The identity of the antichrist in 5 verses

[reba]

You already said I interpret it that way. So, please answer the question. Who or what do YOU say what I interpret to be the antichrist by a different name in Daniel is?

John does the scripture in Dan say anitchrist? we both know it does not..

 

[JohnD]

John does the scripture in Dan say anitchrist? we both know it does not..

Um, please read what you just quoted. In my response I anticipated this statement from you and I clarified it as what I interpret to be the antichrist. Please answer my question now. Who do YOU say that is?

 

[JohnD]

And the only place in Scripture antichrist is found is here..... while reading these verses in context antichrist is defined in scripture as 1Jn_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.
none of the verse here describe antichrist as a 'one guy'

we read many antichrists and the spirit of antichrist.


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.
1Jn_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.
1Jn_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.
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.

The highlighted is a statement of fact that the people have heard it and that it will happen. Even now does not mean "but" or "that was wrong, let me explain what antichrist is..." It says there are many antichrists in addition to the ultimate Antichrist which the people have been hearing about.

I would also ask you, if this is the only place it is mentioned by name... where did they hear about antichrist before this?

Are you so certain you are correct that the man of sin, man of lawlessness, worthless shepherd, abomination of desolation, etc. are NOT references to the antichrist using other names?

 

[JohnD]

The bible says Jesus will be called Immanuel.

Isaiah 7:14 (NASB95)
14“Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.

Matthew quotes this as:

Matthew 1:23 (NASB95)
23“Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.”

Care to quote the scripture that he is called this by Mary or anyone else?

 

[JohnD]

My point is that such a extremely rigid form of interpretation would put most scripture in jeopardy... take Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew 1:23 one says SHE will call him Immanuel the other says THEY will call him Immanuel... for example.

I say this as a brother trying to be frank with a sister for her benefit as well as the readers here. I am out to win no contest or shouting match or anything of the sort.

 

[john darling]

Hmm... for some reason you are assuming that I had never heard about this technology before you bringing it up. Or that I may not have considered it, or even thought about it before you brought it up.

Hi Deborah. No, I did not assume anything like that. My comments about your dismissal of the issues were based on what you actually said here on this thread. I even quoted your exact words, (i.e "so what"). On this thread, there was no careful consideration of the issue from you. Perhaps in other situations you have considered the issue, but I think the evidence of your comments toward the Mark here on this thread strongly suggests that even in those cases the consideration was not "careful".

Do you remember saying "so what" when I asked you to consider the microchipped glove for buying/selling from Barclays bank and a few other examples of buying/selling via the hand?

You say if we don't worry about this microchip in the hand we are in fear.

I think this is a good example that my comments about the lack of careful consideration on your part are accurate. I never said that we should worry about microchips. I would challenge you to quote me on that but I know you won't because it didn't happen. I said we should give it careful consideration. I said that we should not allow secular events to dictate our interpretation of prophecy, but that we should also be watchful and wary, as Jesus taught.

This thing about worry is along the same lines as sinthesis' comments about "hysteria". I asked him to produce evidence to show where the hysteria was in my arguments, but he side-stepped that issue, too, by answering that we should look for the "right" signs and according to him, the "right signs" have nothing to do with buying and selling despite the actual prophecy clearly stating the purpose of the Mark will be to control buying/selling. I realize you are having trouble seeing this but I think it would be good for you to go back to what you were thinking when you made this comment about worry and ask yourself where is it that I've promoted worry about the Mark. Be brutally honest with yourself and try to find even one example where I encourage people to worry. And if you cannot, then ask yourself why you felt the need to misrepresent me in this area. I think you will find this thing about "worry" is something you are projecting onto my arguments to excuse them, ironically, because it is your own worry which is shining through.

Jesus understood this worry well. This is why he specifically mentions worry about food and clothing. He says all the world uses their time to chase after these things because they are worried for them, but that we should not be like them. I am suggesting that we should take these teachings of Jesus seriously, that we should confront our dependence on money as the source of life and that we should, instead, start using our time to work for love while trusting God to meet our needs instead of materialism. Does that sound to you like someone who is promoting worry?

and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Do you have the courage to believe what Jesus taught? Are you part of this church, the body of Christ? If you want to live in fear of man go ahead, that's your choice. I'll just keep my fear to fearing God. The one who can destroy both body and soul.

You've made this argument before, that God will somehow override your freewill and not allow you to make the wrong choices, but a choice is exactly what the teachings of Jesus represent. God will not force you to believe the truth despite yourself. He will encourage, influence, and warn. He may even send messengers your way in an attempt to get through to you, correct you, and set your sight back onto the right path, but he won't force you. We will always have the choice to disregard that still, small voice.

God will not send a bolt of lighting to stop you just as the syringe is about to inject the implant into your hand. He COULD do that, but doing so would defeat the purpose of the Mark to begin with. God wants us, as sincere individuals with a free will, to freely choose to reject the systems of man in preference to his system. So no, the gates of hell will not prevail against us but that is only true insofar as we choose to follow the path Jesus chooses for us. If we step off that path then we choose to put ourselves in a position where the gates of hell can prevail against us.

Imagine someone attempting to justify promiscuous sex using the same argument; "if God didn't want me to do it then he'd stop me because Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail against us". People could use that reasoning to justify any kind of disobedience/sin and feel their conscience soothed for it.

 

[Deborah13]

Do you remember saying "so what" when I asked you to consider the microchipped glove for buying/selling from Barclays bank and a few other examples of buying/selling via the hand?

