It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The False Prophet of Revelation

page: 8
10
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart

Why do you say only 30% of the Dead Sea Scrolls were released?




posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: AngraMainyu

Probably since the find is basically in millions of pieces, most of the book material in the DSS find is unintelligible. And people give the DSS way too much credit. It was the library of an extremist sect. It's like finding the lost books of David Koresh. No doubt, the main difference between DSS biblical texts and, say, the Leningrad Codex, is that the texts found in Qumran belonged to an extremist sect who held an extreme form of Judaism as compared to, say, Rabbinical Judaism. The differences are doctrinal, and the age of it gives no credit. Older doesn't necessarily mean better in biblical archaeology.
edit on 25-3-2016 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The drug Harmala grew especially well on Patmos at the time John did his writing and it hard to believe with the history of drug enhanced visions etc etc he did not imbibe. (he had precious little else to do).

entheology.com...

Makes a very good read indeed. Ha Ha!



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

When in temporary exile on Patmos, John wrote the Book of Revelation, which you now have in greatly abridged and distorted form. This Book of Revelation contains the surviving fragments of a great revelation, large portions of which were lost, other portions of which were removed, subsequent to John’s writing. It is preserved in only fragmentary and adulterated form. (The Urantia Book, paper 139, sec. 4)


To search for exactly what words or how it was corrupted, in my opinion, is fruitless. Rather we need to examine content from a theologian's point of view. It's not enough to be merely a philosopher of religion.

I know someone who is a Protestant preacher with her own family church. She is in the family of preachers who know Hebrew and Hellenistic Greek and, as she tells me, the Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation are written in the same style in original Greek and both are evidently inspired works. Hence your argument that they were written by different people, without specific evidence to support this (beyond the quoted abstract quibbles on Wikipedia), and especially your argument that the writer of the Book of Revelation is a false prophet, ignoring many individuals throughout history and especially today who are more suited for such a description (see below), is ludicrous. To explain your efforts, I would think it's an effect of pop culture of anomie (Richard Dawkins?) on your soul. I hope it's not the case, though, because you seem to be a spiritual person.

Additionally, what may be so confusing to many is that, even though sometimes stated otherwise even in The Book of Urantia, neither God is in us nor are we God. Instead, to be technically correct, a fragment of God, known as Thought Adjuster, is in each one of us, but God is not reducible to His fragments. Similarly, we taken collectively or individually are also not generalizable to be God in any way or form (the antichrist would say otherwise), unless you are referring to a mere small-letter "god," such as those who fly on space saucers (which may also be connected to the antichrist).

John the Apostle (John Zebedee), the most beloved of disciples of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, was speaking through his heart the teaching of his Savior and also thus was in harmony with his own Thought Adjuster (as indeed Rev. 1:8 proves this). He never equated himself with God, but he was speaking for God who was within him partially, hence his connection to God. You, on the other hand, make a sacrilegious logical mistake by equating us with God. The problem is not in John the Apostle. The problem is within you that it prohibits you from being in harmony with your own Thought Adjuster and God. To understand John better, you need to be integrating your consciousness through heart and not your brain/mind that is only concerned with reading words as mere words without any sacred/true content.


originally posted by: SilentHill666
...I was under the understanding Apostle John wrote Revelation when he was older....

According to The Urantia Book, he wrote it before he wrote the Gospel. Hence this may explain a less "elegant" style, although, if to believe my Protestant friend who knows her Greek, the structure of the Book of Revelation is extremely complex and non-linear and hence may be considered "genius" (I must submit that I've only read its Russian Orthodox translation and not the Greek original, so my friend is a better source on this). Here is the quote, following the one above from the same paper of The Urantia Book:

John traveled much, labored incessantly, and after becoming bishop of the Asia churches, settled down at Ephesus. He directed his associate, Nathan, in the writing of the so-called “Gospel according to John,” at Ephesus, when he was ninety-nine years old. Of all the twelve apostles, John Zebedee eventually became the outstanding theologian. He died a natural death at Ephesus in A.D. 103 when he was one hundred and one years of age. (ibid.)



originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

1. Man who claims he is the Christ/Messiah and that Jesus was just a prophet and all religious text contain truth and error.
messenger.cjcmp.org...

2. Man who claims he is the second coming.
conservativepost.com...

3. Australian man claims to be second coming because he looks like the Shroud of Turin.
www.dailymail.co.uk... home-moving-Australia-follow-self-proclaimed-messiah.html

4-37. Wikipedia
A list of 34 other people in the last couple of centuries who have claimed to be the second coming.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

So that is at least 37 in the last two hundred years.

