Bible End Time is Islam

Originally posted by VinceP1974

11:38 What he will honor is a god of fortresses – a god his fathers did not acknowledge he will honor with gold, silver, valuable stones, and treasured commodities.

A god of fortresses is a war god. The moon god is a war god. I dont know what to make of the god his fathers did not give gifts to. I would have to do more historical research to know.

I went looking for information about gold and Islam. And I found this:

In the beginning the Muslims used gold and silver by weight and the dinar and dirhams that they used were made by the Persians.

Under what was known as the coin standard of the Khalif Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the weight of 10 dirhams (silver) was equivalent to 7 dinars (gold) (mithqals).

In the year 75 (695 CE) the Khalifah Abdalmalik ordered Al-Hajjaj to mint the first dirhams, thus he established officially the standard of Umar Ibn al-Khattab. In the next year he ordered the dirhams to be minted in all the regions of the Dar al-Islam. He ordered that the coins be stamped with the sentence: "Allah is Unique, Allah is Eternal". He ordered the removal of human figures and animals from the coins and that they be replaced with letters.

This command was then carried on throughout all the history of Islam. The dinar and the dirham were both round, and the writing was stamped in concentric circles. Typically on one side it was written the "tahlil" and the "tahmid", that is, "la ilaha ill'Allah" and "alhamdulillah"; and on the other side was written the name of the Amir and the date. Later on it became common to introduce the blessings on the Prophet, salla'llahu alayhi wa sallam, and sometimes, ayats of the Qur'an.

Gold and silver coins remained official currency until the fall of the Khalifate. Since then, dozens of different national currencies were made in each of the new postcolonial national states created from the dismemberment of Dar al-Islam.

History has demonstrated repeatedly that paper money has been a permanent instrument of default and reducing the wealth of the Muslims. In addition, Islamic Law does not permit the use of a promise of payment as a medium of exchange.

So here we find that Islam demands a monetary gold standard , and that Islam used gold and silver coins as its money and did so throughout all the Caliphates up until the Caliphate (Khalifate) was abolished following WW-I.

Note the lament that there is no more a Dar Al Islam... without a Calihphate Islam is not being fully adhered to.

Note their certainty that paper currency will eventually collapse

Then I ran across this hadith

Abu Bakr ibn Abi Maryam reported that he heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say: "A time is certainly coming over mankind in which there will be nothing [left] which will be of use save a dinar and a dirham." (The Musnad of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal)

A time is coming in the world where only Islamic currency will be remaining.

Islam introduced this requirement to the Arabs, it was not around in Pre-Islamic times.

SO this is yet another possible literal fullfment of the Bible by Islam.

reply to post by M157yD4wn


Hello. I did respond to your other message as Anonymous.

There's always an impasse when Christiane and Muslims try to refute one another by quoting our holy books. Neither side will convince the other that he is correct.

a quote from the Book of Destiny, by rev Hermand Kramer
Mohammedanism is a religion of crude materialism; it reduced the moral standards of its adherents to animalism; it abolished the Christian standards of self restraint and self denial; its spirituality is an affected oriental fanaticism; it upholds thievery, robbery and slavery against all unbelievers, and promises a heaven of sensual delights. It not only brought spiritual death to the regions it conquered but a bloody death to all who opposed its progress.

he puts the arival of islam into the world into the place of the second trumpet, the burning mountain that turns a third of the sea to blood
and islam did certainly destroy a third of the Christian world
the third trumpet and the fallen star he places as Luther with his great schism, wormwood acuratly describes Luthers doctrine which deviated Christians from true communion with Christ in the Holy Eucharist and from true reconciliation, Luther did indeed devastate a third of Christianity at the time
the antichrist's civilisation is a combination of all the antichristian movments, but what springs to my mind today is the combination of Islam and Protestanism in the form of Barrack Hussein Obama and the US nation only time will tell

reply to post by Notroh est


I have some quotes you may like:

Hilaire Belloc wrote in 1938:

"Will not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Mohammedan world, which will shake off the domination of Europeans -- still nominally Christian -- and reappear as the prime enemy of our civilization? The future always comes as a surprise, but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam".


John Quincy Adams wrote:

In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE (Adams's capital letters)… Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant… While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and goodwill towards men."


John Quincy Adams who wrote in 1829:

"The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force".

John Wesley (1703-91) wrote,

"Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it...have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are raised from the foundation, and only their name remaining; that many countries, which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished from the earth! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind".

You are all thinking inside of the box! Because of this, each and every one of you point the finger at each other, when you are actually pawns to justify the means to an end. That end you fail to comprehend! The Torah, New Testament and Quran come from the same source. Its the interpretation which changes the belief systems. You are using concepts which exist in all three books to point the finger at what you may consider to be the wrong religion. Americans will point the finger at Islam because they dont understand its message and Arabs will do the same to Christianity. Lets use a little common sense here: If there was such a thing called a devil, he wouldnt want you to follow any religion at all, but follow him. So in order to get the people to not follow any religion, he has to destroy what they already believe in or make them feel like what's there, is inadequate. When we follow the religion of "no religion" (like Star Trek) then that will mark the Biblical End times. The so-called abomination of desolation is right at your doorstep, yet you fail to embrace its existence. There are no governments that use the Torah, Bible or Quran as law to judge its people or make decisions against enemies. They are all skewered by man made written laws, some of which do not exist in any of those books. So to judge a nation of people by what its government does, in the name of religion is thinking inside the box. If the Antichrist, as many of you suggest, teams with the so-called islamic governments please keep in mind that we are an ally of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Nigeria and Egypt. Does that mean that we get a free pass because we're American Christians? You say that nations which are non-muslim will not be destroyed??? HELLOOOOOO... what happened to Germany, 1945 - a
Christian nation? The words Jehovah, the Father, Allah (al Ilah - meaning the GOD - equivalent to "el" "elah" and "elohim") all refer to the same GOD who created Adam in the beginning. How can any be the AntiChrist? This ignorance at its highest degree. So as to not digress from my point, I dropped the key inside, so now all you have to do is pick it up, open the door and get outside of the box!

reply to post by VinceP1974


You are 100% percent correct. In fact it's useless to quote any books at each other because each will understand it differently. Even though the capacity to understand the other point of view is there, the years of building up ego within ones self cause people to view blindly, in a first person context. I know I can not change anyones mind, that is for themselves to do. It's like the adage that you can lead the horse to the water, but you can't make him drink. Well another horse standing right next to that one, sipping out the trough, cannot make him drink neither. No matter how refreshing he says it is.

You will believe that Islam is worship of the moon god, and I will believe it's not. I can see exactly how you come to this conclusion, and I respect your beliefs. It is my opinion though that it is completely irrelevant. We each worship in our own way, and we have no authority to judge others, whether they are believing in false Gods or not. I can argue all day that Jesus is not the son of God, and bring up quotes from your own texts, and you will refute me till I give up posting. It's just the way it is, unfortunately.

Peace and Love.

Originally posted by M157yD4wn
reply to post by VinceP1974

 

You are 100% percent correct. In fact it's useless to quote any books at each other because each will understand it differently. Even though the capacity to understand the other point of view is there, the years of building up ego within ones self cause people to view blindly, in a first person context. I know I can not change anyones mind, that is for themselves to do. It's like the adage that you can lead the horse to the water, but you can't make him drink. Well another horse standing right next to that one, sipping out the trough, cannot make him drink neither. No matter how refreshing he says it is.

You will believe that Islam is worship of the moon god, and I will believe it's not. I can see exactly how you come to this conclusion, and I respect your beliefs. It is my opinion though that it is completely irrelevant. We each worship in our own way, and we have no authority to judge others, whether they are believing in false Gods or not. I can argue all day that Jesus is not the son of God, and bring up quotes from your own texts, and you will refute me till I give up posting. It's just the way it is, unfortunately.

Peace and Love.

Muslims aren't knowingly worshipping the moon. That is besides the point.

What is relevant is what type of values does moon worship bring with it.

Moon religions are hostile and violent. The moon god is very often the war god as well.

If you want to know more about Allah's transition from pagan to Islamic God , I recommend reading chapter 16 of this free online book

Moon-o-Theism Vol II

Chapter 16 starts on page 387

Chatper 16 is in Vol II of the book,, the link to Vol I is


Moon-o-Theism Vol I

reply to post by VinceP1974


It doesnt matter whether Muslims are knowingly, unknowingly worshipping a moon god. It doesnt matter if we worship anything. The true path to God is within us. Not in some holy texts. Those are there to guide us. Like was said earlier, nothing in this existence can/will convince me that Allah of Islam is a moon god. This whole thread is, and will be two brick walls on wheels arguing with each other to move, but both are on a flat surface. They cannot move until someone comes along and pushes one or both away. But they remain brick walls. I own and have read the book you mention. Fascinating theory. But irrelevant. There is only one God. and God is all around us, within us. We are a part of God like cells are a part of the Universe. Zues and his pantheon, Moon gods, annunaki, Aboriginal Dreamtime animal spirits, Native American great spirits. They are all one and the same. Just compartmentalized, and broken into fragments to suit the 3rd density ego's of the human race. There is No God but God.

Peace and Love.

your quotes were edifying vince, cheers

its important to point out that when an islamic tells a Christian…
we all believe in the same god and that there is no need for any religious affiliation since this god has shown himself in every religion and pagan belief thru a common spirit in man

well a muslim can say what ever he wants to confuse a non muslim and still hold to his violent faith piously with out any remorse for lying against his allah, any tactic are blessed by there militant leader mohamed it is a war after all, a jihad, a constant struggle against the civilization of Christ

reply to post by Notroh est



You are missing the point of what I said, and it is very very few muslims who speak as I do. In fact, Iranian clerics would issue a death warrant for me if they knew me. Only muslims who seem to have figured this out are Sufis, and the prophet was the original Sufi. God is Love my dude. God is beyond hate, war, fear, terror. People create fear, terror, war, hate. Christianity did this to people as well. There was a time in history when people stood in fear of the church. These energies are a manufactured product of the ego. When I say There is No God but God, I do not mean Allah, that is just a label. I mean the all encompassing God. Within you, within me, within Vince, within every human being. And we are within God. We are ALL one in spirit. There is no other way. To those who read a holy book and shape their points of view from some irrelevant pieces of literature authored by men, be they holy books or otherwise. I am beyond caring wether you think Allah is a moon god. In fact I'll do you one better, your right, the moon god and Allah are one and the same. What do I care, my consciousness is beyond this ego separating of God. God is Love. God is All. All is God. This is the Truth.


p.s. I am beyond labeling myself as Muslim, so I may as well say I am not muslim. But I need to keep soe label so people can still percieve me. In truth what I am, and what humans are ment to be, what Jesus was, is just like God, beyond labelling. Beyond the 3rd density ego. We just are. Is any of this making sense?


[edit on 4-1-2009 by M157yD4wn]

This is info about the founder of Sufi, Al- Ghazai

Al—Ghazali (1058—1111), who was born at Tus in Khurasan, near modern Meshed, Iran, and became a renowned theologian, jurist, and mystic. Al—Ghazali's early training was as a jurist, and he continued to have an interest in jurisprudence throughout his career, writing a work the Wadjiz, dated 1101, i.e., in the last decade of his life. The eminent Islamic scholar W.M. Watt stresses Al—Ghazali's Muslim orthodoxy. Watt maintains that Al—Ghazali was [3]

...acclaimed in both the East and West as the greatest Muslim after Muhammad, and he is by no means unworthy of that dignity...He brought orthodoxy and mysticism into closer contact...the theologians became more ready to accept the mystics as respectable, while the mystics were more careful to remain within the bounds of orthodoxy.

Al—Ghazali, a Sufi orthodox Muslim, and follower of the Shafi'i school of Islamic jurisprudence, wrote this about jihad war and the treatment of the vanquished non—Muslim dhimmi peoples, in the Wadjiz: [4]

[O]ne must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a year...one may use a catapult against them [non—Muslims] when they are in a fortress, even if among them are women and children. One may set fire to them and/or drown them...If a person of the Ahl� al—Kitab [People of The Book — primarily Jews and Christians] is enslaved, his marriage is [automatically] revoked...One may cut down their trees...One must destroy their useless books. Jihadists may take as booty whatever they decide...they may steal as much food as they need...

[T]he dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle...Jews, Christians, and Majians must pay the jizya [poll tax on non—Muslims]...on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [the dhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]... They are not permitted to ostentatiously display their wine or church bells...their houses may not be higher than the Muslim's, no matter how low that is. The dhimmi may not ride an elegant horse or mule; he may ride a donkey only if the saddle [—work] is of wood. He may not walk on the good part of the road. They [the dhimmis] have to wear [an identifying] patch [on their clothing], even women, and even in the [public] baths...[dhimmis] must hold their tongue....��

- more to come -

Compare Al—Ghazali's writings, above, to the statements below by two later, prominent Hanbali jurists, Ibn Qudama (d. 1223), and the much demonized Ibn Taymiyya (d.1328). First Ibn Qudama: [5]

Legal war (jihad) is an obligatory social duty (fard—kifaya);� when one group of Moslems guarantees that it is being carried out in a satisfactory manner, the others are exempted.

The jihad becomes a strictly binding personal duty (fard—'ain) for all Moslems who are enlisted or whose country has been [invaded] by the enemy.� It is obligatory only for free men who have reached puberty, are endowed with reason and capable of fighting.� Jihad is the best of the works of supererogation.� Abu Huraira relates that 'The Prophet, when asked what was the best of all works, replied:� Belief in God [and in His Prophet].— And then? someone asked him. — War for God's cause, then a pious pilgrimage.'� Abu Sa'id reports also that the Prophet, when asked who was the best of all men, replied, 'He who fights for God's cause, personally and with his goods.'... It is permitted to surprise the infidels under cover of night, to bombard them with mangonels [an engine that hurls missiles] and to attack them without declaring battle (du'a').� The Prophet attacked the Banu Mustaliq unexpectedly, while their animals were still at the watering—place;� he killed the men who had fought against him and carried off the children into captivity.� It is forbidden to kill children, madmen, women, priests, impotent old men, the infirm, the blind, the weak—minded, unless they have taken part in the combat.�

The chief of State decides on the fate of the men who are taken as prisoners;� he can have them put to death, reduce them to slavery, free them in return for a ransom or grant them their freedom as a gift.� He must choose the solution most in keeping with the common good of the Moslems.��

The jizya can be demanded only from the Peoples of the Book (Ahl—al—Kitab) and from Zoroastrians (Magus), who pledge to pay it and submit to the laws of the community.� The Peoples of the Book are understood to mean the Jews and those who follow the religion of the Torah, as well as the Christians and those who follow the religion of the Gospel.� When People of the Book or Zoroastrians ask to pay the jizya and to submit to the laws of the community, one must grant their request, and it is forbidden to fight them.� The jizya is collected at the beginning of each year. It is set at 48 dirhems for a rich man, at 24 dirhems for a man of moderate means, and at 12 dirhems for a man of lowly estate. It cannot be demanded from children who have not reached the age of puberty, from women, helpless old men, the sick, the blind, or slaves, nor from poor people who are unable to pay it.� An infidel subject to the jizya who converts to Islam is free of this obligation.� When an infidel dies, his heirs are responsible for the jizya.

Ibn Taymiyya: [6]

�
Since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God's entirely and God's word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought. As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as women, children, monks, old people, the blind, handicapped and their likes, they shall not be killed unless they actually fight with words (e.g. by propaganda) and acts (e.g. by spying or otherwise assisting in the warfare).

As for the People of the Book and the Zoroastrians (Majūs), they are to be fought until they become Muslims or pay the tribute (jizya) out of hand and have been humbled.

Last part:


Any fair, objective comparison must conclude that relative to the Hanbali jurists Ibn Qudama and Ibn Taymiyya, Al—Ghazali is at least as bellicose in his pronouncements on jihad war, and more bigoted and oppressive in his stated guidelines for the treatment of the vanquished non—Muslim dhimmis. Furthermore, Al Ghazali's views regarding non—Muslim dhimmis—which were typical of the prevailing written opinions of Muslim theologians and jurists during the Abbasid—Baghdadian Caliphate—resulted in tangible acts of dhimmi persecution, as recorded, for example, in this contemporary chronicle from Baghdad by Obadyah the Proselyte, in 1100 C.E.: [7]

�
...the Caliph of Baghdad, al—Muqtadi [1075—1094], had given power to his vizier, Abu Shuja... [who] imposed that each male Jew should wear a yellow badge on his headgear. This was one distinctive sign on the head and the other was on the neck— a piece of lead of the weight of a silver dinar hanging round the neck of every Jew and inscribed with the word dhimmi to signify that the Jew had to pay poll—tax. Jews also had to wear girdles round their wastes. Abu Shuja further imposed two signs on Jewish women. They had to wear a black and a red shoe, and each woman had to have a small brass bell on her neck or shoe, which would tinkle and thus announce the separation of Jewish from Gentile [Muslim] women. He assigned cruel Muslim men to spy upon Jewish women, in order to oppress them with all kinds of curses, humiliation, and spite. The Gentile population used to mock all the Jews, and the mob and their children used to beat up the Jews in all the streets of Baghdad...When a Jew died, who had not paid up the poll—tax [jizya] to the full and was in debt for a small or large amount, the Gentiles did not permit burial until the poll—tax was paid. If the deceased left nothing of value, the Gentiles demanded that other Jews should, with their own money, meet the debt owed by the deceased in poll—tax; otherwise they [threatened] they would burn the body.

From www.americanthinker.com...

So you see.. when it comes to what Muslims say, I never know quite what to believe. I want to believe you when you say it's all about love, but when the history is discoverd, it usually is a very bloody yet very legitimaized official act of piety by the Muslims

reply to post by VinceP1974



Sadly, it appears Sufis even take that literal. My friend, I am not defending Muslims they are subjected to errors in thinking just like anyone. I am not speaking to you as a muslim though, we should transcend the labels of religion. I am speaking to you as a fellow human being. Do, I believe we should abolish religion. no, It serves it's purpose. But should people end the thinking that religion is the end all be all. Yes. Religion is there to lay down the law of righteousness. But deeper thinking, meditating upon ones existence within creation, that is the path to spirituality. And God wants us to be Spiritual, but if our only other option is righteousness, then that is a good thing to. We should be both. The fact is that it matters not how you worship. Righteousness= treating your fellow man with respect and kindness in your interactions. Spirituality= treating and interacting with your fellow man in Love. I cannot help you to see that this path is indeed in the Quran, but I know this to be true because I've found it. It is not a book which comes from a god of war and blood sacrifice. I know this without a doubt. Just like I know that when Jesus says we have to experience him to reach the kingdom of heaven, I know he means we must literally experience him, not mumble some words accepting him as our lord and savior. We must experience that He is Us and We are Him.

People need to stop fighting in Gods names and and start living in Gods Love. Only then can we realize the True Kingdom of God on Earth. I apologize if I sound arrogant or as if I am set in my way, It is just that I KNOW this to be true without a doubt, and I cannot speak except that which I know. I do not want to come across as if I think I'm superior either, for I am not, in any way. Any man woman child can come to see the Truth. It is within us all. Jesus said we must have the heart of a child to enter this wonderful kingdom, and children have such simple hearts. The devil is in the details I've heard, and that sounds about right. The more complex the less childlike one gets.


I know no amount of my telling you this can persuade you. You will have to experience it yourself. All I can say is go ahead, give it a try. Experience God, what do you have to lose? Either you will come to see creation and God as he is meant to be seen, or you will have gained nothing and come to the conclusion I am full of it. But I know that if you truly try, you will see this to be true. After all, God is Love.

Peace and Love.

Christ said only through him can you come to the Father
not through the experience of him
another of mohemeds hypocracies, he states that Christ was a prophet, yet Christ himself clearly says who he is, God incarnate through the Virgin Mary, he is the only Son of God (not in the sense we are all God's children)
in the koran mohemed claims that Christ told him (or his voices) exclusivly that this wasnt the case
if mohemed claims Christ was a prophet why doesnt he listen to the words of Christ, and why dont you read the true words of Christ not the ones mohemed wrote, i gave mohemed the benifit of the doubt and read the koran, i only ask you give Christ the same chance and read His true words in the New Testiment not the koran

reply to post by Notroh est


I do not know how more blatantly I can put it. I have read the Torah, both OT and NT, and the Vedas, and the Ramayanas, and the Emerald Tablets of Thoth, and Nordic Texts, and the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Sumerian mythologies and countless other texts. I have studied the writings of Plato to Descartes, of Ptolemey to Al Gebr, I have meditated for hours on end, and I have seen the Beauty of the universe in the leaf of a tree. I have experienced Joy in the cries of a newborn. The Love that permeates the whole of existence. I am not approaching you as a muslim, nor am I trying to defend Islam. That is pointless, your view on that is set. I am speaking as a human, who experiences God as God means us to. I see the infinite Love in all things around us, and in you. and in me. I read the signs given by God upon everything that these two eyes can see in this world, and everything my third eye can feel. These are not the words of a muslim, my brother, these are words of a Human. And you know this. Which is why you keep trying to make me out as a muslim, when in fact I have already shed such labels and made it known. Either you are doing it consciously or sub-consciously, either way I do not care. The simple and Infinite Truth is That God is Love, and All is God.

