Antichrist Duality, One may be correct to oppose Jesus theme of The Father

In reading some of the differences for the original theme for Creator gods, there appear two different forms for the anti-Christ. One is the standard anti-Christ theme which is the Babylon Harlot and the Babylon Talmud worship theme for the 2nd temple that Jesus disliked and wanted replaced. And the other is that Jesus appears to have held god, The Father, or the creator god Enki, as his special diety that set up another problem.

In the old days it appears the Temple Priests followed creator god Jehovah, which is assigned to Enlil themes going back to the times of Abraham in Ur. Enlil wanted to distroy mankind, or Enki's creations. And Jesus appears to have followed the Father theme or Enki the creator god for humankind.

The problem is neither one of these two diety type gods can be considered the real god, the Intelligent Designer theme of the Universe, the Architech for the Universe, Mother Nature, or the Natural Order. So, it may well be that the anti-Christ form that respects the Real theme of god being a Natural Order is correct and those that oppose the Jesus theme based upon that could be the supreme of correctness.

Of course that means Jesus can't be god. That there is not a Trinity for Jesus, as we know that was forged into the Book of John in the times of the Vulgate. But, we know the organized religion tried to cast Jesus in the same mold as Nimrod with trinity, resurrection, and Sun worship themes, all considered Pagan issues.

So, the anti-Christ can take two different themes. One being just as wrong as those trying to make Jesus god, and another that is the highest realm knowledge of god that is correct above all others. It seems like even Enki spoke of this god that was higher than the Creator gods, but it appears Jesus was not aligned with this higher realm of god indentification as he used "god, The Father".

Could be the end-times, when all the great lies and false teachings are exposed, that even the god, The Father, that Jesus proposed as god, fell way short of what most would allow as the official god theme. There appears to be a form of Anti-Christ that would be welcomed as the higher knowledge that would go beyond the Jesus god theme.

It appears that Nimrod has half right to oppose the issue of the Enki or Enlil being god, but went more in the wrong direction with making himself and wife eventually associated with god and the Babylon Trinity concept. There is even the concept that Nimrod posessed the holy blood of the Anu gods, which gave him right to pass as god. And the issues of Jesus held this same holy blood issue for his role to take over as a higher religion taught as "The Way".


Many persons have their doubts on the issue for the Annunaki god theme, but the bulk of the information on this theme highly supports their stories were more than just myths. Their story explains the reshaping of the Continents, the old stories of India on nuclear weapons used long ago, and even the Creation of Homo Sapiens. This appears where Jesus took up the concept for god, The Father.

Yet, the whole story is some greater force or intelligence somewhere fashioned the Creator gods themselves.


The anti-Christ has an element for moving beyond the times of Jesus into a new age of ober intelligent thinking of god and intelligent design.

Jesus only told people to be themselves, live love and laugh. He hated hate. Be yourself, encourage others to be themselves and you are doing God's work. Wouldnt it be something if we were already living in a world without time? Put a smile on someones face and tell them it only gets better from here. If you can forget building your of personal kingdom, and focus on building people you will never be the same. If you have enough make sure that others do too. We dont need the top 1% to do this for us, we can do this ourselves. Our health has nothing to do with what we put in our mouth, it has to do with the words that come out of our mouth. Thank God for today, and God will take care of your tomorrows. If you know someone who's sick tell them theyll feel better, if you know someone who needs help, help them without judgement. It's God's love that sets you free, now go love someone. Have a good one.

Originally posted by willie9696
Jesus only told people to be themselves, live love and laugh. He hated hate. Be yourself, encourage others to be themselves and you are doing God's work. Wouldnt it be something if we were already living in a world without time? Put a smile on someones face and tell them it only gets better from here. If you can forget building your of personal kingdom, and focus on building people you will never be the same. If you have enough make sure that others do too. We dont need the top 1% to do this for us, we can do this ourselves. Our health has nothing to do with what we put in our mouth, it has to do with the words that come out of our mouth. Thank God for today, and God will take care of your tomorrows. If you know someone who's sick tell them theyll feel better, if you know someone who needs help, help them without judgement. It's God's love that sets you free, now go love someone. Have a good one.

Hi,

You have a good bit of sage advice, but I would say that you are what you eat and it does matter. Part of the Bible Narratives on treat the body as a temple is about that theme for health and longevity. The Lord's Supper gets into a ritual for abundat health via grains and wine health giving effects. I tend to point to a missing nutrient called Boron these days that the Lord's Supper contained in abundance. The old gods had an appreciation for Myrrh and Frankencense, as a health giving effect that even involved the incense burned in the most Holy parts of the Old Temple.

If one wants to have aboundant health and longevity those hints point one in the correct direction.

