Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

James Bond is the invention of Satan, friends, created to draw you away from worshipping Jesus, who is "fairer than the sons of men." (Psalm 45:2) Bond seeks to save the world, just like the other superheroes Superman, Spider-Man, & Batman who all are types of the Antichrist (the incarnation of Satan who says "I will be like the Most High" ).

I have found tons of "types of the Antichrist" (i.e. people resembling in many uncommon ways the three persons of God & Satan/The Antichrist , for instance by being worshipped all over the world in place of Jesus) throughout nature (ex. the Moon which resembles the Sun, a symbol of Jesus the "Sun of Righteousness" ) and history
-including gods (ex. Buddha , Crishna the chief Hindu god, Confucius)
-writers/philosophers (ex. Socrates-Plato-Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche),
-political leaders (ex. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, and apparently every US President including Obama),
-movie stars (especially ones who played God or Satan, like Willem Dafoe, Jim Carrey, & Jack Nicholson),
-heroes/villains (Batman, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, James Bond, Superman,...),
-music stars (Elvis, Jim Morrison of the Doors, John Lennon of the Beatles,...)
-and many more.

One way you can tell that an actor is a type of the Antichrist who like the Antichrist will be is possessed by Satan: you can look at the film roles they play. The next role Daniel Craig, the James Bond star, is scheduled to play is Lucifer, another name for Satan! All of the following actors are types of the Antichrist: Jack Nicholson (who played Satan in "Witches of Eastwick", Marlon Brando, Jim Carrey (who played God & Satan in his 13th film role!), Brad Pitt (who played Achilles the son of a god-dess who is a type of the Antichrist, Death in "Meet Joe Black", Tom Cruise, etc. There are very few if any actors in Hollywood who are not "servants of Satan," a name ascribed in the Bible to people possessed by Satan. "The WHOLE world lies in the power of the Wicked One." (1 John 5:19)

There quite good. Try one.

Originally posted by godislove85
James Bond is the invention of Satan, friends, created to draw you away from worshipping Jesus, who is "fairer than the sons of men." (Psalm 45:2) Bond seeks to save the world, just like the other superheroes Superman, Spider-Man, & Batman who all are types of the Antichrist (the incarnation of Satan who says "I will be like the Most High" ).

I have found tons of "types of the Antichrist" (i.e. people resembling in many uncommon ways the three persons of God & Satan/The Antichrist , for instance by being worshipped all over the world in place of Jesus) throughout nature (ex. the Moon which resembles the Sun, a symbol of Jesus the "Sun of Righteousness" ) and history
-including gods (ex. Buddha , Crishna the chief Hindu god, Confucius)
-writers/philosophers (ex. Socrates-Plato-Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche),
-political leaders (ex. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, and apparently every US President including Obama),
-movie stars (especially ones who played God or Satan, like Willem Dafoe, Jim Carrey, & Jack Nicholson),
-heroes/villains (Batman, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, James Bond, Superman,...),
-music stars (Elvis, Jim Morrison of the Doors, John Lennon of the Beatles,...)
-and many more.

One way you can tell that an actor is a type of the Antichrist who like the Antichrist will be is possessed by Satan: you can look at the film roles they play. The next role Daniel Craig, the James Bond star, is scheduled to play is Lucifer, another name for Satan! All of the following actors are types of the Antichrist: Jack Nicholson (who played Satan in "Witches of Eastwick", Marlon Brando, Jim Carrey (who played God & Satan in his 13th film role!), Brad Pitt (who played Achilles the son of a god-dess who is a type of the Antichrist, Death in "Meet Joe Black", Tom Cruise, etc. There are very few if any actors in Hollywood who are not "servants of Satan," a name ascribed in the Bible to people possessed by Satan. "The WHOLE world lies in the power of the Wicked One." (1 John 5:19)

You do know Batman, Harry Potter, Superman, Frodo and James Bond etc are'nt real.

I loled

I really do think that this guy "godislove85" is doing this for kicks. I mean, could anyone honestly believe such steaming bullshit? Maybe, but it seems unlikely.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I really do think that this guy "godislove85" is doing this for kicks. I mean, could anyone honestly believe such steaming bullshit? Maybe, but it seems unlikely.
Yeah most undoubtedly. If he actually looked all this stuff up then yeah I'd think he was serious but he plucked this off a website. Just google bond, Batman, Spiderman antichrist and it'll pop up on the first page. He's just trying to make Christians look like idiots, though he only makes himself look like one.

Moved to the religion forum, to be torn apart... oh, and you're nuts.

Yeah, I agree.

Originally posted by godislove85
James Bond is the invention of Satan, friends, created to draw you away from worshipping Jesus, who is "fairer than the sons of men." (Psalm 45:2) Bond seeks to save the world, just like the other superheroes Superman, Spider-Man, & Batman who all are types of the Antichrist (the incarnation of Satan who says "I will be like the Most High" ).

I have found tons of "types of the Antichrist" (i.e. people resembling in many uncommon ways the three persons of God & Satan/The Antichrist , for instance by being worshipped all over the world in place of Jesus) throughout nature (ex. the Moon which resembles the Sun, a symbol of Jesus the "Sun of Righteousness" ) and history
-including gods (ex. Buddha , Crishna the chief Hindu god, Confucius)
-writers/philosophers (ex. Socrates-Plato-Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche),
-political leaders (ex. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, and apparently every US President including Obama),
-movie stars (especially ones who played God or Satan, like Willem Dafoe, Jim Carrey, & Jack Nicholson),
-heroes/villains (Batman, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, James Bond, Superman,...),
-music stars (Elvis, Jim Morrison of the Doors, John Lennon of the Beatles,...)
-and many more.

One way you can tell that an actor is a type of the Antichrist who like the Antichrist will be is possessed by Satan: you can look at the film roles they play. The next role Daniel Craig, the James Bond star, is scheduled to play is Lucifer, another name for Satan! All of the following actors are types of the Antichrist: Jack Nicholson (who played Satan in "Witches of Eastwick", Marlon Brando, Jim Carrey (who played God & Satan in his 13th film role!), Brad Pitt (who played Achilles the son of a god-dess who is a type of the Antichrist, Death in "Meet Joe Black", Tom Cruise, etc. There are very few if any actors in Hollywood who are not "servants of Satan," a name ascribed in the Bible to people possessed by Satan. "The WHOLE world lies in the power of the Wicked One." (1 John 5:19)

There are similarities between James Bond and Jesus. Both are men with supernatural powers. Jesus uses magic while Bond uses technology. They are both fictional characters that are based on a possible real person (Bond is bases on a hypothetical secret agent and Jesus based on a god-man from 2000 years ago. They both have stories written about then in books. However, there are a lot of differences also. No one worships Bond, and he has not died, yet.

To say that Bond is an Antichrist is to say that Jesus was a bad guy. This is because Bond is a good guy, and an anti-Bond would have to be evil. Therefore, if Jesus was good, and Bond is good, they cannot be anti of each other.

