Truly not trying to anger anyone

[carey]

I am curious as to what Catholics and Orthodox believers think about these Historical facts.

Much is written and spoken today concerning the "anti-Christ". A common interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 says that the "anti-Christ" will take his position in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem and will rule the world from this point. For this reason, Christians are often warned not to participate in activities concerning the possible rebuilding of the temple.

There is an alternative view of Paul's word to the Thessalonians. In every other reference where Paul speaks of the "temple", he is referring to the Church. The Church is seen as the "Temple of God". Therefore, it is possible that a future world ruler could "take his seat in the temple" by assuming authority over the Church and by controlling the position and direction of it. This is much more subtle than going to Jerusalem and usurping a position in a rebuilt "third" Temple. We believe that this is a much more likely development. Indeed, we maintain that there is a historical precedent for such an event. It happened in 325 AD when Emperor Constantine convened and orchestrated what has come to be known as the First General Conference of the Church at Nicea.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE COUNCIL OF NICEA

During the third century AD, the Roman empire began to experience decline due both to internal corruption and to external assault. Throughout this time, the Church was growing throughout the empire. Churches were established in every city. Local churches were under the authority of bishops. There were five main or regional centers of authority including: Rome, Ephesus, Antioch, Alexandria, and Carthage. Indeed, it appears that, to some degree, the Church became "a state within the state". During the reign of Decius (249-251) and Diocletian (284-305), general persecutions of the Church were implemented in an effort to destroy it. The opposite occurred. The Church grew in strength and resolve.

When Constantine became emperor, he reasoned that the Church could serve as the grassroots backbone for the crumbling empire. He therefore legalized Christianity and made it the official religion of the empire. The fortune of the Church was suddenly reversed. Church property was returned to the Church. Bishops and pastors that had suffered loss during the periods of persecution were given government pensions. Laws were passed that strengthened the position of the Church.

For the Church to serve in the capacity envisioned by Constantine, unity was essential. Unfortunately for Constantine, it was at this very time that the Arian dispute arose. Arius was a presbyter at Alexandria. He wrote concerning his belief that Jesus was a "created being". His bishop. Alexander, disagreed with this position and a lively dispute resulted. This dispute spread throughout the Church and threatened to be the source of a major schism. Obviously, such a division in the Church would destroy its role as envisioned by Constantine.

The threat felt by Constantine was so strong that he embarked upon the unprecedented calling for an assembly of the bishops from throughout the empire to deal with this question and to resolve the issue. He personally invited the bishops, paid for their conveyance and maintained them through the conference which lasted for two months. Upon convening the assembly, he told the bishops what he expected to be accomplished and even defined their responsibility to the society. Finally, when the council ended, he gave the bishops "valuable" gifts and sent them on their way. He implemented and enforced the findings of the council, even to the point of the death sentence for anyone harboring materials written by Arius. All of this was done by Constantine while he was the undisputed secular world leader. He was not officially a part of the Church during this time. Constantine as a secular world leader literally "took his seat" in the midst of the Church and ruled over it. He usurped the position of the rightful "Lord" of the Church, Jesus the Messiah; therefore, he was an "anti-Christ".

THE FORESHADOWING OF THE ULTIMATE ANTI-CHRIST

Is it possible that we will see a repetition of the incident discussed above in the future? Could there be a General Council of Christendom today convened and directed by a secular world leader? Would this be a fulfillment of the vision set forth by Paul in his second letter to the believers at Thessalonica? We maintain that all of these things are not only possible, but indeed very likely.

In John's visions recorded in the book of Revelation (chapter 13), he describes a beast with seven heads ruling the world. One head of this beast represents the Rome of Constantine's days. John prophesied that another head would eventually arise and rule over the entire world. We have every reason to believe that this future "global" ruler would be like Constantine. John describes also another "beast", a religious beast, which causes all the peoples to worship or serve the first beast.

The interpretation of "beast" in the Scripture is empire. The nearest thing to a global empire apparent on the world scene today is the United Nations. Representatives from all member nations participate in the general assembly, but real power is reserved to the Security Council, which is controlled, in turn, by the five permanent members. In reality, the real power is reserved today to the single remaining "superpower".

Can we expect a global religious organization formed in the likeness or pattern of the UN? Who would be member "nations" or denominations? Would there be a "Security Council" type body to govern the real administration of such an organization? If such an organization were formed, can you envision the coming world leader "taking his seat" or position of authority in such a council? This, we believe, outlines the most probable fulfillment of Paul's prophecy spoken to the church at Thessalonica. This would be an "anti-Christ" usurping the position of Messiah Jesus.

Take care today lest you get caught participating in such an organization. The consequences are eternal

Again I am not trying to upset anyone I truly want to know your thoughts about these facts.

God bless,
Carey

 

[golfjack]

reply

One thought might be that the anti-christ would come out of the European union. I think he maybe part Jew or part Jew. To convince the Jews and the World, he will have to be Charismatic and know about Jewish law. He will deceive many, and many finally worship him. Also, there will be the anti-christ prophet. I am convinced he will come out of Rome ( revised Roman Empire). Can anyone name the seven heads/hills or seven world Governments?



May God bless, golfjack

 

[carey]

Re: reply

One thought might be that the anti-christ would come out of the European union. I think he maybe part Jew or part Jew. To convince the Jews and the World, he will have to be Charismatic and know about Jewish law. He will deceive many, and many finally worship him. Also, there will be the anti-christ prophet. I am convinced he will come out of Rome ( revised Roman Empire). Can anyone name the seven heads/hills or seven world Governments?



May God bless, golfjack

 

[thessalonian]

Your article is inconsistent with this part of the forum so I am going to lock it an you can post it elsewhere if you would like.

Constantine as a secular world leader literally "took his seat" in the midst of the Church and ruled over it. He usurped the position of the rightful "Lord" of the Church, Jesus the Messiah; therefore, he was an "anti-Christ".

Perhaps you can show what doctrines Contstantine forced upon the Church. This paragraph is nonsense. It is hardly fact.

The Catholic Church does believe that there will be an anti-christ. Constantine was not it. Most likely the anti-christ will also have an interest in the Catholic Church as Christ's true Church as well. He won't be going after the Protestants much.

 

[Judy]

I see nothing wrong with this .. so it is unlocked

 

[francisdesales]

I am curious as to what Catholics and Orthodox believers think about these Historical facts.

Much is written and spoken today concerning the "anti-Christ". A common interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 says that the "anti-Christ" will take his position in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem and will rule the world from this point. For this reason, Christians are often warned not to participate in activities concerning the possible rebuilding of the temple.

There is an alternative view of Paul's word to the Thessalonians. In every other reference where Paul speaks of the "temple", he is referring to the Church. The Church is seen as the "Temple of God". Therefore, it is possible that a future world ruler could "take his seat in the temple" by assuming authority over the Church and by controlling the position and direction of it. This is much more subtle than going to Jerusalem and usurping a position in a rebuilt "third" Temple. We believe that this is a much more likely development. Indeed, we maintain that there is a historical precedent for such an event. It happened in 325 AD when Emperor Constantine convened and orchestrated what has come to be known as the First General Conference of the Church at Nicea.

Carey,

When Paul speaks of "Church", He is speaking of the Body of Christ, not a building of stone and wood. Thus, Paul is not refering to the Jewish Temple, which was merely a foreshadowning of the Church and its role in "housing" God.

To say that the Catholic Church has anything to do with the "anti-Christ" is to not have read St. John's epistles, who several times tells us that the anti-Christ will teach that Jesus is not God or that Jesus was not the Word Incarnate:

"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 1:22

"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 4:3

"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 1:7

Let me assure you, the Church teaches, to the HILT, that Christ has come in the flesh and is the Son of God...

Not to hurt your feelings, but whoever told you that is trying to deceive you. Beware of those who try to lead people astray and cause dissension. Scripture DOES have choice words for such deceivers...

"It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe [unto him], through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." Luke 17:1-2

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Re: reply

One thought might be that the anti-christ would come out of the European union. I think he maybe part Jew or part Jew. To convince the Jews and the World, he will have to be Charismatic and know about Jewish law. He will deceive many, and many finally worship him. Also, there will be the anti-christ prophet. I am convinced he will come out of Rome ( revised Roman Empire). Can anyone name the seven heads/hills or seven world Governments?

Golfjack,

You know, Jerusalem has seven hills, as well. Perhaps the anti-Christ, the one who denies Jesus is the Son of God, or the Word become flesh, may very well be Islamic? Islam DOES control some of Jerusalem. This seems a more logical explanation than Rome, which politically, is of little consequence in the bigger political scheme of things.. (whether you are speaking of the Vatican or Italy itself).

Regards

 

[golfjack]

reply

Babylon is known as the city of Satan because of its long history of idolatry, astrology, witchcraft, and other occult practices. It is the birthplace of many false doctrines and religions such as goddess worship. The ancient city doied out many centuries ago, but during the 1980's and 90's Saddam Hussein poured hundredes of millions of dollars into rebuilding it. The war eventually slowed him down, but the rebuilt city will become a great center of religion and trade during the Tribulation Period. The false Prophet will locate the headquarters of his false religion there.


May God bless, golfjack

 

[francisdesales]

Re: reply

Babylon is known as the city of Satan because of its long history of idolatry, astrology, witchcraft, and other occult practices. It is the birthplace of many false doctrines and religions such as goddess worship. The ancient city doied out many centuries ago, but during the 1980's and 90's Saddam Hussein poured hundredes of millions of dollars into rebuilding it. The war eventually slowed him down, but the rebuilt city will become a great center of religion and trade during the Tribulation Period. The false Prophet will locate the headquarters of his false religion there.

Perhaps you are taking the book of Revelation too literally. It is of the apocalyptic style of writing, with many symbols and signs that point to something else, things that the people of the time would have understood and pertaining to their time... Often, the message is coded.

But even in the OT, Jerusalem is referred to as a harlot, and so forth, because of its infidelity to God. "Babylon" can refer to any worldly power that goes against God. In the book of Revelation, it seems to refer to EITHER the Roman Empire OR Jerusalem itself. Considering the Jewish attitudes towards early Christianity, it would not be surprising that the writer would attack BOTH the pagans at Rome AND the Judaizers in Jerusalem who were again acting the harlot. Rather than reading Revelation literally (a river of blood several feet deep for miles and miles???) I think it is safer and more sensical to read it as apocalyptic literature, the main message is "Persevere. God will win in the end despite what the powers of earth try to do".

Regards

 

[golfjack]

reply

Fran, I believe that the Bible is to be taken Literaly, with figuritive and symbolic language. If we start spirituallizing the Bible, it leads to a false conclusion. Preterists do this. I am not saying that you are a preterist, but one can really come up with the most ridiculous interpretations if they spiritualize scripture. The Apostle John was a Jew, as all the 12 Apostles were. You can bet that John was an expert of the OT., as Jesus was.

Bottom line, I am not going to worry about who the anti-christ and prophet are because I will not be here. I do believe that there will be a rapture of the Church just before the Tribulation. In fact, if you read Ezekiel 38 and 39, you will find out when Russia and the Arab Nations get ready to attack Israel, get ready because we are going. The book of Daniel tells us much about what will happen when he interpreted the Dream for the King of Bablyon. The ten toes are very significant.


May God bless, golfjack

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Perhaps the Temple of God is yourself.

1 Corinthians 3:16 (King James Version) Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

 

[francisdesales]

Re: reply

Bottom line, I am not going to worry about who the anti-christ and prophet are because I will not be here. I do believe that there will be a rapture of the Church just before the Tribulation. In fact, if you read Ezekiel 38 and 39, you will find out when Russia and the Arab Nations get ready to attack Israel, get ready because we are going.

