and the events that most clearly explain the rise of Antichrist, is Daniel 11:

2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.

Click to expand...

So this is like Daniel 8, explaining that Persia will rise up, with a 4th great leader which if we apply the 2 horns .. rules at the same time as the 3rd. (there were more than 4 Persian kings between Darius I and Alexander III)
and again, the kingdom is divided in cardinal directions in exactly 4 way split, and not according to the King's posterity (no heirs), nor his dominion (IE none of his direct subordinates, IE not Alexander's generals). His kingdom will be plucked up. That is, taken control of and divided by an outside power (Mystery Babylon? That is speculation)

What follows is a war between the king of the north and king of the south kingdoms out of this split. There's a lot of detail, political intrigue, a political marriage it seems? Some of these details I'm less clear on than others, it's a lot. So I don't break it down verse by verse as I have been doing with other passages that I feel I understand better.
These are passages I'm still praying about.

But here is where I can pick up and follow and feel I understand it better again, when the King of the North is lost (or dies):

19 Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land: but he shall stumble and fall, and not be found.
20 Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.
21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

Click to expand...

So here we have a chain of succession. The King of the North is either lost or killed. The first successor is a raiser of taxes, but he dies shortly after, seemingly by deception/subterfuge, perhaps something like poisoning.
The next successor is the one of note for this topic: the Antichrist.

key characteristics here:
1. Does not have the right to the kingdom, he's not an heir.
2. Does not take the kingdom by force or violence, he comes in peaceably, he's appointed the king even though it is not by a normal means of succession. It's done by flatteries.

22 And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.
23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.
24 He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time.

Click to expand...

So at first he's promising peace, the Prince of the covenant, that I'm not 100% sure about but it could be the covenant referred to in Daniel 9 that Antichrist confirms in essence there's a covenant made with many, the Vile person deposes who initiated that covenant, but then confirms that covenant. I believe it is also referred to in the league made with him that he begins to work against deceitfully.

Now the next part is more war campaigns against the south.

But here's where we find another important detail we've seen in previous chapters, linking these events and giving timing:

31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Click to expand...

So the abomination of Desolation... so this is all tied into a sign that Jesus told us to watch for and understand. This is NOT Antiochus if Jesus said it'd happen post 30AD.

35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

Click to expand...

This is outright also an end times passage

36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
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.
38 But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.
39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.

Click to expand...

So details:
1. Magnifies himself above God. (as Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 2)
2. He'll prosper until the return of Jesus and the wrath of God.
3. Whatever god his ancestors worshiped, won't be his god
4. The desire of women, while, it could be that he's homosexual, it's not necessarily true, I hear some think it's along the lines that the "desire of women" was to bear the Messiah Could be either or.
5. Doesn't regard any god, which is admittedly a hard detail for me because I normally associate the Antichrist as the Islamic Mahdi, many other details fit, this one admittedly, does not.
6. Divides the land. ties in with Joel 3.

Most the rest is back to the war against the South, but one last detail needs to be discussed:

45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

Click to expand...

Antiochus did not die in Jerusalem in the glorious holy mountain.

Heavenly Father, Holy is Your Name, we pray You will heal and strengthen Jane, and empower her in her job, in the Name of Jesus, as only You can do. Amen and Amen.

Landon Caeli said:

All I do is offer facts. One can make a mockery of the facts, and another can confuse actual Gaelic traditions with "the Pagans and the witches", but the facts still remain the facts, and the fiction is...Just fiction.

Click to expand...

I’m sorry, but claiming they’re lighting crosses on fire because it’s a Gaelic tradition is ludicrous. I was making a lighthearted comment because that’s all you can do when you’re confronted with something so absolutely absurd.

Ophiolite said:

Maybe not. They certainly have a much larger marketing budget. Ah! Maybe that's where a lot of the money goes. Who would have thought it?

Click to expand...

You think the difference between a large fast food chain and a small fast food chain is their marketing budget?

Bradskii said:

Well, they're ticking all the right boxes then, eh? Nothing wrong with a few white supremacists holding a protest now and then. The US is the land of the free and you all have equal rights to do as you please.

Oh, wait...my bad. Except non whites apparently. But at least they don't do a lot of physical harm. I haven't seen a lynching for, well...ages. That's got to be a big plus for the guys, surely. Well done the Klan!

Click to expand...

All I do is offer facts. One can make a mockery of the facts, and another can confuse actual Gaelic traditions with "the Pagans and the witches", but the facts still remain the facts, and the fiction is...Just fiction.

Hentenza said:

But you make it sound that working for the national fast food chain is a bad thing. They obviously have a much more marketable burger flipping skills than the small ones.

Click to expand...

Maybe not. They certainly have a much larger marketing budget. Ah! Maybe that's where a lot of the money goes. Who would have thought it?

Amo2 said:

I have been researching Christian history for at least 45 years now.

Click to expand...

And yet you know next to nothing about the Orthodox Church.

peter2 said:

Thank you for your answer. i meant a christian family structure
Actually i intended to create another thread, but your response encouraged me to write it here :


It's about the younger son of the parable that left his father.
What did he expect to find in a far country, that would be best for him than all the goods he enjoyed at his father's ?
How did such dream spring in his mind that the best was far from his father.
His home coming back yet was expected from the father.
So. What have switched over from the initial to the final situation of the younger son, apart from a false dream disillusionned ?

Seems to me, then, that happiness lies in not dreaming, in the love of the Father, first

Click to expand...

You know the parable is not actually about a father and son. But about God and born again children, one that left to pursue worldly pleasures and another son who got mad because God welcomed His wayward born again child back with open arms when he repented.

Landon Caeli said:

I never said they're "good ol' boys", I'm just going by the facts that there isn’t a lot physical harm being done by the group these days, and that they seem to have shifted towards being a protest group...

Click to expand...

Well, they're ticking all the right boxes then, eh? Nothing wrong with a few white supremacists holding a protest now and then. The US is the land of the free and you all have equal rights to do as you please.

Oh, wait...my bad. Except non whites apparently. But at least they don't do a lot of physical harm. I haven't seen a lynching for, well...ages. That's got to be a big plus for the guys, surely. Well done the Klan!

Sir Joseph said:

Since then, the evolutionary believing Bible skeptics have prompted an explosion of Christian apologetic material, including an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence for the Biblical creation model over the evolutionary model.

Click to expand...

The Biblical creation model is entirely consistent with the observed fact of evolution. The YEC doctrine of special creation has been rather thoroughly debunked, however.

But perhaps you could shows us that overwhelming amount of scientific evidence for YEC.

COOL!

Michie said:

Some in our society seem to think that the Creator has somehow been disproved by science, that evolution is a proven fact,

Click to expand...

That's like saying the creator has somehow been disproved by science, that gravity is a proven fact. The fact that gravity and evolution are directly observed constantly does not disprove God. How could it?

Gregory Thompson said:

Based on the events of Daniel 11 this is declaring the next kings in history.

The events of Daniel were fulfilled when Jesus Christ was on the Earth. Jesus even identified the Roman Empire as the iron foot with clay toes, this was when He identified Himself as the stone that crushes it to Powder. The pharisees who later said "our only king is Caesar" took offense when they found out Jesus was talking about crushing them to powder.

Revelation is a different prophecy compared to Daniel. It looks similar but it also has a chapter which speaks of the birth and resurrection of the savior. Comparing the two can sometimes lead to erroneous conclusions since "this is this, and that is that."

Daniel is about the past. Revelation speaks of the future, but assisting fortunetelling is not the purpose of the book.

Click to expand...

Wrong.
Gabriel outright says that Daniel 8 is about the end times.

This is what I'm talking about. People lean in on these historical interpretations... despite an Angel ordered by Jesus to explain the vision saying it was about the end times!

Your pastor, "great theologians" of the past, THEY say it's history.
JESUS said the Abomination of Desolation was something to watch for in the future from the first century, therefore it CLEARLY could not have been history from the first century point of view.
and an angel charged by Jesus to explain the vision said it was end times.

Why is that important?
Because without Daniel to tell us how the end times will play out, if Daniel is all historic.. we go into the end times half blind we are left with nothing but speculation on these events.

With Daniel being prophecy rather than history? We have a road map, we know where Antichrist will come from, we know the events that will precede his rise to power that is much clearer than Revelation alone.

Daniel 8, which again, explicitly is stated to be end times. Not history.

3 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.

Click to expand...

First the Ram, which is later explained to be Persia, it has 2 horns... at the same time. One of the horns is greater and it came up later than the lesser horn.
Horns we know represent kings from the previous vision, and is later confirmed in this chapter. So Persia, has 2 kings at the same time, and the greater king rose up last. This will be an important thing to remember when we get to Daniel 11.

5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.

Click to expand...

So the goat, which is later explained to be Greece (though it should be remembered that Western Turkey was considered part of ancient Greece and were in the Ionian league), and it has 1 great horn. Single king, as opposed to the ram's co-ruling kings.

6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.
7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.

Click to expand...

Greece/Turkey conquers Iran/Persia, yes, Alexander the Great prefigures this.

8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.

Click to expand...

It becomes a great Empire, then it is broken up into specifically 4 pieces in cardinal directions.

9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

Click to expand...

So the little horn, just like Daniel 7. In this we learn a detail: he comes from one of the splintered parts from that Greek/Turkish empire (the actual Hebrew word is "Javan" btw, it gets translated to Greece, but that is kind of an interpretation)

10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of the sanctuary was cast down.
12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.

Click to expand...

So this is the Abomination of Desolation that Jesus refers to in Matthew 24: it involves ending the daily sacrifices. For those sacrifices to end, they need to be happening.

Now I quoted the part where Gabriel was charged with explaining this vision in another post, but Gabriel explains it's an end times vision, then explains the symbols.

20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

Click to expand...

Alexander III was the 23rd King of Macedonia, so the actual king being talked about will be the first king of that Ionian region empire. Speculation but I believe it will be a Caliph.

