how many people will take the mark of beast . I believe no one will take it

[ezrider]

Consider the "mark" that was originally placed upon Cain for killing his brother, Abel. All over an offering that was not accepted before the Lord. And Why was Cain's offering not accepted?

Cain was a tiller of the ground. Abel a shepherd of the sheep. Abel understood that the Lord gave the increase, so Abel's offering was an offering of the Lord's work. Cain on the other hand tilled the soil with his own hand, and the offering that Cain gave was that of his own works and labor, which was not accepted before the Lord.

Your works under the Law are not accepted. Your labor in death has been refused, and yet you try harder in your obedience to your covenant with death.

But the Lord has declared to you what is the acceptable sacrifice and offering. To Love mercy and to walk in Faith with humility before the Lord.

 

[smaller]

Consider the "mark" that was originally placed upon Cain for killing his brother, Abel. All over an offering that was not accepted before the Lord. And Why was Cain's offering not accepted?

Ah, you and I might see that the "produce" of the ground is never an acceptable offering to God, but DEATH is?

Just having a little Divine Fun dance with my brother In Truth!

Cain was a tiller of the ground. Abel a shepherd of the sheep. Abel understood that the Lord gave the increase, so Abel's offering was an offering of the Lord's work. Cain on the other hand tilled the soil with his own hand, and the offering that Cain gave was that of his own works and labor, which was not accepted before the Lord.

We also know that the "curse" that was put upon Adam's work was to bring forth thorns and thistles from the soil. Significant again, YES!

Your works under the Law are not accepted. Your labor in death has been refused, and yet you try harder in your obedience to your covenant with death.

But the Lord has declared to you what is the acceptable sacrifice and offering. To Love mercy and to walk in Faith.

Amen, and double, Amen.

 

[smaller]

The mark of Cain:

1 John 3:12
Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

And what caused Cain to fall into such a pit?

Genesis 4:7
If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Correlate, here:

Romans 6:12
Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

Paul, ruling over his underling.

 

[JCitoL]

We have very little exposure in the west to such things as you write of above, but I do have a believing friend or two who were shocked out of Buddhism, and into Christ, when they engaged adverse spirits trying to enter them when practicing certain types of Buddhist ritualistic chants/prayers in meditation.

yes, unfortunately all indic religions/creeds/denominations are devilish, including the so-called buddhism, because siddhartha gautama buddha was also a citizen of india, moreover, a son of the leader of shakya republic, and had first passed through the education of the brahmins(hindu priests) and yogins(hindu ascetics) remaining influenced by their tradition to the last, so the teachings of buddha are actually the same as the teachings of krishna and the rest of the indic prophets

Blessings

 

[john darling]

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

I don't observe any exception to getting the mark. The penalty is invoked for this:

If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

Having the mark coupled with worship of the beast seem to be the criteria for penalty. The mark itself though, appears to be universally applied to all.

It's not clear to me what you are suggesting here, but it looks like you are making a distinction between taking the Mark and worshiping the Beast. Is that correct? In other words, one can take the Mark for buying and selling, so long as one does not physically bow down to the Beast? Please let me know if I've misunderstood you.

 

[smaller]

It's not clear to me what you are suggesting here, but it looks like you are making a distinction between taking the Mark and worshiping the Beast. Is that correct? In other words, one can take the Mark for buying and selling, so long as one does not physically bow down to the Beast? Please let me know if I've misunderstood you.

There is no future coming external mark that has anything to do with matters in Revelation.

Here is being sold, in the scriptural sense:

Romans 7:14
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Here, we see the purchase and the price paid:

Acts 20:28
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

And we likewise have had a price paid, for our redemption, here:

Ephesians 1:14
Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

We are even given a form of "deposit" in the spiritual sense:

2 Corinthians 1:
22 Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts

2 Corinthians 5:5
Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.

Looking at external money and external marks will get exactly nowhere in spiritual understandings, of buying and selling. The Book of Life records our purchase, redeemed by His Blood.

Revelation 5:9
And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

Selling, purchase, earnest deposit, blood price, redemption, none of this has anything to do with hard cash money or buying/selling in the external senses.

 

[JCitoL]

hi JC. In an earlier post I asked you for some examples of what this, "attachment" to "certain possessions" actually means. What are these "certain possessions"? How do they "hamper the spiritual growth" of the worshiper and what are these "certain circumstances?

Instead, you respond with things like, "bewitching, imprecating, cursing, accusing, judging and dooming certain people before God, for example some people were kind of cursed so as not to be able to eat normally, and there were symptoms such as sickness, nausea, vomiting, hypersensitivity to food, hypoglycemia, etc., other cursed people were not able to live normally at all, because the curse pursued them everywhere and in everything ruining their lives, etc., so from this point of view it would not be advisable for such a human to eat more than it could bear"

Are you saying that "attachment" to "certain possessions" causes people not to be able to eat properly? Because to me, it sounds like you've not really answered the question at all. The context of your own comments, which I was referring to, was material possessions. I'd still like to hear an explanation which deals specifically with those comments I've quoted from you above. Thanks.

don't get/be angry or sad, but you again demonstrate great inadequacy?!, and this is because you (actually) do not believe rightly enough in That Who really is the true Lord God, and as for the possibility to receive all explanation from someone acquainted, the chance is little nowadays, or what will you do if the available testimony somehow disappears and you lost it?!, furthermore, what is the guarantee that someone or something does not lie you?!

i meant if someone have turned out to be caught under the power of certain curse (for example) so as not to be able to eat normally, then it could turn out to be inappropriate for that person to have and eat too large amounts of food that could be harmful to it, but the word of the true God says the creature must be sanctified i.e. such people must be spiritually cleansed (of the devilish spirits) and released from the curses

Blessings

 

[john darling]

i meant if someone have turned out to be caught under the power of certain curse (for example) so as not to be able to eat normally,

Hi JCitol. That's strange. When you said that,"it really is so that the attachment to certain possessions could hamper the spiritual growth of the worshiper under certain circumstances", what you really meant was something about curses which cause people to eat abnormally? Huh.

I think it's strange because you first made these comments about "attachment to certain possessions" in post #81, and you did so inresponse to this comment from smaller, "No, it's not about the cash" (post #78) and smaller was responding to my comments about our dependence on money.

Clearly neither of us was talking about curses or eating disorders. We were talking about cash, money, materialism or, as you phrased it, "attachment to certain possessions". It's hard to believe that, even with a language barrier, you meant "food curse" in the context.

Anyway, I'm fine to accept that it was all a big misunderstanding, though even then I question why such a weird misunderstanding would happen when talking about the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:10).

 

[john darling]

There is no future coming external mark that has anything to do with matters in Revelation.

I feel like I've been trying pretty hard to avoid comments which could come across as inflammatory or condescending, but at some point I feel I need to say, "that's just plain wrong". A prophecy from nearly 2000 years ago accurately predicted what's actually starting to happen in world economics today; buying and selling via a "mark" on the hand. It's a microchip which will eventually be used exclusively through the hand (or forehead). JCitoL doesn't even bother trying to dismiss the trend towards a cashless system anymore; he just says, "so what".

The purpose of the prophecy in the first place is to act as evidence, or authority as to the legitimacy of the problem. A prophecy about the future actually coming true is a miracle. God used his ability to see into the future and warned us ahead of time "so that we may believe" (John 14:29). Jesus, in what appears to be some genuinely righteous frustration tells the proud religious leaders of his day, "if you won't believe me based on my words then at least believe because of the miracles"! (John 10:38). The prophecy is actually starting to come true but you don't see it. I used to wonder how the pharisees could be so hard hearted despite all the obvious miracles Jesus did. This whole Mark thing is giving me a much better understanding in that area.

Anyway, the Mark described in the Revelation won't necessarily be "external" since a microchip implant will be under the surface of the skin. But then again there is nothing in the prophecy which says it will be visible or not; only that people will not be able to buy or sell without it.

In order for your theory about the reference to "buying and selling" in the Revelation to refer to things like being "sold under sin" and "paying the price with his own blood" (i.e. Jesus) you'd have to assume that the blood of Jesus is the Mark of the Beast. Talk about calling evil good and good evil! (Isaiah 5:30). If I've misunderstood your position here please let me know.

The "mark" of the Beast is called a "mark" because it's a symbol of loyalty and worship. The warning against the Mark in Revelation 14:9 is written in such a way that taking the Mark is seen as worshiping the Beast. In other words, they are not two separate events. You cannot take the Mark of the Beast while avoiding worship of the Beast. Interestingly, the same person who declared the love of money to be the root of all evil also said that greed is the same as idolatry on at least two separate occasions (Colossians 3:5 , Ephesians 5:5).

Greed is linked to idolatry. Buying/selling is linked to worship of the Beast. Jesus said we will choose between two masters. He said God is one master while mammon (money and the things money can buy) is the other master (Matthew 6:24). These are just random verses I picked because they include the words, "price" or "buy". They are part of a consistent theme all throughout the NT.

While there are references to Jesus, "paying the price" these are clearly metaphorical in context. This does not lessen the meaning behind the teaching, but it also does not negate all the other references to literal buying/selling, like the Mark of the Beast prophecy from Revelation 13:16.

 

[smaller]

I feel like I've been trying pretty hard to avoid comments which could come across as inflammatory or condescending, but at some point I feel I need to say, "that's just plain wrong". A prophecy from nearly 2000 years ago accurately predicted what's actually starting to happen in world economics today; buying and selling via a "mark" on the hand. It's a microchip which will eventually be used exclusively through the hand (or forehead). JCitoL doesn't even bother trying to dismiss the trend towards a cashless system anymore; he just says, "so what".

I do as well. There is no 'external mark' that determine the internal conditions of any person. How many people do you know who are saved that have tats? Does that mean anything as to their internal state of affairs?

If people want to believe this stuff, obviously, not my call. I just wouldn't stake anything much on it. Just as the Word of God Lives within us, by His Spirit, thereby sealing us unto the day of redemption, the mark in question can be and probably is the opposite of that, internally. It did the Jews of Israel zero good to wear the marks of scripture on their hands and foreheads in the O.T. That was a fleshly idea of man, that was worthless then, just as it is now.

But hey, if you want to watch for that, that's fine. That's what you believe.

I believe there is NOTHING that can separate us from the Love of God in Christ. The monetary system can tattoo me til they're blue in the face. It will NOT move or remove Christ from within my heart.

And further, the weakness of such an argument is belied by your own statements, that the mark will not be visible, since it is supposed to be UNDER the skin, so there is no mark visible there, either.

Mark fail on that mark, then being visible because such a mark won't be.

Would there be a stir in the christian community if the system tries to brand us in such a manner? There should be regardless of our faith, just on the principles of our government, if there is such a thing anymore.

 

[JCitoL]

Hi JCitol. That's strange. When you said that,"it really is so that the attachment to certain possessions could hamper the spiritual growth of the worshiper under certain circumstances", what you really meant was something about curses which cause people to eat abnormally? Huh.

I think it's strange because you first made these comments about "attachment to certain possessions" in post #81, and you did so inresponse to this comment from smaller, "No, it's not about the cash" (post #78) and smaller was responding to my comments about our dependence on money.

Clearly neither of us was talking about curses or eating disorders. We were talking about cash, money, materialism or, as you phrased it, "attachment to certain possessions". It's hard to believe that, even with a language barrier, you meant "food curse" in the context.

Anyway, I'm fine to accept that it was all a big misunderstanding, though even then I question why such a weird misunderstanding would happen when talking about the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:10).

why do you so often miss to take important words of previous posts into account/consideration, and as if not reason on what was said to you at all, but now again as though trying to make me out to be a foolish prevaricator?! - i'm just trying to say it has become too obvious

so, getting back to the topic, as i was likewise saying before, there were cases in which for example believers/worshipers turned out to be accused/judged before God for e.g. eating animal meat to the extent of being taken under the effect of a curse so as not to be able to fully advance spiritually in the faith, because their meat-eating was considered and presented as a sinful tendency/inclination without being taken into consideration the permission of the true God for the humans to eat animal meat, i.e. the matter in hand is a ruinous work of satan's kingdom against certain believers/worshipers (in this example by calumniation), and i meant not only meal, but even other possible things (appearing to be a reason for the kingdom of satan to accuse/judge such persons) such as alcohol consumption, sex life, etc., and i said that such consumptions are/the use of such goods is in principle not advisable under such circumstances, but the affected must be sanctified according to the word of the true Lord God

so now i expect that you will provoke me no more with (additional) questions for ostensibly opaque testimonies on my part

Blessings

 

[john darling]

so, getting back to the topic, as i was likewise saying before, there were cases in which for example believers/worshipers turned out to be accused/judged before God for e.g. eating animal meat

Hi JCitoL. No, I'm not trying to make you look foolish, but I think this comment from you a good indication that there really is a problem. You don't think it's even a tiny bit strange that you somehow think the topic of this thread is about eating meat?

Here's a basic summary of what happened. I said the part of the Mark prophecy which describes "buying and selling" relates to our dependence on mammon (money and the things money can buy) which is consistent with what Jesus also said about our attitudes towards money (Matthew 6:24-34). Smaller said money has nothing to do with the "buying/selling" in the Mark prophecy. You responded to that comment by saying there are times when "attachment to 'certain' possessions really can cause a problem in our relationship with God". The context was clear and consistent up to that point and had nothing to do with eating meat or food curses.

When I asked you to clarify what "certain" possessions really means, you decided that you weren't talking about possessions at all, but rather food curses, though you didn't mention anything about food in that post. The food curse thing only came later when I challenged you to tell us what these "certain possessions" were and what it means to be "attached" to them. It certainly does look like prevarication.

Anyway, it's interesting that you use the qualifier, "certain" when talking about attachment to possessions, because it's very much like the haggling I described earlier. It's okay to be attached to SOME possessions, as long as we are aware of a "certain" list of possessions which it is NOT okay to be attached to. I wonder what the list of bad attachments looks like.

It's very similar to an earlier post where you claimed the reason Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple was because they were charging prices for Holy Services which were too high for the poor. According to your assessment, if they had charged more reasonable prices, so that the poor could afford to buy the holy spirit, then Jesus would not have been angry. I'll quote your actual words, so that you will not think I'm trying to make you look foolish...

here(as to the last passage [Matthew 21:12-13]) the money is really a critical factor, because if the holy services are performed only for (a lot of) money/against (a solid) payment, then only the rich will be able to afford them, while the poor will not and so they will be kind of doomed to suffer, etc.

I asked you to clarify this point but the explanation never came, which is fine since you don't owe me anything, but I think it does lend credibility to my argument that you really do have a problem with money issues.

It is this kind of confusion which will make the Mark so effective. Can you live without buying and selling? Ask yourself and be brutally honest about the answer, because if the answer is "no" then you will almost certainly be tricked into taking the Mark.

 

[john darling]

I do as well. There is no 'external mark' that determine the internal conditions of any person. How many people do you know who are saved that have tats? Does that mean anything as to their internal state of affairs?

If God tells them not to get tattoos and they do it anyway, yes it DOES say something about their "internal state of affairs". The context of the Mark prophecy is that we are told not to take it (Revelation 14:9-11).

It did the Jews of Israel zero good to wear the marks of scripture on their hands and foreheads in the O.T. That was a fleshly idea of man, that was worthless then, just as it is now.

Sure, the Mark is the counterfeit of God's seal. Christians live and work for one another and God. They don't need to be paid before they will show their love, because they are the bride of Christ, not the prostitute. They can see that money is a myth, a man-made invention catering to greed and fear Timoth6:10). Money doesn't build or create anything. God and people do that.

The Mark is the ultimate symbol of man's trust in himself. The Beast's only interest in buying/selling is in how he can use it to exploit our fear/greed. It is a physical indicator of a VERRRY serious problem happening internally (Luke 12:15).

But hey, if you want to watch for that, that's fine. That's what you believe.

Watch for what? The prophecy says "he" (the AC) will cause the world to take a "mark" in their right hand or forehead without which they cannot buy or sell. Is there anything like that happening in the world today? Sure there is. Cashless banking relies exclusively on microchip technology, whether it's in smart cards, computers, phones, watches, wrist bands or the most simple and efficient, a microchip implanted under the skin. Cashless banking IS the future of money. People who try to claim otherwise are simply being stubborn. Microchip implants in the hand will become the most popular format for cashless banking.

One day a Christian will be standing in the queue to get his implant. He may have a brief flash of panic about whether or not he really should do it, but by then it will almost certainly be too late. Because he spent his time arguing against what Jesus said about working for two masters (God or money) he won't know how to say no. His fear about paying the bills will be intensified all the more by waiting until the last minute, especially if he has any family depending on him. He'll go ahead and take a microchip implant in his right hand for buying and selling and just hope that his theories about how God himself cannot "separate m from the love of Jesus" will be enough to win the argument when God questions why he took the mark despite such serious warnings not to.

And further, the weakness of such an argument is belied by your own statements, that the mark will not be visible, since it is supposed to be UNDER the skin, so there is no mark visible there, either.

I don't understand your logic here. Being put under the skin doesn't make the Mark cease to exist. It just means it's not visible on the surface. But it doesn't need to be visible, because scanners don't need eyeballs. If everyone in the shop closes their eyes so that they can't see the product, the scanner will still scan the barcode.

Would there be a stir in the christian community if the system tries to brand us in such a manner? There should be regardless of our faith, just on the principles of our government, if there is such a thing anymore.

If you are referring to forcing people to take a microchip implant, there won't be any force. People will take it because they want to pay the bills. Over in Sweden new legislation was recently introduced to say that shop owners were no longer legally obliged to accept cash payments. If someone goes to the shop with cash only, they can be told, "sorry, we've switched over to cashless payment so you'll need to try a different shop". Going to a different shop may work for a time, but eventually the person will need to try more and more different shops to find one which will still accept cash as they all start switching over to cashless methods.

The average person won't go through all that trouble. They'll just get the latest cashless payment method, whether it's a smart card, a "tap-and-pay" card, a wristband, a smart watch or a microchip implant. They will do it willingly and, quite often happily, especially when various banks and shops offer discounts for people paying with the latest cashless gadget.

I've talked to hundreds of people who say they don't like the idea of microchip implants and that they would never take one. But when questioned a bit more closely on the changing economic system where more and more services are becoming dependent on microchip-based transactions, almost all of them admit that they would, indeed, take a microchip implant if they had no other way to put food on the table. There is no need for forcing people to take the Mark when good ole fashioned manipulation works even better.

 

[smaller]

If God tells them not to get tattoos and they do it anyway, yes it DOES say something about their "internal state of affairs". The context of the Mark prophecy is that we are told not to take it (Revelation 14:9-11).

No, we are advised not to worship the beast. It is the mark and the worship, combined, that poses the problem.

Sure, the Mark is the counterfeit of God's seal. Christians live and work for one another and God. They don't need to be paid before they will show their love, because they are the bride of Christ, not the prostitute. They can see that money is a myth, a man-made invention catering to greed and fear Timoth6:10). Money doesn't build or create anything. God and people do that.

Money itself isn't the problem either. It's the love of same that is the root of all evil. I actually detest money, but I understand that it is needed to operate in this wicked world.

The Mark is the ultimate symbol of man's trust in himself. The Beast's only interest in buying/selling is in how he can use it to exploit our fear/greed. It is a physical indicator of a VERRRY serious problem happening internally (Luke 12:15).

It will still point back to an internal problem nevertheless, in every case of sight.

And therefore judging this matter as an external problem isn't the basis. Never was. Never will be.

 

[JCitoL]

so, getting back to the topic, as i was likewise saying before, there were cases in which for example believers/worshipers turned out to be accused/judged before God for e.g. eating animal meat

Hi JCitoL. No, I'm not trying to make you look foolish, but I think this comment from you a good indication that there really is a problem. You don't think it's even a tiny bit strange that you somehow think the topic of this thread is about eating meat?

man, why haven't you answered my question about (here i just quote from my previous post) "why do you so often miss to take important words of previous posts into account/consideration, and as if not reason on what was said to you at all, but now again as though trying to make me out to be a foolish prevaricator?! - i'm just trying to say it has become too obvious"?!, i ask you this again, because you again missed to take certain words from my previous post into account/consideration, e.g. you both read my previous post even quoting from it and missed to take the explanatory adverb "for example" into account/consideration when you commented on that part of my post as if the adverb "for example", which appears to be important to the overall meaning of what i explained, does not exist in the sentence at all?!, the adverb "for example" is there not in vain, because i talked about the principled mechanism of satan's kingdom as a whole but in this case particularly with regard to how the attachment to certain possessions/goods turned out to be unfavorable to e.g. certain believers/worshipers, and you even hurried to twist my words as it can also be seen below, moreover, you acted according to the same insidious scheme in your previous posts to me, and all this your circus more and more suggests to me that there is something (very) wrong with you - i say this without any bad intentions

Here's a basic summary of what happened. I said the part of the Mark prophecy which describes "buying and selling" relates to our dependence on mammon (money and the things money can buy) which is consistent with what Jesus also said about our attitudes towards money (Matthew 6:24-34). Smaller said money has nothing to do with the "buying/selling" in the Mark prophecy. You responded to that comment by saying there are times when "attachment to 'certain' possessions really can cause a problem in our relationship with God". The context was clear and consistent up to that point and had nothing to do with eating meat or food curses.

here is how you again tried to impute your own words to me, i used the word "cases", not "times", because the word "cases" is closer to the sense that i meant, neither did i use the word "relationship" and the phrase "relationship with God", but you wrote them in quotes to show that ostensibly i used them in my previous posts, while actually you said so, not i, and here you again misinterpreted the words of the Lord (from Matthew 6:24-34 in this case), because you again rush to inculcate your misbelief that ostensibly the physical possession is the greatest sin in the minds of the others, when the Lord actually says that the purpose of (the) faith is the worshipers to contribute to/the spiritual servants to work for the overall salvation and abundant life's provision in His Heavenly Father and Him, which (salvation and life's provision) last until the end of the eternity, because the kingdom of God is the love, while His righteousness is the perfection of love, "for if you love only those that love you, what reward will you have?!, do not the unrighteous also do so?!"(Matthew 5:46), that's why there is talk of perfect love in the Bible(1 John 4:12-21), because one thing is to love only some people, but quite another thing is to love perfectly all human and other besouled beings of the world, however, for the last centuries and millennia there have been many worshipers/clerics who have preferred to have great: glory, elevation, wisdom, power, might and abilities rather/more than to contribute to/work for the overall salvation and life's provision in the true Lord God, for that reason they have "drunk" (from) the spirit of the "beast(666)" and have "eaten" (from) its wisdom as well as having put on (from) its glory, so the meanings of the verbs "drink", "eat", and "put on/clothe" in Matthew 6:24-34 are also figurative in the spiritual sense, that is why Jesus says there: "Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?"(Matthew 6:27), because see how He spoke of the "meal" in the previous verse(26) as well as (of) the "dressing" in the next verses(28-30), but He does not speak of the "drinking" so directly, yet He does it by mentioning the "drinking" as an addition of "cubits" to the "stature", which shows that the case in point is the spiritual: drinking, eating, and dressing, because it is not typical to be said for the physical growth of the human physical body that it can grow only by drinking of physical drinks/liquids, but it is much more typical to be said for the occult growth of occult human that it can grow by exercise of occultism/yoga

When I asked you to clarify what "certain" possessions really means, you decided that you weren't talking about possessions at all, but rather food curses, though you didn't mention anything about food in that post. The food curse thing only came later when I challenged you to tell us what these "certain possessions" were and what it means to be "attached" to them. It certainly does look like prevarication.

here you again tried to distort the things that i explained, because i meant "possessions" not only in the sense of enjoyments, but also in the sense of being eventually affected/possessed by eventual power(s)/force(s)/spirit(s) of the "darkness", and if in such a case the affected/possessed indulges it/them by showing affection for/attachment to (as it were) its/their meshes, then it/they might eventually turn out to have a power to hamper the spiritual growth of that worshiper affected/possessed by it/them so that, God forbid, it/they might even cause symptoms of a certain discomfort, indisposition or sickness to that person associated with its (as it were) morbid affection/attachment, and i just used the example of e.g. the morbid meat-eating, which is just one of the possible examples, as, if you remember, i also mentioned such possible morbid affection(s) for/attachment(s) to sex, drinking, etc.:

i meant not only meal, but even other possible things (appearing to be a reason for the kingdom of satan to accuse/judge such persons) such as alcohol consumption, sex life, etc.

Anyway, it's interesting that you use the qualifier, "certain" when talking about attachment to possessions, because it's very much like the haggling I described earlier. It's okay to be attached to SOME possessions, as long as we are aware of a "certain" list of possessions which it is NOT okay to be attached to. I wonder what the list of bad attachments looks like.

what is wrong with the adjective "certain"?!, i said "certain possessions" in the sense of some determinate/determined possessions, because in such cases the wicked seeks to find "best" possible way to affect such a person and determines what it has succeeded to find in this regard, so from this point of view there is no certain list of bad attachments equally valid for each human, but from the other hand of the false beliefs of satan's kingdom there is such a list, because the system of (the) spiritual iniquity/lawlessness usually tries to turn the things upside down so that the things of God/the "Light" might be marked as vain, shameful, foolish, lunatic, rotten, profane, sinful, etc., while the things of the wicked/"darkness" - as normal, worth, real, true, just, precious, sublime, sacred, etc., which is visible in the story of the original sin/fall how eve and adam began to perceive the things upside down after they started to exercise/practice occultism/esotericism, because the first wrong thing that they accepted was the devil's lie that the occultism/esoterism is ostensibly the way to (the) greater realization of (the) life, while the very exercise/practice of occultism/esotericism is actually the original/very sin for the humans, and after they started to exercise/practice it, they began to perceive the sex, the other physical sense activities, and the physical creation of God in general as vain, unworthy, shameful, sinful, etc., for that reason they made themselves their own(human/666) creed/religion(the "aprons" from Genesis 3:7) in order to overcome shame/the fear/the vanity by drawing/deriving wisdom from the forbidden tree(the "fig leaves" from Genesis 3:7)
|
|
v

 

[JCitoL]

It's very similar to an earlier post where you claimed the reason Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple was because they were charging prices for Holy Services which were too high for the poor. According to your assessment, if they had charged more reasonable prices, so that the poor could afford to buy the holy spirit, then Jesus would not have been angry. I'll quote your actual words, so that you will not think I'm trying to make you look foolish...

here(as to the last passage [Matthew 21:12-13]) the money is really a critical factor, because if the holy services are performed only for (a lot of) money/against (a solid) payment, then only the rich will be able to afford them, while the poor will not and so they will be kind of doomed to suffer, etc.

here you again tried to twist my words, because i stated that the clergy in the temple sold ostensibly holy services, but actually spiritual services according to their human(unrighteous) spiritual/religious tradition:

