What Time Do You Think It Is??

[rollinTHUNDER]

this thread is no longer available

 

[rollinTHUNDER]

bump

 

[Hoonbaba]

It's time to reach for the 3 billion people who don't know Christ!!! =)

By the way, wanna read about a cool method of evangelism? Check out !!!

By the way, it ain't preterist!!! LOL!!!! =)

God bless!

-Jason

 

[postrib]

...What are the signs that indicate the coming of the Lord is near?...

I believe two major signs are given in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

...We believe that the Lord will appear in the clouds to remove His Church from the earth before the seven year Tribulation begins...

What scripture are you thinking of here?

...We believe this event can take place at any moment...

What scripture are you thinking of here?

 

[jenlu]

4:57

 

[rollinTHUNDER]

Originally posted by postrib
I believe two major signs are given in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

This is the second coming of Christ.

What scripture are you thinking of here?

What scripture are you thinking of here?

I think Rev. 3:10 answers both rather nicely.

 

[postrib]

...2 Thessalonians 2:3...

This is the second coming of Christ...

In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, I believe Paul makes clear that the apostasy and abomination of desolation must occur before the day Jesus comes to gather us together, for Jesus' coming to gather us together must destroy the Antichrist (verse 8). I believe Paul is referring to the same coming and gathering together as Matthew 24:29-31. I don't believe Paul taught a 3rd coming or a 2nd rapture.

...Rev. 3:10...

Where does Revelation 3:10 promise the church an imminent pre-trib rapture?

 

[mcfly1960]

I have studied the dispensational view for several years, but the historicist view is also quite interesting..and if true it could be "later" than we think.

One of the key verses that dispensationalists point to that put end times events still in the future is II Thes 2..they are waiting for the temple to be rebuilt and waiting for the "man of sin" to sit in this temple, declaring he is God. 

The Protestant reformers thought this had already been fulfilled.

Of course, the possibility of a future temple did not even seem remotely possible back then, so maybe they were at a disadvantage. Today, talk of a future temple is a reality among Orthodox Jews who are now back in their homeland (see target=_blank>http://www.templemountfaithful.org/).

Were the Bible's prophetic "temple" and "man of sin" verses referring to events still in the future? Or have those verses already been fulfilled long ago as was originally thought by the Protestant reformers?   Here is an interesting web site that says the verses have already been fulfilled.  The author is a Jewish Christian.

http://www.truthleftbehind.com/bookchaptertitanictruths.html

 

2 Thessalonians 2:1-8 is one of the most controversial passages in the Bible. It is time to examine this section carefully. In this analysis, I will draw on the past insights of historic Protestants, which was commonly accepted doctrine in Europe, England, and America for over 300 years—since the time of the Reformation.

Verse 1—"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering unto him," Jesus is "coming" to gather His children. The Greek word used here for "coming" is parousia, which clearly refers to the second coming of Jesus Christ (Matthew 24:27).

Verse 2—"That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at had." Here Paul warned the Thessalonians not to be troubled by anyone who would suggest that "the day of Christ" on which He would "gather" His children was "at hand" in the first century. No. Something big must happen first.

Verse 3—"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day [when Jesus comes to gather His children] shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin [Antichrist] be revealed, the son of perdition." Here Paul is very clear. "That day" when Jesus comes to "gather" us shall not come until there is first "a falling away" and the Antichrist is revealed! Thus, contrary to popular opinion, Antichrist comes before Jesus comes to gather His people! Paul warned, "Let no man deceive you by any means" into believing anything else.

The phrase, "a falling away," is for the Greek word "apostasia," which means "a falling away" from the truth. Thus, there would be in the history of Christianity, as in the history of Israel, a major "falling away" from God’s Word that would result in the rise of Antichrist. Paul called this antichrist "that man of sin." These words actually point to an earlier prophecy found in Daniel chapter 7.

