Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Bible says we are saved by faith alone.I wrote a thread about that. The so called "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Faith" where the papacy and Protestantism signed a document which claimed "we are saved by grace alone"...which on the surface seems legit, but as always when you start peeling back the layers something totally different emerges. If you're interested:
"Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Faith" - Has 500 Years Taught Us Nothing?
Well since the Millennium comes into effect only AFTER the Second Coming of Christ, a future Millennium is the only Millennium revealed in Scripture.
There is no such thing as anyone being is an imaginary Millennium at the moment.
Satan must roll on the floor laughing at such an absurd idea, since he currently walks about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.
Yes, we are saved "by grace (of God, not the priesthood) through faith (in Jesus' sacrifice, not "the merits of the good works of the Mary, Jesus, and the saints") alone".The Bible says we are saved by faith alone. Salvation is a gift by the grace of God through faith.
Especially when instead of protesting, we champion Jesuit eschatology.Protestant is a meaningless label. Who are these so-called Protestants protesting?
Our beliefs define who we are. Your support of Jesuit Ribera's 15th century Futurists ideas speaks for itself.I am neither Protestant or Catholic. I am Christian.
If you're such an astute student of history, then why can't you see the Jesuits introduced Jesuit Futurism to the world as a "diversionary tactic" to deflect the sound Biblical accusations by the Protestant Reformation that the papacy is Antichrist - by way of placing Antichrist into the past (Jesuit Alcazar's "Preterism") or the future (Jesuit Ribera's Futurism)?Actual
There is no reference in that link to what you claimed I quoted from EGW. What I said...
Is simply a general overview of history and the religious intolerance displayed throughout the ages, even within Protestantism. That same spirit of intolerance and bigotry still persists in those who are righteous in their own eyes thinking they have need of nothing. People such as this guy, who responded by claiming...So said the Sannhedrin to the apostles.
So said the Catholics to the Lutherans.
So said the Lutherans to the Calvinists.
So said the Calvinists to the Wesleyans.
So said the Wesleyans to the Baptists.
So said everyone to the Adventists. Yet the Adventists comprise a mix of ex Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, and numerous others who chose the word of God as opposed to tradition and teachings of church leaders lost in apathy and indifference.
Yet Jesus was a Seventh Day Adventist. He was also catholic, Lutheran, Calvinist, Methodist and Baptist. What He was NOT was a blind self serving uncommitted waffling undecided independent non-denominational critic of everything in sight refusing to see or acknowledge anything good in anything.
Which he could not prove because when asked to do so, he offered something totally unrelated and irrelevant, but compounding and accentuating his own prejudice and resistance to anything that rocks his boat.Really?
No.
You chose the words of Ellen G White.
Jesus never gave anyone the power to withhold or give salvation.Yes, we are saved "by grace (of God, not the priesthood) through faith (in Jesus' sacrifice, not "the merits of the good works of the Mary, Jesus, and the saints") alone".
The claim of Catholicism that the Father's "extreme satisfaction with Jesus' life of good works" is what led Him to arbitrarily grant the priesthood the power to extend or withhold grace to us - apart from any consideration of Calvary whatsoever - is nothing more than a Christianized form of the same denial of the absolute necessity of blood atonement, which denial is at the core of occult, Luciferian religion...
because Satan can't stand the fact that God soundly disproved as patently false every single accusation hurled against Him - from since before the war in heaven until Jesus breathed His last - at Calvary.
Especially when instead of protesting, we champion Jesuit eschatology. Our beliefs define who we are. Your support of Jesuit Ribera's 15th century Futurists ideas speaks for itself.
Yet again, I already refuted your claim on a whole thread. A thread to which you have not commented.If you're such an astute student of history, then why can't you see the Jesuits introduced Jesuit Futurism to the world as a "diversionary tactic" to deflect the sound Biblical accusations by the Protestant Reformation that the papacy is Antichrist - by way of placing Antichrist into the past (Jesuit Alcazar's "Preterism") or the future (Jesuit Ribera's Futurism)?
You have chosen to trust in the eschatological conclusions of an organization which is so blinded by Lucifer that they champion Lucifer's greatest deception to ever sweep over the world: that blood atonement is a wholly unnecessary component for the salvation of men.
And you deny the Biblically established, more than plausible, sound eschatological conclusions of Protestant Historicism because you're too proud to own up to any of this.
You still haven't answered how there can possibly be "two events in history where Jesus comes as a thief in the night".
But you endorse and support her claims. It does not require a verbatim quote to see that.There is no reference in that link to what you claimed I quoted from EGW. What I said...
Is simply a general overview of history and the religious intolerance displayed throughout the ages, even within Protestantism. That same spirit of intolerance and bigotry still persists in those who are righteous in their own eyes thinking they have need of nothing. People such as this guy, who responded by claiming...
Which he could not prove because when asked to do so, he offered something totally unrelated and irrelevant, but compounding and accentuating his own prejudice and resistance to anything that rocks his boat.
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.
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?
CoreIssue, I most certainly did address your non-point about Erasmus. Might I su
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.
Context is critical. What did Christ mean by this: But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.Does it? What is the "Kingdom" that is "upon us" that Christ speaks of in Matt 12?
This is the eternal Kingdom of God on earth AFTER the Second Coming, and AFTER the Millennium, and AFTER the New Heavens and the New Earth have bee established. So there is a sequence of events from Revelation 19-21 before the Kingdom of God is handed over to the Father.What is the "Kingdom" that is handed over to the Father upon his return and final defeat of death in 1 Cor 15?
Now you are mixing apples and oranges. What applies to the children of God does NOT apply to the unbelieving and the ungodly. So the last enemy of the children of God -- physical death -- is destroyed at the Resurrection/Rapture. The saints who passed on receive immortal glorified "spiritual bodies" (free from earthly limitations) whereas the ones who are alive are transformed, perfected, and also received glorified bodies.And IF death is finally defeated as the LAST enemy (not second last) when we receive our resurrection bodies AT Christ's second coming, and Revelation 20 tells us that Death is tossed into the Lake of Fire AFTER Satan has already been so (which is AFTER the Millennium)...then I fail to see how there is a 'time' in scripture for an 'in between' 1000 years.
This pertains to the Church Age. But the Church Age ends with the Resurrection/Rapture (see above).Christ tells people clearly that his Kingdom is "not of this world". He says that the "Kingdom is upon you"...
And it is a very important and critical passage and within the context of events which take place AFTER the Second Coming of Christ. The Millennium is simply a prelude to the eternal Kingdom of God on earth.The bible only references the 1000 years in one passage.
The Kingdom is now only in the spiritual sense in that those who have been born again are within the Kingdom of God during the Church Age. The Kingdom is not visible since "the Kingdom of God is within you". That does not change the fact that there will be A LITERAL, VISIBLE, TANGIBLE, PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL KINGDOM OF GOD ON EARTH IN THE FUTURE. There is an overwhelming number of Scriptures to support this.Considered how often and in how many other places we are told that the Kingdom is NOW...I wouldn't feel so confident, if I were you, that there's going to be a magical 'in between' period that in fact serves no real biblical purpose.
Then where or what is the AC today and how is it exercising theocratic power currently?
No doubt the church of Rome and ecumenical movements will merge and go along with the singular world religion, but the true remnants of Christianity will not and will be targeted. Once they are removed, nothing resembling real Christianity will be left.
I think you're interpreting the use of singular pronouns to rigidly. Plenty of times the Bible writers used a singular pronoun or person to refer to entire nations or tribes.You're just following a DOCTRINE OF MEN, not the actual written Scripture.
I just showed why Bible scholars like Bullinger and James Strong showed that Matt.24:23-26 context is about a SINGULAR false Messiah. And the icing on the cake further proof is how Jesus showed in those verses that false Messiah will work great signs and wonders that if possible, would deceive even His elect. That is different than the earlier Matt.24:5 warning of 'many' coming that only say... they are Christ.
Matt 24:4-5
4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, "Take heed that no man deceive you."
5 For many shall come in My name, saying, "I am Christ"; and shall deceive many.
KJV
That warning above is DIFFERENT than the one below. Jesus gave that warning during the time of the beginning of sorrows, not the actual tribulation time which He warns of later at verse 21. In the above, those are only saying, "I am Christ". There are no miracles associated with those. Those are not associated with the later mention of the "abomination of desolation" event from Daniel. Those are like the religious hoaxes like Moony, etc., that have claimed to be Jesus throughout the centuries, and just do a bunch of talking, but no great signs and wonders that would almost deceive Christ's elect.
Matt 24:23-26
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, "Lo, here is Christ, or there"; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
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
That Scripture there at verse 23-26 is DIFFERENT. Jesus gave this warning right after He warned of the time of "great tribulation". And there He is warning of a pseudochristos that others... will say is Christ, and he will work great signs and wonders that would almost deceive Christ's elect. If you can't understand this difference, then you are already deceived and prepared to fall away to the first supernatural messiah that shows up, which will not be our Lord Jesus Christ. The working of supernatural miracles is set for the tribulation in our near future.
1 John 2:18
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.
KJV
That first phrase with "antichrist" is SINGULAR. Those brethren John said had ALREADY HEARD that antichrist shall come. WHERE... did they first hear that? From Jesus...
John 14:30
30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.
KJV
Jesus said that just prior to His being delivered up to be crucified. The prince of this world of course is Satan. Many try to say Satan was bound by Jesus' death on the cross, but that is not true. Jesus there was warning that Satan, the prince of this world, is coming. And that is what the subject of all these Scriptures about the coming singular Antichrist is about.
