Concerning the "Antichrist"...

Originally posted by SeekerOfAUTMN
To those who understand religion, namely Christianity, better than I do, I pose a question:

How does one identify the Antichrist?

There are many branches of Christianity,all claiming to be the true branch...the New Testament and the Word of Christ says all should be of one Tree with many branches being of the One family...One true Church with the branches being of the members.
When each Christian claims to be of that one true church you get many different opinions based on what they think of
Well, firstly the Antichrist is in the New Testament,so we should be able to find what he stands for and why he is to come.
In Daniel.....The antichrist is descibed as ...
quote///"And in the latter times of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full,
a king of fierce countenance,
and understanding dark sentences,
shall stand up." (Daniel 8:23)
Now who will he be?

1. In the prophecies of Patriarch Jacob about each of his sons becoming the progenitors of the tribes of Israel, the fate of Dan's ancestors is depicted in such a way that can only be ascribed to the Antichrist. "Dan shall be a serpent on the way, an adder in the path..." (Genesis 49, 17)
2. In the prophecies of Ierenim: "From Dan himself...(Ierenim VIII,16)
3. In the prophecies of the Apocalypse, enumerating the remainder of all the tribes of Israel, marked by the Angel for salvation, the tribe of Dan is absolutely excluded. (Revelations VII, 4-8).

The Antichrist shall be of the tribe of Dan.
This is clear to many early Fathers as well as many prophecies made about the end of Times.
One who thinks different, is not taking the Scriptures seriously because He/She makes their own knowledge of more importance then that f the Scriptures.

I have heard many different ideas/opinions/speculations when I have asked this question of others.

I ask this question again because I am worried that there are certain traits that might make an individual look like the Antichrist to a great many people when this person is just a normal man/woman with the ambition to change the world. Mind you, not all change is bad.

The New Testament was written in the Greek Language and so it should be interpreted with the exact Greek words used...not changed to fit in with the English language and have the words confuse the reader.
The Anti christ shall be a male....as was Jesus Christ.
Anti.....?
The opposite.
In place of.
He will be in place of Christ but also will do what Jesus Christ would not do....
Jesus Christ welcomed sinners of their own accord.....with His Word and His teachings of Love and forgiveness.
The Antichrist shall also do this, but will teach about Wordly ideas and do miracles that people seek....he will use this to get the attention and people will believe because they seek not of what goes beyond life, but that of which makes one temporarily feel good at the time.



I can't help but conclude, with my current knowledge, that should some charismatic person come into power with a set of ideals that require large and sweeping changes to society, that person would be considered the Antichrist by many.

For example, the issue of a 'world currency'. Let's say that in the future, a world leader initiates a plan to create a currency that would be accepted anywhere in the world. This, in my opinion, sounds like a decent plan. Alot of time and money go into currency exchange operations... It seems to me that a world currency would cause the human race alot less stress in general. It would seem to me that should something like that happen today, the leader responsible would be villified by a great many Christians. Please correct me if I am reading into this wrong...

At this point, I think alot of people would be quick to jump on the bandwagon against anyone in power who displayed certain traits or initiated certain laws/plans, regardless of wether or not they were good or helpful changes. I think it could be possible that a good leader, who truly wants to make this world a better place for everyone, would be labeled as the"Antichrist".

Please educate me on this subject, and offer your opinions too. But please don't turn this into a Christianity recruitment/conversion/bashing topic.

If your talking about "The Beast" as described in the Book of Revelation, he has come and gone almost two thousand years ago. His name was Nero Caesar and was one of the last emperors of the Old Roman Empire.

The term "antichrist is only mentioned 4 times in the Bible. None of these verses describe a future world ruler who leads the planet into Armeggedon.

"Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have arisen; from this we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be shown that they all are not of us." 1 Jn 2:18-19

John wrote this in about 85AD, just before the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of ancient jewish society. It is clear he was only speaking to fellow believers at that time about the many anti-christs (those against Christ) who are already present and the ones to come. Remember this is the start of Christianity and there were many who were opposed to it.

"Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also." 1 John 2:22-23

Here John is clearly defining the anti-christ as anyone who denies the Father and the Son.

"By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world." 1 John 4:2-3

John is clearly speaking to the people of that time. Describing spirits, who do not confess Jesus as anti-christs.

"For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist." 2 John 1:7

Basically saying the same thing as in the other versus.

People, these verses are easy to interpret and clearly are not describing the Anti-Christ, the "End of the World-Rapture Fanatics" would like you to believe. John is not speaking to you and I here in the 21st century.






[edit on 24-5-2007 by iandavis]

[edit on 24-5-2007 by iandavis]

great post good bible study.
thanks for that.
the few the proud the ones who have studied

Originally posted by iandavis
If your talking about "The Beast" as described in the Book of Revelation, he has come and gone almost two thousand years ago. His name was Nero Caesar and was one of the last emperors of the Old Roman Empire.

