Americans have no idea what the LSE is or its significance. They don’t know that it teaches Fabian socialism, and even if they did, they likely wouldn’t know what that is and how Fabianism, Keynesian economics, and communitarianism is destroying America along with many other nations.
The Fabian Window
Regardless of what anyone claims, every person has a religion. A religion is simply a system, set, or collection of beliefs, and everybody has that whether they articulate it or not. Even the U.S. Supreme Court, in a footnote to a key decision in 1961, ruled that secular humanism is a religion. And many religions use stained glass windows to communicate their beliefs—including the Fabians.
The Fabian stained glass window was created and designed by George Bernard Shaw in 1910. The playwright designed and commissioned the window to exemplify Fabian beliefs. For many years, the window was not publicly displayed. It was stolen in 1978, and then in 2005 it reappeared at an auction of Sotheby’s. The next year, the Fabian window was unveiled in a ceremony at the London School of Economics. And who was there to deliver the keynote address for the unveiling? The Fabian socialist, former prime minister of Great Britain, Tony Blair.
If you look up the Fabian window on the internet, you will see that it features the earth or globe sitting on a red-hot anvil. A man in a green outfit is grabbing the world with tongs because it is too hot to touch. Why? This symbolizes the world coming out of some kind of crisis. Behind the man is the fire. The Fabians have just pulled the earth out of a fire, and they’re hammering the world on an anvil with two hammers. Across the top of the window is a phrase that enlightens the intent of the image: “Remold it near to the heart’s desire.” What are we to remold? Fabians intend to remold the world.
The window is predictive of what I think is likely to come upon us. At some point (likely sooner rather than later), a crisis will heat the world to the boiling point. It will be a crisis manufactured by globalist world leaders who will take advantage of the crisis to remold the world nearer to their hearts’ desire.
Pulitzer Prize-winning author James MacGregor Burns promotes globalism, and in his 1984 book, The Power to Lead, he reveals that a crisis will cause the American people to reject our founding documents, give up our sovereignty, and embrace globalism. The globalists/socialists are intentionally creating just such a crisis:
Let us face reality. The framers [of the Constitution] have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They designed separated institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail bridges, tinkering. If we are to “turn the founders upside down” we must directly confront the constitutional structure they erected.
Others might press for major constitutional restructuring but I doubt that Americans under normal conditions could agree on the package of radical and “alien” constitutional changes that would be required. They would do so, I think, only during and following a stupendous national crisis and political failure.7
Days before Barack Obama was sworn into office as president of the United States, Nobel Peace Prize winner and former secretary of state Henry Kissinger gave an interview on CNBC at the New York Stock Exchange. Speaking of President-elect Obama, Kissinger said, “His task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It’s a great opportunity, it isn’t just a crisis.”8
The crisis is a great opportunity? Barack Obama’s White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, told business leaders in a November 2008 meeting that the financial crisis presents “an opportunity to do things you could not do before.” Emanuel has also said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”
It sounds as if Kissinger, Obama, and Emanuel are singing from the same song sheet, but there’s another voice in the chorus Americans should find alarming. Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, is president of the International Foundation for Socio-Economic and Political Studies in Moscow and has been pushing one-world religion and one-world government ideas for years. Remarkably, Gorbachev has conducted much of his work right here in America, from an office in San Francisco.
On January 1, 2009, Gorbachev wrote a column in the International Herald Tribune in which he seemed gleeful over the financial crisis and the “opportunity” it provides for furthering the globalist agenda:
The G-20 summit meeting in Washington foreshadowed a new format of global leadership, bringing together the countries responsible for the future of the world economy. And more than just the economy is at stake. …The economic and political balance in the world has changed. It is now a given that a world with a single power center, in any shape or guise, is no longer possible. The global challenge of a financial and economic tsunami can only be met by working together.9
Working together for what purpose? Gorbachev reveals:
A new concept is emerging for addressing the crisis at the national and international levels. If current ideas for reforming the world’s financial and economic institutions are consistently implemented, that would suggest we are finally beginning to understand the importance of global governance.10
On the heels of Gorbachev’s New Year’s comments, a January 8, 2009, Associated Press article by Emma Vandore reported on a two-day meeting hosted by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
The event roster included former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has been calling for a one-world interfaith dialog for years and who used the platform to promote a new financial order based on “values other than the maximum short-term profits.” Sarkozy argued that:
In the 21st century, there is no longer a single nation who can say what we should do or what we should think…. We cannot accept the status quo.…In the capitalism of the 21st century, there is room for the state.11
When the State moves in, capitalism ceases to be capitalism, and that is exactly the goal. The demise of capitalism brings the fulfillment of the humanist and socialist dream: global government.
