Future New World Order One World Government...in the Bible?
- Thread starter LittleLambofJesus
- Start date
yeshuaslavejeff
simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Likewise most all of the world. Even after one third of all are killed, the remaining two thirds REFUSE - they instead continue serving demons.
Upvote
0
- May 19, 2015
- 125,492
- 28,587
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
They will once they receive Christ and read the NT/NC [including the Covenantle book of Revelation], which many have over the centuries, just as you and I have, and will continue doing for centuries to come
2 Corinthians 3:
12 Having then such hope, we use much freedom of speech, 13 and [are] not as Moses, who was putting a veil<2571> upon his own face, for the sons of Israel not stedfastly to look to the end of that which is being made useless,
14 but their minds were hardened, for unto this day the same veil<2571> at the reading of the Old Covenant/Testament doth remain unwithdrawn — which in Christ is being made useless —
15 but till to-day, when Moses is read, a veil<2571> upon their heart doth lie,
16and whenever they may turn unto the Lord, the veil<2571> is taken away.
17 And the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty; 18 and we all, with unvailed face, the glory of the Lord beholding in a mirror, to the same image are being transformed, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
=========================
Revelation 1:1
An unveiling/revealing <602> of Jesus Christ, which gives to him, the God, to show to the bond-servants of Him which-things is binding to be becoming in swiftness. And He signifies-it, commissioning thru the messenger of Him, to the bond-servant of Him, John.
Exo 34:33
And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face.
34
But whenever Moses went in before the LORD to speak with Him, he would take the veil off until he came out; and he would come out and speak to the children of Israel whatever he had been commanded.
35
And whenever the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone, then Moses would put the veil on his face again, until he went in to speak with Him.
===================
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
jgr,
1. All the Jews by and large between the 1st and the 19th century understood that Jeremiah was talking specifically to the house of Israel and Judah and not the gentiles eschatologically speaking.
They knew the New Covenant came in because that was undeniable but they knew their covenants for them.
2. Ezekiel 36:25-38 shows that God will sprinkle lean water upon Israel cleanse their filthiness and give them a new heart and put the spirit in them and cause them to walk in his statutes and Israel will dwell in their land that God gave to their fathers and they would be his people and he would be their God.
And for those who believe in the spiritual Israel theory as the church today taking Israel’s place it is impossible because the nation of Israel’s land that will be desolate will be tilled and restored. The church doesn’t have physical land as a nation in the same sense and certainly not Israel’s land and the church will not be trodden under the foot of men Matthew 5:13 for the gates of hell shall never prevail against it Matthew 16:18.
Across the board of the scriptures you are wrong.
3. Just because the Catholic Church polluted many truths such as thinking they are the true church by using the false apostolic succession doctrine and think they have the vicar of the earth and their replacement theology and have dominated history of wrong doctrines such as supersessionism doesn’t mean they are right because they are not.
4. I proved to you the time factor in Hebrews 10 that the prophecy of Jeremiah 31 would not happen with Israel till Christ makes his enemies his footstool which will be the millennial kingdom which is still future. Jerry Kelso
Upvote
0
jerry,
There was virtual unanimity within the post-apostolic defenders of the true faith, from the second to the eighteenth centures, that the aforecited Scriptures were, and are, fulfilled.
The church fathers of the early post-apostolic era (Clement, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, et al) pre-dated the Roman Catholic church by more than a century. They were not "polluted".
Nor were the Reformers "polluted". They sacrificed to the death to liberate the true Church from the spiritual dark ages.
You are unable to provide the name of any historical defender of the true faith who denied the fulfillment of the aforecited Scriptures.
That denial is the exclusive invention of dispensational modernism.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
jgr,
1. Biblically, since the Jews existence understood as God’s chosen people to the gentiles.
Since David they understood the Davidic Covenant that the lineage would bring forth the Messiah 2 Samuel 7:13-16; 1 Chronicles 28:1-8 and that they were chosen to be the salt of the earth and light of the world as Jesus said Matthew 5:13.
2. Jesus offered the Physical Kingdom of Heaven reign on earth Matthew 4:17.
The unconditional Davidic covenant was conditioned on repentance even for entrance into the physical KoH reign Matthew 4:17; 6:33; Luke 17:20-21.
Isaiah 53 shows the suffering Messiah who they rejected and failed to believe in as a nation Matthew 23:37-39.
3. Acts 1:6-7 Jesus answers the KoH reign question by the disciples and told them it was not for them to know the times and seasons when this would happen for that was in the Father’s hand.
This ends any argument that the KoH reign came in at the Day of Pentecost and is proof it has not happened yet.
Jesus told about the rejection of the Jews in his ministry Matthew 23:37-39 and
prophesied the destruction of Israel in Matthew 24:1-2 which happened in 70 A.D.
4. Acts 1:6-7 proves that the KoH reign didn’t happen in the early church.
Acts 28:25-28 proves that the Jewish nation rejected the gospel and Paul went to the gentiles which fulfills Matthew 21:43.
5. The New Covenant came in because of the death and resurrection Hebrews 8:6-7 and because Christ was the mediator.
6. 70 A.D. destroyed the nation of Israel which was fulfillment by Jesus in Matthew 24:1-2.
Many people were abused in the Jewish sects after 70 A.D. like in the days of Constantine in the 3rd century.
Constantine made Christianity the state religion according to many, and because of his mother who supposedly was a real Christian.
Constantine corrupted Christianity and abused the Jews and said they could not practice Judaism.
Some of the Church fathers had some wrong doctrines such as supersessionism from the belief of Apostolic Succession.
They spiritualized the Davidic Covenant
and made the millennial kingdom as presently in effect not to mention many pagan beliefs. It was the same way with the Jewish leaders in Matthew 23 as Jesus proclaimed them hypocrites etc.
The Popes were worse like with the vicar of Earth belief. This is why the Roman Catholic Church (west) and the Greek Orthodox Church(East) split.
The bottom line is that the Jewish nation’s sin was destroyed and much of the truth about the Davidic Covenant was lost for centuries or at least covered up by the belief that the church replaced Israel and even many Gentile Christian groups were trying to make Jews Christians in this belief.
7. In the 1800’s there were Jewish converts to Christianity as far as accepting the New blood covenant of Jesus that started the Messianic Jews like Joseph Reboniwitz and others that believed in the Davidic Covenant.
The Modern Messianic Judaism was started in the 60’s and 70’s. I believe Kaplan started it if I recall.
Anyway, they believe just like David H. Stern who gave the Complete Jewish Bible and Dr. Arnold Fruchentbaumc Jewish theologian believe the Millennial kingdom will happen with the Jewish Kingdom as was promised to the nation of Israel that is separate from the church, is still future.
8. The Davidic covenant has not come in with the physical rule of the earth and the New Covenant has not come in for the nation of Israel concerning this millennial kingdom.
The Bible says in Hebrew 10 that Jeremiah’s prophecy concerning accepting the New Covenant will not happen till Christ has put his enemies under his feet which corresponds with 1 Corinthians 15:24-25.
9. The covering up of the replacement theology is part because of Israel’s disobedience and the other part because of the false doctrines of organized religion such as the Catholic Church and much of if not all the full covenant theology crowd if I remember right and many other gentile churches that believe they have to save the Jew and convert them to gentile brand of Christianity and forsake the unconditional covenants of Abraham and David promised to Israel
for eternity 2 Samuel 7:13-16; 1 Chronicles 28:1-8; Romans 11:25-29; Hebrews 10:13-17.
10. So if you think I am going to believe your replacement theology when you can’t proof it anywhere in the Bible unless you spiritualize, allegorize, and build up straw men then you are dreaming.
And if you think I am going to believe a corrupt leadership of the Catholic Church’s replacement theology when they are a big part the truth is thwarted concerning the Davidic Covenant then you are badly mistaken.
The CC brought many truths according to the Bible but that doesn’t uphold the other side of mixing in the doctrines of men just like Jesus told the Jews Matthew 15:9. Jerry Kelso
Upvote
0
jerry,
A surfeit of irrelevant and irrational verbiage, to no avail.
You are unable to provide the name of any historical defender of the true faith who denied the fulfillment of the aforecited Scriptures.