People, these verses are easy to interpret and clearly are not describing the Anti-Christ, the "End of the World-Rapture Fanatics" would like you to believe. John is not speaking to you and I here in the 21st century.
[edit on 24-5-2007 by iandavis]

[edit on 24-5-2007 by iandavis]

Clearly this post is the reason why jesus never wanted his desciples to write down that which he spoke to them openly about. Jesus wasn't in the publishing business. Jesus wasn't about Bible study. But you can't see past your own contradiction here, in naming Nero as an antichrist, and saying John wasn't speaking to you in the 21st century, with a cheering section to-boot:

Originally posted by junglelord
great post good bible study.
thanks for that.
the few the proud the ones who have studied

The key word boys is SPIRIT. Now if you think that the spirit of anti-christ ideology does not cross over the ages, just as this earth has remainded since the time of the Christ, then why are you even bothering to read a book about a man named Jesus, and all the others, who lived 2,000 years ago?

Spirit has a funny way of not dying, like the flesh. Or maybe you believe that Jesus wasn't talking to us in the 21st century either?

Now, I'm not one of them "End of Worlders' in fact, all you have to do is read my posts and you'll see that I don't even accept the Bible as being from God, or the "Word of God". It's a reference book, with lots of distortions and lies, compiled by men, that's it.

In fact, I am more inclined to believe that anyone who believes the Bible is the "Word of God', IS antiChrist, since Jesus clearly had no intentions of starting a religion, especially one in which our Father God is slandered, and made to believe that He is out of His friggen' mind.

Jesus was about changing the way we lived, and loved each other through God.

But if you're trying to say that the spirit of Antichrist is not alive and kicking here in the 21st century, then once again you demonstrate the reason why I believe: that a bible in the hands of a man, is like a car in the hands of a monkey at rush hour - in new York.

[edit on 25-5-2007 by SatansQue]

I, like a few others in this thread, am impressed with the theory. As i have stated, it shares some similarities with the Cathars. Personally I like the whole 'Devil made a pact with god' part so much I feel that your(satansque) theory is somewhat lacking. Having said that the fallen angel scenario is quite adequate.

I do have a few of questions that I hope you will answer.

Originally posted by SatansQue
Now, from the moment these dark brothers of ours created this realm, hundreds of thousands of years ago, The True Light - our God, began trying to figure out how to destroy it. Since there is no time in the spirit realm, it was only like, a day ago.

How come this realm was created hundreds of thousands of years ago? Science claims that the earth is far older and the universe even older still. Does science mean nothing to you? Is it all a lie?

Originally posted by SatansQue
Gaia, the spirit of this earth escaped, Dec 26, 2004
With Gaia gone, time, and this evil material realm is on it's last leg. Myan calender?

The Christ is the escape route. Now, is that the same as saying 'my way or the highway?'

You are a Light being. Time to choose.

What happened on December 26th 2004? How did Gaia escape? Mayan Calender? How did the long count get into the mix?

I got to say I didn't bother reading any of the post's after I read your first paragraph. There is ample post's on the Anti-Christ in the forum just do a search ok.

Originally posted by SeekerOfAUTMN
To those who understand religion, namely Christianity, better than I do, I pose a question:
How does one identify the Antichrist?
Please educate me on this subject, and offer your opinions too.

As much as I don’t agree with some of what SatansQue is saying this is actually the correct answer:

Originally posted by SatansQue
Here's what you do. Go stand in front of a mirror. If the Love of God - the Christ, is not in your heart, then the Antichrist is YOU.
Am I lying?

The word Anti-Christ is only mentioned 4 places in the bible and none of them make reference to a single, one time, all powerful, opponent of Christ, but rather to anyone who denies Christ:

1Jo 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.
1Jo 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.
1Jo 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.
2Jo 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.

Now what about this:

Originally posted by iandavis
If your talking about "The Beast" as described in the Book of Revelation, he has come and gone almost two thousand years ago. His name was Nero Caesar and was one of the last emperors of the Old Roman Empire.

This is also somewhat correct, but also somewhat incorrect. In order to properly learn biblical prophecy you must first understand what the different styles of interpretation are. The study of prophecy is called Eschatology, and in Christian Eschatology there are three main prophetic schools of teaching, there are at least two minor schools as well, and even in the main schools there are some sub-groupings. So far, from what you have said, I am going to guess that the only school you have been exposed to is Futurism, which is not surprising as it’s currently the most prevalent school. However, if your not a Catholic, it may not be the school which the founder of your church intended for you to follow, rather Historicism is.

There are several reasons why Futurism is now the most popular style of interpretation, one of which is that it does not single out any one group as actually being mentioned in prophecy, explicitly. Another reason why Futurism is prevalent is because it supports current day Israel and the Zionists, which is high on the agenda of many of the Jewish controlled Media Outlets. This is why we only see books like “Left Behind”, “The Late Great Planet Earth”, and movies such as “The Omega Code”, “The End of Days”, get any media attention. Also many of your pastors never received proper training in Eschatology, as until it became a hot topic in 1999, it was considered unpopular to discuss with parishioners. So, all these untrained pastors learned from the books being promoted, most of which were Futurist. To make matters even worse some of your independent Churches provide no formal Seminary Schooling to their pastors, and promote form within the ranks.

So, back to what I was mentioning above, that quote from iandavis is from the school of Preteristism, which is the proper interpretation for those who are part of the Catholic Church.
Only Futurism teaches in an end Times Antichrist Figure…

In a quick, nutshell this is what each school teaches:

Futurism: Teaches that there is going to be a seven year tribulation period at some future point, during which an Antichrist will come to power. During this seven year period, this Antichrist will make peace in the Middle East, rebuild the Temple on Mount Zion, break the peace treaty, declare himself god, start a war, have everyone “Marked” with a Chip or brand, call down fire from heaven, and so on. He is obviously a busy guy for that seven years. From here the school splits into the groups which believe that there is going to be a Rapture (which is totally unscriptural), and the argument is whether this happens before, during, or after the tribulation period. There is another sub-group of Futurists who are Millennialists, and believe there is a thousand year reign of Christ after the tribulation. Believe it or not, Futurism is the school I used to believe when I first started learning Eschatology, as it was the only one I had been exposed to.

Preteristism: Teaches that the events of Revelations have been fulfilled in Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, and the “Little Horn” of Daniel in Emperor Diocletian. This is what iandavis is talking about above. The Catholic Church currently accepts this as the teaching it supports. The teachings of are similar to that of Historicism in many ways, but there is a great difference in them. The difference is that Rome is clearly defined in the Bible as one of the entities mentioned in both Revelations and Daniel, and the Roman Catholic Church had to come up with some way to limit that to only one aspect of Rome by making it about specific Emperors. Preterism is very easy to disprove as the history does not flow 100% correctly with its interpretations of the prophecies.

Historicism: I could go on about this one all day long, but I will try and keep it short. Once I learned this school, it totally changed my outlook on everything, and tied up all of history with a neat little bow on the top. It is the least politically correct school of teaching, but it is the most accurate. You will also find out that we are very near the end, and the end can truly come five seconds after I hit the “Post Button” here. There are no signs to follow, there is no Antichrist, no rebuilt temple mount, the beasts already exist, the “Little Horn” already exists, the only thing left to happen is “the Mark”, natural disasters (which have already started), and possibly the Battle of Megiddo (if that is not currently going on). Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and pretty much the rest of the protestant reformers all accept this school of prophecy as the correct school, even if their Churches are now lax about teaching it. It is accepted by all protestant faiths who follow the Westminster Confession of Faith; which even includes the Baptists, who are among the worst group for accidentally teaching Futurism, as they are mostly Independent Churches with no Seminary Training.

Historicism teaches that the “Beasts” in Daniel are all countries, or “World Superpowers”, and that Revelations follows this same pattern. The final one, which Futurists refer to as the “false prophet”, is the final world superpower, and not an Antichrist persona. The order of these are: Babylon, Media/Persia, Greece, Rome, and the final world superpower (possibly the US, or a conglomeration of allied countries). The “Little Horn” refers to the station of the Pontifex Maximus, which is a position originally held by the old Roman Emperors, including….. Nero.

Today we call the station of the Pontifex Maximus the Holy Pontiff, and station of the Pontifex fits the exact description of the book of Daniel for the “Little Horn”. Rome is the beast which was wounded, it is the “Beast which was, then was not, yet is”.
I can show you exactly how this relates back to each individual biblical verse if you’re interested, but that will take more time then I have at the moment.

Here are some links to another thread where I explain this some more if you want to read it:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I believe this relates very precisely to “The Mark”:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

SatansQue what religion is this your talking about, some of what you say is excellent and other stuff is kind of out there from biblical teaching?

Originally posted by SatansQue
But the fact (and I mean fact) remains that there is a rescue mission in operation as we speak, and the Christ Jesus is on the planet leading it.

This is way wrong, and goes specifically against the scripture of both Matthew and Luke:

Mat 24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
Mat 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Luk 17:23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them.
Luk 17:24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.

Originally posted by SatansQue
So they manifested this material realm, using the power of the light of God within them, to create an impregnable structure, imposed over a sector of the spiritual realm. At that time, many of the Light beings in the spiritual realm had no clue as to what evil or darkness was - when they saw the new thing created by their brothers, they became curious, got to close, and found themselves trapped within it.

This seems to go along with the pseudepigraphal story of Jubilees where the offspring of Seth are on the holy mountain being tempted down by the sons of Cain, and are unable to return. It’s kind of interesting, though Jubilees is pseudepigrapha, and not to be taken as literal scripture.

Originally posted by SatansQue
Also, where is the elitism? The Christ's people are usually broke, down trodden, lead simplistic lives, care more for others than they care for themselves, are long suffering, humble, love God and neighbor with all the heart, soul and mind, are helpful to strangers, live in the world, but are not of the world, and are continually on the verge...

Now this bit I agree with.

Originally posted by SatansQue
Gaia, the spirit of this earth escaped, Dec 26, 2004

Whoa…
Where did this come from, Gaia is not even a Christian concept, it’s a Greek persona.

Originally posted by defcon5
Historicism: I could go on about this one all day long, but I will try and keep it short. Once I learned this school, it totally changed my outlook on everything, and tied up all of history with a neat little bow on the top. It is the least politically correct school of teaching, but it is the most accurate.

I used lean toward this teaching until I studied the Bible. This teaching is totally inaccurate as it is unscriptural. Nothing mattered in the end times until Israel was restored as a nation. The time of Jacobs trouble and the 70 week of Daniel will happen when the treaty is signed.

No, actually Futurism is unscriptural.
The Treaty you are referring to relates to this bible passage:

Dan 9:27 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.

This verse, according to Futurists, refers to a treaty broken by the Antichrist; but to Historicists it refers to the Covenant between God and Man being fulfilled. God made a covenant with man to send a savior to redeem them from sin, until the savior arrived the Jews offered animal sacrifice for forgiveness. After Christ death, in the middle of this week, or after 3.5 years, the animal sacrifice became null and void as Christ had fulfilled the covenant and made the other sacrifices unnecessary. This is shown in the New Testament here:

Mat 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

This veil was the area crossed by the head rabbi when they sprinkled the sacrificial blood on the ark.

This verse referring to Christ can be further seen in the proceeding verses of Daniel:

Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
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.

This week ended with the stoning of Steven, and the destruction of Israel as a nation came shortly after that, leaving Israel desolate. The age of the Jews was over and the Age of the Church began.

The final week of Daniels 70 weeks remains nicely intact to the first 69 weeks, where it belongs.

Originally posted by defcon5
After Christ death, in the middle of this week, or after 3.5 years, the animal sacrifice became null and void as Christ had fulfilled the covenant and made the other sacrifices unnecessary. This is shown in the New Testament here:

There was no 3.5 years necessary. The verse you quoted happened at the death of Christ. Someone got you to stick a round peg in a square hole.

This week ended with the stoning of Steven, and the destruction of Israel as a nation came shortly after that, leaving Israel desolate. The age of the Jews was over and the Age of the Church began.

Israel was conquered in 63 BC. The destruction of the temple occurred in 70 AD. Your teachers are driving round pegs into square holes to make their ideas fit. The stoning of Steven had nothing to do with the church age starting. That occurred at Pentecost.....at the latest.

If you compare Matthew 24 to Luke 21 it pretty much shoots down this unscriptural teaching. I would pay particular attention to Matthew 24:9 and Luke 21:12. The word THEN in Matthew 24 compared to BUT BEFORE ALL THESE jin Luke 21.

Futher.........yes I'm waiting for the treaty to be signed that is talked of in Daniel. I can hardly go a day without this treaty with Israel being talked about in the news. The final treaty will not be signed until after the rapture........just as scripture declares.

Originally posted by surrender_dorothy
Personally I like the whole 'Devil made a pact with god' part so much I feel that your(satansque) theory is somewhat lacking. Having said that the fallen angel scenario is quite adequate.

I quite understand. You can only believe what you're told, not what you have experienced. Experience is not just a dream, experience is, "I was there." And how do you explain being there, to someone who refuses to remember?

Also, the way things work, even in the material universe; the more powerfull, strongest, wealthiest, do not put themselves in a position where they have to make packs with the weaker.

So why would an Absolute God, lower Him/Her self, or place Him/Herself to the position of a "fallen" angel, having to make a pack with His/Her supposed enemy? Are you nuts?

To be in that position, would automatically dissqualify your candidate as GOD! Because you're God obviously didn't know, what a 3 year old child would know - that you don't make deals with the devil! LOL!!

So your god must be intellectually challenged, and my God is smarter than your God, Na-na-na, na-na-na!

Originally posted by surrender_dorothy
How come this realm was created hundreds of thousands of years ago? Science claims that the earth is far older and the universe even older still. Does science mean nothing to you? Is it all a lie?

I wasn't using that number as a quote. I just pulled it out of my butt. A trillion years, a ga-zillion years if you like. What diference does it make, you've been here the entire time, as one thing or another. I'm begining to suspect "Other", on quite a many occassions.

Like I should talk right? I'm Satan. I'm red! With horns. Not like I can hide from anybody. Which is why you're all no good. You talk about me like a dog; causing this, causing that, but you see me coming a mile away. And run to me.

Listen, you can't be rich and happy in 2007 unless you made a deal with me at some point along the way. So don't...

And Science? Who's science? Scientists of man? Let's see, we live on a planet in the middle, (outter, side, butt, where ever you want to place us) of nothing but light and darkness, surrounded by ga-zillions, upon ga-zillions of light years of space and time. From 2 million light years away, you couldn't even see us among all the stuff out their in space.

The only way on this planet is somebody has to get F'd, and you live, breed, make it, don't make it, become a murder victim, get the Oscar, take about a million dumps, get happy, fall in love, fall out of love, get a little, get a lot, get sick, get old, and die, over and over again. The only way off this rock is through death, and the space shuttle.

And you actually believe the pinheads on this spec of dust in the cosmos, have the slightest clue? Most of them don't even believe in God. Even Satan knows there's a God. Damn!

I'll bet you believe scientist when they tell you your cell phone won't give you a brain tumor? Come on, admit it. Yeah, go right ahead. Humans made it 99.9% of his history without them.

One day you're gonna wake up with a big ol' knott poking out your brain, on your cell phone side. LOL!!

That's mean, I'll stop.

Originally posted by surrender_dorothy
What happened on December 26th 2004? How did Gaia escape? Mayan Calender? How did the long count get into the mix?

Hmmm, what happened on 12/26/2004? What event completely changed the shape, magnetic resonance, axis; moved a friggin' tectonic plate 90 feet?

Actually, I believe you have enough information in what I have written here, to find answers for yourself. More than enough. Maybe you could actually do a little work on your own. If I had a breast I would feed you, until a certain age. LOL!!

But why should I deprive you of the many joyous hours spent, enriching your mind, hopefully because you love it.

Originally posted by defcon5
SatansQue what religion is this your talking about, some of what you say is excellent and other stuff is kind of out there from biblical teaching?

Originally posted by SatansQue
But the fact (and I mean fact) remains that there is a rescue mission in operation as we speak, and the Christ Jesus is on the planet leading it.

This is way wrong, and goes specifically against the scripture of both Matthew and Luke:

You know what defcon5,

That's a great name, because what we have here, is an emergency. "Holy makerel!"

The emergency is that you have not read this entire post, which is fine by me, but if you want to begin a dialogue, responding to various quotes by me nilly-willy... LOL!! Why, I may have to ignor you completely.

You're throwing all of these Bible quotes at me, and clearly, if you read me, you gotta know that I do not recognise the bible as any thing more than a partially, mostly... incredibly inaccurate reference book.

So therefore, I can only be wrong, in as much as I, or anyone one else on board, lays credence to what you believe, is the "Word of God."

Thank you, and... have a nice day.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
There was no 3.5 years necessary. The verse you quoted happened at the death of Christ. Someone got you to stick a round peg in a square hole.

I am not sure where you get this from, its pretty clear that 3.5 years into the ministry of Christ that he was to be betrayed, killed, and fulfill Gods covenant with Man to send a Savior. Nothing square about the peg, it fits perfectly. No one taught me this, its well know Historicism, and it is the proper system of eschatology for the Protestant faiths.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Your teachers are driving round pegs into square holes to make their ideas fit.

Again I am not learning this from some modern day church, but rather form the writings of men such as Martin Luther, John Wesley, and John Calvin. I recommend you read Elliott’s Horae Apocalypticae to better understand what I am talking about.

Came across this while looking for an online Horae Apocalyptica, you might want to give it a read to further understand what I am saying above: (The Tribulation). You can also search on Historicism, and you will find many examples and further explanations of what I am saying. Please don’t make remarks implying that I am being improperly taught or lead astray by someone, as it’s just not the case.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Israel was conquered in 63 BC. The destruction of the temple occurred in 70 AD.

Neither I, nor the bible states that the destruction would be accomplished in the next 3.5 years as a matter of fact it says:

and unto the end of the war desolations are determined

This is referring to the revolt that was to occur within Jerusalem, and the final destruction that was to follow.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
The stoning of Steven had nothing to do with the church age starting. That occurred at Pentecost.....at the latest.

Again from the above sight, and it saves me a bunch of typing as it is stating the same thing I am, in more detail:

The Jews are still with out their sanctuary. In fact, their enemy has built a temple on the very spot where their own temple once stood.

9. The 70th week was from 27 A.D. - 34 A.D. The entire 70-week period was for the Jews. The "covenant" was confirmed to Israel by Jesus Christ and His disciples during the 70th week. In 34 A.D. after the stoning of Stephen by the Sanhedrin, the gospel began to go to the Gentiles. See Acts 7; 8:4. In Acts 9 Paul was converted to become the "apostle of the Gentiles" (Romans 11:13). In Acts 10 Peter received a vision revealing it was now time to reach the Gentiles. See also Acts 13:46.
From A.D. 27 to A.D. 34, the disciples went only "to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

So the stoning of a Christian was the straw which finally broke the back of Israel and was taken by God as their final act of rebellion against him, thus he made them desolate. The revolt came next, and their final elimination from the land of Israel.

This text also makes a good point of the fact that the Temple Mount is still not under the control of the Israelis and most likely never will be without a major war in the Middle East.

I see though that you have fallen for the Jewish controlled Media Propaganda that I mentioned above, which pushes the idea that the Temple MUST be rebuilt for the end times to occur. I truly believe that Futurism is nothing more or less then the "Great Deception” mentioned in the bible, which will “deceive the very elect if possible” (meaning a lot of Christians).

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
If you compare Matthew 24 to Luke 21 it pretty much shoots down this unscriptural teaching.

Matthew 24 and Luke 21 are referring to more then one thing, as Christ was asked two different questions. See the disciples thought that this was all going to occur in their lifetimes, they thought they would still be alive when Christ returned, so they did not realize that what they were asking was somewhat incorrect in its syntax.

Mat 24:3 While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately and said, "Tell us, when will these things take place, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"

Question 1) When is the end of an age (the age of the Jews), referring to this:

Mat 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to show him the buildings of the temple.
Mat 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Meaning the end of Isreal.

Question 2) What will be the sign of your coming.

The rest of the verse then goes on to explain the things that would happen from that period forward. The end of the Age of Israel, and the beginning of the end times, or the age of the church. You see the end of the world has been going on since 70 AD, and we have seen those exact same things occur throughout history with an increasing frequency, leading up to now.

The early Jewish Christians understood what was meant by this verse and when they saw the Standard of Emperor Titus in the Temple, they fled Jerusalem and hid in Pella.

"Eusebius (Church History III.5.3) tells us that Christians abandoned Jerusalem before the siege began and fled to the city of Pella."

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
I would pay particular attention to Matthew 24:9 and Luke 21:12. The word THEN in Matthew 24 compared to BUT BEFORE ALL THESE jin Luke 21.

Here are the verses so its easy to check them:

Mat 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Luk 21:12 But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.

I don’t see any discrepancy in what is written here as neither the word “then” nor the word “before” are in the actual text. The actual word in Matthew is:

τότε
tote
tot'-eh
From (the neuter of) G3588 and G3753; the when, that is, at the time that (of the past or future, also in consecution): - that time, then.

And the word in Luke is:

πρό
pro
pro
A primary preposition; “fore”, that is, in front of, prior (figuratively superior) to. In compounds it retains the same significations: - above, ago, before, or ever. In compounds it retains the same significations.

But the point is that before the return of Christ or the Destruction of the Temple, the Christians would be persecuted by both the Jews and the Romans. Again the persecution of Stephen and the Christians hiding in Damascus from Saul are classic examples of how they would be persecuted before the fall of the Temple, and later at the hands of Rome, after it as well. Both of these events occur before the Return of Christ, however. Point is that is really not a significant discrepancy.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Futher.........yes I'm waiting for the treaty to be signed that is talked of in Daniel.

Your in for a long wait, maybe you should take a book along…

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
I can hardly go a day without this treaty with Israel being talked about in the news.

Really, I have yet to hear about any treaty, every time that there is peace over there for two minutes, one side sucker punches the other.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
final treaty will not be signed until after the rapture........just as scripture declares.

Show me where the Rapture is mentioned in the Bible. I’ll save you some time; it’s not in the Bible. It is Christian wishful thinking, and more of that Futurism Great Deception mentioned above. There will be one taking away of the Christians, and it will be at the final Trump, after the tribulation.

You should really go learn who came up with the schools of Futurism and Preteristism, and then you may begin to understand why they were made, and how they are a deception. Lets just say that the one group mentioned by Historicists, as being one of the “bad guys” in both Daniel and Revelations, was responsible for both schools of prophetic interpretation.

Originally posted by defcon5
SatansQue what religion is this your talking about, some of what you say is excellent and other stuff is kind of out there from biblical teaching?

Originally posted by SatansQue
But the fact (and I mean fact) remains that there is a rescue mission in operation as we speak, and the Christ Jesus is on the planet leading it.

This is way wrong, and goes specifically against the scripture of both Matthew and Luke:

You know what defcon5,

That's a great name, because what we have here, is an emergency. "Holy makerel!"

The emergency is that you have not read this entire post, which is fine by me, but if you want to begin a dialogue, responding to various quotes by me nilly-willy... LOL!! Why, I may have to ignor you completely.

You're throwing all of these Bible quotes at me, and clearly, if you read me, you gotta know that I do not recognise the bible as any thing more than a partially, mostly... incredibly inaccurate reference book.

So therefore, I can only be wrong, in as much as I, or anyone one else on board, lays credence to what you believe, is the "Word of God."

Thank you, and... have a nice day.

Originally posted by SatansQue
That's a great name, because what we have here, is an emergency. "Holy makerel!"

Actually, DEFCON 5 is peace.

Originally posted by SatansQue
The emergency is that you have not read this entire post, which is fine by me, but if you want to begin a dialogue, responding to various quotes by me nilly-willy... LOL!! Why, I may have to ignor you completely.

I thought I did read your posts; I am not sure what your complaint is?

Originally posted by SatansQue
You're throwing all of these Bible quotes at me, and clearly, if you read me, you gotta know that I do not recognise the bible as any thing more than a partially, mostly... incredibly inaccurate reference book.

Ok, yeah I did catch that part. However without the bible, how do you have any idea what Christ’s message is. The bible is actually very accurate, and can be proven such by things such as the Muratorian fragment dated to around 170 AD. Also men such as Polycarp were involved in the compiling of the New testament. Polycarp was a student of the Apostle John, and lived from 69AD to 150AD. Irenaeus was the most instrumental in helping compile the present day Bible, and he was a student of Polycarp. You really could not get much better then these two men to tell us that intended message of Christ himself.

Originally posted by SatansQue
You're throwing all of these Bible quotes at me

It’s one section from two different books to show each other support.

Ignore me if you want to, but I really don’t see what you’re all upset over.

There may have been a few communication problems because I found your reply a little mystifying. I'll try and reply as best as I can.

Originally posted by SatansQue
You can only believe what you're told, not what you have experienced. Experience is not just a dream, experience is, "I was there." And how do you explain being there, to someone who refuses to remember?

