Islam the Opposite

It is important to note that there are 1.5 billion antichrists in Islam. The single most important fundamental in Mohammedanism, "shirk", is manifest in specific denial that God has a Son. Indeed if a Muslim were to confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God he would have committed the only unpardonable sin in Islam. They believe that all other sins are atoned for, near or in hell for a spell, before proceeding on to heaven. But declaring that Jesus is the Son of God would result in permanent condemnation according to their false prophet Mohammed.

1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also].

More important to understand is that Islam is to Christianity as the negative is to a photograph. That is to say that Mohammed (channeling Satan who appeared to him as an angel of light) taught them what not to believe as above. Or

Surah 4.157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Even the internal evidence within this verse makes it ridiculous. Mohammed is quoting the Jews as saying "We killed Christ Jesus....". If the Jews recognized Jesus as their Christ, or Messiah, then why would they kill Him?

More importantly, not a single Christian for the last 2,000 years ever disbelieved that Jesus was crucified, because if a person didn't believe Jesus died on the cross (to save us from sin), they wouldn't be a Christian. Additionally, as far as I am aware there is not a single sect in Judaism that doesn't believe that Jesus died on the cross. In other words, Christians and Jews have never harbored a doubt that Jesus died on the cross.

Interestingly, while Mohammed/Satan taught Muslims what not to believe, he failed altogether to teach them who did die on the cross. This while at the same time confirming that the event happened. No Muslim can deny that it "appeared" that someone died on the cross. I encourage everyone to go out into Muslim forums and such and ask the simple question "Who died on the cross?". The number of answers you will receive will likely be as numerous as the Muslims you ask. "Jesus asked a disciple to die in His place, to later join Him in paradise, and so God put Jesus face on the disciple, but after He was crucified the Jews realized that the man had Jesus face, but not his body." Or "A Jew went into the house to get Jesus, but Jesus had already ascended into heaven, but when the man came back out of the house, he looked like Jesus, so they crucified him." And on and on in a dizzying array of confusion.

So ironically, while Christians and Jews are in complete resolve as to Jesus' crucifixion, Mohammed's followers are exactly as Mohammed described Christians and Jews "...those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow..."

Thus we see Islam emerge as the only religion whose adherents aren't taught what to believe but rather what not to believe, as the very core of it's doctrine.

Islam is the only anti-another-religion, religion, by design. Mohammed's/Satan's reign/bondage over those poor folks has continued for 1400 years, with another 1/4 of mankind in it's grip as I write. In view of the evidence above, whom might we consider as the false prophet, whose religion is the exact and perfect mirror opposite, of Christianity?

Is there evidence in prior verses Muhammad is addressing specifically Jews in Surah 4.157, not Christians, showing he is misrepresents the former by claiming they believed Jesus was the Messiah (the Christ).

What if a Muslim responds and says, Muhammad was not referring to the Jews, but to Christians?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Would you agree Muhammad is addressing specifically Jews in Surah 4.157, not to Christians as he misrepresents the former by claiming they believe Jesus was the Messiah.

---

Not sure I quite understand your question. Mohammed's audience is composed of those that have been deceived into following him through his book. To someone outside of Islam they would only need to read Sura 56 and Mohammed's preposterously carnal heaven, to see that it springs from the child-like imagination of a 7th century illiterate.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...n/056.qmt.html

In that verse Mohammed makes reference to all that were present - hundreds or perhaps thousands - at Jesus' crucifixion, whether Christian, Jew or pagan, that were all deceived into believing Jesus was crucified, when Mohammed claimed He wasn't.

I don't doubt the literature at the time, just like Mormons were under a cultural spell of various authors prior to the book of Mormon writing about how the Jews came to the Americas, so Joseph Smith fed off of that in creating the book of Mormon and plagiarizing from several sources.

So what I was thinking was that if Muhammad was addressing many people, he might not have meant the Jews specifically who obviously don't accept Jesus as the Christ, and therefore, it wouldn't be an internal contradiction.

But, since he can't be referring to the Jews, who else? He can't be addressing Christians because obviously Christians didn't kill Jesus. Christians love Jesus as the Christ, our Lord and Savior.

So it would seem strange not to refer to the Jews or the Christians, but to some other group of people. That's the internal contradiction. What was this other group of people at the time of the cross? Silly eh?

Muslims face an irreconcilable conundrum.

Surah 4:157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

That single verse denies ALL of the prophets and apostles of the New Testament and the WHOLE SUBJECT of the new covenant. The crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is what Christianity IS ABOUT. Yet God's people have followed Him for 3500 years through two covenants detailed in the 1600 year record of God to mankind through all of the prophets and witnesses of His Word.

Here's the Muslims conundrum:

sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

That is, of course, exactly what Christians do.

Sura 5:68 Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord." It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith.

So Christians and Jews are instructed to "judge by" and "stand fast by" "all the revelation that has come to us from our Lord.

So any claim that the bible was corrupted prior to the 7th century would suggest that Allah was clueless regarding history, when he made this recommendation in the 7th century.

To say the bible was corrupted later, would suggest that Allah was clueless regarding the future, otherwise why would he make such a what Muslims can only regard as misguided recommendation? Besides, to make the claim of corruption after the 7th century would be utterly preposterous, since we have over 5300 partial or complete manuscripts of God’s Word that were penned prior even to 300AD, in every popular language that was known to man, that were being read all over the known world. Let alone the Dead Sea Scrolls, some of which can be positively dated to 350BC, that were found in a cave at Qumran in 1947, that - particularly the Daniel scroll - verifies the textual integrity of the bible as we have received it. Indeed many centuries before Jesus was made manifest His crucifixion was prophesied:

Psalms 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for [his] only [son], and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for [his] firstborn.

So what do those Gospels that Mohammed's "Allah" told us to "judge" and "stand fast by" say?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Mark 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.

1John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son [to be] the propitiation for our sins.

1John 4:15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

My Muslim friends, even you believe that Jesus was the only person in human history to be conceived by a virgin, by the will of God. How could that possibly make Him not the Son of God?

1John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also].

1John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

Muslims deny that record.

John 19:34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

After his crucifixion, death and resurrection:

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Importantly:

John 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

Our Muslim friends, are you ready to stand in judgment before, Jesus Christ, the Word, the Son of the living God? You could die in a car accident tomorrow, or even of an aneurysm in the next few moments. Forever is a very long time.

Mohammed's is the only anti-another-religion, religion. Islam is antichrist.

Mohammed even gave Muslims advice similar to that which he gave Christians and Jews:

sura 4:136 O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and His Messenger, and the scripture which He hath sent to His Messenger and the scripture which He sent to those before (him). Any who denieth Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgment, hath gone far, far astray.

What do those books and messengers before Mohammed say?

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

How can a Muslim "believe in" "the scripture" that came before Mohammed if they haven't even read it?

Another interesting conundrum. Consider the verse that opens this page and then Mohammed's supposed quote of Jesus as a baby (that comes from an Arabic apocryphal fable that preceeded Mohammed):

Surah 19:33 "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"! 34 Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.

That death by crucifixion and resurrection to life again happened in three days.

It's no wonder that Mohammed himself even admitted, that he thought it was a demon that met him in the cave. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpsWnbApBNw

It would seem that Mohammed was given just enough rope to hang himself with his own words, and it's not like we weren't warned.

Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

But Mohammed came as a ravening wolf. Indeed as a single, 7th century, illiterate, pillaging, plundering, murdering, child doing, stepson's wife taking, sex slave capturing, slave pimping, concubine fornicating, bloody imperialistic coward and thief.

No Muslim has yet denied those characterizations of Mohammed because they are aware that their own books support every one of those characterizations.

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

I don't doubt the literature at the time, just like Mormons were under a cultural spell of various authors prior to the book of Mormon writing about how the Jews came to the Americas, so Joseph Smith fed off of that in creating the book of Mormon and plagiarizing from several sources.

So what I was thinking was that if Muhammad was addressing many people, he might not have meant the Jews specifically who obviously don't accept Jesus as the Christ, and therefore, it wouldn't be an internal contradiction.

---

Mohammed was addressing Muslims, but any Muslim will tell you that those who "boasted" of killing Jesus of that verse, was a reference to Jews.
Unfortunately there is no shortage of Christians that believe Jews killed Jesus too, perhaps failing to recognize that it was the sinful nature of mankind that killed Jesus. That it was you and I that killed Jesus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

But, since he can't be referring to the Jews, who else? He can't be addressing Christians because obviously Christians didn't kill Jesus. Christians love Jesus as the Christ, our Lord and Savior.

