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.

 

Jesus Christ and the anti christ

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Hello all.
As Sir Issac Newton would have it ' To every action , there is an equal and opposite recation. '
By the same token, every positive, should have a negative.
To apply the above to this topic, here goes and what is the take of ATSers on this.
So now if Jesus Christ had a first coming, then who was the first coming of anti christ?
If Jesus was a True Prophet and the Son of God, then who was the false prophet and the son of satan?
If Jesus saves, then in contrast what does the son of satan do?
If Jesus will have a second coming, then who will be the second coming of anti christ?
If Jesus promises eternal life, then what does the anti christ promise?

Pl feel free to post your own ques on this, to receive responses and/ or discussion.
As for me i have a firm conviction that, there can be no Debate, between the Truth and the untruth.

Peace




posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
basically the evil guys have lies for us...to hurt us which is why we want to strangle evil....



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
you have misinterpreted issac newtons quote.

and you're questions answer themselves.

the antichrist will come before jesus and tries to trick the world into believeing hes the true christ, he will bring food and water, he will bring heaven with him but in reality that heaven is hell. etc



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Jesus is Satan. This quote of Isaac Newton does not apply to gods and demons, but to the forces and laws of this universe. How can you apply these laws to something that is not only of this world? I mean it is possible that this equation can be true in a sense, but the way you've interpruted it is wrong.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by savvys84
So now if Jesus Christ had a first coming, then who was the first coming of anti christ?

If Jesus will have a second coming, then who will be the second coming of anti christ?
.
As for me i have a firm conviction that, there can be no Debate, between the Truth and the untruth.

If you go by the NT statements, you can't talk about "first" or "second" comings, because there are simply too many of them.

Matthew ch24 says that there will be many people claiming to be Christ.
I John ch2 says there are many antichrists.

The usual assumption is that these are the same people, that the word "antichrist" (which probably means "instead of Christ") applies to a whole category.

And the opposite of "life" and "salvation" is death, surely?

How is the last comment intended to affect the discussion?



[edit on 14-5-2010 by DISRAELI]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   
If there is any character guilty of being an "ANTI-CHRIST" it would have to be a counterfeit of the TRUE christ, correct? So since Jesus is a plagiarism of MANY earlier Gods and God-men Christ-figures, I would say it is VERY safe to say the ANTI-CHRIST would have to be Jesus since Jesus is a copy of the original "Christs". BUT, since they were all FAKE anyways, what we have is a bunch of paranoid people discussing total fairy tales and expecting superstitious foolishness to occur any minute now expecting some second coming and all the other NUTTY end-time garbage.

Folks, you will NOT witness this second-coming, as it is ALL FAKE. Remember this before your last breath, as you are not going to see such an occurrence, and hopefully you smarten-up before you cease to exist. Unless you wish to die ignorant, than be my guest.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by ToToo]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ToToo
I would say it is VERY safe to say the ANTI-CHRIST would have to be Jesus since Jesus is a copy of the original "Christs".

The flaw in this argument is that the concept originates in words attributed to Jesus, and Jesus would not have been describing himself as a fake version of himself.

Since it is a Christian concept in the first place, it needs to be defined in Christian terms.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


You make a valid point in regards to that. But beyond that, I cannot see how anyone can still believe in this Jesus divine son of God messiah/savior man when there are SO MANY similar Gods and characters before him performing all of the same miraculous and above-human works. I used to believe in all this too until I read up on all the earlier Gods and religions. I find it unbelievable that anyone hasnt discovered all these earlier religions and Gods yet to which Christianity has copied.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by ToToo
I would say it is VERY safe to say the ANTI-CHRIST would have to be Jesus since Jesus is a copy of the original "Christs".

The flaw in this argument is that the concept originates in words attributed to Jesus, and Jesus would not have been describing himself as a fake version of himself.

Since it is a Christian concept in the first place, it needs to be defined in Christian terms.


No, the origin of the anti-christ is John. John was a crazy hermit who was exiled and spent his life writing against tptb. All of the events of the revelation have already occured so basicly the world ended for him a long time ago. Others think he refered to the fall of rome as the end of the world.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ToToo
You make a valid point in regards to that. But beyond that, I cannot see how anyone can still believe in this Jesus divine son of God messiah/savior man when there are SO MANY similar Gods and characters before him performing all of the same miraculous and above-human works. I used to believe in all this too until I read up on all the earlier Gods and religions. I find it unbelievable that anyone hasnt discovered all these earlier religions and Gods yet to which Christianity has copied.

There isn't a short answer to this. But, speaking for myself, I've already been through the non-believing, atheist stage- and then came out the other side again. There is something there which makes it possible, but I'm not in a position to argue it out.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by damwel


Since it is a Christian concept in the first place, it needs to be defined in Christian terms.


No, the origin of the anti-christ is John. John was a crazy hermit who was exiled and spent his life writing against tptb. All of the events of the revelation have already occured so basicly the world ended for him a long time ago. Others think he refered to the fall of rome as the end of the world.

The word seems to be John's, yes. But the concept goes back to Matthew ch 24, "many people claiming to be the Christ".

[edit on 14-5-2010 by DISRAELI]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I do not believe anything about God or Jesus in the context of religions. I think the promise of an end of the world in the near future is like children being told that Santa will come at the end of the year, so they better be good. I don't believe in a first, second, third etc. coming of a Christ.

I expect disagreement, but the lead post welcomed other ATS member opinions.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I am unsure about how you interpreted that. The truth is no one but God himself knows when and what will happen. Nice way of thinking, that is something I never would have thought about.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I am unsure about how you interpreted that. The truth is no one but God himself knows when and what will happen. Nice way of thinking, that is something I never would have thought about.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I am unsure about how you interpreted that. The truth is no one but God himself knows when and what will happen. Nice way of thinking, that is something I never would have thought about.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
I would have to look at this in a philosophical light. Since Jesus preaches about love and acceptance, tolerance and compassion, pretty much anyone could be the Anti-Christ. Maybe it's that humanity starts out that way and anyone who doesn't aspire to Christlike qualities and instead gives in to the more base human emotions, is not of Christ.

In the end all of humanity is supposed to be able to do the things Jesus could do and more? If that is so, then eventually humanity will begin to embody his teachings on a daily basis and 'defeat' that which is Anti-Christ.

That's not to say that a particular entity won't one day embody all that is 'Anti-Christ'. Who knows what higher beings are out there and what they are capable of doing.

In the end we will see what we will see.

-Dredge



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by RizeorDie
 


Does this mean, that if some people find ways of feeding the planet for free, end poverty,etc half of the Christians will think its the Devils doings and not accept it ??? because they think these are false prophet working for the antichrist, just cause their man made scripture says so?



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 01:31 AM
link   
The talk of previous gods / religions does not hold water, where in those cases is the shed blood to take away the sins of the world.
Since Jesus was the only begotten Son of God, he was a perfect sacrifice And Jesus fulfilled that and rose from the dead again and sent the comforter in the form of The Holy Ghost. Amen.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by savvys84
Hello all.
As Sir Issac Newton would have it ' To every action , there is an equal and opposite recation. '
By the same token, every positive, should have a negative.
To apply the above to this topic, here goes and what is the take of ATSers on this.
So now if Jesus Christ had a first coming, then who was the first coming of anti christ?
If Jesus was a True Prophet and the Son of God, then who was the false prophet and the son of satan?
If Jesus saves, then in contrast what does the son of satan do?
If Jesus will have a second coming, then who will be the second coming of anti christ?
If Jesus promises eternal life, then what does the anti christ promise?

Pl feel free to post your own ques on this, to receive responses and/ or discussion.
As for me i have a firm conviction that, there can be no Debate, between the Truth and the untruth.

What did Sir Issac Newton himself say about it?

Sir Issac Newton wrote more theology than he did science...
...and some think it was his ability to conceptualize theological issues...
...that gave him the ability and freedom to investigate the sciences...
...without being bound by contemporary preconceptions.

You might be surprised to read what he had to say about this.



[edit on 15/5/10 by troubleshooter]



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by troubleshooter
What did Sir Issac Newton himself say about it?

Sir Issac Newton wrote more theology than he did science...
...and some think it was his ability to conceptualize theological issues...
...that gave him the ability and freedom to investigate the sciences...
...without being bound by contemporary preconceptions.

You might be surprised to read what he had to say about this.



[edit on 15/5/10 by troubleshooter]


Thats a welcome twist.
So lets hear what Newton had to say about this




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join