Daniel chapter 7 predicted the rise of a "little horn" with "eyes like the eyes of a man." Daniel 7:8. Daniel did not say the little horn would be a man, but that it would have "eyes like the eyes of a man." This horn would arise out of "the fourth beast," or "fourth kingdom" (verse 23), which was the Roman Empire. It would arise "among" the 10 horns in Europe (verse 8), would speak proud words against God (verses 8, 25) and would make "war with the saints" (verse 21) in Christian history.

Paul also called the Antichrist "the son of perdition," which is what Jesus Christ called Judas (John 17:12). Judas was an insider, an apostle, one of the twelve. Judas kissed Jesus, calling him "Master" (Mark 14:45). Yet it was a kiss of betrayal. By calling Antichrist "the son or perdition," Paul gives us a clue in that this deceiver would not be a pagan dictator like Adolf Hitler, but rather a professed apostle of Jesus Christ. Yet in reality, he would be a false apostle. (See 2 Corinthians 11:13.)

Verse 4—"Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." Paul did not say, as so many believe, that Antichrist will walk into a temple and say, "I am God." Rather, he would sit "as God…shewing himself that he is God." The difference is subtle, yet very important. The Antichrist will not "say it," for this would be too obvious. Yet he will "show it" by his actions.

The Antichrist will "sit." This does not mean he will "sit down" on some chair. In the language of the Bible, to "sit" means to sit in a position of authority. Jesus Christ now "sits" at the right hand of God (Mark 16:19). He is our supreme authority, the only Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5). According to Paul, the Antichrist will also deceptively "sit" in a position of authority. Yet this "sitting will actually be in opposition to the supreme authority of Jesus Christ!

Antichrist will even "sit in the temple of God." Here is the key text! Millions of sincere Christians, like Hal Lindsey, apply this to a rebuilt third Jewish temple in Jerusalem. But is that right? Think about it. Let’s say that a group of Jewish people, who do not believe in the great sacrifice of Jesus Christ, were to rebuild a third temple on the Temple Mount. Could that temple ever really be called "the temple of God"? No! For that temple would be in itself a denial of Jesus Christ! Notice what the famous Christian commentator Adam Clarke had to say about Paul’s words: "By the temple of God the apostle could not well mean the temple of Jerusalem; because that, he knew, would be destroyed with a few years. After the death of Christ the temple of Jerusalem is never called by the apostles the temple of God."

The Greek word Paul used here for "temple" is "naos." One Titanic truth about the temple is that every time Paul used the word "naos" in his letters, he always applied it not to a building in Jerusalem, but to the Church! Paul wrote to "the Church of God which is at Corinth," saying, "Know ye not that ye are the temple ["naos"] of God?" 1 Corinthians 1:2; 3:16. (See also 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:19-22.) Thus, to Paul, "the temple of God" is the Christian Church! Again, Adam Clarke commented: "Under the gospel dispensation, the temple of God is the Church of Christ." And this is where Antichrist will sit! He will deceptively enter the Church, like Judas, who was one of the twelve! Then he will "sit" in a position of supreme, apparently infallible authority, which will ever so subtly counterfeit the supreme authority of Jesus Christ!

If you were the devil, wouldn’t you try to do the same thing? You wouldn’t spend most of your time hanging out in a bar. Your goal would be to try and deceive Christians! If you were Satan, wouldn’t you want to sneak into the Church, get behind the pulpit, and then preach a sermon? (See Acts 20:28-31; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 4:3, 4.) This is exactly what Paul says the Antichrist will do! He will cleverly enter the temple of God, which is the Christian Church, and then he will "sit" in a position of apparently supreme authority as he makes pronouncements on matters of Christian doctrine.

The world-famous Matthew Henry, whose roots were firmly planted in historic Protestantism, commented: "[Paul] speaks of some very great apostasy. …No sooner was Christianity planted and rooted in the world than there began to be a defection in the Christian church. …He is called the man of sin, …the son of perdition. …These names may properly be applied, for these reasons, to the papal state. …The bishops of Rome not only oppose God’s authority, …but have exalted themselves above God. …The antichrist here mentioned is some usurper of God’s authority in the Christian church, …and to whom can this better apply than to the bishops of Rome?"

