Daniel 11:37, The Future Antichrist Will Be A Jew/Hebrew In Decent

[OrphanedRepublican]

I agree with your political opinion, apparently, and also with your religious opinion about Lutherans, Mormons, etc. I do have a friend who is a Lutheran pastor, and he's actually really good. You can't judge all fish by a school of sick ones. Mormonism is a heretical Christian cult. They are externally Christian and biblical. But they interpret the Christian Scriptures differently, and with a different, exclusivistic spirit. Don't be fooled by them--apparently you're not.

I don't like the idea of "try it to see how good it is," instead of studying things against the Scripture first. Apparently you're good at beginning with Scripture only to start with? So I agree with much of what you say.

I don't really think Michael was Jesus. But I don't have a problem with Christians who may think so.

I do think you would do well to keep reading in these forums, and do independent research when a subject comes up that concerns you. I fell into a Christian cult many years ago, even though I was pretty well-established in the faith. But I was not particularly educated.

Fortunately, I moved to a city where one of the most effective apologists for the Christian faith in the US taught, and was particularly adept at dealing with cults. His name was Dr. Walter Martin. He wrote "Kingdom of the Cults," a classic work on the Christian cults in America. But he was capable of answering any question from a knowledgeable pov. His style, in particularly, spoke to me. On radio he was pretty strong. On Sunday mornings he was one of the funniest guys I ever heard!

Thanks for your input!

I started with an avid interest in history, then patterns of world religions then theology and then ultimately apologetics. I understand the interest and NECESSITY of Christian apologetics once you study other religions. So, I'm not knocking it at all. Effective persuasion of the values and ultimate primacy of Christian faith is its own type of "soldiering." But, ultimately, God makes the case for himself the best.

I get your point about try it to see how good it is. There's a couple lines of OT scripture read. There's a couple verses of NT scripture read. There's some hymns. There's some recitation of creeds. There's a sermon that doesn't connect me to God's word or understanding its mysteries. Some community announcements. It seems like faith by rote. And always, in most churches, some graven image or idol somewhere in view.

People used to dress up in their "Sunday best" when going to church. Now there are t-shirts, jeans and unruly children. Not all. The older folks still come with their most polished and elegant appearance.

 

[OldSage]

That is an interesting idea. But, then the logical question is, does the church possess the power and glory of the word? I think we all know the power, cause and effect of the word belongs to the chief messenger who will not share praise or glory with anyone. He empowers his angels to spread his word and perform miracles.

The empowerment of the word, is it in the church and its leadership or does it remain with the chief messenger who is the power behind it?

I don't know. Paul says that the AC will be destroyed by spirit of Jesus' mouth and the brightness of his coming. The brightness seems to mean scriptural prophecy.

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

The spirit of his mouth seems to mean scripture, as Jesus is seeen with the 2 edged sword in his mouth.
So if it is scripture and prophecy that destroys him, delivered by a group, not of private interpretation, then it suggests the Church overcoming the AC

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

The Chief Messenger, Jesus Christ, is the ORIGIN of the Message, angels and the Church just pass it on (they 'message' it).

You're half way there. All you need now is to understand what an angel is.

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

I don't know. Paul says that the AC will be destroyed by spirit of Jesus' mouth and the brightness of his coming. The brightness seems to mean scriptural prophecy.

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

The spirit of his mouth seems to mean scripture, as Jesus is seeen with the 2 edged sword in his mouth.
So if it is scripture and prophecy that destroys him, delivered by a group, not of private interpretation, then it suggests the Church overcoming the AC

AC meaning antichrist? When it comes to that topic, I'm kind of in the dark. I do believe the day star is Jesus Christ because he says he is the morning star in Revelation and the morning star is a reward for the faithful.

Other than that, I'm bewildered with end times prophesy.

 

[OldSage]

I suppose that 1) proving through scripture that Jesus was the Messiah and 2) through prophetic scripture that he is returning would burst the AC's bubble

 

[OldSage]

AntiChrist

 

[crossnote]

You're half way there. All you need now is to understand what an angel is.

An angel is a created being that also acts as a messenger....not God!
'Half way there?', I'd rather not go in that direction, lol

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

An angel is a created being that also acts as a messenger....not God!
'Half way there?', I'd rather not go in that direction, lol

An angel is a messenger. As I've said numerous times. Created angels in heaven are described by God as "powerful ministering spirits." Not that they don't get dispatched by Michael, the archangel to deliver a message.

But, I've finally found the proof in the Bible that no leaves no room for doubt any longer.


The prince has been identified as the Messiah in Daniel Chapter 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Michael is identified as the great prince of the people of Israel in Daniel Chapter 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

We are full circle now. There is no more room for doubt. The Bible has declared the identity of Michael (the one and only Michael contending with Satan) to be the Messiah. We know who the Messiah is.

If the verse in Jude still causes doubt, then you'll probably have trouble with Zechariah 3:2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

 

[crossnote]

An angel is a messenger. As I've said numerous times. Created angels in heaven are described by God as "powerful ministering spirits." Not that they don't get dispatched by Michael, the archangel to deliver a message.

But, I've finally found the proof in the Bible that no leaves no room for doubt any longer.


The prince has been identified as the Messiah in Daniel Chapter 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Michael is identified as the great prince of the people of Israel in Daniel Chapter 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

We are full circle now. There is no more room for doubt. The Bible has declared the identity of Michael (the one and only Michael contending with Satan) to be the Messiah. We know who the Messiah is.

If the verse in Jude still causes doubt, then you'll probably have trouble with Zechariah 3:2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

With your logic, I can pick out any mention of Prince in the bible, including the prince of the power of air, and claim it's Jesus. That is plain nutso.
So now you are stating Michael in Jude 9 is Jesus? If so, that is simply heretical.

 

[Runningman]

An angel is a messenger. As I've said numerous times. Created angels in heaven are described by God as "powerful ministering spirits." Not that they don't get dispatched by Michael, the archangel to deliver a message.

But, I've finally found the proof in the Bible that no leaves no room for doubt any longer.


The prince has been identified as the Messiah in Daniel Chapter 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Michael is identified as the great prince of the people of Israel in Daniel Chapter 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

We are full circle now. There is no more room for doubt. The Bible has declared the identity of Michael (the one and only Michael contending with Satan) to be the Messiah. We know who the Messiah is.

If the verse in Jude still causes doubt, then you'll probably have trouble with Zechariah 3:2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

Your interpretation is impossible.

Since you seemed to have ignored Hebrews 1, I'll just post the whole chapter:

Hebrews 1:1-14
1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
7And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
8But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
9Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
10And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
11They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
12And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
13But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
14Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

 

[Mem]

@Orphaned,
Although I lean toward the understanding that Jesus and Michael are not the same side, I can see how a definitive view of it might be difficult to ascertain, and so I try to give effort in understanding other views as at the least worth considering. Not that this would necessarily clarify my inclination to view it this way or that but you mentioned the meaning of archangel as being an chief angel (you might have specified "the," so sorry if I misrepresent you there). I can't atm recall, and therefore tag, exactly who brought Gabriel up earlier using the reference to the account of the angel delayed in engagement with the Prince of Persia that appeared to interpret Daniel's vision. I've learned since, having recently looked it up, of the position that this is Gabriel whom is also considered an archangel. However, according to your interpretation, there can be only one '"chief angel," correct?

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

Your interpretation is impossible.

Since you seemed to have ignored Hebrews 1, I'll just post the whole chapter:

Hebrews 1:1-14
1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
7And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
8But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
9Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
10And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
11They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
12And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
13But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
14Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

I understand your points. But, I'm not saying Jesus was made a God from a created angel. You have the verses there that are all saying the same thing, that Jesus is above all the angels. He is the chief messenger (which is what angels are.) He is their captain, their prince, their leader. All these titles describe Jesus. Michael, the archangel is a singular person who is the captain, the chief, the prince.

Your verses tell us that God never chose a created angel or a man to do the work that Jesus did.

There is no contradiction or conflict in what you've cited in Hebrews to the truth that Jesus is Michael, the archangel. The Bible has declared it and you either believe or you will not believe.

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

@Orphaned,
Although I lean toward the understanding that Jesus and Michael are not the same side, I can see how a definitive view of it might be difficult to ascertain, and so I try to give effort in understanding other views as at the least worth considering. Not that this would necessarily clarify my inclination to view it this way or that but you mentioned the meaning of archangel as being an chief angel (you might have specified "the," so sorry if I misrepresent you there). I can't atm recall, and therefore tag, exactly who brought Gabriel up earlier using the reference to the account of the angel delayed in engagement with the Prince of Persia that appeared to interpret Daniel's vision. I've learned since, having recently looked it up, of the position that this is Gabriel whom is also considered an archangel. However, according to your interpretation, there can be only one '"chief angel," correct?

Michael is always referred to in singular as "the" archangel. Meaning, there is no other "archangel." Gabriel sheds a little light on the matter when he declares he is helped by Michael. They are 2 separate entities.

There is another concept that ties in nicely with Michael being Jesus. We are told that the devil is always "accusing" us and that Jesus is making intercession. Revelation 12:10/Romans 8:34. Interestingly, Michael always appears in the scriptures to be contending with Satan. This is that constant accuse/intercede battle, I think. Maybe not, but certainly is an adversarial position.

 

[Runningman]

I understand your points. But, I'm not saying Jesus was made a God from a created angel. You have the verses there that are all saying the same thing, that Jesus is above all the angels. He is the chief messenger (which is what angels are.) He is their captain, their prince, their leader. All these titles describe Jesus. Michael, the archangel is a singular person who is the captain, the chief, the prince.

Your verses tell us that God never chose a created angel or a man to do the work that Jesus did.

There is no contradiction or conflict in what you've cited in Hebrews to the truth that Jesus is Michael, the archangel. The Bible has declared it and you either believe or you will not believe.

Hebrews 1 entirely rules out the possibility that Jesus is or ever was an angel. It states that Jesus is God Himself. The Bible has declared this to you. You will either believe or will not believe.

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

Hebrews 1 entirely rules out the possibility that Jesus is or ever was an angel. It states that Jesus is God Himself. The Bible has declared this to you. You will either believe or will not believe.

Good luck on your journey.

 

[Truth7t7]

Really, to be honest, I just don't know anything about churches or denominations. I was raised in a Presbyterian church, learned doctrine of free willism, discovered that wasn't biblical, and never went back. I tried a Lutheran church after that which seemed "luke warm," and had a giant life-sized modernist wood carving of a man hanging on a cross that I found very offensive. I don't like graven images. I sat in that church for about a year and little memory of it other than that offensive modern artistic graven image of Jesus on the cross.

After that, I have stuck to very strict solo scriptura study and am at a real disadvantage discussing churches and denominations because I don't know any of them and don't have the inclination to study them or their histories. Although in the past I have looked at the Mormons and their claim to have new prophesies, angelic tablets, blah, blah. I investigated them a little bit at the time Mit Romney was running against President Obama to determine what kind of man a Mormon might be as a president. I voted for Romney, though he is rather despicable to me these days. How church denominations are organized, their doctrines, their theologies, I just couldn't care less about them nowadays.

Direct Question: Do you believe in a literal place of torment upon death for the wicked "Hell"?

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

Hebrews 1 entirely rules out the possibility that Jesus is or ever was an angel. It states that Jesus is God Himself. The Bible has declared this to you. You will either believe or will not believe.

I can't help myself, but I have found another verse that very mysteriously, yet conclusively declares that Jesus is an angel. But in order to understand this, you have to let the Bible interpret itself. So at this point, you will need to correct the Scriptures for their "error" of calling Jesus an angel.

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Who intercedes on our behalf from the "roaring lion" the devil? Let the Bible interpret itself. It's called the devil this.

Who shuts the mouths of the roaring lion so it cannot devour us? The one who covers our sins and intercedes for us?

Daniel 6:22 My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that they have not hurt me: forasmuch as before him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt.

 

[Mem]

Michael is always referred to in singular as "the" archangel. Meaning, there is no other "archangel." Gabriel sheds a little light on the matter when he declares he is helped by Michael. They are 2 separate entities.

There is another concept that ties in nicely with Michael being Jesus. We are told that the devil is always "accusing" us and that Jesus is making intercession. Revelation 12:10/Romans 8:34. Interestingly, Michael always appears in the scriptures to be contending with Satan. This is that constant accuse/intercede battle, I think. Maybe not, but certainly is an adversarial position.

Actually, this is the first I've learned that this particular speaker in Daniel 10 is thought to be Gabriel, though I can see its assumption considering Daniel specified Gabriel speaking in Daniel 9 vision, with an added inclusion of the Daniel 8 vision, and is identified in 8 by 'the voice of a man calling from between the banks of the Ulai.' However, it seems peculiar to me that Daniel does not specify Gabriel in his vision by the Tigris, but only elaborates on his appearance , ie eyes of flame, voice like the sound of the multitude... the mysterious man with the voice of many waters perhaps (*Ulai is Hebrew for 'perhaps yes' whereas Penai is Hebrew for 'perhaps (and hopefully) no' or 'lest') a description which brings a vision of the LORD, to my mind. And, if I do see Him correctly, since He refers to both Gabriel and Michael as separate from Him, then He can be consider as neither of these.

 

[Mem]

(*Ulai is Hebrew for 'perhaps yes' whereas Penai is Hebrew for 'perhaps (and hopefully) no' or 'lest')

My Hebrew is sketchy, I'm probably wrong on the exact meaning of ulai, although I am almost certain the word I'm thinking of is derived from the same root which is characteristic of Hebrew to mean these words are closely related.

 

[Runningman]

I can't help myself, but I have found another verse that very mysteriously, yet conclusively declares that Jesus is an angel. But in order to understand this, you have to let the Bible interpret itself. So at this point, you will need to correct the Scriptures for their "error" of calling Jesus an angel.

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Who intercedes on our behalf from the "roaring lion" the devil? Let the Bible interpret itself. It's called the devil this.

Who shuts the mouths of the roaring lion so it cannot devour us? The one who covers our sins and intercedes for us?

Daniel 6:22 My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that they have not hurt me: forasmuch as before him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt.

I would like to add this before I answer that:

Behold Daniel 10:13
13But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.

So there is more than one prince Michael is not the only prince referred to in Daniel.

Daniel 6 does not say which angel shut the mouth of the lion. I mean, it could be any of them. God's angels can do whatever He tells them to. Doesn't mean it was Michael or Jesus.