Antichrist/Beast/Man of Sin/Little Horn Separate and distinct or the Same?

[parousia70]

I'm not here to hand feed you everything, you need to fight for yourself.

So you aren't here to express your personal view, you are just here to regurgitate the views of others?

 

[ver 2-10]

So you aren't here to express your personal view, you are just here to regurgitate the views of others?

Wrong, I had hoped you were strong enough to view the video, but you are not, so I must await the day that you view it, and we can discuss the video in a good manner.

 

[parousia70]

Wrong, I had hoped you were strong enough to view the video, but you are not, so I must await the day that you view it, and we can discuss the video in a good manner.

Oh I'm strong enough, I'm just not interested nor have the inclination to spend the time.

I'd rather hear YOUR view expressed in your own words... but if you aren't strong enough to do that, I'll move on.

 

[LastSeven]

Wrong, I had hoped you were strong enough to view the video, but you are not, so I must await the day that you view it, and we can discuss the video in a good manner.

lol. Come on man. If you're here to discuss, just discuss. You've spent more effort trying to get him to watch that video than it would've taken you to use your own words.

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Revealing Times]

If you stick to the bible, there's only one kingdom that is divided into two (dominion and sanctuary) and has 10 horns and 2 horns, and conquered 7 mountains. Anyone know which it is? Anyone?

The Kingdom is divided by being headquartered on two places, Rome and Constantinople, that is shown to be a fact, your dominion and sanctuary is of course just something people have added. It has 10 Horns plus ONE. The ONE is the Beast, the 10 are the Kings that rule one hour with the Beast. The Seven Mountains are not Conquered, they are Seven Rulers (Mountains) that are ALSO Seven Kings. Five have Fallen, ONE IS, and one is YET TO COME. The Five Kings that were FALLEN are(Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia and Greece). The ONE THAT IS(WAS) at Johns time was Rome of course. And the one that is YET TO COME is the Anti-Christ/Beast and his 10 Kings. Thus if you read Rev. 17 properly, it tells us this, the Seven Headed Beast is SEVEN MOUNTAINS who are ALSO Seven Kings. The Seven Headed Beast is Seven Rulers, and we understand what a Beast is via Daniel, a nation that Conquers Israel.

Please show me from scripture where 10 kings are to rule with the beast for 42 months... note the use of the words kings that have no kingdom yet. This not the case for the beast with 7 heads and ten crowns.

The Anti-Christ is only ONE of the Seven Heads of the Seven Headed Beast. The 10 Horns are coming to power with him. This is why there is only 10 HORNS in Revelation, but 11 Horns in Daniel, 10 PLUS the Little Horn........what happens to the Little Horn in Revelation 13 and 17 ? He is one of the Seven Heads, thus there are only 10 Horns.

The 19 Kings are t rule with the Beast for ONE HOUR, meaning a short time. Since we understand the BEAST only becomes the BEAST when he conquers Israel, they can only rule with the BEAST for 42 Months. The might rule with the Anti-Christ for 7 years.

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.

This has nothing to do with the MAN who will become the BEAST/Little Horn/Man of Sin, who is called the Anti-Christ at least once. We know hum by the name Anti-Christ but in the bible he has many names. All mean he will become the DICTATOR at the end of the Age. He will become the BEAST. And it doesn't matter what we call him.

And there is of course a Trinity.

People say the SDA somehow manipulate history somehow to fit what we think the Bible says... c

SDA cant even read Galatians without seeing their understandings are way off kilter, so they must skip that chapter. SDA just isn't plausible. That doesn't mean you can't be right about other things in the bible, it just means I start off skeptical about most things a SDA says.

The 10 toes represents the ten divisions of the former Roman Empire, at that time the world at large... which the Papacy has claimed as her jurisdiction ever since.

The Ten Toes have nothing to do with the RCC/Papacy. It is the 10 Kings who rule with the Anti-Christ. The base is weak, because it is NOT OF GOD, that's the whole point. Jesus (the rock cut out of the Mountain) will make the statue crumble to pieces, because it is NOT OF GOD.

Partly strong means the statue was strong, it ruled over many, but weak in that it ruled without God and thus can not stand.

