christ_undivided
Well-known member
The mark may well not be "666". It might just be 616 or 646. Either way, many books have been sold with elaborate explanations that didn't help.
Who Else (Non-KJVO) Does Not Believe There Will Be An Antichrist?
- Thread starter AntiMason
- Start date
The mark may well not be "666". It might just be 616 or 646. Either way, many books have been sold with elaborate explanations that didn't help.
Actually Shoonra, the practice of “pinning the tail on the antichrist” is a 20th century fundamentalist habit…..resulting from the decades-long indoctrination into Futurism by the likes of Lahaye, Lindsey, Van Impe, etc.
Futurist prophecies never come to pass, thus, every generation is forced to “upgrade” their candidate for the antichrist in order for the false teachers to avoid detection as false teachers, and to keep selling their books.
Until the 17th century, when the Jesuit Alcasar put out the very first Preterist commentary, Christianity had been unanimous that:
1. The pagan Roman Empire was the restrainer of 2 Thes. 2, the expected fall of which would usher in the man of sin.
2. The Papal Roman empire was the fulfillment of the prophecies concerning the man of sin, the beast from the sea, the whore of Babylon, or all of the above.
Did you look up what “Vicar of Christ” means?
Did you find any of those papal decrees or RCC councils to examine?
Futurist prophecies never come to pass, thus, every generation is forced to “upgrade” their candidate for the antichrist in order for the false teachers to avoid detection as false teachers, and to keep selling their books.
Until the 17th century, when the Jesuit Alcasar put out the very first Preterist commentary, Christianity had been unanimous that:
1. The pagan Roman Empire was the restrainer of 2 Thes. 2, the expected fall of which would usher in the man of sin.
2. The Papal Roman empire was the fulfillment of the prophecies concerning the man of sin, the beast from the sea, the whore of Babylon, or all of the above.
Did you look up what “Vicar of Christ” means?
Did you find any of those papal decrees or RCC councils to examine?
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
Lol, any argument will do against God’s word even false ones.
Is the following God’s inspired word:
Genesis 7:22 KJV
All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
Or is THIS God’s inspired word:
NKJV:
All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, all that was on the dry land, died.
Name a few.
Such as?
Which is to be expected. Do you actually think she would acknowledge being the fulfillment of any of the prophecies concerning the beast, antichrist, or man of sin? Of course not, which is why two of her soldiers put out competing commentaries that located antichrist in the past and future, but never in the present.
Can I assume by your non-response to my questions that you haven’t sought out and read the two papal decrees I suggested, nor the Councils of Lateran IV and Toulouse?
Can I also assume that you haven’t looked up the meaning of one of the Pope’s titles: i.e., Vicar of Christ?
Give me your own explanation and demonstration of what it is you are referring to. I don't want links and I'm not going to buy an article that militates against you and proves my point anyway.
Is that the ONLY question of mine you plan on attempting to answer?
Are you going to search out and read any of the documents that I recommended, after you specifically asked for guidance on the interpretation of certain portions of the book of Revelation?
Let me help you on the Vicar of Christ question.
Vicar and Anti are synonymous.
Vicar means "in the place of" or "substitute."
Anti means "against" or "in the place of."
Vicar of Christ means "in the place of Christ."
Antichrist means "against Christ" or "in the place of Christ." (Futurist authors themselves make this very same point when trying to explain how their future antichrist won't arrive in a militant fashion but peacefully)
Thus, when the Pope calls himself the Vicar of Christ, he is actually calling himself the ANTICHRIST. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. The Papacy and RCC have used the Bible's own nomenclature from the book of Revelation many times in their own documents and decrees, almost as if they were daring Christians at large to make the obvious connection and identification.
Vicar and Anti are synonymous.
Vicar means "in the place of" or "substitute."
Anti means "against" or "in the place of."
Vicar of Christ means "in the place of Christ."
Antichrist means "against Christ" or "in the place of Christ." (Futurist authors themselves make this very same point when trying to explain how their future antichrist won't arrive in a militant fashion but peacefully)
Thus, when the Pope calls himself the Vicar of Christ, he is actually calling himself the ANTICHRIST. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. The Papacy and RCC have used the Bible's own nomenclature from the book of Revelation many times in their own documents and decrees, almost as if they were daring Christians at large to make the obvious connection and identification.
I don't see any benefit in indulging in Catholic-baiting.
I could not find your imaginative translation of "anti" in any of my Latin dictionaries. And I will remind you that the manuscripts that make up the "Majority Text" and the Textus Receptus were preserved and maintained by Roman Catholic institutions.
I could not find your imaginative translation of "anti" in any of my Latin dictionaries. And I will remind you that the manuscripts that make up the "Majority Text" and the Textus Receptus were preserved and maintained by Roman Catholic institutions.
Last edited:
Are you kidding me? So you were lying when you said you needed guidance then. What you meant was that you needed affirmation of things you already believe.
What’s “Catholic-baiting” about anything I wrote in this thread?
You asked for guidance. I’ve attempted to give it to you, but you simply refuse to take any of my suggestions.
I believe, with a majority of Christendom over the last 8 centuries, that the RCC and her head are the fulfillment of scripture.
I’m not baiting anyone. I’m saying certain prophecies have been fulfilled for a long time and the teachers in the professing church aren’t screaming it from the rooftops.
Let me get this straight: if prophecy points to any religious denomination, you won’t entertain such an idea at all, because “baiting” blah blah (to quote someone else here).
The entire subject of the man of sin and the beasts of Revelation are religious in nature! So why such a reluctance to admit the prophecies actually point to one particular religious system?
Who must the antichrist be in your mind, before you decide alerting your brothers and sisters to his or it’s arrival is worth the flack you might receive for “baiting?”
Can we EVER scream from the rooftops that the antichrist is here (whenever you deem that time to have come)?
And Greek Orthodox.
Why are you trying to paint me as a deceiver? My definition isn’t “imaginative.”
Who said anything about looking it up in a Latin dictionary? Antichristos in the NT is a GREEK word.
Are you really denying the definition of the word “anti” that I’ve given? Every Christian author who has written on the subject has accepted the standard definition of “against” or “in the place of.” For you to say that definition is “imaginative” only shows how unread you are on the topic.
It seems you’re actively doing everything you can to protect the RCC and her Pope. Why? Their own words, teachings, and history betray them as the fulfillment of prophecy, but you won’t hear it and you refuse to look at the documents, before declaring me a “Catholic baiter.”
If the Baptist church or Presbyterian church answered to the prophecies in the books of Revelation and 2 Thessalonians concerning the beast and man of sin, I’d be saying the same thing.
You asked for guidance, then refused it when it was given.
I didn’t say you had to agree with me about anything. I merely suggested you read those 2 decrees and 2 councils (believe me, there’s much, much more that I can provide) to give my position a fair hearing!
You can no longer claim ignorance.
Which means your accountability in the matter has changed.
And?
Everything that follows “but” is irrelevant.
christ_undivided
Well-known member
"AntiChrist" is unique to the apostle John. It is a compound word. Did you take a look at Liddell and Scott for base words?
And BDAG:
ἀντί prep. w. gen. (Hom.+; for lit. s. on ἀνά, beg.); orig. mng. local, ‘opposite’, then of various types of correspondence ranging from replacement to equivalence. A marker
① indicating that one person or thing is, or is to be, replaced by another, instead of, in place of