Bladestunner316
Puritan Board Doctor
Hey I still want Vaders armor 
The Antichrist
- Thread starter C. Matthew McMahon
- Start date
- Status
[quote:6f462127f2][i:6f462127f2]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:6f462127f2]
[quote:6f462127f2][i:6f462127f2]Originally posted by puritansailor[/i:6f462127f2]
At least he had a cool car! [/quote:6f462127f2]
kit [/quote:6f462127f2]
Actually, KITT (Knight Industries Two Thousand)
[quote:6f462127f2][i:6f462127f2]Originally posted by puritansailor[/i:6f462127f2]
At least he had a cool car!
[/quote:6f462127f2]kit [/quote:6f462127f2]
Actually, KITT (Knight Industries Two Thousand)
<<<Everybody knows that it was the universal belief of the Reformers and the Puritans that the office of the bishop of Rome is the office of Antichrist (he is that man of sin, that son of perdition who exalts himself, etc.). >>>
Everybody?Not me.And where is your scriptural support?
"For what saith the scripture"?Rom.4:3
andreas.
Everybody?Not me.And where is your scriptural support?
"For what saith the scripture"?Rom.4:3
andreas.
You say that everybody knows that the office of the bishop of Rome is the antichrist.What do the scriptures say?
" Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."
1 John 2:22
How can a human being be Antichrist ,since the verse tells us that anyone who denies the Father and the Son is Antichrist? There have always been those who deny the faith since the time of Christ. John wrote this some 2000 years ago,and as far as i know there is no human that can live for that period of time,unless you know something we do not.
andreas
" Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."
1 John 2:22
How can a human being be Antichrist ,since the verse tells us that anyone who denies the Father and the Son is Antichrist? There have always been those who deny the faith since the time of Christ. John wrote this some 2000 years ago,and as far as i know there is no human that can live for that period of time,unless you know something we do not.
andreas
Irishcat922
Puritan Board Sophomore
[quote:6e4e57e5aa][i:6e4e57e5aa]Originally posted by puritansailor[/i:6e4e57e5aa]
At least he had a cool car! [/quote:6e4e57e5aa]
See! that's what he wants you to think, careful now.
At least he had a cool car!
[/quote:6e4e57e5aa]See! that's what he wants you to think, careful now.
Saiph
Puritan Board Junior
1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time. And just as you have heard that antichrist is coming, even now [b:a356772cee]many[/b:a356772cee]antichrists have risen up, from which we know that it is the last hour.
1Jo 2:19 [b:a356772cee] They[/b:a356772cee] went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they were of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out so that it might be revealed that they were not all of us.
1Jo 2:20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.
1Jo 2:21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and know that no lie is of the truth.
1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He who denies the Father and the Son is antichrist.
1Jo 2:19 [b:a356772cee] They[/b:a356772cee] went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they were of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out so that it might be revealed that they were not all of us.
1Jo 2:20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.
1Jo 2:21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and know that no lie is of the truth.
1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He who denies the Father and the Son is antichrist.
sastark
Puritan Board Graduate
[quote:572b2297b5][i:572b2297b5]Originally posted by andreas[/i:572b2297b5]
<<<Everybody knows that it was the universal belief of the Reformers and the Puritans that the office of the bishop of Rome is the office of Antichrist (he is that man of sin, that son of perdition who exalts himself, etc.). >>>
Everybody?Not me.And where is your scriptural support?
"For what saith the scripture"?Rom.4:3
andreas. [/quote:572b2297b5]
Andreas,
Please re-read the section of my post that you quoted. I was stating a historical fact, not a theological assumption. It [b:572b2297b5]was[/b:572b2297b5] the universal belief of the reformers that the pope is antichrist. I do not need to quote Scripture to prove this. That is like saying "Show me in the Bible where is says Pearl Harbor was attacked on Dec. 7, 1941!"
Now, if you want to discuss, from Scripture, who the man of sin is, then I'd be glad to do that; however, a Bible verse is not needed to talk about history.
<<<Everybody knows that it was the universal belief of the Reformers and the Puritans that the office of the bishop of Rome is the office of Antichrist (he is that man of sin, that son of perdition who exalts himself, etc.). >>>
Everybody?Not me.And where is your scriptural support?
"For what saith the scripture"?Rom.4:3
andreas.
[/quote:572b2297b5]Andreas,
Please re-read the section of my post that you quoted. I was stating a historical fact, not a theological assumption. It [b:572b2297b5]was[/b:572b2297b5] the universal belief of the reformers that the pope is antichrist. I do not need to quote Scripture to prove this. That is like saying "Show me in the Bible where is says Pearl Harbor was attacked on Dec. 7, 1941!"
Now, if you want to discuss, from Scripture, who the man of sin is, then I'd be glad to do that; however, a Bible verse is not needed to talk about history.
sastark
Puritan Board Graduate
[quote:363316592c][i:363316592c]Originally posted by puritansailor[/i:363316592c]
The opinions of many in one period of time don't determine what is orthodox. If that were the case, then we would still be celebrating the Mass. What is important is our exegetical basis for coming to our conclusions. [/quote:363316592c]
Patrick,
Thanks for taking the time to reply. So, if I understand you correctly, the reason behind throwing out all the reforms/puritans was because they were all around at the same time? Or becuase they used bad exegesis? I am a bit leary of accusing the reformers of bad exegesis, simply because of all the other work they did correctly. As for them all being around at the same time, I've heard this before, but I don't think I buy it.
[quote:363316592c]
Using Perkin's quote above, I find some flaws in exegesis. One, he is using the lense of history to interpret that prophecy rather than comparing Scripture with Scripture.
