Biblical Prophecy Thread

[catfishpunter]

Here's a short, current events update. Remember that one of the key features of the end of the world, one-world government that was predicted 2,000 years ago is total control of every aspect of life worldwide.

There has never been any way to pull that off... until our lifetimes.

Last year, I warned that Starlink would soon present the world's first ever blanket network. It's not that Starlink in and of itself is remotely evil; rather, it represents the first time in human history that a network has covered the earth in surveillance, communication and tracking capabilities.

This was my post from last year, which I made on the main thread on this board (not this prophecy thread):



Well, we're there, folks. Here's the current network coverage map for Starlink, which you can view live at starlink.com/map. The only places that have no coverage are the poor places on the planet (dark blue) and states that could be classified as enemies of America.



The only thing standing between us and uniform blanket coverage is the desire to turn it on.

The only thing standing between us and "always on" systems of surveillance and tracking that reach into the most rural and remote reaches of the planet is the desire to turn it on.

The only thing standing between us and using such a system as a means of control is... you guessed it, the desire to turn it on.

In August, Starlink celebrated its 3,000th satellite launched into space. It plans for up to 42,000 satellites total (see story here: https://www.space.com/spacex-30000-more-starlink-satellites.html).

This is a major moment in world history, and very few people recognize it. Hopefully, you see the significance of what has happened with this network coming online and continuing to grow in capability.

 

[Deleted member 2886]

See the bolded:

2 Thes 2:3-4 - 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; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

1 John 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.

Rev. 13 - 16-17
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Just speculating here, it kinda seems as if alluding to the "ego".

Maybe i am simply way off target, though i can't ignore the correlation, which strikes me, as relevant due to, imo, the prolific materialistic worship rampant amongst mankind, currently.

It's the main thing(*materialism)that differentiates whatever i am, from so many others who are, imo, heavily bound unto the weighted shackles of materialistic identifications.
(*greed, lust, pride, power, etc.)

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Great question. That's as good a subject for tonight as any. Is there "an" Antichrist, or does that term refer to something different? The term Antichrist can be understood not just as "against Christ" but also as "instead of Christ," someone presented as an alternative to Jesus.

Those passages you linked from John's epistles show the spiritual nature of anyone who could be described as antichrist. Such a person denies Jesus, either that He came in the flesh or that He is God.

There have been millions of people who have had this "antichrist" aspect. They refuse to acknowledge Jesus, seek alternatives instead of Him, and live in opposition to Him. They are, by definition, anti-Christ.

That said, the Bible lays out a progressively clearer picture throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament that, one day, the ultimate expression of this attitude will appear on earth. He will be THE Antichrist, a man who defiantly mocks God and defies the name of Jesus.

He is known by many identities and titles throughout Scripture, including:

The Lawless one (2 Thess 2)
The Beast (Rev 11)
The Man of Sin (2 Thess 2)
The Prince That Shall Come (Dan 9)
The Worthless Shepherd (Zech 11)

Do you think that Revelation is in chronological order?

 

[AgEngDawg]

Great question. That's as good a subject for tonight as any. Is there "an" Antichrist, or does that term refer to something different? The term Antichrist can be understood not just as "against Christ" but also as "instead of Christ," someone presented as an alternative to Jesus.

Those passages you linked from John's epistles show the spiritual nature of anyone who could be described as antichrist. Such a person denies Jesus, either that He came in the flesh or that He is God.

There have been millions of people who have had this "antichrist" aspect. They refuse to acknowledge Jesus, seek alternatives instead of Him, and live in opposition to Him. They are, by definition, anti-Christ.

That said, the Bible lays out a progressively clearer picture throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament that, one day, the ultimate expression of this attitude will appear on earth. He will be THE Antichrist, a man who defiantly mocks God and defies the name of Jesus.

He is known by many identities and titles throughout Scripture, including:

The Lawless one (2 Thess 2)
The Beast (Rev 11)
The Man of Sin (2 Thess 2)
The Prince That Shall Come (Dan 9)
The Worthless Shepherd (Zech 11)

The spirit of the Antichrist is in lead of US culture, policy, government, etc.

I have a suspicion that the flag of the antichrist will be rainbow flag.

 

[Old Glory]

The spirit of the Antichrist is in lead of US culture, policy, government, etc.

I have a suspicion that the flag of the antichrist will be rainbow flag.

A Rainbow with 6 colors, not 7.

Someone pointed that out to me a while ago. Gods rainbow has 7 colors, the lgb whatever you want to call it flag only has 6.

 

[ETNVol]

Do you think that Revelation is in chronological order?

There are a few interludes, and it doubles back a time or two, but for the most part, it's chronological.

 

[ETNVol]

A Rainbow with 6 colors, not 7.

Someone pointed that out to me a while ago. Gods rainbow has 7 colors, the lgb whatever you want to call it flag only has 6.

Never noticed that. Makes perfect sense though.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

There are a few interludes, and it doubles back a time or two, but for the most part, it's chronological.

The wicked angels are in chains of darkness in the two verses below.

2Pe_2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;


Jud_1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.



Why does an angel come down from heaven with a key to unlock and open the pit in the verses below, unless the pit was locked before that time?

Rev 9:1 Then the fifth angel sounded: And I saw a star fallen from heaven to the earth. To him was given the key to the bottomless pit.
Rev 9:2 And he opened the bottomless pit, and smoke arose out of the pit like the smoke of a great furnace. So the sun and the air were darkened because of the smoke of the pit.


Are angels already "bound" in the verse below?

Rev 9:14 saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, "Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates."


Who is the king of the angels in the pit below?

Rev 9:11 And they had as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon.


Where was the beast before it "ascended" out of the pit below?

Rev 11:7 When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them.

 

[catfishpunter]

The wicked angels are in chains of darkness in the two verses below.

2Pe_2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;


Jud_1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.



Why does an angel come down from heaven with a key to unlock and open the pit in the verses below, unless the pit was locked before that time?

Rev 9:1 Then the fifth angel sounded: And I saw a star fallen from heaven to the earth. To him was given the key to the bottomless pit.
Rev 9:2 And he opened the bottomless pit, and smoke arose out of the pit like the smoke of a great furnace. So the sun and the air were darkened because of the smoke of the pit.


Are angels already "bound" in the verse below?

Rev 9:14 saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, "Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates."


Who is the king of the angels in the pit below?

Rev 9:11 And they had as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon.


Where was the beast before it "ascended" out of the pit below?

Rev 11:7 When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them.

Awesome questions. What on earth are Peter and Jude talking about? Who are these angels that are bound, and where are they bound?

We don't know, exactly. What we can say, when we look at the rest of the Bible, is that these angels are currently in a place of darkness and imprisonment. It does not appear to be any place where humans are sent, and it is not their final resting place.