Of coarse and I still say 'so what'.
I don't see swiping a microchip glove as being anything different than swiping a credit card.
There is more involved in the 'mark of the beast' then a financial system. It is not something one would do without knowing the implications of worshiping the beast.
I see it much like Paul saying those that were afraid that they Might be eating meat offered to idols so they only eat herbs. He said they were weak in faith.
Rom 14:1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
Rom 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
Rom 14:3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

I think you will find this thing about "worry" is something you are projecting onto my arguments to excuse them, ironically, because it is your own worry which is shining through.

I believe you said we were afraid. Worry naturally comes along with fear, in my experience.

God will not send a bolt of lighting to stop you just as the syringe is about to inject the implant into your hand.

lol.
I don't see the mark as being something physical at all. You are taking scripture and interpreting it as the rabbis do when they think that God was telling them to tie little boxes, with Torah inside, to their foreheads and the left hand. That is not what He said at all. He was talking about writing His law on their minds and hearts, a form of worship.

So those who follow the beast/worship him have his law written on their minds/forehead or on their RIGHT hand. They don't know God or they have rejected Him and His law.

Imagine someone attempting to justify promiscuous sex using the same argument; "if God didn't want me to do it then he'd stop me because Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail against us".

And that wasn't my point at all.
My point is that we are the church, the church as a whole will not perish. God will protect His own. If we cannot buy/sell, so what!
My faith says, that God will take care of us one way or another. If that means loosing this physical life, so be it. We just go home sooner.
What you are saying is that a believer could be tricked by a man into rejecting their salvation, rejecting the blood of Christ, without them knowing that they are doing it. I say that is hogwash and a lie from the pit.

 

[turnorburn]

And the only place in Scripture antichrist is found is here..... while reading these verses in context antichrist is defined in scripture as 1Jn_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.
none of the verse here describe antichrist as a 'one guy'

we read many antichrists and the spirit of antichrist.


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.
1Jn_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.
1Jn_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.
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.

Your right reba there are many this is yet another article similar to ones I've posted in the past, its amazing how well the counter reformation has worked..

The truth on antichrist in the Bible was first discovered by all the early Protestants and even the translators of the King James Bible. Why have all the Churches that originated from these Protestants lost this vital truth? This is a very important topic as it also tells us who it is that enforces the mark from the beast and relates to the war of Armageddon. Our adversary will stop at nothing to prevent Christians from finding or keeping this truth and I am disappointed and stunned that he has managed to steal this truth from so many Churches over the last few centuries. I am going to outright reveal whom all these people knew to be antichrist and then give supporting evidence.

All these well known and famous people understood scripture and history and knew the Papacy is the antichrist power of Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 and some of these people were also killed by this Church that ruled for 1260 horrid years. “John Wycliffe, William Tyndale (translated the Bible - Tyndale Bible), Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer; in the seventeenth century, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist confessions of Faith; Sir Isaac Newton, John Wesley, Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards; and more recently Spurgeon, Bishop J.C. Ryle and Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones; these men among countless others, all saw the office of the Papacy as the antichrist.” — All Roads Lead to Rome, by Michael de Semlyen. Dorchestor House Publications, p. 205. 1991.

http://www.whoistheantichrist.info/

This should give us an idea of just how many..

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0001474.html

tob

 

[reba]

AS i have said before i remember where some one had figured out a way to make Micky Mouse to be 666...

I disagree with your ideas.. God wrote of many antichrists and a spirit of antichrist.. I do not read God saying there will be this one guy who is THEE Antichrist.

Some day we will know... and at that time it wont matter a hoot to any of us...

 

[turnorburn]

Your not the only one that disagrees reba, more than a few disagree, but then again more than a few completely agree.. i know these folks did..

"After the Bible itself, no book so profoundly influenced early Protestant sentiment as the Book of Martyrs. Even in our time it is still a living force. It is more than a record of persecution. It is an arsenal of controversy, a storehouse of romance, as well as a source of edification." - James Miller Dodds, English Prose.

http://biblebelievers.com/foxes/findex.htm

tob

 

[reba]

Is your idea of an antichrist past or future ? Those ugly guys are past... Men with out God..

 

[turnorburn]

Past present and future, in Paul's time the mystery of iniquity was already at work, the word antichrist just doesn't mean against Christ it also mean another Christ a phony, a deceiver an imitator..

tob

 

[reba]

to you in means "antichrist just doesn't mean against Christ it also mean another Christ a phony, a deceiver an imitator.. "

To me it means
1Jn_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.
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.

 

[turnorburn]

i believe Jesus had something to say about it here in..

John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

tob

 

[turnorburn]

What must we do to be saved reba, who must we know?

tob

*edit: forgot this..

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

 

[reba]

Yup

 

[reba]

Loosing me TOB ?


Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

[turnorburn]

That's right to believe in him is to know him.. If somebody told you it was dangerous to know Jesus Christ what spirit would you call that?

tob

 

[reba]

I will not say what you are wanting me to say TOB... Please dont think i like all the RCC teaches at the same time please dont think i like all the baptist teach ...Please dont think i like all the AofG teaches .. SDA... WOF Which of those few are 100 % correct in their teaching? I do not expect a direct answer...

 

[turnorburn]

Is your idea of an antichrist past or future ? Those ugly guys are past... Men with out God..

i couldn't figure out what you meant by "those ugly guys" did you mean the office of the Inquisition, the holy office?

tob

*edit: forgot something "again" if those ugly guys were the office of the Inquisition then those guys are still in business they never closed shop.. They now call themselves Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith