Sign up for email updates!


PART 25: LIES OF MEN AND GODS—Pope ‘Calls’ for Antichrist System

Share this!

Pope Francis’ recent encyclical, “Brothers All” (Fratelli Tutti), used “love” as a repetitious theme to call for a One-World Order. Due to his position, whatever goals he has must be motivated by the Gospel of Christ…or at least it must appear to be, if he is to save face. Yet, by using love and Jesus as the motivation behind establishing the One-World Order, Francis is unequivocally positioning Christianity at the forefront of launching the Antichrist system.

The pope’s letter begins with a reference to “a way of life marked by the flavour of the Gospel…that transcends the barriers of geography and distance.” From this syrupy beginning, Francis spends several long paragraphs developing his call for a “fraternal society,” before clarifying that he doesn’t intend to teach on the subject of fraternal love; rather, his purpose is to emphasize its “universal scope.” Then, in a manner predicted by just about every prophecy-watcher on the planet, he mentions that COVID-19 has exposed vulnerabilities in the working relationships each country has with its neighboring nations. He states that simply improving existing communication strategies is equivalent to “denying reality.” Something far more drastic must be done to correct this malady…like a united world (so predictable). Therefore, Francis poetically writes before continuing on to discuss his propositions in more detail, “Let us dream, then, as a single human family, as fellow travelers sharing the same flesh, as children of the same earth which is our common home.”[i]

Next, Francis, most certainly banking on the idea that his readers can be fear-mongered and made to feel defenseless without radical intervention in lieu of future COVID-19-like outbreaks, goes on to talk at length about certain evils within humanity’s current social condition: world hunger, war, poverty, terrorism, racism, slavery, trafficking, religious persecution, and generally all other affronts to human dignity. For pages and pages, he continues this thread, listing every negative reality of the Fall of Man. By this point in his letter, any reader is a bleeding heart. The sheer barrage of depravity that readers are blasted with would stir even the coldest person to mourn the wanton state we all share as people of earth. The pope’s One-World Order undertones as a cure for all these ills is already almost irresistibly persuasive.

Striking while the iron is hot, Francis returns to the subject of the pandemic, capitalizing on the recent loss of lives as a result of the lack of respirators to further his religio-political agenda, this time suggesting that all would be fixed by a global healthcare system. His choice of words is once again poetic and desperate, calling for cooperation with his forthcoming ideas so that “our human family can experience a rebirth, with all its faces, all its hands and all its voices, beyond the walls that we have erected…[lest we] collapse and leave many in the grip of anguish and emptiness.”[ii] In a vein similar to his reflections on the pandemic, the pope calls attention to the drug and arms cartels, migration and border issues, fake news, the woes of digital communication, public safety, and myriad other categories of contemporary maladies that are provoking a greater tension between international human communities. Again, he conditions his reader to accept that only a truly united world can apply salve to the rash of troubles plaguing the human race.

From this point, Francis weaves an extensive exhortation on the idea of embracing those who are foreigners to us using many Scriptures. He leads with our Savior’s Parable of the Good Samaritan, who aided a stranger on the road who was not of his own people; notes the offense of Cain in his famous retort, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Genesis 4:9); provides a long list of Scripture passages remembering the Israelites’ days as foreigners; shows the mounting commands of the New Testament to love all people; and then comes round about, landing back at the Good Samaritan before challenging his readers to consider whom they identify to be their own beaten and bloodied strangers on the roadside, left to die without their assistance. Francis continues to form a sermon using the characters in Jesus’ narrative to represent different people groups today, even going as far as to state that, like the priest and Levite in the story, all the piousness and religious authority in the world are meaningless if we neglect the needs of our fellow man. By this, the underlying statement is heavily implied: Anyone who resists uniting the world for a Christlike cause, even those whose resistance stems from religious conviction, are guilty of going against Jesus’ example as laid out in the parable He, Himself, gave us to follow. Pope Francis reiterates:

May we not sink to such depths! Let us look to the example of the Good Samaritan. Jesus’ parable summons us to rediscover our vocation as citizens of our respective nations and of the entire world, builders of a new social bond. This summons is ever new, yet it is grounded in a fundamental law of our being: we are called to direct society to the pursuit of the common good and, with this purpose in mind, to persevere in consolidating its political and social order [!!!].[iii]

Did you catch that? Jesus is calling us to a One-World Order…? If Francis didn’t convince his readers to agree to a One-World Order by pulling on the heartstrings during the “human depravity and global issues” presentation, his manipulation of scriptural context swung around for a “gotcha” that his God-fearing audience would feel compelled to obey. (In case some are wondering how the pope could be wrong in his application—and these authors will admit that, without a good foundation of biblical understanding, the pope’s challenge does sound feasible—the proper context of Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan was a call for universal love for one another, and it was the extension of Christ’s salvation work to the Gentiles during a time when the Jews believed themselves to be the elect. By wrapping the “One-World Order” blanket around the parable, the pope has expanded [translation: twisted] the Word to imply that Jesus wanted a social and political unification of earthly territories…even though His kingdom is “not of this world” [John 18:36]. Don’t forget, too, that the entire book of Revelation—including all those bits about Antichrist and his One-World System that solves all the problems within humanity for the first half of his rule—is “The Revelation of Jesus Christ” [1:1]. It’s His warning to begin with! Either Jesus warns against Antichrist, or He endorses One-World Order ideologies like the one the pope is vying for here. He can’t be behind both, and the Bible is clear about one of these possibilities.) After using Jesus’ parable to back his united world plan, Francis then quotes the words of wise men like Thomas Aquinas along with another grand (and drawn-out) entreaty of flowery words about brotherly love and a chastisement of radical individualism to perpetuate his aims of a universal society.

Gaining momentum, Francis moves on to boldly address the opening of international borders, because all people are born equal, so all people have the equal right of enjoying the land God created and all that is upon it. Likewise, there is much to learn from those coming in from other cultures, and the human race can only benefit from trading information and intelligence with those from other perspectives (just like Francis has personally observed in his relationships with other world leaders he has met, and so on). Noting the existence of impoverished people groups who otherwise cannot participate in this kind of beautiful cultural sharing and expansion, Francis says we need to “attain a global juridical, political and economic order” to reach them. Anything less, the pope eventually coins as “local narcissism.” This evil is juxtaposed by Christ’s loving ideal, which was earlier in the letter referred to as “universal communion.”

After a discussion about the misapplication of certain political and religious terms, the pope finally arrives at the point where his (now obvious) aims toward a One-World Order are put in clear terms:

The twenty-first century is witnessing a weakening of the power of nation states, chiefly because the economic and financial sectors, being transnational, tend to prevail over the political. Given this situation, it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, with functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments, and empowered to impose sanctions. When we talk about the possibility of some form of world authority regulated by law, we need not necessarily think of a personal authority.[iv]

This last sentence about a “personal authority” suggests it wouldn’t have to be a single person in charge, like Antichrist, though the words “not necessarily” leave that possibility wide open. The pope immediately goes on to describe the circumstances of the global system in place at the time of Antichrist’s rule:

Still, such an authority ought at least to promote more effective world organizations, equipped with the power to provide for the global common good, the elimination of hunger and poverty and the sure defence of fundamental human rights.

In this regard, we would also note the need for a reform of “the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth.” [This is a quote by former Pope Benedict XVI.] Needless to say, this calls for clear legal limits to avoid power being co-opted only by a few countries and to prevent cultural impositions or a restriction of the basic freedoms of weaker nations on the basis of ideological differences.… [T]he work of the United Nations…can be seen as the development and promotion of the rule of law, based on the realization that justice is an essential condition for achieving the ideal of universal fraternity… There is a need to ensure the uncontested rule of law and tireless recourse to negotiation, mediation and arbitration, as proposed by the Charter of the United Nations, which constitutes truly a fundamental juridical norm. There is need to prevent this Organization from being delegitimized, since its problems and shortcomings are capable of being jointly addressed and resolved.[v]

In other words, he is pointing to a world superpower over all nations in compliance with one law or “juridical norm,” born under the ideal of justice and universal brotherly love, that cannot be contested or delegitimized, because any weaknesses this superpower has will obviously be worked out through global negotiations. It would be risky for the pope to come right out and say that a single world leader, like the one who will oversee the Superchurch, is in mind here, lest he provoke worldwide panic about Antichrist. What is astounding, however, is that he portrays the possibility of a reformed United Nations and all of its potentially benevolent achievements, after having technically allowed for the prospects of an eventual single leader, as well as the firm establishment of global mandatory compliance with the system by that time. Later in the letter, Pope Francis writes:

The seventy-five years since the establishment of the United Nations and the experience of the first twenty years of this millennium have shown that the full application of international norms proves truly effective, and that failure to comply with them is detrimental.… Here there can be no room for disguising false intentions or placing the partisan interests of one country or group above the global common good.




“Failure to comply.” Those words are always so reassuring…

Anyway, you get the idea. Pope Francis’ letter is 42,990 words (just under the length of the average nonfiction book in today’s industry), so we won’t continue to pour over it. We just want to make the point: If you think this “final pope” is going to save us from Antichrist—this last pope listed in the chillingly accurate “Prophecy of the Popes” that ends with the destruction of Rome—he’s not. Everything he says appears to be in support of the whole idea. His letter is remarkably persuasive regarding the benefits of bringing the world together. He weaves so much Christ-resembling love and beauty into his end goal that it’s nearly impossible for the untrained Christian eye to see how anti-Christ it really is.

Have you ever handled counterfeit money? If so, then you know it looks identical to the real thing. It’s only when the fake copy is examined by a trained eye that it’s exposed as fraudulent. Not just any Jane Doe at a grocery checkout is going to know when a counterfeit bill comes her way. It has to be scrutinized and pass or fail certain tests in order to be identified as phony money. The same principle applies here: The pope’s plan for world unity, to the untrained eye, looks identical to Gospel-Kingdom work. In order for it to be recognized as a counterfeit, it would have to be examined and pass or fail certain tests of Scripture. When that is done, Francis’ goal fails every time, exposed as a fraudulent kingdom work…and, just like Jane Doe who doesn’t realize until later on at the bank that she has been scammed, when the One-World Order of the End Times is officially inaugurated, people won’t know until afterward that what looked like a beautiful and legitimate thing was a counterfeit. Unlike Jane Doe, we’ll be out more than twenty bucks…

The problem is, Christians would have to know the Lord and His Word well enough to examine the pope’s plan to expose it as fraudulent. That is the testing mechanism in this case.

Jesus would love nothing more than for His followers to wake up and spiritually unite all across the planet in His name, but if it was a sincere, spiritual endeavor, world peace and every kind of philanthropic/humanitarian objective the pope listed in his letter would naturally stem from that movement anyway, because that is the truer sense of “universal fraternal society” that naturally bubbles up from loving our Savior. The only reason we’re in such need of the benevolent intervention Francis identified is that the most powerful and prosperous Christian Church in the known universe is currently using her own pile of resources as the mattress upon which she sleeps. No kingdom work can be done for Christ when His Bride won’t get out of bed. So, when a Christian leader as prominent as Pope Francis shows up and points to a political, earthly kingdom work that counterfeits the true Gospel, the sleepy Bride yawns and says, “Thank goodness someone has figured it out. Looks good to me!” A Bride this lazy, who can hardly lift her lethargic hand in the air to give a thumbs-up to a plan she hasn’t analyzed against the warnings of Scripture, has set herself up to cheat on her Betrothed for another man from another kingdom. She has set herself up to be the Harlot.

The worst part is this: If we’re anywhere as close to this reality as Francis wants us to be, the end is very close…yet, tragically, when the world’s most influential Christian takes the pulpit to usher in Antichrist’s system, Christians everywhere shrug and say, “Oh…he did? I musta missed that. Oh well, back to Netflix.”

We are so dead inside. So asleep. We are so the church at Sardis…

[Sardis,] I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished… But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you. (Revelation 3:1–3; NIV)

But why should it be a surprise anyway, to think that the pope would use the Gospel of Christ as his platform to promote evil? He did that very thing last year, and what should have been the biggest news in history wasn’t even a blip on anyone’s radar.

Praising the Pachamama: A Motion for a One-World Religion

In October of 2019, in the Vatican Gardens during the Feast of St. Francis, the Pope—himself one of the most prominent world leaders and role models of the Christian Church (albeit Roman Catholic)—sat front and center at an idol-worshiping ceremony dedicated to the Mother-Nature-esque Incan goddess of fertility, earth, and the harvest, known as Pachamama. Photos and videos[vi] taken at the site commemorate the entire tree-planting ritual, from the women lying prostrate on the ground in worship of the naked, pregnant goddess made of wood and surrounded by offerings of fruit and candles, to Pope Francis standing and offering his official benediction blessing upon the idol.

Though the general public was largely unaware of the earth goddess and her past prior to all of this, after the pope’s irreversibly reckless deed, there was an initial surge in online research linking to Pachamama’s consistent, historical lust for the blood of children. The Incan child-sacrifice ceremony was known as the ritual of Capacocha, and its relation to Pachamama is commonly known. A growing number of mummified adolescent remains, along with ancient cultural documentation, has helped fill in the blanks about these young victims. Three of these children—a seven-year-old boy, a six-year-old girl, and a fifteen-year-old girl known as “the Maiden” (La Doncella)—are so well preserved after five hundred years that they appear to have passed away yesterday. (Warning: Related photos online may be graphic to some viewers.) Another two mummies, “Sarita” and “Juanita,” are the attraction of Arequipa, Peru. One peer-reviewed scientific journal article notes that, in Pachamama’s ritual of Capacocha, the “victims were selected, elevated in social status, prepared for a high-altitude pilgrimage, and killed.”[vii] The details regarding how the youth were put to death are disturbing enough that we will not delve into the subject further, but suffice it to say that it was not a quick or painless process to offer a child to the goddess. In fact, studies have shown that these progenies were prepared for months or years prior to their death, or, as is the case with “the Maiden,” they might be “raised in status [from birth], presumably for the express purpose of making her an appropriate sacrifice,”[viii] so they had ample time to fear their own end. This is, of course, emotional torture on top of the slow, ritualistic, human sacrifice.

When Pope Francis was asked why he would facilitate a worship ritual of this blood-hungry, pagan idol, then participate in his own authoritative and example-setting act of worship at its close by enacting the benediction blessing upon her, some rose to his defense by saying that the wooden sculpture wasn’t Pachamama, but “Our Lady of the Amazon.” Anthropologists, like Steven Mosher of LifeSite News, took a close look at the event at the Vatican Gardens and responded otherwise, explaining that the effigy and other idols like it “were worshiped in the fertility cults of many primitive cultures around the world and still are in the recesses of the Amazon.” In his article titled “Not Even Pope Francis Can Deny the Pachamama Is a Pagan Idol,” Mosher goes on to explain that the nature of these cults does involve human sacrifice as a means to satisfy the deities’ demands, and that, particular to the “South American Pachamama cult, child sacrifice was practiced.”[ix]

Awareness of this connection was raised in the days following the event at the Vatican, and, not unreasonably, some questioned whether the pope knew at the time of the ritual that the goddess they were worshiping was such an image of evil, as opposed to a more ethnic depiction of Mother Mary. And, of course, one might argue in kind that it is extremely unlikely that, out of all the pope’s advisors and officials, not one would have known who or what they were really worshiping. (Even if that were the case, that level of ignorance regarding pagan influence is alarming, considering how many top-level leaders of the Roman Catholic Church must have approved this idol ceremony “innocently.” Surely at least someone in that circle has enough education in theology and its sister study, anthropology, to ensure that their beloved pope doesn’t “accidentally worship a pagan idol”?—or, if not, at least enough discernment to check the background of each statue brought to their group before the ceremony is scheduled to take place? Even if their motivation is simply to avoid a scandal? No? Nobody? Does the pope just go around blessing any ol’ idol that comes into his presence without accountability?)

Regardless, it didn’t take long before the pope, by his own admission in a public statement, just after this statue and several others like it were stolen out of the Santa Maria church just outside the Vatican and thrown into the Tiber River, acknowledged that the figurine involved in the ritual was not Mary at all, but “Pachamama.”[x] He proceeded to criticize and condemn those who had removed the idols from the church, even though their presence inside the house of God is overtly prohibited by Scripture.

Thus far, the whole ordeal may otherwise have been chalked up as a giant misunderstanding. But after the highest Christian leader on the globe acknowledged his role in and subsequent endorsement of this apostasy, you would think the media blast would be enormous.

