Mark of the beast is sunday laws.

[Kerry]

Hi shiloah, No debate tonight. Hey thank God that you go to church. Many in America do not. Many would rather watch TMZ to find out what the stars are doing and how many times they have been married. Praise God for people like you. Who trust in Gods word. Though we see it differently. Praise God. Saturday or Sunday or any other day of the week. When His Kingdom is established it will be everyday as it should know. Hey, you accept Jesus Christ and you are my sister. Brothers and sisters fight sometimes but we are still family. Love you sister.

 

[danschance]

i'm not convinced the sunday law is the mark of the beast.

Well, I am 100% convinced that the mark of the beast is not Sunday worship. As you pointed out in Rev 13, They get a mark on the hand and on the forehead. They also worship the beast. A two year old can see that this is not Sunday worship.

 

[Kerry]

i'm not convinced the sunday law is the mark of the beast.

Well, I am 100% convinced that the mark of the beast is not Sunday worship. As you pointed out in Rev 13, They get a mark on the hand and on the forehead. They also worship the beast. A two year old can see that this is not Sunday worship.

Clearly the mark of the beast has nothing to with anyday. Many say it is chip placed in your hand or forehead. Look, the mark whatever it is cannot be forced, it must be accepted willing and without deceit, the person that accepts it know what they are doing, God is Just enough and He protects His righteousness to the point that no one can stand and say "I didn't know". In fact many teachers in whom I put some weight in say that it must be a tattoo or something similar. Okay so you can't buy or sell without the mark. Many say it's a barcode, well retail giants are running out of barcode combinations, so they are going to rfid chips. You can get one implanted in your pet incase he gets lost and they can track these chips. which is great for inventory.

However, the mark is a mark that you must willing accept. There are places that will not sell to you nor buy your stuff if you are not a member of their club. Kind a like the Union. you can't work where they have control unless you join their group. There are all kinds of theories out there. but, the ones that tie it to being a member of some group or religion make the best sense.

 

[loveme1]

i believe a pledge of allegiance type of thing is sought.

The Messiah was offered much if he would bow down and worship etc.. Matthew 4...

 

[danschance]

Clearly the mark of the beast has nothing to with anyday. Many say it is chip placed in your hand or forehead. Look, the mark whatever it is cannot be forced, it must be accepted willing and without deceit, the person that accepts it know what they are doing, God is Just enough and He protects His righteousness to the point that no one can stand and say "I didn't know". In fact many teachers in whom I put some weight in say that it must be a tattoo or something similar. Okay so you can't buy or sell without the mark. Many say it's a barcode, well retail giants are running out of barcode combinations, so they are going to rfid chips. You can get one implanted in your pet incase he gets lost and they can track these chips. which is great for inventory.

However, the mark is a mark that you must willing accept. There are places that will not sell to you nor buy your stuff if you are not a member of their club. Kind a like the Union. you can't work where they have control unless you join their group. There are all kinds of theories out there. but, the ones that tie it to being a member of some group or religion make the best sense.

I think you have a good handle on it. The bible says it is a mark. So I can assume it is some sort of mark on the surface of the skin, though it might be invisible to the unaided eye. It does not say it is a device or something under the skin. RFIDs are a reality but they don't leave a mark. Also why use two RFIDs (in the hand and forehead)?

I like the way you are thinking on this, but to me it is still future.. how far into the future, I have no idea.
All I know is that it has something to do with worshipping the beast. As you put it it, it must be a willful decision and there is no forgiveness for those who accept it.

 

[Kerry]

I think you have a good handle on it. The bible says it is a mark. So I can assume it is some sort of mark on the surface of the skin, though it might be invisible to the unaided eye. It does not say it is a device or something under the skin. RFIDs are a reality but they don't leave a mark. Also why use two RFIDs (in the hand and forehead)?

I like the way you are thinking on this, but to me it is still future.. how far into the future, I have no idea.
All I know is that it has something to do with worshipping the beast. As you put it it, it must be a willful decision and there is no forgiveness for those who accept it.

amen brother.

 

[danschance]

How can we be forgiven of every sin except the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and receiving the mark of the beast? Even the Sabbath creepers must admit Attending church on Sunday can be forgiven, so it can not be the mark of the beast. I have no idea what the mark of the beast is.

 

[Shiloah]

How can we be forgiven of every sin except the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and receiving the mark of the beast? Even the Sabbath creepers must admit Attending church on Sunday can be forgiven, so it can not be the mark of the beast. I have no idea what the mark of the beast is.

Sabbath creepers. lol. But that's a good point. Anything can be forgiven but that infamous blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Christforme]

You know? What I find so suspicious about these accusers of 7th day Adventists is this. Again, I'm not one and don't know that much about them though I've checked into them recently because of accusations I've seen on here AS WELL as the reasoning I've seen put forth by (apparently) some 7th day Adventists. The reasoning I've seen put forth by the 7th dayers made much more sense than that of the accusers, not to mention, it was all scripturally based. And the accusers? What's funniest is that the accusations made involve these Millerites or whatever that lived back in the early 18 hundreds, and whatever was involved there had absolutely nothing to do with the arguments being discussed. I've never even heard this Ellen White mentioned in here by 7th Day Adventists in respect to these arguments, which have been strictly about the Laws of God, specifically the sabbath law on occasion. So don't you people realize this is a perfect example of basing your arguments on a logical fallacy?

Your argument that is a church that believes that sabbath still should be kept on Saturday originated with a group of people that interpreted something wrong makes the argument itself invalid? Something that had nothing to do with these arguments? Huh? It seems apparent to me that accusation is made when you can't win the argument based on scriptures alone. I also know when I see this accusation made that the accusers are not entirely honest people, nor do they even care if their accusations are entirely sound, for clearly, the reason for these accusations in the first place is simply to devalue the argument of anyone who might be associated with this church on that charge alone, which again, has nothing whatsoever to do with an argument based on scriptures alone.

I've not seen these 7th day Adventists do this. I've only seen them ever base their arguments solely on scripture. This tells me a lot about both sides of this argument.

I truly appreciate that you are understanding the truth of God. But i wanted to tell you something: i am not an SDA. Sdaapostasy.org
The web author is the same as
Remnantofgod.org
Here's a link to free Bible studies that will arm you:
Last Days Studies

God bless you friend. I hope to see you in the kingdom.

 

[Shiloah]

As a "Sabbath creeper," I keep sabbath because, from what I see in scriptures, Christ tells me to. Whether the sabbath becomes the Mark of the Beast of not is yet to be seen. If the time comes that laws are put in force to prevent me from keeping sabbath on the 7th day of the week, then I'll know. However, my keeping that law has nothing to do with this Mark of the Beast concept. If it happens, well it happens. Either way it makes no difference to me.

 

[Shiloah]

I truly appreciate that you are understanding the truth of God. But i wanted to tell you something: i am not an SDA. Sdaapostasy.org
The web author is the same as
Remnantofgod.org
Here's a link to free Bible studies that will arm you:
Last Days Studies

God bless you friend. I hope to see you in the kingdom.

I see. Ok, well cool! Either way, in fact. I'll sure check out your cites! Thanks!

 

[Shiloah]

Would Jesus has broken His own Sabbath? Yet, He worked on the Sabbath. Wonder why He went against the Law which said that no work is to be done on the Sabbath? Perhaps, the Lord of Sabbath was trying to teach us something.

Jesus is our High Priest. Check out this discussion in earlier posts on this thread. Priests doing God's work in the temple were not guilty of breaking the sabbath.

 

[Kerry]

what we all are attempting to do is tame the beast. That beast is self. the only way to overcome the beast is by the blood of the Lamb. Many have already taken the mark by trusting in himself.

I would rather be a Sabbath creeper than to trust in myself. Thank God for Jesus Christ and His work at Calvary. with out it mark or not we are all doomed. Thank you Jesus!!!

 

[Christforme]

Would Jesus has broken His own Sabbath? Yet, He worked on the Sabbath. Wonder why He went against the Law which said that no work is to be done on the Sabbath? Perhaps, the Lord of Sabbath was trying to teach us something.

Let me ask you a question. You are claiming Jesus broke the Sabbath,
Which Jews accused Jesus of doing. Now did Jesus break the Law? Did He not say "i came not to destroy the law, but to FULFILL". Matthew 5:17 where is the fulfilling of the law when you say Jesus broke the Sabbath? Plus if Jesus broke the sabbath then He is a sinner. Your jesus is a false jesus. My Jesus is a Jesus that never once yielded to sin. Jesus defended His claims that He did not break the Sabbath at all. "Which of you convinceth me of sin" that's a question Jesus DARED to challenge the whole Jewish nation with. Jesus does not teach to sin. On the other hand, Jesus taught you that good works on the Sabbath is LAWFUL. "Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days"- matthew 12
The argument with Jesus and the pharisees was not whether we should keep the Sabbath or not. But what was it lawful to do on the Sabbath. Pharisees so degraded and vile and murders that even a child of God they would not release from bondage to the devil. "And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day? -Luke 13:16" ofcourse she ought to be helped. It is murder if you don't.

Now here's a question that can drive you thinking. This is how i will confuse your whole theory of yours that Jesus was teaching to break the Sabbath. Your pastors claim that on the cross Jesus abolished the Law. So in that case you can't even use matthew 12 to claim that Jesus was teaching something else, or that Jesus broke the Law, because before the cross, had He done that, He would have been a sinner. So matthew 12 you can't use to teach that Jesus broke the Law :O cuz back then the law Jesus did not abolish on the cross yet.
Now here's something more to further drive this truth deep down to your heart:
Now that you can't use Matthew 12, we turn to the original point, that the bible colleges make: that the law was abolished at the cross. Let us assume that the law was abolished at the cross. Can't use that too, cuz it makes Jesus a liar :S we don't want that. Jesus said "it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one title of the law to fail."- luke 16:17.
Thank you for reading.

 

[Shiloah]

someone had claimed that the passage in hebrews was telling us we still had to observe the sabbath...i was refuting that claim...since hebrews is talking about something completely different and not relevant to the topic...

Your opinion period.

 

[danschance]

Let me ask you a question. You are claiming Jesus broke the Sabbath,
Which Jews accused Jesus of doing. Now did Jesus break the Law? Did He not say "i came not to destroy the law, but to FULFILL". Matthew 5:17 where is the fulfilling of the law when you say Jesus broke the Sabbath? Plus if Jesus broke the sabbath then He is a sinner. Your jesus is a false jesus. My Jesus is a Jesus that never once yielded to sin. Jesus defended His claims that He did not break the Sabbath at all. "Which of you convinceth me of sin" that's a question Jesus DARED to challenge the whole Jewish nation with. Jesus does not teach to sin. On the other hand, Jesus taught you that good works on the Sabbath is LAWFUL. "Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days"- matthew 12
The argument with Jesus and the pharisees was not whether we should keep the Sabbath or not. But what was it lawful to do on the Sabbath. Pharisees so degraded and vile and murders that even a child of God they would not release from bondage to the devil. "And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day? -Luke 13:16" ofcourse she ought to be helped. It is murder if you don't.

Now here's a question that can drive you thinking. This is how i will confuse your whole theory of yours that Jesus was teaching to break the Sabbath. Your pastors claim that on the cross Jesus abolished the Law. So in that case you can't even use matthew 12 to claim that Jesus was teaching something else, or that Jesus broke the Law, because before the cross, had He done that, He would have been a sinner. So matthew 12 you can't use to teach that Jesus broke the Law :O cuz back then the law Jesus did not abolish on the cross yet.
Now here's something more to further drive this truth deep down to your heart:
Now that you can't use Matthew 12, we turn to the original point, that the bible colleges make: that the law was abolished at the cross. Let us assume that the law was abolished at the cross. Can't use that too, cuz it makes Jesus a liar :S we don't want that. Jesus said "it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one title of the law to fail."- luke 16:17.
Thank you for reading.

It is the story of how Jesus and his disciples were hungry on a Sabbath. SO the walked into a field and pulled some wheat kernals off and ate them. They were accused of breaking the Sabbath by harvesting. So in a sense, he broke man's rules about what they think is right. Of course, Jesus did not break the Sabbath.

Question of the Sabbath
23 And it happened that He was passing through the grainfields on the Sabbath, and His disciples began to make their way along while picking the heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees were saying to Him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?”25 And He said to them, “Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry; 26 how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the consecrated bread, which is not lawful foranyone to eat except the priests, and he also gave it to those who were with him?” 27 Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. 28 “So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” Mark 2

 

[Shiloah]

Would Jesus has broken His own Sabbath? Yet, He worked on the Sabbath. Wonder why He went against the Law which said that no work is to be done on the Sabbath? Perhaps, the Lord of Sabbath was trying to teach us something.

Matthew 12:14

3But He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions, 4how he entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone? 5"Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent?

Isn't Jesus our High Priest?

 

[Christforme]

Show me how the two are realated?

Show me how a vision about killing and eating unclean food at lunch time while hungry is really about gentiles?

Peter himself explains his vision. You come here to the earth 2000 years later? no i will listen to Peter. Oh and by the way, if dietary laws were abolished why did Isaiah prophecy, that those that would be consuming such stuff would be consumed?
"They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine’s flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD. -Isaiah 66:17"
And why John in his book of Revelation still claimed animals to be unclean:
"And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. -Revelation 18:2" ?
No friend. Dietary laws are for your own safety. How many people have been dead because of bad eating habits?! How many people have had not normal children, just because their mommies just for selfishness wanted to eat a pork?
Did you KNOW that John bids you to be healthy?! "I would, that thou mayest prosper and BE IN HEALTH, even as thy soul prospereth."- 3 john 1:2
you gonna keep on eating pork, you will be consumed at the great day of God. Please. Reconsider. This is not the time to love your appetite before God. So you can't claim the verses in timothy that if you bless or pray for God to sanctify the food than it becomes sanctified. Cuz isaiah said those that do this are actually eatin abomination. Isaiah actually mentions pork specifically.

 

[Kerry]

Opinions are an awesome thing. We all have them. just like problems, we all have those too. the question is which opinion do we trust? My opinion our your opinion. this is the dilemma. Should I trust the opinion that I have been taught from my youth or is there other opinions that are closer to right than what I have been taught all my life.

I mean a child that has been taught to rob steal and kill, to get ahead in this life will not listen to meekness or humility.

We must be brought to a place that say's HMMMM. Have I been listening to the right thing. It is very difficult to unlearn what we have been taught. That's what Paul had to do in order to present the Gospel correctly. That's what we have to do in order to understand the true meaning of the cross. We have not been taught the meaning, only given a glimpse.

Knowing the meaning of the cross annuls the mark. I don't fully understand, but I know that denominations ( all of them including pentecostals) are teaching law, psychology, education, and religion ( which is righteousness by works).

 

[Christforme]

God bless you brother, let's look at the Bible.

Deut 5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.

Deut 5:15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.

The word "therefore" Deut 5:15 says I should keep the Sabbath only if I or my ancestors were slaves in Egypt. Sabbath has nothing to do with Gentile Christians and it never has.

So you are saying that not keeping the Sabbath is not for the Christian. Why was Jesus concerned about His Sabbath when He prophesied of the destruction of Jerusalem?
"And pray ye, that your flight be neither in the winter, NOR ON THE SABBATH DAY"- matthew 24:20
And what does Luke 16:17 mean to you?
How about Rev 22:14? Rev 14:12? 1 john 3:8 and 1 john 3:4? What about our lovely 1 john 5:3? 1 john 2:4?
Salvation is by faith. But your faith is dead if you wilfully continue in sin.
Romans 6:15 and romans 3:31 has become my favorite verse almost because no one can answer it. You claim because you got faith, you are released from obligation to the law:
"Do we then make the law void through faith? God forbid. We establish it."- romans 3:31. Paul is saying a big NO to the assumption "you are released from obligation to God's Law". he rather says, God forbid, we will establish the law.

Here's a striking statement too: "shall we sin because we are not under the law, but under grace? GOD FORBID."- romans 6:15.

EXODUS 20:1-17.
Revelation 22:14, "blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right unto the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."
I hope you have understood. It's a lie to keep you out of the holy city, New Jerusalem, that you can go ahead and break carelessly God's law. If you do sin, even though you were honest, you have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. But you don't wilfully sin and spray gravel over God's mercy.