The Beast of Revelation 17 and how it effects us today.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

Also there is Isaiah 42. Here are some key verses.


"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles"

Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice, the villages that Kedar doth inhabit: let the inhabitants of the rock sing, let them shout from the top of the mountains.

They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say to the molten images, Ye are our gods.


We know that no biblical "servant" ever influenced the people of Kedar and the wilderness...and no biblical servant defeated the idolaters... and established worship of the God of Abraham. Isaiah 42 is a direct prophecy of Mohammad.

The fact that Mohammad fulfilled the prophecy of shaming the idolaters seals the case. Islam is of God.

edit on 26-7-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

Is that supposed to refute his idea? I have to study the scripture further so I cant approve or disapprove your hypothesis but I think you just supported his idea about Islam and prophecy. His point relating more to end times prophecy.

reply to post by NihilistSanta

Is that supposed to refute his idea? I have to study the scripture further so I cant approve or disapprove your hypothesis but I think you just supported his idea about Islam and prophecy.

His only idea is that Islam = bad.

But going by the clues in Isaiah 42, we can see that it points towards Mohammad and the arrival of Islam.
Thereby proving that Islam is of God and refutes the OPs idea that Islam is the beast.

I have made a more detailed thread about Isaiah 42 here
The light of the Gentiles mentioned in Isaiah 42

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by NihilistSanta

 

Is that supposed to refute his idea? I have to study the scripture further so I cant approve or disapprove your hypothesis but I think you just supported his idea about Islam and prophecy.

His only idea is that Islam = bad.

But going by the clues in Isaiah 42, we can see that it points towards Mohammad and the arrival of Islam.
Thereby proving that Islam is of God and refutes the OPs idea that Islam is the beast.

I have made a more detailed thread about Isaiah 42 here
The light of the Gentiles mentioned in Isaiah 42

Islam can still be of God and be the beast so I dont see a contradiction.

All things are of God

Colossians 1:17 King James Version (KJV) 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Romans 9:20-21 King James Version (KJV) 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Yet you still have a choice. So no obstruction of free will either.

Joshua 24:15

King James Version (KJV)

15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

reply to post by NihilistSanta

Islam can still be of God and be the beast so I dont see a contradiction.

Except, Islam is the "light" in Isaiah 42. The beast is NOT a light to anybody.

Christians don't seem to have an answer as to who the "servant" of Isaiah 42 was. And they also refuse to accept that Mohammad is the only candidate

To identify that servant of Isaiah 42, just look for someone who...
a) Influenced the people of Kedar and the wilderness (associated with arabia)...
b) fulfilled the prophecy of defeating the idolaters.

Idolatry was rampant in Arabia, but ended only after the arrival of Mohammad. So we know Isaiah 42 was fulfilled with Mohammad, thus proving that Islam is divine and not the beast as claimed by the OP.

The fundamentalists will try and work their way around this by saying that Isaiah 42 is yet to be fulfilled.
But the reality is that idolatry went extinct 1500 years ago thanks to Mohammad. There are no more people left in Kedar and the wilderness who trust in graven images and say to the molten images, "Ye are our gods." They all went out of business after Mohammads arrival.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by NihilistSanta

 

Islam can still be of God and be the beast so I dont see a contradiction.

Except, Islam is the "light" in Isaiah 42. The beast is NOT a light to anybody.

Christians don't seem to have an answer as to who the "servant" of Isaiah 42 was. And they also refuse to accept that Mohammad is the only candidate

To identify that servant of Isaiah 42, just look for someone who...
a) Influenced the people of Kedar and the wilderness (associated with arabia)...
b) fulfilled the prophecy of defeating the idolaters.

Idolatry was rampant in Arabia, but ended only after the arrival of Mohammad. So we know Isaiah 42 was fulfilled with Mohammad, thus proving that Islam is divine and not the beast as claimed by the OP.

