Revelation 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 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. These protestant bible scholars believed that the pope is an antichrist or that the antichrist would be the last pope:Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, Cotton Mather, John Knox, Wycliffe, Tyndale, Finney, Moody, Spurgeon, Sir Isaac Newton, and Fox.During the Reformation, Martin Luther noted that "Benediktos", [the name Benedict in Greek], added up to 666 in Greek gematria, and he thought it might refer to a Pope named Benedict or to Benedictine monks. [Gematria is Greek letters used for numbers in Geek.]ΒενεδικτοσςTOTAL255054102030070200666Benedict xvi is the pope now. However I believe from what the bible says that the Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39 prophecy must happen before antichrist comes to power over the 10 nations of the EU, the revived Roman empire. The Ezekiel prophecy is about nations, Russia, Iran/Iraq, Ethiopia, Lybia Germany or France uniting in a coalition to attack Israel. That is not about to happen yet, although the middle east is moving in that direction. Recently Israel threatened by a military exercise to attack Iran's nuclear facilities and Russia warned them to back off. If Israel does attack Iran, this could make Russia angry enough to form the coalition to attack Israel in just a few years, while Benedict is still pope. This guy pope Benedict was a Hitler youth and grew up in a country where the mostly catholic Govt. of Germany was murdering people of other religions in the holocaust. [I read that the third reich was the most catholic controlled Govt. Germany ever had.] Before he became pope, he was the head of the modern "office of the inquisition" which now has another name, something like the congregation for the doctrine of the faith or something like that. Seeing his background it seems to me that he could have the mentality of the antichrist. The antichrist is supposed to come in peacefully and obtain the kingdom by flattery, Dan. 11:21. Is pope Benedict using flattery on the leaders of the European Union? If the Ezekiel prophecy happens soon enough, he could be the antichrist.!! We will need to wait and see. I know he is an old man, but aging can be greatly slowed down by vitamins, calcium and alot of sleep or harmone therapy with human growth harmone. He could last a long time.
Number of His Name
- Thread starter stone
- Start date
-
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!
tomwebster
New Member
- Dec 11, 2006
- 2,041
- 107
- 0
- 76
There are some major bible scholars that would disagree with what you said.Martin Luther(1483-1546) (Lutheran)"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist...personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist." (Aug. 18, 1520) John Calvin(1509-1564) (Presbyterian)"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt...I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." Taken from "Institutes" by John Calvin. Cotton Mather(1663-1728) (Congregational Theologian)"The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church; and in the Pope of Rome, all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them." Taken from "The Fall of Babylon" by Cotton Mather John Knox(1505-1572) (Scotch Presbyterian)Knox wrote to abolish "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church" and that the pope should be recognized as "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." Taken from "The Zurich Letters" pg. 199 by John Knox. Thomas Cranmer(1489-1556) (Anglican)"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Referring to prophecies in Revelation and Daniel.) Taken from "Works" by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp. 6-7. John Wesley(1703-1791) (Methodist)Speaking of the Papacy he said, "He is in an emphatical sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers...He it is...that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped...claiming the highest power, and highest honor...claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." Taken from "Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms" by John Wesley, pg. 110. Roger William(1603-1683) (First Baptist Pastor in America)He spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vessals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to changed times and laws: but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." You can add to those names these men that thought the pope is an antichrist:Wycliff, Tyndale, Sir Isaac Newton, Fox, Finney, Moody, Spurgeon."It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist. And as to what Antichrist is, no sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not Popery in the Church of Rome, there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name. . . . Popery is contrary to Christ’s gospel and is the Antichrist and we ought to pray against it." ~Charles Haddon Spurgeon, 1873 England’s Prince of Preachers Quoted by Ireland’s Ian Paisley Protest of the Pope in Parliament Pope's title vicar of Christ means antichrist by definition.JESUS CHRIST HAS NO VlCAR. Vicar, from the Latin "vicarius" means "in the place of" e.g. vicarius sacrifice of Christ being His sacrifice in the place of the sinner. Papal claims such as infallibility, Head of the Church, Holy Father, all seek to put the Pope in the place of Christ, which place only the Living Christ can have. This false assumption of Rome is expressly put forward in the Papal title "Vicar of Jesus Christ".The New Testament was written in Greek, and the Greek translation of " vicar of Christ" is "Anti (instead of)-christos", or in our English Bible, "Antichrist". The word "Antichrist" is not just a word of wild insult, but is a Bible warning of the false role assumed by the Popes of Rome as supposed vicars of Christ, (See 1 John 2:18 D.V.). The Greek word for "Vice President" is "Anti-Proedros"; Because Anti, which means opposite, also means "replacement" or "instead", as in Vicar or Viceroy or Vicarious. Anyone pretending to be a substitute for Jesus Christ on the Earth is by definition an antichrist. There is only one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. He does not have a substitute, though some pretend to be.1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; The office of Pope does not come from the bible. Roman Pontiff comes from the old pagan Roman religion. All of the Roman emporers following Julius Caesar were chief Roman Pontiff.The office of pope itself pretends to be a substitute for Jesus and therefore any pope is an antichrist.The Bull Unam Sanctam... Issued by POPE BONIFACE VIII reads as follows: "The Roman Pontiff judges all men, but is judged by no one. We declare, assert, define and pronounce: to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every human creature necessary for salvation that which was spoken of Christ 'thou has subdued all things under his feet' may well seem verified in me... I have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all and above all, so that God himself and I, the vicar of God, have but one consistory, and I am able to do all that God can do." "Christ entrusted His office to the chief pontiff;... but all power in heaven and in earth has been given to Christ;... therefore the chief pontiff, who is His vicar, will have this power." Corpus Juris chap. 1 column 29, translated from a gloss on the words Porro Subesse Romano Pontiff "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII "All the names which are attributed to Christ in Scripture, inplying His supremacy over the church, are also attributed to the Pope." Bellamin, "On the Authority of Councils," book 2, Chapter 17. "For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth." Labbe and Cossart's "History of the Councils." Vol. XIV, col. 109 The title "Lord God the Pope" can be found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4, Declaramus.
tomwebster
New Member
- Dec 11, 2006
- 2,041
- 107
- 0
- 76
stone,I don't care what they say, I will stick to what Scripture says. Satan is The Antichrist. Their are many antichrist's but Satan is The Antichrist.