The "little horn" of Daniel was Antiochus IV Epiphanes. He's identified in Daniel 11

The "man of sin" was none other than Emperor Nero who killed Paul and Peter and mounted great persecution against the church.

NOPE................The Little Horn s the coming Anti-Christ.

 

[Revealing Times]

I don't believe the final "beast" has anything to do with the "ancient" Roman empire being resurrected. At least not in any "strict" literal sense anyway. I think this is a common misinterpretation by End Time Bible scholars. Here's why.

"And I saw one of the heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed; and all the world wondered after the beast" (Revelation 13:3).

Notice in this passage one of the seven original heads of the beast (system of world government) is "wounded as it were dead".. and then the deadly wound is "healed". This is where the Roman empire "resurrection" idea originates from. But is it historically correct ?

This might be so, and it might also be true for all I know as per the meaning of the wound. But I don't use this at all to come unto my understanding that the Anti-Christ/Beast arises out of Europe. There are plenty of indicators that show this to b true. The Little Horn in Daniel 7 arises out of the FOURTH BEAST in the END TIMES. The Little Horn also has to arise out of one of the Four Generals Kingdoms that came to power after Alexander the Great died. That means he has to arise out of Two Kingdoms at once. Only Greece is in the European Union. He will be born in Greece and come to power via the E.U.

To begin with, looking at it from purely a historical perspective, the ancient Roman empire was never totally destroyed. Although the Visigoths did sack the city of Rome in 410 AD, the Western capital of Rome had already been moved to Constantinople by the Emperor Constantine in 330 AD. and survived the sack of Rome.

From there, Christianity transformed the ancient Roman empire into the Christian "Byzantine" empire.. So technically ancient Rome never died, it was transformed, or assimilated depending on your viewpoint.

Why is a BEAST a BEAST in Daniel ? Because they conquered or enslaved Israel. So why would you think there could be a BEAST when there is NO ISRAEL ? Why is the USA, British Empire or Ottoman Empire along with many others not considered a BEAST ? Because Israel was as Dead Men's Bones, they were not alive, but as Ezekiel was asked by God, CAN THESE BONES LIVE AGAIN ? And of course they can, and God resurrected Israel as a Nation. Now, ONLY NOW, can we have a BEAST again. After Israel was dispersed, there was no Beast, nor could there be one, because a Beast is a Nation that Conquers Gods peoples.

Anything that happened between basically 70 AD, on up to about 120 AD when Israel took over again for THREE YEARS, and 1948 is basically irrelevant. Anything between 120 AD and 1948 could not be a BEAST. Rome lost its Power also, there is no RCC church Beast. This is about SEVEN BEAST HEADS. When Rome fizzled out and when Israel was dispersed the World over, there was no CONQUERING BEAST in the world, nor could there be one. This is about Israel, not the WORLD.

On the other hand, the Soviet Union did receive a "deadly wound" in 1991 and did cease to exist completely and Stalinism was thought to have been tossed upon the trash heap of history.

Until in 2012 Vladimir Putin was elected President of Russia after which he vowed to restore Russia to its' former glory" under the Soviet Union. Ever since, Putin has been busy "resurrecting" Stalinism in Russia.

I wouldn't worry about Russia. That might be a Nation the Beast Conquers, but it will not be a factor in bible prophecy.

Daniel 7 tells us why. The Little Horn ARISES out of the FOURTH BEAST.

 

[parousia70]

The Anti-Christ is only ONE of the Seven Heads of the Seven Headed Beast.

Where does the Bible teach this about antichrist?

This has nothing to do with the MAN who will become the BEAST/Little Horn/Man of Sin, who is called the Anti-Christ at least once.

Where does the Bible call Beast/Little Horn/Man of Sin "antichrist" at least once?

We know hum by the name Anti-Christ but in the bible he has many names.

So Calling Him antichrist is NOT in the Bible?

All mean he will become the DICTATOR at the end of the Age. He will become the BEAST. And it doesn't matter what we call him.

