ARE YOU READY FOR THE MARK OF THE BEAST?

Status
Not open for further replies.

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
WHAT IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST AND WHEN DO PEOPLE RECEIVE IT?

SUMMARY SO FAR AND PUTTING IT TOGETHER

We have looked at and ideitified who the HARLOT WOMAN sitting on the scarlet colored BEAST is and let the scriptures define these symbols which the bible alone says that the MYSTERY HARLOT NAMED BABYLON represents the UNFAITHFUL MOTHER CHURCH of all Churches which also has UNFAITHFUL DAUGHTER CHURCHES * REVELATION 14:8; 17:1-5; 18:1-10. We have also seen through God’s WORD that it is NOT the people in these CHURCHES that God are the problem but what they teach the people which leads them away from God’s Word and that God has his people in ALL of these Churches and is calling them out to worship him in Spirit and in TRUTH according to the Word of God *REVELATION 18:1:4. We also saw that a BEAST in bible prophecy represents a KINGDOM while a HORN on a BEAST represents a KING that may come out of that KINGDOM *DANIEL 7:23-25

We also looked the HEBREW and GREEK meanings of MARK; SEAL and SIGN and compared these word meanings with the scriptures found in REVELATION 13:6; REVELATION 7:4-10; DEUTERONOMY 6:8; EZEKIEL 9:1-11; EXEKIEL 20:11-12; All of which liked the SERVITUDE of OBEDIENCE to God’s 10 Commandments to God’s SEAL; SIGN and MARK (which all have a similar meaning) or SERVITUDE to DISOBEDIENCE to God’s Commandments. *REVELATION 14:8-12. As the MARK is a symbol of SERVITUDE to God’s WORD and OBEDIENCE or SERVITUDE to the BEAST and DISOBEDIENCE we saw that RECEIVING the BEASTS MARK of DISOBEDIENCE in the HAND or the FOREHEAD means; *HAND = To act out or to do action (Ecclesiastes 9:10; Acts 4:28 etc) *FOREHAND = To believe or think (EZEKIEL 3:8-9; JEREMIAH 3:3 see also word meanings).

……………

CONCLUSION: The MARK OF THE BEAST is a SYMBOL OF SERVITUDE to the BEAST of REVELATION 13 and REVELATION 14; REVELATION 17 and REVELATION 18 which is influenced by the MOTHER OF ALL UNFAITHFUL CHURCHES names BABYLON THE MAOTHER OF HARLOTS *REVELATION 17:1-5.

This MARK is received in the HAND which means to act out and do what the BEAST commands in WORSHIPPING the BEASTS image (you do not have to believe the BEAST), while to receive the MARK in the FOREHEAD means to BELIEVE and do what the BEAST commands *REVELATION 13:15-16.

Those who are SEALED by GOD serve him through OBEDIENCE and SERVITUDE to God’s WORD *REVELATION 12:17; REVELATION 14:12; REVELATION 22:14. They do not bow down to the BEASTS FALSE IMAGE of WORSHIP and before the final judgments of God are poured out GOD calls all his true people to leave these CHURCHES to whorship and follow him in Spirit and in Truth.

The MARK OF THE BEAST AND THE SEAL OF GOD is received over SERVITUDE doing what the BEAST asks resulting in DISOBEDIENCE to God’s WORD or BELIEVING and FOLLOWING what God asks us through his WORD and disobeying what the BEAST asks us. The issue will be over WORSHIP. Who do we worship, God by believing and following his WORD or the BEAST by following the teaching and traditions of men that lead us away from God to break his Commandments *REVELATION 13:8; 13:12; 13:15; 14:7; 14:11; MATTHEW 15:3-9

The issue of worship is over God’s 4th Commandment of the 10 commandments that give us a knowledge of GOOD and EVIL; SIN AND RIGHTOUESNESS *ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7; JAMES 2:10-11; 1 JOHN 3:4; PSALMS 119:172

This results in a people of GOD who keep ALL THE COMMANDMENTS of God by faith in God’s WORD. REVELATION 22:9; REVELATION 12:17; REVELATION 14:12; REVELATION 22:14. The issue is over OBEDIENCE and DISOBEDIENCE.

No one has received the MARK OF THE BEAST until it become ENFORCED UNDER CIVIL LAW *REVELATION 13:16-17. The issue will be over worship *REVELATION 13:8; 13:12; 13:15; 14:7; 14:11; MATTHEW 15:3-9. Do we BELIEVE and FOLLOW God’s WORD and keep ALL THE COMMANDMETNS of GOD *REVELATION 22:9; REVELATION 12:17; REVELATION 14:12; REVELATION 22:14 or do we BELIEVE and FOLLOW the MOTHER OF HARLOTS *The MOTHER of all UNFAITHFUL CHURCHES, and RECEIVE the MARK of the BEAST? Which will you choose?

.............

SIN is the breaking of God's Commandments (James 2:9-11; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4) Those who CONTINUE in UNREPENTANT SIN will NOT enter into the KINGDOM of HEAVEN.

.............

God's 4th commandment is one of the ten (Exodus 20:8-11) If we knowingly break it when God asks us not to we stand guilty before God of committing sin (James 2:8-12). If we do not seek him in repentance and forgiveness we are in danger of the Judgement (Hebrews 10:26-27)

Sunday worship is a tradition and teaching of man that has led many to UNKNOWINGLY break the commandments of God. Jesus says that if we follow the traditions of man that break the commandments of God we are not following God (Matthew 15:3-9)

There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says that God's 4th Commandment is now ABOLISHED and we are now commanded to KEEP Sunday as a Holy day. Who should we follow the teachings and traditions of men or the Word of God? Who should we believe the Words of men or the Word of God?

In times of ignorance God winks at but now, <when a KNOWLEDGE of the truth has come> calls all men everywhere to REPENT (FOLLOW) (Acts 17:30-31).


God bless.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,342
26,787
Pacific Northwest
✟728,236.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Seeing as, historically, the beast was Nero (and, more broadly, the imperial power structure of ancient Rome), the "mark" should be understood in that context.

The Apocalypse of St. John mentions a different kind of mark too, we see the host of saints who are sealed by God on their foreheads. So we have two sorts of things here, one is marked by the beast, or one is sealed by God. It's a poignant statement: You can't belong to Christ and Caesar at the same time, either Christ is Lord or Caesar is lord, not both.

While these things are historically relevant, because they were about circumstances two thousand years ago when St. John wrote the Apocalypse; there is a continued lesson for us as the Church. We can never forfeit our faith and allegiance to Jesus, to abandon our eternal hope, for the temporal and political powers of this age. And the overall theme and point of the text remains as well: That no matter what the powers of this world rage against us, Christ our Lord has triumphed, He has defeated sin, death, hell, and the devil and will, in the end, return and God will be set all things right and make all things new. We have no need to fear the powers and principalities, because our gaze is set upon Christ who has the victory, now and forever.

To quote the great Lutheran hymn,

"And though this world, with devils filled,
Should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God hath willed
His truth to triumph through us:
The Prince of Darkness grim,
We tremble not for him;
His rage we can endure,
For lo, his doom is sure,
One little word shall fell him.

That word above all earthly powers,
No thanks to them, abideth;
The Spirit and the gifts are ours
Through Him who with us sideth:
Let goods and kindred go,
This mortal life also;
The body they may kill:
God’s truth abideth still,
His kingdom is forever.
"

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Seeing as, historically, the beast was Nero (and, more broadly, the imperial power structure of ancient Rome), the "mark" should be understood in that context.

The Apocalypse of St. John mentions a different kind of mark too, we see the host of saints who are sealed by God on their foreheads. So we have two sorts of things here, one is marked by the beast, or one is sealed by God. It's a poignant statement: You can't belong to Christ and Caesar at the same time, either Christ is Lord or Caesar is lord, not both.

While these things are historically relevant, because they were about circumstances two thousand years ago when St. John wrote the Apocalypse; there is a continued lesson for us as the Church. We can never forfeit our faith and allegiance to Jesus, to abandon our eternal hope, for the temporal and political powers of this age. And the overall theme and point of the text remains as well: That no matter what the powers of this world rage against us, Christ our Lord has triumphed, He has defeated sin, death, hell, and the devil and will, in the end, return and God will be set all things right and make all things new. We have no need to fear the powers and principalities, because our gaze is set upon Christ who has the victory, now and forever.

To quote the great Lutheran hymn,

"And though this world, with devils filled,
Should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God hath willed
His truth to triumph through us:
The Prince of Darkness grim,
We tremble not for him;
His rage we can endure,
For lo, his doom is sure,
One little word shall fell him.

That word above all earthly powers,
No thanks to them, abideth;
The Spirit and the gifts are ours
Through Him who with us sideth:
Let goods and kindred go,
This mortal life also;
The body they may kill:
God’s truth abideth still,
His kingdom is forever.
"

-CryptoLutheran

Who says that the BEAST is NERO?

5 Reasons Why “Neron Kaiser” is Not the Calculation of 666


1. The Name is calculated from Hebrew instead of Greek.

The book of Revelation was written by the apostle John in the common language used by the seven churches. There are many Jewish themes and even a few Hebrew words in the book of Revelation but the original audience were more familiar with the Greek language. Nrwn Qsr is the Hebrew spelling of Nero’s name but it is not natural to jump to a whole different language to try to calculate the number of the beast. The warning of this is beast was not just a warning to the Jews and those who spoke Hebrew, it is a warning to all Christians. Therefore, it is more natural to calculate the name in the common tongue known to the original audience and in the language that they received it.

One might protest against the arbitrariness of searching for the number 666 in the numerical value of Hebrew letters in a book written in Greek. Also, since Nero did not return, and, consequently, the deadly wound was not healed, do they mean to tell us that the writer of the Apocalypse was a false prophet? But such questions would not trouble the critics of this school; for they can sit loose to such niceties.

– David Brown, The Apocalypse: Its Structure and Primary Predictions (1891)

2. The calculation of the 666 is not for a specific individual.

Ken Gentry makes the case that 666 is a number of an individual. It’s the name of a specific person who the original audience would know.

The name-number 666 must be “that of a man” (Rev. 13:18b). This excludes any interpretation that would involve demonic beings, philosophical ideas, political movements, or anything other than an individual human person.

– Ken Gentry, The Beast of Revelation, 10

Revelation 13:18 says, “…Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man…” John is not saying that it is a number of a specific person. He is saying that this number is calculated by the numbers used by man. This is pretty easy to understand when compared to another place in Revelation. Revelation 21:17 says, “And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.” It would be awkward if we took that verse to say the “measure of a man” means the measurement of a specific human being since there has never been a person that measured 216 feet. What is being communicated is the measurement of the wall in the way humans measure. Concerning Revelation 21:17, Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown understand this as “The ordinary measure used by men is the measure here used by the angel.” In the same way, “the number of a man” is the calculation in the way humans do math.

the number of a man—that is, counted as men generally count. So the phrase is used in Rev 21:17…

– Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871), Volume 2, 585

Since the number is “the number of the beast,” it is not inappropriate to attribute this to a specific individual. The name must be connected to the entire beast itself and not only one of the seven heads of the beast.

3. “Nrwn Qsr” is not the common Hebrew spelling for Nero’s name.

If we are to count the number of the beast correctly, it would make sense to use the common spelling of the name. Instead, Nrwn Qsr, an uncommon spelling of Nero’s name is used. Why would God tell the church to calculate the number using a rare spelling? Ken Gentry explains how this spelling was discovered.

Interestingly, several scholars of the last century – Fritzsche, Holtzmann, Berm-y, Hitzig and Reuss – each stumbled independently upon the name Nero Caesar almost simultaneously. We have seen that the Greek spelling of Nero’s name has the value 1005. A Hebrew spelling of his name was Nrwn Qsr (pronounced: Neron Kaiser). It has been documented by archaeological finds that a first century Hebrew spelling of Nero’s name provides us with precisely the value of 666. Jastrow’s lexicon of the Talmud contains this very spelling.

– Ken Gentry, The Beast of Revelation, 34

This spelling exists but it was not common. It is even possible that these sources followed a misspelling of the name. It is true that spelling was not standardized during the first century but in this situation, it is important to have the spelling in order to calculate the number precisely. The common Hebrew spelling from Latin is Nrw Qsr. In both Hebrew and Latin, this name equals 616 and not 666. This leads me to the next objection.

4. “616” manuscript variant should be rejected.

There is a manuscript that contains the number 616 instead of 666. Partial preterists claim that this strengthens their view because of the alternate Latin spelling of Nero’s name.

John, a Jew, used a Hebrew spelling of Nero’s name in order to arrive at the figure 666. But when Revelation began circulating among those less acquainted with Hebrew, a well-meaning copyist who knew the meaning of 666 might have intended to make its deciphering easier by altering it to 616. It surely is no mere coincidence that 616 is the numerical value of ‘Nero Caesar,’ when spelled in Hebrew by transliterating it from its more common Latin spelling.

– Ken Gentry, The Beast of Revelation, 35

Gary DeMar explains how 616 instead of 666 ended up in that manuscript.

A Latin copyist might have thought that 666 was an error because Nero Caesar did not add up to 666 when transliterated into Latin. He then changed 666 to 616 to conform to the Latin rendering since it was generally accepted that Nero was the Beast.

– Gary DeMar, The Mark of the Beast – 666 or 616? (The Mark of the Beast - 666 or 616? The American Vision)

This actually does not strengthen the partial preterist view, but weakens it. How does Gary DeMar know this copyist was thinking of the Latin name of Nero? And why is it OK to intentionally change what he was copying? These are not facts, only speculation. God promises to preserve his word and has committed to the church the oracles of God (Gal. 3:2). No one has the right to alter God’s word. Later in Revelation, we find out the deadly consequences of changing God’s word. If the copyist intentionally changed God’s word then that variant and his interpretation should be rejected (if he really interpreted the number of the beast in that way).

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

– Revelation 22:18–19

The church never accepted the 616 variant; 666 is the authoritative reading. Irenaeus knew about his variant and recognized it as a copyist error.

I do not know how it is that some have erred following the ordinary mode of speech, and have vitiated the middle number in the name, deducting the amount of fifty from it, so that instead of six decades they will have it that there is but one. [I am inclined to think that this occurred through the fault of the copyists, as is wont to happen, since numbers also are expressed by letters; so that the Greek letter which expresses the number sixty was easily expanded into the letter Iota of the Greeks.] Others then received this reading without examination; some in their simplicity, and upon their own responsibility, making use of this number expressing one decad; while some, in their inexperience, have ventured to seek out a name which should contain the erroneous and spurious number. Now, as regards those who have done this in simplicity, and without evil intent, we are at liberty to assume that pardon will be granted them by God. But as for those who, for the sake of vainglory, lay it down for certain that names containing the spurious number are to be accepted, and affirm that this name, hit upon by themselves, is that of him who is to come; such persons shall not come forth without loss, because they have led into error both themselves and those who confided in them.

– Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 50.30.1 (brackets are original)

5. There are no early church interpretations that fit the Neron Kaiser interpretation.

Ken Gentry says that the copyist “knew the meaning of 666.” How does he know the thoughts of the copyist? Gary DeMar says that “it was generally accepted that Nero was the Beast.” How does he know what was generally accepted during that time? The fact is that there is no historical evidence that the early church interpreted 666 as the calculation of Nero’s name. Gentry knows that as well. He says concerning this historical objection, “In fact, it is the strongest argument against it.” (The Beast of Revelation, pg. 36)

As reformed Christians, we hold to Sola Scriptura. That is, Scripture alone is the final authority. This does not mean it is our only authority. God has blessed the church with teachers and many gifted theologians to help us understand the difficult parts of Scripture. If an interpretation of Scripture did not exist in church history for a long time, there is a good chance that the new view is wrong. What church history has said is very important because “…no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20). Many anti-dispensational theologians reject the pre-tribulational rapture because of how new that interpretation is. This rapture view was first invented around 1830 and popularized by John Darby. This view of Nero and 666 was never heard of before 1831.

The solution to the riddle of 666 which has been most widely accepted since it was first suggested in 1831 is that 666 is the sum of the letters of Nero Caesar written in Hebrew characters as נרון קסר (נ = 50 + ר = 200 + ו = 6 + ן = 50 + ק = 100 + ס = 60 + ר = 200). Few of the many other solutions by gematria which have been proposed offer a name, which the phrase ‘the number of his name’ (Rev. 13:17; 15:2) requires, and of those few which do this seems eminently the most preferable.

– Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation (1993) , 387
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Is NERO the BEAST of REVELATION 13? Nope.

REVELATION 13:1-18
[1], and he stood upon the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns, and seven heads, and on his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy.
[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 throne, and great authority.
[3], And I saw one of his heads as though it had been smitten unto death; and his death-stroke was healed: and the whole earth wondered after the beast;
[4], and they worshipped the dragon, because he gave his authority unto the beast; and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? And who is able to war with him?
[5], and there was given to him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and there was given to him authority to continue forty and two months.
[6], And he opened his mouth for blasphemies against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, even them that dwell in the heaven.
[7], And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and there was given to him authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation.
[8], And all that dwell on the earth shall worship him, every one whose name hath not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that hath been slain.
[9], If any man hath an ear, let him hear.
[10], If any man is for captivity, into captivity he goeth: if any man shall kill with the sword, with the sword must he be killed. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.
[11], And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like unto a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
[12], And he exerciseth all the authority of the first beast in his sight. And he maketh the earth and them that dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose death-stroke was healed.
[13], And he doeth great signs, that he should even make fire to come down out of heaven upon the earth in the sight of men.
[14], And he deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by reason of the signs which it was given him to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast who hath the stroke of the sword and lived.
[15], And it was given unto him to give breath to it, even to the image to the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as should not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
[16], And he causeth all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the bond, that there be given them a mark on their right hand, or upon their forehead;
[17], and that no man should be able to buy or to sell, save he that hath the mark, even the name of the beast or the number of his name.
[18], Here is wisdom. He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast; for it is the number of a man: and his number is Six hundred and sixty and six.

.............

Q1, One might ask whether an image of Nero was ever given breath so that it spoke, and whether any “beast” v14 who supported Nero had everyone killed who would not worship his image—an image which both breathed and spoke?

Q2, One might also ask whether there was a time in Nero’s reign where people couldn’t buy of sell v17 unless they had a mark on their right hand or forehead (not Nero’s image on the coins, as some claim)?

Q3, Not to mention his name does not add up to 666.

.............

PROTESTANT VIEW.

The historical and reformed view is that the office of papacy is the Antichrist, Man of Sin, and second Beast of Revelation. I will not argue for this view here since there a 3 part series on this topic. The historicist view is that 666 is the calculation of the Greek word, LATEINOS (the Latin one). The earliest record of this interpretation is found in Irenaeus’ book, Against Heresies (180 AD). I will let Rev. Wilhelmus à Brakel explain the reason for this understanding.

The Greeks calculated with their alphabet. Their letters were also numbers. That means that one word can represent a certain matter, place, or person, as well as a number. This was the number 666. The Greek letters, which were used for this number, were also a number of man, spelling a human name. Shortly after the time of the apostles the number 666 translated to the name LATEINOZ, the first king of the region where Rome is located. The land was called Latium after him. And the language they spoke was called the Latin language, as it is still called. And so this number 666, which spells Lateinoz, leads as by the hand to Rome and in Rome to the pope, who established himself within the church. Then it was referred to as the Latin Church, to make a distinction with the Eastern Church, which was referred to as the Greek Church. Until today the service is still executed in Latin. The pope is still writing his bulls and decrees in the Latin language. This name and his number clearly show that the pope is the Antichrist, which is described in great detail in PART 1, chapter 24, § 44 until § 51. This became clearer during the time of the Reformation.

– Rev. Wilhelmus à Brakel’s (1635 -1711), Not To Be Ignored: Commentary on Revelation

This view is historical, reformed, consistent with the original language of Revelation, and represents the antichristian papal beast. I will conclude this study with multiple quotes from the early church and reformed writers.

For if there are many names found possessing this number, it will be asked which among them shall the coming man bear. It is not through a want of names containing the number of that name that I say this, but on account of the fear of God, and zeal for the truth: for the name Evanthas (ΕΥΑΝΘΑΣ) contains the required number, but I make no allegation regarding it. Then also Lateinos (ΛΑΤΕΙΝΟΣ) has the number six hundred and sixty-six; and it is a very probable [solution], this being the name of the last kingdom [of the four seen by Daniel]. For the Latins are they who at present bear rule: I will not, however, make any boast over this [coincidence].

– Irenaeus, Against Heresies (180AD), 5.30.3

and has number] It is to be found in the numbers of the Greek letters of his general name: for men’s names in Greek, contained numbers in the letters.They had not other figures, as we have, but counted by letters.

Six hundred threescore and six] S. John would not plainly set down the name, lest he should make the Roman Emperours offended with the Christians; as S.PauI doth not name him that letteth, 2 Thes. 2.6,7. Yet such plain tokens are set down by both, that he, and antichrist his upholder, might be known when he cometh. The truth is, this is the name of the beast, not of antichrist; and so a national name, describing that state where antichrist should rise and reign: and therefore though it is like to be comprehended in Greek letters, in which language John wrote; yet it is not likely to be Greek word originally. Ireneus, and the ancients, take it for the word Lateinos, which, in Greek letters, maketh six hundred sixty & six: showing, that antichrist should be a Roman, or one of the Latin Church. Others suppose his power should begin in the year of Christ six hundred sixty and six. Others, that it should last so many years in the height of it.

– Westminster Assembly, Annotations and Commentary on the Whole Bible (1657)

…the wound of the first beast was healed, and he (the second beast) was to make the image speak, that is to say, he should be powerful; and it is manifest to all that those who at present still hold the power are Latins. If, then, we take the name as the name of a single man, it becomes Latinus.

– Hippolytus (170 – 235 AD), Treatise on Christ and Antichrist

Therefore, we dismiss these opinions, while holding firmly to the popular and more commonly accepted view which maintains that the Pontiff, his rank and his rule, are correctly described by this prophecy. In fact, we may compute his name in either Greek or Hebrew, the two languages by which God gave his oracles and prophecies (shrouding them in mystery), yet the sum of their letters will yield the same result. For, if the computation be made in Greek, which is quite appropriate considering the Revelation was written in Greek to Greeks, no other suitable name occurs than the name Lateinos, Λατεινος, as Irenæus conjectured. And, if the name Romanus should be counted in the Hebrew characters, it will mean either Roman seat or Roman, as John Foxe determined. Moreover, the Hebrew term comprises the same meaning as that of the Greek term. For Romanus or Lateinos is the name of the aforementioned Beast and is that name which the Pope imposes on all his disciples. It is on this self-same Beast that all these and additional marks of Antichrist converge; i.e., such marks as causing the whole earth, which follows him, to wonder; his blaspheming the name of God; and the great power he holds over the heads of all peoples and tongues, etc. That this name contains the number 666 in both Greek and Hebrew is not a point of dispute:

Λ α τ ε ι ν ο ς
30 1 300 5 10 50 70 200 666

Thus, the Roman Pontiff and his Seat is undoubtedly indicated. For he is truly Latin who holds the remains of the Latin empire and the ancient seat. By no small coincidence, he does not allow public worship to be conducted in any other language than Latin; nor does he publish his official documents and decrees in any other language. Also, the Eastern Orthodox call the Roman Church by the name Latin Church, as seen in the general councils where this distinction was meticulously made between the western fathers or bishops, called Latins, while the rest were called Greeks. Therefore, the name Lateinos (in Greek) or Romanus (in Hebrew) is fully consistent with the fulfillment of this prophecy, in that it predicts the seat of the Beast to be Rome, where it remains to this day. The truth is out in the open.

