Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 2/2/2006 5:58:56 AM EDT
What do you think??? Are we looking at the "end of days" within our lifetime?? If you have any ideas or have studied Revelation, let me hear your take on the final battle.

lawdog (I'm serious)
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 8:06:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By lawdog:
What do you think??? Are we looking at the "end of days" within our lifetime?? If you have any ideas or have studied Revelation, let me hear your take on the final battle.

lawdog (I'm serious)




Which final battle is that? Would you please provide some scriptural references so we know what we're talking about?

Until then I think I can say with a high degree of certainty: NO.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 3:01:43 PM EDT
google preterism for a different take on Revelations.



Link Posted: 2/2/2006 3:34:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:
google preterism for a different take on Revelations.






partial preterist here.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 3:36:41 PM EDT
Not an exact quote of the scripture, " He will return like a thief in the night, when you least expect it". I, like many Americans, wondered if 9-11 was the begining of the end, and picked up my Bible, and read the New Testament, several times, including Revalations, what I got from it, besides a good reminder of Gods love for us, is, the end will come when we least expect it.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 3:43:51 PM EDT


Heresy

Prophecy
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 3:44:54 PM EDT
Sorry for the slight hijack. Its The Revelation of Jesus Christ.

Not Revelations.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 3:47:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lawdog:
What do you think??? Are we looking at the "end of days" within our lifetime?? If you have any ideas or have studied Revelation, let me hear your take on the final battle.

lawdog (I'm serious)



I dont know and dont focus on the end times. Its hard enough keeping an eye on myself. I think some folks mention the Valley of Megido is where the name Armegeddon is derived from so some think the final battle will be there.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 5:23:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lawdog:
What do you think??? Are we looking at the "end of days" within our lifetime?? If you have any ideas or have studied Revelation, let me hear your take on the final battle.

lawdog (I'm serious)



No man shall know the day or the hour, but we should know the season!

I believe the season has started but I think there are some things that are not in place yet. Rough guess would be at least 5 yrs to a max of 40 yrs(but that of course assumes things continue at the current rate...)
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 5:30:03 PM EDT
I recon we will.
I mean, we won't be around for the End times, at least not as a country.
The EU is the 7 horned beast mentioned.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 6:43:00 PM EDT
Nope.

If anything, Israel will start things out of fear of a possible nuclear Iran. I don't think Iran is stupid enough to be the aggressor.

It might end up being the end of Israel, if they're too late and Iran gets a few off, but not the end of the world.

Personally, the only downside I see to the mid-east nuking itself into oblivion is that Americans in Iraq will end up taking it up the ass because we won't have the good sense to cut and run if the nuclear shit starts moving towards the fan.
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 6:45:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:
I recon we will.
I mean, we won't be around for the End times, at least not as a country.
The EU is the 7 horned beast mentioned.




Umm....Germany, France....I only see two "horns", not 7. What the french couldn't accomplish in the middle ages and the germans couldn't accomplish in the 20th century, they've teamed up and found a way to do. Most of the other countries in europe were faced with "join us or face economic ruin".
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:14:59 PM EDT
Maybe "end times/last days" doesn't mean what you think it means . . .

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds . . .


Apparently, there were some end times that happened 2,000 years ago.

Acts 2: 16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.


There's some scaring sounding stuff that Joel prophesied about but Peter says it all happened on the day of Pentecost. How can that be? Was the sun turned to darkness? Did the moon turn to blood? Peter seems to think so but why? All that was going on was people were filled with the spirit and started preaching.

1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Here's not only last times but also the Antichrist. Oh, wait, this says that there are MANY antichrists and they came 2,000 years ago. How can THAT be?

Jude: 17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.


Jude is writing about false prophets that were working at the time he wrote and said that they fullfilled Jesus' prophecy of the last time.


Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.


The writer of Hebrews says that Jesus died "in the end of the world." What world ended with Christ's death on the cross?

Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:22:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By WildBoar:
I dont know and dont focus on the end times. Its hard enough keeping an eye on myself. I think some folks mention the Valley of Megido is where the name Armegeddon is derived from so some think the final battle will be there.



But what kind of battle will it be?

2Co 10:3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;


Eph 6:10 ¶ Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:24:22 PM EDT
No absolutly not. Satan has to come first pretending to be Christ.

II Thessalonians 2
2th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2th 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

2th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

2th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 6:34:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AlreadyThere:
No absolutly not. Satan has to come first pretending to be Christ.

II Thessalonians 2
2th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2th 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

2th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

2th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.





Such a mystery isn't it? Where exactly is this temple of God anyway? Look to 1Co 3:16 for a clue . . .

