Proposition: There Is No Bible-Verse Argument For A Future Antichrist.

[JAG**]

7 minutes ago, douggg said:

 

Plus, you put a curse on me    

 

That is incorrect.

I do not put curses on anyone.

JAG Wrote:

"One more thing Douggg, you will from  now on, have to "live with" the

FACT that you will ALWAYS KNOW that you were unable to produce a

Bible-Verse that made the connection with the Bible's mention of

antichrist in John's epistles  with any other parts of the Bible.

You will live out your days KNOWING that I just spoke the absolute truth to you."__JAG

That is not a curse. That is a fact.

I presented you with a FACT.

 

Best.

JAG

Edited August 2, 2020 by JAG**

[douggg]

9 minutes ago, JAG** said:

The Bible does not mention the European Union. The Bible does

not say a single word about the European Union

You expect the bible to have expressly the term "European Union" in it?

[douggg]

14 minutes ago, JAG** said:

This remains unrefuted , , , 

...your strawman argument.

[JAG**]

1 hour ago, douggg said:

All wrong.

 

That was the whole point Douggg  that the quote was clearly and obviously wrong.

But the LARGER and MORE IMPORTANT  point was that it came from the "people on your side"

and the people that wrote that pure-speculative stuff believed  that it was true and now here you are

saying that they were "all wrong." 

Douggg they will say that YOU are "all wrong" when you say that they are "all wrong."

So?

So many people "on your side" have their "end time charts" that contradict each other 

about the fictional imaginary end times "evil man" that they speculate is yet coming.

The people that wrote this stuff down there believed it was true. My view is that

your end times speculations or no more factually correct that is the end times

speculations down below:

____________________

 

"11. Resurrected Dead? - "Seemed to have a mortal wound" : Some Bible expositors believe

this mortal wound refers to the pagan Roman Empire, which died in the past but will be revived

in the end times. Others say a historical character of the past, such as Nero, Judas Iscariot,

Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin, will come back to life and fulfill the role of the antichrist in the

end times. Others say the antichrist will actually be killed and then resurrected. Still others

say that perhaps the antichrist will be severely wounded, and Satan will supernaturally heal

this wound. Perhaps he will simply appear to be killed, though he really is not, and through

satanic trickery will appear to be resurrected."

https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/topical-studies/the-rise-of-the-antichrist.html

 

 

Edited August 2, 2020 by JAG**

[JAG**]

13 minutes ago, douggg said:

...your strawman argument.

That is incorrect Douggg.

I have presented no Straw Man arguments.

My Opening Post is clearly NOT a Straw Man.

Neither is my title to this thread.

 So far this stands  unrefuted , , 

Proposition: There Is No Bible-Verse Argument For A Future Antichrist.

[douggg]

21 minutes ago, JAG** said:

That is incorrect.

I do not put curses on anyone.

JAG Wrote:

"One more thing Douggg, you will from  now on, have to "live with" the

FACT that you will ALWAYS KNOW that you were unable to produce a

Bible-Verse that made the connection with the Bible's mention of

antichrist in John's epistles  with any other parts of the Bible.

You will live out your days KNOWING that I just spoke the absolute truth to you."__JAG

That is not a curse. That is a fact.

I presented you with a FACT.

 

Best.

JAG

...... and now you are going to deny it?    Really?    Do you think what you wrote is a blessing on me?

It doesn't mean anything, because you have no power over me.     It was just funny to hear, after you saying how people are demonizing you.

[douggg]

12 minutes ago, JAG** said:

That was the whole point Douggg  that the quote was clearly and obviously wrong.

But the LARGER and MORE IMPORTANT  point was that it came from the "people on your side"

My side?    I am disagreeing with those points - so how could they be on my side?

My side is that the person is the Antichrist only for the time he is the King of Israel, coming in his own name.     

You find some other commentator(s) that are saying the same thing.... and then we can talk about the rest of their eschatology.

 

Edited August 2, 2020 by douggg

[JAG**]

1 hour ago, douggg said:

 

Get your doctrine right instead.

 

My doctrine is correct Douggg.

For example the following from my Opening Post is  correct doctrine:

". . . not one single reference in Daniel or Ezekiel or Paul or the Book of Revelation . . .

which (some) allege refer to the Antichrist is connected in any way with the verses in

the epistles of John that mention the antichrist. All is based on inference. Let the reader

search for himself and see how far-fetched that (alleged) connection is.

 

We make bold to say that this picture of Antichrist as a (future) world ruler . . . is pure fiction,

without so much as one clear supporting verse in all Scripture."

The Millennium, Dr. Loraine Boettner, page 210

 

The Bible mentions Antichrist in only the following 4 verses:

1 John 2:18

1John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

There is no  Bible-Verse argument for a future Antichrist because . . . .

There is no  Bible-Verse argument that connects these 4 verses with

anything said in Daniel or Ezekiel or Paul or the Book of Revelation,

or any other parts of the Bible.

 

 

 

 

[JAG**]

8 minutes ago, douggg said:

 and now you are going to deny it?  

Yes I am going to deny it.

I do not put curses on anyone. Not ever.

JAG Wrote:

"One more thing Douggg, you will from  now on, have to "live with" the

FACT that you will ALWAYS KNOW that you were unable to produce a

Bible-Verse that made the connection with the Bible's mention of

antichrist in John's epistles  with any other parts of the Bible.

You will live out your days KNOWING that I just spoke the absolute truth to you."__JAG

That is not a curse. That is a fact.

I presented you with a FACT.

 

[douggg]

3 minutes ago, JAG** said:

My doctrine is correct Douggg.

For example the following from my Opening Post is  correct doctrine:

". . . not one single reference in Daniel or Ezekiel or Paul or the Book of Revelation . . .

which (some) allege refer to the Antichrist is connected in any way with the verses in

the epistles of John that mention the antichrist. All is based on inference. Let the reader

search for himself and see how far-fetched that (alleged) connection is.

 

We make bold to say that this picture of Antichrist as a (future) world ruler . . . is pure fiction,

without so much as one clear supporting verse in all Scripture."

The Millennium, Dr. Loraine Boettner, page 210

 

The Bible mentions Antichrist in only the following 4 verses:

1 John 2:18

1John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

There is no  Bible-Verse argument for a future Antichrist because . . . .

There is no  Bible-Verse argument that connects these 4 verses with

anything said in Daniel or Ezekiel or Paul or the Book of Revelation,

or any other parts of the Bible.

 

 

 

 

If your doctrine were correct, you would first acknowledge that antichrist shall come is a singular person.     How to insert that person into the bible scheme of when he will come, and in what manner - are separate issues.