John's First Phrase of 1 John 2:18

[Ridgerunner]

I've been criticize at church and on forums for studying prophecy and for utilizing study tools like Vine's Exposotory Dictionary of New Testament Words or Strong's Exhaustive concordance of the Bible. Both books I've had for 38 years.

When studying God's Word I must ask you about your beliefs. "How have you arrive at you conclusions." What reliable methods did you use to form your beliefs and attain what you hope is "the truth". "Jesus said, I am truth."

Do you approach the scriptures and study them the with purpose of understanding the truth? Or do you approach them thinking you already have the truth looking to support what you already believe. I have to wonder if most Christians even question what they believe or the works of others like all the promminent prophecy experts. Too many people think they already have things all figured out.

For now I will call a hermeneutic a sensible and reliable method of interpretation.

I have about seven pillars of interpretation in my hermeneutic.

The first and most important part of my hermeneutic is to study God's Word in the language it was written in. Why do I do that? Two main reasons.

1. Both Greek and Hebrew are very different than English and much was lost in the English translation. They are more detailed and descriptive languages than English. There are over 100 mistakes in the KJV and some accuracy and truth was lost in the translation. That's why there are often several different Greek words for one English word. Sometimes the English translation just doesn't do justice to God's Word.

2. More important is this.

Every Christian believes in the inspired Word of God. Well what does inspired mean?

Timothy 3:16 　All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

In 2 Timothy 3:16 It means...

1) inspired by God
a) the contents of the scriptures

That meaning is derived from another word which means...To breath. So to say all scripture is given by inspiration of God can be understood a few different ways. One way is to understand it as, "God Spoke."

2 Peter 1:21 　For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Now think about this.

We know that in the book of Revelation (as well as many other places) Jesus spoke directly to John. John spoke and understood Greek. So it's only logical that Jesus spoke to him in Greek when he was in the Spirit. And who knows, maybe Aramaic. Now if I want to understand something Jesus said through the author (John in this case), and if I want to know what John (and Jesus) original intended to mean, the wise thing to do is to look at the language Jesus spoke it in, the language John heard it in, and the language he wrote it in! That's why I look at Gods Word from that perspective.

So now we have people on the forum who say that because I look at the original language I'm relying on "MAN'S DEFINITION"

One said that the using the Greek is man's definition. and also said...

"This is part of the problem when we rely on man’s definition instead of God’s definition"

OR

"the definition Scripture itself gives."

So these guy's just look at the bible in English and call that God's definition.
They don't utilize any of the reliable study tools and methods I've described above.

Well scripture itself was written in Greek! Not English! How foolish and hypocritical of them to say I'm using "man's definition. That's why I say these guys have absolutely no clue how to interpret prophecy. They don't have a reliable method of interpretation. The extent of their studies come only from the English translation of God's Word. These guys adamantly refuse to study God's Word in it's original language, yet they have no problem quoting people like Ellis Skolfield.

I know a guy who has a page on his site entitled, "stupid Christians!" I think I'm going to do the same on mine under a different title. Maybe something like, "foolish Christian's." And I have a couple of great examples right here from the forum!

My final thoughts.

I actually have an unfavorable view of Christians. I've had some bad experiences in several churches with pastors, clergy, and people in general. My biggest disturbance comes from the overwhelming number of false teachings about prophecy. Most of what Christians believe will come in the last days will never come to pass. And I blame it all on the long list of so called bible prophecy experts. People would rather adhere to a false teaching even when there's a mountain of scriptural evidence against them because "I was wrong" is a phrase not found in the vocabulary of most Christians.

As far as this debate goes. I'm done with it.

As far as interpretation goes. Here's a message for ridgerunner and believerway.

Romans 1:22 　Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,



The word kingdom...

1) royal power, kingship, dominion, rule

a) not to be confused with an actual kingdom but rather the right or authority to rule over a kingdom

Vines says about the word kingdom,

A concrete noun, denoting the territory or people over whom a king rules.

