PDA

View Full Version : Who was the first human antichrist?



dialm
April 14th, 2016, 06:16 PM
You may be surprised.

(Ground rules for posting:
1 no misspelling
2 no guys with girl names allowed
3 girls are ok if they keep silent
4 no OSAS)

Nick M
April 14th, 2016, 06:41 PM
Gerald?

Flaminggg
April 14th, 2016, 07:36 PM
The Answer is Lazarus: Before there could be an "Express Image of Jesus, as a representative of - Joseph the Blessing", there had to first be a Jesus Incarnated. Lazarus does not go to Heaven, he goes into Abraham's Bosom, a picture of the "Manchild that marks the Ascension of Mankind, which is the Child that God promised to Abraham's Wife, Sarai, because she was Barren and without - Joseph the Blessing". ... ... ... ... The Title of "Express Image of Jesus", can only belong to the Antichrist of Revelation, however, Lazarus rose before Christ rose, that is how revelation is structured, first the Antichrist - "Condemns many then Rewards Many, for Jesus (Luke 2:34)", then God/Jesus completes the judgment program altogether. ... ... ... ... Lazarus did not confirm the covenant between the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit, by giving a law to bestow - "Joseph the Blessing", this is carried out with the Antichrist of Revelation. ... ... ... ... Mark of the Beast is 666 = More than 99.9 percent of human life on earth will be terminated with no inheritance, this is true for the entire summation of the Gospel's Program ... ... ... ... we are viewing a very small geographic area and people, thus "City of Philadelphia" can be construed as literal, however, we must keep watch as we will pass the point of no return, when God violates his law, by not acting in a parallel length of time, for such a "Sign of Antipas/Antiparticle/Divorce", after that, God will not introduce a New Law by providing a Sign for a variation of time, God is not giving a new law, we must keep watch and wait for the "Three Days of Darkness". (even though we are not yet past the point of no return for Antipas, 4/17/2016, we do have a 10 hour walk tomorrow). (Jesus was incarnated twice, once before time began, and once after time began ... ... ... ... the Antichrist was incarnated twice, once as the "Rod/Staff of Moses", and once at the end of time ... ... ... ... if the Antichrist is a angel or a fallen angel, then he would also exist outside of time originally like Jesus, so the argument is paralleled).

patrick jane
April 14th, 2016, 09:29 PM
You may be surprised.

(Ground rules for posting:
1 no misspelling
2 no guys with girl names allowed
3 girls are ok if they keep silent
4 no OSAS)
Some loser named dialm ?

Bradley D
April 14th, 2016, 10:17 PM
Anyone who denies Christ is an antichrist. Where does it say that Lazarus denied Christ?

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son" (1 John 2:22).

Crucible
April 14th, 2016, 10:35 PM
Emperor Nero

The early Christians had to be careful not to have the Roman authorities know about their dealings, which is why Revelation is so symbolic- anyone with literature speaking against Rome or it's emperor would've been killed.

666, or 616, were the cryptic numbers for his name. Rome was extremely Babylonian in it's insignia, belief, and structure at the time.

Grosnick Marowbe
April 14th, 2016, 11:54 PM
Louie Petunia?

dialm
April 14th, 2016, 11:55 PM
Nick,

If you mean Gerald Ford then I would say that the antichrist is part political.

If you mean Geraldo Rivero then I would say the antichrist is part actor.

Grosnick Marowbe
April 14th, 2016, 11:55 PM
I love your imbecilic threads. Please provide an excess amount of them?

dialm
April 14th, 2016, 11:56 PM
Flaminggg,

The antichrist has to be someone close to the Lord.

Grosnick Marowbe
April 14th, 2016, 11:57 PM
Nick,

If you mean Gerald Ford then I would say that the antichrist is part political.

If you mean Geraldo Rivero then I would say the antichrist is part actor.

Do you think it might have been Groucho Marx? My best guess would have to be, Shemp Howard?

dialm
April 14th, 2016, 11:58 PM
Bradley,

Good answer. But we are looking for an actual historical person who can be identified.

Grosnick Marowbe
April 15th, 2016, 12:00 AM
Emperor Nero

The early Christians had to be careful not to have the Roman authorities know about their dealings, which is why Revelation is so symbolic- anyone with literature speaking against Rome or it's emperor would've been killed.

