₦airaland Forum

oteneaaron:
That is very important question.

I honestly don't know why people feel threatened when these topics are explored.

Why can't we investigate into biblical history and chronology?

Or are they scared of what they might find out?

Even the Bible at 1 Thessalonians 5 VS 21 encourages everyone to - "Test all things..."

How can we "test all things.." when we don't take our time to do indepth research?

Makes you wonder.

🤔🤔

To do indepth research you need to go back in time and see what really happened for yourself.

All the so called archeological finds are the things the Egyptians wrote for themselves. The Israelites also have written for themselves. I have given you clues that may guide you in making comparative analysis of the conflicting stories. Now, the ball is in your court.

LordReed:
Really? So why is there no archeological evidence for this 'honest' exodus?

What pieces of evidence are you actually looking for? Archeological footprints of people marching across the Sinai Peninsula?

MaxInDHouse:
With the highlighted you have killed this thread!

When some people want to pick up arguments against God's word they don't know that lack of CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS is stupidity on its own. Whatever is written on their walls wasn't done by sincere historians but under the direction of their kings who wants their citizens to feel highly secured in their domain and pose a threat to any supposed enemy who may be planning a siege against their Cities.

So in a nutshell the invented stories has a purpose not just what really happened in the past.

Take for instance the Ọ̀yọ́ empire, this people became great right from the time of Ṣàngó the third King of Ọ̀yọ́ and they ruled for years but when the Fúlànís invaded Ọ̀yọ́ they conquered Ọ̀yọ́ and took away the crown as a sign of their victory only to face their doom when they got to Ògbómọ̀ṣọ́. The Ògbómọ̀ṣọ́ people fought, conquered the Fúlànís and returned the crown back to Ọ̀yọ́.
This STORY i heard from my late great-grandmother who is also an historian in Abẹ́òkúta but the day i told an Ọ̀yọ́ chieftain he almost turn it into a bloody fight saying it never happened not until recently when the late Aláàfin Làmídì Adéyẹmí insulted the Ṣọ̀ún of Ògbómọ̀ṣọ́ claiming the later was never a crowned prince in Yorùbá land that Ṣọ̀ún angrily responded that the crown on the Aláàfin's head belongs to him. So when journalists asked him why he uttered such a statement then he revealed exactly the story my late great-grandmother told me.
Ever since then i knew why my late great grandmother was highly respected as a great historian in Abẹ́òkúta!

From the Oyo history you shared, you nailed it.

One thing is clear about the historical records of most nations in antiquity. They write only good things about themselves. You'll never see them write about their defeats in battle or their enslavement to another nation, the despicable manners of their kings or the failures of their gods. They're always conquering and never being defeated, living as lords over other nations and recording only good and favourable events in the making of their nationhood. We all know that this can only be far from the truth. Egypt's Pharaoh pursued the Israelites into the red sea and perished there but they'll narrate the events to rather show might and conquests. They actually distort their own histories to brush their national ego. All the nations are like that. No one ever gets defeated in battle except their enemies. Should anyone believe such reports? They're always one sided and narcissistic in tone.

Can the same be said of Israel? Israel has its recorded history as the Old Testaments in the Bible. They didn't write it for religious purposes initially, they were just honestly penning down their records for the coming generations of their children. They record their own failings, their own defeats, the misbehaviours of their kings, the fall of their own nation, even their enslavement and exiles by foreign powers. You'll read balanced records that do not prioritize self praise or national egoism.

So, when contrasting records made by a nation with whom Israel has some ancient involvements, whose records would you believe? I leave it to the reader to judge.

Beetunez44:
As for me i wasnt really in the world before but never knew the true nature of God until i gained admission into an institution; attending a student fellowship so with a lot of bible studies my eyes opened.

Ignore that demon called kobojunkie. He's a known demon on this platform. Don't allow him quote the scriptures upside down for you.

Explore2xmore:
If we look at the language here like that in Isaiah 48:10 states, "I have refined you, but not as silver; I have tested you in the furnace of affliction." This language suggests that the purpose of the refining fire is to purify and renew, not to condemn and destroy.

The book of Malachi is primarily concerned with addressing the corrupt practices of the Israelites and calling them to repentance. The dreadful day is presented as a consequence of their actions, but it is also portrayed as a potential turning point for the people.

The Fuller's fire, the refining fire, the spirit of burning, etc are all judgements in the sense of chastisements. God's hands are heavy upon His children whenever they go wayward but His chastisements are all in love. To call back into order, those that are going astray.

The dreadful and terrible day is the day of judgement. Quiet different from the occasional chastisements. It's a day when all, young and old, man and woman would stand before the fiery judgement of the Lord God Almighty. It's going to be a dreadful day. That's what Malachi 4 was talking about.

Explore2xmore:
Perharps we should look again.

The judgment that is spoken of in Malachi primarily refers to the judgment on earth. Malachi warns of consequences for the people's actions and urges them to repent and return to God. The judgment that is described in the book is not necessarily a final judgment day, but rather a judgment that will have immediate repercussions on the people's lives and their relationship with God.

The judgment that is spoken of in Malachi primarily refers to the judgment on earth. Malachi warns of consequences for the people's actions and urges them to repent and return to God. The judgment that is described in the book is not necessarily a final judgment day, but rather a judgment that will have immediate repercussions on the people's lives and their relationship with God.

Malachi 3:2-3 describes the coming of the Lord as a refiner's fire, purifying the people and purging them of impurity. This imagery of purification and refinement suggests a judgment that is aimed at correcting and purifying the people, rather than condemning them to eternal damnation.

The judgment prophesied in Malachi 3 is for Israel. The dreadful day prophesied in Malachi 4 is for the world.

Explore2xmore:
What really is the great and dreadful day?

Judgement day.

SharingIsLife:
Lol Bro please how can I get this Naira symbol on my keyboard?

Long press your space bar. A list would pop up. Look down on the pop up, you'll see an option to choose Language Settings. Click on 'Language Settings' and choose a Nigerian language among them. From then on, you'll be able to type in English as well as in the language you've chosen. When you press the number key on your keypad, the key that beside your space bar that has 123 written on it, you'll see the ₦ symbol among the keys that are displayed.

FRANCISTOWN:
@FxMasterz
When Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus.
Note that, John the Baptist already died.
John died in chapter 14 of Matthew, while Elijah and Moses appeared with Jesus in chapter 17.

Also in Mark. John the Baptist died in the sixth chapter of Mark and Elijah appeared in the 9th chapter on the mount of transfiguration.

Elijah was already a "spirit" according to you guys' bible.

You also said Moses did not die, see. Read your bible.
Deuteronomy 34:7 "And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died..."

Jude the brother of James even gave an account of what happened after Moses' death in Jude 1: 9 "Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee."

So Moses died, according to the bible stories.

The Moses and Elijah that appeared to the bible Jesus were spirits.

