Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. 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!

Bible Study Ã¢â‚¬Å“that man of sinâ€Â

JM said:
A little more: Verse 35 acknowledges that the centuries following the rise of Catholic Christianity would bring suffering for the saints: not what Christians would have expected in the optimistic decades of the fourth century!

JM....Verse 35 has nothing to do with Christianity. As my sign off verse indicates....history repeats itself.....I believe this is the case here....obviously, Daniel predicted the rise and fall of empires....the little horn in Dan 8:9 was fulfilled in Antiouchus Epiphanes..and the wars and politics associated with him. Antiochus is most famous for his desecration of the Temple. Now, Jesus in his prophecy of the end times talks about the A of D as being in the future, yet it happened in the past. Dan 11 is a template of history past and history yet to occur again.

That is because Antiouchus was a shadow or forerunner of the real deal.... I think history past with the setting up of Antiochus will repeat itself with the modern nations repeating the same steps as the occured in history past.


Verse 36 explains why: the new Roman leader, that is the ecclesial head of Rome, the Bishop of Rome, or the “Popeâ€Â, will be fundamentally anti-Christian. He will exalt himself as “God on Earthâ€Â. And he would “prosper†for a long, long time.

What can I say....Verse 36 was fulfilled once by Antiochus and will be fulfilled again by the False messiah, to the point. Will the Pope, or did the Pope set up a statue (image) of himself in the Temple? No, although I think the Pope is antichrist, I don't consider him the False messiah...Why? because it's a Jewish thing.

Verse 37 shows the true spiritual reality behind the Roman antichristian Popes: they do not serve God at all, but themselves. They teach celibacy, in contradiction to the teaching of Scripture.

Can't argue that.....however, they don't fit the criteria for a False messiah.

Instead, in verse 38, we see that their ambition is for strength, power and wealth. Joe Haynes

Again, fulfilled once by Antiochus....and in the future by a False messiah. The pope and the RCC sound like they meet the requirement, but considering all of the other aspects of prophecy, the pope don't fit.

As Johnny Cochran once said...."If the Pope don't fit, you must acquit...." :)

 
How can I say this......hmmm.....Believers, yes,... but it concerns Israel and Judaism.....that can include Christianity in the parameters of Judaism (as Christianity originally was a sect of Judaism).
The book is in a context you can understand.....first you have to remove the traditional Christian trappings of neoplatonic Gentile commentaries, and retool your mind to view the subject from a Jewish perspective.

Ok, this is where we disagree and it's probably why we don't see eye to eye on the issue. Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism. Christianity was never a sect but a group of elected called out by God to believe the promises are being fulfilled. Israel as a nation was unbelieving, with believers existing within that nation. Today, believers (of the same promises) exist within the mass of humankind. So, the Jewish perspective is now found in the spiritual seed of Abraham. (see notes I made in the book forum 'Abraham's Four Seeds)

Gen 49:17 Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.
Gen 49:18 I have waited for thy salvation, O LORD.

You'll have to do a little better, how is this passage related to the false Messiah? When I looked into the historical commentaries (Gill being one), he says the Jews claim this was fulfilled in Judges 18:1. Again, you're reading into the passage what you want to see, I don't see anything about a false Messiah. As for verse 18, I have no problem with your understanding.

You can do a search to verify that...but it is interesting to note that the AC is mentioned in verse 17 and the Messiah is mentioned in verse 18.

JM, as I quoted in the prophecy forum concerning a post to Preterist, this is not just a Rabbinical interpretation only, several early Church fathers state the same. I have a book that is cheaply available in any bookstore titled "A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs" edited by David Bercot. In the subject concerning the antichrist (False messiah), there are no less than 24 entries by no less than 9 Church fathers ranging from Justin Martyr to Lactantius....in some of the quotes they claim the future AC will be descended from the tribe of Dan. These are Christian fathers.....not Rabbis.

Ok, fair enough. We're both using commentaries but at what point do we read the text without commentary? The problem with the ECF's is the same one we have today, no one agrees. That's like a dispensationalist 2000 years in future quoting Scofield, Chafer, LaHaye, Ice and Couch. We need to read the passage and let it stand. What good is prophecy if it only pertains to the future and is never fulfilled for us today?

