Comments on: America is being set up for deception on every front and on both coasts

By: Don

Don — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:04:58 +0000

More likely the source of all religious deception is the same evil spirit. All false religion descends from the false religion first set up at Babylon and that is the root of the commonality in symbols that you see in many religions of the world.

By: jn

jn — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:02:45 +0000

Catholic church created Islam that’s right Freemasory the shriners is also Islam when you get to top levels they replace the bible w/ koron bible… Just remember catholic church controls Islam you must know the occults to see the hidden symbols in the catolic church.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=walter+J.Veith&search_type=&aq=f

By: nasrani

nasrani — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:16:33 +0000

Yes, unfortunately some people still like to claim you can’t be truly lutheran or calvinist (i.e. reformed) AND believe in a literal (pre)millenial fullfilment of Revelation no matter what you tell them. I think they’re the kind of people you described to me once as holding to wooden interpretations of the Bible or their denomination’s creed. I know for a fact that many religious reformed people actually are postmillenialists or premillenialists. But perhaps that’s not the case among the majority of presbyterian or reformed denominations in the US. I understand there is a conflict between strict covenant and strictly dispensationalist teachings but if any visitor here has taken the time to read your homepage then they’d know you’re not even a pure dispensationalist. Even so, Spurgeon was not a dispensationalist but strictly reformed and still held to a certain premillenialism. If God had any purpose with the Reformers at all I thought it was to show us men that we are to follow the teachings of the Bible and not heap up our own teachers? Luther and Calvin undoubtedly have made immense contributions to Christianity but they are not without fault and I think eschatology may be one such area.

By: Don

Don — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 17:17:08 +0000

You are correct about Spurgeon. I should not have thrown in that name but did so because the comment by “J” commentator used Luther, Calvin and Spurgeon. Luther and Calvin believed there was no millennial reign on earth. That does make them amillennial.

You are correct that they thought the Pope would fulfill the prophecies of the Antichrist figure in Revelation making them hold to an historical interpretation of Revelation but that view has since fallen into disfavor.

Here is a quote from the New World Encyclopeida on Amillennialism and the Reformers.

“Amillennialism was the dominant view of the Protestant Reformers. The Lutheran Church formally rejected chiliasm in the The Augsburg Confession—“Art. XVII., condemns the Anabaptists and others ’who now scatter Jewish opinions that, before the resurrection of the dead, the godly shall occupy the kingdom of the world, the wicked being everywhere suppressed.’”[9] Likewise, the Swiss Reformer, Heinrich Bullinger wrote up the Second Helvetic Confession, which reads, “We also reject the Jewish dream of a millennium, or golden age on earth, before the last judgment.”[10] John Calvin wrote in Institutes that chiliasm is a “fiction” which is “too childish either to need or to be worth a refutation.” He interpreted the thousand year period of Revelation 20 non-literally, applying it to the “various disturbances that awaited the church, while still toiling on earth.”[11]“

By: nasrani

nasrani — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 16:10:26 +0000

Spurgeon did not have amillenial theology but believed in a form of premillenialism (though indeed not dispensationalism). You all should get your facts straight before making all sorts of silly claims. And there’s no reason to believe Luther or Calvin held amillenialism either. In fact Reformers like Calvin saw the Roman church and more specifically the Pope as a future Antichrist. Now who’s silly? Anyway, their theology was more concerned with reforming the church and fighting against heresy instead of eschatology. It’s not suprising they identified the Antichrist as the Pope in view of the situation they found themselves in.

No Christian should want to claim the Reformers or people like Spurgeon (a reformed Baptist, btw) for themselves in debates about eschatology, you only dishonor these great minds. That is silly.

By: Don

Don — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 00:02:51 +0000

I already addressed the Islam issue in another post. All people that were in any religion will follow the Antichrist because he will claim to be above anything called God. However there is little reason to think that the Beast or the Beast world government is based on the religion of Islam. The remnant of the Catholic Church will be involved along with all the other religions. Anyway, it is all explained here.

http://www.thepropheticyears.com/wordpress/2008/07/24/will-the-antichrist-and-his-beast-government-come-from-islam.html

By: Kay

Kay — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 23:40:47 +0000

I fail to see clear biblical basis for Catholic Church, though I agree Catholcism is a mess. I think it is Islam there are far more scriptures that point to it. The daughters of Allah are mentioned in Zechariah 5–the wicked woman in basket carried by to women w/ stork wings. These two women are what the Quran says are Allat, Uzzah, and Manat, the exalted cranes intermediaries of Allah. (see Satanic verses)
The wicked women is spirit of Jezebel who kills all the saints and innocents and sets up the false prophets of Baal who eat at her table. Judaism also had a roll in Islam’s creation which explains the house of Israel connected to it in Zechariah. The reason why she is a “mystery” is because her resemblance is past over the earth until she sets on her own house(royal dynasty) in the plain of Shinar. This is accurate historically–though Mecca is Muslims (un)Holy city—Baghdad(ancient Babylon) was the center for military conquest and where the Caliphate back (Damascus briefly was at one time too) and was the Islamic capital.

Think about this in Isaiah 14—Lucifer is also Hilal and also means son of the crscent moon and star. This is Islam’s symbol( the Greco-Romans called it the star of Diana and Lucifer)

Just think about it. And yes I agree the Pope is false, but please try to see the entire picture.

By: J

Fri, 09 May 2008 22:10:13 +0000

Silly fellow!

By: Don

Don — Fri, 09 May 2008 22:04:59 +0000

I certainly had good reason to be nasty after your personal attacks but I really was quite civil.

By: J

Fri, 09 May 2008 21:32:30 +0000

I forgot to answer your question.

You are not nasty because you do not agree with me. You are just plain nasty in your reply.

Now: ‘Bye Don!