Francis Turretin’s 7th Disputation, Whether it Can Be Proven The Pope of Rome is the Antichrist

the number of a man—that is, counted as men generally count. So the phrase is used in Rev 21:17. The number is the number of a man, not of God; he shall extol himself above the power of the Godhead, as the man of sin [Aquinas]. Though it is an imitation of the divine name, it is only human.

six hundred threescore and six—A and Vulgate write the numbers in full in the Greek. But B writes merely the three Greek letters standing for numbers, Ch, X, St. “C reads” 616, but Irenaeus, 328, opposes this and maintains “666.” Irenaeus, in the second century, disciple of Polycarp, John’s disciple, explained this number as contained in the Greek letters of Lateinos (L being thirty; A, one; T, three hundred; E, five; I, ten; N, fifty; O, seventy; S, two hundred). The Latin is peculiarly the language of the Church of Rome in all her official acts; the forced unity of language in ritual being the counterfeit of the true unity; the premature and spurious anticipation of the real unity, only to be realized at Christ’s coming, when all the earth shall speak “one language” (Zep 3:9). The last Antichrist may have a close connection with Rome, and so the name Lateinos (666) may apply to him.”

– Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871), Volume 2, Page 585

…but the name “Lateinos” bids as fair as any, which is mentioned by so ancient a writer as Irenaeus, who was a hearer of Polycarp, a disciple of John, the writer of this book; now the numeral value of the letters of this word makes up exactly 666, thus; λ 30. α1. τ 300. ε 5. ι 10. ν 50. ο 70. ς 200. in all 666; and it is well known that the church of Rome is called the Latin Church and the pope of Rome the head of the Latin church, and his seat is in the Latin empire, and the service of the beast is in the Latin tongue, and the Bible is kept in that language, from the reading of the common people…

John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible

The number of the beast being 666, may hint that the pagan doctrines, laws, and offices have apparently a marvellous connection, but are no way founded on the doctrine of the twelve apostles. It is found in the Greek LATEINOS, and the Hebrew ROMIITH, and points to the Christian church, and the place of its peculiar residence. About A. D. 666, it is said that Vitalian marked his subjects with the use of the Latin or Roman tongue. From the time when John had his vision of a civil as well as an eclesiastical head, A.D. 756, or some years after, when he began to exercise his temporal jurisdiction, might be precisely 666 years.

John Brown’s Self-Interpreting Bible (1831)
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
WHO DID THE EARLY REFORMERS BELIEVE THE ANTICHRIST WAS?
PART 1/2


Protestant Reformers View of Antichrist (Source Wikipedia)

See also: Great Apostasy, Protestant Reformation, and History of Protestantism

Protestant Reformers, including John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, John Thomas, John Knox, Roger Williams, Cotton Mather, Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley, as well as most Protestants of the 16th-18th centuries, felt that the Early Church had been led into the Great Apostasy by the Papacy and identified the Pope with the Antichrist.[13][14] The Centuriators of Magdeburg, a group of Lutheran scholars in Magdeburg headed by Matthias Flacius, wrote the 12-volume Magdeburg Centuries to discredit the Catholic Church and lead other Christians to recognize the Pope as the Antichrist. So, rather than expecting a single Antichrist to rule the earth during a future Tribulation period, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other Protestant Reformers saw the Antichrist as a present feature in the world of their time, fulfilled in the Papacy.[13][15]

Among the others who interpreted the Biblical prophecy historistically there were many Church Fathers; Justin Martyr wrote about the Antichrist: "He Whom Daniel foretells would have dominion for a time and times and an half, is even now at the door".[16] Irenaeus wrote in Against Heresies about the coming of the Antichrist: "This Antichrist shall ... devastate all things ... But then, the Lord will come from Heaven on the clouds ... for the righteous".[17] Tertullian looking to the Antichrist wrote: "He is to sit in the temple of God, and boast himself as being god. In our view, he is Antichrist as taught us in both the ancient and the new prophecies; and especially by the Apostle John, who says that 'already many false-prophets are gone out into the world' as the fore-runners of Antichrist".[18] Hippolytus of Rome in his Treatise on Christ and Antichrist wrote: "As Daniel also says (in the words) 'I considered the Beast, and look! There were ten horns behind it – among which shall rise another (horn), an offshoot, and shall pluck up by the roots the three (that were) before it.' And under this, was signified none other than Antichrist."[19][20] Athanasius of Alexandria clearly hold to the historical view in his many writings; in The Deposition of Arius, he wrote: "I addressed the letter to Arius and his fellows, exhorting them to renounce his impiety.... There have gone forth in this diocese at this time certain lawless men – enemies of Christ – teaching an apostasy which one may justly suspect and designate as a forerunner of Antichrist".[21] Jerome wrote: "Says the apostle [Paul in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians], 'Unless the Roman Empire should first be desolated, and antichrist proceed, Christ will not come.'" He also identifies the Little horn of Daniel 7:8 and 7:24-25 which "shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and shall think to change the times and the law" as the Papacy.[22]

Some Franciscans had considered the Emperor Frederick II a positive Antichrist who would purify the Catholic Church from opulence, riches and clergy.[23]

Some of the debated features of the Reformation's Historicist interpretations reached beyond the Book of Revelation. They included the identification of:

* the Antichrist (1 and 2 John);
* the Beast of Revelation 13;
* the Man of Sin, or Man of Lawlessness, of 2 Thessalonians 2 (2:1-12);
* the "Little horn" of Daniel 7 and 8;
* The Abomination of desolation of Daniel 9, 11, and 12; and
* the harlot of Babylon of Revelation 17.

The Protestant Reformers tended to hold the belief that the Antichrist power would be revealed so that everyone would comprehend and recognize that the Pope is the real, true Antichrist and not the vicar of Christ. Doctrinal works of literature published by the Lutherans, the Reformed Churches, the Presbyterians, the Baptists, the Anabaptists, and the Methodists contain references to the Pope as the Antichrist, including the Smalcald Articles, Article 4 (1537),[24] the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope written by Philip Melanchthon (1537),[25] the Westminster Confession, Article 25.6 (1646), and the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, Article 26.4. In 1754, John Wesley published his Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, which is currently an official Doctrinal Standard of the United Methodist Church. In his notes on the Book of Revelation (chapter 13), he commented: "The whole succession of Popes from Gregory VII are undoubtedly Antichrists. Yet this hinders not, but that the last Pope in this succession will be more eminently the Antichrist, the Man of Sin, adding to that of his predecessors a peculiar degree of wickedness from the bottomless pit."[26][27]

to be continued....
 
