Who's the most impressive Christian you've met

Originally posted by ivanhoe
I never took part in the discussions you are referring to.

I didn't mean to suggest that you had. My main point -- that my purpose is not
to compel anyone to believe any one thing, but to expose where views make no
sense and ought to be rejected -- stands.

If I make any one person contemplate the way in which they think about the
Divine in even a slightly different way, then I consider my posts worth it. Just
because you aren't inclined to reevaluate anything you believe makes little
difference to me. There are a lot of people at RHP, many of whom that never
post.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
I didn't mean to suggest that you had. My main point -- that my purpose is not
to compel anyone to believe any one thing, but to expose where views make no
sense and ought to be rejected -- stands.

If I make any one person contemplate the way in which they think about the
Divine in even a slightly different way, then I consider my posts worth it. ...[text shortened]...
difference to me. There are a lot of people at RHP, many of whom that never
post.

Nemesio

Nemesio: "Just because you aren't inclined to reevaluate anything you believe makes little difference to me."

That's how the rumour starts, now people only have to believe it and it will become a universal spiritual truth.

Thanks to Nemesio.

If I had to address all the nonsense written about me here and there I would need another 24 hours in a day.

Say hi to Emma.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Nemesio: "Just because you aren't inclined to reevaluate anything you believe makes little difference to me."

That's how the rumour starts, now people only have to believe it and it will become a universal spiritual truth.

Thanks ...[text shortened]... ere I would need another 24 hours in a day.

Say hi to Emma.

The reason I conclude that you aren't inclined to reevaluate anything you believe is borne
out by the way in which you 'debate,' which starts with a series of assertions with little
rational underpinning which fall apart under minimal scrutiny. When this happens, you
either assert your claims ever the louder (ignoring the arguments against them) or you
cry 'foul,' which generally consists of insinuating that Cribs, me, Bennett, #1, and/or
Rwingett have in part or in whole collaborated against you for no reason whatsoever.

As such, your nonresponse posts make little difference to me. I hope that those who
read them (and the responses of the so-called WolfPack [TM]) will evaluate them and
come to their own conclusions, hopefully the logical ones (not yours).

You have every opportunity to prove me wrong on this, Ivanhoe. Engage Bennett in
discussion in the 'General Argument from Evil' thread. Prove him wrong or submit to
his argument. Either way, you make me look the fool by disproving the 'rumor.'

Nemesio

Edit: Who is Emma? Is this some sort of Netherlands humor?

Originally posted by pcaspian
I have little doubt God can forgive anyone, for Jesus died so that we all may have a chance at salvation. My argument, a scriptural argument remains that we should not preach to those that choose not to hear. Matthew 10 vs 5-16

You are mixing different strands of the discussion. You said you've never known God to call those who curse His name. I showed that he does. So now you know.
The question of preaching to those who don't want to hear is another question. To that, I can only repeat that bbarr, as one example, has never closed his ears (eyes) to anything I want to say (type). Again, you are confusing whether the messenger or the message is rejected. If bbarr won't listen to ivanhoe, then neither of these follows:

a) Christians are entitled to curse or insult bbarr.
b) No other Christian is permitted to hold conversations with bbarr.

I believe any Christian is entitled to protect his faith from someone attempting to destroy that.

These are the seeds of Inquisition. We are to defend our faith, as our brother Peter made very clear, with gentleness and respect. You insist on making me out to be against defending our faith. You misrepresent me. I am not against defending our faith. I am against doing so in a way which constitutes disobedience to our faith. How shall we defend it and break it at the same time?

Lets take the following example. You believe it is your duty to protect your family (as scripture dictates). You also believe you should turn the other cheek should your brother hit you. Now how far does this go ?

Pacifism is a separate question. In fact, I once started a thread about just that tension between the non-retaliation ethic and the duty of the father to protect his family.
What is at issue here, however, the thing you confronted me about in the first place, is that apparently you felt I was out of line to suggest that ivanhoe should not use obscenities and be abusive to people in the forums. Now, if these people are somehow causing his family physical injury with their posts, and he is someone defending his famiy by being rude and insulting, then this tangent of yours would be relevant. But for now, it's just a red herring.

By this statement however, you seem to be suggest blaim on Christians when someone is not listening to them. The Bible clearly tells us that there will exists those that do not wish to hear the gospel

Does it tells us to curse and insult those who won't listen to us?

