The Greatest Mysteries in Daniel and Revelation
Adamas
news:3d08...@sys13.hou.wt.net...
> The historicist scholar George Eldon Ladd says that the three cycles of
> judgment--seven seals, seven trumpets and seven last plagues--is the
> greatest mystery in the book of Revelation. I believe the greatest mystery
> in the book of Daniel is that the end of all things was scheduled to occur
> just after the reign of four kingdoms (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome)
> yet there is an appointed time of the end at the latter end of Greek rule
> (Da 8:17,19).
>
> I believe I understand all these mysteries. How do you explain them?
>
I'll give it a crack!
Unlike you, but more like Daniel, I do not claim to have all understanding.
I rely heavily on the scriptures for my understanding.
I acknowledge some people do claim to have independent sources and some even
claim direct revelation. Both do not need the Bible for all their answers.
For me the Bible is sort of like a mystery book where the author has left
clues in many chapters. You have to check out the whole book to get the full
story. Any explanations of any one part must fit with the full story. If any
explanation of prophecy is not consistent with the whole Bible I tend to be
sceptical of the explanation and the claims of the person offering it.
I believe I have correctly answered your question about understanding
mysteries. So what methodology do you use to explain them?
Eugene Shubert
explained anything in the Biblical text.
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Adamas
which deleted everything previous to todays items. I know I responded to
this post so this may be addressed to me. Apologies if I am wrong)
I read your original post as a troll. You said you understood everything
about the subject and from that stated position were inviting others to
comment so you could tell them your version. I read your intention was to
"teach" others from your own intransigence and not to discuss it openly with
an open mind.
However, you actually asked how others arrived at their conclusions. It may
have been a poor use of the English language but you did not ask what their
conclusions were, simply how they got there. I responded in like troll
fashion by explaining my methodology in arriving at my unstated position.
Now then. Are you seriously interested in discussing this subject in a
spirit of open mindedness free from judgementalism and prejudice, accepting
that you do not possess all knowledge?
If so, on that basis I would be interested in sharing and learning.
Otherwise - no thanks.
"Eugene Shubert" <eug...@everythingimportant.org> wrote in message
news:3d0df00e$1...@sys13.hou.wt.net...
Eugene Shubert
The historicist scholar George Eldon Ladd says that the three cycles of
judgment--seven seals, seven trumpets and seven last plagues--is the
greatest mystery in the book of Revelation. I believe the greatest mystery
in the book of Daniel is that the end of all things was scheduled to occur
just after the reign of four kingdoms (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome)
yet there is an appointed time of the end at the latter end of Greek rule
(Da 8:17,19).
I believe I understand all these mysteries. How do you explain them?
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
You replied:
I'll give it a crack!
Unlike you, but more like Daniel, I do not claim to have all understanding.
I rely heavily on the scriptures for my understanding.
I acknowledge some people do claim to have independent sources and some even
claim direct revelation. Both do not need the Bible for all their answers.
For me the Bible is sort of like a mystery book where the author has left
clues in many chapters. You have to check out the whole book to get the full
story. Any explanations of any one part must fit with the full story. If any
explanation of prophecy is not consistent with the whole Bible I tend to be
sceptical of the explanation and the claims of the person offering it.
I believe I have correctly answered your question about understanding
mysteries. So what methodology do you use to explain them?
"Adamas" wrote:
: (Bother! - I went to compact my folders and clicked on the wrong button
: >
: >
: >
:
:
Eugene Shubert
:
:
I did not claim to have all understanding. My claim is that I understand
those mysteries. I did not ask about mysteries in general. I asked about
specific mysteries. I didn't want to explain my understanding of the
mysteries until the reader realized that he didn't have any answers. My
understanding came from God:
http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=34
Adamas
> I said:
>
> The historicist scholar George Eldon Ladd says that the three cycles of
> judgment--seven seals, seven trumpets and seven last plagues--is the
> greatest mystery in the book of Revelation. I believe the greatest mystery
> in the book of Daniel is that the end of all things was scheduled to occur
> just after the reign of four kingdoms (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome)
> yet there is an appointed time of the end at the latter end of Greek rule
> (Da 8:17,19).
I acknowledge that you find things in the Bible a mystery to you. It is good
that you are searching. There is some conflict in your staement on the one
hand that these are mysteries to you and on the other hand that you claim to
have full understanding of them.
It is possible you are a young Christian with a zeal for God? If you are
such a young believer, please be careful about making claims about
possessing superior knowledge as you appear to do. (check 1 Timothy 3:6 ).
Such claims are typically the prideful domain of the cults and sects of
religion but have no place in God.
I understand the excitement of gaining a personal revelation into an aspect
of God's infinite Word and the desire to share that knowledge. However be
careful not to allow pride to creep in. Remember there have been many before
you who have considered these scriptures and who also have had their
personal revelations. It is not good to despise the faith of others by
claiming exclusive understanding of aspects of Gods Word. Better to tread
lightly and proceed slowly in humility.
Ecclesiastes 7:8 Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof:
and the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit.
Especially do not put your trust in the revelations of self styled
"experts".
Jeremiah 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man,
and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.
The walk with Christ is a personal one and that life is lived by faith..
Learn to put your trust in Him first and He will bring your life into order
until you develop the attributes of His son.(Romans 8:29). That is the real
priority.
Keeping it all in perspective:
Hebrews 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who
for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame,
and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
>
> I believe I understand all these mysteries. How do you explain them?
>
> Eugene Shubert
> http://www.everythingimportant.org
>
>
>
> You replied:
> p
Eugene Shubert
:
: "Eugene Shubert" wrote:
: > I said:
: >
: > The historicist scholar George Eldon Ladd says that the three cycles of
: > judgment--seven seals, seven trumpets and seven last plagues--is the
: > greatest mystery in the book of Revelation. I believe the greatest
mystery
: > in the book of Daniel is that the end of all things was scheduled to
occur
: > just after the reign of four kingdoms (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece,
Rome)
: > yet there is an appointed time of the end at the latter end of Greek
rule
: > (Da 8:17,19).
