President of Israel and the Antichrist

The antichrist is basically a Jewish ruler of Israel who rules for seven years and is elected from a vast multitude.

What's the difference with this and the system of presidency in today's Israel?

[1] He is the secular ruler of Israel (practically a humanist Messiah)
[2] He sits for seven years (Rev. speaks of a 7 year tribulation)
[3] He is elected through democracy (comes up from the sea)

So what you guys think? Would Shimon Peres fit the suit of the Antichrist? Doubtfully. There are antipopes, and there are also antichrists, rulers who do "evil in the eyes of God". But what do you think?

I doubt it. Sorry for not agreeing with this train of thought. I think there are many small antichrists around and there were twelve tribes of Israel, which tribe would it be.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


He has to do more than that to be eligible.
I mean hes the antichrist, he gotta beat hitler at least.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


No, I don't think so. He's the one who imposes a 7-year peace treaty on both Israel and the Middle East. I don't see that person as coming from within the region. I don't think it's possible. Neither side trusts the other enough to allow it.

Personally, I think that if there is any truth to the whole evil Zionist thing, they are the evil Banker cabal, and the current state of Israel is their decoy ... a tool used to misdirect people's energy and attention. Sort of a "pay no attention to the men behind the curtain" ploy. They care nothing about the Jews in Israel and care only for their own power games.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim

The antichrist is basically a Jewish ruler of Israel . . .

So where does that list of indicators of an antichrist come from?

I think Zionism in general is the biblical antichrist (as opposed to a modern fictional version).
I don't see Israel, as in the occupational regime in Palestine, having any legitimate claim to the name and is just a pretense to give cover to a criminal enterprise.

True spiritual Israel is the church of Jesus, which he came to found.
Any theories to claim a future Messianic "coming" only serve zionist interests and should be abolished from Christian thinking.
We should as a church get on with the mission that God has given to us through His son, Jesus, to make everyone on Earth his disciples.

Well let's compare the two:

Anti-christ - doesn't exist
President of Israel - real political position in Israel.

Of course we can get more descriptive in that the anti-christ isn't even mentioned in Revelations or that there are actually MANY anti-christs in the bible in that an anti-christ is pretty much anyone who rejects christ.

"Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the Antichrist." (2 John 1:7)

But woe be it from me to rain on Christians' favorite game of "accuse anyone you don't like as the anti-christ." Of course that game would actually make sense if Christians used the biblical definition of the anti-christ and not what some dude (Saint Irenaeus) from the 2nd century decided the anti-christ was.

rickymouse
there were twelve tribes of Israel, which tribe would it be.

And that's where the very nature of the current nation of Israel becomes confusing. Israel was a kingdom, set aside from Judah the second kingdom. However, the only two tribes that can be accounted for in Israel today, are Judah and Levi, the only two tribes that has no part in the ancient kingdom of Israel. For this reason the nationalist Hasidim and other orthodox Jews want to change the name of Israel given by the UN into Judah or Judea. Levi actually has no right to any land according to the Bible, being they were to be a holy priesthood.

Further, claiming Judah decent is spurious, the great majority of the population of Judah in today's Israel are Europeans who at some point converted to the Jewish religion, and have no real historical links or rights to the Land. This is in part the reason why Jews today trace their lineage on the mother's side, since nearly all Judahites present in Israel today are decendants of one of a handful women of Judah decent who lived in Rome roughly a millennium ago (a genetic bottleneck).

Most of the original decendants to the ancient Jews are today Syrians and Libanese, Jordanians and so on, and have been so since Assyria occupied and enslaved them. They never moved back after the fall of Assyria. And then came Babylon. The bible tells us that only a small group of Judahites returned to Jerusalem after the captivity, the others were scattered around the world and married into other families of non-Jewish decent. So in effect, the Palestinians who are mostly Arabs are the sons of Abraham and Semites, while most of the Jews are Europeans and Japhetites.

Confusing to say the least.

Peres may be a war criminal of the lowest order but is he the antichrist? No way. The AC was also supposed to bring about peace and Peres can't even make peace in his own nation.

Hmmm what's the difference? Well probably the most obvious is the anti-Christ will be indwelt by Satan. Then there's the whole make the entire world worship him and bring about the apocalypse. I mean those are just some small starters, I'm sure there's more minor differences.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


Well put and precisely why Peres cannot be the anti-christ. People forget the Jews are only interested in the coming Messiah, anything to do with Christ is not Jewish - its a Christian idea. I often wonder if today's Christians have any idea of the differences between Christianity and Judaism. One group believes they will be resurrected with their bodies - the other apparently believes just in resurrection and probably 'hopes' they won't have their old bodies etc only their spirits/souls.

You also are right on the hereditary point you made because unless one tested the people in the surrounding countries for the Jewish bloodline/chromazone marker they would be invisible due to conversion to islam in the past. Interestingly I did read that the Saudi royals were originally Jews but converted and I must admit to being curious about the alliance that appears to be being forged between Israel and Saudi - not that I suspect it will ever make good bedfellows.

buster2010
The AC was also supposed to bring about peace and Peres can't even make peace in his own nation.

Jesusalem is a combination of Yarah and Shalam. Yarah means to Shoot (ex. arrows) and Shalam means Peace. Reminds me of a story in Kings (1Ki 22:34ff, compare with 2Chr 18:33) about the death of Ahab:

But someone drew his bow at random and hit the king of Israel between the sections of his armor. The king told his chariot driver, "Wheel around and get me out of the fighting. I've been wounded." All day long the battle raged, and the king was propped up in his chariot facing the Arameans. The blood from his wound ran onto the floor of the chariot, and that evening he died. As the sun was setting, a cry spread through the army: "Every man to his town; everyone to his land!"

Peace by archery in other words, so being a killer or war criminal could easily be combined with being a 'peacemaker' (like the Colt 45 carryng that name).

However, the trad. semantic meaning of Jerusalem is 'Teaching of Peace' and is of Chaldean origin it seems.

Shiloh7
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

Well put and precisely why Peres cannot be the anti-christ. People forget the Jews are only interested in the coming Messiah, anything to do with Christ is not Jewish - its a Christian idea. I often wonder if today's Christians have any idea of the differences between Christianity and Judaism. One group believes they will be resurrected with their bodies - the other apparently believes just in resurrection and probably 'hopes' they won't have their old bodies etc only their spirits/souls.

You also are right on the hereditary point you made because unless one tested the people in the surrounding countries for the Jewish bloodline/chromazone marker they would be invisible due to conversion to islam in the past. Interestingly I did read that the Saudi royals were originally Jews but converted and I must admit to being curious about the alliance that appears to be being forged between Israel and Saudi - not that I suspect it will ever make good bedfellows.

The Jews are more interested in a Messiah figure who will be someone more in keeping with King David, a military figure. They rejected Jesus because that's not what he was.

The Jesus in Revelation will be this sort of figure. The Jesus of the Millennial Reign is also hinted to be closer to this kind of authority - ruling with an iron rod. So, I don't know how much of the New Testament Jesus Christians will get which is one more reason why I'm not quite looking forward to the Apocalypse. I'm not sure how much of our Jesus will be there to greet us.

As for the Diaspora, you can't get scattered as thoroughly as the Jews were and expect that they will remain perfectly intact as a racial heritage. So, I guess the question is what is more important to God - the physical heredity or the spiritual one?

reply to post by payta


Hitler was just a pawn, if he were to be considered an anti-Christ, it would be the people behind the scenes who organized and funded his reign of terror who realistically qualify for anti-Christ label.

Personally, I am not religious so I take all this stuff with a grain of salt but it doesn't mean that I can't entertain it.

I must point out that it frightens me when people use current events as a reason to reinforce their religious beliefs. Are we supposed to believe the bible? Are we supposed to believe Nostradamus? Should we believe all self proclaimed prophets?

The world will always have evil people who do nasty things, we have probably had over a million "anti-Christs" by now.

For all we know, Christ was the anti-Christ.

Utnapisjtim

buster2010
The AC was also supposed to bring about peace and Peres can't even make peace in his own nation.

Jesusalem is a combination of Yarah and Shalam. Yarah means to Shoot (ex. arrows) and Shalam means Peace. Reminds me of a story in Kings (1Ki 22:34ff, compare with 2Chr 18:33) about the death of Ahab:

But someone drew his bow at random and hit the king of Israel between the sections of his armor. The king told his chariot driver, "Wheel around and get me out of the fighting. I've been wounded." All day long the battle raged, and the king was propped up in his chariot facing the Arameans. The blood from his wound ran onto the floor of the chariot, and that evening he died. As the sun was setting, a cry spread through the army: "Every man to his town; everyone to his land!"

Peace by archery in other words, so being a killer or war criminal could easily be combined with being a 'peacemaker' (like the Colt 45 carryng that name).

However, the trad. semantic meaning of Jerusalem is 'Teaching of Peace' and is of Chaldean origin it seems.

What does that have to do with anything I said? The AC is supposed to bring about peace before making the announcement of his godhood from the rebuilt temple mount. So where is the peace? Not to mention the temple mount won't be rebuilt in Peres's lifetime so assuming he is the AC really makes no sense.

reply to post by ketsuko


Good points however I would just mention that the Jews themselves don't even mention Jesus as having existed. Its Christianity that claims they rejected Jesus as a peace maker. His role which certainly didn't bring any form of peace to the Jewish authorities, if we believe the NT should have caused some reaction that was recorded in their holy books, but strangely it has not.

payta
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

He has to do more than that to be eligible.
I mean hes the antichrist, he gotta beat hitler at least.

Well, ask a Palestinian in Gaza or the West Bank-- who is worst Peres or Hitler. Just a thought. To the people who fit into the Arian jacket, Hitler was a nice guy, but if you didn't fit in, Hitler would be your worst nightmare. Seeing that Israel today run ghettos and practice apartheid practicing differenciated laws for Jews and non-Jews, and to the general Palestinians Israel is nothing short of being a fascist police state. Some would perhaps say Israel today is even worse than Nazi-Germany or pre-Mandelean South-Africa. Not that I agree. Comparing a modern nation to that of Nazi Germany is just silly, and is a typical example of being short of real arguments. Also. In no way do I believe Shimon Peres to be the Antichrist, I used him as a generic example since he is the current president. I just want to see what people here on ATS thinks.

Corruption Exposed

For all we know, Christ was the anti-Christ.

And that's what I believe. The Beast is the tradition discribing a supernatural Jesus who never existed i.e. the Catholic one that has been designed and tailored to fit Rome.

Shiloh7
reply to post by ketsuko

 

Good points however I would just mention that the Jews themselves don't even mention Jesus as having existed. Its Christianity that claims they rejected Jesus as a peace maker. His role which certainly didn't bring any form of peace to the Jewish authorities, if we believe the NT should have caused some reaction that was recorded in their holy books, but strangely it has not.

Google "Talmud Jesus" to realize they do mention him.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


Youre thinking about the false prophet. He is of Jewish blood. The Anti-Christ is Ku#e. Strangely enough, Israel's govt has slowely been selling parts of Jerusalem to the Vatican. Barry Chamish wrote all about it and the Oslo Accords.

If the Pope is from the tribe of Dan (which is possible), and He owns Jerusalem, then he would fit perfectly as the False Prophet.

The Anti-christ or beast on the other hand is identified as "The Assyrian"...as in the First Assyrian ever and for that matter the first Babylonian ever. He is Nimrod/Asshur/Osiris/Apollo-Apollyon/Orion.

The bible is clear about the identity of the Antichrist. Why do you think the Theosophists are so interested in ressurection?