As far as Reformation era resources....The trouble with anything post 100 AD in Christianity is that as the Church moved for Jerusalem to Rome, it also made an antisemitic split with Messianic Judaism....Time and distance biased Christian commentators. For example....Do you think Martin Luther had any idea about Judaism, it's manners, customs or worship? That is really a simple example of Time, Distance and Culture distortion....Another example would be Me reading a book on the writings of Confucius (330 BC Chinese) using a Japanese commentary (written 1400AD) trying to explain a Chinese teaching to a 21st Century American. How in the world would a 1400's Japanese man know the customs and manner of a 330BC Chinaman? How can I trust the Japanese interpretation to be right? Why don't I go straight to the best resource...that would be an expert on early Chinese. Someone who would know the Manners, Customs, and History of the early Chinese?

Now with the advent of the internet we have that capability to find these experts and documents ourselves. Barclay didn't have a computer to do any research....his commentary is what he learned by tradition.

Again, we shouldn't view Judaism and Christianity as different. We are heirs of the same promise and our covenant is better then the old. We are the fufillment of the OT types. We are the spiritual seed of Abraham because we believe.

George, it's getting a little too deep for me, if I don't respond for a while it's because I'm reading and trying to catch up to you. :lol:

Peace brother.
 
JM said:
How can I say this......hmmm.....Believers, yes,... but it concerns Israel and Judaism.....that can include Christianity in the parameters of Judaism (as Christianity originally was a sect of Judaism).
The book is in a context you can understand.....first you have to remove the traditional Christian trappings of neoplatonic Gentile commentaries, and retool your mind to view the subject from a Jewish perspective.

Ok, this is where we disagree and it's probably why we don't see eye to eye on the issue. Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism.

Christianity as the Apostles practiced it is what Jesus had in mind....The Apostles didn't consider themselves Christians, they considered themselves Jews....

Christianity was never a sect but a group of elected called out by God to believe the promises are being fulfilled.

Not True......

Act 15:5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command [them] to keep the law of Moses.

Act 24:5 For we have found this man [a] pestilent [fellow], and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:

The early Christians were Jews....mostly Pharisee's (from the school of Shammai (strict Torah observers), and Hillel (more relaxed Torah observers).

Here are the major groups in Judaism during the time of the Apostles:

1. Pharisee's: Judaic: Shammai, Hillel, Essene, and Nazarene
Hellinistic: Shammai, Hillel, Essene, and Nazarene Christians.
2. Sadducees
3. God Fearer's: Gentiles who observe Jewish law who are not proselytes.


Israel as a nation was unbelieving, with believers existing within that nation.

Not necessarily true.....at the time, there were many pseudo Messiah's...that is pretenders to the title. The Jews were expecting a Messiah to deliver them from Rome. From the studies I've encountered, the Pharisee's wouldn't have disputed Jesus as the Messiah, they would have sat back and seen if his claims would pan out (like they did with every other Messianic pretender).

Check this jewishencylopedia.com article on false messiahs....

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view. ... 1&letter=P

It was the politically involved priesthood (Sadducean) that was against Jesus. Jesus was a threat to them.....not the Pharisee's.

Today, believers (of the same promises) exist within the mass of humankind. So, the Jewish perspective is now found in the spiritual seed of Abraham. (see notes I made in the book forum 'Abraham's Four Seeds)

[quote:f3096]Gen 49:17 Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.
Gen 49:18 I have waited for thy salvation, O LORD.

You'll have to do a little better, how is this passage related to the false Messiah?

JW, if it comes down to brass tack's, I'll go with the Jewish commentary over Protestant....

From Jewishencyclopedia.com article on Dan:

...Dan, Type of Antichrist.

But Dan became the very type of evil-doing. He was placed to the north (Num. ii. 25), this being the region of darkness and evil (Jer. i. 14), because of his idolatry which wrapped the world in darkness (Num. R. ii.). Still further goes a tradition which identifies the serpent and the lion (Gen. xlix. 17 and Deut. xxxiii. 22) with Belial (see the literature in Bousset's "Antichrist," 1895, pp. 87, 113). Irenæus ("Adversus Hæreses," v. 302), Hippolytus ("De Christo et Antichristo," pp. 14, 15), and other Church fathers have a tradition, which can not but be of Jewish origin, that the Antichrist comes from the tribe of Dan, and base it upon Jer. viii. 16: "The snorting of his [the enemy's] horses was heard from Dan"â€â€a verse referred also in Gen. R. xliii. to Dan's idolatry. Irenæus remarks that Dan is, in view of this tradition, not in the Apocalypse (Rev. vii. 5-7) among the 144,000 saved ones of the twelve tribes. Nor is the omission of Dan in I Chron. iv. et seq. unintentional. Bousset, who has a special chapter devoted to the Dan Antichrist legend (l.c. pp. 112-115), believes that the connection of Dan with Belial in Test. Patr., Dan, 5 points to the same tradition. This seems to find corroboration in Targ. Yer. to Deut. xxxiv. 3, where the war against Ahriman ()and Gog or Magog in the vision of Moses seems to refer to Dan, 1 (compare Sifre, l.c. to ; see also Dan, in Ten Tribes, The Lost.) K.

When I looked into the historical commentaries (Gill being one), he says the Jews claim this was fulfilled in Judges 18:1. Again, you're reading into the passage what you want to see, I don't see anything about a false Messiah. As for verse 18, I have no problem with your understanding.

As you say....to each his own commentary...As I say, I'll go with the source closest to the Hebrew scholars.

You can do a search to verify that...but it is interesting to note that the AC is mentioned in verse 17 and the Messiah is mentioned in verse 18.

JM, as I quoted in the prophecy forum concerning a post to Preterist, this is not just a Rabbinical interpretation only, several early Church fathers state the same. I have a book that is cheaply available in any bookstore titled "A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs" edited by David Bercot. In the subject concerning the antichrist (False messiah), there are no less than 24 entries by no less than 9 Church fathers ranging from Justin Martyr to Lactantius....in some of the quotes they claim the future AC will be descended from the tribe of Dan. These are Christian fathers.....not Rabbis.

Ok, fair enough. We're both using commentaries but at what point do we read the text without commentary?

As I had presented.....personally, I'm more apt to use a commentary that is closer in time, custom, and geographic area to the original...JW, would you agree that time and customs exist between cultures? Would someone be hamstringing themselves if they didn't attempt to understand the mindset of a different culture, especially when they are trying to intrepret certain concepts? That is what led me to a study of the Jewish Roots of Christianity...I wanted to understand the people of the time (Politics and religion).

The problem with the ECF's is the same one we have today, no one agrees.

That is true....it is for everyone to amass the information and decide. Still, I'm more apt to go with the earliest commentary than a reformation era commentary....too much time and distance and cultural distance.

That's like a dispensationalist 2000 years in future quoting Scofield, Chafer, LaHaye, Ice and Couch. We need to read the passage and let it stand. What good is prophecy if it only pertains to the future and is never fulfilled for us today?

Can't do that JW....There are things (Customs mainly) that need to be understood in interpreting passages...especially prophecy. A good example of this would be the term "Last Trump"....how would anyone know that it is a Jewish idiom for the Jewish Feast day of "Rosh Hashanah"? Would (Gill) have known anything about that? Doubtful......Bu t if one studies the Jewish roots...one becomes familiar with those types of Jewish idioms.....Another example is the custom of the Jewish wedding...gotta know how that works to understand events such as the Raptue, etc :)

As far as Reformation era resources....The trouble with anything post 100 AD in Christianity is that as the Church moved for Jerusalem to Rome, it also made an antisemitic split with Messianic Judaism....Time and distance biased Christian commentators. For example....Do you think Martin Luther had any idea about Judaism, it's manners, customs or worship? That is really a simple example of Time, Distance and Culture distortion....Another example would be Me reading a book on the writings of Confucius (330 BC Chinese) using a Japanese commentary (written 1400AD) trying to explain a Chinese teaching to a 21st Century American. How in the world would a 1400's Japanese man know the customs and manner of a 330BC Chinaman? How can I trust the Japanese interpretation to be right? Why don't I go straight to the best resource...that would be an expert on early Chinese. Someone who would know the Manners, Customs, and History of the early Chinese?

Now with the advent of the internet we have that capability to find these experts and documents ourselves. Barclay didn't have a computer to do any research....his commentary is what he learned by tradition.

Again, we shouldn't view Judaism and Christianity as different. We are heirs of the same promise and our covenant is better then the old. We are the fufillment of the OT types. We are the spiritual seed of Abraham because we believe.

But people do view them as different.....We are heirs to the same promise....The Old covenant is still here, the New won't be FULLY recognized until the Messianic kingdom arrives....

George, it's getting a little too deep for me, if I don't respond for a while it's because I'm reading and trying to catch up to you. :lol:

:D It's been fun......and enjoyable...

Peace brother.[/quote:f3096]

See you around....
 