Who is this man of sin that must be revealed? What does Rom 6:6 and Eph 4:22 call this son of perdition?
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 7:33:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 7:34:08 PM EDT by WildBoar]

Originally Posted By Bladeswitcher:

Originally Posted By WildBoar:
I dont know and dont focus on the end times. Its hard enough keeping an eye on myself. I think some folks mention the Valley of Megido is where the name Armegeddon is derived from so some think the final battle will be there.



But what kind of battle will it be?

2Co 10:3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;


Eph 6:10 ¶ Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:



Thats a battle we face everyday.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 7:42:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 7:49:07 PM EDT by Bladeswitcher]

Originally Posted By WildBoar:
Thats a battle we face everyday.



How about that . . .

Seriously, do you have any stronger scriptures that suggest there's going to be some natural/physical battle someplace? And what good would that do us, individually?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:23:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:
The EU is the 7 horned beast mentioned.



Oh, do tell . . .

Care to flesh that one out a bit? What do you base that on? What does that mean exactly?
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 1:31:32 AM EDT
Sounds like a good enough reason considering all the other signs we are being given in the latter days. Since we cant stop it, bring it on.

Lebrew
Link Posted: 2/6/2006 3:34:15 AM EDT
Back in the day I used to think it would be communism. Since then I have read the Koran. Islam is the Anti Christ. One of the books purposes is to debunk Christ's divinity. If Islam does not start WWIII, it will take advantage of the rest of the worlds chaos to take Isreal(Amageddon). If we let them get more counties with nukes what do you think they will do next time some one paints a cartoon of Muhommad?
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 8:36:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1cheapshot:
Back in the day I used to think it would be communism. Since then I have read the Koran. Islam is the Anti Christ. One of the books purposes is to debunk Christ's divinity. If Islam does not start WWIII, it will take advantage of the rest of the worlds chaos to take Isreal(Amageddon). If we let them get more counties with nukes what do you think they will do next time some one paints a cartoon of Muhommad?




Wow!
Arguing that Islam is a "flawed" philosophy that will lead to violence is one thing, but this?
Insane.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 9:47:18 AM EDT
Maybe it's provocative...but not "insane".

To be insane there'd have to be little or no reasons to think the ROP is capable of filling the shoes of the AC.

Now, to claim "Denmark" is the AC WOULD BE INSANE. It's also a long shot to claim the RCC is "the anti-Christ" since whatever the Church has taught it's definately NOT that the Christ hasn't come in the flesh. You might not like the Catholic Church for a host of reasons, but you can't accuse them of claiming that God isn't triune and God's Son, Jesus wasn't God incarnate.

Now, what major religion or ideology in history HAS denied that God can/did become incarnate?

The early Pagan religions and heresies certainly claimed either that there isn't a single God - or that whatever Jesus was, he couldn't possibly be THE God in question but a demiurg, demigod, angel, lesser creature, etc.

But with the demise of the Arians in the 500's the mantle for a major world religion based on the belief that Jesus was merely a creature went to....the Muslims.

Christendom had to deal with pagan vikings and mongols for centuries but those conflicts were mostly about basic survival - as in, NOT DYING rather than serious threats of being converted by force or culture to a non-Christian viewpoint.

Islam was always there looming on the horizon...for 1000 years, Islam WAS THE MAIN OPPOSITION to Christianity. From 1700 - 1999 the atheist European utopian seemed to take over the mantle of world wide threat to Christendom - definately taking over the job of main opposition to the Church and indeed Christianity in general - especially from the cultural/soco-political realm.

But with the coming decline and demographic free fall of the non-Christian western EU nations and US Blue-States, it sure looks like the next main threat to Christianity will once again be Muslim.

I refer much of my post to OBL's own letter to America in which he posts has a precondition for a cessation of his hostilities that we convert to Islam, a religion that specifically forbids any trinitarian and thus incarnational theology.

For Muslims Jesus was just a prophet. Nothing more. Certainly not on par with Mohammed. Their theology (such as it is) is posited on a particular reading of Aristotle's metaphysics, in that God can not POSSIBLY be Triune, that there can't POSSIBLY be "persons in God".

So for them it's metaphysically (pre-theology) impossible for God to be Father as he can't possibly have a Son....

From the Gospel perspective then, anyone or theory that claims that Jesus is NOT the Son of God, undermines the whole kit and kaboodle, and becomes ergo, "anti-Christ".

And while Communism rejected the idea of God himself, it did so on the stupid materialism level, never offering a serious metaphysical challenge. Islam is a serious contender. Perhaps THE serious contender compared with all other religions given its size, scope, and tendencies.