On January 12, 2009, Henry Kissinger published an article in the International Herald Tribune entitled “A Chance for New World Order” in which he declared:
As the new U.S. administration prepares to take office amid grave financial and international crises, it may seem counterintuitive to argue that the very unsettled nature of the international system generates a unique opportunity for creative diplomacy…. An international order can be permanent only if its participants have a share not only in building but also in securing it. In this manner, America and its potential partners have a unique opportunity to transform a moment of crisis into a vision of hope.12
In a twist of irony—or perhaps in a plan well laid and patiently implemented since 1883—the British Fabian Socialists are going to dominate America’s financial system. Dick Morris’s April 7, 2009 article, “European Socialism to Run Our Financial System,” explains:
On April 2, 2009, the work of July 4, 1776 was nullified at the meeting of the G-20 in London.
The joint communiqué essentially announces a global economic union with uniform regulations and bylaws for all nations, including the United States. Henceforth, our SEC, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Federal Reserve Board and other regulators will have to march to the beat of drums pounded by the Financial Stability Board (FSB), a body of central bankers from each of the G-20 states and the European Union.
The mandate conferred on the FSB is remarkable for its scope and open-endedness. It is to set a “framework of internationally agreed high standards that a global financial system requires.”
Now we may no longer look to presidential appointees, confirmed by the Senate, to make policy for our economy. These decisions will be made internationally. And Europe will dominate them. The FSF [Financial Stability Forum and precursor to the FSB] and, presumably, the FSB is now composed of the central bankers of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States plus representatives of the World Bank, the European Union, the IMF, and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
The Europeans have been trying to get their hands on our financial system for decades. It is essential to them that they rein in American free enterprise so that their socialist heaven will not be polluted by vices such as the profit motive.13
The developments in Europe represent what I believe is the revived Roman Empire predicted in Daniel 2:41-43. This sort of prophecy reveals the remarkable, supernatural nature of God’s Word. Scripture repeatedly predicts, years in advance, what inevitably comes to pass. We are now watching the fulfillment of Scripture as Europe increases and America decreases.
Secular journalists that once laughed at the idea of a world government are now writing on the issue themselves. In the December 9, 2008 Financial Times, Gideon Rachman shared his concern in “And Now for World Government”:
I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.
A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.
So could the European model go global?14
Rachman then lays out three reasons why he thinks it is plausible, and one of them is our global financial crisis.
Rachman’s worries are well founded. On July 10, 2009, Bloomberg announced in “Medvedev Shows Off Sample Coin of New ‘World Currency’ at G-8”:
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev illustrated his call for a supranational currency to replace the dollar by pulling from his pocket a sample coin of a “united future world currency.”
“Here it is,” Medvedev told reporters today in L’Aquila, Italy, after a summit of the Group of Eight nations. “You can see it and touch it.”
The coin, which bears the words “unity in diversity,” was minted in Belgium and presented to the heads of G-8 delegations, Medvedev said.
The question of a supranational currency “concerns everyone now, even the mints,” Medvedev said. The test coin “means they’re getting ready. I think it’s a good sign that we understand how interdependent we are.”15
Along with a few other observers, I’ve predicted for years that a global crisis would be used to implement the freedom-robbing tyranny of global governance, and now here we are.
Socialism, Cloward-Piven Style
Months ahead of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and scores of other pundits, I was talking about and revealing the Cloward-Piven Strategy on my national radio program and on our website www.worldviewtimes.com? One of our columnists, James Simpson, wrote an article on the Cloward-Piven Strategy that we carried on our website. I also interviewed James on my national radio program, and much of the material presented in this book and on my radio and TV program and on our website will continue to be months and years ahead of most of the secular talk show hosts. That’s because many of them do not have the spiritual eyes and biblical discernment with which Christians are blessed as we study God’s Word and ask for wisdom, knowledge, and understanding.
After studying the Marxist Saul Alinsky (read Grave Influence for an entire chapter on Alinksy), Professor Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven wrote an article in the May 2, 1966, far-left magazine, The Nation. This husband-and-wife pair of radical socialists from Columbia University developed the Cloward-Piven Strategy, which advocates implementing socialism by swamping the welfare system of states as well as the federal government with new recipients.
