Is the Mark of the Beast Forgivable?

[jasoncran]

I don't use the Egyptian Roman solar Gregorian calendar. I use the original Genesis calendar of 12 months, 30 days. As for possessing a familiar spirit, it is the unforgivable sin, regardless of certain tampered scriptures that try to say otherwise.

and whom mary magediline whom the lord CAST OUT seven spirits was amongst them that saw him first after his resurrection.

hmm i guess you know more then the lord.

 

[precepts]

D's

Using the terms 'mark of the beast' and 'forgiveness' in the same sentence is a contradiction. To suggest that someone who takes the mark would ask for or seek forgiveness in order to be forgiven goes against what the scriptures tell us.

I never suggested any would ask for forgiveness. I simply asked if the mark was forgivable, and if not, does that make it the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit. You went on to write a book, but haven't address the issue of is it the sin against the Holy Spirit. That's the main point!

This was my original response to your above quote:

When did I suggest such a thing? The point was if the "mark" isn't unforgivable, is it the unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit. That's exactly why I wrote what I wrote, to show you that that's what you're doing, twisting my and the bible words.

I never suggested the marked would ask for forgiveness!


D's

You suggested this contradiction in your opening post:

The question is, is the mark of the Beast forgivable, and if not, does that make it the unpardonable sin against the holy spirit?

Is the mark forgivable??? But I just showed where those who take the mark, worship the beast and refuse to repent, therefore refusing to seek forgiveness in order to be forgiven. It is a moot point since forgiveness is not being sought in the case of those who take the mark, and whether it could be given is irrelevant.

You missed the point, and misinterpreted my opening statement/post. The issue wasn't about the marked asking for forgiveness but if the mark was the sin against the Holy Spirit. I asked the question knowing the answer was no, because I also know there's only one unforgivable sin.




D's

Btw, you contradict yourself when you wrote,

The point was if the "mark" isn't unforgivable, is it the unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit.

Unforgivable means to be unable to pardon for a mistake. Therefore, your sentence is actually reading, "if the "mark" is not unable to be pardonned [unforgivable].....creating a double negative. If the "mark" is NOT unable (to be pardonned), then it means it is able (to be pardonned).

And you couldn't tell from the context, it was a mistake?





D's

You have said taking the mark is becomming a child of the devil, and being a child of the devil is blasphamey against the HS, which is the unforgiveable sin.

1. No where does scriptures state that taking the mark is becoming a child of the devil.
2. Matthew 12 never says that possessing familiar spirits is the same as blasphemy against the HS. If this were true then Acts 16: 16-18 would be false.

(1)How many unforgivable sins do you know of? There's only one, and if the mark is unforgivable, there's only one conclusion that you and others purposely avoid.
(2)Theres two different version of Christ's reference to the unforgivable sin. You quote one. The other I will have to find and post it for you, but the point remains, there's only one unforgivable sin.

 

[precepts]

D's

2. Matthew 12 never says that possessing familiar spirits is the same as blasphemy against the HS.

I found the verses I was looking for:

Mar 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.
-
Mar 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
Mar 3:30 Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.

That's plain English.


D's

If this were true then Acts 16: 16-18 would be false.

It could be, the bible has many contradictions, the reason for Revelation's warning:

Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

 

[D4Christ]

I never suggested any would ask for forgiveness. I simply asked if the mark was forgivable, and if not, does that make it the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit. You went on to write a book, but haven't address the issue of is it the sin against the Holy Spirit. That's the main point!

This seems like a game of musical chairs of words......I and others have stated that the mark of the beast is not "forgivable" and it is not the same as the sin as blashphemy against the HS...the only known unforgivable sin.

To be an unforgivable sin suggests that if a person is guilty of this sin and then decides they want to repent, they would be unable to. Therefore, taking the mark does not qualiify as the "unforgivable sin" because those who take said mark, refuse to repent and wouldn't ask for forgiveness anyway.

Why do you admit the mark is not a sin against the HS...

The issue wasn't about the marked asking for forgiveness but if the mark was the sin against the Holy Spirit. I asked the question knowing the answer was no, because I also know there's only one unforgivable sin.

...but you state below that if the mark is unforgivable there is only one conclusion that is being purposely avoided.

(1)How many unforgivable sins do you know of? There's only one, and if the mark is unforgivable, there's only one conclusion that you and others purposely avoid.

Since everyone seems to be missing your point...please...englighten us.

1. Is the taking the mark unforgivable. Yes or no.
2. Is taking the mark blasphemy against the HS. Yes or no.

 

[D4Christ]

D's I found the verses I was looking for:
That's plain English.

No...that's King James English. Do you know anyone who speaks that way today. You don't seem to employ that grammatical structure in your own writings.

