Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
Gregory Matthews

The Little Horn--More

Recommended Posts

If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.

The Wanderer
37 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

No time to comment right now; but a very interesting article.  I agree with the premise.

The whole article was ridiculous, there was no point to it. Seems like all the authors wanted to do was a turkey-shoot. "Quick! Lets see how many we can get in one (pot) shot!" There wasnt even a scrap of Biblical information in the whole thing.  I would say the same thing whether I knew who they were or not; but to be honest, when they right like that; I really couldnt care less who they are. Something they seemed to make a big tadoo about. (and no; I didnt mispell the word "write" here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo

To me, the premise of the article was to rethink the idea that the little horn is the papacy, because the papacy is not even the slightest threat to Adventism; and that the pope being taken prisoner in 1798 is historically irrelevant to most people of today compared to other worldwide geopolitical shifts over the past few hundred years.  The wild speculation on other interpretations of the 1260 days was just that - wild speculation.  But the premise of rethinking our message on the little horn (and the harlot and the antichrist) in light of present facts (present truth?) rings true to me.  I have presented my opinion on who these entities might be in other threads.  I won't rehash it here.

Could it be that prophecy has a two-fold purpose?  That it not only tells us of events that will happen, but that it also proves the omniscience and sovereign will of God when we see it happen - even if we don't see it until it unfolds?  We will then say "OOHH! God told us this would happen; and it happened just as He said it would!"  It then strengthens our confidence in prophecies dealing with events still future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
38 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

the papacy is not even the slightest threat to Adventism;

and you KNOW, and are 100% certain of this how? 

40 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

the pope being taken prisoner in 1798 is historically irrelevant to most people of today

says who, and what would that PROVE about Bible prophecy, even if it were true?

A "rethink" of Bible prophecy should not involve throwing out former light on Bible prophecy, and replacing it with something more "palatable" to current culture and rabid media demands. IF its Bible prophecy; and new light does come into view; it doesn't automatically follow that all the old light has to be tossed.

A few years ago when The USSR was still an entity, I remember teaching a prophecy class and stating that at some point (I had no idea when), the USSR would somehow be dissolved. This was my then current understanding of Bible prophecy; and as we all know; that is exactly what happened. The trouble with whats in your post here is that we are being told that something definitely will NOT happen, just because YOU don't see how it could. Did you get this kind of "prophecy" from the Bible? If so, where?

As far as I can see; your post is a reflection of History Revisionism at  best.

I would talk differently if I saw a clear line of biblical reasoning for what you have posted. The whole "rethink" mantra is often just cultural buzz-speak for revisionism of history that "culture" either doesn't like or "cannot see."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings Greg,

 

I was interested in reading the article, but I am of the opinion that the little horn of Daniel 7 is the Papacy, and current events are tending towards the pre-determined end at an ever increasing pace and therefore these prophecies are relevant to today. I suggest that Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 are excellent frameworks for the overall view, and then the Book of Revelation fills in some of the detail. If you remove the framework, then the detail loses its stability.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo

Wanderer,

Thank you for the cordial and constructive feedback.

2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

and you KNOW, and are 100% certain of this how? 

I don't "know" anything about future events. I am only a poster here whom I thought was allowed to freely express his opinion on what prophecy might say.  The papacy may indeed play a role in end-time events one way or another.  I just don't see it now.

2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

I would talk differently if I saw a clear line of biblical reasoning for what you have posted.

I will post my OPINION.  I'm not saying it's "new light".  1798 is a key year based on the "day for year principle (which I don't see the Bible a declaring true for all prophecy); and 538 being the fall of the Western Roman Empire.  The Eastern Roman Empire - centered in Constantinople which was named after King Constantine -  didn't fall until the middle of the 15th century when it was overrun by the Ottomans. From the viewpoint of Middle Eastern culture, THAT event was the fall of the Roman Empire.  Remember that the Bible was written from a Middle Eastern perspective - not a Western perspective.

In Daniel, the angel makes it abundantly clear that his visions involve the time of the end:

"he said to me, “understand that the vision concerns the time of the end.” (Dan. 8:17)

"He said: “I am going to tell you what will happen later in the time of wrath, because the vision concerns the appointed time of the end." (Dan. 8:19)

"The vision of the evenings and mornings that has been given you is true, but seal up the vision, for it concerns the distant future.” (Dan. 8:26)

"Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end." (Dan. 12:9)

"As for you, go your way till the end. You will rest, and then at the end of the days you will rise to receive your allotted inheritance." (Dan. 12:13)

I have a hard time accepting that the time of the end - the 1260 days - began almost 1,500 years ago. 

I could go on with texts in Revelation, but this post is already too long.

Call me dense - it's just my opinion.  Feel free to dissect it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
3 hours ago, JoeMo said:

 I am only a poster here whom I thought was allowed to freely express his opinion

Of course you are! That was the whole reason I replied! I prefer to be challenged, rather than agreed with! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo

More indications (not proofs) that the papacy is not the little horn (assuming that "little horn" in synonymous with "antichrist"):

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22)  The Catholic Church/Papacy has never denied that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah in Hebrew).

"Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,  but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist," (1 John 4:2-3)  The Catholic Church/Papacy has never denied that Jesus is from God - His one and only Son.

"I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." (2 John 1:7)  The Catholic Church/Papacy has never denied that Jesus is God in the flesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
38 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22)  The Catholic Church/Papacy has never denied that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah in Hebrew).

I see the point you are trying to make; and yet I would suggest that we stop and think for a minute on what it means to "deny Christ."  When I see a person, or a group, who has beliefs that they not only preach, but practice, and those beliefs essentially negate the need for Christ, and Him crucified," then we do have the problem where Christ is in fact denied. All of us can invoke the name of Jesus and make it look like we are not in denial of Him; thats the easy part! Appearances! The reason there is no such thing as a fake three dollar bill is because there is no such thing as a real three dollar bill! Thats just how it is with truth and error! IF there is a real one; there will be a fake version. The very reason it is fake is derived from the fact that there is the real version; and the fake is so close to the real; that only those who know their Bible well can discern the true from the false. All of these beasts of Bible prophecy are all about fear.  FEAR is how they rule, FEAR is how they divide and conquer. And the Bible tells us that during the time of their actions, mens hearts will be failing them FOR FEAR.

The very definition of FEAR goes something like this:

F.  alse

E.  vidence

A.  ppearing

R.  eal

For all intents and purposes, it really does not matter who one thinks is the "little horn" of Bible prophecy actually is or will be. What does the Bible tell us will be the characteristics of this "little horn?"

Quote

Dan_7:8  I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
Dan_8:9  And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

Here are just a few ideas from Scripture to get us started:

Little horn. The first of twelve titles given to the power commonly known as "the Antichrist": compare Dan 11:21-30,

Note the other titles:

(1) "the king of Babylon" (Isa 14:4);

(2) "the Assyrian" (Isa 14:25; +**Mic_5:5 note);

(3) "Lucifer, son of the morning," in opposition to "the bright and morning star" (Isa 14:12);

(4) "the Prince that shall come" (Dan 9:26);

(5) "the king of fierce countenance" (Dan 8:23);

(6) "the vile person" (Dan 11:21);

(7) "the willful king" (Dan 11:36);

(8) "the man of sin" (2 Thes 2:3);

(9) "the son of perdition" (2 Thes 2:3);

(10) "that wicked (or lawless) one" (2 Thes 2:3; Rev 13:18);

(11) "the beast with ten horns" (Rev_13:1);

(12) "the little horn" (Dan 8:8) [CB]. =1 Kings 22:11, = Psalms 75:10; = Psalms 132:17, Psalms 27:1, = Zech 1:18, **Mat 24:5; **Mat 24:15, 2Th_2:3-4, 1 John 2:18; 1 John 4:3.

Daniel not only sees ten horns proceeding from the head of the fourth beast, corresponding with these ten toes, but another horn additional to these, which, though appearing as a “little horn,” engaged the special attention of the prophet, and constitutes the leading object in the vision. The character of the kingdoms of the world was to be concentrated in that horn or the power represented by it, and it was from it that the Church of God was mainly to suffer. As a “horn,” it was to be a power like the rest; that term, being quite expressive of the powerful weapon of many animals, being figuratively employed in the Scripture to denote power or strength, and so a kingdom or a sovereignty. See Deut 33:17; Psalms 18:2; Luke 1:69.

There is only ONE world power that fits such descriptors:

Quote

And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth. (Rev 17:18)

There IS only ONE "city" on the planet that is also a sovereign power/nation, with representation by diplomats in almost every country there is.

