We know from SOP that it will entail a union of church and state, but on practical grounds, how will that be instituted as that would mean foundational changes.

And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. 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 (Revelation 13:15-16).

We know the mark of the Beast will be enforced by the image of the Beast. The first beast of the Papacy utilized the state resources to enforce its doctrines, so we know that America will use its police forces as well as armed forces to make everyone obey the false doctrines of the first beast. With its political and military might, the United States can force the world to pay homage to the first beast and comply with its doctrines. The mark of the beast on the hand is just following along with it while the mark of the beast on the forehead is actually believing its false doctrine and rejecting the scriptures.

The Image of the Beast will enforced the Beasts doctrines through the law and persecution and somehow through its influence force the world to enact papal laws and enforce their observance. According to the Scriptures, the mark will be enforced by imposing economic sanctions which it is doing even now for smaller issues, but this will be on global scale on those unwilling to accept the mark of the beast...

And that no man might buy nor sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast or the number of his name…and his number is six hundred, three score and six (Revelation 13:17-18).

Now Seventh-day Adventists teach that the near the end of time the "mark of the beast" of Revelation 14 will be received on those who follow and those who actually believe on the false doctrines of the Beast which includes the change to Sunday worship instead of Saturday.

Here are the main points:

1. Adventists identify the union of Roman Catholicism with civil power or church-state power as the "beast" of Revelation.

"The beast described in Revelation 13:1-10 is the church-state union that dominated the Christian world for many centuries and was described by Paul as the 'man of sin' (2 Thess. 2:2-4) and by Daniel as the 'little horn' (Den. 7:8, 20-25; 8:9-12).

2. The Catholic Church, in the Dark Ages, changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, a pagan day of worship and enforced it on all the lands it went into or killed and excommunited those who opposed it.

3. At the end of time, a conflict will arise between those who worship the beast and receive its mark, and those who are the true followers of God. What sets these two groups apart is that the true loyal remnant, keeps Saturday as a holy day, and the fallen and apostate, keeps Sunday as a holy day.


4. At the end of time, those who keep Sunday as a holy day will seek to destroy those who keep Saturday as a holy day. They will pass laws against the Sabbath-keepers, known to Adventists as the National Sunday Law or Universal Sunday Law:

5. Jesus will return to put an end to the conflict, and those who follow God will go with Christ to heaven and Eternal Life, while those who follow the Beast and his image or the United States enforcement of the Beasts power and doctrine, will at the end receive Eternal Death.

So what will the Image Beast do to enforce the false doctrines of the Papal power beast?

The first thing that needs to happen is for the inactive Sunday laws to become fully active again.

Do we see this happening yet?

That is what Adventists teach, but the Bible warns of a financial entity that will most likely precede the Sabbath/Sunday problem.

Since judgment starts at the house of God, those who adhere to the Sabbath issue First view, will see no problems with buying into a universal monetary system that Revelation forewarns about. Then after they have disobeyed a clear thus saith the Lord, the Sabbath issue will arise. Those who obeyed the beast in order to buy and sell will find out too late that the financial system became the mark of the beast when it linked to Sabbath observance and they can't opt out. Thus it is a deception and the deceived will be lost.

Please, describe this "universal monetary system".

I don't know what "His Child" sees as the "universal monetary system" --

Seems it can mean an international monetary system of a set of internationally agreed rules, conventions and supporting institutions that facilitate international trade and the flow of money between nations. Right now it seems the US dollar is the "standard" by which other currencies are measured.

OR

It could mean the introduction of a single currency used by all nations -- though that doesn't seem like it's going to happen.

However, I personally see the move from currency to plastic cards as the most probably means by which buying and selling will be controlled. We are seeing more and more of that-- money is being handled electronically rather than actual cash.
When your cards are rejected -- you can not buy.

I do not agree that using the means by which money is now exchanged in buying and selling is accepting the "mark of the beast". There is no moral issue involved as long as the money is rightfully yours and you are engaged in a legal financial exchange. Though it may be wise to use cash at least some of the time, to encourage the government to keep cash in the financial world.


What ever method the governments use to restrict buying and selling, it will be an extremely difficult time for those denied. It will be a test THEN whether to renounce ones stand for Christ in order to continue to buy and sell, or throw themselves in complete trust into the arms of the Lord to maintain them in spite of the fact they are cut of from human support.