Mark 3

22 But the teachers of religious law who had arrived from Jerusalem said, “He’s possessed by Satan, the prince of demons. That’s where he gets the power to cast out demons.”

23 Jesus called them over and responded with an illustration. “How can Satan cast out Satan?” he asked. 24 “A kingdom divided by civil war will collapse. 25 Similarly, a family splintered by feuding will fall apart. 26 And if Satan is divided and fights against himself, how can he stand? He would never survive. 27 Let me illustrate this further. Who is powerful enough to enter the house of a strong man like Satan and plunder his goods? Only someone even stronger—someone who could tie him up and then plunder his house. 28 “I tell you the truth, all sin and blasphemy can be forgiven, 29 but anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven. This is a sin with eternal consequences.” 30 He told them this because they were saying, “He’s possessed by an evil spirit.”

It seems like you are suggesting that to be possessed by an evil spirit is to commit blasphemy against the HS. But Christ is not saying that. The teachers were saying Christ, the Son of God, was actually possessed by Satan. Christ, as you may remember, was full of the HS, which descended on Him at His baptism. Therefore, to say Christ was full of an evil spirit was akin to saying that the HS is evil. Christ goes on to tell the religious leaders that blasphemy...

G988
1) slander, detraction, speech injurious, to another's good name
2) impious and reproachful speech injurious to divine majesty

...against the HS is unforgivable.

D's

If this were true then Acts 16: 16-18 would be false.

It could be, the bible has many contradictions, the reason for Revelation's warning:

Good grief. In Mark 1 right after the HS descended on Christ, He cast out an evil spirit out of a man. Are all examples of spirits being cast out of people fabricated in the bible?

Dee

 

[precepts]

Here endeth the lesson.

 

[D4Christ]

Agreed.

If any lesson was learned it was to read and study to show ourselves approved and to test all things (theories, statements) against the Word of God.

2 Peter 3

15...This is what our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you with the wisdom God gave him—16 speaking of these things in all of his letters. Some of his comments are hard to understand, and those who are ignorant and unstable have twisted his letters to mean something quite different, just as they do with other parts of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction.
17 I am warning you ahead of time, dear friends. Be on guard so that you will not be carried away by the errors of these wicked people and lose your own secure footing.

Dee

 

[turnorburn]

Its not forgivable, those people putting their wallets first and foremost stealing from the poor and give to the rich. A picture speaks 1000 words..

turnorburn

 

[Vic C.]

With all due respect, you're not worthy, but here's some information you can use. The 1,260 days, prophecied in Daniel, equals 3 1/2 years or 42 months, if divide by 30 days.

That is uncalled for. Please do not talk to members that way. You are no more or less worthy than any other member here.

You also said:

It could be, the bible has many contradictions, the reason for Revelation's warning:

That's just in case anyone missed that telltale statement of yours.

 

[D4Christ]

You also said:

It could be, the bible has many contradictions, the reason for Revelation's warning:

That's just in case anyone missed that telltale statement of yours.

Yup...I saw that too and pointed it out in post #45....still waiting on an answer for that one. Don't expect to get one though.......

Dee

 

[D4Christ]

So, what was I suppose to say? The bible instructs us to guard ourselves, and not to cast our blessings if they might not be appreciated. I wasn't trying to insult him, but was using my judgement and discretion.

I'm curious. Do you base your above statement on Matt 7.

6 “Don’t waste what is holy on people who are unholy. Don’t throw your pearls to pigs! They will trample the pearls, then turn and attack you.

 

[precepts]

D's

precepts'

So, what was I suppose to say? The bible instructs us to guard ourselves, and not to cast our blessings if they might not be appreciated. I wasn't trying to insult him, but was using my judgement and discretion.

I'm curious. Do you base your above statement on Matt 7.

D's

6 “Don’t waste what is holy on people who are unholy. Don’t throw your pearls to pigs! They will trample the pearls, then turn and attack you.

I base it on statements like these:

D's

22 But the teachers of religious law who had arrived from Jerusalem said, “He’s possessed by Satan, the prince of demons. That’s where he gets the power to cast out demons.” 23 Jesus called them over and responded with an illustration. “How can Satan cast out Satan?” he asked. 24 “A kingdom divided by civil war will collapse. 25 Similarly, a family splintered by feuding will fall apart. 26 And if Satan is divided and fights against himself, how can he stand? He would never survive. 27 Let me illustrate this further. Who is powerful enough to enter the house of a strong man like Satan and plunder his goods? Only someone even stronger—someone who could tie him up and then plunder his house. 28 “I tell you the truth, all sin and blasphemy can be forgiven, 29 but anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven. This is a sin with eternal consequences.” 30 He told them this because they were saying, “He’s possessed by an evil spirit.”

It seems like you are suggesting that to be possessed by an evil spirit is to commit blasphemy against the HS. But Christ is not saying that. The teachers were saying Christ, the Son of God, was actually possessed by Satan. Christ, as you may remember, was full of the HS, which descended on Him at His baptism. Therefore, to say Christ was full of an evil spirit was akin to saying that the HS is evil. Christ goes on to tell the religious leaders that blasphemy...

How many times do I have to tell you there's only one unforgivable sin? How many times? Yet, you keep separating the mark, which is unforgivable, and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, also noted as unforgivable. There's only one unforgivable sin, not two. If you can't comprehend that, then there's no need for me to proceed. If I percieve that you're not being logical, then I have to end the conversation, as cruel as it might sound, but that's what the bible and wisdom dictates.

 

[theLords]

You asked but you may not like my answer. Hardly anyone is willing to accept this.

This sin cannot be committed by a born again, bought by blood, believer. This sin was against those who saw Jesus in the flesh, performing miracles in and through the Spirit, yet rejected them and accused Him of doing the work of the Adversary.

Those who took/take this mark were NEVER one of God's children. They are all children of lawlessness.

Why is hardly anyone willing to accept this? I thought this was "common" knowledge?

 

[D4Christ]

I base it on statements like these:
How many times do I have to tell you there's only one unforgivable sin? How many times? Yet, you keep separating the mark, which is unforgivable, and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, also noted as unforgivable. There's only one unforgivable sin, not two. If you can't comprehend that, then there's no need for me to proceed. If I percieve that you're not being logical, then I have to end the conversation, as cruel as it might sound, but that's what the bible and wisdom dictates.

Thank God we have the Word to rely on so we do not have to guess at what God has said. Perhaps one day you will come to see that, as far as scriptures are concerned, forgiveness can only come about thru repentance. Time after time in the bible it says repent of your sins and turn to God to be forgiven. Yet clearly those who take the mark never repent, nor ask for forgiveness. How then can taking the mark be unforgivable, when the perpertrator never asks for forgiveness?

I also question your attempts to categorize being possessed by an evil spirit as blasphemy, considering that the casting out of demons and evil spirits is well documented throughout scripture. Your theory would end all hope for those who have practiced the occult and who may have had experience with evil spirits. Many would believe that all hope is lost if their sin is "unforgiveable." The devil is a liar.

Either the scriptures are wrong, as you previously aluded to, or you are.

I pray that those who want to come out of the occult are not confused by your message. I pray the enemy has been exposed.


In the name of Yahushua,
Dee

 

[Bick]

The question is, is the mark of the Beast forgivable, and if not, does that make it the unpardonable sin against the holy spirit?

MY COMMENTS:
In John 1:29, John the Baptist declares "Behold, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world." RSV.
John 3:17 in the RSV reads, "For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world would be save through him."

And 2 Cor. 5:19 makes it so clear: "...God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses...." RSV.

My friends, through the sacrifice of Christ, he became the sin offering to take away all sins of the world.

That includes receiving the mark of the beast, or blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

Oh, every human being will have to give account for his deeds. God through Christ will exact his jusctice, his vengeance on all who deserve it, particularly at the great white throne judgment (Rev.20:11-15).

But that is not the end. God's great plan for the ages is after all enemies in the universe are made subject to Christ, the last enemy abolished is death. Christ then turns over the kingdom to his God and Father, that God may be all in all (1 Cor. 15:29-28).

And Col. 1:19-20 tells us, "For it was the good pleasure of the of the Father that in him (Christ) should all the fullness dwell; and through him to reconcile all things to himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross; through him, whether things upon the earth, or things in the heavens."

How can this be? Because God's love and grace are greater than all our sin/sins. During man's day, which we are in, there is evil, sin and sorrow, and judgment, but only for the evers (ages--aions Gk)

Have you not read 1 Tim. 2:3 , "This is comely and acceptable in presence of our Saviour God, who will all men to be saved and into a full-knowledge of truth to come." ?
And 1 Tim. 4:10, "For to this end we are toiling and contending, because we have set hope on a Living God, who is Saviour of all men, especially of believing ones." verses from Rothermam Version.

And there are many more throughout the Bible.

 

[Vic C.]

Why is hardly anyone willing to accept this? I thought this was "common" knowledge?

No, it's not. I learned it thorough studying some Reformed beliefs. But many a Christian hangs in the balance thinking somewhere along the way, they may have committed the unforgivable. :

Also, in an effort to keep this thread on track, I have deleted some posts.

 

[precepts]

There is only one unforgivable sin, whether the masses refuse to acknowledge the fact or not. The truth will be revealled.