brakelite

I have responded to similar posts previously just on the least few pages.

Because Jesus fulfilled all the OT laws does that mean we can ignore the 6th or the 3rd commandments along with the 4th?

Which is a common response. My only reply is that in making such a decision as you have made, considering it is a decision to deliberately ignore a specific commandment of the original ten, you must have a very very good sound Biblical reason for doing so...a reason beyond all doubt, beyond all dispute. A clear unmistakable "thus sayeth the Lord" in support. Perhaps one day I will discover that I am wrong, that it is me who has been teaching as doctrine the commandment of men.... perhaps.

@Giller I won't quote your whole post for the sake of space, for I have only one point to make which beleve may change the perspectie of your post. You quoted Colossians 2:16... ¶ Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days...you correctly stated that we must refer scripture to other scripture...comparing one text with another to find understanding. You reference Levit 23, and ecause you see that the weekly Sabbath is there mentioned in verse 3, you infer that that weekly Sabbath is therefore a 'feast day' and ceremonial, along with the other 7. I would like to respectfully disagree with that, for the following reason. First, because in verse 4 Moses repeats what he said in verse 2, "These are the feasts of the Lord, even holy convocations etc., " the way I see that is that the weekly Sabbath is set apart from the others...it is actually set in contrast to the other Sabbaths. The Lord, through Moses, is saying effectually that these are my feast days which you must observe, aside from the weekly Sabbath. In harmony with this is that those feasts are annual days, and are closely bound up with the Temple service in accordance with the annual Jewish calendar. This calendar, the temple services, the sacrifices, and the annual round of feast days and ceremonies, were established as a result of sin. It was the gospel for the Jewish nation...all pointed to the future ministry of the coming Messiah, who when He came in the person of Jesus, fulfilled all those feasts and ceremonies thus no longer were those who accepted Christ obliged to observe them. Following on from this is verse 17, of Colossians 2. Verse 16 and 17 saying "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come. Thus Paul has given to those things previously mentioned, a specific quality...they are shadows of things to come. Now as I mentioned, the Temple service and all its accompanying feasts and sacrifices, were given to Israel as a result of sin, forshadowing Christ. The weekly Sabbath by contrast was given to man (as per Mark 2:27) before sin entered the world, and therefore cannot be included among those Sabbaths which were shadows, or types of the coming ministry of the Messiah whose purpose was to destroy the power of sin. The handwriting of ordinances which were against Israel, which were nailed to the cross, cannot be inclusive of that portion of Torah which were written by the finger of God, even though the Ten Commandments were included in Deut.5. One can tear up that handwriting...burn them...utterly destroy them and yet those stone rock-hewn tables written by the finger of God remain as a constant reminder saying, "Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy...."

Can I try and make myself a little clearer. When I said the disciples had profaned the Sabbath by their eating of the corn as they passed through the fields, which was perfectly lawful to do on any other day, I meant that it was profaned only in the sense of the misguided or warped view of man. If they had been doing so in order to sell the product for personal gain, thus partaking of their normal secular labor, then indeed, they would have been 'breaking' the law as regards Sabbath keeping. However, for several reasons this occasion did not profane or 'break' the commandment regards Sabbath keeping in God's eyes. First, as Jesus explained, they were working in the service of God, just as the priests would do so in their service in the temple on the Sabbath. This more than exonerates, or gives an excuse for God to "overlook" an offense. Their service to God on the Sabbath completely outweighed any law regarding Sabbath keeping. As Jesus said, it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days. The other reason it was right that they could do this, was because love and mercy and judgment were weightier matters of the law. It is God's plan for His people to love mercy, do justly, and walk humbly with Him. To get back to the original question, which day is Sabbath? It is the day Jesus made holy at creation....it is the day He sanctified...it is the day He rested on...it is the first full day in which He spent time with His special new creation, man and woman...it is the day He reminded Israel of to remember that they may be blessed...it is the day Jesus observed throughout His life correcting the mistakes and undoing the heavy burdens that had been placed upon it since Israel's sojourn in Babylon...it is the day the apostles observed throughout their lifetime...it is the day Paul observed teaching both Jews and Gentiles...it is the 7th day ...it is the day that the Roman church decided to trample on by persecuting those who observed it and upholding Sunday, the first day which was first instituted by the Roman emperor but confirmed by the clergy to replace Sabbath with a spurious, false and counterfeit "Lord's Day".

No Shiloh, Jesus did not violate the Sabbath. He said Himself, it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath. Jesus said of David's incident, “Have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? " So as far as the disciples are concerned, yes, they profaned the Sabbath, by reaping and threshing. In the words of a writer I greatly admire but who shall remain nameless... If it was right for David to satisfy his hunger by eating of the bread that had been set apart to a holy use, then it was right for the disciples to supply their need by plucking the grain upon the sacred hours of the Sabbath. Again, the priests in the temple performed greater labor on the Sabbath than upon other days. The same labor in secular business would be sinful; but the work of the priests was in the service of God. They were performing those rites that pointed to the redeeming power of Christ, and their labor was in harmony with the object of the Sabbath. But now Christ Himself had come. The disciples, in doing the work of Christ, were engaged in God's service, and that which was necessary for the accomplishment of this work it was right to do on the Sabbath day. Many Sabbath-keeping Pastors 'work' harder on Sabbath than on other days, just as Sunday Pastors likely also do on that day. Yet who would charge them with profaning either day? Only a Pharisee. And to use the disciples action as evidence or support of ignoring the Sabbath altogether as some do makes no sense. Just as some saying in defense of keeping Sunday, or any day, or no day at all, because "Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath". I see that often. My response is yes, He is. So? What does that mean? Does it not mean that He is the Lord of the Sabbath??? That being the case, what right, what arrogance, what authority does the church have to change a day He instituted at creation and for which there is no evidence anywhere in scripture that the only person with that rightful authority to change the day or the commandment actually used that authority to do so?

Shiloh, to suggest Jesus broke the Sabbath is tantamount to claiming he sinned. He broke the Sabbath free from the false restrictions placed upon it by the Jewish ruling council, but He did not break the 4th commandment in any way, shape, or form. By healing on the Sabbath, what He was demonstrating was that it was fully in the parameters of Sabbath keeping to do good on that day. Pulling your sheep out of a ditch is another example, which even the Pharisees would have done as Jesus suggested. Allowing his disciples to 'harvest' corn and eat it, was also within the parameters of the law, just as David's eating of the showbread was also lawful. Why? Because there are "weightier matters of the law" than the nit-picking legalistic legal yokes that the rulers were so keen to burden the people with. And what are those "weightier matters"? Judgment, mercy, and faith...John 23:23. Your argument can in no wise be used as a defense of not observing the Sabbath commandment. Judgment, mercy and faith, which Jesus says are a part of the law in that text, while outweighing the legalistic demands of the Pharisees, did not annul Sabbath observance altogether. Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath because it was He that instituted at the beginning. Therefore only He can annul or change it. And He didn't.

In over one hundred languages throughout the world the seventh day is called ‘sabbath’ or its equivalent. Thus the seventh day is not just a day of rest for the Jews, but a day of rest for all peoples. This idea is confirmed for us in both the old testament and new testament of the scriptures. In Isaiah 56 the Lord declares through His prophet: “Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold upon it: that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil. Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord speak, saying, the Lord hath utterly separated me from his people; neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths and choose the things that please me and take hold of my covenant; even unto them will I give in my house and within my walls a place and a name better than the of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. Also the sons of the stranger that join themselves to the Lord, to serve Him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be His servants, every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it and taketh hold of my covenant; even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer.” Isaiah 56:2-7 And in the NT Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for man. Man in that context was a generic term meaning mankind. And in Paul’s letter to the Hebrews he declares that there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, the same rest that God established at creation. It was an invitation to join with God and rest with Him, in peaceful and joyful fellowship as God did with our first parents in the beginning. The Jewish people were blessed with something unique and very special. It was something which God intended they share with gentiles, for God always intended that all peoples should know Him. The pagan nations around Israel had their fertility rites, their initiations, their icons, their statues and idols. But Israel had a day. This day set them apart. But rather than share the Sabbath with others, Israel repeatedly ignored, neglected, or polluted it by introducing pagan practices into their religion. Their holiday in Babylon was greatly a direct result of their desecration of the Sabbath. By the time of Christ they had moved to the other extreme and burdened the Sabbath with so many added laws and regulations the day had become a curse rather than a blessing. Jesus came to reveal how the Sabbath was intended to be kept and to free it from the encumbrances of legalism. To heal on the Sabbath was scandalous to the rabbis. They accused Jesus of breaking the Sabbath, and because Jesus had such huge support and influence, it was partly through fear that the whole nation would begin ‘desecrating’ the Sabbath and of the subsequent judgments of God that the leaders of the nation sought to kill Him, “But a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all nor do ye take account that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.” John 11:49,50, and that finally led to His crucifixion. Jesus had numerous opportunities to speak of how the Sabbath was going to be changed or done away with. But rather than do this, all His debates and discussions with the rabbis and the people revolved around or were were focused on how the Sabbath was to be kept. He defied the human traditions and yes, Jesus did break the Sabbath, He broke it free from the rigid guidelines that made it a burden, and a rigid formality. The early Christians saw the Christian faith as an advance on the OT Judaism, or a continuation, not a new religion. Calvary gave the Sabbath new significance, but did not annul it. The Sabbath is mentioned over 50 times in the NT directly related to times of fellowship, teaching, and preaching, and both Gentiles and Jews were there. This cannot be explained as is commonly done by some, that Paul was merely meeting with Jews to convert them on their Sabbath, and then meet with the converted on the next day. Nowhere is that suggested, not even once. History tells us that Christians were worshiping alongside Jews in the synagogues every Sabbath, but over a period of time Jews became less tolerant of this arrangement and the rabbis actually devised prayers that were to be said which exposed the Christians within the community. Prayers that denigrated the belief in Jesus as being Messiah. This made it very uncomfortable for Christians to continue meeting in the synagogues, but they did not forsake the Sabbath. They began to meet in their houses and in places like the riversides as Paul found in Thyatira. Eventually, Christians found it impossible to worship in the synagogues and about that same time found themselves questioning their connections to the Jews, and with good reason. Much conflict around the early second century between the Jews and Rome began to impact the church. Not wanting to be recognized by Rome as being sympathetic or in any way involved with the Jews, some Christians began to abandon the Sabbath in favor of Sunday, which became an attractive alternative. At this time also Sun worship increased in popularity with Rome. Mithra was particularly popular with the military, and Sunday became increasingly significant throughout the empire. Constantine established the first Sunday law in 321ad, and the church of Rome later adopted that day as its own. As late as the 5th century however there were still a majority of Christian churches that were still observing the Sabbath. The church leaders in Rome strongly encouraged resting on Sunday in accordance to the law, while at the same time imposing fasts and other strictures on the Sabbath. Councils such as that of Laodicea in the mid 4th century recognized the continuing popularity of the Sabbath observance, and instituted canons to further enforce Sunday and demote the Sabbath. Churches that abandoned the Sabbath altogether however were very much in the minority, as attested to by Socrates scholasticus when he wrote in the 4th century “ For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this.” Despite theological arguments, anti-Jewish prejudice, and empirical decrees, the Sabbath was still honored well into the 5th century and in places where the Roman church had less influence, much later, as in the Celtic churches in Britain and in the Ethiopian church and in the churches in the east. It was not dead. In fact, the Sabbath issue became a greatly heated debate between popes and patriarchs throughout the ensuing centuries, and became a test of authority. Sunday became the sign of submission to papal authority, and was a major cause of the great rift within the Christian faith that remained for 900 years. With that history in mind, and the lack of scriptural evidence in favor of any change to another day, I believe we can forever lay to rest the idea that Jesus or the apostles, or the scriptures themselves for that matter, had anything to do with any change or annulment of the seventh day Sabbath. Let us, at least in this matter, agree with the Church of Rome that responsibility for such a change can be laid squarely upon her shoulders. For it was the leaders, the popes, cardinals and bishops of that church who down through the ages from the 3rd century to the present day deliberately exalted Sunday and erroneously named that day the Lord’s Day; meanwhile persecuting Sabbath keepers, labeling them, among other things as 'Judaisers' and heretics, and have trampled upon the true Lord’s day and cast it aside. The book of Revelation revals that a distinct part of the gospel for the last days is a call to worship our Creator. Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. Rev. 14:6 Jesus said that it was even then time to worship God in spirit, and in truth. It is time today even more so to cast aside our human assumptions and simply accept a "Thus saith the Lord" in respect to the Sabbath. To cast aside our man-made reasonings of spurious scriptures in order to defend a preconceived tradition. It remains for the Christian today to “choose this day whom ye will serve”. It is for you friend to decide upon whose authority your faith is surrendered to. The Sabbath/Sunday issue is not merely a matter of rest, or even worship. It is a matter of authority. Whose day do you honor? 1. The Creator of the “heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and all that in them is”, who first established the Sabbath at creation, who being Jesus Himself was entitled to be designated "Lord of the Sabbath" and that day, and none other therefore being "the Lord's Day'. 2. The prelates and lawmakers of the Catholic church, the foster parents of the counterfeit day of rest and worship, the day of the Sun.

Salvation has many facets. It isn't just the freedom from condemnation and sin. It is also the freedom to live in righteousness, holiness, and in obedience to God's commandments. Salvation is the power to love the unlovable; to have compassion on the undeserving; to show mercy to the unmerciful. It is Christ Himself living His life in and through us to the glory of His Father's name. In summary, I think John 17:3 says it all. "Eternal life is knowing thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent". Salvation is the receiving of the Light that enables us to know God. It is the final realization of God's eternal plan for mankind, that He, by His power, mercy and grace, may, through man's obedience to the gospel, eradicate forever the lies, insinuations, accusations, and deceptions of Satan, and thereby fully vindicating God in all His purposes and dealings with His creation, both to angels and men.

Paul, a greater theologian than either you or I, says "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." Rom. 9:6,7 So I would imagine that in answer to your question, he would answer yes. And he would affirm that by giving the following reason..."But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed." Rom. 9:31-33. Romans 11:1 ¶ I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, 3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. 4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. 5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. The witnesses are not literal Elijah and Moses as many assume. A correct Bible study would reveal that the scriptures...the witness of the OT and the witness of the NT lay in the street 3 1/2 years under the reign of the beast that rose from the bottomless pit. When atheism began its journey into the world during the French revolution,being the genesis of communism, history tells us that the French parliament brought a prostitute into the house of government and celebrated the 'Goddess of Reason", banning the Bible from the whole land, burning every copy they could lay their hands on, and murdering anyone who professed any kind of faith in God, regardless of denomination. This state of affairs lasted exactly 3 and 1/2 years, after which time the scriptures were once again brought into the open and legalized, being 'raised up from the dead' immediately Bible Societies were established the world over; these were the two olive trees...read...Zechariah 4: 3 And two olive trees by it, one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof. 4 So I answered and spake to the angel that talked with me, saying, What are these, my lord? 5 Then the angel that talked with me answered and said unto me, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord. 6 Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts. Isaiah 45:23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. Romans 14:11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. Even Satan in the end will be forced to confess that Jesus is Lord. Albeit reluctantly, but not to his salvation. All the wicked, and the righteous, will say blessed is He that cometh. You think this is about the nation of Israel? No my friend, this is about the church. It is the church that Jesus rescues from global conflagration at the end of time. Jerusalem is a metaphor for God's people of all ages in prophecy when referring to the final days, and the women who are ravished are those unfaithful churches, the harlots, the apostate daughters of Babylon. "Those nations" are all the empires of the first beast of Revelation 13, the composites remnants of pagan history, depicted as the gold, silver, bronze, and iron and clay of the statue of Daniel 2. Destroyed by the "rightness of His coming", the Rock cut out of the mountain without hands. The residue of verse 2 are the remnant people of God who are witnesses to the final plagues and who will bear personal testimony throughout eternity to the righteousness and true justice and the fairness of the judgment of God upon the wicked. upon the wicked

According too Paul true Israel are those of the same faith as Abraham...not the geneological children. Thus the woman who gave birth to Messiah represents God's people...faithful Israel in the OT, the true church in the NT. Who was it that stood before the woman to kill the child? The dragon right? The devil, Satan. But who was his agent in this? Was it not Herod, the Roman appointed so-called king of Judea? Thus it was pagan Rome (note the similarities between the description of the dragon and the 4th beast of Daniel 7.) Now notice that the little horn which grew from pagan Rome would live initially (until his mortal head wound) times, time, and the dividing of time. (V25). Note also that the woman would flee into the wilderness for the same period...Revel 12:6...1260 days. Note that Biblical time was measured 30 days every month. You may be interested to learn that the Roman apostatsy had its genesis in the early centuries, but was not fully developed until the Roman bishops received official recognition as universal rulers of Christendom through the edict of Justinian in 533AD, and 5 years later put into effect when the last of the 3 horns, the Ostrogoths, were ousted from Rome in 538AD. Until then the Popes were elected only with the approval of the Ostrogoth king. In 538, the RCC had its autonomy. Now, exactly 1260 years later, in 1798, the French general Berthier, under orders of Napoleon, entered Rome, arrested the Pope, disbanded the college of cardinals, declared the papal states a republic, and the pope died in exile 2 years later. During that previous 1260 years, the true church, the pure woman, had fled into the wilderness. She was mercilessly persecuted by this haughty 'little horn' which had grown into a beast in its own right, but 1798 saw its temporary demise. In fact at that time, political rulers throughout Europe thought the papacy was finished. The 70th week was fulfilled by the Messiah. The whole 70 weeks was a Messianic prophecy. ^9 weeks unto Messiah the Prince started from 537BC, to the time of Jesus' baptism...His anointing as Messiah, in 27AD. He then confirmed the covenant with Israel, or made the covenant strong, in person for 3 and 1/2 years until in the midst of the week He in essence through His death caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease , but commanded His disciples to complete the 70 weeks by "going first to the lost sheep of the house of Israel", which they did until the stoning of Steven, who was the last prophet to Israel. The Sannhedrins condemnation and killing of Steven sealed heir fate. The gospel from that time forward went to the Gentiles, although individual Jews of course were still able to receive the gospel, and did. But the nations probationary period was finished in 34AD. Though there is no specific evidence given in scripture for that 34 date, one can ascertain through Stevens final call to the rulers of the nation that their time was up. His speech was a very similar repeat of all the prophets calls to the nation throughout their history, with one major exception. Steven speech, though a judicial indictment on the nation as were the messages of the previous prophets, was missing one major aspect...there was no call to repentance. Israel's time was up. Their probation of 70 weeks over. Finished. Their next view of Christ would be in the clouds of heaven coming to judge. Jesus' prophecy before His crucifixion, that their house (not the Father's house or the Lord's house anymore) was left to them desolate, was coming to fruition. Prophecied by Jesus, sentenced by the prophet Steven, carried out by Titus.

