"For the time will come when men WILL NOT PUT UP WITH sound doctrine.Instead, TO SUIT THEIR OWN DESIRES, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say WHAT THEIR ITCHING EARS WANT TO HEAR. They will turn their ears AWAY FROM The Truth and turn aside TO MYTHS" (2 Timothy 4:3,4)..
MYTH #1: THE ANTICHRIST IS ALIVE
Ask prophecy teachers and they will tell you "they" believe [who cares what "they" believe? I want to know what the Bible says!] that the Antichrist is alive somewhere on this planet, probably living somewhere in Europe, incognito, waiting for the opportune time to reveal himself.
Former prophecy establishment "Antichrist nominees" include: Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, various Popes, Muammar Khaddafi, Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Mikhail Gorbachev and King Juan Carlos of Spain.
More recently, they've named George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Prince Charles [must admit, I got a good laugh out of that one!], Prince William, Arnold Schwarzenegger, the late Pope John Paul II, Javier Solana of the EU, George Soros, and even Barack Obama as possible candidates for the office of Antichrist.
Bottom line: the alleged "experts" don't know!
Study your Bibles, fellas...You may be surprised what you learn!
MYTH #2: THE ANTICHRIST IS MUSLIM
The Antichrist will NOT be a Muslim.
Daniel 11:37 states "neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard ANY god".
That would have to include Allah.
According to Revelation 17:8, the Antichrist must have already lived prior to the first century A.D. There were no Muslims at the time. The Islamic religion did not even exist until the 7th century A.D. Period. Case closed.
NO WAY CAN HE BE MUSLIM.
MYTH #3: OBAMA IS THE ANTICHRIST
Obama can't be the Antichrist because he was born in 1961.
According to Revelation 17:8 the Antichrist "was" [he lived prior to the first century A.D.], IS NOT, and WILL ASCEND [COME UP] FROM THE BOTTOMLESS PIT".
The Antichrist, according to Daniel 7:8, 24 must come from the territories of the former Roman Empire [Daniel 7:8,24]. Obama was born in Hawaii. That automatically disqualifies him.
Even if we use his father's ancestry from Kenya. Kenya was never, repeat, NEVER part of the Roman Empire.
The Antichrist will be a military man [Revelation 13:4]. Obama hasn't even served in the armed forces... ever. He's a rookie, folks! He's untried and untested.
NO WAY CAN HE BE OBAMA.
Contrary to Hollywood's portrayal in such mediocre movies as The Omen, and the prophecy establishment's misguided prognostications, the future Antichrist will NOT BE BORN. HE WILL SIMPLY SHOW UP.
He will emerge, suddenly, RESURRECTED, OUT OF THE BOTTOMLESS PIT [Revelation 11:7].
He doesn't show up UNTIL THE MIDDLE OF THE TRIBULATION [Revelation 13:1,5].
The tribulation hasn't even begun. Therefore, he's not Obama or any other LIVING PERSON.
The reason so many people are trying to "guess" whether he's Obama or whether he's Muslim, is SHEER IGNORANCE. THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT HIM.
So, any charismatic guy that comes along, and gains a measure of influence and popularity is immediately tagged with the ominous title.
This is a sad commentary on what a lousy job the alleged prophecy pundits have done in providing accurate and biblical information.
The Antichrist is WHO HE IS, NOT WHOM WE WANT HIM TO BE.
MYTH #4: JESUS NAMED THE ANTICHRIST
There's this piece of crap circulating on the internet, particularly on You Tube, where some guy read Luke 10:18, then "figured out" that, when translated from Greek into Hebrew, it says "Barack Obama".
For starters, if you believe EVERYTHING you see on YouTube -- or for that matter, everything you read on the internet, or see on TV -- then you probably also believe in the Tooth Fairy.
Luke 10:18 reads:
"And He said to them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven".
The genius in question claims that the word "lightning" in Hebrew isbarak, and that the word for "heaven" is bamah.
Therefore, this scripture in Hebrew would read "I beheld satan as Barack Obama".
He even relates it to Isaiah 14:12 which reads:
How are you fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How are you cut down to the ground, which did weaken the nations!
That is a blatant, outrageous LIE.
Even IF his translation were correct (it ISN'T], it WOULDN'T SAY "I beheld satan as Barack Obama".
It would say "I beheld satan AS barak FALL FROM bamah".
However, that's NOT what it says. The Greek VERB for "fall" is in aorist active participle, which indicates the action HAD ALREADY TAKEN PLACE, so the LITERAL translation into English would be:
"I was beholding satan, as barak from the bamah having fallen".
The use of the word barak means NOTHING, and PROVES NOTHING: barak is a very common Semitic name and surname. Two well known examples are Israel's former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak. There's even a famous entertainer named Shakira Mebarak.
While the word barak in Hebrew does mean "lightning", the word bamahDOES NOT MEAN "heaven" or "sky".
The word "bamah" means "high place" [Ezekiel 20:29].
