How to avoid the mark of the beast

[Carry_Your_Name]

for_his_glory

Carry_Your_Name

2 Peter 1:20

Historical facts, not interpretation. Also, bible is used to interpret history - and current events, not the other way around, that's called wisdom of discernment.

 

[for_his_glory]

for_his_glory

Carry_Your_Name

2 Peter 1:20

I never said anything of what I post is of private interpretation as there is no such thing. God's word is for all with only the Holy Spirit teachings us all truths.

 

[for_his_glory]

You disagree because you neglected Lk. 21:20-24, you didn't combine that with Matthew's account, thereby you didn't see the whole picture. Does it really make any sense that Jesus would skip the catastrophic destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD that directly ruined the city into an "abomination of desolation" - when some of his disciples were still alive - and jump right into those other 23 sieges? Maybe it is so to me, but not to me and those "many".

I'm not here to argue, but to give my understanding like everyone else. If you do not agree, then so be it as there is no room for the "I am right, you are wrong" types of discussions as we are all still learning.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I'm not here to argue, but to give my understanding like everyone else. If you do not agree, then so be it as there is no room for the "I am right, you are wrong" types of discussions as we are all still learning.

I'm not here to argue either. God commanded us to scrutinize teachings and check if they match the fact. If a teaching is truly from the Holy Spirit, especially prophecy, then it must match the fact. Valid historic documents determine who's right and who's wrong.

And if you say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?’— when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. (Deut. 18:21-22)

 

[for_his_glory]

You disagree because you neglected Lk. 21:20-24, you didn't combine that with Matthew's account, thereby you didn't see the whole picture. Does it really make any sense that Jesus would skip the catastrophic destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD that directly ruined the city into an "abomination of desolation" - when some of his disciples were still alive - and jump right into those other 23 sieges? Maybe it is so to me, but not to me and those "many".

What about all the other destruction's that were abominations in Jerusalem throughout history way before that of 70AD.

During its long history, Jerusalem has been destroyed at least twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and captured and recaptured 44 times.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

What about all the other destruction's that were abominations in Jerusalem throughout history way before that of 70AD.

During its long history, Jerusalem has been destroyed at least twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and captured and recaptured 44 times.

There were no such destruction between Jesus's ministry and 70AD. Jerusalem may have been destroyed twice, but as I said, the temple was only destroyed ONCE, and that's what the discipled asked and what Jesus referred to.