So it would seem strange not to refer to the Jews or the Christians, but to some other group of people. That's the internal contradiction. What was this other group of people at the time of the cross? Silly eh?

---

Of course he was talking to Muslims. He wasn't giving a seminar to Christians.

Try to understand what I am saying. The Jews don't call Jesus the Christ. You admitted this, so Muhammad was not referring to the Jews unless Muhammad made a mistake. Nor could Muhammad be referring to Christians, because Christians don't kill the Christ. So what other group could he be referring to? If there is no other group, it proves Muhammad has internally contradicted himself with his own material. So that is where the contradiction lies, not necessarily in merely saying the Jews killed their Jesus Christ. Christians have to be brought into the equation as well to fully show the internal contradiction by Muhammad.

Do you understand what I am saying?

Let me see if I understand this. Christians, the Qur'an says, are suppose to stand fast to the word of God, the law, the gospel, and revelation, except all the parts Muslims say were added later and don't agree with one man in a cave all by himself. That sure does sound a lot like Mormons. Mormons say the Bible is true only insofar as the book of Mormon says so by one man. It's always one guy who starts it up. Funny.

Personally, I think Jesus was the wisest of us all when He said just kick the dust under our feet and don't concern ourselves with people who could care less, e.g. Muslims and Mormons. Look, if they had a heart for the truth they would be a little more receptive than they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Let me see if I understand this. Christians, the Qur'an says, are suppose to stand fast to the word of God, the law, the gospel, and revelation, except all the parts Muslims say were added later and don't agree with one man in a cave all by himself.

---

No the Quran says just what I quoted. Where in the Quran do you find any ability for a Muslim to say other than the verses above allow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

That sure does sound a lot like Mormons. Mormons say the Bible is true only insofar as the book of Mormon says so by one man. It's always one guy who starts it up. Funny.

---

Just as we were warned

Mat 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

The 19th century alone brought us

Mary Baker Eddy - Christian Science
Joseph Smith - LDS Mormon
Charles Taze Russell - Jehovah's Witness
William Miller - Millerites associated into SDA
Ellen White - SDA Seventh Day Adventists
Edward Irving - Irvingites
John Nelson Darby - dispensationalism
Westcott and Hort - wrote corrupt 19th century minority Greek text that is the basis of the majority of modern bible versions.
Madame Blavatsky - Theosophical Society - satanist acquaintence of Westcott and Hort

2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Personally, I think Jesus was the wisest of us all when He said just kick the dust under our feet and don't concern ourselves with people who could care less, e.g. Muslims and Mormons. Look, if they had a heart for the truth they would be a little more receptive than they are.

---

But how can they receive it if it hasn't been shown to them?
Everything most Muslims know about Christianity has been taught to them by their imams.
Trust me, they are surprised and then get pretty hot when you inform them they are antichrists, through scripture. Lying Greek sophist styled entertainers like Ahmed Deedat even created his own bible verse to deceive them into believing they are not antichrist.

Of course, you should go through the word of God with them, spend time reading it with them showing what it really says. That's really the only solution to show how what they assumed was not true. But after you have done a pretty good job of explaining everything and still not response. You got to kick the dust under your feet and move onto the next Muslim to see if he hath an ear to hear.

What did I say that you thought was more than what the Qur'an said for the Muslim?

Darby was correct. Why are you offended by dispensations of time? Surely you don't think the age of grace was the same as the age under the law?

There is the Abrahamic Covenant, the Old Covenant of the Law with the nation of Israel, and the New Covenant in the dispensation of grace. There are several covenants below these major ones.

Age of (eah with its unique characteristics or dispensation):
1. Innocence - Adam
2. Conscience - After man sinned, up to the flood
3. Government - After the flood, man allowed to eat meat, death penalty instituted
4. Promise - Abraham up to Moses and the giving of the Law
5. Law - Moses to the cross
6. Grace - The cross to the Millennial Kingdom
7. Millennial Kingdom - A 1000 year reign of Christ on earth centered in Jerusalem

Just looking at your profile, you don't agree with the premillennial view which shows you are don't accept sound doctrine. How are you any different?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Of course he was talking to Muslims. He wasn't giving a seminar to Christians.

Try to understand what I am saying. The Jews don't call Jesus the Christ. You admitted this, so Muhammad was not referring to the Jews unless Muhammad made a mistake.

---

That's the whole point. Mohammed did blunder over and over and over again. If a writer had written something like that verse in his book in Judaism or Christianity it wouldn't have been canonized for such a stunning internal error. Ask a Muslim. They will still tell you that is Jews that are referenced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Nor could Muhammad be referring to Christians, because Christians don't kill the Christ. So what other group could he be referring to? If there is no other group, it proves Muhammad has internally contradicted himself with his own material.

---

Comically, partly because of Mohammed's untimely death, the Quran was left in such a mess that a whopping 71, out of only 114 suras, are subject to Abrogation. The Al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh (the abrogator and the abrogated) is the Arabic language book that details all of the abrogated verses, and what they have been abrogated by.

Even Mohammed had a tacit admission to what a mess he made of it

Surah 2:106 (Asad) Any message which, We annul or consign to oblivion We replace with a better or a similar one. Dost thou not know that God has the power to will anything?

He even had to engage in damage control, knowing how he was being, and would continue to be perceived

Surah 16:101 When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.

That's why when Muslims are in their Mecca mode (beginning to take over a country) you will hear the "no compulsion in religion" verses from waaayyy back in sura 2 and Mohammed's peaceful Mecca days. But when Muslims gain control they become the Medina style Muslims, with the verses that abrogate those from Mohammed's early years.

sura 8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them

In Indonesia 3 teenage girls were beheaded on their way to their Christian school and one of their heads left on the steps of a Church. The note left behind reads: "We will murder 100 more Christian teenagers and their heads will be presented as presents."

"Once again, women are the targets. In mid-March, rebels assaulted three women gathering firewood and cut off their ears, lips, and breasts."
"Starting in 2003, Janjaweed Arabs, a Sudan-backed militia, have driven 2 million villagers from their homes in ethnic-cleansing attacks designed to suppress local rebels."

"Eyewitness accounts detailing the militia attacks are horrifying. "They killed my 3-year-old son right in front of my eyes," one father from West Darfur said. Since last fall, women have reported more than 500 rapes. Three women said five militiamen beat and raped them last August. The women said, "After they abused us, they told us that now we would have Arab babies. And, if they would find any [more] women, they would rape them again to change the color of their children.""

AP - December 06, 2006 MOGADISHU, Somalia - "Residents of a southern Somalia town who do not pray five times a day will be beheaded, an Islamic courts official said Wednesday, adding the edict will be implemented in three days."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

So that is where the contradiction lies, not necessarily in merely saying the Jews killed their Jesus Christ. Christians have to be brought into the equation as well to fully show the internal contradiction by Muhammad.

Do you understand what I am saying?

---

I hope that answered to it.

They call it progressive revelation so it is open to any kind of changes their leaders want as they see fit. Sorta like atheism, their own progressive morality with no fixed reference point. It is just assumed they won't turn into Hitlers. So there is no consistent unchanging word of God for them like the Bible has a clear OT and a clear NT. There is no objective moral reference point like we have in Jesus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Of course, you should go through the word of God with them, spend time reading it with them showing what it really says. That's really the only solution to show how what they assumed was not true. But after you have done a pretty good job of explaining everything and still not response. You got to kick the dust under your feet and move onto the next Muslim to see if he hath an ear to hear.

What did I say that you thought was more than what the Qur'an said for the Muslim?

---

"...except all the parts Muslims say were added later and don't agree with one man in a cave all by himself."

I thought you were crediting the Quran with being the reason modern Muslims suggest that the bible was corrupt, or parts added later, etc.
But the claim of bible cannot be supported by the Quran. Another of Mohammed's oxymorons.

Of course the Qur'an is irrelevant six centuries later.

But Muslims do claim, say, the parts about the Trinity were added later; that is the only explanation to resolve contradictions between the Bible and the Qur'an. Those are the true Muslims who take that approach. Based on the Qur'an, you can make from the perspective of a Muslim a case for not accepting all chapters of all 66 books by saying parts revealed by Allah hath revealed therein Jesus didn't die on the cross and God is not Triune.

sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

Islam is the stunning direct opposite of Christianity. The only anti-another-religion, religion, on earth. Indeed Islam is so perfectly the opposite it should cause a Jew, or even a devout atheist, to Consider the odds of this being an accident. For example:

1. Christians hold the doctrine of Christ:

2John 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

Muslims are taught that if they confess that Jesus is the Son of God they will have committed the ONLY unpardonable sin in Islam (shirk).

Surah 9.30 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

Matthew 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. 33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.


2. The whole subject and point of the New Testament is the new covenant we are given in Jesus Christ through His crucifixion, death and resurrection. The sacrifice of the Lamb without spot to save all who believe in Him from our sins through His shed blood.

Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.

Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

This event was witnessed by many:

Mark 15:39 And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.
Luke 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

While even many secular historians confirm that Jesus was crucified, Mohammed came along five centuries later and denied Jesus' crucifixion and death on the Cross:

Surah 4:157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

This is the single most deadly verse in the Quran.


3. There are at least 10 verses that tell us that Jesus is the ONLY begotten Son of God.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

beget
1. To father; sire.
2. To cause to exist or occur; produce: Violence begets more violence.

If God didn't beget Jesus, then who caused Jesus to be made manifest to us? Who was responsible for putting Jesus in Mary?
In God's own words:

Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Amazingly, Muslims even believe that Jesus was the only person in human history to be born of a virgin by the will of God. They even believe He led a sinless life, yet they deny that Jesus is the Son of God and that God is His Father.

Sura 19:88 They say: "(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!" 89 Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!


4. Christians are instructed to:

1Thessalonians 5:17 Pray without ceasing.

This describes a relationship and constant communication with God through the Holy Ghost.

The Hadith tells us that earlier Muslims were instructed to pray 50 times a day. Mohammed later reduced this to a more manageable 5 times per day after his alleged flight on a horse.

From "Infidel" Ali explains part of salat, "You say Praise be to Allah thirty-three times; God forgive me thirty-three times; Allah is great thirty-three times; and then, if you choose, you may also say Gratitude to Allah."
That's a total of 495 repetitions of just those first three prayers - every day - because Muslims are commanded to perform salat fives times a day.

Islam requires so much repetitive prayer one would have to wonder how those folks would find time for a relationship with their Creator. God's Word on the subject:

Matthew 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen [do]: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

Add to that the opposite when it comes to imams head coverings:

1Cr 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.
1Cr 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.


Mat 6:5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites [are]: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.


Always the opposite, Muslims pray their repetitive mantras in front of each other in mosques 5 times a day. In Saudi Arabia if you miss showing up for these prayers (salat) they send the police to your house to find out why

5. Mohammed was the OPPOSITE of Jesus.
Perhaps the most violent thing Jesus did was to overturn the tables of the moneychangers.

From the time Mohammed plundered his first caravan, Islam was financed with property stolen from others. There is a whole sura regarding "Spoils of war, booty" detailing Mohammed's/Allah's 1/5 share. Along with pillage and plunder, even poets were killed for speech at Mohammed's behest. Fatwas are put out on folks that speak against Islam today, because Islam cannot stand the light of the truth of God's Word. That's why bibles and Christian materials are banned in Muslim countries. Muslims are encouraged to sexually violate and enslave women that are taken as spoils of war. Mohammed was allowed by Allah all the wives he wanted, but only for him. Mohammed was allowed by Allah to marry his step-son's wife. Mohammed inspired bloody imperialistic conquest through the Islamic first Jihad conquering nearly the whole known world. The Islamic Second Jihad has engaged in over 12,000 deadly terror attacks just since 9-11.

6. The goal of Islam is conquest of all of the kingdoms of the world, as evidenced by the Islamic First Jihad. "Islam will someday rule all the mountain tops of the world" - Ahmadinejad

Christians understand the the kingdoms of this world have been Satan's legal property ever since Adam's fall. He even offered them to Jesus. Jesus declined, but never contested Satan's ownership. Being born again is to be specifically called out of the kingdoms of this world, and into the Kingdom of God. The direct opposite of Islam's goal.

7. Genesis 12:2 And I will make of thee [Abram] a great nation [Israel], and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' " (video) Sahih Bukhari Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176 - Sunna: Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985) USC had to remove this "inspired" Islamic hadith as hate speech, but does not repudiate it).


8. Christian men are to:

Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

There can be no greater love than Christ had for us.
Islam?

Sura 2:223 your wives are as tilth (farmland) unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will...

Husbands are allowed four wives plus concubines. Women are stoned for adultery. Men are allowed to marry and have sex with girls as young as 9 years old. Men are permitted one day marriages. Women inherit half of what their brothers do. The testimony of a woman is only worth half that of a man. Women are often effectively the property of their parents who decide whom they will marry. If a woman follows her heart she can be the victim of an "honor killing". If parents die then it is their brothers who control these decisions. There are fewer women in Mohammed's heaven then men because they are "deficient in intelligence".

(Sura al-Baqara 2:282). Muhammad accounted for this rule by the deficiency of woman's intelligence: Once the Messenger of God went out to a prayer place to offer the prayer of Greater Bairam or Lesser Bairam. He passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell- fire were you [women]." They asked, "Why is it so, Messenger of God?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "What is deficient in our intelligence and religion, Messenger of God?" He answered, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in your intelligence.

Women are there for beating:

Sura 4:34 - Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/#women

9. Even Mohammed's heaven is the opposite.

Romans 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Mohammed's Aljana (From Islam Reviewed, a book filled with opposites from a Nigerian former Muslim perspective.).

"Rivers of wine of many varieties (Sura 47:15; 76:6)
- There is the promise of pure sealed wine (Sura 83:25)
- Zanjabil enhanced wine (Sura 76:17)
- Tasnim brand of wine (Sura 83:27)
- Wine mixed with kafur (Sura 76:5)

Then:
- Gushing water (Sura 3:15, 198, 4:57, 15:48).
- Clustered plantains (Sura 56:29)
- Fruits (Sura 56:20, 69:21-24).
- Shades with bunches of fruits (Sura 76:14).
- Enclosed gardens and grape vines (Sura 78:32).
- Fowl meat is one more carrot that Allah dangles before the noses of the Muslim faithful. (Sura 56:2)."
In essence the things that Mohammed's desert habitat lacked. The list obviously reads more like California than heaven.


In conclusion we can see that Christians and Muslims cannot possibly be worshiping the same God since the two religions are DIRECT OPPOSITES. Allah even curses Christians and Jews. Islam is the only anti-another-religion, religion, on earth. Islam is antichrist.

1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also].

Christians follow the 1600 year record of God to mankind revealed through all of the prophets and legions of witnesses in His Holy Word. Muslims follow the 23 year, 6th century record of Mohammed that is the perfect DIRECT OPPOSITE, of the Word of God.

Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Of course, you should go through the word of God with them, spend time reading it with them showing what it really says.

---

Is this a vital part of the focus of your church's ministry? Bringing the Gospel to that 1/4 of mankind?
If it is, it is pretty unique.
I see 1.5 billion people headed for the lake of fire, in sight of a church that appears more despondent and defensive, more than anything else.

The problem is you are deceiving Muslims, because you are leading them from Allah to a false Christ who does not return to Earth and reign for the 1000 years with the saints (Jude 14,15). Revelation 20 follows the return of Christ (Revelation 19) and after the 1000 years is the finishing up of things at the end of the thousand years (latter part of Revelation 20). then the New City (chapter 21) takes place on the New Earth. So when Jesus returns to reign on Earth you will reject Him, because you are looking for something else, the Antichrist. You need to get yourself right before God before helping Muslims. Since you claim the False Prophet already came, you will be deceived by the Antichrist coming out of revived Rome and his False Prophet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

The problem is you are deceiving Muslims, because you are leading them from Allah to a false Christ who does not return to Earth and reign for the 1000 years with the saints (Jude 14,15).

---

I don't teach one way or the other in regard to the millennial reign.
But if you believe that salvation is dependent on one's interpretation of a single verse, contained in the figurative language of a prophetic vision, from which springs your "definite" doctrine, based on an indefinite plural, you are actually suggesting your own unregenerate nature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Revelation 20 follows the return of Christ (Revelation 19) and after the 1000 years is the finishing up of things at the end of the thousand years (latter part of Revelation 20). then the New City (chapter 21) takes place on the New Earth. So when Jesus returns to reign on Earth you will reject Him, because you are looking for something else, the Antichrist. You need to get yourself right before God before helping Muslims. Since you claim the False Prophet already came, you will be deceived by the Antichrist coming out of revived Rome and his False Prophet.

---

Everyone in this forum failed to make a case for a single antichrist based on the verses that actually contain the term. But hey, what does the Word of God matter when one has his doctrine to defend!
It is the 20th century church that blinded itself to the fact that 1/4 of the world are antichrists as a result of following Mohammedanism that is the exact opposite of Christianity.

What makes you think there is only one verse proving the millennial reign of Christ on earth? And what is that verse by the way? I don't understand how you can keep contending 1260 days are really years when Jesus would have returned in 1948 if you were right. Nothing happened in the 1290th which would have been 1978. 1335th would be 2023. Nonsense! The 1290th day is 30 days of judgment by Jesus when He is on earth. The 1335th day is 45 more days to set Israel up as the center of all nations.

What indefinite plural are you talking about? And why don't you believe God's word is "definite"? Are you a relativist?

The language of prophecy is not figurative, but specific, exacting and precise. Take for example the book of Revelation. There are 30 or so symbols, but half of them are explained right there in the text. So in 22 chapters that is less than 1 unexplained symbol every two chapters. That can hardly be construed as figurative language. The other half are relatively simple enough to discern from other parts of the Bible.

You accused me of being an unregenerate because Jesus said He is returning in Person to reign for the 1000 years (Zech. 14.4, Acts 1.11, Jude 14,15, Rev. 1.7, chapter 19.11-16, 20.2-7)? It would seem to me your accusing the saints (Rev. 12.10), therefore, you are following Satan, so you would be unregenerate?

The Antichrist described in Revelation 13, I gave you a lengthy post under in Roman Church forums, which you didn't respond to at all, so the burden of the proof remains on you to challenge it. Furthermore, you admit if the Antichrist is true you will clearly be deceived because you wouldn't even accept him when he arrives since you don't think he exists.

You are blinded by the fact not just 1/4 of the world are antichrists because they are Muslims, but almost everyone else is antichrist too including the vast bulk of Christendom who actually worship a false Christ. You are antichrist, because you reject the Christ and accept Antichrist who you admit if he comes on the scene since you deny his existence, you will not discern him and his deception.

Since you are a follower of Antichrist, then you are not a Christian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

What makes you think there is only one verse proving the millennial reign of Christ on earth? And what is that verse by the way? I don't understand how you can keep contending 1260 days are really years when Jesus would have returned in 1948 if you were right.

---

You mean is that as you try to wring a single concept through the filter of your doctrine that's how it looks to you. This is why I included several threads in the forum to try begin to introduce a broader picture of this continuous historic context, because it needs to be considered on the basis of it's own merits, in total, and will never be seen if one insists on taking pieces of it and testing them individually against preconceived notions.

I believe 1948 marked the beginning of what Daniel referred to as the "time of the end", and thus when his prophecies began to be unsealed. For example -

Daniel 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [was] true, but the time appointed [was] long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.

"The time appointed was long...".
You can Yahoo a supportable date of the first year of Cyrus in Babylon to be 536 BC (making the third year of Cyrus 533 BC)

Toward the end of his prophecy we read:

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which [was] upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that [it shall be] for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these [things] shall be finished.

Jews - both Messianic and non-Messianic - translation of the Hebrew idiom "time, times and an half" is somewhat different than most of us Christians may have been taught. Let's suppose for a moment, just for the sake of argument, that Jewish scholars just may happen to have a better understanding of antiquated Hebrew idioms, than church scholars do.

Below is the above verse from a version of the Tanach:

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clad in linen, who was above the waters of the river, and he raised his right hand and his left hand to the heavens, and he swore by the Life of the world, that in the time of [two] times and a half, and when they have ended shattering the strength of the holy people, all these will end.

While Daniel's prophecies use this "times" idiom, the Old Testament never defines it. However, most Christians are familiar with the following verse from the New Testament:

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

The Greek word that is translated as "day" in the above verse is "hemera". This is an ambiguous word whose definition is determined by it's context.
In 3 other passages in the KJV it is translated as "time" (in 12 verses in the NASB).

From Strong's:
New Testament Greek Definition:
2250 hemera {hay-mer'-ah}
from (with 5610 implied) of a derivative of hemai (to sit,
akin to the base of 1476) meaning tame, i.e. gentle;
TDNT - 2:943,309; n f
AV - day 355, daily + 2596 15, time 3, not tr 2, misc 14; 389

So what happens if we ponder for a moment as to whether the Lord may have meant for a "time" to be as a thousand years:

2-1/2 "times" would equal 2500 years. Then 2500 - 533 = 1967. The restoration of the Jews to, and end of the Gentile control of, Jerusalem. Note it in the context of the above verse. The end of the "shattering the strength of the holy people". As Daniel wrote, the Jews were the only "holy people". In 1967 the completion of the restoration of their power and strength occurred when they took Jerusalem.

Do you find that interesting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteWaldo

I believe 1948 marked the beginning of what Daniel referred to as the "time of the end", and thus when his prophecies began to be unsealed. For example -

Daniel 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [was] true, but the time appointed [was] long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.

"The time appointed was long...".
You can Yahoo a supportable date of the first year of Cyrus in Babylon to be 536 BC (making the third year of Cyrus 533 BC)

---

My Bible Study guide says 538 BC for the 1st year of Cyrus' reign. Ezra 1:1 The first year of Cyrus's reign was 538 B.C. 3.1 Hebrew - in the seventh month. The year is not specific, so it may have been during Cyrus's first year (538 BC) or second year (537 BC). The seventh month of the Hebrew lunar calendar occurred in Sept/Oct 538 BC and Oct/Nov 537 BC.

long (gadowl) = great

a) large (in magnitude and extent)
b) in number
c) in intensity
d) loud (in sound)
e) older (in age)
f) in importance
1) important things
2) great, distinguished (of men)
3) God Himself (of God)

NKJV mg. agrees. NLT, NIV, ESV, NASB, RSV and ASV all agree with "great" not in today's English "long".

Quote:

---

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which [was] upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that [it shall be] for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these [things] shall be finished.

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clad in linen, who was above the waters of the river, and he raised his right hand and his left hand to the heavens, and he swore by the Life of the world, that in the time of [two] times and a half, and when they have ended shattering the strength of the holy people, all these will end.

---

The Masoretic text is a newer text, so it is not the oldest. Revelation keeps to time, times and a half (Rev. 12.14).

Quote:

---

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

The Greek word that is translated as "day" in the above verse is "hemera". This is an ambiguous word whose definition is determined by it's context. In 3 other passages in the KJV it is translated as "time" (in 12 verses in the NASB).
From Strong's:
New Testament Greek Definition:
2250 hemera {hay-mer'-ah}
from (with 5610 implied) of a derivative of hemai (to sit,
akin to the base of 1476) meaning tame, i.e. gentle;
TDNT - 2:943,309; n f
AV - day 355, daily + 2596 15, time 3, not tr 2, misc 14; 389

---

The clear meaning of the text is to compare a single day to a thousand years. I'd look at those verses in context before you change the context for 2 Pet. 3.8.

Quote:

---

So what happens if we ponder for a moment as to whether the Lord may have meant for a "time" to be as a thousand years:

2-1/2 "times" would equal 2500 years. Then 2500 - 533 = 1967. The restoration of the Jews to, and end of the Gentile control of, Jerusalem. Note it in the context of the above verse. The end of the "shattering the strength of the holy people". As Daniel wrote, the Jews were the only "holy people". In 1967 the completion of the restoration of their power and strength occurred when they took Jerusalem.

---

John's vision in Greek of three and a half years would have been wrong according to you. Time, times and a half is a definite marker in Scripture to identify consistency. Wars last a short period and don't go on and on for centuries.

Israel has had many battles since 1967 where "times of war and great hardship" continue. Your morality is lowered. The dates don't add up exactly like they do for the prophecy of when Jesus would enter Jerusalem to die on the cross for our sins. You're off by a couple years.

The context doesn't make sense. Besides Daniel's prophecy in chapter 10 does not have to do with "end of days" (Dan. 12.13), but prior kingdoms that were to fall, "kingdom of Persia, and then against...Greece" (10.20).

You can't mix and confuse two kinds of times and a half. 2500 years from Cyrus and 1260 years from the Dome. They are all either time, times and a half OR two times and a half. You can't have 2500 years and 1260 years at the same time. Besides, the Bible says, you can't know when Christ will return at least not until you draw near to that season.