HuntingBear, the verse does not refer to ‘us’ dragging Jesus’s name through the mud, but ‘them’. “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest [b]they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.” [/b]

It doesn't refer to anyone dragging it through the mud. I wasn't quoting that verse. I only said that we drag Christ's name through the mud (or we dishonor it, or we shame it, or we abuse it, or we disown it, whatever wording you'd prefer) when we behave in a manner (e.g., cursing, obscenity, spitefulness) contradictory to our calling. Surely you agree with this?!

I believe the problem is that we should not be preaching in a forum where we are going to be angered on a daily basis, where God’s name will not be respected, but mocked, and where people do not wish to hear our message.

Fine. Don't preach. What on earth has this got to do with me, or with Christians behaving like spiteful children and soiling the reputation of their Lord?

If you believe you are now immune to this, not able to be angered, fine, but I don’t believe you are.

You cannot find the slightest suggestion that I think myself immune to anger in anything I have posted. In fact, I will admit that right now I am angry that you continually misrepresent me and bombard me with red herrings. I am angry. But am I cursing you? Am I telling you that you look like the hindquarters of some sort of animal? Am I calling you obscene names?

If you speak to a person regarding God, and they reject you, do you continue to preach your message to that same person, or do you move on to those that actually want to hear your message ?

Where on earth did you ever get the idea that I continue to push the gospel on people who refuse to hear it? What on earth does this have to do with Christians dishonoring Christ with rude behavior and language?

Was Paul not passionate about God ? So much so that he killed those He considered against God ? Yes he was wrong, but God saw the love for God in Paul’s heart. God did not condemn Paul, he did not hand Paul over to the Gentiles to pay for his transgressions, He converted Paul.

That's grace. Do you honestly think that Paul's persecution of Christians was not a sin? I will be shocked if you really think that. Paul didn't receive justice ONLY because of God's grace, not because his persecution of Christians had anything to do with loving God. In what terms does Paul himself speak of his former life? God did not save Paul because of any merit in Paul or in anything Paul thought, said, or did. This is spiritual milk, pcaspian. Salvation is by God's grace alone.

If you honestly think anything in Paul earned his conversion, then you and I know different gospels.

wow.. its amazing how side tracked some of these threads get...

Originally posted by ivanhoe
From what you wrote I conclude you have one set of values for Christians and another set of values for Non-Christians. I bet that means Christians cannot perform abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide and active euthanasia but non-Christians can.

ivanhoe, are you deliberately setting about trying to get me to post a hateful rampage? I'll admit you've angered me with this absurdity, but you won't get me to curse or insult you. I won't leave God out of it!

Yours is a thoroughly unwarranted conclusion. I never said it is permissable for non-Christians to behave the way you have been behaving. I don't think it's permissable for anyone. I won't let my children behave that way. It is wrong for anyone to indulge in such malice and spitefulness.

Are you making the mistake of thinking that if I criticize you it must mean that I defend bbarr? That's insane.

I take no side but His. I am packless

Where on earth did you get the idea that I have a separate set of values for non-Christians? I only said that you add to your sin of spite the sin of dishonoring the name of the Lord Jesus, whose name you bear when you call yourself a Christian. Ironically, I have been accused of having no regard for the defense of Christ's name, but my whole purpose in confronting you on this issue is to defend His name. I am tired of seeing you abuse it. If you insist on behaving like a blasphemer yourself, then you have no gound to stand on when you condemn them.

As for the suggestion that I think non-Christians are permitted to, for example, commit infanticide, what are you up to? Where on earth would you get the idea that I believe that? Or are you just trying to provoke me to spew out obscenities on the forums? Or are you misrepesenting me in order to paint me in a villainous color and dump me in the Wolf Pack?

Or do you really believe that if I oppose your behavior, then I must be an evil person?

Originally posted by ivanhoe
I did not claim you twisted the Word of God, I claimed you and others on this site (mis)use the Word of God to manipulate and tame me (or others) to get me into the corner you want me to go.

If I have misused the Word of God, then please, if you have any love for Christ and one of His, show me where I have erred.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Huntingbear, you still don't understand when I say "Let's leave God out of this".

Whatever you mean, I won't do it. I am a Christian.

I think you mean that I have misused the Bible, which to me must mean that I have interpreted or applied it improperly.

