Cardinal Biffi - Antichrist walks among us

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 11:52 AM
link   


Actually, it's more like trying to find a needle in a needlestack. Anyone who refers to THE Antichrist as though there's only one unique singular being, is misguided. In my opinion.


I agree with you! I am of the belief that the Anti-Christ will be more of a political / conglomerate or even a multi-national entity than just a single person. I could be wrong but to me that makes more sense.




posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 11:56 AM
link   

The Antichrist will be a "convinced spiritualist" Soloviev says, an admirable philanthropist, a committed, active pacifist, a practicing vegetarian, a determined defender of animal rights


Hmmm, according to Soloviev, the Antichrist sounds like a pretty decent guy. What's the dealio? Unless this supposed Antichrist turns all Darth Vader on us, I don't see what there is to worry about.

Or maybe... Vegetarians are just plain evil?



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 11:56 AM
link   
I would recommend as background reading the following webpage: The Catholic Origins of Futurism and Preterism


In this the "Historical" interpretation, the antichrist was clearly not merely a single individual, it was a system of apostasy and persecution that would hold sway for over twelve centuries. The inevitable conclusion of those who studied these prophesies in scripture, before and during the Protestant Reformation, was that there was only one entity that fit all the above characteristics: the papal dynasty of the Roman Catholic Church.
(emphasis -Rren)

The the CC counters with Francisco Ribera's interpretation:

Ribera proposed that the first few chapters of the Apocalypse applied to ancient pagan Rome, and the rest he limited to a yet future period of 3 1/2 literal years, immediately prior to the second coming.

[...]

So, according to Ribera, the 1260 days and 42 months and 3 1/2 times of prophecy were not 1260 years, but a literal 3 1/2 years, and therefore none of the book of Revelation had any application to the middle ages or the papacy, but to the future, to a period immediately prior to the second coming, hence the name Futurism. Ribera's work is available for study at the James White Library* in Michgan.


*James White Library Information Gateway

The idea of a smooth talkin', good lookin', philanthropist who wants to stamp 666/616 on people's hands, etc, etc ad infinitum and at the same time believe that 'most, even the very elect, will be deceived' is just silly imo. Who aint gonna see that a mile away, believers and non. But I'm not Catholic either. :shrug:



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 11:59 AM
link   
I thought the antichrist was Prince William.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012



I agree with you! I am of the belief that the Anti-Christ will be more of a political / conglomerate or even a multi-national entity than just a single person. I could be wrong but to me that makes more sense.



Kinda like the Vatican....? These guys have been my personal favorite for the job for a while now. ( Not trying to convince anyone else, just adding my 2bits.)



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Let's try a little exercise here since the term "Antichrist" is scriptural, i.e. pertaining to the Bible, in nature. What does the Bible say about antichrist?


From the King James Version English Concordance-


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. 1John 2:18



Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 1John 2:22



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. 1John 4:3



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. 2John 1:17


And there you go. Four references. Any of that sound like it's referring to an individual? It doesn't to me.

Discuss among yourselves...


[Edit for typo]

[edit on 3/1/2007 by yeahright]



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   
What other evidence does the cardinal have? To it, it just sounds like his personal opinion, and Catholics are not bound to believe it.

Regardless of his status in the Church hierarchy, his pronouncement doesn't carry much weight, IMO.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Chrisitianity (Catholicism) is a derivative religion based on on Sun (son) worship (Astrotheology).

The bible is a glorified political manifesto. Nothing more, nothing less.

If there was such a thing as a antichrist it would be the catholic church!

More ignornance, killing, wars, oppression......anything and everything evil has come from the Christianity and Catholicism.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeahright
Let's try a little exercise here since the term "Antichrist" is scriptural, i.e. pertaining to the Bible, in nature. What does the Bible say about antichrist?


From the King James Version English Concordance-


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. 1John 2:18



Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 1John 2:22



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. 1John 4:3



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. 2John 1:17


And there you go. Four references. Any of that sound like it's referring to an individual? It doesn't to me.

Discuss among yourselves...


[Edit for typo]

[edit on 3/1/2007 by yeahright]


the idea of the antichrist has been applied to the beasty type thing in revelations. it's just a simplified way of describing him. everybody understands by now that if you reference the term "antichrist" it refers to the act of being against christ as a savior. so from here on out let's just understand that the bible does refer to a person who will be the "great deceiver" and we can call him/her/it the antichrist for the point of debate.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by QuasiShaman
More ignornance, killing, wars, oppression......anything and everything evil has come from the Christianity and Catholicism.


WOW! Then I take it that Christianity even predates the Bible and has been a world influence since before the Neaderthals!
Incredible piece of reasoning! Let's deny all of history and lump all the blame on Christians.
Ignorance Denied!

[edit on 1-3-2007 by kenshiro2012]



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by reaganero
the idea of the antichrist has been applied to the beasty type thing in revelations. it's just a simplified way of describing him. everybody understands by now that if you reference the term "antichrist" it refers to the act of being against christ as a savior. so from here on out let's just understand that the bible does refer to a person who will be the "great deceiver" and we can call him/her/it the antichrist for the point of debate.


That's fine, you can do as you like. But calling a duck an eagle doesn't make it one. IMO, if people are going to attempt to ascertain the meaning behind scripture, it's vital to have a clear understanding of the terms being referenced. Lucifer, Satan, The Beast, The Deceiver, antichrist, are not interchangable terms if you have any hope of comprehending the message.

But it's a futile exercise at best in these situations, and as I said, discuss among yourselves. I should've stayed out of it.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012

Originally posted by QuasiShaman
More ignornance, killing, wars, oppression......anything and everything evil has come from the Christianity and Catholicism.


WOW! Then I take it that Christianity even predates the Bible and has been a world influence since before the Neaderthals!
Incredible piece of reasoning! Let's deny all of history and lump all the blame on Christians.
Ignorance Denied!

[edit on 1-3-2007 by kenshiro2012]


What are you talkin bout Willis?

90 some % of the wars, murder and ignorance has come directly from religion. I'm sure Neandrathals had battles and wars, but were based soley on survival if anything. Not religious prrsecution!? Prove me wrong!



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:08 PM
link   
why does it seem like the catholic church worships mary more than christ? or do they? could that be a form of antichrist?



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeahright

Originally posted by reaganero
the idea of the antichrist has been applied to the beasty type thing in revelations. it's just a simplified way of describing him. everybody understands by now that if you reference the term "antichrist" it refers to the act of being against christ as a savior. so from here on out let's just understand that the bible does refer to a person who will be the "great deceiver" and we can call him/her/it the antichrist for the point of debate.


That's fine, you can do as you like. But calling a duck an eagle doesn't make it one. IMO, if people are going to attempt to ascertain the meaning behind scripture, it's vital to have a clear understanding of the terms being referenced. Lucifer, Satan, The Beast, The Deceiver, antichrist, are not interchangable terms if you have any hope of comprehending the message.

But it's a futile exercise at best in these situations, and as I said, discuss among yourselves. I should've stayed out of it.


so, when people try to attach a modern face to the term "antichrist" you chose to ignore the claim because calling that person "antichrist" is not defining it correctly? that's fine and all but universally it's pretty well known what they're talking about. what should we call this "leader/deceiver" instead?



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   
EKKKK!!!!

I am a vegetarian! does that mean that I am the Antichrist that walks among us?

best stop reading my bible at night now



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
EKKKK!!!!

I am a vegetarian! does that mean that I am the Antichrist that walks among us?

best stop reading my bible at night now


nope. if people wanted to truly live how god intended we wouldn't eat meat at all. just like his "ideal world" was in the beginning. (based on the adam and eve story).



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   


What are you talkin bout Willis?

90 some % of the wars, murder and ignorance has come directly from religion. I'm sure Neandrathals had battles and wars, but were based soley on survival if anything. Not religious prrsecution!? Prove me wrong!

That is not what you stated earlier.



More ignornance, killing, wars, oppression......anything and everything evil has come from the Christianity and Catholicism.


You laid the blame for everything bad that has ever happened in the history of the world soley as an problem caused by Christians. Not on any other religion, not on survival, not on religious persecution but just Christians. Take a look around, Since you wish to blame the world's woes on religion, please take the time and read up on some of the other religions around the world. Check out the Islamic extremists for example.
What about Hitler? Was his and his parties atrocities something in which you can blame on Christians? How about the great leader of Iran who has vowed numerous times that Israel should and will be wiped off the face of the earth.
Yes, much evil has been been done in the name of religion. But not all the blame, nor the majority of the blame can be laid out at the feet of any one religion.
You did just that which is why I posted what I did.

*****
Edited to add:
Back to the subject at hand, I tend to beleive that the anti-christ (in what ever form) is alive today. To me it seems that the world's situation is walking straight into his hands.

[edit on 1-3-2007 by kenshiro2012]



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jbondo
Gore was first in my mind also but the antichrist is supposed to come from Europe.

As for being frightened, as a Christian the only thing that frightens me is the number of people not saved.

As always, this is my belief and everyone has a right to believe what they wish.



The bible's not too clear on defining a difference between where you physically come from, and where your descendants come from. Meaning that this individual's bloodline may only need originate from the suspected region.

That's again only if you buy into the bible as a whole. Far too many facets to this world to let a single book be one's only viewpoint.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012

Back to the subject at hand, I tend to beleive that the anti-christ (in what ever form) is alive today. To me it seems that the world's situation is walking straight into his hands.

[edit on 1-3-2007 by kenshiro2012]


The anti-christ is alive and well. He is probably in Europe currently, if you ask me and is likely to come from the European Union.



posted on Mar, 1 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   
javier salona was on the list for a while wasn't he? his involvement with the UN and all was pretty interesting.





top topics
 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join