Is Bush the Antichrist?

Fox, from my understanding, almost wants Mexico treated as a state in the aspect that Mexicans would freely be able to cross the border.

That's what I understand, too.

But that was in a land far, far away......it's not going to happen now, IMO. The entire world has changed since last November -- and not in favor of Mexico, if you read any of Fox's remarks about Iraq.

And if and when it does, I'll be right there with you screaming bloody murder.

Thank you for that. :)

Well, it must be a comfort to be one of the few Enlightened, then.

To every cloud, right?...;D

I always kind of thought Bill Clinton was the antichrist,...

So did I. But we're both wrong. He's just a sociopathic con artist that knew enough to successfully con the willing
disciples of the anti-Christ - aka - The Lamestream Media.

The antichrist

Most Christians today are taught that the antichrist is alive right now, and that he is about to break forth onto the world scene as a brilliant yet wicked world leader.

Although the antichrist is perhaps the most popular figure in the current prophecy scene, he is also the most misunderstood.

The problem is that premillennial authors focus their attention on Daniel’s little horn, Paul’s man of sin, and the beast in Revelation, yet ignore the passages of Scripture which actually discuss antichrist.

There are only four passages of Scripture which expressly mention “antichrist,” all in the epistles of John (1 Jn. 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 Jn. 7).

John corrects the false notion of antichrist that had arisen among Christians in his own day; he declares that antichrist is not something far off in the future but a present reality.

Second, he says that antichrist is not a single individual but a large group of people.

Third, he defines antichrist not as a person (a coming world leader) but as a current movement: “Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour” (1 Jn. 2:18).

Many Christians in John’s day had heard that antichrist (singular) was coming. John responded by saying that even now many antichrists (plural) had arisen. The verb “have arisen” or “have come” (gegonasin) indicates that these antichrists arose in the past and were still present.

The presence of these antichrists proves that “it is (present tense) the last hour” (2:18).

Thus it is evident that John (who wrote the book of Revelation) rejected the idea of a future, singular antichrist; instead, he warned Christians of a heretical movement (or movements).

There are many antichrists. “For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist” (2 Jn. 7). “Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son” (1 Jn. 2:22). “‘These antichrists who have arisen,’ says John, ‘belonged to us, but they were not of us.’

In other words, they took up the Christian position, they claimed they were Christian, they professed to be teachers of the Christian Church, and yet they have been separated from the Christians in order that it would be clear to all that they were not of them.

In other words, they claimed to delight in the true religion and yet they destroyed it.” [Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Walking with God: Studies in I John (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1993), p. 100.]

John focused the attention of his readers upon one, or perhaps two, heretical movements.

The first, probably Gnostic in origin, denied the real humanity of Jesus Christ (2 Jn. 7).

The second, probably Jewish in origin, denied that Jesus was the Messiah (1 Jn. 2:22). “John clearly applies the conception of the one antichrist (ho antichristos) to the generic tendency to promote lies about the identity of Christ.” [Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., He Shall Have Dominion (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), p. 373]

“Every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world” (1 Jn. 4:3).

“Antichrist is not an individual, malevolent ruler looming in our future. Rather, Antichrist was a contemporary heretical tendency regarding the person of Christ that was current among many in John’s day.” [Gentry, p. 374]

2. The beast

Another greatly misunderstood figure from the Bible is the beast of Revelation. The beast, unlike the antichrist, is at least a real political leader. The problem with most modern interpretations seeking to identity the beast is that the many textual indicators given by John to identify the beast are ignored in favor of the futurist, revived Roman emperor idea.

In the book of Revelation the beast is identified as both an empire and as a leader of an empire.

The empire is without question the Roman empire of John’s own day.

In Revelation 13 John is standing on the sand of the sea and observing a beast rising up out of the sea. The beast has “seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority” (Rev. 13:1-2).

John describes the very same animals alluded to by the prophet Daniel to describe three of the four great world empires: Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece (Dan. 7:1-6). The fourth empire, which has all the beast-like features of the other empires (only much worse), is none other than the Roman empire (Dan. 7:7).

In Revelation 17:12 John declares that the ten horns are ten kings; they are the leaders or governors of the ten imperial provinces.

In Revelation 17:9-10, John identifies the seven heads as both seven hills (a place) and seven kings (individuals). In the ancient world Rome was known as the city of seven mountains.