Also it is important to know that, whenever Elijah appeared. There was always a Jezebel who wanted to kill him.
It happened in 1kings chapter 18-19
Since she couldn't kill Elijah.

When Elijah came back as John the Baptist. The spirit of Jezebel also reappeared as herodias (another case of reincarnation in the bible that people don't know about)

Jesus himself said John the Baptist was Elijah, so why the stress?

Jesus saying John the Baptist was Elijah is prophetic language. Please read my recent response to Explore2xmore. I explained it in the context of Jerusalem being Sodom and Egypt.

Yeah Moses probably died. I didn't say emphatically that he did not die. The statement was a probability. I had said "Moses like Elijah probably did not die." It was a statement of probability. In the light of what Jude said about the disputation on the body of Moses. We can further establish that Moses probably didn't die. His physical body became a bone of contention only because it was still alive. The physical body is useless after death. Its destination is the grave. Neither God, Angels nor Satan are concerned about the body of a dead man. The body that could be contended for by Satan is a living body because that one has a destination beyond the grave. These are all probabilities because God never revealed what happened to Moses on the top of Pisgah in Mount Nebo. He simply disappeared. It is reasonable for the people of his days to think that he died and that God had buried him. God never said that to anybody. We are not perfect in knowledge. A day will come when every mystery shall be uncovered.

The Jezebel appearance wherever Elijah appeared could be taken as a mere deduction. The idea of Herodias being John's Jezebel is not theologically grounded enough to paint John as Elijah. Most times, when you carry the prophetic mantle of somebody, you would experience similar life events like that individual whose mantle you're carrying. The same travails, tribulations and vagaries of life happen to you. Compare Elijah's ministry with that of Elisha, the similarities are even more pronounced than John's. Elijah is not John. John is not a reincarnation of Elijah.

Explore2xmore:
Quite a good submission however where then do you place the statement of Jesus?

Mark 9:13
But I tell you, Elijah has come, and they have done to him everything they wished, just as it is written about him."

Matthew 17:10-13
10 The disciples asked him, “Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”

11 Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. 12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.

The Lord Jesus was speaking in prophetic language there. The clarification of that statement is found in Luke 1:17.

Prophetically, there are two events associated with Elijah. Both events were mentioned in the book of Malachi 4:5-6:

"5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:

6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."

The real Elijah would accomplish verse 5 as prophesied in the book of Revelation. In the book of Revelation, Elijah was not seen "turning the hearts of the children to their fathers." He was busy commanding fire and prophesying. He was shutting the heavens. He
and Moses appeared on the scene suddenly prophesying and doing mighty and dreadful deeds. They didn't have time to turn the hearts of the children to the fathers.

John accomplished verse 6 as the "voice of one crying in the wilderness, make straight the path of the Lord." He performed this task in the spirit of Elijah. Under the same anointing that Elijah carried So, he is spiritually called Elijah. Someone in the spiritual mantle of Elijah (John the Baptist) is prophetically called Elijah but he is not physically Elijah. The real Elijah comes at the close of the age.

For example, let's look at a similar prophetic language about Jerusalem.

Revelation 11:8:
"[8] And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified."

You can see that the city referred to here is clearly Jerusalem. It was spiritually called Sodom and Egypt. That does not make Jerusalem Sodom or Egypt. It's a prophetic language. This prophecy is already fulfilled in our own days. Sodomy means Gayism - Homosexuality. LGBTQ things. These are things for which Israel is known today. John accurately named Israel Sodom spiritually. That does not make Israel Sodom geographically or otherwise. Egypt means a departure from the true God. A breaking of the divine covenant. This is already clear. Those guys who call themselves Israelites today don't know God. Today's Israel is spiritually Sodom and Egypt.Israel is not Egypt geographically or other wise. The same way John was spiritually Elijah but not physically Elijah.

As Jerusalem is not physically Sodom, so also John is not physically Elijah. The spirit of Sodom is upon Jerusalem just as the spirit of Elijah was upon John. However, they are two distinct individuals.

FRANCISTOWN:
@Explore2xmore
@FxMasterz
@SIRTee15
@MightySparrow
@MaxInDHouse

I'll be speaking according to the bible.
John the Baptist was infact the reincarnation of Elijah.
Let's walk thru the bible together.
What happens when a man dies?
His earthly body returns back to the ground.
It is impossible to ascend into heaven with your earthly body.
For God himself said this to the first man who inherited death.

In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return. Gen 3:19

When Enoch was taken up to heaven, he was not taken with his earthly body, likewise Elijah

Apostle Paul better explained this in

Phil3: 21 He will take our weak mortal bodies and change them into glorious bodies like his own, using the same power with which he will bring everything under his control.

The earthly body cannot survive in heaven.
So Enoch and Elijah must have been given a new body just as Paul explained.

Now about reincarnation.
See what the dictionary says:
•A rebirth of a soul, in a physical life form, such as a body.
Since Elijah was taken into heaven without his earthly body. It is reasonable to say he was a soul.
Now in Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

John was the only prophet that was sent just before Jesus.

Even Jesus confirmed that indeed John the Baptist was a prophet in Luke 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist...

Luke 1:17 "And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah..."

Simply put, the spirit of Elijah in a new earthly body.
And Jesus really said it clearly in

Mat 11:14:
"And if you will receive it, this is Elijah, which was for to come."

Mat 17:11-13:
"And Jesus answered and said to them, Elijah truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say to you, That Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but have done to him whatever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spoke to them of John the Baptist."

When Elijah was taken to heaven, he was given a different body, so, he had to enter a new earthly body which can only happen by birth. Hence, reincarnation

All this lengthy talk can be rendered heretic by one simple scripture -The two appearances Jesus had on the Mount of Transfiguration.

Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. The same Elijah that appeared to Jesus cannot be the same John the Baptist.

Truly, flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. That does not mean flesh and blood cannot appear there. Moses like Elijah probably never died too. His grave was never found. There's high tendency that their reappearance at the end of time as prophesied in the book of Revelation was to accomplish the shedding off of the flesh so that they, in their spirit bodies can inherit the Kingdom of God.

Malachi 4:5 refers to the reappearance of Elijah before the coming of the dreadful day of the Lord. The dreadful day of the Lord is still future. It is a day of judgement. The first coming of Christ was not dreadful. It was for the salvation of souls. You can bear me witness that there was nothing dreadful about it. In the book of revelation, just immediately after Moses and Elijah (The two witnesses) were taken up after their ressurection, the dreadful judgement of the Lord began upon the earth. That's the day Malachi was talking about.

John himself testified that "He was the voice of one crying in the wilderness" - John 1:23. Re-echoing an earlier prophecy of Isaiah about him.

"This is Elijah that was to come..." Is a prophetic language. It should not be taken literally. The literal meaning of those words was given at John's birth in Luke 1:17.

Being in the spirit of Elijah is not the same as being Elijah. The anointing or mantle of Elijah was upon him to deliver his fiery message of repentance to Israel. This is a similar event as the one recorded of Elisha after the mantle of Elijah fell on him on the other side of Jordan. The sons of the prophet looking at Elisha from afar off reported: "The spirit of Elijah doth rest upon Elisha". Elisha did not become Elijah at that point but he operated in the spirit of Elijah. John was not a reincarnation of Elijah. He was a distinct spirit with the zeal, fervour and anointing of Elijah.

Explore2xmore:
There appears some verses in the Bible that say reincarnation doesn't occur.
Hebrews 9:27 - "And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment

Yet Jesus is said to say Elijah had come but wasn't recognised. Matthew 11:10-14.

Where was Elijah said to have come?

Then he is also said to come again at the end of the world.


Attn: Fxmasterz,SirTee15,Malcom1x,Maximdhouse,Mightysparrow,MrPrevailer,Tenq and all who can shed light and knowledge about this.

Christianity does not believe in reincarnation.

Elijah never died. He was taken up in a chariot of fire. So a reappearance of this prophet does not qualify as a reincarnation.

But actually, Jesus was not referring to John in that statement of His as the very same Elijah but rather, His reference to John as being Elijah was a reference to the same anointing and fiery spirit that Elijah carried.

A prophecy about John in Luke 1:17 will bring clarity to the matter.

"And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Shoodboi:
They will soon claim it was Hamas, watch them. In the same Jerusalem where there are no Palestinians. The same Jerusalem fully controlled by Israel. The same Jerusalem where Israel has soldiers and tanks all over. Watch them, they will soon say it was Hamas. They've even identified the shooters as Palestinians. How did they know the dead men are Palestinians? Dead people o.

Hamas has claimed responsibility!

EMILO2STAY:
you said islam also fits those descriptions of the antichrist in the bible but it does not. lol every thing you listed there I have addressed in the post you quoted my guy it seems you have comprehension problem.

it seems you are now seeking clarification like you want to learn ok.


1. daniel 7 gives an insight into what the beast is and that is a kingdom with a
man ruling and sitted in top position. if you agree this kingdom / system is already in existence then you also know that the man ruling there is the eyes and mouth of that little horn the same as the man of sin. this system is refered to as the beast in bible
prophecy because it took over from the fourth beast and used its political
power. the beast is not a person per say but a political power how many times do i have to prove that with scripture?


2.this beast described by John in revelation is nothing but the office of the
papacy as proven by the bible and history, which is still same as mystery babylon. this babylonian system as at the time of johns revelation was "not" in existence but is to
" to come. meaning the babylonian system was in existed before johns times during time of of babylonian empire and as at the time of the revelation is not in existence becuase babylon is no more but is to come in the near future through the papacy who have assimilated the babylonian pagan culture through rome because the priests of
babylon ran to rome at the fall of babylon and they ran to a place called
pagamos in rome which the bible called the sit of satan. rome incooperated
this practices into there religious system and that is how the vatican got it.
now do you understand why it is called mystery babylon?
remember the son of perdition which paul spoke of? it is same thing as this beast who will also go into perdition. perdition means destined for destruction by the Lord.


3.the scripture means indeed that the numerical equivalent of his name is 666. now you need to understand that the word name does not necessarily imply literal name but what he stands for or acts, or claims to be ,.. in otherwords his title which he wears on his crown . take for example Exodus 34:14 "For you shall worship no other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous..

4 it is you who think otherwise. john started by saying "as you have heard that antichrist is coming" he was referring to the same thing paul was saying in 2 thessalonians 2. and then went on to say that many antichrists have come already meaning there are many people who have corrupted the gospel as at his time. the catholic church foundation goes back to the time of the apostles with a man known as simon the sorcerer. these people are same people who are part of the fallen ,the apostasia that shall usher in the man of sin. so john is not saying somthing different at all he is still referring to the antichrist and its system because john still spoke of a falling away and a revealing of the apostate church when he said " that they might be manifest that they where not of us. this is the apostasia. when this apostate church is set up it will have a man as its head. every organization do that.


5. you sound like a child. is this the kind of person that stands in front of people to preach? christianity was spreading all over the world. john was not adressing a hebrew and greek audience, he was adressing every beliver in christ irreective of nationality.

paul himself took the gospel to rome. rome was the capitial of civilization then just as america is now. the gospel was spreading to rome faster than any place and so rome was not left out. the roman numerals equally serve as letters. you no go school? i(1) ,ii (2), iii(3), iv(4), v(5) and so on and so forth. in does days they understood that when the antichrist comes his name in any letter will have a numerical equivalent of 666 in this case it has to be the roman numerals because rome is the fourth kingdom and the papacy has been identified as the little horn.
why would one look at greek or hebrew language for 666 , is the antichrist said to arise from greece or jerusalem ? you dont know your bible.

Please it's okay. I don't think you fit into my space. Constantly saying what I never said and presenting yourself as though you're in a fight.

I need intelligent and and mature presentations. Thanks for your time.

EMILO2STAY:
you clearly made an assumption when there is no need or reason to, the fact is that you said it. why are you dragging unnecessarily.

It was not an assertion. It was a question of whether you're JW or not.

EMILO2STAY:
oga leave matter you directly put words in my mouth when my monica never made such statement . the fact is it is what you said and i have shown it to you. so leave matter

I know you'll remain obstinate without minding the clarifications. I addressed it for the record and not purposely for you.

EMILO2STAY:
25 years in pastoral ministry and you still dont know biblical truth. there is nothing in your post I have not countered as a matter of fact you have not countered mine instead your beating about the bush. pauls anm of sin is same as as the little horn of daniel 7. beciase they both blasphem and usurped the position of God

daniel 7 gives an insight into what the beast is and that is a kingdom with a man ruling if you agree this kingdom / system is already inexistence then you also know that the man ruling there is the eyes and mouth of that little horn the same as the man of sin this system is refered to as the beast in bible prophecy because it took over from the fourth beast amd used its political power. the beast is not a person per say how many times do i have to prove that with scripture?

this beast described by John in revelation is nothing but the office of the papacy which is still same as mystry babylon. this babylonian system as at the time of johns revelation was and is not but is to come. meaning the babylonian system was inexisted before johns times during of there political power and as at the time of the revelation is not in existence becuase babylon is no more but is to come in the near future through the papacy who have assimilated the babylonian culture through rome because the priests of babylon ran to rome at the fall if babylon and they ran to a place called pagamos in rome which the bible called the sit of satan. rome incooperated this practices into there religious system and that is how the vatican got it. now do you understand why it is called mystery babylon?

notice the beast embodies the features of other beast before it read it again. this simply means it incooperates the pagan practicies of the kingdsoms before him all the way up to babylon meaning its pagan practice goes back to babylon which is why it is called mystry babylon. same as the harlot. you should know how to interpret biblical symbolism but i see that your 25 years in the ministry is in futility because you do not recognize that your church is part of the babylonian system the bibile says come out of her my people which is still referring to the same system not a person. your ego as a pastor is the reason why you are ignoring the things I write and counter with empty words that prove nothing.

