The Mark of the Beast

Michael Brown has an online debate with an SDA on Sunday vs Saturday sabbath observance as a New Covenant law. Tim Conway also has an "ask Tim" session where he addresses this on the "I'll Be Honest" site/app - FYI. Sunday (as scripture in Acts says "the believers met on the first day of the week, the Lord's Day..." & Hebrews 4 explains the "sabbath rest" of God He intends (I don't judge those who corporately worship on Saturday or Sunday, but there's no NT "Law" where we have to meet on Saturday to observe "the sabbath" as defined in the Mosaic Law. There are multiple scriptures like Hebrews 4, Colossians 2, Jesus in the Gospels explaining "the sabbath was made for man & not man for the sabbath", etc. to make this case plainly from scripture. I know all the arguments (have had MANY discussions both online and in person with SDA's) & how they "twist & pervert the scriptures" to make their doctrine, but it's bogus.

Scripture tells us that "The mark of the beast is something without which no man can buy or sell save the mark on his right hand or on his forehead". That pretty obviously has nothing to do with sabbath observance on one day or another.

Dr Brown debates a Seventh Day Adventist on Line of Fire Call in show
https://youtu.be/978dYsM5LoU

Pastor Tim Conway on Seventh Day Adventism: Cult or Not?
https://youtu.be/65PcypkGaew

And once you study the ridiculous and outrageous things SDA "prophesied" that didn't come true, the insane & unbiblical things Ellen White taught, how her dead husband's spirit spoke to her to override scripture (a demon masquerading), etc., it becomes clear SDA & their whole doctrine and cult is just as (if not more) dangerous than the Roman Catholic Church, which is one of the main focuses of their theology & eschatology.

You people know nothing at all. The mark already occurred
on July 12 70 A.D. Subsequent events in history are only a
spiritual illusion of what already transpired eons ago.
Therefore when reading prophetic writings in the Bible
remember people that its all spiritual, nothing is real
in the sense of time and space as we know it.
You may be wondering how I am aware of these deep deep truths and I am wondering that as well.

You people know nothing at all.

Brother,

If you are not going to refrain from such language and accusations of saints then we would encourage you not to participate in the forums here and we can gladly shut down your account. There is no need for using hard language and speaking that way to believers even if there is such a vast disagreement.

On the SDA Church we included a message that is very much worth hearing on the history of the group:

Seventh-Day Adventism a Cult? by Phil Johnson
https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=25907&commentView=itemComments

Lighten up Greg, was just kidding. Or is humor not allowed here?

(as you can see,my whole post was rather ludicrous. And the worse part is some people will actually believe it)

.
I lean toward the mark being some type of a computer or RFID chip. But remember the mark will also come with the worship of the beast or the antichrist.

Just a little humor. I was watching one of the end time movies on YouTube. As if I have too much time on my hands. In the movue a young lady was selling some groceries to those remnant saints that did not make the rapture. Just to bring a little humor she said will that be cash or chip. Get it...cash or chip. Yuk yuk.:)

Okay now back to the serious discussion of what is the mark?

TMK,
Then if you take that preterist (preter meaning "past things") reading of it (they do the same hermeneutic argument and stress - "soon" & "near" & say the same thing, even though near & soon mean different things to the Lord than to us, then you must also say some very clear things about the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24-25, about I John 2, etc. Not only that, but then you are FORCED to look at Revelation 17-22 a certain way too. Because there the "beast" (as he called there), is thrown into the lake of fire with the false prophet & after that is the great white throne judgement. Not only that, but Revelation 13 which speaks of the calculating of the number of his name says, "This calls for wisdom, let the one who has understanding, calculate the number of of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666." - ESV, Revelation 13:18. It says absolutely nothing about it being written only to his readers at that time. Zero.

Yes, Revelation 1-3 is written with specific words, letters, to the churches in Asia Minor. But the rest of the book from 4-22 is clearly a prophetic book. The fact is, Those churches all died out in Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) & their candlesticks were taken from them & Islam has ruled them for centuries.

But the nature of prophesy in scripture can't always be quickly relegated away to only the current audience. That immediate and surrounding context must be considered, but you can't take Isaiah's or other OT Prophet's prophesies and say that they all had nothing to do with their immediate impact on Israel at the time, nor can you say none of them had any future prophetic significance. We look at context & compare scripture with scripture. If you try to relegate Revelation to ONLY the immediate readers (which the verses you were speaking of in Revelation 13 - NEVER ONCE DO THAT OR ANY SUCH THING), then why did he go on and on about so many things they would never live to see? That's illogical, & clearly not the case. He goes on to explain far future events like the binding of Satan in a pit with the lid placed on it, the beast and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire, the devil thrown into the lake of fire, the great white throne judgement, etc. I agree that Revelation 1-3 was at the very least "mostly just" an immediate application to those churches in those cities at that time. But Revelation 4-22 is clearly prophetic & goes well beyond those churches and all the way up until the end of all things, the new heavens and new earth, etc.
God Bless,
Jeff

Wtchnpray,
I used to think that mystery Babylon, Babylon the great, or the harlot that rides the beast was the RCC. I do not "think" that's the case any more. Especially not Babylon. Not America either.
God Bless,
Jeff

Matthew Henry's interpretation:

"By disfranchisement, allowing none to enjoy natural, civil, or municipal rights, who will not worship that papal beast, that is, the image of the pagan beast. It is made a qualification for buying and selling the rights of nature, as well as for places of profit and trust, that they have the mark of the beast in their forehead and in their right hand, and that they have the name of the beast and the number of his name. It is probable that the mark, the name, and the number of the beast, may all signify the same thing””that they make an open profession of their subjection and obedience to the papacy, which is receiving the mark in their forehead, and that they oblige themselves to use all their interest, power, and endeavour, to promote the papal authority, which is receiving the mark in their right hands. We are told that pope Martin V. in his bull, added to the council of Constance, prohibits Roman catholics from suffering any heretics to dwell in their countries, or to make any bargains, use any trades, or bear any civil offices, which is a very clear interpretation of this prophecy."

I brought that up in another thread on the same subject. Those who have the "mark of Christ" (are true followers of Christ), and will be shunned. They will not be hired for jobs and thus will not be able to provide for their families. Richard Wurmbrand experienced this in Romania. Christians from the first century on have been shunned by society where they could not buy or sell and it is happening today in many persecuted countries. So John the apostle was not lying to the 1st century church.

Those who have the "mark of the beast" (unregenerate), are friends with the world and the world loves its own. If the Christian would just renounce Christ, then they would not be shunned.

I believe Matthew Henry got it right and it has been applicable for every century since Christ.

And I've seen Ceasar Nero, Popes, Antiochus, Obama, Hitler, Stalin, & all kinds of people's names equal 666, so I'm not sure if that's coincidence, shoehorning with numerology, or a pattern that comes with those "many antichrists" John spoke of that we're not "THE antichrist (ie "man of lawlessness", or "son of perdition") in the end. Gog of Magog is a way of saying in Biblical geographical historical terms, the anyichrist from the area of Turkey. This is provable by all of the scriptures (& the recorded commentary opinion/explanation of many Bible scholars historically) that speak on the subject. You can have that explained and proven to you if it interests you, here:

Joel Richardson's The Underground, Episode 48, Gog is the Antichrist, A Historical Survey
https://youtu.be/Aef-ieQmsWY

Christians constantly need the wisdom of Christ (I Cor. 1:24,30) to discern Satan’s activity from Christ’s activity, to distinguish between religion and genuine Christianity. "Here is wisdom,” declares the risen Lord Jesus. "Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six” (13:18). Throughout the Revelation numbers have symbolic significance. Seven is the number of divine perfection, and if the number seven were triplicated as seven hundred and seventy-seven it would represent the triune perfection of the Godhead. The number six falls short of that which is of God. Man certainly falls short of that which is of God and brings glory to God (Rom. 3:23). Six hundred and sixty-six is a number that comes short of perfection. It is a parody on the divine trinity of perfec- tion represented by seven hundred and seventy-seven. It is a number that represents the beast of religion, which though inspired and energized by the self-oriented, rebellious activity of Satan, is evidenced by man’s self-effort to appease and please God apart from Jesus Christ. Religion is man’s best efforts to construct moral systems and theological formulations and institutional structures. It is the best that man can do as he tries to reach God, just as he did at Babel (Gen. 11:1-9).

The "number of the beast” is explicitly identied as "the number of man” (13:18). Many translations and interpretations of this text supply an indefnite article which indicates that the number of the beast is "a man.” The original Greek language of the Revelation has no indenite article, and proper hermeneutic principles allow us to supply such in English translation only if the context demands such for clarity of expression. Such is not the case in this instance. When the indefinite article is supplied it gives the impression that the second beast is to be identi ed as a singular and particular individual man. This has led to much religious obsession with decoding the cryptographic number of "six hundred and sixty-six” in order to identify a particular person. Speculations have included Nero, Caligula, other Roman emperors, Mohammed, various Roman Catholic popes, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, various United States presidents, leaders of Russia, etc. The numbers can arbitrarily and subjectively be twisted in order to apply to anyone! When such a procedure is employed the primary emphasis of the vision is missed. There is no need to identify this number as a particular historical individual. When the indefinite article is not supplied, a consistent contextual meaning is evident as the "number of the beast” is explained to be the "number of man” or the "number of mankind” as he engages in religious endeavors. Those who would demand a translation and interpretation that supplies the indefinite article identifying the number of the beast as "a man,” must also allow the Jehovah’s Witnesses to do the same in their translation of John 1:1, wherein they indicate that the Word was "a god.” Few Christian religionists would want to allow such, but equity of translation technique would demand such.

James Fowler
http://www.christinyou.net/pdfs/RevelationCommEbook.pdf

I don't know that I would necessarily disagree with that Julius. Although I don't think that absolutizes it where something about the man couldn't equal the real number 666. But am certainly ok with the interpretation as laid out, potentially, either way.

I don't know if James Fowler is a complete historicist/preterist or a futurist, so I may not have a problem with what is said here, but may with where he may be trying to take it. Something's are symbolic, especially in the apocalyptic & prophetic texts. However, when one uses that to later over-allegorize everything, that's where I have a serious issue with it. Not saying he was, or is, or later does that, but just honest about what my cautionary alarms ring on those type things.

I know a lot of false religions are anti-Christ's, but none fit the description laid out in 1 John & elsewhere like Islam. None. Fits like a glove. And the fact is, Islm wasn't around at the generation of Revelation, so again, on a number of scriptural points I have no problem Agreeing that some things are allegorical symbology, but not all. Usually immediate & surrounding context & other scriptures clear up which is which. And a rational literalism of common sense. I know there's a real satan, but not a real physical beast that literally will rise up out of the Mediterranean. That's what I mean by that. Anyways,
God Bless,
Jeff

I think it's ironic when people say that an Islamic Antichrist theory is "current event newspaper exegesis" (without studying out the history, scholars, scriptures & all the gaps it fills & fits perfectly), but Matthew Henry's commentary isn't (since the pope was the easy target of the day). I think he is right in principle, but not application. So in regards to the "many anti-Christ's" & the normal seperation of a believer from the world, yes. But for the eschatological Final literal fulfillment of THE "son of perdition" & for it always being "the mark of the beast" spoken of in scripture by which no man can buy or sell, Save the mark? No. In fact, I think that's ridiculous eisogesis. If that's true, then either you, Julius, have taken the mark of the beast, or can't hold a job at all in society as a true believer. And every believer since 70 AD? That's nonsensical (& almost exclusive to the point of "cultish" really if you think about it). That will be the case at some point at the end, but most definitely had not been true of all believers through all ages since 70 AD. No way.

Philip/ Christinyou

Thank you, what you wrote to me is true. Must not feed
the delusion of some who frequent this place.

Many religious folk are of the same ilk as you wrote about. They believe everything and anything written by religious spirits, utterly absent of the anointing or presence of the Holy Spirit guiding them.
Sad that you can read and study the Bible and be so misled.
Religious pride is a killer.

Thanks Lysa.

Lord bless you too!

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/8/21 2:18:43

I don't know that I would necessarily disagree with that Julius. Although I don't think that absolutizes it where something about the man couldn't equal the real number 666. But am certainly ok with the interpretation as laid out, potentially, either way.

I don't know if James Fowler is a complete historicist/preterist or a futurist, so I may not have a problem with what is said here, but may with where he may be trying to take it.

No, he is not a Preterist, Futurist or Historicist.

But the subject is about 666, the mark of the beast, which is the number of man, not Jim or Matthew Henry, (though, I do agree with both of them).

But, in case you are interested, he believes in the Christocentric-Triumphalist intepretation of Revelation because it seems to provide the best consistency with the interpretation of the rest of the Scriptures. I agree with his view.

Page 9 and10 of his Revelation series.
http://www.christinyou.net/pdfs/RevelationCommEbook.pdf

Jim Fowler said this baloney:

"The physical Israel of the Old Testament represented a people "set apart" to function as intended, but they failed to thus function because of unbelief and disobedience (Heb. 3:16-4:6). By the resurrection of Jesus all Christians become the "Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16; Rom. 9:6); people "set apart" to function as intended; people who can collectively be called "Israel" because we have fought with God, surrendered to God and been conquered by God, spiritually.

The resurrection gives us an eternal perspective of who the people of Israel really are."

This statement above alone is a massive satainc falsehood.

and Fowler also pontificated:

ESCHATOLOGY. When the resurrection-dynamic of Jesus Christ is misunderstood, then the consideration of "last things" often degenerates into mere speculative "futurism," with their voluminous linear time-lines and charts."

When Christians understand the resurrection, then the consideration of "last things", i.e. eschatology, is not "utopianism." By the resurrection of Jesus Christ, God has established the "last things", the "last days". Jesus Christ is the "first and the last", the "alpha and the omega", the Creator and the End. All that God has designed for man is inaugurated and realized in Jesus Christ, and that by the resurrection.

Flower who is being promoted here on a regular basis espouses a spiritual resurrection with NO physical and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ at all. Thus they promote another jesus, an anti-Christ as 1 John 4 points out.

Julius,
I am saying that if someone believes the mark of the beast is past (or throughout, but already instituted - which again is ridiculous & illogical unless you just can't find a job or feed your family from shopping at the store because of your radical faith Julius - which you did not address?), they must believe the beast (antichrist) of whom the mark is named is past, or allegorize/metaphoricalize & explain away the "son of perdition" & "man of lawlessness" altogether . That is by definition a preterist/historicist position, call it what you want. You can't reconcile all the related passages otherwise (without some serious exegetical errors IMHO). I understand what's inferred and meant by "triumphalism". I would rather guess a more accurate term of that belief is likely "Christo-PLATONIC Triumphalism" whose basis of allegorization/metaphoricalization stems from none other than the cultural Greek Philosophy of Plato, & was carried down and almost worshipped by Augustine (& Origen), & then carried on by Luther & Calvin, & others. I believe in a plain reading of scripture & a Christicentric Cruciform Apocalypticism (since we are getting technical & using all the big Scrabble bonus words 😊). This teaches from the scriptures that it will continue to steadily get much worse on the earth overall UNTIL Christ returns & then it will Get MUCH better when Christ returns. Triumphalism tries to stress that it is better NOW. Well, it is in the sense that the Lord's salvation & spirit is available to us now through the new birth & have a taste/deposit of the kingdom now (but not its fullness which comes when Christ comes and establishes it in its fullness in the earth), but the earth & its inhabitants are & will continue to "wax worse and worse" until Christ returns. And Sorry, but Nero, the early Pope, Titus, Antiochus may very well be classified as part of the league of "many anti-Christ's" John speaks of, but the scriptures are clear in Daniel, Ezekiel, Jesus in the Olivet Discourse, Paul in 1 Thessalonians, John in Revelation, etc. that there is an end time, eschatological, apocalyptic "Son of perdition", "man of lawlessness", beast, Gog of Magog, etc. who leads the "whole world (& I don't think that term must mean every single individual on the planet to include Eskimos, island aborigines, etc. by the way)" astray & captive to his system to trade. To explain away the actual fulfillment of this in one man at the time of the end in the "time of Jacob's trouble" (known as "the great tribulation", "such as there never has been, NOR EVER WILL BE AGAIN") as already fulfilled or some atherial symbolic metaphorical time requires eisogesis & "exegetical gymnastics" (butchering the text, using "ISO-proof texts" out of their greater context, etc.). And I can list a stack of respected commentators & Bible scholars/preachers throughout history who hold to this view that I am a believer of. But I know there are respected men in history who hold to all kinds of eschatology. If you really study & research it & staying to the scriptures (all of them), & context it's hard to believe a lot of it though. And if you research their view closely, where they came up with it, walk down the corridor of the "echo-chamber" of who they read/followed, it "usually" leads you back mainly to Augustine, who was a big time Plato fan. He or Origen, which held views almost one and the same said something like Plato was as close to heaven as you can get without being Christian. As a former Philosophy (Greek) Minor before conversion, I know how ridiculous (& Undiscerning) that statement is. And the rivers of theology that flowed from Augustine down in so many areas (the "fruit of the tree", you know what the tree actually sooner or later actually produces, by which Jesus told us a false teaching can be recognized), was so rotten to the core. This is the well-spring from which so many other theological & doxology/orthopraxy errors stemmed. Including theology that was used to murder millions upon millions as self-proclaimed "instruments of God's judgement" delusionally down through the millinea. This is also the strain of theology, eschatology, hermeneutical approach which explains away plain passages of scripture like Romans 11 with what can only accurately be defined as a borderline gnostic hermeneutic where only "the enlightened ones" even among real born-again, spirit-filled, blood washed believers are "in the know" of the "secret" of "what the scriptures REALLY mean". It's a rotating carousel, but it always points to & rolls back around to this type issue. Besides all that, Julius, as can be routine at times, you still never answered my very simple, very direct question:
If the mark is as you say it is and quote its explanation: are you so "marked" that you are unable to hold down a job & feed your family? Are all the rest of us right now who have jobs & live as faithful witnesses just "compromised harlots" & deluded and don't know it? Are we marked with the mark of the beast with great delusion? And if you say that it just applies to certain parts of the world; what certain part? That's easy - it is the "most" this way in the 10/40 window in the lands described in the scriptures in all of the OT Prophets & Revelation. The nations immediately surrounding Israel (all Islamic majority nations, by the way). So are you saying there is a Judeo-centric eschatology the scriptures are trying to have us see? I know you wouldn't say that (lest the scriptural eschatological emphasis on the restoration of Israel & the Jews be unarguable). Anyways, I would love to hear what the mark of the beast looks like in your life & how you feed your family in this current (according to your view) "time of tribulation such as NEVER WAS, NOR NEVER WILL BE AGAIN"? In this world We have tribulation" for sure in a general, ever-present (always for believers throughout all ages) reality, but that's different then the prophesied "time of Jacob's trouble" when "the man of sin shall be revealed" & "no man can buy or sell save the mark (of the beast)". Far different.
Anyways,
God Bless,
Jeff

Julius,
And please don't feel as though (wrongly if it's the case) that I'm "attacking" you or whatever. I certainly am not. I'm merely explaining issues with the teaching/doctrine you sometimes post or direct people to, & I am asking for you simply an answer a simple question that will help me understand how you see this "Mark of the Beast" playing out, if it is "right now" in our current day, in YOUR LIFE/WALK? That's not an attempt to attack you, nor make you a victim/martyr, I promise. It's merely a disagreement with your position (from history, the scriptures as a whole & logical & consistent application/explanation) & a request for clarification on what that looks like in your life. I think it's a fair question given what you presented, don't you? My desire for a response/answer isn't a "gotcha" set up either, but an honest desire for truth & understanding how you could possibly see specific current examples of this in life on the earth right now, especially yours, since that would be easy to explain since you know you and your life and all the specifics better than anyone else's. If you don't answer (as is sometimes the case), I can only assume it's because you don't have a good answer. That Your own life doesn't fit in the paradigm/timeline you attest to of the mark of the beast already being in place. If you do, it will help me understand how you see that as feasibly & functionally possible. But don't feel attacked or a victim/martyr here please. If you do, it is wrongly assigned/appropriated. I'm simply comparing scripture with scripture (in context) like we are Biblically admonished to do as a Berean & wondering how you could fit into it?
Jeff

watchnpray,

Thank you for your kind remarks and may the Lord bless you in your study of the book of Revelation. It is a fascinating study which is just as relevant today as it was in the Early Church.

Watchnpray,
Thank you for your gracious words (probably most undeserved from me those you kindly said towards me), but I pose the same question to you for thought/consideration/response:

If the mark is already, and always has been, in place NOW, then how are you personally "unable to buy or sell save the mark"? Are you not able to hold down a job and operate at Wal-Mart, local flea/produce markets, the local shopping mall, etc.? In fact, this type situation wasn't even in place in the divided old city of Jerusalem when I went a couple months ago), much less America, anywhere else in the west, it's not so in Nairobi, Kenya, & in fact my dear brother/friend who leads a HUGE network of house churches in The hardest country of persecution in the Middle East & I were emailing back & forth this morning & he is about to go into another ME country to start a new group! But they don't have any mark? And they can go buy and sell just fine? They aren't starving or having to farm & garden to eat (or be fed by sparrows)? You could say that's somehow metaphorically/symbolically true in North Korea, but that's hardly "no man" in "all the world". That's the problem (& danger) IMHO once we start down the road of not reading plain texts as they are and hyper-allegorizing everything in the world. Some things are "allegorical" in scripture and it is usually quite plain and obvious to see (obviously, a real "7-headed beast with 10 horns" isn't going to come up literally out of the midst of the Mediterranean Sea) for a "common sense rational literalism" student of the Word who compares scripture with scripture in context. Eventually, nothing means anything it says almost without "their" interpretation, which is often built on a foundation of a house of cards of ISO-proof text arguments that simple context would explain & show to be false. That's the same way this guy ends up explaining away Romans 11, & undoubtedly many other things. You need "his" special enlightened interpretations to get there. This is how the error of "Pretribukational Dispensationalism" came about and prospered for decades now. So how does the mark manifest its buying and selling control over you and your life at this time? Not persecution (I have had that, almost lost a job but God protected me, lost customers, etc.), but actually "no man can buy or sell save the mark". What does that look like in your life?
God Bless,
Jeff

Many Christians through the centuries have been "marked" by their governments as people not to assist or help in any way.

Those who have not been identified as Christians are able to buy and sell. They don't have the "mark of Christ". Satan's counterfeit is the "mark of the beast".

Even scripture tells Christians to "mark" (identify) certain people.

Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, MARK THEM which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; AND AVOID THEM.

Php 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, AND MARK THEM which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

Part 1 and 2 of "The Mark of God or the Mark of the Beast"

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?lid=12041

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?lid=12042

On what basis? Common sense rational literalism & context. We know a real beast with ten horns isn't rising out of the sea. But was Jesus real or just a metaphor? What about the cross? Or what about a bodily resurrection? Paul dealt with that head on cause the gnostic heresies already arose in his day. We know, I believe, when we just read the Word at face value. Sure, some things are more complex or require more study than others, but what I see very often is taking plain spoken scriptures allegorized & explained away. This is DANGEROUS. So what we must do is look at the WHOLE counsel of scripture, context when we look at passages of scripture, & not leave our brain in the garbage & think we need some "enlightened" interpreters to tell us "what the verse really means" all the time. What about the passages of the mark of the beast in their context make you think it's allegorical? Not only that, but If it's being played out now, what do you with the clear plain passages connected to it about the false prophet and the beast? And then how do you reconcile a "now" timeline of those same actors with Revelation 19-22? Clearly the great white throne judgement isn't allegorical & it follows it immediately. And also, if it's being played out now, what does that look like in your life? And if it's allegorical - for what? Nothing at all? Anything we want to imagine? Everything? This is why I feel it's so dangerous. And these crowds of hyper-allegorizers also violate the plain reading of other texts. Their favorite ones to explain away - like Romans 11. But you can't do that without eisogesis & text/context mutulation.

by docs on 2016/8/21 21:29:19

/Fowler who is being promoted here on a regular basis espouses a spiritual resurrection with NO physical and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ at all. Thus they promote another jesus, an anti-Christ as 1 John 4 points out./

Are there any actual quotes or links that one can look at that have Fowler promoting no bodily resurrection of Jesus?

If there are, I would like to see them otherwise they are just lies and slander.

I think the Pharisee hunters need to go after the Heresy hunters. 😜

Hey Julius,
How's the mark of the beast affecting you?
Jeff

So everyone in Israel is going to hell? I can't really follow you, sorry? Maybe I got lost in there somewhere? It's like when scripture says plainly of the "time of Jacob's trouble", then there shall be "great tribulation, like NEVER WAS, NOR EVER SHALL BE AGAIN", & people say that's already happening and has been for 2,000 years? Say what? And in context of all the mentions of such a time don't fit that "allegorical theory". Or when people say the mark of the beast has been going on for 2,000 years, but it says a time is coming when without the mark "no man can buy or sell" & says if we take the mark & image of the beast, we are cast off, condemned, damned, but it gets relegated to a nations participation in the UN? What? So every man in Israel (messianic believers included) are going to hell because Israel is in the UN? That makes no sense when plugged in to all of the relevant texts & words of the prophets, Jesus, John in Revelation, etc., I'm sorry, but it just doesn't. We see "glimpses" of this in part/piece in the times of Hitler, in N Korea, etc. but nothing wholesale at the end, in a time of unparalleled persecution & tribulation such as never has been or ever will be again. I'm sure people thought that with Nero. But then there was Hitler. And Stalin. Etc. But in a full reading & reconciliation of all related scriptures, there must be an end-times eschatological apocalyptic final actual fulfillment greater and wider in scope than all of these. Otherwise, the scriptures contradict. And that's just obviously not the case. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you're trying to convey?

Honestly,
Roger, I think I just totally got lost in what you were trying to convey. Probably me? 😊
God Bless,
Jeff

Brotbers just a thought. There are some who dismiss outright the idea that the mark is a computer chip. One will be accused of being a prettib conspiracy nut. And then praeterism starts looking pretty good...caution, the last sentence was only meant for humor. :-)

But let's take a look at the world financial system. Let me ask. How many checks have you all written in the last few weeks. You know those paper things you used to have in a box. You would sit down and probably right a check to pay your house mortgage. Maybe another check to pay the utility bill. And then put the amount in a register.

A few years ago I would go through a box of checks about every 4-5 months and have to order another box. Now I'm using the same box of checks for about let's say the last two years. I was pondering this today and wondering when was the last time I actually wrote a check out. And it was about 2 months ago. Give or take.

A lot of my financial transactions are conducted through a debit card. Or through something akin to PayPal. When I use Uber. No cash is exchanged unless I leave a tip for the driver. My debit card on a PayPal type of setup is immediately charged. No cash is exchanged. I do need to remember to put the amount in my register.

I still carry cash for incidentals. But when I go to the store or when I give to missions or engage in other transactions. A lot of my transactions are cashless.

By this time you're probably wondering ho hum. So boring Bear? Why are you bringing this up?

Brethren simply to point out that we are moving toward a cashless society whether we like it or not. Whereas I see it's convenient to not have to carry cash all the time. And it is convenient to use a debit card. Do we not see what this is leading to?

The whole idea of a mark is for control. And that is to control people. Consider the verses that have already been discussed in Revelation 13:16-17,

... and he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and a free man and a slave, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast, or the number of his name...

Look at the above verses again. The beast causes all classes of humanity to take the mark. And I believe this mark is a sign of allegiance to him. But also to no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark. This would mean that no one could engage in normal commercial day-to-day activity unless they had the mark, possibly a computer chip, implanted on them.

Brethren before you dismiss this as right wing paranoia. Consider. How many of you can actually get a job without a social security number? How many of you can actually conduct business without a checking account? How many of you can actually engage in financial transactions such as securing hotel or airline reservations without a debit or credit card? Can I ask how many of your day today transactions are actually cashless?

Already the financial system so the world are linked digitally and electronically. The technology already exists the individuals can be chipped and linked to the world database.

So the idea of the mark being some type of an implanted biochip is not far from the realm of possibility. The technology is there. All that the world is waiting for is the rise of the Antichrist to implement the technology.

Simply my thoughts.

NDY wrote

"You people know nothing at all. The mark already occurred
on July 12 70 A.D. Subsequent events in history are only a
spiritual illusion of what already transpired eons ago.
Therefore when reading prophetic writings in the Bible
remember people that its all spiritual, nothing is real
in the sense of time and space as we know it.
You may be wondering how I am aware of these deep deep truths and I am wondering that as well. "

Unfortunatley this makes more sense than most of the other posts in this thread.

Bear, good points.

How many have birth certificates issued by the state?
How many have bank accounts?
How many have driver's license?
How many have social security numbers?
How many use credit or debit cards?

The mark of the beast just like the mark of Christ is spiritual, not physical. It had been that way for 20 centuries.

Who's your Daddy? You will them know which mark you have.

Rev

This place bears witness to the unfortunate disconnect
that most religionists have with the living God.

Revelation 13:17

and he provides that no one will be able to buy or sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.

Bro I'm aware that the mark has spiritual application. I'm also aware that one who takes this mark is in danger of their immortal soul being cast into the Lake of gire. But if the Mark has been around for 2000 years then how do you explain the above verses.

For that matter anyone holding to a preaterist position how do you explain the above verses that one could not buy or sell unless they had the mark on the back of their right hand or on their forehead.

Also can you please show that if this is spiritual what point of history has one not been able to buy or to sell unless he had a mark on his forehead or on the back of his right hand.

Just some questions.

Brothers can we please hold off on the sarcastic posts. I do not believe that such posts will help in fruitful discussion all the scriptures before us.

Let me say I am not a preaterist. I believe there is a future fulfilment yet in the Book of Revelation. I believe God has put before us these scriptures to warn us of what is about it soon take place. In other words I take a futurist view of Revelation which is actually being fulfilled right now.

Thus if we humble ourselves before the Holy Spirit and try to come together and see what is God telling us in these end times. We need to be aware of what the mark is. So that we are not deceived and taking it.

Send a my thoughts.

In WW II Germany one had to wear the swastika or show the swastika to prove that they were loyal members of the German Nazi party. I would imagine that it would have been pretty hard to conduct business in Germany unless one was seen wearing the Twisted cross.

The higher echelons of the German government were very demonic. Hitler was probably possessed by Satan himself. Or at least by a satanic demon. So even though the swastika was a physical symbol. It definitely had spiritual overtones of allegiance to an antichrist government.

This is what I imagine the chip or the Mark will be in Revelation. Except on a worldwide scale.

Against my thoughts.

2 Timothy 3:16-17

All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for a reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
___________________________________________

Brother the text above says that all scripture IS INSPIRED by God. That means that the scripture speak to us today just as they spoke to those who heard them two thousand years ago.

If scripture is merely a glorified history book where prophecy was fulfilled 2000 years ago than the text would read all scripture WAS IBSPURED by God with no practical meaning for us today.

If you are going to argue that Book of Revelation was fulfilled around 70 AD. Or the Revelation was fulfilled a short time afterwards. Then you are going to have to argue that Jesus has already returned. Brother simply that is faith I do not have.

It would take far more faith for me to embrace a preterist position. Then to simply hold to a future literal fulfillment of Revelation yet to come.

I am aware of what we called dual prophecy. There could be parts of Revelation and other scriptures that were fulfilled in times past. But I believe there is yet a literal fulfillment of Revelation and the signs that Jesus speaks of in the synoptic Gospels that yet point to His soon return.

Again bro simply my thoughts.

As I am pondering these thoughts some questions come to mind. Do praeterist acknowledge the inspiration of scripture? Do praeterist believe that the scriptures speak to us today just as thsy spoke to those who heard the them 2000 years ago? Are praeterists cessationists?

I get the impression that those who hold to praeterism do not acknowledge the role of the Holy Spirit speaking to us today. At least they do not acknowledge that the Holy Spirit can speak to us through the scriptures just as he spoke to those saints who heard the scriptures in the times in which they were written.

To the preterist, the scriptures are nothing more than just a history book that was fulfilled in times past. They do not see the scriptures as being used by God to instruct us in this current time. Certainly they did not see a prophetic relevance in a scripture to us in this present time. At least this is my impression.

Does anybody refused this?

TMK,
A couple of comments:

1.) But the Roman Catholic Inquisition wasn't for hundreds of years after Revelation was penned. So "soon" & "near" Aren't the same to man & to God. Jesus said, "Behold, I am coming soon..." But its been 2,000 years. So either he already came again (as the full preterists falsely believe), or He lied, or His way of viewing "Soon" is different than ours. The men who read Revelation first penned in Asia Minor were not alive when the RCC was fully formed & in full swing in the inquisitions.

2.) and even if that wasn't the case, the scripture has VERY clear statements on the scope & the severity of the time of Jacob's trouble, ie the "great tribulation" being "such as NEVER WAS, NOR EVER AGAIN SHALL BE". But the extermination of Jews (& Christians who hid or helped them) in WW2 FAR EXCEEDED the scope & magnitude of the RCC from 70AD to 170AD (no one who read the words penned who could read lived beyond that according to how you're defining it as "soon" must be in their lifetime). In fact, historians agree most of the deaths of the inquisitions were in the Middle Ages between 606ad & the 1,800's. But in WW2, Jews had to wear "badges" as marks & so were Christians likewise treated who stood with them. These things were but "mini-types" or "mini-fulfillments" or "glimpses" in the same way Nero, Antiochus, Titus, certain murderous popes, Hitler, Stalin, Kim Jong IL, etc. are but the same: "many antichrists", but not "THE Son of Perdition" or "MAN of Lawlessness" (even the historicists and preterists try to Say "THE MAN" = Papacy, when the Greek word for man is singular, as in ONE MAN. All such hermeneutical & entomological gymnastics & magic tricks must by slight of hand twist & allegorize plain passages to hold up the narrative). And I don't say that to be proud or mean, but intellectually honest.

But "so that NO man can buy or sell, save the mark..."

And "great tribulation such as NEVER before was & NEVER AGAIN SHALL BE"

Must be reconciled (along with tons of other prophetic scriptures, the OT Prophets, all of Revelation, etc.)

The only way I can see that all these passages can be reconciled without disregarding any (or butchering/allegorizing where scripture doesn't) is in a Futurist, Apocalyptic, just prior to The Day of the Lord Fulfillment, period. Once you start down the "I think this means..." & totally subjective interpretations are building doctrinal foundations & context & the whole of scripture and all relevant passages, particularly the prophetic ones, it's a slippery slope and it's just a schmorgesborg of opinions only. I don't know what the mark will look like, but I certainly don't see how it's already happened or was past, or is now, given what the scriptures plainly show/tell (All of them, not one isolated).

by bearmaster on 2016/8/22 13:48:25

Revelation 13:17

"and he provides that no one will be able to buy or sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name."

Bro I'm aware that the mark has spiritual application. I'm also aware that one who takes this mark is in danger of their immortal soul being cast into the Lake of fire. But if the Mark has been around for 2000 years then how do you explain the above verses.

For that matter anyone holding to a preaterist position how do you explain the above verses that one could not buy or sell unless they had the mark on the back of their right hand or on their forehead.

Also can you please show that if this is spiritual what point of history has one not been able to buy or to sell unless he had a mark on his forehead or on the back of his right hand.

Just some questions.

Thank you for your thoughtful questions, Bear. By the way, I am not aware of anyone in this discussion who is a Preterist. You don't have to believe in Preterism to understand that the "mark" is spiritual. As a follower of the Persecuted Church, I think these truths will resonate with you.

In the OT the Hebrew children were commanded to mark their door posts with the blood of a lamb. This was a physical mark. Today, we do not mark our foreheads (door to our mind) with physical blood, yet Satan knows who is covered with the blood of Jesus.

Case in point:

Act 19:13 Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.
Act 19:14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.
Act 19:15 And the evil spirit answered and said, JESUS I KNOW, AND PAUL I KNOW; BUT WHO ARE YE?

Evil spirits know who your F(father) is. They recognize their "friends" (evil spirits) in the unsaved and they recognize the Holy Spirit in the saved. Thus, you have people with the "mark of the beast" and the "mark of Christ".

Let's take a look at what else happens to the people who have the "mark of the beast.

When the first angel poured out his vial of God's wrath into the earth, "and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men WHICH HAD THE MARK OF THE BEAST, and upon them which worshipped his image. " (Rev 16:2).

Do you think the "first angel" was confined to looking for a physical mark on men to figure out who God's wrath should fall on? I don't think so. I think the "first angel" knew just as evil spirits know, who belongs to the Lord and who do not belong to the Lord. The boils in Egypt were physical, the "noisome and grievous sore" upon the men WHICH HAD THE MARK OF THE BEAST is a spiritual, ugly cancer inflicted on all religionists that reject Jesus Christ and identify with Satan in idolatrous worship of religion.

The bowl of the second angel is poured out into the sea, whereupon the sea becomes the "blood of a dead man, and every living thing in the sea dies" (16:3). This judgment may have been prefigured by the plague of turning the water into blood (Exod. 7:17-21). As the sea is often portrayed as the reservoir of evil (13:1), this bowl seems to represent the judgment of death that will come upon those operating in the cesspool of religion.

"The third angel poured out his bowl into the rivers and springs of waters, and they became blood" (16:4). This too may have been prefigured by the plague wherein God judged Egypt by "turning their rivers to blood, and from their streams they could not drink" (Ps. 78:44). The "rivers and springs of water" are the sources for the quenching of thirst. Religion offers a false fulfillment of man's God-given need of spiritual thirst, and God will judge those engaged in such fraudulent activity.

