"eschatological speculation."

[Stormcrow]

Where? The only Scriptural reference to antichrist is in the books of john which i have posted a few times here. To pull antichrist out of any other place is conjecture on mans part.

Yep. Scofield has washed many brains. :bigfrown

 

[Hitch]

Re: Comparing the biblical Anti Christ and the Mahdi (4)

Where?

13 Satanic Bloodlines 4;17 duh

The only Scriptural reference to antichrist is in the books of john which i have posted a few times here. To pull antichrist out of any other place is conjecture on mans part.

 

[Stormcrow]

Re: Comparing the biblical Anti Christ and the Mahdi (4)

The Scofield Reference Bible promoted dispensationalism, the belief that between creation and the final judgment there were seven distinct eras of God's dealing with man and that these eras were a framework for synthesizing the message of the Bible.[6] It was largely through the influence of Scofield's notes that dispensationalism grew in influence among fundamentalist Christians in the United States. Scofield's notes on the Book of Revelation are a major source for the various timetables, judgments, and plagues elaborated by popular religious writers such as Hal Lindsey, Edgar C. Whisenant, and Tim LaHaye;[7] and in part because of the success of the Scofield Reference Bible, twentieth-century American fundamentalists placed greater stress on eschatological speculation.

Opponents of biblical fundamentalism have criticized the Scofield Bible for its air of total authority in biblical interpretation, for what they consider its glossing over of biblical contradictions, and for its focus on eschatology.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scofield_Reference_Bible

Garbage in, garbage out. This next line from the cited source should scare anyone interested in the truth:

The 1917 Scofield Reference Bible is now in the public domain, continues to be published, and is "consistently the best selling edition" in the United Kingdom and Ireland.[9]

 

[Stormcrow]

Re: Comparing the biblical Anti Christ and the Mahdi (4)

and in part because of the success of the Scofield Reference Bible, twentieth-century American fundamentalists placed greater stress on eschatological speculation.

And what do we see here in forums like this all over the web???

"eschatological speculation."

That's exactly what this thread is!

 

[reba]

Re: Comparing the biblical Anti Christ and the Mahdi (4)

SHEESH off topic....

Storm start a thread and i will move these posts to it! I 'll give ya few minutes then do it my self

Scofield is not thee antichrist just one of many

 

[Broncobilly1972]

Re: Comparing the biblical Anti Christ and the Mahdi (4)

I knew we could agree on something, Scofield that is


This not so much
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out , that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (1 John 2:18, 19 KJV)

Nero followed Christ for a time? He went out from Christ, cause his heart wasn't truly with Christ?

 

[Hitch]

Re: Comparing the biblical Anti Christ and the Mahdi (4)

Nero followed Christ for a time? He went out from Christ, cause his heart wasn't truly with Christ?



So who is it that said that?

 

[Broncobilly1972]

I was asking

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out , that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (1 John 2:18, 19 KJV)

John still seems to be talking about many Antichrists, when he says they went out from us, but they were not of us.

Was Nero ever considered of us? It seems that John is saying anyone that doesn't continue in sound doctrine is Antichrist. Or am I reading it wrong?

 

[Hitch]

I was asking

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out , that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (1 John 2:18, 19 KJV)

John still seems to be talking about many Antichrists, when he says they went out from us, but they were not of us.

1 John 2:18
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1 John 2:17-19 (in Context) 1 John 2 (Whole Chapter) 1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John 2:21-23 (in Context) 1 John 2 (Whole Chapter) 1 John 4:3
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
1 John 4:2-4 (in Context) 1 John 4 (Whole Chapter) 2 John 1:7
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
2 John 1:6-8 (in Context) 2 John 1 (Whole Chapter)

No mention of a 'world leader' or some super human boogey-man.

Was Nero ever considered of us? It seems that John is saying anyone that doesn't continue in sound doctrine is Antichrist. Or am I reading it wrong?

Yup. As far as the originator and sole user of the term in Scripture is concerned, it is entirely a matter of defining who and what Christ is. Status,office and position have nothing to do with it.

 

[Stormcrow]

The "antichrists" of whom John writes are those whom had fallen away from the faith and heretics: gnostics, judaizers, and false apostles that had infiltrated the churches the apostles planted and were turning people away from the gospel.

Peter, James, and Paul not only dealt with them, too, but wrote about them as well. And John mentions the problem of false apostles in Revelation.

And by the way, Nero was the beast from the earth, not the beast from the sea. That one was Rome itself.

Nero was not a Christian (that is to say he was never one of us) but there are some who believe he converted to Judaism after killing his first wife, then his mother, and marrying Poppea, a Jew, whom he later kicked in the stomach so hard that he killed both her and the baby she was carrying.

 

[Broncobilly1972]

So obviously, you don't see the dispensationalist view, I don't I actually see revelations quite differently.

I've actually never heard anyone discuss these verses, do you see this as the first ressurection?

And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. (Matthew 27:52, 53 KJV)

He did say he had other sheep, and this seems to be avoided by most that I ask.

And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. (John 10:16 KJV)

Ezekiel prophesies about the stick of Judah, and the stick of Joseph being joined together in Christs hand

Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. (Ezekiel 37:19 KJV)

The reason I ask is in Hosea he deals with Judah first then Israel. And if Nero were the Antichrist, and destroyed Judah then it would make sense. If
now he turns to deal with israel, who follows in the footsteps of Judah's sins.
Judah rejected grace, they were born chosen they didn't need it, but they clung to the law. We do just the opposite, we cling to grace and reject the law, saying we don't need it. Even though it's supposed to be written on our hearts, when we are sealed with the spirit.

