Daniel 11:37, The Future Antichrist Will Be A Jew/Hebrew In Decent

  • 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.

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,697
13,514
113
Daniel 11:37 actually says: "He shall pay no attention to the gods [’ĕ·lō·hê, plural] of his fathers. . ." To me this suggests a pagan background.
compare Deuteronomy 4:35 --

Unto thee it was shewed,
that thou mightest know that the LORD He is God;
there is none else beside Him.

in the Hebrew 'God' there is Elohim, plural, but 'LORD' and 'Him' are singular.
iirc Hebrew sometimes uses plurality to indicate greatness, not necessarily quality. like the 'royal we' in English
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
7,093
2,126
113
I have my own idea of who the antichrist will be, I mean is, but since this thread's assertion is that he will be a Jew with the support that Jews are looking for their Messiah (that is the religious ones because there are secular "Jews" also) and, even though they missed (or, if you will, 'rejected') Him the first time, is it possible that their acceptance of Him (Jesus) is, in fact, what Romans 11:15 touches on...? I think so, yes, even as many, if not most, will be quick to say, "it's speaking to God's rejection of them, not their rejection of Him," although I think it not unreasonable to regard these two as commensurate.

Romans 11:15 For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Dan 9
And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.


1. The man of sin will be from the people who destroyed Jerusalem.Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman army in 70 AD. Hence the man of sin will be from the Roman Empire or the final gentile kingdom which we are told in Dan 2 and 7 will be destroyed by Christ himself at his return


27 Then he shall confirm a [k]covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the [l]desolate.”


this prince will confirm a covenant with many, in the middle of the week he will commit the abomination of desolation where where we are told he sets an idol in the sanctuary, and people can see this idle. At which time Christ tells the, to run

Matt 24: 15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ 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[c]elect’s sake those days will be shortened.

the days are shortened by the return of Christ to crush the statue of the nebachadnezzar dream (Dan 2) and the final beast of daniels vision. In Dan 7

dan 2 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 [n]break in pieces and [o]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

dan 7
23 “Thus he said:

‘The fourth beast shall be
A fourth kingdom on earth,
Which shall be different from all otherkingdoms,
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[j] 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.’
 
Apr 26, 2021
495
151
43
ok, so, you believe Michael is more or less another name for Christ? pointing to things like 1 Thessalonians 4:16m that He will return with "the voice of an archangel" ?

and i get how you're saying Luke 2 is solved - the same way John 17 is, because God fully dwells in Jesus, but Jesus is praying to God there - the answer is partially in that He is doing this, as His whole earthly ministry, for our benefit - to be heard and seen as a witness and an example to us, and partially in His triune nature; we are seeing His mercy & His justice communing, just like the smoking lamp & burning furnace in Genesis 15.

iirc the JW's believe Michael & Christ are not the same, but they think that Michael switched places with Christ at the cross, so that it was Michael who died there, not Christ, because they say, a god cannot die, but an angel can - and they call Christ 'a god' not the God in the flesh ((re-writing John 1)). so they say it was Christ who re-entered the body of Jesus at the resurrection after leaving Him and being temporarily replaced by Michael.


so, you're not JW, right? ;)
I am not JW or any other religious affiliation. You will all have me at a disadvantage discussing these other factors because I know nothing about them.

But, I'm honestly not even that literate in theology to have such worldly understandings. The reason, and only reason I believe Michael the Arch Angel is Jesus is because of the definition of arch angel. I believe Jesus is the chief messenger. He's the source I learn doctrine.

And just for interest's sake, I'll cut and paste the Strongs definition of Michael.

The "one who stands in time of conflict for the children of Israel" is there one other than Jesus who stands for Israel? Is there one other than Jesus who stands in the breach?

