The Coming Great Apostasy

[farouk]

LOL

That's how it goes...

LOL

This how it goes...

 

[Earburner]

Have you ever heard of the Dark Ages? A time when between 50 - 150 Christians were killed BY ORDER OF THE CHURCH? You're preaching Jesuit Futurism. Protestant Historicism is the correct interpretation of eschatology, and shows how the "falling away" happened right on time and the "man of sin" arose and sat in the "temple of God showing himself that he is God", that temple being the church.

You've probably never heard of Protestant Historicism, right? But did you know that it was the only interpretation taught in the Christian church for over THREE SOLID CENTURIES up until only about 150 years ago when Jesuit "left behind" Futurism began to take over? Yes, it's true. Please investigate.

Neither of you understand your KJV Bible! And, if you don't have one to read, then that is your primary problem!!
However, you both do grip tightly to the indoctrination of your Religion!!
Religion against Religion, nobody cares, and nobody learns!
There is no such thing as "THE" Antichrist in the KJV.

 

[Enoch111]

There is no such thing as "THE" Antichrist in the KJV.

The Antichrist goes by many names and titles, so if the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, the Beast of Revelation is not the Antichrist, who else would he be? Quibbling over this will get you nowhere, since *the Antichrist* is an accepted term, and has been for a very long time.

"...nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny." (Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196-197)

While the Reformers believed that the Pope was the Antichrist, they were mistaken. But "the Antichrist" is exactly what we find in Scripture.

 

[Enoch111]

...and the "man of sin" arose and sat in the "temple of God showing himself that he is God", that temple being the church.

That is really stretching it. Since the true Church is the Body of Christ, there is absolutely no possibility that Satan or the Antichrist can sit "in the Church". That would be preposterous, since it would require that they elbow out Christ Himself!

Furthermore, Daniel's prophecy about the Abomination of Desolation makes it crystal clear the the Holy Place literally means the Holy Place within the future temple at Jerusalem.

The Reformers were quite mistaken about the Pope being the Antichrist. And the church of Rome is certainly NOT the Church which is the Body of Christ.

 

[Earburner]

The Antichrist goes by many names and titles, so if the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, the Beast of Revelation is not the Antichrist, who else would he be? Quibbling over this will get you nowhere, since *the Antichrist* is an accepted term, and has been for a very long time.

"...nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny." (Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196-197)

While the Reformers believed that the Pope was the Antichrist, they were mistaken. But "the Antichrist" is exactly what we find in Scripture.

You and most don't find what's IN Scripture, because you read through the doctrines of your denomination, and lean to your own understanding through your fleshly "natural" mind.
Why do we all understand "the natural man" is read and understood in the plural, and then turn around and read to understand "that man of sin, the son of perdition" is in the singular?
Don't you know that the context of 2 Thes. 2 is in the plural?
"The natural man" is "that man of sin, the son of perdition."
What does the Lord say about His own words in Isa. 55:8-9 and John 16:13?

Where is the temple in which the Lord longs to dwell?
1Cor.6[19] What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
.
If the Lord is NOT dwelling within you, then who is??
Ans. "The natural man", that man of sin, the son of perdition", which is YOURSELF!!

 

[Earburner]

In John 2:1-20 Jesus gave the truthful example of what the temple is.
[21] But he spake of the temple of his body.
.
Why is it that you all don't hear?

 

[Earburner]

Correction: John 2:18-21

 

[Phoneman777]

Neither of you understand your KJV Bible! And, if you don't have one to read, then that is your primary problem!!
However, you both do grip tightly to the indoctrination of your Religion!!
Religion against Religion, nobody cares, and nobody learns!
There is no such thing as "THE" Antichrist in the KJV.

No need to shout. We're all here to "reason together". The facts are that Jesuit Futurism is a lie and can be shown to be such.

The great apostasy Paul spoke of was expected by Bible writers to come upon the church soon after they were gone.

Paul:
"I know after my departing, grievous wolves will come in among you not sparing the flock."
"We are not as many who (now at this very moment) corrupt the Word of God".

John:
"Little children, keep yourselves from idols" (John knew pagan/papal idolatry was soon to creep into the church)

"You have heard that Antichrist shall come...even now there are many Antichrists."