Cloward and Piven also called for a protest movement, marches, and rallies to put extreme pressure on politicians to create new benefits. This strategy is also used to stop the elimination of government benefits as we saw in Madison, Wisconsin, in February 2011. If you remember, thousands of union thugs protested as newly elected Governor Scott Walker sought to cut a small portion of the government benefits received by Wisconsin teachers so he could reduce the size of government and the crippling tax burden on Wisconsin families and business.
Cloward and Piven’s strategy was to create a financial crisis, to bankrupt city and state governments—and eventually the federal government—through an ever-expanding welfare state. Once the financial crisis blooms, the collapse of state and federal budgets would spawn a socialist state and the nationalizing of failed financial institutions such as mortgage lenders.
Among their many accomplishments, Cloward and Piven inspired an activist named George Wiley to found a liberal organization that set in motion a startling chain reaction. Wiley’s work influenced Wade Rathke who, along with Bill Ayers, was a member of the Radical Students for a Democratic Society. The SDS organization was the student off-shoot of John Dewey’s League for Industrial Democracy. Rathke started Arkansas Community Organizations for Reform Now to employ the Cloward-Piven strategy. He was so successful in Arkansas that the organization expanded and changed the “A” in its name from “Arkansas” to “Association,” and it became known as the Association of Community Organizers for Reform— the now infamous ACORN.
James Simpson, writing for worldviewtimes.com, notes:
As a young attorney in the 1990s, Barack Obama represented ACORN in Washington in their successful efforts to expand Community Reinvestment Act authority. In addition to making it easier for ACORN groups to force banks into making risky loans, this also paved the way for banks like Superior to package mortgages as investments, and for the government sponsored enterprise Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to underwrite them.16
The financial housing crisis that made headlines in 2007 was brought on through Saul Alinksy’s ideas, via the Cloward-Piven Strategy of implementing socialism through big government destruction of contract law and free market principles. This “economic sabotage” was originally attempted in New York City, and by 1975 the Big Apple was on the verge of financial melt-down. In 1960, New York had a manageable 150,000 welfare cases, but a decade later, the number had soared past the 1.5 million mark.
Barack Obama was a community organizer with Project Vote, an affiliate of the ACORN, before he entered public service, and his “organizing” was built on the model of Saul Alinsky.17 Obama’s activities come right from the Alinsky playbook. In Rules for Radicals, Alinsky describes his purpose:
In this book we are concerned with how to create mass organizations to seize power and give it to the people; to realize the democratic dream of equality, justice, peace.... “Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.” This means revolution.18
An obvious plug for socialism, Alinksy says radicals “hope for a future…where the means of production will be owned by all of the people instead of just a comparative handful.”19 In Rules for Radicals, Alinksy admits that his goal is to “present an arrangement of certain facts and general concepts of change, a step toward a science of revolution.”20 He also reflects on the book The Prince which he says “was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold onto power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.”21 According to Alinsky, an organizer “is in a true sense reaching for the highest level for which man can reach—to create, to be a ‘great creator,’ to play God.”22 Alinsky notes that out of the chaos the politician/community organizer can “play God.”
Much of the unrest and chaos around the globe is related to central banks and globalists manipulating their nation’s money systems and deliberately creating inflation. Inflation means higher fuel costs, higher costs in fertilizer, higher costs in planting and harvesting a crop, and higher costs in driving that crop to market. Runaway inflation offers the real possibility of spawning more and more social unrest. And I believe this is all part of the ultimate plan. A crisis is needed to remold the world closer to the heart’s desire of the globalists.
So, as the Fabian window shows, the globe is on fire. There’s a crisis or chaos taking place, and the Fabians are banging on the world with these hammers, remolding it on an anvil.
Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing
A small sign to the bottom left of the Fabian window offers yet another important insight in Fabian intentions. It says, “Pray devoutly, hammer stoutly.” At the bottom of the window, nine people, looking very religious, kneel and pray toward a stack of books or essays. A tenth person is standing and waving his arms. Many believe this man represents George Bernard Shaw himself. Some say he’s mocking the nine that are kneeling and praying, because he believes their plans should be out in the open, for everybody to know about. Shaw himself was quite frank about his plans—“I am a communist. I’m just not a member of the Communist Party.”23
Perhaps the most shocking and revealing aspect of the Fabian window is the image that stands above the globe. A wolf in sheep’s clothing clearly represents the Fabians’ deceptive intent. Globalists are intently building a religious Trojan horse by which to co-opt the Church. Jesus addressed this issue in Matthew 7:15-16: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits.”
What fruits? Jesus is speaking of their doctrinal fruits. Do they teach the exclusivity of Jesus Christ, salvation through Christ alone? Do they teach about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ? The inerrancy of Scripture? Do they bring to you the doctrines of Christ, as we see in 2 John 9-11? If they do not, then we are not to enter into spiritual enterprises with them:
Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.
If you want to know who is a false teacher or a wolf in sheep’s clothing, then judge by the doctrinal fruits. Many Fabian socialists have been involved in religion as false teachers and wolves in sheep’s clothing, just as their logo reveals was planned as far back as 1910 and earlier.
Tony Blair is an excellent example of a Fabian socialist wolf in sheep’s clothing. In addition to presenting an address at the unveiling of the Fabian window, today he leads the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, the stated goal of which is to bring the religions of the world together. In Blair’s window speech, he declared:
Despite all the very obvious differences in policy and attitude and positioning, a lot of the values that the Fabians and George Bernard Shaw stood for would be very recognizable, at least I hope they would, in today’s Labour Party.
The Labour Party in Great Britain, for which Tony Blair was the prime minister, grew out of the Fabian socialist party. And so Blair acknowledges that he wants to see the Fabian socialist ideas coming from the Labour Party.
The November 26, 2010, London newspaper The Telegraph offers further evidence of Blair’s campaign to use religion to bring about global governance:
Mr. Blair, who converted to Roman Catholicism after he stepped down as Prime Minister in 2007, was to address the question, “Is religion a force for good or ill?”...[Inan] interview with the Toronto’s Globe and Mail newspaper, Mr. Blair said, “I think the place of faith in the era of globalization is the single biggest issue of the 21st century. In terms of how people live together, how we minimize the prospects of conflict and maximize the prospects of peace, the place of religion in our society is essential….I think religion could be, in an era of globalization, a civilizing force.”
Through the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, he promotes the notion that an amalgamated world religion will be “a civilizing force.” (Note, too, that Blair is a disciple of the Church of Rome. I will talk more about the significance of this in a later chapter.)
As I will show in more detail in another chapter, Christian colleges in America are embracing Tony Blair despite his worldview. One such example would be Wheaton College. A press release by the Tony Blair Foundation about its newfound relationship with Wheaton announced:
The Tony Blair Faith Foundation has announced that Wheaton College, Illinois, USA, has become the first American Associate University of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation’s Faith and Globalization Initiative (FGI).24
As unpopular as it may be for me to say so, Pastor Rick Warren, author of the best-selling book, The Purpose Driven Life, is another false teacher garbed in sheep’s clothing—and an extremely influential one at that. His website claims he has 500,000 churches plugged into what he’s doing. His books have sold millions of copies. He appears regularly on national television and travels the globe holding and speaking at various conferences. Warren is one of the great change agents of our day. But the change is not necessarily for the better.
As of this writing, Warren sits on the advisory board of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. That raises the legitimate question: Why would any solid evangelical, Bible-teaching pastor sit on the advisory board of a foundation that seeks to bring the religions of the world together? This is a clear violation of 2 John 9-11 (which we have already discussed) and 2 Corinthians 6:14:
Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
From those two verses alone—and I could cite many more—Rick Warren should not be on Blair’s advisory board.
An article in the February 14, 2011, Christian Post, “Rick Warren to interview Tony Blair at Saddleback Church,” announced:
Mega-church pastor, Rick Warren, will speak to former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, on Egypt and peace and a globalized economy next month at Saddleback Church. Warren is expected to award Blair with the Annual International Medal of Peace. The award is given to individuals who exemplify outstanding contribution toward alleviating the five global giants.
Author Roger Oakland and two members of his ministry attended the event at Warren’s church and offered the following report on his website:
At the forum, both Warren and Blair stated that the only way a global peace could happen on planet earth in the future would be for all faiths to work together and do good together. The audience at the forum appeared to be mesmerized and awe- struck as they were wooed with discussion on faith, good works, democracy, and coming together. Beneath the vernacular, however, was another story. During the time that Roger Oakland and his co-researchers were at the Blair/Warren forum at Saddleback this past week, the team only heard one Bible verse mentioned. It was quoted so quickly it was hard to recognize if it was a verse or a paraphrase of a biblical verse. Clearly the Word of God was not included as a crucial element in this inter-faith plan to save the world.25
Rick Warren’s endorsement of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation appears on Blair’s website:
I honestly don’t know of anyone better suited for this challenge. It’s why I agreed to serve on the advisory board. The Tony Blair Faith Foundation’s potential for doing good is staggering.