This continues with all seven angels. In the OT, it was physical and John is clearly thinking of the plagues in Egypt as he is using them as symbols and types of God's judgment on men in the last days.

Rev 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

Religion proceeds to attempt "to give breath to the image of the beast” (13:15), to make it "come alive,” and invest it with spiritual life and activity, while also making it "speak” (13:15) with pompous pronouncements of piety. Those who "do not worship the imagevof the beast are killed” (13:15). Religion will tolerate no refusal to conform to its tenets. The intolerance of religion is well documented in its destruction and death of nonconformists.

Rev 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

This second beastly form of religion "causes all to be given a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead” (13:16). Conformity of outward identification is important to religion. Religious adherents must be identified by what they do with their "hands” in moral activity and by what they think with their "heads” in an epistemological belief-system. Religion "brands” people so that the whole of society will be "stamped” by their religious adherence and it will "mark” everything they do. This includes the right to economic exchange, for "no one should be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, of the name of the beast or the number of his name” (13:17). Religion creates an in-bred favoritism for conformists who bear the "mark” of the "name” of the beast, perhaps by expressing the diabolic character of the one who energizes religion, for "name” often represents character. The "number of his name” also represents the character of the devil in "self-effort.” Those who do not share the "mark” are stigmatized for economic ostracism and boycott. History adequately records these repressive economic actions of religion, and such can still be seen today in the exclusivistic economic practices of evangelicals with their "sign of the fish” on business cards and advertising.

Thanks for following up on your original question, docs. I think it is fair to inquire (not accuse) about anything but to be fair to Jim, quotes should be provided. It's not fair to falsely accuse someone however, I understand the tactic is employed to make Jim or others seem wacky and keep people from reading any of his or others material. So, it begs the question why someone would try to prevent others from reading James Fowler's material?

Since the accusers cannot provide quotes I will provide quotes that Jim believes not only in the physical resurrection of Christ but the bodily resurrection of Believers, too.

"The concept of resurrection must first be decoded. The resurrection is not just an historical event, not just a theological truth. The resurrection is a living, personal reality in the Person of Jesus Christ. Jesus said, "I AM the resurrection and the life." (John 11:25)

Jesus was indeed raised from the dead historically on that "first day of the week." The theological significance of "life out of death" and eventual bodily resurrection is truly important. The present significance of the resurrection is recognized when Christians understand that the risen Lord Jesus ascended to heaven and the very resurrection-life of Jesus was poured out on Pentecost to dwell in the spirits of Christian people. That spiritual reality, the indwelling of the living Lord Jesus, the dynamic function of His resurrection-life in and through our lives, is the essence of the gospel. Jesus, the "resurrection and the life," is living out His resurrection-life in us, the Christ-life expressed in the Christian."

Resurrection: The Key to Understanding the Gospel
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/reskeygosp.html

I recommended this article by Jim: A Call for Resurrection Theology and the article in the previous post.

"Christian theology has tended to focus on the birth and the death of Jesus, and in so doing has defaulted in explaining the significance of the resurrection."

"On the basis of the historicity of Jesus' resurrection and the theological establishment of His deity, Christian religion has proceeded to emphasize that the primary theological import of the historical resurrection of Jesus is to validate the assurance of the eventual resurrection of Christians' bodies in the future. The historical, physical resurrection of Jesus is used as the foundational basis for authenticating the expected bodily resurrection of the Christian after death.

Is this not the argument that Paul uses in I Corinthians 15 in the "Resurrection chapter"? Yes it is, but this is not the entirety of what Paul had to say about the subject of resurrection. Though it is the most extended passage that he seems to have written on the subject, it is not the predominant or primary emphasis that Paul makes concerning the resurrection. The historical sitz im leben context of I Corinthians was that the Corinthians were so enamored with their present "spirituality" that they were eschewing or denying anything beyond the present. To counter this triumphalistic diminishment of hope, and to correct Hellenic concepts that deprecated embodiment, Paul ties the bodily resurrection of Jesus with the expected bodily resurrection of Christians.

In so doing, Paul does not necessarily imply that the resurrected physical body of Jesus is prototypical of the resurrected body of the Christian after death. The physicality of the resurrected body is not the issue Paul was addressing.

Secondly, it must be noted that the predominance of Paul's references to the resurrection of Jesus do not relate to the future bodily resurrection of Christians. Paul's primary inference from the resurrection of Jesus is that anyone who is receptive in faith to the living Lord Jesus can be spiritually raised to newness of life (cf. Rom. 6:4,5) by the resurrection life of the living Jesus. Paul emphasized the present availability of life in Christ, and avoided lapsing back into the Jewish framework of theology that he had espoused in the past.

Jewish theology was always a theology of future expectation. As can be noted throughout the Old Testament (the old covenant literature), the Jewish people were always looking for fulfillment in the future; the prophetic promise of that which was yet to come. Regrettably, Christian theology has often fallen prey to just such future expectations in a reversion to a Jewish paradigm of theological expectations.

New covenant Christian theology, as expressed in the New Testament, emphasizes that God's promises and man's expectations are realized in Jesus Christ. Christian theology looks back to the "finished work" of Jesus Christ (cf. John 17:4; 19:30). Christians are "complete in Christ" (Col. 3:10). Christian theology is a realized theology (cf. I Cor 3:21-23; II Pet. 1:3). The emphasis is not on "it is coming," but on "it is done!" for the whole of God's intent is in the risen and living Lord Jesus.

The emphases of Christian religion on resurrection have traditionally been on proving the historical accuracy of Jesus' resurrection in order to authenticate His divinity, which in turn has been used to convince and assure Christians of an eventual bodily resurrection after physical death.

If Christian theology does not get beyond the cradle and the cross, the birth and the death of Jesus, then all we have to offer is a static history lesson with no contemporary consequence. If Christian theology does not get beyond apologetic defense for what "was", and longing expectation for what "will be," then it becomes an irrelevancy of temporalized "bookends" that fails to address what "is" and "should be" presently.

H.A. Williams explains that,

"Resurrection, at least in Western Christendom, has invariably been described as belonging to another time and place. The typical emphasis has been upon the past and future ­ a past and future with which our connection can only be theoretical... So, for example, a book about the resurrection is naturally assumed to be a discussion either about what can be held to have happened in the environs of Jerusalem and Galilee on the third day after Jesus was crucified or about what can be held to be in store for us after our own death.
When resurrection is considered in terms of past and future, it is robbed of its impact on the present. That is why for most of the time resurrection means little to us. It is remote and isolated."
It is a neat trick...this banishing of resurrection to past and future. It saves us from a lot of reality and delivers us from a great deal of fear. It has, in short, the advantage of safeguarding us from life."10

What a tragedy that the Christian religion has itself blockaded people from life in Christ by projecting the implications of the resurrection to an historical event of the past or to an anticipated expectation of the future. These are not the predominant emphases of resurrection in the new covenant literature of the New Testament as we shall proceed to note."

A Call for Resurrection Theology
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/restheol.html

And to clarify what I meant in the other thread & here. I could actually possibly see allowing for the Mark to be SPIRITUAL (non-visible) - I know that may surprise you 😊 - but I see the "NO MAN can buy or sell save the mark" as being pretty cut and dry & exclusive where it can't just mean some people in small numbers at various times in various environments. That's like when people explain away the time of Jacob's trouble (the great tribulation) when it says a time "such as never was not ever will be). Can't do that based on context and reconciling all the texts in a hermeneutically responsible way. I see it both as LITERAL, but on the MARK, not NECESSARILY that it must be PHYSICAL. Make sense?

Oh yes Fowler is a grade A heretic. He absolutely denys the physical and literal
resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ in the same sense that genuine Christians believe and the Word of God teaches,
Fowlers god is a singular spirit being. There is no separate person of the Godhead called the Holy Spirit for him in his twisted perversion of God. There is no God the Father either for him, Read between the lines, The second person of the trinity, the Holy Spirit does not exist for him. He does not have a resurrected physical Jesus in heaven, just a new being that he calls jesus that was resurrected spiritually and dwells in believers, This is a subtle and satanic perversion of the gospel.

The real Jesus Christ is presently in his own human glorified body. He is not the Holy Spirit . Fowler has no Holy Spirit in his twisted views

Dohzman,
Good thoughts and thanks for sharing and being so open. I didn't say I agreed with Julius, but that I was at least open as a stretch that maybe the mark could be spiritual, but the "no man" means what it says & the "Son of perdition", ie "MAN of lawlessness" does to.

And I have had similar forth telling dreams as well as have other brothers and sisters I know closely in fellowship. I know God does this. I have seen it. In others & in me. I would tell you some more of similar ones I have had here, but I won't for now.

God Bless,
Jeff

Read the rubbish quoted by Julius below again to see what this heretic is really saying. Please read it carefully.

"H.A. Williams explains that,

"Resurrection, at least in Western Christendom, has invariably been described as belonging to another time and place. The typical emphasis has been upon the past and future ­ a past and future with which our connection can only be theoretical...

He goes on to lie:

"So, for example, a book about the resurrection is naturally assumed to be a discussion either about what can be held to have happened in the environs of Jerusalem and Galilee on the third day after Jesus was crucified or about what can be held to be in store for us after our own death.
When resurrection is considered in terms of past and future, it is robbed of its impact on the present. That is why for most of the time resurrection means little to us.

It is remote and isolated."
It is a neat trick...this banishing of resurrection to past and future. It saves us from a lot of reality and delivers us from a great deal of fear. It has, in short, the advantage of safeguarding us from life."

********What a tragedy that the Christian religion has itself blockaded people from life in Christ by projecting the implications of the resurrection to an historical event of the past or to an anticipated expectation of the future. These are not the predominant emphases of resurrection in the new covenant literature of the New Testament as we shall proceed to note."*********

_____________________________

According the these writers the resurrection of Jesus was not a time and space event. And so it was of no importance anyway because it was purely a spiritual resurrection in nature and not a historical, physical material event anyway.

Of course the ressurection DID OCCUR IN ANOTHER TIME AND physical PLACE and our present connection to it is of eternal consequences. It absolutely reaps eternal blessings to believers. No Theory here whatsoever. If Jesus was not raised physically and literally from the dead then we have no hope, But he was and so the connection is of utmost importance unlike the heretic states above.

How was Daniel "marked" for the Lions Den?

How was Meshach, Shadrach and Abednego "marked" for the fiery furnace?

Daniel would not worship the Beast and became a marked man set for destruction.
Dan 6:13 Then answered they and said before the king, That Daniel, which is of the children of the captivity of Judah, regardeth not thee, O king, nor the decree that thou hast signed, but maketh his petition three times a day.

Same with Meshach, Shadrach and Abednego. They were "marked" as those who would not bow down and worship the beast of religion.

Dan 3:14 Nebuchadnezzar spake and said unto them, Is it true, O Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, do not ye serve my gods, nor worship the golden image which I have set up?

You don't need a physical mark to refuse to bow down to Satan's religious system. And believe me, they know how to identify (mark) you. How would a physical mark keep you from using PayPal or online banking? It wouldn't. A physical mark in only useful when exchanging money with a person. So, it is certainly not a physical mark as many people today purchase online.

This is the way it has always been. Our foreheads represent the mind of Christ and our right hand represents who we employ our energies for. (Members of righteousness or unrighteousness). Satan wants our minds and hands (members) to be marked (employed) for his kingdom. We have many examples of godly people in the Old and New Testament, marked for destruction because they did not bow down and worship the Beast. It is the same today. How do you think Satan knows who to persecute in North Korea, Asia, South America, Arab lands, Europe and the U.S? People don't have a physical mark, they have the mark of Christ on them as they will not compromise and bow down to the Beast.

Is everyone forgetting all of the imagery in Revelation that cannot possibly be physical? Does no one spend time studying the history of the Christian Church? Has everyone forgotten we fight a spiritual battle against a spiritual enemy?

In our time, Christians are being "marked" and either killed or having all their possessions confiscated. "Mark" means to IDENTIFY those who are Christians.

Baghdad: 70 per cent of Christian homes illegally seized
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/baghdad.70.per.cent.of.christian.homes.illegally.seized/55902.htm

What the Apostle John saw happening in the Spirit, has been happening in all generations.

More examples:

"Greed for money went even further. The clergy began to excommunicate the neighborhood of the man who had been originally excommunicated; this with the specific objective of seizing the properties concerned.

The anathemas, interdicts, and excommunications employed by popes, cardinals, bishops, and minor clergy, for motives of the basest avarice became so frequent, so wide-spread and so scandalous that many genuinely religious individuals, no less than lay authorities, began openly to revolt against the abuse.

The scandal was not confined to any limited period or country. It became universal, and it lasted for centuries.

Indeed, with the passing of time the greed for worldly riches ultimately permeated the whole system to such an extent that the cry of the Diet of Nuremberg, uttered in 1522, expressed the anguish of countless individuals throughout Christendom:

"Multitudes of Christians are driven to desperation whenever their properties are confiscated, thus causing the utter destruction of their bodies no less than their souls." The Verdict of the Diet of Nuremberg was not a gross exaggeration. It was a most accurate assessment of the Roman Church's insatiable thirst for the riches of this world.

In addition to the oblations, tithes, and mortuaries, there were other means by which to replenish the Church's treasuries with individual sizeable amounts - from the heretics.

The Inquisition was very precise about it. Listen to Diana.

In his 43rd Resolution he put the question:
"Are the possessions of heretics turned over to the Inquisitors?

"I speak not, " answers Diana, "for other countries, but the Spanish custom is to confiscate to the royal treasury (fisco regio) all the possession of heretics (omnia bona haereticorum) because our King, who is a pillar of orthodoxy (columna fidel), generously supplies the Inquisitors and their agents with whatever the Holy Office requires." (Inquistitoribus et eorum ministris abunde suppeditat quidquid necessarium est ad conservationem sanctae Inquisionis.) Thanks to this principle, the Church could obtain vast estates or substantial wealth when prosperous individuals were, as happened often, accused of heresy and condemned - sometimes in collusion with the temporal authorities.

Witness, for instance, the case of Philip II (1556-98). Two-thirds of the income of the Inquisition went to him, the rest of the Roman Catholic institution. Further to the Inquisition were the weapons of interdiction and excommunication. These were used with increasing frequency to compel the faithful to pay under practically any pretext.

Thus, for example, church and temporal powers would often used the Inquisition. Witness Regent Blache of Castille, who in 1228 issued an edict addressed to the authorities of Nimes and Narbonne, directing that the excommunicated who remained for a whole year should be forced to seek absolution by the seizure of their property. To quicken the process, a fine of ten livres was exacted on all those excommunicated who had not entered the church within forty days.

To make money, the clergy - as already mentioned - forced the faithful to purchase escapes from excommunication. Their threats often related to the most trivial matters .

For instance, at vintage time the tithers time the tithers forbade, under pain of excommunication, the gathering of gathering of grapes until they could choose the best, so that very often the peasants, owing to frequent delays, saw the ruin of their crops.

But one of the grossest abuses of excommunication was that perpetrated by bishops and even by hierarchs who began to excommunicate the neighbors of the originally excommunicated person, the result being that when finally the family of the latter was exiled in his whole property confiscated, dozens of others, his neighbors, were placed under the same ban and hence the same penalties that is their properties could be, and as a rule were, in new , and as our role in new and NC same penalties; that is, their properties could be, and as a rule were, confiscated.

The excommunications employed by the popes down to the lowest priests , the motives of the basest avarice, became so frequent and scandalous that many individuals and temporal authorities, including numerous genuinely devout persons, complained bitterly about them. Owing to such abuses, multitudes were driven to desperation, as the Diet of Nuremberg stated in 1522.

The immense wealth thus collected finally reached such proportions that her economic stranglehold upon all and sundry was no less massive than her spiritual dominion, and almost paralyzed whole countries.

The authorities, lay or ecclesiastical, were compelled under pain of excommunication, "to seize all the heretic's property, good, lands and chattels, to arrest him and throw him into prison."(1)

Pope Innocent III issued specific instructions concerning this. The Corpus Juris, the official law book of the Papacy, gave details:
"The possessions of heretics are to be confiscated. In the Church's territories they are to go to the Church's treasury". (2)

This papal injunction was carried out everywhere the Roman Catholic Institution ruled.

Thus, for instance following the edict to the authorities of Nimes and Narbonne, in 1228, Blache of Castille ordered that any person who had been excommunicated, "shall be forced to seek absolution by the seizure of all his property." (3)

This order became so general that, in a collection of laws known as the Etablissement, it is commanded that royal officers, whenever summoned by the bishops, shall seize both the accused and his property. (4)"

The Vatican Billions
2,000 Years of Wealth Accumulation from Caesar to the Space Age
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatican/vatican_billions.htm

Really cannot take NotDarkYet and RevEnue seriously as they purposely obfiscate and take out of context Fowler's writings. They never provided quotes and are perverting my quotes. They are found out and squirming as they cannot bring themselves to admit that Jim does not deny the bodily resurrection of Christ.

They miss the point as to what James Fowler was saying. He does not deny the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ or Believers, but goes on to say that the Resurrection Life of Jesus Christ in Believers daily is not emphasized as Paul teaches it should be emphasized.

Read the entire articles in context and don't depend on NDY and Enue's purposeful biased rantings and ravings and falsifications.

A Call for Resurrection Theology
Christian theology has tended to focus on the birth and the death of Jesus, and in so doing has defaulted in explaining the significance of the resurrection.
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/restheol.html

Christianity is Resurrection
Declaring Himself to be "the resurrection and the life" (Jn. 11:25), Jesus indicated that the continuing reality of His presence was by His risen and resurrected life.
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/xnty=res.html

The Living Reality of the Resurrection
An Easter sermon that points out that the resurrection is more than just an historical miracle or a theological explanation, but must be understood as a living reality.
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/livingrealityres.html

Julius,
I get the "marked" imagery throughout scripture. But please Don't waste time with the "has nobody read the scriptures" hyperbole stuff. But what is described in Revelation is much more descript & specific than Daniel, those in Ezekiel who God told the Angel to mark their foreheads, etc. And it still doesn't reconcile with the prophesy as a whole & all the rested scriptures of the beast, the false prophet (who are thrown into hell by Jesus, so they are specific individuals clearly), etc. And if it's not applicable that "NO MAN may buy or sell", either God's Word isn't true, or your allegorical interpretation is lacking (& off).

Hi Dohzman,

I certainly don't consider this a debate but rather a sharing of ideas and thoughts. Iron sharpens iron. I do appreciate your thoughts and spirit too, and am presently working through some of your questions. :-)

Getting late and I am going to turn in.

Blessings to you, brother.

