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.

 

What Evidence Points Toward's Obama Not Being The Anti Christ

page: 5
2
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
He aint no antichrist. Barry's just a community organizer who made a deal with george soros and hillary clinton back in 2008. The deal was that he'd do most of the dirty work so that hillary may do the coup da grace in 2016.




posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Gryphon66

ElohimJD
Barack Obama has never been in this fellowship and does not understand the work of Christ in order to turn against it at this time.


Out of curiosity, how do you know this?

Are you being metaphorical?


1 John 2:4
"Whoever says I know him; but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

If he had been called into fellowship with God and Jesus Christ and came to "know" the work of Jesus Christ in his mind (in order to choose to turn against it), he would have kept the commandments of God in spirit and in truth according to the Word of God; until the day came when he chose to no longer repent of sin and set his mind against that continually transforming work he was originally called into by the grace of God.

The entire chapter of 1 John 2 is about what Anti-Christ is, how to tell if a person has been called into a true relationship with God and Jesus Christ in the first place, how the spirit of Anti-Christ comes out from "us" (out of the Body of Christ/Church of God/Temple of God) they reveal how; though originally called to be a part of "us" (in agreement with what is true), they became not one with "us"; because they did not agree with the truth of God anymore. They eventually refused to continually repent of their carnal human nature, which is the work of Christ in his Church all their lives after being called out of the world.

Once you partake of this way of life, and have proved it's true ways through the transformation of your mind into a portion of the spiritual image of God (God's way of thinking) and later make the intentional choice to refuse this continual process/work, you set your mind against Christ becoming Anti-Christ in your attitude.

You must "know" Christ to turn against him.

God Bless,
edit on 27-2-2014 by ElohimJD because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I made this post about a month ago in another thread:

"I remember one time getting into a conversation with a group of my friends in university about the whole 'anti-christ' situation. Two of them were religion majors, I tried up and down to argue that the anti christ is coming - long story, I was into the whole doomsday stuff back then - and they shot me down with, long story short.
NO ONE can predict or know when the anti-christ will come, it even says in the bible that it will come when people least expect it, and it will come without any warning what so ever.
So ever since then, when people say "This guy is the anti christ!" or "He will come on this date!" is pretty much automatically, wrong, because no one who is living will know until it's too late.

Matthew 24:36 - But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

2 John 1:7
Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

ANYONE can be the anti-christ. And if you read the bible it suggests that there is no one individual person who is the anti-christ, anyone who denies Jesus has come in the flesh, and does not let God into their hearts is deemed a deceiver, just like how Jesus was betrayed on his final days by his disciple.

1 John 2:22 - Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son"

That's why he isn't the anti-christ...



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by DrunkYogi
 




What Evidence Points Toward's Obama Not Being The Anti Christ

How about the bible is bunk aside from the multi-religion message to love.
edit on 2/27/2014 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 05:40 PM
link   
easy: since the new testament is where the Antichrist is mentioned and it was written in greek we need to take the greek meaning of anti that was the primary use then. anti means instead of. if you think of it the antichrist has always wanted to be christ. wanted to sit in Christs stead at the right hand of God. wanted the mercy seat. he is described as doing what Christ does upon his advent. even to the extent that in some passages in the book of revelation Christians even confuse the two. he comes pretending to bring peace and confusing even the elect if it were possible according to Jesus's own word. Barrack has not performed miracles, is not a religious leader and is not mimicking Jesus and has not been mortally wounded and then miraculously healed.

the only thing even remotely offering some sort of biblical evidence is his choice of the name barrack and what that word means in Hebrew. that and his idiot supporters contsantly photoshopping halos (time magazine covers) on him and acting like he is a messiah.
edit on 27-2-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


Judas was jealous of Jesus... if you read my post a little bit up you'd see that the first true anti christ was Judas.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by DrunkYogi
 


The Beast needs a false prophet and he needs to deceive everyone, even the very elect, into following him and thinking he is Christ.

Can you really see Obama doing that? I'll admit he had a nice little cult of personality going at first and I was a bit concerned, but the bloom is off that rose now. I don't see the Beast losing that bloom until he takes control of the whole world. Obama may claim 57 states, but he's still 7 states and several hundred countries short of world domination. And he's weakening our capacity to try to conquer the globe even further.

So, I wouldn't worry at all about Obama or any future leader of the US being the Beast, nope, not even if the World really does end for you lefties and we wind up with someone like a President Palin.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 10:13 PM
link   
He is one of them. I think US is some mystery connection to Sumar and the pontiff is a symboic figure in ancient times, thus by definition, pontiff always is the seat of one of the anti christs.

But, Obama got named it. Though doubt that's his real name and believe him to be a tool.

I pray for them, to be free. All to be free, wake up and get away.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 02:08 AM
link   

The classic philosophical treatment of the problem of induction was given by the Scottish philosopher David Hume. Hume highlighted the fact that our everyday habits of mind depend on drawing uncertain conclusions from our relatively limited experiences rather than on deductively valid arguments. For example, we believe that bread will nourish us because it has done so in the past, despite no guarantee that it will do so. Hume argued that it is impossible to justify inductive reasoning: specifically, that it cannot be justified deductively, so our only option is to justify it inductively. Since this is circular he concluded that it is impossible to justify induction.[8]

However, Hume then stated that even if induction were proved unreliable, we would still have to rely on it. So instead of a position of severe skepticism, Hume advocated a practical skepticism based on common sense, where the inevitability of induction is accepted.


Induction is still valuable! Who would have thunk it!



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by DrunkYogi
 


He certainly is a lot of things, but YOU are making extraordinary claims, so you need to produce some extraordinary evidence. Your whole argument is flawed since it starts with the idea that Obama IS the antichrist and asks us to disprove that this is the case. It doesn't work that way. The reason for that is because you can keep pushing the goal posts back. I come up with a reason why he isn't the antichrist (really it should only take one) then you alter what was said slightly and continue with your faulty premise. Start laying down why YOU think he is the antichrist so that we have somewhere to begin to pick apart your faulty argument (I say faulty because the antichrist doesn't exist. Revelations is a lie).


Of course my argument doesn't start with the premise that Obama is the AC. I said he could be. He's a candidate.

And as i said before more than one religion or prophet has mentioned a specific AC. So even if Revelations is a lie there are other sources. The World does not stand or fall by the Bible.

You quote the Bible to tell me all non believers in Jesus are AC's. Then you say an AC doesn't exist, Revelation's is a lie!!! Are all book's in the Bible a lie? If so your argument is guff. If you say some are true and some are lies, how did you choose. How do you know which are real and which are not? Your confused mate!
edit on 28-2-2014 by DrunkYogi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:01 AM
link   

strongfp
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


Judas was jealous of Jesus... if you read my post a little bit up you'd see that the first true anti christ was Judas.


Have you read the Gnostic Gospel of Judas?



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:04 AM
link   

interupt42

DrunkYogi

interupt42
reply to post by DrunkYogi
 


IMO nothing but reality.


Keep going!


And then get back to trying to debunk my OP.


Sure , present me the facts that religion and/or the bible were true accurate depiction of reality based on facts rather than faith.

BTW if you can then you would be one of the most influential people in the world, as to date has not been done.




Jeeeez......How many times? There are other sources rather than the Bible.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:12 AM
link   

ignorant_ape
reply to post by DrunkYogi
 


take a foundation course in logic / critical thinking - then you will understand the fallacy of your OP



Inductive reasoning has been criticized by thinkers as diverse as Sextus Empiricus[6] and Karl Popper.[7] The classic philosophical treatment of the problem of induction was given by the Scottish philosopher David Hume. Hume highlighted the fact that our everyday habits of mind depend on drawing uncertain conclusions from our relatively limited experiences rather than on deductively valid arguments. For example, we believe that bread will nourish us because it has done so in the past, despite no guarantee that it will do so. Hume argued that it is impossible to justify inductive reasoning: specifically, that it cannot be justified deductively, so our only option is to justify it inductively. Since this is circular he concluded that it is impossible to justify induction.[8]

However, Hume then stated that even if induction were proved unreliable, we would still have to rely on it. So instead of a position of severe skepticism, Hume advocated a practical skepticism based on common sense, where the inevitability of induction is accepted.[


If you can't see there is merit in Inductive Reasoning then there's no hope for you. Use your own brain instead of jumping on the "It's a Logical Fallacy" Bandwagon.



Yah Hoooooooooooooo.
edit on 28-2-2014 by DrunkYogi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Because the premise is 100% stupid thats why.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:35 AM
link   

crazyewok
Because the premise is 100% stupid thats why.


Premise=A premise is a statement that an argument claims will induce or justify a conclusion. In other words: a premise is an assumption that something is true.

en.wikipedia.org...

How many times do i have to say i didn't say Obama was the AC. He is a candidate.

Here's one for you too...........




posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:45 AM
link   

boymonkey74
I would have thought the anti christ would be/do better than him so no he isn't the anti christ...in fact no one ever is or will be, it's a religious bogey man.


There is the possibility that certain people are playing up to the prophecies and will create the situation described as the end times to further their own agenda.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by DrunkYogi
 


What evidence indicates he's not?

1. He's not bright enough.
2. He's got tooooooooooooo much OBVIOUS negative horrific overt hideous baggage.

3. He's toooooooooooo OBVIOUSLY demonized in his motivations, intent, black-hearted narcissistic, pathological lying habits.
4. He's toooooooooooo OBVIOUSLY tooooooo eagerly bent on destroying the USA every way he can get away with as fast as he can, as ordered by his puppet masters.

5. There's no way the Israeli's could accept him as a messiah or even a messiah type figure.
6. There's no way he could convincingly pretend to be a man of peace to anyone with an IQ above freezing.

7. He's toooooooooooo OBVIOUSLY ruthless, harsh, mean-spirited, vengeful to the core.
8. Only the grossly uninformed; terminally deluded; worshipful s-o-ck-ups; 'mentally altered;' globalist shills; . . . can ignore that he's a hollow, chosen, trained, assigned globalist Destroyer in Chief from the git go.

9. He makes a tolerable forerunner testing the waters as to how much destruction the populace and planet will tolerate how soon.

10. The authentic AC will come on the scene as a lily white, brilliant, messiah-figure-man-of-peace . . . convincing the masses of his saintliness to solve horrendous problems with gracious peaceful wonderfulness. He will actually, as the Bible says, "wage war with peace" but that will not be immediately evident, except to the discerning and Biblically astute. He will not have a reputation for gleefully watching drones blow up families.

imho.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by strongfp
 


Your post is askew on at least a couple of points.

1. The Scripture about no man knowing the day nor the hour

IS ABOUT Jesus The true Messiah coming again.

2. No--NOT anyone could be THE Anti-Christ. There are many anti-Christ figures from 2,000 years ago until now. But THE final and world leader AC is not yet OVERTLY fully known on the world stage. When HE is overtly known on the world stage, the 7 years of Tribulation will be off and running.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by strongfp
 


Your post is askew on at least a couple of points.

1. The Scripture about no man knowing the day nor the hour

IS ABOUT Jesus The true Messiah coming again.

2. No--NOT anyone could be THE Anti-Christ. There are many anti-Christ figures from 2,000 years ago until now. But THE final and world leader AC is not yet OVERTLY fully known on the world stage. When HE is overtly known on the world stage, the 7 years of Tribulation will be off and running.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


LOL. You've got a lot of anger there bud. If you don't like Obama you just had to say.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join