Profile image
By John Rolls (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

UN Ordered Depopulation of 3 Billion People by Food Malnutrition Has Started

Sunday, November 19, 2017 13:38
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

Headline: Bitcoin & Blockchain Searches Exceed Trump! Blockchain Stocks Are Next!

 

By Amber William  /  My Daily Informer

EVERYONE NEEDS TO READ THIS! The UN is the Third Reich – Nazi’s with a world program to starve everyone to death with nutritionless food full of poisons!

Classified UN documents reveal that 1 billion people will be killed by starvation as UN trade agreements and WHO health moratoriums will forbid any country from selling and exporting any food to targeted regions for depopulation. Starvation of 3 billion people has already begun as the United States has been using its weapon of mass destruction called HAARP to control, alter and intensify the weather of the targeted nations. This past summer HAARP was used to create a heat wave in Russia, resulting in the near complete destruction of its crops. Also this past summer the US used HAARP to cause the massive flooding in China and Pakistan – an attempt to wipe out the crops of China and Pakistan resulting in the mass starvation of their populations. 2 billion more will be murdered by diseases and illnesses associated with malnutrition from crop destruction, pasteurization and irradiation.

Via : pdf.usaid.gov

  • 1. World population growth since World War 11 is quantitatively and qualitatively
    different from any previous epoch in human history. The rapid reduction in death rates, unmatched by corresponding birth rate reductions, has brought total growth rates close to 2 percent a year, compared with about 1 percent before World War II, under 0.5 percent in 1750-1900, and far lower rates before 1750. The effect is to double the world’s population in 35 years instead of 100 years. Almost 80 million are now being added each year, compared with 10 million in 1900.
  • 2. The second new feature of population trends is the sharp differentiation between rich and poor countries. Since 1950, population in the former group has been growing at O to 1.5 percent per year, and in the latter at 2.0 to 3.5 percent (doubling in 20 to 35 years). Some of the highest rates of increase are in areas already densely populated and with a weak resource base.
  • 3. Because of the momentum of population dynamics, reductions in birth rates affect total numbers only slowly. High birth rates in the recent past have resulted in a high proportion m the youngest age groups, so that there will continue to be substantial population increases over many years even if a two-child family should become the norm in the future. Policies to reduce fertility will have their main effects on total numbers only after several decades. However, if future numbers are to be kept within reasonable bounds, it is urgent that measures to reduce fertility be started and made effective in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Moreover, programs started now to reduce birth rates will have short run advantages for developing countries in lowered demands on food, health and educational and other services and in enlarged capacity to contribute to productive investments, thus accelerating development.
  • 4. U.N. estimates use the 3.6 billion population of 1970 as a base (there are nearly 4 billion now) and project from about 6 billion to 8 billion people for the year 2000 with the U.S. medium estimate at 6.4 billion. The U.S. medium projections show a world population of 12 billion by 2075 which implies a five-fold increase in south and southeast Asia and in Latin American and a seven-fold increase in Africa, compared with a doubling in east Asia and a 40% increase in the presently developed countries (see Table I). Most demographers, including the U.N. and the U.S. Population Council, regard the range of 10 to 13 billion as the most likely level for world population stability, even with intensive efforts at fertility control. (These figures assume, that sufficient food could be produced and distributed to avoid limitation through famines.)

