Ten Horns of the Leopard-Bear-Lion

  • 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.
T

Therapon

Guest
#22
Mr. Therapon, Another things please. When Revelation said that they worship the dragon (snake), isn't Satan's sole purpose that of being opposed to Christ. Islam, with its moon crest, certainly worship the dragon in his rebellion against the Christ.
I am of the opinion that Islam turned from the the worship of the true God to worshiping the same "moon goddess" the ancient Jews did . . . .

Jeramiah 44:16-18 "As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of Jehovah, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly perform every word that is gone forth out of our mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto her, as we have done, we and our fathers, our kings and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem; for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off burning incense to the queen of heaven, and pouring out drink-offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine."

Again, in my opinion, the god of Islam is that same evil spirit.
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
#23
If I understand you correctly, you believe it is islam's intent to turn the whole world into an Islamic Caliphate under an immaginary 10th Imam who is supposedly going to rise up out of a well and conquor the world. You are right, that is what Moslems believe, but what Moslems believes won't save them. It is what they don't believe about Jesus that has them on the broad road that leadeth to destruction. To quote the Lord Jesus, "If you don't believe that I AM, ye shall die in your sins."
UNLESS you're jewish.

to whom did Jesus say that? Muslims in Jerusalem?
LOL
 
L

Laodicea

Guest
#24
Could yoy be forgetting the two beasts folowing Daniel 7, in Daniel 8 that are out of the Middle East? I know your's is a popular view, but I don't believe there is any biblical support for it. It's one thing to make a doctrinal statement, quite another to prove it from the Bible.
We are clearly told who the beasts are in Daniel 8, there is no guess work.
Daniel 8:20-21 KJV
(20) The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
(21) And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

To say that it is not those nations mentioned is to clearly put your own interpretation into it.
 

Katy-follower

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2011
2,719
155
63
#25
No one is deceived by Islam, except the Muslims themselves. That religion is blatantly against Christ, just like many other religions are. They are not the end times antichrist mentioned, where there will be a man of sin/son of perdition.

Satan is a deceiver. If we look at his characteristics we can see he transforms himself into a holy angel of light. He wears a mask of holiness so that he is not easily detected. He would not show up and wave at everyone :)

Islam is a tool though. Since Satan is the prince of this world you can see his characteristics everywhere. Where there is blatant evil, it can create fear in people and have them running into the arms of a 'savior' to rescue them from it.

Rome has many parts. I believe the religious aspect is the whore, but that leaves the other sides..
 
Jan 17, 2013
612
19
18
#26
"The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits."
Rome is indeed in Rev 17, the whore of Babylon being an apostate Roman church,
If you are implying that Rev 17 speaks of the Roman Catholic Church, understand that Vatican Hill (Latin Collis Vaticanus) is northwest of the Tiber and is NOT one of the Seven Hills of Rome. Likewise, the Pincian Hill (Latin Mons Pincius), to the north, and the Janiculum Hill (Latin Ianiculum), to the west, are not counted among the traditional Seven Hills.

Of the Seven Hills of current Rome, five (Aventine, Caelian, Esquiline, Quirinal and Viminal hills) are populated with monuments, buildings, and parks. The Capitoline now hosts the Municipality of Rome, and the Palatine Hill is an archaeological area. Note that the Vatican hill is not one of the “seven hills” of Rome, as it is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber. So the association of the Roman papacy as the woman is not a strong argument.


I am not saying that is necessarily what you were implying. Just saying.


Often the 7 hills of the book of Revelation are assigned to Rome. So is this the only option?
NO.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
List of cities claimed to be built on seven hills:

Amman, Jordan

Asunción, Paraguay

Bath, England

Cincinnati, OH United States

Edinburgh, Scotland

Istanbul, Turkey

Jerusalem, Israel

Kampala, Uganda

Lisbon, Portugal

Moscow, Russia

Nevada City, United States

Prague, Czech Republic, said to be built on seven or nine hills: Hradčany, Vítkov, (Opyš), Větrov, Skalka, (Emauzy), Vyšehrad, Karlov and Petřín

Providence, Rhode Island, built on Christian Hill, College Hill, Constitution Hill, Federal Hill, Smith Hill, Tockwotten Hill, and Weybosset Hill.