Chalk it up to Satan to get his hands into this, create confusion and cast doubt (makes doubletalk acceptable). Think about it. What does Satan want to do? He wants you to doubt his Antichrist is coming. What better way to do that then to think 1260 days is really 2500 years or 1260 years! You don't believe there is an Antichrist. It's proven the Antichrist is a person who is at the end of days not Muhammad. You never responded to this proof. I can't help but think how you are going to be deceived by the Antichrist, because you are focused on the wrong guy!

A careful reading of Daniel's seventy sevens will clear this up for you to realize there is only one possibility (1260 days). The Jewish people are smart. They knew the significance of these two dates, 1948 and 1967. They knew these are two key dates that make Christianity look foolish regarding the book of Revelation that call for a battle and Israel to be overrun for three and a half years, yet again! Israel doesn't want that again. They don't want to have flee in the wilderness for three and a half years after reclaiming their land again. If the appearance of "long" dated prophecies are fulfilled, then no Antichrist who will reign from their Temple at the very, very end of this age.

Daniel’s Seventy Sevens

Now let us look at Daniel chapter 9. After Daniel had confessed the sins of his people, God sent Gabriel to say this to him: "Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy" (v.24). Since Daniel prayed to God for His people and His holy city, God in His answer also mentioned "thy people and thy holy city." Let us understand that "thy people" points to the children of Israel, and "thy holy city" refers to Jerusalem. What God means is this: When the seventy sevens are passed, the transgression of Israel and the holy city will be finished, their sins will come to an end, their iniquity will receive reconciliation, and the everlasting righteousness will be brought to them. Have all these been fulfilled? No, the children of Israel continue today to be "Lo-ammi . . . not my people" (Hosea 1.9). Hence her restoration is yet in the future. These things still remain unfulfilled because the prophecy concerning the seventy sevens has not been fulfilled. But at the second coming of the Lord Jesus, all the prophecies shall be fulfilled.

"Know therefore and discern," continued Gabriel, "that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined" (Dan. 9.25,26). "Troublous times" may also be translated as "brief times." This probably points to the seven sevens, which in terms of time is so much shorter than the sixty-two sevens. The rebuilding of Jerusalem happened within the seven sevens spoken of, which, as calculated by some commentators, come to forty-nine years. Although in the original it merely says "seven"—with no designation of days or years—most commentators believe it refers to the "year" measurement of time, and hence forty-nine years. Sixty-two sevens after the city is rebuilt there shall come the Anointed One.

Here we will not investigate as to when the seventy-sevens actually commenced. One fact is enough for us, however, which is, that we know the Anointed One did come after the sixty-nine sevens (seven sevens plus sixty-two sevens). From the time of the decree concerning the rebuilding of Jerusalem to the moment of the coming of the Anointed One, there were to be four hundred eighty-three years. Now that the sixty-nine sevens have already passed and the Anointed One (Christ) has also come, what is left is the last seven. As soon as the last seven is fulfilled the children of Israel will receive the fullness of blessing of Daniel 9.24. However, within the seven years of the death of Christ, was there any day which could have been deemed as a time when transgression was finished for the children of Israel and upon Jerusalem? No, not even a single day. And have there not been over nineteen hundred more years since the time of Christ and still no end of transgression? Hence, it is quite evident that the seventieth seven did not follow immediately after the sixty-nine sevens.

Why is it that this one seven has not been fulfilled and that the children of Israel have not yet received the full blessing? Because "after the threescore and two weeks [the sixty-two sevens mentioned above] shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing." Christ has died, and consequently the children of Israel did not receive the blessing. It was because they would not receive Him with willing hearts but crucified Him instead, and therefore punishment came upon them. "The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" (v.26). When the Jews insisted on killing the Lord Jesus, they openly declared: "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Matt. 27.25). Naturally God is treating them according to their own word by temporarily rejecting them and showing grace towards the Gentiles. But after the number of the Gentiles has been fulfilled, He will give grace once again to the children of Israel. And at that time, this last seven shall be fulfilled. As soon as the last seven is over, God will deliver the children of Israel according to promise (Dan. 9.24).

"The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary." All students of Revelation know that this refers to the Romans. After the death of Christ the Jews incurred God’s severe judgment: the Romans came and destroyed Jerusalem and its temple sanctuary in 70 A.D. Since the term "the people" refers to the Romans, many accordingly think that the term "the prince" obviously points to the Roman prince Titus who led the Romans. But there are many reasons to refute this conclusion. Why is it that the Scripture here does not say the prince shall destroy the city but rather says the people of the prince? Although the prince must work through his people, it is still unnatural to say the people and not directly say the prince. Since the Holy Spirit mentions both the prince and the people, while nevertheless putting a primary emphasis on the people, can it be that He is implying by this that these people represent the people of that prince who is yet to come? If so, then the prince in question here is not Titus, and the people who attacked Jerusalem in the former day were in spirit and in attitude morally the people of the future prince. This prince whom Daniel prophecies about will be a world renown figure in the future, who is the Antichrist. "The prince that shall come" is therefore the Antichrist.

"The end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined" (v.26). "The end" here is not the end of the city nor of the sanctuary. According to correct grammatical construction, "the end thereof" should be connected to the phrase "the prince that shall come." The fulfillment did not come at the time of Titus but is yet to come in the future. The people of the prince who shall come shall destroy this city and the sanctuary, but "the end thereof" (that is to say, the end of the prince)* shall come as a flood. We know that this superman is soon to come, and the world will have no peace. But thank God, we shall be gone before the Antichrist arrives.

* The Revised Standard Version (1952) recognizes this construction of the verse, as follows: ". . . and the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. His end shall come with a flood . . ." (9.26 mg.).

"And he shall confirm a covenant with the many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease" (v.27a Darby). The preceding verse tells us of the destructive actions of Antichrist; this next verse continues to speak of his action. The last seven is divided into two halves. At the beginning of the last seven, the Antichrist will confirm a covenant with many. This covenant is not the Old Covenant which God singularly covenanted with His people, for the use of the indefinite article "a" here proves it. The phrase "the many" with the use of the definite article "the" refers to a special group of people — even the Jews. So that this covenant will be a political pact between the Jews and the Antichrist. The duration of the pact is to be seven years, but in the middle of this term of years Antichrist will break it. This is the meaning of the words, "he shall think to change the times and the law," found in chapter 7 and verse 25. Here we may see the similarity disclosed between this prince and the little horn mentioned in chapter 7.

In the midst of these seven years in question, Antichrist shall break the covenant, and thus the rest of this period of the seven (that is to say, three years and a half) shall be in his hand. During these three and a half years he shall also wear out the saints (7.25). And during the same three and a half years, this little horn will attempt to change time and season, and cause sacrifice and oblation to cease. At the present moment the Jews have neither sacrifice nor oblation; but in the future these will be restored. We now have seen the beginning of the return of the Jews to Palestine and have also heard of their desire to restore these things. The end is truly near.

Why will the Antichrist cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease? Because at that time he will speak blasphemously against God (see ch. 7). Since sacrifice and oblation are offered to God, he will naturally forbid them. "And upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end" (v.27b). "The wing of abominations" speaks of idols. In the temple of God the wings of the cherubim covered the ark. Yet Antichrist shall enter God’s temple and proclaim himself God (2 Thess. 2), thus having the wings of abominations. Due to this idolatry, God will permit desolations to extend for three and a half years until the end of the seventy sevens. "And that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate" (v.27c). The desolate is Jerusalem. As the end of the seventy sevens approaches, the nations shall gather to attack Jerusalem. Then shall the Lord fight for her (Zech. 14.1-6). And so shall the word of Daniel 9.24 be fulfilled.

We may here perceive just how Satan uses man. Antichrist is only a man; but by his obeying Satan he is given devilish power to rule over nations. Though his actual coming is still in the future, nonetheless even in 70 A.D. the Romans had already become Antichrist’s people! For they had his spirit. Today we see the many turmoils among the nations. Satan is actually manipulating at the back. He gives power to this person and to that, using many in the political arena as his puppets to disturb the world. The last person he is to use will be the Antichrist. We can even now discern that the spirit of Antichrist is already working everywhere. The most revealing character of the Antichrist is his lawlessness (2 Thess. 2). If we open our eyes to the affairs of this age, we shall know how rampant lawlessness has become. At every level of society there are lawless people. In every profession, the lawless form the majority. It seems as though there is but a thin line between people and the outbreak of lawlessness. Once one yields to lawlessness, that one is forever caught.

For this reason, we who believe in the Lord and are bought with His blood ought at this hour to resist together with one mind Satan and his works both in our spirits as well as in our prayers. Pray that God will enable His Church to know the victory of the cross in order that the saints may have the experience of ascension. The sins of the world need to be judged. The Church of Christ needs to be matured for rapture!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

What makes you think there is only one verse proving the millennial reign of Christ on earth? And what is that verse by the way? I don't understand how you can keep contending 1260 days are really years when Jesus would have returned in 1948 if you were right. Nothing happened in the 1290th which would have been 1978. 1335th would be 2023. Nonsense! The 1290th day is 30 days of judgment by Jesus when He is on earth. The 1335th day is 45 more days to set Israel up as the center of all nations.

What indefinite plural are you talking about?

---

the thousand
New Testament Greek Definition:
5507 chilioi {khil'-ee-oy}
plural of uncertain affinity; TDNT - 9:466,1316; adj
AV - thousand 11; 11
1) a thousand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

And why don't you believe God's word is "definite"? Are you a relativist?

The language of prophecy is not figurative,....

---

Then you believe as some in the 15th century that there will be a literal 7-headed, 10 horned scarlet beast roaming the earth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

...... but specific, exacting and precise.

---

Indeed it is. That's when we find Daniel's figures of lion, bear and leopard "beast" kingdoms, we recognize them right away when we see John's composite leopard-bear-lion beast kingdom, for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

Take for example the book of Revelation. There are 30 or so symbols, but half of them are explained right there in the text.The other half are relatively simple enough to discern from other parts of the Bible.

---

Indeed, like two "olive trees" (good and wild of Romans) representing the two "witnesses".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

So in 22 chapters that is less than 1 unexplained symbol every two chapters. That can hardly be construed as figurative language.

---

But you yourself called them "symbols". Do you prefer the term "symbolic language"?
Unless you are expecting two witnesses to be literal candlesticks, and a literal scarlet beast to roam the earth, you understand the language of dreams to be figurative.
That certainly doesn't preclude that through the figurative language we can find literal fulfillment of these prophesies, because that's their purpose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

You accused me of being an unregenerate because Jesus said He is returning in Person to reign for the 1000 years (Zech. 14.4, Acts 1.11, Jude 14,15, Rev. 1.7, chapter 19.11-16, 20.2-7)?

---

If you are going to make an accusation you need to quote me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

It would seem to me your accusing the saints (Rev. 12.10), therefore, you are following Satan, so you would be unregenerate?

The Antichrist described in Revelation 13, I gave you a lengthy post under in Roman Church forums, which you didn't respond to at all, so the burden of the proof remains on you to challenge it. Furthermore, you admit if the Antichrist is true you will clearly be deceived because you wouldn't even accept him when he arrives since you don't think he exists.

You are blinded by the fact not just 1/4 of the world are antichrists because they are Muslims, but almost everyone else is antichrist too including the vast bulk of Christendom who actually worship a false Christ. You are antichrist, because you reject the Christ .......

---

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nottheworld

.......and accept Antichrist who you admit if he comes on the scene since you deny his existence, you will not discern him and his deception.

Since you are a follower of Antichrist, then you are not a Christian.

---

Further demonstrating your disinterest in how scripture describes the term. Perhaps also why my question regarding where a singular "The" "Antichrist" comes from in light of the related verses, remains unanswered.

http://biblocality.com/forums/showpo...1&postcount=18

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteWaldo

the thousand
New Testament Greek Definition:
5507 chilioi {khil'-ee-oy}
plural of uncertain affinity; TDNT - 9:466,1316; adj
AV - thousand 11; 11
1) a thousand

---

I don't think it means of an unknown "infinity" but at least 1000 years. But the New City is for eternity. You really have no case. The very argument you are trying for fails and breaks down the foundation of your beliefs. So repent and receive the time of recompense to spiritually motivate you, as intended by God, to overcome in Christ to receive this reward.

Quote:

---

Then you believe as some in the 15th century that there will be a literal 7-headed, 10 horned scarlet beast roaming the earth?

---

The Bible gives an explanation who the 7 headed beast is in scarlet with 10 hornes. It would make no sense to argue for a literal monster when the explanation is given for what it represents. But no explanation is given of the 1000 years. It is repeated 7 times literally in a row to emphasis it literally (Rev. 20.2-7). Is 7 times not enough for you? It is the millennial kingdom. Not a decade kingdom or a million years' kingdom. But the 1000 year kingdom. The largest number in the Bible is 220 million. If 1000 years meant infinity then why use a number smaller than the largest number in the Bible? Or even a million, because the Bible says there millions of angels, not a 1000 angels. Your theory just does not fit everything we have looked at. You need to let it go and not seek to change the times and the ways and God's plan.

“A woman sitting upon a scarlet-colored beast”—This beast represents the Roman Empire, for the seven heads and ten horns are merely part of it; it also points to Antichrist, because even though he is the eighth head he nevertheless possesses all the villainy of the other seven as well as the powers of the ten horns. God looks upon Antichrist as just a wild beast. Moreover, He looks upon this woman as a harlot, for she is not as irrationally vicious as a wild beast, though she abandons her rationality and acts a harlot.

The Gross Domestic Product of the European Union with its banking cartels (of 10 kings) makes your Islamic threat pale in comparison. The GDP of the Arab league GDP is about 2 billion compared to the EU which is possibly 19 billion (and more countries joining soon), and U.S.A only 14 billion. Islam can't even defend its own land with invasions of Iraq and Iran, nor move a tiny people (Israel) into the Mediterranean surrounding by Muslims with massive oil rich states. United States has a military base in their capital Saudi Arabia. Do Muslims have military bases in United States or Europe? Economics simply don't agree with your theory.

Rev. 17.3 “A woman sitting upon . . . a beast”—This speaks of the union of the Roman Church with the Roman state. How this woman has made use of the state! If a local magistrate had offended a Roman Catholic priest, the pope might have issued an interdict upon the city, prohibiting the celebration of mass and thus stirring up the people against their magistrate. Or if the Roman Church had wished for any action to be taken against some people, she would not have acted directly; instead, she would have instigated the Roman state to act. The woman’s influence is as great as that of the beast, because she rides on the beast. Read Dave Hunt's, A Woman Rides the Beast. And stop being so spiritually dumb! You should know better.

The color of the beast is red as that of the dragon is red. This indicates that this beast comes out of the dragon; therefore, it is the same as the dragon.

“Full of names of blasphemy”—This is different from the words of blasphemy. The words “names of blasphemy” mean calling oneself with the names used of God. How the Roman Caesars were accustomed to employing divine titles!

Rev. 17.4 “Purple”—This is the color adopted in the Roman Empire as the symbol of honor and power. For example, a Roman senator had a broad strip of purple on the breast, while a knight had a narrow strip of it. The emperor wore a purple robe. For the woman to be thus arrayed in purple means that she is in possession of earthly glory (note that the rich man cited in Luke 16.19 wore a robe of purple).

Purple is not a basic color since it is the combination of blue and red colors. Blue is the heavenly color, but red is the earthly (for note that the Biblical place-name Edom means red, and therefore this color denotes that which is earthly). Hence purple is the blending of heaven and earth.

Scarlet is the color of Rome—“‘I caused this inquiry to be made of an intelligent gentleman who had passed much time in Rome, without his knowing my design,’ said Barnes. ‘What would strike a stranger on visiting Rome, or what would be likely particularly to arrest his attention as remarkably there?’ And he unhesitatingly replied, ‘The scarlet color.’”*

Scarlet is the special color of the ecclesiastical cardinals as well as the popes. The cardinals are so called since their dresses, their hats, their cloaks, and their stockings are always of scarlet. In the case of the pope, even the inner lining of his cloak is scarlet; and the costume of his bodyguard is also scarlet. Whenever the pope travels, he is welcomed with decorations of scarlet color.

* Govett , op. cit., p.430.

“And decked with gold and precious stone and pearls”—All these things represent the truths of God. The Roman Church, like this woman, adorns herself with these outwardly (cf. 1 Peter 3.3, 1 Tim. 2.9); yet her real condition is most abnormal in the sight of God.

“Having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations”—This woman has no crown on her head for she is not a genuine queen, neither does she hold a staff in her hand since she is not supposed to possess any earthly authority. Instead she has in her hand a golden cup full of abominations, which speaks of her seducing power. Her victory is gained not by any direct authority, but through her seductive influence.