tim_from_pa
New Member
- Jul 11, 2007
- 1,656
- 12
- 0
- 65
Tom
o you believe as I do that the beast will be an actual person i.e. Satan in the flesh? Some say the beast is a system, some the devil, others a person. I think all 3 apply. Based on OT and NT scripture, I think he will be Assyrian, footed in what is modern day Iraq, Iran or Syria, and he will have a side-kick called the false prophet (found in Revelation). It is this sidekick I think will be the head of a false church. Then of course we have the great red Dragon in Revelation 12---- sort of a satanic trinity.Depending on some interpretations, the Grecian Demon that empowered Alexander the Great (the angelic power behind his kingdom) will empower Antichrist. There were/are 7 oppressors of Israel--- namely Egypt, Assyrian, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Grecian, Roman and end-time reconstituted Roman Empire.Revelation17:10: 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. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.In other words, 5 of the kingdoms (and Kings) were fallen in John's day. One is, i.e. the Roman empire, and one will yet be coming. Notice how the beast was one of them that reigned. He will come back to power again one day (the wounded head that makes a comeback when everyone will be amazed to see such an empire rise suddenly). Since the beast "is not" in John's Day, we know he will be from another one of the empires.When we study the book of Daniel, that sheds some light there. By Daniel 11 we can equate the beast with the "King of the North" or the one that comes out of the Seleucid portion of the Grecian Empire---- i.e. the Grecian Demon. History already attests to a prototype Antichrist in Antiochus Epiphanies from the same region in the Maccabean timesAnd since revelation calls the beast the "eighth" King, it tells me that it is a person.At this point I think we are all dealing with manifestations here. I wouldn't deny for one second that whether we are talking about Satan, a King, a system, a demon or whatever, they are all on the same boat with the same agenda.
o you believe as I do that the beast will be an actual person i.e. Satan in the flesh? Some say the beast is a system, some the devil, others a person. I think all 3 apply. Based on OT and NT scripture, I think he will be Assyrian, footed in what is modern day Iraq, Iran or Syria, and he will have a side-kick called the false prophet (found in Revelation). It is this sidekick I think will be the head of a false church. Then of course we have the great red Dragon in Revelation 12---- sort of a satanic trinity.Depending on some interpretations, the Grecian Demon that empowered Alexander the Great (the angelic power behind his kingdom) will empower Antichrist. There were/are 7 oppressors of Israel--- namely Egypt, Assyrian, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Grecian, Roman and end-time reconstituted Roman Empire.Revelation17:10: 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. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.In other words, 5 of the kingdoms (and Kings) were fallen in John's day. One is, i.e. the Roman empire, and one will yet be coming. Notice how the beast was one of them that reigned. He will come back to power again one day (the wounded head that makes a comeback when everyone will be amazed to see such an empire rise suddenly). Since the beast "is not" in John's Day, we know he will be from another one of the empires.When we study the book of Daniel, that sheds some light there. By Daniel 11 we can equate the beast with the "King of the North" or the one that comes out of the Seleucid portion of the Grecian Empire---- i.e. the Grecian Demon. History already attests to a prototype Antichrist in Antiochus Epiphanies from the same region in the Maccabean timesAnd since revelation calls the beast the "eighth" King, it tells me that it is a person.At this point I think we are all dealing with manifestations here. I wouldn't deny for one second that whether we are talking about Satan, a King, a system, a demon or whatever, they are all on the same boat with the same agenda.(tomwebster;55389)
stone,I don't care what they say, I will stick to what Scripture says. Satan is The Antichrist. Their are many antichrist's but Satan is The Antichrist.
You say will stick to what the scripture says. The scripture says this: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. "it is the number of a man" ---antichrist is a man controlled by Satan himself. He is possessed by Satan. [I use present tense, because I think he is already here!]Important biblical characters have actions that mirror the definitions of there names:It was that way with Abraham, Jacob, Jesus, Gideon, etc.Antichrist is an important biblical characterJoseph Ratzinger alias Benedict XVILet's look at the definition of his name in English: [American heritage dictionary]RatzingerRat;-- a long tailed rodent; a despicable, sneaky person especially one who betrays his associates.Zinger;--2. A sudden shock, revelation, or turn of events....Definition: RatzingerA despicable sneaky betrayer, suddenly revealedWatch how he betrays the separated brethren in the future {ie. the protestants} if he is the antichrist.
stone,I don't care what they say, I will stick to what Scripture says. Satan is The Antichrist. Their are many antichrist's but Satan is The Antichrist.
You say will stick to what the scripture says. The scripture says this: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. "it is the number of a man" ---antichrist is a man controlled by Satan himself. He is possessed by Satan. [I use present tense, because I think he is already here!]Important biblical characters have actions that mirror the definitions of there names:It was that way with Abraham, Jacob, Jesus, Gideon, etc.Antichrist is an important biblical characterJoseph Ratzinger alias Benedict XVILet's look at the definition of his name in English: [American heritage dictionary]RatzingerRat;-- a long tailed rodent; a despicable, sneaky person especially one who betrays his associates.Zinger;--2. A sudden shock, revelation, or turn of events....Definition: RatzingerA despicable sneaky betrayer, suddenly revealedWatch how he betrays the separated brethren in the future {ie. the protestants} if he is the antichrist.
(tim_from_pa;55401)
Tomo you believe as I do that the beast will be an actual person i.e. Satan in the flesh? Some say the beast is a system, some the devil, others a person. I think all 3 apply. Based on OT and NT scripture, I think he will be Assyrian, footed in what is modern day Iraq, Iran or Syria, and he will have a side-kick called the false prophet (found in Revelation). It is this sidekick I think will be the head of a false church. Then of course we have the great red Dragon in Revelation 12---- sort of a satanic trinity.Depending on some interpretations, the Grecian Demon that empowered Alexander the Great (the angelic power behind his kingdom) will empower Antichrist. There were/are 7 oppressors of Israel--- namely Egypt, Assyrian, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Grecian, Roman and end-time reconstituted Roman Empire.Revelation17:10: 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. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.In other words, 5 of the kingdoms (and Kings) were fallen in John's day. One is, i.e. the Roman empire, and one will yet be coming. Notice how the beast was one of them that reigned. He will come back to power again one day (the wounded head that makes a comeback when everyone will be amazed to see such an empire rise suddenly). Since the beast "is not" in John's Day, we know he will be from another one of the empires.When we study the book of Daniel, that sheds some light there. By Daniel 11 we can equate the beast with the "King of the North" or the one that comes out of the Seleucid portion of the Grecian Empire---- i.e. the Grecian Demon. History already attests to a prototype Antichrist in Antiochus Epiphanies from the same region in the Maccabean timesAnd since revelation calls the beast the "eighth" King, it tells me that it is a person.At this point I think we are all dealing with manifestations here. I wouldn't deny for one second that whether we are talking about Satan, a King, a system, a demon or whatever, they are all on the same boat with the same agenda.
The title king of the north was tranferred to Tigaranes a rich king that took over the Seleucid dynasty. Rome took over the title king of the north when Roman general Pompey defeated Tigranes and then marched on Jerusalem.Daniel 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches. Daniel 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither [shall there be any] strength to withstand. Daniel 11:16 But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Rome became king of the north; Syria what made a tributary to Rome.The kingdom returning is the revived Roman empire from the European Union. The nations surrouding the Mediteranean sea. 10 nations from there giving there power to the last pope so it will be ruled from Rome, before Rome is destroyed in the fall of babylon.
Tom
o you believe as I do that the beast will be an actual person i.e. Satan in the flesh? Some say the beast is a system, some the devil, others a person. I think all 3 apply. Based on OT and NT scripture, I think he will be Assyrian, footed in what is modern day Iraq, Iran or Syria, and he will have a side-kick called the false prophet (found in Revelation). It is this sidekick I think will be the head of a false church. Then of course we have the great red Dragon in Revelation 12---- sort of a satanic trinity.Depending on some interpretations, the Grecian Demon that empowered Alexander the Great (the angelic power behind his kingdom) will empower Antichrist. There were/are 7 oppressors of Israel--- namely Egypt, Assyrian, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Grecian, Roman and end-time reconstituted Roman Empire.Revelation17:10: 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. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.In other words, 5 of the kingdoms (and Kings) were fallen in John's day. One is, i.e. the Roman empire, and one will yet be coming. Notice how the beast was one of them that reigned. He will come back to power again one day (the wounded head that makes a comeback when everyone will be amazed to see such an empire rise suddenly). Since the beast "is not" in John's Day, we know he will be from another one of the empires.When we study the book of Daniel, that sheds some light there. By Daniel 11 we can equate the beast with the "King of the North" or the one that comes out of the Seleucid portion of the Grecian Empire---- i.e. the Grecian Demon. History already attests to a prototype Antichrist in Antiochus Epiphanies from the same region in the Maccabean timesAnd since revelation calls the beast the "eighth" King, it tells me that it is a person.At this point I think we are all dealing with manifestations here. I wouldn't deny for one second that whether we are talking about Satan, a King, a system, a demon or whatever, they are all on the same boat with the same agenda.The title king of the north was tranferred to Tigaranes a rich king that took over the Seleucid dynasty. Rome took over the title king of the north when Roman general Pompey defeated Tigranes and then marched on Jerusalem.Daniel 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches. Daniel 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither [shall there be any] strength to withstand. Daniel 11:16 But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Rome became king of the north; Syria what made a tributary to Rome.The kingdom returning is the revived Roman empire from the European Union. The nations surrouding the Mediteranean sea. 10 nations from there giving there power to the last pope so it will be ruled from Rome, before Rome is destroyed in the fall of babylon.
tim_from_pa
New Member
- Jul 11, 2007
- 1,656
- 12
- 0
- 65
(stone;55404)
The title king of the north was tranferred to Tigaranes a rich king that took over the Seleucid dynasty. Rome took over the title king of the north when Roman general Pompey defeated Tigranes and then marched on Jerusalem.Daniel 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches. Daniel 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither [shall there be any] strength to withstand. Daniel 11:16 But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Rome became king of the north; Syria what made a tributary to Rome.The kingdom returning is the revived Roman empire from the European Union. The nations surrouding the Mediteranean sea. 10 nations from there giving there power to the last pope so it will be ruled from Rome, before Rome is destroyed in the fall of babylon.
I see where you are coming from, and the reconstituted Roman Empire would include some of Europe. However, the Antichrist need not be planted (or "footed" there) due to what Revelation says about him.Also, keep in mind that some of the European nations, specifically the NW one's are actually (the lost tribes of) Israel and as such will be persecuted with national Israel and the world against them.Again, historically the "King of the North" was the Selucid King in spite of what may have happened later. As I already pointed out, the beast in John's day "is not" which means he will not be the demon empowering the Roman Empire. however, the confederacy will GIVE the Kingdom over to Antichrist so he will rule them but not be from them per se.
The title king of the north was tranferred to Tigaranes a rich king that took over the Seleucid dynasty. Rome took over the title king of the north when Roman general Pompey defeated Tigranes and then marched on Jerusalem.Daniel 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches. Daniel 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither [shall there be any] strength to withstand. Daniel 11:16 But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Rome became king of the north; Syria what made a tributary to Rome.The kingdom returning is the revived Roman empire from the European Union. The nations surrouding the Mediteranean sea. 10 nations from there giving there power to the last pope so it will be ruled from Rome, before Rome is destroyed in the fall of babylon.
I see where you are coming from, and the reconstituted Roman Empire would include some of Europe. However, the Antichrist need not be planted (or "footed" there) due to what Revelation says about him.Also, keep in mind that some of the European nations, specifically the NW one's are actually (the lost tribes of) Israel and as such will be persecuted with national Israel and the world against them.Again, historically the "King of the North" was the Selucid King in spite of what may have happened later. As I already pointed out, the beast in John's day "is not" which means he will not be the demon empowering the Roman Empire. however, the confederacy will GIVE the Kingdom over to Antichrist so he will rule them but not be from them per se.
(stone;55403)
Joseph Ratzinger alias Benedict XVILet's look at the definition of his name in English: [American heritage dictionary]RatzingerRat;-- a long tailed rodent; a despicable, sneaky person especially one who betrays his associates.Zinger;--2. A sudden shock, revelation, or turn of events....Definition: RatzingerA despicable sneaky betrayer, suddenly revealed
Wow. You're using an English deconstruction on a German name? You know, I've known many non-English names that sounds terrible in English.