Rome, Italy (not including Vatican hill which is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber.)

Saint-Etienne, France

Seattle, United States

Sheffield, England

Tirumala, India

Worcester, Massachusetts, United States

Plovdiv, Bulgaria

Ceuta , Morocco
 
Last edited:
A

Abiding

Guest
#27
Who were the scribes that put the quran together?
 
L

Laodicea

Guest
#29
"The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits."


If you are implying that Rev 17 speaks of the Roman Catholic Church, understand that Vatican Hill (Latin Collis Vaticanus) is northwest of the Tiber and is NOT one of the Seven Hills of Rome. Likewise, the Pincian Hill (Latin Mons Pincius), to the north, and the Janiculum Hill (Latin Ianiculum), to the west, are not counted among the traditional Seven Hills.

Of the Seven Hills of current Rome, five (Aventine, Caelian, Esquiline, Quirinal and Viminal hills) are populated with monuments, buildings, and parks. The Capitoline now hosts the Municipality of Rome, and the Palatine Hill is an archaeological area. Note that the Vatican hill is not one of the “seven hills” of Rome, as it is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber. So the association of the Roman papacy as the woman is not a strong argument.


I am not saying that is necessarily what you were implying. Just saying.


Often the 7 hills of the book of Revelation are assigned to Rome. So is this the only option?
NO.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
List of cities claimed to be built on seven hills:

Amman, Jordan

Asunción, Paraguay

Bath, England

Cincinnati, OH United States

Edinburgh, Scotland

Istanbul, Turkey

Jerusalem, Israel

Kampala, Uganda

Lisbon, Portugal

Moscow, Russia

Nevada City, United States

Prague, Czech Republic, said to be built on seven or nine hills: Hradčany, Vítkov, (Opyš), Větrov, Skalka, (Emauzy), Vyšehrad, Karlov and Petřín

Providence, Rhode Island, built on Christian Hill, College Hill, Constitution Hill, Federal Hill, Smith Hill, Tockwotten Hill, and Weybosset Hill.

Rome, Italy (not including Vatican hill which is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber.)

Saint-Etienne, France

Seattle, United States

Sheffield, England

Tirumala, India

Worcester, Massachusetts, United States

Plovdiv, Bulgaria

Ceuta , Morocco
Yes there have been many cities with Seven Hills mentioned But the 7 Mountains are symbolic not literal.

Revelation 17:9-10 KJV
(9) And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
(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

iamthelordsforever

Guest
#31
Well sir, in my humble opinion, you may be using your doctrine to interpret Scripture, rather that letting Scripture determine your doctrine. Let's look at that verse one more time and please pay very close attention to the tense of the verbs . . .

Revelation 1:19 "Write the things which thou hast seen (past tense, events that have already happened), and the things which are (events that are happening now), and the things which shall be hereafter (events that will happen in the future)."

We need to stand in John's sandals in 100 A.D. and look at that prophecy from his time. According to Revelation 1:19, some of Revelation is about events that happened before John's time, some of of Revelation is about events are happening during John's time, and some of Revelation is about events that will happen after John's time. Just trust God's Word! Since the Bible says "hast seen, are, and shall be hereafter," believe it.

If we place any of our doctrines above God's Word, it isn't long before we start doubting all of God's Word. So please be careful, younger brother. <smile>
However, that is what you are doing. You have taken one verse and used that verse to interpret the whole of Scripture, purely on a speculation that Jesus was telling John to use what he saw in the past as opposed to what he was currently seeing. All of Revelations is writing about things in the future. That is the truth and anybody who says otherwise is trying to fit Scripture to his particular views. We are not living in the Millennium, considering the fact that Jesus is not here and actively ruling from Jerusalem. Please do not confuse Christians who have not studied Scriptures closely. Sir.
 
