Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
OakWood

Reign of the Beast -genuinely Global or just the Mid-East?

Recommended Posts

I've been thinking about this for some time. Will this directly affect everyone alive or just indirectly?

Not being allowed to buy and sell unless you have the mark, how can this apllied to every single nation and every single person on Earth? Will there be pockets of resistance or pockets of self-sustenance?

I'll give you an example of what I mean:

World War 2 was called World War 2 because it affected the entire World and was a war that spanned the globe. Not every nation was involved however, in fact most were not, but every nation was affected by it in some way or another, either at the time or shortly afterwards. Some nations were hardly affected at all, but nevertheless were acutely aware of what was going on.

Will the reign of the anti-christ be the same? I mean, if it literally does involve submission on the part of every single person on the planet, then who will be there to resist this submission and tell others to resist too? There has to be a resistance movement or free areas that try to fight back.

If the entire World is under submission then how can there be a Mystery Babylon? How can sailors watch her burn from afar (Rev 18:17) and mourn for her? Would the beast allow these sailors to be freely sailing in ships?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** edited out the insult ***Look...the Beast (nation) was Rome. It was Daniel's Fourth Beast. It ruled the entire KNOWN world.

There IS no 'antichrist'. Nero (a Roman emperor, the 6th) was 666. His name adds up to 666 in the alpha numerical system of his time. He died of a head wound, self inflicted. His secretary finished him off. The Roman Empire nearly collapsed because it plunged into civil war over the vacant emperorship. After the death of Nero came what is referred to historically as the year of four emperors. One emerged (Gaius) but was quickly murdered and Vespasian took his place. Vespasian was the father of Titus, the Roman General who took Jerusalem. Much of Revelation refers to these events, and how God delivered the Church. The final chapters (20 & 21) are for US. The last Christians. John tells us that Satan is released after having been bound, and he (Satan) gathers up an army and commences to attack Believers, the Church and all they stand for. Then Christ comes, burning the earth up and destroying the wicked.

The word Antichrist is never used in Revelation anywhere. The facts of the matter is that the word is only by John (the writer of Revelation, incidentally) in his letters (1, 2, John) and only 5 times. Antichrists (yes, plural) are defined by John so that there is no question as to what they are. Furthermore, antichrists came out of the Church, they were heretics called Gnostics.

Don't be fooled by modern teachings that have no basis in Scripture.

Edited by OneLight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look...the Beast (nation) was Rome. It was Daniel's Fourth Beast. It ruled the entire KNOWN world.

There IS no 'antichrist'. Nero (a Roman emperor, the 6th) was 666. His name adds up to 666 in the alpha numerical system of his time. He died of a head wound, self inflicted. His secretary finished him off. The Roman Empire nearly collapsed because it plunged into civil war over the vacant emperorship. After the death of Nero came what is referred to historically as the year of four emperors. One emerged (Gaius) but was quickly murdered and Vespasian took his place. Vespasian was the father of Titus, the Roman General who took Jerusalem. Much of Revelation refers to these events, and how God delivered the Church. The final chapters (20 & 21) are for US. The last Christians. John tells us that Satan is released after having been bound, and he (Satan) gathers up an army and commences to attack Believers, the Church and all they stand for. Then Christ comes, burning the earth up and destroying the wicked.

The word Antichrist is never used in Revelation anywhere. The facts of the matter is that the word is only by John (the writer of Revelation, incidentally) in his letters (1, 2, John) and only 5 times. Antichrists (yes, plural) are defined by John so that there is no question as to what they are. Furthermore, antichrists came out of the Church, they were heretics called Gnostics.

Don't be fooled by modern teachings that have no basis in Scripture.

I wasn't taught by anyone. I picked up the Bible and started reading it, but being 'new' I would appreciated guidance now and again. What you're saying to me sounds as if you're a preterist, a position that I haven't considered. If the final chapters are for us (as you say) then that's fine, but it still does not answer my question, will this be global or not?

Edited by OneLight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look...the Beast (nation) was Rome. It was Daniel's Fourth Beast. It ruled the entire KNOWN world.

There IS no 'antichrist'. Nero (a Roman emperor, the 6th) was 666. His name adds up to 666 in the alpha numerical system of his time. He died of a head wound, self inflicted. His secretary finished him off. The Roman Empire nearly collapsed because it plunged into civil war over the vacant emperorship. After the death of Nero came what is referred to historically as the year of four emperors. One emerged (Gaius) but was quickly murdered and Vespasian took his place. Vespasian was the father of Titus, the Roman General who took Jerusalem. Much of Revelation refers to these events, and how God delivered the Church. The final chapters (20 & 21) are for US. The last Christians. John tells us that Satan is released after having been bound, and he (Satan) gathers up an army and commences to attack Believers, the Church and all they stand for. Then Christ comes, burning the earth up and destroying the wicked.

