- Jan 3, 2014
- 2,608
- 964
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What does that have to do with the "mark"?Most of the world leaders & the masses pledged alliance to King Charles at his Coronation
Am I making sense?
So I'm still at the understanding that the mark of the beast could be a chip or a DNA change.
But there's also the reference to men longing for death which could be the result of conditions and the realizations of those who've taken the mark.
Not forgetting the sores they break out with, it all fits together for it to be DNA splicing, and what were they doing in Noah's day ?
Agreed. This past and present reality in John's days was true about the "mark". It had already been in use before John was writing Revelation, and it was also then presently in use. The Rev. 13 Land Beast had been requiring the use of that "mark" by everyone coming to the land of Israel who desired to offer worship in the Jerusalem temple. That "mark" gave homage to the Roman phase of the Rev. 13 Sea Beast that was then in power in John's days.If read exactly as written then some of what is in the book of Revelation had already transpired (the things which John had seen), and some of it was about conditions existing at the time of his writing the book (the things which are),
John 21:25
But there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they were written in detail, I expect that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.
Say as who?Sort of. What I don't understand is that Jesus hasn't returned yet...
Yes, it has. It has been 2000 years since God stated the things that would happen quickly was near. So is God mistaken or a liar? No! Definitely not. That leaves us with only one other conclusion: Jesus did come, but not as most of our end-times views say he's supposed to come. Most of these debates on eschatology are about what a particular doctrine teaches, not what scripture teaches. When the Dispensationalist, for example, argues, "That hasn't yet happened!" what s/he more accurately means is, "The way my end-times doctrine teaches 'X' will happen has not yet happened." That's an entirely different statement than "What scripture teaches hasn't happened."& it's been 2,000 years since John wrote revelation,
Who said God is the only one who knows?if God is the only one who knows when Jesus is to return
Yep. And He stated it in His word., surely God would know in what era we would be living at upon Jesus's return.
Yes, that is true, but the reason it has meaning for all people of all generations (beginning with those who are Christians) is because God was faithful and true. It is because He kept His word that we KNOW we can trust Him. The modern futurist teaches an entirely different kind of trust. They teach we're are to trust God because He will keep His word, not because He has kept His word.I'm at a understanding that Revelation was written for our generation...
No. In Matthew 24 Jesus told his disciples, the ones sitting there with him on the Mount of Olives to be ready. You, me, and everyone living in the 21st century are never mentioned. Go back and read that chapter and ask yourself, "To whom does the 'you' in this verse refer?"...as we are told in Matthew 24 the things to look out for in order to be ready for his 2nd coming.
Okay.So I'm still at the understanding that the mark of the beast could be a chip or a DNA change.
That might be true if any of those sources were identified, but they are not. That means the inclusion of any other source must first be examined for its integrity with whole scripture. I've recently been having a conversation with a poster in another forum who has expressed the view this book, HERE, might be a legitimate source for understanding 1) Solomon's Christology and 2) why Jews of the first century would expect the Messiah to be able to cast out demons. It is my opinion they book is not to be considered a legitimate source for either task because the book's contents contradict scripture in many ways and in multiple places (beginning with its claim the "heart girl with the serpent" is the "bornless" lord of all things who can invoke God). That book is NOT something that could scripturally or logically be considered something to which John might be alluding in that verse.This passage tells me that we do no wrong in looking into the lost books of the Bible, where we can learn more about Jesus & his second coming.
Perhaps, but we don't know the mark has anything to do with Rome. What we do know is that the mark, whatever it was/is/or will be (and I include all three possibilities solely as a concession to the modern futurists so as not to create unnecessary division) is something understandable by the original readers of Revelation 13. To say otherwise inescapably makes the text meaningless to both the first century, original reader and every Christian who has lived and will ever live between the time the book was written and the time the mark appears.Agreed. This past and present reality in John's days was true about the "mark". It had already been in use before John was writing Revelation, and it was also then presently in use. The Rev. 13 Land Beast had been requiring the use of that "mark" by everyone coming to the land of Israel who desired to offer worship in the Jerusalem temple. That "mark" gave homage to the Roman phase of the Rev. 13 Sea Beast that was then in power in John's days.
But you are mistaken that it is only a "peripheral" issue of what the Sea Beast's identity was. If you don't know the identity of the Land Beast that was requiring the "mark", and the identity of the Sea Beast which that "mark" was giving homage TO, then you can't really figure out what that "mark" was.
The "mark" which gave homage to the Roman phase of the Rev. 13 Sea Beast and its demi-gods was the required use of the Tyrian shekel in the temple in order to buy or sell sacrificial items for worship. The Tyrian shekel was also the coin which was required for paying the annual temple tax by the adult Israelite males. The two-horned Rev. 13 Land Beast was the religious leadership of Israel with its Pharisee and Sadducee rulers of the Sanhedrin who spoke lies like Satan the Dragon. This Land Beast of Israel's religious leadership had been demanding that all foreign currency be exchanged for this single Tyrian shekel coin before any buying or selling could be done in Jerusalem's temple. A fee was charged for this "exchange service", and was collected by the money-changers. This was the reason why Christ was so enraged at the money-changers who had turned His Father's house into a "den of thieves" with this abominable practice instituted by the high priesthood.
The Tyrian shekel "mark" which gave homage to the Roman phase of the Sea Beast remained as the only coin allowed for temple transactions until AD 66 when the Zealots launched the rebellion against Rome. After AD 66, the Zealots began minting their own currency instead, and the Tyrian shekel "mark" was no longer being required for temple purchases and sales. As of the time John was writing Revelation, the Tyrian shekel "mark" would only be required for just a few more years - 6 more years to be exact.
Actually, we do know. What proves to me that the mark required by the Rev. 13 Judean Land Beast gave homage to Rome is the information in Revelation 13:2. In this verse, it says that the Dragon's / Satan's throne was given to the Sea Beast, along with great authority. John had already written in Revelation 2:13 that the throne of Satan was in the city of Pergamos.Perhaps, but we don't know the mark has anything to do with Rome.
That is speculation. No matter how well-informed it may be, it is still speculation. In the absence fo either some specific scripture explicitly explaining the mark or some post-NT era history explicitly specifying the mark its identity is lost to time.Actually, we do know. What proves to me that the mark required by the Rev. 13 Judean Land Beast gave homage to Rome is the information in Revelation 13:2. In this verse, it says that the Dragon's / Satan's throne was given to the Sea Beast, along with great authority. John had already written in Revelation 2:13 that the throne of Satan was in the city of Pergamos.
The fulfillment of this was when the entire idol-worshipping kingdom of Pergamos along with that throne in Pergamos was given to the Roman Republic in 133 BC. The dying king of the Pergamum kingdom, Attalus III, had no heir to whom he could pass his kingdom, so in his will he bequeathed it entirely to his ally, the Roman Republic. This bequest was recorded by the Roman senate.
This connection of Revelation 2:13 with Revelation 13:2 tells us that the Sea Beast was in some way connected with ancient Rome.
What are you talking about? The Tyrian shekel being the mark that gave homage to the ancient Roman phase of the Sea Best most definitely matches the temporal language of Revelation 1:19 on all fronts. As you yourself have pointed out, John was to write about past things he had seen, present things going on, and those things that were "about to take place hereafter".And your belief violates the temporal specifications provided in Revelation, so it's a bad speculation.
No, the identity of the "mark" is not "lost to time". You need to do some numismatic study of the Tyrian shekel to see why its images and inscriptions were considered so abominable by God, and such a disobedient act against His commandments not to take the silver of other gods unto themselves, because it was "a cursed thing". The high priesthood was totally ignoring those OT commandments in Deuteronomy 7:25-26 in order to make vast profits from exchanging all other foreign currency coming to the temple for their required Tyrian shekel coin. Christ's driving the money-changers from the temple for this offense should tell you how abominable this Tyrian shekel requirement was.That is speculation. No matter how well-informed it may be, it is still speculation. In the absence fo either some specific scripture explicitly explaining the mark or some post-NT era history explicitly specifying the mark its identity is lost to time.
When was Revelation written?What are you talking about?
John wrote Revelation 666 YEARS after the Sea Beast first began its existence back under King Nebuchadnezzar (the "lion" kingdom in Daniel's writings). The first Babylonian deportation of Jerusalem's nobility was in 607 BC (including Daniel and his friends). Sometime between late AD 59 and early AD 60, John wrote the book of Revelation after 666 YEARS of those various pagan nations holding control over Israel (the "lion", the "bear" and the "leopard" features of the Sea Beast in Rev. 13:2).When was Revelation written?
And how many years occur between 59 and 60 AD and 119 AD? That would be about 60 years after the "near/at hand" of Revelation 1 and 22, and about 120 years after the "you will sees/hears" and "this generation" of Matthew 24.Sometime between late AD 59 and early AD 60.....
I'm afraid you will have to explain why you are bringing up the AD 119 year. Are you accidentally mistaking this for the 19 BC year I brought up? That year of 19 BC was when King Herod was making plans for his lavish temple renovations, and needed to show the priesthood that he had plans for a ready source of money in Israel to fund those extensive temple renovations.And how many years occur between 59 and 60 AD and 119 AD? That would be about 60 years after the "near/at hand" of Revelation 1 and 22, and about 120 years after the "you will sees/hears" and "this generation" of Matthew 24.
Do you see a problem with that? I do. It's too much time. The mark was something John's 59-60 AD original audience knew was at hand, something they were going to observe (and experience if they didn't heed the warning). Most of his readers would have been dead had they had to wait another 60 years, and if any of them had been present in Mattew 24 they'd all be dead by 119 AD.
My bad. I mistakenly thought you'd posted something about a mark occurring in 119 AD, but I see that you have, instead said the mark began in 19 AD. I stand corrected (and appreciate the commendable grace extended in my error).I'm afraid you will have to explain why you are bringing up the AD 119 year. Are you accidentally mistaking this for the 19 BC year I brought up?
So, what you are saying, if I understand this correctly, is that the "mark" of Revelation 13 is part of the Revelation 1:19's things already seen and things that are, and not (just) things that take place afterwards. Is that correct?That year of 19 BC was when King Herod was making plans for his lavish temple renovations, and needed to show the priesthood that he had plans for a ready source of money in Israel to fund those extensive temple renovations.
I think it is more than just coincidence that the high priesthood asked permission from Rome to began minting their copy of the Tyrian shekel in that same 19 BC year. The fee which the money-changers charged every time someone coming to the temple wished to either buy or sell sacrificial items for their temple worship (swapping any foreign currency for the required Tyrian shekel) provided a steady stream of funds for the temple's renovations....
Yes, that is what I intended to say. And thank you for clarifying that bit about the AD 119 year being just a simple mis-reading of the 19 BC year.So, what you are saying, if I understand this correctly, is that the "mark" of Revelation 13 is part of the Revelation 1:19's things already seen and things that are, and not (just) things that take place afterwards. Is that correct?
Revelation 1:19
Therefore, write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things.
If that is correct then 1) how is that shekel a mark on the hand or forehead, and 2) what do you think of the appeal to an extra-biblical source as the explanation for the mark?
Source?Yes, that is what I intended to say. And thank you for clarifying that bit about the AD 119 year being just a simple mis-reading of the 19 BC year.
For all those great and small, rich and poor, free and bond who in Rev. 13:16-17 were caused "to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads", this Tyrian shekel "mark" WAS received in the right hands of those coming to the temple who had to hand over their own foreign currency to the money-changers, along with a transaction fee. In exchange, these all received in their right hand the Tyrian shekel so that they could either sell sacrificial items or buy them if they were not able to bring those things with them on their journey to the temple.
As for the "forehead" part of this verse where the "mark" was received, women in those days wore a headdress with a set of ten Tyrian shekels on the forehead portion of that headdress, which denoted their marital status. This was why the woman in the "lost coin" parable in Luke 15:8-9 was so upset at losing one of those drachma coins, since it was the equivalent of a woman today losing her wedding ring somewhere in her house.
John mentioned both the right hand and then the forehead in connection with this "mark", since this covered the universal use of that profane Tyrian shekel in those days by both men and women, free and bond, small and great, rich and poor.
This isn't strictly an appeal to an extra-biblical source I'm using to explain this "mark". The money-changers are well known from scripture. Christ's angry response to this abuse of His Father's house in John 2:13-17 was totally understandable. The temple should have been a house of prayer instead of a "den of thieves" which was extorting that onerous fee from everyone to make them comply with the profane Tyrian shekel requirement in the temple, both Israelite and those from other nations as well who came to the temple to worship.
The woman in the "lost coin" parable is also well known from Luke 15:8-9. The coin in this context was a "drachma" in this case, which in Jewish terminology was the shekel coin. The value of a complete set of ten drachma coins worn on a married woman's headdress can be compared to the annual tax of the half-shekel (didrachma) from every adult male in Israel. So the married woman's headdress actually had the value of twenty annual temple tax payments by a single adult Israelite male.
Likewise, the dated year when King Herod began plans for the temple renovations is known from John 2:20, where the Jews told Christ, "forty-six years was this temple in building..." prior to Christ's first Passover of His earthly ministry in AD 30. It took a couple years for King Herod to plan and collect materials and start funding for the renovations. (This connects with the 19 BC year I proposed above when the high priesthood asked Rome if they could start minting those Tyrian shekel copies to use in the temple.) Then in 17 BC, those 46 years of the temple's actual building process were initiated (up to AD 30 which was Christ's first Passover of His earthly ministry).
So this presentation of the Tyrian shekel required by the high priesthood being the "mark" is mixed with both scripture and historical records that coincide with each other on the chronological timeline. None of this information is self-contradictory.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?