Edited by The Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phkrause

Growing up I've always been taught from many Jewish/SDA pastors, like J.M. Hoffman, Herb Silver, (have forgotten there first names) Roseman, Potland, Potash, and a number of others! Than into my older years, Batchelor, Wolhberg, Shushler, and a few more! More importantly he "takes the place of Christ/God!" Now there are obviously many that oppose Christ, are they considered anti? Not sure, but I do know one that considers himself to be the representative/takes the place on earth of Christ/God!! Of course there are other non Jewish Adventist pastors that also teach this, and all the reformers taught this, the Adventist church did not start this teaching as some seem to think! Also the Apostles taught that the anti-christ was already among them back in the days after Christ had died??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
28 minutes ago, phkrause said:

Also the Apostles taught that the anti-christ was already among them back in the days after Christ had died??

YES! And this is a very important point! Also very noteworthy is the fact that scripture uses the plural in saying "antichrists" so anyone who says its just one person, ergo a Pope, does not have a scriptural leg to stand on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo

Y'all are free to believe what you believe; and I will believe what I believe.  You see what the Bible says one way, and I see it another way.  One of use is obviously wrong - maybe both of us.  Time will tell.  I'll concede your point when I see bands of marauding Catholics running around beheading people all over the world at the order of the pope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
5 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

Y'all are free to believe what you believe; and I will believe what I believe.  You see what the Bible says one way, and I see it another way.  One of use is obviously wrong - maybe both of us.  Time will tell.  I'll concede your point when I see bands of marauding Catholics running around beheading people all over the world at the order of the pope.

Thats a nice, compliant apologetic.  

In my post above I don't think I said any such thing about the Pope. What I did say was that there are a number of entities, named in scripture, that DO and will play a role in events of Bible prophecy that we all know is coming. My post did not name names. I simply listed the scriptures I thought were related to the subject. What did I do "wrong" this time?

HOW do you see any of those scriptures I referenced "differently?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
20 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

There is only ONE world power that fits such descriptors ...There IS only ONE "city" on the planet that is also a sovereign power/nation, with representation by diplomats in almost every country there is.

 

2 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

In my post above I don't think I said any such thing about the Pope.

If you weren't speaking of the Pope, which world power were you speaking of?  If you weren't speaking of Rome, which city were you speaking of?  Not challenging you, just curious.  If you're not "naming" the Pope, what problem do you have with me opining that we should rethink calling the Pope the little horn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
Just now, JoeMo said:

what problem do you have with me opining that we should rethink calling the Pope the little horn?

I don't have "a problem." I have questions and I have made a point of asking people to look at that scripture and decide for themselves. IF you even have a plausible answer, I am listening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
1 minute ago, The Wanderer said:

I don't have "a problem." I have questions and I have made a point of asking people to look at that scripture and decide for themselves. IF you even have a plausible answer, I am listening.

I have no problem with any of the scriptures - they're scripture.  I just don't think they apply specifically and solely to the Pope, which is basically what the SDA Church teaches.  I don't really care if the church revisits it or not; a pronouncement by the church won't change my belief; solid events in this world might.  Don't those same scriptures also possibly pertain to Islam?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
9 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

Don't those same scriptures also possibly pertain to Islam?

Perhaps if one is an adherent to Pop-Prophecy they might; but I have never seen your posts telling us anything about that with a solid backing from scripture. Telling everyone they are "wrong" or "might" be wrong, and then NOT once ever giving them a plausible scripture support and/or solution is just plain unbelievable. What I am saying is that your insinuations re Islam and the Adventist Church are not evident in Rev 17:18, or any other related scripture.

I was once taught that it is wrong to tear down someone's "shack of belief" without giving them a "palace of truth" to move into. I see here a lot of drive-by posts taking pot shots at whoever, and no real substance to go by.

9 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

I just don't think they apply specifically and solely to the Pope

So are you saying that yes, the Pope does have "partial" involvement? (re Rev 17:18)

Edited by The Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phkrause
1 hour ago, JoeMo said:

I'll concede your point when I see bands of marauding Catholics running around beheading people all over the world at the order of the pope.

Where does it say that there will be marauding Catholics running around beheading people per the orders of the pope?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
1 hour ago, phkrause said:

Where does it say that there will be marauding Catholics running around beheading people per the orders of the pope?

Isn't this what mainstream Adventism preaches?  If "Little Horn = Antichrist/beast, and the Pope is the one who ends the sacrifices and declares himself to be god, and institutes the mark of the beast and makes war against the saints, and those who are beheaded cry out from under the altar, who else could it be?  If I am misunderstanding SDA doctrine, please explain to me who SDA's thing the Little Horn is?

 

2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

So are you saying that yes, the Pope does have "partial" involvement?

I'm saying he MAY have involvement.

2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

Perhaps if one is an adherent to Pop-Prophecy they might; but I have never seen your posts telling us anything about that with a solid backing from scripture.

Read all of the verses you posted above!  Read the posts from Hebrews and 1 John I posted above!  IMHO, they could pertain to radical Islam just as much as Catholicism.  I have posted scripture after scripture for a few years on the possibility that Islam is the little horn.  If it isn't "solid" enough for you so be it.

I'm not going to debate this issue in vain with anyone; nor do I have to be insulted by having you call my opinions "pop prophecy" and my opinions a "shack of belief". I won't be responding to any more insults on this topic.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
22 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

I'm saying he MAY have involvement.

After thinking about it, past actions by the papacy and RCC had a whole lot to do with the current animosity between Islam and Christianity (Crusades) and past animosity between Protestants and Catholics (the Inquisition); and their past actions have been influential in setting up end time events. The church has officially and publicly apologized for their past actions. It's been a different Catholic Church since Vatican II and Pope John XVIII. I don't know how much current influence they will have on future end-time events, but they ( as well as many of us Protestants)  have done a good job setting the stage - albeit without understanding the unintended consequences at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
1 hour ago, JoeMo said:

I won't be responding to any more insults on this topic. 

thanks, for the Pop-Prophecy. Looks to me like some things just are not "allowed" to be questioned. Otherwise, its "insults." Who even knows what you mean by "mainstream" or "Adventism?"  And who says thats what they teach? Where do they teach that? What book, what page number? ergo "Pop-Prophecy."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phkrause
22 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Isn't this what mainstream Adventism preaches?

Not as far as I know?? Sorry, but I've never heard that!!

 

22 hours ago, JoeMo said:

If "Little Horn = Antichrist/beast, and the Pope is the one who ends the sacrifices

Again I've never heard that? As far as I know when Jesus died that is what ended the sacrificial system! Having said that, the Jews didn't stop right away, they stopped I believe when the Romans destroyed the temple in AD 70?

 

22 hours ago, JoeMo said:

those who are beheaded cry out from under the altar,

Can I get a quote? Thanks

 

22 hours ago, JoeMo said:

If I am misunderstanding SDA doctrine, please explain to me who SDA's thing the Little Horn is?

I would say that your not misunderstanding the SDA doctrine or those that actually started that thinking, the reformers, Luther, Huss, Jerome, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
On 12/16/2018 at 7:50 PM, phkrause said:

there are other non Jewish Adventist pastors that also teach this, and all the reformers taught this, the Adventist church did not start this teaching as some seem to think! 

The whole thing regarding the Roman church was well developed before there was an SDA church. I believe Uriah Smith added to it. However, the whole topic is on my to-do list. If one was interested in preAdventist thought regarding the Roman church and it's very early pagan roots, you might look up a book called "Babylon: Mystery Religion" by Ralph Woodrow. I had an interesting discussion with him one time, at least 30 years ago, regarding things NOT in the book. He did not mention wedding rings or the Sabbath. But anything else I could possibly have wondered about, he covered it. Woodrow as I recall was a Baptist.

One interesting thing that we missed regarding the papal insignia on the papal miter was it used to be there but came off around the year 1798! So during the years SDAs have been writing about the papal insignia, that was an error in facts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
On 12/16/2018 at 12:03 AM, JoeMo said:

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22)  The Catholic Church/Papacy has never denied that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah in Hebrew).


On 12/16/2018 at 8:20 PM, The Wanderer said:

YES! And this is a very important point! Also very noteworthy is the fact that scripture uses the plural in saying "antichrists" so anyone who says its just one person, ergo a Pope, does not have a scriptural leg to stand on.

So often it becomes a semantical war here! Yes, anti-christ appears all thru the New Testament and refers to anyone who attempts to assume the place of God. Whatever the action, you get anti-christ with lower case "a".

However, there is the Anti-Christ with the upper case "A". This is for no other than Satan himself and refers to that time he will impersonate Jesus and walk on this earth and deceive the whole world.

While the popes may behave as "antichrists" they are not exclusively "the anti-christs." Dare I say there are anti-christs roaming the sanctuaries of SDA churches and even the halls of learning in SDA universities?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×