Search results

Nope - you absolutely follow Jesuit doctrine, and I can prove it. My understanding is that you said you're waiting for a future "man of sin" so whether you think it's a man or a system is irrelevant - it's still based on the lie of Jesuit Futurism! If you're waiting for a future "man of sin"...

It's a fact, seeing that the 2300 Days are years that point to the "distant future" when the only polluted temple that has any significance is the Heavenly Sanctuary - but for some reason, you guys think the "distant future" is a mere 6.3 years... Since the 2300 Days are symbolic for literal...

SDAs give no private interpretation of anything! Every prophetic symbol we assign is from the "holy men who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost".

I know it's a 24 hour period - my point is that this is a prophetic passage full of symbolism which includes the "24 hour period" is as much symbolic as is the horns, the ram, and the goat - it's symbolic for a year.

"Holy men who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" are those whose words are inspired by God - THE PROPHETS. Has the Holy Spirit fallen upon you in vision as was Elijah or Samuel? Wanna know what "waters" means? Ask John in Revelation 19:10 KJV. Wanna know what "eagle's wings" means? Ask...

The text does not say that! It says he fainted and was sick at the end of the vision - not that he was already sick at the beginning. He lifted up his eyes as one who gazes, not as one who languishes. Signs accompany those upon whom the Lord comes in vision (Numbers 24:4 KJV) - they fall weak...

Not sure what is meant by this, except the "army of Israel" is opinion, while the "angelic host" is more accurate.

Jesus is the "Messenger of the Covenant" (Malachi 3:1 KJV) Jesus came to "confirm the promises" (Romans 15:8 KJV) Daniel said the covenant is confirmed for "many" (Daniel 9:27 KJV) Jesus said His blood of the New Covenant would be shed for "many" (Matthew 26:28 KJV) Isaiah said God would give...

If we fail to remain consistent in our eschatological symbol interpretation by the "holy men" who interpret the symbols for us, we are guilty of "private interpretation". According to the "holy men" named Ezekiel and Moses and Jesus, a symbolic day is a literal year, according to Numbers 14:34...

Sorry, I'll break it down: Daniel knew that the Babylonian captivity would last 70 years. At the time Daniel had the 2300 Days vision, the captivity was almost over. 2300 literal Days is just over 6 years. QUESTION: Why would Daniel - God's vision/dream interpretation champ - pass out and...

I don't make false accusations. If you're waiting for a future Man of Sin to come, you're a Jesuit Futurist and if you believe the Man of Sin has already come in the first century, you're a Jesuit Preterist. Pick one.

"Antichrist" is no where mentioned in Daniel 9. The only two princes that can qualify as "the prince that shall come" are "Messiah the Prince" or "prince Titus" which history shows came and destroyed Jerusalem. Understand? "Messiah the Prince" or "prince Titus" - and that's the only two princes...

Still waiting for the answer. The Roman Little Horn arises at the end of the four Greek empires and was "exceeding great" above Alex the Great or MP. The only thing Antiochus excelled at was championing mediocrity. The text says the 490 days are "cut off" from something - the only prophetic...

You're absolutely follwing Jesuit ideas, friend. Might as well get that copy of "The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine".

Your understanding of church history is a bit lacking, friend. There was no "SDA" in 1844. There were, however, people from all different Protestant denominations who - because of the "Great Religious Awakening" in which people all over the world simultaneously began studying end times Bible...

We must be careful not to over generalize that which God has specifically pointed out. If we start the prophetic timeline at Babylon, following it leads us right to the fall of Rome, the rise of the Ten Barbarian tribes, war against the Three Tribes which opposed the Bishop of Rome, and finally...

Good gravy, man, don't you care about consistent eschatological interpretation? In prophetic passages, "time" is as symbolic as beasts, horns, winds, wings, etc. If "Consistency, thou art a jewel" - then "Inconsistency, thou art cubic zirconia junk". Protestant Historicism requires no such...

Yes, they are two literal men, and in chapter 13 a literal seven headed, ten horned beast is coming up out of the sea, right? Hello...the book was "sent and signified" aka "sign-i-fied" in signs and symbols which require interpretation - the "two witnesses" are not literal men, the "false...

You keep on believing Jesuit lies, friend, and see where that gets you in the judgment.

Does Scripture say the Man of Sin antichrist sits on a Jewish throne and shows himself to be a king? No. It says he sits in the "temple of God" and show himself to be God. That's what the popes do as they sit in the "temple of God" - the church.