President of Israel and the Antichrist

buster2010
What does that have to do with anything I said?

You indirectly claimed a war-criminal could not bring peace. I demonstrated that it's false. War-crimes is the rule of peacemaking it seems....

Corruption Exposed
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.

Like I said earlier in the thread, according to the bible anyone who rejects Christ is an Anti-Christ. The term has NOTHING to do with revelations. So you, me, anyone from any religion that isn't Christian, atheists, etc are all Anti-Christs. Basically it is another term for heretic. So your post is correct, there are literally BILLIONS of anti-christs. It wasn't until some "Saint" in the 2nd century decided that the anti-christ was a singular person that will herald the end of the world through his actions that we got the current definition of anti-christ. Christians should read their bibles better.

Utnapisjtim

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 word 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.

edit on 28-1-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: Strange typo

This is the best explanation I've heard concerning the Jewish issue because it simplifies it in a way that non-Jews can understand.

Shimon Perez..? Naw he is good cop compare to netanyahoo, but the real antichrist is Avigdor Lieberman, just take a look at his hateful out of orbit eyes..!

I swear his is Dajjal himself.

Utnapisjtim
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?

The antichrist was Herod the Great (King of the Jews 37 BCE – 4 BCE) and the following Herodian dynasty.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

BELIEVERpriest
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

Youre thinking about the false prophet.

There were two people who would be salved or annointed in ancient Israel. The King (Meschiach i.e. Christ in Greek), and the High Priest. I am talking about a false ruler of Israel, a false king, a false Israeli king, a false Meschiac, a false Messiah. The church took the word meschiach and through the centuries they have changed it's semantics from meaning 'King of the Jews' to mean something like Saviour and cut away the part that makes the word walk and talk in order to make sure he will never fit their description and certainly never threaten their seats of power. The same has happened with the English word Salvation. It lit. means to apply salvae or oil on something, like a king for liturgic reasons, or a cut in the head for a more down to earth application.

reply to post by ketsuko


i cannot wait to see those bada55 versions of jesus you mentioned!!!

the one in shining armor riding pegasus is the coolest!

i imagine he would be like gandalf in two towers charging from the top of mountain!!!
or doing 'You shall not pass!' moment

awesome

peace

reply to post by Krazysh0t


antichrists speculating antichrists!!!
good one bro!
i just had a good laugh!
thanks

hahaha

peace

reply to post by dodol


Reminded me of this....

Krazysh0t
Like I said earlier in the thread, according to the bible anyone who rejects Christ is an Anti-Christ. The term has NOTHING to do with revelations.

An antichrist is not a name it is a concept. Anti + Christ, the oposite of Christ. To say there are no antichrists mentioned in the Apocalypse is like saying royalty isn't mentioned, only kings. You're splitting hairs.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


Most people seem to throw it around as more of a title it seems. No one ever says obama is a antichrist, they say he is the antichrist, like it is some big bad scary monster about to eat up everyone type deal.

Personally, I put as much stock in the whole biblical prophecy stuff, as I do nostradamus. Which is none.

reply to post by TKDRL


Indeed, many Christians seem to believe more in an Antichrist than a Christ. Their Christ has been shaped through the centuries into a supernatural superhero which is a red herring compared even compared to his colleagues Superman and Chuck Norris!

Utnapisjtim


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).

Or how about a 'peace' through a nuclear missile deterrent... seeing as how the (ill-named State) Israeli's have around 80-90 nukes to be delivered by planes, or Submarine launched 'Arrows'
RE: www.theguardian.com...


the "10 Lost Tribes of Israel" are not representative of the modern State called Israel...
so the prophetic scriptures are not speaking of the 'Israel' created by the UN in 1948
those prophecies are about a symbolic 'Israel' brought together from many peoples...(say around 1776)
a regathering, not just of Jews & Levites in the lands of the Levant & Palestine
but a regathering of a population with representatives of the other 10-lost-tribes-of -Israel =the founding fathers?


Can Perez have dual citizenship & be vetted to become an American President in 2016?
Thus joining the Symbolic 'Israel' (USA) and the mis-identified 'Israel' (aka: Judah) born in 1948

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


You are misinterpreting what I am getting at. Anti-Christ as Christians currently define it, a person of immense evil who slides his way into international leadership then proceeds to sink the world into evil, doesn't exist in Revelations (not to mention the term "Anti-Christ" doesn't appear in Revelations either). However, anti-Christ as it is ACTUALLY defined in the bible would show up during the events depicted in Revelations, but only because they've always existed. Anti-Christ as defined by the bible is a synonym for heretic or someone who doesn't follow Jesus Christ. That is a HUGE misconception that was started in the second century and is repeated to this day. So going around saying "So and so is the Anti-Christ," is dumb because first it implies that there is only one and two it suggests that an anti-christ is something more than what it actually is.

Krazysh0t
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

Anti-Christ as defined by the bible is a synonym for heretic or someone who doesn't follow Jesus Christ.

To me it looks like the only thing that is rendered completely impossible for Jesus-- is to exist (or to have existed) in flesh and blood, given the description by choice Christians.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Even though I am not religious, I am familiar with various forms of scripture.

I find your quote applicable to modern day Israel as others in this thread, and many other threads, have pointed out that the European immigrants who came to Israel are not part of the "Tribes of Israel".

I think Zionism in general is the biblical antichrist (as opposed to a modern fictional version).

Here is a quote from Revelations which reinforces your quoted statement.

3:9

I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars--I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.

biblehub.com...

There are many other version of this quote in similar form depending which version of the bible you read.

Regardless of the non religious label which I have given myself, I sometimes find myself questioning my beliefs due to the accuracy of some prophecies/predictions/scriptures...

At the end of the day I keep an open mind and hope for the best. I think all this organized religion stuff has steered humanity in the wrong direction ever since its conception...just my opinion.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


Well just like anti-christ, christ has been blown out of proportion as well. Personally, I don't believe the bible is even close to a true account of things. I look at it more like looking at historical fiction. Sure some of the things may have occurred in the bible, but the overall story is bunk or embellished.

So, if it's not an Israeli meschiach (i.e. Israeli president) who is the Antichrist, then what about Iran? The only non-Hebrew who is refered to as a Christ in the Bible is the Persian emperor Cyrus/Kyros who funded the second Temple, destroyed Babylon and brought peace to the region. Isn't this exactly what is expected by the Antichrist? Iranian officials and priests threaten Israel's existence on a regular basis.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


First, by antichrist, Im assuming you are refering to the Biblical one.

The kingdom of the Anti-christ is supposed to simulate the Milennial Kingdom of Christ. So, while Christ is King of Israel, He is also King of the world.

Almost all OT references to the anti-christ refer to him as the Assyrian. This is because the False Prophet of Israel is supposed to anoint him as King of Israel and the world when the Assyrian takes his seat in the rebuilt temple. The Book of Revelation calls him the beast that rises from the abyss, which is also said about Apollyon. Then Revelation calls Him the 1st of 7 fallen kings who will become the 8th. Nimrod was the first King of the unified world. He was the founder of Assyria and Babylon, and Gen 10 calls him by his other name Asshur.

Without question, the Bible identifies the Antichrist as an Assyrian Ku#e. Not just any Assyrian Ku#e, but specifically King Nimrod.

Who ever owns Jerusalem is ruler over Israel. At this point the Vatican owns much of Jerusalem. So, until the Pope anoints a king, the Israeli's are property of the papacy.

Utnapisjtim
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 agree with you and have pointed this out
before!