The above view was shared by John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, the translators of the King James Bible, John Wesley, Sir Isaac Newton, Charles Spurgeon, Bishop J.C. Ryle, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and countless other Protestant reformers. Have we not just discovered a Titanic truth?

Verse 5, 6—"Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what witholdeth [restrains] that he might be revealed in his time." This is a very controversial sentence. Multitudes of prophecy scholars today believe that the Christian Church is the restrainer. They teach that when the Church is removed at the rapture, then the Antichrist will appear. They also teach that after this Antichrist shows up, he will then enter the rebuilt Jewish temple in Jerusalem and proclaim that he is God. This will supposedly happen during "the seven years of tribulation." Yet from what we have studied so far, can you not see that there is something wrong with this picture?

Paul did not specify in this letter "what" was restraining Antichrist. Yet the Thessalonians knew, for Paul said in verse 6 that he had previously "told" them. A study of the writings of the early Church fathers, who were Christian leaders living after the apostles, reveals exactly what the early church believed. "The early Church—from whom alone we can learn what Paul told them by word of mouth, but refrained from committing to writing—has left is on record that the Apostle had told them that this hindering power was the dominion of the Roman Caesars; that while they continued to reign at Rome, the development of the predicted power of evil was impossible. …While the Caesars reigned he [the Antichrist] could not appear, but when they passed away he would succeed them."

Based on historical research, Matthew Henry agreed. "This is supposed [believed] to be the power of the Roman empire, which the apostle did not think fit to mention more plainly at that time; and it is notorious that, while this power continued, it prevented the advances of the bishops of Rome to that height of tyranny to which soon afterwards they arrived." Thus, the force that "witholdeth," or restrains, was the imperial power of the Roman Empire ruled by the Caesars. It was only after Rome fell, in A.D. 476, that the popes were free to rule. This used to be a common interpretation among Lutheran, Baptist, Presbyterian, and Methodist scholars for 300 years after the Reformation. But times have changed. New scholars are here with new ideas.

Verse 7—"For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [restrains] will let, until he be taken out of the way." In Paul’s day, because of the restraining power of the Roman empire, the Antichrist’s rise to power was being hindered. Yet Daniel’s previous prophecy predicted the eventual fall of the fourth beast (the Roman Empire), which would then allow the "little horn" (Antichrist) to fully spring into action (Daniel 7:7, 8). In his epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul did not specify in writing that the Roman Empire would eventually be "taken out of the way." The reason was because his letter might be discovered by Roman authorities, which might have resulted in more "persecutions and tribulations" against his converts for their perceived disloyalty to Caesar. (See 2 Thessalonians 1:4.) This view fits with prophecy and history. Not only that, it makes perfect sense!

In Paul’s day, the "mystery of iniquity" was already working. Yet it was largely hidden. It was not until the Roman Empire finally fell in A.D. 476 that this "mystery" was fully revealed for what it was to the eyes of the world. Then came the Dark Ages, when Europe was held in a grip of terror for almost 1,000 years. Historians estimate that the "Holy Office of the Inquisition" was responsible for the brutal torture and deaths of 50-100 million Christians. And this was done in the name of Jesus Christ! Surely Antichrist has entered the temple of God.

Verse 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." Thus "the mystery of iniquity" would start in the days of Paul and would continue to the end. Then it would be destroyed by the "brightness of his coming." The Greek word for "coming" used in verse 8 is the same for "coming" used in verse 1. That word is parousia, which clearly refers to the second coming of Jesus Christ. Thus, according to verses 1 and 8, it is at the second coming, after Antichrist is revealed, that Jesus Christ will come to "gather" His children.


A SIMPLE SUMMARY OF 2 THESSALONIANS 2:1-8

Verse 1—Jesus Christ is "coming" [the parousia] to "gather" His children.
Verse 2—Paul told the early Thessalonian believers not be "shaken" by false ideas that this "day of Christ" was "at hand" in the first century.

Verse 3—Before "the day of Christ" comes, "a falling away" must come first, and the prophesied "man of sin" must be revealed.