Adequacy of World Food Supplies

  • 5. Growing populations will have a serious impact on the need for food especially in the poorest, fastest growing LDCs. While under normal weather conditions and assuming food production growth in line with recent trends, total world agricultural production could expand faster than population, there will nevertheless be serious problems in food distribution and financing, making shortages, even at today’s poor nutrition levels, probable in many of the larger more populous LDC regions. Even today 10 to 20 million people die each year due, directly or indirectly, to malnutrition. Even more serious is the consequence of major crop failures which are likely to occur from time to time.
  • 6. The most serious consequence for the short and middle term is the possibility of massive famines in certain parts of the world, especially the poorest regions. World needs for food rise by 2-1/2 percent or more per year (making a modest allowance for improved diets and nutrition) at a time when readily available fertilizer and well-watered land is already largely being utilized. Therefore, additions to food production must come mainly from higher yields.
    Countries with large population growth cannot afford constantly growing imports, but for them to raise food output steadily by 2 to 4 percent over the next generation or two is a formidable challenge. Capital and foreign exchange requirements for intensive agriculture are heavy, and are aggravated by energy cost increases and fertilizer scarcities and price rises. The institutional, technical, and economic problems of transforming traditional agriculture are also very difficult to overcome.
  • 7. In addition, in some overpopulated regions, rapid population growth presses on a fragile environment in ways that threaten longer-term food production: through cultivation of marginal lands, overgrazing, desertification, deforestation, and soil erosion, with consequent destruction of land and pollution of water, rapid siltation of reservoirs, and impairment of inland and coastal fisheries.
  • Mineral and Fuel
  • 8. Rapid population growth is not in itself a major factor in pressure on depletable resources (fossil fuels and other minerals), since demand for them depends more on levels of industrial output than on numbers of people. On the other hand, the world is increasingly dependent on mineral supplies from developing countries, and if rapid population frustrates their prospects for economic development and social progress, the resulting instability may undermine the conditions for expanded output and sustained flows of such resources.
  • 9. There will be serious problems for some of the poorest LDCs with rapid population growth. They will increasingly find it difficult to pay for needed raw materials and energy. Fertilizer, vital for their own agricultural production, will be difficult to obtain for the next few years. Imports for fuel and other materials will cause grave problems which could impinge on the U.S., both through the need to supply greater financial support and in LDC efforts to obtain better terms of trade through higher prices for exports.

What happens if we lose power indefinitely — foods that require freezing or refrigeration for long term storage are going to go bad. Emergency food storage in advance will be the only way to feed yourself and your family.

Economic Development and Population Growth

  • 10. Rapid population growth creates a severe drag on rates of economic development
    otherwise attainable, sometimes to the point of preventing any increase in per capita incomes. In addition to the overall impact on per capita incomes, rapid population growth seriously affects a vast range of other aspects of the quality of life important to social and economic progress in the LDCs.
  • 11. Adverse economic factors which generally result from rapid population growth include:
    — reduced family savings and domestic investment;
    — increased need for large amounts of foreign exchange for food imports;
    — intensification of severe unemployment and underemployment;
    — the need for large expenditures for services such as dependency support,
    education, and health which would be used for more productive investment;
    — the concentration of developmental resources on increasing food production
    to ensure survival for a larger population, rather than on improving living
    conditions for smaller total numbers.
  • 12. While GNP increased per annum at an average rate of 5 percent in LDCs over the last decade, the population increase of 2.5 percent reduced the average annual per capita growth rate to only 2.5 percent. In many heavily populated areas this rate was 2 percent or less. In the LDCs hardest hit by the oil crisis, with an aggregate population of 800 million, GNP increases may be reduced to less than 1 percent per capita per year for the remainder of the 1970’s. For the poorest half of the populations of these countries, with average incomes of less than $100, the prospect is for no growth or retrogression for this period.
  • 13. If significant progress can be made in slowing population growth, the positive impact
    on growth of GNP and per capita income will be significant. Moreover, economic and social progress will probably contribute further to the decline in fertility rates.
  • 14. High birth rates appear to stem primarily from:
    a. inadequate information about and availability of means of fertility control;
    b. inadequate motivation for reduced numbers of children combined with motivation
    for many children resulting from still high infant and child mortality and need for
    support in old age; and
    c. the slowness of change in family preferences in response to changes in
    environment.

Artificial Weather

The essential ingredient of the weather-modification system is the set of intervention techniques used to modify the weather. The number of specific intervention methodologies is limited only by the imagination, but with few exceptions they involve infusing either energy or chemicals into the meteorological process in the right way, at the right place and time. The intervention could be designed to modify the weather in a number of ways, such as influencing clouds and precipitation, storm intensity, climate, space, or fog.

While most weather-modification efforts rely on the existence of certain preexisting conditions, it may be possible to produce some weather effects artificially, regardless of preexisting conditions. For instance, virtual weather could be created by influencing the weather information received by an end user.

Their perception of parameter values or images from global or local meteorological information systems would differ from reality. This difference in perception would lead the end user to make degraded operational decisions.

Nanotechnology also offers possibilities for creating simulated weather. A cloud, or several clouds, of microscopic computer particles, all communicating with each other and with a larger control system could provide tremendous capability. Interconnected, atmospherically buoyant, and having navigation capability in three dimensions, such clouds could be designed to have a wide-range of properties. They might exclusively block optical sensors or could adjust to become impermeable to other surveillance methods. They could also provide an atmospheric electrical potential difference, which otherwise might not exist, to achieve precisely aimed and timed lightning strikes. Even if power levels achieved were insufficient to be an effective strike weapon, the potential for psychological operations in many situations could be fantastic.

One major advantage of using simulated weather to achieve a desired effect is that unlike other approaches, it makes what are otherwise the results of deliberate actions appear to be the consequences of natural weather phenomena. In addition, it is potentially relatively inexpensive to do. According to J. Storrs Hall, a scientist at Rutgers University conducting research on nanotechnology, production costs of these nanoparticles could be about the same price per pound as potatoes.34 This of course discounts research and development costs, which will be primarily borne by the private sector and be considered a sunk cost by 2025 and probably earlier.

Political Effects of Population Factors

The political consequences of current population factors in the LDCs – rapid growth, internal migration, high percentages of young people, slow improvement in living standards, urban concentrations, and pressures for foreign migration ── are damaging to the internal stability and international relations of countries in whose advancement the U.S. is interested, thus creating political or even national security problems for the U.S. In a broader sense, there is a major risk of severe damage to world economic, political, and ecological systems and, as these systems begin to fail, to our humanitarian values.

The pace of internal migration from countryside to over swollen cities is greatly intensified by rapid population growth. Enormous burdens are placed on LDC governments for public administration, sanitation, education, police, and other services, and urban slum dwellers (though apparently not recent migrants) may serve as a volatile, violent force which threatens political stability.

Adverse socio-economic conditions generated by these and related factors may contribute to high and increasing levels of child abandonment, juvenile delinquency, chronic and growing underemployment and unemployment, petty thievery, organized brigandry, food riots, separatist movements, communal massacres, revolutionary actions and counter-revolutionary coupe. Such conditions also detract form the environment needed to attract the foreign capital vital to increasing levels of economic growth in these areas. If these conditions result in expropriation of foreign interests, such action, from an economic viewpoint, is not in the best interests of either the investing country or the host government.

In international relations, population factors are crucial in, and often determinants of, violent conflicts in developing areas. Conflicts that are regarded in primarily political terms often have demographic roots. Recognition of these relationships appears crucial to any understanding or prevention of such hostilities.

General Goals and Requirements for Dealing With Rapid Population Growth

The central question for world population policy in the year 1974, is whether mankind is to remain on a track toward an ultimate population of 12 to 15 billion — implying a five to seven-fold increase in almost all the underdeveloped world outside of China — or whether (despite the momentum of population growth) it can be switched over to the course of earliest feasible population stability — implying ultimate totals of 8 to 9 billions and not more than a three or four-fold increase in any major region.

What are the stakes? We do not know whether technological developments will make it possible to feed over 8 much less 12 billion people in the 21st century. We cannot be entirely certain that climatic changes in the coming decade will not create great difficulties in feeding a growing population, especially people in the LDCs who live under increasingly marginal and more vulnerable conditions. There exists at least the possibility that present developments point toward Malthusian conditions for many regions of the world.

But even if survival for these much larger numbers is possible, it will in all likelihood be bare survival, with all efforts going in the good years to provide minimum nutrition and utter dependence in the bad years on emergency rescue efforts from the less populated and richer countries of the world. In the shorter run — between now and the year 2000 — the difference between the two courses can be some perceptible material gain in the crowded poor regions, and some improvement in the relative distribution of intra- country per capita income between rich and poor, as against permanent poverty and the widening of income gaps. A much more vigorous effort to slow population growth can also mean a very great difference between enormous tragedies of malnutrition and starvation as against only serious chronic conditions.

Disaster preparation has received a lot of attention in the recent past. In fact, people who live in every corner of the world prepare for various disasters such as famine and war. Some of them even prepare for zombies. It is always better to prepare to face disasters as they can hit us at unexpected times. However, it should be done according to a plan. That’s where The Lost Ways comes into play. This guide follows a scientific approach to help people prepare for disasters. In fact, it would let people know about the secret methods followed by the ancestors to survive disasters. They include a variety of disasters such as droughts, diseases, financial crisis, wars, famines and everything else life threw at them. 

http://www.mydailyinformer.com/un-ordered-depopulation-of-3-billion-people-by-food-malnutrition-has-started/

Read more great articles here; http://www.mydailyinformer.com

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Total 11 comments
  • jdpent01

    SUCH A BOGUS ARTICLE CATASTROPHIC EVENTS ALREADY ASSURE FOOD SHORTAGES, VOLCANOES, EARTHQUAKES, FLOODS, HURRICANES, TORNADOES, AND WAR.

