Why so difficult to spot the Anti-Christ ?

[Mosacked]

Because of the sin in many of us.

**1 John 2:22 Who is the Liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a man is the Antichrist—he denies the Father (God) and the Son (Jesus).
**

When the above verse was quoted, we saw lots of people insisting that therefore ‘everyone who refuses to acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God’ must be Anti-Christ, and that it even includes Hindhus, Confucianists, Sikhs etc etc.

But is this really what the verse is instructing Christians?

If a man declares himself as a king to 3 of his men, A, B & C

A – Admits and acknowledges his kingship
B – Is blaise about his kingship and would neither say he is or he is not the king.
C – Rejects his kingship and denies his authority saying he is not the king.

WHICH of these is the Anti-King?

With a little bit of common sense, it is not difficult to see that C is the Anti-King that the King would find offensive and an enemy.

Similarly, it is the religion that deliberately puts forth a religious teaching to its people to deny and reject the DEITY of Jesus that makes that religion the Anti-Christ.

And factually the ONLY religion in the world that does this is Islam.

Instead of getting blinded by irrelevant ‘noise’ by evil minions to divert attention from the clear identification of the Anti-Christ, it is equally important that Christians make a conscious stand FOR Holy Biblical Scripture.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

 

[kalt]

It’s against forum rules to post repeatedly with an agenda.

“Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.”

 

[Newbie2]

I don’t get at all what the OP is saying. Maybe that’s a good thing?

 

[Mosacked]

It’s against forum rules to post repeatedly with an agenda.

“Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.”

Everybody has an agenda, if you don’t why are you even here? You’re talking gibberish.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Because of the sin in many of us.

1 John 2:22 Who is the Liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a man is the Antichrist—he denies the Father (God) and the Son (Jesus).

When the above verse was quoted, we saw lots of people insisting that therefore ‘everyone who refuses to acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God’ must be Anti-Christ, and that it even includes Hindhus, Confucianists, Sikhs etc etc.

But is this really what the verse is instructing Christians?

If a man declares himself as a king to 3 of his men, A, B & C

A – Admits and acknowledges his kingship
B – Is blaise about his kingship and would neither say he is or he is not the king.
C – Rejects his kingship and denies his authority saying he is not the king.

WHICH of these is the Anti-King?

With a little bit of common sense, it is not difficult to see that C is the Anti-King that the King would find offensive and an enemy.

Similarly, it is the religion that deliberately puts forth a religious teaching to its people to deny and reject the DEITY of Jesus that makes that religion the Anti-Christ.

And factually the ONLY religion in the world that does this is Islam.

Instead of getting blinded by irrelevant ‘noise’ by evil minions to divert attention from the clear identification of the Anti-Christ, it is equally important that Christians make a conscious stand FOR Holy Biblical Scripture.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

“Antichrist” is used in at least two different ways in Scripture. First of all there is the generic term which includes anything or anybody which denies Jesus Christ.

However there is also a specific personal “Antichrist” who will bitterly oppose the church, set up a world wide dictatorship, which will include the ability to “force everyone, great and small, to wear the mark of the beast.” Without it they will not be able to buy or sell.

I think the personal anti-Christ is an American politician, who is around today. And I don’t think it’s Obama, although I’ve got some doubts about his declared faith.

There’s more than one definition.

 

[Mosacked]

“Antichrist” is used in at least two different ways in Scripture. First of all there is the generic term which includes anything or anybody which denies Jesus Christ.

However there is also a specific personal “Antichrist” who will bitterly oppose the church, set up a world wide dictatorship, which will include the ability to “force everyone, great and small, to wear the mark of the beast.” Without it they will not be able to buy or sell.

I think the personal anti-Christ is an American politician, who is around today. And I don’t think it’s Obama, although I’ve got some doubts about his declared faith.

There’s more than one definition.

Perhaps everyone has their OWN definition, but the Bible has only one. And that’s in 1 John 2:22.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Perhaps everyone has their OWN definition, but the Bible has only one. And that’s in 1 John 2:22.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

When the New Testament was written, Islam didn’t even exist, and there were anti-Christs around then, in the generic sense of the term. And I’ll stick to my opinion. There is more than one sense of “Antichrist” in Scripture.

 

[Mosacked]

When the New Testament was written, Islam didn’t even exist, and there were anti-Christs around then, in the generic sense of the term. And I’ll stick to my opinion. There is more than one sense of “Antichrist” in Scripture.

If that is so, then why are you even a catholic? Cos when Paul said “Repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins”. you were not even born yet.

Oh…because you want to be saved and delude yourself into thinking that the salvation grace is applicable to you even though you were not yet born. BUT the words of the Bible is not applicable even though its spoken before the occasion rises to fit its description.

You really are amazing. Amazingly un-holy.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

If that is so, then why are you even a catholic? Cos when Paul said “Repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins”. you were not even born yet.

Oh…because you want to be saved and delude yourself into thinking that the salvation grace is applicable to you even though you were not yet born. BUT the words of the Bible is not applicable even though its spoken before the occasion rises to fit its description.

You really are amazing. Amazingly un-holy.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

And you’re arrogant in your self righteous labelling of other people.

When the Scriptures were being written, the term “anti-Christ” was not specifically meant to refer to Islam, which appears to be your personal panacea.

I don’t see much point in arguing with you. You have your own theory, and I’ll let you fool around with it to your heart’s content.

 

[kalt]

Everybody has an agenda, if you don’t why are you even here? You’re talking gibberish.

The rule was quoted. You called it gibberish. Take it up with the forum administrators.

 

[Publisher]

I believe when 1 John was written, the writer had a certain sect of Gnostics in mind. The group which denied that Jesus actually possesed a physical body, but was entirely a spiritual entity. I also believe it was addressing the group which taught that Jesus really didn’t suffer, but only appeared to suffer. 1 John makes much more sense when read with the historical background of the “why” it was written instead of removing it from it’s historical context and have it mean any group which we disagree with…at least in my opinion.

 

[Mosacked]

And you’re arrogant in your self righteous labelling of other people.

When the Scriptures were being written, the term “anti-Christ” was not specifically meant to refer to Islam, which appears to be your personal panacea.

I don’t see much point in arguing with you. You have your own theory, and I’ll let you fool around with it to your heart’s content.

Then…Like I said when the scriptures were written, the term “Salvation” was not specifically meant to be applied to you too (since you were not yet born, so how can you be saved?! haaa), which also appears to be your personal panacea.

You’re right, I cannot argue with someone who applies double standards to simple scriptural instructions. That would be an attempt to handle a scriptural serpent. Most evil men judge others but not themselves, but in your case, you judged God’s instruction as mis-fitting the situation but yours as valid and you go around educating others in your fallacy. So, you’re at least a grade higher than these men.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

 

[Mosacked]

The rule was quoted. You called it gibberish. Take it up with the forum administrators.

And the rule applies to you too. Is this gibberish? If it is, take it up with the administrators.