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 Final and Most Powerful Deciever of All.

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Thanks for the replies so far. Please remember that I strongly encourage "black sheep" and "out-of-the-box" predictions. As long as you can reason why you believe so, don't be shy to suggest any possible entity that makes sense to you.

PS: I also want to thank posters for NOT turning this into a thread that gets derailed by a myriad of bible quotes and long, repeated generalisations. Short and to the point works best.




posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marle
reply to post by octotom
 


One posibility of the fatal head wound referring to the islamic religion and not to an actual man could be a fatal wound to the head of an empire or kingdom, like say to its governing body. In March of 1924, the Office of Calif, the governing body of the Islamic Empire for over 1400 years, was officially abolished. This could be the fatal head wound. And in the past few years, more and more muslim groups are calling for the revival of the the islamic caliphate. That could be the miraculous recovery of the fatal head wound. Just an idea.



The riddle is simpler than that, IMO. Cæsar, Czar, Tsar, Kaizer, Keiser etc. means Fatal Wound. It's etymology suggests it's root is an Indo-European word meaning to cut or a scar. You'll find the word hidden in English words like a Scar, a Share, a Skerry, to Scare etc. Cæsar is the king who "was before, is no more, but will come again" IMO....



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Just wanted to note that at the time of this post, I currently have 666 combined points. Since I have declared in an earlier post that I am not the Antichrist, I just thought I'd point out the irony of the situation.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Hallberg Rassy
 



When jesus says " I AM", in the book of john, he says eigo eimi, which is not the same as the grand " I AM THAT I AM" spoken by God. The pphrase spoken by jesus in the book of john is not the same words as attributed to God, but are translated into english as the same. It is a translation error, one of many.

I'll have to look into it, but I'm pretty sure that in the Septuagint, the same phrase is used when God says "I AM THAT I AM" as when Jesus said it. Regardless of what Jesus said though, the Jews knew what he was getting at--they wanted to stone him. Jesus also said that he was around before Abraham was. He was stating his eternality.


And if this is the only example of jesus stating he is god, why wouldnt the other 3 gospels mention it..? they do not because it is not what has been purported.

All four of the Gospel's had a different purpose in writing. In addition, most likely when the other three Gospels were written, they were written to specific groups of Christians. It is entirely possible that, for example, when Matthew wrote his Gospel, he knew that his intended audience already knew and accepted that Jesus was God. Therefore, it wasn't an important detail, in light of the audience, to mention. It would be similar to me writing to my brother and talking about our dad--I don't have to mention some things because they're inherently understood.

Despite this though, throughout the synoptic gospels, we see Jesus accepting worship--which would be wrong to do if he wasn't God--and controling the weather--demonstrating his omnipotence, which is an attribute of God.



The word becoming flesh refers to the act of creation, not to jesus specifically. ( LOGOS ), please read the Bible in original Greek or Hebrew, in some cases both, to understand the context of a particular word or phrase. Logos cannot be considered a person, it is an ACT as used in this context.

In other places than John in the New Testament, Jesus is refered to as the Word. This coupled with John saying that the word, was present at the beginning, indicates that the word is a person [it's being present at the beginning indicates that it existed before the beginning, which makes it God], and then it became flesh. It's not an act of creation--John's telling us what the word did.




I have a sneeking suspicion jesus would not approve of the manner a book has been elevated to become more important than the teachings contained within.

I think Jesus would be happy that people care about keeping God's Word God's Word.


It has always been a curious point that less than 1% of the bible is what Jesus actually says or does, but 99% intrepretation.

The whole Bible is about what Jesus did. Jesus is God and the whole Bible describes his work throughout history.


I imagine there are books somewhere that contain the missing 18 years of his life, but they do not jibe with the personae that the organized church wishes to portray jesus.

You're correct--there are books such as this. They're not accepted though because they were written centuries after Jesus even lived [unlike the NT books] and have Jesus doing things in them that are contrary to his nature--for example, killing people.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 09:30 AM
link   
I heard this guy on Coast to Coast lay out the evidence that the Greek god Apollo was the actual fallen angel that is the devil.

This is his site. nephilimapocalypse.com...

This is the interview on Coast to Coast AM.

www.coasttocoastam.com...

At first I was like what in the world is this guy smoking but it made the most sense as it actually says that in the bible when he comes from. So Apollo is the god of Anti-Christ. 666 anyone? Apollo is the fallen angel who is the Beast.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Sky watcher
 



At first I was like what in the world is this guy smoking but it made the most sense as it actually says that in the bible when he comes from. So Apollo is the god of Anti-Christ. 666 anyone? Apollo is the fallen angel who is the Beast.

Interesting. I could see the correlation between Apollo and Lucifer--since "Lucifer" means "light bearer" or something along those lines.

Just a minor correction, the fallen angel [Lucifer/Satan] isn't the Beast, according to Scripture. The Antichrist=the Beast.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   
FGS! Lucifer has nothing to do with Satan. Though it's old news that Apollo does. Satan is the God of the Air and the sungod. Zeus is the typical archtype of Satan....



posted on May, 25 2009 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Even though I don't believe in the whole "antichrist" thing, I do think about it when the subject comes up. There have been so many leaders in the world that could easily go with the description. But If there was to be the last and most powerful, I have to go with a woman this time. The men screwed it up and the right woman can do some serious damage. (think of the white witch from Narnia, she had problems) And since I'm going with a woman here, I would say it could be Hilary Clinton, no can't be right, she's to obvious. Nancy Pelosi? Again, too easy, she could definitely be mistaken for being the right hand person though.
It would have to be someone seemingly innocent, likeable, maybe cute or beautiful...Angelina Jolie perhaps? She his beautiful, she adopts children, she get's involved with third world countries, she works with the UN, she just about wore Billy Bob Thorntan to death and now Brad Pitt doesn't look as friendly as he used to be. Even though I'm partially joking and serious using her, I do think that if there were to be a final Anti-Christ, it would be some ugly guy with an enormous ego to make up for his ugliness and possible small package, but it would have to be someone likeable and seemingly innocent which is why I go with a woman.



posted on May, 25 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Well, for the sake of argument, if we are assuming the antichrist is a woman, my pick would be Oprah. She has to be one of the most powerful women in the world. She has the money, the fame, and has her own cult-like following with her New Age Religion, openly speaking against Christian beliefs. People love her. The only thing she has left to do is get into politics. Can you imagine how far she would go as popular as she is?



posted on May, 25 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Yeah and have you seen when Barbara Straisland (sp?) invades South Park with a bunch of aliens? No donkey Kong is the Antichrist openly speaking about his forefathers, the apes. Klicky klicky...

www.newscientist.com...



posted on May, 25 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
The Bible says there are many antichrists. So there is one for everyone. If one antichrist does not appeal to you, there are others to choose from.
Everything that is not the truth is a product of deception.
What people confuse with the antichrist is the beast of Revelation, which is a world government, which will rule for a short time, because God will have to stomp it out before it kills all the Saints.
So, anyone who says "We are bringing a new world order" you can guarantee it is the Beast. The real deception is to create a myth of a single person as The antichrist, thus diverting away your attention on the thing that will have a force of law to persecute true believers who do not accept the state religion, which is of course Egypt and Babylon and perverted forms of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.

[edit on 25-5-2009 by jmdewey60]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join