[Cubeoid]

I figure we're due for one in the next few years. And the nominations are....

(please be as broad as possible, and don't discriminate against people in the entertainment industry, some of them are just as ignorant and devout of souls as our politicians)

[Face Ache]

I guess I missed the first anti-chirst.

[cjrivera]

Originally posted by Face Ache:
I guess I missed the first anti-chirst.

That woulda been Bill Gates.

[SOLIDAge]

Avril Lavigne

[simonjames]

And this has ??? to do with the political forum?


Ned Flanders

[Cubeoid]

Originally posted by solidage:
Avril Lavigne

She's stupid alright. Could grow to become evil with time. Good choice.

[fireside]

i know who the next anti-christ is but he i'm sure you guys dont know who he is.

[chris v]

She has walked among us for years, and her name is Celine Dion.

Avril Levine is merely one of her hoarde of minions.

CV

[theolein]

He's been around for years. His name starts with Donald and ends with Rumsfeld.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally posted by chris v:
She has walked among us for years, and her name is Celine Dion.

We have a winner!

[fxbezak]

Originally posted by theolein:
He's been around for years. His name starts with Donald and ends with Rumsfeld.

Why? Why is he the anti christ?
Because he is leading the department of defence against a regime that rapes, murders and forces its men to fight by taking their familes hostage under threat of death ?


Honestly... how can anyone say what was going on in Iraq good, how can we overlook that... I mean if you told the jews no we arent gonna invade germany because we dont think whats goin on is a real threat to humanity.. dont you think they would hev gotten a little bitter?


Gee while we are at it... lets clone hitler and give him a teaching position at berkley

[MacGorilla]

This guy:

[theolein]

Originally posted by fxbezak:
Why? Why is he the anti christ?
Because he is leading the department of defence against a regime that rapes, murders and forces its men to fight by taking their familes hostage under threat of death ?


Honestly... how can anyone say what was going on in Iraq good, how can we overlook that... I mean if you told the jews no we arent gonna invade germany because we dont think whats goin on is a real threat to humanity.. dont you think they would hev gotten a little bitter?


Gee while we are at it... lets clone hitler and give him a teaching position at berkley

No, Because he is leading the department of defence of a regime that rapes, murders and forces its men to fight by taking their familes hostage under threat of death ?

[NosniboR80]

Originally posted by theolein:
No, Because he is leading the department of defence of a regime that rapes, murders and forces its men to fight by taking their familes hostage under threat of death ?

Oh really? That's interesting! What 'regime' is that? And what policy is it that 'forces its ment to fight by taking their families hostage under threat of death?" Even less, what policy is it that even forces its men to fight? We aren't even using the draft!

Rapes and murders happen of course, but they are hardly commanded or overlooked (and if they are overlooked, it isn't because of Rumsfeld or even Bush).

Sheesh. Sometimes, you write worthwhile things, but sometimes you are just incendiary. What a punka$$ thing to do!

I've even seen posts where you target America, Americans, and their leaders for neglecting to deal with Saddam from '80-98! Yet, I also remember that LONG-A$$ thread in which people got onto you about being from Switzerland, which of course neglected to do anything at all, even after the US did, which was a long time.

(Of course, I will also note that you are not actually from there, since you so poignantly claimed that you were actually from S. Africa. Then, people got onto you about being from S. Africa, but you claimed that you weren't responsible for their policies, which you aren't really, assuming you were too young or didn't vote for the guilty. So, I'd just like you to be VERY careful in the future of not getting onto Americans for policies on which they had little impact, like our Iraq policies.)

[nickdman]

I thought Zimphire was going to be the next anti-christ ?

[Brien]

Originally posted by MacGorilla:
This guy:

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


We have us a winner.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by fxbezak:


Gee while we are at it... lets clone hitler and give him a teaching position at berkley

Umm, you probably mean Columbia University. I think they may have supplanted Berkley for outrageous statements now.

[theolein]

Originally posted by NosniboR80:
Oh really? That's interesting! What 'regime' is that? And what policy is it that 'forces its ment to fight by taking their families hostage under threat of death?" Even less, what policy is it that even forces its men to fight? We aren't even using the draft!

Rapes and murders happen of course, but they are hardly commanded or overlooked (and if they are overlooked, it isn't because of Rumsfeld or even Bush).

Sheesh. Sometimes, you write worthwhile things, but sometimes you are just incendiary. What a punka$$ thing to do!

I've even seen posts where you target America, Americans, and their leaders for neglecting to deal with Saddam from '80-98! Yet, I also remember that LONG-A$$ thread in which people got onto you about being from Switzerland, which of course neglected to do anything at all, even after the US did, which was a long time.

(Of course, I will also note that you are not actually from there, since you so poignantly claimed that you were actually from S. Africa. Then, people got onto you about being from S. Africa, but you claimed that you weren't responsible for their policies, which you aren't really, assuming you were too young or didn't vote for the guilty. So, I'd just like you to be VERY careful in the future of not getting onto Americans for policies on which they had little impact, like our Iraq policies.)

Is this an attempt to find some sort of personal guilt on my part for the failings of your government?

Perhaps you would like to point out to me the place where I wrote about not being culpable for the atrocities in South Africa?

I was definitely indirectly responsible, in my own capacity as a human being, for that part of what happened in South Africa. I grew up taking black people as "untermenschen" (look it up yourself) for granted. I believed every bit of propaganda that was continually thrown at us and was proud of my country and it's invinceable army...

until I was 15.

I was very careful, later at university, not to open my mouth too loudly, in order to avoid being arrested and detained without trial, as were a number of my friends found out to their detriment. Some of those people were never seen again. I carry guilt with me to this day for not having had the courage to stand up in the open against that government of murderers, thieves, psychopaths, sadists and torturers. I was simply too scared.

But it was very hard having friends on both sides of the conflict, drafted soldiers on the one hand, some of them very patriotic when they went in, but not when they came out, and members of banned organisations on the other, who had to lead secret lives in order to avoid being tortured and killed.

If you take offense because you are an American, and feel that I am lumping all Americans into one box, then I apologise. I'm sorry, it was wrong of me. (I've done this before, and it has been pointed out to me)

If you are trying to tell me what I should think and what I should write here, then I don't apologise, and will continue to do so until I am banned or in some other way forced to start voicing my opposition to this insanity of killing and suffering.

[NosniboR80]

Originally posted by theolein:
If you take offense because you are an American, and feel that I am lumping all Americans into one box, then I apologise. I'm sorry, it was wrong of me. (I've done this before, and it has been pointed out to me)

If you are trying to tell me what I should think and what I should write here, then I don't apologise, and will continue to do so until I am banned or in some other way forced to start voicing my opposition to this insanity of killing and suffering.

On one level, I take offense, because I see no grounds for the claim you made against America (and trust me, I am constantly around wild claims with which I disagree but can attest that there is some reason to think this or that way).

On another level, with regards to the moral culpability, I've read Daniel Goldhagen, "Hitler's Willing Executioners," and I don't really buy it. I mean, sure, one could do more, as you said about yourself in S. Africa, but you did not take part. So, I guess I agree that you are somewhat responsible for that (just going by what you said), but I think it is futile to beat yourself up about it, because it would have been futile to oppose the situation in a position of so little power (at that age and without any power or expertise).

Anyway, I am not telling you how to think. I am picking a fight about what you think - if you really think that America "forces...." as you wrote earlier. You saw my concessions, and I stand by them. Of course, rape, murder, etc go on here and it is terrible. Yet, it is not forced by the government. If it is, it is not overlooked. If it is overlooked, then it is the fault of some individual who should not have overlooked it. It is not a cultural, mass-political head turning on atrocities.

We certainly don't force men to join the military (except during the draft, so part of my argument goes out the window in those instances), and we certainly don't hold their families hostage to do so.

There is plenty wrong with America, but next to Saddam's regime it is like smooth vanilla ice cream. And, anyone who says otherwise deserves a lesson.

[theolein]

Originally posted by NosniboR80:
On one level, I take offense, because I see no grounds for the claim you made against America (and trust me, I am constantly around wild claims with which I disagree but can attest that there is some reason to think this or that way).

On another level, with regards to the moral culpability, I've read Daniel Goldhagen, "Hitler's Willing Executioners," and I don't really buy it. I mean, sure, one could do more, as you said about yourself in S. Africa, but you did not take part. So, I guess I agree that you are somewhat responsible for that (just going by what you said), but I think it is futile to beat yourself up about it, because it would have been futile to oppose the situation in a position of so little power (at that age and without any power or expertise).

Anyway, I am not telling you how to think. I am picking a fight about what you think - if you really think that America "forces...." as you wrote earlier. You saw my concessions, and I stand by them. Of course, rape, murder, etc go on here and it is terrible. Yet, it is not forced by the government. If it is, it is not overlooked. If it is overlooked, then it is the fault of some individual who should not have overlooked it. It is not a cultural, mass-political head turning on atrocities.

We certainly don't force men to join the military (except during the draft, so part of my argument goes out the window in those instances), and we certainly don't hold their families hostage to do so.

There is plenty wrong with America, but next to Saddam's regime it is like smooth vanilla ice cream. And, anyone who says otherwise deserves a lesson.

Ah, I see what you're getting at now. That twisted post I made by turing that sentence around that someone else posted. That was not right on my part, and was made in anger as a stupid response to a response on my comment on Donald Rumdfeld. I do, however believe that Donald Rumsfled (just do a google on him, or go to everything2.com) is somehow the personification of evil. To me that man has done so much damage to people of your own country and has never shown a single sign of remorse for his love of power, death and weapons of mass destruction and is someone personally responsible for much of what is now happening in Iraq. Saddam is far worse in terms of actual numbers, but I believe Rumsfeld would be just as happy to have served in the Iraqi regime if he has been born there, and I think he would have gained great power.

[Lerkfish]

I have no idea who the "anti-chirst" will be...Chirstie Alley?

heh.

The anti-christ you mean, perhaps?

I have no idea, but I wonder if he would take control of the most powerful country with the greatest and most powerful weapons, and then proceed to pre-emptively attack an ever increasing list of "enemies" until world domination was achieved. Simultaneous to that, he would have his henchmen make it difficult, unpopular, and even illegal for his own countrymen to object or obstruct him.
Then, he would assign little ID chips in everyone so they could be more easily tracked, and prevented from buying or selling if they disagreed with his policies. He would use threats of terrorism or outside enemies as justifications for further and further restrictions of civil liberties, and stigmatize anyone who disagreed as not being patriotic.


Of course, I'm only speculating.

[Cubeoid]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
I have no idea who the "anti-chirst" will be...Chirstie Alley?

heh.

The anti-christ you mean, perhaps?

I have no idea, but I wonder if he would take control of the most powerful country with the greatest and most powerful weapons, and then proceed to pre-emptively attack an ever increasing list of "enemies" until world domination was achieved. Simultaneous to that, he would have his henchmen make it difficult, unpopular, and even illegal for his own countrymen to object or obstruct him.
Then, he would assign little ID chips in everyone so they could be more easily tracked, and prevented from buying or selling if they disagreed with his policies. He would use threats of terrorism or outside enemies as justifications for further and further restrictions of civil liberties, and stigmatize anyone who disagreed as not being patriotic.


Of course, I'm only speculating.

There's a lot of light in your speculation and it's shared by many around the world. I'm not one to preach, but the "Revelations" (the last book of the bible) apparently tells of these events, leading up to a world government, comprising of a single curancy (the euro, one step to that) increased surveilance and control of people (check), and the heavy unrest starting in the middle east (check). Out of this chaos, a leader from hell will be sent among men to take down the world. After a bloody battle in which most of the world's population will die, Jesus is claimed to come and rescue his believers. That ain't me talkin...but if that's what revelations says, then it's pretty on the mark.

[clarkgoble]

That's more a conservative American protestant interpretation. If you read the book it is couched in flowery symblic imagery and tying it to any particular world event is difficult. It says nothing about any "world currency" for instance. It speaks of the mark of the beast (typically taken to be Caesar) and that to buy or sell you had to have the mark of the beast. Even if one see the beast/Caesar as a type of the last days, one must quickly see that the Protestant interpretations are but one of dozens of possible readings. Take pretty much any period of the last 150 years and you'll find at least some Protestant theologian claiming Revelation talked about it in depth.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by nickdman:
I thought Zimphire was going to be the next anti-christ ?

*looks at your location*

You have some weird obsession with me don't you?

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by clarkgoble:
That's more a conservative American protestant interpretation. If you read the book it is couched in flowery symblic imagery and tying it to any particular world event is difficult. It says nothing about any "world currency" for instance. It speaks of the mark of the beast (typically taken to be Caesar) and that to buy or sell you had to have the mark of the beast. Even if one see the beast/Caesar as a type of the last days, one must quickly see that the Protestant interpretations are but one of dozens of possible readings. Take pretty much any period of the last 150 years and you'll find at least some Protestant theologian claiming Revelation talked about it in depth.

True. Its all interpretation, which I couched what I said in speculative terms.

However, when the antichrist comes, I don't think he'll do much that is different. He will have to have access (I assume) to the largest arsenal in order to rule the entire world with a "rod of iron". At present, that's the US. He will also (apparently) wage war between the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers (which is Baghdad, or Babylon). He will order the rebuilding of the Temple (have no idea how that would come about), and would fool the very elect (have strong christian support -- the right wing christian contingent would do nicely here in the equation).
As far as the Mark of the Beast, its said everyone must have a number written in their hands or their heads. Right now the technology exists to make implanted ID chips, and the only impediment to them is simply that Bush hasn't asked for them yet.
Under Homeland Security, I can easily see a situation where we are required to be implanted for "security".

but everything is open to interpretation, as always.

[Zimphire]

Lerk, and he will probably have to be Jewish, AND BTW having the a large arsenel doesn't mean it has to come from the US. He could have every country BUT the US in control and be able to topple the US. I believe Revelations talks about a "country" getting bombed out off the earth when this starts.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Lerk, and he will probably have to be Jewish, AND BTW having the a large arsenel doesn't mean it has to come from the US. He could have every country BUT the US in control and be able to topple the US. I believe Revelations talks about a "country" getting bombed out off the earth when this starts.

I dunno, I don't recall anywhere where his religion was stated.
I also don't recall your last line at all. All I recall is that Babylon will be destroyed in a day, calling for the lament of "alas, babylon" in grief of all the women and children.
However, like I said, how you interpret it is highly subjective.

back to the arsenal, I cannot see the antichrist trying to get a coalition of all the other countries against the US, very unwieldy. Instead I think its going to be easier to supplant the US democracy (thanks ashcroft) and then move from there.
Considering also our relationship historically with Isreal, its not inconceivable that if we lay waste to the middle east EXCEPT for isreal, it would in a way be rebuilding temple metaphorically.

[Zimphire]

Lerk, you think the Jewish people would accept anyone else but a Jew as their messiah?

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Lerk, you think the Jewish people would accept anyone else but a Jew as their messiah?

You seem to be confusing the antichrist with the second coming, I think.
the antichrist comes first, and has some of the characteristics we have mentioned, mainly ruling the world with a rod of iron for a time. I don't recall he had to be jewish. then, after all hell has broken loose (literally), the second coming happens. The second coming is for everyone, not just the jews.
I'll have to reread revelations, but I'm fairly certain it never gets to the nitty gritty detail of the religion of choice of the antichrist.

Unless I've misunderstood your point?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
You seem to be confusing the antichrist with the second coming, I think.
the antichrist comes first, and has some of the characteristics we have mentioned, mainly ruling the world with a rod of iron for a time. I don't recall he had to be jewish. then, after all hell has broken loose (literally), the second coming happens. The second coming is for everyone, not just the jews.
I'll have to reread revelations, but I'm fairly certain it never gets to the nitty gritty detail of the religion of choice of the antichrist.

Unless I've misunderstood your point?

The Anti-Christ will indeed try to repeat the resurrection of Jesus. This will be the end of him. He will be deemed as the 1st coming of Christ to those who didn't think Jesus was such, He will be fullfilling the prophecy of the Jewish people. THEN Jesus will show up. The ANti-Christ will rule the world in a socialist regime. I really can't see the US accepting such a government, unless of course there is a liberal in the white house pushing such a regime.

Of course, this is assuming it's coming in the near future.

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by Zimphire:


Of course, this is assuming it's coming in the near future.

It's assuming an awful lot more. Like that it will be happen at all.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Mastrap:
It's assuming an awful lot more. Like that it will be happen at all.

We will see I guess. If we are alive at the time. So tell me Mastrap, if indeed the prophecies of Revelations comes true, like say, if Israel starts building a 3rd temple where the original one was, would you start to wonder?

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
The Anti-Christ will indeed try to repeat the resurrection of Jesus. This will be the end of him. He will be deemed as the 1st coming of Christ to those who didn't think Jesus was such, He will be fullfilling the prophecy of the Jewish people. THEN Jesus will show up. The ANti-Christ will rule the world in a socialist regime. I really can't see the US accepting such a government, unless of course there is a liberal in the white house pushing such a regime.

Of course, this is assuming it's coming in the near future.

hm. I guess I have a different bible.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
We will see I guess. If we are alive at the time. So tell me Mastrap, if indeed the prophecies of Revelations comes true, like say, if Israel starts building a 3rd temple where the original one was, would you start to wonder?

nah, I'll answer for him: not everyone:
1. buys into christianity in the first place
2. believes revelations is anything other than allegory
3. believes its possible to accurately interprete it even if it is direct prophecy
4. believes your interpretation is correct.

I'm in up to #2, but after that, I have to say no, and for #4, an emphatic no.

[Kitschy]

Doesn't the Bible talk about (perhaps in Daniel, a very prophetic book as well) the Anti-Christ coming from an area that is Europe today?

[boots]

Lerk said:
hm. I guess I have a different bible.

I was thinking the same thing.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
Doesn't the Bible talk about (perhaps in Daniel, a very prophetic book as well) the Anti-Christ coming from an area that is Europe today?

I'll have to reread it, but as I recall, identifiers are very vague.
there are kingdoms mentioned, but not named.
The battle of Armageddon is tied to the Baghdad area because of the two rivers, but beyond that, it is highly subjective.

[Kitschy]

An interesting website (for those interested in Revelations of the Bible) is www.revelationcommentary.org. I'm reading through it, chapter by chapter to get their perspective. Definitely interesting.

[Zimphire]

Lerk what parts of what I said did you not agree with?

[wolfen]

The current situation in the middle east bears the closest resemblence to biblical Armageddon prophecies we've seen in the past few hundred years.

1) Bad guy (Saddam)
2a) Bad Prophet (Osama u Mamma)
2b) Who performed a miracle (9/11)
3) Loose confederation of angry, non-judeo christian militant nations (Islamic world)
4) Israel provoking a swift kick in the ass from #3
5) The usual famines, plagues, etc.
6) A primarily Judeo-Christian superpower that is about to require divine intervention to save itself (The US)
7) Plenty of bulldozers and munitions available to blow the Mount of Olives in two.


Yeah, looks good for the placard holders these days. But don't worry, there's a 1000yrs peace after that.

But if this interpretation is inaccurate, it's definitely Celine Dion.


wolfen

[Ver de Terre]

I would volunteer, assuming it is strictly understood that I am operating under God's plan. I've got to assume there's a good retirement plan in it. So what's next? Do we take a vote or something?

[simonjames]

what is it with people interested in religion and their spelling ability?

We've got two religious topics - both with spelling mistakes

America is made for Chistians!?!?! and The next Anti-Chirst!


Maybe its the devil - can't spell Christ without his fingers burning on the keyboard



I, for one, hope that Satan puts the position out to tender and just doesn't choose some friend of his to get the chushy job. Don't you just hate it - you think you've got a chance to get the job when you find out the interviewer's friend has just applied.

Has anyone heard what the base salary is like and if there are any benefits such as a health plan or gym membership? What class of travel does Satan send his minions on when they have to travel?

And when do applications close?

[xi_hyperon]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
I'll have to reread it, but as I recall, identifiers are very vague.
there are kingdoms mentioned, but not named.
The battle of Armageddon is tied to the Baghdad area because of the two rivers, but beyond that, it is highly subjective.

I have to re-read it myself, but some contemporary interpreters of the book of Revelations believe that his place of origin would be in Europe, perhaps eastern Europe.

Also, I think I may have picked up my copy of the bible at whatever store you picked up yours, Lerk. I think Zimph got an updated 2nd edition or something.

[edit]Here's a bit more after going through some books. According to Daniel, ten nations will emerge from the location of the fourth world empire that has risen and fallen - the four being Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. The Roman empire included most of Western Europe. These ten nations will organize a political and/or economic union, and from this, the anti-christ will emerge as one of its leaders. [/edit]

[xi_hyperon]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
The Anti-Christ will indeed try to repeat the resurrection of Jesus. This will be the end of him. He will be deemed as the 1st coming of Christ to those who didn't think Jesus was such, He will be fullfilling the prophecy of the Jewish people. THEN Jesus will show up. The ANti-Christ will rule the world in a socialist regime. I really can't see the US accepting such a government, unless of course there is a liberal in the white house pushing such a regime.

Of course, this is assuming it's coming in the near future.

I'm a bit rusty, but I think it is a bit more along these lines-

- Anti-Christ gains power as a world leader
Somehow works out a 7 year peace agreement with Israel (between them and who I don't really know, I assume the Palestinians and/or the neighboring Arab states). His role is as a leader and mediator, but not the Messiah.

- It is during this time the 3rd Temple is supposed to be constructed in preparation for the coming of the Messiah.

- Halfway through the 7 year period, the anti-christ betrays the people of Israel, and I believe they are driven out of the country and into the desert. Anti-christ will shut down all worship, enter the holy of holies in the Temple, and declare himself God. However, my guess is the Jews will probably have a pretty good idea he is not.

I'm probably off somewhat too, and like Lerk said, it is highly subject to interpretation.

[Kitschy]

Regarding the location the Anti-Christ will have dominion over:

"When the Lamb broke the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature saying, "Come." I looked, and behold, (1) an ashen horse; and he who sat on it had the name (2) Death; and Hades was following with (3) him. (4) Authority was given to them over (5) a fourth of the earth, (6) to kill with (7) sword and with famine and with pestilence and by the wild beasts of the earth."

Specifically regarding the bold scripture:

4. Authority = dominion.

5. A fourth of the earth = is speaking either geographically or demographically. The focus is clearly on the people of this "fourth of the earth." The beast will be given "a fourth of the earth," but he will attempt to take control of the whole earth. Based on Daniel 2 and Ezekiel 38 the final Beast Empire will consist of peoples from modern day Iraq, Iran, Syria, Ethiopia, Libya, Ukraine, Turkey, Russia and Germany. These nations at present combine populations equal to about one-tenth the total population of the earth. However, graphically, these nations equal one-fourth the earth?s total landmass. (9 million square miles).

from: revelationcommentary.org

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
Regarding the location the Anti-Christ will have dominion over:



Specifically regarding the bold scripture:


from: revelationcommentary.org

I think if you examine the source (dig a little deeper in the website), you see that revelationcommentary.org is hardly an objective source for interpretation.

[Kitschy]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
I think if you examine the source (dig a little deeper in the website), you see that revelationcommentary.org is hardly an objective source for interpretation.

You imply that there IS an objective source for interpreting the Bible.

Around here, none of us can agree on anything objective, much less Biblical matters (Kinda fun, really). For the record, I would tend to say that the organization behind revelationcommentary.org (Sola Scriptura) is right on.

Look, revelationcommentary.org is a very analytical take on Revelation and I find it fascinating.

That's all.

[clarkgoble]

If you want an analytic commentary, may I suggest the Anchor series? Much more scholarly than some fundie site trying to link up specific latter day events to scripture.

(A hobby which has been going on for hundreds of years)

[Mastrap]

Some light relief:

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by Kitschy:
Doesn't the Bible talk about (perhaps in Daniel, a very prophetic book as well) the Anti-Christ coming from an area that is Europe today?

Yes the anti-christ will anti-american too. God backs America after all. Be afraid - be very afraid. Hide your cheese in a can and your peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. For the Europeans are coming to spread the evil that is known as quality condiments across the globe! Muahaha!