Shilohsfoal Posted March 27 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 27 (edited) 43 minutes ago, BlindSeeker said: Montana Marv and Shilohsfoal, you are both correct. There is indeed places in scripture where "anointed" means "chosen" or set "apart," but it is indeed absolutely correct to understand it as "being poured upon" or a "filling." Perhaps, being specific with each other how you are using it will allow a path to agreement and a return to the Original Topic. I believe Donald Trump is the man of sin . King of the north I believe he has a purpose and that is to destroy the middle east but I don't see him as a saviour as he sees himself and others see him as.I don't believe he can save anything or keep anything safe as he claims. As of now hes trying to make a fast buck selling bibles.Reminds me of Trump's TV show theme song. Money money money- money Edited March 27 by Shilohsfoal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted March 27 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,041 Content Per Day: 0.52 Reputation: 426 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 27 (edited) 1 hour ago, Shilohsfoal said: I believe Donald Trump is the man of sin. Thank you for the clear statement. While I do believe Trump is indeed mentioned in scripture, and his position as POTUS, being that of one exercising all power and authority over America, I can not identify with him as meeting the requirements of “the man of sin.” 1st Thessalonians 2:3 – Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there comes a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition. My reluctance is due to the fact that the phrase “son of perdition” is only used twice in scripture, once by Jesus specifically in reference to Judas - who ended up being a false apostle, and again above by Paul used in my opinion and that of many in reference to the Papacy which by Catholicism is said to be overseen by a continuation of “apostles” ( a position or office similar to POTUS or high priest, which only one man at a time fills), which are now referred to as “popes” or the “the papacy.” Historically, in the eyes of true Protestants, all the popes have all been false apostles and betrayers of truth, antichrists promoting another gospel and Jesus by another spirit, just as surely as Judas was possessed of the devil... Much more can be stated, but I will simply submit my reasoning on this here in a chapter I wrote called “Giving Way to the Rise of The Son of Perdition.” At first, it all may seem irrelevant to the particular topic, and it might require some patience, but I assure you it is relative and, IMHO, fundamental to one properly understanding both the term “the son of perdition" and the rise thereof. Furthermore, I think it would be prudent for all, especially the earnest seeker of the truth, to ask what scriptural and historical justification those early protestant commentators have for interpreting "son of perdition" they did and attributing it to Catholicism and the papacy... For some clarification, I am including a brief excerpt to present part of vagueness around this phrase, and the criticalness of the context of "he that will let (prevent), will let until he be taken out of the way." (Note - there is a downloadable mp3 - duration 58 min.) "[I am] ...asking the question, “Why didn’t Paul just articulate these things again in more detail in his epistle?” With a matter of such significant importance, what could be his reason for not putting forth a clear and coherent teaching on this apostasy which the Holy Spirit had revealed to him was going to take place? Especially when Paul’s normal pattern in his epistles was to be very meticulous and thorough when presenting to the saints the oracles of God; yet here he goes no further than to write to them “Remember you not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” It is evident Paul felt it was wisdom to trust the Holy Spirit to help them recall these pertinent things, for he continues with “you know what withholds that he might be revealed in his time.” Hence it seems evident that the Apostle Paul under the unction of the Holy Spirit was writing with great carefulness and was unwilling to formally document those things which he had obviously communicated to them in person. Plus, in those days, delivering a letter was considerably costlier, more laborious, and time-consuming than merely writing one; especially compared to the ease of email correspondence nowadays. So it wouldn’t have been prudent for Paul to be so vague in his letter unless it was intentional. Also, let’s not fail to note that it is only in 2nd Thessalonians 2:5 that Paul can be found imploring his readers to “Remember you not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things,” making this a clear departure from Paul’s normal manner of wholly giving himself to clearly define “these things” whether in person or letter. Therefore, Paul had to believe there was more wisdom in being vague and petitioning them to recall, than there was in establishing an official document outlining “these things” with Silvanus, Timothy and his name being attached to it." Edited March 27 by BlindSeeker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilohsfoal Posted March 28 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 28 (edited) 2 hours ago, BlindSeeker said: Thank you for the clear statement. While I do believe Trump is indeed mentioned in scripture, and his position as POTUS, being that of one exercising all power and authority over America, I can not identify with him as meeting the requirements of “the man of sin.” 1st Thessalonians 2:3 – Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there comes a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition. My reluctance is due to the fact that the phrase “son of perdition” is only used twice in scripture, once by Jesus specifically in reference to Judas - who ended up being a false apostle, and again above by Paul used in my opinion and that of many in reference to the Papacy which by Catholicism is said to be overseen by a continuation of “apostles” ( a position or office similar to POTUS or high priest, which only one man at a time fills), which are now referred to as “popes” or the “the papacy.” Historically, in the eyes of true Protestants, all the popes have all been false apostles and betrayers of truth, antichrists promoting another gospel and Jesus by another spirit, just as surely as Judas was possessed of the devil... Much more can be stated, but I will simply submit my reasoning on this here in a chapter I wrote called “Giving Way to the Rise of The Son of Perdition.” At first, it all may seem irrelevant to the particular topic, and it might require some patience, but I assure you it is relative and, IMHO, fundamental to one properly understanding both the term “the son of perdition" and the rise thereof. Furthermore, I think it would be prudent for all, especially the earnest seeker of the truth, to ask what scriptural and historical justification those early protestant commentators have for interpreting "son of perdition" they did and attributing it to Catholicism and the papacy... For some clarification, I am including a brief excerpt to present part of vagueness around this phrase, and the criticalness of the context of "he that will let (prevent), will let until he be taken out of the way." (Note - there is a downloadable mp3 - duration 58 min.) "[I am] ...asking the question, “Why didn’t Paul just articulate these things again in more detail in his epistle?” With a matter of such significant importance, what could be his reason for not putting forth a clear and coherent teaching on this apostasy which the Holy Spirit had revealed to him was going to take place? Especially when Paul’s normal pattern in his epistles was to be very meticulous and thorough when presenting to the saints the oracles of God; yet here he goes no further than to write to them “Remember you not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” It is evident Paul felt it was wisdom to trust the Holy Spirit to help them recall these pertinent things, for he continues with “you know what withholds that he might be revealed in his time.” Hence it seems evident that the Apostle Paul under the unction of the Holy Spirit was writing with great carefulness and was unwilling to formally document those things which he had obviously communicated to them in person. Plus, in those days, delivering a letter was considerably costlier, more laborious, and time-consuming than merely writing one; especially compared to the ease of email correspondence nowadays. So it wouldn’t have been prudent for Paul to be so vague in his letter unless it was intentional. Also, let’s not fail to note that it is only in 2nd Thessalonians 2:5 that Paul can be found imploring his readers to “Remember you not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things,” making this a clear departure from Paul’s normal manner of wholly giving himself to clearly define “these things” whether in person or letter. Therefore, Paul had to believe there was more wisdom in being vague and petitioning them to recall, than there was in establishing an official document outlining “these things” with Silvanus, Timothy and his name being attached to it." I can't see the Pope giving Israel his armed forces to abolish the daily sacrifice.Mainly because the Pope has no armed forces. Paul in 2Thes2 was talking about the king of the north in Daniel 11. 2 Thes 2 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Daniel 11 36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Besides that,the Pope has no abomination that causes desolation in his arsenal because the Pope has no arsenal. Edited March 28 by Shilohsfoal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted March 28 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,041 Content Per Day: 0.52 Reputation: 426 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 28 41 minutes ago, Shilohsfoal said: I can't see the Pope giving Israel his armed forces to abolish the daily sacrifice.Mainly because the Pope has no armed forces. Paul in 2Thes2 was talking about the king of the north in Daniel 11. 