Vine's say's about beast..
...in the sense of wild beast, is used in the Apocalypse for two antichristian potentates who are destined to control the affairs of the nations with Satanic power in the closing period of the present era.

Let me spell it out for you.

King dom

Enough said!

Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

If a beast is a kingdom in Daniel it will still be a kingdom in Revelation.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Mal 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Believe the definition Vine’s/Strong's (etc...) provides or believe the definition the unchanging Word/God provides, your choice, you have free will.
As you are led friend, as you are led. May God bless your studies!

 

[us2are1]

So who are the false prophets going around today preaching the lie that there is no singular Antichrist entity coming in the role of king to mimic our Lord Jesus Christ? They are liars, deceivers, the "forerunners of Antichrist" like Tertullian also showed.

The false prophets are those preaching rapture theories and going to heaven along with false notions of who satan is and the antichrist.

John shed the light on who the antichrist's are. You choose not to listen to Him.

When the real sons of disobedience arise, hunting and eating people in the name of Jesus, you will probably already be dead because of the great tribulation that can not be lived through without true faith in God.

 

[revturmoil]

If a beast is a kingdom in Daniel it will still be a kingdom in Revelation.

That's not true. That's not a universal truth in scripture. Show me a kingdom in the bible that doesn't have a king.

In every resource I look at a beast is a "blooded animal." Not one resource say's it's a kingdom. BUT.

An unbiased observation of the text and true definition of the words. A kingdom is a system, a person, and and an entity of nations.

Your method of interpretation is elementary and lacks wisdom and logic. On the other
hand you don't have a method of interpretation. You fabricate your own interpretationan.

By definition of the Words God spoke and by context your theory has been debunked.

Let me break it down for you again.

KING dom!

Believe the definition Vine’s/Strong's (etc...) provides or believe the definition the unchanging Word/God provides, your choice, you have free will.

I do believe in Strong's, Vines, Wuest, Gesennius, Thayer's, CWD, and Textus Receptus.

I believe them and anybody who believes you has fallen into the same trap of denial as you have.

You adamantly remain in denial because "I'm wrong" doesn't exist in your vocabulary.

You must be a sola scripturist or something. There must be a term for the flawed method of interpretation you use.

 

[Ridgerunner]

That's not true. That's not a universal truth in scripture. Show me a kingdom in the bible that doesn't have a king.

I already have but because you fail to understand the proper way to interpret the figurative language of prophecy you can’t see it.
Rev 17:9 - 11 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

7 kings but 8 beasts/kingdoms, the 8th kingdom does not have a king.

In every resource I look at a beast is a "blooded animal." Not one resource say's it's a kingdom.

Scripture itself says a beast is a kingdom.
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Do you deny what Scripture says?

BUT

An unbiased observation of the text and true definition of the words. A kingdom is a system, a person, and and an entity of nations.

Your method of interpretation is elementary and lacks wisdom and logic. On the other
hand you don't have a method of interpretation. You fabricate your own interpretationan.

By definition of the Words God spoke and by context your theory has been debunked.

Let me break it down for you again.

KING dom!



I do believe in Strong's, Vines, Wuest, Gesennius, Thayer's, CWD, and Textus Receptus.

Nothing wrong with using Strong’s Vines etc…. when dealing with verses that are not figurative (or symbolic if you prefer). Unfortunately prophecy is written in figurative (or symbolic) language. To understand that figurative language you must use the definitions the author provides, which may be different from the literal definition of a word. Let’s revisit Dan7:23
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast (H2423) shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
The definition from Strong’s for the word beast in the above verse is:
H2423 chêyvâ' khay-vaw'
(Chaldee); from H2418; an animal: - beast.

So the literal definition of the word beast in this verse is an animal but Scripture itself tells us this beast is kingdom. So in the figurative language of this prophecy beast means kingdom. So let’s look at a few more verses and see if we should use this definition for beast in other prophetic verses.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Mal 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

So if the Word was God (John1:1) and God does not change (Mal3:6, Heb13:*) then if a beast in the figurative language of prophecy used in Daniel was a kingdom then a beast will still be a kingdom in the figurative language of prophecy used in Revelation. Word/God does not change so we must continue to use the definition provided by Scripture itself when we see the word beast used again in other prophetic verses rhat use figurative (or symbolic) language.