Verse 4—This "man of sin" will exalt himself and will even sit in "the temple of God," which is the church, "shewing himself that he is God."

Verse 5—Paul had previously warned the Thessalonians about this.

Verse 6—The Thessalonians knew "what" was then restraining the Antichrist.

Verse 7—The Antichrist was already working secretly in the first century. Soon the restraining power would be "taken out of the way."

Verse 8—Then the Antichrist would be fully "revealed." After his revelation, he would continue until the second coming of Jesus. Then he will be "destroyed" by the "brightness" of Christ’s "coming" [the parousia]. And it is at this second coming, at the parousia, after the Antichrist is revealed, that Jesus Christ will "gather" His children who have remained faithful to the truth!

In short, this view states that the "temple" refers to the Church and that the pope was the "man of sin".  The pope has already exalted himself in the church.  If this is correct, then it is indeed later than we think.

Perhaps there is a little truth in each view.  I still think that there will be a future not-yet-revealed political figure to come on to the world scene who will deceive the world, and that these events will involve the modern state of Israel and the Jewish people.

 

 

[franklin]

Concept of time according to the Apostle Paul: And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light" [Rom. 13:11,12].

So that ye come behind in no gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" [I Cor. 1:7].

But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none." "And they that use this world, as not abusing it: for the fashion of this world passeth away" (lit. "is passing away") [I Cor. 7:29,31].

Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching." "For yet a little while (lit. "soon, very soon") and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry" [Heb. 10:25,37].

Time according to James:  Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and later rain. Be ye also patient, establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh. Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door" [James 5:7-9].

Time according to Peter:  "Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" [I Pet. 1:5].

"Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead."... "but the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer."... "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God" [I Pet. 4:5,7,17]

Do any of these inspired writers contradict each other?

Who were these passages spoken TO?

 

 

 

 

[postrib]

...Could that temple ever really be called "the temple of God"?...

Note that even after the crucifixion had annulled the temple sacrifices (Hebrews 7:18), Jesus commanded the apostles to speak to the people in "the temple" (Acts 5:20), and Paul went to "the temple" to pray (Acts 22:17) and was found "purified in the temple" (Acts 24:18, 21:26), and in a prophetic vision John measured "the temple of God" that will stand during the coming tribulation while the city of Jerusalem is being trodden under foot by the Gentiles for the 42 months of the Antichrist's rule (Revelation 11:1-2, 13:5).

...would be destroyed with a few years...

I believe the Jewish temple will be rebuilt (Revelation 11:1-2), daily sacrifices will be reinstituted (Daniel 9:27, 11:31), a false Messiah will arise to rule Israel (Ezekiel 21:25), the Antichrist will make a 7-year treaty with him (Daniel 9:26-27), in the midst of which 7 years the Antichrist will break the treaty (Daniel 9:27) and sit in the temple and proclaim himself God above all gods (Daniel 11:36; 2 Thessalonians 2:4; Revelation 13:6, 8), and so commit "the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet" (Matthew 24:15; Daniel 11:31, 36).

...the word "naos"...

Note that it can refer to the physical temple in Jerusalem (Matthew 23:16, Mark 15:38, Luke 1:9, John 2:20).

...The bishops of Rome not only oppose God’s authority, …but have exalted themselves above God...

How have they done either?

 

[mcfly1960]

Maybe you were not paying attention in history class, forgetting the torturous inquistion of millions of Christians and Jews during the middle ages, the paganization of Christianity by the Roman Church, and the many abuses of the papacy that led to the Protestant Revolution?

This view was shared by all the Protestant reformers, not by just a few voices "on the fringe".  By voicing dissent to the Roman Church, they and their followers paid with their blood, enduring horrible deaths and excrutiating and merciless pain in many cases. So even though their books are not on the New York Times bestseller list, maybe we should at least listen to them... 