It is also an interesting side note that in The Purpose Driven Life Warren makes positive references to three Fabian socialists. He quotes George Bernard Shaw on page 33, Aldous Huxley on page 248, and Bertrand Russell on page 17. While Warren acknowledges that Russell was an atheist, he quotes him as saying, “Unless you assume a God, the question of life’s purpose is meaningless.” Warren quotes Huxley as saying, “Experience is not what happens to you. It is what you do with what happens to you.” And he quotes George Bernard Shaw as writing, “This is the true joy of life: the being used up for a purpose recognized by yourself as a mighty one; being a force of nature instead of a feverish, selfish little clot of ailments and grievances, complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.”
“Recognized by yourself as a mighty one”? The Bible says that in our weakness the Lord is strong. In 2 Corinthians 12:9-12 we read:
And He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong.
The warning signs have been around for a long time that Rick Warren is someone that the Church should not be following. He is also a member of the one-world-oriented Council on Foreign Relations.26
The (Fabian) Council on Foreign Relations
In 1921, a group of Fabians started the Council on Foreign Relations.27 It included a mix of globalists, internationalists, and statists—not all Fabians but all Fabian-friendly. This same group helped give us the United Nations in 1945.
Volumes of books have been written on the unbiblical and anti-Christ objectives of the Council on Foreign Relations, and there is, quite simply, no reason I can see for a Christian to serve on the Council’s board. Yet, sadly, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention is also a member. He’s spoken extensively about it on the radio and has noted that he was invited to join—which is not unusual. That’s the kind of club it is. Land claims to have joined so he can be salt and light, but Christians are never called to compromise biblical principles in order to be salt and light.
While I believe Rick Warren is complicit in his participation with the CFR, I believe Richard Land is simply ignorant about the council. I doubt he’s ever read Carroll Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. The CFR is eager to co-opt religious leaders so the organization will not be viewed as a threat to Christians. This is how they will infiltrate the Church. As my friend Dennis Cuddy has revealed:
Members of the Round Table Groups along with members of the Fabian (Socialist) Society as well as “the inquiry” formed the Royal Institute of International Affairs in Great Britain, and its American branch, the Council on Foreign Relations.28
Many of our elected officials in Washington look to the Council on Foreign Relations to set policy agendas. On July 15, 2009, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations and was introduced by the organization’s president, Richard N. Haas. In her opening statement Clinton remarked:
Thank you very much, Richard, and I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.29
In addition, the president of the European Central Bank came to America and gave a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations on April 26, 2010, in which he used the phrase “global governance” over and over. Similarly, Richard Haas has declared:
The near monopoly of power once enjoyed by sovereign entities is being eroded ... states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies.... Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker....The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for the era of globalization, to find a balance between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy.30
One of America’s most influential families, the Rockefellers, was heavily involved in founding the Council on Foreign Relations. John Ensor Harr and Peter J. Johnson document in their book on the Rockefellers that John D. Rockefeller, Jr. was:
[a] committed internationalist, he financially supported programs of the League of Nations and crucially funded the formation and ongoing expenses of the Council on Foreign Relations and its initial headquarters building, in New York in 1921.31
The United Nations was birthed out of the Council on Foreign Relations on October 24, 1945, and the Rockefellers donated the land in New York City on which the United Nations headquarters was built. John D. Rockefeller was also a strong promoter and supporter of ecumenicalism. He once declared:
Would that I had the power to bring to your minds the vision as it unfolds before me! I see all denominational emphasis set aside….I see the church molding the thought of the world as it has never done before, leading in all great movements as it should. I see it literally establishing the Kingdom of God on earth.32
In his memoirs, David Rockefeller admitted to the goals of his family, which many have been alleging for years:
Some even believe we [the Rockefellers] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists” and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.33
Tony Blair’s work would make the Rockefellers proud as he set aside “all denominational emphasis” through his foundation.
In 1959, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund report entitled “The Mid-Century Challenge to U.S. Foreign Policy,” outlined “the task of helping shape a new world order in all its dimensions— spiritual, economic, political, social.” Notice that the first dimension they look to influence for a “new world order” (their words, not mine) is “spiritual.”
The globalists are fighting to set up their own “kingdom of God” on earth. And they’re getting help from many inside the Church besides just the high profile folks like Rick Warren. Many who call themselves Christians are part of Dominion Theology or the New Apostolic Reformation. But Jesus made it clear in John 18:36 that dominion theology is not biblical when He declared:
Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.”
