America: The cursed burnt offering for the age to come.

reply to post by UNIT76


Ive heard of Bill Cooper in passing, never really examined his work. I'll check it out. Thanks.

brazenalderpadrescorpio
reply to post by Maigret

 

Jehovah's Witnesses say that the 144,000 represent those who are going to rule as kings and priests along with Christ. They fit a large portion of their interpretation of the Bible to this one belief. To me, their reasoning is the one that makes the most sense, biblically. I personally believe that everyone is offered the chance of existence in the spirit-realm however.

Nowhere are the 144,000 are spoken of as being priests, or as having been saved by the atoning Blood sacrifice of the Lamb of God; instead they are described as being the 'first-fruits' and as having been 'sealed by God'.

Whereas Revelation 5:9-10 specifically speaks of the priests, who form the holy nation, as being redeemed to God by the Blood of His Son. In Revelation 7:9 it mentions that there are so many of them who have come through the Tribulation and been washed/cleansed in the Blood (See verse 14) that no one can count them. Elsewhere in the Bible, it is stated that it is only those [men, women and children] who take up their crosses and follow him, who are worthy of his sacrifice... This makes it clear that there are far more than only 144,000 priests!

Revelation 20:4-6 also makes it clearly evident that it is the priests who have come through the Tribulation, who have testified about the Messiah and who refused to worship the Beast, to receive his mark, etc. who will reign as priests of God and the Messiah - and who will not suffer the second death.

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest


An Apocalypse just means an unveiling of something not previously known in any sense. So, I can't really see why an obsession with wanting an unveiling is anything to worry about.

reply to post by Voyaging


Its all about whether or not you are prepared for the unveiling when it happens. My soul is prepared.

ketsuko
reply to post by defcon5

 

I think the Real ID has to be something more permanent to qualify as a mark, but we have the technology for it to easily become so.

For some inexplicable reason people seem to think that the “mark” has to be something that is permanently attached to your body, but that is simply one translation. Revelations 13 uses the phrase “EPI”, which in turn most translate into: “to receive a mark 'on' their right hands or 'on' their foreheads”, but that is not the only translation of the word EPI. It can just as easily be interpreted into “to receive a mark 'based on' their right hands or 'based on' their foreheads”.

In other words the Mark may not be something that goes on your face or hand, but rather something you get after submitting your face and your hand to receive it. The people who wrote the original translation would have no idea of collecting biometrics, and would have never thought to translate it to mean anything other then a physical “branding” of some type.

So moving into a more modern translation, its possible that you receive the mark for allowing collection of a number that is based on the biometrics of your hand or forehead. Biometrics essentially does nothing more then breaking down a digital image into a unique number that is based on measurements of certain biologically unique markers.

A RFID chip can be removed and destroyed, a tattoo can be surgically removed, but allowing the government to collect your biometrics is forever. Once you have submitted your biometrics they will happily issue you new “marks” all day long, whether its in a card, in an RFID chip, a passport, or even if it were a tattoo.

As the DHS lists in its Benchmarks for the Real ID, you are getting a “mark” on your drivers license to show that you are a good citizen in allegiance with the government and not loyal to any terrorists. I find it very telling that the DHS even calls it a mark in the benchmark list where it states your Real ID is: “marked with a DHS marking”... Never heard a government organization call its “logo” a “mark” anywhere else, ever... They normally call them a “Seal” (Eg. 'Seal' of the President of the United States, 'Seal' of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, etc...)

reply to post by Maigret


Are you talking about this verse: After this I saw, and look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes. (Rev. 7:9)

The key is the word, before. If you examine the next link you'll see that all the verses referenced there with that Greek word show that the word before does not require being in the same location. Any scholar will tell you that. So in other words those people with palm branches in their hand, according to the Bible, are here on the Earth. Check it out:

enópios: in sight of, before

BELIEVERpriest
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

No, you need to cite scripture to indicate that Jesus was unwilling to lay His life down for His creation.

Firstly whether he was willing or not is arbitrary, besides he went into Getsemane armed and on watch. A certain Judas Iscariot betrayed him, remember? He resisted the arrest.

Now here's a challenge to you: How do you justify treason and human sacrifice? Biblical or otherwise.

Your pastors have you blinded.

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest


I understod Utnapisjtim's argument to be that if you lay the scriptures down for a second and think about the whole sacrificial theme objectively, you can't come up with a logical answer to why the creator would have to die for his creation.

If you then look to the bible for an answer it seems like the logic used is circular. It basically just moves the plot along.

reply to post by daskakik


Indeed. The bible can be used to justify slavery, genocide, racism, terrorism and of course human sacrifice and high treason. It's a versatile tool for any despot. The testament we have about Jesus was written, shaped and reshaped by his very killers. Pharicees and Romans, and the Roman Church is founded on the only person in the NT Jesus called Satan directly.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


By going to the cross, Jesus essentially stood in front of us and took the "bullet" of sin. Its the same concept as sacrificing yourself for a loved one. It was unsolicoted by His followers, and the conspirators against Him did not seek atonement, but political power. Both God the Father and Jesus seized the opportunity presented by the conspiracy to defer the judgment of sin away from mortal man and towards Jesus who was resurrected. Jesus taught us to lay our lives down for each other as He did for us. I dont know about you, but from where I am from, that is an honourable virtue. Its not the same as the unvoluntary and unclean sacrifices of the Babylonians.