Quoting Steve Wohlberg, here is a sampling of opinions during the turbulent years of the Protestant Revolution. 

http://www.truthleftbehind.com/AntichristChroniclesChapter9.html

Martin Luther (1483-1546) (Lutheran): "Martin Luther was the first to identify the papacy as such with the Antichrist. At first he discounted the value of John's Apocalypse. But then he saw in it a revelation of the Church of Rome as the deceiving Antichrist who secretly served Satan … a view that was to become dogma for all Protestant Churches." Newsweek, November 1, 1999. p. 71.


<DT>
"Luther... proved, by the revelations of Daniel and St. John, by the epistles of St. Paul, St. Peter, and St. Jude, that the reign of Antichrist, predicted and described in the Bible, was the Papacy ... And all the people did say, Amen! A holy terror seized their souls. It was Antichrist whom they beheld seated on the pontifical throne. This new idea, which derived greater strength from the prophetic descriptions launched forth by Luther into the midst of his contemporaries, inflicted the most terrible blow on Rome." Taken from J. H. Merle D'aubigne's classic work, History of the Reformation of the Sixteen Century, book 6, chapter 12, p. 215.&nbsp;

On August 20, 1520, Luther declared, "We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist." Quoted in LeRoy Froom's monumental work, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 121.&nbsp;


<DT>John Calvin (1509-1564) (Presbyterian): "Daniel and Paul had predicted that Antichrist would sit in the temple of God. The head of that cursed and abominable kingdom, in the Western Church, we affirm to be the Pope." Institutes of the Christian Religion, by John Calvin. Vol. 2, pp. 314, 315 (1561 edition).&nbsp;

"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." Ibid. p. 410.&nbsp;

John Knox (1505-1572) (Scotch Presbyterian): John Knox wrote about "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church." Along with Martin Luther, Knox finally concluded that the Papacy was "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." The Zurich letters, by John Knox, p. 199.&nbsp;

Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556) (Anglican): "Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." Taken from Works by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp. 6-7.&nbsp;

<DT>
Roger Williams (1603-1683) (First Baptist Pastor in America): Roger Williams spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." Quoted in Froom's The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, p. 52.&nbsp;

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647): "There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition that exalteth himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God." Reproduced in The Creeds of Christendom, With a History and Critical Notes, by Philip Schaff. Vol. 3, p. 658, 659, Chapter 25, Sec. 6.&nbsp;

Cotton Mather (1663-1728) (Congregational Theologian): "The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church: and in the Pope of Rome all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them." The Fall of Babylon, by Cotton Mather. Quoted in Froom's book, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, p. 113.&nbsp;

<DT>
John Wesley (1703-1791) (Methodist): Speaking of the Papacy, John Wesley wrote, "He is in an emphatic sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers... He it is...that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped...claiming the highest power, and highest honor...claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms, by John Wesley, p. 110.&nbsp;

A Great Cloud of Witnesses: "Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer; in the seventeenth century, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist confessions of Faith; Sir Isaac Newton, Wesley, Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards; and more recently Spurgeon, Bishop J.C. Ryle and Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones; these men among countless others, all saw the office of the Papacy as the antichrist." Taken from All Roads Lead to Rome, by Michael de Semlyen. Dorchestor House Publications, p. 205. (1991).

</DT>

 

[rollinTHUNDER]

Hello Everyone,
I don't want to mess up a good debate, but just to throw in a few cents worth. I am terrible at debating, so I will leave it for you heavy-weights.

I believe McFly is right about the subject of the "restrainer" has been and will continue to be very controversial. If you'll allow me my opinion, I'll promise not to cram it down your throats. This subject is not very important to me personally. But I believe that when Jesus told His disciples to wait for the comforter, He was going to send them power from on high. This restrainer in MHO is none other than the Holy Spirit. When the Lord calls His Bride up to meet Him in the clouds, the restrainer will also leave this earth and spiritual things on earth will be as they were before the church began.
Do you think the church would not raise a mighty fuss if this man of sin rose to power and tried to sell his plan for the mark of the beast now?? He would be exposed at the drop of a hat. He would be ruined. But on the other hand, if Christ took His bride, this problem would be removed. The tribulation saints will be overcome, thus he will not be opposed with much of a threat at all. Also, there is no need of such a mark. The worlds economy will have to collapse before they will accept it, and it will even include the rich as well. This sounds like their money will fail them. The rapture will accomplish both problems for a lost and dying world. So I believe that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit that is living inside of every believer. Then you will see the apostate Church set up, with the great falling away from the way, the truth and the life that the unbelieving world rejected. And they will be preaching what their itching ears want to hear, not unlike many are doing even today, and some even on this very forum.

 

[postrib]

...not paying attention in history class...

How does the&nbsp;papacy "opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped?" And how&nbsp;is the papacy&nbsp;"shewing himself that he is God?" (2 Thessalonians 2:4)

...Do you think the church would not raise a mighty fuss if this man of sin rose to power and tried to sell his plan for the mark of the beast now?? He would be exposed at the drop of a hat...

Note that the Bible says that God himself will send a "strong delusion" on all unbelievers so they will believe in the Antichrist when he proclaims that he is God (2 Thessalonians 2:4-12, compare Revelation 13:4-8).

And the Antichrist will be "given power" to "make war" against Christians "and to overcome them" (Revelation 13:7), just as the Roman emperors who said they were gods were allowed to persecute and kill so many Christians in the early church.

...I believe that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit that is living inside of every believer...

I don't believe it can be because many of us Christians will still be on the earth during the Antichrist’s rule (Revelation 13:7-10, 14:12-13), and no one can be a Christian without the Spirit (Romans 8:9).

...Then you will see the apostate Church set up, with the great falling away...

Note that in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Paul says&nbsp;that both the great falling away and the abomination of desolation must occur before the day Jesus comes to gather us together, for Jesus' coming to gather us together must destroy the Antichrist (verse 8).

 

[mcfly1960]

How does the&nbsp;papacy "opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped?" And how&nbsp;is the papacy&nbsp;"shewing himself that he is God?" (2 Thessalonians 2:4)

The titles of the Pope, "the true Vicar of Christ", "His Holiness", "Most Holy", "Holy Father", "Supreme High Priest" are titles only appropriate to God alone.&nbsp; The true Vicar of Christ is the Holy Spirit, not the Pope.

"But you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." Matthew 23:8-9

I would recommend&nbsp;"The Antichrist Unveiled" by Richard Bennett, a former Roman Catholic priest..see link below.&nbsp;

http://www.bereanbeacon.org/Prof.html

 

[postrib]

...titles only appropriate to God alone...

When has the Pope himself "opposed" God or "exalted himself above" all that is called God, or that is worshipped? (2 Thessalonians 2:4) Doesn't the Pope claim that he agrees with God on everything and that he is under God and worships God? When has the Pope ever claimed that "he is God?" (2 Thessalonians 2:4)

 

[rollinTHUNDER]

Good question postrib. I am interested in the answer to that one. In MHO, If it didn't happen in the past, then I wouldn't expect it to be fulfilled in the future either, because everything of significance that will happen in the future will have already happened in the past, but the past is only the shadow. By that I mean that the greater event will be the future one. Not only did God create the end from the beginning, but He also makes history repeat itself, (Eccles.3:15). I'm not up to par with knowledge of the Popes, but I would be interested in the input offered.

 

[mcfly1960]

Originally posted by postrib
When has the Pope ever claimed that "he is God?" (2 Thessalonians 2:4)

Is this a requirement of II Thessalonians 2:4 that&nbsp;the "son of perdition"&nbsp;be quoted as saying&nbsp;"he is God"?&nbsp;&nbsp;The scripture simply says that "he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God".

Would the devil's man appear to be an "insider" like Judas Iscariot who Jesus called a "devil" (John 6:70)&nbsp;and "son of perdition" (John 17:12)(which must have been a shock to the other 11 disciples)? &nbsp;Wasn't&nbsp;Satan himself&nbsp;an "insider"&nbsp;in the presence of God in&nbsp;heaven before his fall..an annointed cherub who fancied himself&nbsp;being like the most High&nbsp;(Isaiah 14:12-14, Ezekiel 28:12-15)?&nbsp; The devils, too, believe, and tremble (James 2:19).