Our call is not to physically build God’s kingdom here on earth now. We are to be involved in building His kingdom in the spiritual realm as we preach the Gospel, which brings people to salvation through Jesus Christ alone.
“Sustainable Development” and the United Nations
This “kingdom building” comes at us on many fronts, and environmentalism is a favorite. Mikhail Gorbachev and Maurice Strong were all involved in the United Nations’ Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, where they unveiled Agenda 21, a nearly 400-page document on how to use “sustainable development” as the framework for global governance. Sustainable development is a code term for restraining developed countries through multi-national power. (To get a more complete understanding of sustainable development, please read Grave Influence.) Agenda 21 is the global plan for how to implement a one-world economy, a one- world government, a one-world religious system, and radical environmentalism.
Sustainable development promotes abortion on demand, population control, socialized medicine, social justice, welfare programs, public housing, and elimination of national sovereignty, parental authority, and religious liberty. One of its tenets is the criminalization of Christianity. A variety of UN-aligned organizations uses sustainable development as the framework for bringing about global governance.
The approach is now being implemented in over 2,000 communities in America without any government mandate. The perpetrators are getting federal money for it, but there’s no federal mandate to do it. This is all part of a spooky confluence of belief systems. In 1990, Steven Rockefeller co-authored Spirit and Nature: Visions of Interdependence, which encourages people to discover “the face of the sacred in rocks, trees, animals… and the Earth as a whole.”34
In his article “The Rockefeller Plan,” author Dennis Cuddy reveals that “he [Steven Rockefeller] started writing the Earth Charter for Maurice Strong and Mikhail Gorbachev, both of whom said the charter would be like a new Ten Commandments.”35
After the Rio Earth Summit, Rockefeller, Strong, and Gorbachev unveiled the Earth Charter, which calls for the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and among nations, social justice, communitarianism or Fabian socialism, depending on what you prefer to call it. It has been housed in the Ark of Hope, an “ark” intended to resemble the Ark of the Covenant that held the Ten Commandments. According to the arkofhope.org website:
Recognizing that the United Nations is central to global efforts to solve problems which challenge humanity, the Ark of Hope carrying the Earth Charter and the Temenos Books was exhibited at the United Nations during the World Summit Prep Com II in January-February 2002.
The Ark of Hope was also placed on display at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa.
Socialism by Another Name
The “social justice” called for by the Earth Charter is merely socialism or redistribution of wealth. The term has been used by communists for years, and now it is being used by religious leaders. When social justice comes into the Church it is called the social gospel, but make no mistake, the social gospel is nothing more than socialism wrapped in religious terminology and unbiblical theology.
Dr. Walter Rauschenbusch is called the father of the social gospel. A member of the Fabian Socialist Society, Rauschenbusch taught at Rochester Theological Seminary. His goal was to indoctrinate seminary students in socialism, global governance, the social gospel, and Fabian socialism, and then send them into the churches. Rauschenbusch declared: “The only power that can make socialism succeed, if it is established, is religion. It cannot work in an irreligious country.”36 Rauschenbusch spoke of Jesus “not as one who would come to save sinners from their sins but as one who had a ‘social passion’ for society.”37
With the financial support of the Rockefellers, Rauschenbusch and his Fabian colleague, Rev. Harry F. Ward (also know as the “Red Dean” for his communist beliefs), started the Federal Council of Churches, which later became the National Council of Churches. According to a publication of the Federal Council of Churches, Ward sought to produce “a changed attitude on the part of many church members concerning the purpose and function both of the Church and Christianity.”38
But why would they want to change the purpose of the Church? They wanted to move it away from preaching the Gospel to using it as a vehicle for bringing about global governance, social justice, and the ideas that we see communitarian Rick Warren and other social justice/social gospel proponents promoting. Author Edgar Bundy explains in Collectivism in the Churches that:
...we have seen how Dr. Walter Rauschenbusch... and the leaders of the social- action movements in the churches decided to do away with Christian individualism and turn to outright collectivism, using the church as their instrument.... Religion was only a means toward achieving socialism. And, like all other false prophets who have infiltrated religion through the centuries, [Rauschenbusch] used a “front” or disguise. This disguise, as we have seen, was “'The Kingdom of God.” The Kingdom was not pictured as a spiritual society into which men and women had to be born as individuals through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as Savior, but as a collectivist society which would be brought about by... eradication of poverty, redistribution of wealth... and “economic justice.”39
Take note of this incredible testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities of the U.S. House of Representatives in July, 1953. Robert Kunzig, chief counsel for the committee, asked Manning Johnson, a former top member of the Communist Party, a series of questions:
KUNZIG: ...the name Harry Ward has appeared in so many of these various organizations and groups. It seems as if there is almost an interlacing tie-up... through various sects and denominations. Have you any comment to make on this situation?