ANY "high place" here on earth would be a bamah, including the altars where sacrifices to idols were made.
The Hebrew word for "sky" or "heaven" is shamayim.
Furthermore, shamayim is also the Hebrew word used in Isaiah 14:12,13, when it says "how are you fallen from heaven, O Lucifer", which is the second scripture they give as "evidence" for their ludicrous theory.
Therefore the CORRECT translation of Luke 10:18 into Hebrew is:
"I was beholding satan, as barak from the shamayim having fallen".
NOWHERE does it say in that passage that Jesus saw satan as Barack Obama.
So much for that RIDICULOUS theory.
The people behind this video are TOTALLY DISHONEST.
They're not the least bit interested in what GOD SAYS about the Antichrist. They've deluded themselves into thinking they can get Him to do their bidding.
They FIRST DECIDED THEY WANTED the Antichrist TO BE Barack Obama, then went on a WILD CHASE to find SOME WAY to try to make this Scripture "fit" their "candidate of choice".
When you do that, you can claim Bugs Bunny is the Antichrist.
WHAT THEY CAN'T DO IS PROVE IT.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The Antichrist is who GOD SAYS,NOT whom WE WANT HIM to be.
Did Jesus name the Antichrist? Yes.
He named him in the Book of Daniel. He named him in the Book of Revelation. He DID NOT name him in Luke 10:18.
MYTH #5: NO ONE WILL KNOW THE IDENTITY OF THE ANTICHRIST
This is pure myth. There's NOTHING in the Bible to indicate that.
If God didn't want Antichrist's identity revealed until he shows up, they why put it in the Scriptures? [Daniel 11:28,29; Revelation 13:2].
Furthermore, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 says that our gathering together with Jesus cannot take place until two things happen:
1. the Departure [ho apostasia] of the Church, and
2. the man of sin [Antichrist] is REVEALED.
MYTH #6: ANTICHRIST IS SHOT IN THE HEAD
That's NOT what the Bible says. If you read Revelation chapter 13 closely, it says John saw ONE of his SYMBOLIC HEADS as if wounded to death, but his deadly wound was healed.
The question is, if Antichrist is a man, and Revelation 13:18 UNEQUIVOCALLY STATES THAT HE IS, how many heads does he have?
Obviously, he's got one head. The 7 heads mentioned in verses 1 and 3, evidently, are SYMBOLIC.
What do they represent? The answer is found in Revelation 17:10 where the Antichrist beast is further described: THEY REPRESENT 7 KINGS, of which 5 are dead, one is living, and one has not yet come.
If THE HEADS are KINGS, then John SAW ONE OF THE 7 KINGS AS IF he had been wounded to death, but his deadly wound was healed.
The verb sphazo [meaning "wounded", "slain", "to slaughter or maim violently"] is used in the perfect passive participle, clearly indicating, this HAD ALREADY OCCURRED when John wrote it.
The word for "deadly wound" is plege, which means a deadly stroke.
Revelation 13:14 gives us one further detail, the wound in question ISN'T a head wound, or bullet wound, it's a SWORD WOUND.
The word translated "sword" is machaira in Greek. It means "a small sword, dirk or dirk-like object".
So, we have ONE of the 7 KINGS, who SUFFERS AND SURVIVES a mortal wound caused by a machaira.
NOWHERE DOES IT SAY the Antichrist is WOUNDED IN HIS HEAD.
This event had already happened, so we can immediately eliminate the FUTURE Antichrist [7th king] since his 3½-year kingdom hasn't yet happened.
Which of the 6 former KINGS, of the 6 former world empires, [Pharaoh, Sennacherib, Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, Alexander the Great, or Ceasar, suffered such a wound?
Julius Caesar comes to mind, since he was stabbed repeatedly with a large knife or small sword, BUT IT COULDN'T POSSIBLY BE Caesar, BECAUSE HE DIDN'T SURVIVE. The same can be said of Nero, who committed suicide by stabbing himself thru the neck.
Only one of these kings suffered such mortal wound, which he MIRACULOUSLY recovered from, to the surprise and wonder of his troops. What king was that? Alexander the Great.
It's well-documented, historic fact, that Alexander was STRUCK in the chest by a barbed arrow which pierced his lung, and came out his neck.
NO ONE, not even his doctors, thought he'd survive, but he did.
It took 39 different surgical procedures to mend the damage, but it healed.
Indeed, Plutarch compared Alexander to the Hydra, the mythical serpent which, when you cut one of its heads off, ANOTHER GREW IN ITS PLACE.
The Hydra, in fact, pictured below, CLOSELY RESEMBLES John's description of the Antichrist BEAST.
MYTH #7: ANTICHRIST'S 7-YEAR REIGNBible prophecy teaches, quite clearly, that Antichrist will appear on earth just prior to the last 3-1/2 years of tribulation, and that he will be permitted to rule the earth for only 3½ years, or 42 months. Nowhere does it state he will rule for 7 years. That's utterly false [Revelation 12:6, 14; 13:5].
MYTH #8: THE 7-YEAR PEACE TREATYAntichrist will NOT sign a peace treaty with anybody, much less for 7 years, since he'll only appear on earth for the last 3½ years of the tribulation.
This "treaty" is pure religious fabrication resulting from erroneous exegesis of Daniel 9:27 which reads: "he shall confirm the covenantwith many for one week" (Which, in prophetic lingo, refers not to a literal week (7 days), but a sabbatical week (7 years).
To "confirm", according to the dictionary, means to "ratify, reinforce or make formally valid something that already exists".
You can't "confirm" something that doesn't [already] exist.
The Antichrist is NOWHERE mentioned in this verse.
The word "peace" is found NOWHERE in this verse.
The word "treaty" is not found either.
NOWHERE does it state that the covenant is made, then broken. The words "make" and "break" are not found there, either.
Therefore, this verse doesn't refer to a future covenant, but to the already existing covenant between God and Abraham's seed.
The "He" mentioned here isn't the Antichrist, but the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Jesus, not the Antichrist, is the subject and focus of this prophecy [Daniel 9:25].
The Antichrist, I repeat, is not even mentioned.
But HOW can this refer to Jesus Christ? Doesn't Daniel 9:27 say that the same person who CONFIRMS the covenant COMMITS THE "abomination of desolation? NO, IT DOES NOT.
For FULL EXPLANATION of THAT FALSE TEACHING, read the VERY NEXT Myth #9.
"The covenant" refers to the [already existing] eternal covenant God made with Abraham and his Seed.
This chapter begins with a reference to that covenant [see Daniel 9:4].
The exact same word in Hebrew beryith is used in both verses [4 and 26]. In verse 4, Daniel is NOT talking about a "7-year peace treaty", but aboutthe [Abrahamic] covenant.
Messiah doesn't make this covenant. He confirms the already existing one. He ratifies it. How?
By dying on Mount Moriah where Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac 2,000 years earlier.
Abraham prophesied that God would provide Himself a lamb for the sacrifice and even called the place Yahwe Jireh [God will provide] [Genesis 22:8,14].
Jesus was the Lamb God provided, to confirm His covenant with Abraham and his Seed, just like Abraham predicted, just like Daniel predicted [Genesis 22:8-14, John 1:29].
Since Messiah is Abraham's Seed, only the Messiah is qualified to confirm such covenant.
This is Paul's clear teaching in the New Testament:
"Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made... to your seed, which is Christ.
And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before God in Christ, the law, which was 430 years after, cannot disannul"... [Galatians 3:16,17]
The Antichrist never was, nor will be, Abraham's Seed. Therefore, there'sno way he can confirm the [Abrahamic] covenant.
It's the Messiah who caused the [animal] sacrifice and oblation [grain offering] to cease.
God no longer accepts such sacrifices and offerings, since the ultimate sacrifice for sin, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah, already offered Himself as the final, eternal, all-sufficient sacrifice to confirm the eternal covenant God made with Abraham [Hebrews 9:12, 10:14].
It's ONLY the Messiah's precious Blood that can confirm His Covenant. It's ONLY His Blood that forever washes away our sins.Praise His Holy Name!
Leave it to the stale, sterile prophecy establishment to take a portion of scripture that's supposed to glorify God and exalt his faithfulness, and ascribe the prophecy to the Antichrist.
[Actually, that shouldn't surprise us, since it isn't His glory they seek, but their own].
One has to totally take this verse out of context, twist it, add a number of things it doesn't say, plus a good dose of religious speculation, to come up with the ludicrous "7-year peace treaty".
There's NOTHING IN THE ENTIRE BIBLE about a "7-year peace treaty".
Therefore, DON'T LOOK FOR a "7-year peace treaty" because there won't be one.
MYTH #9: ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION
Daniel 9:27 DOES NOT, repeat, DOES NOT refer to the "abomination of desolation". Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 DO.
BEFORE you fire off an e-mail asking "what about verse 27", ESPECIALLY THOSE OF YOU WHO READ THE NIV, please take a DEEP breath, and let that sink in for a moment.
I've nothing against the NIV, but it does not offer the most accurate translation of this particular verse.
Hence, Daniel 9:27 is NOT what Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:15-21 when He said that when they saw the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel in the temple (holy place), they should flee into the mountains.
He was referring, rather, to the other two passages: Daniel 11:31 and 12:11.
The Hebrew word used in Daniel 9:27 is shikkutzim which UNEQUIVOCALLY REFERS TO "ABOMINATIONS" [more than one, PLURAL].
In the other two passages it's shikkutz, which means JUST ONE "ABOMINATION" [SINGULAR].
Daniel 9:27 has already been fulfilled. Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 are still in our future.
The "prince that shall come" mentioned in Daniel 9:26 is NOT the Antichrist. Rather, it was Titus the Roman prince, who CAME in 70 A.D., some 600 after this prophecy was given, and destroyed the city [Jerusalem] and the second temple, PRECISELY as this prophecy foretold.
That is UNDISPUTED, HISTORIC FACT.
The "abominations" [plural] in Daniel 9:27, that caused the SECOND temple to be destroyed, and its site to remain desolate to this very day,are the same abominations that caused Jesus to throw out the moneychangers from it, and overturn their tables [John 2:14-16], the same ones that caused Him to refer to it as "a den of thieves"[Matthew 21:13; Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46].
Daniel 9:27, as explained in Myth #7 above, refers to Jesus who confirmed the Abrahamic Covenant, in the middle of the 70th week, and caused a Sabbath [shabath] of sacrifices. He made sacrifices stop, or "rest", because God no longer accepts those.
Fact is that Jews HAVEN'T offered sacrifices for the past
2,000 years. Who lived, died and resurrected 2,000 years ago, but the Christ?
How, then, can this cessation of sacrifices refer to the Antichrist, when he has YET TO APPEAR as such?
In Daniel 9:26 "the prince that shall come" destroys Jerusalem and the temple.
If this were the Antichrist, and if this were referring to him placing the [one] abomination of desolation Jesus spoke of, HOW COULD HE PLACE IT IN A TEMPLE HE JUST DESTROYED?
It doesn't add up.
To sum up, verses 26 and 27 CANNOT POSSIBLY refer to the Antichrist because:
1. The Hebrew text doesn't support it, since it DOESN'T talk about one specific abomination but MANY.
2. This prince [Titus] ALREADY [IN THE PAST] destroyed the city and the SECOND temple, fulfilling this prophecy.
The FUTURE Antichrist WILL NOT destroy Jerusalem, or the THIRD temple.
3. The future Antichrist will conquer Jerusalem [Zechariah 14:1,2] and SIT IN the third temple, passing himself off as God [2 Thessalonians 2:4].
He will place A SINGLE ABOMINATION [IDOL] of himself in the THIRD [yet to be built] temple.
4. If Daniel 9:26,27 referred to the Antichrist, Scripture would CONTRADICT ITSELF [perish the thought] because they say he'll destroy the city and the temple, whereas Zechariah 14:1 says he'll conquer the city and 2 Thessalonians 2:4 say he'll SIT IN the temple. He won't destroy either one.
5. As already stated in the previous Myth, the Antichrist is not mentioned IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, in the aforementioned verses.
6. As already stated in the previous Myth, Galatians 3:17 UNEQUIVOCALLY STATES it was Jesus, NOT THE ANTICHRIST, who ALREADY CONFIRMED THE COVENANT.
I didn't write the Bible. If you want to argue about it, take it up WITH GOD, not with me. Thank you.
MYTH #10: THE PRINCE THAT SHALL COME
Self-declared prophecy pundits will tell you, time and again, that this "prince that shall come" mentioned in Daniel 9:26 is the Antichrist.
There are at least 5 MAJOR problems with their FALSE theory:
1. The Antichrist is NOWHERE mentioned in this verse.
2. The Antichrist, according to the Bible, will NOT destroy Jerusalem and the temple. Rather, he will CONQUER AND OCCUPY Jerusalem [Zechariah 14:2] and SIT IN the temple, passing himself off as God [2 Thessalonians 2:4]. Hence, there's NO WAY this "prince" can be the Antichrist.
3. This prophecy was ALREADY FULFILLED, in precise detail, 2,000 years ago.
4. There's no "mystery" whatsoever as to the identity of this prince.
5. The prince in question is the Roman prince Titus, son of Caesar Vespasian, who destroyed Jerusalem and its temple in 70 A.D., EXACTLY as Gabriel predicted.
In Daniel 9:25-27, Gabriel predicted that Jerusalem and the temple would be rebuilt [they were], then ONCE AGAIN destroyed. They were.
He predicted that, from the edict to rebuild Jerusalem to the Messiah, there would be 69 sabbatical "weeks" [483 years].
After the 483 years, in the middle of the FINAL week [3½ years later] Messiah would be killed.
Then [after Messiah's death] this prince would come and destroy the city and the temple.
Everything happened, in exact sequence:
Jesus began His public ministry in the fall of 29 A.D. He died for our sins and rose from the dead 3½ years later, in the spring of 33 A.D.
Some 37 years later, the Roman 10th Legion, under Titus's command, totally destroyed the temple and leveled the city to the ground.
This "prince" IS NOT in our future. He already came and fulfilled this portion of the prophecy IN OUR PAST.
That's not speculation. That's FACT.
MYTH #1: THE ANTICHRIST IS ALIVE
Ask prophecy teachers and they will tell you "they" believe [who cares what "they" believe? I want to know what the Bible says!] that the Antichrist is alive somewhere on this planet, probably living somewhere in Europe, incognito, waiting for the opportune time to reveal himself.
Of course, when you ask them who they think he might be, they have no clue as to his identity. [This is understandable, since they got so many other things wrong about the end times].
This teaching is utterly false. The Bible clearly states that the Antichrist is not on earth. He's dead and in hell. He will emerge from hell itself , resurrected from the dead [Revelation 11:7; 13:1,3; 17:8].
That's what will cause most people to be in awe of him and submit to him. They will perceive him as immortal and invincible; as a "god", and will worship satan and his evil seed.
There isn't A SINGLE SCRIPTURE, from Genesis to Revelation, that teaches the Antichrist will be living among us prior to his reappearance.
Why do they teach he's alive, when the Bible SPECIFICALLY states he's dead? You'll have to ask them.
Prophecy pundits are looking for the dead among the living.
That's why, whenever they've speculated about someone being the Antichrist they've been "dead wrong".This teaching is utterly false. The Bible clearly states that the Antichrist is not on earth. He's dead and in hell. He will emerge from hell itself , resurrected from the dead [Revelation 11:7; 13:1,3; 17:8].
That's what will cause most people to be in awe of him and submit to him. They will perceive him as immortal and invincible; as a "god", and will worship satan and his evil seed.
There isn't A SINGLE SCRIPTURE, from Genesis to Revelation, that teaches the Antichrist will be living among us prior to his reappearance.
Why do they teach he's alive, when the Bible SPECIFICALLY states he's dead? You'll have to ask them.
Prophecy pundits are looking for the dead among the living.
Former prophecy establishment "Antichrist nominees" include: Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, various Popes, Muammar Khaddafi, Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Mikhail Gorbachev and King Juan Carlos of Spain.
More recently, they've named George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Prince Charles [must admit, I got a good laugh out of that one!], Prince William, Arnold Schwarzenegger, the late Pope John Paul II, Javier Solana of the EU, George Soros, and even Barack Obama as possible candidates for the office of Antichrist.
Bottom line: the alleged "experts" don't know!
Study your Bibles, fellas...You may be surprised what you learn!
MYTH #2: THE ANTICHRIST IS MUSLIM
The Antichrist will NOT be a Muslim.
Daniel 11:37 states "neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard ANY god".
That would have to include Allah.
According to Revelation 17:8, the Antichrist must have already lived prior to the first century A.D. There were no Muslims at the time. The Islamic religion did not even exist until the 7th century A.D. Period. Case closed.
NO WAY CAN HE BE MUSLIM.
MYTH #3: OBAMA IS THE ANTICHRIST
Obama can't be the Antichrist because he was born in 1961.
According to Revelation 17:8 the Antichrist "was" [he lived prior to the first century A.D.], IS NOT, and WILL ASCEND [COME UP] FROM THE BOTTOMLESS PIT".
The Antichrist, according to Daniel 7:8, 24 must come from the territories of the former Roman Empire [Daniel 7:8,24]. Obama was born in Hawaii. That automatically disqualifies him.
Even if we use his father's ancestry from Kenya. Kenya was never, repeat, NEVER part of the Roman Empire.
The Antichrist will be a military man [Revelation 13:4]. Obama hasn't even served in the armed forces... ever. He's a rookie, folks! He's untried and untested.
NO WAY CAN HE BE OBAMA.
Contrary to Hollywood's portrayal in such mediocre movies as The Omen, and the prophecy establishment's misguided prognostications, the future Antichrist will NOT BE BORN. HE WILL SIMPLY SHOW UP.
He will emerge, suddenly, RESURRECTED, OUT OF THE BOTTOMLESS PIT [Revelation 11:7].
He doesn't show up UNTIL THE MIDDLE OF THE TRIBULATION [Revelation 13:1,5].
The tribulation hasn't even begun. Therefore, he's not Obama or any other LIVING PERSON.
The reason so many people are trying to "guess" whether he's Obama or whether he's Muslim, is SHEER IGNORANCE. THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT HIM.
So, any charismatic guy that comes along, and gains a measure of influence and popularity is immediately tagged with the ominous title.
This is a sad commentary on what a lousy job the alleged prophecy pundits have done in providing accurate and biblical information.
The Antichrist is WHO HE IS, NOT WHOM WE WANT HIM TO BE.
MYTH #4: JESUS NAMED THE ANTICHRIST
There's this piece of crap circulating on the internet, particularly on You Tube, where some guy read Luke 10:18, then "figured out" that, when translated from Greek into Hebrew, it says "Barack Obama".
For starters, if you believe EVERYTHING you see on YouTube -- or for that matter, everything you read on the internet, or see on TV -- then you probably also believe in the Tooth Fairy.
Luke 10:18 reads:
"And He said to them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven".
The genius in question claims that the word "lightning" in Hebrew isbarak, and that the word for "heaven" is bamah.
Therefore, this scripture in Hebrew would read "I beheld satan as Barack Obama".
He even relates it to Isaiah 14:12 which reads:
How are you fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How are you cut down to the ground, which did weaken the nations!
That is a blatant, outrageous LIE.
Even IF his translation were correct (it ISN'T], it WOULDN'T SAY "I beheld satan as Barack Obama".
It would say "I beheld satan AS barak FALL FROM bamah".
