The Restrainer

[brakelite]

Once again Seventh-day Adventist doctrine.

Again, you reveal your abject and willing ignorance. It is history CI. Written in the blood of millions of martyrs across the pages of the last 1800 years of church history, which your Jesuit inspired and taught lies obscure and trample underfoot to the shame of true protestants everywhere. You have swallowed not only the hook, line, and sinker of the counter reformation, but the boat, the anchor, the chain, and the fisherman. And you are choking on it.

 

[CoreIssue]

@CoreIssue For example...But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority—not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith.Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain “Thus saith the Lord” in its support
EGW

Take a look at the thread I started on EGW.

 

[Naomi25]

The end of Satan's power and influence over us ceases completely as we are literally translated into the presence of Jesus. Yes, I know the same could be said of Calvary...Pentecost, whatever, but until the resurrection, it is all of faith and apprehending it spiritually making that victory a part of our lives...at the resurrection, what was of faith now becomes the literal realisation and reality. We are finally utterly free of him. BUT, that does not mean the end of him as an individual living conscious angel yet filled with hatred and vindictive pride and murder. That we are now finally and irrevocably out of his reach, doesn't mean he ceases to exist. That we have already been judged worthy of redemption and are finally saved (note that judgement must take place before, not after the second coming, a subject we can tackle another day) and are in the process of realising our destiny as face to face subjects to the King, does not mean that the devil has yet been finally judged according to his works. That comes at the end of the 1000 years...the thrown into the fire bit etc. The final hell (grave) and death into the lake along with all the wicked who have ever lived completely and utterly frees the entire universe of any hint or remaining memory of the evil that inflicted God's creation. The only reminder will be the imprints of the nails and scars on our Saviour.
Just a reminder, when he is loosed from his bondage, at the end of the 1000 years, Satan cannot touch us, God's people. We are safe. Perfectly protected and secure inside the city which had just descended out of heaven. The only ones outside the city are the lost...the wicked who have just been raised to face their final sentencing. (The fact the sheep and goats have already been divided, again, this had to take place prior to the second coming) means that second death applies only to the wicked...it is their second death which has no power over us.
The old saying, born twice die once, born once die twice, applies here. But real death Naomi...not life in torment. That lake of fire...the fire which rains down from heaven upon all the wicked, and the devil, and the demons...destroys everything. God does not plan to immortalise sin nor does he confer immortality/eternal life on sinners. They die. Thus it is at that time, at the end of the 1000 years, that metaphorically hell, death, and all God's enemies are drowned...permanently.

I think the fundamental difference you and I stumble over in this case, is perhaps this issue of the timing/capacity of the Millennium. I would say that scripture doesn't leave room for a future one. That every verse that we turn to that speaks of his return gives us yet another aspect of this moment/event that wraps it all up into one sequence. Rapture/resurrection? His return. The defeat of death? His return. The judgement of just and wicked? His return. The burning of the elements? His return? The groaning of this world and when it will end? His return. The resurrection of just and unjust? His return.
And so, when I do look at passages like 1 Cor 15 and then Rev 20 and I see the correlation between 'handing the kingdom over at the defeat of the last enemy' and that Satan is defeated 'after' the 1000 years but before death is 'tossed' into the lake of fire, for me...it just lines up with all those other passages. They set the benchmark, the expectation of that event, and there is very little room to stick a whole other 'age' in there between his return and the wrapping up of 'this age' and before the 'age to come' which is always painted as the eternal one...comes.

I think my point is this: probably before we make much headway here...I'd need to reconsider all the 'second coming' passages, and my Millennial stance. And...one project at a time?!!

 

[brakelite]

I think the fundamental difference you and I stumble over in this case, is perhaps this issue of the timing/capacity of the Millennium. I would say that scripture doesn't leave room for a future one. That every verse that we turn to that speaks of his return gives us yet another aspect of this moment/event that wraps it all up into one sequence. Rapture/resurrection? His return. The defeat of death? His return. The judgement of just and wicked? His return. The burning of the elements? His return? The groaning of this world and when it will end? His return. The resurrection of just and unjust? His return.
And so, when I do look at passages like 1 Cor 15 and then Rev 20 and I see the correlation between 'handing the kingdom over at the defeat of the last enemy' and that Satan is defeated 'after' the 1000 years but before death is 'tossed' into the lake of fire, for me...it just lines up with all those other passages. They set the benchmark, the expectation of that event, and there is very little room to stick a whole other 'age' in there between his return and the wrapping up of 'this age' and before the 'age to come' which is always painted as the eternal one...comes.

I think my point is this: probably before we make much headway here...I'd need to reconsider all the 'second coming' passages, and my Millennial stance. And...one project at a time?!!

Yep, I always said women are hopeless at multi-tas...ummm, can I rephrase? hopeless at doing things men can do easil...nuh, maybe not...ahhhh, women are hopeless at doing things only men can do. Yes. Sounds good.

 

[farouk]

Did He look the same? The woman at the tomb didn't recognize Him. She DID, however, think He was a human.

His was a Resurrection body from that time onward.

 

[Davy]

I think we can all agree the AC will hate religion and particularly hate Christianity and its founder.

So, if he were to claim to be Christ, would that not have a preserving effect on Christianity itself?

That the coming Antichrist will secretly hate all religions and especially Christianity, yet it doesn't mean he will not come to play God and claim responsibility for all of them. Paul said in 2 Thess.2 the man of sin (Antichrist) will exalt himself as God, and over all that is called God, or that is worshiped. That eliminates that weird idea you're having.

 

[Davy]

I don't have time at the moment to refute all the scriptures you posted above, but I will say this.

When the AC comes he will deceive the Jewish people into believing he is their long awaited messiah, fulfillment of Judaic prophecy. How could he accomplish that if hes claiming to be Christ Jesus, whom Judaism has already rejected?

What you apparently don't understand is the meaning of the word 'Christ'. It is from a Greek translation of the Hebrew for Messiah. The Messiah of Old Testament Scripture is what the orthodox Jews are basing their expected one on. They are preaching Messiah's coming. Problem is though, they don't believe He ever came a 1st time. They don't recognize our Lord Jesus Christ as their Messiah. So God is going to send them a messiah, a fake, for their rebelliousness. Anyone else joining in their delusion will likewise suffer our Lord Jesus' wrath when He comes after that fake one they will have unknowingly worshiped in His place.

 

[Davy]

Well, even after that, many will come to saving knowledge of Christianity. The AC will target Christianity in attempt to permanently whipe it out. If the AC were to claim to be Christ, then Christianity would then be acknowledged by the rest of the world as the real deal. However, we know that there will be a one world religion and this religion will blur the lines between all others and it will be inclusive to all others and fortified against Christianity entirely.

Not so. Satan is going to deceive many Christian brethren just as much as with all religions. He is not going to destroy religion. He is going to melt them all together while keeping each individual system intact.

This is how the fraternities of secret initiation operate in ALL... nations today, among ALL religions. They don't teach a destruction of the religions, they recommend their members to take part in them. And in the Christian west, that means Christianity. The western Masonic lodge has for a long time recommended its members to become Christians. In their literature they weave their eastern doctrines in with Christian doctrine, just like what the Gnostics of old did in the 1st and 2nd centuries A.D.

 

[friend of]

That eliminates that weird idea you're having.

Not really. How is the genocide of Christian's supposed to come about if Christianity is just going to be absorbed into a broad one-world religion? The answer is that Christianity will be averse to merging with all other religions and this will turn Christians into a target for elimination.

 

[friend of]

They are preaching Messiah's coming. Problem is though, they don't believe He ever came a 1st time. They don't recognize our Lord Jesus Christ as their Messiah. So God is going to send them a messiah, a fake, for their rebelliousness.

And you are saying that he will claim to be Jesus, whom they have already rejected. What on earth makes you think they will accept someone claiming to be Jesus this time?

 

[Phoneman777]

You refuse to address the point that the TR was written by a Catholic priest.

You who has a prophetess establishing your religion and telling you what to believe.

CoreIssue, I most certainly did address your non-point about Erasmus. Might I su

It truly is not in the plural. The 19th British scholar E.W. Bullinger in his Companion Bible (a KJV study Bible), capitalized the "He" in the Matthew 24:26 verse to show our Lord Jesus was speaking of a singular false-Christ...

Matt 24:26
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.
KJV


Dr. James Strong in his Strong's Exhaustive Concordance translated the KJV phrase "false Christs" in verse 24 as 'a spurious Messiah', showing the subject is about a singular false Christ.

NT:5580
pseudochristos (psyoo-dokh'-ris-tos); from NT:5571 and NT:5547; a spurious Messiah:
KJV - false Christ.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)


Then of course there's old fashioned common sense English grammar. The tense of verse 26 is singular, because Christ's warning to not be deceived by that "He" they will say is Christ requires it to be about a singular false Christ.

Because you refuse to see the simplicity in that Scripture, it can only mean that you are listening to a doctrine of men instead of reading the Scripture in simplicity as written.

It is IMPOSSIBLE that the Antichrist is a singular man.

If we lay aside Jesuit Futurist propagandist bulldookey for a moment (I was once convinced Jesuit Futurism was true) and read where Daniel says: "I considered the (ten) horns and behold there came up among them another little horn before whom three horns were plucked up by the roots."...

...it should be readily evident to anyone with a casual knowledge of history that the ten horns which were on the head of the fourth beast are the ten barbarian nations which arose out of the ashes of the fallen fourth Empire, Rome, and were forerunners of nations of Europe. After these ten horns arose, there "came up among them another little horn" Antichrist which is the papacy, which calls itself the Antichrist.

 

[Phoneman777]

You refuse to address the point that the TR was written by a Catholic priest.

You who has a prophetess establishing your religion and telling you what to believe.

I realize your Jesuit Futurist tunnel vision puts you at an intellectual disadvantage, but there's no need for it to put you at an ocular disadvantage. Buy a stronger pair of reading glasses and review my post 580 where I answered your point weak insinuation about Erasmus.

 

[Phoneman777]

Once again Seventh-day Adventist doctrine.

Are you really so obtuse that you can confuse a historical account with a denominational doctrine?

Everything Brakelite said in post #638 is a matter of history. Your problem is that you're so convince by your beloved Jesuit Futurist ideas that the Bible has nothing to say about the events of the world between the time of the Ascension and the Second Coming that you've failed to recognize how so unbelievably perfect prophecy matches history.

 

[Phoneman777]

@CoreIssue For example...But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority—not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith.Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain “Thus saith the Lord” in its support
EGW

It's like dealing with leftists who call Trump "raaaacist" because "he called all Mexicans rapists, theives, and murderers" and when you tell them "that's not what he said - he said MANY of the people crossing our Southern border illegally are raping, murdering, and robbing Americans as well as each other" -- instead of admitting their error, they get angry and call you a fascist for supporting Trump.

When facts are lacking in the arena of ideas but surrender is not an option, insult becomes the weapon of choice.

 

[CoreIssue]

CoreIssue, I most certainly did address your non-point about Erasmus. /QUOTE]
Why did you defend a Catholic Bible?

 

[CoreIssue]

I realize your Jesuit Futurist tunnel vision puts you at an intellectual disadvantage, but there's no need for it to put you at an ocular disadvantage. Buy a stronger pair of reading glasses and review my post 580 where I answered your point weak insinuation about Erasmus.

You're Jesuit nonsense has a full thread refuting it.

 

[CoreIssue]

It's like dealing with leftists who call Trump "raaaacist" because "he called all Mexicans rapists, theives, and murderers" and when you tell them "that's not what he said - he said MANY of the people crossing our Southern border illegally are raping, murdering, and robbing Americans as well as each other" -- instead of admitting their error, they get angry and call you a fascist for supporting Trump.

When facts are lacking in the arena of ideas but surrender is not an option, insult becomes the weapon of choice.

So says the SDA.

 

[friend of]

...it should be readily evident to anyone with a casual knowledge of history that the ten horns which were on the head of the fourth beast are the ten barbarian nations which arose out of the ashes of the fallen fourth Empire, Rome, and were forerunners of nations of Europe. After these ten horns arose, there "came up among them another little horn" Antichrist which is the papacy, which calls itself the Antichrist.

Okay, so great Briton and Spain are both antichrist nations then, am I with you so far?

 

[Naomi25]

Yep, I always said women are hopeless at multi-tas...ummm, can I rephrase? hopeless at doing things men can do easil...nuh, maybe not...ahhhh, women are hopeless at doing things only men can do. Yes. Sounds good.

That's quite true...just as men are quite hopeless at things only women can do! I'm pleased enough with the balance!

 

[brakelite]

So says the SDA.

For someone who boasts of his past work in "intelligence" and politics, it seems your responses are more from your political bent because they certainly aren't intelligent.