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;
4&nbsp;&nbsp;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. II Thessalonians 2:3-4

Along with the Pope's titles&nbsp;"the true Vicar of Christ", "His Holiness", "Most Holy", "Holy Father", "Supreme High Priest" that are appropriate only to God, he claims to have "supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls" (Catholic Catechism #937), an assertion of power given to Jesus Christ alone.

Again, I would refer to the following web site from a former Roman Catholic priest. http://www.bereanbeacon.org/Prof.html

It was the opinion of Martin Luther, John Calvin, Charles Wesley, Roger Williams, Sir Isaac Newton, and Protestant scholars&nbsp;for 300 years that the papacy met the "requirements" for the "man of sin" set forth in II Thessalonians 2:4 and the rest of scripture.

I&nbsp;don't believe that the Bible&nbsp;is&nbsp;silent on the most&nbsp;violent time thus far&nbsp;in Church history, that being the days of the Dark Ages and Middle Ages when terror ruled over Europe by means of the Inquisition and the Pope's "skilled torturers".&nbsp;&nbsp; An estimated&nbsp;100 million&nbsp;people including 75 million Protestants&nbsp;were tortured to death&nbsp;over a 1200 year period (from Fox's Book of Martyrs and other sources).&nbsp;

http://www.reformed.org/books/fox/fox_martyrs.html

http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1676.cfm&nbsp;

http://www.reformation.org/inquisit.html

"And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration." Revelation 17:16

I have studied the futurist/dispensational view for years, but the historicist view is quite interesting and worthy of our study.&nbsp;

As Richard Bennett puts it (see link in previous post), "While futurism asserts the nearness of the Second Advent of Christ, it destroys the historical timeframe of His opposer, the Antichrist, which is essential to correctly understanding this fulfillment of prophecy."

Many of today's&nbsp;prophecy scholars&nbsp;see the&nbsp;False Prophet&nbsp;as a separate man from the Antichrist..the Pope or another religious figure, perhaps,&nbsp;will&nbsp;be the False Prophet, and a political figure will be the Antichrist.&nbsp; Perhaps, this is based on the contemporary concept of&nbsp;the "separation of church and state".&nbsp; But is "separation of church and state" just a temporary phenomenon? We will just have to wait and see.

 

[postrib]

...he claims to have "supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls"...

I believe&nbsp;he makes this claim in the belief that he is the chief bishop of the church on earth, not in the belief that he is Jesus or God.

...the historical timeframe of His opposer, the Antichrist...

Has the Pope fulfilled Revelation 13?

What are the seven symbolic heads and ten symbolic horns of the Pope? (Revelation 13:1)

Was one of the seven symbolic heads of the Pope wounded to death and then healed? (Revelation 13:3)

Does all the world worship Satan and the Pope? (Revelation 13:3-4)

Was power given to the Pope to continue forty and two months? (Revelation 13:5)

Did the Pope open his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven? (Revelation 13:6) Doesn't the Pope honor God and honor the name of God and honor the saints that dwell in heaven?

Was the Pope given power over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations, and did all that dwell upon the earth worship the Pope, whose names are not written in the book of life? (Revelation 13:7-8)

Did the Pope have a False Prophet who caused the earth to worship him? (Revelation 13:12)

Did the Pope have a False Prophet who did great wonders and called fire down from heaven in the sight of men? (Revelation 13:13)

Did the Pope have a False Prophet who deceived the earth by the means of the miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the Pope? (Revelation 13:14)

Did the Pope have a False Prophet who said to the earth that they should make an image of the Pope? (Revelation 13:14)

Did the Pope have a False Prophet who gave life to the image of the Pope, that the image of the Pope should both speak, and cause as many who would not worship the image of the Pope to be killed? (Revelation 13:14-15)

Did the Pope have a False Prophet who caused everyone to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their forehead? (Revelation 13:16)

Did the Pope have a False Prophet who made it so that nobody could buy or sell unless they had the mark, or the name of the Pope, or the number of the Pope's name? (Revelation 13:16-17)

Was the number of the Pope's name, which was the number of a man, 666? (Revelation 13:18)

 

[mcfly1960]

Regarding the&nbsp;Pope and 666, here is some interesting information I found&nbsp;from this web site:

&nbsp;http://christianessays.freeservers.com/antichrist1.htm

"When a Pope is crowned, there is placed on his head a heavy golden crown made of three crowns. One crown represents rulership over heaven, one is for rulership over earth, and the third is for rulership over hell.&nbsp; When this golden crown is placed on the Pope's head at his coronation, it bears the inscription VICARIUS FILII DEI, which means, in English, "Vicarius Son of God"."&nbsp;

The numeric value of VICARIUS FILII DEI is 666

The eastern Roman Empire used Greek, the western Roman Empire used Latin as its main language. For the Roman Catholic Church, it was a Latin world with Latin liturgy and a Latin Vulgate Bible.

The numeric value of "Latin" is 666. When "Latin" is changed to the Greek "Lateinos", the value is also 666.&nbsp; Pope Vitallian issued a decree commanding the use of Latin in all&nbsp;Roman Catholic services in 666 A.D.

Iraneus, back in the 2nd century, and a follower of the apostle John wrote: "Lateinos has the number 666, and this is a very probable solution".

From: http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/claims.htm&nbsp;(this link includes pictures of the Pope's triple crown!)

#1. "The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God."
(#1. "Papa tantae est dignitatis et cesitudinis, ut non sit simplex homo, sed quasi Deus, et Dei vicarius.")

#13. "Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions."
(#13. Hinc Papa triplici corona coronatur tanquam rex coeli, terre et infernoram.")

#18. "As to papal authority, the Pope is as it were God on earth, Sole sovereign of all the faithful of Christ, chief king of kings, having a plentitude of unbroken power, entrusted by the omnipotent God to govern the earthly and heavenly kingdoms."

(#18. "Deveniendo ad Papae auctoritatem, Papa est quasi Deus in terra unicaus Christifidelium princeps, regum omnium rex maximus, plenitudinem potestatis continens, cui terreni simul, ac coelestis imperii gubernacula ab omnipotenti Deo credita sunt.")

&nbsp;#30. "The Pope is of so great authority and power, that he is able to modify, declare, or interpret even divine laws."
(#30. "Papa tantae est auctoritatis et potestatis, ut possit quoque leges divinas modificare, declarare, vel interpretari, ad num.")

The following scanned pages from Prompta Bibliotheca (“Handy Library”) are from Vol. 5, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition:

&nbsp;

While Pope John Paul II has a triple crown on his coat of arms, it should be noted that:

Pope John Paul I and then John Paul II, in 1978, both refused a formal coronation ceremony with the&nbsp;triple-tiered crown, as it was considered to be out of step with the less pompous tone set by their predecessor Pope Paul VI and Vatican II's recent emphasis on the pastoral role of the Papacy, rather than its temporal authority. However, nothing really prevents the next Pope from returning to the tradition of the coronation and wearing of the triregno crown.

Postrib asked: Has the Pope fulfilled Revelation 13?&nbsp;

It is probably at least partially fulfilled..future events are probably yet to be played out, though, regarding the&nbsp;Jewish people. We will have to continue paying attention to current events, keeping an eye especially on&nbsp;the Vatican, the Middle East, Europe, the UN and the new International Criminal Court.&nbsp;&nbsp;Here is a possible verse-by-verse commentary on Revelation 13 of what has been fulfilled thus far..interesting reading!

http://historicist.tripod.com/ch13.htm

 

[postrib]

...future events are probably yet to be played out...

I agree; I still don't see how the Pope has already fulfilled 2 Thessalonians 2:4 or any part of Revelation 13 (see my questions in my last post).

If you believe a future Pope will, who do you believe the False Prophet will be, and who&nbsp;or what is the Woman Babylon?