John 12:31
31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
KJV
That's another Scripture often wrongly understood. That casting out did not happen when our Lord Jesus was crucified. This casting out has not happened yet. It is associated with the future tribulation time when Satan and his angels are cast out of the heavenly dimension down to our earth in OUR earthly dimension...
Rev 12:7-9
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
KJV
Except this is clearly something he also bestowed authority upon his followers to do also.Context is critical. What did Christ mean by this: But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
What He meant was that He Himself as King-Messiah was manifesting the power of the Kingdom of God. He preached the Gospel of the Kingdom because He was the King. But Christ did not establish His visible, physical and spiritual Kingdom at that time. The King of the Jews was crucified at the behest of the Jews.
Wait...so, the Kingdom that Christ "hands over to the Father" in 1 Cor 15, is not established until AFTER the Millennium? Until after even the new earth and heavens have been restored?This is the eternal Kingdom of God on earth AFTER the Second Coming, and AFTER the Millennium, and AFTER the New Heavens and the New Earth have bee established. So there is a sequence of events from Revelation 19-21 before the Kingdom of God is handed over to the Father.
Does the bible make this distinction? You seem quick to, but I wouldn't be so hasty. What about other verses that speak of both just and unjust being resurrected and judged at the same time? What about verses that speak of the just and unjust being judged at the same time? What makes you think that suddenly we can only apply this reference to the resurrection to believers? Is there a different verse that makes it clear that unbelievers have their own, special time? Because unless you can produce one, I believe I'll stick with the bible verses that tell me it's going to be the same event:Now you are mixing apples and oranges. What applies to the children of God does NOT apply to the unbelieving and the ungodly. So the last enemy of the children of God -- physical death -- is destroyed at the Resurrection/Rapture. The saints who passed on receive immortal glorified "spiritual bodies" (free from earthly limitations) whereas the ones who are alive are transformed, perfected, and also received glorified bodies.
However, since there will be no more sin and death after the New Heavens and New Earth are established, Death and Hades are metaphorically cast into the Lake of Fire. This means that the physical death of sinners and their presence in Hades will be abolished. No more death means no more need for Hades.
Your biblical passages to back this up?So the biblical sequence of events is as follows:
1. The Church Age (the Kingdom of God invisible)
2. The Resurrection/Rapture (the last enemy of Christians destroyed)
3. The Second Coming of Christ with power and great glory
4. The establishment of the Millennium (prelude to the Kingdom on earth)
5. The Great White Throne Judgment
6. The abolishing of Death and Hades (the end of sin and death on earth)
7. The New Heavens and the New Earth
8. The eternal visible Kingdom of God on earth
Mmm....except...there's really nothing within scripture that gives you guys the authority or even blueprints to start dividing up these "kingdoms", is there? It's a bit like the second coming, that you seem to feel free to divide into two sections, which is also not specifically stated anywhere in scripture.This pertains to the Church Age. But the Church Age ends with the Resurrection/Rapture (see above).
All of scripture is important and critical. But not if we twist it's meaning and then run with it.And it is a very important and critical passage and within the context of events which take place AFTER the Second Coming of Christ. The Millennium is simply a prelude to the eternal Kingdom of God on earth.
It's sort of funny to me that you can say that "the kingdom is now in the spiritual sense", but then you dismiss verses like "my kingdom is not of this earth". How can you NOT see the connection here?The Kingdom is now only in the spiritual sense in that those who have been born again are within the Kingdom of God during the Church Age. The Kingdom is not visible since "the Kingdom of God is within you". That does not change the fact that there will be A LITERAL, VISIBLE, TANGIBLE, PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL KINGDOM OF GOD ON EARTH IN THE FUTURE. There is an overwhelming number of Scriptures to support this.
I think you're interpreting the use of singular pronouns to rigidly. Plenty of times the Bible writers used a singular pronoun or person to refer to entire nations or tribes.
....
I gave you explicit examples of where the Bible says the Antichrist is a "horn" and a "beast" which the Bible says plainly are KINGDOMS - not singular men.That's what you... say, just to keep to your tradition.
I gave you explicit Scripture CONTEXT examples of what the coming false one is about with a singular pseudo-Christ, and you resort to pronoun interpretation BS.
"Beasts" represent both kingdoms and a man in the Bible. Horns represent power in both kingdoms and the Little Horn of Daniel. But both Daniel, Revelation and other Scriptures make it clear that the Antichrist is a Satan-energized king, not merely a kingdom (which would make no sense).I gave you explicit examples of where the Bible says the Antichrist is a "horn" and a "beast" which the Bible says plainly are KINGDOMS - not singular men.