Thanks for the comment.

reply to post by willie9696


Ironically, the Enki followers they do not like Jesus and they see him as working for the slave god. We would never know because the bible is so corrected, we don't know what he really say or didn't say.

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by willie9696

 

Ironically, the Enki followers they do not like Jesus and they see him as working for the slave god. We would never know because the bible is so corrected, we don't know what he really say or didn't say.

I'll have to give ya that, the Bible Narratives are some of the most worst written things ever done to attempt to tell the literal truth for god, what Jesus proposed to change, and so forth.

I'd give the Bible's Writers the Nobel Prize in terrible writing skills. It is so bad that it appears to cause internal conflicts, so severe, as to drive mental illness issues.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


"Ante" in the Greek means "in place of" not what anti means in English which is "against/opposite of". The context for the antichrist (hu antechristos) is a coming man who will claim to be God. Who will stand in the temple and claim he is God.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

"Ante" in the Greek means "in place of" not what anti means in English which is "against/opposite of". The context for the antichrist (hu antechristos) is a coming man who will claim to be God. Who will stand in the temple and claim he is God.

Ante works much the same as antechamber or the smaller forward chamber before the larger central chamber. Analogy with Christ/god, to be superceeded with main theme for god.

So, it might well mean Christ (Who Christians claim is Jesus/god) gets replaced by the real issue of god (Natural Order Force, Mother Nature, Intelligent Architech, etc.), and Jesus is left as just a Prophet that appeared not to have the real god theme in mind via The Father term.

It still gets to the theme that Jesus can't sustain playing god in the end times, and the issue that god is only the Intelligent Design theme that really takes no form but for perhaps symbolically as the universe itself. And there is a reality to the anti-Christ theme via that avenue of thought and the duality of the anti-Christ concept.

There is a reality for a real concept for anti-christ based upon Jesus being built into god falsely. Especially the false trinity game that tried to make Jesus into the Babylon he disliked

Jesus can't become god, even in the End-Times, as the Son of Man remains the Son of Man, not god. Though some might try to force Jesus into a position as god, it won't be sustained.

There can exist the concept for anteSavior leading to the Loving God concept or ultimate Savior. And the Temple designs would support this sort of antelevel system of steps leading to the most Holy Zone. These old temples have multiple symbolic door fames, specially chosen numbers of steps, and follow much of the old Phonecian and Tyre themes to make temples.


For you the (hu antechristos) theme is Prince of Persia, King of Babylon, and King of Tyre. The "City of Ur" was held by Persia and was earlier home for Abraham and Enki (The Father), the King of Tyre was allied with Phonecians to build the first temple and Jesus was technically from Phonecia and Tyre area and the Part of the Fertile Crescent that Ur once Controlled, and Jesus is sheep dipped into being Nimrod Clone via the Babylon Trinity, so he has all those pseudo titles it appears. Thus, the "anteChist" means Jesus/Savior and means there is a higher concept for Savior or god. Jesus still gets to assist in showing The Way.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

"Ante" in the Greek means "in place of" not what anti means in English which is "against/opposite of". The context for the antichrist (hu antechristos) is a coming man who will claim to be God. Who will stand in the temple and claim he is God.

edit on 5-6-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

What if everybody starts to realize that they are God? Does that mean that everyone is the anti-christ?

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Thanks, Magnum. I had a post all ready to reply with, and thought....what's the use?
ANTE means "before"....
antebellum
anteroom
antedate

ante- 
a prefix meaning “before,” used in the formation of compound words: anteroom; antebellum; antedate.
Origin:
< Latin, prefixal form of preposition and adv. ante ( see ancient); akin to Greek antí, Old English and- against, toward, opposite. See answer, and, anti-

Can be confused:  ante, ante-, anti-, auntie.

dictionary.reference.com...

The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon
Strong's Number: 473
Original Word Word Origin
anti a primary particle
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Anti 1:372,61
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
an-tee' Preposition
Definition
over against, opposite to, before
for, instead of, in place of (something)
instead of
for
for that, because
wherefore, for this cause

NAS Word Usage - Total: 9
accordingly 1, because* 4, instead 2, place 1, reason 1

NAS Verse Count
Matthew 1
Luke 4
Acts 1
Ephesians 1
2 Thessalonians 1
James 1
Total 9
Greek lexicon based on Thayer's and Smith's Bible Dictionary plus others; this is keyed to the large Kittel and the "Theological Dictionary of the New Testament." These files are public domain.
Dictionary.com Unabridged

www.biblestudytools.com...

Notice the orange words are equally translatable. This makes "antichrist" the term itself, subject to interpretation.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


No, the Babylonian model of the trinity is a father-like figure, a son-like figure, and a mother or queen of heaven-like figure. Nimrod, Tammuz, and Semiramis. Or in other words, the Catholic dogmatic version. The devil cannot create anything original, he only can pervert the original.

Originally posted by arpgme

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

"Ante" in the Greek means "in place of" not what anti means in English which is "against/opposite of". The context for the antichrist (hu antechristos) is a coming man who will claim to be God. Who will stand in the temple and claim he is God.

edit on 5-6-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

What if everybody starts to realize that they are God? Does that mean that everyone is the anti-christ?

That's what the personal pronoun "hu" is for in the Greek. The personal pronoun "hu" (the) is significant because it denotes one specific and distinct from all others. THE antichrist, or THE man of sin is a specific man who will sit in the temple of God and declare himself to be God. Mirroring Christ, or as a pseudo Christ. Any other folks or numerous folks throughout history were operating under the influence of the " spirit of" antichrist.

reply to post by wildtimes


Dont really care what the English and Latin came to mean, no offense, John's letters weren't written in Latin or English. The Koine Greek defines ante/anti as:

(1) instead of (2) for, as (3) on behalf of (4) for the purpose of


So John is speaking of a replacement Christ, as pseudo-Christ. Not necessarily someone who is against or opposite of Christ. This anichrist will fool the entire world into thinking he is the real Jesus of Nazareth. Muslims are waiting for Jesus to return as well. It will be a man claiming to be Christ. Just remember folks, the first one that comes with amazing miracles is the fake one, no matter how spectacular the miracles are don't follow the first one.

Originally posted by wildtimes

Thanks, Magnum. I had a post all ready to reply with, and thought....what's the use?
ANTE means "before"....
antebellum
anteroom
antedate

Hello Wild,

What can I say, the more resource materials the better the understanding. Revelations was technically sourced in Greek, so one has to make an judgement call on how close the translations fit. Lots seem to just call it anti-Christ, but the ante term adds a little more insight in terms of the duality for Anti-Christ.

I agree with anteChrist being the lesser path to more predominate The Christ/Savior. Jesus, the lesser savior is the Way to the ultimate Savior and Loving god of universe concept.

AnteChrist appears to have only a single interpretation, meaning Jesus, The Man, is the lesser Savior leading into the Main theme Savior or god.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

No, the Babylonian model of the trinity is a father-like figure, a son-like figure, and a mother or queen of heaven-like figure. Nimrod, Tammuz, and Semiramis. Or in other words, the Catholic dogmatic version. The devil cannot create anything original, he only can pervert the original.

The false Pagan Trinity is the Nimrod, Tammuz, Semiramis theme. There was never a Trinity theme for Jesus, and it was added around the times for the Vulgate and corrupted the orignal text of John.

So, those, meaning you and the organized churches that hold the Bible as their word of god, sheep dipped Jesus into the pagan theme of Sun Worshipping via painting Jesus with the Babylon Trinity.

Thus, this word of god book you hold to be the word of god has been perverted from the words of John, and only gotten worse ever since.


This makes you a component for the anti-christ, as you try to run Jesus up the temple as god, but that only comes from the antichrists telling the predominate lie that Jesus was a Trinity concept so the times of Constantine could suck up all the pagan Sun Worshipping crowd in those times around 300 AD.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Wrong, the Nicaean Council officially voted on how to define His deity in 325 AD. The apostle's creed existed long before that even. And Roman perecuted Christians worshipped Christ as God and were marvelled as such since the end of the first century, thats why the Emperors of Rome wanted them exterminated. Read a few books abiut the martyrs, just finished my second one a few days ago. Quite the eye-opener.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


I dont think jesus should be raised above all other humans, as having a special relationship with god...... but......
all the information we have as humans,, technology and methods, laws, rules, formulas, philosophies, psychologies,,, have been crafted by individual men, alone or with others,, mostly over time it is via cooperation with others,, bouncing and piggy backing off prior or contemporary ideas and information..... If jesus attempted to unite every single human in the world by the bound of existence in the universe,,, if jesus is successful in doing so,, or an individual is successful in doing so,, that would be profound and make history/change the course of history... I think its an archetypal longing to create an orderly heaven on earth,,, all the positive things that come along with the abolishment of negative conflict between humans,,,

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

Wrong, the Nicaean Council officially voted on how to define His deity in 325 AD. The apostle's creed existed long before that even. And Roman perecuted Christians worshipped Christ as God and were marvelled as such since the end of the first century, thats why the Emperors of Rome wanted them exterminated. Read a few books abiut the martyrs, just finished my second one a few days ago. Quite the eye-opener.

