Abomination of Desolation in 70AD - Part 2

[Rev33]

You have no scriptural instruction to tie Antichrist of St John to St Paul's man of sin. None.

2 Thessalonians 2 -

1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4

8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 2 Thessalonians 2:8


Looks like Paul refers to him by three different names here.

And none of those 3 names are "antichrist"

Maybe you don't like him to be refereed to as antichrist. WHY?

What I like or don't like makes no difference, there is simply ZERO scriptural instruction to refer to the MoS, SoP, Lawless one or Beast as "The Antichrist".

It is solely a Man made tradition to do so. The Bible teaches no such thing.

31 And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation.

35 And some of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify them, and make them white, until the time of the end; because it is still for the appointed time. 36 "Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done. Daniel 11:35-36


What name does Daniel refer to him as?


JLB

Daniel never discusses antichrist. Not even once.

 

[JLB]

What I like or don't like makes no difference, there is simply ZERO scriptural instruction to refer to the MoS, SoP, Lawless one or Beast as "The Antichrist". It is solely a Man made tradition to do so. The Bible teaches no such thing.

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18

The Antichrist is coming...

Looks like scripture does in fact support that the antichrist is coming.


JLB

 

[reba]

18 cLittle children, mit is the last time: and as ye have heard that nantichrist shall come, even now are there omany antichrists; whereby we know mthat it is the last time.


A way bigger deal than some ol antichrist is this Jesus is coming....

 

[Rev33]

What I like or don't like makes no difference, there is simply ZERO scriptural instruction to refer to the MoS, SoP, Lawless one or Beast as "The Antichrist". It is solely a Man made tradition to do so. The Bible teaches no such thing.

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18

The Antichrist is coming...

Looks like scripture does in fact support that the antichrist is coming.


JLB

And again, as I have shown, Scripture testifies that Antichrist of 1 and 2 John was the first century Church Heresy already in the world, and was a spirit that affected many, proving to John that the last hour of the last days had come upon him and his contemporaries.

What scripture does not show, anywhere, is that Antichrist of 1 and 2 John are the same entity as Pauls MoS, SoP - Lawless one, or John's Beast of Revelation.

Such is purely man made tradition.

 

[JLB]

What I like or don't like makes no difference, there is simply ZERO scriptural instruction to refer to the MoS, SoP, Lawless one or Beast as "The Antichrist". It is solely a Man made tradition to do so. The Bible teaches no such thing.

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18

The Antichrist is coming...

Looks like scripture does in fact support that the antichrist is coming.


JLB

And again, as I have shown, Scripture testifies that Antichrist of 1 and 2 John was the first century Church Heresy already in the world, and was a spirit that affected many, proving to John that the last hour of the last days had come upon him and his contemporaries.

What scripture does not show, anywhere, is that Antichrist of 1 and 2 John are the same entity as Pauls MoS, SoP - Lawless one, or John's Beast of Revelation.

Such is purely man made tradition.

You haven't shown anything, except that you believe in Preterism.

The anti christ is a biblical term.

This biblical term described the false messiah that is associated with:

The end of the age.

The Abomination of Desolation.

A man posing as the True Messiah who goes to the Temple to proclaim himself as God.

A man that is called by other names such as man of sin, son of perdition, lawless one, the prince who is to come.

A man that is personally destroyed by Jesus Christ, when He returns.


The reason he is called by these other names, is that he is the one who is associated with the temple and the AOD.

The Holy Spirit wants us to identify him by the use of the other descriptive names.


The antichrist is a biblical term.

It comes from this scripture -

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.


The question is : Who benefits from you distorting a biblical term?


JLB

 

[Rev33]

The anti christ is a biblical term.

Yes it is, and you will not find one post where I disagree with you on this fact.

This biblical term described the false messiah that is associated with:

The end of the age.

The Abomination of Desolation.

A man posing as the True Messiah who goes to the Temple to proclaim himself as God.

A man that is called by other names such as man of sin, son of perdition, lawless one, the prince who is to come.

A man that is personally destroyed by Jesus Christ, when He returns.

Not ANYWHERE in the Bible will you find "antichrist" used in the way you are suggesting. Nowhere. If you could find it, you would have quoted chapter and verse where the Biblical term "antichrist" is used to refer to the Man of Sin, Son of Perdition, Beast, or Abomination of Desolation. But you can't because Scripture teaches NO SUCH THING.

The reason he is called by these other names, is that he is the one who is associated with the temple and the AOD.

Scripture NEVER associates Antichrist with the temple and the AOD. Not once, EVER. You have shown that YOU make the association, but you do so in the complete ABSENCE of ANY scriptural instruction to do so.

The Holy Spirit wants us to identify him by the use of the other descriptive names.

Source? Chapter and Verse teaching us that the HS "wants us" to associate the Man of Sin, Son of Perdition, Beast, AOD, etc.. with the term "antichrist"?

The antichrist is a biblical term.

It comes from this scripture -

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

EXACTLY

The question is : Who benefits from you distorting a biblical term?


JLB

I'm not distorting anything. I am taking the biblical term "antichrist" at face value.
It is YOU who are distorting it by adding meaning to the term, in the complete absence of any scriptural instruction to do so.

Who benefits from that?

 

[Brother Mike]

You haven't shown anything, except that you believe in Preterism.

The anti christ is a biblical term.

This biblical term described the false messiah that is associated with:

The end of the age.

The Abomination of Desolation.

1Jn 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.

The problem I have is that Antichrist is a Male noun but not a Greek title......... Theos is a Male noun, Jesus called us Theos, Satan was called theos, and Father God is a title specific to Father God.

2Jn_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.

Apparently the way the Greek uses the Term Antichrist is any spirit that fights against the power and anointing in a believers life saying that Christ (The anointed man) can't be in the flesh. Antichrist just means Anti anointing.

The Jews also did not believe the Messiah had yet come, so that is most likely the same spirits in operation.

So then, is the Son of perdition the Antichrist?

It would be a large stretch to Make the Greek say that. If the Antichrist is a man under the authority of Satan who deceives many and gains power then we need to be able to make references to that.

Joh_17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
2Th_2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Son of Perdition............ Son of apōleia.................. from apollumi Abaddon, ...........................but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

The Son of Satan.

This would denote some human figure a copy of What God did with Jesus as His son. Satan is not that original.........

Judas became a son of Satan.... Son of perdition and went to his place (Acts) A human operating as an agent of Satan.

Antichrist denotes a type of spirit, one that is anti anointing. No question this is not at the direction of Satan also.

Antichrist is not a Greek title, but Son of Perdition is a title and a person of some type.

What scripture does not show, anywhere, is that Antichrist of 1 and 2 John are the same entity as Pauls MoS, SoP - Lawless one, or John's Beast of Revelation.

Such is purely man made tradition.

However, A devil is a devil is a devil is a devil.............. Angelic being (Destroying Angel) or a man under the direction of a destroying angel. This is where you error because the Kingdom is not divided against itself and the term does not matter. Satan's Kingdom is His Kingdom be it a man or spirit.

You make no point anyway...... about what spirit Satan uses for his Kingdom.

Antichrist is exactly what the Son of Perdition embraces and is against Christ (The anointed one)

Act_4:26 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.

Antichrist

The Son of Perdition is a Antichrist.

For any to be against Christ............ Is a Antichrist.

Mike.

 

[Rev33]

Antichrist is exactly what the Son of Perdition embraces and is against Christ (The anointed one)

Act_4:26 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.

Antichrist

The Son of Perdition is a Antichrist.

For any to be against Christ............ Is a Antichrist.

Mike.

You neglect a crucial point St John makes in identifying antichrist...

"They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us."

Antichrist was a "they" not a "him", and was a first century Church Heresy that affected it's members.... Nowhere in scripture do we find the MOS, SOP, AOD as having come from the Christian Flocks the way St John infallibly claims Antichrist had done.

Simply put, AOD, MOS, SOP, Beast, etc do not measure up to the identifiers of antichrist St John clearly lays out.

The shoe don't fit.

 

[Brother Mike]

"They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us."

Antichrist was a "they" not a "him", and was a first century Church Heresy that affected it's members.... Nowhere in scripture do we find the MOS, SOP, AOD as having come from the Christian Flocks the way St John infallibly claims Antichrist had done.

If you would actually take the time to read my post, which you did not or you just have issues with understanding things (I don't know which) I already Stated that Antichrist was not a Greek title and therefore not a singular person.

Antichrist ....... Anti-Anointing of God (Greek) Anti Jesus Christ is any spirit or person who is false Christ (Someone not anointed of God) or spirit against Christ.

That is all the Word means.

I never said that Antichrist just means the Son of Perdition or Beast.

You need to pay attention.

What I said is that the Son of Perdition is the a Antichrist unless you think He is rooting for Jesus. You don't think that I hope.

Mike.

 

[JLB]

Yes it is, and you will not find one post where I disagree with you on this fact.

Not ANYWHERE in the Bible will you find "antichrist" used in the way you are suggesting. Nowhere. If you could find it, you would have quoted chapter and verse where the Biblical term "antichrist" is used to refer to the Man of Sin, Son of Perdition, Beast, or Abomination of Desolation. But you can't because Scripture teaches NO SUCH THING.


Scripture NEVER associates Antichrist with the temple and the AOD. Not once, EVER. You have shown that YOU make the association, but you do so in the complete ABSENCE of ANY scriptural instruction to do so.

The Holy Spirit wants us to identify him by the use of the other descriptive names.

Source? Chapter and Verse teaching us that the HS "wants us" to associate the Man of Sin, Son of Perdition, Beast, AOD, etc.. with the term "antichrist"?

The antichrist is a biblical term.

It comes from this scripture -

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

EXACTLY

The question is : Who benefits from you distorting a biblical term?


