the "son of perdition"

[JSojourner]

Ok, this guy is crazy.  I believe in the "end times" stuff predicted in the Bible, as do most American christians, especially Catholics, but to categorize the son of perdition as African Americans is crazy and totally racist.  The African American subsection of American Christianity is one of the biggest groups of evangelical Christianity in the country.  Even Obama, though Rev. Wright was himself a racist black liberation theologist, is a evangelical christian (though a liberal first).  The pentecostal doctrine is not the only doctrine in evangelical Christianity.  Indeed, the word evangelical is a media-created word along with Christian fundamentalist to mock voters in the south or pro-life voters.

Well Az, we certainly agree on the wackiness of prophetman's post.  But the words "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" were never media constructs. They have both been used by the media -- accurately, at times and derisively at other times. 

I might quibble with some of the minutiae in the article below, but it is basically a sound delineation between the two terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christianity

[nhmagic]

Ok, this guy is crazy.  I believe in the "end times" stuff predicted in the Bible, as do most American christians, especially Catholics, but to categorize the son of perdition as African Americans is crazy and totally racist.  The African American subsection of American Christianity is one of the biggest groups of evangelical Christianity in the country.  Even Obama, though Rev. Wright was himself a racist black liberation theologist, is a evangelical christian (though a liberal first).  The pentecostal doctrine is not the only doctrine in evangelical Christianity.  Indeed, the word evangelical is a media-created word along with Christian fundamentalist to mock voters in the south or pro-life voters.

Well Az, we certainly agree on the wackiness of prophetman's post.  But the words "evangelical" and "fundamentalist" were never media constructs. They have both been used by the media -- accurately, at times and derisively at other times. 

I might quibble with some of the minutiae in the article below, but it is basically a sound delineation between the two terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christianity

The difference is that we dont use the term fundamentalist, or fundy to describe ourselves.  The usage of the word is comparable to gays being called "f******".  Suffice to say, its highly offensive.  The context in which the media uses it is to:

a)attribute all conservative Christians to Jerry Falwell and John Hagee (just as Obama was attributed to Reverend Wright)

b)put a separation between ourselves and other Christians, especially the Catholics, as the media treats them and especially the Anglican church as acceptable Christians

c)to give the left netroots terms and talking points and people to attack

[tik 🪀✨]

Prophetman, there are many more races than just whites and blacks. What are Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, etc according to your philosophy? What the  is Michael Jackson?

If God created man's physical attributes based on the genes in their DNA, why would a different pattern of genes constitute evil? It's as arbitrary as saying everyone born with dwarfism is the 'son of perdition' or perhaps any born with a predilection of Alzheimer's, or anyone born with green eyes, or everyone from Iceland. The fact is, there's nothing specific in that verse for black people that specifically incriminates them. You just don't like black people.

[Mechaman]

hehe, I don't know if you people are as dumb as you appear, or if, you simply won't believe the truth even though it's staring you in the face. 

Would you be as upset with me if I told you that God likens this present generation of white Americans to that of a harlot?
Well, it's true.  As a people today, we white Americans resemble a harlot; a protestute working for her pimp (the black man), and trying to please him.  And as the result, we've exalted the black man above ourselves and even above our God. 

Think about it!  We white Americans won't even allow our Lord's name to be mentioned in the public square, and yet we cannot find enough ways to honor black Americans. 
God calls that "the worship of the beast".

If black Americans are indeed demons, why are they by and large (85%) Christians? If they are so evil, why do they bother worshipping a so called "god of good"?

[prophetman]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Now I'm not going to enter into a discussion about geneologies because, when it comes to salvation it doesn't matter from whence one descended. The shed blood of Christ covers the sins of ALL mankind including the sins of the black man.  So yes, there are black Christians today. Just because they descended from Cain doesn't mean that ALL are lawless and murderers.   Neither is every white American a harlot today just because our present generation is depicted as such.

It is however important to know these things in order to understand end-time scriptures, and to understand who the man of sin is, and who the Babylon harlot is.
These two groups play the major roles in end-time prophecies.

[JSojourner]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Now I'm not going to enter into a discussion about geneologies because, when it comes to salvation it doesn't matter from whence one descended. The shed blood of Christ covers the sins of ALL mankind including the sins of the black man.  So yes, there are black Christians today. Just because they descended from Cain doesn't mean that ALL are lawless and murderers.   Neither is every white American a harlot today just because our present generation is depicted as such.

It is however important to know these things in order to understand end-time scriptures, and to understand who the man of sin is, and who the Babylon harlot is.
These two groups play the major roles in end-time prophecies

I think I hear your Moms calling you.  Time to come in for lunch...

[prophetman]

Prophetman, there are many more races than just whites and blacks. What are Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, etc according to your philosophy? What the  is Michael Jackson?

If God created man's physical attributes based on the genes in their DNA, why would a different pattern of genes constitute evil? It's as arbitrary as saying everyone born with dwarfism is the 'son of perdition' or perhaps any born with a predilection of Alzheimer's, or anyone born with green eyes, or everyone from Iceland. The fact is, there's nothing specific in that verse for black people that specifically incriminates them. You just don't like black people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Michael Jackson was a black man who descended from Cain and from Ham.  Thus, he was one of those whom the scriptures call,  "son of perdition" and "man of sin" or "man of lawlessness."

[prophetman]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Now I'm not going to enter into a discussion about geneologies because, when it comes to salvation it doesn't matter from whence one descended. The shed blood of Christ covers the sins of ALL mankind including the sins of the black man.  So yes, there are black Christians today. Just because they descended from Cain doesn't mean that ALL are lawless and murderers.   Neither is every white American a harlot today just because our present generation is depicted as such.

It is however important to know these things in order to understand end-time scriptures, and to understand who the man of sin is, and who the Babylon harlot is.
These two groups play the major roles in end-time prophecies

I think I hear your Moms calling you.  Time to come in for lunch...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Those who can't discuss, ridicule and poke fun.

[JSojourner]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Now I'm not going to enter into a discussion about geneologies because, when it comes to salvation it doesn't matter from whence one descended. The shed blood of Christ covers the sins of ALL mankind including the sins of the black man.  So yes, there are black Christians today. Just because they descended from Cain doesn't mean that ALL are lawless and murderers.   Neither is every white American a harlot today just because our present generation is depicted as such.

It is however important to know these things in order to understand end-time scriptures, and to understand who the man of sin is, and who the Babylon harlot is.
These two groups play the major roles in end-time prophecies

I think I hear your Moms calling you.  Time to come in for lunch...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Those who can't discuss, ridicule and poke fun.

You're right.  I can't discuss. Of course, the fact that you are nuttier than a fruitcake has nothing to do with it.

[John Dibble]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Methinks you're a very confused individual who doesn't know his Bible very well. Ham's son was Canaan. It says so in Genesis chapter 9 - "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan."

Cain was born from Eve, whom preceeded Noah by quite a while in Biblical chronology.

[JSojourner]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Methinks you're a very confused individual who doesn't know his Bible very well. Ham's son was Canaan. It says so in Genesis chapter 9 - "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan."

Cain was born from Eve, whom preceeded Noah by quite a while in Biblical chronology.

At some point, I suspect Prophetman believes someone in this chain of events mated with an ape or with one of the Nephilim.  At least, I have heard that line of ignorant pap from those of his ilk before.

[prophetman]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Methinks you're a very confused individual who doesn't know his Bible very well. Ham's son was Canaan. It says so in Genesis chapter 9 - "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan."

Cain was born from Eve, whom preceeded Noah by quite a while in Biblical chronology.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

>>>Ham's son was Canaan.  It says so in Genesis chapter 9.<<<

I know that.  In fact I was looking at the verse when I posted about Ham being the father of Cain er Canaan. 
Ham no doubt married a black woman, ie, of Cain's race.   

[tik 🪀✨]

Prophetman, there are many more races than just whites and blacks. What are Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, etc according to your philosophy? What the  is Michael Jackson?

If God created man's physical attributes based on the genes in their DNA, why would a different pattern of genes constitute evil? It's as arbitrary as saying everyone born with dwarfism is the 'son of perdition' or perhaps any born with a predilection of Alzheimer's, or anyone born with green eyes, or everyone from Iceland. The fact is, there's nothing specific in that verse for black people that specifically incriminates them. You just don't like black people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Michael Jackson was a black man who descended from Cain and from Ham.  Thus, he was one of those whom the scriptures call,  "son of perdition" and "man of sin" or "man of lawlessness."

But he had a skin condition that changed the pigmentation of his skin. Anyway, you didn't mention my first question by saying that whites and blacks were the "major players" in the Bible. And yet, God's chosen people, the Israelites, are their own race. And people of Asian decent are the most populous in the world, are they just cannon fodder? I know the fact that you simply don't like black people informs this interpretation of Scripture, I'm just trying to illustrate that it doesn't make any sense.

It seems like for every Christian I find, I find another interpretation of Revelations. Who is the man of perdition? Is it the blacks, the Catholics, secularism, Protestants who have lost their way, Nazis, America, Israel, Muslims, aliens, the UN? More and more I'm thinking it's just another Biblical red herring used to justify prejudice.

[JSojourner]

Prophetman, there are many more races than just whites and blacks. What are Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, etc according to your philosophy? What the  is Michael Jackson?

If God created man's physical attributes based on the genes in their DNA, why would a different pattern of genes constitute evil? It's as arbitrary as saying everyone born with dwarfism is the 'son of perdition' or perhaps any born with a predilection of Alzheimer's, or anyone born with green eyes, or everyone from Iceland. The fact is, there's nothing specific in that verse for black people that specifically incriminates them. You just don't like black people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Michael Jackson was a black man who descended from Cain and from Ham.  Thus, he was one of those whom the scriptures call,  "son of perdition" and "man of sin" or "man of lawlessness."

But he had a skin condition that changed the pigmentation of his skin. Anyway, you didn't mention my first question by saying that whites and blacks were the "major players" in the Bible. And yet, God's chosen people, the Israelites, are their own race. And people of Asian decent are the most populous in the world, are they just cannon fodder? I know the fact that you simply don't like black people informs this interpretation of Scripture, I'm just trying to illustrate that it doesn't make any sense.

It seems like for every Christian I find, I find another interpretation of Revelations. Who is the man of perdition? Is it the blacks, the Catholics, secularism, Protestants who have lost their way, Nazis, America, Israel, Muslims, aliens, the UN? More and more I'm thinking it's just another Biblical red herring used to justify prejudice.

As the Fonz used to say, "Exactamundo!"

[prophetman]

Prophetman, there are many more races than just whites and blacks. What are Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, etc according to your philosophy? What the  is Michael Jackson?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If God created man's physical attributes based on the genes in their DNA, why would a different pattern of genes constitute evil? It's as arbitrary as saying everyone born with dwarfism is the 'son of perdition' or perhaps any born with a predilection of Alzheimer's, or anyone born with green eyes, or everyone from Iceland. The fact is, there's nothing specific in that verse for black people that specifically incriminates them. You just don't like black people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Michael Jackson was a black man who descended from Cain and from Ham.  Thus, he was one of those whom the scriptures call,  "son of perdition" and "man of sin" or "man of lawlessness."

But he had a skin condition that changed the pigmentation of his skin. Anyway, you didn't mention my first question by saying that whites and blacks were the "major players" in the Bible. And yet, God's chosen people, the Israelites, are their own race. And people of Asian decent are the most populous in the world, are they just cannon fodder? I know the fact that you simply don't like black people informs this interpretation of Scripture, I'm just trying to illustrate that it doesn't make any sense.

It seems like for every Christian I find, I find another interpretation of Revelations. Who is the man of perdition? Is it the blacks, the Catholics, secularism, Protestants who have lost their way, Nazis, America, Israel, Muslims, aliens, the UN? More and more I'm thinking it's just another Biblical red herring used to justify prejudice.

The man of sin; son of perdition is symbolized in Revelation 13 and 17 as, "the ten horns" that are upon Babylon the great (upon America).

Daniel as well in 7:24 described the man of sin as, "another ten horns" (another people) who rise after the ten kings (after the European Americans).

Verses 25 and 26 goes on to describe that other ten horns and what they will do.

It says, they are diverse from the ten kings (diverse from the European Americans), and that, they will subdue and bring under subjection the ten kings.  That they will think to change the times and laws of the ten kings, and that they will take away the dominion of the ten kings and will consume and destroy the nation until the end.


Based on everthing else said about the  man of sin; son of perdition in Daniel and Revelation, the ten horns cannot be any other people EXCEPT African Americans.

[Gustaf]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Methinks you're a very confused individual who doesn't know his Bible very well. Ham's son was Canaan. It says so in Genesis chapter 9 - "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan."

Cain was born from Eve, whom preceeded Noah by quite a while in Biblical chronology.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

>>>Ham's son was Canaan.  It says so in Genesis chapter 9.<<<

I know that.  In fact I was looking at the verse when I posted about Ham being the father of Cain er Canaan. 
Ham no doubt married a black woman, ie, of Cain's race.   

"no doubt"

No doubt?

Bible verse please.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Prophetman, there are many more races than just whites and blacks. What are Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, Arabs, etc according to your philosophy? What the  is Michael Jackson?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If God created man's physical attributes based on the genes in their DNA, why would a different pattern of genes constitute evil? It's as arbitrary as saying everyone born with dwarfism is the 'son of perdition' or perhaps any born with a predilection of Alzheimer's, or anyone born with green eyes, or everyone from Iceland. The fact is, there's nothing specific in that verse for black people that specifically incriminates them. You just don't like black people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Michael Jackson was a black man who descended from Cain and from Ham.  Thus, he was one of those whom the scriptures call,  "son of perdition" and "man of sin" or "man of lawlessness."

But he had a skin condition that changed the pigmentation of his skin. Anyway, you didn't mention my first question by saying that whites and blacks were the "major players" in the Bible. And yet, God's chosen people, the Israelites, are their own race. And people of Asian decent are the most populous in the world, are they just cannon fodder? I know the fact that you simply don't like black people informs this interpretation of Scripture, I'm just trying to illustrate that it doesn't make any sense.

It seems like for every Christian I find, I find another interpretation of Revelations. Who is the man of perdition? Is it the blacks, the Catholics, secularism, Protestants who have lost their way, Nazis, America, Israel, Muslims, aliens, the UN? More and more I'm thinking it's just another Biblical red herring used to justify prejudice.

The man of sin; son of perdition is symbolized in Revelation 13 and 17 as, "the ten horns" that are upon Babylon the great (upon America).

Daniel as well in 7:24 described the man of sin as, "another ten horns" (another people) who rise after the ten kings (after the European Americans).

Verses 25 and 26 goes on to describe that other ten horns and what they will do.

It says, they are diverse from the ten kings (diverse from the European Americans), and that, they will subdue and bring under subjection the ten kings.  That they will think to change the times and laws of the ten kings, and that they will take away the dominion of the ten kings and will consume and destroy the nation until the end.


Based on everthing else said about the  man of sin; son of perdition in Daniel and Revelation, the ten horns cannot be any other people EXCEPT African Americans.

OK, now would you acknowledge that everything that you put between brackets haven't here the slightest justification, and that that are just totally personal interpretations? It's a bit light to condemn a group of people in the name of "THE" truth.

[Gustaf]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Methinks you're a very confused individual who doesn't know his Bible very well. Ham's son was Canaan. It says so in Genesis chapter 9 - "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan."

Cain was born from Eve, whom preceeded Noah by quite a while in Biblical chronology.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

>>>Ham's son was Canaan.  It says so in Genesis chapter 9.<<<

I know that.  In fact I was looking at the verse when I posted about Ham being the father of Cain er Canaan. 
Ham no doubt married a black woman, ie, of Cain's race.   

"no doubt"

No doubt?

Bible verse please.

Actually, this is even dumber than I originally thought.

First he says that blacks descend from Ham and that Cain, the first murderer, was Ham's son, hence blacks are murderers.

But Cain didn't descend from Ham, of course. So then he changes the story. Now he says Ham's son probably married a black woman, i.e. a descendant from Cain. So now the idea seems to be that since Cain was a murderer he must have been black or something.

And not to go all genetics on you but if Adam and Eve were caucasians how did Cain get black?

[Mechaman]

It's pretty well understood by Bible scholars that the African black man descended from Noah's son Ham.  Genesis chapter 9 says that Ham was/is the father of Cain, who was in fact the son of perdition, and is often called the first murderer or the lawless one.

Methinks you're a very confused individual who doesn't know his Bible very well. Ham's son was Canaan. It says so in Genesis chapter 9 - "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan."

Cain was born from Eve, whom preceeded Noah by quite a while in Biblical chronology.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

>>>Ham's son was Canaan.  It says so in Genesis chapter 9.<<<

I know that.  In fact I was looking at the verse when I posted about Ham being the father of Cain er Canaan. 
Ham no doubt married a black woman, ie, of Cain's race.   

"no doubt"

No doubt?

Bible verse please.

Actually, this is even dumber than I originally thought.

First he says that blacks descend from Ham and that Cain, the first murderer, was Ham's son, hence blacks are murderers.

But Cain didn't descend from Ham, of course. So then he changes the story. Now he says Ham's son probably married a black woman, i.e. a descendant from Cain. So now the idea seems to be that since Cain was a murderer he must have been black or something.

And not to go all genetics on you but if Adam and Eve were caucasians how did Cain get black?

[JSojourner]

Mmmmm.  Hammmmmmm....