NuT,

We have been over this area before, and the proof exists that the Trinity theme was faked into the written record of John. It is over on the Mason's theme thread, and I am not going to duplicate what has already been said and well vetted. It shows up easily in the Google Search for when and how the Trinity was inserted into the John text.

Constaintine's thing began with a vision of a Cross over the Sun. Constaintine's Mother, Helana, discovers a Cross theme in Jerusalem, and the whole Jesus and Cross thing becames Constatine's game for Jesus linked with the Sun god.

Jesus isn't god, no matter who was worshipping at any time.

Christ basically means Savior to most, and there is a concept for a duality of Christ with god symbolism. But that should not be inclusive of making Jesus god. Jesus was a Savior or Messiah, but one can have a Messiah and not be god.

Jesus, The Man, could be a Messiah with a higher message, but he cannot be god. Christ is more a concept than a term for Jesus exclusively.

The duality involves the term "Christos", which means the annointed or chosen one. This was a ritual for Kings and even gods at times, but even those gods were only pseudo gods. It stems from the times of the Annunaki, and the Holy Myrrh oil annointing thing still happens today in various fashion.

Jesus was essentially annointed with the gold, myrrh, and frankecense from the Wise men of the East or area of Babylon. He remained Jesus, The Man, but considered to have a special message on the order of a prophet or messiah with a greater truth and knowledge.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Dont really care what the English and Latin came to mean, no offense, John's letters weren't written in Latin or English.

Of course you don't really care. You're not interested in the truth, you're interested in your personal interpretation of the Bible and Christianity.

No offense taken....but the definition all by itself implies (demands?) several possible interpretations....and "before" as used in Latin, is ONE OF THEM.

Your refusal to acknowledge that illustrates your narrow vision, and your hobby of tossing out facts that don't fit your fantasy.

Originally posted by MagnumOpus

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

Wrong, the Nicaean Council officially voted on how to define His deity in 325 AD. The apostle's creed existed long before that even. And Roman perecuted Christians worshipped Christ as God and were marvelled as such since the end of the first century, thats why the Emperors of Rome wanted them exterminated. Read a few books abiut the martyrs, just finished my second one a few days ago. Quite the eye-opener.

NuT,

We have been over this area before, and the proof exists that the Trinity theme was faked into the written record of John. It is over on the Mason's theme thread, and I am not going to duplicate what has already been said and well vetted. It shows up easily in the Google Search for when and how the Trinity was inserted into the John text.

Constaintine's thing began with a vision of a Cross over the Sun. Constaintine's Mother, Helana, discovers a Cross theme in Jerusalem, and the whole Jesus and Cross thing becames Constatine's game for Jesus linked with the Sun god.

Jesus isn't god, no matter who was worshipping at any time.

Christ basically means Savior to most, and there is a concept for a duality of Christ with god symbolism. But that should not be inclusive of making Jesus god. Jesus was a Savior or Messiah, but one can have a Messiah and not be god.

Jesus, The Man, could be a Messiah with a higher message, but he cannot be god. Christ is more a concept than a term for Jesus exclusively.

The duality involves the term "Christos", which means the annointed or chosen one. This was a ritual for Kings and even gods at times, but even those gods were only pseudo gods. It stems from the times of the Annunaki, and the Holy Myrrh oil annointing thing still happens today in various fashion.

Jesus was essentially annointed with the gold, myrrh, and frankecense from the Wise men of the East or area of Babylon. He remained Jesus, The Man, but considered to have a special message on the order of a prophet or messiah with a greater truth and knowledge.

edit on 5-6-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Jesus isn't god

I wasn't talking about any texts from John. In fact, I can teach Christ from tue OT as well as a Trinue God from the OT. Christians were being murdered for worshipping Christ as the Son of God for hundreds of years before Constantine was born.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Dont really care what the English and Latin came to mean, no offense, John's letters weren't written in Latin or English.

Of course you don't really care. You're not interested in the truth, you're interested in your personal interpretation of the Bible and Christianity.

No offense taken....but the definition all by itself implies (demands?) several possible interpretations....and "before" as used in Latin, is ONE OF THEM.

Your refusal to acknowledge that illustrates your narrow vision, and your hobby of tossing out facts that don't fit your fantasy.

)
Wrong Wild. The reason I said I don't really care what the English and Latin definitions have to say on the matter is because the books of the NT were not written in those languages, in fact those languages were non-existant at that time. The reason I cared about the Greek definition, specifically the Koine Greek (common Greek) is because they were penned in Koine Greek. I even stated that and you addressed my post without that context. You ignored that aspect of my response and act like I rejected the Latin and English arbitrarily when my entire point was to highlight the DIFFERENCE between what anti has come to mean in the English from what it meant at the time John used the term to describe the future man of sin.