And I don't remember who, and I couldn't find it on Google. But there was a Protestant preacher claiming to be Elijah not long ago, who was going to reunite the Christians and Catholics.

But You can keep trying to use the bible to disprove the bible if you like.


Excellent research, thanks! This is a list of possible false prophets that is important to show to the OP that he shouldn't just concentrate on John the Apostle who wrote the Book of Revelation but on those who are more relevant for our time today. You also need to add Pope Francis to the list. He is trying to unite Protestants and Catholics through him (among others).


originally posted by: Farlander
Revelation 1
8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”

John is QUOTING what GOD said. He isn't claiming to BE God or the Alpha and Omega....

Indeed so. Thanks for pointing this out.


originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
...Works without faith are empty in God's eyes, and faith without works is dead. They are interdependent, but it is clear that faith is the first requirement.

Totally agree. You need to teach this to Catholics, especially those since Vatican II.
edit on 25-3-2016 by ilstar because: alignment in quotes



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: ketsuko

To believe in Jesus (his true nature, that of yourself) is to emulate him and to become perfect. If you honestly try to be perfect, you can be. The thing is, a lot of people believe perfection is unattainable, and in the process they do not try to be perfect because of that belief.

How can you claim to live in Jesus if you do not live as he did: perfectly?

In my personal opinion (I'm nonreligious), we must never try to be like someone else, even Jesus, but should be only ourselves perfecting ourselves to a higher state, going toward a realm that is ruled by Christ. Hence I'd interpret that passage as not literal but a mere statement of exhortation and a role model to be followed within our ability. To put it in other words, add evolution to the statement, and you'd know what I mean. We aren't and never will be Jesus but we can be pure and honest and loving like (or "as") Jesus. Exactly as ketsuko said:

originally posted by: ketsuko
...You can always be better [with belief, even in love]. (emphasis added)



originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: ketsuko

My point is that there is no such thing as a "false church" if they teach Jesus' sacrifice being the way to salvation. You're the pot calling the kettle black.


Please refer to the Gospel of Judas on this one. For example,

"[We have seen] a great [house with a large] altar [in it, and] twelve men—they are the priests, we would say—and a name; and a crowd of people is waiting at that altar, [until] the priests [… and receive] the offerings. [But] we kept waiting.”
[Jesus said], “What are [the priests] like?”
They [said, “Some …] two weeks; [some] sacrifice their own children, others their wives, in praise [and] humility with each other; some sleep with men; some are involved in [slaughter]; some commit a multitude of sins and deeds of lawlessness. And the men who stand [before] the altar invoke your [name], [39] and in all the deeds of their deficiency, the sacrifices are brought to completion" (Gospel of Judas, 38-9).


Also see this interview.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 02:49 AM
link   
I think the Christians should stop be paralyzed by the image of the antichrist that they expect to come since the time of the writing of Revelation. First of all Jesus didn't talk of ONE antichrist, didn't use the word, and didn't speak of the mark of the beast.

There are other events in the Revelation preceding the surface of the last antichrist, whoever and whenever he might come. There is no timing whatsoever. We may say, he came 1000 years ago, 70 years ago, he is living today, or he will come after 150 years, and that all is correct. Are there today's antichrists? more than we can count.

The problem is not that someone who opposes Jesus an God will arrive, since he already arrived many times. The problem is the Christian population is deluded not to strive for the Kingdom of God. But to await passively someone to make it worse before Jesus will make it better "in an instant". Good but not good enough. Because where are the beatitudes and the kingdom Jesus preached of? Where are our efforts to bring food to the hungry and visit those in need? Aren't we falling short of Jesus' own demands as he speaks of the Judgment Day? Jesus didn't speak of one antichrist who sends to hell by chipping or whatever. But Jesus clearly said who would go to hell: whoever doesn't see Himself in the least of His brethren and whoever doesn't fulfill the teaching of Jesus in first place. Be it in the End times or in the Middle of history.

And even if tomorrow the final antichrist starts chipping everyone, something very unlikely, (we will know it only when it happens not beforehand because otherwise we would know beforehand the exact timing of the Second Coming that is impossible by the words of Jesus himself). Even then the fundamentals would not recognize the rescue way out given by God, thru prophets and most likely, Angels. Instead, that rescue way will be demonized by people who always think they know it better. As their forefathers thought in the Middle age. Be it a rapture, a hiding in caves, or whatever else.

For me, a successful drive of the Churches will be to acknowledge a number of truths never acknowledged or obscured in centuries uneasy history. And to start leading spiritually humanity in a new way. I can list some of that, but I believe it is well known both by frequent readers and by those who actually rule the Christianity (in all its forms). First of all, it should be made crystal clear that the Holy Scripture does not ban the Aliens as demons. Angels appearing either in person or with chariots and Ezekiel's wheels are something present and lauded by prophets all the time, and expected by them at the end times. The idea of a new earth (and thousands more) should be made clear once again as cornerstone of our Christian belief, not as remote hypothetical option that will never arrive in our lifetime and therefore better stay in the dark corner...

Ont he other side, the morality should be defined in the light of what Jesus did in real life while on earth. All bans of books should be lifted, and newly discovered books that do not have any bans should be reviewed as equally important histrical documents. Because it does matter if Jesus was married, and possibly had children. It just matters for Christianity and the Christians. As everything else what He did or said. I can quote such texts, but I don't want to make ti too long or to enter into discussion about that (no time to answer anyway). It should be clarified where Jesus spent the years that are outside Gospel's (current canonical ones), as well as where He went after Ascension. Not on clouds. It is some place since we know there is a throne. Perhaps he didn't sit on one place on the throne all that time, roughly some 1990 years. That should all be defined better, with the knowledge of our age that is of trillions of other stars that potentially could harbor as many planets as our solar system have. Who are the angels and where they come from? Who are the demons?

Having all that said, one can further look at interpretations of End times. Is there Factor Nibiru, as the Shumers have recorded it? If yes, when and how it fits the End times of Revelation timeline, that envisions not one impact but 3 or more in the trumps before the antichrist.

Unless the approach changes, nothing will change. We wil continue waiting for the next eclipse and the next anniversary of liberation of Israel.

Indeed, whether waited or not, the events will befall us one day. But let me say, the Churches today do next to nothing to prepare us for that day. Instead, it seems to me they buy time, especially the Catholic church but also the others. By selling us true things that are small part of the truth, without the above mentioned major issues. Indeed the Catholic Church and pope Francis tried to change status quo in last years, but it is too little too late. Much more is needed.

Or we get it directly by the angels when they finally come. Be it in a rapture like event, or be it to continue what failed to be established after Jesus' departure and the last records of angels in the Gospel. Why did they stop appearing in public, as they did throughout the Old and New Testament? Aren't we just spared the truth on that, too? Why Jesus said to Nathaniel, he would see angels descending on the Son of Man, and in the record we have only the angels at the tomb and then Ascension, and once to Peter once to Phillip? Where are the angels in the canonical books? Were they cut short, as Mary Magdalene too? What we were never told of, is more important part of the Gospel.

Instead, we were filled with modern and medieval prophecies that try to substitute the picture of the so cut Gospels. I don't say all of them are false. But the apocalyptic picture of ONE antichrist that controls the world, already 1990 years, is not the real picture. Even if such is about to come. Without getting the other part of the truth we get nothing but delusion skillfully manipulated by those same forces that will ultimately bring forth the final antichrist. In a way, we are more prepared to greet him than to greet God's kingdom preached by the Son of God. Of course everyone of us is also mortal and may not survive to see it all. But we are given reason to discern the signs of the times, even if we ourselves do not live long enough to see them. As the prophets died in their age. For me the picture of the so called antichrist starting from Augustine, is totally flawed and on wrong basis. He redrew the basic timeline of the Revelation. Instead of copying that failed model, that proved grossly failed in middle age (because it couldn't be the kingdom of God on Earth with all bloodshed), instead the Churches should see a better model and new interpretation dated today 21st century, taking account of the things I already mentioned briefly. You cannot exclude the 99.9999% of the visible world and pretend you have the entire picture and no other truth is permissible. Galileo mindset. At the same time, I will repeat again, core issues of the life of Jesus on Earth have been kept hidden until this day. Perhaps there are enough existing documents, both published and still secret, to speak about that. They only need to be rubber stamped by authority. The problem is not in the documents to be called forged, the problem is in the authority that refuses to change already 16 years in the new century. Sorry but we are not in the Middle ages.

edit on 2-4-2016 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Isurrender73

You claim that the Web site at messenger.cjcmp.org is written by (and I quote): "1. Man who claims he is the Christ/Messiah and that Jesus was just a prophet and all religious text contain truth and error."

