Were they right?

brakelite · Oct 5, 2012

David777 said:
Contradict is one of a number of meanings, it is not the principle meaning brakelite.

If you look at the word "antichrist", "anti" means against or opposition.

Now if we look at the Websters Revised again, we have "opposed to"
which is a much more suitable definition.

The antichrist will oppose Christ brakelite, hence the papacy will not qualify as the antichrist.

This is the main problem in your eschatology brakelite.

David, in Strongs concordance look up #473 in the Greek section.

brakelite · May 10, 2013

Since this thread went to sleep a while back, there have been a number of hard-core futurist contributions to the forums advocating the coming of a future 'antichrist' who will rule for 7 years during a period of tribulation and during which he establishes a peace treaty with Israel, breaks the treaty, rules the world as a dictator from Jerusalem and is destroyed at the second coming. All this during the re-establishment of the temple services and sacrifices, etc etc etc. For 40 odd years we have been receiving this message with greater strength, with luminaries such as Hal Lindsay et al offering books, movies and internet websites all promoting similar messages, and lately on talkjesus we have heard from yet more saying the same thing.
I have no intention of entering into a debate with these folk, yet wish to make it clear that I in no way can agree with nor condone their teachings. I am convinced that they are genuine Christians, with a genuine concern for the future of mankind, a love for God and a sincere though I believe deluded desire to teach their futurist paradigm. I agree with them that mankind's present time upon this earth is soon to come to a close. Though we differ in our understanding of the way this close will eventuate, it is certain that Jesus' return to this earth is imminent, that the church is asleep to the crisis, and the message of salvation and mercy must be given to the world with much more urgency that in past days. The time is short, and it is time to awaken from our slumber.

I have resurrected this thread as a counter to the futurist teachings that have recently inundated the forums. The points that I made throughout the thread have yet to be seriously challenged. They are Biblically and historically sound, and it is my contention that whatever future we may have remaining is contingent on what has been developed in the past. As Solomon said, there is nothing new under the son. For those who are serious about eschatology, I offer this alternative to futurism. It is not preterist, but historicist. Historicism generally takes the view that prophecy began to be fulfilled the moment it was given, and has continued to be fulfilled in the life of nations and God's people throughout history. This is not a new belief, nor is it controversial, for it has been the belief of Bible scholars throughout the history of the church. Futurism however is a relatively new concept, being the main thrust of the counter-reformation movement began by the Jesuits as a response to the threat of Protestantism at the time of the council of Trent, and the subsequent warfare between Catholicism and the reformed movement (as well as several other Biblically inclined faiths such as the Celtic church in Britain and the Waldenses).

As for the future, we can learn from past history fairly accurately what we can expect. But the first rule of Bible exegesis must be adhered to strictly. The Bible interprets itself. If one part of the Bible tells us clearly what a "beast" is for example, then let us not go on a different tangent to suit our preconceived ideas and proclaim the beast as something vastly different to what the Bible has already stated. Nor should we use one rule for measuring prophetic time in one instance, then changing the rule to suit a later idea. This doesn't work, and leads our conclusions to pastures far afield from where can receive proper and nutritious spiritual food. Truth.

If anyone is interested in doing a study on prophecy from a historicist perspective I would be delighted to contribute my thoughts. Daniel and Revelation particularly have much to offer us in the way of truth about the future, so long as we keep to established rules for proper exegesis. The result may be vastly different from what you have been previously taught, but in the long run I assure you will offer greater hope, greater strength, and greater confidence as we face what in many ways is still an uncertain future with regards to detail and time. But the essence, the spiritual lessons, and most importantly the gospel, will ever remain the same.

God bless.

Eric E Stahl · May 10, 2013

brakelite · May 11, 2013

Eric E Stahl said:
<style>  </style> Daniel 12:4, 8-10
4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

It may be that the future prophecy could not be understood till now because it was still sealed.

It is true that the book of Daniel has only been understood in relatively recent times. But not because our understanding of the future has improved, but rather our understanding of the past.

"Now I tell you before it come, that when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am He." John 13:19.
And now I have told you before it come to pass, that when it is come to pass, ye might believe." John 14:29

I do not for one instant beleive that Christians are meant to be able to predict the future. We are not prognosticators. That is witchcraft. However, we can know certain things based on our understanding of what history has revealed and comparing that with Biblical prophecy.Our knowledge of the past gives evidence of what is to come in the future. This is what Jesus has indicated in the above verses, and what the intent of prophecy is for. To increase ouir faith that we may be assured of God's divine control over all things.

Daniel 2 is a fine illustration of this. Daniel clearly had no idea what Nebuchadnezzar's vision was all about until God revealed it. And even then only in part, in general pricipals. He had no idea how it could be, even after future visions expanded on the same theme. Daniel later was rendered speechless and shocked, unable to understand the portent of all he saw, yet knowing how critical it all was to God's people. Today however, we can clearly see how history has perfectly replayed the vision before the eyes of the whole universe, and we can now say, praise God and all glory to Him for He is sovereign and rules over the nations!!!

From Daniels time to the second coming, four world empires. Only four, and the last, although a change in character, reaching all the way down to the end. Babylon, Meda-Persia, Greece, Rome. No gaps, no fifth kingdom, Pefectly accurate when understood in the light of history. Rome has indeed changed, but is still with us today in the form of the RCC. Same principles, same character, still a persecuting power when she can, and will continue to be until the time of the end. How can we believe anything else when the foundation is based on the rock of history? The past verifies and confirms the future.

canada · May 11, 2013

"It may be that the future prophecy could not be understood till now because it was still sealed."

Wrong ... the Reformers understood, and they DID reveal it ... it is futurists (even today) that do not understand it even though it was revealed to them.

Eric E Stahl · May 11, 2013

canada said:
"It may be that the future prophecy could not be understood till now because it was still sealed."

Wrong ... the Reformers understood, and they DID reveal it ... it is futurists (even today) that do not understand it even though it was revealed to them.

What is a futurists?

If it is a person that believes there is still prophecy to be fulfilled, then I am a futurists.

rodd · May 11, 2013

canada said:
"It may be that the future prophecy could not be understood till now because it was still sealed."

Wrong ... the Reformers understood, and they DID reveal it ... it is futurists (even today) that do not understand it even though it was revealed to them.

On prophesy the reformers were ignorant but when it came to defining justification and saving faith, .....they were great!.....I identify with Calvin and Luther and their qualification of what the gospel is.....but their prophetic insight was very limited .......and even incorrect!
We have the advantage of future history to understand what's been written, although many false prophets will arise, and that has happened.

Eric E Stahl · May 12, 2013

canada said:
"It may be that the future prophecy could not be understood till now because it was still sealed."

Wrong ... the Reformers understood, and they DID reveal it ... it is futurists (even today) that do not understand it even though it was revealed to them.

Isaiah 59:18-21
18 According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay, fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies; to the islands he will repay recompence.
19 So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.
20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.

When Jesus comes to save Israel it will the Western Powers lead by the antichrist that will be in control of earth.

rodd · May 12, 2013

I can say without doubt neither Antiochus or Titus were the Antichrist of revelation both were archetypes but that's about it.. the millenium is yet to be because that's exactly what it is, a millenium, plain language must be understood that way otherwise everything is undefinable including all your reform theology!

stephen · May 12, 2013

Surely thety were 'right'

Just so much as we are also 'right' in our perception of 'right and wrong' in such matters in this our day......following Jesus..........and that is the most important thing Following Jesus

rodd · May 12, 2013

stephen said:
Surely thety were 'right'

Just so much as we are also 'right' in our perception of 'right and wrong' in such matters in this our day......following Jesus..........and that is the most important thing Following Jesus

Not going to argue over your statement, but you've got to be prepared to speak up when people speak out of context or certain things that contradict other scripture, ...hopefully it might benefit someone.

brakelite · May 12, 2013

Eric E Stahl said:
Isaiah 59:18-21
18 According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay, fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies; to the islands he will repay recompence.
19 So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.
20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.

