Is North Korea the little horn?

[Acts2:38]

The Orthodox Church, which Jesus Christ founded, is the only one to say who is right.

YOU step down off YOUR pedestal of claiming to have the right to interpret Scripture for yourself--a notion Scripture itself repudiates.

Christ is risen!

Hello,

Just out of curiosity, where in scripture did it say Christ set up the "Orthodox" church?

In scripture, I only see Christ setting up "His" church. Matthew 16:18-19; Romans 16:16; Colossians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 1 Corinthians 3:4-5;(only one church verses) Ephesians 4:4-6; 1 Corinthians 12; Romans 12; (no earthly high priest and no earthly headquarters) Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22-23.

With a claim like what you have made, one should prove it with scripture.

I hope we can reason earnest and compassionately (Isaiah 1:18). No offense was intended. Just seeking out a defense to your claim.

 

[Keath]

Could you say a little more about the woman clothed with the sun and the moon at her feet? Is this something we will see in the sky?

My understanding of this is that this represents Israel at some level (see Joseph's dream of the sun, moon, and stars), with the 'child' being the promised messiah, Christ.

 

[Keath]

I think you make some good points, and especially the key point you made that Matt 24 starts with a 3 part question; yes, in the disciples mind the 3 questions were one and the same, but that was because they were struggling with prophetic perspective (perceiving both close and distant events together as one).
Also Matt 24 and Rev 6 (the 7 seals) parallel very closely). Revelation's general accepted dating of 96 A.D. thrusts these events ultimate fulfillment past 70 A.D.; not that 70 A.D. was not a significant partial / 'interim' fulfillment. But this is very similar to Daniel's writings about the Abomination of Desolation. He wrote this after the Babylonian 'abomination of desolation' had occurred, while he was in captivity; this is very similar to John's circumstances. And Jesus 'spoke' Matt 24, after the Greek's 'abomination of desolation', which easily satisfied Daniel's prophecy; however, Jesus confidently thrusts Daniel's fulfilled prophecy into the future. Why? Because of another aspect of prophetic perspective, recurring fulfillment (tremors) leading up to the consummate fulfillment. This is something that preterist fail to take into consideration.

 

[Armoured]

Is North Korea the little horn?

No.

 

[Keath]

Jesus teaches the suddenness of the second coming (like a thief/ no signs, warnings, announcements)

1 Thes 4:4,6 "But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. .. Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober."

 

[Monk Brendan]

I tend to agree with you monk, if there is going to be accusations flung around then it should have firm proof to back it up.

Thank you!

 

[Jack Isaacks]

Hello,

Just out of curiosity, where in scripture did it say Christ set up the "Orthodox" church?

"Orthodox" is simply a label we wear so others can find us.

Our name to ourselves is the Church of Christ. Of the other names in the Bible, such as "Church of God," or "Church of the First-born" are our names, too.

We can prove, even on the basis of SECULAR history, that our Church goes all the way back to Christ Himself in an unbroken line.

Can you?

Christ is risen!

 

[Andrew4jesus]

1 Thes 4:4,6 "But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. .. Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober."

So really Keath we should be keeping an eye out? It's been consuming me for sometime now, I had let it go then a really good friend asked me to go camping with him last week and he started telling me he is worried about the world. This seems to have rekindled my own worries.

 

[Andrew4jesus]

Turkish authorities block Wikipedia without giving reason - BBC News

This looks suspicious

 

[Keath]

So really Keath we should be keeping an eye out? It's been consuming me for sometime now, I had let it go then a really good friend asked me to go camping with him last week and he started telling me he is worried about the world. This seems to have rekindled my own worries.

Trust and focus in Christ; so don't worry; but yes, we don't have to bumble along in ignorance either; yes, I'd say keep your eyes at least open.

 

[Jack Isaacks]

So really Keath we should be keeping an eye out? It's been consuming me for sometime now, I had let it go then a really good friend asked me to go camping with him last week and he started telling me he is worried about the world. This seems to have rekindled my own worries.

At the very moment of His Ascension, Jesus was asked, "Will you now restore sovereignty to Israel?"

The Savior replied, "It is not for you to know the times or seasons which the Father has fixed by His own authority."

We would all do well to take these words to heart before indulging in any apocalyptic or eschatological speculations.

Christ is risen!

 

[Waggles]

We would all do well to take these words to heart before indulging in any apocalyptic or eschatological speculations.

I truly believe that none will miss the end of the world as it will be broadcast live on Fox and CNN.

 

[Acts2:38]

"Orthodox" is simply a label we wear so others can find us.

Our name to ourselves is the Church of Christ. Of the other names in the Bible, such as "Church of God," or "Church of the First-born" are our names, too.

We can prove, even on the basis of SECULAR history, that our Church goes all the way back to Christ Himself in an unbroken line.

Can you?

Christ is risen!

Hello again,

I still didn't catch any scriptural base for your naming yourselfs "Orthodox". The bible from what I read only gives authority to name yourselves for Christs honor like church of God or church of Christ. After all, it is HIS church. I just don't see authority in the scriptures to be named anything else. You have to show scripture, which you haven't yet. I refer back to the verses I have shown you.

Matthew 16:18-19; Romans 16:16; Colossians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 1 Corinthians 3:4-5;(only one church verses) Ephesians 4:4-6; 1 Corinthians 12; Romans 12; (no earthly high priest and no earthly headquarters) Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22-23.

Secondly, the secular history I see and read, supports the fact that the Orthodox church and Catholic church are set up almost hand in hand until a larger difference in ideas in the "the east-west schism " of 1054. So if the Orthodox went "hand in hand" with the Catholic church. The earliest possible date Catholics are founded is about 325 (council of nicea) roughly and then more prevalent in 600's. Orthodox are a split off of Catholic like most all reformation churches are. The great split in 1054.

No. I do not see Orthodox or Catholic is being the original. The original church is Christ's church. A true church of Christ, gives honor and glory to God, by sticking to the doctrines found in the bible (not mans) and stays in the "one body" (Romans 12; 1 Corinthians 12; Ephesians 4:4-6) with what names scripture has authorized, such as the examples I previously given.

Nowhere do I see Paul saying "The holy orthodox church salute you.". If you do not carry Christs name, you are a denomination. Denomination means "separate and apart from the original".

First false doctrine held, is the fact that the Orthodox church has a pope. A head of the church right?
What does this read - Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22-23.

I humbly ask again, with a claim that you have made, prove it in scripture.

 

[Acts2:38]

1 Thes 4:4,6 "But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. .. Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober."

Hello Keath,

You must mean 1 Thessalonians 5:4 and 6 right?

Did you just cherry pick out of desperation? I implore you to read verses 1-3 and it should fall into context for you. In fact, read 1-13 and you will see, it is really not what you are implying at all. I will let you go over it and if you still are not striking a chord I will be more than willing to help.

The problem with premillinnialism, is the fact that it requires Jesus to pull followers secretly from the earth leaving everyone else to wonder where they went. It also requires that Jesus set up His kingdom physically and rule from Jerusalem's temple which would mean Jesus would touch down on the ground. It also implies that Jesus wasn't successful with setting up his kingdom in Acts 2 and therefore had to "try" to do it a different way.

So wrong my friend. When "that day" comes:
1.Christ will return visibly for ALL to see
2.There will be no escape like implied in Matthew 24:4-34
3.There will be a "shout...with the voice of an archangel...trumpet of God". Everyone, sinner and saint alike, will see and hear this. No secret to that.
4.Believers who are dead will rise first
5.Believers who are alive at that point in time will be caught up with the Lord in the clouds and we will remain with Him forever. Where is earthly, physical world ruling in this?

1 Thessalonians 4:15-18

 

[Acts2:38]

in the disciples mind the 3 questions were one and the same, but that was because they were struggling with prophetic perspective (perceiving both close and distant events together as one).

The TWO different questions are not the same. One speaks referring to the destruction of the temple see v.1 as a reference. While the disciples were on this subject, and they had Jesus pulled aside for the moment, they refer back to MANY parables spoken of by Jesus and ask about the end of the world and IF there are signs for that as well.

It is 2 questions:
Question 1:Tell us, when shall these things be? (In reference to the temple and Jerusalem being destroyed)

Question 2:what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? (in reference to the end of the world and IF there will be any signs)

You also are wrong about the disciples not understanding. Matthew 13:51, says that they did. Also take into consideration that in Acts 2, all the disciples were granted with miraculous gifts, one such gifts being the knowledge given to them by the holy spirit among tongues and other gifts. How else would God say this 2 Peter 1:21. They would have corrected the error then otherwise God was allowing them to lie and continue a lie.

No, the disciples understood clearly according to scripture.

Also Matt 24 and Rev 6 (the 7 seals) parallel very closely). Revelation's general accepted dating of 96 A.D.

Well, we are getting somewhere in your admitting that Revelation (or some of it) is parallel (to some extent according to you). Yes I see that a lot of people date Rev. to anywhere from 95-96 AD. However, look at these verses here:

Look at Revelation 11:1-2. You can clearly see the 'temple' in Jerusalem is still standing. It also implies people are still worshiping there at this time John is speaking. But after 70 AD, the temple was no longer standing because of the Romans. This account in Revelations is supported by book/chpts like Matthew 24 and 25 among others.

Also look at Revelation 17:9-11. What is it talking about with all that 'five are fallen' and such. The Romans emperors. Even secular history can show you the dates of these emperors and the happenings.

And Jesus 'spoke' Matt 24, after the Greek's 'abomination of desolation', which easily satisfied Daniel's prophecy; however, Jesus confidently thrusts Daniel's fulfilled prophecy into the future.

No. Look in the book of Luke 21. I encourage a full reading of it but see verse 20? Luke is one of the four gospels that run side by side with each other as the SAME accounts but from different perspectives. Luke 21 ties in very nicely to Matthew 24. Tie in Matthew 24:15 and then read Luke 21:20. Daniel supports Matthew 24 and Luke 21 as well as Revelation. They are in perfect harmony. There is no double talk here as you imply.

 

[Jack Isaacks]

Hello again,

I still didn't catch any scriptural base for your naming yourselfs "Orthodox". The bible from what I read only gives authority to name yourselves for Christs honor like church of God or church of Christ. After all, it is HIS church. I just don't see authority in the scriptures to be named anything else. You have to show scripture, which you haven't yet. I refer back to the verses I have shown you.



Secondly, the secular history I see and read, supports the fact that the Orthodox church and Catholic church are set up almost hand in hand until a larger difference in ideas in the "the east-west schism " of 1054. So if the Orthodox went "hand in hand" with the Catholic church. The earliest possible date Catholics are founded is about 325 (council of nicea) roughly and then more prevalent in 600's. Orthodox are a split off of Catholic like most all reformation churches are. The great split in 1054.

No. I do not see Orthodox or Catholic is being the original. The original church is Christ's church. A true church of Christ, gives honor and glory to God, by sticking to the doctrines found in the bible (not mans) and stays in the "one body" (Romans 12; 1 Corinthians 12; Ephesians 4:4-6) with what names scripture has authorized, such as the examples I previously given.

Nowhere do I see Paul saying "The holy orthodox church salute you.". If you do not carry Christs name, you are a denomination. Denomination means "separate and apart from the original".

First false doctrine held, is the fact that the Orthodox church has a pope. A head of the church right?
What does this read - Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22-23.

I humbly ask again, with a claim that you have made, prove it in scripture.

I've already answered your question. "Orthodox" is not our name. Our name to ourselves is the Church of Christ and other Biblical sobriquets.

Or did you not understand what I said?

Christ is risen!

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Acts2:38]

I've already answered your question. "Orthodox" is not our name. Our name to ourselves is the Church of Christ and other Biblical sobriquets.

Or did you not understand what I said?

Christ is risen!

That's contradictory. I see names like "St Peter and Paul Orthodox Church" and "Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church". They name THEMSELVES that. They gladly bare that name otherwise they wouldn't have such names.

"St. Peter and Paul"? 1 Corinthians 1:10-13

No. It is not the church of Christ my dear friend. If it was, you'd have names like church of Christ or church of God, not "St. Peter and Paul Orthodox Church".

Can you provide scriptural proof or not?

 

[Jack Isaacks]

That's contradictory. I see names like "St Peter and Paul Orthodox Church" and "Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church". They name THEMSELVES that. They gladly bare that name otherwise they wouldn't have such names.

"St. Peter and Paul"? 1 Corinthians 1:10-13

No. It is not the church of Christ my dear friend. If it was, you'd have names like church of Christ or church of God, not "St. Peter and Paul Orthodox Church".

Can you provide scriptural proof or not?

Uhhhhh... can you not understand plain English prose?

As an Orthodox of decades long membership, I think I know more about us and how we do things then you would ever grasp in your present perspective of being on the outside looking in.

Christ is Risen!

 

[Acts2:38]

Uhhhhh... can you not understand plain English prose?

As an Orthodox of decades long membership, I think I know more about us and how we do things then you would ever grasp in your present perspective of being on the outside looking in.

Christ is Risen!

Look, please do not get upset. You made a claim and I asked you to defend it. I gave you scripture, history, and other dealings that shows the proof that you are not and I merely asked if you have scriptural evidence.

I do not need to be an Orthodox for one second to know the doctrines they follow, such as a 'pope', are false.

If you are a church of Christ, then you will be called church of Christ. They are not. They are "St. Peter and Paul" and other such names ALWAYS with Orthodox in it.

If you cannot defend it scripturally then just say so. There is no need to get in a fit over a claim you made that was called out on. Ease it down my friend and lets "reason together" (Isaiah 1:18)