Who is the Antichrist?

[OneLight]

When it comes to debating the rapture or the Antichrist or anything else in prophesy, I am reminded of this little piece of scripture:

For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.

I know this speaks of Love, and my walk in Christ, but I can also see how this can point to our seeking to understand the future.

Gods Peace to All,

Onelight

[yaqub]

I have not ruled out the possibility that the anti-Christ may be Islamic in some form.

Islam is anti-Christ in nature ("God has no son" is a common Islamic saying.)

There is also a strong Islamic belief that there is coming a TRUE Messiah (in their minds), and Lord and Savior type figure, who will arise. His arrival and ascension will also be accompanied by war and massive death.....including the extermination of Christians and Jews. But then again, that's just guessing on my part.

We all guess, whether we admit it or not, especially when we talk about the End Times. Some better guessing (intelligent guessing rather than random) than others, but in almost everyone's case, we all have to make a jump here or there. There is nothing wrong with making a good guess. We do that in every day life as well. We guess (predict) where the next car is going to be in the next few seconds in order that we don't bang into it.

As for Islam and Antichrist connection, there is strong anti-parallelism between the End Times figures:

Al-Mahdi compared to AC:

http://al-mahdi.atspace.com/al-mahdi.html

Isa (Muslim version of Jesus) compared to False Prophet:

http://al-mahdi.atspace.com/isa.html

ad-Dajjal (Muslim version of Antichrist) compared to Two Witnesses:

http://al-mahdi.atspace.com/dajjal.html

[damo1]

damo1

i think he is bugs bunney i am going to have him toingiht for dinner with potatoes and karots and onions in a big pot cooked in wine and on saturday i am going to borow a gun and go out and kil a wild bore as the anti christ loves to be a pig at times so i wil have enough pork to last me of course a young wild bore

and then i might write a letter to our prime minster teling him he is the next anti christ

[Grungekid]

I believe the Antichrist to be an employee at the IRS.

HA!!!

Where did you get this? That's just delightful!

So final verdict: should I spend any of my precious time reading this stuff?

[Grungekid]

Regardless, the only way you've been defending your case is by attacking my character, calling me names and telling me im delusional, simply because we disagree. While that's elementary at best, it also goes to show that dispensationalism cannot be proved soley by fact. You have to attack my character and break down my reputation so that by the time i make a statement, it seems as though i am whatever you want me to be.

Forget about him, then. I didn't insult you, did I? I didn't mean to. In any case, that shouldn't be evidence of the invalidity of the position, just the inabillity of the proponent.

You take statements i make and generalize them. I have never said, nor implied, that the Bible was written by stone age Jews. What I said was that Jews were given liberty to write the Bible in their own words. Of course it was God inspired, and because of that, the Jews didn't mess up the story. But it's not as though God floated down into their heads and controlled their hands.

No, He didn't, but He did enable them to write the correct things, did He not?

I have never denied Christ's miracles. I merely showed how Christ's miracles were misinturpreted. The sad thing is that i can be open to accepting things i dont know, such as the creation of the world. I believe its more than 6000 years old, but i have no proof or evidence, so im open to that. Yet you seem to be closed to your own inturpretations, and therefore hostile to those which you disagree with. Its sad, really. Not very Christ like, and if that's how you're trying to live your life, i'd be a little more mature than that.

No, Christ would stand for the truth. He did, and He openly rejected plenty of ideas that weren't true without spending too much time arguing with people. I know how that sounds, but the simple fact is that people need truth, and it doesn't change. We can't be open in the sense your suggesting: constantly being ready to change our ideas when ever someone comes along and tells us to. Truth doesn't change, and one is justified in not being so ready to change their beliefs if they truly hold them to be true.

Also, it's not necessary to constantly go through the process of argumentation whenever someone disagrees. Some things are just false, and more frequently, even the strongest argument won't change any opinions, or even prove anything.

All that said, there is a time and place for close-mindedness. Rude behavior isn't the way to go, however.

I cant count how many times i've told you to research it. You havent. If you don't believe i'm right, then researching it should only back that up. You have quoted several scriptures to me, and every time i offer correct inturpretation, you deny it and attack my character. Its really sad, and honestly makes me angry. Please be an adult about our conversation. We can respectfully agree to disagree. If you would like to debate, i'm fine with that.

I remember what happened the last time you brought evidence to the table. It was aptly discredited.

But i am finished being a punching bag for you. I am done listening to you misinturpret scripture and then gloat when you think you've found victory.

Do you ever stop to think maybe you're the one being obstinant? I'm not trying to insult you, but even in my short stay on these boards, you are constantly bringing up your ideas about revelation, and they never change. I have seen evidence you have provided, and it has been proven to be inaccurate. Even then, you don't seem reluctant to continue making the same claims about the truth of God's word.

[Grungekid]

Which of my claims has shown inaccurate? The way the internet is set up, im sure there are thousands of websites and "scholars" and opinions that are very eloquent and could do a good job trying to prove me wrong. And i may not be a historian or a scholar myself, but the things i say are true.

You gave a time for revelation's composition that was inaccurate, if I remember correctly. Without that, the whole idea fell through. It's been a while since that thread, so I'll have to say something if we come to that subject again.

Also, look at the last sentence in that paragraph a couple times, then tell me how it compares to the people you describe.

There has to be absolute truth, Grungekid. Rapture theology, the thoughts on the Antichrist, the Tribulation period, none of it allows room for absolute truth. People who believe Rapture theology must continuously try to spin verses to make themselves correct instead of just reading the Word the way it was meant to be read.

The absolute truth is the bible, that's all there is to it. As to rapture theology and the antichrist, and the tribulation, I think it's clearly evident that something is going on in Revelation that hasn't yet occured. The meeting of all the kingdoms at Meggido, for example, and the reference to the figure on the white horse definitely hasn't been seen as of yet in the historical theater, that I know of. When you say 'read the Word as it was meant to be read' I think that only strengthens the opposite argument. People read the bible and take for granted what it actually says. The book of Revelation does actually say that there will be a time of tribulation, and that it is yet to come. What more are we supposed to be reading?

Mark 13:1-2

1As he was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!"

2"Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

I have mentioned before how Revelation was prophecy of the fall of Jerusalem. People "discredit" me and "prove me inaccurate" soley by their misinterpretation of the Bible. People often use the prophecy of Daniel, Mark 13, the entire book of Revelation to support Rapture theology. In the first two verses of Mark 13, Jesus speaks to his disciples and says "not one stone here will be left on another..." How do you reconcile that he's speaking of the Rapture? He's speaking of the coming destruction of Jerusalem.

But Thoughtful, Jerusalem had already fallen to the Roman empire when the book was written. What fall are you speaking of?

Mark 13:3-8

3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 "Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?" 5 Jesus said to them: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 6Many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and will deceive many. 7 When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 8 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes in various places, and famines. These are the beginning of birth pains"

People often use this verse as well, to denote false prophets coming in the End Days. But keeping it in context of the preceding verses, it fits quite well with the fall of Jerusalem. The Jews were looking for a Messiah, someone to deliver them from Rome. Jesus was warning them that He was the Messiah, although his approach was not one that the Jews would be looking for, because he wasnt coming with a sword to deliver them from Rome. Wars and rumors of wars were just that, rumors of wars on Israel. The earthquakes and famines were exaggetory, not literal. Jesus was speaking to them in a way they would understand, using the context of their culture. Without understanding their culture, how can we claim to know what Jesus meant?

Jesus was not talking about the period of His death, Thoughtful. There is no evidence that the time of His death was the time He was refering to.

My views are definitely out numbered here. But just because there are enough people here to twist verses and misinterpret scripture does not mean i've been discredited.

I hope you know you're being very paranoid, although I can understand how the overwhelming opposition could lead to such problems.

[irishcowboy]

This is a series of messages dedicated to showing who the Antichrist really is. Please do not make any comments to me or about these messages unless you read them. Please don't just mock them or anything.....If you are a true Christian, you will consider all views and then compare them with the Bible and not immediately reject them. So, if you are an open-minded Christian as you ought to be, then these messages are for you....

Who is the Antichrist - Part 1

Who is the Antichrist - Part 2

Who is the Antichrist - Part 3

these messages are quite long and in depth. I hope God will bless you as you read them. again, I am not saying you have to believe what I believe, just consider it...

Ah! Good old fashioned 'Catholic Bashing!' Is there anything like it?

Why don't you just give us the Readers Digest version by saying: "I hate the Pope, and I think you should too. THE END"

i was most certainly not bashing the pope, he is not the Antichrist! Like I said, don't leave any comments unless you read it (edited by moderator - please keep the discussion on the issues not our opinion on how peoples actions reflect on their intelligence).

It certainly IS Rome bashing. There was nothing new here, this is all very very old stuff. You could have taken most of it from the margin notes of the Geneva Bible of 1560! But I didn't claim you said the Pope was the antichrist....do pay attention my boy!

My main point is really that the problem with Christians today is they'd rather know about antichrist than JESUS CHRIST!

The only reason why people need to know who the Antichrist really is, is because the whole world believes that it will be one man at the end of time and it mst certainly will not be. He will supposedly rise duriing the seven year tribulation........I've got news for ya.......There is no seven year tribulation!!!!!! If you want to believe in man-made traditions of Antichrist, go ahead, but I am just simply suggesting the most biblical way of interpreting prophecy truth. The seventy weeks ended a long long time ago.....if you don't believe that, don't take it up with me, you are going to have to explain to God why you believed that you were going to have a second chance during the seven year trib. People want sin so bad that they actually came up with a doctrine that says you will have a second chance. and since sin is so attractive, people believe it because thats what they want! If you are counting on a seven year trib and an antichrist during those days, you are heading down the wrong path my friend.....god Bless and I hope you will soon see the light of Bible truth.

editing out comments on post... heard this teaching before, before you was even born.... mike

[Grungekid]

editing out comments on post... heard this teaching before, before you was even born.... mike

And... is it wrong, or what?

[Guest Lazyday]

editing out comments on post... heard this teaching before, before you was even born.... mike

And... is it wrong, or what?

The Pope is the only one who fulfills all the scripture about the Anti-Messiah. The time is not yet for him to show his hand.

[cymba22]

editing out comments on post... heard this teaching before, before you was even born.... mike

And... is it wrong, or what?

The Pope is the only one who fulfills all the scripture about the Anti-Messiah. The time is not yet for him to show his hand.

Which pope? they have been saying this since the time king James was a prince...its why he changed the 616 to 666 to fit the then pope...who btw died....oh and none of the popes have fitted the requirments to be the a/c....