2 Thes 2 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Daniel 11 36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Besides that,the Pope has no abomination that causes desolation in his arsenal because the Pope has no arsenal. What you believe and preach was actually first preached by a French Catholic monk known as Adso of Montier-en-Der who died in 992 A.D. He was a prolific writer of poems, hymns, and biographies of the lives of saints. However, perhaps his most famous work was his “Letter to Queen Gerberga on the Place and Time of Antichrist,” which became known as the “Little Book on the Antichrist.” He wrote this as he was prompted of her to give sound reason why the pre-reformation protestants, the anabaptists and such, the true church reject the papacy and its heresy, why they were wrong and they, Catholicism, were right. Seriously, you need to do some deeper research.... If you would have read the things I submitted concerning the man of sin, you would know how I feel about your perspective. If you would read it, then would be easier for you to see why it was wisdom for Paul to be elusive and not to write in his Epistle to the Thessalonians that Rome was what was hindering Catholicism from rising, since it was going to have to fall first in order to make way for the great apostasy and the son of perdition. Furthermore, as I stated earlier, (maybe another thread ) the phrase “son of perdition” is only used twice in scripture, once by Jesus in reference to Judas who ended up being a false apostle, and here again used by Paul in reference to the Papacy which by Catholicism is said to be overseen by a continuation of apostles now referred to as popes. However, in the eyes of true Protestants, the popes have all been false apostles and betrayers of truth, just as surely as Judas was. 2nd Thessalonians 2:3 – Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposes and exalts 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. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? [How that God will judge His people, and afterwards will likewise judge those nations whereby He chastised those who are called by His name, causing those nations to fall?] 6 And now ye know what withholds [Rome] that he [the false apostle] might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he [Rome] who now lets will let [prevent his rise], until he [Rome] be taken out of the way [falls]. 8 And then shall that Wicked [lawless one] be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Another point that was succinctly stated by Bible commentator Adam Clarke that is noteworthy – “After the death of Christ the temple of Jerusalem is never called by the apostles the temple of God; and if at any time they make mention of the house or temple of God, they mean the Church in general, or every particular believer. Whoever will consult (*verses next page) will want no examples to prove that, under the Gospel dispensation, the temple of God is the Church of Christ; and the man of sin sitting implies this ruling and presiding there; and sitting there as God implies his claiming Divine authority in things spiritual as well as temporal; and showing himself that he is God, implies his doing it with ostentation.” *Verses referenced by Adam Clarke above: 1st Corinthians 3:16 – Know you not that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple you are. 2nd Corinthians 6:16 – And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? for you are the temple of the living God; as God has said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 1st Timothy 3:15 – But if I tarry long, that you may know how you ought to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. Revelation 3:12 – Him that overcomes will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him My new name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilohsfoal Posted March 28 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 28 10 hours ago, BlindSeeker said: What you believe and preach was actually first preached by a French Catholic monk known as Adso of Montier-en-Der who died in 992 A.D. He was a prolific writer of poems, hymns, and biographies of the lives of saints. However, perhaps his most famous work was his “Letter to Queen Gerberga on the Place and Time of Antichrist,” which became known as the “Little Book on the Antichrist.” He wrote this as he was prompted of her to give sound reason why the pre-reformation protestants, the anabaptists and such, the true church reject the papacy and its heresy, why they were wrong and they, Catholicism, were right. Seriously, you need to do some deeper research.... If you would have read the things I submitted concerning the man of sin, you would know how I feel about your perspective. If you would read it, then would be easier for you to see why it was wisdom for Paul to be elusive and not to write in his Epistle to the Thessalonians that Rome was what was hindering Catholicism from rising, since it was going to have to fall first in order to make way for the great apostasy and the son of perdition. Furthermore, as I stated earlier, (maybe another thread ) the phrase “son of perdition” is only used twice in scripture, once by Jesus in reference to Judas who ended up being a false apostle, and here again used by Paul in reference to the Papacy which by Catholicism is said to be overseen by a continuation of apostles now referred to as popes. However, in the eyes of true Protestants, the popes have all been false apostles and betrayers of truth, just as surely as Judas was. 2nd Thessalonians 2:3 – Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposes and exalts 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. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? [How that God will judge His people, and afterwards will likewise judge those nations whereby He chastised those who are called by His name, causing those nations to fall?] 6 And now ye know what withholds [Rome] that he [the false apostle] might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he [Rome] who now lets will let [prevent his rise], until he [Rome] be taken out of the way [falls]. 8 And then shall that Wicked [lawless one] be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Another point that was succinctly stated by Bible commentator Adam Clarke that is noteworthy – “After the death of Christ the temple of Jerusalem is never called by the apostles the temple of God; and if at any time they make mention of the house or temple of God, they mean the Church in general, or every particular believer. Whoever will consult (*verses next page) will want no examples to prove that, under the Gospel dispensation, the temple of God is the Church of Christ; and the man of sin sitting implies this ruling and presiding there; and sitting there as God implies his claiming Divine authority in things spiritual as well as temporal; and showing himself that he is God, implies his doing it with ostentation.” *Verses referenced by Adam Clarke above: 1st Corinthians 3:16 – Know you not that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple you are. 2nd Corinthians 6:16 – And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? for you are the temple of the living God; as God has said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 1st Timothy 3:15 – But if I tarry long, that you may know how you ought to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. Revelation 3:12 – Him that overcomes will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him My new name. Adso of Montier-en-Der is not the first person to teach what Daniel wrote about the king of the north.Daniel is. Daniel is the first person to say the king of the north will exalt himself above all. Daniel 11 36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Paul is the second person who would say he will exalt himself above all. 2 Thes 2 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. So you are wrong about Adso of Montier-en-Derbeing the first person to teach this.Daniel wrote it long before Adso of Montier-en-Der was born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted March 28 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 597 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,116 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,847 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Online Share Posted March 28 2 minutes ago, Shilohsfoal said: So you are wrong He's a lot more likely to give thought to what you are saying if you leave this part out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilohsfoal Posted March 28 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 28 (edited) 9 minutes ago, other one said: He's a lot more likely to give thought to what you are saying if you leave this part out What he said is that Adso of Montier-en-Der is the first person to say what I'm saying. He is wrong.Daniel is the first person to have written about the man of sin who will exalt himself above all. Daniel 11 36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Paul later wrote of the same man who would exalt himself above all.Paul ,having been a Pharisees would have been familiar with the book of Daniel. Thes 2 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Edited March 28 by Shilohsfoal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi Posted March 28 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 57 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,767 Content Per Day: 1.02 Reputation: 317 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted March 28 On 3/23/2024 at 10:37 AM, Shilohsfoal said: My post borders on blasphemy or the people who believe Trump is Christ or is in Christ borders on blasphemy,? I'm posting what some people believe .I have not said what I believe in this thread.Just what some of Trump's followers have said. You know what else there Shilohsfoal? About a month ago Trump had a video made of himself, showing himself as a Messiah. Evangelical communities said the video was in bad taste, but did not denounce him. 2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warrior12 Posted March 28 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 54 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,428 Content Per Day: 0.88 Reputation: 1,516 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/05/2016 Status: Online Share Posted March 28 20 minutes ago, luigi said: You know what else there Shilohsfoal? About a month ago Trump had a video made of himself, showing himself as a Messiah. Evangelical communities said the video was in bad taste, but did not denounce him. 2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. where is that video to be found ?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi Posted March 28 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 57 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,767 Content Per Day: 1.02 Reputation: 317 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted March 28 4 minutes ago, warrior12 said: where is that video to be found ?. Here is one link below to it. It was back in January, however, 2 months ago, not one month ago, when Trump made a video of himself as the Messiah. There are many more links to this by the way, if you google it. https://www.npr.org/2024/01/26/1227070827/a-video-making-the-rounds-online-depicts-trump-as-a-messiah-like-figure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts