Who is the Antichrist? Let's Put a Name on Him.

[Timtofly]

Now that is interesting. It's always been concluded that this is prophecy of Scripture, with the hidden details of creating man revealed in Gen 2, as well as the prophecy being fulfilled by the children of Adam and Eve.

And it must be true, because Adam was the first man created by God.

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Every teaching of Scripture must be tried by all Scripture. If any Scripture contradicts any teaching, then it is false teaching, so that Scripture is not broken, changed, or done away with to teach it.

The first time Adam was called anything was to be given a name. The only time the Lord called out for Adam was to come to Him for repentance, but he refused and blamed it all on Eve. Adam was the first man and first self-justifying coward on earth.

The only other sons of God are the angels, and no man is called out from among the angels, including the second Adam.

But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?

The sons of God were created on the 6th day. Adam was a son of God, then became a corruptible man plunging all his offspring into sin, when he disobeyed God. Adam was the first sinful man. But not the first created son of God. There were many sons of God created on the 6th day, not just one that God named Adam after God placed him in the Garden. The name Adam means man, not that Adam was the first man. He was the first son of God called a man. A name is not the physical you. It is the descriptive you. Adam was still a son of God called a man by name. Adam was the only son of God with that name.

 

[robert derrick]

The sons of God were created on the 6th day. Adam was a son of God, then became a corruptible man plunging all his offspring into sin, when he disobeyed God. Adam was the first sinful man.

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Don't read anything about being sinful, but just the first man.

The name Adam means man, not that Adam was the first man.

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Yep. First man.

He was the first son of God called a man. A name is not the physical you. It is the descriptive you. Adam was still a son of God called a man by name. Adam was the only son of God with that name.

Since you don't care what Scripture says, then there's really no point in arguing with you. It may be interesting at times to hear your myths and legends made up out of Scripture, but just not worth arguing over.

I'm afraid your mythological mind no longer allows you to just read what the words of Scripture say, and take God at His word to mean exactly what He says.

The first man Adam was the first man, and God calls him Adam. And he was not created sinful by Christ, nor did he make other men to be sinful, but all men are made by Christ and come into the world today the same as yesterday and at the beginning:

Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Man doesn't create nor make man, nor does any man make sinners of men other than himself.

Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.

I make myself a sinner by sinning, and Adam has nothing to do with it. He's not my father, nor my dad, nor may example. Period.

 

[Timtofly]

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Don't read anything about being sinful, but just the first man.


And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Yep. First man.


Since you don't care what Scripture says, then there's really no point in arguing with you. It may be interesting at times to hear your myths and legends made up out of Scripture, but just not worth arguing over.

I'm afraid your mythological mind no longer allows you to just read what the words of Scripture say, and take God at His word to mean exactly what He says.

The first man Adam was the first man, and God calls him Adam. And he was not created sinful by Christ, nor did he make other men to be sinful, but all men are made by Christ and come into the world today the same as yesterday and at the beginning:

Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Man doesn't create nor make man, nor does any man make sinners of men other than himself.

Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.

I make myself a sinner by sinning, and Adam has nothing to do with it. He's not my father, nor my dad, nor may example. Period.

Well then you can demand God does not restore you to being a son of God. Stay a man and be proud.

Paul was not giving us a history lesson. He was explaining sin and how it entered the world. Don't claim to be a descendant of Adam. Not sure who else you would be descendant from, if you are not in Adam's image.

 

[ewq1938]

How so? Which prophecies of God have been changed, after He prophesied what is to come to pass?

In Daniel the AC overthrows 3 kings/horns. In Revelation this does not happen.

This assumes that the 4th beast In Daniel 7 is the same beast of Rev 13:1 and are the last ten horned beast of this age before the Rev 19 war of Armageddon. I know some claim the beasts are two different beasts existing at two different times.

Dan 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
Dan_7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.

Dan_7:20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.

Dan 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.

Yet when we look at Revelation we do not find any of the kings/horns being "plucked up":

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.

All ten horns remain as kings with kingdoms the entire "hour" of the GT. The only time any of them fall or are subdued is when the entire beast with all ten horns and 7 heads is defeated by Christ at Armageddon.

In addition:

Rev 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

Again, all ten kings remain fully intact and even all together attack Babylon which happens at the end or just after the end of the great tribulation. Again this shows none of the ten horns/kings are subdued as we find in Daniel.


Daniel: antichrist and 10 kings/horns turns into antichrist and 7 kings/horns because three are plucked up.
Rev: antichrist and 10 kings the entire time of the great tribulation because NONE of the 10 kings/horns are plucked up.

 

[robert derrick]

In Daniel the AC overthrows 3 kings/horns. In Revelation this does not happen.

I don't see any quoted Scripture contradicting itself here. All I see is your interpretation of Scripture trying to say so. The interpretation is false, not the prophesy Scripture.

This assumes that the 4th beast In Daniel 7 is the same beast of Rev 13:1 and are the last ten horned beast of this age before the Rev 19 war of Armageddon. I know some claim the beasts are two different beasts existing at two different times.

Dan 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
Dan_7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.

Dan_7:20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.

Dan 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.

Yet when we look at Revelation we do not find any of the kings/horns being "plucked up":

Nor subdued. And so once again your interpretation is false.

Now if you show prophecy with the same little and notable horn that does not pluck up three horns before him, then you have a change of prophecy and contradiction of Scripture.

Prophecy comes not by the will of man, nor changes by the will of man. ANd most certainly not by interpretations of man.

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.

All ten horns remain as kings with kingdoms the entire "hour" of the GT. The only time any of them fall or are subdued is when the entire beast with all ten horns and 7 heads is defeated by Christ at Armageddon.

Unless of course the Scarlet colored beast is not the beast of Dan 7. And since neither of them answer to the description of the other, then they are not.

Rev 17 only speaks of 10 kings, not another rising after them as does Dan 7. Not the same beast nor kings.

Your interpretations by unbelief in all Scripture as true, is not proof that all Scripture is not true.

In addition:

Rev 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

Again, all ten kings remain fully intact and even all together attack Babylon which happens at the end or just after the end of the great tribulation. Again this shows none of the ten horns/kings are subdued as we find in Daniel.

True. Can't be that of Daniel then. Obviously.

Daniel: antichrist and 10 kings/horns turns into antichrist and 7 kings/horns because three are plucked up.
Rev: antichrist and 10 kings the entire time of the great tribulation because NONE of the 10 kings/horns are plucked up.

A perfect proof that they cannot be the same beasts and kings.

I would say trying to prove Scripture is false, by applying our false interpretation to Scripture, is a circular argument on the broken wheels of unbelief.

 

[Gottservant]

The anti-Christ is in more pain, in the natural man, than Christ was (Christ had more pain on the cross, but the World does not consider the Cross a good indicator of how much pain you can be in, in general).

When people talk to the anti-Christ, they forget the suffering that came before - that's why the World loves him.

By the same measure, he (the anti-Christ) forgets the pain brought on by the mark, this is his downfall; Jesus did not do this.

 

[robert derrick]

The anti-Christ is in more pain, in the natural man, than Christ was

What do you mean?

When people talk to the anti-Christ, they forget the suffering that came before - that's why the World loves him.

How so?

By the same measure, he (the anti-Christ) forgets the pain brought on by the mark, this is his downfall; Jesus did not do this.

Once again, what are you talking about?

 

[ewq1938]

I don't see any quoted Scripture contradicting itself here. All I see is your interpretation of Scripture trying to say so. The interpretation is false, not the prophesy Scripture.

Except I didn't give an interpretation, just laid out contradictions between the two prophecies. One choice is to believe the two ten headed beasts are not the same but that means the little horn cannot be the AC and one would have to explain what the ten horned beast is that is destroyed when God returns in a throne judgment preceding an everlasting kingdom ruled by the saints. Sounds like the same end times timeframe that we see in Rev regarding a ten horned beast etc.

 

[Gottservant]

What do you mean?

The anti-Christ is a slave to sin. Slavery to sin, brings pain. The more sin, the more pain.

How so?

This is the gift of the Holy Spirit, that blasphemy against Christ be forgiven, no matter what. The anti-Christ takes this to an extreme.

Once again, what are you talking about?

Revelation talks about those receiving the mark of the anti-Christ receiving a painful sore, the anti-Christ ignores the pain it puts him in - such that it becomes an "ache". Therefore the anti-Christ receives the greater condemnation; not only does he give the mark, he ignores the consequences of giving the mark.

 

[ewq1938]

Revelation talks about those receiving the mark of the anti-Christ receiving a painful sore, the anti-Christ ignores the pain it puts him in -

The AC does not take the mark for obvious reasons. This pain you speak of regarding him is imaginary and non-biblical as is most of the things you post about.

 

[robert derrick]

The anti-Christ is a slave to sin. Slavery to sin, brings pain. The more sin, the more pain.

Ok, I see your point. Unfortunately that's only true for those like you with conscience toward God. Reprobation from God is without conscience toward God at all.

Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

For them, sinning is only painful if it hurts the flesh or fails to achieve it's goal. That's why Esau found no repentance and Judas hanged himself, rather than like Peter who sorrowed with a godly sorrow. The other two were just pained for failing to achieve their goal, not for sinning to do it.

The only way anyone can be pained for sinning against God and man, is if the Holy Spirit convicts us.

Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.

The love of God that first loves us, is to convict us of sinning and draw us to Himself with godly sorrow for forgiveness of sins in Jesus Christ. Reprobates are those that God is not now convicting nor drawing to Himself. He is giving up on them to their own way without restraint of the His Spirit:

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.


And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient.

All antichrists, and especially the last great one, have completely shut themselves off from any affection for God and man and any living creature on earth. The most evil of angels and men, is that they no longer have any heart to care for God nor man. There's no there, there.

And I believe the last great antichrist may indeed be a dead false prophet brought back to live again on earth from hell. And the torment of it does not convince him to repent, but only sears burns his heart and sears his conscience to the most extreme of any man on earth, including Cain, Nimrod, Goliath, Pharaoh, Korah, Judas, Alexander the coppersmith, Diotrephes, etc...

This is the gift of the Holy Spirit, that blasphemy against Christ be forgiven, no matter what. The anti-Christ takes this to an extreme.

You mean after searing His conscience to God and show no remorse for sin at all, that the world then loves Him for his sheer 'audacity'?

Revelation talks about those receiving the mark of the anti-Christ receiving a painful sore, the anti-Christ ignores the pain it puts him in - such that it becomes an "ache". Therefore the anti-Christ receives the greater condemnation; not only does he give the mark, he ignores the consequences of giving the mark.

Where does it say receiving the mark is physically painful and sore?

I would think enticement to receive the mark would include it being easy and painless, though not harmless. The attitude of many could be that it's no big deal, but just a little mark. Many people go along to get along and justify it as no big deal. Many go with the flow and don't rock the boat, because they don't want to stand out as some kind of anti-social nut, like it was at Babel.

Not all followers are fanatical and willing to be sore and even burn for their great leader.

And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

In the end they will have sores and be burned, but not willingly from the beginning, for their 'beloved' leader. A low percentage of the German army was willing NAZI members. That's why they had the SS to keep their own soldiers and citizens in line. Dittoes communist Russia and China.

 

[Gottservant]

like Peter who sorrowed with a godly sorrow.

I like the idea of godly sorrow; it suggests we can be saved, even when our flesh is giving us Hell.

 

[Gottservant]

The AC does not take the mark for obvious reasons. This pain you speak of regarding him is imaginary and non-biblical as is most of the things you post about.

I think that's a painful remark, about my contributions.

I read the Bible, I just don't close my mind off to the idea, that there are other ways to be holy, that we have not learned yet.

 

[ewq1938]

I think that's a painful remark, about my contributions.

I read the Bible

Then you should know the bible never one time says the AC takes the mark of the beast. That's akin to saying God receives the seal of God in his own forehead. It's not biblical.

 

[Gottservant]

Then you should know the bible never one time says the AC takes the mark of the beast. That's akin to saying God receives the seal of God in his own forehead. It's not biblical.

He's a slave of sin! If he didn't take the mark, he would be accused of hypocrisy.

As for the Son, yes, He receives the seal of God. Why you would think the anti-Christ had no desire to imitate Christ, as regards the mark, I have no idea?

 

[ewq1938]

He's a slave of sin! If he didn't take the mark, he would be accused of hypocrisy.

Again, none of this comes from the bible! You create new things and insert it alongside biblical concepts.

As for the Son, yes, He receives the seal of God.

Also not something that comes from the bible.

 

[Gottservant]

Again, none of this comes from the bible! You create new things and insert it alongside biblical concepts.

The Bible calls the anti-Christ, "the man of sin". Jesus said "whoever sins, is the slave of sin". If you put two and two together, you conclude that he will struggle to be a Man, about sin.

Also not something that comes from the bible.

Jesus said "the Son of God will give you food, because God has set His seal upon Him" (roughly quoted, John 6:26)

You need to let scripture inspire your imagination, not just corner people who are struggling with sin already?

 

[ewq1938]

You need to let scripture inspire your imagination

A very devilish statement.

 

[Gottservant]

A very devilish statement.

Where in the Bible, does it say "it has to be in the Bible, before you can trust the Holy Spirit"?

Does the Holy Spirit say "no, trust the Bible was inspired, but cut off any other kind of inspiration"?

"The wind blows and you hear the sound of it, but you know not where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit." (John, roughly quoted)

You're trying to tell me you *know* where the wind has blown? That scripture says explicitly "the wind blows this way"?

 

[ewq1938]

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.