That is not true. He does not claim to be "the Christ." However, he does explain what a Mashiach (Messiah) is, as the Tanakh defines it, and as Jesus understood it.

Furthermore, he does not say Jesus was "just a prophet." He says Jesus was a prophet, as he said he was, which is obvious since his prophecies are accurate. But he also says Jesus was an Avatar, in that he was not only an "anointed one," but also an enlightened one who realized his oneness with God, the Great Spirit Parent of us all.

As for religious texts containing both truth and error, that is true. All religious texts were written by divinely inspired human beings, and they were only human. That's why they contain some contradictions, some errors and some fabricated myths, but yet still contain much universal truth.

Please do not misrepresent what the principal messenger for the Spirit of truth says.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim


TextAgreed. Saulus was the person John of Patmos called the False Prophet or the second beast of Re 13.

Nonsense. Hatred breeds insanity.



posted on Apr, 18 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   
I find the difference between the Revelation timeline and Ezekiel's timeline disturbing. First Revelations eems to copy much of Ezekiel regarding the cherubs (wheels) in Ezekiel 1 and regarding the heavenly Jerusalem in the last chapters of Ezekiel who saw it on the ground in today's Israel. But that is not the most important.

The timeline of Revelation includes series of events to precede the coming of Jesus Christ. Then it comes the Millennium. And only then comes the war of Gog and Magog.

Ezekiel predicts Gog and Magog war to come between the establishment of the Jewish nation again, and the coming of the heavenly Jerusalem. Indeed one may say, ok between the Jewish nation and Gog and Magog all of that wil happen that John wrote about it. Well, also the Second Coming and the Millenium? Isn't it against the logic that Jesus Christ have to wait a future after millenial war in order to bring the resurrection and everything good? Or Ezekiel was mistaken somehow? BTW why didn't the prophets foresee the Church era on earth?

The church scholars after Augustine decided to further change the strange timeline of Revelation. They cancelled the Millennium (how about Gog and Magog) and said, the Church's reign on earth IS the kingdom of God on Earth! Quite strong assertion, knowing from history of all bloodshed and burning of people who thought differently (who were also baptized Christians, may be more fervent than their persecutors). Today, looking back in history, is absurd to claim that was the Kingdom of God preached by the meek Jesus Christ.

Is it possible indeed someone else to have written the Apocalypse of John, and therefore that piece of writing to be not equally inspired as the rest of the Bible? After all, even if John himself saw those things, they were just a vision and not words said by Jesus himself. Let alone the fact all Gospels were written down at least one century after Jesus. Not a line was written down and preserved from the time of Jesus.

In contrast, the works of the prophets are rather well documented, many of them. Indeed there are some questions of some parts of them whether they were written later.

The early Christians awaited the soon to come Second Coming of the Lord. So much so that they abandoned their daily works, admonished by Paul (Paul's role being another hot topic by itself).

Where did Jesus speak of one only antichrist with the mark 666 who will have the power to throw in hell? If it was that important, wouldn't He tell us to save us? His warning of "many false christs" is nowhere near to the John's antichrist that everyone who worship him goes automatically to hell. Jesus didn't say the same for those false christs.

I wonder, who redacted the words of Jesus in 2nd and 3rd centuries and for what purposes.

For us the believers of 21st century remains the hope that Jesus will accept us the way we are given to believe, although it might be wrong. He knows from heaven how much the texts were changed, which one is right and which one we have at our disposal to read, to love, to fulfill. I believe that all those honest christians throughout the centuries, some of them martyrs by pagan persecutors, others martyrs by the Church fellow servants, will be judged and rewarded based on what they sincerely accepted by heart and followed their whole lives.

And those who changed Jesus' words will be judged severely, as the text of John itself says. In a sense, even if the timeline of the Revelation is the 100% true one, it has been changed in history of the Church to serve contemporary needs of establishment of a kingdom pretty much opposite to what Jesus preached. So, if the people believe the revelation of John and are judged by what they believe, it is exactly the Revelation that accuses those who changed words throughout the centuries.

In conclusion, I Don't Know whether John of Revelation is another John, or how true the book is by itself, that started to be written down no earlier than the end of second century (first papirii found dating back then). If I accept it, it is to help me recognize Jesus' words and works. If I have doubts it is because of Jesus' words and works might be somewhat different in the near future and not exactly what preached in churches. I do expect a different manifestation of Jesus, that some mystics speak about, starting from St Bernard and going to modern mystics. Indeed, the terrible judge may come, but first Jesus will come as a merciful savior, as St Faustina for example said in the mid of 20th century in her devotion of Divine Mercy.

I wonder, is it because of celestial event such as Nibiru Planet X or another one, that whoever accepts Jesus as merciful savior and his angels as sent by God (let say chariots of fire spaceships) will be saved physically, and whoever doesn't accept it, will have to undergo the punishment worse than the Flood as other mystics speak about? (Akita, Fatima, St Pio, others). And the real End times to unfold later? Or that to be the first part of the End times? I just don't know. I expect Jesus, not necessarily the way the preachers tell us. I am not eager to see an antichrist, although there are many available today, in order to believe Jesus will come to save me and my loved ones.

And finally, if John's revelation is 100% correct, where are the Manchild and the 144,000 that come before the rise of the antichrist? Apparently the manchild is another person(s) not baby Jesus who wasn't raptured but grew up, died and resurrected. If there is such prophecy, as we can all read, of another one coming "in the name of the Lord", as the Churches proclaim on every Sanctus on every mass, and as Jesus himself told the Jews they should accept "whoever comes in the name of" the Lord and not the Lord directly, then why we are not being told that by the clergy for so long, instead fed up with the myths of the antichrist to come first? In that way, they have put a time trap for th ebelievers to automatically reject anyone that Jesus might send before Him, as John the Baptist, or as the predicted Elijah.

Thank you for reading
edit on 18-4-2017 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2017 @ 01:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Don't believe that John claims to be Jesus through the words he writes down? Let's look a little further down within the first chapter.


Revelation 1
8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”


John is claiming to be the "Alpha and Omega" through his writing. No one else but John wrote these words down, so he is claiming to be God speaking through the hand of John of Patmos.



What if I told you "I had a dream last night about something bad happening in May, in the northern part of the US. Go warn your family that lives there something bad will happen". Would I be warning you of my dream? or would I be telling you that I am the one who is going to do the bad thing? In oterh words, this verse in revelation is merely telling us his dream. And in his dream, he heard the voice of God saying "I am, the alpha and the omega".



posted on Apr, 18 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: 2012newstart
and as Jesus himself told the Jews they should accept "whoever comes in the name of" the Lord and not the Lord directly, ...

When I googled that phrase the only related links I got was another Paul-bashing+twisting website and a song.



posted on Apr, 18 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   
As correction to what I said until now, it is highly probable that Jesus will come for the Bride in a rapture-like event, whatever the exact name. I will not enter into long discussion of the rapture doctrine that traces back to the 4th century St Ephraem the Syrian, and to the early centuries belief of Christian communities of soon to come Jesus Christ. (below)

Indeed, if all gospels and the book of Revelation are recorded 100% correct, or let say, at least 90% correct, then little is left to doubt the preventive action of God in the face of incoming antichrist. The event of taking the faithful to heaven (or wherever it might be that place) is spoken of a dozen of times in the gospels and thee epistles. Regardless of the exact name given after 18th century, and how that name is "not found in the gospel", the event is clearly described as such.

In other words, I want to believe what is written, up to the letter. I don't know how much it was changed. But as I said in the previous post, God will judge and reward us for what we believe because He knows perfectly well what has been changed throughout the centuries and what verse of the Gospel books we have today.

Whether the rapture event will happen overnight (as said in the Gospel) or it will take longer time, and how exactly, by lifting up in free flight, or by boarding flying devices, I can only guess, and my guess is not better than yours. But that should happen, even only by the logical consideration that God will save His people from a dying planet in the face of cataclysm, that many secular sources speak of either.

It is very likely both the rapture and the following events of Great Trib/comet/Nibiru to be related to extraterrestrials of different kinds. In the rapture, God's angels will take us up, be it directly as depicted in pictures, or be it in spaceships, more likely IMO after the example of Elijah.

In the following Great Trib and/or planetary cataclysm, it is also very likely OTHER extraterrestrial groups to participate, the evil ones, the fallen ones, or call them devils if you want to (or their servants). The people unfortunately don't make distinction between these two groups (or there might be more than just two) and will fall prey to think, God's angels are the demons. Refusing the rapture (or you name it, whatever way of salvation God has appointed and how exactly), they will be voluntarily left behind with the other option to face exactly those negative beings whom they wanted to escape from.

Therefore prophet Daniel says about the Wise people to teach many. Not the holy but the wise. It is needed wisdom, said John, to decode the number of the beast. And,
Hosea 4:6 King James Version (KJV)
6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge
________________________________________

St Ephraem the Syrian
"For all the saints and Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."

www.khouse.org...

www.arewelivinginthelastdays.com...
On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World

edit on 18-4-2017 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

www.biblegateway.com...

Matthew 23:39 New King James Version (NKJV)

39 for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’

Luke 13:35 New King James Version (NKJV)

35 See! Your house is left to you desolate; and assuredly, I say to you, you shall not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’ ”


________________________________________

my insignificant interpretation: whether Jesus talks of himself, that certainly He is the one sent in the name of the Lord,

Or, whether Jesus talks of those whom He will send in His name, the name of the Lord, because He is the Lord, ...I don't know. His last words before His ascension to His disciples were:

Mark 16:15 New King James Version (NKJV)

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.

The word "world" in Greek is "cosmos", and I know there is always heated discussion about the exact meaning of the greek words. Thus Universe is translated with world. Whatever it is, my point here is that Jesus clearly gives mandate to His disciples, so they go in "His name" without abusing power.

Therefore, as reviewed all of that, I disagree with the OP that John the author of the apocalypse is antichrist. Even if John of the apocalypse is different personage from John the apostle, and he didn't say he was the apostle. Of course if he differs that will make the importance of the apocalypse less than what assumed. Whatever, there are many inspired books after the apocalypse from later centuries with their authors known to be faithful servants of the lord. As St Ephraim (Ephrem/Epraem) whom I quoted. en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 18-4-2017 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2017 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-4-2017 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2017 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart

Your mistake is to think people wait passively. The lesson is to keep ourselves always spiritually ready.

To be spiritually ready, you must be full in faith and with the Holy Spirit, and to truly be full with the Holy Spirit, you will be called to works. That means the world will be a better place for the true faithful as they will always seek to make the world a better place just by virtue of who they are and what that makes them.

The complacent ones are the ones who tell themselves that He is not coming, not today, tomorrow, or for hundreds of years, so they do not keep themselves ready. Maybe they go to church on Sunday and live in the world the rest of the week without thought to Him. But they don't have enough oil in their lamps and if He should come, they won't be ready.



posted on Apr, 18 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
The False Prophet of Revelation...

I am still trying to find out if False Prophet... is the same thing as False Messenger

It seems scripture sets the scene with the 1st Beast having been the Universal Religion, possibly first come about during the Reign of Nimrod (the hunter God-King)

then after humans discovered/invented other religions over the next 5 thousand years...
along comes the End-Time False-Prophet (or False-Messenger) to restore the Pagan worship that arose in our Antiquity (AKA: 1st Beast from Sea),
which preceded both the Hebrews/Jews also the Buddha & Islam Faiths of Today...

These later model religions became the method of leaking out 'secrets' called 'Prophecy' to the ever growing Human population of 'worshipers'

So, to my mind, the 'Revelation False Prophet' will create or revive a First-Beast~ AKA Antichrist.../or the Pagan religion from antiquity

Everybody will be looking for a team of 2 persons, but the False Prophet is the One who performs miracles and such... the antichrist is only an 'Image...that Speaks' and is immobile as it only sits on the Throne Seat-of-Power


I keep recalling that even-the-Elect will be deceived for a time, so all the EU-Rome as Dragon Empire themes circulating out there since started by Mr Darby are false teachings...having you look here-there-&-everywhere for the end-times



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart

Ah, now I can confidently say that Jesus never used the noun "the Lord" in that phrase. He was quoting the Hebrew Scriptures, Ps 118:26.

Psalms 118:26 (ASV)

Blessed be he that cometh in the name of Jehovah: We have blessed you out of the house of Jehovah.

(NW)

26 Blessed is the one who comes in the name of Jehovah;

We bless you from the house of Jehovah.


Matthew 23:39

39 For I say to you, you will by no means see me from now until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovah’s* name!’”

*: See App. A5.

Rational people that are willing to be honest with themselves and others about this should be able to tell straight away, since "Lord" is not a name. That was what put me on the trail and wanting to know which specific text you were referring to, I could tell straight away that wasn't right/accurate in spite of the subtlety with the "" leaving out "the Lord" in the 2nd mention of that quotation but not doing that in the first quotation and still adding it straight after the 2nd quotation.

Luke wrote down the same quotation Jesus made from the Hebrew Scriptures that use God's name as is still clearly and unambiguously seen in the oldest Hebrew manuscripts at Psalms 118:26. God's name does not translate to "the LORD" or even more deceptively "the Lord", it does not mean "the lord" or "lord". Try to quit playing according to the tunes these type of people want you to play:
"you can't use his name!"

