Anyone else have a unique eschatology?

[Mr E]

Maybe not, but Tim Cohen and his charismatic buddies seem to think, and from what I see in some of the podcast Tim Cohen has shown up on, they've swallowed the storyline hook, line and sinker. For the most part, Cohen has cobbled together a number of books and has been putting his prophetic musings out there for the Church (primarily those in the charismatic/faith movement side of things) to buy and consume.

It's at best a compendium of information gathered from fringe groups- like the British-Israel movement. It wouldn't even classify as unique in this thread, never mind the overall geography we call eschatology. As a young man he was exposed to these ideas by a local Colorado Springs pastor of a Messianic Jewish church-- by the name of Monte Judah, who more than thirty years ago determined (in his head) that (then) Prince Charles was the anti-christ figure to come.... He (and young Tim, now old) have been developing the theory ever since, building line by line, enough material for a 400 page book the pages of which would make excellent fire-starter.

Lion & Lamb Ministries

Lion & Lamb Ministries has been teaching the Hebraic roots of the Christian faith for over 25 years. As a leader in the Messianic movement since 1995 we strive to teach Torah and Yeshua to the world.

www.lionandlambministries.org

 

[dwb001]

It's at best a compendium of information gathered from fringe groups- like the British-Israel movement. It wouldn't even classify as unique in this thread, never mind the overall geography we call eschatology. As a young man he was exposed to these ideas by a local Colorado Springs pastor of a Messianic Jewish church-- by the name of Monte Judah, who more than thirty years ago determined (in his head) that (then) Prince Charles was the anti-christ figure to come.... He (and young Tim, now old) have been developing the theory ever since, building line by line, enough material for a 400 page book the pages of which would make excellent fire-starter.

Lion & Lamb Ministries

Lion & Lamb Ministries has been teaching the Hebraic roots of the Christian faith for over 25 years. As a leader in the Messianic movement since 1995 we strive to teach Torah and Yeshua to the world.

www.lionandlambministries.org

Monte Judah does not say that King Charles is the AC.
Please know a persons perspectives before trying to represent them.
Monte has said often that he is just keeping an eye on King Charles as a good prospect for the AC.

Don't lie about what another person has said. Or at least get their true perspective before commenting.

 

[Douggg]

As a young man he was exposed to these ideas by a local Colorado Springs pastor of a Messianic Jewish church-- by the name of Monte Judah, who more than thirty years ago determined (in his head) that (then) Prince Charles was the anti-christ figure to come....

Charles back then was 44 years old, so that speculation has long since been eroded by time, as Charles is now 74.

 

[dwb001]

Charles back then was 44 years old, so that speculation has long since been eroded by time, as Charles is now 74.

And Monte Judah never said King Charles was the AC.
Your portion of the quoted post included that lie and I just needed to make sure it was corrected.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I don't want you to focus on anything!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why will you not listen??????????????????

I am listening. I'm trying to understand your goal here.

Nothing to do with it. Charles is the son of god. How do you address that?

Ok. I first address it by citing that the words "Charles is the son of god" is a mere claim.

Then, secondly, we apply reasoning and logic and rules of argumentation to "a claim." That's where we start. Those who make a claim are then asked to offer reasonable, sound and sufficient support for that claim.

Do you not have Google... Google the father of the King.
This is FACT not opinion.

No. You need to follow the rules of not only good edicate but also good argumentation and...............................the rules of CF. The burden of proof (or support) is ON YOU. Not me.

I ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have sources and support for my views, even simply for my surmisals. You should too. That's how substantiating a claim works.

It's not up to me to prove or disprove your claim. You have to explain it.

Then ask questions... after you do your homework.
You learn better if you discover for yourself.

That's not how human communication, discussion, argumentation or plain interaction works.

I could make the same assertion to you: that YOU need to do your homework. What do you think my book list represents? Fried potatoes?

Both are subjective in their value.

Oh? Really? Please tell me more.

I don't go in much for ultimatums. If you want to explain yourself... I can't stop you.
If someone speaks error as if it is truth... I don't go easy on that type of thing.

Now you're just obfuscating. I don't go for that tactic.

No the person that I was originally responding to.

And who was that? You need to cite them as you go so we can all follow your thinking. If all you can do is state pejorative and try to poke the rest of us in the eye and tell us how deficient we are, then we will lose track of what it is you're wanting to achieve here in your communication.

At the current time... America.
Now let the fight begin.

I'm not here to debate it. But thank you for letting me know your view on that. There's a person in my extended family who thinks the same thing.

 

[Mr E]

Monte Judah does not say that King Charles is the AC.
Please know a persons perspectives before trying to represent them.
Monte has said often that he is just keeping an eye on King Charles as a good prospect for the AC.

Don't lie about what another person has said. Or at least get their true perspective before commenting.

Since you didn't read the book, maybe your information isn't complete. Here is a video where Monte Judah speaks to where he and a friend of his wrote a computer program using gematria, and using it determined by calculation that (then) Prince Charles was the anti-christ. Monte showed this program to a young Air Force cadet (Tim Huckabay) along with the Prince of Wales coat of arms-- who bought the idea hook, line and sinker (as @2PhiloVoid) coined... and wrote this book of drivel.

He tells the story here>>>

 

[dwb001]

I am listening. I'm trying to understand your goal here.

I have stated my goal here at least twice already... go back and check... or maybe read the OP.

Ok. I first address it by citing that the words "Charles is the son of god" is a mere claim. Now, we apply reasoning and logic and rules of argumentation to "a claim." That's where we start. Those who make a claim are then asked to offer reasonable, sound and sufficient support for that claim.

And I respond with it is public information. Who was King Charles dad? Maybe Google that with the phrase "was a god" after it.
Now I am having to teach people how to Google.

No. You need to follow the rules of not only good edicate but also good argumentation and...............................the rules of CF. The burden of proof (or support) is ON YOU. Not me.

I will do me and you do you.
I have told you where the information is and why I want you to look it up. I have fulfilled my burden of proof to a degree I am happy with.
You are not happy with my level of support for my argument... but that does not mean I have provided no level of support.

I ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have sources and support for my views, even simply for my surmisals. You should too. That's how substantiating a claim works.

"surmisals"? Typos can confuse the issue... like here I have no idea the word you are intending.
I have my proof and I have shown you exactly where to find it.

It's not up to me to prove or disprove your claim. You have to explain it.

I have explained it... not to your satisfaction but it is explained.
Have you never been given an answer that you have not found to be satisfactory but were given nothing further... I have given you something further but you appear to not be satisfied with it.

That's not how human communication, discussion, argumentation or plain interaction works.

Yes it does... Because that is what we are doing here. Clumsy, ugly, stumbling communication... very human.

I could make the same assertion to you: that YOU need to do your homework. What do you think my book list represents? Fried potatoes?

Yes fried potatoes. Suitable only for the compost heap... I don't like fried potatoes.
You have asked me to do the homework... and I say no.
You are free to say no.. and I am free to keep bringing the subject up every chance I get. FREEDOM!!!!!!

Oh? Really? Please tell me more.

Your prerogative is of subjective value because that is the nature of choice... fried potatoes might be your favorite today but not tomorrow.
Your education is of subjective value because that is the nature of education... ever heard of a good or a bad education? Subjective.

Now you're just obfuscating. I don't go for that tactic.

How am I making things unclear? I don't like ultimatums and I try to correct error. Sounds clear to me.

And who was that? You need to cite them as you go so we can all follow your thinking. If all you can do is state pejorative and try to poke the rest of us in the eye and tell us how deficient we are, then we will lose track of what it is you're wanting to achieve here in your communication.

Go back and read... I will look up the post number and edit it back in here..... Post #167
If you are loosing track of the conversation... keep your questions and answers closer to the topic.

I'm not here to debate it. But thank you for letting me know your view on that. There's a person in my extended family who thinks the same thing.

You are the one who asked the question and now you do not want to discuss my answer. Sounds disingenuous.
And I probably have very different reasons for my belief than your family member.

 

[dwb001]

Since you didn't read the book, maybe your information isn't complete. Here is a video where Monte Judah speaks to where he and a friend of his wrote a computer program using gematria, and using it determined by calculation that (then) Prince Charles was the anti-christ. Monte showed this program to a young Air Force cadet (Tim Huckabay) along with the Prince of Wales coat of arms-- who bought the idea hook, line and sinker (as @2PhiloVoid) coined... and wrote this book of drivel.

He tells the story here>>>

Seen it and I think you missed all the parts where Monte says he is NOT calling King Charles the AC.
A strong candidate and one to watch... but he never holds to the position that King Charles is the AC.

Or give me the exact time reference when Monte says what you say he says.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You are the one who asked the question and now you do not want to discuss my answer. Sounds disingenuous.
And I probably have very different reasons for my belief than your family member.

Actually, it was an honest question, so I asked it. Mainly because you said you wanted us to ask you questions. So, I asked. And I heard your answer. It's different than mine, BUT as I've said earlier, I take the book of Revelation with a grain of salt and without any dogmatic position. There are 12 or so different eschatological schemas, and I don't claim I know which one is definitively "the correct one."

So, you want "freedom? I'm giving you ample freedom to express what you think the book of Revelation means. I'm not telling you your wrong. Who knows? Maybe you're right about your Post-Mill viewpoint. I have no way to know for sure.

Another question then: What is the meaning or nature of "the Millenium"?

P.S. ............... and yes, I'm quite aware I make various typos. I'm a lousy typist. Lol! (Note though: "surmisal" is an actual word)

 

[dwb001]

Actually, it was an honest question, so I asked it. Mainly because you said you wanted us to ask you questions. So, I asked. And I heard your answer. It's different than mine, BUT as I've said earlier, I take the book of Revelation with a grain of salt and without any dogmatic position on which of 12 different eschatological schemas is "the correct one."

And I have a different schema than all the rest. Totally unique as far as I have seen.
Kind of like as if God was dong a new thing. As He said He would do... kinda a Acts 13:41thing.

So, you want "freedom?

No... I have freedom.

I'm giving you ample freedom express what you think the book of Revelation means. I'm not telling you your wrong. Who knows? Maybe you're right about your Post-Mill viewpoint. I have no way to know for sure.

I do not have a Post-Mill viewpoint. This just shows how little you pay attention.

Another question then: What is the meaning or nature of "the Millenium"?

One thousand years.

 

[Douggg]

Arguing over whether Charles is speculatively the person who becomes the Antichrist - is like arguing over spilled milk. He is not and cannot be the person who becomes the Antichrist because he is not a Jew and is too old.

Redirect to looking for someone else who could possibly become the Antichrist, like Zelensky. And if there is another candidate, a Jew, besides him that comes to mind, let's discuss that person.

 

[dwb001]

Arguing over whether Charles is speculatively the person who becomes the Antichrist - is like arguing over spilled milk. He is not and cannot be the person who becomes the Antichrist because he is not a Jew and is too old.

You keep saying that the AC needs to be a Jew without any references to back your opinion.
And what does age have to do with anything.

Redirect to looking for someone else who could possibly become the Antichrist, like Zelensky. And if there is another candidate, a Jew, besides him that comes to mind, let's discuss that person.

Why are you so fixated on the AC being a Jew?
You have provided nothing other that a graphic of your own design to somehow say that the AC is a Jew.
Show Biblical references that the AC needs to be a Jew.

 

[Douggg]

What needs to be focused on regarding the person who becomes the Antichrist is that he first must become the little horn person of Daniel 8.

 

[Douggg]

You keep saying that the AC needs to be a Jew without any references to back your opinion.

I explained in my post #328. Please read the whole post.

 

[dwb001]

What needs to be focused on regarding the person who becomes the Antichrist is that he first must become the little horn person of Daniel 8.




View attachment 338091

Nice picture but the picture does not provide any real information.

Why MUST the AC be a Jew?
No references provided. How about just conversation instead of pictures that need another few pages of explanation.

 

[dwb001]

I explained in my post #328. Please read the whole post.

Skimmed your post and if I get the logic correct... because Jesus was the King... the anti-Jesus must also be the King.

But that does not make sense because you say anti means against... then the antichrist would have to NOT be a King.

 

[Douggg]

Nice picture but the picture does not provide any real information.

Why MUST the AC be a Jew?
No references provided. How about just conversation instead of pictures that need another few pages of explanation.

Again, the reason he must be a Jew is spelled out in my post #428.

The chart provides a tremendous amount of information. Firstly, it shows the framework of when the 7 years of the 70th week of Daniel 9:27 begins, which will be right after the Gog/Magog event.

Also the chart shows the progressive stages of the person on the way to his destruction.

 

[Douggg]

Skimmed your post and if I get the logic correct... because Jesus was the King... the anti-Jesus must also be the King.

But that does not make sense because you say anti means against... then the antichrist would have to NOT be a King.

Not just King, but King of Israel.

Please, go back and re-read. I wrote Anti can mean against and/or instead of. And I even wrote a sentence saying the Antichrist will be both against Jesus and instead of Jesus.

When you realize that the Antichrist will be anointed the King of Israel messiah, then Revelation 6:2 about the rider on the white horse being given a crown - then it will become apparent the crown he is given is that of being the King of Israel.

 

[dwb001]

Again, the reason he must be a Jew is spelled out in my post #428.

The chart provides a tremendous amount of information. Firstly, it shows the framework of when the 7 years of the 70th week of Daniel 9:27 begins, which will be right after the Gog/Magog event.

Also the chart shows the progressive stages of the person on the way to his destruction.

Your charts do not provide as much information as you think.
This is a symptom of working too closely to a project without push back.

So I missed your 428 reasons... and remember I don't just want reasons but references. There is a difference.
So why not just once more and I will not ask again.
In one or two references that prove that the AC MUST BE A JEW.
That is all. Just a couple of references from the Bible that state your foundational idea.

 

[Douggg]

So I missed your 428 reasons... and remember I don't just want reasons but references. There is a difference.
So why not just once more and I will not ask again.
In one or two references that prove that the AC MUST BE A JEW.
That is all. Just a couple of references from the Bible that state your foundational idea.

I gave the references in my post #428. The one reference not in my post is John 5:43.

John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

As supplemental information that you are probably not aware of is the Greek word "Christ, Christos" equates to messiah, as understood by the Jews in Jesus's day....

The woman at the well speaking...

John 4:25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.