  • Like
Reactions: JLB777
Upvote 0

sparow

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,540
426
85
✟482,162.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
WHO DID THE EARLY REFORMERS BELIEVE THE ANTICHRIST WAS?
PART 1/2


Protestant Reformers View of Antichrist (Source Wikipedia)

See also: Great Apostasy, Protestant Reformation, and History of Protestantism

Protestant Reformers, including John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, John Thomas, John Knox, Roger Williams, Cotton Mather, Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley, as well as most Protestants of the 16th-18th centuries, felt that the Early Church had been led into the Great Apostasy by the Papacy and identified the Pope with the Antichrist.[13][14] The Centuriators of Magdeburg, a group of Lutheran scholars in Magdeburg headed by Matthias Flacius, wrote the 12-volume Magdeburg Centuries to discredit the Catholic Church and lead other Christians to recognize the Pope as the Antichrist. So, rather than expecting a single Antichrist to rule the earth during a future Tribulation period, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other Protestant Reformers saw the Antichrist as a present feature in the world of their time, fulfilled in the Papacy.[13][15]

Among the others who interpreted the Biblical prophecy historistically there were many Church Fathers; Justin Martyr wrote about the Antichrist: "He Whom Daniel foretells would have dominion for a time and times and an half, is even now at the door".[16] Irenaeus wrote in Against Heresies about the coming of the Antichrist: "This Antichrist shall ... devastate all things ... But then, the Lord will come from Heaven on the clouds ... for the righteous".[17] Tertullian looking to the Antichrist wrote: "He is to sit in the temple of God, and boast himself as being god. In our view, he is Antichrist as taught us in both the ancient and the new prophecies; and especially by the Apostle John, who says that 'already many false-prophets are gone out into the world' as the fore-runners of Antichrist".[18] Hippolytus of Rome in his Treatise on Christ and Antichrist wrote: "As Daniel also says (in the words) 'I considered the Beast, and look! There were ten horns behind it – among which shall rise another (horn), an offshoot, and shall pluck up by the roots the three (that were) before it.' And under this, was signified none other than Antichrist."[19][20] Athanasius of Alexandria clearly hold to the historical view in his many writings; in The Deposition of Arius, he wrote: "I addressed the letter to Arius and his fellows, exhorting them to renounce his impiety.... There have gone forth in this diocese at this time certain lawless men – enemies of Christ – teaching an apostasy which one may justly suspect and designate as a forerunner of Antichrist".[21] Jerome wrote: "Says the apostle [Paul in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians], 'Unless the Roman Empire should first be desolated, and antichrist proceed, Christ will not come.'" He also identifies the Little horn of Daniel 7:8 and 7:24-25 which "shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and shall think to change the times and the law" as the Papacy.[22]

Some Franciscans had considered the Emperor Frederick II a positive Antichrist who would purify the Catholic Church from opulence, riches and clergy.[23]

Some of the debated features of the Reformation's Historicist interpretations reached beyond the Book of Revelation. They included the identification of:

* the Antichrist (1 and 2 John);
* the Beast of Revelation 13;
* the Man of Sin, or Man of Lawlessness, of 2 Thessalonians 2 (2:1-12);
* the "Little horn" of Daniel 7 and 8;
* The Abomination of desolation of Daniel 9, 11, and 12; and
* the harlot of Babylon of Revelation 17.

The Protestant Reformers tended to hold the belief that the Antichrist power would be revealed so that everyone would comprehend and recognize that the Pope is the real, true Antichrist and not the vicar of Christ. Doctrinal works of literature published by the Lutherans, the Reformed Churches, the Presbyterians, the Baptists, the Anabaptists, and the Methodists contain references to the Pope as the Antichrist, including the Smalcald Articles, Article 4 (1537),[24] the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope written by Philip Melanchthon (1537),[25] the Westminster Confession, Article 25.6 (1646), and the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, Article 26.4. In 1754, John Wesley published his Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, which is currently an official Doctrinal Standard of the United Methodist Church. In his notes on the Book of Revelation (chapter 13), he commented: "The whole succession of Popes from Gregory VII are undoubtedly Antichrists. Yet this hinders not, but that the last Pope in this succession will be more eminently the Antichrist, the Man of Sin, adding to that of his predecessors a peculiar degree of wickedness from the bottomless pit."[26][27]

to be continued....


<<Protestant Reformers, including John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, John Thomas, John Knox, Roger Williams, Cotton Mather, Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley, as well as most Protestants of the 16th-18th centuries, felt that the Early Church had been led into the Great Apostasy by the Papacy and identified the Pope with the Antichrist.[13][14] >>

These men are not entirely right; there is error in this statement. The fact that they believed it or felt it doesn't make it true.

Of course the Papacy is a great apostasy; or is it; was the Papacy ever of the faith that it could fall away from it; I think not. The early church up to the third century, were apostate at the time when they subjected themselves to the authority of a Roman governor. From that time on that church was not authentic such that is could fall away to be apostate.

The term “THE Antichrist” doesn't seem biblical to me; as I understand all the Popes are Antichrist; the beasts are Antichrist but “The” Antichrist seem to be a fabrication.

The spirit of Antichrist was with us when John wrote Revelation and has been with us for two thousand years but today it is running a muck and a climax is approaching.
 
Upvote 0

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,413
6,797
✟915,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
The term “THE Antichrist” doesn't seem biblical to me; as I understand all the Popes are Antichrist; the beasts are Antichrist but “The” Antichrist seem to be a fabrication.

John spoke of a singular and particular antichrist who was to yet come:

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.

He says "now" there were many antichrists but does specific one certain antichrist (singular) that was yet to come. This is known as "the Antichrist" which is a specific Antichrist among all those who are antichrists.