[/quote:363316592c]
Let me ask you this: Have all of the prophecies in the book of Revelation been fulfilled? Of course they have not. So then, how will we know when they are fulfilled? We will have to use history to judge when certain events take place. People who do not hold to the Reformed position simply start using history to interpret prophecy at a different point.
[quote:363316592c]
And the question I have failed to see answered by those holding to the Reformers view on this is, how would this prophecy be any comfort to the first century Christians who first recieved this letter?
[/quote:363316592c]
This is a pretty common objection raised against the Reformed position, but I do not think it is valid, and here's why: If your argument is correct, how would any prophecy which was not fulfilled within the life span of the generation in which the prophecy was prophesied be of use to any one? How would Daniel's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? How would Isaiah's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? Do you see what I mean? Maybe Revelation was meant to be useful to more than one generation of Christians.
Food for thought.
The opinions of many in one period of time don't determine what is orthodox. If that were the case, then we would still be celebrating the Mass. What is important is our exegetical basis for coming to our conclusions. [/quote:363316592c]
Patrick,
Thanks for taking the time to reply. So, if I understand you correctly, the reason behind throwing out all the reforms/puritans was because they were all around at the same time? Or becuase they used bad exegesis? I am a bit leary of accusing the reformers of bad exegesis, simply because of all the other work they did correctly. As for them all being around at the same time, I've heard this before, but I don't think I buy it.
[quote:363316592c]
Using Perkin's quote above, I find some flaws in exegesis. One, he is using the lense of history to interpret that prophecy rather than comparing Scripture with Scripture.
[/quote:363316592c]
Let me ask you this: Have all of the prophecies in the book of Revelation been fulfilled? Of course they have not. So then, how will we know when they are fulfilled? We will have to use history to judge when certain events take place. People who do not hold to the Reformed position simply start using history to interpret prophecy at a different point.
[quote:363316592c]
And the question I have failed to see answered by those holding to the Reformers view on this is, how would this prophecy be any comfort to the first century Christians who first recieved this letter?
[/quote:363316592c]
This is a pretty common objection raised against the Reformed position, but I do not think it is valid, and here's why: If your argument is correct, how would any prophecy which was not fulfilled within the life span of the generation in which the prophecy was prophesied be of use to any one? How would Daniel's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? How would Isaiah's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? Do you see what I mean? Maybe Revelation was meant to be useful to more than one generation of Christians.
Food for thought.
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
[quote:9e63b0ebcb][i:9e63b0ebcb]Originally posted by sastark[/i:9e63b0ebcb]
[quote:9e63b0ebcb]
And the question I have failed to see answered by those holding to the Reformers view on this is, how would this prophecy be any comfort to the first century Christians who first recieved this letter?
[/quote:9e63b0ebcb]
This is a pretty common objection raised against the Reformed position, but I do not think it is valid, and here's why: If your argument is correct, how would any prophecy which was not fulfilled within the life span of the generation in which the prophecy was prophesied be of use to any one? How would Daniel's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? How would Isaiah's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? Do you see what I mean? Maybe Revelation was meant to be useful to more than one generation of Christians.
[/quote:9e63b0ebcb]
Actually, that's what I'm trying to show you. It is useful to more than one generation. But you must understand it within the historical context for which it was written. It doesn't mean that the prophecies were fulfilled in that generation, but that generation was suppose to understand something from them. Isaiah, Daniel, and Jeremiah's prophecies don't make much sense unless you understand the historical circumstances behind them. They are using language which condescends to the people whom they are speaking to. Whenever we exegete passages, we must understand what is being spoken to the generation to whom it was written before we can apply to it us today. Otherwise we miss the whole point of the passage. We must do this with Revelation also. We cannot try to interpret it with our 20th century perspective (or 16th century). Was John trying to say the Antichrist is the Pope? I find that a stretch. There is no historical reference for Christians in that time to concieve of such a notion unless they returned their thoughts to the high priests of Judaism, but we have no reference to that (correct me if I'm wrong). There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian. And, there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely embodied the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation. But that is not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much greater in scope than Roman Catholicism.
[quote:9e63b0ebcb]
And the question I have failed to see answered by those holding to the Reformers view on this is, how would this prophecy be any comfort to the first century Christians who first recieved this letter?
[/quote:9e63b0ebcb]
This is a pretty common objection raised against the Reformed position, but I do not think it is valid, and here's why: If your argument is correct, how would any prophecy which was not fulfilled within the life span of the generation in which the prophecy was prophesied be of use to any one? How would Daniel's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? How would Isaiah's prophecies be useful to the Jews in his day? Do you see what I mean? Maybe Revelation was meant to be useful to more than one generation of Christians.
[/quote:9e63b0ebcb]
Actually, that's what I'm trying to show you. It is useful to more than one generation. But you must understand it within the historical context for which it was written. It doesn't mean that the prophecies were fulfilled in that generation, but that generation was suppose to understand something from them. Isaiah, Daniel, and Jeremiah's prophecies don't make much sense unless you understand the historical circumstances behind them. They are using language which condescends to the people whom they are speaking to. Whenever we exegete passages, we must understand what is being spoken to the generation to whom it was written before we can apply to it us today. Otherwise we miss the whole point of the passage. We must do this with Revelation also. We cannot try to interpret it with our 20th century perspective (or 16th century). Was John trying to say the Antichrist is the Pope? I find that a stretch. There is no historical reference for Christians in that time to concieve of such a notion unless they returned their thoughts to the high priests of Judaism, but we have no reference to that (correct me if I'm wrong). There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian. And, there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely embodied the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation. But that is not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much greater in scope than Roman Catholicism.
Rand Winburn
Inactive User
The Truth Concerning the Antichrist
Preterist Logician Paul Manata says:
"X denies Christ came in the flesh. Therefore, X is an antichrist. Now, plug ANYTHING into X and whatever you plugged in will complete the premise."
[u:9d2596a551]My response[/u:9d2596a551]:
The subject of this thread is not, 'Who is an antichrist?' Rather, it concerns the identity of THE ANTICHRIST: The one whom your namesake warns us in 2 Thess 2, and other citations; the one whom John warns us in the Revelation and 1 John 2:18, among other citations; the one whom Jesus warns us in Matt. 24, among other citations; and the one whom Daniel warns us in his 7th chapter, among other citations.
The prophecies pertaining to Antichrist are numerous and complex. They begin in Genesis and finish in Revelation. They detail his nature, character, sins, birthplace, time of birth, desires, heresies, cunning, deception, faithlessness, purpose, strategy, murders, temporal success, acclaim, religion, traditions, favorite colors and ultimate doom. The prophecies also reveal the identity of his father and master: Satan.
The prophecies concerning the Antichrist alert the Elect as to the identity of those who are actually of his flock, Satan's sheep. Those who are of his flock, Satan's sheep, do not believe he is the Antichrist. Instead, they look for another. The Pre-Reformation Christians, the Reformers and the Puritans did not need to look for another. They discerned he was already in their midst.
Belief in the truth of the matter concerning Antichrist is the gift of God to the Elect: 2 Thess. 2:13.
In fact, it is impossible to believe both that Jesus is the Christ and that the Pope is the Antichrist without direct revelation by the Holy Spirit. Both must be spiritually discerned. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.
Patrick said:
"I suggest sir that you change your tone......We are seeking truth, not to be pounded by those who disagree."
My response:
The Pharisees had similar problems with the 'tone' of Jesus. His disciples warned Him to 'tone it down,' for fear of reprisals against them......[i:9d2596a551]Then came his disciples, and said unto him, knowest that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?[/i:9d2596a551]
The truth offends many. Jesus Christ, Truth come in the flesh, was crucified because He was an offense. He dared tell the whole uncensored truth. Those who claimed to be His disciples left Him, offended by His words......[i:9d2596a551]Many therefore of his disciples, when they heard this, said, This is an hard saying: who can hear it?[/i:9d2596a551]
The topic of the Antichrist is one which has stirred controversy and heated discussion within the professing Christian Church from the beginning. For centuries God has had His true witnesses preach the truth of the matter, without thought to personal safety and political correctness, frequently dying a martyr's death for His cause. Please read Revelation 11 which depicts the Lord's true witnesses through the ages, as well as their ministry; their enemy; their murder; and their continued witness through others whom the Lord has raised up as a never-ending testimony against the Beast, the Antichrist.
Patrick declares:
"As with Kenneth above, you are missing the issue in this debate."
[u:9d2596a551]My response[/u:9d2596a551]:
Who is Kenneth? The issue is the identity of the Antichrist. This mystery, [b:9d2596a551]the mystery of iniquity[/b:9d2596a551], has been solved by Christians for centuries - before the Internet was invented. Thus, the real mystery is why today's educated, professing Christians do not believe the testimony of God's Elect, preserved for Christ's true church in every age?
Christ promises His Spirit is the Teacher, who will lead His people into all truth. Is not the identity of the Antichrist, hidden in the prophecies, truth which He wills His people know, understand and believe? Is not the Revelation called the Revelation because it is God's will that His people discern what He has revealed to His Church? Please note that 'to reveal' necessitates disclosing that which was hidden. In the Revelation and other prophecies, the Lord has revealed the mystery of the two Churches, the true and the false. This mystery first had its appearance in Genesis 3:15, with the disclosure of the two seeds or generations, Christ and His seed/Body vs. Satan and his seed/Body, who will be enemies forever. The Head of Christ's Body is Christ. The head of Satan's body is Antichrist. Satan's begotten son, the son of perdition, his false Christ, is his finest and most cunning deception, having taken centuries to raise him up to world renowned power and influence.
This feat is not to be taken lightly, for Satan could not have achieved such unbridled success without the affirmation of the Lord Himself.........but this fact begs the question, Why the Antichrist in the first place? Why does the Lord decree the existence of this arch-enemy? To what purpose does he serve?
The answer may be found in Deut. 13:1-3 and re-confirmed in 2 Thess. 2:1-12. In both instances, the Old Testament false prophet and New Testament Man of Sin are used to test the faith of the professing Christian, who claims to love God. Those who truly love the Lord will identify the false prophet/Man of Sin and refuse to follow or honor him as a brother in Christ. Instead, as Rev. 11 depicts, the true Christian will expose the false prophet/Beast for what he really is --- the Antichrist.
Thus, with this knowledge the discerning Christian is able to view the faith of other professing Christians, especially the 'educated' leaders in authority whose task it is to teach and feed the flock of Christ. Rev. Billy Graham, for example, the most renowned name in Christianity, second only to the Pope of Rome, fails this litmus test. The Reverend publicly declares his allegiance to the Pope as one he deems the greatest 'Man of the Twentieth Century.' By this astonishing statement Christ's Elect may determine Graham himself the seed of the Serpent, of the body of Antichrist, devoid of the Spirit of Christ, whose name is not written in the Book of Life, Rev. 13:8; Rev. 17:8.
Should Patrick or any other member of this board dare publicly pronounce the esteemed, beloved Billy Graham to be the Devil's prophet, belonging to Antichrist's body, and all those who follow him are doomed to be damned, they will soon discover the wrath of false Christianity and their eyes will be opened to the Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The same holds true for daring to proclaim the Bishop of Rome in office is that very Antichrist predicted by Jesus and His Apostles, and confirmed by God's prophets through the ages.
Rand Winburn
Director
Protestant Reformation Publications
http://www.iconbusters.com
Preterist Logician Paul Manata says:
"X denies Christ came in the flesh. Therefore, X is an antichrist. Now, plug ANYTHING into X and whatever you plugged in will complete the premise."
[u:9d2596a551]My response[/u:9d2596a551]:
The subject of this thread is not, 'Who is an antichrist?' Rather, it concerns the identity of THE ANTICHRIST: The one whom your namesake warns us in 2 Thess 2, and other citations; the one whom John warns us in the Revelation and 1 John 2:18, among other citations; the one whom Jesus warns us in Matt. 24, among other citations; and the one whom Daniel warns us in his 7th chapter, among other citations.
The prophecies pertaining to Antichrist are numerous and complex. They begin in Genesis and finish in Revelation. They detail his nature, character, sins, birthplace, time of birth, desires, heresies, cunning, deception, faithlessness, purpose, strategy, murders, temporal success, acclaim, religion, traditions, favorite colors and ultimate doom. The prophecies also reveal the identity of his father and master: Satan.
The prophecies concerning the Antichrist alert the Elect as to the identity of those who are actually of his flock, Satan's sheep. Those who are of his flock, Satan's sheep, do not believe he is the Antichrist. Instead, they look for another. The Pre-Reformation Christians, the Reformers and the Puritans did not need to look for another. They discerned he was already in their midst.
Belief in the truth of the matter concerning Antichrist is the gift of God to the Elect: 2 Thess. 2:13.
In fact, it is impossible to believe both that Jesus is the Christ and that the Pope is the Antichrist without direct revelation by the Holy Spirit. Both must be spiritually discerned. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.
Patrick said:
"I suggest sir that you change your tone......We are seeking truth, not to be pounded by those who disagree."
My response:
The Pharisees had similar problems with the 'tone' of Jesus. His disciples warned Him to 'tone it down,' for fear of reprisals against them......[i:9d2596a551]Then came his disciples, and said unto him, knowest that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?[/i:9d2596a551]
The truth offends many. Jesus Christ, Truth come in the flesh, was crucified because He was an offense. He dared tell the whole uncensored truth. Those who claimed to be His disciples left Him, offended by His words......[i:9d2596a551]Many therefore of his disciples, when they heard this, said, This is an hard saying: who can hear it?[/i:9d2596a551]
The topic of the Antichrist is one which has stirred controversy and heated discussion within the professing Christian Church from the beginning. For centuries God has had His true witnesses preach the truth of the matter, without thought to personal safety and political correctness, frequently dying a martyr's death for His cause. Please read Revelation 11 which depicts the Lord's true witnesses through the ages, as well as their ministry; their enemy; their murder; and their continued witness through others whom the Lord has raised up as a never-ending testimony against the Beast, the Antichrist.
Patrick declares:
"As with Kenneth above, you are missing the issue in this debate."
[u:9d2596a551]My response[/u:9d2596a551]:
Who is Kenneth? The issue is the identity of the Antichrist. This mystery, [b:9d2596a551]the mystery of iniquity[/b:9d2596a551], has been solved by Christians for centuries - before the Internet was invented. Thus, the real mystery is why today's educated, professing Christians do not believe the testimony of God's Elect, preserved for Christ's true church in every age?
Christ promises His Spirit is the Teacher, who will lead His people into all truth. Is not the identity of the Antichrist, hidden in the prophecies, truth which He wills His people know, understand and believe? Is not the Revelation called the Revelation because it is God's will that His people discern what He has revealed to His Church? Please note that 'to reveal' necessitates disclosing that which was hidden. In the Revelation and other prophecies, the Lord has revealed the mystery of the two Churches, the true and the false. This mystery first had its appearance in Genesis 3:15, with the disclosure of the two seeds or generations, Christ and His seed/Body vs. Satan and his seed/Body, who will be enemies forever. The Head of Christ's Body is Christ. The head of Satan's body is Antichrist. Satan's begotten son, the son of perdition, his false Christ, is his finest and most cunning deception, having taken centuries to raise him up to world renowned power and influence.
This feat is not to be taken lightly, for Satan could not have achieved such unbridled success without the affirmation of the Lord Himself.........but this fact begs the question, Why the Antichrist in the first place? Why does the Lord decree the existence of this arch-enemy? To what purpose does he serve?
The answer may be found in Deut. 13:1-3 and re-confirmed in 2 Thess. 2:1-12. In both instances, the Old Testament false prophet and New Testament Man of Sin are used to test the faith of the professing Christian, who claims to love God. Those who truly love the Lord will identify the false prophet/Man of Sin and refuse to follow or honor him as a brother in Christ. Instead, as Rev. 11 depicts, the true Christian will expose the false prophet/Beast for what he really is --- the Antichrist.
Thus, with this knowledge the discerning Christian is able to view the faith of other professing Christians, especially the 'educated' leaders in authority whose task it is to teach and feed the flock of Christ. Rev. Billy Graham, for example, the most renowned name in Christianity, second only to the Pope of Rome, fails this litmus test. The Reverend publicly declares his allegiance to the Pope as one he deems the greatest 'Man of the Twentieth Century.' By this astonishing statement Christ's Elect may determine Graham himself the seed of the Serpent, of the body of Antichrist, devoid of the Spirit of Christ, whose name is not written in the Book of Life, Rev. 13:8; Rev. 17:8.
Should Patrick or any other member of this board dare publicly pronounce the esteemed, beloved Billy Graham to be the Devil's prophet, belonging to Antichrist's body, and all those who follow him are doomed to be damned, they will soon discover the wrath of false Christianity and their eyes will be opened to the Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The same holds true for daring to proclaim the Bishop of Rome in office is that very Antichrist predicted by Jesus and His Apostles, and confirmed by God's prophets through the ages.
Rand Winburn
Director
Protestant Reformation Publications
http://www.iconbusters.com
Scott Bushey
Puritanboard Commissioner
Rand,
You write:
"Should Patrick or any other member of this board dare publicly pronounce the esteemed, beloved Billy Graham to be the Devil's prophet, belonging to Antichrist's body, and all those who follow him are doomed to be damned, they will soon discover the wrath of false Christianity and their eyes will be opened to the Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The same holds true for daring to proclaim the Bishop of Rome in office is that very Antichrist predicted by Jesus and His Apostles, and confirmed by God's prophets through the ages. "
1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
I don't see the argument..............Whats your point? Most all of us believe that Rome is an 'antichrist', and the Pope it's 'antichrist(ian)' leader. Most all of us agree that Billy G. is in error. The list could go on and on. This thread reminds me of Marc Carpenters "Hall of Shame" (http://www.outsidethecamp.org). Is this where you want it to go? That we should list 'our' antichrists publicly?
1 Cor 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
Luke 6:27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
Luke 6:28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.
Luke 6:29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.
Luke 6:30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
Luke 6:31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
Luke 6:33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
Luke 6:34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
Luke 6:35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.
[Edited on 5-5-2004 by Scott Bushey]
You write:
"Should Patrick or any other member of this board dare publicly pronounce the esteemed, beloved Billy Graham to be the Devil's prophet, belonging to Antichrist's body, and all those who follow him are doomed to be damned, they will soon discover the wrath of false Christianity and their eyes will be opened to the Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The same holds true for daring to proclaim the Bishop of Rome in office is that very Antichrist predicted by Jesus and His Apostles, and confirmed by God's prophets through the ages. "
1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
I don't see the argument..............Whats your point? Most all of us believe that Rome is an 'antichrist', and the Pope it's 'antichrist(ian)' leader. Most all of us agree that Billy G. is in error. The list could go on and on. This thread reminds me of Marc Carpenters "Hall of Shame" (http://www.outsidethecamp.org). Is this where you want it to go? That we should list 'our' antichrists publicly?
1 Cor 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
Luke 6:27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
Luke 6:28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.
Luke 6:29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.
Luke 6:30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
Luke 6:31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
Luke 6:33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
Luke 6:34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
Luke 6:35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.
[Edited on 5-5-2004 by Scott Bushey]
Rand,
Please inform me as to your affiliation with the body of Christ - namely church and denomination - that has oversight over you.
Please inform me as to your affiliation with the body of Christ - namely church and denomination - that has oversight over you.
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
[quote:8c67b58f15][i:8c67b58f15]Originally posted by Rand Winburn[/i:8c67b58f15]
The prophecies concerning the Antichrist alert the Elect as to the identity of those who are actually of his flock, Satan's sheep. Those who are of his flock, Satan's sheep, do not believe he is the Antichrist. Instead, they look for another. The Pre-Reformation Christians, the Reformers and the Puritans did not need to look for another. They discerned he was already in their midst. [/quote:8c67b58f15]
Did they discern? Or did they just think he was in their midst? Like I said before, you must deal with exegesis here Rand. Exegetically, how do you come to the conclusion that the Pope is the Antichrist using all those passages you refer to in passing?
[quote:8c67b58f15]
Belief in the truth of the matter concerning Antichrist is the gift of God to the Elect: 2 Thess. 2:13.
In fact, it is impossible to believe both that Jesus is the Christ and that the Pope is the Antichrist without direct revelation by the Holy Spirit. Both must be spiritually discerned. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
Here again Rand, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope. You have not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so doesn't make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for your perspective.
[quote:8c67b58f15]
Patrick said:
"I suggest sir that you change your tone......We are seeking truth, not to be pounded by those who disagree."
My response:
The Pharisees had similar problems with the 'tone' of Jesus. His disciples warned Him to 'tone it down,' for fear of reprisals against them......[i:8c67b58f15]Then came his disciples, and said unto him, knowest that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?[/i:8c67b58f15]
The truth offends many. Jesus Christ, Truth come in the flesh, was crucified because He was an offense. He dared tell the whole uncensored truth. Those who claimed to be His disciples left Him, offended by His words......[i:8c67b58f15]Many therefore of his disciples, when they heard this, said, This is an hard saying: who can hear it?[/i:8c67b58f15]
The topic of the Antichrist is one which has stirred controversy and heated discussion within the professing Christian Church from the beginning. For centuries God has had His true witnesses preach the truth of the matter, without thought to personal safety and political correctness, frequently dying a martyr's death for His cause. Please read Revelation 11 which depicts the Lord's true witnesses through the ages, as well as their ministry; their enemy; their murder; and their continued witness through others whom the Lord has raised up as a never-ending testimony against the Beast, the Antichrist.
