The Beast and The Antichrist Have Been Revealed!

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


I like to see different points of view, thanks for your input too.

But if we're on a biblical topic (the only book that described antichrist and the beast) then we need to take that book as a basis for the debate, or else it will be off the subject.


reply to post by thegoodearth


I understand I dragged myself off the main subject, Peter's not the defendant here, we may disagree on him, and still contribute to the thread.

What I really don't understand is for example, how can God take a law, that He created himself, and just give someone the power to change it?

There's only 2 times in history that God really got his hands on the dust to create something: 1)when He created Adam 2)when He wrote the ten commandments with his own finger (twice, moses broke the first set)

That's so hundreds of years later the pope would change the sabbath (saturday) for the sunday? No one has authority to change God's law, unless one puts himself in the place of god...
Ezekiel 20:20 "And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I (not the pope) am the LORD your God.

That is one example of how Jesus would not put a fallible being in His place, His only substitute is the Holy Spirit.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by HSDA83]

reply to post by HSDA83


Well, that depends on what you believe.
If you believe in Jesus Christ, He came as the New Covenant, as proclaimed in the Gospels. Therefore, it is not breaking the Sabbath (i.e. Saturday Passover) as He established the New Covenant with the proclamation of the Kingdom of God, the Eucharist, and His Resurrection on Sunday, therefore setting the Lord's Day as Sunday.

reply to post by thegoodearth
These are a bunch of cliches and can not be substantiated.
What is the "Lord's Day"?
How is the Gospel another covenant?
How is the "New Covenant" any different from what was already in the Old Testament?
Where is there in the Bible authorisation for a change from the 10 Commandments?
Your post is a repetition for an Ad-Hock argument to explain something that already happened in the distant path for reasons probably of a completely different reason. We were not there and we have no clear explanation, from the time, of what and why there was any change other than what was instituted by Constantine who was an admitted sun worshiper.


[edit on 3-8-2010 by jmdewey60]

reply to post by jmdewey60


My post was in reply to another who I was discussing the Sacred Scriptures with.

If one doesn't believe in the Sacred Scriptures, then one won't believe in anything else in the post, therefore any further discussion will be fruitless, don't you think?

Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by Spectral Norm

 

Now, what the author of the rather glib request that I have reproduced in this article neglects to tell us is what this corroborative evidence is supposed to look like, i.e., what would be accepted as corroborative evidence? I strongly suspect that the request was merely a rhetorical one. I suppose that the unspoken logic of the rhetoric runs something like this: I conclude at the outset that no such historical personage existed, therefore, no credible evidence of such a personage can exist. Hence, I am safe in requesting such evidence, since none can be produced.

How about a body (or remains) in a tomb, an inscription bearing the name jesus son of joseph but born of a virgin mary. Brother of James Judas Simon and judas plus sisters.

The heir to the throne of david crucified by the romans , the guy that walked on water raised dead people out of the grave etc etc.

That would be a pretty good start ,

Wait a minute, didn't a jesus son of joseph turn up at talpiot ? Oh, that's right rejected by Christians as the wrong one because their jesus disappeared into the sky, how convenient.

Josephus -

Whole libraries of antiquity were torched by the Christians. Yet unlike the works of his Jewish contemporaries, the histories of Josephus survived. They survived because the Christian censors had a use for them. They planted evidence on Josephus, turning the leading Jewish historian of his day into a witness for Jesus Christ !
Finding no references to Jesus anywhere in Josephus's genuine work, they interpolated a brief but all-embracing reference based purely on Christian belief.

Do we need to look any further to identify Eusebius himself as the forger?

www.jesusneverexisted.com...

I intend to answer this in due course, however, out of courtesy and respect for others here who may not wish to be distracted from the current discussion as it stands, I shall do so in a new thread.

reply to post by HSDA83


thanks for your tolerance, and understanding.

but after more than a thousand threads concerning the antichrist on ATS & BTS and 100 pages worth of antichrist threads revealed via the search application here on ATS, the subject matter keeps motivating people to author more threads about it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


in my opinion....

you, me, and everyone else i have ever met may have been a part of the antichrists' "super-ego".


if god = truth

then were are first loves the truth, or something other than the truth?

do instincts' genetic programming define our loves and our priorities?

if so, then we may be 666 at the cellular level....

my first loves, my first priorities were:

1 - Fear, a byproduct of self preservation, a tool to help identify possible threats.