I agree with dedication, the elimination of cash is the key. Nations may be manipulated by military intimidation and the interconnected banking system, that to a large extent, already exists; however, individuals must be deprived of access to cash. Only then will it be possible, literally with the push of a button, to prevent anyone, anywhere, on earth from buying or selling.

The language used to describe the Papal power in Daniel 8:25 may have some bearing, especially in light of Revelation 13:12 "And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him..."

Daniel 8:23-25
23 "And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand."

Strong’s defines the word "peace" here, as security/abundance/peace/prosperity...

shalvâh, shal-vaw'; from H7951; security (genuine or false):—abundance, peace(-ably), prosperity, quietness.

Does this language bring to mind international free trade treaties: the European Common Market, the USMCA, the New Silk Road, TPP? Financial control of the world’s nation’s is progressing rapidly. As for control of individual finances, how often do you use a debit card, or online banking? How often do you pay with cash? We are already conditioned to think of cash as an inconvenience. If it was gradually phased out, would you really miss it?

Zero access to savings, pay cheques, impossible to pay mortgages, car loans, buy food...
"The just shall live by faith.". Amen!

When the image was first proposed, it was not meant to be a statuesque replica of the beast, but something to honour the beast by: "make an image TO the beast." Rev 13:14

• Think of the time when Moses left Israel to go up the mountain and Aaron asked the people for jewelry and fashioned a golden calf. "Then they said, This is your god, O Israel, that brought you out of the land of Egypt!" Exod. 32:4 That golden calf was an image TO and not OF ...
   
• This was the same type of image spoken of in Dan. 3:1, "Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was sixty cubits and its width six cubits." It was not an image of Nebuchadnezzar but an image TO some Chaldean god of whom Nebuchadnezzar and his advisers were "prophets".
   
• Also, in the book of Ezekiel, God showed him what the Jews were doing even in His House. "'Son of man, lift your eyes now toward the north.' So I lifted my eyes toward the north, and there, north of the altar gate, was this image of jealousy in the entrance." Ezek. 8:5

The interesting thing about these images is that they are dead, dead, dead. They speak only because some "prophet" claims to be their medium. In Revelation, it is the false prophet (the beast from the earth) that plays the part of medium, forcing people to actively, deliberately worship the Image much like what Nebuchadnezzar did.

But it is difficult, in this day and age, to see a possibility for such a scenario in North America. Civilization has progressed to the point that any suggestion that a well-crafted piece of stone should be worshiped comes across as ludicrous to our eyes and ears. However, there is a real possibility that the Christian SHROUD OF TURIN or Muslim KAABAH or Buddhist BUDDHA or Hindu RAM|SITA or, most surprisingly, the American FLAG could arise in a troubled world.

///
 

Re 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
It does not say, that those who use some money system have the mark of the beast. It says, only those who have (already) the mark of the beast can buy or sell.

Keeping cash as a currency could possibly prolong the time towards control. But having cash will not stop anything, nor will it allow you to circumvent God (or satan or man) and buy or sell. Imagine having a fistful of cash, going to buy food or gas, and the attendant says, sorry, we don't accept cash anymore.

Daryl:

I can't speak for "we," but personally I DON'T see this happening anytime soon, for the following reasons:

1. Too many religious groups hold too strongly to their own ideas, including which day they should worship on. The Jews worship on Saturday, and will never change. Muslims worship on Friday, and will never change. Both of these groups contain militant factions that will actively oppose a forced day of worship.

2. The economic engines that drive economies, and the societies in which they operate, will mitigate against a 1/7th-time shut-down of their money machines and the ensuing loss of revenue.

3. The Catholics don't care what day one worships on. In fact, they offer a Saturday Mass for those who find it more convenient/biblical/whatever. It is possible to be a Catholic in good standing and worship on Saturday.

4. The "conflict" between Saturday vs. Sunday is an SDA construct. It actually serves to divert attention from what is actually happening in the world and incapacitate those who are looking for Sunday laws as a sign of the end. Saturday vs Sunday is never mentioned or spelled out in Scripture. In reality we do not know what "...think to change times and laws..." refers to.

