CHECK THIS OUT: 666 IS REAL & PASTORS ARE PROMOTING IT!!! (Part 1)

[Endtime Survivors]

The "Mark of the Beast" is not a microchip implant. Revelation indicates it was addressed to the church leaders at the time, and the Number of the Beast was a way to refer to Nero, with 666 being the "number of his name".

Yeah, yeah, yeah, and apparently the teachings of Jesus were only meant for the "messianic generation", whatever that means.

Have you ever read the 1st verse of the Revelation? "A Revelation of Jesus Christ to his servants". Have you ever taken some time to think about what that means? It's rather heartbreaking to hear a Christian claim, "The Revelation of Jesus isn't for me".

In Revelation 19 an angel says to John, "The spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus". It's a profound statement indicating that the Revelation isn't just a series of prophecies but rather a portrait of spiritual principles based on the teachings of Jesus. Although they are contained in different "books", the spirit is the same between them . And you're ready to casually dismiss all of that because some specific "churches" are mentioned?

What about "get back to your first love"? Is that only for the early church? What about, "Because you are luke-warm I will spit you out". Is that waring only valid for one particular group of people thousands of years ago?

The stated purpose of the Mark is to control buying/selling. It's obviously an issue of our relationship to money and the things money can buy, just like Jesus taught when he said, "you can't work for God and money without cheating on one or the other. Seek my kingdom first".

 

[parousia70]

I'm so confused....where did I ever suggest that "God was seen doing all these things at the time of the Ancient Battle"?

Scripture says He was. Do you not believe it?
Will you challenge the scriptural account?
Where is the corroborating evidence?

You see, if you can't evidence that it did happen, wouldn't that be evidence that it hasn't yet taken place?

So you believe the Battle between King David and Saul never took place?

Or do you hold to a different "standard of proof" for that one than you do for the Revelation?

 

[parousia70]

Deleted

 

[parousia70]

my thresh hold for evidence is at this point extremely low, anything at all that even resembles the second coming would be worthy of looking at in my opinion

Josephus (A.D. 75) - Jewish Historian
"Besides these [signs], a few days after that feast, on the one- and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Jyar,] a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence" (Jewish Wars, VI-V-3).

“A supernatural apparition was seen, too amazing to be believed. What I am now to relate would, I imagine, be dismissed as imaginary, had this not been vouched for by eyewitnesses, then followed by subsequent disasters that deserved to be thus signalized. For before sunset chariots were seen in the air over the whole country, and armed battalions speeding through the clouds and encircling the cities.” (rendered in Chilton)

Tacitus (A.D. 115) - Roman historian
"13. Prodigies had occurred, but their expiation by the offering of victims or solemn vows is held to be unlawful by a nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs. In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure.

 

[razzelflabben]

Scripture says He was. Do you not believe it?
Will you challenge the scriptural account?
Where is the corroborating evidence?

seriously, what are you going on about? I am so confused by your questions here I don't even know how to answer. I have proudly declared that what God says is done, no doubt....I have indicated that Scripture is absolutely the word of God and thus truth...I do believe that we are instructed in scripture to test everything to see if it is from God and I have been pretty clear about that as well. What corroborating evidence do you want for what? I don't get it...what do you want me to evidence? My claim is that the second coming of Christ has not yet come and you want corroborating evidence...of what?

these questions are in relation to an old testament account that I accepted long ago as evidence through witness testimony but that even is not what Rev. tells us the second coming of Christ will be like, so I have no clue what so ever what it is you are trying to argue here...none at all...

So you believe the Battle between Kindg David and Saul never took place?

????? where would you get that idea? SEriously, I said that an event can happen without seeing the source of the thing and you get from that I don't believe something happened?????? Wow...that is like me saying, I know that the earthquake happened because of shifting plates in the earth even though we didn't see the plates shifting. And you coming along and trying to accuse me of not accepting there was an earthquake because we didn't see shifting plates that I already acknowledged we didn't have to physically see in order to know what caused the quake....you are at this point just trying to flame me and I will not tolerate it. We can have a great discussion but not by this kind of non sense.

Or do you hold a different set of "standard of proof" for that one than you do for the Revelation?

I already told you without hesitation that my level of proof was at this point very low....what more do you want? You have an open field so to speak of just about any kind of proof you want to offer other than "cause I say so" or "cause Joe says so"...pretty much anything else goes at this point of the discussion. Just keep in mind it has to at least resemble the accounts of prophecy in Rev. something totally off is evidence of another event.

 

[razzelflabben]

Josephus (A.D. 75) - Jewish Historian
"Besides these [signs], a few days after that feast, on the one- and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Jyar,] a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence" (Jewish Wars, VI-V-3).

“A supernatural apparition was seen, too amazing to be believed. What I am now to relate would, I imagine, be dismissed as imaginary, had this not been vouched for by eyewitnesses, then followed by subsequent disasters that deserved to be thus signalized. For before sunset chariots were seen in the air over the whole country, and armed battalions speeding through the clouds and encircling the cities.” (rendered in Chilton)

Tacitus (A.D. 115) - Roman historian
"13. Prodigies had occurred, but their expiation by the offering of victims or solemn vows is held to be unlawful by a nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs. In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure.

and....so far I don't see very many parallels to the Rev. prophecy which was your only limitation....

 

[Straightshot]

The preterist uses Josephus who was an unregenerate Jew for proving that 70 AD is an account contained within the scope of the prophetic scriptures

This man was not a prophet and appears nowhere in scripture

70 AD is an historical account of the Roman incursions not found in any prophet's vision and was not the time of the end of this present age still pending

 

[parousia70]

and....so far I don't see very many parallels to the Rev. prophecy which was your only limitation....

Very many?
So you do see a few?

 

[parousia70]

seriously, what are you going on about? I am so confused by your questions here I don't even know how to answer. I have proudly declared that what God says is done, no doubt....I have indicated that Scripture is absolutely the word of God and thus truth...I do believe that we are instructed in scripture to test everything to see if it is from God and I have been pretty clear about that as well. What corroborating evidence do you want for what? I don't get it...what do you want me to evidence? My claim is that the second coming of Christ has not yet come and you want corroborating evidence...of what?

Ok. I'll try to be as Direct as possible:
In the account of the Battle between David and Saul, God is described as doing a host of VISIBLE PHYSICAL things that I listed for you.

I contend that those things were accomplished metaphorically.
I do not believe God was SEEN flying on a Cherub, appearing on the clouds, shooting actual arrows at Saul's armies, with smoke billowing from His nostrils and Kindling coals of fire with His breath. I do not believe the literal foundations of the entire earth and all of heaven shook and were were laid bare during that battle, the way the prophet says they were.

Would you agree or disagree with my assessment of the nature of that FULFILLED event?

If you likewise believe those things were accomplished metaphorically, then we can move on to where you believe scripture teaches you to interpret Old Testament phrases such as "God rides a swift could" and was "Seen by the eyes of all nations" metaphorically, yet teaches you to interpret New Testament phrases such as "He is coming on the clouds and every eye shall see" in polar opposite, Literal fashion.

Conversely, If you believe God physically Shot arrows at Saul, kindled fire with His breath, visibly appeared on the clouds riding a cherub, and laid the entire literal foundations of heaven and earth bare at that time, I'm going to ask you to produce any historical record of that event that even remotely resembles such, Just as you have asked of me.

 

[razzelflabben]

Very many?
So you do see a few?

loud noise is about it...which isn't anything to fuse over, loud noises happen all the time, in fact, the noise is suppose to be a trumpet sound which was not what the text you offered said at all.

 

[razzelflabben]

Ok. I'll try to be as Direct as possible:
In the account of the Battle between David and Saul, God is described as doing a host of VISIBLE PHYSICAL things that I listed for you.

I contend that those things were accomplished metaphorically.
I do not believe God was SEEN flying on a Cherub, appearing on the clouds, shooting actual arrows at Saul's armies, with smoke billowing from His nostrils and Kindling coals of fire with His breath. I do not believe the literal foundations of the entire earth and all of heaven shook and were were laid bare the way the prophet says they were.

Would you agree or disagree with my assessment of the nature of that FULFILLED event?

I would say you are delusional if you think that account is a mirror of what Rev. tells us will happen.

 

[parousia70]

loud noise is about it...which isn't anything to fuse over, loud noises happen all the time, in fact, the noise is suppose to be a trumpet sound which was not what the text you offered said at all.

Really?
Horses, chariots, and angelic armies in the clouds are never mentioned in NT eschatology?
Lightning is never mentioned either I suppose....

 

[parousia70]

I would say you are delusional if you think that account is a mirror of what Rev. tells us will happen.

Can you answer the question?
Do you believe God accomplished those things at Saul's Defeat LITERALLY or METAPHORICALLY?

 

[parousia70]

I would say you are delusional if you think that account is a mirror of what Rev. tells us will happen.

Explain How only delusional people see a mirror between this and the Revelation please:

God Comes To Judge Ancient Babylon Using the Medes - 500s BC
Again, this Historically documented event took place in 539 BC... we are not still waiting for Ancient Babylon to be destroyed by the Medeo-Persian Armies.

It's HISTORY.

Pay close attention to the language used and ask yourself if it sounds familiar...

Wail, for the day of the LORD is near; it will come like destruction from the Almighty! Therefore all hands will be feeble, and every human heart will melt, and they will be dismayed. Pangs and agony will seize them; they will be in anguish like a woman in labor. They will look aghast at one another; their faces will be aflame. See, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with wrath and fierce anger, to make the earth a desolation, and to destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light. I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity...Therefore I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken out of its place, at the wrath of the LORD of hosts in the day of his fierce anger. Like a hunted gazelle, or like sheep with no one to gather them, all will turn to their own people, and all will flee to their own lands. Whoever is found will be thrust through, and whoever is caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be plundered, and their wives ravished. See, I am stirring up the Medes against them, who have no regard for silver and do not delight in gold. Their bows will slaughter the young men; they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not pity children. And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the splendor and pride of the Chaldeans, will be like Sodom and Gomorrah when God overthrew them. (Isaiah 13:6-11, 13,15-19)


This Particular Past "Day of the Lord" came to pass in 539 BC when the Medeo-Persian Armies overthrew Babylon.

Notice the language used?
Sound Familiar?

 

[razzelflabben]

Really?
Horses, chariots, and angelic armies in the clouds are never mentioned in NT eschatology?
Lightning is never mentioned either I suppose....

not what I said and you know it...there is a vast difference between something having something in it that resembles and something that is identical to and you have to know that being an intelligent person.

 

[razzelflabben]

Can you answer the question?
Do you believe God accomplished those things at Saul's Defeat LITERALLY or METAPHORICALLY?

I did answer the question...if you think that the battle in question is a mirror of the prophecy of Rev. I think you are delusional. It's as simple as that. As to the other question about literal or metaphoric, what do the common literary rules tell us? Hum...you see, I have repeatedly seen you dismiss the common literary rules in exchange for your opinion so no matter how I answer the question you will reinvent it into something new so that you can pretend to "prove" me wrong which is dishonest and rude. So the only answer you need is it is what the common literary rules tell us it is. Feel free to use those rules to show me if it is literal or metaphoric but remember, I have my degree in reading and have taught reading comprehension for years so an answer of "cause I say so" won't fly.

 

[razzelflabben]

Explain How only delusional people see a mirror between this and the Revelation please:

I'm going to just point out a couple of painfully obvious problems with your assertion since you don't listen to anything said anyway as per your posts....

God Comes To Judge Ancient Babylon Using the Medes - 500s BC
Again, this Historically documented event took place in 539 BC... we are not still waiting for Ancient Babylon to be destroyed by the Medeo-Persian Armies.

It's HISTORY.

Pay close attention to the language used and ask yourself if it sounds familiar...

Wail, for the day of the LORD is near;

notice the word near, not here....remember this is what you highlighted as important

it will come like destruction from the Almighty! Therefore all hands will be feeble, and every human heart will melt,

please show me the mirror of this statement in Rev.

and they will be dismayed. Pangs and agony will seize them; they will be in anguish like a woman in labor. They will look aghast at one another; their faces will be aflame. See, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with wrath and fierce anger, to make the earth a desolation, and to destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light. I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity...Therefore I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken out of its place, at the wrath of the LORD of hosts in the day of his fierce anger.

First notice this says "I will" iow's not having already happened...remember, I am only responding to what you highlighted as important....further it says that God comes to destroy sinners, whereas Rev. says He comes to reconcile, that is two vastly different things. As too the rest, there have been other times of darkness and earth shaking, one that jumps to mind is the crucifixion of Christ.

Like a hunted gazelle, or like sheep with no one to gather them, all will turn to their own people, and all will flee to their own lands. Whoever is found will be thrust through, and whoever is caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be plundered, and their wives ravished. See, I am stirring up the Medes against them, who have no regard for silver and do not delight in gold. Their bows will slaughter the young men; they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not pity children. And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the splendor and pride of the Chaldeans, will be like Sodom and Gomorrah when God overthrew them. (Isaiah 13:6-11, 13,15-19)

sounds like the god Molech...but then again...not something you highlighted so moving on...

This Particular Past "Day of the Lord" came to pass in 539 BC when the Medeo-Persian Armies overthrew Babylon.

Notice the language used?
Sound Familiar?

I did notice and pointed out some of the most blatant obvious not like Rev. wording there is much more that we could talk about but history tells us you won't listen anyway so why bother.

 

[parousia70]

not what I said and you know it...there is a vast difference between something having something in it that resembles and something that is identical to and you have to know that being an intelligent person.

First you asked me to produce that anything even resembling the Revelation.
Once I provide it you change the rule to "Identical"?

I suppose when you move the goalposts around like that it's easier to feel in control of the debate.

 

[parousia70]

I did answer the question...if you think that the battle in question is a mirror of the prophecy of Rev. I think you are delusional.

My point is that in the account I mentioned, the prophet describes a host of things God "does" Physically and Visibly in Battle.

IF you are insisting that John in the Revelation does NOT describe a Host of things Christ "Does" Physically and Visibly in battle, then I believe you are the delusional one.

It's as simple as that. As to the other question about literal or metaphoric, what do the common literary rules tell us? Hum...you see, I have repeatedly seen you dismiss the common literary rules in exchange for your opinion so no matter how I answer the question you will reinvent it into something new so that you can pretend to "prove" me wrong which is dishonest and rude. So the only answer you need is it is what the common literary rules tell us it is. Feel free to use those rules to show me if it is literal or metaphoric but remember, I have my degree in reading and have taught reading comprehension for years so an answer of "cause I say so" won't fly.

Well Lets look at the Cloud coming of Christ that every eye would see (Revelation 1:7)
Feel free to apply those rules as you see fit:

That very cloud coming of Rev 1:7 is depicted fully in Revelation 14:14-20 -- the passage shows us unquestionably an event that takes place in the UNSEEN heavenly realms. Do you see this?

Next, as I keep reminding you but you reject "because you say so" Yahweh came many, many times -- Jesus' coming is a mirror action, proving his equality and divinity with Yahweh. Yahweh came down and shot his arrows at Saul and his armies, destroying the earth and the heavens at the time (2 Sam 22:8-16); Yahweh came down and shot his arrows over Greece (Zechariah 9:13-14); Yahweh came down riding a cloud to beat up on Egypt (Isa 19:1-2); Yahweh made bare his Holy Arm in the eyes of all nations (Isa 52:10); Yahweh came to the Israelites at Sinai and Seir with Ten Thousand of His Saints and led a march on the fields of Edom (Deut 33:2; Judges 5:4-5); Yahweh destroyed the universe when he judged Israel through Babylon (Jer 4:22-30) and did so again when he judged Egypt by Babylon (Ezekiel 32:2-8). So also did Christ do these things when "the Lord of the Vineyard came" in AD 66-70 and was to them the Stone that crushed them to powder and removed the Kingdom of God from them (see Matthew 21:40-45).

My specific point is that Revelation 1:7's "he comes with clouds" and Matt 26:64's "hereafter you [Caiaphas] shall see the son of man...coming in the clouds of heaven" ARE THE SAME EVENT AS Revelation 14:14-20, which is clearly a depiction of a heavenly visitation, not some physical appearing in cumulus clouds. Read that Revelation 14:14-20 passage to see that ST. John is not thinking of a physical event in the skies overhead, but of an event in the heavenly realms. This was fulfilled in the Day of the Lord against Israel in AD 67-70 when Christ the Stone--the Lord of the Vineyard--came in their generation, and did grind them to powder as foretold (Matt 21:40-45; Matt 23:34-38; Matt 24:33-34).

Go ahead and show us where I'm wrong in my assertions.

Show us what Literary rules instruct you to interpret "God Rides a Swift cloud" and was "seen by the eyes of all Nations" as metaphor in the OT but Interpret "He is coming on the clouds and every eye shall see" as Literal in the NT.

 

[razzelflabben]

First you asked me to produce that anything even resembling the Revelation.
Once I provide it you change the rule to "Identical"?

no, identical would be word for word, you provided something that you want to resemble it but it doesn't really as I pointed out to you. Do I really need to start quoting from Rev. in order for you to see what I am saying?

I suppose when you move the goalposts around like that it's easier to feel in control of the debate.

lol no goal post has moved...it has to resemble it which I showed you it didn't....equate it to this...I say to you that the pair of shoes in the corner are the same shoes that were sitting on the dryer because they both have soles. Forget that they are different colors and different sizes and different makes, they both have soles so they must be the same shoes...this is how you are arguing. You take a story that doesn't really resemble what you claim then accuse me of changing the goal post because I tell you it has to have more than a sole to testify to them being the same thing.