This all said, I for one do not think the GWOT is the ultimate solution - even if we went to full mobilization and really got serious.

Armed conflict with an opponent who is inspired by some theology can only at best be a precaution, a temporary 'holding action'. The real meat and potato lifting has to be done on the level of motivation - metaphysical/theological and personal as in holiness.

For example. Muslims claim their conception of God is superior. Fine. But if a human being can be shown to be more merciful than Allah, that doesn't make their conception of Allah ironclad anymore. And how merciful could this god be if he allows his followers to kill those who doubt his existence?

How logical is this god if he claims on the one hand that there is "no compulsion in religion" but on the other threatens execution to any Muslim who leaves the faith, any non-believer who preaches and different faith and any pagan who doesn't follow the religion of the books? Major contradiction there.

Once you sit down and level with the serious minded young Jihadi and the Mullahs who command him on THIS level - setting armed violence aside - you stand a chance to undermine their motives and suicidal sureness of the justice and rightness of their cause.

But if you don't go THERE and settle on merely a show of strength or armed conflict you end up with the war of atrition - both in current force levels and above all, staying power.

Because the Vietnamese commies believed in communism and their sense of nationalism more than they feared US bombs, they won, ultimately (no small thanks to the US LEFT).

Muslims believe (although I wonder how many know why they believe other than to not believe is to court execution) that Mohammed is THE final PROPHET of God and that God is and can only possibly be ONE and never Father for he has no "companion" and hence, no SON.

It's an all-or-nothing system; theocracy in that God's law involves EVERYTHING. Not even Christendom in the height of its influence circa 1250AD involved the Church's running of EVERYTHING.

There were always Kings and nobles and intermediary powers responsible for their own doings. Sure, morality and culture was suffused with Christian teachings....but the actual prelates didn't micromanage what the political people did.

Plus you could (and they did) debate serious questions about theology. For all the ink written about the evil Inquisition, it was never a secret police on the level of Queen Elizabeth's or a Calvinist theocracy as in Geneva... it was in fact a court - which meant you could debate and reason your way out of trouble.

IM NOT EXCUSING EVERYTHING THEY DID.... just pointing out that for all the black legends, the Inquisitions (plural as the Spanish one was only one of 4 of them over 400 years)... weren't as repressive and bloody as the Shariah law is today in Muslim nations.

What we have in Islam as it's lived in most great nations is a force more powerful than almost anything in the West's collective memory; if it's not a repressive as a generation of Communists, it's more robust in its elements of truth (there IS ONE GOD...who is merciful, gracious, wonderful, beautiful, truthful, etc.)

Link Posted: 2/19/2006 10:49:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JusAdBellum:
Maybe it's provocative...but not "insane".

<snip>




All very true, many things that I do agree with.
Perhaps I should clarify, what I meant by "anti-christ"
I meant "anti-christ" from a theological perspective.
I always understood that the anti-christ would be accepted by "Peter the Roman" as the second coming of Christ.
Link Posted: 2/25/2006 6:58:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/25/2006 7:00:55 AM EDT by Bladeswitcher]

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Perhaps I should clarify, what I meant by "anti-christ"
I meant "anti-christ" from a theological perspective.
I always understood that the anti-christ would be accepted by "Peter the Roman" as the second coming of Christ.



Here are ALL the BIBLICAL references to the "anti-Christ."

1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1Jo 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.
1Jo 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jo 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.


Please note a couple of things:

1Jo 2:18 says that NOW is the last time and that EVEN NOW are there MANY antiChrists, whereby we know it IS the last time. That was written 2,000 years ago! Clearly, John did not understand the antiChrist to be some boogy man that would arise in the future.

1Jo 2:22 defines an antiChrist — an antiChrist denies the father and the son!

1Jo 4:3 goes further in defining the antiChrist. Here we see the antiChrist is the SPIRIT that confesses not that Jesus is come in the flesh. So, the antiChrist is not a person, after all, but a SPIRIT! Also, note that this verse again tells us that spirit was in the world EVEN NOW — again, written 2,000 years ago.

2Jon 1:7 again says that MANY antiChrists are in the world. That's not ONE antiChrist, but many. And they don't appear in the future but at the time John was writing.

These four verses provide the BIBLICAL understanding for the term antiChrist. An antiChrist is simply a SPIRIT in man that OPPOSES the Christ (the Christ being the deeper annointing, or Christos, that Jesus had in him).

If this is the Biblical basis for the antiChrist, one might ask what is the "theological" perspective that you speak of?
Top Top