Moral of the story kids: don't be like Jesus, and don't help/save people. It's a clear sign you're starting to resemble the anti-christ.

absurd. Just because someone plays the antagonist doesn't mean they are the antichrist. They are a real person pretending to be a fictional role.

Originally posted by godislove85
"Old Nick" a name for Satan

where would I find him referred to as such?

Originally posted by inimalist
where would I find him referred to as such?

All you have to do is spell satan backward (natas). Now if that isn't perfectly clear to you...

Originally posted by Digi
Moral of the story kids: don't be like Jesus, and don't help/save people. It's a clear sign you're starting to resemble the anti-christ.

His point is not that these people do bad things therefore they are evil but rather they promise to be "salvatory" for the Earth. He believes these false heroes are taking away from the true Hero and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
His point is not that these people do bad things therefore they are evil but rather they promise to be "salvatory" for the Earth. He believes these false heroes are taking away from the true Hero and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Right. Don't be heroic, don't try to save or help others. I love how it shoots itself in the foot with its own argument. Irony like that is hard to come by, even though I don't think this guy actually believes a word of it.

Originally posted by Digi
Right. Don't be heroic, don't try to save or help others. I love how it shoots itself in the foot with its own argument. Irony like that is hard to come by, even though I don't think this guy actually believes a word of it.

Again you are being deliberately selective of his points.

He is not saying don't be heroic. He is saying don't try and take away from Jesus, the glory which belongs to Jesus.

By all means be heroic, help and save people- just don't try and steal Jesus' glory by pretending to be the Salvation of Earth from all evil.

He 'believes' these characters are forms of AntiChrist because they are offering people an alternative to Jesus in forms of a Saviour.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Again you are being deliberately selective of his points.

He is not saying don't be heroic. He is saying don't try and take away from Jesus, the glory which belongs to Jesus.

By all means be heroic, help and save people- just don't try and steal Jesus' glory by pretending to be the Salvation of Earth from all evil.

He 'believes' these characters are forms of AntiChrist because they are offering people an alternative to Jesus in forms of a Saviour.


It is still stupid even after you word it better. The idea that we can only have one savior is just silly. To save the world we need everyone, and that is more then just one. It's called team work.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It is still stupid even after you word it better. The idea that we can only have one savior is just silly. To save the world we need everyone, and that is more then just one. It's called team work.

Nah, you only need one guy.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Nah, you only need one guy.

To save the world? You need as many people working together to make this world a better place. One man cannot do it.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
To save the world? You need as many people working together to make this world a better place. One man cannot do it.

Is your view. A view which is totally irrelevant to the topic.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Is your view. A view which is totally irrelevant to the topic.

And now you are being childish. It has everything to do with the topic.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And now you are being childish. It has everything to do with the topic.

Well not really, because they cannot be debated.

He is saying that he believes these people to be AntiChrists because they rob from Jesus the Glory and promise of salvation which he alone can bring.

His point is one of Christian theology.

You argument is basically- "They are not anti-Christ because Jesus isn't real ergo there is no such thing as an anti-Christ." Now that ofcourse may be true but it does not lend itself to the debate at hand.

You consistently do this funny thing when people discuss a Theological point of saying Its not real- so the debate is pointless. I really don't know why...are you not capable of discussing things within an appropriate context? We should all be able to discuss Greek Mythology without believing in it. Better still, some people can debate Superman vs. Batman without believing either to be true.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Well not really, because they cannot be debated.

He is saying that he believes these people to be AntiChrists because they rob from Jesus the Glory and promise of salvation which he alone can bring.

His point is one of Christian theology.

You argument is basically- "They are not anti-Christ because Jesus isn't real ergo there is no such thing as an anti-Christ." Now that ofcourse may be true but it does not lend itself to the debate at hand.

You consistently do this funny thing when people discuss a Theological point of saying Its not real- so the debate is pointless. I really don't know why...are you not capable of discussing things within an appropriate context? We should all be able to discuss Greek Mythology without believing in it. Better still, some people can debate Superman vs. Batman without believing either to be true.

However, the starter of the thread obviously believes that Jesus is real, and that Bond is not. They have set themselves up to fail. The main point of my argument (that I thought you got, but was wrong) is that Bond and the other characters listed in this thread are trying to save the "world", and Jesus was NOT. To say that these fictional characters were an Antichrist is to say that Jesus was trying to save the world. This is just wrong. It would be like Bond trying to say your soul.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, the starter of the thread obviously believes that Jesus is real, and that Bond is not. They have set themselves up to fail. The main point of my argument (that I thought you got, but was wrong) is that Bond and the other characters listed in this thread are trying to save the "world", and Jesus was NOT. To say that these fictional characters were an Antichrist is to say that Jesus was trying to save the world. This is just wrong. It would be like Bond trying to say your soul.

They are again not setting themselves up to fail. The argument is fairly straightforward in itself and is surprisingly one shared by a few conservatives I know.

You never set out clearly that your argument was that Jesus was not trying to save the world while the characters were not. I personally would disagree and say the whole point of Christ's life was to save the world- just to a far larger extent than any of the people he has chosen to mention.

Jesus may have been more concerned with saving the world in terms of the souls of mankind and Superman deals with saving the physical Earth but it can still be argued that such a thing is a form of Anti-Christ because the way in which it is done makes the heroes appear to be godlike and superhuman who can solve all the worlds problems- leaving no place for God who in reality is the only one who can solve the worlds problems. Bond creates the idea that mankind can look after mankind, according to Christianity this is not true- man needs God.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
They are again not setting themselves up to fail. The argument is fairly straightforward in itself and is surprisingly one shared by a few conservatives I know.

You never set out clearly that your argument was that Jesus was not trying to save the world while the characters were not. I personally would disagree and say the whole point of Christ's life was to save the world- just to a far larger extent than any of the people he has chosen to mention.

Jesus may have been more concerned with saving the world in terms of the souls of mankind and Superman deals with saving the physical Earth but it can still be argued that such a thing is a form of Anti-Christ because the way in which it is done makes the heroes appear to be godlike and superhuman who can solve all the worlds problems- leaving no place for God who in reality is the only one who can solve the worlds problems. Bond creates the idea that mankind can look after mankind, according to Christianity this is not true- man needs God.

Now you are making Jesus fictional.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Now you are making Jesus fictional.

In what way?

Are you suggesting that fictional characters and ideas i.e. Bond have no effect on our understanding and regard for reality i.e. Jesus?

I wasn't able to LOL at this post -- it was just too nutty, it actually rendered me to a state of closed mouthed, wide-eyed, impending hilarity.

I think I'll start to laugh in about five minutes.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
I wasn't able to LOL at this post -- it was just too nutty, it actually rendered me to a state of closed mouthed, wide-eyed, impending hilarity.

I think I'll start to laugh in about five minutes.