I believe them and anybody who believes you has fallen into the same trap of denial as you have.

You adamantly remain in denial because "I'm wrong" doesn't exist in your vocabulary.

You must be a sola scripturist or something.

Try setting your frustration aside and honestly examining what I have shown you. Resorting to criticism becuase you make false assumptions about those you disagree with instead of sticking to the issue is nonproductive and only serves to diminish your credibility.

There must be a term for the flawed method of interpretation you use.

The best way to describe my method of interpretation is too say that I use sound hermeneutic principles (as demonstrated above) to allow the bible to interpret itself. In order to understand prophecy we must first recognize that most of prophecy is written in figurative language. Interpreting figurative (or symbolic) language literally will result in false doctrine. Using literal definitions (man’s) instead of the Scriptural (Word/Gods) definition results in a faulty interpretation of the prophetic verses. Faulty interpretation results in false doctrine.
Be blessed friend and may God bless your studies!

 

[veteran]

God's Word applies the idea of the wicked as natural brute beasts made to be destroyed...

2 Pet 2:10-19
10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
11 Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.
12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:
15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet.
17 These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
18 For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
(KJV)



Jude 1:10-16
10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.
12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.
(KJV)


In Rev.13 are given TWO separate 'beasts', the first is a kingdom beast which is what relates back to the beasts of Daniel. But the 2nd beast of Rev.13:11 forward is about a beast king, an individual. Likewise in Rev.17 the application of the idea of beast is given both ways as it is in Rev.13, sometimes about a kingdom and others about a man, a king.

 

[us2are1]

Johns first phrase was to tell his little children the truth about antichrist. He told them not to be looking for one specific antichrist because they will miss the fact that the world has always been controlled by many and that won't change to the end when Christ takes up His power and reigns.

 

[revturmoil]

Ridgerunner,

All you're doing is quoting scripture. There's no depth to your research because you don't look at this in the language the Lord spoke it in....i.e. the one Daniel and John heards and wrote it down in and you don't consider what's implied by the context. All you do is bounce around the English translation saying that because it means this here it also means this there. I'm sorry but there is nor structure to your method of interpretation.

I can then make a better argument that since the word beast or 'therion' in Revelation 13 and 17 means either a literal animal or figurative of a beastly man. I can then say that it means the same in Daniel 7 because that'swhat the Greek word means anyway! The beast of Revelation 13 is also said to have a number of a man. Prophetic beast are called he, him, his etc. over and over yet you say that doesnt mean a man. The word 'kingly' is used to describe a king it's the same word as kingdom. Not one definition of beast in Greek or Hebrew say that a beast is a kingdom though it is implied in most cases. Not one definition of kingdom indicates a beast or a kingless entity. You have a mountain of evidence against you.

The words like temple, church, kingdom, beast and many others don't have a universal meening in the bible. To do so really changes the true meaning of the authors intent.and makes the bible kind of flawed. And don't think atheist haven't pick up on some of the blunders you and the experts believe in. Kyle Williams has a site called The Book of Daniel debunks the Bible. He has found several contradictions in the Protestant interpretations and so have I.

I think the biggest impediment to Christians is their unwillingness to consider other views or change their mind thinking they already have the truth. They don't keep an unbiased opne mind. For once I would like to see someone admit a mistake on a forum.

I have to ask? Do you think the prophecy in Daniel 2 was insuficient whereas God had give Daniel another in chapter 7? I can understand another prophet getting a similar vision but not the same one.

Logic alone should overide your reasoning on this one.

I'm convinced that the first seal is holy war and opened on September 11 2001 and that the second seal has passed with Saddam and that those two are the first round of horsemen in pairs and that Assad and Amadinnijad are seal 3 and four.

