Is this story related to the Mark of the Beast?

Spiritual Jew · Apr 18, 2021

DavidPT said:
What took me so long? Don't you read a person's post in it's entirety first, then respond afterwards?

No, I don't. Especially long ones like that. I read a paragraph at a time and respond to each point that's made as I go along. But, the point is that a lot of what you said was directed to me as if I was a preterist, which I'm not.

Spiritual Jew · Apr 18, 2021

Hammster said:
Let’s look at that.

For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,
— Matthew 24:37-38

It doesn’t say anything about anyone being destroyed at His second coming. In fact, it doesn’t say anything about His second coming at all. It does say that when he comes people will be living normal lives like they did in Noah’s day prior to the flood.

This is the second time I've mentioned a passage to you and you didn't bother quoting the entire passage I was referencing. Do you do that on purpose or do you just not pay close attention to what people say? I specifically mentioned Matthew 24:37-39. You didn't quote verse 39 for some reason.

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Jesus made the point here that the flood destroyed all of the unbelievers (took them all away) and "so shall also the coming of the Son of man be". He was indicating that the coming of the Son of man would bring about the destruction of all unbeliever just as the flood did. That is exactly the same thing that Peter wrote about in 2 Peter 3:3-13. Peter wrote that when Jesus comes the entire earth will be burned up. Obviously, no one could survive that. Jesus was talking about the same thing.

Spiritual Jew · Apr 18, 2021

Hammster said:
Let’s look.

“There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth dismay among nations, in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves, men fainting from fear and the expectation of the things which are coming upon the world; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
— Luke 21:25-27

Looks to me like it’s the destruction of Jerusalem.

How does "dismay among nations" taking place "on the earth" and "the things which are coming up on the world" have anything to do with what happened in Jerusalem?

Spiritual Jew · Apr 18, 2021

DavidPT said:
Let me try and tackle this last part first and for now. Have a stray cat that just got into the house. I need to deal with trying to get it out of here. It went into hiding somewhere.

He did answer that question, but not in Matthew 24, but in Luke 21.

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

In Matthew 24 and Mark 13 it says the following instead.

Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )

Mark 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand, ) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

If these are referring to the same events, then what exactly was the AOD in 70 AD, that was standing in the holy place, standing where it ought not? To this day no one has ever given a satisfactory answer to that, IMO anyway. What does any of that have to do with what happened in 70 AD? Why was the city and temple destroyed to be begin with? Because of an abomination of desolation at the time? Is that why God desired these places destroyed? If yes, then we are back to what I initially asked, what exactly was the AOD in 70 AD, that was standing in the holy place, standing where it ought not?

What basis is there for thinking that Matthew and Mark would not record His answer to the question about the destruction of the temple buildings and only Luke would do that? That doesn't make any sense.

All of the things the Roman armies did in Jerusalem were an abomination. They raped women, killed children and did all kinds of abominable things. There is no basis for trying to claim that Luke 21:20-24 is referring to a different event than Matthew 24:15-22 and Mark 13:14-20. Luke worded it a bit differently only because of his audience, which was Gentiles. The Jews were the primary audience for Matthew and Mark and they would know what the abomination of desolation was about, but the Gentiles wouldn't so that's why Luke spelled it out to them in Luke 21:20.

Hammster · Apr 18, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
This is the second time I've mentioned a passage to you and you didn't bother quoting the entire passage I was referencing. Do you do that on purpose or do you just not pay close attention to what people say? I specifically mentioned Matthew 24:37-39. You didn't quote verse 39 for some reason.

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Jesus made the point here that the flood destroyed all of the unbelievers (took them all away) and "so shall also the coming of the Son of man be". He was indicating that the coming of the Son of man would bring about the destruction of all unbeliever just as the flood did. That is exactly the same thing that Peter wrote about in 2 Peter 3:3-13. Peter wrote that when Jesus comes the entire earth will be burned up. Obviously, no one could survive that. Jesus was talking about the same thing.

All of those references (v 37 Deeper Fellowship - )talk of the same thing.

For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you do not think He will. Matthew 24:44

There’s no need to read into the text something that’s not there.