I just don't remember the fallen angel incident...sorry. Maybe it's because it happened, according to your reckoning, hundreds of thousands of years ago or a trillion years, a ga-zillion years...who knows?

Also, the way things work, even in the material universe; the more powerfull, strongest, wealthiest, do not put themselves in a position where they have to make packs with the weaker.

Well...I think it was the fact that the all powerful god of evil was creating objects without life and soul. Our Benevolent god is essentially impotent. He created our soul and the Devil corrupted it. It's an interesting theory of creation.

The other stuff about an all powerful God(Devil) lowering himself to a fallen angel to make a pact must definately be an error in communication. I thoughts the idea of the devil as a fallen angel was your theory. The Cathar theory suggest nothing of the sort.

So your god must be intellectually challenged, and my God is smarter than your God, Na-na-na, na-na-na!

Remember this is not my god. I'm an agnostic. I don't think that the Cathars painted the benevolent God in much glory really. Weak, impotent and, as you yourself so graciously pointed out, stupid enough to make a pact with the devil and get screwed. So I guess he is intellectually challenged. I guess this is why i'm so attracted to this idea of Creation. It gives the gods a human quality.

Similarly the Gnostic theory that paints God as a confused idiot who botched up the job of Creation amuses me greatly. Christ has to come to earth and get brutally murdered in order to pay for the sins of His Father who created such an imperfect world.

What kind of a Father is he? Is this the god we worship? This is theology with a sense of humour. And this I like.

Hmmm, what happened on 12/26/2004? What event completely changed the shape, magnetic resonance, axis; moved a friggin' tectonic plate 90 feet?

Hah! Yes of course. I do apologise. How could I forget? Maybe it was because I was so incredibly stoned that day. I remember it clearly enough now though. It's quite shameful really. Sitting on my mates sofa smoking weed while hundreds of thousands are dying and Gaia is making a run for it.

Actually, I believe you have enough information in what I have written here, to find answers for yourself. More than enough. Maybe you could actually do a little work on your own. If I had a breast I would feed you, until a certain age. LOL!!

I knew I wouldn't get response to Mayan Long count question. And it was by far the most important question.

I probably won't get a response to this but here goes. What happens when the calender ends? Don't tell me to look this up because nobody knows(except for you, maybe, and the ancient mayans).

Does the rescue mission cease? If so what happens to those who don't get rescued? Damned for all eternity? I know you've said that Damnation isn't part of your theory so that can't be it. What happens? Tell me.

Originally posted by defcon5

The 70th week was from 27 A.D. - 34 A.D. The entire 70-week period was for the Jews. The "covenant" was confirmed to Israel by Jesus Christ and His disciples during the 70th week.

No, the 70th week of Daniel has not occurred and will happen when the peace treaty has been signed. I'd hope you're familiar with the roadmap to peace that is constantly in the news.

Originally posted by defcon5

This text also makes a good point of the fact that the Temple Mount is still not under the control of the Israelis and most likely never will be without a major war in the Middle East.

I prefer this text. Notice that it also says the temple mount is not under Jewish control. What is the Jewish temple doing here in Revelation. OOPS and look there we have 42 months or 3.5 years. What's that there for????

Revelation 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. 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.

Originally posted by defcon5
I see though that you have fallen for the Jewish controlled Media Propaganda that I mentioned above, which pushes the idea that the Temple MUST be rebuilt for the end times to occur.

No, I just go by what scripture says. You should reread Rev. 11. You might try tracking back to the Church of Rome, who also hold your views.

Originally posted by defcon5
I truly believe that Futurism is nothing more or less then the "Great Deception” mentioned in the bible, which will “deceive the very elect if possible” (meaning a lot of Christians).

No, the deception spoken or is the belief that aliens have invaded the earth when the rapture happens. Can you not see the lie in place right now.....alien abductions?????

Originally posted by defcon5
See the disciples thought that this was all going to occur in their lifetimes, they thought they would still be alive when Christ returned, so they did not realize that what they were asking was somewhat incorrect in its syntax.

I guess I believe the things I do because that's what the Word says. I don't need to drive round pegs in square holes. I say just read what it says.

Originally posted by defcon5
Meaning the end of Isreal.

No, it is a prophecy about the destruction of the Jewish temple fulfilled in 70 AD

Originally posted by defcon5
You see the end of the world has been going on since 70 AD,

No........the latter times did not begin until Israel was restored as a nation. That is part of the parable of the Fig Tree. Israel is the Fig Tree.

Originally posted by defcon5
Point is that is really not a significant discrepancy.

No, point is Matthew 24 talks about the beginning of sorrows. After these sorrows there is talk of a temple and the things that will happen. Luke 21 talks about these sorrows also and then says BUT BEFORE ALL OF THESE. Luke is talking about the destruction of the Jewish temple and the things that will happen in that age.

Originally posted by defcon5
Your in for a long wait, maybe you should take a book along…

I don't intend on being here when this happens. The rapture will have occurred and the everyone can stand around and talk about the alien abduction and the peace that the Antichrist will bring. Order out of Chaos.

Originally posted by defcon5
Show me where the Rapture is mentioned in the Bible. I’ll save you some time; it’s not in the Bible. it is Christian wishful thinking, and more of that Futurism Great Deception mentioned above.

1 Corinthians 15:52
In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Originally posted by defcon5
There will be one taking away of the Christians, and it will be at the final Trump, after the tribulation.

The trump of God is the voice of God and has nothing to do with the trumpets of Revelation. You might check Exodus 20 and again we can see the trump or voice of God in Rev. 4.

Revelation 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.]

Originally posted by defcon5
You should really go learn who came up with the schools of Futurism and Preteristism, and then you may begin to understand why they were made, and how they are a deception. Lets just say that the one group mentioned by Historicists, as being one of the “bad guys” in both Daniel and Revelations, was responsible for both schools of prophetic interpretation.

You might check the teachings of the Church of Rome and realize the source of your teachings.

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
You might check the teachings of the Church of Rome and realize the source of your teachings.
You might try tracking back to the Church of Rome, who also hold your views.

These two remarks tell me that you have not really read anything I have posted, or do not understand what I have written. It also tells me you do not understand the fundamentals of Christian Eschatology, nor the correct schools of prophetic interpretation, and do not realize which come from where. Most likely you are being taught prophecy from some book such as those written by John Hagee, Hal Lindsey, Pat Robertson, or that crowed, or you're being taught this by some pastor or bible study of an independent or fundamentalist church. Either way your are deadly incorrect, totally in error, and just flat out wrong in your ascertation of where my school of interpretation comes from, and where yours comes from.

BTW, you do not need to proceed on with telling me anymore of how you interpret prophecy, as I understand Futurism better then you obviously do. I have a sneaking suspicion that you don’t even know that what you believe is called futurism.

Let me educate you on where each school, in fact, comes from:
1) Historicism = What I believe. It first began with Martin Luther (though some think he was influenced by Hess), and is followed by all major protestant religions, including: Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptists; also some other Christian religions which are less mainline including: Jehovah’s witnesses, and Seven Day Adventists.
If you are a member of any of these churches you should be learning and understanding exactly what I am speaking about in the above posts.

Here is why your remarks above are so laughable:

Eventually, Martin Luther turned to the prophecies. By candlelight, he read about the "little horn," the "man of sin," and "the beast," and he was shocked as the Holy Spirit spoke to his heart. Finally, he saw the truth and said to himself, "Why, these prophecies apply to the Roman Catholic Church!" As he wrestled with this new insight, the voice of God echoed loudly in his soul, saying, "Preach the word!" (2 Timothy 4:2). And so, at the risk of losing his life, Martin Luther preached publicly and in print to an astonished people that Papal Rome was indeed the Antichrist of Bible prophecy. Because of this dual message of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ apart from works and of Papal Rome being the Antichrist, the river of history literally changed its course. Hundreds of thousands of people in Europe and in England left the Catholic Church.

2) Futurism = What you believe in. Here is where it comes from:

Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), a brilliant Jesuit priest and doctor of theology from Spain, in 1590, published a commentary on the Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem" (George Eldon Ladd, The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1956, pp. 37-38). "Ribera denied the Protestant Scriptural Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2) as seated in the church of God - asserted by Augustine, Jerome, Luther and many reformers. He set on an infidel Antichrist, outside the church of God." (Ralph Thompson, Champions of Christianity in Search of Truth, p. 89). "The result of his work [Ribera's] was a twisting and maligning of prophetic truth" (Robert Caringola, Seventy Weeks: The Historical Alternative, p. 32)

WOW, after those remarks, look who’s interpretation actually comes from within the Roman Catholic Church…..
Yours, not mine, I tried to warn you above, but you did not take the hint.

3) Preterism = This is the currently held Roman Catholic teaching on prophetic interpritation. Three guesses where it comes from:

Another counter-interpretation to the Historicism held by Protestantism was proposed by the Spanish Jesuit Luis De Alcazar (1554-1613), who also wrote a commentary called Investigation of the Hidden Sense of the Apocalypse, which ran to some 900 pages. In it he proposed that it all of Revelation applied to the era of pagan Rome and the first six centuries of Christianity. According to Alcazar (or Alcasar):

You can find further information at these places:
Jesuit Futurism or Protestant Historicism How the Jesuits’ child was adopted by Protestants
The Catholic Origins of Futurism and Preterism
A History of the Foundation of Futurism and Preterism

So there you have it, Futurism and Preterism are part of the “Great Deception”, It is an intentional lie made up by Papal Rome to throw those who followed Historicism off the trail, and make up fantasies for folks to follow instead:

At the Council of Trent, the Jesuits were commissioned by the Pope to develop a new interpretation of Scripture that would counteract the Protestant application of the Bible's antichrist prophecies to the Roman Catholic Church.

As to the rest, I know Futurism better then you do anyway, so there is not much more point in you trying to teach it to me. If you want me to explain why its incorrect in areas I will be happy to do so, but there is no point in debating it as I have studied it too. I have also read the books of men like Lindsey, seen the movies, and found them all to be incorrect. I will answer your questions below in a separate post, but again there is no use in trying to convince me that Futurism is the better path as I have been that route already and found it full of errors and deceptions.