TrueHolyBibleChristianCatholic wrote: IT'S THE RELIGIOUS-EARTH-BEAST OF APOCALYPSE/REVELATION 13:11-18--UNDER THE POLITICAL-SEA-BEAST OF APOCALYPSE/REVELATION 13:1-10--WHO CAUSES ALL, BOTH SMALL AND GREAT, RICH AND POOR, FREE AND BOND, TO RECEIVE A MARK +++IN+++ THEIR RIGHT-HAND OR +++IN+++ THEIR FOREHEAD[S] ! ! !
Interesting thoughts, TLC. Here are a couple thoughts I have.
If the sea beast is a political entity and the earth beast religious, why would the religious beast cause everyone to worship the political beast (Rev 13:12)? Seems backwards.
The 7 headed sea beast is said to be given power to continue 42 months. The earth beast rises during the same timeline to carry out his deeds. It is said the sea beast had a deadly wound which had healed. So if, as you say, the coronavirus vaccine is the mark, name or number of the sea beast, shouldn't we be able to identify this political beast by now considering a vaccine may be available within a year or less?
These are sincere questions to test your theory so no need to take offense.
B. McCausland wrote: Lurker Wondering if you are reading the same Scriptures we are, or you have them upside down
Thanks for the mention, sister B.
. . . .
For anyone interested in what Scripture has to say about the matter of pride, here is one example:
Daniel 5:18-20 O thou king, the most high God gave Nebuchadnezzar thy father a kingdom, and majesty, and glory, and honour: And for the majesty that he gave him, all people, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him: whom he would he slew; and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he set up; and whom he would he put down.
But when **his heart was lifted up, and his mind hardened in pride**, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him:
A mind hardened in pride? Sounds like a stony unregenerate heart void of God's laws to me. Sort of like the Pharisee of whom Jesus spoke in Luke 18:9-14:
And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others.
I've gone way over my quota so will depart the discussion and leave it to the learned.
I just searched the bible for the words 'pride' and 'proud' and read every appearance in context. Can't find a single occurrence where the context supports the meaning our contributors from across the pond are arguing for. Only minds settled in error would argue for something that can't be established from the word of God.
Pride: The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
A meek and humble spirit: And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
To which Jesus commented: I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
Anyone notice the word 'justified'? Isn't the parable about the state of hearts and justification?
And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others.
Interesting discussion. I had to go back to see if part of my post had been censored by SA but, no, it's all there.
1/26/2020 1:42 PM Lurker: ""In the context of the entire bible, pride is generally pinned to acts of self righteousness. The best long standing example I can think of is the RCC's doctrine of faith + works = salvation which is the same as the pride the Christ rejecting Jews had and God hated.
I am proud of my children and grandchildren. To inflate and abuse the biblical definition of proud/pride to suggest that this is an affront to God is just plain ignorance and arrogance as children are an heritage unto the Lord.""
The first paragraph is my belief of what biblical pride is. The second paragraph is an example of what, in my opinion, biblical pride is not. Strange that the entire discussion has focused on what biblical pride is not. Strange indeed.
In the context of the entire bible, pride is generally pinned to acts of self righteousness. The best long standing example I can think of is the RCC's doctrine of faith + works = salvation which is the same as the pride the Christ rejecting Jews had and God hated.
I am proud of my children and grandchildren. To inflate and abuse the biblical definition of proud/pride to suggest that this is an affront to God is just plain ignorance and arrogance as children are an heritage unto the Lord.
Rnel wrote: No problem there will always be confusion with these topics and also the layouts of this comment section can be hard to follow with who said?, where? and what? We must remember that Christ was crucified on the 69 week and there remains a week left(7 years) 3 and a half months of great tribulation. The last week will start with the false peace covenant made with the jews in Jerusalem by then there will be a temple.
Not wanting to put words in your mouth but it seems you believe there is a significant gap in the 69th week in which 2000 years and counting of world history takes place including the rebuilding of the third temple.
I am familiar with and understand the interpretation but respectfully disagree so I will take my leave of the discussion. Thanks for the civil interaction and all the best to you and yours.
Rnel wrote: Hey guys 1) It was not me who said the little horn comes from perian ampire but bro James did please see belowūüĎáūüŹľ
2) There must be a 3rd temple, Jesus said so when he cited Daniel 12 about the great tribulation and abomination in Matt 24 Even John was told to mark it in Rev 11:1-2
1) Okay... clearly a misunderstanding. James just said it was a popular interpretation but also pointed out it was fatally flawed.
2) But where does it fit into the 70 weeks? The 70 weeks commenced immediately after the Babylonian captivity; the temple was rebuilt during the first 7 weeks; the tribulation is the 70th week and the abomination of desolation takes place about midway during the 70th week setting up the great tribulation. After the 70th weeks comes the resurrection of the just and unjust to be judged and rewarded according to their works. The only thing spoken of during the interim 62 weeks is the street and wall will be built again during times of trouble. Why can't we find anything in the bible about a 2nd destruction of the temple and rebuilding it again?
One other question. The resurrection spoken of in Daniel 12; is it the same as the Revelation 19 judgment or the great white throne judgment of Revelation 20:11ff?
Rnel wrote: Hi Lurker and James No I never said the Horn of the goat is Persian, the Horn of the goat is Alexander the great. That is what I meant by Antiochus that came out of one of the 4 kingdoms. He was the one who made an abomination of the temple in 171BC. BUT BUTūüĎáūüŹľ Daniel 8:17 (NASB) So he came near to where I was standing, and when he came I was frightened and fell on my face; but he said to me, ‚ÄúSon of man, understand that the vision pertains to the time of the end.‚ÄĚ
Hey Bro Rnel,
I'm not going to interject myself into this discussion as it gets too confusing when too many are involved. But..... it's not possible that Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Persian) can be the little horn who set up the abomination of desolation as that little horn came out of the Greek (Gentile) empire (He-goat)..... not the Persian/Mede empire (Ram). That is what James pointed out from Daniel 8:20-21.
But I believe your greater point is there must be a third temple for the son of perdition to sit in which does not yet exist. To that I'll just say that God gave exacting instructions for the first and rebuilt temples. Where are the instructions for the third? And when will it be rebuilt in relation to the 70 weeks (for the end of the 70th is the end)?
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Disciples ask our Lord what will be signs of "end of the age" Mathew 24:15 ‚ÄúTherefore when you see the ‚Äėabomination of desolation,‚Äô spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place‚ÄĚ (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 ‚Äúthen let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. v. 21 for then there *will be* great tribulation Our Lord spoke of these things as a future event. Brother James says it happened a tad over a century and a half before His birth.
Respectfully brother, I don't believe James said that at all. He simply recited a popular interpretation of the ram and he-goat from Daniel 8 which, when examined closely, has a problem. If anything, brother Rnel holds to the faulty interpretation. Maybe you need to go back and read a few more posts.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Talking about personal morality, did either Hillary or Obama get a divorce or commit adultery? I have seen no public record of such.
You don't like Trump and that's your right which I respect. What I do NOT respect is using God's written word to condemn Trump while justifying Obama/Hillary.
To make my point..... would you say that both Obama and Hillary, in their current state, are on course to spend eternity in Paradise in the presence of God? If not then you are misusing God's word to justify your own political bias which I doubt God will approve.
Jim Lincoln wrote: 1 Timothy 1:9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,---ESV Carl, who are more faithfully avoiding doing the above - Obama or Trump? Case closed.
I am not answering for Carl as I'm sure he can answer better than I but.....
Did Jesus call out Caesar for his ungodly behavior or did he say render to Caesar that which belongs to him?
The only difference between Obama and Trump is one is better at hiding his dirty laundry. Neither, in their current unrepentant state, will see the kingdom of God.
NOTW wrote: Exactly Dyle you are asking the right questions. The Dominion Christians will side with anyone as long as they can achieve their goals. They do not care if it is some 3x married adulterer with a shady past. The sheep have hired a bear to protect them from the wolf without knowing that the bear will eat them. Trump more or less passed some laws at the expense of Christians. I cannot witness to people without them thinking that I worship trump. They refuse to listen to bible verses I have to say because of that man. Trump is a stumbling block and he has wrecked churches and has further removed the youth from God. All so Christians could feel in control. And the economy is about to burst. The irony is that what the Christians feared would happen to America Trump is doing. They are causing their defeat.
So Hillary Clinton would have been a better choice for POTUS? Or are you one of those who voted NOTA just so you would be free to complain and point fingers? If so you've given up your right to complain.
Lisa wrote: So according to someone by the name of Frank, we should pretty much group individuals who are attracted to the same sex as pedophiles, murderers, thieves, etc... Let me start off by saying that I myself am not gay, but I try to love everyone just as Jesus did. I don‚Äôt always succeed, but I refuse not to be kind or loving to someone for the simple fact that they are gay. Here‚Äôs something to think about....why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay?? Life is hard enough when you‚Äôre a heterosexual, much less someone that others believe that you‚Äôre evil. People are stoned, flogged, beheaded, burned, etc...simply for loving.
Respectfully Lisa, I believe your argument is with God and not Frank.
God said the acts of sodomites are an abomination and you are saying they are loving. Would Jesus coddle and "There, there..." a sodomite all the way to the gates of hell? If you really loved those who are clearly in sin and rebellion against God, you'd do whatever you could to see their souls saved from eternal damnation. And if you're unwilling to risk offending them by pointing out their sin against God then your "love and kindness" toward them isn't wrought of God.
Jim Lincoln wrote: As time pointed out, the Pilgrims weren't Christian enough to implement a New Testament type Church even if that's what they vocally said Acts 4:32 Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. ---ESV
Interesting how you fail to see your own hypocrisy. If you actually believed what you quoted from scripture, you'd be promoting Medi-share, a Christian based healthcare program, instead of federal government universal healthcare. Perhaps the reason you don't is because Medi-share doesn't cover abortions.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Not really, Mike, QC. Income distribution was an important worry and the late 19th and 20th century. This is why we had the Sherman Antitrust Act. So monopolies would not accumulate all the wealth of the country. I was doing this. The farmers had a real populist movement to control them and the railroads ‚ĚóūüĎć
Jim! Even you can't be so ignorant as to equate anti-trust laws to the Dem's plan to punish the rich by taxing them out of existence and giving "free stuff" to the less fortunate. The first ensures healthy competition and a chance for the American Dream for those who work hard and the latter ensures everyone remains on The Dem's plantation.