You are correct though with regards the subject of the thread. A union of church and state is the only means by which anyone will be convicted under law for not receiving the mark of the beast. It is clearly a religious law with a financial incentive. Worship our way or starve.
-
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!
If we can accept the estimated time frames in as per one of my Bibles, it shows the events of book of Jonah occurred about 150 years prior to those of the book of Nahum which speaks specifically and prophetically about Nineveh calling it the "bloody city" [3:1] ... "And it shall come to pass, that all they that look upon thee shall flee from thee, and say, Nineveh is laid waste: who will bemoan her? whence shall I seek comforters for thee?" [Nahum 3:7]
It would seem that the repentance of the days of Jonah was gone in the time of Nahum.
Last edited:
Okay, let's do this. In previous posts (linking back from the above should be easy) I proved from scripture that the first beast of Revelation can be accurately entitled the Antichrist, because in comparison to the true Christ, is in reality a counterfeit, and has usurped the prerogatives of Christ in taking upon itself the roles that marked Jesus as the true Messiah.
Prophet
Priest
King.
Yet that beast, despite our understanding as to his true character and identity as a spiritual and political union of church and state, is still a prophetic picture that needs to be understood and brought contextually into our current Christian worldview. In the prophecy of Revelation 13 it's a beast. An impossibly presented composite with an array of characteristics that render it totally unique and unlike any other entity before nor since...except Christ Himself, to Whom this beast is a copy. The metaphor or caricature we are presented with in the prophecy is a representation of a real living entity that in its nature, and practice, displays those unique characteristics in the context of prophet, priest, and king. In doing so, this entity replaces Christ in the minds and hearts of those who follow its doctrines, (yes, doctrines because it is a religious entity) and laws (yes, laws, because its a political entity). So, the question remains, what institution is there on this earth that acts, practices, and teaches principles and laws which reflect Christ, but are in their true context and nature, are in fact against Christ because they replace Christ with a counterfeit, and thus may be confidently identified as the Antichrist that the beast represents?
The first criteria from the prophecy itself is...
So, what is this water the prophecy speaks of? The Bible is its own best expositor, (a quote from someone else, not my own) explains.
Revelation 17:15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
Christ Himself rose out of the waters of baptism before embarking upon His ministry. The beast as described above also rose out of water before beginning its life as a counterfeit to Christ. Interestingly, we are told of other beasts that also rose out of water...
Daniel 7:1 ¶ In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters.
2 Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
We see here four beasts which rose out of the sea, just like the first beast of Revelation 13, and we know from previous studies that these four beasts are Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Revelation 17:15 tells us that waters in prophecy represent peoples, multitudes, nations, tongues, therefore they rose amid centers of population. We are also informed that winds strove upon that sea, which can only mean that those powers arose amid warfare and turbulence, and history indeed attests to this fact, and the beasts themselves, being predatory animals, confirms this scenario. Later in Daniel 7, we are told of a number of horns that grow from the fourth beast, Rome. The 11th horn, which began as small but grew to sufficient power in short time to displace three of the ten horns which preceded it. By comparing the time and nature of this little horn, and the beast of Revelation 13, it can be readily deduced that these are one and the same power, the little horn depicted in its initial phase and the beast the grown up version. So what can we now understand about this beast? That it definitely grew in an area that was comparatively densely populated, ( I say comparatively because the second beast of Revelation 13 rises from the earth, as opposed to the sea; but more on that later), and in the same place as those previous four beasts, which in appearance comprise the greater part of this Revelation 13 beast, being lion, bear, leopard, dragon. So which powers in history grew out of the head of pagan Rome; in an area of population, and amid war and strife? There are only eleven candidates. Ten of them are those main Barbarian tribes which overran the Roman empire after the Roman troops were withdrawn from her former territories, the garrisons abandoned, the city of Rome was abandoned , and the capital removed to Constantinople. The eleventh, is that power which rose among them, in their midst, and before whom 3 were plucked up by their roots, never to be seen nor heard from again. That 11th horn was also instrumental in their demise. The reasons for her involvement in this scenario will be dealt with later, but regarding the identity of that little horn there can be little doubt. The Papacy. Does the Papacy answer to that characteristic as revealed in Revelation 13, rising out of 'water'? Yes, it does.
But that is merely the beginning. Having identified the Papacy as answering one criteria, does not constitute a definitive identification with regards as being the Antichrist. She has to answer all the criteria. Without exception. T
To be continued....
