What's new
Christian Forums

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Do not use Chrome Incognito when registering as it freezes the registration page.
  • We have just installed new software to help eliminate spam. If you experience any issues logging in or creating a new account, please use the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of the page and we will assist you. Thank you!
  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • No longer will OSAS vx OSNAS be allowed to be debated, argued, or discussed in theology forum. Too much time is required to monitor and rescources used to debate this subject which hasn't been definitively decided in 3,000 years.

Who was the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition?

reba

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
47,107
Gender
Female
Edited .....Failed attempt to make a point
 
Last edited:

reba

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
47,107
Gender
Female
Something i have noticed around here the general rudeness of many who post in here.... Seems those of the orthodox preterest view are not rudely posting else where.
To make peace do we have to keep members in little boxes or can we behave like Christians? Do we really only want to talk with those who agree, the good ol yes man thing or do we want to be asked, challenged to dig deeper in the Word?
From where i read, those who (IMO) show the attitude of "watch me get this thread closed" might find out differently. Admin
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Topical Studies Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
23,039
Gender
Male
Though the word "antichrist" (Greek antikhristos) is used only on the Epistles of John, the similar word "Pseudochrist" (Greek pseudokhristos) or "false Messiah" is used by Jesus in the gospels:[8]
 

reba

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
47,107
Gender
Female
Eugene you may notice a number of deletions the point i was trying to make i did not get across... Any thing i view as snarky or rude ETC will be deleted and or warning points issued ...
 
Last edited:

Deborah13

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
14,684
Christian
Yes
I do do that. Archaeology is proving the bible. Absolutely we tie them together. But I do feel that because the temple was destroyed, doesn't emphatically mean that there will not be a third temple. We have to be careful which archaeology and science that we tie to scripture, lest we be in error. I can not wrap my mind around, that the temple was destroyed in 70 AD meaning that was it, no third temple. Sure, Jesus did away with sacrifices, but that doesn't mean that mankind couldn't mistakenly start it up again! Does not the anti-christ supposed to go into the temple and declare himself to be God? There has to be a temple for that.
They're ready to build a temple. They have building materials on hand and are waiting. Now, the have the Ark of the Covenant also. It's just that dome of the rock thing that is in the way. Perhaps the coming blood moons will somehow make it possible for it (to fall?) to the temple to be rebuilt.
When did they find the Ark of the Covenant?

The last that I read on Ron Wyatt's site was date 2006. They were excavating down from inside the city wall of Jerusalem. And an article from an Israel newspaper about what they had found so far. But there was nothing after that.
They have had building supplies for rebuilding the temple from as far back as at least the 1970's. I remember that was the talk.

Blessings
 

reba

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
47,107
Gender
Female
And the mod cries not fair not fair .... how can the line be held while busting up.... ?:wall

Deborah13 i know things like this are a bit embarrassing, here it is any way Thank you for the way you post, saying your piece, having some fun being kind, and holding to Christian principles. :sohappy
 

Sinthesis

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
5,188
Christian
Yes
Then if I am understanding you correctly, one of the following categories is gone forever. Is it Christians?
  1. genetic faithful Jews who fear God(meek - good figs)
  2. genetic unfaithful Jews who don't fear God(zealots - bad figs)
  3. faithful Christians
Group #2 is no longer to be considered of God's people. Faith, not genes, differentiate God's people.
 

Sinthesis

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
5,188
Christian
Yes
So it's an analogy now? Nah. I don't buy that. Besides, I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that the time of Jacobs trouble will take 2/3 Jews. That didn't happen yet, not even in WWII.
Be specific. Generalizations are what feed sloppy interpretation.
 

Sinthesis

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
5,188
Christian
Yes
I know about that. It doesn't seem to have any relevance to Revelation though.
Jerusalem is consistently identified as Babylon all through Revelation. Their judgments share similar characteristics.
 

Eugene

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
10,778
Gender
Male

Sinthesis

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
5,188
Christian
Yes
Be specific. Generalizations are what feed sloppy interpretation.
http://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/who-was-the-man-of-sin-the-son-of-perdition.51729/page-5#post-889246
I'm beginning to think I will find a lot of use for this comment of yours. :)
You miss the point again. :hips
If someone is going to reject an answer based on some vague notion that they read something somewhere, then it would be courteous to identify what authority they are appealing to so that the exact wording and context can be examined. I feel under no obligation to assume what motivates the belief of others.

If you want to challenge something I post, then explain your concern so I can see exactly where you are having trouble that I may address that area specifically.
 

Deborah13

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
14,684
Christian
Yes
The reason I mention this again is because I want to ask where in scripture can it be found that the Apostle John wrote Revelation after AD 70? Well, it doesn't.

But within the scripture itself there is some evidence that it may have been written before AD 70.

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

I believe,
This verse is referring to seven kings, who are emperors of Rome. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has yet to come. This means that five have died. The sixth is currently reigning. The seventh is not yet ruling.

Claudius was the fifth emperor of Rome, and he died in AD 54. Nero was the sixth emperor, and he reigned from AD 54-68. This suggests that the book of Revelation was written during his Nero’s reign.
 

Deborah13

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
14,684
Christian
Yes
And the mod cries not fair not fair .... how can the line be held while busting up.... ?:wall

Deborah13 i know things like this are a bit embarrassing, here it is any way Thank you for the way you post, saying your piece, having some fun being kind, and holding to Christian principles. :sohappy
Thank you, Reba. It's nice of you to say so. :nod

Thank you, Lord Jesus! :pray For teaching me to not always say what I'm thinking. :blush
 

Eugene

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
10,778
Gender
Male
You miss the point again. :hips
If someone is going to reject an answer based on some vague notion that they read something somewhere, then it would be courteous to identify what authority they are appealing to so that the exact wording and context can be examined. I feel under no obligation to assume what motivates the belief of others.

If you want to challenge something I post, then explain your concern so I can see exactly where you are having trouble that I may address that area specifically.
Miss the point? I seem to disagree with most of your doctrine, and in your response you cite "Group #2 is no longer to be considered of God's people." Maybe I'm wrong, but when were "genetic unfaithful Jews who don't fear God(zealots - bad figs)" ever considered God's people? Possibly referencing a scripture would help.

The second illustration is that "Jerusalem is consistently identified as Babylon all through Revelation. Their judgments share similar characteristics." Again scripture in correct context might substantiate your statement. I will discontinue using your statement "Be specific. Generalizations are what feed sloppy interpretation."
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Topical Studies Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
23,039
Gender
Male
Edited .....Failed attempt to make a point

Some of us believe that Paul was referring to the Temple In Jerusalem that is referred to in Daniel 9:27.

A Temple that is built after the destruction of Daniel 9:26.
Miss the point? I seem to disagree with most of your doctrine, and in your response you cite "Group #2 is no longer to be considered of God's people." Maybe I'm wrong, but when were "genetic unfaithful Jews who don't fear God(zealots - bad figs)" ever considered God's people? Possibly referencing a scripture would help.

The second illustration is that "Jerusalem is consistently identified as Babylon all through Revelation. Their judgments share similar characteristics." Again scripture in correct context might substantiate your statement. I will discontinue using your statement "Be specific. Generalizations are what feed sloppy interpretation."
Amen.

I don't that Babylon is referenced as Jerusalem anywhere in scripture.


JLB
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Topical Studies Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
23,039
Gender
Male
Jerusalem is consistently identified as Babylon all through Revelation. Their judgments share similar characteristics.

Please show the scripture for this.


JLB
 

Initial Site Debt

Total amount
$804.00
Goal
$5,080.00
Top