WatchmanOnTheWall
Well-known member
A
Last edited:
WARNING! Apostasy about to happen.
- Thread starter WatchmanOnTheWall
- Start date
The apostasy has already happened. The historical Gospel of Jesus Christ is no longer taught in the organized church. The man of sin is the pope who claims to be the vicar of Christ.
Epoisses
New member
No Gentile would ever be allowed to sit in a rebuilt temple so it pretty much narrows it down to who it will be.
Epoisses
New member
I agree. No Muslim will sit in a Jewish temple....dur!
genuineoriginal
New member
Don't let anyone deceive you.
2 Thessalonians 2:3 is not talking about the same person as Daniel 11:38-39.
People that claim they are talking about the same person are trying to deceive you.
Epoisses
New member
I hope you miss the top step in your fallout bunker and fall into the barrel anti-radiation jelly!
CherubRam
New member
Apostasy entered the congregations after the disciples died.
CherubRam
New member
The book of Revelation gives the answer. The (name / title) of the man and the (name / title) of the (beast / nation.) Rome was once where Satan sits. Who says they are God on earth? Who claims the things belonging to God is in his possession.
KingdomRose
New member
Wise words! Don't be deceived. The Apostasy happened 2,000 years ago, after the death of the last Apostle. The apostle Paul warned of this, and said that sometime after he "went away" the church would be infiltrated by "wolves," and this certainly took place. From the end of the first century onward, the church was adulterated with twisted teachings.
"I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves." (Acts 20:29,30)
This apostasy arose quickly and subverted Christ's pure teaching. Pagan-influenced doctrines such as the Trinity and Hell-fire started to be taught. Even the teaching that "Anti-Christ" is a single man who is yet to show up on the scene is a twisted teaching. Look closely at the Scriptures....."anti-christ" has been influencing the congregations since the Apostles were on the earth. John said that even thenanti-christ was among them, and there were MANY (I John 2:18; 4:3), not just a single individual.
"Every spirit that confesseth notthat Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." (I John 4:3, KJV)
The "antichrist" is shown to be---not an individual person, but---a spiritual backwardness, a misleading spiritual stance, taken into the general cast of mind of those who were determined to influence the "flock" away from the truth. This "antichrist" can be identified as the religious institutions that have been lording it over billions of people for centuries. It can be compared to "the man of lawlessness" or "the son of perdition of 2 Thessalonians. This refers to a religious institution that considers itself on the level of God (think: what comes to mind when I think of a very high-ranking clergyman in expensive garb sitting on a gilded throne). This has been evident for many centuries, all the way back to the first millennium after Christ.
"Let no one seduce you in any manner, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes firt and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction. He is set in opposition and lifts himself up over everyone who is called 'god'or an object of reverence, so that he sits down in the temple of God, publicly showing himself to be a god." (2 Thess. 2:3,4)
Don't look for an individual. "Anti-christ" has been here for 2,000 years. The deception has been quite thorough and extensive and even mistaken for something Godly.
And here is the correct interpretation of 2 Thess 2:1-3 !!
The CONTEXT OF 2 Thess 1-3 is CAUGHT UP / PAROUSIA !!
So the correct interpretation of verse 3 is NOT FALLING AWAY , but a DEPARTURE of the B O C and then in verse 3 The man of sin should be Revealed !!
Then God will in verse 11 , well send them the superhuman power of ERROR for them to believe a LIE , to those left behind !!
The Greek word APOSTASIA has many other meaning as it is a transliterated word !!
dan p
I do not know that I can agree with you. However, my studies of scripture and history apart from Islam, studying the Bible and not knowing history beyond it, I do not know what to think. Meaning, I am against sensationalism, such as with end times things. Remember it was said, in these last days. So, if we can, we should be able to fill in the blanks. And from Torah to Jesus there is much that we can learn. As for Islam I am not a Muslim, and I believe many Muslims study Jewish and Christian things, perhaps coming to understand God's Word as it was meant to be understood. That said, many are not Muslims but of Ishmael or other, commonly misunderstood. It is possible to have once been a Muslim. I have only had thoughts about whether or not I am. After becoming acquainted with Muslims and as my memory is far removed from that acquaintance. But I grew up Christian, debated an Imam shared Christ with him, and I am a proselyte to and or of Israel. My contact with Muslims has been minimal, with attention to hospitality as a man not a woman and one whose old High School Gym was used for a meeting.
The United States of America.
Shalom.
Jacob
nikolai_42
Well-known member
If I might make a couple of observations on prophetic interpretation. First a couple of scriptures :
And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Matthew 17:10-12
The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven.
He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red.
And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?
A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.
Matthew 16:1-4
If you read the scriptures, you find many examples of prophecy being given and men missing the fulfillment of it because they were not looking aright. John the Baptist didn't have the name "Elijah" and didn't claim so to be - and Israel missed it (in large numbers). Jesus came in a manner and with a pedigree the religious leaders wouldn't even tolerate and so they rejected Him as Messiah. Jesus made the point to them (above) that they were looking for the wrong thing and it was because of their unbelief. The signs of the times are timeless and are unmistakable in any context (for the one really looking for them). But if someone is relying on names, titles, personalities etc..., they are looking to something that is liable to bring a misconception. Even the disciples expected Jesus to liberate Israel from Rome - and they were deeply disappointed (to say the least) when He didn't do what they expected Him to do (and this from their own prophets!).
The Lord revealed Himself to those who looked for Him a first time and He will return a second time unto salvation for those that, again are looking...FOR HIM. But we don't look for the description of a man's appearance or any political entity or king that will supposedly exist in the day of either Christ or Anti-Christ (whenever that be). Rather, we look at the signs of the times themselves. So when we read of descriptions of those who are to come (like the Man of Sin), we are not reading a newspaper clipping but rather a spiritual biography of someone (or something) that is of immense import to the church. Paul did, after all, say these things to the Thessalonian church to keep them from looking for the return of Christ before something else occurred. I believe many of them were concerned and had left jobs, homes etc...(I may have this point wrong) because they didn't want to miss Christ's return. Paul wrote back to set their minds at ease and have them looking, rather, to keep on doing what they had been doing in serving Christ :
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,
Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.
2 Thessalonians 2:15-17
With that said, he did tell them that there was something that would have to precede Christ's return : the unveiling of the Man of Sin. I won't tell you what I believe is being said specifically about the withholding and what the precise identity of the MoS is (since my aim is to communicate what I see being important about Paul's letter) but rather the characteristics of the deception that he warns the Thessalonians about.
To claim that some political leader, religious figure or charismatic figure will be the undoing of the faith of the entire Christian world (nominal though they be) is not only (I believe) unfaithful to the text of scripture, but it flies in the face of the extent of deception that already works in the church today according to the Eastern Mysticism that has infiltrated many of the churches so radically. One man is really going to be more of a deceiving influence than a whole movement? I'm not saying all churches are so infiltrated, and I'm not saying it is the great deception, but in keeping with my comments above - the scriptures are not telling us to be on our guard over a man. We don't, after all, wrestle against flesh and blood but against powers and principalities and spiritual wickedness in high places.
Keeping that in mind I have a few short points about the famous passage in 2 Thessalonians 2 :
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, shewing himself that he is God.
2 Thessalonians 2:3-4
1. Here we have someone saying "I am God" (or so it seems). Such a claim even Jesus didn't come out and make in such a blatant, obvious and direct way. Rather, He let His works and His words speak for Him. Anyone can make such ludicrous claims, but what man - sitting at the table across from you - will be able to back up the claim "I am God"? None. At best he will be considered a holy prophet. But this passage isn't talking about a mere prophet or someone simply speaking for God - this is about some entity claiming Godhood above all else.
2. This entity/man puts him (or it) self into the temple. Again...to assert that someone walks into a rebuilt temple and claims to be God (and as a result is worshipped as God) is just plain silliness. This exaltation described in verse 4 goes well beyond just a claim and a physical location.
3. Importantly, we have two things here that strongly suggest something far more insidious. First, the MoS opposes and exalts himself above God or that is worshipped (!) SO THAT he AS GOD sits in the temple of God. This is not describing a physical placement bringing about acceptance as God - rather, this is accepted worship of the MoS bringing him in to the temple of God. He is worshipped SO THAT he is in the temple. NOT being in the temple bringing him worship. And his sitting in the temple of God here implies no physical walking in or physical taking of a seat - it implies very strongly a spiritual delusion that causes men to worship a lie.
4. Secondly, Paul use the Greek word naos where we have it translated as temple. In all his letters, that term is used only in a spiritual sense. The church (not the building) is the temple of God. This is the way Paul uses the term in all his letters (1 Cor 3:16-17, I Cor 6:19, 2 Cor 6:16, Eph 2:21 and here in 2 Thess 2:4 being assumed). And all its uses in Revelation are arguably spiritual as well.
So we don't have someone who is simply claiming Godhood, we have something or someone taking the place of God in the church. In a spiritual sense, it is impossible to do so as a localized individual. In a physical sense, the only entity that has even possibly fulfilled that is the Papacy (Vicar of Christ being a term given only to the Holy Spirit, for example). The Reformers - almost to a man - believed that. It was central to much of their theology. It can't be so easily dismissed as ludicrous.
But again, if there is a further expression of the Spirit of Antichrist, there is nothing that I can see that would prevent that. If we are looking for names and/or faces and/or political characters to fulfill prophecies, we are missing the point. That is just as easy a way to be deceived (or at least confused) as anything.
That would be like demanding a Caterpillar to fly to prove he is also has the butterfly in him yet to be manifested, just because you can't say your a Son of God because you think like a son of man is your lack of faith/foresight in who your are, that's not some humble pious position! its unbelief.