Hey George, I just want to back up a little.

Where in Gen. 49 does it speak of the antichrist? Commentary is helpful, but what does the Scripture say that makes you believe the tribe of Dan will supply the antichrist? If this passage refers to the end times, can you explain how each tribe (according to Gen. 49) will play a roll during the end times? It just seems like you're reading way too much into this passage, I don't see this as being and end times chpt or verse.

Peace,

j
 
JM said:
Hey George, I just want to back up a little.

Where in Gen. 49 does it speak of the antichrist? Commentary is helpful, but what does the Scripture say that makes you believe the tribe of Dan will supply the antichrist? If this passage refers to the end times, can you explain how each tribe (according to Gen. 49) will play a roll during the end times? It just seems like you're reading way too much into this passage, I don't see this as being and end times chpt or verse.

Peace,

j

JM....It is not I that am reading into it....I didn't make it up....According to the references I supplied, it was the character of Dan and the history of the Danite tribe that lead scholars to the Dan/False messiah connection. The only role I see each tribe playing (except for Dan) is their part of the 144000 in Rev.

Also, there is a Jewish document called the Testament of the 12 Patriarchs that go hand in hand with Gen 49.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view. ... Patriarchs

JM....In Gen 49 Dan is called a serpent.......Do you not think there is a connection between serpent, satan and the AC?

Here is an end time verse that connects Serpent with Leviathan....Leviathan is the seven headed sea beast in Hebrew Mythology....it is the same beast John see's coming out of the sea in Revelation....

Isa 27:1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that [is] in the sea.

"In that Day" a Jewish reference to the Day of the Lord, or the Millennium. Serpent here is connected with Leviathan....Leviathan will be destroyed at the Second coming of Christ....The False Messiah is destroyed when the real Messiah returns.....

I may be streching as you say....but serpent tied in with leviathan...and serpent tied in with Dan.......and other passages that the Rabbis allude to....I may be streching it.....or maybe not.
 
That man of sin

I disagree wiyh your idea, AV Bunyan and JM, that the "Man of Sin" is the resurrected Judas Iscariot, because they are both called "the son of perdition." A bible dictionary or concordance will show that "perdition" means "destruction or loss". Just because they are both "doomed to destruction" NIV, doesn't mean they are the same person. That is poor exegesis.

After reading the dialogue between JM and Georges I have some questions.
JM: you comment that the "ships of Chittim KJ, (Kittim)" are connected with Rome. Using a concordance I found that this Chittim was the son of Javan and peopled the island of Cypress. Did these people also settle in Italy and Rome?

JM, it sounds as if you believe that Revelation (the Unveiling of Christ) began right after John wrote it. Is that true?

Georges, Jewish and other commentaries to the contrary, just from the descriptions of Dan as "a serpent, and adder to bite the horse heels" makes his seed to be the false Messiah is really far fetched. Using a serpent as a figure is no reason to tie the tribe of Dan with the anti-Christ who will be empowered by Satan, the devil, the dragon, that old serpent.
Moses lifted up a serpent in the wilderness so that all who looked at it with faith would not be bitten by the other serpents. Does that make Moses a figure of the devil?

And it is hard for me to understand how the writers of the commentaries again speculate that out of Dan would come the false-Messiah because Dan was called "a lion's whelp." For instance, in Gen. 49:9, Judah is called a "lions whelp." The Messiah is from the tribe of Judah.

All for now, Bick
 
Re: That man of sin

Bick said:
I disagree wiyh your idea, AV Bunyan and JM, that the "Man of Sin" is the resurrected Judas Iscariot, because they are both called "the son of perdition." A bible dictionary or concordance will show that "perdition" means "destruction or loss". Just because they are both "doomed to destruction" NIV, doesn't mean they are the same person. That is poor exegesis.

Well, I didn't put forth the idea that Judas would be resurrected. I disagree with AV on this matter as well. :wink: What made you think I agreed with him?

After reading the dialogue between JM and Georges I have some questions.
JM: you comment that the "ships of Chittim KJ, (Kittim)" are connected with Rome. Using a concordance I found that this Chittim was the son of Javan and peopled the island of Cypress. Did these people also settle in Italy and Rome?

Here's a little on Kittim: http://www.keyway.ca/htm2001/20010329.htm

JM, it sounds as if you believe that Revelation (the Unveiling of Christ) began right after John wrote it. Is that true?

"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand." It seems Jesus thought so, He tells John these things should begin to be fulfilled.
 
Georges, Jewish and other commentaries to the contrary, just from the descriptions of Dan as "a serpent, and adder to bite the horse heels" makes his seed to be the false Messiah is really far fetched.


Bickster........

The concept of the False Messiah predates Christianity....it is a Jewish concept...in the posts above, I provided the links that support the Jewish commentators interpretation of the verses pertaining to the False messiah, including those that comment that he will be a descendent of Dan.

I also had presented links....(in particular Jewishencyclopedia.com, the foremost reference for Judaica), in particular Dan...the most corrupt of the 12 tribes....Is it coincidence that Dan isn't included in the 144000?

The False messiah, (a Jewish concept) must have come from somewhere. They certainly didn't borrow it from the Gentile Christian commentators. As far as the commentaries themselves...I will trust the commentary of the Rabbi's rather than a Gentile (especially, a european of the recent centuries). I will say the Edershiem and Bullinger are quite good however.


Using a serpent as a figure is no reason to tie the tribe of Dan with the anti-Christ who will be empowered by Satan, the devil, the dragon, that old serpent.

Bick....please consider this.....

Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

Rev 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as [the feet] of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

This is the same beast (in type) as seen in.......

Isa 27:1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that [is] in the sea.

and
Psa 74:14 Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, [and] gavest him [to be] meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

just so you know leviathan is in Jewish Mythology....you can search that on the web...

So...my long winded point was associating the 7 headed Sea Beast of Rev 13 with the Leviathan of Isa 27. Leviathan is associated with the Serpent...so is Dan....The False messiah is a Jewish concept therefore will be a False messiah to the Jews....or even the Christian believers, but not from the Christian perspective as been put forth from Gentile Christian commentators....and there is more.....to much to put here.


Moses lifted up a serpent in the wilderness so that all who looked at it with faith would not be bitten by the other serpents. Does that make Moses a figure of the devil?

I'll have to research why the serpent was used here.....I will get bact to that later.

And it is hard for me to understand how the writers of the commentaries again speculate that out of Dan would come the false-Messiah because Dan was called "a lion's whelp." For instance, in Gen. 49:9, Judah is called a "lions whelp." The Messiah is from the tribe of Judah.

Yeh...but it's clear that Lion is only a description of Power and fearceness, nothing more. That both tribes are described as a Lion's whelp is just a desciption of their prowess....to me (imo) it is a strech to discount that the Fasle messiah "may" come from Dan because the "spirit" of Dan is the same description as the spirit of Judah....Messiah is The Lion of Judah...False messiah is the serpent of Dan.

Thanks Bick....
 
Bick..JM...

I'm off to San Antonio for a weekend of Golf so I won't be back til monday....that is if you have any posts addressed to me on this topic....

See ya's around... 8-)
 
The Man of Sin is an arch-deceiver. His main deception is to make people think he is the true Christ. He is anti-christ, the one who tries to take the place of Christ. It is not the radical difference from Christ which the secular view of Antichrist emphasizes, rather it is the CLOSE resemblance to Christ which the Bible depicts, which should instruct the Bible-believer.

This Man of Sin works pseudo-miracles, signs and wonder. He is a religious man and a veritable Christ to those who are deceived by him.

This is what the popes of Rome have done for centuries. They have sought to replace Christ. By deception and confusion they have effectively opposed Christ as well. They are still masquerading as the Vicar of Christ today, and multiplied millions fall down before them.

The Pope claims to be God.

Pope Innocent III enacted in writing, ‘We may according to the fulness of our power, dispose of the law and dispense above the law. Those whom the Pope of Rome doth separate, it is not a man that separates them but God. For the Pope holdeth place on earth, not simply of a man but of the true God.’ I Book of Gregory 9 Decret. C3.

The Lateran Council, addressing Pope Julius II in an oration delivered by Marcellus states, ‘Take care that we lose not that salvation, that life and breath which thou hast given us, for thou art our shepherd, tou art physician, thou art governor, thou are husbandman, thou finally ART ANOTHER GOD ON EARTH’ Council Edit. Colm. Agrip. 1618.

Pope Nicholas assumed the title of God. His words are:â€â€Ã¢â‚¬ËœI am all in all and above all, so that God Himself, and I, the Vicar of God, hath both one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do . . . Wherefore, if those things that I do be said not to be done of man, but of God. WHAT CAN YOU MAKE ME BUT GOD? Again, if prelates of the Church be called and counted of Constantine for gods, I then, being above all prelates, seem by this reason to be ABOVE ALL GODS. Wherefore, no marvel if it be in my power to dispense with all things, yea, with the precepts of Christ.’ See Decret. Par Distinct 96 Ch. 7 Edit Lugd. 1661.

Sitting in the temple of God speaking ex-cathedra the Pope claims to have the infallibility of God Himself. This is the daring pitch and blasphemy of Antichrist in keeping with Paul’s prophecy, ‘Shewing himself to be God.’

‘Whatever God does the Pope professes also. Does God require that to Him every knee shall bow? So, too, the Pope: he requires to be worshipped with prostration and kissing. Does God reveal Himself as the ‘only holy?’ So, too, the Pope. He claims to be styled ‘his holiness.’ Is God the ‘only wise?’ So, too, the Pope: he claims to be ‘inerrable.’ Did God plant his throne on the summit of Sinai, and thence promulgate those ten commandments which are the world’s law? So, too, the Pope: he has planted his seat on the seven hills in the character of the world’s supreme lawgiver and judge, and he claims an equal authority and infallibility for all that he is pleased to promulgate ex-cathedra as Jehovah claims for the precepts of the decalogue.

Is it God’s prerogative to pardon sin? The Pope assumes the same great prerogative. He pardons the sins of the living and the dead. Is it God’s prerogative to assign men their eternal destiny? This, too, does the Pope. He pretends to hold the keys that open and shut purgatory, and while he reserves to his followers a sure passport to the realms of paradise, he consigns all outside his church to eternal woe. In fine, does God sit between the Cherubim and receive the homage of His people in His sanctuary? The Pope, seated on the high altar of St. Peter’s while incense is burned before him, and the knee is bent to him, is invoked as the Lord our God. Romanists are accustomed to call the altar, the throne of God, inasmuch as thereon they place the host. The use the Pope finds for it on these occasions, is the not very dignified one of a footstool. ‘He as God sitteth in the temple of God showing himself that he is God.’ (2 Timothy 2:4)

"He spoke pompous (great blasphemous) words against the Most High. The parallel to this prophecy is in The Revelation 13. Have a look at the next few paragraphs. You'll see those great words of blasphemy used by this unholy dynasty.

Pope Innocent - When he was crowned, the priests of Rome said to him at his coronation, "Most holy and blessed father, head of the church, ruler of the world, to whom the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed, whom all the world adores, we especially venerate, worship and adore you."

Pope Boniface said - "The Roman Pontiff judges all men but he is judged by none. We declare, assert and pronounce that to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is for every creature altogether necessary to salvation. I have the authority of the King of kings, I am all, in all and above all. So that God himself, and I his vicar, have but one essence. I am able to do almost anything that God can do, what else can you make of me but God."

This is the church with which they want us to unite.

Pope Pius X said "I am not only the representative of Jesus Christ, I am Jesus Christ under the veil of the flesh. Does the Pope speak? It's Jesus Christ who speaks. Does the Pope accord a favour or pronounce a curse? It's Jesus Christ who pronounces a curse or accords a favour. When the Pope speaks you have no business to examine, only to obey. We have no right to criticize his decisions or discuss his commands. Therefore all who would wear the crown ought to submit to his divine right."


Christ has told us that many false Christs will appear after His ascension to glory and before His return. When we open the Pages of history we see how our Lord's words have been so literally fulfilled. Many Christs who professed to come in His Holy Name have appeared exactly as He predicted - at least 265 of them - all phoney christs, self styled christs, false christs and all harboured by the Church of Rome. Of them all Christ said, ‘BELIEVE THEM NOT.’

How clearly Christ predicted the Papacy. How plainly Christ interpreted for us the prophecies of Daniel and John. We bow to His authority and rejoice that the Antichrist has not deceived us and we have not gone after him as the world has.

The Popes of Rome for centuries have, under the title of Vicar of Christ, been masquerading as christs.

Ever since the Bishop of Rome got a taste for power, early in the Christian era, he yelled, ‘I AM CHRIST,’ and right down to Pope John Paul II they have been yelling it, shouting it, trumpeting it and parroting it. The halls of Christendom have not been without this din for sixteen centuries. Reverberations and amplifications from the original cries and their echoes and re-echoes plus added new yells multiplied a million tunes by the Roman acoustics of the halls, plague us daily. I am Christ! I AM Christ! I AM CHRIST! THIS IS THE CONFESSION OF THE ANTICHRIST. THANK GOD WE RECOGNISE HIM.

"...I scoff at the notion that anyone other
than a pope could be the antichrist."


--W.F. Strojie, a conservative Roman Catholic scholar in,
Last Days of the Catholic Church, 1978, p. 3, (self-published).
 
That's what I was thinking...it's interesting to note that both futurist and preterist views will not allow for the antichrist to be acknowledged in our time. Both futurist and preterist views were invented by Jeusits.
 
The man of sin

Hi JM. I certainly was mistaken that you thought the anti-Christ might be the resurrected Judas Iscariot. In reading your post of Feb.21, 5:18 am, I got confused by the quotes within quotes. Actually it was said by A V Bunyan, not you. I apologize.

To all: As to whether or not the false Messiah will be a Danite really, is of little consequence. All records of tribal ancestory are gone. Today, no Jew or Hebrew knows from which tribe he is from. So it will be then.

I'm convinced that Revelation has to do with the time when Israel's clock is running again, so to speak, and it is mainly concerned with the Lords Day (The Day of The Lord), as John said in verse 1:10: "I came to be in spirit in the Lord's day..." CV.

All for now, Bick
 
Re: The man of sin

Bick said:
Hi JM. I certainly was mistaken that you thought the anti-Christ might be the resurrected Judas Iscariot. In reading your post of Feb.21, 5:18 am, I got confused by the quotes within quotes. Actually it was said by A V Bunyan, not you. I apologize.

To all: As to whether or not the false Messiah will be a Danite really, is of little consequence. All records of tribal ancestory are gone. Today, no Jew or Hebrew knows from which tribe he is from. So it will be then.

That isn't quite acurate Mr. Bick....the particular gene in the DNA of the Levites that separates them from any other Israelite or race has been identified and verified. Here is a website stating such...

http://www.cohen-levi.org/jewish_genes_ ... dition.htm

Mr. Bick.....would you agree that if man has been able to identify the gene that separates the Levites from all others, wouldn't God (the creator of man) most certainly know the DNA of the other tribes....That obviously is the case because in the future tribulation period, the 144000 will be separated according to tribe.....God can do that.

I'm convinced that Revelation has to do with the time when Israel's clock is running again, so to speak, and it is mainly concerned with the Lords Day (The Day of The Lord), as John said in verse 1:10: "I came to be in spirit in the Lord's day..." CV.

All for now, Bick
 
"That man of sin"

George: please, no "Mr." 'Bick' is a nick name for my last name. My complete name is Arnold Bickham.

Of course God knows the identity of all the descendents of Jacob. And, even if the Levite strain has been identified, what then?

So, all those 12.000 from each tribe listed in Rev. will be alive during that time, and some may be alive today, for all we know.

Again, thinking back on this subject, certainly Jesus warned of false Christs (Messiahs), as John in his epistles warned of anti-christs. And, prior to the man of sin being revealed, no doubt there will be other "messiahs" arise to lead away or confuse all but the elect of Israel.

Bick
 
Re: "That man of sin"

Bick said:
George: please, no "Mr." 'Bick' is a nick name for my last name. My complete name is Arnold Bickham.

Good enough....I had used the Mr...in a friendly manner as my custom is when greeting a dear friend....I have a friend named Jimmy...when I see him I might say...."hey there, Mr. Jim howze it going?". :)

Of course God knows the identity of all the descendents of Jacob. And, even if the Levite strain has been identified, what then?

Just pointing out that even though most of the tribes (by name and descent) are lost in obsurity, they are potentially identifiable...as I had pointed out in the mention of the 144000.


So, all those 12.000 from each tribe listed in Rev. will be alive during that time, and some may be alive today, for all we know.

I personally think so..

Again, thinking back on this subject, certainly Jesus warned of false Christs (Messiahs), as John in his epistles warned of anti-christs. And, prior to the man of sin being revealed, no doubt there will be other "messiahs" arise to lead away or confuse all but the elect of Israel.

an interesting thing.....the Jew's didn't hate Jesus for proclaiming to be the Messiah....as history has proven, there were other self proclaimed messiah's at that time...and the Jews had no problem with accepting as messianic candidates themselves. Jesus just happens to point out the leading candidate during the circumstances he had dictated in Mat 24.

Bick

Thanks....Bick.
 
Back
Top