However, that's NOT what it says. The Greek VERB for "fall" is in aorist active participle, which indicates the action HAD ALREADY TAKEN PLACE, so the LITERAL translation into English would be:
"I was beholding satan, as barak from the bamah having fallen".
The use of the word barak means NOTHING, and PROVES NOTHING: barak is a very common Semitic name and surname. Two well known examples are Israel's former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak. There's even a famous entertainer named Shakira Mebarak.
While the word barak in Hebrew does mean "lightning", the word bamahDOES NOT MEAN "heaven" or "sky".
The word "bamah" means "high place" [Ezekiel 20:29].
ANY "high place" here on earth would be a bamah, including the altars where sacrifices to idols were made.
The Hebrew word for "sky" or "heaven" is shamayim.
Furthermore, shamayim is also the Hebrew word used in Isaiah 14:12,13, when it says "how are you fallen from heaven, O Lucifer", which is the second scripture they give as "evidence" for their ludicrous theory.
Therefore the CORRECT translation of Luke 10:18 into Hebrew is:
"I was beholding satan, as barak from the shamayim having fallen".
NOWHERE does it say in that passage that Jesus saw satan as Barack Obama.
So much for that RIDICULOUS theory.
The people behind this video are TOTALLY DISHONEST.
They're not the least bit interested in what GOD SAYS about the Antichrist. They've deluded themselves into thinking they can get Him to do their bidding.
They FIRST DECIDED THEY WANTED the Antichrist TO BE Barack Obama, then went on a WILD CHASE to find SOME WAY to try to make this Scripture "fit" their "candidate of choice".
When you do that, you can claim Bugs Bunny is the Antichrist.
WHAT THEY CAN'T DO IS PROVE IT.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The Antichrist is who GOD SAYS,NOT whom WE WANT HIM to be.
Did Jesus name the Antichrist? Yes.
He named him in the Book of Daniel. He named him in the Book of Revelation. He DID NOT name him in Luke 10:18.
MYTH #5: NO ONE WILL KNOW THE IDENTITY OF THE ANTICHRIST
This is pure myth. There's NOTHING in the Bible to indicate that.
If God didn't want Antichrist's identity revealed until he shows up, they why put it in the Scriptures? [Daniel 11:28,29; Revelation 13:2].
Furthermore, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 says that our gathering together with Jesus cannot take place until two things happen:
1. the Departure [ho apostasia] of the Church, and
2. the man of sin [Antichrist] is REVEALED.
MYTH #6: ANTICHRIST IS SHOT IN THE HEAD
That's NOT what the Bible says. If you read Revelation chapter 13 closely, it says John saw ONE of his SYMBOLIC HEADS as if wounded to death, but his deadly wound was healed.
The question is, if Antichrist is a man, and Revelation 13:18 UNEQUIVOCALLY STATES THAT HE IS, how many heads does he have?
Obviously, he's got one head. The 7 heads mentioned in verses 1 and 3, evidently, are SYMBOLIC.
What do they represent? The answer is found in Revelation 17:10 where the Antichrist beast is further described: THEY REPRESENT 7 KINGS, of which 5 are dead, one is living, and one has not yet come.
If THE HEADS are KINGS, then John SAW ONE OF THE 7 KINGS AS IF he had been wounded to death, but his deadly wound was healed.
The verb sphazo [meaning "wounded", "slain", "to slaughter or maim violently"] is used in the perfect passive participle, clearly indicating, this HAD ALREADY OCCURRED when John wrote it.
The word for "deadly wound" is plege, which means a deadly stroke.
Revelation 13:14 gives us one further detail, the wound in question ISN'T a head wound, or bullet wound, it's a SWORD WOUND.
The word translated "sword" is machaira in Greek. It means "a small sword, dirk or dirk-like object".
So, we have ONE of the 7 KINGS, who SUFFERS AND SURVIVES a mortal wound caused by a machaira.
NOWHERE DOES IT SAY the Antichrist is WOUNDED IN HIS HEAD.
This event had already happened, so we can immediately eliminate the FUTURE Antichrist [7th king] since his 3½-year kingdom hasn't yet happened.
Which of the 6 former KINGS, of the 6 former world empires, [Pharaoh, Sennacherib, Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, Alexander the Great, or Ceasar, suffered such a wound?
Julius Caesar comes to mind, since he was stabbed repeatedly with a large knife or small sword, BUT IT COULDN'T POSSIBLY BE Caesar, BECAUSE HE DIDN'T SURVIVE. The same can be said of Nero, who committed suicide by stabbing himself thru the neck.
Only one of these kings suffered such mortal wound, which he MIRACULOUSLY recovered from, to the surprise and wonder of his troops. What king was that? Alexander the Great.
It's well-documented, historic fact, that Alexander was STRUCK in the chest by a barbed arrow which pierced his lung, and came out his neck.
NO ONE, not even his doctors, thought he'd survive, but he did.
It took 39 different surgical procedures to mend the damage, but it healed.
Indeed, Plutarch compared Alexander to the Hydra, the mythical serpent which, when you cut one of its heads off, ANOTHER GREW IN ITS PLACE.
The Hydra, in fact, pictured below, CLOSELY RESEMBLES John's description of the Antichrist BEAST.
MYTH #7: ANTICHRIST'S 7-YEAR REIGNBible prophecy teaches, quite clearly, that Antichrist will appear on earth just prior to the last 3-1/2 years of tribulation, and that he will be permitted to rule the earth for only 3½ years, or 42 months. Nowhere does it state he will rule for 7 years. That's utterly false [Revelation 12:6, 14; 13:5].
MYTH #8: THE 7-YEAR PEACE TREATYAntichrist will NOT sign a peace treaty with anybody, much less for 7 years, since he'll only appear on earth for the last 3½ years of the tribulation.
This "treaty" is pure religious fabrication resulting from erroneous exegesis of Daniel 9:27 which reads: "he shall confirm the covenantwith many for one week" (Which, in prophetic lingo, refers not to a literal week (7 days), but a sabbatical week (7 years).
To "confirm", according to the dictionary, means to "ratify, reinforce or make formally valid something that already exists".
You can't "confirm" something that doesn't [already] exist.
The Antichrist is NOWHERE mentioned in this verse.
The word "peace" is found NOWHERE in this verse.
The word "treaty" is not found either.
NOWHERE does it state that the covenant is made, then broken. The words "make" and "break" are not found there, either.
Therefore, this verse doesn't refer to a future covenant, but to the already existing covenant between God and Abraham's seed.
The "He" mentioned here isn't the Antichrist, but the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Jesus, not the Antichrist, is the subject and focus of this prophecy [Daniel 9:25].
The Antichrist, I repeat, is not even mentioned.
But HOW can this refer to Jesus Christ? Doesn't Daniel 9:27 say that the same person who CONFIRMS the covenant COMMITS THE "abomination of desolation? NO, IT DOES NOT.
For FULL EXPLANATION of THAT FALSE TEACHING, read the VERY NEXT Myth #9.
"The covenant" refers to the [already existing] eternal covenant God made with Abraham and his Seed.
This chapter begins with a reference to that covenant [see Daniel 9:4].
The exact same word in Hebrew beryith is used in both verses [4 and 26]. In verse 4, Daniel is NOT talking about a "7-year peace treaty", but aboutthe [Abrahamic] covenant.
Messiah doesn't make this covenant. He confirms the already existing one. He ratifies it. How?
By dying on Mount Moriah where Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac 2,000 years earlier.
Abraham prophesied that God would provide Himself a lamb for the sacrifice and even called the place Yahwe Jireh [God will provide] [Genesis 22:8,14].
Jesus was the Lamb God provided, to confirm His covenant with Abraham and his Seed, just like Abraham predicted, just like Daniel predicted [Genesis 22:8-14, John 1:29].
Since Messiah is Abraham's Seed, only the Messiah is qualified to confirm such covenant.
This is Paul's clear teaching in the New Testament:
"Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made... to your seed, which is Christ.
And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before God in Christ, the law, which was 430 years after, cannot disannul"... [Galatians 3:16,17]
The Antichrist never was, nor will be, Abraham's Seed. Therefore, there'sno way he can confirm the [Abrahamic] covenant.
It's the Messiah who caused the [animal] sacrifice and oblation [grain offering] to cease.
God no longer accepts such sacrifices and offerings, since the ultimate sacrifice for sin, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah, already offered Himself as the final, eternal, all-sufficient sacrifice to confirm the eternal covenant God made with Abraham [Hebrews 9:12, 10:14].
It's ONLY the Messiah's precious Blood that can confirm His Covenant. It's ONLY His Blood that forever washes away our sins.Praise His Holy Name!
Leave it to the stale, sterile prophecy establishment to take a portion of scripture that's supposed to glorify God and exalt his faithfulness, and ascribe the prophecy to the Antichrist.
[Actually, that shouldn't surprise us, since it isn't His glory they seek, but their own].
One has to totally take this verse out of context, twist it, add a number of things it doesn't say, plus a good dose of religious speculation, to come up with the ludicrous "7-year peace treaty".
There's NOTHING IN THE ENTIRE BIBLE about a "7-year peace treaty".
Therefore, DON'T LOOK FOR a "7-year peace treaty" because there won't be one.
MYTH #9: ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION
Daniel 9:27 DOES NOT, repeat, DOES NOT refer to the "abomination of desolation". Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 DO.
BEFORE you fire off an e-mail asking "what about verse 27", ESPECIALLY THOSE OF YOU WHO READ THE NIV, please take a DEEP breath, and let that sink in for a moment.
I've nothing against the NIV, but it does not offer the most accurate translation of this particular verse.
Hence, Daniel 9:27 is NOT what Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:15-21 when He said that when they saw the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel in the temple (holy place), they should flee into the mountains.
He was referring, rather, to the other two passages: Daniel 11:31 and 12:11.
The Hebrew word used in Daniel 9:27 is shikkutzim which UNEQUIVOCALLY REFERS TO "ABOMINATIONS" [more than one, PLURAL].
In the other two passages it's shikkutz, which means JUST ONE "ABOMINATION" [SINGULAR].
Daniel 9:27 has already been fulfilled. Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 are still in our future.
The "prince that shall come" mentioned in Daniel 9:26 is NOT the Antichrist. Rather, it was Titus the Roman prince, who CAME in 70 A.D., some 600 after this prophecy was given, and destroyed the city [Jerusalem] and the second temple, PRECISELY as this prophecy foretold.
That is UNDISPUTED, HISTORIC FACT.
The "abominations" [plural] in Daniel 9:27, that caused the SECOND temple to be destroyed, and its site to remain desolate to this very day,are the same abominations that caused Jesus to throw out the moneychangers from it, and overturn their tables [John 2:14-16], the same ones that caused Him to refer to it as "a den of thieves"[Matthew 21:13; Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46].
Daniel 9:27, as explained in Myth #7 above, refers to Jesus who confirmed the Abrahamic Covenant, in the middle of the 70th week, and caused a Sabbath [shabath] of sacrifices. He made sacrifices stop, or "rest", because God no longer accepts those.
Fact is that Jews HAVEN'T offered sacrifices for the past
2,000 years. Who lived, died and resurrected 2,000 years ago, but the Christ?
How, then, can this cessation of sacrifices refer to the Antichrist, when he has YET TO APPEAR as such?
In Daniel 9:26 "the prince that shall come" destroys Jerusalem and the temple.
If this were the Antichrist, and if this were referring to him placing the [one] abomination of desolation Jesus spoke of, HOW COULD HE PLACE IT IN A TEMPLE HE JUST DESTROYED?
It doesn't add up.
To sum up, verses 26 and 27 CANNOT POSSIBLY refer to the Antichrist because:
1. The Hebrew text doesn't support it, since it DOESN'T talk about one specific abomination but MANY.
2. This prince [Titus] ALREADY [IN THE PAST] destroyed the city and the SECOND temple, fulfilling this prophecy.
The FUTURE Antichrist WILL NOT destroy Jerusalem, or the THIRD temple.
3. The future Antichrist will conquer Jerusalem [Zechariah 14:1,2] and SIT IN the third temple, passing himself off as God [2 Thessalonians 2:4].
He will place A SINGLE ABOMINATION [IDOL] of himself in the THIRD [yet to be built] temple.
4. If Daniel 9:26,27 referred to the Antichrist, Scripture would CONTRADICT ITSELF [perish the thought] because they say he'll destroy the city and the temple, whereas Zechariah 14:1 says he'll conquer the city and 2 Thessalonians 2:4 say he'll SIT IN the temple. He won't destroy either one.
5. As already stated in the previous Myth, the Antichrist is not mentioned IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, in the aforementioned verses.
6. As already stated in the previous Myth, Galatians 3:17 UNEQUIVOCALLY STATES it was Jesus, NOT THE ANTICHRIST, who ALREADY CONFIRMED THE COVENANT.
I didn't write the Bible. If you want to argue about it, take it up WITH GOD, not with me. Thank you.
MYTH #10: THE PRINCE THAT SHALL COME
Self-declared prophecy pundits will tell you, time and again, that this "prince that shall come" mentioned in Daniel 9:26 is the Antichrist.
There are at least 5 MAJOR problems with their FALSE theory:
1. The Antichrist is NOWHERE mentioned in this verse.
2. The Antichrist, according to the Bible, will NOT destroy Jerusalem and the temple. Rather, he will CONQUER AND OCCUPY Jerusalem [Zechariah 14:2] and SIT IN the temple, passing himself off as God [2 Thessalonians 2:4]. Hence, there's NO WAY this "prince" can be the Antichrist.
3. This prophecy was ALREADY FULFILLED, in precise detail, 2,000 years ago.
4. There's no "mystery" whatsoever as to the identity of this prince.
5. The prince in question is the Roman prince Titus, son of Caesar Vespasian, who destroyed Jerusalem and its temple in 70 A.D., EXACTLY as Gabriel predicted.
In Daniel 9:25-27, Gabriel predicted that Jerusalem and the temple would be rebuilt [they were], then ONCE AGAIN destroyed. They were.
He predicted that, from the edict to rebuild Jerusalem to the Messiah, there would be 69 sabbatical "weeks" [483 years].
After the 483 years, in the middle of the FINAL week [3½ years later] Messiah would be killed.
Then [after Messiah's death] this prince would come and destroy the city and the temple.
Everything happened, in exact sequence:
Jesus began His public ministry in the fall of 29 A.D. He died for our sins and rose from the dead 3½ years later, in the spring of 33 A.D.
Some 37 years later, the Roman 10th Legion, under Titus's command, totally destroyed the temple and leveled the city to the ground.
This "prince" IS NOT in our future. He already came and fulfilled this portion of the prophecy IN OUR PAST.
That's not speculation. That's FACT.
No comments:
Post a Comment