The way I see things is obviously somewhat different from you fellas. We look at the same characteristics, but whereas you apply them to a future individual, I apply them to a present system. Where you apply them to a future time period of 7 years, I apply them to a continuous time period from the time the prophecy was first given. Where you apply a literal interpretation to some aspects, I apply a spiritual application to them, the primary one being Israel. Where you see the nation of Israel as being the center and focus of prophecy, I see the church. Where you see the Antichrist as being an enemy to Israel and deceiving Israel into accepting a false Messiah, I see the church being deceived into accepting a false Christ. Where you see a literal individual entering a future literal temple and halting the sacrifice, I see the Antichrist already in the church temple displacing the real Lamb from His rightful ministry in heaven. From my perspective, right or wrong, I believe where you guys depart from scripture is in placing a gap between the legs and the feet of the statue in Daniel 2. I see no reason to do this, unless you are already predisposed toward placing prophecy yet in the future. This predisposition comes from the teachings of Jesuits in the 16th century. Why do you place so much faith in them? It was they who took the 70th week of Daniel 9:24-27 and removed it from the 69 other weeks and made it yet future, giving them a space in time in which to insert their invented future Antichrist which hides the Papacy from being identified. Darby, then Schofield, ran with that idea and the rest of Protestantism took the bait. Daniel 9:24-27 is a Messianic prophecy. It is about Jesus Christ. All of it. Below is a graph showing the true timeline of the 70 weeks. If however you view prophecy as a continuous timeline, as historicism does, then there is no reason for a gap, all of church history becomes relevant to prophecy, and it all makes sense. No gaps. And it makes the symbolism consistent. For example, in Daniel 7 the beasts are empires. Babylon, Media/Persia, Greece, Rome. This is in harmony with the statue. Same empires, same order. The iron and clay is still empirical, only in a different form. The iron of pagan Rome, the miry clay of a fallen church*. Each subsequent vision of Daniel is built upon the previous visions. They do not, cannot change that which has already been revealed. It merely fills in the gaps...adds more detail. Like the ten toes of the statue for example and the ten horns of the 4th beast. They cannot be the same ten entities. On the statue they come at the end, and are destroyed by Christ. All ten. However, the ten horns on the 4th beast are not destroyed at the second coming, the angel making it clear that 3 are destroyed by the 11th horn. Thus each set of ten must be different. Yet futurism attempts to make them the same by claiming there are yet 10 kings in the future which grow out of a revived Roman Empire. Why a revived empire, when the original continued in the guise of apostate Christianity without pause until 1798, then resumed in 1929? Sister, Dougg, I have seen over the years many versions of futurism with its literal hermeneutic. It has many variations, and for a long time I accepted them as the only way to interpret prophecy. But I was confused at to why God would allow something so vital to our salvation as to the identity of the Antichrist be so obvious when Jesus made it so clear that the most dangerous sign of the last days was deception? An Assyrian Jew ruling in Europe for 3 1/2 years then brokering a peace treaty with Israel and breaking that treaty, entering the temple, proclaiming himself to be God, ending the sacrifices, and the world is to be deceived by this??? Deceived by something the church has been talking about through every media channel for the past 5o years? Add to that a talking image????? Please, come on. Seriously? The issues of these last days revolve around worship, and deception is the one danger that leads the majority to worship according to the dictates of Babylon, the Mother. Remember, Satan already has the world in his hands. He already has Israel in his hands. Satan's focus is not on Israel It is the church that he hates the most, because it is the church that Christ loves the most. Armageddon isn't a literal battle between Israel and Russia. Armageddon is a spiritual war between spiritual Israel (the church) and the rest of the world. It is a battle over the mind. And right now, in the form of futurism, Satan has the church almost in his clutches. They fail to recognize Antichrist, and are now falling over one another to join with Antichrist and promote him to the head of Satan's new world order, the coming Luciferian global government with an apostate Christian face, enforcing Catholic doctrine which the majority of the world will gladly accept, which apostate Protestants in the US will accept repudiating constitution as they do so, in fact it will be they who will be the most instrumental in promoting the Antichrist to his final enthronement at the head of all world Christendom. And you fellas are in danger of going along with it because you cannot see the danger that is approaching because of the spiritual blindness that futurism has imposed on you. You are so focused on the future, you fail to see what is before your own eyes now. *God spoke to Israel, His people, you are the clay, I am the potter. In the NT it is no different. So long as we are malleable in His hands, we are able to be sanctified and changed into the image of Christ. Miry clay however cannot be used by the potter. It is like salt that has lost its savor...good only for throwing out. Like the branches that bear no fruit...good only for burning. Such as an apostate system of Christianity when in an adulterous relationship with the kings of the earth. This is the principle character and nature of the Vatican...a church/state apostate church, that has inherited the nature and characteristics of those empires from which she grew. The history of the papacy throughout the dark ages of Europe bear testimony to the fact that the iron and clay "could not cleave one to another, though they mingled their seed with men." The royal families of Europe are all related, were all intimate in the relationship with the Popes, yet Rome failed in numerous and repeated attempts at a full union.

Not complicated Douggg, for I have seen this type of teaching before, when I first became a Christian 40 years ago, when Hal Lindsay wrote his first book, The Late Great Planet Earth. Since then there have been numerous interpretations and versions of the futurist paradigm, and as each one came and went, my understanding actually became clearer, so clear that any confusion that remained, was completely obliterated when I rejected futurism altogether, and embraced historicism as the only logical consistent hermeneutic that explained prophecy with any semblance of reality and common sense. Not only so, but historicism refuses to lie down and surrender and hide when faced with historical reality, particularly that historical reality that is written in the blood of millions of martyrs at the hands of the Papacy over the past 1500 years. Futurism ignores that. Even deliberately hides it, and obscures the truth. It also tends to ignore the numerous doctrines, dogmas, and traditions of Rome that perfectly meet the conditions required of them to be labelled accurately as Antichrist (instead of, in place of, Christ). The truth that every reformer almost without exception, accused the papal system as THE Antichrist of scripture. They weren't wrong. I happen to agree with them...I see no logical sense nor see any Biblical reason for looking anywhere else, and certainly not into any distant or near future, for an entity to appear when one has already fulfilled all the criteria demanded of it as I am in the process of revealing.

Okay, here's my view of Revelation 13, that first composite beast. Composites. We see them everywhere. They are all about us. They are called people. Every single person on the planet is a composite of his ancestors. DNA inherited from the sum total of all who have gone before make up what we are today. Although we are individuals, and unique, that uniqueness is bound up in our inherited genes. With that in mind I would like to discuss one of the most intriguing composites on the planet. Not an individual, but an institution. Described as a ‘beast’ in the book of Revelation in chapter 13, this beast has had many Biblical scholars both university educated and self taught, deeply embroiled in debate, argument, and discussion for nearly 2000 years. This beast has been the focus of attention with far more intensity in the past 150 years or so as the church recognises the signs of the second coming approaching, thus study with more interest those prophecies which reveal events, and characters which are pertinent to the ‘last days’. It is the nature of the composites, those things which form the beast, that I will focus on in this post. I have dealt extensively elsewhere with the prophecies of Daniel, linking the characteristics of the ‘little horn’ power of Daniel 7 with those of the papacy, and as we will see here, the beast of Revelation 13 likewise mirrors those characteristics. Revelation 13:1 ¶ And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. Revel. 17:15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. We see here a kingdom rising up in a populous part of the earth, in this case the capital of the then superpower, Rome. When compared with… Revel.12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. …we see that whatever this beast is, it is a clone of Satan, the dragon, himself. This is his baby so to speak, his own creation, made after his own likeness. Revel. 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. The Apostle John from his vantage point was looking backwards in time and seeing the same beasts of Daniel 7 only in reverse order. Daniel was looking forward, John back. Thus what John was seeing was a beast that had already begun to rise to power in his day. This gels with his comment in one of his letters that states that ” even now are there many antichrists”. The spirit that gave rise to the one Antichrist had begun to develop and was seen in several different forms in Johns lifetime. This beast is a composite of all that had gone before. Those characteristics which marked the uniqueness and nature of the previous powers were now resident in this one. Like unto a leopard…. Nothing in nature, be they plants, animals, reptiles, birds, nor fish, can lie, not having the power of speech, but they can deceive. Deception is attained through appearance, or camouflage. And deception Jesus said, would be Satan’s principle weapon of choice in the last days. The leopard is a prime example of camouflage. The leopard, unlike the tiger or the lion, for the most part does not stalk its prey. It patiently lies in wait, in all appearance an innocent part of the foliage, until its prey come to him, then the leopard strikes. The papacy is of very similar character. An attractive and seemingly innocent part of the Christian landscape, but deceptively dangerous. Patience is the hallmark of the Catholic church. For 400 years she has waited for the counter reformation to bear fruit, and today we witness hundreds of priests and lay people from other faiths and denominations now returning to the ‘mother church’. Hundreds of years she has waited for her opportunity to rise again to her former glory. Her ambitions are now global, take note of the following from a very recent news report: The Vatican called in 2011 for the establishment of a “global public authority” and a “central world bank” to rule over financial institutions that have become outdated and often ineffective in dealing fairly with crises…..A proposal by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace calls for a new world economic order based on ethics and the “achievement of a universal common good.” It follows Pope Benedict XVI’s 2009 economic encyclical that denounced a profit-at-all-cost mentality as responsible for the global financial meltdown. Read more: Vatican Calls For Global Authority On Economy | Fox Business Isn’t this interesting? And they are not alone. Politicians the world over for several decades have been calling for a "new world order" and lately, this has become so commonplace that the news media isn't even bothering to report on it any more. Yet the prophetic implications are huge, as I am sure you are aware. Particularly when one considers the prophetic implications of an international authority with the power to enforce a religious mark using economic boycotts to encourage subservience. But since John Paul 11 there has been a marked increase in the Vatican's role in this endeavor to implement global governance, not just financially, but religiously. The current pope above all his predecessors has promoted himself as the only logical and viable candidate to be the head of this NWO. His recent visit to Congress, his video messages to Pentecostal pastors and the recent gathering at the Washington memorial, and next years meet with Lutheran leaders in Sweden to mark the 500th anniversary of the reformation are all designed to woo Protestantism back into the fold, and it will be they who promote the Pope to the future exalted position as civil AND religious ruler of the world. Thus the system of Antichrist will become global, and will have accomplished its goals. Notice one more thing about leopards. Jesus Himself significantly remarked that a leopard cannot change her spots. It is worthwhile to note that many protestants today would claim that the papacy has changed. That she has mellowed from her former harsh judgemental attitudes which marked her history throughout the dark ages. But can a leopard change her character? No. Jer. 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. The feet of a bear…. Death is, until the resurrection, like a deep dreamless sleep. In 1798 the papacy, as we saw previously, received its deadly head-wound (Verse 3) when the then pope was taken captive by the French, and the Catholic church ‘ceased to range over the country-side’ like a bear and went into hibernation until 1929 when Mussolini returned to the Vatican, and the pope, the civil power which had been taken from her. Once again she was a church/state power, the unique distinction which marks her pagan 'composite' beginnings. The feet and claws of a bear are her most powerful weapons: one strike can rip open her prey, killing instantly. The injunction in Daniel 7:5 of the bear/Media-Persia to “devour much flesh” is very apt when applied to such a beast as a bear which has a ravenous appetite especially after hibernation. Whether in hibernation, or as a leopard or bear, whether in patient hiding or as a ravenous beast on the hunt, the Vatican will do whatever is necessary to achieve her goals…global dominion. An interesting point regarding this particular bear. The Media/Persians, which nation was represented by the bear in Daniel, were renowned as lawmakers. Daniel 6:8 Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not. “Why does the Catholic church not recant what was said by Trent…because it is Catholic teaching that a council teaches authoritatively, and the church is not authorised to repudiate retrospectively a conciliar decree”. John Neuhaus. Every principle of the papacy that existed in past ages exists today.The doctrines devised in the darkest ages are still held. The leopard has not, indeed cannot, change her spots. The laws, canons, and various decrees which vaunted the papal power’s presumed authority to torture, to wage war, and to destroy all who believe in their God given right to freedom of conscience, still exist today. Not one has been abrogated or altered. Their own dogma regarding infallibility forbids any change to that which has been officially legislated as articles of doctrine in the dogmas and canons of the Catholic Church. The inquisition, torture, and burning of heretics in past ages are still looked upon by the ruling councils of the Vatican as justifiable, lawful, and at times even necessary. And there is evidence that the inquisition has not finished, but continues in secret to this day. mouth of a lion…. Ask a native of Africa what the most fearsome sound is in the African bush and all would agree that it is the roar of the lion. Various bulls and pronouncements from popes and his representatives have for centuries sent chills of fear and dread down the spines of kings and common man alike. There was a time, until the late 18th century, when a pronouncement of excommunication from the church could send an entire nation into a state of fear of eternal damnation in the fires of hell. Like the devil, “as a roaring lion walketh about seeking who he may devour” the papacy has no true authority in spiritual matters. It is the fear, rather than the popes words themselves, that has destroyed the faith of millions. “But we have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but rather the spirit of adoption” (Romans 8:15) “and of power, and of love, and a sound mind”. (2 Tim. 1:7) Notice the mouth “speaking great things and blasphemies” (Rev.13:15). Since its re-establishment in 1929, the Vatican has slowly but surely wooed herself into becoming once again a world power, and presidents and royalty alike present themselves to the pope bowing before him, kissing the ring upon his finger, and wait in awe and reverence to hear his words….”and all the world wonders after the beast”. (Revel. 13:5) This composite beast, made up spiritually of all those pagan entities which have gone before, make up what we know is the final mystical revelation of the Antichrist, "Babylon the Great". Those previous entities all had one thin in common. They were unions of church and state. This is a pagan characteristic, and is a Satanic counterfeit to a theocracy. Revelation 13 makes it clear that the first beast , the composite, is a church/state union, and has inherited the pagan characteristics of her forbears. A little study into Catholicism will reveal this. Books have been written on the subject, one such being the classic "The Two Babylons" by Hislop. The second beast of Revelation 13 is no less interesting. It is said that this second beast cause or 'encourages' the people, (Revel:13:5 )(thus this is a democracy calling upon the people to do what it doesn't have the power to do without their consent), deceiving the people into making an image of the first beast. Thus what the people do is through popular vote, create another union of church and state ...a mirror image to the papacy. This is the United States through Protestant ecumenism creating a church/stet union which will then through her legislative power enforce the doctrines and dogmas of Catholicism upon the world. Now you may not see this happening. You eyes are only focused on what you have been taught to see...a future individual in Israel persecuting the church. But do you not see how the Vatican is already standing in the temple of God, (the church) deceiving the people and is currently gaining huge strides in her ambitions to global governance? And how the whole world is even now "wondering after the beast"? This beast has already lived the first stage of her double life, the 1260 days/42 months/ times,time, and half a time. These being prophetic days (as Daniel's 70 weeks were prophetic days) the literal total is 1260 years, from 538 to 1798. Her head wound is now healed. The Leopard is back. The bear has woken up. And its hungry. Stop searching the horizon for a mythical figure to come charging in with his guns blazing and aimed at all things Christian. How ill anyone be deceived by such an act? No Sister, all roads lead to Rome.

There shall be no need for me to remind you of these messages. When the Pope is established as the head of the NWO with the support of the apostate Protestant churches in the US, and the US government, after which the religion of Rome shall be made a mandatory obligation globally, you will remember what I have said.

No. My hope is that in recognizing through the prophetic eyes of historicism people will reject the Roman Antichrist and turn from idolatry to the true Christ. It is the Papal system that has usurped the authority and the prerogatives of Jesus Christ as Head of His church. That makes the RCC system the Antichrist. Simple.

Which God are you asking? The God we believe in, or the God you don't believe in? There is a difference.

The Antichrist is revealed to us through scripture in several different ways. In Daniel 2 he is the mixture of iron and clay. In Daniel 7 he is the little horn. In 2 Thess the man of sin and son of perdition, and in Revelation 13 the first beast, among others. The beasts of Daniel 7 were all representative of empires, even though they prophecy referenced an individual king. Nebuchadnezzar was the representative of the entire empire, so also with the ‘man of sin’, and 'son of perdition'. Below is an excerpt from a sermon by the renowned preacher and writer Puritan Thomas Manton in the 17th century. Charles Spurgeon testified to Mantons works as being “a mighty mountain of sound theology” But because he is called the man of sin, here it cometh fitly to be inquired whether Antichrist be an individual person? for ‘that man of sin’ would seem to be some single person. No; he is put for a society and succession of men, that make up the head of the apostate state. As one lion figured the whole kingdom of the Babylonians, and one bear the kingdom of the Medes and Persians, and one leopard the kingdom of the Grecians, Dan. 7, — and there the fourth beast is the fourth kingdom, — so one person that succession of men that head the revolters from Christ. So Dan. 8, a goat figured a succession of kings; so the Assyrian, Isa. 10:5, several kings in that empire; so Isa. 14:9, the king of Babylon, meaning not one but many. So this man of sin doth not note a single man, but a succession of men, a body politic or corporate, under one opposite head to the kingdom of Christ: so the ‘man of God’ is put for all faithful ministers, 2 Tim. 3:17; so ‘honour the king,’ I Peter 2:17, series regum. So o arciereus, Heb. 9:25, ‘The high priest every year entereth into the holy place;’ meaning not one, but the succession of the order; and in reason it must needs be so here. Because Antichrist, from his beginning to his end, from his rise and revelation, till his ruin and destruction, will take up such a long track of time, as cannot fall within the age of any one man, even from the time of the apostles till the end of the world. Antichrist is the head of the apostasy; for here the apostasy and the revelation of the man of sin are tied together; now the mysterious apostasy could not be perfected in a short time. In this sermon, Manton, like many reformers before him, was applying the prophecy of 2 Thess. concerning the man of sin directly to the papal system. To accept the teaching that the Antichrist is an individual man, is to fall under the same delusion or deception that the Jesuits invented to divert the accusations of the reformers away from the Papal power. The futurist paradigm completely hides the true Antichrist from the Bible scholar. It does away with nearly 2000 years of church history, nearly 2000 years of political and church persecution, nearly 2000 years of apostasy, and nearly 2000 years of courage of martyrs and Christians who against all odds, cleaved to Christ despite the Roman despotism. All cleverly invented as part and parcel with the counter reformation. Because Protestants no longer believe what the reformers all agreed on, the identity of the RCC system as the Antichrist, Protestants now see no reason not to return to Mother, thus they trample on the blood of their forbears, and like their mother, become harlots in apostatizing from truth.