John, standing on the edge of the Mediterranean sea, looks in the direction of Rome and sees a beast coming out of the sea. Rome was a world empire that had authority over all peoples and nations (Rev. 13:7); that was the culmination of the four empires in Daniel, an empire that was satanic to the core (v. 2); and that existed on seven mountains (v. 9).

Following are some other features about the beast.

1. The beast was not only an empire but was also a man (Rev. 13:18).

John says that the beast had a blasphemous name on its heads (v. 1).

The Roman Caesars were worshiped as gods. Roman emperors were referred to as: Sebastos (one to be worshiped), divus (god) and even Deus and Theos (God). [David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance, An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Fort Worth, TX: Dominion, 1987) p. 328]

Nero’s coins said “Savior of the world,” and Domitian was referred to as “our Lord and our God.”

John gives a number of specific indicators that identify the beast, all of which point not to someone over 2,000 years in the future, but to an emperor still living in John’s own day: Nero.

Revelation 17:10 says, “There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time.”

John specifically says that the sixth king is presently ruling. Who is the sixth king? None other than Nero, the first great persecutor of Christians.

Following is a list of the Roman Caesars: 1. Julius (49-44 B.C.), 2. Augustus (31 B.C.-A.D. 14), 3. Tiberius (A.D. 14-37), 4. Gaius (Caligula, A.D. 37-41), 5. Claudius (A.D. 41-54), 6. Nero (A.D. 54-68), 7. Galba (A.D. 68).

John said that the sixth king was ruling when he wrote; this king would be followed by a seventh who would rule for only “a short time” (Rev. 17:10).

This was fulfilled to the letter: Nero was followed by Galba who ruled for only three months before he was assassinated.

2. John gives another identifier of the beast: a number.

“Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666” (Rev. 13:18).

Why does not John just say who the beast is? Why does he speak cryptically? John was writing from Patmos where he was exiled by the Romans. The church was being persecuted systematically by the Roman state under Nero.

John identifies the Roman emperor but he does it in such a way so that he protects the church from reprisal if the letter is intercepted by the Roman authorities.

Almost every church in the Roman empire contained both Jews and Gentiles. The Jews living in John’s day used their alphabet for both sound symbols (phonetics) and numerical values. Each letter of the Hebrew alphabet had a numerical value.

A Hebrew spelling of Nero’s name found in documents contemporary with the writing of Revelation is Nrwn Qsr, which equals exactly 666. [The number 666 in some ancient manuscripts of Scripture is actually changed to 616. The difference surely is no accident of sight made by an early copyist. The numbers 666 and 616 are not similar in appearance in the original Greek—whether spelled out in words or written out as numerals. Textual scholars agree: it must be intentional. Although we cannot be absolutely certain, a strong and most reasonable case may be made for the following conjecture. John, a Jew, used a Hebrew spelling of Nero’s name in order to arrive at the figure 666. But when Revelation began circulating among those less acquainted with Hebrew, a well-meaning copyist who knew the meaning of 666 might have intended to make its deciphering easier by altering it to 616. It surely is no mere coincidence that 616 is the numerical value of ‘Nero Caesar,’ when spelled in Hebrew by transliterating it from its more common Latin spelling” (Gentry, pp. 376-77)]

3. Another indicator is the beastly image itself.

Nero truly possessed a wicked, bestial nature. He was even referred to as a “beast” by his contemporaries. [The pagan writer Apollinius of Tyana, a contemporary of Nero, specifically mentions that Nero was called a “beast” (ibid., p. 377). Nero may have acquired the nickname “the beast” from some of his perverse activities. Nero was a sadistic pervert who was hated and feared, even by the pagan Romans.]

“Nero, who murdered numerous members of his own family (including his pregnant wife, whom he kicked to death); who was homosexual, the final stage in degeneracy (Rom. 1:24-32); whose favorite aphrodisiac consisted of watching people suffer the most horrifying and disgusting tortures; who dressed up as a wild beast in order to attack and rape male and female prisoners; who used the bodies of Christians burning at the stake as the original ‘Roman candles’ to light up his filthy garden parties; who launched the first imperial persecution of Christians at the instigation of the Jews, in order to destroy the Church; this animalistic pervert was the ruler of the most powerful empire on earth.” [Chilton, p. 329]

4. John said that the beast would make war upon God’s saints.

“The Beast is said to ‘make war with the saints and to overcome them’ (Rev. 13:7).

In fact, he is said to conduct such blasphemous warfare for a specific period of time: 42 months (Rev. 13:5).

The Neronic persecution, which was initiated by Nero in A.D. 64, was the first ever Roman assault on Christianity, as noted by Church fathers Eusebius, Tertullian, Paulus Orosius, and Sulpicius Severus, as well as by Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius.” [Gentry, pp. 377-78]

Nero’s assassination by the sword on June 8, A.D. 68, ended the bloody persecution of believers. Note that Nero’s persecution of Christians lasted 42 months, exactly as prophesied by the Apostle John in Revelation 13:5.

3. The mark of the beast

Is everyone soon to receive a bar code on his forehead and/or right hand in order to buy and sell goods? Is the government going to force people to have a computer chip inserted in their right hand for identification purposes? While these things are possible, they have absolutely nothing to do with the mark of the beast spoken of in Revelation.

In the Old Testament God spoke of total allegiance to Him and His law as a putting of the law on the forehead and on the hands: “You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes” (Dt. 6:8).

In Revelation, those who are faithful to Christ, “the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes” (Rev. 14:4), are said to have “His [the Lamb’s] Father’s name written on their foreheads” (Rev. 14:1).

John also refers to it as a seal: “Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads” (Rev. 7:3).

The Lord tells the church at Sardis: “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. And I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem...” (Rev. 3:12).

Even after the second coming John says, “His name shall be on their foreheads” (Rev. 22:4).

In the old covenant “Aaron bore on his forehead the name of the Lord inscribed on the crown on the front of the priestly mitre.” [Meredith G. Kline, Images of the Spirit, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), p. 54.]

It is obvious that having the name of Christ (or God the Father, Rev. 14:1) on the forehead is not meant to be taken literally but is representative of allegiance to God, ownership by God, and even the presence of God the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, the mark of the beast should be viewed as “the Satanic parody of the ‘seal of God’ on the foreheads and hands of the righteous.... Israel has rejected Christ, and is ‘marked’ with the seal of Rome’s total lordship; she has given her allegiance to Caesar, and is obedient to his rule and law. Israel chose to be saved by the pagan state, and persecuted those who sought salvation in Christ.” [Chilton, p. 342]

The mark of the beast is a counterfeit of God’s seal on His people. Those who give their allegiance to Caesar and the Roman state have social respectability and the benefits that go with it (economic, political, religious, etc.).

The Roman state demanded total allegiance to Caesar; everyone was required to make an offering of incense unto Caesar as God. “All who dwell on the earth will worship him [the beast], whose names have not been written in the Book of Life...” (Rev. 13:8).

But Christians refused to worship the beast and thus were persecuted unto death and became economic and social outcasts. The mark of the beast reflects a wicked heart that worships and serves Caesar.

“The imagery no doubt comes from the practice of branding slaves with the mark of their master.” [Philip Edgecumbe Hughes, The Book of the Revelation, pp. 153-54.]

Christians are slaves of Christ; all others are slaves of Satan.

Revelation 13 focuses on the Roman empire and the beast—Nero Caesar.

Things look very bleak for the church in chapter 13, but in chapter 14 the prophet focuses his attention upon Christ and His people.

Those who persecute the church, who worship the beast, will receive their due:

“If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever” (Rev. 14:9-11).

But Christians are blessed: “‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.’ ‘Yes,’ says the Spirit, ‘that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them’” (v. 13).

Although these words should comfort Christians of all ages, they were written specifically to comfort believers suffering the persecution of Nero—the Beast.

This truth is confirmed when the many time indicators within Revelation are considered.

John wrote, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants things which must shortly take place.... Blessed is he who reads...for the time is near.... The Lord God...sent His angel to show His servants the things which must shortly take place” (Rev. 1:1-3; 22:6).

Five times Jesus Christ declared, “I am coming quickly” (2:16; 3:11; 22:7, 12, 20); He was referring to His coming to judge apostate Israel and their Roman accomplices in the persecution of the church (this judgment occurred in A.D. 67-70).

But He promised to spare a faithful first-century church from the coming conflagration: “Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world” (3:10).

The purpose of the references to the millennium, the second coming, the final judgment and the eternal state is to give persecuted first-century Christians a glimpse of the church’s glorious future.

The significance of the book of Revelation *to its first-century audience* must no longer be ignored. ~~~ Brian Schwertley

Now I don't know if the President invited him to the WH or not - and I don't care -

Since your post #159 was a reply to post #145, I'm assuming you read through most of this thread.

How is it that you read ALL the refutation of Osborne being invited to the White House and STILL came up with the above statement?

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I think we all know this.

Sorry can't agree with this one. Good men are good and corrupt men are corrupt regardless of the power they hold. Power just makes that corruption more obvious.

I said: "The totality of the Bible's teaching on antichrist or antichrists if found in the following four verses:

You said: "Absoutely not true!"

Please give chapter and verse to any reference to "the Antichrist" other than the ones I provided.

Now I don't know if the President invited him to the WH or not - and I don't care - I am just surprised at the way people will sometimes defend anyone and anything.

what nonsense. President Bush did not invite Osbourne to the WH. That fact is pointed out when the lie is presented that he was invited. And you manage to turn that to "people will sometimes defend anyone and anything". If that is not what you meant, what are you talking about regarding having that "trash into your home". What home? President Bush did not invite him to his home? So what is your point?

People like this writer are so full of themselves that they always suspect the world will end on their watch. Just maybe, things are bigger than their fantasies.

does this statement intend to make any sense?

There's no conspiracy, therefore no need for tin foil. This administration gave us the "patriot" act, iniated a preemtive action against a country that had not attacked us, and supports a ban on assault weapons for starters. This is not news or a conspiracy. If Clinton had supported, or any democratic president for the matter, had supported or sponsered such acts, "conservatives" in this country would have had fits probably leading to anyerism and hemmorhage. Bush does the same and he's a freakin' genius all of a sudden - all part of the "master conservative plan" - right? Bush has the magical "R" after his name, giving him a "pass" amoung most "conservatives".

we love GWB because he's the best we have to date. But he's not going to save this country.

He's going a long way to doing exactly that.

It is confusing for you guys to carry over a conversation to this thread, by the way. What it has to do with the "topic" (such as it is) is not clear in the least.

HERE

So the President isn't allowed to have his own tastes in music?

You asked for the link. Personally, I don't even care that Brown will be there. I think he's cleaned up his "act".

"Hearing this one sentence being spoken by none other than Chuck Baldwin has truly made my day, and made this article more than worth my while to read. "

The word "pisseth" is in the bible. Of course damn and hell are too but those are no-nos as well.

Are you some kind of clinton fan, per chance?

That certainly explains a lot, with all the boohooing over "when clinton did this, freepers did that" nonsense you bellyache about.

Again I say this wide-eyed act you pull as if you don't understand someone's perfectly clear point is not fooling anybody.

No, I can't agree. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Has our education system come to this? As Christ said, " Why do you call me good? There is none good but God".

It's really pathetic that on a board that allegedly prides itself on being populated by real thinkers who enjoy discussing the truth, someone posts something like this and instantly gets hit with labels of "ridiculous" and "nutcase" and "wacko." Sickening.

If you have a problem with what the guy said, why don't you dispute his alleged facts? I have problems with Bush on some of those issues myself, and while I wouldn't have showcased them in an article like this one, he still has the right to post a well-presented set of issues without being assigned an instant litany of childish insults.

In times like these, it's hard to tell FR apart from a liberal board. They're the ones whom we lambast for not wanting to be distracted by the facts, for just sticking to the party line no matter what. What's the difference?

MM

"Invited to perform" is not the same as "invited to the White House", unless you mean "invited to perform at the White House" which is not stated anywhere in the James Brown article linked above.

You'll see from the constant insistance on this thread that the White House Correspondents dinner equals an invitation to the White House, itself, that such factual details mean little when one is set on a course of denigration.

And about Ozzy being there, Bush acknowledged a popular member of the American public, that the whole country was in a buzz about. To me, this showed that Bush knew of Ozzy's popularity, and even was amused that Ozzy was at the dinner. The irony of Bush and Ozzy together at the same function, is humorous. Bush gets the joke.

Your post reminds me of the time when President Bush remarked that he wasn't familiar with the television show, "Sex and the City." The liberal media was so anxious to declare that Bush isn't up on pop culture, as if that was some kind of sin.

He acknowledges Ozzy Osbourne, and he is bashed for that.

Poor guy can't win.