Hammster · Apr 18, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
How does "dismay among nations" taking place "on the earth" and "the things which are coming up on the world" have anything to do with what happened in Jerusalem?

Because, as Jesus said:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all things take place.
— Luke 21:32

DavidPT · Apr 18, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
What basis is there for thinking that Matthew and Mark would not record His answer to the question about the destruction of the temple buildings and only Luke would do that? That doesn't make any sense.

I fully realize it doesn't appear to make sense, while at the same time, some of what you conclude doesn't appear to make sense as well, where I try and address some of that below.

Spiritual Jew said:
All of the things the Roman armies did in Jerusalem were an abomination. They raped women, killed children and did all kinds of abominable things.

In what way does that sound like this---When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place(Matthew 24:15), standing where it ought not(Mark 13:14)?

Jesus clearly said this is spoken of by Daniel the prophet. So where is there anything that you are talking about, spoken somewhere by Daniel the prophet? What ch and verses in Daniel can I find anything about Romans raped women, killed children and did all kinds of abominable things? I'm not disputing that they raped women, killed children, I'm just not seeing how that is a description of this---When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place(Matthew 24:15), standing where it ought not(Mark 13:14).

Nor am I seeing anywhere in the book of Daniel anything involving the Romans in 70 AD, though some insist Daniel 9:26 involves what happened in 70 AD. If it does it does not make it undeniably clear. How would anyone prior to 70 AD, when reading only Daniel 9:26 after having had heard what Jesus said in Matthew 24:15, take that to mean what would happen to Jerusalem and the temple in their near future? Especially since Daniel 9:26 makes zero mention of an AOD in that verse, and that Matthew 24:15 does make mention of an AOD.

grafted branch · Apr 18, 2021

DavidPT said:
Why would it need to ascend out of the pit more than once? While it's in the pit, is it in it against it's will, or is it in it and can come and go as it pleases, anytime it wants to?

My point had mainly to do with that when JTB was alive, the beast would have been in the pit at the time, which also means there was a time when the beast wasn't in the pit at all. The chronology would have to be, and that this involves thousands of years over all, initially he is not in the pit, then he is, then he no longer is. The chronology is not instead--- initially he is not in the pit, then he is, then he no longer is, then he is yet again, then he is no longer in the pit yet again, so on and so on.

I think every interpretation has areas that require some speculation and the beast ascending in Revelation 11:7 is a difficult area if JtB is the 2 witnesses.

I think a reasonable answer for this can be found in Matthew 12:43-45 and Luke 11:24-26 which should be grouped together and related to the strong man being bound.

Matthew 12:43-45 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.

The unclean spirit has to be the one that goes through dry places because a person who seeks shall find; Matthew 7:7 says seek and ye shall find. So the unclean spirit says he will return to his house, this is the same house that is spoiled when the strong man is bound.

The last statement in the verses is “even so shall it be also unto this generation”. I’m interpreting this as meaning that there are 2 distinct groups this happens to, one being obviously this generation and the other could be referring to the 2 witnesses.

Matthew 1:17 divides the generations into three 14 generation periods with the last generation starting with Christ. From Luke 1:26-31, JtB was approximately 6 months older that Jesus. So JtB was in the generation prior to “this generation”.

I don’t think I’m going to convince you that JtB is the 2 witnesses, but would you agree that due to the multiple similarities between JtB and the 2 witnesses at the very least JtB is a type and at some point the antitype happens?

BABerean2 · Apr 18, 2021

DavidPT said:
I fully realize it doesn't appear to make sense, while at the same time, some of what you conclude doesn't appear to make sense as well, where I try and address some of that below.

In what way does that sound like this---When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place(Matthew 24:15), standing where it ought not(Mark 13:14)?

Jesus clearly said this is spoken of by Daniel the prophet. So where is there anything that you are talking about, spoken somewhere by Daniel the prophet? What ch and verses in Daniel can I find anything about Romans raped women, killed children and did all kinds of abominable things? I'm not disputing that they raped women, killed children, I'm just not seeing how that is a description of this---When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place(Matthew 24:15), standing where it ought not(Mark 13:14).

Nor am I seeing anywhere in the book of Daniel anything involving the Romans in 70 AD, though some insist Daniel 9:26 involves what happened in 70 AD. If it does it does not make it undeniably clear. How would anyone prior to 70 AD, when reading only Daniel 9:26 after having had heard what Jesus said in Matthew 24:15, take that to mean what would happen to Jerusalem and the temple in their near future? Especially since Daniel 9:26 makes zero mention of an AOD in that verse, and that Matthew 24:15 does make mention of an AOD.

What is the probability of having the same common words, in the same sequence, without the two passages being parallel Gospels?

That probability is zero, since it is not found anywhere else in the Bible.

Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

You must "understand" Hanukkah found in John 10:22, to understand the reference to the "abomination of desolation" in the Book of Daniel. What did Antiochus Epiphanes do in the Jewish temple during 167 BC? He also surrounded the city, and killed thousands of Jews, and stopped the temple sacrifices for a time.
Did any of these things happen during 70AD ?

.

Spiritual Jew · Apr 18, 2021

Hammster said:
All of those references (v 37 Deeper Fellowship - )talk of the same thing.

For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you do not think He will. Matthew 24:44

There’s no need to read into the text something that’s not there.

Verse 39 is there. You seem to not want to acknowledge what He was saying in Matthew 24:39. Just as all unbelievers were killed in the flood, so shall it be when Christ returns. It's the same thing Peter wrote about in 2 Peter 3. Do you think 2 Peter 3:3-13 is already fulfilled, too?

Spiritual Jew · Apr 18, 2021

Hammster said:
Because, as Jesus said:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all things take place.
— Luke 21:32

Why do you act as if the word "generation" only has one definition? How was their tribulation in the whole world in 70 AD? You have no answer for that. All you have is your assumption about what "this generation" refers to.

Spiritual Jew · Apr 18, 2021

DavidPT said:
I fully realize it doesn't appear to make sense, while at the same time, some of what you conclude doesn't appear to make sense as well, where I try and address some of that below.

In what way does that sound like this---When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place(Matthew 24:15), standing where it ought not(Mark 13:14)?

Jesus clearly said this is spoken of by Daniel the prophet. So where is there anything that you are talking about, spoken somewhere by Daniel the prophet?

In Daniel 9:26-27 it references the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

What ch and verses in Daniel can I find anything about Romans raped women, killed children and did all kinds of abominable things? I'm not disputing that they raped women, killed children, I'm just not seeing how that is a description of this---When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place(Matthew 24:15), standing where it ought not(Mark 13:14).

Daniel didn't specify exactly the type of things that would occur there, but he did prophesy that the city and the sanctuary would be destroyed.

Nor am I seeing anywhere in the book of Daniel anything involving the Romans in 70 AD, though some insist Daniel 9:26 involves what happened in 70 AD. If it does it does not make it undeniably clear. How would anyone prior to 70 AD, when reading only Daniel 9:26 after having had heard what Jesus said in Matthew 24:15, take that to mean what would happen to Jerusalem and the temple in their near future? Especially since Daniel 9:26 makes zero mention of an AOD in that verse, and that Matthew 24:15 does make mention of an AOD.

Believe what you want. If you want to think that Matthew and Mark did not record Christ's answer to the question regarding the timing of the destruction of the temple buildings, so be it. I believe there is no basis for believing that. Are there two Olivet discourses or one? Clearly, there was just one and it's recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21.

You apparently think that Jesus spoke about two different events where people would need to flee from Judea into the mountains and so on. Does it not make sense to you that Luke would want to spell out what Jesus was talking about in Luke 21:20 since he was addressing Gentiles who wouldn't be familiar with Daniel's prophecies? That easily explains why Luke 21:20 is different from Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14. But the verses that follow Luke 21:20 are very similar to those that follow Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14. Did Jesus say the same thing twice regarding two different events (let those in Judea flee into the mountains, etc.)? I don't believe so. Again, Luke recorded it differently for the benefit of his Gentile audience. I'm not sure why you can't acknowledge that.