JOHNSON: Yes, I have. Dr. Harry F. Ward, for many years, has been the chief architect for Communist infiltration and subversion in the religious field.
KUNZIG: ...could you give us a summary of the overall manner in which the Communists have attempted to infiltrate and poison the religious organizations of America wherever possible?
JOHNSON: Once the tactic of infiltrating religious organizations was set by the Kremlin, the actual mechanics of implementing the “new line” was a question of following the... church movement in Russia, where the Communists discovered that the destruction of religion could proceed much faster through infiltration of the church by Communist agents operating within the church itself. ...the infiltration tactic in this country would have to adapt itself to American conditions.... In the earliest stages it was determined that with only small forces available it would be necessary to concentrate Communist agents in the seminaries and divinity schools. The practical conclusion drawn by the Red leaders was that these institutions would make it possible for a small Communist minority to influence the ideology of future clergymen....The idea was to divert the emphasis of clerical thinking from the spiritual to the material.... Instead of emphasis towards the spiritual and matters of the soul, the new and heavy emphasis was to deal with those matters which, in the main, led toward the Communist program of “immediate demands”….
Manning explained that religion was the cover for an overall communist operation:
The plan was to make the seminaries the neck of a funnel through which thousands of potential clergymen would issue forth, carrying with them, in varying degrees, an ideology and slant which would aid in neutralizing the anti- Communist character of the church and also to use the clergy to spearhead important Communist projects....
This policy was successful beyond even Communist expectations. The combination of Communist clergymen, clergymen with a pro-Communist ideology, plus thousands of clergymen who were sold the principle of considering Communist causes as progressive... furnished the Soviet apparatus with a machine which was used as a religious cover for the overall Communist operation.40
Benjamin Gitlow, a Communist Party USA founder who turned against Communism, wrote and spoke against Communism until his death in 1965. He, too, testified before the committee:
KUNZIG: What kind of an organization was the Methodist Federation for Social Action, and how did it differ from a Communist-front organization?
GITLOW: The Methodist Federation for Social Action, originally called the Methodist Federation for Social Service, was first organized by a group of Socialist, Marxist clergymen of the Methodist church headed by Dr. Harry F. Ward. Dr. Ward was the organizer, for almost a lifetime its secretary and actual leader. He at all times set its ideological and political pattern. Its objective was to transform the Methodist Church and Christianity into an instrument for the achievement of socialism. It was established in 1907, 12 years before the organization of the Communist Party in the United States in 1919.
As we conclude this chapter, it is crucial to understand that the Scriptures have warned us there would be people just like we’ve examined. Committed Christians must warn the Church of the wolves in sheep’s clothing, just as the Fabian socialists’ window depicted. Jude 3-4 warns:
I found it necessary to write to you, exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith, which was once for all delivered to the saints, for certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men who turned the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord, Jesus Christ.
Notice the Word of God warns us to be aware that certain men have crept in “unnoticed.” This is why we must be watchmen on the wall. Christ died for the Church, and we should be willing to defend the Church from these ungodly men.
Second Peter 2:1-2 similarly cautions that “there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways.”
When we call out false teachers, the wolves in sheep’s clothing, when we call out these men who have crept in unnoticed, who have brought in secret, destructive heresies and doctrines, we will be accused of intolerance, of being divisive, creating factions. Many people have told me, “Howse, you’re divisive.” And my response is, “I hope so.”
I want to be as wise as a serpent and as gentle as a dove, but I hope what I’m saying and writing is divisive because the Word of God is a double-edged sword, dividing between truth and untruth. If we speak biblical truth, it will be divisive to those who contradict the Word of God. True Christians are called to distinguish between what is right and wrong, between truth and untruth. That which is consistent with the Word of God and God’s character and nature is truth, and that which deviates is not truth. We dare not fear being divisive if we hope to win the battle against the one-world Trojan horse.
U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater ran for president in 1964, and you may remember that during his campaign, Ronald Reagan cut his political teeth, giving speeches for Goldwater. Much later, in 1979, Goldwater wrote the book With No Apologies in which he discussed globalists and the Trilateral Commission. Goldwater explained that the Trilateral Commission (and globalists) “represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power—political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical.”41
Goldwater had the foresight to warn the Church that globalists were working to co-opt the Church with a religious Trojan horse. We should do no less.