Just because you have the intellectual capacity of a toadstool and are therefore unable to comprehend the views of other people or empathise with their understanding doesn't mean you should compensate by ridiculing people when they say things beyond your limited capacity.

Perhaps you also believe fiction has never and will never affect peoples understanding of the world and how they live in it? Perhaps you deny ideas given a platform in fictional works ever gave an impact on society? Perhaps you deny Lewis, Steinbeck, Orwell and even Aesop have any contribution whatsoever to the popular understanding of the universe?

You silly silly nilly. Even Hairy Potter makes reference to God several times. I rather ejoyed Rawlings reference/homage to God in her stories. Take THAT stupid arrogant hypocritical Christains. (They're usually the ones who make shit up about Mormons because Mormons take money away from their pastors...they can't afford their big ass houses and expensive cars when they start losing members to the Mormons.)


Originally posted by Da Pittman


QFT

Originally posted by dadudemon
You silly silly nilly. Even Hairy Potter makes reference to God several times. I rather ejoyed Rawlings reference/homage to God in her stories. Take THAT stupid arrogant hypocritical Christains. (They're usually the ones who make shit up about Mormons because Mormons take money away from their pastors...they can't afford their big ass houses and expensive cars when they start losing members to the Mormons.)




QFT

What?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
What?

I think the thread starter is silly. i also think most Protestants are stupid (when it comes to religion) and I thought Da Pittman's post was all to relevant.


Also, I agree with both you and Shaky. You are BOTH correct. Christ's work means absolutely NOTHING without all of capable man trying their best to help each other through righteous motivation. This includes Protestants, Catholics, Mormons, Buddhists, atheist etc. We should all be working as altruistically as possible for each other. Since you and I have provincially a sure knowledge of Christ and his Redeemership, we can help in one extra way, for those who'll have it. In the end, it is up to God to judge us according to our works and our faith. God already said that he will make provisions for people who never got the chance to live by his exact teachings and precepts, however, in almost every positive religion is found the fundamental teachings of God.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In what way?

Are you suggesting that fictional characters and ideas i.e. Bond have no effect on our understanding and regard for reality i.e. Jesus?

No. The Antichrist has to be a real person, otherwise, you are sounding like a Gnostic.

first of all, to end all arguments, all of these characters are fictional. they are not sataan or the antichrist. THe antichrist is one man fortold in the book of revelation. And on the topic of saving the world, do you think patton saved the world with his tactics? yes. in some circumstances, one man can impact the world enough to save it. jesus is a god though, so he can save it. saying one man can't save the world is an absurd point of view.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
first of all, to end all arguments, all of these characters are fictional. they are not sataan or the antichrist. THe antichrist is one man fortold in the book of revelation. And on the topic of saving the world, do you think patton saved the world with his tactics? yes. in some circumstances, one man can impact the world enough to save it. jesus is a god though, so he can save it. saying one man can't save the world is an absurd point of view.

No, the anitChrist is a metaphor for everything evil that takes interferes with God's Children's salvation.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No. The Antichrist has to be a real person, otherwise, you are sounding like a Gnostic.

You're concept of antichrist is fundamentally flawed.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
You're concept of antichrist is fundamentally flawed.

Do you agree with my interpretation, more or less? I find it hard to believe that there will only be one specific individual.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
You're concept of antichrist is fundamentally flawed.

And your is not very Catholic. BTW the antichrist is just a made up idea, so I don't really have an concept about the antichrist.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Do you agree with my interpretation, more or less? I find it hard to believe that there will only be one specific individual.

I think there will be (or has been) a specific man/woman or even institution which will be The Anti-Christ, i.e. the person who will try to totally displace Jesus Christ- people like Nero or Muhammad are often seen as historical candidates for these figures.

However I am open to the very likely possibility that the Anti-Christ will not come alone, there will be many different agents/events which contribute to his ascendency- perhaps the long line of heretics are all Anti-Christs. (Muhammad, Luther and your Joseph Smith I would all include in that list.)

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And your is not very Catholic. BTW the antichrist is just a made up idea, so I don't really have an concept about the antichrist.

Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.

note the Wiki page on Antichrist discuss the one Antichrist and the many antichrists who will operate around him. So...my opinion is very Catholic.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I think there will be (or has been) a specific man/woman or even institution which will be The Anti-Christ, i.e. the person who will try to totally displace Jesus Christ- people like Nero or Muhammad are often seen as historical candidates for these figures.

However I am open to the very likely possibility that the Anti-Christ will not come alone, there will be many different agents/events which contribute to his ascendency- perhaps the long line of heretics are all Anti-Christs. (Muhammad, Luther and your Joseph Smith I would all include in that list.)



Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.

note the Wiki page on Antichrist discuss the one Antichrist and the many antichrists who will operate around him. So...my opinion is very Catholic.

But each of these are real people, not fictional characters.

I was refering to the beast, the antichrist that is to come at revalation and create the new world order.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
I was refering to the beast, the antichrist that is to come at revalation and create the new world order.

Wouldn't that be a person?

they refer to the demon that controlls him as the beast and the combo as the anti-christ.

in fact some people even think that obama is a likely candidate because he has such a wide following of people and takes such a liberal stance on everything.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But each of these are real people, not fictional characters.

He said type of, he did not say they were the anti christ.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
in fact some people even think that obama is a likely candidate because he has such a wide following of people and takes such a liberal stance on everything.
OK.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
takes such a liberal stance on everything.

not even when compared to NATO countries

This thread came back to life

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Well not really, because they cannot be debated.

He is saying that he believes these people to be AntiChrists because they rob from Jesus the Glory and promise of salvation which he alone can bring.

His point is one of Christian theology.


that sounds nearly Muslim in theology

ie: No real name for allah, no drawing Mohammed, no humans having divinity because they become false idols (rob glory)

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I think there will be (or has been) a specific man/woman or even institution which will be The Anti-Christ, i.e. the person who will try to totally displace Jesus Christ- people like Nero or Muhammad are often seen as historical candidates for these figures.

However I am open to the very likely possibility that the Anti-Christ will not come alone, there will be many different agents/events which contribute to his ascendency- perhaps the long line of heretics are all Anti-Christs. (Muhammad, Luther and your Joseph Smith I would all include in that list.)

I find it quite impossible, considering the metaphorical and symbolic nature of Revelations, that the anti-Christ is one specific person. It is more likely a reference to things like "Babylon" which was a general reference to evil people or an evil state of mind. In fact, "the anti-Christ" should be almost completely interchangeable with "Babylon."

Also, we have a scripture in our Book of Mormon that groups almost all churches into one church and it is referred to as the "great whore.' It's pretty harsh.

1 Nephi 14:10-12

"10 And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.
11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over ball the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.
12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw."


Then it goes on to talk about religion being the cause of many wars and warring contentions and masked evil.

We don't teach about that very much.

So I can see exactly why you would view any church other than the original church (don't be smart asses, you know what I mean by original) as part of the anti-Christ problem. However, in LDS defense, I would think that Mormons have exalted Christ to a holy and sacred position even more precious and holy than any other religion. We even gave Him His own full God status. We also believe he is the savior for all God's children, from all planets in our universe. If anything, we've made Christ an even more holy and exalted Redeemer.



Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.

note the Wiki page on Antichrist discuss the one Antichrist and the many antichrists who will operate around him. So...my opinion is very Catholic.

Hmm, could that simply be a group of people...and then many groups of people? An atheist who seeks to destroy Christ as much as he or she can would be an anti-Christ to the max, wouldn't you agree?

I don't think the anti-Christ has to be pure evil, either. They could just be an average Joe. I think humans have far less influence from God or Satan than everyone thinks. I think that we are rarely tempted and rarely assisted by Satan and God, respectively.

Originally posted by godislove85
James Bond is the invention of Satan, friends, created to draw you away from worshipping Jesus, who is "fairer than the sons of men." (Psalm 45:2) Bond seeks to save the world, just like the other superheroes Superman, Spider-Man, & Batman who all are types of the Antichrist (the incarnation of Satan who says "I will be like the Most High" ).

I have found tons of "types of the Antichrist" (i.e. people resembling in many uncommon ways the three persons of God & Satan/The Antichrist , for instance by being worshipped all over the world in place of Jesus) throughout nature (ex. the Moon which resembles the Sun, a symbol of Jesus the "Sun of Righteousness" ) and history
-including gods (ex. Buddha , Crishna the chief Hindu god, Confucius)
-writers/philosophers (ex. Socrates-Plato-Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche),
-political leaders (ex. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, and apparently every US President including Obama),
-movie stars (especially ones who played God or Satan, like Willem Dafoe, Jim Carrey, & Jack Nicholson),
-heroes/villains (Batman, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, James Bond, Superman,...),
-music stars (Elvis, Jim Morrison of the Doors, John Lennon of the Beatles,...)
-and many more.

One way you can tell that an actor is a type of the Antichrist who like the Antichrist will be is possessed by Satan: you can look at the film roles they play. The next role Daniel Craig, the James Bond star, is scheduled to play is Lucifer, another name for Satan! All of the following actors are types of the Antichrist: Jack Nicholson (who played Satan in "Witches of Eastwick", Marlon Brando, Jim Carrey (who played God & Satan in his 13th film role!), Brad Pitt (who played Achilles the son of a god-dess who is a type of the Antichrist, Death in "Meet Joe Black", Tom Cruise, etc. There are very few if any actors in Hollywood who are not "servants of Satan," a name ascribed in the Bible to people possessed by Satan. "The WHOLE world lies in the power of the Wicked One." (1 John 5:19) shut up

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
He said type of, he did not say they were the anti christ...

They are not even a type of antichrist.

There is only one Antichrist that I know of and it goes by the name of JIA

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Again you are being deliberately selective of his points.

He is not saying don't be heroic. He is saying don't try and take away from Jesus, the glory which belongs to Jesus.

By all means be heroic, help and save people- just don't try and steal Jesus' glory by pretending to be the Salvation of Earth from all evil.

He 'believes' these characters are forms of AntiChrist because they are offering people an alternative to Jesus in forms of a Saviour.

To my knowledge, none of those characters has ever tried to replace a religious figure. So my original point stands. The article claims that they are a form of the anti-christ because they are christ-like. For your argument to be valid, they would actually have to be offering an alternative to Jesus. They are not. They're just good guys trying to save the day.

This argument could be valid, though only from a Christian perspective, and only if they were trying to offer a religious alternative to an established religion. As it stands, the original article, and your subsequent defense of it, are just silly.

Don't help people....you may be the anti-christ.

Originally posted by Digi
...Don't help people....you may be the anti-christ.



I think it is more of a case of don't think about anything but Jesus. In that way of thinking, anything can be a type of antichrist. Having a beer could be a type of antichrist. Having dinner could be a type of antichrist. It is a form of extremistic thinking.

he might take it to an extreme that most religious people don't...

but the concept of idolatry is certainly not extreme, especially given that each one of us knows someone who would care more about Comics or movies than they do about their lord and savior

well even christians debate who/what the antichrist will be.

I believe it will be the president of the united states in some future time.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
well even christians debate who/what the antichrist will be.

I believe it will be the president of the united states in some future time.

Have you considered the possibility that the antichrist will not be? In other words, Could the antichrist be a propaganda tool made up by the early church?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Have you considered the possibility that the antichrist will not be? In other words, Could the antichrist be a propaganda tool made up by the early church?

Very possible.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
well even christians debate who/what the antichrist will be.

I believe it will be the president of the united states in some future time.

in 50 years it will be a leader of China

naw because New world=the americas, china and russia are defined as something else in revelation.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
naw because New world=the americas, china and russia are defined as something else in revelation.

Nothing is defined in Revelations.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
naw because New world=the americas, china and russia are defined as something else in revelation. How do you get this?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Just because you have the intellectual capacity of a toadstool and are therefore unable to comprehend the views of other people or empathise with their understanding doesn't mean you should compensate by ridiculing people when they say things beyond your limited capacity.

Perhaps you also believe fiction has never and will never affect peoples understanding of the world and how they live in it? Perhaps you deny ideas given a platform in fictional works ever gave an impact on society? Perhaps you deny Lewis, Steinbeck, Orwell and even Aesop have any contribution whatsoever to the popular understanding of the universe?

I was talking about the main post. The first one, where it says James Bond and kin are models of the anti-christ?

that post was basically because i think it's ridiculous for someone to take something from the bible and twist it to the point of no return.

but thanks. know i know i'm a toadstool and can be comfortable in that identity.

Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
naw because New world=the americas, china and russia are defined as something else in revelation.

right, because if there is one thing about religion that never changes, it is how the scriptural references to the end times are interpreted

Originally posted by inimalist
he might take it to an extreme that most religious people don't...

but the concept of idolatry is certainly not extreme, especially given that each one of us knows someone who would care more about Comics or movies than they do about their lord and savior

See, this I'm ok with. The idea of idolatry isn't a new one, and is a valid fear for theists. But the way it is framed in the opening posts, by fictional characters who don't purport to be a replacement for any religious figure but are merely doing good, is still silly.

Originally posted by Digi
See, this I'm ok with. The idea of idolatry isn't a new one, and is a valid fear for theists. But the way it is framed in the opening posts, by fictional characters who don't purport to be a replacement for any religious figure but are merely doing good, is still silly.

It is not that they openly try to displace Christ its that they lead people away from Christ as saviour- according to many people.

Originally posted by Kazenji
You do know Batman, Harry Potter, Superman, Frodo and James Bond etc are'nt real.

What? Not real? So who was that caped crusader who climbed in my window last night????

This kind of thread is so easy to spot....either the OP is a genuine fruit cake, mind wiped bible bother or is a grade troll looking for a quick jolly.

I prefer the former. Makes my feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know that mental patients have access to the internet.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
What? Not real? So who was that caped crusader who climbed in my window last night????

This kind of thread is so easy to spot....either the OP is a genuine fruit cake, mind wiped bible bother or is a grade troll looking for a quick jolly.

I prefer the former. Makes my feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know that mental patients have access to the internet.

I'm think he is a troll building a bridge.

Hell if you look at it I think Christ could be the antichrist, you are worshiping the son of God and not God.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Hell if you look at it I think Christ could be the antichrist, you are worshiping the son of God and not God.

I was thinking about using that angle, but I didn't want everyone to be mad at me.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I was thinking about using that angle, but I didn't want everyone to be mad at me. Aw come on that has never stopped you before

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Aw come on that has never stopped you before

Pitch forks and torches scare me.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Pitch forks and torches scare me. If you are put together with dead flesh

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
It is not that they openly try to displace Christ its that they lead people away from Christ as saviour- according to many people.

Well then that's the peoples' faults, not the replacement "savior." Thou shall not have other gods before me, eh? So who was at fault, the golden calf or the people worshipping it? You're making my point for me. If saving others in some manner detracts from Christ, the only possible solution is to stop saving people. Don't be good.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
If you are put together with dead flesh

Stop getting personal.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Hell if you look at it I think Christ could be the antichrist, you are worshiping the son of God and not God.

Mormons consider it blasphemous to worship Jesus Christ like that. We teach that even Christ is subjected to God's will, despite Christ's godliness. We give him great thanks and praise for what he's done, but we are never to pray to him or treat him as THE God.

Here's an interesting fact, though. The only time praying to Jesus is acceptable is when you are in the physical presence of Jesus Christ. Quite strange, that rule, but it's allowed for some reason. Someone explained it to me, but I forgot the reasoning of why it's only acceptable at that moment.

Originally posted by Digi
Well then that's the peoples' faults, not the replacement "savior." Thou shall not have other gods before me, eh? So who was at fault, the golden calf or the people worshipping it? You're making my point for me. If saving others in some manner detracts from Christ, the only possible solution is to stop saving people. Don't be good.



Or save people and point to Jesus like say, John the Baptist did.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Mormons consider it blasphemous to worship Jesus Christ like that. We teach that even Christ is subjected to God's will, despite Christ's godliness. We give him great thanks and praise for what he's done, but we are never to pray to him or treat him as THE God.

Here's an interesting fact, though. The only time praying to Jesus is acceptable is when you are in the physical presence of Jesus Christ. Quite strange, that rule, but it's allowed for some reason. Someone explained it to me, but I forgot the reasoning of why it's only acceptable at that moment. Interesting, I never heard of that.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Or save people and point to Jesus like say, John the Baptist did.

So doing good and pointing to Jesus is ok, but doing good for the sake of itself isn't and makes you an aspect of the anti-Christ? Making a statement like this, but also endorsing the opening post is exactly that idea. Please stop making awful arguments. I know you're better than this.

You also do nothing to defend your position that it is the "good guys" that are at fault, and not the people who follow them instead of Christ. If they aren't trying to offer an alternative to Jesus, how is it wrong from ANY perspective? It isn't. The worshippers are the only ones at fault, and then only from a Christian perspective. And the fact that James Bond, Spider-Man, etc. don't have their own church means there isn't really any blame to go around.

Silly argument. Still is. It's taking something good, something that detracts from no worldview whatsoever and probably brings about happiness in the world, and turning it into something negative. It's also militant theism at its irrational worst, because its inspiring hatred in themselves and creating problems for others.

Originally posted by Digi
To my knowledge, none of those characters has ever tried to replace a religious figure.

Batgod

The OP's statement is the kind of backwards thinking I've come to expect from the Christian hard liners these days. Anything modern and not Bible approved is wrong and shall be marked as such.

All this talk of the anti-christ and end of days is about as valid as worrying about orcs invading London and planning UN air strikes on Mount Doom. By that I mean its all fictional mumbo-jumbo.

(oh and my application for Hogwarts just came through HOORAY!!)

Originally posted by MilitantDog
All this talk of the anti-christ and end of days is about as valid as worrying about orcs invading London and planning UN air strikes on Mount Doom. By that I mean its all fictional mumbo-jumbo.

Well of course that wouldn't happen. Orcs aren't smart enough to see the value in taking over the UN and bombing Mount Doom. Besides the UN headquarters isn't in London, its in New York.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Well of course that wouldn't happen. Orcs aren't smart enough to see the value in taking over the UN and bombing Mount Doom. Besides the UN headquarters isn't in London, its in New York.

So, are you telling me that the Orcs have already taken over the UN?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, are you telling me that the Orcs have already taken over the UN?

yes

Originally posted by inimalist
yes


Damn them.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, are you telling me that the Orcs have already taken over the UN?

Four point racial Int penalty. Poor handling of the UN. It makes sense!

And by the transitive property of mythology: If Orcs, Then Jesus and If Jesus, Then Anti-Christ! We're all gonna die!

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Four point racial Int penalty. Poor handling of the UN. It makes sense!

And by the transitive property of mythology: If Orcs, Then Jesus and If Jesus, Then Anti-Christ! We're all gonna die!

We are all going to die one day.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
We are all going to die one day.

Only if we accept it as inevitable like you do.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Only if we accept it as inevitable like you do.

It's the only way I will reincarnate. It's nice to get a new body.

Originally posted by Digi
So doing good and pointing to Jesus is ok, but doing good for the sake of itself isn't and makes you an aspect of the anti-Christ? Making a statement like this, but also endorsing the opening post is exactly that idea. Please stop making awful arguments. I know you're better than this.
I think that per his scenario their is no "guilt" here on behalf of the fictional characters or even the creators of them. I don't believe he considers them to be intentional anti-Christ but rather, accidental. They do not intentionally draw away from Jesus Christ but it is what they do- in his eyes. Perhaps it is possible that while the characters do good things and such there are underlying themes which might seem incompatible with Gospel teaching. Namely, one can be a wonderful person like Superman without God. In Harry Potter's case one can fight evil with sorcery. So I feel that his argument while very much the extreme of the community is one which has some rational basis.

Originally posted by Digi
You also do nothing to defend your position that it is the "good guys" that are at fault, and not the people who follow them instead of Christ. If they aren't trying to offer an alternative to Jesus, how is it wrong from ANY perspective? It isn't. The worshippers are the only ones at fault, and then only from a Christian perspective. And the fact that James Bond, Spider-Man, etc. don't have their own church means there isn't really any blame to go around.
I actually answered you're first para before reading this one but I think I answered it- they are not to blame entirely for the void of Christ in their stories, neither are their creators- I do not suspect they were at all intended to be an alternative to religion. However it might be that they do unintentionally carry messages which, as stated seem contrary to some Christians understandings of goodness.

Originally posted by Digi
Silly argument. Still is. It's taking something good, something that detracts from no worldview whatsoever and probably brings about happiness in the world, and turning it into something negative. It's also militant theism at its irrational worst, because its inspiring hatred in themselves and creating problems for others.

What we need to remember is many Christians/Muslims/ET AL believe that no person can be good if it is not directly related to God. Therefore a doctor who works tirelessly to save lives might be seen as a good man, but because he does not worship God many Christians would say he is not a good man.

This extends to many of these examples he has given, they teach morals/ideals etc but do not mention God- ergo they are bad. (In some Christians eyes.

The Justification for this would be when Jesus said in Matthew 12:30 "He who is not with me, is against me." Though a retort which you might know is that he also said in Mark 9:40 "he who is not against us is for us."

So you see the basis for the debate amongst Christians- is Frodo against Jesus? No. Is he for him? Not explicitly (as you know Tolkien was very much a dedicated Roman Catholic and so I see many parallels in LOTR which lean towards Christian theology, much like C.S. Lewis.) So in Frodo's case he is neither for nor against Jesus. The same is with James Bond and the others I suppose. So what can a Christian say to this?

Well, the Mark 9 verse is Jesus' response to the disciples who inform him that people not of the group are invoking his name and healing people. The Matt 12:30 verse is a response to the power of Satan and demons. Here Jesus forgives blasphemy against the incarnate Christ but not against the Holy Spirit.

So I suppose, you could say that denying or being silent on Jesus' divinity will be forgiven- provided we see a following of Jesus' philosphy (love, caring, alms etc) However, denying God but doing good works would be considered the unforgivable sin.

Does that make sense? I feel that it is a very flimsy interpretation...but best I could come up with.

Ultimately, these characters could be seen as anti-Christ if one holds a strict but in my opinion incorrect understanding of the Matt 12:30 verse. So that is where he is coming from, but who has responsibility? Perhaps no one- it is a very subtle thing...but one does not have to know they are anti-Christ to be anti-Christ.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I think that per his scenario their is no "guilt" here on behalf of the fictional characters or even the creators of them. I don't believe he considers them to be intentional anti-Christ but rather, accidental. They do not intentionally draw away from Jesus Christ but it is what they do- in his eyes. Perhaps it is possible that while the characters do good things and such there are underlying themes which might seem incompatible with Gospel teaching. Namely, one can be a wonderful person like Superman without God. In Harry Potter's case one can fight evil with sorcery. So I feel that his argument while very much the extreme of the community is one which has some rational basis.

You're reading a much different opening post than I am, then. Your interpretation sugar-coats the vehemence that is obviously present in it in order to make the argument seem more palatable. And there are wonderful people that don't do it in the name of any particular God, so it's being true to life. Unless, of course, your religion tells you that it is evil to do good things but not in the name of God...if that's the case, we're back to square one, with the argument being not to do good works and inspiring hatred for those with good intentions and actions.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I actually answered you're first para before reading this one but I think I answered it- they are not to blame entirely for the void of Christ in their stories, neither are their creators- I do not suspect they were at all intended to be an alternative to religion. However it might be that they do unintentionally carry messages which, as stated seem contrary to some Christians understandings of goodness.

I'd love to see exactly why people doing good acts is unintentionally contrary to Christian teachings. Again, it's shooting yourself in the foot: don't do good things. It's not Christian. Surely having some virtues of Christ is desirable, yes? Otherwise you're punishing them for doing good and just being unlucky enough not to be the savior of mankind.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
What we need to remember is many Christians/Muslims/ET AL believe that no person can be good if it is not directly related to God. Therefore a doctor who works tirelessly to save lives might be seen as a good man, but because he does not worship God many Christians would say he is not a good man.

This extends to many of these examples he has given, they teach morals/ideals etc but do not mention God- ergo they are bad. (In some Christians eyes.

The Justification for this would be when Jesus said in Matthew 12:30 "He who is not with me, is against me." Though a retort which you might know is that he also said in Mark 9:40 "he who is not against us is for us."

So you see the basis for the debate amongst Christians- is Frodo against Jesus? No. Is he for him? Not explicitly (as you know Tolkien was very much a dedicated Roman Catholic and so I see many parallels in LOTR which lean towards Christian theology, much like C.S. Lewis.) So in Frodo's case he is neither for nor against Jesus. The same is with James Bond and the others I suppose. So what can a Christian say to this?

Well, the Mark 9 verse is Jesus' response to the disciples who inform him that people not of the group are invoking his name and healing people. The Matt 12:30 verse is a response to the power of Satan and demons. Here Jesus forgives blasphemy against the incarnate Christ but not against the Holy Spirit.

So I suppose, you could say that denying or being silent on Jesus' divinity will be forgiven- provided we see a following of Jesus' philosphy (love, caring, alms etc) However, denying God but doing good works would be considered the unforgivable sin.

Does that make sense? I feel that it is a very flimsy interpretation...but best I could come up with.

Ultimately, these characters could be seen as anti-Christ if one holds a strict but in my opinion incorrect understanding of the Matt 12:30 verse. So that is where he is coming from, but who has responsibility? Perhaps no one- it is a very subtle thing...but one does not have to know they are anti-Christ to be anti-Christ.

Lol. So you agree with me? Seems like yes.

Though I love that under this interpretation, a person who did ONLY good works their entire life, but didn't give credit to Jesus, would need to be forgiven for it. Looking for sin where only goodness exists is the very definition of the negativity I was talking about earlier, and its deleterious affects on humans.

Also, A+ on finding your own contradicting Bible verses. Were I a Christian, I'd probably agree with your interpretation. As it is, your view on it is as arbitrary as anyone else's, and subject to endless debate. Which is why internal contradictions only breed hatred and misunderstanding, because countless others will take those same verses (and many other verses, to be sure) to find their own justification to hate Harry Potter, or Superman, or...etc. etc.

...

...there's a cliche line about love not being Christian or Muslim or any other religion. It is simply love. So too with goodness of any sort. And you're drawing a distinction that makes "non-Christian good" worse than "Christian good," even though either would be considered "good" in nearly any ideology. Whether or not the former is "forgivable" (which is laughable) is not the point. It is needless and harmful to make such distinctions, and only separates us and creates barriers between peoples and cultures.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Well of course that wouldn't happen. Orcs aren't smart enough to see the value in taking over the UN and bombing Mount Doom. Besides the UN headquarters isn't in London, its in New York.

Would you kindly put your glasses on. I at no point mentioned that the UN HQ was in London.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Only if we accept it as inevitable like you do.

Sorry but there are two constants in the universe (as we understand it at this time):

1. Death.

2. Taxes.

Unless you have proof of someone by passing number 1.

I'm walking down the road with a loaf of bread in my hand, when I happen across a starving man in the road.

Scenario 1.

I give the man the bread and I am a Christian. I have done good and its in the name of God so thats okay.

Scenario 2.

I give the man the bread, just out of normal human niceness and in the spirit of good, and I am not a Christian so I am the anti-christ.

Scenario 3.

I give the man the bread, don't give a hoop what the Bible or the Christians say and can carry on down the road knowing I have done a good thing.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
Sorry but there are two constants in the universe (as we understand it at this time):

1. Death.

2. Taxes.

Unless you have proof of someone by passing number 1.

If you are a congressman you can bypass #2.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
Sorry but there are two constants in the universe (as we understand it at this time):

1. Death.

2. Taxes.

Unless you have proof of someone by passing number 1.

Death can be avoided by not dying. So far I'm doing awesome.

Taxes can be avoided by just leaving society.

anything but batman

I'm a Christian, but I believe that if something is in NO way real (i.e. a fictional character) then it's not much of a problem, unless they're saying "WORSHIP SATAN!!!"

Originally posted by MilitantDog
I'm walking down the road with a loaf of bread in my hand, when I happen across a starving man in the road.

Scenario 1.

I give the man the bread and I am a Christian. I have done good and its in the name of God so thats okay.

Scenario 2.

I give the man the bread, just out of normal human niceness and in the spirit of good, and I am not a Christian so I am the anti-christ.

Scenario 3.

I give the man the bread, don't give a hoop what the Bible or the Christians say and can carry on down the road knowing I have done a good thing.
Wow...gross simplification of the point...

Just out of interest, were you educated?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Wow...gross simplification of the point...

Just out of interest, were you educated?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Wow...gross simplification of the point...

Just out of interest, were you educated?

But at the same time, you yourself said that a person who knowingly did good would have to be forgiven if they did not give credit to Jesus/God for that acts they performed, even though all they ever did was "good." His summary is indeed simplification, but it doesn't mean that it's not without a point.

I think we're overlooking that he apparently think Scenario 2 is different from Scenario 3.

Scenario 2 is from the eyes of whoever siad that all good deeds must be done in the name of God.

Scenario 3 is for everyone else.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Wow...gross simplification of the point...

Just out of interest, were you educated?

Just because I did not write a ten thousand word paper on the subject does not make it any more right or wrong.

I am a qualified IT engineer and spent 10 years in the RAF as an electronics engineer working on radar, air field navigation aids, fibre optics, HF/UHF/VHF communications, display systems and computer systems. Also in that time I am a qualified parachutist, scuba diver, marksman and 2 exams away from being paramedic trained.

And you were educated where and how?

I'll just mug the guy down the road for the bread

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I'll just mug the guy down the road for the bread

DA PITTMAN FOR KING!!!!!!

Originally posted by MilitantDog
I am a qualified IT engineer and spent 10 years in the RAF as an electronics engineer working on radar, air field navigation aids, fibre optics, HF/UHF/VHF communications, display systems and computer systems. Also in that time I am a qualified parachutist, scuba diver, marksman and 2 exams away from being paramedic trained.

Isn't that just an really complex way of admitting you have no relevant experience or education?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Isn't that just an really complex way of admitting you have no relevant experience or education?

Relevant to what exactly? And no education? Do you honestly expect me to be able to do all those things without an education?

Would you care to elighten us as to your experience and education and how it is relevant?

Originally posted by MilitantDog
Relevant to what exactly? And no education? Do you honestly expect me to be able to do all those things without an education?

Would you care to elighten us as to your experience and education and how it is relevant?

Just ignore them...

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I really do think that this guy "godislove85" is doing this for kicks. I mean, could anyone honestly believe such steaming bullshit? Maybe, but it seems unlikely.

yeah so do I.I mean come on seriously.

Originally posted by godislove85
James Bond is the invention of Satan, friends, created to draw you away from worshipping Jesus, who is "fairer than the sons of men." (Psalm 45:2) Bond seeks to save the world, just like the other superheroes Superman, Spider-Man, & Batman who all are types of the Antichrist (the incarnation of Satan who says "I will be like the Most High" ).

I have found tons of "types of the Antichrist" (i.e. people resembling in many uncommon ways the three persons of God & Satan/The Antichrist , for instance by being worshipped all over the world in place of Jesus) throughout nature (ex. the Moon which resembles the Sun, a symbol of Jesus the "Sun of Righteousness" ) and history
-including gods (ex. Buddha , Crishna the chief Hindu god, Confucius)
-writers/philosophers (ex. Socrates-Plato-Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche),
-political leaders (ex. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, and apparently every US President including Obama),
-movie stars (especially ones who played God or Satan, like Willem Dafoe, Jim Carrey, & Jack Nicholson),
-heroes/villains (Batman, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, James Bond, Superman,...),
-music stars (Elvis, Jim Morrison of the Doors, John Lennon of the Beatles,...)
-and many more.

One way you can tell that an actor is a type of the Antichrist who like the Antichrist will be is possessed by Satan: you can look at the film roles they play. The next role Daniel Craig, the James Bond star, is scheduled to play is Lucifer, another name for Satan! All of the following actors are types of the Antichrist: Jack Nicholson (who played Satan in "Witches of Eastwick", Marlon Brando, Jim Carrey (who played God & Satan in his 13th film role!), Brad Pitt (who played Achilles the son of a god-dess who is a type of the Antichrist, Death in "Meet Joe Black", Tom Cruise, etc. There are very few if any actors in Hollywood who are not "servants of Satan," a name ascribed in the Bible to people possessed by Satan. "The WHOLE world lies in the power of the Wicked One." (1 John 5:19)

If Jesus was here...he'd tell you to shut the f*ck up

The next anti-Christ will be a super computer

Originally posted by MilitantDog
Relevant to what exactly?

*facepalm*

Originally posted by MilitantDog
And no education? Do you honestly expect me to be able to do all those things without an education?

I didn't say you had no education . . .

Originally posted by MilitantDog
Would you care to elighten us as to your experience and education and how it is relevant?

I'm a professor at Yale.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
The next anti-Christ will be a super computer

My comptuer says that isn't true.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
...
I'm a professor at Yale...

hysterical

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
My comptuer says that isn't true. Well your computer is lying to you, he told me this...



See it is lying to you

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Well your computer is lying to you, he told me this...



See it is lying to you

B-but that's nothing but gibberish . . .

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
B-but that's nothing but gibberish . . . I was trying to spare you, this is what it said...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I was trying to spare you, this is what it said...

Y-you mean: 4d 79 20 63 6f 6d 70 75 74 65 72 20 72 65 61 6c 6c 79 20 69 73 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 78 74 20 61 6e 74 69 2d 63 68 72 69 73 74?

Hopefully they can't read that yet.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Y-you mean: 4d 79 20 63 6f 6d 70 75 74 65 72 20 72 65 61 6c 6c 79 20 69 73 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 78 74 20 61 6e 74 69 2d 63 68 72 69 73 74?

Hopefully they can't read that yet.

hex?

Originally posted by inimalist
hex?

Now they know!!!!!

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Now they know!!!!!

buzz tracker, you never let me down

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Y-you mean: 4d 79 20 63 6f 6d 70 75 74 65 72 20 72 65 61 6c 6c 79 20 69 73 20 74 68 65 20 6e 65 78 74 20 61 6e 74 69 2d 63 68 72 69 73 74?

Hopefully they can't read that yet.

4f 68 20 79 65 73 20 69 74 20 69 73 20 6e 6f 77 20 77 61 74 63 68 20 6f 75 74

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I really do think that this guy "godislove85" is doing this for kicks. I mean, could anyone honestly believe such steaming bullshit? Maybe, but it seems unlikely.

I would like to think this is a joke but i just don't know anymore. People are fuking weird.



Also, Superman more closely resembles Christ than he does, the Antichrist. The Superman Comics have been known to have very strong religious undertones. Just thought that was worth throwing out there.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Also, Superman more closely resembles Christ than he does, the Antichrist. The Superman Comics have been known to have very strong religious undertones. Just thought that was worth throwing out there.

Superman was created by Jews . . .

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Superman was created by Jews . . .

Yeah, but you still can't deny the uncanny similarities between Christ and Superman. Besides, maybe they were good Jews and believed in Christ

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Superman was created by Jews . . .

Jesus was a Jew?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
*facepalm*



I didn't say you had no education . . .



I'm a professor at Yale.



My comptuer says that isn't true.

Hhhmmmm. Of course you are. Your not Peter Griffin (Family Guy) the millionaire, cowboy astronaut by any chance?

Good to see your Yale education was put to good use avoiding the spell checker.

Jesus Christ, I'm so God damned tired of hearing about Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by UKR
Jesus Christ, I'm so God damned tired of hearing about Jesus Christ.

James Bond is the invention of Satan



Let us suppose for a minute that that is true.



What does that make Stan Lee?



And yes it is a serious question.

Originally posted by you get thorns
James Bond is the invention of Satan



Let us suppose for a minute that that is true.



What does that make Stan Lee?



And yes it is a serious question. Stan Lee is God, they have already shown that

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Stan Lee is God, they have already shown that

"Pop quiz, Leemy or God?"

"Lemmy?"

"Wrong....Lemmy is God"

Airheads...what a film!

Originally posted by godislove85
James Bond is the invention of Satan, friends, created to draw you away from worshipping Jesus, who is "fairer than the sons of men." (Psalm 45:2) Bond seeks to save the world, just like the other superheroes Superman, Spider-Man, & Batman who all are types of the Antichrist (the incarnation of Satan who says "I will be like the Most High" ).

I have found tons of "types of the Antichrist" (i.e. people resembling in many uncommon ways the three persons of God & Satan/The Antichrist , for instance by being worshipped all over the world in place of Jesus) throughout nature (ex. the Moon which resembles the Sun, a symbol of Jesus the "Sun of Righteousness" ) and history
-including gods (ex. Buddha , Crishna the chief Hindu god, Confucius)
-writers/philosophers (ex. Socrates-Plato-Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche),
-political leaders (ex. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, and apparently every US President including Obama),
-movie stars (especially ones who played God or Satan, like Willem Dafoe, Jim Carrey, & Jack Nicholson),
-heroes/villains (Batman, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, James Bond, Superman,...),
-music stars (Elvis, Jim Morrison of the Doors, John Lennon of the Beatles,...)
-and many more.

One way you can tell that an actor is a type of the Antichrist who like the Antichrist will be is possessed by Satan: you can look at the film roles they play. The next role Daniel Craig, the James Bond star, is scheduled to play is Lucifer, another name for Satan! All of the following actors are types of the Antichrist: Jack Nicholson (who played Satan in "Witches of Eastwick", Marlon Brando, Jim Carrey (who played God & Satan in his 13th film role!), Brad Pitt (who played Achilles the son of a god-dess who is a type of the Antichrist, Death in "Meet Joe Black", Tom Cruise, etc. There are very few if any actors in Hollywood who are not "servants of Satan," a name ascribed in the Bible to people possessed by Satan. "The WHOLE world lies in the power of the Wicked One." (1 John 5:19)

Ha ha ha ha ha ha - oh, thank you - I haven't laughed this much in years - I was in quite a horrible mood until I read this.

You are probably one of those people that believes some supernatural being created you in one day - you ever stop to think and ask yourself if maybe they rushed the job? (with apologies to Bill Hicks).



Oh, how long is it still going to be before we get rid of these silly superstitions and fables...

Originally posted by Dreampanther
...Oh, how long is it still going to be before we get rid of these silly superstitions and fables...

Never.

Well, Jesus himself "said" that he would be here untill the end of the age, so we have until 2150...

SORRY FOLKS!

Wait... hang on... this seems familiar...

That's right! We've met before!!!
Darth Vader is a type (foreshadowing) of the Antichrist along with Batman,...

What's up? Been awhile! Still posting this same stuff that makes no sence, I see.



Really... because I don't think there is or ever was much worship of bush going on...

Ixex5QLYCAg

Yea... great worship going on there right?

"I have never felt more ashamed of, nor more frightened of my leadership in Washington."

Gets you right here, to have shugh a highly regarded and highly worshiped president, doesn't it?

Ah! So this was posted back in december aswell... so that means that we are not meeting again.

Originally posted by Mandrag Ganon
Wait... hang on... this seems familiar...

That's right! We've met before!!!

Darth Vader is a type (foreshadowing) of the Antichrist along with Batman,...

What's up? Been awhile! Still posting this same stuff that makes no sence, I see.



Really... because I don't think there is or ever was much worship of bush going on...


Yea... great worship going on there right?

"I have never felt more ashamed of, nor more frightened of my leadership in Washington."

Gets you right here, to have shugh a highly regarded and highly worshiped president, doesn't it?

This seems so off topic and random.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
This seems so off topic and random.


Just how I roll.

But in truth, I came across this guy before in the Star Wars forum, around the same time he posted this thread. At the time I did not realise he has posted this thread around the same time he posted the Darth Vader thread, so I decided to go on and confront some of his more preposterous remarks (hence the video of bush, which was refering to his statement about all US presidents being "worshiped". Never really consitered commenting on the creator of the thread's first post as random and off-topic but, ah oh well.

Originally posted by Mandrag Ganon
Just how I roll.

But in truth, I came across this guy before in the Star Wars forum, around the same time he posted this thread. At the time I did not realise he has posted this thread around the same time he posted the Darth Vader thread, so I decided to go on and confront some of his more preposterous remarks (hence the video of bush, which was refering to his statement about all US presidents being "worshiped". Never really consitered commenting on the creator of the thread's first post as random and off-topic but, ah oh well.

I was just hoping you would put your thoughts in more context.