Timtofly · Apr 18, 2021

Hammster said:
Because, as Jesus said:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all things take place.
— Luke 21:32

Can you elaborate on which generation is the very last one on earth prior to the literal end of the church and Adam's punishment at the same time? That is the end the church is working out, no?

Hammster · Apr 18, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
Verse 39 is there. You seem to not want to acknowledge what He was saying in Matthew 24:39. Just as all unbelievers were killed in the flood, so shall it be when Christ returns. It's the same thing Peter wrote about in 2 Peter 3. Do you think 2 Peter 3:3-13 is already fulfilled, too?

and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be.

Yeah, when the destruction came to Jerusalem, some were not prepared. You should read up on the destruction that happened.

Hammster · Apr 18, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
Why do you act as if the word "generation" only has one definition? How was their tribulation in the whole world in 70 AD? You have no answer for that. All you have is your assumption about what "this generation" refers to.

It doesn’t have one definition. But the context, starting all the way back in chapter 23, indicates he was talking about that generation. If you have a different definition of that word you’d like to plug in, let me know so that we can discuss it.

Timtofly · Apr 18, 2021

grafted branch said:
I don’t think I’m going to convince you that JtB is the 2 witnesses, but would you agree that due to the multiple similarities between JtB and the 2 witnesses at the very least JtB is a type and at some point the antitype happens.

What is the antitype of a witness? The point of John being a witness is to force Revelation into the first century. If someone claimed to be John and claimed the Second Coming was about to happen, would any one even listen to him? How does this prove all of Revelation was fulfilled in the first century?

Hammster · Apr 18, 2021

Timtofly said:
Can you elaborate on which generation is the very last one on earth prior to the literal end of the church and Adam's punishment at the same time? That is the end the church is working out, no?

I don’t fully understand your question.

Timtofly · Apr 18, 2021

BABerean2 said:
What is the probability of having the same common words, in the same sequence, without the two passages being parallel Gospels?

That probability is zero, since it is not found anywhere else in the Bible.

Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

You must "understand" Hanukkah found in John 10:22, to understand the reference to the "abomination of desolation" in the Book of Daniel. What did Antiochus Epiphanes do in the Jewish temple during 167 BC? He also surrounded the city, and killed thousands of Jews, and stopped the temple sacrifices for a time.
Did any of these things happen during 70AD?

Conjecture is not proof that both Passages are talking about the same thing. They are two accounts from different people about the same event. There were many more words said that did not get recorded.

Conspiracy cannot be charged to the Holy Spirit. So saying the early church was trying to cover up some big event, accomplishes nothing. They just never made a big deal out of 70AD, to even give proof to the Eschatological point of the Olivet Discourse. Yes, the church could have proved that Jesus was a great prophet, and yes the Temple and city were destroyed.

Not putting emphasis on 70AD would ensure, no one ever made a big deal out of it. Except now many are making a big deal out of it 1900 years later. Would not the Conspiracy now be that God is withholding information? Sound familiar? Remember Eve in the Garden? God, in choosing not to make a big deal out of the 70AD event, and emphasize the Gospel over prophecy, knew that 1900 years later, it would go against His very Word.

6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

grafted branch · Apr 18, 2021

Timtofly said:
What is the antitype of a witness? The point of John being a witness is to force Revelation into the first century. If someone claimed to be John and claimed the Second Coming was about to happen, would any one even listen to him? How does this prove all of Revelation was fulfilled in the first century?

Antitype - One that is foreshadowed by or identified with an earlier symbol or type, as a figure in the New Testament who has a counterpart in the Old Testament.

I place JtB in the Old Testament, with the New Testament starting after the testator dies.

I don’t expect you to believe that JtB was the 2 witnesses, but I do think a person should acknowledge all the similarities between the two.

Timtofly · Apr 18, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
Daniel didn't specify exactly the type of things that would occur there, but he did prophesy that the city and the sanctuary would be destroyed.

With a flood. Was there a flood in 70AD?

Is this story related to the Mark of the Beast?

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Psalm 144:1

Psalm 144:1

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Psalm 144:1

Psalm 144:1

Well-Known Member

Psalm 144:1

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads