- Topic
The more I spend time talking to members and ex-members of the WMSCOG one thing is reviled over and over again. It seems that the initial hook placed into people when this group first reels someone in instantly creates distrust in anything outside of the group. This causes people not to do any studying outside on their own. I want to know how many people did some studies, felt something was wrong with what was being taught, and discovered outside the group what other truths there are about this group?
I remember also linking to another site about the Sabbath. It was written by a Seventh Day Adventist and he had research about sunset vs. sunrise day keeping.
I only link to my website out of convenience so I don't have to repeat the lengthy research here, and because the pictures are already posted there. I could put the pictures up here too, but that seemed redundant.
So, I guess that means no, you haven't visited any of the links. Why not?
genny wrote:
I remember also linking to another site about the Sabbath. It was written by a Seventh Day Adventist and he had research about sunset vs. sunrise day keeping.
I only link to my website out of convenience so I don't have to repeat the lengthy research here, and because the pictures are already posted there. I could put the pictures up here too, but that seemed redundant.
So, I guess that means no, you haven't visited any of the links. Why not?
I went to your website a couple times, when you linked to it but I don't feel like I am getting compelling information. I know you are not just making things up as you go I just cannot compare it with my experiences from my studdying with WMC. What you say is taught and what others say is taught doesn't always align with what I am being taught, I am sure you are trying to explain what your sister (if I remember right) is trying to explain to you but I am not sure if you really know or not.
As for the Sabbath link I don't remember it I'd need to look again maybe I didn't see it or maybe I forgot it.
shimon wrote:
What you say is taught and what others say is taught doesn't always align with what I am being taught, I am sure you are trying to explain what your sister (if I remember right) is trying to explain to you but I am not sure if you really know or not.
Why would what I've learned in person from my sister and other wmscog teachers and directly from church publications, websites, and videos, be different from what you have learned? Don't you think that is odd? Are wmscog teachers not consistent?
Here's the link again about the Sabbath, though the conversation was in a different topic: http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/crucifixion/4.html
And back to the topic at hand, research… Which evidence book do you have? The dates and kingdoms are keys to the wmscog teaching about the Pope/Catholic Church being the Antichrist and about Daniel's prophecy. I'm surprised if they don't ring a bell with you. One of the earliest studies my sister did with me was about Daniel's prophecy, and she mentioned the 10 kingdoms. Did you look at the historical research about that? I wish I had looked more closely at that years ago when my sister first mentioned it, but now that I have investigated it, I find it pretty compelling that it shows the wmscog is wrong. There's no arguing about Biblical interpretations here–the facts of history show this error.
I think you are misunderstanding
I have the Black binder it only gives dates for the 4 empires
Babylon BC 605~539
Media•Persia BC 539~331
Greece BC331~168
Rome BC168~AD476
The Papacy AD476~Jesus's Second Coming
The Kingdom of God
I have a black leather (type) bound book. In the back it says "First Edition 2006".
I've tried to put in a picture here of the page in the book, but it's not working well. If you want to see it, you'll have to go to the link I posted earlier. It shows what happened after AD 476, regarding the beast with 10 horns and the iron and clay (except that it is wrong).
Let's take this a step at a time…
Do you agree the wmscog teaches that the Pope/Catholic Church is the Antichrist?
What is the evidence they use to support that teaching? Can you list it?
Yes I agree WMC teaching Pope=AntiChrist
Daniel 7:25 he will change the set times and the law (Catholic Church changed Sabbath=>Sunday does not keep the seven feasts but does celebrate Christmas, Easter, Created Halloween as All Hallows Eve (I believe that was the original name, besides the pagan ones like samhain)
And as much as they say they didn't change the ten commandments they actually did. I recognize you can argue Idols are false God's but they still pray to saints at their statues that is clear idolatry, further making the 9th and 10th commandment as they do isn't comporable to the text. Also 4th/3rd is Remember the Sabbath day but they quote Remember the Lords day and say the Lords day is the first day of the week.
I would also point out Pope Gregory set the New Year on 1 January (from spring as God set it to winter, I know Julius Caeasar did this before but then it got moved back to 1 March and Gregory set it in 1 Jan again)
In Revelation 13 the Harlot rides on the beast which is often interpreted to be the fourth beast in Daniel, A woman can mean God's people and a Harlot can represent those who are unfaithful among God's people so it represents a group of God's people who are unfaithful in Rome.
She also has the Gold Chalise filled with the blood of Martyred Saints (and yes WMC aknowledges Dark Ages Saints)
She is also dressed in fine clothes and ornate Jewelry which describes most Catholic Church buildings. She also wears the colours of the bishops/cardinals.
All right. Some people may say that those reasons are misinterpreted, misunderstood, or coincidence, or otherwise incorrect. But for the sake of argument, let's assume you are correct about the changing of the law, the changing of the times, martyring saints (keep in mind many Catholics were martyred also), and the colors and richness.
If a person (or organization) meets some, but not all, of the prophcies about the Antichrist, are they the Antichrist?
Here's a similar example. If someone met some, but not all, of the prophecies of the Messiah, would they qualify to be the Messiah? The answer is no, isn't it?
All the prophecies must be fulfilled if the person (or organization) is to fulfill the requirements for THE Antichrist (Rev. 13, Dan. 7), otherwise they are simply an antichrist (1 John 2), an opponent of Christ or a false Christ.
Please tell how the Pope/Catholic Church fulfilled these prophecies about the Antichrist in Dan. 7 and Rev. 13:
Dan. 7:24-25, "The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time."
Rev. 13:1, "The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name."
Rev. 13:3, "One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast."
Rev. 13:5, "The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months."
(There are others, but I think these are enough to start with.)
loocpoc wrote:
Then if Jesus met only half the prophecies then how is he the "messiah" or "G-d in the flesh"?
Ah, I wondered if someone would mention that.
We believe that those prophecies are yet to be fulfilled, and will be fulfilled by the same Jesus.
In the case here of the Antichrist, if thoes prophecies are yet to be fulfilled, then they must be fulfilled before the end of the world. And if the wmscog preaches that the end of the world could happen any day now, then when will there be time to fulfill a prophecy that speaks of a 3 1/2 year time period, or 10 kingdoms coming out of one with 3 being conquered?
If the ten kingdoms are not fulfilled already Daniel is a false prophet for he said they would come out of Rome.
shimon wrote:
If the ten kingdoms are not fulfilled already Daniel is a false prophet for he said they would come out of Rome.
I believe these prophecies are yet to come (or in the works currently). But since the wmscog believes the end of the world could be tomorrow, then this position doesn't work for them.
So if you (and the wmscog) believe these prophecies I listed regarding the Antichrist have already been fulfilled, please share. How were they fulfilled?
Rome is long gone and they (the ten kingdoms and the eventh) must come out of Rome according to Daniel. BTW most Christians teach the end of the world could be tomorow.
btw you said how we teach the fulfillment the only thing I disagree with is teaching the years you claim we taught for the defeats of the kingdoms.
shimon wrote:
Rome is long gone and they (the ten kingdoms and the eventh) must come out of Rome according to Daniel. BTW most Christians teach the end of the world could be tomorow.
btw you said how we teach the fulfillment the only thing I disagree with is teaching the years you claim we taught for the defeats of the kingdoms.
Most Christians (at least in my circles) teach that the Rapture could be tomorrow. That's different than the end of the world.
If the wmscog does not teach the years, then how do they account for the timing of the 42 months or 3 1/2 years? And why is it in the Evidence Book and the video about the identity of 666?
genny wrote:
shimon wrote:
Rome is long gone and they (the ten kingdoms and the eventh) must come out of Rome according to Daniel. BTW most Christians teach the end of the world could be tomorow.
btw you said how we teach the fulfillment the only thing I disagree with is teaching the years you claim we taught for the defeats of the kingdoms.
Most Christians (at least in my circles) teach that the Rapture could be tomorrow. That's different than the end of the world.
If the wmscog does not teach the years, then how do they account for the timing of the 42 months or 3 1/2 years? And why is it in the Evidence Book and the video about the identity of 666?
EVEN If I believe in a rapture pretrib is directly in contraiction with the 3 1/2 years.
538-1798 IS taught but they never make a connection with ostrogoths being destroyed in that year. As I said it is not in my evidence book.
shimon wrote:
EVEN If I believe in a rapture pretrib is directly in contraiction with the 3 1/2 years.
No, there is no contradiction, but maybe you need to come to my church and study more about it. (sound familiar?, sorry couldn't resist ๐
538-1798 IS taught but they never make a connection with ostrogoths being destroyed in that year. As I said it is not in my evidence book.
So where did the year 538 come from in their teaching? Did they just pull it out of thin air? There must be a reason for it.
genny wrote:
shimon wrote:
EVEN If I believe in a rapture pretrib is directly in contraiction with the 3 1/2 years.
No, there is no contradiction, but maybe you need to come to my church and study more about it. (sound familiar?, sorry couldn't resist ๐
538-1798 IS taught but they never make a connection with ostrogoths being destroyed in that year. As I said it is not in my evidence book.
So where did the year 538 come from in their teaching? Did they just pull it out of thin air? There must be a reason for it.
LOL that was funny actually ๐
I do not know where 538 came from I can ask cuz that would be good to know.
shimon wrote:
I do not know where 538 came from I can ask cuz that would be good to know.
Good, I'll be waiting to hear back from you. ๐
While you are thinking about that, think about these facts about the 10 kingdoms. (I'll go ahead and summarize here so you won't have to link to my website if you don't want to.)
My evidence book says, as part of a diagram, "Rome was divided into ten kingdoms rapidly… The seven kingdoms accepted Catholicism to be authorized by the Pope and swore allegiance to him…. The three kingdoms were destroyed by the Pope. No one could face against the Pope."
It lists these 7 kingdoms as accepting Catholicism (and the parentheses part is actually in the book, I'm not adding it):
Anglo-Saxons (England)
Franks (France)
Alemanni (Germany)
Lombards (Italy)
Burgundians (Switzerland)
Suevi (Portugal)
Visigoths (Spain)
And these 3 kingdoms as being destroyed by the Pope (with the years in parentheses included, I didn't add those either):
Heruli (A.D. 493)
Vandals (A.D. 534)
Ostrogoths (A.D. 538)
Here are some facts from the history books:
The Anglo-Saxons did not accept Christianity until the 600s, but they were not destroyed by the Pope.
The Alemanni were conquered in 496 and put under control of the Ostrogoths and Franks.
The Lombards didn't even establish their kingdom in the right area until 572.
The Burgundians were conquered in 534, even though they had already accepted Christianity.
The Suevi were converted in the 560s, but they were not destroyed yet. After they converted, then they were conquered in 585.
The Visigoths didn't convert until about 580, but they were not destroyed by the Pope in that time.
The Ostrogoths were not conquered in 538, but rather 553 (or 552, if you just count when they finally let go of Rome).
And the Britons are not even mentioned in the wmscog list.
shimon wrote:
I do not know where 538 came from I can ask cuz that would be good to know.
Just wondered if you checked into this yet, shimon.
I found a copy of the newest evidence book it DOES mention 538 and the ostrogoths but it doesn't say they were defeated in 538 I have to read the entire section I was quickly going through it.
Further it is talking about Arianism so I don't know much about that but it talks about arianism behind the 3 that were destroyed so the other two you claimed were destroyed were no longer arian believers so far as I understand it.
shimon wrote:
I found a copy of the newest evidence book it DOES mention 538 and the ostrogoths but it doesn't say they were defeated in 538 I have to read the entire section I was quickly going through it.
On the page about Iron-Clay, the Papacy, beside the picture, it says, "After Rome was diveded into ten countries from 351 to 476 AD, Heruli was destroyed by the Papacy in 493 AD, Vandals in 534 and Ostrogoths in 538."
If you wish to claim that the wmscog now says that the date of 538 does not come from the defeat of the Ostrogoths, then what is the significance of 538?
Further it is talking about Arianism so I don't know much about that but it talks about arianism behind the 3 that were destroyed so the other two you claimed were destroyed were no longer arian believers so far as I understand it.
Arianism was just one of the heresies that the Catholic Church opposed. Are you saying that the Catholic Church didn't have a problem with anyone else opposing them, just the Arians?
The Alemanni were pagan when they were conquered by Clovis I, a Catholic. They didn't convert until around the 600s.
The Burgundians were Arian, but became Catholic before they were conquered, by the Franks, a Catholic kingdom. They were still conquered.
Do you have any other objections or questions about the research?
Okay. First of all, we're talking about a humongous timespan, and a humongous book to help guide us through it, assisted by footnotes in encyclopedic history…
Also I am SO not qualified to share the study, so I'm just gonna link the history
So…
Biblically, the last thing that we hear about the church of God, is that they are sending letters to each other on how to "stay strong" and faithful, because people are getting flogged, imprisoned, and getting their heads chopped off. "many times I have gotten my 40 lashes minus one". Somebody was even crucified. They were regarded as the Nazarene cult, and the whole world hated them. That actually didn't change. At all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan
Basically persecution of Christians -continued- to be a problem for a couple hundred years. So much so, that they had to pass multiple laws to literally LEGALIZE being christian, because the nation as a whole treated them as heretical lawbreakers, reference New Covenant and ancient paintings to get an idea of how they were tortured or killed.
When I say "Constantine abolished the Sabbath day in 321" … What I actually mean to say is that the sabbath day had -always- been getting stomped on, and this is where changing the set times and laws of God -begins-. His edict is the first one to command everyone to worship "on the venerable day of the sun" or "dias venerabilis solis" he wanted people to venerate the all mighty day of the Sun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol_Invictus
Some people say that this didn't actually make Sabbath day illegal at all, and nobody was put to death.
http://christianityforthinkers.com/pdfFormat/Persecution-endnotes.pdf
"Licinius, in about 321 A.D. … outlawed councils of bishops and Christian assemblies within walled cities; he also dismissed Christians from imperial service and prohibited men and women worshiping together."
It actually lead to -no sabbaths- at all, and you already know how Rome punishes law breakers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Laodicea
"about 363–364 AD"
"Outlawing the keeping of the Jewish sabbath (Saturday) and encouraging rest on the (Sunday) (canon 29)"
Canon 29
"Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday, but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s Day they shall especially honor, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day."
And then it straight up did become illegal to keep the sabbath on Saturday.
—
So you can read all that, or I can say "Constantine passed a law in 321 which outlawed the Sabbath" and you understand that Christs Law has been changed, and people were murdered because of it in the reign of and because of, Constantine.
Generally speaking, we try to keep it simple in order to get the most out of a bible study. We answer questions with sources like these, and it is very very good to research and get the whole story.
The point of Daniel's prophecy is to point out that the set times were changed to sunday, as prophesied, and the people who did it make a big pretty building and called sunday "Christian" boasting as if they had the authority of God.
I'll chat about passover, and kingdoms later, respectively. I'm gettin tired and I think I've gotten plenty of gospel in today.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.