The fundamentalists will try and work their way around this by saying that Isaiah 42 is yet to be fulfilled.
But the reality is that idolatry went extinct 1500 years ago thanks to Mohammad. There are no more people left in Kedar and the wilderness who trust in graven images and say to the molten images, "Ye are our gods." They all went out of business after Mohammads arrival.

I have read the scripture Isaiah 42 and do not agree with your interpretation but still hold to my view. God allows all things to exist. Even if Islam is mentioned in prophecy that does not make it "good" it just means it happens because God allows it to. Which does not refute the OP. I think we might have to disagree about Idolatry in those regions being ended.

reply to post by NihilistSanta


Idolatry is to make idols or images. Right here and right now - what is present does not need 'making'. Images made in the mind is idolatry. Only this moment is real but man makes images and idols in his head and worships what is not real.
This moment is God. However humans made believe that there is more than this by believing their thoughts, thoughts are images made (imagination).

reply to post by NihilistSanta

I have read the scripture Isaiah 42 and do not agree with your interpretation but still hold to my view.

Very well. But there is an objective way to resolve this.

Which biblical prophet did the following-
a) Influenced the people of Kedar and the wilderness (associated with arabia)...
b) fulfilled the prophecy of defeating the idolaters.

I believe this perfectly fits Mohammads profile and I have presented the relevant verses to back my case.
If you think its someone else I am curious to know who you think this servant is.

reply to post by NihilistSanta

Even if Islam is mentioned in prophecy that does not make it "good" it just means it happens because God allows it to.

Thats what the OP is trying to imply.. that islam is mentioned in a bad way... just because of his personal interpretation of some vague verses in Revelation 17.

“Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time. The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.


Isaiah 42, has clear details on places and events... which only applies to Mohammad and Islam. (See above)


I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles -Isaiah 42:6

And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them. -Isaiah 42:16

and so on..

Thereby proving that Islam is mentioned in a "good" way.

I think you are missing the point. The good or bad is irrelevant. We have already established that everything that exist exist because the Lord allows it. If Islam is mentioned in scripture which OP is trying to indicate then you can draw your own conclusion whether it is good or bad depending on your belief in Islam. He does support his views on it being in a negative context in Rev: 17 but hey glass half full glass half empty. I believe it to be good by virtue of it being part of the Lords will and brings us closer to the 2nd coming.

Question for you sk0rpion if your interpretation of Isaiah 42 is that Islam is good and godly how come Christ makes no mention of it? Seems kind of important. "hey guys await my second coming, oh yeah another guy will come too and preach against many of my claims. Go follow him." I mean he did say others would come but he implies that they come to deceive and not to save. Doesn't make sense if you include the context of the rest of the book rather than trying to impose some meaning outside of context on one piece of scripture.

Also I have been doing research on that passage and some believe it refers to Sargon, king of Assyria and that the judgements were related to his military advancements. Your thoughts? I promise to do further research.

I think it's a mistake to identify the seventh king with the "eighth".
If that were the case, where would one finish and the other begin? Where's the boundary line? In effect, there would be seven in the sequence instead of eight.
The "seventh king" is rather a brief interval, perhaps comparatively peaceful, between the turmoil of the sixth king and "the eighth". That needs to be incorporated into the theory.

reply to post by NihilistSanta

Question for you sk0rpion if your interpretation of Isaiah 42 is that Islam is good and godly how come Christ makes no mention of it? Seems kind of important.

Isaiah 42 shows that Mohammad and Islam were foretold by God...as a good thing to come. So the OPs claim that islam is the beast is unbiblical.

As for the lack of mention by Jesus...The same can be said of many christian beliefs.

Did Jesus mention that God is a trinity and that he is part of it? Did Jesus mention that he is actually the God of the old testament, as believed by many christians? Did Jesus mention that one needs to believe that he died on the cross to be redeemed? and so on.

Those are all important tenets of the christian faith, and yet Jesus never mentioned any of it. Seems kind of important right?