JLB

I'm not distorting anything. I am taking the biblical term "antichrist" at face value.
It is YOU who are distorting it by adding meaning to the term, in the complete absence of any scriptural instruction to do so.

Who benefits from that?

Antichrist is a biblical term.

If you would prefer I use the term false messiah, then we can move forward with this discussion.


JLB

 

[Rev33]

Antichrist is a biblical term.

If you would prefer I use the term false messiah, then we can move forward with this discussion.


JLB

I would prefer you not use Biblical terms in unscriptural ways.

It's like if I said Jesus teaches us to Kill our firstborn sons today because of these scriptures:

Exodus 4:23 and I told you, “Let my son go, so he may worship me.” But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.’”

Luke 10:37 Jesus said, “Go and do likewise.”


You attempting to cement scriptural teaching on antichrist to the scriptural teaching on the Beast, Man of Sin, Son of Perdition and Abomination of desolation is no less unscriptural than my above example of trying to cement Jesus teaching to "go and do likewise" to God's threat to Kill Pharoah's firstborn son.


The Biblical teaching on antichrist is limited and specific. Expanding it to include any meaning beyond what the apostle John taught is unbiblical, unethical, and disingenuous and makes a mockery of scripture.... if we can simply take any scripture we see and apply it any way we want, then we have no basis for defending our faith.

If you want to discuss the man of sin, call him the man of sin... if you want to discuss the beast, call him the beast... if you want to discuss antichrist, by all means lets discuss antichrist, but lets do so in the framework the apostles infallibly set up, instead of creating our own definitions out of thin air, shall we?

 

[JLB]

Antichrist is a biblical term.

If you would prefer I use the term false messiah, then we can move forward with this discussion.


JLB

I would prefer you not use Biblical terms in unscriptural ways.

It's like if I said Jesus teaches us to Kill our firstborn sons today because of these scriptures:

Exodus 4:23 and I told you, “Let my son go, so he may worship me.†But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.’â€

Luke 10:37 Jesus said, “Go and do likewise.â€


You attempting to cement scriptural teaching on antichrist to the scriptural teaching on the Beast, Man of Sin, Son of Perdition and Abomination of desolation is no less unscriptural than my above example of trying to cement Jesus teaching to "go and do likewise" to God's threat to Kill Pharoah's firstborn son.


The Biblical teaching on antichrist is limited and specific. Expanding it to include any meaning beyond what the apostle John taught is unbiblical, unethical, and disingenuous and makes a mockery of scripture.... if we can simply take any scripture we see and apply it any way we want, then we have no basis for defending our faith.

If you want to discuss the man of sin, call him the man of sin... if you want to discuss the beast, call him the beast... if you want to discuss antichrist, by all means lets discuss antichrist, but lets do so in the framework the apostles infallibly set up, instead of creating our own definitions out of thin air, shall we?

Antichrist is a biblical term.

The man who goes to the Temple of God, to proclaim himself as God, is posing as The Messiah.

This man of sin is actually claiming to be the Messiah.

That is who the Jews are expecting to come to the temple they build.

The Messiah.

This man of sin will be The False messiah that deceives many false signs and wonders.

The man of sin, the son of perdition, the lawless one all are the same man.

This man will be followed as a "messiah".


JLB

 

[reba]

The man who goes to the Temple of God, to proclaim himself as God, is posing as The Messiah.

Is there a scripture that says some antichrist will do the above?

 

[reba]

The man of sin, the son of perdition, the lawless one all are the same man.

And the scripture that says the above is where?

 

[reba]

Amen kiwidan amen

 

[JLB]

The man of sin, the son of perdition, the lawless one all are the same man.

And the scripture that says the above is where?

1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8

These different names refer to one person.

The false messiah.


JLB

 

[reba]

These different names refer to one person.

Where is the scripture? when one demands scripture from others. shouldn't that person have the responsibility to show scripture when asked...

 

[reba]

off topic i see some double posts it might have to do with the move

totopic

 

[Rev33]

Antichrist is a biblical term.

Yes it is. Again, not once have I argued that it isn't.

The man who goes to the Temple of God, to proclaim himself as God, is posing as The Messiah.

This man of sin is actually claiming to be the Messiah.

That is who the Jews are expecting to come to the temple they build.

The Messiah.

This man of sin will be The False messiah that deceives many false signs and wonders.

The man of sin, the son of perdition, the lawless one all are the same man.

This man will be followed as a "messiah".


JLB

However, There is no scripture that teaches you to call that man "antichrist".

 

[Rev33]

Antichrist is a biblical term.

Yes it is. not once have I argued that it isn't.

The man who goes to the Temple of God, to proclaim himself as God, is posing as The Messiah. This man of sin is actually claiming to be the Messiah. That is who the Jews are expecting to come to the temple they build. The Messiah. This man of sin will be The False messiah that deceives many false signs and wonders. The man of sin, the son of perdition, the lawless one all are the same man. This man will be followed as a "messiah". JLB

However, not one single scripture teaches you to call that man "antichrist"
The Apostles never called him by that name, nor did the prophets, nor did Christ.