you keep proving to be ignorant of the scripture you have been preaching for 25 years daniels seventy weeks gives us an insight of prophetic times. the 70weeks where not literal but symbolic for each day for a year totaling 490years see ezekiel 4:6.And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year

the same principle is to be applied in daniel 7 to fully understand it. using this principle in daniel 7 we come to 1260 years persecutions by the little horn power when it arose out of the fourth beast. now going back to history rome is the fourth kingdom and this fourth kingdom fell in the year476 ad and the little horn power that took over this fourth kingdom is the papacy in 538ad. this was the year pope vigilus took power from the ceasers and started exercising his political authory by plucking off three kingdoms( heruli, osthrogoths and vandals) because they would not recorgnise the authority of the pope, the popes exercised this authority untill 1798 when napoleon went into the vatican and captured the pope hence the fatal wound the beast recieved but this wound was healed in 1929 when Mussolini signed the vatican concordant. make I still dey teach you in case you think its talking about a person. do your maths 1798- 538=1260 years.


every thing you said about islam beeing the antichrist is jargon. no entity fits the describtion of the antichrist like the papacy and vatican unless you have not done your home work. islam was created by the vatican in 600 Ad by the papacy through mohammeds wife and uncle both whom are roman catholics and the aim was capture jerusalem and kill north african christians who does not recognise the pope. let me stop here you know nothing the LovePeddler of babylon is said to have many daughters and islam is her first that is if you understamd the symbolism.

I never said Islam is the antichrist. I only gave an example of many conspiracy theories like your indicating our space.

I gave you some scripture. Tackle only those scriptures. Quote them and explain the following:

1. The Bible says two people were cast into the lake of fire. Why did the bible make the antichrist abd the beast 2 people?

2. Who is the beast which was and is not and shall come and go into perdition? How does it fit into the papacy?

3. What do the scriptures mean by the statement "It is a man's number" while referring to the number of the antichrist+ 666.

4. Simple English of John which said ", You've heard that THE ANTICHRIST IS coming (,one man is coming) but even now, MANY ANTICHRISTS (many men) are already among us. You might need to give this passage to an English Language specialist to analyze for you.

5. Why would John refer to a Latin name as 666 when he was addressing a Greek and Hebrew audience? I mean that the number 666 is referenced to a Greek name. Ancient Greeks associate names with numbers. The audience of John fully understood who he was referring to.

Let me see your response to the 5 questions above. Line by line as simplified for you up there. I have several over questions that challenge your position but I'll limit it to 5 for now.

EMILO2STAY:
whats the difference? there was actually no reason at all to call me that, besides you said I should show you where you made such statement and the fact is you indeed made such statemnet if this where in a court of law you think your rejoinder prove anything?..' you actially really have no shame

Even if it was a court case, I never inferred that you made a direct statement. Courts would look at context which you ignored. A certain JW was supporting your posts and mentioning me. That made me think you're brothers.

EMILO2STAY:
look at the base of your post at the bolded. are you mentally unstable or what? you see why I said you pretend and live in denial too much abeg carry your wahala dey go. I never knew I was dealing with a mentally unstable person.

Did you see the rejoinder that says "or are you not a JW?" Meaning you JWs say Jesus came in 1914. That statement therefore did not refer to you as a person but to JW as a group. Then I went further to say "if you are not a JW, I am surprised where you got all those craps from." After you said you are not a JW, a sensible person would no longer hold that word as referring to you. the statement came with a condition. You left the condition and held on to the statement. I might stop interacting with you because I don't think I'm dealing with someone worthy of my time.

EMILO2STAY:
on the contrary you go by public opinion and you dont know the bible. the doctrine you believe is called futurism and it follows the pretribulation rapture doctrine which is a false doctrine that arose at the wake of the reformation.see the proof below that you are ignoring I can also give you more..

In the late Middle Ages and the Protestant Reformation, some commentators sought
to identify the Antichrist with the Pope, so that figures from the Book of Revelation might not only be interpreted as representing figures in the past
(such as the Emperor Nero) or in the future (in the Last Days), but also in the present. Ribera in 1585 began writing a 500-page commentary on the Book of Revelation, titled
In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarii, proposing that the first chapters of the Apocalypse applied to ancient pagan Rome, and the rest referred to a yet future period of 3½ literal years, immediately prior to the second coming. During that time, the Roman Catholic Church would have fallen away from the pope into apostasy . Then, he proposed, the Antichrist, a single individual, would:

Persecute and blaspheme the saints of God

Rebuild the temple in Jerusalem

Abolish the Christian religion

Deny Jesus Christ

Destroy Rome

Be received by the Jews

Pretend to be God

Kill the two witnesses of God

Conquer the world.

-- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Ribera
the above shows you are following public opinion and your assertions are not your own



you have shown great ignorance by saying history is anti scripture I wonder if you are twleve years old. the bible itself is a book of history and you cant seperate the two.
the prophecies of daniel cannot be understood without going back in time through history to understand and unravel it.

in daniel 7, daniel chronicled a list of nations to come one after the other starting from babylon so in other to understand that prophecy a good bible student would go back in time and investigate events leading up to present time. yiur actually showing dumbness I cant beleive this!!..

you are still grasping at straws by quoting 2 thessalonians2 and 1 john 2:18 which I have adressed. now let me say it again in case you didnt get.

paul and john speaking with the same spirirt are refering to the same thing and same event and the proof lies in the fact that they are both speaking of an antichrist and a falling away. 2 thessalonians 2: 3 let no man decieve you you for that day will not come except a falling away (apostasia) comes first and that man of sin be revealed.

from the above verse we can see that it is the apostasia that revealed the antichrist. now lets go to john;

They went out from us, (apostasia)but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made MANIFEST that they were not all of us.
-- 1 John 2:19



did you notice the word manifest? in other words john is saying that an apostatsia is to happen for the antichrist to manisfest that is to show that they are not of the true church these goes to show these men are speaking of the same thing and same entity. there are no two antichrist any good bible student knows that. the plural word in johns writing is referring to the same entity and we know this by reading 18-19 of the verse to understand what he is talking about because john used the word "they" which is still plural to refer to the same entity. so this is talking of a system and an organization.

in case you dont know the last days started since the time of christ. even 1 john 2;18 said we are in the last days because the antichrist has come you dont know your bible at all but let me continue teaching you for free.


your problem is understanding and that comes from the fact that you dont study and comprehend the bible. yes paul said the man of sin but is paul referring to just one single powerful super bad guy in the future? the answer is no and the proof lies in daniel 7; 8 , "I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.
-- Daniel 7:8

from the above scripture we see here that daniel says the little horn has the eyes and mouth of a man but is daniel pointing to just one man in the future? this is when a good bible student willl do their investigation. now let me school you proper. the first image of a lion was babylon and after babylon came greece amd after greece came rome. see scripture below

Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
-- Daniel 7:23

now we can only know the fourth kingdom if we go back to history to find out. now history has it that rome took over from greece who took over from medo persia who took over from babylon. so history is in perfect agreement with the bible that rome is the fourth kingdom.

now see what the bible said again below

And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
-- Daniel 7:24


it is now clear from the above scripture that this little horn that arose after these ten kings is a political power with a kingdom meaning a system by with an office by which it acts or assumes power. from this we know that this man who persecutes the saints and blasphems God is a king/ kingdom just as the bible says. in otherwords the bible implies the antichrist is working through system / an office or a postion in a system and that is where the power lies. understanding is key. the bible also says this same horn persecuted the saints for 3.5 prophetic years which is 1260 literal years and no man lives that long but let me stop there.

so we can now see that ths little horn is a political power by which men assume a top position to assume power. in that case the antichrist is not just a single man that is to come at the end of time but but an entity by which men assumes a position to act as antichrist simple.


the beast that was capture along with the false prophet is not a singular person but a system/political entity . you are greatly mistaken when you say the beast is a man. it show your level of ignorance. the biblical interpretation of a beast in prophecy is a political nation. just as we see it in daniel 7. the beast is talking of a nation and in this case it is talking of the metamorphosed beast which is still same as the little horn kingdom antichrist system. notice the beast embodies all the charateristics of the former beasts before it in daniel 7 all the way to babylon. which is why the bible calls it mystery babylon notice the angel said in revelation 17:15 that the waters which you saw the beast arose from are peoples multupitudes and tongues. this indicates that these are symbolical representaion and not literal. so they have an underlying meaning. oga you dey goof ohh.


and if the beast is a symbolical representation of a political kingdom then his image will also be a political kingdom and not a literal image as you think so you are wrong.

so far with both scripture amd historical proof we can see that the beast, the little horn with eyes and mouth of a man is not is not just talking of one singular super bad guy to come in the future but an entity and system or political kingdom which is already present with the man already assumed his position of antichrist and succeded by another upon death in office these men take upon them the title of the vicar of thesupon assumption of office which is vicar if the son of God and the numerical equivalent of the tittle is = Vicarius=112 · Filii=53 · Dei=501 =666, other words the antichrist is already here

My friend, you are just ranting and seeking a fight but you won't get one.

I didn't insert my own words! Everything I posted earlier was pure scripture. Take those scriptures and counter me one after the other. Tell me that those scriptures didn't say what I said they said. That's how to debate. Quote the public opinion I inserted into that post if you can dare find one. Prove that my interpretation of those scriptures are wrong, and give your own interpretation in its place in a very organized manner. I wouldn't listen to stories. All those stories you are telling hold no water.

For your information, it is not only the history and title of the papacy that have been used as basis for saying the antichrist has come. I read a similar conspiracy theory here on Nairaland not long ago where Islam was propounded as the antichrist. They accurately calculated the number of Mohammed's name to give 666. They historically earmarked the 10 nations and the little horn. The compiled a list of persecutions from Islam and even proved the blasphemies of Islam while dissecting the Kaaba, and proved that Islam has fulfilled the prophecy of the antichrist. They spewed the same nonsense you are spewing now, bragging on historical facts that explicitly contradicted the Bible. Did I say that History is anti-scripture? You don't read to comprehend? Would you quote where I said that? I said the historical past you have been relaying is anti-scripture because they didn't tally with Bible prophecy. You are just forcing your own narration into the scriptures blindly.

Did I tell you that I read a book in the year 1997 where the Computer was said to be the antichrist? They calculated the number too, and it was 666. By taking the letters A - Z, with A assigned the number 6 and B, 12, C 18 in an arithmetic progression, COMPUTER has its numbers added together to make 666. See attached screenshot. On this link here too, someone argued that it is E-trade Mark and even went ahead to compute its number also as 666: https://www.nairaland.com/4356211/mark-beast-666-computer-technology. Vicarius Filii Dei is Latin, and the Apostle John was referring to a Greek name because as it is, John and his audience knew no Latin. He went ahead to tell his Greek and Hebrew readers "Let everyone that reads understand the number of 'HIS name' for it is ' A MAN's number'." How will John tell Greek and Hebrew readers to understand a Latin name and assign numbers to it? Everyone is just having his own story to tell but when they're brought under scriptural scrutiny, just like your stories, they fall flat. Some have even used the names of Nero and Caligula and translated them to 666. Even the title "Augustus.'

A distinguishing feature of the antichrist is described in Revelation 17:8 :

"The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and yet will come up out of the Abyss and go to its destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because it once was, now is not, and yet will come.

The papacy had being, ceased to be, came out of the abyss and is going to its destruction, isn't it? Do you even notice that John used a future tense "and yet will come out of the abyss" even though he had previously written that antichrist (plural) are already among us. John showed clearly that the antichrists (plural) are different from the antichrist (singular). While the antichrist[b]s[/b] are already among us, the antichrist is still future. He has been, has ceased to be, and would be again and go into destruction. The papacy did not not fulfil any dot of this feature.

The beast that was captured along with the antichrist is an entity, yet the scripture says, the beast along with the false prophets made the two people that were cast into the lake of fire: Revelation 19:20.

CSB
"But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur."

NIV
"But the beast was taken prisoner, and along with it the false prophet, who had performed the signs in its presence. He deceived those who accepted the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image with these signs. Both of them were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur."

3.5 Prophetic years is 3.5 literal years. Where did you get your 1260 years from?

I am more than 25yrs in the pastoral ministry. I am not a baby Christian. Neither am I new to all these things you are saying up there. all I want from you is solid scriptural exposition. Honestly, yourb posts so far are not scripturally balanced. Please organize your post when replying. Disorganized writing can be so boring to read.

EMILO2STAY:
pls stop forming what ever you think yiur are fpr me I have seen you form what ever you are. na you come be the sound believer falsely accusing me of saying christ came in 1914. pls just shut your trap mr gentle man indeed.


I talk about disgrace because you pretend not to see your own shortcomings and mistakes you make. did you not call apostasia the love of many waxing cold?
you pretend not to see evidence and evade questions.

I have been the one actaully debating in a healthy manner with point to point explanations with evidence. but you where busy ignoring and falsely acussing me of things I never said.

Quote where I said you said that Christ came in 1914. You have reading comprehension Issues.

I first asked if you're a JW. The JW believe Christ came in 1914. I was only using that to know where you were coming from.

You're very unrefined. Debating in a healthy manner? Lol. From the start you put yourself in a position of a fighter. Always looking for fights. Rolling out insults without being provoked. Proud and arrogant. Why are you like that?