If you mean that I misuse it simply by hoping it will lead you to change your ways, then I am speechless. The Bible is there to help us change our ways. If I behave in an inappropriate manner, I expect my fellow Christians to correct me from Scripture. That's how this faith of ours works. So I must believe that you mean I am interpreting or applying Scripture incorrectly.

If I am misusing Scripture, you should be able to show me how. If I am not misusing Scripture, then it is not me with whom you have a problem. If you refuse or are unable to show me how I have wrongly interpreted or applied Scripture, then I have no option left but to conclude that it is the message of Scripture itself to which you object.

I would hate to come to that conclusion, so please tell me which passage (or passages) of Scripture I have misused and how it (or they) ought rightly to be interpreted and applied.

Originally posted by huntingbear
ivanhoe, are you deliberately setting about trying to get me to post a hateful rampage? I'll admit you've angered me with this absurdity, but you won't get me to curse or insult you. I won't leave God out of it!

Yours is a thorou ...[text shortened]... eve that if I oppose your behavior, then I must be an evil person?

What I find most disturbing is that you do not raise your voice against abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide on the forums. I do raise my voice and that's why I get the Wolfpack treatment. You also do not raise your voice against these Wolfpack tactics, but if I explode because of the constant and continuing insults, degrading innuendo and unfair treatment, you rebuke me for several reasons. Of course I agree with you that what I've done, namecalling and using certain words as a Christian is wrong and it is not something I am proud of. I do not want to justify this in any way. I have asked the Lord for forgiveness.

However, Huntingbear, if I want to rebuke someone I do it on my own authority, not on God's. I do not throw in all kinds of Bible quotes, the Word of God, to show the other person I am right. (For a better understanding of things I can add that I didn't look up the quotes you presented to me, so there is no problem with interpretation as far as I am concerned.) Maybe that's a protestant way of rebuking people, but it is certainly not mine. I don't like to be bombarded with quotes from the Scriptures when I have done something wrong. Certainly not in the case when I agree with the rebuke.
Furthermore you do not express any kind of understanding for my position and what preceded and caused my outburst.

Huntingbear: "I'll admit you've angered me with this absurdity, but you won't get me to curse or insult you."

If you are already angered by this question then we can conclude the following:

First. You'd better not engage in debate with certain members I have been debating because you will have sleepness nights.

Second. It seems I have adapted myself to the Wolfpacks's standards of what constitutes a "good" debate. The anger and strife they trigger influences the whole Debating and Spirituality forums. Having said that I do not forget my own responsability and guilt in any way. The longer I think about it the more clear it becomes to me that I have to stop debating at this site for my own good.
My behaviour and my debating tactics are becoming increasingly uncivil, rude and unchristian. I apologise to you for angering and upsetting you. I'm afraid I will have to do what so many have done in the past: Leave the forums.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
I'm afraid I will have to do what so many have done so in the past: Leave the forums.

Please don't go ivanhoe. This is all somewhat silly on both sides. The essence of debate is still working here, but despite this, you seem to be happy to take on the victim persona and the Wolfpack seem to be happy to goad you into it. Despite both these things, the issues are still being discussed with good points from both sides.

I'm sure you know that you blow your top easier than most and consequently you fall prey to the teeth of wolfish attack, but those teeth are often not as sharp as you think.

By all means take some time out, cool down, review some of the debates and look at where you began to feel threatened and what triggered it, but don't leave. That won't solve the problem and it won't make you feel any better. Deep breaths ivanhoe, deep breaths.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
What I find most disturbing is that you do not raise your voice against abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide on the forums.

I have partially addressed the question of why I don't participate in the ethical debates. I'll give you a more complete explanation:

1) I don't have time for really involved debates. I have off-line ministry, studies, and my family which all take priority over on-line debates. As it is, this thread is straining my time too much.

2) All my ethical views depend on my love for Christ. This means that debate on ethical matters is largely futile unless I'm discussing them with someone who already loves Christ like I do. So I concentrate my efforts on apologetics more than on ethics. I preach ethics (among other things) at church. I couldn't contribute more to an ethical debate than a mere statement of my beliefs. Does a debate on abortion really need me saying, "I am against abortion" and nothing more? If someone wanted to know why I'm against abortion, I'd have to say, "That's a long story, but it all begins with the fact that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins...." and then I'm into the gospel itself and apologetics before I can even begin on ethics. So, in short, if you really think it's necessary, I'll pop into ethical threads and state my opinion. But I won't get drawn into bickering about it with people who don't share a Christian ethical system. It is futile. I would much better spend my time trying to show Christ's love and hoping people come to trust Him. Only from there is there any point of contact for a discussion of ethics.