The only ones who commited treason are the conspirators who executed our King of kings.

Firstly whether he was willing or not is arbitrary, besides he went into Getsemane armed and on watch. A certain Judas Iscariot betrayed him, remember? He resisted the arrest.

Now here's a challenge to you: How do you justify treason and human sacrifice? Biblical or otherwise.

Your pastors have you blinded.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim



Jesus was not armed, but at least one of His disciples was. Jesus did not resist arrest. He even said He could've called down legions of angels had He so wished it. If that was the case, I'm sure the angels would've come down to rescue Him, not stand there in columns to nod with tacit approval.

How do I justify human sacrifice, biblical or otherwise? GOD asks it/requires it. Here's the rub: It's your choice. Take it or leave it.
I guess that understanding depends on your own personal understanding of the weight, gravity, seriousness and consequence of sin, the ultimate consequence being the fall out that mankind has had to deal with since it became part of our DNA through personal choice of Adam and Eve. We no longer bear the covering of GOD's protection. We cast it off in a fit of petulant 'I know better'. Since then, we have lost the divine covering that set us apart from the animals and 'beasts' of the earth.
We needed a covering. Its nature has changed with time according to revelation of it.

Utnapisjtim

BELIEVERpriest
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

No, you need to cite scripture to indicate that Jesus was unwilling to lay His life down for His creation.

Firstly whether he was willing or not is arbitrary, besides he went into Getsemane armed and on watch. A certain Judas Iscariot betrayed him, remember? He resisted the arrest.

Now here's a challenge to you: How do you justify treason and human sacrifice? Biblical or otherwise.

Your pastors have you blinded.

edit on 30-3-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: last line

Christ, Himself, said He came to fulfill the Law. It's not exactly a very good law if you just arbitrarily unmake it to suit your whims, whether you are God or not. So, to fulfill the Law which was written to call for sacrifice God offered the one sacrifice which would suffice for all time if you accept it, and He did so willingly knowing it would need to be so.

reply to post by Lucius Driftwood


By "covering", I assume you mean that Adam and Eve emitted light from their skin in the pre-fallen state. I agree. Have you read "Corrupting the Image", by Doug Hamp?

brazenalderpadrescorpio
reply to post by BELIEVERpriest

 

I just have a hard time believing that a nation who has not learned to develop a love for the Christ would suddenly repent. It just sounds like you have blind faith, and that a nation that would do that would also by necessity have blind faith. However, everybody is free to think whatever they would like.

This is a good point and should be addressed. It appears according to the Prophet Ezekiel that Israle will have an old school type repentance according to the old ways, the old covenant. God will restore them to the land at this time or the two events will run concurrently. At some point after this Israle will be fiercely besieged in what appears to be some sort of effort to eradicate them. It is at this point that they will "see Him whom they have pierced" as He appears to save them. It is at this critical point that they understand its the person that they rejected years ago that will now save them.

Utnapisjtim
reply to post by daskakik

 

Indeed. The bible can be used to justify slavery, genocide, racism, terrorism and of course human sacrifice and high treason. It's a versatile tool for any despot. The testament we have about Jesus was written, shaped and reshaped by his very killers. Pharicees and Romans, and the Roman Church is founded on the only person in the NT Jesus called Satan directly.

edit on 30-3-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: Matthew 16:23

These are simply rhetorical conclusions born on some half baking of the story. Despots can only use the bible as a control and justification tool on those ignorant of what it really teaches.

Jesus called Peter "satan" and not "diablos" for a specific reason.....and no Peter was not possessed by the Satan.

I'll keep my mouth shut...

reply to post by Logarock


It just sounds like a whole lot of speculation. I don't even think that anything you're saying is based on what the Bible says.

brazenalderpadrescorpio
reply to post by Maigret

 

Are you talking about this verse: After this I saw, and look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes. (Rev. 7:9)

The key is the word, before. If you examine the next link you'll see that all the verses referenced there with that Greek word show that the word before does not require being in the same location. Any scholar will tell you that. So in other words those people with palm branches in their hand, according to the Bible, are here on the Earth. Check it out:

enópios: in sight of, before

edit on 30-3-2014 by brazenalderpadrescorpio because: (no reason given)

I see at your link, the Greek meaning of the word, 'before' does not specify 'here on earth' as you assert!

reply to post by Maigret


That's because the website has an agenda, as most Christian websites do. You have to look between the lines. Look at all the verses where that word is. The word, before, in those verses does not require being in the same location. Hence, the ones with palm branches are before the throne, but far from God physically. According to the Bible, those with palm branches are here on the Earth.