This is what I think.

The first two seals passed on 911 and the next two seals will pass in rapid sucession at the next 911. The four beast of Revelation 7 are all end time beast and will be present on earth at the same time in the end.

When he sees riders, horsemen in pairs, A train of donkeys, a train of camels, Let him pay close attention, very close attention."

And he answered and said, Babylon is fallen, is fallen; and all the graven images of her gods he hath broken unto the ground.

Revelation 17:10 　And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

I think that of the "5 kings that have fallen" in Revelation 17 two have already fallen (Mubarak and Kadafi) in the apostasy currently taking place in the Arab World. There may even be more than one ten nation kingdom in the end.

I have a lot of questions and doubt many people here are interested in helping me figure it out.
I think the next 911 is just before or just around the corner.

 

[Saint]

Every kingdom that has ever existed or that will exist in the future has a leader; there will be a central figure in charge so get real already

In Yeshua Messiah,

Bob

 

[Ridgerunner]

Veteran When interpreting Scripture one must first determine whether those verses are written in figurative language or not. In the examples you use there is nothing in the context that suggest the term is used in a figurative manner therefore in those verses it is proper to apply a literal translation. However the description of the two beats in Rev13 does contain numerous indicators that figurative (or symbolic) language is being used. In order to properly interpret these types of verses we must use the definition the unchanging Word/God provides. In other words interpreting figurative language literally results in false doctrine. By the same token interpreting literal language figuratively results in false doctrine.

You say the first beast of Rev13 is a kingdom and the second is a man. I don’t see anything in Rev 13 that tells us one is a kingdom and the other is a man, what Scriptural justification do you have to change the definition of a beast between Rev13:1 and Rev13:11?

kaoticprofit You are making the mistake of trying to apply literal definitions when figurative language is used. In order to understand figurative language we must use the definition the unchanging Word/God provides not the literal definition that comes from man’s books like Strong’s Vines etc…. If you wish to continue in your error so be it. As you are led friend, as you are led!

Saint Remember “we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”. The spiritual kingdom which now controls the geographic areas that were once the same lands (geographic area) as Daniel’s leopard bear and lion kingdoms is not united by an earthly leader, but by the spirit of antichrist. While it may not have an earthly leader it is still waging an effective Jihad against all who refuse to submit. As the verses below show there are a total of 8 beasts/kingdoms but only seven kings. While it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for one man to gain control of the world it is possible for a false religion (united bu the spirit oa antichrist, all muslims deny God has a Son) to spread throughout the world, especially if it is one that uses violence to violently force others into submission.

Rev 17:7-11 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

 

[Saint]

The second beast of chapter 13 is the beast that comes from the bottomless pit of chapter 9:11 who is the king of the angels from the pit. This Apollyon in the same who kills the two wittiness in chapter 11:7. Apollyon is a spirit man whom I think is the Madih that Islam said disappeared into the earth but will return to lead them to victory,

Rev 13:11 LITV And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth. And it had two horns like a lamb, but spoke like a dragon.

Rev 9:11 LITV And they have a king over them, the angel of the abyss. In Hebrew his name was Abaddon, and in Greek he has the name Apollyon.

Rev 11:7 LITV And when they complete their witness, the beast coming up out of the abyss will make war with them, and will overcome them, and will kill them.

In Yeshua Messiah,

Bob

 

[veteran]

Johns first phrase was to tell his little children the truth about antichrist. He told them not to be looking for one specific antichrist because they will miss the fact that the world has always been controlled by many and that won't change to the end when Christ takes up His power and reigns.

With the 1 John 2:18 verse, John is reminding them that they had heard antichrist shall come; that was his first phrase, and antichrist in that first phrase is singular per the Greek. The Greek title 'Christos' for Christ is singular, not plural. The Greek word 'antichristos' is Greek anti & Christos and it's singular, meaning 'against Christ' or 'instead of Christ'.

But in John's second phrase about "many antichrists" that is plural, as it has the modifier Greek polus (much, many, great, oft).