3) I have and do make stands on ethical matters. I have had debates with many of the same people you have. It was in the course of public ethical debates that I came to realize the futility of them, and that it was not the best way to use my resources for God. Not all my debates are in the public eye, and I find them far more productive that way. They don't degenerate into mud-slinging.

4) My apologetic discussions have been productive, mostly peaceful, and thoroughly enjoyable, in no small part because of bbarr. bbarr is a tremendous help to a Christian, because his wide knowledge and powerful logic keeps me at my best form just to keep up. He and I have had (and are having) calm, productive, enjoyable discussions about various apologetic and philisophical matters (including the problem of evil and the nature of free will) and even ethical matters. But when it becomes clear that we can't help each other with ethics, we have sense enough to leave them alone. He knows where I stand; I know where he stands.

I have asked the Lord for forgiveness.

Ask and you shall receive. That's what He says.

However, Huntingbear, if I want to rebuke someone I do it on my own authority, not on God's.

I have no authority. I only have God's Word.

I do not throw in all kinds of Bible quotes, the Word of God, to show the other person I am right.

I have no other way of knowing whether I'm right, or whether someone else is right.

(For a better understanding of things I can add that I didn't look up the quotes you presented to me, so there is no problem with interpretation as far as I am concerned.)

Do you really think I only quoted the Bible to intimidate you, back you into a corner, and silence you? Is that really what you meant when you said I misuse Scripture? I don't want you to be silent; I want you to be polite. God's Word indicates that He wants us to be polite. The only reason I care whether you're polite because God cares. I want you to be as vocal as you want. I have no objection to your voicing your opinions publically. It has never been my desire to silence you.

Maybe that's a protestant way of rebuking people, but it is certainly not mine.

I'd really prefer this did not become a denominational issue. I would like to think that the Bible is canon for all Christians, not just for Protestants. (by the way, I rarely call myself a Protestant, because my doctrine is not based on protest, and when I do call myself a Protestant I do so only with great hesitation)

I don't like to be bombarded with quotes from the Scriptures when I have done something wrong.

I tried to use minimal Scripture for maximal effect; I certainly never intended a bombardment. In any case, if any Christian feels I am behaving inappropriately I will insist they back up their claims with the Bible. No Christian has any other authority at his disposal, as I see it.

Certainly not in the case when I agree with the rebuke.

It was not apparent to me that you agreed. I apologize if I have been "preaching to the converted."

Furthermore you do not express any kind of understanding for my position and what preceded and caused my outburst.

I may not have expressed it, but that doesn't mean I don't have it. The fact is, we're called on to carry our cross, ivanhoe. It's not supposed to be easy. God knows I want to curse at people some times. God knows I do. Even if I don't type it, still I think it. And as I mentioned previously, you should hear me now and then in the car. In short, I know what it's like to be angry. I know what it's like to indulge my anger. I know what it's like to resist that temptation. I know which way is easier and which harder. I know that when I fail I fail, and when I succeed I succeed only by God's grace. I know I will fail again. And again, and again. But I must try my best to obey Him. If you ever hear (or read) me losing my temper, I hope you'll rebuke me, with Scripture if necessary.

I'm afraid I will have to do what so many have done in the past: Leave the forums.

I don't know whether that's necessary. I don't think it is, but it's up to you. Whether you stay or go, I hope you understand that it was only for Christ's sake that I entered this thread. If I was wrong in anything, may God forgive me. But I was never attacking you or confronting you for the purpose of harming you, or for any personal gain. What have I gained from this? I've nearly, if not entirely, lost a friend, if not more than one.

Whether you stay or go, may God bless you and keep you. May He make His face shine upon you, and be gracious to you. May He turn His face toward you, and give you peace.

Originally posted by huntingbear
Originally posted by ivanhoe
[b]What I find most disturbing is that you do not raise your voice against abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide on the forums.

I have partially addressed the question of why I don't participate in the ethical debates. I'll give you a more complete explanation:

1) I don't have time for re ...[text shortened]... ne upon you, and be gracious to you. May He turn His face toward you, and give you peace.[/b]

Thank you, Huntingbear.

I'd like to start this conversation first and foremost by emphasizing the fact that I have nothing but a sincere discussion in mind when discussing this with you. Before you continue to read my response you need to realise this. As my previous post angered you, I need you to understand this, I don't have a motiv in my posts. I have no ambition to absolve myself of all wrong doings and placing such fault on your shoulders. I would much rather have discussed this in private as our other discussions have proceeded, but as this is already public and in a previous example you preferred to use a public forum as means of rebuke, we can keep it here. Please however keep in mind that I do not support a public rebuke of another Christian. As such this post is in no way an attempt at rebuking you or passing blaim.


If bbarr won't listen to ivanhoe, then neither of these follows:

a) Christians are entitled to curse or insult bbarr.
b) No other Christian is permitted to hold conversations with bbarr.
[/b]

I agree with this view. I do not believe nor endorse any of these actions on someone that chooses not to listen to another Christian. I've yet to insult any person's that say to me "I just don't believe pcaspian, sorry".


These are the seeds of Inquisition. We are to defend our faith, as our brother Peter made very clear, with gentleness and respect. You insist on making me out to be against defending our faith. You misrepresent me. I am not against defending our faith. I am against doing so in a way which constitutes disobedience to our faith. How shall we defend it and break it at the same time?

My question has a purpose. From what I understand, you believe that , under no circumstances will a Christian be justified in protecting his faith by force. Not when a person disrupts a church service nor when a person attempts to kill you or even the person holding the church service. The only caveat is when you are protecting your family from this man. I claim otherwise. If my undestanding of your belief is incorrect, please correct me.

I believe otherwise for a number of reasons. I believe that should one be persecuted for one's faith, we should not resist, we should shine as an example of Christianity, much like the Christians persecuted by Nero did. I also believe we should be forgive and love those that persecute us, much like the Pope loves and forgave the man who attempted to take his life.

I do not however belief that when a Christian community is established, we should relinquish that establishment because the minority is out to disrupt it. Should we live in a society where a single man can murder every single Christian man because we do not retaliate ? One where an entire service is disrupted because one man bellows on a loudspeaker ?

These are my views. I mention them not to prove your view wrong, for that is in deed a view I may yet embrace, but rather to give you my point of view so you may be able to understand me.


What is at issue here, however, the thing you confronted me about in the first place, is that apparently you felt I was out of line to suggest that ivanhoe should not use obscenities and be abusive to people in the forums... But for now, it's just a red herring.

I am not suggesting this at all. I merely asked you to stand in his shoes, shoes by your own admission you have filled. Whether Ivan has done this more than anyone else here is not relevant with regard to sinning. You have done so, I certainly have done so.

Ivan drew you into this debate, I believe as an attempt to get through to BBarr. To illustrate to him that you did not post here because you were insulted by the manner God's name is blasphemed on the forums. As you have already stated you found Ivan's behaviour more disgusting than any blaspheming any non-Christian has done at this site, he was clearly wrong. I may be partly to blaim as I have already indicated to Ivan that to be one of the reasons I would no longer stay at RHP, thus perhaps he simply assumed this to be your reasoning also.


Does it tells us to curse and insult those who won't listen to us?

No and I am not condoning such an act. I am however not referring to those that simply do not care to listen to the Gospel, but those purposefully out to disrupt us from preaching it.

I only said that we drag Christ's name through the mud (or we dishonor it, or we shame it, or we abuse it, or we disown it, whatever wording you'd prefer) when we behave in a manner (e.g., cursing, obscenity, spitefulness) contradictory to our calling. Surely you agree with this?!

Of course I agree with you. If someone cares not to hear the word of God, we are not to preach to them, nor to insult them, nor to curse them. We are to leave them alone. What you have yet to acknowledge is that non-Christians can drag God's name through the mud. Instead you place blaim on Christians. Disciples needed to aquire who was worthy and not give that which is Holy to the dogs. If you want to continue this part of the discussion in private I will understand.


Fine. Don't preach. What on earth has this got to do with me, or with Christians behaving like spiteful children and soiling the reputation of their Lord?

By that own admission Huntingbear, you were also a spitefull child. If you rebuked each of these Christians in private as the scriptures instructed, then they are to accountable for their own deeds. This public rebuke however is not in love.


You cannot find the slightest suggestion that I think myself immune to anger in anything I have posted. In fact, I will admit that right now I am angry that you continually misrepresent me and bombard me with red herrings. I am angry. But am I cursing you? Am I telling you that you look like the hindquarters of some sort of animal? Am I calling you obscene names?

You are posting in anger and you've been questioned not by someone that is trying to fool you, tease you, insult you, or belittle that which you love, but by someone that cares for both you and Ivan. Now apply that type of behaviour to someone that received spitefull, malicious, instigating posts on a daily basis because they are trying to spread the Lords message. Welcome to Ivan's life. Excuses for his behaviour, no. Understanding yes.

I don't post in anger HB. I am extremely conscious of that. If and when I did insult certain posters at RHP, it had its purpose and provided no pleasure to me. As I was very conscious of these posts I paid particular attention to my motivs, for any pleasure derived from betlitting someone would clearly be wrong. I once had a friend that insulted my now wife. He is not a Christian. I explained to him that he offended me. He pretended that I was overreacting and continued in this fashion. He would not be my friend anymore and I would not have remained calm had I simply kept my anger inside. A calculated move was to insult him in a similar way to make him understand and appreciate what it feels like to be insulted. It worked and he stopped at once. Sometimes when a friend doesn't understand that they're actually hurting you when they hit you on the arm, a punch in return can help. You may not understand this, you may not agree.

If I meet someone that doesn't care to hear about the Gospel, I treat them as I would any other. I even treat blaspheming athiests whom I work at with nothing but friendship. Other than their ignorant blaspheming, they are actually nice guys. Difference is that I will not tolerate them insulting my God, infront of me or infront of my Christian friends. Every athiest that I have met has shown me this common courtecy, for they atleast showed me this respect.


That's grace. Do you honestly think that Paul's persecution of Christians was not a sin? I will be shocked if you really think that. Paul didn't receive justice [b]ONLY because of God's grace, not because his persecution of Christians had anything to do with loving God. [/b]

If you believe that, then you would certainly have to ask why Nero and not Paul received the interjection that Paul received. Not every person is blessed with God making Himself known to them. A person searching for God will find Him. Neither Paul, not Nero deserve salvation, yet God chose one and not the other for a reason.

pc

Originally posted by pcaspian
I'd like to start this conversation first and foremost by emphasizing the fact that I have nothing but a sincere discussion in mind when discussing this with you. Before you continue to read my response you need to realise this. As my previous post angered you, I need you to understand this, I don't have a motiv in my posts. I have no ambition to absolve ...[text shortened]... ther Paul, not Nero deserve salvation, yet God chose one and not the other for a reason.

pc

I hope you guys are about done because the really good debates are drying up. I've had the final word in several threads, and we know that's just not right. 😉

Now kiss and make up.

I'll nominate Rev Iain Paisley as representing a thoroughly bigotted manifestation of christianity:

Antichrist: His Doom
As Son of Perdition, the Antichrist is the heir of perdition. It was written of him before he arose, 'he goeth unto perdition.'
Dr. Ian R. K. Paisley

Antichrist is the Son of Perdition. If a son, the scripture underlines this conclusion, THEN AN HEIR.

As Son of Perdition, the Antichrist is the heir of perdition. It was written of him before he arose, 'he goeth unto perdition.'

The king of heaven has made His decree and it altereth not. As sure as the Papacy has had its glory so surely shall its doom come.

The destruction of the Popes is twofold, 'Whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming.’

This duality of doom has been noted in prophecy ever since the beginning of the little horn of Daniel chapter seven. We read in verse 26 that the judgement shall sit and they shall take away his dominion to consume and destroy it unto the end. Here is yet another proof that the ‘little horn’ of Daniel Chapter 7 is the Antichrist of Paul.

The doom is in two stages. (1) gradual and (2) sudden and terrible destruction.

The gradual consuming is by 'the spirit of the Lord's mouth,' that is the spreading of the Word of God. Ever since the Bible has been translated this has been going forward. The Reformation displayed to men the damnable errors of Rome, and its hold on the nations was loosened. When the Word is not proclaimed the Pope will flourish.

But the destruction of Rome in totality will be sudden and terrible. Leaving His seat of glory Christ will confront the Antichrist personally and hurl him into perdition with all his priests and his whole apparatus of antichristianity. God speed the day.

'And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.' Revelation 18:21.

Then and only then will the ‘Hallelujahs’ of the saints ring forth.