First, how can anyone "assume" that the church won't be here during the tribulation when the scripture gives no indication of its disappearance until the actual second coming? Second, it is another assumption on your part that that the "restrainer" so called is the Holy Spirit. And finally, why would the church "rot" during the tribulation when God's promises to His people are to protect them in any circumstance? There is so much information in scripture that clearly identifies the true Antichrist that for a Bible believing Christian to ignore, or teach contrary to it, or even as you say claim it be a "fool's game", is gross negligence. The Antichrist is described in many ways, and under several different symbols, revealing when put together, a very complete picture. God has done this for a purpose. That purpose is that we may clearly identify the Antichrist, to know of a surety his character and goals, and so be aware and prepare ourselves that we may understand truth, and not be deceived. I wonder what side people are on when they teach doctrines and beliefs that contradict or ignore these truths. It makes me wonder if they know who the Bible is referring to, and are deliberately undermining it. Just as the Jesuits invented futurism, preterism, and the rapture theory all of which are clever ploys that hide the Vatican from being identified as Antichrist, so I wonder at times if certain people on forums who consistently defend these theories despite clear contradictory teachings from scripture, are themselves Jesuits. I will proclaim loud and clear till the day I die who and what I believe is Antichrist. I am doing so on another thread "The characteristics of the Little horn". I could not care less if someone thinks I am a fool. All the reformers taught the same. I also am a Protestant. As far as I am concerned, the protest is NOT over. So I am in very good company.

That would be nice, but no where in scripture is such a thing suggested. Those in expectation of being taken off the planet before the global reign of Antichrist, will throughout his reign not only not recognize him, but accept his mark. I say "his", as a figure of speech. The beast is not an individual man. All beasts in prophetic scripture are political powers...in this case, a union of church and state...aka Vatican. Not only has this power been here for centuries, along with 10 others grew out of the 4th beast of Rome as a little horn, uprooted three of the other ten, ruled for 1260 years and then recovered, speaks blasphemies, persecutes the saints, changed times and laws, but also sits in the temple of God (the church) believing himself to be God by forgiving sin and "creating his Creator"! And you think all this evidence insufficient to indict him as the only true Antichrist? What more could you want?