John is repeating the same warnings that Christ did, and Paul did. In Matt.24 Jesus warned about both the idea of "many" coming in His Name saying they are Christ. That's John's idea of the "many antichrists" that were already here. Later with Jesus' warning about one coming to setup the "abomination of desolation" and proclaim himself as Christ with many following after him and believing it, is the idea of the singular antichrist that they had heard shall come (Matt.24:23-26). The Greek for "false Christs" there is specifically 'a pseudo Christ'. Jesus attached the idea of that false Christ working miracles so powerful in deception that it would deceive even His elect, if it were possible.

In 2 Thess.2 Apostle Paul gives the same two warnings, first about a singular false one coming to sit in the temple of God exalting himself over all that is called God or that is worshipped. And then later in 2 Thess.2 Paul mentions about the "mystery of iniquity" that it was already at work, which is the "many antichrists" meaning.

So those who are NOT looking for a specific antichrist to come and do what Lord Jesus and His Apostles warned of, is deceived by the "many antichrists" already, and most likely will bow in false worship to the singular Antichrist when he gets here.

The second beast of chapter 13 is the beast that comes from the bottomless pit of chapter 9:11 who is the king of the angels from the pit. This Apollyon in the same who kills the two wittiness in chapter 11:7. Apollyon is a spirit man whom I think is the Madih that Islam said disappeared into the earth but will return to lead them to victory,

Rev 13:11 LITV And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth. And it had two horns like a lamb, but spoke like a dragon.

Rev 9:11 LITV And they have a king over them, the angel of the abyss. In Hebrew his name was Abaddon, and in Greek he has the name Apollyon.

Rev 11:7 LITV And when they complete their witness, the beast coming up out of the abyss will make war with them, and will overcome them, and will kill them.

In Yeshua Messiah,

Bob

And that's the very false one Jesus was warning of in Matt.24:23-26, and Paul in 2 Thess.2:3-4, and John with his first phrase of 1 John 2:18, literally a pseudo Christ.

Christ also gave this warning of Satan as the coming Antichrist in the John 12 through 16 chapters...

John 12:30-31
30 Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of Me, but for your sakes.
31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
(KJV)

John 14:28-30
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved Me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for My Father is greater than I.
29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.
(KJV)

Jesus was speaking of "Hereafter" to mean after His crucifixion and resurrection. He was teaching that if He did not go away after that then The Holy Spirit Comforter would not come otherwise (John 16:7). Along with that revelation He also mentioned that the prince of this world cometh.

So those who read John 12:31 that the devil is cast out of this world, how is it they missed our Lord's words later in John 14:30 that the devil is coming?

 

[Saint]

Actually the intent of the antichrist is the denial that Yeshua is the Son of Yahweh but only a prophet of Yahweh. They (Islam) produce a false Messiah whom they claim is not the true Son but only a prophet. On the wall of the Dome of the Rock is written "Heavens forbid that God could have a son" .

After all whom can be saved if Yahweh does not have a Son; then the whole gospel would be a lie and Satan wins.

In Yeshua Messiah,

Bob

 

[veteran]

In reality the coming Antichrist will not be a product of Islam, even though they too have a prophecy of his coming and Antiochus IV was from Syria. The coming Antichrist is going to be the devil himself, in person, on this earth, as we are shown about his coming in Rev.12:7 forward. That's why we are given the Messages in Revelation about the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit and goes into perdition. That cannot apply to any flesh born man, but to Satan only, for he is that king of Rev.9 and angel of the bottomless pit. He goes into perdition because he 'already' has been judged and sentenced to perish (perdition = to perish).

Many have been listening to false prophets with the idea that the coming Antichrist must be some flesh born man. Per God's Word angels have manifested on earth to flesh men, so no big deal that Satan and his angels can manifest here on earth in plain sight once they are cast to earth out of heaven per Rev.12:7 forward. Satan's abode is in the heavenly dimension right now, and that's where he is going to be cast out of. There's only one other place left for him to go, and that's to this earthy dimension we live in.

