The Mark of the Beast (666)

Started by Nellinator34 pages

What are you doing with the Colossians quote? It clearly supports the position I am giving.

Colossian 2:14 Speaking about Christ say this:
"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross." Hmmm... sounds like Paul agrees with Jesus about the law being fulfilled.

Isaiah is talking about a time to come and is, therefore, not applicable to this discussion. Secondly, "one sabbath to another" is a way of referencing the an unending passage of time.

Holy days are holy. Apparently you have a poor understanding of the word holy and of what is meant for the nation of Israel and the Jews and what is for all people. They are very seperate.

1 Corinthians 5:8 actually says something entirely different. The context completely defeats this argument. 1 Corinthians 5:7 clearly states that because Christ (ie. the perfect sacrifice, the Lamb of God)
is sacrificed for us. This means that the Passover is no longer needed because the sacrifice has already been made. That is Christianity 101 and a very important concept to Christianity. Also, read 1 Corinthians 5:8 again, it clearly refers to the Passover from 5:7 and is speaking of how the Passover is passed and we are in the days of unleavened bread. We are called to live in sincerity and truth not malice and wickedness. It's pretty clear that this is an allegory because it has no literal reference.
Colossian 2:16 clearly says not to let man judge you about how you keep the sabbath, it says nothing about keeping it. In fact, it directly going against the very things you are trying to say. I have not idea why you are using it because it is in opposition to you...

And when Jesus breaks the Law he has the mark of the beast amirite?

Do you understand the importance of the Jeremiah prophecy stating that the written law will be removed? That a new covenant will be established? That Jesus himself claimed to fulfil scripture that therefore removes the Law? That Paul agrees with this speaking of how the Law was nailed to the cross with Jesus? How about Acts 15 where it is very clear that the Gentiles are seperate from the Law in either case? How about the time David ate the consecrated bread and God was cool with it?

We are not bound by the Law because it was removed. That is the sum of it. The Law can be useful as a guideline and as a way of seeking God, but it is not binding on us unless we choose to make it so (which is a viable option), but we don't need too. Once again remember that "The sabbath came into being for man, not man for the sabbath". Until, you understand the import of that you cannot argue anything.

Why does someone keep writing in blue so I can´t read it.

The number of the beast actually isn´t a person but a discription.

7 is pefection 6 is imperfection emphasised by the number three.
The human race is therefore "!Imperfect Imperfect Imperfect!"

which when observing what a chaotic place this has become isn´t rocket science.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
What someone "thought" and what is actually "written" are two different things entirely. I believe what was written.
Originally posted by Bardock42
The oldest known record of the verse, a fragment of an early manuscript of Revelation from the Oxyrhynchus site, gives a different number, 616, as “χιϛ”.[1] The early Church father Irenaeus knew several occurrences of the 616-variant but regarded them as a scribal error, although he didn't know the meaning of the number.[9] The Zürich Bible which is based on the oldest Bible manuscripts also mentions the number 616.
I'm still wondering what JIA has to say on this?

Originally posted by ThePittman
I'm still wondering what JIA has to say on this?

I doubt he will give you a peep.

Ohh! 666! I know that one. A great song by Iron Maiden 😄

Originally posted by eezy45
Ohh! 666! I know that one. A great song by Iron Maiden 😄

Noooooooo they are evil!

Originally posted by ThePittman
I'm still wondering what JIA has to say on this?

I agree with Irenaeus that it is scribal error.

😄

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I agree with Irenaeus that it is scribal error.

😄

Which one though?

Did God tell you?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Which one though?

Did God tell you?

Which what?

😄

Well, at least he smiles while failing.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I agree with Irenaeus that it is scribal error.

😄

So you are admitting that you were wrong?

Originally posted by ThePittman
So you are admitting that you were wrong?

No, I am saying that the scribes who mis-wrote 666 to 616 were wrong.

😄

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Why does someone keep writing in blue so I can´t read it.

The number of the beast actually isn´t a person but a discription.

7 is pefection 6 is imperfection emphasised by the number three.
The human race is therefore "!Imperfect Imperfect Imperfect!"

which when observing what a chaotic place this has become isn´t rocket science.

You can't read blue text?

😕

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
No, I am saying that the scribes who mis-wrote 666 to 616 were wrong.

😄

Translation: I was wrong and trying to cover it up with a joke and not admitting I was wrong and being a total a$$.

ThePittman, you forgot to add the smiley face.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
ThePittman, you forgot to add the smiley face.

I'll do it for him:

🙂 😄 😉

You realize I was laughing at you, and not with you...

Originally posted by siriuswriter
You realize I was laughing at you, and not with you...

I realize that but why? You claim to know Jesus? Why would a person that claims to know Jesus be laughing at me?

😕

Because I don't like you.

Are you trying to suggest that the two are mutually exclusive?

Because that would be exceptionally ridiculous.