Vatican Seeks to Eliminate Use of the Divine Name:

THE Catholic hierarchy is seeking to eliminate the use of the divine name in their church services. Last year, the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments sent instructions on this matter to Catholic bishops’ conferences worldwide. The step was taken “by directive” of the pope.

This document, dated June 29, 2008, decries the fact that despite instructions to the contrary, “in recent years the practice has crept in of pronouncing the God of Israel’s proper name, known as the holy or divine tetragrammaton, written with four consonants of the Hebrew alphabet in the form יהוה, YHWH.” The document notes that the divine name has variously been rendered “Yahweh,” “Yahwè,” “Jahweh,” “Jahwè,” “Jave,” “Yehovah,” and so forth.* However, the Vatican directive seeks to reestablish the traditional Catholic position. That is to say, the Tetragrammaton is to be replaced by “Lord.” Moreover, in Catholic religious services, hymns, and prayers, God’s name “YHWH is neither to be used or pronounced.”

In support of this position, the Vatican’s document appeals to the “immemorial tradition” of Catholicism. The directive claims that even in the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, dating to pre-Christian times, the divine name was regularly rendered Kyʹri·os, the Greek word for “Lord.” Thus, the directive insists, “Christians, too, from the beginning never pronounced the divine tetragrammaton.” This statement, however, ignores clear evidence to the contrary. Early copies of the Septuagint contained, not Kyʹri·os, but the divine name in the form יהוה. Christ’s first-century followers knew and pronounced God’s name. Jesus himself said in prayer to his Father: “I have made your name known.” (John 17:26) And in his well-known model prayer, Jesus taught us to pray: “Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.”—Matthew 6:9.

It should be the desire of all Christians to see God’s name sanctified. Vatican efforts to eliminate its use dishonor Jehovah, the one who said: “This is my name for all time; by this name I shall be invoked for all generations to come.”—Exodus 3:15, The Jerusalem Bible.

[Footnote]

In English, the form “Jehovah” has been widely recognized for centuries and is used in many Bible translations.

[Blurb on page 30]

“This is my name for all time.”—Exodus 3:15, JB

[Picture on page 30]

A fragment of the “Septuagint” dating from the first century C.E. The divine name, represented by the four Hebrew letters commonly transliterated YHWH, is circled

See earlier video or follow the link for the picture (unambiguous evidence; still denied and conveniently ignored).

You were talking about a false prophet? Continue...(this time without any possible inadvertent hypocrisy and the false information about God's identity, His name and what Jesus really said). Cause otherwise it gets so ironic when talking about a false prophet for those who do know how to recognize those who are antichrist, against Christ, or who demonstrate the spirit* of the antichrist. *: attitude+way of thinking and the resulting behaviour being demonstrated. Like using bible translations that have intentionally or ignorantly mistranslated God's name with "the LORD" or more deceptively "the Lord" and ignored the evidence of God's name and its rightful place in the bible, all over 7000 times it should be in there, not just 4 times such as in the KJV which also uses Jehovah before you start about spelling when just having used the NKJV for your quotations+the other arguments or excuses and twists used below, that "Jehovah" isn't in the Hebrew or the Greek; duh, neither is "Jesus" cause those are English renderings of Hebrew names. In Dutch it's "Jezus", names are spelled different in different languages, just like the bible writers did when they transliterated and translated all the Hebrew names into Greek. Check out the nonsensical arguments regarding this below and another type of response one could give to it...)


The denial and twisting game is easy. But people do end up providing evidence for the bible's reliability regarding "false prophets" when they do this (I guess one can view it as a 'the glass is half full or half empty' kind of thing):

"They intend to make my people forget my name...." (Jeremiah 23:27, Jeremiah speaking for Jehovah, hey, notice the "Je" and "ah"-suffix in both those names?)
The name Jehovah and its theophoric names.
edit on 19-4-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: 2012newstart

Matthew 23:39 Divine Name King James Bible:

39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the LORD.( Jehovah Psa 118:26 )

See, they know what's up, still trying to conflate God's name "Jehovah" with "the LORD" there though (note the use of all capitals to hide in plain sight). Neither Jesus nor Matthew uses their language variant of "the lord" there. That term "the lord" or "the LORD" or "the Lord" should be nowhere near that verse. It's a lie, there already are Hebrew and Greek words for the noun "lord" and none of the original writings of Matthew 23:39 contained those words and the evidence is clear in spite of not having the originals (which is just used as an excuse to dismiss the evidence, both from the Hebrew Scriptures that were being quoted, which the translators of the DNKJB acknowledge in their own deceptive way, and archeology+historical documentation as discussed in the videos, early fragments of the Greek Septuagint, etc.).

But people have been nicely conditioned not to see the biggest conspiracy on the planet. And the tap-dancing around this issue on a website that supposedly addresses conspiracies, it's all just so overwhelming for someone who knows what the bible says about the subject. Hard to ignore. Also the various different forms of apathy, ignorance, preferred ignorance and agnosticism or vagueness and a general incapability of seeing what's going on here, all described in the bible and add to the pile of evidence for me for trusting what the bible says about it. The excuses, the lame arguments (with all due respect, they are just so devoid of reason and full of 'cop-out', twists and spin, a warped usage of language and logic and elements of propaganda and conditioning with propagandistic techniques, i.e. brainwashing while accusing others of brainwashing, the level of irony and hypocrisy, inadvertent or otherwise, just gets higher and higher and more convincing in relation to what the bible says about it). The inability to get any answers or responses that makes the remotest of sense or demonstrates some honesty (with oneself or others) regarding this subject again is overwhelming (talking about on ATS). But plenty of twists as demonstrated in the videos, especially the one addressed to nikkie2Christ and Barbsinclair, such a patterned set of responses or arguments. So clear how it fits with bible descriptions. I'd like it if I could just make some people see what they're doing a bit more easily, would be interesting.

Just acknowledging basic facts related to this subject seems incredibly hard for many people on these forums.
edit on 19-4-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 02:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Utnapisjtim


TextAgreed. Saulus was the person John of Patmos called the False Prophet or the second beast of Re 13.

Nonsense. Hatred breeds insanity.


Haha, and you have proof of THAT nonsense? Pft. Saulus was born «in Tarsos» (en Tarso). Tarso when transliterated into Hebrew becomes a number TRSO or Tav (400) + Resh (200) + Samek (60) and Vav (6) and added together that number is 666. Saulus said he was a Roman citizen. Which is a lie. He took the Roman name Paulus after he called a person named «Son of Jesus» for «Son of Satan» and blinded him in revenge for when Jesus (whom Saulus calls Satan) blinding Saulus. Saulus then switched identity and changed his name from Saul to Paulus, possibly after having blackmailed Sergius Paulus the Roman official who were hanging out with Barjesus in exchange for healing him or, rather, guarantee his vision would return.

Understand that Saulus was an inquisitor and a bounty hunter. A HUNGRY BLASPHEMOUS BEAST. Everything he makes Peter and the others «following» him do and say is treachery-- read everything Saulus says and understand his letters in the eye of irony and sarcasm-- as a Roman citizen he could force Peter and the others to follow him anywhere and have them interrogated in front of great audiences to confess to their crimes against Rome and Jerusalem (the early Jesus-movement were considered political dissidents and enemies of Rome, they received a day and an hour for when they would finally be tossed to the lions in the circuses or otherwise executed) in every forum and arena he would pass in his rapture (not a good thing) harvest in and around Asia Minor.

I could write volumes about Saulus' sacrilege and wicked ways, his murderous nature and his crimes against Early Christendom. Not to mention how the later Church hierarchies loved and still love the guy. Go figure.
edit on 19-4-2017 by Utnapisjtim because: misc



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 03:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

How's the Paul-bashing and bible twisting going today? The hammer working for ye? Repetition is key right?



edit on 19-4-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2017 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

Well, it seems I sort of started it, and until Saulus' books are eradicated from the Bible and his name is blot out, I will continue. Everything he witness about in the forums and the arenas, that he has seen the Jesus movement do and practice around the Empire, are descriptions of CRIMES the Jesus movement were guilty of. Read acts 13 with a minimum of Hebrew and Greek, hermeneutics and exegesis and you quickly see how Luke (who wrote Acts) also saw Saulus as a false prophet and an enemy of Jesus. Hey, read it with a minimum of intelligence in English and understand it. Saulus never ceased to be an executioner, a bounty hunter and a Pharicee. And Barnabas (who worked for the Elders) Saul's friend, claimed Jesus was never crucified, but forced another to be crucified in his place. Barnabas' version of the Jesus was the one the authors of the Koran used.
edit on 23-4-2017 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join