These angels did something bad, so bad that they're imprisoned. If we look at a little more of what's written in Jude, we get a fuller picture of what they did:

"And angels who did not keep their own domain but abandoned their proper dwelling place, these He has kept in eternal restraints under darkness for the judgment of the great day, just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these angels indulged in sexual perversion and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." [Jude 1:6-7]

Jude states that these angels engaged in sexual perversion. OK, but with whom? Well, the Bible hints at this, but does not describe it explicitly. It is possible that the sexual immorality described here is the same act described in Genesis 6:

"When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in1 man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown." [Genesis 6:1-4]

There are significant Jewish and Christian traditions and schools of thought that believe that the "sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6 refer to angels who, finding human women attractive, had sex with them and gave birth to sons. Their offspring were "the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown." They are also called the "Nephilim," a term which appears again in the Old Testament in the book of Numbers, when they are referred to as giants. The Nephilim and their offspring, the Anakim and Rephaim, were reportedly giant men.

This is purely conjecture, but it is possible that many of our mythological stories about demigods and men with "superpowers" are twisted references to these ancient offspring, which were possibly the product of angels mating with women.

Whatever happened, we know that Jude believed that a group of angels committed sexual perversion so great that they were imprisoned by God. This may be the type of perversion he means, which appears to have happened more than once throughout biblical history (at least once before the Flood, and again after).

The point is, they're imprisoned and awaiting final judgment, after which, they will be thrown into the place of eternal torment - the lake of fire, what we commonly think of as an eternal Hell.

Your second set of questions centers around another set of angels that appear to be bound elsewhere. We don't know why angels would be imprisoned near the river Euphrates, or exactly who the Beast is that is currently imprisoned in the Abyss.

We do know that he is demonic, he is powerful, he is not Satan, and he is a key figure in the end times. We can get much more into this as we go, but it seems as though the Beast is the demonic power that indwells the human man known as The Antichrist. Revelation refers often to this demonic/human fusion as the Beast.

 

[Deleted member 2886]

Awesome questions. What on earth are Peter and Jude talking about? Who are these angels that are bound, and where are they bound?

We don't know, exactly. What we can say, when we look at the rest of the Bible, is that these angels are currently in a place of darkness and imprisonment. It does not appear to be any place where humans are sent, and it is not their final resting place.

These angels did something bad, so bad that they're imprisoned. If we look at a little more of what's written in Jude, we get a fuller picture of what they did:

"And angels who did not keep their own domain but abandoned their proper dwelling place, these He has kept in eternal restraints under darkness for the judgment of the great day, just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these angels indulged in sexual perversion and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." [Jude 1:6-7]

Jude states that these angels engaged in sexual perversion. OK, but with whom? Well, the Bible hints at this, but does not describe it explicitly. It is possible that the sexual immorality described here is the same act described in Genesis 6:

"When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in1 man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown." [Genesis 6:1-4]

There are significant Jewish and Christian traditions and schools of thought that believe that the "sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6 refer to angels who, finding human women attractive, had sex with them and gave birth to sons. Their offspring were "the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown." They are also called the "Nephilim," a term which appears again in the Old Testament in the book of Numbers, when they are referred to as giants. The Nephilim and their offspring, the Anakim and Rephaim, were reportedly giant men.

This is purely conjecture, but it is possible that many of our mythological stories about demigods and men with "superpowers" are twisted references to these ancient offspring, which were possibly the product of angels mating with women.

Whatever happened, we know that Jude believed that a group of angels committed sexual perversion so great that they were imprisoned by God. This may be the type of perversion he means, which appears to have happened more than once throughout biblical history (at least once before the Flood, and again after).

The point is, they're imprisoned and awaiting final judgment, after which, they will be thrown into the place of eternal torment - the lake of fire, what we commonly think of as an eternal Hell.

Your second set of questions centers around another set of angels that appear to be bound elsewhere. We don't know why angels would be imprisoned near the river Euphrates, or exactly who the Beast is that is currently imprisoned in the Abyss.

We do know that he is demonic, he is powerful, he is not Satan, and he is a key figure in the end times. We can get much more into this as we go, but it seems as though the Beast is the demonic power that indwells the human man known as The Antichrist. Revelation refers often to this demonic/human fusion as the Beast.

Far out, this is fascinating!

Wasn't aware of this idea that there's more than one set of imprisoned "angels".

Wondering about something, though unsure, as this sorta clicks with an Anthroposophical concept.

One of which i've, so far, been unable to reconcile—adequately.

The mention of a second set of imprisoned "angels" and the "Beast", immediately elicited thoughts of there being a "Luciferic" association.[¿?]

Hoping you, or anyone else interested, might share opinion, or insight as to whether, what, why, when, where, who, how this stuff all fits together.[¿?]

i've read about there "being",...[*in simplest terms],...3 distinct "oppositional", —(*to God, Christ , Spirit), "essence's" which "negatively" "influence" "man" in uniquely differing ways.[¿?]

And they aren't exactly—entirely "oppositional" to "one-another" either, though they can be, they can also somehow "align" in a sorta "mutually beneficial"/ "complimentary"/"symbiotic" manner.[¿?]

[*Been trying to figure this stuff out for several years now.]

•¿["Satan"]?
•¿["Lucifer"]?
•¿["Ahriman"]?

And, cheers, in advance, for any input aye, definitely will be grateful.
Thanks.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Awesome questions. What on earth are Peter and Jude talking about? Who are these angels that are bound, and where are they bound?

We don't know, exactly. What we can say, when we look at the rest of the Bible, is that these angels are currently in a place of darkness and imprisonment. It does not appear to be any place where humans are sent, and it is not their final resting place.

These angels did something bad, so bad that they're imprisoned. If we look at a little more of what's written in Jude, we get a fuller picture of what they did:

"And angels who did not keep their own domain but abandoned their proper dwelling place, these He has kept in eternal restraints under darkness for the judgment of the great day, just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these angels indulged in sexual perversion and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." [Jude 1:6-7]

Jude states that these angels engaged in sexual perversion. OK, but with whom? Well, the Bible hints at this, but does not describe it explicitly. It is possible that the sexual immorality described here is the same act described in Genesis 6:

"When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in1 man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown." [Genesis 6:1-4]

There are significant Jewish and Christian traditions and schools of thought that believe that the "sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6 refer to angels who, finding human women attractive, had sex with them and gave birth to sons. Their offspring were "the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown." They are also called the "Nephilim," a term which appears again in the Old Testament in the book of Numbers, when they are referred to as giants. The Nephilim and their offspring, the Anakim and Rephaim, were reportedly giant men.

This is purely conjecture, but it is possible that many of our mythological stories about demigods and men with "superpowers" are twisted references to these ancient offspring, which were possibly the product of angels mating with women.

Whatever happened, we know that Jude believed that a group of angels committed sexual perversion so great that they were imprisoned by God. This may be the type of perversion he means, which appears to have happened more than once throughout biblical history (at least once before the Flood, and again after).

The point is, they're imprisoned and awaiting final judgment, after which, they will be thrown into the place of eternal torment - the lake of fire, what we commonly think of as an eternal Hell.

Your second set of questions centers around another set of angels that appear to be bound elsewhere. We don't know why angels would be imprisoned near the river Euphrates, or exactly who the Beast is that is currently imprisoned in the Abyss.

We do know that he is demonic, he is powerful, he is not Satan, and he is a key figure in the end times. We can get much more into this as we go, but it seems as though the Beast is the demonic power that indwells the human man known as The Antichrist. Revelation refers often to this demonic/human fusion as the Beast.

ok.................................but as to my original question.......................why does John refer to antichrist as plural............??????????? If there is only one being? Understand, the word antichrist is not in revelation.

 

[Old Glory]

ISRAEL365 EXCLUSIVE: Red Heifers arrive in Israel [WATCH]

The Temple Institute made a huge step towards reinstating the Temple service on Thursday when five red heifers landed at Ben Gurion International Airport.

www.israel365news.com

 

[catfishpunter]

ok.................................but as to my original question.......................why does John refer to antichrist as plural............??????????? If there is only one being? Understand, the word antichrist is not in revelation.

Sure thing. I wrote back regarding that a couple posts ago. Sorry if that answer was buried in a bunch of text. Here it is on its own:

Those passages you linked from John's epistles show the spiritual nature of anyone who could be described as antichrist. Such a person denies Jesus, either that He came in the flesh or that He is God.

There have been millions of people who have had this "antichrist" aspect. They refuse to acknowledge Jesus, seek alternatives instead of Him, and live in opposition to Him. They are, by definition, anti-Christ.

That said, the Bible lays out a progressively clearer picture throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament that, one day, the ultimate expression of this attitude will appear on earth. He will be THE Antichrist, a man who defiantly mocks God and defies the name of Jesus.

 

[catfishpunter]

ISRAEL365 EXCLUSIVE: Red Heifers arrive in Israel [WATCH]

The Temple Institute made a huge step towards reinstating the Temple service on Thursday when five red heifers landed at Ben Gurion International Airport.

www.israel365news.com

WHOA. Unreal. I've been waiting for this news for a couple of years. I was on the Temple Institute website Wednesday night looking to see if they had made any progress since March.

To be clear, there is nothing prophetically standing in the way of Jesus returning. That's what we mean when we say that His return is imminent.

Many of us also believe that the final days of the earth will be marked by a rebuilding of the Jewish Temple and the reinstitution of Jewish temple-based worship rituals (the books of Daniel and Revelation, as well as Jesus's own words, lead us to think that way, though we could be wrong).

The red heifer is a big part of Jewish understanding of what needs to happen to reinstitute these rituals. This is probably worth an entire in-depth post of its own.

What a day.... we'll see what plays out next.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Sure thing. I wrote back regarding that a couple posts ago. Sorry if that answer was buried in a bunch of text. Here it is on its own:

Those passages you linked from John's epistles show the spiritual nature of anyone who could be described as antichrist. Such a person denies Jesus, either that He came in the flesh or that He is God.

There have been millions of people who have had this "antichrist" aspect. They refuse to acknowledge Jesus, seek alternatives instead of Him, and live in opposition to Him. They are, by definition, anti-Christ.

That said, the Bible lays out a progressively clearer picture throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament that, one day, the ultimate expression of this attitude will appear on earth. He will be THE Antichrist, a man who defiantly mocks God and defies the name of Jesus.

I am sorry, but that is not what it says. The word antichrist is used as an adjective, and also in the plural, not as a noun, anywhere. This is a very simple concept, by difficult for some to accept.

You are correct, millions if not billions think that this is all to come, that and the "rapture" which is not in the bible, and the 7 years tribulation, which is not in the bible. Many of these teachings were started in the 1850s (by memory) by a man named John Nelson Darby, and his interpretations. Understand, that those teachings were not of the bible, but a man reading the bible. It has been accepted by many, because if is "easier".

Let discuss this in more simple terms, with both accepting that the bible is very much up to interpretation, and that people have killed each other over this concept for millenia......

If in fact that no one will know when the ends is here.............what sense does it make for all these things to happen before the 2nd coming? What sense does it make to make the unfaithful and untrue all upon a sudden, start "the belief" in Jesus? If there is a 7 year tribulation ( or 3.5 years ) as some think.............there is a timeline until the 2nd coming, which there is not supposed to be.

Rape, pilage, plunder, murder, etc..............until the time of tribulation? Then at that time, better get good with Jesus, lest you be going to hell? I think not. Before I continue, are you catching what I am saying?

 

[catfishpunter]

I am sorry, but that is not what it says. The word antichrist is used as an adjective, and also in the plural, not as a noun, anywhere. This is a very simple concept, by difficult for some to accept.

You are correct, millions if not billions think that this is all to come, that and the "rapture" which is not in the bible, and the 7 years tribulation, which is not in the bible. Many of these teachings were started in the 1850s (by memory) by a man named John Nelson Darby, and his interpretations. Understand, that those teachings were not of the bible, but a man reading the bible. It has been accepted by many, because if is "easier".

Let discuss this in more simple terms, with both accepting that the bible is very much up to interpretation, and that people have killed each other over this concept for millenia......

If in fact that no one will know when the ends is here.............what sense does it make for all these things to happen before the 2nd coming? What sense does it make to make the unfaithful and untrue all upon a sudden, start "the belief" in Jesus? If there is a 7 year tribulation ( or 3.5 years ) as some think.............there is a timeline until the 2nd coming, which there is not supposed to be.

Rape, pilage, plunder, murder, etc..............until the time of tribulation? Then at that time, better get good with Jesus, lest you be going to hell? I think not. Before I continue, are you catching what I am saying?

You mention that the term "antichrist" in all of those verses is used as an adjective. Read what I wrote and pasted again and replace the word "antichrist" with any other adjective you like and help me understand how what I wrote does not clearly support the use of the word as an adjective used to describe people throughout the ages.

Replace the word "antichrist" with "purple," "small," "energetic," or any other adjective you like. Just like multiple people can be "purple," "small," or "energetic," multiple people can be "antichrist."

The final use of the word in the third bolded paragraph below is to describe the man who is clearly and unequivocally prophesied to be the human pinnacle of the adjective "antichrist." He is presented throughout the Old and the New Testament (in many places which I have shown above). He has become synonymous with the term "antichrist" - so much so that the term has colloquially been converted to a titular form by believers. He is the unparalleled expression of antichrist. As we decide what to call him, many believers, having no name for him, have called him "The Antichrist," as it conveys what he will be - the ultimate alternative Messiah.

