Did Jesus Reveal to us the name of the Anti-Christ?

[Blogger]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXMAnlMmEPw

[bdeaner]

LOL

[Elsie]

Scripture says all the nations of the earth will ally against Israel.

From the news that is published; I'd say the USoA is pretty much 'against' Israel these days - no matter HOM much 'support' we give her!

[navygal]

Just have to wait and see.

[Uri’el-2012]

Call on His Name

Excellent Bible study on the Holy NAME of Elohim !

shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach

[spetznaz]

Thank you.

[Marysecretary]

Yes, I believe we will also know. Be a Watchman!

[Marysecretary]

That’s cuz he’s always WRONG...LOL.

[Captain Beyond]

As I see it the Anti-Christ will be someone that mirrors Jesus’ life. And I use the word mirror as in the negative connotation as in a negative image. The Anti-Christ comes to deceive people into believing he is the Christ. Where as Jesus offers eternal life from the damnation of our sins and to glorify the Father the AC will offer life without condemnation but it will be death in disguise as eternal damnation of sin and his miracles will be to glorify himself to further deceive the people into believing he is the savior and not the crucifier of people for their sin.

Whoever the AC is he will be all about negating the teachings and works of Jesus and Christ's sacrifice on the cross for us to set himself up as the savior. He will be silky smooth and a creature of light but for those the know the Shepherd's voice will see that he is darkness and jagged painful death.

John 10:27 (New International Version) 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.

1 John 2:22 (New International Version)
22Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son.

Matthew 24:24 (New International Version)
24For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible.

[I got the rope]

I find your explanation repugnant. Jesus and Paul were speaking spiritually about what Jesus was about to accomplish on the cross.

1 Corinthians 11:25

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

Luke 22:19

And he (Jesus) took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

John 6:33-35 ... For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

John 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life

[Quix]

Your assertions closely parallel my own convictions about those issues re the AC.

[Steve Van Doorn]

"Didn’t a whole bunch of people think Bill Clinton was the anti-Christ?"

Not that I remember but my bother told me Reagan was the Anti-christ.
Ronald(6) Wilson(6) Reagan(6) (6 letters each)

[bdeaner]

I find your explanation repugnant.

Personally, I try to be careful about my emotional reactions to theological matters. Mind you, I don't read minds. Nevertheless, speaking in the abstract and not about you or anyone in particular: When one is in grave error, sometimes the truth can appear to be offensive or repulsive. Contempt is sometimes a sign of conviction. Satan uses our desires to trick us with his lies. Bitterness about the past is one of his favorites devices for his deception.

Perhaps we can both pray for each other, and for ourselves, that the Lord will bind Satan from permitting bitterness to seed the sin of hatred and contempt among Christians who love the Lord. Where there is charity and hope, there goes the Lord and those with faith in Him. May the Lord give us the grace to follow Him in his ways of infinite compassion and mercy without ever sacrificing the truth.

Jesus and Paul were speaking spiritually about what Jesus was about to accomplish on the cross.

I don't understand, my friend. How could they be speaking merely spiritually when the cross was very much a physical, tangible event? Was it not both an event of the flesh and of the spirit? Of course it was.

How else could we take St. Paul's warning to us in 1 Corinthians 11:23-32? He says, "to eat and drink without recognizing the body of the Lord" is to eat and drink judgment on one's self. I don't know how he could be any clearer than that.

In the early Church, everyone who wrote anything about the Eucharist believed in the Real Presence of Christ in the elements of Communion. Ignatius was the second bishop of Antioch and died a martyr at about the same time the Apostle John died. Speaking of the Docetist heretics, who denied the humanity of Jesus, he wrote, "They confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again" (Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans). Just as we saw in John 6, Ignatius also equated the flesh of the Eucharist with the flesh of the Cross.

Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who remembered Polycarp's firsthand stories about the Apostle John. He used the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist to prove the resurrection of the Christian dead: "The Eucharist becomes the body of Christ" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies). "How can they say that the flesh which is nourished with the body of the Lord and with his blood passes into corruption and partake not of life?" These translations, by the way, are from The Ante Nicene Fathers, a Protestant translation published by Eerdmans.

I challenge you to find anyone in the first three hundred years of the Church whose beliefs were even remotely related to Protestant notions concerning the Lord's supper. For a full millennium of Christianity, there were no exceptions to this belief of the early Church in the Real Presence. It was the universal teaching of the entire Church. Not until Rationalism had started to transform the thinking of Europe would any movement call into question the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Rationalism was condemned in the Second Lateran Concul in A.D. 1215.

In addition, what does it really mean when Christ says to eat his body and drink his blood in remembrance of Him? It means to eat His body and drink His blood as a sacrifice. If you look at Psalm 110:4, yu will see a prophecy, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: 'You are a priest forever, in the order of Malchizedek." Now, by definition, a priest orders a sacrifice. What did Melchizedek offer? He offered bread and wine, which he brought to Abraham as an offering (Gen 14:18).

Now here is the next logical question: When did Jesus offer bread and wine as a sacrifice? The only instance recorded in the Gospels is the Last Supper. Isn't it logical, then, that unless one can point to another time Jesus fulfilled this function of the Malchizedekian priesthood, Jesus saw the Last Supper as the institution of a sacrifice? Otherwise the imagery of Psalm 11o:4 is emptied of meaning.

If we understand the Mass as a Sacrifice, this helps to explain why 1 Corinthians 11:24-25 quotes Jesus as saying during the Last Supper, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." The Greek word for "remembrance" in this passage is a very technical word. Interestingly, it is also a relatively rare word in Scripture. Outside of its uses in the Last Supper, it is used only one other time in the New Testament. This is in Hebrews 10:3, where the remembrance is the act of carrying out a sacrifice. "Those sacrifices are an annual reminder [remembrance] of sins." I invite you to check your Greek Old Testament, and you will find the word used only twice. Both times the remembrance is actually a sacrifice: "Put some pure incense as a memorial...to be an offering" (Lev 24:7) and "Sound the trumpets over your burn offerings and fellowship offerings, and they will be a memorial for you" (Nb 10:10).

This Greek word "remembrance" is more than just "think about me by recalling this event to mind." It is a word fraught with sacrificial overtones, used in the Bible to mean "remind yoruself of something by participating in a sacrifice." What a strange word for Jesus to use if he did not intend to set up the Eucharist as a sacrifice. In fact, Jesus' choice of this rather rare word is unexplainable if he did not view the Last Supper as a sacrifice.

But let's not end on a note of hostility, my Brother in Christ. Perhaps you will join with me in a prayer for discernment of the truth in the sacred scriptures. May the Holy Spirit take the lead.

Our Father, who art in heaven,
sacred is Your Word.
Your kingdom come,
Your Words be heard on earth as they are in heaven.
Give us today Your Sacred Word.
Forgive our neglect of it in the past
as we forgive those who neglect us.
Lead us toward an encounter with You
each time we delve into the Scriptures.
For Your presence, Your power,
and Your glory
are ever present among us
now and forever.

Amen.

[I got the rope]

I agree brother.

Let’s take the advice of Saint Thomas of Aquin, “Orationi vacare non desinas”...never give up praying.

I wish we could meet someday and share a meal together...or even have a discussion over coffee. I think we could learn a great deal from one another.

[bdeaner]

Amen, Brother. Never give up praying. It would be great to meet and have coffee one day. Who knows?

[Alouette]

This is by far the STUPIDEST thing that I have ever seen.

The idiot not only does not understand Hebrew, he can’t even spell English. “Heigths”

[WaterBoard]

Folks, this is seems to be a Con put on to embarrass Freerepublic.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34329_Free_Republic_Freaking_Out_About_the_Coming_of_the_Anti-Christ

See the above post mocking FR.

[EveningStar]

This is ludicrous.

[jeanguy04]

Yes. The media will be for A/C.

Revelation 13:5 (New International Version)

5The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months.

The mouth is a mouthpieace, a properganda tool.

The bible is clear about the character of A/C.

He is the king of fierce countenance (Daniel 8:23). The people of fiece countenance is defined by Moses (Deut 28:50) as “the people without respect for the old or pity for the young”. fierce countenance also means brazen, shameless.

The A/C is also called the false shepherd, the abomination that causes desolation.

Zechariah 11:16 (New King James Version) Portrait of false shepherd

16 For indeed I will raise up a shepherd in the land who will not care for those who are cut off (people who were taken by the enemy), nor seek the young, nor heal those that are broken, nor feed those that still stand (feed the nursing sheep). But he will eat the flesh of the fat and tear their hooves in pieces (will destroy the rich and cripple them).

The definition of abomination in the bible:

Prov 26:24-25
24 A malicious man disguises himself with his lips,
but in his heart he harbors deceit.
25 Though his speech is charming, do not believe him,
for seven abominations fill his heart.

Prov 6:16-25 The combination of characters that makes an abomination:

16 These six things the LORD hates,
Yes, seven are an abomination to Him:
17 A proud look,
A lying tongue,
Hands that shed innocent blood,
18 A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that are swift in running to evil,
19 A false witness who speaks lies,
And one who sows discord among brethren

[Blogger]

Where is he wrong? Best I can tell, the Hebrew word in Isaiah 14:14 is indeed Bamah and Barak does mean lightning. The area I would disagree with his translation on is the conjunctive Vav. The literal translation of what he is trying to say is “I beheld Satan falling as Barak and Heights”. I’m not discussing the theological implications with you on this, I am just interested in the Hebrew.

[Blogger]

Who cares what the little Greenies think? I’m not in a popularity contest with them and a theological discussion on the AntiChrist is certainly not a “Con put on to embarass Freerepublic”.