The Abomination Of Desolation

[Alofa Atu]

Whatever the Mark is, it will that by which you be able to buy and sell, travel, and get all your other access, needs and services.

They come at you by your vices first, needs after.

People won’t be able to go to the bottle shops to get alcohol, so people who are addicted to alcohol will fold at that point. Take the Mark.

People who need medicine and medical services, will be barred from treatment and fold at that point and take the Mark.

People who need food, will not be able to buy it, fold and take the Mark.

Time of great distress, yes, not like any other time in history.

These controls are in place now, in phase 1.

I know what the Mark is, even the Beast, and it's number.

I basically agree with you. Much is already in place. Now comes the last act in the drama, with several scenes to unfold.

7th SEALed In - Sermon - Study By brother Aaron Earnest : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Civil (See Evil) War - State Of RuiNation, sermon study by brother Aaron Earnest : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

 

[robycop3]

The fact that Jesus died for everyone doesn't really have any bearing on this discussion. The Olivet Discourse describes judgment that came on Israel.

No, it describes that will happen to the whole world.

Jesus was using hyperbole. This was unique, though. This was the only time the Old Covenant was ever ended.

No, He was prophesying literal events to come. He ended the Old Covenant at the "Last Supper" & sealed the new one with His death.

If you are referring to the "Dry Bones" prophecy of Ezekiel, I believe that was fulfilled when the exiles returned to Judah.

No. Remember, God told Zeke that was THE WHOLE HOUSE OF ISRAEL, which is all 12 tribes. The Jews are only Judah, Benjamin, & Levi.

It doesn't matter what anyone in the world believes, as Scripture tells us that the new temple is Christ (and those in whom the Holy Spirit dwells). Romans 2:25-29 tells us that there is no advantage in being a physical Jew. The true Jew is Spiritual Israel. This view is supported by several other passages, which I will provide upon request. With this in mind, I really don't get why God would have Israel bring back animal sacrifices, circumcision, and the whole Old Covenant system.

We know the new temple won't really be a TOG, as Jesus won't be worshipped in it. God will allow sacrifices to resume so prophecy can be fulfilled when the beast/antichrist comes.

I must admit that this looks like the way Revelation describes it. Time will tell.

Why not just give in to fact, & believe JESUS over Gentry & Co?

 

[Lodic]

It’s playing out now, in my life. Livelihood gone, Doctor gone, Dentist gone, travel gone. State border closed indefinitely, if I leave, I won’t be able reenter the state without the vaccine passport.
I’m watching people with the digital pass take my contract, get their access to medical and travel where they want as a higher class of citizen.

Whether or not this is a foreshadow of the Mark of the Beast, I believe this control is of the Devil just as Hitler's control over the Jews was of the Devil. Whether the prophecies of the Olivet Discourse and Revelation are in our past or in our future, we must all be prepared to go through the same type of isolation and restrictions that you are experiencing.

It is noteworthy that these restrictions are on the unvaxxed. Who's to say whether they will expand to Christians? After all, some governments are already controlling what can be preached from the pulpit.

 

[robycop3]

They already have an invisible but indelible Mark, Luciferase with quantum dots stamped into skin, holding all vaccine and other records. It can luminess under a powerful spectrum of light making it visible a short time or it can be seen with a cellphone app and filter.

Whatever the Mark is, it will that by which you be able to buy and sell, travel, and get all your other access, needs and services.

They come at you by your vices first, needs after.

People won’t be able to go to the bottle shops to get alcohol, so people who are addicted to alcohol will fold at that point. Take the Mark.

People who need medicine and medical services, will be barred from treatment and fold at that point and take the Mark.

People who need food, will not be able to buy it, fold and take the Mark.

Time of great distress, yes, not like any other time in history.

These controls are in place now, in phase 1.

Not really. This is a nation that has more guns than people. If the govt. were to try to apply such controls now, anarchy would result. Same in many other nations that don't have gun control.

The mark will succeed because people will be willing to take it, not because they HAVE to.

 

[Lodic]

Why not just give in to fact, & believe JESUS over Gentry & Co?

What if I were to suggest that you believe Jesus over Mark Hitchcock, Tommy Ice, and John Hagee? The fact that I agree with Gentry does not mean that I believe him over Jesus.

 

[robycop3]

Whether or not this is a foreshadow of the Mark of the Beast, I believe this control is of the Devil just as Hitler's control over the Jews was of the Devil. Whether the prophecies of the Olivet Discourse and Revelation are in our past or in our future, we must all be prepared to go through the same type of isolation and restrictions that you are experiencing.

It is noteworthy that these restrictions are on the unvaxxed. Who's to say whether they will expand to Christians? After all, some governments are already controlling what can be preached from the pulpit.

That's why I believe the rapture will occur. First, it will keep the true Church of Christians out of the great trib, and from the mark, plus, it will rempve almost all opposition to the mark. The beast will have an explanation for the disappearance of millions, which the world will believe & accept. There'll only be a handful left who'll realize the rapture has occurred, and will come to Jesus. These will be the "trib saints". There won't be enough of them to have any influence, and besides, Jesus said it will be granted to the beast & his forces to overcome them.

 

[robycop3]

What if I were to suggest that you believe Jesus over Mark Hitchcock, Tommy Ice, and John Hagee? The fact that I agree with Gentry does not mean that I believe him over Jesus.

What I believe is based upon my own bible-reading, study of history, & following of world events. I've never read anything by Hitchcock or Ice, & very little by Hagee. The history I've studied is unbiased, not recorded to support any religious doctrines, but to make a record of FACTS.

 

[Lodic]

That's why I believe the rapture will occur. First, it will keep the true Church of Christians out of the great trib, and from the mark, plus, it will rempve almost all opposition to the mark. The beast will have an explanation for the disappearance of millions, which the world will believe & accept. There'll only be a handful left who'll realize the rapture has occurred, and will come to Jesus. These will be the "trib saints". There won't be enough of them to have any influence, and besides, Jesus said it will be granted to the beast & his forces to overcome them.

If the events of Revelation are in our future, I think you've spelled out how it would happen.

 

[Lodic]

What I believe is based upon my own bible-reading, study of history, & following of world events. I've never read anything by Hitchcock or Ice, & very little by Hagee. The history I've studied is unbiased, not recorded to support any religious doctrines, but to make a record of FACTS.

You've just made my point. Your comments make it sound as if Gentry, DeMar, et al were leaders in a cult that have blinded me to the truth. The fact is that, after studying what these guys have to say, I believe they are right based on proper interpretation of Scripture. Would you say that I am biased toward the Preterist view? Would you say that you are biased toward the "Futurist" view? Only one view can be correct.

 

[robycop3]

You've just made my point. Your comments make it sound as if Gentry, DeMar, et al were leaders in a cult that have blinded me to the truth. The fact is that, after studying what these guys have to say, I believe they are right based on proper interpretation of Scripture. Would you say that I am biased toward the Preterist view? Would you say that you are biased toward the "Futurist" view? Only one view can be correct.

Well, it's obviously not the pret one, as the occurrence of the prophesied events are not found in history.

 

[Lodic]

Well, it's obviously not the pret one, as the occurrence of the prophesied events are not found in history.

Or...it's obviously not the futurist view, as Jesus said those events would happen within the lifetime of His disciples. On top of that, several passages say those events would happen "soon" - not 2,000 years later. That's a problem you can't work around without changing the meaning of "soon", "this generation", etc. Either all of Scripture means what it says, or it doesn't. Personally, I choose to take the words of Jesus and the NT authors to mean what they say. Having said that, I also recognize it when they use the same type of symbolism and hyperbole as the OT prophets used.

 

[robycop3]

Or...it's obviously not the futurist view, as Jesus said those events would happen within the lifetime of His disciples. On top of that, several passages say those events would happen "soon" - not 2,000 years later. That's a problem you can't work around without changing the meaning of "soon", "this generation", etc. Either all of Scripture means what it says, or it doesn't. Personally, I choose to take the words of Jesus and the NT authors to mean what they say. Having said that, I also recognize it when they use the same type of symbolism and hyperbole as the OT prophets used.

One prob...THE EVENTS HAVEN'T YET OCCURRED! !
You simply CAN'T get around that FACT! You're beating a dead horse!
The ONLY thing that can prove the pret view correct is to show us the occurrence of those events in history. And you haven't done that. You (and Gentry) have only GUESSED that this-n-that were the fulfillment of those prophecies when they don't even come close. The "Nero" thingie is a good example.
So, JESUS' "soon" must be different from your "soon".

 

[Lodic]

One prob...THE EVENTS HAVEN'T YET OCCURRED! !
You simply CAN'T get around that FACT! You're beating a dead horse!
The ONLY thing that can prove the pret view correct is to show us the occurrence of those events in history. And you haven't done that. You (and Gentry) have only GUESSED that this-n-that were the fulfillment of those prophecies when they don't even come close. The "Nero" thingie is a good example.
So, JESUS' "soon" must be different from your "soon".

To turn this around, you simply can't get around the fact that Jesus plainly said those events would happen within the generation of those He was speaking to. Every time you make this claim, you are saying that Jesus was either a liar or that He didn't know what He was talking about. You claim that He meant something other than what He actually said. Jesus spoke very clearly to His disciples. He would not have deliberately confused them by saying those events would come soon within their lifetime if it were not so. In case you are thinking of the argument that "only the Father knows", why would Jesus have even made that claim in the first place? Was He guessing? Careless? You are only assuming that those events did not come to pass in AD 70 because you refuse to believe it. And that, Brother, is the dead horse that you are beating.

 

[robycop3]

To turn this around, you simply can't get around the fact that Jesus plainly said those events would happen within the generation of those He was speaking to. Every time you make this claim, you are saying that Jesus was either a liar or that He didn't know what He was talking about. You claim that He meant something other than what He actually said. Jesus spoke very clearly to His disciples. He would not have deliberately confused them by saying those events would come soon within their lifetime if it were not so. In case you are thinking of the argument that "only the Father knows", why would Jesus have even made that claim in the first place? Was He guessing? Careless? You are only assuming that those events did not come to pass in AD 70 because you refuse to believe it. And that, Brother, is the dead horse that you are beating.

The ace of trumps is that the events HAVE NOT YET HAPPENED !

Jesus said "this generation". That generation will be the one that sees the beginning of those events; it'll see them all. No matter how you try to "take" Jesus' words, the cold, hard truth is that the events haven't yet occurred !

NO GETTING AROUND THAT FACT ! !

 

[Cathode]

Legislation passed here before the pandemic, that police could forcibly enter homes and forcibly inject people with vaccines against their consent.
This goes totally against human liberty, international treaty and our constitution.
Medical privacy is totally gone as well.
You have to present proof of vaccination to hotels, pubs, and even bottle shops, otherwise you can’t buy anything.
Refused State and Local government contracts.
This is a punitive measure, reminds me of pharaoh, bidding the Israelites make bricks without straw.

It seems careful planning occurred before the pandemic and data bases were in place long before contact tracing was implemented.

 

[Cathode]

Not really. This is a nation that has more guns than people. If the govt. were to try to apply such controls now, anarchy would result. Same in many other nations that don't have gun control.

The mark will succeed because people will be willing to take it, not because they HAVE to.

Well your guns might be your final argument. You might want to put in a strong point in your home if anarchy looks like happening.
Perhaps have some supplies put away.

 

[Cathode]

Whether or not this is a foreshadow of the Mark of the Beast, I believe this control is of the Devil just as Hitler's control over the Jews was of the Devil. Whether the prophecies of the Olivet Discourse and Revelation are in our past or in our future, we must all be prepared to go through the same type of isolation and restrictions that you are experiencing.

It is noteworthy that these restrictions are on the unvaxxed. Who's to say whether they will expand to Christians? After all, some governments are already controlling what can be preached from the pulpit.

Be prepared to lose everything. If you are in America, you might fair a little better for a time because you have a Bill of Rights, and the recognised Right to bear arms.
We don’t have rights here, governments and bureaucrats can dictate whatever they like.

 

[Lodic]

The ace of trumps is that the events HAVE NOT YET HAPPENED !

Jesus said "this generation". That generation will be the one that sees the beginning of those events; it'll see them all. No matter how you try to "take" Jesus' words, the cold, hard truth is that the events haven't yet occurred !

NO GETTING AROUND THAT FACT ! !

Consider Matthew 11:16, 12:4, 23:36; Mark 8:12, 8:38; Luke 7:31, 11:29-32, 17:25. In each of those passages, He clearly meant then generation He was speaking to in each passage - several of which speak of judgment. Why would the Olivet Discourse contain the lone exception to what Jesus meant by "this generation"? You are not comparing Scripture with Scripture to see what is meant. Jesus did not say "the generation that sees these things", or even "that generation". You cannot twist what Jesus has plainly said to make your claim that these events have not yet happened.

Then there is "when you see the abomination of desolation" (Matthew 24:15). Compare that with Luke 21:20 "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies". You know this happened in AD 70.

Here is more "time indicator" evidence for your consideration: James 5:7-9 "the coming of the Lord is at hand...the Judge is standing right at the door"; Rev 1:1 "things which must shortly take place"; Rev 1:3 "the time is near". There are more examples, but this is enough to make the point. If you can change the meaning of "at hand", "shortly" and "near" to mean the opposite of what they mean in normal conversation, what else are you going to change the meaning of? Scripture was written in a way for us to understand. Words mean what they always mean.

When I recognize some prophetic passages as symbolic in nature, you insist that I need to understand it literally. Then you violate your own standard by changing the meaning of common words. Can God tell time? Does Jesus speak plainly regarding these events, or was He deliberately leaving His disciples confused? Since none of the disciples questioned what He meant, they obviously understood that Jesus meant exactly what He said - their generation would see those things happen. And this is how we are to understand Scripture - just as the original audience did. No matter how many times you claim that these events haven't happened yet, Scripture says they must have. You will pardon me if I choose to believe what Jesus said over what you say.

 

[robycop3]

Consider Matthew 11:16, 12:4, 23:36; Mark 8:12, 8:38; Luke 7:31, 11:29-32, 17:25. In each of those passages, He clearly meant then generation He was speaking to in each passage - several of which speak of judgment. Why would the Olivet Discourse contain the lone exception to what Jesus meant by "this generation"? You are not comparing Scripture with Scripture to see what is meant. Jesus did not say "the generation that sees these things", or even "that generation". You cannot twist what Jesus has plainly said to make your claim that these events have not yet happened.

Then there is "when you see the abomination of desolation" (Matthew 24:15). Compare that with Luke 21:20 "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies". You know this happened in AD 70.

Here is more "time indicator" evidence for your consideration: James 5:7-9 "the coming of the Lord is at hand...the Judge is standing right at the door"; Rev 1:1 "things which must shortly take place"; Rev 1:3 "the time is near". There are more examples, but this is enough to make the point. If you can change the meaning of "at hand", "shortly" and "near" to mean the opposite of what they mean in normal conversation, what else are you going to change the meaning of? Scripture was written in a way for us to understand. Words mean what they always mean.

When I recognize some prophetic passages as symbolic in nature, you insist that I need to understand it literally. Then you violate your own standard by changing the meaning of common words. Can God tell time? Does Jesus speak plainly regarding these events, or was He deliberately leaving His disciples confused? Since none of the disciples questioned what He meant, they obviously understood that Jesus meant exactly what He said - their generation would see those things happen. And this is how we are to understand Scripture - just as the original audience did. No matter how many times you claim that these events haven't happened yet, Scripture says they must have. You will pardon me if I choose to believe what Jesus said over what you say.

Sir, you may write a whole book about :time indicators, but you simply CANNOT get by the FACT that the prophesied events have N O T yet occurred ! The preterist seex to escape that fact by reducing "inconvenient" Scriptures to "figurative/symbolic" status.

Again, wanna prove me wrong? Just show us the occurrence of those events in history !

 

[Lodic]

Sir, you may write a whole book about :time indicators, but you simply CANNOT get by the FACT that the prophesied events have N O T yet occurred ! The preterist seex to escape that fact by reducing "inconvenient" Scriptures to "figurative/symbolic" status.

Again, wanna prove me wrong? Just show us the occurrence of those events in history !

You haven't explained how you get around the book of time indicators that I could write. "Soon" means "soon" - unless Jesus said it? "This generation" means "this generation" - unless it means "that generation"? "Near" means "near", unless you just don't want it to. How convenient for you. The only way you can fit these events to a future fulfillment is to change what Scriptures actually say. But wait - what do you do with Rev 22:18-19? Doesn't this also prohibit changing Scripture?