KingdomRose
New member
The church has already fallen away en mass. The "Antichrist" is not an individual but an all-pervasive attitude of seeking to deceive people away from the truth. Paul warned of this back in the first century, as we read at Acts 20:29,30: "I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them."
This has happened, with the result being what we see today as Christendom---false Christianity. It shows itself as the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, and all of the denominations that came from them.
There will be no individual Antichrist. We already have this Anti-christ in all the religious organizations of self-proclaimed Christians who are not really following Christ, as can be seen by their works. Satan has already got people to believe in his disgusting religious organizations that speak out of one side of their mouths and act like Satan himself behind closed doors. Don't be waiting for an individual who will never come, and a rebuilt temple that will never be rebuilt.
nikolai_42
Well-known member
Note the order and the full passage :
And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
Matthew 17:10-13
Jeus FIRST makes the statement about Elijah coming first and restoring all things. THEN He says that Elijah had already come! Not that he would come later. Matthew even makes it clear for the reader (in case they hadn't realized it) that Jesus was talking about Elijah. The point here is not the name or identity of the individual but rather the role and purpose that person fulfills. Otherwise, they should have been looking for someone who looked like Elijah (and how would they know that?).
Apparently it meant something to Jesus and it should have meant something to the scribes and Pharisees. Jesus' point was that they were looking for some big sign - some emphatic outworking that would mark the prophetic importance of (in this case) Jesus arriving as Messiah - but what they were looking for wasn't going to help them in identifying what was important. On the other hand, what about a man such as Simeon who didn't get any big sign or manifestation? All he saw was a little baby :
And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.
And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.
And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,
Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,
Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:
For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,
Luke 2:25-30
There was nothing for him to note (externally) that this was the promised Messiah, but he knew it because he understood what was going on spiritually and could discern the times - and had been promised by God to see His salvation. No externals. All spiritual. So when it came to the Pharisees, their desire for a sign showed their unbelief. As such, Jesus' comments about the signs of the times are VERY important. One need not have a knowledge about the (outward) identity of the antichrist is to know what is necessary for him to arise. Paul described that very well and showed what was happening in the church in the midst of the Man of Sin's ascendancy. Nowhere, however, did he say who this would be. He only gave spiritual indicators. That's exactly what the Pharisees were promised. After all, more signs and wonders weren't going to make them believe anyway (Luke 16:31).
Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
John 10:24-25
That vague drivel is necessary to understand what I'm trying to say. My point is that everyone who came on here has said (essentially) "You've got the wrong man - this is the right man!" and proceeds to produce a new identity. My point (and I admit it sounded like I wasn't going to identify anyone, not well-worded, sorry) there is that I do believe there is a MoS, but that the identifying characteristics are at least as important as a name. In that sense, the identification is less important than an actual name. And if - as I believe - it goes beyond a single person alive at a single point in time, then the spiritual description of such an entity becomes more useful than the name or title. You can't obscure an individual's identity - but you can obscure something bigger. As movements grow, they take on a life of their own. And so what qualifies (for example) as true Christianity becomes more complex than picking someone out of a lineup. But if you're looking for a single person, all you need to do is describe his external features.
Consider also that the Lord will destroy the Man of Sin with the brightness of His coming. He calls it the mystery of iniquity (2 Thessalonians 2:7). Is that a single man? Is that a single individual that necessitates such spectacular judgment? I will admit that I may be wrong about the Papacy being THE Man of Sin (I also question whether the MoS and the Antichrist are necessarily identical with one another - but that's not a sticking point here). But what I find very important is that the characteristics described here are far beyond any one man whose life spans 80 or even 100 years. We are dealing with something well beyond that - something that cannot be properly localized in a single individual.
There again, I would raise the point that just because someone calls themselves Christian doesn't mean they are of God. In fact, the whole point of deception is that things aren't really as they appear to be on the surface. Do those who know the Lord trust in Mary for their spiritual provision? Do those who know the Lord believe in a Mass that essentially recrucifies Christ every time it is had and is plainly said to be the key to the RC sacramental system?
If I can point something out - the beast is not a single person. Daniel clearly calls the beasts empires. Revelation picks up where Daniel leaves off. So if you are going to be consistent, you need to realize that this is much bigger than some individual. And if you want to equate the Mahdi with the Man of Sin, you need to demonstrate how the apostasy and the Mahdi appearing in the temple are directly linked. And what lying signs and wonders does he bring? Your OP strings 2 verses together and comes to a conclusion on the strength of that alone. You want brief, but when brevity sacrifices accuracy it is counter-productive.
Again...my point is that while I do believe that the Man of Sin can be identified (and may or may NOT be the same thing as THE Antichrist), the important thing is to have a spiritual biography of this man, entity (or whatever you or others might think it is) before coming to any conclusions about the name. You called Roman Catholicism the largest Christian denomination. That right there is an example of being more focused on names than descriptions.
Last edited: