Dems & Reps

[TonyC]

THE Antichrist ?!?!

If you like, I can find both the scriptural references and the calculation of the seven year timeline.

While no man knows when the rapture will happen (theoretically, it could happen at ANY moment) this even begins the tribulation, whcih Bible scholars have widely agreed is a period of seven years, during which the antichrist ...

WHOA. Hold up there for a second.

Please find me a single reference in scripture to the antichrist.

 

[Super 80]

The Antichrist is described in Daniel 7:24-26, Daniel 8:23-25, Daniel 9:27, Daniel 11:36-45, Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22, Luke 21:20 2Thessalonians 2:3-4, Revelation 13:1b-8, Revelation 17:8, Revelation 17:10, Revelation 19:20.

The main fact about the Antichrist is that he is opposite of Christ Jesus. While Jesus had the power to lay down His life on the cross (He did not die as a crucified man would- which is why the Centurion said surely, this was the Son of God) and He had the power to pick His life back up. This was given to Him by the Father. This is why we have a bodily resurrection too.

The Antichrist (the sixth "head") is a false Christ. He has a wound which should be mortally fatal, but he does not die-a false death. Instead he merely continues to live, -a false resurrection. False death, false life: false Christ.

And his image (a detestable thing) is erected in the Temple and this image apart from previous idols of animals and men such as the one in Daniel 11:31 set up by Antiochus Epiphanes in 168 B.C. is different. Emperors have said they were God. Idols have been set up for worship. But this Emperor will set up his own image for worship and unlike images of wood, stone and metal -this image can talk! -Revelation 13:15

Here is the abomination that causes desolation spoken of by Daniel in 9:27 and Jesus in Matthew, Mark and Luke.

 

[TonyC]

The Antichrist is described in Daniel 7:24-26, Daniel 8:23-25, Daniel 9:27, Daniel 11:36-45, Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22, Luke 21:20 2Thessalonians 2:3-4, Revelation 13:1b-8, Revelation 17:8, Revelation 17:10, Revelation 19:20.

You didn't answer my question. Where in scripture do you find "the antichrist"?

The only occurances of the word antichrist use the word as an adjective, which means (as one might expect) "against christ." Nowhere is "antichrist" used as a noun, much less as a specific noun. Please explain.

 

[Super 80]

I did.

Antichrist as a word in the NIV is only used in John's first and second letters and comes from the combination in the Greek as antichristos.

The other mentions of the Antichrist do not refer to him specifically as such just as Christians are not called Christians but are called Saints, elect, chosen, offspring, those that hold to the testimony of Jesus, and of every tribe, nation and tongue. Likewise the word Rapture does not occur in the English Bible (It does when you translate the Greek into Latin though.) nor will the word Trinity be found at all in any language.

Can you now discern the character of the Antichrist from the passages I've cited now that you're not limited to a strict name?

 

[Super 80]

I left out some references - Daniel 7:8, Daniel 7:11, 7:20-21.

Tony,

Do you think it just a coincidence that this little horn, this beast of the sea (many peoples, the great sea, Rome) this man of lawlessness, has as its main attribute the ability to speak against God with boasting, proud words, blasphemies and also has an image that can speak?

 

[UpNDownGuy]

You scared me!

Boy, I thought we were done for for a second there:



Do you think it just a coincidence that this little horn, this beast of the sea (many peoples, the great sea, Rome) this man of lawlessness, has as its main attribute the ability to speak against God with boasting, proud words, blasphemies and also has an image that can speak?


I got about half-way through the sentence , and was convinced it was Dubya, 'til you got the part of the image speaking. Whatever you want to accuse Bush of, being a speaker is not one of them.

 

[Super 80]

Personally I was always hoping Hilary Clinton would prove to "da man."

But as far as the timeline may be going, it has advanced with the formation of the EU, but the last terrible nation written in Daniel 7:7, and further in Daniel 7:19-25 and again in Revelation 13:1-2 with a further explanation in Revelation 17:12-13 has not yet been formed.

