Free Republic

The Italians and Germans once thought Mussolini and Hitler “beacons of hope” also. American Christians are being deceived by Putin’s “Christianity,” in my opinion. He is no champion of freedom of religion and human rights. Non-Russian Orthodox Christians have no place in Putin’s Russia.

His kind of Christianity is more akin to the medieval totalitarian system of the Papacy, than to the kind of Christianity we have here in America (sad to say, the left has just about succeeded in bringing down faith here).

Comparing Putin’s kind of Russian Christianity to America’s freedom of religion, is apples and oranges, two very different things.

It seems common among evangelicals to think of America as if it were the nation of Israel. I don’t think so, the Old Testament nation of Israel was a theocracy, the founding fathers of America, most of them deist Freemasons, saw to it that this country would be a kind of hunanism and NOT a Christian version of Old Testament theocracy.

The US of A is not the kingdom of God, though there are many in this country who are of that kingdom. Our hope is Christ and the gospel of the kingdom, Matt. 24:14.

You may not draw an obligation from this particular Talmud quote, but it is clear from Antelman’s book, and from Sholem’s writings which he drew from, that a particular line of Jews (Sabbatai, Frank, etc.), in anticipation of the Messiah like yourself, certainly did! How one interprets such Talmudic statements as this can have great consequences, whether his interpretation is correct or not is irrelevant.

About me worrying. I am not in the least worrying about what you folks do to hasten the coming of your Messiah. I’ve “read the back of the book,” I know who wins in the end.

My interest in Antelman and this hastening the coming of the Messiah business has to do with Bible prophecy.

Antelman made it clear where he stood on non-Orthodox Judaism. He says Reform Judaism, Haskala, and to a lesser extent, Conservative Judaism, do not keep the 613 commandments, make excuses to not do so because they live in modern society. It thus seems your kind of Chabad is not as strong as his.

But this hasn’t got that much to do with my original post, i.e., your statement about hastening the coming of your Messiah. Just how are you folks doing this, since, according to the Talmud, the world has to be evil for him to come?

By the way, Antelman did not invent all this about Sabbatai, Frank, etc., we’re talking historical events here, most of his book is based on the writings of the late professor at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Gershom Sholem. He documents the connecting of his “dots,” I find his documenting of them hard to refute.

Thanks for your reply. I was under the impression Rabbi Antelman would be well known among you (I speak of the Chabad), his book being written from the Chabad standpoint - opposed to all forms of liberal Judaism.

Re: your comment about the hastening of the coming of Messiah.

Don’t you have a statement somewhere in your Talmud about, your Messiah cannot come until the world has become entirely good or entirely evil? And since the former is not going to happen (the world entirely good), the latter is what will bring your Messiah in (the world entirely evil). From the looks of things, your Messiah cannot be that far off!

According to Rabbi Marvin Antelman, that effort to hasten the coming of your Messiah has been ongoing for sometime now - I refer to his classic, “To Eliminate the Opiate.”

His book is quite an eye opener, in it he reveals the subversive, behind the scenes, Sabbatai Zevi-Jacob Frank-Adam Wisehaoupt’s Illuminati- Rothschild-Karl Marx-Socialism/Communism-Haskala-Reform Judaism connection. Doing what I mentioned above, the making of the world evil (by the subversive hand of Socialism, eliminating the “opiate,” i.e., belief in God, in both conservative Christianity and orthodox Judaism) in order that Messiah can come.

Antelman’s book, and he himself, himself bitterly opposed to all of this, and apparently a Chabad himself, you fellows must be aware of. If so, what is your opinion of Antelman’s Sabbataen subversion of the world in order to bring in Messiah? Surely that is not what you meant, when you spoke of “hastening” the coming of your Messiah?

This is getting sillier and sillier (”sillier,” is there such a word?) Have a good day, Al, bye now.

Correction:

The variations Postmills and Amills have, has to do with how they interpret prophecy in relation to time: past (Preterist), present (Historicist), or future (Futurist).

The lead article must have been written quite a few years ago, as it makes no mention of Preterism, risen in recent years becoming very common among both postmills and amills. Once Historicists or Futurists, they have morphed into Preterists. It’s hard to find Postmills or Amils nowadays, who do not hold to some form of Preterism.

The variations Postmills and Amills have to do with how they interpret prophecy in relation to time, past (Preterist), present (Historicist), or future (Futurist).

Premills, on the other hand, are Futurists... whether Historic Premill or Dispensational Premill. On the end time tribulation they are pre, mid, or post.

You know what I meant:

Bergdahl defects to the Taliban and the defector is made a hero
A Presbyterian pastor defects to the RCC and the defector is made a hero

A hero in your eyes, a defector and an apostate in mine

So a Presbyterian pastor, like the soldier Bergdahl, defects to the RCC. No pushing of the RCC there at all, no sir, no agenda at all. yeah, right.

Yeah but Protestants don’t care because we are right.

Don't care? Well, Protestants who know their Bibles do think of the claims of pompous Romanists as just so much noise, static. Scripture refutes the RCC, so in that sense, I guess we don't care. Romanism is but a form of paganized totalitarian Christianity masquerading as the church Christ founded. We know the truth, we know who's right...more importantly, WHAT'S right, the word of God.

Doesn't matter tho since the republicans and RATs are one in the same.

Typical libertarian strategy, lump rats and repubs as one, leaving libertarians the alternative. Let me correct you: it is RINO's and Rats that are one and the same. Come on, non-Rino's like Ted Cruz are one and the same?

The FR religious forum is nothing but a platform for the RCC, bashing protestantism, pushing their marxist pope, and pushing the papacy, this thread typical of their agenda.

Some of us who have been saying all along that Rand P. is a libertarian in sheep clothing, a stealth politician, are getting proved right almost every day.

my perception of Florida is a bit different than say GA or AL.

The panhandle and northern Florida is as southern as GA or AL. Southern Florida is pretty much Yankee wall to wall.

America and the American People are set for change.

What change in South Carolina? supposed to be a conservative voting state, yet voted Linda back in.

I agree with most of what you said. About the middle ages Roman institution, you said:

Its "good old days" are the middle ages and its organic/corporate/guild culture (which many Catholics regard as utopia).

Puts me in mind of what Admiral Doenitz' Nazi U-boat sailors called their "happy time," in the battle of the Atlantic WW2. Later in the war, they looked back at the time they had control of the Atlantic shipping lanes, it was their "good old days." Too bad both totalitarian regimes, Hitler and the middle ages RCC, lost their control.

Comrade indeed... your post sheds light on that fact. Francis is a liberation theologian from Argentina, plain and simple, a flat out Marxist.

Yet the RF, supposedly a conservative forum, anti-marxist and pro-free market, is flooded with Francis fawners, go figure.

He’s a stealth Republican, a libertopian in sheep clothing. Like father, like son.

Amillennialism is a RCC doctrine, Augustine the main impetus behind it. First cousin to other RCC doctrines, such as the primacy of Rome, Peter the first Pope, the Papacy, Mariolatry, Purgatory. Amill goes hand in glove with them.

Protestantism is an ongoing attempt to return to the beliefs of the church of the Bible.

More likely a MORMON!

Let's see, the piece was written for a Nevada newspaper, and for decriminalization of polygamy. That sort of equals Mormonism. I didn't think of that. I stand corrected.

No sir, I was referring to the lead article: Leslie Jacobs who wrote the piece for the Las Vegas Sun. Probably a libertarian.

Polygamy, eh? The libertarians are at it again. They are running amuck on FR these days.

Ok, she wants to renounce her Repub ties, so she can become what? A Democrat? of course not. A libertopian? If so, she has to renounce her Christian beliefs, libertopians (for the most part, except for a minority that claim otherwise) are for abortion, atheism, same sex marriage, and other assorted Sodom and Gomorrah beliefs.

You are right, thanks.

Just guessing about knarf, but if he is a libertarian, what he means is America is becoming libertarian (he hopes) instead of CONSERVATIVE Repub or Dem. libertarians are the hippies of the right, they are not conservatives.

ObamaCore...THIS has got a ring to it! If only it had some legs, like ObamaCare. I’m going to do my part and use the term every chance I get.

Butting in here, but thought I’d throw this in concerning Phinneous’ repudiation of Christianity for it being so disjointed, i.e., the differences Protestants have with Catholics (he cites the Catholic vs Protestant threads on FR). This in contrast to what he calls the “binary, equal, godly soul” of Judaism.

Rabbi Marvin S. Antelman, who wrote the classic “To Eliminate the Opiate” (written 1974), would view Phinneous’ notion of Judaism very naïve and uninformed. I’ve had Antleman’s book since the 80’s, it is available now on the internet.

Antelman wrote his book against, what he calls the “JINO’s” (Jews in name only), and “phony Judaisms:” Reform, Conservative, and Karaite. He himself, of course, is none of this, he holds to the only “true” Judaism, which, he says, is Talmudic and Kabbalist Orthodox, apparently the Lubavitch variety.

Sounds like Judaism is as disjointed as Christianity is. Nothing like Phinneous’ unified “binary soul.”

Libertarian alert

I don’t believe in any NT prophecy.

What you believe is the extra-Biblical mystical notions of certain Jews, the Kabbalists, but not certain other Jews, namely John, the apostles, and the early church. Kinda selective in which Jews you choose to believe it appears to me.

