Anitchrist

[Patmosman_sga]

So Jesus comes and after 3 1/2 years ministry 'signs' the covenant with his own blood on behalf of the elect...Ending once and for all the old world of daily animal sacrfices...

It continually amazes me how rapturists just can't seem to grasp something so utterly simple as this.

 

[Knee V]

I would like to see some Biblical precedence for God making a promise with regard to a specific number of years, and putting gaps in that time frame. God didn't use a prophetic "stop-watch" with regard to the Israelites' time in Egypt, nor with Judah's captivity in Babylon. God couldn't say that Judah would be taken captive by the Babylonians for 70 years, then 500 years after their exile take them back to their land.

Deut 18:22 "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."

When a prophet is in fact sent from God, his predictions will come to pass. When they come to pass, that is a sign that he is indeed sent from God. The opposite is true of a false prophet, as shown in the verse above.

When Daniel predicts that the events in Dan 9 are to be completed in 490 years, we should expect that to happen. If Daniel is not sent from God, then they won't come to pass.

To say that the events in Dan 9 did not come to pass in the 490 years that Daniel said they would is to say that he is a false prophet and is to be rejected. However, if he is from God, then his predictions will come to pass in the 490 years.

Deut 18:22 "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."

When a prophet speaks something from the Lord, that thing will come to pass. When it does in fact come to pass, that is a sign that that prophet is indeed sent from God. And the exact opposite for a false prophet, as shown in the verse above.

When Daniel writes that these events are to happen within a 490 period of time, we should expect that to happen. If the events in Dan 9 do not come to pass in 490 years as he foretold, then Daniel is a false prophet. If Daniel IS a prophet sent from God, then that which he says will come about.

To say that the things predicted in Daniel did not come to pass in the amount of time foretold is to say that Daniel is a false prophet and should be rejected. However, if Daniel is a true prophet, then 490 years after the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem his prophecy will have been realized.

 

[Patmosman_sga]

When Daniel predicts that the events in Dan 9 are to be completed in 490 years, we should expect that to happen. If Daniel is not sent from God, then they won't come to pass.

To say that the events in Dan 9 did not come to pass in the 490 years that Daniel said they would is to say that he is a false prophet and is to be rejected. However, if he is from God, then his predictions will come to pass in the 490 years.

Precisely! The time from the decree to restore Jerusalem to the time of Jesus' baptism was 483 years (69 weeks); from his baptism to crucifixion/resurrection (putting an end to sacrifice and offering), three and a half years; and from the time of the resurrection to the scattering of the disciples after the stoning of Stephen, three and a half years. From that point on (the "Seventy Weeks" being completed), the Gospel of the Kingdom began to be proclaimed from Jerusalem into Judea and to the ends of the earth, with great power and with signs and wonders. As Jesus had promised his disciples, "There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power" (Mark 9:1). And so shall "his kingdom spread from shore to shore, till moons shall wax and wane no more!"

 

[Knee V]

In order to not get off an a tangent...

If the prophecy of Dan 9 was fulfilled in Christ's first advent, then these "Antichrist" predictions supposedly found in the text are not really "The Antichrist". If the events foretold in Dan 9 happened within the 70 weeks, then there is no yet-future "evil" prince who "signs" a covenant with Israel only to "break it" 3 1/2 years later.

If the 70 weeks took 70 weeks (of years, of course) to be completed, then it is Christ who confirms the covenant with the many. And it is Christ who puts an end to sacrifice and grain offerings (which he did on the cross).

 

[RaptureTicketHolder]

He is not a rapturist pat...he is seeking answers.

Stop for a minute and put on your pastor's hat - if it still fits....

Indeed Daniel is stocked with the Lords time. I think its awesome and you know what, Daniel knew it!

So what exactly to do you tell your methodist friends about the endtimes anyway?

 

[vinsight4u]

...

 

[vinsight4u]

...

 

[A Brethren IN CHRIST]

I would like to see some Biblical precedence for God making a promise with regard to a specific number of years, and putting gaps in that time frame. God didn't use a prophetic "stop-watch" with regard to the Israelites' time in Egypt,


Read Gen 15:13-14

nor with Judah's captivity in Babylon. God couldn't say that Judah would be taken captive by the Babylonians for 70 years, then 500 years after their exile take them back to their land.

Deut 18:22 "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."

When a prophet is in fact sent from God, his predictions will come to pass. When they come to pass, that is a sign that he is indeed sent from God. The opposite is true of a false prophet, as shown in the verse above.

When Daniel predicts that the events in Dan 9 are to be completed in 490 years, we should expect that to happen. If Daniel is not sent from God, then they won't come to pass.

To say that the events in Dan 9 did not come to pass in the 490 years that Daniel said they would is to say that he is a false prophet and is to be rejected. However, if he is from God, then his predictions will come to pass in the 490 years.

Deut 18:22 "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him."

When a prophet speaks something from the Lord, that thing will come to pass. When it does in fact come to pass, that is a sign that that prophet is indeed sent from God. And the exact opposite for a false prophet, as shown in the verse above.

When Daniel writes that these events are to happen within a 490 period of time, we should expect that to happen. If the events in Dan 9 do not come to pass in 490 years as he foretold, then Daniel is a false prophet. If Daniel IS a prophet sent from God, then that which he says will come about.

