Does yesterday’s No vote for Scottish independence fulfill Bible Prophesy? A lot of people are asking that. Don’t worry. Right now I am scouring the Book of Revelations looking for some clue that the Scotts would wuss out.
But first I got to say something about Bible prophesy in general. Most ameteurs think that the dangerous part of interpeting Bible prophesy is that you might be proven wrong.
No. We professionals cover that risk by ensconsing our interpetations behind weasely conditional words such as “if,” “might,” or “probably.” That way if we get specific and time goes by and what we predict does not come to pass, we can just point to those weasle words and say we’re not wrong. The conditions of our interpetation were wrong.
Even Bible prophesy itself has weasle words.
A lot of people wondered if John the Baptist fulfilled the prophesy that Elijah was going to come back. Jesus said to them, “For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John, and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come.” (Matthew 11:13)
See? If you are willing to accept it. So if we accept it, John the Baptist was Elijah. But if we don’t, then what, Jesus? It doesn’t say.
In fact, the exact time of the Second Coming is left up in the air according to Jesus. He said, “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.” (Matthew 24:36)
And then Jesus adds a condition to trigger the Second Coming that seems to depend on us! “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” (Matthew 24:14)
Now get ready. Because what I’m about to write will boggle your mind. I’m like theology’s Dr. Emmet Brown.
Bible prophesy can be cryptic at times, okay? Some might say it’s a tad apocalyptic. Perhaps there is some language in Scripture that could be taken to mean that Scotland would break away from the United Kingdom. But when I wrote this article earlier this week explicitly dealing with the subject, it somehow influenced Scotland’s voters and made that part of Scripture not be fulfilled by yesterday’s vote.
But if I hadn’t written that article, perhaps the vote would have been YES. So many people read the article, it could have influenced those historic events.
How could this be? Well, maybe some of Scotland’s Richard Dawkins types could not stand the thought the Bible be proven true so they commited voter fraud. They each voted NO to independence multiple times.
These are all just hypotheticals! Notice I’m adding an extra dose of weasle words! I don’t wan’t to be taken as a blasphemer of Scripture, so I’m not saying anything definitively.
Hey. If it’s God’s will that Scotland break away, it will happen.
It’s easy to imagine how. Maybe now the British will go back on the promises they made to Scotland. I mean, have they ever done that before? If the Brits betray Scotland, they’ll make all the gingers in Scotland mad. Gingers have anger problems.
That’s a biblical truth. Look at Jacob and Essau.
What does Scotland have to do with Armegeddon?
Back to the question we began with. Does yesterday’s No vote to Scottish independence fulfill Bible prophesy?
I think the answer might definetly be yes.
The story of human history is man’s desire to eat the fruit of his labor. That’s a theme of Holy Scripture for both the Old and New testiment. From page one to page 948 (the last page) the Bible holds up hard work as given by God and rewarded by him.
But today’s anti-Christian liberals hate hard work. All around the world, liberal governements promise people the opportunity to eat the fruit of someone else’s labor. Ironically, in the United Kingdom it’s the Labour party.
The NO vote in Scotland shows that globally, liberalism has reached a critical mass. To be Scottish, by definition, means to be so stingy that you barely eat your own fruit of your own labor for guilt of wasting food by eating it. So you would think that given the chance, the Scotts would avail themselves the opportunity to stop paying for London’s medical bills.
But they didn’t. There were enough people in Scotland who saw benefit from someone else paying for their bills, they voted to keep the gravy train running. It’s sad to see, but even America fell to that delusion. We reelected Barack Obama based on the promise of free birth control for all. We traded our freedom for a poison pill.
Liberalism is a delusion. (Or socialism, or whatever you want to call it. It’s governement replacing the Providence of God.) It cannot work. As UK Prime Minster Margaret Thatcher said, “The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples’ money.”
Concerning the endtimes and delusions Paul the Apostle prophesied:
The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
(2 Thessalonians 2:9–12 ESV) (emphasis mine)
So is the liberalism that Scotland fell to the strong delusion prophesied by the Bible? I say it’s possible that yes might answer that question correctly.
But anyways Bible prophesy is a confusing and complex topic. And so is politics on the British Isles. As you can see not being able to understand either did not stop me from commenting on the combination of the two. Thanks for reading!