  • Pink Slime

    Don’t worry, WW 3 will solve ALL human problems. According to Einstein, stock up on sticks and stones. :lol:

  • unidentified

    they’re planning on killing the really useless unskilled expendable sick people first :evil: :cool: :???:

  • Major Headache

    Clickbate fear porn. Did this article scare you?

  • allendaves

    life is temp ..better worry about eternity……123’s of true Christianity v popular & damnable heresies

    #1 “ANOTHER JESUS”:
    -“ONE” not triune: Mark 12:28…Which is the first commandment of all? 29. …Hear, O Israel; THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD: 30. And ………..this is the first commandment….. 31. And the second is….. IF YOU CAN’T GET THIS “FIRST OF ALL COMMANDMENTS” RIGHT, ALL THE REST OF YOUR “FAITH” AND PREACHING ON LOVE & SIN IS MOOT….. (NOTE: And yes, the specific Greek and Hebrew words used also and only define one person contrary to the ridiculous obfuscation attempts of some!?!)
    PART 4 & 5 HOW MANY GODS ARE THERE FOR THE ONE GOD TO TALK TO?? Who was Jesus praying to??!?…. The real question should be … How does having multiple different persons keep this one God/being/entity from praying to himself?! (The trinitarian “schizophrenic” “god-head”) The Trinitarians want to have their cake and eat it too as the saying goes. On the one hand they need to say they only worship one indivisible God being/ entity but on the other hand they feel the need for some reason to keep Jesus or God from praying and talking to himself by dividing him up into different persons!?! It never occurs to them that that since there is only one indivisible God to pray too and Jesus is that indivisible God come in the flesh that he would need to talk to himself as to show us how to live, suffer, pray and die for our/ flesh) benefit not his!?!….. So while Trinitarians are quick to complain that God was not talking to himself at Christ baptism or in Gen “let us” they ignore the logical demands of their own theology! If Jesus is the ONE GOD in flesh and the Father is the SAME ONE GOD in heaven then Trinitarianism demands THE ONE GOD is talking to HIMSELF! Claiming that God is multiple different persons as the reason for why God is not talking to himself (because God is three different “selfs”) only demonstrates that what they really worship is in fact not a ONE GOD who talks to himself but three different god “selfs”/ and they all talk to each other! When they speak about who God was talking and praying to, they are quick to say “the other person, NOT HIMSELF!” But if you ask them how many gods do they pray to then they will say “ONLY ONE”!?! They expect you to believe that those three different persons are THE ONE GOD-BEING” which is like calling three different cars “THE ONE VEHICLE” (text book examples of prov 26:12)

    -PART 5 Echad, Echad, my God, God is Echad!….:The Greek word pros in Jn 1:1 does not inherently demand multiple different persons because:

    1. The definitions (without forced conclusions stuffed in) are just as equally valid as reference to parts of the same person (modalisim) Your head and your right arm have close relationship to each other; can be facing, towards, relating to, moving to, in the direction of, to, unto, looking to; even at home with, a living union, in the presence of, a common ground, closeness They are still both distinct and different from each other and yet they are of both the same person. Ironically the scriptures use the very same terms to describe father and son.

    2. Ironically and most hypocritically, the trinitarians are trying to appeal to the anthropomorphisms (they claim this passage implies) to demonstrate different persons while at the same time denying the very anthropomorphisms that God himself specifically in scriptures uses to define the son and the son’s relationship to the father. Apparently only the literal anthropomorphisms that trintiarins “see’ exist while the one’s that God himself uses should not be taken too literal or too anthropomorphic or seriously. Is the face anthropomorphic and or literal face or just some metaphor? Either way the problem for trinitarians still exist and simply does not cease with linguistic distractions. There are many different types of faces; face of a clock; face of a mirror; face of one’s palm. Further, the face of one’s palm would be totally consistent with the anthropomorphism that God uses when discussing his own right arm as the son! So either way, a literal and or anthropomorphic face or a metaphorical face in close relationship only leaves the trinitarinas peddling an empty argument hoping no one notices the fact that this argument is nothing more then delusional smoke and mirrors for “the faithful” and for everyone else, well, just “never mind that man behind the curtain”.