T

Therapon

Guest
#32
All of Revelations is writing about things in the future. That is the truth and anybody who says otherwise is trying to fit Scripture to his particular views.
It's never wise to make such a bold statement when it goes directly against a verse in the Bible like Rev 1:19, but I have absolutly no desire to disturb your faith. Go in peace.
 
T

Therapon

Guest
#33
Who were the scribes that put the quran together?
After the famous battle of Aqraba in 632 AD, during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr, many Muslims who knew the Koran by heart were killed. As a result, Umar B. Al-Khattab advised Abu Bakr of the need to compile the Koran into a standardized text. Abu Bakr ordered the compilation to be made by Zaid Ibn Thabit from inscriptions on palm leaves, stones and from the remaining reciters.

When the compilation was done, it was kept by Abu Bakr until his death. His successor, Umar, then took custody of it. Afterward, it came into the possession of Hafsa, one of Muhammad’s widows (a daughter of Umar). The companions of the prophet also did their own compilations and produced other manuscripts for use in various provinces. There were four rival provinces, each using a different text of the Koran.

During the reign of Khalif Uthman (the third Khalifah), reports reached him that in various parts of Syria, Armenia and Iraq, Muslims were reciting the Koran differently from the way it was being recited by Arabian Muslims. Uthman immediately sent for the manuscript in Hafsa’s possession and ordered Zaid Ibn Thabit and three others, Abdullah Ibn Zubair, Said Ibn Al-As and Abdullah Al-Rahman Ibn Harith B. Hisham to make copies of the text and make corrections where necessary. When these were completed, we read that Uthman took violent action regarding other existing Koranic manuscripts:

"Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied and ordered that all the other koranic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts, whole copies, to be burnt." (Sahih al-Bukhari Vol. 6 Page 479).

To eliminate variant readings and contradictions, all other manuscripts were indeed burned, but the Uthmanic edition itself was not perfect and met with a similar fate. When Marwan was governor of Medina, he ordered Hafsa’s manuscript to be destroyed. The only reasonable conclusion one can have is that during Uthman’s time, some of the contradictions in Hafsa’s text were so glaring that a total destruction of it was called for rather than a revision. From then until now, conflicting passages and historical inaccuracies exist within the Koranic texts.

Contrary to Muslim belief, there were more than just language differences between Uthman’s text and the texts which were ordered to be burned. In every case, there were considerable verbal differences between them and the text Uthman determined (by whim) to be the final standardized version of the Koran. These differences were real textual variants and not just language peculiarities as is often taken for granted. In several cases there were words and sentences found in some codices that were missing in others. In other instances, the variants concerned whole clauses and consonantal variants in certain words.

Evidence abounds to this day, that verses, indeed whole passages are missing from the Koran that is in circulation today. For instance, the second Khalifah, Khalif Umar, stated in his life-time that certain verses prescribing stoning for adultery were recited by Prophet Muhammad himself as part of the Koran:

"God sent Muhammad and sent down the scripture to him. Part of what he sent down was the passage on stoning. We read it, we were taught it, and we heeded it. The apostle stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that in time to come men will say that they find no mention of stoning in God’s book and thereby go astray in neglecting an ordinance which God has sent down. Verily, stoning in the book of God is a penalty laid on married men and women who commit adultery." (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah p. 684)

The verse on stoning, no longer to be found in the Koran, is incontrovertible proof that the Koran as it stands today is not the same as the one spoken by Muhammad. What the public does not know is that Jihad has many faces. Jihad is not just slaughtering people for Islam, but it is also a systematic suppression of truth and propagation of lies.
 
T

Therapon

Guest
#34
rabbi scribe slaves of Mohammad whatever value that has.
There have been many revisions and corrections made to what we now know as the Koran. If memory serves (and that is gertting worse by the day), the defrocked monk who first wrote down much of it was named Marino, which is why the Koran contains bits of Jewish fables and early monastic beliefs. The first Muslim scribe to compile the Koran was an Arab named Zaid Ibn Thabit.
 
T

Therapon

Guest
#35
Yes there have been many cities with Seven Hills mentioned But the 7 Mountains are symbolic not literal.
It's facinating to watch people conclude on a whim that some verses are literal while others are symbolic. So in Revelation 17, these seven mountains are symbolic, but just three chapters away, in Revelation 20, those thousand years, they have to be literal. ROTHLMHO!!!

In my humble opinion, that is called manipulating Scripture to fit our doctrines.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Abiding

Guest
#36
There have been many revisions and corrections made to what we now know as the Koran. If memory serves (and that is gertting worse by the day), the defrocked monk who first wrote down much of it was named Marino, which is why the Koran contains bits of Jewish fables and early monastic beliefs. The first Muslim scribe to compile the Koran was an Arab named Zaid Ibn Thabit.
Yes he was a jew raised and educated with jews. in medina i think
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
#37


It's facinating to watch people conclude on a whim that some verses are literal while others are symbolic. So in Revelation 17, these seven mountains are symbolic, but just three chapters away, in Revelation 20, those thousand years, they have to be literal. ROTHLMHO!!!

In my humble opinion, that is called manipulating Scripture to fit our doctrines.
"the City of Jerusalem as it existed in that time was also reckoned to be the "City of Seven Hills." This fact was well recognized in Jewish circles. In the Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer, an 8th century midrashic narrative (section 10), the writer mentioned without commentary (showing that the understanding was well known and required no defense) that "Jerusalem is situated on seven hills" (recorded in The Book of Legends, edited by Bialik and Ravnitzky, p. 371, paragraph 111).

And, so it was. Those "seven hills" are easy to identify.

If one starts with the Mount of Olives just to the east of the main City of Jerusalem (but still reckoned to be located within the environs of Jerusalem), there are three summits to that Mount of Olives:

The northern summit (hill) is called Scopus [Hill One],

The middle summit (hill) was called Nob [Hill Two],

The highest point of Olivet itself, and the southern summit (hill) was called in the Holy Scriptures the "Mount of Corruption" or "Mount of Offence" [Hill Three] (II Kings 23:13).

On the middle ridge between the Kedron and the Tyropoeon Valleys there was (formerly) in the south "Mount Zion" [Hill Four] (the original "Mount Zion" and not the later southwest hill that was later called by that name),

The "Ophel Mount" [Hill Five],

To the north of that the "Rock" around which "Fort Antonia" was built [Hill Six],

And finally, there was the southwest hill itself [Hill Seven] that finally became known in the time of Simon the Hasmonean as the new "Mount Zion."
This makes "Seven Hills" in all.

Is Jerusalem set on seven hills? - Yahoo! Answers < click


Revelation 11:8
Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.
 
T

Therapon

Guest
#38
Yes he was a jew raised and educated with jews. in medina i think
Yeah, that sounds right. It's been years since I read about Marino, our defrocked friend, so I just don't remember more.
 
I

iamthelordsforever

Guest
#39
I'm sorry but, unfortunately, the Bible specifically says they are symbolic. However, the 1,000 is never said to be symbolic. I fail to see that Satan is bound in chains as we speak, so the Millennium has not started, as well as Jesus ruling in Jerusalem. But, from my experience, those who preach false doctrines, will never change, even when shown the errors in their theories. Our generations is falling further and further into apostasy, just as Jesus said would happen toward the end of the Church Age. I am so sorry that you can not embrace the 'Blessed Hope' that is the Rapture.
 
A

Abiding

Guest
#40
I'm sorry but, unfortunately, the Bible specifically says they are symbolic. However, the 1,000 is never said to be symbolic. I fail to see that Satan is bound in chains as we speak, so the Millennium has not started, as well as Jesus ruling in Jerusalem. But, from my experience, those who preach false doctrines, will never change, even when shown the errors in their theories. Our generations is falling further and further into apostasy, just as Jesus said would happen toward the end of the Church Age. I am so sorry that you can not embrace the 'Blessed Hope' that is the Rapture.
How many rapture paperbacks have you read?