22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

Click to expand...

That last part is important, the empire gets broken up will not be ones that he would choose, Alexander was succeeded by his generals, those are people that were under Alexander's dominion. This is saying that they will be people chosen that did NOT belong to this first King's dominion, outside leaders, or raised up from local people, but not people from this specific Empire that conquered.

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

Click to expand...

and this explains the little horn, coming out of that shattered kingdom, who then goes after the holy people (makes war on the saints in Daniel 7 and Revelation 17). He stands up against Jesus and gets destroyed.

Antiochus never stood against Jesus.

Valletta said:

...taxes or tariffs make little difference to me...

Click to expand...

So after arguing that Trump will bring down prices (from Day One!) and that this was one of the reasons why people should vote for him, you've now done a 180 and you're effectively saying that everyone should not just expect higher prices, but should in effect be grateful for them. Because hey, the US is now getting a better deal.

So paying more for everything is now your definition of 'a better deal'. Notwithstanding that you have prompted a lot of countries that did a lot of business with you to think twice about that. You're isolating yourself from the world economy. Australia for example is looking more to China, Japan and SE Asia. From here: The United States has proven itself an incomprehensible and unreliable ally

'Examples of America's unseriousness have been building to the point where the US isn't even a comprehensible ally, let alone a reliable one, or a safe place to invest — global investors are now steadily reducing their exposure to American assets.'

A steady alliance with so many countries that has been built up over decades is crumbling.

boughtwithaprice said:

There is no contention with your last statement.
We do works from salvation, not for salvation.
My point is that justification and sanctification cannot be separated unless you want to make them meaningless.

Click to expand...

If you believe that we do works from salvation then how were we made righteous? How can the believer with saving faith be saved without being righteous?

Paul gives us the answer:

“But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in God’s merciful restraint He let the sins previously committed go unpunished; for the demonstration, that is, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3‬:‭21‬-‭26‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬


“Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we also have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we celebrate in hope of the glory of God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭5‬:‭1‬-‭2‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Being justified or having been justified is in the aorist passive which means that receiver received it already as a gift with no further effort required. You cant accept justification apart from sanctification because your church teaches erroneously that both are one. Apostolic teaching does not agree with your church. There is nothing meaningless about being justified (once) and then work from salvation for sanctification. That is the order of things. We can’t make ourselves righteous (justified) by doing works. We can, however, work alongside our Lord for our sanctification.

boughtwithaprice said:

From the teaching that they can be separated, we have those that think they may give mental ascent to Jesus and then do nothing as if sanctification is optional

Click to expand...

There are certainly those that do not have saving faith. People need to complete their faith by being born again. Again, the parable of the sower explains the different types of faith.

boughtwithaprice said:

Non of the verses you share with me show that sanctification is optional or that we need not take care once we come to the knowledge of Christ

Click to expand...

Because there are non. You assume that my argument stipulates that anyone that calls Jesus Lord actually has saving faith. Every verse regarding sanctification however, states the work we do naturally by having been justified.

boughtwithaprice said:

Scripture says, that if we love Him, we keep His commandments and His commandments are not burdensome, yet we have those that preach His commandments are impossible, so don’t do them, just believe and you will be fine. That is not true and the warnings are all in scripture

Click to expand...

Again, not my argument. Those with saving faith will keep His commandments (Jesus not the law). The warning are for those without saving faith.

Paul teaches:

“Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8‬:‭1‬-‭2‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

The key here is “IN Christ Jesus”.

boughtwithaprice said:

It doesn’t matter if you won’t listen to me. I feel bad for you, but I cannot make you believe. You will face the judgement seat of Christ some day, and scripture says you will be judged by your works

Click to expand...

All of us will face the judgement seat of Christ. Actually, tell me where in scripture Christ says that? I can show you where Paul teaches it.

“According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each person must be careful how he builds on it. For no one can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, each one’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each one’s work. If anyone’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet only so as through fire.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭3‬:‭10‬-‭15‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Do you think Paul teaches contrary to Christ? Of course not. Works never saved anyone. I much rather have a reward here but even those that do not do good works are STILL saved.

boughtwithaprice said:

I will loudly proclaim the truth of scripture and Apostolic teaching which was sealed by the tongues of fire from the Holy Spirit

Click to expand...

The apostles never taught works salvation. None of them did. The Catholic Church, however, it’s a different story.

boughtwithaprice said:

Last time I checked, there were no tongues of fire poured out on those that preach sanctification is optional. You need to study history and scripture, and not rely on your distortion

Click to expand...

No one has argued that. If you were to actually read and address other people’s posts you would know this. You are assigning others the wrong premise. You still believe that if those with saving faith do not do works during sanctification that they can loose their saving faith. That premise results in your belief that works are required for salvation. You talk with both sides of your mouth when you say that we work from salvation and then require works for salvation. Let me tell you what else Paul teaches in the holy scriptures.

“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, since otherwise grace is no longer grace.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭11‬:‭6‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

I'm not a moderator, but the topic kind of looks like politics.

Just saying...