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
So you expect me to accept your interpretation and your tone as I would Jesus? I gave you a warning sir, and consider this another. Change your tone. You may pound your interpretation into us all you want, but you have yet to prove it. You assume that those who do not hold to your understanding are not enlightened by the Holy Spirit. You equate beleiving on Christ for salvation and believing in your interpretation of the Antichrist as equally important. But the Reformers and Puritans never went that far. If you wish to interact in any meaningful way with us in this discussion then you must change your attitude. We seek the truth in love. We understand here that all of us are resting upon Christ alone for salvation and seeking His guidance in understanding His word. If you cannot learn to interact with us as brothers, instead of enemies, then I suggest you go elsewhere to discuss these things.
[quote:8c67b58f15]
The issue is the identity of the Antichrist. This mystery, [b:8c67b58f15]the mystery of iniquity[/b:8c67b58f15], has been solved by Christians for centuries - before the Internet was invented. Thus, the real mystery is why today's educated, professing Christians do not believe the testimony of God's Elect, preserved for Christ's true church in every age?
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
How was it solved? Just because martyrs may identify someone as the antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me theirs.
[quote:8c67b58f15] Should Patrick or any other member of this board dare publicly pronounce the esteemed, beloved Billy Graham to be the Devil's prophet, belonging to Antichrist's body, and all those who follow him are doomed to be damned, they will soon discover the wrath of false Christianity and their eyes will be opened to the Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The same holds true for daring to proclaim the Bishop of Rome in office is that very Antichrist predicted by Jesus and His Apostles, and confirmed by God's prophets through the ages.
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
This final point doesn't prove anything either. If I were to call your pastor or beloved theologian Antichrist, then I too would be ridiculed. Just because someone would react to calling someone the antichrist doesn't prove they are beholden to the antichrist. Again, Rand, I'm trying to steer you in the right manner of discussing this. If you wish us to take you seriously, then you must slow down, change your attitude, and start back at square one. I'm trying to help you out here. I don't take the testimony of the Reformers or Puritans lightly. But their words must pass the test of Scripture as must yours.
So, let's try this one more time. Please show me how the first century Christians would understand these prophecies of the Antichrist. Then we will go from there.
[Edited on 5-5-2004 by puritansailor]
The prophecies concerning the Antichrist alert the Elect as to the identity of those who are actually of his flock, Satan's sheep. Those who are of his flock, Satan's sheep, do not believe he is the Antichrist. Instead, they look for another. The Pre-Reformation Christians, the Reformers and the Puritans did not need to look for another. They discerned he was already in their midst. [/quote:8c67b58f15]
Did they discern? Or did they just think he was in their midst? Like I said before, you must deal with exegesis here Rand. Exegetically, how do you come to the conclusion that the Pope is the Antichrist using all those passages you refer to in passing?
[quote:8c67b58f15]
Belief in the truth of the matter concerning Antichrist is the gift of God to the Elect: 2 Thess. 2:13.
In fact, it is impossible to believe both that Jesus is the Christ and that the Pope is the Antichrist without direct revelation by the Holy Spirit. Both must be spiritually discerned. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
Here again Rand, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope. You have not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so doesn't make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for your perspective.
[quote:8c67b58f15]
Patrick said:
"I suggest sir that you change your tone......We are seeking truth, not to be pounded by those who disagree."
My response:
The Pharisees had similar problems with the 'tone' of Jesus. His disciples warned Him to 'tone it down,' for fear of reprisals against them......[i:8c67b58f15]Then came his disciples, and said unto him, knowest that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?[/i:8c67b58f15]
The truth offends many. Jesus Christ, Truth come in the flesh, was crucified because He was an offense. He dared tell the whole uncensored truth. Those who claimed to be His disciples left Him, offended by His words......[i:8c67b58f15]Many therefore of his disciples, when they heard this, said, This is an hard saying: who can hear it?[/i:8c67b58f15]
The topic of the Antichrist is one which has stirred controversy and heated discussion within the professing Christian Church from the beginning. For centuries God has had His true witnesses preach the truth of the matter, without thought to personal safety and political correctness, frequently dying a martyr's death for His cause. Please read Revelation 11 which depicts the Lord's true witnesses through the ages, as well as their ministry; their enemy; their murder; and their continued witness through others whom the Lord has raised up as a never-ending testimony against the Beast, the Antichrist.
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
So you expect me to accept your interpretation and your tone as I would Jesus? I gave you a warning sir, and consider this another. Change your tone. You may pound your interpretation into us all you want, but you have yet to prove it. You assume that those who do not hold to your understanding are not enlightened by the Holy Spirit. You equate beleiving on Christ for salvation and believing in your interpretation of the Antichrist as equally important. But the Reformers and Puritans never went that far. If you wish to interact in any meaningful way with us in this discussion then you must change your attitude. We seek the truth in love. We understand here that all of us are resting upon Christ alone for salvation and seeking His guidance in understanding His word. If you cannot learn to interact with us as brothers, instead of enemies, then I suggest you go elsewhere to discuss these things.
[quote:8c67b58f15]
The issue is the identity of the Antichrist. This mystery, [b:8c67b58f15]the mystery of iniquity[/b:8c67b58f15], has been solved by Christians for centuries - before the Internet was invented. Thus, the real mystery is why today's educated, professing Christians do not believe the testimony of God's Elect, preserved for Christ's true church in every age?
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
How was it solved? Just because martyrs may identify someone as the antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me theirs.
[quote:8c67b58f15] Should Patrick or any other member of this board dare publicly pronounce the esteemed, beloved Billy Graham to be the Devil's prophet, belonging to Antichrist's body, and all those who follow him are doomed to be damned, they will soon discover the wrath of false Christianity and their eyes will be opened to the Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The same holds true for daring to proclaim the Bishop of Rome in office is that very Antichrist predicted by Jesus and His Apostles, and confirmed by God's prophets through the ages.
[/quote:8c67b58f15]
This final point doesn't prove anything either. If I were to call your pastor or beloved theologian Antichrist, then I too would be ridiculed. Just because someone would react to calling someone the antichrist doesn't prove they are beholden to the antichrist. Again, Rand, I'm trying to steer you in the right manner of discussing this. If you wish us to take you seriously, then you must slow down, change your attitude, and start back at square one. I'm trying to help you out here. I don't take the testimony of the Reformers or Puritans lightly. But their words must pass the test of Scripture as must yours.
So, let's try this one more time. Please show me how the first century Christians would understand these prophecies of the Antichrist. Then we will go from there.
[Edited on 5-5-2004 by puritansailor]
johnny_redeemed
Puritan Board Freshman
the antichrist is anyone who says that Jesus did not come in the flesh and stay in the flesh, Greek perfect tence
1 John 4:2-3
By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
NKJV
1 John 4:2-3
By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
NKJV
Roldan
Puritan Board Junior
[quote:52e6502148][i:52e6502148]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:52e6502148]
[quote:52e6502148][i:52e6502148]Originally posted by Roldan[/i:52e6502148]
The Roman Catholic and its popes as system is THE antichrist, nero was the type and Rome is now the fullfilment
Glad to be back, been out a while
[Edited on 5-7-2004 by Roldan] [/quote:52e6502148]
Roldan I thought you said you were a preterist? [/quote:52e6502148]
Already/not yet preterist.
In that Matt. 24 came to its typical fullfilment but its reality is coming.
Didn't you say that you believed in a coming apostacy? If matt. 24 is FINALLY fullfilled including the apostasy mentioned then how could there be ANOTHER one?
[quote:52e6502148][i:52e6502148]Originally posted by Roldan[/i:52e6502148]
The Roman Catholic and its popes as system is THE antichrist, nero was the type and Rome is now the fullfilment
Glad to be back, been out a while
[Edited on 5-7-2004 by Roldan] [/quote:52e6502148]
Roldan I thought you said you were a preterist? [/quote:52e6502148]
Already/not yet preterist.
In that Matt. 24 came to its typical fullfilment but its reality is coming.
Didn't you say that you believed in a coming apostacy? If matt. 24 is FINALLY fullfilled including the apostasy mentioned then how could there be ANOTHER one?
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
I agree with you Roldan to some extent. I'm not against viewing the Pope as the Antichrist. I'm more inclined to agree with that actually. But I'm not convinced of the exegetical arguments to support that viewpoint yet. For instance, how do we connect Nero and the Pope? Nero was not someone standing within the temple. He can't be a "type" of the religious leader that would come because he doesn't qualify, he was never "in the camp." See where I'm going. That's why I'm trying to get back to what the first century Christians were suppose to get out of this prophecy. This is why I'm thinking the Antichrist is much bigger than a civil or religious ruler, of whom I am inclined to think both Nero and the Pope are types.
johnny_redeemed
Puritan Board Freshman
did no one take my post seriously??
can someone give me a paragraph definition of preterism?
can someone give me a paragraph definition of preterism?
Bladestunner316
Puritan Board Doctor
I believe preterism is that all or most of the prophecys were fufilled in ad 70 or is that amill
uzzled:
uzzled:
Bladestunner316
Puritan Board Doctor
Maybe this will help it looked decent enough:
http://www.preterism-eschatology.com/An Introduction to Preterism.htm
http://www.preterism-eschatology.com/An Introduction to Preterism.htm
[quote:fa00e0813c][i:fa00e0813c]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:fa00e0813c]
[quote:fa00e0813c][i:fa00e0813c]Originally posted by Bladestunner316[/i:fa00e0813c]
Maybe this will help it looked decent enough:
http://www.preterism-eschatology.com/An Introduction to Preterism.htm [/quote:fa00e0813c]
no.
that's from a hyper-pret understanding. [/quote:fa00e0813c]
Yep that HyperPreterism alright. I'm personally a partial preterist (or orthodox preterist) and believe the issue of the antichrist needs to be interpreted preteristically.
VanVos
[quote:fa00e0813c][i:fa00e0813c]Originally posted by Bladestunner316[/i:fa00e0813c]
Maybe this will help it looked decent enough:
http://www.preterism-eschatology.com/An Introduction to Preterism.htm [/quote:fa00e0813c]
no.
that's from a hyper-pret understanding. [/quote:fa00e0813c]
Yep that HyperPreterism alright. I'm personally a partial preterist (or orthodox preterist) and believe the issue of the antichrist needs to be interpreted preteristically.
VanVos
Bladestunner316
Puritan Board Doctor
oops see I didnt know it just said it was preterist.
blade sorry...
blade sorry...
ReformedWretch
Puritan Board Doctor
I would love to offern an opinion but after reading all this I believe most of you would find me insane.
The member Rand Winburn has been banned for failure to abide by forum rules and for private coorespondence to the moderators indicating that the identity of antichrist is a test of orthodoxy. He made false accusations against the owners of the Puritan Board. Healso maligned several sound reformed denominations accusing them of changing the Word of God because they edited their confession of faith to remove the statement about the antichrist being the Pope. Changing or amending a confession is not the same as changing the Word of God. The Bible nowhere outright states that the Pope of Rome is the antichrist.
The Bible is clear that there have been and will continue to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the Pope is an antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for orthodoxy.
Rand has made the unfortunate mistake of becoming so fixated on the antichrist that I fear he has missed acting and speaking in a tone that honors Christ. We must preach Christ, and Him crucified - that in fact is the test of orthodoxy - the person and work of Jesus.