EMILO2STAY:
there is nothing left for you to present anymore. if you doubt me. bring it on tonight I am waiting. you had your chance you didnt present nothing. wetin you wan come form again.. the two topics you presented have already been addressed by me with historical and biblical proofs but if you want your second round of disgrace then come back tonight

There is one thing about me. I am aware that many errors were passed down to us from Roman Catholicism. Infact many practices of protestantism are still not biblical As a result, I do not go by public opinion on Christian doctrines. I study the word for myself to know what the Bible says. If your doctrine cannot stand the test of scripture, then I discard it. Unfortunately, all your postions are anti-scripture. You are looking at history to justify anti-scriptural positions. The Bible has the final say in our matters. Not history or some supposed documents found online.

Now, let's find out from the Word of God whether the Antichrist is a system or a person. Whether he has already come or he is still future. And whether the Temple in question is a physical or spiritual temple.

Let's look into some relevant scriptures:
1. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4:

"3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God."

First, you must realize that the emergence of the antichrist is a 'Last Days' event. The events of the end of time. That is why John said "Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming...," 1John 2:18. It is a last days event. Did John say that the very antichrist has already come? No! Let's examine what he said further: "so now many antichrists have come." From John's words, we have two entities: 1. The antichrist whom we heard is coming 2. Many antichrists that have now come. Take note of the two words used "antichrist" - singular that is coming. "antichrists" - plural that have now come. By the sighting of the "antichrists" John thought that the 'antichrist' would soon appear. So, he said, "we are in the last days." Almost 2,000yrs have passed since John wrote those words. You and I know that John and his contemporaries were not in the last days as they thought. Paul clarified it saying in the scripture first quoted above, "Don't be alarmed by anyone's preaching. That man would not come until there is a falling away." Interestingly, Paul was a contemporary of John. While John thought that the antichrist would soon be revealed, Paul cleared the air that he is still future even though he was aware that antichrists were already in the world.

John said "The antichrist is coming", Paul said "THE MAN" of lawlessness shall be revealed. We have no reference here to "The Men" of sin whom you call the Popes. Instead, we have THE MAN of sin. In the Book of Revelation, John said in 13:18 "This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of A Man, and his number is 666. It is not the number of some men but of A Man. He didn't say "Their number" but "his" number. You need to explain beyond reasonable doubt why A Man and His Number would become a system or a group of men.

Then comes Revelation 19:20
"Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence(in the presence of the beast), by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone”

You can see clearly in the above scripture that the beast is a person. He was captured, and "with him" the false prophet. The scriptures says "These two" (the beast and the false prophet} were thrown alive into the lake of fire. The beast (1 man), plus the false prophet (1 man), = 2 people cast into the lake of fire. Tell me how the addition of the beast to the false prophet = 2 men if the beast is the Popes. The Popes actually have many images but the antichrist has only one image. His own very image. This the Popes don't have.

For smoother interaction, let's first discuss this part of him being one man. Then other parts later.

EMILO2STAY:
there is nothing left for you to present anymore. if you doubt me. bring it on tonight I am waiting. you had your chance you didnt present nothing. wetin you wan come form again.. the two topics you presented have already been addressed by me with historical and biblical proofs but if you want your second round of disgrace then come back tonight

I don't think I'm talking with a sound believer. Also, you must be very immature to think that a debate is a fight. What disgrace are you talking about? I am a gentleman. I do not mean to disgrace you but to present what you can learn from me while I also learn from you. You're just too awkward. I have tried to subtly call you to order to no avail. I.engage in healthy debates. Not unnecessary banters. If I learn any new thing from you, I'll commend you and appreciate you. That's me, that's a mature way to debate. And if I dismantle your ignorance, I'll still address you honorably. Not your kiddish puffed up arrogance debating in hopes of disgracing another. You're so unrefined.

EMILO2STAY:
those who read our debat can clearly see who is unintelligent.
you cannot address my assertions point by point yet this is what I do with both historical proof and scriptural proof.

all what you have said here is nothing but empty words with no substance nor evidence backed by history or scriptural fact just emptiness of words and rants.


look at a man who does not even understand APOSTASY.

I dont need to know you in person but I have weighed you through your reply and have seen that your not an intelligent person neither do you have a comprehensive knowledge about what your talking about and thats why I said you are not on my level.


I gave you proof both scriptural and historical. I have asked you to do same even asked you questions of which you are dodging. I have seen that your just a waste of my time I taught I was arguing with an intelligent person what a mistake.
let me give you a proper definition of pride and ego: it is the purposeful neglect and rejection of the truth right in front of your face and refusing to accept correction and lesson while pretending to still know it all even without present any evidence. this is the typical case with you


what a funny person you asked me a qeustion and even anwered your self therefor prooving your own flaws by yourself and you have the guts to call me confused when you are the definition of confused. just take a look at the bolded words in your post above. you said I should show you where you said the antichrist is a system headed by a man yet at the base of you post you still admitted it is a system headed by a man. lol confused man.


for your info every thing you have typed up there is empty with no proof no fact empty words of nothingness. pls try and address my posts point by point the way I am doing it

Tonight, I'll create time for you okay.

I don't need all the stories you're telling. I'll take you from scripture to scripture to debunk your lies.

Of course, those reading us know who's unintelligent and ignorantly boastful. Even telling disjointed stories that interest no one neither are they in any way connected to the subject matter.

Did I say I have typed or resounded anything yet? Did you not read that I don't even read your posts? Why are you not seeing that I told you clearly that I'm currently busy? This is the sane way you read your bible to come up with those jargons you're so proud about. Reading without comprehending. I have not posted anything yet. And I already told you that clearly.

Even at this moment, I only read the first and last paragraph of your post. No time right now. So, wait till night.

The important things I'll iron out with you tonight are:

1. Is the antichrist a person or a system?

2. Has he already come or is he in the future?

Those are the only issues I have with you. Any other thing you're saying is irrelevant.

EMILO2STAY:
look I am not in your level for your info. and I know I have schooled you enough for you for you to admiit that the antichrist isnt just a man but a system headed by a man.

there is no devil incarnate to come in the future. the devil incarnate are in the popes who assume the office of the vicar of christ. this is bible truth and the position of the reformers. also you must be very ignorant to think that john was talking about a falling away that will happen in jerusalem. christianity was spreading fast and it got to rome even during the time of the apostles. and the apostles understood that the falling away and corruption of the church will not happen in jerusalem but in rome the headquaters of world corruption

see the definition of apostasia again in case you dont understand; "APOSTASY is the formal disaffiliation from, abandonment of, or renunciation of a religion by a person. It can also be defined within the broader context of embracing an opinion that is contrary to one's previous religious beliefs.-- Wikipedia

from the above have you seen that you are wrong to think it has to do with peoples love waxing cold !! can you see your own ignorance now. are you seeing your disgrace? pls feel ashamed small nahh..

let me also educate you for free again; the doctrine you believe is known as futurism proposed by a catholic jesuit known as francisco ribera in 1585. this was in the wake of the protestant reformation by Martin luther and other reformers who called the office of the papacy the antichrist. this has been the views of the early christians from the time of the apostles until 1585. these below are excerpts from wikipedia its not even hidden


In the late Middle Ages and the Protestant Reformation, some commentators sought
to identify the Antichrist with the Pope, so that figures from the Book of Revelation might not only be interpreted as representing figures in the past (such as the Emperor
Nero) or in the future (in the Last Days), but also in the present. Ribera in 1585 began writing a 500-page commentary on the Book of Revelation, titled In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarii, proposing that the first chapters of the Apocalypse applied to ancient pagan Rome, and the rest referred to a yet future period of 3½ literal years, immediately prior to the second coming. During that time, the Roman Catholic Church would have fallen away from the pope into apostasy . Then, he proposed, the Antichrist, a single individual, would:

Persecute and blaspheme the saints of God

Rebuild the temple in Jerusalem

Abolish the Christian religion

Deny Jesus Christ

Destroy Rome

Be received by the Jews

Pretend to be God

Kill the two witnesses of God

Conquer the world.

-- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Ribera

this view follows the dispensational eschatological view which holds that the jews have a different programe of salvation and that there eyes will be opened when the antichrist breaks his covenant with them. all these are false doctrine of the jesuit. just to take away fingers pointing to the papacy as antichrist and they have succeeded with people like you believing it .

I can school you for free every day and twice on sunday. my previouse questions still stands. you have not attempted them lol.. nah me you wan form for lol you never start. bring it on let me see what you got.

and yes I have thought you that the antichrist has come already if not tell me the significance of the little horns eyes and mouth and if it has arisen out of the beast or not and prove it with history and the bible I am waiting patiently.


pls I am not a jw, you are now showing weakness by putting words in my mouth and lying against me. where did I say christ came in 1914. I thought I was talking to a reasonable human beign

The first way to know an heretic is by his pride and bloated ego. You don't know me, yet you boast yourself to be someone not in the level of an individual you know nothing about. Is that not plain arrogance? Very demonically induced pride.

I have pointed out your errors. Honestly, if not due to the volume of tasks on my table which make me read hastily and post hastily, I would have matched several points with scriptures upon scriptures to expose your foolishness. Just give me time, I'll come for you once I'm free.

Did I say that the antichrist is a system headed by a man? Quote where I said that!

My position is that there's a system. An antichrist system. Infact, the entire unbelieving world is an antichrist system . Anything anti-God is antichrist. But then, there's a system headed by The Antichrist. The system is different from the antichrist. The system is currently at work right now in the world. In its appointment time, the antichrist would be revealed. He heads the system.

There are so many flaws in your argument. My usual way of countering unbalanced information here on Nairaland is to quote you and counter, or produce screenshots of relevant sections of your quotes and counter them one after the other.

Frankly speaking, your posts and arguments appear unintelligent. I'm not used to making such comments as this when I see such flaws in people but I detest proud individuals and have no iota of respect for them.

Yeah, by saying you appear unintelligent, I'm talking what's obvious without intending any pune. Take for example your contradictory assertion that the Antichrist was the ones John referred to in 1John 2:19, and then join it to another assertion of yours that the collapse of Rome paved way for the emergence of the antichrist. Since you do not know how to separate the system of the antichrist from the person of the antichrist, you're automatically saying that the antichrist appeared even in the days of John, and again appeared after the fall of Rome. Lol. That's just one out of many. Go back and read yourself, reorganize your thoughts, become humble and be open minded. I'm doing the same. Stop being childish. Arguing and boasting at the same time is the Hallmark of childishness. Even if you know more than anyone, present yourself maturely, leave the commendation to your listeners. If you don't know this by now, I guess I'm chatting with a kid.

I've read only the first paragraphs of your post. I don't know what you said in the other parts. No time to read everything right now. I'll create the time later on. I'll respond to you comprehensively in one single post. But for now, understand my English thus:

There's an antichrist system headed by a man. There's a system and there's a man. The system is already in the world but the man is still future. He'll emerge out of the system to rule the world. He's the man of sin. His name is given in numerals. The Bible says 'Calculate the number of his name.' The number is 666. He's one man. Not a system. A devil incarnate. Satan's christ. In one single post, I'll be back to prove this position beyond reasonable doubt.

EMILO2STAY:
you should be ashamed to call me confused because you are the confused one. and you have shown it. your lack of comprehension is making you confused. the information I give is heavy for to comprehend and thtas why you call me confused.

you cant deny that you have learned a lot from you should see it as a privilege.

show me where I said that the falling away is the fall of rome? I am waing pls dont fail
you dont understand simple things and that is because you lack basic knowledge of history.
I said the falling away is the departure of the apostate church from the true church. and this apostate church would gain power at the fall of rome. I have proven this times and again through the book of daniel 7.

you are obviously the confused one, so according to you john has a different antichrist and paul has his own antichrist.. can you see that you lack simple understanding. a man who does not know that the bible writers are speaking through one spirirt and they are saying the same.

let me ask you are there two antichrist? and where did the bible mention them. I am waiting.

antiochus epiphanes was a greek and not a roman. your see your lack of undesstanding?
antiochus did not persecute the saints. antiochus did not change the commanment of God, anticohus did not put himself in place of christ. antiochus did not rule the world.

the book of daniel said the antichrist will arise from rome in daniel 7 so mr you are wrong.

pls today is sunday I am ready for you . I have already shown you enough evidence that you cannot help but agree with me that the antichrist is a system headed by a man.
I wll also make agree with me today in the end so I am waiting.

Lol

I have not been readings.your posts, just gleaming through. I'm very busy at the moment. My responses may not be comprehensive, and may not address your points headlong but I have done my best to let you know that there's a system and there's a man. While you think that the system is the anti, I'm making you know that there's a man in the system. A devil-incarnate. Satan's last card. I'll find time today to school you.

The Roman Catholic church started in Rome. It wasn't even part of the antichrists John was talking about. I've not been fully reading your posts but today I'll try to read and respond. I'm in one of my very busy days, additional I got discouraged reading your texts when you were writing in all smalls letters, with no order.

What do you think you're saying that I should learn from? That the Antichrist has already come? Lol. The same way you said the Jesus came in 1914 - or are you not a JW? If you're not a JW, I'm surprised where you got all those craps from.

EMILO2STAY:
lol seeing you agree that the antichrist is a system yet disagree it is a positon occupied by other men is quit contradictory so you are the one contradicting your self.
I am actually teaching and not arguing with you. I believe you have learned from arguing with me even though you will deny it.

I am not arguing that the antichrist is not a person but I am saying that the antichrist has to do with a system than a person which is why I said it is a system with a man at the top and you disagree

if you believe the little horn of Daniel 7 is the system of the antichrist yet believe the antichrist has not emerged then you contradict yourself and disagree with the bible.


the bible refers to the little horn with eyes and mouth of a man as the one blapheming God, persecuting the saints, changing times and laws and all these has already happend. do you thing all these will be done by a man in the future? if you do then you have kbpw kbowledge of history. the man occupying the sit of the papacy will be the son of perdition. the antichrist has already emerged.



even martin Luther the refomer and the host of others called the papacy the sit of the antichrist.
you they learn work. you dont know history .

You're confused. From day one I.have posited that there's a system and there's a man. It seems you're a JW. I can understand where the heresy is coming from.

Even the falling away mentioned in 2Thess 2, you interpreted it as the fall of Rome. Then later you interpreted it as few brothers leaving the church. You called those guys the antichrist. Meanwhile, they were not part of the Roman Catholic whose popes you also called the antichrist. According to you, those whom John referred to are the antichrist. Centuries later, Popes emerged, you called them too the antichrist. How can someone be so confused?

Hopefully today or tomorrow I'll have your time. I don't have time right now. That's why you still have mouth to brag.

A single man has done all those things before in the past on a small scale - Antiochus Epiphanes. So, why can't another single man do it again in the future? Anyone who heads a government as vast as his can do any of those things you're doubting. I just have to take you from scripture to scripture.

EMILO2STAY:
you are the confused one. I have maintained from the start that the antichrist a system headed by a man. you are the one arguing that it is just a single man in the future. well you have finally agreed with me that its a system headed by a man. you are the confused one.

since you now admit that daniel 7 is taliking about a system, let me ask you what is the significance of the eyes and mouth of the little horn and has the little horn emerged?


notice you are now slowly agreeing with me in everything I said but yet have not been able to prove all you have said so far. such as the antichrist coming to bring peace in the niddle east and sitting in a rebuilt temple
I am waiting.

You're the one contradicting yourself. I do not agree that the antichrist has already emerged. He's still future. The benefit you have is that I really don't have time right now. I'm just coming online today very briefly. Perhaps tomorrow.

I have shown you scriptures already that the Antichrist is a person. To this, all christians worldwide agree. It's even funny that you're equating what John said about antichrists being in the world already to be the same thing as the antichrist. Can't you different between antichrists and the antichrist? Or what type of Eschatology are you doing? The antichrist is the head of a system of antichrists. What's hard in that?

EMILO2STAY:
I can see you have no other line of defence nor fact to prove your point. the time of the antichrist has already come. the bible revealed it a long time ago in the book of daniel. unless you diagree with the bible. then invent your own antichrist.

I asked you a question, if you are honest about your belief then answer it.

oga daniel 7 clearly tells you this system has a mans eyes and mouth
speaking great things blaspheming God and persecuting the saints do you
thinks this is talking of a particular man? or a system with a man positioned
at the top.? answer this question.!!

let me also ask you another one.
has the little horn of daniel with eyes and mouth emerged?




every thing you believe about the antichrist you cannot prove with the scriptures yet you call me confused. you are the confused one running from pullar to post..

I don't even have the time for unnecessary arguments.

You have said it in your confusion that the antichrist heads a system. The word 'The' I'd a definite article pointing to something. The words it points to is singular- Antichrist. Not antichrists. There's a. Man of Sin. One man. The antichrist is more powerful than the Popes. When he emerges he would not be mistaken. All these your conspiracy theories hold no water. I have shown you facts already from scripture, and you have confessed multiple times that he is a man heading a system. Why argue with yourself?

Daniel 7 is talking about the system. The antichrist is part of the system but has a distinct individuality from the system. The problem you're having is your inability to separate the antichrist from the system of the antichrist.

EMILO2STAY:
you are now not making sense.who esle have positioned themselves in place of christ and God ? who esle has claimed to forgive sins? who else have changed the commandment of God? you have you have no argument abeg. I am teaching you I am not arguing with with you. read what I wrote again from the beginning I told you that the antichrist isnt just a system but a system headed by a man and even given scripture to prove.

the fact that the antichrist is not just a single man in the future is revealed by daniel 7s little horn and revelation 17 and 18 every thing written in those scriptures where fulfilled by a series of popes through the vatican which is a system and an organization. if you say the antichrist is a man that comes through a system them your ultimately agreeing with me which is what I have been saying since. and if that is the case then there is no way the man will just come out of no where in the future rather he comes into a position through a system and process by which other men have occupied before common sense!!

oga daniel 7 clearly tells you this system has a mans eyes and mouth speaking great things blaspheming God and persecuting the saints do you thinks this is talking of a particular man? or a system with a man positioned at the top.? answer this question.!!


the fact of the matter is that there is nothing a future anctichrist will fulfill that the popes have not done already.

You're confused.

The Antichrist would do much more than that. The time of the antichrist is trickling. Stop confusing yourself. The antichrist system is different from the antichrist himself. That's the Bible!

EMILO2STAY:
you say I am wrong? lol you are even double wrong.

the popes never gained any political promince before 538.

no one obeyed the popes above the emperors before 538. in rome the ceasears ehere seen as Gods
the title pontifex maximus was given to the popes by the cesears showing a transference of power and authority.
you are busy citing a donation that happend in 756. which has no significance here. when the popes already gained authority way back in 538ad . after which they uprooted 3 kingsoms namely the heruli osthrogoths and vandals. as daniel spoke of about the little horn.

the rest of the things you said there even though it is copy and paste has no significance here they prove nothing.


you are busy thinking a super human will come in the future ,this is because you lack understanding. satans own christ id the popes they have usurped the positon of christ already and the number of there title is 666 which is the numerical equibalent of the word vicarious filli dei go find out and stop arguing. they will put on a final show down at the of times in an effort to decieve the world again but many people will be decieved ince theu dont know that antichrist is already in there midst.

lol its funny how you now admits that the man of sin will come from a system which is what I have been saying.

this system has been in existence for over 1700 years and this system has a man as a figure head. now see the logic; if the system has been in existence for thousands of years does it mean it has one and same man as the figure head for thousands of years? you see how you lack understanding.

I told you its a system with a amn at the top and there is a succesion that follows in other to keep this position going. so in other words it not about a man but system or organization.

the persecutoon of the saints of God by the vatican lasted for over a thousasnd years was it done by one man?

the usurpation of the position of God and son of God in he vatican was it done by one man?

the blasphemy of God by the catholic church was it done by one man ?


this is why the book of revelation spoke of this system as a city. notice that this city doomed to the wrath of God so also is the man of sin doom to the wrath of God so also is the little horn doomed to the wrath of God all these are one and same thing.

pray for understanding.

Is sit only the Catholics that blaspheme God? If you would judge with that, then everybody who blasphemes God is the antichrist. I think you just love unnecessary arguments. After admitting that the antichrist is the one man head of a system and not a system, what further argument do we need? Is that not in tandem with my position already? The antichrist is the head of a system. There is one man at the end of time regardless of whatever antichrist practices existed before him that is explicitly referred to as the man of sin. Many have betrayed Christ but not everyone is called the son of perdition except Judas Iscariot. Many are antichrists but not everyone is The Antichrist except The MAN OF SIN. Note, not The Men of Sin. That's clear enough.