-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
It is actually you who make the problem through your lack of understanding of how to interpret (last day) prophetic truth, for in the context of Daniel 9v20-27 the years are looked upon as "Passover years" ie. made up of 360 days, with the required extra days added on...
Rev 4v1 to Rev 19v21 is based upon Dan 9v27 (the last seven years of this age), hence, the time periods used in the Book of Revelation are the same.
42 months = 1260 years = time, times (dual) and half a time (three and a half years)!
Your method of interpretation of the Book of Revelation makes an absolute nonsense of it!
Rev 4v1 to Rev 19v21 is based upon Dan 9v27 (the last seven years of this age), hence, the time periods used in the Book of Revelation are the same.
42 months = 1260 years = time, times (dual) and half a time (three and a half years)!
Your method of interpretation of the Book of Revelation makes an absolute nonsense of it!
C
A according to the apostate political spirit that is attempting to take control over the American church, President Obama (the liberal agenda) is the antichrist. However, I don't believe the conservative agenda is much better. With every presidential election, I feel as though I have to decide which is the lesser of two evils.
S
Well, I can remember Reagan being called the Antichrist way back when. In fact a casual search revealed this website which had every theory on the Gipper you can imagine. But as for me, even though I disagree with most of Obama's policies, I am confident that Barack is NOT the Antichrist, because I figure this being will take on a most charismatic form in order to deceive almost everyone, and you can be sure this Antichrist, whoever he is, will be able to speak with great ability without a teleprompter.
E
WHo was babylon? Was it not Nebuchadnezzar? Was not he the "king" that did what God prophesied (captured jerusalem and destroyed the city and temple? Who was media-persia? Was it not Cyrus among others? How about greece? Was it not allexander? or rome, was it not the Ceasar?
How does scripture show time? Do they show years of the kingdoms? Or years of the "king" of the power that be?? "in the third year of cyrus, king of persia,,,
It will be no different with the future beast. It will be a kingdom, But this kingdom will have a "king" who calls all the shots. and he does, or orders his armies, to do what is prophesied.
Wow, Thanks, you just proved me right.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Do I not read "kings" in that passage. wonder why that is??
So your telling me the "it" which caused the desecration, say like the pig which was used by Antiochus Epiphanes, somehow got into the inner sanctum by itself?
We are not told what is used to cause the abomination. Only that it will happen. And it will be done by the prince of the people who destroyed jerusalem and the temple.
so I am not sure what your trying to get at here
M
If beasts are the kings then for Daniel’s prophecy to be true the king who followed Nebuchadnezzar would have been the bear. The prophecy is true and history proves it. The bear wasn’t the next king that followed Nenuchadnezzar but the next kingdom(Medo-Persia) that came after Babylon.
Dan 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
In the verse above the third year of Cyrus is used as a way of determining when the event took place. Does it show that beast means king? No, it is nothing more then a way to convey when the event occurred.
So where does Scripture say there will be an eighth king? Scripture positively shows 8 beasts but only 7 kings, we can’t just assume the eighth kingdom will have a king just because the previous seven had kings. Assumption is not proof.
Contrary to your belief this does not prove you right, on the other hand it demonstrates there are only 7 kings but 8 beasts/kingdoms. So where is your Scriptural proof? Where in Scripture is your eighth king?
Rev 17:9 Here is the mind that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth:
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet
come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
5 (are fallen) + 1 (one is) + (the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.) =7
So once again if the seven kings represent the first seven beasts where is your eighth king that represents the eighth beast. Does Scripture lie? Are there really 8 kings, or could your doctrine be mistaken?
No, that isn’t what I am telling you. On the other hand, I am trying to understand why do you say the abomination is set up in the inner sanctum?
He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' [fn] In the middle of the 'seven' [fn] he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
Doesn’t Scripture tell us it is on the wing of the temple? Is the wing of the temple the inner sanctum?
We are not told that it will be something he does or commits, but that he will set up or build (Dan9:27 and Dan12:11) and it will stand (Mark13:14 and Mat24:15). the abomination is an it that is set up or stands. (Dan9:27 Mark 13:14 and Mat24:15). So the abomination will be something that is set up and will stand until the end so it should be something we can see until the end.
stand
New Testament Greek Definition:
2476 histemi {his'-tay-mee}
a prolonged form of a primary stao {stah'-o} (of the samemeaning, and used for it in certain tenses); TDNT - 7:638,1082; v
AV - stand 116, set 11, establish 5, stand still 4, stand by 3,misc 17, vr stand 2; 158
1) to cause or make to stand, to place, put, set
1a) to bid to stand by, [set up]
1a1) in the presence of others, in the midst, before judges,
before members of the Sanhedrin;
1a2) to place
1b) to make firm, fix establish
1b1) to cause a person or a thing to keep his or its place
1b2) to stand, be kept intact (of family, a kingdom), to escapein safety
1b3) to establish a thing, cause it to stand
1b31) to uphold or sustain the authority or force of anything
1c) to set or place in a balance
1c1) to weigh: money to one (because in very early times beforethe introduction of coinage, the metals used to be weighed)
2) to stand
2a) to stand by or near
2a1) to stop, stand still, to stand immovable, stand firm
2a1a) of the foundation of a building
2b) to stand
2b1) continue safe and sound, stand unharmed, to stand ready orprepared
2b2) to be of a steadfast mind
2b3) of quality, one who does not hesitate, does not waiver
set up
Old Testament Hebrew Definition:
05414 nathan {naw-than'}
a primitive root; TWOT - 1443; v
AV - give 1078, put 191, deliver 174, made 107, set 99, up 26, lay 22,
grant 21, suffer 18, yield 15, bring 15, cause 13, utter 12,
aid 11, send 11, recompense 11, appoint 10, shew 7, misc 167; 2008
1) to give, put, set
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to give, bestow, grant, permit, ascribe, employ, devote,
consecrate, dedicate, pay wages, sell, exchange, lend,
commit, entrust, give over, deliver up, yield produce,
occasion, produce, requite to, report, mention, utter,
stretch out, extend
1a2) to put, set, put on, put upon, set, appoint, assign,
designate
1a3) to make, constitute
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be given, be bestowed, be provided, be entrusted to, begranted to, be permitted, be issued, be published, be
uttered, be assigned
1b2) to be set, be put, be made, be inflicted
1c) (Hophal)
1c1) to be given, be bestowed, be given up, be delivered up
1c2) to be put upon
I am trying to understand why you say “He blasphemes the tabernacle, (commits the abomination of desolation)” . If this were the case we might hear about it but it won’t be something we can see that is “set up” or “standing.” Will his words be set up and will they stand on the wing of the temple for all to see until the end?
I am trying to understand why you say it is in the inner sanctum when Scripture says it is on the wing of the temple.
I am trying to understand why you say this eighth beast has a king when Scripture says there are only 7 kings. 5+ 1+1 =7 So where does Scripture say this eighth beast has a king?
Dan 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
In the verse above the third year of Cyrus is used as a way of determining when the event took place. Does it show that beast means king? No, it is nothing more then a way to convey when the event occurred.
So where does Scripture say there will be an eighth king? Scripture positively shows 8 beasts but only 7 kings, we can’t just assume the eighth kingdom will have a king just because the previous seven had kings. Assumption is not proof.
Contrary to your belief this does not prove you right, on the other hand it demonstrates there are only 7 kings but 8 beasts/kingdoms. So where is your Scriptural proof? Where in Scripture is your eighth king?
Rev 17:9 Here is the mind that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth:
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet
come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
5 (are fallen) + 1 (one is) + (the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.) =7
So once again if the seven kings represent the first seven beasts where is your eighth king that represents the eighth beast. Does Scripture lie? Are there really 8 kings, or could your doctrine be mistaken?
No, that isn’t what I am telling you. On the other hand, I am trying to understand why do you say the abomination is set up in the inner sanctum?
He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' [fn] In the middle of the 'seven' [fn] he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
Doesn’t Scripture tell us it is on the wing of the temple? Is the wing of the temple the inner sanctum?
We are not told that it will be something he does or commits, but that he will set up or build (Dan9:27 and Dan12:11) and it will stand (Mark13:14 and Mat24:15). the abomination is an it that is set up or stands. (Dan9:27 Mark 13:14 and Mat24:15). So the abomination will be something that is set up and will stand until the end so it should be something we can see until the end.
stand
New Testament Greek Definition:
2476 histemi {his'-tay-mee}
a prolonged form of a primary stao {stah'-o} (of the samemeaning, and used for it in certain tenses); TDNT - 7:638,1082; v
AV - stand 116, set 11, establish 5, stand still 4, stand by 3,misc 17, vr stand 2; 158
1) to cause or make to stand, to place, put, set
1a) to bid to stand by, [set up]
1a1) in the presence of others, in the midst, before judges,
before members of the Sanhedrin;
1a2) to place
1b) to make firm, fix establish
1b1) to cause a person or a thing to keep his or its place
1b2) to stand, be kept intact (of family, a kingdom), to escapein safety
1b3) to establish a thing, cause it to stand
1b31) to uphold or sustain the authority or force of anything
1c) to set or place in a balance
1c1) to weigh: money to one (because in very early times beforethe introduction of coinage, the metals used to be weighed)
2) to stand
2a) to stand by or near
2a1) to stop, stand still, to stand immovable, stand firm
2a1a) of the foundation of a building
2b) to stand
2b1) continue safe and sound, stand unharmed, to stand ready orprepared
2b2) to be of a steadfast mind
2b3) of quality, one who does not hesitate, does not waiver
set up
Old Testament Hebrew Definition:
05414 nathan {naw-than'}
a primitive root; TWOT - 1443; v
AV - give 1078, put 191, deliver 174, made 107, set 99, up 26, lay 22,
grant 21, suffer 18, yield 15, bring 15, cause 13, utter 12,
aid 11, send 11, recompense 11, appoint 10, shew 7, misc 167; 2008
1) to give, put, set
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to give, bestow, grant, permit, ascribe, employ, devote,
consecrate, dedicate, pay wages, sell, exchange, lend,
commit, entrust, give over, deliver up, yield produce,
occasion, produce, requite to, report, mention, utter,
stretch out, extend
1a2) to put, set, put on, put upon, set, appoint, assign,
designate
1a3) to make, constitute
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be given, be bestowed, be provided, be entrusted to, begranted to, be permitted, be issued, be published, be
uttered, be assigned
1b2) to be set, be put, be made, be inflicted
1c) (Hophal)
1c1) to be given, be bestowed, be given up, be delivered up
1c2) to be put upon
I am trying to understand why you say “He blasphemes the tabernacle, (commits the abomination of desolation)” . If this were the case we might hear about it but it won’t be something we can see that is “set up” or “standing.” Will his words be set up and will they stand on the wing of the temple for all to see until the end?
I am trying to understand why you say it is in the inner sanctum when Scripture says it is on the wing of the temple.
I am trying to understand why you say this eighth beast has a king when Scripture says there are only 7 kings. 5+ 1+1 =7 So where does Scripture say this eighth beast has a king?
E
Wow, just wow, Do you always take things out of context to support your theories?
Nebuchadnezzar was the first king of babylon. He was followed by other kings. The kingdom who over through babylon was medio persian empire. During the reign of Belshazzar, who was king of babylon, and ruled the empire. which is what history proves, and what Scripture said would happen. Even the king of medio persia was told there would be three kings before the greecian empire took over and became the next gentile empire.
Why are you fighting this so much??
who was the beast empire? Medio-persial, who was in charge of that beast? Cyrus. no one did anything unless cryus decreed it. He was the empire. as every king who has ever served over an empire was that empire! if something happened under cyruses kingdom, it was HIM who decreed it, or HIM who did it.
Daniels prophesy speaks of four beasts, or four gentil kingdoms who will be given power from God. the final beast will be destroyed in the end. It is this beast which has power when Christ returns.
Which beast is the fourth beast. which was wounded, (as if dead) but came back to life, and had more power than any of the former beasts, including its former self before it was deamed dead? Is it not rome??
will not the "man of sin" be king over this empire? Will it not be HE which controls the world who is given to him (and his empire) and does what prophesy says he will do. Just like Nebuchadnezzar did exactly what God prophesied the first beast would do to Isreal?
It does not say Babylon destroyed the temple, and took the things in the temple as booty, it says Nebuchadnezzar did.
These seven kings all belong to the fourth empire. or are a part of the final beast of Daniels prophesy concerning the fourth beast.
so what does that have to do with the first three beasts?
Also you will note. the 8th king is what??
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
what does it say about him? His kingdom was, then was not. Which of the four beasts of daniels prophesy does scripture say had a mortal womb, but came back to life? What does history show? the last empire (rome) was, and todat it is not (has a mortal womb) yet out of seving kingdoms, will appear this 8th king which will give power to the empire which had suffered a mortal womb and come back to life, more fearse than it ever had been. Which means the future roman empire will make the first one look like childs play.
You keep mentioning seven kings. But you forget, they all are a part of the fourth and final beast (kingdom) mentioned to daniel
1. Because if it is not, it would not be an abomination of desolation if it was not in the holy place..
2. Where does jesus say it will take place?
Matthew 24:15
[ The Great Tribulation ] “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand),
3. You desecrate a temple in the holy place of that temple. where is the most holy place of the temple? the inner sanctom.
reasoning would help you. where else would it be?
1. The inner sanctum is a "wing" of the temple.
2. Jesus states we will see the abomination sitting in the "holy place"
you figure it out!
1. Who put it there?
2. Who has the authorty to order it built and to place it where it stands?
your joking right. why can't you see this? THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO HAVE IT BUILT AND PUT IN PLACE IS THE KING.
Who put it there?
Does not the one who put it there "blaspheme the tabernackle" by putting an idol in the temple,
Did not, when Antiochus Epiphanies blasphemed the temple by commiting this "abomination off desolation" do so for all the world to see "know"??
Jesus said it will be in the holy place. You be the judge
I explained the kings. You judge.
how many gentile kingdoms are there according to daniel? (beasts)
Nebuchadnezzar was the first king of babylon. He was followed by other kings. The kingdom who over through babylon was medio persian empire. During the reign of Belshazzar, who was king of babylon, and ruled the empire. which is what history proves, and what Scripture said would happen. Even the king of medio persia was told there would be three kings before the greecian empire took over and became the next gentile empire.
Why are you fighting this so much??
who was the beast empire? Medio-persial, who was in charge of that beast? Cyrus. no one did anything unless cryus decreed it. He was the empire. as every king who has ever served over an empire was that empire! if something happened under cyruses kingdom, it was HIM who decreed it, or HIM who did it.
Daniels prophesy speaks of four beasts, or four gentil kingdoms who will be given power from God. the final beast will be destroyed in the end. It is this beast which has power when Christ returns.
Which beast is the fourth beast. which was wounded, (as if dead) but came back to life, and had more power than any of the former beasts, including its former self before it was deamed dead? Is it not rome??
will not the "man of sin" be king over this empire? Will it not be HE which controls the world who is given to him (and his empire) and does what prophesy says he will do. Just like Nebuchadnezzar did exactly what God prophesied the first beast would do to Isreal?
It does not say Babylon destroyed the temple, and took the things in the temple as booty, it says Nebuchadnezzar did.
These seven kings all belong to the fourth empire. or are a part of the final beast of Daniels prophesy concerning the fourth beast.
so what does that have to do with the first three beasts?
Also you will note. the 8th king is what??
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
what does it say about him? His kingdom was, then was not. Which of the four beasts of daniels prophesy does scripture say had a mortal womb, but came back to life? What does history show? the last empire (rome) was, and todat it is not (has a mortal womb) yet out of seving kingdoms, will appear this 8th king which will give power to the empire which had suffered a mortal womb and come back to life, more fearse than it ever had been. Which means the future roman empire will make the first one look like childs play.
You keep mentioning seven kings. But you forget, they all are a part of the fourth and final beast (kingdom) mentioned to daniel
1. Because if it is not, it would not be an abomination of desolation if it was not in the holy place..
2. Where does jesus say it will take place?
Matthew 24:15
[ The Great Tribulation ] “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand),
3. You desecrate a temple in the holy place of that temple. where is the most holy place of the temple? the inner sanctom.
reasoning would help you. where else would it be?
1. The inner sanctum is a "wing" of the temple.
2. Jesus states we will see the abomination sitting in the "holy place"
you figure it out!
1. Who put it there?
2. Who has the authorty to order it built and to place it where it stands?
your joking right. why can't you see this? THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO HAVE IT BUILT AND PUT IN PLACE IS THE KING.
Who put it there?
Does not the one who put it there "blaspheme the tabernackle" by putting an idol in the temple,
Did not, when Antiochus Epiphanies blasphemed the temple by commiting this "abomination off desolation" do so for all the world to see "know"??
Jesus said it will be in the holy place. You be the judge
I explained the kings. You judge.
how many gentile kingdoms are there according to daniel? (beasts)
M
No, nor do comments like this help further the discussion. What purpose does it serve? I could ask you the same question but why would I want to insult you by implying whatever it is you are trying to imply? Don’t let your frustration motivate your speech it will only hinder the discussion. Disparaging remarks to the one you are conversing with only serves to confuse the issue.
Who’s taking it out of Context God’s inspired word tells us beasts are kingdoms. History proves God’s word true yet you try to change beasts/kingdoms to kings. Kings may represent the kingdom but they are not the kingdom. Beasts are kingdoms.
I could ask you the same but what would be the point? It serves no useful purpose, in the search for truth. But nonetheless I will answer.
Because I believe it is fallacy. The mythical “the Antichrist” is a product of doctrine built in the absence of sound hermeneutic principles. Scripture tells us there are many antichrists and they were already in the world when John wrote the verses. Not one verse in Scripture states that antichrist is an end time world leader. That belief is nothing but a false doctrine, a ploy of satan’s to take our eyes off the literally billion plus antichrists that surround us in our daily lives. The term antichrist has been removed from the Christian vocabulary except when used to describe some individual boogeyman. Who would casually refer to the atheist that lives down the block as an antichrist, yet wouldn't this be correct? How much more soul searching might that individual do if we did?
A term that should be a normal part of Christian vocabulary has been stolen by the enemy. Just ask the guy next to you in Church next Sunday "what is the antichrist?" to get an idea of how this term is understood in the Church. Few if any will give a scriptural based answer and say it is anyone who denies Christ/God, but many will offer there guess as to who the doctrinally based Antichrist will be.
Are you saying that the beasts John speaks of (Rev13:1-2 and Revv17) is still Rome and that God gives it power? If that were the case wouldn’t that contradict what John tells us?
Contradiction concerning who gives the beast power:
“…..and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.”(Rev13:1-2)
Contradiction concerning whether it is Rome revived
“…..five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come…” (Rev17:10)
If kings represent kingdoms the sixth king would be Rome. The seventh kingdom cannot be Rome because Rome has already come. Remember the seventh is not yet come. Rome had already come so we can eliminate Rome. But the seventh beast has to come from the ones that were in the past , while being one that has not yet come. We also know it has to have the attributes of the leopard, bear, and lion (Rev13:1-2) So it stands to reason that this new beast/kingdom comes out of what was once Daniels Lion, bear and leopard kingdoms not Rome.
Please quote the book chapter and verse that says the man of sin will be king over an empire
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2Th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
2Th 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
2Th 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let,
until he be taken out of the way.
2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
2Th 2:9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Nothing in the verses telling us about the man of sin says he will rule the world. If you are claiming this is what he does the burden of proof is on you, show us where Scripture says the man of sin rules the world!
A point you keep insisting on but have failed to prove.
“…..five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come…” (Rev17:10)
If kings represent kingdoms the sixth king would be Rome. The seventh kingdom cannot be Rome because Rome has already come. Remember the seventh is not yet come. Rome had already come so we can eliminate Rome. But the seventh beast has to come from the ones that were in the past , while being one that has not yet come. We also know it has to have the attributes of the leopard, bear, and lion (Rev13:1-2) So it stands to reason that this new beast/kingdom comes out of what was once Daniels Lion, bear and leopard kingdoms not Rome
How convenient you leave out the verse that says there are only 7 kings then pont at the eighth beast and try claiming it’s a king.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not
yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
Still just 7 kings and 8 beasts. Like I said before God’s inspired word tells us beast are kingdoms and history proves it so why do you keep trying to change the definition God gave so that you make beasts kings?
Who’s taking it out of Context God’s inspired word tells us beasts are kingdoms. History proves God’s word true yet you try to change beasts/kingdoms to kings. Kings may represent the kingdom but they are not the kingdom. Beasts are kingdoms.
I could ask you the same but what would be the point? It serves no useful purpose, in the search for truth. But nonetheless I will answer.
Because I believe it is fallacy. The mythical “the Antichrist” is a product of doctrine built in the absence of sound hermeneutic principles. Scripture tells us there are many antichrists and they were already in the world when John wrote the verses. Not one verse in Scripture states that antichrist is an end time world leader. That belief is nothing but a false doctrine, a ploy of satan’s to take our eyes off the literally billion plus antichrists that surround us in our daily lives. The term antichrist has been removed from the Christian vocabulary except when used to describe some individual boogeyman. Who would casually refer to the atheist that lives down the block as an antichrist, yet wouldn't this be correct? How much more soul searching might that individual do if we did?
A term that should be a normal part of Christian vocabulary has been stolen by the enemy. Just ask the guy next to you in Church next Sunday "what is the antichrist?" to get an idea of how this term is understood in the Church. Few if any will give a scriptural based answer and say it is anyone who denies Christ/God, but many will offer there guess as to who the doctrinally based Antichrist will be.
Are you saying that the beasts John speaks of (Rev13:1-2 and Revv17) is still Rome and that God gives it power? If that were the case wouldn’t that contradict what John tells us?
Contradiction concerning who gives the beast power:
“…..and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.”(Rev13:1-2)
Contradiction concerning whether it is Rome revived
“…..five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come…” (Rev17:10)
If kings represent kingdoms the sixth king would be Rome. The seventh kingdom cannot be Rome because Rome has already come. Remember the seventh is not yet come. Rome had already come so we can eliminate Rome. But the seventh beast has to come from the ones that were in the past , while being one that has not yet come. We also know it has to have the attributes of the leopard, bear, and lion (Rev13:1-2) So it stands to reason that this new beast/kingdom comes out of what was once Daniels Lion, bear and leopard kingdoms not Rome.
Please quote the book chapter and verse that says the man of sin will be king over an empire
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2Th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
2Th 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
2Th 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let,
until he be taken out of the way.
2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
2Th 2:9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Nothing in the verses telling us about the man of sin says he will rule the world. If you are claiming this is what he does the burden of proof is on you, show us where Scripture says the man of sin rules the world!
A point you keep insisting on but have failed to prove.
“…..five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come…” (Rev17:10)
If kings represent kingdoms the sixth king would be Rome. The seventh kingdom cannot be Rome because Rome has already come. Remember the seventh is not yet come. Rome had already come so we can eliminate Rome. But the seventh beast has to come from the ones that were in the past , while being one that has not yet come. We also know it has to have the attributes of the leopard, bear, and lion (Rev13:1-2) So it stands to reason that this new beast/kingdom comes out of what was once Daniels Lion, bear and leopard kingdoms not Rome
How convenient you leave out the verse that says there are only 7 kings then pont at the eighth beast and try claiming it’s a king.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not
yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
Still just 7 kings and 8 beasts. Like I said before God’s inspired word tells us beast are kingdoms and history proves it so why do you keep trying to change the definition God gave so that you make beasts kings?
M
Instead of proof you ask questions. You keep insisting that Daniels 4th kingdom Rome is the final kingdom. It may have been the final beast/kingdom Daniel spoke of but if John’s word is true then Rome was the sixth kingdom he is speaking of. The seventh and eighth beasts/ kingdoms cannot be Rome. John tells us, Rome is represented by the 6th king. That is the one that “is” and cannot be the “one that is not yet come” for Rome had already existed. The seventh and eighth beasts is a new kingdom that comes from the old kingdoms. Considering that John described it as a composite beast having the characteristics of Daniel’s leopard bear and lion kingdoms so it stands to reason we should look for something that comes from those geographic locations or possibly the descendants of those kingdoms.
That’s because Scripture tells us there are seven.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
I haven’t forgot that, I just don’t believe it. You keep saying that ,but yet you have not used Scripture to prove it. In fact Scripture tells us Rome is represented by Johns sixth king. And after the 6th king and kingdom we have a seventh king and kingdom and then finally an eighth beast that has no king. Remember Scripture positively states there are seven kings and eight beasts.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not
yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition
If kings and beasts/kingdoms are the same thing why call it a king and say there are seven in one verse then change it to a beast and there are eight in the very next verse? Considering the seventh and eighth beast are the same beast but there are only seven heads/kings have you considered the possibility that it may have been the seventh beast/kingdom that suffered the mortal wound and came back without a king?
Why does it have to be in the inner sanctum to desolate Jerusalem? Scripture does say it is Jerusalem that is desolated. Scripture does call Jerusalem a holy city. Is Jerusalem a place? Sure it is, but we can even narrow it’s location to the temple mount if we take into consideration Daniel says it is on a wing of the temple.
But we cannot neglect Daniel tells us it is on the wing of the temple. The whole city of Jerusalem is Holy. Jerusalem is a place. We cannot limit ourselves to just the inner sanctum based on that. To do so would eliminate the fact that Daniel tells us it is on the wing of the temple(not the inner sanctum).
Jesus did not say the “most” holy place He just said Holy place. Is Jerusalem a holy city? Is a city a place? Is the wing of the temple(not the inner sanctum) in a holy place?
Another irrelevant comment, designed to make it look as if I am incapable of reasoning simply because I refuse to blindly accept your doctrinally based argument that has been proven to contradict Scripture. I find it sad when one feels the need to resort to such tactics. Unfortunately it appears to be a common tactic many resort to when one can’t prove a point with Scripture. Maybe it’s time to take a break before your frustration results in any more irrelevant and inappropriate comments that only disrupt the conversation.
Exactly where Daniel said it would be on the wing of the temple. Isn’t that what Scripture tells us?
He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
Definition of WING
1a: one of the movable feathered or membranous paired appendages by means of which a bird, bat, or insect is able to fly;
2: an appendage or part resembling a wing in appearance, position, or function: as a: a device worn under the arms to aid a person in swimming or staying afloat b:alac: a turned-back or extended edge on an article of clothingd:
3: a means of flight or rapid progress
4: the act or manner of flying :flight<take wing>
5: a side or outlying region or district
6: a part or feature of a building usually projecting from and subordinate to the main or central part <the servants' wing>
7a: one of the pieces of scenery at the side of a stage bplural: the area at the side of the stage out of sight
8a: a left or right section of an army or fleet :flankb: one of the offensive positions or players on either side of a center position in certain team sports; also:flanker
I already have. As I demonstrated Holy place does not limit it to just the inner sanctum, coupled with Daniel telling us it is on the wing we should be looking for it in a section of the building or courtyard away from the main section of the building(wasn’t the inner sanctum in the main structure?) it is exactly where Daniel said it would be on the wing of the temple, which is a Holy place even though it isn’t the inner sanctum.
Have you ever considered these verses?
Eze 42:20 He measured it by the four sides: it had a wall round about, five hundred reeds long, and five hundred broad, to make a separation between the sanctuary and the profane place.
Could this be why John was told to leave out the courtyard for it is given unto the Gentiles?
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
Remember the seventh and eighth beasts/kingdoms are the same kingdom but only the seventh beast/kingdom has a king. It stands to reason that it is set up by either the seventh or eighth kingdom.
Rev 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
He (the kingdom) blasphemes the tabernacle by his words. It doesn’t say by setting up an idol.
Rev 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live
It is a result of the second beast that comes up out of the earth in Rev13 that an image is built. While an image can be an idol it can also be something as simple as a photograph, a likeness, representation, resemblance.
Can you see that abomination standing? Doesn’t Daniel tell us the abomination is set up on the wing and will be there until the end? If it is there to the end we should be able to see it.
And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
As you wish. Jesus said it would stand in a holy place, the wing as Daniel calls it is an extremity(not the inner sanctum) of the temple is a holy place. We cannot limit it to the inner sanctum When Daniel tells us it is on the wing.
You say the beasts are kings based on your understanding, yet God’s inspired word tells us beasts are kingdoms. I’ll take the definition God’s inspired word gives.
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon……
4 - Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
How many Gentile kingdoms are there according to John?
8 - Rev 17:11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition
Why not give it a rest for a day or two and let your frustration level drop a little before this conversation loses all resemblance to a civil conversation. In the meantime reexamine what has been said in light of the Scriptures (not your doctrine) and then if you would like to continue by all means let’s continue.
That’s because Scripture tells us there are seven.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
I haven’t forgot that, I just don’t believe it. You keep saying that ,but yet you have not used Scripture to prove it. In fact Scripture tells us Rome is represented by Johns sixth king. And after the 6th king and kingdom we have a seventh king and kingdom and then finally an eighth beast that has no king. Remember Scripture positively states there are seven kings and eight beasts.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not
yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition
If kings and beasts/kingdoms are the same thing why call it a king and say there are seven in one verse then change it to a beast and there are eight in the very next verse? Considering the seventh and eighth beast are the same beast but there are only seven heads/kings have you considered the possibility that it may have been the seventh beast/kingdom that suffered the mortal wound and came back without a king?
Why does it have to be in the inner sanctum to desolate Jerusalem? Scripture does say it is Jerusalem that is desolated. Scripture does call Jerusalem a holy city. Is Jerusalem a place? Sure it is, but we can even narrow it’s location to the temple mount if we take into consideration Daniel says it is on a wing of the temple.
But we cannot neglect Daniel tells us it is on the wing of the temple. The whole city of Jerusalem is Holy. Jerusalem is a place. We cannot limit ourselves to just the inner sanctum based on that. To do so would eliminate the fact that Daniel tells us it is on the wing of the temple(not the inner sanctum).
Jesus did not say the “most” holy place He just said Holy place. Is Jerusalem a holy city? Is a city a place? Is the wing of the temple(not the inner sanctum) in a holy place?
Another irrelevant comment, designed to make it look as if I am incapable of reasoning simply because I refuse to blindly accept your doctrinally based argument that has been proven to contradict Scripture. I find it sad when one feels the need to resort to such tactics. Unfortunately it appears to be a common tactic many resort to when one can’t prove a point with Scripture. Maybe it’s time to take a break before your frustration results in any more irrelevant and inappropriate comments that only disrupt the conversation.
Exactly where Daniel said it would be on the wing of the temple. Isn’t that what Scripture tells us?
He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
Definition of WING
1a: one of the movable feathered or membranous paired appendages by means of which a bird, bat, or insect is able to fly;
2: an appendage or part resembling a wing in appearance, position, or function: as a: a device worn under the arms to aid a person in swimming or staying afloat b:alac: a turned-back or extended edge on an article of clothingd:
3: a means of flight or rapid progress
4: the act or manner of flying :flight<take wing>
5: a side or outlying region or district
6: a part or feature of a building usually projecting from and subordinate to the main or central part <the servants' wing>
7a: one of the pieces of scenery at the side of a stage bplural: the area at the side of the stage out of sight
8a: a left or right section of an army or fleet :flankb: one of the offensive positions or players on either side of a center position in certain team sports; also:flanker
I already have. As I demonstrated Holy place does not limit it to just the inner sanctum, coupled with Daniel telling us it is on the wing we should be looking for it in a section of the building or courtyard away from the main section of the building(wasn’t the inner sanctum in the main structure?) it is exactly where Daniel said it would be on the wing of the temple, which is a Holy place even though it isn’t the inner sanctum.
Have you ever considered these verses?
Eze 42:20 He measured it by the four sides: it had a wall round about, five hundred reeds long, and five hundred broad, to make a separation between the sanctuary and the profane place.
Could this be why John was told to leave out the courtyard for it is given unto the Gentiles?
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
Remember the seventh and eighth beasts/kingdoms are the same kingdom but only the seventh beast/kingdom has a king. It stands to reason that it is set up by either the seventh or eighth kingdom.
Rev 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
He (the kingdom) blasphemes the tabernacle by his words. It doesn’t say by setting up an idol.
Rev 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live
It is a result of the second beast that comes up out of the earth in Rev13 that an image is built. While an image can be an idol it can also be something as simple as a photograph, a likeness, representation, resemblance.
Can you see that abomination standing? Doesn’t Daniel tell us the abomination is set up on the wing and will be there until the end? If it is there to the end we should be able to see it.
And on a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
As you wish. Jesus said it would stand in a holy place, the wing as Daniel calls it is an extremity(not the inner sanctum) of the temple is a holy place. We cannot limit it to the inner sanctum When Daniel tells us it is on the wing.
You say the beasts are kings based on your understanding, yet God’s inspired word tells us beasts are kingdoms. I’ll take the definition God’s inspired word gives.
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon……
4 - Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
How many Gentile kingdoms are there according to John?
8 - Rev 17:11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition
Why not give it a rest for a day or two and let your frustration level drop a little before this conversation loses all resemblance to a civil conversation. In the meantime reexamine what has been said in light of the Scriptures (not your doctrine) and then if you would like to continue by all means let’s continue.
E
See this is why we can't discuss. I never claimed that beast did not represent a kingdom. It always does. But a kingdom is always defined by whoever is ruler at the time. This is the part your are not seeing.
Funny how scripture states this man (whatever you call him) will be cast into the lake of fire with the false prophet at the same time satan is cast into the bottomless pit for 1000 years. I c=guess this is all mythology too??
There are many antiChrists. but there will be one who will be chief of all antichrist. He is called the son of perdition, the beast, and many names. he will take power and rule the world, and cause utter chaos. Until he is destroyed.
Satan gave him his supernatural power. God allowed it did he not? which means God gave him the ability to do what he did. God did not stop him.
Why do you want to twist things??Try reading what I am saying, and understand what it is!~
Sorry. Daniel said their would be four beasts in succession. Rome would be the last beast. If rome is said to be the last Gentile power. then to say otherwise is to contradict scripture.
40 And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others. 41 Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. 44 And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. 45 Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold—the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure.”
So where is the fifth kingdom? Daniel makes it clerar. The last one destroys the first three. But itself is broke in peaces. scatters. has many toes. As we will find out later, these are many kings.
‘ The fourth beast shall be
A fourth kingdom on earth,
Which shall be different from all other kingdoms,
And shall devour the whole earth,
Trample it and break it in pieces.
24 The ten horns are ten kings
Who shall arise from this kingdom.
And another shall rise after them;
He shall be different from the first ones,
And shall subdue three kings.
25 He shall speak pompous words against the Most High,
Shall persecute[d] the saints of the Most High,
And shall intend to change times and law.
Then the saints shall be given into his hand
For a time and times and half a time.
26 ‘ But the court shall be seated,
And they shall take away his dominion,
To consume and destroy it forever.
27 Then the kingdom and dominion,
And the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven,
Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High.
His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,
And all dominions shall serve and obey Him.’
Again we see the fourth beast. Here are your kings. 10 kings arise form this kingdom (which was split just like the first vision of the last beast said it would be. the ten toes) Another king will arise, and subdue 3 of the kings. This leaves 8 kings. And the one who comes out makes 8. This is the one who will commit blapshemies. Commit the abomination. and be in power when the king of King comes.
why are you fighting this??
I just did!
I just did in Daniel. this is the man who does what Daniel said he would do. Subdue three kings. Then commit all kinds of blasphemies, until Christ comes and takes his power. Prophesy must be taken together. In daniel alone there are two prophesies concerning the 4 beasts (egntile empires) there are many more all throughout scripture. You need to put them all together to get the picture.
the verses you just posted show that the man of sin will do what Daniels second prophesy said he would do. And where does he come from? the first three?? No the final beast. rome!
M
Doctrinally based arguments do not trump the word of God!
God which according to Scripture is the Word. (John1;1)
God which according to Scripture is unchanging (Mal3:6 and Hebrew13:8)
So based on Scripture God/Word is unchanging. The unchanging God/Word says beasts are kingdoms, The unchanging God/ Word says antichrists are those who deny Christ/God and there are many .
Yet you insist beast is another name for the Antichrist. In addition you insist Antichrist is an individual world leader. For your belief to be true the unchanging God/Word would have to change. God/Word does not change your belief is in error and makes the word of God of none effect by requiring the unchanging God/Word to change so you can force fit Scripture to your doctrine. You can jump through all the hoops you want to try and change a beast to the antichrist but your explanation will fall short God/Word does not change. If you want to believe God/Word changes so you can cling to your doctrine then as you are led friend as you are led!
God which according to Scripture is the Word. (John1;1)
God which according to Scripture is unchanging (Mal3:6 and Hebrew13:8)
So based on Scripture God/Word is unchanging. The unchanging God/Word says beasts are kingdoms, The unchanging God/ Word says antichrists are those who deny Christ/God and there are many .
Yet you insist beast is another name for the Antichrist. In addition you insist Antichrist is an individual world leader. For your belief to be true the unchanging God/Word would have to change. God/Word does not change your belief is in error and makes the word of God of none effect by requiring the unchanging God/Word to change so you can force fit Scripture to your doctrine. You can jump through all the hoops you want to try and change a beast to the antichrist but your explanation will fall short God/Word does not change. If you want to believe God/Word changes so you can cling to your doctrine then as you are led friend as you are led!
E
you have been shown many parts of scripture which speak of a future world leader. whether you chose to accept these passages or not is beyond the point. You have not proven that there will not be a future leader. you just speculate. Your saying the world of God does not change does not help your position. Scripture is clear what this leader will do.
M
No I have been shown the verses you interpret as having a future world leader.
It’s not that I don’t believe the Scriptures, it’s just your interpretation I don’t believe.
You are the one that insists there will be, the burden of proof is on you.
I said antichrist is a spirit or individual that denies Christ/God and there are many. And back it up with the only 4 verses in Scripture that uses the term antichrist or antichrists.
1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1Jn 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jn 1:7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
You’re the one that insists there will be a “the Antichrist” the burden of proof is on you.
I said beasts are kingdoms. And backed it up withDan7:23 which tells us beast are kingdoms and history proves God's Word true with Daniel’s beasts, the lion was Babylon, the bear Medo-Persia, and the leopard was Greece.
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces
You are the one who says the beast is “the Antichrist” the burden of proof is on you.
No using the definition’s the unchanging God/Word gives in the Scriptures is not speculation.
It doesn’t? Then maybe you can show us where the unchanging God/Word changed the definition of a beast to “the Antichrist” or maybe you could show us the verse in Scripture where the unchanging God/Word changed the definition of antichrist from many that deny Christ/God to an individual world leader.
Scripture is clear what this beast/ kingdom will do.
It’s not that I don’t believe the Scriptures, it’s just your interpretation I don’t believe.
You are the one that insists there will be, the burden of proof is on you.
I said antichrist is a spirit or individual that denies Christ/God and there are many. And back it up with the only 4 verses in Scripture that uses the term antichrist or antichrists.
1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1Jn 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jn 1:7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
You’re the one that insists there will be a “the Antichrist” the burden of proof is on you.
I said beasts are kingdoms. And backed it up withDan7:23 which tells us beast are kingdoms and history proves God's Word true with Daniel’s beasts, the lion was Babylon, the bear Medo-Persia, and the leopard was Greece.
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces
You are the one who says the beast is “the Antichrist” the burden of proof is on you.
No using the definition’s the unchanging God/Word gives in the Scriptures is not speculation.
It doesn’t? Then maybe you can show us where the unchanging God/Word changed the definition of a beast to “the Antichrist” or maybe you could show us the verse in Scripture where the unchanging God/Word changed the definition of antichrist from many that deny Christ/God to an individual world leader.
Scripture is clear what this beast/ kingdom will do.
P
In the Bible He’s known as a dragon.
He’s known as a beast.
He’s known as a king a man the little horn.
Are Christian forefathers named him the Antichrist.
Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Revelation13: 4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who [is] like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty [and] two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
Daniel 7:8I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another LITTLE horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this HORN [were] eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
Daniel 7:11I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the HORN spake: I beheld [even] till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
Daniel 7:20And of the ten horns that [were] in his head, and [of] the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even [of] that HORN that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look [was] more stout than his fellows.
Daniel 7:21I beheld, and the same HORN made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
2 Thessalonians Chapter 2 1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and [by] our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
He’s known as a beast.
He’s known as a king a man the little horn.
Are Christian forefathers named him the Antichrist.
Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Revelation13: 4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who [is] like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty [and] two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
Daniel 7:8I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another LITTLE horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this HORN [were] eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
Daniel 7:11I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the HORN spake: I beheld [even] till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
Daniel 7:20And of the ten horns that [were] in his head, and [of] the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even [of] that HORN that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look [was] more stout than his fellows.
Daniel 7:21I beheld, and the same HORN made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
2 Thessalonians Chapter 2 1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and [by] our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
M
Actually there are many and they have been in the world since John first wrote about them.
1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1Jn 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
We already know wo antichrists are if we accept what Scripture says. It is a spirit or individual that denies Christ/God.
1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1Jn 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
We already know wo antichrists are if we accept what Scripture says. It is a spirit or individual that denies Christ/God.
L
To take the place of Jesus Christ, is not falling short. It is Blaspemy, and it is utter rebellion towards God. The Pope in their own words is in the place of Jesus on this earth, and higher than Him, and higher than Gods word. They believe that the Pope has the right and authority to change and overrule the word.
The Total Onslaught series by Walter Veith, is the most researched and well presented series on end times that I have every seen. And I believe that if watched from start to finish, (37 Sessions) or at least from the start, through to this video ive posted, you might have a different perspective.
The Total Onslaught series by Walter Veith, is the most researched and well presented series on end times that I have every seen. And I believe that if watched from start to finish, (37 Sessions) or at least from the start, through to this video ive posted, you might have a different perspective.
