can I skip the 3.5 hr long video and cut to the chase: the Papacy, including every pope, is the anti-christ and always has been.
Merger of Church and State, "God-Emperor" ceaser-priest, who rules over the kings of the earth until the Capture of Rome in 1870 (deadly wound) which effectively removed the Papacy's political power (for a season). You will say "Paul said the MAN of sin in 2 Thess. 3!" and I would say:
the word "man" in 2 Thess. 2:3 can also be used to refer to a GROUP or CLASS of men! Hello papacy! "Men of sin"
444 (anthrōpos) relates to both genders (male and female) as both are created in the image of God – each equally vested with individual personhood and destiny (cf. Gal 3:28). Accordingly, the Bible uses 444 (ánthrōpos) of a specific man, woman, or class (type, group) of people – i.e. mankind in general (inclusive of every man, woman and child; see also 1 Cor 11:7). (435 /anḗr specifically refers to a male and 1135 /gynḗ to a female.)
The "son of perdition", rather, the class of men who [5207 hyiós – properly, a son (by birth or adoption); (figuratively) anyone sharing the same nature as their Father.] share the same nature as "destruction, ruin, loss, perishing; eternal ruin." (apóleia)
The "Dark Ages" sure saw a lot of that! More than any other time in history.
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
I mean you could skip another perspective and present that of your own but I think you'd find the symbolism surrounding his theory interesting to say the least. Personally I lean more in the direction of the pope being the false profit but thanks for sharing anyway.
I don't have time right now is why, I'll keep this tab up though and check it out. It would be nice if you can give me his answer beforehand, because I may have already gone down this viewpoint rabbit hole. In the last few years I've heard a wide array on the topic
I would say if you are short on time and would like a quick read on the subject matter of his book that this video revolves around. Scroll down and in my comment to this post you'll find a link to a fairly detailed synopsis. From there you can decide if it's worth your time. If symbolism and timing aren't your thing then you may not find it as interesting of a theory as I do.
I've heard this theory before. Might have been by the same guy. However, I feel that Charles is too old and disliked to be the actual Antichrist. Plus, he is apparently dying, unless he gets his cancer cured.
I think at the time of his writing the book it was easier to conceptualize then. If the Antichrist does emerge from the royal bloodline, presently it seems more likely to be William. This is supported by other information regarding William not included here in his interview. However if you are looking for some interesting content to think on, don't let the criticism of the length and depth of his presentation discouraged you from listening.
I see alot of spoiled and whiny brats filled with the spirit of Antichrist all over collage campuses and on the TV lately. Seems like there could be a pattern there to me.
Another interesting theory I have heard is that the Islamic savior, the Mahdi, is actually the Antichrist. I heard they are suppose to do similar things, in the end times.
can I skip the 3.5 hr long video and cut to the chase: the Papacy, including every pope, is the anti-christ and always has been.
Merger of Church and State, "God-Emperor" ceaser-priest, who rules over the kings of the earth until the Capture of Rome in 1870 (deadly wound) which effectively removed the Papacy's political power (for a season). You will say "Paul said the MAN of sin in 2 Thess. 3!" and I would say:
the word "man" in 2 Thess. 2:3 can also be used to refer to a GROUP or CLASS of men! Hello papacy! "Men of sin"
444 (anthrōpos) relates to both genders (male and female) as both are created in the image of God – each equally vested with individual personhood and destiny (cf. Gal 3:28). Accordingly, the Bible uses 444 (ánthrōpos) of a specific man, woman, or class (type, group) of people – i.e. mankind in general (inclusive of every man, woman and child; see also 1 Cor 11:7). (435 /anḗr specifically refers to a male and 1135 /gynḗ to a female.)
https://biblehub.com/greek/444.htm
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_thessalonians/2-3.htm
The "son of perdition", rather, the class of men who [5207 hyiós – properly, a son (by birth or adoption); (figuratively) anyone sharing the same nature as their Father.] share the same nature as "destruction, ruin, loss, perishing; eternal ruin." (apóleia)
The "Dark Ages" sure saw a lot of that! More than any other time in history.
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
No "group or class of men" fit it better!
An informative summation can be found here:
https://files.catbox.moe/yaicm2.pdf
pages 49 - 64
I mean you could skip another perspective and present that of your own but I think you'd find the symbolism surrounding his theory interesting to say the least. Personally I lean more in the direction of the pope being the false profit but thanks for sharing anyway.
I don't have time right now is why, I'll keep this tab up though and check it out. It would be nice if you can give me his answer beforehand, because I may have already gone down this viewpoint rabbit hole. In the last few years I've heard a wide array on the topic
I would say if you are short on time and would like a quick read on the subject matter of his book that this video revolves around. Scroll down and in my comment to this post you'll find a link to a fairly detailed synopsis. From there you can decide if it's worth your time. If symbolism and timing aren't your thing then you may not find it as interesting of a theory as I do.
Ok will do, ty!
I've heard this theory before. Might have been by the same guy. However, I feel that Charles is too old and disliked to be the actual Antichrist. Plus, he is apparently dying, unless he gets his cancer cured.
I think at the time of his writing the book it was easier to conceptualize then. If the Antichrist does emerge from the royal bloodline, presently it seems more likely to be William. This is supported by other information regarding William not included here in his interview. However if you are looking for some interesting content to think on, don't let the criticism of the length and depth of his presentation discouraged you from listening.
If he is the antichrist, he's the whiniest, temper-tamtrum-baby antichrist ever! https://youtu.be/2Encm187scA?si=owTU2LC1rdlcn6zM
Also this one, https://youtu.be/alFsYEbTPQ4?si=_x9KFju0HxQK6mEu
It cracks me up to think of a whiny, spoiled antichrist
I see alot of spoiled and whiny brats filled with the spirit of Antichrist all over collage campuses and on the TV lately. Seems like there could be a pattern there to me.
Another interesting theory I have heard is that the Islamic savior, the Mahdi, is actually the Antichrist. I heard they are suppose to do similar things, in the end times.
Interview by Jon Pounders of NYSTV and Scott Harwell.
Detailed synopsis of Tim's book
https://www.librarything.com/work/6484809
A link to a copy of the book for free on Archive.org
https://archive.org/details/the-antichrist-amp-a-cup-of-tea-by-tim-cohen_compress/mode/1up
Edited to contain link to mentioned post:
https://greatawakening.win/p/17t1outp8n/king-charles-new-portrait-mirror/c/