"And I saw, and behold, a white horse (34 A.D. - 100 A.D. = 1st century pure church conquering with the Gospel)
...another horse that was red (100 A.D. - 336 A.D. = period of ramped up persecution of Christians which included "ye shall have tribulation ten days", the absolute horrific 10 year onslaught of Emperor Dioclesian against Christians from 303 A.D. - 313 A.D.)
... a black horse (336 A.D. -538 A.D. = period when Christianity was legalized and made the official Empire religion and compromise of Christianity began to run roughshod over the church: idolatry, pagan practices and rituals, pagan festivals, etc. became the "baptized paganism" of Christianity, which included the first "Sunday observance law" by Constantine.
...a pale horse (538 A.D. - 1798 A.D. = the prophesied 1,260 year period of the "Little Horn", "Man of Sin", "Whore of Babylon", "Beast" Antichrist reign in which the great "falling away" apostasy where men began to call themselves "god on earth" and "vicar of Christ" united with the power of the state to control the consciences of men and put to death anyone that refused to go along with papal dogma.

You really should set aside all that Jesuit Futurism garbage propaganda and read what church historians like Foxe and Guinness had to say. Maybe you'd discover that your beloved ideas of Jesuit Futurism were actually part of the orchestrated papal Jesuit "Counter-Reformation" (I'm absolutely sure you have not idea what the "Counter-Reformation" was) where Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit "left behind" Futurism were manufactured and produced to combat the teachings of "Protestant Historicism" which was pummeling and tearing apart the papacy with Bible truth.

 

[Phoneman777]

That is really stretching it. Since the true Church is the Body of Christ, there is absolutely no possibility that Satan or the Antichrist can sit "in the Church". That would be preposterous, since it would require that they elbow out Christ Himself!

Jesus had to rebuke Peter as "Satan" did he not? Let's not be so naive as to pretend that Satan hasn't infiltrated, seated himself, and operates behind evil or misguided, well meaning men who wear a garb of Christianity.

Furthermore, Daniel's prophecy about the Abomination of Desolation makes it crystal clear the the Holy Place literally means the Holy Place within the future temple at Jerusalem.

Absolutely false. Daniel's prophecy refers to the anointing of Jesus, because that's what the entire 70 Weeks prophecy is about - a prophecy of the exact timing of the arrival of Messiah and His baptism!

However, if we must insist that "Most Holy" refers to a temple, you're still found once again delinquent in logic, for at the end of the 2,300 Days (FROM WHICH THE 70 WEEKS ARE CUT OFF) it is then that "the sanctuary shall be cleansed" which was when the Most Holy Place was anointed to cleanse it from the record of sin which accumulated there - and in 1844, the only sanctuary that could possibly be cleansed was the Heavenly Sanctuary by our Heavenly High Priest Jesus!

The Reformers were quite mistaken about the Pope being the Antichrist. And the church of Rome is certainly NOT the Church which is the Body of Christ.

The Reformers were absolutely spot on about papal Rome being the Antichrist, because that's exactly what the identifying marks of prophecy point to. It is you and your Jesuit Futurist ideas which have sprung forth from an institution so blinded by Satan himself that they can't even establish for themselves a correct theological position on something so elementary as "salvation by grace of God through faith in Jesus' sacrifice" that are wrong wrong wrong.

That is really stretching it.

What is REALLY stretching things is to think that God would ever inspire Paul or anyone else to designate a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem in which the sacrifices and offerings made there as a bold, defiant, middle finger in the face of God by those who have declared "we will not have this Man to rule over us!!" as the "Temple of God". Such a temple will NEVER be recognized by God as such, nor acknowledged by God because that's what "His chose people" decided to call it.

 

[Earburner]

No need to shout. We're all here to "reason together". The facts are that Jesuit Futurism is a lie and can be shown to be such.

The great apostasy Paul spoke of was expected by Bible writers to come upon the church soon after they were gone.

Paul:
"I know after my departing, grievous wolves will come in among you not sparing the flock."
"We are not as many who (now at this very moment) corrupt the Word of God".

John:
"Little children, keep yourselves from idols" (John knew pagan/papal idolatry was soon to creep into the church)

"You have heard that Antichrist shall come...even now there are many Antichrists."

"And I saw, and behold, a white horse (34 A.D. - 100 A.D. = 1st century pure church conquering with the Gospel)
...another horse that was red (100 A.D. - 336 A.D. = period of ramped up persecution of Christians which included "ye shall have tribulation ten days", the absolute horrific 10 year onslaught of Emperor Dioclesian against Christians from 303 A.D. - 313 A.D.)
... a black horse (336 A.D. -538 A.D. = period when Christianity was legalized and made the official Empire religion and compromise of Christianity began to run roughshod over the church: idolatry, pagan practices and rituals, pagan festivals, etc. became the "baptized paganism" of Christianity, which included the first "Sunday observance law" by Constantine.
...a pale horse (538 A.D. - 1798 A.D. = the prophesied 1,260 year period of the "Little Horn", "Man of Sin", "Whore of Babylon", "Beast" Antichrist reign in which the great "falling away" apostasy where men began to call themselves "god on earth" and "vicar of Christ" united with the power of the state to control the consciences of men and put to death anyone that refused to go along with papal dogma.

You really should set aside all that Jesuit Futurism garbage propaganda and read what church historians like Foxe and Guinness had to say. Maybe you'd discover that your beloved ideas of Jesuit Futurism were actually part of the orchestrated papal Jesuit "Counter-Reformation" (I'm absolutely sure you have not idea what the "Counter-Reformation" was) where Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit "left behind" Futurism were manufactured and produced to combat the teachings of "Protestant Historicism" which was pummeling and tearing apart the papacy with Bible truth.

I emphasized the word "THE" , not for shouting, but to help all to understand that anything that smacks of a singular "the" Antichrist, is an extreme fabrication in fantasy. There is no "little horn" in Rev.
That was all fulfilled in Daniel.
One must learn to read the interpretations of Gabriel separately, and not together with Daniel's visions.

 

[Earburner]

Jesus had to rebuke Peter as "Satan" did he not? Let's not be so naive as to pretend that Satan hasn't infiltrated, seated himself, and operates behind evil or misguided, well meaning men who wear a garb of Christianity.

What is REALLY stretching things is to think that God would ever inspire Paul or anyone else to designate a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem in which the sacrifices and offerings made there as a bold, defiant, middle finger in the face of God by those who have declared "we will not have this Man to rule over us!!" as the "Temple of God". Such a temple will NEVER be recognized by God as such, nor acknowledged by God because that's what "His chose people" decided to call it.

Jesus plainly said that Judas Iscariot was "the son of perdition". But none of you know why!
Ans. Judas ended his life before the Day of Pentecost. Peter on the other hand, lived to see that day, and did receive the free Gift of the Holy Spirit.
So, which is the worst sin?
Sell out on Jesus for money, or deny Him three times?
Don't you yet know that it's not about sin, but rather that you come to Him for forgiveness, and that you do ask for His Gift of the HS. Luke 11:13 KJV
Read Rom. 8:9 KJV, and see if you really are one of His, and not in the same condition as Judas Iscariot, "the son of perdition", for by far he is not the only one! Rom. 8:9 explains it very simply.

 

[Phoneman777]

I emphasized the word "THE" , not for shouting, but to help all to understand that anything that smacks of a singular "the" Antichrist, is an extreme fabrication in fantasy. There is no "little horn" in Rev.
That was all fulfilled in Daniel.
One must learn to read the interpretations of Gabriel separately, and not together with Daniel's visions.

I counted five (!) in five sentences of your post #222. One or two would be emphasis. Five in five is clearly shouting. Those who get wrapped up in emotionalism demonstrate how weak their arguments are - just like liberal snowflakes who shout down their opposition because they know they can't win in the arena of idea.

 

[Phoneman777]

I emphasized the word "THE" , not for shouting, but to help all to understand that anything that smacks of a singular "the" Antichrist, is an extreme fabrication in fantasy. There is no "little horn" in Rev.
That was all fulfilled in Daniel.
One must learn to read the interpretations of Gabriel separately, and not together with Daniel's visions.

The claim that the Little Horn was fulfilled in Daniel is just so entirely asinine I'm not going to waste my time.

The Little Horn of Daniel was NOT Antiochus Epiphenes IV by several irrefutably arguments.

The Judgement scene in Daniel 7 and the fire that the Little Horn is to be cast in happens at the end of time and did not already happen in antiquity.

The same Little Horn was to reign for 2,300 years which would have brought that reign to an end in 1798 A.D. (which happened when the papacy was abolished by Napoleon).

So, just keep on drinking the Jesuit Futurism Koolaid if you like. It's a free country here in the U.S. (until the Second Beast unites church and state and forms an image to the First Beast papal Antichrist and begins persecuting Christians like happened during the Dark Ages, except now with DARPA Hunter/Killer drones, DARPA terminators, and oodles of new Military Industrial Complex technology that will be turned against "they which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ".

 

[Phoneman777]

Jesus plainly said that Judas Iscariot was "the son of perdition". But none of you know why!

There you go with the shouting again...
The "Man of Sin" Antichrist is called "the son of perdition" because like Judas, it started out as good, arose within the church to leadership, became seduced by lust for money and power, committed apostasy and turned against Jesus and His truth and departed from the faith.
Just.
Like.
History.
Shows.
What.
The.
Papacy.
Did.

Ans. Judas ended his life before the Day of Pentecost. Peter on the other hand, lived to see that day, and did receive the free Gift of the Holy Spirit. So, which is the worst sin? Sell out on Jesus for money, or deny Him three times? Don't you yet know that it's not about sin, but rather that you come to Him for forgiveness, and that you do ask for His Gift of the HS. Luke 11:13 KJV Read Rom. 8:9 KJV, and see if you really are one of His, and not in the same condition as Judas Iscariot, "the son of perdition", for by far he is not the only one! Rom. 8:9 explains it very simply.

If you're only going to focus on one aspect of Judas - his betrayal - then you're just spinning your wheels.

When a good prophecy student hears about the Man of Sin Antichrist being called "the Son of Perdition", he will immediately consider ALL ASPECTS of the life of Judas in order to understand what the prophetic symbolism means, as I've shown you above.

 

[Earburner]

The claim that the Little Horn was fulfilled in Daniel is just so entirely asinine I'm not going to waste my time.

The Little Horn of Daniel was NOT Antiochus Epiphenes IV by several irrefutably arguments.

The Judgement scene in Daniel 7 and the fire that the Little Horn is to be cast in happens at the end of time and did not already happen in antiquity.

The same Little Horn was to reign for 2,300 years which would have brought that reign to an end in 1798 A.D. (which happened when the papacy was abolished by Napoleon).

So, just keep on drinking the Jesuit Futurism Koolaid if you like. It's a free country here in the U.S. (until the Second Beast unites church and state and forms an image to the First Beast papal Antichrist and begins persecuting Christians like happened during the Dark Ages, except now with DARPA Hunter/Killer drones, DARPA terminators, and oodles of new Military Industrial Complex technology that will be turned against "they which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ".

Here is your dilemma, the " little horn", Antiochus Epiphanes, rose up from the 3rd beast (Grecian Empire), in the latter time of their empire.
While he was rising, the 4th 10H Beast (Roman E.) was coming to power also. Therefore, while the 3rd beast was waning, the 4th beast was coming on the world stage. Of a truth, that "little horn" did rise "among them", but he was not of them.
Please read the KJV only.
And by all means, do not mix the visions of Daniel with the interpretations of the angel Gabriel. Gabriel is the authority for understanding, not Daniel.

 

[bbyrd009]

Don't we have a "do this, don't do that" Ref?
lol, yup, we do

You'll have to give a little more detail, on what you mean by "witness".

Um, but you don't need any more detail on "deliberately making jokes at my expense?"
hmm

 

[Earburner]

There you go with the shouting again...
The "Man of Sin" Antichrist is called "the son of perdition" because like Judas, it started out as good but eventually committed apostasy and turned against Jesus and His truth and departed from the faith.
Just.
Like.
History.
Shows.
What.
The.
Papacy.
Did.

If you're only going to focus on one aspect of Judas - his betrayal - then you're just spinning your wheels.

When a good prophecy student hears about the Man of Sin Antichrist being called "the Son of Perdition", he will immediately consider ALL ASPECTS of the life of Judas in order to understand what the prophetic symbolism means, as I've shown you above.

Correct!
By the words of " the natural man"- 1Cor. 2:14, I did give you the symbolism of how to interpret the words "that man of sin, the son of perdition".
Unfortunately, you are not taking the time to make the association, and would rather teach me with your preconceived, religious regurgitation of commentary from men.

 

[Earburner]

There you go with the shouting again...
The "Man of Sin" Antichrist is called "the son of perdition" because like Judas, it started out as good, arose within the church to leadership, became seduced by lust for money and power, committed apostasy and turned against Jesus and His truth and departed from the faith.
Just.
Like.
History.
Shows.
What.
The.
Papacy.
Did.

If you're only going to focus on one aspect of Judas - his betrayal - then you're just spinning your wheels.

When a good prophecy student hears about the Man of Sin Antichrist being called "the Son of Perdition", he will immediately consider ALL ASPECTS of the life of Judas in order to understand what the prophetic symbolism means, as I've shown you above.

Understand Rom. 8:9 first, and then you will know why Judas was "none of His".

 

[Enoch111]

Absolutely false. Daniel's prophecy refers to the anointing of Jesus, because that's what the entire 70 Weeks prophecy is about - a prophecy of the exact timing of the arrival of Messiah and His baptism!

That is a fanciful interpretation. The prophecy speaks of Messiah being cut off, but not for Himself. Which is a reference to the crucifixion. The time between the decree of Cyrus and the crucifixion was 483 years (69 weeks). There is absolutely nothing about Christ's baptism in that prophecy.

and in 1844, the only sanctuary that could possibly be cleansed was the Heavenly Sanctuary by our Heavenly High Priest Jesus!

Now that's SDA theology, but also really stretching it. Why in the world would the Heavenly Sanctuary need cleansing? It has always been clean and pure, since the throne of God is there.

 

[Enoch111]

You and most don't find what's IN Scripture, because you read through the doctrines of your denomination, and lean to your own understanding through your fleshly "natural" mind.

Looks like you are the only spiritual man left on earth. Sounds cultish to me.