ISIS are waiting for Jesus to show up!

a reply to: rokkuman

Old news pal, someone posted an in depth atticle on this site that went into depth aboit what ISIS is about, there is no secret they think they're preparing for the "end times." They think they know where the U.S. will be defeated, it's some random feild somewhere. Nutty, smelly, ugly little creatures these guys are.

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy

This is another part I am unsure of and hope for someone qualified to inform me.

...but I'm thinking the slaying of the 'False Messiah' from Madhi and Jesus/Isa is said to occur near the 'End of Days'. All part of many tribulations leading to a resurrection and final judgment by Allah. In other words I don't think they believe this is about converting the World to Islam so much as it is the culmination of all religious events on Earth.

But not sure.

According to their eschatology, Isa returns to assist the Mahdi in conquering evil, and then "breaks the cross" (their words) i.e. orders all Christians to convert to Islam. Isa then rules the world for 40 years and dies, and the Mahdi takes over the crown for the rest of eternity.

Different sects have slightly different takes on that, but them's the basics of it.

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: SpongeBeard
a reply to: rokkuman

I think it's just a comparison in a poorly written article. They're not literally saying "Jesus" just the equivalent deity in their religion.

Jesus is one of the most important figures in Islam. The Quran calls him the messiah, and says he will return in the end times. Not many seem to understand Jesus' importance in Islam.

The Qur'an calls Jesus "al-masih", but gives no indication whatsoever that it, Muhammed, or Muslims in general have any understanding at all of what a "messiah" is.

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
a reply to: ketsuko
Your interpretation is tailored to suit your desired actions and doesn't really make sense - there's no need to be so cryptic with regards to the spreading of the gospel. Your morality should not be determined by your squeamishness.

Have you actually experienced God? Not figuratively, but actually? Beliefs simply aren't enough - as with all education, self-realisation is the only thing that will exact change. Paraphrasing the man that I believe to be the basis of the Christian Jesus from - I think - the Apocalypse of Peter: I can't get you to heaven - I don't have that power. I'm here to teach you how to do it for yourself.

My interpretation is based on reading the entire chapter surrounding the verse. That's what "in context" means.

And you think I don't know what it means to experience God? You think I haven't experienced Him?

Is this all going to be based on you calling my faith into question?

originally posted by: dr1234
a reply to: rokkuman

Old news pal, someone posted an in depth atticle on this site that went into depth aboit what ISIS is about, there is no secret they think they're preparing for the "end times." They think they know where the U.S. will be defeated, it's some random feild somewhere. Nutty, smelly, ugly little creatures these guys are.

They believe the "Crusader Armies" (apparently "The U.S." is their interpretation of that phrase) will be defeated at Dabiq, Syria. It's a really tiny town on the border of Syria and Turkey. It is what they have named their monthly "news" rag after, and it is where Peter Kassig was beheaded as the first "Crusader" to die at Dabiq. By doing so, and "tweaking" the designation "Crusader" (there have been no actual Crusaders in existence anywhere on Earth for 800 years - all the Crusaders are already long dead) they show, as previously mentioned, a desire to "force" their prophecy.

Sadly for them, unless "Crusaders" show up at Dabiq for their scheduled defeat, their entire "prophecy" falls flat on it's face, and since there are no more Crusaders, and have not been for 800 years, their "prophecy" is doomed to failure, right out of the gate. If Crusaders no longer exist, it naturally follows that none will be putting in their appearance at Dabiq.

Now, to be fair, the actual prophecy (the non-Daesh version) specifies NOT "Crusaders" but rather "Roman armies" to be defeated at Dabiq. That, however, may be even worse - there have been no "Roman armies" since the mid 6th century, so of course they won't be putting in an appearance, either. We may be able to fudge it a bit, and declare the Vatican Swiss Guard as the "Roman Army". There are slightly under 200 of them all total, making a rather tiny "army" as armies go, and you can see them coming a mile away in those ridiculously garish uniforms they wear. Rather than being any actual danger, they are an embarrassment to the mercenary profession in this day and age.

I cannot, in my wildest dreams, even imagine the Vatican's mercenary "Swiss Guard" army marching on Dabiq in Syria - not even a few of them, much less the entire 200-odd man force.

SO - their "prophecy" can be empirically demonstrated to be a failure already, and if their prophecies fail, then so has their religion - because "prophecy" seems to be a big part of religion these days. Meaning, their religion can be demonstrated to be a false one, right now... not just "some unspecified time in the future".

False prophecies are uttered by false prophets.

Ouch.

It must suck to know that.

No wonder they're so grouchy and out of sorts.

Most folks would just go shopping for another religion that might yet prove to be valid.

originally posted by: Willtell
The Prophet Muhammad made some accurate prophesies and two were these:

He predicted the Arabs would find gold under their feet

That’s obviously an illusion to oil

Obviously ...?

Why would a prediction say gold when it "obviously" references oil ?

Mental gymnastics

originally posted by: UmbraSumus

originally posted by: Willtell
The Prophet Muhammad made some accurate prophesies and two were these:

He predicted the Arabs would find gold under their feet

That’s obviously an illusion to oil

Obviously ...?

Why would a prediction say gold when it "obviously" references oil ?

Mental gymnastics

"... black gold, Saudi tea,

Well, the first thing you know,
Ahmad's a millionaire ..."

a reply to: rokkuman

Bottom line - Religion is the real problem. ISIS is just a symptom.

That's right OP, point that nasty finger of judgement.
And ignore the deeper truth.

a reply to: [post=19061771]rokkuman[/post

Scary...and WOW!
The doc I work for, who is Assyrian, told me about this today at clinic..that Jesus would come during this great "end times" battle and JESUS would spear this Dajjal or antichrist and bring about the glory of Islam....(I am a Christian...so I never had heard this story before...just the old stories about Armageddon and the "2nd coming" of Jesus during the "end times....

I am a middle aged woman and am saying that I NEVER thought I would see the things I have seen....Mosques in EL PASO even....all over the US....Hijab wearing women everywhere....a MUSLIM president.....

I am not trying to be a fear monger...but WOW......

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Never surprised at how far believers will deny logic and facts to preserve their belief.

Notice the number of responses here "well, I believe" or "the Bible says" or "that just can't be true."

Jews, Christians and Muslims are all "People of the Book." With a few discrepancies, you all believe the same thing.

Not unlike the right of Baptism ... some dab and some dunk.

If you anti-Islamists took a minute to learn anything about your "enemy," you'd find that Islam respects Jesus a lot more than most of you do (e.g. they don't have him still skewered on a cross on the wall in most mosques, just sayin.)

You might also know, if actual history weren't such a problem that the name "Jesus" is an entirely modern phenomenon.

In His own "time" He was called Ieshua. The Muslims know Him as Isa.

Isa was taken up to heaven rather than being killed, and He's waiting to come back to destroy the evil one during the end times.

Isa also proclaimed the coming of the last Prophet Muhammad.

I know some of you don't want to share your Masih (Messiah) ... but, if the fairy tales, er, beliefs that both Christians and Muslims hold, actually turn out to be true, you're going to have to, at least by a 1.6 Billion to 2 Billion chance.

Of course, the Jews may be right and you're all heretics worshiping false gods.

Or the Hindus may be right and you're all worshiping the same God under different names.

Or the Buddhists may be right and it's all just in your mind.

Or ... (and this is the one I'm betting on) ... these beliefs will continue to beget the violence they always have for the last 2000 years or so, and humans will fight and bleed and die for nothing besides their own delusions.

That's only my opinion though. No evidence aside from, well, everything.

Awesome post.

a reply to: jcrash

I don't normally suggest someone read something so long but America was essentially founded as a new Rome and a new Jerusalem. All throughout the country, but especially in DC the symbols are everywhere. I have no idea what this means to your prophecy but seats of power change, and now its America.

Heres the youtube video. For the record I think he reaches in a lot of places but I can't deny the conclusions
www.youtube.com...

The whore of Rome would in that case be a subcommittee of our congress that rules financial matters, or possibly the federal reserve.

Which would mean their entire goal is to destroy our monetary system and capitalism.

So if any of that made sense (sorry, sleep meds kicking in, I'm not the most lucid) the question is... who is the antichrist today? There are many descriptions of him, such as a man of peace that brings about war. Who would that be? I think we could rule out any president, they're not in power long enough. Would it be a businessman with deep control of government like the Kochs or Larry Page?

originally posted by: nenothtu
They believe the "Crusader Armies" (apparently "The U.S." is their interpretation of that phrase) will be defeated at Dabiq, Syria. It's a really tiny town on the border of Syria and Turkey. It is what they have named their monthly "news" rag after, and it is where Peter Kassig was beheaded as the first "Crusader" to die at Dabiq. By doing so, and "tweaking" the designation "Crusader" (there have been no actual Crusaders in existence anywhere on Earth for 800 years - all the Crusaders are already long dead) they show, as previously mentioned, a desire to "force" their prophecy.

Sadly for them, unless "Crusaders" show up at Dabiq for their scheduled defeat, their entire "prophecy" falls flat on it's face, and since there are no more Crusaders, and have not been for 800 years, their "prophecy" is doomed to failure, right out of the gate. If Crusaders no longer exist, it naturally follows that none will be putting in their appearance at Dabiq.

Now, to be fair, the actual prophecy (the non-Daesh version) specifies NOT "Crusaders" but rather "Roman armies" to be defeated at Dabiq. That, however, may be even worse - there have been no "Roman armies" since the mid 6th century, so of course they won't be putting in an appearance, either. We may be able to fudge it a bit, and declare the Vatican Swiss Guard as the "Roman Army". There are slightly under 200 of them all total, making a rather tiny "army" as armies go, and you can see them coming a mile away in those ridiculously garish uniforms they wear. Rather than being any actual danger, they are an embarrassment to the mercenary profession in this day and age.

If you look at the historical ideas that the US was meant to be a new Rome, you could say it would be our soldiers. That's stretching things a bit, but you have to stretch every prophecy to make it fit. ISIS is already pretty clear in their position, they want to kill a whole bunch of US citizens there. So, atleast they do see us as the successor.

originally posted by: Aazadan

... who is the antichrist today? There are many descriptions of him, such as a man of peace that brings about war. Who would that be? I think we could rule out any president, they're not in power long enough.

I can think of one in particular who won a "Nobel Peace prize" before he did anything at all, and then proceeded to get his hands bloody up to his elbows promoting an "Arab Spring" and trying to overthrow Syrian leadership, and who doesn't mind making new laws (which is, after all, all that a term limit is) as he goes along, by executive fiat...

... just sayin', if folks really want to interpret antichrists and such the way listed there...

originally posted by: Aazadan

If you look at the historical ideas that the US was meant to be a new Rome, you could say it would be our soldiers. That's stretching things a bit, but you have to stretch every prophecy to make it fit. ISIS is already pretty clear in their position, they want to kill a whole bunch of US citizens there. So, atleast they do see us as the successor.

I don't subscribe to that notion, in part because Latin isn't the language of the Empire these days. I do agree that they see the U.S. as the successors, but lamentably, the prophecy didn't say "Romans or their successors", so it's still a bust. Now, if Mohammed (or whomever put those words in his mouth) had said "Some day, we will meet the American Federal Empire on the field at Dabiq", I'd say "whoa, dude!" and possibly look into taking up Islam, but he (or they) didn't. Their pipeline to Allah evidently has a leak in it somewhere.

That's sort of like predicting that America is going to destroy Europe, and then having Russia turn Europe into a smoking crater, then trying to claim the Russians were Americans to make the prophecy stick. Wars are predictable to a degree, because they happen with some regularity. Getting specific about who is going to do what, and where, is where Mohammed (or whomever actually made the "prophecy" in his name) went horribly off the rails.

As prophecies go, Edgar Cayce has a better track record, even with that drivel about Atlantis dogging his rep. I personally can predict the weather with better accuracy than that alleged prophecy, but I make no claims to prophethood just because of that.

originally posted by: nenothtu
I can think of one in particular who won a "Nobel Peace prize" before he did anything at all, and then proceeded to get his hands bloody up to his elbows promoting an "Arab Spring" and trying to overthrow Syrian leadership, and who doesn't mind making new laws (which is, after all, all that a term limit is) as he goes along, by executive fiat...

... just sayin', if folks really want to interpret antichrists and such the way listed there...

And in less than 2 years Obama will be completely powerless and irrelevant. That's why I said before that I don't see it being any president, their terms just aren't long enough.

a reply to: randyvs

That's right OP, point that nasty finger of judgement.
And ignore the deeper truth.

the "deeper truth" is that religion causes nothing but trouble.

ISIS are waiting for Jesus to show up!

If He ever does show up, they'll be wishing He hadn't. Jesus forgave sinners, he didn't hang them in the town square. Jesus forgave adulterers, he didn't stone them to death. Jesus was kind and taught those who didn't understand instead of killing 'unbelievers'.

a reply to: rokkuman

religion causes nothing but trouble.

How does that happen? That's like saying politics causes nothing but
bar fights. Or really great morals. See religion or politics do nothing
by themselves. Religion can't be judged like, Ooo oo religion bad.
Do you honestly think that if there were no religions the world would
be all peaches and cream?

a reply to: nenothtu

I read something like this the other day that made a connection for me.

The first horseman is the white horseman who goes forth with a bow to conquer.

Well, lots of people have pointed out that his bow has no arrows and that the white horse is like the one Christ comes on in the true second coming. They say it's deception all over it. The bow that conquers without firing an arrow is deceptive or "peaceful" conquering, and the white horse is in imitation or counterfeit of the messiah.

And the red horse follows. And we know the red horse is war.

So which figure in recent history has everyone looked at as the great one, the lightbringer who will bring all the world closer together in love and harmony? And now we see it descending into war as his time in power starts coming to a close.

Does that mean that Obama's presidency was the first seal, the first horseman? I don't know, but I know he's not the anti-Christ.

I dunno what film it was, but somebody fired a single arrow towards the enemy and it landed a good few hundred metres in front of them. They thought he completely missed and their cavalry charged towards them. When they reached the arrow, which was sticking out of the ground, every archer fired and the timing proved to be not only absolutely correct, but the crucial factor in their success as they had no conventional means to defend against horsemen. In spite of their massive numerical advantage, the enemy infantry immediately realised how good the Templar was with his battlefield decisions, and turned about.

As for Obama, I regard him as rather average in terms of his role, which may not be such a bad considering the failures that were Bush & Blair.