-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The mark spoken of in the bible is some sort of visible tattoo or etching, as given by the word for "mark".
The mark must be visible for practical reasons as well - given that the mark was or is required to buy or sell, the mark cannot be an invisible "sign of the cross" which the priest makes upon a person - which is invisible and temporary with water.
This is also a good argument against implantable computer chips being the mark, which are placed under the skin (therefore largely invisble), and on the upper arm, or in fleshly areas - not in less fleshly areas such as the forehand or forehead.
As far as I understand, Catholics never worship the cross, but Jesus who was put on the cross and what the cross represents. That said, the cross is a very important symbol in Christianity - without the cross there is no Savior.
Where in scripture does it say the beast has statues that talk? Perhaps you are confusing symbolic with literal.
So does Emperor Nero or Caligula and a few other candidates. It is very unlikely that 666 would be applied to an abbreviated title in the mind of the author of Revelation, and it is clear from Rev 13:9 that it represents a man's name, not a title, it also is clear that it is the number of a man (not a title) : "it is the number of a man" (Rev 13:17).
Rome itself sits on seven hills, in the mind of the author of Revelation it was probably the city of Rome - that being pagan Rome. Besides, the Vatican didn't even exist at the time Revelation was written.
Firstly, most theologians interepret 1260 days as literal days. These days are usually interpreted as the literal desecrations of Antiochus IV Epiphanes between 168-165 B. C.
Secondly, a 1260 year reign of papal Rome is completely impractical and incorrect according to history. The empire was assailed from various fronts and there were hundreds of thousands of christians killed by invading pagan groups such as the Nordic, Germanic and Muslim tribes. For most of history, papal Rome was under allegiance to various secular powers, Emperors, and kings and powerful families. The papacy would change allegiance to whoever was the stronger power. A full strength papal Rome "making war with the saints and overcome" for 1260 years doesn't add up with the historical records and must be rejected as myth.
Anti-Christ means opposing Christ. I believe Cup of Ruin has corrected you on this in previous posts.
Further proof from the scripture is that 2 John 1:7 makes clear that the anti-Christ are those who do not believe Jesus came in the flesh. Catholics do not fit into this category, but rather have been the key ones to refute any arguments against the humanity and fleshliness of Christ.
The mark must be visible for practical reasons as well - given that the mark was or is required to buy or sell, the mark cannot be an invisible "sign of the cross" which the priest makes upon a person - which is invisible and temporary with water.
This is also a good argument against implantable computer chips being the mark, which are placed under the skin (therefore largely invisble), and on the upper arm, or in fleshly areas - not in less fleshly areas such as the forehand or forehead.
As far as I understand, Catholics never worship the cross, but Jesus who was put on the cross and what the cross represents. That said, the cross is a very important symbol in Christianity - without the cross there is no Savior.
Where in scripture does it say the beast has statues that talk? Perhaps you are confusing symbolic with literal.
So does Emperor Nero or Caligula and a few other candidates. It is very unlikely that 666 would be applied to an abbreviated title in the mind of the author of Revelation, and it is clear from Rev 13:9 that it represents a man's name, not a title, it also is clear that it is the number of a man (not a title) : "it is the number of a man" (Rev 13:17).
Rome itself sits on seven hills, in the mind of the author of Revelation it was probably the city of Rome - that being pagan Rome. Besides, the Vatican didn't even exist at the time Revelation was written.
Firstly, most theologians interepret 1260 days as literal days. These days are usually interpreted as the literal desecrations of Antiochus IV Epiphanes between 168-165 B. C.
Secondly, a 1260 year reign of papal Rome is completely impractical and incorrect according to history. The empire was assailed from various fronts and there were hundreds of thousands of christians killed by invading pagan groups such as the Nordic, Germanic and Muslim tribes. For most of history, papal Rome was under allegiance to various secular powers, Emperors, and kings and powerful families. The papacy would change allegiance to whoever was the stronger power. A full strength papal Rome "making war with the saints and overcome" for 1260 years doesn't add up with the historical records and must be rejected as myth.
Anti-Christ means opposing Christ. I believe Cup of Ruin has corrected you on this in previous posts.
Further proof from the scripture is that 2 John 1:7 makes clear that the anti-Christ are those who do not believe Jesus came in the flesh. Catholics do not fit into this category, but rather have been the key ones to refute any arguments against the humanity and fleshliness of Christ.
M
The Antichrist, according to Christianity, is one who fulfills Biblical prophecies concerning an adversary of Christ while resembling him in a deceptive manner. "Antichrist" is the English translation of the original Koine Greek ἀντίχριστος, pronounced än-tē'-khrē-stos. It is made up of two root words, αντί + Χριστός (anti + Christos). "Αντί" can mean not only “against” and “opposite of”, but also “in place of"
the mark was visible when branded with an iron as such was the practice.
the cross was invented by costantine when the biggest relics drew the biggest offerings
Rev 13 He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.
rev 13 This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666 pont max and only pont max appears on papal tombs. why then do we call the president "president"
Rome, Vatican whats the difference
The 1260 Years Begin with the Implementation of Emperor Justinian's Decree Arian Ostrogoths under Theodoric had controlled Italy since 493, and had even imprisoned Pope John I, who died in Ostrogoth custody in Ravenna in 526. Catholic Emperor Justinian, who began waging open war with the Arians in the 530s, declared the Bishop of Rome the head of all Christian churches in 533, and commissioned his General Belisarius to destroy the Arian Vandals and Ostrogoths. The Vandals were defeated in 534 in the battle of Tricamarum. Turning his attention to the Ostrogoths, General Belisarius took Rome in December of 536, and under the direction of Emperor Justinian, deposed and exiled Pope Silverius who had been installed by the last Ostrogoth King of Italy, Theodahad, who had terrorized the clergy into electing his pro-Gothic candidate. Silverius died a prisoner. Belisarius installed Vigilius, a confidant of Empress Theodora, as the Bishop of Rome in March of 537. In quick reply, the Ostrogoths rallied and laid siege to Rome. When the siege was finally broken by General Belisarius in March of 538, the Ostrogoths withdrew from Rome in defeat, leaving it in the Emperor's control, and Vigilius as the Bishop of Rome (who reigned until 555 A.D.). So it was in 538 A.D. that Emperor Justinian's Decree of the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome over the Church could actually be implemented, beginning the prophetic 1260 years of temporal rule by the papacy.
The 1260 Years End with a Head Wound to Papal Power
The "head wound" to papal power was inflicted in 1798 when General Berthier of France captured Pope Pius VI, who soon died in captivity in Valence, on August 29, 1799.
... when the French general L. Duphot was killed in a riot in Rome the Directory ordered the occupation of the papal states. On 15 Feb. 1798 General Louis Berthier entered Rome, proclaimed the Roman Republic and the deposition of Pius as head of state, and forced him to withdraw to Tuscany. For several months he lived at the charterhouse at Florence, cut off from almost all his advisers, but able to use the nuncio to Florence as secretary of state. The Directory planned to banish him to Sardinia, but his precarious health ruled that out. When war broke out afresh, fearful of attempts to rescue him, it had him conveyed from Florence (28 Mar. 1799) via Turin across the Alps to Briancon (30 Apr.) and then Valence (13 July). He died a prisoner in the citadel there, and was buried in the local cemetery; his body was then transferred to St. Peter's, in Rome, in Feb. 1802.
Source: The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, by J. N. D. Kelly, Copyright 1986, published by Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-282085-0, page 302.
not just my opinion it appears. now ive corrected you and Ruined Cup.
Snail if you dont like what im saying dont come here any more.
I suspect youre almost convinced!
PS: do you enjoy public egg sucking...buddy. lol...
C
'Pont. Max' is not the official title for the head office of the Papacy, but even if it was, the gematria of the Latin is not 666 let alone the Hebrew, and considering that Pontifex is a purely Roman Latin term. The 'number of the name' will not only fullfill Hebrew gematria is will fulfill all gematria for it will be universal, the recognition will be universal and it is calculated, it is also a 'mark' 'in', the biblical dfinitions of these words are far more significant than a few drops of water on a infants head!
