Mark of the effing Beast

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus
You are conflating how things are in our society and how god will judge.

Honestly, I don't think you are in a position to do that.

originally posted by: Bent8484
a reply to: St0rD

Look up the Aksum massacre, and dig a bit for witness statements about who the locals think did it, and why. It happened a couple months back, but Western journalists only learned about it recently. Notice that both Ethiopia and Eritrea are unable to clearly state who they think did it, but also not pointing the finger at each other, strangely.

Then think of all the church burnings, and all the vandalized mosques and synagogues, in the last 2 years...and let's not forget the locust swarms, eh?

Stay safe, everyone.

Edit: I'll drop you guys an extra bread crumb, because I haven't been here in a while and I miss ATS. Look for news stories, in the last year, about people who snapped, did something horribly cruel, then claimed not to know why they did it. You'll be surprised at how many examples come up. I still have my doubts about Christianity, and religion as a whole, but there are an awful lot of strange events lately that suddenly make a lot more sense if you posit that humanity has a very real, and very organized, spiritual adversary.

Another edit: if you wonder what side those serpents in the Catholic church are on, tune in live tomorrow as the pope offers a propitiation ritual to Apophis from the top of a ziggurat.

They Fired the First Shot - 2012... similar thing with the Tutsis and the Hutus ( they did make a movie about what happened there also called Hotel Rwanda. )

The birth of true AGI and the symbiotic integration into a digital system under it's control would certainly qualify in my mind as worship of a new God. I fear the day when we hand over control of our consciousness to a digital God. Before hand it seems inevitable that digital currency and implants will be commonplace for trade and identity.

I heard an anecdote from someone on the west coast where they get scanned on the hand or the forehead for temperature before being allowed to enter the store.

High temps apparently means covid-likely, so everyone freaks out I guess.

I don't know this first hand, just something I heard.

originally posted by: St0rD
For those wondering-

The tool being showcased in the clip which scans the woman's right hand is looking like the kind of thermometer that is being used for frontal temperature.

I don't know what's up with that because obviously, a temperature degree can't be obtained this way. The Tv news host is from my country and they were talking about covid passpart implemented in Isreal, portraying it as a good thing.

Question is,

Why the f-ck are these people getting their hands scan by what looks like a thermometer? And how quick before it invites itself in our own reality?

originally posted by: rounda
The beast did come first.

The vote happened before the vaccine dropped.

Dominating the world? Making war on the church?
Not yet. Wait until it happens before getting anxious and excited.

Kamala rose to power by sleeping her way through the San Francisco elites.

The key feature of the Harlot is "drunk with the blood of the saints" (and her harlotry is metaphorical- she is the ultimate in spiritual unfaithfulness).

Forget about the book of Revelation altogether, for the moment. Put it to one side, and bring it out again when the great war on the church IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.

originally posted by: rigel4
a reply to: St0rD

The answer you seek is Caesar Nero

Yes, indeed.

The preterist reading of Revelation makes the most sense.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: rounda
The beast did come first.

The vote happened before the vaccine dropped.

Dominating the world? Making war on the church?
Not yet. Wait until it happens before getting anxious and excited.

Kamala rose to power by sleeping her way through the San Francisco elites.

The key feature of the Harlot is "drunk with the blood of the saints" (and her harlotry is metaphorical- she is the ultimate in spiritual unfaithfulness).

Forget about the book of Revelation altogether, for the moment. Put it to one side, and bring it out again when the great war on the church IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.

I suppose someone like you needs to see a swat team take over the vatican to believe there is a war on the church.

Something as basic as pushing abortions or gay marriage doesn't count for you.

Why would it? You have no problem letting them alter your dna.

a reply to: rounda
I would expect to see imprisonment and execution, which is what John's own church was experiencing, That is the kind of thing he means by "tribulation" and "war on the church". That is why the Harlot is said to be "drunk with the blood of the saints". So do not trivialise it.

The only thing "wrong with me" is that I've studied the book of Revelation carefully enough to understand what it's getting at, and my faith is focused on Christ, not on "the events of Revelation being fulfilled in my lifetime".

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: rounda
I would expect to see imprisonment and execution, which is what John's own church was experiencing, That is the kind of thing he means by "tribulation" and "war on the church". That is why the Harlot is said to be "drunk with the blood of the saints". So do not trivialise it.

The only thing "wrong with me" is that I've studied the book of Revelation carefully enough to understand what it's getting at, and my faith is focused on Christ, not on "the events of Revelation being fulfilled in my lifetime".

Why are you quoting "wrong with me?" I didn't say there was anything wrong with you.

Attacks come in many forms... Especially when 5th gen warfare isn't with guns and troops.

But you just keep reading the bible as if we're living 2000 years ago, bro. Maybe they'll attack the Vatican with spears and rocks in slings. Lmao.