When Jesus comes to save Israel it will the Western Powers lead by the antichrist that will be in control of earth.

That's a mighty huge leap from the quoted scripture to your explanation.

brakelite · May 12, 2013

rodd said:
On prophesy the reformers were ignorant but when it came to defining justification and saving faith, .....they were great!.....I identify with Calvin and Luther and their qualification of what the gospel is.....but their prophetic insight was very limited .......and even incorrect!
We have the advantage of future history to understand what's been written, although many false prophets will arise, and that has happened.

Have to disagree with you Rodd concerning the reformers' understanding of prophecy. Though it was certainly less than our own, yet it wasn't for the sake of accuracy, but rather that history hadn't developed as fully then as it has now. They in fact understood history and how it relates to prophecy far better than the majority of Christendom today. They knew who the antichrist was/is. They weren't ignorant or mistaken about that.

Eric E Stahl · May 12, 2013

brakelite said:
That's a mighty huge leap from the quoted scripture to your explanation.

When Jesus comes to take earth we know that he will destroy the antichrist and his kingdom. In Daniel 11:43b-45 the power of the north (Russia and it's Alliance will be destroyed)
The kings of the east go to war in Revelation chapter 9.
19 So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west,

rodd · May 12, 2013

brakelite said:
Have to disagree with you Rodd concerning the reformers' understanding of prophecy. Though it was certainly less than our own, yet it wasn't for the sake of accuracy, but rather that history hadn't developed as fully then as it has now. They in fact understood history and how it relates to prophecy far better than the majority of Christendom today. They knew who the antichrist was/is. They weren't ignorant or mistaken about that.

That's "ok" you're free to disagree but you're like most of this theological group, you've embraced the whole both true and false or I should say error.
Their eschatology was a fumble for answers in an age of closed prophetic revelation.
I have to disagree with your overestimation of their prophetic insight.
The re-establishment of Israel of 1948 is pivotal in the fulfilment of apocalyptic prophecy, and the reformers pulled up about 500 years short on that.
Little do people realise we're right on the verge of radical change from so-called democracy to the extreme dictatorial control of Antichrist and his global elite, they've now got the bases covered. (political control / UN.)
He is in position and very soon to take power again.

brakelite · May 18, 2013

rodd said:
That's "ok" you're free to disagree but you're like most of this theological group, you've embraced the whole both true and false or I should say error.
Their eschatology was a fumble for answers in an age of closed prophetic revelation.
I have to disagree with your overestimation of their prophetic insight.
The re-establishment of Israel of 1948 is pivotal in the fulfilment of apocalyptic prophecy, and the reformers pulled up about 500 years short on that.
Little do people realise we're right on the verge of radical change from so-called democracy to the extreme dictatorial control of Antichrist and his global elite, they've now got the bases covered. (political control / UN.)
He is in position and very soon to take power again.

Hi Rodd. When I first became a Christian nearly 40 years ago, I thrived on all the new apocolyptic literature then becoming available. Hal Lindsay's 'Late Great Planet Earth', and NZ author Barry Smith's "Warning" , and his subsequent "Second Warning" and "Final Warning" at the top of my reading list. Along with any material I could lay my hands on regarding the UN, the world bank, the CFR, the Bilderburgers, the Illuminati, Freemasons and every Thomas, Richard and Harold and all the secret societies they may have belonged to in between. I fully understand where you are coming from, and how much of your thinking relates to prophecy.

I must ask the question, have you read this thread from the beginning? If not, then may I suggest please do so, and you will realise more accurately how I view the reformers conclusions regarding the antichrist and prophecy in general.

Oh, and despite my initiation into futurism through the likes of Hal Lindsay et al, I am yet to be convinced that the re-formation of Israel in 1948 is directly linked to prophecy. I did at one time believe this, but only on the word of the authors and movie makers. The Bible seemed to me to be quite silent on the subject. What scripture there was regarding any reformation of Israel cpould just as easily have been referenced to the return of the remnant after captivity in Babylon. I see no rreason to revise this to a later date, and in light of other prophetic revealtion, I am more inclined to hold fast to that view than relinquish it any time soon. That Israel may play a part in future politics there can be little doubt, if only because such a vast majority of Christendom, both evangelical and catholic, and working extrememly hard to make it so. I am more inclined to believe Jesus words regarding the nation of Israel "Your house is left unto you desolate".

rodd · May 18, 2013

I personally think that the year of 1948 was the year of the 'fig tree,' Matt 24:32-34, Jesus framed the generation (that's 70 yrs) that sees the re-formation of this fig tree blossom and reemerge (that's Israel as a nation), from that point in time you've got the 70yrs of life span in total for a generation (not 40yrs), because it's with a view to the passing of that generation that the time of his return will happen.
So it is 70yrs from that 1948 re-emergence, but it's not counted until the fulness of that year is reached therefore we actually start with 1949,+70=2019, plus 1 extra for the fulness of the final year, would give us the year 2020 for all to be fulfilled.

If we deduct 7yrs for the tribulation, we have a tribulation start date of 2013, soon this year. Us pre-millennialists as we're categorized believe Daniel 9:27 takes up the start of those final last 7 years of the tribulation when antichrist is revealed by his mediatorial role in that Daniel peace treaty process, I know and believe Syria is the last obstacle to be removed before this occurs later this year.
And of course that would necessitate Antichrist is a global statesman right at this time. So who could he possibly be?....I think it's Nicolas Sarkozy the ex-French President soon to make his great comeback as you know who! Time will tell and soon if what I'm suggesting is true or not!

Eric E Stahl · May 18, 2013

The antichrist will come from the land in darkness before Armageddon.

Revelation 16:10-11
10 And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,
11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.

Habakkuk 3:11-13
11 The sun and moon stood still in their habitation: at the light of thine arrows they went(from view), and at the shining of thy glittering spear.
12 Thou didst march through the land in indignation, thou didst thresh the heathen in anger.
13 Thou wentest forth for the salvation of thy people, even for salvation with thine anointed(saints); thou woundedst the head out of the house of the wicked, by discovering the foundation unto the neck. Selah. (Armageddon)

When the sun stand still over Israel America will be dark!

rodd · May 19, 2013

Isn't it a world of darkness??????

james1523 · May 19, 2013

brakelite said:
Hi James.
I have seen that thought many times, and was one of the reasons I started the thread "Were they right"? For another perspective on that topic and for some sound Biblical and historical reasons why I amconvinced that the antichrist is in fact extrememly religious and far from atheistic, might I suggest you read that. Appreciate however it is not a short thread now, but you will find enough information in the first few pages to give grounds for a rethink on your suggestion above.

Hi Brakelite. I had a read through the first few pages. The AntiChrist denies the incarnation of Christ in the flesh.He will declare himself to be God (in this sense , will he be religious). He will sit in the temple. This does not seem to fit Roman Catholicism which does not deny the incarnation and they have no reason to sit in the Temple in Jerusalem, they sit in the Vatican.

For this reason i believe the anti-christ to be an atheist, a former Jew or former Islamic.

I believe the anti-christ will be a "Jew" by being the false Jewish Messiah, leading many to believe he is God. The false Jewish Messiah will be an atheist from a secular country which removes the presence of Islam, facilitates the rebuilding of the temple on the temple mount, and then runs the world from this central location (the UN). The anti-christ will suppress all religions, Catholic, Islam, etc

Welcome!

Were they right?

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Members Online

Trending content

Newest members

Stay Connected