That denial is the exclusive invention of dispensational modernism.
Dispensationalism is a purveyor of delusional antiscriptural modernist futurism, and a betrayer of the historical prophetic faith of the fathers.
Still awaiting that name.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
jgr,
1. Ipea and Polycarp were friends of the apostle John and taught that all the apostles taught pre-trib rapture.
150 Barnabas who traveled with Paul Acts 15 preached a pre-trib rapture.
270 catholic Bishop Victors said we would be evacuated before that horrible tribulation.
Latin Vulgate- Jerome said the Latin was appeomore meant rapture.
For 1000 years never heard of this because of the Middle Ages with darkness and persecution.
1455 Jude Lattimmer
1620 Joseph Meade
1640 Morgan Edwards
1648 James McKnight
All these believed in a pre trib which means they believe in a separation of Israel and the church and the Davidic covenant.
The 1800’s Joseph Rebowitz
Started a messianism movement that would inspire the 1960’s and 1970’s Messianic Judaism who believes in the separation of Israel and the church and belief in the Davidic Covenant.
These were defenders of faith.
2. You can’t prove your position by the scriptures or your history.
You would rather believe evil history of corruption to destroy not only true doctrine but God’s apple of his eye and his people that he promised the land and the head of the Kingdom of Heaven on earth that is unconditional 2 Samuel 7:13-16; 1 Chronicles 28:1-8. Jerry Kelso
Upvote
0
You have made claims without anything to back them up, which is typical of those promoting the Pre-Trib doctrine.
I will help you out with one of them.
Morgan Edwards did consider the possibility of the PreTrib removal of the Church, while he was in seminary. However, both Edwards and his professor considered it an unlikely possibility.
Edwards never preached the doctrine as the truth.
Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_23.pdf
Pretribulationist Revisionism
(Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints)
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_22.pdf
.
Upvote
0
jerry,
None of those who were true believers denied the fulfillment of the aforecited Scriptures in the earlier post.
Nor did any of those espouse a pretrib rapture. That is a dispensational delusion.
There is no one who goes by the name of "Ipea".
There is nothing in the brief writings of Polycarp that have survived which even remotely hints at a rapture. That is a dispensational fantasy.
Barnabas repudiated a pretrib rapture. From the Epistle of Barnabas:
Chapter 4. Antichrist is at hand: let us therefore avoid Jewish errors
"We take earnest heed in these last days; for the whole [past] time of your faith will profit you nothing, unless now in this wicked time we also withstand coming sources of danger, as becomes the sons of God. That the Black One may find no means of entrance, let us flee from every vanity, let us utterly hate the works of the way of wickedness."
There would be no coming sources of danger to withstand in the event of a pretrib rapture.
There would be no means of entrance for the Black One to find in the event of a pretrib rapture.
More dispensational delusion.
There is no one who goes by the name of "Jude Lattimmer".
There is no one who goes by the name of Joseph Rebowitz.
You are unable to provide the name of any historical defender of the true faith who denied the fulfillment of the aforecited Scriptures in the earlier post.
Dispensationalism is a purveyor of delusional antiscriptural modernist futurism, and a betrayer of the historical prophetic faith of the fathers.
It is the quintessence of "interpretation by hallucination".
Still awaiting that name.
Last edited:
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
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
jgr,
1. All the early church fathers had the concept of an imminent return of Christ.
Ireaneus, Against Heresies 5.29; In the end the church from this ( tribulation ) shall suddenly be caught up for it is said
There shall be a tribulation such as not been since the beginning, neither shall it be Matthew 24:21.
For this is the last contest of the righteous in which they overcome they are crowned with incorruption 1 Corinthians 15:50 and down through the end of the chapter.
3rd Century Cyprian taught an early departure from the tribulation that will overwhelm the earth but the righteous shall be snatched which is harps I gr. for rapture.
4th century Ephraem taught the gathering of all the saints and elect of Godprior to the Coming tribulation and that we wouldn’t taken to the Lord.
Clement of Rome said speedily he will come and shall not tarry.
