> General Discussions
Question about anti christs
John from Kentucky:
Here is something else to read concerning the study of Scriptures.
http://bible-truths.com/twelve.htm
I can only speak for myself. I do not consider Ray Smith a prophet. But Ray backs his statements that I agree with, with at least two Scriptures, which is the Scriptural way to keep us in Truth.
As for your contention that the Beast is Rome, can you provide at least two Scriptures that says that? Not your interpretation or the interpretation of any great minds (human) of the past. But two clear Scriptures that prove the Beast is Rome?
Again, let the two Scriptures stand alone. The Two Witnesses do not need any help to state the Truth.
"Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit says the Lord God Almighty."
horan:
Thank you for the links and advice. Have you never heard any reference to the beast of Revelation being representative of Rome? Is this entirely foreign to you? The support for this view is vast and quite sound, and I've already provided a point of entry in saying that there's a wonderful correspondence between the beast of Revelation and the 4the beast of Daniel. You're fully empowered to explore this yourselves, as it's never been so easy, as well Daniel's 1260 years as expressed:
Daniel 7:25 He shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws, and they shall be given into his hands until a time and times and the dividing of a time.
So here, a time, times and half a time is 1260 years, the same as expressed in Revelation 12 as 1260 days, a time, times and half a time, and 42 months, all expressions of the same time period, 538 to 1798, the span of papal supremacy prior to that office receiving its seeming deadly wound at the hands of Napoleon's general, which wound is later healed.
And my translation of Revelation 13:18 doesn't say that 666 is the number of mankind, but the number of a man. and interestingly with the Latin expression for Vicar of Christ, all of the characters, letters which have corresponding numeric values add up to 666, which Latin expression actually means substitute for Christ, while the Greek anti means not against, but in place of. Of course, we understand that there are some translation issues with the King James, so I would like to know for sure if the received and inspired Greek text expresses in Rev 13:18 as "number of mankind" or "number of a man". An inquiring mind should like to clear this up. But already I might suspect that Rome is somehow involved in whatever translation that is,which deflects attention away from itself as the beast, because Rome does indeed do that sort of thing.
There is actually no mention of Antichrist in Revelation, but much discussion of the beast, and I've hardly scratched the surface of the extremely ample support for this understanding that the beast represents Rome. Daniel's "think to change times and laws" is a pointer to yet another vast area of correspondence in this regard. You're entirely welcome and empowered to explore this issue. I doubt very much that it has any bearing on salvation, but the historical understanding of Revelation is extremely powerful for demonstrating the veracity of Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done.
For now, however, I'm much less interested in arguing this point of understanding than I am in finding good, solid scriptural support for taking the stand that everyone, without exception will be saved. I very much hope this can done honestly. I'm quite good with Adventists on many issues, but this particular notion of God, at the end of the millennium, waking up most people who have ever lived from their sleep of death, only to rub their noses in whatever they've done or not done, just before burning them to a crisp, with some burning longer than others, while we saints look on with some sort of approval, has got to be wrong, I hope and pray. So I am diligently studying what your friend Mr. Smith has to say, hoping he can help me with this. Because if I claim that salvation is universal, I must be able to back it up with both scripture and reason.
I also think Adventists are wrong about the 7 last plagues being literal. I think I can support their being symbolic of spiritual plagues quite nicely, and that we are living in the midst of the 6th plague being poured out, with the seventh coming very soon, which quite upsets the Adventist notion of the end of probation. I think those folks have much to contribute, and perhaps Mr Smith as well, but it's good to keep a nimble, flexible mind, especially in these end-times, when we should well expect a greater outpouring of the Holy Spirit to guide us.
lilitalienboi16:
Hello Horan,
I will let someone else address your post about Rome if they so desire. There is not a single scripture which says Rome is the beast of revelation but I have provided you with two witnesses that say mankind, the sons of men, are the beast. I can provide more if you like but those two are the best matches. I am going to share several translations which translate Rev 13:18 as a gender neutral word for 'man', meaning women are included, and the KJV translated this world as plural many times using the word 'MEN' aka "mankind." I'm not sure which translation you use but you should check several including strong's defintion for words to help better understanding what the original greek was conveying. First, here is strong's for the word from the King James:
Rev 13:18 HereG5602 isG2076 wisdom.G4678 Let him that hathG2192 understandingG3563 countG5585 theG3588 numberG706 of theG3588 beast:G2342 forG1063 it isG2076 the numberG706 of a man;G444 andG2532 hisG848 numberG706 is Six hundred threescore and six.G5516
G444
ἄνθρωπος
anthrōpos
anth'-ro-pos
From G435 and ὤψ ōps (the countenance; from G3700); manfaced, that is, a human being: - certain, man.
Total KJV occurrences: 560
The Greek word used when only man is meant (always excluding woman), is "aner." But the Greek word translated "man" in Rev. 13:18 is not aner, but rather the word anthropos, which means "a human being, male or female." Strong’s Concordant.
Here is an example of this same word translated as "men" (PLURAL) implying mankind as in WOMEN as well.
Mat_5:16 Let yourG5216 lightG5457 soG3779 shineG2989 beforeG1715 men,G444 thatG3704 they may seeG1492 yourG5216 goodG2570 works,G2041 andG2532 glorifyG1392 yourG5216 FatherG3962 whichG3588 is inG1722 heaven.G3772
Unless you want to argue that God only wants our light to shine amongst the male sex, and only infront of one single man, which would be rather a silly point to argue, then it is clear this word means more than just a singular male human.
Let me provide one last witness to this and then I will share the other translations which translate it properly:
Mat_6:1 Take heedG4337 that ye doG4160 notG3361 yourG5216 almsG1654 beforeG1715 men,G444 to be seenG2300 of them:G846 otherwiseG1490 ye haveG2192 noG3756 rewardG3408 ofG3844 yourG5216 FatherG3962 whichG3588 is inG1722 heaven.G3772
Again, are we not to do our good deeds before a singular man but its okay to do them in front of women? Is that what this verse is saying? Of course not, that would, again, be silly! There are many many many many more examples of this throughout the greek scriptures where the word 'anthropos' means more than just "A (SINGULAR MALE) MAN" and is better translated as "MEN" plural, aka, MANKIND/Humanity.
Here are some other translations which get Rev 13:18:
(CEV) You need wisdom to understand the number of the beast! But if you are smart enough, you can figure this out. Its number is six hundred sixty-six, and it stands for a person.
(CLV) Here is wisdom. Let him who has a mind calculate the number of the wild beast, for it is the number of mankind, and its number is six hundred sixty-six."
(GNB) This calls for wisdom. Whoever is intelligent can figure out the meaning of the number of the beast, because the number stands for the name of someone. Its number is 666.
(ISV) In this case wisdom is needed: Let the person who has understanding calculate the total number of the beast, because it is a human total number, and the sum of the number is 666.
(MSG) Solve a riddle: Put your heads together and figure out the meaning of the number of the Beast. It's a human number: six hundred sixty-six.
(RSV) 18 This calls for wisdom: let him who has understanding reckon the number of the beast, for it is a human number, its number is six hundred and sixty-six
So the word "someone," "person," "human," and "mankind" all include both male and females of the human race and are not gender specific. Human would be best translated as HUMANITY as I showed you with this word "anthropos" that even the king james translates it plural in so many places.
To establish doctrine you need two or three witnesses, the other I provided you is Ecc 3:18 as it is very close to this one even in its chapter and number! ;)
In Christ,
Alex
Extol:
--- Quote from: Horan on September 15, 2015, 01:37:06 AM ---
For now, however, I'm much less interested in arguing this point of understanding than I am in finding good, solid scriptural support for taking the stand that everyone, without exception will be saved.
--- End quote ---
Hello Horan,
I would suggest listening to Ray's teachings Foundational Truths and Does All Mean All? which can be found here: http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,13.0.html (Foundational Truths in 2008, Does All Mean All in 2007, on the bottom link.)
Ray does exactly what you are looking for, and he does it in a simple, easy-to-understand way. Just a brief summation of what Ray goes through:
We have Scriptures that say God will save everyone:
1 Tim. 2:4--Who wills that all mankind be saved...
1 Tim. 4:10--...Who is the Saviour of all mankind..
1 John 4:14-- And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.
There are many more, but let's just take those three...
We have a verse that says God wills that all mankind be saved. Is there a verse that says God wills NOT that all mankind be saved? NO.
We do have a verse that says God is the Saviour of all mankind. Do we have a verse that says God is NOT the Saviour of all mankind? NO.
We have a verse that says the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world. Do we have a verse that says God did NOT send the Son to be the Savior of the world? NO.
So, as Ray asks: Which verse are you going to believe? The one that IS there or the one that ISN'T there? If you want to believe the Scriptures--keeping in mind there is no Scriptural word meaning "eternal"--the answer should be very easy. You can do the same thing with the dozens and dozens of other Scriptures which support the salvation of all. You can believe what it says, and you can also know that you won't find a verse which says the opposite.
--- Quote from: Horan on September 15, 2015, 01:37:06 AM --- So I am diligently studying what your friend Mr. Smith has to say, hoping he can help me with this. Because if I claim that salvation is universal, I must be able to back it up with both scripture and reason.
--- End quote ---
If you are diligent and sincere, I have no doubt that you will find the truth. If you're just here so you can pick up a new doctrine to argue (a "religious hobbyist" as Ray would say) you probably won't get much out of this site. But a word of warning: Scripture and reason aren't going to convince any of your Adventist friends. Only the Spirit of God can do that. ;)
horan:
Hello Again,
Might it be that Rome is not directly implicated as the beast in Revelation because of the time when it was written? There had already been some Roman persecution of Christians under Nero, who ruled the empire between 54 and 68 AD. What a politically incorrect document Revelation would have been, for hundreds and hundreds of years, if the beast's identity weren't veiled in symbolism. I suspect Jesus knows what He's doing. Well, context and relationship, there is so much of these supporting this understanding. Are you familiar with the four beasts of Daniel, as well as the four corresponding divisions of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar's dream? There's so much that pertains to this, and I encourage you to explore it. If anybody would like a link to some good materials, email me and I'll be happy to provide. But in the spirit of not arguing dissenting viewpoints on this forum, to which rule I've agreed, I'll leave the pursuit or otherwise of followup regarding this matter to your own discretion.
Extol, I'm not an Adventist, nor do I have any Adventist friends. But Adventists have been making Revelation and Biblical prophecy their stock-in-trade for about 170 years and, though I don't agree with everything they propose, I've nonetheless suggested that they're quite good at the study of prophetic scripture, and well worth some attention. But your mileage may vary, and I'll leave it at that.
I appreciate the verses which indicate that Christ fully intends to save all from death in sin, but it's not quite enough, as there is also so much that implies, or can easily be made to imply that salvation is selective, and these things also need to be addressed. I don't mean that you've somehow fallen short of adequate demonstration, but it's important that I arm myself with reasoned argument supported by scripture to deal with all aspects of the issue. It doesn't seem at all far-fetched to me that error in accurately understanding the ultimate fate of all of humanity has been allowed by God these past 2000 years and that now, as we approach the end, it's appropriate to correct it. And I hope Mr. Smith will provide me with the tools to do this, if not the whole toolbox, at least a good start, because I do so want to believe and teach that all of God's prodigal children will be guided home.
These direct statements you and Mr. Smith have provided which point simply to all of humanity being ultimately protected are quite good, as is the understanding that the word, judgment, can also be understood as 'to make things right'. I suspect the latter, word-meaning insight will be helpful in "debunking" those many statements in scripture which suggest that salvation is selective.
In Christ,
Mark
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version