Daniel's (Little Horn) Paul's (Man Of Sin) John's (The Beast) All The Same Bad Guy (The Antichrist)

[Truth7t7]

Scripture below teaches John's (The Beast) will be present on earth at the battle of Armageddon and will see the second coming and final judgment (Future Unfulfilled)

Revelation 19:19-20KJV
19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Daniel's (Little Horn) will be present on earth to witness the second coming and final judgment, same bad guy as John's (The Beast) and Paul's (Man Of Sin)

Daniel 9:9-11KJV
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

Paul's (Man Of Sin) will be present on earth to see the second coming and his destruction, same bad guy as John's (The Beast) and Daniel's (Little Horn)

2 Thessalonians 2:8KJV
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

 

[Marilyn C]

Hi Truth,

I agree. And God`s word tells us he is the Assyrian, the king of the North, and the king of Babylon. (Isa. 31: 4 - 8, Dan. 11: 40. Rev. 17 & 18)

God`s word is very detailed.

Marilyn.

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

This position is absolutely wrong on the basis that the "man of sin" Paul refers to is someone in God's Church(2 Thess. 2:3-4). This is evident by the fact that Paul says that the man sits in the temple of God. In NT theology, that is God's Church. The little horn in Daniel is the papacy, which is part of the Rev. 17 counterfeit church system that is described as opposing God's Church throughout its existence. As the illustration in the first 5 verses of the chapter reveals, it is clearly not God's Church.

Your theology also overlooks the fact that Rev. 13 describes 2 beasts: a political and religious beast. The political beast is the one that leads the army against Christ, which is why John explicitly mentions in Rev. 19 that the religious beast will also be captured.

The obvious problem with this theology of yours' is that it attempts to connect dots that doesn't exist while overlooking passages that are central to understanding the identity of the players involved.

 

[Truth7t7]

Hi Truth,

I agree. And God`s word tells us he is the Assyrian, the king of the North, and the king of Babylon. (Isa. 31: 4 - 8, Dan. 11: 40. Rev. 17 & 18)

God`s word is very detailed.

Marilyn.

As you have been clearly shown in previous threads, not one word that you post in reference mentions the future antichrist, not one word

 

[Truth7t7]

This position is absolutely wrong on the basis that the "man of sin" Paul refers to is someone in God's Church(2 Thess. 2:3-4). This is evident by the fact that Paul says that the man sits in the temple of God. In NT theology, that is God's Church. The little horn in Daniel is the papacy, which is part of the Rev. 17 counterfeit church system that is described as opposing God's Church throughout its existence. As the illustration in the first 5 verses of the chapter reveals, it is clearly not God's Church.

Your theology also overlooks the fact that Rev. 13 describes 2 beasts: a political and religious beast. The political beast is the one that leads the army against Christ, which is why John explicitly mentions in Rev. 19 that the religious beast will also be captured.

The obvious problem with this theology of yours' is that it attempts to connect dots that doesn't exist while overlooking passages that are central to understanding the identity of the players involved.

No the man of sin isn't in the church, a bogus claim

Your parroting the standard reformed eschatology false claims

 

[covenantee]

No the man of sin isn't in the church, a bogus claim

Your parroting the standard reformed eschatology false claims

The temple of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is a "naos" (Greek) spiritual temple, which in every instance where Paul uses the word, refers collectively to the Church.

The Reformers got it right.

Modernist futurists parrot the fabricated claims of the historical apostasized papacy's Jesuit counter-reformation.

They get it wrong.

 

[Truth7t7]

The temple of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is a "naos" (Greek) spiritual temple, which in every instance where Paul uses the word, refers collectively to the Church.

The Reformers got it right.

Modernist futurists parrot the fabricated claims of the historical apostasized papacy's Jesuit counter-reformation.

They get it wrong.

Once again I disagree, the man of sin will be a literal human man, whom the Lord will destroy at his future second coming

Preterist Reformed Eschatology Is A Farce

 

[covenantee]

Once again I disagree, the man of sin will be a literal human man, whom the Lord will destroy at his future second coming

Preterist Reformed Eschatology Is A Farce

Each pope was a literal human man.

Whom to believe?

1. Modernist futurist deniers.
or
2. The Reformers who recognized and acted upon the prophetic realities of their time, and won the spiritual victory of the Reformation.

Couldn't be easier.

Futurism was spawned in the cauldron of apostasy of the historical papacy.

Futurism is an abomination of desecration, and a betrayal of the Reformation.

Thank God that no Reformer was a futurist.

 

[ewq1938]

The political beast is the one that leads the army against Christ

Both beasts and satan lead an army against Christ, not just one of the beasts.

Rev 16:13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
Rev 16:14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

 

[Phoneman777]

Scripture below teaches John's (The Beast) will be present on earth at the battle of Armageddon and will see the second coming and final judgment (Future Unfulfilled)

Revelation 19:19-20KJV
19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Daniel's (Little Horn) will be present on earth to witness the second coming and final judgment, same bad guy as John's (The Beast) and Paul's (Man Of Sin)

Daniel 9:9-11KJV
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

Paul's (Man Of Sin) will be present on earth to see the second coming and his destruction, same bad guy as John's (The Beast) and Daniel's (Little Horn)

2 Thessalonians 2:8KJV
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

In your interpretation of the judgment scene in Daniel 7 why do you not incorporate the 2,300 Days prophecy of Daniel 8 which says the "cleansing of the sanctuary" aka "THE JUDGMENT" takes place 2,300 years after Artaxerxes' 457 decree (which we know is the starting point of both the "2,300 Days" and the "70 Weeks" because the one is "cut off" from the other)?

We can't inconsistently claim that the 2,300 Days are literal days while correctly interpreting the 70 Weeks as 490 years - because you can't amputate 490 years from 6 1/2 months.

Therefore, 2,300 years after Artaxerxes' 457 B.C. - which is 1844 - has already come to pass...which means the judgment has already begun, right or wrong? It also means the papal Antichrist has already arisen on the scene because he's running his mouth at that time, right or wrong?

And ultimately, all this means that when "the judgment was set and the books were opened" this judgment takes place before the Second Coming of Jesus -- which is why the last warning message to the world in Revelation 14 which goes out before the Second Coming says "the hour of His judgment IS come" or "the hour of His judgment IS HERE NOW" but according to your interpretation, it should read "the hour of His judgment is NOT YET COME". What say you, friend?

 

[Truth7t7]

In your interpretation of the judgment scene in Daniel 7 why do you not incorporate the 2,300 Days prophecy of Daniel 8 which says the "cleansing of the sanctuary" aka "the judgment" takes place 2,300 years after Artaxerxes' 457 decree (which we know is the starting point of both the "2,300 Days" and the "70 Weeks" because the one is "cut off" from the other)?

We can't inconsistently claim that the 2,300 Days are literal days while correctly interpreting the 70 Weeks as 490 years - because you can't amputate 490 years from 6 1/2 months.

Therefore, 2,300 years after Artaxerxes' 457 B.C. - which is 1844 - has already come to pass...which means the judgment has already begun, right or wrong? It also means the papal Antichrist has already arisen on the scene because he's running his mouth at that time, right or wrong?

And ultimately, all this means that when "the judgment was set and the books were opened" this judgment takes place before the Second Coming of Jesus -- which is why the last warning message to the world in Revelation 14 which goes out before the Second Coming says "the hour of His judgment IS come" or "the hour of His judgment IS HERE NOW" but according to your interpretation, it should read "the hour of His judgment is NOT YET COME". What say you, friend?

7th Day Adventism in Ellen G. Whites teaching of the "investigative judgement" is a farce, a cover up of William Miller's 1844 false prediction of the second coming of Jesus Christ in the "Great Disappointment", and the cult of Ellen continues, are you glad to be a part of it?

False teachings in the "Investigative Judgement", "Soul Sleep", "Sunday Observance" Is the mark of the beast, The Cult Of Ellen G. White In 7th Day Adventism "Beware"!

 

[Phoneman777]

7th Day Adventism in Ellen G. Whites teaching of the "investigative judgement" is a farce, a cover up of William Miller's 1844 false prediction of the second coming of Jesus Christ in the "Great Disappointment", and the cult of Ellen continues, are you glad to be a part of it?

False teachings in the "Investigative Judgement", "Soul Sleep", "Sunday Observance" Is the mark of the beast, The Cult Of Ellen G. White In 7th Day Adventism "Beware"!

