The "revived Roman empire" is another
Posted on 08/23/2009 5:16:05 AM PDT by kingattax
One of the central tenets of the Christian belief in a coming Roman Antichrist is under fire because, as the author of a new book shows, the destruction of the Jerusalem in A.D. 70 was actually carried out by peoples from the Middle East, not Europe.
As Joel Richardson, author of "The Islamic Antichrist," writes today in WND's commentary section, one of the pillars of the European Antichrist theory is a prophecy in Daniel 9: "The people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary."
When the Temple was destroyed in A.D. 70 and the city of Jerusalem sacked, while under Roman occupation, many prophecy scholars assumed the future dark prince needs to be Roman. However, historical research by Richardson now suggests otherwise.
He points out Emperor Augustus made a series of sweeping reforms that led to dramatic changes in the ethnic make-up of the Roman armies. After this time, the army was increasingly composed of anything but Italian or European soldiers. Instead, he writes, they were composed of what were known as "provincials," or citizens who lived in the provinces – the outer fringes of the empire.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
No, but they destroyed the U. of Pennsylvania and Bucknell.
Who did? The Romans or the Middle Easterners? lol
The Kenyans?
Whoever said that the antichrist would be Roman?
Made head of the Roman Catholic Church, perhaps, and the Muslim Mahdi, but only after he manifests himself, and fools the people of the world into thinking he is divine.
I’ve looked at the subject and from the historical evidence the Jews actually ‘destroyed’ the city and the temple, the Roman’s simply quelled the uprising. The proper translation of the word ‘destroy’ is to ‘cause ruin’, check it out; Strong’s Concordance.
I wrote a short blog about this subject (http://www.snwh.net/blog/2009/01/17/who-dunnit/) with more information explaining what actually happened.
They're moving into being a positive spiritual danger.
End Times Ping.
This is World Nut Daily at it’s dishonest worst. Farah’s obsession with nutbag “prophecy” ruins his credibility, which is sad because he sometimes has some significant scoops.
All the article says is that the Roman armies of the time were no longer composed of Roman freemen but largely of non-Roman “auxiliaries.”
This has never been a secret. Everyone who has a smattering of knowledge of Roman history knows this. The Romans drew on the peoples outside the Empire to fill the ranks of the legions. They had to, and not just in the late stages of the Empire but at this time period because there just weren’t enough old-Roman-Republic-type free men to staff the kind of army required to defend the Empire. And people wanted to enter Roman army service because it was a path inside the empire, a path to Roman citizenship.
But under whose command did these “auxiliary” troops destroy Jerusalem? Roman command.
The Empire had been multi-ethnic for centuries. People from “outside” ethnic groups had always served as provincial administrators and governors. They had always been recruited into the armies.
And the British did the same in India and throughout their empire and the French did the same and so on and so forth.
Farah’s a fool to publish this as breathless discovery.
Then again, he’s not a fool. It’s his niche and it drives web-traffic to his site, web-traffic of a certain credulous “prophecy”-drunk Bible-thumpers.
Farah is nothing if not sensationalist.
More “news” from WND.
I should make a small correction. I should not have written that provincial governors came from the ranks of the conquered peoples. Non-Roman “local” ethnics served as “kings” or “rulers” of subject or allied kingdoms or other political units. I think actual provincial governors continued to be pretty much taken from the old Roman nobility at least during these centuries. But a lot of conquered peoples were ruled by rulers of their own ethnicity, as long as the rulers understood who was boss. Or there’d be a dual rulership—as with Herod, a subject king and the Jewish aristocracy going back to the Maccabeans side-by-side with the provincial governor, Pontius Pilate.
Yeah, I was never taught that, or believed that. The false messiah would be just that-false. He didn't necessarily have to be from "Rome". Believers will know it when we see it. Obama is a "type" -and not a very successful one at that!
I always thought there was something devious about Bucknell.
How did you come up with the head of the Catholic church as a possible candidate?
Thanks.
Will check it out.
Interesting assertions.
I think the prophecies yet to be fulfilled . . . indicate that the ‘revived’ Roman empire will be a key player in the satanic END TIMES tyrannical global government.
Seems to me, that’s already true. It’s essentially from that empire that the elites in control arose.
VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.-- Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 25, paragraph 6
We saw this coming years ago when Farah added prophecy nutjob Hal Lindsey to the WND stable.
I didn't say that the Pope would become the Antichrist, I said Anticrist would become the Pope. I think in prophecy it is clear that after the Antichrist manifests, he/it will be made the leader of all the worlds religious organizations. Believers will reject him, and be persecuted.
The "revived Roman empire" is another
The prediction is that the AC will rule over what was the Roman Empire but he is not necessarily a Roman or even a European.
I believe it would be more accurate to say the False Prophet is thought to be a Roman Catholic pope who will lead his religion into a world, ecumenical religion which includes Izlam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc...
This one world religion will usher in the anti-Christ who will bring temporary peace to the world, and who will be accepted and revered by all religions of the world...
He will not necessarily be a Catholic, or a muzlim but they will look to him as their leader...
After three and a half years, he will be struck down and killed...This anti-Christ will come back to life and claim to be God...People will witness the miracle on CNN, Fox, CBS, etc. and all fall in line to worship the 'Christ'...
It is said by many who have researched the scriptures that this anti-Christ will be an Israeli of Arabic descent
One of the central tenets of the Christian belief in a coming Roman Antichrist
Huh? Since when is a minor feature of modern dispensational eschatology a "central tenet of Christian belief", on the level of any assertion in the Apostle's Creed?
That does it. I'm starting a "WND Heresy" file.
Sorry. You are swimming upstream. The historical record shows quite clearly that Titus’ men destroyed the Temple.
Since this is all being invented by dispensational futurists, that can say anything is possible. He could be Colombian or Korean or and Eskimo. It doesn't matter when you are inventing theology on the fly. Folks will still buy the books no matter how nutty the ideas. Richardson is another one who has figured out how to capitalize on the ignornace of the Christian reading public.
I think our REPLACEMENTARIANS et al heresy file would be a LOT longer.
“Prophetic shocker: Romans didn’t destroy Temple”
Yet.
Was it Prisca or Maximilla who spoke at service today?
I see some REPLACEMENTARIANS et al have taken out a license on the
ABSURD BLATHER
communications module! LOL.
Look it up.
Flattering the bloke in your mirror again?
Oh, that’s right, the mirrors were shattered long ago!
My memory of such things is faint, indeed.
It may be that a refresher would be worth it when I have the time.
However, it is striking that some seem to construe themselves as the only readers of such histories . . . somewhat akin to construing their tidy little boxed personal theologies as the only comprehensive REALLY TRUESTLY REAL AND TRUESTLY TRUE “theology.”
And here I thought they kept helium mostly in pressure cylinders and balloons.
LOL.
The revived Roman empire doesn’t necessarily mean Rome itself but all the other countries involved in that. None of us really knows, but it’s fun to speculate.
INDEED.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachSomehow the Arch of Titus in Rome documents the sack of Jerusalem.
YUP.
Had forgotten that.
Thx.
"... abounds with proofs ...". Sure it does. More eschatology on crack.
A death match between two competing works of fiction. This ought to be good.
It may be "fun" for you, but it is a useless exercise and disgraces our Lord who gave us His Word for something other than our personal amusement.
A death match between two competing works of fiction. This ought to be good.
My memory of such things is faint, indeed. It may be that a refresher would be worth it when I have the time.
You really should. "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it."
However, it is striking that some seem to construe themselves as the only readers of such histories . . . somewhat blah blah blah
Many "prophecy scholars" assume (wrongly) that there will be a "future dark prince". It's just another example of
think what you like, topcat. We eagerly await the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and we do not shame Him with our speculation. That seems to be YOUR problem, not ours.
Sorry, but “it’s fun to speculate” indicates a low view of the person and work of Jesus Christ, as if the Word of God is a personal play thing. It’s also an excuse for shoddy exegetical work.
I don’t consider the word of God a plaything. But people have always been interested in who the AC might be. Nothing wrong with that.
You missed my point, physically yes the Roman’s destroyed the Temple (as an example) but the Jews clearly desecrated and caused the ruin of the city and the Sanctuary.
Daniel 9:26
... and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy (cause the ruin of) the city and the sanctuary ...
Strong’s translation on the word ‘destroy’:
“A primitive root; to decay, that is, (causatively)ruin (literally or figuratively):...
In this case: literally. So I say again, it was the Jews that caused the destruction of the Temple and is therefore (according to Daniel) the ‘people’ of the prince.
JB
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