And there's a difference between a literal story that occurs in the bible, and prophecies that come through visions, riddled with metaphor. Like if someone 2000 years ago was describing events from a future containing things he couldn't dream of.

Kamala literally put her own people into servitude, and hid evidence that would release them in order to force them to fight wildfires for $1/day. That's being drunk on the blood of saints.

a reply to: rounda
Whoops. Your post being small-screened out of vision, I was evidently misremembering "You have no problem with..." Sorry about that.

For the overall question of interpretation of Revelation, I refer you to Revelation; Project Complete. I keep threaetning to bump these threads. I still think that the imaginative shoe-horning of Revelation into current events can work only when the book is misunderstood and trivialised.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: rounda
Whoops. Your post being small-screened out of vision, I was evidently misremembering "You have no problem with..." Sorry about that.

For the overall question of interpretation of Revelation, I refer you to Revelation; Project Complete. I keep threaetning to bump these threads. I still think that the imaginative shoe-horning of Revelation into current events can work only when the book is misunderstood and trivialised.

No, interpreting prophetic visions literally only works when you believe the world was created in a literal 6 days.

Anyone with two working eyes can see society is quickly eroding. We saw the same signs with every empire in history.

Death to America is the popular slogan this time.

a reply to: rounda
My interpretations were never "literal". There were regular complaints that they were not literal enough. I am always aiming at understanding what the writer wants to say- which is not the same thing, because human language is not obsessively literal. So my object in reading either Genesis or Revelation is to grasp the intended significance of any metaphors that might be used.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: rounda
My interpretations were never "literal". There were regular complaints that they were not literal enough. I am always aiming at understanding what the writer wants to say- which is not the same thing, because human language is not obsessively literal. So my object in reading either Genesis or Revelation is to grasp the intended significance of any metaphors that might be used.

You literally just argued that the beast comes and then his head explodes, because that's the order the verses were in...

a reply to: rounda
The chronology isn't set by the verse order but by the content.

So when it says x happens and then y happens, how do you end up with y happening before x?

a reply to: rounda
First, I said nothing at all about "head exploding". Now it's your turn to misremember posts.
What I said was that the arrival of the Beast comes before the appearance of the mark of the Beast.

Secondly, I do not base my statement specifically on the order of the verses.
I base it on the fact that the mark is used by the Beast to identify those willing to follow him, and that is how the process is described.
Common sense alone then tells us that the label which identifies the follower is not going to be adopted until the leader himself has arrived.

In the same way, Germans living fifty years before Hitler was born would have found it impossible to guess, for obvious reasons, that a future leader of the Third Reich would identify his followers by means of the swastika and the "Hitler salute". But at least they weren't working themselves into a panic about imaginary possibitlies; "Whatever you do, don't go to England and travel on the railways there, because the English railway ticket will be HIS mark!" You may learn from their tacit example. Don't start worrying about identifying yourself as a follower of the Beast before there is a Beast to be followed.

nvm

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: rounda
First, I said nothing at all about "head exploding". Now it's your turn to misremember posts.
What I said was that the arrival of the Beast comes before the appearance of the mark of the Beast.

Secondly, I do not base my statement specifically on the order of the verses.
I base it on the fact that the mark is used by the Beast to identify those willing to follow him, and that is how the process is described.
Common sense alone then tells us that the label which identifies the follower is not going to be adopted until the leader himself has arrived.

In the same way, Germans living fifty years before Hitler was born would have found it impossible to guess, for obvious reasons, that a future leader of the Third Reich would identify his followers by means of the swastika and the "Hitler salute". But at least they weren't working themselves into a panic about imaginary possibitlies; "Whatever you do, don't go to England and travel on the railways there, because the English railway ticket will be HIS mark!" You may learn from their tacit example. Don't start worrying about identifying yourself as a follower of the Beast before there is a Beast to be followed.

There's a difference between misremembering and exaggerating to make a point.

You don't seem to get that there is also a difference between taking an aspirin and altering your dna.

When they clone you, which one is created in God's image?

originally posted by: rounda
You don't seem to get that there is also a difference between taking an aspirin and altering your dna.

There is also a difference between being given something that may alter your dna, not sure that has been proven, and pledging allegiance to the antichrist.

ETA:

When they clone you, which one is created in God's image?

According to your logic, both, if the dna is unaltered.

a reply to: daskakik
An mRNA vaccine does not alter your dna

I personally think that we are getting to a point in science and medicine that we will be able to use read peoples dna. I think that many diseases will be cured through the understanding of dna and how to alter it to correct incorrect dna sequences.

a reply to: Wildbob77
I know, but it is the crux of rounda's argument, so I thought I would put out there that the claim that it does would have to be proven first, if it is going to be used as an argument that it shows that you have taken the mark of the beast.