First Corinthians 11:18-19 explains that divisions over truth are actually necessary:
For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it. For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you.
There must be factions. Otherwise, how are you going to know who’s being faithful to the Word of God? There is a religious Trojan horse inside the camp of Christianity. The question is: Will you embrace the religious Trojan horse, or will you expose it in order to keep people from being taken spiritual prisoners of war?
1 John Strachey, Contemporary Capitalism, (New York: Random House, 1956), 310.
2John Maynard Keynes, Economic Consequences of the Peace (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1920).
3 Walter Williams, “Counterfeiting Versus Monetary Policy,” December 17, 2008. Article posted here:
4 Zygmund Dobbs, “Sugar Keynes,” The Review of the News, June 23, 1971.
5 “About LSE- Students and staff,” posted at: Jobs.ac.uk. http://www.jobs.ac.uk/enhanced/employer/london- school-of-economics-and-political-science/.
6 “2008 Sunday Times University Guide – LSE Profile,” The Times (London). 2007-09-23, posted at:
7 James McGregor Burns, The Power to Lead (New York: Touchstone Publishing, 1984), 189.
8 CNBC interview on floor of New York Stock Exchange, January 2009, posted at:
9 Mikhail Gorbachev, “A New International Agenda,” International Herald Tribune, January 1, 2009.
11 Brannon Howse, “Using the Financial Crisis for Global Governance?”, www.worldviewtimes.com, January 12, 2009.
12 Henry Kissinger, “The Chance for A New World Order,” International Herald Tribune, January 12, 2009.
13 Dick Morris, “European Socialism to Run Our Financial System,” www.newsmax.com, April 7, 2009.
14 Gideon Rachman, “And Now for World Government,” Financial Times, December 9, 2008.
15 Lyubov Pronina, “Medvedev Shows Off Sample Coin of New ‘World Currency’ at G-8,” Bloomberg.com, July 10, 2009.
16 James Simpson, “Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis,” worldviewtimes.com, March 9, 2009.
17 Heather Heidelbaugh, “Obama Is Governing as a Community Organizer,” Washington Examiner.com, August 21, 2009.
18 Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals (New York: Vintage Books, March 1972 edition), 3.
19 Ibid., 25.
20 Ibid., 7
21 Ibid., 3
22 Ibid., 61
24 “Wheaton College to Become the First American Associate University of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation,”
posted at: http://www.tonyblairfaithfoundation.org/news/2010/12/03.
25 Roger Oakland, “Globalization: A Special Report.” Article posted here:
26 Joe Farah, “Rick Warren: Is He or Isn’t He?” posted at: http://www.wnd.com/2007/01/39612/
27 Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, (G S G & Associates Pub, June 1981), 168.
28 Dennis Cuddy, “The Power Elite Exposed,” posted at: worldviewweekend.com, March 25, 2010.
29 Council on Foreign Relations Address by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, July 15, 2009, posted at:
30 Richard N. Haas, “Sovereignty and Globalization,” February 17, 2006. Posted on CFR website at:
31 John Ensor Harr and Peter J. Johnson, The Rockefeller Century: Three Generations of America's Greatest Family (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1988), 156.
32 John D. Rockefeller, quoted in James W. Wardner, Unholy Alliances: The Secret Plan and the Secret People Who Are Working to Destroy America, 1996. (Privately Published)
33 David Rockefeller, Memoirs (New York: Random House, 2002), 404-405.
34 Dennis Cuddy, “The Rockefeller Plan,” January 12, 2009. Article posted here in 2012:
36 John Stormer, None Dare Call it Treason (Florissant, MO: Liberty Bell Press, 1964), 125.
37 Edgar C. Bundy, Collectivism in the Churches: A Documented Account of the Political Activities of the Federal, National, and World Councils of Churches (Wheaton, Illinois: Church League of America, 1957), 97.
38 A Yearbook of the Church and Social Service in The U.S., Federal Council of Churches, 1916, 23.
39 Bundy, Collectivism, 101.
40 Committee on Un-American Activities of the U.S. House of Representatives, 83rd Congress, in July, 1953, page 2229. Cited in Bundy, 127-28.
41 Barry Goldwater, With No Apologies: The Personal and Political Memoirs of United States Senator Barry M. Goldwater (William Morrow and Company; 1st edition, 1979).