The official doctrine of the Antichrist / king / leader in the end

[1Christianwarrior316]

Got it. In the greek the word is exothen. here is the defenition

ἔξωθεν, adv., (fr. ἔξω, opp. to ἔσωθεν fr. ἔσω; cf. ἄνωθεν, πόρρωθε&#957, from without, outward, [cf. W. 472 (440)];
1. adverbially: (outwardly), Mt. 23:27 sq.; Mk. 7:18; 2 Co. 7:5; τὸ ἔξωθεν, the outside, the exterior,


Thayer, J. H. (1889). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (226). New York: Harper & Brothers.

ἔξωθεν, Adv. (ἔξ&#969 from without, Trag., Plat., etc.:—c. gen., ἔξ. δόμων from without the house, Eur.
II. = ἔξω, Hdt., Plat., etc.; οἱ ἔξωθεν foreigners, Hdt.; τὰ ἔξωθεν matters outside the house,


Liddell, H. (1996). A lexicon : Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English lexicon (277). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

2033 ἔξωθεν (exōthen): prep. (never compounded with verbs)or adv. of place; ≡ DBLHebr 2575; Str 1855—1. LN 84.15 from outside (Mk 7:18); 2. LN 83.20 outside, apart from (Rev 14:20); 3. LN 83.21 the outside of, a surface or object (Mt 23:25, 27; Lk 11:39, 40); 4. LN 11.10 ὁ ἔξωθεν (ho exōthen), outsider, one not in a group (1Ti 3:7+)

Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

as we can see. You used an old english translation. Saying something is without somethin in old english, means it is outside of the temple.

Thats why we should not use the KJV, no one speaks that language today. so we can easily confuse what is rely said and mistranslate, as you did.

There is no mistranslation here or a need to not use the Kings James Version.
Let us compare.
Rev 11:2
(KJV) 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.
(ASV) And the court which is without the temple leave without, and measure it not; for it hath been given unto the nations: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
(CEV) But don't measure the courtyard outside the temple building. Leave it out. It has been given to those people who don't know God, and they will trample all over the holy city for forty-two months.
(ESV) but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months.
(GNB) But do not measure the outer courts, because they have been given to the heathen, who will trample on the Holy City for forty-two months.
(GW) But do not measure the temple courtyard. Leave that out, because it is given to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for 42 months.
(ISV) But don't measure the courtyard outside the temple. Leave that out, because it is given to the nations, and they will trample the Holy City for forty-two months.
(KJV+) But2532 the3588 court833 which is without1855 the3588 temple3485 leave1544 out,1854 and2532 measure3354 it846 not;3361 for3754 it is given1325 unto the3588 Gentiles:1484 and2532 the3588 holy40 city4172 shall they tread under foot3961 forty and two5062, 1417 months.3376
(LITV) And cast aside the outside court of the temple, and do not measure it. For it was given to the nations, and they will trample the holy city forty two months.
(MKJV) But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it was given to the nations. And they will trample the holy city forty-two months.
(RV) And the court which is without the temple leave without, and measure it not; for it hath been given unto the nations: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
(NIV) But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.
The newer versions are in agreement with the Kings James Version and in no way gives us a reason not to rely on it.

The doctrine you espouse is based on the teachings of the Jesuit Priest Francisco Ribera.
Ribera who is called the father of futurism brought forth doctrine that the fathers of the Reformation so vehemently condemned. While Ribera taught this futurist view others added upon this doctrine which is commonly being taught today. Can you imagine how the fathers of the Reformation would feel today seeing the doctrine that they rejected being commonly taught in the churches today? It would be wise of every Christian to research the doctrine they hold to make sure they are not following the precepts of man. We have been warned about unsound doctrine entering the church to itching ears that want to fulfill their own lusts. And seeing many Christians walking after the flesh these days, and not walking in the Spirit, we know that unsound doctrine has caused the condition of the churches to be in poor spiritual health indeed.

In Christ, 1Christianwarrior316
　

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Now you are accusing me of mistranslating, what a joke. I fully understand that the court is not in the temple but I think you totally missed the point I was making. Rev11:2 tells us that Jerusalem is a holy city. A city is a place. So an abomination standing on the temple mount (which is in Jerusalem) is standing in a holy place.

No, The only way you could even assume this is if you assume there is no temple. Which is what I thought when you posted that verse which said without a temple.

The passage makes it clear. there is a temple there, otherwise there would be no court "outside the temple"

Didn’t you say in an earlier post it was in the temple? See post # 52
( http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/40441-official-doctrine-antichrist-king-leader-end-3.html#post689341 )
“who see the abomination in the future temple.”
Or how about post#56 ( http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...-antichrist-king-leader-end-3.html#post689753 )
“The temple is there, the abomination sits inside the temple.”
Now let’s look at Dan9:26-27 again and look at the order of events.
Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for
himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the
sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war
desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Daniel tells us the city and the sanctuary are destroyed before the abomination. If the sanctuary (temple) is destroyed before the abomination it cannot be in the temple. So it makes perfect sense that with Jerusalem being a holy city which is a place an abomination standing on the temple mount is an abomination standing in a holy place.

You did even try to respond to the events I posted. So how can I respond to this?

I already showed you how. there is ample time for a temple to be rebuilt. Daniel showed many things would occure between the destruction and the abomination, The "wars desolations are still happening, and their are rumors of more wars (think Iran and Isreal wanting to destroy it nuclear facilities, and the possible war which would probably follow)

all these things must take place before the covenant is confirms.

What covenant has been confirmed for one weeK?? You have not even answered that.

In addition the events of 70 AD while horrific did not destroy the city or leave it desolate. The Christians went unharmed and even the Jews survived in numbers large enough that the Romans came back in 132-135 and whacked another 650,000 or so Jews. And let’s not forget that in the olivette discourse we are told:

Mat 24:21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
If the events of70AD were the fulfillment then there would be no greater tribulation after that, it could never be more desolate then it was after those events. Yet approximately 550 - 600 years later when the muslims hit Jerusalem they did destroy the city and left it more desolate then any other time in Jerusalem’s history leaving it’s population as low as 550 people while under Islamic control. Turning Jerusalem into a literal desert waste land (even the trees were cut down). While the events of 70AD were horrific they pale in comparison.

No point arguing about it I have thoroughly studied the futurist doctrine and reject it. Can you honestly say you have thoroughly studied the doctrine I hold? If not, why not set your doctrinal filter aside and examine it in light of what Scripture says and history proves.
Read about it HERE
Be blessed my friend.

lol.. Great tribulation. You forgot a huge tribulation which was far greater than even the two you mentioned. You forgot Hitler, and WW2 which up to date is the greatest tribulation this world has ever seen. You forgot the fact that Jesus said during this time, he would have to return and put a stop to it, because if he did not "no flesh would survive" (which was not even possible during WW2,) meaning he is not just talking of jersualem, but a tribulation which is worldwide in scope.

you forget all these things, then you want me to give you some creadance and look at what your saying? I can't because they don't add up.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

There is no mistranslation here or a need to not use the Kings James Version.
Let us compare.
Rev 11:2
(KJV) 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.
(ASV) And the court which is without the temple leave without, and measure it not; for it hath been given unto the nations: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
(CEV) But don't measure the courtyard outside the temple building. Leave it out. It has been given to those people who don't know God, and they will trample all over the holy city for forty-two months.
(ESV) but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months.
(GNB) But do not measure the outer courts, because they have been given to the heathen, who will trample on the Holy City for forty-two months.
(GW) But do not measure the temple courtyard. Leave that out, because it is given to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for 42 months.
(ISV) But don't measure the courtyard outside the temple. Leave that out, because it is given to the nations, and they will trample the Holy City for forty-two months.
(KJV+) But2532 the3588 court833 which is without1855 the3588 temple3485 leave1544 out,1854 and2532 measure3354 it846 not;3361 for3754 it is given1325 unto the3588 Gentiles:1484 and2532 the3588 holy40 city4172 shall they tread under foot3961 forty and two5062, 1417 months.3376
(LITV) And cast aside the outside court of the temple, and do not measure it. For it was given to the nations, and they will trample the holy city forty two months.
(MKJV) But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it was given to the nations. And they will trample the holy city forty-two months.
(RV) And the court which is without the temple leave without, and measure it not; for it hath been given unto the nations: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
(NIV) But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.
The newer versions are in agreement with the Kings James Version and in no way gives us a reason not to rely on it.

The doctrine you espouse is based on the teachings of the Jesuit Priest Francisco Ribera.
Ribera who is called the father of futurism brought forth doctrine that the fathers of the Reformation so vehemently condemned. While Ribera taught this futurist view others added upon this doctrine which is commonly being taught today. Can you imagine how the fathers of the Reformation would feel today seeing the doctrine that they rejected being commonly taught in the churches today? It would be wise of every Christian to research the doctrine they hold to make sure they are not following the precepts of man. We have been warned about unsound doctrine entering the church to itching ears that want to fulfill their own lusts. And seeing many Christians walking after the flesh these days, and not walking in the Spirit, we know that unsound doctrine has caused the condition of the churches to be in poor spiritual health indeed.

In Christ, 1Christianwarrior316
　

1. If I read today, that there is a court without the temple. I could easily mistranslate it to mean there is no temple. so yes this is dangerous. I grew up on KJV, so I understand it. But many of my friends did not grow up churched. when they read the KJV they can't understand it. We do not speak that way, why add confusion and allow satan to use it to keep people from God?

2. I don't follow men. I never even heard of the man your speaking of. I got my belief by studying scripture over many many years.
3. WHy should I worry about what a reformer said? Is my salvation based on what they believed? I should be more worried about what Daniel believed, what The apostles believed, and people like Ezekial, Jeremiah and Isaiah, who were given these prophesies concerning the end times.

 

[doulos]

No, The only way you could even assume this is if you assume there is no temple. Which is what I thought when you posted that verse which said without a temple.

The passage makes it clear. there is a temple there, otherwise there would be no court "outside the temple"

Obviously the court left out and given to the Gentiles is of significant importance or it would not have been mentioned. Remember this is a vision and God can use anything in a vision to get his point across. The easiest way to show John this significant location would be to show him the temple he was familiar with, the one that was destroyed in 70AD. Take a moment and consider this in light of Eze42:20
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.

You did even try to respond to the events I posted. So how can I respond to this?
I already showed you how. there is ample time for a temple to be rebuilt. Daniel showed many things would occure between the destruction and the abomination, The "wars desolations are still happening, and their are rumors of more wars (think Iran and Isreal wanting to destroy it nuclear facilities, and the possible war which would probably follow)

all these things must take place before the covenant is confirms.

What covenant has been confirmed for one weeK?? You have not even answered that.

I am assuming you meant didn’t even try and you are right I didn’t. I chose not to respond because I am not interested in writing a book. There is far to much written in Scripture about this to attempt to cover it all in one post, which is why I provided a link that shows what and why I believe.




lol.. Great tribulation. You forgot a huge tribulation which was far greater than even the two you mentioned. You forgot Hitler, and WW2 which up to date is the greatest tribulation this world has ever seen. You forgot the fact that Jesus said during this time, he would have to return and put a stop to it, because if he did not "no flesh would survive" (which was not even possible during WW2,) meaning he is not just talking of jersualem, but a tribulation which is worldwide in scope.

you forget all these things, then you want me to give you some creadance and look at what your saying? I can't because they don't add up. [/quote]

Your assumption is false, but of course you would have known that if you would have taken the time to check out the link provided. I believe the time of great tribulation began when the abomination of desolation (dome of the rock 688AD) is set up and those in Judeae are told to flee. This is a 1260 day period. Taking a day for a year (the doctrine held by the majority of the church until the futurists doctrines became popular) starting with 688 and going forward to 1948 would include the most desolate period of Jerusalem’s history and the worst persecution (the holocaust) the Jews had ever seen. Once again might I suggest you actually take a little time and objectively examine the information provided in the link I posted earlier. Your criticism is based on your not understanding the view I hold and results in you making false assumptions. As I said before I have thoroughly studied the futurist doctrine (pre, mid and post trib variations) and reject them. You on the other or rejecting a view you have not studied and do not understand and as a result make false assumptions about that view.

If you want to honestly and intelligently discuss the merits of a view you must first take the time to gain an understanding about it, That eliminates one from making false assumptions, eliminating the need for the other side to constantly be correcting your false assumptions about what the other believes. No sense arguing about this as you say our salvation does not depend on it. Be blessed my friend and may God bless your studies.

 

[doulos]

1. If I read today, that there is a court without the temple. I could easily mistranslate it to mean there is no temple. so yes this is dangerous.

Actually I believe the danger lies in believing in a man made temple.
Act 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,
Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
The temple of God is not a man made building.
1Co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth
in you?
1Co 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
2Co 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Eph 2:19-21 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens
with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the
apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the
building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
Heb 8:1-2 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an
high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

I can understand a Jew who has been given the spirit of slumber wanting a man made temple but as Christians we should understand the true temple of God is the body of the believer or the collective body of believers, not some man made building.

I grew up on KJV, so I understand it. But many of my friends did not grow up churched. when they read the KJV they can't understand it. We do not speak that way, why add confusion and allow satan to use it to keep people from God?

Surely you jest, or I am misunderstanding. Are you really suggesting that satan uses the KJV to confuse people and keep them from God?

2. I don't follow men. I never even heard of the man your speaking of. I got my belief by studying scripture over many many years.

Yet the view you espouse is commonly taught and is a derived from the view originally authored by Ribera.

3. WHy should I worry about what a reformer said? Is my salvation based on what they believed?

Ribera was not a reformer he was a Jesuit who’s mission was to counter the reformers. No your salvation does not depend on what they believed, nor do I recall anyone suggesting that. On the other hand as a Christian it is our duty to study and rightly divide the word of truth which includes studying and understanding what those of the former ages believed.
Job 8:8 For enquire, I pray thee, of the former age, and prepare thyself to the search of their fathers:
We wouldn’t have been told to study the doctrines those of the former ages held if it wasn’t important. Not all from the former ages agreed but by studying what they said we may gather a piece of the puzzle here and another piece there so that in the end we are armed with the knowledge required to rightly divide the word of truth.

I should be more worried about what Daniel believed, what The apostles believed, and people like Ezekial, Jeremiah and Isaiah, who were given these prophesies concerning the end times.

Exactly which is why we should honestly and objectively (in other words turn off our doctrinal filters) examine all the different doctrines. If we don’t we risk following a traditionally taught doctrine that may be in error, which would be doing exactly what Christ warned against in Mark7:13.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Obviously the court left out and given to the Gentiles is of significant importance or it would not have been mentioned. Remember this is a vision and God can use anything in a vision to get his point across. The easiest way to show John this significant location would be to show him the temple he was familiar with, the one that was destroyed in 70AD. Take a moment and consider this in light of Eze42:20
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.

Obviously the fact that the temple is mentioned (considering the court is outside the temple) it is important to believe that fact that a physical temple is present.

if there is no temple, there is no court outside the temple to have, there would be no court period

I am assuming you meant didn’t even try and you are right I didn’t. I chose not to respond because I am not interested in writing a book. There is far to much written in Scripture about this to attempt to cover it all in one post, which is why I provided a link that shows what and why I believe.

Your assumption is false, but of course you would have known that if you would have taken the time to check out the link provided. I believe the time of great tribulation began when the abomination of desolation (dome of the rock 688AD) is set up and those in Judeae are told to flee. .

15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’[c] spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.


I don't have to read anything to learn why I am wrong.. all I have to do is look at scripture. Jesus said those days were not shortened, no flesh would survive, This was not possible until about 50 years ago with the advent of nuclear weapons. So anyone who says it happened before this time period, you can bring all the proof you want, I will not believe it, because it is impossible it happened.

 

[1Christianwarrior316]

Obviously the fact that the temple is mentioned (considering the court is outside the temple) it is important to believe that fact that a physical temple is present.

if there is no temple, there is no court outside the temple to have, there would be no court period




15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’[c] spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.


I don't have to read anything to learn why I am wrong.. all I have to do is look at scripture. Jesus said those days were not shortened, no flesh would survive, This was not possible until about 50 years ago with the advent of nuclear weapons. So anyone who says it happened before this time period, you can bring all the proof you want, I will not believe it, because it is impossible it happened.

Are you saying that no one survives the tribulation?

1. If I read today, that there is a court without the temple. I could easily mistranslate it to mean there is no temple. so yes this is dangerous. I grew up on KJV, so I understand it. But many of my friends did not grow up churched. when they read the KJV they can't understand it. We do not speak that way, why add confusion and allow satan to use it to keep people from God?

2. I don't follow men. I never even heard of the man your speaking of. I got my belief by studying scripture over many many years.
3. WHy should I worry about what a reformer said? Is my salvation based on what they believed? I should be more worried about what Daniel believed, what The apostles believed, and people like Ezekial, Jeremiah and Isaiah, who were given these prophesies concerning the end times.

Are you insinuating that Satan uses the King James Version to keep people from God?

In Christ, 1Christianwarrior316