:
: I acknowledge that you find things in the Bible a mystery to you. It is
good
: that you are searching. There is some conflict in your staement on the one
: hand that these are mysteries to you and on the other hand that you claim
to
: have full understanding of them.
Brother,
There is no conflict in my statement. If you were familiar with the NT, you
would know that the deep things of God are called mysteries and that the
saints understand mysteries.
Consider the following proof:
Romans 11:25
I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may
not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full
number of the Gentiles has come in.
Romans 16:25
Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of
Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long
ages past,
1 Corinthians 2:1
When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior
wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. [ 2:1 Some
manuscripts as I proclaimed to you God's mystery]
1 Corinthians 15:51
Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be
changed
Ephesians 1:9
And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good
pleasure, which he purposed in Christ,
Ephesians 3:3
that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already
written briefly.
Ephesians 3:4
In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the
mystery of Christ,
Ephesians 3:6
This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with
Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in
Christ Jesus.
Ephesians 3:9
and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for
ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.
Ephesians 5:32
This is a profound mystery-but I am talking about Christ and the church.
Ephesians 6:19
Pray also for me, that whenever I open my mouth, words may be given me so
that I will fearlessly make known the mystery of the gospel,
Colossians 1:26
the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now
disclosed to the saints.
Colossians 1:27
To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches
of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
Colossians 2:2
My purpose is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so
that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that
they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ,
Colossians 4:3
And pray for us, too, that God may open a door for our message, so that we
may proclaim the mystery of Christ, for which I am in chains.
1 Timothy 3:16
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a
body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among
the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.
Revelation 1:20
The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and of the
seven golden lampstands is this: The seven stars are the angels of the seven
churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.
Revelation 10:7
But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the
mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants
the prophets."
Revelation 17:5
This title was written on her forehead: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER
OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
Revelation 17:7
Then the angel said to me: "Why are you astonished? I will explain to you
the mystery of the woman and of the beast she rides, which has the seven
heads and ten horns. "
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Eugene Shubert
:
: It is possible you are a young Christian with a zeal for God? If you are
: such a young believer, please be careful about making claims about
: possessing superior knowledge as you appear to do. (check 1 Timothy 3:6 ).
: Such claims are typically the prideful domain of the cults and sects of
: religion but have no place in God.
And my advice to you is:
"Do not quench the Spirit; do not despise prophetic utterances. But examine
everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good." 1 Thessalonians
5:19-21.
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Eugene Shubert
:
: Remember there have been many before
: you who have considered these scriptures and who also have had their
: personal revelations. It is not good to despise the faith of others by
: claiming exclusive understanding of aspects of Gods Word.
I do not despise the faith of others. If a respected Bible scholar confesses
his ignorance about a mystery I understand, how it that despising the faith
of others? I think it's arrogant of you to assume that my understanding isn'
t exclusive when all evidence indicates that you don't even know what I'm
talking about. Do you despise prophetic utterances?
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Terry
Not too long ago my bible study group covered the Book of The Revelation.
I thought that the book of Daniel and the book of The Revelation were
obviously reffering to the same event and that it was an event that
was yet to be seen (for the most part). Most of the group didn't see
the connection. I thought it was obvious.
Notice the beast with ten horns in Dan 7:7 and the Dragon with ten horns
in Rev 12:3. there is no way this is a coincedence.
We should discuss this in detail gentlmen. I have some ideas to throw
in as soon as I dig out the details. I hope to hear more from both of
you on this subject.
Terry
Adamas
"Terry" <ter...@northstate.net> wrote in message
news:ugvp562...@corp.supernews.com...
Oh OK Terry. But that's pretty basic stuff. Jesus already explained it. Are
we really going back to kindergarten? How about starting with the four faces
of Israel or something a bit more deep and challenging?
One thought: The three of us here so far all come from different cultures
within the Christian genre. Each of us has a different dictionary of
christian english. How are we going to understand each other and avoid
misunderstanding each other?.
Adamas
Here you are playing word games in the attempt to force your will. This is a
christian bible study newsgroup. These things are not mysteries to
Christians because the Holy Spirit is their teacher now. Jesus explains
these mysteries for the benefit of the saints. Sometimes by parables,
sometimes in plain language and sometimes by types and symbols. His sheep
hear His voice. They are "mysteries" only to those outside of Christ who are
not His sheep. It was designed to be this way.
By saying that Christians here do not understand these mysteries, and that
you do, you are implying that the people here are not Christians but that
you represent the real truth and we had better listen to you. You claim that
you alone have been blessed with the ability to interpret His Word. You do
not give us the option to consider and discuss your opinion. You claim
direct prophetic revelation from God. In reality your webpage shows you have
given your allegiance to the spirit of Ellen G. White and any interpretation
you present will reflect her views. Basically you are trapped within fringe
religion.It is difficult to accept that God talks to His sheep from such a
location.
If you want to change your approach and just offer your understanding of the
scriptures which interest you then put them up for public scrutiny. This
will protect you from the curse which goes with private interpretation. If
you have some good ideas which stack up in the Bible, I for one will say so
and accept what you say.
Eugene Shubert
:
: "Terry" wrote:
: >
: > Hi Guys
: > Not too long ago my bible study group covered the Book of The
Revelation.
: > I thought that the book of Daniel and the book of The Revelation were
: > obviously reffering to the same event and that it was an event that
: > was yet to be seen (for the most part). Most of the group didn't see
: > the connection. I thought it was obvious.
: > Notice the beast with ten horns in Dan 7:7 and the Dragon with ten horns
: > in Rev 12:3. there is no way this is a coincedence.
: > We should discuss this in detail gentlmen. I have some ideas to throw
: > in as soon as I dig out the details. I hope to hear more from both of
: > you on this subject.
: >
: > Terry
:
: Oh OK Terry. But that's pretty basic stuff. Jesus already explained it.