Turn your eyes upon [b:de680b2a19]Jesus[/b:de680b2a19]
Look full in His wonderful face
And the things of earth will grow strangely dim
In the light of His glory and grace
Phillip
[i:de680b2a19]Super Administator[/i:de680b2a19]
The Bible is clear that there have been and will continue to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the Pope is an antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for orthodoxy.
Rand has made the unfortunate mistake of becoming so fixated on the antichrist that I fear he has missed acting and speaking in a tone that honors Christ. We must preach Christ, and Him crucified - that in fact is the test of orthodoxy - the person and work of Jesus.
Turn your eyes upon [b:de680b2a19]Jesus[/b:de680b2a19]
Look full in His wonderful face
And the things of earth will grow strangely dim
In the light of His glory and grace
Phillip
[i:de680b2a19]Super Administator[/i:de680b2a19]
Maybe old news, but I see this provoked the casting of the PB as part of AntiChrist's photo album.
http://www.iconbusters.com/iconbusters/htm/photo_album/2/figure12.html
http://www.iconbusters.com/iconbusters/htm/photo_album/2/figure12.html
ReformedWretch
Puritan Board Doctor
Wow, what an old thread! I know agree with Paul M. that Nero was "the" anti Christ. I bet I get an e-mail from our friend asking me how I can believe that though!
Yes, I agree.
There are 1700+ years that testify to this. The more able Historians here will confirm that many, if not most, of the Reformers thought it impossible that the Pope in Rome was not the Antichrist.
Remember, he [antichrist] sets himself up in the temple of God. What is the temple of God? Is it not us [believers], the ones indwelled by the Spirit? The bride of Christ. The antichrist is primarily an impostor and a deceiver. A fake Christian claiming titles, and powers for himself that are rightfully God's. Yes, there are many antichrists, and there is THE antichrist, the final one to be revealed at the end.
Anyone care to speculate how "drunk" Nero got "with the blood of the saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus", and how drunk Rome's great impostor has gotten?
I believe there's also a sense where a person who's an antichrist is one who preaches a false gospel.
"œChildren, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 2.18-22, ESV)
I always remember the following (especially in context of subscription to the WCF): "The pope is not *the* Antichrist, he's *an* Antichrist."
If you don't believe there are many antichrists, just check out the Trinity Broadcasting Network.
"œChildren, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 2.18-22, ESV)
I always remember the following (especially in context of subscription to the WCF): "The pope is not *the* Antichrist, he's *an* Antichrist."
If you don't believe there are many antichrists, just check out the Trinity Broadcasting Network.
CalvinandHodges
Puritan Board Junior
The WCF
Greetings:
The WCF has it correct. Though the Bible clearly teaches that there are many antichrists, 1 John 2:18,19, there will be a manifestation of one who embodies all of the antichristian traits - the pope of Rome.
The idea that Nero is the antichrist does not fit the Biblical criteria found in Rev. 13. There is no indication that Nero did any of the following things:
1) Caused the earth to worship the First Beast.
2) Made fire to come down from Heaven.
3) Deceptions through miracles.
4) Give life to the Image of the First Beast.
5) Caused all both small and great to receive a mark on their hand or forehead.
6) Forbade those who did not have the mark to buy and sell.
Most important of all the number 666 does not fit with Nero:
First, because John is writing in Greek to the Greek churches. Thus, to say that one has to figure the number in Hebrew gematria would not make sense to Greek speaking people.
Second, in order to fit the name of Nero into 666 one has to add an "n" at the end of his name: "Neron Caesar" is how the number is calculated from the name. The second "n" though is called a "final n" which is calculated as 700. Thus, "Neron Casear" is calculated in Hebrew as 1316 - not 666. (Those who say that the 5 finals in Hebrew came at a later time cannot answer the question as to how the Hebrews calculated 700, 800, 900 etc before then).
The Bible gives us no indication that Hebrew gematria should be used in calculating the name. The idea that Nero was the antichrist was a ruse used by the Jesuits in order to deflect attention from the Pope.
Grace and Peace,
-CH
Greetings:
The WCF has it correct. Though the Bible clearly teaches that there are many antichrists, 1 John 2:18,19, there will be a manifestation of one who embodies all of the antichristian traits - the pope of Rome.
The idea that Nero is the antichrist does not fit the Biblical criteria found in Rev. 13. There is no indication that Nero did any of the following things:
1) Caused the earth to worship the First Beast.
2) Made fire to come down from Heaven.
3) Deceptions through miracles.
4) Give life to the Image of the First Beast.
5) Caused all both small and great to receive a mark on their hand or forehead.
6) Forbade those who did not have the mark to buy and sell.
Most important of all the number 666 does not fit with Nero:
First, because John is writing in Greek to the Greek churches. Thus, to say that one has to figure the number in Hebrew gematria would not make sense to Greek speaking people.
Second, in order to fit the name of Nero into 666 one has to add an "n" at the end of his name: "Neron Caesar" is how the number is calculated from the name. The second "n" though is called a "final n" which is calculated as 700. Thus, "Neron Casear" is calculated in Hebrew as 1316 - not 666. (Those who say that the 5 finals in Hebrew came at a later time cannot answer the question as to how the Hebrews calculated 700, 800, 900 etc before then).
The Bible gives us no indication that Hebrew gematria should be used in calculating the name. The idea that Nero was the antichrist was a ruse used by the Jesuits in order to deflect attention from the Pope.
Grace and Peace,
-CH
- Status