I honestly would like to know what you think

 

[Stormcrow]

What Ezekiel writes about the reunion of Judah and Israel has to be seen in the context of what had happened to the divided kingdoms earlier in history.

Israel was carried off into captivity by the Assyrians in about 724 BC, only to be taken captive by Babylon later (not going to go into detail on this because I'm too tired right now.)

In 587 BC, Jerusalem was destroyed and Judah was taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar. (This event was prophesied by both Ezekiel and Jeremiah). The reunion of the whole house of Israel from the valley of the dry bones, seen in Ezekiel 37, is fulfilled by the acts of Cyrus of Persia, when he allowed Israel (all the captives he inherited from Babylon, including Judah), to return to their land and rebuild their homes, their city (Jerusalem) and its Temple.

Here is that fulfillment:

Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he sent a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying: "Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, 'The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. ~'Whoever there is among you of all His people, may his God be with him! Let him go up to Jerusalem which is in Judah and rebuild the house of the LORD, the God of Israel; He is the God who is in Jerusalem. ~'Every survivor, at whatever place he may live, let the men of that place support him with silver and gold, with goods and cattle, together with a freewill offering for the house of God which is in Jerusalem.'" Ezra 1:1-4 (NASB)

The two sticks of Ezekiel 37: fulfilled prophecy.

 

[Stormcrow]

I've actually never heard anyone discuss these verses, do you see this as the first ressurection?

And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. (Matthew 27:52, 53 KJV)

He did say he had other sheep, and this seems to be avoided by most that I ask.

And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. (John 10:16 KJV)

Ezekiel prophesies about the stick of Judah, and the stick of Joseph being joined together in Christs hand

Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. (Ezekiel 37:19 KJV)

The reason I ask is in Hosea he deals with Judah first then Israel. And if Nero were the Antichrist, and destroyed Judah then it would make sense. If
now he turns to deal with israel, who follows in the footsteps of Judah's sins.
Judah rejected grace, they were born chosen they didn't need it, but they clung to the law. We do just the opposite, we cling to grace and reject the law, saying we don't need it. Even though it's supposed to be written on our hearts, when we are sealed with the spirit.

I honestly would like to know what you think

I don't know what to think. This is all over the map. Do you have a specific question in all of this?

 

[Stormcrow]

One of the things I've found problematic in dealing with the Old Testament is that the books are out of order!

Ezekiel, which prophesies of Jerusalem's destruction, comes after books like Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, which address the fulfillment of these prophesies.

 

[Broncobilly1972]

No, I do get ahead of my self sometimes. I have always seen revelations as historical. What I was thinking, whether or not I conveyed it does make sense to me, and im not saying that just because it makes sense means im right. You saying that Nero was the Antichrist, and being able to give some scripture to back it up, means I won't just dismiss it, I will consider it. I do know what I believe, but I'm not scared to say I'm wrong.

 

[Broncobilly1972]

After all this is a speculation thread

 

[Stormcrow]

You saying that Nero was the Antichrist...

If we're going to try to understand each other, we have to be accurate with the language.

Nowhere in the Bible is antichrist used to identify a single individual.

The beast from the earth is not the antichrist.

The beast may have been an antichrist, but these terms are not synonymous in the Bible. The beast from the earth was a specific person - a ruler - who had a specific number assigned to his name.

"Antichrists" were simply people who denied Christ.

Confusion arises when these terms are treated interchangeably.

Now, as to the verse about captivity, this is another verse pulled directly from the Old Testament that relates to the judgment of Jerusalem and Judah!

Here is the verse in Revelation:

If anyone is destined for captivity, to captivity he goes; if anyone kills with the sword, with the sword he must be killed. Here is the perseverance and the faith of the saints. Revelation 13:10 (NASB)

And here is the expanded passage in Jeremiah:

Then the LORD said to me, "Even though Moses and Samuel were to stand before Me, My heart would not be with this people; send them away from My presence and let them go! "And it shall be that when they say to you, 'Where should we go?' then you are to tell them, 'Thus says the LORD: "Those destined for death, to death; And those destined for the sword, to the sword; And those destined for famine, to famine; And those destined for captivity, to captivity."' "I will appoint over them four kinds of doom," declares the LORD: "the sword to slay, the dogs to drag off, and the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth to devour and destroy.

"I will make them an object of horror among all the kingdoms of the earth because of Manasseh, the son of Hezekiah, the king of Judah, for what he did in Jerusalem.

"Indeed, who will have pity on you, O Jerusalem, Or who will mourn for you, Or who will turn aside to ask about your welfare? "You who have forsaken Me," declares the LORD, "You keep going backward. So I will stretch out My hand against you and destroy you; I am tired of relenting! "I will winnow them with a winnowing fork At the gates of the land; I will bereave them of children, I will destroy My people; They did not repent of their ways. Jeremiah 15:1-7 (NASB)

This passage in Jeremiah prophesies of the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon.

The judgment that would befall Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans was ordered by Nero, when the first Jewish war with Rome began in 66 AD. Revelation 13 - in part - is a prophecy of the soon-to-come destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans.

 

[Vic C.]

One of the things I've found problematic in dealing with the Old Testament is that the books are out of order!

Ezekiel, which prophesies of Jerusalem's destruction, comes after books like Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, which address the fulfillment of these prophesies.

Buy a chronological Bible.

 

[Stormcrow]

Buy a chronological Bible.

Does such a Bible really exist? If so...

JOY AND RAPTURE! :bounce:onfire:adore:splat23

(and all Vic's smileys said "AMEN!")

 

[Vic C.]

http://www.amazon.com/Chronological-Study-Bible-James-Version/dp/0718020685