To say that the things predicted in Daniel did not come to pass in the amount of time foretold is to say that Daniel is a false prophet and should be rejected. However, if Daniel is a true prophet, then 490 years after the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem his prophecy will have been realized.

 

[Patmosman_sga]

So what exactly to do you tell your methodist friends about the endtimes anyway?

I tell them that the glory we will experience in the end is well worth whatever suffering we must endure to get there. I think Paul said something like that, too, didn't he?

 

[Palatka44]

Wow Pat, you really do need to re-read that passage.

Daniel is indeed talking about the endtimes and includes the "antichrist" persona. The rebuilding of Babalon (sp) is mentioned in here, the timing of the trib is mentioned in here with the rise and fall of that persona which you question along with the removal of the Holy Spirit.

There is a ton you are missing in just this slight passage!

But, try it in NIV:

Daniel 9
25 "Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree [1] to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, [2] the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. [3] The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' [4] In the middle of the 'seven' [5] he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. [6] " [7]



Footnotes

1. 9:25 Or word
2. 9:25 Or an anointed one ; also in verse 26
3. 9:26 Or off and will have no one ; or off, but not for himself
4. 9:27 Or 'week'
5. 9:27 Or 'week'
6. 9:27 Or it
7. 9:27 Or And one who causes desolation will come upon the pinnacle of the abominable temple , until the end that is decreed is poured out on the desolated city

Thank you

 

[Palatka44]

In order to not get off an a tangent...

If the prophecy of Dan 9 was fulfilled in Christ's first advent, then these "Antichrist" predictions supposedly found in the text are not really "The Antichrist". If the events foretold in Dan 9 happened within the 70 weeks, then there is no yet-future "evil" prince who "signs" a covenant with Israel only to "break it" 3 1/2 years later.

If the 70 weeks took 70 weeks (of years, of course) to be completed, then it is Christ who confirms the covenant with the many. And it is Christ who puts an end to sacrifice and grain offerings (which he did on the cross).

It refers to the people of the prince to come.

Daniel 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Now after 490 years sence Cyrus decreed that the Jews Should go back and rebuild the walls and the temple, Jesus the Messiah, is baptised and begins His ministry which leds Him 3 1/2 years to Calvary. There He is crucified and as Daniel says Messiah is cut off. Daniel does leave out a period of time, approx. 70 years, and takes up with the fact that the Romans, the people of the prince to come, will and did destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. Our generation is the generation that is now witness to the return of Judah (Israel) to the land from which she was exiled some 1933 years ago.

This gets me back to why I posted these scriptures in the first place. It was asked or stated that there is no record as to the national idenity of the Antichrist. This verse tells us his nationality by reason of historical evidence in relation to Daniel's writting.

You had the idenity right RJ and I posted these scriptures to affirm that.

ok just for some clarification... i dont believe it ever says he has to be jewish... second its predicted that he will have roman blood... since the romans were the ones opposed to jesus at the time (im talking politically not religiously) plus the fact that he depends on about a thousand things... o by the way the fact that it might even be a she.... one last thing.. it depends on israel's total safety and that aint happening soon short of a miracle so y worry bout it?

In post #28 Hitch wrote,

Well Junk I'll pay $1,000 for any Scripture that combines antichist and any relationship to nationality.

You are making this all up from thin air.
And it has no basis in fact.

H

Hitch, I'm waiting at my mail box. I love it when checks come in the mail. It kind of balances out all those bills that come daily.

 

[RaptureTicketHolder]

I tell them that the glory we will experience in the end is well worth whatever suffering we must endure to get there. I think Paul said something like that, too, didn't he?

*wink* You tell me Pastor*wink*

Peter said in his first book, 5th chapter:

1 Peter 5
9Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kind of sufferings.
10And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. 11To him be the power for ever and ever. Amen.

Great is the Lord and worthy of glory.

Great is the Lord and wothy of praise.

Now lift up your voice

Great is the Lord!

 

[Patmosman_sga]

1 Peter 5
[/b]9Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kind of sufferings.
10And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. 11To him be the power for ever and ever. Amen.

Yes, Peter says it very well, too. Perhaps you can see from passages like this why I have a problem with Darbyism/rapturism. Perfection through suffering is an essential element of traditional Christian eschatology, and it is precisely what is missing in rapturism.

 

[vinsight4u]

...

 

[vinsight4u]

...

 

[vinsight4u]

...

 

[vinsight4u]

...

 

[Knee V]

It's pretty much impossible to imagine nothing. Not just not anything, but nothing. It is too much for our minds to comprehend (or not enough). But let's try here for a sec. Picture absolutely nothing. Does nothing have size? Does nothing have shape? Can nothing move around? What color is nothing? What does nothing smell like? Obviously, the answer to all of these questions is some kind of negative response. There is no substance to nothing to allow for any of those questions to have some kind of positive answer. So how can nothing have a nationality?

 

[Patmosman_sga]

It's pretty much impossible to imagine nothing. Not just not anything, but nothing. It is too much for our minds to comprehend (or not enough). But let's try here for a sec. Picture absolutely nothing. Does nothing have size? Does nothing have shape? Can nothing move around? What color is nothing? What does nothing smell like? Obviously, the answer to all of these questions is some kind of negative response. There is no substance to nothing to allow for any of those questions to have some kind of positive answer. So how can nothing have a nationality?

. . . which is why I don't waste my time responding to these redundant proof-texters.