"hey guys await my second coming, oh yeah another guy will come too and preach against many of my claims. Go follow him." I mean he did say others would come but he implies that they come to deceive and not to save. Doesn't make sense if you include the context of the rest of the book rather than trying to impose some meaning outside of context on one piece of scripture.

Mohammad never preached against Jesus. In fact, Mohammad retained the christian belief that Jesus is the messiah. Whether you like it or nor, apart from christianity only Islam regards Jesus as the messiah.

Islam was directed towards another group of people... the pagan, idol worshipping, polytheistic arabs. Islam was Gods way of ridding pagan Arabia of its idols.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

As for the lack of mention by Jesus...The same can be said of many christian beliefs. Did Jesus mention that God is a trinity and that he is part of it? Did Jesus mention that he is actually the God of the old testament, as believed by many christians? Did Jesus mention that one needs to believe that he died on the cross to be redeemed? and so on. Those are all important tenets of the christian faith, and yet Jesus never mentioned any of it. Seems kind of important right?

Hmm kind of answered my question with a question.

My question was a serious one. If Muhammad was foretold to come after Christ we have no mention of this anywhere in the New Testament?. Christ did mention others that would come but as I said before we are told to beware of them. Also you did not mention the claim about Sargon. As to the claims about christian ideology and its correlation to the words of Christ well you again are only choosing pieces of scripture. The entire bible is about Christ and is full of references to what the messiah is and his relation to God,the trinity, the sacrifice of Jesus etc. You have to take it as a whole.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by NihilistSanta

 

Is that supposed to refute his idea? I have to study the scripture further so I cant approve or disapprove your hypothesis but I think you just supported his idea about Islam and prophecy.

His only idea is that Islam = bad.

But going by the clues in Isaiah 42, we can see that it points towards Mohammad and the arrival of Islam.
Thereby proving that Islam is of God and refutes the OPs idea that Islam is the beast.

I have made a more detailed thread about Isaiah 42 here
The light of the Gentiles mentioned in Isaiah 42

Isaiah 42 is not the only servant passage in the Bible. There are many references to God’s servant, some of which refer specifically to the nation of Israel. Cf. Isaiah 41:8-16; 42:18-25; 43:10; 44:1-5, 21-23; 45:4; 48:20.

A summary of those passages as to the nature of God's servant:
He is a descendent of Jesse through his son David. This proves that God’s servant is an Israelite, not an Arab.
He is called Israel and distinct from national Israel. This provides additional proof that the servant is an Israelite and not an Arab.
He is the Mighty God and eternal king.
He is empowered by God’s Spirit.
He will restore national Israel.
He will be a light to the Gentiles and the Savior of the entire earth.
He will be a covenant to the people.
He will bring a law which all the peoples will follow.
He will at first be rejected and despised by both the nation of Israel and other nations.
He will offer himself as a sacrifice for sin.
He will see offspring and carry out the Lord’s will.
He will intercede and justify sinners.

It is clear to me that God's servant is Jesus the Messiah.

Peace be to you my brother, and may the Light of the World illumine your heart and mind to His love and grace through our most precious Redeemer.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
I think it's a mistake to identify the seventh king with the "eighth".
If that were the case, where would one finish and the other begin? Where's the boundary line? In effect, there would be seven in the sequence instead of eight.
The "seventh king" is rather a brief interval, perhaps comparatively peaceful, between the turmoil of the sixth king and "the eighth". That needs to be incorporated into the theory.

That's why it's called the "revived" Roman Empire. It had a deadly wound to it's head in 1924 and is now being "revived" right before everyone's eyes.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by NihilistSanta

 

Idolatry is to make idols or images. Right here and right now - what is present does not need 'making'. Images made in the mind is idolatry. Only this moment is real but man makes images and idols in his head and worships what is not real.
This moment is God. However humans made believe that there is more than this by believing their thoughts, thoughts are images made (imagination).

edit on 27-7-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

The worship of self is also idolatry, not just things that can be fashioned by the hands or sweat of the brow.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

We know that no biblical "servant" ever influenced the people of Kedar and the wilderness...and no biblical servant defeated the idolaters... and established worship of the God of Abraham. Isaiah 42 is a direct prophecy of Mohammad

Judaism and christianity had already been established in Kedar by 450 A.D., so it's not Muhammad it is Jesus that Isaiah 42 speaks of. Isaiah speaks exclusively about Jesus. Muhammad wasn't converting pagans he was converting christians and jews and killing the ones who refused.

Biblical Arabia is not Saudi Arabia. Biblical Arabia is east of Jerusalem about 400 miles heading towards Babylon on the eastern border of Jordan. Judaism itself had existed all between Babylon and Jerusalem. Babylon is 700 miles from Jerusalem. Saudi Arabia is the area Midian inhabitated.



When Paul travelled to Arabia, that's where he went, over towards the east of Nabataea.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
I think it's a mistake to identify the seventh king with the "eighth".
If that were the case, where would one finish and the other begin? Where's the boundary line? In effect, there would be seven in the sequence instead of eight.
The "seventh king" is rather a brief interval, perhaps comparatively peaceful, between the turmoil of the sixth king and "the eighth". That needs to be incorporated into the theory.

If you pay attention to biblical sequence it fits perfectly. The 8th is of the seven because it is an empire, and it is also encompassing the same area as the previous 7. Notice with each head on the Beast, the Beast got bigger, ecompassing more and more territory. Alexander the Great took it from Greece all the way through Iran to the Indus river on the edge of India. Also notice that Islam now inhabits everyone of these areas that each head on the Beast conquered. By the time Muhammad arrived the Beast extended all the way to Hadrian's wall in Brittain. Each Head of the Beast went in sequence, one after the other. Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome/H.R.E., Islam/Ottoman empire. Leaving 1 head left, one last empire to arise.

The Beast gets dealt a mortal wound (1924 end of the Ottoman empire), the Muslim Brotherhood is created in 1925 to resurrect it. Now look at current events in the ME. The MB is flipping most of the nations in the ME and installing MB regimes, surrounding Israel. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Does your god have trouble with math? "The 7th is also the 8th and of the seven..."

7 =/= 8.

And furthermore, 7 does not have room for an 8th.

What kind of math is this?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Does your god have trouble with math? "The 7th is also the 8th and of the seven..."

7 =/= 8.

And furthermore, 7 does not have room for an 8th.

What kind of math is this?

edit on 27-7-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

You need biblical knowledge and you have none. This has nothing to do with math .

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

Mohammad never preached against Jesus. In fact, Mohammad retained the christian belief that Jesus is the messiah. Whether you like it or nor, apart from christianity only Islam regards Jesus as the messiah.

Islam was directed towards another group of people... the pagan, idol worshipping, polytheistic arabs. Islam was Gods way of ridding pagan Arabia of its idols.

Then why do Muslim say Jesus is not the messiah, that he will not be Messiah until he returns hm? I've had many a muslim dispute what you are saying.

If Jesus didn't come as Messiah by the time the second temple was destroyed then there will not be a Messiah ever.

As for Islam being God's way of ridding Arabia of Idols, Arabia would have to be where Mecca is, and i have already Established that Arabia was towards Babylon on the eastern edge of Jordan which is the biblical location of Arabia. Apparently God failed to rid the pagan arabs of their Idols because you still have a couple flourishing in Mecca.



To this day the muslim walk 7 times around the kaaba for remission of sins (idolatry), just as Muhammad and the pagan Quraysh tribe did that he belonged to as a child, in which Hu'bal the moongod was supreme deity.





Here we see worshipping, praying, touching the Black Stone meteorite for forgiveness of sins (Idolatry).
Now either God failed and he is not omnipotent and incapable of doing all things, or Islam is a lie. Obviously God's way of ridding the Arabs of Idols failed, so we can only conclude then, that it was never God who was pushing Muhammad, or he would not have failed, and Mecca and the Kaaba and the Black Stone meteorite would be destroyed.