Correct, it's the same argument against a still future literal 1,000 year millineaum & Satan's future binding in Revelation 19-20. Everything before it and after it create a clear timeline, it's obvious to anyone who just plainly reads it in context, & the only reply from the hyper-allegorization crowd is "I don't understand all of Revelation. It's full of dragons & symbols." Even though the immediate context of Revelation 17-22 says nothing about any of that? It speaks plainly of Satan, Jesus, the false prophet, the abyss, the lake of fire, the great white throne judgement & Day of the Lord, the new heavens and new earth, etc. When people don't want to take contextual rational literalism verses at plain reading, that's how it gets avoided & "explained away". And with all of those in that crowd, if you hang in there, they are really getting back around with that hermeneutic to Romans 11 & explaining why it doesn't mean what it says. Without fail all in those camps/circles are going for that in particular. Israel. They always do. I have to wonder, "why is that? Mere coincidence?" That's like saying the fact that Israel, the Jews, & Jerusalem take on century after century after century of unexplainable, irrational, illogical rage is just mere coincidence cause Israel means ZERO anymore. No, no that's not the case aT all. I think the hyper-allegorization on plain texts mode is actually propagated & defended to the death for that very reason. To question the prophetic faithfulness of God. Not always necessarily consciencely or maliciously necessarily, if even subconsciencely or in ignorance, but I can't make these clear repeated connections (from Augustine, to Origen, to Luther, to Calvin, to Phillip Mauro, to NT Wright, to Stephen Sizer, to James Fowler, to you name the hyper-allegorizer). It's too consistent and illogical I think to be totally coincidental or random.

Dohzman,

Before I turn in, I wanted to post Jim's commentary on Rev 13. I can't say I agree with everything but much of it makes a lot of spiritual sense to me. He titles this section "The Beasts". As always, I would be interested in your thoughts.

The Beasts
The ongoing conflict of the dragon and the Christian offspring of the woman is illustrated when John sees the devil standing on "the sand of the seashore," and "a beast coming up out of the sea" (13:1). The sea is often represented as a great reservoir of evil from which monsters arise in symbolic imagery. Satan recognizes that he is going to have to take a different approach and employ a different ploy in the spiritual battle against God. He attempts to establish a beach-head by employing the technique of "religion." There is no greater "beast" than religion! It is a real monster! Previously referred to as killing the Christian "witnesses" (11:7), the beast from the reservoir of evil is now represented as "having ten horns," a parody of complete power or authority, "and seven heads," a presumption of perfect wisdom. "On his horns were ten diadems," a pretense of full royal regency and a parody of Jesus who is "King of Kings" (19:16). Religion has certainly engaged in the presumption of royal power and perfect knowledge. On the heads of the beast were "blasphemous names" whereby it misrepresented itself as God. Religion loves to put "titles" on all its "heads," calling them "Holy Father," "Righteous One," "Most Honorable," and "Reverend," among others.

The beast is described with characteristics of different animals (13:2), similar to the "four beasts" who are likened to animals in Daniel 7:2-7. One must beware of the deceiving leopard spots of religion, the strong and surly bearishness, and the lion-like mouth that would kill and devour. John has already referred to the religious tendency of Balaam (2:14) which "devours man." It is further explained that "the dragon has given to the beast his power and his throne and great authority" (13;2). The beast of religion drives its authority and empowering from Satan, "the ruler of this world" (John 12:31; 14:20; 16:11), "the god of this world" (II Cor. 4:4), who had the audacity to offer Jesus some of his authority when he tempted Him in the wilderness (Luke 4:6).

On one of the heads of the beast was a "fatal wound, as if it had been slain and was healed" (13:3). Religion constantly portrays itself as a "victim" of unfair persecution. They develop a "martyr-complex" which complains that "everybody is out to get us." In this case it appears that the beast of religion is attempting to parody the death and resurrection of Jesus. The phrase used to describe the beast "as if slain" is the same Greek verb construction used to describe the Lamb in 5:6. The preterist interpreters who seek to find a counterpart in the first century point to the suicide of Nero on June 9, 68 A.D. and the subsequent myth of his resurrection, which is known as the Nero redivivus legend, but it is not necessary to find a particular historical event to fulfill the symbol since this diminishes the transgenerational and translocational application of the Revelation.

"The whole earth was amazed and followed after the beast" (13:4). "The whole world lies in the Evil One" (I John 5:19). Religion is man's natural propensity. In their devotion to man-made religion, mankind is really "worshipping the dragon." In parody of God's people exclaiming, "Who is like Thee, O Lord?" (Exod. 15:11), sinful men extol satanic religion, saying, "Who is like the beast, and who is able to wage war with him?" (13:4). Natural men are awed by and convinced of the invincible power of religion, and are willing to worship such taking no account of its evil character.

The beast of religion "speaks arrogant words and blasphemies against God" (13:5,6). Paul explained that the "man of lawlessness, the son of destruction, opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object or worship, displaying himself as being God" (II Thess. 2:3,4). Religion continues to arrogantly proclaim that it speaks for God, making moral pronouncements and political directives that are contrary to the ways of God. The religious beast "blasphemes God's name and His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven" (13:6). Religion cannot tolerate the character of God nor the tabernacling of the presence of God within Christian people in like manner as God tabernacled in Jesus when "the Word became flesh" (John 1:14). This is why religion constantly misrepresents and berates the indwelling presence of Jesus in Christians.

Genuine Christianity, the life of Jesus Christ functioning in Christians, is always in conflict with religion, which "makes war with the saints to overcome them" (13:7). "Saints" are Christians, "holy ones" in whom the Holy One, Jesus Christ, lives. Religion always seeks to "overcome" Christians, to "conquer" them. The Greek word used in this verse is nike, which we have noted previously in reference to the Nicolaitans (2:6,15) and the rider of the white horse who "went out conquering and to conquer" (6:2).

As "the whole world lies in the Evil One" (I John 5:19), they will all worship the beast (13:8) of religion, except for the Christians "whose names have been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain" (13:8). By the foreknowledge of God the names of Christians have been entered in the heavenly register of those who have eternal life in Jesus Christ. Presently these Christians must be discerning and faithful. "If any one has an ear, let him hear" (13:9), just as the risen Lord Jesus told the seven churches, representing all Christians. Part of Christian discernment is the realization that the demonic warfare and the deception is but for a limited duration. The beast of religion has "authority to act for only forty-two months" (13:5), a divinely limited time which will not last forever. This prompts the "perseverance and faith of the saints" (13:10) in order to "abide under" the painful present circumstances by being receptive to the divine indwelling activity of the Savior.

On the other hand, those "gathered together for captivity, to captivity they will go, and those who kill with the sword, with the sword they must be killed" (13:10). This is similar to the language of God threatening His judgment on Israel and Egypt through His prophet Jeremiah (Jere. 15:2; 43:11). Religion "gathers people together" for captivity. In fact, religion is the greatest of captivities as it captivates men's thinking and behavior and "binds them up" in rules, regulations and rituals. The etymological root of the word "religion" is the Latin word religo meaning "to bind up." The risen Lord Jesus declares that religionists who captivate others will be captives forever in hell. During His earthly ministry Jesus said that those who "live by the sword, will be killed by the sword" (Matt. 26:52). Religion has certainly been marked by militaristic warfare, "living by the sword" as they fight for their cause celebre of moral or doctrinal correctness. They will be killed in like manner as they have killed.

Sensing his ineffectiveness in seducing Christians by the general "beast of religion," Satan sees the need to become even more deceptive by presenting another form of the beast. "From the earth," out of his world-system, Satan brings forth "another beast" (13:11) who is in the form of a counterfeit lamb. Some have attempted to link the two beasts with the ancient legend of the two beasts, Leviathan from the sea and Behemoth from the earth. Others have suggested a diabolic trinity of evil in the dragon, the sea-beast and the earth-beast, representing the devil, the world and the flesh. Tri-unity is to be reserved as an attribute of God alone; never to be attributed to evil. These suggestions are questionable and without much merit. The symbols seem to point to another form of the beast of religion, who will later be identified with "the false prophet" of religion in 16:13; 19:20 and 20:10.

This second form of the beast is described as having "two horns like a lamb" (13:11). This is an obvious attempt to portray itself as Christ-like. It is a satanic subterfuge to parody the Lamb, Jesus Christ. Religion often seeks to project itself as Christ or His representative. Jesus said, "Beware of the false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing" (Matt. 7:15), while Paul mentioned those religionists who "disguise themselves as apostles of Christ or servants of righteousness" (II Cor. 11:13-15).

As this second form of the beast of religion is somewhat re-formed to better deceive Christians, some might want to identify the first beast as Roman Catholic religion and the second beast as Protestant religion from the Reformation. In this case some will identify the "two horns" of authority either as Luther and Calvin, or perhaps as Calvin and Arminius. It is best, however, to avoid such attempts at precise historical and personal identification, and to simply recognize the deceitful attempts of religion to parody the reality of Jesus.

Disguised as a lamb, this second beast of religion belies his disguise, for "he spoke as a dragon" (13:11). His voice is that of the one who activates all religion, the devil. This is a "dragon in sheep's clothing." The authority of this second beast (13:12) is also derived from Satan (13:4) with the intent of causing men to worship Satan through religion.

The second beast "performs great signs and deceives people by those signs" (13:13,14). It is indicative of religion to attempt to justify its power by manifestations of miraculous "signs and wonders." Moses explained to Israel that "if a prophet or dreamer arises giving you a sign or wonder, saying, 'Let us go after other gods,' do not listen to the words of that prophet, for the Lord your God is testing you." (Deut. 13:1-3). Throughout the earthly ministry of Jesus the religionists were constantly asking Jesus to "show them a sign" (Matt. 16:1), and Jesus explained that they should seek Him "not because they saw signs" (John 4:48; 6:26). In like manner as this second beast, Paul refers to "the lawless one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders" (II Thess. 2:9). Religion employs the deception of the diabolic deceiver by deceiving men with alleged "supernatural signs" supposedly attributable to God, but really derived from the power of Satan. Many have been duped into believing in religion because having seen a supernatural manifestation of the miraculous, they concluded it was God at work, when it was actually the devil. The beast of religion "even makes fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the presence of men" (13:13). This is a parody of Pentecost. Religion will try to counterfeit every supernatural expression of Christianity with false Pentecostal "signs" and pseudo-charismatic gifts.

The idolatrous intent of religion is evidenced as the second beast tells people "to make an image to the beast" (13:14). The Greek word for "image" is eikon from which we get the English word "icon." Religion specializes in making external and idolatrous "graven images." Unable to accept that "Christ is the image of God" (Col. 1:15; II Cor. 4:4), and that God desires that His divine character be visibly expressed in the behavior of man, religion instead seeks to construct an external visible expression. These may take the form of tangible likenesses of creatures or men as well as religious buildings, or they may be intangible constructs of belief-systems and morality, or the ecclesiastical organizations of institutional religion. Idols all the same! Religion proceeds to attempt "to give breath to the image of the beast" (13:15), to make it "come alive," and invest it with spiritual life and activity, while also making it "speak" (13:15) with pompous pronouncements of piety. Those who "do not worship the image of the beast are killed" (13:15). Religion will tolerate no refusal to conform to its tenets. The intolerance of religion is well documented in its destruction and death of nonconformists.

This second beastly form of religion "causes all to be given a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead" (13:16). Conformity of outward identification is important to religion. Religious adherents must be identified by what they do with their "hands" in moral activity and by what they think with their "heads" in an epistemological belief-system. Religion "brands" people so that the whole of society will be "stamped" by their religious adherence and it will "mark" everything they do. This includes the right to economic exchange, for "no one should be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, of the name of the beast or the number of his name" (13:17). Religion creates an in-bred favoritism for conformists who bear the "mark" of the "name" of the beast, perhaps by expressing the diabolic character of the one who energizes religion, for "name" often represents character. The "number of his name" also represents the character of the devil in "self-effort." Those who do not share the "mark" are stigmatized for economic ostracism and boycott. History adequately records these repressive economic actions of religion, and such can still be seen today in the exclusivistic economic practices of evangelicals with their "sign of the fish" on business cards and advertising.

Christians constantly need the wisdom of Christ (I Cor. 1:24,30) to discern Satan's activity from Christ's activity, to distinguish between religion and genuine Christianity. "Here is wisdom," declares the risen Lord Jesus. "Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six" (13:18). Throughout the Revelation numbers have symbolic significance. Seven is the number of divine perfection, and if the number seven were triplicated as seven hundred and seventy-seven it would represent the triune perfection of the Godhead. The number six falls short of that which is of God. Man certainly falls short of that which is of God and brings glory to God (Rom. 3:23). Six hundred and sixty-six is a number that comes short of perfection. It is a parody on the divine trinity of perfection represented by seven hundred and seventy-seven. It is a number that represents the beast of religion, which though inspired and energized by the self-oriented, rebellious activity of Satan, is evidenced by man's self-effort to appease and please God apart from Jesus Christ. Religion is man's best efforts to construct moral systems and theological formulations and institutional structures. It is the best that man can do as he tries to reach God, just as he did at Babel (Gen. 11:1-9).

The "number of the beast" is explicitly identified as "the number of man" (13:18). Many translations and interpretations of this text supply an indefinite article which indicates that the number of the beast is "a man." The original Greek language of the Revelation has no indefinite article, and proper hermeneutic principles allow us to supply such in English translation only if the context demands such for clarity of expression. Such is not the case in this instance. When the indefinite article is supplied it gives the impression that the second beast is to be identified as a singular and particular individual man. This has led to much religious obsession with decoding the cryptographic number of "six hundred and sixty-six" in order to identify a particular person. Speculations have included Nero, Caligula, other Roman emperors, Mohammed, various Roman Catholic popes, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, various United States presidents, leaders of Russia, etc. The numbers can arbitrarily and subjectively be twisted in order to apply to anyone! When such a procedure is employed the primary emphasis of the vision is missed. There is no need to identify this number as a particular historical individual. When the indefinite article is not supplied, a consistent contextual meaning is evident as the "number of the beast" is explained to be the "number of man" or the "number of mankind" as he engages in religious endeavors. Those who would demand a translation and interpretation that supplies the indefinite article identifying the number of the beast as "a man," must also allow the Jehovah's Witnesses to do the same in their translation of John 1:1, wherein they indicate that the Word was "a god." Few Christian religionists would want to allow such, but equity of translation technique would demand such.

I want to later address this article (good Lord that was long! 😊), & where I believe he clearly overshoots the text, adds in presumptive interpretations ("no prophecy is of any private interpretation"), lumps things in together the scriptures do not, & IMHO creates an almost gnostic (& just be honest, a common "cult-ish") hermeneutical tactic. I know false religion is a sneaky vessel used of satan that appeals to the "religious itch every man has" (as ARt Katz once put it), & isn't the life of Christ described in the scriptures of repentance, faith, being born again, & the in dwelling life of the Spirit of God that is indicative of a believer's walk/life & identity in Christ. But when someone goes this far ("do not go beyond what is written", "if anyone adds to the words of the book of this prophecy - *ie the book of ThenRevelation of Jesus Christ, my added* - I will add to him the plagues described therein" - so it's an admonition straight from Jesus that one should take cautionary heed of in proceeding to "presume to be a teacher" concerning), and over-allegorized everything, doesn't use the interpret scripture with scripture with the Hermeneutical principle of the Law of First use (how are these things first used &/or consistently explained in scripture if symbolic?), & creates an environment in his writing where everyone but he and a class of a few "just like him" separatists in his own group (theologically) who have his interpretive hermeneutic are "the real Christians". I know there are a likely large, if not majority, of "false believers" ("Tares" as Jesus described them in His parable) especially in the western church. I get it. I was one before I truly got supernaturally Born Again at 23. However, when you apply everything he is "interpreting" for his readers here as he is, I believe he is running the risk of violating the scriptures which say "do not go beyond what is written", "do not add or take away from the words of this book of prophecy" & "do not pull up the Tares before the the of the harvest lest you also uproot some wheat with it. At the end of the age the angel will come at the harvest time & thrust in the sickle" & Jesus will separate the sheep from the goats. I know clear apostate Christianity must be called out (& Paul tells us throughout the epistles how to identify them and the works of the flesh for which those who are marked by them as a consistent pattern of life throughout are not to even be eaten with for the sake of the church as in 1 Corinthians, the doctrines of Devils, etc.), but the going beyond that at times creates an almost "cultish" separatists even from the real (& sometimes weak, immature, struggling, Biblically ignorant, etc.) true believers. The monastic separatists ("heretic" is one with false doctrine interpretations who "draws away & divides disciples after themselves") who create an allegorical interpretive hermeneutic where you need their interpretation (with not a lot of scriptural support to back their opinions & fanciful eisogesis) are something to be very careful of. This was the primary characteristic of the Gnostics that even Paul (& Jude, & others) were addressing in the epistles right from the beginning. "Grievous wolves not sparing the flock" that Paul said he knew "as soon as I leave" they would "creep in unawares". I'm not sniffing for heretics in some unhealthy "seeing heretics everywhere" kinda way either. I'm not saying this guy IS A HERETIC, so please don't shape what I have and haven't said that way, but I'm saying some of his hermeneutic approach, speculations, & statements caution me of that ilk. I will try to get around to addressing them one by one later (since the article is so incredibly long and there are so many examples in it of what I am talking about).

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/8/23 9:56:37

I want to later address this article (good Lord that was long! 😊), & where I believe he clearly overshoots the text, adds in presumptive interpretations ("no prophecy is of any private interpretation"), lumps things in together the scriptures do not, & IMHO creates an almost gnostic (& just be honest, a common "cult-ish") hermeneutical tactic. I know false religion is a sneaky vessel used of satan that appeals to the "religious itch every man has" (as Art Katz once put it), & isn't the life of Christ described in the scriptures of repentance, faith, being born again, & the in dwelling life of the Spirit of God that is indicative of a believer's walk/life & identity in Christ. But when someone goes this far ("do not go beyond what is written", "if anyone adds to the words of the book of this prophecy - *ie the book of The Revelation of Jesus Christ, my added* - I will add to him the plagues described therein" - so it's an admonition straight from Jesus that one should take cautionary heed of in proceeding to "presume to be a teacher" concerning), and over-allegorized everything, doesn't use the interpret scripture with scripture with the Hermeneutical principle of the Law of First use (how are these things first used &/or consistently explained in scripture if symbolic?), & creates an environment in his writing where everyone but he and a class of a few "just like him" separatists in his own group (theologically) who have his interpretive hermeneutic are "the real Christians". I know there are a likely large, if not majority, of "false believers" ("Tares" as Jesus described them in His parable) especially in the western church. I get it. I was one before I truly got supernaturally Born Again at 23. However, when you apply everything he is "interpreting" for his readers here as he is, I believe he is running the risk of violating the scriptures which say "do not go beyond what is written", "do not add or take away from the words of this book of prophecy" & "do not pull up the Tares before the the of the harvest lest you also uproot some wheat with it. At the end of the age the angel will come at the harvest time & thrust in the sickle" & Jesus will separate the sheep from the goats. I know clear apostate Christianity must be called out (& Paul tells us throughout the epistles how to identify them and the works of the flesh for which those who are marked by them as a consistent pattern of life throughout are not to even be eaten with for the sake of the church as in 1 Corinthians, the doctrines of Devils, etc.), but the going beyond that at times creates an almost "cultish" separatists even from the real (& sometimes weak, immature, struggling, Biblically ignorant, etc.) true believers. The monastic separatists ("heretic" is one with false doctrine interpretations who "draws away & divides disciples after themselves") who create an allegorical interpretive hermeneutic where you need their interpretation (with not a lot of scriptural support to back their opinions & fanciful eisogesis) are something to be very careful of. This was the primary characteristic of the Gnostics that even Paul (& Jude, & others) were addressing in the epistles right from the beginning. "Grievous wolves not sparing the flock" that Paul said he knew "as soon as I leave" they would "creep in unawares". I'm not sniffing for heretics in some unhealthy "seeing heretics everywhere" kinda way either. I'm not saying this guy IS A HERETIC, so please don't shape what I have and haven't said that way, but I'm saying some of his hermeneutic approach, speculations, & statements caution me of that ilk. I will try to get around to addressing them one by one later (since the article is so incredibly long and there are so many examples in it of what I am talking about).

Jeff,

I don't see any real effort on your part to hold a conversation. There is absolutely nothing in your post that is addressing a specific statement. Most of your replies don't warrant a reply. Have you not noticed in most of your posts where you disagree with something or someone, you will editorialize with a slew of slanderous statements which is simply a backdoor way of sliming someone without addressing anything specific the person has said or written. I don't think it is only evident to me and unfortunately no one has been kind enough to bring this to your attention.

And then you always close your postulations with, "I'm not saying this guy IS A HERETIC", or something to that effect.

Let's me list some of the words you use:
ilk
gnostic
cultish
separatists
plagues
add to or take away
go beyond what is written
heretic
draw away and divide
fanciful eisogesis

You friend, are simply a conversation killer and this is an example of why myself and maybe others find it difficult to exchange thoughts with you.

You gave me absolutely nothing to respond to. You do realize that what you said could also be said by someone about your beliefs.

Julius,
I told you upfront I would address all of the Dozens upon dozens of specific errors in the "article" (large excerpt from a book) you posted later but shared my thoughts (this is a forum. I am still free to do that, even I disagree with you Julius, am I not?). And the most funny/ironic thing is:

1.) you said my post didn't warrant a reply, but you wrote a whole reply on how my post didn't warrant a reply? 😳

2.) You accuse me of things I didn't do/say as I just merely stated what's clear to me.

3.) when I do pose real, scriptural, step by step objections/problems with your views (like the timeline of Satan being bound now not fitting the rest of the events of Revelation 17-22, like how the mark is affecting your buying and selling, like how if these allegorical spiritual (non)timelines are the correct interpretation scripture can be true when it says "never before was nor ever again will be, etc., etc. - I could give dozens of examples over the last several months) - you simply don't provide a response/answer (because you know it's problematic & you don't have a good answer without conjecture or more books from the "enlightened" teachers you consistently promote on here. And "coincidentally" they ALL have serious explaining away doctrines concerning Israel & if unchecked, you bring the merry go back around to that (subtly, in due time). It's a repeat scenario.

So with all due respect friend, don't slander me by accusing me of slander, not answer a million obvious questions from scripture & just ignore the posts asking the tough (for your views) questions and then jump on the one post where I said I'd have to get back to all the errors in it (cause it was a LONG post and there are MANY IMHO). If you don't ever want to answer the simple straightforward questions from scripture & common sense rational real world application I ask EVER, & then attempt to jump on me because I use accurate words that describe what these type "special revelations" type "teachers" always have (not from scripture, but their own "enlightened" conjecture) then everyone here can also see that as well friend.

No Holy Spirit for Jim Fowler....er Julius.

This is Julius

Information About Jim Fowler

Jim Fowler has been a pastor at the Neighborhood Church in Fallbrook, California for the last twenty-three years. His wife, Gracie, and their five children, Philip, Charis, Kirsten, Sarah and Sandi have been very supportive in Jim's teaching, preaching and writing ministries.

Jim's educational background includes Manhattan Christian College, Friends University, New College-University of Edinburgh, Bethel Theological Seminary, Palomar College, and Jubilee Theological Institute.

In recent years Jim has spent much of his time writing, as can be viewed within the resources of this site. He is currently researching and writing several other articles and books.

Jim has travelled extensively in his teaching ministry throughout the United States and in other countries such as India, Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand, England, Canada, Germany, Kenya, and the Philippines. He remains available for teaching ministry. Feel free to contact him at jimfowler@christinyou.net

And I can back my beliefs by scripture & responsible hermeneutics. The allegorical/theoretical/conjectured beliefs you tend to espouse on here can't be "proven" by anyone. They are generally mere conjecture. That's what most of Fowler's "interpretations" were. I could & can prove these things from scripture, but it takes a lot of time because you aren't "searching the scriptures" & sharing what you find and can prove from the scriptures. You are often cut and pasting small books worth of "the enlightened" teachers who have "private interpretations" and it takes a college class semester worth of time to unpack & explain all the errors from scripture. Not trying to be hard either friend, just honest. You bring some of the stranger teachings to the forum & that's what concerns me. Not for me or even for you (you won't choose by experience to admit/see things even in plain text refutes it. When it's obvious, you act like you don't even see it, move on, refuse to reply from scripture, and resurface with something similar later). This isn't even about you or me being right. I think it's about a clear "agenda" to "presume to teach" here on the forum with every kind of strange teacher & "enlightened doctrine" (that is what I mean by borderline gnostic & a practice of the cult-ish, & I think people generally understand that). Everyone who won't take scripture at face value and needs a "special revelation" from their teaching is a promotable friend of yours. And, by mere coincidence or because they are enlightened, you will say, they all just so happen to explain away Israel & clear, plain texts. That is a WELL-DOCUMENTABLE pattern. And I think it is an issue. One of "spiritual arrogance" which Paul addresses in the mystery of Israel & the Gentile church in Romans 11. But I know you will disagree, & I'm ok with that. It's the masses of people on here for which I happen to know you have an agenda to reach wig this message "when the time is right" that I see as a problem. So, I keep bringing scripture and you keep not answering. Until I post 1 time and say I will address ALL THE MANY ERRORS from scripture later & you respond IMMEDIATELY & jump all over my post and me. That's fine. I have no ill in my heart towards you friend, God as my witness. But I think you have an agenda on here & you often propagate strange, unorthodox, and dare I say borderline gnostic teachings/teachers. I will not hold back that truth. I believe it. I have your pattern track record. I have other proof of this you don't even know I have, & I have what I believe is clear confirmation from the Lord. So my concern is not win an argument or malign you, but for the sheep of the fold for which it is your purpose that you should convince.

Jeff

I understood this way back also as well as a few others on this forum.
And yet he is allowed to continue to propagate his serious anti-christ heresies here almost unabated. Baffling to say the least.

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/8/23 11:41:38

1.) you said my post didn't warrant a reply, but you wrote a whole reply on how my post didn't warrant a reply? 😳

My post was for the express purposes of showing you something you are obviously unaware of or refuse to consider.

2.) You accuse me of things I didn't do/say as I just merely stated what's clear to me.

No accusation or slander, that comes from you and your friends and that is also contained in many of your posts. I have given you only the truth which is in many of your posts to me. I have sat by and read them and watched how you slime what others say or use "guilt by association", lumping them in with other names of people not even being addressed in the thread. You editorialize with random, besmirching thoughts, "flapping your wings" and "wringing your hands", never addressing specific things. I have neither the time nor energy to show you all of your own posts. If you were interested you would amend how you post (and how you think). But, it is clear from this reply to me that you are not interested.

You mean like how you say,

"You and your friends..."

Is that the type guilt by association, flapping your wings and sliming you mean?

Interesting how you addressed those two things I said, but not the third/other one which is why you never answer the plain, clear, pure scriptural objections?

Like how satan can be bound when that doesn't fit the obvious timeline of Rev 17-22, like how the mark is affecting YOUR life in buying and selling?, like how it's all going on through tiny pockets throughout 2,000 years can be the actual "fulfillment" of these verses when the scriptures can't be reconciled with that & it plainly says "SUCH AS NEVER WAS, NOR EVER AGAIN SHALL BE.." (Which if it was for the last 2,000 years, that would make NO SENSE, because we know it won't exist after the Day of the Lord), etc.? Plain simple pure scripture questions, but you ignore and NEVER address them. Kinda reminds me of how you called all the Pre-Mil believers to be of a "false gospel, false Christ, false salvation..." But NEVER owned that either. And this guy is similarly marking out a cult-ish extra biblical interpretation of who is "really in" & who is just "religious and deceived" (seemingly everyone who disagrees with him/you). This is my concern. Secret, enlightened, extra biblical knowledge proponents. Those were ALWAYS historically called Gnostics, Heretics, etc. Make me out to be a slanderer for saying that if you want. If that's true, I'm in good company with Paul, Jude & the apostles in the epistles and early church.

To make things clearer to you...

Julius,
I told you upfront I would address all of the Dozens upon dozens of specific errors in the "article" (large excerpt from a book) you posted later but shared my thoughts (this is a forum.

Yes. You lob your "hand grenade" first then say you will come back and address specifics.

Best that we avoid each other, don't you think? I don't want to argue. Just looking to exchange ideas with others, but your remarks have a mean streak in them. Peace to you, I just think we are incompatible in the forum universe.

From your posts:

"To make things clearer to you" (clear intellectual condescension)

"You lob your hand grenades" (mischaracterization with subtle slander)

"You and your friends.." (Lumping me in with people I am not even joining arms with & making me guilty by association like you accuse me of)

"you slander..." (Accusation)

"Your problem is..." (Proud accusation)

"You have a mean streak..." (Accusation)

So you don't answer any of my plain questions from scripture, make accusations & statements like above, & then tell me "I have a mean streak"? Really?

All me, huh?

Maybe you want to avoid me because I actually object to your postings and teachings and you don't/can't answer the objections from scripture? My problem again isn't with you Julius. It's with the teachers, teaching & strange doctrines you tend to post on this public forum. As long as I am on this public forum & you post public unorthodox (or at the very least questionable) teachings, I am going to ask you public questions on how to defend those stances from scripture & how you reconcile it with the context & other relevant passages in the Word on the subject. If you choose not to answer those questions and attack me personally (ironically, what you're accusing me of? 😳), that's your prerogative & choice. But at least everyone can see you don't/can't answer the scriptural doctrinal challenges and resort to ignoring my questions or attacking me, & that shows there may be a problem with the fruit if the tree is that way & you can't answer simple, contextual, historical Biblical challenges to your position.

by docs on 2016/8/22 16:39:19

Where are any quotes or links showing Jim Fowler believes in a spiritual non bodily resurrection of Christ? It was openly stated he believes that yet what I have read seems just the opposite. If you label someone a heretic at least a bit of proof might be offered it seems.

Jim Fowler is Julius and is a grade a heretic based on his writings.
What is he purpose here?

He denies most orthodox Christian truths and invents his own
interpretations, rejecting the tri·une God, the person and work of the Holy Spirit, and promotes a jesus who is a spirit only. And a whole lot more.

So whey give him space in this place?

And I also find it ironic that you would post

"You just have a mean streak.." & you won't answer me anymore (when you already don't answer the direct, soft, gentle, purely scriptural questions or to explain what you said in light of specific passages of scripture or context, & so "you just won't be able to post me anymore", especially when you're Fowler post goes on about how "religionists play the victim and the marytyr" & whatnot? All Strangely ironic to me friend, honestly.

Thanks, dohzman,

And docs, just a friendly reminder to let me know what scriptures you are using for the 4th Beast.

Julius,
Would you receive it better & respond if I said:

"Thanks Julius. And just a friendly reminder to please answer my questions on Revelation 17-22, tell me how the mark of the beast is affecting you & your ability to buy and sell personally, & let me
Know what scriptures you use to reconcile "never has or ever again will be" as past, present & future events throughout the last 2,000 years?

Just trying to figure out how not to be wrongly perceived as "mean" by you & actually have an exchange with you based on the scriptures? So I just used your exact words to others so it can't possibly be considered mean. Honestly.

Again, I think the mark is "literal", but not 100% convinced it's "physical". But the "no man can buy or sell save the mark" is the part that seems to leave no room for anything vastly different than what it says, & no reason to believe from scripture it means something other than what it says. I'm not even 100% certain the AC's dominion will be "worldwide" (as in, I'm not sure people on an island in the pacific will be bound by it), but it will be Jerusalem, then Israel, then Middle East - centric) st, & then 10/40 window, then out from there. I don't think his dominion MUST be ABSOLUTE in terms of "Globally". Overall yes, specifically necessarily from scripture? No, not necessarily.

docs

Can you point out one time Julius/Jim Fowler points out the PERSON of the Holy Spirit as described by the scriptures, the second person of the Trinity?

Does Julius/Jim Fowler ever distinguish the work of Holy Spirit at all from that of his jesus?

Can you point out one time when Julius/Jim Fowler points out the Father
as the Father and not Jesus in different form?

Can you point out once when Juluis/ Jim Fowler describes Jesus being currently
in the flesh with body and bone inhabiting a physical and literal place?

NDY said:

"JIm Fowler is Julius and is a grade a heretic based on his writings.
What is he purpose here?

He denies most orthodox Christian truths and invents his own
interpretations, rejecting the tri·une God, the person and work of the Holy Spirit, and promotes a jesus who is a spirit only. And a whole lot more.

So whey give him space in this place?"

good question.

by Rev__Enue on 2016/8/23 20:54:17

docs

Can you point out one time Julius/Jim Fowler points out the PERSON of the Holy Spirit as described by the scriptures, the second person of the Trinity?

Does Julius/Jim Fowler ever distinguish the work of Holy Spirit at all from that of his jesus?

Can you point out one time when Julius/Jim Fowler points out the Father
as the Father and not Jesus in different form?

Can you point out once when Juluis/ Jim Fowler describes Jesus being currently
in the flesh with body and bone inhabiting a physical and literal place?

Answering a question with a question. Basically, they have been caught in the trap they thought they laid for others.

Julius why do you not use your real name Jim Fowler in this forum?

Do you deny that is your name because that would be lying and all liars
will have their place in the literal lake of fire.

And Jim tell us without using weasel words:

1) Can you point out one time you point out the PERSON of the Holy Spirit as described by the scriptures, the second person of the Trinity?

Do you Julius/Jim Fowler ever distinguish the work of Holy Spirit at all from that of your jesus?
/
Can you point out one time when you Julius/Jim Fowler points out the Father
as the Father and not Jesus in different form and NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT either ?

Can you point out once when you describe Jesus being currently
in the flesh with body and bone inhabiting a physical and literal place?

by Rev__Enue on 2016/8/23 20:57:44

NDY said:

So whey give him space in this place?"

Oh contraire. The question is why have you and NDY been allowed to spread false things about people without evidence and with impunity? This is what we all want to know.

Watchnpray has your number, Enue and NDY.

by watchnpray on 2016/8/23 20:23:35

Notdarkyet: You already categorized yourself, on this very thread, as comic-relief on the forum, and were applauded by a select audience. Are we to take anything you say hereafter as anything other than a clown’s routine, or the ramblings of a madman? (See below.)

But you even seem to enjoy caricaturing yourself, as per another thread:

"Bear/Blaine
Haven't you red my version of the Bible, the RTNV? (Replacement Theological Nonsense Version) jesus already returned in 70 AD and we were all raptured by then. Even those of us who were not born yet. So your question is redundant. Right now we are in the invisible kingdom age with jesus reigning invisibly on his invisible throne from the invisible Jerusalem having been invisibly raptured ..... er strike that part about Jerusalem please.”

Now, let me feed you back some more of your own words, with a final evaluation unquestionably more valid than anything I could come up with:

"Lighten up Greg, was just kidding. Or is humor not allowed here? (as you can see,my whole post was rather ludicrous. And the worse part is some people will actually believe it)” Your words.

But:

"Like a maniac shooting\tflaming arrows of death is one who deceives their neighbor and says, ‘I was only joking!’” The Holy Bible (Prov. 26:18-19).

As you can see, the Word foresaw your type over 2700 years ago, but is as timely as ever.

(And for those who celebrate your folly, there is a choice Woe! for them in Isaiah 5:20.) That is all.

If you think I am James Fowler, I consider that a compliment, Revenue. Are you NDY? That's not a compliment.

Anyway, enough jibber jabber with you.

You and NDY never add anything positive or edifying to any conversation.

Jeff stated to Julius aka Jim Fowler:

And I can back my beliefs by scripture & responsible hermeneutics.

The allegorical/theoretical/conjectured beliefs you tend to espouse on here can't be "proven" by anyone. They are generally mere conjecture. That's what most of Fowler's "interpretations" were.

I could & can prove these things from scripture, but it takes a lot of time because you aren't "searching the scriptures" & sharing what you find and can prove from the
scriptures.

You are often cut and pasting small books worth of "the enlightened" teachers who have "private interpretations" and it takes a college class semester worth of time to unpack & explain all the errors from scripture. Not trying to be hard either friend, just honest.

******You bring some of the stranger teachings to the forum & that's what concerns me. Not for me or even for you (you won't choose by experience to admit/see things even in plain text refutes it. When it's obvious, you act like you don't even see it, move on, refuse to reply from scripture, and resurface with something similar later). This isn't even about you or me being right. I think it's about a clear "agenda" to "presume to teach" here on the forum with every kind of strange teacher & "enlightened doctrine" (that is what I mean by borderline gnostic & a practice of the cult-ish,*******

& I think people generally understand that). Everyone who won't take scripture at face value and needs a "special revelation" from their teaching is a promotable friend of yours.

And, by mere coincidence or because they are enlightened, you will say, they all just so happen to explain away Israel & clear, plain texts. That is a WELL-DOCUMENTABLE pattern. And I think it is an issue. One of "spiritual arrogance" which Paul addresses in the mystery of Israel & the Gentile church in Romans 11.

But I know you will disagree, & I'm ok with that. It's the masses of people on here for which I happen to know you have an agenda to reach wig this message "when the time is right" that I see as a problem.

So, I keep bringing scripture and you keep not answering. Until I post 1 time and say I will address ALL THE MANY ERRORS from scripture later & you respond IMMEDIATELY & jump all over my post and me. That's fine. I

******** But I think you have an agenda on here & you often propagate strange, unorthodox, and dare I say borderline gnostic teachings/teachers.**********

I will not hold back that truth. I believe it. I have your pattern track record. I have other proof of this you don't even know I have, & I have what I believe is clear confirmation from the Lord. So my concern is not win an argument or malign you, but for the sheep of the fold for which it is your purpose that you should convince."

Good stuff Jeff and absolutley true. Jim has an agenda and it is not pretty.

Yawn...

I knew you guys (jeff, NDY) were friends.

Docs

If you have the Holy Spirit in you (And perhaps you do) as quite a few of the brethren here do, good and sound men and women of faith and character they do bear witness to what we have stated about this person. You would not require us to tell you what this person is up to.
Maybe you should pray to the Lord yourself rather than believe us . You obviously don't. No matter, its true and his wicked schemes will continue to be exposed.

This man is a heretic and is damaging influence.

It's only 6:33 PM where you are Jim. Stay awake a little longer, you need your rest.

Dear brother Greg and other moderators, please do not merely lock this thread. Its time to clear this forum of the trouble makers if you want it to retain any shred of credibility. Message me for a list of names, but honestly just read this abomination of a thread and it is clear who they are. I am grieved by the way you allow these guys to carry on, I can only imagine how the Lord feels! Seriously!

No its no compliment Jim. Why do you not use your real name instead of using Julius? What are you hiding Jim? (other than false doctrine)

Look,
I don't agree with much of what is said (or how it is said/handled) on both sides of the aisle on this - I want to be upfront & forthright about that. And I want to avoid speculation, sarcasm, arrogance, division (divisiveness for the sake of it), strife, name calling, victim/martyr-role playing, accusation, slander, etc. I get accused of these things, but I go back and re-read my posts & don't see it. I may disagree strongly with someone's teachings and not hold back on that, especially if I discern an error & an alarm bell for the young lambs reading, but I am not attempting to do the things I have been accused by Julius of doing (accusations, slander, etc.) all the while often these things being done to me in the very process. I am not "teaming up with my friends" either. I agree with Docs & will say right upfront that I think some of those who agree with me theologically actually hurt the conversation, & do harm to the fair reading & weighing of the scriptures on the matter. I have serious concerns about long patterns of certain teachers being promoted on here. I do not hide that. Some of them approach the scriptures a lot like the Gnostics of old. I don't have a problem saying that. But I am not siding with "mean-streak"s & don't appreciate the accusation. I said what I said in the post just quoted from me & I stand behind it. But it wasn't said in a mean spirit. I don't think a Shephard is "mean" when he grabs the staff when he thinks he might here a wolf or even a coyote or even possibly a fox a ways off. If he's wrong, he'll be glad he was when it comes close enough INTO THE LIGHT & shows it easel to be a harmless animal. But if it's a predator, he'll be ready. Why? Because he's "mean"? No. Because he loves and cares for the sheep, especially the smallest and most vulnerable among the flock. Anyways, I'm out. This is gone way off in to never never land because some people refuse to stick with the scriptures & dive off into making accusations (while calling others accusers) & playing the victim, & looking to their favorite teachers instead of explaining the scriptures. And one last thing: if when presenting a new teacher/doctrine/teaching & then confronted with some questions from the scriptures on how to reconcile the two someone simply said: "I don't know?" It would command respect for the humility and honesty of just admitting it. When it gets intentionally repeatedly avoided, it makes the case for a weak defense/case HUGE. Otherwise, why the hiding & avoidance (until an pouty unity comes along that looks "easy" to jump on and mischaracterize. Crazy

The problem brother Jeff and I really do see that you have a good heart, is that you are unwilling to receive correction. Maybe it was because it was coming from Julius but if brother Greg had brought these things to your attention you probably would have received them. Maybe in private. I don't know. Getting told to sit down in a public setting is a very humbling thing. I have had it done to me and it makes my blood boil a little. Just shows me how full of pride I am. I think Julius could be right about some of the things he said about you. But you are completely unwilling to accept any of it. You even said that you have gone over all the things you have written and you "can't see it". Of course you can't, which is why it is so wonderful to have brothers who love us and are willing to stick their necks out to help us see what we cannot see about ourselves because of our blind spots. On the other hand I appreciate your desire to stand up for what is right and to dig your heels in and fight for the truth. But its the way you do it that is hard to handle sometimes. I appreciate you brother and I am sure in face to face conversation we would get along like a house on fire:-) Much love to you Jeff!

Julius,
"I knew you guys (Jeff & NDY) were friends"

Look, you have not been treated nicely by a couple on here, but to lump me in because I disagree with you (& half or more of the the teachers/teachings you push on SI) and just ask you to own/admit things & answer simple questions about specific passages is disingenuous & dishonest. I don't know NDY & Rev any more than you do. You are playing the victim/martyr again & trying to throw me under the bus in the process. I'm a grown man who loves Christ. I will admit when I am wrong & I will tell you the truth straight up. Your games & avoidances & resurfacing of strange doctrines on here is concerning to me. I said it. Because I mean it. Not hiding or playing coy, or playing the victim, or concealing my real intent for being on the forum, or giving you a false name, or anything else. I'm being straight up with you friend.

Thanks Mark,
I would receive it (or try to). I know I can be direct. And face to face people are not offended at me. But I don't believe Julius' intent is to help or love me. Sorry, I don't. I have a host of reasons for that. I am not perfect, yes I know that & admit it. When someone won't answer a simple question asked about scriptures, avoids it, comes back around and resurfaces it through other avenues & then accuses me of slander & a whole list of unfounded accusations - yes, it bothers me. I accept your admonition friend.
God Bless,
Jeff

With all this fighting here I admonish all involved to check your hearts and ask yourself if you really love your brother? Do you? Really? If not then you are not born of God and no matter how much you are upset over your differences with another person, your real problem is that you do not carry the nature of Christ within you. If you do not love your brother then I pray you will repent of your sin and turn to God for mercy.

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/8/23 21:52:52

Julius,
"I knew you guys (Jeff & NDY) were friends"

Look, you have not been treated nicely by a couple on here, but to lump me in because I disagree with you (& half or more of the the teachers/teachings you push on SI) and just ask you to own/admit things & answer simple questions about specific passages is disingenuous & dishonest. I don't know NDY & Rev any more than you do.

Jeff,

I sincerely apologize for lumping you in with NDY and Enue. I should not have taken their word for it as their word is highly suspect and it is a terrible thing to be associated with them. Please accept my apologies.

Apology (truly from the heart) accepted, & you are forgiven.

Thank you,
Jeff

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/8/23 21:57:22

Thanks Mark,
I would receive it (or try to). I know I can be direct. And face to face people are not offended at me. But I don't believe Julius' intent is to help or love me.

Jeff,

I have absolutely nothing against you (or Enue and NDY for that matter). I just think we might need a vacation from one another in the forum world for a time. I am sure you are a sweet brother in person but probably live too far away from me. By the way, Jim Fowler lives in California, I believe. I live in Texas. :-)

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/8/23 22:06:53

Apology (truly from the heart) accepted, & you are forgiven.

Thank you,
Jeff

That's wonderful. Thanks! I just posted we might need a vacation, but I am willing to keep trying to work through different topics with you in brotherly love. I truly don't care about debate, but love the exchange of ideas, thoughts and revelation that the Lord has given us. I appreciate your heart and wish you a blessed night.

Jeff

I admit I am not nice to those that satan uses to harm the body of Christ. Must pray first, type later if so led. Responding to the damaging false doctrines that false brethren bring forth designed to harm the body of Christ must be responded to by praying first. I do not always do that. For that I apologize to you and the Christians who have read my posts when written in anger,

I do not apologize for stating that what this individual writes and posts here is serious, damaging and destructive heresy however., unabated and unchallenged unfortunately for the greater part.

Philippians 4: 6 states: Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.

My wife told me that this place is not a church and she is certainly correct.
Some people trying to coerce their so called spiritual superiority one over another, keyboard religionists as our good buddy N calls them . Actually that is just like most churches when you think of it except for the keyboards.

I have never before witnessed such a disgusting attack on a brother in Christ as this, and respect to Julius for his behaviour throughout it. Even if he were a heretic, which he is not, the behaviour of Rev and NDY in particular has been loathsome and disturbing.

Let's hope that some justice will be performed on this forum.

Rev said:

"I do not apologize for stating that what this individual writes and posts here is serious, damaging and destructive heresy however., unabated and unchallenged unfortunately for the greater part."

True word. As you said to forrests, expect opposition.
Especially from the religion types void of the Holy Spirit.

Satan is a specific person. Why can't Rev. 13:16 be Satan?

He is behind everything that is opposed to God. Why are we making it one human being? All human beings that are not in Christ, are being ruled by Satan.

The "mark" of Satan, is the mark of godlessness and everyone that is opposed to Christ including this one human being that you are attributing Rev. 13:16, to. Human beings are not our enemies. Our enemies are powers and principalities and spiritual wickedness in high places. Many are teaching to watch out for this One particular evil man that will arise when we have had multiples of evil men through the centuries all energized and operating out of Satan's spirit. Are we not opening up the Christian church to a great deception?

The "mark" of God on an individual is known by the powers of darkness as I illustrated with the story of the sons of Sceva.

Isn't the king of the false, counterfeit religious system, Satan? He counterfeits everything of God, and hides behind men. His greatest weapon is deception and hiding behind men and systems which are made up of men energized and operating out of their father from below.

Adolf Hitler, Po Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Joseph Stalin, Isaias Afwerki, the 3 Kims of N. Korea, Nero, Diacletian, and countless other wicked people werd all influenced or possesed by Satan.

So why not an acual person who will be possessed by the devil to rule the workd as the Antichrist.

If God uses men and women to accompmush His purposes will the devil do any differently.

Traditionally Christianity has understood the Antichrist to be an actual person who will be possessed by the devil and oppose Christ.

My thoughts.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4New American Standard Bible (NASB)

3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the [a]apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above [b]every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God
____________________________________________

Paul is writing about an actual person above. Look at the language he uses...Man of lawlessness... son of destruction. Paul uses adjectives to describe this person as...he...himself.

This is a hard stretch of the text to get allegory or spiritual out of this. Clearly Paul is talking about a literal person who will be the Antichrist.

So in light of this discussion if we're talking about an actual physical person for the AC. Why not an actual physical marks such as a computer chip or tattoo or something to show one's allegiance to the Antichrist?

My thoughts.

by RogerB on 2016/8/24 12:27:48

Buying and selling is the issue.
You can't do either unless you compromise your values and convert to their way of thinking. The people in Venezuela have trouble buying or selling right now. Imagine a scenario like that. Sounds like the food issue will be huge. Perhaps control of the food is what will happen. I've seen that discussed before. Food and medicine can be used as a weapon.

You are on to something there, Roger. Have you heard of the Codex Alimentarius?

Population Control under the Guise of Consumer Protection
http://www.naturalnews.com/024128_CODEX_food_health.html

by bearmaster on 2016/8/24 12:40:58

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4New American Standard Bible (NASB)

3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the [a]apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above [b]every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God

You see, I think John in using all of his spiritual imagery understands the counterfeits of Satan and is using Judas, the son of perdition as a typology for Satan's counterfeit "New Man", his body of "believers". That is why John's revelation is absolutely pertinent and relevant to all generations since Christ ascended as the "body of Satan", the synagogue of Satan.

Rev 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

He is not a figurative analogy but real people that persecute real people. However, John is using "son of perdition" to speak of Satan's congregation. Remember, it is always the children of the flesh which persecute the children of the spirit.

Gal 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

It has always been about many people persecuting many other people. One satanic body persecuting the Godly Body of Christ. Why should anything change to one specific human being?

John is always drawing comparisons between the True Church and False Church, True Believers and False Believers and knows that the spirit of antichrist has never and will never be about one man. It is about all those who are in Satan's grip and especially those who have religious power and influence and control over people. And these people exist in government and religious circles where power and control are condensed.

It has never been about one man through the centuries and it won't (in my mind) be about one human being prior to Christ's coming, either. Makes for good movies, but not spiritually realistic in my mind.

The reason I believe Satan is trying to get the Christian Church to believe it is all about one (boogey) man, is because it furthers his work regarding ecumenicalism by taking the focus off of his world-wide false body/religious system. And this includes those in the Christian religious system who like Judas, seem to be close to Jesus yet are only rendering lip service. He wants us to accept his "body of believers" into our lives.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4New American Standard Bible (NASB)

3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the [a]apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above [b]every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God
_____________________________________________

Julius a simple reading of the text above out of Thessalonians will show that Paul is talking about a person. He is not talking about a spiritual force and he is not talking about allegory. He is talking about the Antichrist.

Who else is going to be taking a seat in the temple of God displaying himself as being our God? Who else is going to oppose and exalt himself above everything that is god displaying himself as being god. It is a person who is the Antichrist. Possessed by Satan. But it will be an actual person.

By the way the New American Standard translation uses the term son of destruction. Not son of perdition. The NASB is more accurate translation.

Simply my thoughts.

All very well stated Docs. The devil knows when these fulfillments come to a head, the promises will be fulfilled and his time will be short & then up. And he even came up with his own counterfeits like Islam where he is worshipped "like the most high" & then calls into question as the over-allegorization theologies tend to do, the very words & promises of God. It is, I believe (whether intentionally or naively in ignorance) a principality & power tactic assaulting God at His Word & doing exactly what satan did to Eve in the Garden: "Did God really say?....you will not die....for God knows the day that you eat of this fruit, your eyes will be opened..." Subtle & yet deceptive. And it enters through, I believe, most often the gateway of intellectual &/or spiritual pride/arrogance. Paul actually deals with this and speaks of it (& warns STERNLY against it) in Romans 11, "I do not want you to be ignorant concerning this mystery...do not be arrogant and boast against the branches...or you too could be cut off..." It begins I believe, as all good theology & error-avoidance does, in the Word & the receiving of it being in a low, humble, weak posture of the heart to truly have ears to hear, & that not to just "hear" as we say to hear audibly, but to truly hear. To "Schma, O Israel", where the prophets & Jesus clearly used language which connected mere audible hearing & being in a place to hear & receive & then jointly to DO & act accordingly. Trust me, the Prince of Persia, the powers of the air & principalities, & satan himself know what's ahead & is coming, & their assault on that land, that people, & the church as a whole all show this quite clearly. Would to God that we as the Body of Messiah worldwide would turn off the voices of those actually being influenced by he voice of satan (it can happen to real believers just as it did to Peter when Jesus told him "get behind me satan, for you have not in mind the things of God, but the things of man") through the same theology & spirit that drove men like Augustine, Luther, etc. that's now driving (at least influencing, I believe) those of the preterist position & the total Israel replacement theology & the whole idea that now the AC, the FP, Israel, Jerusalem, etc. are all metaphorically explained away with smooth analogies. The faithfulness & the sovereign election of God & His name, Word & reputation are in this matter & He will rule, reign & show Himself mighty, strong & TOTALLY trustworthy & faithful to complete all His Word so that not one jot or tittle falls to the ground unfulfilled. Context usually helps counter many of these ISO-proof text hyper-allegorizations, but I also am convinced a humble heart that goes to the Lord & prays with an open honesty for the Lord to show them if Romans 11 means what it says or not (& other passages) or if these enlightened ("for God knows then your eyes will be opened....") teachers' stories and inventions are true or not. "For no prophecy is of any private interpretation...men of God of old were moved by the Holy Spirit..."). Intellectual humility before God, I believe, will help the honest discerning seeker in this. I think Language Paul used in Romans 11 makes that (& the dangers against not coming from that place) clear. Crystal.

by bearmaster on 2016/8/24 14:59:33

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4New American Standard Bible (NASB)

3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the [a]apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above [b]every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God
_____________________________________________

Julius a simple reading of the text above out of Thessalonians will show that Paul is talking about a person. He is not talking about a spiritual force and he is not talking about allegory. He is talking about the Antichrist.

Who else is going to be taking a seat in the temple of God displaying himself as being our God? Who else is going to oppose and exalt himself above everything that is god displaying himself as being god. It is a person who is the Antichrist. Possessed by Satan. But it will be an actual person.

By the way the New American Standard translation uses the term son of destruction. Not son of perdition. The NASB is more accurate translation.

Simply my thoughts.

docs,

I respect the fact that you cannot receive anything that you don't believe God has revealed to you, and I am the same way. In fact, no one in this forum should receive anything unless the Holy Spirit confirms it in their spirit.

As I compare "spiritual things with spiritual things", and seek to understand all the counterfeits of Satan, I can't help but believe for now what I believe and of course I am always asking the Lord for more light.

One thing that has helped me arrive at my current belief is studying the persecuted church through the centuries and also realizing that the teaching of a single end times antichrist man seems to have come about via the church of Rome.

Thanks docs.

I'm sure though that the view that Israel was replaced and the church is the "new Israel" came largely through the Roman Catholic Church. Basically if you believe the church is the "new Israel" you are espousing Catholic doctrine. 

Now thats a topic Jim/Julius and you can really bite into eh? Just like old times.

by Notdarkyet on 2016/8/24 19:31:39

Now thats a topic Jim/Julius and you can really bite into eh? Just like old times.

I'm sure we would love to continue. Is it possible for you to control yourself while we do that?

by Tozsu on 2016/8/24 19:28:01

If you had a tree in your backyard and you would call it "My Favorite Tree", you water it and take care of it and love it. And one day you would break out some old branches that did not bear fruit and graft in some new branches, would you say that you REPLACED your tree? Would you not call it "My Favorite Tree" any more?

It has always been God's favorite tree. Those with the "faith of Abraham"...faith that saves...faith that pleases God.

Only by belief in Christ are we grafted into the "Olive Tree" which is figurative language of Jesus Christ.

Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off...

I have changed my views on the True Israel of God and who the Olive Tree is. You see, it is possible for me to receive new light.

Maybe you and your wife could discuss this in the living room instead of a public forum, Or are you trying to add more strife and contention to this place when the topic is Israel?

Julius,
I'm not trying to disrespect you or call you a heretic or say you're James Fowler, but when Docs said "and I believe you are Julius", I couldn't help but think, your real name isn't Julius, is it? Cause if it isn't, if he thinks you're Julius when that's not really your name - well, he'd be wrong now wouldn't he? Lol. 😊 Real question (about your name) & a little light hearted, friendly humor. That's ok brothers, isn't it?
God Bless,
Jeff

Hey there Jeff. I wouldn't call you a heretic either. I wouldn't even call you a false teacher or grossly mistaken.

Regarding my name: In this forum my real name is Julius so docs is correct. You guys only know me in this forum, anyway. Outside of this forum it is not. Since I am loved so much and no one wishes me any hurt, maybe I should go by my real name, eh?

Haha. Just kidding. A little friendly humor back at yah.

God bless you, too!

Well, my real name is Jeff Marshall. And if someone means me harm because of the truth of God's Word, then God is sovereign & what will be will be & no weapon formed against me shall prosper. And even if it overcomes me in this world - it would be to my benefit in the age to come!

You don't really think people in the forum would mean you actual physical harm because they vehemently disagree (or even if they despise) teachings you put on here do you? You aren't actually paranoid about that are you? I honestly would think that would be an over reactive fear. Changing your name as you move through Islamic nations, yes, but the SI Forum crowd? 😊

Anyways, God Bless - Jeff

Julius,
You only used Romans 11:20 taken out of its greater total context in your previous post & that's disingenuous I believe to all of those here (& God's Word, the basic laws of hermeneutics & Bible study, and especially teaching), so even though it will likely have no effect on your beliefs, for the sake of others here, I want to quote all of the verses around it:

Romans 11: (speaks for itself in context without special revelations or explanations from those who want to tell others "what these verses REALLY MEAN):

13Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry 14in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. 15For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? 16If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches.

17But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, 18do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. 19Then you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. 24For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree.

The Mystery of Israel's Salvation

25Lest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
"The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
27
"and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”
28As regards the gospel, they are enemies of God for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30Just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. 32For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.

33Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
34
"For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?”
35
"Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”
36For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

I think the scriptures (in their full context) can speak for God on Israel just fine without all the commentators who want to tell us "what it REALLY means)

God Bless,
Jeff

Thank you for your thoughts. Blessings to you, too Jeff.

And you didn't even quote all of verse 20! It also says "...So do not become proud, but stand in awe." Which you "Cut off" the verse like the cutting off of the original branches. I don't think this is a good practice. In fact, the part you cut off is a reiteration of verse 18, "...do not be arrogant against the branches for it is not you that supports the root but the root that supports you...." How you (or others) can ignore, twist & change this is beyond me, but I think there is a "spiritual intellectual arrogance" behind it. I say that because Paul said it. He explains in these verses that only pride & arrogance would do that (especially now with his words in the canon), & he warns against it pretty matter of fact like and severely. "Otherwise you too will be cut off." And he lays it out VERY clear "lest you be wise in your own conceits."

Hi Jeff,

I am going to try to point some things out to you regarding how you converse with people. This may not help you with me, but it might help you with others.

By the way, you could take the road of believing the best of an individual and then asking them for clarification regarding what they wrote, but instead you take a hostile road, lacing your remarks with attacks on my character (ARROGANT, DISINGENUOUS, etc). I tried to show you this before and told you that you do it often in many of your posts and yet you don't even realize it. Awakened (Mark) even told you about this. Do you speak this way to real people in real life. Do you insult and berate their character?

This is why I previously said you are a conversation killer. If you want to have a conversation you don't call people names or attack their character. Would you continue to converse with someone who openly attacks your character? Do you even understand that? If you were in my shoes would you continue to talk to Jeff Marshall and let him berate your character? Why so hostile?

See uppercase characters.

by jeffmar1130 on 2016/8/24 21:35:40

And you didn't even quote all of verse 20! It also says "...So do not become proud, but stand in awe." Which you "Cut off" the verse like the cutting off of the original branches. I don't think this is a good practice. In fact, the part you cut off is a reiteration of verse 18, "...do not be arrogant against the branches for it is not you that supports the root but the root that supports you...." HOW YOU (or others) can IGNORE, TWIST & CHANGE THIS is beyond me, but I THINK THERE IS A SPIRITUAL INTELLECTUAL ARROGANCE BEHIND IT". I say that because Paul said it. He explains in these verses that only pride & arrogance would do that (especially now with his words in the canon), & he warns against it pretty matter of fact like and severely. "Otherwise you too will be cut off." And he lays it out VERY clear "lest you be wise in your own conceits."

And again, in the previous post:

You only used Romans 11:20 taken out of its greater total context in your previous post & THAT'S DISINGENUOUS. I BELIEVE TO ALL OF THOSE HERE (& God's Word, the basic laws of hermeneutics & Bible study, and especially teaching), so even though it will likely have no effect on your beliefs, for the sake of others here, I want to quote all of the verses around it:

Romans 11: (speaks for itself in context without special revelations or explanations from those who want to tell others "what these verses REALLY MEAN):

Implying I am deceiving by hiding something.

I am sure you will continue to post as you do, but please excuse me if I do not participate.

By the way, I write many verses in my posts and often cut off parts because I am trying to accentuate the first part or second part of a verse for the purposes of getting a thought across. Many respected people do this and I don't see them being berated because people UNDERSTAND what they are trying to communicate.

Xavier,

That is cool what you are seeing. By the way I have learned much from our brother, Savannah through the years. I don't always agree but he doesn't always agree with me, either. Still, we are one in Christ.

I also look forward to learning from what the Lord has shown and is showing you, too.

Julius,
I don't mean to "berate" you. I used the word arrogant because that is the language Paul uses himself in scripture in Romans 11 to speak to those who "boast against the natural branches.." His words, & God's, not mine.

And as far as "emphasizing a first part of the verse" that's fine sometimes, but honestly friend you do it a lot, & the fact is that you "emphasized" the first part of the verse, but the second part of the verse goes against the greater "point" you are trying to make. And you do that a lot. Or you take a verse out of its greater context and apply "meaning" (often an allegorical spiritual meaning) to it that seems ok, other than that we can rad the context around it and see it doesn't say what you're importing into it after that. You do this a lot. It's called Eisogesis (ISO-proof texts outside of context with your thoughts brought to it apart from context). It's a problem for using scripture to build doctrine. A big one. It's what the Pre-Tribbers do. It's what cults do actually too (I know, you'll probably accuse me of calling you a cultist even though I'm not - I'm just showing you how problematic it can actually be).

If I offended you, I apologize. Arrogant is Paul's words. I do believe it's disingenuous to carve out the first few words of a verse, import your interpretation & use it outside its context & intentionally leave out the very next few words. I'm just being real with you friend. I do not mean to offend you. I can be direct, to the point, & bluntly honest at times I know. I'm sorry. I am continuously working on my written communication, especially where there is disagreement. I'm pretty passionate about some things though and it does come through. Explaining away (twisting is what it is) plain scripture & butchering passages to make points opposite of the real point, particularly when consistently applied to the Apple of God's Eye, burn in my heart. Sorry, but it does. I am always praying about growing in grace & humility without just allowing every criticism and cold, wet blanket get to my head. But I'm not perfect. I ask for your understanding & mean no offense.

That being said, Romans 11 says what it says, & I bet some gentile, roman believers who got this letter didn't like Paul's direct language either, but I am certainly no Apostle Paul I know, for sure.

God Bless!
Jeff

That's certainly one view. It's the same one the preterists use and then say that Revelation 20-22 already happened too (Great White throne judgement, New heavens and new earth, new Jerusalem, etc.). But there are major flaws for this view. Half or more scholars say Revelation was written AFTER 70 AD first of all. And then there's the pesky timeline of events laid out in Revelation 17-22 that must be toyed with and rearranged to fit that narrative, & then there's all the things the prophets, Appstles & Jesus said about "Gog of Magog", "Son Of Perdition", "Man of Lawlessness", many of which were in the context of the just prior timeline of the Day of the Lord (why full preterists just stop trying to fight that argument and say that already happened also). And many many other issues as a whole. It is a view. But it's not even the historical view for the most part. And it totally doesn't fit the visions and prophecies of Daniel concerning the "time of the end", nor Jesus' Olivet discourse where he references Daniel's prophecies. Nero was a mini-type of the AC. A fore-shadowing. One of the "many anti-Christ's" John speaks of in his epistle, but so are Hitler, Stalin, various popes, Titus, Antiochus of Epiphanies, Dometian, etc., etc.

Lol. I thought for the longest it was a sister, but apparently it is a brother. Maybe from Savanah, Georgia or something? I have no idea? Lol

by docs on 2016/8/24 23:05:14

I'm just wondering why vindictive bullying based on nothing else than long held grudges and unrepented of personal animosity still isn't being addressed.

Plus we have been subjected to the bizarre:

/No its no compliment Jim. Why do you not use your real named instead of using Julius? What are you hiding Jim? (other than false doctrine)/

/It's only 6:33 PM where you are Jim. Stay awake a little longer, you need your rest./

Have these brothers taken leave of their senses? On top of deliberately made up false charges of one being a heretic they are so driven they are willing to go to this low delusional place. When is enough enough? This issue needs to be addressed instead of ignored. Common standards of decency which benefit all are being ignored. If the thread is closed I apologize but this needs remedying. Vindictive bullying of Julius coupled with posting outright falsehoods regarding him needs to be addressed and stopped. I disagree with many of Julius' views but would say the same for him or anyone being so treated.

David,

I believe the Lord has given me discernment as to why the bizarre, abusive behavior of Revenue and NDY has been allowed to continue for months with impunity. They are only surrogates. At this time I am unable to share more and must trust in the Lord.

I don't want your thread closed so will allow myself to be run off this one since you guys will have no peace if I continue to participate. I wish you all the best on this subject as you all exchange your ideas. Sounds like Xavier is excited to share some things. I'll see you on another thread.

I appreciate you, Brenda, Mark and Xavier's comments on my behalf.

Sorry Savannah, but that's just totally not true. Among many others, Mark Hitchcock wrote his 253 page dissertation on the subject refuting the Neronic dating of Revelation called "The Defense of the Domitiantic Dating of the Book of Revelation". The Domitianic dating is thought by many scholars to be written around 95-96 AD. There are many other works & scholarly writings on the subject. I'm not saying I know it is, but I am saying exactly what I already said which is that the scholars are almost split down the middle. And of course you're saying your view is "irrefutable" (which is well, just not true. I would call it what I really think it is, but I'll get accused of things I'm not intending, so I'll just stop at the fact that's it is just not true

Irrefutable = "Impossible to deny or disprove"

Mark Hitchcock wrote a 253 page dissertation disproving it. Half of the Biblical Historical scholars out there deny & write to disprove the Neronic time period (65 ADish) writing of Revelation, in support of a Diatatonic (95ADish) writing of Revelatikn, making it by definition NOT "irrefutable". That's what I mean.

Well put Docs. Very well put. And more than that, you are restating (quite nicely) exactly the point of what Paul is using Romans chapter 11 to convey. And if you study the history of what was going on in Rome with the Gentiles of the church in regard/response to the returning Jewish believers, & what is being propagated & popular today, it's just as timely now as it was then when it was penned in Holy Writ. You often do a better job than I of expressing & explaining exactly what I attempt to convey (but gets often disregarded because I speak often with more direct adjectives and statements - partly my fault/flaw at times, partly at times an excuse to dismiss what I'm actually saying/showing I think too). Either way, thanks for putting it so eloquently & Biblically accurate.
God Bless,
Jeff

That's a bit of a loaded question.

Did God send an angel down to tell you it was early?

Fact is, in my view theologically & hermeneutically, I don't even think it actually matters that much. Your view is absolutely unhinged or propped up by the (totally arguable, refutable, & disagreed upon by scholars) answer. That's why it matters SO MUCH to you.

The original question was:

Quote:
I'm sure though that the view that Israel was replaced and the church is the "new Israel" came largely through the Roman Catholic Church. Basically if you believe the church is the "new Israel" you are espousing Catholic doctrine.

Docs,
If you had a tree in your backyard and you would call it "My Favorite Tree", you water it and take care of it and love it. And one day you would break out some old branches that did not bear fruit and graft in some new branches, would you say that you REPLACED your tree? Would you not call it "My Favorite Tree" any more?

And the reply was:

I would reply perhaps that the purging of old branches and the grafting in of new branches does not change the root of this favorite tree. The newly grafted in branches should celebrate the new life they are now experiencing yet should remain in humility and not begin to boast against the natural branches and claim the tree is now theirs. They should not cultivate the notion the keeper of the tree saw something "good" in them that made them more able to believe than the natural branches. Nor should they say the original intent for planting, nurturing and cultivating the tree had been changed because of their grafting in. And remember that at any time the keeper of the tree chooses he can graft the natural branches in again. Then they should continue to drink deeply of the nurturing life they are now grafted into and should help spread the news that the holy root is still providing abundant nourishment and life to all who thirst and are hungry for the nourishment that springs up into eternal life.

Romans 9:3-7King James Version (KJV)

3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

In my understanding the above verses define two meanings of the word Israel:
1. Natural descendants of Abraham
2. God's people to whom the promises are made. (The believing remnant of Israel + the believing gentiles)

Galatians 3:16King James Version (KJV)

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

So the words "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel" means that God considers the true believers in Christ as the true Israel, whether they were born as a Jew or not.
There is no replacement here at all.

There was no promise made to the broken off branches"

Contraire there was. Romans 11:26 specifically. And the usage of spiritual Israel in Romans 9 out of the context of Romans 11 to explain away the coming promise to natural Israel gets old. It's like a willful blindness. I don't say that loosely, but when it's so repetitive and context ignored, I can only conclude this.

Romans 11:26King James Version (KJV)

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

The Deliverer came out of Sion: The coming of the Messiah Jesus.
and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: Offered salvation through his blood to the sons of Jacob who believed in Him.

Romans 11:26 in my opinion describes the salvation that Jesus brought to the Jews when he came (first).

"all Israel" refers to the true Israel of god described in the previous post.

Everyone should agree with this:

The Olive Tree is Not only the Gentile believers.

The Olive Tree is Not only the Messianic Jewish believers.

The Olive Tree is the "Spiritual Commonwealth of Israel!"
If the Olive Tree is not solely the Gentile believers and it is not solely Messianic Believers, what is it? Paul refers to it as the Commonwealth of Israel, and that the Olive Tree is none other than the Spiritual Commonwealth of Israel.

11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 That at that time ye were WITHOUT CHRIST, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13 BUT NOW IN CHRIST JESUS ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. (Eph. 2:11-13)

The Olive Tree is Spiritual, Composed of people made Righteous by Faith who are NOW IN CHRIST JESUS.

Through the blood of Israel’s Messiah (Christ), we Gentiles who were once aliens, have been made nigh (near) to the Commonwealth of Israel, being made one in Christ (Jew and Gentile are now one in Christ, the middle wall of partition being broken down). We no longer refer to each other as Jews or Gentiles since a true Jew is one who has been circumcised inwardly in the heart and not outwardly. Rom 2:28. Gentiles have now received the same spiritual circumcision that Messianic Jews have received. In fact, there is no other way to be in Christ and in the Olive Tree but through spiritual circumcision.

Thus we have the figure of the Olive Tree, of which the ROOT is none other than Jesus Christ and in which the spiritual commonwealth of Israel (Jew and Gentile by faith in Christ) live. (In Him we live and move and have our being). It is spiritual, because only those with the "faith of Abraham" (righteous, born-again, blood-bought believers are in the Olive Tree, whether Jew or Gentile). It pertains to Israel, because the natural branches of the Olive Tree are the fathers of Israel ”” Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ”” and Jews who have received Yeshua Hamashiach as their Messiah by faith (Faith of Abraham). Both Jew and Gentile remain in the Olive Tree BY VIRTUE OF THEIR continuiing FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST, THE MESSIAH.

Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither (outward) circumcision availeth any thing, nor (outward) uncircumcision, but a new creature.

Thus the "Israel of God" are all those (Jew and Gentile) who have been spiritually circumcised.

Gal 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

Spiritually uncircumcised Jews or Gentiles are not in the Olive Tree. Spiritually circumcised Gentiles will be grafted in and spiritually circumcised Jews will be grafted back in.

The root (Jesus Christ) is the one that bears all of us.

Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, BUT THE ROOT THEE.

By the way, I have never ever read of any Gentile believers on SI boasting against the natural branches. I would like to see those quotes if they even exist. We are all thankful that the Lord grafted us into (Him) the Olive Tree.

When Jesus came there were no broken off branches yet, the braking off of branches started when Christ came and some were rejecting Him therefore rejecting the Father and were broken off. However if they believe in Christ they will be grafted in again. In their broken off state they do not have the promises.

That might be a tangible possibility if it wasn't for the rest of the chapter in context, Which does not allow for that. This has clearly been clearly shown her many times before with the standard laws of Biblical hermeneutics (& common sense plain reading of the text) and not refuted on any real scriptural hermeneutical commonsense basis, so honestly rehashing I don't even think it's worth the time. I have come to the conclusion that those who do not want to see it won't see it no matter how clearly you explain/show it. And honestly I think Paul speaks to it her when he spoke to the church in Roma & touches on this type of thing there when he speaks of a position of the heart. I personally have come to the conclusion that it's "more" than just a textual Bible study doctrine mental theological doctrine once someone has the scripture read to them without all the "enlightened" ones commentating their postulations and impositions on the text (eisogesis). Come find me at the wedding supper of the lamb on that Great Day & we will discuss it then when we "know fully as we are fully known", ok? Unless of course you think that already happened too? 😊 Funny Paul says "my fellow country-men, the Jews" ..(yet rejected Christ) & people will say that's the "spiritual Israel" of Romans 9? I can't explain that rationally? Any more than I can explain naturally and rationally why the Jews have been hunting down, oppressed, ran out of their homes, pogromed, holocausted, smeared & slandered, accused more at the UN than all other nations combined, are hated by all their enemies around them on every side, are the subject of Islamic eschatology that they will all be snuffed out to bring in the Mahdi, were made the target of Augustine/Origen, were called upon as liars to be murdered by Luther, etc. It defies rational, natural common sense. It's source is not natural. Satan knows more about the coming fulfillment than most Christians. Sad. Especially since Paul wrote Romans & in chapter 11 says he "doesn't wish for us to be ignorant in this mystery" and speaks of their final full inclusion still to come. It's a matter of the promises of God. The irrevocable gifts and callings of God. Sovereign Grace and election. And yes, clearly one for Gentiles of intellectual, theological & mental humility or arrogance. I have never been more convinced than I am at this moment. Art Katz understood this. JC Ryle did. David Wilkerson did. Charles Spurgeon did. Jonathan Edwards did. David Baron did. Adolph Saphir did. Sinclair Feeguson did. Nathanial West did. John Bunyn did. Horatius Bonar did. John Piper does. Joe Richardson does. Barry Horner does. Samuel Whitefield does. Dalton Thomas does. Reggie Kelley does. Many many others did and do. But many these days do not. Like I said, come and see me after the judgement so we can celebrate God's grace and Unsearchable and unfathomable wisdom mentioned at the end of Romans Chapter 11, ok? 😉👍🙏🏻☝️💪🏻

God Bless,
Jeff

by Tozsu on 2016/8/25 14:26:59

When Jesus came there were no broken off branches yet, the braking off of branches started when Christ came and some were rejecting Him therefore rejecting the Father and were broken off. However if they believe in Christ they will be grafted in again. In their broken off state they do not have the promises.

That is true and that is what I would call "spiritual common-sense".

Rejection of the Messiah will break you off from the "commonwealth of Israel".

In their broken off state, they do not have faith in Messiah. In their grafted back in state, they do. Scriptures are clear about this.

It's ok, I've shown you what is plain in the context many times. You choose not to see it, or you can't/won't. I see, understand, & accept that. And of course no one comes to God BUT through Jesus. I have said that many times. The question is concerning election, sovereignty, & the final "full inclusion" to come whereby "All Israel (in context clearly Jews in the land of Israel) shall be saved". If you choose to not see that, or can't for some reason, the laws of Biblical Hermeneutics are there to help keep you doctrinally straight, but those just get explained away, ignored, &/or denied too. That's fine. Come see me at The wedding supper of the Lamb & we will talk about this very debate, Ok? 😊
God Bless,
Jeff

Jeff said:

quote (from tozsu):"There was no promise made to the broken off branches"

Contraire there was. Romans 11:26 specifically.

tozsu answered:

Romans 11:26King James Version (KJV)

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

The Deliverer came out of Sion: The coming of the Messiah Jesus.
and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: Offered salvation through his blood to the sons of Jacob who believed in Him.

Romans 11:26 in my opinion describes the salvation that Jesus brought to the Jews when he came (first).

"all Israel" refers to the true Israel of god described in the previous post.

Jeff said:

That might be a tangible possibility if it wasn't for the rest of the chapter in context, Which does not allow for that.

Jeff,
I have read the context. Romans 11:1-7 Paul explains the concept that the remnant of Israel who truly believed, is considered to be God's people. According to good hermeneutics we have to consider that Paul talked to his own generation and not to 21 century believers. When he speaks about hardening of hearts, the broken off branches and grafting in again if they believe, he is referring to people within that generation. Do you have proof that "the fullness of the gentiles.." means a fullness throughout the ages? In my opinion the fullness meant the current fullness of that age (Paul's), so it could happen in the same generation. And so the hardening could have ended also then and some broken off branches could have been grafted in again. (All in the same generation) As of today's Jews.... They can be grafted in any time if they believe.
So do you have scriptural proof that Roman's chapter 11 doesn't allow an understanding that is different from yours?
Do you agree that Romans 11:26 talks about the FIRST coming of Jesus?

Edited for clarity

Jeff,
I have just thought about this:
I can not consider today's non believing Jews as broken off branches at all. In my opinion the expression "broken off branches" could only refer to those who were born in OT times. They were broken off if they didn't believe, and remained in the tree if they believed in Jesus. And also could be grafted in again. Today there are no such natural branches...

2 Peter 1

20knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.

by Tozsu on 2016/8/25 16:13:57

Jeff,
I have just thought about this:
I can not consider today's non believing Jews as broken off branches at all. In my opinion the expression "broken off branches" could only refer to those who were born in OT times. They were broken off if they didn't believe, and remained in the tree if they believed in Jesus. And also could be grafted in again. Today there are no such natural branches...

Tozsu,

I agree with your statement primarily because of the scriptures that back it up. If the scriptures did not back your statement up, I could not agree with it. When Paul was speaking about the branches cut off, he was speaking about Jews under the Old Covenant that rejected Christ, shortly before the Temple was destroyed which the physical manifestation of the ending of the Old Covenant. The spiritual manifestation of the end of the Old Covenant was Christ death on the cross when He "nailed the law to the tree."

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ORDINANCES that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

He abolished "the law of commandments".
Eph 2:15 Having ABOLISHED in his flesh the enmity, even THE LAW OF COMMANDMENTS contained in ORDINANCES; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

There are no Jews under an Old Covenant today, because there is no Old Covenant that exists anymore in God's eyes that He will honor. And to prove this, if a 3rd temple was rebuilt today and sacrifices reinstituted, God would not be obligated to forgive the sins of those trusting in animal sacrifices. This would negate all that His Son had done. This would trample openly upon His Son's blood.

Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, WHICH CAN NEVER TAKE AWAY SINS:

What God regards today and ONLY what He regards is His Son, Jesus Christ and the New Covenant written in His blood. God is not calling people to Jesus Christ and at the same time honoring the OT Covenant and forgiving people via animal sacrifices. Without the temple and animal sacrifices there is no OT and if you have them again, there is no OT because God will not honor the law and the sacrifices to make men righteous. He never did. He always honored only the "faith of Abraham".

Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

So, what was the law for? It was meant to bring us to Christ so that we would receive Him by Faith and be justified by this faith.

Gal 3:24 Wherefore THE LAW WAS OUR SCHOOLMASTER to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Gal 3:25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

He took away the Old Testament, to establish the New Testament.
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Heb 10:14 For by one offering (the blood of Christ) He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Them, that are sanctified are sanctified only by the offering of Jesus Christ, nothing else!

Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a BETTER COVENANT, which was established upon better promises.

Why do we need a NT if God is still honoring the OT?

Heb 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

The OT has been disannulled.

Heb 7:18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
Heb 7:19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Heb 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

by watchnpray on 2016/8/25 15:50:58

All hail! :) (Just thought I'd sound like a 1st century Christian this time...)

Anyway, to recap: Julius, I agree with most of your statements re the mark included in some of your last posts:

"He is not a figurative analogy but real people that persecute real people. However, John is using "son of perdition" to speak of Satan's congregation. Remember, it is always the children of the flesh which persecute the children of the spirit." (Right, we are and have always been a "foreign body" in the organism of the world and it must expel us sooner or later.)

"Gal 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

It has always been about many people persecuting many other people. One satanic body persecuting the Godly Body of Christ. Why should anything change to one specific human being?

John is always drawing comparisons between the True Church and False Church, True Believers and False Believers and knows that the spirit of antichrist has never and will never be about one man. It is about all those who are in Satan's grip and especially those who have religious power and influence and control over people. And these people exist in government and religious circles where power and control are condensed.

It has never been about one man through the centuries and it won't (in my mind) be about one human being prior to Christ's coming, either. Makes for good movies, but not spiritually realistic in my mind." (Well put, and I agree in essence to what you said, except I withhold concluding as yet about "the antichrist has never and will never be about one man"; well, could be, could be not, but it's just that I haven't made up my own mind about it, not that I outright agree or disagree.)

"The reason I believe Satan is trying to get the Christian Church to believe it is all about one (boogey) man, is because it furthers his work regarding ecumenicalism by taking the focus off of his world-wide false body/religious system. And this includes those in the Christian religious system who like Judas, seem to be close to Jesus yet are only rendering lip service. He wants us to accept his "body of believers" into our lives." (Dude, I think you're definitely on to something here! And I especially like all the background info on Judas.)

On another note, I see that there is still some belief in a "third temple in Jerusalem" going up sometime, but would it have been considered any "temple of God" by the apostles, knowing, as they did, that Christ's sacrifice/resurrection and the establishment of the church had already rendered any such obsolete? Besides, absent any supporting passage of Scripture, it's a totally indigent theory and must be allowed at least a dignified demise. And, for good measure, here's a pertinent verse I missed last night and that should lay the matter to rest: "Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst?" (1 Cor. 3:16)

Oh, and Savannah: I promise I'll look at the video, but in order of priority, will you forgive me if I postpone that?

Y'know brethren (true lambs), I am definitely able to put together a coherent, cogent and convincing essay with all the stuff I've read as well as the outcome of my ruminations (nearly pulled an all-nighter last night because of my reflections and only thanks to cups of hot cocoa and the odd salami'n'olives sandwich, was I able to keep my eyelids open), but the game's afoot and tempus fugit. THEREFORE, I shall "pull a Julius" (just gently pulling your leg, old bro!) and cut-and-paste most of the relevant material I've checked. My synthesized, annotated, with exhaustive commentary, blah, blah, blah, magnum opus will have to wait. But now, a late lunch will do the trick. Mexican chicken, with tortillas and salsa, that you calling?? :))

Xavier,

Thank you for your encouraging and blithesome words. You communicate a lot of warmth and good heartedness through your posts.

Of course, there have been many anti-christs through the centuries. All those who are not with Jesus are against Him and thus are anti-christ (against Christ). There are small anti-christs and very big ones and their father is Satan. Just as the Christian does the will of his Father in heaven, those who are not with Christ are doing the will of their father, below.

Luke 11:23 He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.

Read my reply to Tozsu regarding the 3rd temple and is God obligated to honor it.

Blessings to you, good friend.

That's a very long string of straw men verses. No one is saying the Law can save anyone. Romans 11 he says that a "partial hardening" HAS COME over the Jews NOW, but there is a "FULL INCLUSION" to come & "ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED". And there are other verses to back this prophetic promise. "When the fullness of the Gentiles have come in...", "When they look on Him whom they pierced..." And on and on. Is a non sequitur straw man to keep arguing no one is saved through the Law. That's been explained to you like 47 times on this site, but you just roll it back out like a long dead great grandma in a casket to beat that dead horse. It's very strange. Who's arguing for salvation through Judaism & Law? You know who, NOONE! That's why your arguments are so strangely out of place it's baffling. Just like the Jews currently have a veil (a partial hardening) over their eyes where they can't see Jesus is their promised Messiah in wholesale/large part, so do you & those who won't accept Romans 11 have "a veil over your eyes" in a sense where you can't see what God has already clearly prophesied will happen. Like I said, Paul indicates in this mystery concerning Israel in Romans 11 that it is a heart posture issue. Like I said, come see me at the wedding supper of the Lamb. I'm the one who will have the cup with the fruit of the vine in total shock and awe at the majesty of God in Christ! 😊
God Bless,
Jeff

docs,

Something ended at the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
What was it?

Something ended at the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple.
What was it?

What do the scriptures say?

Also, what makes a Jew a Jew? I think it would help everyone here if you could define it. I am under the impression that biblically, one that is circumcised outwardly and following the Old Covenant was a Jew. Yet, there is no more Old Covenant and certainly no one that follows it because it cannot be followed without a temple or animal sacrifices.

To me, those born in Israel today are Israeli's. They call themselves Jews but this is just tradition, now. Many are not following the OT or even believe in God.

There are Romanian, Polish, Russian, Italian, American, Argentinan Jews, etc, etc. The ethnicity is the country they come from, the traditional religion is Jewish.

I was born an Italian-German-Irish-American Christian. My ethnicity is a mixture (whose isn't?) and my traditional inherited religion was Catholic.

Today, anyone born-again is grafted into the Olive Tree (Jesus Christ).

The Natural Olive Tree were the Jews of the OT when the OT was alive and well and authentic with a Temple and animal sacrifices. These were the natural branches.

Jim/julious

Please stop baiting these guys with your religious hatred of the Jewish nation and people.

And you two should be in tune with the Lord enough not to give him a platform for spouting his ant-Jewish venom disguised in religious garb.

Whatever spirit this is, is certainly not the Holy Spirit.

Julius/Jim wrote: (should say lied)

A. There is no Biblical basis to assert that the modern nation of Israel has anything to do with Biblical prophecy.

1. It is a twentieth century geo-political organization.

2. The name of "Israel" was selected with deliberate intention of conveying connection with legacy of ancient Israel.

3. Modern Israel is not the Biblical Israel and has no claim to any promises or rights of Biblical Israel.

4. Modern Israel cannot be considered a chosen nation of divine destiny any more than any other nation.

B. The demise of the modern nation of Israel would not impinge upon Biblical prophecy.

1. God's character and faithfulness do not depend upon the changable circumstances of human politics and warfare.

2. Nations come and go, but God remains the same.
3. Only the spiritual nation of Israel is eternal - I Peter. 2:9

why thank you

God Bless Docs!

Reggie going to be there too by chance?

Julius,
It's clear you have & do read & follow enough historical revisionists, replacement theologians, people who have no real high view value for the OT prophets, etc. And it's actually worse than that. Are You a BDS guy? Christ at the checkpoint kinda guy?

I'm a French, Dutch, Cherokee, Irish descent guy who recently just found out (ironically) that my great great grandparents were Jews in Spain. I got all kinds of backgrounds ethnically & religiously (Direct descendant of Rufus Burleson, the baptist preacher/missionary who started Baylor University). But ultimately - so what? We aren't talking about Julius' heritage, but what does God's Word say and teach. And ultimately, it boils down to Michael Brown's question concerning the regathering of Israel in 1948 (that Philip Mauro said would never happen lest we must question the whole NT) which Spurgeon, Bonar, Baron, Edwards, Ryle & so many others predicted:

If God scattered them in judgement, and no one can gather where God scatters, who regathered them in the land?

A question neither Stephen Sizer (I know you like him), nor you, nor anyone else can sufficiently answer.

Jim/Juilius also wrote:

Rather, Christian peoples are fulfillment of the people of Israel

(This is an outright fabrication of a Jew despising mind)

a. Continuity with Israel of God - preliminary/reality

b. Discontinuity with external, physical Jewish nation

(another replacement fabrication fueled by anti-Israeli
and a deluded mind that willfully ignores the clear Word of God)

B. Designations of old covenant Israel applied to new covenant Christians

(Baloney)

Docs,
Of course you never said anything different. Neither did I or anyone else on here. It's a regurgitated well poisoning straw man argument. I used to think it was a mere misunderstanding potentially. I do not believe that anymore. How on earth after all of these repeating of the same things could I? That would be illogical. I'm not trying to be goofy or mean, just dead on honest. I wish I could say more that I know, but I am just leaving it at that. It's like a deliberate agenda to spread the abdication of the plans and purposes of God for Israel in scripture. And it goes beyond that to say there isn't even a Biblical Jew in Israel. It gets more bizarre from here if we are all honest enough to share all the people/teachings we really follow, & all that we really believe. I'm not even trying to change Julius' mind honestly. These type conversations prove that facts, Responsible Biblical Hermeneutics, scripture in context, tough questions on plain passages, etc. make no difference at all & the "rewind & replay" default button gets pushed & it's really an intentional agenda here on SI to discredit God's purpose for Israel in the last days prophetic, apocalyptic plans of God. I wish I knew less than I do, but I don't. I can't act naively blissfully ignorant because I'm not. When I post about the "Apple of God's Eye" & then in another thread the one usage of this that doesn't specifically speak about Israel is woven in to "prove" that saying doesn't ever mean Israel, it's not coincidence. Now there is no such thing as Jews. What's next for Julius (when the fire dies down and enough people post who agree and go down this road)? Jews are the cause of all the evil on earth? I am not saying the Jews & Israel are perfect or "better" by any means. Quite the contrary. But they are beloved for the sake of the fathers, they will be grafted back in en made when all Israel is saved, & even as they first got the Gospel (to the Jew First), they will even be judged first ("first the Jew, then the gentile") as scripture tells us. So, this conversation isn't really one where there's a real look at the exchange of ideas, or much less a responsible study of the scriptures, but one where the real agenda every so often pops it's head up & then when spotted, called out, & asked real, tough, scriptural questions, plays hurt & goes back & hides behind a big teddy bear. It's a repeat scenario too. I know it's a heart issue because Paul says it is in Romans 11 & God has confirmed it clearly in more than one way. It is disingenuous whether people care for that word or not. I don't mean it to be "mean", but honest. I'm inclined to let it go. It will grow on here uncontested over time like a cancer I believe. I believe the Lord has shown me that. I pray people en made are not deceived in this, but take it to the Lord & not the "enlightened ones" who teach it.

Jeff

Okay some of us get angry with this persons venom towords the Jews and God' eternal plan for them

No offence to you please but why do you and docs keep giving him an audience? This is part of the agenda and I think you know it. Neil has had enough and even if the moderators do nothing please stop responding to this spirit that inhabits this person. If you do I will also and even Rev will refrain from taiking the bait I believe .

You also said a mouthfull here:

"I'm inclined to let it go. It will grow on here uncontested over time like a cancer I believe. I believe the Lord has shown me that. I pray people en made are not deceived in this, but take it to the Lord & not the "enlightened ones" who teach it."

That tells me something that is not good at all about the proceedings at this site and obliviously can't say any more whithout being kicked out.....

Yeah, I'm through with it.

Is that some kind of Bible Code or something, Docs? Lol. Am I missing something? I don't know what that last post is brother?

Saints,

We are locked the thread as the discussions have resulted down to name-calling and simply unprofitable talking back and forth that is not well thought out or graceful. Brethren we can disagree with certain things but we must be loving and teachable.

We do not have strong dogmatic views of end-times on SermonIndex, we do not fit into any man-made theological system. Rather we have simple truths that we hold to such as:

We believe that Jesus, some days after His resurrection from the dead, ascended to God in heaven (Acts1:1-10; Eph. 1:15-23). We believe in the personal return of Jesus with power and great glory (Luke 21:27), and that His return is an event for saved people to look forward to with great expectation and with constant watchfulness and prayer (Luke 21:34-36; 1 John 3:2-3). We believe that this same Jesus, which was taken up from the apostles into heaven, shall so come in like manner as they saw Him go into heaven (Acts 1:1-11). We believe it is the privilege and duty of every Christian--to be filled with the Holy Spirit, and to live a holy life, and to be always ready for the return of Jesus, and that, in the meantime, each Christian should Occupy (keep busy in His will, and in His service) till the Lord's return (John 7:37-39; Acts 1:8; Eph. 5:18; Matt. 24:44; Luke 19:13; Titus 2:11-15; 1 Peter 1:13-19).

and we agree with many house churches in China:

7. The Last Days
! We believe Christ will return, but no one except the Father knows the date of His return.1239 On the day when Christ returns, He will come in glory and power on the clouds with the angels.1240 On that day, the angels will blow the trumpet, and those who were dead in Christ will rise first. After that, all born again Christians who are still alive will also be transformed.1241 Their bodies will all be glorified, and they will all be caught up together in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.1242
! The saints will then reign together with Christ for a thousand years,1243 during which Satan will be cast into the Abyss. When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released temporarily and will go out to deceive the nations until he is finally thrown into the lake of burning sulfur.1244 After that, Christ will sit on the great white throne to judge men from each nation, tribe and people. Everyone will rise from the dead and be judged before the throne. If anyone’s name is not found written in the Book of life, he will
be thrown into the lake of fire. The former heaven
289
and earth will be consumed by fire. Death and Hades will also be thrown into the fire.1245
! Those whose names are found written in the Book of life will enter into the new heaven and the new earth, living there with God forever.1246 We believe that while waiting for the coming of the Lord, believers should serve the Lord with great diligence, preach the Word of life,1247 and bear abundant fruits in their words, actions, faith, love and holiness. We also believe that those who do this shall receive all kinds of rewards.1248
! As for whether the rapture happens before, during or after the great tribulation, we recognize that each denomination has its own conviction, and therefore there is no absolute conclusion in regard to this. The duty of each Christian is to be alert1249 and prepare himself for the coming of the Lord.1250

from: https://ia600202.us.archive.org/28/items/principlesv4/64_StatementofFaith.pdf

this thread is locked.

It's also good to point out that Satan has "marked" us for destruction. No physical markings needed.

1Pet 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

I also recognize, that the inward mark of the Holy Spirit which the Enemy recognizes and hates can also result in an outward mark through men. This outward mark can take many forms.

Men have "marked" Christians in many ways. Sometimes with a physical mark (brand, missing finger, limb, shorn hair, missing ear), sometimes with an article of clothing, written certificate, or even a social mark brought about by slander and lies.