666, or 616, were the cryptic numbers for his name. Rome was extremely Babylonian in it's insignia, belief, and structure at the time.

Nah, he fiddled while Rome burned. Remember your history? Most likely not?

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 12:01 AM
Crucible,

Nero wore out the saints. Very bad guy of that we can be sure.

Here is something. In the book of Foxx, the author claims that a certain Ceasar before Nero was introduced to Christ and became a believer.

Grosnick Marowbe
April 15th, 2016, 12:02 AM
Dialm, I hardly think you have a clue? You're not that bright. If you don't believe it, ask me?

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 12:03 AM
Grosnic,

Grosnic and Old Lace. It has a certain ring. Don't you agree?

Grosnick Marowbe
April 15th, 2016, 12:05 AM
Grosnic,

Grosnic and Old Lace. It has a certain ring. Don't you agree?

I rather like: Dialm4moron for you.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 12:07 AM
Janie,

The Supreme Court gives its blessing on a certain type of marriage. That to me is an act of the antichrist.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 12:19 AM
Don't get mad Grosnic. I'm agreeing with you that the antichrist is poisonous person.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 05:54 AM
Yeah so ah, the Protestants, of whom I am one have historically tag the Pope, whom ever he was at the time the accusation was made as being the antichrist. And maybe they were/are right. Certainly Martin Luther knew what he was talking about. Myself, I like a few of the past Popes.

Take pope Gregory. Now that guy was a real Pope.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 05:57 AM
But this thread is looking for Alpha antichrist. The Popes are Johnny come late when deciding that.

chrysostom
April 15th, 2016, 05:58 AM
Yeah so ah, the Protestants, of whom I am one have historically tag the Pope, whom ever he was at the time the accusation was made as being the antichrist.

so many do not understand what antichrist means

TulipBee
April 15th, 2016, 06:43 AM
You may be surprised.

(Ground rules for posting:
1 no misspelling
2 no guys with girl names allowed
3 girls are ok if they keep silent
4 no OSAS)
Eve

Nick M
April 15th, 2016, 06:52 AM
Nick,

If you mean Gerald Ford then I would say that the antichrist is part political.

If you mean Geraldo Rivero then I would say the antichrist is part actor.

Gerald (http://theologyonline.com/member.php?121-Gerald)

SaulToPaul
April 15th, 2016, 06:53 AM
Nimrod

SaulToPaul
April 15th, 2016, 06:57 AM
so many do not understand what antichrist means

In place of Christ.
Another good word is Vicar.

annabenedetti
April 15th, 2016, 06:58 AM
3 girls are ok if they keep silent)

You remind me of a quote I saw recently in the Saturday Evening Post, it was an excerpt from an 1866 Post editorial:

The dangers of being a bookworm, especially for girls!
Girls read too much, and think too little. . . Multifarious reading weakens the mind more than doing nothing; for it becomes a necessity at last, like smoking, and is an excuse for the mind to lie dormant, whilst thought is pouring in, and runs through, a clear stream, over unproductive gravel, on which not even mosses grow.

You're like a throwback to 1866.

:chuckle:

patrick jane
April 15th, 2016, 08:00 AM
Cain

Crucible
April 15th, 2016, 08:34 AM
so many do not understand what antichrist means

:doh:
Says the preterist who denies the ridiculously obvious description Revelation gives of the Antichrist.

Ktoyou
April 15th, 2016, 09:05 AM
You may be surprised.

(Ground rules for posting:
1 no misspelling
2 no guys with girl names allowed
3 girls are ok if they keep silent
4 no OSAS)

I see you are still acting nutty. There are too many cuckoo birds flying around TOL these days. This is why I do not post often, too many goofballs saying things they think will come across as religious, when, in fact, the attempt is to pretend to be religious, yet able to show contempt for people.

You dislike women and that is all of it! Why, I do not know? Maybe the girl you loved (lusted after) in high school thought you were not good enough for her? Maybe you were married, but resented not having a more 'attractive' wife? Maybe you cheated on her and she divorced you? :idunno:

What seems apparent is you resent women and now attempt to cover that psychological problem by cloaking it in religion. Anyway, you are a cuckoo and if I were active on TOL, I would warn you and if you did not stop it, ban you.

As it is, please know I am aware of your little game and find you a pathetic nuisance.:mmph:

Nihilo
April 15th, 2016, 09:45 AM
The man whose number is 666.

chrysostom
April 15th, 2016, 09:52 AM
The man whose number is 666.

that would be mohammed

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 10:35 AM
Ktoyou,

Sorry but a woman can't be the antichrist, not even Hilery. But keep trying as there is always Lady Luck.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 10:37 AM
Chrysostom,

You are wrong about Mohammed. The antichrist impersonates Christ. Mohammed just doesn't have that ability. But the first antichrist was very religious.

Nihilo
April 15th, 2016, 10:42 AM
that would be mohammedFrom the Scripture it looks to me anyway to be somebody else.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 10:47 AM
There is one more fact you guys are over looking concerning the antichrist.

The False Prophet

Got to have one. (Even the very first human antichrist had his false prophet.)

chrysostom
April 15th, 2016, 10:51 AM
From the Scripture it looks to me anyway to be somebody else.

based on what?

Nihilo
April 15th, 2016, 10:55 AM
based on what?Based on the other mentions in the Scripture of that number.

chrysostom
April 15th, 2016, 10:59 AM
Based on the other mentions in the Scripture of that number.

and what or who does that point to?

1Mind1Spirit
April 15th, 2016, 11:41 AM
Adam.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 11:45 AM
Stick around 1Mind1Spirit,

Have a feeling you will love my pick.

Nihilo
April 15th, 2016, 11:53 AM
and what or who does that point to?To the man whose number is 666, IMO.

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 02:38 PM
The problem with guys like Nimrod and Adam is that not enough was know about Christ to make a convincing imitation. Plus they would need motive. Adam had no motive. Nimrod had no reason to pretend to be a savior.

Here is what antichrist needs

1 the False Prophet
2 political intrigue
3 religious power
4 motive
5 opportunity
6 means

Here is an analysis of the false prophet

1 great religious potential
2 inability to rise above a certain level
3 willingness to climb up on a tiger's back
4 ability to mimick real prophets
5 luck
6 great deceptive power

I will not address the female rider as to many people here think I am a male chauvinist pig. But there are six points and all this is in the bible. As a matter of fact the first human antichrist is in the bible.

Ktoyou
April 15th, 2016, 03:54 PM
Ktoyou,

Sorry but a woman can't be the antichrist, not even Hilery. But keep trying as there is always Lady Luck.Hillary?

I did not say she was, you ignorant buzzard.

Crucible
April 15th, 2016, 04:23 PM
Ktoyou,

Sorry but a woman can't be the antichrist, not even Hilery. But keep trying as there is always Lady Luck.

Nonetheless interesting that the Bible commonly uses a whoring woman for symbolism, especially in Ezekiel and Revelation.

Revelation 17:5
Ezekiel 23:11-21

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 08:24 PM
Listen up everybody. I have been call all sorts of names. Ktoyou is just the latest. Now that I have been publicly insulted everyone should understand how sick and twisted my mind really is. And that is exactly what it takes to understand

EVIL

But not to understand it really. To explain it. I'm going to give you a sick and twisted look at the antichrist. Oh you will call me all kinds of names. Threaten me. Probably get old Sherman involved. But in the end you will come away with a whole different take on what is happening.

Good luck yea who's!

Flaminggg
April 15th, 2016, 08:26 PM
Anyone who denies Christ is an antichrist. Where does it say that Lazarus denied Christ?

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son" (1 John 2:22).

Yes and No. Jesus does not use "Joseph the Blessing" to pay for everyone's sin, because we are not designed to distinguish our spirituality in heaven (that is something God uses Jesus to do ... you are designed with freewill, this also exists outside of our realm of control in the spiritual environment in an entirely different level, this is apart of the Judgment, and Jesus not only has the right to say no, but does so for anything that constitutes Genetic Dan, and also many people according to the law). "JOHN 11:5 Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus." ............... Jesus did not just love Lazarus, because God Loves all Men but that is not the point. Jesus loved "Lazarus, Martha and Mary" together, and because of that, Jesus claimed that Lazarus denied that Jesus was the Son of God, more so than the Son of Joseph the Blessing. Love and Blessings (Nightly walk after 4/17/2016, if the level of force continues, we will repeat what happened in May 2011, that is not something I want to see happen, but what becomes necessary that will be done).

patrick jane
April 15th, 2016, 08:29 PM
Listen up everybody. I have been call all sorts of names. Ktoyou is just the latest. Now that I have been publicly insulted everyone should understand how sick and twisted my mind really is. And that is exactly what it takes to understand

EVIL

But not to understand it really. To explain it. I'm going to give you a sick and twisted look at the antichrist. Oh you will call me all kinds of names. Threaten me. Probably get old Sherman involved. But in the end you will come away with a whole different take on what is happening.