5. Those who think the Catholics are referred to in Revelation fail on two counts:
a. They misread, and then misapply, Scripture. More on this if asked.
b. They are unaware of, (or will not accept) both the nature of the Catholic church and/or the changes in it ushered in by Vatican II.

Just my 2-bits worth.

The beast from the sea arrives at the shore of the land. "Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea ..." John says in Rev. 13:1. So it is coming towards this particular land; and of this beast, it was particularly said, "It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev. 13:7-8

1. So, the first question is: what land was that land? And the answer is simply, unequivocally, VERY obviously: Israel. The beast was granted to make war with "the saints" and overcome them. It is Jerusalem being given over into the hands of Rome through Vespasian and his son Titus, both of whom were destined to ascend the throne of the empire.
    
2. Secondly, what was going to be the response of those caught in Jerusalem? Well, according to the Revelation, a false prophet was going to arise and encourage obedience to Rome in a very brutal dictatorship. And this is where the mark of the beast comes into play. It is the currency of Rome that was going to be imposed on the citizens of Jerusalem, coinage with Caesar's "glorious name"; and Rome's demand that Caesar be worshiped.
    
3. But Christians, true Christians were going to refuse and fall like flies. "Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on. Yes, says the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them." Rev. 14:13.

And that is all there is to it. But do SDA care for the truth? They are like a man with a toothache who refuses the service of a dentist. Instead, they go through excruciating pain and tortuous contortions, mangling all the prophecies of God, vainly endeavouring to push the square pegs of their own fantasies into the round holes of what is written.

///

One is reminded of His Child, picking very specific details of a scene and making a big issue of it. "Land" was not the point of the scene, but the beast and perhaps sea were. It doesn't mention "land"; you do. In fact, the beast was still in the sea, not on any land.

But going with your presumed "land" being a big issue, what makes you think "land" was Jerusalem? You said, "VERY obviously". Show us why we should assume that?

"Then I stood on the sand of the sea." Rev. 13:1

Was John standing in the middle of an ocean and on water? Look before you leap.

///

Still, ...kland has a point. You have not connected "standing on the sand of the sea" with Jerusalem.
In fact, John was on the Isle of Patmos when he saw this vision, so the stronger argument would be that it refers to Patmos...
Perhaps you should read before you leap...

Perhaps you should read before you leap...

Kland > "It doesn't mention 'land'; you do."

Me > "Then I stood on the sand of the sea." Rev. 13:1. Was John standing in the middle of an ocean and on water? Look before you leap.

Contrary to Kland's audacious claim, it does mention 'land'.

///

Are you struggling to keep up here, James?
Despite your argument with kland, the point remains that you equate the land, or the sand (or whatever) to Jerusalem. The question is not if land is mentioned, but on what basis you think it refers to Jerusalem.

The two of you are running on two different tracks. Kland is wondering about the 'land' and now you are wondering about equating the 'land' to Israel. Since this is in response to you, I will address your question that "upon what basis does the 'land' refer to Jerusalem, Israel?"

As I pointed out previously, "It was granted to [the Beast of the Sea] to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation." Rev. 13:7

1. to make war ...
2. to make war with the saints ...
3. to make war with the saints AND overcome them!

The saints were Israel, or as in Jesus' day, simply the Jews. And from the progression above, it becomes evident that the Jews were about to face war and lose, badly.

This is why the vision has the Beast from the Sea and the Beast from the Land and the "Land" succumbing to the charm of the "Sea" and crushing anyone who would not worship the "Sea" or his Image. Eventually though, the invasion will occur and the 'Land' would be washed away by the "Sea". Rev. 17

///

Thank you for that explanation, James. I now see where you are coming from.
I don't agree with your view, but I understand it.

Who are "the saints" then that are given over into war and desolation (Dan. 9:26), in your opinion?

///

As Daniel and Revelation reference end-time events, the "saints" refer to God's people at the end of time. This could include Jews, Christians, and any who confess Christ.

The reason I made reference to Dan. 9:26 is because it parallels Rev. 13:7. I will place them side by side for you to see:

• Dan. 9:26
  And after the sixty-two weeks, Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
  And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.
   
• Rev. 13:5-7
  And HE was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. It was granted to him to make war with the saints AND to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.

It's the same character and period of "time, times and the dividing of times" (OR 1,260 days, OR 42 months); then the utter overthrow of Jerusalem.

///

Daniel 9 is addressing the 490 years -- the seventy sevens of prophetic time that spanned time from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity, until Messiah the Prince, who would die, (be cut off) not for Himself but to provide salvation for the human race.

Because Israel (as a nation) rejected the Messiah the Prince and declared they "have no king but Caesar, they chose ANOTHER PRINCE, who came and destroyed their city in 70 A.D.

REVELATION
on the other hand, was written AFTER the 490 years were already fulfilled. It was written AFTER Rome had already destroyed Jerusalem and the temple there in 70 A.D..

Revelation joins with Daniel's much longer prophecies (1260 and 2300 day/years) that reach beyond His (John's) time and show the future of the church from John's day forward to the end.

John and the other apostles define the "saints", not as the Jews, but as the followers of Christ. This definitely includes the Gentiles and is based on a connection with Christ, not a physical descent from Abraham, as we see Paul calling the Gentile believers "saints" in his letters.

I do not at this time recognize the suggested parallel between Dan. 9 and Rev. 13, for the following reasons:

1. Daniel is addressing the time period between him and the coming and crucifixion of Christ, while Revelation addresses some future time prior to the end.

2. There is no correlation in time periods.

3. The "saints" are not the Jews, as previously mentioned.

So I must reject the relationship between the passages, and the related assertion that the "land" or "sand" refers to Jerusalem.

************

This is going to be a VERY interesting discussion.


************

///
 

I've heard that said before without any evidence. Perhaps you might like to share your reason why you see the book as post-70AD?

///

Really?
I'm not sure why.
It will likely deteriorate into mis-quotes and half-truths and shifting positions and finally fade away.

1. "... the crucifixion of Christ"; yes, and further to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Dan. 9:26-27
    
2. OK
    
3. You are imposing the Catholic idea of "saints" on the Bible: people who walk around in long white robes, having a halo on their heads, who did at least two miracles to make themselves worthy of petitions by mere mortals on this side; exceptionally holy people, even nice people with hardly a fault.
   
   Saints, according to the Bible are simply those who know God, by association at least:
    
   • Deut. 33:3, "Yes, He loves the people; All His saints are in Your hand; They sit down at Your feet; Everyone receives Your words."
      
   • John 10:34-35, "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, You are 'gods'? If He called them 'gods', to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken) ..."

///
 

1. Let me rephrase that: The word "saints" when used in Revelation, never refers to the Jews or Jewish people.
2. "You are imposing the Catholic idea of "saints" on the Bible: etc., etc." I DID NOT have this idea in mind when understanding the word "saints." If you continue to tell me what I'm thinking this will be a very SHORT discussion.

Then we end it now; for a thin skin is not for warriors: Eph. 6:10-18. Thank you for your time.

///

As you wish. Such arrogance rarely leads to meaningful discussion.

I fully agree.
The monetary system is not the mark of the beast. But it will be used in some way to enforce the mark of the beast.

As long as retail still accepts cash, it seems it would prolong or at least weaken the crack down. That's why prolonging the cash flow may be a good idea.

The scholarly evidence is pretty strong that John wrote the book of Revelation during the reign of Domitian, around 96 A.D.

1. References to the book by Church writers in early Christian centuries were pretty unanimous that is written during this time.

2. There's really no mention of Palestine, or Jerusalem. Except in a metaphorical way. The references to a temple are all IN HEAVEN. None of the letters were written to churches in Palestine -- so it appears that the transition had been fully made from the earthly temple and earthly Jerusalem as the "headquarters" of Christianity -- to other centers, and to focusing on Christ in the heavenly realms.

3. The state of the churches fit better to a later era.
For example Laodicea, had experience a devastating earthquake in the 60 AD, but in the letter it is rich and increased with goods - a state it could easily reach in 30 some years.

Worse than I had thought.

I had not considered the point of the vision was the location of the one having the vision.

But let's see what you actually said.

The topic of your comment was the beast, right?
James: The beast arrives at the shore.

Me: It is not mentioned in the text.

However, now that I understand that you think the one having the vision has to do with the vision, I can see what you said next, you thought had something to do with it.

James: So it is coming towards this particular land;

But if where John is standing is presumed to be part of the vision, then John must have something to do with it, and the beast never reaches there.

Besides, as was asked you, why does sand mean Jerusalem?



When did John have this vision?

Was it after Jesus said about Jerusalem, "Mt 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate"? Did Jesus still consider them "saints" at that time? Would you consider Jerusalem, as a whole, "the saints", after they killed their Savior? Would you consider they "knew" Him?

Was it after Paul said, "Ga 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus"?



Was John's vision after the Messiah was cut off?
Do you think that John, having a vision after this time, believed the 42 months would start before that point in history?

"It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev. 13:7-8

Would it not be reasonable to conclude the "saints" are those whose names have been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

Are you aware of U.S. Civil Forfeiture laws? Carrying any amount of cash is not safe if you are stopped by police and they find it. They can take it and keep it for no real reason, no due process. And getting it back is not easy.

Absolutely riveting conversation here, James...

Kland, when we understand the line of interpretation a person is following, then what they are saying starts making a bit more sense.
For example -- most Adventists interpret Daniel and Revelation following the historicist method. That is -- the prophecies cover huge amount of time -- from the prophets day clear to the restoration of all things.

James' approach, on the other hand, is to interpret these prophecies in the preterits method. That method tends to see the prophecies pertaining mainly to the Jewish people, with the major "endpoint" being the destruction of their city and temple in 70 A.D.

Thus they try very hard to prove that Revelation was written prior to 70 A.D. as a warning of the great destruction of Jerusalem, though evidence is strongly against such an early writing of the book.

Anyhow -- many following that method of interpretation see the 42 months as the time Christians fled from Jerusalem around the time of the Feast of Tabernacles in A.D. 66 when Cestius arrived outside of Jerusalem with the 12th Legion, led a brief assault and then abruptly departed. Christains flee into the "wilderness" In A.D. 70 the Romans returned to the city with a much larger army at the time of the Passover of that year–1,260 days or 42 months later.

Though I haven't studied into forfeiture laws that much, I am aware they exist. Basically, the "door" is put in place, so not only your cash, but even your access to your own funds in the bank can be confiscated.
It's just another sign the noose is being strengthened and tightened, so when the crises hits, everything will be in place to tighten that noose.

I would think they'd be hard pressed to explain the rest of the chapter. How do they explain the head healed after receiving the deadly wound? Did all the world "worship" Rome, Vespasian, or his son Titus? What do they make of the other beast coming up out of the earth? What do they say was the image of the beast that the second beast made everyone to worship?

I fully agree with you.
I have found the preterits method of interpretation pretty fanciful and strange.
Also - there are different levels of preterit interpretations, so if I tell you how the preterit interpretations explain your questions in a certain way, it does not mean James has accepted that part of their interpretation -- I'm sure he will speak for himself.

How do they explain the head healed after receiving the deadly wound?

Taken from the Preterit writings:
"The seven heads of the sea monster represent the seven Caesars of Rome and its body represents the Roman citizenry."

"The seven Caesars begin with the first, Julius Caesar. The head of the beast that had a fatal wound in Revelation 13:3 is the sixth head of the beast and the sixth Caesar, Nero, who committed suicide by stabbing himself in the neck. After Nero’s death, the Roman Empire collapsed into civil war. Peace and order was not restored until the rise of the Flavian Dynasty one year later. Therefore, the Flavian Dynasty beginning with Caesar Vespasian is the beast whose wound had been healed in Revelation 13:3."



The second beast of Rev. 13 Represents the army that destroys Israel.
Arises from the earth

"The word earth often just represents the people of a particular city or kingdom, , ,while sea represents the nations foreign to it"
Thus supposedly "earth" represents Jerusalem, and "sea" represents the nations -- particularly Rome.

So here we see James's idea -- that the beast was coming onto land (leaving Rome, the foreign kingdom, and advancing on Jerusalem)

The 2nd beast landed in Israel, but then, because the first beast was wounded, (Nero's suicide) the war stopped, The rise is connected because Vespasian was the general of the army that attacked Israel when Nero was emperor, Nero's suicide puts a temporal end to the invasion, but then Vespasian resumes the attack when the Flavian Dynasty achieved the power. Thus he rises "again" from the earth.
The two horns of the second beast -- represent the two generals of the army that attacked Jerusalem -- Vespasian and Titus.

All the world worshipped the beast and his image????

Well, this is how they explain it:
"After Titus seized the temple in Jerusalem, the Roman army under Titus’s leadership worshipped the ensigns, one of which is called the numina legionum (meaning “gods of the legions”), the numina legionum was an image of Caesar and his favorites (i.e. Titus). Thus an image of Caesar Vespasian and Titus were worshipped in the Temple in A.D. 70.

Then Titus supposedly called down the fire from heaven????
"by ordering the firing of flaming arrows or debris into Jerusalem during the siege"
also "Under Titus’ leadership, the 12th Legion whose emblem is a lightning bolt—fire from heaven" also supposedly fulfills the prophecy.


So, that's kind of roughly (and probably imperfectly) showing the framework with which preterits look at Revelation 13.

The preterits method of interpretation is VERY different from the historicist method of interpretation. Nor does it really fit the Biblical picture.

And of course -- the fact that most scholars have found the evidence rather overwhelming that the book of Revelation was written around 96 A.D., well AFTER the fall of Jerusalem, which would make it rather irrelevant as a warning of Jerusalem's coming doom!

There is no need for private interpretation when the correct one was given by the very angel who gave the vision.

• Rev. 17:9-11
  The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. There are also seven kings:
  
  1. Five have fallen,
  2. one is,
  3. and the other has not yet come.
  
  And when he comes, he must continue a short time. The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.

The head that receives the deadly wound is the seventh or last head. The head whose deadly wound was healed is the seventh or last giving way to the beast himself (the eighth and of the seven). In other words, John was living in the days of the second to last king, one king away from the end, from a foreign invasion and defeat.

Any other private interpretation or fanciful idea is wrong and plain nonsense.

///

Meaning that this fanciful private interpretation is correct, but the others are wrong?
Just wondering.

JAK the Troll.

???

Any other (private interpretation or fanciful idea) is wrong and plain nonsense.

///

They are certainly creative... No doubt directly influenced by the papacy in a distraction. But isn't that from where the preterits originate?

///

• "The angel said to me, Why did you marvel? I will tell you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and the ten horns." Rev. 17:7
   
• That's an interesting thing for the angel to have said. "Why did you marvel?" What was there to be amazed by a woman "drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus"?
   
• But those who purport to know God, do they behave that way? No, it's totally unexpected -- a VERY strange thing to see, indeed. But "the angel said to me, I will tell you ..."

///
 

Daniel 7:1-3 shows sea beasts in the vision. Daniel 7:17 explains earth beasts. Revelation 13 distinguishes between the sea beast (papacy) and the land beast (linked to America).

The 490 years of Daniel 9 began in 457 BC and ended in 33/34 AD. Thus the 23 years ended in 1843 and 1844. But Daniel 9 had its endtime fulfillment beginning 31 May 1998. As the Prophecy was fulfilled correctly before Christ's First Advent, It has been fulfilled correctly as Christ's Second Advent nears.

The problem is very simple. God Commands "don't take the instrument that is required by the beast in order to buy and sell."

When Adventists' rationalize that since it is not linked to Sabbath observance, it is ok to take it. Like Eve picking the fruit. Then when the SDA's have it and it gets linked to the Sabbath, Satan gloats, "gotch ya!"
The Mark of the beast and the seal of God cannot be on God's people at the same time.


There are 2 commands...1) don't take the Mark 2) keep the Sabbath holy.


Remember Peter...Lord I'll die for you...denied Him thrice.


The problem was that he failed to watch unto prayer while he had the opportunity. Thus when the test came, he was not prepared to meet it.

James,

The word that is used for Private is idios from which we get idiotic.
Lots of people use that verse to say that anyone who does not go along with accepted theological views is using a "private interpretation.
The 7 heads are kings. The kings had their kingdom restored for an hour 83 years 4 months from 14 October 1929 through 14 February 2013.

The popes from Pius XI to Benedict XVI (who reigned a short space) and the 6th was Pope John-Paul II (who made war against Communism without firing a shot and received a deadly wound from which he recovered). The 8th is of the 7 John-Paul II. When Satan impersonates him ( Sunday sacredness and spiritualism will be the
focus of his impersonation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TCGprjCEKE&t=190s

What happened on 31 May 1998? Did I miss something.....

On May 31, 1998, Pope John Paul II issued a lengthy Pastoral Letter Dies Domini, a passionate plea for a revival of Sunday observance.
A significant event in the march to a Sunday law.

But not sure how that fits the "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem"
and how 69 weeks later Messiah the Prince comes.

All the reinterpretations of the time line prophecies are NOT where we should be ---
The 70 weeks began in 457 BC with a decree to restore Jerusalem, 69 weeks took us to Christ's baptism, and the last week ended in 34 AD with Stephen's covenant summons to the Jewish nation and his resulting martyrdom.

"New light" - George Bush is the 5th fallen king.

When time shall be no more, SDA, confronted by their dubious prognostications, will bow their head in shame. In that day, they will cry, "Did we not prophecy in your name? Did we not preach a health message? Did we not look pious on Saturdays? The books - do they not testify to our righteousness?"

///

James, do you not believe that a Sunday law is being promoted and urged by many factions?

It doesn't matter because Jesus already stated how the world will be divided when He returns.

"When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats." Matthew 25:31-46

And then He goes on to say that on the one hand would be those who reflected HIS LOVE but on the other, those who did not. Nowhere does He ever intimate, even remotely, about a National Sunday Law being a lightening rod for controversy to test who is for Him.

///

Indeed -- it is with the heart that we serve HIM, not just with outward show and pious words.
Indeed there will be those lost who will say, "but we kept the Sabbath"
"Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me"

But those Who love Christ Jesus, will keep His commandments!

Also read the verses surrounding the one you quoted:
7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

What was missing?
They were counting on their own works.
But they were not following the will of the Father.
They did not have a relationship with Christ, they did not know Him, thus He didn't know them.
They were engaged in iniquity (sin).

Activity does not save nor cleanse us. Only Christ can do that.
But notice that these people turned away, were turned away because they were engaged in sin, not following the will of the Father, and didn't have an intimate relationship with Christ.

But now, we see people take the texts that show that without the justification from Christ and without that relationship with Christ, all our "works" can never amount to any true righteousness, and they ignore the many texts that a true knowledge and surrendered relationship with Christ WILL cleanse and sanctify the believer, and will enable them to follow God's will and that this is an important and necessary part of living according to the will of God.

When we truly love God -- do we obey Him? Do we love His ways and commandments?

Or do we show our love for God, by disregarding His commands and doing our own thing in the way we want to do them?

You see -- when people "keep the Sabbath" simply as a cultural practice, yet are doing their own thing without much seeking after God -- then the Sabbath keeping means nothing.

But when people scoff at those who seek after God and His ways and laws, and discard God's commandment as if by disobeying it they are loving God -- they are definitely doing their own thing not obeying God's will.

And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants, all who keep the Sabbath...these I will bring to my holy mountain and make them joyful in my house of prayer...for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples Isaiah 56:6-7

In Isaiah 56 the Sabbath stands out as a vital concern, affirming both its validity and universality.

Notice how it broadens the circle of people included:

56:2 Blessed is the man that does this, and the son of man that lays hold on it; that keeps the sabbath from polluting it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil.

Then the passage moves on to foreigners --

56:3 Don't let the son of a foreigner who joins God's people say, The LORD has utterly separated me from his people.
56:6 The foreigner..who loves the name of the LORD,...all who keep the Sabbath

Numerous historians have noted that Isaiah chapters 56-66 are filled with prophetic revelations of the future, not only of Christ's first coming, but more significantly of the time of the end.

Blessed, or "happy" is the person that does this...that keeps the Sabbath....
It is a privilege, a special connection of love with the LORD, bringing into sharp focus Who God is -- our Creator, and Redeemer.

The strangers, immigrants, all ethnic groups are called to the blessing of the Sabbath.
This passage clearly shows that the idea of the Sabbath being only for Jews is NOT God's idea.

The blessing is extended to all who "keep" "choose" "hold fast" --
all who " join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keeps the sabbath from polluting it, and takes hold of my covenant;" ... " I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off."

And it doesn't say they won't be killing, won't be stealing, won't be worshiping idols....

In what way does He separate the sheep from the goats, what is the condition?

He basically took a presentation on the Sabbath by I think it was Samuel Bacchiocchi, and twisted it to fit Sunday instead of the Sabbath.