If it doesn't matter, Why don't we call Him Jesus, or Joseph, or Mary, or Moses, Or Aaron, or Abraham, or Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James, Judas, Timothy, etc.. then?
From what I can tell, there is just as much scriptural instruction to call him antichrist as there is to call him any of those other names..
I think I'll start calling him "Mark", or maybe "Luke"... yes, Luke. I like Luke better. Luke it is.

The Little Horn s the coming Anti-Christ.

And scripture teaches this...where?

 

[LastSeven]

This has nothing to do with the MAN who will become the BEAST/Little Horn/Man of Sin, who is called the Anti-Christ at least once.

Can you show me please where exactly the beast or little horn or man of sin is directly linked to the name "anti-Christ".

 

[Neil10]

Since this topic has come up often in various threads, it seemed to deserve it's own.

For all of you who believe the Biblical "antichrist", the Biblical "man of Sin" and the Biblical "Beast" are one and the same individual, please provide as concise a scriptural analysis as you can to demonstrate this connection.

For those who hold that they are synonymous, I suggest that the best way to prove your case is to find parallel passages that speak of each character performing the same function or speaking of each character as synonymous participants in the same capacity at the same event.

Connect all 3 or connect any 2, but demonstrate this connection with scripture.

Any reply that consists of "Well, it's commonly known that the beast is the antichrist", or "People have always called the man of sin "antichrist", or "Everybody knows that the beast and the man of sin are the same person", or "wikipedia says they are the same"...will be summarily dismissed as invalid.

Please post the "Scriptural connection" not the "man made traditional" one.

 

[Revealing Times]

Where does the Bible teach this about antichrist?

You have to be able to decipher The bible via the Holy Spirit. If I explain it, you still won't get it. I have only explained this dozens of times on here. If you really want me to I will, but I am sure you can check out my thread on Babylon and get the explanation you need.

Where does the Bible call Beast/Little Horn/Man of Sin "antichrist" at least once?

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.

{ John explains to them that in the last day (SINGULAR) ANTICHRIST shall come, then says even now there are many antichrists. John was speaking about a SINGULAR MAN. He called him ANTICHRIST and differentiated him from the many that were already on earth. The problem I see with most people is they have no discernment, that is supposed to be one of Gods gifts. We all should have discernment.

God told different people different things that all match up, this makes God the ultimate Author. He called this Man the Little Horn in His Angels visitation to Daniel, to Isaiah he called this man the Assyrian, to Paul he called this man the Man of Sin, to John he called this man the BEAST and Antichrist. This comes from God, on purpose. God could call him CONCRETE, and he would still be the Anti-Christ of the end times. Christendom has chosen ONE NAME (Anti-Christ) to call him, to bring all the names under one umbrella. Its not rocket science. It is God using MANY NAMES, and man understanding all these names are about ONE MAN, thus we call him the Anti-Christ, and John spoke of this man in the SINGULAR....Anti-Christ, then spoke of the MANY anti-christs who had already come.

So Calling Him antichrist is NOT in the Bible?

EXPLAINED ABOVE.

If it doesn't matter, Why don't we call Him Jesus, or Joseph, or Mary, or Moses, Or Aaron, or Abraham, or Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James, Judas, Timothy, etc.. then?
From what I can tell, there is just as much scriptural instruction to call him antichrist as there is to call him any of those other names..
I think I'll start calling him "Mark", or maybe "Luke"... yes, Luke. I like Luke better. Luke it is.

That's cute and all, but it is asinine. I am speaking about all of the names he is called by, it doesn't matter which one we use, I think you knew that. We could do as you imply, and call him CONCRETE or RED, as long as we know we are speaking about the Man of Sin, BEAST, Anti-Christ, Little Horn etc. etc. The asinine paragraph you just typed was a waste of time.

And scripture teaches this...where?

Oh my, you don't understand the Little Horn is the Anti-Christ/Beast ? SMH

 

[Revealing Times]

Can you show me please where exactly the beast or little horn or man of sin is directly linked to the name "anti-Christ".


If you don't know I can't explain it.

 

[parousia70]

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.

{ John explains to them that in the last day (SINGULAR) ANTICHRIST shall come, then says even now there are many antichrists.

John says "It is the Last Hour" - was he wrong?

John was speaking about a SINGULAR MAN. He called him ANTICHRIST and differentiated him from the many that were already on earth.