Good luck yea who's!


:allsmile:

dialm
April 15th, 2016, 08:48 PM
Don't worry Patty Jane. You are not forgotten. As a matter of fact the Supreme Court decision is in keeping with the concept of the antichrist.

The easiest and most straight forward way to enslave a people or a nation is to destroy the sanctity of

MARRIAGE

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:38 PM
Dr. Phil

patrick jane
April 15th, 2016, 09:40 PM
Eve

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:40 PM
Rush Limbaugh

patrick jane
April 15th, 2016, 09:41 PM
Don't worry Patty Jane. You are not forgotten. As a matter of fact the Supreme Court decision is in keeping with the concept of the antichrist.

The easiest and most straight forward way to enslave a people or a nation is to destroy the sanctity of

MARRIAGE
Yep, crazy boy

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:43 PM
Darth Bane

patrick jane
April 15th, 2016, 09:44 PM
Darth Bane
24013

Patrick Bateman

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:45 PM
Oprah

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:47 PM
Theodore Beza

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:48 PM
Barney

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:49 PM
Maury Povich

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:50 PM
Fred Sanford

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:50 PM
That guy on that show I hate

Epoisses
April 15th, 2016, 09:51 PM
Yea, I'm upping my post count, so what.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 05:14 AM
Thanks for hanging in there Yea Who's. But as always your genius is Genesis. As in

Genesis 49:10

We are going to use this verse to usher in the first human antichrist. But first a little book keeping.

The antichrist is two. He is

1 Satanic
2 Agnostic

The two parts have separate goals that coexist. Satan knows about God but denies Him. The Agnostic part doesn't know about god but wants too. Only thing is the Agnostic wants to know if he himself is God. The Satanic part say

YES

chrysostom
April 16th, 2016, 05:24 AM
Anyone who denies Christ is an antichrist. Where does it say that Lazarus denied Christ?

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son" (1 John 2:22).

yes
-but
-there is one who gets the big a
-and
-has over a billion followers

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 05:31 AM
You guys need an attitude adjustment. Since you guys are not Calvinists you don't have Predestination in your theology. That fact denies you of the Providence of God. All you are left with is

Lady Luck

Same with the first human antichrist.

To become Christ, the first human antichrist needed three things

1 motive
2 means
3 opportunity

The motive was provided by the people he associated with. The means and opportunity was provided by Lady Luck.

Now then, to conjure up the first human antichrist using Genesis 49:10 all one had to do was to take the Sceptre away from the House of Judah. (Not such an easy task but possible.)

patrick jane
April 16th, 2016, 05:46 AM
Thanks for hanging in there Yea Who's. But as always your genius is Genesis. As in

Genesis 49:10

We are going to use this verse to usher in the first human antichrist. But first a little book keeping.

The antichrist is two. He is

1 Satanic
2 Agnostic

The two parts have separate goals that coexist. Satan knows about God but denies Him. The Agnostic part doesn't know about god but wants too. Only thing is the Agnostic wants to know if he himself is God. The Satanic part say

YES

Do you read what you write ? it's jibberish. It makes about as much sense as a screen door on a submarine

24016

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 06:14 AM
Jannie,

The Supremme Court has clearly spoken. It says that the American Christians have been wrong for over 200 years. And the Court is threatening Christians that if they don't stop being part of the old time religion that the Court will take all the material possessions that the Christians have. Then if the Christians still resist the Court will incarcerate the Christians. If that doesn't stop the Christian resistance then capital.

The Supremme Court is the latest antichrist.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 06:16 AM
This thread could be a lot quicker if the Yea Who's would obey the ground rules for posting

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 06:34 AM
Genesis 49:10 clearly states the requirement for the Messiah to make His appearance. It is not jibberish. It clearly states that the Sceptre must be taken away from the House of Judah.

Therefore

If you want the Messiah to come it is clear what must be done. The House of David must fall.