Ignatius wrote to Polycarp; Be watchful, be possessing a sleepless spirit, Be evermore becoming zealous than what thou art. Weigh carefully the times. Look for him who is above all time, eternal and invisible, yet who became visible for our sakes. Sounds like Titus and the Blessed Hope.
2. The epistle is said by almost all scholars that it cannot be substantiated.
It is highly doubtful that Barnabas wrote Hebrews. It is not his style and Paul had more earmarks on why he would have written it and more reason he would have written it.
Either way it doesn’t matter because Hebrews 10:12-17 shows the Jeremiah passage is till Christ makes his enemies a footstool which is 1 Corinthians 15:24-25.
2. A) I apologize it was Hugh Latimer in the 1481-1555.
B) Joseph Mede 1586- 1639; The Pilgrims 1600’s
Thomas Collier 1674; John Gill 1748
C) Someone named Scott 1792
James McKnight1763
D) Morgan Edwards 1744;
E) JosephRabinowitz I believe in the 1700’s which were concepts of modern Messianic Judaism
F) Wm. Blackstone 1878 wrote “Jesus Is Coming”. I forgot I even had that book.
3. When Luther had saved by grace through faith or by works, the number 1 argument of the RCC claimed that the early church fathers or the pope ever taught that, to which, Luther replied, Well the real church fathers did, like Jesus, Paul and Peter.
4. The real kicker is that like I talked in a previous post about the corruption of the RCC. The pope as the vicar is what the Eastern Orthodox Church and the western RCC split up over. This was a devious doctrine by the RCC.
The early church fathers concepts were geared to the pre-trib, davidic kingdom and second coming etc.
The guilt lies with Augustine who believed prophecy should be spiritualized, and so they were living in the millennial kingdom and this allegorical interpretation the church accepted because it gave them importance to the church as God’s KoH and the Pope being his personal vicar over the earth.
The Bible teaches no such thing and it does not teach Apostolic Succession they teach.
5. The biggest thing is that during the dark ages only the Catholic Church had bibles but not the people.
When the printing press came in the 1400’s and Wycliffe and Tyndale Bibles come out the public could read for themselves and understand that the Catholic Church not right.
The Jewish people had more disadvantage because of disobedience to their covenant, their oppressors which made them convert from Judaism to their brand of Christianity, not to mention being scattered and infiltrated and in Jesus day and after many believed he was just a prophet and a good teacher but not the Messiah and because he did not rescue them is why many are still blinded and are atheist.
6. You can believe all the phones baloney that the RCC has given out but you can’t say there were no defenders of the faith against the RCC including the early church fathers. You also cannot prove your position of the Bible. Jerry Kelso
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
1. Read the last post to Jgr above and you will find the truth.
2. As far as Morgan Edwards goes we would have to decide what source to believe and which may be more credible.
It doesn’t really matter in the long scheme of things I have given enough proof to debunk your position. Jerry Kelso
Upvote
0
You have done an excellent job of selectively copying, just like Grant Jeffrey.
Jeffrey copied, cut, and pasted the writings of the Early Church Fathers, in order to make the PreTrib doctrine work. Then others copy his writings, as if they were the truth.
Pretribulationist Revisionism
(Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints)
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_22.pdf
.
Upvote
0
jerry kelso
Food For Thought
baberean2,
1. Just like usual, you have no answer just disagreement.
2. I have not read Grant Jefferies and it was the early church fathers that I used as an examples not the post church fathers.
It is true what history recorded about Augustine and how he mixed in some of his gnostic background that affected his teachings.
3. You give the perception that Catholic teachers and their church popes hold more weight than God’s word and his apostles.
4. With all the RCC has done to suppress
the real truth and killing people in the name of God and how they uphold heathen Babylonian rituals etc. It is a wonder they had any truth at all. But even then the Jewish leaders had the same problem and Christ called them hypocrites and white walled sepulchers.
5. You can’t prove from the early church Fathers especially those who knew John because he didn’t teach those diabolical teachings such as spiritual Jew theory etc. and neither did Paul or Peter.
6. I already debunked your belief about Jeremiah in more than one place. And Hebrews 10 shows that the Jeremiah passage will not happen with Israel until he makes his enemies his footstool. That is not until the end of the tribulation and he consummated the kingdom and gives it back to the Father so he can be God all in all 1 Corinthians 15:24-28.
7. Sorry, but all you are is disagreeing for naught and you haven’t proved anything to your point. Jerry Kelso
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
jerry,
Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
You should listen to your own brethren.
Dr. Thomas Ice, Executive Director, Pre-Trib Research Center:
"
Irenaeus
Some have thought that Irenaeus (c. 180) could be a pre-trib rapture statement since he actually speaks of the rapture: “the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this [the tribulation],” as noted below:
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.[7]
However, the very next statement speaks of believers in the tribulation. When taken within the context of all of Irenaeus’ writings on these subjects, it appears that he was not teaching pretribulationism.
"
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote.
Correct. "we wouldn't taken to the Lord".
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote. Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote. Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
Then why did you make a bogus claim about Barnabas in your post 128?
Where did I say that Barnabas wrote Hebrews?
All of these wrote during the Reformation era prior to the appearance of dispensational modernism. They were unanimous in declaring the apostate papacy to be the antichrist of that era, under which the true Church was suffering.
Their guffaws would have been long and loud at any suggestion of a pretrib rapture which had never occurred.
Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
You should listen to your own brethren.
Dr. Thomas Ice, Executive Director, Pre-Trib Research Center:
"
Irenaeus
Some have thought that Irenaeus (c. 180) could be a pre-trib rapture statement since he actually speaks of the rapture: “the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this [the tribulation],” as noted below:
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.[7]
However, the very next statement speaks of believers in the tribulation. When taken within the context of all of Irenaeus’ writings on these subjects, it appears that he was not teaching pretribulationism.
"
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote.
Correct. "we wouldn't taken to the Lord".
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote. Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
Bogus unless accompanied by a link to quote and source of quote. Nothing to do with pretrib rapture.
Then why did you make a bogus claim about Barnabas in your post 128?
Where did I say that Barnabas wrote Hebrews?
All of these wrote during the Reformation era prior to the appearance of dispensational modernism. They were unanimous in declaring the apostate papacy to be the antichrist of that era, under which the true Church was suffering.
Their guffaws would have been long and loud at any suggestion of a pretrib rapture which had never occurred.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
jerry,
Both were 19th century dispensational modernists and traitors to the Reformation.
Incomprehensible. If someone else can translate, please do.
Then why did dispensational modernism embrace the counterfeit futurism of Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera as a foundational dogma?
Debunked. Not one espoused pretrib; all who wrote eschatologically believed that the true Church would suffer under antichrist.
Then why did dispensational modernism embrace the counterfeit futurism of Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera as a foundational dogma?
Then why did dispensational modernism embrace the counterfeit futurism of Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera as a foundational dogma?
Incomprehensible. If someone else can translate, please do.
A further surfeit of bilge and bunkum.
Both were 19th century dispensational modernists and traitors to the Reformation.
Incomprehensible. If someone else can translate, please do.
Then why did dispensational modernism embrace the counterfeit futurism of Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera as a foundational dogma?
Debunked. Not one espoused pretrib; all who wrote eschatologically believed that the true Church would suffer under antichrist.
Then why did dispensational modernism embrace the counterfeit futurism of Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera as a foundational dogma?
Then why did dispensational modernism embrace the counterfeit futurism of Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera as a foundational dogma?
Incomprehensible. If someone else can translate, please do.
A further surfeit of bilge and bunkum.
Upvote
0
- May 19, 2015
- 125,492
- 28,587
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Same with a future antichrist...........It's madness I say!
Gary DeMar: Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church (1997)
“It is unbiblical to use the term ‘Antichrist’ for a present-day or future political ruler. The proper context is theological and pre-A. D. 70” (p.204).
Chapter 11, “Identifying Antichrist”
About the Title:
The end is here…again. At every calendar milestone, self-proclaimed modern-day “prophets” arise to stir up a furor rivaled only by the impending apocalypse they predict.
This doom-and-gloom prognostication is not only spread by a few fanatics, but millions of Christians, including some of the most recognized names in mainstream Christianity who are caught up in the latest “last days” frenzy. Seduced by the popular craze, they are driven not to action, but to radical inactivity, ineffectiveness, and lethargy while waiting for the easy-out “end.”
===============================
Hal Lindsey wrote in 1970 that he believed that the Antichrist was alive somewhere in the world. He repeated this belief in 1977 when he wrote that it was his “personal opinion” that “he’s alive somewhere now. But he’s not going to become this awesome figure that we nickname the Anti-Christ until Satan possesses him, and I don’t believe that will occur until there is this ‘mortal wound’ from which he’s raised up.”[1] In 1980 he restated this conviction by writing that “this man [Antichrist] is alive today—alive and waiting to come forth.”[2] Although Lindsey believes the Antichrist is alive somewhere in the world today, and actually has been since at least 1970, he has stated that “we must not indulge in speculation about whether any of the current world figures is the antichrist.”[3] Anyway, determining the identity of the Antichrist does not really matter since Lindsey and others believe “that Christians will not be around to watch the debacle brought about by the cruelest dictator of all time.”[4]
Not to be outdone, Dave Hunt voices a similar opinion: “Somewhere, at this very moment, on planet Earth, the antichrist is almost certainly alive—biding his time, awaiting his cue. Banal sensationalism? Far from it! That likelihood is based upon a sober evaluation of current events in relation to Bible prophecy. Already a mature man, he is probably active in politics, perhaps even an admired world leader whose name is almost daily on everyone’s lips.”[5] Salem Kirban wrote in 1977 that “those of us familiar with Scriptures can easily see the handwriting on the wall as the way is prepared for the coming Antichrist.”[6]
Lindsey, Hunt, Kirban, and many others share a belief that is strikingly similar to that of fortuneteller Jeane Dixon. Dixon claimed to have received a divine vision on February 5, 1962, about a coming world religious-political ruler; her “prophecy” strikingly resembles the modern doctrine of Antichrist: “A child, born somewhere in the Middle East shortly before 7 A.M. (EST) on February 5, 1962, will revolutionize the world. Before the close of the century he will bring together all mankind in one all-embracing faith. This will be the foundation of a new Christianity, with every sect and creed united through this man who will walk among the people to spread the wisdom of the Almighty Power.”[7] “Mrs. Dixon claims that this man’s influence will be felt in the early 1980s and that by 1999, the ecumenical religion will be achieved.”[8] Why should we believe present-day prophetic prognosticators when we have been offered assurances of the identity of the Antichrist numerous times over the centuries?
Saint Martin of Tours, who died in A.D. 397, wrote of the coming Antichrist whose reign would signify the last days. His prediction sounds strangely familiar. “Non est dubium, quin anticbristus…. There is no doubt that the Antichrist has already been born. Firmly established already in his early years, he will, after reaching maturity, achieve supreme power.”[9] Now go back and reread the quotations of Lindsey and Hunt. Christians should repudiate the writings of anyone who speculates that the Antichrist is a contemporary figure. Such speculation is biblically unsound, as will become evident as we survey the passages used to make the identification.
=================================
"Some fictional stories of the west including the Jewish ones are stunningly similar to the true events of ancient India. I have watched this series a 100 times, it still seems so appealing without any major special effects and no CG. What a great piece of human effort and amazing acting"
=============
Storyline
Robert and Katherine Thorn seem to have it all. They are happily married and he is the US Ambassador to Great Britain, but they want nothing more than to have children. When Katharine has a stillborn child, Robert is approached by a priest at the hospital who suggests that they take a healthy newborn whose mother has just died in childbirth. Without telling his wife he agrees. After relocating to London, strange events - and the ominous warnings of a priest - lead him to believe that the child he took from that Italian hospital is evil incarnate.
Gregory Peck is the ambassador to the United States whose wife has a stillborn child. Without her knowledge, he substitutes another baby as theirs. A few years go by, and then grisly deaths begin to happen. The child's nanny hangs herself and a priest is speared to death in a freak accident. It turns out the child is the son of Satan and can only be killed with the seven daggers of Meggado.
=====================
Last edited:
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
- May 19, 2015
- 125,492
- 28,587
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Upvote
0
