Romans; The powers that be

Revelations 13
"Then I saw a second beast, coming out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb, but it spoke like a dragon."

"It exercised all the authority of the first beast on its behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed."

"And it performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of the people."

"Because of the signs it was given power to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived the inhabitants of the earth. It ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived."

"The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed."

Me wonders if Paul was actually fabricated.

a reply to: Specimen88
I covered that chapter in my 2010 threads on Revelation.
The Beast from the sea is a great political state, modelled on the similar states in Deniel ch7.
The second beast is best explained as the loud-mouthed leader of that state.
The relationship between them is exactly the relationship that existed between Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich, when Hitler exercised the authority of the Reich, and persuaded his people to worship the Reich, and to worship himself at the same time.
I mentioned the Revelation state in the OP as the kind of regime which directly sets itself against God.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Like Jews an Roman's wanting to reject the gospel?

Then why is it brought up again in Revelations, with Rome being presented as the Fourth just like Daniel's vision hundreds of year before with the adage of it being the first of the two? All the numero of the beast is highly implied to have been Niro/Nero...and that was said or hinted by John.

How about I accept Jesus, but I deny Paul, is that acceptable?

Not saying Paul is good or bad, just find it very weird that he given such significance, all the while never having met Jesus, but was given an a vision or an image that he originally didnt respect.

And no, your just making superstitious claims to justify the logic, where as the old saying history can repeat itself, much like the fall of Roman Republic and the rise of the Holy Roman Empire...which sounds communists btw with Caesar an what not.

a reply to: Specimen88
Whether Paul was good or bad is not relevant here, so I'm not going to get into that conversation. The topic of the thread is the content of what he says in that chapter of Romans.

a reply to: DISRAELI

So the ex pharisee should of been an atheist an started a CSI training program, where it should be innocent till proven guilty when in Rome.

Story of the ages. Isnt Gnostics illegal?

a reply to: Specimen88
Not on this thread. I know you're something of a newbie here, but you should take time to get hold of the concept of "on-topic", which is very important on this site. Anything that wanders off is going to get disregarded.

a reply to: GBP/JPY

Paul says that when he says he says that he held the coats for those throwing stones...in that same chapter or so...

In some studies of some of the Nazarene scholars [and most all denominations and sects do have their own scholars of their doctrines] it is taught that Saul/Paul was a member of the Jerusalem Sanhedrin or at least some connection of which he was associated to the Jerusalem Sanhedrin. Paul was a disciple of great stature under the tutelage of Gamaliel who in turn was the Nasi [President] of the courts at that time.

Now while it is not planily said in the NT literature that Paul was a judge of the minority authority, it is believed by tradition that Paul was a court member and had both seen and talked with the Christ Jesus at His trial. It is for that reason that he was assigned to witness the execution of Stephen. When the Jerusalem court did get permission from the Roman Senate to execute a person then the court must have a witness that the sentence was carried out as ordered.

This order of execution of Stephen was not approved by Rome because Pilate had been recalled by Rome for insurrection and had left Jerusalem under no other law than the Sanhedrin. The court judges saw this opening and took advantage of this as the means of killing this influential Stephen. This is where Paul comes into play. Paul being with the court was ordered to witness this sentence of Stephen by court order. This is why the executioners lay their garments at Paul's feet so as to guard their possessions. All sentences must have a witness by law. The sentence was carried out under the watch of Paul and submitted to Rome.

Pilate was found guilty of both past crimes against Rome and also of leaving Jerusalem under the Sanhedrin authority. He was then deposed and later committed suicide. A few years later Paul was blinded, regained his sight and repented of his past sins. Murder is but one of many crimes against Gods nature and all can be forgiven without punishment except one. Actually Paul is greater than most of us today in that regard.