M
lol Ruined... you make it up as you go.
PONT MAX does fit Hebrew gematria YOU figure it out. We discovered this in 1993...im sure you can too...
What ever language it is does not matter no.
Is it just coincident it fits Hebrew and not Nepalese or Inuit! (no dis)
Answer YES OR NO to my NUMBERED questions. I dare you, salty!
1. is baptism a condition of the covenant as circumcision is to the Jews?
2. was Jesus immersed?
3. does the catholic church and all her daughter church's do something to FOREHEADS during this?
4. did Jesus receive anything on his forehead during this?
5. does repent and be baptised all of you appear in the bible?
6. does repent and be baptised and put a cross on you foreheads all of you appear in the bible?
i could go on and on!
R.E.M.E.M.B.E.R.........ONLY YES OR NO'S OR DONT REPLY AT ALL.
PONT MAX does fit Hebrew gematria YOU figure it out. We discovered this in 1993...im sure you can too...
What ever language it is does not matter no.
Is it just coincident it fits Hebrew and not Nepalese or Inuit! (no dis)
Answer YES OR NO to my NUMBERED questions. I dare you, salty!
1. is baptism a condition of the covenant as circumcision is to the Jews?
2. was Jesus immersed?
3. does the catholic church and all her daughter church's do something to FOREHEADS during this?
4. did Jesus receive anything on his forehead during this?
5. does repent and be baptised all of you appear in the bible?
6. does repent and be baptised and put a cross on you foreheads all of you appear in the bible?
i could go on and on!
R.E.M.E.M.B.E.R.........ONLY YES OR NO'S OR DONT REPLY AT ALL.
M
M
Hopefully you have enough intelligence to know the difference between an invisible sign of the cross made with water as the priest makes, and a visible cross branded or marked on the body? The sign of the cross in Christianity has been used as far back as early NT times, probably in line with Ezek 9:4 the mark of God. Jews had hand signs they used as well. You seem to be confused between Christ and satan, aka, the mark of God and the mark of the beast. Yes, God puts a mark on the forehead too you know, see Ezek 9:4 ?
Actually according to your views, we'd be calling the president - pres. , to fit your view of pont. max. ..abbreviated titles
. As I said earlier, the bible says the number is the name of a man. Not the name of many men, or the titles of many men. Go figure.
So you've gone from stating papal Rome reigning for 1260 years, which is not supported by history,
to "1260 years of temporal rule by the papacy", which is more or less making the numbers try fit history I'm afraid. The papacy didn't come to sudden full strength and power in an instant. A decree of supremacy does not make it so. As I said before, most theologians who know what they are talking about , do not consider 1260 to be years but literal days. There are other events which can fit a literal 1260 day fulfillment, let alone requiring us to go to a year-day principle as you do to prove an unproven allegation about the papacy ruling for 1260 years lol.
Anyway just for fun let's compare sources. It seems you've taken a paragraph of dates etc straight off this website: http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/ by a seventh day adventist apologist called Michael Scheifler.
Anyway unlike yourself who prefers the Michael Scheifler who is an Adventist apologist (surprise surprise) and the Oxford Dictionary of Popes , I will give you a few quotes from another Adventist and someone who knows what they are talking about, and who also has a Seventh Day Adventist background and regarded as an accomplished Adventist theologian. I'll quote from Australian theologian Dr D. Ford who has two PhD's , one from MSU in Michigan and one from University of Manchester, England, has been a seminary professor and has studied eschatology for 60 years.