Does this mean (to you) that the Church will not suffer through the Rapture?

I think you are taking Ez 38 and 39 out of context. They were written for people of those days, not 2500 years later.

Regards

 

[golfjack]

reply

Fran, You can bet the Church will not have to go through the Tribulation. Ezekiel was a prophet and certainly was talking about an event in the future.




May God bless, golfjack

 

[francisdesales]

Re: reply

Fran, You can bet the Church will not have to go through the Tribulation. Ezekiel was a prophet and certainly was talking about an event in the future.

Not to go beyond a simple disagreement here, since this is not an "argument" forum. I don't see how the Church, the Body of Christ, will not suffer, as its pioneer did on the Cross. Catholics don't believe that the Church will avoid the final tribulation.

Regards

 

[golfjack]

reply

Read 1 Thess. 5:10 and Rev. 3:10. It doesn't say through Tribulation, but from Tribulation. The Bible says that God's grace is sufficient for thee. The Work of the cross is enough. I guess, you must make the choice to either go through the Tribulation or come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.


May God bless, golfjack

 

[francisdesales]

Re: reply

Read 1 Thess. 5:10 and Rev. 3:10. It doesn't say through Tribulation, but from Tribulation. The Bible says that God's grace is sufficient for thee. The Work of the cross is enough. I guess, you must make the choice to either go through the Tribulation or come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.

"Who died for us; that, whether we watch or sleep, we may live together with him"

What does that have to do with the Tribulation? Those who die before the end of the world or during it, (if they die), we will live together with Him. This says nothing about avoiding the Tribulation! It even suggests we will endure it by telling us to watch!

"Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I will also keep thee from the hour of the temptation, which shall come upon the whole world to try them that dwell upon the earth. "

Again, nothing about avoiding the Tribulation. Christ will help us fight temptation, which we face daily. We are DAILY tried!!!

Sorry, these verses don't tell us the Church will avoid the Tribulation.

Regards

 

[golfjack]

reply

Fran, we should always eagerly watch for the Son of God to take us up to meet Him in the Clouds. Always be aware that He is coming, and for the unbeliever to start thinking about his physical death here on earth. I sincerely hope that all unbelievers listen to the prompting of the Holy Spirit, so they will not experience God's wrath. Do you really think that God is throwing darts at His Children from Heaven? I put my faith in Jesus Christ and not in the traditions of men. By the way, what do your priests learn in their seminaries? It just doesn't seem they know much about what the Bibles says.


May God bless, golfjack

 

[matto]

If someone wanted to know if the Pope was the anti-christ, the test is simple enough.

The Scripture calls the anti-christ , " the lawless one ", if the Pope was the anti-christ , why does he preach the Ten Commandments ?

Maybe peoples prejudice is thicker than their logic.

 

[francisdesales]

Re: reply

Fran, we should always eagerly watch for the Son of God to take us up to meet Him in the Clouds. Always be aware that He is coming, and for the unbeliever to start thinking about his physical death here on earth. I sincerely hope that all unbelievers listen to the prompting of the Holy Spirit, so they will not experience God's wrath.

I fully agree with you and I believe that much talk on "perseverance" is directed at one's own personal life on earth, not necessarily the End of the World times...

Do you really think that God is throwing darts at His Children from Heaven? I put my faith in Jesus Christ and not in the traditions of men. By the way, what do your priests learn in their seminaries? It just doesn't seem they know much about what the Bibles says.

I don't know where this is coming from. No, I don't believe that God throws darts at His children. I also put my faith in Jesus Christ. Traditions of men are merely meant to guide men to Christ, they are not means of faith in of themselves. As to what priests learn in seminaries, quite a bit. Granted, they don't memorize the Bible, if that is what you mean. They learn philosophy and theology, they must learn the rituals and how to run a parish. They must learn canon law and to deal with pastoral situations. The Christian religion is not just about the Bible. I believe they spend some 6-8 years in school.

Regards