2 - Food, needed for cellular reproduction and growth into the macro-organism i am.

3 - Family, helped teach me and protected me.

4 - Friends, helped me learn about myself and helped me feel less alone.

5 - Fornication, (not just sex, but kissing, hugging, etc also) helped me learn about aspects of what "love" is.

6 - Finances, by the laws (laws = accumilation of fears & hates), and laws re-enforce monetary. also finances helped us with the illusion we have control over our previous 5 loves, and even helps pay for the scary movies.


so, i declare myself to be your antichrist based upon my first priorities which were my first loves, which helped define my intentions.

SIX choices to love SIX things before loving the "truth" that all begin with the SIXth letter of the ALPHA BET

666 = genetic/dna level programming. (original sin(s)?)


but we are too afraid to turn around, it seems and face the facts...

"LOOK I FEAR"

u makes the same sound as "OO" does....

"LUK I FEAR"

c makes the same sound as a "K" does....

"LUC I FEAR"

i hear no "A" sound in "FEAR"....

"LUC I FER"


maybe "LOOK I FEAR" caused us (LUCIFER) to "LOSE A CYPHER", cypher is a key to unlocking a code....

there, "GO SPELL" ..... "GOSPELL"....


eden [reversed & spelled phonetically] nude

yep, they were nude in the garden of edun (eden).
truisms encoded into the words, and even the names of people....

SUE SIEGE = SU SEJ

SU SEJ = SUSEJ

and what does "JESUS" see when "JESUS" looks in a mirror?
JESUS [mirror] SUSEJ = sue siege



incidently... somewhere, sometime, i imagine Lucifer & Jesus's conversation going something like this:

Jesus tells Lucifer that their daddy (they are brothers) would like to talk to Lucifer about some things Lucifer has been doing...


Jesus says: "Lucifer, you wanted to be like "I AM", but no one else can be the one alpha, so give me your fear for a moment, and i will relpace it with "I'm" instead. So, brother, you are no longer "LOOK I FEAR", because Truth does not wish to be feared. You are now "LUK I'M" aka "LUKIM"..

hey, before you enter the throne room and approach daddy, check yourself in the mirror to see how you look:"

LUKIM [mirror] MIKUL

the same archangel that suppressed lucifer, with a little help from his brother. cuz .... Michael & Lucifer may have been one in the same, if we apply what the words of the bible to the words of the bible.


and who do we call in case of an emergency?
911

trinitiy has connotations to god, but it also means three.

911 trinity = 9113

the ninth letter of the alpha bet = I
the first letter of the alpha bet = A
the thirteenth letter of the alpha bet = M

911 Trinity = I AM

and who was it that responded to moses when moses asked who is sending me?

"I AM"


but this is all speculation, and i could be totally wrong on all accounts of what you just read, if enough of you want me to be, i'm willing to comprimise and say: "i don't know what i'm talking about".



ah, but who am i, and what do i know,
et


[edit on 3-8-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]

Originally posted by jmdewey60.
What is the "Lord's Day"?

abba tab day, of course...

A = 1
B = 2
B = 2
A = 1
T = 20
A = 1
B = 2


ABBA TAB day. (tab can be what you remove from a can of whoop a$$)

abba tab = 12212012, aka December 21st, 2012

seems i have heard that date mentioned before somewhere...

Apparently, I am not authorized to create a new thread. Thus, although I am prepared to discuss the issue in detail, I feel that it is more appropriate, under the circumstances, to let the matter drop, despite the inevitability that it will engender yet another sarcastic reply.

Peace be with you.

reply to post by thegoodearth
You misjudge me, my friend. I believe in scripture but I don't believe in a lot of rationalization not based on scripture.
I will repeat my charge, that your explanation about Sunday being the Lord's Day is so much conjecture based on close to nothing historically verifiable, much less anything scriptural.
I am not an atheist, but a Seventh Day Adventist.



