Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith

Here's another post I made at my blog. somewhat altered for EvC.
Tuesday, September 4, 2018
The Antichrist of the Tribulation / Day of the LORDPeople who don't give much credence to the Bible aren't going to care much what it says about the Antichrist, but since he’s a major player in most current futurist interpretations of what is to happen during the Great Tribulation, it seems relevant to post it in the context of a possible soon-coming Rapture of the Church, which will inaugurate that seven-year tribulation period.I collected some references from a CD by Chris Pinto, who got his list from a book titled What Luther Says, by E.M. Plass, a book I can’t afford at the moment though it sounds like a must-have. He lists many who came before the Reformers who called the papacy the Antichrist, which ought to dispel the accusation of Luther that he made it up in retaliation for being excommunicated. (As a matter of fact it took him about five years to become fully convinced from scripture and history that the Pope was indeed the Antichirst.)Soon-coming Rapture and Tribulation or not, the Church itself needs to recover the understanding that the Antichrist is the Pope, which used to be commonly recognized but has been lost in recent times. In the Tribulation he will loom large, but he is the Antichrist now as well as he will be then.Although the Pope is an unlikely Antichrist as we've come to picture the man we associate with End Times events, he does have all the necessary characteristics as laid out by the Protestant Reformers and their predecessors. While there is really no doubt as to the identity of the Pope as Antichrist, there may be some legitimate questions about exactly what role he'll play in the Day of the Lord or Great Tribulation, since he could play False Prophet to a political figure as the Pope in Hitler's day did for Hitler.The Day of the LORD is generally understood to occur during the Seventieth Week of Daniel's prophecy of the Seventy Weeks, which was not fulfilled in the time of the coming of Christ and is therefore understood to have been put off to the future. It is now considered to be bracketed by two stages of the Second Coming of Christ, the first to Rapture His Church, and the second or last to return as conquerer of the entire world. In between there is to be the Day of the Lord or Great Tribulation of seven years.Here is the main scripture that is taken to describe the Antichrist: The Pope is primarily identified as the Antichrist from the little horn of Daniel 7:8, and also from this passage quoted above. The "falling away" is also known as the Great Apostasy, and these days the futurists point to current deviations in the many churches from the gospel truth. And that certainly has to be a major part of the apostasy (And here's a link to Jan Markell's latest summary of this current falling away), but the Reformers, especially Martin Luther I believe, identified it as the doctrines of the Roman Church, though today there is a lot of ignorance and apathy about this fact among Protestants. The "man of sin" also known as the "son of perdition" is identified with the Pope. It is his role as "Vicar of Christ" by which he "opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God" and he "sits in the temple of God" because the people of Christ are now the "temple of God." I've posted on the Latin title VICARIVS FILII DEI, which means Vicar of Christ or literally, "Substitute" or "In the place of the Son of God" showing that the Latin letters which are also Roman numerals add up to 666.The following is a much shortened list from a site called Revelation Timeline that includes all those who testified that the papacy is the Antichrist that Chris Pinto mentioned. The passage in Thessalonians goes on to say that this man of sin had not yet been revealed in Paul's time, so he is only hinting at it in writing, having told the Thessalonians in person at an earlier time. Today it is thought that what restrains the revelation of some yet-unknown Antichrist is the Holy Spirit, or the Church, but the Reformers understood Paul to be referring to the Roman Empire or the Caesars who were still in power, which explains why he wouldn't identify them in writing. And this makes sense if you recognize that the Pope has taken the place of the Caesars with their title Pontifex Maximus and their Roman garb, and his presiding over an institution that over time acquired most of the trappings of the Roman pagan religions, including putting various Christian "saints" in the place of some of the Roman gods and encouraging prayers to them as to gods. If there is to be a Rapture very soon, I would hope it might jar some people awake to the truth of the God of the Bible and salvation through Christ. But I suppose many people will actually like the New World Order under the Antichrist Pope, at least before God's wrath falls on it all.======================================
ABE: Some historical information.
Those who identified the Pope as the Antichrist saw the Antichrist papal system as having developed in the year 606 (about the same time Islam conquered the Eastern Roman Empire). I think it was the Byzantine Emperor who referred to Pope Gregory the Great as "universal bishop" to which Gregory replied that anyone who accepted that title would be a forerunner of Antichrist. Then the next Pope, Boniface, DID accept it as it was given to him by the Byzantine Emperor Phocas. Gregory the Great was thought by the Reformers to be the last legitimate Bishop of Rome, all those following being the Antichrist papal system. Over the ensuing years the Church of Rome accumulated the superstitions of pagan Rome that came to characterize its functions. Relics, prayers to saints, the rosary, and so on. This is all addressed in a book titled The History of Romanism by John Dowling, but I think Luther also addressed it, which would be in the book What Luther Says, by Plass. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I mentioned that a collection of essays in a book titled The Coming Pagan Utopia is being read on my local Christian radio. So far it's only covered the first chapter, basically how Utopian visions always end up as totalitarian Dystopias.It does a good job of characterizing opinions I've heard for decades, and we hear every day now, such as at EvC, that point to the popularity of this pagan utopian idea, which can be summarized as all the aspirations of humanity toward the creation of a perfect world without God. It's built on ideas that go back to Bacon and Nietzsche and Marx and Bertrand Russell and H.G. Wells. It includes manipulations of human beings ourselves to create the perfect version of us since evolution isn't doing a speedy enough job of it, and may not have the right idea anyway as it were.If Christians, we fundies anyway, stick around for a while, we'll be protesting this vision and trying to expose its dangers, which of course makes us unwelcome in this brave new world. If we do stick around, the modern version of the Inquisition will probably get us since you can't have dissenting voices when you're trying to create the perfect religious vision of the perfect world. You'd think by now it would have been learned that utopia always requires censorship, controlled conformity, oppression, tyranny and the death of difficult people, i.e. the current flavor of heretics; but no, this lesson is never learned.But maybe we'll get Raptured out of the way and all this utopian misery can have free course. It makes me cry for the millions, no, billions, of simple ordinary people who have no idea what's about to happen to them.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Punishments, imprisonments, executions for objecting to the governmental system, particular pagan doctrines, and that sort of thing.