The Levites were expert at the Law. No one knew the Law better than the Levites. They were the keepers of the Law. They wrote the Law. They wrote

Genesis 49:10

patrick jane
April 16th, 2016, 06:42 AM
Jannie,

The Supremme Court has clearly spoken. It says that the American Christians have been wrong for over 200 years. And the Court is threatening Christians that if they don't stop being part of the old time religion that the Court will take all the material possessions that the Christians have. Then if the Christians still resist the Court will incarcerate the Christians. If that doesn't stop the Christian resistance then capital.

The Supremme Court is the latest antichrist.

I agree that in the near future and happening now, that Christians are being persecuted and silenced. What can we do ?

Ben Masada
April 16th, 2016, 08:20 AM
Who was the first human Antichrist? The answer is Paul because Antisemitism started and spread from the NT. From then on, if you read II John 2:18,19, the Antichrists have come out of the ranks of Christianity. Since
the Christian church was founded by Paul, if you read Acts 11:26, it is only obvious that Paul was the first human Antichrist.

Epoisses
April 16th, 2016, 08:26 AM
Satan is the first and last antichrist. He is the only one who was in existence in the 1st century when it was penned and will be alive in the last century. The antichrist is a spiritual being seeing that John said this is the spirit of antichrist. Satan is the antichrist and those who are imbued with his spirit are the followers of antichrist.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Eph. 6:12

patrick jane
April 16th, 2016, 08:43 AM
Satan is the first and last antichrist. He is the only one who was in existence in the 1st century when it was penned and will be alive in the last century.

I thought about satan being the first but the question was the first human

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 08:44 AM
PJ,

The first sensible thing you have said to me. I'm willing to forget our past.

Ben Masada
April 16th, 2016, 08:44 AM
Genesis 49:10 clearly states the requirement for the Messiah to make His appearance. It is not jibberish. It clearly states that the Sceptre must be taken away from the House of Judah.

Therefore

If you want the Messiah to come it is clear what must be done. The House of David must fall.

The Levites were expert at the Law. No one knew the Law better than the Levites. They were the keepers of the Law. They wrote the Law. They wrote Genesis 49:10

Genesis 49:10 has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus since he is the one you mean to be the Messiah. The text is a reference to Judah the Tribe of king David which lost the Scepter of authority over all the other Tribes. That's when the Lord rejected the Tabernacle of Joseph and confirm Judah to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Psa. 78:67-69; Jer. 31:35-37)

Anyway, Jesus could have never been the Messiah because the Messiah could not be an individual. The individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a people; a nation before the Lord forever. (Ezek. 37:22) Now, for a prophetic reference to the Messiah as God's People, we have in Habakkuk 3:13. "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what the Messiah is, the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel, God's People. (Ezekiel 37:22)

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 08:45 AM
Ben,

Will you agree that the Levites are still going strong?

Epoisses
April 16th, 2016, 08:46 AM
I thought about satan being the first but the question was the first human

The first human antichrist was Eve. She fell prey to the serpent and rebelled against God.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 08:47 AM
Dp,

Satan is the driving force. But this thread is searching for someone we can get our hands on.

patrick jane
April 16th, 2016, 08:54 AM
The first human antichrist was Eve. She fell prey to the serpent and rebelled against God.
That's what I thought too, I answered Eve in the midst of funny guesses

patrick jane
April 16th, 2016, 08:55 AM
24017

Ben Masada
April 16th, 2016, 08:56 AM
Satan is the first and last antichrist. He is the only one who was in existence in the 1st century when it was penned and will be alive in the last century. The antichrist is a spiritual being seeing that John said this is the spirit of antichrist. Satan is the antichrist and those who are imbued with his spirit are the followers of antichrist.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Eph. 6:12

Since Satan does not exist as a being in reality, Paul became the one, first of all, because he founded Christianity if you read Acts 11:26 and the author of II John 2:18,19 says that the Antichrist is identified as coming out from the ranks of Christianity. Jesus was a Jew and he knew that Satan does not exist. Any reference to Satan as a real being did not come from Jesus but later from Paul. Any mention to Satan in the Tanach is purely metaphorical as a concept to illustrate the evil inclination in man.

patrick jane
April 16th, 2016, 09:01 AM
Since Satan does not exist as a being in reality, Paul became the one, first of all, because he founded Christianity if you read Acts 11:26 and the author of II John 2:18,19 says that the Antichrist is identified as coming out from the ranks of Christianity. Jesus was a Jew and he knew that Satan does not exist. Any reference to Satan as a real being did not come from Jesus but later from Paul. Any mention to Satan in the Tanach is purely metaphorical as a concept to illustrate the evil inclination in man.

What's it like being a complete idiot ?

Ben Masada
April 16th, 2016, 09:12 AM
Ben,

Will you agree that the Levites are still going strong?

No, as a matter of fact, and according to Ezekiel 37:22 the Tribe of Levy does not exist any more. Modern Jews keep the memory of the Levites on because of nationalism as the religious Jews in general want to recover the old Tribal system and likewise, to bring the sacrifices back with the rebuilding of the Temple. They cannot accept the fact that it is not the will of God to bring the sacrifices back with the rebuilding of the Temple. As a matter of fact, and according to Prophet Jeremiah 7:22, HaShem never commanded that sacrifices of animals were to be part of the religion of Israel. Why then they became so? As a result of Pichuach Nephesh when Moses found necessary to add the sacrifices in order to help the Exodus of the People out of Mitzraim.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 09:13 AM
Ben is not an idiot. Ben Masda is a Levite.

The Levites rate the bible like this

1 first the Law of Moses

Then

2 the prophets

Third

3 psalms are mainly writings of David to support his right to the throne

This makes genesis 49:10 superior to any writing outside the first four books of the Old Testament.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 09:17 AM
The Ezekiel verse is talking about the Northern and Southern kingdoms. The Old Tesament is replete with predictions of the Levites lasting "forever".

"forever" is a debatable term

Ben Masada
April 16th, 2016, 09:19 AM
What's it like being a complete idiot ?

When someone does not have any thing to say in reply to a serious post and ends up saying any thing that comes to mind.

Ben Masada
April 16th, 2016, 09:38 AM
The Ezekiel verse is talking about the Northern and Southern kingdoms. The Old Tesament is replete with predictions of the Levites lasting "forever". "forever" is a debatable term

I bag to disagree because Prophet Ezekiel is talking about what remained from Psalm 78:67-69 after HaShem rejected the Tent of Joseph aka Ephraim aka the Ten Tribes and confirmed Judah to remain as a People before the Lord forever. Then the New Israel composed of the Tribe of Judah, and about 10% of the Ten Tribes that escaped Assyria, especially the Levites, and joined Judah in the South and were exiled to Babylon for 70 years. Regarding the term "forever" it is not debatable as the Jews are concern because forever here does not mean absolutely without an end but conditionally as we live as a People before the Lord. As we reject the Lord, we cease being the ones for a time till we set things right with the Lord again and we are taken back as what have happened with the establishing Of modern Israel. (Ezekiel 37:22)

Ben Masada
April 16th, 2016, 09:49 AM
Ben is not an idiot. Ben Masda is a Levite.

The Levites rate the bible like this

1 first the Law of Moses

Then

2 the prophets

Third

3 psalms are mainly writings of David to support his right to the throne

This makes genesis 49:10 superior to any writing outside the first four books of the Old Testament.

The whole thing in this post of yours above is totally wrong. I think you are simply joking.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 10:06 AM
Masada,

Genesis 49:10 is no joke. Until 70ad the verse was interpreted as Shiloh being a man of the tribe of Judah. After 70ad nonchristian jewish religious people were forced to spin the verse.

By the way. If you would I will agree with you concerning the Apostle Paul if instead you call him Saul of Tarsus. Saul of Tarsus was a religious bigot. But as the first human antichrist he too was a Johnny come lately. Besides Saul was Predestined to deliver up the Keys to the Kingdom to the Gentiles. The loss was saved for the Levites. I will show you.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 10:18 AM
King Uzziah was wroth with the High Priest. And King Uzziah was stricken. II Chronicles 26:16-21

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 10:20 AM
The office of High Priest can only be administered by the Levites according to Moses.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 10:22 AM
But!!!

The office of King is fair game for any Isrealite.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 10:25 AM
As a matter of fact one doesn't even have to be an Isrealite to be King.

Case in point

1 Herrod
2 "We have no king but Caesar!"

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 10:31 AM
So when Joshua the High Priest was crowned king in Jerusalem there was nothing wrong with that.

But when Joshua the High Priest and King in Jerusalem took the title

BRANCH

Then that was a declaration against

THE MESSIAH

Josuah the High Priest was the first human anti Christ

And Zechariah was the false prophet to the first human antichrist.

dialm
April 16th, 2016, 11:53 AM
dialm's perscription for the future.

Christians should stop opposing the building of the Temple in Jerusalem. Christians should stop opposing animal sacrifices.

Don't misunderstand. We are not to do anything to help them build the Temple or start up its operation. Only stop opposing it

Look at it this way. Once they start up animal sacrificing it will create such a stinch in Heaven that the Lord will have to come down with

THUNDER

Epoisses
April 16th, 2016, 02:07 PM
Since Satan does not exist as a being in reality, Paul became the one, first of all, because he founded Christianity if you read Acts 11:26 and the author of II John 2:18,19 says that the Antichrist is identified as coming out from the ranks of Christianity. Jesus was a Jew and he knew that Satan does not exist. Any reference to Satan as a real being did not come from Jesus but later from Paul. Any mention to Satan in the Tanach is purely metaphorical as a concept to illustrate the evil inclination in man.

I'll take Paul's word over yours. He was an apostle and you're just an apostasile.

Bradley D
April 16th, 2016, 11:13 PM
No, the kingship is of the Davidic Line.

"He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever" (2 Samuel 7:13).

Jesus Christ is the Eternal King.

"He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David" (Luke 1:32).

dialm
April 17th, 2016, 01:36 AM
The throne of David that the Father gives to the Son is not a physical throne.

Jesus ran the money changers out and said they were not to make His Father's house a den of thieves. Then in 70ad the physical temple was destroyed. Proof that Jesus has no attachment to physical temples or thrones. They mean nothing. The money changers were training little children to use religion to make money.

So it is ok if the Supremme Court takes away every bit of property that American Christians own.

Better to enter Heaven penniless then to train children to reject God's Word on marriage. Why is the sanctity of marriage so important that God would have us sac our physical wealth?

Jesus is married to us. We must hold onto that marriage at all cost. Even if it kills us.

Flaminggg
April 17th, 2016, 01:08 PM
(The Bible is not Anti Semetic/Anti-Jewish) 2 Chronicles 23:18 ................ the people God used to record his written Gospel were referred to as Levites, for a long period of time the Jewish People that held this position were considered, "Levites". God is no longer recording his written Gospel, that was completed with the book of revelation, the Apostles were the last to be considered "Levites". ........................ (Jesus is in Heaven, he is the Lamb Slain in Revelation, not the Antichrist, a false position is only suicide) The Gospel records only Two Legitimate, "HIGH PRIESTS", one is Christ before the Foundation of the Earth he was called Melchisedek to begin the sequence of the Old Testament. Second, is Zechariah,Zacharias (Budda/Buddah), who served as a High Priest to begin the sequence of the New Testament. There are no more high priests according to the Gospel's Program (High Priest makes some intercession with the Gospel's Program, the Antichrist does not do that, a false position is only suicide))

Jesus Answers the Parable of Daniel about the Antichrist Directly

Daniel 7:8 says "Three Horns were removed by a Little Horn" ... Matthew 17:4-5 says "Jesus, Moses, Elijah were removed by a Dark Cloud" ... Exodus 3:1-2, Exodus 4:2 says an "Angel of Jesus, not of God" is the Dark Could or the Little Horn, which is the "Rod of Joseph/Staff of Moses or Antichrist". (The Father of Jesus was Joseph the Blessing ... Jesus is God so he has no father, but he made Joseph the Blessing his father to satisfy the law). ................... When the Gospel says the Manchild of Revelation will rule with a "Rod of Iron", it is declaring that the Antichrist is the "Rod of Joseph/Staff of Moses", that God ordained. .......................... (Jeremiah 33:20-22) The Antichrist is referred to as a "Daughter" by reason of Joseph, therefore, he cannot be a Levite or a High Priest, these positions have not existed beyond the Old Testament. Love and Blessings. (Daniel 7:8 and Matthew 17:4-5 are stating the "Three Days of Darkness", where humanity does not have a legal right to a sign before God eliminates human life for the 5 months of "Joseph the Blessing", in which the Antichrist will Reign ............. at such a time, he will not be speaking alone or with God only, since he will have equipment that testifies of all of these things and the potential God has afforded, to however few outstanding at such and such a time to come).