I’ve seen a couple of stories suggesting that Google’s new browser, “Chrome,” is part of the Google plan to take over the world. Others argue that Google has removed the most objectionable features of the user agreement. Others note that one of the features of Chrome (suggested URL addresses) is common to other browsers. For Mac users this question is purely academic. What do you think?
R. Scott Clark
R.Scott Clark is the President of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, the author and editor of, and contributor to several books and the author of many articles. He has taught church history and historical theology since 1997 at Westminster Seminary California. He has also taught at Wheaton College, Reformed Theological Seminary, and Concordia University. He has hosted the Heidelblog since 2007.
More by R. Scott Clark ›
I would suggest they already own the world, their stock being in the mid$400s per share. Yikes!
Well, one thing’s for certain. If Google owns all the world’s data – and now that they have their own web browser, they’ve gotten one step closer to that maniacal goal – then surely we’re one step closer to the advent of the Antichrist. Surely the Antichrist wants to own all the world’s data. After all, he will surely want to hunt down Christians and tattoo 666 to our foreheads. It seems patently obvious that Google is part of Satan’s plan to unite the world together against Christ. Armageddon is near! We must boycott Google! The fate of the world may depend on it! We must stop Antichrist from taking over!
Even if the above paranoid ramblings WERE true, there’s nothing that can be done to stop prophecy coming true. So let’s sit back and relax and remember that the Lord is in control, and that the battle is already won. If Chrome is an attempt by Google to take over the world, then I say, good for them. The ambition is refreshing.
Others say Google has made them stupid! Meaning, our way of reading and thinking has been altered by googling so much. Pastors beware!
http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/doctrine/?p=362#comment-547