Paul spoke of this same singular evil person using different names:

2 Thessalonians 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 Thessalonians 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.
2 Thessalonians 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
2 Thessalonians 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
2 Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

John writes of this same singular antichrist person calling him different names/terms in the book of Revelation, the false prophet and the (second) beast.

Rev 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
Rev 13:12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
Rev 13:13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
Rev 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast;

Rev 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

What name or term used to describe this singular evil person is irrelevant because many names are used whether Antichrist, false prophet, (second) beast, man of sin, that Wicked, the son of perdition, the little horn, abomination of desolation and so on. It's all speaking of the same individual who will reign the world during the great tribulation and claim to be God.

The concept of a future singular "antichrist" person is biblical. Who this person is has been debated very much, but denying that there is a future singular antichrist denies what scripture tells us.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,413
6,797
✟915,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

sparow

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,540
426
85
✟482,162.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
John spoke of a singular and particular antichrist who was to yet come:

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.

He says "now" there were many antichrists but does specific one certain antichrist (singular) that was yet to come. This is known as "the Antichrist" which is a specific Antichrist among all those who are antichrists.


Paul spoke of this same singular evil person using different names:

2 Thessalonians 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 Thessalonians 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.
2 Thessalonians 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
2 Thessalonians 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
2 Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

John writes of this same singular antichrist person calling him different names/terms in the book of Revelation, the false prophet and the (second) beast.

Rev 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
Rev 13:12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
Rev 13:13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
Rev 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast;

Rev 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

What name or term used to describe this singular evil person is irrelevant because many names are used whether Antichrist, false prophet, (second) beast, man of sin, that Wicked, the son of perdition, the little horn, abomination of desolation and so on. It's all speaking of the same individual who will reign the world during the great tribulation and claim to be God.

The concept of a future singular "antichrist" person is biblical. Who this person is has been debated very much, but denying that there is a future singular antichrist denies what scripture tells us.


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.

I am not able to agree with what you are saying. Taking a composite of all your arguments, Satan is not the Antichrist because Satan is already come and in the world.

Looking at 1John2:18, I see no reason to assume “that Antichrist”, while grammatically singular, refers to a single man. The most interesting point in this verse that I see is John is declaring his time as the time of the end; not to be confused with the end of time. This makes the time of the end greater than 2000 years.

I have read chapter 2 to see what John was talking about; I am impressed with verses three and four. In verse 13 , I assume, Satan, is referred to in the past tense; in verse 22, most translations say, “THE Antichrist”.

1 John 2:22 (ASV)
22 Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son.

Also mentioned is darkness, the absence of the knowledge of God (the spirit of Antichrist).

<<<What name or term used to describe this singular evil person is irrelevant because many names are used whether Antichrist, false prophet, (second) beast, man of sin, that Wicked, the son of perdition, the little horn, abomination of desolation and so on. It's all speaking of the same individual who will reign the world during the great tribulation and claim to be God.>>>

NOT TRUE; it is relevant; the term “THE Antichrist”, is intrinsically linked to false doctrine or doctrines of men in place of what God has given. Grammatically, and in prose and as an artist using words, one can say The Antichrist, can call Satan THE Antichrist; can call the fifth and/or the eighth Beast THE Antichrist; just so long as one doesn't think one is quoting scripture. 99% of the time one would be quoting false doctrine.

<<<The concept of a future singular "antichrist" person is biblical. Who this person is has been debated very much, but denying that there is a future singular antichrist denies what scripture tells us. >>>

We could call the eighth and final singular Beast, THE Antichrist, but the title is not exclusive, the title is for anyone who denies the Father and the Son; even the eighth beast is not exclusive but is one of the previous seven.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,413
6,797
✟915,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Looking at 1John2:18, I see no reason to assume “that Antichrist”, while grammatically singular, refers to a single man.

If you won't accept the grammar John used then what else can I do? The verse itself proves John believed in a certain and future person who is antichrist, someone not a generic part of all the other antichrists. The little horn is a singular man but no one has to believe that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
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.

I am not able to agree with what you are saying. Taking a composite of all your arguments, Satan is not the Antichrist because Satan is already come and in the world.

Looking at 1John2:18, I see no reason to assume “that Antichrist”, while grammatically singular, refers to a single man. The most interesting point in this verse that I see is John is declaring his time as the time of the end; not to be confused with the end of time. This makes the time of the end greater than 2000 years.

I have read chapter 2 to see what John was talking about; I am impressed with verses three and four. In verse 13 , I assume, Satan, is referred to in the past tense; in verse 22, most translations say, “THE Antichrist”.

1 John 2:22 (ASV)
22 Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son.

Also mentioned is darkness, the absence of the knowledge of God (the spirit of Antichrist).

<<<What name or term used to describe this singular evil person is irrelevant because many names are used whether Antichrist, false prophet, (second) beast, man of sin, that Wicked, the son of perdition, the little horn, abomination of desolation and so on. It's all speaking of the same individual who will reign the world during the great tribulation and claim to be God.>>>

NOT TRUE; it is relevant; the term “THE Antichrist”, is intrinsically linked to false doctrine or doctrines of men in place of what God has given. Grammatically, and in prose and as an artist using words, one can say The Antichrist, can call Satan THE Antichrist; can call the fifth and/or the eighth Beast THE Antichrist; just so long as one doesn't think one is quoting scripture. 99% of the time one would be quoting false doctrine.

<<<The concept of a future singular "antichrist" person is biblical. Who this person is has been debated very much, but denying that there is a future singular antichrist denies what scripture tells us. >>>

We could call the eighth and final singular Beast, THE Antichrist, but the title is not exclusive, the title is for anyone who denies the Father and the Son; even the eighth beast is not exclusive but is one of the previous seven.

Hi brother Sparrow, thanks for sharing your thoughts. For me it is an interesting subject of which many people have different ideas. I do believe as others have stated that there are many Antichrists that have been all through time to this present day and will be so into the future. AntiChrist meanning anything that is opposed to Christ and God's Word. For me linking this into the books of Daniel and Revelation I believe this to be the Roman Catholic Church just as our protestant fathers taught many years ago.

God bless and thanks for sharing your thoughts
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
<<Protestant Reformers, including John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, John Thomas, John Knox, Roger Williams, Cotton Mather, Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley, as well as most Protestants of the 16th-18th centuries, felt that the Early Church had been led into the Great Apostasy by the Papacy and identified the Pope with the Antichrist.[13][14] >>

These men are not entirely right; there is error in this statement. The fact that they believed it or felt it doesn't make it true.

Of course the Papacy is a great apostasy; or is it; was the Papacy ever of the faith that it could fall away from it; I think not. The early church up to the third century, were apostate at the time when they subjected themselves to the authority of a Roman governor. From that time on that church was not authentic such that is could fall away to be apostate.

The term “THE Antichrist” doesn't seem biblical to me; as I understand all the Popes are Antichrist; the beasts are Antichrist but “The” Antichrist seem to be a fabrication.

The spirit of Antichrist was with us when John wrote Revelation and has been with us for two thousand years but today it is running a muck and a climax is approaching.

It is not as though they believe of felt that it was true. The scriptures actually teach this as shown in the linked posts in the OP on the first page. Did you read through what has already been posted?
 
Upvote 0

FEZZILLA

Well-Known Member
Jun 24, 2003
1,031
131
53
Wisconsin
✟16,495.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
ARE YOU READY FOR THE MARK OF THE BEAST?

WHAT IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST CLICK ME?

There is a simple study from God's WORD * DANIEL AND REVELATION and history here beastsmark.com for those who may be interested in the scriptures and some more detail.

God's WORD teaches that GOD'S PEOPLE ARE IN EVERY CHURCH! Theye are all those who BELIEVE and FOLLOW God's WORD as much as God has revealed to them. *JOHN 10:16; ACT 17:30-31.

I would like to discuss the following scriptures here in this OP.

REVELATION 14:6-12
[6], And I saw another angel fly in midheaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and tribe, and tongue, and people,
[7], Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment has come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
[8], And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
[9], And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
[10], The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out undiluted into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
[11], And the smoke of their torment ascends up forever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receives the mark of his name.
[12], Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

...............

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION (linked to scripture studies in this thread)

Q1. WHAT IS THE EVERLASTING GOSPEL? v6 linked
Q2. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO FEAR GOD? v7 linked
Q3. HOW DO WE GIVE GLORY TO GOD? v7 linked
Q4. WHAT IS THE JUDGMENT ABOUT? v7 linked
Q5. WHO DOES BABYLON THE HARLOT WOMAN REPRESENT? v8; 17:1-5; 18:1-9
Q6. THE MARK OF THE BEAST IS OVER WHORSHIP v8-12
Q7. WHO IS GOD’S TRUE CHURCH IN GOD’S WORD? v12
Q8. WHAT DOES A BEAST OF KINGDOM REPRESENT IN DANIAL AND REVELATIONS?
Q9 WHAT ARE THE SYMBOLS AND MEANING OF MARK, SIGN AND SEAL?
Q10. WHAT IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST AND WHEN DO PEOPLE RECEIVE IT?
Q11. THE SEAL OF GOD HOW DO WE GET IT?
Q12. DID YOU KNOW THAT THE CIVIL SUNDAY LAWS HAVE ALREADY PASSED?
Q13. WHO IS THE ANTICHRIST, THE MAN OF SIN, THE BEAST AND 666?
Q14. WHO DID THE EARLY REFORMERS BELIEVE THE ANTICHRIST WAS? 1/2
Q15. WHO DID THE EARLY REFORMERS BELIEVE THE ANTICHRIST WAS? 2/2

QUESTIONS TO THINK ABOUT

...............

FRIENDLY CHRISTIAN DISCUSSION AND SCRIPTURE ONLY PLEASE.

God bless you as you seek him through his Word.
Not even close.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sparow

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,540
426
85
✟482,162.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
If you won't accept the grammar John used then what else can I do? The verse itself proves John believed in a certain and future person who is antichrist, someone not a generic part of all the other antichrists. The little horn is a singular man but no one has to believe that.


John didn't use English grammar and proof is the antithesis of faith; still we have to have a correct paradigm or abstract to interpret verses into; some people think verses can stand alone.

The little horn mentioned in Daniel came out of one of the four horns which were the divisions of Alexander's kingdom. I believe Rome is one of those four horns and that the little horn come out of Rome as the British Empire which later split into the two horned beast. There are always men, sometimes a man as the head of the beasts but the beasts are the institutions that empower the man or men.
 
Upvote 0

sparow

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,540
426
85
✟482,162.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Hi brother Sparrow, thanks for sharing your thoughts. For me it is an interesting subject of which many people have different ideas. I do believe as others have stated that there are many Antichrists that have been all through time to this present day and will be so into the future. AntiChrist meanning anything that is opposed to Christ and God's Word. For me linking this into the books of Daniel and Revelation I believe this to be the Roman Catholic Church just as our protestant fathers taught many years ago.

God bless and thanks for sharing your thoughts


There is nothing wrong with having different ideas, it would be boring other wise. For prophesy to be useful to us we need to link it to the world in our day. There was a time when the Papacy was the beast and Church in one; since Napoleon put the Church in jail the beast went under ground, in as far as Napoleon was not the beast himself or part thereof. Today the Papacy is riding the beast's back.
 
Upvote 0

sparow

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,540
426
85
✟482,162.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
It is not as though they believe of felt that it was true. The scriptures actually teach this as shown in the linked posts in the OP on the first page. Did you read through what has already been posted?

During the time of most of these men it probably was true; but as a nuance instead saying the RC is the beast it would be more accurate to say the Papacy was the beast on one occasion but on the next occasion other instruments of government and institutions are the beast; the RC would be if it could be instead is intrinsic in it but is the prostitute Jessabelle.
 
Upvote 0

sparow

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,540
426
85
✟482,162.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Not even close.

Well done! I have a philosophy like this; a person who claims to be right is like the person who buys a lottery ticket and claims to have the winning ticket; where as he has one chance in infinity. Another person who claims the first person does not have the winning ticket has infinity minus one chances in infinity of being right, right up to the point where he offers an alternative where he is the person claiming to have the winning ticket.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.