Are
: we really going back to kindergarten? How about starting with the four
faces
: of Israel or something a bit more deep and challenging?
:
: One thought: The three of us here so far all come from different cultures
: within the Christian genre. Each of us has a different dictionary of
: christian english. How are we going to understand each other and avoid
: misunderstanding each other?
A logical starting point would be for us to explain the entire book of
Daniel in one brief summary statement.
Do any of you even have a concept of the big picture? I propose that each of
us present their individual attempt to explain the interrelationship between
all of the prophetic dreams and visions of Daniel. Here's my summary:
http://www.everythingimportant.org/seventhdayAdventists/eschatology5.htm
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Eugene Shubert
:
: Here you are playing word games in the attempt to force your will.
You have accused me of being contradictory. I have explained that my
language is identical to that of the NT. You now accuse me of using force.
It is purely the force of Scripture. Rejoice and be glad; I have more truth
to share with you.
: This is a
: christian bible study newsgroup. These things are not mysteries to
: Christians because the Holy Spirit is their teacher now. Jesus explains
: these mysteries for the benefit of the saints. Sometimes by parables,
: sometimes in plain language and sometimes by types and symbols. His sheep
: hear His voice. They are "mysteries" only to those outside of Christ who
are
: not His sheep. It was designed to be this way.
The historicist scholar George Eldon Ladd says that the three cycles of
judgment--seven seals, seven trumpets and seven last plagues--is the
a mystery to him.
:
: By saying that Christians here do not understand these mysteries, and that
: you do, you are implying that the people here are not Christians
I have implied no such thing. I believe George Eldon Ladd is a Christian. I
don't doubt his sincerity. If you understand the mysteries he mentioned,
please explain them.
: you represent the real truth and we had better listen to you.
Correct. Bu if God speaks to you and you understand all mysteries, then
there's no reason to believe that I can teach you anything.
: You claim that
: you alone have been blessed with the ability to interpret His Word.
I deny your allegation.
:You do
: not give us the option to consider and discuss your opinion.
Sure I do.
You claim
: direct prophetic revelation from God.
I claim revelation from God. That is correct.
: In reality your webpage shows you have
: given your allegiance to the spirit of Ellen G. White and any
interpretation
: you present will reflect her views.
My understanding is different than that of Ellen G. White. She would call it
new light.
: Basically you are trapped within fringe
: religion. It is difficult to accept that God talks to His sheep from such
a
: location.
Seventh-day Adventism is equal to first century Judaism. Not only can God
talk to the Jews; his messengers can be Jews.
: If you want to change your approach and just offer your understanding of
the
: scriptures which interest you then put them up for public scrutiny.
My view on prophecy is open for public scrutiny. See
http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=128
http://www.everythingimportant.org/seventhdayAdventists/eschatologyIndex.htm
: This
: will protect you from the curse which goes with private interpretation. If
: you have some good ideas which stack up in the Bible, I for one will say
so
: and accept what you say.
: It is unreasonable for me to also expect an apology from you as well as
your endorsement?
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Terry
"Adamas" <mi...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message news:3d10...@clear.net.nz...
Do you mean Mathew 24 and 25? I guess that He did tell us all that we
really need to know in these chapters.
> Are
> we really going back to kindergarten? How about starting with the four
faces
> of Israel or something a bit more deep and challenging?
OK give us your thoughts.
> One thought: The three of us here so far all come from different cultures
> within the Christian genre. Each of us has a different dictionary of
> christian english. How are we going to understand each other and avoid
> misunderstanding each other?.
We will have to be specific.
I live in the United States in the state of North Carolina.
I am a member of a Methodist Church but I also like to visit
the Local Baptist Churches.
What are your backgrounds?
Eugene Shubert
:
: What are your backgrounds?
My background is Seventh-day Adventist.
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Adamas
I also like Micah 6:8
>
> > Are
> > we really going back to kindergarten? How about starting with the four
> faces
> > of Israel or something a bit more deep and challenging?
>
> OK give us your thoughts.
That was just a "for instance". I have no wish to dominate the discussion.
There was a third person who had something to say and who started this whole
thread trying so hard to get our attention. Now he has succeeded, how about
we let him have his say and then discuss his ideas?
> > One thought: The three of us here so far all come from different
cultures
> > within the Christian genre. Each of us has a different dictionary of
> > christian english. How are we going to understand each other and avoid
> > misunderstanding each other?.
>
> We will have to be specific.
> I live in the United States in the state of North Carolina.
> I am a member of a Methodist Church but I also like to visit
> the Local Baptist Churches.
> What are your backgrounds?
>
I live in the deep south of New Zealand. I had had no access to "system"
religion of any kind when I discovered through reading the Bible that I was
a Son of God who had been Redeemed. My life has been lived away from contact
with denominational religion. I don't really understand religion or why
anyone would need it. I think a lot of people place their religion higher
than God. I do enjoy discussion which focusses on God's Word with people who
just love Him as first priority in their lives.
Adamas
Go back to the original thread where you have already been invited to share
your conviction and let us see what you have got.
People here will soon let you know.
"Eugene Shubert" <eug...@everythingimportant.org> wrote in message
news:3d10...@sys13.hou.wt.net...
Adamas
himself.
Go back to the one thread where you have been invited to share what you
wanted to say...
Bye from here.
"Eugene Shubert" <eug...@everythingimportant.org> wrote in message
news:3d10...@sys13.hou.wt.net...
Terry
a friend in high school and some neighbors who were adventists.
When I was a kid I thought it looked odd to see them working in the
feilds on sunday. Tell me about your beliefs. In what way does an adventist
differ from other churches? I am particularly interested in what you believe
about Jesus. Don't just say we believe in Jesus and leave it at that. What
exactly do you believe about Jesus. Tell me what He means to you.
We can get back to Daniel or the four faces in a few days.
Terry
--
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish;
and no one will snatch them out of My hand."
The Lord of Lords
Terry
"Adamas" <mi...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message news:3d11...@clear.net.nz...
One thing about you Adamas your discussions are always bible
related and you never get into denominational feuds, thats cool.
Being denominational is not as bad as it sounds. The purpose is
to hold on to the word of the Lord and not allow it to be corrupted
by false teachings. A lot of denominations hold nearly the same beliefs
anyway.
I admit that it would be nice to go back to the church as it was in
the book of acts, with no denominations, just a pure devotion
to Christ. But there seems to be a worldwide assault on the name
of Jesus, attempts to ridicule or corrupt the word are everywhere.
So we try to stand firm within our denominations.
When you say "the four faces of israel" are you reffering to the
beings with four faces from the book of Ezekiel?
Adamas
>
> So you live in New Zealand. Do you raise cattle?
I have raised a bit of Cain in my day. I am basically retired now as far as
anyone ever gets to retire.
> One thing about you Adamas your discussions are always bible
> related and you never get into denominational feuds, thats cool.
> Being denominational is not as bad as it sounds. The purpose is
> to hold on to the word of the Lord and not allow it to be corrupted
> by false teachings. A lot of denominations hold nearly the same beliefs
> anyway.
> I admit that it would be nice to go back to the church as it was in
> the book of acts, with no denominations, just a pure devotion
> to Christ. But there seems to be a worldwide assault on the name
> of Jesus, attempts to ridicule or corrupt the word are everywhere.
> So we try to stand firm within our denominations.
> When you say "the four faces of israel" are you reffering to the
> beings with four faces from the book of Ezekiel?
Religion teaches that we were not His children but that He had compassion on
us and adopts us into His family if we will only accept His offer. I
compared this to the natural family strucure which God has set up for
mankind and I know that I am my Fathers own Son. I was never a child of an
alien up for adoption by the father which religion offers me. For this
reason I now believe religion of any kind is a deception which robs us of
our rightful inheritance in God by conditioning us to believe that we are
not who we really are: God's Sons and Daughters. I believe God loves His
kids regardless of the situations they have chosen for themselves. You
continue to love your kids no matter what they get up to because you
understand them.
The "four faces" were the brigade emblems by which they assembled. The
tribes were grouped by threes in a square formation according to the points
of the compass for marching, camping and fighting. The hollwood image of a
rag-tag bunch of stragglers wandering the desert is quite wrong.. One tribe
on each side of the square was the designated leader. The symbols of these
leading four tribes were the four faces. You probably read the places where
it refers to them camping and assembling by their "standards" without
realising the wondeful truths that word concealed. In fact they had a very
disciplined regime of camping and marching which gave them military
superiority over their adversaries. In terms of military strategy for those
times they were practically invincible.
But I didn't really want to get into that right now as it requires a
certain level of detailed knowledge of scripture history (not superior!). I
was hoping to hear the words of wisdom from the person who started this
thread and claims to understand Daniel in a way that nobody else can.
> Terry
> --
>
> "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
> and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish;
> and no one will snatch them out of My hand."
>
> The Lord of Lords
His Sons and Daughters are always going to be His kids in His eyes, no
matter what they think they believe about Him. The only options open to us
are to be obedient or disobedient kids but nothing we can do is capable of
separating us from the love of our Heavenly Father. (Rom 8:38,39).
Adamas
1) A friend and I went to a service in a local SDA church one Saturday. We
went just the one time out of curiosity. To my surprise, after the meeting
we were invited to remain and asked to remove our shoes and socks. They then
washed our feet. It symbolised the place of humility and servitude
demonstrated in Christ. I have never forgotten it. Is this place of meekness
representative what SDA beliefs teach?
2) A couple have just been sent to prison here for failing to provide the
necessities of life for their baby who died. They were Vegans and the child
died from a vitamin B12 deficiency related to the parents diet. The parents
took their baby to hospital but refused medical help which could have saved
the baby's life even up to 30 minutes before it died. All it needed was one
injection of the vitamin but they refused this and fled from the hospital
and went into hiding and watched their baby die a most horrible agonising
death. It beggars belief. The trial was high profile on national TV and
their defence was that their behaviour resulted from their SDA beliefs. The
father said it was God's will. Is this also what SDA belief teaches?
3) Then you come along full of yourself, claiming to understand the
mysteries of God and practically claiming to be the reincarnation of the
founder of your religion. How can all this be the same SDA? It is impossible
to understand.
"Eugene Shubert" <eug...@everythingimportant.org> wrote in message
news:3d11...@sys13.hou.wt.net...
scholar
> "Eugene Shubert" <eug...@everythingimportant.org> wrote in message
> news:3d08...@sys13.hou.wt.net...
> > The historicist scholar George Eldon Ladd says that the three cycles of
> > judgment--seven seals, seven trumpets and seven last plagues--is the
> > greatest mystery in the book of Revelation. I believe the greatest mystery
> > in the book of Daniel is that the end of all things was scheduled to occur
> > just after the reign of four kingdoms (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome)
> > yet there is an appointed time of the end at the latter end of Greek rule
> > (Da 8:17,19).
> >
The Roman kingdom never really went away. When Rome fell as a
political power, the leaders put on religious robes and created the
Roman catholic church, the so called holy Roman empire. Popes have
reigned over catholic kings of Europe, central and South America;
catholic kings must obey the pope or be excommunicated. All catholics
in the world are considered citizens of the vatican in Rome. So you
see the Roman empire never really went away, it just changed to a
religious empire with control over politics and militaries of catholic
nations. The revived Roman empire is now being reconstructed in the
European Economic Community. When the head of the holy Roman Empire,
the catholic church, gains control over the European Economic
Community, then Rome will again be established as a revived Roman
empire. When the last pope, the antichrist, gets control over the EEC,
then the stage is set for the last 7 year tribulation period to begin.
Martin Luther
(1483-1546) (Lutheran)
"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true
and real Antichrist...personally I declare that I owe the Pope no
other obedience than that to Antichrist." (Aug. 18, 1520) Taken from
"The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers," Vol. 2, pg. 121 by Froom.
John Calvin
(1509-1564) (Presbyterian)
"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the
Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not
consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul
himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt...I shall
briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any
other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy."
Taken from "Institutes" by John Calvin.
Cotton Mather
(1663-1728) (Congregational Theologian)
"The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the
Christian Church; and in the Pope of Rome, all the characteristics of
that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the
Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them."
Taken from "The Fall of Babylon" by Cotton Mather in Froom's book "The
Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers," Vol. 3, pg. 113.
John Knox
(1505-1572) (Scotch Presbyterian)
Knox wrote to abolish "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so
many ages exercised over the church" and that the pope should be
recognized as "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul
speaks." Taken from "The Zurich Letters" pg. 199 by John Knox.
Thomas Cranmer
(1489-1556) (Anglican)
"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope
to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other
scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Referring to prophecies
in Revelation and Daniel.) Taken from "Works" by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp.
6-7.
John Wesley
(1703-1791) (Methodist)
Speaking of the Papacy he said, "He is in an emphatical sense, the Man
of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is,
too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death
of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers...He it
is...that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is
worshiped...claiming the highest power, and highest honor...claiming
the prerogatives which belong to God alone." Taken from "Antichrist
and His Ten Kingdoms" by John Wesley, pg. 110.
Roger William
(1603-1683) (First Baptist Pastor in America)
He spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who
sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above
all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his
vessals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and
God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to changed
times and laws: but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." Taken
from "The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers" by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52.
Quoted from GREAT PROPHECIES OF THE BIBLE by Woodrow.
©1984-2001 Chick Publications, Inc. All rights reserved
Daniel 8 shows how after Alexander the great fell, he was the great
horn of Greece, Greece was divided into 4 Kingdoms. However, Rome
assimilated all of the land of these Kingdoms and they became part of
the Roman empire. Therefore it is correct to say that antichrist would
arise in the latter time of their kingdom, but the kingdom would now
be called Rome, and not Greece anymore. When Greece was broken into 4
kingdoms, it was no longer greece, but 4 separate Kingdoms; Greece as
an empire ceased to be. Rome reunited all thise lands into the Roman
Empire, that is why it is correct to say in the latter time of thier
kingdom, in Dan. 8:23.
Adamas
pentecostal and evangelical churches. It is simple and concise and makes a
lot of sense on the surface. The destruction of political Rome to be
replaced with the more powerful Religious Roman Empire is a foundation of
one view.
I have a problem with the identification of the RC church as the spawning
ground for the antichrist because even with all its faults, the RC church as
an institution has never denied the diety of Jesus Christ or His
resurrection.
Here is the descriptions which Christ gave so that we could identify
antichrist:
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.
1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He
is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come
in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist , whereof
ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not
that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an
antichrist.
According to this, the RC church can not represent that spirit of
antichrist. Even Islam does not fit this profile. Is there any religious
belief system anywhere which actively denies Jesus Christ is the son of God?
If there is, then I believe that is where the final embodiement of
antichrist (Satan) should be found.
"scholar" <anti...@ineedhits-mail.com> wrote in message
news:bec9a4be.02062...@posting.google.com...
Eugene Shubert
does, is it improper to call it antichrist?
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
"Adamas" wrote (in part):
: I have a problem with the identification of the RC church as the spawning
:
Adamas
not saying that you are wrong. You could be quite right but it comes down to
what you are prepared to believe and how you arrive at that conviction. The
Bible warns us that deception is rife and things are not what they seem. It
tells us that absolutely everyone will be deceived except the "very elect".
This is a revealing term because it means even the average "Christian" will
also fall for the last days' deceptions. I didn't know what to think once
upon a time but have learned to rely totally on the Word of God even when it
doesn't make any apparent sense to do so. I have been in situations where
"logic" screams for action but the Word of God contradicts what I think I
should do. I have found through painful experience of going my own way too
often that God's Word stands the test and my human reasoning fails me. That
is why I now choose to live my life in reliance on His Word. I accept that
you may have a different criteria based on a different way of understanding
things. Thats OK. I am not claiming I am right and you are wrong. I am just
explaining how I arrive at what I believe.
For these reasons, I believe that Christ has defined "antichrist" and going
by His strict definition the RC Church as an institution can not be
antichrist no matter what excesses it has perpetrated. I am not saying it is
Godly either, just that it cannot be that antichrist if you accept the
biblical definition of antichrist.
So who or what is antichrist? I read a simple story one time in another
newsgroup which is very illuminating as to what I mean about how we go about
deciding these things. It goes like this:
Mickey Mouse was walking along the road one day whistling in the sunshine as
he always did when he came across Goofy frantically searching the bushes at
the side of the road. Goofy explained that he had lost a 10 dollar bill when
the wind took it out of his hand and so Mickey helped him look for it. They
searched everywhere without success. Then Mickey finally asked Goofy to tell
him exactly where he was standing when the wind took it out of his fingers.
Goofy said, "Oh, it wasn't here, I was a mile farther back but that was in
the woods where it was too dark so I am looking here because the light is
better"
I believe this is our problem today. We are like Goofy, looking in all the
wrong places because the light is better, (the facts seem to fit). If we go
back to the place of the strict definition which Christ gave us and apply
only that, exactly as He gave it, I believe it will point us in a different
direction and we will not be deceived. It may be a darker picture we don't
particularly want to see but we have to decide who are we going to believe?.
Do we believe the evidence of our own understanding or the strict Word of
God. What about when they seem to be in conflict? Do we then "bend" the Word
to make it fit the facts as we see them or we do rely on the Word despite
the facts as we think we understand them?
I just watched a documentary about the American landing on the moon. I saw
the absence of dust when the lunar lander landed, yet the dust thrown up by
the astronauts when they descended, I saw the flag waving in the moon wind
(there is no wind on the moon). I saw the shadows of the rocks and of the
astronauts going in different directions. I saw the position markers going
behind the figures when they are supposed to be a final processing overlay
and a lot of other anomalies too. The documentary questioned whether there
ever had been a lunar landing. It certainly left more questions unanswered
than answered. There is no doubt that at the very least the official film of
the event has been doctored and that some of it was filmed in the US desert.
This is a simple example to demonstrate that deception is routinely being
perpetrated on the world's population on a scale which is beyond the
comprehension of the average person.
I have explained all this so we can understand how we can all arrive at
different conclusions. Your position on Rev 13 is perfectly valid as you see
things, and I cannot say you are wrong, just that I see it differently.
"Eugene Shubert" <eug...@everythingimportant.org> wrote in message
news:3d17...@sys13.hou.wt.net...
Eugene Shubert
Revelation 13
does, is it improper to call it antichrist?"
I understand your reply to be "yes."
Second question. Why don't you believe that the papacy is the first beast of
Revelation 13?
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
Adamas
> I asked, "If an ecclesiastical power does all that the first beast of
> Revelation 13
> does, is it improper to call it antichrist?"
>
> I understand your reply to be "yes."
I did not give you any reply. Instead I referred you to God's definition of
antichrist as given by Jesus Christ in the Bible. I then challenged you to
answer your own question using Christ's own words as your standard.
What do you believe now after considering God's definition of an antichrist?
Do you still believe the RC Church is that antichrist?
> Second question. Why don't you believe that the papacy is the first beast
of
> Revelation 13?
Why is your focus on the papacy?. The papacy is an office and not a person.
Is antichrist an office or a people, or a person? Have you considered that
Judaism rejects Jesus Christ. Doesn't that make it the more likely source to
produce antichrist? Is it possible that the current Pope is a polish Jew who
converted to Catholicism? Do Jews ever convert away from Judaism? Can Jews
practice other religious beliefs whilst remaining Jews? David Ben Gurion was
simultaneously a Buddhist and a Jew. How could this affect your beliefs
concerning the Catholic Church? Would you blame all Anglicans if their
primary office was usurped by the forces of evil? Would you blame all Jews
for the actions of political Zionism? Do you blame all Catholics for the
actions of Jesuits?
But firstly I would like to see how you believe your interpretations stand
up in the face of Christs definition of antichrist. I believe you have a
problem with what you think you believe and that you haven't thought it
through as well as you think you have.
Rob
>Herein lies the danger of interpretating what the eye thinks it sees. I am
>not saying that you are wrong. You could be quite right but it comes down to
>what you are prepared to believe and how you arrive at that conviction. The
>Bible warns us that deception is rife and things are not what they seem. It
>tells us that absolutely everyone will be deceived except the "very elect".
>
>This is a revealing term because it means even the average "Christian" will
>also fall for the last days' deceptions.
How do you deduce that? Are you saying you don't believe all Christians
are God's chosen ones?
Rob
Adamas
"Rob" <r...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:necmhuo2h5l3m5m2l...@4ax.com...
Rob,
Zephaniah 3:13 The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies;
neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth: for they shall
feed and lie down, and none shall make them afraid.
Romans 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the
children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
Romans 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant
according to the election of grace.
Note not all Israel. Just some. (Many are called but few are chosen)
Check out the "elect" and the "very elect" and the other levels of
responsibility in the Kingdom of God. It is a fascinating study.
Otho
"Adamas" <mi...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message news:3d1c...@clear.net.nz...
The Lord shewed me: and behold two baskets full of figs, set before the
temple of the Lord: after that Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon had carried
away Jechonias the son of Joakim the king of Juda, and his chief men, and
the craftsmen, and engravers of Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.
A small group, the descendants of the Jebusite aristocracy, the book of
Jeremiah identifies as the good figs, while in Babylon, initiated a new
religion, a monotheist religion called Judaism. They also initiated and
produced a book, the Tanach. The authors of that book tell us that this
small group of people were the 'elect', Jews.
> Romans 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of
the
> children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
> Romans 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant
> according to the election of grace.
>
Some five hundred years later, a small group of Jews became Christians and
the NT authors tell us that out of the 'elect' they were the 'very elect'.
>
> Note not all Israel. Just some. (Many are called but few are chosen)
>
> Check out the "elect" and the "very elect" and the other levels of
> responsibility in the Kingdom of God. It is a fascinating study.
>
For the last five hundred years, Christian splinter groups have been telling
us that are the 'very elect'.
>
Where does that leave us? LOL.
"It is a fascinating study" indeed.
>
Rob
I understand that, but where did you get your idea that Israel constitutes
the "elect" and the remnant of Israel constitutes the "very elect"?
>Check out the "elect" and the "very elect" and the other levels of
>responsibility in the Kingdom of God. It is a fascinating study.
Again, are you saying the "elect" and "very elect" are different? And if so,
then how do you explain Rom 11:7?
Romans 11:7 What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain,
but the elect did. The others were hardened, (NIV)
It doesn't say "very elect" in the above scripture, but only "elect". How is
the "elect" in the above scripture distinct from the "very elect"?
Also, did you read my response to you in the following post?
Message-ID: <1oamhu885jkr3d26n...@4ax.com>
Rob
Adamas
I am probably coming at this from a very different angle and may not be
seeing the difficulty you see. Bear with me and help me understand what you
understand from it.
This is what I see: These Rom 11 scripture verses confirm the blindness of
God's people Israel as stated in Isaiah 42:19. Starting with the disciples
God commenced the process of awakening them to their new identity as
promised in Jer 31:31 and narrowed down to specifics in v.33 (revealing the
delay with Judah). The fulfilment for Israel was confirmed by Jesus Christ
in Matt 15:24. Also John 11:51-53 confirms that the purpose of God was to
gather together into one body the children of God that were scattered
abroad. This is an ethnic term designating the Israelite Hebrews because at
that time which was before the crucifiction and even longer before the
gentile question ever arose, there was no gentile church and no gentile
could have been admitted to the "church".
> Romans 11:7 What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain,
> but the elect did. The others were hardened, (NIV)
I am not sure about this translation you employed here. The KJV implies That
Israel is the personal name as Jacob and the word "it" is translated "he".
Also KJV uses the "election" meaning people chosen out of the nation for a
special role.
>
> It doesn't say "very elect" in the above scripture, but only "elect". How
is
> the "elect" in the above scripture distinct from the "very elect"?
There were many special groups chosen out of the nation for special
purposes.
But first, I see the Bible as one book and the product of a single mind. It
contains themes which run right through it. If you are interested in looking
into one of these themes you might want to follow up on these pointers.
Israel and the OT represent patterns by which we live out our lives (1 Cor
10:11). By looking at the nation we can gain an insight into those "unseen"
specialist groups who contributed so much to the running of the nation.
For example who killed the passover lambs? Typically we are told it was the
head of every household but there is debate and at least one translation
says it was the "magistrates". So here is a possible special group within
the nations infrastructure.
Next see the various groups who were present when the Law was being given.
Typically we are told that Moses went up alone but this is not correct. In
fact Moses, Joshua, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu in addition to the 70 elders
were all present eating and talking with the "God of Israel" (Ex 24:10) when
Yahweh God (Ex 24:12) called to them from the top of the mountain and told
Moses to go higher. Joshua and Moses then went up and the cloud came down.
They waited for six days and on the seventh, Yahweh God called Moses up to
Him. Joshua waited the full 40 days and 40 nights that Moses was away but
the others who were lower down talking to the God of Israel, returned to the
people who were camped around the mountain and who were forbidden to go onto
the mountain.
This is the common biblical account which you will probably know inside out
and backwards. My purpose in telling it again is to point out that there
were various groups represented who had access to different levels of
knowledge and privelege in God. This same pattern of the mountain is
duplicated in the account of the upper room with Jesus where a similar
number of groups were also represented.
So who are the elect, the very elect, and the others? Room for a lot of
research isn't there!
>
> Also, did you read my response to you in the following post?
>
> Message-ID: <1oamhu885jkr3d26n...@4ax.com>
I hope so. As far as i am aware I have seen and answered all your posts to
me. I'll check them again later but I can't spend as much time on this
machine as I would like because it gets to my joints..
No attacks or bad stuff please. If you disagree then I would be quite happy
to go through it and even agree to disagree amicably if it goes that way.
But always I enjoy my God and His word and have little truck with those who
have to defend their religion to the death. [smiling].
>
> Rob
Adamas
Nice to see you are still active. Good health!
No point arguing with you old chap!. We'd probably only end up agreeing with
each other again.
Take care :)
"Otho" <spi...@netcrawlers.ca> wrote in message
news:ogYS8.6144$%N4.18...@news20.bellglobal.com...
scholar
Note: Allah of Islam is not God of the Bible. The description of Allah
in the Qu'ran is very different from the description of God in the
Bible. Allah is a false god that doesn't exist.
History of the Catholic church from the 7th to the 15th centuries
From THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH by Cardinals Baronius and Fleury
This book contains the names of more than 50 popes who were atheists
and infidels. They became pope because of the power and wealth of the
position.
Any atheist fulfills the scripture 1John 2:22, because he denies the
existence of God the Father. The antichrist can be just another
atheist pope that has the position of pope because of the power and
prestige that it represents and not because he really believes in God.
Daniel 11:37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the
desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself
above all.
The anitchrist can indeed be the last pope, if he himself personally,
is an atheist and because of this he denies both the Father and the
Son; 1John 2:22.
scholar
> Herein lies the danger of interpretating what the eye thinks it sees. I am
> not saying that you are wrong. You could be quite right but it comes down to
> what you are prepared to believe and how you arrive at that conviction. The
> Bible warns us that deception is rife and things are not what they seem. It
> tells us that absolutely everyone will be deceived except the "very elect".
> This is a revealing term because it means even the average "Christian" will
> also fall for the last days' deceptions. I didn't know what to think once
> upon a time but have learned to rely totally on the Word of God even when it
> doesn't make any apparent sense to do so. I have been in situations where
> "logic" screams for action but the Word of God contradicts what I think I
> should do. I have found through painful experience of going my own way too
> often that God's Word stands the test and my human reasoning fails me. That
> is why I now choose to live my life in reliance on His Word. I accept that
> you may have a different criteria based on a different way of understanding
> things. Thats OK. I am not claiming I am right and you are wrong. I am just
> explaining how I arrive at what I believe.
>
> For these reasons, I believe that Christ has defined "antichrist" and going
> by His strict definition the RC Church as an institution can not be
> antichrist no matter what excesses it has perpetrated. I am not saying it is
> Godly either, just that it cannot be that antichrist if you accept the
> biblical definition of antichrist.
The protestant Bible scholars are saying that the papacy is the seat
of the antichrist. They are not saying that the RC church is the
antichrist. The antichrist is a man. Revelation 13:18 Here is
wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast:
for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred
threescore and six.
This man is going to have a seat or throne position of rule:
Revelation 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard,
and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of
a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great
authority.
Protestant Bible scholars believe the papacy is the seat that is going
to bring the antichrist to power.
Martin Luther
(1483-1546) (Lutheran)
"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true
and real Antichrist...personally I declare that I owe the Pope no
other obedience than that to Antichrist." (Aug. 18, 1520) Taken from
"The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers," Vol. 2, pg. 121 by Froom.
Many popes have been atheists in the past and the antichrist will be
an atheist. If the last pope is an atheist, then he would deny both
the Father and the Son (denying thier deity) and this would fulfill
the condition in 1John 2:22 that the antichrist denies both the Father
and the son.
JESUS CHRIST HAS NO VlCAR. Vicar, from the Latin "vicarius" means "in
the place of" e.g. vicarius sacrifice of Christ being His sacrifice in
the place of the sinner. Papal claims such as infallibility, Head of
the Church, Holy Father, all seek to put the Pope in the place of
Christ, which place only the Living Christ can have. This false
assumption of Rome is expressly put forward in the Papal title "Vicar
of Jesus Christ".
The New Testament was written in Greek, and the Greek translation of "
vicar of Christ" is "Anti (instead of)-christos", or in our English
Bible, "Antichrist". The word "Antichrist" is not just a word of wild
insult, but is a Bible warning of the false role assumed by the Popes
of Rome as supposed vicars of Christ, (See 1 John 2:18) The pope's
title Vicar of Christ means antichrist by definition.
II Thes. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall
not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin
be revealed, the son of perdition; 2:4 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.
This verse refers to the coming antichrist.
Behold the blasphemy of the papacy, and how the papacy tends to
fulfill this scripture:
The Bull Unam Sanctam... Issued by POPE BONIFACE VIII reads as
follows: "The Roman Pontiff judges all men, but is judged by no one.
We declare, assert, define and pronounce: to be subject to the Roman
Pontiff is to every human creature necessary for salvation that which
was spoken of Christ 'thou has subdued all things under his feet' may
well seem verified in me... I have the authority of the King of Kings.
I am all in all and above all, so that God himself and I, the vicar of
God, have but one consistory, and I am able to do all that God can
do." "Christ entrusted His office to the chief pontiff;... but all
power in heaven and in earth has been given to Christ;... therefore
the chief pontiff, who is His vicar, will have this power." Corpus
Juris chap. 1 column 29, translated from a gloss on the words Porro
Subesse Romano Pontiff "We hold upon this earth the place of God
Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII "All the names which are attributed to
Christ in Scripture, inplying His supremacy over the church, are also
attributed to the Pope." Bellamin, "On the Authority of Councils,"
book 2, Chapter 17. "For thou art the shepherd, thou art the
physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally
thou art another God on earth." Labbe and Cossart's "History of the
Councils." Vol. XIV, col. 109 The title "Lord God the Pope" can be
found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14,
chapter 4, Declaramus.
In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, the words, "Dominum Deum
Nostrum Papam" (Our Lord God the Pope) can be found in column 153. In
a Paris edition, they are found in column 140. "Hence the Pope is
crowned with a triple crown, as king of Heaven and earth, and
purgatory." Prompta Bibliotheca," Feraris, Vol. VI, p. 26, art.
"Papa." Roman Catholic Canon Law stipulates through Pope Innocent III
that the Roman pontiff is "the vicegerent upon earth, not a mere man,
but of a very God;" and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that
this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is "very God and
very man." Decretales Domini Gregorii translatione Episcoporum, (on
the
transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice
(2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99;(Paris, 1612), tom. 2
Martin Luther (Lutheran), John Calvin (Presbyterian), John Knox
(Scotch Presbyterian), Roger William (baptist), John Wesley
(Methodist), Cotton Mather (Congregational); they all believed that
the Antichrist would be the last pope.
Cotton Mather (Congregational church leader - 1663 - 1728) said, "The
oracles of God foretold the rising of an antichrist and in the pope of
Rome, all the characteristics of that antichrist are so marvellously
answered that if any who read Scripture do not see it, there is a
marvellous blindness upon them".
Revelation 6:2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat
upon him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth
conquering and to conquer.
Bible scholars agree that this scripture refers to the antichrist
going forth to try to conquer the world at the beginning of the
tribulation period. Believe it or not, Alberto Rivera, ex-jesuit
priest, said that the bent or bowed crucifix on a pole that the pope
carries was deliberately bent to identify the pope with the rider on
this horse, the antichrist.
Reference: The Four Horseman, - Chick.com.
Rob
There are other fine translations that render these words "it" and "elect",
including the following:
Romans 11:7 What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect
have obtained it, and the rest were blinded. (NKJV)
Romans 11:7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect
obtained it, but the rest were hardened, (NRSV)
Romans 11:7 What then [shall we conclude]? Israel failed to obtain what it
sought [God's favor by obedience to the Law]. Only the elect (those chosen few)
obtained it, while the rest of them became callously indifferent (blinded,
hardened, and made insensible to it). (AMPLIFIED BIBLE)
I think Rom 11:7 presents a serious problem for you in your effort to draw
a distinction between "elect" and "very elect", and I see nothing in your
above exposition that supports a distinction.
Rob
Adamas
<I snipped the discussion to concentrate on this part>
> I think Rom 11:7 presents a serious problem for you in your effort to draw
> a distinction between "elect" and "very elect", and I see nothing in your
> above exposition that supports a distinction.
Rob.
It has been an interesting discussion. I accept that coming from your
background you will always see things a certain way and I will see things
quite differently. I really don't understand your conclusion and why you
can't see what I see. But I have to accept that it must be as a result of
our differing paths by which we have come to know our God. There is no point
in continuing to the point of attempting to persuade each other because it
is not possible. To this point we have just been sharing our respective
opinions and to go any further on this topic would get us into the danger
area of conflicts. So thanks again. Following through on the research has
been enjoyable. No doubt we will come across each other in various threads
from time to time.
Rob
>
>"Rob" <r...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:vagshuockt42oerqh...@4ax.com...
><I snipped the discussion to concentrate on this part>
>
>> I think Rom 11:7 presents a serious problem for you in your effort to draw
>> a distinction between "elect" and "very elect", and I see nothing in your
>> above exposition that supports a distinction.
>
>Rob.
>It has been an interesting discussion. I accept that coming from your
>background
What background is that?
> you will always see things a certain way and I will see things
>quite differently.
>
> I really don't understand your conclusion and why you
>can't see what I see.
I really don't understand why you can't understand my conclusion. Several
translations for Rom 11:7 say God's "elect" are the ones who have found grace,
so that is proof "elect" and "very elect" are the same thing. This fact is made
even more clear in the NLT bible.
Matthew 24:24 For false messiahs and false prophets will rise up and perform
great miraculous signs and wonders so as to deceive, if possible, even God's
chosen ones. (NLT)
Romans 11:7 So this is the situation: Most of the Jews have not found the favor
of God they are looking for so earnestly. A few have--the ones God has
chosen--but the rest were made unresponsive. (NLT)
Rob