    3. You cant appeal to your own desired and or preconceived conclusions as evidence that your methodology in arriving at your conclusions are valid. [ie the use of Jn 1:18 et al as proof that Jn1:1 supports different persons in Jn1:18 et al or visa versa ] How difficult can they make these simple things? The God in heaven is a he but cannot be known except by the he who is the same God in flesh! So why can’t they be the same he again? It should not be difficult to understand since:

    A. The same God who is in heaven is on earth and the difference need only be of circumstance which at least we know that much to be factually true [spirit only v spirit in human flesh] There is no further need or demand for different individual persons since all the different he’s are in fact the same HE!. Trying to claim that God is multiple different “He(s)” who make up the one being either leaves your God to be a “it” that consist of different he(s) or a“God being” who is a he while simultaneously consisting of different individual he(s) [Father-he; Son=he; Holy Spirit=he].

    B. If you find no difficulty in accepting that God is a he that consist of father son and holy spirit also referred to each as a different he and yet all the same he then what is the point to claiming different persons again? How is the multitude of hes who are all the same he show or demand different persons rather than different circumstances of the same person who is in fact “HE”?

    In any case, the trinitarian inconsistency and or incoherence will never be resolved by simply chalking it all up to “how great thou art” unless you willingly and blindly “drink the cool aid” calling it “faith”. True faith is in the words of God (including the specific anthropomorphism God himself uses) not in wild created imaginations of three different persons with different minds, locations and instructions for each other that is somehow not a pantheon of three gods who are only “one in terms of purpose not one god!….To deny the father is to deny the son because they are one and the same person that came in the flesh! Trinitarians confess & preach literally …”ANOTHER JESUS” 2 Cor 11:4

    -JOHN 14: 8-20 ….[Note Isaiah 9:6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: …: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, … the everlasting Father] ….The son, father/Holy Spirit are all the same person, NOT like two different persons working together even as “one flesh” ….The “oneness” between Christ and the father is not comparable to a man & his wife, for only a fool would say “When you have seen me you have seen my wife, how sayest thou then, Shew us your wife?” Notice they asked to see THE FATHER and the response was Jn 14:9 ..“HAVE I BEEN SO LONG time with you, and yet hast THOU NOT KNOW ME, Philip…..Now image some fool trying to claim that statement if you asked to see his wife!?!!? You want to see the FATHER but have I been with you but you don’t know me!?!?!
    Jn 14 continued….…………..17. Even THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH; (Jn 14:6 I AM the way, THE TRUTH,) whom the world cannot receive, .. for HE DEWLLETH WITH YOU, (present tense/standing next to them in the flesh) and SHALL BE IN YOU… (future tense “In them”) 18. I will not leave you comfortless: I WILL COME TO YOU (future tense “In them”) Jesus himself here makes the point that the same person who was the HOLY SPIRIT that would come was standing next to them but lets them know “I will come to you again to be Inside of you”

    -The whole point to Gal 3:20.a mediator is NOT A MEDIATOR OF ONE, (HEIS) but GOD IS ONE. (HEIS) again, point blank, identifies the number of persons of God! The “but” points out the contrast between multiple persons in a mediation party v the “one” of God. God is not like a mediation party with multiple different persons. …..”the express image of his person” ( the person of God; singular not plural) Any attempt to lay claim otherwise is willful ignorance and delusional nonsense

    -Like a thief in your house caught stealing your things insisting he was not there stealing “I CONFESS I am NOT stealing”. You just do not “properly understand” what he is doing/saying. Further, since you never had a “proper understanding” of what he is doing/saying you have no business accusing him since you do not even know what you are talking about in the first place. It is with and in your own ignorance that you base your “false accusations” & “ad homonym attacks” against him…… Ridiculous of course it is ……2Thess 2:11; Titus 1:16; 2Tim 3:5; TRINITARIANS CONFESS JESUS /THEY ARE NOT POLYTHEIST BUT ARE MONOTHEIST LIKE A LIAR & THIEF WHO “CONFESS” THEY DO NOT LIE OR STEAL The simple fact is that just because you confess or deny that you are in an adulterous relationship and denounce all forms of adultery has nothing to do with whether or not it is in fact adulterous! .. …A rose by any other name is still just a rose AND calling it a water lily does not change the definition of what a water Lilly or a rose is either!…

    -This should have given you a hint, harking back to Satan in The garden…God said you will die…Satan comes along and states no you will be more WISE……Today .God said He is one; but Satan’s children come along and say no three is more WISE and humble in the face of God’s grandeur only “a mystery” that can be understood “in faith”. God uses head and right arm to explain the distinctions between father and son.. However, the Trinitarian heretics say to the effect: “NO, that is just a figure of speech, or that is not what God really means. What God is really saying is that God is three different persons”. Fools, hypocrites and blind guides, God said he was One and by your traditions have taken the words of God and made them of no effect, refashioning God into the image of your vain imaginations!
    You can download the complete FREE book from
    https://www.scribd.com/doc/305367608/The-Trinity-Heresy
    OR
    https://www.academia.edu/23463667/THE_TRINITY_HERESY
    OR
    http://www.globethics.net/gtl/10920799

    #2 “ANOTHER GOSPEL”:
    -If you ask most people what the Good news or Gospel is they will probably tell you about the virgin birth or Christ death burial and resurrection. This would be rather humorous if it was not so sad considering that for the three and half years of Christ ministry he does not mention hardly ever. However, Christ does spend a lot of time preaching out of the OT scriptures. Now imagine given a report or manual to read and understand, that makes reference to and even quotes other source material and then ignoring that source material when it comes to defining the context and meanings of words in the report or manual you are trying to make sense of. If that seems dysfunctional that is because it is. This is, however, what most people are doing when it comes to understanding sound NT doctrine and or even what the Gospel message of Jesus was. The mystery of the gospel was not the death, burial and resurrection although it is part of it. In fact, death, burial and resurrection was the sign, the only sign, that Jesus gave to validate that the gospel message he was preaching all that time was true……and yet most deny it!?!?!

    -The “2nd coming”… “I come quickly” so “Hold fast till i come”… NOT …“in another 2000 years I might be coming soon any time now, so hold fast”!?! …those that deny the second coming of Christ in the war of AD70 (in their lifetime) are practicing a damnable heresy in denying the Lord that bought them ( 2Peter 2:1-2 ;2Tim 4:8/ you cant love an appearing you deny& the context is the 2nd coming not the first)… Mat 7:23..”I NEVER KNEW YOU” …..Mat 10:33. But whosoever shall deny me before men……..sound familiar?…. If I said I am coming to your house in this generation when these things happen but no one knows the day or hour what fool would think I might be coming in 2000 years latter!?!? ..2 Tim 4: 4. And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be TURNED UNTO FABLES. The “idea”/ doctrine that Jesus has not yet returned but “soon any day now soon” does not just make God out a liar; it is not just ridiculous but makes Christianity a mockery, A pathetic “ship of fools”!?!
    -The following example excerpt from Bertrand Russell: sometimes quoted by atheist et al and from his published work “Why I Am Not A Christian”
    Defects in Christ’s Teaching
    Having granted the excellence of these maxims, I come to certain points in which I do not believe that one can grant either the superlative wisdom or the superlative goodness of Christ as depicted in the Gospels; …. I am concerned with Christ as He appears in the Gospels, taking the Gospel narrative as it stands, and there one does find some things that do not seem to be very wise. For one thing, he certainly thought that His second coming would occur in clouds of glory before the death of all the people who were living at that time. There are a great many texts that prove that. He says, for instance, “Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of Man be come.” Then he says, “There are some standing here which shall not taste death till the Son of Man comes into His kingdom”; and there are a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed that His second coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living. That was the belief of His earlier followers, and it was the basis of a good deal of His moral teaching. When He said, “Take no thought for the morrow,” and things of that sort, it was very largely because He thought that the second coming was going to be very soon, and that all ordinary mundane affairs did not count. I have, as a matter of fact, known some Christians who did believe that the second coming was imminent. I knew a parson who frightened his congregation terribly by telling them that the second coming was very imminent indeed, but they were much consoled when they found that he was planting trees in his garden. The early Christians did really believe it, and they did abstain from such things as planting trees in their gardens, because they did accept from Christ the belief that the second coming was imminent. In that respect, clearly He was not so wise as some other people have been, and He was certainly not superlatively wise.
    https://www.scribd.com/doc/305366745/Revelation-the-First-Gospel-of-the-Kingdom
    OR
    http://www.globethics.net/gtl/5455069
    OR
    https://www.academia.edu/23464127/REVELATION_THE_FIRST_GOSPEL_OF_THE_KINGDOM
    Amazon/Barns & Nobel et al
    978-1-4907-0590-3 (SC ISBN)