You can call him whatever you like, though, as the Bible describes him in many ways with several titles, which I shared in a previous post.

Again, for reference, here's what I wrote:

Those passages you linked from John's epistles show the spiritual nature of anyone who could be described as antichrist. Such a person denies Jesus, either that He came in the flesh or that He is God.

There have been millions of people who have had this "antichrist" aspect. They refuse to acknowledge Jesus, seek alternatives instead of Him, and live in opposition to Him. They are, by definition, anti-Christ.

That said, the Bible lays out a progressively clearer picture throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament that, one day, the ultimate expression of this attitude will appear on earth. He will be THE Antichrist, a man who defiantly mocks God and defies the name of Jesus.

As for the rest of your comment, I apologize, but I'm afraid I don't follow. I'd be glad to walk through Scripture, as we have with the verses you shared regarding the very good questions you asked around "antichrist" / "Antichrist."

 

[Deleted member 2886]

Oh man, i definitely enjoy reading this thread aye.
Thanks @catfishpunter

Am a little confused about how exactly this "anti-christ" / "Anti-christ" concept works.
(*still learning this remarkably complex subject.)

Unsure what i'm possibly missing right now, coz for me, it sorta almost seems like your-self and @weaponoffreedom are kinda saying the same thing—for the most part, but [¿?] arrive at two very similar—yet distinctly separate conclusions¿?

Eg;

---

"That said, the Bible lays out a progressively clearer picture throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament that, one day, the ultimate expression of this attitude will appear on earth. He will be THE Antichrist, a man who defiantly mocks God and defies the name of Jesus."

---

This, oddly, makes sense to me when utilizing several differing contextual interpretations, as well from various subjective perspectives.

Basically i'm saying i haven't been able to attain adequate orientation within the apparently vast ideological spectrum of such widely varied "christian" biblical contexts.

Have attempted to describe the concept of "egregores"/"thoughtforms", etc in another thread.

Are there perhaps similarities between these so-called "egregores", and what you guys are talking about¿?

Cheers mates

 

[weaponoffreedom]

You mention that the term "antichrist" in all of those verses is used as an adjective. Read what I wrote and pasted again and replace the word "antichrist" with any other adjective you like and help me understand how what I wrote does not clearly support the use of the word as an adjective used to describe people throughout the ages.

Replace the word "antichrist" with "purple," "small," "energetic," or any other adjective you like. Just like multiple people can be "purple," "small," or "energetic," multiple people can be "antichrist."

The final use of the word in the third bolded paragraph below is to describe the man who is clearly and unequivocally prophesied to be the human pinnacle of the adjective "antichrist." He is presented throughout the Old and the New Testament (in many places which I have shown above). He has become synonymous with the term "antichrist" - so much so that the term has colloquially been converted to a titular form by believers. He is the unparalleled expression of antichrist. As we decide what to call him, many believers, having no name for him, have called him "The Antichrist," as it conveys what he will be - the ultimate alternative Messiah.

You can call him whatever you like, though, as the Bible describes him in many ways with several titles, which I shared in a previous post.

Again, for reference, here's what I wrote:

Those passages you linked from John's epistles show the spiritual nature of anyone who could be described as antichrist. Such a person denies Jesus, either that He came in the flesh or that He is God.

There have been millions of people who have had this "antichrist" aspect. They refuse to acknowledge Jesus, seek alternatives instead of Him, and live in opposition to Him. They are, by definition, anti-Christ.

That said, the Bible lays out a progressively clearer picture throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament that, one day, the ultimate expression of this attitude will appear on earth. He will be THE Antichrist, a man who defiantly mocks God and defies the name of Jesus.

As for the rest of your comment, I apologize, but I'm afraid I don't follow. I'd be glad to walk through Scripture, as we have with the verses you shared regarding the very good questions you asked around "antichrist" / "Antichrist."

I will not replace any word with any word. That is not for me to do, and in many ways is the problem. It is simple. The word "antichrist" as used in the bible is mentioned only the times I listed, in John. No exception. It is a descriptive word used to describe a group or thought. Not a person

This teaching, that the "antichrist" is a person, and the "rapture", which itself is not in the bible, is very new, and is not in the bible.

This concept is very important, as previously mentioned.

Deception is the most powerful weapon of all.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 24:36 - King James Version

But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

www.biblegateway.com

Why is this so important? And to understand that there is no warning, and that the above passage is the warning?

Be a good person, do good things, do as Jesus would do........it is that simple. Do it all the time, to your maximum. Jesus died for our sins because we are not perfect, has he was. God wants us to join the ranks of Heaven, in truth, through our hearts and minds, and the very idea that a "tribulation" would somehow change the minds of people does not fit.

The following is my context, and not the bible:

So, the teachings of Jesus and thereby God, have been known on this earth for at least 2000+ years...........it tells many stories of the past, and give examples of righteousness, and what it is, and what evil is. In a nutshell, it teaches us to be good people and do good things, and not to be bad people and do bad things. We are built with an internal compass, and whether or not you follow it is up to you.

Do you really think that Jesus would put everyone through a tribulation just to prove a final point? No. the teachings are already here.......now is the chance, now is the tribulation.

the principles of the old testament are obsolete.........

Bible Gateway passage: Hebrews 8 - King James Version

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. For every high priest is ordained to offer...

www.biblegateway.com

and more specifically, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+8:13&version=KJV

To "believe" in the teachings of Jesus and thereby God, is to emulate, to duplicate, to the best of our abilities, "do as Jesus would do" ( WWJD?). All the time.

Understand, there is no 3rd coming of Jesus........which the "rapture" implies. There is only a 2nd, which is the end, the apocalypse, the end.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:11 - King James Version

He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[weaponoffreedom]

now for a bit of levity.............................this is the deal......

Nirvana Lyrics

Nirvana lyrics - 165 song lyrics sorted by album, including "Smells Like Teen Spirit", "Come As You Are", "Lithium".

www.azlyrics.com

they got it.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

ISRAEL365 EXCLUSIVE: Red Heifers arrive in Israel [WATCH]

The Temple Institute made a huge step towards reinstating the Temple service on Thursday when five red heifers landed at Ben Gurion International Airport.

www.israel365news.com

Israel is not a land, the followers of Jesus is Israel. It is not a land it is a people.

 

[catfishpunter]

I will not replace any word with any word. That is not for me to do, and in many ways is the problem. It is simple. The word "antichrist" as used in the bible is mentioned only the times I listed, in John. No exception. It is a descriptive word used to describe a group or thought. Not a person

This teaching, that the "antichrist" is a person, and the "rapture", which itself is not in the bible, is very new, and is not in the bible.

This concept is very important, as previously mentioned.

Deception is the most powerful weapon of all.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 24:36 - King James Version

But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

www.biblegateway.com

Why is this so important? And to understand that there is no warning, and that the above passage is the warning?

Be a good person, do good things, do as Jesus would do........it is that simple. Do it all the time, to your maximum. Jesus died for our sins because we are not perfect, has he was. God wants us to join the ranks of Heaven, in truth, through our hearts and minds, and the very idea that a "tribulation" would somehow change the minds of people does not fit.

The following is my context, and not the bible:

So, the teachings of Jesus and thereby God, have been known on this earth for at least 2000+ years...........it tells many stories of the past, and give examples of righteousness, and what it is, and what evil is. In a nutshell, it teaches us to be good people and do good things, and not to be bad people and do bad things. We are built with an internal compass, and whether or not you follow it is up to you.

Do you really think that Jesus would put everyone through a tribulation just to prove a final point? No. the teachings are already here.......now is the chance, now is the tribulation.

the principles of the old testament are obsolete.........

Bible Gateway passage: Hebrews 8 - King James Version

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. For every high priest is ordained to offer...

www.biblegateway.com

and more specifically, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+8:13&version=KJV

To "believe" in the teachings of Jesus and thereby God, is to emulate, to duplicate, to the best of our abilities, "do as Jesus would do" ( WWJD?). All the time.

Understand, there is no 3rd coming of Jesus........which the "rapture" implies. There is only a 2nd, which is the end, the apocalypse, the end.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:11 - King James Version

He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

www.biblegateway.com

I'm not sure where we're not connecting regarding the use of the word "antichrist" as a descriptor that fits multiple people. You've said that and shown Scripture for it. I've said that and shown Scripture for it. We are in complete agreement there.

Where we seem to split on that is on the minor issue as to whether or not people have license to use that term in any other context or manner. I believe that it is appropriate to use it in a proper noun sense to describe the person who will be the ultimate expression of the antichrist attribute; you don't. That's completely fine, and not something that should divide us in any way.

We can even disagree on whether such a man will ever exist, whether he will lead a one-world government, whether there will be a seven year tribulation, whether there will be a rapture, etc. None of that should get in the way of us worshipping Jesus.

For example, on Thursday, I sat in a meeting with pastors from 70 different churches (and three business leaders - I don't know why they invited the three of us, but I'm glad that they did). We were there together for prayer, worship, and mutual support. I attend a non-denominational church, yet my theological background is Baptist, and I sat next to a guy who's from a charismatic/Pentecostal background. We prayed for one another and experienced the unity in Christ together. Likewise, I met a wonderful brother who is Seventh Day Adventist. They hold very strong opinions about worshipping only on Saturdays, which I don't, yet we put all of that aside to focus on the only thing that matters - Jesus.

God was glorified and we were edified in our unity under Jesus.

And as I've said from the first posts I made in this thread, that has been my aim all along. For people who know Jesus already, as I said in my very first post last year: "I hope you'll learn something and maybe get an interest in the subject that helps you understand the Bible and your faith in Jesus more deeply."

And for people who don't know Jesus, I encouraged them as follows: "If you're not a Christian, well, I'd be lying if I said otherwise, but I do hope that this discussion gives you pause to maybe reconsider what you've thought about God, the Bible, and Jesus to date."

I repeat that call to repentance throughout my posts. For instance, several months ago, when I discussed the prophecies regarding Gog/Magog and what they might mean, I wrapped that series of posts by saying: For those of you reading now, I urge you to turn to Him while you can. God's time of patience and grace runs out for each of us who persist as His enemy, be it in our own individual lives or at the end of all things. Do not continue to reject Him and reject the truth, because ultimately, you will condition yourself to believe any lie presented to you.

Just a few days ago, when I restarted this thread, I made it clear that, while prophecy is interesting, and trying to understand what it might mean can be edifying, the ultimate purpose for this is to have people turn to Jesus today. In that post, I said:

I stand by every prediction I made last year, and urge you even more strongly to consider Jesus. No man will save you. No technocrat, no politician, no amount of prepping, nothing will save you but Jesus. YOU will not save you. The best efforts of man will always fall short, as we're seeing now. We are generating misery at an exponential rate.

Follow Jesus.

In case it's not clear, what does that look like? It's really simple. You agree to surrender and end your personal war with God, asking Jesus to forgive you for choosing a sinful life apart from God in the first place, and submitting to Him as Lord, the rightful authority in your life.

If you do this:

He will change you.
He will give you lasting peace with God.
He will NOT abandon you.

I hope you see the clear call I continue to make for people to turn to Jesus today, to do so right now. Everything else is minor. He is major.

I've been consistent since day one in saying that today is the day to turn to Jesus.

I'm glad to keep having discussions with you. I appreciate your passion and your interest. I see a few statements you made that might be worth exploring together, if you'd like. If not, that's completely fine. I think there are areas where you and I might hold some very different beliefs, or just see things differently.

My main question for you, though, is this - how exactly does a person find salvation in Jesus? If you and I can agree on that, we can have all sorts of other discussions about everything else, which is minor by comparison.

I'd rather us not divide on antichrist if we cannot agree on Christ.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

My main question for you, though, is this - how exactly does a person find salvation in Jesus? If you and I can agree on that, we can have all sorts of other discussions about everything else, which is minor by comparison.

I'd rather us not divide on antichrist if we cannot agree on Christ.

The common belief, as i am sure you will agree, is that if you accept Jesus into your heart, and accept him as your savior, then you are saved............

I do share this belief, but with one addition: you must do as he would do. It is not a matter of just accepting Jesus, but living by his example. Through faith, aswell as works.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:12 - King James Version

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

www.biblegateway.com

I cannot find the scriptures that tell the new "commandments" right now as some of the text elude me, but I can.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

I'm not sure where we're not connecting regarding the use of the word "antichrist" as a descriptor that fits multiple people. You've said that and shown Scripture for it. I've said that and shown Scripture for it. We are in complete agreement there.

Where we seem to split on that is on the minor issue as to whether or not people have license to use that term in any other context or manner. I believe that it is appropriate to use it in a proper noun sense to describe the person who will be the ultimate expression of the antichrist attribute; you don't. That's completely fine, and not something that should divide us in any way.

We can even disagree on whether such a man will ever exist, whether he will lead a one-world government, whether there will be a seven year tribulation, whether there will be a rapture, etc. None of that should get in the way of us worshipping Jesus.

For example, on Thursday, I sat in a meeting with pastors from 70 different churches (and three business leaders - I don't know why they invited the three of us, but I'm glad that they did). We were there together for prayer, worship, and mutual support. I attend a non-denominational church, yet my theological background is Baptist, and I sat next to a guy who's from a charismatic/Pentecostal background. We prayed for one another and experienced the unity in Christ together. Likewise, I met a wonderful brother who is Seventh Day Adventist. They hold very strong opinions about worshipping only on Saturdays, which I don't, yet we put all of that aside to focus on the only thing that matters - Jesus.

