"The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." (Psalm 19:1)
https://discussions.godandscience.org/
Indeed, one sure sign that we haven't yet seen the anti-christ.bizzt wrote:On top of what Felgar says in the Book of Daniel it tells us that there will be a peace treaty between Israel and The Anti-Christ for 7 years. We have not seen that yet!
Well we may have seen him but do not know who he really isFelgar wrote:Indeed, one sure sign that we haven't yet seen the anti-christ.bizzt wrote:On top of what Felgar says in the Book of Daniel it tells us that there will be a peace treaty between Israel and The Anti-Christ for 7 years. We have not seen that yet!
I agree there are many Anti-Christs but there will be one that will have so much Evil that he will be called the ANTI_CHRIST. If I only had an Echo Machine! It would give it so much more dramatic Effect!!!Mastermind wrote:Some people don't think the antichrist is only one person. In addition, I thought preterists thought Nero was the antichrist.
To be honest, I think that the only reason why the later Church Fathers endorsed the end times view was for just that reason: drama! Just one of many unbiblical tactics used in order to keep the citizens of Byzantium in line. When faced with a problem of how to keep order without stretching your millitary, it's so much easier to say you will be eternally tortured in Hell, or you will by allies with the Anti-Christ if you don't obey the Church.bizzt wrote:I agree there are many Anti-Christs but there will be one that will have so much Evil that he will be called the ANTI_CHRIST. If I only had an Echo Machine! It would give it so much more dramatic Effect!!!
Christ said the end was at hand, and it is on His timescale (billions upon billions of eternities) but the early Christians didn't know that! They actually thought His kingdom was coming in their lifetimes so they tried to be prepared as it says in the Bible. (The parable about the lord being out and his servants watching for him.)That is ridiculous. The reason an end times view is accepted is because no prior events have fullfilled the Bible's description of the end times.Shirtless wrote:To be honest, I think that the only reason why the later Church Fathers endorsed the end times view was for just that reason: drama!
Look for Jack Van Impe. He seems to be genuine and has the greatest scope on the End times. http://www.jvim.comFelgar wrote:That is ridiculous. The reason an end times view is accepted is because no prior events have fullfilled the Bible's description of the end times.Shirtless wrote:To be honest, I think that the only reason why the later Church Fathers endorsed the end times view was for just that reason: drama!
Of course, the only way to prove that would be for you to delve into the prophecies yourself and make up your own mind. I'm not one for books but I'm sure there are a number of books that one could use as a starting point.
Agreed. I've thought of bringing him up many times. Unless I want to do my own research I pretty much defer to him on any end times issue.bizzt wrote:Look for Jack Van Impe. He seems to be genuine and has the greatest scope on the End times. http://www.jvim.com
The determining factor for when satan would be unchained is whatever determines the end of the millennium. Of course that is kind of obvious, when did it start is the more interesting question.bizzt wrote:For the first part I would have to say no. What is the Determining Factor of when He was released from the Abyss? And when was Satan ever Thrown into the Abyss?j316 wrote:I would put myself in the preterist camp so I believe that all that has already happened but there is one thing I find kind of interesting. Prior to the final events of revelation, after the millennium, satan is to be released for a time. I wonder, given the nature of some of the things that have happened in the 150 years, if we are not in that period of time now. The primary reason I say that is because satan is the accuser of the church, and the pace of that has been increasing almost exponentially in the recent past.Felgar wrote:Many prophecies are like that, in that they could apply in varying degrees to various points throughout history. But the spectacular rise of a single leader that ushers in world peace and in particular a 7 year agreement with Isreal is not something that applies to past events. Which is the exact reason I haven't spent much time learning about the end times, because they very well may be a long ways off.j316 wrote:If you were following the news regularly how would you know whether or not you were in the middle of those events? Think about it, the news now could be apocalyptic, or it could have been at any particular time in history.
Given the current state of expectatation as to the nearness of some great event, could people be confusing the pre rapture period with the pre armageddon period?
What about the crusades? Overall not much was really gained but they were significant in the history of the church. I do not think that there is going to be a signpost on any of the events in Revelation because that would allow us to date it accurately. Rev 16:15 speaks of coming like a thief in the night, thieves don't post notices in the paper.Felgar wrote:No we couldn't be in that period now due to the fact that we have not seen the battle of Ameggedon that marks the demise of the anti-christ and the start of the 1000-year reign.j316 wrote:I would put myself in the preterist camp so I believe that all that has already happened but there is one thing I find kind of interesting. Prior to the final events of revelation, after the millennium, satan is to be released for a time. I wonder, given the nature of some of the things that have happened in the 150 years, if we are not in that period of time now. The primary reason I say that is because satan is the accuser of the church, and the pace of that has been increasing almost exponentially in the recent past.
Ok well first the whole world did not see God descend from heaven. Additionally the crusades were not against Isreal. And we have no known record of every person being required to aquire a mark on their foreheads in order to buy and sell (in fact, most would have lived off the land and done little buying and selling). Also the knowledge curve didn't explode at that time.j316 wrote:What about the crusades? Overall not much was really gained but they were significant in the history of the church. I do not think that there is going to be a signpost on any of the events in Revelation because that would allow us to date it accurately. Rev 16:15 speaks of coming like a thief in the night, thieves don't post notices in the paper.