 

[revturmoil]

Ridgerunner said

Nothing wrong with using Strong’s Vines etc…. when dealing with verses that are not figurative (or symbolic if you prefer).

How do you come up with that? Strong's has both the litereal and figurative meaning of these words!

kaoticprofit You are making the mistake of trying to apply literal definitions when figurative language is used. In order to understand figurative language we must use the definition the unchanging Word/God provides not the literal definition that comes from man’s books like Strong’s Vines etc…. If you wish to continue in your error so be it. As you are led friend, as you are led!

What do you know about truth since you don't have a 'method' of interpretation." You stand on a mountain of false teaching and denial. Are you ever going to believe the text at face value?

The text alone proves you're wrong in Daniel 7 and Rev. 13 as it does elswhere.

Revelation 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Rev. 13 clearly states it's a man.

Daniel 7 clearly states a beast is a king with a kingdom!

Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

So you should have quoted verse 24! But why would you do that?

24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

You said,

Man's book like Strong's?

I have the option of believing Ridgerunner who doesn't know how to interpret scripture.

Or I can listen to the Word of God at face value and to Strong's or Vines who define the words in the text in the language they were spoken to Daniel and John by our Lord.

 

[Believerway]

How do you come up with that? Strong's has both the litereal and figurative meaning of these words!

Let’s us look to Strong’s definition of Beast in Daniel 7:23 in relation to your above comment to see if what you say is true.

The reference to beast is H2423 in Strong’s and below is the definition Strong’s gives us.

H2423

חיוא

che^yva^'

khay-vaw'

(Chaldee); from H2418; an animal: - beast.

So by your above comment we should see a figurative definition of beast in Strong’s. Notice that it does not say anything in the above definition of a figurative definition of beast.

Now let us look at God’s definition of what a beast is and that can be done by the following verse.

Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

So we either trust God’s definition or we can trust man’s definition. If we trust in the Lord then we should believe his Word and the definition of what God reveals unto as the truth through his Word.

If we trust in man’s definition it leads us to a faulty exegesis of Scripture and false doctrine.

So kaoticprofit your above statement is a false statement. And the only reason for you to make such a statement is that you would much rather trust man than you would God.



In Christ, Believerway

 

[Ridgerunner]

Mat 5:21-22 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Mat 5:27-28 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Mat 5:33-37 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Mat 5:38-39 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Mat 5:43-44 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Notice the pattern in the verses above all say “ye have heard” plus what they heard and then came correction to clear up the misconception. Now let’s apply this principle to 1John 2:18

1Jn 2:18 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.

In 1John2:18 “ye have heard” is followed by the misconception in this case “that antichrist shall come” and the correction is “even now there are many antichrists”

John even gave us an extra push to recognize this in 1John4:3 when he said “this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world”

1Jn 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.

 

[revturmoil]

Let’s us look to Strong’s definition of Beast in Daniel 7:23 in relation to your above comment to see if what you say is true.

The reference to beast is H2423 in Strong’s and below is the definition Strong’s gives us.

H2423

חיוא

che^yva^'

khay-vaw'

(Chaldee); from H2418; an animal: - beast.

So by your above comment we should see a figurative definition of beast in Strong’s. Notice that it does not say anything in the above definition of a figurative definition of beast.

Now let us look at God’s definition of what a beast is and that can be done by the following verse.

Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

So we either trust God’s definition or we can trust man’s definition. If we trust in the Lord then we should believe his Word and the definition of what God reveals unto as the truth through his Word.

If we trust in man’s definition it leads us to a faulty exegesis of Scripture and false doctrine.

So kaoticprofit your above statement is a false statement. And the only reason for you to make such a statement is that you would much rather trust man than you would God.



In Christ, Believerway

Why do you always omit verse 24???

Because it debunks your theory!

I didn't make a false statement. I made a mistake and should have said Strong's often does give the figurative meanings.
Like it does here about a beast in Rev. 13

1) an animal

2) a wild animal, wild beast, beast

3) metaph. a brutal, bestial man, savage, ferocious

And here with the word kingdom as well.

Daniel 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

Isn't it clear from the text that kings will arise in the kingdom? And doesn't it say that "another" called 'he' shall rise after them!

The beast speaks and thinks!!!!

25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Speaking and thinking are attributes of humans.

I have one verse from the fith vial that debunks your theory and then I'm done with this. It's become a waste of time.

Revelation 16:10 And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,

A seat is a throne!
http://www.bluelette...ngs=G2362&t=KJV

Here the beast is called a person because it has a throne! Just like it is a dozen times elsewhere. Only here it's clear what a beast kingdom is.a A beast has a seat in a kingdom i.e. the man of sin and here he gets sores on his body.

Revelation 16:11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.

And what did you say about man's definition!

 

[us2are1]

Every kingdom that has ever existed or that will exist in the future has a leader; there will be a central figure in charge so get real already

In Yeshua Messiah,

Bob

Name one country who's leader is not an antichrist by Saint Johns description.

 

[veteran]

Name one country who's leader is not an antichrist by Saint Johns description.

Name just one 'man' that has done the miracles and great signs and wonders of Rev.13:11 forward, setup an image of the beast for all to worship or be killed, and setup a mark required to buy and sell, and sat in a built temple in Jerusalem and proclaimed himself as God, with the 'majority' of the whole world believing it. (especially that underlined part).

 

[us2are1]

Posted 31 August 2012 - 10:23 AM

Son of Man, on 30 August 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

[background=rgb(247, 247, 247)]Johns first phrase was to tell his little children the truth about antichrist. He told them not to be looking for one specific antichrist because they will miss the fact that the world has always been controlled by many and that won't change to the end when Christ takes up His power and reigns.[/background]
With the 1 John 2:18 verse, John is reminding them that they had heard antichrist shall come; that was his first phrase, and antichrist in that first phrase is singular per the Greek. The Greek title 'Christos' for Christ is singular, not plural. The Greek word 'antichristos' is Greek anti & Christos and it's singular, meaning 'against Christ' or 'instead of Christ'.

But in John's second phrase about "many antichrists" that is plural, as it has the modifier Greek polus (much, many, great, oft).

John is repeating the same warnings that Christ did, and Paul did. In Matt.24 Jesus warned about both the idea of "many" coming in His Name saying they are Christ. That's John's idea of the "many antichrists" that were already here. Later with Jesus' warning about one coming to setup the "abomination of desolation" and proclaim himself as Christ with many following after him and believing it, is the idea of the singular antichrist that they had heard shall come (Matt.24:23-26). The Greek for "false Christs" there is specifically 'a pseudo Christ'. Jesus attached the idea of that false Christ working miracles so powerful in deception that it would deceive even His elect, if it were possible.

In 2 Thess.2 Apostle Paul gives the same two warnings, first about a singular false one coming to sit in the temple of God exalting himself over all that is called God or that is worshipped. And then later in 2 Thess.2 Paul mentions about the "mystery of iniquity" that it was already at work, which is the "many antichrists" meaning.

So those who are NOT looking for a specific antichrist to come and do what Lord Jesus and His Apostles warned of, is deceived by the "many antichrists" already, and most likely will bow in false worship to the singular Antichrist when he gets here.

We have the full gospel according to Saint John. He teaches nothing about a single antichrist coming. John is straightening out false doctrine that has reached the ears of His little children.

Name just one 'man' that has done the miracles and great signs and wonders of Rev.13:11 forward, setup an image of the beast for all to worship or be killed, and setup a mark required to buy and sell, and sat in a built temple in Jerusalem and proclaimed himself as God, with the 'majority' of the whole world believing it. (especially that underlined part).

Truman was a first baptist minister (false Prophet) who made fire come down out of heaven in the sight of men.
The type have setup their false versions of Christ in the temple of the body showing themselves that they are god in their understanding since long before you were born.





.