  1. Michael = "who is like God"
    1. one of, the chief, or the first archangel who is described as the one who stands in time of conflict for the children of Israel
    2. an Asherite, father of Sethur, one of the 12 spies of Israel
    3. one of the Gadites who settled in the land of Bashan
    4. another Gadite, ancestor of Abihail
    5. a Gershonite Levite, ancestor of Asaph
    6. one of the 5 sons of Izrahiah of the tribe of Issachar
    7. a Benjamite of the sons of Beriah
    8. one of the captains from Manasseh who joined David at Ziklag
    9. father or ancestor of Omri, chief of the tribe of Issachar in the reign of David
    10. one of the sons of Jehoshaphat who were murdered by their elder brother, Jehoram
    11. father or ancestor of Zebadiah, of the sons of Shephatiah
 
Apr 26, 2021
495
151
43
Does it not bother you that the belief that Michael is Jesus was never articulated by any Christian for over 1,870 years after Christ’s death? You can’t honestly believe that it would take that long for the Billions of Christians throughout history to come to that conclusion if that is indeed the truth?
It doesn't bother me because I learn truth from the chief messenger.

Are you bothered by what other people think? Does worldly opinion influence you?
 
Apr 26, 2021
495
151
43
I'm not trying to play word games. If by messenger you mean Jesus is Someone with a message then yes I agree.

But according to Hebrews 1 and many other verses, Jesus is much more than a messenger, but rather God Himself and is not an angel.

I reject that Jesus (the Son, the Word) is an archangel known as Michael. The Son of God is an integral part of the Godhead. Where does Michael fit into the Godhead?

I'm sticking with Hebrews 1. Slam dunk.

What verses are you sticking with that says Jesus is Michael the archangel? Enlighten me.
I'm sticking with the definition of arch angel. That definition identifies Jesus.

Where does David fit into the Godhead? You don't seem to mind that Jesus is called David in some places. What about Emmanuel? Where does that name fit into the Godhead?

If you don't resist other names, why do you resist one name that specifically identifies Jesus Christ? You will admit he's "much more than a messenger" but you won't admit he's the chief messenger or the arch angel.

I don't perceive you believe that Jesus is even a messenger. If you did, you'd understand he's the chief messenger.
 
Mar 4, 2020
8,614
3,691
113
I'm sticking with the definition of arch angel. That definition identifies Jesus.
The definition of archangel is a high ranking angel. Jesus is not an angel so He doesn't fit that definition.

Jesus is better than angels:
Hebrews 1:4
4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Where does David fit into the Godhead? You don't seem to mind that Jesus is called David in some places. What about Emmanuel Where does that name fit into the Godhead?
Where in the Bible is Jesus referred to as David?

The name Emmanuel (Matthew 1:23) means God is with us (not an archangel is with us) and that is a Biblical description of Jesus.

If you don't resist other names, why do you resist one name that specifically identifies Jesus Christ? You will admit he's "much more than a messenger" but you won't admit he's the chief messenger or the arch angel.
Archangel is not a name, but rather a rank in the angelic army. Michael is a name and Jesus is never referred to as either archangel or Michael because neither of those descriptors fit Him.

I don't perceive you believe that Jesus is even a messenger. If you did, you'd understand he's the chief messenger.
Jesus has a message called the Gospel, but He isn't Michael the archangel. Having a message doesn't mean they're the same individual. Everyone has a message but retain their individual identity.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,742
3,670
113
My sentiments regarding Jesus as Michael the Arch Angel...

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Titus 3:10 (KJV)
 

GodMyFortress

Active member
May 9, 2021
432
60
28
It doesn't bother me because I learn truth from the chief messenger.

Are you bothered by what other people think? Does worldly opinion influence you?
There is a legitimate reason why it would bother me. If Michael was actually Jesus, that would be a huge deal. It would practically reconfigure our entire understanding of God. If what you believe is actually true Christian Orthodoxy taught by the apostles, there is no possible way at least one early Christian wouldn’t of wrote about it. That would be too significant a detail about Christianity to be evaded by every pen for 1,870 years. That is unless you’re claiming to be a prophet that is revealing something no one else knew. Hence, what the JW do claim.
 
Apr 26, 2021
495
151
43
There is a legitimate reason why it would bother me. If Michael was actually Jesus, that would be a huge deal. It would practically reconfigure our entire understanding of God. If what you believe is actually true Christian Orthodoxy taught by the apostles, there is no possible way at least one early Christian wouldn’t of wrote about it. That would be too significant a detail about Christianity to be evaded by every pen for 1,870 years. That is unless you’re claiming to be a prophet that is revealing something no one else knew. Hence, what the JW do claim.
Who is a more chief messenger than Jesus?
 
