Explain why 666 is the Mark of the Beast using Roman Numerals and not the Hebrew "letters" Alpha-Bet, which is different to 666.................
Now you have put me on the spot! For the second beast I start to read from Revelation 13:11. So the second beast acts in the presence of the first verse 12. He is able to do the sign of making fire come down from heaven as Elijah did. There seems to be an imitation of the resurrection of Christ; verse 14. He Yeshua was dead and now is alive for evermore. This is confirmed in the giving of life to the image of the first beast. (Suppose the present Islamic State is in the image of the original founding Islamic State then its present form has reinvigorated life.) So IS kills all those who do not worship the Prophets original brotherhood; verse 15. Note this was before he division of Sunny and Sheah. Verse 16 all that you do or think must be marked. The mark is that I am subject to Alla (mentally), and only do (the right hand) what pleases Allah. Friday prayers is both doing and mentally participating. Verses 17 and 18 give more detail of what it means to be a worshiper of the beast, rather than a true worshiper of the Father. It has itself before it. 666 can be "calculated" from the Greek. kai ho arithmos outoh (is) Chi Xi Sigma 666 (Green's pocket interlinear) the numbers corresponding to the letters. (the Arabic numerals are later in history) Any further comments please would be helpful.
I always thought of the beast as the secular system that says man descended from beasts. I always thought of the harlot (whether catholic, protestant of 7th day adventist etc) as the false religious system that gives you all of the good feeling of salvation without the commitment Messiah and the disciples had to our father in heaven and one another "unless a man forsakes all...") just as a Harlot gives all the good feelings of sex without the commitment of marriage and children. From there I surmised the secular beast system would wage war with the Harlot false religious system.
The Evolution problem is a mixture of vaunted science and its effect on belief in Elohim, our Creator God. I agree that the Harlot is the one who rides the beast. She is seen in history as the church of Rome giving authority and direction to secular kings. For example Henry made himself head of his church after the Pope would not agree to his sinful life. The RC church has become less and less of a power on the world's stage since the reformation. I agree that the history of the visible church in its many forms is "seen to be alive but is in fact dead". I like your candor. Harlotry has to do with a union of what should be the church with the world. So the harlot of scripture is drunk with the blood of the saints. Obviously such a statement could not be leveled against our local Baptist Church but there is the problem of do I go through the motions without my heart being in the worship. Most Christians at our local Baptist would claim that they ask themselves "Do my prayers reach heaven". The principle of the Clergy being above the laity is present in our local Baptist Church which is hateful since we are all brethren and one is our teacher. The problem you have to face is why did Jesus say "their Torah" John 15:25. I cannot have "a good feeling of salvation" if I am sinning. A Christian cannot say he has no sin but he is not on the side of the bad but on the side of the good as your Rabbi preaches. He considers himself dead to sin as I have said before. Keeping a Rosh Hoshana feast in some place in America is not keeping Torah! The High Priest went within the vale on yom kipor. But you have no High Priest or Temple so your feast of Succoth etc. is make believe.
I'm just saying, James, the early Church met daily and sold all their possessions and shared all things as common just as Yeshua taught was required for being a disciple. When you marry you move out of your father's house and live with your wife. Some famous guy said "I don't pay a prostitute for sex. I pay her to leave after". Paul was without fault according to the law yet murdering Christians. You could be keeping the entire law with your outer man and still be sinning.
Yes Doug. The early church showed that what mattered was our heavenly inheritance. This of this life became unimportant. I fully admit I have never been able to reach that standard of leaving all to follow Him. I could have but have lived with a second best, He that marries does well and he that does not marry does better. So I have seven children and seven grandchildren.
Getting back to the subject of my problems on the Halleluyah Scriptures bible I am reading today John 16:27. I discussed with you on Peshitta.Org the Aramiac background or even primacy of the new testament. This is how John 16:27 (second part) reads "and have believed that I came forth from YHWH". Why change "God" for YHWH in the translation? If the word God is a problem then the translation should revert to "Elohim" that is if a Hebrew word is required to cleanse the text of historic errors. Where did the word God come from!
I am not able to look at the Aramaic bible now. One of the reasons is that I have failed to get into Peshitta.Org. Something to do with computer security presumably.
Hope you are blessed. regards Aldred
It wasn't just a heavenly inheritance but on earth as in heaven. It's the love the brethren had for one another. There was no other teaching or example. Leaving all was not an ascetic thing. They all had 100 fold at least because they shared all things as common. I lived in a community where we shared all in common but it lacked in ways and became cultish. Leaving was one of the hardest things I ever did. I missed the daily fellowship and environment of focusing on our creator and not being concerned with earthly decisions. Having a family can be a great gift. Hope you use it wisely!
Been awhile but sometimes the Hebrew is Elohim and sometimes Yahveh or however you want to or believe or should be written. Elohim is a plural. I don't remember the differences however some people are sensitive to names concerned that Jesus was not what he was called. My take on names is Hebrews having a verbal language understood the word "name" to mean "to locate" or "to draw attention to" as opposed to our English nouney understanding as a "label".
So while their are important differences between the different uses of the name I believe it's ok to use "Jesus" or "God"as long as your conscience isn't weak and thinks you're speaking about a pagan deity.
I read "whatever you ask in my name" or "Hallowed be your name" as "whatever you ask to draw attention to me" or "locate me" and Hallowed be to locate you" or "draw attention to you".
I'm blessed (or deceived and believe I am) and hope you are too.
I went a little off topic.