U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Obama Anti Christ
NO Chance 94 71.21%
10% possibility 6 4.55%
50% possibility 20 15.15%
99.9% possibility 12 9.09%
Voters: 132. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-16-2008, 07:35 AM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,037,747 times
Reputation: 284

Advertisements

[quote=Campbell34;6171974]That would be reading something into the Scriptures that is not there. And the Scriptures tell us that one day to God = One Thousand years. And for Revelation to be fulfilled the nations of the East would have to be able to field an army of 200 million men. That was not possible back in Biblical times. It is now, and today is the time the bible was speaking of.[/quote

Campbell34: Whoever and whatever "anti-Christ" was, it is not someone of our day.

When will futurists stop misusing 2 Peter 3:8? That verse was never written to encourage students of the Scriptures to dismiss every eschatological time reference they encounter. Furthermore, Campbell 34, reread 2 Peter. It does not say that "one day to God = One Thousand years." It says: "with the Lord one day is AS a thousand years." Big difference! Do you believe in a literal millennium, Campbell34? Read the rest of 2 Peter 3:8--does a thousand years to God = one day? Does it? If one day equals a thousand years then a thousand years equals a day. How many futurists ever bring that up? Perhaps your 1,000-year reign of Christ will really only last one day!!!! Do you see where this leads?

Peter was not in any way teaching that when God says to us "near" and "soon" and "at hand" and "about to" that He actually meant "far" and "later!" Words mean things and that is how God spoke to us in the Word--through words, through language which He gave to us so that He could clearly speak to us and so that we could understand! 2 Peter 3 deals with the faithfulness of God--what He promises He will do in His timing--it does not give license to redefine simple time statements found in the Bible to fit one's personal eschatological preconceptions.

Whatever the 200 million of Revelation involves, it deals with something that was to come about in John's day. God gave the Revelation to His Son who gave it to His servants through John. That Revelation involved those things that were to shortly take place because the time was then, in John's day, near. These time indicators are given in both the first chapter and the last (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10). Also, John is told in Chapter 22 (in contrast to Daniel 12) to NOT seal up the prophecy because the time was then near. Daniel was told TO seal up the prophecy because it concerned a time that was far off!

This means that any concept of any "anti-Christ" or beast is to be found in the first century and not in our time. Neither Obama nor any other present or future personage can be "Anti-Christ!"

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-16-2008, 07:55 AM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,037,747 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
That would be reading something into the Scriptures that is not there. And the Scriptures tell us that one day to God = One Thousand years. And for Revelation to be fulfilled the nations of the East would have to be able to field an army of 200 million men. That was not possible back in Biblical times. It is now, and today is the time the bible was speaking of.
Campbell34: I think I may have misunderstood your original question? Were you referring to the identity of the king in Daniel 11:37? He is perhaps the man of sin of 2 Thessalonians 2:4. These words were written by Paul to the first-century Thessalonians. This "man of sin" was one of their contemporaries. Nowhere is the word "anti-Christ used.

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 10:20 AM
 
7,654 posts, read 9,683,325 times
Reputation: 495
[quote=Preterist;6180321][quote=Campbell34;6171974]That would be reading something into the Scriptures that is not there. And the Scriptures tell us that one day to God = One Thousand years. And for Revelation to be fulfilled the nations of the East would have to be able to field an army of 200 million men. That was not possible back in Biblical times. It is now, and today is the time the bible was speaking of.[/quote

Campbell34: Whoever and whatever "anti-Christ" was, it is not someone of our day.

When will futurists stop misusing 2 Peter 3:8? That verse was never written to encourage students of the Scriptures to dismiss every eschatological time reference they encounter. Furthermore, Campbell 34, reread 2 Peter. It does not say that "one day to God = One Thousand years." It says: "with the Lord one day is AS a thousand years." Big difference! Do you believe in a literal millennium, Campbell34? Read the rest of 2 Peter 3:8--does a thousand years to God = one day? Does it? If one day equals a thousand years then a thousand years equals a day. How many futurists ever bring that up? Perhaps your 1,000-year reign of Christ will really only last one day!!!! Do you see where this leads?

Peter was not in any way teaching that when God says to us "near" and "soon" and "at hand" and "about to" that He actually meant "far" and "later!" Words mean things and that is how God spoke to us in the Word--through words, through language which He gave to us so that He could clearly speak to us and so that we could understand! 2 Peter 3 deals with the faithfulness of God--what He promises He will do in His timing--it does not give license to redefine simple time statements found in the Bible to fit one's personal eschatological preconceptions.

Whatever the 200 million of Revelation involves, it deals with something that was to come about in John's day. God gave the Revelation to His Son who gave it to His servants through John. That Revelation involved those things that were to shortly take place because the time was then, in John's day, near. These time indicators are given in both the first chapter and the last (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10). Also, John is told in Chapter 22 (in contrast to Daniel 12) to NOT seal up the prophecy because the time was then near. Daniel was told TO seal up the prophecy because it concerned a time that was far off!

This means that any concept of any "anti-Christ" or beast is to be found in the first century and not in our time. Neither Obama nor any other present or future personage can be "Anti-Christ!"

Preterist[/quot

Whatever the 200 million involves? It involves a 200 million man army, that's what it involves. And it was not a prophecy for John's day, because it is doubtful that there were even 200 million men on earth at that time let alone an army.

2 Peter 3:8 But do not ignore this one (FACT) beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day.
And this is an important verse, because it tells us in the Old Testament in Hosea 6:2 That God will revive us after two days.

Can you tell me what two days Hosea is speaking of ?

Also, in the Book of Revelation it speaks of an obvious astroid that will strike the sea and it will sink one third of the ships in that sea. If Revelation has occured in the past, can you tell me when that event happened?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 06:13 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,037,747 times
Reputation: 284
[quote=Campbell34;6181498][quote=Preterist;6180321]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
That would be reading something into the Scriptures that is not there. And the Scriptures tell us that one day to God = One Thousand years. And for Revelation to be fulfilled the nations of the East would have to be able to field an army of 200 million men. That was not possible back in Biblical times. It is now, and today is the time the bible was speaking of.[/quote

Campbell34: Whoever and whatever "anti-Christ" was, it is not someone of our day.

When will futurists stop misusing 2 Peter 3:8? That verse was never written to encourage students of the Scriptures to dismiss every eschatological time reference they encounter. Furthermore, Campbell 34, reread 2 Peter. It does not say that "one day to God = One Thousand years." It says: "with the Lord one day is AS a thousand years." Big difference! Do you believe in a literal millennium, Campbell34? Read the rest of 2 Peter 3:8--does a thousand years to God = one day? Does it? If one day equals a thousand years then a thousand years equals a day. How many futurists ever bring that up? Perhaps your 1,000-year reign of Christ will really only last one day!!!! Do you see where this leads?

Peter was not in any way teaching that when God says to us "near" and "soon" and "at hand" and "about to" that He actually meant "far" and "later!" Words mean things and that is how God spoke to us in the Word--through words, through language which He gave to us so that He could clearly speak to us and so that we could understand! 2 Peter 3 deals with the faithfulness of God--what He promises He will do in His timing--it does not give license to redefine simple time statements found in the Bible to fit one's personal eschatological preconceptions.

Whatever the 200 million of Revelation involves, it deals with something that was to come about in John's day. God gave the Revelation to His Son who gave it to His servants through John. That Revelation involved those things that were to shortly take place because the time was then, in John's day, near. These time indicators are given in both the first chapter and the last (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10). Also, John is told in Chapter 22 (in contrast to Daniel 12) to NOT seal up the prophecy because the time was then near. Daniel was told TO seal up the prophecy because it concerned a time that was far off!

This means that any concept of any "anti-Christ" or beast is to be found in the first century and not in our time. Neither Obama nor any other present or future personage can be "Anti-Christ!"

Preterist[/quot

Whatever the 200 million involves? It involves a 200 million man army, that's what it involves. And it was not a prophecy for John's day, because it is doubtful that there were even 200 million men on earth at that time let alone an army.

2 Peter 3:8 But do not ignore this one (FACT) beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day.
And this is an important verse, because it tells us in the Old Testament in Hosea 6:2 That God will revive us after two days.

Can you tell me what two days Hosea is speaking of ?

Also, in the Book of Revelation it speaks of an obvious astroid that will strike the sea and it will sink one third of the ships in that sea. If Revelation has occured in the past, can you tell me when that event happened?
Campbell34: Can we stick to the verses under consideration? Peter was not in any way doing away with the clear meanings of time indicators when he was inspired to write 2 Peter 3:8. Do you know the absolute meaning of Hosea 6:2? Is there a clear relationship between it and 2 Peter 3:8? No! We must be careful not to wrongly associate verses from different passages of the Bible simply because they share some similar terminologies! What is the context of Hosea 6:2? What is the context of 2 Peter 3:8?

Just what are you saying, Campbell34? Are you saying that nowhere in the NT are there clear indicators of time? Are you saying that they are all negated by 2 Peter 3:8? I think Peter would shudder at such a claim. Peter was simply teaching that God does what He promises in His own time. He is not concerned with the passing of time as we are because He is not in any way bound by it. BUT when He communicates with us through His word, He uses terminology and language within the framework of established rules and meanings. When writers were inspired to write "near," they meant "near" in the very same way that you use it in your own life. Do you not see, Campbell34, that because of your eschatological viewpoint, you MUST change the meanings of time words. But is that how we should approach the Scriptures? Should we not look at clear words and expressions and base our conclusions upon them rather than force false meanings upon them because they do not fit our preconceived ideas?

Again, the time boundaries of the Book of Revelation are clearly determined in the first and last chapters. Just because you cannot see a particular fulfillment, does not make that fact go away! Are you negating the force of "shortly" and "near" based upon your interpretation of 2 Peter 3:8? Is that how the angel used those terms when he spoke them to John? What did the angel mean when he said to John that the things he would see were to "shortly" take place? What did the angel mean when he told John to NOT seal up the words of the prophecy of the Revelation because the time was "near?" Was he thinking of 2 Peter 3:8 when he relayed those words? Was the angel instructed by God to give a message to John that was unclear? I don't think so.

Why are such even and large numbers used in the Revelation? This is a very symbolic book of prophecy. One should expect to find figurative exaggerations and numerical symbols in such a book. Why the number 200,000? Are we to take that literally? Why not 217,526? Or 199,572? Rounded numbers in apocalyptic contexts are usually very symbolic. This number could simply mean a large army of men. Is it necessary, within the confines of such a highly symbolic book, to find exact and precise fulfillments of every detail? I submit that in actuality it is the attempt to find such things that causes many misunderstandings. Do we strive for preciseness in details but ignore preciseness in the timing? One hundred thousand means precisely one hundred thousand but near and shortly are not precise--in face, according to your approach they mean the exact opposite!

In Josephus' Wars, 3, 9, 2-3, Josephus, an eyewitness to the events leading up to and including the fall of Jerusalem, reported that many Jews of Joppa fled on ships from the advancing Roman armies. Many died when their ships were dashed against the rocks and others killed themselves before they would drown. The Romans came upon those Jews who survived the shipwrecks only to be slaughtered as they came ashore by the Romans. The sea was full of dead bodies and red from the shed blood!

When God inspired the writers of the NT to use time indicators, He meant for them to be taken in their normal, everyday, common usages. We are not justified in redefining them simply because they do not fit our preconceived ideas of how and when things should unfold!

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 06:48 PM
 
2,945 posts, read 4,776,332 times
Reputation: 1603
[quote=Preterist;6186828][quote=Campbell34;6181498]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist View Post
Should we not look at clear words and expressions and base our conclusions upon them rather than force false meanings upon them because they do not fit our preconceived ideas?
That is what the church does and you can tell someone who has been indoctrinated into it`s belief system

Quote:
Is it necessary, within the confines of such a highly symbolic book, to find exact and precise fulfillments of every detail? I submit that in actuality it is the attempt to find such things that causes many misunderstandings.
Preterist
I agree. But again that is characteristic of the church. The church (man) tells it`s followers what is symbolic and what is literal and the sheep of the church just follow along.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 09:48 PM
 
48,519 posts, read 81,162,475 times
Reputation: 17979
But it is the easiest to see someone who believes in man. He thru out the ages is lost and disappointed. He is always looking for some idea or person to explain what life is and why he is here.Christians know why before they ever join a church .They go to church because they believe. They find the church ;the church doesn't find them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 11:01 PM
 
Location: SoCal
316 posts, read 628,959 times
Reputation: 68
Interesting article from NewsWeek ? TITLED !

Is Obama The Antichrist ?
Belief Watch: Is Obama the Antichrist? | Newsweek BeliefWatch: Lisa Miller | Newsweek.com


Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. Eph 5:16
FirstWatch
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2008, 11:19 PM
 
Location: SC Foothills
8,830 posts, read 9,758,453 times
Reputation: 58198
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetway777 View Post
Interesting article from NewsWeek ? TITLED !

Is Obama The Antichrist ?
Belief Watch: Is Obama the Antichrist? | Newsweek BeliefWatch: Lisa Miller | Newsweek.com


Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. Eph 5:16
FirstWatch
Wow, fascinating!! And written like a true professional without any bias! Kudos, Lisa Miller! Thanks, Jetway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2008, 12:03 AM
 
Location: Everybody is going to hurt you, you just gotta find the ones worth suffering for-B Marley
9,506 posts, read 17,334,200 times
Reputation: 9336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948 View Post
for the hard right, anybody that does not agree with them is the anti christ.
as far as they are concerned george and dick cheney are the voice of god.
Oh come on. When Reagan was running, people on both sides were speculating as to whether or not he was the anti-Christ! And I've never heard anyone on the right refer to Bush or Cheney as The One or treat them as saviors. Can't say the same for Obama supporters with their teaching their children in masses to do Obama hymns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2008, 04:14 AM
 
Location: Oxford, England
13,036 posts, read 21,542,431 times
Reputation: 19858
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuSuSushi View Post
!!! Good grief, no.
At least he accepted Obama was decent !

I will generously assume that those who said there were some chances Obama was the anti-Christ were either trying to stir or maybe had missed taking some of their meds because anything else is just too scary to mention... and pathetic, and sad and intellectually terrifying....
Hilarious in an ARRRRRRRRRRRRRGH sort of a way !
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top