Islam has no seductive power. People make fun of it in their cartoons. It has no appeal as it is clearly a racist system of beliefs, entirely a non-caucasian religion, and abusive towards women

A metal was once struck by the pope in which a woman was holding in her hand a golden cup; and the caption read: “She sits upon the universe”! Unconsciously, the Roman Church acknowledges herself as that woman. Does Islam?

I have already covered Revelation 13 in which it says who the 7 heads and 10 horns are. The text explains itself. Why do you keep avoiding it?

Rev. 17.2 “With whom the kings of the earth committed fornication”—By way of explanation please consider the following:

(1) In order to please the kings of the earth, the Roman Church was willing to baptize them as long as they wished to be baptized. Thus, she auctioned away the principles of Christ and the word of God.

(2) She made the church co-extensive with the state. Christianity became the state religion of Rome. Anyone who was born a Roman could be a Christian. Normally the church was smaller than the state, but now she became equally as big.

(3) The Church joined to herself the political powers of kings and rulers. The foremost sin of fornication she can commit is to force Christianity on the people by means of the powers of kings and emperors. This was done not only by Rome but also by many other nations. The result was to make merely nominal Christians out of people (still unsaved, unregenerates).

To commit fornication with the kings of the earth is said to be, interpretively speaking, the Roman Church’s direct relationship with them. But the verse, “and they that dwell in the earth were made drunken with the wine of her fornication”, speaks of her indirect relationship with the people on earth. Wine here signifies heresies. The Romish Church has caused people on earth to lose their self-determination and to become foolish through heretical doctrines. On the one hand she has taught that by giving a little money and by making confession to a priest a person’s sin may be forgiven, but on the other hand she has failed to instruct people how they ought to live a holy life. She allows them to indulge in worldly pleasures. Indeed, this wine of her fornication has made the whole world drunk. It is quite true that without religion no one could live on earth. For this reason, the Roman Church is most palatable to the taste of the world. She disregards spiritual reality on the one hand, yet on the other uses all sorts of religious rituals to create emotional comforts as well as glowing expectation within the hearts of the people.

So has been the Church of Rome, and so shall she be revived in the future.

17.9 is the same as 13.18; except that in 13.18 it says that the mind that has wisdom can count the number of the beast, whereas in 17.9 it states that the mind of wisdom is to know the heads of the beast.

The seven heads have double meaning; they point to (1) place, and (2) person.

(1) As to place, the seven heads are seven mountains. The heads of the earth are mountains, which also give the impression of strength or power (see Num. 21.20; Jer. 22.6; Amos 1.2, 9.3).

“Rome was in John’s age usually called the seven-hilled city”, said Dr. Woodworth. Many of the ancient Roman poets in their poetry proclaimed Rome as the seven-hilled city. Someone has noticed that for about five hundred years after the time of John, the Roman poets unanimously called Rome the seven-hilled city. There was once a Roman gold metal which showed a woman sitting on seven hills. Even the coin of Emperor Vespasian, as described by Captain Smyth (Roman Coins, page 310), represented “Rome seated on seven hills; at the base Romulus and Remus suckled by the wolf; in front, the Tiber personified.” *

* Robert Govett, The Apocalypse Expounded. London: Chas. J. Thynne, 1920, p. 442.

The poet Horace once said, “The gods, who look with favour on the seven hills.” And another poet Tibullus said this: “Ye bulls, feed on herbage of the seven hills.”

Now the names of the seven hills are these: Aventine, Coelian, Esquiline, Capitoline, Palatine, Quirinal, and Viminal.

(2) As to person, these seven mountains are also seven kings, for kings are heads of the peoples. While the heads of the earth (that is, the mountains) are contemporary and continuous, the heads of the peoples are temporary and successive to one another. This double concept of head as being both of the earth and of the people may be demonstrated in one particular passage of Isaiah: “The head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin” (7.8,9).

Even so, some may still further argue that even if the seven kings may perhaps be selected on a representative basis, how is anyone to know which seven out of the twelve Caesars are to be chosen? Our answer is that we may find them out by means of the following deductions:

(1) 13.1 states: “And upon his heads names of blasphemy”; since the seven heads all have names of blasphemy, these seven kings must be self-styled gods, demanding worship.

(2) The word “fallen” in 17.10 carries with it the idea of violent death (see 2 Sam. 1.19,25,27). All seven kings do indeed meet with violent death: Julius Caesar, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero—these five kings all assumed deity for themselves; they called for their people to worship them as gods; and all five died unnaturally, either by being murdered or by committing suicide.

Domitian was the sixth one. He was present during the time of John. He too deified himself, and was later murdered.

The seventh one is he who is yet to come. The Bible does not tell us how far apart time-wise the seventh is from the sixth; only that the seventh one will continue a little while (17.10) and later be killed (17.10; 13.3,14).

The interval between the sixth and the seventh one is filled by the reign of religious Rome. From the first to the sixth, also during the seventh and the eighth, political Rome is in power. But now it is currently religious Rome in place of political Rome. Political Rome, the banking cartel of 10 kings, and 7 representative European states, will be the power of political Rome and the end of days. A massive collapse in the U.S. dollar with its 50+ billion dollars of unfunded liabilities will turn it into a basket case, giving the throne to Europe.

After Zedekiah was taken captive into Babylon there was no king in Israel. A long interval passed before Christ was born. Likewise, after the destruction of political Rome there will be an interval before Antichrist appears, re-emergence of political Rome again.

The whole world will be well prepared for the arrival of Antichrist. Hence, as soon as he appears on the scene he will be able to do much during the three and a half years. The seventh king will have already prepared for the eighth one.

Quote:

---

Indeed it is. That's when we find Daniel's figures of lion, bear and leopard "beast" kingdoms, we recognize them right away when we see John's composite leopard-bear-lion beast kingdom, for example.

---

And that precision has nothing to do with Islam.

"4" is the number of the world. God apportions the world dominion to four kingdoms: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. Not Islam. Your obsession and focus is diverted onto the wrong party. The materials representing world power in Nebuchadnezzar’s image are gold, silver, brass and iron (Dan. 2). The world kingdoms in God’s eyes are like four beasts (Dan. 7). 4 as the number of the world may also be seen in this number’s relationships with the world. The world has four seasons: spring, summer, fall and winter. It has four corners: east, west, south and north (Num. 2).

It has four basic elements: earth, air, water and fire. It has four winds (Rev. 7.1). The river which flowed out of the earth’s paradise—the garden of Eden—was parted and became four heads (Gen. 2.10-14). The living creatures which represent the created world are four in number (Rev. 4.6). In Ezekiel we are told that the cherubim, which are the same as the living creatures, have four faces: that of the lion, ox, man, and eagle; and they have also four wings (ch. 1). Mankind on earth is described in a foursome: peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues (Rev. 17.15). The heart conditions of men, according to the parable of the sower as spoken by the Lord Jesus, are of four kinds (Matt. 13.3-9, 18-23). The tribulations over the past 2000 years which come as judgment upon the world are also four in number: war, famine, pestilence and earthquake (Matt. 24.6,7 AV; cf. Luke 21 and Rev. 6). Those which bear witness to the Lord Jesus are the four Gospels which reveal the four aspects of Christ. At the height of men’s sin, the four soldiers divided among themselves the garments of the Lord Jesus (John 19.23). The altar set up for men is "foursquare" with four horns (Ex. 27.1,2). The fourth of the Ten Commandments is the first of the remaining ones that touch upon the things of the world (Ex. 20). The fourth clause in the so-called Lord’s Prayer is also that which commences to deal with matters pertaining to this earth (Matt. 6.9-13). The things God created on the fourth day were to rule over the days and nights on earth. The fourth book of the Bible, Numbers, relates the experience of the wilderness which is a type of the world.

4 comes from 3 plus 1; and 3 is the foundation of 4. As 3 represents God, so 4 represents the created ones who depend on the Creator. 4 is the first number which allows of simple division, even as 2 is the number which divides it. It is therefore the symbol of weakness. The created have really nothing of which to boast.

Quote:

---

Indeed, like two "olive trees" (good and wild of Romans) representing the two "witnesses".

---

You are accuses God's people!

11.3-12 “TWO WITNESSES”

Who are these two witnesses? Some interpret them as Christian nations, some as certain sects, and some as the gospel preached by Christians. All these interpretations are unsatisfactory because (1) since these two witnesses wear sackcloth, they can have no reference to a group or groups; (2) the miracles they perform as recorded in 11.5-6 are self-defensive and result in killing, and are therefore unlike the miracles performed during the gospel age which are saving in nature; and (3) the dead bodies mentioned in 11.9 cannot point to any group (e.g. good and bad Romans) and they certainly cannot typify the gospel.

These two witnesses are two personal witnesses, since (1) witnessing is done by man (Acts 1.8), (2) they are clothed in sackcloth, (3) they are slain, (4) they have their dead bodies, and (5) they are prophets.

Who are they? Some interpreters say they are none other than Elijah and Moses. They maintain that what is mentioned in 11.6 about the power to shut the heaven from raining is an allusion to something that had actually been done by Elijah; and that the power to turn waters into blood is an allusion to what had been done by Moses. But such an interpretation is based only on what the two men do. According to Hebrews 9, “it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment” (v.27). Moses was dead once, how then could he die again? Moses should therefore not be included.

11.3 “My two witnesses”—The way it is presented here seems to imply that everyone who reads this passage should know who these two men are. The words in 11.4 are quoted from Zechariah 4.2,3. “Standing” signifies living. When a person is tired, he sits down; when sick, he lies down; and when dead, he falls down. But these two men are standing. In the entire Bible only two men are recorded as not having died; they are Enoch and Elijah. These two men alone stand before the Lord. (And incidentally, it is said in the apocryphal writings of John that Enoch and Elijah will come.)

“Two witnesses”—This is the number prescribed in the Scriptures for witnessing (cf. Deut. 17.6, 19.15; Matt. 18.16).
“Sackcloth” conveys the thought of bitterness. The New Testament does not command us to wear sackcloth, but in the Old Testament there was such a command (Is. 22.12; Joel 1.13).

What they preached is judgment, not glad tidings. Enoch preached judgment once before (Jude 14-15), and Elijah was a prophet who killed (see 1 Kings 18.40 and 2 Kings 1.10,12). They will yet preach the woeful news, not the glad tidings.
They shall prophesy during the three and a half years of the Great Tribulation.

11.4 “Olive trees” give oil. “Candlesticks” uplift light. Here then are oil and light. These two witnesses stood at the time of the prophet Zechariah (Zech. 4.11-14), they were standing at the time of John’s writing the book of Revelation, and they are still standing in our own day; that it is to say, Enoch and Elijah have not yet died as the Two Witnesses.

These two witnesses are “the sons of oil” (Zech. 4.14 Darby), for they are filled with the Holy Spirit.

“The Lord of the earth”—The Jews had their kingdom. God is the Lord of the heaven and the earth (Gen. 14.22). After the destruction of the Jewish nation God was always addressed as the God of heaven (Dan. 2.18,37,44). Now He is again called the Lord of the earth, for God has returned to the position of the Old Covenant period and has once more recognized the Jews as a nation.

What kind of persons are these two men? Perhaps they are the ones who sell oil to the five foolish virgins (Matt. 25.1-2, 8-10a), or possibly they are those who render a little help to those who will be persecuted during the Great Tribulation (Dan. 11.34).

11.5 These two men oppose the whole wide world, including Antichrist. “And if any man shall desire to hurt them . . . must he be killed”, thus showing that these two men know even the evil thoughts of the heart. They testify with force, thereby proving they are not preaching the gospel. They perform miracles in order to protect themselves and help the Jews and the remaining Christians during the period of the Great Tribulation. They do not aim at saving souls.

11.6 “Rain” expresses the grace of God. For God “sendeth rain on the just and the unjust” (Matt. 5.45). A not raining suggests that God has withdrawn His grace.

11.7 “The beast that cometh up out of the abyss”—This points to Antichrist. The wild beast is mentioned 36 times in this book of Revelation. Thirty-six is six times six, the number of man. The very name of “wild beast” reveals his nature and work. (The Lamb is mentioned 28 times in this book. Twenty-eight is seven times four. This name expresses the Lord’s nature and work as well as denotes His perfect relationships with God and men.)

This beast comes out of the abyss. In 13.1 it is noted that the beast comes up out of the sea, thus confirming that the abyss is beneath the sea. Knowing the 10 dimensions of string theory, we know this is possible.

The abyss is where the devils live. To come out of the abyss presupposes a resuscitation. According to 17.8 we know that this beast has died and is to be resuscitated. The 7th individual was here a short while, has died, now th 8th reigns as a miraculous recovery for all the world to sea, and he is one of the 5 Caesars (Nero revived-the most evil man in history), making up all the evil of those 5 Caesars.

The two witnesses have powers to kill as they wish, but they cannot kill the beast since the latter is a resuscitated beast.

11.8 “The great city”—Human eyes see it as Jerusalem; but according to its significance “spiritually” it “is called Sodom” (a city noted for its crimes) “and Egypt” (that which opposes God-Rome). Yet historically it remains as the place where the Lord was crucified. Islam did not exist in his day. Islam is quite insignificant even though they may have some nominal inciteful role to play such as being the holders of most of the world's oil an 911. They are on the whole, insignificant, because of their lack of power even though they are sitting on so much oil. It is because their morality doesn't come shrouded but is openly divisive, offensive, and therefore will never muster much appeal to deceive like religious Rome and political Rome has been able to, especially now political Rome, printing money like never before and a one world bank. The Antichrist will arise from a mix of these enterprises. Perhaps Tony Blair is setting the stage with his efforts to make a one world religion. And some indications lead to Barack Hussein Obama as the Antichrist and Oprah Winfrey as the False Prophet.

The manner of death of these two witnesses is perhaps similar to the Lord’s crucifixion, because in the original it says: “where also their Lord was crucified”—the word “also” seems to emphasize the thought that they die in the same way as their Lord once died. This coincides with the words in Matthew 23.34-35 that some prophets will be killed and crucified.

11.9 “And from among the peoples”—Representatives come from all peoples and nations to view the scene, for they all deem these two men to be public enemies. When they hear that these two men are killed, they come to see it for themselves. In accordance with Joel 3.1-2 and Zechariah 12.3 and 14.2 peoples from all over the earth will gather at Jerusalem.

“Three days and a half’—This number stands between three days and four days. They are neither incorruptible (just as was the Lord, in His three days of burial—John 2.19; Acts 2.30-31) nor decayed (as was Lazarus, being four days in the grave—John 11.39). And it is John alone who records the three days, the four days, and now these three days and a half.

Quote:

---

But you yourself called them "symbols". Do you prefer the term "symbolic language"? Unless you are expecting two witnesses to be literal candlesticks, and a literal scarlet beast to roam the earth, you understand the language of dreams to be figurative. That certainly doesn't preclude that through the figurative language we can find literal fulfillment of these prophesies, because that's their purpose.

---

There is a difference between a symbol you have to try to interpret and one that immediately follows with an explanation what that symbol represents. If the text says Symbol A then says Symbol A means B, then there is no reason for you to try to make A mean C. Therefore, your fulfillments violates the text, and you are proven to be a false teacher.

Quote:

---

If you are going to make an accusation you need to quote me.

---

You said "you are actually suggesting your own unregenerate nature" because I accept Jesus said He is returning in Person to reign for the 1000 years (Zech. 14.4, Acts 1.11, Jude 14,15, Rev. 1.7, chapter 19.11-16, 20.2-7)? I don't mind so much someone accusing me like this because they just expose themselves as being unregenerate. It is when someone says, don't accuse of being an unregenerate, then flip right around with their doubletongue and accuse of this themselves. Shame on you! Be "not doubletongued" (1 Tim. 3.8).

Quote:

---

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

---

Remind you of anyone? So much so you deny the Antichrist that is to come to reign in political Rome, the revived Roman empire of the European Economic Union.

Quote:

---

Further demonstrating your disinterest in how scripture describes the term. Perhaps also why my question regarding where a singular "The" "Antichrist" comes from in light of the related verses, remains unanswered.
http://biblocality.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6481&postcount=18

---

Why have you not read the description of the first beast that was in response to the above link, why the Antichrist is a person? Should I assume you agree since you don't specifically challenge any of it?

"Many antichrists," "whosoever," "every" and "many deceivers" are terms about antichrists. But this is not mutually exclusive of the "Antichrist." In fact, with so many antichrists, only then will the "Antichrist" (1 John 2.18) be revealed. I am not sure how you overlooked this. You didn't put Antichrist in bold. Clearly the Antichrist is a person, and he is the number of man, revived Neron Kaisar in Aramaic which equals 666 (Nero Caesar).

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/neronkaisar.gif