Posted on 09/21/2009 1:00:43 PM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
I beg to differ. I say that Islam fits the bill... not the EU. Biblical prophesy has nothing to do with the West. It is all centered around Israel and the middle east. Not Europe. The revived Roman empire had 2 legs.. the western and the eastern. It’s all about the eastern portion. That antichrist figure will come out of Islam. The description of this world figure fits the messianic islamic figure perfectly. Better look into it... because this paradigm doesn’t fit.
I agree that there is a good possibility that the Antichrist will be Muslim.
This sounds similar to a famous curse. "May you live in interesting times."
LOL! This is true and I think the fun hasn’t even begun yet.
save
I think Islam is an arm of the antichrist..
It wouldn’t surprise me at all.
I certainly don’t think they’d have a problem with one another.
Eastern Europe and Western Europe need to unite to fight Islam.
This stuff repeats every 600 to 1000 years. Battle of Tours 732 AD. Battle of Vienna 1683 AD.
The EU sucks and should be abolished as it’s political correctness and other BS pander to Islam.
This “Trumpet” publication was going on and on about Germany being a problem. Germany is not the problem. Merkel is not an Islamist like ACORN boy.
Neither the Book of the Revelation nor the other prophetic books mention "the antichrist." "The Antichrist" seems to be a construct based upon four verses in John's epistles. "Who is the antichrist, but he who denies the Father and the Son." This means anyone who denies God the Father and God the Son is the antichrist. That can be anyone.
However the Book of the Revelation, Daniel, and the Apostle Paul do speak of a "Man of Sin," who is given other descriptions, such as "the Beast," "The Little Horn," etc., who aspires to become world emperor during the 7-year period preceding the triumphal return of Our Lord. Popular eschatologists like Hal Lindsey, Chuck Missler, etc. label this individual "The Antichrist." But such a label is not used in scripture for this individual.
Why am I splitting hairs? Because according to the Apostle John, there are MANY antichrists, not just one. Looking for the one in the future tends to give people a false sense of security, having fed their curiosity, but not giving cause for personal vigilance or piety. But knowing that there are MANY antichrists, serves as a warning to protect your heart, mind and emotions from those who would deceive, if possible, even the elect.
I think, like the word "rapture", which cannot be found in Scripture but is simply a word used to describe an event which will happen, "Antichrist" cannot be found in Scripture but is basically an all-purpose word to describe a world dictator who is yet to arise.
The fact that "rapture" is not explicitly in the Bible does not mean that there will not be a moment in time when Christ removes His church from the scene before He judges the world, and the fact that "Antichrist" is not used explicitly by God to describe the "man of sin" carries no particular meaning- the world will still be under the satanic rule of the "Antichrist" for seven years- no matter what label someone gives him.
Also, "rapture," the english word, is not in any translation that I know of. However, it is based upon the Greek word, 'arpazo, which is precisely the word Paul uses in 1 Thess 4:17. Most english versions translate it as "caught up." "Raptured" could be used interchangeably with "caught up."
Having said all that, when giving messages, I do not use the english word "rapture," precisely because of this confusion. I simply say "caught up." It's easier to defend when people question what I'm teaching.
I serously doubt that members of the EU will war with each other going forward, they are too well integrated.
consider for hought:
IF / when The U.N. is finally given an independant funding stream, it will become an unbridled beast. It is currently a bridled beast, corrupt and nearly unacountable but limited in ability due to its dependance on the U.S. for money.
The UN security council with 5 permanent membership and 5 revolving membership ie 10 seats of power, or 10 horns.
One of security council members will war on 3 others causing them to lose their seats on the council...
This scenario does not fit the Bible. Let me explain. If you look at Revelation 16:12-16, where it describes who is going to be invited to this battle it says this:
"And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared."
13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
There are two things that you need to look at. #1 - The Euphrates River. That this river is dried up is significant because there's no way the Asian nations can take part in the final battle with it in the way. It's just too deep and big for them to cross. #2 - The spirits "go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty."
So we see from these passages that the entire world will be involved in this last battle for the 1000 reign of Christ. It isn't just Islam and the islamic nations.
Now, if you look at passages in Ezekiel, specifically 38 & 39, the nations involved in this war are vastly different. The nations mentioned in this war are: Gog, Magog, Meshech and Tubal, Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya, Gomer, and Togarmah. These nations are pretty much all islamic, and if they aren't they soon will be. Of course we're talking about Russia, Iran, Libya, Turkey, Afghanistan, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, possibly even Germany and France. These are all islamic nations, nothing more, and their chief leader is Russia. We all know Russia has been stocking nations like Iran, Syria and Lebanon with arms preparing for this war.
God supernaturally intervenes in this war and destroys those nations who take part, leaving only 1/6th of the population alive. It would be utterly impossible for some Islamic messiah to rise from the ashes, sort to speak, if the those nations have been destroyed.
And something else to think about. When will this war take place? It can't logically take place at the beginning of the Tribulation because the Israelites are said to be "burning the weapons for 7 years." They can't be going out from their homes and doing that when the second half of the Tribulation begins and the Israelites are fleeing for their lives. It can't be after the Tribulation. So logically it would have to occur before the Tribulation and possibly even the Rapture of the Church, which means we could quite possibly see this war happen.
So there's my take on this whole matter. Rosenberg is great to listen to and his books are phenomenal, but I believe he has this part wrong.
Yeah, sure. We've heard it all before. First it was the Common Market. The futurist prophecy gurus like Hal Lindsey were all agog about the possibilities for Jesus’ return Real Soon Now® back in the ‘80s when the Common Market approached 10 nations. Then it shot past 10 nations without stopping to catch its breath. Then there was the European Economic Community. Same nonsense from the futurists. Now what is the EU up to, like 27 countries? And what do we get? More nonsense. “Oh, we’re sorry, we meant the ten kings/toes, etc means ten MAJOR nations. We must have missed that the first time we dreamed this stuff up. ‘Core Europe” yeah, that’s the ticket. WEU, does that get us the theory we need? For the moment?”
Of course the Bible does not support such nonsense. The futurists are making it all up as they go along.
And all they are left with is more twisted claims and unsubstantiated theorizing about these “clear end times prophecies” of futurism.
It’s a sham, my friend. Folks who truly know their Bible can see right through it. They are not suckered in to the “just wait and see” approach of futurists. The only thing that futurists can manage is to change their tune on cue when current events take a right turn.
There has also been discussion on FR about a pre-Gog war that takes out Islam close to Israel, like Syria, so that Israel can be at peace before Gog Magog.
So many so often try to conflate “end-times” prophecy with a rapid succession of near-future events and a single “anti-Christ.” If Islam fits the bill (and it does to a great degree), then Mohammed, himself, is the dark prophet. He regarded himself greater than Christ; he called himself simply “The Prophet;” His followers unleashed the Black Death, which killed one-third of humanity; and his followers conquered one-third of humanity. Further, much of Islam is an outgrowth and radicalization of a heresy already present within the Church during the apostolic age.
Josephus wouldn’t necessarily be terribly knowledgeable of Ezekiel’s or Isaiah’s meanings, but he was a contemporary of John of Revelation. That means that whatever Josephus’ *understanding* of these names was, that understanding was quite possibly shared by John’s audience.
Gog, Magog =? Scythians =? Ukranians? or Turks?
Meschech = Moscow?
Tubal = N. Africa or Iberia, which is Spain and Portugal)
Persia = Iran
Ethiopia = Northeastern Africa, not necessarily the modern nation of Ethiopia.
Gomer = Turkey
Togarmah = the Caucasus (Armenia, Georgia or Chechnya). Is this why you mention Afghanistan?
Not sure why Germany and France get pulled into this by you; there’s plainly no candidate for refering to them.
Gog and Magog could also simply represent the furthest reaches North, in which case one could suppose they could refer to Northern Russia, instead of the region just South of Russia. Could the scripture use those names to represent the Rus (even though the meaning at the time clearly was not the Rus)? Could Russia be described by the Rus, the Moscovites, and the Caucasians?
Minus your seemingly unsubstantiated of Germany and France, these nations listed seem to suggest an alliance of Russian and Muslim nations, strangely reminiscent of the old Cold War, and curiously missing Arabia, Iraq, etc. Are they absent because of U.S. influence?
What about a pre-Gog war with Israel?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.