God was glorified and we were edified in our unity under Jesus.

And as I've said from the first posts I made in this thread, that has been my aim all along. For people who know Jesus already, as I said in my very first post last year: "I hope you'll learn something and maybe get an interest in the subject that helps you understand the Bible and your faith in Jesus more deeply."

And for people who don't know Jesus, I encouraged them as follows: "If you're not a Christian, well, I'd be lying if I said otherwise, but I do hope that this discussion gives you pause to maybe reconsider what you've thought about God, the Bible, and Jesus to date."

I repeat that call to repentance throughout my posts. For instance, several months ago, when I discussed the prophecies regarding Gog/Magog and what they might mean, I wrapped that series of posts by saying: For those of you reading now, I urge you to turn to Him while you can. God's time of patience and grace runs out for each of us who persist as His enemy, be it in our own individual lives or at the end of all things. Do not continue to reject Him and reject the truth, because ultimately, you will condition yourself to believe any lie presented to you.

Just a few days ago, when I restarted this thread, I made it clear that, while prophecy is interesting, and trying to understand what it might mean can be edifying, the ultimate purpose for this is to have people turn to Jesus today. In that post, I said:

I stand by every prediction I made last year, and urge you even more strongly to consider Jesus. No man will save you. No technocrat, no politician, no amount of prepping, nothing will save you but Jesus. YOU will not save you. The best efforts of man will always fall short, as we're seeing now. We are generating misery at an exponential rate.

Follow Jesus.

In case it's not clear, what does that look like? It's really simple. You agree to surrender and end your personal war with God, asking Jesus to forgive you for choosing a sinful life apart from God in the first place, and submitting to Him as Lord, the rightful authority in your life.

If you do this:

He will change you.
He will give you lasting peace with God.
He will NOT abandon you.

I hope you see the clear call I continue to make for people to turn to Jesus today, to do so right now. Everything else is minor. He is major.

I've been consistent since day one in saying that today is the day to turn to Jesus.

I'm glad to keep having discussions with you. I appreciate your passion and your interest. I see a few statements you made that might be worth exploring together, if you'd like. If not, that's completely fine. I think there are areas where you and I might hold some very different beliefs, or just see things differently.

My main question for you, though, is this - how exactly does a person find salvation in Jesus? If you and I can agree on that, we can have all sorts of other discussions about everything else, which is minor by comparison.

I'd rather us not divide on antichrist if we cannot agree on Christ.

As to the whole church on saturday thing..........................the new covenant, which was layed out by Jesus, make the old 10 commandments obsolete. Everyday is "worship day". The seventh day adventists do not recognize the new covenant.

Blood sacrifice of heifers and their ash is obsolete. (which you will see is now in the news)

The rebuilding of the "temple in Israel" thing is all BS. It is a show of antichrist. To stray away from Christ, and return to idolitry.

I fact, all that are reading this conversation we are having.......are in church right this very moment.

Did you know that the Roman Catholic church commandments and the 10 Commandments in the bible are different?

 

[ETNVol]

ok.................................but as to my original question.......................why does John refer to antichrist as plural............??????????? If there is only one being? Understand, the word antichrist is not in revelation.

The word anti-christ is not an end-all-be-all term. The Beast/AC has many names throughout scripture. He's called the Son of Perdition in 2 Thes., a name that Judas was also called. Satan is called "the Devil", and yet there are references to his minions, called "devils".

It appears to me you're attempting to cause strife in Catfish's thread, if so, please leave. Your random facts and opinions you post scattershot as though they have some sort of relevance to the topic are clouding a most important thread.

Re: your post 2 posts above. No. Works has no part in salvation. The work was done by Jesus 2000 years ago. Christ's reward to his believers is based on works, his salvation is not. There is nothing you can ever do to be worthy of salvation, nothing you can ever do to maintain it. Over and over again, God's word makes it plain to us that faith is all that is required on our part for salvation, approximately 250 times in the new testament books, most famously in John 3:16.

Peter preached to Cornelius that "whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins". Paul told the Philippian jailer, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved". Paul told the Ephesians that "after ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise". Their salvation could not possibly be sealed were it dependent on future events. "Sealed" meant the king's mark was on something, it belongs to the King, and no one could remove a seal. It is permanent. And finally, "by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." If we had to work for a gift, it is not a gift. Paul spent much of his ministry spiritually warring against people who tried to add works or a work to the gospel. His response to them was that any gospel other than his was cursed by God.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

look at this passage and compare it to your post,....do you see a difference?

Bible Gateway passage: 2 Thessalonians 2:3 - King James Version

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;

www.biblegateway.com

and then remember

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:18-19 - King James Version

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out...

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Pineapple]

The common belief, as i am sure you will agree, is that if you accept Jesus into your heart, and accept him as your savior, then you are saved............

I do share this belief, but with one addition: you must do as he would do. It is not a matter of just accepting Jesus, but living by his example. Through faith, aswell as works.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:12 - King James Version

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

www.biblegateway.com

I cannot find the scriptures that tell the new "commandments" right now as some of the text elude me, but I can.

No. Works has nothing to do with it. It is not of us. If you are telling people this you are hindering them. Stop it.

 

[catfishpunter]

The common belief, as i am sure you will agree, is that if you accept Jesus into your heart, and accept him as your savior, then you are saved............

I do share this belief, but with one addition: you must do as he would do. It is not a matter of just accepting Jesus, but living by his example. Through faith, aswell as works.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:12 - King James Version

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

www.biblegateway.com

I cannot find the scriptures that tell the new "commandments" right now as some of the text elude me, but I can.

Jesus plus works is a tough position to hold for salvation's sake. It takes the complete work of salvation out of Jesus's hands and puts it back in our hands. Either the work on the cross was sufficient for salvation for those who accept it by faith, or it isn't, and we're all left to wonder if what we've done is enough to merit salvation.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

No. Works has nothing to do with it. It is not of us. If you are telling people this you are hindering them. Stop it.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 20:12-13 - King James Version

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and...

www.biblegateway.com

Understand, that I know and agree that it is not "works based" it is faith based. But faith without works is what???????. These are not my words.

Bible Gateway passage: James 2:26 - King James Version

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[weaponoffreedom]

I go with what it says, and here is why....

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:19 - King James Version

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

www.biblegateway.com

which is linked to the post below

 

[Deleted member 2886]

The common belief, as i am sure you will agree, is that if you accept Jesus into your heart, and accept him as your savior, then you are saved............

I do share this belief, but with one addition: you must do as he would do. It is not a matter of just accepting Jesus, but living by his example. Through faith, aswell as works.

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 22:12 - King James Version

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

www.biblegateway.com

I cannot find the scriptures that tell the new "commandments" right now as some of the text elude me, but I can.

As to the whole church on saturday thing..........................the new covenant, which was layed out by Jesus, make the old 10 commandments obsolete. Everyday is "worship day". The seventh day adventists do not recognize the new covenant.

Blood sacrifice of heifers and their ash is obsolete. (which you will see is now in the news)

The rebuilding of the "temple in Israel" thing is all BS. It is a show of antichrist. To stray away from Christ, and return to idolitry.

I fact, all that are reading this conversation we are having.......are in church right this very moment.

Did you know that the Roman Catholic church commandments and the 10 Commandments in the bible are different?

Jesus plus works is a tough position to hold for salvation's sake. It takes the complete work of salvation out of Jesus's hands and puts it back in our hands. Either the work on the cross was sufficient for salvation for those who accept it by faith, or it isn't, and we're all left to wonder if what we've done is enough to merit salvation.

---

•This is all very difficult to understand,...and considerably moreso due to strategically utilized rhetorical devices;

---

Spoiler

---

•Why has one acted as such?

---

---

•i will address this following quote on it's own and in the same context as it is initially—overtly presented;

---

---

"Jesus plus works is a tough position to hold for salvation's sake."

---

---

•For "salvation's sake", of course,...why should salvation be easy?

---

---

•This is correct?, is it not?

---

---

•Now shifting back to the alternate context, as is implied:

---

Jesus plus works is a tough position to hold for salvation's sake. It takes the complete work of salvation out of Jesus's hands and puts it back in our hands. Either the work on the cross was sufficient for salvation for those who accept it by faith, or it isn't, and we're all left to wonder if what we've done is enough to merit salvation.

---

•Who/how could any mere flesh & blood being ever take anything out of Jesus's hands?

---

---

•Was the work on the cross not done?...how would any man possibly change this?...whether in thought or belief, to do so would be no less than blatant untruth, ain't it?

---

---

•And for what reasons shouldn't we all be left to wonder if what we've done is enough to merit salvation?

---

---

•i can't see why it shouldn't be—at all times foremost in mind body and spirit, and ought to be developed into one's imperative—fundamental motivating principle behind every thought and action in life.

---

---

•Is this too—not faith in our Lord and salvation?

---

---

•Seems it is precisely without this fundamental Christ-"template" established within our entire being, that so-many others have so-easily strayed. For now most of our brothers and sisters are lost in darkness, having so-easily forgotten the Way.

---

---

•Is not it inherently our duty to authentically ask ones-self, what would Jesus do in one's subjective position, and how does ones-self measure up, and then to wilfully act—in accordance with be-ing Chist-likeness?...at all times?

---

---

•PSA:- woah, woah now chill guys, i have said my bit and already see i am unwelcome in this seemingly exclusive corner of TheFreeSpeechForum.com —and so will leave you's to it ok.
[*unless i'm requested.]

---

---

•Catch

 

[Pineapple]

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 20:12-13 - King James Version

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and...

www.biblegateway.com

Understand, that I know and agree that it is not "works based" it is faith based. But faith without works is what???????. These are not my words.

Bible Gateway passage: James 2:26 - King James Version

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

www.biblegateway.com

Because once you have accepted God’s gift, you are called to use the gifts you have been given to further The Kingdom. It’s like being married and not giving any effort. Faith, without works, is dead. Use your spiritual gifts to support the church and spread the Word.

But, it isn’t works that saves. Work is a by product.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Because once you have accepted God’s gift, you are called to use the gifts you have been given to further The Kingdom. It’s like being married and not giving any effort. Faith, without works, is dead. Use your spiritual gifts to support the church and spread the Word.

But, it isn’t works that saves. Work is a by product.

Understood, it is not the works, but the combination of the two.................there is not salvation without faith, and faith without works is dead, as the books says. What is there to disagree with???????????????????????

 

[Pineapple]

Understood, it is not the works, but the combination of the two.................there is not salvation without faith, and faith without works is dead, as the books says. What is there to disagree with???????????????????????

Where were the works of the man on the cross? Show me where the Bible says you must have works to be saved? It’s like baptism. You should do so as a public demonstration of your faith. But, it isn’t required to be saved.

“God's Word says that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ Jesus and not by our own efforts or works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Grace Alone. Faith Alone. Grace alone means that God loves, forgives, and saves us not because of who we are or what we do, but because of the work of Christ.”

You should do works. You should be baptized. You should tithe. You should serve with your gifts. But, that is between you and God. And nothing other than the above is required to receive salvation.

If you agree there then we don’t disagree. If you believe you must do works then you have found our disagreement.

 

[Old Glory]

Where were the works of the man on the cross? Show me where the Bible says you must have works to be saved? It’s like baptism. You should do so as a public demonstration of your faith. But, it isn’t required to be saved.

“God's Word says that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ Jesus and not by our own efforts or works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Grace Alone. Faith Alone. Grace alone means that God loves, forgives, and saves us not because of who we are or what we do, but because of the work of Christ.”

You should do works. You should be baptized. You should tithe. You should serve with your gifts. But, that is between you and God. And nothing other than the above is required to receive salvation.

If you agree there then we don’t disagree. If you believe you must do works then you have found our disagreement.

Saw a tik tok that said if there is a pre tribulation rapture, after that event it will be faith and works because you will have to believe in Jesus and refuse the mark, refuse worship of the AC, etc. I’m not sure if that’s biblical or not but certainly an interesting thought.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

I'm not sure where we're not connecting regarding the use of the word "antichrist" as a descriptor that fits multiple people. You've said that and shown Scripture for it. I've said that and shown Scripture for it. We are in complete agreement there.

Where we seem to split on that is on the minor issue as to whether or not people have license to use that term in any other context or manner. I believe that it is appropriate to use it in a proper noun sense to describe the person who will be the ultimate expression of the antichrist attribute; you don't. That's completely fine, and not something that should divide us in any way.

We can even disagree on whether such a man will ever exist, whether he will lead a one-world government, whether there will be a seven year tribulation, whether there will be a rapture, etc. None of that should get in the way of us worshipping Jesus.

For example, on Thursday, I sat in a meeting with pastors from 70 different churches (and three business leaders - I don't know why they invited the three of us, but I'm glad that they did). We were there together for prayer, worship, and mutual support. I attend a non-denominational church, yet my theological background is Baptist, and I sat next to a guy who's from a charismatic/Pentecostal background. We prayed for one another and experienced the unity in Christ together. Likewise, I met a wonderful brother who is Seventh Day Adventist. They hold very strong opinions about worshipping only on Saturdays, which I don't, yet we put all of that aside to focus on the only thing that matters - Jesus.

God was glorified and we were edified in our unity under Jesus.

And as I've said from the first posts I made in this thread, that has been my aim all along. For people who know Jesus already, as I said in my very first post last year: "I hope you'll learn something and maybe get an interest in the subject that helps you understand the Bible and your faith in Jesus more deeply."

And for people who don't know Jesus, I encouraged them as follows: "If you're not a Christian, well, I'd be lying if I said otherwise, but I do hope that this discussion gives you pause to maybe reconsider what you've thought about God, the Bible, and Jesus to date."

I repeat that call to repentance throughout my posts. For instance, several months ago, when I discussed the prophecies regarding Gog/Magog and what they might mean, I wrapped that series of posts by saying: For those of you reading now, I urge you to turn to Him while you can. God's time of patience and grace runs out for each of us who persist as His enemy, be it in our own individual lives or at the end of all things. Do not continue to reject Him and reject the truth, because ultimately, you will condition yourself to believe any lie presented to you.

Just a few days ago, when I restarted this thread, I made it clear that, while prophecy is interesting, and trying to understand what it might mean can be edifying, the ultimate purpose for this is to have people turn to Jesus today. In that post, I said:

I stand by every prediction I made last year, and urge you even more strongly to consider Jesus. No man will save you. No technocrat, no politician, no amount of prepping, nothing will save you but Jesus. YOU will not save you. The best efforts of man will always fall short, as we're seeing now. We are generating misery at an exponential rate.

Follow Jesus.

In case it's not clear, what does that look like? It's really simple. You agree to surrender and end your personal war with God, asking Jesus to forgive you for choosing a sinful life apart from God in the first place, and submitting to Him as Lord, the rightful authority in your life.

If you do this:

He will change you.
He will give you lasting peace with God.
He will NOT abandon you.

I hope you see the clear call I continue to make for people to turn to Jesus today, to do so right now. Everything else is minor. He is major.

I've been consistent since day one in saying that today is the day to turn to Jesus.

I'm glad to keep having discussions with you. I appreciate your passion and your interest. I see a few statements you made that might be worth exploring together, if you'd like. If not, that's completely fine. I think there are areas where you and I might hold some very different beliefs, or just see things differently.

My main question for you, though, is this - how exactly does a person find salvation in Jesus? If you and I can agree on that, we can have all sorts of other discussions about everything else, which is minor by comparison.

I'd rather us not divide on antichrist if we cannot agree on Christ.

I would rather show those the right thing, than half the wrong thing. That is what spreading the WORD is about.

Where were the works of the man on the cross? Show me where the Bible says you must have works to be saved? It’s like baptism. You should do so as a public demonstration of your faith. But, it isn’t required to be saved.

“God's Word says that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ Jesus and not by our own efforts or works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Grace Alone. Faith Alone. Grace alone means that God loves, forgives, and saves us not because of who we are or what we do, but because of the work of Christ.”

You should do works. You should be baptized. You should tithe. You should serve with your gifts. But, that is between you and God. And nothing other than the above is required to receive salvation.

If you agree there then we don’t disagree. If you believe you must do works then you have found our disagreement.

I have shown that the bible says faith without works is dead............meaning you must have faith first.
Agrreeeeeeeeeed. Faith in heart, works to show your faith...........and by works I do not mean being nice.............simply put, to believe in Christ is to do what he would do, just like the timeless saying "what would Jesus do?" Yes, you get it. If you really believe, then the works show it, but not becasue you want to go to heaven, becasue you want to be better, like Christ.

As to the other fella on the cross, he accepted, and truly repented (repentance is a work) then was all good in the hood !

Baptism is obsolete, cant hurt, but obsolete. Has been since the Christ died.

 

[Densel]

It's not relevant, at least not today. I used to listen to "Prophecy Today" on the Rock Radio Network becuse it seemed interesting at the time but I did a little research and found out that what they told me wasn't even in the Bible. It was total fake news. Maybe someday it'll come true but right now I don't see it. And though I find most of the things on the Rock Radio Network to be trustworthy I don't recommend "Prophecy Today" its not a trustworthy source.

 

[ETNVol]

Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 20:12-13 - King James Version

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and...

www.biblegateway.com

Understand, that I know and agree that it is not "works based" it is faith based. But faith without works is what???????. These are not my words.

Bible Gateway passage: James 2:26 - King James Version

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

www.biblegateway.com

Dead does not mean nonexistent. Lazarus was dead, was he nonexistent? Dead means it's of no use for God's work.

James is not answering the questions of salvation for his readers, he's speaking to the importance of working for God, which they evidently were not doing. You're using his words to answer a question that isn't being asked. The concept of salvation is only referred to a few times in the entire book. James is telling believers how to live. Evidenced by the fact that in spite of all the ways James' audience was falling short in working for God, he still called them "brethren".

To say works has any part in salvation, which you have repeatedly done above, is heresy.

 

[ETNVol]

Saw a tik tok that said if there is a pre tribulation rapture, after that event it will be faith and works because you will have to believe in Jesus and refuse the mark, refuse worship of the AC, etc. I’m not sure if that’s biblical or not but certainly an interesting thought.

I don't believe so. It's always been faith. Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Whosoever believeth in Jesus should not perish, but have everlasting life. Faith before the cross, faith after the cross. To change that in the final moments of the age of man wouldn't seem logical.

I cannot prove it by scripture, so this is opinion, but spiritually, I think someone who becomes a believer in the Tribulation will be made incapable of taking the mark. The agents of evil could force someone to take it. Though God isn't going to hold people accountable for something someone else did, they would still have his mark, it seems to me God would not permit that abomination. We don't really know what it is, but I think the mark will change who people are: their DNA, their soul, their mind, maybe even their appearance.

We're told in Daniel that the devil and his AC will be blocked from killing the remnant of Israel by the archangel Michael. The AC won't be able to get to them (those who fled and hid, as described by Jesus in Matt. 24), so as we're told in Revelation, in his fury he'll go to make war with the remnant of her (Israel's) seed.

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

Perhaps, just as Michael supernaturally (empowered by God; I don't mean to suggest that Michael could do that of his own accord) prevents satan from killing those specific Israelites, God will put a barrier, a spiritual mark, maybe even a visible mark on believers - as he did with the 144,000 - so that they're incapable of accepting the mark, and, likewise, this prevents satan's minions from forcing it on someone. But that's just conjecture, I don't think anyone truly knows.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Dead does not mean nonexistent. Lazarus was dead, was he nonexistent? Dead means it's of no use for God's work.

James is not answering the questions of salvation for his readers, he's speaking to the importance of working for God, which they evidently were not doing. You're using his words to answer a question that isn't being asked. The concept of salvation is only referred to a few times in the entire book. James is telling believers how to live. Evidenced by the fact that in spite of all the ways James' audience was falling short in working for God, he still called them "brethren".

To say works has any part in salvation, which you have repeatedly done above, is heresy.

ok, good luck

 

[ETNVol]

ok, good luck

There is no such thing as luck. There is the word of God. Which couldn't be more clear on the subject.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Not of works, lest any man should boast.