In his book "exposition of Daniel 9:24-27" Ford says regarding the "year - day " principle:
"the year-day principle is quite untenable and has not been used by scholars for the last centuary and a half. None of God's Old Testament people knew of any such principle, nor did th eapostles, the primitive church or the Church Fathers. The first Christian to come anywhere near this approach was the eccentric abbot Joachim of Flora. He died in 1202 AD after having claimed divine inspiration for his interpretation.. as signifying 1260 years. "
"It was a Jew (Nahawendi) who originated the year-day concept in the 9th centuary and not until the 14th did it surface again. "
"The year-day theory.. is no where set forth in Scripture as the key to prophetic symbols"
Also in his book, regarding 1260 years of papal supremacy he says:
"It is not accepted by any historian of note that there was a 1260 year period of papal supremacy from 538 to 1798 AD. The real period was from the 11th to 13th centuary. "
So chew on those eggs
We could easily take any event in papal history and declare it to be a "wound". I don't think this event you mentioned has the significance.
So instead of getting your doctrine from "experts" such as SDA propaganda websites and the Oxford Dictionary of Popes and youtube LOL, (I see it is very appropriate that the views you present are taken from the same place (youtube) where videos of cats on toilets may be found ) I recommend you do some real research and get out some scholarly books by real modern-day eschatology experts. The views and sources you present are outdated and wrong and not accepted by any scholars of reputation , and what you present includes a considerable amount of bias from the SDA propaganderists who are well known for having re-written history to suit their purposes and justify their dislike for Roman Catholicism.
Actually according to your views, we'd be calling the president - pres. , to fit your view of pont. max. ..abbreviated titles
. As I said earlier, the bible says the number is the name of a man. Not the name of many men, or the titles of many men. Go figure. So you've gone from stating papal Rome reigning for 1260 years, which is not supported by history,
to "1260 years of temporal rule by the papacy", which is more or less making the numbers try fit history I'm afraid. The papacy didn't come to sudden full strength and power in an instant. A decree of supremacy does not make it so. As I said before, most theologians who know what they are talking about , do not consider 1260 to be years but literal days. There are other events which can fit a literal 1260 day fulfillment, let alone requiring us to go to a year-day principle as you do to prove an unproven allegation about the papacy ruling for 1260 years lol.
Anyway just for fun let's compare sources. It seems you've taken a paragraph of dates etc straight off this website: http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/ by a seventh day adventist apologist called Michael Scheifler.
Anyway unlike yourself who prefers the Michael Scheifler who is an Adventist apologist (surprise surprise) and the Oxford Dictionary of Popes , I will give you a few quotes from another Adventist and someone who knows what they are talking about, and who also has a Seventh Day Adventist background and regarded as an accomplished Adventist theologian. I'll quote from Australian theologian Dr D. Ford who has two PhD's , one from MSU in Michigan and one from University of Manchester, England, has been a seminary professor and has studied eschatology for 60 years.
In his book "exposition of Daniel 9:24-27" Ford says regarding the "year - day " principle:
"the year-day principle is quite untenable and has not been used by scholars for the last centuary and a half. None of God's Old Testament people knew of any such principle, nor did th eapostles, the primitive church or the Church Fathers. The first Christian to come anywhere near this approach was the eccentric abbot Joachim of Flora. He died in 1202 AD after having claimed divine inspiration for his interpretation.. as signifying 1260 years. "
"It was a Jew (Nahawendi) who originated the year-day concept in the 9th centuary and not until the 14th did it surface again. "
"The year-day theory.. is no where set forth in Scripture as the key to prophetic symbols"
Also in his book, regarding 1260 years of papal supremacy he says:
"It is not accepted by any historian of note that there was a 1260 year period of papal supremacy from 538 to 1798 AD. The real period was from the 11th to 13th centuary. "
So chew on those eggs
We could easily take any event in papal history and declare it to be a "wound". I don't think this event you mentioned has the significance.
So instead of getting your doctrine from "experts" such as SDA propaganda websites and the Oxford Dictionary of Popes and youtube LOL, (I see it is very appropriate that the views you present are taken from the same place (youtube) where videos of cats on toilets may be found ) I recommend you do some real research and get out some scholarly books by real modern-day eschatology experts. The views and sources you present are outdated and wrong and not accepted by any scholars of reputation , and what you present includes a considerable amount of bias from the SDA propaganderists who are well known for having re-written history to suit their purposes and justify their dislike for Roman Catholicism.
Last edited: