Interpretations of the "Purple Turban" - For open discussion

I posted this in another thread, but after reading the OPies original post again, I didn't feel that this post applied to that thread at all. I am, therefore, re-posting it in hopes of some discussion on the idea.

I have to go to Waco for a few hours so I will be away, but I'll read the thread posts and respond when I return.

~~~~~~
Has anyone ever considered that the reference in Revelation to the Antichrist wearing a "purple" turban, is actually a denotation of kingly government and not just a color?

Purple has long been a color associated with nobility and the right of Kings. I am wondering if this bizarre cult-like adoration for a man who was "selected before he was elected" isn't just the progression of something our forefathers warned us about.

"...there is a natural inclination in mankind to kingly goverment. It gives people the illusion that some how a king will establish equality among citizens; and that they like. I am apprehensive, therefore - perhaps too apprehensive - that the Government of these States may in future times end in a monarch. But this catastrophe, I think, may be long delayed, if in our proposed system we do not sow the seeds of contention, faction, and tumult, by making our posts of honor places of profit." (Albert Henry Smyth, ed., The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, 10 vols. [New York: The Macmillan Company, 1905-07], 9:593; modern spelling.)

I would like to add that this cult-like adoration of Presidents goes back long before Mr. Obama; however, with this president, it just seems more apparent.

Do you think our forefathers were aware of the desire of the elites to bring about a one world government that had one appointed ruler? Aristotle's depiction of governments did show that the opposite of Monarch is Tyranny and what better way to lure in the masses than to promise them equality and social justice.

Last Edited by Khim on 08/24/2011 01:28 PM