Joseph Ratzinger alias Benedict XVILet's look at the definition of his name in English: [American heritage dictionary]RatzingerRat;-- a long tailed rodent; a despicable, sneaky person especially one who betrays his associates.Zinger;--2. A sudden shock, revelation, or turn of events....Definition: RatzingerA despicable sneaky betrayer, suddenly revealed
Wow. You're using an English deconstruction on a German name? You know, I've known many non-English names that sounds terrible in English.
(tim_from_pa;55445)
I see where you are coming from, and the reconstituted Roman Empire would include some of Europe. However, the Antichrist need not be planted (or "footed" there) due to what Revelation says about him.Also, keep in mind that some of the European nations, specifically the NW one's are actually (the lost tribes of) Israel and as such will be persecuted with national Israel and the world against them.Again, historically the "King of the North" was the Selucid King in spite of what may have happened later. As I already pointed out, the beast in John's day "is not" which means he will not be the demon empowering the Roman Empire. however, the confederacy will GIVE the Kingdom over to Antichrist so he will rule them but not be from them per se.
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. Revelation 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. 5 fallen: natons that ruled over and persecuted Israel;Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, medo-persia, Greece. One that is is the old roman empire at the time of the writing. The other to come is the revived Roman empire ruled from rome by the antichrist; that is the 7th. The eighth is the same as the 7th, but he will have changed his method of ruling for the last 3.5 years. Antichrist is going to order a nuclear hit on the city of Rome [fall of babylon] destroying rome and the Roman catholic church, shortly after he moves his throne to Jerusalem and then he will set up the worship of himself, making himself the 8th king. He is going to essentially be like the ruler of the ancient babylonian baal worship, Nimrod, having total authority and calling himself God. That is the beast that was and is not and yet is; Nimrod's type of rule coming back.
I see where you are coming from, and the reconstituted Roman Empire would include some of Europe. However, the Antichrist need not be planted (or "footed" there) due to what Revelation says about him.Also, keep in mind that some of the European nations, specifically the NW one's are actually (the lost tribes of) Israel and as such will be persecuted with national Israel and the world against them.Again, historically the "King of the North" was the Selucid King in spite of what may have happened later. As I already pointed out, the beast in John's day "is not" which means he will not be the demon empowering the Roman Empire. however, the confederacy will GIVE the Kingdom over to Antichrist so he will rule them but not be from them per se.
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. Revelation 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. 5 fallen: natons that ruled over and persecuted Israel;Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, medo-persia, Greece. One that is is the old roman empire at the time of the writing. The other to come is the revived Roman empire ruled from rome by the antichrist; that is the 7th. The eighth is the same as the 7th, but he will have changed his method of ruling for the last 3.5 years. Antichrist is going to order a nuclear hit on the city of Rome [fall of babylon] destroying rome and the Roman catholic church, shortly after he moves his throne to Jerusalem and then he will set up the worship of himself, making himself the 8th king. He is going to essentially be like the ruler of the ancient babylonian baal worship, Nimrod, having total authority and calling himself God. That is the beast that was and is not and yet is; Nimrod's type of rule coming back.
(yaqub;55499)
Wow. You're using an English deconstruction on a German name? You know, I've known many non-English names that sounds terrible in English.
Jacob meant heal grabber or supplanter. He lived up to his name in taking the birthright and blessing from his older brother. When he wrestled the angel, God changed his name to Israel, a name he also lived up to.Abram became Abraham, a father of many nations, something he lived up to.Gideon was called Jurbaal, because he cast down the alter of Baal.Jesus is called Emmanuel, meaning God with us.Major biblical characters have names and the definitions of those names describe what they would do or be.Antichrist is a major biblical character. So the definition of his name should be important.It just so happens that the name ratzinger in English has a definition that fits what the antichrist is supposed to be like.
Wow. You're using an English deconstruction on a German name? You know, I've known many non-English names that sounds terrible in English.
Jacob meant heal grabber or supplanter. He lived up to his name in taking the birthright and blessing from his older brother. When he wrestled the angel, God changed his name to Israel, a name he also lived up to.Abram became Abraham, a father of many nations, something he lived up to.Gideon was called Jurbaal, because he cast down the alter of Baal.Jesus is called Emmanuel, meaning God with us.Major biblical characters have names and the definitions of those names describe what they would do or be.Antichrist is a major biblical character. So the definition of his name should be important.It just so happens that the name ratzinger in English has a definition that fits what the antichrist is supposed to be like.
(stone;55511)
Jacob meant heal grabber or supplanter. He lived up to his name in taking the birthright and blessing from his older brother. When he wrestled the angel, God changed his name to Israel, a name he also lived up to.Abram became Abraham, a father of many nations, something he lived up to.Gideon was called Jurbaal, because he cast down the alter of Baal.Jesus is called Emmanuel, meaning God with us.Major biblical characters have names and the definitions of those names describe what they would do or be.Antichrist is a major biblical character. So the definition of his name should be important.It just so happens that the name ratzinger in English has a definition that fits what the antichrist is supposed to be like.
True about Jacob and Emmanuel. But they are names in Hebrew and the meanings emanated are also in Hebrew. Ratzinger means a person from the clan/village of Ratzo.
Jacob meant heal grabber or supplanter. He lived up to his name in taking the birthright and blessing from his older brother. When he wrestled the angel, God changed his name to Israel, a name he also lived up to.Abram became Abraham, a father of many nations, something he lived up to.Gideon was called Jurbaal, because he cast down the alter of Baal.Jesus is called Emmanuel, meaning God with us.Major biblical characters have names and the definitions of those names describe what they would do or be.Antichrist is a major biblical character. So the definition of his name should be important.It just so happens that the name ratzinger in English has a definition that fits what the antichrist is supposed to be like.
True about Jacob and Emmanuel. But they are names in Hebrew and the meanings emanated are also in Hebrew. Ratzinger means a person from the clan/village of Ratzo.
Revelation 13 vv. 1 - 10 describe a great power which received a deadly wound. The description of this power is very similar to that of the 'little horn' in Daniel 7. It is described as a 'beast' in Rev. 13, made up of the four beasts in Dan. 7. This beast was given dominion over many kingdoms, and persecuted the 'saints.' It exercised great power for 1,260 years ('days' in Dan. 7 and Rev. 13, recognized as prophetic days or years (see, for example, Isaac Newton on the day for a year principle) Theh head of this power is a man, who has a blasphemous name or title. The number of that name is 666.Now consider the application:In 538 A.D., the emperor Justinian decreed the bishop of Rome as the 'definer of doctrine and corrector of heretics,' and as head over all the churces. Justinian sent his army to support the pope and installed his man, Vigilius as pope. Over the next 500 years, the 'papacy' as it was called, 'waxed great,' and achieved great power, ably helped by Gregory 7th (the German pope, Hildebrande) and reaching the zenith of power under Innocent III in the 13th c. When challengers arose, the papacy called upon the kings of Europe to defend and enforce its power, claiming the authority of the 'Donation of Constantine' and, of course, Justinian's edict. The papacy ruthlessly suppressed dissent. During the period of its secular power, between 50 milllion and 100 million people were put to death because of their faith.In 1798, Napoleon took away the power of the papacy, as well as its territory. It received a deadly wound to its power. That was 1,260 years after the papacy received its grant of power. Since the reign of Pope Leo XIII in the later 1800's, the papacy has been in the process of restoration. In 1929, the papacy had its sovereign status and territory restored, thanks to Mussolini. Once again, it was and is a sovereign State. John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II all have been very, very instrumental in the wound beinghealed. An now, we have Herr Ratzinger, seeking to restore western Europe to the Catholic fold, and realize Konrad Adenaur's dream of a Christian Europe, led by Germany as the ancient defender of the faith.As to the name and its number:At the coronation of each pope, this name is pronounced, 'Vicarius Filii Dei.' It is translated by the Church as 'Vicar of the Son of God.' The claim of authority, however, is, as the name indicates, 'Substitute Son of God,' 'Alter Cristus,' 'Christ in the flesh.' That name is blasphemous. It is the official name or title of a man, who is the head of the papacy. As for the numerical value of that title, which the prophet calls us to calculate (the meaning of the Greek word), we would reasonably look to the official language of the power, the papacy, which is Latin, hence, Latin or Roman numerals. That calculation comes out to 666. As has been noted earlier on this thread, The Reformers studied Revelation and recognized the identity of the papacy as clearly described. Hence, the RCC convened the Council of Trent to inaugurate the Catholic Counter-Reformation. A key concern was to take the heat off the papacy as the Antichrist. Hence, the Church came up with 'futurism,' which puts the man of sin at the very end of time. This doctrine stayed Catholic until the 1800's, when a Scottish preacher read about it, and started promoting it. Since that time, it has spread to America, and is now taught in the major seminaries in this country. But ultimately, futurism was and is a tactic of the RCC to deflect attention from itself. Dave
The Thorndike-Barnhart English dictionary presents this definition for the word, antichrist: "The Great enemy or opponent of Christ." However. This definition, taken to be specific, might have direct reference as to the arch enemy of God, Satan. Which would be very correct with the all Scripture. However, as per the Pope. Not so as by Scripture Standard for its own interpretation for the word. It is true however, taking the word "antichrist" in its broadest sense as per its prefix and suffix, we could label any persons or doctrine as of "antichrist." But sense there seems to be so many variations of the "Word of Truth" Which Words are Truth in Christ? Or which interpretations are the Words the confusions offered in opposition to the One Truth of Christ? But since this word, "antichrist," is used in the Bible only for times, and never in direct reference to any singular person or any governing body we are hard put to apply this word, correctly as per Bible definition, to any person or governing body, except one or both of these, profess, as yet any Orthodox Jew does, that God, or Messiah has not come "in the flesh."Now who of us can apply this definition to the Papacy, whether a singular Pope or a line of popes? Does, or has, any one Pope taught doctrinally that "Messiah has not come "in the flesh?" How would these same "scholars" cited in this thread answer.What intelligence does the word give to us with regard to description of the great opposing force we have been taught by Scripture to be alert to recognize? Will it be a personage with the shortness of human life? or will it possibly be similar to a sovereignty which is subject to a change in leadership by authority from the death of one 'figurehead' to another yet professing openly the doctrinal belief that Christ did indeed come "in the flesh." While, at the same time, professing, falsely, its position as vicariously, the representative mediating personage, between heaven and earth, for sinful mankind. In "magnifying," or "exalting" its position, it is presenting its leadership as "God of the earth."?So while this "figure head" does not fit the Bible definition of the word "antichrist" as per disbelief in the First Advent of Christ "in the flesh," as the word was originally used for expression by John, there are positive prophetic clues given us all for recognition of this master of confusion to come to us "in the name of God," and an identifying number to be discovered in the "title" it claims to itself.It is my studied biblical opinion from Scripture and history that this personage, with its title has been amid Christianity for more than 13 centuries to date with yet approximately 820 years before it shall be "broken without hand."Got questions? [email protected]
tomwebster
New Member
- Dec 11, 2006
- 2,041
- 107
- 0
- 76
(tomwebster;56395)
harv,The pope is not The Antichrist. The Antichrist, when he appears soon, will be Satan.
I agree with you. The pope is more of a type of an antichrist.
harv,The pope is not The Antichrist. The Antichrist, when he appears soon, will be Satan.
I agree with you. The pope is more of a type of an antichrist.
(tomwebster;56395)
harv,The pope is not The Antichrist. The Antichrist, when he appears soon, will be Satan.
You are absolutely correct. The Pope, or any one Pope, should be called 'antichrist as per the Bible definition of the word, as used from 1st and 2nd John. All Papacy has ever taught that Messiah has come "in the flesh." However the Papacy, per se,' is the only body with a religious and political head which does conform to biblical description, presenting the doctrine, adverse to The Bible, for its leadership as the mediator between God and man, in the stead of Christ.Which doctrine, being in direct opposition to Christ as our only mediator, is worthy of the present dictionary term as being "anti-Christian." An enemy of the true doctrine/s of God's Messiah, for man's access to Himself directly as our only mediator for our personal salvation. [Gal.3:19-20; 1Tim.2:5; Heb.8:6; 9:15; 12:24].So you are "technically accurate in saying the Pope is not Antichrist, __ if one is intenending to give the Pope a Biblically definitive word. Because the "biblical" definition for the word "antichrist" can not rightly be applied, in that same sense to any Pope I am aware of in all the centuries of the history of the Papacy. I am wholly in agreement that Satan is truly the "great opponent of Christ." But the biblical descriptions for "the king of fierce understanding dark sentences," The Mystery of Iniquity," "The beast" with the number 666, is an issue relative to history's record of the rise and fall of nation named, forward to the rise of this "Mystery of Iniquity," to its foretold periods of power to "war" against the people of God, to the year of its final demise: the year in which it "the king of fierce countenance, understanding dark sentences ("Mystery of Iniquity")... shall be broken without hand."
harv,The pope is not The Antichrist. The Antichrist, when he appears soon, will be Satan.
You are absolutely correct. The Pope, or any one Pope, should be called 'antichrist as per the Bible definition of the word, as used from 1st and 2nd John. All Papacy has ever taught that Messiah has come "in the flesh." However the Papacy, per se,' is the only body with a religious and political head which does conform to biblical description, presenting the doctrine, adverse to The Bible, for its leadership as the mediator between God and man, in the stead of Christ.Which doctrine, being in direct opposition to Christ as our only mediator, is worthy of the present dictionary term as being "anti-Christian." An enemy of the true doctrine/s of God's Messiah, for man's access to Himself directly as our only mediator for our personal salvation. [Gal.3:19-20; 1Tim.2:5; Heb.8:6; 9:15; 12:24].So you are "technically accurate in saying the Pope is not Antichrist, __ if one is intenending to give the Pope a Biblically definitive word. Because the "biblical" definition for the word "antichrist" can not rightly be applied, in that same sense to any Pope I am aware of in all the centuries of the history of the Papacy. I am wholly in agreement that Satan is truly the "great opponent of Christ." But the biblical descriptions for "the king of fierce understanding dark sentences," The Mystery of Iniquity," "The beast" with the number 666, is an issue relative to history's record of the rise and fall of nation named, forward to the rise of this "Mystery of Iniquity," to its foretold periods of power to "war" against the people of God, to the year of its final demise: the year in which it "the king of fierce countenance, understanding dark sentences ("Mystery of Iniquity")... shall be broken without hand."
precepts
Member
- Feb 24, 2008
- 180
- 0
- 16
- 55
Stone's
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. Revelation 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. 5 fallen: natons that ruled over and persecuted Israel;Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, medo-persia, Greece. One that is is the old roman empire at the time of the writing. The other to come is the revived Roman empire ruled from rome by the antichrist; that is the 7th. The eighth is the same as the 7th, but he will have changed his method of ruling for the last 3.5 years. Antichrist is going to order a nuclear hit on the city of Rome [fall of babylon] destroying rome and the Roman catholic church, shortly after he moves his throne to Jerusalem and then he will set up the worship of himself, making himself the 8th king. He is going to essentially be like the ruler of the ancient babylonian baal worship, Nimrod, having total authority and calling himself God. That is the beast that was and is not and yet is; Nimrod's type of rule coming back.
I wonder where in the bible did you get all that information?Why is it that the prophecies in Daniel occurred from one leader to another, but when it comes to Rome there's a 2,000 yrs gap.If Rome is the 4th and 5th beasts, who are the horns?The horns in Persia were Cyrus and Darius, one higher than the next representing Darius(Medes) and his dynasty rise after the death of Cyrus(Persia).The horns in Grecia, Alexander the Great and his four generals of which a little horn came up among the four.But as for Rome, no interpretation of who the seven heads, ten horns, ten crowns are. I wonder why? Then the 5th beast that rises among the 10 takes 2,000 yrs? Gimme a break!The seven first emperors of Rome are well documented. The 8th,9th, & 10th being the Flavian Dynasty who destroyed the Temple in 70ad and also ended Ceasar's Dynasty.The 11th emperor, Nerva, plucked up the three horns when he started the Antonine Dynasty but installed Flavian worship, the name of the beast.Please note users of the name Flavius, like Constantine and his mother Helen, Josephus the renowned Jewish historian, and pre-Caesar users which fulfills Rev 17:12; And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. FlaviusFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavius Flavius was the name of a gens in ancient Rome, meaning "blond". The feminine form was Flavia. After the end of the popular Flavian dynasty of emperors, Flavius/Flavia became a praenomen, common especially among royalty: the adoption of this praenomen by Constantine I set a precedent for some imperial dynasties, such as Justinianian dynasty and in the official names of high-ranking officials (Aëtius, Belisarius). Famous people from the gens Flavia are: Gaius Flavius Fimbria, consul in 104 BC Titus Flavius Clemens, consul in 95 Titus Flavius Sabinus, consul in 82 Gaius Flavius Antoninus, general of the 1st century BC and assassin of Julius Caesar Lucius Caesetius Flavius, 1st century BC tribune also connected with Caesar who appears in the play Julius Caesar as simply "Flavius" Flavius Scaevinus, member of the Pisonian conspiracy against Nero Lucius Flavius Arrianus Xenophon, historian of the 2nd century The Flavian dynasty of emperors: Titus Flavius Domitianus, Emperor Domitian Titus Flavius Vespasianus, Emperor Vespasian Titus Flavius Vespasianus, Emperor Titus Julia Flavia, daughter of Titus and mistress of Domitian Flavius Josephus (or just Josephus), famous historian of the 1st century, took his Roman name from his patron Vespasian Flavia Julia Helena Flavia Domitilla - wife / daughter / granddaughter of Vespasian Flavia Maximiana Theodora Flavia Julia Constantia Flavius was also used as a praenomen: Flavius Aëtius, general of 5th century Flavius Arcadius, Byzantine Emperor of the 4th and 5th century Flavius Augustus Honorius, Western Roman Emperor of the 4th and 5th century Flavius Belisarius, Byzantine general of the 6th century Flavius Caper, grammarian of the 2nd century Flavius Claudius Constantinus (Constantine II), emperor of the 4th century Flavius Claudius Iulianus (Julian the Apostate), emperor of the 4th century Flavius Gratianus Augustus (Gratian), Western Roman Emperor of the 4th century Flavius Iovianus (or just Jovian), emperor of the 4th century Flavius Julius Crispus (or just Crispus), Western Roman Emperor of the 4th century Flavius Magnus Magnentius (or just Magnentius), would-be Western Roman Emperor of the 4th century Flavius Martinus, vicarius of Roman Britain of the 4th century Flavius Petrus Sabbatius Justinianus (Justinian I), Eastern Roman Emperor of the 6th century Also some Roman legions were called Flavia, since they had been levied by Flavian emperors: Legio IV Flavia Felix Legio XVI Flavia Firma Legio I Flavia Constantia Legio I Flavia Gallicana Constantia Legio I Flavia Martis Legio I Flavia Pacis Legio I Flavia Theodosiana Legio II Flavia Constantia Legio II Flavia Virtutis Legio III Flavia Salutis Others bearing similar names: Patriarch Flavianus (Fravitta of Constantinople) Virius Nicomachus Flavianus There is a Christian saint and martyr named Saint Flavia. She was venerated along with Saint Placidus.
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. Revelation 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. 5 fallen: natons that ruled over and persecuted Israel;Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, medo-persia, Greece. One that is is the old roman empire at the time of the writing. The other to come is the revived Roman empire ruled from rome by the antichrist; that is the 7th. The eighth is the same as the 7th, but he will have changed his method of ruling for the last 3.5 years. Antichrist is going to order a nuclear hit on the city of Rome [fall of babylon] destroying rome and the Roman catholic church, shortly after he moves his throne to Jerusalem and then he will set up the worship of himself, making himself the 8th king. He is going to essentially be like the ruler of the ancient babylonian baal worship, Nimrod, having total authority and calling himself God. That is the beast that was and is not and yet is; Nimrod's type of rule coming back.
I wonder where in the bible did you get all that information?Why is it that the prophecies in Daniel occurred from one leader to another, but when it comes to Rome there's a 2,000 yrs gap.If Rome is the 4th and 5th beasts, who are the horns?The horns in Persia were Cyrus and Darius, one higher than the next representing Darius(Medes) and his dynasty rise after the death of Cyrus(Persia).The horns in Grecia, Alexander the Great and his four generals of which a little horn came up among the four.But as for Rome, no interpretation of who the seven heads, ten horns, ten crowns are. I wonder why? Then the 5th beast that rises among the 10 takes 2,000 yrs? Gimme a break!The seven first emperors of Rome are well documented. The 8th,9th, & 10th being the Flavian Dynasty who destroyed the Temple in 70ad and also ended Ceasar's Dynasty.The 11th emperor, Nerva, plucked up the three horns when he started the Antonine Dynasty but installed Flavian worship, the name of the beast.Please note users of the name Flavius, like Constantine and his mother Helen, Josephus the renowned Jewish historian, and pre-Caesar users which fulfills Rev 17:12; And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. FlaviusFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavius Flavius was the name of a gens in ancient Rome, meaning "blond". The feminine form was Flavia. After the end of the popular Flavian dynasty of emperors, Flavius/Flavia became a praenomen, common especially among royalty: the adoption of this praenomen by Constantine I set a precedent for some imperial dynasties, such as Justinianian dynasty and in the official names of high-ranking officials (Aëtius, Belisarius). Famous people from the gens Flavia are: Gaius Flavius Fimbria, consul in 104 BC Titus Flavius Clemens, consul in 95 Titus Flavius Sabinus, consul in 82 Gaius Flavius Antoninus, general of the 1st century BC and assassin of Julius Caesar Lucius Caesetius Flavius, 1st century BC tribune also connected with Caesar who appears in the play Julius Caesar as simply "Flavius" Flavius Scaevinus, member of the Pisonian conspiracy against Nero Lucius Flavius Arrianus Xenophon, historian of the 2nd century The Flavian dynasty of emperors: Titus Flavius Domitianus, Emperor Domitian Titus Flavius Vespasianus, Emperor Vespasian Titus Flavius Vespasianus, Emperor Titus Julia Flavia, daughter of Titus and mistress of Domitian Flavius Josephus (or just Josephus), famous historian of the 1st century, took his Roman name from his patron Vespasian Flavia Julia Helena Flavia Domitilla - wife / daughter / granddaughter of Vespasian Flavia Maximiana Theodora Flavia Julia Constantia Flavius was also used as a praenomen: Flavius Aëtius, general of 5th century Flavius Arcadius, Byzantine Emperor of the 4th and 5th century Flavius Augustus Honorius, Western Roman Emperor of the 4th and 5th century Flavius Belisarius, Byzantine general of the 6th century Flavius Caper, grammarian of the 2nd century Flavius Claudius Constantinus (Constantine II), emperor of the 4th century Flavius Claudius Iulianus (Julian the Apostate), emperor of the 4th century Flavius Gratianus Augustus (Gratian), Western Roman Emperor of the 4th century Flavius Iovianus (or just Jovian), emperor of the 4th century Flavius Julius Crispus (or just Crispus), Western Roman Emperor of the 4th century Flavius Magnus Magnentius (or just Magnentius), would-be Western Roman Emperor of the 4th century Flavius Martinus, vicarius of Roman Britain of the 4th century Flavius Petrus Sabbatius Justinianus (Justinian I), Eastern Roman Emperor of the 6th century Also some Roman legions were called Flavia, since they had been levied by Flavian emperors: Legio IV Flavia Felix Legio XVI Flavia Firma Legio I Flavia Constantia Legio I Flavia Gallicana Constantia Legio I Flavia Martis Legio I Flavia Pacis Legio I Flavia Theodosiana Legio II Flavia Constantia Legio II Flavia Virtutis Legio III Flavia Salutis Others bearing similar names: Patriarch Flavianus (Fravitta of Constantinople) Virius Nicomachus Flavianus There is a Christian saint and martyr named Saint Flavia. She was venerated along with Saint Placidus.
(harv;56394)
The Thorndike-Barnhart English dictionary presents this definition for the word, antichrist: "The Great enemy or opponent of Christ." However. This definition, taken to be specific, might have direct reference as to the arch enemy of God, Satan. Which would be very correct with the all Scripture. However, as per the Pope. Not so as by Scripture Standard for its own interpretation for the word. It is true however, taking the word "antichrist" in its broadest sense as per its prefix and suffix, we could label any persons or doctrine as of "antichrist." But sense there seems to be so many variations of the "Word of Truth" Which Words are Truth in Christ? Or which interpretations are the Words the confusions offered in opposition to the One Truth of Christ? But since this word, "antichrist," is used in the Bible only for times, and never in direct reference to any singular person or any governing body we are hard put to apply this word, correctly as per Bible definition, to any person or governing body, except one or both of these, profess, as yet any Orthodox Jew does, that God, or Messiah has not come "in the flesh."Now who of us can apply this definition to the Papacy, whether a singular Pope or a line of popes? Does, or has, any one Pope taught doctrinally that "Messiah has not come "in the flesh?" How would these same "scholars" cited in this thread answer.What intelligence does the word give to us with regard to description of the great opposing force we have been taught by Scripture to be alert to recognize? Will it be a personage with the shortness of human life? or will it possibly be similar to a sovereignty which is subject to a change in leadership by authority from the death of one 'figurehead' to another yet professing openly the doctrinal belief that Christ did indeed come "in the flesh." While, at the same time, professing, falsely, its position as vicariously, the representative mediating personage, between heaven and earth, for sinful mankind. In "magnifying," or "exalting" its position, it is presenting its leadership as "God of the earth."?So while this "figure head" does not fit the Bible definition of the word "antichrist" as per disbelief in the First Advent of Christ "in the flesh," as the word was originally used for expression by John, there are positive prophetic clues given us all for recognition of this master of confusion to come to us "in the name of God," and an identifying number to be discovered in the "title" it claims to itself.It is my studied biblical opinion from Scripture and history that this personage, with its title has been amid Christianity for more than 13 centuries to date with yet approximately 820 years before it shall be "broken without hand."Got questions? [email protected]
People that are atheists represent a disbelief that Christ came in the flesh. They don't believe in God, and don't believe He came in the flesh.Charles Chiniquy, former catholic priest, in his book, 50 YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME, cited that there were over 50 popes that were atheists and infidels. Roman catholicism baptizes little babies that don't believe anything. Many catholics grow up as atheists, never believing in God, yet they belong to the catholic church. And also many in the catholic clergy follow this same pattern and are atheists.The antichrist, the man himself, will be an atheist.Catholic doctrine is to obey a pope no matter how evil he is:Regardless of how bad the pope, or if he is the devil himself, he must be obeyed.So it is written, so it is done.If the Pope errs by commanding vices or forbidding virtues, then the Church must believe that vices are good and virtues bad, unless one wants to sin against conscience"- Cardinal 'St.' Robert Bellarmine (a saint to Roman Catholics, and one of the Counter-Reformation leaders), De Summo Pontifice, bk. 4, ch. 5http://www.trueorthodoxy.org/heretic...s_christ.shtmlthis contradicts 3 John 1:113 John 1:11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.No matter what evil decree the antichrist gives, as last pope, it will be followed by catholics.Quote by Atheist pope Leo X:"How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us!"
The Thorndike-Barnhart English dictionary presents this definition for the word, antichrist: "The Great enemy or opponent of Christ." However. This definition, taken to be specific, might have direct reference as to the arch enemy of God, Satan. Which would be very correct with the all Scripture. However, as per the Pope. Not so as by Scripture Standard for its own interpretation for the word. It is true however, taking the word "antichrist" in its broadest sense as per its prefix and suffix, we could label any persons or doctrine as of "antichrist." But sense there seems to be so many variations of the "Word of Truth" Which Words are Truth in Christ? Or which interpretations are the Words the confusions offered in opposition to the One Truth of Christ? But since this word, "antichrist," is used in the Bible only for times, and never in direct reference to any singular person or any governing body we are hard put to apply this word, correctly as per Bible definition, to any person or governing body, except one or both of these, profess, as yet any Orthodox Jew does, that God, or Messiah has not come "in the flesh."Now who of us can apply this definition to the Papacy, whether a singular Pope or a line of popes? Does, or has, any one Pope taught doctrinally that "Messiah has not come "in the flesh?" How would these same "scholars" cited in this thread answer.What intelligence does the word give to us with regard to description of the great opposing force we have been taught by Scripture to be alert to recognize? Will it be a personage with the shortness of human life? or will it possibly be similar to a sovereignty which is subject to a change in leadership by authority from the death of one 'figurehead' to another yet professing openly the doctrinal belief that Christ did indeed come "in the flesh." While, at the same time, professing, falsely, its position as vicariously, the representative mediating personage, between heaven and earth, for sinful mankind. In "magnifying," or "exalting" its position, it is presenting its leadership as "God of the earth."?So while this "figure head" does not fit the Bible definition of the word "antichrist" as per disbelief in the First Advent of Christ "in the flesh," as the word was originally used for expression by John, there are positive prophetic clues given us all for recognition of this master of confusion to come to us "in the name of God," and an identifying number to be discovered in the "title" it claims to itself.It is my studied biblical opinion from Scripture and history that this personage, with its title has been amid Christianity for more than 13 centuries to date with yet approximately 820 years before it shall be "broken without hand."Got questions? [email protected]
People that are atheists represent a disbelief that Christ came in the flesh. They don't believe in God, and don't believe He came in the flesh.Charles Chiniquy, former catholic priest, in his book, 50 YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME, cited that there were over 50 popes that were atheists and infidels. Roman catholicism baptizes little babies that don't believe anything. Many catholics grow up as atheists, never believing in God, yet they belong to the catholic church. And also many in the catholic clergy follow this same pattern and are atheists.The antichrist, the man himself, will be an atheist.Catholic doctrine is to obey a pope no matter how evil he is:Regardless of how bad the pope, or if he is the devil himself, he must be obeyed.So it is written, so it is done.If the Pope errs by commanding vices or forbidding virtues, then the Church must believe that vices are good and virtues bad, unless one wants to sin against conscience"- Cardinal 'St.' Robert Bellarmine (a saint to Roman Catholics, and one of the Counter-Reformation leaders), De Summo Pontifice, bk. 4, ch. 5http://www.trueorthodoxy.org/heretic...s_christ.shtmlthis contradicts 3 John 1:113 John 1:11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.No matter what evil decree the antichrist gives, as last pope, it will be followed by catholics.Quote by Atheist pope Leo X:"How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us!"
Similar threads