Philip James
Well-Known Member
You mean like this criteria:
Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist.
Kinda blows a hole in your hypothesis that the Papacy is the antichrist no?
If Satan's plan to counter Christ is to get hundreds of millions to call Jesus Christ their Lord and Saviour, he's not very bright...
Your whole polemic is based on the teachings of men.... We are not your enemy..
Peace!
While I can see how you would think the above to be an "out", unfortunately for you, what your church teaches and believes regarding the Son coming in the flesh totally fulfills the Antichrist paradigm. And in doing so does indeed deny the Father and the Son. I have explained this in previous threads but for your benefit will do so after dealing with those references above.
Last edited by a moderator:
Prayer Warrior
Well-Known Member
The devil, which the Bible calls the deceiver, knows this so he offers people a counterfeit. Satan has his snares for those seeking such experiences. One of which is called kundalini awakening (also called kundalini activation or kundalini arousal), which is basically the event where the kundalini “takes over” a person, or when it rises from the base of the spine to the top of his head.
My contention is that kundalini is nothing more than a demon or an evil spirit and that it is extremely dangerous to have a kundalini awakening. This so-called awakening is a deception for people to allow themselves to be demonized since a lot of times demons can’t just enter inside of a person but needs an open “door” to go through. These doors are easily opened by New Age and occult practices. The promises of the benefits of kundalini are bait for the enemy to snare a victim through demonization as satan’s demons have a desire to inhabit a human body (read Mark 5:1-13; Matt. 12:43-45). This is the antithesis of one filled with the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 5:18) in which born again Christians have when they repent and turn to the Lord Jesus Christ.
Source:Kundalini Awakening/Arousal/Activation or Really Demonic Possession?
More info on the dangers of all kinds of yoga (from an ex-Hindu, now Christian).
This includes kundalini, addressed in the article linked above this (in my dropdown comment in this post).
Last edited:
You have read, I hope, those posts I presented regarding the beast of revelation 13. That was a Bible study. There was nothing of man in that whatsoever. The Bible interpreted itself.
What I am presenting now is somewhat different...I am showing that your church... Not you... Has perfectly fulfilled the criteria the Bible describes as pertaining to the Antichrist. Now you are welcome, as you have done in your post, to refute what I post. But you jumped the gun. Let's deal with one point at a time. After I get through revelation and Daniel, then we will look at John's letter.
Who is "we"? The institution you are a member of, or you and the other members? I would suggest the institution is everyone's enemy if what I am presenting is true. If the institution, the Catholic church, takes a prominent role in global politics and religion, which is what this thread is all about, and proceeds to establish laws and decrees that the whole world is expected to obey, then your church has become my enemy... And the enemy of God. And it is part and parcel of the gospel message to reveal the things. See Revelation 14:6-12
Philip James
Well-Known Member
Dear brakelite,
We are the institition... We are one!
Why bother, you youself said :. She has to answer all the criteria. Without exception.
And plainly she does not deny that Jesus is the Christ so your whole house of cards comes crashing down...
Peace!
That is precisely why
KJV Revelation 18
4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
You've changed the text from the letter of John. It isn't just about confessing Jesus as Christ.
KJV 1 John 4
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
I said I would deal with this in due course. But because of your persistence...
2Jo 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Antichrist being in denial of the Christ as coming in the flesh, this does in fact perfectly fit with the Catholic Church's doctrine re the immaculate conception of Mary...a claim that because Mary was without original sin, thus Jesus could live the perfect life. yet this is a denial of scripture, that says that Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin.(Romans 8:3). He was born in the likeness of fallen Adam, sinful flesh. He was born however without the propensities to sin that we inherit, and most certainly did not sin on any occasion. He lived a perfect life, yes, not because he had a perfect mother, but because he lived in accordance to the OT mandate, the just shall live by his faith. Thus He is our example. Though we are born of sinful flesh as He was, we also can be born again of the Spirit to live a victorious life through faith in the power and grace of an all-powerful and merciful loving Savior.
By creating an 'immaculate conception' theory the Vatican removes the glory of Christ's sinless life from the Father and gives the glory to Mary. In this they again fulfil the concept of antichrist (replacing Christ) by denying the very unique relationship between the Father and Son which resulted in Christ's victorious life. (1 John 2:22)
What the 'imaculate conception' doctrine also accomplishes very successfully is to remove Jesus as our nearest kinsman. Because according to RCC lies, Jesus did not take the seed of David according to the flesh...nor even the seed of Abraham...both fallen men...fallen flesh...but took upon Himself the seed of Mary..."unfallen and immaculate flesh". So therefore Jesus is so far removed from us, He can no longer be our Mediator, Friend, nor even Messiah. Thus the Vatican denies that He is even Christ. Not only so, but if Jesus did not partake of sinful flesh, as Paul informs us, then we can no longer partake of His righteousness, and the law can no longer be fulfilled in us. (Romans 8:3,4)
I fact, it goes further. If Jesus was born of an immaculate mother, the the following is also made null and void. 2 Cor. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. ....thus the entire plane of salvation is turned on ts head...Mary becomes our Savior, Jesus is just a by-product, and incidental appendage. No wonder Mary becomes the worshiped Mediatrix...no wonder Jesus is removed from us...He is too good...too holy...too inaccessable to be our help in time of need...no, no, we have to go to Mary who becomes our intercessor.
Satan knew exactly what he was doing when he inspired the pope to utter that foolishness ....‘Yes! We must believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary was immaculate in her conception… There is no salvation to those who do not believe this dogma!’
quietthinker
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure where you're coming from. Isn't the immediate topic being addressed here the 144,000 and the large multitude?
Last edited:
No, you are not my enemy. Never have been, and never will. I will never be a threat to you. However, below is a quote from another thread from earlier in the year, which suggests that at some time in the near future, what we are discussing in this thread and confirmed by other sources, I, and other like-minded individuals, might become your enemy... They is, you may well become a threat to us.
The Aggressive Intentions of the Papacy
Summary: The historian Ranke says thisabout Protestant-Catholic relations: "In the year 1617, everything betokened a decisive conflict between them. The Catholic party appears to have felt itself the superior. At all events it was the first to take up arms."
Many Americans would be surprised to learn that one of the greatest opponents of civil and religious liberty is the Roman Catholic Church.
No one knows about the Roman Catholic hatred of liberty because history textbooks in public schools and colleges have been, for the most part, purged of nearly all things negative about papal Rome’s bloody history. Many Jesuits and other supporters of Catholicism have allegedly joined textbook selection committees in order to censor negative comments about the Roman Catholic Church. Encyclopedias in the USA have also been affected. History has been rewritten so that less and less people know about the true issues that faced the reformers and the true history of the Catholic Church.
Darryl Eberhart of Tackling the Tough Topics newsletter writes this:
Most of our encyclopedias and history textbooks do NOT tell us that the purposeof the attempted invasion of England in 1588 by the Spanish Armada was to land troops in England to be joined by local Roman Catholics in an effort to overthrow the government and bring England, by force, back under the authority of Papal Rome! The Roman Catholic King of Spain (Philip II) wanted financial “compensation” for launching this invasion. And so the Roman pontiff, Pope Sixtus V, promised King Philip II 200,000 crowns as soon as the Spanish Armada had set sail for England, and more cash to follow later. Thus the Papacy was helping to fund the planned invasion of England.
In 1931, Pope Pius XI explained this initiative in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno:
Under the guidance and in light of Leo’s encyclical was thus evolved a truly Christian social science, which continues to be fostered and enriched daily by the tireless labours of those picked menwhom we have named the auxiliaries of the Church...The doctrine of Rerum Novarum began little by little to penetrate among those who, being outside Catholic unity, do not recognize the authority of the Church; and these Catholic principles of sociology gradually became part of the intellectual heritage of the whole human race...Thus too, we rejoice that the Catholic truths proclaimed so vigorously by our illustrious Predecessor [Leo XIII in 1891’s Rerum Novarum], are advanced and advocated not merely in non-Catholic books and journals, but frequently also in legislative assemblies and in courts of justice” (emphasis added).ii
Here are several quotes highlighting the Papacy's aggressive intentions:
Catholic Professor Orestes Brownson, Brownson’s Review (January, 1854): 90:
But is it the intention of the pope to possess this country? Undoubtedly. In this intention is he aided by the Jesuits and all the Catholic prelates and priests? Undoubtedly, if they are faithful to their religion.iii
Hector MacPherson, The Jesuits in History(Edinburgh: Macniven and Wallace, 1914): 52, 85, 100:
...that the Jesuits were actively plotting for the extermination of Protestantism was no fiction of Oates, but a most certain and deadly fact...
At the Reformation the Irish race remained Romanist; and the miseries which came upon it must be in the main traced to the Jesuits, who used Ireland as a factor in their scheme of overthrowing the Protestantism of England and establishing a Roman Catholic dynasty completely under the control of the Papacy.
...wherever the Jesuits went, they placed the worldly prosperity and the political influence of their Order above all religious considerations. In accordance with their secret policy they set themselves to gain influence at Court; and, in order to carry their point, they were willing to countenance assassination, sedition, etc.
Pope John Paul II, in his apostolic letter Ad Tuendam Fidem (May 18, 1998), made bold statements about the need for submission to the Pope on doctrinal issues. He declared that lack of submission was worthy of punishment:
Whoever denies or places in doubt any truth that must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or repudiates the Christian faith as a whole, and does not come to his senses after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished as a heretic...whoever obstinately rejects a teaching that the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising the authentic Magisterium, have set forth to be held definitively, or who affirms what they have condemned as erroneous, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished with an appropriate penalty.
One of the doctrinal issues the Papacy demands submission on is the keeping of Sunday. Pope John Paul II said this, in agreement with Ad Tuendam Fidem:
A person who violates the sanctity of Sunday is to be punished as a heretic.iv
Pope Nicholas I in a letter to the King of Bulgaria in 860 AD:
I glorify you for having maintained your authority by putting to death those wandering sheep who refused to enter the fold; and you not only have not sinned, by showing a holy rigour, but I even congratulate you on having opened the kingdom of heaven to the people submitted to your rule. A king need not fear to command massacres, when these will retain his subjects in obedience, or cause them to submit to the faith of Christ; and God will reward him in this world, and in eternal life, for these murders.
Pope Urban II's address in Clermont, France in November 1095:
If you must have blood, bathe in the blood of infidels. Soldiers of hell, become soldiers of the living God!
Pope Leo VIII, Immortale Dei (November 1, 1885):
The unrestrained freedom of thinking and of openly making known one’s thoughts is not inherent in the rights of citizens and is by no means worthy of favor and support (emphasis added).
It was and you then wrote, "It was taken from them permanently as a nation when they murdered their Lord and given to others. Jesus tells stories to this end." I did not think that was accurate.I'm not sure where you're coming from. Isn't the immediate topic being addressed here the 144,000 and the large multitude?
@Philip James
Note the above. Pope Francis, and his friends in the Vatican and beyond, is now beside himself with determined and steadfast zeal to promote an religiously faceted ecological paradigm whereby it would be classified as sin if one is to whatever degree they decide, environmentally negligent.
Amazon Synod Briefing: Ecological sins and integral responses - Vatican News
Very closely related with this is the oft suggested call for Sunday to become mandatory throughout the world as a means to combat climate change. John Paul II and Francis have both suggested this in separate encyclicals. If there are any who actually believe that climate change is the prime motive for making a Sunday law they have their heads firmly planted in their children's sand box. What of religious freedom then? Who becomes whose enemy when globally legislated Sunday sacredness turns into a witch-hunt for climate change denying Sabbath keepers?
Oh okay. Brakelite again wipes egg off face. Sounds like something I would say but. Or maybe something I wish i'd said. Or maybe something I'll quote in the future. Perhaps I'll shut up now.
Philip James
Well-Known Member
funny that you would try and address a verse that I hadn't quoted (although that verse also destroys your hypothesis) and then link my verse as part of your argument
Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist.
The Church has always affirmed that Jesus is the Christ. When we speak of Christ , we speak of Jesus; and when we speak of Jesus, we speak of Christ.
We affirm with Peter: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
The Catholic Church fails this test of yours and thus your whole house of cards comes tumbling down.
You want examples of the spirit of antichrist? The Jews, the Muslims, those who try and separate Jesus from Christ, those who deny the divinty of Jesus or the humanity of Christ... for Jesus IS the Christ and there is no other way to the Father, but through Him.
To Him , be the power and the Glory, for ever and ever!
That affirmation becomes valid only if put into practice. By practice, the CC places itself in between the Messiah she confesseds, and the people she betrays. That is Antichrist. It is that role as intermediary, placing herself in a position instead of Christ, that is revealed in her self chimed role as priest, prophet, King.
Similar threads