Note the nature of this nation in Revelation 13:2 is a conglomeration of the nations of Daniel 7:4-6 in inverse order. Notice also the ten kings do not have a kingdom already, but just receive authority as kings for just one hour—Rev 17:12. This suggests a ruling council over some super-state reminiscent of the Roman Empire from which the Antichrist comes to the forefront once everything is ready for him to dominate.

Nice guy isn't he? Good news: he goes to hell first with the false prophet.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

Randall Terry , founder of Operation Rescue:
“I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good… Our goal is a Christian Nation. We have a Biblical duty; we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don’t want equal time. We don’t want pluralism. ”

Jerry Falwell, founder of the Moral Majority: “Just give me the Supreme Court.”

Ralph Reed, former executive director of the Christian Coalition:
“I do guerrilla warfare. I paint my face and travel at night. You don’t know until you’re in a body bag. You don’t know till election night.”

Pat Robertson, GOP presidential candidate, 1988:
“When the Christian majority takes over this country, there will be no more satanic churches, no more free distribution of pornography, no more abortion on demand, and no more talk of rights for homosexuals. After the Christian majority takes control, pluralism will be seen as immoral and evil and the state will not allow anyone to practice it. ”

Jesus Christ, "Love your neighbor as yourself."

Who cares what some guy says, even if they call themselves a Christian, it is about following after Jesus and loving God with all your heart, mind, and soul. If I am doing that I am not hurting anyone. Some may think I don't deserve the right to share my beliefs because I might hurt their feelings, but that is just silly. So why is Christianity so censored and other religions aren't? How come you didn't quote the Koran, or better yet those who practice Islam as extreme as Mr. Robertson, Reed, and Falwell practice Christianity (with politics mixed in?)

Here is a quote right outta the Koran-(Sura 4:59) "59 Verily, those who disbelieve in our signs, we will broil them with fire; whenever their skins are well done, then we will change them for other skins, that they may taste the torment. Verily, God is glorious and wise."

That is just one quote. There are plenty more plus if I had the time I could find thousands of Islamic leaders that would have something to say about America and what people other than Muslims should have happen to them. My point is you will always find a few nuts that exist supporting anything. But the real evaluation of a religion, or anything for that matter, is what the book/guideline says about it and what it means in its true form, not what it means based on the opinions of people. So I ask again. Based on what the two books teach and the way that true believers of either one are supposed to act, why is the one that preaches love in the most obvious way censored, and the one that (when all said and done) preaches that whoever doesn’t follow it should be tortured and killed is the one that is given the green light, and anyone who speaks against it in this country is in danger of being politically incorrect, labeled a racist, or whatever else?

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Timebuilder,


What did he do to the reputation of the U.S.? Do you really think the Europeans look down on us because of a stain on a dress? They laughed at the witchhunt ($75 million for an "independent" investigation that turned up a stain on a dress) that was conducted by the GOP. They thought is was ridiciulous such a big deal was made out of it. Other parts of the world, I have no idea.

I'd assume you're just as upset with Nixon for the Watergate scandal?? Certainly not a shining moment. Probably the most neurotic President in the country's history and certainly shamed the office as much as Clinton, if not more so. I suppose it's how one looks at it. One had lower morals, the other, lower ethics.

I'd lump our current Pres in with Nixon. Seems like alot of shady behavior going on in the White House now. But that's ok because GW is a god fearing man who loves his wife. Of course, someone in that White House didn't love Joseph Wilson's wife.....but that's ok because GW is a god fearing man who loves his wife.

Really, sarcasm aaide, if we go back to reputation of the U.S., not that I'm too concerned, although I am somewhat, has anyone done more to damage our reputation among the world than GW??? I certainly wouldn't blame him for the circumstances he was placed in, economy and terrorism, but someone is going to do alot of fence mending starting either in 2004 or 2008.