    #3 GOD LOVES EVERYONE; Jesus Died for “you”…… Just “come as you are”
    Does God love you?….”Probably” NOT!….and NO Jesus did not die for everyone!?!……There is a sharp contrast between THREE groups : A. The predestined damned B. the “many” called C. The “Few” Chosen
    Predestination….its true..its all true… God does NOT love everyone:

    Prov 8: 17. I LOVE THEM THAT LOVE ME …………
    1John 5:3. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments:

    (1) “PREDESTINED DAMNED” who were NEVER written in the book of life ………..Rev 17: 8 WHOSE NAMES WERE NOT WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF LIFE FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, …as contrasted …EPH 1: 4. According as he hath CHOSEN US in him BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD

    (2) “MANY CALLED”= ONLY and ALL SAINTS (those who come to Christ) are written in the book of life … Philippians 4:3… ……Rev 21:27; (Only saints are Called and elect; Rom 1:6-7 et al) This is THE CHRUCH and ONLY these can have their names blotted out of the book of life ….….Heb 12:23 to the general assembly and CHURCH of the firstborn … WHICH ………are WRITTEN in heaven,

    (3) THE FEW CHOSEN: Those saints who were alive in group #2 who are now physically dead. They died “faithful” these are the FEW that were chosen faithful…….Rev 3:5. ……; and I
    will not BLOT OUT HIS NAME OUT OF THE BOOK OF LIFE, (Ps 69:28) …. These are the FEW that are CHOSEN and now that they have died and are saved then “once saved THEY CAN NEVER BE LOST”

    PS: “The world” that God so loved was not the Roman world nor the world of the Maya nor the world you imagined in your head that God specifically told them NOT TO LOVE!?!
    https://www.scribd.com/doc/306868420/Most-True-Christians-Go-to-Hell
    OR
    http://www.globethics.net/gtl/10920800
    OR
    https://www.academia.edu/25217564/Most_True_Christains_Go_to_Hell

    THE THIEF-BAPTISM-GRACE& THE NAME-LORD & LT

    “whosoever shall call on THE NAME OF THE LORD shall be saved”
    ………So WHAT “NAME” did you “CALL UPON”?……
    Rev 19:13. .. and HIS NAME IS called THE WORD OF GOD
    Ps 138:2. praise THY NAME … for thou hast magnified THY WORD ABOVE ALL THY NAME -
    NOTE: God placed His “THE WORD” ABOVE all of God’s various NAMEs – and Jesus NAME IS called “THE WORD” no other name saves. The MOST important name we should KNOW and CALL UPON is “THE WORD”; Not letters that spell “word” but the sayings/ doctrine/commands. It does NOT say “thy word is given a name above other names because here THY WORD is identified as the name that is placed above all other names.
    Isaiah 52:1. . 6. Therefore MY PEOPLE SHALL KNOW MY NAME: ..What NAME do you “KNOW”.?
    1Jn 2:3. And HEREBY WE DO KNOW that we KNOW HIM, if we KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS./ Titus 1: 16. They profess that THEY KNOW God; but IN WORKS THEY DENY him…
    “AT the name OF JESUS”…..Jesus has a name that belongs to Jesus…just like the name OF GOD means a name that belongs to GOD but it is ridiculous to suggest that the letters G-O-D is that name…likewise the name OF JESUS is NOT the letters J-E-S-U-S. Why would anyone think that you could pronounce THE HIGHEST NAME OF GOD letter by letter…. (ie Judges 13:18; 2Cor 12:4 but God’s name is not as great and or “unspeakable )
    Rev 3:8 kept MY WORD, and hast not DENIED MY NAME; …
    .Jn 17:6. I have MANIFESTED THY NAME And they have KEPT THY WORD.;
    THE WORD is THE NAME above every name that saves us 1Pt 3:21 The ONE baptism(Eph 4:5) is into THE WORD ( which is also baptism in the Holy spirit Jn 6:63the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit ) ..ALL the sayings doctrines and commands….what did THE WORD that became flesh command? (Mat 28:19)…..what did THE WORD exemplify? (Mat 3:15/ Jn 4:1)………among other things…..YES .water baptism is just as essential and necessary for much a part of salvation (1Pt 3:21) as is keeping one self away from works of the flesh (Gal 5:21)….In fact obedience to the command of water baptism is specifically identified as the act of calling on the name of the Lord (Col 2:12 “……though the operation[work] of God” CAN ANY MAN BE SAVED WITHOUT GOD WORKING ON HIM?) …..THE WORD OF GOD is the name of God that men call upon OR…OR ..they DENY with their disobedience
    The scriptures tell us almost nothing about the thief’s life. However, the scriptures tell us a great deal about Christ life……Jesus had been around for 3.5 years before the cross and was Baptizing (Jn 4:1-2 in fact He instructed his disciples to do so and did many more then John the Baptist ever did) …..Those who try to appeal to the thief on the cross assume the thief had never heard of Jesus preaching and had never ever been baptized….The burden of Proof is on those who say baptism is not essential! ………..You can’t claim a logically valid “non-essentiality” doctrinal argument on ANYTHING based on what the scriptures do not say and in spite of the things it clearly does state to the opposite effect!…That is like looking at the constitutional law and then basing a argument against a constitutional principle in law based on the fact that history did not record for us what some unknown cattle thief did or did not do a 150 years ago?!?! What??..Who cares?? We know what the constitution did say 150 years ago. I don’t know of any Law school that bases its teaching on constitutional law based on what history does not tell us about unknown cattle thieves!?! ..Jesus command, preached & practiced Baptism so did the apostles ….To build one’s theology on the fact that the scriptures do not tell us ANY detail(s) of the thief’s life before the cross (we know almost absolutely nothing about the thief!!) it is quite foolish and willfully ignorant of what the scriptures do say about baptism…….so those who try to use the thief are in effect building their house on the sand of what scriptures do not say about a thief in spite of what the scriptures do specifically tell us about baptism!?!… “Their damnation is just” comes to mind…
    https://www.scribd.com/document/326686356/Thief-Cross-3D OR https://www.academia.edu/23846490/Thief_and_Cross_3D.

  • YellowRoseTx51

    Reality check. An American INVENTED HAARP.
    RAYTHEON took HAARP. Its design was seized and then built, by RAYTHEON.
    HAARP isn’t owned by America, nor is it just 1 Array in the U.S. There are multiple arrays world wide now. It is Foreign owned.

  • Ideas Time

    Third world people can not take care of themselves so they come to America and have tons of kids who will destroy our county just like they did to their own countries and get paid by white people to fk up our country.

    I don’t care about sex, but the are kid machines.

    Go to Walmart now and all you see it the the third world people who hate us white people left their countries to cash in on white people accomplishments. They all have anchor babies in tow.

    Time to wake up white America, these people will turn us white people who are responsible who have two kids into their county with anchor babies.

    These people from India have tons of kids, that are citizens at birth so they never have to leave. Mexicans do the same.

    Anchor babies has to end before it is to late.

  • 2QIK4U

    This is what all poor government hear and looked at the NWO as a good thing.

  • Tedx

    Reporter Amber William completely discredits himself and everything that follows his opening statement by parroting fictitious characteristics of the fictitious group he and other disinformation agents call “Nazis”.

  • The Watcher

    JUST RELEASE A VIRUS, IN ALL COUNTRIES, AT THE SAME TIME, THAT WILL ONLY KILL NON-WHITES! NO MORE POPULATION PROBLEM AND NO MORE RACE PROBLEM! WHITES ONLY!

  • Geeper

    “U.N. estimates use the 3.6 billion population of 1970 as a base (there are nearly 4 billion now) and project from about 6 billion to 8 billion people for the year 2000″

    “Now” being before 2000? Just how old is this junk story?

Top Stories
Recent Stories
 

Featured

 

Top Global

 

Top Alternative

 

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.