The word Antichrist is never used in Revelation anywhere. The facts of the matter is that the word is only by John (the writer of Revelation, incidentally) in his letters (1, 2, John) and only 5 times. Antichrists (yes, plural) are defined by John so that there is no question as to what they are. Furthermore, antichrists came out of the Church, they were heretics called Gnostics.

Don't be fooled by modern teachings that have no basis in Scripture.

I wasn't taught by anyone. I picked up the Bible and started reading it, but being 'new' I would appreciated guidance now and again. What you're saying to me sounds as if you're a preterist, a position that I haven't considered. If the final chapters are for us (as you say) then that's fine, but it still does not answer my question, will this be global or not?

And if there is no 'anti-Christ' then I apologise for my error. John said that many antichrists have been, and gives the definition of what an anti-christ is. I'm assuming from the definition that the Beast and/or the False Prophet will be anti-Christs. I hardly think that they are going to be pro-Christs.

I don't jump to conclusions either - if I did I wouldn't ask questions.

Edited by OneLight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest man

And if there is no 'anti-Christ' then I apologise for my error. John said that many antichrists have been, and gives the definition of what an anti-christ is. I'm assuming from the definition that the Beast and/or the False Prophet will be anti-Christs. I hardly think that they are going to be pro-Christs.

I don't jump to conclusions either - if I did I wouldn't ask questions.

"The Antichrist" is a manmade title. The bible mentions antichrists but it doesn't target one individual as "The Antichrist".

I believe it's a global experience. Check out verse 23. The 4th beast is going to devour the whole earth. Notice who comes out of that kingdom.

Daniel 7

23 “Thus he said:

‘The fourth beast shall be

A fourth kingdom on earth,

Which shall be different from all other kingdoms,

And shall devour the whole earth,

Trample it and break it in pieces.

24 The ten horns are ten kings

Who shall arise from this kingdom.

And another shall rise after them;

He shall be different from the first ones,

And shall subdue three kings.

25 He shall speak pompous words against the Most High,

Shall persecute the saints of the Most High,

And shall intend to change times and law.

Then the saints shall be given into his hand

For a time and times and half a time.

26 ‘But the court shall be seated,

And they shall take away his dominion,

To consume and destroy it forever.

27 Then the kingdom and dominion,

And the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven,

Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High.

His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,

And all dominions shall serve and obey Him.’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more confused now than when I asked the question.

From what I can gather, I need to study the book of Daniel more, as apparently it has the same prophecies as listed in Revelation. Ok, I can do that, no problem.

It seems to me to be the most sensible option that I have been given so far.

I also need to check my Roman history and find out if Nero actually performed miraculous signs, causing fire to come down from Heaven in full view of men, deceived the inhabitants of the Earth, (I'm guessing the entire Earth, which would include Native Americans and Australian aborigines) and whether or not he forced everyone to bear a mark. I don't think that Nero did this, but I'll check anyway.

Unless of course Nero is the first Beast mentioned in Revelation 13, in which case he had a fatal wound, which had been healed and the whole World followed him because he was given authority over every, tribe, people and nation (including, I assume Native Americans and Australian Aborigines).

Either way, Nero sure knew a lot of people and not a single person on the planet failed to fall under his spell.

Then again, it's possible that the whole World doesn't mean the WHOLE world, in which case you can see why I would want to ask my original question in the first place. Also if the whole world doesn't mean the whole world then is it possible that it doesn't mean the 'whole world' later on in Revelations.

Just asking - a sensible question I think.

It's also possible that Nero is neither of the beasts mentioned in Revelation 13, in which case who are/were those beasts?

I'm not being glib here, nor am I claiming to have the answers, in fact I don't. I am genuinely confused.

I am simply reading the Bible and trying to understand what I read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest man

Here's another passage that makes note of the entire world belonging to the devil.

Luke 4

5 Then the devil, taking Him up on a high mountain, showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

6 And the devil said to Him, “All this authority I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish.

If the entire world has been given to Satan, it's only reasonable to assume the reign of the "antichrist" will be global.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SIgh....another poorly taught Believer. Look...the Beast (nation) was Rome. It was Daniel's Fourth Beast. It ruled the entire KNOWN world.

There IS no 'antichrist'. Nero (a Roman emperor, the 6th) was 666. His name adds up to 666 in the alpha numerical system of his time. He died of a head wound, self inflicted. His secretary finished him off. The Roman Empire nearly collapsed because it plunged into civil war over the vacant emperorship. After the death of Nero came what is referred to historically as the year of four emperors. One emerged (Gaius) but was quickly murdered and Vespasian took his place. Vespasian was the father of Titus, the Roman General who took Jerusalem. Much of Revelation refers to these events, and how God delivered the Church. The final chapters (20 & 21) are for US. The last Christians. John tells us that Satan is released after having been bound, and he (Satan) gathers up an army and commences to attack Believers, the Church and all they stand for. Then Christ comes, burning the earth up and destroying the wicked.

The word Antichrist is never used in Revelation anywhere. The facts of the matter is that the word is only by John (the writer of Revelation, incidentally) in his letters (1, 2, John) and only 5 times. Antichrists (yes, plural) are defined by John so that there is no question as to what they are. Furthermore, antichrists came out of the Church, they were heretics called Gnostics.

Don't be fooled by modern teachings that have no basis in Scripture.

I wasn't taught by anyone. I picked up the Bible and started reading it, but being 'new' I would appreciated guidance now and again. What you're saying to me sounds as if you're a preterist, a position that I haven't considered. If the final chapters are for us (as you say) then that's fine, but it still does not answer my question, will this be global or not?

And if there is no 'anti-Christ' then I apologise for my error. John said that many antichrists have been, and gives the definition of what an anti-christ is. I'm assuming from the definition that the Beast and/or the False Prophet will be anti-Christs. I hardly think that they are going to be pro-Christs.

I don't jump to conclusions either - if I did I wouldn't ask questions.

The mistake many of us make/made (I know I did) is misunderstand the role of history alongside Scripture. I'm a historical partial preterist. Full preterism says the 2d Coming was 70 AD.

Remember, the Beast is ROME. The Roman Empire. The Fourth Beast of Daniel. So then, since Rome is gone, how could Rome affect us today? Answer: It can't. Rome's reach WAS global, in the Biblical sense of eikoumene or known world. The False Prophet and Beast were against Christ, yes, but not in the sense John used in his letters. Actually, the Beast Nero was against Christ only because he threatened his emperorship, since Nero believed he was supreme over every god.

The False Prophet is the High Priest and his cronies. THEY hated Jesus, because His presence was antagonistic to them. See Matthew 22 for a clear example. They had authority to call down fire from heaven, that is they could demand worship. They were SUPPOSED to demand worship of the True God, instead, they demanded worship of a false one. They resisted everything Jesus had to say (but for a scant few). They incited the crowd against Christ at His trial.

The Fourth Beast DID devour the whole earth. The one of its time.

It wasn't your error WW, concerning the whole antichrist thing. It's an error from well before both of us, but one that's still being taught, that there is one single individual antichrist who will force everyone to worship him. Roman emperors did just that, each of them to some extent. Nero was the worst of the lot. He also persecuted the Church 3.5 years (1260 days) until his death. Daniel called him 'the Little Horn'.

Fortunately for us, the Beast, Nero and the rest are all gone. We've lived in a greater, better time. Call it the Church age or the Millennium, whichever you like, Christ reigned. But now, Satan is loose again. His army is marching across the world, attacking Christians and the Scripture and righteous values. Some places, we're persecuted, others just ignored. But the time is coming when Satan will dare to use His Magog army (Rev 20) to exterminate the Church totally, and when he does, Christ will reign fire on him and his followers and usher in the final judgment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** edited insult poster is referring to so removing this also ***

As far as nero being the anti-Christ, I hold that is a false teaching, Nero was not the anti-Christ. While he did make people worship him, that much is true, he was not in control of the whole world. He was in control of the world known to him-but not in control of the whole world, the wold world could not have worshiped him, because they couldn't the whole world could not have known him. If you look at the original greek, in revelations 13:2-10, the greek word means entiretly-to say that it was just the "known world" is putting our own interpretation into it.

There is one more thing, that disqualified Nero, and any other emperor, or leader, known to man, from being the anti-Christ. Look at Revelations 13:2:3 "and I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the Beast."

Nero, suffered no mortal wounds-and was miraculously healed. Nor did any other Roman commander. Or US president, for that matter. Neither, did all the world worship Nero either. Scripturally, the Anti-Christ has not risen yet-and when he does, it will, indeed, affect the entire world.

Edited by OneLight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BB who is Apolyon in Revelation?

WW the whole earth is to be divided up in 10 regions not just the EU as some suggest because the Antichrist will rule the whole world. This was done by the Club of Rome.

1. NAFTA (America, Canada and Mexico) 2. The E.U. – countries of the European Union, Western Europe as a whole 3. Japan 4. Australia, New Zealand, South Africa 5. Eastern Europe, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia and the former countries of the Soviet Union 6. Central and South America, Cuba and Caribbean Islands 7. The Middle East and North Africa 8. The rest of Africa, except South Africa 9. South and Southeast Asia, including India 10. China (Mongolia is now included with China) The islands of the seas, for the most part, fit in with the closest regio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...