So you're all set up now for the One World Pagan Religion. It could be that even YOU might oppose it at some point and be persecuted for it.But as long as we're around we will be persecuted for opposing it no matter what you say. It includes all this gay marriage and all-genders stuff that we have to oppose if it's imposed on us, as the gay marriage stuff has been imposed on wedding businesses.At this point I really don't WANT to be around but I got another "portent" yesterday that contradicts the others. Sigh.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

How did I insult you?

There is reason to think a version of paganism is going to be the One World religion no matter how much atheism is growing. (book I mentioned, The Coming Pagan Utopia). Atheists aren't going to like the paganism either, which is why I suggested you might oppose it and get persecuted for it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Here's another contribution to the deep darkness of irrational thinking the world is trying so hard to extinquish these days. I just posted this at my blog.===================================Just heard a sermon by Sam Storms on the number 666 in which he concludes that it's a symbolic number. Storms also discussed some attempts to determine its meaning through gematria, or systems of numbers based on various alphabets.In some cases if the Greek alphabet doesn't work they try the Hebrew and maybe that will work. I think he said Hebrew works for Nero. But why on earth should Nero be identified by the Hebrew alphabet? Hitler comes up on the English alphabet after assigning some special numbering system to the letters. This just gets ridiculous.And I don't know why the system I've posted on so many times isn't better known, or if it is known why it isn't accepted. It is perfection itself. There is no need to manipulate the letters and numbers because Latin has a system of Roman numerals based on its letters that is solidly established. And when it is applied to the LATIN title for Vicar of Christ, VICARIVUS FILII DEI, for the ROMAN Pope, who is also called by the ROMAN title Pontifex Maximus, it adds up to 666 without any manipulations whatever. It's a ROMAN/LATIN system of ROMAN/LATIN letters with ROMAN numbers applied to a ROMAN/LATIN title for the Bishop of ROME who is called Pope and the Head of the Church. By that name he usurps the role of Christ since scripture says Christ and Christ alone is the Head of the Church, and by the title Vicar of Christ he usurps the role of Christ when you understand it through the Latin phrase VICARIVUS FILII DEI, which literally means "in the place of the Son of God." Add em up, it's 666 without even trying.The Pope usurps the role of Christ and the role of the Holy Spirit who is the representative of Christ on earth, NOT the "Pope." Since the temple of God is the people of God the Pope "sits in the temple of God showing that he is God."

You've said a great deal here but I really don't know how to respond to it yet. It's interesting that this book seems to have brought out a lot of your thinking that otherwise might not have become apparent. I'm not sure why that is but it may help me understand why you never seem to be quite Christian although you eventually convinced me you believe the basics. Now I'm thinking perhaps you don't after all. As I said I really don't know where to begin to discuss this with you.

Perhaps it would help just to clarify something about those basics I mentioned:Do you believe you are a sinner who has been saved from sin and from Hell by God's grace alone without your having to do anything to earn it? Do you believe that the Lord Jesus' death on the cross is wholly sufficient to pay for your sins in entirety, that His blood shed there pays for your sins? That He died for all those who believe on Him and rose from the dead and now sits at the right hand of the Father? That He is the way, the truth and the life and that nobody comes to the Father except through Him?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You don't seem to be particularly bothered by this. Do you think they are wrong, or what?ABE: Another question: Do you pray much? Do you pray to understand these things?AND: Perhaps this should all be discussed privately, if it can be discussed at all.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The problem now is that I'm getting awfully sleepy though I hate to interrupt this. I don't think I can do a very good job if I'm about to nod off though, so I've really got to get some sleep and come back to this later.

I'm back, Phat, but now I don't see much reason to continue this, unless you raise some particular issues I could think about. One thing I'd comment on is that I don't think you know what "mindfulness" is. It's a specific discipline of meditation practiced in Buddhism, and possibly also Hinduism, in which the person watches his/her thoughts as they come up.

Maybe a cup of coffee and a slice of toast.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The oneism and twoism kind of bug me too, I don't know why he did that, but he's been doing it for years, through many earlier books.

I should put honey on the toast because Rosh Hashanah is big on sweet eats, honey in particular, which the Parisian Jews gave Macron when he visited their synagogue for the Rosh Hashanah event. Challah bread is also mentioned for that holiday but I'm not going to go that far. But probably just butter on the toast. Unsalted actually, with a pinch of salt because unsalted needs a little.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.