But now we must take a look at another movement in Great Britain which was destined to derail the Protestant prophetic hermeneutic. In 1825 a small group of men, dissatisfied with the spiritual condition of the Protestant Church in Ireland, met in Dublin to spiritually strengthen one another. Soon other groups were formed in Ireland and in England. The most famous of these was the one in Plymouth. This group came to be known as the Plymouth Brethren. Among the notables in these fellowships were Edward Irving, Dr. S. P. Tregelles and John Nelson Darby (who joined in 1827). At some point during this time, Edward Irving heard some mysterious utterances in an unknown tongue telling him that there was going to be a secret rapture of the church before the visible coming of Jesus. This was a new concept in the incredible journey of futurism. Futurists themselves will admit that this idea was alien to the Christian church until the 19th century. Dr. S. P. Tregelles, who, as we have noted, for some time belonged to the Plymouth Brethren movement but later abandoned it describes Irving’s experience: “I am not aware that there was any definite teaching that there would be a secret rapture of the Church at a secret coming, until this was given forth as an utterance in Mr. Irving’s church, from what was there received as being the Voice of the Spirit. But whether anyone ever asserted such a thing or not, it was from that supposed revelation that the modern doctrine and the modern phraseology arose. It came not from Holy Scripture, but from that which falsely pretended to be the Spirit of God.” (S. P. Tregelles, The Hope of Christ’s Second Coming, first published in 1864, and now available at Ambassadors for Christ, Los Angeles, California). From 1830 onward, a series of conferences were held at Powerscourt Castle in Ireland. We know that Edward Irving attended some of these as did John Nelson Darby and other key leaders of the Plymouth Brethren. At these meetings literalistic futurism became the prophetic methodology of choice and the idea of the secret rapture was adopted. The views established at these conferences soon spread like grassfire and penetrated other denominations. We must say a few words about John Nelson Darby. He was born in Ireland in 1800 and died in 1882. He was a brilliant law student at Westminster Trinity College. Darby soon broke with the Church of England and embraced literalistic futurism with a vengeance. Undoubtedly, one of the main reasons why he did not discern the Papacy as the Antichrist was his total disdain for history. He once remarked: “I do not want history to tell me Nineveh or Babylon is ruined or Jerusalem in the hands of the Gentiles. I do not admit history to be, in any sense, necessary to the understanding of prophecy.” Do not make the same mistake! (Quoted in, Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church [Philadelphia: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company], 1977, p. 26). Jesus Himself would disagree with Darby regarding an understanding of history in order to understand prophecy. John 14:29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe. Thus history is essential to understanding prophecy. In the historicist method, a knowledge of history is of critical importance because it provides the reference point for the understanding of prophecy. But in futurism, an understanding of history is superfluous. It is of great importance to realize that between 1859 and 1874, Darby made six trips to the United States where he was warmly welcomed and his views were eagerly adopted. Darby’s writings, however, would have been forgotten had it not been for Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921). Scofield was converted in 1879 and, though he had no theological training, he was ordained a Congregationalist minister three years later. At this time, Darby’s books were gathering dust in the few libraries where they could be found. But when Scofield discovered them, he came up with the idea of incorporating Darby’s futuristic ideas into a series of footnotes in the King James Bible. Thus in 1909, the famous Scofield Reference Bible was born. Soon, the notes were considered as inspired as the Bible itself. Even today, this is the Bible of choice among Protestants who uphold a futurist outlook of Bible prophecy. Before we move on to speak of the baleful influence of futurism upon contemporary Protestantism, it would be well to quote various scholars who trace the origins of preterism and futurism to Alcazar and Ribera. We will begin with George Eldon Ladd: “It would probably come as a shock to many modern futurists to be told that the first scholar in relatively modern times who returned to the patristic futuristic interpretation was a Spanish Jesuit named Ribera. In 1590 Ribera published a commentary on the Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem, abolish Christianity, deny Christ, persecute the Church and rule the world for three and a half years.” (George Eldon Ladd, The Blessed Hope, Grand Rapids: Eerdman’s, 1972, p. 37). Next we will quote Joseph Tanner: “ So great a hold did the conviction that the Papacy was the Antichrist gain upon the minds of men, that Rome at last saw she must bestir herself, and try, by putting forth other systems of interpretation, to counteract the identification of the Papacy with the Antichrist. Accordingly, towards the close of the century of the Reformation two of her most learned doctors set themselves to the task, each endeavoring by different means to accomplish the same end, namely, that of diverting men’s minds from perceiving the fulfillment of the prophecies of the Antichrist in the Papal system. The Jesuit Alcasar devoted himself to bring into prominence the Preterist method of interpretation, which we have already briefly noticed, and thus endeavored to show that the prophecies of Antichrist were fulfilled before the Popes ever ruled at Rome, and therefore could not apply to the Papacy. On the other hand the Jesuit Ribera tried to set aside the application of these prophecies to the Papal Power by bringing out the Futurist system, which asserts that these prophecies refer properly not to the career of the Papacy, but to that of some future supernatural individual, who is yet to appear, and to continue in power for three and a half years.” (Joseph Tanner, Daniel and the Revelation, [London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1898], pp. 16, 17). Dean Henry Alford in the “Prolegomena” of his Greek Testament, declares: “The founder of this system [Futurist] in modern times. . . appears to have been the Jesuit Ribera, about A. D. 1580.” (Henry Alford, The New Testament for English Readers, vol. 2, part 2, p. 351). Alford also states: “The Preterist view found no favour, and was hardly so much as thought of, in the times of primitive Christianity. . . The view is said to have been first promulgated in any thing like completeness by the Jesuit Alcasar. . . in 1614.” (Henry Alford, The New Testament for English Readers, vol. 2, part 2, pp. 348, 349). Even the Roman Catholic, G. S. Hitchcock, states: “The Futuristic School, founded by the Jesuit Ribera in 1591, looks for Antichrist, Babylon and a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, at the end of the Christian Dispensation. . . The Praeterist School, founded by the Jesuit Alcasar in 1614, explains the Revelation by the Fall of Jerusalem, or by the fall of Pagan Rome in 410 A. D.” (G. S. Hitchcock, The Beasts and the Little Horn, p. 7). Well has Tanner remarked: “It is a matter for deep regret that those who hold and advocate the futurist system at the present day, Protestants as they are for the most part, are thus really playing into the hands of Rome, and helping to screen the Papacy from detection as the Antichrist. It has been well said that ‘Futurism tends to obliterate the brand put by the Holy Spirit upon Popery.’ More especially is this to be deplored at a time when the Papal Antichrist seems to be making an expiring effort to regain his former hold on men’s minds.” (Joseph Tanner, Daniel and the Revelation, [London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1898], p. 17). Consider the above in light of the Pope's recent visit to the American Congress and the UN, where he unashamedly promoted himself as the only viable candidate with the popular mandate to head the NWO. And what about conservative Protestantism today? The fact is that they have not only swallowed these futuristic views hook, line and sinker, but they have swallowed the fishing pole and fisherman as well!! In fact, they have taken the literalistic hermeneutic of futurism so far that it borders on the ridiculous. Evangelicals, Baptists, Pentecostals and other born-again Christians have proliferated futurism around the globe. This phenomenal growth has been due to four main factors: The influence of the Schofield Reference Bible. This annotated Bible provides a futuristic and literalistic interpretation of the little horn of Daniel 7 seeing it as a future individual world dictator who will rule the world for three and a half literal years from a rebuilt Jerusalem temple. On the other hand, this same Bible manifests a touch of preterism by interpreting the little horn of Daniel 8 as a symbol of Antiochus Epiphanes [see the footnotes in the Scofield Reference Bible, pp. 909, 910]. The proliferation of television evangelists. For example, Jack Van Impe showed his unabashed admiration for Pope John Paul II by repeatedly stating on his television program: “What a man!!” A plethora of both fiction and “ non-fiction” books. For example, Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins have written a series of Christian thrillers which explore the last days. The titles tell it all: Left Behind: A Novel ofthe Earth’s Last Days; Tribulation Force: The Continuing Drama of Those Left Behind; Nicolae: The Rise of Antichrist; Soul Harvest: The World Takes Sides; Appollyon: The Destroyer is Unleashed; Assassins: Assignment: Jerusalem, Target: Antichrist. This series has sold over 10 million copies and was on the New York Times best seller list for months!! Jenkins states: “The purpose was to encourage the church and to persuade unbelievers. We have found that people are reading the Bible again because of it and many have become believers” (The Costco Connection, “Arts and Entertainment”, March 2000, p. 49). The question is: Believers in what? Are people reading the Bible through the futurist eyeglasses of these novels? Even more amazing is the comment made by LaHaye: “I’m hearing from church pastors all over the world (the series has been published in at least 14 languages) and they’re telling me that the books are the best evangelistic tools they’ve ever seen. It’s gratifying to see so much interest in this story because, of any of the major world religions, Christianity has the most exciting story to tell about the future.” (The Costco Connection, “Arts and Entertainment”, March 2000, p. 49). Here LaHaye lauds the world-wide evangelistic thrust of futurism through the message of these books. Thus, futurism is being exported to every nation, kindred, tongue and people!! The multiplication of thriller movies such as The Omega Code, and Left Behind. I have personally seen The Omega Code. It is pure, untarnished, unvarnished futurism and literalism. The number of proponents of the futuristic scenario is legion. Among the main prognosticators are: Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye, Jerry Jenkins, Grant Jeffrey, John Walvoord, John Hagee, Benny Hinn, Jack Van Impe, Jack LeLonde, Dave Hunt, David Jeremiah, Zola Levitt, Arno Froese, Pat Robertson, Randall Price, Dwight Pentecost and ad infinitum. These recent proponents of futurism have outdone by far their forefathers. As an example, we will refer to Grant Jeffrey’s book The Signature of God: The Handwriting of God. Jeffrey claims to have cracked a secret Bible prophecy code by using the Hebrew numbering system. He claims to have found, among other things, the following specific predictions in this secret code: The death of Princess Di, the plague of AIDS, the assassination of Franz Joseph I of Austria, the peace process of Israel and the PLO, the assassination of Yitzak Rabbin, the Gulf War including the specific names of America, George Bush, General Schwartzkoff, Scud-B Missile, Russia, etc. He also claims to have found predictions of the Oklahoma City bombing including the specific names, Timothy McVeigh and Oklahoma. Amazingly, he even claims to have found “day 19, and 9th hour” the precise day and hour of the explosion. Apart from the fact that the Bible is not interested in trivialities such as this, I find it amazing that Jeffrey thinks he is able to find all these hidden, cryptic, secret, veiled, subliminal messages but at the same time has not been able to figure out something as clear and simple as, which is the right day of the week to go to church!! Dave Hunt presents an interesting case. He has written two scathing books denouncing the Roman Catholic Papacy as the harlot of Revelation 17 (Global Peace, A Woman Rides the Beast). For example, he makes the following astounding statement: “Some suggest that the Vatican will move to Babylon in Iraq when it is rebuilt. But why should it? The Vatican has been fulfilling John’s vision from its location in Rome for the past 15 centuries. Moreover, we have shown the connection to ancient Babylon which the Vatican has maintained down through history in the paganized Christianity it has promulgated. As for ancient Babylon itself, it wasn’t even in existence during the past 2300 years ‘to reign over the kings of the earth.’ Babylon lay in ruins while pagan Rome and later Catholic Rome, the new Babylon, was indeed reigning over kings.” (Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, p. 84). So much for consistent literalism! What hermeneutic allows Hunt to see in literal Babylon a symbol of a worldwide apostate Christian Roman Catholicism and yet to not see in literal Jerusalem a symbol of God’s faithful worldwide Christian church? Hunt has also castigated Protestants for betraying the Reformation when they signed the joint declaration: Evangelicals and Catholics Together. Yet he still remains a futurist at heart. For him, Daniel seven’s little horn is a literal person who in the future will rule three and a half literal years during the Tribulation. He believes this horn will oppress the literal Jews from a rebuilt literal Jerusalem Temple. Regarding Daniel 2, Hunt comments: “He [Daniel] explained that Nebuchadnezzar, represented by the head of gold, was the ruler of the first world empire. The three other parts of the image, made of silver, brass, and iron, foreshadowed three more world empires that would follow Babylon as its successors. In a later vision Daniel would be given the name of the second world empire, Medo-Persia, and details concerning the third kingdom which clearly identified it as the Grecian empire. The fourth world empire, of course, would be Rome. That much is history.” (Dave Hunt, Global Peace, p. 68). Up to this point, Hunt sounds like a genuine historicist. But wait, there is more! Referring to the ten toes, Hunt then affirms: “Obviously, what the toes represent has not yet come to pass. God’s kingdom was not established ‘in the days of these [ten] kings.’” (Dave Hunt, Global Peace, p. 69). What he says next is simply amazing: “Furthermore, the Antichrist never appeared to take the reins of the ancient Roman Empire.” (Dave Hunt, Global Peace, p. 69). What Hunt has done is sever the feet from the legs. He has created a gap of over 1500 years between the legs [the Roman Empire] and the toes [the divisions of the Roman Empire]. Why is he not able to see that Rome was divided by the Barbarian invasions and that, shortly thereafter, the Papacy arose to govern in what had been the Roman Empire? The fact is that the literalistic hermeneutic of futurism has blinded Hunt and led him to shield the Papacy from her baleful work during the Middle Ages. The gap he has left between the legs and the toes is the hiding place for the REAL ANTICHRIST!! Do not let this literal hermeneutic blind you! Inexcusably, Hunt states: “The Reformers and their creeds were unanimous in identifying each pope as the Antichrist. Scripture, however, does not support that claim. The Antichrist is a unique individual without predecessors or successors.” (Dave Hunt, Global Peace, p. 47) Thus, Hunt sides with Ribera, Newman, and Lacunza while he betrays the Reformation. He is saying that Ribera was right and Luther was wrong! How can he complain about the apostasy of Protestantism and then turn around and employ the prophetic method of Apostate Protestantism? No wonder Protestant leaders signed the ecumenical document, Evangelicals and Catholics Together. No wonder that Lutheran and Catholic theologians have signed a Joint Declaration on Righteousness by Faith. And next year, 2017, Pope Francis meets in Sweden with Lutheran leaders to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the reformation, that many Protestant leaders have declared is now over! How blind is today's church!!!! Through preterism, Satan has laid hold of the liberal wing of Protestantism. Through futurism he has laid hold of the conservative wing. Although these two systems appear to be opposites, they really have several striking similarities and they both meet in the abyss of satanic deception. In both systems, Antichrist is understood as a literal blasphemous individual. Both see this individual as a desecrator of the literal Jewish Temple for three and a half literal years. The only difference is that, in the case of preterism this person was Antiochus Epiphanes, while in the case of futurism it will be an individual who has not yet appeared. But the most notable similarity is that both systems derived their hermeneutical methodology from Papal Jesuit theologians and both systems shield the Papacy from being detected as the great Antichrist of Scripture!! By shifting the fulfillment of prophecy backwards or forwards, these prophetic systems have attempted to change God’s prophetic times. But now we must ask some very serious questions. Why did Protestantism first adopt futurism in Great Britain? Why not in Germany or France or, for that matter, in any other European country? And why in the 1830’s? Why did Lacunza’s writings find their way to England and not to another country in Europe? Why was Lacunza’s book translated into English by one of the Plymouth Brethren in 1833? The answers to these questions are not hard to find. The greatest number of immigrants into the United States in the 1830’s and 1840’s were from Great Britain. What better way for Satan to transplant futurism to the United States than to do it from Great Britain? It is easy to see now, why this whole apostasy from historicism to futurism took place in England in the 1830’s. Satan wanted to transplant futurism from England to the New World!! Even at this early stage, he was laying the groundwork for the United States to become the champion of futurism and to make an image to the beast!! Remarkably, on the other side of the Atlantic, William Miller and his co-workers were expounding the same prophecies of Daniel and Revelation using a historicist hermeneutic–and this, in the same decade of the 1830’s!! In this way, the battle lines were being drawn. Satan was preparing to import futurism into United States at the same time that God was empowering the Millerites to explain the prophecies from a historicist perspective. Which system was destined to win on the American continent? On the surface, it would appear that futurism has gained the upper hand. But we are reminded that in the end, God’s historicist perspective will prevail because He controls “the times”. No matter how much apostate Protestantism may try to exalt and disperse its prophetic scenario, all will come crashing down because God is the arbiter of history, and prophecy will fulfill as He has predetermined. By employing the preterist and futurist prophetic principles of the Roman Catholic Church, Protestants have made an image to the beast. Furthermore, they have become the False Prophet because they speak the prophetic message which they have derived from the beast. There is a close relationship between Daniel 7:25, Revelation 12:17, Revelation 13:11-18 and Revelation 14:6-12. In Daniel 7:25 the little horn thinks it can change two things: the times and the law. God’s response to this is to raise up a remnant church (after the 1260 years) which will restore what the little horn attempted to change. That is, they will have a true prophet in their midst to explain and restore the true meaning of the times; and they will keep the commandments of God, including the one which the little horn claimed to have changed (Revelation 12:17; 19:10; 22:8,9). The beast will not take this restoration hands down. It will react in the end-time by imposing the mark of the beast (the change in the law) and by raising up the false prophet ( the change in the times). But, as always, God will speak the last word. The three angels’ messages will be proclaimed to every nation, kindred, tongue and people (Revelation 14:6). These will call the world to keep the Sabbath, and resist the mark of the beast (Revelation 14:9-12). They will also call the world to refuse the message of the beast and his false prophet.

Your 'rebuttals' Sister are not rebuttals at all, but merely a clairvoyants view of the future. You are comparing an imagined future making that to fit scripture, against an established recorded history that matches scripture. You will find that at the end of my last article , you will have to choose between continuing to believe in an imaginary future antichrist who will in some way fulfill all the characteristics I have been discussing here, or the RCC who has already fulfilled all the criteria demanded of it in scripture. BTW, there are certain characteristics of the Antichrist that a future entity cannot fulfill. One, growing out of the pagan Roman empire. Two, uprooting 3 of the horns that grew from that empire. And three, deceiving the church into joining with him. All these 3 the RCC has accomplished. And more. As to Daniel 8:23. Why have you not included verses 24,25? They all pertain to the same power, whoever it is. Now think about it. At the latter time of whose kingdom? Who is the 'their' of verse 23? Surely the 4 divisions of Greece of the previous verse right? Who came to rise toward the end of the reign of the 4 Grecian kings, Lysymachus, Ptolemy, Cassander, and Seleucis? Was it not Rome? It most assuredly could not be Antiochus Epiphanes, because he was just one minor king in the Seleucid line. He was not mighty, his father, Antiochus the Great, was mightier than he. (There are many other reasons why Antiochus Epiphanes cannot be the Antichrist). So who is it that met the criteria of the following 3 verses? There is much that could be discussed, but I will limit myself to just verse 25. He stood up against the Prince of princes (Christ Himself) but was broken without hand. First, the power that stood against Christ was pagan Rome. Second, pagan Rome was not conquered outright by any one power of man. In fact, as revealed in the statue of Daniel 2, and in several places in Daniel 7, pagan Rome continues to exist in another form all the way down through time until the second coming. The iron of pagan Rome's legs in the statue continued in a miry clay loose union until destroyed by Christ. It is that union, in its most matured form, which is the Antichrist of the last days, Babylon the Great. That power spoken of in verses 23-25, is the same power spoken of in verses 9-12. The little horn which grew from the one of the 4. One can see the change in the formation of the statue from iron to an iron/clay mix repeated in verses 9 and 10 of Daniel 8. The horn waxed exceeding great on a horizontal plane in verse 9, but in verse 10 takes on a vertical direction, against heaven. This is the change from a purely pagan secular entity, to a pseudo Christian entity , a union of church and state. Now, I will continue with the next characteristic, I suppose #7C.

I am sorry if you find that post of mine a little long, but can anything be fully understood or appreciated with just 5 second reads? If you want to really understand something, you need to spend time at it. Make an effort. You skimmed thru and then passed judgement "that's off kilter"? No offense, but I suggest you read it again properly then we can discuss any objections. The subject of the Antichrist is one of the most misunderstood subjects in Christendom. The vast majority of people who call themselves Christian is already deceived by the Antichrist, because they reject Biblical evidence proving he has been here for a long time, and has himself deceived everyone into believing he is yet to come. That was the whole crux of my post. Everyone on this topic page all agreed that that the restrainer was some power that would/is restraining the future Antichrist, yet I showed that the restrainer was pulled away 1500 years ago, and the Antichrist was then revealed! And all Bible scholars of that time and afterward, recognized him. In this all modern Christians reject not only Biblical evidence, but also the unanimous testimony of many of the early church leaders and all the reformers, and many in between. Looking to the distant horizon in expectation of some great ogre entering the scene with all guns blazing destroying Christians and everything to do with Christianity, the church is cosying up to the real Antichrist who has been posing as one of them since it began to form as far back as the 3rd century. The church today is mesmerized, deceived, and asleep and will happily receive the mark of the beast when it is made mandatory because they have no idea who the beast is, let alone its mark. They take the word of the writers of novels and movies, of their Televangelists and false prophets, who all have been sucked in by the perverted teachings of the Jesuits of the 16th century who turned the reformers collective accusations away from the true Antichrist, and made of modern Christians clairvoyants and prognosticators of the future. The greatest and most dire warning in all scripture is cried out against those who receive the name, mark, or number of the Antichrist, yet modern Christians reject all the clear evidence God has provided in His love as to the real identity of that Antichrist. Rather than accept the word and history, they pick and choose scripture to fit with their imaginations concerning what they believe will take place in the future, while turning away from the reality of the past which will repeat. What modern Christians are doing and perpetuating in forums such as this is rejecting testimony for which 100s of thousands have died to preserve, and accepting the word of the Antichrist HIMSELF that he is yet to come. Wake up church!

Now we beseech you brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him, that ye be not troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of the Lord is at hand. 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; 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, showing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what with-holdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way, 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: even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-10 The above verses are perhaps, alongside Daniel 7 and Revelation 13, the most significant texts in the entire word of God as to revealing the identity of the Antichrist of scripture. When reading Daniel 7 and Revelation 13, and in contemplating the above, the reader cannot help but be impressed with the detail and amount of information given regarding the nature, the thoughts, beliefs and practices of this entity who from the beginnings of the Christian faith to the present time, has shed such a dark forbidding cloud over the true church. In these few short verses the apostle Paul has given his readers a clear and unambiguous signpost pointing directly to the rise of the man of sin, the son perdition. A signpost that he first revealed to the Thessalonian church in person, and reaffirmed in this letter. Bible scholars for centuries have agreed that the reason Paul was less than forthcoming in his letter in naming the ‘restrainer’ directly as he is commonly known, was because there was a very real danger involved in so doing. That danger coming from the restrainer himself, the Roman pagan empire who ruled the then known world at that time, and who, if upon reading this letter and realizing that Paul was here saying that their power was about to be swept away to make way for another, Paul would have been immediately arrested and charged, tried, and executed for sedition. Also, because the Thessalonians already knew who Paul was talking about, it was not necessary for Paul to risk naming Rome again. Practically all the early commentators and church fathers were unanimous in their belief that Paul was referring to the empire of Rome in general, and to the emperors in particular. Let me provide a few quotes from those early church statesmen from their comments on this matter. Let me start with Tertullian (160-240 A. D.): “‘For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way.’ What obstacle is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist upon (its own ruins)? ‘And then shall be revealed the wicked one.” “On the Resurrection of the Flesh,” chapter 24; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. III, p. 563 (Author: There is some debate as to whether the ‘falling away’ referred to here is in reference to the empire, or the church. Some say one, some the other, while some would contend that it can apply equally to both. Either way, Tertullian was certain in his belief that the restrainer was the Roman Empire. That it was Rome itself that inhibited in some way the rise of the antichrist. This was generally accepted throughout the church at that time, and it was common for the church to pray to God that He would keep the Roman power intact in order to keep the antichrist to coming to power in their time. Interesting also is Tertullian’s reference to the ten kingdoms that would result from the break up of Rome. This is a direct reference to Daniel 7 and the ten horns that would grow from the 4th beast, Rome. The Antichrist, according to Bible scholars, was the 11th horn. Tertullian was using the historicist method of prophetic interpretation, that method which viewed prophecy as an historical unfolding throughout history from the time the prophecy was first given, and culminating at the second coming. This is significant when understanding Paul’s letter, because Paul is clear that the Antichrist would appear as soon as Rome moves aside, and that very same Antichrist would still be there to be judged at the second coming. Not futurist, not preterist, but a historicist approach, just like Tertullian.) In yet another comment, Tertullian states: “The very end of all things threatening dreadful woes is only retarded by the continued existence of the Roman Empire.” (“Apology,” chapter 32; Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. III, p. 43). A little later Lactantius,. in the early fourth century wrote: “The subject itself declares that the fall and ruin of the world will shortly take place; except that while the city of Rome remains, it appears that nothing of this kind is to be feared. But when that capital of the world shall have fallen, and shall have begun to be a street, which the Sibyls say shall come to pass, who can doubt that the end has now arrived to the affairs of men and the whole world? It is that city, that only, which still sustains all things.” (“The Divine Institutes,” book 7, chapter 25; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. VII, p. 220). Also early in the fourth century Cyril of Jerusalem (318-386 A. D.)had this to say: “But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come when the times of the Roman Empire shall have been fulfilled, and the end of the world is drawing near. There shall rise up together ten kings of the Romans, reigning in different parts perhaps, but all about the same time; and after those an eleventh, the Antichrist, who by his magical craft shall seize upon the Roman power; and of the kings who reigned before him, ‘three he shall humble,’ and the remaining seven he shall keep in subjection to himself.” (Catechetical Lectures,” section 15, on II Thessalonians 2:4; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. VII, p. 108 [New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1895]). (Author: Much could be said about this quote; he also is clearly linking the prophecy of Daniel to the text of Paul’s, agreeing with other eminent writers of his time that out of Rome would evolve ten kings, 3 of whom the antichrist would subdue. When the restrainer, Rome, was to be taken out of the way, and the horns of Daniel 7 arise, the antichrist would be revealed.) Now I would present the testimony of Ambrose (died in 398): “After the falling or decay of the Roman Empire, Antichrist shall appear.” (Quoted in, Bishop Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, p. 463)…… ….and Chrysostom (died in 407): “When the Roman Empire is taken out of the way, then he [the Antichrist] shall come. And naturally. For as long as the fear of this empire lasts, no one will willingly exalt himself, but when that is dissolved, he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government both of man and of God.” “Homily IV on 2 Thessalonians 2:6-9,” Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. XIII, p. 389 [New York: Charles Scribner’s and Sons, 1905]….. …and finally Jerome (died 420): “He that letteth is taken out of the way, and yet we do not realize that Antichrist is near.” (Letter to Ageruchia, written about 409A. D. Letter 123, section 16; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. VI, p. 236 Jerome’s testimony is interesting. He admits and agrees with other early church fathers of his era that Rome was the restrainer, and had been removed in his (Jerome’s) lifetime. Yet it had not yet been made apparent who the power was that could definitively be called the Antichrist. Why? Because from Jerome’s perspective, he could not see all the signs of the Antichrist’s coming, as they had yet to be revealed in history. The capital of the empire had been removed to Constantinople, and the Gothic barbarian kings* were already well entrenched in ongoing battles and wars to decide who would rule over the territories not long since vacated by Rome, but the three horns to be subdued were still in power. When they were subdued, it would then be known by whose power they were done away, and the identity of Antichrist would be revealed. I think it would be very helpful if I here provided a quote from the eminent Catholic historian, Cardinal Manning. “Now the abandonment of Rome was the liberation of the pontiffs. Whatsoever claims to obedience the emperors may have made, and whatsoever compliance the Pontiff may have yielded, the whole previous relation, anomalous, and annulled again and again by the vices and outrages of the emperors, was finally dissolved by a higher power. The providence of God permitted a succession of irruptions, Gothic, Lombard, and Hungarian, to desolate Italy, and to efface from it every remnant of the empire. The pontiffs found themselves alone, the sole fountains of order, peace, law, and safety. And from the hour of this providential liberation, when, by a divine intervention, the chains fell off from the hands of the successor of St. Peter, as once before from his own, no sovereign has ever reigned in Rome except the Vicar of Jesus Christ.” (Henry Edward Manning, The Temporal Power of The Vicar of Jesus Christ, Preface, pp. xxviii, xxix. London: Burns and Lambert, 1862). Manning has clearly given an excellent summary of history which directly correlates with the prophecies of Daniel and Paul. While attributing the fall of Rome to God and the rise of the papacy to Him also, Manning seems oblivious to the fact that he is revealing the perfect fulfillment of the prophecy of Paul and Daniel. That when Rome fell, the ten nations arose, three were subdued, and the ultimate victor was the papacy! It was the papacy itself that the empire of Rome was restraining. It was the papacy that arose after the establishment of the ten horns. It was the papacy that had a major role in the subjugation of the 3 horns because being Arian in belief they were directly opposed to the rule of the pontiffs. It will be the papacy that will still be here at the second coming. Therefore it is the papacy which perfectly fulfils the criteria demanded of it in order to be identified as the Antichrist. And that my friends are precisely the reasons all non-Roman Bible commentators from the time of the 6th century on were almost unanimous in identifying the papacy as the man of sin. The power who entered the church (the temple of God) and by claiming the power to forgive sin, and shut out of heaven whom he will, and claiming universal spiritual and temporal authority over all the earth, thus claiming the prerogatives of God, “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, showing himself that he is God.” * The ten kings who vied for power as the Roman Empire disintegrated before them and from which 7 nations of modern Europe can trace their descent are known by most historians as being the Anglo-Saxons (Britain), the Allamanni (Germany), the Franks (France), the Lombards (first around the Danube then Italy), Visigoths (Spain), Burgundians (Burgundy/Switzerland)) and the Suevi (Portugal). These seven of the ten Barbarian kingdoms were converted to Christianity and submitted to the authority of the Bishop of Rome. However, three of the kingdoms converted to Christianity but embraced the heretical teachings of Arius. It is believed that Arius (who was presbyter in Alexandria around the year 320 A. D.) taught that ‘Christ was created out of nothing as the first and greatest of all creatures’, very similar to Jehovah Witness teachings of today, although there is some doubt as the precise teachings of this man as there is very little evidence remaining of his writings. Most were destroyed by the papacy itself, or perhaps kept preserved in its library. The teachings of Arius were condemned in two great church councils, Nicea (325 A. D.) and Constantinople (381 A. D.). These three Arian kingdoms were a threat to the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome [later called the Pope]. To make a long story short, these three kingdoms eventually were uprooted by the imperial power acting under the influence of the Bishop of Rome. The Ostrogoths (originally from Yugoslavia), by order of the emperor, dealt the heretical Heruli a devastating defeat in 493 A. D. (The Ostrogoths, though also claimed as being 'Arian', were converted by the efforts of Wulfilas, an ex-slave who became a missionary to his own captors, much in the same vein as Patrick of Ireland. Yet we do have some writings of Wulfilas, and it is clear that his teachings bear very little similarity to those purported to be of Arius, although they both lay no claim to belief in the trinity.) It happened like this: The Pope requested the emperor to do something about the unorthodox Heruli. In response, the emperor sent Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths to do battle with Odoacer, king of the Heruli. Odoacer was slain by Theodoric and the Heruli disappeared from history. Then the Vandals were crushed (in 534 A. D.) by Belisarius, general of emperor Justinian’s armies. But there was one remaining horn which needed to be uprooted, and it was the most formidable of all: the Ostrogoths. After the Ostrogoths conquered the Heruli, they became extremely powerful. They were also Arians, so the Bishop of Rome [the Pope] implored Justinian to uproot the Ostrogoths. There were several battles between Belisarius and the Ostrogoths. The decisive battle, however, was in February of the year 538. The armies of Justinian, as well as the ravages of disease, decimated the armies of the Ostrogoths, they were expelled from Rome and in short order, disappeared from the historical scene in Europe. In conclusion then, the 'falling away', or divorce from the true Bridegroom, came when the church of Rome rose to secular power at the time of the void left at the removal of the empire from Rome to Constantinople (Istanbul). In gaining secular authority and thus forming relations with the kings of the earth, the Roman bishops were comitting spiritual adultery, and therefore had 'apostatised' from the true faith, and had fallen away. It was the restraining power of the pagan Roman empire that held in check the development of the Papal Antichrist. It was prophesied by Daniel that this Antichrist, or 'little horn' would rule for 1260 days...42 months....time, times, and half a time. All these are prophetic time periods amounting to 1260 years. Add 1260 to 538 and we arrive at 1798. It was in that precise year that Bertier, the General in Napoleons republican army, entered Rome, took the Pope captive and taking him into exile where he died 2 years later. He disbanded the college of cardinals, and declared all the papal states as a republic. As a secular power, or a union of church and state which character the Papacy had thus held for exactly 1260 years, was dead. The beast had received her deadly wound. In 1929 however this deadly wound was healed, when Mussolini reinstated the Pope to his secular/civil position, the Vatican City becoming an independent nation with the Pope as its King, and today the wound is now fully healed, with almost every nation on the planet having diplomatic relations with the Vatican thus "all the world wondering after the beast". That beast is now coming to power once again. Soon the NWO will be set in place, and the Pope is now currently being upheld by many as the only viable candidate to be its head. Soon this will be so, and the Antichrist power will rule the planet as prophesied. The second beast of Revel. 13, the beast with the horns like a Lamb but speaking as a dragon, is the USA. The US will form an image to the first beast, another union of church and state , a mirror image of the papacy of the dark ages. This image will enforce submission to Rome. The rest of the world under the UN will follow suit. The ten divisions (kings) of the world will give their power and sovereignty to the the Vatican, forming Babylon the Great, Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth, but it will only be for a short time. They will soon recognize their error, and turn on her and destroy her. Amid the judgements being poured out upon an apostate world, the true followers of Christ who rejected this counterfeit religious system, will be protected as they look forward to the soon coming of Christ, even while a counterfeit Christ (Satan) will emerge claiming the world as his. The elect will not be deceived.

The news I just heard that Matthew is a cat. 4 hurricane and is changing track to impact much of the state of Florida, and that the governor has declred a state of emergency in expectation of this life threatening storm. My prayers for all the people of Florida that they may remain safe and secure at this time. Take care people.