Christianity is a prophetic religion, so, yes, you are right in putting such emphasis on it. Jews like John saw Christ everywhere in the prophetic scriptures; chief reason being they had their understanding opened “that they might understand the scriptures,” Christ’s death and resurrection revealed to them in the prophets, Luke 24:45-47.

Your understanding could be opened also, if you would only choose the right Jews to open your understanding. John and the apostles had their understanding opened, none of these Jews in whom you trust for interpreting prophecy have had their understanding opened. They follow visions of their own heart, which the NT calls "the flesh." Its of man, not God.

I take it then you are more Jewish than John. And more Jewish than the author of the book of Hebrews, I suppose...

Who said God had appointed the Son of God “heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds,” 1:2. “FOR whom are all things, and BY whom are all things,” 2:10.

John also, speaking of the Word in Genesis that spoke life into the world, said, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life,” 1 John 1.

Phinneous, my friend, IT WASN’T LETTERS OF THE HEBREW ALPHABET John had seen with his own eyes, looked upon, and handled with his own hands!

...if you remain unconvinced, I won’t be offended.

I remain very much unconvinced. The apostle John, typical of enlightened Jews of the first century (the early church), had a much different interpretation of what "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made" (Psalms 33:6) meant. And it wasn't Hebrew letters!

In the prologue to his gospel he said, "All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made," "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..."

The "Word" that created all things, in the fullness of time made flesh, and dwelt among us, was none other than the virgin born Jesus of Nazareth (Yeshua to you), your Messiah and Savior.

Why not take the insight of John and the rest of the early Jewish church about the meaning of the creative "Word?" Instead of the highly mystical opinions of Kabbalists? John and the early Jewish church, after all, were as much, if not more, Jewish than you, moreover, they lived some 2000 years closer to the truth than you.

As for Judaism in general, it is so filled with stupid oral traditions that I actually even consider it worse than the absurdities of Mormonism. For example:

Like God creating the heavens and the earth by means of 22 Hebrew letters, for instance. "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made," "For he spake, and it was done," Psalms 33:6, 9, the "word of the Lord," and "he spake," in this passage Kabbalist Judaism interprets to mean God uttering the 22 Hebrew letters.

Maybe the Kabbalists on this thread will care to tell us which Hebrew letter God spoke to create the land, which one the seas, the vegetation, etc.

155 posts = 135 posts

The Catholic church perverted the true teachings of Christ. It is perverted to the point that men assume “God’s representative on earth”. The Catholic Church today bears no resemblance whatsoever to the church Christ established on the day of Pentecost.

After reading through 155 posts, finally one that cuts to the chase. The RCC masquerades as the church Christ established, they insist everybody else who are not RCC are heretics and a cult - as on this thread - truth is, they are the biggest heretical cult in the world.

Indeed, Hitler was rash, did things on impulse, like declaring war on the USA, for instance. What a dumb move.

I can hardly imagine anything better than a Cruz-Carson ticket. I’d be first in line when the voting booth opens up for such a ticket.

While 70 AD and the events leading up to it were big things to those of that “generation,” in the bigger scope of things, they were but blips. We live in the consummation of all things. Six thousand years of human history is coming to a head in our times. What happened in 70 AD was but precursory, which means most of what Christ said in Matt. 24 was directed to US.

(I think you must have meant Matt. 24 not Matt. 14)

I was trying to convince. Like someone at a Marine recruiting desk, trying to get you to join the Marines. But if end time battle is not your cup of tea, preterists need not apply.

“I can see the argument the preterist make as far as the gospels are concerned but Revelation is far different.”

Revelation is different, not sure what you meant about the gospels. What argument the preterist make? Matt. 24:34?

Okay, I guess by repeating your post you are saying you opt out of Rom. 16:20. You want no part of it. No future putting of the enemies of Christ under your feet. I wouldn't want to go into battle with you, Christ needs end time warriors.

Rom. 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

19 For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.

20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.

Churchill was a driving force in both world wars, a patriot he was, but no libertarian.

Thanks for your response, and a sincere one it appears.

I, too, believe that Jesus came to re-establish the conditions which existed before the fall – the very conditions presented in Revelation. But they haven’t yet, that’s the difference between your system of interpretation and mine.

While it is true, for those who have Christ as their Lord, we experience the things you mentioned, full communion with God, etc. The things brought to us as a result of the wound the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15) received, Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection, but what of the rest of the world that does not have him as Lord? What about all his enemies? What of the other part of the seed of the woman prophecy? What about the crushing of the devil’s head?

Paul wrote Romans many years after the wounding of the seed of the woman, wherein he says the rest of that prophecy remains to be fulfilled, Rom. 16:20. Christ’s enemies have assuredly NOT been put under his feet yet. In order for the Edenic conditions you mentioned be restored, his enemies have to be put under his feet.

While it has happened already for those of us who are subjects of Christ, not so the rest of the world. The seed of the woman prophecy, thus was only partially fulfilled at the first coming, at his wounding, we are presently awaiting his inter-advent enemies to be put under his feet at the second coming.

Like I tried to bring out in my post to you, prophecy is near-far. We are not in a prophetic vacuum, as preterists claim, since 70 AD left without any prophetic signs to let us know prophetically where we are in God’s grand prophetic plan, far from it, that is why so much of the Bible is prophetic.

Mary Soames looks like a chip off the old block. She’s got a real bulldog look about her. A great conservative lady, God bless her.

libertarian, my eye, if he was still around you wouldn’t find him coming down on the side of the atheists, queers, hippies, and every other ungodly abomination, like our modern libertarians are so prone to do.

Impactplayer quotes Jesus in Matt. 24:34, in the KJV, “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled,” complaining that futurists don’t agree with his preterist interpretation of this verse.

The reason we don’t is because of a different hermeneutic. The right hermeneutic has to be applied to this verse. In Matt. 24:34, Jesus wasn’t speaking to Gentiles, he was speaking to “the children of the prophets,” Acts 3:25, the foundation of the church.

I am referring to what some expositors call the “prophetic precursory phenomena,” or “the near-far prophetic phenomena,” very common to Jews in the OT. God could speak to a particular situation, yet beyond it having a future fulfillment in mind. Examples abound:

When God spoke to Eve in Gen. 3:15, the first prophecy in the Bible, He had a future woman in mind. The tremendous far into the future things that would be fulfilled in 3:15, were not fulfilled in Eve. What was said to Eve was precursory, the “near” projecting far into the future to Christ the seed of the “woman,” who would receive a minor wound at the hand of the serpent, the cross, but would ultimately crush the serpent’s head.

Another well known example is 2 Sam. 7:14, “I will be his father, and he shall be my son.” A superficial reading of the situation at hand would be Solomon, David’s son, was the son God had in mind, but Heb. 1:5, says no, God had Christ in mind. Solomon was the precursory near fulfillment, Christ the ultimate “far” fulfillment.

In Isa. 7, the situation at hand was dire, the kings of Syria and Israel (the northern ten tribes) were threatening war against Ahaz king of Judah. God said the alliance would not stand, nor come to pass, v. 7, the sign He gave in v. 14 was amazing indeed, the very famous prophecy that Christ would be virgin born, his name Immanuel (see Matt. 1:23). God used the situation at hand as the “near” projecting far into the future to the “far” fulfillment – Christ.

In Isa. 14:13-15, the subject was the king of Babylon, v. 4, lifted up in his pride, God used this king as prophetic of the devil’s ultimate destiny, “Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit,” v. 15. God had something else in mind, much bigger fish to fry than this king, something future.

One more OT example, Hos. 11:1 quoted by Matthew (2:15). Jews bitterly remonstrate against Matthew’s hermeneutic, saying this verse refers only to the Israelites being called out of Egypt, apart from the prophetic hermeneutic we have been using, yes, that is how the Hosea verse reads, but Matthew saw Christ in it, and interpreted it so in his gospel. Matthew had a futurist interpretation of this verse.

And it is this same Matthew, who records Jesus on mount Olivet, namely the verse at issue here, the one preterists claim can ONLY be referring to 70 AD (v. 34). We have already seen that Matthew, in his interpretation of Hosea 11:1, full well understood the prophetic precursory phenomena. And this is Jesus, the greatest prophet of all, the inspiration behind the OT examples we cited – we could cite many more - WHO SPOKE VERSE 34.

For a lot reasons (many brought out on this thread), Jesus could not have possibly meant ONLY the immediate situation. That “generation” he spoke of was precursory of the end time generation, the generation that would see “all these things,” ALL of the things he had described, fulfilled.

Jesus being the greatest prophet, like the prophets before him, simply looked beyond 70 AD to the end time. He used the prophetic projection used by the inspired prophets. AD 70 was but the precursory “near” fulfillment.

How a Protestant spin machine hid the truth about the English Reformation

And this, on the religious forum of FR, no less, the biggest Roman Catholic spin machine on the planet...hiding the truth about their own history, a long history of totalitarian rule and persecution. Hiding the truth that they are not the church Christ founded as they claim, but an impostor religio-political machine that arose in the seventh century.

Most preterists I’ve known tell me they don’t like labels. They prefer to operate incognito, like on this thread, in the shade. I think labels are a good thing, poison I want it labeled on the bottle as such.

On trying to get Freneau to confess up to being a preterist, good luck! See my post 60 in “The Church and Israel in the New Testament” thread.