Matthew 21:12-13 "And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers(i.e. of the cashiers that sold (ostensibly) holy services performed by the relevant jews/pharisees there), and the seats of them that sold doves(i.e. that sold occult services for pacification performed by certain esotericists among the jews), And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves(i.e. a devilish den)."

and you lie about this that according to your supposed claims i meant that if the prices were more reasonable, then Jesus would not have been angry - i did not claim such a thing, but i just said that the then clergy of the then jews' religion made the holy services inaccessible to the poor as well as to all people there, as it is also written in Matthew 21:12-13 and as i also said:

here(as to the last passage) the money is really a critical factor, because if the holy services are performed only for (a lot of) money/against (a solid) payment, then only the rich will be able to afford them, while the poor will not and so they will be kind of doomed to suffer, etc.

as if you did not notice/see the brackets: "only for (a lot of) money/against (a solid) payment", i wrote it originally so, because i considered the fact that there might have been poor people during that time who had no money at all - the text in the brackets indicates an optional part of the sentence

I asked you to clarify this point but the explanation never came, which is fine since you don't owe me anything, but I think it does lend credibility to my argument that you really do have a problem with money issues.

if you want to know, there is even a commandment in the Pentateuch/Torah according to which the believers/worshipers should pay a tithe so as the priests, the levites, the strangers, the fatherless, the widows, and the poor in general to have a living/livelihood:

Deuteronomy 14:28-29 "At the end of three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates: And the Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,) and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest."

the Lord, Jesus Christ, also confirms this:

Matthew 8:4 "shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded",

Mark 12:41-44 "Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much. And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing. And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury: For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living."

It is this kind of confusion which will make the Mark so effective. Can you live without buying and selling? Ask yourself and be brutally honest about the answer, because if the answer is "no" then you will almost certainly be tricked into taking the Mark.

and can you live without any living/livelihood?!, why do you continue to assert nonsense as if you would/could survive alone in the midst of a vast jungle in which there is no livelihood/living at all?!, once you know so much, why don't you go to live in such a place under such conditions?!

Blessings

 

[john darling]

No, we are advised not to worship the beast. It is the mark and the worship, combined, that poses the problem.

I smaller. Thanks for providing these responses. I feel they get much closer to the heart of the issue. Can you please clarify what you see is the difference between taking the Mark of the Beast and worshiping the Beast? How are they different?

Money itself isn't the problem either. It's the love of same that is the root of all evil. I actually detest money, but I understand that it is needed to operate in this wicked world.

Excellent. However, one problem I've noticed when it comes to people saying, "it's not money which is the problem, it's the love of money which is the problem" is that no one ever seems to get around to explaining what the love of money actually looks like. How do we know when someone loves money? Can you give an example or two?

And therefore judging this matter as an external problem isn't the basis. Never was. Never will be.

Would you be willing to accept that the love of money (an external, physical matter) is an indication of a spiritual, internal problem? If not, then do you think there is ever a time at all when a spiritual problem manifests in a physical way? For example, do you think fornication is the result of any kind of internal, spiritual problem (Matthew 5:28, James 1:14-15)? What about hypocritical speech (a physical, outward thing (Matthew 12:34)). Do you think that is a result of any internal, spiritual problem?

From what I can see of Jesus' teachings, spiritual problems almost always result in physical ways. Jesus called it, "knowing them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:15-16). The "fruits" are the physical, observable results of what is happening inside a person.

 

[john darling]

and you lie about this that according to your supposed claims i meant that if the prices were more reasonable, then Jesus would not have been angry - i did not claim such a thing, but i just said that the then clergy of the then jews' religion made the holy services inaccessible to the poor as well as to all people there,

Hi JCitoL. To me, it sounds like you are trying to say two things at once. Because you believe the monetary system is a good thing, you feel a need to justify it but because there are very clear examples where Jesus preaches against faith in the monetary system your defenses come out sounding like double-speak.

I think it's helpful to remember why you used the example in the first place. What point were you trying to make? Remember the context. You said the words "buy and sell" in the Mark prophecy don't really mean to buy or sell. When I asked you for evidence of that, you posted the example of Jesus overturning the money changers' tables, not because he was upset with them buying and selling, but because they were charging prices which were too high (see post #56). You were clearly defending the concepts of buying and selling as good things, but only if the price is fair to the poor.

This wasn't really an explanation as to why "buy and sell" doesn't really mean buy and sell, and yet it was still relevant; "from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks". Because you depend on money as the source of life (in your most recent post you claim it's not possible to live without money) you seem to feel a need to challenge any teaching which may threaten that dependence. "Buying and selling" is clearly linked to loyalty to the Beast (Rev 14:9). You know that loyalty to the Beast is not a good thing, but you also believe you cannot live without buying/selling. This puts you in a verrry difficult position, spiritually.

To overcome this problem you've convinced yourself that buying and selling doesn't really mean buying and selling. You're trying to use examples from Jesus to prove your case, but because Jesus clearly did teach against dependence on mammon (money and the things money can buy (Matthew 6:24-34)) your arguments come out sounding contradictory (the double-speak I mentioned earlier).

An example of this is you saying the problem with the money changers in the temple was that they were charging prices which were too high, thus making the services unavailable to the poor, while at the same time claiming that paying for Holy services is not what you meant. The prices were too high, and yet pricing is not what you meant?

As for me lying about what you've said or putting words into your mouth, the beauty of forum posting is that all the words we speak are on record.

Here is what you said:

here(as to the last passage) the money is really a critical factor, because if the holy services are performed only for (a lot of) money/against (a solid) payment, then only the rich will be able to afford them, while the poor will not and so they will be kind of doomed to suffer, etc.

Here is my assessment of what you said:

It's very similar to an earlier post where you claimed the reason Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple was because they were charging prices for Holy Services which were too high for the poor. According to your assessment, if they had charged more reasonable prices, so that the poor could afford to buy the holy spirit, then Jesus would not have been angry.

There is no lie in my assessment. All I've done is to strip away the justifications to reveal the spirit underneath.

 

[smaller]

I smaller. Thanks for providing these responses. I feel they get much closer to the heart of the issue. Can you please clarify what you see is the difference between taking the Mark of the Beast and worshiping the Beast? How are they different?

Depends on which class we are observing. Humans or devils.

All demons worship the prince of demons, Satan. He is lord over them, in his kingdom.

Excellent. However, one problem I've noticed when it comes to people saying, "it's not money which is the problem, it's the love of money which is the problem" is that no one ever seems to get around to explaining what the love of money actually looks like. How do we know when someone loves money? Can you give an example or two?

The difficulty, dear brother John, is that the parties in question, devils and mankind, are presently overlapped in the flesh. No one knows what is "within" man, but God. And God in Christ, by His Word, has assuredly revealed that the tempter inserts various lusts into all our flesh. We are called to divide from that working and worker. These are those upon whom God has set His Seal, that they may see and divide from that other worker and working in their own flesh.

What we see on the outside, in various measures of observations, are observations of good and evil transpiring from the mixture of the parties in question. We recognize each others in Christ by our love for one another, in various measures, and by those who do not seek to condemn us in Christ. Nevertheless that does not mean judgment has departed the flesh of us. It is expedient for any of us to understand that Christ is for us, and against the worker and workings of the tempter in our flesh, simultaneously.

The preamble to Revelation, to the churches, for example, shows us that the workings of Satan transpired in all 7 churches. And we are all to hear what the Spirit says to the churches in these matters, but unfortunately we all tend to disregard the ill side of the ledgers, applied personally. This is however the basis for our individual, respective crosses. We all personally, bear in our own flesh, that which will be brought to judgment in the flesh.

Would you be willing to accept that the love of money (an external, physical matter) is an indication of a spiritual, internal problem?

Well, I might hope that you or a few will see the deeper problem. It's not a problem of the love of money, it's the problem of internal adversity, courtesy of the enemy of our own soul. Whatever things of God we bear within, we can be assured that Satan (or his own) will resist everything of God in our flesh. And therein is the essence of all our difficulties, internally.

If not, then do you think there is ever a time at all when a spiritual problem manifests in a physical way? For example, do you think fornication is the result of any kind of internal, spiritual problem (Matthew 5:28, James 1:14-15)? What about hypocritical speech (a physical, outward thing (Matthew 12:34)). Do you think that is a result of any internal, spiritual problem?

I think every ill thing is a direct reflection of the internal problem of mankind, and that these problems are directly linked to how God Works against the internal adversary in mankind. There are great showings of Gods Present Workings, on the earth, today, on the ill side of the ledgers. Great showings. I revel in them, and see Gods Active Hand, moving. Quickly, sharply. This Divine Hand has been ever upon the earth, and upon His creation. I could write of these matters, matters present, at length. And point/link them directly to "how" God Works, by what He has shown and done prior.

So, yeah. I see many things on the horizon, from what I see going on, daily. It would be difficult for a novice to perceive, as there are some basic rules of the game that God puts in place that must be entered into, personally. I do not control if a person can see or not. But I do see His Active Hand. And it can be quite horrific. I have also tasted this side of God in Christ, and I have not lips service fear, but genuine fear, because I have perceived my own condition in the flesh, with the presence of the adversary, and Gods Real Active resistance to that working/worker, even though it is passive and kept in check, in my eyes, as it pertains to "external" fleshly showings. The chastisement of God in Christ is exceptionally real, and no pleasure by any means. If we view how Jesus was treated by the enemy, and them, being aroused by the Presence of the Living Word, to crucify Him, we can perceive how God Works with His sons of the flesh. But for us, the matters are a little more intricate, as Jesus did not have any sin in Him. We, unfortunately do, no matter how good we dress up our hypocritical flesh.

From what I can see of Jesus' teachings, spiritual problems almost always result in physical ways. Jesus called it, "knowing them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:15-16). The "fruits" are the physical, observable results of what is happening inside a person.

I agree. So what does it tell you about how far the churches themselves are fallen, when we constantly barrage each others with the potential fate of eternal fire?

The churches fell, long long ago, headlong into the condemnation of the devil. Even prophesied by Paul, here:

Acts 20:29
For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

God is being Divinely Patient with us, presently. But He Is Willing to show His Wrath, and in fact it is we who did and do fall into the clutches of the grievous wolf, internally, when we condemn each others to hell.

Divine Judgment unto wrath does fall first, in the CHURCH. It won't be pleasant.

1 Peter 4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

Currently, in the churches, it is in fact Satan, sitting in the flesh of church folk, openly condemning Gods own Children of faith in Christ to hell or potential hell. And he has sat there for a long while.

Oh no or oh woe! Take yer pick.

I doubt any of us will be worrying much about money.

One thing I do know though, for no uncertain fact, is that The Comforter comes, in the midst of adversity.

And, this, His Comfort, is overwhelming and enrapturing.

 

[JCitoL]

and you lie about this that according to your supposed claims i meant that if the prices were more reasonable, then Jesus would not have been angry - i did not claim such a thing, but i just said that the then clergy of the then jews' religion made the holy services inaccessible to the poor as well as to all people there,

Hi JCitoL. To me, it sounds like you are trying to say two things at once. Because you believe the monetary system is a good thing, you feel a need to justify it but because there are very clear examples where Jesus preaches against faith in the monetary system your defenses come out sounding like double-speak.

I think it's helpful to remember why you used the example in the first place. What point were you trying to make? Remember the context. You said the words "buy and sell" in the Mark prophecy don't really mean to buy or sell. When I asked you for evidence of that, you posted the example of Jesus overturning the money changers' tables, not because he was upset with them buying and selling, but because they were charging prices which were too high (see post #56). You were clearly defending the concepts of buying and selling as good things, but only if the price is fair to the poor.

This wasn't really an explanation as to why "buy and sell" doesn't really mean buy and sell, and yet it was still relevant; "from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks". Because you depend on money as the source of life (in your most recent post you claim it's not possible to live without money) you seem to feel a need to challenge any teaching which may threaten that dependence. "Buying and selling" is clearly linked to loyalty to the Beast (Rev 14:9). You know that loyalty to the Beast is not a good thing, but you also believe you cannot live without buying/selling. This puts you in a verrry difficult position, spiritually.

To overcome this problem you've convinced yourself that buying and selling doesn't really mean buying and selling. You're trying to use examples from Jesus to prove your case, but because Jesus clearly did teach against dependence on mammon (money and the things money can buy (Matthew 6:24-34)) your arguments come out sounding contradictory (the double-speak I mentioned earlier).

An example of this is you saying the problem with the money changers in the temple was that they were charging prices which were too high, thus making the services unavailable to the poor, while at the same time claiming that paying for Holy services is not what you meant. The prices were too high, and yet pricing is not what you meant?

As for me lying about what you've said or putting words into your mouth, the beauty of forum posting is that all the words we speak are on record.

Here is what you said:

here(as to the last passage) the money is really a critical factor, because if the holy services are performed only for (a lot of) money/against (a solid) payment, then only the rich will be able to afford them, while the poor will not and so they will be kind of doomed to suffer, etc.

Here is my assessment of what you said:

It's very similar to an earlier post where you claimed the reason Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple was because they were charging prices for Holy Services which were too high for the poor. According to your assessment, if they had charged more reasonable prices, so that the poor could afford to buy the holy spirit, then Jesus would not have been angry.

There is no lie in my assessment. All I've done is to strip away the justifications to reveal the spirit underneath.

what to say on this?!, what can i say on this, except that you again behaves as an impudent person?!, there is again no even one sign of response on your part as to various explanations that i gave in my previous post(s), but as if you only pamper your own obsessions(idees fixes) that you instilled in your mind suiting yourself only to them as though being ready to destroy all your true brethren in faith for (the sake of) your sick cause, i do not judge any person by speaking so, but just comment, and i do not try to make myself out to be perfectly sinless, there were maybe certain mistakes that i made, especially in the insufficiency of my young(verdant) spiritual age(growth)

but i do not live for money, at least because money itself is nothing to me, but can you live without it after the livelihood is evaluated with money?!, because what normal enough person would prefer to live on the edge of poverty and misery merely for the sake/benefit of some smart asses that only exploit it brashly without gratitude, remorse and mercy?!, so money in this world is just like water that we have to drink once in a while, because i talk at least about the eventual need of certain people to live earnestly/honorably towards their children, kith and kin, friends, neighbors, and for the good of all people in general, and then if everyone repudiates the livelihood, who will give a living to the poor:

Ephesians 4:28 "Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.",

2 Timothy 2:4-7 "No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier. And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully. The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits. Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things."

see how even the quite legitimate members of the Church of Christ worked with their own hands and were ready to help the needy/necessitous:

Acts 2:44-45 "all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.",

Acts 18:1-4 "After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome: ) and came unto them. And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.",

Acts 28:30-31 "Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.",

Romans 15:25-28 "now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints. For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem. It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things. When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will come by you into Spain.",

1 Corinthians 4:11-12 "we... labour, working with our own hands:",

2 Thessalonians 3:8 "Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you:"

plus, if the rulers such as the: presidents, premiers, governors, mayors, etc., cannot cope/deal with the situation in the countries/states/cities where they serve as such without receiving subsidies from their citizens e.g. in the form of duty/tax, then how will they manage to save the people from eventual: poverty, misery, dirt, diseases, epidemics, criminal activity/crimes, lawlessness, accidents, breakdowns, poor urban development, disasters, iniquity, etc.?!, for that reason Saint Paul says:

Romans 13:1-8 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers(i.e. the powers over the kingdom of (the) iniquity/lawlessness). For there is no power(i.e. such power) but of God: the powers(i.e. all such powers) that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power(i.e. such a power), resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers(i.e. because their rulers) are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister(i.e. because such a ruler/servant is kind of a minister) of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword(i.e. the power/weapon) in vain: for he is the minister(i.e. kind of a minister) of God, a revenger(i.e. a crime-stopper) to execute wrath upon(i.e. to exercise/apply power over) him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also(i.e. because for this cause you also pay a tribute, e.g. at least for salaries of e.g. the police (officers)): for they are(i.e. they are kind of) God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing(i.e. for they are committed to work on those their positions/posts constantly). Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law."
|
|
v