Miller claimed to be no prophet, merely a God-fearing man who misunderstood God's Word in Daniel 8 just as the disciples misunderstood God's Word about Jesus dying on the Cross. Will you condemn the disciples as you condemn Miller? Of course not...so why condemn Miller? Miller thought Daniel's words "the Sanctuary shall be cleansed" meant "our planet Earth sanctuary would be cleansed in the fiery Second Coming" - an honest mistake - because he didn't understand there was a Heavenly Sanctuary that was to be cleansed by our High Priest Jesus.

The more you Jesuit Futurists fail to disprove the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment, the more sincere Christians everywhere will see through Jesuit eschatological lies about a coming future Antichrist and heed the warning to "come out of her (Babylonian papal Antichrist and her Jesuit army) My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and receive not of her plagues". Babylon is drying up, friend. You claim to among God's people, so will you heed the warning to come out of Babylon, or will you stubbornly remain in Babylon, a peddler of Jesuit eschatological lies? Come out, bro!!!

 

[Truth7t7]

Miller claimed to be no prophet, merely a God-fearing man who misunderstood God's Word in Daniel 8 just as the disciples misunderstood God's Word about Jesus dying on the Cross. Will you condemn the disciples as you condemn Miller? Of course not...so why condemn Miller? Miller thought Daniel's words "the Sanctuary shall be cleansed" meant "our planet Earth sanctuary would be cleansed in the fiery Second Coming" - an honest mistake - because he didn't understand there was a Heavenly Sanctuary that was to be cleansed by our High Priest Jesus.

The more you Jesuit Futurists fail to disprove the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment, the more sincere Christians everywhere will see through Jesuit eschatological lies about a coming future Antichrist and heed the warning to "come out of her (Babylonian papal Antichrist and her Jesuit army) My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and receive not of her plagues". Babylon is drying up, friend. You claim to among God's people, so will you heed the warning to come out of Babylon, or will you stubbornly remain in Babylon, a peddler of Jesuit eschatological lies? Come out, bro!!!

The is no "Investigative Judgement" a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

"Sunday observance" isn't the mark of the beast, a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

There is no such thing as "Soul Sleep" found in scripture, a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

 

[Phoneman777]

The is no "Investigative Judgement" a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

"Sunday observance" isn't the mark of the beast, a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

There is no such thing as "Soul Sleep" found in scripture, a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

Thank you for being part of an extremely important work: proving my point by failing to disprove it from Scripture.

Sure, there will be many scared off by your false claims without taking time to "prove all things, hold fast to that which is good" - they'll be held accountable for having rejected the opportunity to learn truth and you'll be held accountable for causing them to stumble.....but there's always other sincere, obedient saints who will ask, "Why does Truth7t7 never offer Scriptural evidence against Phoneman777's words?" and will "despise not prophesyings" but will "prove all things" and discover why you can't disprove it: because it's Biblical truth.

Millions around the world are abandoning Babylon and her false Jesuit eschatological ideas so cherished by you and taking their place under the banner of God's remnant people "which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony and the faith of Jesus Christ". So, thank you thank you for every time you enter the Arena of Theological Ideas with only weapons of accusation and ridicule but no sword of the Spirit.

 

[Truth7t7]

Thank you for being part of an extremely important work: proving my point by failing to disprove it from Scripture.

Sure, there will be many scared off by your false claims without taking time to "prove all things, hold fast to that which is good" - they'll be held accountable for having rejected the opportunity to learn truth and you'll be held accountable for causing them to stumble.....but there's always other sincere, obedient saints who will ask, "Why does Truth7t7 never offer Scriptural evidence against Phoneman777's words?" and will "despise not prophesyings" but will "prove all things" and discover why you can't disprove it: because it's Biblical truth.

Millions around the world are abandoning Babylon and her false Jesuit eschatological ideas so cherished by you and taking their place under the banner of God's remnant people "which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony and the faith of Jesus Christ". So, thank you thank you for every time you enter the Arena of Theological Ideas with only weapons of accusation and ridicule but no sword of the Spirit.

Jesus Christ Is My Lord And Savior, I Observe The 7th Day Sabbath And 10 Commandments Of God

There is no "Investigative Judgement" a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

"Sunday Observance" Isn't The Mark Of The Beast As Ellen G. White And 7th Day Adventism Falsely Teaches

"Soul Sleep" Isn't Found In Scripture, A False Doctrine Of Ellen G. White And 7th Day Adventism

Ellen G. White Is A False Prophetess, With False Claims Of 2,000+ Dreams And Visions Given By God

7th Day Adventism, "The Cult Of Ellen G. White"

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Phoneman777]

Jesus Christ Is My Lord And Savior, I Observe The 7th Day Sabbath And 10 Commandments Of God

There is no "Investigative Judgement" a false teaching of 7th Day Adventism's Ellen G. White

"Sunday Observance" Isn't The Mark Of The Beast As Ellen G. White And 7th Day Adventism Falsely Teaches

"Soul Sleep" Isn't Found In Scripture, A False Doctrine Of Ellen G. White And 7th Day Adventism

Ellen G. White Is A False Prophetess, With False Claims Of 2,000+ Dreams And Visions Given By God

7th Day Adventism, "The Cult Of Ellen G. White"

Jesus Is The Lord

I can't wait to meet all the people in heaven who will tell me the reason they accepted the truth is because some guy named Truth7t7 failed to disprove it, so they decided to check for themselves to see if these things were so.

Keep it up, bro, you're helping many to escape Jesuit Futurism!

 

[Zao is life]

Scripture below teaches John's (The Beast) will be present on earth at the battle of Armageddon and will see the second coming and final judgment (Future Unfulfilled)

Revelation 19:19-20KJV
19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Daniel's (Little Horn) will be present on earth to witness the second coming and final judgment, same bad guy as John's (The Beast) and Paul's (Man Of Sin)

Daniel 9:9-11KJV
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

Paul's (Man Of Sin) will be present on earth to see the second coming and his destruction, same bad guy as John's (The Beast) and Daniel's (Little Horn)

2 Thessalonians 2:8KJV
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

Now change Daniel 9:9-11 to Daniel 7:9-11 so I can give your post a like.

 

[Zao is life]

This position is absolutely wrong on the basis that the "man of sin" Paul refers to is someone in God's Church(2 Thess. 2:3-4). This is evident by the fact that Paul says that the man sits in the temple of God. In NT theology, that is God's Church. The little horn in Daniel is the papacy, which is part of the Rev. 17 counterfeit church system that is described as opposing God's Church throughout its existence. As the illustration in the first 5 verses of the chapter reveals, it is clearly not God's Church.

Your theology also overlooks the fact that Rev. 13 describes 2 beasts: a political and religious beast. The political beast is the one that leads the army against Christ, which is why John explicitly mentions in Rev. 19 that the religious beast will also be captured.

The obvious problem with this theology of yours' is that it attempts to connect dots that doesn't exist while overlooking passages that are central to understanding the identity of the players involved.

Personally I believe any claim that names/identifies individuals by name and geographic region is still absolutely wrong and always untenable by its very nature. The Church whose headquarters is the Vatican is by no means the only possible "harlot" among churches in the 21st century.

 

[Truth7t7]

Each pope was a literal human man.

Whom to believe?

1. Modernist futurist deniers.
or
2. The Reformers who recognized and acted upon the prophetic realities of their time, and won the spiritual victory of the Reformation.

Couldn't be easier.

Futurism was spawned in the cauldron of apostasy of the historical papacy.

Futurism is an abomination of desecration, and a betrayal of the Reformation.

Thank God that no Reformer was a futurist.

Your reformed Preterist Escgatology Is Jesuit Catholic driven (Luis De Alcasar), trying to remove the future human man "The Antichrist" with false claims of 1st Century Fulfillment

Wikipedia: Preterism

At the time of the Counter-Reformation, the Jesuit Luis de Alcasar wrote a prominent preterist exposition of prophecy. Moses Stuart noted in 1845 that Alcasar's preterist interpretation advantaged the Roman Catholic Church during its arguments with Protestants, and Kenneth Newport in an eschatological commentary in 2000 described preterism as a Catholic defense against the Protestant historicist view which identified the Roman Catholic Church as a persecuting apostasy.

Due to resistance from Protestant historicists, the preterist view was slow to gain acceptance outside the Roman Catholic Church. Among Protestants preterism was first accepted by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), a Dutch Protestant eager to establish common ground between Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church. His first attempt to do this in his "Commentary on Certain Texts Which Deal with Antichrist" (1640) attempted to argue that the texts relating to Antichrist had had their fulfillment in the 1st century AD. Protestants did not welcome such views but Grotius remained undeterred and in his next work, "Commentaries On The New Testament" (1641–50), he expanded his preterist views to include the Olivet discourse and the Book of Revelation.

Preterism continued to struggle to gain credibility within other Protestant communities, especially in England. The English commentator Thomas Hayne claimed in 1645 that the prophecies of the Book of Daniel had all been fulfilled by the 1st century, and Joseph Hall expressed the same conclusion concerning Daniel's prophecies in 1650, but neither of them applied a preterist approach to Revelation. However, the exposition of Grotius convinced the Englishman Henry Hammond (1605-1660). Hammond sympathized with Grotius' desire for unity among Christians, and found his preterist exposition useful to this end. Hammond wrote his own preterist exposition in 1653, borrowing extensively from Grotius. In his introduction to Revelation he claimed that others had independently arrived at similar conclusions as himself, though giving pride of place to Grotius. Hammond was Grotius' only notable Protestant convert, and despite his reputation and influence, Protestants overwhelmingly rejected Grotius' interpretation of Revelation, which gained no ground for at least 100 years.

By the end of the 18th century preterist exposition had gradually become more widespread. In 1730 the Protestant and Arian, Frenchman Firmin Abauzit wrote the first full preterist exposition, "Essai sur l'Apocalypse". Abauzit worked in the then independent Republic of Geneva as a librarian. This was part of a growing development of more systematic preterist expositions of Revelation. Later, though, it appears that Abauzit recanted this approach after a critical examination by his English translator, Leonard Twells.

The earliest American full-preterist work, The Second Advent of the Lord Jesus Christ: A Past Event, was written in 1845 by Robert Townley. Townley later recanted this view.]

 

[covenantee]

Your reformed Preterist Escgatology Is Jesuit Catholic driven (Luis De Alcasar), trying to remove the future human man "The Antichrist" with false claims of 1st Century Fulfillment

Wikipedia: Preterism

At the time of the Counter-Reformation, the Jesuit Luis de Alcasar wrote a prominent preterist exposition of prophecy. Moses Stuart noted in 1845 that Alcasar's preterist interpretation advantaged the Roman Catholic Church during its arguments with Protestants, and Kenneth Newport in an eschatological commentary in 2000 described preterism as a Catholic defense against the Protestant historicist view which identified the Roman Catholic Church as a persecuting apostasy.

Due to resistance from Protestant historicists, the preterist view was slow to gain acceptance outside the Roman Catholic Church. Among Protestants preterism was first accepted by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), a Dutch Protestant eager to establish common ground between Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church. His first attempt to do this in his "Commentary on Certain Texts Which Deal with Antichrist" (1640) attempted to argue that the texts relating to Antichrist had had their fulfillment in the 1st century AD. Protestants did not welcome such views but Grotius remained undeterred and in his next work, "Commentaries On The New Testament" (1641–50), he expanded his preterist views to include the Olivet discourse and the Book of Revelation.

Preterism continued to struggle to gain credibility within other Protestant communities, especially in England. The English commentator Thomas Hayne claimed in 1645 that the prophecies of the Book of Daniel had all been fulfilled by the 1st century, and Joseph Hall expressed the same conclusion concerning Daniel's prophecies in 1650, but neither of them applied a preterist approach to Revelation. However, the exposition of Grotius convinced the Englishman Henry Hammond (1605-1660). Hammond sympathized with Grotius' desire for unity among Christians, and found his preterist exposition useful to this end. Hammond wrote his own preterist exposition in 1653, borrowing extensively from Grotius. In his introduction to Revelation he claimed that others had independently arrived at similar conclusions as himself, though giving pride of place to Grotius. Hammond was Grotius' only notable Protestant convert, and despite his reputation and influence, Protestants overwhelmingly rejected Grotius' interpretation of Revelation, which gained no ground for at least 100 years.

By the end of the 18th century preterist exposition had gradually become more widespread. In 1730 the Protestant and Arian, Frenchman Firmin Abauzit wrote the first full preterist exposition, "Essai sur l'Apocalypse". Abauzit worked in the then independent Republic of Geneva as a librarian. This was part of a growing development of more systematic preterist expositions of Revelation. Later, though, it appears that Abauzit recanted this approach after a critical examination by his English translator, Leonard Twells.

The earliest American full-preterist work, The Second Advent of the Lord Jesus Christ: A Past Event, was written in 1845 by Robert Townley. Townley later recanted this view.]

Continue to regale us with your Jesuit futurism and blasphemous claim that Christ is antichrist.

You're still afraid to do the grammar in Daniel 9:27.