• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is the 'church' the antichrist?

G

gzusfrk

Christian
Bible Student said:
Jesus quoted the OT numerous times all throughout the NT.Even his disciples do too.So according to your statement,Jesus and his disciples were then quoting writings in the OT that you say are not Gods Word? Wow!:eek:
Click to expand...

Jesus had yet died, their was no New Covenant.
 
Nada

Nada

#
gzusfrk said:
So Christ and His Gospel is not enough.
Click to expand...
No, its not.The holy scriptures consist of both the old writings before Jesus time that started with Moses and the writings that were penned by Jesus' disciples in the 1st century.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Bible Student said:
Tormented day and night forever and ever is a symbolic statement that implies total destruction for eternity.It does not mean that God will torture people or the devil for all eternity.God does not torture people and burn them in fire forever.

Jeremiah 7:31 They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind.

Jeremiah 32:35 They built high places for Baal in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to sacrifice their sons and daughters to Molek, though I never commanded--nor did it enter my mind--that they should do such a detestable thing and so make Judah sin.


So as you can see from Gods own Word, He finds this act detestable.It is something that never entered His mind and He never commanded.



Symbolic language.

You have to understand brother that when Gods Word describes things, its not always literal.
There is much symbolism,especially in the book of Revelation.

When God says beast,He does not mean an animal literally.This describes a Kingdom or world government.

When God says island,it usually refers to a distant Kingdom or far away land.

When many waters or seas a re spoken of it can refer to many peoples.For example,
Revelation 17:15 Then the angel said to me, "The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages.

When Gods Word speaks of carry off His people to safety with wings,it does not mean they were literally carried of and flown away.It just means He made sure they were taken care of and helped to get to safety by way of His holy spirit.

Mountains can also refer to a Kingdom or a government.Gods Kingdom is described as a mountain smashing the feet of the statue in the book of Daniel that represents all the Kingdoms of the world from the time of King Nebuchadnezzar to end of our time.


Its all symbolic language and not to be taken literally.

The eternal lake of fire is a symbolic place that really represents eternal damnation in the form of eternal destruction.No eternal life.eternal separation form your God and creator.
Click to expand...

And yet at the 'day of judgement', what is the difference? Seems like semantics.
p.s., I think the 'Hell' argument is off-topic as well. No worries.
 
Last edited:
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
savagewind said:
When you stand before The Judge on judgement day and say "I obeyed the Bible the best way I knew how" The Judge might say "the what?" But...."I even helped slaughter those that wouldn't!" "Some of the prophets who tried to tell me the Bible is not for obeying I called the devil". "Please understand my motives were GOOD and it was YOU who gave us it"
Click to expand...

I don't think the Bible is a 'trick' to separate hardcore believers from either others or those with different concepts of Jesus/Deity. I think 'Christos" is pan-meaning here, otherwise Esu would never have been considered Deity.
 
Last edited:
Nada

Nada

#
disciple said:
I agree, I don't think the intent was ever to 'replace' the OT.
Click to expand...
I cant believe people actually think you can have the writings done by the 1st century disciples,better known as the NT,without having the OT first.Thats amazing!
 
savagewind

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
disciple said:
I don't think the Bible is a 'trick' to separate hardcore believers from either others or those with different concepts of Jesus/Deity. I think 'Christos" is pan-meaning here, otherwise Esu would never have been considered Deity.
Click to expand...

If the Bible is a trick whose trick would it be? I don't believe it is anyone's trick. Mistakes grew there because of many different people. All of them are dead. The scriptures never were for obeying as lord. Not for Israel or for us. But now what we have are people telling us to obey God means to obey the bible. That is assuming it is for leading us. If it is for leading us then what is Jesus for? What is to worship in spirit and truth mean?
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Is the 'church' the antichrist?

Muhammad prophesied for coming of the Anti-Christ (Dajjal) at the end-times and also coming of the Promised Messiah to kill the Anti-Christ (Dajjal).

Sure the Church and its priests are the Anti-Christ (Dajjal).

Regards
 
Prophet

Prophet

breaking the statutes of my local municipality
If we are talking about the anti-Christ as per the Book of Revelation, the anti-Christ being talked about is Nero Caesar. The Roman Empire and its emperor are derided by Revelation in code--that code being the only reason the book survived later Roman control of Christianity.
 
Last edited:
Alt Thinker

Alt Thinker

Older than the hills
Prophet said:
If we are talking about the anti-Christ as per the Book of Revelation, the anti-Christ being talked about is Nero Caesar. The Roman Empire and its emperor are derided by Revelation in code--that code being the only reason the book survived later Roman control of Christianity.
Click to expand...

I agree that the Beast of Revelation is Nero Caesar. But the anti-Christ is not mentioned in Revelation. The epistles of John make it clear that anti-Christs (plural) are people who deny that Jesus is the Christ and came in the flesh. John mentions that there are many such people already around in his day.

See my full comments here.
 
ChristineES

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
paarsurrey said:
Is the 'church' the antichrist?

Muhammad prophesied for coming of the Anti-Christ (Dajjal) at the end-times and also coming of the Promised Messiah to kill the Anti-Christ (Dajjal).

Sure the Church and its priests are the Anti-Christ (Dajjal).

Regards
Click to expand...

My Church doesn't even have a priest. :shrug:
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
“The Holy Prophet's (Muhammad’s)sa elaboration of the anti-Christ and the unique donkey he would ride must have seemed extremely odd to the people of his time. It had to appear odd because despite the fact that he continually refers to that mount as a donkey, none of the known characteristics of a donkey are ascribed to that oddity. However all the modern modes of transport answer to this description perfectly.”

https://www.alislam.org/library/books/revelation/part_6_section_2.html

Regards
 
Prophet

Prophet

breaking the statutes of my local municipality
Alt Thinker said:
I agree that the Beast of Revelation is Nero Caesar. But the anti-Christ is not mentioned in Revelation. The epistles of John make it clear that anti-Christs (plural) are people who deny that Jesus is the Christ and came in the flesh. John mentions that there are many such people already around in his day.

See my full comments here.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. If I were to guess who is being identified as the antichrist, gnostic Christians are my first bet, based upon their rejection of the orthodoxy's doctrines such as the virgin birth and the physical resurrection of Jesus... my second guess is that the orthodoxy is being identified as the antichrist, based upon gnostic Christians claiming to be the true bearers of his gospel. I imagine the two sides called each other antichrists routinely.
 
Last edited:
B

BummerBeavis

Member
Alt Thinker said:
The term ‘antichrist’ is used only in the epistles of John. In the popular imagination, fostered in part by Hollywood, the antichrist is often conflated with the Beast, the False Prophet and/or Satan in Revelation. These are in fact three different entities and none of them is the antichrist as defined in the epistles of John.

Who is the antichrist?
“whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ … is the antichrist” (1 Jn 2:22)
“every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus … is the spirit of the antichrist” (1 Jn 4:3)
“who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh … is the deceiver and the antichrist” (2 Jn 1:7)

The antichrist is anyone who denies that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah) and has come in the flesh. John refers mainly to persons but also to spirits. These are not ghosts but thoughts that arise from other than the Spirit that comes from God.

Any church that accepts that Jesus is the Christ and has come in the flesh (or members thereof) is therefore not the antichrist.
Click to expand...
NO NO NO. VICARIOUS FILII DEI= THE SUBSTITUTE FOR THE SON OF GOD= THE POPE AND HIS NAME ADDS UP TO 666 IN ROMAN NUMERALS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top