Peace and Love.

ps] We are all God incarnate, and That is what Jesus was teaching. God is All. We are a part of all.

[edit on 5-1-2009 by M157yD4wn]

your words shed as much clarity to me as the words of mohemed.

reply to post by Notroh est


Yet your last words shed more clarity to me than my own.

reply to post by aleon1018


It is the daajal and he has one eye, rings a bell yes, the one eye on the dollar, m15 etc etc

Text Green
Hello there

i am just reading through all that is posted here.....

i would like to reply first to Whiteraven .... you said Ishmael against Issac means works vs faith ...

I do agree with you there. A little thing i would like to add ... the one is works = because I think i can get myself rightess...
faith = i love God and what he did for me, and therefor i am glad to do good and to help just to make God happy .... because by making others happy i am happy myself.

Someone said = the present makes the giver more happy then the receiver !!


To VinceP1974 You said ... Rome never conquered all of Babylon .....

True ! -- well i think you are right ... would be wrong for me to define true and wrong ...

OK i think you are right there But in the war that is discriped in the Bible it never talks about ALL OF the globe..... it only talks about that part of our globe that is populated with Gods children ... and there neighbor enemy..

At the Time of that Kingdom it was Rom that ruled the (then called) Christian world. ((After Stefans death it was not anymore jews that were Gods people but all that excepted God = Christian ))

Kingdoms are only in the OT realy Kingdoms... after Jesus there is no Kingdom -- that is Gods People but a KIND off people -- everyone who wants to follow God !

That then means -- there is no enemy kingdom - a country or many countrys but the KIND of people.

Which off cause could be Islamic - thinking !!

However i do disagree with that. Please do not get me wrong! I do see the problems and threat that the Islam is giving !!!


Someone (sorry dont know who) said that there is to be a 7 year peace time. ... talked about in the Bible..... Where ???

There is talked about by Daniel a time when Jesus first came the 70 weeks periode - at THAT end there is 7 years when Jesus will give the last appeal to the jewish people.... 7 years ... but that is past ! it ended with Stefans death.

After that the followers of Jesus were send to ALL THE WORLD. also the non jews people. That then markt the end of the 70 weeks period.



To Rev 20:4 The thrones and jugdment is in heaven...
The beheaded people are the once that where killed from the physical and later spiritual Rom... first in Roms arenas and later burned and so on... be- headed is just a collective name for all of them that were killed because they did not adhere to the (then-) Anti christ !!


About Promises of God... i would like to piont out that they are ALLWAYS conditional !!!

Israel did not do there part - but worshiped idols - God did not do his part - to save them as promised !!



One piont i want to give to consider ...

In the near future is sone big thing to happen.. i think we all agree on that.. (?)
If i would be the "Antichrist", i would want every one to look into the wrong direction...
So to look in but one direction, i think is very dangers !!!

The biblical piont of view is, that the last problem is not a real kingdom but a way of thinking.
The Bible points us to the spiritual realm ...or in other words = we are ask to worship the way someone else wants us to....

Also we should consider that this "kingdom" (or way of thinking) is called smart and deceptive. Making people beleive that they are doing right, when they are doing wrong.
and that on a big scale...
But most of world population are NOT muslems.... and they are not by nice words conviced but by the swort !!
Where i see a proplem with the Islam

There i raser beleive that that is the Romen beleive !! They make the people think that all is well when they are changing the law of God (cutting out the 2. law = Exedus 20 and changing the 4. law) and stopping people from going to God (by making them believe that a person can forgive sins....
Maybe you should make a survey about blasvamy in the NT ... that is what the Antichrist is blamed to do
(i will look it up and post the verses soon)