Apr 26, 2021
495
151
43
The definition of archangel is a high ranking angel. Jesus is not an angel so He doesn't fit that definition.

Jesus is better than angels:
Hebrews 1:4
4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.



Where in the Bible is Jesus referred to as David?

The name Emmanuel (Matthew 1:23) means God is with us (not an archangel is with us) and that is a Biblical description of Jesus.



Archangel is not a name, but rather a rank in the angelic army. Michael is a name and Jesus is never referred to as either archangel or Michael because neither of those descriptors fit Him.



Jesus has a message called the Gospel, but He isn't Michael the archangel. Having a message doesn't mean they're the same individual. Everyone has a message but retain their individual identity.
Archangel = archangel, or chief of the angels.

angel =
  1. messenger, representative
    1. messenger
    2. angel
    3. the theophanic angel
Now tell me, who is chief of the angels?
 
Apr 26, 2021
495
151
43
I respect your question but I need to understand something from you first...Who is the chief messenger, the deliverer of the message or the originator of the message?
I see no difference.

I will tell you why I see no difference.

Because I read the bible and I know the words originate from the Lord and as I read them, they are delivered to me from the originator. So, the originator of the message is the one that is delivering that same message to me as I read the words in the bible.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
Correct. There are a huge number of reasons why this is false. So when some realized how false this is they changed it to "the papacy" (which is still incorrect).

The Antichrist must be a renegade Jew, since he must present himself to Orthodox Jews as Messiah. They are waiting for Messiah, since they rejected the true Messiah. To the world, he will be the miracle-worker who rivals Christ. And since God will send strong delusion, the world will be deceived.
Your response is spot on, the Jews are waiting for a Messiah from the lineage of David, and yes they are dedicated to genealogy records, scripture clearly shows hes going to be a renegade against the historical hebrew customs

The many claims of a Pope, Muslim, Syrian, etc are absurd

The Future Antichrist Is Going To Be A Jew/Hebrew in Ancestry, As Scripture Clearly Teaches
 

Rondonmon

Senior Member
May 13, 2016
1,304
183
63
Your response is spot on, the Jews are waiting for a Messiah from the lineage of David, and yes they are dedicated to genealogy records, scripture clearly shows hes going to be a renegade against the historical hebrew customs

The many claims of a Pope, Muslim, Syrian, etc are absurd

The Future Antichrist Is Going To Be A Jew/Hebrew in Ancestry, As Scripture Clearly Teaches
Once again, the Jews are mostly not religious now. The 1/3 that REPENT accept Jesus Christ BEFORE the coming DOTL, and that is when the Anti-Chriost goes forth Conquering. On the DOTL. Thus, the only Messiah the Jews accept is Jesus, they create an AGREEMENT with the Anti-Christ, as does all of the Mediterranean Sea Region. These anti-religious Jews do;t even believe in God. You get this in your mind, and it's like locked in for the long haul, but it's not factual.

Hes not a pope, he's not Muslim, he's not Syria, he's Assyrian by blood, they aren't the same. Hes born in Greece, the bible says he is, and he's a European via his power base, the bible says he is. You're wanting him to be a Jew it seems, but that doesn't cut it.
 

GodMyFortress

Active member
May 9, 2021
432
60
28
I see no difference.

I will tell you why I see no difference.

Because I read the bible and I know the words originate from the Lord and as I read them, they are delivered to me from the originator. So, the originator of the message is the one that is delivering that same message to me as I read the words in the bible.
Well then God the father is also Michael then according to that reasoning. It’s just not a sound or historical belief. Like I said before, the only other person that first came to believe what you do had to claim to be a prophet because he knew his understanding wasn’t shared by anyone else in history.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Archangel = archangel, or chief of the angels.

angel =
  1. messenger, representative
    1. messenger
    2. angel
    3. the theophanic angel
Now tell me, who is chief of the angels?
If you think it is Jesus you would be wrong

He is ABOVE the angels.. He is also the creator. No angel created anything