[edit on 3-8-2010 by jmdewey60]

reply to thegoodearth

ok, it does depend on what I believe, but that would be only the Bible, and nothing that goes against it.

I really don't want to use my words to express this so I'll quote a few verses:

Mark 2:27-28 - "Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath"
Matthew 5:17 - "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill it"
Luke 16:17-18 - "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail"
James 2:10-11 - "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all"
Mathew 5:18 - "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law"
Mathew 24:20 - "But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day"
Mark 7:7-9 - "Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition"
Isaiah 66:22-23 - "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD."

There is a profecy in the Book of Daniel about this beast, on chapter 7 you will find it being described as being able to "and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws"

What time would it change? saturday -> sunday
What law has he changed? 4th commandment

In fact, Jesus kept the saturday, virgin Mary kept the saturday (Luke 23:56), St. Paul and the apostles kept the saturday years after Christ's ressurrection (Acts 13:14)...

If this religious power represented by this beast is still unknown for some, it will reveal himself pretty obvious if one decides to research the bible.


I hope you understand it's not something personal against you, its only against this idea of having a man change god's law, because that is a profecy's fulfillment, all of us should be able to see it

reply to post by jmdewey60

it's kind of hard to explain, without wandering around on the heaven's sanctuary subject...

[edit on 3-8-2010 by HSDA83]

reply to post by HSDA83


I understand... some Biblical passages that may help explain my position...

"The time is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." Jeremiah 31:31

"For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that He has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant." Hebrews 9:15

"The Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.” Luke 6:5

"On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight." Acts 20:7

“Now concerning the collection for the saints: you should follow the directions I gave to the churches of Galatia. On the first day of every week, each of you is to put aside and save whatever extra you earn, so that collections need not be taken when I come.” 1 Cor. 16:1-2

The early church fathers generally viewed sabbath as a Jewish observance, and the Lord's Day as the proper Christian observance.

For example, Ignatius wrote in the early 100's A.D., describing Christians with a Jewish background as those who “have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death” (Magnesians 9 ). Magnesians is a letter written to the church at Magnesia by Ignatius, a church father, also called Theophorus.

A Reminder to Christians

1CO 13:4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

1CO 14:1 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.

This is what you have been called for and to. I know of no way that you can get out from under this.

A Warning to Dispensationalist Zionist Christians

You believe the Church dispensation to be a mere parenthesis in God's full plan. I warn you sincerely, that if you dedicate your lives and money to furthering a dispensation not your own, then you forfeit the rights and privileges of the dispensation to which you belong.

It is not the Jews who believe a new temple to be for the use of the anti-Christ, it is you. All your money, energy, and moral support is therefore dedicated to the anti-Christ. Why do you serve the anti-Christ and yet call yourselves followers of Jesus. You cannot serve two masters. Either follow Jesus, or work for anti-Christ. You are not doing both at the same time.

I moved this post from another thread where it seemed to me to be a little bit off topic. Here, at least some one may be able to say whether it seems on track.

To tell the truth, I am becoming more uncomfortable as time goes by telling anybody about religions that they hold and not me. It's like, none of my business.

How close do you think the personal religion of Jesus resembled the religion held to in the Roman provinces of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee?

How much do you think the personal religion of Jesus resembles the various sects of Christianity today?

[edit on 3-8-2010 by pthena]

reply to post by thegoodearth
Here's a quote from wikipedia concerning the letter you are using to back up your argument:

. . .some of the original letters had been changed with interpolations, created to posthumously enlist Ignatius as an unwitting witness in theological disputes. . .

en.wikipedia.org...
This is what I am talking about, that after-the-fact inventions were made to make the change somehow seem normal.
Even if the letter was authentic it really means nothing because he could have been talking about how the seventh day was not observed in the way the Jews did, but was spent in doing good deeds, as the Lord had done.
There is no specific texts anywhere that say "Sunday is the Lord's Day" from ancient times, meaning in the first or second century. Sunday worship comes from the likes of Pythagoras who thought of the sun as a god.


[edit on 4-8-2010 by jmdewey60]

reply to post by jmdewey60


Dear friend, I certainly am not trying to change your belief system, and you will not change mine...
Ignatius' letter was merely one thing I have posted in context of others, not the entire basis of proof, though I do believe in its authenticity more than Wiki could disprove it to me.

If I have somehow insulted you, I am sorry, however, I haven't addressed you personally, have I?
Could we respectfully agree to disagree, and respect each other's principles?
[extending olive branch]

Originally posted by Spectral Norm


Now, what the author of the rather glib request that I have reproduced in this article neglects to tell us is what this corroborative evidence is supposed to look like, i.e., what would be accepted as corroborative evidence? I strongly suspect that the request was merely a rhetorical one. I suppose that the unspoken logic of the rhetoric runs something like this: I conclude at the outset that no such historical personage existed, therefore, no credible evidence of such a personage can exist. Hence, I am safe in requesting such evidence, since none can be produced. Furthermore, if anyone claims to have such evidence, I will simply call into question the veracity of it.

But let us assume that what is meant is a contemporaneous written document, distinct from the New Testament or the Christian Apocrypha, which refers to Jesus. Well, such a document exists. In the 90's C.E., Josephus wrote The Antiquities of the Jews, and in it there are two references to Jesus. The first is a direct one in Book 18, and this has become known as the Testimonium Flavianum. The second is in Book 20 and deals with the murder of James, identified by Josephus as the brother of Jesus.

One might conclude from this that the New Testament was written by Josephus. I think he left corroborating evidence for his own fairy tale. Titus Flavius Josephus was a Jewish traitor who realized the folly of resisting the Roman Empire. He was adopted into the Roman court, documented the Roman military triumphs over the Jews and in my opinion, concocted the longest running deception in the history of the world. He and likely a group of ghost writers employed by the Romans took the Jewish prophetical writings (he was an expert), a smattering of myths from the mystery cults that were prevalent in the first century and blended a tale that would be a tool used by the Roman Empire to conquer and control peoples without military force until the present day. The New Testament, Christianity and the mythical Jesus of Nazareth.

And so Josephus wrote parallel military histories, one actual and one mythical of Titus Flavius Vespasianus and his destruction of the Temple in 70 CE. The mythical Jesus son of God, was Titus son of Vespasian. Titus and the Romans destroyed the Jewish resistance in two ways. One, the immediate physical destruction of the Temple Mount. This took much of the steam out of the Jewish resistance. Faithful Jews realized that their G_d had not protected Herod's Temple. Two, with the invention of Christianity, a much more subservient non-militaristic form of Judaism, Josephus gave unto the Caesars a tool for subverting the Jewish faith and conquering the world. One book validates the other. who but a Roman sympathizer could have written "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and render unto God that which is God's"? The Roman court must have roared with laughter. Consider that the Caesars considered themselves living gods. And so material wealth, the coins of the realm were as you know adorned with the image of the emperor, were given to the tax collectors willingly. And unwittingly what was "God's", your soul and everything intangible, were being pledged to Caesar, the living god.

And so consider that the "Son of God", Titus, conquered death, the Jewish resistance. God the father, Vespasian, might well have said at the time of Titus's victory "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased." Just my thoughts, just my opinion.

This on Josephus from Wiki:

Josephus, who introduced himself in Greek as "Iosepos (Ιώσηπος), son of Matthias, an ethnic Jew, a priest from Jerusalem",[5] fought the Romans in the First Jewish-Roman War of 66–73 as a Jewish military leader in Galilee. Prior to this however, he was sent in his early twenties for negotiations with Emperor Nero, for the release of several Jewish priests. He later returned to Jerusalem and was drafted as a commander of the Galilean forces.[6] After the Jewish garrison of Yodfat fell under siege, the Romans invaded, killing thousands; the survivors committed suicide.

According to Josephus, however, in circumstances that are somewhat unclear, Josephus found himself trapped in a cave with forty of his companions. The Romans asked him to surrender once they discovered where he was, but his companions refused to allow this. He therefore suggested a method of collective suicide: they draw lots and killed each other, one by one, counting to every third person. The sole survivor of this process was Josephus (this method as a mathematical problem is referred to as the Josephus problem, or Roman Roulette [7]) Josephus and one of his soldiers then surrendered to the Roman forces invading Galilee in July 67 and became prisoners. The Roman forces were led by Flavius Vespasian and his son Titus, both subsequently Roman emperors. In 69, Josephus was released (cf. War IV.622–629) and according to Josephus's own account, he appears to have played a role as a negotiator with the defenders during the Siege of Jerusalem in 70.

And so like Jesus, Josephus was from Galilee and so the NT sites were familiar to him. Convenient in the least. And imagine his miraculous escape from the mass suicide that was his brainchild. Who but the treasonous Josephus could have written of the betrayal of Christ by Judas? Judas (Juda), interesting choice of names, don't you think? The beat goes on and on, I find evidence at every turn that backs my theory. That's just me folks, I gain nothing from relating my thoughts to you. Not even satisfaction as a millennia old, mass deception is not a satisfying story in the least.

Knowing that the Biblical Jesus is a fiction is not a sin. Knowing that the Biblical Jesus is a fiction and using that information to gain power and profit is a horrible crime. Again, just my opinion.

reply to post by thegoodearth
I think people can use things for evidence to reinforce what they are already practicing. The fact is that a lot of people believe that Sunday is somehow a holy day without ever questioning how such a thing came about, because they just figure that is how it has always been. It seems that Paul did not get the memo because he continued to observe the Sabbath. The New Covenant is that God would write the Law on people's hearts, not that there would be a nullification of the Law. Popes starting with the instigation of a pagan Roman emperor liked the day of the sun and had a compliant church hierarchy that would go along with his wishes, being a professional class of state sponsored religionists who knew what the trend was and were quick to jump in to fill positions that opened up with the decline of their former benefactors in the fading mythological god cults, and in most cases without actually converting in a overt way to Christianity. These were in a ruling class that had power and authority and attracted the very sort of person who would have been shunned by an organic sort of church organization. The momentum became supporting the new defensible status quo backed up my a strong military organization which the Romans had and could force their will on lesser more independent churches to adopt a religious system based on the regalia and ritual of the Emperor worship, thus negating the advances made through the old martyrs who gave their lives in opposition to such a system. This power had been able to exert its will on religious thinking through the power of not just excommunicating but actually killing those who opposed it. The Reformation was a chance for the freedom of thought for people to fix some of the problems that could be adjusted on a personal level. Unfortunately, though a lot of the bright lights of the Reformation adopted Sabbath keeping, the large churches that grew up from them were stifled by the inertia of officialdom and we are today stuck with the old practices left over from ancient pagan influences. The Beast is merely the creature as contrasted against the creator, as in worship of a planet like the sun, instead of the One who made the sun, who made it as clear as possible with the giving of the Ten Commandments that have been attempted to be abrogated by a self proclaimed god-on-earth, as in the Pope, who by the way announced upon his taking office that the central goal of his papacy was to get everyone to worship Sunday.


[edit on 4-8-2010 by jmdewey60]

To what can I compare this generation?

They are like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling out to others:

" `We played the flute for you,
and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge,
and you did not mourn.'

For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, `He has a demon.' The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, `Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and "sinners." ' But wisdom is proved right by her actions."
Matthew 11:16-19

I guess it's no wonder that the OP has abandoned us to our own devices. All we're doing is engaging in sectarian bickering, very polite bickering, but not very helpful. I'm certain that any of you sectarians could quite easily post a link to an official denominational website and say, "click here, and learn all truth." Then you wouldn't have to say any more.

We are alive and thinking right now, today. We should be able to take into account what we have seen and heard personally, and what we can read of history. These things (our personal and our collective experiences) were not available to the people who set the official sectarian doctrines in stone. Why in the name of all things sane do we limit ourselves to what someone in the past taught to be true?

Examples:

The official Roman Catholic doctrines were adopted in 325 at the council of Nicaea. Nothing is going to change that. There have been councils since that reaffirm and add additional understandings of contemporary concerns.

The Protestants pretty much set their doctrines in stone by the early 1600s regarding the Pope as the anti-Christ and the Papacy as Beast/and or Anti-Christ.

The Seventh-day Adventists set their doctrines in stone by the late 1880s. To illustrate, An American grown movement with strong Baptist influence. See themselves as a historic movement completing the Protestant Reformation, in complete unbroken line all the way back to Adam. Therefore taking unto themselves all the revelations from God, Old and New Testaments and another later prophet of their own number. Goes along with Protestant teaching regarding Pope as anti-Christ and being America centric, identifies the US as the Beast from the earth, at first nice seeming and then turning wicked under the influence of the Papacy, with Sunday keeping as the mark.

Therefore no account is taken of Nazi Germany, changes in relative influence upon U.S. policy by Roman Catholicism, the growing power of Jewish and Christian Zionism as the preeminent influencer of U.S. policies. What will SDAs think if a Sabbath Law passes in the US? will they then say, "I guess the US hasn't turned yet, it's the Sunday Law that we expected." All the while, the US straddles the globe as an unstoppable Beast, ripping and tearing the people of the world and stamping the residue under foot all at the command of the Zionists, of whom they don't consider since they (the Zionists) didn't exist at the time their(SDA) doctrines were set in stone.

I will get to (if necessary) Baptists, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, whatever is necessary. I've considered them all, and have many opinions. For now, I will read some news.

I thought I'd add a quote from Justin Raimondo about the War Party:

I don’t know about you, but I find this frightening: that some men can be so unreflective, so immersed in their own ideological and economic bubble, that rational arguments simply bounce off of them. They are immune to argument, unable and unwilling to understand how militarism and imperialism are killing us and dragging us down into financial and moral bankruptcy. Sprung from the nexus of economics and foreign interventionism, they personify a growing sector of American society, one that derives both its income and its very identity from our ever-expanding Empire.
original.antiwar.com...

[edit on 4-8-2010 by pthena]

reply to post by thegoodearth

For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that He has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant

The diference between the old and the new covenant is that the old was a "symbol" of the new, a fulfillment of the types from the old testament.
If we had sacrifices before, they were always pointing to the only real sacrifice that would be enough and sufficient for salvation. Hebrews 9:11-12 "But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption"

On the first day of the week we came together to break bread.

Actually we have in the bible people going to the sinagogue every day, not only on the first day of the week. It doesn't make any other day holy or to be kept.

On the first day of every week, each of you is to put aside and save whatever extra you earn

Read the previous verse, you migh get the explanation on what to save and put aside.

We have no proof in bible that he proclaimed a new day to keep on his ressurrection. Even on the new covenant, the decalogue law remains the same.

Mathew 5:17 (again) - "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets"
We must remember that when Jesus said that, the only bible that existed was the Old Testament, what law is He talking about?


reply to post by pthena


You are right about religions setting their beliefs and that they won't change. Even that is profetic, that's why for example the US won't pass a law on the saturday, some things cannot be changed.

What we CAN change is ourselves, what we believe in and what side we take. The truth is coming one way or the other, the only difference is what part of the truth you're in: inside or outside, and I hope it won't be too late for all of us.
One can balieve in anything about the beasts or the antichrists, it won't change the reality of their existence or not or who they are or will be.


A belief won't change. People will.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by HSDA83]

reply to post by HSDA83
I'm fairly frustrated, you can probably tell. I was raised SDA and even studied Theology at La Sierra back in the day. I am frustrated that the SDAs with their historical interpritation of prophecy should be at the forefront in confronting and exposing the Beast, which currently is being fed with militarism and destructive self glorification arising out of the growing popularity of Dispensational Theology. That's where Christian Zionism comes from.

No one in the US, except Muslims, seemed to notice or bat an eye when GW Bush proclaimed loud and clear that the US eternal war would be called Operation Infinite Justice. Loud and clear blasphemy for the whole world to see and hear. As if GW or the US were taking over God's position as Judge of the whole Earth.

Saturday, Sunday, don't mean a thing to me. People are being killed by the millions, while the sects ignore it looking for some sign that the US will some day be on the wrong side. Some day has passed. We're full blown living in the belly of the Beast. The people outside being ripped up don't have the luxury of sitting around debating who the beast may be, they see it with their own eyes as the claw descends and the teeth close.

Yes, I am frustrated. And I'm really freaked out.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by pthena]

reply to post by pthena


Just wanted to let you know that I really respect your posts.
God Bless~