…And it should have been.

Was everyone asleep? Why were so few people reacting to this story? Something is very wrong here…

Quite unbelievably, in practicing some of the weakest (and most profane) exegesis, hermeneutics, and homiletics these authors have heard to date, Pope Francis used the Bible, itself, as justification for his worship of the idol and the defense of idols being displayed in the church. In a lackluster, lazy sermon, he unambiguously wove together a response to the few folks in public who cared enough to demand answers—delivered to the “general audience” at St. Peter’s Square on Wednesday, November 6, 2019. Francis zigzagged around a few verses in Acts 17:15–23 and even twisted a verse to relate the opposite of what its meaning in proper context. Acts 17:16 states: “Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him [i.e., he was upset], when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry.” Pope Francis’ warping of this verse, in a reading from some translation of the Bible that was left ambiguous (at least in the sermon transcript from the official Vatican website), stated that Paul “thrills within himself [i.e., he couldn’t be happier] to see the city full of idols.”

We don’t need to launch into a formal word-study diatribe about whether Paul felt angry versus overjoyed at the sight of the God-offending idols all over town. But just in case “common sense” isn’t enough of a resource platform to dismiss what the pope just said, we’ll hit this one quick: The word behind the KJV’s “stirred” and the PFT’s (Pope Francis Translation; excuse our sarcasm) “thrills” is the Greek paroxuno. Here are the concordance, lexicon, and biblical dictionary verdicts from just a few of the world’s leading scholarly word-study resources:

  • “to exasperate:—easily provoke, stir”[xi]Strong’s Concordance
  • “to irritate, provoke, rouse to anger…[as is the context in] Acts 17:16; 1 Co. 13:5”[xii]Thayer’s Lexicon
  • “be upset, be angered, irritated, distressed”[xiii]—James Swanson’s Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains


“THE LIES OF MEN AND GODS–EPISODE 2”: What’s Behind Flying Seraphim, Reptilians, And Portals Opening Above Mountains

“THE LIES OF MEN AND GODS–EPISODE 1”: The Vatican, Aliens, and Government Elites. Is It All a Coincidence?

Of course, we could throw in another twenty-five sources identifying the same context slaughter that Francis committed here, but you get the idea. An argument could be made for paroxuno meaning to “make sharp,” “sharpen,” “stimulate,” “spur on,” or “urge” (all related to the roots para and oxys, which describe something unexpected and sharp),[xiv] but only as it pertains to something adverse or undesirable, like a sharp pang of hurt or agitation over something. With this in mind, Francis’ application of this verse makes as much sense as saying that Paul was “absolutely thrilled to be swiftly and sharply stabbed at the sight of idols.” Under no circumstances, the ancient language experts unanimously agree, would Acts 17:16 ever suggest that Paul was pleased to see so many idols in Athens. (This is, again, assuming a “word study” on such a thing would be necessary, since the more obvious “character study” in any language would be enough to show that our Lord’s great apostle would be devastated to see a cluster of idols in a city of lost souls.)

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy 4:3–4)

In any case, after this Scripture defacement, whereupon Pope Francis established Paul’s boyish glee, he proceeded to explain how the apostle chose to “open a gap between the Gospel and the pagan world” as an intercultural “pontiff, builder of bridges.”[xv] Though he avoids explaining how this behavior could be consistent with Paul’s message to the church at Corinth that merging the Gospel with the pagan world is a literal, spiritual impossibility—“the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils.… Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils” (1 Corinthians 10:20–21)—Francis heavily implies that Paul would have been incapable of witnessing to the Athenians without their “idol to the unknown god” as a conversational genesis. Aside from the fact that this application is totally debatable and grasping (by no means did Paul need a pagan idol to complete God’s work), the emphasis of the sermon is not just a statement of relief that Paul conveniently had a tool to reach the lost. Francis is playing an ingenious, and very dangerous, word game. Note his closing statement:

Today we too ask the Holy Spirit to teach us to build bridges with culture…. Always build bridges, always an outstretched hand, no aggression. Let us ask him for the ability to delicately inculturate the message of faith, placing a contemplative gaze on those who are ignorant of Christ, moved by a love that warms even the most hardened hearts.[xvi]

Simply put: “Inculturation” is the emphasizing of Christian teachings in a pagan culture; “acculturation” is when one culture changes (religiously and otherwise) as a result of exposure to, or a merger with, another. By endorsing “inculturation,” Pope Francis was technically only guilty of suggesting that we need to witness to the lost. However, in context of—

  1. the child-sacrifice goddess “Pachamama” idol service he facilitated on “Christian” grounds;
  2. the decision to house these idols in a church that is (supposedly) consecrated to the God of the Bible;
  3. the statement of condemnation against the personalities who removed said idols from the house of God; and
  4. his subsequent maiming of Scripture that belied Apostle Paul as one who finds idols to be resourceful and opportunistic

—he is actually pushing the agenda of acculturation and the syncretizing of the Gospel with culture and its little-g gods. Though some superficial elements of acculturation are quite innocent (for example, residents of an American city move to Beijing, learn Chinese, and adjust to standing a lot closer to strangers than we do in the States), the Bible is clear on the following: God’s people have been set apart (Genesis 12:1–3; Isaiah 43:21); we have nonnegotiable boundaries that say we’re never to live the way the pagans do or entertain the worship of their gods, lest we be found detestable and completely cut off from God (Leviticus 18:3; Deuteronomy 12:29–31); God’s supreme and all-encompassing judgment is a direct response of knowing this kind of idolatrous behavior is forbidden, and then doing it anyway (Jeremiah 44:23; 1 Kings 9:9).

Pope Francis’ sermon, in lieu of both his actions and words, has a clear scheme, and it’s not just to show the love of Christ to “hardened hearts” and “build a bridge” to the pagans, but to merge the Gospel with the pagans, which, as any one of the verses just referenced will show, leads only to having the blessing of God over a nation entirely removed. Using the Bible to excuse and endorse actions that the Bible forbids will do that… Meanwhile, the pope positions himself as an intercultural bridge-builder who peacefully and innocently champions inculturation and healthy societal pluralism.

Hey, remember when we said that syncretism is the evil crouching behind the glossy veneer called pluralism?

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness. (Isaiah 5:20)

Woe unto them that use their position as the most powerful religious figure in the (current) world to justify and make holy a pagan goddess with a known history of child sacrifice.

Then again, this is coming from the same “Holy Father” who, in 2018—when members of the Vatican hierarchy were confronted with numerous allegations of concealing child sexual abuse within the Catholic Church—backwardly identified Satan as the one who “uncover[ed] the sin” of the accused leaders. It should be more of a shock to all of us that he didn’t use his platform to defend the kids whose innocence was defiled. But even the Vatican’s own news website quotes from that public statement, when Pope Francis said, “The ‘Great Accuser’ has been unchained and is attacking bishops.”[xvii] Perhaps we shouldn’t assume that kiddos are at the top of the Holy Father’s priority list, eh?

Of course, we really shouldn’t be surprised. Technically, the papacy has been promoting worship of Pachamama since 1985. Pope John Paul II, in a public homily to citizens of Cuzco, Peru, on Sunday, February 3, of that year, spoke directly to the Incan people, saying:

The Church, in effect, welcomes the cultures of all peoples. In them there are always the traces and seeds of the Word of God. Thus your ancestors, when paying tribute to the land (Mama Pacha), did nothing but acknowledge the goodness of God and his benefactor presence, which gave them food through the land they cultivated.[xviii]

It appears that the agenda to drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of Pachamama has been brewing for quite some time.

Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils. (1 Corinthians 10:21)

Due to the nature of Pachamama’s adolescent bloodthirst, after Pope Francis’ pagan-worship story hit a few “nobody cares” corners of the Internet, locals linked this religious leader’s questionable decision to the influence of the child-sacrifice god Moloch of the Old Testament. His idol, too, had been given a place of honor stationed at the entrance of the Roman Colosseum just outside the Vatican days earlier. The Roman Colosseum, as many know, is a key location of interest to those who study the spread of early Christianity; it was in this very spot that many Christian martyrs were executed in unnecessarily violent and bloody ways, primarily as entertainment for the Romans who watched them die. This enormous statue of Moloch, according to tourists, appeared to sit as the gatekeeper to the site, leering down at passersby “to mock the sacred place where the holy martyrs spilled their blood for the True Faith.”[xix] The irony of the timing between the appearance of the Moloch idol at the Colosseum and the pope’s benediction of Pachamama wasn’t lost on everyone…

Ya know, it’s really no wonder that many dispensationalists believe that the pope will either be Antichrist or his False Prophet. If a central event of the End Times involves placing the Abomination of Desolation idol in the Temple (see Daniel 8:11–14; 9:27; 11:30–31; 12:11; Revelation 13:15; Matthew 24:15; Luke 21:20–21), then Pachamama is a clever public grooming tool.

Recall that lightning struck the Vatican on the night the last pope, Benedict XVI, resigned—February 28, 2013. Might that have been the God of the Bible marking the very day His enemy entered into covenant with the Roman Catholic Church? Could Francis actually be one of these eschatological figures from the book of Revelation, as so many voices are claiming?

UP NEXT: Catholic Leadership Says Pope Is “False Prophet”

[i] Pope Francis, in an encyclical released on October 3, 2020, translated and archived by the official Vatican website: “FRATELLI TUTTI: Of the Holy Father, Francis, On Fraternity and Social Friendship,” Vatican, last accessed October 27, 2020,

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.; note that internal quotation marks were removed to avoid confusion, since Pope Francis is here quoting an earlier document that he, himself, was author of.

[v] Ibid.; last set of internal quotation marks were removed to avoid confusion, since Pope Francis is here quoting an earlier document that he, himself, was author of.

[vi] Both photos and videos of this incident can be found all over the web at this time, due to the fact that the controversy was so recent. However, as one close-up example showing the blessing of the idol by Pope Francis, see: “Video Shows Pope Francis Blessing Controversial ‘Pachamama’ Statue,” YouTube, uploaded by LifeSiteNews on October 24, 2019, last accessed January 10, 2020,

[vii] Wilson, Andrew S., Timothy Taylor, Maria Constanza Ceruti, et al, “Stable Isotope and DNA Evidence for Ritual Sequences in Inca Child Sacrifice,” October 16, 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), last accessed October 15, 2020,; quote taken from the abstract of the article.

[viii] Ibid.

[ix] Steven Mosher, “Not Even Pope Francis Can Deny the Pachamama is a Pagan Idol,” October 28, 2019, LifeSite News, last accessed January 10, 2020,

[x] John-Henry Weston, “Pope Calls Statues ‘Pachamamas’ and Apologizes for Their Removal from Church,” October 25, 2019, LifeSite News, last accessed January 10, 2020,

[xi] Strong, J., A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible: Vol. 1 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software; 2009), 56.

[xii] Thayer, J. H., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm’s Wilke’s Clavis Novi Testamenti (New York: Harper & Brothers; 1889), 490.

[xiii] Swanson, J., Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed., Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.; 1997), entry “4236.”

[xiv] For a bit more reflection, see: “Strong’s G3947,” Blue Letter Bible, last accessed October 16, 2020,; then, on this same page, follow the links near the top in the “Root Word (Etymology)” box to the roots G3844 and G3691 to study how paroxuno or paroxyno formed from a term that would have never applied itself to Pope Francis’ “thrills” application.

[xv] Pope Francis, in a sermon delivered to the “general audience” at St. Peter’s Square on Wednesday, November 6, 2019; translated and archived by the official Vatican website: “Catechesis on the Acts of the Apostles—15. ‘Whom you adore without knowing him, I tell you’ (Acts 17:23). Paul at the Areopagus: an example of the inculturation of the faith in Athens,” Vatican, last accessed October 16, 2020,

[xvi] Ibid; emphasis added.

[xvii] “Pope Francis at Mass: Bishops Must Pray to Overcome ‘Great Accuser,’” September 11, 2018, Vatican News, last accessed October 22, 2020,

[xviii] Pope John Paull II, in a public homily on Sunday February 3, 1985; translated and archived by the official Vatican website: “Apostolic Journey to Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago: Liturgy of the Word in Cuzco,” Vatican, last accessed October 16, 2020,

[xix] “Statue of Ancient God of Child Sacrifice Put on Display in Rome,” November 6, 2019, LifeSite News, last accessed January 10, 2020,

Category: Featured, Featured Articles