Mr. I.

 

[TonyC]

I did.

Antichrist as a word in the NIV is only used in John's first and second letters and comes from the combination in the Greek as antichristos.

I'm not trying to argue, but I still don't believe you answered my original question. (I can understand the confusion, though, as I originally omitted the quotation marks around "the antichrist.") I asked you to find "the antichrist." You found "anitchrist."

Antichrist in the two books you cited is an ADJECTIVE. An adjective is a word that describes a person, place, or thing.

You insist on using antichrist as a noun - a person, place or thing. There is no example of antichrist as a noun in the Bible.

(What a difference an article makes, huh?) (Umm, "the" is an article.)

I believe that if you'll read those passages in I John and II John slowly, with the earnest desire to understand, you might see them in a new light.

By the way, what's so cryptic about "no man knowest the hour..." that people keep trying to force current events into Daniel and Revelation?

 

[Timebuilder]

What did he do to the reputation of the U.S.?

Before Clinton, the office had a certain amount of respect and decorum. The lack of same under European leaders makes no difference to me. While they may have laughed at us for a "witchhunt", that is of no more consequence than a gang memeber laughing at our gun laws.

They laughed at the witchhunt ($75 million for an "independent" investigation that turned up a stain on a dress) that was conducted by the GOP.

The investigation was conducted by the office of independent council, which was begun under a democrat administration. If the cost of the investigation was high, you have to focus your frustration on the one person who could have prevented it entirely. Who might that be?

I'd assume you're just as upset with Nixon for the Watergate scandal??

I was very upset by that, for the same reasons as I am with Clinton, plus the fact that I was a democrat at the time. At least Nixon had the good sense to fess up finally and resign. No such luck with slick willy.

I'd lump our current Pres in with Nixon. Seems like alot of shady behavior going on in the White House now.

If you listen to the liberal media, there sure seems to be that happening. The truth is that this is mere conjecture with no substance.

Of course, someone in that White House didn't love Joseph Wilson's wife.....

I'd be a lot more upset if she was an operative. She was not. Even so, I hope they find out who is responsible, and charge them. Period.

has anyone done more to damage our reputation among the world than GW???

I don't think our reputaion has been "damaged" at all. Are people pissed at us? You bet, and that's GOOD. We are putting every country that supports or exports terror on notice, and we are going after the terrorists and their supporters. Fence mending? You're joking right? We OWN the fence. We staarted the fence, and we built it. We made it possible for France to be mad at us, and for Germany to be able to exist at all. We had the ability to fully clean the European clock, but if we had, we would have been just as culpable as the Nazis.

We have acted in the best, most effective, and most compassionate manner possible considering what has been visited upon our own innocent citizens. We have nothing whatsoever to be apologetic about and we can be proud of the manner in which we have conducted ourselves.

The UN was not effective in backing up its own sanctions and resolutions. They are not a world government, not yet, although the Bible indicates that the EU will likely become such a government, and likely with the UN's blessing. The UN has placated and attempted to pacify terrorists for decades, and we can clearly see what the fruits of those labors are. You can't negotiate a peace with someone who wants to eliminate you. It's just that simple. Now, it is truly a case of "us or them".

I choose us.

 

[Typhoon1244]

I am encouraged! Foobar and Typhoon actually managed to dredge up old quotes that a public figure made which contridict what that person is doing today!

Are you suggesting that this is difficult to do?

And why are you dragging me into this? Foobar started it!

My intense dislike for Rush Limbaugh stems not so much from his politics, but rather from the fact that he's an arrogant windbag...and a hypocrite.

 

[Timebuilder]

but rather from the fact that he's an arrogant windbag...and a hypocrite.

Every human who wants to do better is a hypocrite, because if you are striving to do better than you currently are, and encourage others to do the same, you are essentially advocting a position that you are currently unable to sustain by example.

This does not mean that it is not a good idea to constantly strive to become more ethical, more responsible, more moral and more consistent.

Christ said that we are ALL hypocrites. Only He was walking the same walk that He was talking.

The rest of us can only try harder to do better. Rush included.

 

[Super 80]

I'm not trying to argue, but I still don't believe you answered my original question. (I can understand the confusion, though, as I originally omitted the quotation marks around "the antichrist.") I asked you to find "the antichrist." You found "anitchrist."

Antichrist in the two books you cited is an ADJECTIVE. An adjective is a word that describes a person, place, or thing.

You insist on using antichrist as a noun - a person, place or thing. There is no example of antichrist as a noun in the Bible.

(What a difference an article makes, huh?) (Umm, "the" is an article.)

Tony C.

I count four times John uses antichrist. Of those three specifically use the in the Greek. One time that John uses antichrists in the plural it is used as the subject of a clause.

Furthermore, even my study Bible equates John's antichrist to the man of lawlessness and the beast.

So if you don't see it, there's nothing else I can do to show you where the antichrist is written about as the pivotal player in Daniel's midweek of the seventieth 'seven.'

I believe that if you'll read those passages in I John and II John slowly, with the earnest desire to understand, you might see them in a new light.

1JN 2:18 "Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming..." I have not studied John's letters as much as other books, but I understand this as a simple declarative statement of a future eventuality. How do you read it?

By the way, what's so cryptic about "no man knowest the hour..." that people keep trying to force current events into Daniel and Revelation?

The events in Daniel go from our past into the future. While there are non-heretical ways of looking at the first four Seals in Revelations as forces at work in the world (combining John's vision with Zechariah's four chariots) most of the events of the end times are still to come. We are not yet there, the end is still to come.

If you think you know the day or the hour, then you make Jesus a liar, or you're fooling yourself. Since Jesus is the truth, the light and the way, I wouldn't ever suppose I'd know which day it'll be until it arrives, nor the hour until it comes.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

By the way, what's so cryptic about "no man knowest the hour..." that people keep trying to force current events into Daniel and Revelation?

I know you guys have been talking about the whole antichrist thing. I must admit I didn't read, in detail, most of the posts, but I did catch this (what Tony C typed.) I kind of agree with Tony. I don't necessarily think it is wrong to associate today's society with Biblical prophesies, I mean just look at Israel becoming a nation in one day. That happened in the 20th century and was a Biblical prophecy. And I don't want to cause division with other Christians on this board that feel passionate about the whole "last days stuff." But here is my take on it. After doing a challenging Bible study with a couple of close friends one night, I saw something I never realized about end times stuff. Here is the area of scripture we were looking at (Matthew 24.)

His disciples came to him privately and asked, "When will all this take place? And will there be any sign ahead of time to signal your return and the end of the world[1] ?"
4Jesus told them, "Don't let anyone mislead you. 5For many will come in my name, saying, `I am the Messiah.' They will lead many astray. 6And wars will break out near and far, but don't panic. Yes, these things must come, but the end won't follow immediately. 7The nations and kingdoms will proclaim war against each other, and there will be famines and earthquakes in many parts of the world. 8But all this will be only the beginning of the horrors to come.
9"Then you will be arrested, persecuted, and killed. You will be hated all over the world because of your allegiance to me. 10And many will turn away from me and betray and hate each other. 11And many false prophets will appear and will lead many people astray. 12Sin will be rampant everywhere, and the love of many will grow cold. 13But those who endure to the end will be saved. 14And the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, so that all nations will hear it; and then, finally, the end will come.

See, the disciples asked Jesus the very question when will the end come. And Jesus basically replies that after the whole world has heard the Gospel message. When that exactly happens no one will know nor could they know (other than God.) He says later in the chapter that no one knows the exact hour. In the above verses from Matt 24 Jesus is basically warning them (and us) not to rationalize current events, such as wars and earthquakes and other things, as a sign of the end. It could lead to following a false messiah or ditching your faith or just simply misleading someone. I am not implying anyone on this board is misleading, since I didn't see anyone claim that Jesus would return on a specific date (EG-New Years 2003/2004.) However, I don’t think it is correct to assume that we can say Jesus is going to return (as in the end of this world) in our lifetime or in 50 years or whatever based simply on current events and the way society is behaving. I mean who cares anyway in less than 100 years we will all be face to face with Jesus whether the end of the world has happened or not.

 

[Super 80]

I know you guys have been talking about the whole antichrist thing. I must admit I didn't read, in detail, most of the posts, but I did catch this (what Tony C typed.) I kind of agree with Tony.

Hey that's alright to disagree. The study of end times is difficult and it is not by knowledge that one gains eternal salvation. No matter which school of eschatology a person might gravitate towards in their thinking, we're all still saved by the blood of Jesus. While the surest coming event in the world is the second advent of Christ, the most important thing in history was the first advent.

You raise some good points and I think there is quite a similarity between the events Christ says come like the beginnings of birth pains and the conditions unleashed by the first four Seals. However as far as preaching the Gospel, while all kinds of men have tried to fulfill that it will be finally done by an angel right before the "harvest." So Jesus' words are fulfilled in Revelation 14:6, "Then I saw another angel flying in midair, and he had the eternal gospel to proclaim to those who live on the earth--to every nation, tribe, language and people."

There are specific and unique events in prophecy that allow you to discern multiple accounts of the same time period. Also the Bible uses parallel accounts to show complex events and the book of Revelation has more than half a dozen parallel accounts to show various aspects and perspectives. This type of storytelling is common in antiquity. Understandably this does make reading it difficult with our Western post-Renaissance modern scientific thinking, but there are considerable cross reference points between Daniel, the Olivet Discourses and Revelation as the main books to establish a general series of events.

While this does not allow for future prediction, it has enhanced my appreciation for the Church of Philadelphia and the command to endure patiently in Rev 13:10 and 14:12.

 

[Timebuilder]

While no man knows the hour of His coming, the fulfilled prophecies of our own time (the re-establishment of the State of Isreal and the rise of the European Common Market for example) are a reminder that whenever the hour, that hour is getting closer and closer. Be ready. Listen for the trumpet.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Every human who wants to do better is a hypocrite, because if you are striving to do better than you currently are, and encourage others to do the same, you are essentially advocting a position that you are currently unable to sustain by example.

Timebuilder...that is the most grotesque justification I've ever read. Did you by any chance work for Bill Clinton?

I suppose there may be some logic to that line of reasoning, but come on! We're talking about Rush Limbaugh here!

 

[Timebuilder]

It was a general comment about the nature of hypocracy. None of us are able to meet the true standard of the sinless, righteous life.

We can go round and round sharing our opinions about whether the current situation constitutes hipocracy on the part of Rush. I don't think it does, and I have explained why. Even his critics are fully aware of what Rush was talking about when he made his previous comments about drugs. It is a convenient opportunity for those critics to pretend that his comments included becoming addicted to prescription drugs, but they are disingenuous when they do this.

If he had been speaking out against, say, cocaine use while at the same time indulging in a few snorts, he would be a hypocrite.

Nothing even close to this has happened.

 

[Super 80]

It was a general comment about the nature of hypocracy. None of us are able to meet the true standard of the sinless, righteous life.

If he had been speaking out against, say, cocaine use while at the same time indulging in a few snorts, he would be a hypocrite.

I guess the one aspect of Christ that is different than any other religion is forgiveness. It doesn't matter as much as what you have done as much as it does to ask for God's mercy and forgiveness. Since Jesus paid for our sins on the cross, Christianity stands as the one religion that says it has all been done. Every other religion says what you must do to gain heaven. (But you cannot gain heaven by works so that no one may boast.)

If you confess with your mouth and believe in your heart you will be saved, and when the heart leads and the hands follow, this is a faith that is demonstrated. Rush has at least admitted a wrong; that is the first step in forgiveness, to confess to your brother your sin. I've done (and still do) wrong in my own life, so I'll not cast stones at a brother who has fallen.

 

[DoinTime]

Timebuilder.....I pray to God (my God that is, not yours) that I never have to share a cockpit with you. Your extremist positions on sensitive subjects raise my blood pressure and make my head hurt. If you presented your opinions and ideas with phrases like "I think..." or "In my opinion..." instead of "Truth be told...." and "The fact is..." your writings would be immensely more palatable. You are not privilege to the meaning of life and I know for a fact that you do not know everything so lay off with the notion that you speak for the Creator himself. Show a little bit of humility, you may find that some people may start to like you.

 

[Timebuilder]

I don't know what has you so fired up. Maybe if you read the Bible you would know as much about what the creator wanted you to know as you could know.

As for the chances of you and I in a cockpit? Zero..

Have an aspirin. On me.

 

[Super 80]

I pray to God (my God that is, not yours)

What god is that? Should Christians not make strong statements? Or was Job, who lived before there even was the Torah wrong when he said in black and white; "I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth." -JOB 19:25

Maybe he should have said in my opinion, or I think my Redeemer will maybe someday possibly...

 

[Timebuilder]

..or I'm not really certain about this, and there are conflicting viewpoints, taking into account the ideas of the satan worshippers and the child molesters, I can say with certainty, no, relative certainty, no a good possibility...oh, well who am I to say....

 

[DoinTime]

Or was Job, who lived before there even was the Torah wrong when he said in black and white;

You put to much faith in the physical words of the bible. The bible is a story, and a good one at that. If Jesus were to come back to earth and see what Christians had done to Christianity we would surely be in for another wet 40 days and nights. But then, that story was just fiction too.

btw: how do you say something in black and white?

 

[fLYbUDDY]

You put to much faith in the physical words of the bible. The bible is a story, and a good one at that. If Jesus were to come back to earth and see what Christians had done to Christianity we would surely be in for another wet 40 days and nights. But then, that story was just fiction too.

btw: how do you say something in black and white?

Well first of all you criticized Timebuilder for stating stuff as a matter of fact and then you go ahead and contradict yourself. So how is it just a story? Do we really need to go through another 13 pages of thread posts to give you the strong evidence that it is not? Don't think it offends me that you think that way about the Bible being a "fairytale." That is between you and where you decide to put your trust into. I just find it funny how you jump to an assumption, present it as a fact, and then criticize someone else that you have accused of doing just that.

 

[Timebuilder]

You put to much faith in the physical words of the bible.

How much faith should we ascribe to the words of the Bible? We find the answer in 2Tim 3:16. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

If Jesus were to come back to earth and see what Christians had done to Christianity we would surely be in for another wet 40 days and nights.

Not so. God specifically promised that the flood was the last time such an event would be caused to happen.

Of course, He has many other modes still at His discretion.

But then, that story was just fiction too.

Not according to Christ and the apostles. He authenticated Old Testament scripture and Peter wrote in his second epistle:
2Peter1:19
And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts;
1:20
knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,
1:21
for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

Acording to the Bible, there really was a boat, and Noah and his family were on it with a bunch of animals.

Some theologians theorize (which they love to do) that God caused the animals to enter a state of suspended animation or sleep, allowing for the problem of caring for a great many birds, mammals, and reptiles. However it was accomplished, God wants us to understand this event this way.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Oh Jesus! Not again!

 

[fLYbUDDY]

Oh Jesus! Not again!

hey DoinTime started it.

 

[Timebuilder]

Carson (Johnny, not Daley for you younger guys) doing his old "Carnac" routine. He holds the envelope to his headdress and says "Oh Jesus! Not again!"

He opens the envelope, and reads:

"What will satan say at the second coming?"



sorry. I had to.