The problem I see with most people is they have no discernment, that is supposed to be one of Gods gifts. We all should have discernment.

The Gift of discernment should point you to 1 John 4:3 for clarification:

"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.

The Antichrist that they heard was coming, according to John, was an IT not a HE as your man made tradition contends. In fact nowhere does John call antichrist a HE, Him, man, etc... it's not there. It simply, quite frankly, does not exist anywhere in the pages of scripture.
One must manufacture such from man made tradition alone, because scripture nowhere teaches it.

According to scripture, Antichrist was a first century Church Heresy SPIRIT that affected many, and who's arrival proved to John that the last hour of the last days had come upon them, then.. John nowhere in his explicit teaching on antichrist foretells of a singular, 21st century end time world ruling despot.

As I've said before, It never ceases to amaze me how much mythology has been built up over 2000 years on this idea of a Mr. Antichrist world ruler dude. No such thing exists anywhere in the bible, yet so many Christians buy into it hook, line, and sinker -- thanks to Hal Lindsey, J. Hagee, LaHaye, and other so-called "prophecy experts."

 

[Revealing Times]

John says "It is the Last Hour" - was he wrong?

For starters, that is not what he said in the verse I quoted.

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.

But the fact that you guys do not vet the scriptures and just accept every translation is a huge problem. Just like Day (YOM) can mean about 50 things, the LAST HOUR can mean many things, depending on the TIME-FRAME someone is referencing. So you might want to mention what Scripture you are speaking of, else I have no clue what you are speaking about.

Oh, I see, you chose to go with "HOUR" instead of the KJV "TIME" you might want to look up all the meanings for the Greek word used there. It can be figurative or literal. Just like the KINGS rule with the BEAST one Hour, you dont actually think they rule one Hour do you ? You don't actually think Babylon is destroyed on ONE HOUR do you ? John was no doubt telling whoever he was writing to that they were in the FINAL STAGE.....The Church Age so to speak, the are in the LAST TIME, there is nothing else to come, save Jesus' second coming (after the rapture). If you can't understand scripture man, that is on you. Stop trying to be so technical. If you would place many scriptures together, as God intended, you would see the big picture, instead you get stuck in the minutia like an HOUR.......Or in not understanding the Little Horn is the Anti-Christ.

The Gift of discernment should point you to 1 John 4:3 for clarification:

"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.

No kidding, that is why John said there be MANY ANTICHRISTS NOW...Because it comes forth from SATAN !! No Kidding.

But John also spoke of the SINGULAR MAN who shall come, THAT ANTICHRIST !! If you can't see it, that's on you. Why would he speak of a COMING SINGULAR ANTICHRIST.....Then mention there be many anti-christs in the world now ? Because these that are AGAINST CHRIST are of Satan, just like that ANTICHRIST will be. Its simple logic.

The Antichrist that they heard was coming, according to John, was an IT not a HE as your man made tradition contends. In fact nowhere does John call antichrist a HE, Him, man, etc... it's not there. It simply, quite frankly, does not exist anywhere in the pages of scripture.
One must manufacture such from man made tradition alone, because scripture nowhere teaches it.

Oh BROTHER....An IT....You must really believe the Anti-Christ is a Demon not a man, even though the bible proves over an over he is a MAN.

According to scripture, Antichrist was a first century Church Heresy SPIRIT that affected many, and who's arrival proved to John that the last hour of the last days had come upon them, then.. John nowhere in his explicit teaching on antichrist foretells of a singular, 21st century end time world ruling despot.

As I've said before, It never ceases to amaze me how much mythology has been built up over 2000 years on this idea of a Mr. Antichrist world ruler dude. No such thing exists anywhere in the bible, yet so many Christians buy into it hook, line, and sinker -- thanks to Hal Lindsey, J. Hagee, LaHaye, and other so-called "prophecy experts."

SMH.......Speaking of MYTHOLOGY.

The Anti-Christ is A MAN....Read Rev. 20:10, the Devil/Satan is locked in the pit, and the False Prophet and BEAST (MEN) are cast into hell. The Little Horn has eyes like a man and speaks WITH A MOUTH. The Beast of Rev. 13 is the same, he SPEAKS BLASPHEMIES.

WEIRD.

 

[ewq1938]

According to scripture, Antichrist was a first century Church Heresy SPIRIT that affected many, and who's arrival proved to John that the last hour of the last days had come upon them, then.. John nowhere in his explicit teaching on antichrist foretells of a singular, 21st century end time world ruling despot.

John and other write of this man using other names and the context of the events do take place a little prior to the 2nd coming which places it yet in our future. The fact that there have been "Antichrist" throughout history is simply known as shadows and types but not fulfillment of the final and literal "Antichrist".

This man can be identified in the gospels where Christ spends of the tribulation as well as in Rev during the same time period. What exact name is used is fully irrelevant.

 

[parousia70]

Oh, I see, you chose to go with "HOUR" instead of the KJV "TIME" you might want to look up all the meanings for the Greek word used there.

5610 // wra // hora // ho'-rah //

apparently a primary word; TDNT - 9:675,1355; n f

AV - hour 89, time 11, season 3, misc 5; 108

1) a certain definite time or season fixed by natural law and
returning with the revolving year
1a) of the seasons of the year, spring, summer, autumn, winter
2) the daytime (bounded by the rising and setting of the sun), a day
3) a twelfth part of the day-time, an hour, (the twelve hours of
the day are reckoned from the rising to the setting of the sun)
4) any definite time, point of time, moment

In none of these definitions can we arrive at "figurative, elastic period of time that stretches for millennia" the way your position demands we do.

John was no doubt telling whoever he was writing to that they were in the FINAL STAGE.....The Church Age so to speak, the are in the LAST TIME, there is nothing else to come, save Jesus' second coming (after the rapture).

So Israel's formation in 1948 is NOT prophesied in the pages of Scripture then? and It does not signify anything about the time we have left?

But John also spoke of the SINGULAR MAN who shall come

He plainly taught no such thing in his explicit teaching on antichrist.

If you can't see it, that's on you.

Yes. I do not "see" what is not taught.
That you choose to see things in scripture that scripture plainly does NOT teach, is on you.

Why would he speak of a COMING SINGULAR ANTICHRIST.....Then mention there be many anti-christs in the world now ?

It's not rocket surgery friend...John reminds His Audience that they had heard that the antichrist spirit was coming, and he infallibly announces IT's then present Arrival. It's Simple logic.

SMH.......Speaking of MYTHOLOGY.

The Anti-Christ is A MAN....Read Rev. 20:10, the Devil/Satan is locked in the pit, and the False Prophet and BEAST (MEN) are cast into hell.

Which has absolutely ZERO connection to Johns EXPLICIT teaching on the Antichrist Spirit.
You have invented a connection in the absence of any scriptural instruction to do so.

The Little Horn has eyes like a man and speaks WITH A MOUTH. The Beast of Rev. 13 is the same, he SPEAKS BLASPHEMIES.

Again, this has nothing to do with antichrist of 1 & 2 John.
The fact remains, I have given you ample opportunity to prove the connection you claim from scripture, and you still can not show a scriptural connection.
You have assumption and speculation as your foundation for this erroneous, man made, unscriptural teaching.

WEIRD.

You can say that again!

 

[parousia70]

John and other write of this man

1) ONLY JOHN teaches about Antichrist
2) John NEVER ONCE Says it is a Man

The fact that there have been "Antichrist" throughout history is simply known as shadows and types but not fulfillment of the final and literal "Antichrist".

Scripture teaches no such this as a "final and literal antichrist man"

This man can be identified in the gospels where Christ spends of the tribulation as well as in Rev during the same time period. What exact name is used is fully irrelevant.

So again, if the name is irrelevant, why not call Him Jesus?

To insist that ANY explicit teaching on ANY subject in the pages of scripture is "Fully Irrelevant" is untenable.

 

[ewq1938]

5610 // wra // hora // ho'-rah //

apparently a primary word; TDNT - 9:675,1355; n f

AV - hour 89, time 11, season 3, misc 5; 108

1) a certain definite time or season fixed by natural law and
returning with the revolving year

Kinda skipped over this part...